Talk:Morcar

Untitled

Where on earth did the author find evidence that Morcar 'swore fealty' to William in September? Why would he undermine the legally elected and recognised King Harold, to whom he owed everything, ie Harold confirmed and supported his elevation to Earl in 1065 ( whilst sacrificing his own brother Tostig to avoid civil war)for a complete outsider (William) who had absolutely no legitimate claim to the throne, no following or power base in England? Also his sister Aldgyth, was married to King Harold and pregnant with the heir to the throne, so he had a binding and bloodline investment in supporting the success of the Godwinson dynasty, why would he undermine that too?

Also we have more nonsense about the 'superiority' of Norman arms- Why did William wait 16-17 days holed up and hiding behind defences near Hastings after landing, without striking out to Winchester or London? If they had been so superior at the battle why did it take them all day the defeat the English army where many of the best elements had been lost at Stamford Bridge and it had also made a round trip of over 400 miles in the space of a month? The truth is the Normans could not break the Saxon line no matter what they used and they came within an ace of defeat, first when the left Breton wing collapsed and nearly rolled up the entire army after an English piecemeal right wing charge around midday, and ONLY finally broke the English line when Harold was unluckily struck down very very late in the day- if the battle had ended in a 'draw' then William would have been defeated, trapped, without hope of reinforcement, whilst Harold's army would have gathered strength from the arrival of more distant recruits and the approaching Northern armies of Edwin and Morcar, plus the English fleet had been dispatched to take the Normans in the rear. William was, yes a very brave man to risk all in invading, but he was supremely lucky to win on the day.

Chronology of events

Morcar's article says, "In 1065, the Northumbrians revolted against their Earl Tostig, who was replaced by Morcar" and at the top of the page it says, "He was himself the earl of Northumbria from 1065 to 1066, when he was replaced by William the Conqueror with Copsi."
Simple timeline:
* 1065 Tostig deposed, Morcar installed
* 1066 Morcar deposed Copsi installed.
However, on Copsi's page it says that in March 1067 copsi travelled to Barking, paid Homage to Harold and, "In return, William made Copsi earl of Northumbria" when according to Morcar's page he already is earl of Northumbria and has been since the previous year.
The question then is when exactly was Copsi made earl of Nothumbria? Was it a) soon after the invasion to depose Morcar, and so Copsi travelled to Barking to pay homage to the man who made him an earl, or b) after the battle of Hastings, Copsi sees which way the wind blows so pays homage to William I at Barking and is rewarded with the title of earl of Northumbria?
It would of course help if articles had inline citations so that we could tell which "facts" are supposed to come from which sources and then check for ourselves. But, you know, whatever. Cottonshirtτ 05:16, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

I'm rather confused by the chronology as well. The article states that he ceased to be the Earl of Northumbria in 1066, but then it is said he and his brother Edwin "fled William's court and returned to their earldoms" to lead a rebellion in 1068. After submitting to William shortly afterwards they were both pardoned, implying he was allowed to retain his earldom right up until 1071 (like his brother) when they both fled William's court for the final time. 2A00:23C6:4182:9500:6802:D077:1AC9:E32C (talk) 01:43, 2 April 2021 (UTC)