¹ Since the appearance of Sawyer, P. H., The Age of the Vikings (London, 1962)Google Scholar, there has been much discussion of the size of Viking armies. In general, Sawyer's claim that the normal Viking force should be counted in hundreds rather than in thousands has won acceptance, with the possibility being reserved that several smaller armies might combine to form great armies; but most scholars have maintained that the final attacks were on a much larger scale, and Sawyer accepted that in the second edition of his book (London, 1971), pp. 131–8. The most recent discussion of the problem is in Keynes, Simon, The Diplomas of King Æthelred ‘the Unready’ 978–1016: a Study in their Use as Historical Evidence (Cambridge, 1980), pp. 224–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

² Olsen, Olaf, ‘Tanker i tusindåret’, Skalk 1980 no. 3, 18–26Google Scholar. At a late stage in the preparation of this paper, I became aware of Timothy Reuter's study of very similar problems in a Carolingian context: ‘Plunder and Tribute in the Carolingian Empire’, TRHS, 5th ser. 35 (1985), 75–94. Dr Reuter, no doubt rightly, questions the concept of the Germanic free men and their military duties on which discussion of these problems has so far been based, and he argues convincingly that practically all early medieval offensive warfare was private in the sense in which I am using the word. It was not conducted by heads of state with forces of free men conscripted on the basis of their landholding, but by warlords, of which the king himself was the greatest, with followers who hoped to be well provided for and richly rewarded; one is reminded of the young Scandinavians who joined the lið of a famous furungi like Torsten (see below, p. 111). I have not here made any attempt to place the Scandinavian lið in its European context, or to compare it with the followings of Carolingian, Merovingian, Visigothic or Lombard rulers, or with the comitatus of Tacitus. Yet the lið does belong firmly in this context and I entirely agree with Dr Reuter when he states that ‘Bretons, Danes, Moravians and Franks shared to a surprising extent a common political culture’ (ibid., p. 91).

³ Skovgaard-Petersen, Inge, ‘Vikingerne i den nyere forskning’, Historisk Tidsskrift, 12th ser., 5 (1971), 651–721, at 706–7.Google Scholar

⁴ Skovgaard-Petersen, Inge, ‘Oldtid og vikingetid’, Danmarks historie, ed. Christensen, Aksel E. et al. 1, Tiden indtil 1340 (Copenhagen, 1977), 15–209, at 184.Google Scholar

⁵ ‘Leidang’, Kulturhistorisk leksicon for nordisk middelalder, ed. Rona, Georg and Karker, Allan, X (Copenhagen, 1965), col. 444.Google Scholar

⁶ Diplomatarium Danicum 1.2, ed. Weibull, Lauritz and Skyum-Nielsen, Niels (Copenhagen 1963), no. 21.Google Scholar

⁷ Christensen, Thus Aksel E., ‘Tiden 1042–1241’, Danmarks historie, ed. Christensen et al. 1, Tiden indtil 1340, 211–399, at 248Google Scholar. Aelnoth, , ‘Gesta Swenomagni Regis et Filiorum eivs’, Vitae Sanctorum Danorum, ed. Gertz, M.CI. (Copenhagen, 1908–1912), pp. 77–136, at 102–3Google Scholar, tries to take the blame for harshness off Cnut and lay it on his reeves.

⁸ Malmros, Rikke, ‘Leding og skjaldekvad’, for nordisk oldkyndighed og historie (1985), forthcoming.Google Scholar

⁹ ‘Oldtid og vikingetid’, p. 196.

¹⁰ Christiansen, Tage E., ‘Trelleborgs Alder. Arkæologisk Datering’, for nordisk oldkyndighed og historic (1982), pp. 84–110Google Scholar; Bonde, Niels and Christensen, Kjeld, ‘Trelleborgs Alder. Dendrokronologisk datering’, for nordisk oldkyndighed og historic (1982), pp. 111–52Google Scholar. Both papers incorporate a full English translation.

¹¹ Roesdahl, Else, Fyrkat. Enjysk vikingeborg II. Oldsagerne og gravpladsen (Copenhagen, 1977), pp. 172–3Google Scholar; Lund, Niels, ‘Vikingetiden’, Dansk Socialhistorie 2 (Copenhagen, 1980), 11–75, at 53–4.Google Scholar

¹² Ulsig, Erik, ‘Bolbegrebet og bolskiftet’, Dansk landbrug i oldtid og middelalder, ed. Thrane, H., Skrifter fra Historisk Institut, Odense Universitet, 32 (Odense, 1984), 74–81, at 80.Google Scholar

¹³ Andersen, H. Helmuth et al. , Danevirke, Jysk Arkæologisk Selskabs Skrifter 13 (Copenhagen, 1976), 12–19.Google Scholar

¹⁴ Lund, ‘Vikingetiden’, pp. 53–5; Lund, Niels, ‘Viking Age Society in Denmark – Evidence and Theories’, Danish Medieval History – New Currents, ed. Skyum-Nielsen, N. and Lund, N. (Copenhagen, 1981), pp. 22–35, at 24–5.Google Scholar

¹⁵ Annales Bertiniani, s.a. 847 (Quellen zur karolingischen Reichsgeschichte 11, ed. Rau, Reinhold (Darmstadt, 1969), 70)Google Scholar.

¹⁶ Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, s.a. 893 (The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle: a Revised Translation, ed. Whitelock, Dorothy et al. (London, 1961Google Scholar; rev. imp., 1965), p. 54).

¹⁷ ‘Landvärn’, Kulturhistorisk leksikon for nordisk middelalder x, col. 307. The most recent scholarly treatment of these institutions is Kjersgaard, Erik, ‘Leding og landeværn’, Middelalderstudier tilegnede Aksel E. Christensen, ed. Christiansen, Tage E. et al. (Copenhagen, 1966), pp. 113–40Google Scholar. Hedegaard, Ole A., Leding og landeværn – Middelalderens danske forsvar. En militærorganisatorisk undersθgelse (Vedbæk, 1985) may safely be disregarded.Google Scholar

¹⁸ Andersen, Per Sveaas, Samlingen av Norge og kristningen av landet 800–1130, Handbok i Norges historie 2 (Oslo, 1977), 271.Google Scholar

¹⁹ Saxo, , Gesta Danorum, ed. Olrik, J. and Ræder, H. (Copenhagen, 1931), pp. 463–4.Google Scholar

²⁰ Diplomatarium Danicum 1.2, no. 78.

²¹ Skovgaard-Petersen, ‘Vikingerne i den nyere forskning’, p. 704.

²² The runic inscriptions cited hereafter, and other inscriptions relating to Viking activity in England, may be found in Sven Jansson, B. F., Runinskrifter i Sverige, 2nd ed. (Uppsala, 1977)Google Scholar, and The Runes of Sweden (London, 1962); see also idem, Swedish Vikings in England: the Evidence of the Rune Stones, Dorothea Coke Memorial Lecture, 1965 (London, 1966). The standard corpus of Swedish runic inscriptions, which began publication in 1900 and is still in progress, is Sveriges Runinskrifter. It is organized by provinces, and the provincial volumes relevant in our context are: Ostergötlands Runinskrifter, ed. Brate, Erik (Stockholm, 1911–1918)Google Scholar, hereafter Og; Södermanlands Runinskrifter, ed. Brate, Erik and Wessén, Erik (Stockholm, 1924–1936)Google Scholar, hereafter Sö; and Upplands Runinskrifter, ed. Wessén, Elias and Jansson, S. B. F. (Stockholm, 1940–), hereafter U. The Kålsta stone is U 669.Google Scholar

²³ ‘Lex Castrensis,’ in Scriptores minores historiæ Danicæ medii ævi, ed. Gertz, M. Cl. (Copenhagen, 1917–1922) 1, 55–93.Google Scholar

²⁴ U 112.

²⁵ There is a comprehensive study of the Varangian guard by Blöndal, Sigfús, The Varangians of Byzantium. An Aspect of Byzantine Military History, transl., rev., and rewritten by Benedikz, Benedikt S. (Cambridge, 1978).Google Scholar

²⁶ DR(= Danmarks Runeindskrifter, ed. Jacobsen, Lis and Moltke, Erik (Copenhagen, 1941–1942)), 131 and 295.Google Scholar

²⁷ DR 3.

²⁸ DR 154, 155, 296 and 297.

²⁹ Sö 338; U 330 and 335.

³⁰ There has been a good deal of discussion about the thegns and drengs appearing in Danish runic inscriptions. In 1927 Svend Aakjær suggested that they were royal servants, and claimed that they formed a parallel to the thegns in Anglo-Saxon England (‘Old Danish Thegns and Drengs’, Ada Philologica Scandinavica 2 (1927–1928), 1–30). Although the runologist Karl Martin Nielsen attempted to refute this thesis (‘Var thegnerne og drengene kongelige hirdmænd’. for nordisk oldkyndighed og historie (1945), pp. 111–21), it has generally been adopted by historians (e.g. Christensen, Aksel E., Vikingetidens Danmark (Copenhagen, 1969), pp. 218–22Google Scholar, and Lund, ‘Vikingetiden’, pp. 61–2). Aakjær's ideas would undoubtedly have gained a much smoother acceptance if he and other Danish historians had realized that the English thegns were not just royal servants.

³¹ Sö 338.

³² U 778, Svinnegarn. There is a vast literature on Ingvar and his expedition. A comprehensive study with good bibliographic references may be found in Pritsak, Omeljan, The Origin of Rus’, I: Old Scandinavian sources other than the Sagas (Harvard, 1981), pp. 423–60Google Scholar; see also Shepard, Jonathan, ‘Yngvarr's Expedition to the East and a Russian Inscribed Stone Cross’, SBVS 21 (1982–1985), 222–92Google Scholar.

³³ DR 68.

³⁴ Vikingetidens Danmark, p. 220.

³⁵ Quellen 11, ed. Rau, 106, line 21. See also Lund, Niels, ‘The Settlers: where do we get them from –and do we need them?’, Proceedings of the Eighth Viking Congress, ed. Bekker-Nielsen, Hans et al. (Odense, 1981), pp. 149–71, at 152.Google Scholar

³⁶ Annales Bertiniani, s.a. 860 (Quellen 11, ed. Rau, 102).

³⁷ Annales Bertiniani, s.a. 855 (Quellen 11, ed. Rau, 88).

³⁸ Annales Fuldenses, s.a. 854 (Quellen zur karolingischen Reichsgeschichte 111, ed. Rau, Reinhold (Darmstadt, 1960), 46).Google Scholar

³⁹ See English Historical Documents c. 500–1042 (hereafter EHD) ed. Whitelock, Dorothy, 2nd ed. (London, 1979), no. 121.Google Scholar

⁴⁰ EHD, ed. Whitelock, no. 42 (II Æthelred).

⁴¹ Encomium Emmae Reginae, ed. Campbell, A., Camden 3rd ser. 72 (London, 1949), 11–13.Google Scholar

⁴² The Jomsvikings have led a very chequered life in scholarship. Lauritz Weibull referred them to the world of fantasy (Nordisk Historia 1 (Stockholm, 1948), 348–58); but Svend Ellehøj restored them to reality (‘Olav Tryggvesons fald og Venderne’, Historisk Tidsskrift, 11th ser. 4 (1953), 1–55), and his findings have been accepted by Scandinavian historians like Christensen, A. E. (Vikingetidens Danmark, pp. 251–9)Google Scholar, I. Skovgaard-Petersen (‘Oldtid og vikingetid’, pp. 179–85), and Andersen, P. Sveaas (Samlingen av Norge, p. 105)Google Scholar. Recently, however, their existence has again been questioned: see Sobel, Leopold, ‘Ruler and Society in Early Medieval Western Pomerania’, Antemurale 25 (1981), 19–142, at 79–85Google Scholar; unfortunately Dr Sobel does not discuss Professor Ellehøj's evidence. The truth concealed behind the late and very legendary tradition about them may be that they were just a gang of thugs operating in the Baltic.

⁴³ It is uncertain whether there is any element of truth behind the traditions of Swein's capture; but Ellehøj suggested that the reason why Swein turned his attention towards England in the last decade of the tenth century was that he was out of pocket because of the ransom he had been forced to pay (‘Olav Tryggvesons fald og Venderne’, p. 34). For a penetrating discussion of the traditions about Swein Forkbeard, see Skovgaard-Petersen, Inge, ‘Sven Tveskæg i den ældste danske historiografi. En Saxostudie’, Middelalderstudier tilegnede Aksel E. Christensen, ed. Christiansen et al., pp. 1–38.Google Scholar

⁴⁴ Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, s.a. 1012 (Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, ed. Whitelock, et al. , p. 92).Google Scholar

⁴⁵ Steenstrup, Johannes C. H. R., Venderne og de Danske for Valdemar den Stores Tid, Indbydelsesskrift til Kjøbenhavns Universitets Aarsfest til Erindring om Kirkens Reformation (Copenhagen, 1900), p. 54.Google Scholar

⁴⁶ Encomium Emmae Reginae, ed. Campbell, , p. 10Google Scholar; Stenton, F. M., Anglo-Saxon England, 3rd ed. (Oxford, 1971), p. 384.Google Scholar

⁴⁷ Keynes, , Diplomas, pp. 219–20Google Scholar; Encomium Emmae Reginae, ed. Campbell, , pp. 76–82.Google Scholar

⁴⁸ Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, s.a. 1014 (Two of the Saxon Chronicles Parallel, ed. Plummer, Charles (Oxford, 1892–1899) 1, 145).Google Scholar

⁴⁹ Encomium Emmae Reginae, ed. Campbell, , p. 18.Google Scholar

⁵⁰ U 194.

⁵¹ Og 111.

⁵² U 344 (Yttergärde).

⁵³ Norges innskrifter med de yngre runer, ed. Olsen, Magnus and Liestøl, Aslak (Oslo, 1941–), no. 184.Google Scholar

⁵⁴ Sö 260. Pritsak, (Origin of the Rus', pp. 406–12Google Scholar) identifies the father of Ulf with the Norwegian earl Hákon Eiríksson.

⁵⁵ Ulf appears in only two acceptable charters (Sawyer, P. H., Anglo-Saxon Charters: an Annotated List and Bibliography (London, 1968), nos. 980 and 984Google Scholar), while Eilaf signs nos. 955, 956, 958, 960, 977, 980, 894 and 1423. In addition, both of them appear in some spurious charters.