The Battle of Assandun
When it comes to this time period there seems to be a problem; most documentary's and school age education presents the Norman invasion as some random event, but in reality it was the culmination of decades of political uncertainty and squabbles over successions. The battle at Assandun set the stage for the chaos that would inevitably lead to the Bastard Duke taking the throne of England.
Politics In The Lead Up
It could be said that the lead up to the battle of Assandun really began with England's struggle against the original Danelaw. The first Danish invasion of England in the mid-ninth century established a huge territory in England until King Aethelstan successfully re-captured the lost territory between the years of 924 to 939. Afterwards peace existed for a short while during the rule of the English King Edgar from 959 to 978, but relations between the Saxons and the Northmen soured again in the period of Viking expansionism that saw Scandinavian colonies set up as far away as Greenland.From 978 to 1016, King Ethelred the Unready took the throne aged just ten years old, but he never seemed to possess the qualities necessary to lead the nation, hence the name. Although I'd argue that granting this title to someone who took the throne as a boy is a tad harsh!
During Ethelred's reign there was no national army organised to be called upon in the event of Viking raids or invasions, and all defensive means were organised on a local basis under the control of county Aldermen. Each Alderman had his own force of personal body guards and Thanes but will have relied heavily on local Fyrd militias who were far from professional soldiers, and were very often armed with nothing more than farming tools. Whilst these local defensive armies might have been ok for defending against small raiding parties, they proved totally inadequate when the Danes began launching larger campaigns with fleets of up to ninety or more longboats, which were capable of carrying up to around a hundred or so fighting men each.
This is what happened at the battle of Maldon on the 10th of August 991. Forces led by the Alderman Brithnoth arrived in Maldon, a small coastal town where the river Chelmer meets the river Blackwater, to find that a Viking force of some forty or so longships had been repelled back to a island in the bay (most likely Northey Island) by the courageous actions of some local townsmen.
As the land bridge was inaccessible due to the high tide, the two armies shouted demands at one another for hours as they waited for the waters to subside. The invading Danes reportedly shouted their demand; a large tribute to be paid in order to make them leave, a demand that Brithnoth reportedly refused by flatly stating "the only tribute you will get will be of spears and arrows!"
As the tides finally began to recede, the Viking forces led by Olaf Tryggvason began their advance across what would presumably be very difficult, wet clay. The Anglo Saxon Chronicle tells of three Saxon heroes; Wulfstan, Aldere and Caccus, who held back the Danes (presumably with arrows) until they demanded the Saxons withdraw and allow them to cross the causeway unimpeded so that they might fight fairly on dry land.
In a true self-destructive manner, the Saxons agreed to the detriment of their own tactical situation, and allowed the Danes safe passage so that the massacre could occur on equal terms. After a few more volleys of arrows, the two sides closed and did battle leading to what was effectively a stalemate. The Viking forces were too depleted and too worn out to continue fighting and sailed off, returning to a camp near the Isle of Sheppey. Ironically, after the battle King Ethelred still paid them off with a huge amount of silver and gold anyway, effectively making the loss of life on either side absolutely meaningless!
With the English showing weakness and a willingness to pay ransoms, Maldon marked the beginning of a twenty-five year period of Danish raids on the English which eventually got so bad that the English were forced to endure a specific tax known at the Danegeld, which was to used to pay off raiders. As the years went by, the raids penetrated England further and further inland with little Saxon resistance. Presumably frustrated by these frequent raids, the English finally snapped and executed a number of peaceful Danish settlers living in the city of London. This incident led to the Danish justification for a full scale invasion of England culminating with Swegn Forkbeard being Crowned King of England by 1013. As a result King Ethelred and his family fled to Normandy to wait out the crisis and plot their next move.
Swegn Forkbeard died a year later in 1014, and his son and heir Canute who was also present in England at the time, had to return home to deal with the courts in Denmark and be sworn in as King, which gave Ethelred the opportunity to return to London from Normandy.
Soon after retaking the English throne King Ethelred also died, leaving his Son Edmund Ironside as heir. It's clear that Ironside learned a lot from his Father's shortcomings though as within just seven months his charismatic leadership had led to a reasonably well trained national army which, with perhaps more time or more reliable support, could have led a successful campaign against the Danish forces. Unfortunately though, history was not on his side as the events of the Battle of Assandun show.
The Run Up To The Battle
Canute's forces returned to England in early 1016 with a fleet of some one-hundred and sixty ships, landing on the south coast. In early May the fleet moved again, travelling up along the Thames to Greenwich where they remained until after midsummer, after which they moved again to the river Orwell near Ipswich.Its possible that when the Danes arrived at the river Orwell (or Stour) they may have built a defended harbour there, similar to the one I have already mentioned at the Battle of Benfleet. Its most likely construction site would have been at Harwich, which in Old English literally means Military Settlement, (2) which is apt given that between the Roman era up until the end of the second world war the town was used extensively for military purposes. Evidence of a camp had existed in Harwich up until quite recently, with an earthwork running through the eastern part of the Dovercourt parish containing the chapelry of Harwich.(3) This site was originally investigated by the Morant Society and suggested as possibly been of Viking origin, although there is no guarantee as, already stated, the area had been in use since before the Saxon period.
Harwich would have served as a great site with its command over both the river Orwell and Stour, offering a few tactical options, but was also a perfect as it was the farthest point away from London within Essex at some eighty or so miles, which meant the Saxon's job of destroying the fleet was a little harder.
 |
| An early attempt of mine to commemorate the battle back in 2014. |
Eventually, the Danes walked inland from the camp at Orwell towards Mercia where, as the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle tells us, "they went destroying and burning everything in their path".
The most likely land route taken to Mercia from the Orwell estuary would be along the Stour valley which divides Essex and East Anglia, raiding what is now Cambridgeshire via Manningtree, Sudbury, Clare and through Haverhill, travelling on through the valley of Granta at Barlow and into the Cam valley and then Cambridge itself. The total journey would have been around sixty-two miles. Having procured supplies and livestock, they returned to their ships in the Orwell and sailed south to the Medway, the estuary adjacent to the Isle of Grain on the south bank of the Thames estuary.
After the Danes attacked Mercia and retreated to Kent, the English finally mounted a response and were slowly making their way to engage the enemy. It is likely they had been heading north east from London when news of the Viking departure to the Medway reached them, as the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle states "Then for the fourth time Edmund called up all the people of England, and crossed the Thames at Brentford, and went into Kent."
When the English finally met the Danes there was a mass rout by the Danish forces. They departed the Medway quickly, and whilst at first it might have seemed as though the English had evicted the enemy, they simply sailed north again, mooring themselves on the Essex coastline to start yet another raid on Mercia.
The Anglo Saxon Chronicle states "The host went back up into Essex, and made their way to Mercia, destroying everything before them. When the King learned that the host had appeared on the scene, then for the fifth time he called up all the people of England and followed them up, over taking them in Essex at the hill called Assandun, and there a fierce battle was fought".
Ashdon or Ashingdon?
To this day a question looms on the whereabouts of Assandun. In north Essex there is a case presented for Ashdon, but in south Essex there is a second claimant at Ashingdon.When I had originally written about the battle of Assandun a few years ago for the one-thousandth anniversary, I had assumed perhaps out of local pride (given that I lived no more than a few miles from the "battle site" for most of my childhood) that the site had always taken place at modern day Ashingdon in the Rochford Hundred near Southend. However after reading an unbiased essay in the book The Battle of Maldon - Fiction and Fact written by historian Warwick Rodwell, I am willing to concede that the evidence for my local area's claim to it is a bit thin.
The locations considered for the battle were limited to these two villages as early as 1586, as found in William Camden's Britannica in 1567 who wrote in favour of Ashingdon's claim. He was soon backed up by Raphael Holinshed's Chronicle written in 1587, but these old antiquarians were hardly decent archæologists by today's standards.
In 1867, Edward Augustus Freeman discussed the topography of the area in his book The History of the Norman Conquest of England and again came to the conclusion that Ashingdon was the most likely candidate of the two sites. However the rector of Ashdon in 1889 wrote a well received paper to the Essex Archæological Society in favour of his parish, and in 1925, Essex historian Miller Christy also weighed in on the argument in favour of Ashdon.(4)
Following a long running debate on the subject during the nineteen-twenties, a silver penny was discovered at Ashingdon's churchyard by grave diggers in 1928.(5) The coin found was stamped in Canute's reign and was perhaps rather preemptively taken by some as confirmation of the battle site, but one coin doesn't necessarily prove anything, and as Warrick Rodwell states in his essay, these coins are found all over the South East of England anyway!
The timing of this coin's discovery was also somewhat suspicious, although its easy to be overly cynical. Other artefacts allegedly found at Ashingdon's churchyard are also quite tantalising, as they allegedly include fragments of a shield, a spear head and two coats of chainmail armour - but the claims are unsubstantiated and again may have come to be there for reasons other than this battle.(6)
A large number of Saxon era graves were found near Ashdon buried alongside their pottery and weapons, but their bodies were laid north to south rather than west to east as you would expect for the time period, leading the archæologists at the time to presume that they were actually earlier pagan burials.(8) That said, although I'm probably not qualified to argue this either way, I would seriously consider the possibility that not all of of Canute's men were fully Christianised in 1016, and that maybe some of the old customs amongst the Danes were still being followed. Either way, the physical evidence at both sites are found to be underwhelming.
Dr Cyril Hart in 1968 was one of the more recent scholars who began looking at the evidence of the battle from an unbiased point of view, and unveiled a lot of fresh evidence which supported Ashdon's claim, writing "it cannot be said that the evidence here put forward allows of a certain identification of the site of Assandun. The most that can be claimed is that the balance of probability is on the side of Ashdon."(7)
It seems early archæologists and antiquarians assumed Ashingdon was the battle site because of the similarities between Assandun and Ashingdon in their more modern pronunciations, but this oversight seems to have led to an entrenchment of thought as many researchers later on relied on older, flawed information. Modern etymological study has shown the most agreed upon meanings of Assandun as being either;
- The hill of the ash trees
- The hill of the asses
- Or Assa's Hill
Cyril Hart through his own research also realised that whilst the modern day town names of both Ashingdon and Ashdon could both theoretically be derived from hill of the ash trees, for geological reasons one site can be ruled out for one simple reason. Ashingdon sits on very clay soil which is perfect for Oak and Birch, but can be troublesome for Ash trees. Ashdon on the other hand with its chalky substrate proves favourable for Ash to flourish. Put simply its hard to have the hill of the ash trees with few or any ash trees.
Another issue for Ashingdon's claim when we consider the local geography is that mooring over a hundred longboats in the river Crouch a thousand years ago would have been a bit difficult. The river before flood defences would be narrower, but the marshes on both banks of the river would have at that time extended much further than they currently do. You only have to look at the landscape of nearby Wallasea island that is flanked by the river Crouch to its north, to see the kind of natural coastline that would be present a thousand years ago. Not only would the marsh prove hazardous for ships and men alike, but its cramped location and the narrow nature of the river itself would prove a tactical nightmare as the ships would be nigh on impossible to defend.
 |
| The rivers of Essex, with the Medway on the south bank of the Thames Estuary. |
Most importantly is that if the Danes had been interested in setting off again on a raid towards Mercia, why would they choose to have their camp on the southern bank of the river Crouch, and not the north in the Dengie peninsula?
The problem with the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle is that it fails to clarify whether the English intercepted the Danes as they were leaving their ships or as they were returning after having raided Mercia for the second time. This, along with the other conflicting facts and theories surrounding the location makes ascertaining anything with certainty incredibly difficult. This been said, the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle does seem to imply that there was some period of time between the Danish rout in Kent and and the Dane's second raid into Mercia, but this does little to help us. The most accepted view is that the Danes had finished their raid and were returning to their ships when the English finally caught up to them and engaged.
Once again though we get another issue with the locations. If the Danes had been keen on another raid on Mercia, why would they have chosen south east Essex at all, instead of returning to the Harwich area?
Heading to Mercia from Canewdon would have meant a long and arduous journey across some of the worst terrain for a marching army, along the marshy Crouch, up to old Roman road to Chelmsford and from there north through Saffron Walden and onto Cambridge. A distance of some sixty odd miles with no discernible targets for plunder along the way.
If the Danes hadn't been attacked as they left Canewdon as they began their raid on Mercia, then the English who by this point were only in London, were ridiculously slow to react - and if they were too late to intercept them as the Danes set out, then they were even more foolish not to destroy their vulnerable crowded fleet sitting helplessly in a tidal marsh! A possibility remains that the English lay in wait for the Danes to return to Canewdon at Ashingdon, but it begs the question of why the Viking fleet was allowed to survive, or again why the Danish fleet was left on the south bank of a river when they were heading north.
Tactically, it would make more sense for the Danes to make the English think that they had left altogether, and this seems to have been the case as immediately after the rout in Kent, King Edmund disbanded the local fyrd. Considering the Viking ships could easily sail from the Medway to the Crouch in a few hours, it seems unlikely that news would not have quickly reached the English as they marched back to London.
If Ashdon is the battle site, as evidence suggests, its most likely the Danes would have chosen Harwich (or the Orwell/Stour estuaries in general) for their encampment, and travelled along the Stour valley again towards Mercia. The river Orwell has very wide, well drained gravel river beds and could comfortably provide shelter for the numerous ships. In terms of getting to the Cambridge area by foot, there isn't a great deal of difference in mileage between either Canewdon or the outer reaches of the Stour estuary, but the latter has two distinct advantages which have been mentioned already. Firstly, its an easy to follow route along the Stour valley without treacherous river crossings or marshes, and secondly its some eighty miles or so from London, giving the Danes at least some time to manoeuvre and prepare themselves.
Given the distances involved at Ashdon, its chances for the Saxon's intercept are more or less the same whether the Danes were heading into Mercia or back from it.
The Battle Itself
Little is known about the events of this battle save that the English were totally annihilated because of a treacherous character in Edmund's midst's. As the two armies closed, Eadric Stroena, who is mentioned in Saxon literature as being a traitor to the English nation, pulled out a large number of troops under his command from the battle, causing Edmund Ironside to suffer a crippling defeat. The Anglo Saxon Chronicle mentions Stroena as having "Betrayed his natural lord and all the people of England."
Whilst it may seem unfair to trust the writings of a clearly biased manuscript written decades after the event, the reality is that Eadric likely did betray England in exchange for political favour or estates from Canute. Unfortunately for him though, he would get his just rewards as just one year later, Canute himself had Stroena executed at his royal palace for not fighting for Edmund during the battle. Allegedly Canute said to his men "pay this man what we owe him" just before Stroena's head was struck off with an axe.
Despite winning a clear victory at Assandun, Canute was wary of thinning his ranks further, and the English who were once again feeling under immense pressure, also sought to end hostilities as soon as possible. With both sides favouring at least a temporary peace, Ironside and Canute met on Alney Island near Gloucester to speak terms, the result of which effectively split England in two once again with a Danish east and Saxon west. Unfortunately for the English in what might have been either a case of assassination or exhaustion, Ironside died only a few weeks later, leaving Canute the sole leader of the English nation.
The Aftermath
The defeat of the Saxons at Assandun began decades of political instability which inevitably led to the invasion of England in 1066 by the Norwegian King Hardrada and William the Conqueror a month later. The various treaties, marriages and agreements between the various houses of nobility in Normandy, England and Scandinavia had led to a situation where various factions felt they all had a legitimate claim to the throne of England.The connection between England and Normandy only occurred because the Pope in 991 had forced the Norman and English parties to sign a peace treaty (the Normans had been harbouring Danish ships between raids on England,) with Ethelred's marriage to Emma of Normandy to sign the deal, so to speak. Years later, there was then a number of what appear to be very spurious claims made by William the Conqueror that make little sense.
Whilst we will never know what might have happened had Ironside won the battle at Assandun, there is a big possibility that the entire character of England would be totally different today. Had the Saxon's not endured decades of instability, the entire Norman or French Latin influence on England (and the rest of the British Isles for that matter) might not have existed at all. Had England kept it's more Scandinavian or Germanic cultural attributes, perhaps the entire World would be a different place today.
In 1020 King Canute commissioned the construction of a church at the battle site to commemorate the fallen or give thanks to God, but as is the theme on this subject so far, neither the main church at Ashingdon or Ashdon, or indeed any church still standing in either area - fits the bill. In the book The Battle of Maldon - Fiction and Fact, the author Warwick Rodwell supposes that the church constructed by Canute may not even exist any longer, and quotes R. Morris' Churches in the Landscape written in 1989 - which states that many Anglo-Scandinavian churches never survived into the later Medieval period.
There is as Warwick suggests, one final clue that the battle took place near Ashdon. There exists there a forest known as Danes Wood, and fields with the titles 'Long Dane' and 'Short Dane' but most importantly, there is also a possible reference to a church which no longer exists as one of the fields which lies quite a large distance from the local parish church is called "old church field". Perhaps archæological surveys will find Canute's missing church there hidden in the ground there.
Ashingdon Today
In recent times it seems there is another battle underway. Rochford county council is planning to use their claim on the battle for local tourism whilst groups in Ashdon await funding for a full archælogical survey. A few years ago, on the evening of the 1000th anniversary, both local parish churches held their own services, both fairly convinced of their rightful claim to Canute's minster - but the sad truth is neither church can really lay claim to it, and that we might never know where exactly this seriously understated battle took place.Neither site today has a statue or monument, not even local maps mark the battle site, and it does seem a bit of a shame that so little attention is paid to our countries history.
Back in 2014 when I was in ignorance of all the facts, I began trying to mark the occasion. I wrote to and called the vicar of the church and got no reply and called the local paper who sent a photographer on the 998th anniversary. The paper never bothered to publish it. I do unfortunately feel as though its a losing battle (pun not intended) to try and get our history notice more recognised.
The Ashingdon Commemoration
 |
| Ashingdon church on the night of the 1000th commemoration service. |
With it being past seven in the evening and in the middle of the working week, I rather naively thought that this would be some non-religious historical event inside the church, but as I walked in I had a hymn book shoved in my face. Rather reluctantly I plunked myself down on a pew at the back of the church.
Thoughout the service I was reminded as to why I don't do Christianity. There were comments galore about how the Danes were immigrants, and a rather convoluted idea expressed that Anglo-Scandinavian relations are some how relatable to the current unfettered migration that the church of England seems to cherish so much. As I looked about the church I felt a little depressed if I'm honest, as with the exception of a handful of kids I was the youngest one in there. As the vicar said, in jest of course, that they would meet again for the 2000th anniversary, I couldn't help but think that by that point in the future, should things not improve (due to the immigration policies the Church itself seems to promote) that no one will even remember who or what the English are, let alone their history. There was however something rather comical about seeing Odin's raven banner sat behind a church altar though.
After the service was over I managed to wash some of the Christian taint off myself by raising a glass of mead in the church yard to the fallen as a friendly Robin sat beside me on the bench in the moonlight. As I watched the moon rising over the horizon, I felt an overwhelming forlorning for the future of our people.
(The image below is a 360 image, and you can use your phone or mouse to scroll around. It shows the inside of the church on the night of the 1000th anniversary.)
Sources
*The details in this article, or blog post, or whatever you want to call it, would not have been possible were it not for the writings of Warwick Rodwell in the book “The Battle of Maldon - Fiction and Fact" published by The Hambledon Press in 1993. I have done little else but attempt to compress his rather comprehensive essay into something the average casual reader might be able to stomach.
(1) The main source of facts comes from the Anglo Saxon Chronicle and the Ecomium Emmæ.
(2) Placenames of the World by Adrian Room, 2003
(3) P. Morant History of Essex (1768) i, 499; V.C.H. Essex, i (1903), 285
(4) M. Christy, The Battle of “Assandun": Where was it Fought?' Journal of the British Archæological Association [Hereafter J.B.A.A. new series, xxxii (1925) 168-90.
(5) F.W. Steer, The Site of the Battle of Assandun, or Assingdon, Essex Review, xlvi (1937), 80-4.
(6) Steer, Essex Review, xlvi, 80-4; F.C. Ewing, A History and guide of Ashingdon Minster (priv. print., n.d., [1970s]).
(7) Cyril Hart, The Site of Assandun, history studies, i - 1968, 1-12p.
(8) Swete “On the Identification of Assanduna" Pg.7
Comments
Post a Comment