Hello and welcome to today's history lesson.

My name is Mr. Merrett and I'll be guiding you through today's lesson.

So, let's get started.

Today's lesson, looking at the Norman England historic environment is focusing on rebellions against Norman rule.

And by the end of today's lesson, we'll be able to recall key rebellions against Norman rule in Wales and the Marches.

In order to do that, we need to use some key terms, and our key terms for today are rebellion and revolts.

A rebellion is an armed uprising against a ruler and a revolt means to take violent action against a ruler.

Today's lesson will consist of three separate learning cycles, and our first learning cycle is looking at rebellions during the reign of William I, so let's get going.

So, the first rebellion we'll look at will be the rebellion from Eadric the Wild between 1067 and 1069.

And Eadric the Wild was an Anglo-Saxon thegn from Mercia.

He was one of the leading landholders in modern day Shropshire and Herefordshire, and historians think probably a thegn linked to the Bishop of Worcester.

In 1067, Eadric rebelled against Norman control as a result of losing lands and authority to Norman's and Eadric's rebellion relied upon support from Wales.

The first significant action of Eadric's rebellion occurred when he allied with the Welsh princes of Powys and Gwynedd who were Bleddyn and Rhiwallon and attacked Norman held Hereford.

Eadric's forces succeeded in sacking the town and laying waste to the surrounding area, although an attempted siege of Hereford Castle failed.

This was probably the point at which William FitzOsbern was appointed as the Marcher Earl of Hereford.

FitzOsbern certainly led the Norman forces against Eadric's attack on Shrewsbury in 1069 and was successful in defeating the rebels.

1069 was a year of rebellions across Norman England and Eadric and his Welsh allies were able to link their uprisings to rebellion also taking place in Staffordshire and Shropshire led by Earl Edwin.

The defeat of Eadric by William FitzOsbern was, therefore, a very important victory for the Marcher Earl.

Okay, let's have a quick check for understanding now.

Which two Welsh kingdoms allied with Eadric the Wild and is rebelling against Norman rule in 1067? Was it to Deheubarth, Gwent, Gwynedd, or Powys? Make two of those choices now.

Okay, if you chose C and D then very well done.

There's the correct answers.

Now, the next big revolt we're gonna look at is the Revolt of the Earls, which took place in 1075, and this was a significant rebellion against William the Conqueror led by Roger de Breteuil, who is Earl of Hereford and Ralph de Gael, who's the Earl of Norfolk.

And they did this together with the Anglo-Saxon Earl of Northumbria, Waltheof.

Roger de Breteuil was the son of William FitzOsbern, who had died in battle in Flanders in 1071.

The reasons for the revolt were largely to do with Roger and Ralph being dissatisfied with the reduction in their powers and influence as earls compared to what their father's had.

The counter argument, of course, would be that their fathers had earned their position, they'd earned their power, and their sons had yet to do so.

In reality, though, the more authority that William took back for himself and therefore took away from these new young earls, the more that these young earls resented it.

Roger and Ralph's plan involved a coordinated uprising with the support of Waltheof who had significant influence in the north and also Viking allies in Denmark.

And their strategy was to leverage their combined military strength to challenge William's authority and possibly divide the kingdom up amongst themselves.

Roger's role was to raise troops from the west and link up with Ralph's forces from the East.

Roger de Breteuil's forces attempted to cross the River Severn to link up with Ralph's troops, but they were held up by the forces loyal to William, who were commanded by Bishop Wulfstan of Worcester and Abbot Ethelwig of Evesham.

And this containment preventing Roger from being able to support Ralph, who's troops were defeated by an army led by Bishop Odo and William de Warenne.

Ralph was forced to retreat to Norwich Castle and after that he then fled to Brittany, so he got away.

Waltheof was eventually executed, arguably unfairly because it was him that was actually who first backed out of the revolt and told William the plans and he was rewarded with then execution instead.

Roger de Breteuil though was captured.

He was tried for treason and he was imprisoned for life.

King William did not appoint another earl for Herefords, and there was a pause in Norman expansion in Gwent in Southeast Wales as a result.

Okay, let's have another check for understanding.

Roger de Breteuil, one of the leaders of the Revolt of the Earls in 1075 was the Earl of which of the Marcher earldoms? Is it Chester, Shrewsbury, or Hereford? Make your choice now.

Okay.

If you chose C, then very well done.

That's a correct answer.

Right.

Let's go for our first task for today.

There's interpretation of the screen in front of you there.

It's from Andeep, and he says, "The Revolt of the Earls represented a more significant challenge to Norman control than the rebellion of Eadric the Wild." Now, what I'd like you to consider is to what extent do you agree with Andeep interpretation, and I'd like to support your opinion with at least two pieces of evidence.

So, pause the video while you complete this task and I'll see you again in just a moment.

Okay, welcome back.

Hopefully, you're okay with that task.

Let's think about what you could have said.

So you could have said, "Andeep's interpretation is correct to a limited extent because the Revolt of the Earls in 1075 was organised by important men from different regions of England, the earls of Hereford, Norfolk, and Northumbria who looked for support from the Vikings.

So, if all of these forces had followed their intended plan, then King William would've had to fight enemy forces all across his kingdom.

However, the plan quickly fell apart.

The Earl of Northumbria fled and the Earls of Hereford and Norfolk were prevented from joining forces and quickly defeated ending what could have been a serious rebellion before it really started.

The rebellion of Eadric the wild, however, achieved genuine gains and was part of a wider rebellion that William had to contend with in the years following the Norman Conquest.

Eadric successfully destroyed the town of Hereford, which was more damaging than anything that the Revolt of the Earls managed to achieve.

He also drew the Welsh into battle against William's forces giving William another problem to deal with.

The rebellion of Eadric the Wild occurred in 1067 before William consolidated his hold on England whilst other rebellions were taking place elsewhere around the country, making it a genuine cause for concern for William.

Now, if you hold a different opinion to myself, that's absolutely fine.

The key thing is that you've used at least two specific pieces of evidence to back up your point of view and you've fully explained why you hold your point of view.

As long as you've done that, then you've done a perfectly good answer.

Let's go for our next learning cycle, which is looking at the Norman retreats during the rule of William Rufus.

Now, William I seemed happy to let the Marcher Earls take charge of Norman expansion into Wales, but in 1080, he did carry out a pilgrimage to St.

David's in the far southwest of Wales.

The purpose of this was really to show off Norman power and involved a now typical Norman combination of castle building.

For instance, Cardiff Castle may very well date from this visit and control of the church as St.

David's was the spiritual heart of Christianity in Wales.

The key event of the pilgrimage was that William recognised Rhys ap Tewdwr as the ruler of Deheubarth.

In return for ap Tewdwr swearing loyalty to William as his overlord, which also involved a yearly payment of 40 pounds to the English king.

However, in 1093, Rhys ap Tewdwr died in a fight with Norman settlers and Norman's grabbed the opportunity that the power vacuum created in Deheubarth to push further into Welsh territories.

And their initial successes were short-lived, however, as a major rebellion against the Normans broke out in 1094 led by Gruffudd ap Cynan in the north and Cadwgan ap Bleddyn in the south.

And I'm sorry if my pronunciations are off there.

These leaders rallied the Welsh forces and launched a series of gorilla attacks against Norman castles and settlements.

Let's have a quick check for understanding now.

So, King William the Conqueror went on a pilgrimage to St.

David's in southwest Wales in 1080.

Is that true or is that false? Okay, if you chose true, then very well done.

That's the correct answer.

And it's true because St.

David's was the centre of Christianity in Wales.

So by visiting there, William was able to assert Norman control of the land and the church in Wales.

Now, in 1095, William II, who's more better known as William Rufus, he himself led a punitive expedition into Wales, but he failed to achieve a decisive victory.

The 12th century English historian William of Malmesbury blamed William Rufu's failure on the difficult mountain terrain and bad weather, but it was more likely due to the Norman's overextending their advance into Wales.

And this led to their soldiers running out of supplies whilst facing effective attacks from the Welsh.

The Earl of Shrewsbury, Roger Montgomery, died in 1094 and his son Hugh took over as Earl only to lose control of the settlement of Montgomery in 1095.

In 1098, Hugh himself was then also killed.

By 1100, the Norman has been pushed back in the north, the centre, and the south of Wales.

Although, they did retain control of Pembrokeshire and much of southeast Quint.

Okay, let's another quick check for understanding now.

Which Marcher earldom lost their earl in 1094 and its successor in 1098 contributing to the decline in Norman influence in Wales? Was it Chester, Shrewsbury, or Hereford? Make your choice now.

Okay, if you chose B then very well done, that's the correct answer.

And let's go for our next now.

So I'd like you to describe the role played by the Kingdom of Deheubarth in Norman attempts to control Wales.

And I just want to write one paragraph for this answer.

So, pause the video while you consider this task and I'll see you again in just a moment.

Okay, welcome back.

Hope you're okay with that task.

Let's think of about what you could have said then.

So, you could have said that Deheubarth was the kingdom in southwest Wales where St.

Davies was located, which was the heart of Welsh Christianity, William the Conqueror made at the destination of his pilgrimage in 1080, which was in reality a barely concealed display of Norman power across southern Wales, and an excuse to build more Norman castles across the region, projecting Norman power ever deeper into the country.

Deheubarth was the starting point of the 1094 Welsh rebellion against Norman control, which successfully reversed the gains that Normans had made into the country in the preceding decades.

Although the Normans retained control over Pembrokeshire, which was the heart of Deheubarth, doing so came at the cost of losing land elsewhere in Wales.

Now, if you picked up some different points to myself then that's absolutely fantastic, hopefully at least discussed a few of those points that I've also discussed as well.

Okay, let's go for our third and final learning cycle of the day, which is looking at the battle of Crug Mawr in 1136.

Now, Henry I, who reigned from 1100 until 1135, continued to deal with Welsh resistance, especially in 1116 when Gruffudd ap Cynan and Gruffydd ap Rhys, who was the son of Rhys ap Tewdwr, launched attacks against Norman held territories.

Henry I responded with a combination of military force and diplomacy, building and reinforcing castles to maintain control.

The construction of castles like Aberystwyth and the strengthening of others was crucial in his strategy.

Henry also used marriage alliances to help stabilise his control in Wales.

The last Norman King of England though was Stephen, who reigned from 1135 to 1154, and he was involved in the Civil War with his cousin Matilda, which is known as the Anarchy.

And this played his whole kingship.

During this time of troubles, Norman controlling Wales was weakened, and Welsh rulers took advantage of this.

In 1136, a revolt in South Wales had defeated Norman forces and the Norman Lord of Ceredigion in West Wales was killed.

Forces from Gwyneth then pushed into Ceredigion from the north and having formed an alliance with Gruffydd ap Rhys, the ruler of Deheubarth, a Welsh army advanced on the town of Cardigan, where the families of many Norman settlers had taken refuge.

two miles outside Cardigan at a place called Crug Mawr, the Welsh defeated an army of Norman and Flemish soldiers and settlers and chased the defeated soldiers to the River Teifi where many drowned as the bridge they were crossing collapsed.

As a result of this defeat, Norman controlling Wales was significantly weakened.

Okay, let's go for a quick check for understanding again.

So, which son of King William I stabilised Norman control of Wales through a combination of castle building and marriage alliance? Was it Roberts? Was it William Rufus? Or was it Henry? Make your choice now.

Okay, if you chose C then very well done.

That's the correct answer.

And another quick check for understanding.

The Battle of Crug Mawr took place outside of which Welsh town controlled by the Normans? Was it Aberystwyth, Brecon, or Cardigan? Make your choice now.

Okay.

If you chose C then very well done, that's the correct answer.

Okay, let's go for our next task for today.

So, I'd like to consider how significant an impact did rebellions against Norman rule have on Norman control of Wales? And I'd like to refer to the following in your answer, I'd like to discuss Eadric the Wild, the Revolt of the Earls, William Rufus, and Crug Mawr.

So, pause the video whilst you complete this task and I'll see you again in just a moment.

Okay, welcome back.

I hope you're okay with that task.

Let's think what you could have said then.

So, you could have said that "Rebellions against Norman control had a significant impact on the extent of Norman control over Wales in the years following the Norman Conquest of England.

The rebellion of Eadric the Wild was significant because it showed the Normans that alliances between English rebels like Eadric and Welsh princes were a real threat to Norman control in the West.

The rebellion of Eadric the Wild, which saw attacks on two English towns was important in William I decision to create the Marcher earldoms to impose control over the Welsh border.

This then began Norman expansion into Wales.

One of the Marcher Earsl, William FitzOsbern, advanced rapidly into South Wales.

The Revolt of the Earls in 1075 slowed this advance after the new Earl of Hereford, Roger de Breteuil, was removed from his position because of the part that he played in the revolts.

William I then left Hereford without an earl, and the push into South Wales lost momentum.

The Welsh uprising under King William Rufus beginning in 1094 had an even greater impact on Norman control of Wales.

William Rufus' campaign to take back control was a failure, and by the end of William Rufus' reign in 1100, the Normans have been forced to retreat in most parts of Wales as Norman control in Wales had been overstretched King Henry I stabilised Norman control of wells through castle building and marriage alliances.

However, the turmoil and confusion over the choice of his successor caused another major Welsh rebellion in 1136, as Welsh rulers sought to take advantage of the distraction that Norman's faced during the anarchy.

The Battle of Crug Mawr, in which a Welsh army defeated a Norman army in West Wales saw a significant weakening of Norman control in Wales.

Therefore, rebellions seriously weakened Norman control in Wales wherever they occurred.

The timing of the rebellions also suggests that Welsh leaders waited for weakened Norman control before leading revolts adding to their effectiveness.

Now, hopefully, you've got an understanding about all of these different factors affected Norman control of Wales.

You've got a slightly different interpretation of the impact of these events than myself, that's absolutely fine, as long as you can back it up with evidence and explain your point of view.

That's the really key thing there.

But hopefully you can see how all of these tie in together to have a real genuine impact on Norman control of Wales.

Okay, let's summarise today's lesson now then.

The Anglo-Saxon thegn, Eadric the Wild, launched a revolt in 1067 with Welsh support to protest the loss of his land.

The revolt of the Earls in 1075, jointly led by the young Earl of Hereford and the Earl of Norfolk, was a serious rebellion against King William in protest at the removal of some of their power.

The reign of King William Rufus from 1087 to 1100 saw a decline of Norman influence in Wales.

And although King Henry I who reigned from 1100 to 1135, stabilised Norman control in Wales during his reign, the Normans lost the battle of Crug Mawr to an army of Welshman in 1136.

And with it, Norman control of Wales was significantly weakened.

Thank you very much for joining me today.

Hopefully you've enjoyed yourself, hopefully you learned something, and hopefully I'll see you again next time.

Bye-bye.