King Henry II's Rebellion Causes

Words: 1085
Pages: 5

“The rebellion of 1173-74 was caused by King Henry II’s treatment of his sons”. Assess the validity of this view.
The rebellion was caused due to many factors such as Eleanor, Louis VII and the barons. However above all the rebellion was a family dispute that arose due to Henry II’s treatment of his sons. Therefore it was the King Henry himself who was responsible for the rebellion as it was provoked by his attempts to settle the future government of the Angevin Empire. There have been more than 30 examples in history of sons rebelling against their fathers. This was not unusual as many disputes and clashes occurred in the Angevin Empire due to the rightful heir to the throne and power.
The lack of power that young Henry had was the most
…show more content…
The coronation of the young king in 1170 made him King so he had a taste of power but in reality he had none. Young Henry came to expect a degree of authority and sovereignty but Henry II’s refused to pass on his power, he was the oldest legitimate son of the king and yet he felt overlooked. During 1173 the Young King Henry was a full grown eighteen year old married male. He naturally wanted power and his inheritance rights as the legitimate heir of the king. He wanted to settle down in his own holdings and rule with his wife. King Henry II really did not relinquish any of this to his son and in fact did something that was considered an act of betrayal to his eldest son. Henry II granted his castles in Touraine to John which threatened young Henry’s inheritance and stressed the young King’s lack of authority. Young Henry had little say in the working and running of the government compared to his father whom had acquired the title of Duke of Normandy at 17 and had inherited Anjou in 1151. Roger of Hoveden argues that the young king was deeply offended that his father was unwilling to assign to him some portion of his territories. He had requested his …show more content…
This was the perfect opportunity for the barons to gain back their power which they has lost under Henry. Earls and barons of England and Normandy who disliked young Henry’s father saw an opportunity to withdraw him from power. The rebellion was also a baronial reaction to King Henry’s restoration of strong government after the ‘anarchy’ of Stephen’s reign. Barons resented the control exerted by King Henry. The Earl of Chester was denied lands granted to his father; Hugh Bigod’s lands were threatened by a new royal castle at Orford, and the Earl of Leicester was made to pay scutage. As part of Henrys restoration of royal authority after Stephens reign baronial castles were destroyed, crown lands were reclaimed and the exchequer was re-established, this all weakened baronial power. Scarborough castle was taken from William of Aumale and Bridgnorth from Hugh Mortimer, while King William of Scots, perhaps the key participant in the rebellion in England, had lost control over the northern led to many of the barons to have motive to support young Henry as they had the potential to regain the power they had