1066: The Year of the Three Battles

by Frank McLynn

Members	Reviews	Popularity	Average rating	Mentions
232	6	116,525	(3.76)	13
Everyone knows what William the Conqueror won the Battle of Hastings in 1066, but in recent years is has become customary to assume that the victory was virtually inevitable, given the alleged superiority of Norman military technology. In this new study, underpinned by biographical sketches of the great warriors who fought for the crown of England in 1066, Frank McLynn shows that this view is mistaken. The battle on Senlac Hill on 14 October was a desperately close-run thing, which Harold lost only because of an incredible run of bad fortune and some treachery from the Saxon elite in England. Both William and Harold were fine generals, but Harold was the more inspirational of the two. Making use of all the latest scholarship, McLynn shows that most of our 'knowledge' of 1066 rests on myths or illusions: Harold did not fight at Hastings with the same army with which he had been victorious at Stamford Bridge three weeks earlier; the Battle of Senlac was not won by Norman archery; Harold did not die with an arrow in the eye. In overturning these myths, McLynn shows that the truth is even more astonishing than the legend. An original feature of the book is the space devoted to the career and achievements of Harald Hardrada, who usually appears in such narratives as the shadowy 'third man'. McLynn shows that he was probably the greatest warrior of the three and that he, in turn, lost a battle through unforeseen circumstances.… (more)

all members

▾Members

Recently added by

Sean85, john257hopper, socksforllamas, Silverwolfman12, bujeya, Markober, Den85, Sommesoldier, MCMULLIN, FredFleet

▾Tags

▾LibraryThing Recommendations

▾Member recommendations

00
Battles of the Dark Ages by Peter Marren (kkunker)

▾Lists

None

▾Will you like it?

▾Conversations (About links)

No current Talk conversations about this book.

» See also 13 mentions

▾Member reviews

date ▼ | votes

Showing 1-5 of 6 (next | show all)

A fine and detailed history of the "Big Three" leaders of the 1066 time period - Harold Godwinson (the rightful king of England), Harald Hardrada (king of Norway), and William of Normandy ("the Conqueror"). In 1066 they all wanted England for himself. That year each one was a victor in one of the three battles in the title, William of course won the battle that mattered the most, the last one. The author gives fine bios of many of the people involved (King Edward the Confessor, Tostig, Harold Godwinson's traitorous brother, and others). My favorite bio was the history of Harald Hardrada of Norway, but then I've always been a fan of The Vikings (no, not the ones from Minnesota), and feel like they have gotten a bad rap. McLynn dispels many myths, such as William being the rightful heir to the English throne, Harald Godwinson being killed with an arrow to the eye. etc. I wish the chapters on the three battles had been more detailed, but they give fine information. Maybe it's just the board war-gamer in me. I also think that the book could have used a glossary of all the many historical characters mentioned, just a line or two of each to reference when reading the book. All-in-all though, it is the best history of a memorable year that changed history. (

)

CRChapin | Jul 8, 2023 |

Excellent book if you already know much of the detail. The knowing and slightly ironic style is very engaging.

Thoroughly enjoyed it. (

)

CraigGoodwin | May 13, 2023 |

It's been a long time since I've been this thrilled by a history. McLynn provides the perfect combination of readability and real in-depth historical analysis: 1066 is a bit more comprehensive than a popular history book but is not so dryly scholarly that it's boring. Other reviewers mentioned that the book is at times difficult to get through, but that was not my experience at all. McLynn's treatment of the Battle of Stamford Bridge and The Battle of Hastings were so engaging I couldn't put it down! McLynn's other works are now high on my to-read list.

As another reviewer mentioned, family trees and maps would have been nice. On the other hand, it's not hard to find the information online and print yourself cheat sheets to keep in the book. I highly recommended 1066 if you are interested in the political goings on that led to the end of Anglo-Saxon England and Norman Conquest. (

)

k8_not_kate | Aug 30, 2009 |

If you can get through the first 190 pages (of 230) it's somewhat interesting. No joke. This is a slog. McLynn's writing is straightforward enough, but the book suffers mightily from a lack of maps and family trees. There are dozens of different characters, all interelated, with tough-to-pronounce names. Often I forgot about whom I was reading.

And for a book subtitled "The Year of Three Battles" there is very little detail about the battles themselves. Instead, the book focuses on all the wheeling and dealing that caused the four main characters to confront one another in 1066.

Hardly a beginners look at the Norman conquest. McLynn seems to have some very compelling new arguments, but unless you're very familiar with this part of history already avoid this book. (

)

sergerca | Oct 24, 2008 |

A bit hard to get thru

jaygheiser | Jul 23, 2008 |

date ▼ | votes

Showing 1-5 of 6 (next | show all)

▾Published reviews

no reviews | add a review

▾Other authors

» Add other authors

▾Series and work relationships

▾Awards and Honors

view history

▾Common Knowledge

You must log in to edit Common Knowledge data.

For more help see the Common Knowledge help page.

Canonical title

Original title

1066: The Year of the Three Battles

Alternative titles

Original publication date

People/Characters

Harald Hardrada

Harold II Godwinson

William the Conqueror

Important places

Important events

Battle of Fulford (1066-09-20)

Battle of Stamford Bridge (1066-09-25)

Battle of Hastings (1066-10-14)

Related movies

Epigraph

Dedication

First words

Quotations

Last words

Disambiguation notice

Publisher's editors

Blurbers

Original language

Canonical DDC/MDS

Canonical LCC

▾References

References to this work on external resources.

Wikipedia in English (3)

Frank McLynn

Hakon Sweynson

Kalv Arnesson

▾Book descriptions

Everyone knows what William the Conqueror won the Battle of Hastings in 1066, but in recent years is has become customary to assume that the victory was virtually inevitable, given the alleged superiority of Norman military technology. In this new study, underpinned by biographical sketches of the great warriors who fought for the crown of England in 1066, Frank McLynn shows that this view is mistaken. The battle on Senlac Hill on 14 October was a desperately close-run thing, which Harold lost only because of an incredible run of bad fortune and some treachery from the Saxon elite in England. Both William and Harold were fine generals, but Harold was the more inspirational of the two. Making use of all the latest scholarship, McLynn shows that most of our 'knowledge' of 1066 rests on myths or illusions: Harold did not fight at Hastings with the same army with which he had been victorious at Stamford Bridge three weeks earlier; the Battle of Senlac was not won by Norman archery; Harold did not die with an arrow in the eye. In overturning these myths, McLynn shows that the truth is even more astonishing than the legend. An original feature of the book is the space devoted to the career and achievements of Harald Hardrada, who usually appears in such narratives as the shadowy 'third man'. McLynn shows that he was probably the greatest warrior of the three and that he, in turn, lost a battle through unforeseen circumstances.

▾Library descriptions

No library descriptions found.

▾LibraryThing members' description

Book description

Haiku summary