Introduction: The tussle for supremacy between England and France goes back to ancient history. After several failed attempts in previous centuries, the Normans finally defeated the English in the Battle of Hastings in the year 1066, thereby changing the course of the island’s history significantly. Not only did the Normans take over the political reigns but also effected profound changes to the cultural and linguistic heritage of the people of England. This essay will attempt to show how the Norman Conquest of England left a lasting impact on future generations of English in the social, political, literary and cultural realms.
Immediately following the Norman Conquest, the religious orthodoxy of England faced a serious threat to their material possessions, as the new rulers ordered despoliation of church treasures, imposition of punitive gelds and taxes, introduced new mandates of knight service, and lay magnates’ seizure of the estates belonging to churches if they were strong enough to do so. In addition to such strictures, the autonomy and authority of monasteries were undermined, as bishops were bestowed with powers to annex a wealthy monastery. Further,
“the establishment of an Episcopal see in an abbey threatened not only the wealth of the community, which had to be divided to provide for the bishop and his familia, but also the independence and the status of its head, and it is not surprising that communities so threatened resisted vigorously. Tension between religious houses and bishops is a dominant theme in post-Conquest ecclesiastical histories”. (Jane Dick Zatta, 2005, p.306)
Older historical accounts of medieval England presented a rather simplistic picture. The authors of these accounts do not venture beyond stating the obvious political and cultural transformations of the period. But as the methods of research got more advanced alongside developments in such fields as archaeology and anthropology, revisionist histories and subaltern studies have given new perspectives into English past. As a consequence, such popular interpretations of medieval English history as recorded by the great nineteenth century historian William Stubbs are being revised and rewritten. In Stubbs’ works, for instance, the introduction of French feudalism to England is given a sympathetic treatment. But for contemporary historians, feudalism is a purely exploitative enterprise devoid of civil merits. Similarly, the Magna Carta and the Parliament of the thirteenth century England have now come to be seen “not as responses to popular protest but as the outcome of negotiation among the political elite, to a large extent as instruments controlled by kings who sought to mask the exercise of brute royal lordship behind a facade of communal consent” (Jane Dick Zatta, 2005, p.306).
Moreover, the Norman Conquest does not pertain only to England, for it was truly a British people’s history that comprised the Welsh, the Scots, the Irish and the Cornish. Studied in light of these new perspectives, we learn that the French speaking Normans’ conquest of the island kingdom did not induce sentiments of retribution and revenge among the conquered subjects. To the contrary, the natives easily fraternized with their new masters, leading to a state of harmony and socio-cultural assimilation. In contrast to the Austro-Hungarian and Finish ruling classes of recent centuries, the Norman aristocracy was open to intermarry as well as accept the indigenous language of the subjects. Such intermingling of ethnicity, culture and language would lead, in subsequent years, to the most dynamic and versatile of literary traditions in England. But the smoothness associated with social assimilation did not easily carry over to the language traditions of French and English. In fact, historical analysis of medieval literature reveals the then existing linguistic antagonism between the two language traditions. Given the long warring legacy between the two kingdoms, this should come as no surprise. As the English nation was forever at war with their trans-channel neighbor, it seemed apt that their languages should be dragged into a conflict as well. In particular, the notion of gender cleansing is “portrayed, enacted, and consummated in its linguistic incarnation. As the Englishmen are virile, rugged, honest, and virtuous, so must be their language, in opposition to the womanish, effete, deceptive, and perfidious language of the French” (Vincent, 2003, p.61). Such stereotypes are far too simplistic to be true. Nevertheless, the linkage between the English language, the Anglo-Saxon ethnic roots and the notion of the English nation is very strong indeed. Centuries later, when English theatre flourished under the reign of Queen Elizabeth, literary artists, including Shakespeare, would explore this sense of English identity.
It also means that literature can be a useful source material for ascertaining political and cultural dynamics of England under the rule of Normans. A prominent theme in Elizabethan theatre is the concept of common identity and brotherhood amongst the English peoples; a concept that is reinforced through the English nation’s perennial battles against France.
“The French armies could not be transported into the theater, but in a sense they were already there. Not the armies that Henry V fought at Agincourt, but the Norman armies of three-and-a-half centuries before, who imposed a French-speaking nobility and repressed English to an unwritten plebian jargon. While the foreign rulers were slowly domesticated in the centuries of Anglo-Saxon twilight, a thick stratum of French vocabulary survived in English. With it survived, too, the native English resentment, in the English-speaker’s unconscious sense that French words are arrogant, mannered, and even rude”. (Steinsaltz, 2002, p.317)
It is no surprise then that the playwright of the day exploited this resentment in the English psyche. As a result the enterprise of literary art of the Elizabethan period is characterized by the sense of identity the people of England associated with their language. A classic exemplification of this theme is Shakespeare’s Henry V, which is marked by its disparaging view of the French language. Ever since the Norman Conquest in the middle of eleventh century, French had been the language of the courts and the ruling classes. Even during the fourteenth century, when the English aristocracy regained the throne, they continued to treat French as their first language. The lingual divide between the classes is illustrated by Edward the Third’s decree in 1362 which stated that “court proceedings be conducted in English rather than French because French is much unknown in the said realm” (Steinsaltz, 2002, p.317). The working class’ view of French language as alien to their own language, as well as carrying other negative connotations springs from this fact.
The Norman Conquest precipitated the emergence of co-operation between the two peoples that was surely unprecedented in their common history. The erstwhile distinct Anglo-Saxon and Norman ethnic groups now became irreversibly assimilated and they strived to collectively defend their nation against extraneous threats as well as helped their nation towards progress. This mixing of blood had also handed the royalty more military and economic power. New opportunities for prosperity also presented itself, which the youth were only eager to avail.
“Capable and eager, the youth of the country strove for distinction; and reward as yielded richly to those who had the wisdom to seek it aright. Success, it was evident, lay not in harking back to a past from which the people was definitely severed, but in seizing the advantages of the present and reaching forward to those seemingly still more abundant in store. As a result of the Battle of Hastings, England was finally removed from isolation, and impelled into the strong currents of international life. The Anglo-Normans, possessed as they were of enthusiasm, energy, and executive skill, vied successfully with their Continental kin, and stirred their fellow-countrymen to like achievement”. (Schofield, et. al., p.25)
Under these new circumstances, literature flourished as did renewed interest in reading and learning among the common people. If one work of literature has to be picked among the entire medieval English canon, which typifies the dynamics of change witnessed in the art, then it would have to be Vie Seinte Osith, which is not very well known then as is now. The Vie Seinte Osith is a classic Anglo-Norman verse life of an early English virgin martyr. The saint venerated in this life is a “pseudo-historical composite made up of three Anglo-Saxon holy women connected to the seventh and tenth centuries” (Jane Dick Zatta, 2005, p.306). Although very little documentation exists of this saint’s followers prior to the Norman Conquest, it certainly did rise in prominence during the years of Norman rule, for the Normans supported all Anglo-Saxon saints. This goes to show the profound impact the Normans have had in the social, religious and intellectual aspects of English life. For example, the house of the Holy Trinity Aldgate in London which played a crucial role in the composition of Vie Seinte Osith, was patronized by Bishop Richard as well as King Henry I himself. As early as the first decade of the twelfth century it earned renown for its intellectual culture. It encouraged writers from all classes, so that even those in rural settlements could enjoy literature. The importance of “the cult of St. Osyth at the heart of the intellectual circles close to the Norman and Angevin kings makes her Anglo-Norman life, by far the longest and most complete of the extant lives, especially important to a study of the development of vernacular literature in the twelfth century.” (Jane Dick Zatta, 2005, p.306)
Conclusion: More broadly, in the literary scene of England, traditional Anglo-Saxon authors found themselves replaced by a new breed of Anglo-Norman authors, whose literary styles and emotional sensibilities were very different. The new Anglo Norman nobility acquired new tastes for literature. This transformation came to define the emerging national character of England. How the English literary scene would have transpired in the absence of Norman rule is a matter of conjecture. What is more certain is the fact that prior to the Norman Conquest, the native Anglo-Saxons had a body of indigenous literature that is decidedly superior to anything comparable in continental Europe. This is particularly true of English narrative prose. But meritorious as it surely was, the ascendancy of English literature preceding the Normans should be judged in light of equally impressive, if not more brilliant writings of Norsemen between the eleventh and thirteenth centuries, where political and climatic conditions were not much different from that of the English isles. While acknowledging the vibrant tradition of native English literature, it should also be noted that the Normans came to their land at a time when such an upheaval was urgently needed; “for ignorance was then rife in all parts, learning and culture were dying of inanition, and darkness seemed gathering round” (Schofield, et. al., p.25). The Norman infusion resulted in a radical rejuvenation of national life. It inspired the people to work toward a prosperous future and a common destiny.
Works Cited:
“Anglo-Norman Studies” Medium Aevum 74.1 (2005): 185.
Garnett, Richard, and Edmund Gosse. English Literature: An Illustrated Record. New York: The Macmillan company, 1935. .
Schofield, William Henry, and William Henry Schofield. English Literature, from the Norman Conquest to Chaucer. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1931.
Steinsaltz, David., “The Politics of French Language in Shakespeare’s History Plays.” Studies in English Literature, 1500-1900 42.2 (2002): 317+.
Vincent, Nicholas. “The Struggle for Mastery: Britain 1066-1284.” History Today Dec. 2003: 60+.
Zatta, Jane Dick. “The Vie Seinte Osith: Hagiography and Politics in Anglo-Norman England.” Papers on Language & Literature 41.3-4 (2005): 306.