Hello, welcome to History here at Oak National Academy.

My name's Mr. Newton and I will be your teacher today guiding you through the entirety of the lesson.

Right, let's get started.

In these lessons, we will focus on a specific historical environment within Norman England and today, we will learn about the sources and historical context of this period.

By the end of this lesson, you will be able to explain the strengths and limitations of key sources for Norman England.

Before we begin, there are a few keywords that we need to understand.

A source is a direct or firsthand piece of evidence from the past.

Historical context is what is happening at the time of the historical event, possibly shaping it, and contemporary means from the same time as something.

Today's lesson is split into three parts.

First, we'll look at visual sources before moving on to text sources and finally, looking at the material sources.

Right, let's begin by looking at visual sources.

The most famous visual source for Norman England is the Bayeux Tapestry.

This 70-meter long embroidery was created sometime between 1066 and the 1080s.

If you have a look at the photo on the right, it shows the Bayeux Tapestry.

It tells the story of the Norman invasion and the Battle of Hastings.

While it is of key importance to the Battle of Hastings, it also illustrates many aspects of Anglo-Saxon and Norman life and culture.

For example, this scene shows a motte-and-bailey castle in France being attacked and if you have a look at the image, it shows Normans attacking Dinan Castle in a war against Brittany, and we can see key features of a castle are shown.

We can see a motte which is the mound, the hill, we can see a palisade, and we can see a tall tower in the middle.

We can also see that it's surrounded by ditches and there's a steep walkway or drawbridge to the left.

The tapestry shows how castles were defended and attacked with fire and on foot.

Much of what we know about 11th century Norman weapons, armour, and equipment comes from the Bayeux Tapestry.

In this scene from the Bayeux Tapestry, we can see Norman knights attacking the Anglo-Saxon shield wall on the left at the Battle of Hastings and here we can see a castle being constructed at Hastings.

In this scene, we can see the Normans which have a very distinctive Norman haircut building the castle.

Castles were constructed very quickly by conscripting local people to dig the ditches and pile up earth for the mottes.

This scene appears to show two of the workers fighting each other behind the Norman overseer's back.

We also get a picture of daily life amongst the Normans including the Norman elites.

This includes food and drink, hunting, William's favourite hobby, and travel.

If you have a look at the scene from the Bayeux Tapestry, it shows Bishop Odo in the centre blessing a meal and William is next to him.

Women rarely feature, in fact, there are only three in the whole tapestry compared to 35 dogs and 190 horses.

Okay, let's have a check for understanding.

Discuss this question with a partner.

What makes the Bayeux Tapestry a useful source for understanding the historical context of Norman England? Pause the video, have a quick discussion, and then come right back.

Okay, welcome back, so your discussion might have included that the Bayeux Tapestry is useful because it tells the story of the Norman invasion or illustrates key events.

Furthermore much of what we know about 11th century Norman weapons, armour, and equipment comes from the Bayeux Tapestry.

It also illustrates important features of castles and castle-building and finally, it shows scenes from everyday life, meals, religious practises, hobbies, et cetera.

However the Bayeux Tapestry does have limitations as a source.

It was almost certainly made on the orders of Bishop Odo of Bayeux who became the Earl of Kent in 1066.

The tapestry shows Odo playing an important role.

Perhaps the embroiders made his role seem more important than it was because he was their boss.

Another limitation is that the tapestry shows events from the Norman point of view.

It makes a big deal of Harold swearing an oath to William and then breaking that oath.

The tapestry is also incomplete.

It is likely that it originally had a final section showing events up to William's coronation in December 1066.

The tapestry is not always clear.

This may be because the embroiderers were English women from Canterbury and so it is more sympathetic to Harold and the English than the Normans.

If you have a look at the scene on the right, it shows Harold's coronation and the caption calls him king or rex even though the Normans never accepted that Harold was ever king.

The tapestry may not be very accurate.

For example, the chainmail hauberks worn by knights could not have had onesie-style legs as depicted and if you have a look at the scene on the right, we can see William riding into battle in a chainmail hauberk with legs.

These would've been too restrictive and uncomfortable for horse-riding.

They must have been more like skirts.

Perhaps the women embroiders had not seen Norman knight' armour in detail at the time the tapestry was made.

Okay, let's have a check for understanding.

What I want you to do here is decide whether each feature is a strength or a limitation of the Bayeux Tapestry as a source for the historical context of Norman England.

Tick the column to show your choice or choices.

So have a read through those features and decide whether that's a strength or a limitation of the Bayeux Tapestry.

Pause the video, have a go, and then come right back.

Okay, welcome back, let's check those answers.

So for the first feature, a contemporary source created in the period 1066 to the 1080s and yes, I think we could probably put that as a strength as it's a great insight into the historical context of the time, giving us an insight of what people at the time thought about those events.

And the next feature stops at the end of the Battle of Hastings.

I think that's probably a limitation as it doesn't show us what happens after the Battle of Hastings.

The next feature, made by order of Bishop Odo of Bayeux, Earl of Kent, and that perhaps could be seen as a limitation.

Odo is depicted rather self-importantly in his tapestry, so it might have exaggerated his role and the next feature, embroidered by English women from Canterbury.

Again, that might be a limitation as they're being asked to embroid things such hauberks which they might have not seen before.

But we could also put this as a strength because it might introduce an English point of view into the tapestry which gives us a more rounded historical context.

Rather than just being a Norman point of view or Odo's point of view, we're also getting that English perspective.

The next feature generally represents the Norman view of events.

Yes, and as we've already hinted, that could be seen as a limitation as we're only really getting one side of the historical context.

And finally, it shows a range of features of everyday Norman life and we can put that as a strength.

So it's great we've got the big events like the Battle of Hastings being depicted, but we've also got the sort of granular detail of everyday life such as eating and hunting.

Okay, let's move on to Task A.

How far do you agree with Sofia's view? So let's read Sofia's view.

"The Bayeux Tapestry is not a valuable source for understanding Norman England because it only covers the period 1064 to 1066." So what I want you to do is write one paragraph that states whether you agree or disagree and explain why.

So have another read of Sofia's View, decide whether you agree with her or not, and then explain why.

Pause the video, have a go at the task, and then come right back.

So there's many ways you could have written your paragraphs, but compare what you have with what I have here.

So if you chose to disagree with Sofia, your answer might look something like this.

"I disagree with Sofia's view that the Bayeux Tapestry is not a valuable source because it only covers a short period.

One reason for this is that the period covered is extremely important in English history and as a result, the tapestry is a key source for understanding the events of the Battle of Hastings and Norman weapons and armour.

A second reason is that the tapestry is a contemporary source for information on features of Norman England such as castles and how they were constructed.

This means that tapestry is also a valuable source for a much longer time period." Okay, and if you agreed with Sofia's argument, your paragraph might look something like this.

"I agree in parts with Sophia's argument.

The Bayeux Tapestry only goes up to the point at which the Normans won the Battle of Hastings and even for the years 1064 to 1066, the tapestry is not a fully reliable source.

It was made for a Norman audience and so only puts forward the Norman view of events.

However I do think it has some value as a source.

For example, from the tapestry, historians can understand a lot about the Norman military and the role of innovation such as knights and castles which had a long-lasting impact on England." Okay, great, let's move on to the second part of the lesson, text sources.

So compared to later periods of history, Norman England does not have many contemporary text sources.

In other words, primary sources written in the Norman period.

However there are three important contemporary sources that we can look at.

The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, Domesday Book, and William of Poitier's "Gesta Guillelmi," "The Deeds of William." So let's have a closer look at the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle.

The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle provides year-by-year accounts of key events in Anglo-Saxon and Norman England.

Strengths include it is a contemporary source, events are usually described within a year of them happening.

It is written by English monks, so historians get insights into English culture and reactions to the Norman invasion and conquest, and finally, it details key events such as battles and revolts with different accounts written in different monasteries, sometimes providing different details.

As with all sources, the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle does have limitations.

These include that it provides an Anglo-Saxon and monastic viewpoint which is sometimes biassed against the norms. Sometimes descriptions of key events are very brief or described vaguely or are simply missing.

Different accounts of the same event do not always match up, making it hard to know what really happened, and finally, it does not have many accounts of everyday life.

It's focused on religious matters and key military and political events.

So let's have a look at a passage from the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle.

So below we've got a passage about William from the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle for 1087 and that was the year of William's death.

So in the passage it said, "He caused castles to be built which were a sore burden to the poor.

The rich complained and the poor cried, but he was too relentless to care even though everyone hated him.

Everyone had to submit themselves completely to the king's will if they wanted to keep their lives, and their land, and their goods and be in the king's favour.

Okay, let's have a check for understanding.

Which two of the following are limitations of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle as a source about Norman England? A, written within a year of the events it describes.

B, some events are only described briefly or vaguely.

C, provides insights as to how the English felt about Normans.

D, accounts are often biassed about Norman actions.

Pause the video, select your two correct limitations, and come right back.

Okay, welcome back, and well done if you knew it was B, some events are only described briefly or vaguely and D, accounts are often biassed about Norman actions.

Okay, let's have a look at our next text source.

Domesday Book was compiled from William's great survey in 1086.

It provides an incredibly detailed record of landholding and resources in Norman England.

Strengths include that it provides masses of reliable data that historians can use in many different ways.

For example, looking at population sizes, economic growth, and regional differences.

It's also evidence of how the Normans' administration functioned and what information Norman government was most interested in, money, and finally, the records are not just for 1086, but also for 1066, so Domesday Book shows the impact of the Norman Conquest.

However Domesday Book also has limitations.

It does not cover all regions of England,.

For example, there are no records for London.

The records are also very difficult to interpret.

It's often used a confusing coding system and had lots of abbreviations, and finally, the records are most detailed for Williams tenants-in-chief and provide less detail for ordinary people.

Okay, let's have a look at an entry from the Domesday Book so it can get further understanding of how useful this source can be.

So for our first entry here, this is from Earley in Berkshire, the entry states that, "The king, William the Conqueror, holds the land in Earley.

Almar used to hold it freely from King Edward." So from here historians can work out how much land William held personally by collating all similar entries and if this was done for Almar, we can see that Almar was linked to 179 places in 1066, but just 17 in 1086.

So clearly the Norman Conquest was not a great time for Almar, losing most of his land within 10 years.

Okay, let's have a look at another entry.

This one's from Newington in Oxfordshire.

The Archbishop of Canterbury holds Newington.

In the time of King Edward, it was worth 11 pounds.

Now it is worth 15 pounds." So from this historians can learn that land in this part of southern England became more valuable.

However if we have a look at this entry from Carleton in Yorkshire, we read that, "Ulfkil holds Carleton.

In the time of King Edward, it was worth 40 shillings," that's two pounds.

"Now it is worth 20 shillings," one pound.

So we learn here that land in this part of Yorkshire became less valuable and this might have something to do with William and his Harrying of the North.

Okay, let's check for understanding.

For which two of the following questions can historians use Domesday Book to help find an answer? A, did most people support the collection of information into Domesday Book? B, did land in England become more or less valuable after 1066? C, did William the Conqueror personally control lots of land after 1066? D, did people give information about landholding enthusiastically? Pause the video, select the two correct answers, and then come right back.

Okay, welcome back, and well done if you knew it was useful because you could find the answer to the question B, did land in England become more or less valuable after 1066? And C, did William the Conquer personally control lots of land after 1066? The "Gesta Guillelmi" was written in the 1070s by a Norman priest known as William of Poitier.

It's a historical record of William of Normandy's life.

Strengths include William of Poitiers served as a priest of William of Normandy and so he knew William very well.

The "Gesta" provides all sorts of insight into William's life that historians would otherwise not know about and it provides in-depth information about preparations for William's invasion and for the events of the Battle of Hastings, written only a few years after they happened.

And of course, as with all sources, there are implementations to the "Gesta" which include William of Poitiers was a loyal supporter of William of Normandy and much of the "Gesta" is written to praise and flatter his lord.

Also the "Gesta" is one-sided and does not consider the English perspective on the invasion at all.

And finally, the account provided by the "Gesta" stops in 1071, so it does not include an account of later key events of Norman England.

Okay, let's check for understanding.

When using the "Gesta Guillelmi," why do historians need to keep in mind that William of Poitiers wrote it in order to promote William of Normandy and his claim to the English throne? Discuss your ideas with a partner.

Pause the video, have a quick discussion, and then come right back.

Okay, welcome back, so you may have discussed that historians need to keep in mind that Poitiers was writing in order to promote William's claim to the English throne.

It therefore includes details that support William's claim whilst neglecting those that suggest other claims were also valid.

Okay, great, let's move on to task B.

The most important written source for understanding the historical context of Norman England is Domesday Book.

What I want you to do is list three points that agree with this statement and three points that disagree with it.

Consider using strengths of other text sources for your counter arguments.

Pause the video, have a go at the task, and then come right back.

Okay, welcome back, so let's look at the points that agree first and your answer could include that Domesday Book has masses of reliable data about landholding and resources.

It also shows how the Norman government's administration function and the records are not just for 1086 but also for 1066, so Domesday Book shows the impact of the Norman Conquest.

Okay, let's look at the points that disagree with the statement and here I suggested that you could reference other sources for your counter arguments.

So you might have said that some areas are not covered by Domesday Book, for example, London.

Also unlike the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, it does not tell us how English people felt about living under Norman Rule.

And finally, unlike the "Gesta," it does not provide an account of how Normans justified the conquest and their rule over England.

Okay, excellent, let's move on to the final part of the lesson, material sources.

So material sources are physical objects from the past that can be analysed to gain insights into historical events, culture, and daily life.

For Norman England, buildings are an example of material sources.

The photo on the right is of the ruins of St.

Oswald's Priory in Gloucester, an Anglo-Saxon priory that declined in importance in Norman England.

So for us to interrogate and understand Norman buildings, there are certain questions that we can pose.

For example, what does it tell us about Norman culture and values? Why was it built in that specific location? What was its purpose and what can we learn about Norman life from that? What were its impacts and consequences? Why was the building built in that way? What was its function or functions? Why did someone want to build this specific building? What was their motivation? And finally, what important events and people are connected to the building.

Like other types of sources, material sources have limitations, as well as strengths.

Strengths include that buildings provide evidence of technology and engineering skills.

Coins and trade goods show us where people traded and it's also direct evidence from Norman England, it's not rewritten or recorded by later writers, and it can show us how non literate people lived and worked, people who did not record things in writing.

Limitations include that if there are no written records, we can struggle to interpret how a material source was used or what it was used for.

Material sources have often been remodelled, extended, or damaged and so their evidence can be incomplete or complex to untangle.

And most buildings survive because they were important.

Surviving buildings for ordinary people are very rare.

So here's a photo of Totnes Castle in Devon.

So the question we can pose for this building is what was the purpose of the motte-and-bailey castle at Totnes? So in this photo of Totnes Castle, you can see how steep and imposing the sides of the motte are and by the way, the path would not have been there in Norman times.

One purpose of the motte was defence.

The steep-sided, fireproof motte made the castle difficult to attack.

The castle had a military purpose, to control Totnes and the area around it, and it housed a garrison of soldiers who would ride out to deal with any trouble.

So what does Totnes Castle tell us about Norman culture and values? The motte raised the castle high above Totnes, dominating the settlement.

The Normans wanted everyone to know they were in control.

Okay, let's check for understanding.

Choose the two correct answers.

Motte-and-bailey castles were constructed to A, provide homes for Anglo-Saxons, B, defend the soldiers who lived in them, C, make the landscape look more interesting.

D, intimidate potential rebels.

Pause the video, have a think, and come right back.

Okay, welcome back, and well done if you knew it was B, defend the soldiers who lived in them and D, intimidate potential rebels.

Okay, so let's interrogate another material source and here we're gonna look at Winchester Cathedral.

So the first question we'll pose is why was the building built in that way? So Winchester was the capital of the Anglo-Saxon kingdom of Wessex.

A cathedral was built here in the seventh century and by the ninth century, it was one of the largest cathedrals in Europe.

In 1079, the Normans pulled down the Anglo-Saxon cathedral and started building a new one.

William installed a new Norman bishop at Winchester in 1070, Bishop Wakelin, and Wakelin introduced church reforms. Wakelin was responsible for starting the construction of the new cathedral in 1079.

It was built in the Normans' favourite Romanesque style.

If you have a closer look at the building, we can see the central tower and this was built in the early 12th century.

The transepts were completed under Wakelin's supervision and survive to this day.

The Romanesque style featured huge stone walls representing strength.

The arched windows were small to allow high walls.

The cathedral towered over everything, representing Norman power and control.

The style was based on Roman architecture.

The Romans had ruled Britain like the Normans and the Normans wanted the English to think of them as being like the Romans.

The Normans built many cathedrals and of course, cathedrals were places of worship, and the Normans were pious, very religious.

Okay, let's have a check for understanding.

Which two of the following can be learned from studying Winchester Cathedral? A, the image which the Normans wished to project.

B, the values which existed in Norman culture.

C, the thoughts and feelings of Anglo-Saxons about Norman reforms to the church.

Pause the video, have a think, and come right back.

Okay, welcome back, and well done if you knew was A, the image which Normans wished to project and B, the values which existed in Norman culture.

Okay, let's move on to Task C.

What I want you to do here is answer each question in one sentence.

From the physical remains, what have historians learned about the A, purpose of Totnes Castle and B, impact of Totnes Castle? Pause the video, have a go at the task, and come right back.

Okay, welcome back, so compare your sentences with what I have here.

So for 1a, historians have learned that Totnes Castle was built to house soldiers and to deter rebellions.

And for B, historians have learned that Totnes Castle would have dominated the settlement of Totnes and intimidated the local Anglo Saxon population.

Okay, let's move on to the second part of Task C.

What can historians learn about Norman changes to the English church from the study of Winchester Cathedral? List three points.

So pause the video, list your three points, and then come right back.

Okay, welcome back, so your points could have included one, that the Normans were trying to recall the power of the Roman Empire, two, that the Normans wanted to show their piety and Christian devotion, and three, that the buildings asserted Norman power and control over England.

Okay, that's great, let's summarise today's lesson.

Visual sources, text sources, and material sources can all be used to deepen our understanding of the historical context of Norman England.

There are strengths and limitations to each type of source and historians ask questions of sources to produce evidence for a particular inquiry, eg, what does Totnes Castle tell us about Norman culture and values? Well done on a brilliant lesson and hopefully you've seen how useful sources can be, with both strengths and limitations still providing a utility to historians.

I really hope this has sparked your curiosity to delve deeper into those primary sources or have a greater appreciation of the buildings that are still with us to this day.

See you in the next lesson.