NAMES.PLACES AND PEOPLE An OnomasticMiscellanY in Memoryof JOHN McNEAL DODGSON Editedbv ALEXANDER R. RUMBLE and A. D. MILLS PAUL WATKINS STAMFORD r997 The C ontexl o/Brunanburh N. J. HIGHAM In an important contribution to recent debate concerning the battle of Brunanbuih (937),t the late and much lamented John McNeal Dodgson stronglyendoised its identificationwith Bromboroughin north'westCheshire.2 tn support,he proceededto an authoritativediscussion of the Norsesettlements on th; Winai arid in south-westLancashire, emphasizing the long-lived political distinctivenessof the former in particular,3and outlining the process ofuigo.ou. expansionwhich had broughtthese colonies into existenceearly in the tinth century.aHe consideredthat the presenceof theseViking colonies renderedthe river Mersey an attractiveinvasion route into Mercia'5and his examinationof the literary evidencefor the Brunanburhcampaign led him to claim madeby Florence(John) of Worcesterthat Anlaf (otherwise discountthe 'Bromborough olafl landed in the Humber estuary.6He concludedthat in Winal would appearto be the mosteligible place for the battlefield'.7 This opinionprevailed until the publicationof a major revisionby Michael Woodsin 1980,in which the authorattempted to replacethis westernlocation with an alternative,Brinsworth, a hill on Ryknild Streetbetween the rivers Rotherand Don in southernYorkshire.s His caserested not on the place'name, for which thereis no convincingconnection with Brunanburhwhatwer" but on a complexweb of analogiesby which Woodssought to persuadehis audience 'The t J. McN.Dodgson, backgroundof Brunanburh"saga-Book of theviking soc. seealso idem, PNCheshire,N (1972),23740' XIV (1953-7),303-16; 'The t As pieviouslysuggested on onomasticgrounds by A. H. Smith, site of Brunanburh"London Medinal StudiesI, i (1937),56-9. For alternativesites consultA. campbell,ed., The Battle of Brunanburh(London, 1938), 57-80, but 'all notehis conclusion that hopeoflocalising Brunanburh is lost'' t Dodgson,'BackgroundofBrunanburh', 312. o lbid. ' Ibid.312-l3. , Florenceofworcester, Chroniconex chronicis,ed. B. Thorpe,I (London, 1848), 132;the relevant exlract is in Campbell,Battle of Brunanburh,l47.The source,if any, of this assertionis unknownand it needbe basedon nothing more relevant than Florence's comparison of this poorly documentedevent with Harald Hardrada'smore fully reportedentry to Bntain via the Humberin 1066' t Dodgson,'BackgroundofBrunanburh',312-13. .Brunanbwh 8 M. Woods, revisited',Saga-Book of the Viking Soc. XX (1978-80), 200-17,esp.211. e Ibid.2ll, basedon A. H. Smith,PMorks(WR),1(1961)' 177-8. 144 THE CONTEXT OF BRUNANBURH 'between that this importantbattle-site should be sought the upper Trent and the Aire ... a heavilyfortified zonewhere the wars of the secondquarter of the tenth centurywere waged'.to Professor Dodgson's arguments were dismissed in a brief endnote.tt Theseviews are mutually exclusiveand each offers a radically different vision of the political and geopoliticalcontext in which the battleoccurred. Yet the battle and the campaignof which it formed the culmination were not isolatedevents but just one episodein a comparativelylong history of conllict betweenViking incomersin control of southernNorthumbria and the kings of the Merciansand West Saxons.Both sidespresent at the battle could look back over the experiencesof two generationsand it seemslikely that their strategies were fashionedwith one eye at least on precedent.Re-examination of earlier conJlictsmight, therefore,shed some light on Brunanburh itself - more so perhapsthan do the subsequentevents of 93942,t2 when the king of Dublin was briefly recognized as king in the Five Boroughs as well as in Northumbria.t3 The sequenceof eventswhich culminatedin the Brunanburh campaign beganwith the Danish conquestof York in 867,but for a generationthereafter the intermittentpresence of new Danish armiesin Britain and Danish control of all eastern England minimized conllict between the English and the 'Northern Army' of York. The situationis illustratedby parts of the complex campaigningof 893-4 when a Danish army from outsideBritain attracted reinforcementsto its maritimebase at Shoeburyness@ssex) from East Anglia and Northumbria,then raided deepinto English Mercia via the Thamesand Severnvalleys, only to standsiege and sufferdefeat at Buttington.raRetreating to Essex, they once again raised allied forces from East Anglia and Northumbria,the latter reachingthem presumably by sea,t5and raidednorthern Mercia. This force was besiegedat Chester,then raidedinto Wales,returning thenceinto Mercia ladenwith bootyin 894.Fearful of English intervention,the Danes spent the minimum time possiblein Mercia, returning to base via Northumbria and East Anglia, so presumablycrossing the Mersey into the r0 Woods,'Brunanburh revisited', 211. tt Ibid. endnote4, 213. 'Brunanburh t2 Contra Woods, revisited',passim, who placesundue emphasison this later period as a guide to Anlafs probablebehaviour in937.It is at least as likely that the Dublin Norsemodified their strategyin responseto their defeat,and the political context in 939 had altered radically, with .;Ethelstandead and his youthfulsuccessor in the throesof establishinghimself as king. " D. Whitelock,ed.,The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle (London, l96l), (D), s.aa.940-3. '4 ASC(A,B), s.a.893. t5 ASC(A, B), s.a. 894; a raid on the coastsof southernBritain by a Northumbrian Viking fleet was recordedunder the year 893 by,€thelweard:A. Campbell,ed., TheChronicle of Athelweard(London, 1962). 145 NAMES. PLACES AND PEOPLE protectionof York via the fordsat Runcornor Warrington.tuNeither side forgot thesecrossings thereafter. Viking and Mercian armies may have fought again in this region if an Irish Norseleader, Ingimundr, besieged English Chesterwith a mixed force of Norse, Irishmen and Danes.r'If othersof the Dublin Norse in exile were by then activelyco-operating with the rulersof York,rsIngimundr is likely to have recruitedhis Danishcontingent north of the Mersey.If so,these crossings were oncemore in use. Prior to the 'reconquest'of Danish Mercia, the river Merseywas the sole frontier betweenEnglish Mercia and Northumbria.Consequently it seemsmost likely that it was this boundarywhich wasbreached by a largeEnglish force in 'Northern 909,which invaded,and ravagedfor five weeksin the territoryof the Army'.'t This foray into Northumbriaby West Saxonand Mercian troopswas 'Mercian perhaps less precipitate than it may at first sight appear. The Register'recorded that, in the sameyear, the relicsof St Oswaldwere brought from Bardney(on the river Witham in Lindsey,deep inside the Danelaw)into EnglishMercia,zo where they wereprobably deposited in the intendedsepulchre of ,€thelredand ^lEthelflred- the minsterat Gloucester.2rThereis no reasonto think that this was achievedby force. The languageused is consistentwith a diplomaticinitiative. Sincethe removalof theserelics was a Mercian objective concededby the Danes,it implies that ,fEthelred'sinfluence over the northern Danelawwas considerable.This may be confirmedby evidencefor Mercian land purchasesin Derbyshirein 906-10.22An assaulton Northumbriafrom English Mercia would have been foolhardy in the extreme without prior containmentof the threat of a counter-movefrom the easternMidlands and 'u N. J.Higham, 'The Cheshire burhs and the Mercian frontier to 924',Trans.Lancs. andCheshire Antiquaian Soc. LXXXV (1988), 200-3. " J. O'Donovan,ed., Annals of lreland: ThreeFragments (Dublin, 1860),226-37. There is clearly an elementof folklore in this account,the historical descentof which is beyondreconstruction, but therehas never been a seriouschallenge to the establishmentof an historical contextby F. T. Wainright, ScandinavianEngland (Chichester,197 5), 13142. " N. J. Higham,'Northumbria, Mercia andthe Irish SeaVikings, AD 893-924', in J. Graham-Campbell,ed., Viking Treasurefrom theNonh West:the CuerdaleHoard in itsContext (Liverpool, 1992),21-30, esp.25. " ASC(A,B), s.a.909. 20 'Mercian Register' in D. Whitelock, ed., Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, s.a. 909; ASC(D),s.a. 906. 2t This interestin a royal Mercian cult was hardly likely to havebeen a West Saxon initiative, contra D. Iltll, An Atlas of Anglo-SaxonEngland (Oxford, 1982),56, frg. 86. Bardneyand St Oswald seemto have been focal to Mercian control of 'Kings, Lindsey from the late seventhcentuy until this translation:A. Thacker, saintsand monasteries in pre-VikingMercia',Midland HistoryX (1985),2-4. zz Hlll, Atlas,47, fig.70. 146 THE CONTEXT OF BRUNANBURH East Anglia. Despitethe povertyof our written sources,this problemdoes seem to have been resolvedprior to the English campaignof 909. Without allies south of the Humber or other outside help, the York leadershipproved incapable of protecting its own territory or personnel23and negotiateda political solutionwhich recognized,€thelredas king (or perhaps'overking') of Nonhumbria.2aIt is temptingto imaginethat this settlementmirrored the role of ,iEthelredin Danish Mercia, creating a political oversight and military protectionwhich reflectedhis superiormilitary power.There is no suggestion, however,that he had achievedthis positionby campaigningin that region. This experimentin Mercianoversight of the northernDanes ran counterto the interestsof the Danishking of York, who reactedto the debacleof 909 by launching a massedraid in the following surnmer deep into ,iEthelred's territory. This army penetratedas far southas the river Avon, then took plunder from west of the river Severnbefore retiring homewards,only to be engaged