How accurate a term is "Angevin Empire"
when describing the Plantagenet Kings' lands?
The Angevin Empire refers
to the collection of lands
held by the Angevin Kings
(The Plantagenet Rulers)
Plantagenet comes from 'planta genista'
the Latin name for the Broom plant which
legend says Geoffrey of Anjou (Henry II's
father) wore in his hat
Dates of land acqusition 1. Normandy 1144, 2.
Maine Anjou and Touraine 1144, 3. Aquitaine
1152 (by marriage), 4. England 1154, 5. Brittany
1166
Angevin (noun) can be defined as: A
native, inhabitant or rule of Anjou. Or
something relating to Anjou
Empire (noun) can be defined as: An
extensive group of states or
countries ruled over by a single
monarch, an oligarchy or a sovereign
state e.g. the Roman Empire. Or an
extensive sphere of activity
controlled by one person or group.
The term "Angevin Empire" was coined by Kate Norgate in
1887 and is as such a modenr and retrospective term. (The
Angevin Kings never called it an Angevin Empire)
"Angevin Empire" as a term is too general it is like saying
Richard was the best king of England and John the worst.
WHY?
King Henry II never saw his collection of lands as an
Empire or even particularly Angevin
Henry II referred to his patchwork of lands
as "our kingdom and everything subject to its
rule wherever it may be"
This indicates that England is the
focus rather than Anjou as England was
the only kingdom he presided over
By labelling the lands as "Angevin" historians place Anjou at
central importance to Henry and the rest of the Empire but this
is not the case
Anjou was important politically and
geographically as it shared borders with
Aquitaine and other important lands
This proved useful when defending England
from Louis' attacks across the channel
Anjou was a central land geographically and this eased
communications between Henry's northern and southern lands
TONY MCCONNELL said the lands were
"founded on inheritance, marriage and
battle" and did not reflect anything
"imperial"
Although the large set of lands were ruled by one leader
it did not exhibit the qualities traditionally associated with
an Empire
Empire denotes a "extensive group of states or
countries ruled over by a single monarch, an oligarchy
or a sovereign state"
This definition supports the idea of Henry's
lands as an empire because they were
ruled over by one man: Henry, so at face
value the term "Angevin Empire" is
accurate
Contrastingly the above definition
of the word describes what the word
Empire is, it doesn't define what an
Empire is
Several sources state that the characteristic
that defines an Empire is the fact that
alongside being a colleciton of lands ruled by
one person they must be unified or under a
unified authority
It is under a
general unified
authority: Henry II
Not unified politically - each land had
their own leaders and separate and
independent justice and government
systems
Henry = overlord in name only.
Subordinates ruled the independent
states for him
Lands were not all
unified georgrpahically
Angevin can be a suitable
term to describe the
collection lands
Anjou was a politically and
geographically central land. Also
Henry II's homeland
This has limitations how can any of the
lands be central in any sense when none
of them were unified
Anjou is Henry II's heritage
As no land is particularly central
in any sense they are therefore all
equal in importance
Is it more appropriate to call it the "Aquitainian
Empire" after the extensive lands Eleanor of
Aquitaine brought to Henry
Is it more appropriate to call it the
"Norman Empire" because the dynasty
of Kings started with his conquest in
1066. And Normandy was the longest
surviving continental land
Is it more appropriate to call it the "English
Empire" because in order of power the King is
the most important role and England was the
only land they managed to successfully keep
hold of.
PROFESSOR BOUSSARD: interpreted the
nature and concept of the "Angevin Empire"
as a "conceptual administrative and
geographical whole"
She also said that "Empire" is not an
applicable word because they were unified
only "by their borders". Each state was
strong and individual within the feudal
network
FRANK MCLYNN's book
"Lionheart and Lackland"
he described the Empire
as a system "peculiarly
vulnerableto break-up" and
a "ramshackle structure"
TONY MCCONNELL: asked
in his work "Is it right to use a
non-contemporary label to
describe a period of
history?"
HOLT: argues that "it
was not designed as
an Empire"
Henry intended to split his lands up upon
his death to distribute between his sons.
His assimilation of lands was not so much
for an Empire but for an iinheritance
If we want to be really accurate
why don't we just call them "Henry's
Lands"?
That label is boring and conveys
no image. Empire conveys a sense
of scale and importance, power
and might and grandeur
Empire also identifies Henry
with other powerful men
and his skill at collecting all
these lands
The French don't call it the "Angevin
Empire" they call it "la espace
Plantagenet" - the Plantagenet
Space
This is an accurate term
but again lacks
grandeur and scale and
power and military skill
HOLT: the lands were
"cobbled together"
CLANCHY: an "unholy
combination of princely greed
and genealogical accident"
Better terms we could use
to describe the "Angevin
Empire"
Henry's Lands
A Federation
The Plantagenet Empire
la espace Plantagenet
Plantagenet Sovereignity
I would say this is most accurate. It denotes a
collection of lands ruled by the Plantagenet
family, ultimately governed by a Sovereign, the
King of England, whether Henry II, Richard I or
John I