Article in the Reflections series by Nick Saunders September 2019
published in the New Milton Advertiser & Lymington Times

King William Rufus

On the 2nd of August 1100 King William II was killed in the New Forest
whilst out hunting. There has been some debate over whether William
Rufus was killed by accident or was murdered and where the incident
actually took place. In this edition of ‘Reflections’ we will look at some of
the sources of information to help the reader come to their own
conclusion.

William Rufus was the third of four sons of William the Conqueror. He is
believed to have been born in about 1060. It was his father’s wish that
Rufus should succeed him as king of England. The oldest son, Robert
was given the powerbase of the Duchy of Normandy. The second son,
Richard had been killed in an earlier hunting accident in the New Forest
and the youngest son, Henry would be bequeathed money. On the
death of his father, Rufus was crowned king on 26th September 1087.

Some writers give William a bad press, describing him as a violent,
tyrannical ruler. Many of those early chroniclers were members of the
clergy and William II was no friend of theirs. He was sceptical of religious
beliefs and practices and refused to fill some vacancies for bishoprics
ensuring that the income they accrued went to him instead of the clergy.
Later scholars consider him in a more favourable light.

Historians need to treat sources with caution and look at them critically.
With that in mind the first text under review was written by William of
Malmesbury who was a monk at the abbey in the town. He wrote his
account at some time between 1118 and 1125. It was translated from
the Latin and later published in a book in 1882. Therefore, the account is
potentially written twenty-five years after the event, by a monk who may
not have given an unbiased account of what took place. There is also a
risk of mistranslation or selective use of the account by later historians.
The late Arthur Lloyd, an eminent local historian stated that William was
‘a chronicler of high repute for his accuracy’. William of Malmesbury
recorded that the night before his death the king had suffered a
nightmare in which he ‘was bled, and that the stream of blood, pouring
up to the heavens, clouded the very day’. In the morning a further dream
was relayed to him by Robert Fitz Hamon, a close confidante of the king.
A monk dreamt the king entered a church and desecrated the figure of
Christ on the cross. The rood had struck the king who fell to the ground
with flames and smoke coming out of his mouth, ‘obscuring the light of
the stars’. William records that the king laughed on being told this omen
and said “he is a monk and dreams for money like a monk: give him this”
he then handed Fitz Hamon a purse with one hundred shillings. In the
afternoon the king went hunting with a small number of attendants
including his brother Henry and Walter Tirel a French nobleman.
Eventually the party split up leaving just Rufus and Tirel together.
William wrote that the king and Tirel were in a clearing when a stag ran
close to them. The king fired an arrow which wounded the animal.
Another stag was spotted and Tirel took a quick shot but missed, hitting
instead King William in the breast. The account states that the king in
trying to remove the arrow broke the shaft and fell to the ground. Tirel is
supposed to have run to the king’s assistance but finding him lifeless
mounted his horse and rode for the coast, eventually returning to his
estate in France. William recorded that the king’s body was recovered by
some locals who took it by cart to Winchester Cathedral, ‘the blood
dripping from it all the way.’ William of Malmesbury does not mention the
arrow ricocheting off a tree or animal or name who brought the king’s
body to Winchester.

Another near contemporary account was written by the Norman monk
Orderic Vitalis who lived from 1075 to 1142. In his version he recorded
that prior to the hunting party departing, the king’s armourer presents
Rufus with six new arrows. The king handed two of them to Tirel
apparently saying “the best arrows to the best marksman”. Vitalis went
on to state that there were several companions with the king and Tirel
when the fatal shot was fired. The hunting party had all taken up posts
around the forest to wait in ambush for the deer, bows at the ready. A
stag ran between the king and Tirel who fired a shot that ‘grazed the
animal’s hairy back but glanced off and struck the king who was
standing in range’. Vitalis also records that the abbot of Gloucester sent
a warning to Rufus that a monk had dreamt that the Virgin Mary had
pleaded with Christ to take pity on the English and to punish the wicked
king. Christ replied “You must be patient and wait; due retribution will in
time befall the wicked”. Rufus apparently laughed and dismissed this as
a prophesy. Vitalis also recorded that the king’s brother Henry was one
of the hunting party and that on hearing of the death of his brother,
without checking the body, he rode to Winchester, where he seized the
keys of the royal treasury. He then made his way to London where he
was crowned king on the 5th of August. Vitalis also records that the body
of William Rufus was buried in Winchester Cathedral, without the tolling
of the bells or a religious service.

Florence of Worcester a monk and chronicler who died in 1118 wrote
that William Rufus was killed on the spot where a church had previously
stood. It had been destroyed as part of the creation of the New Forest. If
this is true then the destruction of the church was more likely to have
been caused by William I than Rufus.

Another monk and chronicler Matthew Paris writing his book Chronica
Majora some 150 years after the death of William Rufus claimed that the
arrow fired by Tirel was deflected by a tree into the king’s breast. This is
the first account to suggest this.

John R. Wise in his 1863 book ‘The New Forest, Its History and
Scenery’, pulled together a number of the accounts as told by the
various chroniclers including some of the later writers. He also showed
how they had based some of their accounts on the early chronicles by
Vitalis, William of Malmesbury and Florence of Worcester but add extra
details. Wise wrote that according to John Leland, topographer to King
Henry VIII, William Rufus was killed at a place called Thorougham. Wise
took this to mean Fritham. He recorded that the oak tree that deflected
the arrow had died and a stone was placed to mark the spot. He went on
to say that it was now ‘capped over by a hideous cast-iron case’ which
he described as being ‘on a par with a post office pillar box’. Wise points
out that it was by no means certain the site of the Rufus Stone was
where the king was killed. He wrote that legend told of Tirel’s horse
being reshod at a smithy near Tyrrel’s Ford and that the blacksmith had
to pay a yearly fine to the crown. Wise questions much of the accounts
pointing out that they were ‘written by unfriendly chroniclers, who have
good reasons for supressing the truth’. He asked if the king was shot by
accident why did the royal party abandon the kings body? How could the
dead body bleed all the way to Winchester? Why was there no
investigation into the king’s death or Tirel’s part in the incident? He was
suspicious of Henry hasty departure to Winchester and onwards to
London to be crowned and concluded by suggesting Rufus was
murdered.

John Murray published in 1888 ‘A handbook for travellers in Surrey,
Hampshire and the Isle of Wight’. Murray repeated much of the earlier
accounts but stated that the king was staying at Castle Malwood in a
royal hunting lodge. He added that local tradition records that the
charcoal-burner who found the kings body and took him to Winchester
was called Purkess who lived in the area. Murray recorded that Tirel did
stop at the smithy near Tyrrel’s Ford and had the shoes of his horse
reversed. He then killed the blacksmith.

Historian F.H.M. Parker writing in 1912 commented that Rufus was
‘specially obnoxious to the church’, creating many enemies by enforcing
the Forest law that had been put in place by his father. Parker
considered that the dream of the Gloucester monk was indicative of the
church being involved in a plot to kill Rufus. The swift actions of his
brother Henry, showed preparation and planning before the death took
place. Parker argued that whilst Tirel’s flight to France indicated guilt, his
later sworn affirmation to an abbot that he did not fire the fatal shot
suggests he was ‘entitled to credence’ especially when the statement
was made at a time when Tirel had nothing to lose or gain by making it.
Parker stopped short of accusing Henry of being part of a plot to kill his
brother but pointed out that other writers have promoted that theory. He
suggested that the false allegations that William I destroyed numerous
parishes and displaced thousands of locals to create the New Forest led
on to the anti-Norman myths created around the death of Rufus.

In 1973 C. Warren Hollister wrote an in-depth article in which he
reviewed the sources. Regarding the prophesy of the death in the
dreams and that the church was privy to a conspiracy, Hollister stated
that this was not evidence of murder but simply indicative of people
believing that ‘God directs history’. He pointed out that Henry’s swift
actions in seizing the royal treasury and going to London to be crowned
were on a par with William II when his father died in 1087. Assessing the
suggestion that Henry arranged for his brother to be killed so he could
take the throne, Hollister pointed out that this was not an opportune
moment for Henry to strike. Rufus was in the process of ousting his
brother from the Duchy of Normandy. If he had succeeded his later
death would have provided Henry with a much greater reward. Hollister
also refuted the claim that Tirel’s relatives in the English court were
handsomely rewarded after the death of Rufus. He pointed out that they
were rewarded to the same extent as other leading families as Henry
attempted to win allies in the difficult first year of his reign. Hollister
concluded Rufus died in a hunting accident.

Arthur Lloyd in his book ‘The Death of Willliam Rufus’ published in 2000
carefully reviewed all of the chronicles, legends and academic writing on
the royal death. He noted that ‘not one recent historian of the period
believes the death was murder’. Arthur concluded that the death of
Rufus was an accident. He also presented evidence, gleaned from the
Domesday Book to suggest that Thorougham or Truham was located
somewhere on the Beaulieu estate. This was reinforced by a monk who
wrote soon after Beaulieu Abbey was founded that it was located near to
the site of the death of William Rufus. Those findings were reported in
this newspaper on the 14th of April 2001 when a memorial cairn to King
William II was unveiled on the Beaulieu Estate beside the millstream
walk.

It is worth pointing out that a medieval peasant could walk at about
3mph. An Ox and cart could travel at about 10 miles per day. A horse
and cart could cover 20 miles per day. The distance from the Rufus
Stone to Winchester Cathedral via Romsey is 21 miles. From Beaulieu
Abbey to Winchester Cathedral via Romsey is 28 miles. From either
location the overnight stop in Romsey would have been essential with
the king’s body arriving at the cathedral sometime in the mid-afternoon,
following his death.

It is unlikely that the true facts behind the death of William Rufus will
ever be known. Writing in 1846 the Reverend Edward Drake said ‘it is
astonishing in the early ages how readily a fiction promulgated by one
was eagerly seized on and adopted by successive writers until at last it
surreptitiously took its place among established truths’.

Nick Saunders MA is a local historian and chairman of the Milton Heritage Society.

Colin Bower
18 August 2024

Reflections Index

Project Index