New research upends history of battle that doomed the last Anglo-Saxon king

A close-up of the Bayeux Tapestry, an embroidered cloth which depicts the events leading up to the Norman conquest of England, thought to date to the 11th century, at the Bayeux Museum, France, September 13, 2019. (Charles Platiau/Reuters via CNN Newsource)

The tragic tale of Harold, the king who lost England to William the Conqueror in an infamous battle, still looms large in British popular culture. But that story may need a reset, according to new research.

The Battle of Hastings in 1066 ended the short rule of Harold, the last Anglo-Saxon king, and ushered in William, Duke of Normandy, as England’s leader, forever changing the country, as the well-worn story is told on TV, podcasts and in classrooms. New analysis of manuscripts, however, casts the nature of Harold’s devastating defeat in a fresh light.

The arduous 200-mile (322-kilometre) march that King Harold and his men made before facing off with William, which supposedly left his troops depleted and ill-prepared to fight, never actually happened, says Tom Licence, a professor of medieval history and literature at the University of East Anglia in the United Kingdom. Instead, Licence argues, the troops made that journey southward by ship.

“1066 is still one of the few dates that virtually everyone knows,” said Rory Naismith, a professor of early medieval English history at the University of Cambridge in the United Kingdom who wasn’t involved in the research. “It is a watershed in English history, when one political regime was defeated and very soon replaced by another, with huge consequences for the cultural and institutional identity of the kingdom. The developments of 1066 are therefore crucial to understanding everything that came after.”

Reexamining the record

The idea that Harold’s men covered nearly 200 miles in 10 days after a hard-won battle at Stamford Bridge, near York, against Viking leader Harald Hardrada, another rival for the throne, had long struck Licence and other historians as improbable, given the distances involved.

The story of the dramatic overland march was largely a Victorian interpretation that had stuck, Licence said. Its origins stem from a misunderstood reference to Harold’s fleet being sent home in the Anglo Saxon Chronicle, an account of key events written in old English by clergy of the time. In the earlier interpretation, “sent home” was assumed to mean disbanded, with ships sent home to their port of origin. While reviewing the chronicle Licence found repeated reference to home, meaning London, where King Harold was based.

“It dawned on me that when he says, ‘The fleet came home,’ he doesn’t mean the fleet was sent to its various ports. The fleet was sent to its home, London,” he said, referring to one of the authors of the chronicles

To recap: Harold first sailed his fleet northward, Licence said, where he successfully battled the Viking leader Harald Hardrada and his Norwegian force on September 26, 1066. He then returned with it to London. “Rather than exhausting his men on that march south, which of course has been blamed for the English defeat, he had the chance to rest them,” Licence added.

Then, Harold and some of his men traveled overland south toward Hastings to confront the Duke of Normandy. Meanwhile, Licence argued, Harold also sent ships to Hastings to attempt a pincer movement to trap William from the south, but the fleet arrived too late to change the course of the devastating battle that took place on October 14.

Naismith said he agreed with the new interpretation. “The English had a large seagoing fleet of ships, and there is plentiful evidence for sailing up and down the east coast in the era of the Norman Conquest,” he said. “A larger role for these ships in the events of 1066 makes a lot of sense and demonstrates Harold’s ability to use the resources available to him.”

The English army’s march southward has always been part of Harold’s romantic identity, said Duncan Wright, a senior lecturer in medieval archaeology at the Newcastle University in England. Harold is known as the last Anglo-Saxon king who strove valiantly against invading threats, but whose efforts were ultimately futile, Wright added. The march has inspired large-scale reenactments, including one in 2016 for the 950th anniversary that involved 1,066 people.

“Indeed, the English today remain very fond of a ‘brave loser,’” he said via email.

“This new reading also goes to show the lasting legacy of Victorian understandings of the past, and the way in which factoids can develop into historical canon; when we question such traditions, it can result in valuable new comprehensions of the past, as we see here,” he added via email.

The new interpretation shows that King Harold was a competent commander, Licence said, not reckless and impulsive: “I think it was a coin toss, really. It could have been William that day. It could have been Harold.”

Historians have debunked another long-standing story associated with the Battle of Hastings. A famous scene in the Bayeux Tapestry, which depicts the battle from a Norman perspective, shows Harold shot with an arrow in the eye. In fact, the earliest sources describe Harold being hacked to death at the hands of four Norman knights.

The Bayeux Tapestry will travel from France and go on display in Britain for the first time later this year at London’s British Museum.

Licence will present his work at a conference at the University of Oxford on Tuesday, March 24, and the research will also feature in a forthcoming biography of King Harold written by Licence.