By Marnie Camping-Harris
Medieval chronicles are extremely useful for historians, acting as a contemporary source available for understanding opinions from this earlier time period. Focusing on the chronicles from 1066 to 1216, a number of omens, miracles, and other indirect means can be identified throughout. In a world that was so heavily focused on and consumed by religion, it is no surprise that these prophecies would have had an immense impact on the way people thought of and remembered each monarch. Ultimately, therefore, clerical authors use these means to criticise and praise medieval monarchs, by drawing on the suspicious and religious minds of people at the time, as well as using them as descriptions of character, emulating contemporary opinion. For historians, these omens and miracles are extremely helpful in understanding how each monarch could have been perceived at the time, even if biases can be found in each author. Moreover, this essay will be organised thematically, instead of chronologically, so that the way clerical authors utilised a range of omens and miracles can be fully acknowledged and understood.
Even today, dreams are sometimes thought to be premonitions of things to come, and in the Middle Ages, this thought was seen as fact. In William of Malmesbury’s chronicle, Historia Novella, he mentions two dreams leading up to the death of William Rufus. To help understand these dreams it is important to acknowledge William Rufus’ tumultuous relationship with the church during his reign, with some describing him as “wicked” and “an oppressor of the church”. William Rufus did not care about church reform, viewing the church as one of his properties and exercising regalian rights often; these included collecting money from vacant church offices, most famously when he refused to fill the position of Archbishop of Canterbury until 1093, so that he could continue to collect money from it. It was only after a bought of serious illness that William Rufus decided to change his ways, but even then this did not last long. Fearing that God was angry with him, he finally appointed a new Archbishop of Canterbury: Anselm. However, William Rufus and Anselm would not prove to be the best of friends, with the two constantly fighting over church rights and control, so much so that Anslem went into exile in 1097. Therefore, it is no surprise that clergymen, including these clerical authors, were upset with William Rufus’ treatment of their beloved church, this disdain expanding onto the people as well. On the day of William Rufus’ death, Malmesbury notes that a foreign monk came to court to tell one of the chief magnates of “a strange and fearful dream” he had had about the king. This dream consisted of the king bursting into a church, shouting threats and boasts, something that Malmesbury makes sure to include and acknowledge as “his custom”. The monk then described William Rufus gnawing on the arms and the legs of the crucifix, until the image on the said crucifix kicked the king off and onto the floor. As the king fell backwards onto the floor, the monk claimed a flame escaped his mouth, with the smoke of the flame touching the stars in the sky. According to Malmesbury, when told this dream, William Rufus burst into laughter, exclaiming that the monk simply wanted money for his dream; proving how the king did not believe in these sorts of omens or prophecies. Nevertheless, Malmesbury makes sure to mention how William Rufus himself had a dream the night before he died, a dream which shocked him into ordering his attendants not to leave him. This dream consisted of him letting so much blood that the stream reached heaven and clouded the light from the sky. Therefore, it is rather surprising that the monk’s dream of Jesus kicking the king onto the ground did not also alarm him or deter him from hunting on that fatal day. To anyone else, the combination of both dreams occurring at similar times would have raised alarm within but, as stated before, William Rufus was not a religious or believing man. Moreover, another king with similar attributes as those describing William Rufus, was John. Not only was contemporary opinion negative due to his lack of religious zeal or his gluttony and greed, but people also believed John to have murdered his own nephew for the throne. The clerical author of Flowers of History (this essay will acknowledge Roger of Wendover as such) also mentioned a prophecy predicting the death of a king. Wendover notes that in 1212, a hermit known as Peter the Wise claimed that upon the next accession of the pope, John would not be king. Surprisingly, the hermit was somewhat right, as Pope Innocent III died in the same year as John (1216), and Honorius III was elected as the new pope. Wendover does not include what John’s reaction to this prophecy was, nor the reaction of the people. However, upon hearing the hopeful prediction that their tyrannical king might die in the near future, it is easy to assume how the people could feel hopeful. Contemporary opinion can also be cited as a possible reason for such a prophecy, as it could be said that John’s death was desired by most if not all. Ultimately, clerical authors used these dreams and prophecies of death to emulate contemporary opinion and to criticise William Rufus and King John.
Another commonality of omens and miracles found in these chronicles were ones relating to the weather. In the Middle Ages, the weather was viewed as God given, and any abnormality found or felt was usually attested to being an omen or miracle. It was a sign or test from God, and clerical authors utilised this belief to aide in their criticism or praising of medieval monarchs. Notably due to his patronage from Robert of Gloucester, William of Malmesbury was steadfastly on the side of Empress Matilda during the anarchy. He demonstrated this allegiance by using omens to criticise Stephen’s usurping of the throne, despite also praising his character as “courteous to all”; nevertheless, this proves how omens were seen as more trustworthy and still affect our opinion today, as Stephen is remembered as being a typically bad king, not one who is “active in war”. Upon arriving in England, Malmesbury noted that “a terrible sound of thunder accompanied by fearful lightning” was seen and heard throughout, so much so that people thought the world was breaking apart. The point Malmesbury is trying to get across in including this omen is incredibly obvious, and if someone did not know where his allegiance lied already, they most certainly did now. In using this omen, Malmesbury is hinting that this sudden change in weather is God’s wrath at seeing the throne usurped from its true queen, Matilda. Moreover, the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle also includes a number of weather-related omens and miracles regarding the Battle of Hastings, as well as William the Conqueror’s reign. For instance, the author states that a comet appeared in the sky in April 1066 and lasted for a week. This caused some to believe that the world was going to end; a rather clever way to hint at their opinion of the outcome of the Battle of Hastings, as well as the impending Norman rule. During this Norman rule, the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle also mentions how the moon eclipsed for three nights in 1077, as well as how a dry summer in the same year caused wildfires to spread, burning many towns and villages. Again, these miracles of strange moon cycles and dramatic weather all encapsulate what the contemporary Anglo-Saxon opinion of the Normans was, especially William the Conqueror. Wendover also uses these same miracles to pose uncertainty over God’s opinion of John. He mentions two strange occurrences with the moon and sun in 1200 and 1208. The first being when on the night before the nativity, the moon appeared five times – in the north, east, south, west and centre of the sky – forming a peculiar pattern. The second being when the sun eclipsed in 1208, causing the day to be darkened. Eclipses were just as rare as they are today to those living in the Middle Ages, but as seen before it is not unheard of to experience one. However, it must have been very distressing for those to experience the day being darkened by the eclipsing of the sun, most likely causing them to believe this as an omen from God. Wendover also mentions how a violent storm in 1207 tore down buildings, uprooted trees and killed thousands of sheep and cattle. Again, this storm would have been viewed as an omen from God, an expression of how He was unhappy with the way England was being controlled. Ultimately, clerical authors used these weather-related omens and miracles to emulate contemporary opinion and to criticise William the Conqueror, King Stephen and King John through religious speculation.
Finally, some of the omens and miracles used by clerical authors are unexplainable, even today, and ultimately helps historians comprehend how unsettling and suspicious they would have been in the Middle Ages. For instance, in the lead up to William Rufus’ death, a well in Finchampstead, Berkshire was recorded as overflowing with blood for fifteen days straight and even discolouring a neighbouring pool. Today, this omen of free-flowing blood remains unexplainable and demonstrates how disconcerting it must have been to the inhabitants of Finchampstead and to those who heard of the incident. With hindsight, Malmesbury is able to attribute this incident as an omen of William Rufus’ death. Moreover, when chronicling the history of the anarchy, Malmesbury uses another miracle to align which side he is on, when he states that Matilda’s escape from Oxford in 1142 was “a manifest miracle of God”. Here, Malmesbury is firmly placing God’s favour onto Matilda, claiming that if it were not for the latter, she would never have escaped. This, combined with the omen from Stephen’s arrival in England mentioned above, it is very clear where Malmesbury’s loyalties lie. However, his bias does not hinder his source, but further strengthens his points as we can see what his motivations are. To the modern reader, Malmesbury is hoping to present his bias as contemporary opinion, using these omens and miracles as his evidence. Furthermore, in his chronicle, Richard of Devices notes two incidents occurring at the coronation of Richard I. Firstly, he claims that during midday, a bat flew through Westminster Abbey, circling the king’s soon to be throne. Secondly, the bells appeared to ring on their own during the ceremony. Bats are known as nocturnal animals, meaning that during daytime they do not leave their roost. For a bat to fly about during midday and to circle a specific object, the only logical explanation could be that it was hurt or confused. Still, the reason why it chose to circle the throne is unexplainable, yet it appears as a simple omen to what King Richard’s reign might be like. Perhaps, the bat was hinting at how the king would rarely sit on his throne in England during his ten-year rule, however, Devices would not have known that as he published his chronicle in 1192. There is also no feasible explanation for the bells at Westminster Abbey to ring on their own, therefore, Devices is ultimately using both the bat and the bells as omens for what might come during Richard’s reign. Lastly, Wendover also notes of an unexplainable miracle occurring near Damascus in 1204: an image of the Madonna appeared to cry, with oil flowing from her eyes. Tales of such a miracle started to be spread all over the medieval world, causing many Saracens to convert to Christianity. Despite not being directly related to John’s reign, it can be further read and analysed as a criticism of John’s lack of religious zeal; a criticism that was high in contemporary opinion. Wendover uses this miracle as a way to question John’s rule, claiming that his gluttony and other vices caused England to not be blessed with such a miracle. Ultimately, clerical authors used these unexplainable omens and miracles to emulate contemporary opinion and to criticise William Rufus and King John, while praising Empress Matilda and Richard the Lionheart, to an extent.
To conclude, clerical authors used a range of different omens, miracles and other indirect means to draw on suspicious minds. Once they had obtained focus, these clerical authors then utilised such omens and miracles to emulate contemporary opinion of the time. Their hopes being that their chronicle would be used for centuries to come, so that their narrative was not only centered on ‘truth’ but also on God’s opinion. Alongside this, clerical authors also employed such occurrences as a way to criticise and praise medieval monarchs. Never explicitly offering their own opinion, these authors resorted to using omens and miracles as a sort of mouthpiece for their possible criticisms of each king. All these catalysts and causes were ultimately successful, as these omens and miracles have been useful to historians in understanding contemporary opinion on each medieval monarch.
Bibliography
M. T. Clanchy, England and its Rulers
William of Malmesbury, Historia Novella
Roger of Wendover, Flowers of History
Anglo-Saxon Chronicle
Richard of Devices, The Chronicle of Richard of Devices of the Time of King Richard the First
Retrospect Journal 