William II of England

William II reigned from 1087 to 1100. He was the second Norman king of England. Known as William Rufus for his red hair or ruddy complexion, he was the third son of William I, the Conqueror. William I was King of England and Duke of Normandy. Ordinarily, the throne would have passed to the first son, Robert Curthose. However, William I decided to divide his Norman and English lands, giving the Dukedom to Robert and the rule of England to his second surviving son, William II.¹

Fast Facts

1. Born c.1058
2. Died 1100
3. Third son of William I
4. Never married
5. No known children
6. Killed by an arrow while hunting

Brotherly Love

William the Conqueror's decision to split his Norman and English lands created difficulties for William II. Most of the nobles in Normandy and England had lands on both sides of the Channel and were caught between their loyalty to two lords. Some, like Odo of Bayeaux, thought that this could only be resolved by joining the lands together under Robert, the eldest son. These nobles rebelled in 1088. William Rufus managed to put down this rebellion, as well as a subsequent one in 1095. The issue was resolved, with Robert's departure for the First Crusade in 1096. William leased Normandy from him for 10,000 marks and effectively took ownership of it.²

Border Squabbles

William also faced challenges from the Scots and Welsh during his reign. In 1091 Malcolm, king of Scotland, faced William in battle near the Tweed. They reached terms of peace, but were at war again in 1093, after William built a castle at Carlisle. Malcolm died before they could resolve the matter on the battlefield, leaving his son dependent on English support for his throne. Thereafter, the Scots were in a much weaker position. The course of events in Wales followed this pattern in reverse. Until 1094, William made good progress in pushing back the Welsh princes, but he then lost Powys and Gwynedd. He made two attempts to win these lands back to no avail.³

A Bad Reputation

William Rufus is famous for arousing the ire of contemporary chroniclers. Peter of Blois described his reign as a time devoid of all blessing. This may have been due to his quarrel with the Church, and consequently with the clerics who wrote about him, rather than to his personal flaws.⁴

Categories