What if?????

I use to get these what if comics by Marvel. Like, what if Wonder Man has lived etc.

What if the Byzantine arny had defeated the Turks at the Battle of Manzikert in 1071 AD? What would the world be like today?

What if the Normans had lost in the Battle of Hastings in 1066 AD? same question!

The Normans are amongst my favorite bad guys in history!

Originally posted by Spartakus Shouldn't this be in the historical Amusement forum?

Yes.

Originally posted by Kenaney What if.... you dont dream so much? i will repeat a preverb that almost all civilisation say it; "if my aunt had testicles, she would be my uncle" take youre conclusions....

Ok

THE BATTLE OF HASTINGS 1066
It is still a valid question but if Manzikert is too touchy with the Greeks and Turks then let's just stick with the Battle of Hastings in 1066 and leave Manzikert out. What would England be like today and what would the English language be like if King Harold had defeated the Normans????? I don't think the English and French will get too upset over this topic.

The English language would probably be more Germanic and it would not have the Latin and French influences it has today. The British Empire would have probably never existed or even possibly the American colonies.

The Normans brought a new generation of technology that eventually made England a leading European power which it otherwise would not have been or if so, at a much later date.

Many English historians agree that the Norman invasion was one of the most important events in the history of the country.

Unlike the Saxons the Normans were great builders,building Castles and other defensive structures would of helped strengthen England.
On the issue of the Normans being "bad guys" ,William the bastards doomsday book is a great help to us now, but at the time i imagine the peoples experience of this act to be far from good.Some foriegner takes the English throne and sends his henchmen/tax collectors out to document every single thing of any value in the Country,so he knows how much money he gained.


Edited by Gavriel

Originally posted by Zagros Many English historians agree that the Norman invasion was one of the most important events in the history of the country.

But without it, England might have stayed in the Northern European/Scandinavian sphere of influence and might now be a country with a decent football team (1:4 against Denmark last Wednesday), functioning welfare, health and education systems, lots of tall blond women and a liberal attitude to sexuality.

we got beat 4-1 because we have a filandering scandinavaian manager who couldnt give a toss about English football. 
With no Norman invasion and consequently no war with the French would England have become a world power?i imagine a lot of money was gained during that 100 years.If the Normans never came someone would have.
Gavrriel


Edited by Gavriel

Yes, but the Anglo-Saxon were divided into many kingdoms. Alfred was successful in uniting most, but not all of them.

Also, it was not 'England' that became a world power, but 'Britain'. The English could not have been a major European power if it could not even control its own island. The Angevin Empire only occured because of the foothold in France that the Normans left behind.

Originally posted by Belisarius Yes, but the Anglo-Saxon were divided into many kingdoms. Alfred was successful in uniting most, but not all of them. Also, it was not 'England' that became a world power, but 'Britain'. The English could not have been a major European power if it could not even control its own island. The Angevin Empire only occured because of the foothold in France that the Normans left behind.

The English were already a major power without controlling Scotland. Scotland wasn't untied to the British crown before 1603. But in nay case I can imagine that between 1066 and 1603 (more than 5 centuries!), the Anglo-Saxon monarchy could actually unify all Britain. I see no reason for them not do it.

The Angevin Empire that you mention is a perfect example of how England could play major role without controlling Scotland. Still I have always seen those wars as meaningless. Maybe if the english crown would have conquered France the subsequently unified state could have played a bigger role in European and World affairs but that never happenend, so it was only a waste of time and resources for both countries, specially for England, as France was at least fighting for their own sovereignity and "national" union.

In fact it was the Hundred Years' War and no other reason what retarded the French and English colonial empires, giving all the initiative to the Iberian kingdoms.

Originally posted by Ahmed The Fighter  Why the Norman didnot change the name of the island after they conqured it they defeated the Anglo-saxon what after that ?

It wasn't an invading migration, like that of Anglos, Saxons and Jutes, it was more like when Goths took Aquitaine and Spain, they naver renamed their posessions, they just formed the ruling elithe.

The Normans didn't give either their name to any other of their conquests: Naples & Sicily, Byzantium, Jerusalem... the only country that took their name was Normandy and that is because Normans or Danes had occupied it earlier at the time of the ikig invasions. But when the Normans with that French name started their campaigns all around Europe and the Med, they were just a fierce group of French knights and and not anymore a separate ethnicity. hey thought in non-ethnical feudal concepts where most countries had the name they found them with more or less.

Another reason I can think is that often the names of realms at that time were often born from popular usage rather than because any monarch decided anything. Still, they probaly imposed their French diffuse concept of Anglia/England to all the Anglo-Saxon territory, despite the realm they conquered had the name of Wessex (that is: Western Saxony). Anglo realms proper were only East Anglia, Mercia (already extinct at 1066) and Northumbria (in proccess of anexation too) but guess that the Norman invasion helped to diffuminate whatever differences remained between Anglos, Saxons and Jutes.