DARK AGE NORTHMEN

 

NORTHMEN (600 - 1100 CE)

Norsemen (Old Norse, “Northmen”)

Nortmanni (Medieval Latin, “Northmen”)

 

THE VIKING AGE (793 - 1094 CE)

Víkingar (Old Norse, “Raiders”)

 

This gallery is devoted to the armies of the North Germanic Peoples (Old Norse, Norsemen, Anglicized as “Northmen”) during the Dark Ages. This includes the loosely organized bands of raiders (Old Norse, vikingar; singular, vikingr; Anglicized as “vikings”) that have captured the popular imagination, as well as the royal plundering expeditions and armies of conquest that followed (sometimes referred to as the “royal vikings”), and the home levies (Old Norse, leithangar; singular, leithangr; Anglicized as “lething”) of the nascent monarchies of Norway, Sweden, and Denmark. I think it is important to note here that this is a period of ethnogenesis for the Scandinavian peoples, that the peoples of Norway, Sweden, and Denmark all spoke the same language throughout this period (Old Norse), and the formation of the three nascent monarchies in Norway, Sweden, and Denmark beginning in the late ninth and tenth centuries CE was only the beginning of a long period of ethnogenesis that did not result in the formation of the three distinct Scandinavian identities we know today until the end of the Middle Ages (well beyond the scope of this gallery). Initially, the term, Danes, was used in reference to the Northmen of the North Sea Empire (1013-1042 CE), with its capital in what is today Denmark, but this empire included most of England, parts of southeastern Scotland, all of Norway, Denmark, and parts of southern Sweden, and at that time the term was not considered an ethnym (i.e., it was basically used interchangeably with Norsemen/Northmen). Only later did this term become associated specifically with the inhabitants of Denmark, and the Danish language did not emerge as a distinct language until the thirteenth century. Similarly, the term, Swede, originally referred only to the Northmen of the Kingdom of Svealand/Swealand in central Sweden, and this was only extended to include the inhabitants of all of Sweden (and western Finland) in the late tenth and early eleventh centuries CE, and it was not considered an ethnym (once again, often being used interchangeably with Norsemen/Northmen). The Swedish language did not become distinct until the thirteenth century. Therefore, during this stage of history, I think it is appropriate to treat all three Scandinavian peoples collectively—as Northmen—and to use only the Old Norse terms that would have prevailed throughout Scandinavia at that time. I originally painted this army for use in a Battle of Clontarf scenario (Dark Age Irish v. Dark Age Northmen), and thus the figures best represent those of the Dublin Ostmen (“East Men”) of Sigtrygg “Silkbeard” Olafsson (989-1036 CE), the Hiberno-Norse King of Dublin, and his two primary allies—Sigurd Hlodvesson “the Stout” (960-1014 CE), the Earl (Jarl) of Orkney, and Brodir/Brodar, captain (hersir) of the vikings of the Isle of Man. More generally, these figures could be used to cobble together representative forces for any army or raiding band of the Northmen during the Viking Age (ca. 793-1094 CE).

 

The Northmen burst onto the historical stage on 8 June 793 CE, when the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle records a raid conducted by Nortmanni (Latin, “Northmen”) against the Christian monastery at Lindisfarne in northeastern England. There are no historical records of the Northmen before this date, although archeology has provided a rough date (ca. 600 CE) for the start of the material culture that characterized the Viking Age. From 793 to 1094 CE, viking raiders are recorded in Finland, Russia, the Baltics, northern Germany, western France, Britain, Ireland, western and southern Spain, the western Mediterranean, the Black Sea, and the Caspian Sea. Their naval technology (clinker-built or lapstrake longships of various designs) allowed them to mount long-distance raids along all the major coastlines of Europe and to sail up and down its major river systems to strike at targets far inland. Viking forces could range in size from small isolated bands (26-78 men) to small armies (5-6,000 men). Although levies in the homelands—lethings—could slightly increase the size of the armies of the Royal Vikings and the home armies of the nascent Scandinavian kingdoms, the balkanized power structure of these kingdoms during this period meant that the lethings likely did not result in significantly larger armies (10-15,000 men at best). While the Northmen were definitely fierce and brutal warriors, the view of them as undisciplined is wrong. There is a great deal of evidence to suggest that the Northmen used straightforward but effective tactics and techniques very similar to those utilized by their ancient Germanic antecedents, but with a higher degree of discipline—during the period covered by this gallery, there were few disciplined infantry forces in Europe that could match them in open battle (they were vulnerable to well-equipped and trained cavalry, however). The wealth generated by the viking raids fed into the growth of centralized monarchies at home—Norway by 872 CE, Denmark by 936 CE, and Sweden by 970 CE—and by 850 CE major plundering expeditions and armies of conquest began to appear, either led by kings (Old Norse, koningar; singular, koningr) or chiefs (Old Norse, jarls; singular, jarl). The most successful of these created the Kingdom of York (Jórvík)(866-954 CE) in northeastern England, the Kingdom of Dublin (Dyflin)(839-1171 CE) in Ireland, the Duchy of Normandy (Normandia)(911-1259 CE) in France, the Kingdoms of the Isles—Sudreyjar (“South Isles”)(848-1098 CE), Nordreyjar (“North Isles”)(848-875 CE), the Earldom of Orkney (Orkneyjar)(875-890 CE), and the Kingdom of Mann and the Isles (1098-1265 CE)—in northern and western Scotland, the colonies of the Gallwegians (849-1034 CE) and the Kingdom of Galloway (1034-1234 CE) in northwestern England, the Icelandic Free State (930-1262 CE) in Iceland, and the early Rus’ city-states (Gardariki)(830-899 CE) in Russia (the North Sea Empire is mentioned above). This gallery only covers the initial period of viking settlement in Normandy—ca. 911-987 CE—and thereafter the Normans should be treated separately. Similarly, this gallery only covers the early viking raiders and settlers in Russia (in the east, vikings were known as varangians)—ca. 750-930 CE—and thereafter the early Rus’ city-states are covered by my Early Medieval Russians gallery. The reason for this is that prior to the above-cited dates, the vikings of what would become Normandy and Rus’ would simply have been viking fellowships, but after those dates they would have already started to become assimilated into the indigenous culture. The last viking raid was recorded in 1094 CE. By 1100 CE, the consolidation of the home kingdoms in Scandinavia was more-or-less complete, and although the lethings of these kingdoms still relied on a combination of housecarls, prosperous landowners, and a broad class of free men (farmers, craftsmen, traders), the nature of the military system of the Dark Age Northmen had begun to evolve, and from about 1100 CE the Scandinavian military system, and the equipment of its warriors, would have started to look significantly different—although Scandinavia was never fully feudalized and developed its own unique Medieval military institutions, the equipment and some of the institutions began to show heavy continental European influence by about 1100 CE (despite its political independence, Iceland generally followed the pattern of Norway). Also by about 1100 CE, the viking colonies that remained in Ireland, Scotland, and England were in the process of assimilation with the native populace, and the military institutions of the Norse Gaels (as the Gaelicized Northmen of Ireland, Scotland, and England are often called) were already evolving away from the institutions described in this gallery (giving rise to the Medieval gallowglass class of warriors).

 

The social structure of the Northmen at first seems relatively simple and straightforward, with only three recognized social classes—chiefs (singular, jarl; plural, jarls; Anglicized as “earl/earls”), free men (singular, karl; plural, karls; Anglicized as “carl/carls” or “churl/churls”), and slaves (singular, träll; plural, trälls; Anglicized as “thrall/thralls”). However, nothing with the Northmen is as simple as it seems. As with ancient Germanic societies, there was a high premium on individual liberty, and at least during the early part of the period covered by this gallery there was often very little to distinguish between jarls and karls—jarls were basically just prosperous karls. The initial viking raids were mostly carried out by “fellowships” or “partnerships” (félag) of fellows/partners (félagi) who could be jarls or karls. It would seem that jarls most often had the resources to organize and equip partnerships (particularly being able to afford to have longships built), and therefore they often had a leadership role, but karls could and often did pool their resources to carry out raids on their own, under their own elected leader(s), and success could easily lead to upward mobility. However, both the wealth gained as the result of the viking raids, and the relationships that developed as the result of these partnerships, tended to lead to greater social stratification as successful leaders attempted to cement their position and formalize the hierarchy of the society in which they lived. By the beginning of the tenth century CE, the social position of many jarls were gradually transformed from being merely prosperous free men to being something like regional kings whose leadership was recognized by all the karls in a given region, while particularly successful karls were often recognized as local leaders—intermediary between jarls and karls—known as hersirs (singular, hersir). Although hersirs were something like village headmen, the name literally means “Commander of 100,” indicating the military role attached to this social rank. The Northmen do not seem to have used this term literally, however, as referring to a leader of precisely 100 men. Rather, hersir was generally used in one of two ways—to denote a viking captain that led a félag in his own right (whether he was a jarl or a karl), or as a sub-commander of a jarl who commanded a sub-unit of karls and/or bóndi. Another layer of social stratification that seems to have appeared by the end of the ninth century is the rank of bóndi or húsbóndi (“farmer” or “house-farmer,” Anglicized as “bondsman/bondsmen” or “housebondsman/housebondsmen”). As with the original distinction between jarls and karls, bóndi/húsbóndi seem initially to have been nothing more than particularly prosperous karls (bóndi were actual farmers, whereas húsbóndi seems to have been a term for men who lived in a town and were probably traders or craftsmen). However, as the Viking Age progressed, the term karl gradually came to be used only in reference to free men who did not own their own land, and who worked contractually for a noble or bondsman (essentially a manservant, farmhand, assistant, or worker).

 

By the end of the ninth century, a class of bondsmen arose in the service of the increasingly wealthy and powerful nobility that became the backbone of most subsequent Northmen armies—these were the famous housekarls/housecarls/huscarls/huscarles/houscarls. They were generally known in Old Norse as húskarlar (singular, húskarl), meaning “free men [man] of the household,” although they were also sometimes known as innaesmaen/innaesmann (“inside-men/man,” i.e., non-family with positions within the household of a jarl). These were originally men who were something like household manservants, but by the beginning of the tenth century the term specifically referred to armed retainers who served in the retinue of a jarl or king (by the tenth century, some jarls were already styling themselves as koningr, “king”). These retinues were generally known as hirths (singular, hirth)(although the term drótt was also sometimes used), and thus their members were also sometimes referred to as hirthmen (singular, hirthman). These terms all seem to be related to the ancient Germanic root word for “hearth,” and thus a reasonable modern translation could also be “hearthmen/man,” terms that also hint at the idea that these were men intimately attached to the household (i.e., the hearth was considered the heart of the household). In the modern Scandinavian languages, the terms are rendered as hird/hirds/hirdmen/hirdman. Unlike bóndi, húsbóndi, and karls, who had to pool their resources to equip themselves, housecarls were financially supported by their lord, making them retainers (although still free men). This was done both by the lord paying for equipment out of his own coffers, and by sharing out wealth acquired through raiding and/or conquest. For this reason, housecarls were also sometimes called heithpegar (“gift [or pay] receivers”), although it should be noted that technically they were not considered mercenaries as we would understand that term. These were men that bound themselves to the service of their chief by oaths of amity and loyalty—often for life—and who were willing to die in the service of their chief. In return, they were considered members of the chief’s household, and their “pay” was essentially in the form of room and board, supplemented with the sharing out of booty, which it was the obligation of the chief to do. It was also in the best interests of each chief to make certain that his hirthmen were as well equipped as he could make them—they were, after all, his bodyguards, the physical expression of his power, and the means by which he acquired more wealth and power. As with viking félag, sub-units of housecarls were commanded by men using the title, hersir (although, once again, they do not seem to have literally commanded 100 men). By the end of the tenth century, some housecarls seem to have begun to receive land as gifts/payment for their services—both at home and in newly conquered territories overseas—and these hirthsmen became known as heimpegi (“home-receivers”). It is not known whether such men were henceforth expected to equip themselves from their own resources, and thus would form yet another social layer between jarls and bóndi/húsbóndi, or whether they were still considered part of a chief’s household, which would make them something akin to a majordomo or seneschal. There is, however, no evidence that feudalism, or any kind of quasi-feudal system, developed in the lands controlled by the Northmen, so I tend to favor the idea that these heimpegi likely expanded the class of landholding chiefs, perhaps even becoming jarls themselves, and thus their relationship with the chief that granted them land as a gift is likely best characterized as an alliance (i.e., cooperative, not hierarchical).

 

As mentioned above, the hirth became the backbone of most later armies of the Northmen, although the félag of hersir, bóndi, húsbóndi, and karls remained an important supplementary source of military manpower until the end of the eleventh century. Indeed, even as the home territories began to be consolidated into centralized states, and independent viking félagi began to fall out of favor, there remained in some of the far-flung outposts of the Northmen independent brotherhoods or warrior societies of vikings known as vikinge-lag (literally, “viking-law,” i.e., “[those that live by] viking-law”). These were simply félagi who had formed relatively stable long-term associations, who built and maintained their own palisaded raiding/trading outposts (Old Norse, longphuirt; singular, longphort) and longboats (langskips/langskip), who lived by a mutually agreed-upon (although usually very strict) code of discipline, who elected their own leaders, and who both operated independently and hired themselves out to other Northmen as mercenaries. By far the most famous of these were the Jomsvikings, who established a fort—Jomsborg—somewhere along the southern Baltic littoral in the territory of the Wends (West Slavs) or the Prusi (Old Prussians), and were active in the tenth and eleventh centuries CE. To gain admission to this brotherhood, one had to be between 18 and 50, with a reputation for valor, although this reputation was tested in a ritual duel (holmgang) fought against a prominent current member. Once admitted, each Jomsviking was required to follow a strict code of conduct—the members treated themselves as brothers, and thus were sworn to avenge the death of any other members the same as if they were biological brothers; members were forbidden to speak ill of fellow members or to quarrel with them (if feuds developed, these were mediated by Jomsviking officers); members were forbidden to show fear or to flee in the face of enemy forces considered to be of equal or inferior strength (although an orderly retreat in the face of numerically superior forces was acceptable); members shared the spoils of battle equally; no Jomsviking was allowed to be absent from Jomsborg for more than three days without the permission of the officers of the brotherhood; women and children were not allowed within the fortress walls of the Jomsborg; and no women or children were to be taken captive on raids (it is unknown whether members were forbidden to marry or have liaisons with women outside the walls of Jomsborg, but this seems unlikely).

 

By the end of the tenth century, the homelands of the Northmen in Scandinavia underwent a series of power struggles between various ultra-powerful jarls and koningar that eventually led to the development of regional kingships. By the mid-ninth century, there were 31 petty kingdoms in Norway (some chiefs referred to themselves as koningr, others as jarl), two large kingdoms in Sweden (Sweodeod and Götland), and 15 petty kingdoms in Denmark. These petty kingdoms not only launched plundering expeditions and wars of conquest overseas, but they also spent much of the seventh, eighth, and ninth centuries fighting each other. In order to better defend themselves against the attacks of their neighbors, these petty kingdoms developed a levy system that would allow a koningr or jarl to quickly raise a body of local men (bóndi, húsbóndi, and karls) to defend a given territory. This was particularly important when the koningr or jarl in question was overseas campaigning with the bulk of his housecarls. These levies were known as leithangr (Old Norse, “light-men,” Anglicized as “lething”). The name seems to imply they were generally more lightly equipped than housecarls, although the evidence suggests they were organized similarly, fought in much the same manner, and were more disciplined than vikings. The modern Scandinavian terms for these levies are leidang (Norwegian), leding (Danish), and ledung (Swedish). The lethings seem to have been an attempt at formalizing the previously ad hoc system of the viking félag. Each petty kingdom was organized into districts called “ship-communities” (Old Norse, skipraetha), each district being responsible for building, maintaining, and manning one longship. The headman of each district was known as the styrimathr (Old Norse, “steersman”), who functioned as the captain of the district’s ship, while the levied men were referred to as lithsmathar (Old Norse, “oarsmen”; singular, lithsmathr; Anglicized as “lithsmen/lithsmann”), and each district’s band of levied men was known as a lith, hlid, or lid (lithsmathr/lithsmathar were, prior to the creation of the lethings, general terms for Northmen warriors, most of whom were sailors on warships that used oars). Although naval warfare remained highly important, even during defensive actions, such forces could also fight on land, but the organization of the units was still based on the naval levy. We can therefore see that the styrimathr is roughly the equivalent of the hersir, and the skipraetha is roughly the equivalent of the félag—from 600 to 875 CE all viking armies consisted of félag commanded by jarls; between 876 and 984 CE minor viking armies consisted of félag commanded by jarls or hersir, while major armies consisted of a core of húskarlar supplemented with félag, with overall command usually in the hands of a koningr or jarl; between 985 and 1094 CE, there were still independent félag, although these were mostly located outside of the home territories and many had developed into mercenary viking brotherhoods (vikinge-lag), but major armies commanded by a koningr or jarl had a core of húskarlar sometimes supplemented by vikinge-lag and/or leithangr; and between 1095 and 1100 CE there were only húskarlar and leithangr (i.e., by this latter period, the leithangr had fully supplanted the félag, although some vikinge-lag persisted overseas). All of these classes of warriors were essentially infantry. The home countries lacked the kind of land needed to maintain significant numbers of cavalry horses, and although we know that overseas expeditions of Vikings often seized horses to use as overland transportation (and to carry booty back to the ships), the overwhelming preponderance of evidence points to the fact that the Northmen almost always preferred to dismount to fight. Sometimes small numbers of horsemen were used as raiders, flankers, and scouts, but in those places where the Vikings adopted cavalry warfare on a larger scale (e.g., Normandy and Russia), it was due to the fact that they had assimilated with local culture and thus are beyond the scope of this gallery. Even when fighting naval battles, there is no evidence of the kind of ship maneuvers or ship-to-ship artillery like we find in Mediterranean warfare—the object was always to pull alongside an enemy ship, board it, and try to clear the deck in hand-to-hand combat.

 

I would like to make one final note of another type of warrior amongst the Northmen that has captured the popular imagination—the berserker. There are two types of berserker identified in the sources—berserkir (“bear-shirted”) and ulfhethnar (“wolf-coats”). These do not seem to have been distinct warrior societies, but rather the choice of skin worn seems simply to have been predicated on personal choice. Nevertheless, the choice of wearing the skins of these predators does seem to have been linked in some way with a belief in lycanthropy (i.e., the berserkers possibly believed they were channeling animal spirits, or perhaps they even believed they transformed into lycanthropes in battle). I think they are best seen as something akin to warrior-shamans, since they seem to have had an even higher degree of attachment to the cults of Odin and Thor than other Northmen (these were the patron-gods of most fighters in pre-Christian Scandinavia). Berserkers used a kind of psychopathic rage to fuel them in battle. There are several modern theories regarding the nature of the battle rage of the berserkers, based largely on the literary evidence that describes their behavior—they may have used psychotropic mushrooms in some sort of pre-battle ritual, they may have truly been psychopathic or suffered from some sort of mental illness (writers frequently mention them foaming at the mouth and even sometimes having fits of rage at unexpected times, so that they attacked inanimate objects like rocks or trees in order to avoid attacking their own men), they may have been delusional (e.g., they actually believed they were channeling animal spirits or transforming into lycanthropes), the battle-fury may simply have been an act that was intended to intimidate and frighten enemy fighters, or some combination of these explanations. Considering the relatively high degree of discipline on display throughout much of the rest of the military system of the Northmen, it is difficult to identify exactly how these men fitted into the overall battle scheme—they were given to making wild impetuous charges (at the naval Battle of Svöldr, a unit of berserkers apparently charged overboard in an attempt to reach an enemy ship, but being weighed down by their armor they sank and drowned) and often fought two-handed (i.e., without a shield)—the primary tactical formations used by most Northmen were the skjaldborg (Old Norse, “shield-wall”) or svinfylking (Old Norse, “Swine-array” or “Boar’s-snout”), both of which relied on relatively tightly knit rank-and-file group maneuvers (the shield-wall was basically a phalanx, while the Swine-array/Boar’s-snout was a saw-toothed line made up of a series of wedge-shaped formations deployed side-by-side). It is tempting to see the berserks as a throwback, or perhaps holdover, to/from ancient Germanic warbands, and although there is some evidence that they were sometimes grouped together in distinct warrior-bands, the berserker-bands mentioned in the sources are quite small (a maximum of around a dozen men). Such small groups would only have made up a significant unit in the smaller raiding bands of the vikings (i.e., those with less than 100 men overall), but would seem to be insignificant in a larger army (unless there were multiple tiny units of berserkers that were brigaded together for major battles). This is even more jarring when you look at the evidence that points to the fact that berserkers were often used as the personal bodyguards of many pagan koningar, jarls, and hersir, and the sources make it obvious that they fought alongside their lord in battle (i.e., as a type of housecarl). To be honest, I don’t think I have a satisfactory explanation for how these seemingly impetuous fanatics should be modeled in a strategic gaming system—their small numbers seems to militate against separate deployment in distinct units (and there is no evidence to support the assertion made by some authors that their ranks may have been “swelled by imitators”), but for them to be fit into the overall tactical stance of a unit of housecarls would seem to indicate that they either didn’t really lose control of themselves in battle (i.e., that their famous battle-rage was mostly hyperbole), or that the housecarls were not as disciplined as the evidence suggests. The only other explanation I can make by way of conjecture is that perhaps they operated something like the ekdromoi of ancient Greek armies. The primary battle formation of the ancient Greeks was the phalanx—very similar to the shield-wall of the Northmen—composed of close-order main battle spearmen (hoplites or phalangites). However, many Greek phalanxes included a class of soldier called ekdromoi (Greek, "out-runners")—more lightly equipped hoplites that were prepared to leave the ranks and charge out ahead of the phalanx to achieve various tactical goals. These goals included chasing off skirmishers, the capture of strategically important terrain features (like a hill full of enemy archers), or to pursue broken and fleeing troops (thus allowing the men of the phalanx to maintain discipline in case of a potential regroup by the enemy). All of these tasks would seem to be things that would have also been useful to commanders of a shield-wall. Things at which the fighting style of the berserkers (as described in period sources) would seem to fit. To the above-sited possible tasks, I would add that descriptions of battles between two shield walls sometimes mention men that would charge forward between the ordered ranks of the shield walls and attempt to create a breach in the enemy shield wall through a ferocious attack, sometimes with a group of comrades-in-arms. These men were often leaders (the Northmen believed in leading by example), and as I have mentioned, berserkers are most often mentioned in period sources as being part of the retinue of various leaders.

​

The figures I used for the armies of the Northmen are almost entirely from Old Glory 15s. This is a company for which I have deeply ambivalent feelings. The quality of the sculpts is really hit-and-miss. Some lines are fantastic, others not so much—some sculpts are well thought out and well done, others look like they were thrown in just to fill out the line. Some of the poses are downright goofy looking (I hate the guys that appear to be hugging their spears, a pose that recurs in several ranges). I do think their Vikings are one of their better lines. Another thing I’m not fond of, however, is the way they require you to buy in bulk (most packs are 20 figures). If you’re just looking for a few figures or some specific poses, you’re out of luck unless you want to overbuy just to get what you want (I did). However, I have to say, I really like many of their infantry poses, they have some very solid horse sculpts with dynamic poses (running, rearing, etc.), and I like the really solid, blocky sculpts of many of the infantry figures (like the Vikings). They work particularly well for brawny warriors like Vikings, Germanics, Dark Age Irish, etc. Good details, deeply etched (so they take an ink wash well), enough surface area for a painter to add some decorative detail, and a pretty good variety of poses. The cavalry are a combination of Essex and Splintered Light—there just isn’t much choice for Viking cavalry figures out there, but I think these work well (the Splintered Light figures actually come from their Saxon line). The big tent for the camp and the berserkers are from Baueda Models, the shield transfers and banners are from Little Big Men Studios, and some few shields are my own creations.