The Normans in European historyHaskins, Charles Homer
History
The Normans in European history
Haskins, Charles Homer
Europe -- History; Great Britain -- History -- Medieval period, 1066-1485; Normans -- Europe
In the last year of his life he made me his nephew a knight at the
age of seventeen in the city of Angers, at the feast of Pentecost,
in the year of the Incarnation 1060, and granted me Saintonge and
the city of Saintes because of a quarrel he had with Peter of
Didonne. In this same year King Henry died on the nativity of St.
John, and my uncle Geoffrey on the third day after Martinmas came
to a good end. For in the night which preceded his death, laying
aside all care of knighthood and secular things, he became a monk
in the monastery of St. Nicholas, which his father and he had built
with much devotion and endowed with their goods.
The great source of conflict between William and Geoffrey was the
intervening county of Maine, whence the Angevins had gained possession
of the Norman fortresses of Domfront and Alençon, and it was not till
after Geoffrey’s death, in 1063, that the capture of its chief city,
LeMans, completed that union of Normandy and Maine which was to last
through the greater part of Norman history. The conquest of Maine was
the first fruit of William’s work as conqueror.
With William’s suzerain, the king of France, relations were more
complicated. Legally there could be no question that the duke of
Normandy was the feudal vassal of the French king and as such bound to
the obligations of loyalty and service which flowed from his oath of
homage and fealty. Actually, in the society of the eleventh and twelfth
centuries, such bonds were freely and frequently broken, yet they were
not thrown off. Here, as in many other phases of mediæval life, we
meet that persistent contradiction between theory and practice which
shocks our more consistent minds. Just as the men of the Middle Ages
tolerated a Holy Roman Empire which claimed universal dominion and
often exercised only the most local and rudimentary authority, so they
accepted a monarchy like that of the early Capetians, which claimed to
rule over the whole of France and was limited in its actual government
to a few farms and castles in the neighborhood of Paris. And just
as they maintained ideals of lofty chivalry and rigorous asceticism
far beyond the sordid reality of ordinary knighthood or monkhood,
so the constant violation of feudal obligations did not change the
feudal bond or destroy the nexus of feudal relations. In this age of
unrestraint, ferocious savagery alternated with knightly generosity,
and ungovernable rage with self-abasing penance.
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.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account