Anglo-Saxon Military
Encyclopedia
Anglo-Saxon military organization is difficult to analyze because there are many conflicting records and opinions as to the precise occurrences and procedures. Anglo-Saxon England was known for its tumultuous nature and the constant presence of outside threats and dangers made it necessary for a solid military to constantly be in place. However in spite of this by the 10th century the Saxon kingdom of England was perhaps the best ordered state in Europe with a highly efficient administration that had a solid currency and could raise taxes to support a military establishment. Even though there is some controversy as to the accurate forms of military organization, some aspects can be deduced from the records that have been preserved.
The period can however be split into two, before settlement, AD 400 to AD 600, and the settlement period when the Saxons had established organized kingdoms, AD 600 to AD 1066.
or a modern army. There were three classes of warrior.
The Gedriht were the personal followers of the chief and were sworn to die with him. There would have been few of them in a warband. They would have been well armed and the majority would have worn a helmet and chainmail
armour. The main weapon was the Gar. This was an 2.5 m long spear with an ash shaft (Old English, gar = ash) Many would have carried long slashing swords.
The second group were the Geoguth, or young warriors. They would have formed the bulk of the warband and would have carried a shield, spear, and Seax
(a single edged dagger or short sword). Few would have had helmets or defensive armour.
The Duguth, or old warriors, appear later in this period. They would have carried the same equipment as the geoguth and served mainly to provide a stabilising element in battle.
In addition there would have been skirmishers armed with either a bow or sling.
. This suggests that they fought in open order. Later the shield was enlarged and was up to 1 m across. The warband then fought in close order. This required a reasonable level of training and discipline. This style of fighting had a long history. It was essentially the same system used by the Greeks and Spartans
before the advent of the Macedonian phalanx
.
The use of the horse in battle is very unclear and probably only the gedriht would have had them. However horses at this period were small and would have had to be battle trained. They could have been a logistical nightmare. On balance the sources indicate that the Saxons fielded a balanced and effective infantry army. It seems likely that horses would have been used either for scouting or transport.
It is not clear how large armies were, the Saxons themselves described anything more than thirty warriors as an army. Interestingly this would have been about same number as a ships crew. The general view is that army would have been made up of a number of warbands under a senior chief or .
The organisation undergoes considerable changes becoming essentially more feudal. The Gedriht become a more organised household guard and also provode a core of military specialists. Individual Earls also would have had their own household troops. There is also a new class of lord the Thegn
. These men were roughly the equivalent of the later Norman Baron. They held land from the king and were responsible for raising the fyrd in their area and leading them into battle. The richer thegns would also have had their own household troops. The major innovation is however in the organisation of the Fyrd. This in the post Alfred period is called up in groups either to man the Burgh
s [Each burgh had a manpower level calculated on the length of wall] or to serve in the field army. By this process a Saxon army could remain in the field all year as there are always enough men at home producing food and goods. The army was thus significantly larger than in the early period. It may not however have been as well trained or effective as in the early period.
Weapons and equipment remained broadly the same. Most of the household troops would have had swords and worn helmets and chain mail. Most of the Fyrd would have had helmets but would have still carried the large shield and heavy spear. The only addition would have the Dane Axe. This required a great deal of training and was only used by household troops.
battles are reported in many texts from the period, though it is also written. Anglo-Saxon military organization is difficult to analyze.
The combat strength of the Anglo-Saxon army is another issue which cannot be agreed upon by scholars. Some believe that the army was weak and only used infantry as a means of defense and battle; whereas others believe that the army was much more powerful, employing both infantry and cavalry. The former argument suggests that the infantry was great but did not have very much power and that the Anglo-Saxons did not carry many strong weapons, but they did have archers as their early literature relates.
This is clearly not a valid argument. The early Saxon armies were very formidable indeed, specializing in high-intensity close combat. The large shield was an offensive weapon as well as defensive. In the later period the Saxons adopted the Danish battle axe. This had a 1.3 m shaft and could decapitate a horse or break up an opposing shield wall
.
There was thus no cavalry in western Europe capable of breaking a well ordered Saxon phalanx. This was demonstrated at Hastings when the Normans, who probably were the best cavalry of the period tried all day.
To judge the effectiveness of any military formation one first needs to determine what was its function The early Saxon armies were aggressive small raiding units that could be quickly combined in larger unit to take and land and goods. The later army's function was defensive and was the military expression of an organised state. It not only depended on the raising manpower through the fyrd but on a network of burghs that provided supply bases and mustering points. It was this system that allowed Alfed and his successors to conquer England and for Harold to move his army rapidly against the Danes and defeat them at Stamford Bridge
then move elements 250 miles south to Hastings.
There are some battles in which scholars generally agree on which tactics and methods were used. The Battle of Hastings
, in 1066, demonstrates some interesting military tactics. At Hastings, the soldiers were organized in such a fashion that the best soldiers were in the front line, and the less adequate fighters in the following lines. They formed a tightly packed shield wall with a spear projecting from it. Protecting the areas behind and to the side were archers and slingers. The Bayeux tapistry also shows armoured Saxon warriors using the long handled Danish axe. Either they stood in front of the shield wall or the wall opened to let them through. Though this formation has been criticised it was highly effective. It provided reasonable cover from missile weapons and was capable of resisting cavalry. It also needs to be remembered that all the Saxons needed to do was to hold the position and the Normans would then be penned into a small area and with no way of feeding themselves or their horses would have had to retreat.
It was in fact rather effective at repelling the Norman Cavalry and it was only the death of Harold and his brothers probably at the beginning of the battle that caused the Saxon command system to ultimately fail and the battle to be lost. This strategy was also used in the battle of Sherston
in 1016, only with a slight difference. Instead of simply standing in a solitary position, the army moved to the opposing line as a large solid group. They moved very slowly and managed to maintain their formation while advancing on the enemy. This tactic was further developed and used in the crusades. The same procedure would take place, however at an eventual point in the advance; a hole would open in the wall of soldiers to allow a charge of cavalry to attack the opposition. Military tactics did develop gradually throughout the Anglo-Saxon period. Though there is still much debate as to how efficient the soldiers and the fighting was, it is clear that as the ages progressed, so to did the power and intelligence of the army.
The period can however be split into two, before settlement, AD 400 to AD 600, and the settlement period when the Saxons had established organized kingdoms, AD 600 to AD 1066.
Military organization in the pre settlement period
The Saxons were organized into warbands led by a chief. The warriors comprising the warband were professional soldiers though perhaps without the discipline of the RomansRoman army
The Roman army is the generic term for the terrestrial armed forces deployed by the kingdom of Rome , the Roman Republic , the Roman Empire and its successor, the Byzantine empire...
or a modern army. There were three classes of warrior.
The Gedriht were the personal followers of the chief and were sworn to die with him. There would have been few of them in a warband. They would have been well armed and the majority would have worn a helmet and chainmail
Chainmail
Mail is a type of armour consisting of small metal rings linked together in a pattern to form a mesh.-History:Mail was a highly successful type of armour and was used by nearly every metalworking culture....
armour. The main weapon was the Gar. This was an 2.5 m long spear with an ash shaft (Old English, gar = ash) Many would have carried long slashing swords.
The second group were the Geoguth, or young warriors. They would have formed the bulk of the warband and would have carried a shield, spear, and Seax
Seax
Seax in Old English means knife or cutting tool. The name of the roofer's tool, the zax, is a development from this word...
(a single edged dagger or short sword). Few would have had helmets or defensive armour.
The Duguth, or old warriors, appear later in this period. They would have carried the same equipment as the geoguth and served mainly to provide a stabilising element in battle.
In addition there would have been skirmishers armed with either a bow or sling.
Method of fighting and army composition
This appears to have changed over this period. At the beginning the shield was small, more like a bucklerBuckler
A buckler is a small shield, 15 to 45 cm in diameter, gripped in the fist; it was generally used as a companion weapon in hand-to-hand combat during the Medieval and Renaissance, as its size made it poor protection against missile weapons but useful in deflecting the blow of...
. This suggests that they fought in open order. Later the shield was enlarged and was up to 1 m across. The warband then fought in close order. This required a reasonable level of training and discipline. This style of fighting had a long history. It was essentially the same system used by the Greeks and Spartans
Spartan Army
The Spartan army was the military force of Sparta, one of the leading city-states of ancient Greece. The army stood at the centre of the Spartan state, whose citizens' primary obligation was to be good soldiers. Subject to military drill from infancy, the Spartans were one of the most feared...
before the advent of the Macedonian phalanx
Macedonian phalanx
The Macedonian phalanx is an infantry formation developed by Philip II and used by his son Alexander the Great to conquer the Persian Empire and other armies...
.
The use of the horse in battle is very unclear and probably only the gedriht would have had them. However horses at this period were small and would have had to be battle trained. They could have been a logistical nightmare. On balance the sources indicate that the Saxons fielded a balanced and effective infantry army. It seems likely that horses would have been used either for scouting or transport.
It is not clear how large armies were, the Saxons themselves described anything more than thirty warriors as an army. Interestingly this would have been about same number as a ships crew. The general view is that army would have been made up of a number of warbands under a senior chief or .
Settlement Period
Thegn
The term thegn , from OE þegn, ðegn "servant, attendant, retainer", is commonly used to describe either an aristocratic retainer of a king or nobleman in Anglo-Saxon England, or as a class term, the majority of the aristocracy below the ranks of ealdormen and high-reeves...
. These men were roughly the equivalent of the later Norman Baron. They held land from the king and were responsible for raising the fyrd in their area and leading them into battle. The richer thegns would also have had their own household troops. The major innovation is however in the organisation of the Fyrd. This in the post Alfred period is called up in groups either to man the Burgh
Burgh
A burgh was an autonomous corporate entity in Scotland and Northern England, usually a town. This type of administrative division existed from the 12th century, when King David I created the first royal burghs. Burgh status was broadly analogous to borough status, found in the rest of the United...
s [Each burgh had a manpower level calculated on the length of wall] or to serve in the field army. By this process a Saxon army could remain in the field all year as there are always enough men at home producing food and goods. The army was thus significantly larger than in the early period. It may not however have been as well trained or effective as in the early period.
Weapons and equipment remained broadly the same. Most of the household troops would have had swords and worn helmets and chain mail. Most of the Fyrd would have had helmets but would have still carried the large shield and heavy spear. The only addition would have the Dane Axe. This required a great deal of training and was only used by household troops.
Tactics and strategies
Anglo-Saxon land battle tactics have also spawned much debate. The conflict lies in how the armies fought. Some historians believe that horses were used, though most argue that the battles took place on foot. InfantryInfantry
Infantrymen are soldiers who are specifically trained for the role of fighting on foot to engage the enemy face to face and have historically borne the brunt of the casualties of combat in wars. As the oldest branch of combat arms, they are the backbone of armies...
battles are reported in many texts from the period, though it is also written. Anglo-Saxon military organization is difficult to analyze.
The combat strength of the Anglo-Saxon army is another issue which cannot be agreed upon by scholars. Some believe that the army was weak and only used infantry as a means of defense and battle; whereas others believe that the army was much more powerful, employing both infantry and cavalry. The former argument suggests that the infantry was great but did not have very much power and that the Anglo-Saxons did not carry many strong weapons, but they did have archers as their early literature relates.
This is clearly not a valid argument. The early Saxon armies were very formidable indeed, specializing in high-intensity close combat. The large shield was an offensive weapon as well as defensive. In the later period the Saxons adopted the Danish battle axe. This had a 1.3 m shaft and could decapitate a horse or break up an opposing shield wall
Shield wall
The wall, is a military tactic that was common in many cultures in the Pre-Early Modern warfare age...
.
There was thus no cavalry in western Europe capable of breaking a well ordered Saxon phalanx. This was demonstrated at Hastings when the Normans, who probably were the best cavalry of the period tried all day.
To judge the effectiveness of any military formation one first needs to determine what was its function The early Saxon armies were aggressive small raiding units that could be quickly combined in larger unit to take and land and goods. The later army's function was defensive and was the military expression of an organised state. It not only depended on the raising manpower through the fyrd but on a network of burghs that provided supply bases and mustering points. It was this system that allowed Alfed and his successors to conquer England and for Harold to move his army rapidly against the Danes and defeat them at Stamford Bridge
Battle of Stamford Bridge
The Battle of Stamford Bridge took place at the village of Stamford Bridge, East Riding of Yorkshire in England on 25 September 1066, between an English army under King Harold Godwinson and an invading Norwegian force led by King Harald Hardrada of Norway and the English king's brother Tostig...
then move elements 250 miles south to Hastings.
There are some battles in which scholars generally agree on which tactics and methods were used. The Battle of Hastings
Battle of Hastings
The Battle of Hastings occurred on 14 October 1066 during the Norman conquest of England, between the Norman-French army of Duke William II of Normandy and the English army under King Harold II...
, in 1066, demonstrates some interesting military tactics. At Hastings, the soldiers were organized in such a fashion that the best soldiers were in the front line, and the less adequate fighters in the following lines. They formed a tightly packed shield wall with a spear projecting from it. Protecting the areas behind and to the side were archers and slingers. The Bayeux tapistry also shows armoured Saxon warriors using the long handled Danish axe. Either they stood in front of the shield wall or the wall opened to let them through. Though this formation has been criticised it was highly effective. It provided reasonable cover from missile weapons and was capable of resisting cavalry. It also needs to be remembered that all the Saxons needed to do was to hold the position and the Normans would then be penned into a small area and with no way of feeding themselves or their horses would have had to retreat.
It was in fact rather effective at repelling the Norman Cavalry and it was only the death of Harold and his brothers probably at the beginning of the battle that caused the Saxon command system to ultimately fail and the battle to be lost. This strategy was also used in the battle of Sherston
Sherston, Wiltshire
Sherston is a village approximately 5 miles to the west of Malmesbury in the English county of Wiltshire. The population in 2001 was 1418 .- History :...
in 1016, only with a slight difference. Instead of simply standing in a solitary position, the army moved to the opposing line as a large solid group. They moved very slowly and managed to maintain their formation while advancing on the enemy. This tactic was further developed and used in the crusades. The same procedure would take place, however at an eventual point in the advance; a hole would open in the wall of soldiers to allow a charge of cavalry to attack the opposition. Military tactics did develop gradually throughout the Anglo-Saxon period. Though there is still much debate as to how efficient the soldiers and the fighting was, it is clear that as the ages progressed, so to did the power and intelligence of the army.