25 September: On this day in 1066, the battle of Stamford Bridge took place. From QI Series H, Episode 16 - 'History' With Rob Brydon, David Mitchell, Sandi Toksvig and Alan Davies For more visit qi.com
0:40 "How did you become a king" and NO ONE said you have to pull a sword out of a stone, or have one distributed to you by a strange woman lying in a pond?
Not surprising that they didn't. After all, that is no basis for a system of government. Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not some farcical aquatic ceremony.
Sandi... so sweetly and innocently hurt and confused by QI's trick questions and ravenous elves eagerly waiting in wings, to pounce on any misstep with the savage klaxon. the power has gone to her head.
He was kind of known as that because his family had been the Royal Family since the founding of England as a singular state, they had consistently been one of the most prominent families during the heptarchy before hand (Alfred the Great was one, his 5x great grandfather), but he had very little under his belt in terms of real power. He was born in Hungary to Edward the Exile, who had been exiled when Cnut the Great took over. Spent most of his life in Norman custody, or living in other people's courts in Hungary, Scotland, Normandy (he was both a prisoner and a vassal at different points), southern Italy (with other Normans) and possibly in the Crusader States and the Roman Empire (the latter as a member of the Varangian Guard, we associate them with Vikings, but that is partially because everyone was called Swedes regardless if they were actually Swedish, Norwegian, English or Norse-Gaels). First time he set foot in England was at the invitation of his Grandfather's half-brother, Edward the Confessor, who was also Cnut's step-son (which is how he inherited the throne back, actually, his half-brother was Cnut's oldest son), and the son of Emma of Normandy (who was William the Bastard's grandfather's sister, Edward familial relations where largely responsible for the problems of the English monarchy after Cnut, that and his apparent abstinence, which is why he is considered a Saint as he was otherwise not terribly saintly but abstinence counted for a lot of holiness in Anglo-Saxon England). Anyways, for most of his life he didn't really do much of note and all he had was the name, then the name didn't matter because of William and he did a bunch of stuff, but most of it didn't benefit him personally much, although his sister and her descendants did make out rather well.
It's worth pointing out as an Anglo-Saxon archaeologist that Edgar's coronation was not recognised by basically any other power in Christendom and he did not undergo any formal coronation at all. Basically after Hastings they just said he was the true king but was never officially king of England.
William possibly had papal approval for his whole invasion, so his Christian support as king was already quite certain before he even set foot in England.
Yes, despite spending his life in the Royal Court (surprisingly not under arrest, just without income except a pension paid by the Kings William)(in person :-). His great contribution to history was resupplying Robert Curthose, Duke of Normandy (the Conqueror’s oldest son), during the First Crusade at a critical time, allowing his troops to go on to Jerusalem.
ScabiousGarde it seemed to me that he was just guessing based on the fact that royal succession is immensely complicated and there's always some weird exception. "some Saxon claimant who was nominally king for 45 seconds or something" is the kind of thing that happens a lot.
He just knows how QI generally works. I was also thinking "Must have been some guy who "reigned" for a very short time in between the two, and wasn't too significant."
Playing very fast and loose with the role of the Witenagemot there. How an Anglo-Saxon king was actually chosen was that, nominally at least, the Witenagemot (a council of nobles and a few bishops who advised the king) picked a successor. It was almost always the old king's son or another relative. But there was certainly no form of popular voting among the common people. If there was any voting to be done it was done by the Witenagemot and nobody else
Fun fact: Edgar's father, Edward the Exile, was the son of Edmund Ironside and the nephew of Edward the Confessor. He had fled into exile with his younger brother (who died in exile) after the Danish king Canute defeated his father and conquered England, settling in Hungary. In the final years of Edward the Confessor's reign, he was briefly considered to be the answer to England's prayers for a legitimate heir. His claim to the throne was unquestionable, certainly stronger than William's. He was an adult male-line member of the royal House of Wessex and son of a previous king. His uncle, upon learning he was still alive, immediately sent for his and his family's return to England... Unfortunately, mere days after safely arriving in England, Edward the Exile suddenly died. Foul play on the part of the Godwins is suspected, but can never be proved. With him died the last hope Anglo-Saxon England had for a peaceful succession.
Neither was Edward V or Lady Jane Grey but they still count. There is always a King or Queen whether crowned or not and that is reflected by the expression 'The King is dead. Long live the King'.
Every king from Henry II onwards was a direct descendant of Alfred the Great, so it was only a 4 monarch blip, during which we didn't have an English monarch on the throne
@@arthurfisher1857 I think that's about right. Also at some point they were English speaking again which is the most important factor of whether or not they were English.
Harold Godwinson was at least half Danish. Harold was a Norse name. All the Anglo-Saxon kings, with the exception of Alfred, had names beginning wit E. (Or ae
Yes, because it gives all of his line a strong claim to the throne even if usurped. This can then inform us of some of the politics of the time, such as those that might plot against the next king.
It'd be pretty hard to get the bank of england printing them in that little time, but maybe the next king will make them a commemorative one in a couple of decades.
@@willh2690 I believe she is known as Queen Jane. The reason she is often played down is because she only ruled for 9 days and she wasn't the true heir according to the rules of royal inheritance. Her brief reign was just Edward VI's last minute decision to stop the country from being turned Catholic again.
@@heliotropezzz333 every academic source in can find call her Lady Jane Grey. The rules allowed for the monarch to name their successor, a precedentlaid done by his father. This is pre civil war England so the rules are pretty much whatever the King says as long as he doesn't piss off enough of the nobility. Also Cnut the Great, William I and George I didn't follow the regular lines of succession. 2 were conquerors and 1 was made king by acts of Parliament.
Bloody Normans don't. Patriarchal dynastic hereditary system. Saxons had democratically elected Kings. I like that, but I share a surname with the most powerful family in Anglo Saxon England, so there's that.....
@@pjabrony8280 of course. They were actually of Viking descent, anyway! The “Northmen” who attacked France years before, but were ceded land north of the Seine and settled in Normandie
OK, I sucked in to the click bait one more time. Doesn't almost every English person know that it is William the conqueror? So is this a trick question? You need to know the real name of WTC? Or maybe he was King of the combined country of England and the parts of France he controlled? OK, I'm going to watch it now. ETA: Good answer. I didn't know that and I didn't think of that possibility. Nuts. But I am only an American.
Edward the confessor promised the throne to three different people. William had a legitimate claim to the throne and had lived with Harold in Normandy and offered Harold the chance to allow him to become King. William ended slavery in England.
This is an example of why QI is quite a dodgy show for actual facts (rather than comedy). Stephens answer gives quite a misleading impression of what happened. Edgar Aethling was indeed nominated and elected as King by the Witan. But was not consecrated and crowned as King. By Saxon law he was not yet King. A modern day equivalent would be being called and offered a job and accepting it. But not having completed the HR references and signed the contract before your forced to decline and someone else gets it. Edgar ultimately swore fealty to William. So no he wasn't really King (even technically).
