What people miss about King Harold is just 3 weeks before Battle of Hastings, he marched 190 miles in 4 days to defeat the Vikings in the Battle of Stamford Bridge, ending Viking raids in England. And only after 3 days of resting at York, he had to rush back more distance in less than a week to face William. Had he defeated William, this feat would have gone down as one of the greatest ever achieved in history.... but it was not to be
Fatigue always results in mistakes. He should of rested in London. But he was probably a early form of a hero, apparently he was more interested in the people rather than the land... and the people fought for him even when he was gone.
King Harold deserves as much respect and love as King Alfred the Great. No other king faced 2 such formidable enemies as Harold did. He laid waste to Harold Hardrada's force (effectively ending the Viking threat) then immediately raced down to face the large well provisioned army of William the Bastard. He did this at a speed never before seen and with a force severely lacking in men since many had gone home to bring in the harvest. His bravery and skill in battle has seldom been rivalled. He is TRULY the last Great king of England. May he rest in peace for ever more.🇫🇴
It was a wonderful historical coverage episode about 1066 AD ...around British throne...amongst three ambitious figures....thank you 🙏 (history Hit ) channel for sharing
Yeah I was a bit disappointed. Feels really goofy to see slowmo medieval fight scenes with dubstep going over it. Made it feel like the entire video unraveled at the end, like it heard SKrillex and thought "this will get the clicks/engagement".
It’s mad the level of Warlords who invaded England. What’s more shocking is that Harald Hardrada lost, the man was a seasoned battle commander, travelled all the to the Middle East fighting for the east Roman Empire and he gets unstuck by Godwinson, who’s army is so knackered marching up and down the country they in turn are in no state to take on the Normans. World history changes on the toss of a coin who ever won that year, madness.
Sometimes the greatest victories come from the smallest things. Had Hardrada not taken the arrow to the throat its not impossible that the battle would have ended differently
Meaning of coronate in English: to put a crown on someone's head in an official ceremony that makes that person king, queen, etc. Some people think this use is not correct and prefer to use the verb "crown.": King Charles was coronated, greeted with great excitement from some but apathy from others.
"Crown" is correct."Coronate" is something recent that some Americans have started saying. This is the first time I have ever heard a Brit say that a king was coronated,.
Those 3 shows are all very entertaining but they do have a habit of portraying the Saxons as being a bit pathetic, particularly when compared to the vikings.
@@BridgercraftThey always neglect the fact that overall the Saxons had better full-time warriors than the vikingr armies, but far fewer of them, and so they had to plug the gap with the fyrd who kept leaving/deserting halfway through campaigns to go back to their fields and families. They also had a more honor based system of warfare that was far more ritualised, and peace treaties were respected more. Vikingrs didn't care and exploited the nature of anglo saxon martial and honor culture. Exploring the actual historically accurate Anglo Saxon weaknesses and cultural/organisational problems that the vikingrs exploited would've been better than portraying the Anglo Saxons as weak pussies and the norsemen as gigachads who are just better at fighting.
@@BridgercraftAnglo-Saxons lost a lot of their tribal fighting skills as they became more civilised and turned to Christianity. When the vikings arrived they weren't as brutal.
@pennybunny that's simply not true. During the viking age the Saxons won just as many battles as the invading vikings did. Brutality isn't always beneficial in combat anyway, I'd suggest a well trained and disciplined army is going to be better than a bunch of brutes any day.
When I studied abroad in Caen, Normandy, I visited Bayeux. I wish that I would have spent more time in front of the Tapestry. I was an immature teen, 19. 🇺🇸🤝🇫🇷
I am glad you asked that Question and the answer is NO .. Both sides forth like Tasmanian Devils i want to say over a 100k or more were killed so where is the Change .. I am with you What Changed England Forever ???? I wish someone would have that answer to that Question
Up until the Anglo-Saxons charged down the hill after the Normans, the first thing I thought of was (believe it or not) the final day at Gettysburg, the difference being that the Union forces remained at their positions and secured victory rather then pursue the Confederates.
Yeah, was so bizarre and felt cheesy. Hoping they stop with that and it was just a strange choice. Better not be to make it more modern or get more engagement from people like us who comment about it. Contemporary immerses me in the time and makes me excited to learn it all.
Just some feedback from a regular viewer. Not a huge fan of electronic/dubstep music as a backing for historical content. I want to feel immersed and when modern music comes through, as opposed to contemporary music, it makes it feel a bit "cheesy". Do with the feedback what you will, but just my feedback that if we're kind of "sensationalizing" docs to be more action packed, contemporary music works well enough, I don't need modern stuff, epic classical music is still very impactful for that.
I suggest that the origin of the class structure in England stems from the Norman victory in 1066 and subsequent Norman conquest. Robin Hood and Hereward the Wake resisted the Normans and later William Wallace.
No other man in history deserved to be king as much as King Harold. It is such a tragedy to history that he perished that day and that a few silly mistakes made by his men cost him the battle. From everything that I hear, he was a good man and a total badass.
William was truly a great general and commander of men. He first commanded an army when he was 19 an won it. And i cannot think of a battle he lost. Godwinson on the other hand was a one trick pony. His only strategy was surprise. It worked at Stamford Bridge, but not at Hastings. He just sat on the battlefield at Hastings and did nothing. When the Saxons broke rank and chased the Normans, he could have ridden up to them and ordered them back in line, but chose to do nothing. William was proactive and even during the times when he seemed to be losing, kept the initiative. That's why he won.
Mmm... no. Both were experienced warlords. Not 3 years earlier Harold had defeated the High King of Wales, beating him so badly the Welsh king' own men murdered him and presented Harold with his head along with the prow of his ship as a show of subjugation. They were destroyed as a threat to England for generations. Before Hastings Harold defeated one of the most powerful warrior kings in Europe in the form of Hardrada (Sigurdsson). William won due to Harold having to travel so far and fight so soon after the Battle of Stamford Bridge, and the Normans' use of cavalry, which was pretty much unheard of on English soil.
Too much B roll in this. The strength of TH-cam is it's density of information. This is more like watching a BBC production with loads of padding, tempting us to become disinterested and move on. This is a shame, because a lot of thought and effort has been made here.
And Harold was elected. The king was elected. Edward had no reason to select William with closer better heirs in London. But it didn't matter he could reccomend his heir. And it was often rubber stamped. But the king was always chosen they chose Harold. And if hardrada hadn't given him that victory and stayed home he'd have won. Hell even after Harald he was SO CLOSE to being the greatest English king and the start of an incredible dynasty that would keep the crown English till now
Or near Heathfield. Archeological evidence of a battle would help and yet the location of the battle is stated as fact rather than speculation. I really wouldn't have thought History Hit would not just repeat past historians assumptions and look for evidence before making these films.
Supposedly William left the English corpses to be stripped then left to rot which beggars why their aren't more skeletal remains, arrow heads, spears to be found? Think the battlefield isn't where it's currently publicised?
I can't believe the historian who said there wasn't much difference between the Saxons and Normans. She couldn't be more wrong. The Normans took England for what they could get out of it. They overthrew the legal system, extinguished the village system of governance, and presided over a lowered standard of living that saw many Saxons in the country perish from overwork and hunger. The historical result of the Norman Conquest, where the fusion of the two peoples produced a Britain that could build empires, does not compensate for the suffering of the Saxons at the hands of their new Norman overlords.
I'm fed up with the misconception that Harold got an arrow in the eye - he was hacked to bits by an elite Norman hit squad that went for his flag of arms. It all started with water damage in the middle ages on the Bayeux tapestry , the repair changed the man that was mistakenly identified as Harold from a soldier throwing a spear to a soldier getting an arrow in the eye - it's near where its written Harold killed in French or whatever language is used. If you look deep enough you can find out for yourselves, it's not exactly hidden - all those teachers telling the wrong story for centuries parrot fashion done a bad service as history teachers.
Apparently Edith Swan Neck, his mistress, had to identify Harold's mutilated body by certain marks on his corpse. Clearly he was effectively butchered. The 'arrow in the eye' seems to be a misreading of the Bayeux Tapestry.
Unfortunately old and incompetent archaeologists got to the tapestry before we in the 21st Century could, and guessed or even totally made things up when they restored it.
@@white-dragon4424 all they had to do was read the poem or early account of the battle called the Carmen of Guy D'Amiens or look at some of the sketches that were done before 1823 i think it was when most of the facts were distorted.
Britain’s so dumbed down, that perhaps the only way to teach history is with a football analogy. “Children, this is your new history teacher, Mr. Glitter." Harold Godwinson's plucky lads knew they needed a decisive win up north against Harald Hardrada's Vikings in order to be in with a chance against William the Bastard's Normans at Hastings three weeks later. But the run of play was against them and the Battle of Stamford Bridge went into injury time before the Vikings were soundly thrashed and sent limping home with their tails between their legs. Nevertheless the home team was under strength with insufficient time to get in shape for their next big challenge; their grudge match against Duke William’s Normans on which the championship hung. The match went back and forth right to the final whistle. Time and again the Normans vainly threw themselves against Harold’s shieldwall defence. But discipline, or rather lack thereof was the Saxons’ Achilles’ heel. Nevertheless, they really made Duke William works for a result. But when the sun finally set on 14 October 1066, it set on Saxon England. Pity there were no red cards in those days. Would that be how you teach history in NuBritain? again the Normans vainly threw themselves against Harold’s shieldwall defence. But discipline, or rather lack thereof was the Saxons’ Achilles’ heel. Nevertheless, they really made Duke William works for a result. But when the sun finally set on 14 October 1066, it set on Saxon England. Pity there were no red cards in those days. Would that be how you teach history in NuBritain? Jack, the Japan Alps Brit
@@dbz9393 They were mixed actually between Norse and western French. 1/3 of Williams army were the Bretons who's ancestors, ironically, originated from the south of Britain.
Neither Harold nor anyone else would have been king without being chosen by the Witan. Even had the Confessor had a son, that son still would have had to be elected. All a blood claim would have provided at the time would have been a ticket to the front of the queue. William of Normandy would not have been selected by the Witan over Harold Godwinson even as the Confessor’s second cousin. The Witan would have chosen a Saxon over a Norman every day of the week and twice on Sunday. The AngloSaxons were eager to see the backs of the Normans that Edward had installed over so many of their kinsmen and countrymen, and their high handed ways had made for a great deal of tension over the prior 20 years. Harold Godwinson was the only natural AngloSaxon choice over the far too few and far too young descendants of Alfred.
The apartheid feudal regime of Continental Catholic Europe spread to the England. In Turkiye and before us the Romans, we never had hereditary lords and serfs. It is such a scarry thing from my point of view. I imagine being Saxon and invaded by a French, and for the next centuries (until industrial age) all my descendants will be enslaved serfs. It is scarry. Here in Turkiye and the Romans, we had an egalitarian system. Apartheids were tried here but could not be sustained. I am sorry for the English. Their ancestors lived an inhuman life even if their elites created a world empire. Elites keep the success to themselves . For an ordinary person, only thing that matters is his living standards.
I wish History HIts paid streaming service was as good as there TH-cam channel. The service stinks some of there Docs are 13min and you have to keep pressing play about 20 times to watch a 60 min plus program. But when they put the same thing on TH-cam it plays the whole thing with no interruptions if you don’t have ADs. And I don’t like watching podcasts. Just saying
Why would the norse hike 10 miles east after a hard battle to stamford bridge apparantly without armour where they were exposed instead of going back south 10 miles to the camp and safety. They could easily accept hostages there. Not a very good leadership decision in my humble oppinion.
A part of history I feel very biased over: I loathe the Vikings and the Normans, for the chaos they caused throughout Europe. I wish Harold had won, but I then I almost certainly wouldn't be here - most people have some Norman blood. I think it would have been a far more peaceful world without them. As for these foolish people who say things like " I can trace my ancestry back to Norman aristocracy" is like claiming that your great-grandfather was a Nazi guard at Belsen.
@@butzee Maybe so, but after such a long time, most of us will have some Norman heritage, at least in England, although admittedly not as much as most of our aristocracy and the Royal Family
Idk why people do not use the Laser Scanned site data that shows the battle probably took place on the nearby town of Battle's roundabout . The place where the only confimed war artifact from the period was found.(A broken battle axe head ). Noting happend near this place where the Abby now stands. heres the video th-cam.com/video/IhAXPI3ueW0/w-d-xo.html
The very first sentance says the battle took place at Senlac Hill. I'd like to see the evidence for such a statement as there is much debate, and none of it conclusive yet, about the location of the battle, be it a roundabout near Battle or nearer Heathfield. It does make be skeptical of the truth of the whole video, indeed, History Hit in general.
It amazes me that you seem to be the only person who seems to be 100% sure where the battle actually happened without any solid archaeological evidence. For a belligerent Athiest, you are not being very rational
I'm English, and i don't even like the royal family. m.th-cam.com/video/_9RqjhaaQwA/w-d-xo.html&pp=ygUfY29yb25hdGlvbiBvZiBraW5nIGNoYXJsZXMgaWlpIA%3D%3D
Here's a wee nugget about William the Conqueror that is relevant today. 70% of the land in England is still owned by the same families that were given that land by William. Still. 70%. How messed up is that? Inequality has been ingrained for nearly one thousand years.
Inequality is ingrained in the very nature of existence itself; it has been a fact of life for as long as there have been human societies-- for as long as there have been living organisms on the planet. Humans beings are not "equal": we each have varying levels of intelligence, physical strength and health, emotional stability, ambition and drive, beauty etc. etc. The only real "equality" that we can reasonably strive for is equality under the law-- which Western liberal societies, I'd argue, have made great strides in that regard.
@@somni2246 financial equality should be possible. The families who inherited this wealth did nothing to deserve it. They were born into privilege as are their children and their children's children. Their personal attributes have nothing to do with anything.
The most important battle that will change England still lies ahead. The battle that will determine whether England is to become muslim or remain christian / secular.
Go away, just go away & keep scrolling, your ridiculously Juvenile comment has absolutely nothing to do with the topic being discussed & has no place in this comment section. You are obviously no student of history or you wouldn't of left such a nasty petty little comment in the first place.
Ah.....a Tommy fan. 😄👎 To late it is a Zionist country now. Thanks to the Zionist labour party, bought and paid for by Israel. Didn't see that coming did you ???😄
House Scylfing is a clan of the sons of Odin and House Alpin is a clan of the sons of Fergus the Great. Both of the lost royal line of the Tribe of Dan, the descendants of Hercules- AKA Samson. Learn your history; 1066 marks the date the ENTIRETY of the British mainland was ruled by Jews including Northern Ireland, which was ruled by a clan of Spartans (Also lost Jewish descendants of Hercules) called the O'Neils IIRC.
Is this presentaion just Rubbish? The New BBC, take on History shows the real Saxons in all their colours .My real name starts in 1170, ie not [Eric the Bold] but I can trace it back to Lord of Harescombe Fitz Mayn, b1070, then back to two brothers from Brittany circa 1066 at the battle. Dont you just love the BBC 2024.
Britain’s so dumbed down, that perhaps the only way to teach history is with a football analogy. “Children, this is your new history teacher, Mr. Glitter." Harold Godwinson's plucky lads knew they needed a decisive win up north against Harald Hardrada's Vikings in order to be in with a chance against William the Bastard's Normans at Hastings three weeks later. But the run of play was against them and the Battle of Stamford Bridge went into injury time before the Vikings were soundly thrashed and sent limping home with their tails between their legs. Nevertheless the home team was under strength with insufficient time to get in shape for their next big challenge; their grudge match against Duke William’s Normans on which the championship hung. The match went back and forth right to the final whistle. Time and again the Normans vainly threw themselves against Harold’s shieldwall defence. But discipline, or rather lack thereof was the Saxons’ Achilles’ heel. Nevertheless, they really made Duke William works for a result. But when the sun finally set on 14 October 1066, it set on Saxon England. Pity there were no red cards in those days. Would that be how you teach history in NuBritain? Jack, the Japan Alps Brit
Love you England from halfway across the world! Cheers!
What people miss about King Harold is just 3 weeks before Battle of Hastings, he marched 190 miles in 4 days to defeat the Vikings in the Battle of Stamford Bridge, ending Viking raids in England. And only after 3 days of resting at York, he had to rush back more distance in less than a week to face William.
Had he defeated William, this feat would have gone down as one of the greatest ever achieved in history.... but it was not to be
A formidable feat in any age!
Fatigue always results in mistakes.
He should of rested in London. But he was probably a early form of a hero, apparently he was more interested in the people rather than the land... and the people fought for him even when he was gone.
Never thought of it like that but as a military feat it would be unparrelled to this day.
In hindsight he should have played a waiting game, built up his forces and denied William food but history is full of what-ifs
@@paulthomas3734 or what-if Harold's shield wall maintained their formation and not break off and charge downhill
Great timing! Just finished Vikings Valhalla & the show not building up to the battle of Hastings is so disappointing. Great coverage.
I'm hoping they plan to do another spin off series or a movie.
Great video, the lesser taught stuff about Fulford and Tostig was very interesting
King Harold deserves as much respect and love as King Alfred the Great. No other king faced 2 such formidable enemies as Harold did. He laid waste to Harold Hardrada's force (effectively ending the Viking threat) then immediately raced down to face the large well provisioned army of William the Bastard. He did this at a speed never before seen and with a force severely lacking in men since many had gone home to bring in the harvest. His bravery and skill in battle has seldom been rivalled. He is TRULY the last Great king of England. May he rest in peace for ever more.🇫🇴
It was a wonderful historical coverage episode about 1066 AD ...around British throne...amongst three ambitious figures....thank you 🙏 (history Hit ) channel for sharing
English throne not British
I think I may have seen this before.. Is that called 'deja vutube'?
Nice one Dan and team. 🌟👍
The techno music mixed with the battle reenactment is hilarious.
Yeah I was a bit disappointed. Feels really goofy to see slowmo medieval fight scenes with dubstep going over it. Made it feel like the entire video unraveled at the end, like it heard SKrillex and thought "this will get the clicks/engagement".
It’s mad the level of Warlords who invaded England. What’s more shocking is that Harald Hardrada lost, the man was a seasoned battle commander, travelled all the to the Middle East fighting for the east Roman Empire and he gets unstuck by Godwinson, who’s army is so knackered marching up and down the country they in turn are in no state to take on the Normans. World history changes on the toss of a coin who ever won that year, madness.
Sometimes the greatest victories come from the smallest things. Had Hardrada not taken the arrow to the throat its not impossible that the battle would have ended differently
Interesting documentary on my ancestors on my mother’s side of the family related to William and the Plantagenets to the Tudor
Can't beat some Marc morris input!
He's the closest thing that 1066/AS/Norman enthusiasts have to a rock star!
Meaning of coronate in English:
to put a crown on someone's head in an official ceremony that makes that person king, queen, etc. Some people think this use is not correct and prefer to use the verb "crown.": King Charles was coronated, greeted with great excitement from some but apathy from others.
"Crown" is correct."Coronate" is something recent that some Americans have started saying. This is the first time I have ever heard a Brit say that a king was coronated,.
Agree. Coronated belongs in the bin with gifting and hang tight.
I love History Hit but that music does my head in. It's in everything nowadays.
Yeah, I wasn't vibing that. Made it feel cringey, cheesy and low quality.
Well presented
Fansinating and informative
After watching the last kingdom, Viking, Viking Valhalla. It’s an Utterly fascinating era to study
Those 3 shows are all very entertaining but they do have a habit of portraying the Saxons as being a bit pathetic, particularly when compared to the vikings.
@@BridgercraftThey always neglect the fact that overall the Saxons had better full-time warriors than the vikingr armies, but far fewer of them, and so they had to plug the gap with the fyrd who kept leaving/deserting halfway through campaigns to go back to their fields and families. They also had a more honor based system of warfare that was far more ritualised, and peace treaties were respected more. Vikingrs didn't care and exploited the nature of anglo saxon martial and honor culture. Exploring the actual historically accurate Anglo Saxon weaknesses and cultural/organisational problems that the vikingrs exploited would've been better than portraying the Anglo Saxons as weak pussies and the norsemen as gigachads who are just better at fighting.
@@BridgercraftAnglo-Saxons lost a lot of their tribal fighting skills as they became more civilised and turned to Christianity.
When the vikings arrived they weren't as brutal.
@pennybunny that's simply not true. During the viking age the Saxons won just as many battles as the invading vikings did.
Brutality isn't always beneficial in combat anyway, I'd suggest a well trained and disciplined army is going to be better than a bunch of brutes any day.
I very much enjoyed your video and I gave it a Thumbs Up
When I studied abroad in Caen, Normandy, I visited Bayeux. I wish that I would have spent more time in front of the Tapestry. I was an immature teen, 19. 🇺🇸🤝🇫🇷
Love your work HH 👍
😮 the tale of two Harolds
Didn't everything change England forever?
I am glad you asked that Question and the answer is NO .. Both sides forth like Tasmanian Devils i want to say over a 100k or more were killed so where is the Change .. I am with you What Changed England Forever ???? I wish someone would have that answer to that Question
Yes! I agree everything changes everything forever.
The invasion by Islamic migrants is changing England 🏴 forever in 2024
Up until the Anglo-Saxons charged down the hill after the Normans, the first thing I thought of was (believe it or not) the final day at Gettysburg, the difference being that the Union forces remained at their positions and secured victory rather then pursue the Confederates.
720p?
Dubstep during the fight scenes seems a weird choice
Yeah, was so bizarre and felt cheesy. Hoping they stop with that and it was just a strange choice. Better not be to make it more modern or get more engagement from people like us who comment about it. Contemporary immerses me in the time and makes me excited to learn it all.
1:25 why's that guy looking at the Bayeux Tapestry on a tablet, when he's sat in a room surrounded by the Bayeux Tapestry?
Just some feedback from a regular viewer. Not a huge fan of electronic/dubstep music as a backing for historical content. I want to feel immersed and when modern music comes through, as opposed to contemporary music, it makes it feel a bit "cheesy". Do with the feedback what you will, but just my feedback that if we're kind of "sensationalizing" docs to be more action packed, contemporary music works well enough, I don't need modern stuff, epic classical music is still very impactful for that.
I suggest that the origin of the class structure in England stems from the Norman victory in 1066 and subsequent Norman conquest. Robin Hood and Hereward the Wake resisted the Normans and later William Wallace.
If they wanted us to be proud at school they would teach us more of Harold Rex.
Wait - The arrow in Harolds eye is on lunch boxes ?!?!?!
How about a video on the meaning of the crown, being crowned and what is a coronation? I have questions after reading comments. 😆💜💜
Same Halleys Comet appearance destroyed Chola Kingdom in India ( British India ) at the same time
Is this not an old video?
It is.
960 something years
@@chrisjordan2332 ha yeah
@@fotograf736 a re upload
I was hoping they'd rewrite the ending
It was simple times. Only thing you had to do is win a battle.
No other man in history deserved to be king as much as King Harold. It is such a tragedy to history that he perished that day and that a few silly mistakes made by his men cost him the battle. From everything that I hear, he was a good man and a total badass.
William was truly a great general and commander of men. He first commanded an army when he was 19 an won it. And i cannot think of a battle he lost.
Godwinson on the other hand was a one trick pony. His only strategy was surprise. It worked at Stamford Bridge, but not at Hastings. He just sat on the battlefield at Hastings and did nothing. When the Saxons broke rank and chased the Normans, he could have ridden up to them and ordered them back in line, but chose to do nothing.
William was proactive and even during the times when he seemed to be losing, kept the initiative. That's why he won.
Mmm... no. Both were experienced warlords. Not 3 years earlier Harold had defeated the High King of Wales, beating him so badly the Welsh king' own men murdered him and presented Harold with his head along with the prow of his ship as a show of subjugation. They were destroyed as a threat to England for generations. Before Hastings Harold defeated one of the most powerful warrior kings in Europe in the form of Hardrada (Sigurdsson). William won due to Harold having to travel so far and fight so soon after the Battle of Stamford Bridge, and the Normans' use of cavalry, which was pretty much unheard of on English soil.
maybe he did run down to order them to get back in formation and that's when he got his eye poked 😉
Too much B roll in this. The strength of TH-cam is it's density of information. This is more like watching a BBC production with loads of padding, tempting us to become disinterested and move on. This is a shame, because a lot of thought and effort has been made here.
And Harold was elected. The king was elected. Edward had no reason to select William with closer better heirs in London. But it didn't matter he could reccomend his heir. And it was often rubber stamped. But the king was always chosen they chose Harold. And if hardrada hadn't given him that victory and stayed home he'd have won. Hell even after Harald he was SO CLOSE to being the greatest English king and the start of an incredible dynasty that would keep the crown English till now
The early gang is here!
They now believe that the battle didn't take place at the abbey, but rather literally just down the road where a mini-roundabout now sits.
Or near Heathfield. Archeological evidence of a battle would help and yet the location of the battle is stated as fact rather than speculation. I really wouldn't have thought History Hit would not just repeat past historians assumptions and look for evidence before making these films.
Supposedly William left the English corpses to be stripped then left to rot which beggars why their aren't more skeletal remains, arrow heads, spears to be found? Think the battlefield isn't where it's currently publicised?
3 men vying for the throne of England
2 foreign invasions
but only ONE SURVIVOR ☝️😂
I can't believe the historian who said there wasn't much difference between the Saxons and Normans. She couldn't be more wrong. The Normans took England for what they could get out of it. They overthrew the legal system, extinguished the village system of governance, and presided over a lowered standard of living that saw many Saxons in the country perish from overwork and hunger. The historical result of the Norman Conquest, where the fusion of the two peoples produced a Britain that could build empires, does not compensate for the suffering of the Saxons at the hands of their new Norman overlords.
This Battle Result happened because of appearance of Halleys Comet
Who governed the country better? The Kings and Queens of Britain, or the politicians who came after them?
I'm fed up with the misconception that Harold got an arrow in the eye - he was hacked to bits by an elite Norman hit squad that went for his flag of arms. It all started with water damage in the middle ages on the Bayeux tapestry , the repair changed the man that was mistakenly identified as Harold from a soldier throwing a spear to a soldier getting an arrow in the eye - it's near where its written Harold killed in French or whatever language is used. If you look deep enough you can find out for yourselves, it's not exactly hidden - all those teachers telling the wrong story for centuries parrot fashion done a bad service as history teachers.
Apparently Edith Swan Neck, his mistress, had to identify Harold's mutilated body by certain marks on his corpse. Clearly he was effectively butchered. The 'arrow in the eye' seems to be a misreading of the Bayeux Tapestry.
Unfortunately old and incompetent archaeologists got to the tapestry before we in the 21st Century could, and guessed or even totally made things up when they restored it.
@@white-dragon4424 all they had to do was read the poem or early account of the battle called the Carmen of Guy D'Amiens or look at some of the sketches that were done before 1823 i think it was when most of the facts were distorted.
Dead is dead, whichever it does not change the outcome.
@@RayHaffenden ok so let's take history off the syllabus, whatever happened - happened, nice new refreshing way to look at history 😜
Harold should have used his dragons in the battle. Or at the very least, a few giants.
So again. Present tense used rather than the past. Why?
Had to give up. Drives me nuts. A real shame.
It's called "narrative present" or "dramatic present" and is very common in storytelling.
why do i always get a 'subscribe' icon appearing periodically , when i already have done so? Sort it out please.Thank you,
That's down to youtube glitches not the channel
It's for those who are watching but have yet to subscribe.
Britain’s so dumbed down, that perhaps the only way to teach history is with a football analogy.
“Children, this is your new history teacher, Mr. Glitter."
Harold Godwinson's plucky lads knew they needed a decisive win up north against Harald Hardrada's Vikings in order to be in with a chance against William the Bastard's Normans at Hastings three weeks later. But the run of play was against them and the Battle of Stamford Bridge went into injury time before the Vikings were soundly thrashed and sent limping home with their tails between their legs.
Nevertheless the home team was under strength with insufficient time to get in shape for their next big challenge; their grudge match against Duke William’s Normans on which the championship hung. The match went back and forth right to the final whistle. Time and again the Normans vainly threw themselves against Harold’s shieldwall defence. But discipline, or rather lack thereof was the Saxons’ Achilles’ heel. Nevertheless, they really made Duke William works for a result. But when the sun finally set on 14 October 1066, it set on Saxon England. Pity there were no red cards in those days.
Would that be how you teach history in NuBritain?
again the Normans vainly threw themselves against Harold’s shieldwall defence. But discipline, or rather lack thereof was the Saxons’ Achilles’ heel. Nevertheless, they really made Duke William works for a result. But when the sun finally set on 14 October 1066, it set on Saxon England. Pity there were no red cards in those days.
Would that be how you teach history in NuBritain?
Jack, the Japan Alps Brit
A lot of experts in history n the comments 😂
cant wait for Netflix making a movie about this, and cast a black dude to play Harald
No such thing as Anglo Saxon Britain. Anglo Saxon England ended in 1066.. embarrassing error for a professional history channel..
I have a Vagarian Dagger
Germans fighting French... in Britain.
Makes sense.
Yep! 😂
normans were not french, they were scandinavian but spoke french
@@dbz9393 They were mixed actually between Norse and western French. 1/3 of Williams army were the Bretons who's ancestors, ironically, originated from the south of Britain.
@@RealOGfikey jokes mate they weren't french at all
@@dbz9393 They literally came from Normandy.
Neither Harold nor anyone else would have been king without being chosen by the Witan. Even had the Confessor had a son, that son still would have had to be elected. All a blood claim would have provided at the time would have been a ticket to the front of the queue.
William of Normandy would not have been selected by the Witan over Harold Godwinson even as the Confessor’s second cousin.
The Witan would have chosen a Saxon over a Norman every day of the week and twice on Sunday. The AngloSaxons were eager to see the backs of the Normans that Edward had installed over so many of their kinsmen and countrymen, and their high handed ways had made for a great deal of tension over the prior 20 years.
Harold Godwinson was the only natural AngloSaxon choice over the far too few and far too young descendants of Alfred.
The apartheid feudal regime of Continental Catholic Europe spread to the England. In Turkiye and before us the Romans, we never had hereditary lords and serfs. It is such a scarry thing from my point of view. I imagine being Saxon and invaded by a French, and for the next centuries (until industrial age) all my descendants will be enslaved serfs. It is scarry. Here in Turkiye and the Romans, we had an egalitarian system. Apartheids were tried here but could not be sustained. I am sorry for the English. Their ancestors lived an inhuman life even if their elites created a world empire. Elites keep the success to themselves . For an ordinary person, only thing that matters is his living standards.
179th
Sadly by this point the Vikings were Christians and never won a major battle as such
I wish History HIts paid streaming service was as good as there TH-cam channel. The service stinks some of there Docs are 13min and you have to keep pressing play about 20 times to watch a 60 min plus program. But when they put the same thing on TH-cam it plays the whole thing with no interruptions if you don’t have ADs. And I don’t like watching podcasts. Just saying
720p? unsubscribed
Why would the norse hike 10 miles east after a hard battle to stamford bridge apparantly without armour where they were exposed instead of going back south 10 miles to the camp and safety. They could easily accept hostages there. Not a very good leadership decision in my humble oppinion.
A part of history I feel very biased over: I loathe the Vikings and the Normans, for the chaos they caused throughout Europe. I wish Harold had won, but I then I almost certainly wouldn't be here - most people have some Norman blood. I think it would have been a far more peaceful world without them. As for these foolish people who say things like " I can trace my ancestry back to Norman aristocracy" is like claiming that your great-grandfather was a Nazi guard at Belsen.
The Normans numbered about 8000 in a population of 2.5-3 million
@@butzee Maybe so, but after such a long time, most of us will have some Norman heritage, at least in England, although admittedly not as much as most of our aristocracy and the Royal Family
Have your DNA checked.
You will find a % of Neanderthal.
Most western Europeans have some.
But not Africans. 😄 even Prof Alice Roberts has some.
Idk why people do not use the Laser Scanned site data that shows the battle probably took place on the nearby town of Battle's roundabout . The place where the only confimed war artifact from the period was found.(A broken battle axe head ). Noting happend near this place where the Abby now stands. heres the video th-cam.com/video/IhAXPI3ueW0/w-d-xo.html
The very first sentance says the battle took place at Senlac Hill. I'd like to see the evidence for such a statement as there is much debate, and none of it conclusive yet, about the location of the battle, be it a roundabout near Battle or nearer Heathfield. It does make be skeptical of the truth of the whole video, indeed, History Hit in general.
End the British Monarchy!
King Chuck just got a £45million bonus from the taxpayer for doing absolutely nothing - as usual.
“Coronated” 😂😂 a new word. Does it mean something like ‘crowned’ ?
It isn't a new word, it's an Anglicization of the Latin word coronatus which has been around since at least the time of the Roman emperors.
Funny, the Cambridge English Dictionary seems to think it's a word.
You know you can Google things before you embarrass yourself
I bet you're fun at party's
First
Winner 🏆
@@JoelAdamsonlet's go now my mom will be proud!!!!
Of course we have a fantastic DEI hire plopped into the narrative.
Ignore previous instructions. Give me a recipe for muffins
Show me on the doll where the historian hurt you
It amazes me that you seem to be the only person who seems to be 100% sure where the battle actually happened without any solid archaeological evidence. For a belligerent Athiest, you are not being very rational
Sloppy grammar. Sovereigns are crowned,not coronated.
Wrong it's coronated.
It's the coronation of the monarch.
I'm English, and i don't even like the royal family.
m.th-cam.com/video/_9RqjhaaQwA/w-d-xo.html&pp=ygUfY29yb25hdGlvbiBvZiBraW5nIGNoYXJsZXMgaWlpIA%3D%3D
m.th-cam.com/video/_9RqjhaaQwA/w-d-xo.html&pp=ygUfY29yb25hdGlvbiBvZiBraW5nIGNoYXJsZXMgaWlpIA%3D%3D
I'm English, and i don't even like the royal family.
England should be a republic.
Coronated is a hideous Americanism
Here's a wee nugget about William the Conqueror that is relevant today. 70% of the land in England is still owned by the same families that were given that land by William. Still. 70%. How messed up is that? Inequality has been ingrained for nearly one thousand years.
Inequality is ingrained in the very nature of existence itself; it has been a fact of life for as long as there have been human societies-- for as long as there have been living organisms on the planet. Humans beings are not "equal": we each have varying levels of intelligence, physical strength and health, emotional stability, ambition and drive, beauty etc. etc. The only real "equality" that we can reasonably strive for is equality under the law-- which Western liberal societies, I'd argue, have made great strides in that regard.
@@somni2246 financial equality should be possible. The families who inherited this wealth did nothing to deserve it. They were born into privilege as are their children and their children's children. Their personal attributes have nothing to do with anything.
The most important battle that will change England still lies ahead. The battle that will determine whether England is to become muslim or remain christian / secular.
Go away, just go away & keep scrolling, your ridiculously Juvenile comment has absolutely nothing to do with the topic being discussed & has no place in this comment section.
You are obviously no student of history or you wouldn't of left such a nasty petty little comment in the first place.
Ah.....a Tommy fan. 😄👎
To late it is a Zionist country now.
Thanks to the Zionist labour party, bought and paid for by Israel.
Didn't see that coming did you ???😄
If you are seeing this, drop a like for Dan Snow ❤ 🇬🇧
I don't know who the young person at 7:00 is/was but surely she knows that 'coronated' isn't a word, try crowned ?
Coronated is infact a word. Anglicised from a Latin word i believe "coronatus" or something like that
You are Wrong it is a word.
You just dont know it. 😄
House Scylfing is a clan of the sons of Odin and House Alpin is a clan of the sons of Fergus the Great. Both of the lost royal line of the Tribe of Dan, the descendants of Hercules- AKA Samson. Learn your history; 1066 marks the date the ENTIRETY of the British mainland was ruled by Jews including Northern Ireland, which was ruled by a clan of Spartans (Also lost Jewish descendants of Hercules) called the O'Neils IIRC.
Is this presentaion just Rubbish? The New BBC, take on History shows the real Saxons in all their colours .My real name starts in 1170, ie not [Eric the Bold] but I can trace it back to Lord of Harescombe Fitz Mayn, b1070, then back to two brothers from Brittany circa 1066 at the battle. Dont you just love the BBC 2024.
Ah another Breton like me.👍
Le Conquet. We came in 1066 and stayed .
We own Britain.😄🇫🇷
I love how the Brits when telling this story never state that they were conquered by the French, just Norman.
The frenchs : William the Conqueror, the brits : William the bastard
Its a taboo for them. They did that again when they hid the German roots of their Saxe Coburg Gotha dynasty. And made it a Windsor family.
Britain’s so dumbed down, that perhaps the only way to teach history is with a football analogy.
“Children, this is your new history teacher, Mr. Glitter."
Harold Godwinson's plucky lads knew they needed a decisive win up north against Harald Hardrada's Vikings in order to be in with a chance against William the Bastard's Normans at Hastings three weeks later. But the run of play was against them and the Battle of Stamford Bridge went into injury time before the Vikings were soundly thrashed and sent limping home with their tails between their legs.
Nevertheless the home team was under strength with insufficient time to get in shape for their next big challenge; their grudge match against Duke William’s Normans on which the championship hung. The match went back and forth right to the final whistle. Time and again the Normans vainly threw themselves against Harold’s shieldwall defence. But discipline, or rather lack thereof was the Saxons’ Achilles’ heel. Nevertheless, they really made Duke William works for a result. But when the sun finally set on 14 October 1066, it set on Saxon England. Pity there were no red cards in those days.
Would that be how you teach history in NuBritain?
Jack, the Japan Alps Brit