He was lucky he took his eye off the proceedings for a while, unlike Harold. Lo xxx
2007-10-23 04:59:39
·
answer #1
·
answered by Lo 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
William only just won the Battle of Senlac Ridge (Hastings). The tatcics he used in the start of the battle where easily countered by the English, taking the brunt of the fight on the Sheild wall (Interlocking shields and buffering 3 or 4 people behind as a wall) as the afternoon wore on the English where being constantly reienforced by small bands of troops arriving from the long marches from the shires and Stamford Bridge (The Battle Harold had fought a few weeks before against hi Brother and Norse allies in Yorkshire area) and although exhausted where able to shore up the wall and replace those that had been killed already.
The Tactical change came when William ordered a joint operation between Archers firing high into the line behind the wall and a charge by his light horse, giving the English no time to change sheild positions. It is speculation as to if Harold was hit in the eye by an arrow or not as his remains where removed from battle or where so badly mutilated once the Normans and their Allies in the battle gained a foot hold on the ridge and slashed every Saxon they could find, including the wounded and killed (remember it takes a lot of cuts to kill someone or to cause them to loose so much blood they die, the thrust to the heart or head wound that kills is very rare unless you are injured or dying already and can not defend yourself).
As for the sabres. The Saxons had an aray of wepons the main choice being the broad saxon axe or spear. Not many would have been able to afford a sword or those that did would have been dulled in years of rest or from the previous battle as there was no chance for the equipment to be sharpened.
One of the other underlying reasons for the loss of the Battle is the way the English Saxon Army was raised. The Campaign Season was almost over, most of the House Carls could only raise a limited number of troops due to the Harvest Season and after 1 Battle the ordinary Saxon was normally released from the service that year to be replaced by another taken from the fiefdom. This of course could not happen when the Army is forced marched so far to meet a new invader so soon after another and also why Harold remained on the defensive rather than Attack.
2007-10-23 23:02:57
·
answer #2
·
answered by Kevan M 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
I have a horrible feeling that you're probably just trying to be funny, but nevertheless here goes :
Harold and his army had just defeated a Norwegian army at the battle of Stamford Bridge in Yorkshire on September 25th and had marched all the way from there down to Sussex to face William on October 14th - so, for a start, they were probably all knackered.
Despite this, the battle could have gone either way during the day and it was only really when Harold himself was killed and the Saxons lost their strategic advantage by chasing the routed Normans down Senlac Hill, that William won the battle.
2007-10-23 04:29:04
·
answer #3
·
answered by the_lipsiot 7
·
3⤊
0⤋
It's also partly to do with luck and timing. Harold II had barely finished putting down an uprising in the North of England when William's army finally landed at Hastings. He had to march his already battle weary soldiers hundreds of miles to meet with William's invading army.
2007-10-23 04:27:04
·
answer #4
·
answered by luckythirteen 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
The tactic of the 'feigned' flight was used with success by the Norman horsemen throughout the day. In addition to the Saxons being tired from their earlier fight with Hadrada mentioned above and the march to meet the Normans, they were outwitted on the field of battle. The death of Harold hastened their demise. The result was a Norman victory.
2007-10-23 09:15:13
·
answer #5
·
answered by Its not me Its u 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Harolds housecarls broke the shieldwall that had repelled Williams' knights. William had his knights break away in confusion, this was just a ruse for Harolds' knights to break ranks on the Shieldwall and give chase. English knights fought on foot in those days whiled the normands were on horse, william took advantage of the housecarls breaking formation, and turned arround and was able to charge the now disorganized shieldwall.
2007-10-23 06:37:14
·
answer #6
·
answered by felipe1974 1
·
1⤊
0⤋
Mainly, it's because Harold made tactical mistakes. William, against a better adversary, would not have won the battle.
2007-10-23 04:58:39
·
answer #7
·
answered by Beastie 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
The answer could be that the Saxon chiefs did the most stupid of things they ran after the fleeing Normans got surrounded and being cut off from the rest of their army were cut down by William's calvary.
2007-10-23 04:26:53
·
answer #8
·
answered by kevin 1
·
4⤊
1⤋
Mostly because the English had just repelled an invasion by the Vikings, and were a tired army facing a fresh army.
2007-10-23 04:21:27
·
answer #9
·
answered by open4one 7
·
3⤊
0⤋
a contributary cause to Harold's losing was that he and his men had just fought Harald at the battle of Stamford and had a long march down to the south coast
2007-10-23 05:26:21
·
answer #10
·
answered by rosie recipe 7
·
1⤊
0⤋