Runboard.com
Слава Україні!
Community logo


runboard.com       Sign up (learn about it) | Sign in (lost password?)

 
Housecarl 1066 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 02-2006
Location: Northern-most Saxon border.
Posts: 620
Karma: 1 (+1/-0)
Reply | Quote
The Battle of Stamford Bridge, 25th September 1066


Battle of Stamford Bridge 25th September.

King Harold II, having abandoned his wait for the expected Norman invasion in the south of England due to an unexpected landing in the north by a huge veteran arm of vikings under their feared KIng, Harald Hardraada, speed-marched his huge, mostly-mounted (huscarls), heavily-armed army north 180m to York in just 4 days and nights with a brief night-stop at Tadcaster, moved straight through York, posting huscarls guards at every city gate to prevent leakage of his presence.

He aimed to completely surprise and massacre the fierce Norse army (only hours before York- thus the entire north?- caved in to Hardrada, and also there learning from local magnates of where the Norse army were?) then dash back south before William could land- then waiting on the Normandy coast for a favourable southerly wind. The Norsemen were then spending idle time waiting for the York VIP's/hostages & resting - UNARMOURED- in the late Summer heat on both sides of the Derwent's riverbanks.

Hardraada had been so flushed with victory at Fulford Gate only five days before, that he fatally didn't post scouts far outfield to reconnoitre for any unexpected enemies (And he allowed his warriors to leave their armour with their fleet at Riccall)- odd for such an experienced and wily veteran, perhaps?
Consequently, the first thing they knew of any Saxons in the locality was a huge cloud of road-dust and glinting metal in the distance towards York at Gate Helmsley 1m away (like a "sheet of ice" acc. to Sturlasson)- could it be the York embassy approaching?

With horror, Harald & Tostig realised they had been almost ambushed by King Harold himself whom they had thought was 180m away to the SOUTH and, ordering fast-riders to hasten word to his fleet guard some miles away to join him asap, Hardrada also ordered the troops on the west bank to fight a delaying action(or were they simply caught out after rustling cattle for food, then relaxing?), whilst he hastily formed his east-bank main army into a huge circle ready for Harold's fearsome huscarls, archers and fyrdsmen.

Charging straight into the 'east bank' Vikings(forming a crude semi-circle flanked by the Derwent at it's ends), Harold's huscarls used (or were ordered to use) their mounted advantage and the English vanguard tore into them (as I believe), hacking down many & then aimed to seize the bridge(then a wooden planked crossing, wide enough only for two men) and cutting most of them off, until the Saxon infantry caught up with their foes- the Norsemen & English disintegrated into a seething mass of struggling men and, with the bridge choked with men, many Norse were driven back into the river where they drowned.

One large chainmailed Norseman stood alone on the western end of the bridge (acc. to Scandinavian legend- but not in English sources, oddly), killing any Englishmen with his axe who neared him, holding up Harold's advance.
If this story is true, then Harold, perhaps momentarily admiring this bravery, must have ordered his archers, infantry & cavalry to hold back from killing this 'hero' there and then, maybe seeing that Hardraada/Tostig had already formed up a fierce defensive formation across the river up the slope anyway, thus too late to catch them exposed even if he killed this lone warrior immediately?

Hardrada's main army had been bought enough time, & they roared their lone comrade on, but the hero was eventually felled by an enterprising Saxon who used a swilltub down the riverbank(hiding under the hanging tree canopies?
His feat is even today celebrated in York's "Spear Pies") and impaled this hero between the legs thru the bridge's wooden footboards. Harold's army then poured across the bridge and formed up (cavalry to the fore, infantry behind?) as the archers 'covered' his advance and rear.

A parlez is supposed to have taken place with the Norse main army from the river up the slope- Harold personally offering his brother his life (& Northumbrian Earldom?) if he switched sides, (he must have been tempted, but could not face the shame of betraying Hardrada who had sponsored this invasion, any more than he might not trust his brother- whom he still wanted to avenge).
But then, what might the earls Edwin and Morcar think to that, when they and their supporters heard this later?
Tostig refused his offer, whether he actually meant it or not, and the defiant Norse roared their refusals back at Harold's men, so battle began again... huscarl against viking.

Harold must have realised that his army now would be fighting slightly uphill with their back to the river!
Just one Viking charge like the English one at Fulford five days before and...disaster for him?

Harold's mounted huscarls (if Sturlasson- writing much later- isn't confusing Stamford with Senlac?) charged up to the dense circular Norse wall of locked shields & upward thrust spears and discharged their own spears and quickly wheeled about, then repeated, to wear their foes down (the Norse front two ranks crouched down behind interlocked shields, aiming their own spears at the rider's chests, making it v.impossible to engage them, whilst those standing behind aimed theirs at the horses chests) whilst archers and spear-throwers were raining missiles upon the cavalry from inside Hardrada's circle.

This continued indecisively, the Norse thinking it rather half-hearted of the Saxons, but on it raged on. Hardrada- who had been inside the circle to plug any gaps in his wall of men- led a fierce charge with a force of retainers(as at Fulford)seeking eternal heroic fame(?) broke rank and charged the Saxons as they withdrew to regroup, as was that tactic, felling many Saxons, whilst the remainder of his army held formation and fought on behind.
As they became exposed in the open outside of their 'circle' with their ferocious counter-attacking assault, the English cavalry and archers whom they dashed through/into showered them with spears from all directions, slaying a great many.
It might have looked as though the English were about to be routed, but just at this point- Hardrada was hit in the throat by a chance arrow among many, felling him along with most of those men with him.

A second parlez?? Maybe another offer of peace by Harold during the lull as the armies reformed again(did the houscarls now dismount?), who needed all his men alive and well to return south asap?
But the Norse roared with defiance- urged on by new leader Tostig, who also was soon afterwards slain as the huscarls and fyrdsmen clashed on foot with the defiant Norse. An even fiercer phase now raged- bloodier than before, the armour-less Norse being butchered by the 100's- the Saxons taking huge casualties while doing so- as the grim day gave way to slaughter on 'battle flats'.

At this point, the armoured yet exhausted Norse fleet-guard, led by Orri Eystein (prospective son-inlaw noble of Hardrada) arrived and crashed heavily into the tangled saxon/vikings from the S.East (many Norse collapsed & died of exhaustion just running to battle, others threw off their chainmail only to be slain), almost battering Harold's Saxons backwards/sidewards with it's initial sheer momentum of force & ferocity, the English only just held their lines & checked the fresh Norse army to a standstill.
A new and bitter fight raged- "Orri's Storm" (Norse sources state this was "the fiercest of all"), dreadful, close-quarter butchery continued "until nightfall" - both sides slugging it out in a ferocious bruiser- the Saxons slain in great numbers but eventually the depleted Norse were finally broken & routed all the way back to their ships(and locally- by Harold's 'cavalry'?) in the darkness.
Many were slain by axe & sword as they fled during the night, many others were trapped and burned alive in barnhouses where they hid, etc. At great cost to Harold's army, they had won a stunning victory.

Aftermath. So heavily slaughtered had the Norsemen been that only 24 ships out of their original 300 sailed home(over 90% of their army!) -after Hardrada's son, Prince Olaf(actually became a peaceful Norse ruler), swore peace and gave hostages and plunder, then the pitiful 1000 shellshocked survivors sailed off north to the Orkneys, collecting the Norsemen at Holderness, Scarborough and Cleveland en route.

• Orderic Vitalis noted that even in his day (12thC) their bones could still be seen in heaps.
• Geoffrey Gaimar, writing at the time, said “nobody could count a half of those left on the field”

---
http://1066andallthat.forumfree.co.uk/
Sep/24/2008, 4:42 pm Link to this post Send Email to Housecarl 1066   Send PM to Housecarl 1066
 
mousteriana Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 03-2005
Posts: 936
Karma: 6 (+6/-0)
Reply | Quote
Re: The Battle of Stamford Bridge, 25th September 1066


Housecarl:

Let's pause a moment to remember this heroic event.
Anne G
Sep/25/2008, 10:54 pm Link to this post Send Email to mousteriana   Send PM to mousteriana
 
WilliamtheRed Forum1 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 10-2007
Posts: 124
Karma: -3 (+0/-3)
Reply | Quote
Re: The Battle of Stamford Bridge, 25th September 1066


Stamford Bridge was a remarkable battle in that Hardraada and Tostig were so confident after Gate Fulford that they were comfortable with the idea of dividing their army.Obviously, this must have been Hardraada's decision and may well have reflected the divisions that had preceded his prosecution of his claim to rule in the debate at Viken earlier where strong reservations against it were expressed by some of his jarls.This confidence, unless it considered a kind of tactic, must have had something to do with the leadership status of Edwin and Morcar who by controlling Mercia and Northumbria had effectively lost half of Angleland at Gate Fulford. Did they attribute that defeat to insufficient support from the Usurper? It needs to be remembered that the defeat reflected directly on them in the eyes of their peoples rather than the Usurper. Certainly distrust of the Usurper in Mercia and Northumbria must have been firmly established. The rule of Tostig in Northumbria was very much remembered in a negative sense and after Gate Fulford, Tostig was back and Mercia and Northumbria annexed to Norway. The complete lack of preparation and initial,total collapse in the surprise attack that ensued can only be explained in our view by Hardraada and Tostig believing that the next battle would be with the Conqueror.Even from this view 942 years later the Usurper's victory seems incredible in the light of Hardraada and Tostig's total supremacy after Gate Fulford.Naturally, the surprise attack is one that is difficult if not impossible to turn around if it is executed vigorously and effectively.Was there a debate about whether or not Hardraada and Tostig's army should strike south and finish the Usurper? Or had they received intelligence to the effect that the Usurper had already been defeated and preparation,for what they must have known was the greater threat to them, made necessary? Our view is that Hardraada ran into the same debate he had at Viken about pressing his claim to rule in Angleland.The Viking leadership in part may well have considered that they had bitten off more than they could chew since Gate Fulford was not the push-over that Hardraada and Tostig had said it would be.Tostig,in particular,would have had a very 'inside view' of Edwin and Morcar and their capabilities which he would not have hesitated to communicate to Hardraada.In fact, Tostig's 'insider status' in relation to Angleland was one of the central reasons Hardraada allied with him. If the Usurper could muster similar resistance before being overcome how could they possibly handle the Conqueror's forces? Gate Fulford may well have generated more problems in and after the battle than any that preceded it. Underscoring all of this is also the fact that this was 'the last hurrah' of the Viking era itself.Hardraada was arguably 'the last Viking leader'. Hardraada intelligent and practical cut off from his Norwegian base may well have made a temporary concession to this uncertainty amongst leaders who despite their misgivings at Viken had serve him well at Gate Fulford.
Rob,John G,"Briggs" (all in personal capacity)
Oct/4/2008, 12:10 pm Link to this post Send Email to WilliamtheRed Forum1   Send PM to WilliamtheRed Forum1
 
Housecarl 1066 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 02-2006
Location: Northern-most Saxon border.
Posts: 620
Karma: 1 (+1/-0)
Reply | Quote
Re: The Battle of Stamford Bridge, 25th September 1066


Ok.

I'm capable of overcoming my hatred of the fat one as a usurping invader etc etc, and discussing his merits on here, and even go as far as to extend a genuine offer to TWTRF to joining- or even guest posting- on my website to debate this/these issues, which would be met by rational, intelligent and respectful replies and counter-arguments maybe?

Why can your forum not- even temporarily -extend myself that same respect? Or King Harold- whom you know actually had great qualities before and after 1064, despite your innate hatred of him in retrospect?

---
http://1066andallthat.forumfree.co.uk/
Oct/4/2008, 6:58 pm Link to this post Send Email to Housecarl 1066   Send PM to Housecarl 1066
 
WilliamtheRed Forum1 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 10-2007
Posts: 124
Karma: -3 (+0/-3)
Reply | Quote
Re: The Battle of Stamford Bridge, 25th September 1066


Housecarl, our Forum has always made it clear that despite the fact that the Usurper was the mortal enemy of the Conqueror he nevertheless deserves recognition as a worthy opponent which despite the fact that the Conqueror hated him for his betrayal was his approach to him also.
How could it be otherwise? The Usurper commanded support in his divided Angleland. Thousands were willing to die for him.The Conqueror had sufficient experience of opponents of a higher calibre than the Usurper such as Henri 1 and Geoffroi Martel to prevent him having the kind of overconfident attitude and the unbridled arrogance that often accompanies it and which Hardraada displayed in spades after Gate Fulford.
We would assert that when you lionise the Usurper you insult Edgar Aethling who was the true successor to the Confessor in the line of the House of Wessex and who was treated appallingly by the Angle-Saxon-Dane grandees because of his age,14. Morcar and Edwin were also teenagers. Hardraada would have been amazed at such an ageist attitude. No less a figure than Harald Fairhair, the unifier of Norway in the 9th Century and the expeller of the people who became the Normans, succeeded as king at the age of 10.The Conqueror became duke of Normandy at the age of 8.Our Forum welcomes a debate on this issue.However, everytime you oppose us on the matter of usurpation and see it as some kind of disrespect to your champion while failing to recognise that in supporting your champion,you disrespect Edgar Aethling.
You are right to record the importance of Stamford Bridge and how Godwineson the Usurper took the golden opportunity handed to him by Hardraada in dividing his army(a third at SB,two thirds at Riccall).Rob,John G and "Briggs" provide reasons for this.What do you think? In our opinion, he was in the process of organising reinforcements to be shipped in from Norway.He had only brought about 40-45% of those who were acceptable for fighting on his side.The result of Gate Fulford must have made it clear that future opposition would be stern and unyielding. Nevertheless, he was pleased to hold his army to await further developments in the south and was relaxed about the whole situation.This can only mean he underestimated not just the Usurper but also the Conqueror.

The opposition to staking his claim registered at Viken and led by Ulf Ospaksson could also have been a factor strengthened by the toll taken on the Norwegians in winning at Gate Fulford.We see the story about the lone viking on the bridge as perhaps being a reference to the use of Berserkers in Hardraada's army condensed to one as a kind of symbol of their legendary 'fighting mad' reputation.It sounds too lurid a tale to be readily credible but perfectly in keeping with Hardraada's personna since apart from being a fearsome warrior, he was a poet. The Berserkers are often compared to Housecarls.Would you agree or not with that comparison?
It's also the case that the victory at Stamford Bridge halted the escalating enslavement of many Angles by Hardraada's army after Gate Fulford.It's often glossed over when the vikings are talked about regarding their historical profile that they remained to the end, slave traders and slave owners. As our Forum points out successive rulers of Angleland,before the Conqueror, tolerated slavery and in 1066 there were 200,000 in the country.Nevertheless,if Hardraada had become king of Angleland that figure would have rocketed enormously along with the slave trade.The result of Stamford Bridge struck a blow against that iniquitous trade and institution.
In approving your recording of both these battles on this Chatboard we would add that it underlines clearly what our Forum has always affirmed, that 1066 in Angleland was about 3 not 1 battles.In our personal view, we think it is long overdue that Gate Fulford and Stamford Bridge be treated equally with Senlac as historical landmarks and resourced likewise for public display and attention.

Marita Keel,First Secretary,Steve Walsh,Pereobou,Paul,Becky (all in personal capacity)
Oct/5/2008, 12:50 pm Link to this post Send Email to WilliamtheRed Forum1   Send PM to WilliamtheRed Forum1
 
mousteriana Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 03-2005
Posts: 936
Karma: 6 (+6/-0)
Reply | Quote
Re: The Battle of Stamford Bridge, 25th September 1066


WRTF:

YOu know, whatever the merits of Harold, Hardraada, Edgar Atheling, et al,and whatever the attitudes toward young possible successors such as Edgar, I think Housecarl has a good point. There's really no reason why you shouldn't join the Anglo-Saxon list and debate all the issues you raised, either from your side or from some other side. You've given your reasons here, and that's fine, but few people come here. If you want a larger audience for your ideas, the Anglo-Saxon list would be a good place to start.
Anne G
Oct/5/2008, 5:23 pm Link to this post Send Email to mousteriana   Send PM to mousteriana
 
WilliamtheRed Forum1 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 10-2007
Posts: 124
Karma: -3 (+0/-3)
Reply | Quote
Re: The Battle of Stamford Bridge, 25th September 1066


Anne G
I dont see Marita and co saying anything negative about visiting any related chatboards including this one.Housecarl has done a professional job with the chatboard for aficionados of Anglo-Saxon History in Angleland, which is a massive subject stretching over 5 Centuries.
Our Forum has a smaller, more focused subject which does not 'automatically' 'slot into' any chatboard out there. Our participation will be measured accordingly.

Drogo,Vice-Chairperson (personal capacity)
Oct/11/2008, 10:45 am Link to this post Send Email to WilliamtheRed Forum1   Send PM to WilliamtheRed Forum1
 
mousteriana Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 03-2005
Posts: 936
Karma: 6 (+6/-0)
Reply | Quote
Re: The Battle of Stamford Bridge, 25th September 1066


Drogo and WRTF:

I didn't say there was anything "negative" about your visiting or not visitng the Anglo-Saxon forum. I just suggested you might want to give it a try and open your ideas up to another audience. Heck, for all I know, you might even gain an adherent or two.
Anne G
Oct/12/2008, 3:17 am Link to this post Send Email to mousteriana   Send PM to mousteriana
 
Housecarl 1066 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 02-2006
Location: Northern-most Saxon border.
Posts: 620
Karma: 1 (+1/-0)
Reply | Quote
Re: The Battle of Stamford Bridge, 25th September 1066


Thanks for your comments, Drogo, it was hard work initially!

All are welcome!

---
http://1066andallthat.forumfree.co.uk/
Oct/14/2008, 7:00 am Link to this post Send Email to Housecarl 1066   Send PM to Housecarl 1066
 


Add a reply





You are not logged in (login)