Who Should Have Been King in 1066?
This essay is about who should have been king in 1066. Edward the Confessor died on 5th January 1066. The King of England was usually the son or another close relation of the previous king. Edward had no children or any surviving brother or sister. There were four people waiting to be the next king. They were Edgar Etheling, Harold Godwinson, William Duke of Normandy and Harald Hadrada. Only one of the four people could be the King of England at any one time. This essay will give you an insight into each of the characters. It will explain who they are, why they should have been king, and what I thought about them. Finally, I will conclude who I thought should have been king in 1066.
The Four Possible Kings
Edgar was Edward’s great nephew, the closest relation of Edward. He was born in Hungary in 1052, and was the last prince of the old West Saxons royal line when Edward the Confessor died on January 5th 1066. At the time, it was decided Edgar was too young to inherit the throne, so it went to Harold Godwinson instead. Harold Godwinson became King Harold II, but was killed in the Battle of Hastings later that same year. The Witan Council chose Edgar as the next king of England. Edgar became king, but resigned only a few months later after he was forced to surrender by William the Conqueror. After abdicating, he went on to live a long life. Edgar should have been king because he was of royal blood and was the closest relation to Edward. He had a claim to the throne because he was a blood relative. Edgar was a direct descendant of Alfred the Great – the most respected of all Anglo Saxon kings. I thought Edgar was too young to be king, and also too young to lead England. He did not have the wealth, power or strength to be king. He was not considered strong enough to defend the realm from the Normans and the Vikings.
Otherwise known as Harold of Wessex, he was one of the...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document