Who had the strongest claim to the throne in 1066?
In 1066, several claimants vied for the English throne. The two primary contenders were Harold Godwinson, the Earl of Wessex, and William the Conqueror, also known as William the . While both had claims, William of Normandy (William the Conqueror) had a stronger claim to the throne.
To determine this, you need to understand the context of the events leading up to the Norman Conquest of England. King Edward the Confessor of England died without a direct heir, which triggered a succession crisis. Two main claimants emerged:
1. Harold Godwinson: Harold was the most powerful noble in England and was chosen by the Witan (a council of nobles) to be the next king. He claimed that Edward the Confessor, on his deathbed, had named him as the heir.
2. William the Conqueror: William, Duke of Normandy, believed that Edward the Confessor had promised him the throne back in 1051, and he was Harold's distant cousin. Additionally, William argued that Harold had sworn an oath of loyalty to him during a visit to Normandy.
Both claims had their merits, but William's claim was stronger for a few reasons:
1. Blood Relation: William asserted that he was the closest living relative of Edward the Confessor. He and Edward were cousins, and William argued that Edward had designated him as the heir.
2. Edward's Support: Edward the Confessor's support for William's claim is significant. Although it is challenging to confirm Edward's intentions, William had gained his favor during his exile in Normandy, and he may have promised him the English throne.
3. Harold's Oath: William claimed that Harold had sworn an oath of loyalty to him during his visit to Normandy. This oath further reinforced William's claim as Harold's superior and rightful heir.
In the end, William the Conqueror's claim to the throne prevailed by force, as he led the Norman invasion of England and defeated Harold Godwinson's forces at the Battle of Hastings in 1066.