William the Conqueror Relationship to William I William I, byname William the Conqueror or William the Bastard or William of Normandy, French Guillaume le Conquérant or Guillaume le Bâtard or Guillaume de Normandie, (born c.1028, Falaise, Normandy [France]—died September 9, 1087, Rouen), duke of Normandy (as William II) from 1035 and king of England (as William I) from 1066, one of the greatest soldiers and rulers of the Middle Ages. He made himself the mightiest noble in France and then changed the course of England’s history by his conquest of that country. Early years William was the elder of the two children of Robert Iof Normandy and his concubine Herleva (also called Arlette, the daughter of a tanner or undertaker from the town of Falaise). Sometime after William’s birth, Herleva was married to Viscount Herluin, by whom she bore two sons—including Odo, the future bishop of Bayeux—and a daughter. In 1035 Robert died while returning from a pilgrimage to Jerusalem, and William, his only son, whom he had nominated as his heir before his departure, was accepted as duke by the Norman magnates and by his overlord, King Henry Iof France. William and his friends had to overcome enormous obstacles, including William’s illegitimacy (he was generally known as the Bastard) and the fact that he had acceded as a child. His weakness led to a breakdown of authority throughout the duchy: private castles were erected, public power was usurped by lesser nobles, and private warfare broke out. Three of William’s guardians died violent deaths before he grew up, and his tutor was murdered. His father’s kin were of little help, since most of them thought that they stood to gain by the boy’s death. His mother, however, managed to protect him through the most dangerous period. These early difficulties probably contributed to William’s strength of purpose and his dislike of lawlessness and misrule. Ruler of Normandy By 1042, when William reached his 15th year, was knighted, and began to play a personal part in the affairs of his duchy, the worst was over. But his attempts to recover rights lost during the anarchy and to bring disobedient vassals and servants to heel inevitably led to trouble. From 1046 until 1055 he dealt with a series of baronial rebellions, mostly led by his kinsmen. Occasionally he was in great danger and had to rely on Henry of France for help, but it was during these years that William learned to fight and rule. A decisive moment came in 1047, when Henry and William defeated a coalition of Norman rebels at Val-ès-Dunes, southeast of Caen, a battle in which William first demonstrated his prowess as a warrior. William soon learned to control his youthful recklessness. He was always ready to take calculated risks on campaign and to fight a battle, but he was not a flamboyant commander. His plans were simple, his methods direct, and he ruthlessly exploited any opportunity. If he found himself at a disadvantage, he withdrew immediately. He showed the same qualities in his government. He never lost sight of his aim to recover lost ducal rights and revenues, and, although he developed no theory of government or great interest in administrative techniques, he was always prepared to improvise and experiment. He was moral and pious by the standards of the time, and he acquired an interest in the welfare of the Norman church. He made his half brother Odo bishop of Bayeux in 1049 at the age of about 16; as bishop, Odo combined the roles of nobleman and prelate in a way that did not greatly shock contemporaries. Although Odo and the other bishops appointed by William were not recognized for their spirituality, they strengthened the church in Normandy by their pious donations and administrative skill. Presiding over numerous church councils, William and his bishops passed important legislation against simony(the selling of church offices) and clerical marriage. He also welcomed foreign monks and scholars to Normandy, including Lanfrancof Pavia, a famous master of the liberal arts, who entered the monastery of Bec about 1042 and was made abbot of Caen in 1063. William endowed several monasteries in his duchy, significantly increasing their number, and introduced the latest currents in reform to Norman monasticism. According to a brief description by an anonymous author—who borrowed extensively from Einhard’s biography of Charlemagne(Vita Karoli Magni; “Life of Charles the Great”)—William was just above average height and had a robust, thickset body. Although he was always sparing of food and drink, he became fat in later life. He had a rough bass voice and was a good and ready speaker. Writers of the next generation agree that he was exceptionally strong and vigorous. He was a hunter and soldier, fierce and despotic, and generally feared; uneducated, he had few graces but was intelligent and shrewd and soon obtained the respect of his rivals. New alliances After 1047 William began to participate in events outside his duchy. In support of King Henry and in an attempt to strengthen his southern frontier and expand into the western county of Maine, he fought a series of campaigns against Geoffrey Martel, count of Anjou. But from 1052, when Henry and Geoffrey made peace and a serious rebellion began in eastern Normandy, until 1054 William was again in grave danger. During this period he conducted important negotiations with his cousin Edwardthe Confessor, king of England, in which he was named heir to the English throne, and took a wife. Norman interest in Anglo-Saxon England derived from an alliance made in 1002, when King Ethelred IIof England married Emma, the sister of Count Richard II, William’s grandfather. Two of her sons, William’s cousins once removed, had reigned in turn in England: Hardecanute(1040–42) and Edward the Confessor (1042–66). William had met Edward during that prince’s exile on the Continent and may well have given him some support when he returned to England in 1041. In that year Edward was about 36 and William 13 years old. It is clear that William expected some sort of reward from Edward; thus, when Edward’s marriage proved unfruitful, William began to develop an ambition to become his kinsman’s heir. Edward, whose childlessness was a diplomatic asset, probably at times encouraged William’s hopes. In 1049 William negotiated with Baldwin V of Flanders for the hand of his daughter, Matilda. Baldwin, an imperial vassal with a distinguished lineage, was in rebellion against the emperor, Henry III, and was in desperate need of allies. At the Council of Reims in October 1049, the emperor’s cousin, Pope Leo IX, condemned the proposed marriage as incestuous (William and Matilda were evidently related in some way), but William and Baldwin were so eager for the alliance that the wedding took place before the end of 1053, possibly in 1052. In 1059 William was reconciled to the papacy, and as penance he and Matilda built two monasteries at Caen. Four sons were born to the couple: Robert(the future duke of Normandy), Richard (who died young), William Rufus(his father’s successor in England), and Henry(Rufus’s successor). Among the daughters was Adela, who became the mother of Stephen, king of England from 1135 to 1154. It is possible that William used his new alliance with Flanders to extort an acknowledgment from Edward that William was the English king’s rightful heir. At all events, Edward seems to have made some sort of promise to William in 1051, the year in which Tostig, son of the greatest nobleman in England, Godwine, married Baldwin’s half sister. The immediate purpose of this tripartite alliance was to improve the security of each of the parties. If William obtained a declaration that he was Edward’s heir, he was also looking very far ahead. Between 1054 and 1060 William was threatened by the combined menace of internal revolt and the new alliance against him between King Henry and Geoffrey Martel. Had the Norman rebels coordinated their attacks with king and count, it would have meant the end for William, but his own skill and some luck allowed him to prevail. After suppressing the rebels, William decisively defeated the invading forces of Henry and Geoffrey at the Battle of Mortemer in 1054. After a second victory, at Varaville in 1057, the duke was in firm control of Normandy. His position was secured even further when both Henry and Geoffrey died in 1060 and were succeeded by weaker rulers. Finally conquering Maine in 1063, William became the most powerful ruler in northern France. In 1064 or 1065 Edward sent his brother-in-law—Harold, earl of Wessex, Godwine’s son and Edward’s eventual successor as king—on an embassy to Normandy to confirm Edward’s recognition of William as his heir, according to Norman sources. While en route, Harold was captured by one of the duke’s vassals. He was ransomed by William, who then took him on a campaign into Brittany. It was at this time, according to the Norman account, that Harold swore an oath in which he renewed Edward’s bequest of the throne to William and promised to support it. This oath, and Harold’s violation of it, would become the central elements of William’s justification of his eventual invasion of England. Harold (right) swearing fealty to William, duke of Normandy, detail from the Bayeux Tapestry, 11th century; in the Musée de la Tapisserie, Bayeux, France.Myrabella When Edward died childless on January 5, 1066, Harold was accepted as king by the English magnates, and William decided on war. He proceeded carefully, however, first taking steps to secure his duchy and to obtain international support for his venture. He took council with his leading nobles, bestowed special authority on his wife, Matilda, and his son Robert, and appointed key supporters to important positions in the ducal administration. He petitioned the pope in Rome and received the blessing of Alexander II, who was encouraged by Archdeacon Hildebrand (the future Pope Gregory VII) to support the invasion. He also appealed to volunteers to join his army of invasion and won numerous recruits from outside Normandy. Events outpaced William, however, as others moved more quickly. Tostig, Harold’s exiled brother, raided England in May but suffered defeat at the hands of one of Harold’s allies. In September Tostig joined Harald III Hardraade, king of Norway, in an invasion of the Northumbrian coast. Although ultimately unsuccessful, Tostig and Harald’s attack had significant implications for the success of William’s invasion in the south. The Battle of Hastings By August William had gathered his army and his fleet at the mouth of the Dives River. At this point he probably intended to sail due north and invade England by way of the Isle of Wight and Southampton Water. But adverse winds held up his fleet, and in September a westerly gale drove his ships up-Channel. William regrouped his forces at Saint-Valéry on the Somme. He had suffered a costly delay, some naval losses, and a drop in the morale of his troops. The delay, however, yielded a very important benefit for William: on September 8 Harold was forced to release the peasant army he had summoned to defend the southern and eastern coastlines, leaving them without adequate protection. On September 27, after cold and rainy weather, the wind turned in William’s favour. William embarked his army and set sail for the southeastern coast of England. The trip was not without incident: William’s ship lost touch with the rest of the fleet, but he calmed his crew by supping as if he were at home, and contact with the other ships was made not long after. The following morning he landed, took the unresisting towns of Pevensey and Hastings, and began to organize a bridgehead with 4,000 to 7,000 cavalry and infantry. English axman in combat with a Norman knight at the Battle of Hastings, detail from the Bayeux Tapestry; in the Musée de la Tapisserie, Bayeux, France.Giraudon/Art Resource, New York William’s forces were in a narrow coastal strip, hemmed in by the great forest of Andred, and, although this corridor was easily defensible, it was not much of a base for the conquest of England. The campaigning season was almost past, and, when William received news of his opponent, it was not reassuring. On September 25 Harold had defeated and slain Tostig and Harald at Stamford Bridge, near York, in a bloody battle with great losses on both sides, and he was retracing his steps to meet the new invader at Hastings. On October 13, Harold emerged from the forest, but the hour was too late to push on to Hastings, and he took up a defensive position instead. Early the next day, before Harold had prepared his exhausted troops for battle, William attacked. The English phalanx, however, held firm against William’s archers and cavalry. The failure to break the English lines caused disarray in the Norman army. As William’s cavalry fled in confusion, Harold’s soldiers abandoned their positions to pursue the enemy. William rallied the fleeing horsemen, however, and they turned and slaughtered the foot soldiers chasing them. On two subsequent occasions, William’s horsemen feigned retreat, which fooled Harold’s soldiers, who were then killed by their opponents. Harold’s brothers were also killed early in the battle. Toward nightfall the king himself fell, struck in the eye by an arrow according to Norman accounts, and the English gave up. William’s coolness and tenacity secured him victory in this fateful battle. He then moved quickly against possible centres of resistance to prevent a new leader from emerging. On Christmas Day, 1066, he was crowned king in Westminster Abbey. In a formal sense, the Norman Conquest of England had taken place. King of England William was already an experienced ruler. In Normandy he had replaced disloyal nobles and ducal servants with his friends, limited private warfare, and recovered usurped ducal rights, defining the duties of his vassals. The Norman church flourished under his reign, as he adapted its structures to English traditions. Like many contemporary rulers, he wanted the church in England to be free of corruption but also subordinate to him. Thus, he condemned simony and disapproved of clerical marriage. He would not tolerate opposition from bishops or abbots or interference from the papacy, but he remained on good terms with Popes Alexander II and Gregory VII—though tensions arose on occasion. During his reign, church synods were held much more frequently, and he also presided over several episcopal councils. He was ably supported in this by his close adviser Lanfranc, whom he made archbishop of Canterbury, replacing Stigand; William replaced all other Anglo-Saxon bishops of England—except Wulfstanof Dorchester—with Normans. He also promoted monastic reform by importing Norman monks and abbots, thus quickening the pace of monastic life in England and bringing it into line with Continental developments. William I (centre), detail from the Bayeux Tapestry, 11th century; in the Musée de la Tapisserie, Bayeux, France.Courtesy of the Phaidon Press Ltd., publishers of The Bayeux Tapestryedited by Sir Frank Stenton William left England early in 1067 but had to return in December to deal with unrest. The rebellions that began that year reached their peak in 1069, when William resorted to such violent measures that even contemporaries were shocked. To secure his hold on the country, he introduced the Norman practice of building castles, including the Tower of London. The rebellions, which were crushed by 1071, completed the ruin of the English higher aristocracy and secured its replacement by an aristocracy of Norman lords, who introduced patterns of landholding and military service that had been developed in Normandy. To secure England’s frontiers, he invaded Scotland in 1072 and Wales in 1081, creating special defensive “marcher” counties along the Scottish and Welsh borders. London, Tower ofTower of London.© Ron Gatepain During the last 15 years of his life, William was more often in Normandy than in England, and there were five years, possibly seven, in which he did not visit the kingdom at all. He retained most of the greatest Anglo-Norman barons with him in Normandy and confided the government of England to bishops, trusting especially his old friend Lanfranc. He returned to England only when it was absolutely necessary: in 1075 to deal with the aftermath of a rebellion by Roger, earl of Hereford, and Ralf, earl of Norfolk, which was made more dangerous by the intervention of a Danish fleet; and in 1082 to arrest and imprison his half brother Odo, who was planning to take an army to Italy, perhaps to make himself pope. In the spring of 1082 William had his son Henry knighted, and in August at Salisbury he took oaths of fealty from all the important landowners in England. In 1085 he returned with a large army to meet the threat of an invasion by Canute IV(Canute the Holy) of Denmark. When this came to nothing, owing to Canute’s death in 1086, William ordered an economic and tenurial survey to be made of the kingdom, the results of which are summarized in the two volumes of Domesday Book, one of the greatest administrative accomplishments of the Middle Ages. Despite his duties as king, William remained preoccupied with the frontiers of Normandy even after the conquest. The danger spots were in Maine and the Vexin on the Seine, where Normandy bordered on the French royal demesne. After 1066, William’s Continental neighbours became more powerful and even more hostile. Fulk the Surly succeeded to Anjou in 1068 and Robert the Frisian to Flanders in 1071. King Philip Iof France allied with Robert, and Robert allied with the Danish king, Canute IV. There was also the problem of William’s heir apparent, Robert Curthose (the future Robert II), who, given no appanage(grant of land from the royal domain) and seemingly kept short of money, left Normandy in 1077 and intrigued with his father’s enemies. In 1081 William reached agreement with Fulk in the treaty of Blancheland: Robert Curthose was to be count of Maine but only as a vassal of Fulk. The eastern part of the Vexin, the county of Mantes, had fallen completely into King Philip’s hands in 1077, when William had been busy with Maine. In 1087 William demanded from Philip the return of the towns of Chaumont, Mantes, and Pontoise. In July he entered Mantes by surprise, but, while the town burned, he suffered an injury from which he never recovered. He was thwarted at the very moment when he seemed about to enforce his last outstanding territorial claim. Death William was taken to a suburb of Rouen, where he lay dying for five weeks. He had the assistance of some of his bishops and doctors, and in attendance were his half brother Robert, count of Mortain, and his younger sons, William Rufus and Henry. Robert Curthose was with the king of France. It had probably been William’s intention that Robert, as was the custom, should succeed to the whole inheritance. Although William was tempted to make the loyal Rufus his sole heir, in the end he compromised: Normandy and Maine went to Robert and England to Rufus. Henry was given great treasure with which to purchase an appanage. William died at daybreak on September 9, in his 60th year. His burial in St. Stephen’s Church, which he had built at Caen, was as eventful as his life. The funeral procession was disrupted by a fire in the town, a local noble complained that he had been dispossessed of the land in which William was to be buried, and William’s body was broken as it was being forced into the stone coffin. The tomb itself was desecrated by Calvinists in the 16th century and by revolutionaries in the 18th. The Editors of Encyclopaedia BritannicaFrank Barlow Legacy William left a profound mark on both Normandy and England and is one of the most important figures of medieval English history. His personal resolve and good fortune allowed him to survive the anarchy of Normandy in his youth, and he gradually transformed the duchy into the leading political and military power of northern France. His support for monastic reform and improved episcopal organization earned him respect from church leaders and further strengthened his hand in the duchy. His conquest of England in 1066 altered the course of English history, even though he adopted a number of Anglo-Saxon institutions and continued various social and economic trends that had begun before 1066. The English church was Normanized by William and brought more fully into line with developments on the Continent. William also imposed a new aristocracy on England that was French in language and culture; English language and literature and art and architecture were transformed because of William’s conquest. The new king and his nobility were also very much involved with affairs in Normandy and France, and, therefore, the orientation of English royal policy shifted toward Continental affairs. New forms of land tenure and military service were established after the conquest, and castles dotted the landscape as a symbol of the new regime. As conqueror and king, William significantly shaped the history of England. William IWilliam I, statue in Falaise, France.Man vyi The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica  Citation InformationArticle Title:William IWebsite Name:Encyclopaedia BritannicaPublisher:Encyclopaedia Britannica, Inc.Date Published:20 December 2018URL:https://www.britannica.com/biography/William-I-king-of-EnglandAccess Date:February 01, 2019 Matilda ( Maud ) of Flanders Matilda of Flanders was born circa 1031, the daughter of Baldwin V, Count of Flanders and Adele of France, who was the daughter of Robert II of France and Constance of Arles. She was also a descendant of King Alfred the Great and the old Saxon House of Wessex, through Alfred’s daughter Aelfthryth who married Baldwin II of Flanders. Her mother, Adele of France, had previously been married for a short time to William’s uncle, Richard III, Duke of Normandy. Adele was an exceptionally religious woman, later referred to as “Adele the Holy”, she had a great interest in Baldwin V’s church-reform politics and was behind her husband’s founding of several collegiate churches, she passed this reverance of Christianity to her daughter, Matilda, who received an excellent education, overseen by her mother. Described by contemporaries as having delicate features and a graceful figure, Matilda spent her early years in Lille in Northern France. Rumours at the time stated that Matilda had fallen in love with the English ambassador to Flanders, a Saxon named Brihtric, who declined her advances. Many years later while she was acting as Regent for William I in England, she confiscated Brihtric’s lands and had him thrown into prison in revenge for this insult, where he is said to have died. Tradition states that when Duke William of Normandysent representatives to her father’s court to request Matilda’s hand in marriage, she retorted by proudly informing the representative that she was far too high-born to consider marrying a bastard. (William was the illegitimate son of ‘Robert the Devil’, Duke of Normandy and Arlette, daughter of Fulbert, a tanner of Falaise). Furious on receiving this response, William rode to Bruges, where he confronted Matilda on her way to church, he pulled her off her horse and threw her down in the street in front of her attendants and rode off. An alternative version of the legend states that he rode to her father’s court in Lille, marched defiantly into her room and threw her to the ground in her room and hit her. Whereupon it is said Matilda refused to marry anyone but William. The couple were married circa 1051-2 at Notre Dame d’Eu. The marriage was condemned as incestuous by Pope Pope Leo IX in 1049, and the couple were excommunicated. But in 1059 William was reconciled to the papacy, William and Matilda agreed to found two churches as penance for defiance of a papal ban on their marriage on the grounds of consanguinity. They were an ill-assorted pair, he strongly built and five feet ten inches tall and she (as it emerged when her skeleton was exhumed) extremely short. In 1819 and 1959, Matilda’s skeleton was examined in France, and her bones were measured to determine her height. The 1819 estimate was under five feet, while the 1959 estimate was 5′ (152 cm) tall. It proved however, to be a highly successful union and produced a large family of ten children. Two sonsRobert (b.1051-1054, died 10 February 1134) and Richard (c.1054, died c. 1075) were born within three years of the marriage. These were followed by the couple’s first two daughters, Cecilia and Adeliza (d. before 1113), and a third son, the future William II(born between 1056 and 1060, died 2 August 1100), Matilda (born around 1061) and Constance (died 1090), named in honour of Matilda’s grandmother, the late Queen of France, she later married Alan IV Fergent, Duke of Brittany. They were followed by a sixth daughter Adela (died 1137) named for Matilda’s mother, Adele of France, she was to become the mother of King Stephen. A fourth son, the future Henry I was born between May, 1068 and May, 1069, probably at Selby in Yorkshire. He was named Henry after his mother’s maternal uncle, King Henry I of France. All of Matilda’s daughters were educated by the nuns at Holy Trinity Abbey. Cecilia took the veil and became Abbess of Holy Trinity, while Agatha, was married to Alfonso VI, King of Galicia-y-León, however, she died before she could join her husband in Spain. Shortly after Agatha’s death, the couple’s second son, Richard, was killed in a hunting accident in the New Forest, when he was gored to death by a stag. In a twist of fate, his younger brother, King William II Rufus, was himself killed in the New Forest thirty years later. When William launched his fateful invasion of England in 1066, Matilda commissioned a magnificent flagship, The Mora, for her husband to cross the Channel, every detail of the ship had been planned with meticulous care. Matilda was left as regent in Normandy for her fourteen year old son Robert Curthose. William presented her with some of the crown jewels of England when they were re-united at Fécamp. Matilda was later crowned Queen of England on 11 May , 1068 at Westminster Abbey. Matilda spent most of her time in Normandy, looking after affairs there and raising her children. She often exerted a moderating influence on her husband. The Anglo-Norman Chronicler Orderic Vitalis relates:- “She was even more distinguished for the purity of her mind and manners than for her illustrious lineage. She united beauty with gentle breeding and all the graces of Christian holiness.” The couple’s eldest son, Robert was Matilda’s favourite child, but grew to be a source of dissension between his parents. Robert rebelled against his father, but proved no match for him and William successfully suppressed the rebellion. Although he pardoned Robert, William refused to completely forgive his son. Relations were not helped when King William discovered that Matilda was secretly sending her son large sums of money. At a battle in January 1079, Robert unhorsed King William in combat and wounded him, ceasing his attack only when he recognized his father’s voice. Humiliated, King William cursed his son then raised the siege and returned to Rouen. At Easter 1080, a reconciliation between father and son was engineered by Matilda. The family were re-united in Breteuil, in northern France, for celebrations to mark the betrothal of William and Matilda’s 14 year-old daughter, Adela, to Stephen, Count of Blois. Matilda then encouraged William to make peace with his estranged half-brother, Odo, Bishop of Bayeux. When Matilda fell seriously ill, William rushed to Normandy to be at her bedside. He wrote to Robert at Gerberol Castle, asking him to immediately come to Rouen. Matilda died at Caen, in November 1083 in her early fifties, after a lingering illness, her husband was at her bedside for her final confession. In her will she left large amounts of money to the poor and her royal sceptre and crown to Holy Trinity Abbey. She was buried in the choir of Holy Trinity, l’Abbaye aux Dames, her own foundation, in Caen, Normandy. Following her death William, much effected by her loss, was said to have became more short-tempered, gloomy and severe.

Relationship to King Rudolph I Rudolf I, also called Rudolf of Habsburg, (born May 1, 1218, Limburg-im-Breisgau [Germany]—died July 15, 1291, Speyer), first German king of the Habsburg dynasty. Rudolf I, detail from his tomb sculpture; in the cathedral of Speyer, Ger.Bildarchiv Preussischer Kulturbesitz, Berlin A son of Albert IV, Count of Habsburg, Rudolf on the occasion of his father’s death (c.1239) inherited lands in upper Alsace, the Aargau, and Breisgau. A partisan of the Hohenstaufen Holy Roman emperor Frederick II and his son Conrad IV, he increased his territories largely at the expense of his uncle, Count Hartmann of Kyburg, and his cousin, Count Hartmann the Younger, who supported the papal cause against the Hohenstaufens. Rudolf’s first marriage (c.1245), to Gertrude of Zollern-Hohenberg-Haigerloch, also added considerable property to his domains. In 1254 he assisted the Knights of the Teutonic Order by participating in a crusade in Prussia. Rudolf ’s election as German king at Frankfurt was hastened by the desire of the electors to exclude an increasingly powerful rival candidate of non-German birth, Otakar II of Bohemia. Crowned at Aachen on Oct. 24, 1273, Rudolf was recognized by Pope Gregory X in September 1274 on the condition that he would renounce all imperial rights in Rome, in the papal territories, and in Italy and to lead a new crusade. In 1275 the pope managed to persuade Alfonso X of Castile (whom some of the German electors had chosen king in April 1257) to abandon his claim to the German crown. Meanwhile Otakar II of Bohemia had been gaining control of Austria, Styria, Carinthia, and Carniola. When in 1274 Otakar refused to appear before an imperial diet to show cause for his actions, Rudolf placed him under the ban of the empire and led an army into Austria, where he defeated Otakar in 1276. In 1278 Otakar, attempting to reconquer the territories he had lost to Rudolf, invaded Austria; he was again defeated and killed at the Battle of Dürnkrut (August 26). In 1282 Rudolf received permission from the German princes to grant to his sons the territories recovered from Otakar, and in December of that year he granted Austria and Styria to his sons Albert and Rudolf, thus constituting the territorial nucleus of the future Habsburg power. Rudolf combated the expansionist policy of France on his western frontier by marrying (his first wife having died in 1281) Isabella, daughter of Hugh IV, Duke of Burgundy, and by compelling Otto IV, Count Palatine of Franche-Comté, to pay homage (1289). French influence at the papal court, however, prevented Rudolf from being crowned Holy Roman emperor by the pope. Rudolf made great efforts, in concert with the territorial princes, to enforce the public peace (Landfriede) in Germany, and in 1274 he reasserted the right of the monarchy to impose taxation on the cities. He was, however, unsuccessful in his efforts, between 1287 and 1291, to secure the election of his elder son Albert as German king or king of the Romans. The German electors were determined that the crown should not become a hereditary possession of the House of Habsburg, and thus the electors’ freedom of action remained intact at the time of Rudolf’s death.  Citation InformationArticle Title:Rudolf IWebsite Name:Encyclopaedia BritannicaPublisher:Encyclopaedia Britannica, Inc. Gertrude was born in Deilingen, Swabiato Count Burkhard V of Hohenberg (died 1253) and his wife Matilda (Mechtild), daughter of Count Palatine Rudolf II of Tübingen. The comital Hohenbergdynasty, a cadet branch of the Swabian House of Hohenzollern, then ruled over extended estates in southwestern Germany. Citing contemporary sources, Gertrude’s descent was questioned by the Swisshistorian Aegidius Tschudi(1505–1572), who postulated a Frohburglineage; nevertheless, his objections have been disproved. About 1251 in Alsace, Gertrude married Rudolf (1218–1291), son of Count Albert IV of Habsburgand Heilwig of Kyburg. She went on to live with her husband as a comital couple in Rheinfelden. They had eleven children: Matilda(c. 1253, Rheinfelden – 23 December 1304, Munich), married 1273 in Aachento Louis II, Duke of Bavariaand became mother of Rudolf I, Count Palatine of the Rhineand Louis IV, Holy Roman Emperor. Albert I of Germany(July 1255 – 1 May 1308), Duke of Austriaand also of Styria. Catherine (1256 – 4 April 1282, Landshut), married 1279 in Viennato Otto III, Duke of Bavariawho later (after her death) became the disputed King Bela V of Hungaryand left no surviving issue. Agnes[Gertrude] (c. 1257 – 11 October 1322, Wittenberg), married 1273 to Albert II, Duke of Saxonyand became the mother of Rudolf I, Duke of Saxe-Wittenberg. Hedwig(c. 1259 – 26 January 1285/27 October 1286), married 1270 in Vienna to Otto VI, Margrave of Brandenburg-Salzwedeland left no issue. Clementia(c. 1262 – after 7 February 1293), married 1281 in Vienna to Charles Martel of Anjou, the Papal claimant to the throne of Hungaryand mother of king Charles I of Hungary, as well as of queen Clementia of France, herself the mother of the baby king John I of France. Hartmann (1263, Rheinfelden – 21 December 1281), drowned in Rheinau. Rudolf II, Duke of Austria and Styria (1270 – 10 May 1290, Prague), titular Duke of Swabia, father of John the Patricide of Austria. Judith of Habsburg(Jutte/Bona) (13 March 1271 – 18 June 1297, Prague), married 24 January 1285 to King Wenceslaus II of Bohemiaand became the mother of king Wenceslaus III of Bohemia, Poland and Hungary, of queen Anne of Bohemia (1290–1313), duchess of Carinthia, and of queen Elisabeth of Bohemia (1292–1330), countess of Luxembourg. Samson (before 19 Oct 1275 – died young). Charles (14 February 1276 – 16 August 1276). Gertrude’s husband was elected King of the Romans(as Rudolf I) in Frankfurton 29 September 1273. The election was largely due to the efforts of her cousin Burgrave Frederick III of Nuremberg. Rudolf was crowned in Aachen Cathedralon 24 October 1273. As “Queen Anne” (Anna Regina) she served as his consort for the following eight years. Reluctant to interfere in politics, she witnessed Rudolf’s struggles to secure his rule against the rivalling King Ottokar II of Bohemia, as well as his fruitless efforts to be crowned Holy Roman Emperor.  Tomb in Basel Minster Gertrude died early in 1281 at her husband’s residence in Viennaafter a short severe illness. According to her will, she was buried in Basel Minster, alongside her youngest son Charles. King Rudolf, though he had engaged in lengthy conflicts with the Prince-Bishops of Basel, gave his consent to the funeral which took place on March 20. Centuries later, her mortal remains were solemnly transferred to Saint Blaise Abbeyin 1770; today they rest at Saint Paul’s Abbeyin Carinthia. King Rudolf remained a widower for three years and proceeded to marry Isabella of Burgundy.

Relationship to Charlemagne  CharlemagneCharlemagne, stucco statue, probably 9th century; in the church of St. John the Baptist, Müstair, Switzerland.Courtesy of Weidenfeld & Nicholson Ltd.; photograph, Ann Munchow   Charlemagne, also called Charles I, byname Charles the Great, (born April 2, 747?—died January 28, 814, Aachen, Austrasia [now in Germany]), king of the Franks(768–814), king of the Lombards (774–814), and first emperor (800–814) of the Romans and of what was later called the Holy Roman Empire. Early years Around the time of the birth of Charlemagne—conventionally held to be 742 but likely to be 747 or 748—his father,Pippin III (the Short), was mayor of the palace, an official serving the Merovingianking but actually wielding effective power over the extensive Frankish kingdom. What little is known about Charlemagne’s youth suggests that he received practical training for leadership by participating in the political, social, and military activities associated with his father’s court. His early years were marked by a succession of events that had immense implications for the Frankish position in the contemporary world. In 751, with papal approval, Pippin seized the Frankish throne from the last Merovingian king, Childeric III. After meeting with Pope Stephen IIat the royal palace of Ponthion in 753–754, Pippin forged an alliance with the pope by committing himself to protect Romein return for papal sanction of the right of Pippin’s dynasty to the Frankish throne. Pippin also intervened militarily in Italyin 755 and 756 to restrain Lombardthreats to Rome, and in the so-called Donation of Pippinin 756 he bestowed on the papacy a block of territory stretching across central Italy which formed the basis of a new political entity, the Papal States, over which the pope ruled. When Pippin died in 768, his realm was divided according to Frankish custom between Charlemagne and his brother, Carloman. Almost immediately the rivalry between the two brothers threatened the unity of the Frankish kingdom. Seeking advantage over his brother, Charlemagne formed an alliance with Desiderius, king of the Lombards, accepting as his wife the daughter of the king to seal an agreement that threatened the delicate equilibrium that had been established in Italy by Pippin’s alliance with the papacy. The death of Carloman in 771 ended the mounting crisis, and Charlemagne, disregarding the rights of Carloman’s heirs, took control of the entire Frankish realm. King of the Franks The age of Charlemagne Charlemagne assumed rulership at a moment when powerful forces of change were affecting his kingdom. By Frankish tradition he was a warrior king, expected to lead his followers in wars that would expand Frankish hegemony and produce rewards for his companions. His Merovingian predecessors had succeeded remarkably well as conquerors, but their victories resulted in a kingdom made up of diverse peoples over which unified rule grew increasingly difficult. Complicating the situation for the Merovingian kings were both the insatiable appetite of the Frankish aristocracy for wealth and power and the constant partitioning of the Frankish realm that resulted from the custom of treating the kingdom as a patrimony to be divided among all the male heirs surviving each king. By the early 8th century these forces had reduced the Merovingian rulers to what their Carolingian successors dubbed “do nothing” kings. Real power had been assumed by an aristocratic dynasty, later called the Carolingiansafter Charlemagne, which during the 7th century clawed its way to dominance by utilizing the office of mayor of the palace to establish control over the royal administration and royal resources and to build a following strong enough to fend off rival Frankish families seeking comparable power. During the 8th century the Carolingian mayors of the palace Charles Martel(714–741) and (prior to becoming king) Pippin III (741–751) increasingly turned their attention to activities aimed at checking the political fragmentation of the Frankish kingdom. Charlemagne was thus heir to a long tradition that measured a king by his success at war, which in turn required him to devise means of governance capable of sustaining control over an increasingly polyglot population. New forces were at work in the mid-8th century to complicate the traditional role of Frankish kingship. As a result of Pippin’s reliance on the ecclesiastical authority to legitimate his deposition of the Merovingian dynasty and his usurpation of the royal office, the Carolingians had become, in the idiom of the time, rulers “by the grace of God,” a role that imposed on them new, not yet clearly defined powers and responsibilities. The assumption of that new burden came at a time when religious renewal was gathering momentum to add a new dimension to the forces defining, directing, and sustaining the Christian community. The 8th century witnessed intellectual and artistic stirrings throughout Latin Christendom which focused on reestablishing contact with the Classical and patristic past as a crucial requirement for the renewal of Christian society. The Frankish social system, which had been based on kinship ties, on bonds linking war leaders and their comrades in arms, and on ethnicity, was being overlaid by social bonds created when one individual commended himself to another, thereby accepting a condition of personal dependence that entailed the rendering of services to the superior in return for material considerations granted to the dependent party. Moreover, the world beyond Francia was being reshaped politically and economically by the decline of the Eastern Roman Empire, the triumphal advance of Arab forces and their Islamic religion across the Mediterranean world, and the threat posed by new Scandinavian, Slavic, and Central Asian invaders. The distinguishing mark of Charlemagne’s reign was his effort to honour the age-old customs and expectations of Frankish kingship while responding creatively to the new forces impinging on society. His personal qualities served him well in confronting that challenge. The ideal warrior chief, Charlemagne was an imposing physical presence blessed with extraordinary energy, personal courage, and an iron will. He loved the active life—military campaigning, hunting, swimming—but he was no less at home at court, generous with his gifts, a boon companion at the banquet table, and adept at establishing friendships. Never far from his mind was his large family: five wives in sequence, several concubines, and at least 18 children over whose interests he watched carefully. Although he received only an elementary level of formal education, Charlemagne possessed considerable native intelligence, intellectual curiosity, a willingness to learn from others, and religious sensibility—all attributes which allowed him to comprehend the forces that were reshaping the world about him. These facets of his persona combined to make him a figure worthy of respect, loyalty, and affection; he was a leader capable of making informed decisions, willing to act on those decisions, and skilled at persuading others to follow him. Military campaigns The first three decades of Charlemagne’s reign were dominated by military campaigns, which were prompted by a variety of factors: the need to defend his realm against external foes and internal separatists, a desire for conquest and booty, a keen sense of opportunities offered by changing power relationships, and an urge to spread Christianity. His performance on the battlefield earned him fame as a warrior king in the Frankish tradition, one who would make the Franks a force in the world once contained in the Roman Empire. The Carolingian empire and (inset) divisions after the Treaty of Verdun, 843.Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc. Charlemagne’s most demanding military undertaking pitted him against the Saxons, longtime adversaries of the Franks whose conquest required more than 30 years of campaigning (772 to 804). This long struggle, which led to the annexation of a large block of territory between the Rhineand the Elberivers, was marked by pillaging, broken truces, hostage taking, mass killings, deportation of rebellious Saxons, draconian measures to compel acceptance of Christianity, and occasional Frankish defeats. The Frisians, Saxon allies living along the North Sea east of the Rhine, were also forced into submission. While the conquest of Saxony was in progress, Charlemagne undertook other campaigns. As soon as he became sole king in 771, he repudiated his Lombard wife and his alliance with her father, King Desiderius. Soon after, in 773–774, he answered the appeals of Pope Adrian I(772–795) for protection by leading a victorious expedition into Italy, which ended with his assumption of the Lombard crown and the annexation of northern Italy. During this campaign Charlemagne went to Rome to reaffirm the Frankish protectorate over the papacy and to confirm papal rights to the territories conceded by Charlemagne’s father. Additional campaigns were required to incorporate the Lombard kingdom fully into the Frankish realm, however; an important step in that process came in 781, when Charlemagne created a subkingdom of Italy with his son Pippinas king. Concerned with defending southern Gaul from Muslim attacks and beguiled by promises of help from local Muslim leaders in northern Spainwho sought to escape the authority of the Umayyadruler of Cordoba, Charlemagne invaded Spain in 778. That ill-considered venture ended in a disastrous defeat of the retreating Frankish army by Gascon (Basque) forces, immortalized three centuries later in the epic poem The Song of Roland. Despite this setback, Charlemagne persisted in his effort to make the frontier in Spain more secure. In 781 he created a subkingdom of Aquitainewith his son Louisas king. From that base Frankish forces mounted a series of campaigns that eventually established Frankish control over the Spanish March, the territory lying between the Pyreneesand the Ebro River. In 787–788 Charlemagne forcibly annexed Bavaria, whose leaders had long resisted Frankish overlordship. That victory brought the Franks face to face with the Avars, Asiatic nomads who during the late 6th and 7th centuries had formed an extensive empire largely inhabited by conquered Slavs living on both sides of the Danube. By the 8th century Avar power was in decline, and successful Frankish campaigns in 791, 795, and 796 hastened the disintegration of that empire. Charlemagne captured a huge store of booty, claimed a block of territory south of the Danube in Carinthia and Pannonia, and opened a missionary field that led to the conversion of the Avars and their former Slavic subjects to Christianity. Charlemagne’s military successes resulted in an ever-lengthening frontier, which needed to be defended. Through a combination of military force and diplomacy he established relatively stable relations with a variety of potentially dangerous enemies, including the Danish kingdom, several Slavic tribes inhabiting the territory along the eastern frontier stretching from the Baltic Seato the Balkans, the Lombard duchy of Benevento in southern Italy, the Muslims in Spain, and the Gascons and the Bretons in Gaul. The Italian scene was complicated by the Papal States, whose boundaries remained problematic and whose leader, the pope, had no clearly defined political status relative to his Frankish protector, now his neighbour as king of the Lombards. In general, Charlemagne’s relations with the papacy, especially with Pope Adrian I, were positive and brought him valuable support for his religious program and praise for his qualities as a Christian leader. The expanded Frankish presence in Italy and the Balkans intensified diplomatic encounters with the Eastern emperors, which strengthened the Frankish position with respect to the Eastern Roman Empire, weakened by internal dissension and threatened by Muslim and Bulgar pressure on its eastern and northern frontiers. Charlemagne also established friendly relations with the ʿAbbāsidcaliph in Baghdad(Hārūn al-Rashīd), the Anglo-Saxon kings of Mercia and Northumbria, and the ruler of the Christian kingdom of Asturiasin northwestern Spain. And he enjoyed a vague role as protector of the Christian establishment in Jerusalem. By boldly and resourcefully combining the traditional role of warrior king with aggressive diplomacy based on a good grasp of current political realities, Charlemagne elevated the Frankish kingdom to a position of leadership in the European world. Court and administration While responding to the challenges involved in enacting his role as warrior king, Charlemagne was mindful of the obligation of a Frankish ruler to maintain the unity of his realm. This burden was complicated by the ethnic, linguistic, and legal divisions between the populations brought under Frankish domination in the course of three centuries of conquest, beginning with the reign of the first Merovingian king, Clovis(481–511). As a political leader, Charlemagne was not an innovator. His concern was to make more effective the political institutions and administrative techniques inherited from his Merovingian predecessors. The central directive force of the kingdom remained the king himself, whose office by tradition empowered its holder with the right to command the obedience of his subjects and to punish those who did not obey. For assistance in asserting his power to command, Charlemagne relied on hispalatium, a shifting assemblage of family members, trusted lay and ecclesiastical companions, and assorted hangers-on, which constituted an itinerant court following the king as he carried out his military campaigns and sought to take advantage of the income from widely scattered royal estates. Members of this circle, some with titles suggesting primitive administrative departments, performed on royal orders various functions related to managing royal resources, conducting military campaigns and diplomatic missions, producing written documents required to administer the realm, undertaking missions across the kingdom to enforce royal policies, rendering justice, conducting religious services, and counseling the king. Charlemagne receiving the oath of fidelity and homage from a baron, coloured engraving after a 14th-century manuscript miniature.The Granger Collection, New York A critical component of the king’s effectiveness and a matter of constant concern for Charlemagne was the army, in which all freemen were obligated to serve at their own expense when summoned by the king. Increasingly important in maintaining the military establishment, especially its armoured cavalry, was the king’s ability to provide sources of income, usually land grants, that enabled his subjects to serve at their own expense. The resources required to sustain the central government were derived from war booty, income from royal estates, judicial fines and fees, tolls on trade, obligatory gifts from noble subjects, and, to a very limited degree, direct taxes. To exercise his authority locally, Charlemagne continued to rely on royal officials known as counts, who represented royal authority in territorial entities called counties (pagi). Their functions included administering justice, raising troops, collecting taxes, and keeping peace. Bishops also continued to play an important role in local government. Charlemagne expanded clerical involvement in government by increasing the use of royal grants of immunity to bishops and abbots, which freed their properties from intervention by public authorities. This privilege, in effect, allowed its recipients or their agents to rule over those inhabiting their property as long as they enjoyed royal favour. The effectiveness of this governance system depended largely on the abilities and the loyalty of those who filled offices at the local level. Charlemagne recruited most royal officials from a limited number of interrelated aristocratic families who were eager to serve the king in return for the prestige, power, and material rewards associated with royal service. Charlemagne’s most innovative political measures involved strengthening the linkages between his person, his palatium, and local officials. He made full use of the traditional Frankish annual assembly, the mustering of those called to military service in a context which highlighted the common bond entailed in their willingness to follow their leader into war. Charlemagne expanded the function of these meetings to make them an instrument for cementing the king’s personal ties with counts, bishops, abbots, and powerful magnates. At these assemblies, he heard their complaints, accepted their advice, gained their assent for his policies, and delivered to them in his own words his commands for ruling his realm. The network of families from which the king selected most of his officials provided important channels through which pressure could be applied to assure that royal commands were executed locally. In addition, Charlemagne required all his free subjects to swear under oath to obey the king and to conduct themselves in ways that contributed to peace and concord. Especially important in strengthening the king’s hand politically was Charlemagne’s practice of establishing personal ties with powerful figures by accepting them as royal vassals in return for benefices in the form of offices and land grants to be exploited for their personal benefit as long as they remained loyal. Charlemagne integrated the central and the local administration by regularizing and expanding the use of missi dominici, royal agents charged with making regular circuits through specifically defined territorial entities to announce the king’s will, to gather information on the performance of local officials, and to correct abuses. The greatly expanded use of written documents as a means of communication between the central and the local governments allowed for greater precision and uniformity in transmitting royal orders and in gathering information about their execution. Among these documents were the royal capitularies, quasi-legislative documents dispatched across the kingdom to set forth the king’s will and to provide instructions for enacting his orders. The record of Charlemagne’s reign indicates his awareness of new developments affecting economic and social conditions. Although scholars are divided on the import of his actions, the evidence suggests that he was concerned with improving the organization and techniques of agricultural production, establishing a monetary system better attuned to actual exchange operations, standardizing weights and measures, expanding trading ventures into areas around the North Sea and Baltic Sea, and protecting merchants from excessive tolls and robbery. Royal legislation sought to protect the weak against exploitation and injustice. The king helped to clarify the incipient lord-vassal system and utilized that form of social contract to promote order and stability. Although his economic and social initiatives were motivated chiefly by his moral convictions, these measures gave modest impetus to movements that eventually ended the economic depression and social instability that had gripped western Europe since the dissolution of the Roman Empire in the 4th and 5th centuries. Charlemagne’s effort to be an effective ruler was given fresh impetus and direction by a change in the concepts of the purpose of government and of the role of monarchs. That change led to the grafting of a religious component onto the traditional, somewhat narrow conception of the basis of royal authority. Drawing on the Old Testament and the teachings of St. Augustineof Hippo on the nature of the “city of God,” Charlemagne and his advisers progressively saw the king’s position as bestowed by God for the purpose of realizing the divine plan for the universe. Kingship took on a ministerial dimension, which obligated the ruler to assume responsibility for both the spiritual and the material well-being of his subjects. This new role entailed a vast expansion of traditional royal authority and a redefinition of the priorities that government should serve. Religious reform Charlemagne’s military conquests, diplomacy, and efforts to impose a unified administration on his kingdom were impressive proof of his ability to play the part of a traditional Frankish king. His religious policy reflected his capacity to respond positively to forces of change working in his world. With considerable enthusiasm he expanded and intensified the reform program rather haltingly instituted in the 740s by his father, Pippin, and his uncle, Carloman. In essence, Charlemagne’s response to the growing urge in his world to deepen spiritual life was to make that objective a prime concern of public policy and royal governance. His program for meeting his royal religious responsibilities was formulated in a series of synods made up of both clerics and laymen summoned by royal order to consider an agenda set by the royal court. The enactments of the councils were given the force of law in royal capitularies, which all royal officials, but especially bishops, were expected to enforce. That legislation, traditional in spirit and content, was inspired by a conviction that the norms required to correct the deficiencies besetting Christian life in the 8th century had already been defined by Scriptureand by earlier church councils and ecclesiastical authorities. The reform focused on a few major concerns: strengthening the church’s hierarchical structure, clarifying the powers and responsibilities of the hierarchy, improving the intellectual and moral quality of the clergy, protecting and expanding ecclesiastical resources, standardizing liturgical practices, intensifying pastoral care aimed at general understanding of the basic tenets of the faith and improvement of morals, and rooting out paganism. As the reform movement progressed, its scope broadened to vest the ruler with authority to discipline clerics, to assert control over ecclesiastical property, to propagate the faith, and to define orthodox doctrine. Despite extending his authority over matters traditionally administered by the church, Charlemagne’s aggressive moves to direct religious life won acceptance from the ecclesiastical establishment, including the papacy. In assessing clerical support for the king’s religious policy, it is necessary to keep in mind that the king controlled the appointment of bishops and abbots, was a major benefactor of the clerical establishment, and was the guarantor of the Papal States. Nonetheless, the clergy’s support was genuine, reflecting its approval of the king’s desire to strengthen ecclesiastical structures and to deepen the piety and correct the morals of his Christian subjects. That approval was expressed in the glorification of the king in his own day as the rector of the “new Israel.” Cultural revival Another notable feature of Charlemagne’s reign was his recognition of the implications for his political and religious programs of the cultural renewal unfolding across much of the Christian West during the 8th century. He and his government patronized a variety of activities that together produced a cultural renovatio(Latin: “renewal” or “restoration”), later called the Carolingian Renaissance. The renewal was given impetus and shape by a circle of educated men—mostly clerics from Italy, Spain, Ireland, and England—to whom Charlemagne gave prominent place in his court in the 780s and 790s; the most influential member of this group was the Anglo-Saxon cleric Alcuin. The interactions among members of the circle, in which the king and a growing number of young Frankish aristocrats often participated, prompted Charlemagne to issue a series of orders defining the objectives of royal cultural policy. Its prime goal was to be the extension and improvement of Latinliteracy, an end viewed as essential to enabling administrators and pastors to understand and discharge their responsibilities effectively. Achieving this goal required the expansion of the educational system and the production of books containing the essentials of Christian Latin culture. Book cover of the Lindau Gospels (MS. M. 1), chased gold with pearls and precious stones, depicting Jesus on the cross and the Evangelists, Carolingian, c.880; in the Pierpont Morgan Library, New York City.Courtesy of the Pierpont Morgan Library, New York The court circle played a key role in producing manuals required to teach Latin, to expound the basic tenets of the faith, and to perform the liturgy correctly. It also helped create a royal library containing works that permitted a deeper exploration of Latin learning and the Christian faith. A royal scriptoriumwas established, which played an important role in propagating the Carolingian minuscule, a new writing system that made copying and reading easier, and in experimenting with art forms useful in decorating books and in transmitting visually the message contained in them. Members of the court circle composed poetry, historiography, biblical exegesis, theological tracts, and epistles—works that exemplified advanced levels of intellectual activity and linguistic expertise. Their efforts prompted Alcuin to boast that a “new Athens” was in the making in Francia. The new Athens came to be identified with Aachen, from about 794 Charlemagne’s favourite royal residence. Aachen was the centre of a major building program that included the Palatine Chapel, a masterpiece of Carolingian architecture that served as Charlemagne’s imperial church. Royal directives and the cultural models provided by the court circle were quickly imitated in cultural centres across the kingdom where signs of renewal were already emerging. Bishops and abbots, sometimes with the support of lay magnates, sought to revitalize existing episcopal and monastic schools and to found new ones, and measures were taken to increase the number of students. Some schoolmasters went beyond elementary Latin education to develop curricula and compile textbooks in the traditional seven liberal arts. The number of scriptoria and their productive capacity increased dramatically. And the number and size of libraries expanded, especially in monasteries, where book collections often included Classical texts whose only surviving copies were made for those libraries. Although the full fruits of the Carolingian Renaissance emerged only after Charlemagne’s death, the consequences of his cultural program appeared already during his lifetime in improved competence in Latin, expanded use of written documents in civil and ecclesiastical administration, advanced levels of discourse and stylistic versatility in formal literary productions, enriched liturgical usages, and variegated techniques and motifs employed in architecture and the visual arts. Emperor of the Romans Charlemagne’s prodigious range of activities during the first 30 years of his reign were prelude to what some contemporaries and many later observers viewed as the culminating event of his reign: his coronation as Roman emperor. In considerable part, that event was the consequence of an idea shaped by the interpretation given to Charlemagne’s actions as ruler. Over the years, some of the king’s chief political, religious, and cultural advisers became convinced that a new community was taking shape under the aegis of the king and the Frankish people, whom, as one pope avowed, “the Lord God of Israel has blessed.” They spoke of that community as the imperium Christianum, comprising all who adhered to the orthodox faith proclaimed by the Roman church. This community accepted the dominion of a monarch increasingly hailed as the “new David” and the “new Constantine,” the guardian of Christendom and executor of God’s will. Concern for the welfare of the imperium Christianumwas heightened by the perceived unfitness of the heretical emperors in Constantinople to claim authority over the Christian community—especially after a woman, Irene, became Eastern emperor in 797. In a larger sense, developments in the 8th century produced the perception in the Carolingian world that the Latin West and the Greek East were diverging in ways that negated the universalist claims of the Eastern emperors. Charlemagne, chromolithograph.© Photos.com/Jupiterimages Then, in 799, an even greater threat to the well being of imperium Christianumemerged. The pope’s capacity to lead God’s people came into question when Pope Leo IIIwas physically attacked by a faction of Romans, including high functionaries in the papal curia, who believed that he was guilty of tyranny and serious personal misconduct. Leo fled to the court of his protector, whose role as rector of Christendom was now dramatically revealed. Charlemagne provided an escort that restored Leo III to the papal office; then, after extensive consultation in Francia, he went to Rome in late 800 to face the delicate issue of judging the vicar of St. Peter and of restoring order in the Papal States. After a series of deliberations with Frankish and Roman clerical and lay notables, it was arranged that, in lieu of being judged, the pope would publicly swear an oath purging himself of the charges against him; some hints in the record suggest that these deliberations also led to a decision to redefine Charlemagne’s position. Two days after Leo’s act of purgation, as Charlemagne attended mass on ChristmasDay in the basilica of St. Peter, the pope placed a crown on his head, while the Romans assembled for worship proclaimed him “emperor of the Romans.” Historians have long debated where responsibility for this dramatic event should be placed. Despite the claim of Einhard, Charlemagne’s court biographer, that the king would not have gone to St. Peter’s on that fateful day had he known what was going to happen, the evidence leaves little doubt that king and pope collaborated in planning the coronation: the restoration of the Roman Empire in the West was advantageous to both. Given the pope’s tenuous position at that moment and the king’s penchant for bold action, it seems highly likely that Charlemagne and his advisers made the key decision involving a new title for the king, leaving it to the pope to arrange the ceremony that would formalize the decision. The new title granted Charlemagne the necessary legal authority to judge and punish those who had conspired against the pope. It also provided suitable recognition of his role as ruler over an empire of diverse peoples and as guardian of orthodox Christendom, and it gave him equal status with his tainted rivals in Constantinople. By once again sanctioning a title for the Carolingians, the pope strengthened his ties with his protector and added lustre to the papal office by virtue of his role in bestowing the imperial crown on the “new Constantine.” On the assessment of Charlemagne’s years as emperor, historians are not in full accord. Some have seen the period as one of emerging crisis, in which the activities of the aging emperor were increasingly constricted. Because Charlemagne no longer led successful military ventures, the resources with which to reward royal followers declined. At the same time, new external enemies appeared to threaten the realm, especially seagoing Northmen (Vikings) and Saracens. There were also signs of structural inadequacy in the system of government, which constantly took upon itself new responsibilities without a commensurate increase in human or material resources, and growing resistance to royal control by lay and ecclesiastical magnates who began to grasp the political, social, and economic power to be derived from royal grants of land and immunities. Other historians, however, have stressed such things as increased royal concern for the helpless, continued efforts to strengthen royal administration, active diplomacy, the maintenance of religious reform, and support of cultural renewal, all of which they see as evidence of vitality during Charlemagne’s last years. Within this larger context there were developments that suggest that the imperial title meant little to its recipient. Indeed, in 802, when he first formally used the enigmatic title “Emperor Governing the Roman Empire,” he retained his old title of “King of the Franks and of the Lombards.” He continued to live in the traditional Frankish way, eschewing modes of conduct and protocol associated with imperial dignity. He relied less on the advice of the circle that had shaped the ideology that led to the revival of the Roman Empire. Indeed, the emperor seemed oblivious to the idea of a unified political entity implicit in the imperial title when, in 806, he decreed that on his death his realm would be divided among his three sons. Other evidence, however, indicates that the imperial title was important to him. Charlemagne engaged in a long military and diplomatic campaign that finally, in 812, gained recognition of his title from the Eastern emperor. After 800 his religious reform program stressed changes in behaviour that implied that membership in the imperium Christianumrequired new modes of public conduct. He attempted to bring greater uniformity to the diverse legal systems prevailing in his empire. The terminology and the symbols employed by the court to set forth its policies and the artistic motifs employed in the building complex at Aachen reflected an awareness of the imperial office as a source of ideological elements capable of buttressing the ruler’s authority. In 813 Charlemagne assured the perpetuation of the imperial title by bestowing with his own hands the imperial crown on his only surviving son, Louis the Pious. The coronation of 813 suggests that Charlemagne believed that the office had some value and that he wished to exclude the papacy from any part in its bestowal. In its entirety the evidence leads to the conclusion that Charlemagne saw the imperial title as a personal award in recognition of his services to Christendom, to be used as he saw fit to enhance his ability and that of his heirs to direct the imperium Christianumto its divinely ordained end. Legacy In January 814 Charlemagne fell ill with a fever after bathing in his beloved warm springs at Aachen; he died one week later. Writing in the 840s, the emperor’s grandson, the historian Nithard, avowed that at the end of his life the great king had “left all Europe filled with every goodness.” Modern historians have made apparent the exaggeration in that statement by calling attention to the inadequacies of Charlemagne’s political apparatus, the limitations of his military forces in the face of new threats from seafaring foes, the failure of his religious reforms to affect the great mass of Christians, the narrow traditionalism and clerical bias of his cultural program, and the oppressive features of his economic and social programs. Such critical attention of Charlemagne’s role, however, cannot efface the fact that his effort to adjust traditional Frankish ideas of leadership and the public good to new currents in society made a crucial difference in European history. His renewal of the Roman Empirein the West provided the ideological foundation for a politically unified Europe, an idea that has inspired Europeans ever since—sometimes with unhappy consequences. His feats as a ruler, both real and imagined, served as a standard to which many generations of European rulers looked for guidance in defining and discharging their royal functions. His religious reforms solidified the organizational structures and the liturgical practices that eventually enfolded most of Europe into a single “Church.” His definition of the role of the secular authority in directing religious life laid the basis for the tension-filled interaction between temporal and spiritual authority that played a crucial role in shaping both political and religious institutions in later western European history. His cultural renaissance provided the basic tools—schools, curricula, textbooks, libraries, and teaching techniques—upon which later cultural revivals would be based. The impetus he gave to the lord-vassal relationship and to the system of agriculture known as manorialism(in which peasants held land from a lord in exchange for dues and service) played a vital role in establishing the seignorial system (in which lords exercised political and economic power over a given territory and its population); the seignorial system in turn had the potential for imposing political and social order and for stimulating economic growth. Such accomplishments certainly justify the superlatives by which he was known in his own time: Carolus Magnus(“Charles the Great”) and Europae pater(“father of Europe”). Richard E. Sullivan  Citation InformationArticle Title:CharlemagneWebsite Name:Encyclopaedia BritannicaPublisher:Encyclopaedia Britannica, Inc.Date Published:24 January 2019URL:https://www.britannica.com/biography/CharlemagneAccess Date:January 27, 2019 Hildegard(ca. 754[1]– 30 April 783 at Thionville,[2]Moselle), was the second[3]wife of Charlemagneand mother of Louis the Pious. Little is known about her life, because, like all women of Charlemagne, she became important only from a political background, recording her parentage, wedding, death, and her role as a mother.[4] Origins She was the daughter of the GermanicCount Gerold of Kraichgau(founder of the Udalriching family) and his wife Emma, in turn daughter of DukeNebe (Hnabi)of Alemannia and Hereswintha vom Bodensee (of Lake Constance).[5]Hildegard’s father had extensive possessions in the dominion of Charlemagne’s younger brother Carloman, so this union was of significant importance for Charlemagne, because he could strengthen its position in the east of the Rhine and also could bind the Alemannian nobility to his side.[6] Life It is unknown if Charlemagne planned his marriage before the sudden death of Carloman or was just a part of the purposeful incorporation of his younger brother’s Kingdom, in detriment of the claims of his nephews.[7]In any event, the wedding between Charlemagne and Hildegard took place at Aix-la-Chapellecertainly before 30 April 771, after the repudiation of the Lombardian princess Desiderata, Charlemagne’s previous wife. As no exact date of birth of Hildegard was recorded, it was assumed that at the time of her wedding she could be around 17 years old, giving her a birthdate of 754. A marriage at this age is not unusual for that time, since the age of marriage was set at puberty. In Roman law, which was very well received by the Church, the minimum age for marriage for girls of 12 years has been established.[8] An intense physical relationship between the spouses was demonstrated by the fact that, during her 12 years of marriage, Hildegard had 8 pregnancies (including one set of twins) and remarkably chronicles never mentioned either miscarriages or stillbirths. She accompanied Charlemagne on many of his military campaigns: she gave birth to her second child and first daughter, Adelaide, during the siege of Pavia, capital of the Kingdom of the Lombards(September 773/June 774), but the child died during the return journey to France. In 778, Hildegard accompanied her husband as far as Aquitaine, where she gave birth to twins Louis and Lothair.[9]In 780/781 she traveled with Charlemagne and four of their children to Rome, where the sons Louis and Carloman (renamed Pepin after his baptism by Pope Adrian I) were appointed sub-kings of Aquitaine and Italy, respectively. This contributed to the strengthening of the alliance between the Carolingians and the Papacy.[10]Because of her frequent pregnancies, it can be presumed that Hildegard accompanied her husband on further campaigns, at least temporarily. Hildegard died on 30 April 783, according to Paul the Deacon, from the after effects of her last childbirth.[11]She was buried on 1 May in the Abbey of Saint-Arnouldin Metz. Following the wishes of Charlemagne, near her grave were burning candles and daily prayers were said for her soul.[12] Interaction with the Church and Donations Hildegard made several donations to the monasteries of St. Denisand St. Martin of Tours.[13]She was a friend of Saint Leoba, who reportedly lived some time with her at court. She intervened in Hildegard’s religious education and also offered her spiritual advice.[14]Together with her husband she commissioned the Godescalc Evangelistary,[15]where for the first time she was explicitly mentioned as Queen -also of the Lombards- through the joint signature of documents with her husband.[16] Hildegard enjoyed in her own lifetime from a high reputation, as was demonstrated in her obituary written by Paul the Deacon.[17]However, these compliments are to be regarded with some skepticism. In her Epitaphwere included phrases that may have been introduced to flatter Charlemagne: for example, the reference to the fact that Hildegard was the epitome of beauty, wisdom and virtue. This were common words used by medieval writers to their rulers.[18]Pope Adrian I, in a letter to Charlemagne, expressed his condolences over the untimely death of Hildegard. Hildegard used her position as Queen consort to obtain for her siblings several territorial and monetary benefits; as far was known, she was the only of Charlemagne’s wives or concubines who managed to obtain for a relative an office after her marriage.[14]In addition, was also assumed that she, like other medieval queens, held several roles, such as ruling the court or being the representative (or regent) of the sovereign during his absence. This could mean that she was in close contact with all the government decision of her husband.[19] Together with her husband, she was the main benefactress of the Monastery of Kempten(founded in 752), who received financial and political support. From Italy they brought after the conquest of the Kingdom of the Lombards in 773/774 the relics of the Roman martyrsSaints Gordianus and Epimachusto Kempten, whom, along with the Virgin Mary, are the patrons of the monastery. Hildegard was extensively mentioned in Kempten as one of the founders; her bust graced the pin crest and some coins of the later Imperial Abbey. In the late Middle Ages it was alleged that Hildegard was buried in Kempten, as well as her son Louis the Pious; there was built the called Hildegard Chapel (Hildegardkapelle), who quickly became in a place of pilgrimage and were several miracles are reported. This explains that the Queen was revered as a saint in the Allgäuand always presented with an aureola. In the 17th century the building of another Hildegard Chapel at the Fürstäbtlicheof Kempten was projected, but this was abandoned after the secularization. Even in modern times, the memory of Hildegard and her importance in the urban development at Kempten is still very noticeable: The central square in front of St. Lorenz Basilicawas named the Hildegard Square(Hildegardplatz) in her honor. In 1862 a Neo-Gothic Hildegard fountain (Hildegardsbrunnen) was erected in the square, which was closed in the 1950s. At the facade of the local Landhaus, appeared her idealized portrait painted by Franz Weiß. Also, in 1874 was founded the originally exclusive for girl Hildegardis-Gymnasium KemptenLyceum. At the Lindau Road, close to the school, was also located another Hildegard Fountain. On the facades of some houses were shown the image of the Queen, and on the edge of the Kempten forest there was the Hildegard Oak (Hildegardseiche) for several years until was replaced by a new plantation. Until the 1950s, many girls born in Kempten were named after Hildegard. Children Although Charlemagne already had an older son (Pepin the Hunchback) from his first union with Himiltrude, he was not considered an heir after the rebellion in which he participated in 792. In his will of 806 (the called Divisio Regnorum), he divided his domains between the three surviving sons of Hildegard. Because her son Louis the Pious succeeded Charlemagne as Emperor, Hildegard is often called “mother of Kings and Emperors”. Charles(772/73 – 4 December 811 in Bavaria[20]), the eldest son according to Paul the Deacon, who recorded his parentage.[21]His father associated him in the government of Francia and Saxony in 790, and crowned joint King of the Franks at Rome on 25 December 800, but died before his father.[16] Rotrude(775 – 6 June 810[22]), named after her paternal great-grandmother. “Hruodrudem et Bertham et Gislam” are named daughters of King Charles and Hildegard by Einhard.[23]Angilbert’s poem Ad Pippinum Italiæ regumnames (in order) “Chrodthrudis…Berta…Gisla et Theodrada” as daughters of King Charles.[24]She was betrothed in 781 with Constantine VI, Emperor of Byzantium, and received the name Erythroin preparation for her future wedding. The betrothal was broken in 787,[25]and she, like all her sisters, remained unmarried. From a liaison with Rorgo of Rennesshe had one son, the latter Louis, Abbot of Saint-Denis. Carloman(777 – 8 July 810 in Milan, buried Verona, San Zeno Maggiore), renamed Pepinin Rome on 15 April 781 by Pope Adrian I, and crowned King of Italythat day. He also predeceased his father. Louis(Chasseneuil-du-Poitou, Vienne, 16 April/September 778 – 20 June 840 in Ingelheim, buried Metz, Abbey of Saint-Arnould). He is named, and his parentage recorded, by Paul the Deacon, which specifies that he was his parents’ third son, born a twin with Lothair.[21]Crowned King of Aquitainein Rome on 15 April 781 by Pope Adrian I, his father named him as his successor at Aix-la-Chapelle, crowning him as joint Holy Roman Emperoron 11 September 813. Bertha(779/80 – after 11 March 824), named after her paternal grandmother. An offer by Offa of Merciato arrange a marriage between her and his son, Ecgfrith, led to Charlemagne breaking off diplomatic relations with Britain in 790, and banning British ships from his ports.[26]Like her sisters, she never married, but from her liaison with Angilbert, a court official, she had two sons: Hartnid (about whom little is known) and the historian Nithard, Abbott of St. Riquier. Gisela(before May 781 – after 800, maybe after 814). Named after her surviving paternal aunt, she was baptized in Milan in May 781.[27]

Emperor Theodore I Theodoros I Komnenos Laskaris (Greek: Θεόδωρος Α’ Λάσκαρις, Theodōros I Laskaris; c. 1174/5 – 1221/August 1222) was the first Emperor of Nicaea (reigned 1204/05–1221/22).  Relationship to Emperor Theodore Theodore Laskaris was born in ca. 1174,[1] to the Laskaris, a noble but not particularly renowned Byzantine family of Constantinople. He was the son of Manuel Laskaris (b. c. 1140) and wife Ioanna Karatzaina (b. c. 1148).[citation needed] He had four older brothers: Manuel Laskaris (died after 1256), Michael Laskaris (d. 1261/1271), Georgios Laskaris and Constantine Laskaris (died after March 19, 1205), Emperor of Byzantium (1204–1205); and two younger brothers: Alexios Laskaris, Latin military leader against the Bulgars who fought with the French against John III Doukas Vatatzes and was imprisoned and blinded, and Isaakios Laskaris.[2] William Miller identified the wife of Marco I Sanudo as the sister of Theodore, based on his interpretation of the Italian sources.[3] However, Mihail-Dimitri Sturdza rejected this identification in his Dictionnaire historique et Généalogique des grandes familles de Grèce, d’Albanie et de Constantinople (1983), based on the silence of Byzantine primary sources.[4]   The Latin Empire, Empire of Nicaea, Empire of Trebizond and the Despotate of Epirus. The borders are very uncertain. The historian George Akropolites left a description of Theodore: “In body he was very small, moderately dark, with a long beard which was divided at the ends”, “His eyes differed from one another“.[5] In 1198/9, Theodore married Anna Angelina, daughter of the Byzantine Emperor Alexios III Angelos and Euphrosyne Doukaina Kamatera; she was the widow of her (his?) cousin the sebastokratōr Isaac Komnenos.[6] Soon after this, he was raised to the rank of despotēs.[1] Theodore later distinguished himself during the sieges of Constantinople by the Latins of the Fourth Crusade (1203–1204). He remained in Constantinople until the Latins actually penetrated into the city, at which point he fled across Bosphorus together with his wife. At about the same time his brother Constantine Laskaris was unsuccessfully proclaimed emperor by some of the defenders of Constantinople. In Bithynia Theodore established himself in Nicaea, which became the chief rallying-point for his countrymen.[7][8] At first Theodore did not claim the imperial title, perhaps because his father-in-law and his brother were both still living, perhaps because of the imminent Latin invasion, or perhaps because there was no Patriarch of Constantinople to crown him Emperor.[9] In addition, his own control over the Anatolian domains of the Byzantine Empire was challenged, by David Komnenos in Paphlagonia and Manuel Maurozomes in Phrygia. It was only after defeating the latter two in 1205 that he was proclaimed Emperor and invited Patriarch John X Kamateros to Nicaea. But John died in 1206 before crowning Theodore. Theodore appointed Michael IV Autoreianos as the new Patriarch and was crowned by him in March 1208. In the meantime, Theodore had been defeated by the Latins at Adramyttion (Edremit), but soon afterwards the Latins were themselves defeated by Kaloyan of Bulgaria at the Battle of Adrianople. This temporarily stalled the Latin advance, but it was renewed by Emperor Henry of Flanders in 1206. Theodore entered into an alliance with Kaloyan and took the offensive in 1209. The situation was complicated by the invasion of Sultan Kaykhusraw I of Rum at the instigation of the deposed Alexios III in 1211; however, the Nicaeans defeated the Seljuk army at the Battle of Antioch on the Meander where Theodore Laskaris killed the sultan in single combat.[1] Although the danger from Rum and Alexios III was thus neutralized, Emperor Henry defeated Theodore in October of the same year, and established his control over the southern shores of the Sea of Marmara.[1] In spite of this defeat, Theodore was able to take advantage of the death of David Megas Komnenos, the brother of Emperor Alexios I of Trebizond in 1212 and to extend his own control over Paphlagonia.[1] In 1214 Theodore concluded a peace treaty with the Latin Empire at Nymphaion, and in 1219 he married Marie de Courtenay, a niece of now deceased Emperor Henry and daughter of the current regent, Yolanda of Flanders.[10] In spite of predominantly peaceful relations, Theodore attacked the Latin Empire again in 1220, but peace was restored. Theodore died in November 1221 and was succeeded by his son-in-law John III Doukas Vatatzes.[11][12] He was buried in the Monastery of Hyakinthos in Nicaea.[1] At the end of his reign he ruled over a territory roughly coterminous with the old Roman provinces of Asia and Bithynia. Though there is no proof of higher qualities of statesmanship in him, by his courage and military skill he enabled the Byzantine nation not merely to survive, but ultimately to beat back the Latin invasion.[7] Theodore married three times. His first wife was Anna Komnene Angelina (b. c. 1176), whom he married in 1199. With Anna, Theodore had three daughters and two sons who died young: Nicholas Laskaris (d. c. 1212) John Laskaris (d. c. 1212) Irene Laskarina, who married first the general Andronikos Palaiologos and then John III Doukas Vatatzes Maria Laskarina, who married King Béla IV of Hungary Eudokia Laskarina (renamed Sophia, born between 1210 and 1212, died between 1247 and 1253), engaged to Robert of Courtenay, married firstly and divorced Frederick II, Duke of Austria, secondly (bef. 1230) Anseau de Cayeux, Governor of Asia Minor After Anna Angelina died in 1212, Theodore took Philippa of Armenia (1183-aft. 1219) as his second wife. She was a niece of Leo I, King of Armenia; this marriage was annulled a year later and they divorced in 1216. Gardiner mentions the theory that Leo wanted to marry his daughter to another, and sent his niece in her place; once Theodore found he had been duped, he sent her and the son born to them, Constantine Laskaris, born in 1214, back to Cilicia.[13] Theodore’s third wife was Maria of Courtenay (1204-September, 1222), whom he married in 1219. She was the daughter of Emperor Peter II of Courtenay and Empress Yolanda of Flanders, but they had no children. Anna Komnene Angelina Born c. 1176 Died 1212 Noble family Angelus Spouse(s) Isaac Komnenos Theodore I Laskaris Father Alexios III Angelos Mother Euphrosyne Doukaina Kamatera Anna Komnene Angelina or Comnena Angelina (c. 1176 – 1212) was an Empress of Nicaea. She was the daughter of the Byzantine Emperor Alexios III Angelos and of Euphrosyne Doukaina Kamatera.   Her first marriage was to the sebastokratōr Isaac Komnenos, a great-nephew of the emperor Manuel I Komnenos. They had one daughter, Theodora Angelina. Soon after Anna’s father became emperor, in 1195, Isaac Komnenos was dispatched to combat the Vlach-Bulgarian Rebellion. He was captured, became a pawn between rival Bulgarian and Vlach factions, and died in chains. Her second marriage to Theodore Laskaris, eventually emperor of Nicaea, was celebrated in a double wedding in early 1200 (the other couple was Anna’s sister Irene and Alexios Palaiologos).   Anna and Theodore had three daughters and two sons: Nicholas Laskaris (died c. 1212) John Laskaris (died c. 1212) Irene Doukaina Komnene Laskarina, who married first the general Andronikos Palaiologos and then John III Doukas Vatatzes Maria Laskarina, who married King Béla IV of Hungary Eudokia Laskarina (renamed Sophia, born between 1210 and 1212, died between 1247 and 1253), engaged to Robert de Courtenay, married firstly and divorced Frederick II, Duke of Austria, secondly (bef. 1230) Anseau de Cayeux, Governor of Asia Minor

Henry I of England Relationship to henry I Henry I, byname Henry Beauclerc (“Good Scholar”), French Henri Beauclerc, (born 1069, Selby, Yorkshire, England—died December 1, 1135, Lyons-la-Forêt, Normandy), youngest and ablest of William I the Conqueror’s sons, who, as king of England (1100–35), strengthened the crown’s executive powers and, like his father, also ruled Normandy (from 1106). Henry I, miniature from a 14th-century manuscript; in the British Library (Cottonian Claud D11 45 B).By permission of the British Library Reign Henry was crowned at Westminster on August 5, 1100, three days after his brother, King William II, William the Conqueror’s second son, had been killed in a hunting accident. Duke Robert Curthose, the eldest of the three brothers, who by Norman custom had succeeded to his father’s inheritance in Normandy, was returning from the First Crusade and could not assert his own claim to the English throne until the following year. The succession was precarious, however, because a number of wealthy Anglo-Norman barons supported Duke Robert, and Henry moved quickly to gain all the backing he could. He issued an ingenious Charter of Liberties, which purported to end capricious taxes, confiscations of church revenues, and other abuses of his predecessor. By his marriage with Matilda, a Scottish princess of the old Anglo-Saxon royal line, he established the foundations for peaceable relations with the Scots and support from the English. And he recalled St. Anselm, the scholarly archbishop of Canterbury whom his brother, William II, had banished. When Robert Curthose finally invaded England in 1101, several of the greatest barons defected to him. But Henry, supported by a number of his barons, most of the Anglo-Saxons, and St. Anselm, worked out an amicable settlement with the invaders. Robert relinquished his claim to England, receiving in return Henry’s own territories in Normandy and a large annuity. Although a Crusading hero, Robert was a self-indulgent, vacillating ruler who allowed Normandy to slip into chaos. Norman churchmen who fled to England urged Henry to conquer and pacify the duchy and thus provided moral grounds for Henry’s ambition to reunify his father’s realm at his brother’s expense. Paving his way with bribes to Norman barons and agreements with neighbouring princes, in 1106 Henry routed Robert’s army at Tinchebrai in southwestern Normandy and captured Robert, holding him prisoner for life. Between 1104 and 1106 Henry had been in the uncomfortable position of posing, in Normandy, as a champion of the church while fighting with his own archbishop of Canterbury. St. Anselm had returned from exile in 1100 dedicated to reforms of Pope Paschal II, which were designed to make the church independent of secular sovereigns. Following papal bans against lay lords investing churchmen with their lands and against churchmen rendering homage to laymen, Anselm refused to consecrate bishops whom Henry had invested and declined to do homage to Henry himself. Henry regarded bishoprics and abbeys not only as spiritual offices but as great sources of wealth. Since in many cases they owed the crown military services, he was anxious to maintain the feudal bond between the bishops and the crown. Ultimately, the issues of ecclesiastical homage and lay investiture forced Anselm into a second exile. After numerous letters and threats between king, pope, and archbishop, a compromise was concluded shortly before the Battle of Tinchebrai and was ratified in London in 1107. Henry relinquished his right to invest churchmen while Anselm submitted on the question of homage. With the London settlement and the English victory at Tinchebrai, the Anglo-Norman state was reunified and at peace. In the years following, Henry married his daughter Matilda (also called Maud) to Emperor Henry V of Germany and groomed his only legitimate son, William, as his successor. Henry’s right to Normandy was challenged by William Clito, son of the captive Robert Curthose, and Henry was obliged to repel two major assaults against eastern Normandy by William Clito’s supporters: Louis VI of France, Count Fulk of Anjou, and the restless Norman barons who detested Henry’s ubiquitous officials and high taxes. By 1120, however, the barons had submitted, Henry’s son had married into the Angevin house, and Louis VI—defeated in battle—had concluded a definitive peace. The settlement was shattered in November 1120, when Henry’s son perished in a shipwreck of the “White Ship,” destroying Henry’s succession plans. After Queen Matilda’s death in 1118, he married Adelaide of Louvain in 1121, but this union proved childless. On Emperor Henry V’s death in 1125, Henry summoned the empress Matilda back to England and made his barons do homage to her as his heir. In 1128 Matilda married Geoffrey Plantagenet, heir to the county of Anjou, and in 1133 she bore him her first son, the future king Henry II. When Henry I died at Lyons-la-Forêt in eastern Normandy, his favourite nephew, Stephen of Blois, disregarding Matilda’s right of succession, seized the English throne. Matilda’s subsequent invasion of England unleashed a bitter civil war that ended with King Stephen’s death and Henry II’s unopposed accession in 1154. Legacy Henry I was a skillful, intelligent monarch who achieved peace in England, relative stability in Normandy, and notable administrative advances on both sides of the Channel. Under Henry, the Anglo-Norman state his father had created was reunited. Royal justices began making systematic tours of the English shires, but, although his administrative policies were highly efficient, they were not infrequently regarded as oppressive. His reign marked a significant advance from the informal, personal monarchy of former times toward the bureaucratized state that lay in the future. It also marked a shift from the wide-ranging imperialism of earlier Norman leaders to consolidation and internal development. In the generations before Henry’s accession, Norman dukes, magnates, and adventurers had conquered southern Italy, Sicily, Antioch, and England. Henry won his major battles but preferred diplomacy or bribery to the risks of the battlefield. Subduing Normandy in 1106, he contented himself with keeping domestic peace, defending his Anglo-Norman state against rebellion and invasion, and making alliances with neighbouring princes. C. Warren Hollister  CITATION INFORMATIONARTICLE TITLE: Henry IWEBSITE NAME: Encyclopaedia BritannicaPUBLISHER: Encyclopaedia Britannica, Inc.DATE PUBLISHED: 01 January 2019URL: https://www.britannica.com/biography/Henry-I-king-of-EnglandACCESS DATE: January 25, 2019   Matilda of Scotland Matilda of Scotland (c. 1080 – 1 May 1118), originally christened Edith,[1] was Queen of England as the first wife of King Henry I. She acted as regent of England in the absence of her spouse on several occasions. Matilda was the daughter of the English princess Saint Margaret and the Scottish king Malcolm III. She was descended from Alfred the Great. At the age of about six Matilda was sent with her sister to be educated in a convent in southern England, where her aunt Cristina was abbess. It is not clear if she spent much time in Scotland thereafter. In 1093, when she was about 13, she was engaged to an English nobleman when her father and brother Edward were killed in a minor raid into England, and her mother died soon after; her fiancé then abandoned the proposed marriage. In Scotland a messy succession conflict followed between Matilda’s uncle Donald III, her half-brother Duncan II and brother Edgar until 1097. Matilda’s whereabouts during this no doubt difficult period are uncertain. But after the suspicious death of William II of England in 1100 and accession of his brother Henry I, Matilda’s prospects improved. Henry moved quickly to propose to her. It is said that he already knew and admired her, and she may indeed have spent time at the English court. Edgar was now secure on the Scottish throne, offering the prospect of better relations between the two countries, and Matilda also had the considerable advantage of Anglo-Saxon royal blood, which the Norman dynasty largely lacked.[2] There was a difficulty about the marriage; a special church council was called to be satisfied that Matilda had not taken vows as a nun, which her emphatic testimony managed to convince them of. Matilda and Henry married in late 1100. They had two children who reached adulthood and two more who died young. Matilda led a literary and musical court, but was also pious. She was “a women of exceptional holiness, in piety her mother’s rival, and in her own character exempt from all evil influence.”[3] She embarked on building projects for the church, and took a role in government when her husband was away; many surviving charters are signed by her. Matilda lived to see her daughter Matilda become Holy Roman Empress but died two years before the drowning of her son William. Henry remarried, but had no further legitimate children, which caused a succession crisis known as The Anarchy. Matilda is buried in Westminster Abbey and was fondly remembered by her subjects as “Matilda the Good Queen” and “Matilda of Blessed Memory”. There was an attempt to have her canonized, which was not pursued. Contents Matilda was born around 1080 in Dunfermline, the daughter of the Scottish king Malcolm III and the Anglo-Saxon princess Saint Margaret. She was christened Edith, with the Anglo-Norman prince Robert Curthose standing as godfather at the ceremony. The English queen Matilda of Flanders was also present at the baptismal font and served as her godmother. Edith pulled at Queen Matilda’s headdress, which was seen as an omen that the infant would be queen one day.[4] The Life of St Margaret, Queen of Scotland was later written for Matilda possibly by Turgot of Durham. It refers to her childhood and her relationship with her mother. In it, Margaret is described as a strict but loving mother. She did not spare the rod when it came to raising her children in virtue, which the author presupposed was the reason for the good behaviour Matilda and her siblings displayed, and Margaret also stressed the importance of piety.[5] When she was about six years old, Edith and her sister Mary were sent to Romsey Abbey, near Southampton in southern England, where their maternal aunt Cristina was abbess. During her stay at Romsey and, some time before 1093, at Wilton Abbey, both institutions known for learning,[6] the Scottish princess was much sought-after as a bride; refusing proposals from William de Warenne, 2nd Earl of Surrey, and Alan Rufus, Lord of Richmond. Hériman of Tournai claimed that William Rufus considered marrying her. Her education went beyond the standard feminine pursuits. This was not surprising as her mother was a great lover of books. Her daughters learned English, French, and some Latin, and were sufficiently literate to read St. Augustine and the Bible.[7] In 1093, her parents betrothed Edith to Alan Rufus, Lord of Richmond, one of her numerous suitors. However, before the marriage took place, her father entered into a dispute with William Rufus. In response, he marauded the English king’s lands where he was surprised by Robert de Mowbray, Earl of Northumbria and killed along with his son, Edward. Upon hearing of her husband and son’s death, Queen Margaret died on 16 November. Edith was now an orphan. She was abandoned by her betrothed who ran off with a daughter of Harold Godwinson, Gunhild of Wessex. However, he died before they could be married.[8] Edith had left the monastery by 1093, when Anselm, Archbishop of Canterbury, wrote to the Bishop of Salisbury ordering that the daughter of the King of Scotland be returned to the monastery that she had left. She did not return to Wilton and until 1100, is largely unaccounted for in chronicles.[9] After William II’s death in the New Forest in August 1100, his brother, Henry, immediately seized the royal treasury and crown. His next task was to marry and Henry’s choice was Matilda. Because Matilda had spent most of her life in a convent, there was some controversy over whether she was a nun and thus canonically ineligible for marriage. During her time at Romsey Abbey, her maternal aunt Cristina, forced her to wear the veil. Henry sought permission for the marriage from Archbishop Anselm, who returned to England in September 1100 after a long exile. Professing himself unwilling to decide so weighty a matter on his own, Anselm called a council of bishops in order to determine the canonical legality of the proposed marriage. Matilda testified that she had never taken holy vows, insisting that her parents had sent her and her sister to England for educational purposes, and her aunt Cristina had veiled her to protect her “from the lust of the Normans.” Matilda claimed she had pulled the veil off and stamped on it, and her aunt beat and scolded her for this act. The council concluded that Matilda was not a nun, never had been and her parents had not intended that she become one, giving their permission for the marriage. Matilda and Henry seem to have known one another for some time before their marriage – William of Malmesbury states that Henry had “long been attached” to her, and Orderic Vitalis says that Henry had “long adored” her character. It is possible that Matilda had spent some time at William Rufus’s court and that the pair had met there. It is also possible Henry was introduced to his bride by his teacher Bishop Osmund. Whatever the case, it is clear that the two at least knew each other prior to their wedding. Additionally, the chronicler William of Malmesbury suggests that the new king loved his bride.[10] Matilda’s mother was the sister of Edgar the Ætheling, proclaimed but uncrowned King of England after Harold, and, through her mother, Matilda was descended from Edmund Ironside and thus from the royal family of Wessex, which in the 10th century had become the royal family of a united England. This was extremely important because although Henry had been born in England, he needed a bride with ties to the ancient Wessex line to increase his popularity with the English and to reconcile the Normans and Anglo-Saxons.[11] In their children, the two factions would be united, further unifying the new regime. Another benefit was that England and Scotland became politically closer; three of Matilda’s brothers became kings of Scotland in succession and were unusually friendly towards England during this period of unbroken peace between the two nations: Alexander I married Sybilla, one of Henry I’s illegitimate daughters, and David I lived at Henry’s court for some time before his accession.[12] Matilda had a small dower but it did incorporate some lordship rights. Most of her dower estates were granted from lands previously held by Edith of Wessex. Additionally, Henry made numerous grants on his wife including substantial property in London. Generosity aside, this was a political move in order to win over the unruly Londoners who were vehement supporters of the Wessex kings.[13]   The seal of Matilda After Matilda and Henry were married on 11 November 1100 at Westminster Abbey by Archbishop Anselm of Canterbury, she was crowned as “Matilda,” a hallowed Norman name. By courtiers, however, she and her husband were soon nicknamed ‘Godric and Godiva’.[14] These two names were typical English names from before The Conquest and mocked their more rustic style, especially when compared to the flamboyance of William II. Matilda gave birth to a daughter, Matilda, born in February 1102, and a son, William, called “Adelin”, in November 1103. As queen, she resided primarily at Westminster, but accompanied her husband on his travels around England, and, circa 1106–1107, probably visited Normandy with him. Matilda was the designated head of Henry’s curia and acted as regent during his frequent absences.[15] During the English investiture controversy (1103–07), Matilda acted as intercessor between her husband and archbishop Anselm. She wrote several letters during Anselm’s absence, first asking him for advice and to return, but later increasingly to mediate.[16]   Matilda had great interest in architecture and instigated the building of many Norman-style buildings, including Waltham Abbey and Holy Trinity Aldgate.[17] She also had the first arched bridge in England built, at Stratford-le-Bow, as well as a bathhouse with piped-in water and public lavatories at Queenhithe.[18] Matilda’s court was filled with musicians and poets; she commissioned a monk, possibly Thurgot, to write a biography of her mother, Saint Margaret. She was an active queen and, like her mother, was renowned for her devotion to religion and the poor. William of Malmesbury describes her as attending church barefoot at Lent, and washing the feet and kissing the hands of the sick. Matilda exhibited a particular interest in leprosy, founding at least two leper hospitals, including the institution that later became the parish church of St Giles-in-the-Fields.[19] She also administered extensive dower properties and was known as a patron of the arts, especially music. Matilda was patroness of the monk Bendeit’s version of The Voyage of Saint Brendan, written around 1106–1118.[20] After Matilda died on 1 May 1118 at Westminster Palace, she was buried at Westminster Abbey. The death of her son, William Adelin, in the disaster of the White Ship (November 1120) and Henry’s failure to produce a legitimate son from his second marriage led to the succession crisis of The Anarchy. After her death, Matilda was remembered by her subjects as “Matilda the Good Queen” and “Matilda of Blessed Memory”, and for a time sainthood was sought for her, though she was never canonized. Matilda is also thought to be the identity of the “Fair Lady” mentioned at the end of each verse in the nursery rhyme London Bridge Is Falling Down. The post-Norman conquest English monarchs to the present day are related to the Anglo-Saxon House of Wessex monarchs via Matilda of Scotland as she was the great-granddaughter of King Edmund Ironside; see House of Wessex family tree. Matilda and Henry had issue Euphemia (July/August 1101), died young. Matilda of England ( c. 7 February 1102 – 10 September 1167), Holy Roman Empress, Countess consort of Anjou, called Lady of the English William Adelin, (5 August 1103 – 25 November 1120), sometimes called Duke of Normandy, who married Matilda (d.1154), daughter of Fulk V, Count of Anjou. Elizabeth (August/September 1104), died young