|
|
|
|
|
|
by pyrale
31 days ago
|
|
|
> It could be argued that this lead to at least 600 years of pain until the Normans aristocracy (now English) gave up trying to take France. You're rewriting history here. "The normans" were completely integrated in the French aristocracy, and that's why the kings of England took part in the successoral struggle. The 100 year war was started by the grandson of Philippe IV, of the french Capet dynasty, fighting against a nephew of Philippe IV for legitimate motives. Other cousins fighting it out included the dukes of burgundy, the house of Anjou-Sicily, etc. If anything, a few normans lords marrying into the Capet family was just a little gene refill to stave off inbreeding. |
|
|
The Norse raiders were given land and in exchange they would stop raiding. Paying off the aggressors.
These Norse became known as the Normans, took the English crown only a few generations after settling and then claimed the French crown.
Taking England gave them enough power to war with France for hundreds of years.
Paying off raiders, time and time again, cost France and never ended the threat. William The Conqueror’s descendants didn’t stop claiming France until around 1800.
But I totally do give you that by the 100 year war they were now English not Norse.
But in the modern West we have a very short 24 hour attention span. In other cultures and other time periods people had long memories. I could imagine Rollo telling his son to finish what his ancestors started. And eventually William telling his sons.
That’s my perspective.