They will almost certainly know the names Harold and William, and that’s a reasonable place to start because the rivalry of these two men is the engine that drives this whole saga.
Between oaths, stolen kingdoms, and deathbed promises, this is a tangled tale of woe.
Reading through the medieval accounts, you get the definite impression that these two men are furious at each other.
But this book is not about the why of the battle, it is only concerned with what actually happened, and why it happened the way it did.
The battle itself is usually described in simple terms. Two armies meet on a hill. One defends, the other attacks. The English hold firm for most of the day behind a shield wall, until fatigue, pressure, and loss finally tell. Late in the afternoon, the line breaks, King Harold is killed, and the Norman Duke William emerges victorious.
This outline is familiar enough to require little explanation. Yet when examined more closely, it raises questions that are rarely pursued. Harold is said to have fought with a reduced army, having marched south in haste after the battle at Stamford Bridge, and yet this smaller force is also said to have formed a long, continuous shield wall, holding firm against repeated cavalry attacks for hour after hour without being outflanked. How such a force sustained that frontage for so long is seldom explained.
The English army is also presented as almost entirely passive. For most of the day, it neither advances nor manoeuvres, despite holding the advantage of position. The only offensive action attributed to it occurs when parts of the Norman army appear to withdraw, drawing pursuit from undisciplined elements of the English line. Apart from these moments, Harold’s army is described as standing, waiting, and enduring.
The battle also begins late in the morning, despite both armies being ready much earlier. It then unfolds for most of the day with remarkably little change in position, before ending abruptly in collapse. The reasons for this delay, and for the long stalemate that follows, are rarely examined in detail.
None of these difficulties overturn the accepted outcome. The Normans won. Harold was killed. England changed hands. But they do suggest that the familiar narrative smooths over uncertainties, especially about numbers, movement, ground, and intent.
That narrative also portrays Harold as operating outside what we know is his favoured action of war: surprise. If fatigue is a primary factor, why would Harold choose an inherently long endurance-based defence if a sudden surprise would end it faster? So, maybe there is greater depth here than we have been shown and the story is far more complex and interesting than anyone has imagined.