|
|
Post by Lord Twaddleford on Jan 27, 2019 23:19:08 GMT
3. Does London become the permanent capital or does somewhere else on the circuit take the position? Given he has had to fight at both ends of the country, I wonder if Harold might have found somewhere more central. Coventry?  After briefly studying a map of England, methinks somewhere such as Nottingham would be more appropriate...  |
|
|
|
Post by Lord Twaddleford on Jan 27, 2019 23:34:12 GMT
An English Parliament could move around the country, spending maybe 18 months or 2 years at each town/city. I've never really seen the appeal of constantly moving the seat of government around a country; if you look at anywhere, it's just not something that's done, at least not in modern times. |
|
|
|
Post by Adam in Stroud on Jan 28, 2019 8:42:00 GMT
An English Parliament could move around the country, spending maybe 18 months or 2 years at each town/city. Before being chased out of town by angry mobs? |
|
|
|
Post by yellowperil on Jan 28, 2019 10:25:44 GMT
Was a time when the seat of government was under the person of the monarch when it happened all the time. Of course these days one option would be a virtual parliament, with members sitting in their own homes, speaking by conference link and voting electronically- what need for a parliament building at all?  |
|
|
|
Post by iainbhx on Feb 3, 2019 19:48:08 GMT
A few thoughts to discuss: 1. Does English entrench itself as the language of prestige earlier as Anglo-Norman does not take hold? 2. Does English retain any of its inflections? 3. Does London become the permanent capital or does somewhere else on the circuit take the position? Given he has had to fight at both ends of the country, I wonder if Harold might have found somewhere more central. David Cowley did write a book or two on this which are available on Amazon at a price. One of them is How We'd Talk If The English Had Won in 1066, the preface, sorry, forthspell starts Abede English speakers to hear - whether learners, or those whose mother tongue it is - that there needs to be aknowness of the losses that the addlebearing Normans brought: as well as adreadingly slithe slaughters, afearing the whole land, as well as grabbing all they could in wealth, they laid our fair tongue low, where before they came it was the speech of kings, thanes and all kind of folk, and had looked set for early greatness.
A call to acover lost words! - end the afremding. How is it that we've had such an afterfollowingness of elds with so little done to withstand this? Only a few stevens raised against the unrightwiseness of 1066. Alease ourselves from this - choose to brook our words more, and althedish words less, anewing our sayness - something athel and smart! And away with the old angmoodness about ‘high' words, which has forebusied the English heart. Anneal a winly hotheartness and aqueath that we will no more be under this yoke, so earm, and in arvethness to ‘talk well'; Yes, England's thedely sundering of the heart, and its atiwedness thusly. Put the atel things behind - let us forthstep to athel things such as the work of winning back words - rine them anew, wend and awherve, back to that old bearingness, to that eldright - Old English roots.
... So let us seek to be eady in words - if we want it and are willing it can be eath to bring about - if each one of us becomes an ednewand, speaking the words to edstall the tongue and edwend its eadiness - it can happen in our days, in our eldom, that this athel eldright rises anew!
... So let us, fakelessly, undo the fallness wrought at Hastings...
Ah, that we get words back into daily brooking! - the sound words that were formerly fordimed, fordone, fordwilmed and had fordwined... |
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 14,774 
|
Post by J.G.Harston on Feb 3, 2019 20:04:48 GMT
A few thoughts to discuss: 1. Does English entrench itself as the language of prestige earlier as Anglo-Norman does not take hold? 2. Does English retain any of its inflections? 3. Does London become the permanent capital or does somewhere else on the circuit take the position? Given he has had to fight at both ends of the country, I wonder if Harold might have found somewhere more central. David Cowley did write a book or two on this which are available on Amazon at a price. One of them is How We'd Talk If The English Had Won in 1066, the preface, sorry, forthspell starts ...A bit like...  |
|
john07
Labour & Co-operative
Posts: 15,788
|
Post by john07 on Feb 12, 2019 15:37:09 GMT
Coventry? After briefly studying a map of England, methinks somewhere such as Nottingham would be more appropriate... I suspect that a population weighted centre for England would be somewhere near Oxford. |
|
|
|
Post by stodge on Feb 13, 2019 21:18:03 GMT
England's involvement with Europe wouldn't have stopped with a Saxon win at Hastings.
It needs to be remembered England wasn't some impoverished backwater in 1066 - indeed, it was one of the wealthiest and most prosperous parts of western Europe which is why William was interested (and Hardrada too). Silver from England was currency and was used to buy wool from Flanders. England had avoided a generation of conflict and its farmland was desirable and well maintained.
I suspect a victorious Harold Godwinson would have faced problems from Flanders (William's widow (presumably), was Matilda, sister of Count Baldwin of Flanders). and from Denmark and its king Sveyn.
There's also the question of Harold's relatives, such as his brother, Wulfnoth, who was held as a hostage in Normandy (a common practice at the time).
The Godwins had effectively seized control of England but the family was prone to its internal conflicts so the likes of Edwin and Morcar might have risen against Harold in time. I suspect we'd have the more traditional notion of the strong man king perpetuate for a while though once Harold had gone would his sons have vied for control?
One thing I do think is without William's brutal Harrying of the North we'd have seen a stronger and more prosperous North of England which in turn would have acted as a lure to Scotland so more intense Anglo-Scottish conflict though possibly an earlier resolution via dynastic marriage (?)
|
|
|
|
Post by BucksDucks on Feb 14, 2019 15:00:29 GMT
Names would be different, ones like Æthelflæd and Ceolwulf died out and with the Norman French influence names like Robert, William and Henry became popular.
In our history 1066 is held as a pivotal moment (and rightly so) but I would hope that in this version of history there would be a re-emphasis of how King Alfred, King Edward, Lady Æthelflæd and King Æthelstan helped forge England, something that was lacking from when I was at school.
|
|
