The Battle of Hastings
Today marks the 951st
anniversary of the Battle of Hastings.
1066 has already been a
tumultuous year in England. On January 5, Edward the Confessor died, leaving
the English throne to Harold Godwinson (King Harold II). Harold’s family, the
Godwins, were the most powerful in England. Harold was himself an earl, and as
well the father-in-law to Edward the Confessor, the latter having been married
to Harold’s daughter Edith. William of Normandy, also known as William the
Bastard, claimed that he had been designated as Edward’s successor and that
Harold had once promised him that he, Harold, disclaimed any right to the
throne, leaving it instead to William. In addition, Harold Hardrada of Norway
asserted a claim to the English throne.
Sometime in September, Harold
Hardrada had landed his troops in the north of England. After fast marching his
troops north, the army of Harold Godwinson met the invading army of Harold
Hardrada (supported by Tostig Godwinson, Harold’s brother) at the Battle of
Stamford Bridge (HERE IS A LINK
to a posting on those events). The invading army was defeated, and Hardrada was
killed. Learning of William’s invasion in the south, Harold had to turn his
army around and fast march it south in order to respond to this new threat.
Those forced marches were some 240 miles each way.
For reasons that have baffled
many historians, Harold, upon arriving in London, quickly turned his troops,
already exhausted from the march, toward Hastings. He did this notwithstanding
that reinforcements were due to arrive the following day. Still, Harold led his
forces towards William’s beachhead, leaving word for the reinforcements to
catch up as soon as possible. Those reinforcements included the archers.
The Battle of Hastings proper
(there was an earlier skirmish) probably began around 11 in the morning.
Through most of the day the forces of Harold prevailed – his forces fought as a
phalanx, and attacks on the shield wall
were not effective. In addition, the
Norman archers were not effective firing up-hill. Harold holding his own against
William would have been for Harold a win. As observed by Frank McLynn in 1066-The
Year of Three Battles:
[Harold] knew
he had only to hold out until nightfall when reinforcements were certain to
arrive; he could play for a draw but William had to have a win.
The Norman infantry having
failed to break through, William sent in his calvary. Attacking uphill, they
did not have the force necessary to break through. William’s flank (the Breton
forces) started to fail and William was unhorsed and rumored to be dead.
Thinking (it would appear) that things
were going in their favor, Harold’s forces began an advance downhill, their
shielded wall still intact and functionally invulnerable. But then the advance
lost its momentum, perhaps due to the death of its leader Leofwine, Harold’s
brother. William’s forces pushed back and in order Harold’s forces reversed
themselves back uphill. It was then a battle of attrition, and the Norman
invaders were lost at a lower rate than were Harold’s forces. A combined
archery and armored calvary assault finally broke the shield wall, and the
battle dissolved into combat between small units ensued. Harold and the
remaining troops around him were attacked and Harold fell to multiple sword
blows and a lance through his chest.
Maybe an hour after Harold
fell, reinforcements, including additional housecarls, arrived.
The accepted, albeit almost
certainly apocryphal, story is that Harold fell after being struck in the eye
with an arrow. The Bayeux Tapestry may be interpreted as saying such. However,
the “King Harold was killed” heading is over two figures (neither wearing a
crown), one with an arrow in his eye and the other being struck down by a
sword. If the former is meant to be Harold, the famous arrow in the eye as
depicted in the Bayeux Tapestry may be a later invention. It is not mentioned
in the earliest accounts of the battle. In addition, in medieval iconography,
an arrow in the eye is the punishment afforded a perjurer. Having gone against
his oath to leave the throne to William, some might have felt it poetic
justice, even if not based in reality.
By Christmas William was
crowned King of England and was in Westminster Abbey accepting pledges of
fealty from England’s mobility. Still, the next two decades of his reign would
see numerous rebellions and challenges, including one from his own son Robert.
As for the Bayeux Tapestry
itself, HERE IS A LINK
is an animated (and translated) version.
The English like to claim that
the Norman Invasion was the last invasion of England. This is not true. For example,
during the Barons War, a French force invaded and had control of a significant
portion of southern England, and the Isle of Wight was invaded in 1545. But the
Norman Conquest is the last successful invasion of England.
No comments:
Post a Comment