In 978, Æthelred, aged about ten, succeeded to the English throne, following the murder (by Æthelred's retainers) of his half brother, St.Edward 'the Martyr'. Æthelred is remembered as 'the Unready'. The name Æthelred is a compound of 'æthel' and 'ræd' - meaning 'noble counsel'. 'Unræd' (of which 'unready' is a corruption) is a pun on the name Æthelred, and means, literally, 'no counsel' - suggesting incompetence. It will become apparent that the soubriquet was fully justified.
William of Malmesbury: "Dunstan [Archbishop of Canterbury], indeed, had foretold his worthlessness, having discovered it by a very filthy token: for, when quite an infant, the bishops standing round, as he was immersed in the baptismal font, he defiled the sacraments by a natural evacuation, at which Dunstan, being extremely angered, exclaimed, "By God and his mother, this will be a sorry fellow!" I have read that when he was ten years of age, hearing it noised abroad that his brother was killed, he so irritated his furious mother by his weeping, that, not having a whip at hand, she beat the little innocent with some candles she had snatched up; nor did she desist till herself bedewed him, nearly lifeless, with her tears. On this account he dreaded candles, during the rest of his life, to such a degree that he would never suffer the light of them to be brought into his presence."
The early 980s saw a spate of Viking attacks. The 'Anglo-Saxon Chronicle' (MS C):
980 "... Southampton was plundered by a pirate-army, and most of the population slain or imprisoned. And the same year was the Isle of Thanet overrun, and the county of Chester was plundered by a pirate-army of the North."
981 "In this year was St.Petroc's-stow [Padstow] plundered; and in the same year was much harm done everywhere by the sea-coast, both upon Devonshire and Wales [i.e. Cornwall]."
982 "In this year came up in Dorsetshire three ships of the pirates, and plundered in Portland."
In 983, Ealdorman Ælfhere of Mercia died, and was succeeded by his son, Ælfric. In 985, Ælfric was, presumably for rebellion (the reasons are unspecified), sent into exile. The 'Anglo-Saxon Chronicle' (MS C,D,E) annal for the following year (986) notes:
"This year the king invaded the bishopric of Rochester ..."
William of Malmesbury:
"A secret enmity between the king and the bishop of Rochester had arisen from some unknown cause, in consequence of which he led an army against that city. It was signified to him by the archbishop [i.e. Archbishop Dunstan, of Canterbury], that he should desist from his fury, and not irritate St.Andrew, under whose guardianship that bishopric was; for as he was ever ready to pardon, so was he equally formidable to avenge. The bare message being held in contempt, he graced the intimation with money, and sent him a hundred pounds, that thus bought off he would raise the siege and retire. Taking the money, he sounded a retreat and dismissed his army."
Florence of Worcester says that, "seeing it would be difficult to reduce" Rochester, Æthelred "retired in wrath, and laid waste the lands of St.Andrew the apostle". A charter from Easter of 998 (S893) records that Æthelred compensated St.Andrew's, Rochester, to the tune of six sulungs at Bromley, with swine-pastures in the Weald. He claims to have acted "not so much in cruelty as ignorance", and that he was incited by one Æthelsige. Florence of Worcester, in his record of the year 988, notes:
"Wecedport [Watchet] was pillaged by the Danish pirates, who also slew a thegn of Devonshire named Goda, Strenwold, a very brave soldier, and several others. However, the loss was greatest on the side of the Danes, and the English remained masters of the carnage."
Dunstan, Archbishop of Canterbury, died in 988. After only one year and three months in office, his successor, Æthelgar, also died, and was replaced by Sigeric.
It seems likely that the Viking raiders were making use of ports in Normandy. In 990, relations between England and Normandy had become sufficiently hostile to be noticed by Pope John XV (985-996). As a result of Pope John's intervention, Æthelred and Duke Richard agreed terms, and a treaty was signed, by their representatives, in Rouen, on 1st March 991. Nevertheless, Florence of Worcester begins his entry for 991:
"In this year the Danes, under the command of Justin and Guthmund, the son of Stercan, laid waste Ipswich. Byrthnoth [Byrhtnoth], the bold ealdorman of the East Saxons, shortly afterwards fought a battle against them near Maldon; but, after great slaughter on both sides, the ealdorman fell, so the Danish fortune prevailed."
Byrhtnoth's defeat (which can be dated to the 10th or 11th of August) was commemorated in a famous heroic poem: The Battle of Maldon.
Florence of Worcester continues:
"Moreover in this year, first of all, and that by the advice of Siric [Sigeric], archbishop of Canterbury, and the ealdormen Aethelward [Æthelweard] and Alfric [Ælfric], a tribute of ten thousand pounds was paid to the Danes, as the price of their cessation from the frequent plunderings, burnings, and slaughters, which they used to make on the sea coast, and their concluding a lasting peace."
This tribute, raised by taxation (which later became known as 'Danegeld'), set a precedent, but failed to provide much of a respite. The next year (992) Æthelred assembled, in London, as large a naval force as he could muster. The fleet was despatched to intercept the Danes, however, one of the ealdormen in command, Ælfric of Hampshire, warned the Danes to be on their guard. In due course, the English fleet caught up with the Danes, and determined to attack them. On the eve of battle, Ælfric, and his men, defected to the Danish fleet - which made a run for it. The English gave chase - one Danish ship was captured, and its crew slaughtered. Later, the fleeing Danish fleet was accidentally encountered by part of the English fleet. Battle was joined and many Danes were killed. Ælfric's ship was captured, but he had managed to escape. The following year, Æthelred had Ælfric's son blinded. Also in 993, the Danes sacked Bamburgh and, entering the Humber, raided Lindsey, to the south, and Northumbria, to the north. A large English army was collected to give battle, but its leaders , "being Danes by the father's side", says Florence of Worcester "betrayed their men and were the first to flee". On the 8th September 994, a fleet of ninety-four Danish ships arrived at London. They were commanded by Olaf Tryggvason and Swein 'Forkbeard'.
Swein 'Forkbeard' was king of Denmark. His father, Harald Gormsson (known as 'Bluetooth'), in a runic inscription on a monument to his parents, declared himself to have: "won the whole of Denmark and Norway and turned the Danes to Christianity". There was opposition to Harald's imposition of Christianity, however, and, shortly before 988, Swein overthrew him. Olaf Tryggvason was great-grandson of Harald 'Fairhair', who, according to saga tradition, was the first king of a united Norway (though modern historians believe his kingdom was confined to the west coast).
The 'Anglo-Saxon Chronicle' (MS C,D,E) says that Olaf and Swein:
"... closely besieged the city, and would fain have set it on fire; but they sustained more harm and evil than they ever supposed that any citizens could inflict on them. The holy mother of God on that day in her mercy considered the citizens, and ridded them of their enemies. Thence they advanced, and wrought the greatest evil that ever any army could do, in burning and plundering and manslaughter, not only on the sea-coast in Essex, but in Kent and in Sussex and in Hampshire. Next they took horse, and rode as wide as they would, and committed unspeakable evil. Then resolved the king and his council to send to them, and offer them tribute and provision, on condition that they desisted from plunder. The terms they accepted; and the whole army came to Southampton, and there fixed their winter-quarters; where they were fed by all the subjects of the West-Saxon kingdom. And they were paid 16,000 pounds in money."
Presumably, Swein returned to Denmark. Æthelred sent Ealdorman Æthelweard and Bishop Ælfheah (of Winchester) to Olaf's ships. Hostages were left, to ensure Olaf's safety, and he was conducted "with great pomp" to meet Æthelred at Andover. Olaf, already a Christian, was confirmed, with Æthelred as his sponsor. Olaf was presented with gifts:
"In return Anlaf [Olaf] promised, as he also performed, that he never again would come in a hostile manner to England."
There exists a treaty between Æthelred and a Viking army, whose leaders were Olaf, Justin and Guthmund, son of Stegitan. The treaty ends by saying that 22,000 pounds, in gold and silver, were given to the Vikings to buy the peace. This treaty may date from 994, but, on balance, 991 actually seems more likely. Manuscript A of the 'Anglo-Saxon Chronicle' reports, alongside the year 993: "In this year came Unlaf [Olaf] with ninety-three ships to Folkestone, and ravaged there about, and then went thence to Sandwich, and so thence to Ipswich, and that all overran; and so to Maldon. And there Byrhtnoth the ealdorman came against them with his forces, and fought against them: and they there slew the ealdorman, and had possession of the place of carnage. And after that peace was made with them; and him the king afterwards received at the bishop's hands ..." There seems to be two possibilities. Firstly, that this annal is simply a conflation of the events of 991 (i.e. the battle of Maldon) and 994 (i.e. the raid of Olaf and Swein, and Olaf's confirmation). The second possibility is that the annal does genuinely belong to 991 (thereby, placing Olaf at the battle of Maldon) - the mention of Olaf's confirmation being a passing reference to 994. Also, the treaty mentions that it was negotiated by Archbishop Sigeric, Ealdorman Æthelweard and Ealdorman Ælfric. Olaf and Swein arrived at London on 8th September 994, but Sigeric died on 29th October 994, which seems to be far too short a period of time for the treaty to be arranged. At any rate, Olaf became king of Norway (Olaf I) in 995. He died at the naval battle of Svolder (c.1000). His opponents - Swein Forkbeard, Swedish king, Olaf 'Skötkonung' ('the Tax-king'), and the Norwegian, Eric, earl of Hlathir - divided up Norway amongst themselves.
There appears to have been a couple of years respite, but, in 997, the Viking onslaught re-commenced. The systematic assault of their "army" lasted for three years. English resistance was uncoordinated and ineffectual. The 'Anglo-Saxon Chronicle' (MS C,D,E):
997 "This year went the army about Devonshire into Severn-mouth, and equally plundered the people of Cornwall, North-Wales, and Devon. Then went they up at Watchet, and there much evil wrought in burning and manslaughter. Afterwards they coasted back about Penwithstert [Land's End] on the south side, and, turning into the mouth of the Tamar, went up till they came to Lydford, burning and slaying everything that they met. Moreover, Ordwulf's minster at Tavistock they burned to the ground, and brought to their ships incalculable plunder."
998 "This year coasted the army back eastward into the mouth of the Frome, and went up everywhere, as widely as they would, into Dorsetshire. Often was an [English] army collected against them; but, as soon as they were about to come together, then were they [the English army] ever through something or other put to flight, and their enemies always in the end had the victory. Another time they [the Danes] lay in the Isle of Wight, and fed themselves meanwhile from Hampshire and Sussex."
999 "This year came the army about again into the Thames, and went up thence along the Medway to Rochester; where the Kentish army came against them, and encountered them in a close engagement; but, alas! they too soon yielded and fled. The Danes therefore occupied the field of battle, and, taking horse, they rode as wide as they would, spoiling and overrunning nearly all West-Kent. Then the king with his council determined to proceed against them with sea and land forces; but as soon as the ships were ready, then arose delay from day to day, which harassed the miserable crew that lay on board; so that, always, the forwarder it should have been, the later it was, from one time to another, and they still suffered the army of their enemies to increase; and they [the English] continually retreated from the sea-coast, and they [the Danes] continually followed. Thus in the end these expeditions both by sea and land served no other purpose but to vex the people, to waste their treasure, and to strengthen their enemies."
In the summer of 1000, the Viking fleet went to Normandy. For reasons that are unrecorded, Æthelred:
"... went into Cumberland [i.e. Strathclyde], and nearly laid waste the whole of it ..."
An English fleet, which had been prevented from joining Æthelred ("by the violence of the wind" says Florence of Worcester), ravaged the Isle of Man. The 'Anglo-Saxon Chronicle' (MS A) documents, in some detail, the events of 1001, when the Vikings returned to southern England:
"... they advanced in one march as far as the town of Æthelingadene; where the people of Hampshire came against them, and fought with them. There was slain Æthelweard, high-reeve of the king, and Leofric of Whitchurch, and Leofwine, high-reeve of the king, and Wulfhere, a bishop's thegn, and Godwine of Worthy, son of Bishop Ælfsige; [of Winchester] and of all the men who were engaged with them eighty-one. Of the Danes there was slain a much greater number, though they remained in possession of the field of battle. Thence they proceeded westward, until they came into Devonshire; where Pallig came to meet them with the ships which he was able to collect; for he had shaken off his allegiance to King Æthelred, against all the vows of truth and fidelity which he had given him, as well as the presents which the king had bestowed on him in houses and gold and silver. And they burned Teignton, and also many other goodly manors that we cannot name; and then peace was there concluded with them. And they proceeded thence towards Exe-mouth, so that they marched at once till they came to Pinhoe; where Kola, high-reeve of the king, and Eadsige, reeve of the king, came against them with the army that they could collect....
"... a vast force of the people of Devon and of the people of Somerset ..." MS C,D,E
.... But they were there put to flight, and there were many slain, and the Danes had possession of the field of battle. And the next morning they burned the manor of Pinhoe, and of Clyst, and also many goodly manors that we cannot name. Then they returned eastward again, till they came to the Isle of Wight. The next morning they burned the manor of Waltham, and many other small villages ..."
MS C,D,E:
"... and there they roved about, even as they themselves would, and nothing withstood them: nor any fleet by sea durst meet them; nor land force either, went they ever so far up. Then was it in every wise a heavy time, because they never ceased from their evil doings."
Æthelred, again, decided to buy off the Vikings. The 'Anglo-Saxon Chronicle' (MS C,D,E) for 1002:
"This year the king and his council agreed that tribute should be given to the fleet, and peace made with them, with the provision that they should desist from their mischief. Then sent the king to the fleet Ealdorman Leofsige [of Essex], who at the king's word and his council made peace with them, on condition that they received food and tribute; which they accepted, and a tribute was paid of 24,000 pounds. In the meantime Ealdorman Leofsige slew Æfic, high-reeve of the king; and the king banished him from the land."
Two other events of 1002 would prove to have far reaching consequences for England. Firstly, Æthelred married Emma, sister of Duke Richard II, 'the Good', of Normandy (their father was Duke Richard I, 'the Fearless').
It cannot be assumed that the treaty, agreed in 991, between Æthelred and Richard I was still in force. Indeed, it is possible ("though on the whole unlikely", says Sir Frank Stenton, in 'Anglo-Saxon England') that the Viking force which crossed to Normandy, in the summer of 1000, peacefully overwintered there. Further, according to a story told by William of Jumièges, in the 'Gesta Normannorum Ducum' (Deeds of the Norman Dukes), Æthelred: "... although he was married to Emma the sister of Duke Richard, nevertheless fell out with the duke on a number of matters and was eager to bring harm and shame upon him ..." Æthelred despatched a large fleet to: "... put all Normandy to fire and sword, save only Mt. St.Michel because a place of such sanctity and religion should not be burnt. Duke Richard, his duchy subdued, his hands tied behind him, they were to bring captive but alive before the king himself." However, the English army was soon routed (only a few made it back to England) by local Norman forces.
Emma adopted, or was given, the name Ælfgifu in England. William of Malmesbury says that Æthelred: "... was so inconstant towards his wife, that he scarcely deigned her his bed, and degraded the royal dignity by his libidinous intercourse with harlots. She too, a woman conscious of her high descent, became indignant at her husband, as she found herself endeared to him neither by her blameless modesty nor her fruitfulness". Æthelred had three children by Emma: sons Edward and Alfred, and daughter Godgifu. Æthelred's first wife, by whom he had several children, is a very shadowy figure - so shadowy that William of Malmesbury refers to her as: "some other person, whom fame has lost in obscurity." There are, however, a couple of, albeit contradictory, references to her. Genealogical material appended to Florence of Worcester's chronicle names her as Ælfgifu, and identifies her father as one Ealdorman Æthelberht. Whereas, in his 'Life' of St.Edward 'the Confessor', Ailred (St.Ailred, 1109-67, Abbot of Rievaulx) states that she was the daughter of "the well known Earl Thored [of Northumbria]".
Secondly, as reported by the 'Anglo-Saxon Chronicle':
"... the king gave an order to slay all the Danes that were in England. This was accordingly done on the mass-day of St.Brice [13th November]; because it was told the king, that they would beshrew him of his life, and afterwards all his council, and then have his kingdom."
Henry of Huntingdon says:
"I have heard in my youth some very old persons give an account of this flagrant outrage. They said that the king sent with secrecy into every town letters, according to which the English suddenly rose on the Danes, everywhere on the same day and at the same hour, and either put them to the sword, or, seizing them unawares, burnt them on the spot."
William of Jumièges describes terrible atrocities (women buried up to their waist so that their breasts could be savaged by dogs; children brained against door-posts), and says that some youths escaped from London to Denmark, informing Swein Forkbeard of the outrage that had been inflicted on his people. William says that Æthelred had no cause to order the massacre, but was "transported by a sudden fury". Roger of Wendover, however, claims that Æthelred was responding to the concerns of one Huna, said to be Æthelred's "chief military commander, an undaunted and warlike man". This Huna: "beholding the insolence of the Danes, who after the establishment of peace had grown strong throughout the whole of England, presuming to violate and insult the wives and daughters of the nobles of the kingdom, came in much distress to the king and made his doleful complaint before him."
In a charter (S909) of 1004, to St.Frideswide's Minster, Oxford, Æthelred himself refers to the slaughter:
"... it will be well known that, since a decree was sent out by me with the counsel of my leading men and magnates, to the effect that all the Danes who had sprung up in this island, sprouting like cockle amongst the wheat, were to be destroyed by a most just extermination ... those Danes who dwelt in the afore-mentioned town, striving to escape death, entered this sanctuary of Christ, having broken by force the doors and bolts, and resolved to make refuge and defence for themselves therein against the people of the town and the suburbs; but when all the people in pursuit strove, forced by necessity, to drive them out, and could not, they set fire to the planks and burnt, as it seems, this church with its ornaments and its books. Afterwards, with God's aid, it was renewed by me ..."
It is not credible that Æthelred's order could have been carried out in the Danish dominated, eastern, part of England. Nevertheless, William of Malmesbury notes that one of the Danes murdered in Æthelred's purge (which has become known as the St.Brice's Day massacre) was Gunnhild, sister of King Swein Forkbeard of Denmark:
"This woman, who possessed considerable beauty, had come over to England with her husband Palling [Pallig], a powerful nobleman, and embracing Christianity had made herself a pledge of the Danish peace... She bore her death with fortitude, neither turning pale at the time of execution, nor, when dead and her blood exhausted, did she lose her beauty; her husband was murdered before her face, and her son, a youth of amiable disposition, was transfixed with four spears."
Swein's revenge was not long coming. The following year (1003) he:
"... broke into the city of Exeter through the stupidity, carelessness, and surrender of Hugo [Hugh], a Norman earl, whom queen Emma had set in command over Devonshire; and he plundered it, broke down the wall from the eastern to the western gate, and having gotten great booty went back to his ships."
Florence of Worcester
Swein's army moved on to Wiltshire:
"Then was collected a very great force, from Wiltshire and from Hampshire; which was soon ready on their march against the enemy: and Ealdorman Ælfric should have led them on; but he brought forth his old tricks, and as soon as they were so near, that either army looked on the other, then he pretended sickness, and began to retch, saying he was sick; and so betrayed the people that he should have led: as it is said, "When the leader is sick the whole army is hindered." When Swein saw that they were not ready, and that they all retreated, then led he his army into Wilton; and they plundered and burned the town. Then went he to Sarum [Salisbury]; and thence back to the sea, where he knew his ships were."
'Anglo-Saxon Chronicle'
Not all English resistance was quite so hapless. In 1004, Swein ravaged Norwich:
"Then Ulfcytel agreed with the council in East-Anglia, that it were better to purchase peace with the enemy, ere they did too much harm on the land; for that they had come unawares, and he had not had time to gather his force. Then, under the truce that should have been between them, stole the army up from their ships, and bent their course to Thetford. When Ulfcytel understood that, then sent he an order to hew the ships in pieces; but those he thought of frustrated his design. Then he gathered his forces, as secretly as he could. The enemy came to Thetford within three weeks after they had plundered Norwich; and, remaining there one night, they spoiled and burned the town; but, in the morning, as they were proceeding to their ships, came Ulfcytel with his army, and said that they must there come to close quarters. And, accordingly, the two armies met together; and much slaughter was made on both sides. There were many of the veterans of the East-Angles slain; but, if the main army had been there, the enemy had never returned to their ships. As they said themselves, that they never met with worse hand-play in England than Ulfcytel brought them."
'Anglo-Saxon Chronicle'
1005 saw a severe famine in England, and Swein's fleet retreated to Denmark. In July 1006, however:
"... an immense fleet of the Danes came over to England, landed at the port of Sandwich, destroyed everything that lay in their way with fire and sword, and took large booty, sometimes in Kent and sometimes in Sussex."
Florence of Worcester
Æthelred called out the forces of Wessex and Mercia. They spent the autumn in a futile campaign against the Danes, who, undaunted, carried on with their business as usual. At the approach of winter, the English forces went home, and the Danes:
"... retired after Martinmas [11th November] to their quarters in the Isle of Wight, and provided themselves everywhere there with what they wanted. Then, about midwinter, they went to their provision dumps, out through Hampshire into Berkshire, to Reading. And they did according to their custom - they lighted their camp-beacons as they advanced. Thence they marched to Wallingford, which they entirely destroyed, and passed one night at Cholsey. They then turned along Ashdown to Cwichelm's Barrow [Cuckamsley Knob, near East Hendred, Berkshire], and there awaited the boasted threats; for it was often said, that if they sought Cwichelm's Barrow, they would never get to the sea. But they went another way homeward. Then was the army collected at the Kennet; and they came to battle there, and soon put the English force to flight; and afterwards carried their spoil to the sea. There might the people of Winchester see the proud and intrepid foe, as they passed by their gates to the sea, fetching their meat and plunder over an extent of fifty miles from sea. Then was the king gone over the Thames into Shropshire; and there he fixed his abode during midwinter. Meanwhile, so great was the fear of the enemy, that no man could think or devise how to drive them from the land, or hold this territory against them; for they had terribly marked each shire in Wessex with fire and devastation. Then the king began to consult seriously with his council, what they all thought most advisable for defending this land, ere it was utterly undone. Then advised the king and his council for the advantage of all the nation, though they were all loth to do it, that they needs must bribe the enemy with a tribute. The king then sent to the army, and ordered it to be made known to them, that his desire was, that there should be peace between them, and that tribute and provision should be given them. And they accepted the terms; and they were provisioned throughout England."
'Anglo-Saxon Chronicle'
Meanwhile, away from the gaze of the 'Anglo-Saxon Chronicle', the Scots, lead by their new king, Malcolm II, were threatening Northumbria: The Siege of Durham.
The 'Anglo-Saxon Chronicle' entry for 1007 notes:
"In this year was the tribute paid to the hostile army; that was, 36,000 pounds. In this year also was Eadric appointed ealdorman over all the kingdom of the Mercians."
The ealdormanry of Mercia had been vacant for more than twenty years - since Ælfric was exiled, in 985. Eadric (also known by the epithet 'Streona') was to become (not without reason) something of a bogeyman figure. Florence of Worcester writes:
"... he was a man of humble birth, but his tongue procured him both riches and high station; he was of a ready wit, of persuasive eloquence, and surpassed all his contemporaries in malice, perfidy, pride, and cruelty."
The 'Anglo-Saxon Chronicle', in the entry for 1006, had mentioned that "Wulfgeat was deprived of all his property; Wulfeah [Wulfheah] and Ufegeat were deprived of sight; Ealdorman Ælfelm [Ælfhelm] was slain". In his account, Florence of Worcester says that Æthelred: "... deprived his especial favourite Wulfgeat, son of Leoueca [Leofeca], of his possessions and dignities; because of his unjust decrees and haughty deeds. The crafty and perfidious Edric [Eadric] Streona, plotting mischief against the noble ealdorman Alfhelm [Æfhelm], prepared a great feast for him at Shrewsbury: and on his arrival pursuant to the invitation, Edric welcomed him like an intimate friend. On the third or fourth day of the entertainment, having laid an ambush, he took him into a wood to hunt. There, when all were occupied in the chase, the hangman of Shrewsbury, called Godwin Porthund (which signifies, The town's hound), whom Edric had long before steeled to commit the crime by great gifts and many promises, suddenly leapt out of ambush, and vilely slew the ealdorman Alfhelm. A short time afterwards, his sons Wulfheag [Wulfheah] and Ufeget [Ufegeat] were by king Aethelred's orders deprived of sight at Cocham [Cookham], where he was then staying." It is possible that the implication of Eadric in the death of Æfhelm (ealdorman of southern Northumbria) is a late invention, inspired by Eadric's notoriety. Indeed, William of Malmesbury (who refers to Eadric as "one of the refuse of mankind, and the reproach of the English") says it was Eadric who had ordered that Gunnhild should be killed in the St.Brice's day massacre of 1002. Sir Frank Stenton ('Anglo-Saxon England') writes that Eadric was: "... a person to whom mysterious crimes could safely be attributed ..."
In 1008, Æthelred ordered ships to be built throughout England. Henry of Huntingdon makes an unsubstantiated claim that, in 1009, Æthelred "sent messengers to the Duke of Normandy, to intreat for counsel and aid". Whether any was forthcoming, Henry does not mention. Meanwhile, the ships that Æthelred had ordered ("there were so many of them as never were in England before, in any king's days, as books tell us", says the 'Anglo-Saxon Chronicle') were all gathered together at Sandwich ("that they should lie there, and defend this land against any out-force"). Brihtric, brother of Ealdorman Eadric, accused one Wulfnoth, from Sussex, of treason. Wulfnoth went on the run with twenty ships, "with which he plundered everywhere by the south coast, and wrought every kind of mischief." Brihtric "thought that he should acquire for himself much reputation", and gave chase in eighty ships. Unfortunately, a storm blew up and drove Brihtric's ships aground. Wulfnoth appeared and burned the grounded ships.
"When this was known to the remaining ships, where the king was, how the others fared, it was then as if all were lost. The king went home; and the ealdormen and chief councillors; and thus lightly did they forsake the ships; whilst the men that were in them brought them back to London. Thus lightly did they suffer the labour of all the people to be in vain ..."
'Anglo-Saxon Chronicle'
No sooner was this episode concluded than:
"Turkill [Thorkell 'the Tall'], a Danish earl, came over to England with his fleet; afterwards, in the month of August [1009], another countless fleet of Danes, under the command of Hemming and Eiglaf [Eilaf], came over to the Isle of Thanet, and without delay joined the other fleet. Thence both fleets went to Sandwich, where the troops landed, marched in battle array to the city of Canterbury, and began to attack it. The citizens of Canterbury, with the inhabitants of East Kent, soon sued for peace, and obtained it, giving three thousand pounds as a consideration."
'Florence of Worcester'
The Danes went to the Isle of Wight, and ravaged Sussex, Hampshire and Berkshire. The 'Anglo-Saxon Chronicle':
"Then ordered the king to summon out all the population, that men might hold firm against them on every side; but nevertheless they marched as they pleased. On one occasion the king had begun his march before them, as they proceeded to their ships, and all the people were ready to fall upon them; but the plan was then frustrated through Ealdorman Eadric, as it ever was....
Florence of Worcester makes the point that Eadric was Æthelred's son-in-law, having married his daughter, Eadgyth (Edith).
.... Then after Martinmas [11th November] they went back again to Kent, and chose their winter-quarters on the Thames; obtaining their provisions from Essex, and from the shires that were next, on both sides of the Thames. And oft they fought against the city of London; but glory be to God, that it yet standeth firm: and they ever there met with ill fare. Then after midwinter took they an excursion up through the Chilterns, and so to Oxford; which city they burned, and plundered on both sides of the Thames towards their ships. Being fore-warned that there was an army gathered against them at London, they went over at Staines; and thus were they in motion all the winter, and in spring [1010], appeared again in Kent, and repaired their ships."
After Easter, 1010, the Danes descended on Ipswich. Ulfcytel assembled an army, from both East Anglia and Cambridgeshire, at a site called Ringmere. The Danes marched to meet Ulfcytel's forces. Battle was joined, and the East Anglians soon fled - one Thurcytel 'Mare's-Head' being the first to flee. For a long time, the Cambridgeshire men held their ground, but, eventually, were overcome, and the Danes were victorious. After providing themselves with horses, the Danes spent three months ravaging East Anglia:
"... and then proceeded further into the wild fens, slaying both men and cattle, and burning throughout the fens. Thetford also they burned, and Cambridge; and afterwards went back southward into the Thames; and the horsemen rode towards the ships. Then went they west-ward into Oxfordshire, and thence to Buckinghamshire, and so along the Ouse till they came to Bedford, and so forth to Temsford, always burning as they went. Then returned they to their ships with their spoil."
The English were in complete disarray:
"... and at length there was not a chief that would collect an army, but each fled as he could: no shire, moreover, would stand by another. Before the feast-day of St.Andrew [30th November] came the enemy to Northampton, and soon burned the town, and took as much spoil thereabout as they would; and then returned over the Thames into Wessex, and so by Cannings-marsh [in Wiltshire], burning all the way. When they had gone as far as they would, then came they by midwinter to their ships."
The 'Chronicle' entry for 1011 begins:
"This year sent the king and his council to the army, and desired peace; promising them both tribute and provisions, on condition that they ceased from plunder. They had now overrun East Anglia i, and Essex ii, and Middlesex iii, and Oxfordshire iiii, and Cambridgeshire v, and Hertfordshire vi, and Buckinghamshire vii, and Bedfordshire viii, and half of Huntingdonshire ix, and much of Northamptonshire x; and, to the south of the Thames, all Kent, and Sussex, and Hastings, and Surrey, and Berkshire, and Hampshire, and much of Wiltshire. All these disasters befel us through bad counsels; that they would not offer tribute in time, or fight with them; but, when they had done most mischief, then entered they into peace and amity with them. And nonetheless, for all this peace and amity and tribute, they went everywhere in troops; plundering, and spoiling, and slaying our miserable people."
Between the 8th and 29th September, 1011, the Danes laid siege to Canterbury. Florence of Worcester says that, "on the twentieth day of the siege", a fire was started, "by the treacherous contrivance" of an archdeacon, which enabled the Danes to gain entry to the city. According to Florence, they committed terrible atrocities:
"... some were slain by the sword, some were burned in the flames, many were hurled from the walls, and some were hung up by their private parts, and so died. Matrons were dragged by their hair through the streets of the city, and then flung into the fire. Infants torn from their mother's breasts were caught on the points of spears, or ground to pieces by chariots driven over them. There Christ's church was pillaged and burned, and all the monks and laity, both men, women, and children, were decimated; nine out of every ten being slain, and the tenth kept alive."
Although they let Abbot Ælfmær (of St.Augustine's, Canterbury) go free, they took captive: Bishop Godwine (of Rochester), Abbess Leofrun (of Minster in Thanet), Ælfweard (king's reeve) and Ælfheah, Archbishop of Canterbury. Florence says that Ælfheah:
"... was brought out in fetters, driven along, wounded grievously, and led to the fleet; then he was thrust back into prison and there badly treated for the space of seven months."
Florence goes on to describe how a pestilence ("the wrath of God") broke out amongst the Danes: "... and slew two thousand of them by means of excruciating disorders of the bowels. The rest, being attacked in a similar manner, were admonished by the faithful to make satisfaction to the archbishop; but they refused so to do. The mortality went on increasing, carrying them off by tens, twenties, and upwards."
During the Easter period of 1012 (Easter Sunday was 13th April), Ealdorman Eadric was in London overseeing the payment of 48,000 pounds to the Danes. Ælfheah, meanwhile, was still prisoner. The Danes demanded that he pay 3,000 pounds for his freedom, and became angry when he refused:
"They were also much drunken; for there was wine brought them from the south. Then took they the bishop, and led him to their hustings, on the eve of the Sunday after Easter, which was the thirteenth before the calends of May [19th April]; and there they then shamefully killed him. They overwhelmed him with bones and ox-heads; and one of them smote him with an axe-iron on the head; so that he sunk downwards with the blow; and his holy blood fell on the earth, whilst his sacred soul was sent to the realm of God. The corpse in the morning was carried to London; and the bishops, Eadnoth [of Dorchester] and Ælfhun [of London], and the citizens, received him with all honour, and buried him in St.Paul's minster; where God now showeth this holy martyr's miracles."
'Anglo-Saxon Chronicle'
Ælfheah's body was moved to Canterbury in 1023. Ælfheah is probably better known as St.Elphege.
The murder of Ælfheah was carried out in defiance of Thorkell 'the Tall'. According to the German chronicler, Thietmar of Merseburg (d.1018), Thorkell tried to save Ælfheah - offering all his possessions, except his ship, in return for the archbishop's life. It comes as less of a surprise then, that, when the Danes dispersed, having received their handsome payoff, Thorkell and forty-five ships remained behind, and defected to Æthelred:
"... and promised him, that they would defend this land, and he should feed and clothe them."
'Anglo-Saxon Chronicle'
According to the version of events presented by the 'Encomium Emmae Reginae': "... the soldiers of the above mentioned king [Swein Forkbeard of Denmark] confident that they would profit by the firm steadfastness of their lord, decided to persuade him, who was already meditating the same plan, to invade England, and add it to the bounds of his empire by the decision of war. "Turchil [Thorkell]," said they, "your military commander, Lord King, having been granted licence by you, has gone to avenge his brother, who was killed there, and leading away a large part of your army, exults that he has conquered. Now, as a victor, he has acquired the south of the country, and living there as an exile, and having become an ally of the English, whom he has conquered through your power, he prefers the enjoyment of his glory to leading his army back, and in submission giving you the credit of his victory. And we are cheated of our companions and forty ships, which he led with him, manned from among the best Danish warriors. Let not our lord suffer so grave a loss, but go forth leading his willing army, and we will subdue for him the contumacious Turchil, together with his companions, and also the English who are leagued with them, and all their possessions."" Though saga tradition corroborates that Thorkell avenged a brother's death in England, it seems likely that the brother in question was Hemming. Since Hemming actually arrived in England after Thorkell, his death cannot have been the prime motive for Thorkell's campaign. In the introduction to his 1949 edition of the 'Encomium', Alistair Campbell asserts: "It is highly improbable that Thorkell was ever in Sveinn's [Swein's] service, or took any forces with him to England which could be considered part of Sveinn's army, but, on the other hand, it is more than likely that his progress was regarded by Sveinn with disquiet, for the latter had himself long cherished designs upon England."
In 1013:
"... before the month August, came King Swegen [Swein] with his fleet to Sandwich; and very soon went about East Anglia into the Humber-mouth, and so upward along the Trent, until he came to Gainsborough. Then soon submitted to him Earl Uhtred, and all the Northumbrians, and all the people of Lindsey, and afterwards the people of the Five Boroughs, and soon after all the army to the north of Watling Street; and hostages were given him from each shire. When he understood that all the people were subject to him, then ordered he that his army should have provision and horses; and he then went southward with his main army, committing his ships and the hostages to his son Cnut. And after he came over Watling Street, they wrought the greatest mischief that any army could do. Then he went to Oxford; and the population soon submitted, and gave hostages; thence to Winchester, where they did the same. Thence went they eastward to London; and many of the party sunk in the Thames, because they kept not to any bridge. When he came to the city, the population would not submit; but held their ground in full fight against him, because therein was King Æthelred, and Thurkyl [Thorkell] with him. Then went King Swegen thence to Wallingford; and so over Thames westward to Bath, where he abode with his army. Thither came Ealdorman Æthelmær, and all the western thegns with him, and all submitted to Swegen, and gave hostages. When he had thus settled all, then went he northward to his ships; and all the population fully received him, and considered him full king. The population of London also after this submitted to him, and gave hostages; because they dreaded that he would undo them. Then bade Swegen full tribute and forage for his army during the winter; and Thurkyl bade the same for the army that lay at Greenwich: besides this, they plundered as oft as they would."
'Anglo-Saxon Chronicle'
Æthelred sent Emma and their sons, Edward and Alfred, to safety in Normandy, whilst he took refuge with Thorkell, at Greenwich. Leaving Thorkell, he spent the Christmas of 1013 on the Isle of Wight, and then joined Emma in Normandy. This was, however, not quite the end of Æthelred.