Was William the Conqueror a good or bad man?

Answer 1

He was a good King as he was a strong leader. He killed many people, but he was a good fighter and didn't give up. I like many others would say that from my reserch he is a good King.just because he was a good fighter dosent meen he's a good king because he didn't treat the British as well as he should have eg: he burned down the land and forced the british to build them castles (motte and bailey castles) so for me he's a ok king but could have tried to get the british to like him more!

He was crowned on Christmas Day which improved the trust between him and his people because the british were very religios

Answer 2

yes

AnswerNo after The Battle of Hastings he wiped out whole villages of Saxons and the population of England plummeted? Answerno becaus ha started an un provoked attack AnswerYes because he was nice enough to save Harold from a shipwreck and he had many heirs to the throne that could be his successers. He was a blood relation of Edward the confessor and so he must have been a nice man for the throne to be promised to him twice (supposibly) AnswerHe was a successful Duke and was knighted at the age of 17 so he must have been seen to have potensial. By starting an un-provoked attack, he was saving the country from a test of power which frequently happened during this time.

Answer

No: His response to rebellion after the conquest was the systematic " harrying of the North".This laid waste an area 150 miles square. Villages burnt, families wiped out, animals destroyed and crops razed.

He did his level best to destroy all signs of English culture, language and traditional religion. In the years before the invasion England was an adherent of the orthodox church, this was, like so many other beliefs suppressed and the practices of the church of Rome enforced.

Had the battle been won by Harold II England would still speak a Nordic language and have close links with it's Scandinavian cousins.

I believe William was known as William the illegitmate before he came to England, the French knew him very well.

Answer 3

He was certainly successful in many efforts of war, but again, what makes a good king? He was probably not kind or gentle... He was likely strong willed and most definitely stood firmly in his convictions. It all comes down to whether you agree with his convictions. Obviously many men did not and died for it.

Answer 4

Well not so much tough, but just lucky. Harold Godwinson had just fought a battle at Stanford and many of his troops were injured. They then had to climb back up the country where William was waiting for him. Although he fought well, it was all really in his favour.

Answer 5

No he was a bad ruler he was not popular and he skinned people alive!

p.s. its true

he was well crappy :p

Answer 6

yes, he changed his ways by learning the English language

yes, he changed his ways by learning the English language

Answer 7

William the Conqueror was a very smart person!!!

Answer 8

No he didnt treat them well, he demolished their houses to build motte and bailey castles and made the domesday book so they can pay him taxes.

Answer 9

no, he killled around 100,000 people in the harrying of the north