Talk:Battle of Stamford Bridge

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The phrase "English" seems anachronistic[edit]

It seems like referring to the Anglo-Saxons as "the English" is an anachronism, and one that has some nationalist undercurrents. For instance, they would not have called them selves the English, or spoken modern English, and there were plenty of Danes from earlier invasions/migrations who lived in what is now England (are they not English as well, if the Saxons at this time were?) and people descended from the Normans are undoubtedly "English" as well. So shouldn't it read "Anglo-Saxon" where it currently reads "English"? (talk) 21:06, 29 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Discussed at some length in the Hastings talk page - [1] Ian Dalziel (talk) 11:34, 30 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
By this point there is compelling evidence they referred to themselves as English, though it would certainly have been spelt different. Alooulla (talk) 15:14, 23 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Source of Harold quote[edit]

Anonymous user, what is the source of the quote? From which historicial record or chronicler did it originate, and what date? Quotational dialouges from the 11th century are rare, and this one reads like fiction. My guess is it is later embelishment that has turned into popular legend. I may be wrong, but without attribution, it needs to be verified. We also have an ongoing problem with anonymous users intentionally inserting false information as a game. Please do not revert a 3rd time without addressing the source of the quote. Thanks!! Stbalbach 15:57, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)

It's probably a popularized & garbled version of this passage from Heimskringla[2]

The earl replies, "This is something different from the enmity and scorn he offered last winter; and if this had been offered then it would have saved many a man's life who now is dead, and it would have been better for the kingdom of England. But if I accept of this offer, what will he give King Harald Sigurdson for his trouble?"
The horseman replied, "He has also spoken of this; and will give him seven feet of English ground, or as much more as he may be taller than other men."

It's a fairly well known quote I think, so it perhaps deserve mention on that accord Fornadan 23:46, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

In the proper context that it is 1) from a Norse saga 2) a secondary source 100s of years after the fact. The "moral of the story" gives it a mythological feel, than of a neutral historical account of what actually happened or was said. Stbalbach 01:04, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)

You guys can still put it in, you just need to mention that it existed only in Snorri's imagination. Augustulus 01:36, 26 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Source of naked and bathing information[edit]

What is the source of the "naked and bathing, ..." information. This sounds like fictional detail and is not present in the sources I have checked (Jones, History of the Vikings, Stenton, Anglo-Saxon England, etc). Snorri in his historical fiction has the Norwegian army moving toward Stamford Bridge when they sight the English army and makes no mention of the although he does say the Norwegians were without their Byrnies, bringing only helmets, shields, spears and swords. If (when) this information is restored, please include source information. Thanks. WPB

WikiProject class rating[edit]

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 09:00, 10 November 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Harald Hardråde's claim[edit]

It should be mentioned that king Harald of Norway had a claim for the English throne, based on the treaty between the kings of Norway and Denmark after the death of king Knut (Canute). — Linkomfod (talk) 20:04, 22 January 2009 (UTC) The Saxon Chronicle was written mainly by King Alfred's Spin doctor Asser, who was empolyed specifically to glorify Alfred and his hot headed family.If you read these accounts you cannot help but realise that they are consistently repetitive with differing battle results.Alfred always defeats a vast army of Danes and afterwards the Danes retain 'retain the field'The chronology is blown to pieces and they omit any reference to the Greatest of all the Kings, that being King Offa the truly GREAT.The time factor, the ability to collect an Army together and march to Yorkshire, feeding yourselves on the way across open country crossing rivers and obstacles then defeating the mighty Danes is a load of utter codswallop. For one thing you could walk ocross the river at Stamford bridge without getting yor knees wet.No one can find any debris in that area or close to it. The 300 ships at Riccall would be similar to 300 aircraft carriers in the thames.Each Viking ship required to be manned by 120 men, sails were only of use use in open sea or at certain times. 300 x 120 = 36000 men According to this story they slew these 36000 battle hardened warriors after marching 300 miles but were held up one warrior on his own. They couldn't cross the bridge but they had a boat.After the bloody slaughter they allowed Tostig to leave peaceably with three ships that were at Riccall near Selby. I would love to have seen 300 ships in the river at Riccall, it would have been better than Pericles and Darius.The facts are that they went on a wild goose chase set up by William the Bastard.No battle took place, they had to save face, The story belongs to the Oxford History of Liars along with Piltdown man, the White horse, Crop circles and Hitler Diaries. They wouudn't know the truth if it was hanging on the end of their noses. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 01:57, 24 January 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Re the above: in 1066 the River Derwent would have been very much larger than it is today, because it's flow has been reduced by large-scale water abstraction; moreover river levels have been controlled by a number of cut-off channels (such as the New Cut near Scarborough), to reduce the risk of flooding. Even so (as shown by the picture on the relevant Wikipedia page), it is quite a substantial river in its lower reaches, and would certainly have been enough to prevent an army from crossing - hence the very important bridge!

the game[edit]

shouldn't a metion be made to the online game 1066 where this is a battle?-- (talk) 17:58, 16 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Probably not. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 01:52, 9 April 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Geographically challenged?[edit]

"The invaders sailed up the Humber and burned Scarborough before advancing on York."

They may well have sailed up the Humber on their way to York, but unless they stopped at Hull and caught the train, there is no way they burned Scarborough during their excursion up the Humber. Scarborough is more than 50 miles from the mouth of the Humber and therefore must have been burned long before the invaders reached the Humber. (talk) 05:54, 18 August 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle is cited - that doesn't mention Scarborough as far as I can see. It also mentions the Ouse rather than the Humber in the context of Fulford. (Not that there's any way to get a longship into the Ouse without using the Humber, or the York and North Midland Railway as you suggest). Changed the text to match, anyway. -- Ian Dalziel (talk) 11:52, 4 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

End of the Viking Age?[edit]

The following assert does not correspond with the informations showed elsewhere (for instance at Viking Age):

The battle has traditionally been presented as symbolising the end of the Viking Age, although in fact major Scandinavian campaigns in Britain and Ireland occurred in the following decades, notably those of King Sweyn Estrithson of Denmark in 1069–70 and King Magnus Barefoot of Norway in 1098 and 1102–03.

It should either show some sources and then be copied on said page, or removed otherwise. I lack any further knowlegde to solve this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 02:51, 7 January 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Legend of the Norwegian Axeman[edit]

A vignette about the Norse axeman at the Stamford bridge battle also appears in King Harald's Saga [1] by Snorri Sturlasson, according to my recollection of my reading of that saga. I don't have access to it at the moment and so cannot confirm. Thomasee73 (talk) 15:00, 10 September 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]


  1. ^ King Harald's Saga

Semi-protected edit request on 9 February 2016[edit]

Search for 'guardingthe'. There should be a space between the two words. (talk) 17:17, 9 February 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes check.svg Done --allthefoxes (Talk) 18:26, 9 February 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 11 February 2016[edit]

Correct spelling "Hadrata's" as "Hardrata's" In the last line of the 2nd paragraph under Background. Gramaticus (talk) 02:05, 11 February 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

done. Ealdgyth - Talk 02:09, 11 February 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Assessment comment[edit]

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Battle of Stamford Bridge/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

  1. Inline references required
Keith D 22:15, 17 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Last edited at 22:15, 17 July 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 09:13, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Spears and bridges[edit]

Has anyone else noticed the similarity between the Battle of Boroughbridge#Battle: "was killed as he crossed the bridge by a pikeman hiding underneath, who thrust his spear up through the Earl's anus" and the Battle of Stamford Bridge#Battle: "when an English soldier floated under the bridge in a half-barrel and thrust his spear through the planks in the bridge, mortally wounding the axeman". The incidents may be 250 years apart, but only 30 miles distance. Is there a chance that a good story was being reused? Maybe just idle speculation - anyone else go any thoughts? (This question is duplicated at the other talk page) Martin of Sheffield (talk) 09:45, 16 March 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Marc Morris in The Norman Conquest chapter 11 29:46 (audible) points out this story was added to the chronicle on the 12th century. So entirely possible that this is an embellishment here or elsewhere in similar battle anecdotes Cgwhitehead (talk) 20:18, 4 April 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

historical marker[edit]

the section about "battle flats" might benefit from the fact there've put up a historical marker. Here it is in Google Maps Street View. (talk) 01:40, 3 March 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 16 April 2020[edit]

I would like to add a legacy section for the Battle of Stamford Bridge as it has been honoured by Swedish metal band Amon Amarth in a song titled “The Berserker At Stamford Bridge” of their 2019 album “Berserker” Jsharp666 (talk) 09:52, 16 April 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. - QuadColour (talk) 20:23, 16 April 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 12 June 2021[edit]

Manuscripts C, D and E of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle all mention Stamford Bridge by name. Manuscript C contains a passage which states "... came upon them beyond the bridge ....".[10] Add the following: Recent scholarship suggests the battle was fought west of the bridge at Halifax Meadow.

Cite error: There are <ref> tags on this page without content in them (see the help page). Blundell, Michael C. "A Mislocated Battlefield? Battle Flats: The Battle of Stamford Bridge, 1066." In Journal of Medieval Military History: Volume XIX, edited by FRANCE JOHN, DeVRIES KELLY, and ROGERS CLIFFORD J., 21-42. Woodbridge, Suffolk; Rochester, NY: Boydell & Brewer, 2021. Visitor1970 (talk) 10:20, 12 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Question: @Visitor1970: is this not covered by There are indications of a meadow on the west side of the river? Is your addition something that would be better off incorporated into that phrase, rather than standing alone? FDW777 (talk) 10:28, 12 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Fought the same year as Battle of Hastings?[edit]

just wondering if they were connected 🙂 (talk) 14:56, 21 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Read the Aftermath section? Ian Dalziel (talk) 19:36, 22 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]