Authors Note
I wrote this elsewhere as a writing exercise, just trying to write 7,000 words in two days which I did. The feedback I got was that it was good but too short and could have used more explanation in parts. So I’m rewriting it here, aiming for more like 12,000 words. Will put up two entries at a time, over the next few days.
Introduction
The Kingdom of England, as every child knows, was formed in 927 when King Æthelstan of Wessex conquered Northumbria for the first time and the Angles of Britain were, however briefly, first united under one King. Later on the Kings of England became High Kings and later still the High Kings were replaced by an empty throne but the Kingdom Æthelstan created has endured through nearly 1,100 years, though admittedly often under foreign rule and rarely with the same borders.
And for better or for worse, so much of the history of that Kingdom was written in blood. From the Norwegian Anarchy to the Serbian Yoke, from the Year of the Moor to the War of the Angry Children, the wars that England have fought has decided its path as a country. Every conflict changes history to some extent if only because every person dead sniffs out a thousand possible futures but in this article we're going to look at the 15 battles which most clearly decided what sort of country England would be.
1. Brunanburh - 937
Winner: England
Defeated side: Dublin, Scotland & Strathclyde
Background: Æthelstan was the first ever ruler to control all of the Seven Kingdoms of the English, thus completing what the House of Wessex had worked for since Edington. By 937 he had also established himself as the de facto High King of Britain, the Kings of Wales and Strathclyde regularly attend his court and just three years earlier he'd raided deep into Scotland and the Orkneys to force those Kings to recognise his overlordship too. But in 937 that was all at risk of being undone. Constantine of Scotland had marched south, Owain of Strathclyde by his side, and joined forces with Olaf, King of Dublin, in Cumbria. The Allies plundered English territory, seemingly at leisure, while Æthelstan sluggishly gathered his own army. The Welsh stayed at home, they did not know who would win and so they preferred to remain neutral. Northumbria, recently conquered, sizzled with discontent and thoughts of rebellion, when confronted with apparant proof of English weakness. Æthelstan’s conquests were at risk of unravelling.
But finally, in late spring, he was ready to march. He would meet these invaders at Brunanburh.
Battle: I do not need to go into too much detail about the battle itself, we all know it. Brunanburh is the subject of the first page of every history book about England and Æthelstan’s supposed speech before the battle, as recounted by much later poets, is a classic of English literature.
In short, the English army broke the shield wall of the invading enemy and scattered them, driving Olaf back to his ships and Owain and Constantine back North. England would remain united.
Aftermath: The importance of Brunanburh in the national myth, as the origin of not just England but the very idea of an English people, has meant it has been the subject of increasing historical scepticism. And to an extent it is hard not to agree that its importance has been overstated. The contemporary idea that this was the great battle that united Britain and bought peace and prosperity to the land does not survive even the slightest analysis. The Kingdom of Northumbria whose annexation Brunanburh was fought to defend would be twice restored within the next decade. Two years after Brunanburh England lost control of the entire midlands. Edmund I would spend much of his rule at war trying to reconquer what his half-brother had first conquered. Brunanburh did not settle anything for good.
But there is a reason why people thought that. Brunanburh was the last concerted attempt by the other British Kings to dispute English Unification, to prevent a united England becoming the dominant power in Britain. The Norse, the Britons and the Scots had united in that attempt. And they failed. Given the struggles the House of Wessex faced to maintain English Unity in a world where they did, how much worse would it have been if they had succeeded?
What could have happened: Æthelstan's victory at Brunanburh ensured the survival of an idea. A vulnerable idea but a powerful one. That the seven nations of the English are and should be one.
But the Kingdom of England could have easily not survived it's early birth pangs. If the English had lost at Burnanburh it is not hard to imagine a much longer period of division, during which much stronger Northumbrian and West Saxon identities could form and the English identity would not be so powerful.
2. Yerk - 1079
Winners: Denmark, England & Scotland
Defeated side: Norway
Background: Brunanburh at the time was also hailed as preserving the English from living under a foreign yoke. To the English of the 11th century, looking back at decades of Norse Kings, this must have seemed like a cruel joke. What the Great Heathen Army could not achieve, their descendants managed with seeming ease. The Danes conquered England in 1013 and then again in 1016, holding it until 1042. Danish rule was disputed and it was not popular, especially under Cnut's sons, but the Kingdom was largely at peace with no large scale rebellions. The same could not be said for its time under Norwegian rule from 1066 onwards.
Harald of Norway well earned his epithet of 'Hard Ruler'. He was highhanded in his dealings with both the Nobles and the Church, England was not yet the 'country of five arch bishops and no King' that it would later become but the Catholic Church was still powerful and Harald's anti papal leanings squandered any possible advantage he could have gained from the Pope's dispute with Stigand and the Anglo-Saxons. Moreover his clemency was simply not trusted, he made nice with men only until he could defeat them and broke any deal he felt he could afford to. The result was a brutal series of rebellions and sacks, areas of South East England did not recover for decades, and the English nobles being replaced with foreigners. The new jarls were largely Norwegians, but also Harald increasingly gave out English land to Welsh and Scottish under kings, in order to tie them into his realm and break any potential ties with English rebels which was staggeringly unpopular. By the time of his death in 1075, England was simply not willing to endure another Scandinavian King.
Tostig Godwinson, the Yarl of Wessex, was the first to make his move, declaring himself King before Olaf could return from Norway, but he was too clearly associated with foreign rule to be accepted by the English rebels and Morcar, the exiled Earl of Northumbria, returned to England in order to challenge both Tostig and Olaf. Olaf landed in the Humber shortly afterwards. The Norwegian Anarchy had begun and it would last for six more years as pretenders and invaders reduced Harald's North Sea Empire to rubble and ashes.
But it was the Battle of Yerk, four years in, that truly changed the course of English History. By 1079, Olaf had seemingly seen off the worst of his troubles, the farmers rebellions back in Norway had yet to reach a critical point, Tostig and Morcar were both dead and the Danish invasion from Scania had been defeated. Yes, Dublin had been lost and the Welsh front was going badly but Olaf must have seen peace if not complete victory as achievable. There was just the problem of Northumbria. Morcar's death at Ligeraceaster had left Edgar the Ætheling in a vulnerable position but Northumbria remained firmly in rebellion. For Olaf to claim all of England he needed to capture Yerk and Edgar's court.
Battle: Edgar, unknown to the Norwegians, had made his famous devil's bargain with the Kings Harald and Malcolm of Denmark and Scotland. As Olaf approached Yerk, he found himself greeted by a united army of his enemies that far outnumbered him. In a mirrior of Brunanburh, the Norwegians formed into a shield wall but the Axemen of the Allied Army flanked it and broke it. The feared Norwegian Army, outnumbered and tired, was routed. Crucially, Olaf himself was trampled down by a cavalry brigade and killed.
Aftermath: In a day, any chances of the Norwegian Empire surviving had been lost. Norway proper, having lost their King, would face two more years of Anarchy but at Yerk, England's independence was won. And it would be a lasting victory, the long fight for English independence from the Nordic invaders that had been ongoing since Lindisfarne was finally won after nearly 300 years. Not only would there never again be a Scandinavian on the English Throne but the British Isles would break from the Nordic orbit almost entirely.
What could have happened: An English defeat at Yerk does not necessarily mean a lasting Nordic Yoke. If England had not won its freedom in 1079, there would be likely other chances. King Olaf would have almost certainly tried to gift Norway to one son and England to another, for one. But it is not impossible to posit a world wherein those ties were never broken and England would become first just another province of the Swedish Empire and then another bickering post imperial Nordic kingdom.
I wrote this elsewhere as a writing exercise, just trying to write 7,000 words in two days which I did. The feedback I got was that it was good but too short and could have used more explanation in parts. So I’m rewriting it here, aiming for more like 12,000 words. Will put up two entries at a time, over the next few days.
Introduction
The Kingdom of England, as every child knows, was formed in 927 when King Æthelstan of Wessex conquered Northumbria for the first time and the Angles of Britain were, however briefly, first united under one King. Later on the Kings of England became High Kings and later still the High Kings were replaced by an empty throne but the Kingdom Æthelstan created has endured through nearly 1,100 years, though admittedly often under foreign rule and rarely with the same borders.
And for better or for worse, so much of the history of that Kingdom was written in blood. From the Norwegian Anarchy to the Serbian Yoke, from the Year of the Moor to the War of the Angry Children, the wars that England have fought has decided its path as a country. Every conflict changes history to some extent if only because every person dead sniffs out a thousand possible futures but in this article we're going to look at the 15 battles which most clearly decided what sort of country England would be.
1. Brunanburh - 937
Winner: England
Defeated side: Dublin, Scotland & Strathclyde
Background: Æthelstan was the first ever ruler to control all of the Seven Kingdoms of the English, thus completing what the House of Wessex had worked for since Edington. By 937 he had also established himself as the de facto High King of Britain, the Kings of Wales and Strathclyde regularly attend his court and just three years earlier he'd raided deep into Scotland and the Orkneys to force those Kings to recognise his overlordship too. But in 937 that was all at risk of being undone. Constantine of Scotland had marched south, Owain of Strathclyde by his side, and joined forces with Olaf, King of Dublin, in Cumbria. The Allies plundered English territory, seemingly at leisure, while Æthelstan sluggishly gathered his own army. The Welsh stayed at home, they did not know who would win and so they preferred to remain neutral. Northumbria, recently conquered, sizzled with discontent and thoughts of rebellion, when confronted with apparant proof of English weakness. Æthelstan’s conquests were at risk of unravelling.
But finally, in late spring, he was ready to march. He would meet these invaders at Brunanburh.
Battle: I do not need to go into too much detail about the battle itself, we all know it. Brunanburh is the subject of the first page of every history book about England and Æthelstan’s supposed speech before the battle, as recounted by much later poets, is a classic of English literature.
In short, the English army broke the shield wall of the invading enemy and scattered them, driving Olaf back to his ships and Owain and Constantine back North. England would remain united.
Aftermath: The importance of Brunanburh in the national myth, as the origin of not just England but the very idea of an English people, has meant it has been the subject of increasing historical scepticism. And to an extent it is hard not to agree that its importance has been overstated. The contemporary idea that this was the great battle that united Britain and bought peace and prosperity to the land does not survive even the slightest analysis. The Kingdom of Northumbria whose annexation Brunanburh was fought to defend would be twice restored within the next decade. Two years after Brunanburh England lost control of the entire midlands. Edmund I would spend much of his rule at war trying to reconquer what his half-brother had first conquered. Brunanburh did not settle anything for good.
But there is a reason why people thought that. Brunanburh was the last concerted attempt by the other British Kings to dispute English Unification, to prevent a united England becoming the dominant power in Britain. The Norse, the Britons and the Scots had united in that attempt. And they failed. Given the struggles the House of Wessex faced to maintain English Unity in a world where they did, how much worse would it have been if they had succeeded?
What could have happened: Æthelstan's victory at Brunanburh ensured the survival of an idea. A vulnerable idea but a powerful one. That the seven nations of the English are and should be one.
But the Kingdom of England could have easily not survived it's early birth pangs. If the English had lost at Burnanburh it is not hard to imagine a much longer period of division, during which much stronger Northumbrian and West Saxon identities could form and the English identity would not be so powerful.
2. Yerk - 1079
Winners: Denmark, England & Scotland
Defeated side: Norway
Background: Brunanburh at the time was also hailed as preserving the English from living under a foreign yoke. To the English of the 11th century, looking back at decades of Norse Kings, this must have seemed like a cruel joke. What the Great Heathen Army could not achieve, their descendants managed with seeming ease. The Danes conquered England in 1013 and then again in 1016, holding it until 1042. Danish rule was disputed and it was not popular, especially under Cnut's sons, but the Kingdom was largely at peace with no large scale rebellions. The same could not be said for its time under Norwegian rule from 1066 onwards.
Harald of Norway well earned his epithet of 'Hard Ruler'. He was highhanded in his dealings with both the Nobles and the Church, England was not yet the 'country of five arch bishops and no King' that it would later become but the Catholic Church was still powerful and Harald's anti papal leanings squandered any possible advantage he could have gained from the Pope's dispute with Stigand and the Anglo-Saxons. Moreover his clemency was simply not trusted, he made nice with men only until he could defeat them and broke any deal he felt he could afford to. The result was a brutal series of rebellions and sacks, areas of South East England did not recover for decades, and the English nobles being replaced with foreigners. The new jarls were largely Norwegians, but also Harald increasingly gave out English land to Welsh and Scottish under kings, in order to tie them into his realm and break any potential ties with English rebels which was staggeringly unpopular. By the time of his death in 1075, England was simply not willing to endure another Scandinavian King.
Tostig Godwinson, the Yarl of Wessex, was the first to make his move, declaring himself King before Olaf could return from Norway, but he was too clearly associated with foreign rule to be accepted by the English rebels and Morcar, the exiled Earl of Northumbria, returned to England in order to challenge both Tostig and Olaf. Olaf landed in the Humber shortly afterwards. The Norwegian Anarchy had begun and it would last for six more years as pretenders and invaders reduced Harald's North Sea Empire to rubble and ashes.
But it was the Battle of Yerk, four years in, that truly changed the course of English History. By 1079, Olaf had seemingly seen off the worst of his troubles, the farmers rebellions back in Norway had yet to reach a critical point, Tostig and Morcar were both dead and the Danish invasion from Scania had been defeated. Yes, Dublin had been lost and the Welsh front was going badly but Olaf must have seen peace if not complete victory as achievable. There was just the problem of Northumbria. Morcar's death at Ligeraceaster had left Edgar the Ætheling in a vulnerable position but Northumbria remained firmly in rebellion. For Olaf to claim all of England he needed to capture Yerk and Edgar's court.
Battle: Edgar, unknown to the Norwegians, had made his famous devil's bargain with the Kings Harald and Malcolm of Denmark and Scotland. As Olaf approached Yerk, he found himself greeted by a united army of his enemies that far outnumbered him. In a mirrior of Brunanburh, the Norwegians formed into a shield wall but the Axemen of the Allied Army flanked it and broke it. The feared Norwegian Army, outnumbered and tired, was routed. Crucially, Olaf himself was trampled down by a cavalry brigade and killed.
Aftermath: In a day, any chances of the Norwegian Empire surviving had been lost. Norway proper, having lost their King, would face two more years of Anarchy but at Yerk, England's independence was won. And it would be a lasting victory, the long fight for English independence from the Nordic invaders that had been ongoing since Lindisfarne was finally won after nearly 300 years. Not only would there never again be a Scandinavian on the English Throne but the British Isles would break from the Nordic orbit almost entirely.
What could have happened: An English defeat at Yerk does not necessarily mean a lasting Nordic Yoke. If England had not won its freedom in 1079, there would be likely other chances. King Olaf would have almost certainly tried to gift Norway to one son and England to another, for one. But it is not impossible to posit a world wherein those ties were never broken and England would become first just another province of the Swedish Empire and then another bickering post imperial Nordic kingdom.
Last edited: