From Conquest to Commons – Governance in England, 1066 – c.1350
A New Order from the Top Down
The Norman Conquest in 1066 did more than change the royal line. It imposed an entirely new model of governance, law, landholding, and military control. Where Anglo-Saxon kings had ruled by consent of the Witan and administered law through a relatively decentralised system, William, Duke of Normandy, brought with him a centralised, feudal model rooted in oaths of loyalty, written records, and royal dominance, not to mention paranoia, mistrust and rivalry.
Over the next three centuries, the English political landscape evolved from conquest and military rule into a more structured medieval polity. By the fourteenth century, England had witnessed the birth of common law, the emergence of Parliament, and the beginnings of political accountability. But this period was not one of linear progress. It was a time of consolidation, conflict, rebellion, and negotiation between crown, barons, clergy, and eventually, commoners there was little peace in this time.
William I and the Machinery of Conquest (1066–1087)
William I introduced an uncompromising form of rule. He confiscated lands from Anglo-Saxon lords and redistributed them to Norman supporters. This created a new aristocracy bound to the king through direct land tenure. All land was held “from the king,” and tenants-in-chief swore personal loyalty in the Oath of Salisbury in 1086.
William introduced the Domesday Book, an unprecedented administrative survey that catalogued landholding, population, resources, and obligations across much of England. It was not just a record; it was a mechanism of control. For the first time, the king could tax, summon, or dispossess based on detailed knowledge of his realm.
Justice was centralised. While local customs were allowed to continue in part, royal sheriffs were empowered to enforce law, collect revenue, and suppress dissent. Castles were built across the country as symbols and tools of power.
Many believe the castles were built to keep out foreign invaders, and whilst there is some truth in that, their real power lay as a symbol of the wealth, power and control the lords exercised over their domain, and by extension, the power of the crown.
The Feudal State and Royal Authority (1087–1135)
William Rufus and Henry I continued the process of Norman consolidation. The crown used feudal obligations, military service, wardship, scutage, a payment in lieu of service, to sustain royal power. Bishops and Abbots were often royal appointees, making the Church a pillar of the monarchy.
Henry I issued the Charter of Liberties in 1100, promising to uphold traditional laws and reduce abuses of royal power. Though often forgotten, this was a key precedent for Magna Carta a century later. It showed that even early Norman kings had to negotiate the limits of their authority in the face of baronial and clerical resistance.
Administration became more formal. The royal court, Curia Regis, served as both a council and a judicial body. Royal writs extended the king’s will across the land. The Exchequer, established under Henry I, created systematic financial auditing, using pipe rolls to record income and obligations.
Anarchy, Civil War, and the Cost of Weak Kingship (1135–1154)
The death of Henry I led to civil war between his daughter Matilda and her cousin Stephen. Known as the Anarchy, this period exposed the fragility of central authority when barons acted without constraint. Private castles proliferated, and royal control collapsed in many areas.
The conflict ended with the Treaty of Wallingford in 1153, allowing Stephen to reign until his death, after which Matilda’s son, Henry II, would take the throne. The war demonstrated that strong governance required both legitimacy and enforcement. It also reminded the nobility that peace, order, and mutual interest were preferable to feudal chaos.
Henry II and the Birth of Common Law (1154–1189)
Henry II restored royal authority and initiated lasting reforms. He expanded royal justice through circuit judges who travelled the kingdom applying standard laws. Trial by jury began to replace ordeal and compurgation. Legal procedures became more uniform, recorded in royal writs.
The king’s courts became increasingly dominant. Disputes once settled by local custom were now heard in the royal system, creating what would become known as common law, law common to all parts of the realm, not just to a single lordship or locality.
Henry clashed with the Church over legal jurisdiction, leading to the infamous dispute with Thomas Becket, Archbishop of Canterbury. This highlighted the limits of royal authority and the enduring power of ecclesiastical law.
John, Magna Carta, and the Limits of Royal Power (1199–1216)
John’s reign was marked by military failure, oppressive taxation, and political overreach. His attempts to rule without consent led to rebellion by the barons, who in 1215 forced him to sign Magna Carta. Though quickly annulled by the Pope and reignited in conflict, the Charter would be reissued, with changes, multiple times and become a foundation of English legal thought. Magan Carta has been widely misinterpreted throughout history, believing it was the start of the real democracy England. It did neither of these things as we shall see later in Chapter 3.
Magna Carta established that the king was subject to the law, not above it. It guaranteed protection for church rights, baronial privileges, and limited the ability to levy taxes without consent. Though it served elite interests at the time, it planted the seed of constitutional limitation.
From Barons to Commons: The Growth of Parliament (1216–1327)
John’s son Henry III inherited the throne as a child. During his long reign, dissatisfaction with royal favourites and foreign influence led to the Provisions of Oxford in 1258, which created a council of barons to oversee the king’s decisions. Though ultimately rolled back, it marked a turning point in constitutional thought.
In 1265, Simon de Montfort summoned a parliament that included not only nobles and clergy but also knights and burgesses from towns. This was the first time representatives of commoners were invited to discuss taxation and grievances.
Though de Montfort was killed and royal control restored, the precedent endured. By the late 13th century, Edward I had institutionalised the practice. The Model Parliament of 1295 formally summoned knights and burgesses, laying the groundwork for a bicameral system.
Edward I, Statutes, and Legal Codification (1272–1307)
Edward I was both a warrior king and an administrative reformer. He issued numerous statutes that clarified, extended, or codified existing law. The Statute of Westminster, Quo Warranto inquiries, and the Statute of Mortmain aimed to define landholding rights, baronial obligations, and church influence.
Parliament became more regular and central to governance. Taxation increasingly required its consent, and the legal system further professionalised. Royal justices became distinct from royal advisors. Though still far from democratic, England now had a recognisable system of consultation and legal consistency.
Crisis and Transition: Edward II and Early Fourteenth-Century Conflict
Edward II’s reign saw the deterioration of royal authority due to favouritism, military defeat, and baronial resentment. His reliance on court favourites like Piers Gaveston alienated the nobility. The Ordinances of 1311 attempted to restrain the king’s power, but conflict persisted.
He was eventually deposed in 1327 with the support of Parliament, and his son Edward III was crowned. This was a crucial moment: Parliament had participated in the removal of a monarch. The concept of conditional monarchy, if not yet codified, was now part of political life.
The Making of Medieval English Governance
From 1066 to around 1350, English governance transitioned from absolute military rule to a recognisable constitutional monarchy in embryo. The king remained central, but power was increasingly mediated by law, by custom, and by the growing expectation that consent—even from a narrow elite—was necessary for legitimate government.
The institutions of the Exchequer, common law courts, Parliament, and local justice all developed in this period. They laid the foundation for modern governance not by democratic intent, but by negotiated necessity. It was the interplay between crown, nobility, church, and eventually townsmen that shaped English political identity.
By the mid-fourteenth century, England had the rudiments of legal accountability, fiscal oversight, and representative consultation. It was not yet democratic, but it was no longer autocratic in the Norman sense. The legacy of this period would dominate English political development for the next 300 years.
References
Barlow, Frank. William I and the Norman Conquest. London: The English Historical Review, 1965.
Douglas, David C. William the Conqueror: The Norman Impact Upon England. London: Eyre & Spottiswoode, 1964.
Hollister, C. Warren. Henry I. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2003.
Green, Judith A. The Government of England Under Henry I. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986.
Carpenter, David. The Struggle for Mastery: Britain 1066–1284. London: Penguin Books, 2003.
Warren, W. L. Henry II. London: Eyre Methuen, 1973.
Hudson, John. The Formation of the English Common Law: Law and Society in England from the Norman Conquest to Magna Carta. London: Longman, 1996.
Turner, Ralph V. Magna Carta Through the Ages. Harlow: Pearson Longman, 2003.
Maddicott, J. R. The Origins of the English Parliament, 924–1327. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010.
Prestwich, Michael. Edward I. London: Methuen, 1988.
Ormrod, W. M. Edward III. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2011.
Huscroft, Richard. Ruling England, 1042–1217. Harlow: Pearson Longman, 2005.
Clanchy, M. T. From Memory to Written Record: England 1066–1307. Oxford: Blackwell, 1993.
© British Democratic Alliance 2025