Who, other than William was most likely to conquer England?

Who, other than William and Harald Hadraada, was most likely to conquer England?

  • Máel Coluim mac Donnchada (Malcolm Canmore) of Scotland

    Votes: 2 2.7%
  • Diarmait mac Máel na mBó (King of Leinster)

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Count Baldwin of Flanders

    Votes: 4 5.5%
  • Henry IV, Holy Roman Emperor

    Votes: 1 1.4%
  • Conan II, Duke of Brittany

    Votes: 2 2.7%
  • Gruffudd ap Llywellyn

    Votes: 3 4.1%
  • Sweyn II of Denmark

    Votes: 55 75.3%
  • Philip I of France

    Votes: 6 8.2%

  • Total voters
    73
Why others even would want conquer England? With my knowledge William the Bastard was only whose had any rights for English throne and probably willing to conquer the country.
 
Sweyn tried in 1070 w the support of some Saxon rebels and was bought off by William. Truthfully, the odds were on Harold Godwinson's side, as in if doesn't loose, he wins eventually. Anyone invading has worse odds than William without the heavy cav and archers.
 
Ooops.

I read the last as Phillipes II of France, aka Phillipes Auguste.

My mistake, then, Philippes I had no real access to the sea.
 
Apart Svein of Danemark and Harald of Norway, none of the rulers listed there had both reasons and ressources to claim and invade England.
By 1066, at least. With an earlier PoD (in the Xth or early XIth century), things might be different.

For Bretons, for exemple, I proposed something with a PoD in 931 some time ago. Obviously, it would change many things, including the geopolitical situation of late Anglo-Saxon England. But you get my point.
 
Last edited:

Redbeard

Banned
Svend Forkbeard and his son Canute the Great (both Kings of Denmark) actually were Kings of England too, Svend only very briefly however before he died.

Canute IV of Denmark (The Holy) was preparing an invasion of England in 1086 when he was killed by rebellious subjects and the invasion fleet assembled in the Limfjord was dissolved.
 

trajen777

Banned
If Harold of Norway had sailed after William he most likely would have won. William was held up by storms -- Harold of England marched north to confront and in the battle of Stamford br surprised Harold of N with 3/4 of his troops who had their arms but not armor -- so if Harold had had all of his troops in the south to confront William -- would have had better chance to win -- then had to march N to confront Harold with wakened army so most likly lost to Harold of N -- who was allied with Harold of E brother
 
Well, if you're going by claim alone, the Welsh have plenty. However, not only would Llewellyn have to completely unify Wales (maybe for a generation), he would also require incredible amounts of civil war in order to do anything beyond humbling some Marcher Lords and pushing the frontier back a little into Lloegyr.

The other celts... are impossible unless the Scots get stupid, and the Danes and Norwegians would require about the same circumstances as the Welsh.
 
When is this conquering meant to take place place? My assumption is that it is somehow connected to the crisis of 1066. In which case if I was to vote it would be for Gruffydd Ap Llywelyn.
I can see it now: Coming back from the dead, the first King of Wales takes his vengeance on Harold Godwineson. After collecting his head from London Bridge, Gruffydd leads his zombie army into continental Europe.:p
 
Why others even would want conquer England? With my knowledge William the Bastard was only whose had any rights for English throne and probably willing to conquer the country.

Well, his claim was in right of his wife, a daughter of the Count of Flanders and a descendant of Alfred the Great. So the Counts of Flanders must have also had a claim.

I agree, however, that with William and Hardrada out of the game, it's not clear that anyone else would be able to do it in the near future.
 

Redbeard

Banned
Well, his claim was in right of his wife, a daughter of the Count of Flanders and a descendant of Alfred the Great. So the Counts of Flanders must have also had a claim.

I agree, however, that with William and Hardrada out of the game, it's not clear that anyone else would be able to do it in the near future.

Hmm, Canute IV in 1086 had a fleet of 1000 ships assembled in the Limfjord, that is an army of 20.000 + men (each ship at least 20 men). He hesitated to send it across the North Sea due to some unsolved business with the Emperor and parts of the army then mutineered and killed him at Odense.

It would probably only require minor PoDs in the timing and you have 20.000 + men land in England. William had 12.000 at Hastings.
 
Well, his claim was in right of his wife, a daughter of the Count of Flanders and a descendant of Alfred the Great. So the Counts of Flanders must have also had a claim.

I agree, however, that with William and Hardrada out of the game, it's not clear that anyone else would be able to do it in the near future.
His wife's claim hardly matters.It's like saying the 100th placed(Matilda) in the line of succession actually had a right to the throne over someone like Prince Charles(Edgar).
 
His wife's claim hardly matters...

It does, and claiming a title on behalf one one's wife rights is hardly unheard of : see, for exemple, Henri's II claims on the County of Toulouse in the XIIth century.

It's just that Flanders didn't have either the ressources or the focus to do so in England.
 
It does, and claiming a title on behalf one one's wife rights is hardly unheard of : see, for exemple, Henri's II claims on the County of Toulouse in the XIIth century.

It's just that Flanders didn't have either the ressources or the focus to do so in England.

Problem is that Matilda's claim to the throne is so bad it's laughable,that is compared to that of Edgar and his sisters.Eleanor of Aquitaine at least has a claim to the county of Toulouse.
 
Problem is that Matilda's claim to the throne is so bad it's laughable,that is compared to that of Edgar and his sisters.Eleanor of Aquitaine at least has a claim to the county of Toulouse.

A claim's relevance is never more good than one's possibility to back it up.
For instance, William's other part of the claim was basically "He promised me the crown", which is as bad as you could imagine as a claim. Still...

While Mathilda's claim isn't exactly obvious as well, using it (while I'm not aware it was IOTL) would have been another shady justification that could have been used without too much more trouble.
 
Well, it's not on there but a surviving Magnus the Good had a claim, as well as Edward's mother's support. My TL I'm writing up right now actually centers on that - and he certainly had a bigger shot at it than the majority of that list!
 
Top