1History of Britain Part IPolitical History of England 1066.docx

1
History of Britain Part I
Political History of England: 1066
By the dawn of the 11th century, England was no amateur to
being invaded. For centuries Vikings had raided and plundered
coastal villages, everywhere sowing seeds of destruction and
chaos. Then, Alfred the Great, a Saxon king, made England
stable enough to fend off Viking attacks; despite the long boats
that came and went, the king’s law ensured stability. However,
one Viking invasion succeeded where the others had failed,
leaving a Viking, King Canute, on the English thrown. Canute,
as has already been discussed in class, ruled a vast empire,
which was comprised of England, Norway, Sweden, and
Denmark. King Canute respected Saxon customs and its nobility
in England, and therefore, he changed nothing with regards to
English society and culture. Canute chose as his closest advisor
the most powerful Saxon noble, Godwin, Earl of Wessex.
Godwin’s power and influence became so insurmountable that
he became virtual co-ruler with Canute in England. Then, when
Canute Died in A.D. 1035, a power struggle ensued amongst the
nobility. Treachery, murder, and mutilation ran rampant
throughout the divided island. By the end of this bloody contest,
Prince Edward was the only survivor that had any claim to the
throne as a descendent of the once great Saxon, Alfred the
Great.
Edward, known as “The Confessor,” was crowned king on
Easter Day A.D. 1043. However, he did not possess absolute
power. Godwin still retained a lot of power and he did not want
to lose power to the newly crowned king. Edward hated Godwin
because Godwin had arranged the death of his older brother
during the tumultuous period after Canute’s death. However,
despite his position as king, Godwin’s influence was such that
there was little Edward could do in order to seek revenge on his

rival. Therefore an uneasy peace agreement was reached when
Godwin offered his daughter to Edward for marriage, and
Edward accepted.
Edward had grown up in Normandy and was not native to
England. Edward’s mother was Norman, and he had lived in
Normandy for 30 years before being crowned the English king.
Edward’s native language was Norman French, and his
godfathers were the formidable Dukes of Normandy. The
Normans themselves were decedents of Viking raiders that had
settled and learned how to ride horses into battle with uncanny
skill. Although the Norman Duchy did formal homage to the
king of France, they were very independent—they owned
fortified castles and were patrons of great churches, which
granted them considerable papal support. In time, a gent by the
name of William “the Conquer,” whichever title you prefer, was
born in A.D. 1027 in Normandy, and was the illegitimate son of
Duke Robert of Normandy. William was a child when his dad
died on a pilgrimage to the holy land, leaving William only 8
years of age as his heir. It is likely that Edward was a protector
of William in his young age. William would not have an easy
upbringing due to Norman nobles that had set their eyes on
becoming the Duke, which was William’s debatable title.
William survived assassination attempts, and saw his Stewart
murdered before his eyes at the tender age of 10. Edward must
have been astonished at how the boy grew into a formidable
man that was able to crush a league of rebellious nobles that
tried to rob William of the title of his duchy.
At any rate, back in England, while William was subduing his
vassals in Normandy, Edward seized upon an opportunity to rid
himself of the Earl of Wessex, the ever present and powerful
Godwin. Edward brought over Norman allies and established
them in castles and made one Archbishop of Canterbury.
Feeling that the time was ripe, he confronted Godwin with the
crime of his murdered brother and banished Godwin from the
country. However, Edward’s scheming failed miserably, for in
exile, Godwin was just as dangerous as he was back in England.

He assembled a fleet, sailed back to England, and reduced
Edward to being a puppet king, forcing Edward to turn to
religion. Through Edward’s new life of prayer and penance, he
earned the nick name “the confessor.” Edward’s marriage to
Godwin’s daughter was a shame, and he never slept with her,
thwarting Godwin’s plan to have his daughter’s son become
king. To establish an heir that would not please Godwin,
Edward secretly made a pact with the young Duke of Normandy,
William, though no one in England was aware of this. Then
Godwin in A.D. 1053 suddenly died of a stroke while at dinner
with the king. His eldest son, Harold Godwinson, took “the
Godfather” position over the Godwin family and possessions
and continued the power struggle with the king. Then Harold
Godwinson did something strange, and the historical account
diverges. The Norman version of event recorded in the Bayeux
Tapestry was that Harold sailed to Normandy as a messenger
affirming Edward’s choice of an heir, William the Duke of
Normandy. The Bayeux Tapestry is a 20 inch by 230 foot long
embroidered cloth that artfully chronicles the events
surrounding this time period. It was commissioned by William’s
half brother a few years after the successful Norman invasion of
England, and therefore, is less credible because of its intended
use as propaganda. The tapestry states that while sailing, a
storm blew Harold and his men ashore Normandy where they
were taken prisoner by William. William generously allowed
Harold to become part of his military entourage and they went
on campaign together. As a result, Harold becomes William’s
knight, which was a two way obligation: William was to protect
Harold, while Harold was to swear an oath of loyalty to the
Duke. Oaths were a religious and sacred act that functioned as
glue for binding social, economic, and political contracts. The
Normans believed that this meant that Harold was a vassal to
William and that William had a legitimate claim to the English
thrown when Edward the Confessor died. However, Harold’s
version of the story is quite different from the Norman version.
Harold’s story is that he sailed to Normandy to rescue his

brother from captivity, but then he was made captive by
William. Harold did swear allegiance to William, but only in
Normandy, not in England, which would have no bearing on the
English succession, or invalidate his claim to the English
thrown. At any rate, most historians believe that Harold did
swear some type of allegiance to William, but went about
securing the throne for himself upon his return to England. To
better secure the English thrown, Harold turned against one of
his brothers, Tostig, the Earl of Northumbria. Tostig had
provoked a northern rebellion against him and had created his
own army. The local nobles rebelled against him and put in
their own man to become earl. Harold was sent by King Edward
to sort out the mess and Harold was presented with two options:
to support his brother and risk a civil war, or forget blood ties
and support the nobles, gaining their support when he made his
bid for the thrown. Harold put ambition before brotherly love
because he would need the nobles to support him in his bid for
the kingship of England. He turned on his foolhardy brother,
and as a result, Tostig was banished from England. Tostig
becomes a mortal enemy of his older brother, Harold, and his
vendetta would cost both brothers their lives in the near future.
During this time of fraternal bickering within the Godwin
family, Edward the Confessor was old and dying. Miserably for
Harold, King Edward never officially designated him as his
heir. However, the king did reach out and touch him on his
death bed. Was this a sign of a king’s favor, or was it a divine
curse? Then, that very night, a comet streaked across the
English sky, and people took it as a sign—not a blessing but an
omen, the year was 1066. Harold Godwinson had no hesitation
that it was the king’s blessing, which was enough For Harold
and for the nobles who supported him to declare Harold King of
England. Therefore, on January 6th, 1066, the country saw the
funeral of one king in the morning and the coronation of another
in the afternoon. The newly crowned King Harold of England
knew what kind of reaction this might create in Normandy, but
had no prescience of the grim consequences. William, Duke of

Normandy, heard of Harold’s coronation while hunting. One of
his colleagues wrote: “When the duke heard the news, he came
as a man outraged. Often he tied his mantle, and often he untied
it again, and spoke to no man. Neither did any man dare speak
to him.” For ten years William had confidently let it be known
that England would be his when Edward died. He was in a
terrible position of looking ridiculous, and therefore, he
consulted his nobles in assemblies about the prospect of
invading England. However, his vassals believed the risk was
too high for the enticement of new lands and wealth, so William
looked for ecclesiastical support. William went to the pope for
support and received it. William was invested with the papal
banner and signet ring. Now, with the support of God’s vicar,
his vassal nobles flocked to support their Duke in this ‘holy’
adventure.
William the Conqueror’s invasion of England in 1066 began
with building boats from lumber. In honor of their Viking
ancestors, the Normans constructed 400 dragon-headed boats.
Loaded in the boats were shields, spears, horses, vast casks of
wine and ale, as well as bows. Across the English Channel,
Harold responded by organizing his military, which was
considerable. Harold had a large numbers of axe men that could
cut through both horse and man with one blow. However, his
men were only obligated to serve the king two months out of the
year. With amazing speed, Harold had his army in place along
the southern coast of England, daring William to come. About
the same time, William had his army in place and was eager to
cross the channel. However, William’s forces did not cross—
William was waiting for a good south to north wind to carry his
ships safely to England, but alas it never came. Harold waited
for William, who never came. After waiting for two months,
William’s Normans were nowhere to be seen. This was
particularly troubling for Harold because his men’s time of
service was running out. More troubling was that it was harvest
time, so men needed to be on their farms to collect food for the
winter. To neglect these duties would certainly spell famine. As

a result, Harold was forced to demobilize men and send them
home. Only 11 days after doing this, he was in for a nasty
surprise. Tostig, Harold’s ‘endeared’ and outcast brother had
returned to England. Tostig had been busy while in exile from
England: he had allied himself to the Norse King, Harold
Hardrada. Hardrada was simply the most feared warrior of the
age. Creative cruelty and super human strength were accredited
to him, and Hardrada also had a claim to the throne of England.
His family lineage went back to King Canute, and therefore, he
possessed a viable claim to the throne. Hardrada was not the
type of man to cower away from a fight, especially when the
prize was a crown. The Norse King and Tostig assembled an
army of about 12 thousand men mobilized by 300 ships and had
landed in Northumbria, Northern England. Tostig’s Vendetta
was at hand and his allied Norse army fought off the northern
earls and nobles and he took control of York. However, when
Tostig sent his army out of the city to collect hostages at
Stamford Bridge, he found his big brother bedecked in armor
and ready for a fight. Harold had travelled a hundred and eighty
seven miles while assembling his army in four days, travelling
about 37-45 miles a day to meet this new Viking threat. At the
end of the journey, Harold fought one of the bloodiest battles in
English history. Harold’s army broke the Norse line and
Hardrada was proven to be mortal when an arrow struck threw
his throat killed him instantly. In addition, Tostig was cut down
by Harold’s men. In an act of fraternal respect, Harold found his
dead brother and buried him at York Minister. The Norse army
was utterly defeated: only 24 ships returned to Norway to report
on their defeat and the death of their warrior king. However,
Harold had no time to exalt or grieve the death of his brother,
for news arrived just one day after Harold’s victory that
William’s winds had changed, and was sailing to the coast of
southern England.
As a result of William’s invasion, Harold had to double back his
entire army to the South of England. William was plundering
southern territories, burning everything that could not be

plundered, driving terror into the locals. In October 1066, the
two armies met at Hastings. The battle began with Harold’s
success: William’s cavalry on his left flank broke and ran;
however, Harold’s men were too inexperienced and broke rank
in order to pursue them. William was able to rally his horses by
personally taking charge and then his cavalry crashed into the
men who were foolish enough to pursue his horses—it was a
slaughter. All-in-all, the battle lasted for 6 hours, but William
exploited his archers and cavalry and wore Harold’s forces
down with interchangeable assaults. It is believed that Harold
died by an arrow to the eye and then was disemboweled with a
sword. Half the nobility of Saxon England perished at Hastings.
After winning the battle, William proceeded from town to town,
city to city subjugating them to his rule.
Due to his right of conquest, William was made the King of
England and was crowned on Christmas day 1066. His
coronation was a violent shamble more than a triumph, for when
the people shouted acclimations in honor of their new king,
William’s soldiers believed that a riot had started. They
responded by burning down every house in sight. Even the
abbey in which the ceremony was taking place was half empty
due to the smoke. At any rate, William was made king, and his
power in England resided on the bases of giving land, Saxon
land, to his Norman nobles. He and his Normans did not
assimilate into Anglo-Saxon culture as Canute once did.
Through campaigns of terror and through the construction of 90
castles throughout England, William was able to control about 2
million Saxons with about 25 thousand Normans. He
constructed churches to reinforce his alliance with the papacy
and made a survey of property. William gathered very accurate
records of every asset in England—especially land and animals,
which was useful for collecting taxes. This census and record
book became known as the “Doomsday Book” because its
decisions were said to be as final as the last judgment.
William’s lordship over England was carried out by brutal,
ruthless, and successful series of acts of aggression and cruelty.

However, William died an old man when he was thrown from
his horse. His body was left to desecration and robbery as his
heirs competed amongst each other for the English crown.
Henry II and the English Dynasty
After the death of William the Conqueror, civil wars were
fought in England for the chief job, the kingship. After this
period of instability, Henry II became a strong leader that
brought stability to England and started the first Dynasty. Henry
the II should be known like figures such as Queen Elizabeth, or
King Henry the VIII, Charles V, or Oliver Cromwell; however,
no great statue of him, like Richard the Lion heart, remains
even though he was the foundation of English history. The
dynasty he establishes is called the “Angevin dynasty” because
of the French territories of Anjou that he controlled. At the
height of Henry’s power he owned vast tracks of land in France,
about ½ of France. These territories included Normandy,
Brittany, Anjou, and Aquitaine. His mother, the Empress
Matilda, was a daughter of Henry I, son of William, making
Henry II a great grandson of William the Conqueror and son of
the prince of Anjou, Geoffrey V. Matilda was trying to place
Henry on the throne of England against a competing cousin.
Empress Matilda and Geoffrey V wanted Henry II to become a
king Arthur figure in England, which would mean taking the
crown, from Stephen, a grandson of William and cousin to
Matilda. This became a civil war between Matilda and Stephen
with neither gaining a military advantage. So by marrying
Geoffrey of Anjou, Matilda’s plan was to breed Stephen out and
place her son on the throne. Henry II was an ideal king; he was
a hard man, had a temper, possessed a quick intellect capable of
political decisions, he was charming, and had lots of energy.
Matilda knew that she would have to marry him well. Therefore
she arranged for Henry II to marry the Lady of Aquitaine,
Eleanor in A.D. 1152. Henry was 19, while Eleanor was 30
years old. She was much more politically experienced then him,
and she had already been married to the king of France, Louis

VII. Surprisingly, and as unlikely as one might think, Henry II
and Eleanor actually fancied each other—a rare union of both
political and love interests. By his marriage to her, he gained
the land of Aquitaine which was a territory in France of great
wealth. In 1153, Henry crossed the English Channel to invade
England. Stephen caved in after his nobles and barons
abandoned him. They struck a deal: Stephen would be allowed
to stay on the throne, but Henry II would be his heir. Henry
would not have long to wait, for Stephen died within a year
after the bargain.
King Henry II of England and his wife, Eleanor, were crowned
as king and queen, and it was a time of prosperity in the middle
ages. Monasteries were thriving, as well as learning and
education. Henry II’s political success stemmed from the fact
that he did not treat his realm like an empire. Each territory was
treated in accordance with its customs. In addition, Henry took
the following responsibilities seriously: 1. Protect the church, 2.
Protect the lands of your ancestors, 3. Do justice, and 4.
Suppress evil laws and customs. Before Henry’s rule, a king had
to physically preside over the various obligations he had as a
ruler. However, by the end of his reign, the king did not have to
be present for his justice to be carried out. Henry II had
instituted judges, permanent and professional courts, as well as
courts that toured the countryside to adjudicate local disputes.
Although he was very successful in delegating responsibilities
to competent officials, the responsibility of being the protector
of the Church would give him the greatest grief. Religious
conflict would turn into an open civil war of sorts and would
end with blood in the cathedral.
The Church was a huge administrative center that had taught
Henry how to govern—it was the institution of the Church that
was the bastion of learning at the time. The Archbishopric of
Canterbury offered the churches’ top protégée to Henry for
election to chancellor, and Henry II accepted the nomination.
The new chancellor of England’s name was Thomas Becket.
Becket was the first commoner to make a large mark on English

history. He was a merchant’s son and became the king’s best
friend. Initially, Becket reveled in his new position of wealth
and power; he liked to get and spend money, to eat the finest
food and drink the finest wines. Becket was tall and self-
contained, but he began to treat the king as his equal, which
would have catastrophic consequences. When the Bishop of
Canterbury died and that position became vacant, Henry
believed it prudent to place his friend, Becket, in the position.
In Henry II’s mind, Becket’s worldliness and loyalty qualified
him for this position because the King needed an ally against
intrusions from the Pope. Becket was seen as the perfect
candidate to become a bishop that could put the Church in its
place beneath the authority of the king. Henry II perceived the
authority of his power above the authority of the Popes and
believed that he was appointed by God to rule. However, the
Popes saw it differently; they believed kings were appointed by
Popes, and only Popes were appointed by God. Some of the
ecclesiastical difficulties Henry II was facing were: 1. could
law breaking clergymen be judged by secular judges, the king?
Or was it an ecclesiastical manner, where only the Pope’s
decision mattered. 2. Could bishops excommunicate royal
officials? 3. Who was responsible for investing bishop’s with
their power, kings or popes? This was an issue of lay
investiture. By making Becket Archbishop of Canterbury, Henry
II would have a powerful ally against the Church in making the
Church subordinate to the state, or would he?
St. Thomas Becket was made Archbishop of Canterbury against
his will, and initially nothing about his lifestyle had changed.
He conducted lavish banquets and seemed to be his usual self.
However, the king began to see some changes in Becket’s
conduct. Becket had stood up publically, and in a militant tone,
opposed a tax Henry was trying to pass on the Church. Henry
went ballistic because he believed that his friendship had been
betrayed. Then Becket began wearing a hair shirt and underwear
made of goat’s hair. These types of garments were known for
lice dwelling within them and were very uncomfortable to wear.

Hair shirts were designed for monks that sought to mortify the
flesh, thereby exalting one’s soul. Then in A.D. 1164, Henry
assembled a council of the most important nobles of the realm
to solidify his control over the clergy. Becket urged his bishops
to oppose this and Becket refused the king’s demands, ordering
total resistance from the clergy. Becket was brought to trial,
accused of improper use of funds during his term as chancellor.
All of those nights drinking, eating, and spending lavishly came
back to haunt the now humbled bishop. However, Becket,
dignified in his bishop’s robe and with a large silver cross,
travelled to his trial. His arch rival, the bishop of London, tried
to wrestle the staff away from him, but Becket’s grip was iron
tight. The trial ended with Becket storming out, convicted of all
charges. He fled on the nearest horse and he sailed to the
Flemish coast with die-hard followers. Henry II took actions
against the followers of Becket back in England by threatening
deportation if they spoke a good word about the bishop. Then
after several years of diplomacy in exile, talks were arranged
between Becket and Henry. During their reunion, the King and
the bishop were reconciled as friends and Becket was restored
to his authority and position. In addition to this, it was agreed
that all of Becket’s enemies were to become the king’s enemies
as well. After Henry II had announced all this publically, he
asked Becket to ride with his court for awhile, but Becket
declined. Although the king forgave those that took Becket’s
side during the controversy, Becket did not forgive the people
who stayed loyal to the king. For whatever reason, Becket had
problems meeting the king half way and letting bygones be
bygones. Therefore, in order to make a long story short, the
king and the bishop have another falling out. One last meeting
is arranged for the old friends and bitterest of enemies. The two,
Henry and Becket, meet by a river and the king claimed that
only if Becket would do what he told him to do, he would have
entrusted Becket with everything he had. Becket did not
respond, and the king sadly dismissed himself and walked away,
making a comment about seeing him next time. Becket

responded that the next time they would see each other would
be in the afterlife. This made the king very angry, and they
departed in hostility.
Thomas Becket travelled from this meeting back to Canterbury
and he walked to the church barefoot, followed by throngs of
the poor and his supporters. Becket excommunicated all those
who had remained loyal to the king and fought against him. The
excommunicated bishops gathered at the king’s court and filled
the king’s ears with reports on Becket’s infidelity. As a result,
King Henry II unofficially ordered Becket’s death, accusing
Becket as a traitor to the state. In A.D. 1170, December the
29th, 4 knights busted into the church and ordered Becket to go
to Westminster to give an account of his conduct, but Becket
refused. Becket went into the cathedral, where he received fatal
sword wounds to the head. Due to the outrage of the people,
Henry II was forced to make a pilgrimage to Becket’s tomb. The
king walked the last 50 miles barefoot wearing a hair shirt and
was wiped by monks at the tomb. Henry would rule for another
20 years.
In addition to Henry’s tumultuous relationship with
ecclesiastical authorities, He had larger troubles with the
supreme authority—his wife. King Henry II’s marriage to
Eleanor of Aquitaine was initially well to do, but through a
string of mistresses that Henry flaunted, the embers of love
began to smolder out. Eleanor felt betrayed and alienated by her
husband’s mistresses, and most significantly, their presence
publically embarrassed her. She was a very powerful woman
and not one that could be insulted casually. She turned her
considerable energy and intellect toward getting revenge against
her husband through their children. Eleanor sedulously
convinced their sons—Henry, Geoffrey, Richard, and John—that
their father was robbing them of the rightful power, dignity, and
inheritance. Young Henry was officially next in line for the
kingship of England, but had to get pocket money from his
father. This apparent dishonor his father had showed him led
Henry to rebel against his father. The rebellion would not last

long because young Henry died of dysentery. Eleanor must have
been very distraught, especially when her next son, Geoffrey,
was trampled to death by a horse. Then, due to John’s affiliation
with the king, she pinned her hopes on Richard—she was not
disappointed. Richard was physically brave and ambitious,
whereas John was vindictive, clever, and self serving. Henry II
saw John as his legitimate heir, and Eleanor constantly
antagonized and baited Richard by that fact. Then, when
Richard was prepared to take his father to war, she craftily
forged an alliance between Richard and the king of France,
Philip II Augustus. In A.D. 1189, Richard declared war against
his father in order to rightfully rule England not as the heir to a
king, but as a conqueror. The war did not go well for Henry II
because some of his Barons defected to Richard’s side, and
John, Henry II’s favorite for the crown, had done so too. In the
end, Henry made peace with his son, and terms were agreed to
that humbled him before his son. Henry II died two days after
the peace and Richard become the King of England.
King Richard’s coronation was a huge spectacle. No one
mourned his father—they were too busy drinking and feasting
for Richard’s coronation. Richard decked himself out in gold,
and then, when a group of Jews gave Richard a gift that others
interpreted as an omen, the Jews were massacred. Indeed,
Richard’s scribes first used the word “holocaust” to describe
what had happened to the Jews in England. Richard actually
spent less time in England than any other English monarch
simply due to the 3rd Crusade. In his absence, his brother John
set himself up as a rival with his own court and mercenary
army. When Richard was captured in Germany, John declared
his brother dead and himself as king of England. Richard would
be ransomed from captivity, leaving England bankrupt.
However, while fighting in England to take power from John,
Richard was killed by an arrow. Hence, John becomes the next
king of England, but he was a terrible politician. Through
various military and economic blunders, King John finds
himself signing Magna Carta, which was a list of abuses the

king could not do to the nobility. From that point forward, the
law was not defined by a king’s whim, which would have
profound consequences for the future of England.
Edward I “the Leopard Prince” and the Wars of the British Isles
Between the years 1250-1300, the nations around Britain would
fight against English dominion. Various voices echo of the
discontent at the prospect of English dominion. A proclamation
drawn up in the Welsh kingdom of Gwynedd stated, “The
people…assert that even if their prince should give overlord-
ship to the English king, they would refuse to do homage to any
foreigner, whose language, customs and laws they were
ignorant.” An Irish proclamation: “On account of the endless
perfidy of the English, and to recover our native freedom, the
Irish are compelled to enter a deadly war.” And Scottish barons:
“For as long as but 100 of us remain alive we will yield no least
way to English dominion. We fight not for glory, nor riches, nor
honor, but for freedom.” The bloody wars of the British nations
were not just battles about territories, but of ideas: What does a
sovereign nation look like? Is it an extension of the ruler’s will?
How much does it involve the people? These wars, fought to
suit the aspirations of an English Empire, were fights to the
death between princes and of principles.
The story begins with Henry III’s son, the Leopard Prince
Edward I, the Caesar of Britain. His enemies compared him to a
large cat predator: “Perhaps he will rightly be called a leopard;
Leo, brave, proud and fierce, wily, devious, and treacherous.”
Edward I’s tomb was opened in 1774 by antiquarians who were
curious about his fearsome reputation. On his tomb is written,
“HICK EST MALLEUS SCOTTORUM,” which translates to
“Here Lies the Hammer of the Scots.” His corps was bedecked
in the purple robe used by ancient Roman emperors, and at 6
feet 2 inches, a large height at the time, he well lived up to his
appellation: “Long Shanks.” Edward I saw it as England’s
imperial mission to bring his rule to the four corners of the
British Isles; his endless ambition was responsible for

provoking the peoples of Britain into a firm awareness of their
nationhood.
Henry III, Edward’s father, named Edward after “the confessor”
because Henry had a lot of respect for his memory. Indeed,
Henry had built a shrine to the 200 year old dead king, and had
built a home for this shrine—Westminster Abbey. Westminster
was/is an immense gothic structure and an awe inspiring vision
of the English monarchy. In years to come, the abbey would
become a place where all English monarchs are crowned and
buried. Henry III reigned for 56 years after inheriting his throne
from his father, King John—the same John that signed Magna
Carta—at the age of 9. Henry III desired to turn the monarchy
into England’s dominate power, and desired to restore his
territories in France lost by his blundering father. It would be a
long and difficult fight that would only serve to limit the power
of kings in England. In A.D. 1258 at Oxford, a council became
the dominant political body due to its support by the nobility. In
particular, Simon De Montfort drastically diminished the
Monarchy’s power and was the De Facto leader of the country.
Essentially, the council had eliminated the structure of
government instituted by William the Conquer—absolute
monarchy. For a while, Henry accepted it because he could not
do anything about it, and he bided his time. This was wise, for
after a period of time, and after controversial issues being
raised in the council, the preliminary republic became divided
against itself. The council agreed that the king ought to be
answerable to the barons, but they disagreed about whether the
barons themselves ought to be responsible to their lesser, the
people? The nobles thought “No,” while De Montfort thought
“Yes.” But how did young, 19 year old Prince Edward think of
these events? Edward was amazed by Simon’s powerful
personality and he, like his father, was forced to abide Simon’s
authority. Simon was indeed a formidable foe, when he went
anywhere he had a personal escort of 160 knights—far more
than that of the king and his son combined. However, as
divisions grew within the nobility, the leopard prince began

sharpening his claws. As his father’s heir, the outcome of a war
fought between the nobles and the monarchy would directly
affect his power when his time came to be king. The dispute as
to who would rule England settled on Simon and Edward;
neither could prevail without the other’s total defeat. For 5
years Henry and Edward maneuvered against Simon for power,
but the issue, in the end, could only be decided through battle.
For the first time since the Norman Conquest the political fate
of the country was at stake, would England be a republic or a
monarchy?
In A.D. 1264, De Montfort won the first round in the conflict at
the battle of Lewes in Sussex. Although Anglo-Irish and
Scotsmen—even Robert the Bruce himself—fought on the
behalf of Henry III and Edward I, the battle was a disaster for
the royalist, and Edward was taken prisoner. This event was the
closest that England came to being a republic, and it would not
come any closer until Oliver Cromwell’s victory over King
Charles. However, the knights, barons, and lesser princes had
trouble determining the fate of the prince and the king, for what
authority could pass judgment over the supreme authority in the
land? A governing council was set up, but soon the council
began to take on the attributes of a dictatorship under De
Montfort. Simon, although a pious and people oriented ruler,
was not the messianic reformer the people had hoped for and
appeared as a vainglorious replacement for the king. He began
to repel more people than he attracted. Meanwhile, Edward
outwitted his captors and made a dashing escape on horseback
away from the clutches of De Montfort. Edward met with nobles
who were royalists and assembled an army and met De Montfort
in battle. It was a slaughter. After he was told that his son had
been killed, Simon replied, “then, it is time to die!” and he
charged into the fray and was cut down in a brutal manner.
Edward ignored the rules of war; the wounded were stabbed
where they lay, and Simon’s head, hands, feet, and testicles
where cut off. After the battle, it took about 2 years for Edward
to lay siege to important castles and consolidate power back to

the monarchy. His success was solidified due to his policy of
making the barons not enemies, but allies with common
interests.
In A.D. 1274 Edward I was crowned as king of England in
Westminster Abbey. Edward wanted Westminster to be the
center of not just England, but the whole of the British Isles. He
first turned his attention to Wales. The dominate prince there
was Llywelyn Gruffydd (Griffith) and his mountainous kingdom
of Gwynedd (Gwenith). Griffith had campaigned successfully
during the wars between Simon and Edward in order to gain
territory and power for himself in Wales. In addition, he was a
supporter of De Montfort and went as far as marrying his
daughter to solidify their bond against the monarchy in
England. Edward was not likely to forgive, or forget, this
offense. Griffith was recognized as the Prince of Wales by
Henry III; however, Griffith failed to show up to Edward’s
Coronation and ignored five summonses to pay homage to the
new king. Edward knew the connection between ceremonies and
power and he immediately took Griffith’s actions, or lack
thereof, as open rebellion. As a result, in A.D. 1276 Edward I
amassed a huge army, the largest seen in England since the
Norman Conquest. The geography of Wales is characterized by
difficult terrain, but Edward managed to successfully invade
Wales and make Griffith pay homage. The war was
characterized by the construction of large castles to solidify
English power and to deprive the Welsh of any hope of support
from the sea. Then in A.D. 1282, a popular rebellion took place
and the war was renewed. No quarter was given by either side—
it was a very brutal and savage war. The Welsh used guerrilla
tactics, but then in a skirmish, Griffith was killed, and the
Welsh held out for another 6 months before Wales was
completely “pacified.” In 1301, the English prince and heir
inherited the title “the Prince of Wales,” making the title
English rather than Welsh. The Welsh were now 2nd class
citizens in their own country. The war in Wales and the
expensive castle building projects landed Edward some money

troubles. The war had cost 10 times more than the king’s annual
income. At the time, Jews were the major source of money
lending. Therefore, Edward I owed the Jews vast amounts of
money. He had bleed them dry, borrowing all their money,
leaving them nothing left to yield, and therefore, valueless and
dispensable. Edward ruthlessly solved his debt problems
through Church law. In an act of “piety” he outlawed money
lending, putting the Jews out of their money and out of
business. He forced them to wear yellow badges of
identification and arrested all the heads of Jewish households,
300 Jews were hung in the tower of London. Then He expelled
the entire community in 1290. This was so popular an act with
the Church that its authorities awarded Edward a large tax
grant. The exportation boats were not a pleasant trip for the
Jews and could be quite hazardous. For instance, one captain
had the Jews on his ship stretch their legs off the ship at a sand
bar/island created by the low tide, however, the captain left
them there, the tide came in, and they all drowned. During this
time of the expulsion of the Jews, Edward’s Queen, Eleanor of
Castile, died. This event left Edward, a usually stern and austere
man, to be overwhelmed with grief. He built monuments in her
honor, which consisted of 12 crosses to mark the way to hear
tomb. Despite this, Eleanor’s death solidified Edward’s
marriage to his imperial plans for the British Isles.
Edward first became interested in Scotland due to “The Great
Cause,” the competition for the crown of Scotland. The
relationship between Scotland and England before this time can
be characterized as harmonious. In 1278 the King of Scotland,
Alexander III, paid homage to Edward, but only for lands that
were Edward’s, Scotland was free and sovereign. Even during
the royalist war against De Montfort, Scotland had supported
Henry III and Edward. However, problems arose in 1290 due to
Alexander’s heirs dying off in the 1280s. When in 1286
Alexander died himself, his only heir was a three year old
granddaughter, Margaret. A treaty was signed that Margaret
would marry Edward’s son, who was 1 year of age, and that

Scotland would maintain its sovereignty. However, when
Margaret sailed to Scotland from Norway, she fell ill and died,
leaving Scotland’s nobles in an atmosphere of competition for
the top position. With nobles lining up to contest for the
position, there had to be someone that could judge which one
was the most fitting, and Edward, all too willingly, took this
position as an adjudicator. The two wealthiest noble houses, the
Bruces and the Balliols, contested each other’s claims and their
bickering threatened Scotland with civil war. Edward came
north to adjudicate between the two families and to settle the
dispute. Edward made it clear that whoever would be elected
king would be under his suzerainty, which was the price for his
blessing—the bent knee, the kiss to the ring, the obedient
sword. All contenders for the Scottish crown paid homage to
Edward, but the other lesser Scottish nobles did not. Then, in
the end, John Balliol’s claim to the Scottish crown ruled out, he
received the blessing of Edward, and he was made king of the
Scots. Although John Balliol acknowledged Edward as a vassal
lord, he did not take orders from him. When a French invasion
on the English mainland coincided with another Welsh
rebellion, Edward decided to exercise his suzerainty over
Scotland and he asked Scottish nobles to fight for him. They
refused, and then signed a formal treaty and an alliance with the
French. To Edward, this was an act worthy of Marcus Junius
Brutus or Judas Iscariot—it was a stab in the back, an act of
treacherous rebellion, a declaration of war.
In preparation for the invasion of Scotland, Edward assembled
an army that dwarfed the one he assembled against the Welsh in
1296. From the onset, this was to be a war of attrition. The
Scottish city of Berwick, a large and wealthy port city, would
be the first to know Edward’s wrath. The city fell in a matter of
hours, but the massacre that followed lasted for days. A
Scotsman wrote: “The king of England spared no one. Whatever
the age or sex, and for two days streams of blood flowed from
the bodies of the slain so that mills could be turned round by its
flow.” Then at the battle of Dunbar, the Scot’s army was swept

aside by the “Hammer of the Scots.” Balliol’s coat of arms was
stripped from him and the Scottish government was taken over
by English officials. Just as Welsh independence and it relics
were taken to Westminster, so now the Scottish’s “Stone of
Scone,” a symbol of the independent Scottish crown on which
every Scottish king was crowned, was removed to Westminster.
A new English coronation chair was designed to hold it. When
Edward was given the broken Scottish royal seal, Edward
commented, “A man does good business when he rids himself of
a turd.” In the end, all the Scottish nobles gave in and paid
homage to Edward, all but the Wallace family.
William Wallace was the son of Malcolm Wallace and their
story is an inspiration for any and all freedom fighters. Wallace
remained loyal to King John Balliol and never gave homage to
Edward. However, William was not the only Scot to take up
arms against the English. A man by the name of Andrew Moray
led gorilla strikes and liberated northern Scotland from English
rule. At the same time, Wallace led his band of men to liberate
the south of Scotland. The two men met each other and joined
forces at Sterling, a key strategic point that opened, or closed,
Scotland for invasion by the English in southern Scotland. The
battle between the Scots and the English at Sterling does not at
all resemble the battle that takes place in the popular movie
Brave-heart—that battle more nearly mirrors a later battle
between Edward’s son, Edward II, and Robert the Bruce (the
battle of Bannockburn). At Sterling, the Scots gathered at the
Sterling Bridge and Wallace broke the conventions of war. He
did not allow the entire English army to move across the bridge
before he began his assault. Therefore half of the English army
was forced to engage the entirety of the Scottish army while the
other half struggled to cross the bridge. The Scots used terror
tactics in fighting the English, and they skinned a fat English
tax collector, and from his flesh made a belt for Wallace’s
sword. At any rate, Wallace used this victory as a launching
point for an invasion of England itself. It was quite
unsuccessful. At the battle of Falkirk, King Edward himself

decided to personally take command of the English army.
Edward’s superior numbers, knights, and archers won the day
for the English. Thousands of Scots died, but Wallace was able
to escape capture and would do so for many years until at last
he was betrayed, perhaps by the Bruce, and was given over to
Edward. Edward gave Wallace a mock trial, and the king’s rage
devised one of the most grueling deaths—alive
disembowelment. Despite the loss at Falkirk, the Scots
continued to fight for Freedom.
For 6 years the Scots fought a hard war with England for
independence. The war was characterized by murderous siege
warfare; at one castle in South West Scotland, Edward took it
and left all the defenders hang from the walls. Edward
proceeded to burn the Scottish Westminster to the ground and
he took Sterling castle, revenging the loss he faced there at the
hands of the deceased Wallace. This was a symbolic victory that
took the fight out of the Scots, and in 1304 they surrendered to
Edward. However this would prove to be the calm before the
storm. The Bruce, “the Lion of Scotland,” had other ideas than
submission to England. Robert the Bruce was very much like
Edward in many respects. He was ruthless and was not inhibited
by the rules of war. He stabbed his main rival, John Comyn, to
death in order to gain power in Scotland. The murder was not
explained or justified; John was still loyal to Balliol and had to
be removed. After 6 days after the murder, he had himself
inaugurated as king of Scotland. His coronation did not unify
Scotland, but rather, put it on the edge of a civil war. Indeed,
the situation escalated and he had to flee Scotland. Legend has
it that he stayed in a cave, where he learned patience from a
spider. Whatever the case, Robert was transformed from being a
noble, to a brutal gorilla captain. 4 months after his exile,
Robert returned and began attacking his Scottish and English
foes alike. He consolidated power in Scotland and his main
victory over Edward was that he simply outlived him. On a
campaign against the Bruce, Edward died in 1307. Edward I had
always feared for his son, Edward II, to ever have to met Robert

in battle; Edward II was a real loser, and Edward I knew it.
After Edward I’s death, by 1314 Robert had regained his
kingdom, and Edward II finally responded by marching north to
meet Robert’s army. At the Battle of Bannockburn 1314, a 2 day
affair, Robert the Bruce was caught by an English knight alone
and away from his men—Robert cleaved the English knight’s
head in two with an axe as the two charged at each other. That
encounter reflected the larger battle; Scottish spearmen defeated
the English knights and it was the worst English defeat since the
battle of Hastings in 1066. Edward II fled the field with 500
knights and his army that he left behind him was routed and cut
down. With this victory, the Scots sought international
recognition of sovereignty by the Church. With the Declaration
of Abroath, Pope John XXII recognized Scottish Independence.
Robert the Bruce becomes king of Scotland, not just a warlord,
but as a war hero and patron to the people.
Edward II’s rule and life was a great shamble. Not only did he
get spanked by the Bruce in Scotland, losing his father’s
territories there for good, but his own wife would be his
complete undoing. He was married to a French princess because
after a war fought between his father and Philip IV of France,
the two parties agreed to marry their offspring as a peace
treaty–Edward II and Isabella. Isabella was young and
extremely attractive, but Edward II had little use for her
charms—he was certainly a rampant homosexual. He neglected
his wife and the nobles to give gifts upon his “royal favorites.”
First of these was Piers Gaveston, who would be executed by
the nobles in 1312. Second was Hugh Despenser, who had a
firm hold upon the king (interpret that however you like) for
many years until Edward lost his crown to his son and wife.
When a dispute arose between England and France, Edward sent
his wife and son to settle the matter. However, Isabella quickly
took up with her lover, Roger Mortimer, and they invaded
England together. The English nobles were so disgusted by their
king that they abandoned him; as a result, Isabella and Roger
won a decisive battle between their forces and Edward’s. They

killed Hugh Despenser and forced Edward to abdicate the throne
to his son by Isabella—Edward III. It is believed that Edward
was killed by his wife—the legend is that he died after having a
hot iron shoved threw his rectum. This was a very significant
event for English history because it demonstrates that England’s
kings could be removed if they failed their obligations, and
because the rule of Edward III would set England and France on
the path to war for the next 100 years.
The Hundred Years War and the Plague
Edward III’s reign marked the beginning of the 100 Years War.
His character was more like Edward I rather than the II and he
would rule England for 50 years (1327-1377). Due to his
mother’s, Isabella’s, blood, Edward III was the nephew of the
King of France. When the King of France, Philip IV, and his
three sons died, Edward III possessed a legitimate claim to his
uncle’s French throne. However legitimate it was, the French
nobility did not recognize the King of England as the King of
France. A council of barons declared Salic law—a very old and
customary Frankish law—that prohibited succession through
women, but only through men. Therefore, Edward’s claim to the
French throne through his mother’s blood was declared invalid.
The French elected Philip VI, a person of distant lineage to the
deceased king, as King of France. However, in 1337, Edward
declared himself to be the rightful King of France, and thus
began the Hundred Years War (1337-1453). Although the
French had superior forces and numbers, the English had a new
weapon—the long bow. It would be through the use of the
English long bow that England took the upper-hand in the war.
With this new weapon, archers could kill knights with ease—the
deadly Frankish charge was then obsolete. At the battle of
Crecy and at the battle of Poitiers (1356), larger French armies
were cut down by the long bow, and the French King, John II
(1350-1364) was captured. An attempt to ransom him was made
by the French, but they could not raise the money to buy his

freedom, he died in captivity. The new king of France, Charles
V (1364-1380), began rebuilding French forces and making
alliances. Under his reign, the war would go badly now for the
English. In addition to the resourcefulness of Charles V of
France, England suffered from dynastic problems at this time—
there were too many heirs. Edward III was a busy man and had
12 children. To make a long story short, in A.D. 1377 Edward
III died, and then after some civil contests for the throne,
Richard II was left as Edward III’s heir. Throughout his reign,
he faced many tribulations—plague and parliament.
During the Hundred Years War, England faced other troubles at
home, king death. In largely crowded cities, like Bristol,
London, and York, vermin and flees lived side by side with
humans. A flee bite was therefore quite a common annoyance in
such cities at this time, and there was no reason to suppose that
this was the reason for the plague. With regards to the plague,
the greater and larger the city, the greater the shock and effects
of the plague. In A.D. 1348, London’s population was about
100,000 and in the first wave of the plague, 300 people died
every day. There have been found huge mass burial sites in
England, which denotes the shear devastation that this plague
caused. With such a large population dying off, England faced
serious social and economic changes. One of the effects of the
plague was that the people who survived were getting rich. For
instance, as tragic as it would be, how much money or land
could you stand to inherit if all, or most, of your relatives died
right now? Young workers found themselves rich due to the vast
inheritances. In addition, there was uncanny social mobility
taking place. With fewer workers left alive, the job market
became very lucrative because wages went sky high. The annual
harvest became twice as expensive to produce and all this
money was going to the workers. Due to the great demand for
labor and there not being adequate supply, the average layman
had more social and economic power because they could simply
quit a job if they were not being paid well or if they were
treated poorly. The countryside after the Black Death was

totally transformed; there were no more serfs. The laborers were
no longer tied to the land, and could move from job to job in
order to get the best wage. Therefore, it was the law of supply
and demand that enabled workers to negotiate terms and change
their social and economic situation. Another effect that the
plague had was on the Church. The effects of the plague not
only eroded away the power of nobles and great land owners,
but also of the power of the Church and its ability to provide
comfort to people. The Church was powerless to heal and
provide help for the afflicted, or even for itself. Due to the
sheer number of deaths, laymen were invested with the powers
to administer confession—to hear the confession of the dyeing.
Priests themselves were not numerically equipped to administer
to the needs of the infected, and many, due to the high mortality
rate of priests that attended to the sick, abandoned their duties.
People began to seek redemption from the scriptures without
priests, or without even going to mass. A particular group, the
“Lollards,” named in honor of their reputation for mumbling
scripture, was such a group. John Wycliffe was the leader and
functioned as a translator, reformer, and theologian for the
group. Wycliffe translated the Bible into English from the
obscurity of Latin, making it more readable to a larger
audience. This was a dramatic threat to the authority of the
Church because now people might interpret the Scripture
differently from Orthodox tradition. The Lollards were
supported by the duke of Lancaster, the son of Edward III, John
of Gaunt. Although Richard II succeeded his grandfather,
Edward III, and had survived the political fallout after his
grandfather’s death, he was a boy king that ruled in name only;
john of Gaunt was the most powerful man in England. The
English government (the nobles) was trying to stabilize the
social “crisis,” seeking to usher back in the pre-plague norms;
however, too much had changed during the plague years for this
reversion to be non-violent. The Peasant’s Revolt was started by
village elite’s responding to the oppression of the old nobility.
New people were in high positions due to inheritance and were

not going to allow the nobility to revert the country back to pre-
plague conditions. Without a doubt, it was a class war for the
people did not want to see their gains snatched away by the
government’s elite. Tax collectors and sheriff’s men were
attacked, and some were killed. It was an outright rebellion
against the ruling class. In 1381 John Ball became the leader of
the Peasant’s Revolt. He was a preaching friar, and a Lollard,
who pushed Black Death radicalism to an extreme. He saw it as
his duty to bring about God’s social design—to get rid of
property owners and bishops. He wanted pure and complete
social equality: “Are we not descendant from the same parents,
Adam and Eve, and what reason can they give why they should
be more masters than ourselves. They are clothed in riches
while we are forced to wear poor clothing, they have wines and
fine spices and good bread while we have only rye and when we
drink it is only water. We are called slaves, and if we do not
perform our services we are beaten.” The peasants were not a
disorganized rabble; they chose targets such as rich villas and
believed themselves to be on the king’s side, even though they
had been outlawed. They believed that they were not against the
king, but convinced themselves that their mission was to rescue
the king and themselves from the rule of Barons. However,
when they came across big cities, and took them, discipline
broke down. Churches were looted, palaces burnt down,
prisoners freed, merchants were beheaded, and the Archbishop
of Canterbury was captured and his head was hacked off, and
then paraded around the streets. Richard II met the rebels at
Smith Field and the Leaders of the Peasant’s Revolt asked the
king for a new Magna Carta—that the king abolish serfdom,
liquidate the assets of the Church, pardon all outlaws, and that
everyman below the level of the king would be equal. Richard
cajolingly said “yes,” but then one of his men killed the leader
and Richard charged at the peasant rebels and yelled: “You
shall have no captain, but me!” This event assuaged the crisis
and allowed the king time enough to mobilize armed men. With
an army, he was successful in intimidating the leaderless band

into submission.
After dealing with the Peasant’s Revolt, Richard II (1377-1399)
set about making his office the supreme authority in England.
He stressed the divine right of kings to rule; He even went to
lengths to portray himself as appointed by the Virgin Mary and
Child through art. However, the nobles and barons become
disenfranchised and organized what would be called the
merciless parliament. This parliament sentenced many of the
king’s advisors to death for abusing power over the king in his
young age. Richard failed to take action and was swayed into
temperance by his wife, staying dormant for 10 years until after
his wife died. Richard sentenced to death all the ring leaders of
the merciless parliament and he began to like the idea of the
nobles fearing him. Therefore, he spontaneously banished
nobles in order to intimidate them. One of the nobles he
banished and took over his estates without even a trial, which
made the other barons and nobles fear for their own lands. They
perceived this, not as much as an act of injustice, but as a threat
to their power, for who was to say who would be next? Then,
when Richard mistakenly took a small army to Ireland with not
enough soldiers to Quell the Irish, but enough to leave him
venerable at home, the alienated English nobles rose up against
Richard. Richard had his crown snatched away and he became a
prisoner in the Tower of London. The king was forced to
renounce his throne and it is believed that he was starved to
death in prison. Quite understandably, the English objective in
the Hundred Years War suffered from Richard’s problems at
home. King Henry IV was put up as Richard II’s heir, but he did
little to further England’s claim to French soil, and was a weak
king due to the growing power of parliament.
Henry V (1413-1422) succeeded his father and he took a much
more active role in pressing English rights in France. He
believed he was appointed by God to be King of France.
Therefore, he began a major offensive in France during a time
of division because the French king went in and out of sanity.
Civil wars broke out in France and Henry seized upon this,

making alliances with various factions within France. Henry V
became famous for his victory at the battle of Agincourt. As a
result, he signed a treaty with Charles VI of France—the Treaty
of Troyes (A.D. 1420). Henry V becomes regent for the old
French king, and Henry married Charles’ daughter, Catherine.
Their Children would rule France and England. They had a son
the following year, but he died in A.D. 1422, leaving his new
one year old son as the potential king of England and France.
The war seemed to be at an end with a favorable outcome for
the English; however, the English were not able to take the city
of Orleans in A.D. 1429. Joan of Arc, a peasant girl, was able to
rally French resistance and was able to convince the dauphin,
the title for the Prince of France, to help lift the siege. More
and more towns and cities fell to the French as they rallied
behind the peasant girl. A few months later, the dauphin was
crowned in Rheims as Charles VII. The following year, Joan
was captured by Burgundians and she was given over to the
English. She was put on trial and burned as a witch in A.D.
1431. Despite her death, the tide had shifted in France; in A.D.
1435, the duke of Burgundy made peace with Charles VII. From
there, the French took Normandy and Gascony and a final peace
was made in 1453, leaving England Calais.
Henry the VI, the successor of Henry V, had a disorganized and
weak rule, which was dominated by the War of the Roses. This
was a contest between the families of Lancaster and York, who
fought for the crown. The Lancaster’s won out, and founded the
Tudor dynasty under King Henry VII of England, the father of
King Henry VIII.

Chapter Case Study
COCA-COLA: A H ISTORY AN D A FUTURE1
Visit virtually any restaurant, fast-food joint, or convenience
store around the
world, and the odds are that you will hear someone ask for a
“Coke.” Even if
the product made by the Coca-Cola Corporation is not readily
available, the term
“Coke” has become shorthand for virtually any dark-colored
carbonated bever-
age. The consumer may really end up drinking a Pepsi, or a
Thums Up, or Parsi
Cola, depending on where he or she is ordering, but few servers
would correct a
patron who asks for Coca-Cola. It takes a special product to get
so ingrained in
people’s minds.
TH E BEGI N N I NG
A potential headache cure invented in 1886 by an Atlanta,
Georgia, pharmacist
named John Pemberton, Coca-Cola got its name because one of
its curative ingre-
dients was an extract of coca leaves, known as cocaine. That
ingredient gave the

beverage its “kick.” By 1929 though, the kick came only from
caffeine.2
Asa Griggs Candler, who became the first president of the
Coca-Cola Company,
purchased the small market but popular beverage in 1891.
Although he appar-
ently never really appreciated what he had, Candler is credited
with getting the
gre2885x_ch10_web_1-5.indd Page 10-3 11/11/11 1:33 PM
user-f494gre2885x_ch10_web_1-5.indd Page 10-3 11/11/11
1:33 PM user-f494
/202/MHBR257/gre2885x_disk1of1/007802885x/gre2885x_page
files/202/MHBR257/gre2885x_disk1of1/007802885x/gre2885x_
pagefiles
Coca-Cola logo into widespread use and acceptance, by
embossing it onto items
such as clocks, scales, and calendars. He then sent the
complimentary Coca-Cola
emblazoned gifts to pharmacists that were compounding the
beverage for custom-
ers. He also pioneered the use of coupons that could be
redeemed for free drinks.
Coca-Cola moved from the pharmacy directly into customers’
hands when the
company sold the bottling rights, for $1, in 1899.
By mid-century, the influence of World War II moved Coke
abroad. The U.S.
GIs took bottles of the popular cola with them to Europe, as
unofficial brand spon-
sors who introduced the brand to an entirely new international
market. By the end

of the war, Coke had earned a market share of more than 60
percent worldwide.3
TH E MI DDLE
Coke’s success was also partially its undoing though. The Coca-
Cola Company
introduced new drinks, such as Sprite, Tab, and Fresca, which
fragmented its mar-
ket. Then the increasing popularity of its direct rival Pepsi-
Cola—a fellow immi-
grant from the nineteenth century—brought Coke into yet
another war . . . the
Cola War. By 1985, Coke had a mere 24 percent market share in
the United States.
Coca-Cola’s response remains fodder for continued debate:
With great fanfare, the
company announced it had changed the formula for its beverage,
and New Coke
would soon be appearing on shelves. An uproar, the likes of
which had never
been seen before, ensued. New Coke did not last long, as
customers voiced their
complaints over and over again. The company had no choice but
to respond; it
brought back “Original” Coke with just as much publicity as it
had employed to
herald its demise. Both products shared shelf space, and they
continue to do so in
some international markets.4
TH E EN D? NOT REALLY
The never-ending Cola War continues. Coca-Cola spends more
money on global
sponsorship deals with athletes, sports teams, sports entities
(e.g., National Bas-
ketball Association), entertainers, and events than does any

other company. Its
expenditures are in excess of $1 billion a year. These
sponsorship efforts publicize
a company that globally distributes approximately 300 brands of
drinks, including
carbonated drinks (e.g., Sprite, various flavors of Coke and Diet
Coke), sports drinks
(e.g., PowerAde), Dasani bottled water, and Minute Maid fruit
juices. The headache
Coca-Cola then and now: The
price and bottle have changed,
but the logo and taste have not.
1:33 PM user-f494
pagefiles
cure founded by a Southern pharmacist more than 100 years ago
has turned into a
multinational conglomerate that offers beverages to slake every
type of thirst.5
ONGOI NG EVOLUTION
No one could accuse Coca-Cola of resting on its laurels.
According to the Interbrand
agency, it remains the world’s most valued brand and continues
to increase in value,
despite the global recession.6 And how does Coca-Cola manage
this feat? Adapt-

ing to an ever-changing environment is key. For example, with
mycoke.com, Coca-
Cola gives its monthly audience of 58,325 young U.S. users
(http://www.quantcast
.com/mycoke.com) a forum to discuss and learn about what is
happening in the
world of the cola. There are links for people to post videos,
look up the latest spon-
sored events, play games, win prizes, and save money. Coca-
Cola even maintains a
presence on the wildly popular social network Twitter. Coke
lovers can chat, see the
latest company updates, and check on new product development
and upcoming
sponsorship events—all in real time
(http://twitter.com/cocaCola).
In addition to the technical and online revolution, perhaps the
next most sig-
nificant global trend is an awareness of climate change and the
need for individu-
als, companies, and countries to “go green.” Coke therefore is
embracing the credo
while still maintaining its unique identity and sponsorship
strategies.
For example, Coca-Cola is partnering with several entities to
spread a green
message. With the Westminster City Council in London,
England, Coca-Cola has
installed 260 recycling bins across the city in an effort to
recycle 11,000 tons of waste
that would normally be thrown into landfills daily. Of course,
London is also the
host city for the 2012 Summer Olympics, so its cooperative
effort closely ties in with
Coca-Cola’s long-standing sponsorship (since 1928) of the
Olympic Games.7

At the 2010 Vancouver Winter Olympics, Coca-Cola conducted
a carefully cal-
ibrated test of its Commitment 2020 plan, by which it aims to
decrease its overall
carbon footprint by 15 percent in 10 years.8 The test determined
whether it could
achieve a net zero carbon footprint for the two-week period of
the Olympics. But
the Olympics feature millions of fans from around the world,
consuming massive
amounts of food and drink, and zero impact is a difficult goal
even in normal con-
sumption situations.9
However, compared with its relatively simple recycling effort
at the 2000 Athens
Olympics, Coca-Cola has significantly increased its green
efforts to include the pro-
duction of bottles made from 30 percent plant-based materials,
using only hybrid
vehicles or electric carts to make deliveries, switching to
environmentally friendly
coolers, and even sporting company shirts made from recycled
plastic bottles.10
As one of the first major marketers to commit itself to
becoming more environ-
mentally friendly, Coca-Cola remains one of the world’s most
trusted brands. Its
increasing role in responding to and influencing how the world
itself is changing
and evolving makes Coke a real thing for most of the world.
Questions
1. Visit the company’s website (www.coca-cola.com) and

identify and describe
the different product lines that it markets.
2. How would you describe its product line breadth?
3. Review the different product categories in each of the
company’s product
lines. Which has the greatest depth? Which has the least?
4. How has the company positioned its brand? How does it go
about communi-
cating its position?
1:33 PM user-f494
pagefiles

1History of Britain Part IPolitical History of England 1066.docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to 1History of Britain Part IPolitical History of England 1066.docx

Similar to 1History of Britain Part IPolitical History of England 1066.docx (6)

More from hyacinthshackley2629

More from hyacinthshackley2629 (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

1History of Britain Part IPolitical History of England 1066.docx