Harold and William Both Die at Hastings in 1066

We had a similar thread before, but we apparently threads become "too old" before 3 years so I wanted to talk about this

In OTL, the Anglo-Saxons at Hastings held favorable high ground. The Normans, despite being professional soldiers against a mix of professionals and the levied fyrd, suffered heavy losses for little gain until a unit of Bretons fled, the English chased, and then Norman cavalry made short work of the out of position pursuers. They then followed this up with a bunch of fake retreats which the English kept falling for.

Suppose that in TTL, the English learn after their first butt kicking to not leave the safety of their shield wall until reinforcements arrive. The fighting continuous until the dark, and both sides get disorganized. The Normans suffered the brunt of the fighting and had their ranks thinned during the day, so in some places they break first, while the English enter pursuit in those areas. In other places, the fighting continuous oblivious to the holes in the Norman formation. Leofwine and Harold Godwinson eventually both realize some have broken off to peruse, and they try to reorganize in the dark by going forward and reestablishing the line further ahead, but both they and their personal guard venture ahead of their own lines by accident.

In the moonlight (or torchlight? I don't know how medieval battles even continue after sun goes down), Harold sees a well-dressed noble on a horse and thinks if he can defeat him, the Normans will rout. He downs the noble and does cause a local rout. However, a lone knight avenges the noble, deals Harold a blow to the head before slinking back into the darkness, joining his fleeing comrades. Harold does not awaken and dies shortly after the sun rises.

Some of the English venture as far as the Norman camp and are stopped there since they had came too far from their comrades. Others only move slowly from their original positions on the hill, engaging whatever Normans they could find in the dark. Most of the fighting ended a few hours after sunset, but the last bit of fighting occurs in the few minutes after dawn when some English who ventured miles too far get cut down when it is clear most of the English are in the immediate vicinity of the hill. The Norman host lost 70% of their manpower and the English won with a 3 to 1 casualty ratio in their favor.

The Normans evacuate. One Knight brings back William's body and says he had avenged William after most of the rest of the Normans in the area fled. On the English side, they realize both Leofwine and Harold are dead. Harold's retinue gives a description of the noble Harold personally downed and this roughly matches William's description.

What happens in England now? Is animosity between England and Normandy destined to occur, or is it possible for Harold's successor to let bygones be bygones in favor of stabilizing his realm and keeping the money from the channel trade continuing?

Who even is Harold's successor? We have mentions of him having children named Godwin, Edmund, Magnus, and Gunild, but nothing about their ages and no information about their lives before Hastings or even their birthdays.

How is Harold remembered for in 1066? He surprised the Norwegians at Stamford Bridge, and beat them soundly. Then he doubled back to surprise William, but when that didn't work successfully bottled them in on favorable ground. He stopped his lines from falling for fake retreats after a group of English got cut down chasing a real retreat. During the night, he managed to find what was probably William and slayed him. His army controlled the battlefield at dawn and had a casualty ratio of 3 to 1. That's not Caesar's the 97 to 1 when he suffered 400 casualties at Pharsalus to Pompey's 39,000 killed or captured, but 3 to 1 is still pretty good when you remember the English had a lot of levied men. "It's over William, I have the high ground!"
 
There's probably going to be some ill feeling between England and Normandy, but not eternal ill will or anything - just that ruffled feelings will take a while to unruffle as people figure out "Now what?"

Edgar the Atheling is likely the next king - he was elected OTL after Hastings so far as "Who would support that?" (presumably from a lack of acceptable alternatives as much as any real commitment), and here is a much more secure situation for him to stay king. Though at fifteen or so, what kind of king he'd be and how well he'd do is a good question. And Harold's children probably bear keeping an eye on as far as watching the earls, but that's medieval kingship for you.

Harold is probably just a "died too soon to really see what kind of king he'd be" figure to most people and 1066 is just not a monumental "and everything changed when the Normans invaded." thing.
 
Last edited:
Harold is probably just a "died too soon to really see what kind of king he'd be" figure to most people and 1066 is just not a monumental "and everything changed when the Normans invaded." thing.
Harold could probably become a 'King in the mountain' type of figure, having defended England from invasion twice in his short reign.
 
"and everything changed when the Normans invaded." thing.

Indeed, some semi-revisionist history fans sometimes ask "was King X of England/ Hungary/ Bohemia/ Demark all that important that he ascended?" who think a lot of aristocracy of one family is interchangeable with their cousins, the Norman arrival is one of the few definite "everything changed" kind of thing. You can ask if Sophia of Hannover would be that much different than Goerge of Hannover, but so many things would be different without William. For one thing, this text here would not be "English" to people of TTL, but some gibberish.
 
Harold could probably become a 'King in the mountain' type of figure, having defended England from invasion twice in his short reign.
It's not out of the question, that's for sure.

Indeed, some semi-revisionist history fans sometimes ask "was King X of England/ Hungary/ Bohemia/ Demark all that important that he ascended?" who think a lot of aristocracy of one family is interchangeable with their cousins, the Norman arrival is one of the few definite "everything changed" kind of thing. You can ask if Sophia of Hannover would be that much different than Goerge of Hannover, but so many things would be different without William. For one thing, this text here would not be "English" to people of TTL, but some gibberish.
Though it is a very good question (and one I am entirely unqualified to answer) how English evolves here. It's probably still changing from what it was a thousand years ago, if not to this.
 
Though it is a very good question (and one I am entirely unqualified to answer) how English evolves here. It's probably still changing from what it was a thousand years ago, if not to this.

I wasn't asking how English changes (or how much it would) in particular. I was just saying William is probably one of the biggest counter examples to that kind of revisionism of "eh, who's king does it matter much?"
 
It's not out of the question, that's for sure.


Though it is a very good question (and one I am entirely unqualified to answer) how English evolves here. It's probably still changing from what it was a thousand years ago, if not to this.
Looking at Frisian would be decent starting point, I would reckon. That is the closest living language group to the Anglic languages, after all.

Regardless, it is quite unlikely that English ends up with 2/3rds of its vocabulary being derived from French or Latin if not for the Norman conquest. Having the entirety of the upper classes speak mostly Anglo-Norman for centuries and so much more cross-Channel interaction is unlikely to occur in any other scenario.
 
I wasn't asking how English changes (or how much it would) in particular. I was just saying William is probably one of the biggest counter examples to that kind of revisionism of "eh, who's king does it matter much?"
Just bringing it up as far as that it's an interesting aspect even if England doesn't orient itself around the east/north - just one I am not qualified to give any specifics on.

Looking at Frisian would be decent starting point, I would reckon. That is the closest living language group to the Anglic languages, after all.

Regardless, it is quite unlikely that English ends up with 2/3rds of its vocabulary being derived from French or Latin if not for the Norman conquest. Having the entirety of the upper classes speak mostly Anglo-Norman for centuries and so much more cross-Channel interaction is unlikely to occur in any other scenario.

Yeah. I would not be surprised if there's still plenty of cross-Channel interaction of some sort - but it is a very different sort.
 
I wasn't asking how English changes (or how much it would) in particular. I was just saying William is probably one of the biggest counter examples to that kind of revisionism of "eh, who's king does it matter much?"
Unless some Anglo-Saxon king decides to import Frankish/Norman nobles and customs to strengthen his position - aka an English Davidian revolution. Say if there, for some reason, suddenly were a lot of masterless Norman knights that already had started building castles in southern England that you could use as a counterweight to the native Saxon nobility. ;)
 
Last edited:
Unless some Anglo-Saxon king decides to import Frankish/Norman nobles and customs to strengthen his position - aka an English Davidian revolution. Say if there, for some reason, suddenly were a lot of masterless Norman knights that already had started building castles in southern England that you could use as a counterweight to the native Saxon nobility. ;)

Edgar really can't offend his new nobles too much by taking the land of the old English aristocracy and giving them to people who recently came in as invaders. That said, he might make buddies with some of Edward's old Norman and Breton friends. In fact, Harold de facto exiling a good portion of those friends who had landed relatives in Normandy, some of whom only reluctantly sided with their bastard duke when he came to power (since they saw the writing on the wall) but would end supporting him in 1066 a bit more vigorously instead of half hearted lip service. In fact, IIRC one of the Breton commanders at Hastings wasn't just a family member, but I think one of Edward's buddies
 
Ok. Now let's ask if this scenario is all out of the question: Just before arriving at Hastings, Harald already fought the battle of Stanford Bridge where he defeated the army of the Norwegian king Harold Hardrada... Who also had an eye on the English throne. The battle was a decisive English victory with Hardrada getting killed in the process and giving the Normans such a good trashing that whoever won at Hastings, William or Harry (sorry....) never would have to worry about any Scandinavian invasions.

But what if both Harald AND William get killed at Hastings? Harald, as mentioned above had a son aged 15. William's son, the future William II, was still a toddler. Hardrada in Norway had two sons: Magnus and Olaf, aged 16 and 17 who OTL became co-rulers upon their father's death. Although Magnus I'd today mostly forgotten, and Olaf is OTL remembered as 'Olaf the Peaceful', with the English throne now once again in question, the two might be compelled to launch another invasion to 1) avenge their father and 2) unite the whole country behind them in the process.... And without Harald Godwinson as a competent English commander this time they might well succeed. So instead of England staying Saxon and England becoming Norman, there is a distinct third possibility: England becoming Scandinavian and today being culturally closer to Norway and Sweden than to mainland Europe.
 
I imagine OTL's post-Hastings scheme to promote Edgar the Atheling to kingship would probably come off ITTL. The Archbishops and the two northern Earls would be the dominant figures of this regime, and whether Edgar would be able to escape from under their thumb and assert himself as he grew older would be in question.

Though it would potentially be a rather fragile regime, with Harold's sons, Harald's sons, and even Sweyn of Denmark all potentially sniffing around.

Some sort of marital rapprochement could be attempted, a daughter of Harold being an obvious candidate- especially if the Godwin faction manage to maintain some reasonable coherence in the aftermath of the battle (Harold's mother Gytha is still around, and could rally for the interests of her grandsons; maybe the last surviving brother Wulfnoth even escapes/get released from his Norman captivity and becomes a factor?).

Reputedly there is also a son of Edward's other nephew Ralph the Timid still about. He could factor into things somehow.
 
Some observations:
In the moonlight (or torchlight? I don't know how medieval battles even continue after sun goes down)
That’s because in the main they didn’t. I won’t say they always ended at sundown (because I’m sure someone will supply an example of a night battle ;)) but in general they did. It allowed both forces to withdraw and lick their wounds (and let’s not forget Hastings had already been a long battle and combatants on both sides must have been spent). Night fighting was dangerous – not because of your enemy – but because you couldn’t see jack… Would a full moon make a difference? Sort of moot because October 14, 1066, was a last or third quarter moon according to this site .
On the English side, they realize both Leofwine and Harold are dead.
So, Earl Gyrth of East Anglia, the (surviving) brother between Harold and Leofwine is still alive?
Who even is Harold's successor? We have mentions of him having children named Godwin, Edmund, Magnus, and Gunild, but nothing about their ages and no information about their lives before Hastings or even their birthdays.
And another daughter, Gytha. Not to mention (the likely twins) Harold and Ulf, born into the purple albeit posthumously. Would (all) these sons be regarded as athelings?
William's son, the future William II, was still a toddler.
The ‘Conqueror’ had three living sons at this date – Robert, Richard and William.
Ages: iirc, Harold’s eldest (Godwin) is maybe 18yo… Edgar the Atheling maybe 15/16yo… the ‘Conqueror’s’ eldest (Robert) is of an age with Edgar… Hardrada’s sons, idk, but @ennobee ‘s suggestion seems reasonable… So, all young men who are likely to be receiving ‘advice’ from much more experienced persons…

@Elfwine and @Tyler96 are probably correct in that Edgar the Atheling becomes king… but I imagine there would be a lot of horse-trading going on, especially with a surviving Earl Gyrth. Whatever the pretensions of the other earls in England (Edwin of Mercia, Waltheof of Huntingdon, Oswulf of Bamburgh and Morcar of Northumbria – although I have doubts about the last), it will be Gyrth that does the kingmaking.
 
I have a suspicion that the death of not one, not two, but three figures in the course of a year creates a sort of "God's chosen king" aura around Edgar and maybe the house of Wessex more generally, especially if the Confessor gets venerated to the degree he was in OTL.
 
Night fighting was dangerous – not because of your enemy – but because you couldn’t see jack…

I imagine most of the English casualties happen during this time. I also bet some people who have been up for 18 hours simply collapsed and got walked on by his own allies.

So, Earl Gyrth of East Anglia, the (surviving) brother between Harold and Leofwine is still alive?

Yeah

Whatever the pretensions of the other earls in England (Edwin of Mercia, Waltheof of Huntingdon, Oswulf of Bamburgh and Morcar of Northumbria – although I have doubts
about the last), it will be Gyrth that does the kingmaking.

Morcar and Edwin are the most powerful Earls after Harold's family members right?
 
Edgar really can't offend his new nobles too much by taking the land of the old English aristocracy and giving them to people who recently came in as invaders.
With Harold’s family members as potential claimants running around, powerful earls and bishops wanting to limit his power and a potential Danish invasion as a prospect I think it’s likely he’d ally with anyone he could.
 
What would happen in Normandy with King William dead?

Also could the English have driven the Norman back into the sea quickly or could the Normans have dug in and regrouped?
 
Top