Comments by "Ronin Dave" (@RoninDave) on "Who Was The Real King Harold? | King Harold: Fact Or Fiction | Timeline" video.

  1. 1066 is odd in that it is so well known and yet not so well known for that very reason being hammered into the skull of most english-speaking school children that everyone just assumes they know the story. Then it's compounded by national historians of the recent past who tried to un-frenchify the frenchness of the next several centuries calling people like Henri I-III as Henry passing over the fact that french was the language of the royal court for 3 centuries. Considering many of the upper class are descended from William's (Guillaume's) followers it's no small surprise. Harold really should be studied more and admired for his achievements and mourned for being cut down low before he could accomplish more.
    37
  2. +Ie Beast what you're suggesting is like calling a Texan Irish because his great-grandfather was Irish. William or Guillaume was for all intents and purposes French or rather Norman French not a Viking which is a term badly misused anyway. Many of dukes married french women such as the first duke Rollo/Rolf so his successor was half Scandinavian and half Frankish. By the time of Guillaume his Norse blood and culture was pretty much bred out of him.
    3