David Howarth’s book “1066: The Year Of The Conquest” examines the similarities between Harold of England and William of Normandy, who were both rulers of prominent countries. While they shared qualities such as leadership skills and the ability to navigate feudal systems, their similarities largely cease there. Furthermore, both England and Normandy, under the rule of Harold and William respectively, experienced similar lifestyles due to the time period they lived in. Both regions operated under feudal systems and enjoyed prosperity and contentment until the Battle of Hastings altered their fates.
The feudal system of the time was based on peasants or serfs, and lords known as thanes who owned the land. The peasants worked on the land and, in return, received the lord’s protection in difficult times. Although the people worked hard, they were happy and prosperous as the labor was rewarded with plenty to eat, drink, and abundant space and virgin land for ambitious individuals to clear and cultivate (Howarth 11). The author mentions a small English village called Horstede which, before the Conquest, was valued at approximately one hundred shillings.
After the Conquest, the village’s value dropped by 50%. It was only worth fifty shillings now and the people were starving due to a lack of workers for the harvest. According to Howarth, one in five of the native population were either killed or starved as a result of William’s actions. Even after twenty years, the village’s value only increased to sixty shillings. A new thane, who was promised land by William, arrived in the village from France. He couldn’t speak the language and only wanted to extract as much as possible from the village. This foreigner ruling over a small place like Horstede is an example of England’s decline. Normandy had some differences in its system, as the Normans were more ruthless than the English. The survival of Norman lords relied on their ability and willingness to defend against other lords. Additionally, they enjoyed fighting, while many English people were starting to appreciate a peaceful life without conflict.
Life in Normandy returned to normal after the events. Although not all of their men returned, there were always replacements to fill the void. The Norman thanes who fought for William acquired English lands and exploited them to their advantage, resulting in increased prosperity. The Normans continued their lifestyle of indulging in wine and engaging in violent activities. Nevertheless, the English never assimilated into the Norman culture and eventually regained control of their country. This crucial distinction between the two nations appears to have greatly influenced the outcome, with William emerging victorious and Harold suffering defeat.
Despite fighting on their home soil, the English troops lacked the warlike and aggressive nature of the Normans, ultimately leading to their failure. Another factor contributing to the English disadvantage was their refusal to engage in civil war, even when commanded by Edward, while the unlucky Normans continuously endured various wars at the same time. The English were evidently more accustomed to peace, whereas the Normans were always prepared and eager to engage in battle at any given moment. With their more aggressive society and better preparedness, the Normans held an advantage even before the battle commenced.
In the book, William of Normandy is depicted as power hungry and deeply upset when he discovers that Harold has been crowned King. He had expected to assume the role upon Edward’s death and invades England with the intention of obtaining the crown that he believes rightfully belongs to him. Additionally, William is portrayed as both cruel and indifferent towards the English people. Despite making promises to be a benevolent ruler upon his coronation, he immediately begins distributing English lands to his own lord, leading to years of oppression, excessive taxation, and rebellion against his tyrannical reign.
Given his background, it is evident that his cruelty can be traced back to it. At just seven years old, he took control in Normandy, although as a vassal under the King of France, he did not possess the true power to govern an entire nation until he successfully conquered England. Throughout his formative years, brutality defined him, prompting Howarth to assert that he exhibited early indications of skillfully employing violent strategies in politics. Starting from age seven onwards, violence became his way of life.
He had extensively communicated his status as a formidable figure in the European courts, as he was poised to assume the English throne. Currently, he was compelled to protect his reputation at any expense. Conversely, Harold seemed to possess a thirst for power as well, evidenced by his successful coronation as king. However, the author emphasizes that Harold was well-liked by most individuals he encountered. According to the author, Harold was perceived as refreshingly ordinary. He exhibited an approachable demeanor, willingly lending an ear to grievances and empathizing with others’ problems. Additionally, he engaged in banter with his soldiers and shared their sense of humor (Howarth 55).
In general, he appears to be a kinder person compared to William, and this may have contributed to his defeat. Multiple coincidences influenced the battle’s result, such as the uncommon winds that helped William cross the channel. Harold had waited throughout the summer for an invasion that never occurred, leading him to believe that William would not be able to cross the channel. As a result, Harold dismissed his troops for the winter. Despite assembling another army, he was unprepared for a fight against William so late in the year.
William, on the contrary, appeared to have luck on his side as numerous coincidences played in his favor. He had favorable wind conditions and a dedicated army. Interestingly, the wind arrived just after Harold’s forces triumphed over Harald’s troops at Stamford Bridge, leaving them occupied with the aftermath of the battle. This allowed William to land without opposition in Pevensey. Although there had previously been a detachment stationed there, they, like Harold’s other soldiers, had departed by the end of summer.
The soldiers in William’s army faced no opposition and went straight inland, where they confronted Harold’s troops at the Battle of Hastings. This turn of events seemed advantageous for William. The Battle of Hastings had a lasting impact on England, with the Normans exerting greater influence and the English gaining resilience and knowledge on rebelling against oppression. Though it was a challenging time for the English, they remained distinctly English, assimilated the invaders, and formed a unique form of Englishness through their amalgamation. Fortunately, the situation could have been much worse.
Works Cited Howarth, David. 1066: The Year of the Conquest. New York: The Viking Press. 1977.
