I am a descendent of Henry de Ferrieres a Norman land baron who traveled to England in 1066 with Duke William. Henry's father Guillaume owned two large estates in Normandy that had large iron deposits on them. Guillaume operated the oldest forge in that region and produced all of Duke William's weapons, armor, and horse shoes. Guillaume was killed in 1040 in a jousting duel when he and his opponent fought to a draw and both died. The Ferrieres families were one of the few large baronial families in Normandy that supported the young Duke William. Henry, and William de Ferrieres, his older brother took many soldiers under the Ferrieres banner and followed the young Duke to England. William de Ferrieres was killed in a charge about the same time King Harold was slain. William the Conqueror gave Henry his brother's share of the spoils of war. Later William the Conqueror rewarded Henry with more large areas of land for faithful service. Henry became one of the largest land barons in England. When my anscestor that came to America in 1673 the French spelling had been changed to English and was Ferrers. After a few generations in America the name was changed to Ferriss. A few generations after that the last s was dropped and now the spelling in Ferris. I know the name has roots earlier with Vikings but I have not had time to research that.
@@discomikeyboy2012 My understanding is Guillaume was named after the iron ore. The ancient family coat of arms has a black field with silver horseshoes on it.
Do you have a copy of the family tree that traces you back to the esteemed knight? I ask because it is a fairly common misconception, if an English person has a Norman sounding name, that they are descended from Normans; however, as the feudal system gradually came to an end, it was the usual practice for emancipated serfs to take their lord's family name as their surname. In post-feudal Britain, it became essential for ordinary folk to have surnames, owing to the fact that they were now a mobile workforce and no longer tied to one village for life.
Fascinating history. I lived in Stamford Bridge for many years. It has never been established exactly where the Bridge in the battle actually was. Logically about 800 m above todays Bridge and wooden accommodation of one horse and wagon. The area is now known as Battleflats. The time taken from Kent to 10 miles from York, on foot is generally estimated at 40 miles per day, so approximately 9 days. Travelling back would have been, probably 11 days, allowing for fatigue and carrying injured men. Probably, to be fair, 14 days would be nearer the mark. Many roads in the village refer to the historic battle, streets like Tostig Close, Hardrada Way, Saxon Road, Fossway ( The fastest road between York and London) Haroldsway being good examples.
need to build a museum next to it, memorial. they should consider reconstruct the wooden bridge, it was a landmark at the time, until the vikings came destoryed everything
My great grandfather fought in this battle. Super cool to learn what he may have gone through. He went over to England from Bourdonnay, Normandy, as a soldier under William the Conquerer, and after the battle of Hastings - in A. D. 1066 - was assigned lands in the County of Kent
@@davidleethompsoniii8263 It is well known to be on a steep slope between two hills: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Hastings#Background_and_location The Nordic lady ALMOST talks about this, but the editing cut it out I think. She mentions that on flat ground the horses usually break through on a direct charge, but at Hastings this didn't work. When the English tried to rout the apparently fleeing cavalry, they broke ranks and got routed themselves. Working down a hill like that would encourage that scenario, as the horses don't mind moving away and the impulse of a foot soldier is to march forward down the hill.
It’s well known in History that the English Army stood on the top of a hill. The Normans were not making much headway so they tried a trick. They put on a fake retreat and the Common men not the Housecarls left the English shield wall on the top of the Hill and charged down onto the alleged fleeing Normans and the Normans turned and cut them down. Battle Abbey built on the site removed the true ground profile of the site. Senlac Hill. The Hill of 🩸
@@jamesglass4842 It would of course help if we knew accurately where the various armies were located. The traditional site is now, like Bosworth, disputed
Whoever advised them on the armour needs to read some books, some of the helmets were 300 years ahead of 1066, like putting a tank in a documentary about the English civil war
Story mentioned 18:49 is just like the Thales of ensing Stål ad Sven Dufva, poem written by Finland-Swedish author Johan Ludvig Runeberg, the national poet of Finland. Story is said to have true life role model but this is really similar story.
The First of my Name ( Sir Robert Le Skynnere) was an Uncle (Mother’s side) of William. He fought beside William at Hastings and lost his left hand in the battle. We was given 5,000 acres and made Barron of Bolingbroke. He married the daughter of the Anglo Saxon Barron they killed in battle and and he took his lands and titles. That way his children would have hereditary titles on both the Norman and Anglo-Saxon side. We ruled over those lands until we were forced to leave England and settled in Jamestown Virginia in the early 1600’s.
William's harrying of the north caused a migration of Anglo-Saxons folks into what came to be known as the Scottish Lowlands, and anyone who knows anything about American history knows the impact the Lowlanders (via Northern Ireland) had on the settling of America. Yes, those Lowlanders that later migrated to America were predominantly of Anglo-Saxon origin, with a bit a native Scottish Brythonic DNA. So, it can now be said that the future America benefitted in great part as a result of William the Conquer's accomplishments in Britain.
My 27th Great Grandfather ^^ You → Denise Kogler, your mother → Marcelle Helene Marchoux, her mother → Jean Texier, her father → Magdeleine Texier, his mother → Marie Vauzelle, her mother → Marquis Etienne Texier de Javerlhac, her father → Marquis Etienne-Marie Texier de Javerlhac, his father → Gabrielle Texier de Javerlhac, his mother → Comte Jean Baptiste de Roffignac, Chevalier, Seigneur de Belleville, les Brosses (Oradour sur Vayres), Saint-Angel et la Francherie, her father → Chevalier René de Roffignac, seigneur de Belleville, his father → Jean de Roffignac, seigneur de Belleville, his father → Jean-Baptiste de Roffignac, seigneur de Belleville, his father → Gaspard de Roffignac, seigneur de Quinsac, his father → Martial de Roffignac, seigneur de Sampnac, his father → Christophe de Roffignac, seigneur de Sampnac, his father → Françoise de Roffignac, his mother → Pierre Chauvet, seigneur de Sannat, her father → Jean Chauvet, seigneur de Sannat, his father → Guillemette de Chenac, his mother → Hélie de de Chenac, seigneur de Bourg-Archambault et du Montmorillonnais, her father → Isabelle de Montberon, his mother → Isabeau de Ventadour, Dame de Marjaride et de Montredon, her mother → Delphine de La Tour, her mother → Jeanne de Toulouse, her mother → Joan Plantagenet of England, Queen of Sicily, her mother → Henry II "Curtmantle", King of England, her father → Empress Matilda, his mother → Henry I, king of England, her father → William "the Conqueror", King of England, his father
I am either the descendant of spanish jews or moors. Maybe both. Or neither, fact remain as soon as the family came to sicily the honoured ancestors slaughtered some monks and took the abbey for themselves.
It wasn't the Last Battle of the Vikings. If anything, Harold (whose family were strongly connected to Canute and who was personally half Danish) was the last vestige of Norse culture stamped out by William. This was the age of the Normans coming to its apex. William was thoroughly and entirely Frankish, and essentially every change the Normans made to the British Isles were due to the influence of Frankish culture, not Norse. Before William, the British Isles were a patchwork of Anglo-Saxon, Norse and Celtic kingdoms. Afterward, England, Wales, Ireland and Scotland were centralized feudal kingdoms thoroughly remade in the Frankish model. Aside from good old anti-French sentiment, there's seriously very little sense in the pattern of British historiography to reduce the Frankish culture of the Normans, and connect William to Viking-ness.
Your points are well taken, but don't ever forget that those Normans, almost to a man, had those Viking Y chromosomes in them and they were still among the greatest warriors the Western world had ever seen! The French culture may have given them the instruments of effective governance, castle building, etc., but it did not provide them with all that military prowess. Just look at the rest of France during that era! To reinforce my point here about the martial qualities associated with those Viking Y chromosomes, just take a look at what was going on in Southern Italy, Sicily, the Balkans and the Middle East at that same point in time? Norman adventurers, warriors, military leaders and rulers, such as Robert Guiscard, his brother Roger d'Hauteville, Bohemund and the others would not necessarily be required to take a backseat to the accomplishments of William the Conqueror, as they were kingpins on a stage that was soon to determine who the major players were to be, not only in the Christian West, but in the Islamic world too!
@@chucklynch6523 military prowess does **not** stem from genetics. If that were the case, no feudal lord would need to educate their heirs. It would all just be preprogrammed into their blood. Military prowess is taught. It is by no means genetic. William himself learned toughness as he grew up in an environment of political chaos. Robert and Bohemund both grew up in environments of conflict. They were taught to be soldiers. Eleanor of Aquitaine was a powerful and widely travelled duchess, probably the greatest Norman of her lifetime, attended the second Crusade, ruled England for three kings, and yet, she lacked that "Viking Y Chromosome". As for look at Frankish world during that era? Some of the finest knights of history were to emerge. Raymond of Tolouse. Baldwin of Boulogne. Godfrey of Boillion, El Cid - all non Normans btw. The crusade itself, which took the Normans to the East, was called precisely because France and Germany, the Frankish World the Normans belonged to, was in upheaval due to incessant feudal infighting. The Peace of God movement was an initiative of the Popes to curb feudal violence and robber barons. Another thing: these movements and migration of Normans did not simply happen within a vaccum, with some genetic alarm bell ringing for Normans to go adventure. They were part of other movements of people, most of whom had no Viking blood. Robert and his brothers were hired as mercenaries to travel to Italy. The Crusade was called by Urban II, a non-Norman. Meanwhile, those very same "Viking Y Chromosomes" you wax lyrical about, were in this time, far less diluted within Scandinavia itself, their place of origin. Yet the entire practice of raiding was undoubtedly coming to an end, and society was becoming more stable. So why was raiding and conquering ending in one, and not in the other? Was it religion? Not really, since the Normans were overwhelmingly devout. Was it genetics? Not really, those viking genes were dramatically diluted from the time of Rollo. The answer has nothing to with genetics, because the genetic code you argue is key was far more prevalent within Scandinavia than Normandy. The answer is stratification and stability. During the Viking Age, social mobility and independent initiative were very possible for local strongmen because there was little in the way of control and there was possibility for upward social mobility.
Sure, I hear you, but without a doubt the warrior spirit and tireless ferocity of the Normans has their origins in their Viking past, or as some like to say, in their Y chromosomes! In my opinion without the Norman influence in the British Isles America would not be the same America we all have known for the last 250 years! William and his successors' harrying of Northern England to bring the native Anglo-Saxons under his yoke prompted many to flee to the Scottish Lowlands where they mixed with the native Brythonics and others to create and new and most cantankerous group that served as a thorn in the English crown's side for many hundreds of years until many were relocated to Northern Ireland and still farther West to North America and elsewhere, where the ones who settled in what is now America were finally able to exact a long overdue revenge on the so-called Anglo-Normans who tortured them for years, via independence!!!
@@TheSamuraijim87 I disagree with your first point. I did 8 years in the Marine Corps. There were some Marines that were just completely meant to be on a battlefield. Natural warriors that can pick up any lesson in firearms, martial arts, tactics, etc. at the snap of the fingers. Some people’s existence comes from generations of warriors serving on battlefields across the world. I don’t think it’s by accident that they choose to follow in their ancestors same footsteps.
The Anglo-Saxons were descended from Old Saxony in northwest Germany, the Normans and Angevins were French, the Tudors were Welsh, the Stuart's were Scottish, the House of Orange was Dutch, and every British monarch since then has been descended from German nobility same as the Anglo-Saxons.
Yeah, but with it being such an IMPORTANT battle, I don't understand wtf they didn't put up a monument to mark the site of such a historic event... FFS...
Indeed. Plus, the after the Battle of Hastings, they built an abbey (which is the monument, btw) on top of the hill. The efforts involved in that likely destroyed any small traces that were left after scavenging.
@@lunaokittens9574 at the centre of the floor under the dome of St Paul's, Christopher Wren made an inscription in Latin which translates as "if you want a memorial, look around you." Battle abbey was built as a memorial to Hastings battle.
I've read that my last name, Martin, came with them from Normandy and was introduced into England. Or that is where it first shows up in records anyway. My DNA is almost exclusively from the UK and Northern Europe and I find the history there absolutely fascinating.
My 28th great-grandfather won that battle. He defeated my 2nd cousin 26x removed. It's surprising how many times my ancestors fought each other, then married.
@@OUTBOUND184 Yeah, afraid almost none of the costumes are remotely close to what they looked like. The normans at least have the right helmets. But they have 13th century style chainmail coifs and flat topped shields. Several of them have 13th century style surcoats. All in all they look more of the time period of the 3rd Crusade than Hastings.
(According to those people.... I'm not saying he didn't do it, he seems to have been a weak king in an often precarious position, but the sources of those claims are not exactly the most trustworthy)
You failed to mention that Harald Hardrada and his army were caught off guard and their armor was back at their ships. So, they were forced to fight unexpectedly without their armor.
William likely waited until September as a strategy due to the Norwegians, led by Harald Hardrada and Harold Godwinson’s younger brother Tostig, were going to invade England anyway, so it is likely that William of Normandy knew that Harold’s forces would have been weakened due to the Battle of Stamford Bridge and took advantage.
Most likely would have Won as he was expecting William to invade and was prepared for it. However what threw him off was the big invasion by brother Tostig Godwinson and Harald Hadrada, if not for that then Hastings would have been hugely different.
You can't honestly consider the demise of the Vikings without considering the beat down they took from Brian Boru a century earlier. Many Vikings embraced Christianity simply because they could not defeat him and they figured the Christ must be more powerful than Odin. And so many of them had taken Christian wives that it was inevitable that their ways would change sooner than later.
@sneksnekitsasnek It certainly wasn't any one thing that changed their ways. They were definitely getting soft from the plunder, and with that comes politics. But taking the kind of losses they took being driven out of Ireland coupled with the influx of Christianity could only spell their demise.
Another great documentary. I would also point out the use of the word "Viking" as it seems to be used a bit loosely. I understand that the word was originally an occupational word meaning pirate and/or raider. But at the end of the day, words mean what the majority of people using them at the time say they mean. In this documentary "Viking" seems to mean people of Scandinavian decent/heritage - which is how many people use the word these days to be fair.
@@kirkmorrison6131 Harold getting the throne wasn't a done deal anyway, wasn't exactly a consolidated England back then, but I guess a lot would have changed, perhaps the whole World history.
@@pixel8ated I know and I agree with you. I am just wondering as always as to how history would have changed. History depends on many events some large many many little ones. There are also many that fall somewhere in between.
@@kirkmorrison6131 Well I guess the big thing that changed was the castles were built to protect us from the invaders, after 1066 they were for the invaders to protect themselves from us and whereas under previous kings every man had a voice now we had direct top down rule.
Coming soon: People whining about experts not speaking English in a French-Nordic production and people who refuse to read subtitles because they can't be bothered to pay attention.
Agreed. In fact it's the furthest thing to Netflix if you think about it. Ads playing every 5 minutes, low-effort content like History Hit Live and all the regurgitated content from decades ago.
Breton Archers were central to the Norman Victory against the English. Therefore, 1066, was the Britons return home, and revenge against the Anglo-Saxons. William the Conqueror was also of Breton heritage.
Excellent documentary, but I’m wondering why the English army is marked under the St. George’s cross, I thought it was first used by a Plantagenet king
Originally yes. Then over the course of 2 centuries, starting in 911, they intermarried with the French creating a hybrid Norse/French population. In 911 the Frankish king Charles III the Simple made the Treaty of St. Clair-sur-Epte with Rollo, ceding him the land around the mouth of the Seine in Rouen.
William was thoroughly and entirely Frankish, and essentially every change the Normans made to the British Isles were due to the influence of Frankish culture, not Norse, much less Viking.
Dear Dan, If you can't bother with voice overs for the translations, maybe you could at least put the captions against a readable background. Just a thought.
Big Mistake,,,, The English should have taken The High Ground 30 miles before the Normans... That would have allowed them to rest and Forced the Normans To come to them while they rested!
No King William conquered England because Guillaume le Conquérant (r. 1066-1087) was a French King. The French not only invaded England but also enriched the English language with 70% of the words found in any English dictionary.
@M C Shame the Hauteville died out before they could forge siciy into nation, rather than the eternal province of someone else. The baron of Norwich wrote a beautiful book on sicilian history. Quite the entertaining read
The Norman cavalry, like most others, would normally have been used as 'light horse', ie arrive near the battle and dismount to fight, keeping their horses behind the lines. The [East] Bretons only fought from their mounts, and historically used armor on the horses they used in battle. Although that said, the Bayaux Tapestry only shows horses without armor, and everything else on the tapestry seems to have been done in meticulous detail.
Send BEN RAFFIELD to an introductory public speaking class, and teach him that sentences do not need to begin with the pig-grunt UM. And individual clauses within sentences do not need to begin with UM. Quite poor form for someone representing the University of Uppsala...
Except the Normans did not speak perfect French. There is no Gwillelm in French as the Normans said William with a 'W' not a 'G' hence us English speakers will understand the Scandinavian words better than the French.
@@M1ggins Well longer still, before the Romans invaded THREE times Bristol was the capital of Wales. The Romans first encountered men painted blue who shaved every hair from their bodies but head and upper lip, these blue men lived in forests then dominated by HOLLY, ofc they cut those down as the druids used Holly for their wands. These were called Brits meaning blue.
Fyrehorse. If that's the case, we're taking our bloody time about it. Most of the English of today, don't have the energy to make a cup of tea at halftime.
Norman men stood about 5'4" perhaps, and illustrations show their little legs barely clearing the ground when astride their horses, who we would call "ponies."
Not a word about William being only two generations removed from a Viking himself, Rollo having terrorized France before being co-opted via marriage and land in a new state whose name literally denotes his Scandinavian ancestry? OK...
Thank you for this ,most important education of the very wide scope of how the Vikings took to their action, both raiding, to exploring, as they were master shipwrights to their laws, which are still used in our courts today...in a basis of our laws, and in someways even more enlightened than our own past laws regarding woman an equal part to the men. If a woman claimed to have been raped ,an Earl or Jarl would rule in favor of her rather than her husbands claims if infidelity. Women were equal to men with regard to most all law. The Vikings were merchants , going as far south and east to trade faster and further than any other peoples. They we FAR from savage brutes, but a people who thought out their movements before acting. William the Conqueror was a direct descendant of Rollo the Walker, a Danish Viking who was givin the lands along the Sienne to prevent more Viking raids. Thus did William know of Viking battle strategies and used them to decimate the Anglo-Saxon English.
I don't think William would of won if it were not for the invasion in the north! Harolds forces had to hike 200 miles then fight a battle, then hike back 200 miles and fight another battle.
Did the Viking spirit ever die out in the UK? We went onto conquer the whole of the British Empire a few centuries later. Has the Viking DNA been in a lot of us all along? I have a 4% Scandinavian DNA and a lot of Jersey/Norman ( plus a lot of Pict!).
Sir Youthful Spikely Ear seems to take a permanent apologist to Harold position ... oh they had already recently fought another battle. ... yes perhaps ... but to eliminate all other reasons and possibilities for the loss of battle is not sensible either, after all deciding to stay up all night drinking, singing songs to keep morale up is simply not a very intelligent decision that has nothing to do with already having had battled. Truly being objective is not an easy thing however, especially when it's your history and you definitely have a preference and bias.
"His body was so mangled he had to be identified by a birthmark" Proceeds to show a completely recognizable hardly mangled body with a clearly visible and recognizable face
This is a small, niche and low budget history documentary. I'd say they did pretty well with what they had. The information is the point, the scenes are just to help you visualize. It's not a movie.
A battle is decided by many factors such as logistics, tactics, equipment, experience. The Normans were superior in all. That´s why they won at Hastings, not because of luck or use of cavalry.
If Edward promised William the throne why did he (Edward the Confessor) arrange to fetch a young member of his family from Europe to have him groomed to be king?
Edward promised a bunch of people the throne, according to some accounts. But if I remember correctly, the promise to William came later in his life as a thank you for his help during Edward's kingship.
@@x5pyke Then after that he nominated Harold...because that he did on that on his his deathbed...it was the last person he nominated....oh and it was VERY unlikely he liked William because he received bad treatment in his unpleasant time in Normandy(he never 'popped back' at all to visit with William or anyone either) .
Funny thing is that English people like considering William as a Vicking more than a French when Napoleon is always told as being French and not Corsican. But on a cultural, language or even genetic point of view, it is exactly the contrary. When you lose, you are French, when you win you are not. Funny you…
If you knew a little more about Normandy you wouldnt be saying that. Normandy was conquered and settled by vikings by the 900s. William the conqueror was a descendant of Rollo, a viking. That makes William both French and Viking origin.
The tides of so many notable histories swept across the English landscape, it's remarkable that an island nation so small saw so much.
British
Sicily: Am I a joke to you?
@@navinkumarpk86 Yes...? #LOL! 🤣
@@NobleKorhedron LOL actually Britain is a bigger joke than Italy/Sicily right now. #Jokeland.
Its proximity to the European continent helped.
I am a descendent of Henry de Ferrieres a Norman land baron who traveled to England in 1066 with Duke William. Henry's father Guillaume owned two large estates in Normandy that had large iron deposits on them. Guillaume operated the oldest forge in that region and produced all of Duke William's weapons, armor, and horse shoes. Guillaume was killed in 1040 in a jousting duel when he and his opponent fought to a draw and both died. The Ferrieres families were one of the few large baronial families in Normandy that supported the young Duke William. Henry, and William de Ferrieres, his older brother took many soldiers under the Ferrieres banner and followed the young Duke to England. William de Ferrieres was killed in a charge about the same time King Harold was slain. William the Conqueror gave Henry his brother's share of the spoils of war. Later William the Conqueror rewarded Henry with more large areas of land for faithful service. Henry became one of the largest land barons in England. When my anscestor that came to America in 1673 the French spelling had been changed to English and was Ferrers. After a few generations in America the name was changed to Ferriss. A few generations after that the last s was dropped and now the spelling in Ferris. I know the name has roots earlier with Vikings but I have not had time to research that.
I'm curious: was he called Ferrieres after the deposit of ferrous metal on his land, or is it the other way round? Or maybe it's coincidence!
@@discomikeyboy2012 My understanding is Guillaume was named after the iron ore. The ancient family coat of arms has a black field with silver horseshoes on it.
True
Do you have a copy of the family tree that traces you back to the esteemed knight? I ask because it is a fairly common misconception, if an English person has a Norman sounding name, that they are descended from Normans; however, as the feudal system gradually came to an end, it was the usual practice for emancipated serfs to take their lord's family name as their surname. In post-feudal Britain, it became essential for ordinary folk to have surnames, owing to the fact that they were now a mobile workforce and no longer tied to one village for life.
Hey if it's ok where can i speak with you more privately on this situation? Because i just learned that WTC is my 29th Great Grandfather
Fascinating history.
I lived in Stamford Bridge for many years.
It has never been established exactly where the Bridge in the battle actually was.
Logically about 800 m above todays Bridge and wooden accommodation of one horse and wagon. The area is now known as Battleflats.
The time taken from Kent to 10 miles from York, on foot is generally estimated at 40 miles per day, so approximately 9 days.
Travelling back would have been, probably 11 days, allowing for fatigue and carrying injured men.
Probably, to be fair, 14 days would be nearer the mark.
Many roads in the village refer to the historic battle, streets like Tostig Close, Hardrada Way, Saxon Road, Fossway ( The fastest road between York and London) Haroldsway
being good examples.
need to build a museum next to it, memorial. they should consider reconstruct the wooden bridge, it was a landmark at the time, until the vikings came destoryed everything
True
My great grandfather fought in this battle. Super cool to learn what he may have gone through. He went over to England from Bourdonnay, Normandy, as a soldier under William the Conquerer, and after the battle of Hastings - in A. D. 1066 - was assigned lands in the County of Kent
Merry Christmas to everyone many blessings 🎅
You to. Merry Christmas and stay safe
Merry logmas to you too
Wow that was offensive
Kiss me
Thanks and a very merry Christmas to ALL of you!!Stay Safe!!!
Respect to Harold Godwinson.
The Normans turned the apparent disadvantage of fighting uphill into an advantage with their cavalry bait-and-switch technique.
The map shows a level plain?
If not tell me the time on this video that you Heard what you Heard?
Thanks.
@@davidleethompsoniii8263 It is well known to be on a steep slope between two hills:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Hastings#Background_and_location
The Nordic lady ALMOST talks about this, but the editing cut it out I think. She mentions that on flat ground the horses usually break through on a direct charge, but at Hastings this didn't work. When the English tried to rout the apparently fleeing cavalry, they broke ranks and got routed themselves. Working down a hill like that would encourage that scenario, as the horses don't mind moving away and the impulse of a foot soldier is to march forward down the hill.
It’s well known in History that the English Army stood on the top of a hill. The Normans were not making much headway so they tried a trick. They put on a fake retreat and the Common men not the Housecarls left the English shield wall on the top of the Hill and charged down onto the alleged fleeing Normans and the Normans turned and cut them down. Battle Abbey built on the site removed the true ground profile of the site. Senlac Hill. The Hill of 🩸
@@jamesglass4842 It would of course help if we knew accurately where the various armies were located. The traditional site is now, like Bosworth, disputed
Didn't help, that Godwinson already fought at Stamford bridge a few days prior, probably took a heavy loss in men also before he fought William
Thank you for this covering this historical era of mainly Northwest Europe.
I love listening to the different historians in their native languages. It makes it feel more real.
You and I enjoy being members of "The Family of Man" but not everybody does. About half-and-half in my opinion.
I know the lady with the dark hair was speaking French but what was the lady with the glasses speaking?? I can’t figure it out
I don't like reading subtitles. I'd rather have it dubbed. Sorry.
@@amandabishop1501 She might be from Sweden or Denmark. Not really sure.
Yes it's brilliant
Once, oh Lord; just once can they please, PLEASE make an effort to get the armor and helmets and general accoutrements reasonably close to accurate?
No
@@connormitchell6446 🤣🤣🤣
I KNOWWWW, I really wanted to see some of those cool helmets with the horns.
Do you mean to say that Harold Godwinson did not actually have that sweet handlebar mustache?
@Samuel Benson yeah but horns are more fun than no horns
Whoever advised them on the armour needs to read some books, some of the helmets were 300 years ahead of 1066, like putting a tank in a documentary about the English civil war
I love this series.
Thank you!
I really enjoyed this. Thank you.
Ahh yes!!! Can't stop watching this series! I love it💕
Story mentioned 18:49 is just like the Thales of ensing Stål ad Sven Dufva, poem written by Finland-Swedish author Johan Ludvig Runeberg, the national poet of Finland. Story is said to have true life role model but this is really similar story.
True
Thank you so much for uploading this video. It is helping me get through the pandemic!
You’re still in a pandemic? Bruh what country do you live in
The First of my Name ( Sir Robert Le Skynnere) was an Uncle (Mother’s side) of William. He fought beside William at Hastings and lost his left hand in the battle. We was given 5,000 acres and made Barron of Bolingbroke. He married the daughter of the Anglo Saxon Barron they killed in battle and and he took his lands and titles. That way his children would have hereditary titles on both the Norman and Anglo-Saxon side. We ruled over those lands until we were forced to leave England and settled in Jamestown Virginia in the early 1600’s.
Very interesting! What forced your ancestors to leave England and settle in Jamestown, Virginia?
William's harrying of the north caused a migration of Anglo-Saxons folks into what came to be known as the Scottish Lowlands, and anyone who knows anything about American history knows the impact the Lowlanders (via Northern Ireland) had on the settling of America.
Yes, those Lowlanders that later migrated to America were predominantly of Anglo-Saxon origin, with a bit a native Scottish Brythonic DNA.
So, it can now be said that the future America benefitted in great part as a result of William the Conquer's accomplishments in Britain.
Another great documentary of the battle of Hastings. Thank you for this documentary.
My 27th Great Grandfather ^^
You → Denise Kogler, your mother → Marcelle Helene Marchoux, her mother → Jean Texier, her father → Magdeleine Texier, his mother
→ Marie Vauzelle, her mother → Marquis Etienne Texier de Javerlhac, her father → Marquis Etienne-Marie Texier de Javerlhac, his father
→ Gabrielle Texier de Javerlhac, his mother → Comte Jean Baptiste de Roffignac, Chevalier, Seigneur de Belleville, les Brosses (Oradour sur Vayres), Saint-Angel et la Francherie, her father → Chevalier René de Roffignac, seigneur de Belleville, his father → Jean de Roffignac, seigneur de Belleville, his father → Jean-Baptiste de Roffignac, seigneur de Belleville, his father → Gaspard de Roffignac, seigneur de Quinsac, his father →
Martial de Roffignac, seigneur de Sampnac, his father → Christophe de Roffignac, seigneur de Sampnac, his father → Françoise de Roffignac,
his mother → Pierre Chauvet, seigneur de Sannat, her father → Jean Chauvet, seigneur de Sannat, his father → Guillemette de Chenac, his mother → Hélie de de Chenac, seigneur de Bourg-Archambault et du Montmorillonnais, her father → Isabelle de Montberon, his mother →
Isabeau de Ventadour, Dame de Marjaride et de Montredon, her mother → Delphine de La Tour, her mother → Jeanne de Toulouse, her mother
→ Joan Plantagenet of England, Queen of Sicily, her mother → Henry II "Curtmantle", King of England, her father → Empress Matilda, his mother
→ Henry I, king of England, her father → William "the Conqueror", King of England, his father
My dad's a plumber
@@Bowie_E A plumber who was probably descended from English royalty (no offense intended🙂)
I am either the descendant of spanish jews or moors. Maybe both.
Or neither, fact remain as soon as the family came to sicily the honoured ancestors slaughtered some monks and took the abbey for themselves.
@@dm8524 awwww absolutely ☺
Very interesting 👍 thank you 🙏 more of this kind of documentaries please, really great 💕😊👍😍
It wasn't the Last Battle of the Vikings. If anything, Harold (whose family were strongly connected to Canute and who was personally half Danish) was the last vestige of Norse culture stamped out by William. This was the age of the Normans coming to its apex. William was thoroughly and entirely Frankish, and essentially every change the Normans made to the British Isles were due to the influence of Frankish culture, not Norse.
Before William, the British Isles were a patchwork of Anglo-Saxon, Norse and Celtic kingdoms. Afterward, England, Wales, Ireland and Scotland were centralized feudal kingdoms thoroughly remade in the Frankish model.
Aside from good old anti-French sentiment, there's seriously very little sense in the pattern of British historiography to reduce the Frankish culture of the Normans, and connect William to Viking-ness.
Your points are well taken, but don't ever forget that those Normans, almost to a man, had those Viking Y chromosomes in them and they were still among the greatest warriors the Western world had ever seen!
The French culture may have given them the instruments of effective governance, castle building, etc., but it did not provide them with all that military prowess. Just look at the rest of France during that era!
To reinforce my point here about the martial qualities associated with those Viking Y chromosomes, just take a look at what was going on in Southern Italy, Sicily, the Balkans and the Middle East at that same point in time? Norman adventurers, warriors, military leaders and rulers, such as Robert Guiscard, his brother Roger d'Hauteville, Bohemund and the others would not necessarily be required to take a backseat to the accomplishments of William the Conqueror, as they were kingpins on a stage that was soon to determine who the major players were to be, not only in the Christian West, but in the Islamic world too!
@@chucklynch6523 military prowess does **not** stem from genetics. If that were the case, no feudal lord would need to educate their heirs. It would all just be preprogrammed into their blood.
Military prowess is taught. It is by no means genetic. William himself learned toughness as he grew up in an environment of political chaos. Robert and Bohemund both grew up in environments of conflict. They were taught to be soldiers. Eleanor of Aquitaine was a powerful and widely travelled duchess, probably the greatest Norman of her lifetime, attended the second Crusade, ruled England for three kings, and yet, she lacked that "Viking Y Chromosome".
As for look at Frankish world during that era? Some of the finest knights of history were to emerge. Raymond of Tolouse. Baldwin of Boulogne. Godfrey of Boillion, El Cid - all non Normans btw. The crusade itself, which took the Normans to the East, was called precisely because France and Germany, the Frankish World the Normans belonged to, was in upheaval due to incessant feudal infighting. The Peace of God movement was an initiative of the Popes to curb feudal violence and robber barons.
Another thing: these movements and migration of Normans did not simply happen within a vaccum, with some genetic alarm bell ringing for Normans to go adventure. They were part of other movements of people, most of whom had no Viking blood. Robert and his brothers were hired as mercenaries to travel to Italy. The Crusade was called by Urban II, a non-Norman.
Meanwhile, those very same "Viking Y Chromosomes" you wax lyrical about, were in this time, far less diluted within Scandinavia itself, their place of origin. Yet the entire practice of raiding was undoubtedly coming to an end, and society was becoming more stable.
So why was raiding and conquering ending in one, and not in the other? Was it religion? Not really, since the Normans were overwhelmingly devout. Was it genetics? Not really, those viking genes were dramatically diluted from the time of Rollo.
The answer has nothing to with genetics, because the genetic code you argue is key was far more prevalent within Scandinavia than Normandy. The answer is stratification and stability. During the Viking Age, social mobility and independent initiative were very possible for local strongmen because there was little in the way of control and there was possibility for upward social mobility.
Anything to avoid been conquered by something resembling France...
Sure, I hear you, but without a doubt the warrior spirit and tireless ferocity of the Normans has their origins in their Viking past, or as some like to say, in their Y chromosomes!
In my opinion without the Norman influence in the British Isles America would not be the same America we all have known for the last 250 years!
William and his successors' harrying of Northern England to bring the native Anglo-Saxons under his yoke prompted many to flee to the Scottish Lowlands where they mixed with the native Brythonics and others to create and new and most cantankerous group that served as a thorn in the English crown's side for many hundreds of years until many were relocated to Northern Ireland and still farther West to North America and elsewhere, where the ones who settled in what is now America were finally able to exact a long overdue revenge on the so-called Anglo-Normans who tortured them for years, via independence!!!
@@TheSamuraijim87 I disagree with your first point. I did 8 years in the Marine Corps. There were some Marines that were just completely meant to be on a battlefield. Natural warriors that can pick up any lesson in firearms, martial arts, tactics, etc. at the snap of the fingers.
Some people’s existence comes from generations of warriors serving on battlefields across the world. I don’t think it’s by accident that they choose to follow in their ancestors same footsteps.
So, being William the Conqueror was the great great grandson of Rollo, the Vikings ended up conquering England after all.
The Anglo-Saxons were descended from Old Saxony in northwest Germany, the Normans and Angevins were French, the Tudors were Welsh, the Stuart's were Scottish, the House of Orange was Dutch, and every British monarch since then has been descended from German nobility same as the Anglo-Saxons.
This is a story....all about how, my life got flippzerred upside down....
I'd like to take a minute would you sit right there
Battlefield archaeology isn't as easy as she makes it sound. Just look at the effort involved in finally locating the battlefield at Bosworrth.
Yeah, but with it being such an IMPORTANT battle, I don't understand wtf they didn't put up a monument to mark the site of such a historic event... FFS...
Indeed. Plus, the after the Battle of Hastings, they built an abbey (which is the monument, btw) on top of the hill. The efforts involved in that likely destroyed any small traces that were left after scavenging.
@@lunaokittens9574 It might have actually been at Crowhurst, where there has been more archaeological evidence.
@@lunaokittens9574 at the centre of the floor under the dome of St Paul's, Christopher Wren made an inscription in Latin which translates as "if you want a memorial, look around you."
Battle abbey was built as a memorial to Hastings battle.
I've read that my last name, Martin, came with them from Normandy and was introduced into England. Or that is where it first shows up in records anyway. My DNA is almost exclusively from the UK and Northern Europe and I find the history there absolutely fascinating.
better acting and filming then most on tv and movies!
THEY took it from a real film that's why.
Research mate lol
Lord Timeline so well done! Such high quality! Keep it coming! Please.
My great uncle was a veteran from the Battle of Hastings.
My 28th great-grandfather won that battle. He defeated my 2nd cousin 26x removed. It's surprising how many times my ancestors fought each other, then married.
This is a brilliant source of reliable history. So happy I found your channel.
Excellent series. Bravo!
Wonderfully made, historically accurate in its depictions ....a rare thing these days!
ERGO:
William ordered the tapestry!
To honor his victory.
hahaha. Terrible costumes and gear. 26:10 The anglo-saxons are wearing 14th century bascinets.
@@patrickrobinson177 Fair enough, I didn’t get that far. They do look like a later design. Let’s be thankful they aren’t sub-Saharan Africans.
@@OUTBOUND184 Yeah, afraid almost none of the costumes are remotely close to what they looked like. The normans at least have the right helmets. But they have 13th century style chainmail coifs and flat topped shields. Several of them have 13th century style surcoats. All in all they look more of the time period of the 3rd Crusade than Hastings.
@@patrickrobinson177 relatively speaking these are minor crimes, considering what we’ve witnessed over the last 10-20 years
Did the English ever check the ancestry of either William or Matilda of Flanders? Matilda was descended from Alfred the Great, and Charlemagne.
Just think In another 45 years it’ll be the a 1000 years since the battle of Hastings
I still remember it like yesterday..
The English King promised the throne to four or five people. That is what created the greatest confusion upon his death.
(According to those people.... I'm not saying he didn't do it, he seems to have been a weak king in an often precarious position, but the sources of those claims are not exactly the most trustworthy)
Mad to think the Norman's descend from vikings
Merry Christmas to everyone
Merry Christmas!
And let us definitely have a happy new year!
Excellent documentary!!!
You failed to mention that Harald Hardrada and his army were caught off guard and their armor was back at their ships. So, they were forced to fight unexpectedly without their armor.
Poor excuse for a well earned defeat.
@@darthvenator2487 Not an excuse, merely a detail. Jeesh..
Unexpected? They were the invaders
They should of had lookouts or rested in a better poistion. I would guess this is a myth that they didn't have armour.
True
I wonder how things would had gone if Harold had fighting William 1st?
Harold would have won
@@123dan165 Maybe so
William likely waited until September as a strategy due to the Norwegians, led by Harald Hardrada and Harold Godwinson’s younger brother Tostig, were going to invade England anyway, so it is likely that William of Normandy knew that Harold’s forces would have been weakened due to the Battle of Stamford Bridge and took advantage.
Most likely would have Won as he was expecting William to invade and was prepared for it. However what threw him off was the big invasion by brother Tostig Godwinson and Harald Hadrada, if not for that then Hastings would have been hugely different.
You can't honestly consider the demise of the Vikings without considering the beat down they took from Brian Boru a century earlier. Many Vikings embraced Christianity simply because they could not defeat him and they figured the Christ must be more powerful than Odin. And so many of them had taken Christian wives that it was inevitable that their ways would change sooner than later.
@sneksnekitsasnek It certainly wasn't any one thing that changed their ways. They were definitely getting soft from the plunder, and with that comes politics. But taking the kind of losses they took being driven out of Ireland coupled with the influx of Christianity could only spell their demise.
True
Another great documentary.
I would also point out the use of the word "Viking" as it seems to be used a bit loosely. I understand that the word was originally an occupational word meaning pirate and/or raider. But at the end of the day, words mean what the majority of people using them at the time say they mean. In this documentary "Viking" seems to mean people of Scandinavian decent/heritage - which is how many people use the word these days to be fair.
Great Documentary, I have always wished I could go back and warn Harold Godwinson about the date William of Normandy's landing
Harold sold us out when he fought in the French Wars, he knew it was coming.
@@pixel8ated Yes, but if he had had intelligence I wonder how history would have changed
@@kirkmorrison6131 Harold getting the throne wasn't a done deal anyway, wasn't exactly a consolidated England back then, but I guess a lot would have changed, perhaps the whole World history.
@@pixel8ated I know and I agree with you. I am just wondering as always as to how history would have changed. History depends on many events some large many many little ones. There are also many that fall somewhere in between.
@@kirkmorrison6131 Well I guess the big thing that changed was the castles were built to protect us from the invaders, after 1066 they were for the invaders to protect themselves from us and whereas under previous kings every man had a voice now we had direct top down rule.
Coming soon: People whining about experts not speaking English in a French-Nordic production and people who refuse to read subtitles because they can't be bothered to pay attention.
I don't mind the subtitles but the english dude says erm hundreds or thousands of times...erm is really doing my head in.
I perceive that you are a Seer.
Only you made it a point 🤣🤣😅
This was a battle between 3 vikings. Harald Godwinson is of viking descent. And william is from the line of Rollo the viking conquerer of Normandy
Does anyone else wonder if/how Dan Snow can keep getting away with using the phrase "The Netflix for History" to advertise his channel?
Agreed. In fact it's the furthest thing to Netflix if you think about it. Ads playing every 5 minutes, low-effort content like History Hit Live and all the regurgitated content from decades ago.
@@mikotagayuna8494 I don’t think there’s ads if you subscribe to the website he’s talking about. He’s not talking about his UA-cam channel.
there were no more Norse raids because these places were no longer weak and undefended, it was no longer easy to invade and take the land.
Very interesting to think what would have happened if william had invaded before the norwegians, could be watching a very different doc.
It’s like WW2 attack on multiple fronts
Its like watching a Crusader Kings game
1066 is actually a start date in ck3 hehe
Empire earth taught me quite alot.
True
i gotta watch this 4 skl😭😭
Rollo you trader, Ragnar will return to avenge us. Rollo: Tell Ragnar I'll be down on the beach dancing naked
True
I took a hit in the Battle of Hastings but I am still around.
Just in time for this
Breton Archers were central to the Norman Victory against the English. Therefore, 1066, was the Britons return home, and revenge against the Anglo-Saxons. William the Conqueror was also of Breton heritage.
Wasn't their last journey. They just integrated. Praise Odin.
Odin!!!!!
All hail the allfather!
Excellent documentary, but I’m wondering why the English army is marked under the St. George’s cross, I thought it was first used by a Plantagenet king
I almost remind myself that the population was much lower back then, so the armies were also quite small
Nice historical video about English history event in 1036 century..
True
Yay found one with captions those who upload please remember captions
the normans were from viking blood.....it used to be a viking trading post.
Originally yes. Then over the course of 2 centuries, starting in 911, they intermarried with the French creating a hybrid Norse/French population. In 911 the Frankish king Charles III the Simple made the Treaty of St. Clair-sur-Epte with Rollo, ceding him the land around the mouth of the Seine in Rouen.
William was thoroughly and entirely Frankish, and essentially every change the Normans made to the British Isles were due to the influence of Frankish culture, not Norse, much less Viking.
@sneksnekitsasnek did mel gibson say that?
True
GOD BLESS KING MICHAEL HASTINGS THE FIRST
THE REAL British monarch living in Australia.
Dear Dan,
If you can't bother with voice overs for the translations, maybe you could at least put the captions against a readable background. Just a thought.
I wish there were Turkish subtitles.-😔...
The Normans did a lot of Conquering Sisicly springs to mind, but they just disappeared from the face of the earth. Vikings to virtually disappeared.
This video needs editing. There is too much repetition.You hear the man say the same things several times.
Big Mistake,,,,
The English should have taken The High Ground 30 miles before the Normans...
That would have allowed them to rest and Forced the Normans
To come to them while they rested!
That would have helped overcome the calvary.
The Last Kingdom of Vikings in 1066 marks the end of the viking age
True
No King William conquered England because Guillaume le Conquérant (r. 1066-1087) was a French King. The French not only invaded England but also enriched the English language with 70% of the words found in any English dictionary.
This scares me
Do a show on the great Black Moors that were great conquerors for many decades and even in parts of Europe. Show all history!
The Moors weren’t black. Black people come from sub-Saharan Africa.
@@kevin6293 Google it then lol
@@factsoverfear9771 are you one of those people who demonizes European colonizers while idolizing North African colonizers?
As a Sicilian I denounce this vile historical revisionism.
@M C Shame the Hauteville died out before they could forge siciy into nation, rather than the eternal province of someone else.
The baron of Norwich wrote a beautiful book on sicilian history.
Quite the entertaining read
Norman cavalry at Hastings did not have horse armour.
The Norman cavalry, like most others, would normally have been used as 'light horse', ie arrive near the battle and dismount to fight, keeping their horses behind the lines.
The [East] Bretons only fought from their mounts, and historically used armor on the horses they used in battle.
Although that said, the Bayaux Tapestry only shows horses without armor, and everything else on the tapestry seems to have been done in meticulous detail.
Send BEN RAFFIELD to an introductory public speaking class, and teach him that sentences do not need to begin with the pig-grunt UM. And individual clauses within sentences do not need to begin with UM. Quite poor form for someone representing the University of Uppsala...
Stamford Bridge was the last raid, surely?
1066....everybody has heard of Hastings....nobody knows of Stamford Bridge......Harold was not bad leader,just William got lucky with that arrow.....
@@bigrobnz which is why a history channel has the obligation to educate people, especially in the history they haven't heard of
William the conqueror vs ageaon the conqueror ❤
Does anyone know what language the lady with the glasses is speaking? It sounds Nordic but I really can’t tell.
Except the Normans did not speak perfect French. There is no Gwillelm in French as the Normans said William with a 'W' not a 'G' hence us English speakers will understand the Scandinavian words better than the French.
We have been an occupied country since 1066 soon we will rise up....
longer than that, try since 54BC
@@M1ggins Well longer still, before the Romans invaded THREE times Bristol was the capital of Wales. The Romans first encountered men painted blue who shaved every hair from their bodies but head and upper lip, these blue men lived in forests then dominated by HOLLY, ofc they cut those down as the druids used Holly for their wands. These were called Brits meaning blue.
Fyrehorse.
If that's the case, we're taking our bloody time about it.
Most of the English of today, don't have the energy to make a cup of tea at halftime.
We are wearing muzzles, case solved.
@@pixel8ated know of any good documentaries on this subject or the like, good fellow?
Norman men stood about 5'4" perhaps, and illustrations show their little legs barely clearing the ground when astride their horses, who we would call "ponies."
Not a word about William being only two generations removed from a Viking himself, Rollo having terrorized France before being co-opted via marriage and land in a new state whose name literally denotes his Scandinavian ancestry? OK...
Thank you for this ,most important education of the very wide scope of how the Vikings took to their action, both raiding, to exploring, as they were master shipwrights to their laws, which are still used in our courts today...in a basis of our laws, and in someways even more enlightened than our own past laws regarding woman an equal part to the men. If a woman claimed to have been raped ,an Earl or Jarl would rule in favor of her rather than her husbands claims if infidelity. Women were equal to men with regard to most all law. The Vikings were merchants , going as far south and east to trade faster and further than any other peoples. They we FAR from savage brutes, but a people who thought out their movements before acting. William the Conqueror was a direct descendant of Rollo the Walker, a Danish Viking who was givin the lands along the Sienne to prevent more Viking raids. Thus did William know of Viking battle strategies and used them to decimate the Anglo-Saxon English.
Never heard of the Battle of Largs in 1263 or is this just about England.
The last battle of the vikings? What happened to the battle of Largs, nearly 200 years later - or doesn't Scottish history count ?
It's Dan Snow and his anglo-centric buddies. Of course Scottish history means nothing to them
UA-cam is weird again 1 view and 14 comments. Hmmmmmm 🤨🤨🤨
Refresh? Showing 176 views for me :)
My son he came to me and left this comet 😗
I don't think William would of won if it were not for the invasion in the north! Harolds forces had to hike 200 miles then fight a battle, then hike back 200 miles and fight another battle.
True
Lol, it wasn't the same army
Did the Viking spirit ever die out in the UK? We went onto conquer the whole of the British Empire a few centuries later. Has the Viking DNA been in a lot of us all along? I have a 4% Scandinavian DNA and a lot of Jersey/Norman ( plus a lot of Pict!).
Yes there is Viking DNA in us. So has Norway, Denmark and Sweden, though they never went on to conquer the world.
@@cambs0181 No, because all the angry ones moved to the UK🤣
True
The Battle of Hastings is the last time a foreign standing army set foot on England’s soil.
I’m not confident that the streak makes it to 1,000yrs...
The Scottish did a few times and the Dutch did in 1688.
@@mcr2356 the Scottish are British and the Dutch were invited in by parliament, not really the same thing
Sir Youthful Spikely Ear seems to take a permanent apologist to Harold position ... oh they had already recently fought another battle. ... yes perhaps ... but to eliminate all other reasons and possibilities for the loss of battle is not sensible either, after all deciding to stay up all night drinking, singing songs to keep morale up is simply not a very intelligent decision that has nothing to do with already having had battled. Truly being objective is not an easy thing however, especially when it's your history and you definitely have a preference and bias.
Couldn’t get one person to translate?
"for most people the vikings were seen only as plunderers and pirates" .... because that's what you do when you go viking.
True
"His body was so mangled he had to be identified by a birthmark"
Proceeds to show a completely recognizable hardly mangled body with a clearly visible and recognizable face
This is a small, niche and low budget history documentary. I'd say they did pretty well with what they had. The information is the point, the scenes are just to help you visualize. It's not a movie.
@@WinterReflections thanks for your commentary there uh genius.
A battle is decided by many factors such as logistics, tactics, equipment, experience. The Normans were superior in all. That´s why they won at Hastings, not because of luck or use of cavalry.
Definitely not! What about the Norman victories and conquests of Southern Italy, Sicily and in the Balkans??? Timeline out of line again!
If Edward promised William the throne why did he (Edward the Confessor) arrange to fetch a young member of his family from Europe to have him groomed to be king?
Edward promised a bunch of people the throne, according to some accounts. But if I remember correctly, the promise to William came later in his life as a thank you for his help during Edward's kingship.
@@x5pyke Then after that he nominated Harold...because that he did on that on his his deathbed...it was the last person he nominated....oh and it was VERY unlikely he liked William because he received bad treatment in his unpleasant time in Normandy(he never 'popped back' at all to visit with William or anyone either) .
On my mother's side I'm decended from Willam . Also Ethelred
the Unready ..oh well..
How did you establish that?
@@GingerBlue84
Genealogist my late auntie hired. Back in the 70's.
@@tgmccoy1556 oh I see, good stuff.
Might’ve been there worse but it absolutely wasn’t there last
Doing repeats now!
Funny thing is that English people like considering William as a Vicking more than a French when Napoleon is always told as being French and not Corsican. But on a cultural, language or even genetic point of view, it is exactly the contrary. When you lose, you are French, when you win you are not. Funny you…
If you knew a little more about Normandy you wouldnt be saying that. Normandy was conquered and settled by vikings by the 900s. William the conqueror was a descendant of Rollo, a viking. That makes William both French and Viking origin.
@@madarab37 ca va je connais et je sais ce que je dis merci au revoir
A comet does not pass like that on the sky.