William Rufus and Robert Curthose: the position of Anglo- Norman nobles;…

The idea

After William I's death in 1087, his lands were divided: Robert Curthose received Normandy, while William Rufus took England. This split gave Anglo-Norman nobles lands on both sides of the Channel, so they had to choose which lord to support. In 1088, a rebellion led by Bishop Odo and Robert of Mortain tried to replace Rufus with Robert Curthose, but Rufus won support by promising good lordship and relief from unjust taxation. In 1091, Rufus invaded Normandy and forced Robert to concede territory and share power. When Robert left for the First Crusade in 1096, he mortgaged Normandy to Rufus, giving Rufus control of both England and Normandy. This strengthened the Anglo-Norman realm and made the 1100 succession crisis more likely.

What earns the marks

• Explains that the 1087 division of William I's inheritance created cross-Channel landholding for Anglo-Norman nobles, forcing them to choose between Robert Curthose in Normandy and William Rufus in England.
• Assesses William Rufus's intervention in Normandy in 1091, including the treaty with Robert Curthose and the pressure it placed on Norman lords and on Rufus's brother Henry.
• Evaluates the significance of Robert Curthose's decision to go on crusade, including the mortgaging of Normandy to Rufus and the resulting shift in the balance of power within the Anglo-Norman realm.
• Connects the events of 1088 to 1096 to the wider theme of Anglo-Norman kingship, showing how Rufus's successes and Robert's absence shaped later conflict after 1100.

Common mistakes and how to put them right

• Treating the 1088 rebellion as a purely English event.

  Put it right: It must be explained as an Anglo-Norman crisis involving nobles with lands in both England and Normandy.

• Assuming Robert Curthose was an absent or irrelevant ruler after 1087.

  Put it right: He was duke of Normandy and his decisions, especially going on crusade, directly affected the balance of power.

• Describing the 1091 settlement as a permanent conquest of Normandy by Rufus.

  Put it right: It was a temporary agreement that left Robert as duke but gave Rufus significant influence and territory.

Exam tips

• Use the wording of the question to decide whether you are explaining causes, analysing consequences or assessing significance, and keep each paragraph focused on that demand.
• Support every claim with specific evidence such as named individuals, dates, treaties or military outcomes rather than general statements about noble discontent.
• When discussing Robert's crusade, link it explicitly to the political situation in Normandy and England, not just to crusading enthusiasm.