Military aspects

Model answer

A is the entrance at first-floor level, reached by the steps beside the forebuilding. B is the sloping plinth at the base of the walls.

Model answer

Interpretation A is convincing in some ways. Norman knights were a formidable force: they trained from boyhood to fight on horseback, rode warhorses bred for battle - William shipped thousands of horses across the Channel - and used stirrups and high saddles that gave them a firm seat for lance and sword. The English had nothing like this; the housecarls and the fyrd rode to battle but fought on foot. At Hastings the mobility of the cavalry was vital. When the Bretons fled and English soldiers chased them down the slope, Norman knights turned and cut them down on a hillock. Mounted knights also carried out the feigned retreats that drew more English off the ridge, and they led the final assault. After the battle, knights based in castles let the Normans control the countryside.

However, A exaggerates. For most of the day the cavalry achieved little. Charging up the slope of Senlac Hill, the knights could not break the shield wall, and the Bayeux Tapestry shows horses and riders falling to English axes. So A's claim that there was 'nothing the shield wall could do' is wrong: it held from about 9 am into the late afternoon. The Normans won by combining their forces: archers shooting high so their arrows fell behind the shield wall, infantry attacks and cavalry together wore the English down. The English also lost because men broke ranks, because they were tired after Stamford Bridge, and above all because Harold was killed. Nor was the English way of war 'hopelessly old-fashioned' - it had beaten Hardrada only three weeks before.

Overall, Interpretation A is only partly convincing. Cavalry gave William a mobile force the English lacked, but it won the battle only in combination with archers and infantry and after English mistakes.

Model answer

Harold's death was important first because it decided the battle. He was killed late in the afternoon of 14 October 1066 beside his standards; how he died is debated - the Bayeux Tapestry seems to show an arrow at his eye, while the Carmen says he was cut down by knights including William himself. Once the king had fallen, the shield wall broke. Some housecarls fought on around his body, but most of the English fled at dusk. Had Harold survived, he might have withdrawn and fought again.

Secondly, his death left England without a leader. His brothers Gyrth and Leofwine had also been killed in the battle, so the Godwin family, the most powerful in England, had lost all its adult leaders at once. The only male of the old royal family left was Edgar Atheling, a teenager. Some English leaders in London proclaimed him king, but he was never crowned, and powerful earls such as Edwin and Morcar would not risk another battle for him.

Thirdly, this lack of leadership allowed William to take the throne quickly. He marched through Dover and Canterbury, crossed the Thames at Wallingford, where Archbishop Stigand submitted, and at Berkhamsted received the submission of Edgar, Archbishop Ealdred and other leaders. He was crowned in Westminster Abbey on Christmas Day 1066. To the Normans, Harold's death also seemed to be God's judgement on a man who had broken his oath to William, which strengthened William's claim.

So Harold's death was important because it turned one battle into the conquest of a kingdom: with no strong leader to rally behind, the English could not continue the war in 1066, although resistance would break out again in the revolts of 1067-71.

Model answer

The Battle of Stamford Bridge did weaken Harold, but I only partly agree that it was the main reason he lost at Hastings. It made his task harder, but the battle itself was decided by William's leadership and by Harold's death.

There is a strong case that Stamford Bridge was crucial. On 25 September Harold won a great victory, killing Harald Hardrada and Tostig, but the battle was hard fought and he lost many men, including experienced housecarls who could not be replaced. His army had already marched about 185 miles north in roughly four or five days, and now it had to march back to London and on to Sussex. Worse, the battle kept Harold in the north at exactly the wrong moment: three days later William landed unopposed at Pevensey and had more than two weeks to build castles at Pevensey and Hastings and harry the countryside. The victory may also have made Harold overconfident. He tried to repeat the speed and surprise that had worked against Hardrada, leaving London after only a few days and fighting before all his troops had arrived, while Edwin and Morcar, whose army had been beaten at Fulford, did not come south at all.

However, other factors were also important. The timing of the invasions was a matter of luck as well as Stamford Bridge: contrary winds held William in Normandy until after Harold had sent the fyrd home on 8 September. Harold's own decision to fight quickly was a choice, not something Stamford Bridge forced on him; he could have waited for more troops. Also, Stamford Bridge was not only a disadvantage: it removed Hardrada and Tostig, so Harold could face William without an enemy behind him.

The most important factors were in the battle itself. The English shield wall held on Senlac Hill from about 9 am until late afternoon, which suggests that tiredness after Stamford Bridge was not decisive. What changed the battle was William's leadership. He used a balanced army of archers, infantry and cavalry - the English had no cavalry and few archers. When the Bretons fled and a rumour spread that he was dead, he rallied his men, and his cavalry cut down the English who had broken ranks to chase them. The Normans then used feigned retreats to draw more men out of the line and shot arrows high over the shield wall. Finally, Harold was killed late in the day, after his brothers Gyrth and Leofwine, and the English collapsed.

Overall, Stamford Bridge was an important background reason because it weakened Harold's army and allowed William to land without opposition. But it was not the main reason for the defeat. The battle was close, and it was won by William's leadership and tactics, helped by English indiscipline and decided by Harold's death.