A HISTORY OF NORFOLK 



The reign of William II is not connected particularly with local history, 

 but there is a suspicion that his death was the result not of an accident but 

 of a plot hatched in Norfolk.^ 



When Henry I succeeded, he was supported locally by Roger Bigod,* 

 who remained constable of Norwich Castle until his death in 1 107, when he 

 was succeeded first by his son William Bigod (who went down in the White 

 iS'>6//»), and then by his other son, Hugh Bigod. In 1122 Henry himself 

 came to Norwich and spent Christmas' there. On the death of Henry in 

 1135, Hugh Bigod materially assisted Stephen's seizure of the crown by 

 coming over from Normandy and asserting that he knew positively that the 

 late king had disinherited his daughter Maud and appointed Stephen his 

 successor.* 



In 1 136' a rumour was spread that Stephen was dead, and Hugh Bigod 

 came down to the castle and shut himself up in it, refusing to deliver it to 

 anyone but the king himself.^ It was said that William de Blois (Stephen's 

 natural son) wished to supplant Bigod in his office, and this may be the 

 reason why Hugh stood on the defensive.^ The result was that the king 

 seized both the castle and the city and gave them to William de Blois. 



Some sort of a compromise or arrangement between Bigod and Stephen 

 seems to have been made, for in that year the king made him earl of the 

 East Angles or Norfolk, and gave him the third part of the profits of the 

 county in inheritance, at the same time granting the remaining two-thirds 

 to William de Blois. This compromise, however, does not seem to have 

 satisfied the newly-created earl, for in 1140 he declared in favour of Maud, 

 and held for her his castle of Bungay.* Once more, however, Bigod must 

 have changed sides, for in 1141 he fought with the king at Lincoln, but 

 apparently soon deserted, for he was with the empress in 1 141 and 1 142.' 



By 1 1 35, Maud having withdrawn to Normandy, Bigod was once more 

 on the king's side, and must have had some interest with him, for in 11 52 

 he persuaded the king to re-grant, though apparently not to enlarge, the 

 liberties of Norwich. The various treasons of its earl are really almost 

 the only connexion which Norfolk had with the war between Stephen 

 and Maud, for the actual fighting does not seem to have come any nearer 

 than Bungay and Ipswich. 



In the reign of Stephen there was, according to the chronicle of 

 St. Edmund's, an assembly or court held in the bishop's garden at Norwich 

 in 1 150 to hear an accusation made by one of the servants of Sir Robert Fitz 

 Gilbert, against his master of alleged treason at the siege of Bedford Castle in 

 1149 ^y conspiring to carry off or murder the king. The presiding officer 

 was William Martel, described as ' sewer or steward,' but he probably sat as 



' Round {Feud. Engl. 472) suggested that he was shot as the result of a plot among the members of the 

 family of GifFard and Clare, one of whom was married to Walter Tirel. He points out also that Tirel is 

 sometimes called ' Walter de Bekham.' This may quite likely be Beckham in this county, and there is other 

 evidence to connect Tirel with the county. 



' Will, of Malmesbury, Gesta Regum (Rolls Ser.), ii, 47 1 . 



» Hen. of Hunt. Hist. Jng!. (Rolls Ser.), 244. 



* Matt. Paris, Chron. Maj. (Rolls Ser.), ii, 62. 



* Hen. of Hunt. op. cit, 259. ' Matt. Paris. Chron. Maj. (Rolls Ser.), ii, 165. 



' From the fact that William de Blois eventually held the castles of Norwich, Bungay, Wormegay, and 

 Castle Acre, it is clear that Stephen preferred to trust his own family. 



' Annals of Waverley (Luard), 229. ' Round, Geoff, de Mandeville, 83, 172. 



470 



