You are viewing a free preview of this lesson.
Subscribe to unlock all 10 lessons in this course and every other course on LearningBro.
When Edward the Confessor died on 5 January 1066 without a clear heir, a succession crisis erupted that would change English history forever. Four men claimed the right to rule England. Understanding their claims is essential for analysing why the Norman Conquest happened.
Edward the Confessor had no children. He had spent much of his youth in Normandy and had close ties to the Norman court. On his deathbed, he reportedly reached out to Harold Godwinson and commended the kingdom to his protection. However, the exact meaning of this gesture was disputed.
Key Term: The succession crisis of 1066 arose because there was no universally accepted rule of primogeniture (inheritance by the eldest son) in Anglo-Saxon England. The Witan had the power to choose the king.
| Claimant | Claim to the Throne | Strengths | Weaknesses |
|---|---|---|---|
| Harold Godwinson | Named by Edward on his deathbed; chosen by the Witan; brother-in-law of Edward | Most powerful earl in England; supported by the Witan; already in England; experienced military leader | No blood claim to the throne; had allegedly sworn an oath to support William |
| William, Duke of Normandy | Claimed Edward had promised him the throne in 1051; Harold had sworn an oath of allegiance to him | Papal support; strong military forces; determined and ruthless leader | Foreign claimant; had to cross the English Channel with an army; no support within England |
| Harald Hardrada | Based on an agreement between King Magnus of Norway and Harthacnut (King of England 1040–1042) | Fearsome Viking warrior; experienced military commander; supported by Tostig, Harold Godwinson's brother | Weakest claim of all; had to invade by sea from Norway; unfamiliar with English terrain |
| Edgar the Aetheling | Great-nephew of Edward the Confessor; closest blood relative | Strongest blood claim to the throne | Only about 14 years old in 1066; no military experience; no powerful supporters |
flowchart TD
E["Edward the Confessor<br/>dies 5 Jan 1066, no heir"] --> H["Harold Godwinson<br/>Earl of Wessex"]
E --> W["William of Normandy<br/>Duke of Normandy"]
E --> HH["Harald Hardrada<br/>King of Norway"]
E --> EA["Edgar the Aetheling<br/>great-nephew, age ~14"]
H -->|deathbed nomination + Witan vote| H1[Crowned 6 Jan 1066]
W -->|alleged 1051 promise + Harold's 1064 oath + papal banner| W1[Invades from south]
HH -->|1039 Magnus-Harthacnut pact + Tostig support| HH1[Invades from north]
EA -->|best blood claim but too young| EA1[No support, sidelined]
Harold Godwinson was the Earl of Wessex, the richest and most powerful earldom in England. His family, the Godwins, dominated English politics. Harold's sister, Edith, was married to Edward the Confessor.
Harold was crowned king on 6 January 1066, the day after Edward's death. The speed of the coronation suggests that Harold wanted to establish his authority before any rivals could act. The ceremony took place in the newly consecrated Westminster Abbey.
Exam Tip: A common exam question asks you to evaluate whose claim was the strongest. There is no single correct answer — the best responses weigh up the evidence for each claimant and reach a supported judgement. Remember that "strongest claim" and "most likely to win the throne" are different things.
William claimed that in 1051, Edward the Confessor had promised him the English throne. Furthermore, in 1064, Harold Godwinson had visited Normandy and allegedly swore an oath on holy relics to support William's claim.
The Bayeux Tapestry — a Norman propaganda piece — depicts Harold swearing this oath. If Harold did indeed swear such an oath and then took the throne for himself, he was a perjurer (oath-breaker) in the eyes of the medieval Church. This was a very serious accusation.
William secured the support of Pope Alexander II, who sent him a papal banner to carry into battle. This gave William's invasion the appearance of a holy crusade.
Harald Hardrada, King of Norway, was one of the most feared warriors in Europe. He had fought across the Byzantine Empire and Scandinavia. His claim to the English throne was based on an old agreement between Scandinavian and English kings.
Hardrada was supported by Tostig Godwinson, Harold's own brother. Tostig had been exiled from his earldom of Northumbria in 1065 after a rebellion against his harsh rule. Bitter and vengeful, Tostig allied with Hardrada to invade England from the north.
| Figure | Role |
|---|---|
| Edward the Confessor | King of England 1042–1066; died without an heir |
| Harold Godwinson | Earl of Wessex; crowned king on 6 January 1066 |
| William, Duke of Normandy | Claimed Edward had promised him the throne |
| Harald Hardrada | King of Norway; invaded northern England |
| Tostig Godwinson | Harold's exiled brother; allied with Hardrada |
| Edgar the Aetheling | Teenage great-nephew of Edward; had the best blood claim |
Question: "Harold Godwinson had the strongest claim to the English throne in January 1066." How far do you agree? [16 marks + 4 SPaG]
Harold Godwinson's claim rested on three pillars: Edward the Confessor's apparent deathbed nomination on 5 January 1066, the formal election by the Witan on 6 January, and the practical necessities of the moment — a kingdom facing external threats required an adult, experienced, and militarily capable ruler. Measured against these criteria, Harold's claim was exceptionally strong. He was already the de facto ruler of England during Edward's final years as sub-regulus, he commanded the richest earldom (Wessex), and he was the brother-in-law of the dying king. Edgar the Aetheling, by contrast, had the best blood claim as great-nephew of Edward but was only around fourteen, had no military experience, and had no powerful supporters — in a world where kings led armies, this was decisive. William of Normandy's claim rested on an alleged promise from 1051, a period when Edward was politically weak and temporarily dominated by pro-Norman advisers, and on Harold's disputed oath of 1064, which Norman sources describe as binding but which English chroniclers either deny or present as made under duress. Harald Hardrada's claim, based on the 1039 agreement between Magnus of Norway and Harthacnut, had never been honoured even during the Scandinavian domination of England under Cnut's sons, and was the weakest in legal terms. On balance, therefore, Harold had the strongest combination of legal election, political support, and practical capacity — yet "strongest claim" and "most likely to prevail" are distinct questions, and William's superior military organisation, papal banner, and willingness to invest his entire ducal resources in invasion ultimately outweighed Harold's constitutional legitimacy. The claim was strongest; the outcome depended on force.
Subscribe to continue reading
Get full access to this lesson and all 10 lessons in this course.