A 1066 question

There have been many WI Harold had won at Hastings. Let's say he did, now the question. How would it be remembered today? Just someone tried to invade and lost, or would the public even know that it happed at all?
 
The odds are good that later in history England and France would end up as enemies in some way, so I guess it would be painted as the first occurance of that rivalry.
 
There have been many WI Harold had won at Hastings. Let's say he did, now the question. How would it be remembered today? Just someone tried to invade and lost, or would the public even know that it happed at all?

Well, we remember that naff French attempt in the Revolutionary Wars with the impressively named 'Black Legion'. If that had worked (unlikely), I guess people would ask the same question that if it had failed would anybody remember it. And the Battle of Hastings was far more competently carried out, and therefore more likely to be remembered than than the aforementioned later invasion.

An interesting idea resulting from this is that if Harold won, he may well be remembered as one of the world's greatest generals. He carried out one of the fastest forced marches in history from one end of the country to the other, and ended two separate invasions. The guy is practically Alfred 2.0 but even better!
 
An interesting idea resulting from this is that if Harold won, he may well be remembered as one of the world's greatest generals. He carried out one of the fastest forced marches in history from one end of the country to the other, and ended two separate invasions. The guy is practically Alfred 2.0 but even better!

In the very least he will become very well known among his contemporaries as a great warrior, especially if he later beats off the Danish too.
 
There have been many WI Harold had won at Hastings. Let's say he did, now the question. How would it be remembered today? Just someone tried to invade and lost, or would the public even know that it happed at all?

How many people remember the Danish invasion of 1086? I think it would be similar to that!

It would be a turning point that did not happen and therefore was scarcely noticed...

Best Regards
Grey Wolf
 
In the very least he will become very well known among his contemporaries as a great warrior, especially if he later beats off the Danish too.

The Danish have less reason to attack as they came partly in support of Dano-Saxon rebels in the Wash.
 
There have been many WI Harold had won at Hastings. Let's say he did, now the question. How would it be remembered today? Just someone tried to invade and lost, or would the public even know that it happed at all?

Actually, thinking further, what 1066 is generally seen as is the end of Anglo-Saxon England. If this does not happen, then Harold and his exploits might only be as well known as those of Hardacnut or Edmund Ironsides, which is to say scarcely known at all outside of specialists.

Some other, later, turning point would occur and that would be where everyone would focus their ATLs on

Best Regards
Grey Wolf
 
Well it would be a turning point as it would be the end of the house of Wessex and the start of the House of Godwin.
 
Well it would be a turning point as it would be the end of the house of Wessex and the start of the House of Godwin.

But it could just be part of the constant changes - from Wessex to Canute back to Wessex, now to Godwin and who knows maybe back to Wessex later?

And Harold doesn't GET the throne by victory in battle, since he inherits from Edward, but rather he gets to keep it by winning battles. That makes it a less dramatic turning point in itself.

I suppose in any case, it depends on what happens next! Does he have a long and glorious reign, does his son take part in the First Crusade, or does England continue as a backwater dogged by constant invasion and upheaval?

Best Regards
Grey Wolf
 
I don't really see a major reason why him winningg would suddenly stop the several invasion attempts, since probably the Anglosaxon are low on draftable men after 'barely' beating two invasion armies back ... at least (as mentioned) the Danish King have a good claim to throw his hat at (and probably will), and its not unreasonable to get some skirmishes with the Scottish king (specially if he marries Margaret of Wessex, which politically makes sense anyhows)
 
I think Hastings might be a little more remembered, if for the simultaneous double-invasion of England and the impressive feat of forced-marching a medieval army from victory to victory across the length of England, and not necessarily for the continued existence of Anglo-Saxon rule.
 
I think Hastings might be a little more remembered, if for the simultaneous double-invasion of England and the impressive feat of forced-marching a medieval army from victory to victory across the length of England, and not necessarily for the continued existence of Anglo-Saxon rule.

Yeah I think most people would presume that the actual war wouldn't have had such a major effect, after all Cnut had conquered England for a while and not much changed so why would William be able to completely transform the country?
 
I suppose in any case, it depends on what happens next! Does he have a long and glorious reign, does his son take part in the First Crusade, or does England continue as a backwater dogged by constant invasion and upheaval?

Since when was England a backwater prior to the Norman Conquest? It had one of the most sophisticated and centralized governments and was quite wealthy (there's a reason that so many people were trying to conquer it).

What I wonder is if the Saxons will break from Catholic tradition somehow due to what they will perceive as their betrayal by the Pope. Didn't England and the remainder of the isles practice a variant of Celtic Christianity prior to being Catholic?
 
Since when was England a backwater prior to the Norman Conquest? It had one of the most sophisticated and centralized governments and was quite wealthy (there's a reason that so many people were trying to conquer it).

Now this is a berserk button for me. Then again, I'm not one to talk, as I thought the same thing before AH.Com educated me on how civilized and sophisticated Anglo-Saxon England truly was.
 
What I wonder is if the Saxons will break from Catholic tradition somehow due to what they will perceive as their betrayal by the Pope. Didn't England and the remainder of the isles practice a variant of Celtic Christianity prior to being Catholic?

My understanding is that the Pope was just starting to really assert himself as the leader of the Church in the mid-11th century. Up until that point, the lines between Celtic, Catholic, and Orthodox Christianity were very blurry because the powers of the upper ranks of the Church hierarchy were mostly theoretical and had little effect on the ground.

However, by trying and failing to assert control of the Church in England by backing William, the Pope would stand a serious risk of creating a clear break between England and Rome.
 
Top