Lesson video

Hello, welcome to history here at Oak National Academy.

My name's Mr. Newton and I will be your teacher for today guiding you through the entirety of the lesson, breaking down any tricky concepts we may encounter along the way.

Right, let's get started.

Over the next few lessons we'll be thinking about our big inquiry question.

How far did Norman government change England? This is the question we will use to investigate the nature of Norman England and what life was like under Norman rule.

After the Normans had successfully conquered England, it still remained uncertain how the defeated Anglo-Saxons and their Norman conquerors would coexist in the same nation or state.

How would William rule England? What would he change? What would he keep the same? And what was life like for ordinary people under Norman rule? In this lesson, we will look at the changes made to land ownership.

And by the end of this lesson, you'll be able to describe the tenurial revolution which followed the normal conquest.

Before we begin, there are a few key words we need to understand.

Landholding is how land is owned or rented.

Tenure is the conditions under which land is held.

Inheritance is land or other property that is passed on to an heir when someone dies.

Castelry is land under the control of a castle and used to support the castle.

Relief is a payment made by an heir to their overlord to be allowed to inherit a thief, to inherit their land.

So today's lesson is be up into three parts.

We'll first look at the revolution that took place in landholding before moving onto the feudal system and inheritance.

And finally, the transfer of land to Normans, demonstrating a huge impact on the government of England.

Okay, let's begin the lesson with a tenurial revolution.

So the Normans introduced a new system for landholding in England.

In this new system, William, as king, owned all the land.

The Normans claimed this had been the same under Edward the Confessor, but this was different from landholding in Anglo-Saxon England.

Some land in Anglo-Saxon England could be bought and sold, other land was owned by families and could only be passed on to others through inheritance.

Some land called loan land could be granted out by its owner for a certain period of time.

In other words, a landholding in Anglo-Saxon England was complex.

However, Williams new feudal system was much simpler and a lot stricter.

Tenants-in-chief could keep hold of land in return for their homage and providing knights.

If a tenant-in-chief broke their vows to William, he could take land away from them.

This happened to Odo of Bayeux in 1082 for example.

He upset William, was imprisoned and lost all of his land in England.

English commentators at the time assumed that William had introduced this landholding system from Normandy.

However, this was not the case.

It was also different from landholding in Normandy.

It is true that Norman barons swore homage to the Duke of Normandy and provided knights for him.

That did not mean William owned their land.

Instead, Norman estates called allods were inherited within families.

So when Odo of Bayeux was disgraced and lost his English lands, William could not take away his lands in Normandy.

Let's have a look at the illustration of the royal seal of King William I.

This seal was a wax mole attached to documents that proved the order was from the king.

And we can see William is seated like a judge with his sword of justice.

But was William's new system of landholding a fair and just system? Historians call this new system a tenurial revolution.

Tenure, the rules about how land was held, was changed significantly in England.

This change greatly increased William's power and control over England.

The tenurial revolution shifted power away from landholders to towards royal authority.

Landholders were now much less secure under Norman rule.

Okay, let's have a check for understanding.

I want you to complete the missing word of this sentence.

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

Okay, welcome back.

Let's check the correct answer.

So the sentence should have read; in Norman England, all land was owned by the king.

Which three of these were types of tenure in Anglo-Saxon England? A, land that could be bought and sold, B, land that could only be passed on by inheritance, C, land that could be granted to others for a set period, D, land specifically for supporting castles, castelries.

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

Okay, welcome back.

Let's check those answers.

So the three types of tenure in Anglo-Saxon England were, A, land that could be bought and sold, B, land that could only be passed on by inheritance and C land that could be granted to others for a set period.

Why is Bishop Odo a good example to use for explaining differences in tenure between Normandy and Norman England? I want you to discuss this with a partner.

So a quick discussion about why Bishop Odo is a great example which highlights the differences between Normandy and Normand England when it comes to tenure.

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

Okay, welcome back.

Hopefully you had some great discussions there and your discussion could have included some of the points I have here.

So Odo is a good example to highlight the differences because in England, William could take away land from tenants-in-chief who were disloyal, and this is what happened to Odo in 1082 after he was imprisoned.

However, this was very different from the situation in Normandy.

William's barons swore loyalty to him, but he did not own their land.

So Odo did not lose his lands in Normandy in 1082.

So this shows how Odo is a great example to highlight the differences in landholding in Normandy and Norman England.

Okay, let's move on to task A.

Hereward the Wake was exiled from England in 1050 and he returned in 1067.

And we can see an illustration of Hereward on the right.

So given that Hereward was away from England in 1050, right up until 1067, England clearly witnessed a lot of change during that time.

So what I want you to do is use these sentence starters to describe to Hereward the Wake, how tenure had changed between 1050 and 1067.

And here are your two sentence starters.

Pause the video, complete the sentence starters, and then come right back.

Okay, welcome back.

So let's see how you could have answered the first sentence starter.

In 1050, people held land in a range of different ways, for example, some land could be bought and sold, other land could only be passed on through inheritance and some could be granted out by its owner for a certain period of time.

Okay, let's have a look at the next sentence.

In 1067, tenure had changed significantly because William now owned all the land and tenants-in-chief held their land from William in return for their homage and providing knights.

If a tenants-in-chief broke their vows to William, he could take their land away from them.

Okay, great, let's now move on to the second part of the lesson, the feudal system and inheritance.

So William's new feudal system made tenure much less secure.

Not only could William take land away from those who displeased him, William also had significant powers to influence inheritance.

If a tenant-in-chief had no heir, the land came back to William plus all the money it's made.

This was called an is escheat.

Another way that William influenced inheritance was in the payment of reliefs.

These relief payments could be very substantial.

In order to get tenure over their father's land, an heir had to pay money to William for the right to inherit, as well as swear allegiance to William, paying homage.

If you have a look at the illustration on the right, it shows the act of paying homage and we can see a noble or a landholder knelt before the king.

This was a ceremony where a public promise was given to be loyal to William.

The promise is with the king and God.

And it was unlikely you would break a public and spiritual promise like this.

It would not be good for your reputation or for your soul.

Therefore, paying homage tightened the bond between the landholder and the king.

William also imposed a similar system on Anglo-Saxon landholders after he became king.

William made Anglo-Saxon landholders pay to get their lands back.

In order to redeem or get back their land, many Anglo-Saxon tenants-in-chief had to pay large sums of money.

If they could not afford to pay, the land went to someone else who could.

Norman's inherited lands from their old Anglo-Saxon owners, a reward for their support.

William was able to pass these lands on to his followers if the previous Anglo-Saxon owners had betrayed their king, William by fighting against him at the Battle of Hastings or had been involved in resistance of any kind after 1066.

This is how most major Anglo-Saxon landholders lost their land.

Their lands were not usually passed directly onto Normans.

Instead, different pieces of land were packaged together into new manors and handed over to Williams followers.

In most cases, Normans did not have to pay a relief when they inherited this land.

This is because they were actually being given this land as a reward for their support for William.

The new tenure system also applied to the church.

Church leaders were now tenants-in-chief.

For example, church leaders such as archbishops, bishops and abbots became tenants-in-chief.

They also had to swear allegiance to the king and provide men for knight service.

And because they were his tenants-in-chief, when they died, William took back the land and decided who the new tenants-in-chief would be.

After William's death, his sons took this power to new levels, holding back on choosing a successor after the death of a bishop so that all the rents from the land came directly to them.

Okay, let's check your understanding.

True or false? Although William changed tenure for most landholders, this did not apply to the church.

Is that true or false? Pause the video have a think and come right back.

Okay, welcome back and well done if you knew that was false.

But why is that false? I want you to justify your answer.

Is it false because A, bishops and abbots paid homage to William but did not have to provide knights or B, when a bishop or abbot died their church lands return to William until he chose their successor.

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

Okay, welcome back and well done If you knew it was B, when a Bishop or abbot died, their church lands returned to William until he chose their successor.

Which two of the following were ways in which William could influence inheritance? A, heirs had to pay William a relief to inherit land.

B, family land could only be passed on through inheritance.

C, heirs had to pay homage to William to inherit land.

D, church leaders also became tenants-in-chief.

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

Okay, welcome back and well done if you knew it was A, heirs had to pay William a relief to inherit land and C heirs had to pay homage to William to inherit land.

Okay, excellent.

Let's move on to task B.

And we can see Izzy here has got a judgement she wants to tell us about.

So Izzy has come to a judgement about inheritance in Norman England.

What I want you to do is identify three points that Izzy could use to support this judgement.

Okay, so let's see what Izzy's judgement is.

"The new feudal system of landholding meant William had a lot of influence over in inheritance of land." Okay, so we need to come up with three points that can back up our argument.

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

Okay, great.

Welcome back.

So there's many points that we could've come up with there.

Your answer could have included the following.

Heirs had to pay homage to William before they could inherit that certainly backs up Izzy's judgement.

Heirs had to pay a relief to William before they could inherit.

And finally, if a tenant-in-chief died without an heir, the land and its revenues came back to William and this was known as escheat.

Okay, perfect, that leads us onto the final part of today's lesson, the transfer of land to Normans.

The Norman conquest saw a massive transfer in landholding from Anglo-Saxons to Normans.

In 1066, approximately 5,000 thegns held land.

However, "Domesday Book" shows that in 1086 landholders were now mostly Normans.

For example, of the 180 tenants-in-chief with the largest land holdings, worth more than 100 pounds a year, only two were Anglo-Saxon.

Of the 1400 tenants-in-chief with smaller manors, only around 100 were Anglo-Saxons.

By 1080, only one of the 16 bishops in Norman England was an Anglo-Saxon.

Have a look at the diagram on the right.

This is a great way to show the scale of the transfer of land to Normans.

At the top of the diagram, these figures represent the 5,000 Anglo-Saxon thegns that held land in 1066.

And we can see with the arrow pointing down, by 1086, their land was redistributed to approximately 200 Norman lords at the bottom of the diagram.

What this meant was that half of all the land in England was held by just 200 Norman Lords.

So as you'll remember, William had promised land to his followers.

And at first these lands came from the earldoms of the Godwinson.

For example, Harold's earldom of Wessex was split between William FitzOsbern and Odo of Bayeux.

William also set up smaller grants of land within these holdings.

And these were called castelries because they supported a castle.

For example, William de Warenne was granted the castelry at Lewes.

And if you look at the photo on the right, we can see William de Warenne's Lewes castle.

An issue that often came with granting these lands out was that land grabs followed these grants, increasing tensions.

Once these new landholders have been granted their land or castelry, they often set about adding to their lands by grabbing more from the Anglo-Saxons around them, including church land.

These land seizures could have been triggers for the revolts against Norman rule in 1067 onwards.

The result of the revolt was however, that Anglo-Saxon suspected of involvement in them were dispossessed and their lands turned into manors and castelries for Normans.

Okay, let's check your understanding.

Of the 180 tenants-in-chief with the largest land holdings in 1086, how many were Anglo-Saxons? A, 100, B, 80, C, 20, D, 2.

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

Okay, welcome back and well done if you knew, yes, it was just 2 that were now Anglo-Saxons.

Okay, let's have another check here.

What I want you to do is discuss one or more of these questions with a partner.

And the questions I want you to discuss are, where did William get the land to transfer to his followers? Why did William transfer so much land to his followers? Why did William break up large earldoms into small areas of land? So pause the video, have a discussion, try and discuss one or more of those questions and then come right back.

Okay, great.

Welcome back.

Hopefully you had some great discussions there.

Your discussion could have included the following.

So for the first question, where did William get the land to transfer to his followers? First from the Godwinson earldoms, that was a straight swap that happened after the Battle of Hastings.

And then later as there was Anglo-Saxon resistance to Norman rule, it came from other rebel Anglo-Saxon landholders.

Okay, let's have a look at the second question.

Why did William transfer so much land to his followers? And perhaps you discuss something like, because he needed to reward them for their role in the conquest or because he could trust them to help him control England.

And the final question, why did William break up large earldoms into smaller areas of land? And we could have said so he could reward more followers or so no one got to have so much land that they had the wealth and military power to challenge William's control of England.

Okay, excellent.

We've now reached the final task, task C.

What I want you to do here is study the two pie charts on the left.

These are pie charts of the land holding in England in 1065 and in 1086.

Once you've studied them, suggest two ways in which Williams control was increased through the transfer of lands after the Norman Conquest.

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

Okay, great.

Welcome back.

So your answer could have included, William divided the land of the Anglo-Saxon earls up among his Norman tenants-in-chief.

This increased his control because it transferred land from rebellious Anglo-Saxons to loyal Normans.

And of course, in the pie chart from 1065, we could see that the land was held by Anglo-Saxon earls.

However, in the pie chart of 1086, we could see that those were now Norman tenants-in-chief.

Okay, another way you could have mentioned was that William reduced the large earldoms into much smaller land holdings.

This helped his control as no one owned as much land as he did, so no one was easily able to challenge him for control of England.

And when looking at the pie chart from 1065, we could see the huge earldoms that King Edward had granted to the earls, representing huge slices on the pie charts.

However, if we had a look at the land ownership in 1086, we could see that William has broken up the earldoms into smaller, less powerful Norman lordships, which he has distributed to his tenants-in-chief, represented by smaller slices on the pie chart.

And another way that we could have mentioned was that William gained more land than Edward the Confessor had held as king.

This gave him direct control over more of the land and meant he had more land to use in keeping Normans loyal and under control.

And looking at the pie chart from 1065, we can see that King Edward, which was the light peach colour slice, only held about a third of England's land.

However, if you have a look at the pie chart of land ownership from 1086, we can see that William directly held twice as much land as King Edward had.

And of course, we know that in reality William owned all of England and that his tenants-in-chief knew very well that they only held their land under strict conditions given by William.

And this kept Norman lords loyal and under his control.

Okay, great.

Let's summarise today's lesson.

Historians refer to a tenurial revolution in Norman England because William made fundamental changes to tenure.

These changes were based on all land belonging to the king, who then granted out land in return for service and homage.

As a result of these changes, tenure became much less secure and William gained much more influence over inheritance.

Under this new system, William oversaw a large scale transfer of land from Anglo-Saxon earls and thegns to Norman tenants-in-chief.

Well done on a brilliant lesson, and I hope you've learned a lot about how William changed the way England was governed with his tenurial revolution, his new system of landholding.

And how this helped him to keep control and inevitably, this had a huge impact on life in Norman England.

I will see you next time when we continue our inquiry.

See you in the next lesson.