William the Conquerer controled Britain by setting up lots of Motte and Bailey castles around the Countory. Each castle was controlled by one of his trusted barons. Lots of the Motte and Bailey castles later turned into stone castles.

He succeeded in controlling England as it stroke fear into Englishmen. Despite all this, there were still many rebelliens.

The Normans started building castles straight away after winning the Battle of Hastings, starting with one at Hastings itself. Then others sprang up such as the one at Tonbridge in Kent. These early castles were wooden structures perched on top of an artificial mound called a motte and surrounded by a ditch filled with water and a rampart enclosing a courtyard or bailey. Later castles, made of stone, were built all over England, but especially in the Welsh border country where the local population were troublesome. Here were built the massive Chepstow, Pembroke, Caerphilly, Cardiff and Kidwelly castles - all still standing today.

well, if you really want to be a good leader, then do responsible things to prove you are responsible enough to lead a group. Then when you are leading a group make sure you are always talking in a loud voice, but not too loud! Make sure you always make eye-contact with the person or peolple you are working with. And don't forget to always keep your head up high to show that you have the cofidence of a leader! :)

They are the descendants of the Vikings mixed with Frankish and Gallo-Roman bloodlines that are the residents of Northern France.

No they dated for 2 years, but broke up. They were never married.

harald hardradra was a relative of a previous king of England- King Cnut.

He was the stronmgest man in Norway when he was 51

Alisha's Attic (1990's) had a song called "I'm Not an Addict" that had a woman "ahhh"- ing in it; but when I see how the question looks, I get men and not women in my mind with, "I know this much is True" by Tears for Fears. That same track is then later mixed by PM Dawn in Set Adrift on Memory Bliss". My last search also shows that Backstreet Boys made a version.

He was Duke of (and born in) Normandy

Around age 70, the biblical "fourscore-and-ten." I have been spending time with several family trees on ancestry.com, and find that most people who achieved middle-age (40+) lived a bit past 80; unless they died of misadventure, or contracted diabetes or another rapidly progressing disease. So this was Life Expectancy at 40, computed from a limited sample. (If we figured in dead babies/fetuses and early death in the hecatombs of the American Civil War, then Life Expectancy at Birth would come down enormously. But the resulting figure would be essentially meaningless because we'd be introducing fictitious and hypothetical elements.)

two

sharia is an arabic word meaning law. and is derived from Koran and sayings of prophet.

William was focused on the battle of Hastings and nothing else, he was prepared and if he hadn't won England wouldn't be the way it is neither the language of English........William was a very kind ruler and unlike Harold encouraged his soldiers to fight not force.

William of Normandy did not fight the vikings at Hastings in 1066. He fought and defeated the newly crowned King Harold, who was Harold Godwinson, the brother-in-law of the previous king and was therefore not of royal blood.

The vikings were actually defeated earlier at York by King Harold and his army.

The battle of Hastings occurred on the 14th of October in 1066, where Duke William of Normandy and Harold Godwinson battled for control of England
Well the current King of The Time Edward The Confessor died, leaving no heir to the throne. Three Other Kings, Harold Godwinson, Harald Hadraada and William Duke of York all wanted to become King, all for different reasons. They all had different claims, but none of them really proved anything. There was another claimant, Edgar. He was the closest living relative to Edward, but he was only a boy at the time and would be a useless king. But in the end, Harold Godwinson was crowned King. This angered William and Harald, but at first England thought William was the only other claimant. So the English Army trouped down to Hastings to wait for Williams Army, down south. But Williams Army didnt turn up, and then they found out that Harald's army had attacked right up in the north of england. So the english had to travel 250 miles over England to Stamford Bridge, where they caught Harald's army unawares and defeated them. But then, Williams army attacked, and the English had to travel all the way back down to Hastings again with hardly any rest. Unfortunately, we lost that battle, and so William took over England. So it was a pretty big year!

they lived in macedonea

Harald Hardrada's body has been moved several times over the 948 years since his death. The first time he was moved was a year after his death, the second was almost a hundred years later. It is reported he is currently buried under a road in Norway.

Anglo saxons and french language and customs

William Kingston was brave because he fought for his country as he was in the Britain

army that's why he is brave

Harald Hardraada - Viking

Harold Godwinson - Englishman

He marched his army north to Stamford bridge to battle with Harald Hradrada who came across form Norway to try to invade England to overthrow monarchy.

jump, run

It is from a Norman perspective ( which means it is biased)

seamstresses were not at the battle and were told what happened (the info passed on could be false)

-----------

That is an extremely uninsightful, and incorrect, answer.

The Bayeaux tapestry is immensely useful to historians. First and most important, it shows us the Norman perspective of the battle, which has historical value in it sown right. Second, it contains subtle commentary by the embroiderers (who many historians believe were Saxon) in a series of tiny figures worked into the borders of the tapestry, ranging from mythological to satirical. They give us insight into the mindset of the people working on the piece. Lastly, the manner in which the tapestry has been interpreted down through the centuries offers insight into the values and historical perspective of each time period involved. There have been whole books written about that one aspect of the work.

To say that the piece has "no historical value" because the events it depicts may reflect the writer's (embroiderer's) cultural perspective is extremely simplistic, and presupposes that the historical record is normally accurate and pure. Josephus did not personally witness every event he recorded in ancient Rome, yet we consider his writings an important part of the historical record. even though we recognize his cultural bias. While the Bayeaux Tapestry is not a primary source, it is a valuable secondary source that offers historians a wealth of information on the world the Conquest took place in, as well as the event itself.