Hadrada wins at Stamford Bridge

What does this mean? End of the Viking Age? England rule from Norway or Norway ruled from England? England given to another son when the king dies? Will William of Normandy still invade England and if so, what are the chances he beats Harald?
 
After Stamford Bridge Hadrada need to defeat William the Conqueror too, otherwise history would not change drasticaly, William would just have different opponent during alternate Battle of Hastings.
 
William was already invading. He landed in England only 3 days after the battle of Stamford Bridge. In fact, I'd say that the Normans have a better chance at taking England if Hardrada wins at Stamford bridge, because the Norwegians invaded with about 9,000 men, fewer than what the Anglo-Saxons had, and with the losses suffered at Stamford Bridge, the Normans will probably have the numerical advantage. Also, the Norwegians - unlike the Anglo-Saxons - when they rush south to meet with the Normans will have to move through hostile territory.
 
Would William have better relations with the AngloSaxons if instead of killing their king, he killed the man who killed their king? If so, how would that change his policies, if at all?

Edit: looks like a variation of this same question already got asked today in another thread
 
Last edited:
For a while, but not long. William wouldn't leave Hardrada too long to consolidate his position. The question is which side the northern English pick. If they fight with William, Hardrada is done for quickly. If they fight for Hardrada, it'll take longer and be similar to the OTL Harrying of the North.
 
Wasn't the division already agreed ? Of course, when Harold managed to curb-stomp Hardrada's men, William had --And took-- the chance to grab the lot...
 
I can see the Anglo-Saxons potentially throwing in with Hardrada and hoping to split off again from the "Nords" later like what happened with the Danes. Not that likely but I can see it being made to work.
 
@Nik
That's debatable. Some earlier historians argued that the two of them coordinated their invasions, but as William sat around waiting for good winds for some time the general consensus now is that they were acting independently. The idea of William and Hardrada being in cahoots was (is?) popular with those who argued for the Norman conquest being a bad thing overall, so wanting William to be not only a 'grasping invader' but also untrustworthy in that, according to this theory, he would just have attacked the weakened Hardrada anyway.
Of course, we'll never know for sure...
 
@Nik
That's debatable. Some earlier historians argued that the two of them coordinated their invasions, but as William sat around waiting for good winds for some time the general consensus now is that they were acting independently. The idea of William and Hardrada being in cahoots was (is?) popular with those who argued for the Norman conquest being a bad thing overall, so wanting William to be not only a 'grasping invader' but also untrustworthy in that, according to this theory, he would just have attacked the weakened Hardrada anyway.
Of course, we'll never know for sure...

As somebody who also believes the Norman conquest to be a Bad Thing, I can see why one might think that the two were co-conspirators. That being said, the lack of historical evidence and overall circumstances of the invasion make such an idea unlikely.
 
If Harald does manage somehow to defeat both Harold and William and take the entirety of England, what next? I guess that might depend on whether William is still alive or not, and the amount of men and wealth he has left. I might be misremembering things, but was William's invasion a make-or-break deal for him and/or Normandy?

1. How long might Tostig remain alive in this scenario? I could see Harald either having to depend on him in the short term, or having him killed to gain further support in the North, due to their dislike of Tostig. Either way, I don't think Harald would trust Tostig.
2. Maybe after a few years, might Harald try and take Denmark from Sweyn Estridsson again, or would Sweyn try to claim England from Harald first?
3. Denmark or no Denmark, when Harald passes away, which kingdom would he leave to which son? Or would he try leaving both kingdoms to both sons, like what Canute tried with his sons, Harald Harefoot and Harthacnut? Magnus (OTL Magnus II) had fought alongside the Welsh ruler, Gruffydd ap Llywelyn. And yet when Harald invaded England, he took his younger son, Olaf, with him and left Magnus is Norway as both regent and King.
 
Top