Wi: One of King Harrold Godwinson's sons removed William the Conqueror
- Thread starter VVD0D95
- Start date
ASB.Where is he going to get an army?Also,most support would have been diverted to Edgar the Aetheling.
Last edited:
Well, I'd be a bit less definitive than darthfanta (even if he's partially right. It's going to be insanely hard) : with a succession conflict going far more down, with a possible support from the continent, with a less brutal Norman conquest (the main problem is that Saxon nobility was entierly chased off power) you could have a tentative of such.
Basically, less (far less) strong Normans and Saxons managing to stay at least partially a political faction in England.
Maybe a more successful Norse campaign, far more devastating and with Harold killed, William and Harald agreeing on splitting the island (Likely chances they already planned that IOTL), and Saxon nobility still in place in part of both kingdoms (that's the part I believe would have the fewer chances to ever happen, especially with Normans)?
William dying far earlier than IOTL and opening an early succession crisis (supported by Capetians, because nothing funnier putting oil on fire)...
Doesn't make it any less hard, but makes the possibility of an open revolt already less implausible; while still really hard when it comes to success.
Basically, less (far less) strong Normans and Saxons managing to stay at least partially a political faction in England.
Maybe a more successful Norse campaign, far more devastating and with Harold killed, William and Harald agreeing on splitting the island (Likely chances they already planned that IOTL), and Saxon nobility still in place in part of both kingdoms (that's the part I believe would have the fewer chances to ever happen, especially with Normans)?
William dying far earlier than IOTL and opening an early succession crisis (supported by Capetians, because nothing funnier putting oil on fire)...
Doesn't make it any less hard, but makes the possibility of an open revolt already less implausible; while still really hard when it comes to success.
VVD0D95
Banned
Were there not nobles who were angry with William or hacked off with him during the early years of his reign?
Okay interesting.
Depends which nobles we're talking about : Godwinsson's clientele was quite well established in the southern part since decades, so more southern the rebellion, more chances to have a Godwinsson being able to take advantage. Of course, southern England would be the first region to be completly taken over by Normans, so except the case of William schoking on a meal quickly after Hastings...
i think the 'best' way to get rid of William, would be to let Edgar, supported by King Sweyn Estridsen of Denmark, win their battles, or prehaps more correctly, not letting Sweyn being bribed to leave.
Which would prehaps lead to Edgar sitting more or less as a puppet king of Sweyn for some years until revolting against Denmark.
Which would prehaps lead to Edgar sitting more or less as a puppet king of Sweyn for some years until revolting against Denmark.
Didn't Sweyn want to be the King of England himself based on the claim of his uncle Canute?
Sweyn argubly had the best claim of any of the pretenders, but he seems to have been pragmatic enough to know that pushing with a puppet king would probably be better ... Edgar can always end up with an accident, leaving the throne to him as he already sit on the country intimidating the nobility into accepting him.
More you go forwards in time, more Normans takeover England structurally and socially speaking, less you have any realistic chance of rebellion. (It's one of the reasons I think a Danish attack allied with Saxons would have little chances to work)
At this point Edgar is probably the last possible Saxon noble whom claim wouldn't fall under the weight on its own ridicule.
Uhura's Mazda
Banned
Two of Harold's many sons invaded from Ireland in 1060s-80s, but IIRC that was mainly raiding, and they didn't get much support. Otherwise, the only recorded descendants of Saxon Kings that haven't been mentioned were the young son of Ralph the Timid, a Scottish nobleman called Gospatric and a load of Continental noblemen who were descended from Edward the Elder. And then there's all those rebellious Ealdormen like Waltheof, Edwin and Morcar who rebelled IOTL but failed for various reasons.
VVD0D95
Banned
Okay fairs enough.
So do you all belief there was not enough widespread discontent to remove William the COnqueror?
There was discontent, but Normans managed to crush it brutally but efficiently. So, more you wait, less a successful revolt is likely.
The main hinderance that faced any of the potential Anglo Saxon leaders at the highest level of society post Hastings was youth. Earls Edwin, Morcar & Waltheof were all young, in their early twenties, and inexperienced. Both Morcar & Waltheof had only just come into their Earldoms so could not be confident in the support of the lesser thegns under them the way a more established Earl would be. Also all three had been involved to some degree with the titanic battles of Fulford and Stamford Bridge which had caused them significant losses in their personal retinues.
The other leaders of the sporadic rebellions and fighting were men of distinctly local influence like Eadric the Wild on the Welsh borders and of course Hereward the Wake in the Fens of East Anglia. Whilst famous locally they were unable to muster a national following that might have stood a chance against the Normans and their castles.
The same problem faced the sons of Harold. If the eldest had been a couple of years older (and had survived Hastings) they might have intervened more decisively in the revolt raised in the west country by their grandmother Earl Godwins widow, Gytha. If they could have brought men and ships from Ireland in time to support those partisans of their cause besieged in Exeter the Normans might well have been forced to retreat back towards London. A major defeat for the invaders might then have enboldened other thegns to join up especially if the successful sons of Harold had move decisively into the more easterly parts of the country.
Of course how things would have panned out with the aforementioned Earls is another matter. Politics of the time were distinctly murky at the best.