‘Characterised by disagreement.’ How far do you agree with this view of relations between the archbishops of Canterbury and York in the period from 1066 to 1216?
Level
A Level
Year Examined
2022
Topic
English government and the church 1066-1216
👑Complete Model Essay
‘Characterised by disagreement.’ How far do you agree with this view of relations between the archbishops of Canterbury and York in the period from 1066 to 1216?
Characterised by Disagreement? Relations Between the Archbishops of Canterbury and York, 1066-1216.
The relationship between the Archbishops of Canterbury and York from 1066 to 1216 is often characterised by disagreement. This essay will explore the validity of this assertion, analysing the various sources of tension and conflict between the two sees, while also considering periods of relative harmony and cooperation. It will conclude that while disagreement was a significant feature of the relationship, it is an oversimplification to characterize it solely as a period of continuous conflict.
The Primacy Dispute
A major source of contention between Canterbury and York was the issue of primacy. The Archbishop of Canterbury claimed superiority over York, citing tradition and papal pronouncements. However, the Archbishop of York often resisted this claim, seeking to maintain his own authority and independence. This unresolved issue was a constant source of tension, and it flared up repeatedly throughout the period. For example, in 1115, Thurstan of York refused to profess obedience to Canterbury, leading to a protracted dispute that was only resolved by papal intervention. The lack of a permanent resolution to the primacy question meant that it remained a potential source of conflict, particularly in the earlier part of the period.
Papal Intervention
The role of the papacy in the relationship between Canterbury and York was often a source of friction. Papal interventions, intended to resolve disputes, often exacerbated the situation. For example, in 1198, Pope Innocent III appointed Archbishop Hubert Walter of Canterbury as papal legate, further reinforcing Canterbury's authority. Conversely, papal grants of privileges to York, such as the exemption from Canterbury's jurisdiction, could fuel resentment and rivalry. These shifting alliances and interventions often served to undermine rather than strengthen the relationship.
Political Intrigue and Royal Patronage
Political machinations played a significant role in exacerbating the conflict between the sees. Monarchs often intervened in the relationship, using their patronage to further their own agendas. For example, Henry II's decision to have York crown Young Henry in 1170, without consulting Canterbury, inflamed tensions and contributed to the murder of Thomas Becket. Becket's subsequent publication of papal bulls suspending York further escalated the dispute. The entanglement of religious and political power made the relationship volatile and unpredictable.
Periods of Relative Harmony
Despite the frequent disagreements, there were periods of relative harmony between the archbishops. Lanfranc, the first Norman Archbishop of Canterbury, enjoyed a harmonious relationship with Thomas of York. Lanfranc's personal authority and the recognition by York of Canterbury's supremacy led to a period of peace in the early 12th century. The 1125 grant of legatine authority to Canterbury also provided a brief period of stability, as Canterbury's authority over York was formally recognised. This period was marked by a more cooperative approach to addressing shared concerns, particularly in the area of reforming the Church. However, this harmony was fragile and susceptible to the shifting political winds.
Other Issues and Shifting Focus
The archbishops of Canterbury and York were not always focused solely on their rivalry. Anselm of Canterbury, for example, spent much of his time and energy on resolving difficulties with Henry I over the issue of lay investiture. Similarly, the schism in York during Stephen's reign and the inability of Stephen Langton, the Archbishop of Canterbury, to enter England due to his suspension, demonstrate that external factors could also influence relations between the sees. By the 13th century, both Canterbury and York were increasingly focused on internal matters within their own dioceses. This shift in focus, combined with the increasing power of the monarchy, contributed to a gradual decline in the intensity of the rivalry between the two archbishops.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the relationship between the Archbishops of Canterbury and York from 1066 to 1216 is accurately characterised by disagreement. The unresolved issue of primacy, papal interventions, and political machinations created a climate of tension and conflict. However, it is important to acknowledge that this relationship was not solely defined by antagonism. There were periods of relative harmony, influenced by strong personalities and specific events. The relationship was complex and multifaceted, shaped by a range of factors, including religious doctrine, political power struggles, and personal ambitions. While disagreement was indeed a prominent feature, it is an oversimplification to claim that it was the sole defining characteristic of their interactions.
Note: History Study Pack Required
Score Big with Perfectly Structured History Essays!
Prepare effortlessly for your A/AS/O-Level exams with our comprehensive...
History Study Pack.
✅ 1200+ Model Essays: Master your essay writing with expertly crafted answers to past paper questions.
✅ Exam Boards Covered: Tailored materials for AQA, Cambridge, and OCR exams.
🍃 Free Essay Plan
Characterised by Disagreement: The Relationship between the Archbishops of Canterbury and York from 1066 to 1216
This essay will examine the relationship between the Archbishops of Canterbury and York from 1066 to 1216, considering the extent to which it can be characterised by disagreement. It will explore periods of conflict and cooperation, considering the ongoing issue of primacy, papal intervention, and the actions of monarchs and archbishops themselves.
Arguments Supporting Disagreement
Periods of Conflict:There were indeed periods of open conflict throughout the period. The Norman Conquest saw the establishment of York as a separate archbishopric, and the question of primacy – who held the superior position – was immediately contested. This became a consistent source of tension, with the archbishops often vying for power.
Primacy:The failure to permanently settle the primacy issue created a continuing source of friction. Events such as Thurstan of York’s refusal to acknowledge Canterbury’s authority in 1115 demonstrate how volatile the situation could be, particularly in the early years.
Papal Intervention:Papal intervention could exacerbate the conflict. The Pope often acted as a third party, appointing papal legates (sometimes bypassing Canterbury) and granting York privileges that challenged Canterbury's jurisdiction. This fuelled rivalry and mistrust between the archbishops.
Monarchs and Archbishops:The actions of monarchs and archbishops themselves could further escalate the tensions. For example, Henry II’s crowning of Young Henry by the Archbishop of York (to Becket's fury) and Becket's subsequent publication of papal bulls suspending York, demonstrate how events could be manipulated to intensify the rivalry.
Arguments Challenging Disagreement
Not Constant Disagreement: While there were periods of conflict, there were also instances of cooperation and even amicable relations between the archbishops. For example, the Archbishop of York's recognition of Lanfranc's personal supremacy or the 1125 grant of legatine authority to Canterbury brought temporary peace to the primacy issue.
Focus on Other Issues: Sometimes, the archbishops were preoccupied with matters other than their rivalry. Anselm's focus on resolving the investiture controversy with Henry I, the schism in York during Stephen's reign, and Langton's inability to enter England (and subsequent suspension) are examples of how external factors could overshadow the traditional disputes between the archbishops.
Shift in Focus by the 13th Century:By the thirteenth century, both Canterbury and York might have been more focused on internal problems within their own dioceses, leading to a reduction in the intensity of their disputes with each other.
Conclusion
While the relationship between the Archbishops of Canterbury and York was often characterised by disagreement, especially in the early years, it wasn't consistently antagonistic. The constant struggle for primacy, coupled with papal interventions and political manoeuvres, fueled friction. However, instances of cooperation, periods of focus on other matters, and evolving priorities all suggest that the relationship was more complex than simply being defined by disagreement.
Extracts from Mark Schemes
Supporting the Hypothesis
• Answers might argue that there are periods of conflict between the archbishops of Canterbury and York through most of the period.
• Answers might argue that failure to reach a permanent resolution of the primacy question meant that it remained a bone of contention on both sides and trouble could flare up at any point, especially earlier in the period as in 1115 when Thurstan of York refused to profess obedience to Canterbury.
• Answers might argue that papal intervention could fuel the acrimony between Canterbury and York, by the pope appointing someone other than Canterbury as papal legate or giving York privileges which exempted him from Canterbury’s jurisdiction.
• Answers might argue that on occasion both monarch and archbishops could take deliberate action which made the situation worse eg Henry II having York crown Young Henry to the fury of Becket and Becket’s publication of papal bulls suspending York.
Challenging the Hypothesis
• Answers might argue that there was not constant disagreement.
• Answers might argue that recognition of Lanfranc’s personal supremacy by York, or the 1125 grant of legatine authority to Canterbury brought temporary peace in the primacy issue.
• Answers might argue that there were times when one or other of the archbishops had other things on their minds than conflict with each other such as Anselm’s trying to resolve difficulties with Henry I over lay investiture, the schism in York in Stephen’s reign or Langton’s inability to enter England and his later suspension.
• Answers might argue that by the thirteenth century both Canterbury and York were more focused on problems with their own diocesans than on disagreement with each other.