History Debate by Isla Alexander

Harold's Family tree

luv2playsokr — 2024-10-18 15:23:12 UTC

Facts From doc. C

luv2playsokr — 2024-10-18 15:26:51 UTC

Harold was a natural choice. He understood the English ways and he would be able to keep England united. He was such an obvious choice that it was clear that Edward expected him to succeed to the throne.
Harold was in fact designated by Edward upon Edward’s death as the next king. This is alluded to in the Bayeux Tapestry, in the scene where Edward, on his deathbed, touches Harold’s hand.
Harold was appointed king by the witan, which is the body who confirms a king.

luv2playsokr — 2024-10-18 15:38:06 UTC

King Edward put his trust and kingly duties in Harolds father Godwin. Therefore when Edward was on his death bed he remembered that and trusted Harold more than William.
William was from France and in order to gain kingship he had to conquer England first.

Closing Notes

2024-10-18 16:16:08 UTC

If Edward chose anyone to be king it was Harold. This is seen in the Bayeux Tapestry, an historical illustration by the Normans that told their side of the story. The pious saint-king Edward would not choose William, who was an illegitimate child, a cruel and vengeful man, and one who would eventually pillage and burn the villages of England.
Harold was very close with Edward, being his brother-in-law. Harold was a good and peaceful man, as portrayed when he is at war with his brother (he stops before the battle begins to offer him peace.)
William was the illegitimate son of a Norman Duke. This undermines his right to the throne, if he had any. He was also the Duke of Normandy, which is in France, not England. This Dukedom is not even the most powerful position in France. William is not even king of France; why should he be king of England?
Harold was the brother of Edward's wife and since Edward had no children, is the nearest related to Edward and much more related to him than William was.
The witan appointed Harold and Harold was ceremoniously crowned in Westminster Abbey.
Edward gave Harold powers and honors. Harold was even called the "Under-King" during Edward's reign.
The oath which Harold swore to William to assist him may not be legal and binding because Harold was forced into it and did not know that he was making an oath on the saints relics until after the fact.

William's own companions did not regard him as the heir or help him until the pope was convinced make the conquest a holy war. The pope is not infallible in this statement; this is not a matter of faith and morals. Therefore, the pope very well might be wrong in making the conquest a holy war.

And finally we are not talking about who won the battle of Hastings but who was the rightful heir.

Notes for the Qs against William

brokingtut — 2024-10-18 21:54:32 UTC

If only Harold’s supporters were in the room at Edward’s death, as William claims, how was it that William was appointed king by Edward? Harold’s supporters definitely didn’t do that. William’s appointment by Edward must have been made up.
As was mentioned in the rebuttal, Edward knew if he gave William the throne then it would inevitably lead to an invasion. Why would he subject his own people to that?
Edward did not clearly elect a ruler at his death. What made William think he had a right to the foreign English throne?

Arguments Against William

brokingtut — 2024-10-18 22:00:45 UTC

It was tradition that, if the king did not have a son to pass on the throne to, the brother-in-law, in this case that would be Harold, would be the rightful heir to the throne before the nephew.
Harold had the support of the Saxons, who were willing to fight for his right to the throne.
The only supporters to William’s right to the throne were his own French men, who they themselves didn’t believe his right to the throne. William’s appointment by Edward could very well have been made up.

Arguments Against Harold: Must learn how to defend against!!

2024-10-18 22:42:36 UTC

Like Edward, William was a deeply religious man who shared many of Edward’s dreams. Having already made him heir, why would he suddenly decide to change his mind?
Years prior to the death of Edward, Harold swore an oath of loyalty to William making Harold not able to take the throne from him because Harold owed William allegiance.
The Pope himself supported William over Harold, giving him permission to invade England and take the throne.
If he wanted Harold to be king, why would Edward not make a public announcement knowing that if he did not, Harold’s claim would be disputed?
William had the right of succession, being appointed heir, and the right of the conquerer to be made king.

Opening Notes

luv2playsokr — 2024-10-20 18:51:16 UTC

In this debate, as we all know, the question being discussed is whether King Harold or King William was the rightful heir to the English crown.

King Harold was the rightful heir, as he was appointed by King Edward on his death bed. His father, Earl Godwin, was an adviser of King Edward and completed a great deal of the king's duties.

Harold was English by blood, and William was not. Because the government of England was a monarchy, the people likely would have wanted their next king to be one of their own as an English Saxon. In order for William to gain the power of the throne he had to fight and kill king Harold and his forces. This was an unjustified attack by William, as Harold showed no violent intent.

Upon considering the information and evidence we have collected, it is apparent that Harold was the rightful heir to the throne of England.

Opening notes Pt.2

2024-10-21 16:45:18 UTC

William was a bastard(maybe say: he was born of an unmarried couple and was therefore illegitimate). This fact makes any blood claim to the English throne he may have had entirely illegitimate

The oath that Harold swore to William of fealty was only made because Harold was in Williams court at the time and had no choice

Harold was confirmed by the Witan, the body that also helped Edward rise to power making his appointment as strong as his predecessor’s

Harold was crowned king in front of the country so whatever claim William might have had would have not mattered because there was already a king

Harold was the brother of the queen, Edith

Harold, being one of them, would have understood the people. As seen when Edward tried to throw him out of England and make William heir and the people revolted and clamored for Harold to come back.

There are three ways to legitimately become king

1 Inherit it: Harold had a much stronger claim by blood than William giving this title to him

2 Be Elected: It was clear through his popularity, the near revolt when he was banished, and his appointment by Witan that Harold was the choice of the people over the cruel foreigner William giving this title to Harold as well

3 Conquerer: Because William won he gets this title but before that Harold had already defended his country from the Vikings giving him this claim as well before his death.

Rebuttal: Experience and Support

jhostermeier — 2024-10-21 19:10:25 UTC

The Saxons held the Godwins in high esteem and respected them even more when Edward showed partiality to the French. When Edward realized there was nothing he could do to increase Saxon support, he decided to help his kingdom in the ways he was able to: serving the poor, building monasteries, etc. During this time, the matters of the realm were given to Harold and his father to take care of. Because of this, Harold would have had prior experience with kingship and the just management and rule of England, while William was only a Duke (a Duke of France, at that). Furthermore, he was respected by the people, who already showed a great deal of support for his family.

Rebuttal: Natural Choice and Support of Church

jhostermeier — 2024-10-21 19:24:05 UTC

Harold was the natural choice for the next English king. He was a native Saxon who held the support of a great portion of the English people and, as one of them, he understood their customs and needs. He had prior experience in the kingship and was therefore prepared to rule his people as a competent leader.

The witan obviously had confidence in him, for they appointed him king upon Edward's death. This means he successfully gained the favor of a council of freemen, magistrates, and bishops. Here it is obvious that Harold too had the support of religion, as numerous English bishops saw him to be a fit ruler. In fact, some of the English even venerated him as a martyr after his death.

Rebuttals: Bloodlines and Claims

jhostermeier — 2024-10-21 19:40:57 UTC

Harold was an earl of England and his family was extremely powerful. In fact, considering the amount of support and lands that they called their own, Harold was arguably more powerful that Edward himself. His connection to King Edward was not one of blood, but of marriage. Under normal circumstances it would be very unusual if Harold were to be made king. However, these were not normal circumstances, for Edward was the last of his bloodline. Therefore, Harold was the closest to him through his marriage to Harold's sister. As mentioned before, Harold was both powerful and loved by the people. This does seem to stack up against the argument of the legitimacy of William's claim. He was a foreigner with no ties to Edward whatsoever. While he did manage to gain the support of very powerful individuals, like the pope, overall he had very little support. Even his own vassals doubted his claim to be valid.

Rebuttal: Heir to the Throne and William's Support

jhostermeier — 2024-10-21 19:57:56 UTC

Earl Godwin and Harold, with their lands and the support of the Saxons, were vital to the stability of Edward's realm. Edward was surely aware of this. He would have known that by appointing William as heir that he would plunge his realm into war upon his death. He knew that Harold would not stand idly by as William tried to force his way to the English throne. Appointing William as heir would have been very risky and, as we see, led to the overthrow of Saxon rule in England. There are even historical works of art, such as the Bayeux Tapestry, that reveal the appointment of Harold as heir by Edward. Keep in mind that this tapestry was made just over 10 years after the Norman Conquest. It was thought to have been commissioned by William's own half-brother. It is obvious that William was not thought to have been the rightful ruler of England, even in his now even-more-powerful family.

Rebuttals to Arguments Against Harold:

2024-10-22 16:47:42 UTC

The previous argument can be better attributed to Harold. William was not a deeply religious man but a vicious tyrant.
Harold's oath of loyalty he swore to William did not make Harold unable to take the throne from William because William had forced Harold to take it.
XXXThe Pope himself supported William over Harold, giving him permission to invade England and take the throne.
King Edward did not make a public announcement declaring who was king for either Harold or William.
Harold's closer blood-relation to Edward's line trumped William's right of conquest.