Firstly Gurlygurl20000 is totally off the mark. William the Conqueror (William Duke of Normandy) did not invade England to give them Independence from Celts, and certainly not Romans whose Empire had had crumbled well before Oct 14, 1066.
After Edward the Confessor (Anglo-Saxon King of England) died, William claimed the throne of England for himself. However Saxon King Harold II claimed the throne of England for himself. William raised an army and invaded and defeated Harold to claim the crown on Oct 14, 1066 at the Battle of Hastings.
So Gurlygurl20000, it was not for independence or anything like that. It was for the typical reason so many people died throughout history, for the betterment of royalty.
The British royal family started the same way that any of the royal houses of the world started, and continued throughout history. They were the best at murder, deceit, theft, corruption, etc. They had no morals and were willing to do anything and were way more violent than anyone else.
2007-01-23 04:18:46
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
0⤋
There was no British Royal family prior to the Union of Crowns in 1606, before that there were seperate dynasties in Scotland and England. The dynasty ruling England, the Tudors, ran out of legitimate heirs so the crown of England was offered to the king of Scotland as his mother, Mary had been a cousin of Queen Elizabeth. James VI of Scotland became James I of the new United Kingdom.
2007-01-24 23:18:30
·
answer #2
·
answered by freebird 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
I suppose it depends on whether you mean the first British Royal family or the current British Royal family...
In the first case, yes, it was the family which first managed to take over all the smaller kingdoms and make them part of one unified country.
In the case of the current British Royal family, they were a group of German nobles (the Saxe-Coburgs) who married in (Prince Albert) then changed their name during WW1 to avoid anti-German sentiment.
Given the tendency of European Royal families to inbreeding, they were probably already related. Previous Royal houses have come from Holland, France, Scotland etc.
2007-01-23 02:13:38
·
answer #3
·
answered by Benny Blanco 2
·
2⤊
0⤋
Whatever they had been in the past, is not so important. But they have made the British nation as no. 1 nation in the world. Rulers of the world.
So don't be thankless, British coming generations must be thankful to them.
2007-01-24 00:21:54
·
answer #4
·
answered by Ishfaq A 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Pretty much. It all began long ago when England was separate pockets of land ruled by whoever had invaded that area last. Once they had become settled in the one area, they then looked round to the neighbouring areas, fought their leader then took their land so you are right to a certain extent.
2007-01-23 01:30:44
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
It started out as the game "I'm the King of the Mountain!"
2007-01-23 03:07:50
·
answer #6
·
answered by poutine 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yup that's right - they were the biggest bullies and had more men to bully more people.
2007-01-25 00:03:37
·
answer #7
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
no,no,no,no,no!!!!! the so called British rein was created by a man called William thresingston 356AD then so on!!!11
2007-01-24 08:19:20
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
No, not quite, the British monarchy that we know today started in 1066 when William the Conquerer fought for Britain to have independence and not being rule of the Celts or Romans. Prior to this the Celts had tribes and had their warrior kings and queens such as Boudica. So it's really in the British people's blood to have a monarchy.
2007-01-23 02:00:12
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
5⤋
thats right they were the mafia of there day, sitting in a big house with locked gates! people with guns guarding them 24/7!infinate amount of money! they got it sorted there havent they?
2007-01-23 01:29:22
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋