Egil's Saga's Battle of Vínheiðar ... at Brasside

Egil’s Saga is a biography of the 10th century Icelandic mercenary, pirate and farmer Egill Skallagrimson (Figure 1). He spent some time in England fighting for King Æthelstan. Egil’s Saga describes their participation in a major battle. It is usually assumed to be the Battle of Brunanburh in 937. We are among the dissenters who think it is describing a different battle, for which we have adopted Egil’s Saga’s name, the ‘Battle of Vínheiðar’. In this paper, we explain why we think it was fought at Brasside near Durham.

Historical background

Æthelstan came to power in 924. His realm covered the whole of modern England below the Humber, bar Cornwall. There were four realms north of the Humber: 1) The ‘Dublin Viking’ Kingdom of York; 2) The Anglian kingdom of Bernicia; 3) The Brythonic kingdom of Strathclyde and Cumberland; 4) The Pictish-Gael kingdom of Alba. The Kingdom of York comprised the mainly Danish Viking region of Deira in the east and the mainly Brythonic region of modern Lancashire in the west. It was ruled, along with north-western islands, peninsulas and coasts by a sect of ethnic Norse Vikings based in Dublin. David Griffiths, who wrote the definitive book about these people, refers to them as the ‘Hiberno-Norse’. We will use his term.

In 926 or 927, Sihtric, Hiberno-Norse King of York, died. Æthelstan annexed the Kingdom of York. Sihtric’s brother Guthfrith, King of the Hiberno-Norse at Dublin, was his heir. Some think that he raised an army and occupied Jorvik (the City of York), others think that he invaded England hoping to take Jorvik but did not get that far. Æthelstan defeated him in battle. The same year, he defeated King Constantine II of Alba, King Owain of Strathclyde & Cumberland, and King Hywel Dda of Wales. They were forced to accept his overlordship, uniting most of modern England under a single ruler for the first time and giving him hegemony over mainland Britain.

The subjugated northern kings rebelled in 934. Æthelstan led an army into Alba to quell the uprising. Later that year Guthfrith died. Guthfrith’s son Olaf succeeded to the Hiberno-Norse throne in Dublin. In 937, this Olaf (Guthfrithson) formed a rebel alliance with Constantine and Owain. They invaded somewhere in what is now the north of England, before being defeated by Æthelstan at the Battle of Brunanburh.

Egil’s Saga’s confusion with Brunanburh

At a glance, it seems that Egil’s Saga’s battle might be the Battle of Brunanburh:

• Egil’s Saga describes Æthelstan’s participation in a major battle at a place named ‘Vínheiðar’. Brunanburh is the only major battle in which Æthelstan is known to have participated.
• Egil’s Saga’s battle was in the north of modern England. Brunanburh was in the north of modern England.
• Egil’s Saga says that Æthelstan’s adversaries were an alliance of invaders from the north. Brunanburh is the only documented conflict in which Æthelstan faced an alliance of invaders from the north.
• Egil’s Saga says that the leader of the invaders was King Olaf the Red. Brunanburh is the only conflict in which Æthelstan is known to have faced anyone named Olaf.

Delving a little deeper, there are a bunch of inconsistencies between Egil’s Saga’s battle and Brunanburh:

• Egil’s Saga says that the invaders were Scots and Britons. English accounts of Brunanburh say that the invaders were Hiberno-Norse, Scots and Britons. If any Hiberno-Norse were involved in its battle, it would be out of character for Egil’s Saga not to give them top billing.
• Egil’s Saga says that the invaders were led by Olaf the Red, King of the Scots, “a Scot on his father’s side, Danish on his mother’s, being descended from Ragnar Hairy-Breeks”. English accounts of Brunanburh say that the invaders were led by Olaf Guthfrithson, King of the Hiberno-Norse, who was Norse on his father’s side, being the grandson of Ímar, Norse founder of the Hiberno-Norse dynasty.
• Egil’s Saga says that the invaders marched south from Scotland. English accounts of Brunanburh say that the Hiberno-Norse arrived and left by ship.
• Egil’s Saga says that Æthelstan was quick to issue a formal challenge to the invaders after they defeated his local Northumbrian militia. William of Malmesbury says that Æthelstan was slow to respond to the Brunanburh invasion, and only did so when shamed by their ongoing plundering of his realm.
• Egil’s Saga’s battle was arranged a week or more in advance on an agreed day at a demarcated field. William of Malmesbury says that the Brunanburh battle started with a surprise nocturnal raid on the English camp.
• Egil’s Saga’s battlefield was a symmetrical level plain bounded by hills on one side and a river on the other. William of Malmesbury says that the Brunanburh battlefield was on a road at or near a ford.
• Egil’s Saga’s battle was shield wall to shield wall, both sides having time to organise their deployment and their advance. William of Malmesbury describes Brunanburh as an opportunistic nocturnal raid on the English camp followed by an English counterattack.
• Egil’s Saga says that three kings/earls were “laid low” – i.e. defeated - in the battle. The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle says that five kings and seven earls were killed at Brunanburh, excluding at least three kings that escaped.
• Egil’s Saga does not mention any horses participating in its battle and it implies that the invaders were chased on foot. William of Malmesbury says that the Brunanburh invaders had: “Countless squadrons both of foot and horse”. The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle says that Æthelstan’s men chased the fleeing invaders on horseback.
• Egil’s Saga implies that the invaders returned to their homeland on foot. The English accounts emphasise that a large proportion of the Brunanburh invaders fled left by ship.

Translator Alistair Campbell noted some of these inconsistencies back in the 1930s: “it is evident that Egils Saga must be treated with the greatest caution and that none of its statements relative to the battle on Vinheithr must be taken as true of the battle of Brunanburh unless they are confirmed by independent sources”.  

Delving deeper still, Egil’s Saga timeline is found to be inconsistent with Brunanburh. Egil’s Saga contains no dates, but the timeline can be calculated. At the start of Chapter 50, Egil’s Saga (Fell) explains: “When Æthelstan succeeded to the throne hostilities began among the chieftains who had lost their power to his ancestors … Æthelstan gathered an army and gave pay to all men from home or abroad who were willing to earn such money. The brothers Thorolf and Egil were willing to earn such money.” So, Æthelstan sent a call for mercenaries soon after his accession. It sounds like the call went out in 925. It cannot have taken more than two years for the news to reach Egill. Egil’s Saga says that he arrived in England in the Autumn of that year. It goes on to say that Northumbria was already in Æthelstan’s possession, so they arrived in 926 or 927 (Note: There is one year of uncertainty about many of the dates because English annals of the same events often differ by a year or two. This might be because receipt of the news was delayed, or the event was confused in the telling, or the chronicle’s year started in September). The rest of Egil’s Saga’s timeline can be calculated because it meticulously notes where Egill spends his winters during Æthelstan’s reign.

• Egil’s Saga’s battle was in the year that Egill arrived in England, so no later than the end of 927, at least ten years before Brunanburh.
• Egill was with Thorir Hroaldsson at Gaular two winters before Egil’s Saga’s battle. Thorir died in 925, so Egil’s Saga’s battle cannot have been later than 927, at least ten years before Brunanburh.

• Egill’s brother was killed in Egil’s Saga’s battle. Egill married Asgerd, his brother’s widow, two years after Egil’s Saga’s battle. His marriage was before Eric Bloodaxe became King of Norway in 932, so Egil’s Saga’s battle was before 930, at least seven years before Brunanburh.
• returned to Norway the year after Egil’s Saga’s battle, to discover that Thorir Hroaldsson had died. He died in 925. If Egil’s Saga’s battle was Brunanburh, Egill would be returning to Norway in 938, 13 years after Thorir’s death. He was an important military leader, foster father to future king Eric Bloodaxe, best man at Thorolf’s wedding, and his father’s best friend. It is inconceivable that Egill would not have heard news of his death for 13 years, so Egil’s Saga’s battle must have been many years before Brunanburh.
• Egill spent ‘several’ years with his father in Iceland before his father died. He died before Eric Bloodaxe killed his brothers which was one or two years before Haakon became King of Norway. Haakon became king in 934, so Egill’s father died no later than 933. If ‘several’ meant two or three, Egill arrived in Iceland in 930 or 931. It was three winters after Egil’s Saga’s battle, so the battle was no later than 928, at least nine years before Brunanburh.
• Æthelstan died in 939. Egill visited Æthelstan at least eight winters after Egil’s Saga’s battle, so the battle was no later than 931, at least six years before Brunanburh.
• Egill returned to England to visit Æthelstan at least eight winters after Egil’s Saga’s battle. Æthelstan died three years after Brunanburh, so Egil’s Saga’s battle is not Brunanburh. Egill hears that all is well with Æthelstan’s kingdom. The only period of relative peace and stability during Æthelstan’s reign was between his invasion of Alba in 934 and Brunanburh in 937. Egil’s Saga’s battle was therefore no later than 929.
• Islendingabok shows that Egill’s first child, Thorgerdr, was born in 939, Wikipedia reckons 935. Egill married Asgerd two years after Egil’s Saga’s battle. Even if Asgerd fell pregnant immediately, Egil’s Saga’s battle was no later than 936 (or 932 if Wikipedia is right), at least a year before Brunanburh.
• Egil’s Saga says that Egill was aged 13 when he left Iceland on his first overseas adventure. Egil’s Saga says that he returned Iceland 12 winters after he left. This was also the year after he got married which was two years after Egil’s Saga’s battle. So, he was aged 22 at Egil’s Saga’s battle. Wikipedia and Islendingabok give Egill’s year of birth as 904 and 910 respectively, meaning that Egil’s Saga’s battle was in 926/7 or 932/3, at least four years before Brunanburh.
• Egill was 22 at Egil’s Saga’s battle. If that battle was Brunanburh in 937, he would have been born in 915. Islendingabok gives his mother’s year of birth as 870, so she would have to have been 45 when she gave birth to Egill. The oldest known medieval childbirth age is 42, so Egil’s Saga’s battle was not Brunanburh.

Egil’s Saga translator Eric Eddison worked all this out in the 1930s: “The better opinion inclines to-day to identify the two battles, correcting the whole chronological system of the saga accordingly.” Hermann Palsson elaborated in his 1975 Egil’s Saga translation: “The Battle of Vinheid in ESS [Egil’s Saga] is usually identified with the Battle of Brunanburh, which was fought at an unknown place in 937, but such an identification makes a complete mess of the chronology of ESS”. Eddison devised a chronology of Egill’s life which dated Egil’s Saga’s battle to 927. Svanhildur Óskarsdóttir published a more detailed chronology in Scudder’s 2004 Egil’s Saga translation which dated the battle to 925.

We discuss the evidence in much greater detail in our paper ‘Why Egil’s Saga is not describing Brunanburh’. It includes a revised chronology of Egill’s life that confirms Egil’s Saga’s battle took place in 926 or 927. English chronicles – translations below - record Æthelstan’s involvement in military action in 926/927, against Kings Constantine, Owain and Guthfrith. They are consistent with all the Egil’s Saga clues and match most of them, with just one exception.

The exception concerns Olaf. Egil’s Saga says that the leader of the invaders at its battle was named Olaf the Red. No one named Olaf is known to have fought Æthelstan in 926/927, but Olaf Guthfrithson was one of the leaders of the invaders at Brunanburh. This is the main evidence that Egil’s Saga’s battle is Brunanburh, but if that were so, it would create some major inconsistencies:

• Egil’s Saga says that Olaf was “konungur á Skotlandi”, ‘King of Scotland’, whereas Olaf Guthfrithson was King of the Hiberno-Norse in Dublin.
• Egil’s Saga says that Olaf was “skoskur að föðurkyni”, ‘patriarchally Scottish’, whereas Olaf Guthfrithson’s father could hardly have been more Norse, being the male-line grandson of Ímar who founded the Hiberno-Norse dynasty.
• Egil’s Saga says that Æthelstan begs Olaf to “fara heim í Skotland”, ‘go home to Scotland’, whereas Olaf Guthfrithson’s home was Dublin.

These details convince us that Egil’s Saga’s King Olaf the Red referred to Constantine II, King of Alba. Snorri Sturlusson, Egil’s Saga’s skald, might have made a mistake, but we think it more likely that he deliberately gave Constantine a Norse name to make him more relevant to his Norse audience. This, after all, is what he did with Hring and Adils, leaders of the Britons in Egil’s Saga, who would obviously not have had Norse names.

It is frustrating that our theory has any possible inconsistencies, but one inconsistency is enormously better than the traditional ‘Egil’s Saga’s battle is Brunanburh’ theory which has more than twenty of them. We are therefore confident that Egil’s Saga is describing a battle that took place in Northumbria in 926 or 927 between Æthelstan and an alliance of Scots and Britons under Kings Constantine and Owain. Apart from us, the only person to have worked this out is Adrian Grant, so it is interesting to check his theory.

A battlefield north or south of Jorvik

Grant’s theory was first published in his 2020 paper: “The Battle of White Hill (‘Vin Heath’), 927”. It explains why he believes that Egil’s Saga’s battle was fought in 927 against Guthfrith at White Hill near Doncaster. This is ninety miles away from where we think the battle was fought at Brasside, and against a different opponent. The discrepancy is down to an inconsistency in Egil’s Saga.

Egil’s Saga sets the scene by explaining that when Egill arrived in England (Green): “[Northumbria] was in Athelstan’s dominions; he had set over it two earls, the one named Alfgeir, the other Gudrek”. It is possible that they held the land jointly, but it is more likely that one was earl of Bernicia the other of Deira. The action starts in Chapter 52 (Paulsson): “King Olaf of Scotland gathered a great army and led it south into England, plundering everywhere as soon as he came to Northumberland. When the earls in charge there got word of this, they mustered their force and went out to face the King. King Olaf won a fierce battle when they clashed. Earl Godrek was killed and Alfgeir had to make a run for it with most of the troops who had survived.”

The narrative continues: “Since Alfgeir could offer no resistance, King Olaf was able to take the whole of Northumberland.” It sounds unequivocal: the invaders took the whole of Northumbria, so they must have taken its capital Jorvik (the city of York). Æthelstan was coming from the south. Grant reasons that the invaders would have defended their front line, so the battle probably happened close to Northumbria’s southern border. He works out that the most likely location is White Hill near Doncaster.

But here is the inconsistency. Egill writes a poem about this same battle (Palsson): “One earl [Alfgeir] fled from Olaf, life ended for the other [Gudrek]; The lusty war leader [Olaf] was lavish in blood gifts; England’s enemy conquered half Alfgeir’s earldom; While the great Godrek rambled on the gore plain.” It says that the invaders only took half of Alfgeir’s earldom. The invaders could not have taken Deira without first taking Bernicia. They could not have taken the south without first taking the north. Therefore, Egill’s poem is probably saying that the Algeir was earl of Bernicia and that the invaders took the northern half of his earldom. Even if Algeir was earl of all Northumbria, Egill’s poem would still be saying that he only lost the northern half, 75 miles from York.

We have discussed this with Adrian. He interprets the conflicting statements to mean that the initial battle was at Otterburn, at which point the invaders had indeed conquered the northern half of Bernicia, but that they then went on to conquer the rest of Northumbria before the main battle. We have no tangible evidence that he is wrong, but it seems unlikely to us. Before giving some reasons, we should summarise what Egil’s Saga says about events after Æthelstan gets news of Alfgeir’s defeat and before the engagement.

Egil’s Saga (Palsson): “… without wasting any time [Æthelstan] set out with all the men he could muster to face the Scots.” So, having received news of Alfgeir’s defeat, Æthelstan immediately leads the men he has at hand, along with Egill and his 300 mercenaries, to attack the invaders. Egil’s Saga continues: “The news [of Alfgeir’s defeat] had reached Hring and Adils [leaders of the Strathclyde Britons], and they went over to the side of King Olaf with the large army they had assembled.” So, the Strathclyde Britons join the enemy. Æthelstan decides that the new combined enemy force is too powerful for the men he has with him. He sends a challenge to the invaders while he returns south to levy more men. Egil’s Saga: “The troops that had already gathered there were placed by the King under the command of Thorolf and Egil.” His army is put under Egill’s command and they continue north to intercept the invaders.

• Æthelstan and Egill were probably in Jorvik when news arrived of Alfgeir’s defeat, so the invaders could not have occupied Jorvik before Egil’s Saga’s battle. Why do we think Æthelstan was in Jorvik? Alfgeir would have told Æthelstan of his intention to engage the invaders. Egil’s Saga says that Æthelstan’s army, and Egill’s 300 mercenaries, were ready at hand, presumably because Æthelstan had prepared them to respond if Alfgeir were to be defeated. Jorvik was the capital of Northumbria, the only town in Northumbria where Æthelstan is likely to be based, the only town in Northumbria that was big enough to host an army of that size, and it was on the only route to the north and to the invaders.
• Even if Æthelstan was not at Jorvik when he received word of Alfgeir’s defeat, he would have immediately gone there, and he would surely have arrived long before the invaders. The invaders probably waited for the defecting Britons to arrive before heading south from their battle with Algeir, but even if they did not, they would have made no more than eight miles a day, less if they were plundering on route. Æthelstan could have made twenty miles a day on horseback. It was 140 miles from Otterburn to the Humber by Dere Street. There is nowhere that Æthelstan is likely to have been that would prevent him arriving at Jorvik before the invaders.
• We think that the battle between Alfgeir and the invaders was at Morebattle, 22 miles north of Otterburn, making it even less likely that the invaders got to Jorvik before Æthelstan.
• Even if the invaders got to Jorvik, the chances of them sacking it before Æthelstan returned with his new levy seems negligible. He had annexed Jorvik nearly a year earlier and had appointed his own earl to rule the region. Presumably, he had evicted any Hiberno-Norse and garrisoned it with supporters. They had at least a week to prepare their defences. They would surely have been able to hold out for another fortnight, which sounds like more than enough for Æthelstan to levy his extra men and return to the fight.  
• The defeat and occupation of Jorvik by Scots invaders would have been big news but no contemporary accounts mention it.
• If, as Grant believes, the battle was fought at White Hill, it was in the ethnic Danish territory known as the Five Boroughs. Adrian tells us that he thinks White Hill was close to the Five Boroughs but outside. It makes little difference. The Five Boroughs was hostile to Æthelstan. If Æthelstan was fighting in their land or nearby, they would surely have joined the invaders but there is no mention of it in Egil’s Saga.

Guthfrith appears in Wikipedia’s king-list for the Kings of York. If he was crowned, it would support Grant’s theory, if not it would support ours. Clare Downham, who wrote the definitive reference book on Norse kings of England and Ireland, says that the evidence is inconclusive. He might be like Lady Jane Grey, for instance, in that he succeeded to the Kingdom of York on Sihtric’s death, but never got to Jorvik and was never crowned. Malmesbury says that Guthfrith laid siege to Jorvik after Constantine and Æthelstan had agreed a peace treaty but got repulsed and returned to Dublin. No contemporary accounts mention that Jorvik was attacked, besieged or occupied before the peace treaty was agreed. Indeed, there is no evidence that Guthfrith participated in the 926/927 conflicts before the peace treaty was signed, let alone that he was crowned.

If we are right that the battle was fought north of the Tees, Egil’s Saga’s narrative about the invaders conquering the whole of Northumberland is either mistaken or mistranslated. We think the latter. All the translators have something similar to Palsson. They are all viable translations, but this does not mean they are the only viable translations. The original Icelandic says: “lagði Ólafur konungur þá allt Norðimbraland undir sig”. ‘lagði’ can mean ‘laid’ which translators interpret to mean ‘subdued’ but it is equally likely to mean ‘thrust into’. This Icelandic phrase is equally likely to mean “King Olaf thrust into all Northumbria below him”, or similar, meaning that he led his army south from the battle against Alfgeir and Gudrek into southern Bernicia. This would not infer that the invaders occupied Jorvik, or indeed that they got into Deira.

The remainder of our theory assumes that the invaders did not take Jorvik before Egil’s Saga’s battle. We have no proof. We are not even sure that our theory is significantly more likely than Grant’s, but we are sure it is valid. Readers can make up their own minds, perhaps rejecting both. We are happy to debate the possibilities offline.

The Battle of Vínheiðar

We are going to try to work out the Vínheiðar battlefield location from clues in Egil’s Saga and the English accounts of 926 and 927. Note that medieval chronicles are often a year or two out due the time it took for news to disseminate and that some of them do not start their calendar year in January. They have enough in common to be confident they all refer to the same events. Downham calculates that it was in 927.  

English accounts of 926/927 military actions

• The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle D recension for 926 (Whitlock) says: “In this year appeared fiery lights in the northern quarter of the sky, and Sihtric died, and King Athelstan succeeded to the kingdom of the Northumbrians ; and he brought under his rule all the kings who were in this island : first Hywel, king of the West Welsh, and Constantine, king of the Scots, and Owain, king of the people of Gwent, and Aldred, son of Eadwulf from Bamburgh. And they established peace with pledge and oaths in the place which is called Eamont, on 12 July, and renounced all idolatry and afterwards departed in peace.”
• The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle E recension for 927 (Whitlock) says: “In this year King Athelstan drove out King Guthfrith. And in this year Archbishop Wulf helm went to Rome.”
• The Irish annals of Ulster says that in April 927: “The fleet of Linn Duachaill departed and Gothfrith abandoned Áth Cliath; and Gothfrith returned again within six months”.
• John of Worcester’s entry for 926 says: “Fiery lights in the northern part of the heavens were visible throughout the whole of England. Shortly afterward, Sihtric, king of Northumbria, departed this life, and king Athelstan expelled Guthferth his son and successor, and united the kingdom to the others which were under his imperial sway, for he defeated in battle and put to flight all the kings throughout Albion; for instance, Howel, king of the West Britons (the Welsh), and afterwards Constantino, king of the Scots, and Wuer (Owen) king of the Wenti (q. Gwent). He also expelled Aldred, the son of Eadulf, from his royal town called by the English Bebbanbyrig (Bamborough). All these, finding that they could no longer resist his power, sued for peace, and assembling at a place called Eamot, on the fourth of the ides [the 12th] of July, ratified by their oaths a solemn treaty.”
• Malmesbury says of Sihtric: “dying after a year, Athelstan took that province under his own government, expelling one Aldulph, who resisted him”. The year can be calculated as 926 from context. Presumably he means Guthfrith.
• Huntingdon says of Æthelstan after Sihtric’s death: “For in the course of the year following, Guthfrith, king of the Danes, brother of Reginald, the king already named, having provoked him to war, was defeated and put to flight, and slain”.
• Simeon’s second chronicle in History of the Kings for year 926 says: “Sithric, king of the Northumbrians, departed this life; whose kingdom king Ethelstan added to his own dominion, driving out his son Guthferth, who had succeeded his father in the kingdom. He likewise conquered in battle, and put to flight, all the kings of the whole of Albion, namely, Huval, king of the West Britons, then Constantine, king of the Scots, and Wuer, king of the Wenti. All these, seeing they could not resist his might, begging from him peace, met him at the place called Eamotun, on the fourth of the ides of July [12th July], and made with him a treaty, which they confirmed with an oath.”
• Gaimar says: “His son Adelstan succeeded him. When he had reigned nearly four years, he fought a battle with the Danes, and discomfited king Gudfrid”. ‘Nearly four years’ means that this happened in 927 or 928.
• Roger of Wendover’s entry for 926 says: “Fiery rays were seen throughout the whole of England in the northern quarter of the heavens, portending the disgraceful death of the aforesaid king Sithric, who came to an evil end shortly afterwards ; on which king Ethelstan expelled Guthferth his son from his kingdom, which he annexed to his own dominions”.

Egil’s Saga’s battlefield description

Egil’s Saga says that Olaf’s invading army was marching south from Scotland, and that the English army, purportedly under Egill Skallagrimsson and his brother Thorolf, was heading north to meet them. The adversaries faced off somewhere in Northumbria. Meanwhile, Æthelstan was in Wessex levying more men. Here is part of W C Green's 1893 translation:

1. After this they sent messengers to king Olaf, giving out this as their errand, that king Athelstan would fain enhazel him a field and offer battle on Vínheiði by Vínuskóga; meanwhile he would have them forbear to harry his land; but of the twain he should rule England who should conquer in the battle.

2. He appointed a week hence for the conflict, and whichever first came on the ground should wait a week for the other. Now this was then the custom, that so soon as a king had enhazelled a field, it was a shameful act to harry before the battle was ended. Accordingly king Olaf halted and harried not, but waited till the appointed day, when he moved his army to Vínheiði. North of the heath stood a town. There in the town king Olaf quartered him, and there he had the greatest part of his force, because there was a wide district around which seemed to him convenient for the bringing in of such provisions as the army needed.

3. But he sent men of his own up to the heath where the battlefield was appointed; these were to take camping-ground, and make all ready before the army came. But when the men came to the place where the field was enhazelled, there were all the hazel-poles set up to mark the ground where the battle should be. The place ought to be chosen level, and whereon a large host might be set in array. And such was this; for in the place where the battle was to be the heath was level, with a river flowing on one side, on the other a large wood.

4. But where the distance between the wood and the river was least (though this was a good long stretch), there king Athelstan’s men had pitched, and their tents quite filled the space between wood and river.

5. They had so pitched that in every third tent there were no men at all, and in one of every three but few. Yet when king Olaf’s men came to them, they had then numbers swarming before all the tents, and the others could not get to go inside. Athelstan’s men said that their tents were all full, so full that their people had not nearly enough room. But the front line of tents stood so high that it could not be seen over them whether they stood many or few in depth.

6. Olaf’s men imagined a vast host must be there. King Olaf’s men pitched north of the hazel-poles, toward which side the ground sloped a little.

Egill stalls, presumably under instruction from Æthelstan, offering ever more generous bribes for the invaders to go home. Meanwhile, Æthelstan was in Wessex and Mercia recruiting more men:

7. From day to day Athelstan’s men said that the king would come, or was come, to the town that lay south of the heath. Meanwhile forces flocked to them both day and night.

There is a skirmish at the battlefield on the day before the main battle. An army of Britons led by the brothers Hring and Adils fight an English scouting army led by Alfgeir, Egill and Thorolf. Alfgeir flees. Egill and Thorolf take command. They kill Hring and Adils and rout the invaders.

The main battle is the following day. The Norse mercenaries under Thorolf fight near the woodland, the main English division under Æthelstan fight towards the river. Æthelstan insists that Egill, against his wishes, fights with the English:

8. After this they formed in the divisions as the king had arranged, and the standards were raised. The king’s division stood on the plain towards the river; Thorolf’s division moved on the higher ground beside the wood.

Æthelstan is victorious, but Thorolf is killed by skirmishers who loop through woodland to get behind the mercenary shield wall. Olaf and the surviving invaders flee. Egill pursues them, killing any that he catches. When sated, he returns to the battlefield to bury his brother. Æthelstan returns to his billet south of the battlefield:

9. While his men still pursued the fugitives, king Æthelstan left the battle-field, and rode back to the town.

Egill writes a poem about Thorolf's death:

10. Dauntless the doughty champion dashed on, the earl’s bold slayer: In stormy stress of battle stout-hearted Thorolf fell; Green grows on soil of Vinu grass o’er my noble brother; But we our woe - a sorrow worse than death-pang must bear.

Egill writes another poem about the aftermath of the main battle. Here he explains that he killed many rebels to the west of the hazelled battlefield, suggesting that they fled west.

11. With warriors slain round standard the western field I burdened; Adils with my blue Adder assailed mid snow of war; Olaf, young prince, encountered England in battle thunder; Hring stood not stour of weapons, starved not the ravens’ maw.

So, putting this together. The English had marked out the battlefield with hazel poles¹. The place was named Vínheiði, meaning Vin-heath. It was next to a woodland named Vínuskóga, meaning Vinu-forest¹. There was a ‘town’ north of the battlefield, where Olaf and most of his army were billeted². The battlefield was fairly level, bounded laterally by a river on one side and woodland on the other³. It was a little higher near the woodland, open to the north and south³. It was a little lower on the rebel side of the battlefield to the north⁶. The gap between the river and the woodland narrowed south of the battlefield, where the English had pitched their tents⁴. It was difficult to see beyond the front row of tents⁵. There was another ‘town’ to the south of the battlefield, where most of the English barons were billeted⁷. After the battle, the rebels fled to the west¹¹. Thorolf was buried at a place named ‘Vinu’ ¹⁰.

It is difficult not to question Æthelstan’s winner-takes-all battle challenge. Egil’s Saga suggests that ‘Olaf’ was honour-bound to accept such a challenge by Norse custom. It is not a known Norse custom and Constantine would not have been bound by it anyway because he was not Norse. We suspect that the challenge was fabricated by Snorri to thrill his Norse audience. It seems likely to us that both sides garrisoned at defensively sound strongholds when they came within striking distance, such that neither army was strong enough to break through the enemy fortifications. Each would have dug in, hoping the other might try a suicidal attack. Perhaps, they did eventually agree to fight on a level battlefield between the camps, each thinking they would win a fair fight. In other words, the places and battle events were the same as described in Egil’s Saga but not because a challenge was issued and accepted.

If the rebels fled west, the river must have been to the east, with the wood to the west. The battlefield was perhaps 1000m wide, to encompass a shield wall of roughly 3000 men, and perhaps 1000m deep to allow them to manoeuvre. There was enough space north and south of the battlefield for perhaps 1000 tents on each side. Egil’s Saga says that English tents are on rising ground, making it difficult to see those at the back.

While we suspect that Æthelstan’s challenge was a literary device, there is no obvious reason why Snorri would invent the troop movements. So, we think that the armies probably did face each other from ‘borgs’. Green and Scudder translate ‘borg’ and variations as ‘town’, but it usually means ‘stronghold’. We interpret this to mean that there were substantial fortified settlements north and south of Egil’s Saga’s battlefield – which might or might not be towns - and that they were joined by a Roman road.

The battlefield at Brasside

The Strathclyde Britons decided to defect when they got news of Alfgeir’s defeat. They joined the invaders. Egil’s Saga does not say how long this took or where they mustered, but it does say that it happened while Æthelstan and Egill were heading north to face the invaders. In our opinion, the invaders only got to Chester-le-Street before realising that the English army was blocking their route.

Æthelstan would have been eager to prevent ethnic Danes in Deira being incited to join the invaders. The border between Bernicia and Deira was along the River Tees. He probably dispatched horsemen to blockade the Roman road River Wear crossings but there is no evidence that the invaders ever reached it. The non-involvement of local Danes in Egil’s Saga’s narrative probably means that they did not reach the Tees.

There were two Roman roads between the Tyne and Humber, namely Dere Street  and Cade’s Road. They were roughly parallel and about 15 miles apart, Cade’s Road to the east. It is usually assumed that Cade’s Road was a relatively minor affair with just one Roman fortress (Concangis) compared to four on Dere Street (Isurium, Cateractonium, Vinovia and Vindomora) over the equivalent distance, but that was in Roman times.

Æthelstan passed through Beverley and Chester-le-Street, both on Cade’s Road, on his way to invade Scotland in 934. St Cuthbert’s relics, the most sacred in England at the time, were at Chester-le-Street, so Cade’s Road must have had a stream of pilgrims. At the end of the 10th century, the relics were moved to Ripon and then Durham for safety, in part because Chester-le-Street was being raided from Scotland. It seems to us that Cade’s Road was the major north-south route between the Tyne and Humber in the 10th century, especially for armies. We therefore believe that the invaders headed south from the Tyne on Cade’s Road.

Both sides would have dispatched messengers and spies to scout the enemy’s progress. With no chance of a surprise attack, and the English wanting to delay while Æthelstan raised more men, both sides would have made a defensively sound camp as they came within striking distance. Egil’s Saga says that Olaf [Constantine] chooses his base: “because there was a wide district around which seemed to him convenient for the bringing in of such provisions as the army needed”. It also says that both armies were at a ‘borg’ – city or stronghold – on the day before the Battle of Vínheiðar. The only city and the only Roman fortification (Concangis) on Cades Road was at modern Chester-le-Street. It was on a navigable part of the River Wear, allowing provisions by sea or river, thereby matching Egil’s Saga’s description. If both armies were at a borg on Cade’s Road, one or other was surely at Chester-le-Street.

If one of the armies was at Chester-le-Street and both were at some sort of city or stronghold, either Constantine was at Pons Aelius on the Tyne, or the English were at Maiden Castle near Durham. We think the latter is more likely because Chester-le-Street was a wealthy and prestigious town that the invaders would have been keen to plunder. Moreover, it is more consistent Egil’s Saga’s geography. It says that the camps were north and south of the battlefield, and that the battlefield was bounded on one side by a river. The river must have bounded the battlefield to the east or west, which means its course must have been generally south to north. The River Team almost fits the bill, flowing north-south near its confluence with the Tyne, but it has a steep sided valley, with no level banks fitting Egil’s Saga’s battlefield description. The only other section of south-north river is the Wear between modern Durham and Chester-le-Street. We therefore think that Constantine was at Chester-le-Street, the English were at Maiden Castle, and the battlefield was between.

A heat relief map of the Brasside area (Figure 4) shows the terrain. It is at the western end of a 60m high plateau that extends northeast through West Rainton and beyond. The plateau is incised by the River Wear in a three-mile gorge. It exactly matches the battlefield description in Egil’s Saga: a level plain, big enough for armies of several thousand on each side, bounded by woodland to one side and a river to the other, a little higher towards the woodland, sloping down slightly to the north, narrowing and rising to the south. The only inconsistency is that the woodland would have been to Thorolf’s left, whereas Egil’s Saga says that the woodland was to his right. Perhaps it is looking from in front of Thorolf’s position, or perhaps it is simply mistaken.

Unable to believe our luck, we followed the course of all the major rivers in Northumbria east of the Pennines. There is nowhere that comes close to matching this battlefield description. Indeed, we could not even find a 1km square of raised level ground adjacent to a river.

The only other non-geographic clues are Egil’s Saga’s name for the battlefield, ‘Vínheiðar’, and the adjacent woodland ‘Vínuskóga’. It is unlikely that they are local Norse names because Brasside was in Anglian Bernicia. heiðar and skóga are the Old Norse words for ‘heath’ and ‘woodland’. ‘Vín’ could be the Old Norse translation or transliteration of a local Old English or Brythonic name, or it could describe a local geographic feature or local fauna perhaps. ‘Wine’ links them all. Chester-le-Street had the greatest concentration of monks in Northumbria, if not in England, at the time. They would have needed lots of wine. Brasside would not have been ideal vine growing terroir, a tad claggy and temperate, but the climate was warm enough to grow some grape varieties and there was no need for high quality. We guess that the monks cultivated vines at Brasside because it was the nearest significant area of agricultural land to Chester-le-Street that was on the Roman road. Presumably, they escaped to choke the nearby woodland.

On visiting the area today, it is difficult to imagine the medieval scene, with Franklin prison sprawling over the middle of the battlefield, huge lakes marking where clay was excavated in Victorian times, the woodland having been cleared to make way for coal mines in the 18th century, then the entire area being built upon in the 20th century. Even so, Brasside is still instantly recognisable to us as the place described in Egil's Saga.

Egil’s Saga’s battle, A revised narrative

Here we present a battle narrative. There is some uncertainty about the year because Egil’s Saga has no absolute dates, and the various English chronicles assign the same events to 926 or 927. The discrepancies are partly due to the times that news takes to arrive, and partly due to some chronicles having year starts on the 1st or 24th of September. The only way to make the narrative consistent with the peace treaty date in July 927 is to assume the Egill arrived in England in the previous autumn, soon after a September year start.

Æthelstan was crowned in September 925, which may have been at the start of 926 for those calendars starting in September. He soon faced rebellions in East Anglia and the Five Boroughs, the regions subjugated by his father and grandfather, in addition to a longstanding conflict on the border with Northumbria. Æthelstan did not have enough men to police his realm, so he sent out a call for mercenaries.

Egill and Thorolf were freebooting off the coast of Denmark. Gunnhild, Eric Bloodaxe’s wife, sent her brother Eyvind to kill them. Egill killed his men and took his ships with their cargo. Egill and Thorolf decide that it would be prudent to move elsewhere. They receive Æthelstan’s open offer for mercenaries in the spring and arrive in England in the autumn, a year after Æthelstan had been crowned. If was 926 in absolute years, but 927 according to those calendars that start in September.  

In the meantime, King Sihtric, ruler of the Kingdom of York, had died. Æthelstan immediately annexed the Kingdom of York. He garrisoned Jorvik, expelled Sihtric’s son, Guthfrith, and appointed some stooge earls named Alfgeir and Gudrek as overlords of Bernicia and Deira, respectively.

Constantine feared the loss of the Northumbrian buffer zone between his realm and Æthelstan’s. He set about raising an army to occupy Northumbria. Another Guthfrith, this one King of the Hiberno-Norse in Dublin and Sihtric’s brother, thought himself to be Sihtric’s rightful heir. He resolved to restore his Northumbrian realm. His fleet left Dublin in April 927, probably heading for Alba to join Constantine’s army. The Scottish, probably augmented by Guthfrith and a few hundred Hiberno-Norse, invaded Northumbria in the late spring or early summer after Egill and Thorolf arrived in England.

The invaders marched down Dere Street from Scotland, until they were opposed in Bernicia by Æthelstan’s local militia under the earls Gudrek and Alfgeir. Constantine was victorious at the ensuing battle. Gudrek was killed. Alfgeir fled by horse to give the bad news to Æthelstan.

Alfgier delivered the news to Æthelstan’s court within a couple of days. Æthelstan assembled his men at hand to intercept the invaders. Then he heard that Hring and Adils had defected to the enemy with their army of Britons. Constantine’s augmented army was too strong for the men that Æthelstan had at hand, so he dispatched his men at hand, perhaps under Egill and Thorolf, to intercept and hold the invaders while he went to Wessex to levy more men.

The armies faced off somewhere between Bernicia and Jorvik. We think Constantine was at Chester-le-Street, the English at Maiden Castle. Each army was in too strong a defensive position for the other to defeat. The English delayed while Æthelstan raised more men. After a week or so of trying to goad the other side into a suicidal attack, they agree to meet in battle on level ground between the two camps. We think it was at Brasside. The result was a comprehensive victory for Æthelstan. Constantine returned to Alba. He went to Eamont in July, along with Owain and Hywel, to sign a peace treaty with Æthelstan. Guthfrith returned to Dublin in October, six months after he left.

Bibliography

Contemporary manuscripts

Anglo-Saxon Chronicle; contemporary; Ingram, Thorpe, Garmonsway, Whitlock translations
Life of Alfred; Asser, c893; Stevenson translation
Chronicon Æthelweardi; Æthelweard, c980; Campbell translation
Chronicon ex Chronicis; John of Worcester, c1125; Stevenson translation
Historia Anglorum; Henry of Huntingdon, c1129; Forester translation
Gesta regum anglorum; William of Malmesbury, c1135; Giles translation
Historia Regum; allegedly by Simeon of Durham; mid to late-12th century; Stevenson translation
Crowland Chronicle; Pseudo-Ingulf; allegedly before 1109, but perhaps forged later; Stevenson translation
Egil’s Saga; Snorri Sturluson; c1250; Green, Eddison, Jones, Palsson, Scudder, Fell translations

Modern references

Egil’s Saga; Rev W C Green, 1893; Elliot Stock, London
Egil’s Saga; E. R. Eddison, 1930; Cambridge University Press
Egil’s Saga; Gwyn Jones, 1960; Amer Scandinavian Foundation
Egil’s Saga; Christine Fell, 1975; University of Toronto Press
Egil’s Saga; Paul Edward & Hermann Palsson, 1976; Penguin Classics
Egil's Saga; Bernard Scudder & Svanhildur Óskarsdóttir, 2004; Penguin Classics
Aethelstan: The First King of England; Sarah Foot, 2004; Yale University Press
Brunanburh Located Through Egil’s Saga; Stefán Björnsson & Björn Vernhardsson, 2020; CreateSpace Independent Publishing
The Battle of White Hill ('Vin Heath'), 927 - the first Battle of Britain v2 (including the 1st Battle of Otterburn 926); Adrian C Grant, 2021; Academia
The Brunanburh Campaign: A Reappraisal; Kevin Halloran, 2005; The Scottish Historical Review, Vol 84
Battles of the Dark Ages; Peter Marren, 2004; Pen and Sword  

Help Wanted

We believe that the Battle of Wen-Heath was fought at Brasside near Durham. Our evidence is circumstantial and speculative. If you unearth any bones or medieval military finds in or around Brasside, please contact us by email. Likewise, if you have any evidence the supports or rebuts any of our theories.

Our email address is momentousbritain@outlook.com.

Endnotes

¹ The Icelandic original ends: "jörð spenr Engla skerðir Alfgeirs und sik halfa". Scudder translates as: “the scourge of the English subdues half of Alfgeir's realm”, Fell as: “Olaf, he must hold half of Alfgeir’s land”. Green’s faulty translation is: “He holds, this foe of England, Northumbria's humbled soil”.