Give Morcar and Edwin Leofricsson claims of the King of England title

[AKjeldsen]

England should have Royal Perogative Realm law in 1066 to represent the fact that Norman England was the most centralised realm in the world at that time, rivaled only by Byzantium. It would help promote revolt.

I would disagree with that. Regardless of how centralized the realm was or not, the kings fundamentally recognized custom - the usus atque leges - as the most important basis for law. Norman custom, to be certain, but custom nonetheless. Thus, it seems entirely correct for England to have Traditional Custom Law. Royal Prerogative would imply that the monarch can alter the law as he sees fit, and that was not the case even after the Conquest.

 

[unmerged(31117)]

The Byzantine Emporers generally respected "custom" too and they're counted as royal perogative. Norman England was far more centralised around the monarchy than every country in the world except Byzantium, all rulers had to swear alliegance directly to the king, rather than to their immediate overlord. Royal Perogative is an utterly accurate way of describing the Norman rule over Engand, Traditional custom countries (by game standards) such a Germany and France were no where near as centralised. Only ongoing baronial revolts and magna-carta really got rid of English Royal Perogative.

As mentioned before I think that ideally the Leafricson's should fight to put Edgar on the throne rather than themselves, but since this can't be handled we have to go for the next best solution that is to give them claims to the throne. Think of it as the anglo-saxon Witan offering one of them the throne of England after William is killed or Edgar Atheling decides he doesn't want to be king and gives them the throne. I'm not actually sure they would have been able to take over Normandie, the Normans would have snuggled back to the French king for protection had Anglo-saxon's tried to invade Normandie.
But it's likely that had William (and probably much of his family) been killed the Normans would have been sufficiantly cowled to not attempt to invade again. The Danes would probably have invaded though.

I agree that Leifricson's shouldn't ideally have claims themselves, but it's the best that can be done.

 

[unmerged(21937)]

I agree that Leifricson's shouldn't ideally have claims themselves, but it's the best that can be done.

If you want, you can put Atheling in the court of the less loyal of Leofricsons (maybe have them allied at start even) and then that Leofricson can make Atheling king of England. I don't see why you consider this as impossible...

 

[unmerged(31117)]

Because you can't demand a title on behalf of your courtier!

 

[Veldmaarschalk]

Well if you are at war with the one who holds to title and you, yourself have no claim on that title.

So if Morcar or the other one, has f.e. a claim on the title count of Essex and the Atheling is in their court they can then put his claim forward. If they win of course.

 

[unmerged(21937)]

Because you can't demand a title on behalf of your courtier!

It was changed in some patch (an early beta iirc) that you can demand titles for your vassals (if they are also at war) or courtiers (but only if your vassals aren't in the war too & you don't have claim on same title). I've tested the ability to demand for courtiers and it worked few patches back. So I'm now somewhat confused by your statement.

 

[Pode]

You can press a courtier's claim at the peace table if you are already at war, but you can't declare war on their behalf without a claim of your own. Leofricsson would have to grab claim to a county in William's demense, start the war, then force William to recognize Aethling's claim.

 

[AKjeldsen]

The Byzantine Emporers generally respected "custom" too and they're counted as royal perogative. Norman England was far more centralised around the monarchy than every country in the world except Byzantium, all rulers had to swear alliegance directly to the king, rather than to their immediate overlord. Royal Perogative is an utterly accurate way of describing the Norman rule over Engand, Traditional custom countries (by game standards) such a Germany and France were no where near as centralised. Only ongoing baronial revolts and magna-carta really got rid of English Royal Perogative.

It's not a question of centralisation, it's a question of which legalistic tradition is dominant in the realm - basically whether it is the Isidorean "Law is either written law or customary law..." etc., or the Iustinian "What pleases the prince has the force of law".

In the case of Norman England, the former is most certainly the case. The customs observed are different than in Germany, and the importance of royal writs in particular makes for a somewhat different system, but the basis is still customary.

 

[Lambert Simnel]

Is it possible to start Edwin and Morcar with low loyalties, and would this allow them to rebel without their own claim?

The peasents should also start disloyal in Norman ruled parts of England.

Also is there any way of starting Edgar Æþeling in England but making it likely that he leaves (ideally for Scotland) during the first few years?

 

[unmerged(29883)]

An alliance of the two Leofricsons at the start would be useful, if the AI actually took any notice of what that really meant. If one of them DoWs the Kingdom of England, the other will almost certainly turn a blind eye or support the King, unless they happen to be rebelling at the same time.

Historically, Aetheling was resident in Scotland, having been exiled from England. There are ways and means to ensure his return in-game as it stands...

Edit:

Just briefly commenting on Lambert's last statement, making the Leofricsons disloyal at game start would either cause an instant 1066 rebellion, which would be both ahistorical and, frankly, annoying - serving only to wipe out the Leofricson dynasty almost from the game start...or it would mean nothing, as the huge loyalty bonus that William the Conqueror generates would wipe it out by the end of the following year.

Also, the peasants (despite being saxon) were not the source of discontent with the Norman administration. Normans had been in positions of power in England since before the conquest, and generally peasants were not overly concerned with exactly who was leading the country as long as the leader was 'good' in their eyes and they were not suffering undue hardship.

Whilst they almost certainly didn't embrace William's accession, it would have been the saxon nobility who would have actively resisted Norman occupation, as their chances of rising in the feudal ladder would have been greatly restricted. Plus, they stood to lose the most of all of the parts of society.

However, most of the lesser saxon nobility were fairly content to accept Norman rule...this was in an age before any real concept of nationalism or loyalty beyond the individual. If Aetheling was sensibly challenging the throne, they would probably have sided with him - but only if they were fairly sure that he would win, or if the lord was particularly ambitious. Far better to work with the new rulers and gain power at expense of those who chose not to...

 

[Lambert Simnel]

Historically, Aetheling was resident in Scotland, having been exiled from England.

Not until Spring 1068. He was at William's court, and quite well treated if I remember correctly for nearly two years after the conquest.

 

[unmerged(31117)]

The point is that written law and customary law were definately at play in Byzantium the emporers typicially did not challenge tradition, as such they would definately class as traditional custom by Woz Early's definition. No the realm laws represent the realms "ideology of kingship". Everyone in Norman England had to swear fealty directly to the king, in Saxon England and most of Europe a vassal only had to swear alliegance to their immediate overlord and kings only had the featly of the very top lords in the realm.

Royal Perogative- All power is centralised around the person of the king, his law is dominant and the king recognises no restraint on his right to rule, except perhaps his own inherant respect for tradition.
Fuedal Contract- The country is ruled by powerful noblemen whose position in the realm relative to the king is guaranteed by two-way legal contracts that are generally respected, those in the middle of the fuedal heirachy have most of the power.
Traditional custom- This system is based on traditional loyalty and the roles, duties and rights of the different levels of the heirachy are deeply inbedded in the consciousness of all levels in the fuedal heirachy.
Popular Law- Both the king and the aristocracy are answerable to a single common law and parliament and local councils have most of the power in the realm and their decisions are generally respected by the aristocracu. This is the closest to a constitutional monarchy that the CK game allows.

I'm not sure that your description of the Saxon peasantry bieng necceserily very happy under their new overlords is entirely accurate, they appear to have supported members of the anglo-saxon nobility against the Normans and the harsh measures taken against villages that were suspected of hiding fugatives suggests the Norman's did fear them (which suggest hostility) and the fact simply is that they didn't have the means to resist or the orginisation to do so at that time.

The key here is that the Norman conquest virtually saw the whole traditonal legal system of England fall apart and the system was replaced with one of effective legal immunity and supremacy for William's lackeys. William had little respect for those lackeys, nor they to him so fuedal contract is it bit wrong and power came totally from William as he legally owned all the land. Royal perogative is definately the best legal system to describe the functioning of post-Norman conquest England.

 

[unmerged(29883)]

Psst...that wasn't my definition of Traditional Custom. Like I said before, I agree that there's a case for making England a Royal Prerogative.

With regard to peasantry...note the caveat of 'not suffering undue hardship'. I don't think that the peasants would have been particularly happy with norman rule, but IMO that's mainly to do with the cultural objections with the normans having a different language and set of demands on the peasantry...and on the two-way distrust between saxons and normans.

In all honesty, to your average peasant, a lord is a lord. As long as he wasn't a terribly cruel or unjust lord, they generally took their lot in life and accepted it with no more complaint than they would give to anyone holding the position.

Meanwhile, yes, historically at December 1066, Aetheling was resident in the court of King William (in Normandy, not London) and remained so until he joined the Leofricsons' rebellion in 1068, after which he was exiled to Scotland, where his sister married King Malcolm, etc.

More of a glaring error is that I'm fairly sure that Aetheling was about 14 or 15 at the time (Dec. 1066), and I seem to recall that he is portrayed as being older at the CK start.

 

[unmerged(21937)]

Meanwhile, yes, historically at December 1066, Aetheling was resident in the court of King William (in Normandy, not London) and remained so until he joined the Leofricsons' rebellion in 1068, after which he was exiled to Scotland, where his sister married King Malcolm, etc.

I think that should warrant putting him to other Leofricson's court, since it's more historically correct than being in Scotland, since he presumably was with Leofricsons during the rebellion and putting him to Leofricson court is better than keeping him in Willy's court, since it allows player (or even AI) Leofricson to attempt the daring feat of overthrowing king Willy and replacing him with Atheling.

 

[unmerged(29883)]

Aetheling undoubtedly kept a close eye on what his former allies were up to, and the Leofricsons would have certainly been content with acting as Kingmakers and getting him on the throne, as that would have protected their lands from William's rather understandable desire to reduce the size and power of their territories.

William kept Aetheling close and treated him well because he knew full well how dangerous the legitimate saxon heir to the throne could be if, in a few years' time, he fell into the wrong hands...which is, of course, exactly what he did.

However, on the note of giving him to the Leofricsons to encourage them to claim the throne on his behalf, that argument really works better for keeping him in Scotland. The invasion of Northumbria in 1069 by the Kingdoms of Scotland and Denmark was far more dangerous to King William, hence why it caused the 'harrowing of the north'.

The Leofricson brothers were pardoned after their rebellion, although I believe they lost their earldoms as a result. Edwin died trying to raise a Welsh rebellion and Morcar joined Hereward the Wake in Ely, and later died in prison.

Edgar Aetheling's sister, Margaret, meanwhile, became Saint Margaret of Scotland, and was responsible for a major part of Scotland becoming anglicized and adopting the Roman Catholic rather than the Celtic Church (Christian, but not truly conformist with Rome). Her sons became some of the major kings of the Dunkeld dynasty, and one of her daughters married King Henry I of England, which helped the saxons be more content under the norman rule, and undoubtedly did a lot for the english 'melting pot'.

If Edgar Aetheling is going to be moved to Lancaster or Northumbria (instinct says Lancaster - Mercia was the stronger, better established, hereditary power base of the Leofricsons), then Margaret should at least be left in Scotland...

 

[unmerged(21937)]

If Edgar Aetheling is going to be moved to Lancaster or Northumbria (instinct says Lancaster - Mercia was the stronger, better established, hereditary power base of the Leofricsons), then Margaret should at least be left in Scotland...

But if Margaret is somewhere else than Scotland, then there at least exists a theoretical chance of AI Scotland marrying her to Malcolm, but if she's in Scotland, AI Scotland will never marry her to Malcolm, since AI doesn't marry from it's own court.

 

[unmerged(29883)]

Ah, I wasn't aware of that. In which case, moving her out of the Scottish court is both historically accurate and entirely sensible. Ideally, I'd love to see a situation where an ambitious lord who'd allied with Aetheling in the first place (ie, Stigand or the Leofricsons) would have the chance to bring him to their court either in brief preparation of a rebellion, or in the early stages of (ie, as is historically accurate).

Given that this is virtually impossible in CK (please, CK2, please...), I suppose it is then logical to move him and his sister to one of the Leofricson duchies so that Aetheling at least has a potential purpose in life.

 

[unmerged(31117)]

Give Aetheling a claim on the Kingdom of England and place him in Morcar Leifricson's court rather than give the Leifricson's themselves claims. I support the suggestion.

What about Gytha Godwineson and whichever scandanavian king it was that had a claim on the throne?

 

[unmerged(29883)]

Hmm...why Morcar? Ever since this got raised I've been trying to find a history book which details exactly what happened in the Leofricsons' rebellion, but was Morcar the protagonist? He was elected as Earl of Northumbria following the popular rebellion against Tostig Godwineson, of which he was a part, but it was Edwin who threw the army of Mercia behind the rebels. Harold Godwineson, before he was King Harold, also came to their aid and utterly defated Tostig...but through all of that, Morcar wasn't all that influential.

AFAIK, Edwin was the ambitious one of the two brothers...the only logical reason I can see to favour Morcar would be that Northumbria was naturally more rebellious. Hence why I'm trying to find a book on the rebellion, but I believe it was started by Edwin.

Northumbria wasn't subject to the harrowing of the north until 1069, when a completely separate effort was made by Scotland and Denmark to put Edgar Aetheling on the throne. By this stage, William the Conqueror realised that the combination of Northumbria's natural streak of independence, distance from his own power base and proximity to potentially powerful enemies caused him to realise that the most sensible solution was to destroy the place in order to deny his enemies access to its resources that could have been used against him.

Basically, although Northumbria was involved more in the rebellions and suffered far more, this was mainly after the Leofricsons' rebellion, and more because of its strategic location than because of its ruler.

Anyway, in terms of CK mechanics, the Leofricsons need some kind of claim on territory that they can pursue against King William, or they'll never actually declare war against him (ie, they can't pursue Edgar's claim). Gytha Godwineson and Sweyn Estridson are tied up in this, too...

I've made various comments on this previously, but I'll collate my thoughts here on who should have what claims. Reasoning follows further down:

Edgar Atheling: (King of England)

Gytha Godwineson: any selection of (County of Hampshire, County of Salisbury, County of Bristol, County of Dorset, County of Somerset, County of Devon)

Sweyn Estridson: (County of York, County of Durham), also arguably you could include other areas of former Danelaw, which would include any selection of (County of Lancaster, County of Derby, County of Leicester, County of Lincoln).

Edwin Leofricson: any selection of (County of Oxford, County of Gloucester, County of Warwick and County of Leicester) and arguably also (County of Hereford and County of Northampton)

Morcar Leofricson: (County of Leicester, County of Lincoln, County of Cumberland) and arguably also (County of Berwick).

==========================================================

Reasoning:

Edgar Aetheling is pretty obvious, given that he was appointed King by the last Saxon Witan before submission to William the Conqueror.

Gytha Godwineson, also Gytha of Wessex, daughter of Harold Godwineson is not really a true claimant to the throne. Having no sons when Harold Godwineson was killed at Hastings, she was dutifully passed over in the succession order. Given that the Witan elected Edgar Aetheling, her claims would now only be logically valid on her father's former lands in Wessex, which cover the counties listed.

Arguably, you could also include claims on the Duke of Norfolk and Duke of Hereford, as her father had held them. It depends how much of a key player you want to make her, but historically she was very, very minor.

Sweyn Estridson, IIRC the uncle of Gytha Godwineson, again has only the loosest claim on the throne of England, as it passes through the female line and through marriage only. Sweyn would have valid claims on some lands in former Danelaw in England, having a slight hereditary right to them. York and Durham are the obvious choices, being the bastions of Danish culture in northern England.

Edwin Leofricson would have claims on the former lands of the Earldom of Mercia. In-game this is rather confusing, because representing him as the Duke of Lancaster already throws him a few hundred miles too far to the north, IIRC. However, Mercia's former ownership of Oxford, Gloucester, Warwick and Leicester was still recent enough for a direct claim to be valid. Arguably, you could include claims on Hereford and Northampton if you want to trace Mercia's borders back slightly further, but that would be stretching things.

Morcar Leofricson, in his capacity as Earl of Northumbria, would have claims on the disputed borders - Leicester, Lincoln and Cumberland. Arguably, you could stretch that up to include Berwick as well.

What this does is give the key players historically supported claims which are also, IMO, fairly balanced - especially if you make sure that Gytha Godwineson's claims are kept low (and have her resident in Denmark, where she had escaped to following the conquest...). There is a possibility that a faintly historical situation could arise, with the Leofricsons trying to expand their direct territory and, in the event of dramatic success, be able to put Aetheling on the throne, since he resides with them.

If Malcolm of Scotland marries Margaret Aetheling, then Edgar should join him if he becomes exiled from England (historical), and then he can follow his historical claim. Sweyn Estridson may choose to pursue his claims, possibly aiding Gytha Godwineson.

Edgar Aetheling, meanwhile, remains the King candidate in desperate need of a Kingmaker, and Margaret Aetheling (who *was* a key player) the link to securing his claim on the throne of England for your dynasty...providing no opportunistic sod prevents you from doing so by marrying his daughter to Edgar.

 

[Earl Uhtred]

Durham was never part of the Danelaw.