One can surmise therefore, that his archers were with his navy, blockading deep water ports, and would not have expected William to land at Hastings because it was purely tidal, and its beach shallow and unsuitable for William's (believed large warships) .
Moreover, why would William build a fleet of 700 shallow keeled boats, unless he intended to land on this particular beach, where he would have faced a large calm tidal lagoon which would stay full and calm - after the tide had receded. It would have appeared as it does in this painting at 4.50am on the 28th of September 1066.
Harold would not have expected William to have had enough time to unload his 7000 men and perhaps horses at the purely tidal port Hastings, at high tide, upon the assumption that William's warships would be the same as Harold's own deep keeled boats shown in early engravings of him actually in one before 1066. This was the same problem faced on D-Day 1944.
Thus one must assume that William did land at Hastings and in doing so, avoided William's navy.
Moreover the name given to William's castle on the Bayeux tapestry -as it also appears in this painting, was 'Hestengaceastre'.
Hestenga is Danish. It means 'Horse-meadow' or 'followers of horses'
If the 'Hestengs' - the local people, were traditionally 'horse-people' or semi-nomadic - grazing their horses around the area (also names exist such as 'Hastingleigh' etc (also of Danish origin - Horse-meadow) - then It is apparent from this painting that these local peoples (The followers of horses) gave their name to the Roman fort - as shown here for the first time. So this painting - combined with the Grose print demonstrates that the name 'Hestenga' goes back - highly probably before Roman times,
and more-over prior to the Anglo-Saxons. One can deduce that the word Saxon actually refers not only to a type of dagger, but a Plough' - both being wooden handled iron implements or 'Seaxe'.
If that is the case, then the Anglo-Saxons (Norse /Danish for 'Ploughed meadow') England - Danish for 'meadow-land'. (Sasanach - Farmers) etc were in nature, farmers. And requiring land with boundaries to farm. Thus, being able to raise taxes.
This being anathema to a people who allowed their horses to roam and graze.
One could thus see a natural ally in William, who used cavalry when Harold didn't, instead Harold fighting from the site of pre-selected Hilltop 'beacons', a method continued from the stone-age using pre-existing stone-age fortifications at the highest points in the landscape for signalling, used as a means of rallying defenders. Sites which negated the need for building castles. Thus, William, who - in effect, made his own hilltops, in the guise of 'mounds' or Mottes, and his more mobile cavalry - who could take a war with him where-ever he went - would be a good customer for their horse-trade.
There would be a strong motivation for the Hestengs to do a deal with William, allowing him unopposed access to their port in return for supplying William with horses.
William would need to be absolutely sure of an unopposed landing if he was to land 2000 horses and building ships 9 months in advance for this purpose.
It is thus evident that he built his 700 shallow keeled boats just as they appear here in this painting, to land exactly at the site in 1066 - as it appears here.
One may conclude that once Harold received the news of William's landing, he would have ordered his ships to regroup - perhaps at the Isle of Wight - and await his arrival with an army.
The history shows that he approached from the north - and in doing so - would have drawn William away from the coast. At that point Harold's large fleet would land, relatively unopposed , probably at the large deep-water port of Pevensey - and crucially his archers would attempt to rendez vous with Harold.
Prima facie Harold had chosen a site for the battle at the top of a hill with a ridge, steep on either side.
So that William's cavalry could not charge up it - and there Harold's archers - when they arrived, would have greater range than William's. It is evident that William's hand was forced by the sighting of Harold's navy - bringing his archers with it. And before Harold's archers could arrive he would engage.
Evidence of this is that William knew Harold didn't have any archers. They would have been positioned behind the ridge of the hill, out of range of Williams archers at the bottom of the hill and out of sight of William.
And yet William positioned his archers at the very front of his rank. Where they would have been totally exposed to the greater range of Harold's archers - out of sight . William knew where Harold's archers were.
One can further deduce that Harold would be at a site where a signal could reach him most rapidly, indicating the arrival of his archers at Pevensey.
The most appropriate hill that fits all of these criteria is to the north west of Heathfield. Until 1900, the final battle was called the Battle of Heathfield. Presumably political considerations changed the perception.
It makes sense that the Bayeux Tapestry was commissioned in England to deflect attention away from the role of the Hestengs in William's conquest, as his position was always under threat.
Further evidence of the conspiracy would be that Hastings was not recorded in the Domesday Book.
One presumes, not because it no longer existed - but that it no longer had to pay taxes. - A reward.
Thus above in the last picture I include a google derived picture, of what would have been the battle hill and the arrangement of forces. It was marked as a Beacon Hill in a 1799 map - when expecting the invasion of Napoleon. In 1066 it would have also been selected as a predetermined sit of defense for a predetermined battle plan. Thus Harold would wait there in order to draw William north - including his force at Pevensey and await a signal from the coast that his archers and navy had arrived. Evidently the wind was not favorable, just as it had not been at Hastings prior, to intercept William's fleet landing at Hastings. The hiill fits the description of the battle and the location on the map of the Beacon Hill and the site explains exactly why and how the battle unfolded. With it being slightly higher at one end - which is where William's men would suffer most from bombardment and from that left flank, William's line under the most pressure would flee when William feigned death.
Harold's men would break rank and pursue down to the flatter lower land, as seen on the left of the satellite image, where William's cavalry could engage them. Their own momentum - downhill, would have been difficult to stop when attacking at the steepest part of the site- so naturally falling on William's line and pursuing their flight.
This would have been a practiced tactic of William's army as opponents to his cavalry would take positions on high ground.
Thus the battle would likely to have naturally proceeded to the left as shown in the picture - and Harold's men would be worn down in this way. the 'malfosse' would be a ditch that runs along the foot of the slope of the battlefield.
All the above and more can for the first time be deduced from the evidence presented in this painting.
Identifying the people of the area as being as old as the Romans and probably prior.
Identifying the geography - both as tidal, and having lagoons which are calm and tidal - which were perfect for William's fleet, particularly his horses to land. (one might suggest that William scuttled his boats in these lagoons - allowing his horses to swim out (using the in-built drain plug integrally designed in Viking boats , and cutting his boats in two and allowing his horses to walk out. This also being shown in the Bayeux tapestry. His horses having been towed across the channel - in part in barges, which were un-rigged and lacking a prow figure, exactly as shown in the tapestry. (a smaller boat is shown being towed and holes are shown in the prows of boats so that they can be towed, and boats are shown as cut in two and stacked vertically. Likely they being used as a part pre-fabricated palisade for his castle. Likewise the masts of boats. Speed being all critical at the landing.
Indeed, the castle's form on the tapestry appears to indicate or evoke that of an upturned planked boat - perhaps a nod to its construction.
A note in respect of The Hestengs - the oldest horse fossils in England were found near Hastings -500000 years old.
The Hestengs (today's 'gypsies'); might have come from Denmark, following horses and herding animals after ice sheets had been melted and the land rose to create the western promontory of europe, its coast home to grasslands exposed by the warming land.. Arriving in Hestengs 500 000 years ago.
The wars of Europe over many hundreds of years being related to the discovery of iron and its use as a plough so that a struggle existed between herders and farmers - the latter requiring fixed plots of land upon which they would raise taxes.
Prima facie again - 'Henge' - a declension of Hesteng - a site where traditional nomadic 'horse followers' traded with farmers.
Amazing as to what one painting can reveal.