OCR Specification focus:
‘extent of disturbances, finance of the war, administration of justice; Stephen's relationship with the barons, the power and loyalty of the barons and earls, baronial coinage; the functioning of central.’
The Civil War of 1139–1154, also known as The Anarchy, brought turmoil to England’s society, economy, and culture, as political instability reshaped governance, justice, and baronial authority.
Extent of Disturbances
The civil war between King Stephen and Empress Matilda fractured the kingdom, leading to widespread instability and localised violence. These disturbances were felt across both rural and urban communities.
Breakdown of royal authority: The monarchy’s inability to enforce order meant that local magnates and earls exerted unchecked influence.
Rise of private fortifications: The widespread building of adulterine castles (unauthorised fortresses) symbolised baronial defiance and hindered royal control.
Impact on the peasantry: Villages and agricultural communities bore the brunt of raids, taxation, and shifting allegiances.
The disruption of ordinary life during this period is central to understanding how conflict destabilised England’s social fabric.
A labelled diagram of a typical motte-and-bailey castle, the swiftly constructed timber-and-earth fortification that proliferated during the Anarchy. It clarifies the relationship between motte, bailey, palisade and ditch, aiding discussion of how unrest translated into fortified control. This is a generic model rather than a diagram of a specific adulterine site. Source
Finance of the War
The civil war drained resources and compelled both Stephen and his rivals to seek new means of raising revenue.
Royal taxation: Traditional levies, such as geld, became unreliable as regions slipped beyond the king’s control.
Baronial exactions: Nobles imposed heavy financial burdens on their tenants to fund private armies.
Debasement of coinage: Rival mints were established by barons, leading to competing currencies that destabilised trade and reduced confidence in monetary systems.
Baronial coinage: Coinage minted independently by barons during the civil war, undermining the Crown’s exclusive right to control money supply.
The economic consequences of baronial coinage were far-reaching, leading to a fragmentation of England’s financial system.
Silver penny of King Stephen (1135–1154). Coins like this underpinned wartime finance and everyday exchange, while irregular baronial issues imitated similar designs to assert local authority. Extra detail: this example is a royal issue rather than a verified baronial striking, used here to illustrate type and style. Source
Administration of Justice
Law and order faltered significantly during Stephen’s reign.
Weakening of central justice: The king’s courts could not function effectively in contested areas, and justice became fragmented.
Baronial courts: Many nobles took justice into their own hands, settling disputes and enforcing punishments within their domains.
Canon law and the Church: Church courts expanded their authority, offering an alternative to secular justice and reinforcing ecclesiastical independence.
This erosion of central justice weakened public trust in royal governance, furthering instability.
Stephen’s Relationship with the Barons
Stephen’s reliance on the nobility defined much of the conflict, as he sought their loyalty while often conceding significant powers.
Granting of earldoms: Stephen created numerous earldoms to secure loyalty, weakening royal authority.
Tensions with the barons: While some remained steadfast allies, others exploited the king’s weakness to expand their independence.
Loyalty in flux: Allegiances frequently shifted between Stephen and Matilda, intensifying instability.
Feudal loyalty: The reciprocal obligation between a vassal and a lord, often formalised through homage and fealty, involving service and protection.
Stephen’s inconsistent handling of baronial power left him dependent on magnates who were often more interested in personal gain than national stability.
Power and Loyalty of the Barons and Earls
The earls became decisive figures during the war, wielding extraordinary influence.
Autonomous rule: Some earls acted virtually as independent rulers, collecting taxes, raising armies, and dispensing justice.
Fragmentation of authority: The loyalty of the nobility was inconsistent, leading to shifting power balances.
Regional strongholds: Certain families consolidated their control over regions, shaping the course of the conflict.
The fluctuating loyalties of the barons exemplify how central government was undermined during the period.
Baronial Coinage and Its Consequences
The minting of private coinage by barons is one of the most striking cultural-economic features of the period.
Loss of uniformity: Competing coinages undermined trust in money, disrupting trade and daily transactions.
Assertion of independence: The act of minting coins symbolised baronial sovereignty and challenged the monarchy’s prerogative.
Economic fragmentation: Localised economies developed, with trade increasingly reliant on barter or restricted to trusted currencies.
The rise of baronial coinage illustrates the collapse of a centralised financial order.
Functioning of Central Government
Despite the turmoil, some central institutions persisted, though in weakened form.
The Exchequer: Once a symbol of royal administrative strength under Henry I, it struggled under Stephen, with reduced revenues and diminished authority.
Chancery and writs: Royal administration of charters and writs continued but lost consistency as rival claimants and contested authority muddied legitimacy.
Church involvement: The Church often filled gaps in governance, preserving a sense of order and record-keeping in an otherwise chaotic environment.
Central government functioned in name but was fractured in practice, reflecting the political disunity of the age.
Cultural and Social Effects
The long years of conflict left their imprint on English society and culture.
Monastic responses: Chroniclers from monasteries recorded the devastation of war, often lamenting the moral decay of society.
Popular suffering: Ordinary people endured instability, famine, and exploitation, shaping a cultural memory of the period as one of suffering.
Perceptions of kingship: Stephen’s weak authority reinforced debates about the responsibilities of kingship and the need for effective governance.
Contractual kingship: The medieval idea that the king’s rule was based on mutual obligations between monarch and subjects, with duties of protection and justice at its core.
Monastic writers, notably the Peterborough Chronicle, crafted a lasting cultural memory of the war’s hardships and the breakdown of order.
Opening page from the Peterborough Chronicle (Laud Misc. 636), a key monastic witness for 1132–1154. Such texts shaped contemporary and later perceptions of the Anarchy’s social costs. Extra detail: the image shows the manuscript layout rather than a translation of the relevant entries. Source
The cultural memory of The Anarchy reinforced expectations of stronger, more effective monarchy in the reign of Henry II.
FAQ
Adulterine castles often became centres of lordly authority, where barons demanded supplies, labour, and military service.
For local communities, this meant:
Forced labour in construction and maintenance.
Seizure of resources to sustain garrisons.
Greater risk of raids, as castles invited conflict.
Thus, instead of offering protection, many castles amplified hardship for ordinary people.
In medieval society, the right to mint coins was a royal prerogative, a visible demonstration of sovereignty.
When barons struck their own coinage, it symbolised independence and challenged Stephen’s legitimacy. Coins bearing a ruler’s name or image circulated widely, spreading a message of who held power.
This symbolic value often mattered as much as the coin’s economic function.
Chroniclers emphasised not only violence but also famine as a marker of divine judgement.
The war disrupted farming cycles, reduced food availability, and heightened the effects of poor harvests. Monastic writers, particularly in the Peterborough Chronicle, linked famine with moral and political decay, portraying the conflict as both a social and spiritual crisis.
As central royal justice weakened, litigants increasingly turned to ecclesiastical courts for disputes.
Church courts gained prominence because they:
Provided continuity in legal procedures.
Claimed authority over moral and marital issues.
Benefited from written records and educated clerics.
This reinforced the Church’s role as a stabilising force amidst secular disorder.
Barons needed to secure the allegiance of knights, retainers, and tenants during prolonged conflict.
They did this through:
Grants of land or rents.
Promises of protection and justice.
Military rewards, such as spoils of war.
These networks of loyalty mirrored the king’s feudal obligations, but at a more localised level, further fragmenting national unity.
Practice Questions
Question 1 (2 marks)
Identify two ways in which baronial coinage affected the English economy during the Civil War of 1139–1154.
Mark scheme:
1 mark for each valid point identified.
Acceptable answers include:
Undermined trust in money.
Disrupted trade and exchange.
Weakened royal control over finance.
Created localised, fragmented economies.
Question 2 (5 marks)
Explain how the relationship between King Stephen and the barons influenced the administration of justice during the Civil War of 1139–1154.
Mark scheme:
Level 1 (1–2 marks): Generalised or simplistic statements with limited reference to Stephen or the barons, e.g., "The barons had power so justice broke down."
Level 2 (3–4 marks): Clear explanation with some specific detail. May mention how Stephen’s reliance on barons allowed them to control justice locally, or that royal courts became ineffective.
Level 3 (5 marks): Well-developed explanation with precise detail, showing direct links between Stephen’s concessions and the weakening of central justice. References may include:
Stephen granting earldoms and powers, weakening his authority.
Baronial courts taking over judicial functions in their domains.
Central royal justice faltering as loyalties shifted.
The expansion of Church courts as an alternative source of justice.
