Collapse of the Angevin Empire

Fall of the Angevin Empire was an inevitable process, the result of long-term underlying factors - social, economic and political. 

Doomed from the start? Divided by the treachery of Henry's sons. Held together with difficulty by John and Richard.

This great centralized administrative structure was ultimately broken down by rebellion and French attack

The Angevin Empire, and its loss, represented the triumph of French culture in England, as well as the separation of England from France.

This was in no sense a true empire, doomed to implode and one of the clearest of all victims of historical inevitability

Angevins never tried to mould their diverse lands into a monolithic union - thus the whole system was particularly vulnerable to break-up

Normandy and England were rivals in the Anglo-Norman realm. The Normans thought that Angevin rule benefited England rather than them

However, the loss of the empire was more King John's fault, rather than the unity of the empire.

Maintained by the greed of Richard, lost by the weaknesses of John

5 years after Richard's death, the Angevin Empire was all lost

By his own incompetence, John lost Normandy to Philip of France

Richard helped destroy the edifice which his father had both built and maintained. Richard's reign arguably marks the beginning of the Angevin empire's collapse

Some argue that had Richard lived longer,he may have confronted the crisis similar to his brother's

Gillingham rejects any notion that the Angevin empire was disintegrating before John's loss of Normandy and Anjou in 1204

Suggested that large shifts in politics, economics and society on the Continent had more to do with John's losses than his personal failings

F

Few historians today saw either Richard or John shaping their diverse and dispersed dynastic heritage into a lasting political entity

England and Normandy were drifting apart by Richard's last years

Were John's difficulties the result of Richard's actions?

John left for England December 1203, leaving his continental lands exposed and vulnerable. Shortly after, Philip captured Richard's powerful castle, Château Gaillard March 1204, and the Norman capital Rouen in June. Eleanor of Aquitaine had no died, leaving the barons to side with Philip, not John. The Angevin Empire had collapsed. 

No indication that Henry II, Richard I or John wished to mould them into a coherent unified 'state'. However, the did strive to keep this diverse, far-flung collection of lands together, which eventually led to the downfall and death of each of them

If the Angevin Empire had a capital it would probably be Rouen. When this fell to Philip in 1204 the Angevin Empire thus collapsed

Previously, Henry II had been richer and more powerful than Louis VII. However, Philip II expanded his authority from the 1180s but adding to his territories. By the 1200s it is arguable that the Capetians were financially better off than the Angevins

John's inheritance was a 'poisoned chalice' 

Lands were cobbled together in a series of succession disputes

With the surrender of Rouen, the capital, and Chateau Gaillard, the strongest fortress, the conquest was completed in 1204

Mutual mistrust amongst father, mother, sons and siblings, exacerbated by capetian meddling, doomed Henry's hope for permanence. 

John

John didn't have time to complete a political structure that might have fostered some sense of unity

New Page