One of the problems afflicting English history surrounding 1066 is that some historians have been swayed by sympathiser sources (e.g. that of Robert of Jumieges, the deposed Archbishop of Canterbury) and the victor's propaganda and actions (e.g. The Bayeux Tapestry, 'The Carmen', and the destruction of many Anglo-Saxon documents).
Harold, The Last Saxon King is a refreshing change.
Ian Walker demonstrates healthy scepticism, steers away from legend, and objectively considers sources - or if lacking, as for some Anglo-Saxon perspectives - reasoned evidence of the time. And through careful analysis and thought, he arrives at good, insightful conclusions.
Considering this book is largely an analysis of sources and literature, the surprise is that it is interesting and involving, which is credit to the author's thinking and writing abilities.
Chapter 11 is an interesting and dispassionate account of the Battle of Hastings. Commonly cited failings directed at King Harold are impetuousness and a 'premature' move from London against Duke William's invading forces - perhaps in hope of surprise, as Harold had previously achieved at the Battle of Stamford Bridge. Ian Walker shows through evidence that Harold was actually a cautious commander in nearly all of his career and generally preferred negotiation to combat, yet there were good reasons to move early against William. Just because Harold lost the Battle of Hastings doesn't mean he wasn't William's equal as a commander. Ian Walker shows Harold was at least that, and without the murderous streak.