King Rufus: The Life and Murder of William II of England

by Emma Mason

The future William II was born in the late 1050s the third son of William the Conqueror. The younger William, - nicknamed Rufus because of his ruddy cheeks - at first had no great expectations of succeeding to the throne. This biography tells the story of William Rufus, King of England from 1087-1100 and reveals the truth behind his death.

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

427 pages, Kindle Edition

First published September 1, 2005

About the author

Emma Mason was, until her recent retirement, Senior Lecturer in History at Birkbeck College, London. She has written extensively on medieval England and William Rufus in particular. She has contributed to several Radio 4 historical documentaries including Document and Historical Inquests.

Reviews

[Jo · Rating 3 out of 5]

The life and times of one of the Norman kings. I'd only really come across 'Rufus' in passing. And through Horrible Histories. I feel much better now having had my curiosity satisfied. I learnt a few new things and got somewhat confused because everybody is called either William, Henry or Matilda.

[Gayla Bassham · Rating 3 out of 5]

Mason does a perfectly serviceable job presenting the life and death of William Rufus -- although I would not go so far as to say she solves the mystery of his death, as the blurb claims. In the final analysis, though, William Rufus was not particularly memorable or interesting. Whether this is his biographer's fault or his own I cannot say. But what I will remember most from this book is the image of the Puritans throwing poor William Rufus's bones out the window -- an ignominious end for a king rivalled only by poor Richard III ending up under a carpark.

[Truls Ljungström · Rating 3 out of 5]

En spännande och välskriven biografi över en kontroversiell monark. William II är i populärmedvetandet mest känd för att ha varit en riddarkonung lika rödsprängd av ilska som hans röda rock, för att ha varit något slags kyrkokritisk protokapitalist, och för att ha varit antingen asexuell eller bisexuell. Emma Mason presenterar en mer konventionell men minst lika intressant gestalt, och hon gör det med hänvisningar till samtida källor och livsteckningar såväl som till tidiga andrahandskällor. Definitivt läsvärd.

[Therese · Rating 3 out of 5]

$10.98

King William, also known as William Rufus, seized the throne after his father, William the Conqueror died claiming that he was the designated heir. This is one thing we will never know because it has never shown up in any documentation, but he and Robert came to a truce (after fighting) that they would each be each other's heirs if neither one had a legitimate son.

William II had a lot to handle. It seemed like he was always fighting, whether it was with his brothers, the Scots, the Welsh, other counts in France, or Earls in England, not to mention his long-running dispute and arguments with Archbishop Anselm. He seemingly had little "need" for the church so exiling Anselm didn't seem to bother him at all. For some reason William never married although the author, who has obviously done a tremendous amount of research, claims he at least had an illegitimate son. Why he never planned for the future is something we will never know.

The author seems to believe that Walter Tirel accidentally shot the king and killed him. There have been many conspiracy theories regarding William's death, and with all the time that has passed, it is something else we will never know. However I find it very "convenient" that William's brother, Henry, was with him when he was killed and he immediately seized the throne since Robert was on his way back from a crusade. I guess the one thing I can't figure out is that if Walter Tirel did kill the king, even accidentally, why wasn't he pursued into France and made to answer for his error, which I imagine would have been pretty drastic in that day and age.

This book was not easy to read, and all I can say is I'm glad I have read other things during this time period otherwise I would have been completely lost. The role of the church is something completely foreign to me that would help if I understood that more. Otherwise this book was difficult for me to understand, and I don't blame the author for that. It is my own lack of knowledge about these ancient time, and so I am looking forward to moving ahead with hopefully some authors that write things in a more simple fashion, not to mention easy and entertaining (for me at least).

[Blair Hodgkinson · Rating 4 out of 5]

An informative read with plenty of attention to period detail, but I did find that the narrative jumped around quite a lot, more than most historical biographies of the type, and ended quite suddenly. Then again, so did William Rufus. The conspiracy theories about who may have murdered the king by such means as to make it look accidental very interesting and insightful. I always suspected Henry I, who was conveniently on hand at the time and quick to claim the royal treasury, as having engineered the death of William II, but Prof. Mason offers some additional and intriguing suspects and theories. Worth the read.

[Best British Biographies]

It’s no exaggeration to say that Emma Mason’s 2005 biography of William Rufus is the product of a career spent studying the king. For nearly thirty years Mason, who taught medieval history at Birkbeck College and wrote several well-regrade books on the era, has written a series of articles about William and his historical reputation. The latter undoubtedly made her a natural choice when the editors of Tempus’s “English Monarchs” series were looking for someone to contribute a volume on William’s life and reign.

For the rest of my review, click on the link:

https://www.bestbritishbios.com/2021/...

[Lenora Rogers · Rating 5 out of 5]

I love learning the history of the Kings and Queens, I find the fascinating. I love this book it gives a lot of details about him that I didn't know. This King doesn't seem to be very well liked. This book just shows how greedy and selfish and cruel he can be. If you like reading about the Royal families and learning about there life , this is a great book to read.

[gizmo cream soda · Rating 3 out of 5]

good riddance coloniser!!!

[Julie Yates · Rating 3 out of 5]

I found this very dense and hard to get through. While I learned a lot, it did not keep my attention and I felt it dragged with extraneous information that neither enlightened the reader on William II character nor helped the flow.

Unlike Barlow (William Rufus ) or Hollister ( Henry I) Mason believes King William II was indeed murdered. She presents her case that it King Philip I of France who was behind the murder (as compared to younger brother Henry,) and that is was possibly a servant associated with Walter Tirel (so perhaps not Tirel himself, so he could truthfully say he did not shoot the arrow) who killed King William to stop his potential invasion of France via Poitou.

Some interesting quotes:


Granted that [Henry] was not in a position to offer military assistance during the crisis, yet he was clearly indifferent as to which of his brothers was king of England, so long as his own interests were served

Analysis of William's strategy was usually cautious, and at times neither particularly decisive nor successful, but throughout his reign he was able to convince people that he could successfuly accomplish great projects.

The succession clause in the treaty may have had the aim of luring Robert into thinking that William would not encroach further on the duchy, and also discouraging the duke from baking any further rebellion in England. The clause also addressed the concerns of those powerful magnates who held lands on both side of the Channel. If they believed that sooner or later all their territories would again be subject to one ruler, they might be less inclined to ferment rebellion.

The problem with this ongoing policy was that a man whose loyalty had once been bought was liable to offer it for sale again to an even higher bidder. Meanwhile his recently acquired patron should always view him with suspicion, even though surveillance needed to be discreet in order to not provoke the very treachery it was designed to thwart. Failure to maintain it at all, on the other hand, could lead to consequences far more extreme.

From the French standpoint William's planned expedition would seem a looming disaster to be prevented, if possible. The abrupt end to William's reign may not have been accidental, as some writers reported, but a deliberate move to ensure that the planned expedition [into France] would not take place. The genuinely accidental death of the King's nephew in May could easily have suggested to those concerned to stop the expedition how they could do so.

On the other hand, the emphasis placed by Orderic Vitalis on warnings emanating from Gloucester, may indicate that rumours were circulating there of a plot against the king.

The sons of the Conqueror made up a very dysfunctional family. Whether their mutual rivalries led Henry to Commission the murder of William is questionable, but his treatment of Robert-seizing the throne to which he was heir, invading his dutchy, imprisoning him for life, effectively disinheriting and hounding his one legitimate son until the latter’s early death-does raise questions about the lengths to which he would be prepared to go to secure the English throne, a much more valuable prize than the Duchy of Normandy.

A variant on the hypothesis that Henry himself instigated his brother 's death would be that a plot to kill William originated with some of the magnates who had rebelled in 1088 and 1095, or were rebel sympathizers and had previous haps been involved in the assassination attempt of the latter year … it is even more likely that an assassination plot originated in France. As news of William's intended expedition spread, there would be growing anxiety in various quarters, and thought given to ideas on how best to avert disaster.

[Chris Stott · Rating 4 out of 5]

For a general, balanced overview of this monarch, whose biography has been rather lost in the mists and misrepresentations of time, this is probably hard to beat. Mason provides a readable narrative that only occasionally gets bogged down in extraneous detail, and I certainly came away from it better informed and eager to research more about this era.

[sir peter shawe · Rating 4 out of 5]

Good read

Enjoyed this well researched and written book. The authors detailed account of William the issues related to his rule and death from various viewpoints, made for interesting reading on, from my perspective, a little known monarch.

[Lauren · Rating 3 out of 5]

Dry in some places, but overall, not bad.

[G Liguori · Rating 2 out of 5]

I learned nothing new. Essentially a book about the clergy.

[Pete daPixie · Rating 4 out of 5]

Emma Mason writes well, and with authority, clearly she's right at home in 11th century England. This is the first book in this series of 'English Monarchs' that I've read, the other dozen or so look interesting too.
When the Conqueror died he split the crown of England from Normandy. Robert, the eldest son, inherited Normandy and England was given to William.
The thirteen year reign had it's troubles both sacred and secular. The appointment of Anselm as Archbishop of Canterbury became a trial run for the struggles between King Henry II and Thomas Becket.
The state suffered and overcame two rebellions as well as border wars with Malcolm of Scotland as well as the Welsh. When Duc Robert went to the holy land, William II dipped his fingers in the Normandy pie.
Throughout, this book takes from the main contemporary sources, Orderic Vitalis, William of Malmesbury, John of Worcester, Geoffrei Gaimar, Eadmer and Henry of Huntingdon.
The author goes along with Henry of Huntingdon, in naming William's assassin as Walter Tirel. I'm not sure I go along with the book's sleeve that states 'reveals for the first time the truth behind his death in the thirteenth year of his troubled reign, settling one of medieval England's most enduring mysteries'. After almost one thousand years we'll almost certainly never know if Walt was a patsy, and if so, just who was behind the grassy knoll in the New Forest.

[Pete daPixie · Rating 4 out of 5]

Note: Two years ago I read Emma Mason's book entitled 'King Rufus: The Life and Mysterious Death of William II.' I have attempted to find out on the net if this is the same work under a different title, but have found no info!?! Altogether strange, however I will read on.

Strange is the word. From what I can find out Emma Mason has two books on the subject of William II. The first book that I read 'King Rufus:The Life and Mysterious Death of William II' was published in 2008. This work, 'William II: Rufus, the Red King', was published in 2005.

Why? As far as my memory can be relied on, these are one and the same book, published a few years apart under different titles. The only reason I can think for doing this is that the size of print of this book is far too small, especially for a near sexagenarian Saxon like me! But why change the title?
Re-reading Emma Mason's 'William II' nothing shoots off the page as new or different from my first read, but it has to be said I still enjoyed reading this. I stick with my original 4 stars and my previous review.

[Simon Bradley · Rating 4 out of 5]

An excellent tale of the life of one of our more obscure monarchs - i also found it more approachable than a lot of other biographies of english monarchs of the pre Tudor times - a lot of them devolve into lists of court decrees and documents that are a challenge to the amateur historian.

[Sean Brennan · Rating 4 out of 5]

An excellent biography of this often demonised King. Highly enjoyable!.

[Neeuqdrazil]

Couldn't do it. This is the type of history that I hate, and the type that makes most people hate history. It's basically a dry recital of what happened when, who was where, with no analysis. Boring!