Welcome back to the Randomizer!
Like my music one last week, I noticed I haven't done a
history article since bitching about the French and Germans in the Derping
Sessions of 1940.
So I wonder what historical period could I look
into.....what grinds my brain about history....Ah, possibly found one! 1066 and
the Battle of Hastings.
1066 is one of THE years of English History every-one of us
knows: The old king Edward the Confessor died early in the year and the most
powerful nobleman at the time Harold Godwinson was crowned King of England. And
he lived happily ever after....except he got an arrow in the eye. His rival to
the throne was that was famous and frankly brutal of men, William the Conqueror
who claimed that Edward had said he would be king, after beating him at the
medieval equivalent of FIFA. Never make such drastic actions when FIFA is
concerned. So William set up an invasion force and came to England for 'his'
crown. Harold at this time had defeated the Vikings already at Stamford Bridge
(Near York, not Chelsea's home ground) and set about gathering forces to face
the Norman Army at a tree and a hilltop.
There on October 14th 1066, the Battle of
Hastings was fought. The Anglo-Saxon army had the advantage at first but
eventually were slowly picked apart by William's forces. The arrows flew high
into the air and one managed to strike Harold in the eye, bringing about his
untimely demise. His loyal soldiers mounted a last stand against the Normans.
But for others it was a lost cause. William had won. On Christmas Day, he was
crowned King and England would never be the same again.
The battle will never leave the mindset of Englishman and Frenchman
alike. It has been embossed in our culture for over 900 years and not about to
go anytime soon. Our only ultimate artifact from that era or close to it is The
Bayeux Tapestry, which shows a distinct timeline from 1064 through to the
Battle itself and was embroided soon after the Conquest of England.
But as history goes, questions always follow around like a
lady-in-waiting concerning the events that led up to the Battle itself. There
are moments in the months and years before 1066 that impacted the people and
the country as a whole, some I would like to raise around Edward the Confessor
and his actions in deciding the successor to his crown. And of course, Harold's
actions and William's will be at the forefront of this too.
As you will see, History isn't just an enigma wrapped in a
mystery; It shows how life is the way it is.
-------------------------------
OK, a little background first.
England in the times before the conquest, had faced
invasions before by all sorts. In the 8th, 9th, 10th
and 11th centuries it was mostly the Vikings whom posed the most
threat, raiding the country sporadically. These invasions eventually led to the
unification of the Saxons under Alfred the Great and defeating the Viking army in 878, and
creating a treaty to sue for peace. The invasions continued to take place for
over 100 years but nothing ever came of it. That is until 1016, 50 years before
the great change.
A Viking called Canute (or Knut) had become co-ruler with Edmund Ironside over England,
until Ironside died sometime later. Canute ruled unopposed for 19 years,
spending much of his time by the seaside trying to hold back what he called,
'the bloody tide'. Also he managed to become King of Denmark as well after his
brother died and took over Norway and part of Sweden creating his own little
empire. Sort of like Charlemagne did years ago. In his reign, Canute chose a
man who would be significant later on as Earl of Wessex, Godwin.
It's possibly debated what Godwin's origins actually are.
What could be true is that he had initially supported Edmund Ironside against
Canute and the invasion of the Vikings, but presumably after Ironside died he
allied himself with Canute, and actually got married to his sister-in-law.
Canute liked him a lot apparently.
Then in 1035, Canute decided it was a good time to die. That
was silly, because his death led to a civil war in England and his empire
pretty much crumbled. Just like Charlemagne. His sons Harold Harefoot and
Hardicanute came after him and were at each other's throats. Harefoot lasted
until 1040 and Hardicanute didn't have a long time either, dying just two years
later.
Peace only came after Hardicanute's half brother, Edward
became king in 1042, and crowned on Easter Day a year later. Unfortunately,
peace was only a temporary moment as soon, England would cease to exist....
---------------------------------------------------
Edward the Confessor.
What can we say about this man? Well he built Westminster
Abbey, saved on money because he didn't go to war, lived off his own
lands....oh yeah, and he had grown up in Normandy.
Now I'm guessing some of you might be saying, "Really?
How did that happen?" Believe me, when I was Simon Schama's History of
Britain I was totally surprised to hear that this King of England had actually
grown up in a place that down the line would take over the country. But he
wasn't there exactly by choice.
His mother Emma was from Normandy and had been married to
Ethelred the Unready (Edmund Ironside's father). Ethelred wasn't a good king by
the looks of things, not as popular as his half brother Edward II. The Church
was against him and he kept facing an onslaught of Viking Invasions.In 1002, he
made his most brilliant decision ever! By committing an act of genocide on all
Danes living in England. What a douche!
Because he incurred the wrath of the Danish king Sweyn, his
family had to flee to Normandy and live in exile for a while. But though it
wasn't much of a choice, the experience of living in Normandy partially shaped
Edward as Simon Schama says 'politically and culturally'. It may even have led
him into having sympathies for the Norman world which would affect the
stability of the country years later. Schama suggested that Edward was one of a
few chosen to protect Robert the Duke of Normandy's son, William when he went
to the Holy Land.
When he finally became King of England, he also inherited
Godwin, whom ruled in his name. But Edward hated the man for good reason. A few
years earlier, his brother Alfred came to England and Godwin had met with him
for parley. But it was a trap and Alfred had his eyes put out and he suffered
for some time until his death a few days later. Though Edward did nothing about
his supposed rival for the time being...yet. And when Godwin offered up his
daughter Edith in marriage to Edward, he took her.
Despite whatever plans Godwin had, Edward could annoy him at
times. He married Edith but he never slept with her, resulting in a childless
marriage all throughout his reign. He also introduced some Norman allies to the
English court, which didn't bode well with some of the English houses and
caused some tension between King and Advisor.
The tensions came to a head in 1050-52 when an incident
involving Edward's sister in Kent prompted Edward to carry a war to the people.
Godwin refused and Edward capitalised on this, possibly confronting him on his
crime against his brother and throwing him out of the country. It was also
around this time where Edward had a rather....ahem.....controversial idea.
In between that time he filled his government with Normans
across the pond, putting them in positions of power. But he had another plan
afoot. It has been speculated that around this time, by Norman historians, that
Edward designated William the Bastard as his heir to the throne of England.
Now you might wonder why Edward would do such a thing in the
first place. But if you read back to what I said, it makes some sense as to
why. Being raised in Normandy far more then in England would seem to put Edward
in the mindset that Normandy felt more like a home then his country of birth ever
did. Maurice Ashley suggested the assumption that Edward: "felt he owned a
debt to the Normans"(Ashley, The Life and Times of William I, p.23). So it
doesn't seem all unnatural for him to turn to them in order to in his mind
stabilise the country.
And if we are to take his relationship with William into
account, one question arises when studying the events before 1066: Was William
promised the throne in the first place by Edward?
William had attained status as a strong military ruler in
Normandy, maybe because people don't know when to keep their mouth shut when a
bastard is around. Sheesh, I'm glad my brother didn't turn out like William!
But truthfully, he had overcome many challenges on his way to securing his home
from many other military men, like Guy of Burgandy and Geoffrey Martel, Count of
Anjou. So with this, and the suggestion that Schama gave about William being watched
over by Edward, it would have been foolhardy in Edward's mind at least, NOT to
ask William for help. I guess in return for his help, Edward would have made a
promise to bequest him the throne.
But history can play tricks on the uninitiated. If there was
any hard proof of the fact that William was promised the throne, surely the
paper would have been revealed around now. Ashley even states that: "It is
true that the King might have held vague promises to secure the Duke's
friendship" (Ashley, p.23). So Edward was playing the game of speaking promises, but not
actually carrying them out. Just like Politicians!
And even if he tried to carry out that promise, there was
another obstacle: The Witanegemot. This was a kind of council, summoned by the
King three times a year to give advice. After a king had died, the crown went
straight into the hands of the Witanegemot, since they also had the power to
elect a king, regardless of blood relationships or otherwise. Ashley does point
out that: "Almost any great nobleman who had some royal blood in his veins might
stake his claim" (Ashley, p.17)
This included men like Harold Godwinson, whose sister was
Edith and married to Edward, making his claim more of a kinship then most. A
second man was Harold Hardrada whose claim went back to Hardicanute promising
the throne to his father, King Magnus of Norway. Which was probably as flimsy
as the apparent promise made to William.
William's own claim was backed up by his blood ties to
Edward. You remember Edward's mother, Emma? It just so happens that Emma was
William's great aunt and made him second cousins with Edward. But even then it
would have done no good with the Witanegemot in control. Spartro suggested that
since Emma was only a Queen Consort, she could not: "convey any hereditary
claim to the throne" (Spartro, Royals of England, p. 3). This means that Emma's position was not to be taken
seriously and disregards William's blood claim away, as well as saying that
Edward's promises could probably be reduced to only preference.
Whatever plans Edward had for the future of England, they
weren't followed up. Edward's plan of getting rid of Godwin and his family
worked so well, Godwin came back with a vengeance in 1052 with a fleet to
embarrass Edward and regained his power when Edward yield. At the same time, it
is claimed that William, apparent heir to the throne, gave no help towards
Edward. Soon after, Edward quickly got rid of the Normans he had placed in
power and replaced the Norman Archbishop of Canterbury with an Englishman. Godwin's
victory was short-lived however, as he died a year later under mysterious
circumstances, while at dinner with the King himself.
His son Harold was elevated to Earl of Wessex, becoming the
most powerful man in England and taking over the reins of the King. For the
next 12 years, he was the dominate figure in English Government, as Edward
wittled away playing Medieval Total War: Viking Invasion wanting his dreams to
come true. Don't ask me how he managed to get a working computer/laptop in the
11th century, I think the Time Lords could've been involved somehow.
However, two significant events happened that would cause
Harold to have a migraine and bring the cultural world of Anglo-Saxon England
to its knees.
The first was a journey Harold made to Normandy in 1064, which
is depicted in the Bayeux Tapestry itself. A couple of theories have been made
as to why he made this journey. One was that when Edward had discussions with
William, hostages were included. So Wulfnoth (Harold's brother) and Hakon (Harold's
nephew) were selected, and now the time had come for securing their release.
The second, and more daring, was that Harold was confirming the promise of the
crown to William. This theory is supported by the Norman chroniclers, and
apparently not contradicted in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle.
But Schama does ask an interesting question: Why would
Harold do something that was against his own best interests? Maybe because it
was his brother and nephew that had been involved in the situation, and it might
have been better to negotiate in person. Of course, I am just speculating
events.
Things didn't go well to start with. Harold's fleet was
trapped in a storm and accidentally landed in the territory of Count Guy of
Ponthieu, who promptly arrested him. William sent a reply saying 'Bitch Please,
hand him over or war will be declared'. He duly obliged.
With Harold at his side, William brought him into his world.
He took him on an expedition to Brittany to sort out Conan of Brittany. No,
seriously that's his name. Never know, he could have looked like Arnie or Khal
Drogo. While on the expedition, Harold saved two of William's men from the
quick-sands of Mont St. Michel, possibly returning the favour for being
released by William.
After Conan's defeat, William makes Harold one of his
knights and in effect became his liege overlord. But Harold would have to make
an oath to the Duke in a two way obligation, as Schama puts it.
This picture shows Harold swearing allegiance, with hands
placed on two shrines in William's presence.
And here another question arises: Did Harold in fact swear
to uphold the Duke's right to the throne? This is more difficult to answer
since there isn't a clearer view of the situation. The only piece of real
evidence we have is this particular scene, and even then it could be seen as
Norman propaganda. Many theories again crop up as whether:
·
Harold swore to be William's man in Normandy
only
·
Harold swore to help William gain the throne
·
Harold was observing the treaty made between the
Duke and King, securing his nephew's release
·
Harold promising to marry William's daughter
·
Harold promised to play Sonic the Hedgehog, with
him being Tails.
There is another theory that Harold was forced to make the
oath to William, effectively trapping him and bringing about later
consequences. Some people believe in this theory. Craughwell states that:
If Harold swore a solemn oath on
the relic of saints recognizing William's right to succeed King Edward,
William, once he was made king, would make Harold richer and more powerful then
he was now. Behind the generous offer was an upspoken threat: If Harold had
refused to take the oath, he would be locked up in a Norman dungeon. Harold had
no choice; he placed his hands on the reliequaries and swore in the presence of
witnesses that William was Edward the Confessor's heir
(Craughwell, How the Barbarians Invasions Shaped the Modern World: The Vikings, Vandals, Huns, Mongols, Goths and Tartars who razed the old world and formed the new, p.224)
Though the idea of being made more powerful than ever sounds
indifferent because Harold already had the goods, it gives an idea on if Harold
hadn't accepted the oath. I would take this further in saying that this could
have made sense, since when you're made a knight, you are obligated to serve your
liege lord and "provide political support and fighting men" (Cosman,
Galeones, p.114). So in accepting the oath, Harold would have to help William
secure the throne easily, despite his own reservations. William had his rival
exactly where he wanted him.
It is also possible that Harold was in fact tricked into
swearing the oath on the holy shrines and that they were only revealed after he
had sworn, possibly leaving him more trapped.
A year after the Normandy expedition, more trouble occurred.
And at the centre of it all was Harold's own brother, Tostig. Tostig was the
Earl of Northumbria and reportedly a favourite of King Edward (he certainly
knew how to pick them, didn't he?). He was also a bit of a flaunter, acting like
a dictator in his own right and using power for his own personal gain by,
according to Alexander, seizing: "...property from the smaller churches of
the region...imposed heavy taxes on many of the richer inhabitants"
(Alexander, Three Crises in Early English History, p. 22-23). Because of these factors, he was eventually overthrown
when not present in his land and replaced with a man called Morcar.
Edward summoned Harold to curp this problem and somehow
restore Tostig back into authority. But there were two options ahead of them.
One: If Tostig was to be backed up, Edward would have a chance of crushing the
rebels with his army, the 'fyrd'. But in doing so might create a civil war. According
to Mason and Shoemaker, Edward's advisers pointed out that November would not
be the appropriate time to take action, because the terrain would be not known
to his army. Presumably a second point would be that winter was eventually
coming, it would not be easy to raise the numbers needed to defeat the rebels
and hold Tostig in office. (Mason, Shoemaker, p.130-131).
Harold had met with the rebels to reconciliate the parties,
but the rebels remained steadfast and wanted Morcar to stay as their Earl. He
probably then realised that if Tostig were reinstated, it would cause more harm
than good. He had made his people suffer and paid the price. Schama adds to
this air by suggesting that if Harold decided to forget his blood ties and
support his enemies: "they might be just feel grateful enough to offer him
their crucial support, when the time came to make his bid for the English
throne" (Schama, A History of Britain). This shows that Harold
could have been thinking about claiming the throne after Edward had died, and
would need all the support he could get. As the most powerful man in England,
taking the throne would have been a great temptation.
The second option they chose then was thus: Do nothing.
Allow Morcar to stay as the Earl of Northumbria. Tostig was and felt betrayed
by his own kin for doing nothing to alleviate his position. He fled in a self
imposed exile, away from England across the border to Flanders where his
father-in-law lived. In carrying through his decision, Harold had unfortunately
laid the stones for a brother's revenge against him which he will attempt to carry
out close to a year later, and it would led to the crashing end of Anglo-Saxon
England. As Schama put it:
It was this merciless war of brothers, that in
the end cost Harold his throne and his wife. More than anything else, it was
the cause of the death of Anglo-Saxon England.
(Schama, A History of Britain)
Edward seemed to be deeply affected by Harold's act of
breaking the family apart, as Jones states that he died about 8 weeks after the
events up north (Jones, Finding Fulford, p.20). In poor health, he requested the
consecration of Westminster Abbey brought forward, but was upset when he could
not attend the ceremony itself. Before his death, he had a nightmare which
might sound quite prophetic to those around his deathbed. Schama relates this
story in his series A History of Britain, as do Mason and Shoemaker in their
book The House of Godwine: The History of a Dynasty:
Two monks came to the King with a message from God. Because
of the sins and wickedness of those in government, God would hand the kingdom
over to evil spirits. When told that the people would not repent, Edward asked
when it would finally end. They replied until a tree was cleaved down the middle,
carrying three furlong seeds in its lopped part to come together again of its
own accord and grew again producing leaves and bearing fruit. Only then will
God grant his mercy.
Despite his words, both sources say that since Edward was
ill and old he was seen to be rambling.
In another of his final moments came a strange act. It is
claimed that Edward possibly designated Harold as his heir, saying to him
"I commend my wife and all my kingdom to your care". In addition to
this, he outstretched his hand and touched Harold on the hand. Soon after on
the 5th January 1066, Edward died, the last of the Anglo-Saxon
bloodline from Alfred the Great.
Was this the moment that Harold believed that Edward was
preferencing him to be King of England? Or was it another episode he was having?
If it was, it was a complete turn-around for Edward to make. Though I theorise
that Edward, having lived under the Godwin's foot for over twenty years,
possibly couldn't see any alternative other than Harold being king, since
William had not given him any help when the Godwins returned after their exile.
But there are some books that claim that a deathbed confession apparently takes
precedence above all else. Hagger states that:
To the English or so William of Poitiers has it, a
deathbed request is sacred. It trumped the earlier, inchoate promise to
William (Hagger, William: King and Conqueror, p.36).
Whatever the stories surrounding Edward, the outcome seemed
certain for the Witanegemot. They elected Harold as King of England. On January
6th, the funeral of Edward the Confessor took place in the morning,
and the coronation of Harold came in the afternoon.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Year Itself
When the news of Harold's coronation reached Normandy, William
was out hunting. What do you think he did on hearing?
1.
Bake a cake and eat it to help himself feel
better?
2.
Think "WHAT THE FUCK?!?!!?"
The answer: 1! It was chocolate if you must know.
Nah, I'm obviously joking. William was now in a bit of a
pratish position, since he had noted to other kingdoms that he would add
England under his wing. So he gathered his own vassels in assemblies and
discussed what to do, none of which were exactly thrilled at the idea of
invading England. But eventually they conceded to help William. To help with
this, William had another trick up his sleeve: The Pope. Because Harold had
sworn on holy relics, it could be seen as a transgression against William and
by extension, God. So he requested the Pope to see his cause, for Harold was an
oathbreaker and a despoiler of the church in his eyes (as Schama puts it from
William's point of view). It worked fantastically in his favour and was
invested with his ring and the Papal Banner.
Harold in the meantime saw the reaction was probably as he
expected it to be. No cake at all! If there's no cake at all to be eaten, you
are in trouble. So he prepared for the inevitable invasion from William,
bringing his Housecarls and Fyrd armies into position across the south coast.
But as the months drifted on and on, nothing came of it. Finally, harvest time
came around and Harold sent the soldiers home, though he was uneasy to do so.
Some time later, he received very bad news. Tostig was back
for revenge, and he wasn't alone. He had en-listed the help of the third claimant
to the throne, the Norwegian king Harold Hardrada. Hardrada landed at
Scarborough with as many as 300 ships (SPARTA!!) , and made his way through to
York, killing, raping and pillaging as any invading Viking tourist at the time
usually did. In that time, he managed to defeat two earls, Morcar (presumably
the same one who replaced Tostig in the first place) and Edwin. They escaped,
but left York at the mercy of the Vikings.
Harold then decided on a gamble. He re-collected his army
quickly and marched up north to meet his brother and Hardrada in four days.
Four days, going at about 37-45 miles a day and finally surprising the Norseman
at Stamford Bridge, where Hardrada had arranged to pick up hostages. On the 25th
September, The Battle of Stamford Bridge was the first test for Harold to keep
his hands on the throne.
And he was successful. The English broke down the Viking
Line and subsequently ended the Viking Age. Hardrada himself was killed with an
arrow in the throat and got his 'seven feet of English land', apparently due to
his height. Tostig in his turn was cut down and killed. The Viking Army
retreated back to the coast and took under a tenth of their ships back to
Norway (no Sparta for them). Harold found his dead brother and had his remains
buried in York.
But then it came. On 29th September, William
finally landed in England in more favourable conditions. Starting at Pevensey,
he constructed a wooden fort over the beach and proceeded with the good old
Viking Tourist Ritual: torching everywhere in sight and pilliaging, as seen
here in this scene from the Bayeux Tapestry.
William continued through to Hastings. Harold came back down
to London and gathered what he could of a new army to meet William down south.
Soon enough, the two armies met each other at Sarlac Hill, Harold's forces at
the top, William's at the bottom. The war for England was about to begin.
At 9 o'clock on the 14th October, the juggler
Taillefer boosted the morale for the Normans by throwing and catching his
sword. When one Englishman came down to meet him, Taillefer cut the man's head
off. And the battle started.
William's horseman started up first, throwing their javelins
into the front line of the Saxons to no avail. The archers came up next to
shoot their arrows too, but again failed. Then the soldiers took their chance
of charging up the hill to meet the Saxon army. But Harold's men had one simple
tactic that worked in their favour: The Shield Wall. Connecting their shields
into one, they became a immovable barricade, forcing the Normans off-balance.
From this success, the Norman army broke rank and routed.
Then came the English folly: Some of the inexperienced men could not resist
chasing the retreating army down the hill, who in turn believed William was
lost. But he revealed himself to be alive, or pretended to be a zombie at
least, and brought men around the persueing Saxon men and slaughtered the lot.
Throughout the day, the English was very, very, very slowly
grinded down. Weak points were exposed and arrows shot high into the air onto
the back of Harold's army. And as we all know, Harold was killed. Though there
has been debate whether he was actually shot in the eye, or killed by the
horseman in the Tapestry. I believe he was probably shot in the eye, before the
knights came down on him.
But even after Harold had died, the battle did not end
there. The few nobleman of Harold's army made their last stand to defend their
dead king, and some remnant of his army retreated across a large concealed
ditch and fought on. But as the day droned into night, the Normans eventually
broke through and the English fled from the field.
England was now in the hands of the Duke of Normandy, and
England would change forever.
Finally as we come to an end, two stories arise from the
ending of the battle. One was Harold's lover, Edith Swan-neck was brought to
the field to find the body of the king via secret marks on his body known only
to her. The second was that when it was safe Harold's body was brought to
Waltham Abbey by the female members of his family and interred in a secret
tomb. So it's possible that the last Anglo-Saxon king is buried beneath the high
alter in this Romanesque designed church.
---------------------------------------------
So at the end, what have we learned?
I will be honest and say that before writing this properly,
I was constantly battling between who was better, Harold or William. And I had
laid some of the guilt for England's problems squarely at Edward the
Confessor's door, believing him to have forsaken his birth homeland in favour
of the homeland he grew up in.
And for that, I was a hypocrite. I was born in Suffolk, yet
I don't have the more fondest memories down there. Up here in York is where I
really grew up and made the best friends ever with people. So really, I have
more of a connection up here in York than I really do in Suffolk. It might be
in the same country, but I might have been a different person down there than
up here.
Still, Edward was a big-game changer in many respects.
Because of that cultural and location change in his life, he felt no obligation
to the country he was born in. I wouldn't go as far to say he betrayed his
country, but politically bringing in Norman allies as opposed to keeping Saxons
in government was a bad move because it hastened the distrust between the
powerful lords and himself. Also the relationship between Edward and his bitter
rival Godwin didn't help matters. Theirs was always a complicated one where
Edward wanted the power, but up against a very powerful family he couldn't
really hope to win.
Which presents another problem: the actual successor to the
throne. This will still divide historians until the end of time. As far as we
know, Edward didn't really single out one person to succeed him, and never
properly indicated whom he wanted to succeed him, just rumours it could've been
William or Harold. Though I suppose with the Witanegemot in control of choosing
a king, it doesn't exactly work in any king's favour. And with the Godwins in
control, Edward's word might not have mattered much anyway. Perhaps he knew
that he couldn't beat the ultimate family, so just gave up ruling and reigned
instead, saying on his deathbed to Harold, "Yeah, you can have it. It's
been pretty much yours anyway".
William was a more difficult customer, since he claimed that
Edward had promised him the throne in the first place, and possibly swore in
Harold to help in gaining the throne in the first place. You could argue that
he had no place to say that, since it was up to the Witanegemot to decide who
would be king. As well, William probably only had his word to go on; Nothing
written in stone, which was a problem.
However, it could have been possible that Harold's claim was
quickly 'accepted' easily and the distress of the succession had to be resolved
as fast. There have been rumours that Harold might have forced them to accept
him as King, but I don't really believe this. Reading through the books, there
isn't a bit of evidence that he would've acted in that manner, and maybe he
didn't need to. He was technically King in all but name.
The other game-changer wasn't either Harold, nor William but
in fact Tostig, for trying to gain retribution against his brother. Remember
thanks to Harold and mostly due to his dickish nature towards his lords and
people, he had lost almost every bit of power. In attempting revenge with the
Viking Invasion, it affectively helped defeat Harold in the long term even if
it cost him his life. So in one way, Tostig had his revenge completed.
One question that I would ask at the end of this is: who
ultimately was to blame for the events leading to the Battle of Hastings. The
answer, more than likely, is almost every-one of the people I mentioned, all connected
and weaved together in its own embroided piece of history. Ethelred the Unready
for his douchebag ruling, Emma of Normandy for taking her sons away, Edward for
his favouritism, Godwin for killing Edward's brother and Tostig for being a
prat, Harold for not helping his brother (though it's justifiable) and William
for probably trapping Harold into helping him take the throne.
All these people helped to create the circumstances for each
other, and more than anything, brought down the culture and independence of
Anglo-Saxon England. The country lost a way of life effectively in gradual
changes from the Norman Conquest, and over the centuries it has shaped us into
the nation we are today. Obviously cultures change and different events helped
shape us too, but those events over 900 years ago changed the face of this country
dramatically in a way that will never be seen again.
One last thing I will mention is that I said at the start
was that history shows how life is the way it is. In one way, I think that is
true. In our culture, we still have a Monarch who reigns over all. One of our
many symbols is the Three Lions, which I do believe is taken from the
Plantagenant Family Emblem. And we have a sect of Christianity as our main
church.
You may think it's a silly question to ask, of course
history shows how life is the way it is. But what I'm trying to say is that
history reveals a lot about our lives in the present moment thanks to actions
done in the past. Imagine if Harold had won the Battle of Hastings, what would
our lives be like then? Probably more Scandinavian then most I reckon, but it's
all speculation.
But those events and the Battle of Hasting really changed
the face of England, and by extension Britain. And we should probably remember
that the past can undoubtedly affect the future too.
The site of the Battle itself
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
That's it for this week. Next Fortnight's edition is still undecided but hopefully will be a good one!
See you then!
