[Mrx123]

What if Harald Harada or Harold was victorious in the end...how different would Britian be today and why???

[natchina]

It would have changed human history. For example, the industrial revolution happened in England. Who knows if the conditions would have existed for It to take place if 1066 had gone the other way?

[Dux_Helvetica]

Britain might have been doomed to be a European backwater, or fought over during history as a bargaining chip for continental power. They certainly would have retained a more Germanic character which would doubtlessly have changed things significantly - possibly not unlike modern day Scandinavian countries? Of course it's always hard to speculate on such things.

[Black Mammoth]

These questions are absolute mindf*cks. If only we had some sort of machine which could map what wouldn't have happened and could have happened in its place.

[danny111]

What if the chicken had never laid the egg?

[Alpharius]

Impossible to say.

We may have remained a backwater. We may have experienced the industrial revolution faster.

It changed the world. Only an idiot would say otherwise.

[MrHayden]

Very difficult - even impossible -question to answer. I was talking to a lecturer of Dark Age history at Cambridge about this a while ago, which I relished the opportunity to do! Even she had relatively little to say on the matter. The best way to find answers to this is simply to work forwards chronologically through the direct causal links between events. The most obvious example of this would be the official establishment of the Feudal System. There was a similar system in place before the Conquest, but it was a little more democratic. The subjugation of the peasant class therefore became more institutionalised, although this was not particularly different from how it was before and life, to my knowledge, didn't become much better or worse for the average English peasant - unless he lived up North, in which case the Bastard would have burned down his house and starved him to death. The Feudal system also allowed the King to summon an able body of knights as well as a huge force of peasant soldiers, which obviously made military organisation fairly sophisticated. However, as I mentioned earlier, the system in place beforehand was fairly similar to this, allowing pretty much the same actions to be carried out.

In terms of English foreign policy, I doubt it ultimately had much influence. My point is very debatable, but I theorise that all Germanic cultures are inherently expansionist, which explains the Migration of the English, the Viking expansions, the Hundred Years War, and all the others up until WWII. Given that the Normans were also Germanic (and assuming my hypothesis to be correct), it seems likely that whoever was in charge, the English nation wouldn't take long to start invading its neighboring countries. Not that giving the Froggies a good kicking is necessarily a bad thing...

Culturally, the influence was massive - obviously. French entered the English language and spoiled it for everyone; the higher class was almost entirely replaced by Normans which continued the developing trend of continental fashions in England, as well as converting the English battle techniques from infantry to cavalry based for a good few centuries; new food was introduced; stricter adherence to Catholicism was introduced (the Saxons were never particularly thrilled by organised religion, as a whole). Given how similar the cultures were in other regards, this seems to be the greatest area that would have been changed by the Saxons' loss at Hastings. Damn cheating Normans...

In terms of what I think might have happened as short-term political consequences of, say, a Viking victory at Stamford, everything would have probably been quite simple. The Viking claim to the throne was a more opportunistic one than an entirely serious campaign. Hardrada saw an opportunity for glory, and went for it. If he had won in the north, it seems likely that he would have just retaken the old Viking stronghold of York and stayed there whilst the Bastard took control of the south. In a typical Viking fashion, he might have extorted tribute from the new king and then gone home, or he could have made a more serious claim to English land and attempted to remain in control of the North. If a battle was fought in the North of England, it seems likely that the Vikings would have emerged victorious given the terrain etc, and it seems unlikely that they would move south in too much of a hurry. However if the Bastard was willing to prolong battle and allow Hardrada to remain in the north for a while, he would probably overcome them eventually without too much difficulty. Either way, it doesn't seem likely to me that the Vikings would have maintained a great degree of control in England - things would probably have ended up pretty much the way they did.

Hope that was interesting!

[Snagprophet]

The Normans brought England castles, the feudal system and the doomsday book. It also started plantations in Ireland, which could've had implications on us colonising and having a navy. We also had land in what is now France and this has certainly brought us into various conflicts with France. A lot of words in English come from French, so the English language would certainly be less latinised.

[ROYP]

We wouldn't have that catchy Hastings Direct advert. 0800 00 1066 (It's better out loud)

[internet tough guy]

wow I remember learning about this in year 7, seems like ages ago now.....

[Lore92]

Most likely as Mr Hayden said.
We would have to consider two things: effects on the ruling class and on the people.
Which significant changes did the Normans bring to the people? A part from the language, that was enriched with many latin words, was everyday life influenced by the conquerors? By knowing that we could start saying what wouldn't have happened, instead of saying what might have actually happened. Perhaps Britain would have been invaded again and again by the danish/vikings and the island divided into a number of different countries, only to be unified centuries later. The cool thing about the great history ifs is that nobody is neither right nor wrong. Perhaps the people wouldn't have changed that much, think of George I and II being german kings who only spoke german and sporadically visited Britain.