The Norman Conquest reshaped English society not only because Norman, Breton and other dynasties from France replaced English families, but also because of the changes in structures of lordship and property law. Other significant developments have been set out by archaeologists, diplomatic historians, palaeographers, numismatists and architectural historians, to name only the most obvious examples, with the result that academic syntheses are becoming that much harder to write. By focusing, though, upon social mobility during and after the Norman Conquest it is possible to address a wide range of themes, ranging from economic paths of growth to the relationships between the Normans and the English. A case study concerned with Roger Bigod enables connections between these various themes to be related to wider questions addressed in syntheses on Anglo-Norman aristocracy and society.

Roger Bigod rose from relatively lowly origins to become one of the wealthiest barons in Anglo-Norman England, holding the office of royal steward. Although the fortunes of the family have been the subject of several studies, these have not devoted much attention to the means by which Roger Bigod established the fortunes of his dynasty. This discussion will look at: first, the effectiveness of Roger Bigod as a custodian of baronial and royal estates in the post-Conquest decades; second, the alliances which he established with lords from a range of social ranks; and third, the significance of an absence of investment by him in seigneurial complexes of lordship before c. 1100.

Distribution of wealth and the career of Roger Bigod

Around a third of East Anglia's wealth was controlled by eight class A barons who were closely connected to William I through kinship and friendship. This grouping can be compared with the earls and stallers of the immediate pre-Conquest period. Although the social groupings who benefited most from Königsnähe shared broadly similar amounts of wealth before and after the Norman Conquest, there were important qualitative differences. First, there was no clear line of tenurial succession linking the earls and stallers with the class A magnates, and second, some of the class A magnates held substantial estates in principalities in northern France.