Yes, he was Anglo-Saxon but raised in Normandy in exile. This is basically what led to the Norman Conquest. Edward was the next to last Anglo-Saxon king and the last directly descended from Alfred the Great. He was dominated as king first by Earl Godwin of Wessex, his wife's father, later by Harold Godwinsson his brother in law. Godwin he hated because he earlier murdered his older brother. He may or may not been a latent homosexual, but he did learn to love his wife at least Platonic. They had no children, and when Edward died he was succeeded by his brother-in-law Harold. The Godwinnsson's were half Danish on their mothers side. Earl Godwin had served both Canute the Great and his son Hardacanute. Edward had lifelong attachments to Normandy, William the Conquer claimed he promised him the throne after his death. Whether or not this was true, it was the basis of the Norman Conquest. And yes he did Regine from 1042 till 1066. Harold regined less than a year until killed at Hastings in October of 1066. Even in the 1960's some people in England still posted his obituary as the last true English king in the London papers on the anniversary of his death. As far as I know it may still be done.
2006-11-04 17:12:56
·
answer #1
·
answered by Marc h 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
Reign June 8, 1042 – 4 January 1066
Born c. 1002–1005
Islip, Oxfordshire, England
Died January 4, 1066
Buried Westminster Abbey
Predecessor Harthacanute
Successor Harold Godwinson
Consort Edith of Wessex
Father Ethelred the Unready
Mother Emma of Normandy
2006-11-04 16:21:29
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
He was called the Confessor" because of his religious disposition. He wanted to be a monk and was living in a monastery when he was dragged blinking onto the throne. He took the traditional vow of poverty, chastity and obedience. He evidently was obedient to the degree that he observed chastity (hence no offspring), though true poverty of the mendicant species was a little difficult for a monarch.
2006-11-05 01:45:21
·
answer #3
·
answered by john s 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
wasn't aware there was a controversy of him having existed or not. He's fairly well documented in several sources - Anglo-Saxon Chronicles, half a dozen historians of that time period, the Bayeux Tapestry which was woven 2 years after his death. He built the first West Minster Abbey and his body is buried there.
2006-11-04 22:28:39
·
answer #4
·
answered by samurai_dave 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes, but he won't admit to it. All the photographs have disintegrated. Does anyone really exist?
2006-11-04 16:21:35
·
answer #5
·
answered by gone 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
yes he was born in 1003, no pictures only paintings
2006-11-04 16:15:01
·
answer #6
·
answered by IndyPunkOne 2
·
0⤊
0⤋