Why Harold Godwinson was better than Harold Hardragar and William of Normandy?

Answer 1

William, duke of Normandy was a better leader because he has more prepared and had better tactics than Harold Godwinson. He was able to adapt to the battle at Hastings, when the Brettons ran from his army he surrounded and killed the group of Saxons who followed them. If Harold had been able to adapt to the battle as well he might have defeated William.

Idk ask the people that were there... oh wait............ THEY'RE DEAD!

Answer 2

Yes Because he was a highly skilled soldier, Harold made a lot of mistakes,

Harold had bad luck and he had a better army. So yes William was a better

leader

Answer 3

I've been doing a project on In my essay, I put

Harold was a better candidate than Harald Hadraada, mainly because Harold Godwinson had the advantage of being English. Harold Godwinson was also a better candidate than Harald Hadraada because he was known by Edward, and he was a good politician. However, Harald Hadraada was a better candidate than Harold Godwinson because Harald Hadraada was a better fighter than Harold Godwinson. Also, Harald Hadraada had experienced royalty before.



Harold Godwinson was a better candidate than William of Normandy, mainly because Harold Godwinson the advantage of being English. Harold Godwinson was also a better candidate than William because Harold Godwinson was a good politician. However, you could say that William was a better candidate than Harold Godwinson because William was related by blood to Edward, and Harold was only related by marriage.

Answer 4

William was a better king, but i think people would have liked to have Harold as a king.

Hope i was a good help :)