Norman Conquests effect on British culture....

[Leet Eriksson]

I've been pretty ignorant on europe during the dark ages up leading to the medieval times,however,i would like to know about the Norman Conquests effect on British culture,or Anglo-Saxon culture,after the Norman conquests britains elite spoke french exclusively,but what about the peasants,and middle class society of britain?Did it change much,or was it no different from Norman(french?)culture?Was britain culturaly assimilated to become Norman,or did its Culture remain intact?

Just wondering,i'd be glad for any answers,also i'm interested on books on this time period(and books on britain,pre-norman,and post-norman),and links if possible.Thanks in advance.

[squippy]

I think it would be more accurate to say that the Normans were culturally assimilated by the 'English'. But paradoxically, it brought England into 'Norman' politics.

The difference bwteen the two political structures is largely becuase of geographic reasons IMO. The islaes, as a discreet entity, had a different experience of the Germanic migrations. While the Germans were pillaging Roman territories, the Germanic rulers of England were able to consolidate their power, so England was amore unified polity than most continental ones just prior to the conquest. But the English crown had passed into the line of Danish kings through Cnut, and his death, and subsequent dismemberment of the greater Danish kingdom, opened the way for the Norman conquest.

Under Norman rule, the Germanic English way of life was largely unchanged for most people. Germanic law still operated in the shires, it was merely over-ruled by Norman law. Once the Plantagenet dynasty assumed power, Norman rule was really Frankish rule. But the old Saxon lords still held significant power and popularity, and so there was much resistance to these 'foreign' rulers. Eventually the loss of continental Plantagenet lands and the formulation of the rights of the barons (Magna Carta) to resist the king encouraged the developement of a specifically English, in some sense anti-French, national identity - at least publically.

However, there was a simnilar thread in the Entrance hall a little while agho that had interesting contributions from others on this topic too.

Norman Davies tome, 'The Isles', carries an excellent discussion of this period, although it covers all the ecorded history of the British Isles.

[Theodoret]

A simple question with a complicated answer.

The Norman invasion affected England, Wales and (to a lesser extent) Ireland. Each of these places had (and still has) a distinct culture.

England was very different to Wales and Ireland, in that the old Celtic culture had been practically extinguished in all places except Cumbria and Cornwall. English culture was Germanic, with regional differences caused by the different peoples who had settled there. In the north, there was a strong Danish influence, thanks to the Danelaw which had existed there. Northumbria and Anglia were Anglian in culture, whilst Mercia and the south were Saxon in culture. The differences can be detected in English regional dialects to this day.

In England, the Conquest was resisted for quite some time (hence the infamous scouring of Northumbria - by far the most willfully independant of the old Earldoms), and William the Bastard and his successors were mainly concerned with holding on to what they had gained. One of the main changes during this period was that castles (mostly wooden forts) began to spring up all over the country in order to keep a better hold on the rebellious population. The Normans also began to replace Anglo-Saxon cathedrals and other civic buildings with buildings of their own, perhaps to extinguish the memories of their predecessors.

English Law was gradually superceded by Norman Law, although this was a long process. The old custom of weregild (blood money) was abandoned, minimum ages for capital punishments were abolished, and the Thing (council of wisemen) no longer met to discuss matters of state (although a Parliament later came into being). Both English (after Alfred's Code) and Norman law were based to an extent upon Roman Law, so bringing the two systems into line was not so radical.

The Feudal system that the Normans brought with them was somewhat different from that of the Anglo-Saxons, although Anglo-Saxon England had been gradually Normanised under Edward the Confessor so, again, the changes were not so radical as one might expect. Primogeniture was the biggest change, although I think the extent of this change is overplayed as some degree of Primogeniture appears to have existed before the Conquest. The Thains were replaced with Knights, and the Anglo-Saxon Earls gradually replaced with Barons. Actual titles varied (many Barons were in fact called Earls, although they were not comparable with the Anglo-Saxon Earls), the main difference being the way power was distributed. The Anglo-Saxon Earldoms were once Kingdoms in their own right, and still fairly independant even with the ascendancy of Wessex. The Barons were not quite so powerful individually, perhaps because William I needed to reward a large number of nobles who had accompanied him (not all of whom were Norman by any means), and perhaps because he wanted to avoid possible rivals. The old Anglo-Saxon families were gradually divested of their power, with almost all lands in Norman hands by 1086.

Linguistically, English became the language of the peasantry, with Norman French the language of official business. As the Normans married into the old English noble families, it is of course possible that Norman nobility learned English from their mothers. Only with Henry II did the language barrier really begin to break down, and it was not until Edward I that English regained it's place as the official language of the Kingdom, perhaps due to the burgeoning power of the mercantile classes. Latin was of course still the language of learning and of religion. Interestingly, Acts of Parliament in the UK are still recorded in Norman French.

William I had given lands along the Welsh border to some of his most powerful subjects, William Fitzosbern (who became Earl of Hereford), Roger Montgomery (who became Earl of Shrewsbury) and Hugh the Fat of Avranches (who became Earl of Chester).

Wales at this time was split into many small kingdoms that had been engaged in a fairly ferocious internicine war. This had ended with the defeat of Caradog ap Gruffudd in 1081, leaving the Kingdoms of Gwynedd and Deheubarth as the main powers in Wales. The Welsh had launched attacks over the border in the early years of the Conquest, as well as
supporting English rebels. Whilst William never seems to have directly ordered an invasion of Wales, he must have encouraged the Barons along the border. Whatever, by 1086, the Earldom of Chester had conquered large swathes of North Wales and the Earl of Shrewsbury had pushed as far as Pembroke, establishing Montgomery which he named after his home town in Normandy. Meanwhile the Earl of Hereford was busily attacking the Kingdoms of Glamorgan and Brycheiniog. However, the Welsh resisted fiercely, and by the death of William II in 1100 the Normans had lost much of their initial conquests. Royal forces became involved, under first William II and later Henry I. By the early years of Henry's reign, the line between Norman controlled Wales (the Welsh Marches) and the parts of Wales controlled by
the Celtic (Brythonic) Kingdoms had been established.

The Welsh version of the Feudal system largely remained in both Welsh and Norman controlled areas. This system consisted of a slave caste (taeogion), a large caste of freemen and lesser nobility, and a small set of ruling families. The main change the Normans made was to impose the manorial system on top of the Welsh caste system.

The Normans encouraged English and Flemish settlers to the Marches, and gave them preferential treatment under law as an encouragement. The Marches were not under Royal control, and the laws were determined by the ruling Baron so English Common Law did not extend to the Marches. The old Welsh Code of Hewel was gradually phased out, although some elements remained. Primogeniture was introduced.

The main cultural change the Normans brought was to reform the Welsh church in areas they controlled. The Welsh church was rather an anomaly, heavily influenced by the ways of the old Celtic church before it's merger with Rome. In Norman areas the Benedictine rule was introduced to the monasteries, and churchs were brought under the control of English (i.e. Norman) bishops. This caused a bit of protest amongst the Welsh Kings, with emissaries being sent to Rome to lobby the Pope.

Outside of the Anglo-Flemish towns, the Welsh language and culture remained strong. (I won't go as far as Edward I, as that would require a whole book, but things were relatively stable for the Welsh until then).

The Normans invaded Ireland in 1169, supposedly to aid the King of Leinster. Richard, earl of Pembroke made himself King of Leinster, but Henry II was not pleased with this development. He persuaded Adrian IV, the only English Pope, to make him Overlord of Ireland. This done, he forced all the Irish Kings to swear fealty to him. Royal law was introduced to Leinster, and this area of Ireland became the main area of colonisation.

Elsewhere, Irish culture and law remained the rule, and this picture did not really change until the wars between England and Scotland spilled over into Ireland with the invasion of Robert the Bruce.

[Mount Suribachi]

Language, culture, politics.....the Normans changed England forever. Its also interesting to note that nearly all our words used in "officialdom" are French in origin.

Faisal if you have the History Channel, they're showing a series on the Normans at the moment.