Raffield, B. 2009. ‘“Plundering the Territories in the Manner of the Heathens”: Identifying Viking Age Battlefields in Britain’, Rosetta 7: 22-43. http://rosetta.bham.ac.uk/issue7/plundering-territories/ http://rosetta.bham.ac.uk/issue7/plundering-territories/ ‘Plundering the Territories in the Manner of the Heathens’: Identifying Viking Age Battlefields in Britain Benjamin Raffield University of Birmingham ‘Battle’ is a word often associated with the Viking Age in England and there are numerous references in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicles to the conflict that took place as the Anglo-Saxons fought to keep Viking incursions at bay. There is no doubt that hostile encounters between the two sides were violent and bloody, with the Anglo-Saxons fighting to hold on to territories that were now not only under threat from other Anglo-Saxon kingdoms, but also from ‘heathens’ and foreign enemies who were set on conquering England for their own. These battles were to take place for over two and a half centuries from the first recorded raid at Lindisfarne, Northumbria, in 793 until the famous Battle of Stamford Bridge in 1066. Archaeology as a discipline knows relatively little of how these people fought each other for possession of English soil and wealth. There are numerous contemporary references to battles in The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, but these state little more than there being a ‘great slaughter’ at a certain location, with the victor occasionally being named. We are not sure of the size of the battles both in terms of area and the number of combatants, nor are we sure of the tactics used. This article will attempt to construct a theoretical model for Viking Age battlefields, utilising a synthesised approach of literary and historical evidence alongside archaeology from a number of different time periods, including prehistory. The study of the Early Medieval period and the Viking Age cannot be undertaken simply from a historical, literary or archaeological viewpoint, but a combined approach has the potential to allow a much more comprehensive view of warfare in the period. 22 http://rosetta.bham.ac.uk/issue7/plundering-territories/ Studying the Viking Way of War The Viking Age (793-1066AD) is a generally lesser studied period of British history, the Vikings being ‘as elusive to us today as they were to their contemporaries’ (Clarke 1999:36). Relatively little has been written on Viking warfare and the widely held view of them as invading, heathen barbarians has meant that warfare has always been taken for granted as part of Viking daily life. This is probably due to a lasting reputation that began with the Christian monks who reported the ‘ravages of the heathen men’ (Swanton 2000:57), associating this with famines and ‘terrible portents... [of] immense flashes of lightning and fiery dragons... flying in the air’ (Swanton 2000:55). It is not surprising therefore, that this fear and bias against the Vikings has permeated through time. The Vikings had a profound effect on British history and the development of the English state, the conflict between them and the Anglo-Saxons not only aiding the unification of the English under Alfred of Wessex, but also by ‘bringing the population into carefully laid out villages’ (Hall 2007:104). Furthermore, the Vikings expanded the existing Anglo-Saxon trading network beyond the boundaries of Europe to the Far East – a resource that had not been available since the collapse of the Roman Empire. Though most sites at which conflict took place are unknown to archaeologists at present, the few that are known are frequently under threat. These often important and influential sites deserve to be recognised and protected where possible – an example of this comes from the site of the famous 1066 Battle of Stamford Bridge. This battle was instrumental in shaping English history, as it not only brought about the end of the Viking Age in England, but it meant that the Anglo-Saxon king, Harold Godwinson, had to defeat the Viking force before marching south to intercept William the Conqueror, who had just invaded England with a claim to the throne. Despite the historical value of this battlefield, it now lies beneath a housing estate. 23 http://rosetta.bham.ac.uk/issue7/plundering-territories/ Identification of Sites The identification of Viking Age battle sites can be hindered in a number of ways. Firstly, the distinct lack of documentary evidence means that locations of battle are often disputed, as there is simply no evidence to tie the conflict to a specific location. Place-name analysis cannot always be instrumental in identifying a location due to the many ways that place names can be interpreted. The Battle of Brunanburh, fought in 937AD, is one such event with theorised locations ranging from Lancashire to Dumfries and Galloway. As a result, the number of battles that can actually be pinpointed to a specific locality within a region are small. Even where there is enough evidence to pinpoint the locality of a battle, there can also be a number of possible locations as to where the conflict took place. The site of the 1066 Battle of Fulford has been debated even though the battle is known to have been fought near to the settlement, which lies just to the South of York (Figure 1). This is a relatively well documented battle, as it is mentioned not only in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicl e (Swanton 2000:196), but also Snorri Sturlason’s Heimskringla (edited by Monsen (1932)). This book, written in 13 th Century Iceland by the poet and historian tells the stories of the Norwegian kings from the first, legendary dynasty of the Ynglingas to King Magnus Erlingson, who died in1177 (Monsen 1932:709). Whilst due caution must be exercised when utilising the sagas for archaeological means, Sturlasson’s Saga of Harald Hardrade has been used alongside place-name evidence and references in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle to establish a location for the battle (Jones 2008a) via the topographic features that are included in the account as part of the saga. Despite this, there are still possible alternatives for the location of the battle (Jones 2008b) and it is archaeological work that has helped strengthen the case for the battle taking place at Germany Beck which lies to the South of Gate Fulford. 24 http://rosetta.bham.ac.uk/issue7/plundering-territories/ Figure 1: The commonly accepted deployment of Anglo-Saxon and Viking forces at the battle of Fulford. The black line separating the two forces is Germany Beck. Image Adapted From: The Battlefields Trust. The location of another site that has been debated is that of a hypothesised 917AD Viking riverside fortification (generally referred to as a ‘longphort’) and battle site on the south bank of the River Great Ouse at Tempsford, Bedfordshire (Figure 2). The fortress, mentioned in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle (Swanton 2000:101), was subject to a siege by Anglo-Saxons in retaliation for a raid on Bedford, with the resulting battle taking the lives of a Danish king and a number of jarls (military commanders), making it an extremely important 25 http://rosetta.bham.ac.uk/issue7/plundering-territories/ battle in the Viking wars. Edgeworth (2008) believes that he has identified the site at a previously unconsidered location on the strength of place-name evidence and comparison with other suspected longphort sites. Edgeworth (2008:8-9) goes on to highlight no less than five other sites in the local vicinity that may be the location of the fortification and battle. Figure 2: The Tempsford site shown on a 1945 aerial photograph. Edgeworth believes the D-shaped area that survives as a crop-mark just south of the River Great Ouse (highlighted) to be the longphort, though the D-shaped field surrounding this area may mark an outer fortification. Photo courtesy of: The Heritage and Environment Service, Bedfordshire County Council. Obviously it would be unwise to rely on historical and documentary sources alone in the identification of sites – whilst they can prove useful, as Heimskringla demonstrates, over reliance on them can easily provide a skewed view of the past. Griffith (1995:172), for example, attempts to utilise the sagas, due to their numerous references of wounds to the lower legs, in his discussion of the types of leg armour worn in battle. This reliance could be misleading, as the multitude of references to leg wounds could be the result of a desire to highlight the athleticism and skill of the heroes who have the ability to jump deadly blows in battle – Kári accomplishes such a feat by jumping 26 http://rosetta.bham.ac.uk/issue7/plundering-territories/ over a spear that is thrown at him in part 91 of Brennu-Njáls Saga (OMACL 2009). However, Griffith (1995:30) rightly states that we must at least take these sources into consideration, as ‘it is only by piecing together dozens of similar cases that we can begin to get even a general idea of what sort of actions may have been normal’. Indeed, the Saga of Harald Hardrade in Heimskringla mentions that King Harald wore a chain mail coat that was so long that it stretched half way down his legs (Monsen 1932:566), so perhaps there may have been a real concern with attack to the legs. Without sufficient archaeological evidence however, this remains a matter of speculation. Landscape analysis is a tool that must be utilised by the archaeologist when attempting to locate a battlefield. Whilst the landscape will undoubtedly have changed since the time that conflict took place, a general idea as to the suitability of a site can be gleaned from analysing the topography of the modern day landscape.