Henry the Young King, 1155-1183

by Matthew Strickland

This first modern study of Henry the Young King, eldest son of Henry II but the least known Plantagenet monarch, explores the brief but eventful life of the only English ruler after the Norman Conquest to be created co-ruler in his father’s lifetime. Crowned at fifteen to secure an undisputed succession, Henry played a central role in the politics of Henry II’s great empire and was hailed as the embodiment of chivalry. Yet, consistently denied direct rule, the Young King was provoked first into heading a major rebellion against his father, then to waging a bitter war against his brother Richard for control of Aquitaine, dying before reaching the age of thirty having never assumed actual power. In this remarkable history, Matthew Strickland provides a richly colored portrait of an all-but-forgotten royal figure tutored by Thomas Becket, trained in arms by the great knight William Marshal, and incited to rebellion by his mother Eleanor of Aquitaine, while using his career to explore the nature of kingship, succession, dynastic politics, and rebellion in twelfth-century England and France.

Genres: History, Nonfiction, Biography, Medieval History, British Literature, Politics, Medieval

496 pages, Hardcover

First published June 14, 2016

Reviews

[Deborah Pickstone · Rating 5 out of 5]

Really excellent! Strickland addresses the life of Henry the Young King who should have been Henry III but predeceased his father so another Henry got that slot a few years later.

As Strickland demonstrates, there is a dearth of recorded information about Henry, son of Henry II and Eleanor of Aquitaine. He also demonstrates that historical assumptions that he was feckless, not especially bright and loads of other mild to severe negatives were heavily prejudiced by a) his death before his father's and b) his rebellions against his father; 'history is written by the victor' - well, not exactly, history is written by people who wanted to please the victor, who in this case probably just wanted to have peace with his son and not to be a winner at all. Howsomever, Henry the Young King was remembered for his unfilial behaviour first and foremost and Richard, Geoffrey and John were barely blamed by history. Eleanor's offence, naturally, was so extreme a form of unnatural behaviour that her imprisonment was just fine by most record keepers.

Comparison to his mentor, William Marshal, were aplenty; as Strickland points out, if Marshal had died 40+ years earlier, he would have been remembered (if at all) as a bit of a bruiser who didn't come to much. He lived to pass his 3 score years and 10 and did a lot of other stuff, so he looks pretty good to history.

A fair hearing for the Young King here, I am glad to say. An excellent read.

[Caroline · Rating 4 out of 5]

I would imagine that most people don't have a clue that the numbering of our Henrys is technically out by one - that there was a missing Henry III, crowned, anointed and yet somehow forgotten, and all the subsequent ones should go up a digit. Henry IX just doesn't sound right, does it? And yet, 'tis true.

The Young King, son of Henry II, was crowned king in his father's lifetime - the only occasion in English history, although it was a relatively common practice on the continent - and should therefore be remembered in the regnal history of England as Henry III. But because he died young before his father, who was succeeded by the Young King's infinitely more famous brother Richard, known as the Lionheart, and because of the circumstances of his death (in rebellion against his father, no less) he has somehow slipped from the remembrance of history and is not included in any lists of the kings and queens of England that you'll find in textbooks and on classrooms walls.

Matthew Strickland has done superlative work restoring the Young King to history - it's hard to think of a more authoritative and well-researched biography of a figure so hitherto neglected. What little remains of the Young King in chronicles and documents tends to be relatively hostile - dying young in the midst of a rebellion against his father, and not the first either, will do that for a reputation, with no opportunity for years and decades of wiser, more responsible behaviour to correct the youthful mistakes.

And yet, as Strickland ably documents, the Young King was not entirely at fault - what is a king without a kingdom to do, after all? Henry II's greatest mistake was anointing his son with a crown but no authority, whilst his younger brothers may have lacked the crown but had lands and titles in which to base themselves and reward their followers. This fostered resentment among the brothers and frustration and aggression in an anointed king with no means to grow into the role he was expected to one day fulfil.

In Strickland's biography, the Young King comes across a far more appealing figure than his brother Richard or indeed his father Henry II - charming, amiable, open-handed, less aggressive and argumentative. It is one of the great what-ifs of history - what if the Young King had succeeded his father? He was already married, and his wife had borne one child, who died shortly after death, but would no doubt have born others. Would Richard the Lionheart still have become king? And at his untimely death, John? Without John, perhaps no Magna Carta? Alas, we shall never know, but that is no reason to forget what might have been so entirely as we have.

[Toby · Rating 5 out of 5]

An outstanding history book, comprehensive and superbly entertaining throughout.

[Colin · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a well-written, scholarly biography of the tragic career of the eldest son of King Henry II of England who was crowned king himself in 1170 during his father's reign but died in 1183 of dysentery before he could accede to the throne in his own right. Hence Henry was a crowned king - The Young King - but never a reigning monarch: the only such case in English history post-1066.

Matthew Strickland recounts Henry's story from birth to death and in so doing gives the reader a clear insight into the politics of the time and the extraordinarily dysfunctional family of Henry II. The book draws heavily on a mass of primary source material and presents the information in a compelling fashion.

This is primarily a narrative history rather than an academic analysis but it does make a good case for focusing on a character who was highly regarded at the time and immediately after his death, even though he fell out disastrously with his father and also his brother, especially Richard - the future Richard The Lionheart. It is a tragedy in that Henry was given a title by his father in order to secure the succession but was very quickly frustrated by the lack of real power that his father gave him. It is interesting to speculate how history would have been different if either Henry had not crowned his son or, having done so, if the king had granted the Young King more authority to go with the title.

[Gayla Bassham · Rating 4 out of 5]

You have to wonder why Shakespeare never wrote a play revolving around Henry the Young King -- the hubris of both the young king and his father, the formidable Henry II, would seem ideally suited to one of his history plays. In this biography, Matthew Strickland revives the memory of one of the lesser known figures in the history of England -- Henry II's son, whom he crowned co-king of England (which he lived to regret).

Probably because he died so young, Henry the Young King's reputation has suffered in comparison to his immediate family -- Henry II, Eleanor of Aquitaine, Richard the Lionheart, John -- and he is often remembered as a somewhat callow young man with a big ego but little ability. Strickland argues that this is unfair -- he hardly had time to prove himself, after all; during his co-regency he was popular and displayed valor and commitment; there's no evidence that he lacked intelligence or seriousness of purpose.

Strickland makes his case, I think, and the family drama in this book can be riveting. Other parts of the book left me cold -- the battles in various areas of France all ran together after a while. But I closed the book wondering about what might have been had young Henry lived -- it's easy to imagine that if he had succeeded Henry II the map of Europe might look quite different.

[Julie Yates · Rating 4 out of 5]

To study the career of the Young King is to go to the heart of the critical issues of succession, delegation of power and the division of the Plantagenet lands."

Excellent biography of the Young King, showing how his capable abilities and well loved character were disparaged after his death (while fighting against his own father King Henry II), mainly by clerics angry over his pillaging the Abby of St. Martail and using that ill gained wealth to pay his mercenaries, who the clerics considered to be godless heretics. Unlike King Henry II biographies, this work explores the difficulties from the Young King's perspective, showing how he was trying to live up to expectations while his ruthlessly controlling father gave him no livelihood and yet his brothers were given reign over their own territories.

The best part is how well Strickland explores what he calls the central themes of the Young King's life: his father’s refusal to relinquish control of any part of his paternal inheritance, the hostility between brothers over the division of their father’s lands, and the ruthless exploitation by the king of France of disputes within the Angevin family.