A Student's History of England, v. 1: B.C. 55-A.D. 1509: From the Earliest Times to the Death of King Edward VIIGardiner, Samuel Rawson
History
A Student's History of England, v. 1: B.C. 55-A.D. 1509: From the Earliest Times to the Death of King Edward VII
Gardiner, Samuel Rawson
Great Britain -- History; Great Britain -- History -- Outlines, syllabi, etc.
13. =William's Great Councils.=--Though William was himself the true
ruler of England, he kept up the practice of his predecessors in
summoning the Witenagemot from time to time. In his days, however, the
name of the Witenagemot was changed into that of the Great Council,
and, to a slight extent, it changed its nature with its name. The
members of the Witenagemot had attended because they were officially
connected with the king, being ealdormen or bishops or thegns serving
in some way under him. Members of the Great Council attended because
they held land in chief from the king. The difference, however, was
greater in appearance than in reality. No doubt men who held very
small estates in chief might, if they pleased, come to the Great
Council, and if they had done so the Great Council would have been
much more numerously attended than the Witenagemot had been. The
poorer tenants-in-chief, however, found that it was not only too
troublesome and expensive to make the journey at a time when all long
journeys had to be made on horseback, but that when they arrived their
wishes were disregarded. They therefore stayed at home, so that the
Great Council was regularly attended only by the bishops, the abbots
of the larger abbeys, and certain great landowners who were known as
barons. In this way the Great Council became a council of the wealthy
landowners, as the Witenagemot had been, though the two assemblies
were formed on different principles.
14. =The Gemot at Salisbury. 1086.=--In =1086=, after Domesday Book
had been finished, William summoned an unusually numerous assembly,
known as the Great Gemot, to meet at Salisbury. At this not only the
tenants-in-chief appeared, but also all those who held lands from them
as sub-tenants. "There came to him," wrote the chronicler, "... all
the landowning men there were over all England, whose soever men they
were, and all bowed down before him and became his men, and swore
oaths of fealty to him, that they would be faithful to him against all
other men." It was this oath which marked the difference between
English and Continental feudalism, though they were now in other
respects alike. On the Continent each tenant swore to be faithful to
his lord, but only the lords who held directly from the crown swore to
be faithful to the king. The consequence was that when a lord rebelled
against the king, his tenants followed their lord and not the king. In
England the tenants swore to forsake their lord and to serve the king
against him if he forsook his duty to the king. Nor was this all. Many
men break their oaths. William, however, was strong enough in England
to punish those who broke their oaths to him, whilst the king of
France was seldom strong enough to punish those who broke their oaths
to him.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account