decline of imperialism since the nineteenth-century. Freeman and Round's interpretations
have been built upon since, producing a moderate middle point on the spectrum, evidenced
in the three historians discussed below.
Frank Stenton, publishing work based on the Ford Lectures he gave at the University
of Oxford in 1929, leans more towards Round's position, favouring the influence of the
Normans for the introduction and development of English feudalism over England's Anglo-
Saxon history. He argues that whilst William brought feudalism into England, it was vastly
different from Norman feudalism, with any similarities between the two ‘superficial’, citing
contrasting attitudes towards knights and their service to their lord(s). 1 The reasons behind
the differing roles of knights and their services, as discussed by Stenton, are expanded upon
by David C. Douglas in 1964, exploring the intertwined relationship between English and
Norman feudalism.
In Normandy, feudalism had begun to emerge before William's accession,
incorporating irreversible traditions, such as the need for private war between the nobility,
that were no longer present in England after the Conquest, with William codifying private
warfare as a treasonous offence. 2 The analysis of William establishing ‘ a completed feudal
organization by means of administrative acts’ by Douglas, expanding Stenton's argument,
may have differed due to thirty years of social change (including a second World War), but
most likely the academic focus of their texts. 3 Stenton focused on a century of change,
looking at the short-term consequences of the Norman Conquest and its introduction of
1 F. M. Stenton, The First Century of English Feudalism, 1066-1166: Second Edition (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1961), p.15 2 David C. Douglas, William the Conqueror: the Norman Impact on England (London: Eyre & Spottiswoode, 1964), p. 281; Stenton, p.14 3 Douglas, p. 281
10
Made with FlippingBook HTML5