Analysis: Why Did William, Duke Of Normandy, Win The Battle Of Hastings
Why did William, Duke of Normandy, win the Battle of Hastings?
It was 1066, England was ruled by the Saxons and the throne was previously held by the childless Edward the Confessor, who had died earlier that year, and the battle to find his successor was beginning. One of the candidates, and probably the most famous of them, was William Duke of Normandy, otherwise known as William the Conqueror. However, there were other strong contenders fighting to take the throne. Harold Godwinson was William’s main opponent, therefore these are the two that I will write about, analysing their choices and events that helped or disadvantaged them along the way.
William won the battle of Hastings for many reasons; skill, trickery, powerful knights, strong soldiers, great timing, accurate archers, …show more content…
He placed his (approximately 7,000) men on top of a steep hill, surrounded by marshland, which is now known as Senlac Hill. There were lots of advantages to this, as it was steeper, and therefore, harder for the Normans to climb, using their energy before they even reached the summit. They also surrounded themselves by a shield wall, meaning that even if the Norman archers tried to fire at them, which was easier due to their high altitude, very few arrows could reach them.
If they weren’t at the top of the hill, would it make it easier for William? It would be easier for them to attack Harold, but Harold’s shield wall would be easier for him to maintain, making it harder for William to attack. William’s trickery might have also been affected by this aspect, as once he had forced the Saxons to run away, it would be easier for them to return as they wouldn’t have to climb a steep path to get back into position. I actually think, that without the hill, battle would have consequently been harder for William, maybe even stopping him from
It was 1066, England was ruled by the Saxons and the throne was previously held by the childless Edward the Confessor, who had died earlier that year, and the battle to find his successor was beginning. One of the candidates, and probably the most famous of them, was William Duke of Normandy, otherwise known as William the Conqueror. However, there were other strong contenders fighting to take the throne. Harold Godwinson was William’s main opponent, therefore these are the two that I will write about, analysing their choices and events that helped or disadvantaged them along the way.
William won the battle of Hastings for many reasons; skill, trickery, powerful knights, strong soldiers, great timing, accurate archers, …show more content…
He placed his (approximately 7,000) men on top of a steep hill, surrounded by marshland, which is now known as Senlac Hill. There were lots of advantages to this, as it was steeper, and therefore, harder for the Normans to climb, using their energy before they even reached the summit. They also surrounded themselves by a shield wall, meaning that even if the Norman archers tried to fire at them, which was easier due to their high altitude, very few arrows could reach them.
If they weren’t at the top of the hill, would it make it easier for William? It would be easier for them to attack Harold, but Harold’s shield wall would be easier for him to maintain, making it harder for William to attack. William’s trickery might have also been affected by this aspect, as once he had forced the Saxons to run away, it would be easier for them to return as they wouldn’t have to climb a steep path to get back into position. I actually think, that without the hill, battle would have consequently been harder for William, maybe even stopping him from