Is it true that ceaser was the only person to successfully invade britain?

Question

I learned recently since im studdying ancient rome that ceaser wanted to conquer gual and he pretty much did and went to britain and invaded with i think was it 20 thousand troops? And no one else has ever done this that means Napoleon and Hitler

Answer 1

The Normans were the last people to successfully invade England, in 1066. The Vikings and other Germanic/Danish groups had also invaded many times- it was against such an army that the legendary King Arthur- or the man that inspired the story- fought about 800 years earlier. In Roman times, the British did not really have a national identity in any way- they were more a collection of Celtic tribes with no wider allegiance.

But no country has managed to invade England since 1066- a remarkable record, as it was attempted quite a number of times.

Answer 2

Great Britain has been successfully invaded twice since then.
In 1066 ad the Normans under William the Conquerer beat the forces of Harold King of England at the Battle of Hasting and took all the land from the English.
In 1688 the Dutchman William of Orange landed with his german and dutch army at Torbay with the help of a party of traitors in the English Parliament who were opposed to James II.
The English army set off to repel the invasion but took fright at Salisbury and ran away. William entered London unopposed.

Answer 3

Julius Caesar circumnavigated Britain and landed there. He had only 10 legions to conquer Gaul, let alone occupy Britain. I seem to remember that Claudius finally completed subjugating Britain to a Roman province. The Romans remained until AD 444, when the needs of defense in Europe led Rome to withdraw the last of the legions. Roman cities and citizens remained there, but they were defenseless against marauders.

Answer 4

Great Britian has been successfully invaded once and that was in 1066 a.d. when William the Conquerer aka William the Bastard, aka William the 1st of England did it with his Norman Army. He is of French roots. Queen Elizabeth can trace her genealogy back to him.

Answer 5

In 1066, William of Normandy, later called William the Conquerer and William I, successfully invaded England, and he and his people and their language became part of England permanently.

I never have heard of any English historian ever accusing him of being unnecessarily nice, but he was effective, even statesmanlike. Maybe his mother should have taught him when he was young not to be so cruel, ruthless, power-hungry and money-grubbing.

"Billy, money and power aren't everything," she might have admonished. "No, Mom, but they're the ONLY thing," he might have replied.

The illegitimate son of the Duke of Normandy, after his father died he somehow legitimized his claim to the Duchy of Normandy. And, just as soon as he was in solid there, Billy started telling everybody that he had a legitimate claim to the throne of England-- that King Edward the Confessor had promised him the throne, and, not only that, but Harold Godwinson, who was sworn in upon Edward's death in 1066, had once sworn allegiance to him. He said that it made his blood boil to think that Godwinson had the nerve to claim to have the right to rule England-- just because he was a native Anglo-Saxon with a claim to the throne, and the Witan, the Anglo-Saxon group that normally took care of such matters, picked him and had him sworn in!

History doesn't care who won the debate, it simply records who won the battle. William the Conquerer beat the troops of Harold Godwinson at Hastings on October 14, 1066. Maybe as a result of William's conquest, "Bill", already a common English name, became the number one name in England, and the name "Harold", the name of the loser, quickly became less popular.

If the King of Norway-- also named Harold!-- had not invaded England while William was waiting to cross the English channel with his invading force, who knows who would have won the Battle of Hastings? But William's fresh troops landed at Pavensy two days after Anglo-Saxon King Harold Godwinson beat Norwegian King Harold Hardrada at Stamford Bridge on September 25, 1066.

William defeated the Anglo-Saxon army at Hastings three weeks later, and Harold Godwinson and his brother died in the battle. This, and merciless suppression of any rebellion, ended Anglo-Saxon claims to the throne.

In the long run, the Norman dialect of French blended with the native Anglo-Saxon speech into one language within a single generation, gave birth to modern English, because, in the short run, William proved his effectiveness as a ruler. Besides being ruthless toward rebels, his shrewd rulership including a good census and taxation system. William combined Norman-French law with native Anglo-Saxon legal practices. And taking power away from local lords in order to make the central government ---him!-- more powerful, helped quite a bit, too.

Britannia records: : .."only two Anglo-Saxon barons that held lands before 1066 retained those lands twenty years later.
...He died as he had lived: an inveterate warrior. He died September 9, 1087 from complications of a wound he received in a siege on the town of Mantes."

Answer 6

No the Angles, Saxons, Normans all did it and stayed, and If the Vikings had wanted to settle the land, they could have also.

Answer 7

No he failed however Emporer Claudius succeded.