1066: The Year of the Conquest

Introductionfew sources exist, but, for me, it casts doubts on the
In this critique of 1066: The Year of the Conquest, I willvalidity of his assertions.
identify Howarth's purpose in writing this book andHowarth's writing style is the popular style, not
discuss how well he fulfilled his purpose. Also I willscholarly. The portrait he paints of medieval England is
evaluate the merits and shortcomings of this book invery vividly done. Through his words, an image springs
relation to the themes, sources used, and the author'sto the mind of exactly how the country looked at this
writing style.time. Besides the image of England, Howarth also is
Author's Themevery successful in giving us insights into the characters
Howarth's 1066 was a description of the "tremendousof the men involved in the battle, from the villagers
drama [in England] that began on January 6 with theturned soldiers to the rulers they fought for. For
burial of King Edward in Westminster Abbey, andexample, it is very easy for the reader to see the
ended on Christmas Day in the same place with thedisillusionment and indecision in Duke William's face
coronation of King William" (7). Howarth balances hisafter hearing that King Edward was dead and that
book by offering insights into the lives and charactersHarold had been crowned the new king.
of all people in England, from the peasants to the rulingI enjoyed very much the way Howarth included the
classes, before and after the conquest.customs of the people involved. I believe customs
Author's Purposedetermine why people act as they do, and so it is
Howarth states that was "not meant to be read as aimportant to consider that when reading history. For
work of scholarship, only as an evocation of thethis reason, I find the first chapter that details the lives
excitement, pleasures, and miseries of that year" (7).of the average Englishman and Englishwoman very
Howarth acknowledges the difficulty of ascertaining ainformative and entertaining.
strictly factual account of a time in which sourcesI also appreciate how Howarth included prior political
were scarce and/or biased. Because of this, Howarthand social events that influenced how people acted
necessarily had to make some assumptions andbefore, during, and after the Battle of Hastings. For
conclusions in his account of the conquest.example, William's invasion would have seemed
Author's Writing Stylebaffling if Howarth had not informed us about King
When reading Howarth's book, it was very easy forEdward's promise to him and the meeting between
one to forget that this is an historical account of theWilliam and Harold in Normandy.
Norman Invasion. His writing is very descriptive andAuthor's Sources
colorful. Howarth succeeded magnificently in keepingHowarth used mainly primary sources for this book. He
the reader engrossed in the book. The book reads sostates that of the twenty sources he used, "twelve
much like a historical novel, that one wonders howwere written within living memory of 1066, and all but
much is factual. Howarth admittedly added his owntwo within a hundred years" of the Battle at Hastings (
opinions and advanced his own conclusions to the7). Howarth also varied his sources to present the
account to fill in the gaps that there are no sources for.different versions of what happened; the different
For example, Howarth believes the change in Kingversions belonged to the English, Normans, and
Harold's behavior between the Battle at StamfordScandinavians.
Bridge and the Battle at Hastings is due to his learningConclusion
that William had papal blessing. This conclusion may beTaken as a whole, I believe this was a good text on
correct, but Howarth offers no evidence to support it.the Norman Conquest. Even though I find some of his
He never mentions that someone specifically told Kingconclusions suspect, the book is written in a manner to
Harold of that fact, he only says that someone mustentertain, while also offering valuable information about
have. Therefore, Howarth is not basing his conclusionsthe lives of medieval peoples during one of the most
on factual evidence, but on what he surmises mustimportant dates in Western history.
have happened. This may be necessary when very