Tag Archives: Bastard


Empress Maud (Matilda)


Categories: Research, Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

Maud was the eldest, legitimate daughter of Henry I of England.  Her major claim to fame is that she warred for 19 years with Stephen of Blois, her cousin (both were grandchildren of William the Conqueror), for the throne of England.  This period of English history is known as ‘The Anarchy’.

Maud resolved to take this path after the death of her brother, Henry, who went down with the White Ship in 1120 AD.  His death left King Henry with no legitimate sons (and up to twenty illegitimate ones).  In English law, illegitimate sons could not inherit, which left only Maud to take the throne.  While Henry was still alive, he tried very hard to get the barons to swear they would follow Maud.  Afterwards … Stephen felt that as a legitimate male, even if descended through his mother, Adela, a daughter of William.

Stephen and his wife, Matilda, were crowned King and Queen of England in 1135, shortly after King Henry’s death.  They had crossed the English Channel from Normandy more quickly than Maud and claimed the throne.

Both Stephen and Maud, of course, were Normans.  The spoke French, they held lands in Normandy and France, and hadn’t actually spent very much time in England before they began fighting over it.

“Matilda is the Latin form of Maud, and the name of the only surviving legitimate child of King Henry I. She was born in 1101, generally it is said at Winchester, but recent research indicates that she was actually born at the Royal Palace in Sutton Courtenay (Berkshire).

In something of a political coup for her father, Matilda was betrothed to the German Emperor, Henry V, when she was only eight. They were married on 7th January 1114. She was twelve and he was thirty-two. Unfortunately there were no children and on the Emperor’s death in 1125, Matilda was recalled to her father’s court.

Matilda’s only legitimate brother had been killed in the disastrous Wreck of the White Ship in late 1120 and she was now her father’s only hope for the continuation of his dynasty. The barons swore allegiance to the young Princess and promised to make her queen after her father’s death. She herself needed heirs though and in April 1127, Matilda found herself obliged to marry Prince Geoffrey of Anjou and Maine (the future Geoffrey V, Count of those Regions). He was thirteen, she twenty-three. It is thought that the two never got on. However, despite this unhappy situation they had had three sons in four years.”  http://www.britannia.com/history/monarchs/mon25a.html

Unfortunately, when Maud did have a chance to claim the crown, the people of London refused to crown her and drove her from the city.  The chronicles report that she was haughty and disagreeable (Norman, remember, overseeing Saxon subjects).  King Stephen’s Queen, Matilda, though also Norman, had behaved more to their liking.  Maud never came close to gaining the throne again.  http://www.guide-to-castles-of-europe.com/empress-matilda.html

The final outcome of The Anarchy was Maud’s retirement from the field in 1148 at the death of her greatest supporter, her half-brother Robert (who was illegitimate).  Once King Stephen’s son, Eustace died in 1153, it allowed for “the possibility of a peaceful settlement between Stephen and his rival, the young Henry of Anjou. According to William of Newburgh, King Stephen was “grieved beyond measure by the death of the son who he hoped would succeed him; he pursued warlike preparations less vigorously, and listened more patiently than usual to the voices of those urging peace.”  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eustace_IV,_Count_of_Boulogne

Here is a timeline for Maud’s life:  http://womenshistory.about.com/od/empressmatilda/a/matilda_timelin.htm

King Owain Gwynedd (King of North Wales) took advantage of The Anarchy to consolidate his lands and power.  This period in the twelfth century is the setting for my Gareth and Gwen Medieval Mysteries.


Inheritance and Welsh Law

Categories: Research, Tags: , , , , , , ,

The Laws of Hywel Dda, codifed formally before 950 AD.  The historical consensus is that the laws had been effect for  hundreds of years, but Hywel Dda ruled much of Wales and that allowed a more cohesive approach to the law.

“Most of the surviving manuscripts of Welsh law start with a preamble explaining how the laws were codified by Hywel. The introduction to the Book of Blegywryd is a typical example:

Hywel the Good, son of Cadell, by the grace of God, king of all Wales… summoned to him from every commote of his kingdom six men who were practised in authority and jurisprudence… to the place called the White House on the Taf in Dyfed. … And at the end of Lent the king selected from that assembly the twelve most skilled laymen of his men and the one most skilled scholar who was called Master Blegywryd, to form and interpret for him and for his kingdom, laws and usages…[1]
The description of Hywel as “king of all Wales” suggests a date between 942 and Hywel’s death in 950 for this council. However the Welsh laws have many points of similarity to the Brehon laws in Ireland and some parts probably date from long before Hywel’s time. What was produced by Hywel’s council was not a set of entirely new laws, rather as described in the preamble to the Book of Iorwerth:
And by the common counsel and agreement of the wise men who came there they examined the old laws, and some of them they allowed to continue, others they amended, others they wholly deleted, and others they laid down anew

A surviving manuscript (from the thirteenth century) is in the National Library of Wales. It was a ‘pocket’ book, designed for lawyers to carry around in their scrip, rather than left on a library shelf.
You can view it here: http://digidol.llgc.org.uk/METS/lhw00003/physical

Later on, with the Norman Conquest, Welsh law proved to be a rallying point for the Welsh resistance. The Normans objected to many of the laws (paying money instead of a sentence of death for various crimes, the status of women, divorce, etc), but the most contentious of all were rights of inheritance.  In Wales, illegitimate sons and legitimate ones were treated identically.

That’s worth repeating, by Welsh law, illegitimate sons would inherit equally with legitimate ones.  In my book,  The Good Knight, Prince Rhun, as the oldest, was his father’s favorite.  If Owain Gwynedd had died in 1246, most likely Rhun and Hywel, both illegimate sons, would have split the kingdom between them in some fashion, possibly with Rhun taking precedence.  Each of Owain’s other sons would have received something, but only Iorwerth might have been of age by that point. “The law of the church says that no-one is entitled to patrimony save the father’s eldest son by his wedded wife. The law of Hywel adjudges it to the youngest son as to the eldest, and judges that the father’s sin and his illegality should not be set against the son for his patrimony.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welsh_law

The consequences of upholding this law were varied.  For the Welsh themselves, it meant that kingdoms were split among many sons and son fought son to consolidate their inheritance.  This wasn’t necessarily a good thing, but it did mean that if the eldest son was less fit to rule than a younger son, that younger son could triumph (Llywelyn ap Gruffydd is a case in point).

The Church viewed this aspect of Welsh law as a horrifying deviance from Holy Scripture:  “When he wrote to Llywelyn ap Gruffydd in October 1279 complaining of the Prince’s infringement of liberties of the Church, Peckham showed knowledge of the laws of Hywel Dda, though only by hearsay: ‘contra quae opponitis leges Howeli Da, quae Decalogo dicuntur in diversis articulis obviare’. When, in November 1282, after the terms of peace proposed by him had been rejected, Peckham sent his letter of general denunciation of the morality of Llywelyn and the Welsh, he twice referred to the laws of Howelda and makes it clear that this time it was a written text he had seen: ‘ac Howelda in lege sua, quam vidimus’.  In this letter Peckham included among the sins of the Welsh their casual regard for the indissolubility of marriage and their allowing inheritance to illegitimate offspring.”  http://welshjournals.llgc.org.uk/browse/viewpage/llgc-id:1277425/llgc-id:1285311/llgc-id:1285326/getText