Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-13T05:12:25.377Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

William of Malmesbury and Robert of Gloucester Reconsidered*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 July 2014

Joe W. Leedom
Get access

Extract

William of Malmesbury's Historia Novella is an apologia for his pro-Angevin patron, Robert Earl of Gloucester, the premier supporter of the Empress Maud in the civil war with king Stephen (1135-1154). Stephen's failure to secure Robert of Gloucester's full backing weakened the reign from the outset. Robert, one of the two or three greatest landholders in the Anglo-Norman world, was among the last and most reluctant magnates to render Stephen homage, and among the first to turn openly against him. The earl of Gloucester became the model for the lay and ecclesiastical pro-Angevin nobility, and William of Malmesbury's panegyric of him guarantees the Historia Novella its place of importance among the sources for Stephen's reign.

Professor Robert B. Patterson has recently argued that the Historia Novella is inaccurate, mendacious, and unreliable, and that its author is unworthy of being called an historian. But a close analysis of Patterson's allegations shows that William's account of earl Robert's actions is consistent with evidence from charters and other chronicles. William of Malmesbury's bias lends interest to his account without seriously compromising its accuracy. The Historia Novella, William of Malmesbury's final work, is a characteristic product of his careful research and scholarship.

Patterson maintains that Robert of Gloucester did not support Maud until 1138, after the earl formally renounced his allegiance to Stephen. In fact, however, Robert was active in his half-sister's service as early as 1126.

Type
Research Article
Information
Albion , Volume 6 , Issue 3 , Fall 1974 , pp. 251 - 265
Copyright
Copyright © North American Conference on British Studies 1974

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

I would like to thank Professor C. Warren Hollister, Professor Richard Harper, and Ms. Jean C. Holzinger for their assistance in the preparation of this article.

References

1 Patterson, Robert B., “William of Malmesbury's Robert of Gloucester: A Re-Evaluation of the Historia Novella,” American Historical Review, LXX, 4 (July, 1965): 983–97.Google Scholar

2 Patterson, , “Re-Evaluation.” p. 987.Google Scholar

3 Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, a. 1126.

4 of Malmesbury, William, Historia Novella, ed. Potter, K.R. (Edinburgh, 1955), p. 4Google Scholar [hereafter cited HN]. Stephen in fact swore first: Weaver, J.R.H., ed., John of Worcester (London, 1908), p. 22.Google Scholar

5 Hollister, C. Warren and Keefe, Thomas K., “The Making of the Angevin Empire,” Journal of British Studies, XII, 2 (May, 1973): 15 and note 64.Google Scholar

6 Cronne, H.A. and Davis, R.H.C., Regesta Regum Anglo-Normannorum, III (Oxford, 1968), #898Google Scholar [hereafter cited Regesta III]. Cronne and Davis date the charter 1126-1135, but this can be refined to 1126-1131, as Maud was not in England between 1131 and 1139. Ranulf of Chester also attests the charter.

7 C. Warren Hollister has prepared a detailed study of the succession plans of Henry I and the factions that began to take shape as a result of his selection of Maud as his heir. “The Anglo-Norman Succession Debate of 1126: Prelude to Stephen's Anarchy,” is forthcoming.

8 Vital, Orderic, Historia Ecclesiastica, ed. Le Prévost, Auguste (Paris, 1855), V: 45–49Google Scholar. William Talvas was fighting for the estates held by his father, Robert of Belleme. Roger of Toeni was involved in a war with Theobald of Blois in 1136.

9 Orderic, V: 46. “Nam eorum quidam Andegavensi favebant.…”

10 Ibid, V:56. of Torigni, Robert, Chronicle, in Howlett, Richard, ed., Chronicles of the Reigns of Stephen, Henry II, and Richard I, (London, 1882), 128.Google Scholar

11 Orderic, V: 52-53.

12 Ibid., “Deinde, provido consultu sapientum, Guillelmo de Guarenna Rotomagus et Caletensis regio commissa est, quae utiliter aliquandiu ab eo protecta est.”

13 The Gesta Stephani provides a partial justification for Stephen's conduct in taking the throne by noting his sobriety in the civil wars that followed Henry I s death. Potter, K.R., ed., Gesta Stephani (Edinburgh, 1955), pp. 1–2Google Scholar [hereafter cited GS].

14 Patterson, , “Re-Evaluation,” p. 986.Google Scholar

15 HN, p. 14. Orderic, V: 50. Robert of Gloucester, William of Warenne, Rotrou of Mortain, Robert of Leicester, and Waleran of Meulan took the body to Rouen, enjoined by Hugh archbishop of Rouen not to leave the corpse unless they did so by common consent. The body was taken to Caen through Bonneville and Pontaudemer.

16 Orderic, V: 56. Robert of Torigni, pp. 128-29. The date is often given as 20 December, but this is incorrect. Robert of Torigni is specific: “Sabbato Jejunii decimi mensis,” the Saturday Ember Day of Advent. In 1135 Ember Saturday fell on 21 December, and the meeting was held “in crastino,” on the next day.

17 Ibid, V: 56. Robert of Torigni, p. 129.

18 Ibid, V: 56. “Venit itaque Rothomagum, et postea Luxovias.…”

19 Ibid, V: 56. “Normann … apud Novum Burgum convenientes.…”

20 Robert of Torigni, pp. 128-29. “…optimates Normanniae confestim miserunt propter comitem Tebaldum, ut veniens reciperet Normanniam.”

21 Orderic, V: 56. “Normanni autem, Tedbaldum fratrem ejus apud Novum Burgum convenientes, sibi praeferre voluerunt.…”

23 Theobald was indignant at the news of Stephen's succession, thinking that as the elder of the two brothers his claim to the throne was better. But it may never have occurred to Theobald that he could have been a serious contender until he heard of Stephen's accession.

24 Many possibilities may have been bruited. The Normans may have asked Theobald to lead a Norman army against Geoffrey of Anjou and the dissident barons so that a de jure succession could be arranged. Robert or Theobald may have suggested a regency in favor of Maud's infant son, Henry. Robert could have been arranging a truce with Theobald, who may himself have been planning to invade the duchy. Or the Normans may have offered Theobald a crown, thinking him to be the best candidate available. But this is simply surmise, and Robert of Gloucester may not even have been present at the larger conference that Orderte describes.

25 Robert of Torigni, p. 129. “His auditis, comes Gloecestris reddidit Castrum Falesiae, quod habebat, asportata prius magna parte thesauri regis Henrici, quod nuper allatum fuerat de Anglia.”

26 To whom did Robert give Falaise? It has been suggested that Theobald received the castle, but the Count of Blois had withdrawn from Normandy when he heard of Stephen's coronation. Richard de Lucy held the castle in 1138 (Orderic, V: 1 15), but Richard had extensive lands in England and was with Stephen at Oxford sometime in 1136 (Regesta III. #142). So Richard de Lucy might not have been in Normandy at all in 1135-36, and we have no certain evidence that he supported Stephen in the opening months of the reign. Stephen could not even be sure that the Norman barons would recognize him: who was in Normandy to take the castle in the king's name?

27 Orderic, V: 56.

28 Patterson, Robert B., “Stephen's Shaftesbury Charter: Another Case Against William of Malmesbury.” Speculum, XLIII, 3 (October, 1968), note 21.Google Scholar

29 Regesta III. #387. Also Patterson, Robert E., Earldom of Gloucester Charters, (Oxford, 1973). p. 95 and noteGoogle Scholar. Round, J.H., Geoffrey de Mandeville (London, 1892), p. 379.Google Scholar

30 GS. p. 8.

31 HN, p. 73: Robert of Gloucester took the young Henry fitz Empress to England, “that on seeing him the nobles might be inspired to fight for the cause of the lawful heir.” GS, p. 1 35: “…Henry, son of the Count of Anjou, the lawful heir and claimant to the kingdom of England, came to England.…”

32 Geoffrey de Mandeville, p. 16. Davis, R.H.C., King Stephen, (Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1967), pp. 21–22.Google Scholar

33 HN, p. 17.

34 Regesta III. #944. p. 341Google Scholar. John bishop of Lisieux and Richard bishop of Bayeux, a natural son of Robert of Gloucester, were also absent.

35 of Huntingdon, Henry, Historia Anglorum, ed. Arnold, Thomas (London, 1879), 259.Google Scholar

36 HN, p. 17.

37 GS, p. 8.

38 HN, p. 17.

39 GS, pp. 8-9.

40 Patterson, , “Shaftesbury Charter,” p. 488.Google Scholar

41 Galbraith, Vivian H., “Royal Charters to Winchester,” English Historical Review, XXXV, (July, 1920): 384.Google Scholar

42 HN, p. 18.

43 Patterson, , “Shaftesbury Charter,” pp. 487–89.Google Scholar

44 Regesta III. #818. This volume of the Regesta was published after Patterson's Speculum article. See “Shaftesbury Charter.” note 22.

45 Poole, R.L., Studies in Chronology and History, (Oxford, 1934). pp. 11–20.Google Scholar

46 Patterson, , “Shaftesbury Charier,” pp. 487–89.Google Scholar

47 This itinerary has been prepared following Regesta III: xxxix–xl.Google Scholar

48 Regesta III, #919, has ihe longest witness list of a charier issued before Easter, 1136. It was issued at York in February, 1136, and has thirleen attestations. Thurstan archbishop of York, Alexander bishop of Lincoln, Audoin bishop of Evreux, John bishop of Sees, and Adelulf bishop of Carlisle are the main attestors. By contrast, the Shaftesbury Charter has eighteen witnesses, including Robert of Gloucester, Roger of Warwick, Ranulf of Chester, and William of Warenne.

49 See appendix.

50 Regesta III. #818 and xiii. Scriptor xiii figured the dale on one of Henry I's charters in the years from the incarnation and from the blessed memory of Pope Innocent (III: but Innocent was still alive when the charter was issued. Similarly, Scriptor xiii has misdated Regesta III. #132. As with the Shaftesbury Charter, the regnal year is correc t but the A.D., date is not.

51 Poole. Studies, pp. 1-27. See also. Luchaire, Aehille. ed., Louis VI Le Gros (Paris, 1890). #298, #367, #444Google Scholaret passim for examples of misdated charters. Patterson dismisses the idea that a scribe might not know the correct year (“Shaftesbury Charier.” note 22).

52 Regesta III. #818.

53 HN, p. 18.

54 Orderic. V: 82. But when Geoffrey of Anjou invaded on 1 May 1137, the garrison of Robert's castle at Caen remained loyal to Stephen.

55 HN, p. 21.

56 Orderic, V: 81. Robert of Torigni, p. 132.

57 Orderic, V: 81.

58 Ibid, V: 84.

59 Robert of Torigni, p. 132. Orderic, V: 81-82.

60 Robert of Torigni, p. 132. Orderic, V: 84.

61 Ibid, V: 103-105.

62 Robert of Torigni, p. 136. “Hoc eodem anno, mense Octobri, Gaufridus, comes Andegavensis, obsederat Falesiam per xv. dies cum magno exercitu, et Robertus comes Gloecestriae cum eo, qui circa praeteritum Pascha concordiam cum eo fecerat,”

63 HN, pp. 22-24. Orderic, V: 108.

64 Patterson, , “Re-Evaluation,” pp. 992–995.Google Scholar

65 Orderte, V: 108.

66 Chronicon Thomas Wykes, in Luard, Henry, ed., Annales Monastici, IV: 22.Google Scholar

67 HN, p. 44. GS, p. 111.

68 Regesta III, #274, confirms Geoffrey II de Mandeville in the St. Claire lands. #277 confirms Geoffrey III de Mandeville in his father's lands. Both charters are witnessed by Robert of Gloucester.

69 Patterson, , Gloucester Charters, p. 6Google Scholar and note, explains the conflict with Richard bishop of Bayeux over these lands.

70 Regesta III, #277.

71 Book of Fees, p. 874. Salter, S.R., The Cartulary of the Monastery of St. Frideswide at Oxford, II, #816.Google Scholar

72 Patterson, , “Re-Evaluation,” pp. 993–94.Google Scholar

73 Patterson, , “Re-Evaluation,” pp. 994–95Google Scholar; “Only Robert's raid against Nottingham in 1140 does not seem susceptible to explanation by land or family.”

74 HN, pp. 67-68. Shortly after Stephen was released in 1141, Robert of Gloucester was offered a large share in the government if he would “abandon his sister and come over to the king's side.…”

74 HN, pp. 67-68. Shortly after Stephen was released in 1141, Robert of Gloucester was offered a large share in the government if he would “abandon his sister and come over to the king's side.…”