Battle of Hastings: New Interpretation of the Bayeux Tapestry

New Interpretation of the Bayeux Tapestry

 I will use  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayeux_Tapestry_tituli   as the source for the Bayeux Tapestry illustrations so as to create a common point of reference. I will use scene numbers to refer the reader to the exact point on the Tapestry where I would like to direct their attention

Structure of the Tapestry 

 I will be referring to “frames”, "cameos" and  referring the reader to the equivalent “scenes” on the Wiki page. Frames, which are more suggestive of movement in a cartoon, are individual pictures on the Tapestry that can be viewed in isolation. For instance, one such frame on the Tapestry starts at the left-hand side of Scene 52b and finishes just to the left of centre in Scene 53 (black horse and rider facing left). However, a frame can have one or more “cameo”s depicting events that happened in close proximity timewise

My interpretation of the Bayeux Tapestry starts on Scene 48 where it is thought that picture shows the Norman knights setting off to meet the English.  It ends on Scene 58 with the Fyrd running away from the battle scene.

Scene 48 to 49 

This shows the Norman knights traversing fairly flat terrain finishing with a knight pointing, with raised arm, to the English. Notice however, that the terrain that the Normans cross is relatively flat. This does not match the terrain between the coastal fort and the location of the muster point. This leads to one of two conclusions. Either the Tapestry is wrong, or William travelled to the area from a place other than Hastings. Assuming the Tapestry is right, where else could William have been? It turns out that the Abbey at Fécamp (where Edward the Confessor spent time whilst exiled, allegedly), had a manor in the vicinity of Guestling and Kathleen Tyson asserts in her translation of the Carmen that William was there just prior to the battle.  It seems to me therefore that the Tapestry is showing the correct terrain and that William was at a location other than Hastings. 

Frame "Lauds ( Dawn or about 07:00) 

This frame runs from Scene 49 to Scene 50 and depicts the Normans gathering at the muster point at Telham and pointing out the English while on the English side it depicts the Normans being spotted by the English and Harold being informed.

The first cameo shows two Norman knights on the top of the hill between present day Battle and Hastings. It omits the hilltop fort which according to experts the Normans always built on their campaigns in France but if we are to match the terrain from the Tapestry to the modern landscape, then what we are looking at in the cameo is a cross section of the ridge that runs from the turning for Battle Station to the Castle at Hastings. Given in the previous section the knights where moving along flat ground then I’m assuming that the footpath from Kent Street to Telham by the Black Horse pub was the route used and that the Normans are assembling in the vicinity of the Black Horse public house.

The next cameo highlights the English response. The usual explanation of this cameo is that this is the English “scouts” on Caldbec Hill spotted the Normans to the south and who then rushed off to tell Harold.  Both Englishmen are depicted as Huscarls dressed in armour – hardly suitable attire for “scouts”. And yes, the designs on each of the shields are different so this could be indicating that these are different people. 

The location of the Huscarls is problematic. If the Huscarls were camped on Caldbec Hill the Normans on the hill opposite would have no reason to use an alternative path off the Hastings peninsula and should have continued along the main London to Hastings route and the first encounter would have taken place at the roundabout at the top of Battle High Street but then there would be no need for the Huscarls to mount their horses in order to ride the 700 metres to the encounter as per Orderic Vitalis‘s account.

If the Huscarls were located at Beechdown Wood, then two possibilities exist for the site of the first encounter;

The roundabout at the top of Battle High Street 

The Normans, knowing Harold was in the vicinity of Netherfield, struck out along the modern

 A 2100. The Huscarls then rode to the roundabout from their overnight camp and gave battle. 

2

      Area of flat ground to the NE of Catsfield.

The Normans, seeing the Huscarls, struck out along the alternative route towards Catsfield. The Huscarls then rode to meet the Normans at what they thought was “a good spot” in a meadow called “Scan- leag”.

There is also a timing issue. The Sun would not be behind the Normans until after 08:00 if the Huscarls were situated on Caldbec Hill but from Beechdown Wood the Sun would be behind the Normans between 06:45 and 07:15 and low down necessitating the shielding of the eyes.

                                    Event               Bearing            Sun Elevation             Time

Caldbec Hill    

                                    Sunrise             106°                        0°                           06:26 GMT

            Norman Muster point - 10°     127°                       14°                          08:13 GMT

            Norman Muster Point              137°                       19°                         08:58 GMT

            Norman Muster Point + 10°    147°                       23°                         09:38 GMT

Beechdown Wood

                                    Sunrise             106°                      0°                            06:26 GMT

            Norman Muster Point              approx 111°          4°                            06:57 GMT

            Norman Muster Point + 10°    approx 121°        10°                            07:43 GMT

* Data taken from https://www.timeanddate.com/ for Hastings UK 21 October 2019 (equates to 14 October 1066 Julien Calendar) and Google Earth. The first engagement starts at approx. 09:00 GMT (Tierce).

Thus, in my opinion, the narrative becomes “…. Lead elements of King Harold’s Army had camped in Beechdown Wood for the evening of the 13^th and on the morning of the 14^th October 1066 spotted the Norman Army on the hill to the south east ...”

Frame "Tierce" ( about 09:00)

This includes Scenes 51, 51b and 52a

We are now shown the Normans charging the English shield wall on Scenes 51 and 51b. On Scene 52a we see the English drawn up behind their shields forming their famous shield wall. This frame continues on Scene 52a where we see the Normans attacking from the opposite direction. I interpret this as saying that the Normans advanced until they made contact with the English and subsequently surrounded them. Notice that all bar one person is wearing armour- the mark of a Huscarl, the other person is depicted as being an archer. So, the narrative here, in my opinion, is “The Normans attacked the Huscarls from all sides …”  I estimate that Harold sent about 2500 Huscarls forward to delay the Norman approach long enough to allow the Fyrd[1] to dig in and to allow late coming Huscarls time to catch their breath.  There is another body of men missing from this frame, namely the Norman infantry. I think there are two reasons for this.

Reason 1: The Norman infantry did not acquit themselves well in the first engagement. Each year there is a re-enactment on the “Official” battlefield and each year the public outcome is the same. However, in the evening after the public have gone home the re-enactors have a “private” battle in which the superior strength and tactics of the Huscarls always win out. So, it is conceivable that if William had had fewer knights in his army then perhaps the invasion could have been stopped here.

Reason 2: The Tapestry was produced as a piece of propaganda to show the inhabitants of Normandy the prowess of their leaders. Rather like a politically biased newspaper of modern times, the Bayeux Tapestry only tells the story that the “owners” want to be told.

That brings me to the question of where this engagement took place. The Bayeux Tapestry offers no clues as to where because this was not the main event. It could be that the Huscarls formed up at the roundabout at the top of Battle High Street or to the northeast of Catsfield, we may never know for certain. Orderic Vitalis calls the place where this engagement took place “Senlac”. It has been suggested that this name comes from the Saxon “Scen-leag” meaning “beautiful meadow” (Charnock S).

Frame "Sext" ( about 12:00)

This runs from Scene 52b until the black horse facing left in Scene53 and depicts the “mopping up” operations after the shield wall collapses.

The Tapestry makes a point in saying that the kin of Harold - Gyrth and Leofwine, are killed during this engagement as if to make the point there was no one left to “inherit” the throne of England.

Frame "None" (about 15:00)

This runs from beneath the black horse facing left in Scene 53 to whomever is pointing out William in Scene 55 (Scene 56a seems to be identical). This frame depicts, in my opinion,  the initial assault on the English Fyrd line, the subsequent rout of the knights and the following rallying of said knights by William and Odo. 

My view of this frame is that it represents a new attack on troops that had been given time to prepare stout defences against the Norman knights. We know from earlier in the Bayeux Tapestry that Harold had spent time as William’s “guest” in Normandy and so Harold would have been familiar with the tactics of the Norman knights. Harold, earlier in the day had sacrificed about 2500 Huscarls in order to give himself time to prepare the defences to protect his lesser able troops and late arriving Huscarls. And it very nearly worked.

Frame  "Vespers" ( about 18:00)

This runs from Scene 56 to just left of the centre of Scene 58. This frame shows the English line being overrun, death of King Harold and the subsequent death of the remaining Huscarls.

This is, maybe, the penultimate frame on the Tapestry. The narrative has a gap from the Norman knights being rallied to essentially the extermination of the English Army. There is nothing controversial in this frame other than the “arrow in the eye” incident. It looks like King Harold is trying to pull the arrow out but is not shown to be in distress. The next cameo shows King Harold being slain by a knight. I think the arrow in the eye is very much a disabling injury and not a fatal one as evidenced by two members of the rapidly departing Fyrd in Scene 58.

One may notice Huscarls being amongst the combatants in this frame and start to wonder why they hadn’t joined their fellows in the first engagement in the morning. The reason could be one of two. Firstly, these are late arriving Huscarls who arrived after the lead elements had set off to halt the Normans. Secondly, these Huscarls depicted could be the personal bodyguard of King Harold II.

Frame "Compline"? (about 21:00)

Again, this runs from a black horse just to the left of centre in Scene 58 to the end. This frame could just be part of the previous frame showing how the different parts of the English Army dealt with defeat (Huscarls fought to the last man while the Fyrd ran) or it could be portraying the early stages of the Malfosse incident as a separate frame.

Conclusion of my Interpretation of the Bayeux Tapestry

Although I have drawn different conclusions on only 10 scenes of the Bayeux Tapestry, I think that I have a more coherent understanding of how the battle unfolded and why it is reputed to have lasted 9 hours instead of the usual 2 to 3 hours. 

Using the current view (http://historylearning.com/medieval-england/bayeux-tapestry/bayeux-tapestry-scene-by-scene/) of the Bayeux Tapestry from Scene 48 to Scene 58 gives:-

1.      The Normans ride into battle.

2.      William leads the Army.

3.      Harold prepares for battle.

4.      The Normans attack.

5.      The English are attacked on all sides.

6.      The Battle continues.

7.      The slaughter continues.

8.      William’s horse falls.

9.      Harold is shot in the eye.

10.  The Normans are victorious.

N.B Each statement is supported by one or more sentences on the website

 Using my interpretation of the Tapestry (from Plate 55 b) to Plate 73) gives:

             Lauds

1.      The Normans spot the English

2.      The lead elements of the English army spot the Normans and rush to inform King Harold.

Tierce

3.      The Normans set off to meet the English.

4.      The Huscarls have managed to form their shield wall but the Normans attack from all sides.

Sext

5.      The Normans prove too strong for the Huscarls but the Huscarls fight and die to the last man as they are trained to do.

6.      The Normans dispatch the last of the Huscarls.

None

7.      Norman knights take casualties due to unseen defences at the new battle line. A few knights manage to launch their spears / light lances, but the defences hold. 

8.      Eventually the knights panic and rout due to the number of casualties.

9.      William rallies his knights by showing his face.

Vespers

10.  The English position is overrun and King Harold II killed.

11.  The remaining Huscarls take as many Norman knights with them for company as the Huscarls follow their leader into death.

Possibly Compline

12.   Some members of the Fyrd escape into the woods.

One final point to make. If King Harold II is killed at around Vespers, then my interpretation of the Bayeux Tapestry would make the second engagement the main engagement and the engagement with the Huscarls just a preliminary.

---

[1] The Fyrd are the Light infantry of Saxon England being made up of less able troops.

Casualties at the Battle(s) of Hastings

Casualties at the Battles

Just a quick one looking over the ramifications of casualty rates in the Norman and English Armies. 

1. Norman Army

Let's start off with we are told 

                                      a)  The Norman Army consisted of equal numbers of archers, infantry and                                                  knights. 

                                      b)  We are not told the actual numbers of dead but we are told that they were                                              similar to the English ones. 

                                       c)  The Army totalled about 7000 in number. 

Okay,  let's make some assumptions

                                       1)  We'll assume for arguments sake that the split in William's army was 

                                              2500 Infantry

                                              2500 Knights and 

                                              2000 Archers. 

2. English Army

The only thing we know for sure was that the English army was comparable to the Norman Army. 

3. The Calculation

I'm going to assume a casualty number of 3000 with 80% of the Norman infantry making up that number

3.1 Norman Casualties

80% of 2500 = 2000

that leaves 1000 coming from the Norman knights ( 40% casualty rate)

I'm assuming the archers never got close enough to engage with hand to hand fighting

3.2 English Casualties

Not knowing the split between the Huscarls and the Fyrd means we have to solve a set of simultaneous equations with a few assumptions. 

I'm going with 

1) All Huscarls perished at Hastings

                                                     2) Same number of casualties as the Normans

So the two "equations" are 

                                                    Huscarls( dead)  + Fyrd (dead)  = 3000

                                                    Huscarls (alive ) + Fyrd (alive) = 7000

so                                                                          Huscarls (dead) = Huscarls (alive)

It's very interesting if you do multiple calculations with different casualty rates for the Fyrd. For instance, if you assume a casualty rate of 30% amongst the Fyrd then the maths say that approx 1700 of approx 5100 Fyrd perished along with just over 1200 Huscarls. If the Fyrd casualty rate is dropped to 10% then the numbers change to approx 444 of approx 4444 Fyrd perishing but the number of Huscarls swells to approx 2600. 

There is a upper bound to the dead Fyrd of 3000 but that would  leave us without any Huscarls!

Conclusion

The conclusion I come away with after doing these calculations is that the written accounts of the Battle are more or less accurate if you take into account the two battles and the Norman infantry not performing well against the Huscarls. It's funny that on a plain reading of the accounts they do not make a believable narrative but adding in what I've found out the accounts sort do now. 

I will endeavour to write a blog post incorporating everything. 

Regards 

Battle of Hastings - Latest thoughts

Latest Thoughts on the Battle of Hastings

Just to let you know that I have been quietly beavering away on the Battle while I'm waiting for permission to metal detect on my site of choice and preparing a talk for a possible symposium later on this year.

The Bayeux Tapestry

After much thought and testing , I've come to the conclusion that scenes from the Battle were taken at 3 hourly intervals throughout the day that is at Tierce ( 0900), Sext (1200), None (1500) and Vespers (1800) and put on the Tapestry. 

Consider. 

From other sources it is generally accepted that the Battle started at 0900 (Tierce). 3 hours later, at noon or Sext, that engagement was drawing to a close as the shield wall had been shattered and the Normans where dispatching the remnants of the Huscarls. 

Now the next scene shows the Norman knights attacking fresh but unarmoured men. So according to the official version of events, these Fyrd had the sense to build prepared defences while their brothers -in-arms were being slaughtered or that they built the defences while being under attack  or even moved about about the battlefield in order to gain some advantageous high ground. In my view it is more likely that they were at a remote location being directed to build defences against the Norman knights. So if this is the case there must have been some time between the end of the first encounter and the start of the second or main engagement. 

Given that in my world there was about a 2 kilometer separation of the engagement sites then it is reasonable to assume that it would be a natural break in the fighting and the Normans could have used it to take on board sustenance and move to the start lines for the second engagement. Thus the second or main engagement started at 1500 or None as depicted by the Bayeux Tapestry.

This also ties in with Harold being killed at Vespers (1800 or approaching dusk). The Bayeux Tapestry shows the knights routing and William rallying them before showing the killing of Harold and the subsequent killing of the remaining Huscarls.

Written Sources 

I have not said much about written sources as I don't read Latin or any other languages other than English, Norwegian and a bit of modern French, so I have rely on other peoples translations. 

I'm going to be very upfront about this. I'm going to interpret the written accounts of the Battle as if I''m right and the Battle was fought in two locations. Let us see where that gets us.

Oderic 

He states that the English troops took post at a place called Senlac and after dismounting from their horses they formed their shieldwall. He also states for the record that William had deployed crossbows - an illegal weapon at that time.  So score "1" for the idea of two encounters

Carmen

In a translation by Kathleen Tyson we have the following:

Line 341                               He[William] intended to station his lancers behind the infantry

Line 342                               But encountering battle, he was not allowed

Line 343                               For he saw the approach of enemy columns not far off

Line 344                               And the woods full of gleaming weapons

To me, this states that William encountered battle before he was expecting it and there were more troops in the far distance. Hmmm, the scene is set for two encounters! So score another "1" for the idea of two encounters.

William of Jumiéges

Since the official book costs £127, all you're going to get is what I can glean from other authors and that's nothing. 

William of Poitiers

Again, since the official book costs £147 what you're going to get is nothing. 

The previous sources are all supposed to be 11th century sources. What follows are 12th century sources. 

William of Malmsbury

In my opinion, William gives a confused account of the battle  and therefore I'm reluctant to comment further. 

Henry of Huntingdon 

While Henry does not mention two encounters, he does describe the formation of an English line reminiscent of the "None" frame of the Bayeux Tapestry. So I'm going to count him as another "1" for my idea of two encounters.

An interesting point made by Henry was that King Harold "drew up his army on level ground" and William attacked with 5 squadrons of calvary. Ummm, did Henry look at the Bayeux Tapestry?

The Chronicle of Battle Abbey

This source is mainly concerned with Walter de Luci defending Battle Abbey's special status and does not go into detail as to how the battle was fought. 

Conclusion

Once I can get my hands on a copy of the two Williams reports I can give a definitive answer but it seems that the 11th century sources give indications that there were two encounters while those of the 12th century are more vague as one might suspect given the separation in time from the battle. 

  

Timeline from Pevensey Castle to the night of the 14th October 1066 revised

From Pevensey to the Aftermath

After spending many hours in study of all available free information (and not so free) I feel that I've done as much as I can before turning it over to the professionals. There are still some loose ends of course but the main thrust of the work is finished.

Right, here we go.

Pevensey

William lands his infantry at Pevensey and refortifies the fort the Romans left behind. His knights however land at Little Standard Hill and while foraging for food and supplies, secure the Port of Hastings.

After a few days, William relocates to the Port of Hastings. The most likely place that he landed is on the site of the old Priory of Hastings which is around the area of ESK, a well known shop in Hastings. This is based on a map showing an ancient boundary between alluvial deposits and head ( see https://www.westsussex.gov.uk/media/1728/hastings_eus_report_maps.pdf page 83 of 90)

which just happens to be where the Priory was located ( shown on page 75 of 90 on the same url ).

Port of Hastings

William builds a lower temporary fort in the area and I think it has been lost to the mists of time. I'd like to think that the ground plan was used to set out the building of the mews for the Priory but there is no guarantee that this is the case. 

William also has a second fort built at the top of the hill towards Battle. The motte is still visible alongside the A2100 and stands there all overgrown. There is a pond nearby called Circle Pond and I'd like to think that the bailey that went with the motte would be somewhere between the motte and the pond. Only time would tell but since we're looking for wooden buildings on farmland, it's a pretty tall ask. 

William now sends out raiding parties for food and to scout for the oncoming English response. According to Nick Austin's site "Secrets of the Norman Invasion " Drigsall and Salehurst are "wasted" in the Doomsday record ( http://www.secretsofthenormaninvasion.com/ parts 8 through and including 11). However since it takes many visits to render a place "wasted" ( see the other manors he mentions) Drigsall and Salehurst must have been visited many times as they were the farthest north one could get without crossing a substantial river ( River Rother). 

Eventually......

King Harold is spotted approaching. 

King Harold camps at Netherfield Down ( triangular camp mentioned by Wace) the night before the battle.  There are reports of the English camping on Caldbec Hill which I have dismissed up til now but given that the "scouts" are actually Huscarls then it makes a bit of sense to have "forward elements" of Harold's army perched on the hill.

The Morning of the Battle

From the Bayeux Tapestry, an English scout Huscarl  spots the Normans at about 8 in the morning assuming the scout Huscarl  is actually shielding his eyes from the sun and has not been posed for dramatic effect. However, this is also assuming that a modern hour is the same as an medieval hour, which I doubt but can find no information about. 

So a scout Huscarl  goes back to King Harold, who is coming away from his overnight camp on Netherfield Down . They meet about where Battle Golf Course is (or was) and the scout Huscarl  relates what he saw to King Harold. The King then orders the Huscarls forward to meet and delay the Normans. King Harold then sets the rest of his troop to building prepared defences ( as seen on plate 65 b) in The Bayeux Tapestry by David M. Wilson). 

The location where the Huscarls were located was Beechdown Wood. By locating the Huscarls there I've been able to identify the route taken to Harold (Wadhurst Lane) and the reason why the Huscarl appears to be shielding his eyes. It also explains why a late Anglo-Saxon stirrup and an Ed the Con coin was found on the route near Beech Farm. Finally, it makes sense of Orderic Vitalis's statement that ALL rode up to the first encounter. (2025) 

Start the clock......

The time is about 9 ( Tierce) in the morning and the Huscarls have just got into position with the horses having just been taken away when the Normans attack.  The Normans surround ( well, attacked from the front and the rear ( see The Chronicle of Battle Abbey)) the Huscarls and kill each and every one of them. Not because the Normans were particularly nasty but because the Huscarls did not and do not run. In order for the number of casualties to be equal, the Norman infantry must have taken a beating here too. Where that beating took place is still surrounded in mystery. All I know is that it wasn't Senlac Ridge or the mini roundabout but somewhere under where the town now stands. There are no clues from the Tapestry.  The ground depicted under the Huscarls is shown as "broken" and Orderic Vitalis calls the place "Senlac" or"beautiful meadow" in Anglo-Saxon. So perhaps the first engagement took place not far from Battle Museum.....

How do I know that it was just the Huscarls getting slaughtered? Have a look at plates 61 and 62 in The Bayeux Tapestry by David M Wilson. All you can see from the English side on those two plates are Housecarls and a single token archer. No Fyrd at all!

Here endeth the first encounter ( 1200 hrs or Sext).....

The first encounter has ended but William still has to check to make sure King Harold wasn't amongst them. The Tapestry records the deaths of Gyrth and Leofwine at this battle and reinforces the Norman idea of hereditary titles ( "We left no surviving family members to inherit the throne")

The clock is still running......

William has now to deal with the rest of King Harold's army. So he relocates to area around Wadhurst Lane and Netherfield Hill Road some 2 km from his first encounter. Although the Huscarls made the journey in 40 minutes first thing this morning it takes the more tired Normans a couple of hours to make the trip. The Normans still have to winkle King Harold out too. 

 The Second or Main Encounter ( 1500 hrs or None)

The Bayeux Tapestry only gives a snapshot of this second encounter. Briefly it says that the Norman knights charged the English line but because of the prepared defences the Norman knights suffered heavy casualties even against the unarmoured men of the Fyrd. 

Perhaps I should describe this battlefield. If you look at the Bayeux Tapestry on plates 66 b) and 67 a) you are looking at the ridge from the north-east and in cross section. This ridge is now on Forestry Commission land and is therefore out of bounds to all. However, the land where the Norman knights came a cropper is open farmland so is accessible with permission.  The Tapestry does not show the ground or the knights charging before the defences but believe me there is a gentle gradient down to the defences taking away control of the horses just that tiny amount so that the outcome is as shown on plate 66. 

Whether or not the knights charged multiple times the outcome recorded by the Tapestry  on plate 67 b) remains the same - routing knights. William had to "expose" himself to rally his knights. 

Meanwhile, not shown on the Tapestry, the Fyrd run after the departing knights to harry them much to their later discomfort. The battle is now lost to the English. The remaining Fyrd scatter but the Norman knights now press home their advantage and  King Harold is killed ( 1800 hrs or Vespers). 

Any Huscarls killed at this point on the Tapestry are either late arriving or part of the Kings Detail and since their King is not leaving the battlefield neither will they. 

The Sun has now set, both on the battlefield and on Saxon England. 

Nine hours have elapsed since the first clash of sword against sword and England has a new master. 

The Malfosse

Norman knights , whose bloodlust had not been satisfied, chase after the retreating English Fyrd through the adjoining wood. In the dark and on unknown paths, they stumble and become unhorsed resulting in a loss of life greater than on the battlefield. 

What's the distance between the second battlefield and the Malfosse? Less than 300 metres. Have you ever tried to outrun a galloping horse with someone on its back intent on killing you? Let's see how far you get....

The Final Reckoning

So, according to me, King Harold was killed about 2 miles from where the monks say he was killed. 

Hopefully, with the assistance of the County Archaeologist, I'll be able to prove my theories unlike others that have gone before me. So watch this space. 

Present Day Contradictions about the Battle of Hastings

Present Day Contradictions about the Battle of Hastings

Even taking present day thinking about the Battle of Hastings there are contradictions in the knowledge that is given out. 

1. Caldbec Hill

The first and foremost is the contradiction of what happened at Caldbec Hill. Many talk of the English scout peering out from between the trees as being on Caldbec Hill. And there are written reports that the English were seen camping on Caldbec Hill. How can we make sense of this?

Since the scout is shielding his eyes perhaps we can assume that it is morning and the sun is shining and that the scout is looking south-ish. Nowhere on the Tapestry does it state that the place is Caldbec Hill. Let us look at the terrain then. 

From Caldbec Hill, the land falls away ( descends) from 103 metres above sea level (m asl) to about 53 metres before rising again to about 62. The land falls away again to 55 metres before rising to 108 metres, dropping to 100 metres before rising again to 141 metres where the Norman lookout post is situated. So Caldbec Hill is next highest point north of the Norman lookout position. 

The scouts only have visibility of the Norman look out post above say 75 metres on the first falling slope. This is only 200 metres from what is supposed to be the main English camp of 7000 soldiers! 

To cap it all however, the Tapestry shows the scout reporting back to Harold, who is sitting astride his horse. This tells me that Harold had to ride to the meeting place with the scout and was therefore newly come to the area. Would Harold go and sit on his horse to listen to a scout that had been 200 metres away from the camp to look at the Normans? Sounds implausible to me. 

So something has to give. 

Could the scout be closer to the Normans than what is thought? I've noticed that on the Tapestry some scenes are framed with trees. Could this be the case here? But as stated previously there is nowhere closer than the top of Caldbec Hill that is better to spy on the Normans. So I think that Caldbec Hill has to stay as the scouts location. 

If the Norman lookouts were wrong, and I believe they were wrong, then Harold must've been in a camp that lay on the same bearing or almost the same bearing as Caldbec Hill. My choice of field for the second engagement lies on that bearing However, if that was the site of the English overnight camp, why Harold is portrayed as being on a horse? It does not make sense.

2. There was only one shield wall

This is regarded as Holy Writ by some especially by the modern day "Housecarls" but this causes untold squirming by modern day scholars. We are forever told that battles of the 1000's lasted no more than 3 hours and that the Battle of Hastings was an exception in that it lasted nine hours. That's 300% longer than normal! 

So what's the story?

Historians and others rely on this single shield wall as a tenet of faith and look no further. So the story they tell is of a scout on Caldbec Hill seeing the Normans and then going to see Harold, who then sets up his troops on Senlac Ridge to meet William coming off Hastings peninsula. Then William wages a war of attrition until such time as he overcomes the defenders. That's it in a nutshell. Okay, it takes 9 hours but what's that?

However , the Bayeux Tapestry tells another story. We still have the narrative of the scout seeing the Normans and reporting back to Harold. Then it says the Norman knights advanced and met the Housecarls and a few archers and gave battle. This could have been where English Heritage now places the battle - under the town itself. Notice that there's no Fyrd or King in the bunch and that the defenders were surrounded. The next scene shows the stragglers being "finished off" and the sons or brothers of Harold being killed. The following scene shows the second engagement which entails unarmoured men ( the Fyrd) killing lots of knights before the Normans overcome this lot of defenders. The King is duly dispatched and the Fyrd heads for the hills. Now 9 hours doesn't seem that long for William to accomplish these feats.  

If anyone thinks that are more contradictions to look into then leave me a message and I'll look into it. 

Regards

Kevin 

Malfosse

Malfosse

After many hours of thought, I came to the conclusion that the location of the Malfosse was unknowable. What everyone is faced with is a report from the Normans that while they were in hot pursuit of rapidly departing Saxons belonging to the Fyrd, they suffered an ambush where the ground disappeared from beneath their horse's feet and the riders were set upon by Saxon fighters.

While the report might have been good enough for their commanders, it does not help us in the future to discover where the clash took place.

The current thinking of English Heritage is, I'm led to believe, is that the battle took place in an area under the monastery and the area under the town with the Malfosse still in Oakwood Gill.

John Grehan also puts the Malfosse incident in Oakwood Gill, explaining it was closer to his choice of battle site than English Heritage's. Unfortunately for him, Time Team put the battle site adjacent to English Heritage's official site because they could find no evidence of the battle ever having taken place on either the official site or John's choice of Caldbec Hill.

I'd stopped looking when I chose my first site at the end of the ridge at Netherfield Down. Nowhere seemed to fit the bill. And there I left it until......

I started to look at the Bayeux Tapestry more closely. On page 192 of David M Wilson's book " The Bayeux Tapestry" he writes " .... Brown ( op cit. in note 113,pp 18ff. Cf. also [G.H. White]'The Battle of Hastings and the death of Harold', The Complete Peerage, xii,i, London 1953, Appendix L, p.42) has convincingly argued that the scene in pls. 65-66 of the tumbling horses represents the so-called Malfosse episode, following William of Malmesbury who may well have been placing his narrative on the tapestry. In this story the Normans were attacking the English, strongly positioned on a hill, and retreating in feigned flight (according to Henry of Huntingdon) into a concealed ditch. A defensive work of sharpened stakes is clearly seen beneath the fallen horses in pl. 65...."

So ask yourself this question. If you're running away on foot from men on horseback determined to hack you to pieces, do you stop, cut down suitable stakes, hammer them into the ground and then turn around to make a stand? No, you keep on running!

Another point to ponder is this. on pl.67 of D.M. Wilson's book " The Bayeux Tapestry ( Scene 54 in standard Bayeux Tapestry form) we have a two cavalryman attacking the back of the hill. Again ask yourself " If this is supposed to represent an ambush what the blue dickens are those cavalryman doing on the wrong side of the main fight?"

The last "frame" of the Tapestry as we have it shows a group of horsemen chasing after a bunch of rapidly departing Saxons. Had the Tapestry continued it could have showed the Malfosse incident and it could have looked something like what I've attempted to draw below.

However since Odo was probably not involved in the incident, it would not have been included. ( "if I didn't see it happen, it didn't happen")

When I realised the above and found my new battle site ( see previous post) I looked at Google Earth and saw a sunken road or pathway not 250 metres away from the Fyrd position. I had my "Malfosse"! Now all that remains is find out who owns the land, find someone with a metal detector and put the two together ( Ugh, Forestry Commission)!

Here is what it looks like in real life in relation to the second and main battlefield. 

Alternative Site for the 1066 Battle of Hastings.

Tying down the actual Battle site?

It's been a long time since I posted anything new on this blog. Partly, this is due to my absolute fascination with the computer game "No Man's Sky" ( I'm more than half way through my third galaxy with over 100,000,000 units in hand) and partly me thinking there was nothing new to add to our understanding of the Battle. How wrong I was!

Between my last post and this one I've been to Bayeux to look at the Tapestry first hand and to find out the received wisdom that was being promulgated. I wish I hadn't bothered. The Tapestry is hung in a very nice setting and one is given a commentary device which once started doesn't stop until you reach the end of the Tapestry - that gives you 20 mins to view the whole thing! One can go around again but if you listen to the commentary you have to move at the pace of the commentary and not at your own pace.

The Bayeux Museum also represents a moment of revelation to me. Never before did I feel able to question what I was being told but this visit revealed the "cracks in the plaster"! For instance, the Museum had a display inviting the viewer to guess who had the strongest claim to the throne of England on the death of Edward. Was it William, Harold or some Scandinavian geezer? It then laid out the bloodlines and posed the question "Who do you think...?" Well since Edward had no offspring etc, etc..... Wrong!!! The Norman idea of inheriting the throne DID NOT OPERATE in England at that time. At the death of the old King, the Witan ( a council of hereditary nobles) met together to decide who would make the best ruler for the Country. Sure, they would heed the "advice" of a previous occupant but not be governed by it ( On the death of Æthelred the Unready, Knut , King of the Danelaw area of England was asked to rule) So the Throne of England worked in the same way as the Roman Catholic papacy operates today - namely the person elected to office was elected for life.

Anyway, I'm getting distracted. Back to the matter in hand.

This is what I wrote in "Where's the Battle Site?" published on 22nd September 2015

"My preferred site for the battle is the end of the slice taken above at 56' 29.35"N  26' 53.11"E. This area seems to be on the old London Road, Also it is situated on the end of a east- west ridge which makes sense of Williams decision to split his force into three. The site is more or less undeveloped so there has been not so many unreported finds. A nearby spring could well have supplied the wet ground and remember hadn't there been a big storm within the last 3 weeks? The site also has a steep incline and a not so steep incline to take account of the many different reports we have of the battle."


I mentioned the nearby spring because casualties amongst William's cavalry was light and the battle lasted so long that Harold must have found a way to neutralise the effectiveness of these troops. I think the neutralisation  of Williams cavalry is key in determining the actual battle site.

From what I've gleamed from that guy from the TV who is an expert on medieval weaponry is the mounted soldier has the height advantage when facing infantry. So if the ground was not firm beneath the horses hooves then the guy on the horse would have had half a brain figuring out where was safe to manoeuvre his horse while having only half his brain trying to kill the Saxon warrior that was trying to kill him!

Another way of neutralising cavalry is to overcome the height advantage. In other words, raise up the Saxon or make the cavalry unit fight from a lower elevation. The "official" battle site does this by having the Saxons on top of Senlac Ridge. My current choice of battle site does this too.  However neither site is supported by the Bayeux Tapestry...

If we examine the Bayeux Tapestry on plate 55/56 we see William talking to his scouts ascertaining the whereabouts of Harold quite clearly on a "hill". In the next screen we have an English scout spotting the Normans and reporting back to Harold. Notice the depiction of the ground. The artist clearly saw the ground as being a little hilly. Is this an attempt to say that Telham Hill was at a higher elevation than where Harold was? ( As an aside the commentary on page 192  of David Wilson's book, says that Williams troops "saw " the English troops on Battle Ridge. This would only be possible if ALL  obstructions  higher than 7 metres (Approx 17 feet) had been cleared in what was considered to be a sparsely wooded area between Telham Hill Fort and Battle Ridge).

It is not until plate 65 b do we see any depiction in the change of terrain even though we've seen lots of fighting and dying. This change is a depiction of a "horse trap"which kills a number of horses ( and subsequently a number of their riders) being no match for the unarmoured Saxons fighting from ABOVE the incoming cavalry.

On plate 66 b/67 a we have the Saxons themselves on a substantial mound.In the commentary associated with this plate on page 193 ( The Bayeux Tapestry by David M Wilson)  the author assigns this picture to the action that took place in a place known as "Malfosse" after the battle had been won. To my mind this looks suspiciously like a cross section of a prepared defence against the cavalry. Indeed, the defence was so good that it was as this point that the rumour of William's demise took hold and the troops were routing.

So according to the Bayeux Tapestry we are looking for a site where Harold met his scouts, assembled his troops on reasonably flat ground, found a ridge and prepared anti-horse defences in front of it . He also managed to kill most of William's infantry ( not seen in the Tapestry other than as dead bodies in the lower margins).  The site or area that can match these conditions lie in the area surrounding ...... remembering to obey all laws and regulations concerning metal detecting on important national sites of interest ..... is 50 N 55' 57" 0 E 27' 43".

The ridge is approx 130 metres away running on a bearing of 220 deg.