William was better prepared for the Battle of Hastings compared to others. However, none of the groups prepared effectively for the ensuing battle.
William of Normandy, also known as William the Conqueror, better prepared for the Battle of Hastings by securing papal support, which legitimized his claim to the English throne and rallied troops. He also spent considerable time assembling a well-trained and diverse army, including infantry, cavalry, and archers, and he conducted extensive planning for logistics and strategy. In contrast, Harold Godwinson was still reeling from his recent victory at the Battle of Stamford Bridge against the Norwegians, which left his forces weakened and less prepared for the subsequent confrontation with William. This combination of strategic foresight and military readiness gave William a crucial advantage in the battle.
are you from ms gardezi's class?
he was quite well prepared for the battle as he had many plans, many men and almost the same number horses.
A better question is "When wasn't William Penn intoxicated?"
William was better prepared for the Battle of Hastings compared to others. However, none of the groups prepared effectively for the ensuing battle.
because he was more prepared and would have been a better leader in the future.
William of Normandy, also known as William the Conqueror, better prepared for the Battle of Hastings by securing papal support, which legitimized his claim to the English throne and rallied troops. He also spent considerable time assembling a well-trained and diverse army, including infantry, cavalry, and archers, and he conducted extensive planning for logistics and strategy. In contrast, Harold Godwinson was still reeling from his recent victory at the Battle of Stamford Bridge against the Norwegians, which left his forces weakened and less prepared for the subsequent confrontation with William. This combination of strategic foresight and military readiness gave William a crucial advantage in the battle.
If he was not well prepared, he wouldn't have taken over England, now, would he?
It all depends on how well prepared he/she is
thats wrong because william was prepared with his horses and weopens
yes of course he was!
William was a good king because he was well prepared and was a good leader.
Prepared enough to go into ROTC or the REAL military.
I believe it was 1st Baron Petre ( William Petre ( 1500-1572 )--although I am prepared to be contradicted.
William was very well prepared which made him a good leader, he did the very clever trick of retreating down the hill!
William won the battle of Hastings so he could be regarded as 'better'.