Gary Smailes

Anglo-Saxon Weapons & Warfare

Anglo-Saxon Weapons & Warfare by Richard Underwood

I have just finished reading Richard Underwood's book and wanted to offer this short review.

Dr Underwood is a living Historian who has drawn on his experience to write a book that aims to tackle the complexity of Anglo-Saxon weapons – did you know there are six types of knife or Seax to be more precise! In the first section he takes each weapon in order, examining archaeological and written evidence to discover the weapon's role in battle and society. He then looks at the everyday use of the weapon, highlighting key historical arguments and drawing on his own practical experience. The second section of the book looks a warfare and society, speculating over how  'British' society was structured and the roles weapons played. It touches on most important issues, without getting bogged down in historical debate.

On the whole this is an excellent book. Unlike other tombs on this subject is is accessible, easy to read and contains excellent illustrations that support the text. It focuses on examining the practical side of the weapons, though this is supported by some deeper debate. I found the chapter looking at single combat, skirmishes and battles very enlightening.

If you are interested in this period, then this is a great book to get you star

The problem with RSS...

Let's face it Google Reader is great.

It allows me to sit and read loads of blog posts without the hassle of skipping around the internet visiting each site in turn. However, this brings me two problems. The first is because I don't actually 'visit' the blog I read, I don't get to see their blog roll. The second is that, as far as I can tell, RSS stats don't show up on most blog stat readers.

So to try and give a little back here's a list of my most visited history blogs (according to Google Reader trends):

A commonplace Book

Airminded

Blog them out of the stone age

Edward II

Investigations of a Dog

Historic Battlefields

Osprey Publishing Blog

The 48th Pennsylvania Volunteer Infantry

Trench Fever

Thoughts on Military History

To Flanders Fields, 1917

The Punch Die

Walking the Berkshires

Muhlberger's Early History

New Blog

Came across of new blog called Famous Wars - looks interesting, though their is little information about the author.

WW1 Blog

Soldier’s ‘blog’ from WW1 trenches is internet hit

Will Pavia

It is a conflict that is fading from living memory, but a “blog” from the trenches of the First World War has become a surprise hit on the internet.

In the past year, the writings of Private Harry Lamin from the Yorkshire and Lancashire Regiment have come to compete with the diaries of call girls, policemen and politicos. The travails of this soldier, set down on the front line in France and Italy in letters to his family, are being posted online 90 years to the day after they were written.

Like the family who anxiously awaited his letters in 1918, thousands of readers keenly await his next post. In the comments section, readers worry over whether he will make it home alive, as he passes through the battles of Messines Ridge and Passchendaele.

His fate has been kept a secret by Bill Lamin, his 59-year-old grandson, who runs the blog and adds photographs and maps he has found while researching the path that his grandfather took through the war. The idea for the blog came to Private Lamin’s grandson, a maths and IT teacher, in 2006.

Harry Lamin, who was born in 1887, worked in Nottingham’s lace industry before being conscripted in 1917 at the age of 29. The first post is in February of that year, from an army training camp in Staffordshire. On May 13, he arrived in France.

In letters to his older brother Jack, a clergyman in Leeds, he writes of being “buried and knocked about” on Messines Ridge and of “rough, rough times” on the front line.

To his sister Kate, a midwife, he is more elliptical. “We had an exciting time up the line,” he wrote to her from the Menin Road in November. “But we beat them back. They lost a good many men.”

The latest word from Private Lamin is on the day before New Year’s Eve, from Italy. He is waiting for his Christmas parcels and news of his wife, Ethel, and Willie, their baby son. To read it, visit

here.
 

The Military History Carnival

Military History Carnival number 10 is up at Walking the Berkshires.

William the Bastard at War

John Gillingham's article William the Bastard at War is nearly twenty years old but it is still one of the most important insights into the Norman invasion of 1066. Most of the article can be read here thanks to Google books or here for the full thing (thanks Lafayette). I do Gillingham a discredit by summerising his excellent article but in essence the argument is a follows:

1.Medieval battles were rare,
2.They were rare because, though potentially decisive, they were equally potentially disastrous,
3.Warfare in the 11th century therefore involved the avoidance of battle. Instead armies would ravage the countryside to such an extent that it forced a showdown. They would use small bands of men to devastate a large area of the country, foraging for their own needs as they went,
4.If faced with an invading army. You had a limited number of choices. If you didn't have an army of your own to hand then you would need to negotiate. However, if you did have an army you could advance to within striking distance of the invaders. Then, since both armies wished to avoid battle, a stalemate would arise. The attackers couldn't forage for fear of being ambushed when weakened, whilst the defenders couldn't challenge since they wish to avoid a major battle. In the end one side would give up and go home.

It appears that William was a master of this tactic in both the attack and defence. This brings us to the events of 1066. William landed in England, set up a strong fortified base and proceeded to pillage the surrounding countryside. So far so good. Harold reacted by moving his army into striking distance and this is were it all goes a bit pear shaped. According to the tactics of the day, this should have lead to a stand off with both armies avoiding battle. However, I believe there were a couple of factors that made this approach unlikely. Firstly, William was unable to retreat due to Harold's fleet in the English channel. Secondly, I believe Harold was using different tactics. He was aware of how William fought, having had first hand experience whilst on campaign with William. He knew William would try and force the issue, he also knew William would not expect a battle. Yet, only weeks before Harold had fought a pitched battle at Stamford Bridge and won. I suspect that in opposition to contemporary thinking Harold set out to engage William in battle. On the morning of the battle of Hastings, Harold forced William's hand engineering the situation to one which a risky pitch battle was unavoidable. I believe this went against William's plan. The battle of was gamble – Harold lost.

You can read more posts about the Battle of Hastings here.