The Battle of Hastings 1066 - The Uncomfortable Truth: Revealing the True Location of England’s Most Famous Battle

by John Grehan, Martin Mace

The Battle of Hastings is the most defining event in English history. As such, its every detail has been analysed by scholars and interpreted by historians. Yet one of the most fundamental aspect of the battle the place upon which it was fought has never been seriously questioned, until now. Could it really be the case that for almost 1,000 years everyone has been studying the wrong location?

In this in-depth study, the authors examine the early sources and the modern interpretations to unravel the compulsive evidence that historians have chosen to ignore because it does not fit the traditional view of where the battle was fought.

Most importantly, the authors investigate the terrain of the battlefield and the archaeological data to reveal exactly where history was made.

Genres: Nonfiction, History

192 pages, Paperback

First published October 1, 2012

Reviews

[Emily · Rating 5 out of 5]

Not that I already knew tons about the Battle of Hastings, but I was very interested in the fact that the authors are basically saying that they believe that the battle happened in a slightly different place than the one that has traditionally been put forward as the site. I was very surprised that massive archaeological excavations haven't been done over the years (there's still time, I suppose!) on both of the hills in question - I figured it was a given.

[Angela · Rating 4 out of 5]

The main aim of this book was to prove where the Battle of Hastings was actually fought in October 1066.

The long-accepted, traditional view of historians was that the battle was fought on Battle Hill, in the grounds of what is now Battle Abbey. Over many years, this was a “fact” that was not challenged, as indeed was the idea that the abbey was built on the spot where King Harold died.

Following on from the theories proposed by British military historian, Jim Bradbury, the authors of this book decided to explore in depth the idea of a different site for the battle. They researched, using primary sources and the work of historians from different eras. They looked at the geographical features mentioned by the oldest sources of information and compared them with the topography of the locations. Factoring in the knowledge they gleaned about how the battle was fought and archaeological evidence – or lack of – they came to a conclusion that was at odds with the traditional view.

I enjoyed this book immensely. The arguments for and against various proposals were clear and backed up by many sources. Grehan and Mace have produced a well written and authoritative book on this important battle in the history of Britain.

I would like to thank NetGalley for the opportunity to read and review this book.

[Paul · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book is a watershed in the study of the Battle of Hastings. Heady and intoxicating stuff indeed. Full to the brim with profound insights and analysis, I thoroughly recommend it. Worth the price for any two of the chapters - it is THAT good. It breaks ground with the general consensus of a century or more of studied thought that the battle was on Senlac hill. Anyone with a background in history or field archaeology will see that even a cursory read of the sources and look at the site will raise grave concerns. And yet, the received wisdom is that the abbey marks the place of Harold's last stand. It is not without its faults though. At times the authors seem to lack a local understanding of topography or ignore aspects of the local topography they should have really brought to the front and discussed. On occasion I found they misrepresented facts to advance their case. The battle axe found on Marley Lane is important. And no, this location is not halfway between the authors' site and the established one, Marley Lane forms part of the established right wing of Williams's advance. On the whole it is a blockbuster; a roller coaster ride of shrewd analysis, biting insight and common sense often missing on the subject. One to read several times over.t

[M.J. · Rating 5 out of 5]

I know it might come as a bit of a surprise that I've given this book 5 stars, after my initial reservations, however, the book was truly excellent and very well written.
This is what a good history book should be about. It shouldn't just be a repeat of what is known from various sources, as though they are somehow more reliable than the others. (Admittedly the author does have a tendency to quote other authors which is a bit annoying - but I have a sneaky feeling, it may have been done on purpose as a means of juxtaposing current historical thinking with what has been written in the past.) It should truly focus on the problem being examined, it should examine all available source material and it should attempt some reconciliation of the 'facts' or make a new assumption, and that's what this author does.
The information on how the battle was fought was fascinating for someone who really struggles to visualise a battle scene.
My only reservation with the whole book is it's repeated reference to the Bayeaux tapestry as an authoritative source whilst at the same time admitting that it is not known who commissioned it and why.
However that doesn't detract from what is, effectively, an enjoyable and engaging attempt to decipher the past.

[Ellen Ekstrom · Rating 4 out of 5]

It's one of the most famous days in history and one that a nation uses to mark the end of one era and the beginning of another, yet so little is truly known about what happened (other than the Norman win)and where exactly it happened. I was amazed and kept entertained by how much Mr. Grehan was able to glean from contradictory sources, incomplete sources, and embellished fact, extant documents and reliable sources to come to the conclusion that historians have had it wrong for almost a thousand years. An abbey was built on the site where King Harold fell, yet why are there no artifacts or remains on the abbey grounds? Over ten thousand souls lost their lives, yet there is no trace. Mr. Grehan gives a compelling argument that the battle wasn't fought on what we now know as Battle Hill, but some distance away at Caldbec Hill, on terrain that was steeper and less cultivated, better strategically than the gentler slope of Battle Hill. Why is this important now? It never hurts to set the record straight and dispel myths, to open the way for new, scholarly research. A recommended source for historians and devotees of the era.

[John · Rating 4 out of 5]

Thanks to NetGalley and the publisher for allowing me to read an ARC of this book in exchange for a non-biased review. The primary intent of this book is to reveal the true location where the epic battle of Hastings was fought. It has always been accepted that the battle took place at the site of Battle Abbey near Hastings. The legend is that the abbey was built on the site of the battle and on the spot where the English king Harold died. But after much research and study of terrain, the author sets out to prove that the battle was actually fought on nearby Caldbec Hill. I admit that I knew nothing about the Battle of Hastings other than that it was fought in 1066 between the British king Harold and the Norman army of William the Conqueror, and won by William. In laying out the groundwork for his premise, the author does an excellent job of providing background to this epic battle, including a history of England and it's kings as well as the background and claim to the throne of William the Conqueror. There is also a good discussion of battle tactics of that period. There are no period descriptions of the battle itself, most of the history having been written long afterwards. As a result most of what is thought to have taken place on that day is largely guesswork. The author uses the works of the many historians who have written and theorized about the battle over the years. He uses common sense, a knowledge of tactics, and a study of the terrain to use these varying accounts to piece together what likely really happened. Using the scant descriptions of the battle available including the Bayeaux Tapestry, he does an excellent job of demonstrating that Battle Hill does not fit at all as a location of the battle. One of the key facts know of the battle is that unlike most battles of that period, this battle lasted nearly an entire day. His theory being that Caldbec Hill was very steep and rugged, allowing for a strong defensive position for the English, and rendering the Norman cavalry much less effective. All of the descriptions of the battle are shown to fit much better if Caldbec Hilll were the site of the battle rather than the lower smoother Battle Hill.

[AcademicEditor · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book was an eye-opening read! I had no idea that the Battle of Hastings could have been fought in a different location than what is commonly believed. John Grehan and Martin Mace have done an excellent job of researching and presenting the evidence for their theory. The authors provide a detailed account of the events leading up to the battle, as well as the battle itself. They also provide a thorough analysis of the archaeological evidence. This is one for history fans to peruse and debate.

Thank you to the publishers and NetGalley for the opportunity to review a temporary digital ARC in exchange for an unbiased review.

[Rebecca Hill · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was a great read! I loved the in-depth analysis and the rundown of the issues that surround the battle of Hastings. While we have contemporary sources, what we are gleaning from modern study is very profound, and worth a deeper look at the official battle site - and the possible new location.

Absolutely amazing read, and one that was well worth the time to sit and read through. I was blown away through the information and the commentary by the author.

Perfect for those who are interested in the Battle of Hastings and the Norman invasion!

[Lady · Rating 4 out of 5]

I really enjoyed this book not only did it tell the story of the battle of Hastings but also the controversy over which hill it was actually on and if the tapestry of William the conqueror was actually of the battle of Hastings or a later battle. The author uses a number of different points of views in the search for the truth. This book has great flow and excellent if you just love learning new things about history.

[Cidney · Rating 5 out of 5]

If you want to read a factual historical book then make it this one, it's only taken me over 3wks to read it! We all know about the famous battle of Hastings which took place on 14 October 1066 and many visit English Heritage's famous Battle Abbey, in Battle, and take the audio walk and eat the cakes and buy the souvenirs. But, this isn't actually the site where the famous battle took place.

When we first moved into this area we had an English Heritage family membership and I used to take the children a couple of weekends each month to wander round the site and soak up the history. Then... some years ago programmes were being made and books being written to say that the Abbey was built in the wrong place, it wasn't the site of the battle at all. Even Time Team did a programme on it.

This is an incredibly good book, one of the best I've read, which takes apart the run up to the battle, the key players and where it really did take place. Work on building the Abbey started in 1070 but didn't finish until 1094 after William had died. William had no intention of building an abbey in Harold's honour, he was after all the King of England now, but the Pope told him he had to build an abbey in honour of all those slain on the battlefield for repentance. William certainly showed no hurry to begin building one! The benedictine monks came along in 1070 and thought now where can we build an abbey and decided that one on more level ground was needed so the abbey was built about a mile away from the actual battle site which was on Caldbec Hill and not Battle Hill, although obviously it wasn't called that then.

Harold was making his way down from the north where he had fought an arduous battle with the vikings and won, and now exhausted he gets a message to say that William had landed in Pevensey and was making his way to London. Harold gets his troops on their feet and hastens down to London and then past there sending messengers out to villages and towns for fighting men to join them and that was at the Old Hoar Apple tree in Battle, except it wasn't called Battle then as there hadn't yet been a battle. Anyway Harold arrives at the tree with his exhausted men only to discover that William was also arriving. Harold had the advantage as Caldbec Hill was 300ft above sealevel and very steep, he was at the top, and William down in the marshy bit at the bottom.

The battle itself only lasted a day but it was a long one nonetheless. The bayeux tapestry tells the story well and we all know how it ends. You would have thought that having your army on the top of a conical shaped steep hill would give you the most advantage, and William must have thought he'd got the short straw but good tactics from William and his army made them the victors. Harold was killed on the battlefield and his two brothers were killed before him, now his army had no-one rallying them and they fled the scene, leaving William to march his men back to Hastings which is where they started from, they moved from Pevensey bay to march eastwards to Hastings and then a few miles northwards to Battle, or whatever it was called then, they weren't many inhabitants it was more of a hamlet. Name unknown or if it was it isn't mentioned in this book.

I remember taking the children to see one of the many re-enactments of the battle and my young son asking me how did all the thousands and thousands of soldiers stand on this small site which was at the top of a slight slope! Hmm just thought it must be land erosion! No, it wasn't the battlefield site, that was around a mile or less from there and there was definitely a very steep hill on which Harold's army was stationed, if you go there you can see just how steep it was for William to climb, there is a windmill there on the top today and no tat to be had anywhere!! What was interesting was the fact that if the battle had been held on the Abbey site there would've been masses of bits of metal left littering the site, yet not a single find has ever been discovered on that site to say that a battle had even been held there, or even near there. All the finds come from the Caldbec Hill site, such as they are. So if you take a visit to the expensive Abbey and take the audio tour just remember this was just the best place for the monks to site it and drum up an imaginative place to put an altar stone marking Harold's death, even if he died a way away, so just use your imagination, and if you can, take a trek up Calbec Hill and survey the landscape of the most famous battlefield in English history! And for free!

[Francis Shaw · Rating 5 out of 5]

The author does a commendable job in outlining a different location for the battle from the traditional site. Until there is archaeology providing further insight, the location of the battle will remain an open question. I agree that Battle Abbey should be questioned as the battle site. Even today we build where makes the most sense and the inclusion of the stone at the supposed location of Harold's banner reminds of the Glastonbury Abbey monks suddenly discovering Arthur's tomb on Abbey grounds. It smells of another money making venture and who is going to care whether the battle was on this hill or another nearby. The history as always was written by the winners. From the different accounts there is only one fact that matters - the battle lasted the whole day. More than unusual for the time, the only way this could have occurred is if the English had an extremely good defensible position. Whichever hill they defended, it must have been steep enough to make it difficult for the Norman horse to penetrate and flanking could not have been an option. I would surmise that the ongoing casualties of the housecarls in the frontline is possibly the biggest factor in eventual defeat. The Fyrd was unlikely to hold once the cavalry got amongst them. Harold must have lost a substantial amount of housecarls at Stamford Bridge. Not having those extra professional forces could have made the difference between victory and defeat. They could have survived until nightfall, received further Fryd the next day and forced William back to his ships. The major problem is none of these possibilities. It's topography. What we see today is not what the area would have looked like in 1066. We just don't know how altered it is. The folks at the Time Time show did a great job in estimating the topography at the time, which outlined another possible battle location literally blocking the London road in the center of Battle. Let's hope the discovery of archaeology can provide more clues.

[Kevin Casey · Rating 4 out of 5]

While the basic tenet of the book has been shown lacking it is still worthwhile to read. I've used it to dip into to find specific items rather than read it from cover to cover.