1066
2007-12-11 03:41:39
·
answer #1
·
answered by aladinsane 4
·
0⤊
3⤋
The Battle of Hastings was the decisive Norman victory in the Norman conquest of England. The battle took place at Senlac Hill, approximately six miles north of Hastings, on which an abbey was subsequently erected.
The battle took place on October 14, 1066, between the Norman army of Duke William of Normandy, and the English army led by King Harold II. Harold was killed during the battle; traditionally, it is believed he was shot through the eye with an arrow. Although there was further English resistance for some time to come, this battle is seen as the point at which William gained control of England.
Glad to be able to help thank you :)
2007-12-11 12:47:27
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Harold had claimed the throne of England for himself in January 1066 soon after Edward the Confessor died. He secured the support of the Witenagemot for his accession. Some sources say that while Edward had promised the throne to his cousin William, on his deathbed he decided to confer it to Harold instead.
Duke William of Normandy held fast to his claim to the throne. He took Harold's hasty ascension as a personal assault against him, simply as a means to prevent him from taking the crown. William had been establishing policy in England for over 15 years, and was not ready to give up his position so easily. He gathered all the troops he could in the following months, secured the blessings of the Pope, and sailed for England.
On September 28, 1066, William, after being delayed by a storm in the English Channel, asserted his claim to the English crown by military force, landing unopposed at a marshy, tidal inlet at Bulverhythe, between what are now the modern towns of Hastings and Bexhill-on-Sea. The beachhead is within two miles of the Senlac battlefield, is sheltered, and has access to high ground, whilst Pevensey, which had long been held to be the Duke's landing place, is marsh-bound—presenting problems for off-loading troops, horses and stores, and remote from the road to London.
Upon hearing the news of the landing of the Duke's forces, the Saxon Harold II, who had just destroyed an invading Norwegian Viking army under King Harald Hardråda and Tostig Godwinson (Harold's brother) at the Battle of Stamford Bridge, hurried southward from London. He departed the morning of 12 October, gathering what available forces he could on the way. After camping at Long Bennington, he arrived at the battlefield the night of 13 October.
The Viking Invasion by Hardrada had nothing to do with THe Norman invasion and was an entirely seperate bid for the English crown.
2007-12-12 18:04:18
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Don't forget that there was supposed to be a coordinated attack. Harald Haardrada, the Scandinavian monarch, had arranged it with Duke William of Normandy. However, the Norman invasion was delayed, giving the English Harold time to take his forces north and defeat Haardrada at Stamford Bridge (near York).
He might, in fact, have been able to defeat William, too, had he not rushed south to the detriment of his forces. But the Normans were deliberately devastating the countryside to force him to a rushed confrontation.
As to the overall why, I believe that requires some analysis of the family relationships behind the various claims to possession of England. Those got messy: two of Harold's brothers were killed at Stamford Bridge, fighting on Haardrada's side.
2007-12-11 11:57:21
·
answer #4
·
answered by Samwise 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
it took place in 1066. It was the last battle on British soil. After the battle the British Empire was established.So this battle litterally created the British Empire
2007-12-11 12:01:12
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Well, there's this web-page...
"Why did the battle happen?"
which might fit the bill.
Basically the Normans (French-speaking and French-acculturated Vikings) looking for a chance to expand, coupled with a dispute over the succession to the English throne.
2007-12-11 11:48:27
·
answer #6
·
answered by Pedestal 42 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
because so-called "royals" traditionally in-bred all over Europe and thus have claims to thrones all over the place - Normans were French but as their name suggests they were originally Norsemen (Vikings). King Cnut was the ancestor of loads of Viking, Northumbrian and Norman noblemen who all wanted a piece of his old empire - Part of that was part of England......... The Anglo Saxons disagreed - They beat Harald Hardrada but didn't beat William -
2007-12-11 11:54:40
·
answer #7
·
answered by john n 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
Because Duke William of Normandy believed he had the right of succession to the English throne,,
2007-12-11 11:41:56
·
answer #8
·
answered by McCanns are guilty 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
Some French dude believed he owned the Country
2007-12-11 11:46:17
·
answer #9
·
answered by No! I'm NOT Elton John 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
The Normans were trying to take over...William of Normandy was the aggressor...
2007-12-11 11:44:28
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋