‘By 1166, Henry II had failed to resolve the problems of royal authority which he faced upon his accession in 1154.’ Assess the validity of this view.
Level
A Level
Year Examined
2022
Topic
Henry II’s Reign
👑Complete Model Essay
‘By 1166, Henry II had failed to resolve the problems of royal authority which he faced upon his accession in 1154.’ Assess the validity of this view.
Henry II and Royal Authority: Success or Failure by 1166?
Upon ascending the throne in 1154, Henry II inherited a realm fraught with challenges to royal authority. By 1166, twelve years into his reign, the question arises: had he managed to resolve these problems, or were the seeds of future discord already sown? While Henry undoubtedly made strides in re-establishing control, arguing he had completely resolved the issues by 1166 would be an overstatement.
One of the most pressing issues Henry faced was the unchecked power of the barons, a legacy of Stephen's chaotic reign. He tackled this through a display of force, dismantling adulterine castles and subduing rebellious lords like Roger Mortimer. The Cartae Baronum of 1166 further solidified his control, demonstrating his ability to effectively levy scutage, a stark contrast to the resistance he initially faced. This indicates a shift in the balance of power, with Henry asserting his dominance over the previously unruly barons.
Financially, Henry made significant progress in restoring royal coffers. He revitalized the Exchequer under Nigel of Ely and implemented measures to increase revenue, such as exploiting Forest Laws and utilizing feudal dues like escheat and purpresture. These actions stand in stark contrast to the dire financial situation he inherited, where royal revenue had dwindled significantly. The introduction of a new silver penny in 1158 further aimed to stabilize the economy and curb counterfeiting. These economic reforms point towards a successful reassertion of royal control over finances.
However, challenges to Henry's authority persisted. While he managed to subdue some rebellious elements, the methods he employed, such as scutage for the Toulouse campaign, bred resentment amongst the barons. His relationship with the Church, initially seemingly under control, deteriorated drastically after Becket's appointment as Archbishop of Canterbury in 1162. This appointment, ironically meant to strengthen royal control over the Church, backfired spectacularly and ultimately became a thorn in Henry's side.
Furthermore, despite attempts to exert control, local power structures proved difficult to completely dismantle. The sheriffs, often appointed by local barons, remained a point of contention. The General Eyre of 1166 exposed inconsistencies in the administration of justice, highlighting the limits of Henry’s reforms. This suggests that while Henry had initiated legal reforms with the Assize of Clarendon in 1166, their full implementation and impact would take time to materialize.
In conclusion, while Henry II undoubtedly made significant progress in addressing the problems of royal authority he inherited, to claim he had completely resolved them by 1166 would be misleading. He had successfully reasserted control over the unruly barons and bolstered the Crown's financial standing. However, underlying tensions remained. His heavy-handed tactics bred resentment, his relationship with the Church, particularly with Becket, was in shambles, and the implementation of his legal reforms was still in its infancy. The seeds of future conflicts, as evidenced by the Great Rebellion years later, were already present. Therefore, 1166 can be seen as a period of fragile peace, a temporary equilibrium maintained by Henry's forceful personality, rather than a complete resolution of the deep-seated challenges to royal authority.
Note: History Study Pack Required
Score Big with Perfectly Structured History Essays!
Prepare effortlessly for your A/AS/O-Level exams with our comprehensive...
History Study Pack.
✅ 1200+ Model Essays: Master your essay writing with expertly crafted answers to past paper questions.
✅ Exam Boards Covered: Tailored materials for AQA, Cambridge, and OCR exams.
🍃 Free Essay Plan
By 1166, Henry II had failed to resolve the problems of royal authority which he faced upon his accession in 1154. Assess the validity of this view.
This essay will assess the validity of the view that by 1166, Henry II had failed to resolve the problems of royal authority he faced when ascending the throne in 1154. It will examine the arguments supporting and challenging this view, analyzing the extent to which Henry's efforts to strengthen royal authority were successful.
Arguments supporting the view that Henry II had failed to resolve the problems of Royal Authority:
Firstly, Henry's methods for controlling the barons were perceived by some as oppressive. The levying of Scutage for the Toulouse campaign in 1159 sparked complaints, demonstrating that Henry's efforts to secure finances through his barons could be met with resistance.
Secondly, Henry's struggles with the sheriffs, many appointed by local barons, highlight the limitations of his authority. Despite investigations and replacements, barons continued to influence the sheriffs in some localities, jeopardizing direct loyalty to the Crown. The General Eyre of 1166 exposed discrepancies in the administration of justice, highlighting the continued challenges in asserting royal authority.
Thirdly, Henry's legal reforms, mostly introduced by the Assize of Clarendon, were only implemented in 1166. This suggests that despite his reforms, a significant period was needed for their full implementation and impact.
Finally, the Church's relative independence remained a concern. The appointment of Thomas Becket as Archbishop of Canterbury in 1162 potentially further deteriorated the relationship between the Crown and the Church.
Arguments challenging the view that Henry II had failed to resolve the problems of Royal Authority:
Conversely, the Cartae Baronum (1166) illustrates Henry's ability to make requests from his barons and effectively levy scutage. This contrasts with the situation in 1154 where overmighty barons and adulterine castles hindered royal authority. Henry effectively addressed this through shows of force, such as against Roger Mortimer, and by confiscating and destroying adulterine castles.
Furthermore, Henry reinvigorated the Exchequer under Nigel of Ely, significantly boosting Crown finances. He exploited Forest Laws and his feudal rights to increase the royal demesne at the expense of the barons through escheat and purpresture. This contrasts with 1154, where the Exchequer was dysfunctional and royal revenue was severely depleted.
In addition, Henry's minting of a new silver penny in 1158 helped control finances and the economy. This move prevented counterfeiting and inflation, further establishing his authority over the realm.
Moreover, Henry demonstrated his ability to deal with threats from Scotland, a significant concern in 1154. His military actions across the border resulted in the complete submission of Malcolm IV, who even contributed money and manpower to Henry's invasion of Toulouse in 1159.
Finally, while Becket's case highlights potential conflict, Henry largely controlled the Church after his accession. He enjoyed the support of most English prelates and generally succeeded in appointing his candidates to high ecclesiastical positions.
Conclusion:
While Henry II faced significant challenges to his royal authority in 1154, his reign witnessed significant progress by 1166. He effectively consolidated his power through a combination of force, legal reforms, and financial management. However, it is crucial to recognize that some challenges remained unresolved. The Church's independence and the potential for baronial discontent continued to be concerns. The Great Rebellion, which erupted after Henry's death, demonstrates the enduring challenges of maintaining royal authority in this era.
Therefore, while Henry II made considerable strides towards resolving the problems of royal authority, it is debatable whether he fully resolved them by 1166. He had significantly strengthened his position, but the seeds of future challenges were sown, leaving the question of his ultimate success open for interpretation.
Extracts from Mark Schemes
Arguments Supporting the View that Henry II Had Failed to Resolve Problems of Royal Authority by 1166
Arguments supporting the view that by 1166, Henry II had failed to resolve the problems of royal authority that he had faced upon his accession in 1154 might include:
⭐The methods used by Henry to control the barons were viewed by some as abrasive and oppressive. For example, there were complaints about the levying of Scutage for the Toulouse campaign in 1159.
⭐At the start of his reign Henry had problems with the sheriffs – many had been appointed by local barons. The fact that Henry had to investigate these men on a number of occasions and replace them shows that he had failed to completely solve the problems. Barons continued to control sheriffs in some localities and Henry could not always be sure of the direct loyalty of these men – the General Eyre of 1166 highlighted major discrepancies in the exercise of justice across the country.
⭐Henry’s legal reforms were mostly introduced by the Assize of Clarendon – but this only happened in 1166. It would take time for Henry’s reforms to be implemented.
⭐The Church’s relative independence had been a key issue for King Stephen and the situation potentially deteriorated further after the appointment of Becket as Archbishop of Canterbury in 1162.
Arguments Challenging the View that Henry II Had Failed to Resolve Problems of Royal Authority by 1166
Arguments challenging the view that by 1166, Henry II had failed to resolve the problems of royal authority that he had faced upon his accession in 1154 might include:
⭐The Cartae Baronum (1166) evidences Henry’s ability to make requests from his barons – and he could now levy scutage effectively. This contrasts with the situation in 1154 where he had faced overmighty barons and adulterine castles. Henry dealt with this directly through shows of force (eg Roger Mortimer) and the confiscation and destruction of adulterine castles.
⭐Henry brought Nigel of Ely out of retirement and ensured that the Exchequer was reinvigorated. Henry also increased Crown finances through ruthless exploitation of Forest Laws and his rights as feudal overlord – the principles of escheat and purpresture were used to increase the size of the royal demesne at the expense of the barons. This contrasts with the financial situation in 1154, as the Exchequer was barely functioning and the King’s revenue was down to about a third of its normal amount.
⭐Henry was also able to gain control of finances and the economy through the minting of a new silver penny in 1158 (this helped to prevent counterfeiting and prevented inflation).
⭐Henry was able to deal with the threat that Scotland posed to northern England by direct military action across the border. Malcolm IV was completely cowed and even contributed money and manpower to Henry’s invasion of Toulouse in 1159.
⭐Henry largely controlled the Church after his accession. Becket aside, he had the support of the majority of the English prelates and was almost always successful in getting his candidates appointed to high ecclesiastical office (Becket himself is a good example of this).
Analysis and Conclusion
Students are likely to be very knowledgeable about this topic and it is important that they actually analyse the extent to which the problems were resolved or not, rather than just describing a series of actions taken by Henry. ‘Royal authority’ covers a range of possible areas – barons, finance, justice and the Church, but the focus should be on England, rather than Henry’s control of his continental lands.
Better answers should recognise that 1166 is an interesting date – Henry had clearly regained a lot of control, but there were many problems which were still only partially dealt with and might resurface in the not too distant future. Judicious reference to later events such as the Great Rebellion may be used, so long as the analytical link to the question is explained. However, the majority of evidence should come from the period 1154 to 1166. Any supported judgement will be rewarded, and some balance of evidence should be expected for higher marks.