• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Why did William win the Battle of Hastings?

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Why did William win the battle of Hastings? In 1066 king Edward the confessor died without any children to inherit the throne of england, this meant that Harold Godwinson was crowned as king despite supposidly promising an oath to william that he would be the next king . However harold faced his position being jeportised because two other determined young men also wanted to be King. These men were Harald Hadrarda and William of Normandy. England was one of the welthiest and most powerfull countrys in the world and all 3 of these men were prepared to do whatever it took to gain the crown. The only way to decide who was going to be king was to engage in battle .Harold and william both prepared there forces. First Harald hardra from norway invaided england with his viking fleet and fought against harold godwinson at stanford bridge .After the Battle of Stamford Bridge (In which Harald had died,) Harold had news that william had finally invaided and went down to hastings to prepare to fight William, but this was going to be tough, both men were desperate to be next King and there could only be one winner. ...read more.

Middle

The army must have been weary encouraged by the strong vicotry at stanfod bridge and gain in arms however the army was cut they were also more drained. Another important reason to why william down in size and a lot weaker than they previously were. In my opion this is the main reason to why Harold lost. His men was majorly cut down in size and being that his army was prodmitatly made up of fryds so there loyalty was doubting.Also they were celebrating there success of winning the battle by getting merry. So aswell as bein exhausted won the battle was due to his tactics and skillfull fighters. It is estimated that that William had 5,000 infantry and 3,000 knights while Harold had about 2, 500 housecarls and over 6,000 members of the fyrd . So prodimataley harolds army were inexperienced fighters whereas willaims were a trained army.The norman army fought on caverlry and had highly skilled archers, whereas the anglo saxon army was made from mainly local men (fyrds) and bretons which were a loyal professional army. Harodls army was not as strong as williams thus why eh lsot the battle. The leaders of the fyrd, (the thegns) ...read more.

Conclusion

He needed to show his followers that his claim was a lawful one, and that he had God on his side. So when he decided on invasion, he took elaborate measures to ensure he had strong support, and even sent an envoy to the Pope asking for his blessing, the pope supported willaims claim , this was a major advantage to willaim as the fighters would have belived that they could win the battle if god was on there side. Also they would have been more likely to fight harder and risk there lives if it meant fighting for god it meant a door open to heaven. During the battle flags with crosses and religious symbols were held. This made the battle look more like a crusade rather than a war. The thought of dying for god grew loyalty with Williams men which reflected in the outcome of the battle. Overall there are many reaons to why William won the battle of Hastings. The Luk and timing is in my opinion the most important reason as without this William would have arrived at Hastings with a saon waiting army and darnet of stood a chance. So without Stamford bridge and the change of weather in that week I would have been surprised if Williams men would have made it past pevansey. Elizabeth Bloxham 25/02/2008 ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Other Historical Periods section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Other Historical Periods essays

  1. What was the impact of the Norman Conquest

    The Church would normally come into contact with people through routine church services and the collection of charity funds. But most importantly, it was their duty to fulfil the functions of a 'civil service' and an education system. Back then, schools did not exist and were surplus to a large

  2. Why did bolsheviks win civil war

    Little warmth or support was felt or given to the White leaders and they rarely felt encouraged to strive to do better. White army forces often behaved with great brutality and cruelty in areas they controlled. They burned down towns, destroyed property and took peasant farmers' crop and livestock by force.

  1. The First English Civil War

    About this time too, following and improving upon the example of Newcastle in the north, Parliament ordered the formation of the celebrated "associations" or groups of counties, banded together by mutual consent for defence. The most powerful and best organised of these was that of the eastern counties (headquartered in

  2. Assess the factors that lead to the defeat of Boudica and the Iceni in ...

    idea prior to the battle of the supreme numerical advantage that her forces possessed. It was possibly the case that the leaders of the Celtic army saw such a lead as insurmountable and thought it unnecessary to develop and strong Tautology.

  1. Consider David Starkey(TM)s and Francis Pryor(TM)s respective versions of the nature and extent of ...

    However, while these might be much more reliable, they can only suggest possibilities for what happened. What few have failed to grasp in that the only way to approach this problem is to use both and see where they compliment and contradict each other and try and build a picture from then onwards.

  2. To what extent is Arrian's praise of Alexander's leadership justified?

    type of challenge Alexander himself raised to his very own subordinates on several occasions. The fact that these parallel similarities between Alexander and his father are widely established and accepted, proves that Arrian is not simply speculating or exaggerating Alexander's abilities as a leader, on the contrary his opinions are based on solid proof of Alexander's persona.

  1. Using appropriate evidence, describe daily life in either Dublin or Waterford in the Viking ...

    Many Dublin craftsmen were highly skilled in areas such as the manufacture of bone and antler combs (Clarke and Simms 1985, 134). The bone that was excavated is known to be of the red deer (Rosedahl 1982, 231). These Dublin craftsmen also worked with leather, wooden objects such as the manufacture of ploughs, bone whorls and needles and pins.

  2. To what extent was england subordinate to Williams concerns in Normandy?

    Ralphs forces were defeated in cambrige and he later returned to his castle in Norwich. Waltheof however soon confessed the conspiracy to Lanfranc before the revoult even got into motion. This revoult brought William to leave matilda and return back to england in the autum of 1075 whilst the Danes

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work