The Lost Papal Letter Behind the 1066 Norman Conquest
Nine and a half centuries on, historians are still finding new reasons why Pope Alexander II blessed William of Normandy’s invasion of England — and the newest one has almost nothing to do with William’s claim to the throne. A newly examined excerpt from a lost letter of Alexander II, uncovered by Professor Tom Licence of the University of East Anglia for his new biography Harold: Warrior King (Yale University Press, published August 10, 2026), reframes the Norman Conquest of 1066 not as a dynastic squabble but as a holy war — one the pope’s supporters saw as a fight against people they called “followers of Satan.”
The lost papal letter, at a glance
- Author: Pope Alexander II, writing around the time of the 1066 conquest
- The original letter (and Alexander’s full register) is lost — it survives only in two excerpts copied into later Vatican collections of papal rulings
- Uncovered by: Prof. Tom Licence, University of East Anglia, for Harold: Warrior King (Yale University Press, Aug 10, 2026)
- Key line: England had strayed from “the path of truth,” led by people “fired with the pride of their father Satan”
- The new argument: papal backing for William hinged on a bitter 1061 schism in Rome — not just Harold’s broken oath
A Schism, Not Just a Succession Crisis
The usual story of 1066 starts with an oath: Harold Godwinson allegedly swore to support William’s claim to the English throne, then took the crown himself when Edward the Confessor died. That broken promise is the reason most textbooks give for papal support of the invasion — William fought under a banner blessed by Rome, and Harold’s men did not.
Licence’s research points somewhere else first: a schism that had nothing to do with England. In 1061, two rival popes were elected within months of each other. Alexander II took Rome with the backing of the Church’s reform movement; his opponent, Bishop Cadalus of Parma, ruled as the antipope Honorius II with the backing of the Holy Roman Empire and much of northern Europe. For years, their supporters fought for control of Rome itself, and every kingdom in Christendom had to pick a side, whether it meant to or not.
What the Letter Actually Says
The surviving fragments show Alexander writing that England had once stood under St Peter’s protection — until its people were “fired with the pride of their father Satan” and led away from “the path of truth.” It is not the language of a property dispute. It is the language of heresy and betrayal, aimed at a Christian kingdom that, in Rome’s eyes, had gone astray.
Licence’s argument is that after Harold was crowned in January 1066, England’s church and court effectively aligned with Alexander’s rivals rather than his faction — a political and ecclesiastical misstep, layered on top of the broken-oath story everyone already knew. That, more than anything else, is what turned a fight over a crown into a fight Rome was willing to call holy.
Wear it: Viking Raven
Premium Norse-inspired apparel, made on demand.
🇺🇸 Fast US shipping · 🇪🇺 Ships across the EU · 🔒 Secure checkout
Why This Rewrites 1066
“1066 was not simply decided on the battlefield at Hastings,” Licence has said of his findings. “Harold’s policy on the papacy may ultimately have played into the hands of his enemies.” In his reading, “in the eyes of Pope Alexander’s supporters, it was no longer simply a battle for a crown, but a struggle against those they regarded as followers of Satan.” That reframing matters: it turns William’s invasion fleet, blessed with a papal banner, from a mercenary land-grab into something both sides could sell as righteous — which is exactly how it was remembered for the next thousand years.
The Viking Angle: Stamford Bridge, Three Weeks Earlier
Here is the part History Warrior readers will care about most: Harold did not march to Hastings fresh. Three weeks before he met William, he had just destroyed one of the last great Viking invasions of England. On 25 September 1066, Harold’s army crushed King Harald Hardrada of Norway and the English earl Tostig at the Battle of Stamford Bridge, near York — a battle fought, tradition holds, beneath the same kind of raven banner that had led Norse war-fleets for centuries. Licence’s book suggests Harold may have rushed his exhausted army south by sea rather than by road to meet William in time — arriving at Hastings days after a forced march most kings would never have attempted.
Seen that way, the pope’s letter is really about the closing act of the Viking Age in England. Harald Hardrada’s death at Stamford Bridge ended Scandinavia’s last serious bid for the English crown, in the same way Norway’s own last Viking king had died a generation earlier at Stiklestad. Weeks later, the exhausted victors of that Viking battle lost everything at Hastings — and, if Licence is right, lost it partly because of a fight in Rome that had started five years earlier and had nothing to do with Vikings at all.
Quick Answers
Who found the letter? Prof. Tom Licence of the University of East Anglia, while researching his biography Harold: Warrior King (Yale University Press, August 2026).
Does the original letter survive? No — Pope Alexander II’s full register is lost. Only two excerpts, copied into later Vatican collections of papal rulings, survive.
What does the letter say? It accuses the English of being led astray by pride, “fired with the pride of their father Satan,” away from “the path of truth” and St Peter’s protection.
How does this connect to the Vikings? Harold won the Battle of Stamford Bridge against Harald Hardrada of Norway on 25 September 1066, then marched south and lost to William at Hastings on 14 October — three weeks later, ending large-scale Viking invasions of England for good.