Welcome to the WWII Forums! Log in or Sign up to interact with the community.

Vanquishing the Vikings

Discussion in 'Military History' started by GRW, Dec 15, 2012.

  1. GRW

    GRW Pillboxologist WW2|ORG Editor

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2003
    Messages:
    20,815
    Likes Received:
    3,042
    Location:
    Stirling, Scotland
    Watched this on tv last night, thought it was well done.
    "It was the battle which led to the end of Viking influence over Scotland, when a terrifying armada from Norway bore down on the Ayrshire town of Largs 750 years ago.
    At the beginning of the 13th century the Firth of Clyde was frontier territory.
    The mainland was Scottish but the islands of Bute and Cumbrae just across from Largs were Norse.
    In fact, the whole of the Hebrides - a region known as Innse Gall - gave its allegiance to the Vikings from western Norway.
    "It was a war just waiting to happen," says underwater archaeologist Dr Jon Henderson.
    When the Vikings had first begun raiding across the North Sea 400 years earlier, there had been no king of Norway and no king of Scotland.
    Their often savage raids evolved over time into trade and settlement.
    Most of the west coast islands were dominated by Norse culture and were important for maintaining Viking power and influence.
    In the early 1200s both countries were united under powerful and ambitious kings."
    BBC News - The last battle of the Vikings
     
  2. Volga Boatman

    Volga Boatman Dishonorably Discharged

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2009
    Messages:
    1,640
    Likes Received:
    154
    I believe, Gordon, that Viking expansion was fuelled by their system of hereditary land ownership, passed down ONLY to the eldest son of a family.

    If he had brothers, they lost out regardless. I understand a lot of their raids were carried out by these siblings that were very much 'on the make', wishing to plunder themselves a fortune, or carve out territory for themselves.

    Something I've always held in mind, one of the principal reasons for their success was the very fact of them having to ROW most of the way across the North Sea to reach their destinations. Day after day of this exercise, and on a sparse diet too, must have been the best training imaginable for swinging a broadsword around. Compared to landlubbers in Britian, the vikings must have been very FIT, and much more ferocious by virtue of the fact that they were 'on the make'.

    A more sucessful combination of elements were not present circa 700 AD, or were raids to Britian earlier? I believe the fall of the Roman Empire opened the doors of opportunity for these people, so 650 to 700 AD would sound about right.
     
  3. GRW

    GRW Pillboxologist WW2|ORG Editor

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2003
    Messages:
    20,815
    Likes Received:
    3,042
    Location:
    Stirling, Scotland
    The first recorded raid was around AD 793 on Lindisfarne. Might have been isolated ones before that, but they don't show up on the historical record.
    There's a train of thought (outlined in that programme) that one of the principle reasons was the ready availability of new prospective slaves, a source of easy profit. Monasteries were undefended, full of silver and bodies, and easily found; the Viking equivalent of cash machines. These could be spirited back to Scandinavia and then sold on through the trading routes into the Middle East from Russia.
    That's not to say the reasons you state weren't also factors, it's just the degree of involvement. I've also heard it suggested the attacks were a response to the Christian incursion into Scandinavia, particularly Charlemagne's wars against the Saxons. The raids were helped by the almost complete lack of navies to counter them.
     
  4. scipio

    scipio Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2011
    Messages:
    652
    Likes Received:
    122
    There was not a lot of difference between the Saxon and the Vikings with the exception of religion. Contrary to legend the Vikings were often defeated but as with any maritime empire, it did not matter you simply got back in the boat and dropped the warriors off somewhere else where the defences were less strong (same applied to the Athenian and British Empire and Navies - you wear down the opposition with constant pinpricks).

    That massive woolen sail was used as often as possible in preference to arm power - still unbelievably tough and good sailors.

    I believe the first Viking raid on Britain was on Lindisfarne about 780AD.

    True they preferred the sword if they could afford it but more likely to be swinging a battle axe.
     
  5. scipio

    scipio Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2011
    Messages:
    652
    Likes Received:
    122
    Sorry Gordon beat me too it and more accurate as usual
     
  6. GRW

    GRW Pillboxologist WW2|ORG Editor

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2003
    Messages:
    20,815
    Likes Received:
    3,042
    Location:
    Stirling, Scotland
    No worries.:cool:
     
  7. lwd

    lwd Ace

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    12,322
    Likes Received:
    1,245
    Location:
    Michigan
    From what I recall there was also a significant advance in the metallurgical technology in making steel around the start of the Viking period. Prior to that Norse pattern welded swords were probably the best available anywhere in the world and some prominent metallurgist and blade makers have made a case for them even being superior to later Japanese Katanas. The advanced in technology allowed a decent sword to be made from steel pretty much right from the smelter. These weren't as good but several could be made in the time it took to make one pattern welded one nor did they require the same level of skill from the maker. This also meant that armor and other weapons effectively became much cheaper. This could have had an indirect impact as well. Better tools and hunting equipment could have led to an increase in the population in the Scandinavian lands.
     
  8. Skipper

    Skipper Kommodore

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2006
    Messages:
    24,984
    Likes Received:
    2,386
    Most interesting Lads, most of the time we hear about the Romans fighting the Picts or the English fighting the Highlanders, but the wars with the Norse is a first to me.
     
  9. KodiakBeer

    KodiakBeer Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2012
    Messages:
    6,329
    Likes Received:
    1,712
    Location:
    The Arid Zone
    One of the keys to Viking expansion (that is rarely credited) is the medieval optimum, a warming period from roughly 800 to 1200. During those years, populations expanded dramatically in Scandinavia due to increased crop yields and that excess population fueled explorations and invasions in every direction.
     
  10. GRW

    GRW Pillboxologist WW2|ORG Editor

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2003
    Messages:
    20,815
    Likes Received:
    3,042
    Location:
    Stirling, Scotland
    The only problem with the diaspora theory is that vast areas (most of Ireland, Wales and Scotland for example) suffered viking raids but very little settlement. Orkney, Shetland, the Hebrides and NE England saw Norse settlers, but they later confined themselves to central areas in mainland Britain-
    File:Viking Expansion.svg - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Did they settle coastal areas because the local populations were more easily overcome, or just because they were easier to reach? Same with Europe; with the exception of Russia, most viking settlements were along a coastal strip.
    Skip,
    This is for you-
    Great Heathen Army - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
     
  11. Volga Boatman

    Volga Boatman Dishonorably Discharged

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2009
    Messages:
    1,640
    Likes Received:
    154
    I think the almost pure coastal nature of their settlements were a measure of the fact that the Scandinavians were a seafaring people, fed on a diet of seafood staple. The sea provided most of what these people felt necessary to survive, so inland farming was ignored by virtue of the fact that settling peoples often stick to that which they are familiar with, tried and tested, and quikly put into action, rather than experimentation with new fangled ideas. This is not to say that vikings had no farming settlements, but they seem to have been something that happened much later on, when their expansion phase was winding down, and the lack of enemy activity gave them time to experiment with newer ways of living.

    Ancient Briton farmers would tend to flee inland, where numbers counted for more in battle, rather than facing the Viking tribes on ground of the Viking's choice. Monestaries were soft targets, and I'm not aware of too many fortified settlements that raiders had the time or the resources to invest in a protracted siege. Some settlements were constructed to hold out for years if necessary, so it was a case of hitting targets that they were aware had little or no defensive works.

    Even the Viking invasion of 1065-66 had no siege equipment to speak of, a fact that Harold Hadrada ignored anyway when he defeated them virtually on the beach at Stamford Bridge.

    Those Fyrdmen nearly pulled it off for poor Harold. They were easily the most practiced soldiers in Europe at the time. Hastings was a remarkable victory, and the Norman William must have realised this as well, for he celebrated victory long and loud!
     
  12. scipio

    scipio Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2011
    Messages:
    652
    Likes Received:
    122
    The first Volga Boatmen were Vikings!

    That longship was perfect for rowing up rivers and especially the huge rivers of Russia.

    Here is the route of the Norwegians of Harald Hardrada's fleet of 200 longboats in their approach to York where at Fulford he defeated the young Earls who should have refused battle and remained behind the walls of York. Harald celebrated too soon. Harold and the English rode 250 miles (400kms) in 5 days and completely surprised and slaughtered the unprepared Viking Army at Stamford Bridge - of those 200 ships barely 20 escaped.

    [​IMG]

    Since there seems to be some interest in this topic. I pick up where Gordon left off. The great Danish Army of Gudrun.

    Badly defeated and retreating to the only sanctuary left, and island in the Marshes of Alderney, Alfred (the Great) after burning the cakes led a spirited comeback and pushed the Danes back to the line on the map below from modern Liverpool in a diagonal to London. His son Edward (but more importantly his warlike daughter Aetfrida), inflicted further defeats on the Danes pushing the border to the Humber ie the line from Liverpool to Hull - in the process the Danes who by now constituted a significant part of the population of Eastern England submitted to English rule and it becomes increasingly difficult to distinguish Dane from Saxon and it is better to think of them as Anglo-Danish.

    The process is completed by the first King of England (who should really get he name Great) Athelstan who inflicts a crushing defeat on a combined Scottish\Viking (and others) at Brunnaburgh. Unfortunately the whereabouts of this battle are unknown but it marked the unification of the State which despite the various foreign usurpers, William the bastard of Normandy or Sveyn of Denmark has remain the same ever since. The Vikings of York and the Kingdom of Strathclyde were all reincorporated into England which regained its old border town of Edinburgh (Edwin's Burgh) founded by the English Northumberian Kings and which Scotland will kindly return when it gets Independence.

    [​IMG]


    The story might have ended there except for the dreadful Ethelred the Unready who after murdering his brother to gain the Crown then murdered the sister of the King of Denmark, Sweyn. Rather stupid thing to do as Sweyn took revenge by conquering England, followed by his Son, Knut (Canute). The king may have changed but the intermingling of Saxon and Danish continued. Harold Godwin was himself half Danish through his mother.

    Here are a few family trees to totally confuse you.
    [​IMG]
     
    Karjala, Skipper and Volga Boatman like this.
  13. GRW

    GRW Pillboxologist WW2|ORG Editor

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2003
    Messages:
    20,815
    Likes Received:
    3,042
    Location:
    Stirling, Scotland
    The forgotten battle of 1066; Fulford is a good book btw.
    Was it the battle of Edington in 878 where the Viking dead were just left where they lay, and a century later a monk visited the scene and described still being able to see human bones lying around?
     
  14. urqh

    urqh Tea drinking surrender monkey

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2002
    Messages:
    9,683
    Likes Received:
    955
    Good one Scipio...My favourite period...Hastings et al...Only surpassed by Simon De Montfort times..whom I place in the same mould as Harold...
     
  15. Volga Boatman

    Volga Boatman Dishonorably Discharged

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2009
    Messages:
    1,640
    Likes Received:
    154
    Scipio nails it with a smashing post! Well done!

    I've got Danish ancestry, and have just learnt more about the period....top hole!

    Amazing how the monarchies of Europe were related to each other as far back as that....puts the Great War into perspective for me. I have always seen the 14-18 conflict as a dynastic family squabble that got out of hand, with the war generating it's own objectives. The great families of Europe were still slugging it out in the same manner as over 2000 years before! Incredible!

    Just shows the value of biofeedback, and exactly why this site is such an entertaining way to spend some time.....even if I do have the odd disagreement that puts me in the cooler.

    BTW, gotta thank you lot for the hot water bottle....kept me warm whilst serving my sentence......or was it an enema? The thread has disappeared, so I cannot double-check my 'prize'!
     
  16. DaveBj

    DaveBj Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2009
    Messages:
    95
    Likes Received:
    16
    This is why my grandfather and one of his brothers wound up in North Dakota in 1905. It is still the law of the land, only it has been modified to "oldest child," meaning that if the oldest child is a girl, she gets the farm.

    (One of the distant cousins in the Old Country ran our family tree -- Harald the Fair-Haired is an ancestor, through a couple of sidesteps from female marriages out of the line. Somehow I can't picture the Bjornstads of my line being raiding Vikings.)

    DaveBj
     
  17. scipio

    scipio Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2011
    Messages:
    652
    Likes Received:
    122
    Gosh what have I done to deserve this - thanks to all of you.

    Actually it is nice to see some decent books now being published about the Vikings and Early English.

    Unfortunately the Battle of Fullford is about to be irrevocably lost. Property Developers have bought the land and are currently even refusing to admit it is the site of the battle and hence refusing any archaeological excavation. It looks like it will go the same way as Stamford Bridge buried under a load of tacky little boxes laughingly called social housing and a few Streets called "Hardrada Way" and "Battle Lane", such is progress.
     
  18. GRW

    GRW Pillboxologist WW2|ORG Editor

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2003
    Messages:
    20,815
    Likes Received:
    3,042
    Location:
    Stirling, Scotland
    I would say it's down the planning department to force the issue. The new NPPF says (p41)-
    "Historic environment
    169. Local planning authorities should have up-to-date evidence about the historic environment in their area and use it to assess the significance of heritage
    assets and the contribution they make to their environment. They should also use it to predict the likelihood that currently unidentified heritage assets,
    particularly sites of historic and archaeological interest, will be discovered in the future. Local planning authorities should either maintain or have access
    to a historic environment record.
    170. Where appropriate, landscape character assessments should also be prepared, integrated with assessment of historic landscape character, and for areas
    where there are major expansion options assessments of landscape sensitivity"
    https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/6077/2116950.pdf
    They've got the power to veto the development if it comes down to it.
     
  19. GRW

    GRW Pillboxologist WW2|ORG Editor

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2003
    Messages:
    20,815
    Likes Received:
    3,042
    Location:
    Stirling, Scotland
    Seems one of their ships is coming to the British Museum. Might be worth a visit-
    "When the sleek, beautiful silhouette of Roskilde 6 appeared on the horizon, 1,000 years ago, it was very bad news. The ship was part of a fleet carrying an army of hungry, thirsty warriors, muscles toned by rowing and sailing across the North Sea; a war machine like nothing else in 11th-century Europe, its arrival meant disaster was imminent.
    Now the ship's timbers are slowly drying out in giant steel tanks at the Danish national museum's conservation centre at Brede outside Copenhagen, and will soon again head across the North Sea – to be a star attraction at an exhibition in the British Museum.
    The largest Viking warship ever found, it was discovered by chance in 1996 at Roskilde. It is estimated that building it would have taken up to 30,000 hours of skilled work, plus the labour of felling trees and hauling materials. At just over 36 metres, it was four metres longer than Henry VIII's flagship Mary Rose built 500 years later, and six metres longer than the Viking ship spectacularly recreated as Sea Stallion, which sailed from Scandinavia around Scotland to Dublin in 2007."
    Rebirth of the Viking warship that may have helped Canute conquer the seas | Culture | The Guardian
     
    scipio likes this.
  20. GRW

    GRW Pillboxologist WW2|ORG Editor

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2003
    Messages:
    20,815
    Likes Received:
    3,042
    Location:
    Stirling, Scotland
    Seems one of their ships is coming to the British Museum. Might be worth a visit-
    "When the sleek, beautiful silhouette of Roskilde 6 appeared on the horizon, 1,000 years ago, it was very bad news. The ship was part of a fleet carrying an army of hungry, thirsty warriors, muscles toned by rowing and sailing across the North Sea; a war machine like nothing else in 11th-century Europe, its arrival meant disaster was imminent.
    Now the ship's timbers are slowly drying out in giant steel tanks at the Danish national museum's conservation centre at Brede outside Copenhagen, and will soon again head across the North Sea – to be a star attraction at an exhibition in the British Museum.
    The largest Viking warship ever found, it was discovered by chance in 1996 at Roskilde. It is estimated that building it would have taken up to 30,000 hours of skilled work, plus the labour of felling trees and hauling materials. At just over 36 metres, it was four metres longer than Henry VIII's flagship Mary Rose built 500 years later, and six metres longer than the Viking ship spectacularly recreated as Sea Stallion, which sailed from Scandinavia around Scotland to Dublin in 2007."
    Rebirth of the Viking warship that may have helped Canute conquer the seas | Culture | The Guardian
     

Share This Page