Friday, October 5, 2012

Robert Curthose: Duke of Normandy (c.1050-1134)



Robert Curthose:  Duke of Normandy (c.1050-1134)
William M. Aird
The Boydell Press, 2008

        This remarkably insightful biography has been touted as one of the most sympathetic and complete assessments of the life of Robert, Duke of Normandy to date, and I must agree.  Aird attempts the reconstruction of the duke’s life which admittedly is very sketchy in the primary sources, and at the same time illuminates the backdrop of Norman society and its incorporation into the kingdom of the Franks.  Aird presents a narrative account following the adventures of William the Conqueror, Robert’s birth and childhood, and advances through the major events to touch Normandy until the duke’s death in confinement at the hands of his duplicitous brother, Henry I.
        The Ecclesiastical History of Orderic Vitalis serves as the primary source for Robert’s life and deeds, and Aird spends considerable time problematizing this source, demonstrating for his readers the usefulness of contemporary accounts and the pitfalls due to personal biases, hindsight, and politic expediency.  That said, Aird also typifies in his work the need for medieval historians like any scholars working with limited resources, to look at a source from every angle and to continue to ask questions that establish context and logical conclusions.  From a compositional point of view, the reader is much gratified to find well researched and annotated footnotes that establish Aird’s well-formed case for a reevaluation of the life and deeds of Robert.
        It is hard to establish Aird’s primary thesis other than in vague points that the reader can establish through the work.  First, Aird upholds Robert’s right to the kingdom of his father and the unscrupulous acts of his brothers.  Second, the argument is made that Robert’s rule of Normandy was more structured and better than has been handed down by contemporaries.  Third, personal piety and the heroic participation in the First Crusade by Robert did not establish any permanent and positive results other than his popularity.  Finally, Robert simply was not as ruthless as his brother Henry, and his somewhat naïve and trusting personality was not equipped to deal with the necessary amount of corruptness required to rule in the latter eleventh century.  These points combined paint a picture of a tragic individual, and one whose role in Norman politics and medieval relevancy needs to be reexamined.

John Lowe (J. Sharp)

No comments:

Post a Comment