"Harold Godwinson’s Posthumous Reputation, 1066-c.1160" Topic

"Introduction: When William Bastard, duke of Normandy, invaded England in 1066 he was very concerned that this would have the bearings of an enterprise that was legitimate according to contemporary norms. After William had been crowned at Westminster Abbey on Christmas Eve that same year, he made severe efforts to persuade the surviving high-born members of Anglo-Saxon society that he truly was the king of England, and that he was the true deserving subject of their loyalty. As a part in this campaign the writing of history was an important tool, and various Norman and Anglo-Norman chronicles were to argue that William's invasion was not a usurpation, but, quite the contrary, an expedition to rid England of the usurper Harold Godwinson. This text will show in which ways Harold's posthumous reputation was constructed to cement the Norman claim to legitimacy and how this legacy lasted well beyond William the Conqueror's death."

From here.
link

Hope you enjoy!.

Amicalement
Armand

"History is written by the victors." -- Winston Churchill

Too true tberry7403, and the Normans were very good at that!
There's doubt that Edward ever did promise William the throne, we only have Norman sources for this. By 1056 Edward (with the Witan approval) was looking for a true Saxon of the royal house of Wessex to inherit, and that is why Edmund Ironside's kin returned home from Hungary. Unfortunately Edward the Exile died too early and his son Edgar Aetheling was too young when the year 1066 came round.
Harold had been underking for about 10 years and Edward entrusted the kingdom into his hands, and the Witan elected him king, as they needed a seasoned warrior king to oppose both the Viking & Norman threat, rather than a mere lad.
The true usurper was William the bastard.