He wasn't a bad king but he just didnt last very long as king
Harold Godwinson was as good as any other king in the 11th century. He was a powerful and rich landowner and popular with most of the richer people in England.
Land, money, power and the ability to keep other people on your side make a good king because they bring stability and peace to the population.
He wasn't a bad king but he just didnt last very long as king
yes he was a bad leader because he has no leadership experience and does not care about his army.
Harold Godwinson was the last Angelo-Saxton King to rule England. His rule was very short lasting from January 6th until his death at The Battle of Hastings later that year.
Harold was not a great military leader. He was fooled by William the Conqueror's false retreat.
yes because he was very powerful and loved by many people of his country
King Harold was not a bad king he just was or a king for very long😰😢
he did not win the battle of Hastings!
he is a good king
why wouldnt harold godwinson be a good king
Harold Godwinson was the king of England during the battle of haistings.
The English King was Harold Godwinson
wrong it is in fact Harold godwinson. William duke of normandys arm killed Harold so he became king
he is a good king
that he was king for the time
why wouldnt harold godwinson be a good king
Harold Godwinson was the king of England during the battle of haistings.
The English King was Harold Godwinson
Harald Hadrada was killed by Harold Godwinson (also known as Harold II) When an arrow pierced through his throat.
Harold Godwinson was also King Harold II of England
yes
Harold godwinson was, then he was beaten by William the conqueror at The Battle of Hastings, and William became king.
wrong it is in fact Harold godwinson. William duke of normandys arm killed Harold so he became king
= Harold Godwinson =
Harold Godwinson died on 14th October 1066 in the battle of Hastings