The Norwegian Invasion Of England In 1066

Three weeks before the battle of Hastings, Harold defeated an invading army of Norwegians at the battle of Stamford Bridge, a victory which was to cost him dear. The events surrounding the battle are discussed in detail. This very accessible narrative...tells the story of 'the first two important battles of 1066', Fulford Gate and Stamford Bridge, and of the leaders of the opposing English and Norwegian factions. CHOICE He places the invasion in a broad context. He outlines the Anglo-Scandinavian nature of the English kingdom in the eleventh century, traces the careers of the major leaders, and devotes a chapter each to the English and Norwegian military systems. JOURNAL OF MILITARY HISTORY William the Conqueror's invasion in 1066 was not the only attack on England that year. On September 25, 1066, less than three weeks before William defeated King Harold II Godwinson at the battle of Hastings, that same Harold had been victorious over his other opponent of 1066, King Haraldr Hardrádi of Norway at the battle of Stamford Bridge. It was an impressive victory, driving an invading army of Norwegians from theearldom of Northumbria; but it was to cost Harold dear. In telling the story of this neglected battle, Kelly DeVries traces the rise and fall of a family of English warlords, the Godwins, as well as that of the equally impressiveNorwegian warlord Hardrádi. KELLY DEVRIES is Associate Professor, Department of History, Loyola College in Maryland.

Everyone knows what William the Conqueror won the Battle of Hastings in 1066, but in recent years is has become customary to assume that the victory was virtually inevitable, given the alleged superiority of Norman military technology. In this new study, underpinned by biographical sketches of the great warriors who fought for the crown of England in 1066, Frank McLynn shows that this view is mistaken. The battle on Senlac Hill on 14 October was a desperately close-run thing, which Harold lost only because of an incredible run of bad fortune and some treachery from the Saxon elite in England. Both William and Harold were fine generals, but Harold was the more inspirational of the two. Making use of all the latest scholarship, McLynn shows that most of our 'knowledge' of 1066 rests on myths or illusions: Harold did not fight at Hastings with the same army with which he had been victorious at Stamford Bridge three weeks earlier; the Battle of Senlac was not won by Norman archery; Harold did not die with an arrow in the eye. In overturning these myths, McLynn shows that the truth is even more astonishing than the legend. An original feature of the book is the space devoted to the career and achievements of Harald Hardrada, who usually appears in such narratives as the shadowy 'third man'. McLynn shows that he was probably the greatest warrior of the three and that he, in turn, lost a battle through unforeseen circumstances.

The Norman Conquest of 1066 and the Viking Conquest by Cnut in 1016 both had huge impacts on the history of England, and yet "1066" has eclipsed "1016" in popular culture. This book challenges that side-lining of Cnut's conquest by presenting compelling evidence that the Viking Conquest of 1016 was the single most influential cause of 1066. This neglected Viking Conquest of 1016 led to the exiling to Normandy and Hungary of the rightful Anglo-Saxon heirs to the English throne, entangled English politics with those of Normandy and Scandinavia, purged and destabilized the Anglo-Saxon ruling class, caused an English king to look abroad for allies in his conflict with over-mighty subjects, and, finally, in 1066 ensured that Harold Godwinson was in the north of England when the Normans landed on the south coast. As if that was not enough, it was the continuation of the Scandinavian connection after 1066 which largely ensured that a Norman victory became a traumatic Norman Conquest.

The Norman Conquest of 1066 and the Viking Conquest by Cnut in 1016 both had huge impacts on the history of England and yet '1066' has eclipsed '1016' in popular culture. This book challenges that side-lining of Cnut's conquest by presenting compelling evidence that the Viking Conquest of 1016 was the single most influential cause of 1066. This neglected Viking Conquest of 1016 led to the exiling to Normandy and Hungary of the rightful Anglo-Saxon heirs to the English throne, entangled English politics with those of Normandy and Scandinavia, purged and destabilized the Anglo-Saxon ruling class, caused an English king to look abroad for allies in his conflict with over-mighty subjects and, finally, in 1066 ensured that Harold Godwinson was in the north of England when the Normans landed on the south coast. As if that was not enough, it was the continuation of the Scandinavian connection after 1066 which largely ensured that a Norman victory became a traumatic Norman Conquest.

This edition investigates the Norman Conquest from a number of perspectives, examining the dynamics of colonisation & exploring the effect of the Norman settlement in a number of key areas, including government, military organisation & the Church.

This book takes a new look at Scandinavian invasions of England after 991 and the personalities involved, drawing on re-examination of manuscript sources.