Changes to Law, Language and Church Key Enquiry 5: Impact of Norman conquest by 1087 Changes to Law, Language and Church STARTER- what do you think this image represents? Think about the title and LO’s for this lesson. EXTENSION: explain how we know its from medieval times?

Keywords Textus Roffensis or ‘the book of Rochester’: a manuscript written by a monk at Rochester in Kent during the 1120s. The first part of the book includes nearly forty English laws stretching across 500 years from 600-1100 and include a long list of violent crimes and punishments in Anglo Saxon England e.g. 50 shillings for gauging out someone's eye and 6 shillings for stabbing a man in his genitals.

Over the centuries this book has been lost and rediscovered on many occasions and in 1170 fell in to a river when the boat carrying it overturned. You can still see the dark water stain on the page.

Laws- an overview Anglo Saxon- trial by ordeal William introduced- trial by combat. When an Englishman was accused of a crime he could sword fight to the death with his Norman accuser. This trial by combat is a good example of how William I trialled and adopted Anglo Saxon laws. However they introduced two new laws which the English hated: The Murdrum fine and the Forest Law

Copy and complete using page 90 Norman Law What was it and why did the English hate it? The Murdrum Fine Forest Law

Mini plenary- were the Normans good for the country? Agree Disagree Write a sentence to agree or disagree with the statement and explain why

Gather roughly 10 key facts for each Gather roughly 10 key facts for each. Work in pairs or independent from page 91-93 Changes to language Changes to the Church

Enquiry focus task- 10 mins Complete a summary of the final topic to show the impact of the Normans Losing the land Earning a living Laws, language and the Church

Summarise in your books

Reflect- final opinions Based on the long and short term impacts reach a final overall decision on whether or not you think the Normans were good for England? Point- make your point to agree/disagree Evidence- use evidence to back up your view Explain- give reasons to support your view Link- LTQ

William dies in 1087- thus ending our Norman study  The Earls’ Revolt of 1075 was the last major rebellion William faced in England. He was relatively secure in England, but his position in Normandy had deteriorated and he spent a lot of time there keeping order. In 1086 he was injured at the Battle of Mantes. He fell against the pommel of his saddle (a raised area at the front of a saddle) and damaged his intestines, although he may already have been ill. He was taken to Rouen to be cared for. After a slow decline lasting six weeks, William the Conqueror died on 9 September 1087, at the age of 59. William was very overweight by the time of his death. His body was transported to Caen but it would not fit into the coffin. The monks tried to force his body to fit and his swollen bowels burst, resulting in an ‘intolerable stench’ according to Orderic Vitalis.

Q6a and 6b: 3 and 5 mark Q Q6a. In Interpretation A the BBC website argues that the Norman conquest ‘transformed the English economy’. Identify and explain one way in which it does this? (5 marks) But, while the blood and guts were horrifying, the conquest also did a lot of good. It transformed the English economy. Institutions, trade patterns and investment all improved. It brought some of the British Isles into European circles of trade (“Brentry”, if you will) and sparked a long economic boom in England which made the country comparatively rich. The conquest and its aftermath also set a wealthy south apart from a poor north, a geographical divide that continues to this day. From those tumultuous decades on, England was indelibly European—and a lot stronger for it. The Norman conquest made England Q6b. If you were asked to do further research on one aspect of interpretation A, what would you choose to investigate? Explain how this would help us understand the impact of the Normans?

Plenary Historian Simon Schama has interpreted the impact of the Norman invasion on England as a ‘truck load of trouble’. To what extent is he correct so far?