I talked about Anglo-Saxon tactics at some length here. Anglo-Saxon warfare revolves around the warhige or shield wall which provides a very effective line of defence, behind which skirmishers can engage the enemy with javelins. A surprisingly accurate modern recreation can be seen in modern riot police tactics, especially something like this where the shields are being used both to the front and overhead to protect against missiles.

Apart from the Bayeux Tapestry, our sources for 1066 are all literary. I'd recommend William of Malmesbury's Gesta Regum Anglorum, John of Worcester's Chronicon, and Orderic Vitalis' Historia Ecclesiastica. I'd also recommend William of Jumiege's Gesta Normannorum Ducum and William of Poitiers' Gesta Guillelmi.

At Hastings, the English deploy their shieldwall along a prominent ridgeline where they can best make use of its defensive strength. The Normans are fighting uphill, largely on horseback with cavalry charges, supported by archers and skirmishers on foot. William of Malmesbury and Orderic both note that Hastings was an extremely long battle, and that for most of the day, the English lines were essentially impregible despite everything the Normans can throw at it. In the end it's generalship that swings it - William orchestrates a feint charge which lures the English flank into breaking ranks and charging downhill in pursuit, where they are ambushed. Fighting on foot at the centre of his line, Harold is unable to intervene, and with the line formation broken, the English position falls.

Our visual guides are limited mostly to the Bayeux Tapestry, although I would suggest visiting somewhere like the British Museum, Leeds Royal Armoury or the Met in New York to see eleventh century weapons and armour in person. Norman knights would likely have worn a long shirt of chainmail down to their knees, with a flap over their faces and a spangenhelm on their heads. The Anglo-Saxon nobility would likely have worn something very similar. Norman cavalry would have carried kite shields to protect the leg, whereas Anglo-Saxon shields were usually round. Both sides would have fought predominantly with spears, although nobles and officers on both sides would have used swords. In the English ranks, the huscarls, or professional retinue soldiers would also have fought with giant axes capable of killing a horse in a single blow. These can be seen in the Bayeux Tapestry.

A nice piece of flavour comes from Orderic Vitalis. He accounts that on the night before battle, the Normans gave themselves to prayer while the English gave themselves one last drink. Leaders and entertainers on both sides mocked the appearance and fashions of their enemies: The Normans mocked the Anglo-Saxons for their long hair and knee-length tunics, saying they were like women in dresses. The English mocked the Normans for wearing trousers in summer and for being clean-shaven, saying they were also like women or little boys. They also commented on the strange tonsured haircut of the Normans, which can again be seen in the Bayeux Tapestry, and which was designed to allow a helmet or chainmail coif to sit more snuggly and comfortably on the head.

Reading-wise, The Making of Europe by Robert Bartlett is pretty solid, as well as Strickland's Anglo-Norman Warfare, and Abels and Bachrach (eds), The Normans and their Adversaries at War.

I'm currently working on a reply that might take a couple of days to research and synthesise, but it would be helpful to know what background reseach you've already done, so I can avoid doubling up with my inevitable research suggestions.