 |
Reply
| |
I messed up  !! The post about King Stephen was supposed to be on this board...please continue it here. Thanks, Stonehenge |
|
 First
Previous
2-14 of 14
Next
Last
|
Reply
| |
Stephen actually pretty much BRIBED his way to the throne! He granted the city of London commune status with the rights of collective self-government to win them over; his younger brother Henry, bishop of Winchester, opened up the treasury there to sweeten the deal for some ofthe barons who had (like Stephen) sworn an oath of fealty to Matilda as Henry I's heir. He was able to do so successfully because of the innate prejudice toward having a female ruler; many of the Norman barons were uncomfortable with that even though Matilda was the designated heir. Knowing this, Stephen fairly scampered over from Boulogne to stake his claim & start throwing money & promises around.....& since that was how he had gotten the throne, perhaps that is what he thought he needed to continue doing in order to keep it! |
|
Reply
| | | From: Eddy | Sent: 8/15/2002 3:48 PM |
Isn't it depressingly familiar that Stephen was able to keep power that shouldn't have been his, simply because he had more money/power? Is might always going to be right? sigh. |
|
Reply
| |
LOL! Eddy, I love your cynicism! Not only should Stephen not have had the power, but realistically, neither should Matilda OR her father.....that whole Norman succession threw primogeniture out the window. William Rufus ousted brother Robert of Normandy to begin with, & Henry I scampered over to seize the throne just as quickly as Stephen did to prevent any of his siblings from doing it. And hmmm, wasn't there a whisper or two that William II's hunting accident was just Henry's was of warming the throne a smidge earlier?  |
|
Reply
| |
Henry's WAY.....I HATE typos!  |
|
Reply
| |
Oh, that's right, Stephen wasn't even the eldest of his brothers! But he was the one who came and made "nice nice" to his Uncle Henry. He was also a distant cousin. His family connection comes from his mother (Adela), who was a daughter of William I. Not only was it because of the money and fantastic promises which got him the throne, but as already has been said his other BIG asset for getting the throne was simply by being MALE. |
|
Reply
| | | From: Eddy | Sent: 8/16/2002 3:39 PM |
The sexist swine! Eleanor of Aquitaine would have made mincemeat of him! |
|
Reply
| |
Come , now , Granpa Willliam stole hte throne , to begin with ! |
|
Reply
| | | From: simon | Sent: 11/20/2003 9:26 AM |
I have just started reading Jim Bradbury's 'Stephen and Matilda,' a fascinating time in history so i will be able to feed back to you more later on! However, although you are correct in saying that Stephen bribed his way to the throne, this was the norm of medieval kingship. All kings had to keep London and his 'mighty subjects' i.e. the nobility, sweet to retain power and prevent rebellion. This was essential for any medieval monarch, as was having his hands on the treasury and lands in order to enrich the nobles. When the nobility were denied patronage, rebellion followed. |
|
Reply
| | | From: simon | Sent: 11/20/2003 9:38 AM |
Ok so William I 'stole' the throne, but so did Harold II. He wasnot even a member of the royal Cerding line and his family had Edward the Confessor's brother murdered. William mainly gained the throne through luck and circumstances. Eric John believes that Edward the Confessor hated the Godwine family so much because they had murdered his brother, that he in fact nominated william the conq as his successor. |
|
Reply
| | | From: judymar | Sent: 11/20/2003 7:21 PM |
One more thing about Matilda is that she was not wanted by the people at the time, think it had something to do with her extreme nastiness!! |
|
Reply
| | | From: simon | Sent: 11/25/2003 6:17 PM |
You are right about Matilda. Apparently she was very arrogant which according to Jim Bradbury was encouraged by her position as Empress. Also, she cocked- up big time in her dealings with London. She had everything wrapped up, but lost the onus by downgrading London from its commune status which it had received from Stephen |
|
Reply
| | | From: simon | Sent: 11/28/2003 8:56 AM |
To reply to Foreverambers comment on the Normans being responsible for throwing primogeniture out of the window. This is not true, as Primogeniture wasnot strictly, if at all, followed by Anglo Saxon England. It was usually the strongest male member of the ruling house who was nominated by the King to succeed. However, it was ideal if it was the eldest son, but it didnot have to be. Aethelread 'Unraed' promoted the sons from his second marriage, to Emma, over those from his first English wife; this is what caused all the troubles of his own reign. Harold succeeded, and was at some time nominated by , Edward the Confessor, and he wasnot even of royal blood, but descended from Wulfnoth from the Sussex area. |
|
Reply
| |
Edward the Confessor may well have hated Earl Godwin, Harold's father, blaming him for the grisly torture death of his brother Alfred. He was literally the only one left alive to blame. Godwin did not actully kill the Aethling Alfred, but seems to have turned him over to Harthacanute under compulsion after allegedly receiving assurances that the Aethling would not be abused. Harthacanute, evidently a throughly nasty man, showed up after his half-brother Harold Harefoot's death "ready to kick ass and take names," as we say here in the States. For lord knows what reason, the Aethling Alfred decided this was the perfect time for a holiday in England. It wasn't an invasion to claim the throne, because he only brought a few ships. After the Aethling turned up on the Sussex coast in Godwin's Earldom, everyone knew what Harthacanute was likely to do to him, but Godwin, who had several small children at the time, was in a very precarious situation of his own in regards to Harthcanute for having supported Harthacanute's half brother Harold Harefoot as king before Harthacanute showed up from Denmark to claim the English throne. The grudge doesn't seem to have extended to Harold though, who was just a child at the time of the Aethling's murder. Edward was even supposed to have been upset over Tostig's banishment, having developed a liking for him, but defineately detested the eldest brother Swen after he raped an Abbess and kept her as a sex slave, and banished him for it. That Swen wasn't castrated probably had a lot to do with Earl Godwin still being in power at the time and protecting his favorite son. But Harold was of different mettle and later after his father Godwin died, when his brother Tostig turned psycho, did not try to cover for him. I don't think the Confessor hated the whole family, just certain members of it. It is telling that not a one of the Norman chroniclers disputes the story that Edward left the crown to Harold on his deathbed. You'd think if there had been some shred of evidence to the contrary they would have bandied it far and wide, instead they just didn't talk about it, coming up instead with a vague promise Edward was supposed to have made to William fifteen years before, though they are never clear as to where, when, or what form the promise took, but it was all William had so he ran with it. |
|
|
First
Previous
2-14 of 14
Next
Last
|
|
Free Forum Hosting
Important Announcement
Return to The Normans