page_title: Siege of Oxford (1142)
section_title: Oxford
hierarchical_section_title: Siege of Oxford (1142) / Background / Oxford
caption_attribution_description: Portrait of Empress Mathilda, from "History of England" by St. Albans monks (15th century); Cotton Nero D. VII, f.7, British Library
context_page_description: The siege of Oxford took place during The Anarchy—a period of civil war following the death of Henry I of England without an heir—in 1142. Fought between his nephew, Stephen of Blois, and his daughter, the Empress Matilda, who had recently been expelled from her base in Westminster and chosen the City of Oxford as her new headquarters. Oxford by now was effectively a regional capital and important in its own right. It was a well-defended city with both rivers and walls protecting it, and was also strategically important as it was at a crossroads between the north, south-east and west of England, and also not far from London.
  By now the civil war was at its height, yet neither party was able to get an edge on the other: both had suffered swings of fate in the last few years which had alternately put them ahead, and then behind, their rival. Stephen, for instance, had been captured by Matilda's army in 1141, but later in the year, Matilda's half-brother and chief military commander, Robert, Earl of Gloucester was captured by Stephen's army. Likewise, Matilda had been recognised as "Lady of the English" but had not long afterwards been run out of London.
context_section_description: Oxford itself had become increasingly important by this period, and, in the words of historian Edmund King, it was "in the course of becoming a regional capital". It also had a royal castle. Its value for whoever held it was not merely symbolic; it was also of great practical value. It was particularly secure, surrounded as it was, says the author of the Gesta Stephani, by "very deep water that washes it all around" and ditches. The Berkshire-Oxfordshire interface area was a contentious one throughout the war, and Oxford particularly was of great strategic value. It was situated at the nexus of the main routes from London to the south-west and from Southampton to the north. Whoever controlled the Oxford area effectively controlled access to London and the north, and for Stephen it provided a bridgehead for attacking Matilda's south-western heartlands.
  Although the size of the army Matilda took with her to Oxford is unknown, it contained only a few barons with whom she could keep a "small court", and for whom she could provide from the local lands of the royal demesne. Oxford's relative proximity to the capital, suggests Bradbury, also made it a "brave move" on her part; it probably also indicates that she did not wish to move too far and that she intended to return to, and reclaim, London in due course. 
  Matilda recognised that her lack of resources meant that she could not bring the war to a decisive close at this point, and so she sent her half-brother, Robert, Earl of Gloucester, to her husband, the Count of Anjou, to try to bring him and his large, experienced army in on her side. Matilda and the earl probably assumed that she would be safe in Oxford until he returned. This was a crucial period for Matilda, says King, and Gloucester's absence weakened her force further: he left for Normandy on 24 June to negotiate with Anjou, despite, says Crouch, Matilda's situation being "desperate". However, she considered Oxford to be her "own town", commented the 17th-century antiquarian Samuel Daniel. Stephen had recently been so ill that it was feared, temporarily, that he was dying; this created a degree of popular sympathy for him, which had already welled up following his release from Matilda's captivity the previous November. A. L. Poole described the train of events thus:
  At the Christmas [1141] festival, celebrated at Canterbury, Stephen submitted to a second coronation, or at least wore his crown, as a token that he once again ruled over England. The affairs of the kingdom, a visit to York, and an illness, so serious that it was rumoured that he was dying, prevented the king from taking steps to complete the overthrow of his rival who remained unmolested at Oxford. It was not till June that he was sufficiently recovered to take the field.
  — A. L. Poole
  Matilda and Gloucester, on the other hand, did not know that he was on the road to recovery; if they had, suggests R. H. C. Davis, they might not have delayed or even cancelled his journey. However, they did not, and Matilda's army was effectively left leaderless. Matilda may have been expecting supporters to make their way to Oxford—"to 'make fine' with her" (i.e. to contract themselves to her cause), suggests Edmund King—"but they were under no compulsion to do so". It is likely, says Professor H. A. Cronne, that by now "the tide had turned and already men were quietly leaving her court". John Appleby, too, has suggested that much of her support had by now decided that, in his words, they had "bet on the wrong horse", particularly as she had failed to put up a stand at Westminster or immediately return in force. Stephen, on the other hand, had recuperated in the north of England; he had a solid base of support there and was able to raise a large army—possibly over 1,000 knights—before returning south.
caption: The Empress Matilda, from a medieval manuscript
exif: {}