Revision notes

Introduction

After the Romans left England, the country was ruled by the Anglo Saxons, From the 8th century onwards, the Viking raid began and in the 860s the Vikings began to settle (invade). By 896 however Alfred the Great’s son, Edward re-conquered Mercia and East Anglia up to the Humber. In 954 the Vikings were driven out of Northumbria.

But things went downhill after Ethelred became king of England. Ethelred was consecrated in 978 and ruled for 38 years to 1016. 980 saw the first Viking raid in a century heralding many more. By 1013 invading Vikings had forced Ethelred into exile, with Sweyn (Viking) declaring himself king. Sweyn then died in 1014, with Ethelred briefly returning. Over the next few months, Sweyn’s son Cnut conquered much of England. Although following the death of Ethelred, Edmund Ironside (his son) enjoyed some success in repelling the Vikings, in 1016 Edmund died, leaving the Viking Cnut in charge of the whole country. Having gained control over Mercia and East Anglia, Cnut received the submission of Wessex.

What happened to the English Royal Family?

Edmund’s half brother, and Ethelred’s son from his 2nd marriage to Emma of Normandy (Edward the Confessor) fled to Normandy, and Edmund Ironside’s two sons Edward and Edmund went to exile in Hungary. Canute then married Ethelred’s widow Emma and had Harthacanute. This decision to marry the ex English Queen was largely pout of a desire for accommodation with the English.

England under Cnut

Cnut was able to establish an empire due to England’s comprehensive and centralised administrative system. Because England had one of the most advanced taxations systems in the world, it was excellent for Cnut to finance his empire building in Scandinavia. The country was split into a number of shires, and then each shire was split into “hundreds” allowing taxation to be organised particularly easily. Furthermore, the currency was extremely sound, and by the 980’s there were approximately 60 mints around the country and every 5 years all coins had to be handed in and exchanged to prevent inflation. Although the aim of this organisation was supposed to be making it easier to fund defence from the Vikings (or raise the Danegeld- a special tax paid to the Vikings to stop them invading- Ethelred paid £82,000 in 1018), once Cnut took over he could use these systems to fund his wars in Scandinavia.

As Cnut spent large amounts of time abroad fighting, he also wanted a degree of accommodation with the English so that he could feel safe leaving England. He soon went about appointing his own figures into dominant positions (men who owed their position to him would be more loyal). Under Cnut, Wessex was given to Godwin in 1023, Mercia to Leofric at some point in the early 1030s (historians are not sure of the exact date) and Northumbria to Siward in 1033. Although Siward and Leofric were already of high social standing, it is possible to blame Cnut for making Godwin too powerful (he had originally been a thegn). Godwin was rewarded particularly well for his loyalty to Cnut (helped him suppress a rebellion in Denmark in 1022-3) and was married to Gytha, Cnut’s sister in law and was promoted to Earl of Wessex (the most powerful Earldom in England) due to his.

How did England change under Cnut?

In spite of Cnut’s reign, many aspects of Anglo Saxon society stayed in place. The system of shires and hides were a useful way of raising taxes so remained. More importantly the system of earldoms was retained, although he removed many of the old Earls, replacing them with men loyal to him (notice how he was willing to keep English institutions in place). Although Cnut nearly bankrupted England paying for his wars abroad, one positive was that Cnut’s reign did lead to an end of Danish raids as a Dane was king.

What problems did Cnut leave?

Cnut left a dubious legacy- a lot of England’s wealth had been spent on fighting abroad. Furthermore, he left rivalries amongst the 3 major Earldoms, with each of the Earls in competition for more power, land and influence (this would pose a real problem for later rulers). Although Cnut had a Scandinavian empire, this brought few benefits, except some trade concessions. On his death in 1035, Cnut left 2 sons from different mothers, however the succession procedure was unclear. Harold Harefoot (Elgifu’s son) took the throne on a temporary basis as Harthacanute couldn’t travel as he was defending his Danish kingdom. England's magnates favoured the idea of installing Harold Harefoot temporarily as regent, due to the difficulty of Harthacnut's absence.

The short reign of Harold Harefoot (Regent 1035-7, King 1037-40)

Harold Harefoot was the son of Cnut and his first wife Elfgifu of Northampton, so he had slightly stronger English links than Harthacanute (whose mother was Emma of Normandy, the former wife of Ethelred). In 1030 Harefoot had even been sent to Norway to rule as regent, so had some governmental experience. After Cnut’s death, a great council was held. The Anglo Saxon Chronicle tells us how the northern Earl favoured Harefoot, by that Godwin preferred Harthacanute. The mercenary fleet also preferred him, however Cnut’s housecarls preferred Harthacanute. However, as Harthacanute was not in the country (unlike Harefoot) he couldn’t push his claim. Although no firm agreement was reached, in Harthacanite’s absence, Harefoot was essentially the King of England. Harefoot was certainly in the ascendancy, and his coins even started to appear in Wessex (where support for Harthacanute was strongest) showing his growing power and influence.

Harefoot survived an attempt to unseat him in 1036 jointly led by Ælfred Ætheling and Edward the Confessor (who had been in exile in Normandy), Emma's sons from Æthelred the Unready. This showed the succession problems that England faced, as there were so many possible claimants. However on the direction of Godwin (now seemingly on the side of Harold Harefoot), Ælfred was captured and blinded by men loyal to Harefoot (probably Godwin). Edward soon fled back to Normandy, with Emma of Normandy (mother of Edward, Ælfred and Harthacanute) exiled. In 1038 Harthacanute also struck the deal with Magnus of Norway that if either died childless, the other would inherit their kingdom.

Magnus was never able to follow up his claim, but his son, Harold Hardraada did in 1066 (notice the long term significance of this)

The even shorter reign of Harthacanute 1040-42

Harefoot died in 1040, just as Harthacanute was preparing an invasion force of Danes. Harthacanute (Cnut and Emma of Normandy’s son) arrived in 1040 to take the throne. Harthacanute did not however inherit an easy situation, particular considering the 3 main Earls (reluctantly in the case of Godwin) had sided with Harefoot. Harthacanute’s first action, digging up the body of Harefoot and having it thrown in the Fens also did little to calm the situation.

What did most to compromise Hathcanaute’s kingship was his brutal levels of taxation. As he arrived in England with 62 ships to stake his claim as king, he demanded £21,000 in geld to pay his troops. This was a huge sum of money and was a 14 fold increase from the previous year. This had a significant effect- the Anglo Saxon Chronicle explained how it caused inflation, with the price of wheat increasing to “fifty five pence a sester”. Things got even worse in Worcester, where two housecarls sent to collect the tax were killed by a mob who resented the high payments. Harthacanute’s response to this- ordering the destruction of the city did little to win him any public support. However in 1042 he died at a wedding feast, leaving the way open to Edward- Prince of the Royal House of Wessex to come from Normandy and take the crown. Although the Danes ruled from 1016-42, the English state was still essentially the same, just ruled by others.

The reign of Edward the Confessor

Harthacanute died in 1042 with Edward the Confessor making a secure entry onto the English scene. He was given a warship by Godwin- this is an interesting move as it suggests Godwin was trying to win the favour of Edward, and possibly looking for forgiveness for his alleged involvement in the blinding of Alfred (aware that if he was to gain patronage in the future, he would need to be on good relations with Edward). There was however also a feeling amongst Godwin that as the most dominant English noble, Edward owed his throne to Harold’s intervention with the English magnates (this is to an extent true- Godwin and the Londoners supported Edward, therefore he was duly crowned). Edward however had long regarded himself as the true king of England and had been named so by charters when he was in exile in Normandy.

What problems would Edward face?

NB- IF ASKED IN AN EXAM HOW SUCCCESSFUL EDWARD WAS IN DEALING WITH THE PROBLEMS HE FACED YOU MAY WISH TO MERGE SOME OF THESE TOGETHER. DON’T ALSO FEEL YOU NEED TO LOOK AT ALL OF THEM!

The Viking threat- most notably from Magnus of Norway who Harthacanute had promised the throne of England to. Furthermore, his own mother Emma was known to favour the Viking cause. When the Scandinavian empire collapsed, the main supporter of the English monarchy was gone.

Would he be able to establish a military organisation capable of repelling threats?

Edward’s relative inexperience

England’s financial problems (Cnut in particular had squandered a great deal of wealth on wars abroad)

How would Edward secure the loyalty of the Earls who had been appointed and elevated to key positions by the Vikings? (particularly the Godwins)

Would he be able to rule a disparate kingdom, where the Earls held huge amounts of power over the regions and owed no real allegiance to him?

Edward’s lack of experience both in terms of government and how the English system of government worked (most of his time had been spent in exile). Would he have the necessary skills of patronage? (granting rewards to secure loyalty, without allowing any one figure to be too powerful).

Would his Norman connections make it difficult for him to be accepted?

The threat posed by Wales and the need to bring the north under greater governmental control.

Overcoming the problems caused by his Norman upbringing

Maintaining the power of the monarchy

Handling of taxation/ other economic issues

Military organisation

Establishing a powerful government and extending law and order

PLUS ANYTHING ELSE THAT YOU CAN THINK OF!How well did Edward deal with the problems that he faced?

1- The Viking threat

Given the fact that his own mother Emma favoured the Viking cause due to her marriage to Cnut (shown by her favouritism of Harthacanute over her two sons from her marriage to Ethelred), and the fact that Edward had no firm English allies when he first became king, the Viking threat was perhaps the most pressing threat facing him, particularly as the aim of any rival Viking claimant would be to remove Edward as king.

Edward can be praised for his swift actions in this respect, as in 1043 he moved with Godwin, Leofric and Siward against his mother Emma, who it was feared would side with Magnus of Norway (due to her previous marriage to Cnut). They marched on Winchester, removed the treasury from Emma’s control and removed all her lands from her. By doing this they were able to destroy her power, and make it difficult for her to help co-ordinate and fund a potential Viking invasion. Although this did not completely remove the threat, it did reduce the chance of a Viking invasion (non came until 1066). Edward’s position was also helped by the fact that the two Viking claimants, Sweyn and Magnus were engaged in a civil war, weakening both and diverting their attention from England. Although this was more luck than judgement on Edward’s part, Edward does deserve some praise for providing Sweyn as the weaker party with English help. In fact Edward could be praised as Godwin had pushed to give greater help to Sweyn, which Edward refused (Sweyn was Godwin’s nephew). It could be argued that Edward’s policy was sensible- it didn’t drain finances too much, and it made sense to keep the war going ona s long as possible, rather than let any one person win!

In addition to these actions, Edwards exiled Gunilda, a niece of Cnut’s in 1044, and also exiled Osgod Clapa, a Viking former associate of Cnut in 1046. We can also see Edward preparing his military for a potential Viking attack. The Anglo Saxon Chronicle explains that in 1044 “The king went out to Sandwich with 35 ships.” This is referring to Edward getting both his mercenary fleet and scyp fyrd (ship fyrd- part time sailors) to carry out manoeuvres in order to practice for and deter a Viking invasion. In 1045 the AS chronicle describes this happening again “with more ships and in greater numbers.” Although potentially a deterrent to the Vikings, even the D version of the AS chronicle conceded that it was Magnus’ civil war with Swein of Denmark, rather than this that prevented invasion.

In 1046 however Magnus expelled Sweyn from Denmark (suggesting the English help wasn’t enough) and the English fleet was called out to meet the threat of a Norwegian invasion. Fortunately for the English, Magnus died in 1047, thus seemingly removing the Viking threat. Although Viking raids continued, such as that by the exiled Osgod Clapa in 1049, the removal of this treat was very helpful for Edward, as in 1050 he reduced the foreign mercenary fleet from 14 to 5 (this is a useful way of proving that Edward thought the threat was removed) NOTICE HOW THE REMOVAL OF THE VIKING THREAT ALSO HELPED BENEFIT THE ECONOMY. Furthermore, the next year he removed them completely and with the money saved he was able to remit the geld (tax) and improve the coinage. The hergeld had been relatively high at the start of his reign given the Viking threat. Hergeld was abolished in 1051 (a sign of peaceful times). To compensate for this lack of naval strength, Ed made an agreement with the south eastern key figures that in return for the profits of justice, they (the shires) would provide ships when necessary. Although the action saved money, it opened the way to piratical raids from Flanders.

Although it would seem that Edward dealt with the Viking threat relatively well (no attacks or raids during his lifetime) it is possible to push the idea that in the long term he was not so successful, as shown by Harald Hardrada’s invasion in 1066 (he took the claim from his friend Magnus after he died). Whilst we could say that Edward was focussed on removing immediate Viking threats and didn’t consider long term security (as shown by the reduction of the fleet), there was little that Edward could do to get rid of the Viking claimants!

2- The Godwins

The Godwin family were the most powerful family in England. This dated back to the time of Cnut when Godwin had been promoted to the position of Earl of Wessex and had been given a royal bride, Gytha. As Godwin (and the other Earls) were in position before Edward, Edward was particularly dependent on them, particularly in his early days. Godwin support would be essential in order to remove the Viking threat and consolidate his position. This was especially true seeing as Edward had been brought up in exile, and did not have the contacts within England that Godwin had. Edward would perhaps also have benefited through reducing the power of the Godwins (it was not sensible to let one family wield so much power and influence, as this may also anger the other leading Earls), although this could also risk antagonising the Godwins. In reward for their support at the start of his reign (e.g. against Emma) Godwin’seldest son Swegn was made an Earl in 1043 (Herefordshire, Oxfordshire and Somerset) and his 2nd son Harold made Earl of East Anglia in 1045. His daughter Edith was then married to Edward in the same year.

The Godwin marriage

This greatly increased the power of the Godwins, giving them a large degree of control over the king. Although in this respect Edward can be criticised for such a policy (as it increased the power of the Godwins to dangerous levels), it did secure him Godwin support at the start of his reign when he was most vulnerable (e.g. from Viking claimants). In the longer term however it did pose a problem, as if they had any children, the future heir to the throne would be half Godwin. Ultimately the two never had children, although it is unclear whether this was deliberate on Edward’s part to stop the Godwins getting too powerful (there are allegations he was celibate) or simply bad luck. It is however interesting to note that when the Godwins were exiled from 1051-2, Edith was sent to a nunnery in order to prevent her from having children. Although she was released in 1052, they remained childless. The marriage had no children, although it made political sense. It is however alleged that Edward was chaste. To an extent, it can also be argued that not having children did partially reduce the threat of the Godwins.

Edward’s attempts to reduce Godwin power

In 1044 Edward had his Norman Counsellor, Robert of Jumieges made Bishop of London (he had been made Bishop of Canterbury in 1051). Furthermore, the Norman Ralf of Mantes was given an earldom in the West in the mid to late 1040s (historians are unsure of the date) based around Herefordshire. The promotion of these Normans served 2 purposes:

1. Increase the power of Normans- loyal friends who he knew he could trust and felt comfortable around (don’t forget he had been brought up in Normandy).

2. Reduce the power and influence enjoyed by the Godwins. The land given to Ralf of mantes brought him into direct competition with Godwin’s son Swein, who also had an earldom in that region, reducing his power.

It is however important not to over estimate extent of Norman domination

Increased conflict with the Godwins/ favouritism of Normans

As a result of the Earldoms awarded to Swein Godwin and Harold Godwin, it appeared that by the mid to late 1040s, the Godwins were at the height of their power and influence (Godwin Sr was also Earl of Wessex). Edward however came into conflict with the Godwin dynasty in 1047 when he banished Swein for allegedly abducting the abbess of Leominster. It must however be noted that Swein, as Earl of Herefordshire, Gloucestershire, Oxfordshire, Somerset and Berkshire and was in local rivalry with Ralph of Mantes, the Earl of Worcester and a French nephew of Edward’s. It could therefore be argued that the exile was part of a deliberate attempt of Edward to start reducing the power of the Godwins, by replacing them in positions of power with his own Norman allies. This would seem to be demonstrated by the fact that it was Ralf of Mantes who took over Swein’s Earldoms, and the fact that Godwin power in East Anglia was also reduced with estates given to Bretons such as Ralf the Staller. Although in 1048 Swein was restored to Edward’s favour, he breached the King’s peace again with the murder of Beorn, and was declared “nithing” by Edward. Although he later returned, he was exiled again in 1051 and killed on return from pilgrimage.

The dispute over Church appointments

This growing resentment between Edward and the Godwins is shown by clashes over the appointment of Bishoprics. Between 1042 and 1051 of the 10 vacancies that occurred, only half were filled by Englishmen. The most prominent example of this was the dispute over who should become Archbishop of Canterbury in 1050 when the post fell vacant with the death of Archbishop Eadsige. Godwin hoped that the monks would favour one of his kinsmen (increasing his power and influence) however this was not so easy. They did elect Aethelric (who was a religious leader from Wessex) but Edward refused giving it to the Norman Robert of Jumieges. Although the Saxon Spearhafoc was appointed to succeed Jumieges as Archbishop London this was scant reward for the Godwins, and reflected the growing tension between Godwin and Edward. It is certainly possible to see both sides of the argument- Edward’s decision to build up various factions in court (e.g. the Norman faction) made a degree of sense by spreading out power and reducing the amount of power held by the Godwins. On the other hand, appointing Normans to key positions angered not just the Godwins, but also other Earls and the people of England.

The Dover Fracas of 1051 and the return of the Godwins

Further problems arose in 1051when Edward’s brother in Law Count Eustace of Boulogne visited (many were already angered by the growing power of foreigners). On his embarkation Eustace and his men got into a fight with the men of Dover after supplies and accommodation were denied to them (possibly on the instructions of Godwin), with 7 dying in the brawl. Edward ordered Godwin to send in armed men to punish the people of Dover. Godwin refused, winning support amongst the people, but not amongst the King. Harold refused, as he already felt sidelined in court by Norman-French followers of the king. At this point, Edward summoned his council and an army in Gloucester and called upon Godwin to account for his actions. Godwin then called on his sons Swein and Harold and their Housecarls to assemble, however Edward summoned Leofric of Mercia and Siward of Northumbria with their men to meet at Gloucester along with Ralph of Mantes. Civil war seemed a distinct possibility, however in face of the opposition, many of Godwin’s men deserted to the royal army. With the Northern Earls supporting Ed, this seemed the moment of Ed’s triumph. By the time he reached London he realised the King had superiority, so he, along with the other Godwins fled. With the Godwins abroad, Edward took full advantage of this and sought to destroy their political power; All were declared outlaws except Edith who was sent to a nunnery, Leofric of Mercia’s son Aelfgar was given Harold’s earldom, with Svein’s divided between Ralf of Mantes and Odda of Deerhurst. Edward’s revenge was however excessive and unwise. The Northern Earls themselves were not particularly loyal to Edward and had only rallied to his cause to prevent Civil War. However as Edward and his Norman friends moved towards personal revenge and Edward used the event as an excuse to move closer to Normandy the Earls went back to neutrality.

The Godwins however returned in 1052, and although their fleet was intercepted as it made its way back to England, the winds split both the King’s and the Godwine’s ships, allowing the Godwins to to sail up the Thames and establish a position south of the Thames (this was also helped by Edward’s decision to disband the navy!) Crucially, the English did not however support Edward and Siward, Leofric and the Northern thegns refused to help. Unable to rely on the Londoners support against England’s chief noble dynasty, and with the men of Wessex supporting their lord, Edward had no option but to back down. Robert of Jumieges and the French Bishops of Dorchester were forced to flee (although Ralf of Mantes stayed). The Saxon Stigand became the new Archbishop of Canterbury. The Godwins were declared innocent and their lands restored, Edith was returned to court (from a nunnery) and Edward had to accept a great loss in prestige. With Godwin’s enemies outlawed, the Godwin influence was at its peak.

What does the Dover Fracas tell us about how well Edward dealt with the Godwins?

In the short term (at least until early 1052) it seemed that Edward dealt with the event pretty well, as he had been able to rally the support of the Northern Earls, and use the event as a convenient excuse to exile the Godwins and remove their power, whilst replacing them with Normans.

We must however think about the cause of the fracas. Quite a convincing case can be built to discredit Edward, as it was his poor patronage and promotion of the Normans which sidelined the Godwins and forced them into such an action. On the other hand, it could perhaps be argued that Edward knew Godwin would refuse so ordered him to sack Dover aware that this

would give him an excuse to turn on them and destroy their power and therefore remove their threat once and for all (suggesting Edward could be tough when he needed to be!)

The fact that none of the Earls were willing to help Edward following the return of Godwin suggests Edward’s favouritism of the Normans in the period 1051-2 severely isolated the remaining Earls.

The event certainly shows that Edward had lost the loyalty of the Godwins by 1051, as they refused to carry out instructions and even summoned an army to sue against Edward.

Following the return of the Godwins in 1052, they had more power than ever before as the Normans had now been exiled

The rise of the Godwins under Harold Godwin

The death of Godwin in 1053 changed the balance of power in England, and would make the Godwin family even more powerful. At first the death of Godwin temporarily increased the power of Mercia, as when Harold Godwin took the title of Earl of Wessex he had to give up his Earldom in East Anglia to Aelfgar (Son of Leofric of Mercia) ensuring the Godwins were left with just 1 earldom. Harold Godwin was slightly more considered in his actions than his father, and it had also helped the Godwins that Swein Godwin (a permanent source of tension with Edward) had died in 1052. When Siward of Northumbria died in 1055 Siward’s son was seen to be too young, and Leofric of Mercia deemed too old to combine the two offices. Northumbria now went to Tostig (another Godwin) with Leofric’s son Elfgar exiled in 1055. Whilst the appointment of Tostig increased the power of the Godwins dramatically, in certain respects it was sensible- as the son of Gytha, Tostig had a northern connection. Furthermore Tostig was quite close to the king, therefore Edward hoped Tostig would be able to bring the region more under his control. In addition to this, it also split the Godwine Earldoms geographically. THE GODWIN’S WERE HOWEVER FAR MORE LOYAL TO EDWARD AFTER THE DEATH OF THEIR FATHER IN 1053.

In 1057 Leofric of Mercia and Ralf of Mantes died. This was great for the Godwins, as although Aelfgar (back from exile) took his fathers land in Mercia, Godwin got Aelfgar’s Earldom in East Anglia (later passed to Gyrth Godwin), with a new Earldom in the south east given to Harold’s brother Leofwine. Furthermore, on Ralf of Mantes death, Harold took his Earldom ensuring that by 1060 Mercia was the only Earldom not controlled in the King’s name by a Godwin. DOES THIS SHOW POOR MANAGEMENT BY ED OR DID HE HAVE NO OTHER CHOICE?

3- Edward and his control over the north of England and Wales

As King, Edward had no authority over Wales (it was a separate country). He did have authority over the north, however as this was a way away from the south, the king traditionally enjoyed little control over the region. Northumbria was of an Anglo-Danish caharcater, and the Earl of Northumbria had traditionally been selected from the House of Bamburgh who held sway in the area. This was part of the motivation behind Edward’s decision to appoint Tostig as Earl of Northumbria, as appointing a figure outside of the House the House of Bamburgh would go some way to reducing the autonomy that the north had enjoyed. Although Tostig’s mother Gytha was Danish, it would appear that Tostig was identified by the north as a “southerner” partly explaining the hostility towards him.

Tostig however tried to bring the region under governmental control too early, leading to hostility from the Northumbrians as they became increasingly angered by Totsig’s harsh administration. In particular John of Worcester (a chronicler) make reference to the anger generated by hius demand for “huge tribute” (heavy tax). Traditionally the north and only paid 1/6 the level of taxation of the south as a result of the lower population/ economic productivity of the region. It is however unclear how much Tostig tried raising tax levels.

We can also question the extent to which Tostig carried out his role of defending Northumbria from the Scots. Whereas Tostig’s predecessor, Siward had invaded Scotland in 1054 and deposed Macbeth as king, Tostig struggled to maintain this level of security. Furthermore in 1061 he left Northumbria to visit Rome, a move which encouraged the Scots to invade the north, capturing Cumbria. His failure to try and recapture Cumbria was of particular anger to Gospatric who held significant land in the region (something further compounded by the fact that he saw himself as the rightful Eorl of Northumbria given his status as the leading member of the House of Bamburgh).

The north was a relatively lawless region, and the Chronicle “The Life of King Edward” (written by Tostig’s sister Edith!!!) explains how Tostig’s aim “as a son and lover of divine justice” was to reduce this terrible lawlessness. This view is however disputed by the C version of the AS Chronicle which explains how Tostig “killed an imprisoned all those less fortunate than himself.” In the winter of 1065 the Northern Magnate Gospatric was killed, with many blaming Tostig something made worse when Tostig had 2 members of the House of Bamburgh murdered whilst under safe conduct at York. On 3rd October, a group of 200 thegns loyal to the murdered Gospatric marched into York, aiming to replace Tostig with Morcar (with Morcar aslo assisted by his brother Edwin of Mercia). The Northumbrian rebels marched south, demanded Tostig be outlawed. Keen to prevent civil war Edward agreed with gtheir demands and declared him an outlaw.

Despite his removal, in some ways, Tostig’s rule can be seen as successful as the rebels marched south asking the court to authorise the appointment (shows Tostig brought the area under royal control and that Edward’s attempts to exert greater control over the region were at least partially successful). Harold Godwin was sent to negotiate, but the Northumbrians refused to take Tostig back, and when Harold met them at Oxford he agreed to their demand, with Edward rubber stamping it. Tostig was forced into exile with no help from his brother Harold.

The effect of the exiling of Tostig

In many ways this reflected positively on Harold Godwin, as it suggested that he put the stability of the country ahead of his family ties, however in the long term this move would be disastrous, as it split the unity of the Godwins. Tostig fled to Norway where he joined with Harald Hardrada, and would invade in 1066. Harold now married Morcar’s sister brining him closer to both Morcar and Edwin (Harold had 5 children from his concubine Edith Swanneck).

Mercia and Wales under Edward

With the Godwin’s growing in power in England, Mercia began increasingly to look towards Wales for support when the House of Mercia had any grievance. In Spring 1055 when Aelfgar of Merica was banished he joined with Gruffydd of Wales in raiding England. Following victory over Ralf of Mantes peace was agreed and Aelfgar was restored to the earldom, with Gruffydd kept his conquests in return for promising to be faithful to Edward. A similar thing happened in 1058 when Aelfgar was exiled again and got the support of a large Viking fleet a swell as Gruffydd proving how the Mercian Welsh alliance hadn’t been destroyed. The death of Aelfgar and accession of his young son Edwin in 1062 seemed to end the threat, and Edward took advantage of this by invading Wales. In 1063, Harold and Tostig invaded Wales (on command of Edward) Harold from the South and Tostig from the north by sea. Encircled, the supporters of Gruffydd murdered him. Harold Godwin’s reputation became legendary (he also benefited from proving his loyalty to Edward) and the Welsh threat as well as the Welsh Mercian alliance was permanently destroyed.

4 Overcoming the problems caused by his Norman upbringing

As Edward spent most of his life in Normandy, it is inevitable that he was most comfortable around Normans (his mother Emma was also a Norman). This Norman upbringing meant he had few connections with the English Earls (viewing them with a degree of suspicion) as well have relatively little knowledge as to how government in England worked.

It would appear that Edward was never able to truly overcome these problems. The growth of Norman appointments within England (E.g. Ralf of Mantes, Ralph the Staller, Robert of Jumieges and the various Norman Bishops) are testimony to Edward’s close links with Normandy and his determination to involve men in his administration who he felt he could trust, however these appointments in turn made it difficult to win the support of the English Earls. IN FACT IT IS INTERESTING TO NOTE THAT THE PERIOD FOLLOWING THE EXPULSION OF MOST OF THE NORMAN PARTY (1052) RELATIONS BETWEEN EDWARD AND THE ENGLISH EARLS IMPORVED, AS DEMONSTRATED BY THE RELATIVE LACK OF CHALLENGES HE FACED FROM THEM. Such Norman connections would however still prove crucial, leading to the succession dispute of 1066.

5 Maintaining the power of the monarchy

Upon becoming king, Edward faced a difficult challenge in maintaining the power of the monarchy; Cnut had been a strong and authoritiative leader who had been able to exert great control over his Earls, however his two successors Harefoot and Harthacanute had struggled to maintain the power of the monarchy. As a monarch, Edward needed not just to be able to control the country as a whole (as previously explored), he also needed to be able to control the Earls in order to suitably maintain the power of the monarchy. It is difficult to judge just how successful Edward was in this respect, however it is important to acknowledge that when Edward became king he had no army of his own, and was completely depended upon securing the support of the Earls.

Although the growing power of the Godwins did to an extent reduce the power of the monarchy, early support of the Godwins (and the Northern Earls) in 1043 helped increase the power of the monarchy through the removal of the Viking threat in the shape of Emma. The exile of the Godwins in 1051 in the short term increased the power of the monarchy, as his chief rival had been removed, and the Northern Earls had rallied to him providing armed support, and thus helping to maintain the power of the monarchy (as Edward had armed support from key nobles). The return of the Godwins in 1052 did however reduce the power of the monarchy slightly, as Edward was forced to back down, restore all Godwin titles and exile Norman enemies of the Godwins such as Jumieges and the bishop of Dorcehster. This suggests that it was the Godwins who had the power at this point, and not Edward.

On the other hand, Edward was arguably successful in maintaining the power of the monarchy after this point- although the Godwins grew in power dramatically, they largely did what Edward demanded of them (as shown when Harold Godwin exiled his brother Tostig rather than risk civil war by supporting him). In fact, we could argue that the unclear succession helped increase the power of the monarchy towards the end of his reign, as Harold Godwin in particular was keen to support Edward (thus increasing the power of the monarchy) in an attempt to win influence and be named as his successor).

Handling of taxation/ other economic issues

As King of England, Edward had huge financial powers, he had the largest demesne (owned most land) which could be rented out for money for others to farm. He was also the only person who could call taxations. When we look at the amount of money left on Edward’s deathbed there was however no great profit. He did not however leave a debt, and we must remember that towards the end of his reign he finally completed the costly building of Westminster Abbey, explaining why he had little money left over. This lack of surplus can also be explained by his decision to abolish the Dangeld in 1051.

Edward’s handling of taxation was generally relatively positive, however this would have a negative effect on his levels of success elsewhere. As Edward was a relatively peaceful king (in contrast to Cnut) who had no intention of establishing an empire abroad, he was able to take advantage of the death of Magnus of Norway (the most dangerous rival claimant) by reducing the foreign mercenary fleet from 14 to 5, and then removing them completely the following year. As a result of the money this saved, Edward was able to abolish the dangled/hergeld (the tax raised to defend from potential Viking invasion- used to pay mercenary forces), although he did keep the geld (regular land taxation) with each hide (a subdivision of a shire) having to pay a set fee based on an earlier assessment.

Although this showed generally positive handling of taxation, this would undermine his success in other areas, as to compensate for this lack of naval strength, Edward made an agreement with the key south eastern figures (including the Godwins) that in return for the profits of justice, they (the shires) would provide ships when necessary. Although the action saved money, it deprived him of money, as he no longer got profits from fines and court punishments in these regions. Furthermore, this also served to increase the power of the Godwins (financially as well as politically), whilst also opening the way to piratical raids from Flanders. It is also interesting that in 1052 the Godwins were able to return to England unopposed, with Edward’s new navy able to do little about this.

On a more positive note, the removal of the geld allowed Edward to focus on improving the quality of the coinage and remove the problem of inflation. Whilst Edward was not particularly innovative and inherited an advanced coinage system (there were over 60 mints throughout the country, with coins recalled regularly in order to prevent inflation), as he did not have the need to raise such large sums of money, he was able to bring inflations under control through improving the coinage. Under Edward the number of minting centres increased to 70 and Foreign coins were banned (important as it allowed the quality of coinage to be regulated, preventing inflation or deflation). Only one coin was in existence and the precious metal content of the coins was kept relatively high (between 17 and 21 grains per coin). Crucially, with coins recalled every several years it was possible to change the precious metal content so that the value of the coinage could be increased or decreased when necessary- this was extremely advanced!

Furthermore, Edward was largely able to live of his own (this means that Edward could live off the income he was provided with, and did not have to supplement this with additional taxation) as his land holdings brought in approximately £5,500 a year, meaning he rarely had to resort to demanding tax. He would however have had far more land had he been able to keep the Godwin land taken from them in 1051 whichw as returned in 1052. Although he authorised aggressive measures against both Wales and Scotland, these military operations were not particularly expensive. The Norman Chronicler William of Malmesbury suggests that Stigand would sell Bishoprics and Abbacies for money (for example Wulfstan bought the Bishopric of Worcester in 1062). Whilst this suggests that Edward may have used slightly

underhand means to make money, we have little evidence that this was widespread and that Edward had a plan of selling Church appointments for money.

Military organisation

Although Edward was vulnerable to an extent in that he had few troops of his own (there was no real royal army) and relied on the Earls to provide troops, with the help of the Earls he had sufficient forces to defeat his mother Emma in 1043. Although there was no standing royal army (an army in existence all the time), Edward could call up other soldiers and sailors. The Welsh marches for example had to provide troops for expeditions against Wales should they be required, and we have evidence of Edward doing this twice. In addition each 5 hides of land was supposed to provide one soldier for the army should it be required. The armed forces of the whole kingdom were called out in 1051 and 1052 (to deal with the Godwin threat) and again in 1065 (to deal with the threat of rebellion in the north), however it is interesting to note that this was to counter the threat of rebellion. Often the aim was not to raise troops, but prevent the rebels using these men as their own army! Most of this summoned men were the fyrd- poorly armed men who were not professional soldiers. The elite soldiers the Housecarls were the bodyguards employed by the King and the leading Earls.

The key change made to military organisation by Edward was undoubtedly the reduction and then removal of the foreign mercenary fleet, and its replacement with a fleet organised and paid for by the key south eastern figures such as the Godwins. There is however evidence to suggest that Edward made the navy meet once a year at Sandwich to practice manoeuvres (don’t forget however that the navy had been unable to prevent the return of the Godwins in 1052!).

Although Edward was not particularly aggressive, he was willing to use force where necessary, successfully using it to break the Mercian Welsh Alliance in 1063 and reducing the threat posed by the Scots.

Edward has been criticised by some, as although he was very close to the Normans in some respects, he did not adopt Norman military customs such as men fighting on horseback (although the thegns would ride to the battle on horseback before dismounting). Due to the relative peace of England, there were however few chances to trial new tactics- furthermore the defeat of Ralf of Mantes by the Welsh in 1055 seemed to show the failings of Norman techniques of mounted soldiers.

Establishing a powerful government and extending law and order

Edward had varying levels of success in this respect. To a degree he did succeed in increasing the power of the government, as shown by his increased authority in the Welsh Marches (by destroying the Welsh Mercian Alliance). Furthermore, the actions of the Northerners once they turned against Tostig (marching on London to ask that Edward remove him) again reveals how Edward was successful in increasing governmental authority over the more distant regions within the kingdom.

A powerful government should also see few examples of opposition to it within the country; the events of 1051 and 1052 (Dover Fracas followed by the return of the Godwins) raise questions as to how powerful Edward’s government was (especially seeing as the Northern Earls refused to support the government in 1065), however it is important to acknowledge that this is the only real time of considerable opposition. Furthermore, in 1065, Harold Godwin rallied to the defence of the government rather than his own brother!

The establishing of law and order did not just mean that those who disobeyed the law were brought to justice, it also meant that the King’s laws were implemented throughout the country. The evidence would suggest that in the latter case, Edward was relatively successful, as demonstrated by Tostig’s (unpopular!) attempts to impose taxation on the people of Northumbria, bringing them in line with the rest of the country. Given the evidence we have available, it is harder to pass judgement on how far Edward was able to improve the quality of law and order for ordinary people. The fact that the South Eastern magnates were able to keep the profits of justice (as payment for providing some type of defensive fleet) did ensure that it was in their interests to prosecute those who broke the law (possibly excessively so!), this was only the case in the south eastern counties.

Although Edward can be criticised for allowing the power of the Godwins to grow to dangerous levels, he did also try to ensure that the Earls themselves were not exempt from law and order, as shown by his punishment of Swein after his abduction of the Abbess of Leominster (banished and declared Nithing in 1047), the Godwines after their refusal to follow his instructions following the Dover Fracas, and Aelfgar (banished in both 1055 and 1058). Disputes between the Earls would also be held by the King, as if these were not dealt with then it could lead to civil war. In 1065 for example Edward publicly held the case brought by Tostig that it was Harold who had incited (caused) the rebellion in the north. Although he rejected Tostig’s case, Edward’s willingness to personally listen to disputes was an important part of his kingship. He can however be criticised for his actions in 1051, as he refused Godwin permission to appear before him, holding the case in Godwin’s absence! Although the Vita Edwardi Regis (a chronicle) explains how Edward “abolished bad laws and with the help of his wise councillors enacted good ones” we have no real evidence of this- in fact the only really have the example of how justice was denied to Godwin in 1051!

Edward broke the hereditary succession to the Earldom of Northumbria when he gave it to Tostig instead of Siward’s son. This shows how Edward was willing to give the role to the person who he thought would best do the job and best increase the royal power/ power of the government in the region.

He also treated the position of Earl of East Anglia as an apprentice post rather than viewing it as a hereditary earldom (passed from father to son)- Harold Godwin was Earl of East Anglia before becoming Earl of Wessex ensuring that he had vital experience of running an Earldom before he inherited the post of Earl of Wessex.

Edward also looked to strengthen the ties with the Catholic Church in Rome- Tostig led the great embassy (diplomatic mission) to Rome in 1061. Close ties with Rome were important given the power of the Pope, who could encourage and dissuade other countries to invade. Falling foul of the Pope could for example encourage him to encourage an invasion from a rival claimant such as Magnus.