Talk:Battle of Hastings

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Battle of Hastings article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3: 3 months

Battle of Hastings is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.

This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on October 14, 2017.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
June 5, 2013	Good article nominee	Listed
August 15, 2013	Featured article candidate	Promoted

Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on October 14, 2004, October 14, 2005, October 14, 2006, October 14, 2014, October 14, 2018, and October 14, 2020.

Current status: Featured article

Military history: British / European / Medieval

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

Associated task forces:
/
	British military history task force
	European military history task force
	Medieval warfare task force (c. 500 – c. 1500)

Middle Ages High‑importance

	Middle Ages portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Middle AgesWikipedia:WikiProject Middle AgesTemplate:WikiProject Middle AgesMiddle Ages articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Anglo-Saxon Kingdoms High‑importance

	Anglo-Saxon England portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anglo-Saxon Kingdoms, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Anglo-Saxon Kingdoms on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Anglo-Saxon KingdomsWikipedia:WikiProject Anglo-Saxon KingdomsTemplate:WikiProject Anglo-Saxon KingdomsAnglo-Saxon Kingdoms articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

England High‑importance

	England portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Norse history and culture High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Norse history and culture, a WikiProject related to all activities of the North Germanic peoples, both in Scandinavia and abroad, prior to the formation of the Kalmar Union in 1397. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.Norse history and cultureWikipedia:WikiProject Norse history and cultureTemplate:WikiProject Norse history and cultureNorse history and culture articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Sussex Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sussex, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Sussex on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SussexWikipedia:WikiProject SussexTemplate:WikiProject SussexSussex-related articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Normandy Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Normandy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Normandy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.NormandyWikipedia:WikiProject NormandyTemplate:WikiProject NormandyNormandy articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Horses

How many horses were used by each side? The Bayeux Tapestry shows 190 horses or mules, of which 182 were probably horses. But it shows horses being used far more by the Normans and the Saxons as mostly on foot, so this cannot be used as firm evidence. How did the Normans get so many horses across the English Channel, when the relatively small boats could have carried only a few at a time? Presumably then invasion force was built up over time in multiple voyages, rather than just arriving as one complete invasion force? 205.239.40.3 (talk) 21:58, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

In his 2000 TV series A History of Britain, Simon Schama says that William brought 6,000 horses, carried in 400 ships. Harold Godwinson says 700 ships, but that claim is unsourced. 86.187.161.211 (talk) 21:35, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Site in Dispute.

The "official" site is under dispute by a number of professional historians and archaeologists with sites ranging from Caldbec Hill itself to Crowhurst via Battle Abbey and the mini roundabout ( Time Team 2013?). There are other sites put forward by various individuals i.e. Beech Farm, Beechdown Wood, on a ridge 3 miles east of Battle and my own two sites ( Skirmish at Battle High Street by Fire Station and the main battle taking place on a ridge just inside Ashes Wood ( the Malfosse happened 300 metres away deeper into the wood). While I don't expect the minor sites to be listed or noted in any way do you not think that the reader be made aware that the actual site is in dispute? 185.246.231.169 (talk) 21:14, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Senlac

In his 2000 TV series A History of Britain, Simon Schama claims the battle site was called Sarlac meaning "lake of blood". 86.187.161.211 (talk) 21:41, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Need to confirm Rasojp (talk) 01:53, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Senlac was originally known in Old English as Santlache meaning "Sand lake", the Normans punned it into the Norman French Sanguelac (translates into English as "blood lake”) the name became shortened to Senlac. The Chronicle of Battle Abbey records two guildhalls in Battle; one of them, the guild of St Martin , located in Sandlake.[see Searle, The Chronicle of Battle Abbey (1980), pp. 64-65].Wilfridselsey (talk) 13:23, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

its Harald III not Harold III — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.97.137.24 (talk) 21:23, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Harold was killed" or "Harold is killed"?

Hey @Piledhigheranddeeper I was sent on a mission by TortieCat on Discord to tell you that your edit from 21:05, 14 October 2020 should be "Harold was killed". The reason why it should be "Harold was killed" is that TortieCat told me word for word:

the text on the thing says "King Harold was killed" or "King Harold has been killed"

it's the perfect passive system

if it said harold rex interfectur it would be "king harold is killed"the text on the thing says "King Harold was killed" or "King Harold has been killed"

Thank you for taking your time to read this message.

PS: I don't know Latin or the Battle Of Hastings, if the "correction" ended up being wrong explain why so I can tell TortieCat why it is "Harold is killed" IServe1PurposeFor-tortie-ondiscord (talk) 03:29, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the image depicts "Harold being killed", i.e. the event of his death, as opposed to "Harold was killed". While the literal translation from Latin may be "was killed", the reader can already infer from the painting's age and the battle it was painted for that Harold most definitely was killed. The caption is simply describing what the image depicts, and it makes somewhat more sense to keep the tense the way it currently is to keep things simple. Sirocco745 (talk) 03:38, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok thanks Sirocco745, I appreciate you replying in quick time! IServe1PurposeFor-tortie-ondiscord (talk) 03:43, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No problem! Always happy to help :D Sirocco745 (talk) 03:45, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]