Interim Conclusions

Introduction

I am conscious that many historians & academics have already trawled through what records are available and in many ways I should avoid trying to reinvent the wheel.

What I an trying to do is to add to the very short list of facts about such an important national/local historical event.

As my interim findings to date show, there are many differences between accounts. The early chroniclers may have used different sources and other authors have paraphrased their words leading to subtle changes in wording, some of which may be significant.

The extent of the embellishment and lack of consistency is staggering.

Nick Saunders summed up the research weaknesses (Article 26).

For such a major event in our history it doesn't seem a lot to ask :

- who was in the hunting party
- from which location did they leave
- where did they hunt
- who killed William Rufus
- who recovered the body
- when was William Rufus buried

There are no clear answers to these questions.

Hunting in Norman Times

It would be very helpful to know how a typical Royal hunt was organised in the New Forest in Norman Times.

There are some clues in the information gathered to date:

Hunting in the New Forest

Presumably the New Forest was different 900 years ago. Living in the New Forest area today, some "Forest" consists of woodland areas with extensive moorland and clearings.

A stag would no doubt seek refuge in a woodland area.

You would expect some of the hunting party to "chase" the deer into the open moorland or clearing where archers would be hidden ready to ambush them.

It may be that William Rufus and Tirel were so hidden awaiting the deer.

It appears that they were separated from the others on the hunt and were dismounted and close together.

Not surprisingly much is made of the possibility of the involvement of trees:

References to Trees

It will be interesting to see if the in-depth books will give more clues.

Comments on the 7 Categories

1. The Chronicles

The Chronicles are the main source of information about the death of William Rufus.

Nick Saunders has pointed out the weaknesses in relying on the Chronicles wrtten some years after the event (Article 26).

As explained in the Introduction, there will be different explanations according to which sources the chroniclers used.

In the case of contemporaries William of Malmesbury and Geffrei Gaimar we do not know the sources they used.

You have to ask how information about the killing was communicated.

The members of the hunting party would have been a main source of information.

A basic outline only would have been passed on by word of mouth at the time and conveyed as far a field as Europe where certain parties/enemies would have been agog.

So far I have not seen reference to anything that was written down shortly after the event.

The only reports (we are told) were from a potential witness - Walter Tirel - who claimed that he was elsewhere/innocent.

This theme is developed in 7. below.

2. The Build Up to the Hunt

We know that the Royal Hunting Party headed out on the second day of the stag-hunting season.

It seems that William Rufus lived at Winchester Castle but it would have been a long ride to hunt in the New Forest.

The start of the stag-hunting season would have been a magnet for the King and his nobles.

It is likely that the hunting party would have assembled and stayed at a hunting lodge.

The choice of hunting lodge is between Brockenhurst and Malwood Castle/Keep.

There is some evidence that William Rufus enjoyed dinner the night before the hunt and breakfast and lunch/dinner the following day.

Most accounts suggesst that the hunting party left in the afternoon but 2 say they left in the morning. (this has a bearing on when the accident occurred).

Some accounts say that the accident happened late in the day.

Who left the hunting lodge to go on the hunt is valuable information.

3. Where the Hunting Lodge was (Brockenhurst or Malwood Castle/Keep).

There appears to be evidence that there were hunting lodges in Brockenhurst and Malwood Castle/Keep. It does seem odd that there should be two relatively near each other.

If William Rufus was killed near Beaulieu, it seems more likely that he would have hunted out of the hunting lodge in Brockenhurst.

Strangely, Malwood Castle/Keep was near to Minstead, near the site of the Rufus Stone.

4. Who was in the Royal Hunting Party

There is a difference between the Articles some saying that the hunting party was small and others saying it was a good size.

Because the hunt was right at the start of the stag-hunting season it seems likely that it was a good size.

If William Rufus only hunted on the afternoon of the second day some nobles may have gone ahead without him (if that was allowed or advisable!).

It is frustrating that I cannot follow up on the article wriiten for the Wessex Society. It is unique in listing a number of nobles who were in the hunting party, but unfortunately the Society has closed down and the author has died.

As a postscript, if the hunting party had been small, the killer of William Rufus would have been more easily identified.

5. Where the Hunting Accident Took Place

It would have neen great if the Rufus Stone marked the spot where William Rufus was killed. It has been a tourit attraction and for many a must-visit.

However it seems more likely that it was in fact on what is now the Beaulieu estate. Arthur Loyd thought so!

As yet, I don't know why John Leland wrote about William Rufus in 1530 and what his source was.

Was there a written account in Royal records of the death of William Rufus?

6. Who fired the arrow that killed William Rufus

It was one of his own men!

We are told that hunting accidents were commonplace. Presumabley horses chased deer at high speed - not a good idea where trees are involved. Also presumably archers had to get their shots of quickly - dangerous if others in the hunting party are nearby.

In this case, some of the articles suggest poor shooting with an arrow richocheting off a tree; while others say that a second stag was involved and/or the evening sun caused a problem.

It is not clear how far the rest of the party were away from Wliiam Rufus and Tirel. It sounds very odd and very dangerous that some of the party fanned out in a circle round the king. (Articles 11 and 25)

The last 3 internet searches about Malwood Castle/Keep carried some surprises.

Whereas in most articles the King and Tirel dismounted and used a bow and arrow,Article has the King being shot whilst on horseback by a crossbow

The article has the King breaking a bow string while other articles have Henry doing this.

7. The Aftermath of the Killing

It ought to have been easy to summarise what happened to William Rufus after he was killed.

Either all the hunting party abandoned him or some saw to the body.

If so, you would expect that they would have needed a horse to take the body to a place where a cart could take the body on to Winchester.

The accepted narrative has a charcoal-burner (some say name of Purkis) who lifted the body on to his cart. It would have been quite a feat for him to have done so on his own.

Many articles have him taking the body to Winchester but in 7.7 of Categories, the article says he took the body to the hunting lodge (so far the only article to say this)

Then there is the heavily-biased accounts of his funeral, with no agreement as to when it took place.

This is arguably the most important section of the Interinm Report, because it determines how many people knew about the death and in how much detail, because this would be the source of information that would be written up or handed down by word of mouth.

People who would know of the death

Depending on which group they were in would determine whether they knew a liile of a lot of what happened:

1. servants at the hunting lodge
2. members of the hunting party
3. Henry I and his entourage
4. The Royal Household/Staff etc at Winchester Castle & Winchester Cathedral and later London
5. Misc people who were told of the event at the time and it was passed down through the ages

Loose Ends

There are a few loose ends to tie up:

Loose Ends

Final Interim Conclusions

The objective of the project was to find out more facts.

It seems reasonable to conclude:

Facts

1. Hunting in the New Forest was very popular particularly at the start of the stag-hunting season.

2. William Rufus hunted in the New Forest on 2 August 1100 (2nd day of the stag-hunting season)

3. He was killed in a hunting accident by one of his own men.

4. Walter Tirel is implicated

5. Brother Henry & others made off for Winchester and Henry claimed the treasury and the crown.

Likely

1. It was a good-sized hunting party with nobles, huntsmen and servants

2. The hunting party stayed at a hunting lodge possibly Brockenhurst

3. The hunting accident occurred on what is now the Beaulieu estate (meaning the Rufus Stone was in the wrong place)

4. Whilst many of the hunting part left the scene, William Rufus did receive some attention.

5. It took at least 2 days before the body reached Winchester

6. William Rufus' death would have been hot news.

Colin Bower
18 August 2024

Project Index