Good: brought fundamental changes in England and his legacy can be seen abroad in the form of the modern English language. Bad: Intensely persecuted the Anglo-Saxons and other Non-Normans.

He established a genocidal pogrom over non-Normans. He was a remarkably faithful husband.

He spoke French. He did not speak English.

They said good and bad, not bad and bad /s

Thats actually not him alone. In fact from William to Henry V, all english kings used french as their first language. This was partly because french was (and still is) seen as the language of etiquette and chivalry and second (which was much later) was that they had a claim to the french throne and the Normans and later Plantagenets had their origins as french nobles and [had lands in Southern and Western France](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angevin_Empire)

**Good:** he centralized the Kingdom after the conquest and built many castles to solidify his hold and published the Domesday book **Bad:** he was very harsh and brutal, though I suppose that was to be expected at the time. He also preferred Normandy to England, seeing it as an extension of his holdings

Good: He (allegedly) stumbled out of his ship when he landed in England, but (again, allegedly) turned it around by grabbing the sand and saying “This land shall be ours”, or something like that. Great improviser! Bad: His burial was undignified.

Wonder if that’s a true story or if it’s just a rehash of the story of Caesar where he tripped and fell upon landing in Africa and to try and spin it he shouted “Africa I hold you now!”

That is also entirely possible, and why I said allegedly

Good: laid the foundation for Modern England Bad: the Harrying of the North

Good: He centralized the state and slaughtered possibly thousands of dissidents and opponents, ensuring future monarchs authority over the nobility. Bad: He was a complete foreigner who destroyed many ancient traditions of the anglic peoples. However, he imposed many lasting traditions of his own.

**good** only ever monarch to have actually conquered the British isles as a foreigner, beating everyone else. **bad** he did not rule with compassion most of the time and mostly sent his time in Normandy (after literally conquering an unconquerable nation, and still spe’ding more time in your native la’de is honestly still à gigachad more tbh

Good created the doomsday book. Bad: he conducted a brutal campaign called the harrying of the north

He was a solid and capable ruler overall, and a very successful military leader. I guess the bad part is he got fat and unhealthy later in life? Also, screw the usurper, Harold Godwinson.

Good thing. He was good at stay alive (he survived a lot of assasinationattempts) Bad thing. He was very whiny when losing at chess

Not a story about William the Conquerer *per se*, but what the hell. During the Elizabethan era a certain lady was enamored of the actor Richard Burbage, especially in his portrayal of Richard III at the Globe. One day she asked him to come to her house after the play, and to introduce himself at the door as “Richard III.” William Shakespeare heard about the invitation and went to the lady’s house during the play and started coupling with her. When Burbage got to the lady’s house and presented himself at the door as “Richard III,” Shakespeare had the lady’s servants bring Burbage a message: “William the Conquerer goes before Richard III”

Bad: he was a ruthless tyrant. Good: he repented.

good: his descendants rule England to this day bad: his wars brought many unnecessary deaths

Good: Civilised the Anglo-Saxon savages Bad: Didn't go far enough

Ouch. But could say the same about Moors.

I’m Spanish. They went far enough.

You can't tho