The Death of William's Sons

My friend LK said he was left feeling “flat” after the Athens post; I said that it was only a quickie, and that he should enjoy those, but he shook his head in utter disagreement.
We can take a look at couple of William the Conqueror’s sons, how’s that? They had good times.
And most excellent deaths… oh, yes.


In the Era following the conquest of Saxon-England by the Normans you had the reign of William I – we know him as William the Conqueror – from 1027 to 1087 AD.
Richard I would have been king, but died young.
William II became king of England in 1087.
Henry I became king of England in 1100.
It is an interesting time in the study of History because you’ve got the transition of England into one of the strongest of the new “kingdoms” in Europe, and also the very strong personality of William I, himself. You begin to see changes in English law, in politics, and the centralization of a king’s authority over distant shires and regions. You also see an intense period of the building of fortifications and institutions as William the Conqueror attempted to cement, with bricks and stone, his absolute control. He is an interesting character, of course, and maybe later I’ll post about his heroics in the Battle of Hastings or his “Domesday Book” – but for this post (LK!) I want to tell you about his immediate sons, and their almost immediate deaths.
Richard I was William the Conqueror’s second son. It is possible that his older brother, Robert II, was responsible for his death. There is scant history here, but young Richard was killed in a hunting accident in 1081. He was hunting a deer, he was attacked by a deer, he was mauled by a deer… little is known of what actually happened to him while he was in the “King’s Forest,” but I can tell you that he went in alive, and came out dead. Signs posted might have said “You aren’t in Sherwood Forest anymore” but I’m not sure that Richard could read them, anyway.
William II, also known as “William Rufus,” was William the Conqueror’s third son.
He was chosen over his older brother, Robert II, who had warred with his father and was under suspicion for the unusual death of Richard. As King, William II was unpopular with the people, and he displayed an extremely violent temper. He was aggressive, quick to fight, and eager to war – he was ruthless in his battles against his brother, just as he was ruthless with any of his own nobles who would not bow down to him. It is also suggested that he was gay… I believe this is true, but it’s not terribly important. More interesting are the circumstances surrounding his death. Like Richard, William II was an avid Huntsman. He, too, went into the “King’s Forest” (hunting grounds stocked exclusively for the nobles) and was soon separated from his hunting party. He was found dead, days later, with an arrow in his chest. It is possible that he was shot by his companion that day… but given the fact that everyone in his hunting party was an excellent marksman, it is probably not true that William’s death was an accident. I have a hunch that it was his younger brother, Henry, who plotted this out. We’ll talk about him next.
Henry I would become King TWO DAYS after William’s death. In a twist, Henry was also known as “The Lion of Justice.” He was perhaps more able to be a “King” of England, and he formed a Charter of Liberties whereby kings, themselves, were subject to laws. He also appointed the first officials in the shires, known as “Shire-riffs,” or “Sheriffs.” His own son would have followed him to the throne, but in a family plagued with strange tragedies, young “William III” drowned in the English Channel. It would be left to Henry’s daughter, “Matilda,” to carry on after her father’s death… and in 1135 he would die from eating too much fish. Well, okay, it wasn’t because he ate too many fish; it was because the fish he DID consume had been poisoned. No trek to the woods for this King. Nope. Instead, Henry the Lion of Justice was poisoned (most probably by his own daughter) and England would be plunged into a war of succession pitting Matilda (grand-daughter of William I) against Stephen of Blois (the grandson of William I).
In the years following the death of William the Conqueror’s sons England would find itself embroiled in the “Nineteen Years War” and a bitter struggle between Matilda and Stephen. Both would have each other imprisoned, and both would escape in dramatic fashion. This Era after the death of William’s sons was traumatic, and it is often referred to as the “Nineteen Year Winter” in early English History. With the death of Stephen’s own son “Eustace” in 1153, Matilda’s son “Henry” would become the next king.

An Athens Quickie

Here is a quickie on Athens, to compliment the quickie on Sparta – I think we’re having fun, right? Even if Gyros are almost five dollars now?
Athens was a mirror opposite of Sparta. I would say they were character foils, but Athens was given to a frequency of warring with her neighbors, often times playing the role of aggressor… and because I like the guys from Sparta better, well, I will just say Athens was a mirror opposite
During the “Classical Era” (500BC to 325BC), Athens was a fertile ground for public life, public culture, and an emerging group of thinkers who would forever change Western History. Just take a look at these guys and you will sense what I mean when I say that this Era was a seed-bomb for future centuries. Oh yeah. You reap what you sew.
You’ve got Sophocles, Aeschylus, and Aristophenes.
You’ve got Herodotus and Thucydides.
You’ve got Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle.
You know these guys. If the Spartans were rock-stars in leather, these guys were the rockin’ thinkers in sandals and white-draped togas.
Sophocles is famous for his Greek Tragedy – he was writing the “Oedipus” plays around 430 BC, and by this time, already, a tradition of dramatic plays was being performed for audiences of thousands. Aristophanes, a contemporary, was writing political plays that, disguised as comedy, satirized well-known men inside the city of Athens.
Herodotus wrote about the History of the wars between the Greeks and the Persians, and his contemporary, Thucydides, wrote a detailed account of the Peloponnesian Wars between Athens and Sparta. He is one of my personal favorites.
Socrates is well-known, if not from Bill & Ted, then at least from his own trial, where he was found guilty of corrupting Athens’ youth. Before he calmly swallowed hemlock he gave us his famous ideal, “Knowledge is virtue.” He is also known for constantly professing his ignorance when saying “I know… that I do not know.”
His student was Plato, and Plato was one of the most important philosophers we have ever known. Plato gave us a Theory of Forms, and he is famous for his “Apology” and “Dialogues.” Unlike his mentor, Plato was fond of censorship and believed only a small group of people might benefit from his teachings.
His own student, Aristotle, is THE most important philosopher… that’s my opinion, of course, but I’m a student of History, you see, so I’m not supposed to make judgements like that. Just trust me that Aristotle was the most important and it will be fine. Aristotle was also a teacher, and he wrote many hundreds of “Treaties” dealing with things like politics, ethics, poetry, botany, physics, metaphysics, astronomy, rhetoric, logic, and philosophy.
I think it’s amazing that we find these great thinkers together in the same time and place.
Athens was gold when compared to its mirror-mate, Sparta. It was a gold mine for thoughts and ideals and was also the very heart of what we understand a “democracy” to be. Life in the “Polis” inside Athens was a remarkably free and dynamic one. And Athens gives us our first glimpses of what a popular form of government might look like. Compared to militaristic Sparta, yeah, I’m giving Athens some gold stars. You remember this when you discover “Oedipus” or “Antigone” sometime. Or when you watch Bill & Ted.