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 going.

Today's lesson, looking at the Norman England historic environment, we're gonna be focusing on the siege of Pevensey.

And by the end of the day's lesson, we'll be able to explain how Pevensey Castle was captured during a siege.

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

A rebellion is an armed uprising against a ruler, and a siege is a military tactic of surrounding a settlement or fortification in order to cut off supplies and weaken troops.

Today's lesson will consist of two separate learning cycles, and our first learning cycle is looking at the rebellion of 1088.

So let's get going.

Now, on the 9th of September 1087, William I, or William the Conqueror, as many people known by, died of a wound received whilst riding his horse at the siege of Mantes.

And on his deathbed, William made a number of decisions that would have a profound impact upon the territories of both England and Normandy over the next few years.

He granted the Duchy of Normandy to his eldest son, Robert Curthose.

And this had not been a foregone conclusion as William and Robert did not hold much love for each other.

Robert had previously rebelled against his father and had nearly killed him in battle in 1079.

The situation regarding this is, is utterly ridiculous as well.

William the Conqueror had four sons.

Robert Curthose was the eldest, the second one Richard died, and then his two younger sons were William II or William Rufus is a better known and Henry.

And William II, William Rufus and Henry were bored one day, so they decided to empty chamber pot over Robert's head.

A chamber pot is what you use to go to the bathroom during the nights, it was a full chamber pot, they were standing at a balcony and they emptied it over their older brother's heads.

He got angry and started a fight with them, William the Conqueror, their dad had to come in and separate it.

Robert felt that his two younger brothers weren't punished enough, so he left the court of his father and started rebelling, started raiding his lands, and it got to the state where Robert and William, his father, were actually in battle against each other.

Robert knocked him off his horse and was gonna kill him, but then he heard his father's voice and realised it was his dad.

So sent him on his way, sent him packing.

But it was, I mean, we are talking about here three eventual, one king of England and two future kings of England and the Duke of Normandy.

And they're fighting, they're starting a rebellion because of the ridiculous prank.

But that was the situation at that point.

In any case, William the Conqueror's second surviving son, William Rufus, was given the kingdom of England.

And as I said, there was as in the son before him, Richard, Richard of Normandy who was known as, and he actually died of a hunting accident in the New Forest.

And we think around about 1070, which is really an alarming coincidence because in 1100, that's almost exactly how William Rufus died as well.

He also died in a hunting accident in the New Forest, not very far away from where his older brother had died as well.

The youngest son, Henry Beauclerc, was given 5,000 pounds to buy land of his own.

And although in some parts of Europe, it was customary for a man to divide his lands and belongings amongst his sons when he died.

It was not the Norman way.

And William I decision caused concern amongst the Norman nobles, Robert Curthose and William Rufus absolutely hated each other.

I don't know if it's necessarily because of that childish prank, that particular incident or whether there was no love lost in beforehand.

I suspect they probably didn't like each other very much before that as well.

But in any case, by this point in time, by the point in time of their father dying, these two boys absolutely hated each other.

And any Norman who obeyed one of them, so do you obey your new king of England, William Rufus, or do you obey your Duke of Normandy, Robert Curthose? By doing so, you will be sure to anger the other.

And this is a real problem for the Norman nobles who held lands in both England under King William Rufus and in Normandy, under Duke Robert Curthose.

So from the perspective of the Norman nobles, the simplest answer really was to just ignore William's will and instead declare one of the brothers ruler of both lands.

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

So I like to identify the two sons of William the Conqueror who fought for the throne of England in 1088.

So there was it Robert Curthose? Was it Richard of Normandy? Was it William Rufus or was it Henry Beauclerc? So choose two of those options now.

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

Those are the correct answers.

Now, the decision over which brother to support was a relatively difficult one.

And the reason being is that both brothers had difficult personalities.

Neither of them were especially liked by Norman nobles.

Many of the Norman nobles chose to support Robert as he was considered the weaker minded of the two.

And therefore, the nobles believed that they could gain more power under his rule than under William Rufus.

As William Rufus was seen as being much more like his iron-willed and controlling father.

Six of the 10 largest Norman landholders in England, according to the Doomsday Book 26, declared their support for Robert around Easter 1088.

And after this point, they raided William Rufus's lands, they stocked their castles with provisions and quite simply, they then waited for William Rufus's response.

Another check for understanding now.

What was one of the reasons why some of the Norman nobles support Robert Curthose as king of England? Was it because he had a better claim to the throne? Was it because they did not want to serve two rulers? Or was it because the nobles all hated William Rufus? So choose one of those options now.

Okay, if you chose B, then congratulations.

That is the correct answer.

Now, William Rufus's response was varied.

He had the support of a great many nobles himself as well as that of all of the bishops of England.

He then promised some of the nobles who rebelled against him an increase of their lands and wealth if they supported him instead.

So he bribed them.

And these promises, although they weren't kept, they did have the desired effect of turning many of Robert's supporters against him.

He also promised the English people "The best law that I had ever been in this land." Those were his words, and that pleased the local Anglo-Saxons as well.

And this then had the effect of freeing up many of the scattered Norman garrisons from where they were controlling the local population and instead allowed William Rufus to redeploy his troops where they were most needed.

And finally, for those nobles who could not be won over by promises, William Rufus took direct action against them himself.

Let's have another check for understanding now.

So what were two of the reasons why some of the Norman nobles supported William Rufus as king of England? Was it because he appealed to the general population? Was it because they did not want to serve two rulers? Or was it because he promised to increase supporters' land? So choose two of those options now.

Okay, if you chose A and C, then well done.

Those are the correct answers.

Let's go for our first task for today.

So I'd like to complete the sentence starters using evidence that you've learned so far.

So there are four sentence starters on the screen there.

William the Conqueror died in 1087 and left his territories to.

Need to finish that sentence.

Many of the Norman nobles chose to support Robert Curthose because.

William Rufus had the support of.

And then finally, William Rufus had gained the support through.

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

Okay, welcome back.

I hope you've got okay with that task.

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

So you might have said William the Conqueror died in 1087 and left his territories to his sons.

He granted the Duchy of Normandy to his eldest son, Robert Curthose, and gave the kingdom of England to another of his surviving sons, William Rufus.

Many of the Norman nobles chose to support Robert Curthose because he was considered the weaker minded of the two brothers, and therefore, the nobles believed they could gain more power under his rule.

Six of the 10 largest Norman landholders in England declared the support for Robert.

William Rufus had the support of a great many nobles, all of the bishops of England and much of the local population.

And then finally, William Rufus had gained the support through promises he had made.

For example, he promised some of the nobles who rebelled against him an increase of their lands and wealth if they supported him instead.

Similarly, he promised the English people the best law that had ever been in this land.

So hopefully, you've got similar answers to myself.

If you don't have similar answers to myself, then at least hopefully you've got some evidence to support the point that you have made there as well.

And let's go for another task now.

So I'd like to read the interpretation below.

So it's from Alex and he says, "William the conqueror made a mistake in dividing his territories between his sons." And I'd like to think, to what extent do you agree with Alex's interpretation? And regardless of what your opinion is, I'd like for you to support it with evidence.

So try and get a couple of bits of evidence to support the point that you are going to make, whether you agree with Alex's interpretation or not.

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

Okay, welcome back.

I hope you've got okay with that task.

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

Seema said, "I agree with Alex's interpretation.

To some extent, William must have known how his sons felt about each other and the problems this would've caused for the Norman nobles who held lands in both Normandy and England.

It was William who gave the nobles these lands, so he knew how valuable they were.

He could have potentially prevented the rebellion of 1088 by giving all of his lands to one of his sons and money to the other, as he did with his youngest son, Henry Beauclerc.

However, William May have divided his lands between his sons in order to try and prevent his eldest son, Robert Curthose from rebelling.

Robert had previously rebelled against his father, and William may have felt that he would do the same if he gave all of his lands to his younger son, William Rufus.

Due to Robert's previous rebellion in which his father was nearly killed, it would've been very unlikely for William to have given all of his lands to Robert.

He must have felt he could not trust him.

So he likely hoped that being Duke of Normandy would be enough to satisfy a Robert." If you hold a different opinion to myself or from the interpretation, that's absolutely fine, as long as you've got the evidence to back it up, that's the key thing here.

Okay, let's move on then to our second and final learning cycle for today, which is looking at the siege of Pevensey Castle.

Now, the leader of the rebellion of 1088 in England was Bishop Odo of Bayeux, who is the Earl of Kent.

He was also the richest man in England after the king, and he was the half-brother of William the Conqueror.

Odo had been one of William's most trusted followers, but had spent the final few years of William's life in prison for the crime of organising a military expedition to Italy without the king's approval.

Apparently, Odo was gonna try and make himself the Pope through force, and William disapproved.

On his deathbed, William had pardoned his brother and ordered for him to be released, and he had been persuaded to do this by Odo's brother, and therefore, William's other half-brother, Robert, Count of Mortain.

Odo and his brother secured themselves in Pevensey Castle after Odo instructed Robert Curthose's supporters to terrorise the country.

From Pevensey castle, they awaited the arrival of Robert's army from Normandy in what they hoped would be scenes reminiscent of William's invasion 22 years beforehand.

However, poor weather drove Robert's army back to the shores of Normandy and prevented their crossing.

And without Robert leading the fight in England, the rebellion began to fizzle out.

This is partly one of the reasons why many of Robert's supporters turned against him.

Not necessarily 'cause he didn't show up because of the weather, but the perception was he didn't show up because he was just quite a lazy guy.

There was no doubt in that he was an exceptional warrior, but he didn't really have that sense of drive and purpose and motivation to get up and do things himself.

And as a result of that, many of Robert's supporters thought the worst of him he didn't show up, and therefore, they also began to turn against him as well.

So another reason why he lost supports.

Well, let's have a check for understanding now.

So who led the rebels at Pevensey in defiance of King William Rufus? Was it Bishop Odo of Bayeux? Was it Roger of Montgomery? Or was it William de Warenne? So make your choice now.

Okay, if you chose A, then congratulations, that's the correct answer.

Now, in Pevensey, Odo and Robert, Count of Mortain relied upon the castle's strong defences, and they also relied on the local assistance of Roger of Montgomery, who is the holder of the Rape of Arundel, and Robert, Count of Eu, who is the holder of the Rape of Hastings.

And just to make it clear, a rape is the traditional name for an administrative district in Sussex, which actually predated the Norman Conquest.

Now, the rebel leaders also expected Robert Curthose to arrive from Normandy and help them.

And taking control of Pevensey Castle would therefore be a logical first step to conquering England, as this is where his father's conquest had begun from.

However, Roger of Montgomery and Robert, Count of Eu, were won over by William Rufus's promises and deserted Robert Curthose's course.

This was a serious blow to Odo and his brother Robert, Count of Mortain, as was the news that William de Warenne, who is the holder of the Rape of Lewes, were providing active support to William Rufus.

In the early summer of 1088, King William Rufus arrived at Pevensey Castle, intent on capturing Odo and putting an end to the rebellion.

He besieged the castle by land and by sea, battering the Roman walls with trebuchet, which is a form of catapult.

However, the defences of Pevensey Castle, which the Roman walls and the Norman motte-and-bailey Castle, they've simply proved too strong.

The defenders also put up a strong resistance themselves.

They mortally wounded the old warrior, William de Warenne, who died of wounds sustained in the siege on the 24th of June 1088.

William Rufus though was ultimately victorious as after six weeks, the rebels agreed to surrender Pevensey Castle to the king, believing that Robert Curthose was coming to support them.

The defenders had not stockpiled enough provisions to withstand lengthy siege.

Facing starvation, they had little choice but to surrender.

William Rufus was quite lenient with his uncle, Robert, Count of Mortain, who was allowed to remain as the holder of the Rape of Pevensey.

The family though did ultimately lose their land when his son, William, rebelled against William Rufus's ultimate successor, Henry I.

Bishop Odo was captured on his route back to London.

He then escaped his captors and made his way to Rochester Castle, where he again faced a lengthy siege.

Once again, William Rufus besiege his uncle, who once again was forced to surrender because once again, Robert Curthose failed to appear in England to support.

Odo was banished to Normandy where he finally met up with his nephew.

And by the summer of 1088, William Rufus had put down the rebellion and confirmed his status as king of England.

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

So how did William Rufus react to Odo and the rebels reinforcing Pevensey Castle against him? Did he ignore it and focus on the targets? Did he laid siege to the castle? Or did he promise land and wealth to Odo to return the castle? Make your choice now.

Okay, if you chose B, then congratulations.

That's the correct answer.

And another check for understanding now.

It's a true or false statement.

William Rufus storm Pevensey Castle after besieging it for nearly six months.

Is that true or false? Make your choice now.

Okay, if you chose false, then congratulations.

That is a false statement.

And the reason being is that the siege of Pevensey Castle lasted six weeks and only ended when the defenders ran out of food.

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

So I'd like you to write an extended paragraph explaining what the siege of Pevensey can tell historians about the castle's significance to the Normans.

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

Okay, welcome back.

Hope you've got okay with that task, let's think of what you could have said then.

So you could have said that the siege of Pevensey Castle tells historians that the castle was seen as very important for the Normans on both sides of the rebellion.

For Odo of Bayeux and Robert Curthose, it was the gateway to a Norman invasion of England.

If not for the bad weather that prevented Robert's ships from crossing the Channel, there is every reason to believe that Robert Curthose would've landed at Pevensey Castle as a first step to conquering England, just as his father had done 22 years previously.

The siege of Pevensey Castle also tells historians that the combined Roman walls and Norman motte-and-bailey castle were an extremely strong defence against an attacking force.

William Rufus attacked it from both land and sea, and also bought powerful siege equipment, trebuchets, against the walls, but was unable to take the castle by force.

The castle only fell because the defenders ran out of food.

This proves that Pevensey Castle was an extremely strong castle and had been built this way because the significance of its location.

If you have a different answer to myself, that's absolutely fine as long as you support it with evidence and you've explained how the evidence supports your points.

That's what I'm looking for here.

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

So the division of William the Conqueror's land after his death between two of his sons, Robert Curthose and William Rufus, led to conflict.

Robert Curthose wanted the throne of England as well as the Duchy of Normandy that he had been given.

Some of the Norman nobles led by Bishop Odo of Bayeux led a rebellion against King William Rufus in 1088.

Odo of Bayeux and his brother, Robert, Count of Mortain, held Pevensey Castle and awaited Robert Curthose's arrival.

William Rufus personally led a six-week siege against Pevensey Castle.

Despite repeated attacks, the castle only fell because the defenders ran out of supplies.

Thank you very much for joining me today.

Hopefully you enjoyed yourself, hope you learned one thing and hopefully I'll see you again next time.

Bye-bye.