CHAPTER TWO

HAROLD BECOMES KING OF ENGLAND

(WILLIAMS FAMILY AND RIGHTS TO ENGLAND)

Two miles up the Thames river was Thorney Island. On this damp, low-lying Island King Edward lay unconscious in an old palace he�d had rebuilt earlier. It had a holy reputation. On this island he had built the Abby of Westminster. Edward was suffering from a series of Cerebral Hemorrages.

Almost all of the greatest men of the Kingdom would have been in attendance upon him. The members of the Witon were also there. It was their duty to choose the Kings successor when he died. Kingship did not automatically go to the next in line to the king, although that was in the near future. The Witan took four things into account when they chose a new ruler; 1. The choice of the dying king would be considered. 2. He should be English. (although I don�t think they could have insisted on that in view of the fact that few in England were pure blood.) 3. He should be of Royal blood. 4. Hopefully he should be a man of honor and fit to rule.

King Edward was not known to have any children. In todays world the next in line would have been Edgar, son of the Aetheling, the son of Ethelred. But he was still too young to be considered by the Witon.

There were contenders for the Crown who had no claim by blood; Godwins sons; Harold and Tostig, King Svein of Denmark, (King Canute had been King of England and Denmark), Harold Hardrada of Norway, Duke William of Normandy, (who�s claim was through his great aunt Emma).

On the 4th of January the King woke up and related a dream he had had. They were hoping he would name a successor.

After asking that they pray for his soul and a last word to his wife, who he refered to as, "A daughter to him," he offered his hand to Harold, saying, �I commend this woman and all the Kingdom to your protection, serve and honour her with faithful obediance as your lady and sister, which she is, and do not deprive her, as long as she lives, of any honour she has recieved from me. I also commend to you those men who have left their native land for love of me and served me faithfully. Take an oath of fealty from them if they wish, and protect and retain them; or send them with your safe conduct across the Channel to their own homes with all they have acquired in my service.�

He fell back into a coma and passed away in the night,January 5th, 1066.

This may appear to be ambiguous on first reading, however these instructions certainly sound like they are meant for one who will have the power and authority to carry them out. Who else but a king would take an oath of fealty, or had the right to that oath?

To expect a man who has been comatose for 2-3 days to be completely alert is asking a lot. Yet these are not incoherent words; they are quite clear in content if not in intent.

In the minds of those who heard those words, Edward had intended Harold to be king. That same day the Witon confirmed it. In the eyes of those present he was the man for the job.

At the time of Edwards death Harold had no wife in the legal sense, but he did have a mistress. She may not have been seen as a mistress but as a �Danish� wife. They were not considered blessed by the church but in many eyes may have been seen as binding. She was Edith Svanneshals(swans throat). She had given him three sons. Harold was an intellegent and learned man. He founded and endowed a secular college and Abby at Waltham in Essex.

Edward was burried in the Abbey of West Minster, that he had founded, the morning after he died, which would have been the 6th of Jan. That afternoon in the same place, Harold was crowned King.

The Archbishop (who anointed the king) of York, and two young Earls who were present, went home to Northumbria only to find their people opposed to the decision because they had not been formally asked.

Harold immediately rode at once to York with his friend Wulfstan, Bishop of Worcester, and offered himself to the mercy of the northerners. A Gemot of the Earldoms was summoned in York. They acclaimed Harold king.

It is at this time that the story of his wife arises. She was Ealdgyth, sister to the two young Earls. She had been given as wife to the Welsh king. In 1063, Harold invaded Wales on Edwards behalf. The Welsh king was killed and she was brought home.

It was the Normans who mentioned that Harold married her. There is no recorded proof of this marriage. The one possibility is that he announced his intentions but never went through with it. What interupted this ten days after his coronation was a threatening message from Duke William.

NOTE; Harold was crowned Jan. 6th, 1066. at Thorney Island on the Thames. He then went to York. It is now Jan 16th, 1066. In that space of time the news reached W.T.C. at Rouen. His response reaches Harold 10 days later. I don�t know how fast they travelled in those days but I figured= Jan. 6th, 3 days for the Abbot of York to return to York, 2 days to send a message to Harold. 2-3 days for him to go to York. I day for the Earls to meet. That�s 9 days at the least, so Harold was at YORK when he got the message. Information across the channel was fast!

History does not state whether Harold specifically notified W.T.C. officially of Edwards death and his coronation but it would seem reasonable to assume he did and not by rumour. He must have known the effect it would have on W.T.C. as everyone was aware for many years of William's hopes in being King of England. For years those in power, including Edward, must have been aware of this as it was no secret. They handled it the only way they could if it was unfounded. They ignored it to let the future take care of it. What else could they do? To do anything else would court a war. In that case Harold knew he would have to fight William for his Crown. No one knows what was in Williams message, so I will not bother to speculate on the contents. I know what I would have asked Harold. How did this come about? Because if Edward had named him his heir, then William was finished as far as a right to the crown.

Harold replied that the witan had chosen him and the Church had annointed him. But the church annointed him before the witan chose him. There seems to be no record of Harold claiming that Edward named him heir.

To understand the behaviour of W.T.C. when he first recieved the news of Harolds crowning we must go back in time to the events that had a bearing on this historical moment in Jan. 1066.

Event # 1; Williams childhood and his strange birth. What I wouldn�t give to go back to the years between 1026 -28 AD when Edward was 24 years old and Robert the Devil was even younger. The records state that Robert was a very young man when William was born to Arletta. He could not have been Duke of Normandy yet, nor was he expected to be as his brother Richard was heir before him. Robert and Edward must have grown up as friends at least, since Edward was 12 when he was taken to Richard the goods court in Normandy in 1012 AD a lonely, unhappy boy.

In two years between 1026AD and 1028AD Roberts brother Richard is murdered and he is accused of this later on. A child is born to him by a French woman, his father dies and he becomes Duke of Normandy. Some strange bond or pact is made between Edward and Robert concerning the throne of England. Yes! That�s what I said! A pact between Edward and Robert, not William!

Around the time that William is 7 years old, his father leaves for the Holy land on a pilgramage. This was a dangerous trip. Not undertaken lightly, nor does a Duke(king)leave a 7 year old defenceless child to hold his Dukedom. Or name a bastard of 7 as heir to it unless he thought someone else was looking out for him. He dies on the way home. Was it before or after his death that Edward attempted to get back into England and failed?

Since Robert leaves for the Holy land when William is 7 years old in 1035, he goes when Canute dies and Harold is made King. If they were expecting Edward to be named King of England as Emma�s and Eathelreds son, it would have been a blow. Harold was not Emma�s son, but a Dane.

From the time that he was a child of 8 or 9 until the day he visited Edward when he was king of England, there is the impression that he expected to inherit Edwards Crown. Why? What could have given him that impression? Only a child that knows a secret about his birth maybe? It is obvious that he expected this or something as important from Edwards death. Claiming him as son, maybe? His behaviour at hearing the news of Edwards death is a more deeply emotional shock than political snit. You don�t go into an emotional binge over losing a political manuever when you are a Duke with many wins and losses behind you.

EVENT # 2; In 1051 A.D. when William is 23 years old he goes in great style to visit Edward who is now King of England. That is 8 years after Edward is crowned. We do not know why he went. He was not sent for by Edward. History would have told us that, I am sure. It does say they had long private conversations together, and that William came away pleased. From the Norman History we are told that some kind of agreement had been reached and that it was common knowledge in Normandy that he was Edwards Heir. This is possible if Edward was acting without the constraint of Godwins influence at court since he had been banished before William arrived.

It would have been old home week to the two of them. Norman greeting Norman, because Edward played the Norman more than the Englishman. He spoke only French and was surrounded with Normans at court. Buddies or not, I don�t believe William would have asked or Edward offered the English Crown just because of close ties of Norman friendship from the past. Neither men were that ignorant of English law or kingship rules. If William was Edwards Bastard son that would explain Williams behaviour. An eager son waiting for recognition from his sire. And being promised it at the time of his sires death? And if that recognition never materealized even on his fathers deathbed? Then William would not acknowledge it later either. But it would be a great incentive to take the crown in anger. In fact if others in England and Normandy knew the relationship unofficially, William would have no choice but to try and claim what was his in his eyes, and maybe the eyes of others at his court.

EVENT # 3; The following incident is not provable by the English records, however I will give a possible reason why not at the end. It was well written by the Normans although there are many different versions. I have gone over all the accounts and possibilities and am writing what I consider the most plausable because of the lack of English records.

In 1064 AD, Harold was at Boshan hunting or hawking. He enters a boat or skiff to sail out to an Island in the Bay. A wind comes up and since he had no means to steer by, he was blown to the French coast. He ended up at St. Valery. He was what could be termed a derelect, on foreign soil and had no rights. The normal state of affairs was to hold these men for ransom or as slaves. I guess it would depend on the man. The Count of Ponthier, who�s domain he landed on, took him prisoner. W.T.C. heard of this and since the count was one of his vassels Harold was turned over to him. Harold was in a very bad situation as the son of Godwin, his position near the throne, and his power. Harold and William may very will have taken a liking to each other. They were of an age, intellegent and ambitious.

Harold was not at that time considered for the throne as far as anyone can tell at this late date. But even if he knew he was he would not have let William know. He was a hostage in every sense of the word and beholden in those days to his captor. He was treated with every courtesy and consideration, but that could change with the tide. There were rules of conduct for the high born that were common; "If you are on my land uninvited you become my vassal, you swear an oath of fealty to me." Harold would have had no choice if he wanted to live.

In his present situation at Edwards court he may also have made a deal with William to back him for king against any others if he didn�t see himself as king. There may have been his life or his freedom at stake. Here is why I think he did make this oath to William: If, as I think, he had not planned his trip but was blown away to Normandy, no one at home would be aware of his whereabouts. He just dissappeared. If William knew that, he could have killed him without impunity as no one would be aware of his fate. Harold would have had to offer william a bribe worthy of his life. And worth more than the death of a possible rival.

What he could offer him was the crown. He really was in a strong enough position to do that I think. If they struck a deal and did not want the English to get a hint or suspect Harold at a later date, they would then have made arrangements to take him back to England secretly and let his people believe he had just gotten lost for awhile. What the highborn wanted to keep secret the servants would not tell. In this manner no one at court would have known of his visit to Normandy at all. No wonder this whole event was known only in Normandy.

Anyone of these events would have been cause enough to eye the Crown of England, but all three together would have made William sure of it. His emotions are sure to have been one of shock and then a slow, sure, anger.

The notes passed back and forth between William and Harold would all have taken place in January, 1066 A.D.

We are about to enter a totally blank period of 1066AD.

CHAPTER THREE

THE SILENT MONTHS

THERE IS NO HISTORY FOR ENGLAND FROM FEBRUARY TO AUGUST OF 1066 A.D.!!!!

No records, nothing! There is only conjecture after the fact, based on the concept centuries later that all was normal. Lack of a history would be put down to the way wars were conducted. The winner destroyed everything. Williams actions and the records deny that as a valid reason.

From June to Sept. there is no report of any event out of England.

Strangely enough there is only one record of an event in England from Feb. to Sept. It is a series of events actually. But the record of them is Norman, not English.

In a very carefull study of all the records and books on 1066 A.D. I found a strange thing. All descriptions of what was going on in England were made up from imagination. From the writer carefully studying the times and means and ways and projecting them onto the blank fabric of time and place.

We know what Harold did only from the time of his leaving the area of the Isle of Wight to the last battle at hastings. And then only from Norman records and because even they were impressed by Harolds march.

We haven�t one solid, blessed record, letter, or proof of life in those silent months. That�s because the country was dying from a plague. I intend to prove it in the following pages.

It is hard to visualize England in 1066 because we usually only know about the people and events that move history. Hollywood confuses us because we see pictures that have little resemblance to what was real. What we do know can be used to give us a rough sketch at best but it�s all we have.

The Saxon rule was certainly not into road building or they would have kept up and expanded the road system. Of course the problem with good roads is; not only can armies move around quickly to preserve the country but invaders like good roads to get around on also.Most of the Roman roads were lost or unused. Only the main roads are still there. The ones that led to all the cities.When a nation is constantly having internal strife, administration suffers. Each shire in England, or county had its own king, Earl or petty ruler. Some good. Some bad.

In KENT for 400 yrs they had 16 kings, average 25 years.
In SUSSEX for 300 yrs they had 9 kings, average 33 years.
In WESSEX for 200 yrs they had 10 kings, average 20 years.
In ESSEX for 300 yrs they had 12 kings, average 25 years.
In NORTHUMBRIA for 270 yrs they had 24 kings, average 11yrs 4mo
In ANGLES for 260 yrs they had 18 kings, average 141/2 yrs.
In MERCIA for 220 yrs they had 11 kings, average 20 yrs.

All up until the time of Egbert who brought them all into one nation. There were one hundred Kings in 400 years ruling England.

A little different picture than what you expected to see isn�t it? England was a united kingdom for only 200 yrs.

I cannot help but wonder if they weren�t better off with each area being a small kingdom. Every corner of their kingdom would be important as well as the people in it.They were the kings revenue. But when they had one king in his busy court what did he know about the farther area�s? How good was communication? There would be certain sections well known and in touch with what was going on. These were all villages, towns, and cities, within 5 to 10 miles on either side of the High roads (highways) leading from city to city. The farther from centers or roads the slower the news traveled.

Only the rich Earls and those around them had horses, mules, or donkeys. The method of travel for the poor was walking. They probably wouldn�t have had any trouble in walking long distances but this would not be done in the usual way of today. Fairs to trade at would be the only reason for the poor to go anywhere. Most were thanes or slaves not allowed to travel. For the better classes of peasant he would be unable to travel because of his duties for his Earl. Only the members of the Witon went far from home. Or the great landowners.

It seems then that the only people who were moving about were the Earls who waited upon the King and those Hangers on to those in position. One point that I can find no information on is whether there was some form of embargo on travel from England during the period of Feb. to Nov. The lack of information or news during this period does seem odd. But a plague got in.

There was one group who travelled between villages, towns, cities, and across all borders and countries freely: The Church. In the years prior to 1066 many church�s and Abbeys and monastarys were built. They would need new abbotts and monks or whatever to fill them. These came direct from Rome in some cases. They would have been great candidates for spreading plague. They would have been allowed into England without any question. Dispersing to the smallest villages throughout Britain as well as the great centres and Abbeys.

Everyone knows about the great plagues of the Black Death that swept across Europe. But little is known about the smaller plagues that broke out constantly around the world. There were no newspapers, or radios telling you what was happening around the world. One of the strangest events taking place in England was very well recorded at the time but seems to be neglected as an interesting historical experiance to be accounted for;It is the bombardment of England of fire from the skies. In reading the accounts given in the Saxon Chronicles they do not behave like meteors so much as deliberate bombardments. Yet the people were under constant attack by mysterious balls of fire that came flying out of the blue. There are stone buildings that have been burnt with extreme heat that is unaccountable for those days. In order to melt rock you need some abnormal means besides just fire. I only mention these things to show that not everything is well known about old England. An epidemic of a virulant strain of Flu is a possibility for those days. That it could have killed a large percentage of the population is what I have to prove. That it could be kept from the rest of Europe is another thing I have to prove. I think I can do that.

I mentioned that there was a series of events that took place in England that was known to the Normans.

Before Edward died he had expelled Tostig, Harolds brother, because of his cruel treatment of his people who had risen against him and complained to the king.

Easter that year was April 16th. On the 18th of April a Comet was seen clearly in the night sky. It was seen for 7 nights. A thousand years ago these signs in the sky were seen as portents of disaster. Sure enough, not long after the comet showed, a fleet of ships was seen off the Isle of Wight. It was Harolds brother Tostig.

For six months he had been living in exile in Flanders where his wife was born. It is believed he had heard that his brother was now king and he would be allowed back in England.

Tostig had started life with a sweet disposition and was liked and favored by all who knew him. This all changed not long after he became Earl. He became secretive, cruel, and even murderous. His actions now are considered those of a mentally sick man.

Before he landed at the Isle of Wight, he had gone to Normandy, but William was in the middle of his plans for his own invasion.The Isle is where Tostig's family met and landed from an earlier exile. At that time they had been welcomed. What he met was hostility, yet they gave him money and food to go away. He then called at; Pevensey, Hastings, Romney, Dover, and Sandwich. When he needed provisions he had to fight for them.

Tosteg heard Harold was heading his way and put to sea again, taking some local ships and their crews. Not all went willingly.

He is heard of next in the Humber, where he went ashore to ravage and burn. Morkere and Edwin ( Northern Earls) fought him off. Most of his sailors deserted. With only 12 small ships left he took refuge with Malcolm, King of Scots. Soon he left to sail across to Oslo fjord in Norway and met with harold (Hadrada)

NOTE; History is not clear on the lineup of events of Tostig. There are conflicts of when he visited all of these places. There is agreement that he sailed up and down the coast. That is the only thing that is a fact. All else is speculation and smoke.

There is a conversation that Snori Sturlassan (1230 AD) writes in dialogue that has a strange comment; "It seems strange to me that you would fight fifteen years to get Denmark, but you will not have England which is lying ready for you to take." I don't see that England was ready for him to take in the normal course of events? However if the people were dying then this sentence makes sense.

Harold Hadrada agreed to an invasion of England and assembled his ships and men at the Island of Solund in the West of Norway. In August he joined his men.

CHAPTER FOUR

HISTORY AFTER THE FACT.

No one can quite agree on who Tostig saw or when, but all agree he was in and out of the English coast and that he visited; Normandy, Scotland, and Hadrada in Norway.

We have already talked about the isolation of Villages and towns in England and the lack of communication. It is surprising how many books I read that mention this in one breath and then write as if all things are known to all people immediatly as if they too had telivision back then.

When Tostig landed at the Isle of Wight this was not far from Bosham, Harolds family home. They must have known in that area what Harold wanted done with Tostig. But a man who is exiled by one king not related to him is differently handled than a brother of the present king.

I wonder no one has questioned this. I believe that it was known that Tostig sailed along and up the coastline of England, only From Williams Chroniclers and that all the rest of the data are assumed by later researchers.

His (a Kings brother?) failure to land at any place along the coast may have had a far more sinister reason than those given. One we will deal with later.

The arguments for that statement are based on human frailties, communication problems, and physical possibilities. Add to that the confused account by those who wrote of his actions and doubt arises.
1. By May all of England must have known Harold was King. 2. Who would want to refuse aid to the Kings Brother? Many Lords and Earls had been guilty of murder and crimes before Tostig and they lived or died depending on who was in power. How were fishermen and villagers to know if Harold was going to keep up Edwards banishment of Tostig? I do not believe any writer has proof or had proof of Tostigs reception unless he told them!

However, if at this time a plague had or was still raging through England, that could account for Tostig trying landing after landing to find a village or place free of plague. When he left Sandwich he travelled in small boats with his men all the way up to the Humber without anyone mentioning a stop on the way. Not for food or for water? Fantastic! Did he ravage a village or burn a plague centre? Where does that information come from? The two Earls were no more than 16-18 years old. How would they have been notified so quickly of a small fleet of fishing boats (because that�s what they resembled) sailing up the Humber and be fast enough to move from York to meet them?

When Tostig fled from the Humber to Norway to meet with Hadrada did he know that William was preparing to invade? He must have been aware of this, and yet he still goes to Hadrada to get him to mount an invasion. If Tostig knew that a plague had hit the North badly maybe he thought that with Harold engaged in the South fighting William, Hadrada could overrun the North with no opposition and then confront a decimated army from whoever won the Battle between William and Harold.

There is another thing. With William going around the country of Normandy and inland and calling for men and ships how could Tostig not know his plans? How could Hadrada not be aware? Yet Tostig tells him England,"Is ready for you to take." Ready how? It had never been considered easy to take by anyone. Swyn got into England because by then there were as many Danes there as British. The Danes let him in.

CHAPTER FIVE

HAROLDS ARMY AT WINCHESTER.

All of these accounts are guess work. People �guess� that Harold formed a Navy! They �guess� at the size of his Army! What they are sure of is that he camped his men on the Isle of Wight while he stayed on the main coast ready to sail when he got word of William.

There was no large standing army at this time. It was normal proceedure in those days to go to war for your Lord for a limited time. Usually this was three weeks. The Chronicles say their food became scarce and Harold sent them home. They had not been paid either.

Food became scarce??? At the end of Summer?? In the food belt of England?? There is something very wrong here. England was one of the great food producers. And the idea that England was not very well settled can be thrown out also. It was a country that had people from one end to the other. The weather was not harsh. The land was rich. The Domesday book will bear this out. More than anything else this confirms my Plague theory. Earls would be responsable for their men as far as food went. So would anyone who supplied men for the king. Why was it short at the end of the summer when the harvest was in? There was time enough to cart it in from farther away if all was normal. There were great dear parks and preserves all over the land to supply meat for an army.

The situation was dire. Harold must still have expected William. Even in a state of calamity one does not let an invader into your country. Men would still be available to form an army, as even the worst of plagues play hit or miss. Harold would have been able to form an army even then but I do not think it was as large as stated. If food was becoming scarce it would be because no one was well enough or alive to harvest it.

CHAPTER SIX

SETTING THE STAGE.

There are certain events that took place in the year 1066AD that are certain. Around those certain events a history has formed based on what William,s chroniclers filled in.

I give those facts now.
Earl Godwins domains were in the north west of England off the Isle of Man. It was an Island that needed boats to get to it. It was a well settled land with many small hamlets before 1066.

Jan 5th king Edward died and Harold was made king by the Wittin.

Tostig and a number of small boats sailed around England and were claimed to make a number of landings at different points. It is claimed that he was beaton off by the residents. He makes his way to Scotland. Then he leaves there for Norway and Harold Hadrada's kingdom where he talks him into an invasion of England.

King Harold takes up camp off the Isle of Wight were he awaits Williams invasion fleet.

From January 5th until September an unusual event takes place. NO ONE is allowed to land on English soil. Nor are any boats leaving England during that entire time.

Only one boat load of Monks are allowed to land off the coast of York. They are not seen or heard from again.

All during this time from Jan 5th to the date of the invasion not one person has left the shores of England. This means that the baggage trains of tithes for Rome which left on a regular bases every two months are not leaving for Rome. Since every train carried the collections from every church in England this would have been noticed immediatly by Rome. And Rome and the Vatican were very greedy when it came to their tithes from England.

From the 5th of January then, England had been a closed shop so to speak. Nothing in-nothing out. A most unusual series of events.

But that is nothing to the events that took place after the invasion that seems to have been overlooked by historians who have been trying to make sense of this invasion for centuries.

CHAPTER SEVEN

WILLIAM THE CON ARTIST.

Imagine if you will that you are William and you have spent money, time, effort and pride in gathering together at Normandy the largest fleet of boats, men, arms and horses, with which to Conquer England!

Now imagine landing that force only to find that instead of the Great Battles and fighting men you expected to find there is only a small army of tired men who have already fought one battle at York and marched all the way to Hastings to confront you. That all around you is devastation and death. That all you have to do is walk in and take England because she has already been beaten by a plague.

Do you announce that to the world and have them laugh at you? Or do you pull off one of the greatest lies in the history of man?
That is what I believe William did!
But I intend to show that instead of a Conqueror he was really the Saviour of England. That he not only managed to keep his name and the names of all his men intact as great warriors, but that he managed to keep intact the concept that England was lost by brave men fighting to the last to save her.
He may not have intended the later but that�s how it worked out.

In researching the history of England I became fascinated by the fact that there is really very little actual information about the last days of England in the year before William. That most of the history of that time is written 8-10 years after Hastings and then by Williams man �Odo�. That and the famous bayoux tapestry, which was woven in Normandy ten years later, are all we have to go on. That and the last days of Edmond. On the surface it appears to be cut and dried. And at this time of the 20th Century there are those who will ask, �who cares?� It�s old history, why go into it again?

Well, I believe that it is important from the standpoint of present wars and those who make wars. In the history of the world only three countries have been conquered by invaders and retained for a long time, but England is the longest. China was conquered by Ghengis khan around 1230 AD. The Americas were conquered in 1493 AD. England in 1066 AD. Making her the longest totally conquered country. The Greeks held their possessions for only 300 years. The Romans for 400-500 years. Spain for 2-3 hundred.

So in a way William has been an example to all conquerors of what is possible for them; to take a country and make it yours!

There are so many other effects of Williams conquest that occurred to make England unique. Most conquerors get assimilated into the conquered country. The invading armies stay and intermarry and it is the Mother who raises the child to her ways, her tongue. Alexander imposed his building style, and life style onto the middle east for awhile but today there is none of it left. They still speak their own tongue and so does China. Rome left behind little but its influence. It was the church that really spread the Roman influence around the world.

In all history only two conguerors have been looked on with favour by the descendants of the conquered; Ghengus Khan and William. History tells us that Ghengus Khans progeny organized China into one of the most highly systemitized country�s in the history of man. Even Rome wasn�t up to their standards. But what did William do to deserve his credit? That�s the mystery of 1066 AD. I hope to unravel it.

Anyone who reads the history books on the time of William keeps coming across a strange line up of mysteries that never get answered. Those that make the attempt leave you unsatisfied by the answer but unable to give any better ones according to the offiicial story.

There is no mystery about why William wanted to have England. His family geneaology is well known and documented. He had as much right to it as most contenders.

There is no mystery about why he choose that time to Conquer England. When he heard that Edmund was dead and he wasn�t named heir it took him that long to build the ships and collect the men needed.

The mysteries begin with the few recorded facts on the events leading up to the Conquest. (I have already listed them). The real puzzles are Williams behaviour and the behaviour of the British for the 10 years after the conquest, culminating in the greatest mystery of all; the Domesday Book. The explanations for this book are laughable. There is a far better explanation as you will see later.

We begin with a look at what was going on in England prior to 1059AD.

Not much is known about the people of the British Isles before the Romans came along. We know they consisted of tribes and had chiefs. That women were on a fairly equal footing to the men. There are few or no remains of these people except for their barrows. And we are really not sure about the use of these either. Stonehenge, dolmans and ley lines point to more intellegence than we admit for them. The first known Conqueror, the Roman Ceasar, was repulsed by them. The next Roman was Claudius. He was victorious. For the next 300 to 350 years Romans ruled England.

It was never an assimilated country to Rome. During its entire 300+ years in England it could not do away with its forts or its legions. Yet in 1069, three years after he Conquered England, William the Conq. could send his forign soldiers home. He could reduce his army by over 5,000 men. This at a time when most of England was made up of a variety of Norsemen. And very soon after that he did the strangest thing any conqueror has ever done; he had a book made listing everyones land, domicile, animals and nails. He called it the Domesday Book. Everyone denies that it really should be "Doomsday Book", yet there is not one shred of Evidence that there is any meaning to the word �domes�, nor any known reason to connect it to �day�. The phrase has no meaning at all. Nor does it have any meaning in connection to the invasion. No Conqueror sees himself as the man of doom. Nor does a Conqueror have any reason to worry about who owned what or how much unless he sees himself as a ruler and not a conqueror, but a ruler who had to correct mistakes made by a great plague and its aftermath would need to make a book on everyones property for the owners in order to make right, wrongs due to the deaths of the men of England who owned property.

When dealing with history we sometimes don�t understand the meaning of time frames because we deal with hundreds, and thousands, and it is all so long ago. I find it helpful to compare the present day time frames with the past. For instance to really understand the Roman era in England, compare it to the American era. The Romans were every bit as industrious and educated as we were if not more. If we can change the face of America in less than three hundred years, from the wilderness it was to that of today, then how much more could they do with a land that was already settled? I am not a bit surprised when I read that they are now discovering Roman road systems the entire length and breadth of England. Just remember this; they were not battling the world of ignorance caused by the thousand years of Catholic Rome prior to 1492. These were educated Romans that took over England.

Another thing to remember, although most people seem to ignore this fact, in all that time they were in England they had no Wars to decimate the country side. Certainly they constantly fought a battle with the Scots, but on the border mostly. No huge battles taking thousands of lives. And they must have left Wales alone as evidenced by the fact that they never lost their own tongue.

When Rome fell and the Roman army pulled out of England who stayed behind? Who left?

The ones who stayed were the British/ Roman descendants of the intermarriages. Those that had no future in Rome. Freed slaves. Foreigners. And retired Roman Soldiers who had been given land in England and settled in as part of the landscape so to speak.

The ones that left with the new Roman leader were his officers, Roman soldiers from all over who had families in other countries. And those that saw a future in a reorganized Roman Empire.

For a hundred years we know little of what happened. We have fanciful tales of Arthur that have actually crept into history books with no proof at all that it happened. For the next hundred after that small kingdoms began to form. We know the picts and Scots fought for the land after the Romans left. Then they invited the saxons in to get rid of them. Saxons (germanic peoples) were most likely the peoples of origen of the British and so there was a kinship there. However, as usual they took over and eventually the land was devided up into petty kingdoms. This must have been the period of time when Roman Britain was destroyed and most traces of her lost.

So, up to now we have Picts, Romans, Scots, and Saxons breeding in a mish-mash and the Danes grabbing toe holds on the Coastlines, until 827 when Egbert became sole ruler of the country and named it England. It was now a Saxon Country. Until 1014AD when it was finally taken by those Danes who had been trying for 500 years at least to conquer her, Just 52 years before William.

You would think by this time that the Island would be a land of beaten people, but evidently not. They were prosperous. Rich with gold and fine things. They were trading, importing and exporting, farming and generally doing well, as their Church�s wealth could testify to. In fact, even after the conquest by Swyn Forkbeard, treasure caravans of great wealth were regularly sent by the churches to the Pope in Rome. These constant shipments of coin, gold, silver, and precious gems to Rome, constitute one of the neglected or unknown facets of the conquest by William. Research has shown me that Rome was very particular about recording everything that was sent to her from all over the Catholic world. Down to the least penny! But more about this later!

It would seem that as long as Conquerers left the people alone to carry on the business of living they didn�t much care who ruled. I think also in a very peculiar way the form of religion in England at the time had a benificial effect on the situations. It was not the harsh religion of Rome. And as long as they sent their tithes or dues to Rome she was content to leave them alone. But England was a curious blend of Christianity and old Celtic beliefs.

I mention this in connection with the conquest because humans have many differente levels that they live on that profoundly influences their behaviour. Especially in times of stress. And prior to 1066 they were stressed out by many events.