1066 and all that

What if before fighting the Normans Harold decides to take his time and really get his army ready, but about a week before he's ready word spreads over the country that Harold and England are under Papal interdict beause the throne was not given to William? IIRC Harold was a popular king. Does his popularity loss, if any, offset his gain for his prudence, if any?
 
What if before fighting the Normans Harold decides to take his time and really get his army ready, but about a week before he's ready word spreads over the country that Harold and England are under Papal interdict beause the throne was not given to William? IIRC Harold was a popular king. Does his popularity loss, if any, offset his gain for his prudence, if any?

Taking his time gives William time to establish his position more securely. That alone is a bad trade.
 
If he prevaricates yes. But William's Breton and Flemish allies were already looking to leave as there had been no conclusion for far too long after landing. Had Harold waited just 2 or 3 days then he would have a far larger army and be well able to deal with William. William's allies would soon have gone off seeing the opposition.

It would have been best if Harold had stayed in London to do this then marched to engage William using the intelligence gained in the meantime. It was certainly the advice he was getting when he reached London and the advisers had days to assemble a picture of William's situation.

I suspect Harold wanted a repeat of Stamford Hill where swift action surprised and defeated a split unprepared enemy.
 
If he prevaricates yes. But William's Breton and Flemish allies were already looking to leave as there had been no conclusion for far too long after landing. Had Harold waited just 2 or 3 days then he would have a far larger army and be well able to deal with William. William's allies would soon have gone off seeing the opposition.

It would have been best if Harold had stayed in London to do this then marched to engage William using the intelligence gained in the meantime. It was certainly the advice he was getting when he reached London and the advisers had days to assemble a picture of William's situation.

I suspect Harold wanted a repeat of Stamford Hill where swift action surprised and defeated a split unprepared enemy.


There is this book 1066 : The year of the conquest by David Howarth, where the author thinks that Harold received word that he was excommunicated and England was under a Papal interdict. He apparently thought that when word spread his support would dissolve thus Harold hurried up going after the Normans. That was the inspiration of my origional post.
 
I suspect Harold wanted a repeat of Stamford Hill where swift action surprised and defeated a split unprepared enemy.
I assume you mean Stamford Bridge?;)

Let's not forget that Harold had just double-marched his army down from there; it was tired out and the southern levies hadn't yet had time to join forces with him. More time would definitely have helped his military situation (interdict aside).
 
I assume you mean Stamford Bridge?;)

Let's not forget that Harold had just double-marched his army down from there; it was tired out and the southern levies hadn't yet had time to join forces with him. More time would definitely have helped his military situation (interdict aside).

But what about with the interdict? Does Howarth have a point? King John's interdict really hurt him, but he was unpopular to begin with.
 
The papal interdict doesn't seem to have caused any concerns amongst the english. Having a different system of law they well knew that the whole issue of any promise by Harold being broken was irrelevant, as the crown was not his to give. Nor that of Edward the Confessor.

It was the Witangemot who chose the King. Realpolitik ruled and they were likely to choose one who had the power to back it up, frequently the eldest male of the predecessor, but not necessarily.

When Harold died they went for Edgar (who, like Louis, gets left out of lists of english kings) but eventually changed their mind, with a large Norman army on the doorstep, and decided William was just the chap for them.

Had Harold waited to assemble a proper southern army then William would likely have lost. Without his allies and outnumbered he would have had to fight on ground of Harold's choosing or risk Harold ravaging the countryside around William's base and starving him back to Normandy.

Even in OTL William, with his allies, had a very hard time and could easily have lost the battle if english discipline had maintained the shield wall and let William's troops exhaust and waste themselves against it.

No french in the language and the verb at the end of the sentence could stay and english speakers like Yoda could sound.
 
The papal interdict doesn't seem to have caused any concerns amongst the english. Having a different system of law they well knew that the whole issue of any promise by Harold being broken was irrelevant, as the crown was not his to give. Nor that of Edward the Confessor.

It was the Witangemot who chose the King. Realpolitik ruled and they were likely to choose one who had the power to back it up, frequently the eldest male of the predecessor, but not necessarily.

When Harold died they went for Edgar (who, like Louis, gets left out of lists of english kings) but eventually changed their mind, with a large Norman army on the doorstep, and decided William was just the chap for them.

Had Harold waited to assemble a proper southern army then William would likely have lost. Without his allies and outnumbered he would have had to fight on ground of Harold's choosing or risk Harold ravaging the countryside around William's base and starving him back to Normandy.

Even in OTL William, with his allies, had a very hard time and could easily have lost the battle if english discipline had maintained the shield wall and let William's troops exhaust and waste themselves against it.

No french in the language and the verb at the end of the sentence could stay and english speakers like Yoda could sound.

The thing was to the Pope " Having a different system of law they well knew that the whole issue of any promise by Harold being broken was irrelevant, as the crown was not his to give. Nor that of Edward the Confessor.

It was the Witangemot who chose the King. Realpolitik ruled and they were likely to choose one who had the power to back it up, frequently the eldest male of the predecessor, but not necessarily" was irrelevant, the interdict was on, and if David Howarth is to be believed, Harold did not consider it irrelevant. So you think the English would have ignored it? I can't say you are wrong, but I wonder. We may have reached the point where things might go around in circles. Any precedent for interdicts having so little effects?
 
The thing was to the Pope " Having a different system of law they well knew that the whole issue of any promise by Harold being broken was irrelevant, as the crown was not his to give. Nor that of Edward the Confessor.

It was the Witangemot who chose the King. Realpolitik ruled and they were likely to choose one who had the power to back it up, frequently the eldest male of the predecessor, but not necessarily" was irrelevant, the interdict was on, and if David Howarth is to be believed, Harold did not consider it irrelevant. So you think the English would have ignored it? I can't say you are wrong, but I wonder. We may have reached the point where things might go around in circles. Any precedent for interdicts having so little effects?

Papal/English relations had always been on the shaky side of things, for the english what is likely to matter more is the opinion of the Bishops on the Wittans opinions on Harold rather than the far off pope.
 
The interdict was certainly there but I can see no real effect upon English actions that actually happened.

The real effect was to help William gather support on the continent. Without that it seems probable the Normans alone would not have defeated Harold in the battle in OTL so yes, the interdict was important. Just not to the English apparently. Did anyone fail to heed Harold's call to arms?

If Harold had heeded his advisers then he would have had the London troops, the local fyrd, the troops arriving from Stamford, his housecarls which, together, should have been able to see to Wilhelm le Batard.
 
No french in the language and the verb at the end of the sentence could stay and english speakers like Yoda could sound.

"English speakers could like Yoda sound"
That is the German word order, I guess English would have the same. ;)
Would the result of this maybe be that English keeps a special suffix for the Indikative of the verb? So people would not misstake "Yoda sound" for something like " (the) Yoda-sound".

We would maybe see:
"English speakers could like Yoda sounden."

... also "sound" would maybe never enter the English language and English would keep "klingen"

"English speakers could like Yoda clingen."

or insteag of "klingen" what is today German "lauten"/ Schwedish "låta"

"English speakers could like Yoda louten"

:p
 
The interdict was certainly there but I can see no real effect upon English actions that actually happened.

The real effect was to help William gather support on the continent. Without that it seems probable the Normans alone would not have defeated Harold in the battle in OTL so yes, the interdict was important. Just not to the English apparently. Did anyone fail to heed Harold's call to arms?

If Harold had heeded his advisers then he would have had the London troops, the local fyrd, the troops arriving from Stamford, his housecarls which, together, should have been able to see to Wilhelm le Batard.

The thing was, according to Howarth, most English did not know about it before Hastings, and Harold felt his only chance to beat William was to do it before they found out or his support would melt away. It does seem otherwise that Harold should have delayed things. And if he had a horse that might have helped him with battlefield communications. Seems the battlefield was too big for a man on foot to command.
 
The thing was, according to Howarth, most English did not know about it before Hastings, and Harold felt his only chance to beat William was to do it before they found out or his support would melt away. It does seem otherwise that Harold should have delayed things. And if he had a horse that might have helped him with battlefield communications. Seems the battlefield was too big for a man on foot to command.

The Anglo-Saxons did have horses, so Harold all but certainly did have one himself. That they fought on foot is for tactical reasons - and good ones, in the context of the shieldwall being a damn hard to break defensive formation.
 
The Anglo-Saxons did have horses, so Harold all but certainly did have one himself. That they fought on foot is for tactical reasons - and good ones, in the context of the shieldwall being a damn hard to break defensive formation.

I meant that Harold should have had one to quicker see what was happening and issue orders. Maybe some couriers should have them. But not neccesarily any cavalry or dragoons.
 
Top