Harold: The Last Anglo-Saxon King

by Ian W. Walker, Harold II Godwin

King Harold Godwineson (c. 1022-66) is best known for his defeat and death at the battle of Hastings. This volume offers a critical study of his father's rise to power and King Harold's own life and short (nine months and nine days) but significant reign. Ten fine color plates as well as abundant b&w illustrations. Distributed by Books International. Annotation c. by Book News, Inc., Portland, Or.

Genres: History, Biography, Nonfiction, Anglo Saxon, Medieval History, British Literature, Royalty

258 pages, Hardcover

First published August 1, 1997

About the author

Ian W. Walker is a Civil Servant in the Scottish Office.

Reviews

[Mercedes Rochelle · Rating 4 out of 5]

Ian Walker's book about Harold Godwineson pretty much brings us over familiar territory, but with a twist. I find his approach to this complex and sparsely documented era to be both intriguing and a little heavy-handed. On the one hand, he does give all the relevant background to a particular event, but then he usually proceeds to make a firm conclusion as to which story is correct. Once concluded, all future events are predicated on this preconceived notion. I find that his conclusions are usually sound, but that does not necessarily mean that they are true.

For instance, there are several opinions as to whether or not King Edward promised the crown to Duke William. Did he promise the crown because the Normans sheltered him during his exile? "It seems that there are insufficient reasons for Edward to make such a grand gesture as designating William as his heir out of gratitude to him, especially after a period of some ten years during which there appears to have been no contact between them." OK, this makes good sense. Did William visit England in person during 1051? Norman writers fail to mention this when it could have favored their arguments, so it seems unlikely. Did Edward send Robert Archbishop of Canterbury to William with an offer of the crown? No contemporary English sources corroborate this assertion. Ultimately, the author concludes that "It seems far more likely that the designation was the work of Robert himself." It easily corresponds with his frantic exit from London on Earl Godwine's return from exile, hostages in hand. If he went directly to William with Wulfnoth and Hakon, he could represent them as having been offered by Edward to secure William's claim to the throne. Robert's motive? Could it be revenge on Earl Godwine?

I found this argument deliciously convincing, and Walker uses it later on to conclude that Harold Godwineson couldn't have been sent to Normandy in 1064 to confirm Edward's promise of the succession. Even more to the point, on being forced to swear the fatal oath, "Harold had fallen into William's trap but it was a concealed trap that neither he nor anyone in England could have anticipated. The promise of the succession to William had after all probably been invented by Robert of Jumieges himself, and was thus unknown beyond William's immediate circle."

This is a profound concept to me. So no one in England had a clue that William had designs on the throne until 1064. It was the silver lining to Harold's disastrous expedition; the events in Normandy opened his eyes to his rival's ambitions. "As a result, he could be fully prepared to repel William's invasion, which he knew would come." It does follow and it's certainly possible; but overall, the chain of events seem quite circumstantial to me.

Hence, my ambivalent feelings toward this book. I found it to be dry reading, but once I concentrated on it I ended up marking several pages for future reference. I found his arguments stimulating in an academic sort of way, but I think I would have been more convinced had he left his conclusions a bit more open-ended.

[Hal Issen · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a scholarly work, exceedingly well researched and documented. There is some controversy of the history and lineage of many of the major players in the drama surrounding King Edward the Confessor's death, and I think Mr. Walker has provide the most compelling arguments. However, scholarly research comes at the price of literary merit. For example, Walker does not include King Harold's most famous quip, that he would grant King Harald Sigurdson of Norway "Seven feet of room [in England] or as much longer as he is taller than other men," presumably because it can't be authenticated. With that in mind, if you absolutely have to be the most informed of the end of Anglo-Saxon England, this is your book.

[Davy Bennett · Rating 5 out of 5]

I read this and also a bio of William the Conqueror (Fat Bastard) about ten years ago.

One thing that really struck me was that Harold went up to York and defeated the Viking Harald Hadrada at the Battle of Stamford Bridge.

He and his troops then had to quickly march down to meet the invading Normans at Hastings, in the south. William had been waiting for a long time for favorable winds to carry his crew across the English Channel. He barely kept them together that long. Imagine if Woodstock had lasted two weeks, cool may have turned to chaos.

It now seems sort of like fate was on the side of the Normans, but that was almost not the case.

[Best British Biographies · Rating 3 out of 5]

One of the things that I did not appreciate until I sat down to write up my review of Ian Walker’s biography of Harold is that all three modern biographies of him share one thing in common: all of them were written by non-academic historians. Whereas Peter Rex was a retired day school teacher and Piers Compton a former Catholic priest who worked as an editor for a Catholic weekly newspaper, Ian W. Walker was a civil servant with the Scottish Office who wrote history books in his spare time, most of which were about aspects of English and Scottish history during the High Middle Ages. His life of Harold was his only foray into biography, and when it was originally published in 1997 it was the first book about the king in over three decades.

For the rest of my review, click on the link:

https://www.bestbritishbios.com/2020/...

[Jen · Rating 2 out of 5]

It's almost amazing how long 200+ pages can seem. I've read much longer books that didn't seem...well...like I was walking though quicksand wearing three layers of sweats. To say this book trudged along would be insulting to things that trudge.

That said, I did learn a lot from reading it. For the most part, Harold (you know, that guy that got died at the Battle of Hastings) is the forgotten man. He's known pretty much as "the guy that lost" and that's about it. This book delves into his family, his character, and how he got to be in the position of battling at Hastings in the first place.

It is full of well-researched, thoroughly documented, and carefully analyzed information--so why is it boring?

I think that the author, though a great researcher, is not the best of writers. It seemed that he had all these things to tell the reader, but had no way to bring it to life. He dryly related facts that a more vibrant writer could have brought to life with just a smattering of adverbs...maybe an adjective? I don't know how dooming your own brother to exile and marrying the wife of a guy you had beheaded could be boring...but dang it this author did it.

I know this is massively off-topic, and really not a big deal. But the font in my version bugged the crap out of me. I would read few pages...and then "dang I hate this font..." would pop into my head. I think it was just too tall for its width. Whatever it was, it was distracting.

I think there's an amazing and interesting story to be told about Harold. But I also think I need to find another book to do it.

[Greg · Rating 2 out of 5]

I should have read the reviews before starting to read this book.

It was clearly well researched. It is clearly about a fascinating character. It clearly has a great plot structure (who doesn't love those man-versus-man stories?).

What is not clear is why this book is so tedious.

Is it because so many pages are devoted to the career of his father? Yes, the family ties and history are obviously of import. Theories about how Godwin's actions and beliefs affected his son Harold are only briefly mentioned, and only several chapters later.

Perhaps it is because the names of so many characters are so foreign to modern English-speakers. I could have learned the same information without so many Tostis, Gyrths, Leofwines, Gythas, Oddas, Stigands, and Aelfgars.

An obvious dearth of historical documents makes writing a book about the last Anglo-Saxon king of England difficult. Walker seems so intent upon presenting only the historical facts as can be deduced by the contemporary and near-contemporary Chronicles that he has completely removed all possibility of conjecture.

Surely in the last 1000 years of history, we must have learned something about human nature and about cause-and-effect. The tale told could have been much more palatable by including at least a smattering of speculation.

[モーリー · Rating 2 out of 5]

This is obviously a tremendously well researched book and fairly well written, so I don't know why I was stymied by the sheer tedium of it. I got through the first chapter and quit because I was so bored I couldn't pay attention. It probably has a lot to do with the approach of "first this happened, then this guy did that, then this other thing happened." Just one event and person after another without much storytelling or overarching argument/narrative to hold it together or keep my interest. I'd say it perhaps assumed more knowledge of the period and figures than I have, but upon reflection, I don't think it does. A total beginner could read this, if only they could sustain attention long enough to get through it. Perhaps it's just not my style of history, but I read a lot of history and much of it quite academic. So there's just something about this book that made it crushingly boring for me despite my curiosity about its topic.

[Sonya · Rating 4 out of 5]

I really enjoyed this book. It introduced Harold the man to me and showed how he and his father came to be in such power although he was not of the royal line. I began to look at the Conquest in a different manner - as not just something that happened in history - as I read about how Harold fought so hard but yet lost all in the end. The author also did a good job explaining why the family did not defeat William after Harold's death and explained what happened to them in the aftermath. What is ironic, however, is that one of Harold's daughters went on to create a family line which can still be connected to the Queens of Denmark and England today. And, William's son Henry went on to marry into Alfred the Great's line. I think Harold would have liked that.

[T.J. Gillespie · Rating 2 out of 5]

Marc Morris's Norman Conquest covers similar ground in much livelier prose.

I did enjoy this book's brief treatment of Harold's incorrigible older brother Swein:

Prodigal son Swein returned from Denmark, where he had apparently managed to outstay his welcome having ‘ruined himself with the Danes.’...Swein had breached the bounds of acceptable behaviour, and this heinous betrayal and killing of a kinsman outraged both the king and the men of the fleet. They declared Swein nithing in the Viking manner, indicating someone utterly and irreparably disgraced.... the ill-starred Swein, died on 29 September near Constantinople on his way home from Jerusalem.

This is all after he kidnapped an abottess and kept her as his personal sex slave.

[Toni Kely-Brown · Rating 3 out of 5]

3.5 stars - This is a well-written if scholarly book about Harold Godwinson. I did have to push through the first chapter, but once I did, I enjoyed the authors style. I thought it was very well researched and the theories believable despite the lack of primary documents from this time period. Maybe I romanticise Harold, but I admire him and liked that this book did try to present and theorise about Harold "the man" based on his actions. Every time I read about the Battle of Hasting I wish that "stray arrow" hadn't killed him. How history might have been different if he had been victorious over William and the Normans that day.......

[Geoff Boxell · Rating 5 out of 5]

THE book for information on Harold, the last King of the English.

[Peter Fox · Rating 3 out of 5]

I usually struggle a bit with books about Harold II. Most of them feel as if they are just building to the events of the 14th of October 1066 and everything prior is viewed in relation to how it affected the battle. This book is better than many in that regard. It begins with Godwin's fall and rise, continues through his deft footwork with Harold and Harthacnut (an era oft brushed by) and carries on the good work right up to the end. You can learn a lot about the politics of the period in this book. It's clearly written and doesn't get bogged down in any one pet area. It demolishes the notion of there being either a Norman '5th column' and strongly criticises the idea that Edward promised the throne to William. Walker's account of Stigand possibly being responsible is intriguing, if unprovable. I enjoyed the section concerning Harold's trip to Normandy and the oath given. This was a good example of well written history. The genealogies and maps are all pretty clear and it is free from blatant errors. There are, though, areas where different interpretations can be had, but that's not the end of the world.

The largest area that I think people would disagree with is Walker's view of King Harold II. He consistently sees his greatness, but not his problems. This does unbalance the book to a degree, but not a fatal one. Harold seems to have been a master of all he touched, liked by everyone and he would probably have washed his recycling before taking it out – that's the impression conveyed. Another example is that Walker seems to have convinced himself that Queen Edith couldn't have children and so Edward wanted a divorce. There's no evidence for this, but it isn't the be all and end all of that chapter. He takes the view that after his oath to William, the thought of a Norman invasion preyed on Harold's mind and this influenced his actions. Possibly true, but as to how much weight to attach to it, that's a matter of opinion. Walker takes the view that Harold took the throne because he knew William was going to invade and also if he just acted as a general for Edgar, then other people could control the king and he'd lose his influence, questionable, but not unreasonably so.

This book is chronological apart from two chapters. These concern Harold's lands and character and they sit in between other chapters, and feel a bit awkward amidst the narrative. They may have worked better amongst the appendices.

This is a decent enough book, but not as good as his book on Mercia. I personally felt it began to drag towards the end, but I think that is due to me finding accounts of the Hastings campaign pretty tedious. I know the ins and outs and seldom learn enough new to justify reading about it – I consider it with the same amount of enthusiasm as someone who has watched his team get smashed 4-0 on Saturday afternoon and is then asked if he wants to see it again on telly that night. If you don't find Hastings boring, then you'll enjoy it to the end, but either way, the earlier chapters are good enough to justify reading it.

[Megan · Rating 3 out of 5]

I've read several novels about Harold and the 1066 Conquest, so it was helpful to have the real background information and to see what repeated anecdotes may not actually have basis in fact. It was also helpful to have the background to the background (his father Godwine's history). Unfortunately, the information presented was so dry that the book was a slow read for me. A glossary or better attention to defining terms would have been helpful; I knew some from my prior reading, but most people wouldn't.

[Rob Western · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book is incredibly well researched. It deserves a three star rating for that alone.

That said, it is a slog. The fact is that there is a reason no one else ha written about Harold, and it is because he was king for less than a year. Therefore, lots of other players and minor events are drawn on to make it a 200 page book.

If you’re interested in Anglo Saxon history it is a must read. If you’re a casual fan of historical non fiction, I’d give it a miss.

[Jonathon · Rating 5 out of 5]

Outstanding account of a man far too few people know about. The author's thoroughness seemed tedious at times, but the plethora of quotes and references were ultimately necessary to weave a story as exciting and complex as this one was. Harold Godwinson, had he been able to stave off William for a mere two more hours or so would have seen the start of what would have been, in my estimation, one of England's most illustrious and prosperous periods in its deeply ancient history.

[Michael Fildes-Peace · Rating 2 out of 5]

I mean, there is absolutely no doubt this is a well researched book on an individual that I knew nothing about.

I had started to read this book after reading about William the Conqueror, and wanted to know more about the last Anglo-Saxon king of England, whose feats, in such a small amount of time were staggering. That said, I didn’t enjoy the read, it felt like I was reading a text book and as such became quite tiresome and hard to read.

[Beverley Ann · Rating 1 out of 5]

I really tried to read this book, especially as it was on Harold Godwinson, the last Anglo Saxon King of England, but it was incredibly wordy. Don't get me wrong, there is a lot of information in there but it reads more like a dull textbook. I still can't get through the first five pages before taking a break. A real pity, as this could have been an exciting tale of a charismatic leader, who was the last English King before the Norman Conquest.

[A Collins · Rating 3 out of 5]

Tragedy of a king

This book is interesting, full of facts, carefully plotted constructions where facts are few, and is well-written. It is an academic work, not a work of role-playing fiction, and is therefore rather dry. But if you are interested in England 's last Anglo-Saxon-Scandinavian monarch, then go for it. It is one terrific story.

[Simon Bradley · Rating 4 out of 5]

A well written and well researched look at this rather obscure king, explains in details why he was so important in british history. As always with bios of the medieval monarchs there is a lack of detail due to the lack of available historical material, so hard to get a real picture of the man.

[Ian Chapman · Rating 3 out of 5]

A book, made from not very numerous and detailed historical sources, yet complete.

[Anne Cupero · Rating 4 out of 5]

Immensely readable and interesting.

[Malacima · Rating 4 out of 5]

3.75 stars

[Paul Lindstrom · Rating 5 out of 5]

Fascinating read. While academic it's still very accessible. I've recently found out that Harold is my 25th Great Grandfather, so it makes it even more interesting to read.

[Ellen Ekstrom · Rating 2 out of 5]

Wow. I rarely do not suffer while reading history, but as I've whined in my updates, this was the longest 290 pages I've ever read. Mr. Walker gave us the complete history of Harold Godwineson's father, Godwin Wulfnothson, and his rise to power in the mid-eleventh century, the crisis of 1052, but almost glossed over Harold, the subject of his book!

I give the book four stars for the research, two stars for actually covering the career of Harold, who was the last Anglo-Saxon King of England.

Histories and biographies of the king and the era written after the Conquest did their best to show Harold in a negative light. William claimed that Edward the Confessor (not exactly a saint but like Thomas Becket, the subject of a quick and political canonization)left England to him, though there were no writings nor mention of this in England at the tie to prove this claim, only what was written into history after the Battle of Hastings. Harold was asked and was elected king as he was the most suitable candidate for the job at the time; Edward the Confessor's nephew Edgar was a child - that's right, elected, for the practice of primogeniture hadn't taken hold in England yet - and judging by the numbers rallying to his side during the march to York to deal with Harald of Norway and his own brother Tostig, he was respected and trusted as a leader, perhaps even beloved by the people, liked by Edward the Confessor, who hated his father. A little gem of supposition caught my attention - Walker opines that Edward the Confessor's confidante and Archbishop of Canterbury, Robert of Jumieges, put the idea that Edward named William his heir in William's head, and that Harold's oath to William to support a claim to England was given under duress while Harold was Normandy after being shipwrecked and taken prisoner.

The Battle of Hastings was well-documented and I was hoping that Walker would give the reader more of the hours directly following Harold's death and mutilation (that's right - accounts state that Harold was within minutes of claiming victory when he was struck in eye by an arrow, fell, and then hacked into pieces perhaps after he was dead). Again, this decisive event is glossed over. At this point in the book, it seems as though the author was in a hurry to finish, or make a deadline, for the writing feels rushed. In fairness, there aren't as many books written about Harold as William the Bastard (in so many ways), but then, history is written by the victorious. A shorter work focusing on the brief career and reign of Harold II would have been more satisfying. The writing is not as dry and academic as a doctoral thesis, and it does keep your attention. I cannot recommend this book for a quick introduction to Late Anglo-Saxon England.

[Matt · Rating 5 out of 5]

A history text that covers a lot of ground and still manages to score high points for readability, Ian Walker's biography of Harold Godwineson and his treatment of the eventful year of 1066 is stellar. He is clearly most at home in considering the political dramas and personalities of the time, and this astute awareness of individual ties, loves, hatreds, friendships, rivalries, ambitions and follies brings to life what would otherwise be a rather dull chronology of the House of Godwine.

Clearly (and, from my view, this is a big positive) Walker has a marked sympathy for Harold, and much of the text itself appears aimed at clearing him of the historical charges of rashness and tactical ineptitude that have dogged him ever since his decisive and fatal loss at Hastings. The picture that comes through instead, is a Harold who is a diplomatic bridge between his father and King Eadweard, and also a cultural bridge between a warlike Scandinavian heritage and a peace-loving English people. These two sides to Harold's personality Walker illustrates with an awesome command of the primary source material - not just the monastic histories; he also brings forward evidence from coinage and tax records, skaldic poems and diplomas, to fashion a fuller-bodied view of the ill-fated king.

If there is one weakness to this narrative, it would be this: religious motives always come second to power politics and intrigues of personality for Walker. He does not discount Harold's pious devotion to Holy Cross, or downplay the importance of papal support for the bishops and other clergymen who were political actors of the time, but the actors and actions involved are always meant to be understood first from the point of view of material, social and political advantage. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, and indeed he is able to provide convincing explanations for a lot of behaviour on all sides through this lens. But it does lend a rather modernistic flavour to the text, in ways which occasionally (but not often) fall near the danger of the historian's fallacy which Walker is so incredibly good about avoiding elsewhere in this same book.

Highly, highly recommended. It's much more of a formal and scholarly history book than either Howarth's storyteller-like approach in 1066 or Lacey and Danziger's popular-historical slant in The Year 1000, but it's still very readable and immensely, deeply informative.

[Debbi · Rating 3 out of 5]

Finally finished! The book is not a difficult read, I simply found several distractions after beginning it. It is mostly well-written, although after being immersed in several years of using the Chicago Manual of Style, the author's use of passive voice and redundant phrasing jumped out at me.

Using the Bayeaux Tapestry and contemporary writings including William of Poitiers and William of Jumieges, Walker brings the usual dim picture of Harold Godwineson to life. He does not try to insert what may have been Harold's thoughts or conversations or motives; rather he uses Harold's actions to describe the type of man he must have been and by including the actions of those around him, helps us to understand what compelled Harold's plans, strategies and the events that brought about his downfall. Walker includes chapters devoted to several of the people surrounding Harold who actions influenced events or created situations that required him to respond as he did.

After reading the book, I now have a clearer picture of Harold as an individual rather than a "footnote" in English royal history.

[Bkwormmegs · Rating 3 out of 5]

I actually took about a week to read this - adding it late to my Goodreads feed. It does seem like a loooong 300 pages. Harold's father is covered in detail, but there is less about Harold, perhaps because we have lost so much information in the Norman conquest. If only the writing style had been less grammatically convoluted! The man loves commas and when you are talking about three women named Gytha you need definitive punctuation to clarify who the subject is supposed to be. An easier system put in place to identify and clarify the confusion of names and connections would have made this a more enjoyable read. Having said that, pay attention and bookmark a family tree in safari and you should be fine. Try reading some of the old Danish names out loud - it adds to the fun. (If he wanted a wider audience than academia he could have included some phonetics to help us non-masters in history students out.) Finally, it's an interesting period in english history and Walker makes a convincing case for Harold's potential greatness.

[Pam Shelton-Anderson · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was a very good book about the last king before the Conquest of England. Like Richard III, Harold's reputation and place in history suffered because he lost his final battle. This author makes a very good point that if Harold is a usurper it was not against William (who had exacted a dubious oath from Harold who risked imprisonment at his hands) but Edgar the Aethling. Harold, despite the weakness of his claim to the throne, was energetic, valiant and capable and largely ended the Viking threat against England. At Hastings, his very strong force was on the verge of defeating the invading Normans who were fighting for their lives when a chance arrow ended his life. How different history might have been.

[Graham Lee · Rating 4 out of 5]

It's a dense read but worth it. I didn't know much about the period and this job does a good job of both describing the political scene in 11th century England and tying it to the wider European context. It's clear that the author goes out of his way to paint Harold Godwineson in a flattering light, for example his use of William of Poitiers is straightforward in some parts, fills in some equivocal sections with his own interpretation but he rejects it where it prefers William. Still a very detailed coverage of the last decades of Anglo-Saxon England.

[G.K. · Rating 5 out of 5]

Ian W Walker shines a dazzling light on this part of what is often referred to as the dark ages. Not only does he write a thoroughly researched account of Harold's life, he also puts it in the context of the late Anglo Saxon period. this book is a labour of love and it comes over as such. There's detail enough to greatly inform you without your getting bogged down in the minutia of humdrum daily life. A superb read!