Meet real William the Conqueror, the Duke of Normandy who reshaped England

But how did an illegitimate Norman boy become the founder of England’s new ruling dynasty? That’s a central question posed in the new BBC series King and Conqueror, that tackles William the Conqueror’s role in the turbulent and dramatic run up to the events of 1066.

Who was Willam the Conqueror?

William the Conqueror was the first Norman king of England, whose reign overhauled the country’s politics, aristocracy and relationship with Europe.

Born the illegitimate son of Duke Robert I of Normandy, William became duke as a child. He fought to secure his rule in a violent and unstable duchy with the support of his wife Matilda of Flanders.

In 1066, he claimed the English crown after the death of Edward the Confessor, arguing that Harold Godwinson had broken an oath to support his succession. William’s victory at the battle of Hastings marked the end of Anglo-Saxon rule.

As king, William violently suppressed rebellion to emphasise his power, most brutally during the Harrying of the North. He also restructured the Church, redistributed land to Norman lords and ordered the Domesday Book in 1086.

His rule bound England to Normandy and initiated four centuries of close ties to continental Europe. His death in 1087 left a legacy that defined the English monarchy for generations.

The rise of William’s family and the Dukes of Normandy

By the early 11th century, Normandy was largely shaped by two competing forces: its Viking past, and its evolving place within the feudal politics of France.

Just over a century before William’s birth, the area that would soon become Normandy was a buffer zone on the edge of Carolingian control. “It was an originally Viking settlement, which was created into a territorial principality, which became Normandy,” says historian David Bates on an episode of the HistoryExtra podcast.

To curb repeated Norse raids up the River Seine in what is now France, the country’s monarch King Charles the Simple of West Francia struck a deal in AD 911 with a Viking leader named Rollo. In exchange for land around Rouen, Rollo agreed to be baptised, swear loyalty to the king and defend the Seine valley from further Viking attacks.

• Read more | When was the Viking Age?

Rollo’s descendants, who would agree to adopt France’s titles and language, became the dukes of Normandy. They ruled as quasi-independent magnates with only nominal ties to the French crown.

But despite their growing integration into French aristocratic culture, they still retained their own distinct martial identity: military ambition, legal innovation and castle-building became central to their power. As Bates explains, “there was of course some memory of their Viking past.”

This shaped the Norman identity and, by the early 11th century, Normandy was densely fortified and, therefore, militarily effective. Its dukes were patrons of reform-minded monasticism, close to Rome and increasingly influential. This was the context that William would be born into.

Why was he called William the Bastard?

William was born in either 1027 or 1028, the only son of Duke Robert I of Normandy and a woman named Herleva, who was “probably the daughter of a tanner – someone of lower social status”.

His parents’ union wasn’t consecrated by the Church, which made William bastardus in Latin, a label that would dog him throughout his life.

When did William become Duke of Normandy?

When his father died in 1035 – while returning from a pilgrimage to Jerusalem – William inherited Normandy. He was just seven years old.

With Robert’s death came an almost complete collapse of central authority. Rival Norman barons, some of whom questioned the legitimacy of the succession, seized land and turned to private warfare. Several of William’s guardians were assassinated, and the young Duke was moved frequently to keep him safe.

That William survived at all is surprising, and he owed it in part to the support of King Henry I of France. Henry initially acted as William’s protector, helping him to secure the ducal throne against the rebellious Norman barons. The most important instance of this support came in 1047, when Henry fought alongside William at the Battle of Val‑ès‑Dunes, helping to suppress a major rebellion.

William’s victory at Val‑ès‑Dunes, alongside his king, allowed him to begin seriously asserting central authority, rebuilding ducal institutions and strengthening his control of the duchy.

Over the following decade, William acted decisively to suppress revolt, assert feudal rights and place his own supporters in positions of power.

His military campaigns were complemented by a programme of ecclesiastical reform, especially through his support of Benedictine monasticism. He built and endowed abbeys at Caen, Fécamp and Jumièges, aligning himself with both the papacy and the wider reform movement in the Church.

William and Henry I of France

As William’s power in Normandy grew, it threatened the balance of power in northern France, and his alliance with Henry I deteriorated in the early 1050s.

By the mid‑1050s, Henry had allied with Geoffrey Martel, Count of Anjou, one of William’s main rivals, and the two launched several campaigns against Normandy.

William defeated these invasions, most notably at the Battle of Mortemer in 1054 and at Varaville in 1057. Bates explains: “it was a manifestation of something that was becoming very clear: William was good at war.”

Yet William’s success was as much about circumstance as his military prowess, as both Henry and Geoffrey died in quick succession.

“Suddenly the world has changed radically, and the two rivals, believe it or not, were succeeded by children,” says Bates.

William and Matilda: what was their relationship like?

William’s marriage in around 1050 to Matilda of Flanders, the daughter of Count Baldwin V, cannily expanded his alliances. Despite initial opposition from the Pope (due to close familial relationship between the couple) the marriage was sanctioned after penance.

“Matilda becomes increasingly prominent in the 1050s,” explains Bates. “It is a very successful marriage. It's a very important feature in their lives.”

Matilda was also a capable and active consort in her own right. “Matilda is left in effect as the ruler of Normandy in 1066,” says Bates. Her name also appears in charters as a co‑signatory, reflecting her recognised authority.

Together, they had at least nine children, four of whom were sons: Robert Curthose, William Rufus, Richard (who died young), and Henry: all future players in Anglo-Norman politics.

What was William’s claim to the English crown?

William's interest in England’s affairs stemmed from family and politics.

Edward the Confessor, who ruled England from 1042 to 1066, had spent much of his formative life (roughly from 1016 to 1041) in exile at the Norman court, after his family was ousted by Danish rule. During this period, he developed close ties with Norman aristocracy and ecclesiastics. He spoke Norman French and retained Norman clerics and courtiers after his accession.

And according to Norman claims, Edward himself had promised William the English throne, likely in the early 1050s. “I think William made a journey to England in the year 1051, in which, so he claimed, he was promised the succession to the English kingdom by Edward the Confessor.”

Whether that promise was ever actually made – or whether it was retroactive propaganda from later Norman sources – there are plausible reasons why Edward might have considered William to be best-placed for the role.

It’s possible that Edward regarded the Norman ducal family with trust, perhaps more so than the boisterous and powerful Anglo-Saxon nobility that he contended with as king of England.

Edward’s reign was dominated by the Godwin family, particularly Earl Godwin of Wessex and, later, his son Harold Godwinson. Edward had a tense relationship with the Godwins, culminating in their exile in 1051 and swift return in 1052, which left Edward politically weakened. During the brief period of their exile, Edward may have looked abroad to William as a way of reasserting royal authority.

Also, Edward had no children and, as he aged, the question of succession became increasingly urgent. Promising the crown to a continental ally like William might have served both as a hedge against unrest in England and a means of asserting control over the succession; at least in theory.

When did William meet Harold?

The one meeting between William and Harold that we can be sure of occurred in 1065, when Harold, the most powerful English noble, was shipwrecked in Normandy and taken into William’s custody.

By this point, Harold was Earl of Wessex and the leading nobleman in England, second in power only to King Edward. According to Norman chroniclers, Harold travelled across the Channel on a mission related to Edward’s succession, possibly to confirm Edward’s earlier promise that William would inherit the throne.

English sources make no mention of such a mission, and some later writers suggest Harold’s voyage was prompted instead by a family matter in Ponthieu. Whatever its purpose, the journey brought Harold directly into William’s orbit for the first time.

When Harold arrived on the Norman coast in 1064, he was reportedly shipwrecked off the coast of Ponthieu and captured by Count Guy of Ponthieu, who held him for ransom. It was William who secured Harold’s release, either through negotiation or by paying Guy compensation. The Bayeux Tapestry depicts William ceremoniously welcoming Harold into Normandy.

During Harold’s stay under William’s watch, the two men campaigned together in Brittany to support William’s ally, Duke Conan II, against a rebellion. Harold fought alongside William’s troops, distinguishing himself in battle and earning praise from the Norman duke. The joint campaign strengthened the personal ties between them (at least, temporarily) and demonstrated Harold’s military competence.

Did Harold give his sworn oath to William?

One of the most infamous and contested episodes of Harold’s visit to Normandy is depicted in the Bayeux Tapestry: Harold swearing a solemn oath to William while placing his hands on what appear to be two reliquaries.

According to Norman sources such as the priest William of Poitiers, this oath bound Harold to support William’s claim to the English throne upon Edward’s death, and to uphold William’s interests in England.

The dramatic staging of this event, with sacred relics hidden beneath a cloth and revealed only after the oath, emphasised the sacred and binding nature of Harold’s pledge in Norman eyes.

Under medieval custom, an oath sworn on holy relics was considered irrevocable; breaking it could be framed as a mortal sin. Whether Harold made the oath freely or under duress remains uncertain, but it became central to William’s justification for invading England in 1066.

What was William’s claim to the English crown?

Edward the Confessor died on 5 January 1066, leaving no heir. The next day, Harold Godwinson was crowned king of England – a decision supported by the Witenagemot, the English council of nobles.

William viewed this as a betrayal. He asserted his claim that Edward had promised him the throne and that Harold had sworn to support him. He therefore denounced the English election as invalid and unjust. “Whatever one makes of the actual dispute, I'm quite prepared to accept that he believed he'd been named as Edward's successor,” says Bates. “I think it was almost a matter of personal honour.”

But it wasn’t just William who had a claim; at least two others had legitimate reasons to feel entitled to the throne.

Harald Hardrada asserted that Magnus I of Norway had been promised the English crown by Harthacnut, Edward the Confessor’s half-brother, in a mutual succession pact. When Harthacnut died in 1042, Magnus never pursued the claim, but Harald considered it valid, especially after Magnus’s death.

With the support of Tostig Godwinson, Harold’s exiled brother, Hardrada led his own invasion. His failure – defeated at the battle of Stamford Bridge by Harold – is seen as the traditional end of the Viking Age.

Another with a strong claim was the closest blood relative of Edward the Confessor: Edgar Aetheling, a great-nephew of the king and a descendant of the royal house of Wessex. However, Edgar, then only 14 or 15 years old, lacked the political backing or military support to press his claim.

Crucially for his claim to the English throne, William obtained papal backing from Pope Alexander II, who sent a consecrated banner for the invasion, framing the conquest as a righteous cause. This support helped William recruit troops, ships and financing from across Normandy and neighbouring regions.

He was now more than a regional duke pursuing personal ambition; he had become a sanctioned leader of a vital religious campaign.

The Norman invasion of England and the battle of Hastings

On 28 September 1066, William landed at Pevensey in Sussex. His fleet is estimated at 600 ships and a force of 7,000 to 8,000 men, including Normans, Bretons, Flemings, and French mercenaries.

He quickly established a fortified base and began raiding the surrounding countryside.

Meanwhile, Harold Godwinson had just defeated a major invasion in the north by King Harald Hardrada of Norway and his exiled brother Tostig, at Stamford Bridge on 25 September. Forced to march south depleted and exhausted, Harold confronted William at Hastings on 14 October.

The battle of Hastings was fought from morning to dusk. Harold’s forces fought from the high ground in a traditional shield wall formation, while William’s mixed infantry and cavalry launched repeated assaults. After several hours of stalemate, feigned Norman retreats reportedly lured English troops into disorder. In the final assault, Harold was killed.

His death led to the collapse of concerted English resistance. Though not crowned immediately, it was at Hastings that William had effectively won the throne.

The Norman Conquest and reorganisation of England

William was crowned King of England in Westminster Abbey on Christmas Day, 1066. But his Norman Conquest was far from complete. Resistance – led by figures like Hereward the Wake – persisted for years, and indeed nearly toppled the new king.

Such was the scale of the revolt against new Norman rule, Bates says, that William “was facing a moment towards the end of 1069 when everything he wanted to accomplish and believed he had been accomplishing was likely to be destroyed”.

The most infamous episode was the devastating Harrying of the North, during which William laid waste to large parts of Yorkshire and the Danelaw, leaving vast areas utterly destroyed and depopulated. Contemporary chroniclers described famine, scorched villages and fields sown with salt. It was a calculated move to quash any further resistance.

To consolidate power, William rebuilt England’s aristocracy almost entirely. Over 4,000 Anglo-Saxon landholders were replaced, with most of the country’s land given to a smaller group of around 200 Norman lords. Castles, including motte-and-bailey structures, were built in major towns to secure military control.

The Church was also restructured. Archbishop Stigand (the last Anglo-Saxon Archbishop of Canterbury) was removed and Lanfranc, a Norman reformer, was appointed as his replacement. Thus, the English Church was brought into alignment with continental practice and papal reform ideals.

In 1086, William commissioned the Domesday Book, a detailed survey of landholding and resources. It remains the most complete record of any European society in the Middle Ages and a testament to William’s administrative accomplishment.

How did William the Conqueror die?

William’s later reign was consumed by disputes in France. His eldest son, Robert Curthose, rebelled repeatedly over the control of Normandy. Relations with the French king and other nobles became tense, and William returned to the continent frequently to defend his ducal lands.

In 1087, while campaigning in the Vexin, William suffered injuries during a raid. He died in Rouen on 9 September 1087. According to one account, his bloated corpse burst during the burial in Caen, where he was laid to rest in the Abbaye-aux-Hommes, a monastery he had founded.

Who succeeded William the Conqueror as king?

Wiliam the Conqueror's lands were divided after his death: his son Robert inherited Normandy, while William Rufus took the English crown, becoming William II.

This separation of realms would lead to decades of rivalry between his sons.

Despite the short-term turbulence that followed his death, William’s conquest permanently transformed England’s political and cultural trajectory. The Anglo-Saxon elite was utterly supplanted, a new aristocratic language was put in place and the legal structures that underpinned society were reshaped.

But perhaps his most enduring legacy was geopolitical: William bound England to Normandy, and the wider affairs of continental Europe. For the next four centuries, English monarchs would hold territory in France integrating the country into the web of Franco-Norman aristocracy, leading to complex cross-Channel loyalties and confrontations.

William redirected the shape of England’s trajectory and the age of the Anglo-Saxons ended with his coronation. A new English identity took shape. It was now time for the rule of the Norman kings.

1066: The battle for England

Member exclusive | The year 1066 is the most famous in English history, but there's a lot more to the story than one bloody battle at Hastings. In this four-part series, medievalist Marc Morris talks David Musgrove through the full story of the Norman Conquest.

Watch all episodes now

King and Conqueror is streaming on BBC iPlayer now. For more content like this, check out the best historical movies of all time as chosen by historians and ranked by you, history TV shows and films to stream tonight, and our picks of the new history TV and radio released in the UK this week