His expedition to England fails. His fleet is largely destroyed in an unexpected storm and his ship sinks and he drowns. The Normans continue to claim the English crown, but cannot launch another expedition. Would this result in a faster French re-conquest of Normany?
His expedition to England fails. His fleet is largely destroyed in an unexpected storm and his ship sinks and he drowns. The Normans continue to claim the English crown, but cannot launch another expedition. Would this result in a faster French re-conquest of Normany?
Question, whould this England still go after Ireland like the one in OTL did?
Highly doubtful, at least in the next couple of centuries. Relations between the English and Irish were pretty good I think. The Norman invasion and resultant English intervention in Ireland was only really because some Norman nobles started building up a sizeable territory and the Norman king [in England] decided to intervene to remove any risk of them getting too powerful.
What you might possibly get, since Harold seems to have been a pretty capable leader, is an English intervention to help the Irish defeat a Norman invasion. Especially if the Norman ruler is trying to continue a claim to England.
Steve
I may be mistaken, but I remember hearing somewhere that one reason the Pope authorised the invasion was that England had sided with the Patriarch of Constantinople in the great schism. Assuming this is so, what would the effects be of an Orthodox aligned England repelling a Catholic aligned Norman invasion?
Once the English get their stuff together, regardless of what regime, Ireland is toast. It is close and divided- a much too tempting target. France might be a venue of eventual expansion, but the Normans are at the top of their game, and I don't know that the English are going to want to mess around with them.
Keeping the Normans in France might threaten the French crown. What do you think about Rufus making a royal marriage and deciding that the crown up the river is a better prize than the crown across the sea?
MC
In the longer term possibly. However don't forget that after Alfred's successor conquered the Danelaw they were mainly concerned with good relations with Scotland and Wales and stopping those peoples [as often not coherent states] from raiding the English borders. According to some sources one of them even gave Lothian to Scotland in return for the Scottish monarchy recognising his overlordship, something that was reported very unpopular with the people of the region. [Not to mention a seriously stupid act as it greatly strengthened a Scotland that continued to be a major threat to peace in the borders]. I can see a more militant line being taken with Scotland and Wales. Harold, as Edward's leading general masterminded a campaign against Wales to end a particlarly persistent period of raiding only a couple of years before Hastings for instance. As such I would see them as the main concerns of the English monarchy not Ireland, at least for the next century or two.
Ireland might be divided but it might also develop a clearer, stronger leadership over time and form a persistent state. Also as said there were trading links with Ireland.
If the Normans were defeated at Hastings but reformed to the degree that they were able to lauch a major invasion of Ireland and at the same time whoever their leader was maintained a claim to the English throne I think it very likely that a powerful military leader like Harold would seek to prevent them establish such a dangerous potential base. [Although since neither nation were particular naval powers at the time it would be very risky for the Normans to try and invade Ireland from Normandy!]
Ireland didn't unify in OTL, even with invasions of Anglo-Norman forces. I don't see any major ripples that could serve up a unified Ireland in this ATL.
Ireland did have a High King, though. At least in name it was united, even though said High King had almost no power in regards to the actual kingdoms in Ireland only in defense of all of them. However, it is possible that some High King in this ATL, possibly with English backing, could begin expanding his powers and if his subjects rebel, we get an Irish civil war that could unite the island as one country and give the High King true power over all of them(e.g. the power of the US federal gov't after the ACW). Heh, this ATL might have the Irish and English as the closest of friends and allies.
I don't think that they would for several reasons.
First, his heirs would be having a slugfest to see who gets control of Normandy (bets are on Rufus over Robert - Robert seems too laid-back to win and Rufus was a real sh!t).
His heirs were at most teenagers, around fifteen years old (Robert Curthose). Somehow I can't see them fighting a large-scale war against each other at that young of an age.
Who would have died in the storm that kills William ITTL. Unfortunately I think they traveled together across the Channel.And they would probably have a time of getting rid of dear uncle Odo (of Bayeux)
Who would have died in the storm that kills William ITTL. Unfortunately I think they traveled together across the Channel.
Well, if the heirs aren't of age you could just as easily get a nasty civil war over the regency and/or various blocs or nobles who support one or the other and largely drive the war.His heirs were at most teenagers, around fifteen years old (Robert Curthose). Somehow I can't see them fighting a large-scale war against each other at that young of an age.