The Year Of The Conquest Analysis

1066: The Year of the Conquest is not a bad book, but it is not a very good book either. When I first opened the book I was expecting to have nothing cold hard facts thrown into my face, but instead I got an informational story that was told with emotion. There were times in the book where my gears actually started to turn and then there were times when I struggled to make it through the chapter because I lost interest in that piece of the text. The information in the book is boring but the way that Howarth told the structure of events is what actually kept me interested in the story. Howarth’s writing style was very interesting because he complies an abundance of facts into an almost novelistic narrative. There is also three different versions of every major event in the book; English, Norman, and Scandinavian. The reasoning behind those parts are interesting because it shows the difference between the countries and their ability to provide reliable information. I also like how he described the excitement, pleasures, and
The best part of the book was the first chapter in which Howarth elaborates on the life of the common people. He gives a clear insight on how simple and kind life was to the people of England. At the beginning of the year, everything was easy and fun for the English. Food was plentiful and the world was safe. It was so safe that a woman could walk alone to the next town, which would be miles away. A bad point in the book was the information about the initiation of King Harold. The information given was straight and to the point which left me wondering about the opinions of the Papacy.
While I was reading 1066 I learned a lot about the history of England and how the Battle of Hastings nearly destroyed it, but the English refused to let their country die. Some of the events of that year are still being debated over but there is no way to know exactly how the events played