By this time probably a Norman castle had been built at Berkeley for Henry spent Easter there in 1121 ( Anglo-Saxon Chronicles) and Roger, the son and successor of William, having fallen into the hands of Walter, the brother of Miles, earl of Hereford, in the time of the anarchy, was cruelly tortured to make him give up his castle." He bequeathed his lands to his nephew William (Pipe Roll 31 Hen. "The first tenant of Berkeley after the conquest was Roger, who in 1086 held lands in Gloucestershire and Wiltshire. The surname Berkie was first found in Gloucestershire where the family name is descended from Thomas de Berkeley, Lord of Berkeley Castle, who was descended from Robert FitzHarding, a Viking of royal blood, and one of the companions at Arms of William the Conqueror at the Battle of Hastings in 1066. When such payments were made to the English Chamber, or revenue.Loading. However, Richard was absent from England for most of his reign, and therefore the problem of missing English revenue paid directly to him or the Chamber is largely eradicated.(1) In any case by the late twelfth century the relevant bodies of audit for the Angevin domains - in particular the English and Norman Exchequers - were playing an increasingly important role in maintaining the cohesion of the empire.(2) Periods of prolonged absence by the Angevins from their respective seats of government actually increased the development of formal procedures for payment, audit and recordkeeping under their appointed deputies. Through surviving English documents, most notably Wardrobe rolls from the early thirteenth century and oblique references to Chamber rolls in the pipe rolls, we know that records of these transactions were originally kept, but the relevant documents for the 1190s are missing. This practical development was necessary to cope with the strains of administering the vast network of lands with their separate financial systems and currencies. Under the Angevins the Chamber became the focal point of income and expenditure, receiving and dispersing revenue on an ad hoc basis as the king moved from territory to territory. John Gillingham has suggested that any figures calculated from these `official' records of audit will be far smaller than the amounts actually received.(5) This statement has some validity. The main sources of information are the Exchequer pipe rolls from England which exist for Richard's entire reign, complemented by two surviving rolls from Normandy for 11. The primary aim of this paper is to present a full analysis of Richard's revenue from England, detailing its size and the sources from which it was derived. Yet the recent treatment of John's revenues has been made without reference to the unprecedented financial activity that occurred in the reign of his predecessor, Richard I.(3) In the 1920s Sir James Ramsay made a rudimentary attempt to link finance with political events, but doubt has been cast on the accuracy of his work.(4) This paper provides the first complete investigation into the impact of the Third Crusade, Richard's subsequent ransom and the resumption of war with Philip Augustus on English state finance in the crucial decade before the loss of Normandy. Recent work into the financial background to these events has uncovered direct links between specific clauses in Magna Carta and John's attempts to raise revenue from domestic sources,(1) and a reassessment of the comparative revenue available to John and Philip Augustus suggests that neither side enjoyed a significant advantage on the eve of war in 1202-3,(2) making it easier to argue that in political and military terms John was the architect of his own misfortune. HISTORIANS tracing the demise of the `Angevin empire' have traditionally focused on the reign of King John for explanations, placing the twin disasters of the loss of Normandy in 1204 and the restrictions on Angevin kingship in England in 1215 firmly at his feet.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |