King and Conquorer - from 24 August BBC and iPlayer

[IwantToRetire]

I had heard about this and sort of didn't listen as I thought it was Netflix.

But it isn't. Its the BBC!

"A clash that defined a country, and a continent, for a thousand years. The epic story of 1066 and the brutal battle for a kingdom. Starring James Norton and Nikolaj Coster-Waldau."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0024pyz

Supposedly based on verified historical facts.

I am imagining a mash up of Game of Throne and Vikings.

(Haven't seen another thread but am nominating this as a binge watch thread, rather than tv pace. If available on iPlayer.)

No but I can give you a complete run down of Tostigs entire life and know all the rulers of Denmark now 🤣🤣🤣

My googling has gone astray

I’m also wondering how many of us Irish are descended from Harold’s runaway kids 😊

I do have Viking blood so …..

My ancestry too.
Good thing they didn’t keep the greasy hair and random braids down the line, it made my scalp itch just looking at it!
(Yep Irish and 1.6 % Danish.
Only 18.6 % English …so who knows!)

There is some gore & violence in The Last Kindom, but much more character development. Watching Utred battle with a broadsword was joyous, as the actor must have worked really hard on this. There was a great deal of character development and the characters based on actual people ( eg Alfred) were true to what is known in the historical record. A lot of nuance ( not just bad guys vs good guys)
@MrsLargeEmbodied there was no personal relationship between Harald and William, that’s totally wrong historically

If they indeed are Icelandic, then the Icelanders are extremely keen that their sweet little horses are described as actual horses not ponies.

I don't know why. Maybe it's because despite their small size, they are absolute badasses. You see them on stony lava fields surrounded by ice and snow in the middle of winter and they're fine.

I wonder why Iceland, surely we have enough barren moors in this country? Then they could have had galloping horses not frantic trotting ponies.

Might have been cheaper to film it in Iceland ?
No idea , but many dramas are not filmed in the UK much anymore.

I think it’s hard to get camera shots without modern infrastructure- power lines, contrails in sky,etc in England. Hungary has been popular & has a well-developed film support industry. Also landscape can appear English, much more so than Iceland.

It irritated me right at the beginning with Sweyne raping a bride and claiming it was his right. I have never heard that English lords had that. We had written laws, so it would be known. I checked ages ago when there was a film called The War Lord. Indeed, it has a French name "droit de seigneur" and no evidence of it in France, either. Apparently some primitive tribes somewhere. I spent a lot of Ep 1 moaning about that. Sweyne was a nasty piece of work, kidnapping an Abbess to marry her for the convent lands, and murdering his Danish royal cousin Beorn, so also stupid. They did not need to invent a nasty law we didn't have.

The series writers didn’t invent it though
it’s a well known myth

and is also used by Chaucer and other writers from the Mediaeval period

It has at the very least caused me to find the in our time on the Norman yoke. And start the 4 part rest is history on 1066.

i feel I’m missing a decent podcast or 4 on Anglo Saxon culture and politics

so James Norton said on radio 4, although admitted it was a long time before 10.66

I've finished watching it now.

And really it was so bad.

Its like so many tv series now that somehow think a sort of lad culture has been in place in England for ever.

The characters were hopeless and so much just wrong.

ie just another soap but with swords.

What a wasted opportunity.

I hadn't realised that Harold's new political alliance wife in fact had his son.

So not as the series shows just some sort of au pair for all his other (not legally recognised) children.

And it does seem that Harold not only disliked his older brother but also his younger brother, and whether he actually killed Tostig or someone else did at the battle at Stamford Bridge, he didn't care and probably didn't apologise to his mother.

The whole point of that series of events was not some sort of family psycho drama, but what was said to be an example of Harold's military skills ie marching so far north, winning a battle against invaders and getting back in time to fight William.

I always though that he probably lost because they were all so worn out and exhausted, and the Normans had just had a nice channel cruise prior to the battle.

Some of us don't need to, because they were committed to memory in childhood.

I do need more reminders on the pre-Norman ones.

I always though that he probably lost because they were all so worn out and exhausted, and the Normans had just had a nice channel cruise prior to the battle.

yes me too, because that is what is printed at Battle Abbey

Oh no didn't realise that (not having visited the Abbey) Its just something I thought when at school and always thought it funny nobody mentioned that.

But the history lessons I had just seem to be lists of dates!

https://www.npg.org.uk/collections/explore/kings-and-queens-a-family-tree#acc41

I always though that he probably lost because they were all so worn out and exhausted

And so many thanes (equivalent to minor nobility/middle ranking officers) and their men had been killed at Fulford Gate and Stamford Bridge.

And big question marks over the actions of Morcar ad Edwin. Were they deliberately hanging back, or did they just not get there in time? Some historians suggest Harold should have waited, to rest his men and wait for reinforcements, rather than rushing on to face William.

the real history is fascinating - Harold nearly did pull of the battle, and the ultimate failure to unite after the battle was what did the English nobility in, as usual, too much disunity against a more unified force.

I’ve read
It’s disputed whether the son she had is his
He was born in Chester some time after the conquest

Ps @IwantToRetire
I took our boys to a history thing at the BMuseum years ago and they said ( amongst other things )
Harold lost
as William had a large cavalry so loads of horses
their shields weren’t as heavy but covered more of the body
and
Harold's lot were exhausted

Plus crossbows on the Norman side - ultimately Harold didn’t call two thirds of the army he could have mustered.

that’s what’s so fascinating about so many historical events, it could so easily have gone the other way.

Agree
and if Harold had been nicer to Tostig he wouldn’t have had to fight them all at Stamford Bridge.

He went to fight the Norwegian King Harald who was the threat. Tostig had a grudge against his brother so joined the Norwegian side.

(Not quite sure how but Harald thought he had just as much right to be the next King of England)