Help support TMP


"Roman vs Norman conquest of England" Topic


6 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

Please remember not to make new product announcements on the forum. Our advertisers pay for the privilege of making such announcements.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.


Back to the Ancients Discussion Message Board

Back to the Medieval Discussion Message Board


Areas of Interest

Ancients
Medieval

Featured Hobby News Article


Featured Link


Top-Rated Ruleset

Ancient and Medieval Wargaming


Rating: gold star gold star gold star gold star gold star gold star gold star 


Featured Showcase Article

Oddzial Osmy's 15mm Teutonic Crossbowmen 1410

The next Teutonic Knights unit - Crossbowmen!


Featured Workbench Article

Bronze Age's Odin

dampfpanzerwagon Fezian finishes his 40mm Norse Gods project.


Featured Profile Article

Rubbery Dinos at the Dollar Store

Get these inexpensive dinos while you can.


Featured Book Review


729 hits since 11 Feb 2025
©1994-2025 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?


TMP logo

Membership

Please sign in to your membership account, or, if you are not yet a member, please sign up for your free membership account.
Rusty Balls11 Feb 2025 7:16 p.m. PST

An American asking here…. I was watching a show the other day about the Battle of Hastings. The narrator stated that England was conquered in a single battle. It made me ask, if that is true, why was William's experience in conquering England so different from the Roman's? The Normans won England in a single battle and yet the Romans had a protracted campaign. Why the difference? Did the fact that England was united under Harold make them more susceptible to a single loss vs each tribe in the Roman times?

Curious why the difference…

gavandjosh0211 Feb 2025 9:50 p.m. PST

There were multiple British kingdoms (ignoring "Scotland")at the time of the Roman invasions. One single Kingdom (ignoring "Wales" and "Scotland") when William invaded. There were various "revolts" against William – so it's not quite right to say conquest in a single battle.

BillyNM11 Feb 2025 11:22 p.m. PST

Lucy Worsley has done a documentary that tells the story of how much more fighting remained after Hastings, albeit not major pitched battles. There's also the book "The English Resistance: The Underground War Againt the Normans" by Peter Rex.

Personal logo Herkybird Supporting Member of TMP12 Feb 2025 1:15 a.m. PST

One must remember the great revolt in the north of England against William. More Normans/French knights were killed than fought at the battle of Hastings!
This lead to the 'Harrying of the North' where Williams army scoured the north of England killing and burning, which made it a virtual wasteland for decades.

robert piepenbrink Supporting Member of TMP12 Feb 2025 10:16 a.m. PST

Awake! Awake! Hereward the Wake!

But yes, Britain in Roman times was a region. England in 1066 was a kingdom, and could be conquered as such.

Dave Jackson13 Feb 2025 6:19 p.m. PST

All great points.

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.