Harold Godwinson
How to catch an arrow in your face?
Written by Louis Binns (28.11.2023)
The first observation of Harold Godwinson’s death is that it happened; he died at the Battle of Hastings in 1066, against William Duke of Normandy, and thus lost the English throne…and his life. Harold’s death, and William’s Victory, is almost considered to be the narrative that shaped British history, at that time. Britain had been previously ruled in places and invaded, but the complete victory over our nation by William, ushered in a new dynasty of rulers altogether. You can imagine a Doctor Who episode based around Hastings 1066; what if Harold was victorious? Would the direction of British history be completely different? The fact is however, whether he was shot in the eye, hacked to death, or simply was trampled after slipping in the mud, doesn’t really matter, he died, and the Normans took over Britain.
The fact is that most believe Harold Godwinson died with an arrow in his eye. This is outlined in the famous Bayeux Tapestry (11th century), a large piece tapestry chronicling the Battle of Hastings, or at least what the Normans claim happened. We also know, or speculate, that the arrow that killed Harold, was added into the legend, woven later into the Bayeux Tapestry, after it’s completion. Harold, after being shot in the eye, lying on the ground in pain, was then finished off by a Norman, hacking him into the mud.
The Bayeux Tapestry is used as one of the main narrative aids for the Battle of Hastings, but seeing as it was created by the victors (Normans), and considering most likely none of the artists witness the events of the battle, it’s not the most reliable source. Its basically a Hollywood styled dramatization of the events; a brutal battle between two reasonably equal sized forces and presented as celebration of Norman conquest and Norman “truth”. Based on reality, but far from the truth, like Braveheart; a cracking and exciting film, but half is from legend or just plain bollocks (William Wallace never sacked York! The Scottish forces did however over four hundred years later, in 1644, during the First English Civil War).
The Arrow in the Eye
The arrow in the eye is an element that stands out in the legend. Someone dying from a stab wound or blunt force trauma to the skull, is commonplace in battle. However, a well shot arrow into a Kings eye is memorable, which is why it was mostly likely added in. The reason it may have been added could have been to make Harold’s death seem more honourable; Harold in the shield wall, barking orders, shot in the eye and finally finished off, a reasonably quick and noble death. It also could in fact have been an amusing last ‘fuck you’ to Harold, making him into the fool who caught and arrow in his face, before falling into the mud and getting hacked to death. Bit like the way Richard III is portrayed by the Tudors at the Battle of Bosworth fields in 1485; conducting an unsuccessful cavalry charge as a last ditch attempt to kill Henry Tudor, riding madly into battle, before being surrounded and killed. The Tudors subsequently stripped and paraded Richard’s body and then went about, for the next hundred years, creating their own edited history of events, portraying Richard as a crazed lunatic (added to later by Shakespeare).
The accuracy and specifics of being shot by an arrow in the eye, spurs further feelings of doubt. The volley of arrows fired by the Normans, were to keep the Saxons pinned down, to force them into taking cover, similar to modern day artillery bombardments. The fact that one of these arrows missed Harold’s shield, armour and helmet, to land in his eye is doubtful, or at least unlikely
The other argument is, what proof do we have, this is Harold Godwinson. It’s convenient of the Normans to name this man as Harold, as the death itself stands out within the history of the battle. ‘The King of England and the Saxons, died with an arrow in his eye’, its memorable. But is it true?
The ‘Carmen de Hastingae Proelio’ (Song of the Battle of Hastings), is a Latin poem, which has a different depiction of Harold’s death; a far more graphic description;
‘These four bore arms to kill the king. Others indeed were there; but these were better than the rest. If anyone doubts this, what they did proves it true, for in accordance with the rules of war they compelled Harold by many blows to go the way of all flesh. The first of the four, piercing the king’s shield and chest with his lance, drenched the ground with a gushing stream of blood. The second with his sword cut off his head below the protection of his helm. The third liquified his entrails with his spear. And the fourth cut off his thigh and carried it some distance away. The earth held the body they had in these ways destroyed.’ — Carmen de Hastingae Proelio
The poem describes William of Normandy, Eustace of Boulogne, Hugh of Pontheiu, and Walter Giffard, hacking Harold to death. The poem itself is not considered to be an amazing piece of work and was likely written in a hurry (possibly as some scholars believe it may have been presented to William I, soon after his victory). Some scholars believe however, the poem is from the twelfth-century, and others believe it was written by Bishop Guy of Amiens, between Christmas 1066 and Easter 1067.
Another source; ‘Gesta Normannorum Ducem’ (Deeds of the Norman Leaders), written in the late 1060s by William of Jumièges, also has no mention of, death by arrow;
‘Harold himself was slain, pierced with mortal wounds, during the first assault.’ — Gesta Normannorum Ducem
The Bayeux tapestry, underwent a restoration period during the 18th Century. What was revealed, was that the arrow in Harold’s eye, may have been added at a later time. In around 1729, The Bayeux tapestry was sketched by an artist Antoine Benoîta, before the tapestry’s restoration took place. The sketch, was of it’s then appearance and along with another engraving, are our earliest still surviving depictions (before the restoration) of Harold’s alleged death scene. Not one of these depicts a spearman/Harold, taking an arrow in the face. Harold has his hand raised, seemingly shaking his fist in anger or rage, rather than pulling out an arrow from his eye.
The arrow, at a closer look is different from the three arrows that have struck Harold’ shield. The fletching’s (the arrow’s feathers) are different. The arrow actually is in fact, different from not just the arrows in the shield, but every other arrow presented in the tapestry.
The fact is we do not exactly know if the arrow was added to the Tapestry, but more importantly why was it. If I was to hazard a guess, I believe the Tapestry was completed with Harold depicted on his feet, in the heat of battle, taking cover with his fellow men from a volley of arrows. An action still of the King fighting amongst his men. However, my theory is that after it’s creation the Tapestry was then reviewed either soon after or possibly years later, where they came to the conclusion that the story didn’t work if Harold wasn’t shown dying in battle. It was then cleverly decided to add the arrow in. Why an arrow? Possibly because this was the easiest edit, a slight change. The arrow essentially is just a line with some feather like details, it’s hardly a time consuming alteration. This theory is most likely wrong, but I like the idea of someone reviewing the Tapestry, exclaiming; ‘Why isn’t Harold dead? Add an arrow there!’
Kings and Arrows
The story of an English King dying from an arrow(s) is actually a common theme in British History; Edmund the Martyr, King of East Anglia was shot by multiply arrows after trying to prove a religious point to some sceptical Vikings. King William II ‘Rufus’ was shot by an arrow in a “hunting accident”, and King Richard I ‘the Lion Heart’ (remember that bastard from the previous blog) was shot by a crossbowman, allegedly a French cook during a siege. All these stories are a mixture of Kings looking heroic or facing Martyrdom or just looking like a berk with an arrow sticking out of them. So essentially its up to you to interrupt! How would you feel about dying from an arrow (or at least a story of you dying from an arrow being distributed); would you feel heroic, or idiotic that you were shot and killed by a high velocity stick with feathers on it.
In any case, as outlined at the beginning of this blog, Harold died and that’s a fact. The way he died can be disputed and debated, but the fact is, he died! So the question is; ‘does Harold Godwinson’s cause of death actually matter in the course of British history, or is the fact that he died enough?!’
