• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

The scale of the raids, the density of the settlements and the degree of destruction have been greatly exaggerated'. Discuss this assessment of Viking activity in England in the ninth and tenth centuries

Extracts from this document...


'The scale of the raids, the density of the settlements and the degree of destruction have been greatly exaggerated'. Discuss this assessment of Viking activity in England in the ninth and tenth centuries. The entry in the northern version of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle for 793 tells how "In this year terrible omens appeared over the land of the Northumbrians...: these were immense lightning flashes and fiery dragons were seen flying in the sky". It goes onto describe how "the ravaging of heathen men miserably destroyed God's church in Lindisfarne through plundering and slaughter". These apocalyptic images helped to support a view of the Vikings, whose name means literally 'pirates', as a mass of (pagan) barbarian invaders who overwhelmed the British Isles. This interpretation of events, notably accepted by Frank Stenton in the 1940s, was (in)famously questioned by Peter Sawyer in an essay of 1958, who argued that the number of invaders, the density of the Danish settlements and, to a certain extent, the degree of Viking destruction had been greatly exaggerated. Sawyer's theory then led to a wave of 'post-revisionism' by historians, including Alfred Smyth, who claim Sawyer's argument is flawed and paints too rosy a picture of Viking activity in England. We must now set out to forge a middle ground between these two sides (for which, Patrick Wormald reminds us, it is necessary to move away from the 1066 And All That -style temptation to see the Vikings as either a 'good thing' or a 'bad thing'), which will helpfully aid our understanding as to what really happened. ...read more.


So can we draw any firm conclusions based on toponymic evidence? Patrick Wormald suggests that the place-names ending in -ton but with a Scandinavian prefix indicate that the first Viking settlers took over the best land (which would have already been settled by the English). The absence of English elements in the 2nd class of names (those ending in -thorp and -by) may show that Viking settlement was either sufficiently dense to obliterate the evidence of previous inhabitants or that it was on unoccupied land. This, he says, builds up a picture of a significant influx of Vikings. Wormald claims that there is no evidence for a difference between the 1st and 2nd class of names which sheds doubt on the idea recently suggested by Sawyer of a second wave of invader-settler colonisation. However, nor is there any real evidence that the names were formed at the same time. After all, we are heavily reliant on the Domesday Book of two-hundred years later. Nevertheless, the fact remains that there are a great many Scandinavian place-names in the area under the Danelaw. One could argue that whether these names were formed in the 9th, 10th or 11th Centuries is not so much an issue as the fact that they were formed at all. What is inescapable with regard to this is that, somehow, the Vikings managed to have a considerable impact on the English language. Gillian Fellows-Jensen perceives a major flaw in the Sawyer perception of England being invaded by a few aristocratic Danes is the 'vast number' of loan words that replaced 'perfectly adequate' English words for familiar objects and concepts (that is, not simply administrative terms). ...read more.


They managed an administration under the Danelaw, replaced the debased copper currency of Northumbria with a silver one, established towns, for example Dublin and maybe Norwich and gave old ones, such as York and London, a lease of life. Certainly, this boost to urbanisation and trade was inextricably linked with violence, raiding and the slave-trade (as Wormald points out), but it still had a positive effect in boosting development in the longer term. Also, without the Vikings, it might have taken a lot longer for England to become unified, but that is another matter. Nils Lund claimed it was misleading to arrange numbers, influence and permanent effects co-ordinately, the latter two being the premises, the first the conclusion drawn from these. Again and again we come back to the same question of whether it is possible for a small group of invaders to effect large-scale change (and, in relation to the Vikings, destruction). As we have seen, the Vikings had a massive and permanent impact on English society, partly positive, partly negative, but always significant. Hopefully it has been established that it is not necessary for there to have been thousands of invaders for this change to happen, at least in the first place. We need to remember to see the Viking period as fragmented: the early period being a great deal more destructive; the later period more constructive, however unless significant archaeological evidence comes to light, we cannot draw firm conclusions on the scale of the Viking raids or the density of settlement, or the timescale involved. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our University Degree Medieval History section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related University Degree Medieval History essays

  1. To what extent did witchcraft accusations reflect socio-economic tensions in early modern British communities?

    As well as being due to religious reasons, Hopkins had a lot more freedom than most others who accused and tried witches; this was mainly due to the civil war that had led to a slackening of local authority laws due to said authorities being weakened.

  2. What impelled the English to fight the Hundred Years War?

    Thus English knights' motive which impelled them to go to war was to earn a reputation which would make them more desirable at home. Glory is also shown to be a motive for the monarchy also as the Black Prince had to 'earn his spurs'_ at the battle of Crecy

  1. A Commentary on the Laws of King Alfred, 871-901 A.D.

    key policies in his reign to counter the threat to Christianity posed by the Vikings: an educational programme and the burghal system.14 Alfred would have seen the education of his subjects as a task which would please God and would be the right action in making the people more worthy.

  2. What impact did the Scandinavian settlement have on pre-Conquest society and economy in England?

    Many graves found to signify the settlement; these have contained pagan religious elements as well as Christian ones which suggest that they were probably Scandinavian graves.6 However as with regards to how the settlement was conducted, historians mainly have to use guess work, the Anglo-Saxon chronicle states that 'Halfdan shared

  1. To what degree was the Black Prince the epitome of the Age of Chivalry?

    accurate might not even have been the number of troops that were present in Limoges.5 Furthermore it was not un-chivalric in the nature of the siege and the subsequent 'massacre'. Limoges was a town that was under control of the Black Prince and they had rebelled, therefore common convention allowed him to go and take the city back.

  2. How seriously did people take claim that kings ruled with Gods blessing?

    churches dominance of kingship for its own subject gains.[8] As Pope Boniface VIII (c.1235-1303), in 1301, idealised the churches pre-eminence over independent kings by arguing that the church is only ?one body and one head, not two heads like a monster?,[9] highlighting the churches stance of being one dominating rule;

  1. To what extent was the English Invasion of Irelandan accident, unforeseen and unplanned?

    would put considerable pressure on the King?s trust in him.[25] This lack of trust was exasperated when, with the death of Diarmait in 1171, Strongbow continued his campaign of expansion, even when the Irish refused to acknowledge him as king.[26] Moreover, Strongbow was the lord of Dublin and as such,

  2. The One Hundred Years War

    They proved to be the most effective army Europe had seen since the Romans? (Invicta Media, 2003). The second disaster for the French was losing their best knights at Crecy. In 1346, the English were debilitated by illness and were withdrawing to the channel harbors.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work