THE VIKING RAVAGES
From 596, the year of the coming of St. Augustine, to 793, England
was practically untroubled by foreign invasion, except in so far as
the raids of the still independent Kymry come under that heading. The
period was by no means peaceful; the three great kingdoms--Northumbria,
Mercia, and Wessex--were frequently at strife, and once or twice the
Welsh interfered with effect in their wars. Wessex was nearly always
torn with intestine war. After 758 the condition of Northumbria was one
of chronic anarchy.
In 793 Mercia, under the great Offa, the friend of Charles the Great,
was the suzerain state of England, supreme over all the English and
Welsh kingdoms south of the Humber. Northumbria was ruled by Æthelred,
son of Æthelwald (known as ‘Moll’), a savage tyrant who, however,
appears to have been capable of keeping order, if only by force, in
his anarchic realm. He was in alliance with Offa, whose daughter
Ælflaed he married, and also with Charles the Great; and his position
seemed fairly secure when, in 793, a squadron of pirate-ships sacked
Lindisfarne. Next year the descent was repeated, and Bede’s monastery
at Jarrow was sacked. The pirate squadron was, however, shattered by a
storm, and its leader taken and put to death.
[Illustration: A VIKING WARRIOR.
The details are taken from objects in the British Museum.]
The raiders were Scandinavians--‘Vikings,’[B] as they have come to be
called, from the fact that their settlements, though scattered all over
the Baltic region, lay thickest in the ‘viks’ (fjords), and especially
along the shores of the great ‘Vik,’ the Skager-Rak and Christiania
Fjord. All these communities were ready, on slight pretext, to take to
warfare and plunder, and leaders were never wanting. Politics, economic
conditions, and mere half-savage love of adventure, all played their
part in driving them seaward; and once the Vikings had tasted plunder,
desire of more soon led them far afield.
[B] The ‘i’ in Viking is short.
The Scandinavians were as yet heathens, and were to continue so
for long centuries. They were not altogether barbarians, despite
the savagery which appears so terribly in their deeds. Their social
condition was well developed, and they were not without a tincture
of civilized culture and art. In metal-work their achievements were
notable.
They had long been renowned as boat-builders. Tacitus especially notes
their proficiency in that science. It does not appear, however, that
they took any part in the Teutonic attacks on the Roman Empire, but in
515 a Danish chief named Hygelac raided the coast of Frankland. He was
defeated and slain by Theudebert I.
It was, perhaps, the conquest of the Saxons by Charles the Great which
alarmed the Danes into attacking Christendom. Before 793 scarcely
anything is heard of hostility from them. But Denmark, bordering on
Saxony, naturally became the refuge of the Saxon chiefs, and was
gradually drawn into the conflict. About 800 King Godfrid took up a
position of open hostility to the new “Roman” Emperor of the West. In
808 Charles apparently meditated an invasion of Denmark, and in 810
a Danish fleet of two hundred sail ravaged Frisia. Two years later
Godfrid prepared to invade the Frankish Empire, but was assassinated.
His successor sued for terms, and Charles the Great died in peace.
Nevertheless, the impulse had been given, and from 793 onward Viking
ravages began to afflict Europe. For many years they were confined
mainly to Ireland, which was wasted almost from sea to sea, the
result being, of course, that its brilliant art and literature were
steadily destroyed. The wasters of Ireland appear to have been chiefly
Norwegians; Denmark was involved in civil war. Frankland, no doubt,
appeared too powerful to annoy with impunity. England also seemed
strong. The raids of 793-794 were directed on anarchic Northumbria.
However, in 834 the Danish civil wars were at an end. The Danish king
was the savage Horik, ‘Fel Christianitatis’--the Gall of Christianity.
In Frankland the kindly but weak Emperor Ludwig ‘the Pious’ was
engaged in civil war with his sons. In England the Mercian supremacy
had come to an end, and had been succeeded by that of Ecgberht of
Wessex. The opportunity appeared to have come, and the Danes, backed by
adventurers from all Scandinavia, began a series of terrible ravages in
Western Europe. First, as with the English attacks on Britain, there
were isolated plundering descents; then larger and better organized
expeditions; finally, great hosts migrating for purposes of settlement.
Such terms as ‘great’ must here be taken in a relative sense.
Scandinavia is to-day the most thinly-peopled region of Europe; a
thousand years ago its population was far scantier.
The Viking ships were long open boats, raised at bow and stern, steered
by a paddle fastened to the starboard quarter. They had one mast with a
square sail, but were normally propelled by oars. In size they varied.
At first they were certainly small, and though excellent in the fjords,
were of little use for rough sea work. Doubtless the Scandinavian
builders soon discovered this, and began to develop their craft, until
they turned out Olaf Tryggvason’s _Long Serpent_, the wonder of the
North. But the average number of men to each ship can hardly have
exceeded sixty, and it is doubtful whether the Vikings in England ever
collected more than 10,000 men in one field.
[Illustration: THE OSEBERG DRAGON SHIP.
(_From the Museum at Christiania._)]
The hosts were heterogeneous, unstable, and ill-disciplined, liable to
disown an unlucky or unpopular chief at a moment’s notice.
The Vikings, however, began with at least three advantages. It is
doubtful if the early English were ever, except from necessity, a
maritime people. In any case, it is clear that in the ninth century
they had almost entirely forgotten the nautical qualities of their
ancestors, and that no English state possessed warships. The Franks
appear to have allowed such squadrons as Charles the Great had
constructed to check the Danes to decay.
Secondly, neither in England nor Frankland was there as yet any real
sense of national union. The various English states were jealous and
disunited. Wessex was slow to aid Mercia, and Northumbria, apart from
its anarchic condition, disliked both. Concerted action was almost
an impossibility. Even more so was this the case in Frankland. The
Vikings, on landing, could generally rely upon having to meet only the
local levies.
Thirdly, the invaders had for a long time at least an immense tactical
superiority. They were for the most part trained fighting men,
physically powerful, brave, ferocious, thoroughly inured to war and
bloodshed, well equipped with arms offensive and defensive. The only
troops on the English side equal to them were the ‘thegns’ and the
royal bodyguard, and the Vikings could easily rout superior numbers of
the ill-trained and ill-equipped country folk.
In 834 the Danes landed at the mouth of the Rhine and sacked Utrecht
and Dorstadt. A detachment of this fleet ran across to Sheppey and
made a hasty raid. In 836 they again wasted the delta of the Rhine,
and thirty-five ships sailed down the English Channel to Charmouth, in
Dorset. King Ecgberht came hastily against them, probably with only
his personal following, and fought a bloody action. The Danes held
their own, but apparently immediately re-embarked; at any rate, no more
is heard of them. But a repulse inflicted on the Bretwalda of England
by only the crews of thirty-five ships was an ominous event.
Two years later a Viking fleet touched in Cornwall. This last remnant
of Damnonia had lately been subjugated by Ecgberht, and at once joined
the invaders against him. The united forces, however, had scarcely
time to unite on Hengestesdune (Hingston Down), west of the Tamar,
when Ecgberht was upon them. They were entirely defeated. Cornwall was
reconquered, and the old king returned home in triumph, to die in the
following year.
He was succeeded by his son Aethelwulf, a curious counterpart of
his contemporary the Frankish Emperor, Ludwig the Pious--brave and
just, but weak and over-conscientious, and cursed, like Ludwig, with
undutiful sons and turbulent vassals. His troubles were soon upon him.
In 840 a Viking fleet appeared on the south coast, and its land force
fought an indecisive action with Wulfheard, Ealdorman of Hampshire,
near Southampton. The raiders next landed on Portland, defeated and
slew Aethelhelm, Ealdorman of Dorset, and sailed away with much booty.
[Illustration: SCANDINAVIAN WEAPONS AND OTHER OBJECTS IN THE BRITISH
MUSEUM.
1 and 2. Swords--the usual length is about 3 feet. 3, 4, and
5. Axe-heads from Norway. 6. A stirrup with inlaid spiral
ornament, found in the Thames at Battersea. 7. Restored silver
cup from Trewhiddle, St. Austell, Cornwall, about 6 inches
high. 8 and 11. Spear or lance heads from Norway. 9. Axe-head
from the Thames at Stanton Harcourt, about 7 inches wide. 10.
Brooch from Goldsborough, Yorks.]
Next year another squadron came into the Wash, defeated and slew
Herebert, Ealdorman of Lindsey, wasted his territory, and then
ravaged the coasts of East Anglia and Kent.
In 842 a great Viking fleet sailed into the Channel, and, apparently
separating into detachments, attacked Quentovic in Picardy, London, and
Rochester. These places seem to have ransomed themselves. In the next
year a force landed once more at Charmouth, and repulsed Aethelwulf as
they had repulsed his father, though, as they left Wessex alone for
four years, it is to be assumed that they had lost heavily. In 844 a
squadron touched probably in the Humber, and killed Redwulf, King of
unhappy Northumbria.
So far as the Vikings had any settled strategic plan, it was to seek
the point of least resistance. If they were beaten off in Frankland,
they turned on England, and _vice versa_. For two years after 844 they
were busy in France, and not until 846 are they found again landing
in England, this time at the mouth of the Parret, where they were
completely defeated by an English force, of which the most conspicuous
leader was Ealhstane, the warrior bishop of Sherborne. It is possible
that this band was composed of Norwegians from Ireland, for the main
body of the Vikings was ravaging in France.
But in 851 the stress of the attack fell upon England. First a band
landed in Devon, but was set upon by Ealdorman Ceorl and completely
defeated. A second force attacked Sandwich, and was also defeated
with heavy loss, including that of nine ships. But in the summer the
main Viking fleet--three hundred and fifty ships under a chief named
Rorik--came up the Thames. North Kent was wasted, and Canterbury taken
and sacked. The victorious Danes then pressed up the river to London.
Beorhtwulf, King of Mercia, was posted before the city, but he was
defeated, and London stormed and sacked. Presumably its Roman walls
were ruinous. The Vikings, flushed with success, pushed on to attack
Wessex. Aethelwulf had failed to succour Beorhtwulf at London, but
had now assembled the army of Wessex, and was advancing against the
invaders. At Aclea (probably Oakley, near Basingstoke; see Appendix
A) Northmen and Englishmen for the first time encountered in a great
battle, and the Vikings were totally defeated. The greater part of
their army was destroyed, the survivors fled to their ships. The fame
of the victory went all over Western Europe, and its effect in England
was to strengthen the suzerainty of Wessex.
[Illustration: IRON-HAFTED BATTLE-AXE FOUND AT WINCHESTER.
Now in Westgate Museum, Winchester.]
In 853 a Viking force entrenched itself in Thanet and defeated an
attempt of the Kentishmen to dislodge them, but then abandoned the
isle and sailed to fields where plunder was more easily gained than
among the obstinate Englishmen. But in 854 they were again in England,
and wintered in Sheppey; and Aethelwulf chose the next year to go
on pilgrimage to Rome! His son Aethelbald seized the opportunity
to practically oust his father--not without some justification in
Aethelwulf’s ill-timed religious enthusiasm. When the king came back
he was content to acknowledge his son as king in Wessex, keeping only
Kent, Sussex, and Essex for himself. The result of this dissension was,
of course, a serious weakening of the suzerain power of Wessex.
Aethelwulf died in 858. His successor, the rebellious Aethelbald,
reigned only two and a half years, and was then succeeded by his
brother Aethelbert, who held the sceptre for six years. There were
sporadic Viking raids at intervals after 855, but it was not until
860 that the danger again became serious. In that year a large Viking
fleet, under a chief named Vœlund, was bribed to depart from France by
the wretched Charles the Bald, and forthwith turned its dragon prows
towards England. It sailed up Southampton Water, and its crews landed
and marched upon Winchester. Its walls were ruinous, and it was taken
and sacked; but immediately afterwards the Vikings were attacked by
the men of Berkshire and Hampshire, under the Ealdormen Aethelwulf and
Osric, and totally routed. This success of a hurried assemblage of
country-folk shows that the military efficiency of the Wessex peasants
was not to be despised.
For some five years the Northmen left England alone, but in 865 a
great horde descended on Kent. An attempt was made to buy them off, and
an armistice was declared, but they broke the truce and ravaged eastern
Kent before assistance could be brought from Wessex. They then settled
down for the winter in Thanet. Next spring King Aethelbert died, and
was succeeded by his brother Aethelred I.
The success of 865 had apparently determined the whole Viking swarm
in France to come over to England. Whether their leaders had any
definite design of settlement it is impossible to ascertain, but
the deliberation of their movements shows that they were carefully
calculated. The people of Wessex had shown themselves to be warlike
and patriotic, and its kings by no means despicable opponents. So the
‘Great Army’ poured into East Anglia, where they desisted from plunder
after receiving a heavy subsidy, but wintered in the unhappy country
and swept up its horses, so as to be able to move swiftly.
Very early in 867 the ‘Great Army’ swarmed out of East Anglia and
passed through Eastern Mercia into Northumbria, which was torn between
two claimants to the throne--Osbeorht and Ælla. The Northmen poured
over the Humber and captured and sacked York, despite the fact that
it was fortified--perhaps the walls of the Roman _castra_ had been
patched up. Ælla and Osbeorht thereupon, with surprising patriotism,
came to terms and advanced together to recover York. The Northmen
were driven back and forced to shut themselves up in the city, and
the Northumbrians, impetuously pursuing, became involved in furious
street-fighting and met with hideous disaster. Both kings were slain;
the flower of the army perished in the streets and during the Viking
pursuit; only a remnant escaped.
This annihilating defeat resulted in the destruction of Northumbria.
For some years Deira remained in a miserable condition, in the power
of the Northmen but not regularly ruled by them. North of the Tyne,
for about ten years, some obscure princes called themselves kings at
Bamborough.
Emboldened by this success, the greatest that any Viking host had
hitherto gained, the ‘Great Army’ next year, under Ingvar and Hubba,
sons of Ragnar Lodbrog, invaded Mercia from Deira and pushed up
the Trent. King Aethelred of Wessex marched to the relief of his
nominal vassal, Burhred of Mercia, and the two kings confronted the
Danes before they had penetrated beyond Nottingham. It was the first
positive sign of that hearty co-operation between the states in which
lay the only hope of salvation; but on this occasion it was not very
successful. The Northmen held out stoutly in Nottingham, and finally
in the autumn a truce was concluded by which they agreed to leave
Mercia in the spring if they were permitted to winter there without
molestation. Whether they received a subsidy is unknown; it is at least
possible.
During 869 the ‘Army’ streamed back to York, and it was now, perhaps,
that they began to think of settling. But their restless and predatory
instincts could not die down quickly, and in 870 the bulk of the
host set forth again, ‘rode over Mercia into East Anglia, and made
their winter quarters at Thetford.’ The great monasteries of the
Fens, Peterborough, Ely, Crowland, and Bardney, went up in flames,
and Eadmund of East Anglia, taken prisoner after a vain attempt at
resistance, was murdered in cold blood. Though there is no authority
earlier than Abbo (_circa_ 980), the story is probably true, for
shortly afterwards one finds his memory honoured, and churches raised
to him by the very men who had murdered him, which could hardly have
happened unless they had been deeply impressed by his heroic end. All
East Anglia and Essex were soon in Danish hands, and the ‘Great Army’
prepared to advance against Wessex.
Ingvar and Hubba now pass from the scene, though Hubba reappears for
a brief space some years later. The army that marched upon Wessex was
led by Halfdene, another son of Ragnar, a second king named Baegsceg,
and several jarls--a division of command which could hardly make for
efficiency.
The defence of Wessex was in capable hands. The gallant King Aethelred
was admirably assisted by his brother Alfred,[C] soon to be the
greatest of English kings. Everything possible appears to have been
done to facilitate mobilization, for the Wessex men were in the
field with the least delay. Better still, there was no standing on
the defensive; the royal brothers appear determined from the first to
attack their foes and drive them out of the country.
[C] The name Alfred has become so much a part of English
history that the time-honoured orthography is retained.
The Danish army advanced from Thetford to the Thames, contemptuously
ignoring Mercia, and entrenched itself at Reading in the triangle
formed by the junction of the Kennet with the Thames. The kings appear
to have established this camp while the jarls began to ravage. But they
were quickly to learn that they could not play the game with impunity.
Three days after their arrival two of the jarls were attacked by the
Berkshire _fyrd_, under Ealdorman Aethelwulf, at Englefield Green,
in Windsor Forest, and defeated; one of them was slain. Four days
afterwards the King and Alfred arrived at Reading unexpectedly with the
army of Wessex. The Northmen were off their guard, and were driven back
within the palisades. But when the English attempted to storm the camp
they were heavily repulsed, with the loss of the brave Aethelwulf, and
obliged to retreat westward.
The Viking host pursued. The retreat and pursuit went on for four days,
until Aethelred and Alfred had called in reinforcements sufficient to
enable them to fight again. Somewhere on Aesc-Dune (Ashdown)--_i.e._,
the Berkshire Downs, a great battle was fought. It is impossible to
locate the field; all that can be said is that it must have been a long
distance west of Reading. The plan of the battle itself is quite clear,
but the movements which preceded it are by no means so. It would
appear that the army of Wessex, coming from the south or south-east,
was halting before breasting the slopes of Aescdune when the Vikings
suddenly crowned the heights. They were in two masses, one led by the
kings, the other by the jarls. The English were also in two divisions,
commanded respectively by Aethelred and Alfred. Alfred was already at
the front, and he apparently made up his mind that it was far better
to meet than to await a downhill charge. He gave the word for the
whole army to advance, and informed his brother, who was hearing Mass
in the rear. Aethelred, perhaps because he knew that matters were
quite safe in his brother’s hands, and because at the price of a few
minutes’ absence from the field he was quite ready to enhearten his
superstitious followers by a little pious posing, declined to come
until service was over. The story is probably true. Asser distinctly
says that he had excellent authority for it, very likely that of Alfred
himself.
The English uphill charge had the best effect. The Vikings were brought
to a stand, and the fight raged furiously on the slopes of Aescdune,
the focus of the fray being a stunted thorn, the only tree on the
hillside. Alfred’s tactical insight had its reward, and the day went
steadily in favour of the English. King Baegsceg and five jarls were
slain, and the Northmen broke and fled headlong. They were pursued all
night and into the next day, and Asser says that ‘many thousands’ of
them were slain.
It is sad to record that this splendid victory had no results.
Halfdene and the surviving jarls succeeded in reaching Reading, and
only a few days later they were joined by large reinforcements from
the Continent. Thus recruited, Halfdene again took the offensive, and
fourteen days after Aescdune was able to fight Aethelred at Basing,
this time with success. Still no decisive victory had been gained,
and two months later the armies are found confronting one another at
Marden, near Hungerford. Evidently the Northmen were still confined
to the neighbourhood of Reading. The army of Wessex was formed in two
divisions as at Aescdune, and for a great part of the day had the
advantage, but in the end the Northmen were victorious. Aethelred
himself was perhaps mortally wounded; certainly he died a few days
after. His death would have been an irreparable loss but that his great
brother was at hand to take up his sword.
The Northmen were now advancing into the heart of Wessex, and so heavy
had been the losses in the campaign that it was a task of exceeding
difficulty to reorganize the army. About a month after Marden Alfred
took up a position at Wilton with the small force which he had been
able to collect. Says Asser: ‘The Saxons had been worn out by eight
battles in one year against the pagans, of whom they had slain one
king, nine dukes, and innumerable troops of soldiers.’ Alfred and his
little army made a gallant resistance, and for long beat back the
assaults of their enemies; but the favourite Viking stratagem of a
feigned retreat and a counter-attack turned the day against them.
Defeated, and with the Northmen in the heart of his ancestral kingdom,
Alfred was forced to sue for terms. The invaders also had suffered
very severely, and were ready to depart for a time to some other more
promising field of plunder. Asser and the Chronicle merely say that
Alfred made peace with the pagans. We must assume that they were bought
off with a subsidy. The respite could not be a long one--the Northmen
of the ninth and tenth centuries were the most perjured of mankind--but
Alfred might be trusted to turn the interval in the fighting to the
best advantage.
The position of England at the end of 871 could scarcely have been
worse. The results of the lack of national unity were terribly
apparent. Northumbria and East Anglia had practically disappeared from
the roll of English kingdoms; Mercia was tottering. Only Wessex had
succeeded in retaining its independence, and was still ready to fight
fiercely for liberty. The situation was similar to what it had been
four centuries before, when the first assaults of the English, after
occupying the east, were checked by Ambrosius and Artorius. But while
the British leaders left no successors worthy of them, it was otherwise
with Ecgberht and Aethelwulf. The youngest son of the latter was to be
the greatest and noblest of English kings, and to pass on his sceptre
to successors worthy of his name.