Talk:Battle of Maldon

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Other sources[edit]

"...that first [payment] was 10,000 pounds..." Although the word "þusend" seems to be the modern "thousend" it ist very unlikely that in this time somebody might have owned so much money, gold or silver. Not even the kings! So therefore it seems to me, "þusend" should be translated as "dozen" "x.þusend punda" would be then "ten dozen pounds" 120 pounds of silver (or whatever) is a much more reasonable ammount. (Waechter im All, Aug.10 2007, 13:45)

English strength of numbers[edit]

>A source from the 12th century, Liber Eliensis, written by the monks at Ely, suggests that Byrhtnoth had only a few men to command: >"he was neither shaken by the small number of his men, nor fearful of the multitude of the enemy". Not all sources indicate such a >disparity in numbers.

Can the battle summary in the blue box be changed to reflect this multiplicity of opinions? It currently just says "a few men".

Year of this Battle[edit]

A program on History Channel that aired Thurs. March 19th, 2009, says that this event took place in 881 AD, not 991 AD. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.192.198.104 (talk) 03:37, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Well, in all manuscripts of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle in which the event appears, C being the earliest attestation I believe, it is clearly indicated as having taken place in 991. Honestly, I trust Wikipedia more than I do the History channel these days and wouldn't modify the former to reflect the claims of the latter without some other source. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.123.138.80 (talk) 19:53, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

"[E]xtra-academic success of The Battle of Maldon"[edit]

This recent addition is on the wrong page. It discusses an "investigation of the poem’s reuse and rewriting", and as such should be on The Battle of Maldon, not here.--Old Moonraker (talk) 10:45, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

"ofermōd" in the poem[edit]

On the word "ofermōd": In Danish language "overmod" means 'overly confident' and to be in this state can course one to become 'reckless' and commit 'hubris'.

To be 'overmodig' is not seen as dishonourable thing in itself, as it also means something like being 'overly eager' and therefore it can actually be used as sort of an acceptable excuse, when one makes mistakes. At least in the Danish language. The hubris interpretation of things would then only apply to the religious or superstitious of course, but that would probably include most common people at the time I guess? Explaining the defeat like that, would leave room for saving Byrhtnoth's honour and blaming it partly on the Gods punishments, rather than him as an individual alone. (Be careful when using explanations based in Christianity alone. Hubris is a thought-pattern that relates to any kind of religious mindset, also a pagan one.)

That is what I read, when I use the Danish word 'overmod' at least. RhinoMind (talk) 11:10, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Nice[edit]

Only 90's kids will remember this!

Will2022 (talk 13:38, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Battle of Maldon. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

☑Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.


Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:38, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

Day and month of the battle[edit]

"The Battle of Maldon took place three weeks before Whitsun on 11 August 991 CE."

Can this be right? Whitsun is seven weeks after Easter, which would place Easter Day 991 in early July. The latest possible date for Easter seems to be 25 April (see List of dates for Easter) - and thus for Whitsun, 13 June. Narky Blert (talk) 17:53, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

An online friend has found this site, according to which Easter 991 was 5 April. If it is correct, then Whitsun 991 would have been 24 May. Narky Blert (talk) 22:10, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
Most books and reputable websites such as Battlefields Trust http://www.battlefieldstrust.com/resource-centre/viking/battleview.asp?BattleFieldId=23 go for an August date, though with some dispute about 10th or 11th August. So it appears the Whitsun comment is the bit that is wrong and should be removed. Monstrelet (talk) 09:22, 31 May 2017 (UTC)
Which dating sources has more amount of reliable sources? OccultZone (TalkContributionsLog) 02:50, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
As I understand it, the only primary sources are the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle which just says "991. This year was Ipswich ravaged; and after that, very shortly, was Britnoth the ealdorman slain at Maldon" [1]. The other source is The Battle of Maldon, a part of a poem which may or may not be contemporary, and gives no dating at all, as far as I can see. It's a bit puzzling how anyone could even guess at a particular month and day. Alansplodge (talk) 13:13, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
Aha, puzzle solved. Quote from: Foard, Glenn (10 September 2003). "MALDON BATTLE AND CAMPAIGN - Information from The UK Battlefields Resource Centre" (PDF). www.battlefieldstrust.com. The Battlefields Trust. Retrieved 2 June 2017. Calendars of Abbey of Ely, Winchester and Ramsey. The calendar of Ely, which Brihtnoth had close associations, gives the 10th August, the currently accepted date, while the other two give 11th August for Brihtnoth’s death and hence for the battle. (p. 17). Alansplodge (talk) 17:56, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
Many apologies User:Monstrelet, I see that you had already linked the Battlefield Trust report, but I lazily didn't read the whole thing and so missed what I was looking for! Alansplodge (talk) 18:21, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
A more weighty source is "English Heritage Battlefield Report: Maldon 991" (PDF). historicengland.org.uk. English Heritage. 1995. Retrieved 2 June 2017. The abbey calendars of Winchester and Ramsey record the death of Brihtnoth on 11 August 991 while that of Ely cites 10 August. The battle may therefore have been fought on either 10 or 11 August 991, but given the close connection deriving from Brihtnoth's substantial patronage of Ely, and his burial there, it seems probable that the Abbey must once have known the date of the Ealdorman's death with some accuracy (p. 5) Alansplodge (talk) 18:18, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
The only source I could find which connects the battle with Whitsun is In the Land of Giants (2015) by Max Adams, which possibly used Wikipedia as a source. Therefore, I intend to remove any reference to Whitsun as suggested above. Alansplodge (talk) 15:55, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
Now done, I have also added "Chronolgy" and "Topography" subsections to the "Other sources" section, using the refs quoted above. Alansplodge (talk) 17:07, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
TY all :-) August makes military sense to me - enough time to raid Ipswich beforehand, and to get back home to bring the crops in afterwards. May (or even June) looked way too early in the year. I'd guess that one of the Vikings' targets may have been food animals; the spring births would have been better grown by August.
FWIW, I don't know of any significant Christian festival which was being celebrated in C10 four weeks either before or after 10/11 August. The Assumption is 15 August, but that's a relatively recent feast day. Narky Blert (talk) 20:57, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Battle of Maldon. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

As of February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 15 July 2018).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.


Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:41, 16 July 2017 (UTC)