Is this a Plausible Scenario?

So I am currently working on a timeline with a POD during the Third Crusade (it probably won't be posted for a while - unlike my other two abandoned timelines, I shall write the bulk of the story before posting it, so I don't abandon the project mid-stream) and I have thought about including an idea which I speculated on in a WI post two months ago. Essentially, my idea is to have an earlier POD prior to the Third Crusade which changes England, although keeps world history more or less the same, thereby preventing any major divergences which would butterfly away the Third Crusade (or make it unrecognisable to the one which occurred during our timeline).

My idea is to have William the Conqueror (or William the Liberator, as he is known in the scenario I will post below) ascend to the throne of England with the support of the Witenagemot, thereby leading to the Normans Anglicising and consequently leading to Anglo-Saxon culture (including Old English) remaining dominant in England post-1066. I will post the scenario below, and I hope that I have done it in such a way which minimises external butterflies and contains changes to the British Isles, thereby allowing history to progress to my main POD.

Any feedback on this scenario would be greatly appreciated, and if it is too implausible, then I will duly remove the idea from my timeline and carry on with the original POD during the Third Crusade.

Without further ado, here is the scenario:

1066

January: Edward III ‘the Confessor’, King of the English [1], passes away childless, leaving no clear successor for the Witenagemot, upon meeting after the passing away of the late King, to appoint. Eventually, the Witan resolves to appoint Harold Godwinson, Earl of Wessex and the most important nobleman during Edward III’s reign, as King Harold II. This enraged two other claimants to the throne – Duke William of Normandy (first cousin once removed of Edward III and the man whom Edward III had allegedly proclaimed as his heir) and King Harald Hardrada of Norway (a descendant of Canute the Great, King of England, Denmark and Norway). Both men start to prepare armies for separate invasions of England to assert their claim to the throne.

September: Harald lands his Norwegian army (accompanied by Harold II’s exiled brother, Tostig Godwinson, who is supporting the Norwegians) on the bank of the Humber in Northern England and defeats a local English army, led by Earl Morcar of Northumbria, in battle. Harold II soon learns of this and quickly moves north to confront the Norwegian invasion with his own army – the two forces clash at the village of Stamford Bridge, near York, on the 25th.

Initially, it appears that the battle will be an easy win for Harold II and the English – Harald and the Norwegians are caught by surprise at the quick response to their landing, while the English army is larger than its Norwegian counterpart. As the battle progresses, it appears that the English forces are close to triumph, yet disaster strikes when Harold II is hit by an arrow in the throat [2] and falls down dead, leaving the English army leaderless. When it becomes clear to the English soldiers that their King is dead, panic ensues and, in the confusion, Harald is able to rally his men and push the English line back. Eventually, a confused withdrawal occurs of English soldiers and the Battle of Stamford Bridge ends in a Norwegian victory. It is, however, a pyrrhic one – the Norwegians lose 4,000 of their 9,000 men in battle.

Following their victory at Stamford Bridge, the Norwegian army moves upon Eoforwic [3], which is defenceless as the English army has retreated south following the disaster at Stamford Bridge, and capture the city. Tostig duly proclaims Harald as King of the English on the 26th, yet this is not recognised by the nobility in the South, who prepare to assemble the Witenagemot to appoint their own successor to Harold II.

The Witenagemot meets on the 27th and the earls and clergymen present initially decide that Edgar the Atheling, the grandson of King Edmund Ironside and therefore the last member of the House of Wessex, should be appointed as the new King. Yet, when news reaches the assembled Witan that a Norman army shall set sail for England within days, the noblemen present agree to a different course of action – they agree to offer William the throne of England, in exchange for defeating Harald and the Norwegians in the North, maintaining the existing Anglo-Saxon nobility in place in England and respecting the rights and customs of the Anglo-Saxon population of England.

This proposal reaches William the following day, only hours before the Norman forces are set to sail for England, and the Duke puts on hold his invasion to consider the Witan’s offer. Eventually, on the 30th, William decides to accept, and envoys are duly sent across the Channel to inform the Witenagemot of his decision. When news of the agreement between William and the English nobility reaches the Duke’s prepared army, most foreign mercenaries (who enlisted in William’s invasion force based on a promise of land in England) disband and return home, yet the main force (Normandy’s own army) remains loyal to William and agrees to cross with the soon-to-be King to England.

October: William lands at Pefensea Bay [4] on the 1st and travels to Lundenburh [5], where he is crowned by the Archbishop of Cantwareburh [6], Stigand, as King of the English on the 3rd. The new King then prepares to confront the advancing Norwegian army (which, by October, has reached Ledecestre [7] and intends to march on Lundenburh to assert Harald’s claim to the throne) by combining the English army previously commanded by Harold II with his Norman army and moving north to meet Harald in battle.

Eventually, on the 5th, William’s Anglo-Norman forces and Harald’s Norwegian forces meet in battle outside of the town of Rodewell [8], starting the Battle of Rodewell. From the start of the engagement, William’s men hold an advantage, as they enjoy numerical superiority while Harald’s forces have yet to recover from Stamford Bridge (Norwegian reinforcements having not yet arrived) and have been unsuccessful in its attempts to recruit English armies in the North to their cause. Therefore, by the end of the day, the battle is over in an Anglo-Norman victory, as Harald falls in battle, leaving the Norwegian army in disarray.

William and his forces then pursue the Norwegians, who are now in a scattered retreat and leaderless, north, where several minor skirmishes finish off their adversaries - in one such skirmish, Tostig, who managed to escape death at Rodewell, is slain. The last Norwegian noblemen present in England offer the new King generous payments for safe passage out of England to return to Norway, which William accepts, and by the 10th the last Norse invasion of England is at an over – thereby marking the point at which most historians accept as being the end of the Viking Age. Meanwhile, William, for successfully evicting the Norwegian invasion, subsequently becomes known as ‘William the Liberator’ and starts his new reign over England.


1066 – 1087

William reigns as King of the English. During this time, William gradually shores up his position in England by filling vacant positions in the English nobility with Normans who accompanied him in 1066 [9], yet also makes several overtures to the Anglo-Saxon population and government of England in the meantime – for instance, his third son William the Red [10] (whom William intends to inherit England, while his eldest son, Robert Curthose, will inherit Normandy) is married to Cristina, daughter of Edward the Exile and sister of Edgar the Atheling, and therefore a member of the House of Wessex [11]. Meanwhile, in Normandy, William starts to appoint Anglo-Saxons to positions in the Norman Court, so as to have officials in the Duchy who are above the typical intrigue which has marked Normandy since William's ascension to the position of Duke in 1035 [12]. Other developments overseen by William during his reign include the collection of the Domesday Book, a major survey of the population of England done so as to provide William with an idea of the state of the land of his new Kingdom, how it is occupied and by whom, while several castles and fortresses are also constructed by William during his reign to solidify his control [13].


1087

September: William I passes away and his plans for succession are duly implemented by the Witenagemot [14] – William the Red receives England, and is crowned King of the English, while Robert Curthose receives the Duchy of Normandy. Neither of the brothers are satisfied with the succession, however, (Robert having already been in open revolt against his father during his final years with the support of the King of France) and conflict will erupt between William II and Robert shortly after the death of their father.


1087 – 1189

The following Monarchs reign as Kings of the English [15]:

- 1087 – 1100: William II

- 1100 – 1135: Henry I

- 1135 – 1154: Stephen I
Note that, at the time of the death of Henry, the succession to the English throne is disputed, between his last surviving legitimate child, Matilda, and Stephen, Count of Blois. In order to reinforce Matilda's position, Henry has the Witenagemot meet during his lifetime and appoint Matilda as his successor-designate. However, upon the death of Henry, the noblemen of England, who prefer Stephen over Matilda, decide to take the unprecedented step of declaring their decision made during Henry's reign to be null and void, and so a second meeting of the Witenagemot appoints Stephen as King. This triggers a civil war in England known as the Anarchy, which pits forces loyal to Stephen against forces loyal to Matilda, who remains a rival claimant to the throne.

- 1154 – 1189: Henry II
Note that Henry II appoints his son, Henry, as co-King of the English during his reign, yet Henry II ultimately outlives his son, who passes away in 1183.


1189

July: King Henry II of the English passes away and the Witenagemot meets shortly afterwards, voting to confer the throne to his eldest son, Richard. Richard (who becomes known as Richard ‘the Lionheart’ during his reign) duly becomes King of the English and prepares to embark upon the Third Crusade alongside King Philip II of France to link up with Holy Roman Emperor Frederick Barbarossa and evict the forces of Saladin from the Holy Land.

***​

[1] In this timeline, the Anglo-Saxon title of ‘King of the English’ is still used by English monarchs post-1066, and England is officially the ‘Kingdom of the English’ (although the nation is almost universally referred to as ‘England’, much like in our timeline the ‘French Republic’ is referred to as ‘France’). In addition to this, one will note that, as well as being ‘the Confessor’, Edward is also referred to as ‘Edward III’ – this is because, in this timeline, the continued dominance of Anglo-Saxon culture post-1066 means that the Anglo-Saxon Monarchs of England are included in the regnal numbering system.

[2] This is the first Point of Divergence – in our timeline, it was Harald Hardrada who was hit by an arrow and died at Stamford Bridge.

[3] The Anglo-Saxon name for York. With Anglo-Saxon culture remaining dominant in this timeline, and Old English unchallenged, pre-1066 place names in England continue to be used up until the present day.

[4] The Anglo-Saxon name for Pevensey Bay.

[5] The Anglo-Saxon name for London.

[6] The Anglo-Saxon name for Canterbury.

[7] The Anglo-Saxon name for Leicester.

[8] The Anglo-Saxon name for Rothwell.

[9] Consequently, by the end of William’s reign in this timeline, the English nobility is more or less the same as it was in our timeline at the end of William’s reign. Yet there are two crucial differences – first, there are only two ranks in the English nobility post-1066 – ‘Earl’ and ‘Thane’. These were the two ranks of nobility (aside from the titles given to Royals) in Anglo-Saxon England, and with William agreeing to abide by Anglo-Saxon customs, they remain the only two titles (in our timeline, the position of Earl survived post-1066 while the position of Thane faded away).

The second difference is that, since William’s appointment of Norman lords in England is more gradual in this timeline, the Normans (including William) are Anglicised, as they spend their time before vacancies emerge in an English Court where the nobility speaks English. Therefore, nearly all Normans appointed as Earls and Thanes by William in this timeline can speak fluent English – this means that there is no language gap between the aristocracy and population of England in this timeline.

As a consequence of this, Middle English never develops and so Old English continues to be used by in this timeline for several centuries more, until the language naturally morphs as into what is referred to in this timeline as 'Modern English'. The differences between Old English and this alternate Modern English (which begins around 1300, and is spoken to the present day of this timeline by English-speakers) are as follows:

- Vowel reduction (in our timeline, this was a major feature of the transition from Old Dutch to Middle Dutch, which the transition in this timeline between Old English and Modern English mirrors), and

- A few Latin loanwords entering the English language. Due to the existence of a Norman nobility, almost all of these loanwords relate to Government - so, in this timeline, 'Ealdorman' would still become 'Earl' in this timeline, 'Thegn' would still become 'Thane', and so on.

Nonetheless, this alternate Modern English retains many aspects of Old English, including (to list a few notable examples):

- The vast majority of the vocabulary of the English language remaining of Germanic origin, with English still being considered a fully Germanic language,

- The word order of English remaining freer, and

- The Old English alphabet being retained, so words such as æ (ash) and þ (thorn) continue to be used.

Now, for everyone's convenience, I shall use our timeline's Modern English, rather than this timeline's Modern English, when writing this timeline, so when a Chapter in prose arrives featuring people from England, then you must use your imagination and pretend that they are speaking in this timeline's English, while when I write an extract from a history book, newspaper or any other media from this timeline, also pretend that it is written in this timeline's English. I will, however, use this timeline's Modern English names for places in England (as I have been doing already), which remain the same as they were in Old English.

[10] Known as ‘William Rufus’ in our timeline (the future William II). ‘Rufus’ is ‘the Red’ in Latin, so it is likely that in this timeline his nickname would be translated into English due to the Anglicisation of the Normans. Also, William I's second son, Richard, still dies in a hunting accident in this timeline.

[11] Although this marriage does not produce children, and so William II still dies childless in this timeline (dying in the hunting accident in New Forest like in our timeline).

[12] Unlike the Norman noblemen whom William appoints in England in our timeline and this alternate timeline, the Norman lords who remain in Normandy do not owe their existence to him, and so their loyalty is more suspect. Therefore, in a timeline where William has better relations with the Anglo-Saxons, it is likely that the King would appoint Anglo-Saxons to positions in Normandy so as to have impartial figures in the Duchy who cannot be bribed and coerced by any lords in there who are still secretly hostile to William.

[13] Obviously, in our timeline the vast number of castles which William oversaw the construction of were to prevent local rebellions breaking out, as there was significant discontent against the Conqueror after his ascension of the throne. However, in this timeline, the threat of local rebellions is less, due to William having ascended with the support of the Witenagemot, agreed to respect English culture and evicted a Norse invasion – nonetheless, William still builds several castles (albeit less than in our timeline) as a precautionary measure, due to mistrust with the nobility he receives upon ascending to the throne.

[14] Which, now filled with Norman noblemen, rarely meets, as neither William nor his successors are keen on a body keeping their power in check and so do not summon the Witenagemot during their lifetimes to consult them on policy. Nonetheless, the Witenagemot continues to control succession to the English throne and so continues to meet after the passing of each Monarch in this timeline - after William II passes away, the Witan appoints Henry I as King. The succession between Henry and Stephen is discussed in detail in the timeline, while, after Stephen's own death, his agreement to allow Henry II to ascend to the throne is supported by the Witenagemot when they assemble in this timeline shortly after Stephen's passing. Nonetheless, the Witan continues to be unused during the reigns of English monarchs until the passage of the Provisions of Oxford in 1258 (which, in this timeline, lead to a strengthened Witan rather than the establishment of a Parliament – although this shall be discussed in greater detail later on).

[15] The reigns of the subsequently mentioned monarchs proceed more or less the same as in our timeline.
 
Last edited:
So I have one issue with this idea; even without Norman dominance of England culturally, English would NOT remain the same as Old English much longer than OTL. Many of the grammatical and phonological changes going into Middle English had been in motion since the Danelaw was established, which would result in changes more or less like those of OTL. Vocabulary would be mildly influenced by Normandy by comparison to OTL but it'd still happen (witness the Scots dialects), and orthography would shift with time from both Old English and OTL Middle English.

The scenario is cool, but the above bit stood out for me.
 
So I have one issue with this idea; even without Norman dominance of England culturally, English would NOT remain the same as Old English much longer than OTL. Many of the grammatical and phonological changes going into Middle English had been in motion since the Danelaw was established, which would result in changes more or less like those of OTL. Vocabulary would be mildly influenced by Normandy by comparison to OTL but it'd still happen (witness the Scots dialects), and orthography would shift with time from both Old English and OTL Middle English.

The scenario is cool, but the above bit stood out for me.

Interesting - I always thought that the change from Old to Modern English was a direct result of the Norman Conquest.

So, in this timeline could we expect English to evolve into something similar to what we call Anglish in our timeline (i.e. with events such as the Great Vowel Shift still occurring, yet the actual vocabulary of the language remaining completely - or at least mostly - Germanic)?
 
@The Professor

Seems like your neck of the woods, and with the language debate thought I’d mention you.
Thanks. I had intended to respond but forgot!

Timeline Notes:
It seems odd to me that a) the Witan would have been notified of the Norman Army so quickly and b) that they would have made William an offer. They would have been very wary that he'd replace too many nobles with Normans, precisely the reason Harold got the nod first.
Still one can get around it by use of unreliable narrators, legend, propaganda etc.
Whilst I can see William stamping his authority on the kingdom he won't be able to appoint too many Normans in place of perfectly acceptable English lords. And he won't be able to impose the feudal system directly. Nor could William II refuse their role in the succession since Henry or Robert could then back the Witan in removing him.
William's acceptance of the Witan's offer also solidifies their role in the succession so assuming Henry is still sonless Mathilda's accession would be assured if the Witan backed her. No Anarchy would result since the alternate heirs - which include Stephen of Blois's older brothers - would need to invade Norman Conquest style.

Language Notes:
@FleetMac is perfectly correct most of the changes to Old English occurred thanks to the Danelaw (though some could be argued as starting under a Brittonic substrate). What the Norman Conquest did was remove the standardising effects of the administration, effectively accelerating changes, and provide a more prestigious source of vocabulary.
I have a few ideas of my own regarding how an Alt English could develop so feel free to ask questions on that @Britannicus
 
They would have been very wary that he'd replace too many nobles with Normans, precisely the reason Harold got the nod first.
It is largely a 'desperate times call for desperate measures' decision - the Witan know that to grant the throne to Edgar the Atheling would mean an attack on two fronts, something which would be dire. Therefore, they decide to chose the lesser of two evils and offer the throne to William (in exchange for the agreement to respect their rights and customs).

Whilst I can see William stamping his authority on the kingdom he won't be able to appoint too many Normans in place of perfectly acceptable English lords. And he won't be able to impose the feudal system directly.
William's appointment of Norman lords in this timeline is a gradual process, which only occurs as the Earls and Thanes who are already present in England pass away and William refuses to allow their heirs to inherit the throne, instead confiscating the Earldoms and granting them to Normans (or creating new titles, so as to create a peerage in England which mirrors that of our timeline (although without Dukes)).

Nor could William II refuse their role in the succession since Henry or Robert could then back the Witan in removing him.
Good point - I'll amend my timeline so that the Witan continues to have a say in succession after William II.

William's acceptance of the Witan's offer also solidifies their role in the succession so assuming Henry is still sonless Mathilda's accession would be assured if the Witan backed her.
I'd disagree that the Witan would appoint Matilda - if I recall correctly, Stephen was well-supported amongst the nobility of England (aside from Robert of Gloucester, Matilda's half-brother), and this nobility is still in place in this timeline and would therefore sit on the Witan and appoint the new Monarch.

I have a few ideas of my own regarding how an Alt English could develop so feel free to ask questions on that
Very kind of you to offer. In light of the point made by yourself and @FleetMac , I'd say that my main question on the development of English would be:
It seems like the transition from Old to Middle English was already in full-swing by 1066, and that the Norman Conquest only accelerated the change and led to an increase in Latin-derived words in the English vocabulary as part of the change. So, if we assume that Middle English eventually emerges (albeit without the Latin influences), and then that butterflies are kept to a minimum when it comes to the further development of English (i.e. events such as the Great Vowel Shift still occur), could we assume that, by the modern day of this timeline, English would more or less resemble what we call 'Anglish' in this timeline (i.e. modern English, yet completely Germanic and lacking in Latin elements)?
 
William's appointment of Norman lords in this timeline is a gradual process, which only occurs as the Earls and Thanes who are already present in England pass away and William refuses to allow their heirs to inherit the throne, instead confiscating the Earldoms and granting them to Normans (or creating new titles, so as to create a peerage in England which mirrors that of our timeline (although without Dukes)).
The confiscation would very difficult to do. It would alienate all his AS support. If he kept it up then he'd have a fullscale rebellion on his hands.
Compare how the Scandinavian Courts acted in the 1200s.
I'd disagree that the Witan would appoint Matilda - if I recall correctly, Stephen was well-supported amongst the nobility of England (aside from Robert of Gloucester, Matilda's half-brother), and this nobility is still in place in this timeline and would therefore sit on the Witan and appoint the new Monarch.
I did say "if backed by the Witan".
Stephen became King OTL because his younger brother Bishop Henry was influential in the court and Stephen got to England before his elder brothers.
TTL that's not guaranteed, a stronger Witan would be choosing Beauclerc's successor while he lives and from among all his (male) relatives with his choice dominant. We could be looking at Theobald I or William III here. They might even consider David of Scotland, nephew to Edgar.
Very kind of you to offer. In light of the point made by yourself and @FleetMac , I'd say that my main question on the development of English would be:
It seems like the transition from Old to Middle English was already in full-swing by 1066, and that the Norman Conquest only accelerated the change and led to an increase in Latin-derived words in the English vocabulary as part of the change. So, if we assume that Middle English eventually emerges, and then that butterflies are kept to a minimum when it comes to the further development of English (i.e. events such as the Great Vowel Shift still occur), could we assume that, by the modern day of this timeline, English would more or less resemble what we call 'Anglish' in this timeline (i.e. modern English, yet completely Germanic and lacking in Latin elements)?
Middle English only occurred after a couple of centuries of Norman Rule. Without Normanisation there won't be Middle English like OTL and thus not a Germanicised Modern English.
However one can assume that the equivalent Modern Alt English would bear some resemblance to a Germanicised Middle English with some level of vowel shift and an orthography evolved from Old English rather than Norman and French.
 
@Britannicus I'll leave the political discussion aside since I'm less versed in Medieval politics than others on here, but @The Professor makes a good point about Norman influence being influential on OTL Modern English (largely by way of Chancery Standard). I would point out that Chaucer's dialect was a distillation of East Midland and Kentish/Sussex dialects, so morphologically speaking that could sorta still happen without Norman domination (largely since Midland English was a medium of standardized features between Wessex and the North).

A centralized England without Wessex might retain the grammar and word order that characterized OTL Middle English; however, it wouldn't be identical necessarily (post-William especially). And again, spelling would follow closer to Old English but gradually shift away from it as the spoken language changed much like Old Dutch morphed into Middle Dutch in spelling terms. The end result IMO would resemble a mashup of Danish and Frisian (probably less the letter K, at least in comparison to OTL English) with loanwords from French and the odd Welsh/Goidelic entry.
 
In terms of dotting I’s and crossing T’s:

How did the Normans cross the channel in this TL earlier than OTL?

Rufus wasn’t the second son but the third – so Richard still has his hunting accident in the New Forest?

Which brings us neatly to the death of Rufus – why does he die in 1100? Does he still have a ‘hunting accident’ in the New Forest as well?

Unsure of why there is an emphasis on the non-use/appearance of the title Duke at this stage of your TL. OTL it came into use in the English peerage mid-1300’s.
 
I don’t usually pay to much attention to TL’s from the Middle Ages. It’s just not my thing. But sir, you have my attention!

Watching this thread.

So far the only thing that I see as being unlikely is for both Harold & Tostig to be killed the same battle. Now you could have Harold killed in the main battle and have Tostig killed either in the pursuit afterwards or in a skirmish just before the battle.

Also, given the increased loyalty of the Anglo-Saxon nobles you could have Anglo-Saxons appointed to positions in Normandy. Their loyalty is more likely to be focused on the king who appointed them than to some local noble or faction.
 
Stephen became King OTL because his younger brother Bishop Henry was influential in the court and Stephen got to England before his elder brothers.
TTL that's not guaranteed, a stronger Witan would be choosing Beauclerc's successor while he lives and from among all his (male) relatives with his choice dominant. We could be looking at Theobald I or William III here. They might even consider David of Scotland, nephew to Edgar.
Good point - I've decided to amend the scenario so that Henry decides to call the Witan while he is still alive so as to ensure that Matilda is his successor (much like how he sought to secure the English nobility's support for Matilda in our timeline), and the Witan duly appoints Matilda as Henry's heir-designate. However, the Witan, not wishing to see Matilda as Queen and continuing to favour Stephen (who manages to reach England first, like in our timeline), decides to annul their own decision once Henry passes away and meets again, voting to appoint Stephen rather than Matilda as England's new Monarch.

Middle English only occurred after a couple of centuries of Norman Rule. Without Normanisation there won't be Middle English like OTL and thus not a Germanicised Modern English.
However one can assume that the equivalent Modern Alt English would bear some resemblance to a Germanicised Middle English with some level of vowel shift and an orthography evolved from Old English rather than Norman and French.

I'll leave the political discussion aside since I'm less versed in Medieval politics than others on here, but @The Professor makes a good point about Norman influence being influential on OTL Modern English (largely by way of Chancery Standard). I would point out that Chaucer's dialect was a distillation of East Midland and Kentish/Sussex dialects, so morphologically speaking that could sorta still happen without Norman domination (largely since Midland English was a medium of standardized features between Wessex and the North).

A centralized England without Wessex might retain the grammar and word order that characterized OTL Middle English; however, it wouldn't be identical necessarily (post-William especially). And again, spelling would follow closer to Old English but gradually shift away from it as the spoken language changed much like Old Dutch morphed into Middle Dutch in spelling terms. The end result IMO would resemble a mashup of Danish and Frisian (probably less the letter K, at least in comparison to OTL English) with loanwords from French and the odd Welsh/Goidelic entry.
So, based off of your advice and some research on the Old Dutch-Middle Dutch transition which @FleetMac identifies, I'd say that, in this timeline, Old English would gradually morph into a new language with the following changes:

- Vowel reduction would take place (this seems to have been one of the central changes which marks the end of Old Dutch and the start of Middle Dutch).

- A few Latin loanwords would enter the language, although not nearly as much as in our timeline. In my opinion, the words most likely to enter the language would be relating to Government, given the continued existence of a Norman nobility, so 'Ealdorman' would still become 'Earl' in this timeline, 'Thegn' would still become 'Thane', and so on.

However, many aspects of Old English would remain in this new language, including:

- The vast majority of words being of Germanic origin (obviously).

- A freer word order than the Modern English of our timeline.

- The Old English alphabet, so words such as æ (ash) and þ (thorn) continue to be used.

Is this a language which could plausibly develop from Old English?


How did the Normans cross the channel in this TL earlier than OTL?
They didn't - in our timeline, William landed at Pevensey Bay on September the 28th, while in this timeline he lands at Pevensey Bay on October the 1st.

Rufus wasn’t the second son but the third – so Richard still has his hunting accident in the New Forest?

Which brings us neatly to the death of Rufus – why does he die in 1100? Does he still have a ‘hunting accident’ in the New Forest as well?
Yes, both of them died in their respective hunting accidents (or 'accident's as it could be said for William II). I know this seems quite convergent, but my objective in this scenario is to create a butterfly-minimum Anglo-Saxon England for my timeline (which shall focus on the Third Crusade).

Unsure of why there is an emphasis on the non-use/appearance of the title Duke at this stage of your TL. OTL it came into use in the English peerage mid-1300’s.
Didn't know that - I'll amend the timeline to remove the mention of the absence of Dukedoms, and instead focus on the retention of Thanedoms.

I don’t usually pay to much attention to TL’s from the Middle Ages. It’s just not my thing. But sir, you have my attention!

Watching this thread.
Thank you! Although I should point out that this thread is simply to see if the scenario I posted is plausible - it shall form part of a timeline which I am currently writing and will start posting soon.

So far the only thing that I see as being unlikely is for both Harold & Tostig to be killed the same battle. Now you could have Harold killed in the main battle and have Tostig killed either in the pursuit afterwards or in a skirmish just before the battle.
Actually, in our timeline, Harald and Tostig were both killed at Stamford Bridge. Nonetheless, I see your point, so I'll amend the timeline to have Tostig killed in confused fighting in the aftermath of the battle.

Also, given the increased loyalty of the Anglo-Saxon nobles you could have Anglo-Saxons appointed to positions in Normandy. Their loyalty is more likely to be focused on the king who appointed them than to some local noble or faction.
I suppose this could work - given the fraught relations between William and the Norman aristocracy in our timeline, I could certainly see William appointing neutral Anglo-Saxons to positions in the Norman Court who are above its intrigue.
 
Last edited:
They didn't - in our timeline, William landed at Pevensey Bay on September the 28th, while in this timeline he lands at Pevensey Bay on October the 1st.

D'oh! Was forgetting the Bastard 'holed' up for a couple of weeks on the Sussex coast.

Best wishes for your TL.
 
Top