Forced March in Hastings

[Pisces Axxxxx]

I just finished reading "The Battle of Hastings" by Jim Bradbury.

 

One of the things he dispels in his book about Hastings is the notion that the reason the Anglo-Saxons lost the battle was because Harold did a reckless forced march.

 

He states that based on physical evidence, it would have been impossible for his force to have made it to Hastings within 4 days.

 

Furthermore he reveals that while the Housecarls (many who fought at Stamford Bridge prior to Hastings) fought as infantry, they used cavalry to travel around rapidly and the trips to Hastings was no exception.Lastly most of the Fryds were not actually part of Harold's army when he fought at Stamford Bridge but he picked them up locally on the way as he and his Housecarls traveled to Hastings.

 

In other words even if Harold did a forced march, most of his troops (the Fryds) wouldn't have been exhausted and would have been in good condition, if not in top physical conditioning, by the time the battle began because he mustered them locally on the way to Hastings.

 

What do you think?

[Melvadius]

The fact that the bulk of Harold's army were the local fyrd is well known so I don't see that as a new revelation.

 

However it does not negate the fact that Harold and his personal retinue had started their journey in the south wikth the local fyrd waitinfg for William's invasion had to rush north, raise the fyrd there, fight a hard battle then make a second forced march south from Stamford Bridge recalling the southern fyrd who had been dismissed when they went north.

 

The situation for Harold's army would have been utterly confused many of the southern fyrd could not have been recalled in time, exhaustion would have played a part in the battle on Harold's side and possibly more to the point most of the fyrd were not professional soldiers and/or mercenaries as William's troops were.