The challenge is to make a Breton nobleman conquer England like William the bastard, the pod is from Alan I the great of britanny (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_I,_King_of_Brittany) onwards.
Edward spent substantial portions of his life in Normandy and had lived for decades as an exile, he admired Norman culture greatly most evidenced by the construction of Westminster Abbey in Norman architectural style, his mother was a Norman and through her he was related to William. Being a distant cousin he was at least closer in relation than Harold who only owed his claim to his family's immense wealth, besides the right of conquest is a valid enough reason to rule in the period, perhaps Harold should have thought more carefully about his choice to go holiday in Normandy.Idk that there's much to this.
William was just a lying psychopath with money, a good marriage, some military ability and charisma.
He didn't have a legit claim or anything, he had just been around Edward long enough that he could plausibly claim that Edward had promised the throne to him.
Which is about as valid as me claiming that I'm the legitimate president because Obama told me I was his boy.
So it's not crazy to imagine that a Breton instead of a Norman has all those characteristics.
Interesting, how do you think the Welsh would react to this British conqueror in a hypothetical success scenario, even more so if the conqueror declares himself a descendant of Conan Meriadoc(https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conan_Meriadoc)?No real idea how to achieve this, but if it happens, Norman Yolk theory is replaced with Briton Revenge theory as historians blame the excesses of Breton William on a deep-seated desire for revenge against the English.
Edward spent substantial portions of his life in Normandy and had lived for decades as an exile, he admired Norman culture greatly most evidenced by the construction of Westminster Abbey in Norman architectural style, his mother was a Norman and through her he was related to William. Being a distant cousin he was at least closer in relation than Harold who only owed his claim to his family's immense wealth, besides the right of conquest is a valid enough reason to rule in the period, perhaps Harold should have thought more carefully about his choice to go holiday in Normandy.
Interesting, how do you think the Welsh would react to this British conqueror in a hypothetical success scenario, even more so if the conqueror declares himself a descendant of Conan Meriadoc(https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conan_Meriadoc)?
There is this poem (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armes_Prydein) from the 10th century where the Welsh poet calls for an alliance between the British and non-English peoples against England, he quotes Meriadoc and the Britons of britanny (called llydaw).It is interesting. FWIW, although the Breton lords were known to be gentler than the Normans, there doesn't seem to be much fraternal nationalist sentiment with the Cornish that gets passed down to us in written form.
William had no realistic claim to the English throne not being a blood descendant of an earlier King, one of the qualifying criteria to be a King in Anglo-Saxon England. Even his wife, Matilda of Flanders, had a better claim being descended from Alfred the Great.Edward spent substantial portions of his life in Normandy and had lived for decades as an exile, he admired Norman culture greatly most evidenced by the construction of Westminster Abbey in Norman architectural style, his mother was a Norman and through her he was related to William. Being a distant cousin he was at least closer in relation than Harold who only owed his claim to his family's immense wealth, besides the right of conquest is a valid enough reason to rule in the period, perhaps Harold should have thought more carefully about his choice to go holiday in Normandy.
William had no realistic claim to the English throne not being a blood descendant of an earlier King, one of the qualifying criteria to be a King in Anglo-Saxon England. Even his wife, Matilda of Flanders, had a better claim being descended from Alfred the Great.
As to being Edward the Confessor's preferred successor that was a thing of the past since Edward's nephew, Walter of the Vexim, son of Edward's sister Goda, died in a Norman dungeon in 1063 alongside his missus. Their "crime"? Count Walter was invited to succeed Count Walter II of Maine by the local nobles despite William's claims that Count Walter had promised the County of Maine to him.
Sounds familiar
I'm not sure how to best position Brittany to be able to act in England
Harold Godwinson would argue otherwise.William had no realistic claim to the English throne not being a blood descendant of an earlier King, one of the qualifying criteria to be a King in Anglo-Saxon England
Harold Godwinson would argue otherwise.
England had nearly 30 years of Danish rule before the Confessor, who was more Norman than Anglo-Saxon, and the only male-line descendant of Alfred still alive was more Hungarian than anything else. At the end of the day, William had as much claim to the throne as anyone else because frankly no one had a good claim.
That's putting it a bit strongly, I think. Yes, Saxon kings were elected, but there was a strong preference for electing a close relative (usually a son) of the deceased king, in a way that isn't the case in modern democracies.No, he didn't, because he wasn't elected, and the Saxons elected their kings.
Doesn't matter how many personal connections someone has to Emanuel Macron, if they aren't elected, they're not the legitimate French president. Conversely, it doesn't matter if someone's a weak candidate. If they win the election, they win.
Said Hungarian had the best claim. He’s called an Aetheling for good reason. It doesn’t matter what culture he is, it’s his paternal descent that mattered the most.Harold Godwinson would argue otherwise.
England had nearly 30 years of Danish rule before the Confessor, who was more Norman than Anglo-Saxon, and the only male-line descendant of Alfred still alive was more Hungarian than anything else. At the end of the day, William had as much claim to the throne as anyone else because frankly no one had a good claim.
That's putting it a bit strongly, I think. Yes, Saxon kings were elected, but there was a strong preference for electing a close relative (usually a son) of the deceased king, in a way that isn't the case in modern democracies.