Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Verginius Rufus

With respect, not so!
At the time of The Conquerer, the island was all divided. Edward had no direct heir and designatedWilliam as his heir. Harold took exception hence the Battle of Hastings. William consequently “united” most of the kingdom and founded the beginning of the modern day England.
Your argument could also be made to allow the kings of Denmark to have a greater claim too.


28 posted on 12/02/2014 6:37:35 PM PST by matginzac
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies ]


To: matginzac
Supposedly Edward the Confessor promised to make William his heir (under coercion) but the whole story could be a Norman invention.

Thomas Paine deals with it pretty well in Common Sense:

England, since the conquest, hath known some few good monarchs, but groaned beneath a much larger number of bad ones, yet no man in his senses can say that their claim under William the Conqueror is a very honorable one. A French bastard landing with an armed banditti, and establishing himself king of England against the consent of the natives, is in plain terms a very paltry rascally original.--It certainly hath no divinity in it.

40 posted on 12/03/2014 7:56:58 AM PST by Verginius Rufus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson