Robert of Gloucester

Transcript:

Robert of Gloucester:

Being the oldest son of a king is almost a gift, especially in the 12th century. You would be well cared for, educated, and you’d have a place in society. Our next subject would want for nothing, except legitimacy. Robert of Gloucester was the oldest son of Henry I, but he wasn’t born to Henry’s wife, Edith-Matilda, he was born to an unknown (but speculated on) woman. He was one of Henry’s many illegitimate children. He was born in 1090, ten years before his father would become king. His name is surprising if we remember the antipathy between Henry and his brother Robert Curthose. It is likely that Robert of Gloucester was born during a brief positive point in their relationship. Robert, sadly, does not have a modern biography. He’s featured in those of his father, sister, and cousin, but no one had written one for him yet. Thankfully he is featured in primary sources, and occasional historical analysis, so there are things to frame his story and add colour. 

Henry I was not unique in his predilection for having bastard children, but he was in his willingness to claim them. There are countless children throughout history who were rejected by their fathers because their mother was not his wife, Henry was not one to do that. He did seem to have regular mistresses, but unlike many kings, they did not seem to have a say in his politics. He kept that place for his legal wife. He did however make sure that the children he claimed were cared for, the boys were raised to be knights, given estates, and had very beneficial marriages arranged for them (these were usually beneficial to Henry as well). His daughters were raised to be ladies, and they were married equally well (one was even the wife of a king). Those of either sex that weren’t married were sent into the church, in roles expected for one a royal birth. He did not just ignore his children. Henry seemed to expect just as much from these children as he did from his legitimate children. The only difference was they would never rule, or at least that was the plan. 

In 1119 Henry arraigned for Robert to marry Mabel FitzRobert. She was a wealthy heiress, about ten years younger than him. She gave him (he would control her estates as her husband) the honours of Gloucester in England, Glamorgan in Wales, Sainte-Scholasse-sur-Sarthe, Evrecy, and Creully in Normandy. An honour is a large barony, consisting of at least 20 knight’s fees. This is the amount of land required to supply and equip 20 knights for one season. Remember, this includes funding for horses, both war, and draft, the knights and his family’s lodgings, food, and clothing, plus their requisite servants. It also includes the payment for those who work the land, either farms or mines, the knights armour, and weapons. It is a huge amount of land and money to control. Having at least 100 knights in his service made Robert very powerful, his role as his father’s general and future military leader for his brother was obvious. Henry wanted his legitimate son, William, to have the best support possible, and Robert, as we’ve seen in Matilda’s episodes, was a great choice. 

As I’ve discussed multiple time, in 1120 the Anglo-Norman world was rocked to it’s core. The White Ship disaster was horrible for the realm, loosing a future king is horrible, but many family’s were touched by it. The ship had been full of the young adults of the aristocracy. Robert lost another brother and sister. Robert avoided being on the ship because he was an adult. Those who liked to go to bed at a more reasonable time were on Henry’s ship, ahead of the White Ship. It’s probably a better excuse than Stephen had for not being on the White Ship. After the sinking, in 1121 or 22 Robert was elevated to the Earldom of Gloucester. This gave him control of at least three castle, Canterbury, Bristol, and Gloucester, though the later was eventually watched by Miles of Gloucester (no relation), Earl of Hereford. He was loyal to Robert and would join Matilda’s side in 1139. These castles and territory also increased the number of knights he had in his service to at least 200, that was a powerful number of fighting men to be in control of. 

Henry choosing to elevate Robert when he did is telling. It’s one year or so after the death of William Adelin. It would have appeared to many outside observers as though Henry was considering naming his natural son his heir. In Normandy this would have been normal. Of the seven dukes of Normandy (or Counts of Rouen as they were first known) only two had been born after their parent’s legal, church-sacntioned marriage (they were brothers). In two cases their parents were married more danico (literally the Dannish manner, a marriage not seen as official in the church, but recognised in the community, sometimes the marriage couldn’t be recognised in the church because one party was already married, this type of marriage will come up a few more times and in later episodes I’ll provide even more detail). One case the dukes parents were married after his birth and he was legitimised at that point. And finally there’s William, the man who was called the Bastard until he became the conqueror, I’m sure no one ever said that to his face. 

There were a few things though that would have stopped Henry from naming Robert as his heir. The first is usually mentioned to be the church, but I’m going to make a minor argument against that. In most modern references to Robert, a reader will find a short statement along the lines of ‘William had been a bastard and that hadn’t stopped him from ruling England, but the church had moved on from his time and changes prevented Robert from being in consideration.’ While it was true that the church preferred legitimate issues I can find evidence of at least one European king, Alfonso VI of Leon and Castile, declaring his natural son, Sancho Alfonsez his heir. While Sancho never became king, his death before the age of twenty precipitated his father’s passing, there was no indication that the church objected in any way. Had Sancho lived, Henry might have been able to use his accession as precedent to appoint Robert. I do think the church would have protested, but I think Henry would have been able to win them over or tell them to shut up, if he had wanted to. 

The second is more interesting than old men in fancy robes, and I think it’s a more compelling reason that more historians should examine. The Anglo-Saxon populace would not have stood for it. While they had been subjugated they still outnumbered their Norman overlords by at least 10-1. Dating back to the time of Offa of Mercia between 757 and 796 and the Council of Chelsea in 787 the only people allowed the title of Aethling, or prince eligible to be elected as king, were legitimate sons of past kings. The witan would have the final say of which of these would be given the kingship, hence why Alfred the Great became king over his nephew, and son of the previous king Aethelwold. The witan could have chosen either, but Aethelwold was a child and Alfred was a proven warrior. However, Aethelwold was still eligible for the kingship after Alfred’s death, lucky for us, but sadly for him Edward the Elder kept that from happening. Avoiding an Anglo-Saxon uprising would be something Henry would have thought about. It’s highly likely that they would not accept an illegitimate son as king, they were more likely to accept a woman. It was a bit more than 50 years since the events of 1066, long enough to still remember what had happened and still want revenge, plus plenty of time to have rebuilt their population of fighting age. I find not wanting to deal with this even more reasonable than worrying about what the church would say. 

The final reason is probably the one that convinced Henry the most, and is most important. Robert didn’t want to be king, not even a little. Every source states that whenever it was put to him he would reject it. Based on his actions after Henry’s death, his lukewarm acceptance of Stephen, his willingness to attach himself to Matilda the moment she needed him, Robert was very honest with what he wanted. Based on all my reading I think Robert was in possession of something most people lack, self awareness. He knew he would only be an okay king, he lacked the drive to be king, but he knew how to lead men well in war. This becomes more apparent through his actions after his father’s death and during Stephen’s rule. If Stephen had possessed this level of self awareness the anarchy could have been avoided. Even though Robert knew he wouldn’t make a great king plenty were ready to suggest him, he would have had more support than Stephen, but it really wasn’t the role he wanted. He was happy to have sworn an oath to support his sister, his disagreement with Stephen as to who would swear first shows Robert’s loyalty and Stephen’s duplicity in a nice little package. 

After publicly declaring for Matilda in 1138, persuaded that Geoffrey of Anjou would take care of her continental interests, he was her most loyal general. His forces captured Stephen at the Battle of Lincoln. Had he not been captured in September 1141 it’s likely he would have been able to retake London and have Matilde crowned. Robert was released in December of the same year. There isn’t much published about Robert’s time in captivity, he was probably not treated poorly, his death would have stopped any discussion of a trade for Stephen. He was able to sail back and forth across the channel and continue fighting and their aren’t reports of him suffering from similar emotional issues that Stephen, understandably, plagued by. 

Robert continued to support Matilda through this all. He would make no trade that would put her at risk or force him to abandon her. After his release he would go on to train his young nephew during one of Henry’s many visits to England. In 1145 he would have to deal with a small bit of rebellion of his own. Philip, one of Robert’s five legitimate sons, defected to Stephen. He was 15, and possibly just going through a teenage rebellion. While it would have hurt Robert to have a son defect it likely didn’t cause any real trouble, at least at first. In the summer of 1146 Reginald, earl of Cornwall, and half brother to both Matilda and Robert was was leading a delegation to conduct peace negotiations on Matilda’s behalf. He had been granted safe conduct by Stephen, so when he was kidnaped by his nephew it was probably a bit of a surprise. Stephen, was understandably enraged, he was a truly honourable man and this was not honourable. Stephen demanded that the young man release their family member (remember, Reginald is also Stephen’s cousin). I can’t find further references to Philip, but I imagine Stephen did not trust him with anything important after that. Philip, sadly, only survives his father by one year. 

in 1147 Robert declined to send Henry fitzEmpress funds when he found himself trapped in England, as I discussed in Matilda’s episode. Just like Matilda I think he was making sure his nephew learned the value of planning and preparation in military operations. Henry should have been grateful to receive this lesson, and it may have been the last his uncle could give him.

In October 1147 Robert fell ill. He was supported by his wife and some of his children (I doubt Philip was invited). He died on the 31st, he was only 57, but had fought hard for much of his adult life. He was survived by his six children with Mabel and at least one of his illegitimate children. He sadly didn’t live long enough to see the result of all his efforts. The crowning of his nephew seven years later and the vast Angevin Empire he would rule would have shown it was all worth it. He was buried in St. James Priory, which he had founded. 

My analysis of Robert is less about how the world would have been if he had been king and more about how he chose to live his life. I find a lot of valuable lessons from learning about him. Robert’s self awareness is something we should all strive for, to know when you’ve reached the limit of you abilities and to be happy there is a great skill. Stephen was a horrible king, had he not been dealing with a civil war he would have been the lower end of middling. He thought much better of his skills than evidence would show he had, maybe his wife Matilde persuaded him to go for it, maybe he thought his son would make a great king, but he made the wrong choice. Robert, on the other hand may have had the role suggested to him by his father. Henry didn’t often take no for an answer, so Robert must have been very convincing to have put it out of Henry’s mind so decidedly. There is no evidence that Henry ever asked Robert, but the timing of his ennoblement could be indicative of this line of thinking. Robert knew when to say he had reached his highest height. 

Robert’s ability to support someone whom the world saw as inferior at ruling is the second part. There were others who did, of course, Brian fitzCount, Geoffrey of Anjou, but Robert was the big one, Matilda needed him if she were to have any chance. It would likely have been easier to just go along with Stephen. Just retire to Bristol, go fight when needed, but stay out of court. Robert knew this wasn’t what he wanted. He wanted a life with purpose, not the purpose of being king, but something of value and meaning. Dr. Catherine Hanley put it beautifully in her book Matilda, Empress, Queen, Warrior. 

Quote: What we really need to do is turn the acceptive narrative on its head and recognise that it was he who was indebted to her for giving him the opportunity to make more of his life than he might otherwise have done. 

Robert could have easily chosen the comfortable life, faded into the background and let Stephen have his way. He would be remembered as one of Henry’s many bastards and a great general for his father, but that’s it. Instead he’s remembered as one of the most loyal and able men history has ever created and a man worthy of his title and place in history. 

For this episode I again used Matilda, Empress, Queen, Warrior as a secondary source. I also used Henry I by C. Warren Hollister, it was a great source for explaining why Robert was not eligible for the kingship.  

One thing I hope to do with this podcast is to inspire listeners to look into some of the more obscure, but interesting people in history. I want to share their stories, but I would love to read more. Robert of Gloucester is one of those characters in need of a biography. He is a main character in so many other people’s stories and he really needs his own fully told. I don’t have access to a full university library, or the archives that would be needed to do Robert justice, if I’m going to put out an episode a week I can’t be flying to the UK for research, plus my husband and kids would miss me. If I’ve inspired anyone to research more about any subject I would love to hear from you! I’m happy to share your research, update my episode, or completely retract anything I’ve said that’s incorrect. Please feel free to contact me at any time!