August Archives - Page 2 of 2 - The History JarThe History Jar

I am leaping around historically speaking at the moment. The Battle of Evesham was fought on the morning of the 4th August 1265. Simon de Montfort, Earl of Leicester was in Evesham when news arrived that the royal army under the leadership of Prince Edward had been sighted – probably from the abbey. Despite holding Henry III captive, De Montfort was outnumbered by as many as three to one which is why he started the battle with a cavalry charge which had it succeeded would have split Edward’s army and given de Montfort an opportunity to escape from Evesham with most of his men. He had to charge uphill which was never going to be tactically satisfactory. Unfortunately for de Montfort Prince Edward was going to turn into King Edward I – probably England’s most effective martial king. Edward learned much from de Montfort regarding tactics when he’d been at the receiving end of them at the Battle of Lewes. Now he employed them against de Montfort himself. The royal army swung in from both sides on de Montfort’s flanks and after several hours fighting it became a rout. Henry III barely escaped with his life so eager was the royal army to let blood.

Henry III

There was even a thunder storm to add some atmosphere to an already bloody battle. As many as 4000 of de Montfort’s 6000 men were killed. Many of the nobles that fought on his side were slaughtered including de Montfort and his son Henry. Prince Edward did not offer any quarter regarding de Montfort as a rebel who needed to be extinguished. This was unusual at the time as it was generally accepted that quarter would be given and ransom obtained. De Montfort was killed by Roger de Mortimer. It proved to be the decisive battle of this particular Barons’ War –the Second one- but it would be another two years before peace was restored to the kingdom on account of many of the rebellious barons having well defended castles.

Almost inevitably the town and abbey of Evesham suffered in the aftermath of the battle. Simon de Montfort, whose body was badly mutilated, was finally buried near the high altar in the abbey. Only the bell tower remains today.

Our story actually began when Henry III tried to turn the clock back. The Provisions of Oxford in 1258 had led to reforms from which many would argue parliamentary democracy had its foundation. Henry III tried to undo the reforms and in 1264 had fought the Battle of Lewes. In that battle de Montfort captured Henry III and Prince Edward, effectively allowing de Montfort to rule England for a year and to summon Parliaments thus drawing on Magna Carta which was about fifty years old at that point as well as the Provisions of Oxford. De Montfort ensured that barons loyal to the Crown were fined or incarcerated – the Earl of Derby found himself in the Tower for instance.

However, things did not go all de Montfort’s way. In May one of de Montfort’s supporters, the Earl of Gloucester (yup – that’s right he was a de Clare) suddenly changed sides. The so-called Red Earl on account of his hair colouring and temper helped Prince Edward escape and put an army together. He drew on his extended family and affinity – many of the Crown’s army came from the Welsh marches. The outcome was the slaughter on the 4^thAugust 1265 but ten years later in 1275 the Statute of Westminster accepted many of the Oxford provisions and there was reconciliation between Crown and barons.

A first hand account of the battle may be found at the National Archives. http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/education/resources/magna-carta/battle-of-evesham/

king-william-rufus-william-ii-house-of-normandy-1087-1100-1351385894_b On the 2nd August 1100 William Rufus or rather William II of England, who was born in 1056, had a nasty accident whilst hunting at Brockenhurst in the New Forest. He’d been king since 1087 and demonstrated that being the eldest son of the previous monarch wasn’t the most necessary of qualifications for taking over the job at that time.

William was the third of William the Conqueror’s four sons. Robert Curthose, the eldest son inherited Normandy which was viewed as the greater part of William’s patrimony. There were also the usual family relationships to be considered as well as fate. The second son Richard died in 1075 whilst, er, hunting in the New Forest. William the Conqueror’s youngest son, named Henry, was left money.

William Rufus was not satisfied with England but then he’d never particularly liked his brother Robert either. There is an account of him emptying a chamberpot over Robert’s head for a joke in his youth. Before long William Rufus and Robert were at war. William the Conqueror’s nobility had a bit of a problem. Many of them owned land in both Normandy and England. It was difficult to decide which one of the brothers they should effectively rebel against. Ultimately each man made his brother his heir – demonstrating that neither of them could gain the upper hand. Eventually Robert felt secure enough to go off on a crusade and leave William in charge of Normandy in his absence.

Meanwhile the Anglo Saxon Chronicle was not overly delighted with William Rufus. The chronicler described him as “harsh and severe” though it seems unlikely that it would have been possible to rule in those times if one were approachable and cuddly. The Anglo Saxon Chronicle suggested that William was advised by evil councillors when it came to extorting heavy taxes from his subjects. One reason for William’s need for cash were his wars. It was the Rufus who took on the Scots with regard to the ownership of Cumberland and he also made a less successful foray in Wales. Then of course there was his war with his brother over Normandy.

So, back to 2nd August 1100. The hunting party was composed of Gilbert and Roger de Clare. There was also a man named Walter Tirel the would-be son-in-law of Richard de Clare. William Rufus’s little brother Henry was also on the scene.

The day hadn’t begun well. A messenger had arrived from the Abbot of Gloucester with the news that a monk had dreamed that the king would be killed in the event of him going hunting that day. William was not impressed. He wasn’t terribly impressed with the Church full stop. He was inclined to mock clerics. In another version of the same story it was a friend who arrived with news of an unsettling area, The group split into two parties in order to better chase the deer. William was with Tirel. Apparently there were two deer; one for each man.

William of Malmsebury chronicled what happened next:

“The sun was now declining, when the king, drawing his bow and letting fly an arrow, slightly wounded a stag which passed before him… The stag was still running… The king, followed it a long time with his eyes, holding up his hand to keep off the power of the sun’s rays. At this instant Walter decided to kill another stag. …Walter immediately ran up, but as he found him senseless, he leapt upon his horse, and escaped with the utmost speed. Indeed there were none to pursue him: some helped his flight…”

Instead of shooting a deer Tirel had shot the king through the chest and to make matters worse William tried to remove the arrow, thus hastening his death. To all intents and purposes it looked very much like a tragic accident, although clearly there were those who had their doubts. The Orderic Vitalis also contains an account of events. It said that the sharpest arrows go to the man who knows how to inflict the deadliest shots. Aside, rather understandably from Tirel fleeing the scene, instead of collecting up his brother’s body, Prince Henry dashed off to the treasury at Winchester and having secured it, declared himself to be the new king of England becoming Henry I on 5th August. The de Clare’s were his key supporters and were handsomely rewarded by the new king.

Various historians have argued that the descriptions make it unlikely for Tirel to have been the murderer. They talk about trajectory, distance and the account of the arrow that killed William glancing off the deer meaning that the arrow was more likely to have lost its power. Mason’s biography of William Rufus, published in 2005 suggests that he was assassinated by a French agent. Mason puts forward the theory that William was planning to invade France and that Prince Louis effectively had him replaced with Henry who was not likely to be so bellicose. Mason pins the blame on Raoul d’ Equesnes who was in the household of Walter Tirel.

The evidence for it not being a genuine hunting accident nearly a thousand years down the line is circumstantial. Usually it is pointed out that Tirel was not pursued, that Henry did rather well out of William’s untimely death and that the de Clare family didn’t do so badly either.

Tirel, having scarpered to one of his castles in France entertained Louis very shortly after William Rufus’s death. Tirel never returned to England but not only was he not physically pursued he wasn’t pursued by the law either so his English estates were passed on to his children on his death.

The English forces which were gathered around the Solent ready for William Rufus to invade France were sent home very shortly after Henry declared himself king.

William Rufus’s body was found by a charcoal burner and it was he who transported the body back to Winchester. The image of William from the Stowe Chronicle shows him clutching an arrow.

Mason, Emma. (2005) William II: Rufus the Red King.