Harold The Godwinson Analysis

475 Words2 Pages
After Edward the Confessor death in 1066 the question of who should follow him as a king appeared. The Witan chose Harold the Godwinson to be the king of England. Harold had already shown his bravery and ability, he had no royal blood but he seemed a good choice for the throne of England. Harold’s right to the English throne was challenged by Duke William of Normandy. He had two claims to the English throne, the first was that King Edward had promised it to him, the second claim was that Harold, who had visited William in the past, had promised William that he – Harold – would not try to take the throne for himself. Harold didn’t deny that claim but said that he had made the promise unwillingly and because of that he was not tied by it. What is more, Danish Vikings hadn’t given up their claim to the English…show more content…
No sooner had he defeated them than William landed in England with an army. (He had ignored the fact that his men were tired and decided to march south as fast as possible. He thought that he could beat William’s small army and decided not to wait for the whole Saxon army. However, the Norman soldiers were better armed and organized, and were mounted on horses. Harold might have won if he had waited but) he was defeated and killed in the battle of Hastings. William – “The Conqueror” marched to London, which quickly gave in and he was crowned king of England in Edward’s church of Westminister Abbey on Christmas Day, 1066. A new period has begun. There was an Anglo-Saxon rebellion against the Normans every year until 1070. The small Norman army marched from village to village, destroying places which it couldn’t control. When the Saxons fought back, the Normans burnt, destroyed and killed. It took a century for the north to recover. William gave the Saxon lands to his Norman nobles. After each rebellion there was more land to give away. William was careful in the way he gave land to
Open Document