The death of William Rufus - accident or murder?

Hunting accidents were a feature of life in the 11th century just as they are today in an age of high visibility jackets. Notoriously Vice President Cheney shot one of his friends while they were out hunting only a few years ago. There are any number of incidents that go unreported unless the injury is fatal.

It does appear that contemporaries and for many years after took the death of William to be a pure accident. the first account, in the Anglo Saxpon Chronoicle, merely says this: In the morning after Lammas King William when hunting was shot by an arrow by one of his own men." Later accounts add detail, that he was shot through the heart and that the culprit was Walter Tirel, Count of Poix.  The fullest account was written by Orderic, writing about 1135. It is possible that Orderic could have had access to eye-witness accounts and he would almost certainly have heard secondary tales. Orderic does not condemn Tirel and saw the killing of the king as God's judgement. Contemporaries agreed, and judged William for his depraved lifestyle and his tendency to tyranny. The monks at Winchester only agreed to bury the body under protest.

Having said that, two men left the scene in almost indecent hate. Walter Tirel fled for France and William's younger brother Henry made speed to Wnchester to secure the treasury and have himself proclaimed king before his oldest brother Robert, duke of Normandy, could set sail from northern France. Henry held on to his kingdom for the next 35 years. The possible involvement of Walter Tirel was officially ignored. Henry neither punished nor rewarded him and both men lived to die in old age.

It is only later historians who have seen darker motives behind the death of William II. Cui bono? as Cicero asked. Who benefited from William's death? That answer is plain enough - Henry. This had led some to speculate that the death was no accident and that Henry engineered it on his own behalf. But there it remains, as simply speculation. There is no contemporary evidence to suggest that it was other than an accident and nobody in Henry's lifetime or after raised this thought. In any case, even if there were a conspiracy of sorts, its effectiveness would depend upon many uncertain factors - moving targets, men being out of position, the behaviour of Tirel or other men designated to do the deed - that its outcome would have been most unpredictable. In addition, we might wonder that if Henry had indeed planned this deed, he might have found it politic not to be present in the hunting party.

This may be one conspiracy theory that has nothig to support it,

The Death of William Rufus

The rules of primogeniture were not generally agreed when William II succeeded his father to the English throne in 1087. His elder brother Robert, his credentials already burnished by being a successful crusader, would not have encountered any objections had he asserted his claim to the English throne, yet when he did so he had already been pre-empted by his younger brother.

William knew what he was doing. While his father lay near death at Rouen, William readied a boat for himself at Bonneville sur Toques on the coast and soon after the last rites were spoken over his father's body made haste to England where he secured the treasury at Winchester and successfully lobbied support for his candidacy as the next king of England. He clearly convinced Archbishop Lanfranc, the key player in this drama, and William was crowned in westminster Abbey on the 26th September, just three weeks after his father's last breath. Later it was given out that William I had willed the kingdom to his second son. Whether true or not William had possession and was not to be dislodged until a fatal arrow killed him in the New Forest in 1100. Robert's whereabouts at this crucial time are unknown. When he did get report of his father's death and returned to Normandy there was no objection to his assuming the dukedom. England however was lost to him.

The death of William Rufus, by an arrow, was sudden and violent. He was hunting in the New Forest and it is presumed, was shot accidentally. The date was August 2nd 1100.

The earliest account of this death is found in the Anglo Saxon Chronicle:

In the morning after Lammas king William when hunting was shot by an arrow by one of his own men.

The man who shot the arrow is not named and these are the bald facts. Later chroniclers, writing between 15 and 30 years after the event supply more detail as well as some moralising. Overall, despite differences in tone and variation in detail, the accounts are relatively consistent and this story can be summarised here.

The hunting party set out from Brockenhurst late in the morning possibly because there had been some heavy drinking the night before. In the party were William's close friends Robert FitzHaimo, William of Breteuil, and some of the barons who were in evidence in Winchester during the aftermath - Walter Giffard, Gerald Bishop of Hereford, Henry earl of Warwick, Simon earl of Northampton, William Giffard, Robert de Montfort and Roger Bigot. There were more, but many made themselves scarce after the event and their names have not been recorded. One man who was almost certainly there was the youngest son of the Conqueror, Henry. Another man present who plays a leading part in this story was Walter Tirel, Count of Poix in France whom was being courted by William to help him a against the king of France.

The hunting party spread out as was customary to various parts of the forest attended by huntsmen and other servants who would chase down and finish off the game. Tirel was apparently close to William and later in the day when the sun was low (in August this wood be evening) Tirel loosed a shot at a stag that was running across. He missed, or it may have glanced off the stag's back, and the arrow his William who was then in the line of fire in the heart. It was reported that he broke the arrow himself but he then fell front forward on it and this killed him.

Once they had assessed what had happened every man suddenly had his own agenda. Walter Tirel quickly made his escape for France. he was not detained. Henry quickly headed for Winchester to secure the treasury. In this he encountered some opposition from William of Breteuil but he faced him down and gained sufficient support to obtain his objective. He was crowned only a few days later in Westminster, on August 5th, by the only available senior cleric, Maurice the Bishop of London. Like his brother before him Henry was able to act swiftly to secure the crown for himself.

In the meantime the former  king was subject to astonishing neglect. It was left to some peasants in the New Forest to tie the dead king onto a litter and drag him to Winchester.It is said that he bled along the route, which would suggest that he was still alive, but this embellishment to the story may be fancy. At Wimchester there was no Bishop because William had left the see vacant and the internment service was conducted in a perfunctory manner by Prior Godfrey who was known to have disapproved of William's lifestyle. He was buried in the Old Minster.

He was not mourned.

The Rufus Stone is said to mark the spot where William fell. It was set up in 1745 near Canterton to mark the site which had been traditional since Charles II visited there. The earliest reports suggest that the fatal shooting was closer to the hunting lodge which was though to be near Brockenhurst. In the 1530s John Leland reported that its had happened at or near Througham which may be identified with Beaulieu. The exact spot was not marked at the time and in the scramble of the barons after the event to secure their own interests it is unlikely that the place was given a second thought.