The king’s absence abroad was the most important factor in the development of English
central government in the period 1066 to 1216. How far do you agree?
During the time period 1066-1216, central government developed enormously and there were three key
factors which influenced this: the personality of the king, continental possessions which led to the king’s
absence and relationship between the King and barons. Whilst it cannot be denied that the king’s absence
was an important factor, it was not the most important factor as this was instead personality of the king,
which impacted his absence abroad and relationship with barons.
One key factor in the development of English central government was continental possessions,
contributing to the king’s absence abroad. As well as ruling England, kings also ruled lands abroad with the
Anglo-Saxons such as William I, William II, Henry and Stephen ruling Normandy and the Angevin kings such
as Henry II and Richard ruling the Angevin empire. This had a double impact on central government, both
political and financial. The political impact was that many kings were abroad more often, with the
exception of Stephen and John, and this meant that they had to delegate to royal officials and departments
more often, leading to the creation of and delegation to central government departments to rule the
country when the King was absent. For example, William I set up the treasury to be in charge of money and
Henry I established the exchequer and bench which Henry II re-established. Kings also needed government
officials in charge of these departments and this led to the concept of patronage started by Henry I where
kings would give titles to their most loyal followers. For example, Richard delegated heavily to Hubert
Walter, appointing him as head of the exchequer, chief justiciar and archbishop of Canterbury. Continental
possessions also had a financial impact on the development of central government as kings often used
England to bankroll their continental possessions, hence the establishment of the treasury and exchequer
to help collect this money. Some kings also raised money in other ways, for example William II exploiting
church vacancies and John finding new innovative ways to raise money such as the tax of scutage.
However, whilst this factor is undeniably important, it was not the most important factor as it was heavily
impacted by the king’s personality. Only if a king was interested in his continental possessions would he
spend time abroad and kings still had to have passion in government to set up these departments, for
example William II was not interested in government and thus despite having continental possessions and
spending a significant amount of time abroad, did not make any significant changes. Also, not all kings
were impacted by continental possessions. Stephen for example was preoccupied with the civil war and
actually lost Normandy and thus was present in England, meaning this factor had little impact in his reign.
Therefore, whilst the absence of the king was important, it was not the most important factor.
Moreover, another contributory factor explaining the development of central government, though
arguably the least important, was the relationship between the king and his barons. For the majority of the
period, particularly during the reigns of William II, Henry I, Henry II and Richard, relations were strong
which allowed for a strong, sturdy central government to run smoothly and thus little changes were made.
However, periodically relationships were strained, particularly as seen in the reigns of William I, Stephen
and John, and this meant that the king had to adapt central government to deal with these issues. For
example, due to conquering England, William I had a strained relationship with his Anglo-Saxon barons
which led to many rebellions and this led to the increasing Normanization of central government where
Anglo-Saxon barons were replaced with Norman ones, changing the personnel involved in central
government. Also, these rebellions led to the building of castles which Normans ruled from, altering the
geo-political landscape of England. Also, in Stephen’s reign there was a civil war and as a result of this,
central government could no longer operate smoothly so Stephen had to decentralise government, instead
having 20 earldoms in the East. However, relations with barons only occasionally impacted central
government when they were strained and for the most part, relations meant that central government
central government in the period 1066 to 1216. How far do you agree?
During the time period 1066-1216, central government developed enormously and there were three key
factors which influenced this: the personality of the king, continental possessions which led to the king’s
absence and relationship between the King and barons. Whilst it cannot be denied that the king’s absence
was an important factor, it was not the most important factor as this was instead personality of the king,
which impacted his absence abroad and relationship with barons.
One key factor in the development of English central government was continental possessions,
contributing to the king’s absence abroad. As well as ruling England, kings also ruled lands abroad with the
Anglo-Saxons such as William I, William II, Henry and Stephen ruling Normandy and the Angevin kings such
as Henry II and Richard ruling the Angevin empire. This had a double impact on central government, both
political and financial. The political impact was that many kings were abroad more often, with the
exception of Stephen and John, and this meant that they had to delegate to royal officials and departments
more often, leading to the creation of and delegation to central government departments to rule the
country when the King was absent. For example, William I set up the treasury to be in charge of money and
Henry I established the exchequer and bench which Henry II re-established. Kings also needed government
officials in charge of these departments and this led to the concept of patronage started by Henry I where
kings would give titles to their most loyal followers. For example, Richard delegated heavily to Hubert
Walter, appointing him as head of the exchequer, chief justiciar and archbishop of Canterbury. Continental
possessions also had a financial impact on the development of central government as kings often used
England to bankroll their continental possessions, hence the establishment of the treasury and exchequer
to help collect this money. Some kings also raised money in other ways, for example William II exploiting
church vacancies and John finding new innovative ways to raise money such as the tax of scutage.
However, whilst this factor is undeniably important, it was not the most important factor as it was heavily
impacted by the king’s personality. Only if a king was interested in his continental possessions would he
spend time abroad and kings still had to have passion in government to set up these departments, for
example William II was not interested in government and thus despite having continental possessions and
spending a significant amount of time abroad, did not make any significant changes. Also, not all kings
were impacted by continental possessions. Stephen for example was preoccupied with the civil war and
actually lost Normandy and thus was present in England, meaning this factor had little impact in his reign.
Therefore, whilst the absence of the king was important, it was not the most important factor.
Moreover, another contributory factor explaining the development of central government, though
arguably the least important, was the relationship between the king and his barons. For the majority of the
period, particularly during the reigns of William II, Henry I, Henry II and Richard, relations were strong
which allowed for a strong, sturdy central government to run smoothly and thus little changes were made.
However, periodically relationships were strained, particularly as seen in the reigns of William I, Stephen
and John, and this meant that the king had to adapt central government to deal with these issues. For
example, due to conquering England, William I had a strained relationship with his Anglo-Saxon barons
which led to many rebellions and this led to the increasing Normanization of central government where
Anglo-Saxon barons were replaced with Norman ones, changing the personnel involved in central
government. Also, these rebellions led to the building of castles which Normans ruled from, altering the
geo-political landscape of England. Also, in Stephen’s reign there was a civil war and as a result of this,
central government could no longer operate smoothly so Stephen had to decentralise government, instead
having 20 earldoms in the East. However, relations with barons only occasionally impacted central
government when they were strained and for the most part, relations meant that central government
