WI: Harold Hardrada won Stamford Bridge

If Hardrada had won easily, he might have been able to rally the local Anglo-Norse nobility, expel William, and re-establish the Danelaw. But if it was a close fight with many casualties on his side, William probably would probably have been able to defeat Harold's exhausted army.
 
If Harald wins (and Harold is dead) obviously), then you've got the first step towards him winning England. Harald is far more acceptable as king of England than William ever would be. Even better Norwegian rule could probably be ended within a generation or less if they are unpopular after they helpfully crush William for them.
 
If Harold managed to push William out, wouldn't he just be facilitating things for Edgar Atheling a year or two later?
 
If Harold managed to push William out, wouldn't he just be facilitating things for Edgar Atheling a year or two later?

Maybe; but there is no way to be sure that Harald would have a more difficult tie dealing with Edgar than William did. For one thing, if he is going to beat William, Harald is going to have to secure London before his for. Faced with the possibility of. Norman king over a Nordic King, the English lords will likely choose the later, depriving Edgar of his initial support he enjoyed in OTL. Even if Edgar is able to flee England gain the support of Scotland like in OTL, Harald should be able to deal with him.

A return of Edgar is possible, but no more likely than in OTL, I would think.
 
Maybe; but there is no way to be sure that Harald would have a more difficult tie dealing with Edgar than William did. For one thing, if he is going to beat William, Harald is going to have to secure London before his for. Faced with the possibility of. Norman king over a Nordic King, the English lords will likely choose the later, depriving Edgar of his initial support he enjoyed in OTL. Even if Edgar is able to flee England gain the support of Scotland like in OTL, Harald should be able to deal with him.

A return of Edgar is possible, but no more likely than in OTL, I would think.

I don't know, in this situation Harald is playing into the hands of the English nobility who are only backing him out of the immediate need to beat William. Once that is done with and if they get tired of king Harald they can just invite Edgar back and revolt against him (since now his forces will be massively drained from fighting both William and Harold for the throne).
 
actually ... depending on the outcome, an TL where Harald and William stalemates and split England in two, North going to the Anglo-Norse Lords pledging vassalage to Norway to help them stay independent from William, South conquered by William, could be quite interesting to see play out
 

Anaxagoras

Banned
Wasn't Harald only invading for Tostig Godwinson's sake.

No, he certainly had his own agenda. He simply used Tostig as a convenient excuse. Had Hardrada won, I have no doubt that Tostig would have ended up a minor court flunkie, if not drowned in the nearest pond.
 
Like it was said in another post, it depends on how many die in the battle. If the Berserker of Stamford Bridge isn't killed by a spear to the ball sack like in OTL, then he probably would have killed many more men before being killed himself. The more men he kills, the less that Harald's army has to deal with. Now let's assume that he stomps the Saxons, and recruits local men into his army. Now they've got "fresh" men, more weapons, more access to food and water...now what? I don't think that William would have invaded any later than he did, so now instead of the Saxons making the long, exhausting march allll the way down Saxony to fight William, it's Harald. Viking vs Viking. At this point you have to assume that the Norse are going to fight differently than the Saxons. As far as I see it, William still wins the battle, and then history goes on as it did in OTL.
 
Harold Hardrada would probably be beaten probably badly by William the Conqueror later on.
Its a bit lke the question - if Napoleon was well at the battle of Waterloo would he have won?
If Hardrada had his armour at Stamford Bridge, and the Berserka had support ?
What combined force would have visited William the Bastards lands the following year? (for he would not have England). The question is what would he have held?
 
Its a bit lke the question - if Napoleon was well at the battle of Waterloo would he have won?
If Hardrada had his armour at Stamford Bridge, and the Berserka had support ?
What combined force would have visited William the Bastards lands the following year? (for he would not have England). The question is what would he have held?

William, if he loses, will be dead. According to the story, at least, he burned his ships upon reaching England Ai that his men would have no opportunity to retreat and would HAVE to win. I'm not sure if the story Ia true or not, but I think there is a good chance that William the Bastard under up dead on the field of battle in the case of a loss.

What that will do to Normandy, I'm not sure; it could be that one of William's sons may try to press his claim at some time in the future; but its going to take some time for Normandy to become politically stable again after William's death, and all that time you will have Harald strengthening his position in England; making a second Norman incursion even less likely to succeed than the first.
 
No, he certainly had his own agenda. He simply used Tostig as a convenient excuse. Had Hardrada won, I have no doubt that Tostig would have ended up a minor court flunkie, if not drowned in the nearest pond.

Tostig would likely get something; he was promised Northumbria, but if Harald is going to be relying on the support of the Anglo-Norse lords of the North, he is goijg to have real difficulties fulfilling his end of the bargain (Tostig was HATED in Northumbria). I'm going to guess that Tostig is given an Earldom of one of his brothers (assuming more than one falls in the battle), but not a terribly influential one, and Harald will do well to keep an eye on him.
 
Top