Playing about with this might while away a dull hour sometime. http://www.conflicthistory.com/

This looks utterly AMAZIN!!!

I had a look at what it had for the battle of Brunanburh 937AD. There were 3 sites, Bromborough on the Wirral which is now the most favoured site. However the other two were Axminster, which has been suggested but not really taken seriously as a site and one near Brighton which I have never come across as a suggested site. Other than a North West of England site such as Bromborough the other suggested sites are in Scotland or a North East England site near the Humber.

Tim

Or near Brinsworth in Rotherham, as M.Wood said at one time? But yes, the south of England is off the scale of logic.

Col A.H.Burne also favoured the Brinsworth site. Axminster is purely based on two West Saxon nobles who were killed in the battle being buried near there. Burnswork is the most commonly suggested Scottish site.

Hi Tim - I'm getting all nostalgic now. I remember many many moons ago myself and my then amour visited Axminster - she to visit the carpet showrooms (boring) and me to meet a member of the local heritage society who took me on a walking tour of the "supposed" Brunanburh site. The walk was immaterial (both of us knew we were probably just walking around a field of no historical merit whatsoever) but her rendition of the lead-up to the battle and how it went was expertly and interestingly delivered, It is forgotten, even by the Irish, that Amlaibh Mac Gofraid (Olav Guthfrithsson) was intent on expanding his Dublin kingdom to include and consolidate all Norse territories on both islands. He came a cropper at Brunanburh but very nearly got what he wanted later during Edmund's reign. Had he managed to achieve it against Aethelstan and hold it from that point the subsequent history of the two islands would have been very different indeed.

So much did we enjoy ourselves that I kept up a correspondence with her for many years and she even came to Dublin several times to visit me when I lived there (where I could return the compliment once and walk her round some deserted warehouses and junkie dens in the decidedly dodgy area of Ballybough - the presumed epicentre of the Battle of Clontarf, the point of the extinction of the Guthfrithsson family's ambition and power). She sadly died some years ago, but every time I hear reference to Axminster carpets I think of her.

Hi Marc

I am sorry that I have taken so long to reply, I am afraid that finishing my book on the history of the WW2 and post war pipeline and storage system before I completely retire is my priority at the moment.

I had not realised that anyone took the Axminster site that seriously. It is so clearly in the wrong part of the country. I presume that the exact location was on the basis of Egil's Saga. However, as I mentioned on the BBC site a paper set out that it was not uncommen for Icelandic sagas to include their main character in a known major battle.

As a matter of interest, is there anything resembling the name Brunanburh near Axminster?

I seem to remember that you are a bit younger than me and so the amour of yours must sadly have been relatively young when she died.

regards

Tim

Hi Tim

If I remember correctly there was, at the time, a handful of local "amateur historians" in Axminster who were "carpeted out" when it came to local history and actively sought alternative themes to pursue. One of these was Brunanburh's possible connection to the Axe Valley which was essentially an ecclesiastic tradition originally that later became common folklore in the area. The ecclesiastic origin was namely that the Minster, founded in Aethelstan's time, and the various monastic settlements that sprang up in its vicinity, all maintained that the king had decreed the Danish noblemen who fell in the battle be buried in the Minster's grounds. Personally I am not aware of any placenames in the district which could conceivably be construed as forms of Brunanburh, and tend to side with those who place that district further north. The Annals of Clonmacnoise incidentally, which also refer to the battle, call it Othluinn. This is another "lost" location but its translation from Irish would appear to indicate an area near the Solway Firth, "luinn/lynn" indicating a torrent and "oth" indicating a plain in the area. The Solway Firth, and especially its tidal bore area, matches this loose description rather better than other candidates (even today fishing trawlers must be wary of this area where within a nine hour draw the sea level can rise or fall by as much as eight meters). This huge in and outrushing of estuary water is the original application too of the English word "torrent" and it would appear from the Annals that an Irish/Danish and Scottish alliance would not only choose this location to join up and launch an invasion but also use the torrent to speed the process.

Which is a long way from Axminster. But yet I would not eliminate Axminster completely from the picture either. It was reported by Malmesbury that for many succeeding generations this conflict between Aethelstan and the Great Alliance of enemies was referred to not as a battle but as "the great war", a term which would indicate a more protracted affair than the ASC intimates. Also, there had already been on two occasions . once in Alfred's time and again in Aethelstan's - an attempt by the Danes "locked" into the east and north-east to break out of these confines and launch a maritime excursion round the coast to Exmouth and thereby attack "England" from two flanks. This could well have been a tactic again employed during this "great war", and it is noticeable that the local tradition in Axminster mentions "Danish princes" only and not noblemen from any of the other elements in the alliance.

So, while Brunanburh might well have been in the Wirral, Cumbria or even Northumbria, and while it might well have been the final decisive encounter, it also could simply have been the last of a series of engagements some of which might even have been greater in terms of importance and casualties than the final one. Yet, like Waterloo or Aughrim in other conflicts, as the final battle in such a decisive war it grew to supersede the others as a reference to the whole episode. It could well be that everywhere which has a tradition associating itself with Brunanburh may indeed have more than a grain of truth in its claim and the key to identifying that truth is not a simplistic attempt to associate the battle's name etymologically to the district but to attempt to work out the likely course of a protracted war which, when one thinks about it, involved in terms of allegiance if not participation almost every bit of territory comprising now the country of England, much of southern Scotland and even eastern and northern Ireland.

You can probably imagine therefore why such postulating and supposition might present an infinitely more fascinating historical inquiry than that which carpets provide - hence my friend's enthusiasm and delight in pursuing it via an Irish angle as well. Not an amour of mine by the way (I was employing some nostalgic wishful thinking I confess) but definitely a kindred spirit and I do indeed miss her (she was older than me by some years, which probably helped keep things in the right perspective in that respect - thankfully, since we both derived so much enjoyment from our joint sleuthing at the time).

Hope the book is coming on well - I know from experience how such enterprises, from writing to publishing, can be 1% application and 99% total frustration in their execution.

Hi Marc

Have been in Morocco, hence the delay in responding and also the book has not progressed that far. I am not sure as to whether it will ever be published but am writing it for my own interest. It is quite rare to have a topic of such historical importance as the pipeline and storage system that no one else has written a history about. I do have quite a few people reading it already as I put the chapters out. I am now up to about 1980 so getting reasonably near the end although I have yet to make up my mind how I will draw it to a close.

Paul Hill in his book on Athelstan states that the basis for Axminster as a possible site is that Camden says that there were tombs there of Saxon nobles killed at the battle, but 2 Saxon princes were also buried at Malmesbury after the battle. John Herman Merivale in his 19th C poem Devon’s Poly-Oblion identifies Axminster as the site. Also Athelstan had attacked the west Welsh earlier.

Agree that Viking fleets had appeared on the English south coast before. For example according to the ASC 838 ‘a great raiding ship-army came to Cornwall’ but not I believe Norse-Irish with an army of Scots and Strathclyde Britons in tow. Not quite as important as either Brunanburh or Clontarf but I like to point out what I belive is the site of Aethelwulf’s, Athelstan’s grandfather, greatest victory over the Vikings at Aclea in 851 ‘the greatest slaughter of a heathen raiding-army that we have heard tell of up to the present day’. It is an equally uninspiring site close to the large former GLC Merstham estate and where the M15 and m23 meet. But is also on the Harrow prehistoric trackway (better known now as the Pilgrims’ Way) and there is an Oakley wood and also an Oakley house there (Aclea becomes Oakley in modern English not Ockley near Dorking which tends to be the favoured site). There is also a Battlebridge lane near by, a very unusual street name, and a local tradition of a victory over the Vikings.

‘The Battle of Brunanburh – A casebook’ published in 2011 dates the Annals of Clonmacnoise’ to quite late; it is No 52 of 53 listed sources for the battle in chronological order dating it to 1627 when the lost Irish Gaelic manuscript was translated into English. In the notes on the source the suggestion by Nicholas Higham is that the meaning of othlyn is not clear as the Irish Gaelic original form may have been corrupted. However, they suggest the plains of Lyne or Lyme which would fit in well with the Bromborough site. Bromborough is the only place in either England or Scotland that can definitely be derived from Brunanburh. The Wirral Peninsula was also an area with a large Norse population and likely to support the Anlaf Guthfrithson. It is also suggested that ‘Dingemere’ by Cavill, Harding and Jesch in ‘Revisiting Dingesmere’ that it refers to the wetland at Heswell on the Wirral.

I can see no suggestion in any of the accounts of Athelstan invading ‘Scotland’ in 937 as he did in 934. Simeon of Durham states that Athelstan invaded Scotland in 934 but does not do so in 937 when he says that Athelstan put to flight King Olaf. William of Malmesbury’s account clearly implies an invasion of Athelstan’s territory ‘now the fierce savagery of the north encroaches on our land’. In the poem in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle it says ‘they defend, land, treasure and homes’. In a Royal grant to Worcester Athelstan refers to ‘Anlaf (Olaf) who tried to deprive me of both life and realm’. One Welsh poet, Armes Pryn, writes joyfully of the English being driven back into the sea.

Paul Cavill in ‘The Place-Names Debate’ forming a chapter in the Bunanburh book claims that Bromborogh ‘fits the philogical, topographical, and sociological descriptors given in the names; and fits these descriptors in a way that none of the other proposed sites do.’ Michael Livingston, in his introduction to the 2011 book, declares that ‘the case for Bromborough is currently so firm that many scholars are engaged not with the question of whether Brunanburh occurred on the Wirral, but where on the peninsula it took place.’

Bromborough also gets a mention in my book as there were pipeline import and storage facilities there as there were on the other side of the Mersey at Dingle.

‘Anoche mate a un hombre en Brunanburh’
From the poem Brunanburh 937AD by Jorge Luis Borges.

Regards

Tim

I did not mean to infer that the Irish/Scots attacked the south coast. If I recall, the implication I remember reading was that the Danegeld Vikings might well have attacked Exmouth while the Irish & Co attacked simultaneously up north - and again the Wirral is a natural choice in that scenario too, it being "do-able" as a target both by naval contingents from over the Irish Sea and land contingents streaming down from Strathclyde.

Dating the Irish annals is tortuously difficult to do with any exactitude because of the way they were compiled, with bits being added in different locations at different times and being only set together and redacted as a unit late in the process, so late that it is conceivable some of those doing the compiling were learning Irish as a second or third language, being of Norman import or extraction. Interpreting some entries can also be sometimes just as difficult for the same reason as many of them actually went through three different languages (four if you count the odd Greek entry) before being accessible to English investigation. Some words defy translation altogether these days therefore as one cannot with any certainty say that they were originally Irish, Latin or Norman French to begin with. However Irish was by far the most common language used and a lot of the ambiguities can be ironed out through contextual comparison, so they're still remarkably legible for all that.

I still like the idea of Brunanburh being partly a euphemism for a broader conflict over a longer time. However, you're right. Even if that is the case then there still is, or was, a Brunanburh some place - and it would be lovely to know just where!

Hi Marc

I doubt if the site will ever be agreed. At one time a Scottish site was favoured. Someone appeared on the BBC site who had written a paper claiming to have identified the meaning of the Wendun reference. When Burne wrote 'More Battlefields of England' he dismissed Bromborough in 1 line. Wood and Hill favoured a Humber site too but Bromborough now seems to be the preferred site. I think the chances of archaeology ever confirming it are remote.

Given that following the death of Athelstan, the frontiers of the West Saxon kingdom were dramatically if temporarily rolled back, I would agree that Brunanburh must be seen in the context of a wider conflict.

regards

Tim

Battle of Aclea 851AD

‘The same year 350 ships came into the mouth of the Thames and stormed Canterbury and London and put to flight Beorhtwulf, king of Mercia with his army and then went over the Thames into Surrey and King Aethelwulf and his son Aethelbald with the army of Wessex fought against them at Aclea [Oak glade] and there made the greatest slaughter of a heathen raiding army that we have heard tell of up to this present day.’ Anglo-Saxon Chronicle
 
The first really serious Danish invasion of England, as distinct from raid, came, in 851.  As related in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle the Danish army took Canterbury and London, defeated the Mercian army, and advanced into Surrey, which had been ruled by Wessex since the battle of Ellendun in 825.  They were there confronted by Aethelwulf, king of Wessex and his eldest son Aethelbald.  According to the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle the Danes suffered their most significant defeat to date.

Aclea is one of the few battles that Surrey can claim and it has traditionally been identified with Ockley to the south of Dorking.  However, Aclea, which means Oak Glade, becomes Oakley in modern English not Ockley.  Now there are a number of Oakleys but, it was said, none in Surrey.  In fact there is one which is in Merstham, to the north of Redhill near the junction of the M23 and M25.  It is close to the route of the ‘Old Way’, the prehistoric trackway (later referred to as the ‘Pilgrims’ way’) which runs from the Kent coast into the heart of Wessex.  The modern North Downs Way follows basically the same route except that it tends to try to keep to the top of the downs whereas the Pilgrims Way was often at the foot of the downs.  In Merstham there is a Battlebridge Lane (there is only one other in the country) and a tradition involving a defeat of the Vikings.  The trackway would be a logical point for the two armies to have engaged each other and therefore it is reasonable to contend that this is where King Aethelwulf was to inflict this first major defeat on the Danes.  How significant the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle considered the victory to be can be seen from its statement that the battle of Aclea ‘made the greatest slaughter of a heathen raiding army that we have heard tell of up to this present day.’

Tim

That's interesting Tim. The small village of Ockley in Surrey is on the Roman road of Stane Street which linked London with Chichester (Noviomagnus) on the south coast, so it's not the most obvious route by which to approach Wessex although it does cut directly through the territories of the 'Southern' Saxons. But if the Danes were indeed advancing southwards from London along Stane Street, then from a military point of view I'd have thought a far better place for Aethelwulf to have confronted the invaders would have been just eight miles (barely a day's march) northwards, towards London, where Stane Street cuts through the North Downs via the constricted valley of the river Mole, with the steep slope of Box Hill on the east side and the high ridge of Mickleham Downs to the west. Provided Aethelwulf could have got there first, I'd have thought that the Mole Gap would have been a very good defensive site to hold firm, or even launch a surprise ambush, against the advancing Danes. A battle at Ockley however - unless the armies' encounter was almost accidental - makes little strategic sense to either side.

Thank you for your reply Meles.  I was aware that Stane Street passes through Ockley, together with the similarity to Oakley, is presumably the reason why the battle was thought at one time to have been there.  According to my rather ancient OS Britain in the Dark Ages, which cost me !7s 6d when I bought it, there are two other Roman roads that run to the east of Stane St and south from London heading for the south coast.  For the battle to have been fought at Oakley near Merstham then the Viking army would have advanced south along one of these before then moving westwards along the prehistoric trackway.  

The Mole valley gap is the location of the fictional Victorian battle of Dorking which led to the break up the British Empire.

I do not think that Aclea will ever attract the level of interest that has gone into attempting to locate Brunanburh 

regards

Tim

Tim of Aclea wrote:

The Mole valley gap is the location of the fictional Victorian battle of Dorking which led to the break up the British Empire.

Whilst there were several skirmishes in Surrey during the English Civil Wars, there has never been a big, set-piece, full-on, battle within the county. Nevertheless as you say, Surrey does host the critical final battle in G T Chesney's ficticious invasion and conquest of England, The Battle of Dorking: Reminiscences of a Volunteer' (publ. 1871). In this short novella, the defence of England - following a German amphibious landing at Worthing - comes to a conclusion at the strategic Mole Gap:

"Beyond the gap on the east (our left), and in continuation of our ridge, rose the chalk-hill again. The shoulder of this ridge overlooking the gap is called Box Hill, from the shrubbery of boxwood with which it was covered. Its sides were very steep, and the top of the ridge was covered with troops. The natural strength of our position was manifested at a glance, a high grassy ridge steep to the south, with a stream in front, and but little cover up the sides. It seemed made for a battle-field."

For 'armchair generals' such as myself, the Mole Gap does indeed look to be an excellent defensive site - "made for a battle-field", as Chesney puts it, as well as being stategically important for the wider defence of England - however I cannot recall any occasion when this has actually been put to the test?

MM

Surrey may be badly off for historic battles but it does very well on fictional ones.

This is from 'The Great War in England in 1897' written by William Le Queux and published in 1894.  I have an 5th edition from 1895.  It does refer to fighting in Dorking.

Our Regulars operating along the old Roman highway through Blindley Heath – where the invaders were making a desperate stand – and over to Lingfield, succeeded, after very hard fighting, in clearing the enemy off the railway embankment from Crowhurst along to South Park Farm, and following them up, annihilated them.

Gradually, just at sundown, a strong division of the enemy were outflanked at Godstone, and, refusing to lay down their arms, were simply swept out of existence, scarcely a single man escaping.  Thus forced back from, perhaps, the most vulnerable point in our defences, the main body of the enemy were then driven away upon Redhill, still fighting fiercely.  Over Redstone Hill, through Mead Vale, and across Reigate Park to the Heath, the enemy were shot down in hundreds by our Regulars; while our Volunteers, whose courage never deserted them, engaged the French in hand-to-hand encounters through the streets of Redhill and Reigate, as far as Underhill Park.

In Hartswood a company of the 4th East Surrey Rifles, under Major S.B. Wheaton V.D. were lying in ambush, when suddenly among the trees they caught glimpses of red, baggy, trousers, and scarlet, black-tasselled fezes, and a few seconds later they found that a large force of Zouaves were working through the wood.  A few moments elapsed, and the combat commenced.  The Algerians fought like demons, and with bullet and bayonet inflicted terrible punishment upon us; but as they emerged into the road preparatory to firing a volley into the thickets, they were surprised by a company of the 2nd Volunteer Battalion of the East Surrey Regiment, under Capt. Pott, who killed and wounded half their number, and took the remainder prisoners.

Gradually our Volunteer brigades occupying the long range of hills united with our Regulars still on the enemy’s right from Reigate to Crawley, and closed down upon the foe, slowly narrowing the sphere of their operations, and by degrees forcing them back due westward.  Russians and French, who had attacked Dorking, had by this time been defeated with heavy loss, and by dusk the main body had been thrown back to Newdigate, where in Reffold’s Copse one or two very sanguinary encounters occurred.  These, however, were not always in our favour, for the Civil Service Volunteers here sustained very heavy losses.  On the railway embankment, and on the road running along the crest of the hill to Dorking, the French made a stand, and there wrought frightful execution among our men with their machine guns.  Around Beare Green, Trout’s Farm, and behind the “White Hart” at Holmwood, the enemy rapidly brought their guns into play, and occupied such strong strategic positions that as night drew on it became evident that they intended to remain there until the morrow.

The defenders had but little cover, and consequently felt the withering fire of the French very severely.  The latter had entrenched themselves, and now in the darkness it was difficult for our men to discern their exact position.  Indeed, the situation of our forces became very serious and unsafe as night proceeded; but at length about ten o’clock, a strong force of British Regulars including the Sikhs and a detachment of Australians, swept along the road from Dorking, and came suddenly upon the French patrols.  These were slaughtered with little resistance, and almost before the enemy were aware of it, the whole position was completely surrounded.

Our men then used their field search-lights with very great advantage; for, as the enemy were driven out into the open, they were blinded by the glare, and fell an easy prey to British rifles; while the Frenchmen’s own machine guns were turned upon them with frightful effect, their battalions being literally mowed down by the awful hail of bullets.

The Battle of Redhill 1648
Given that Redhill, Surrey grew up as a railway town with a fairly short history, one could perhaps reasonable surmise that any battles of Redhill were more likely have been those involving teddy boys, mods and rockers, skinheads or the like.  However, in 1648 there occurred what has been described as the ‘Battle of Redhill’ and it formed a part (fairly small) of the war that was to lead to the trial and execution of Charles I.
In 1646 the first Civil War had ended with the defeat of the last Royalist army and King Charles I surrendered himself to the Scottish army that was allied to parliament and fighting against him.  The Scots promptly ‘sold Charles’ to the parliament in exchange for the back pay that parliament owed them and returned to Scotland.  Parliament now tried to negotiate with Charles, but the terms they offered him were so harsh that it was no surprise that Charles turned them down.  
In 1647 the New Model Army commander Sir Tom Fairfax sent a troop of cavalry to secure the king and then he and his two subordinates Oliver Cromwell and Henry Ireton tried to negotiate a peace with him.  The terms they offered Charles were so generous that his chief advisor urged him to settle.  Charles, however, also turned these down as he had another plan.  Pro royalist aristocrats had recently taken power in Scotland and he signed a secret treaty with them under which a Scottish army would invade England in 1648 and restore him to power.  Charles knew that the Scottish army would probably be defeated by the full strength of the New Model Army.  He therefore also arranged for his supports in the South-East and elsewhere to stage Royalist risings to distract part of the army and this is where Redhill or the ‘Redd or Red Hill’ came in.
In the Summer of 1648 there were large scale royalist risings in Kent and Essex which were dealt with by Fairfax and Ireton and in South Wales which was put down by Cromwell.  In Surrey on 5th July the royalist earl of Holland and duke of Buckingham raised 500 men and marched to occupy Reigate and its castle.  They also placed an outpost on the Red Hill, what is now referred to as Redhill Common.  The royalists on the Red Hill were attached and defeated by a troop of New Model Army cavalry under the command of a Major Audeley.  It was this skirmish that Robert Phillips in his 1885 book, published in Redhill, was to refer to as ‘the battle of Redhill’.  
The following morning, on hearing of the defeat and that Audeley had been reinforced, the royalists decided to retreat in the direction of Kingston.  They were overtaken and defeated in skirmishes at Ewell and again at Kingston, which ended the Surrey revolt.  Afterwards Parliament decided to demolish the Reigate castle, which was already in a somewhat derelict state.  The other royalist revolts were similarly defeated with the remnant holding out in Colchester which was besieged by Fairfax and Ireton.  The war came to an end when in August Cromwell, despite being outnumber two to one, annihilated the Scottish army which had caused widespread devastation in the north of England.  
With the war over, Cromwell and Ireton decided that it was pointless to negotiate with the king as he could not be trusted.  They first gained control of parliament and then put Charles on trial which was unprecedented in English history.  Edward II, Richard II, Henry VI and Edward VI had all been murdered ‘behind closed doors’ but to put a king openly on trial for crimes against his people was unprecedented, not just in England but in Europe.  Fairfax, the army commander who was an aristocrat, took no part in the trial but neither did he speak out.  If he had then, given his standing in the country, it is hard to see how the trial could have continued.  However, he kept silent and continued as army commander; and Charles execution was duly noted by the vicar of Reigate in the parish register.  ‘January 30th [1649] This day King Charles was put to death by separating his royall head from his shoulders’. 

Redhill has a Cromwell Road, Fairfax Avenue and Holland Close (Holland was executed for his part in the revolt).

The battle of Maston Moor 1644 is as far as I am aware a battlefield where there is little dispute about where it was fought and by whom.  

However, there is the question as to why did Prince Rupert fight Maston Moor immediately after relieving York.  It is reasonable to think that it was not just because of the order from his uncle, even though it commanded him both to relieve York and defeat the allied armies.  Rupert could see that the Royalists were losing the war and relieving York on its own was not going to change that.  He needed to defeat the allied armies and he felt that he could do it by striking quickly, catching the allies off balance.  However, he was undone by the failure of Newcastle and Eythin to get their troops out of York and into battle.  Even then it should not be forgotten how close the Royalists came to victory.  If Byron had timed his charge as Goring did then it could have been the Ironsides and David Leslie’s Scots driven from the field and the allied soldiers dying in droves.  On such small things can defeat and victory hang.  Also the allied army would never have won such a crushing victory without Cromwell’s Ironsides.  They proved themselves capable of charging, charging and charging again.  David Leslie declared them to be the best cavalry in Europe.  Six years later Leslie was to be on the receiving end of a devastating charge from the Ironsides.  Prince Rupert, apart from the notes in his diary, never talked or wrote about his defeat.  However, he was said to have carried that order from his uncle with him until his dying day.
 
‘If York be lost I shall esteem my crown little less’ part of an order from King Charles to Prince Rupert commanding him to relieve York.

“Why, then, before God you are undone, for upon this peremptory order he [Prince Rupert] will fight, whatever comes on’t.” Lord Culpeper to King Charles upon reading a copy of the order.

Tim