Gone Medieval - Edgar Ætheling: The King Who Never Was

Episode Date: August 21, 2026

What if you were proclaimed King of England but never sat on the throne? In 1066, Edgar Ætheling possessed the strongest bloodline claim to the English crown, yet this Anglo-Saxon prince became a mere footnote in history.Matt Lewis and Professor Levi Roach bring this forgotten heir out of the shadows. Discover his extraordinary seventy-year life of rebellions, Norman resistance, and Crusade exploits.MOREEdward the ConfessorListen on AppleListen on SpotifyThe Queer Court of William RufusListen on AppleListen on SpotifyGone Medieval is presented by Matt Lewis. Audio editor is Amy Haddow, the senior producer is Anne-Marie Luff.All music used is courtesy of Epidemic Sounds.Gone Medieval is a History Hit podcastHistory Hit is part of Little Dot Studios, a Certified B Corp™Watch Matt and Eleanor's new documentary The Rise of the Plantagenets by subscribing to History Hit. Sign up to History Hit for hundreds of hours of original documentaries, with a new release every week, PLUS early access ad-free podcasts. Sign up at https://www.historyhit.com/subscribe.  Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From long-loss Viking ships and kings buried in unexpected places to tales of murder, power, faith, and the lives of ordinary people across medieval Europe and beyond. Join me, Matt Lewis, Dr. Eleanor Jarniger, and some of the world's leading historians as we bring history's most fascinating stories to life, only on history hit. With your subscription, you'll unlock hundreds of hours of exclusive documentaries

with a brand-new release every week exploring everything from the ancient world, to World War II. Just visit historyhit.com forward slash subscribe. Hello, I'm Matt Lewis. Welcome to Gone Medieval from History Hit, the podcast that delves into the greatest millennium in human history. We've got the most intriguing mysteries, the gobsmacking details and latest groundbreaking research from the Vikings to the printing press, from kings to popes to the crusades. We cross centuries and continents to delve into rebellions, billions, plots and murders to find the stories big and small that tell us how we got here.

Find out who we really were with Gone Medieval. This episode is the result of a listener suggestion from Leslie Schneider. Leslie, thank you. I owe you a chocolate bar of your choice for allowing me to do an episode on someone I've mentioned several times in other episodes as someone that I find intriguing. Etheling is an Anglo-Saxon word, meaning something like throne worthy. The Normans used the word Cleto to convey the same idea in a Latin form. It's perhaps the closest thing in this period to what would later become the title Prince.

What if you were an etheling for 70 or more years, though? What if you were proclaimed king but never sat on a throne? What if you lived an extraordinary life that was packed with adventure, achievements and challenges, but were never more than a footnote in the stories of other people? This is the fate that has befallen Edgar Etheling. His illustrious heritage singled him out as a man of destiny. The Norman conquest placed him directly in harm's way. His career is an incredible chronicle of bad choices,

near misses, attempts to forge his own path and of forgiveness he might not have expected to receive. I've wanted to bring this man out of the shadows for a long time and I finally get to grill Levi Roach, friend of the podcast, and Professor at the University of Exeter to try and shed some much-deserved light on Edgar's story. Welcome back to Gone Medieval, Levi. It's great to have you with us again.

It's great to be back. And I'm really looking forward to this one. So this is a topic that I've wanted to talk about for ages because it's someone that I find just so absolutely fascinating and there's so many things about him that I really want to explaining. I can't wait to get into this one with you. And just to kick us off, just to give the audience a sense of why I might find this so important and interesting. Why is Edgar Etheling someone that people should know about? So Edgar the

Atheling is kind of one of our near misses in British and English history. One of those could have been monarchs because he is of the direct West Saxon Royal Line, the traditional pre-conquest English Royal Line, and he survives the conquest. So he is the person in 1066 with the strongest claim to the throne, at least in terms of bloodline. And so he's the one who's kind of left out in the cold in a sense, but he also isn't killed in the action of that year. So he lives on thereafter and ends up also having a very significant afterlife. So his descendants would have a huge impact on not only English, but actually wider British history throughout the later 11th than well into the 12th centuries. Perfect. I'm even more excited now.

And so if we start at the beginning, what do we know about when and where Edgar is born? So Edgar himself is born to Edward the exile. And so this is the kind of crucial bit of the chain. Edward himself is the son of someone called Edmund Ironside, a brief monarch of England who rules briefly in 1016 and famously fights against King Canute, but ends up dying in that year probably of wounds received from them. So he's himself a son of King Ethelred, the infamous Ethelred the Unready. But that's how you go back to the traditional English royal line.

And so Ethelred's eldest remaining son when he dies is Edmund, this chap Edmund Dyerenside. He does indeed become king briefly. He has a son called Edward, who's known as the exile, because when Canute becomes king thereafter, he very sensibly goes into exile. Some of Edward's uncles are killed at this moment. So there is a kind of a pruning of the English royal line by Canute because they are his potential rivals. So Edward takes himself off to Hungary, nice and far away from the... reach of Canute and sets up shop there for the time being.

We don't really know a lot about what his plans are other than to get a safe distance away from Canute. But the fact that he gives his son the name Edgar. So Edgar's born in Hungary while he's in Hungary is very telling because Edgar is a traditional English royal name. So Edgar had been the father of Ethelred. So if we're kind of tracing this back, it is a direct delineal ancestor and it is a direct claim that would resonate with anyone in England and anyone within that familial context. So it suggests that Edward, whose own name is also a good royal name. There have been two previous Edwards on the English throne too.

He's giving his son the name Edgar. So nicely, not terribly, subtly signaling to all around him that he is of that family of royal status and he knows that full well. at the same time, when Edgar's born, it's about 10.5.2. We don't know exact details because they are often hungry and nobody in Hungary really knows or cares about them that much. And we don't have that many sources for Hungary in this period anyway. At that moment, the English throne is kind of firmly in other hands. There has been a period where Cnuton his heirs are ruling England. And then we have Edward the Confessor, also a relative, a blood relative of these individuals, himself, a son of Ethel Red, the Eust. and ready is by then on the English throne. So when he gets that name, when he's born, nobody necessarily knows that he could well be the best chance of successor to the English throne. At the same time, the choice of name signals

that he's well aware, that his father's well aware of their familial identity, and they've not given up necessarily all hope or all idea of ever returning to England and to their kind of claims to an inheritance there. Yeah, we did a great episode on Edmund Dynside with David McDermott. So we've kind of delved into his life a little bit, But I was going to say, as you alluded to at the end there, it's really interesting that his father, Edward the exile isn't, you know, picking a Hungarian name. He's not picking something obscure. He is very much positioning Edgar for the future as a member of the English royal family. You know, he's in exile in Hungary at the moment, but he's not forgetting where he's come from. And I guess that might hint that he might want to go back there sometime.

It certainly suggests he's not given up all chances. So it's hard to get into his head because we don't have that many sources from around. him, but one of the few indications we have is that very telling choice of his son's name and beyond a potential Hungarian name that he could have gone for, or he could have gone for a good Christian name, maybe something like Stephen, the first Christian king of Hungary that would have resonated there. He could have potentially chosen a German aristocratic name because there's significant German influence on the upper Hungarian aristocracy in this period. But again, he doesn't actually. Edgar isn't any of those things. It is only an English name. It's not one of those names that has different versions that you could easily Germanicize or, you know, turn into a convenient Hungarian alternative.

It is very much an English name and not just any English name, as I say. It is a name of his great-grandfather. So in that sense, it is directly staking a claim to succession from Edgar and to one of the most fondly remembered Kings of England as well. It should be remembered that Edgar's reign was hugely successful and often, look back to certainly in Ethelred's reign as a golden age. And that's something that Edward would have known full well and would have been aware of. So it's also not just kind of a random, let's just pick any good West Saxon royal name. That's a real name to conjure with. If people were thinking back to the good times, that would have been one of the names that would have been first to come to

their lips. Yeah. Yeah. It's kind of putting a lot of weight on his shoulders at birth, isn't it? How significant then? So the family does return to England in 1057. How significant a moment is that for Edward and Edgar? I think that's hugely significant because there's only really one reason for Edward the Confessor. This becomes very confusing here, I'm afraid, at this moment,

because we have two Edwards, both of whom are descended from the same line, who are uncle and nephew. Medieval naming patterns were not very original, shall we say. But they have that name actually because it is a good, redolent, dynastic name.

It's no coincidence. So Edward the Confessor is recalling Edward the exile, his nephew, and the reason for doing so is by now it is clear that he will not have any heirs of his own. Now, that's very clear indeed. It's probably been clear for already about five years, and it's starting to create political turmoil because we regularly see this in the Middle Ages with monarchs who don't have an obvious successor. They need to kind of sort something out because till they do, everyone, it's all a matter of force trading. Everyone's

trying to hedge their bets and decide who's the best kind of bet for the succession in the future. and the story of the succession really overhangs all of Edward the Confessor's reigns. He comes to the throne in his about age of 40 or so. So he's not a young man or certainly nearly 40. And the hope is that he'll have a child very soon. By now it's been about 15 years on the throne. Everyone knows it's not going to happen. And so what else are you going to do?

And he's played with other possible alternatives. He may well have dangled the throne to William of Normandy, the later conqueror. There is clearly a faction that is trying to line up behind. the Godwinson, so the sons of Godwinner. Of course, famously Harold becomes King in 1066. Edward, however, has never got on very well with that family. His wife is from them as a kind of political

alliance, but it's very clear that they have different interests, and partly the fact that he's never had a son makes those problems greater. Because if he has a son, they share an interest in that son succession, because it is also a son of their line through his mother. But the fact that they don't have a son actually then breaks apart this

alliance, and that's what we see happen famously in 10-5-2, where there is this big rebellion, and it's perhaps in that context, 1051, 1052 that he's dangled the throne to William of Normandy. By 1057, he's then clearly settled on an alternative plan. He's decided that perhaps Norman succession isn't going to work, maybe that it's not actually what he really wants either. And so this is the best way to preserve the traditional rights of his line. And that's very important, I think, to Edward, because Edward himself was denied the throne for much of his youth. So he's grown up in exile in Normandy, just like

Edward the exile went to exile in Hungary, he's escaped Canute in his regime. He's then successfully reasserted his rights in the teeth of opposition and those who would have sought to deny them for him. So once he knows that he can't have an air of his own, I think his main priority is to block the Godwinsons, frankly. And Edward the exile is the obvious solution. He's his nephew of the same direct bloodline. So impeccable credentials. He's also an adult, Edward the exile. So bring over Edward, my like-named nephew, line him up as successor.

The only problem is Edward arrives in England, and it's almost like this kind of terrible Highlander moment. There can only be one Edward in England. And Edward the Exile just offs and dies. So Edward, the confessor, thinks he's solved the successor problem. It's taken him years to get Edward over as well. It should be said. They've been sending messengers back and forth, doubtless perhaps offering reassurances, because these are people who are of the same line, but could also be rivals.

You know, Edward the Exile is the main other potential dynastic claimant to the third. throne. I was going to say it could be quite dangerous to have come back, couldn't it? Because the House of Wessex, it's not unknown for rival heirs to be kind of blinded or even killed on their return to England. So it must have been, Edward the exile must have been like, oh, is this a good idea? Should I go back? Exactly. And the English throne has not traditionally been divided, unlike some continental realms, at least up until the 10th century. So there's no real prospect for bringing him back and giving him half a kingdom or something like that, which I think is why Edward hasn't done this earlier. In a sense, it's almost the nuclear option. Because once he brings Edward the Exile back and lines him up, there is no

prospect for Edward to have children of his own. But by the mid-1050s, he's given up on that entirely, as has everyone else in the political class. He knows that isn't a goer. And so now he's having to go to plan B, as it were, or perhaps even plan C. But he clearly decides that this is the best goer that Edward the Exile is of impeccable denastic credentials. is of the royal line that Edward's done so much to preserve. So in that respect is preferable to a Norman interloper and is infinitely preferable to the Godwinsons who Edward has been locking horns with recently

and who he's kind of trying to keep out. So that's why he recalls Edward the exile. It all looks like, you know, everything's been fixed. He arrives in England, but then Edward dies. And that's the kind of catastrophic moment, really. Because for Edward, the confessor, he's not a young man. He is in his late 50s. Most members of his dynasty have died,

by this age already. So Edgar, for example, that great successful king, who Edgar the exiles, named after, died in his early 30s. So Edward the confessor can die any moment now. He needs a successor now. And the problem is that he has Edgar the Atheling then as the son of Edward the exile. It's a decent backup plan. And that's one of the good things about recalling Edward the exile is that he already has a son as well. So in a sense, you've got almost your air and a spare there. But they don't want to have to rely on the spare because what you really want is in the moment when you die as a monarch, your prospective heir to be a grown adult. So they can step into power smoothly, easily. They can be lined up for a few years. All the main aristocratic

factions can get behind them or if they don't really like them, at least can accommodate themselves to them. And so succession is as smooth as possible. But because Edward dies upon arriving on English wars, that's already scuppered. And so the kind of question is, now what do you do? You your clever backup plan is now no longer quite as secure and clever. Do you immediately go to Edgar or do you start entertaining something else entirely? Yeah. And how much of a sense then do we have of what Edward does decide to do? Because we know there's going to be chaos when Edward eventually dies.

There are going to be numerous claimants coming out of the woodwork, many of whom will at least claim that Edward has offered them the throne at some point. do we get any evidence during this period that Edgar is back in England before Edward the confessor dies, that he is really behind Edgar as his heir? Or is he still playing some kind of, you know, uncertain, maybe a power game with the idea of who's going to follow him? The absolute truth is we don't know with certainty. So traditionally earlier in the 10th century, we can often see lines of succession being set up in the witness lists to the diplomas, that is, charters granting land or legal rights, they sued by monarchs, because they have these

lists of those who were witnesses to the transaction, and they're very hierarchical, and periodically sons and airs, prospective errors, appear in these, typically with the title, Clito, which in Latin is the equivalent of the Old English Avaling, which basically means prince, if you will, in later parlance. It doesn't necessarily mean like the equivalent of what now would be the Prince of Wales, direct heir apparent. It can be accorded to multiple people, but it's only accorded to people who are throneworthy is the crucial point. And we typically see these kinds of Atholings, princes, appearing in their predecessors' charters. Not always, they don't have to appear. They're not like archbishops or things like that who always do so. But they tend to do so periodically

and in an order of hierarchy. So you can often see brothers and half-brothers, typically in order of birth. And that gives you an indication that everyone kind of knows. There might be a succession struggle. But in all cases prior to this, although there are many succession struggles, the person who's been first on those lists always ends up winning. So they seem to be kind of air-designate or as close to that as possible. Sadly, no athlings appear in the witness list to Edward's chargers. So we can't know from that, but that's negative evidence. There's plenty of charters from earlier years which have no affilings,

even though they've appeared in maybe a document issued shortly before or shortly after that. So the fact that they're not present is not in itself hugely meaningful. Presence is meaningful. Absence isn't always. And Edward doesn't issue that many of these documents in his later years anyway. So our sample size is very small. So I don't think we can read into that the fact that he's not been lined up. We just don't have positive evidence for it.

Where we do, though, the closest thing we have to a smoking gun is there is an entry in the Libre Vitae of the New Minster in Winchester. This is a very important monastery with traditionally close relations with the royal house. And we have an entry which has simply three names in it. It has Edward's name as himself, his wife Edith. and it has Edgar. And Edgar appears, and this is Latinate, because these Libre Vitae, they're recording who the monks will pray for,

whose souls they're praying for. And so they're done in Latin because that's the language of the liturgy, but it says Edgar Clito, in terms of the title. So it gives him that very telling title that otherwise is restricted in typical usage of this period

for throne-worthy individuals. And so that is a very strong indication that he's appearing there after 10-5-7 because his elder, his father isn't there, who we'd otherwise expect as part of this family. And it's a family entry. We regularly get families entering themselves to be prayed for together as a unit.

So it suggests a tight family unit of Edward, his wife Edith, and Edgar, his Clito, his Atheling, his prince, and, you know, connect the dots. That is our strongest indication that he's potentially heir apparent. He doesn't appear, according to the later Doomsday survey, to have been given lands as an Athling. And there's always were fiscal lands in early years that could be granted to them. But there's been a lot of upevil in this period. And Edgar's still quite young.

So we don't know when that entry is made. Perhaps around 10-6-2 or 3 is our best bet. But it really could be any time between 10-5-7 and 10-66. So it could be that he's five years old, at which point you might not have a quartered him those land. And it might even be that in 10-66, the fact that he's... is that Edward has been kind of caught a bit off guard, has become unwell, but died more suddenly than he anticipated. So there are a number, I think, of indications connecting all those dots, the effort he's gone to recalling his nephew. This appearance in this book of confraternity, this Libra Vitae, to me suggest that he does indeed then decide that, while the ideal would be my fully adult nephew, the next best thing is my nephew's son, who is at least a direct blood descendant of my father.

Ethel Red the Unready. He's here. He's in England and he's not the Godwinson. So it all seems to be coming together. So what we have, and it isn't a lot, seems to point towards him being increasingly lined up as air. And the kind of main detailed source that perhaps doesn't say this or the dog that doesn't bark is the life of Edward. But that is written in circles very close to his wife, Edith, who is of the Godwinson family. And in a sense is trying to play happy families and is trying to tell a narrative, partly written after these events, that plays down these tensions. And that suggests that Harold has been a good in all along as well, and that he and Edward are in fact both good and both singing from the same hymn. So I think there's good reason why that wouldn't go there

as a source. Yeah, yeah, interesting. So when we get to 1066 then, Edward, the confessor falls ill, dies very early in 1066. So Edgar is, what, around 30? maybe 14 at this point. Why doesn't he end up on the throne? Is this a symptom of his age or is this a symptom of a lack of clarity around his position as air or perhaps just the ambition of, in particular, Harold Godwinson at that stage? I suspect it could be a combination of all three. There are yet to be firm succession rules in this period.

So a degree of lack of clarity is normal and it must be remembered that in 1016, Knewit would become King of England by defeating everyone. else. So very recently might has made right in England and of course it would end up doing so in 1066 again as we all know. So there is that sense that while rules of succession

exist or while conventions rules is probably too strong there are conventions and there are claims that are stronger than others these aren't in themselves ironclad. There isn't a kind of a legal edifice as firm as there would be in the later middle ages. So I think that for start opens the cracks. What evidence we have, and as I mentioned, it is slim, I think does indicate that

Edward is preferring and angling for Edgar's succession. But I think for his plans, he's ideally hoping to live maybe a couple years longer because he knows 1314 is still quite young. 16, 17 is pretty much adult or near enough for the middle ages. But 1314 is a big ask when the main other person in England interested in throne, and everyone knows this, is Harold Godwinson. who is at the height of his powers, who's probably somewhere in his kind of 40s, a wily, highly experienced political operator. That is a big ask to put up a 13, 14-year-old.

And for Edgar's potential supporters, that's a big ask. Because the crucial thing is that Harold has been Earl of Wessex, so he's controlled massive lands second only in power to Edward himself, arguably in some senses more powerful than Edward, because Edward the confessors had that misfortune of himself growing up in exile. So hasn't had this kind of power network, hasn't grown up with it the way that Harold had. So Harold is hugely well connected. His brothers own lots of other earldom.

So as a family, they control close to half of England. And so if you're anyone else in England, some of the other earls are very wary of their ambitions. But are you going to risk it yet on Edgar? That's the question you have to ask because you don't want to back the wrong horse with a succession dispute. You'd much rather ring some concessions from Harold if you think he's inevitably going to win, then back the wrong guy. I mean, it's kind of like what we've just been seeing

with the Labor Leadership contest. Everyone knew who was going to win. So everyone started lining up behind Andy Burnham instead of contesting it because the potential other contenders weighed up their chances realized I'm not going to win this. I'm better off instead

striking a backdoor deal or something like that. Who knows what was actually going on? But it's kind of the same in the middle ages. People are clever with these things. They can tell when it's a done deal. And instead of fighting and losing, you'd much rather back the right horse,

make sure that you're on the right side of these things. So I think that's another hugely significant thing is that because Edward dies a bit earlier than maybe he's hoping, Edgar hasn't yet had enough experience, he hasn't been lined up enough, he hasn't yet been able to get that strength of support. The potential supporters look at this people like Edwin and Morcar

in the Midlands and in the North and just say, because they're the main alternatives to the Godwinson family, and just say, there's no way he's going to win this. why lose this and potentially risk exile or the other consequences of this? We will do the inevitable. The third bit is, and I've already kind of touched on so a little bit, is Harold himself,

who is hugely powerful, hugely experienced politically, also militarily, has been fighting in Wales, and crucially, he's on the spot. He's there when Edward dies. We don't know if Edgar is, but Harold is. So Harold is more powerful than Edgar, and Harold is right there. and he strikes while the iron is hot. Very tellingly, he is crowned and consecrated the day after Edward dies, quite possibly in the same church service at the same mass.

We don't know that for certain. That's kind of inference. Historians have often said that. But certainly this is inordinate haste. And it's important to note this. Normally English monarchs in this period are crowned and consecrated six months. six months to a year after their predecessor has died.

So Ethel Red the Unready rates the better part of a year. Edward, the confessor himself, once he becomes sole monarch, waits over six months before he's crowned and consecrated. You normally choose it for a major church festival.

You want the kingdom's great and good to be there to celebrate. You don't rush these things. It's kind of a bit like we've seen recently with Charles, you know. The queen was dead. Long live the king. We all know Charles is there.

Better to do it properly than to rush these things. This is the first time. in English history, we've had a monarch crowned and consecrated within days of his predecessor's death. And that is a massive break with convention, and there can be

only one real reason for that. And that's that Harold knows full well that his claims are weak, that Edgar and others, and of course William two are waiting in the rings. And so what he's doing is he's producing a coup. It's a clever coup d'emar. He's presenting

the English magnates also with a fait accompli. He's not waiting till all everyone assemble, and elects him formally. He's elected, technically speaking, they always have some kind of election, but it's by whoever happens to be there. It's they've not waiting for a big assembly. He's not letting anybody decide anybody else is going to be king but him. And so he's rushing through these things because he's aware that actually if he doesn't, the risks become ever greater than actually they might give some thought to this. Voices might start to be raised. The case of Edgar could be made more forcefully. So I think that's one of the other really.

telling piece of this puzzle that points to actually the fact that while Edgar is overlooked and that's no surprise in hindsight the threat he poses to Harold is not inconsiderable and Harold is clever enough to know that yeah yeah do we get much of a sense then of how

Edgar is treated during Harold's reign I mean it's not unusual during the Anglo-Saxon period is it for the crown to kind of flip-flop between uncles and nephews and stuff to avoid having someone too young on the throne but is Harold If Harold is wanting to get the throne into his family and his dynasty completely, Edgar is still a threat to him.

He clearly is. And the tricky thing here, as you mentioned, is we've had lots of fraternal succession or uncles to nephews in England before. And there is a very strong preference in pre-conquers England for adult successors. So often you'll prefer a younger brother to a monarch than his children, who might be, say, 13, 14, 15. But those children might later succeed themselves, not infrequently. There's a full awareness that they are of royal status. But the problem for Edgar is that Harold already has his own sons and is of a different family entirely. And crucially, entirely, because Edward the confessor never had children with Eda, who is of Harold's family. So that potential union of those families that could bring them together and bind them together never happens.

It's never completed. So there is a very real risk there. And in that sense, Harold is a massive risk to Edgar and his chances. But equally, Edgar, as long as he's around, is a big risk to Harold's heirs. because he again is of, he is the child of a royal line, whereas Harold is not an attritional royal line really at all. It has been a case, an obvious case here of might making right and of forcing things through, which, you know, must have rankled in some circles. There were plenty of people in England who liked the Godwinsons. There were plenty who didn't, as with any overbearing magnates.

So Edgar is the biggest threat to his reign. The fact that he survives Harold's reign is telling here. suggests that Harold isn't yet secure enough to get rid of him and that he feels secure enough that he doesn't have to leave England because he's still in England when Harold dies. We don't know if any kind of horse trading is going on, maybe, but again, it does suggest that Harold's hand isn't all that strong because if it was very strong,

you'd have suspected that he'd have bumped him off, frankly, at some point, and or that Edgar would have felt sufficiently threatened that he'd have left England and done that kind of pragmatic thing, whereas instead that doesn't happen. But unfortunately, Harold Rain is so brief. It is action-packed, but it's a flash in the pan, that it's very hard to discern what's going on here. And it's not helped by the fact that we don't have many of these royal chargers from this period.

So already Edward hadn't been actually issuing that many as monarch, which means we don't have many of these witness lists. Harold, we have none surviving. We only have one writ of his, a shorter form of charger without a witness list, crucially, which was issued for Gizzo of Wells. and that's probably because he's so busy he's not issuing a lot of these. That's one of the considerations. But the other crucial thing is his reign is overshadowed by William's conquest.

And William famously stakes his claim to the throne as the rightful successor to Edward. So Edward's charter stand a good chance of survival in William's reign. You can rock up to William's court saying, hey, Edward, your second cousin gave us these. And William will be happy to say, oh, well, I'll confirm those rights then. You rock up to court with a charter of Harold. and you're asking for trouble because in the conqueror's eyes, Harold has always been a usurper, was never a rightful king, was a tyrant.

So also the chances of survival of Harold's documents are extremely slim. If you're smart in the post-conquest years, you keep that one, that document hidden or if you don't burn it all together. So there is a real damnatio memoria of Harold, and that means that some of the documents he did issue, and he almost certainly did issue some,

that would have had these witnesses have gone, and the fascinating question would be, is Edgar there as Clito? Because if he was, I'd be saying they've struck a deal that Edgar and his supporters have kind of said, fine, we'll back you, but he's there apparent and Harold's gone along with it. And that is a plausible scenario.

Another plausible one is that hasn't happened. And Edgar is kind of biding his time, isn't yet feeling sufficiently threatened, but there is a kind of ongoing struggle happening behind the scenes, but that we don't see much detail of because the greater threats of people like Tosti and Harold Hardrada and William Conquer Rockup. And Edgar doesn't want those people conquering England either. So temporarily they all kind of come together pragmatically, but actually the power struggle is still going on. Yeah, yeah. So we get Harold obviously killed at Hastings before the end of 1066. And you do have this kind of weird moment where it seems that Edgar is sort of elected as the next Anglo-Saxon king of England. And obviously William is never going to stand for that.

And Edgar doesn't ever really sit on the throne. So do we get a sense of why he fails to become king? Is it simply that William, as a grown man, has too much military might? And so Edgar's rights are pushed aside again. It's a very good question. But it is very telling, as you say. So what happens is that, you know, there's that famous victory at Hastings, crucially for the conqueror, Herald is killed.

Because that's what he desperately needs. This is late in the campaign season. not be fighting against a united, united English opposition for much longer. And so Harold dying is great news for William and it comes close to sealing the deal, but crucially it doesn't yet. And this is one of the things that again in the classic narrative gets left off. What the remaining English do,

and particularly Edwin and Warcar, who had been part of the conflicts up in the north and fighting at Stamford and Fulford Bridge. So they've been part of defeating the Norwegian forces up in the north and kind of mopping up. So they're not at Hastings, crucially. They don't die. They are the most powerful English earls still around. They, the Archbishop of Canterbury Stigand, and the Archbishop of York, all are involved in the election of Edgar.

And that is highly significant because it suggests that they think he is a viable alternative to the conqueror. Now, whether or not in the cold light of day they think it's going to succeed is a good question. But if they thought it was completely hopeless, they wouldn't have done this. And another clear indication that some people see him as England's next king is the fact that the monks of Peterborough famously, they've elected a new abbot, brand. And they go to Edgar to have him confirmed as their new abbot. This ends up being a huge mistake because William never forgives them for this. Because this is an act in his eyes of treason. and I am now the rightful king of England.

And of course for William, this is a big issue, as big or bigger than it is for Herald, because in a sense it demonstrates that the emperor has no clothes on, because William's claim is that I am Edward's natural heir. But Edgar is by any measure a more natural heir to him. So he's a real threat for William. So there are these interesting hints. It is also significant at the same time that he's not consecrated. This could be because they're wanting to follow more traditional English convention here,

saying let's not rush this chaps. This mustn't be hasty, kind of, you know, the endish approach. But what ends up happening is that events overtake them. And I think that probably those who elect him always know that this is a bit of a long shot, a roll of the dice, but kind of worth giving it a go. Because who else are they going to rally behind? The only other options might be Edwin and Warcar. William and Monsbury does suggest they may have had their own eyes on the throne. And that could be one of the reasons why Edgar's kind of candidly.

isn't a goer, that the English force are not completely united around him, but frankly, even if they were, the best of England, the best and brightest, at least of southern England, have already been defeated in battle. Harold has been defeated and died. William is ascendant, has his forces marshaled, and he's marching on London, and he's crossed at Wallingford. And so I suspect that even if the English are united, this is a, let's see if we can make this stick. Let's see if we can rally enough forces behind. him. But ultimately, they quickly realize that it's too risky, that William's got too many forces. It's all happening too fast. And so what's telling is that first Stigand goes and submits to William and then a couple of weeks later the rest of those forces. So Edwin and Morkar, the earls, the Archbishop of York. And crucially, Edgar himself go and submit to the conquer at Brickhamsted. And this is what's famously recalled in Hertfordshire as this kind of national moment of submission. It's nothing of the sort because England doesn't have a unified leadership and that's part of the problem at this point. But it is the closest to it in the

sense that the two most powerful Earl still opposing him and the one other realistic prospect as King have all gone to William and submitted to him because they've decided that actually our best bet is working with him. That anything else is madness. And the fact that Edgar does this is especially telling because he has nothing to gain from William's succession. Clearly he can see the writing on the wall at this point. Yeah, and quite striking for this boy at still 14 maybe, that he's been set up as an opponent, a rival, a threat to Harold Godwinson. He survived that. And he's now been set up presumably largely by other people as a very significant and severe threat to William the Conqueror. His life is being constantly put in danger by other people

and the positions that he's thrown into. So what does he do now that William is He's submitted to William. Does he feel safe? I very much doubt it. The thing that he has on his side, but he may not yet be aware of, is that within Norman political culture, although it could be quite rough and tumble, actually just executing people when not in a conflict situation was increasingly not the done thing. This is the era where he starts seeing the development of what would later at least be known as chivalry. It's important not to kind of project too much bag. But one of the things that already is well established is the idea of killing aristocrats when not in a conflict situation, not on the field of battle, is seen as increasingly cowardly.

And this is you're kind of growing sense of espri decor and a kind of a sense of a class identity that transcends nationalities. And of course, in a sense, it's actually very useful for you, actually, if you're someone like William's. It also means that if you're at threat, that, you know, people shouldn't be trying to assassinate you. So that's probably one of the things that's slightly staying his hands is actually it would be a slightly cowardly act. It's fine to kill Harold on the battlefield, but it would be another thing just to execute Edgar now that he's submitted to me. And to some extent, William's been in a similar position himself,

hasn't he? You know, as a young Duke, his life was almost constantly under threat. And I just wonder whether there's a little bit of him that's like I see a bit of Edgar in, or my own position in where Edgar is now, and do I really want to kill him in the way that people tried to kill me? It's possible that there is a kind of a sense of civil. sympathy there. I'm wary of overplaying that because one of the things that William came out of his

youth with was such a hard-nosed approach to politics at the same time. And he does know that Edgar is a problem in that sense. And of course, we know how Williams reign ends with him ascendant. He doesn't want Edgar's life to end that way, shall we say, with him ascendant. But he may have seen, yes, a little bit of himself in Edgar. And as I say, I think he does have some of these principles that while he's hard-nosed and can be extremely, you know, brutal when it comes to dispossessing people who have opposed him, the fact that Edgar is submitted has been quite canny there. I think to some extent, at least initially it binds William's hands. At the same time, if I were Edgar, I would not be feeling very safe. My main threat to my life

and well-being and my own political ambitions is the person I've just submitted to. And he keeps him under lock and key. And we know this because when William returns to Normandy and 1067. And it's important to remember William remains very much Norman. He's conquered England, but he is not an Englishman. He likes England because it's wealthy and because it's prestigious. But he never spends time in England when he doesn't have to. So he's crowned on Christmas Day, 1066, you know, into 1067. The first thing he does then in, you know, 1067 then once he can, is return to Normandy, return home, show off my successes to, you know, and tell everyone, hey, look what I've done. But who does he bring with him under lock and key?

Edgar as well as Edwin and Morcar. So these people are too hot to handle. He knows that they are the main potential opposition. He's not dispossessed them of all their lands and rights, but he's also not going to leave them in England to foment rebellion while he goes back to Normandy. And so that's very telling because what happens, of course, in England while he's way is rebellion,

but crucially a rebellion that is not focused on Edgar. It's focused on the sons of Harold Godwinson in the southwest. And so they find other figureheads, But he has been successful in removing Edgar as a potential focal point for rebellion. So the fact that he's keeping them under lock and key shows that William is no idiot here, that Edgar is his biggest threat. And equally, if you're Edgar, you don't really want to be going to Normandy, the political heartlands of your main political enemy. You know, you may have made some kind of pragmatic arrangement, but you'd much rather be in England, ideally probably to foment rebellion, but even failing that. You'd feel much safer in England where there's a residual knowledge of the kind of what your bloodline means and a sense of loyalty and legitimacy that comes with it.

That's, of course, what makes him dangerous for William. That's why William doesn't let him do that. But if you're Edgar, you feel much safer in England where you feel like the leading magnates are unlikely to turn against me, actually, if anything might turn towards me. Yeah, yeah. I mean, to some extent, this is this part of Edgar's life is the most intriguing in that he does become embroiled in opposition to William. And he does position himself then as a very real threat to William. So I mean, how does he go about getting tied up in some of this resistance to William? So the exact chronology of this is frustratingly vague.

What we know is William comes back to England to face down rebellion. So once he hears of it in 1067, he returns. He marches down towards Exeter. There's the famous siege of Exeter. Exeter submits, so he sees off the thread of the Godwinsons, but almost immediately after that, perhaps even simultaneously with that, we start getting problems in the West Midlands as well and in the North Midlands. And it's at some point in all of this that Edgar escapes,

or perhaps is released. We don't know the full details of chronology, but at some point in 1068, Edgar gets to the Scottish court. And what we'd love to know is whether or not the major rebellion that ends up happening in the North and West Midlands, which is kind of a repeat of an earlier smaller rebellion in 1067, in 1068, there's then this really big one, which is the kind of the start of the kind of rebellions

that would also eventually lead to the harrowing of the North and all of that business. At the heart of that are these earls, Edwin and Morcar, crucially, who are the survivors of the English earld of the pre-conquished English earls, the non-Godwinson one, so, you know, Williams, no idea, he's not going to leave the Godwinson's in their positions, but Edwin and Morkar, who were not natural allies of Herald, he initially is willing to work with and kind of has to do because he needs to build some local alliances.

But they were the ones who put Edgar up to the kingship in the first place. They can see the way that, you know, the wind is blowing that while they're, you know, being left with some rights, their rights are being curtailed already by William. He's appointing Norman sheriffs underneath them and kind of chipping away at their earldoms. They can put two and two together. They're not welcome. William doesn't trust them. So they kind of raised the banner of rebellion. And what we'd love to know is does Edgar kind of escape before, after, during this?

It's at some point in this consequence of events. So it's possible that Edgar escapes and the rebellion happens as a consequence of this. And so it's all rallying behind them. It's also possible that rebellion is being raised and he sees now's the time get out. There's a chink in Williams' armor. equally it's possible that he gets out first and the rebellion is raised kind of as a consequence of that all of those are conceivable

but there is some relationship between these things happening clearly and the fact that he seeks exile in Scotland is very telling in this respect because if you're going to strike at England the best place to do it from is Scotland it's the one reasonably secure powerful kingdom with a direct

border with England but also it ends up being the west and North Midlands and the north that are the focal areas of rebellion and descent to the conquer. They've always been with the royal writ ran leased in pre-conquest England. So they were the natural places to kind of strike at royal authority anyway. And so for Edgar, it's perfect in terms of that. They're also the heartlands of Edwin and Morcar. These are rebellious earls. So in a sense, it's all kind of coming together. And what we're really getting is a coalition of the

disgruntled because the other people who are sometimes involved in these discussions are the Danes and the king of Denmark, who himself from Kanoot has a residual claim to the English throne and ends up involved in some of the later rebellions eventually comes over to England. By that point, the most powerful English rebellions have been put down. It's a little bit too little too late. But what we're really getting is, you know, English people who can see our best chances toppling the conqueror and are willing to ally with the Danish monarch and Edgar simultaneously and almost certainly not with a clear thought-out plan of, you know, who gets the throne after this? You know, with some of these later rebellions, it's very unclear because you've got,

you know, Edgar being mooted as a possibility and you've got the Danish king rocking up. But what's clear is we all have a bigger enemy for the time being. Till we topple William, there's no point in even squabbling over the English throne. So that's kind of what we seem to be seeing really with these kind of rebellions that are in a sense quite complex to trace all the ins and outs of

because they flame up in one year and then go back down and but kind of rumble on in some form another from 1067 starting already. Crucial ones in 1068 are when Edgar's kind of being escaped and he's being mooted. But as late as 1069, 1070 is still a possibility.

Scottish king monarch is still threatening as part of this and the Danes are kind of still involved and what it really seems to be is all of these people have in common a greater enemy, William. And they could all agree that he's a rotter and we need to get rid of him and they're willing to be very pragmatic until or unless they can get rid of him

and then after that they'll have to sit down and say hey wait a second, what do we do now? Who was our alternative candidate? But Edgar is very much part of that is the crucial thing and William's well aware what he's most worried about through the late 1060s, early 1070s, is Edgar and the Danish king.

They're the two realistic threats to him. And Edgar in some respects is probably the more immediate one because he's closer. So the Danish monarch, when he does rock up, is perhaps a greater threat. But he's more distant and he keeps on kind of making plans and being invited over but having bigger fish to fry in Denmark.

He's got his own kingdom to rule. Whereas Edgar doesn't have that. He's an exile in Scotland, but he's not the Scottish monarch. He's got nothing to do but to bide his time and make trouble for William whenever and wherever he can. So, you know, if you need me as your figurehead for rebellion, I'm there is kind of the message he's broadcasting across England at a time when the English are increasingly aware that William doesn't really like us. And the more we rebel, the less he likes us. So it's a bit of a vicious cycle for them.

But by that point, it's too late. And so they at least at certain groups of them in the North Midlands and the North kind of largely stick to their guns and do keep on raising the flags of rebellion. and more often than not in Edgar's name, occasionally with his presence. Yeah, I love the idea that Edgar is like thumbing his nose at William from the other side of the Scottish border. We know as well then that William will invade Scotland in 1072, and part of that at least is obviously that Edgar is there. And I think it's quite interesting that when he's victorious, he asks for Edgar's expulsion from Scotland rather than his handover,

which seems slightly odd to me. He doesn't seem to want Edgar back. He only asks that Malcolm kicks him out of Scotland. Yeah, that is a very good question. What one would love to know behind that is what the kind of counteroffers are, and we'd love to have more dense sources for Scotland, because I wonder if that isn't a case of simply knowing that that's off the table. Because the crucial thing is that Malcolm has married Margaret.

So we have the union of the Scottish law. Who is Edgar's sister. So the other thing that's happening in all of this ferment is that the Scottish monarch, Malcolm has been very canny and can see that he has a new powerful neighbor. This isn't good news if you're the Scottish monarch. He's seen that William's men are starting to carve up whales. He doesn't

want that happening in Scotland. And so for him, he wants to make trouble for William, but most of the time just below the level of making it in William's interest to conquer him outright. And one of the things he's able to do is he marries Margaret. And so this means there's a latent threat now

forever from Scotland, really. But it also means that Edgar is his brother-in-law. So there's There is, he has good reason to back Edgar's claim. So for Edgar, this is also a very good move in the sense that he's lined up a willing supporter. So I do wonder if that wasn't in the room there, that kind of William knows that that's not on or that his first proposal. You know, he's tried to play for this. And Malcolm said, look, yeah, he's my brother-in-law.

Like, you know, can you imagine what my wife's going to say when I get home and tell her that I've just given her brother to you? Tell you what, we'll settle for exile, you know, in terms of that. But for Malcolm, the crucial thing there is that Margaret's still there, and English royal blood still runs through his lines. And it's very telling that English names and that lexicon enters into the Scottish royalty at this point. And so we start getting their children having West Saxon royal names. And you can see, again, exactly what they're doing here, because that is symptomatic of that line being seen as in a sense more exalted in some form or other or more useful. And of course, at least at some level it is, because what Malcolm's doing by this, not terribly subtly, is saying to anybody who would want to know in England, hey, these children are half English. They are rightful heirs potentially to your throne. And this kind of latent threat remains into the 12th century, into that famous point where finally the Anglo-Norman and Scottish oil houses then marry and this union of these two lines that finally kind of diffuses the threat from Scotland, but it takes well into the 12th century before Williams' successors actually

sit comfortably there, not because I think most of the time they think the Scottish king is actually going to march south and conquer everything before him. But he has a latent potential to create a lot of trouble. And it gives that chink in their armor. And I think it's one of the crucial questions whenever you're getting medieval rebellions happening. There's always people who upset with medieval monarchs. But to make it a viable rebellion, you need to have at least a sheen of legitimacy behind it, somebody being wronged by the monarch that some people can rally behind as an action, but also ideally some alternative and some alternative with real heft. And that means there's always an alternative with some heft in Scotland. So what happens to Edgar,

I mean, I think it's quite impressive that he manages to survive the whole of William the conqueror's reign while being such a threat to William. What does he do? He spends a bit of time in Flanders, gets a bit of support from the French king. So he's constantly being positioned as this threat to William.

What does he do on William's death? I mean, he involves himself in English politics again, doesn't he? Which seems dangerous. After William's death,

this is in a sense Edgar's opportunity to play his cards again because once, again, there's this kind of question that is at some level reopened. So Williams

being able to establish himself in England from the early 1070s onwards, there's no other viable ruler of England. But now there's the question of who of his sons should become King of England. He's been

lining up William Rufus as he would become known William II. Seems to be his preference. But that edges out Robert Kurt Hose's eldest son, who he's given Normandy. And this is common for kind of Norman magnates. We do this with other magnates of giving their traditional familial patrimony in Normandy to an eldest son. But often

their wealthier lands to a second son in England. But there are then real questions. So Robert wants a United Succession. And of course, William Rufus will be interested in having Normandy. So there's lots of questions on both sides here. And Edgar is still alive and well. And there is still that slight prospect. And what's interesting in terms of this is that he rallies behind Kurt Hose, which is almost certainly no coincidence because Kurt Hose has been on bad terms with the conquer in his later years. And he's in a sense the opposition candidate. He's the long shot candidate,

but probably the one from whom Edgar can gain the greatest dividends. Because Robert would be more likely to perhaps take England and want to rule it from Normandy rather than from England and from afar. So in a sense, he's still in that level of largely trouble making, but that's where he can get his greatest traction. And the more trouble and more dissent there is amongst the, you know, successors of the conqueror, the more potential there is, and one suspects of the back of his mind, it still is, can I get in myself? Can I stick my foot through this door? If all goes wrong, if they fight each other to a standstill, there's always a chance that one or both of them will die in these conflicts. So he's also got a real interest in stirring things up

and keeping trouble going there. In that respect, it's very telling as well that he's gone into exile in Flanders and Frisia, which is an area that has been traditionally rival to the Norman dukes themselves as kind of controlling the north of France. So he's always kept kind of an eye on making maximum trouble for William and his potential heirs. But when that kind of doesn't, really materialized. Kurt Hose doesn't succeed in sticking his claims to the English throne, another of these great failures that had kind of disappointed his father. So it then leaves Edgar kind of out on a limb again. So he's kind of, again, chosen the riskier venture for the greater risk, greater gain, but it's kind of locked him out of any way back into the quarters of power in England.

And it means that then when the First Crusade is going down and when many of the great and good of Europe or heading off in that direction. He is, in a sense, at a loose end. And in that respect, he is a bit like Kurt Hose himself, who famously joins the Crusade, seeking greater rewards somewhere else. In terms of this, we also see it with Stephen of Blois, the son-in-law of the conqueror, and again, probably spurred on by that sense. Something at the back of his mind may also have been there, an awareness, though, of what

William has done in England. So it's been pointed out that people like Kurt Hose and things like that may have been willing to risk going on Crusade, because they're not. they knew what their father had achieved or Stephen knew what his father-in-law achieved. Of course, in a reverse sense, Edgar lost out from this, but he knew full well what William had achieved and that sometimes rolling the dice is worth it on these kinds of things, because a smart betting man at the start of the First Crusade is not expecting them to take Jerusalem. The great surprise is, in fact, that they do.

And so we don't have a lot of detail of his crusade activities, but we do know that he is the head of a fleet of Englishmen who kind of bring supply. from the Byzantine emperor to the First Crusaders. And so he's also part of that kind of great movement. And we also know that other Englishmen have gone off as kind of Varangian guards. It's quite possible that that's where he is himself, I've gone off to serve in the Byzantine capital, because they traditionally had these guards who were of Scandinavian Norse descent.

But after 1066, there are a lot of aristocratic, highly militant, well-trained Englishmen who are no longer as welcome in England as they might have been, who are recruited very graciously there on the Bosphorus. So there is a kind of an exiled group of Englishmen, and it may well be that he's already there. And certainly recent scholarship on the First Crusade suggests that the Byzantine emperor, Alexis Comnenos, is much more active behind it all along.

And so that may well be actually kind of how and where he joins it rather than from Western Europe, in fact, from the Byzantine court and from his English connections there. But he certainly does end up then playing a crucial of small role in that kind of lost hurrah. I mean, it's just such a glittering and exciting career that he leads, constantly escaping from Norman Kings who view him as an enemy, despite the fact that he entangles himself in all of this stuff,

getting to go off on the first crusade, possibly being part of the Varangian guard. I mean, what do we know about how Edgar sees out his days? Do we know when and where he dies? No, we don't. So what happens is basically over time. although his denational credentials remain as strong as they ever were, a sense of legitimacy move on. And so increasingly, once you get to Henry I first being on the English throne, no one thinks that anyone, I think, seriously, that is not a direct lineal descendant of the conquerors can be English king.

It's still nice to then reunite the line with the Scottish Royal Line. Now that sees off, that seals the deal, if you will. But in a sense, it's become old news. But we do know that as of the time when the white ship goes down, he is still alive, he's still alive in 1125. So when Henry I first dies and when we get the start of the so-called anarchy and the next great succession dispute, what's notable is he's by then clearly quite an old man. He must be in his 70s by then. He's not one of the runners or riders. There's no talk of possibly bringing him in in terms of that. it's too late now by a long shot. But he is still around extraordinarily. So one would love

to know and have a source from him, you know, a memoir from him in his later lives. Because he saw, in a sense, the rise and in some sense then finally the fall of that first Anglo-Norman dynasty when it's wrecked with the white ship and when it ends up embroiled in civil war for many, many years thereafter. So it is a kind of fascinating question as to what he would have made of all of this. And whether or not there wasn't anybody who, you know, somewhere in England, somewhere nearby him and 1125 didn't say, yeah, aren't you going to throw your hat in, mate? But there's no evidence that substantial numbers, right, you line up behind him. While there's a lot of uncertainty as to who should be monarch at that point, what is quite telling is that he's alive and he's,

he's no longer meaningful. He's no longer part of the debate. Yeah, it would have been such a good autobiography. It's annoying that he didn't write it, I think. And he's, Edgar feels like a really good kind of narrator or a good window into this change in England, the kind of the late crises of Anglo-Saxon England and the ideas around succession and what Edward the Confessors, the end of Edward the Confessor's reign looked like. But also the birth of Norman England, the effect that has on the old Anglo-Saxon polity, the resistance that continues. And also the way that you can survive all of this. And he does survive all of this despite being in opposition for so long. I can't help wondering whether part of the reason Henry I first marries, you know, Margaret, is it's to get a bit of English royal blood into his own line, but does it also nullify Edgar's threat a little bit because the House of Wessex is back on the throne? So anyone who's hankering for that is kind of assuaged a little bit by that too. But, I mean, he's just such a fascinating character.

And for someone who never actually sat on the throne of England, it feels like he does have a legacy in English royal history. Absolutely. And no, as you say, it's very telling that Henrik. chooses Margaret. It's no coincidence. And that is celebrated at the time at the moment these lines rejoin. And in a sense, this writes out any of the niggles that there were in the conqueror's claims because, as we know, the conqueror claimed England as his rightful inheritance. But given that Edgar was alive at the time, it was a classic example of, you know, if you're

going to tell a lie, tell a big one, that kind of classic propaganda story. And everyone knows it. But Henry, the first marriage then makes this good. it gets rid of that potential problem. And that is probably one of the reasons why in 1125, there is less of a question there. It doesn't settle at all, of course, because actually it doesn't, Stephen, doesn't benefit from that, if you will. And there's the questions of whether or not Matilda can or should be his heir.

Obviously, the ideal scenario is there's no white ship, because then that really settles everything. But it is probably one of the other reasons why in 1125, Edgar is, in a sense, old news. And there isn't a little bit more of movement behind him because in a sense, Henry has been able to shut that down. And so I think you're right, he's a window in which we can see. In 1066, he's a real prospect.

In the 1070s, he's still something of a prospect. 1087, he's not a realist prospect prospect, but he's there in the wings. We know what he's up to. He's still a bit of a threat. 1125, he's old news. Interesting, but an interesting side note, a footnote to history. So he is in that sense, probably a historical biographer's dream, because there aren't enough sources to get in the way either. So, you know, awkward sources to tell us what he really thought or what was really going on. There's lots of gaps in his life, but also enough for us to know that he would have witnessed some

the most extraordinary events in British and European history. Yeah. Well, this has been absolutely fascinating, Levi. Thank you so much for joining us to share this. It's someone I've wanted to talk about and explore for a very long time, so I've really, really enjoyed this. I feel like I could keep you for another couple of hours chatting about it, but we probably ought to bring things to a close there. So thank you so much for coming on to God Medieval again. Thanks for having me. If you enjoyed this episode, you can find recent ones on Edgar's grandfather, Edmund Ironside, and on William Rufus in our back catalogue, along with several episodes around the events of 1066. that were so pivotal to Edgar's story. There were new installments have gone medieval every Tuesday and Friday, so please come back to join Eleanor and I for more from the greatest millennium in human history.

Don't forget to also subscribe or follow us on Spotify or wherever you get your podcasts and tell all of your friends and family that you've gone medieval. You can also sign up to HistoryHit for hundreds of hours of original documentaries with a new release every week

at historyhit.com forward slash subscribe. Anyway, I better let you go. I've been Matt Lewis, and we've just gone medieval with history hits.