William the Bastard Conqueror

Thought from yesterday (since I didn't have time to write it down). When talking with Chloe about William the Conqueror we threw out a few potential personalities for our William the Conqueror. You don't really want to do another Henry V. Trying to imitate that without copying/plagiarizing too much would be difficult. So, what if... William the Conqueror the antithesis or foil of Henry V? So, we have the valiant Henry V.

It seems from reading the play that Shakespeare would have us remember Henry V as a hero. We can see the responsibility weighing down on Henry, that he is not the one who wants to take france for the sake of his own power or glory, and he at times bemoans the fact that he isn't a common man, and that he has to act to bring justice to those under him.

But now, we will have William the Conqueror.

William the Conqueror, while just as hard of a worker and just as determined as Henry, does not have as pure of motives.

But his men don't know that.

He wants to take over England because it's a big, rich, powerful country. He is friendly to his troops not because he respects and reveres them or because he wants the best for them, but because he sees them as pawns. He wants to manipulate them into doing his will, yet when the defining moment arises will always choose his own comfort and the selfish option over helping out his troops and subordinates.

But he can pretend like he's being Henry V-like. 

He conquered at Battle of Hastings. He changed England. He was dominant. But after he had won the victory, what if it all caught up with him? True, this sounds more like a tragedy, but it's just a thought.

H eis said to have died because he fell off his horse. It sounds like the truth could have been twisted a bit.

He died when invading France by "falling off his horse."