How hard would it have been to kill a king leading his troops into battle?

Something of a legend, that one. Sedgewick actually completed the sentence, and said one more sentence before dying.

If I remember correctly, Lee’s Lieutenants makes a case that part of the reason for the Confederacy’s poor performance was because many officers were killed in action before they had a chance to get good at their jobs.

Harold Godwinson was not the only king killed in battle that year. Harald Hardrada was killed by an arrow at Stamford Bridge just three weeks before. Not a good year for kings, 1066.

Including poor old Stenkil, though at least he didn’t go violently.

Another case of cool legend beating dull fact.

Si non e vero e ben trovato

George Washington was often under fire. He believed in rallying troops from the front.

This was quite common in the musket age. Directing fire and taking advantage of quickly developing openings in an era of professional generals but with limited communications meant leading from the front was the norm.

At Malplaquet the commanding French general Villars had to retire after taking a musket ball to the knee while on the other side Eugene of Savoy was wounded in the neck. At Torgau Frederick the Great was struck in the chest by a spent canister round and his opposite number Daun took one in the foot (which likely lost the battle for the Austrians when Fred’s general Zieten outfought Daun’s general Lacy while both were out of the fight). At Aspern-Essling the French marshal Lannes was sitting depressed during a lull in the fighting, mourning his buddy the French general Pouzet who had been decapitated mid-conversation by a cannonball minutes before, when another cannonball ricochet smashed through both his crossed knees, eventually killing him as well.

That’s just a few of probably many hundreds or thousands. Generals died from hostile fire or even melee combat all the time back in those days.