14

Was King Stephen a Usurper?

Stephen’s reign as king of England from 1135 to 1154 was dominated by the English civil war known as The Anarchy. Although he began his tenure as a popular, well-liked ruler, the abundance of years spent battling Empress Matilda and Henry weakened his hold on the throne. His inability to put down his rivals shook the confidence of both his English nobles and commoners. Unlike William the Conqueror, Stephen did not contribute to improvements in the governance of the kingdom, nor did he leave any lasting legacy of note. He was more inclined towards peace than fighting, which was not a strong characteristic for a medieval king. His inability to maintain law and order caused his people to turn against him and look for another alternative.¹

King Stephen I of England has long been considered a usurper for stealing the crown from his cousin Matilda. There was no precedent at that time for a female ruler and Stephen was very nearly the closest male blood relative to Henry I. Stephen also claimed that Henry chose him to succeed on his deathbed. So, was Stephen really a usurper?

Let’s remind ourselves of the formal definition of the word usurp which is ‘to seize and hold (a position, office, power, etc.) by force or without legal right’.² In twelfth-century England, there were no strict rules when it came to succession. It was very much a fluid thing at that time, usually with the eldest legitimate male heir inheriting from his father. But obviously, there were situations when there was no legitimate male heir to inherit. In those cases, it was basically up to the ruler to make his choice, although there were no laws forcing the people to follow the king’s choice.³

King Henry I selected his legitimate daughter, Matilda, as his heir because he lacked a legitimate male heir. This must have been a stunning announcement at the time since England had never witnessed a female ruler. However shocking it might have been, there was no law against it.⁴ Not only did Henry announce Matilda as his heir, he went to great lengths to have his barons swear oaths of fealty to her, including her own cousin Stephen.

When Henry I died, Stephen saw the chance to overpower what he saw as a stereotypical weak woman so he could steal the crown for himself. Stephen had no legal right to the throne. He had never been named by Henry as an heir despite his claim that King Henry named him as his successor as he lay dying. In fact, Stephen wasn’t even closest in blood line to Henry I. If male succession had been strictly followed, Robert Curthose would have been king after William the Conqueror, and Robert’s son William Clito would have been next in line after that. Due to King William’s conflict with his son Robert, he chose to bypass Robert and pass the throne to his second son William, who in turn passed it to his brother Henry I. Being that Stephen had no legal right to the throne and stole it away from Matilda, Stephen is very deserving of the title of a usurper king.