AISHA ALI TO WHAT EXTENT WAS LANFRANC DIFFERENT FROM THE REST OF THE ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY (1066-1216) Holistically, Archbishop Lanfranc stands out to be predominantly different from the rest of the Archbishops of Canterbury appointed between 1066-1216. During his tenure, he maintained a stable relationship with the king, which cannot be applied to majority of the other Archbishops. Alongside this he was also never exiled which differs explicitly from the other Archbishops. However, in terms of relationship with the papacy, Lanfranc does not follow the same pattern and had quite a bitter relationship with the papacy. This does not follow the other archbishops, for example Anselm and Theobald who maintained a stable relationship with the papacy. Lanfranc was significantly different from the rest of the Archbishops of Canterbury due to his contrasting relationship with William I. Unlike majority of the archbishops, Lanfranc and William were close friends before his appointment in 1066. He was trusted enough to act as regent when William was in Normandy in 1082. Furthermore, William was very supportive of Lanfranc's reforms as they did not undermine his power as king. This is prevalent in the 1075 council of London. Lanfranc attacked clerical abuses such as simony and tried to enforce papal celibacy. The support was reciprocated when Lanfranc backed William in 1082 when he tried Odo of Bayeux as a vassal rather than a bishop. This illustrates the secure relationship between both church and monarchy during 1066. In contrast to this, Anselm struggled to be in good terms with Rufus during his reign. From the start of 1094-95, there was a major falling out between Rufus and Anselm. Unlike Lanfranc, Anselm was a strong supporter of the Gregorian reforms and during the process of his appointment, Anselm made Rufus adhere to his conditions, such as Anselm recognising Urban II as pope, being the sole advisor to the king and property of Canterbury belonging to the church. Rufus however, went back on his word and this angered Anselm. Furthermore, the argument regarding Anselm receiving his pallium from the pope shows discrepancy between Anselm's relationship with the king and Lanfranc's. Similarly, Anselm also fell out with Henry I due to issues regarding lay investiture which forced Henry to exile Anselm. Theobald's relationship does not differ much from Anselm's. Archbishop Theobald disobeyed Stephen when he attended the council of Rheims and because of this was exiled temporarily. Moreover, in 1152, Theobald refused to crown his son Eustace as king of England, which created more hostility. Beckett and Henry III notoriously had a very unstable relationship. Conflict was apparent when Beckett refused to support Henry II regarding issues of royal taxation to the main principles of church property and legal status of clerics. Another major conflict between them was Beckett wanting to maintain the independence of the church whereas Henry was keen to cease the existence of church courts. Beckett reached the limit of Henry's tolerance when he opposed adding his seal to the sixteen clauses made in Clarendon in