Tags
Alexander Draymon, BBC, Bernard Cornwell, Medieval England, Medieval Europe, Military Stuff, The Last Kingdom, Uhtred of Bebbanburg, Vikings
I’ve finally found time to do my last post on The Last Kingdom, after wading through weeks’ worth of term papers and exams. Sorry this post is overdue. I knew I was going to have to re-watch several episodes to formulate my thoughts on the show’s depiction of 9th century warfare, and it took me a while to find the time.
In the series, the Vikings and the Anglo-Saxons are equipped nearly identically in terms of their war gear, with one major exception. Vikings get round shields and Anglo-Saxons get rather pathetic small rectangular shields, clearly inferior in terms of how much of their body they cover and also in terms of manufacture (the Viking shields have metal rims, or actually if you look close, painted details designed to look like metal rims). The purpose of this difference is probably so that the viewer can distinguish the Viking troops from the Anglo-Saxons, which is a reasonable issue for the show to struggle with. But it’s wrong historically. Both Vikings and Anglo-Saxons had the same type of shields. Visually, there wouldn’t have been a whole lot to distinguish the two sides from each other.
In the first episode, three Northumbrian eldermen lead their troops against the invading Vikings. At the battlefield, the Vikings form a testudo and wait in position while the Anglo-Saxons charge across the field in an unruly mob, having apparently never seen a testudo before. (For those who are unclear on what a testudo is, I discuss the topic here.) The Anglo-Saxons are unable to penetrate the testudo, although they do force the Vikings to give a little ground and manage to kill a few. This leads to the Anglo-Saxon reinforcements charging in, thinking they are winning.

The foolish Anglo-Saxons charging the Viking testudo
But then a second Viking unit rushes the field and forms a second testudo behind the Anglo-Saxons. This effective pens the Anglo-Saxons in. The two testudos slowly advance, mercilessly crushing the Northumbrian troops like the garbage compactor scene in Star Wars, only with much bloodier results.
There are a few things wrong here, namely almost everything. First, there is zero evidence that the Norse understood the concept of the testudo, much less had the intensive group military training to pull the formation off. (That is, unless you consider The Vikings, season 1, evidence.) Testudos required a degree of unit cohesion and training that, so far as the evidence allows us to speak, neither the Norse nor the Anglo-Saxons possessed. There’s no reason to think either side would have known about this ancient Roman military technique, much less been able to execute it.
(Ok, a brief digression. There is actually one medieval source that describes Vikings using a testudo. Abbo of Saint-Germaine, a French monk who was present at the Viking Siege of Paris in 886, describes the Vikings as advancing in a testudo. However, in this passage he’s using Roman military terminology, certainly because he’s read some Roman authors and possibly because he wants to show off how well-read he is. The question that historians debate is whether or not Abbo actually understands what a testudo is. Many scholars think that he is using Roman technical vocabulary without really knowing what the vocubalary means. In other words, he’s seen the Vikings using a shield wall and has decided to call that shield wall a testudo, either because he thinks it will make him look more learned or because he thinks that a medieval shield wall is the same thing as a testudo. This is a common problem with medieval authors, not at all unique to Abbo.
And I agree. I think it is much more likely that Abbo is misusing the term testudo here than that the Vikings somehow knew what an ancient Roman military formation involved, because there’s no easy way to explain how the Norse would have had access to military ideas from a culture that died out several centuries before their time. The Norse never fought a classical Roman legion, did not speak Latin, and did not know how to read. So how would they have gotten this information? Occam’s Razor makes me think that Abbo is more likely to have misused the terminology than that the Norse are to have understood this technique. However, this well-educated amateur scholar disagrees with my assessment. So you can decide for yourself.)
Second, the testudo was not really a fighting formation. Its tactical purpose was to allow soldiers to maneuver on the battlefield while taking arrow fire. It essentially puts soldiers into a sort of defensive crouch with their shields locked together. It’s unlikely that soldiers could have fought effectively from that posture, and even more unlikely that they could have held that formation effectively when a large number of hostile soldiers were charging them and slamming into the shields. The idea that a testudo could function offensively to push men back and kill them while still functioning defensively is highly dubious.

Anglo-Saxons with their crappy little shields.
Third, if you watch carefully, you see two testudos slowly closing together, trapping the Anglo-Saxons within. But there’s a huge problem. The testudo is a straight line. So when two testudos close in on each other, there’s nothing to prevent the Northumbrians trapped within from simply running out at the top or the bottom of the formation. The camera shot is structured to keep the viewer from realizing that is a possibility, but it definitely is.
In reality, the Vikings and the Anglo-Saxons used a very similar tactic when they had open-field battles. They both employed a formation called a shield wall, which is similar to a testudo but actually possible. In a shield wall, soldiers stand in a long line, close enough together that their shields overlap. The front rank focuses its energies on defense, while the men in the rank behind them focus on attacking over the shoulders of the front rank. Their presence also helps brace the front line, and if a man in the front rank is injured or killed, the man behind him can step up and close the gap.
The shield wall was a very effective formation, probably the most effective formation of the early Middle Ages. Unlike a testudo, it didn’t require long hours of practice to pull off (although certainly some drilling was necessary). At the battle of Hastings in 1066, the Anglo-Saxon shield wall withstood repeated charges by the Norman cavalry, although keeping the men from breaking rank and counter-attacking whenever the Normans retreated was a problem.
The big tactical drawback of the shield wall is that it was a static formation. When it advanced, it ran the risk of losing cohesion, and without cohesion, it lost most of its value. As a result, the Anglo-Saxons tended to take up a shield wall position and then wait for the other side to charge, trusting in the strength of their defensive position. As a result, when two Anglo-Saxon armies confronted each other, they frequently both adopted the shield wall formation and then waited for the other side to charge. They would taunt each other, each side hoping the other would lose its self-control and charge, thereby surrendering the defensive advantage.

A Roman testudo. Note that it requires fairly tall shields, the sort of shields no one in the MIddle Ages used
So the scene as it’s depicted is sort of the opposite of what would probably have happened if the Vikings had taken up a testudo. The Anglo-Saxons would have done the same and tried to goad the Norse into breaking formation. They were unlike to have charged recklessly and without any structure to attack an unfamiliar formation. We could always assume that the eldermen were stupid, because military commanders did sometimes make shitty decisions, act rashly or with overconfidence, or lose control of their troops. But a plot that requires stupidity to work is a lousy plot.
In the third episode, we see Uhtred (Alexander Draymon) and Leofric (Adrian Bower) drilling a group of Anglo-Saxon men in a shield wall technique. The two sides line up and adopt a shield wall (or what would pass for a shield wall with those crappy little rectangular shields). But then Leofric’s side charges, losing all cohesion, and Uhtred’s side responds by quickly losing cohesion as well. In the second round, the two sides advance more cautiously, probably more the way an actual shield wall would, at least until Leofric’s side charges again and dissolves into disorder. Given that it’s a training sequence, we can forgive that.
Then Uhtred teaches the Anglo-Saxons how to do a testudo, a totally new and unfamiliar formation they’ve never seen before. But Uhtred forgets to make himself part of the shield wall and instead stands in front of it when Leofric’s line charges. It’s a slightly comical moment, but it undercuts the idea that Uhtred is really a great tactician. But overall, this training scene is probably the closest the show gets to showing us something real about how Anglo-Saxons fought.

Uhtred in front of his testudo. Never mind the boom mike.
The idea that the Norse understood the testudo seems to only go back to first seasons of The Vikings. It’s a good illustration of how an historical film or show can shift the way people think about the past for the worse.
If you need help picturing this battle, the always-amusing Lindybeige has a nice analysis of the first episode.
The Battle of Edington
The first season climaxes with the Battle of Edington. The Danes, led by the villainous Skorpa (Jonas Malmsjö) and the less villainous Guthrum (Thomas W Gabrielsson) and the Anglo-Saxons, basically led by Leofric and Uhtred, take up positions opposite each other on a field. Both sides form a testudo, with the Anglo-Saxons suddenly having both their usual crappy rectangular shields and kite shields. The kite shield (which I always think of as the Ice-Cream-Cone shield because in silhouette they look like sugar cones with a single scoop of ice cream on them) seems to have been developed in the 11th century for use from horseback (because the narrow end of the shield can fit between the horse’s neck and the rider’s leg). The 9th century Anglo-Saxons didn’t use kite shields because 1) they hadn’t been invented yet, 2) the Anglo-Saxons were quite resistant to fighting from horseback, and 3) kite shields are rather awkwardly shaped for use by foot soldiers (although foot soldiers can use them). But the production people on the show must have realized that the crappy rectangular shields simply wouldn’t work for a testudo and just threw in some kite shields hoping no one would notice. But I did. That’s why I get paid the big bucks to review shows like this.
Although both sides possess small cavalry units, they’re mostly using foot soldiers. This will become important later on.
The Vikings decide to charge, despite the fact that charging a shield wall is generally a losing tactic. Despite inflicting some casualties (including Leofric), the Vikings are unable to penetrate the Anglo-Saxon testudo, which begins to force the Vikings backward.

The Vikings (left) collide with the Anglo-Saxons (right). The shields in the middle are the two testudos pressed against each other.
At this point, Skorpa has an opportunity to shift the course of the battle by leading his cavalry to flank the Anglo-Saxon formation which is vulnerable on its sides and read. Instead, he succumbs to his villainy and attacks the Anglo-Saxon camp, killing Uhtred’s current woman and bringing her head back to taunt him with.
That turns out to be a bad idea. The enraged Uhtred breaks from the testudo, leaps over the Viking testudo, and starts slaughtering Vikings, who are unable to do anything in response to his righteous fury (which apparently acts like a power-up in a video game). He single-handedly opens a big gap in the Viking position, allowing the Anglo-Saxons to charge into the breach and slaughter the bad guys, whose eyeliner is no longer able to protect them. Skorpa gets speared in the chest, Guthrum has to surrender and accept conversion, and the Anglo-Saxons get to live happily every after until next season, except poor Uhtred, who gets lots of juicy manpain to chew on because the woman he’s loved for the last two episodes has died.
Some elements of this are plausible. If you substitute shield walls for testudos, you have a basically believable 9th century battle, at least until Uhtred eats his spinach and starts clobbering the Vikings. Skorpa’s actions are more cartoon bad guy than ruthless military leader, but I suppose we could say he decided that a flanking maneuver wouldn’t work because he didn’t have a large cavalry unit and his maneuver might have been countered by the Anglo-Saxon cavalry. It seems unlikely that the Anglo-Saxons wouldn’t have posted any guards at their camp in case of just such villainy, and it’s not clear why the Anglo-Saxon cavalry doesn’t move to stop the raid on the camp. But this battle definitely makes a hell of a lot more sense than the one that opens the series.

11th century Normans with kite shields
In general, I dislike the show’s treatment of warfare. The show imagines that the Viking were able to beat the Anglo-Saxons because they had a superior battlefield tactic that the Anglo-Saxons didn’t understand, until Uhtred spilled the beans about how to perform the testudo. That’s just untrue. The Vikings did have a tactical advantage, but it was their longships, not their land tactics. The longship allowed the Vikings to get into a coastal or riverine area quickly, attack a surprised community when its defenses were down, and then get away before the local noble could raise a force to respond. However, during the late 9th century, the Norse switched over to conquest rather than raiding. At that point, the advantage that they had was more about numbers than superior tactics, from what we can tell from surviving sources. The Great Army (as the Viking force was called) probably included several thousand men (although historians have debated the exact size because we have no particularly solid numbers with which to make a real estimate). It wasn’t an enormous force, but the typical Anglo-Saxon kingdom probably could only field a force of several hundred fully trained elite warriors, supplementing that force with much more poorly-trained local peasant levies. So the Great Army probably had the upper hand in terms of numbers and battle experience. The force that Guthrum invaded Wessex with was only half the Great Army, but Alfred’s forces were weakened by years of coastal raiding and a few key defeats. Edington might only have involved one or two thousand men in total, but Alfred was gambling a lot on that battle.
The show also has a tendency, like so many modern depictions of ancient and medieval warfare, to privilege the righteousness of the hero’s cause over all other considerations. Uhtred wins his fights not because he is a demonstrably better fighter or because he’s tactically smarter, but because he’s filled with righteous fury that the enemy ultimately cannot prevail against. It’s the sort of assumption that teenagers make about how combat works. In general, Uhtred acts like an indignant teenager and the show tends to reward him for it. I want to like this show, because I love the fact that it’s telling a story about a period of English history that rarely gets much attention, but Uhtred is just such an unlikable and petulant protagonist that I can’t sympathize with him. Sigh.
This review was paid for by a kind donation to my Paypal account by my faithful reader Lyn. Thanks, Lyn! I’ve got a couple more requested reviews to tackle (my apologies that I’ve been taking a while to get to them guys) but if you want me to review a show or film, please make a generous donation and tell me what you want me to cover, and I’ll get to it as soon as I can.
Want to Know More?
The Last Kingdom is available on Amazon, as well as on Netflix. The first book of Bernard Cornwell’s Saxon Stories is also called The Last Kingdom.
If you want to know more about Anglo-Saxon warfare, I would suggest the works of Richard Abels. His Lordship and Military Obligation in Anglo-Saxon England is excellent. And his Alfred the Great: War, Kingship and Culture in Anglo-Saxon England is very topical for this series.
Thanks Andrew. I have to agree with you about Uhtred not being very likeable (petulant teenager is a great moniker) …he’s not much better in the books either — just altogether too much manpain. But at least the actor is great eye candy, lol.
LikeLiked by 1 person
If you like greasy longhairs…
LikeLike
And man buns lol. I’ve given up expecting these historical programs to show people with combed clean hair, sigh.
LikeLike
Good Lord, so many of you are talking out of your asses on a subject you clearly have no actual factual input on. The Danes, Norse, Scandinavians, Franks, Anglo-Saxons, and even the Rus had the concept of the “shield wall,” which was of course evolved from the Roman era – at the time of the show/books, this was only a couple of centuries ago, and technically still contemporary at that.
As to the character of Uhtred, read the feckin books. You’re not going to get more understandable character advancement than that. He makes sense in the show too, if you’d actually pay attention. But that seems beyond you all. It’s sad when a great character gets misunderstood by people like you.
LikeLike
I never said that the Norse et al. didn’t have the concept of a shield wall. They absolutely did have that concept and I explicit say so. What I said is that they didn’t have the concept of a testudo. A testudo is not a shield wall but a different type of formation entirely, with a different organization, different tactical purpose, and much greater training requirements. I’ll accept your apology now.
As for reading the books, I don’t have to. I’m reviewing tvs and movie shows, not books. If the show depicts the character poorly, whether or not the books depict him well is irrelevant to whether the tv shows as a piece of storytelling or not.
LikeLiked by 2 people
The lindybeige video you link to provided some exclamations of agreement, as well as quite a few chuckes.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yeah, he does good stuff
LikeLike
So pretty much looks like the script said “they form a shield wall” someone google image searched shield wall, found a picture of a testudo, and used it without bothering to check if there was another kind of shield wall?
Btw is the primary difference between a shield wall and a testudo the row of shields on top of the testudo?
LikeLike
Where did the Vikings get it from? Probably Troy or 300, both of which show the tactic. That would be my guess.
A shield wall faces in one direction and has only one rank of shields. A classic testudo faces in all four directions and has shields on top as well. These ‘Viking testudos’ are sort of a hybrid, facing one way, which three ranks of shields.
LikeLike
I hope you’re not serious. The Danes, Anglo-Saxons, Scandinavians, Franks, and Rus of the era most certainly did not get the idea of a shield wall from fictional movies you utter dumbass.
If you’d bother to actually delve into a bit of extremely interesting history instead of talking out of your uninformed ass, you’d realize what you’ve said is nonsense. There was never a term of “viking testudos,” in fact the term “viking” is not even a noun.
A shield wall was the valued tactic of the era in these parts of Europe, taken from Rome yes, but with the spin of using roundshields, seaxes, and axes.
LikeLike
As I replied to your previous post (made immediately after your first one, apparently), I don’t say they got the idea of the shield wall from the Romans. If you’re going to engage in overzealous insulting of strangers on the internet, you should do a better job of reading closing. You should also probably come up for air long enough to realize that my comment about them getting it from Troy was a joke, for the obvious reason that films wouldn’t be invented for a millennium. Sorry that my joke went over your head.
LikeLike
Pingback: Professor Marston and the Wonder Women: Secret Identities for Everyone | An Historian Goes to the Movies
I know it’s been a while since you talked about this show, but I have just come across your blog and was wondering whether you could answer a question. The Briton queen, Iseult, is referred to as a “pagan” several times, which I find rather mystifying since the Britons were evangelized before the Anglo-Saxons were. Am I right on that count or is there really evidence of pagan Britons in the ninth century?
LikeLike
Yes, you’re correct. There’s no historically plausible reason that the Cornish people would be pagan in this era.
LikeLike
Yet again, you’re blatantly talking out of your ass. The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, as well as myriad archeological findings in the lands of the Welsh show that many of the peoples, although Christian in religion/faith, still held the old worships to be true in conjunction to the new. The same was true of the Scottish and Irish kingdoms.
LikeLike
Wow, you’re really eager to yell at me, aren’t you? First, I’ll point out that the Cornish are not Welsh, although they are certainly related. So what archaeology tells us about the Welsh does not definitively tell us much about the Cornish, although it would give us some valuable parallel examples.
I will also point out that archaeology cannot demonstrate that “peoples…still held the old worships to be true”, because archaeology cannot give us clear indications of what people thought about things. It can give clues to what rituals were practiced (clues, not hard evidence, because recreating how a ritual site was used is usually enormously challenging), but it cannot take us very far into the heads of the people who performed those rituals. We can at best demonstrate that pagan rituals may have been practiced alongside Christian rituals, but that can’t even tell us that those pagan rituals were still understood to be pagan and not repurposed to be understood as Christian.
We can’t even say for sure why grave goods were included in burials (as status symbols? for the deceased to use in the afterlife? to keep the dead from haunting the things they possessed in life? because the deceased said they wanted to buried with that stuff?). If archaeologists debate something as basic as that, the idea that they can definitely recreate the religious beliefs of a community is nonsense.
Now, having responded to your three posts, Mr Novitsky, I will say that I am glad to discuss these issues (within the time constraints I have), but only in a polite and civilized way. If you respond with more insults, I’ll simply block you.
LikeLike
I really enjoyed our description of the show, which I have only watched snippets of. I AM part way through the series of books though and I feel the production teams did poor old Bernard Cornwell a great miss service. He includes historical notes in his books to explain where he got his facts and which significant events he made up and why. The opening battle is described as two shield walls with the Saxons hesitantly advancing trying to maintain cohesion which is lost when the viking wall turns and runs to lure them into a trap inside the walled palisade.
I think the books are worth a read if you like tales like this and not anywhere nearas bad as the TV series seems to be.
LikeLike
I’ve been binge watching The Last Kingdom and at a certain point I said to myself, “something about this reminds me of Sharpe’s Rifles,” and sure enough a little googling brings up Bernard Cornwell! I see the Shield Wall as the same sort of magic as the “bite spit pour tap” method used to load the Bakers.
LikeLike
Hello! I actually really enjoyed reading this article, except you got the formation used in the show completely wrong. It’s not a testudo. Testudo was used for siege warfare by the Romans, and that’s it. They used the shield-wall offensively because the legionnaires’ shields were large enough to cover their bodies. They also used short-swords, as you know. That is how they defeated the Greek phalanx. When the Greeks lower their spears and tuck behind their shields, the Romans bash the spears out of the way with their shields and close in, rendering that formation nearly useless.
Now, you mentioned that the Saxon shield-wall formation at the Battle of Hastings repelled multiple waves of Norman cavalry, correct? And, as we both know, the Saxons had the hill advantage against the Normans, right? Wouldn’t it make sense, then, for their formation of the shield-wall to be almost entirely defensive? One line of men with inter-locking shields could not fend off wave after wave of cavalry, even if the enemy is striking from below.
I would venture to guess that they had a similar (not identical) formation to the first picture you posted, with spears pointing out of small holes in the wall, and they were equipped with short-swords, like seaxes. After a century or two of using the shield-wall, I would assume they would have used it to their advantage depending on the situation. Defensively, it could very well have been used the way it was in The Last Kingdom. Offensively? The average shield-wall formation that everyone knows, with interlocking shields, one row, would be more logical.
I’m not hating on the article. I actually agree with some points you make. This is just my take on the shield-wall in the Dark Ages of England. Have a great day!
LikeLike
The fact that they are covering their heads with ranks of shields as well as their bodies and their feet (and having multiple men covering different body parts) means this is a testudo. Shield-walls don’t look like that.
LikeLike
A couple points:
-The Danes and Saxons are not “almost identically equipped” in the show. They look extremely different. This is in fact, one of the show’s biggest errors, they put far too much effort into showing how different the Saxons and Scandinavians are (even to the point of choosing almost exclusively dark and swarthy actors playing the Germanic English, to contrast with the Blonde, aryan-looking Scandinavians). If anything they should really have gone the other way
-Shieldwall =/= Testudo. A multi-tiered shield wall a “Testudo” does not make, and there is no reason to think that Norse armies were incapable of using such a technique, it really doesn’t require that much unit cohesion.
You were very much correct however about the rectangular shields and innaccurate depiction of warfare.
LikeLike
The part of the Bayeux tapestry (actually embroidery) labelled as 11th century Normans with kite shields, shows the English housecarls and not the Normans. Ignore the shield shape depicted and note the large axes, that they are fighting on foot and that they are being attacked by cavalry (shown on the right).
LikeLike
The Bayeux Tapestry does not depict a testudo. It depicts a shield wall–a much simpler technique commonly used in the early Middle Ages and still used by police with riot shields today.
LikeLike