What if England Never Became French? | Alternate History Hub | History Teacher Reacts

Check the playlist of History Showdown episodes so far! • History Showdown
Check out my previous reaction to Alternate History Hub: • 10 More Dumb Alternate...
Alternate History Hub discusses what would have happened if William the Conqueror and the Normans never took over England. How would things be different? What will Mr. Terry think? What do YOU think?
Original Video: • What if England Never ...
Join my channel to get early-access to new videos!
/ @mrterry
Links:
Gaming channel: / mrterrygaming
Discord: / discord
Twitter: / mrterryhistory
Merch - mrterry-shop.f...
Twitch: / mrterryhistory
Patreon - / mrterry
Tik Tok: / mrterryhistory
Instagram: / mrterryhistory
Facebook - / mr-terry-history-10913...
Streamlabs - streamlabs.com...
PayPal - paypal.me/mrte...
For all business and collaboration inquiries: [e-mail]
#alternatehistory #englishhistory #williamtheconqueror #vikings

[@MrTerry]

Do you agree with this alternate history scenario?

[@johnnamorton6744]

Few thoughts here... 1.) Religion... I know we have to talk about the Elephant in the room... This is 1066 one decade after the great schism. The idea that there would have been a third schism is unlikely. If anything you would have a unified East Vs West. To be Truthful the Eastern church considered itself the true church the patriarchal of Rome was an apostate. The idea this would be a protestant reformation is laughable. To many other things including the reopening of the cannon would have to have happened. 2.) I really thought he was going to pull the Harald won card which I thought would be more interesting. having the Danedom against the holy roman empire would be much more interesting to think about. 3.) William gets pushed back or dies... that would have been interesting in france much more than the Anglo-Saxon Kingdom. There is too much infighting in this point of history. It's pretty close to the first crusade and I think it's Williams Grandson who embarks on that while his siblings fight over england. Do they go on the crusade if that happens? probably not cause there's to much turmoil You would definatly see Harold unite Wales and possiably Ireland given the exchanges here with Scotland. Without the Normans the first crusade is defiantly a failure. There most likely would be a marriage to the holy roman emperor's family and someone from Rome. That would be a major consolidation of power. No 100 years war and Richard the lionheart. Just off the top of my head.

[@LJ-pi6np]

I didn't see an argument for why Anglo-Saxons would have ended slavery. It was very profitable for the nobility. Why wouldn't Normans try again? So series of ruinous wars between England and Normandy?

[@johnnamorton6744]

@@LJ-pi6np ... "In RE: Why not a second invasion"... easy answer is that you had two hostile nations. One to your south, the other to your east. invasions weaken you ... and if you do not win well you look weaker. in Re: Anglo's ending slavery... how many slaves can you own til they revolt?

[@MalikF15]

By the time of William the conqueror he was more French than Norse but still had tradition kept the adventurous spirit. And to answer your question A duke is higher rank than earl since they more land and often are related of royalty. The earl comes form Anglo Saxon times which they ruled over county and it comes form old Norse word Jarl.

[@davea6314]

"You’re a man haunted by those two most terrible words: ‘What if’?" -Morlock leader in the Time Machine movie 2002

[@owennoad-watson2820]

I was taught in school that one major advantage lost by Godwinson was the fact that en-route to Hastings after his victory at Sterling bridge, he sent his archers to London to rest, thinking that the smaller force at Hastings would be easier to defeat

[@calvinkeinath6955]

So the witan wasn’t necessarily a collection of wise men, it was more a collection of earls and other wealthy landowners. There likely wasn’t any official council either, just more of a “this is who is in power at this moment in time, therefore this is who influences the decisions. Jamie from the British History Podcast goes in depth on this topic when he was covering the Anglo-Saxon age

[@timefortjer6705]

As a university student on the matter, the linguistics of this video is really off. This quote from Cody rubbed me the wrong way: "no matter what study you use or how you compute it, Germanic elements of English are a minority within the language" - This is at best dumbing down the truth, and at worst, plainly wrong. Whilst it is true that that we have very broad set of words in English from French and Latin, among other tongues, the heart of the language is very much Germanic, and that's quite clear to anyone who has learned our sister-tongues. English is grammatically much more like Dutch than like French. Moreover, whilst two thirds of *all* words comes from romance, the ones that we end up using most often are almost all Germanic. Don't belive me? Up until now, the only non-Germanic words I've used in this paragraph (aside from the quote) are "quote", "Latin", "language", "clearly", "Germanic", "grammatically", "romance" and "paragraph". When you actually weigh words by how often they're actually used, you'll find the majority of English communication happens using Germanic vocabulary. We have a *very* Germanic language. Now, don't get me wrong, English without French influence would undoubtedly be different from English today, but I do think the extent to which English has become a "mutt" is *drastically* overstated. The only real difference *beyond* just vocabulary that I can see happening is that we end up preserving some amount of the Old English Case and Gender System, but just like the Germanic languages on the Mainland, it would still be a greatly reduced version of what once existed. In fact, although the inlfuence of French is much more obvious in our vocabulary, I reckon the influence of the Scandinavian languages probably had more of an effect of English's grammar than French did. Another thing Cody gets wrong is that, while *some* influence from French came right after 1066, the majority of it didn't come until quite late after the Norman Conquests, and until *after* Chaucer's time. It wasn't until the rise of an English-Speaking nobility that the vocabulary of French actually entered into common usage, which happened several hundred years after the Battle of Hastings. The Middle English of the 1300s was still probably more similar to the Old English of the 900s than to the Early Modern English of 1700s. And lastly, English being "easy to learn" is a kind of misleading statement to make. The only thing that makes a language easier to learn is how closely related your language is to it, so while the French influence on English certainly made it easier for French speakers (and speakers of other Romance languages), that doesn't really play any part in the ability of English to become a lingua franca, all the way from Peru to Japan. Make no mistake, that was achieved via military and economic domination, first by Britain and then by the US. The language itself had nothing to do with that.

[@vlbluu124]

I agree for your last part, I often see that english or french and other famous languages are easy to learn but in reality (and mostly for english) there is an abundance of culture to consume that provides an infinite amount of input for someone that wants to learn that langage. And because the language is everywhere, most countries require you to learn it at a certain level thus making you more aware than let's say chinese or vietnamese. For europeans maybe it's the "easiest" overall, but it's also due to us having the same alphabet. For a korean or a thai person it requires more in depth study and time to dip your toes in. In Europe you are almost obliged to learn english by default. PS : thanks for the earlier parts, didn't want to comment on that part because I am no expert and trust your expertise

[@tibsky1396]

The Scandinavians were massively few in number in term of ratio to be able to maintain their culture, they quickly assimilated. All Norse things were diluted with the Gallo-Frankish world in the region of Neustria, particularly with Marriages (Mixed DNA). But also the Language, Trade, Art of war (they became heavy cavalrymen, and knights, where the Vikings fought on foot), castle life, regional customs, feudal politics (vassalage of the king of the Franks), culture (the Song of Roland had been heard during William's conquest), Fashion/Clothing (The Normans shaved short like the Franks), Religion (Entirely Christian), etc... Guy of Burgundy, the lord whom William faced in 1047 at the battle of Val-ès-Dunes was a cousin for example, his link with the French-speaking medieval world was already quite strong, even if he is a descendant of Rollo, he was also of Frankish ancestry, like a lot of nobles. The fact is also that William's army was not only made up of Normans, but also of Barons or Mercenaries coming from Brittany to Flanders, throughout Northern France. In comparison, it was definitely more a Frankish Army than a Scandinavian one. Harald Hardrada was a Norse King, not William.

[@EmperorJohn]

The vikings never sacked Constantinople they never got through its walls

[@Bowleskov]

I also am of Anglo Norman descent. I think that is not commonly understood, in England, that after the Norman conquest the monarch of Britain owed fealty to the French Monarch. Which I can only assume was really awkward when Eleanor of Aquitaine divorces the French King and Married the English King putting a large part of France under the English monarchy and without that no King John and no Magna Carta. Also if England wasn't linked so readily to southern Europe would the Black death have hit so hard in a way that shifted the balance of power.

[@MrTerry]

Check the playlist of History Showdown episodes so far! kzbin.info/aero/PLzKpRgRsZk7NOwoLnoGoV_XNAJOk3ea4r

[@tiberiusbrain]

Taking an arrow to the knee means getting married, terry

[@JeremyDA88]

As an Englishman, this is a topic I've often found myself wondering about. Speaking personally, I've never been fond of William as a historical figure. He's right up there with Henry VIII and Cromwell in terms of English leaders I dislike. So the idea of him never taking the reins of England is something that, in all honesty, would have been pretty great for us :)

[@SamHoward-c9f]

Linguist here, it was a WILDLY different French than the French we know today. Likely still developing from its roots in vulgar Latin.

[@jackthunderbolt4307]

Since rollo the walkers descendants *immediateky* pussed out into being Christian and speaking French (both of those being sins of the highest order) William was french

[@filipexavier8771]

6:05 it is "Bayeux Tapestry", a piece that William's brother, Odo of Bayeux, comissioned (allegedly).

[@gavintheweeb5838]

15:37 when the guard says he took an arrow to the knee je means he got married lmao

[@Danielle-mg5lf]

It’s a fiefdom system

[@RockerTopper-hh3ru]

After the Normans conquered England, the next reigning monarch to speak English as his native tongue was Henry IV, also known as Henry Bolingbroke, who took the throne in 1367.

[@Some_who_call_me_Tiim]

25:35 to "take an arrow to the knee" means he got married

[@tacobowler]

Have you reacted to Rob Words? He has videos on the history of languages, and you’d like his video on letters to add to English I think.

[@kernelpickle]

The thing about English, that I suspect is why it’s persisted and become so widely spoken is that it is easy to learn very basic things. However, it’s extremely difficult to achieve fluency. So, it’s this chess-like nature of being easy to learn, but impossible to master that makes it interesting. Similar to the way a virus replicates with little errors that over time become an entirely new strain, English has done the same as new speakers came on board and remixed it with a bit of their native language. So, you can quickly learn just enough to speak like a caveman or Tarzan and be successfully integrated into English speaking society. Unlike every other foreign language I’ve studied or taken classes over the course of my educational journey, English has lots of flexibility with pronunciation and grammar that can be jumbled and still understandable. You take a class in French and if the instructor is a native Francophone, like mine was, with a thick French accent-she will not understand why it’s rude to insist we speak in the correct accent in order for it to be considered proper French. You can easily think of any number of foreign born speakers butchering the language and pronunciation to a point where it’s on the verge of being unintelligible, but since enough of it is intelligible we let them slide. You try speaking like a French caveman with simple sentences constructed grammatically in the way you would English, and they will never let you get a word out before correcting you. I found that when I kept getting told I was saying something incorrectly, it was merely my accent creeping in because the words used as examples of the same sounds in English are often incorrect because the idiot who came up with the idea had a French accent and pronounced the English words incorrectly, so when you compare them and say it sounds like the end of a word you know, it actually doesn’t. Anyway, the way I passed the class was by low-key making fun of the way my teacher spoke, and by imitating an over-the-top French accent Trey Parker used in an episode of South Park. For anyone interested, it’s the one where they buy something from “Sur La Table” and he just keeps saying the name in a funny way that mocks the French. What was funny is that my classmates knew what I was doing, because I told them and when I would respond to the teacher in French, while speaking in a borderline offensive French accent she was like “that’s perfect, you finally nailed it!” I also recall similar experiences with other languages because people would get ornery about not rolling R’s or doing other things we don’t do in English and I didn’t have the ability to naturally make those sounds. In some English accents people completely ignored “R” sounds entirely, or make certain sounds that end up being indistinguishable like cot and caught. In my accent, those words sound different but in others they’re homophones. Like someone who speaks another language is going to hear me get 85-90% of the way there, and have contextual clues to help and they’re just NOT going to be able to understand what I was trying to say?! Bullshit, complete and utter bullshit, and meanwhile you’ve got people speaking English as a second language that we can barely understand and well consider them to be fluent. It’s a weird ass standard they can’t even meet, but they’ll have words that are homophone adjacent, where they literally mean completely different things if you empathize the wrong syllable or make a slightly different vowel sound. There are even jokes in those languages that highlight that little quirk of their language that wouldn’t translate into English. Anyway, my point is that English isn’t actually hard because the people who still suck at it are able to tell us nonsense like that, when people everywhere have learned enough to communicate. They definitely aren’t going to be accused of being eloquent, but those are two different things and I find it’s entirely unhelpful for people to get too hung up on structure when they’re remapping words in their heads and trying to remember them. If you can say something well enough that someone can pick out the nouns, verbs and adjectives, figure out what the correct order should’ve been in their own head, they can respond in a simplified enough way that you can understand them-that’s communication! Look back at all of the international trade that took place between vastly different languages when Europeans started sailing down to China and India-do you think any of those people engaged in that learned their trade partner’s language fluently? The first time East met West, there wasn’t any common ground linguistically, so they had to learn the language the hard way through brute force and with a little patience and understanding on each side so that they could figure out how to trade goods and negotiate deals. Often times it was the non-English speakers who made the effort to learn our language and become translators. Some folks just pick up on that stuff so easily and naturally, that it’s the reason different languages still exist and they haven’t been wiped out and homogenized into a mess of everything. English is almost exactly that with all the other influences being remixed into our lexicon. I can understand why it would be difficult to learn the rules of English, because even if you can speak it natively, we just know what sounds right and can’t easily explain those rules, many of which are unwritten. If that stuff interests you, Tom Scott put out a video years ago that explained some of those unwritten rules that will completely make sense once you have it explained.

[@nutcrackit7396]

For a bastardized simple explanation earls are the english equivalent of a count. They rule over a county. A duke rules over a dutchy and multiple counts or earls. an archduke typically ruled like a subkingdom. If it didn't owe its allegiance to a higher person this realm would be large enough to be independent usually.

[@MrMjwoodford]

The religious difference it might have made is overplayed. We have a real example in Ireland, which had a church that diverged from the continental Catholic tradition back then, but never broke with it.

[@superferrariman]

I will admit it is a stretch to say that Charlemagne’s Frankish influence spread that far, but think about it… the HRE and France sprouted from the same seed after the separation of the lands. Then, the reconquista was done with a lot of help from French (Portugal) and “Germany”(Spain). And this influence reached into Italy, in some way maybe including the Papal States in this conversation, as the Pope was central for all kings’ claims to power at that time. Far fetched but not so much! 20:34

[@NoNameThoughtOfYet]

Hey Mr. Terry! The Textured “Painting” With The Horses, Chainmail & Writing Above It Is Actually A Tapestry; The Bayeux Tapestry Held In Northern France, Commissioned By William After The Conquest Of England, Yes There Is Old Norse Runes In The Hagia Sophia & The Vikings Also Had Their Own Elite Military Unit In The Ottoman Army Tasked With Guarding The Byzantine Emperor Personally; The Varangian Guard, Middle French & Latin Was The Language Spoken By The Elite In England For A Very Long Time, We Still Live With This Change Today; The Anglo Saxons Were Mostly Confined To Farmwork & Other Menial Jobs; Therefore We Still Use Their Words For The Animals When They’re Alive (Oxen, Pig, Sheep) The Normans Could Afford To Eat The Meat Of Said Animals Where We Get Their French Words (Beef, Pork & Mutton) Old English Would Evolve In The 1300’s With “The Great Vowel Shift” (I’m Not 100% Sure Exactly How It Changed But Around The 1300’s Is When Old Became Middle English (Think Chaucers Canterbury Tales)

[@jackthunderbolt4307]

The varangoan guard guarded the byzantine emperor not the sultan.

[@NoNameThoughtOfYet]

@@jackthunderbolt4307 My Mistake; Fixed It, Thanks For Pointing It Out :)

[@xenowerks7020]

I'll take a simple crown with no jewels one it. On the front it has my family crest, on the back it is inscribed "Wē brēcaþ for nān."

[@PackerBacker23]

Thoughts on the new animation?

[@downindeep369]

I don't think they were saying that castles are crazy and something that they couldn't build. Rather it was something that would not be built in England cuz they didn't need to defend from the locals

[@adrianmroz959]

can you react to napoleonic wars every day with army sizes from italian mapper?

[@joshuawells835]

I like Tolkien's idea for an England if the Anglo-Saxon culture had persisted and then became a horse people.

[@PolymurExcel]

From my understanding, titles like Dukes and Earls represent your rank so to speak when it comes to medieval nobility. In England, the order from highest to lowest is: Duke, Marauess, Earl, Viscount, and Baron. I think Lord and Lady were just general terms ti address nobility.

[@Inquisitor-Beals]

I actually stopped William the conqueror in a country role play once and prevented the normanization of Britain. After that my nation was called kingdom of the Bretons aka England

[@alexschusch7906]

Hey terry, could you react to the new lavader video about why Wilhelm II got rid of Bismarck?

[@Lord_Reavous]

I would assume that horses were just as valid a target as any. If you brought dogs, them too. I mean there were pikes designed specifically to impale horses charging. Also--yes most normies have no clue the order or rank in nobility and sometimes regions use names that are different for the same position. This is how Dune has a baron with more power than a duke which is silly as a baron is the lowest rank with a whole rank in between. So landed titles went: Baron, Earl (or Count if your French/German), Duke, King.

[@vinylwolf0999]

How as a history teacher do you not recognise the Bayeux Tapestry?

[@jackthunderbolt4307]

You should watch "instruments of death: hastings" by element 18 and "could you survive the battle of hastings" by survive history Pretty please

[@owennoad-watson2820]

Southern Scotland was pretty well Anglicised in our real timeline, and that was with the complication of Normanisation further distancing the English from the Scottish. So taking the lowlands and integrating them more easily? Doesn’t seem too insane

[@mmcc5846]

Watson no it wasn't muppet

[@Jliske2]

4:40 that same story is true for my dads family as well

[@hollunk6969]

It was just the nobility that were French. - This is from an English person We also don't surrender in every major confrontation

[@lysimaquetokmok6755]

You surrendered in 1066 and let your whole culture get obliterated by french . Dont be mad bro.

[@lysimaquetokmok6755]

Also France has more military victories than England through its history...

[@hollunk6969]

@lysimaquetokmok6755 Yeah because the French got involved in the continent more often.

[@tibsky1396]

Of course, it is known the Brits always fought bravely until the last drop of blood of their allies... Especially when it was necessary to fight against a major continental power. Whether it was the France of Louis XIV and Napoleon, or Bismarckian Germany and the Third Reich. Without it, they would remain hidden behind their naval blockades, waiting for better fortune.

[@hollunk6969]

@@tibsky1396 sounds like we made the smart choice if anything

[@josephvincent4791]

Edward was a bad example to pick here as it is actually an anglo-saxon name.

[@alanwadey2848]

I'm no expert, but I'm pretty sure that Romans left before the Saxons came over and that the Clets were not the original inhabitants of Britain.

[@benwillis5566]

Mine started in German at first... I thought it was like the History Buffs episode where he was speaking Japanese at first and switched to English.

[@hellsSG]

FIRST BAAAAH. Mr. Terry we

[@jimb9063]

Good God Sir! With a title like that I thought we'd lost Trafalgar and had a guillotine in Piccadilly! Drawn closer to the Southern European Latin Catholic world or remaining a North European Scandy/Germanic Celtic mix? Flat pack furniture, close harmony singing, properly funded social security, royalty who live like "normal" people, happiness. Damn. Generally speaking, the 'Danish' Norse came to England, 'Norwegian' to Scotland and Ireland, and the 'Swedish' went east and south. Some of those went down to the Black Sea, across to Constantinople and became the Varangian bodyguards. It's thought they left the graffiti in the Hagia Sofia.

[@nuraryhyonx2677]

this a question is the Anglo-Saxon and the Northman's (the Vikings ) the same group of people

[@TheBandit025Nova]

And They’re more German now than English and French

[@kineuhansen8629]

i need to get my dna tested i think it could be alots of fun t lern my haritage special since i am bit worried that i am close related to that famous austrian painter

[@tylarjackson7928]

I can't tell what you're saying when you talk over the video during the ad breaks man. At least turn it down or pause or whatever please

[@JoeeyTheeKangaroo]

If the Normans never invaded it would be great. No Southerners, just me and my northern friends.

[@omegamanrad]

Became french? Surrendered in both WW 🤣💀

[@tiberiusbrain]

Ah, a meme-historian 😂 there is more to history then repeating the same hollow stuff, man

[@lysimaquetokmok6755]

Easy to say when you live on an island..

[@lysimaquetokmok6755]

Also, when france surrendered in WW1? The average IQ on this channel is very low.

[@tibsky1396]

Both ? "The Victory of the Entente in 1918 is the triumph of the French trucks over the German Railways"_ Erich Ludendorff.

[@thedarkmasterthedarkmaster]

@@tiberiusbrain it's a joke