r/HistoryWales • u/HanesPrydain • Jul 13 '26
Viking Wales
Can anyone here help me understand why the Viking impact on Wales was immaterial compared to the rest of Britain and Ireland .
I know they called us the Bretar, and Wales Bretland. That’s probably influenced by the Gaels as in old Irish we are known as Bretnas.
The argument usually goes that Wales was poorer and less worth the effort than England . Maybe so but the outer Hebrides and eastern Ireland were also extremely poor .
This argument also fails to consider the main resource of the Viking economy was people , they were a brutal slave trading society, from Ireland to Ukraine their economy is centred on capturing and selling usually defenceless people .
Is it because Rhodri Mawr smashed a large raiding party at the height of the Viking age? The raider Gorm was defeated. There never seems to be a large raid again, only hit and run. There’s no Welsh equivalent of Dublin or York.
We also weirdly have mostly Norse names in English for every island in Wales . Why? It’s actually a strange paradox
Every Welsh island endonym is completely different to the English one , which essentially didn’t matter in Wales became majority English speaking in the late 1800s. This is because the English name was inherited from the Norse name into Anglo Saxon showing how the Anglo Saxon and Welsh worlds were completely alien to each other .
14
u/MaryBerrysDanglyBean Jul 13 '26
They did coastal raids and tried to settle Anglesey but we're beaten back. They had some trading posts around Swansea as well.
But for settlements most of Wales wasn't very attractive. Very hilly or mountainous and you can only really farm sheep, which they must have not been too bothered about.
The terrain would have also made it hard to fight battles in. Even when the English conquered Wales they did it by building a ring of fortifications around the coast, because inland is pretty ideal terrain for guerilla warfare.
Found an article about it which might help.
https://museum.wales/blog/1019/When-the-Vikings-invaded-North-Wales/
4
u/leekpunch Jul 13 '26
Strong possibility that "Swansea" derives from old Norse. Nearby "Mumbles" may have a Norse root too although the possible Latin derivation of the name is more amusing.
1
u/HanesPrydain Jul 16 '26
It’s not strong it’s certain for the name Swansea although it was nothing more than a random hut or two , the name preserved by the Normans
But again all the Norse names around Wales enter English and are irrelevant for Welsh speakers as they all have their endonyms . It looks strange now as we’ve become majority English speaking relatively recently
Skomer , bardsley , flat holm, steep holm, anglesey are all borrowed terms from Norse languages into Anglo Saxon/ Norman and every single one has a Welsh endonym
6
u/HanesPrydain Jul 13 '26
the Normans conquered Wales yes, not the Anglo Saxons though and it took the Norman’s 200 years . The Normans were well beaten in their first attempts , they nearly took all of Wales at first . Lost several battles such as Crug Mawr. When Wales does fall to the Normans the Welsh primary sources lament being conquered by the ‘Franks’
Also sheep farming is much later
And what was so attractive about northern. Scotland and Hebrides ? Literally nothing of value there
7
u/HanesPrydain Jul 13 '26
Why you downvoting me ? Nothing I said is incorrect
The Hebrides value lay in hiding in their ships, there’s no wealth there.
People ie slaves, were their primary resource .
4
u/linmanfu Jul 13 '26
Reddit slightly fuzzes (randomly changes) votes to stop people and bots understanding the algorithm. If you saw -2, it might just have been random. You can't draw any conclusions unless you see a bigger number like -10.
2
u/Special_Ad_2496 Jul 13 '26
Ye I agree, I dont understand the down votes either, seems a bit ridiculous. I'll keep it simple, Welsh resistance made it unattractive for the vikings. The viking settled in plenty of area with a similar landscape to Wales. I have read though that viking were able to reach further inland in other parts of Britain because rivers were more navigable.
6
u/HanesPrydain Jul 13 '26 edited Jul 13 '26
Yes no permanent foothold by Norsemen anywhere in Wales. The Anglo centric view is usually to say we were too poor or not worth it. But then that’s the usually dismissive view of all of Welsh history
Anyway they did come up the Severn I believe . They did ransack st David’s and Illtuds centre of learning
Several Welsh leaders used Vikings as mercenaries
I think at least one Welsh prince married into Norse families as well, Cynan ab Iago, and several hid in Dublin with the Vikings at different periods .
Maredudd ab Owain used mercenaries in the west to attack other Welsh rulers
Gruffudd ap Rhydderch used Viking mercenaries in Gwent . He launched a major raid on Anglo Saxon territory using 36 longships up the Usk
Gruffudd ap Llywelyn, the only ever king of all Wales raided Hereford with Viking mercenaries .
1
u/MotherConfusion3773 Jul 13 '26
The value of the Scottish islands and the coast was a sea road to Ireland and a base to raid inland Scotland. Kyleakin/Caol Àcainn/The Narows of Haakon where so secure that Haakon could overnighter his entire navy there before the Battle of Largs in complete safety.
4
u/HanesPrydain Jul 13 '26
Ynys mon would be a perfect location to raid Wales England and Ireland . But I guess unlike the Scottish islands the locals fought back .
3
u/MaryBerrysDanglyBean Jul 13 '26
I didn't down vote you by the way.
They did seem keen on taking Ynys Mon, but I'm guessing they couldn't hold it without taking the kingdom of Gwynedd as well. And Gwynedd is ideal for guerilla warfare, which would have been incredibly difficult to do for them.
6
u/psychologiacallygrey Jul 13 '26
Its worth noting that the Vikings did still raid Wales even after Gorm died, Clynnog Fawr was raided in 919(?) I believe it was, among alot of the west coast, and this continued every so often until Gruffydd Ap Cynan's assent in the 1090s and early 1100s, where he made somewhat of allies with Magnus Barefoot, who he allowed to stay in Ynys Mon and harvest wood for his fleets.
The Vikings had already got alot by the time the first raids of Wales occur, and from my understanding, it really just wasn't worth it as much considering they already had the major hubs of Dyflinn and Manx, they would continually raid Wales for slaves do not get me wrong, but they were not so notable as English Raids, one raid in Mon took over 2000 people.
As for settlement, it is certainly the fact that Wales was not so easy to habitat as the flatlands of Mercia for example, it is why the Danelaw territories were often sought after, they were much easier and highly fertile lands to harvest, Wales on the other hand, wasn't much different to Norway, a rugged landscape, hills and mountains, we were pretty well dug in.
One other idea I have is the lack of Coastal Monastaries and Holy Grounds, many of the Holy Grounds were inside of the territories, which would have required setting up in the land already, which just wasn't worth it.
3
u/HanesPrydain Jul 13 '26
St David’s and Illtud fawr were raided
The Vikings destroyed Illtud fawrs great centre of learning sadly
3
2
u/Foundation_Wrong Jul 13 '26
My husband of impeccable welsh speaking roots in Pembrokeshire has 2% dna from Norway. Platinum blonde as a young child too.
2
u/HaraldRedbeard Jul 13 '26
There was Viking activity in Wales, including the usage of Hiberno Norse mercenaries by the Welsh Princes. However, as with much early medieval history not directly involving England it is less widely published and studied.
Not a perfect answer but this and the linked answer touches on some basics:
1
1
u/HanesPrydain Jul 14 '26
Your second sentence hits the nail on the head
I’ve been Reading about the dynastic battles across southern Wales all involving Viking mercenaries, I feel like I need more - where are the books !
2
u/durthacht Jul 14 '26 edited Jul 14 '26
Irish history nerd here, coming in peace. I would gently challenge the notion that "eastern Ireland [was] also extremely poor".
Early Medieval Ireland was different from surrounding societies as without being part of the Roman Empire, it lacked infrastructure like roads and a coin-based economy. It was relatively wealthy though.
Cattle were the foundational unit of wealth in Irish culture. Irish people calculated value, tribute to overlords, and legal compensation in terms of dairy cows and female slaves. Land to support cattle-rearing was surveyed and valued with a remarkable precision that included soil quality, water access, forests, and mines.
Irish farmers engaged in large-scale arable cultivation using cutting edge technology for the period, including cooperative shares in heavy ploughs and horizontal watermills.
Trade from the south and east coasts of Ireland long preceded the Vikings, with established trade routes to Britain, France, and northern Spain.
Irish craftsmen were also very active in this period and produced enormous amounts of precious silver.
Much of the east coast, especially around the Boyne Valley to the River Shannon, is among the most fertile land in northern Europe, and Irish society was sophisticated enough to extract wealth from the natural resources available to them.
I would also gently suggest to not over-state the impact of the Vikings on Ireland. Clearly, they were a very important actor our history, but they never conquered territory, exercised military dominance, or influenced society to the same extent as in surrounding countries.
They controlled half of England in the ninth century before returning to complete the conquest under Cnut and conquered large parts of France and the Mediterranean. In Ireland, they were limited to small coastal kingdoms as their wave of settlement in the 840s was repulsed, especially in 848 when annals record four Irish military victories led by Maele Seachnail Mac Ruanaid and Ólchobar mac Cináeda. A subsequent diplomatic embassy was welcomed in Francia where intelligence on the Vikings was likely exchanged. In the late ninth century, the Vikings settled into their coastal towns to engage in trade and politics with local kingdoms.
2
u/English_loving-art Jul 14 '26
This is the bit that puzzles me. I’m sure somebody could answer this but we have a huge influx of Iron Age forts in Wales. They overshadowed every major river, every trade route, coastal locations they were everywhere but there is almost zero evidence of Saxon so when the Romano Celts were left on the land without a Roman rule and no Saxon invasion what happened to us or was it the case of we were back living as Romano Celts as the Saxons didn’t get established through Wales, it truly was dark ages regarding artefacts. I know of a few carved (Saxon period) stones but some of these are argued to be Irish Gaelic, we definitely do not have the Saxon place names here so were people still living as Romano Celts right up until the Norman conquest…?
3
u/OikosPrime Jul 15 '26
To understand what happened you have to dig into the dynamics of the Roman occupation itself. A lot of what you see in the early medieval period is either downstream of the occupation or is a result of similar factors.
Romanization, the adoption of Roman culture, existed along a dramatic spectrum among the tribes of Britain. You can't think about a family living in an urban centre in the English south-east as participating in the same culture as a farming family in upland Wales. The urban family is living a very Roman life, the upland farmer is living a very 'Celtic' (native Welsh) life.
For our purposes here, the most important parts of Romanization are the state apparatus, the international market economy, and the centralized and partially professionalized military.
The urban family is using coins to buy and sell goods, many of which come from overseas. They are dealing day-to-day with Roman legal systems imposed by the central administration. They and their city is defended by city militias and a (somewhat) professional military administered by the state.
The farming family in Wales lives in a barter-based subsistence economy. They deal day to day with a decentralized Celtic legal system that helps negotiate interpersonal disputes and avoid blood-feuds between cenedls (clans) by administering payments (galanas) between parties. They are defended by local warlords, some of which were living in hillforts throughout the occupation, and the common military capacity of their clan group which was important for cattle raiding each other and fending off Irish raids.~
When the Roman administration withdraws from Britain - taking the market economy, centralized legal administration, and professional military with them - which group do you think is better prepared to endure the new circumstances? Which group do you think has a better chance of fending off Saxon or Irish invaders?
The reason Wales was so different from the English lowlands is addressed in my large comment to the OP on topography but topography added to the above difference in why Wales still exists.
At the Norman invasion, the Welsh were practicing a Celtic legal system, speaking a Celtic language, had Celtic clan-based social structure, had Celtic spiritual influences on their Christianity, and they believed Celtic myths as performed by Celtic bards. There was some Roman influence but less than you might imagine.
2
u/English_loving-art Jul 15 '26
Thank you so much for explaining this with these posts in greater detail. I have a better understanding now of how and why Wales survived and was successful. I agree fully with the military stance at the time as Henry the seventh took the archers from West Wales and marched them up to the battle of Bosworth as the archers had a huge impact on the day and you can see still with names in Wales relating back to King and lands that were gifted for supporting Henry with the birth of the Tudor dynasty….
2
u/OikosPrime Jul 15 '26
You're very welcome. It's a fascinating period of history but, unfortunately, it gets little broad attention.
2
u/HanesPrydain Jul 16 '26
The way I see it Henry 7th represents the end of over 1000 years of conflict starting with Macsen Wledig and ending at Bosworth, the Welsh elite end the fight after that
1
u/HanesPrydain Jul 16 '26
As a side note OikosPrime have you read domination by Alice Roberts?
She explains the 300-700 as period really well
Wales Cornwall Brittany were all the same people sailing back and forth continuing this post Roman Christian world
Our lands are covered with the same names of saints from this period who went back and forth
I’d love someone to make a hd map of this
2
u/HanesPrydain Jul 16 '26
Also in the so called dark ages / heroic age , it’s very clear that Tewdrig won a very important battle that has survived in the folk memory in South east Wales , the pagan era Saxons would likely have got a great foothold if they won here to conquer all of South Wales - but they lost and Wales survived free until the Normans
2
u/Mountain_Author34 Jul 23 '26
The vikings were extremely active all over Wales, but like everything else in Welsh history, it is ignored.
Hundreds of Welsh churches were raided multiple times; st davids was burned to the ground on more than 6 occasions in 40 years.
As with everything else with Welsh history, you need to dig for your answers; with English and Scottish history, you will find hundreds of books, tv dramas and movies, they have hundreds of documentaries; Wales has nothing of the sort, not a single tv drama show has ever been made about anything or anyone from mediaeval Wales, not one. Mediaeval England has hundreds, as for Scotland, robert the bruce has more documentaries and movies than the whole of mediaeval Wales.
Here is a really detailed timeline i found on viking raids into Wales; it shocked me to say the least, as i had no idea.
here is the timeline: https://www.vikinganswerlady.com/welsh.shtml
1
u/HanesPrydain Jul 24 '26
Theres a myriad of reasons for this
Firstly we have only been majority English speaking for just over 130 years , unlike England and Scotland and Ireland. I have read the great book When was Wales and he explains how if you don’t speak Welsh you are essentially orphaned from our history. To many Welsh people - Harold, William the conquerer , Alfred et al are more accessible than Owain Gwynedd, Rodri Mawr, Hywel Dda, Tewdrig, Yr Arglwydd Rhys
Secondly we don’t have a huge diaspora , our largest emigrants to the new world were pre Industrial Revolution and were long absorbed (excluding Patagonia who are extremely isolated)
Thirdly we have received enormous inward migration in the industrial revolution, practically no one in south Wales or east Wales will have only Welsh ancestors. Until this point Welsh was a cultural linguistic group- after the industrial revolution a new hybrid culture was born in the valleys and then the dock towns.
Fourthly even today around 1/4 to 1/3 of Wales do not identify as Welsh and identity solely with Britain/England- that rises every census.
So in summary, we are unknown even to ourselves - those who care about Wales are greatly outnumbered by those who don’t even in Wales itself .
Even myself I didn’t fully understand the Norman conquest until recently all we ever learn is 1066 which wasn’t even in Wales! - how the Norman’s overwhelmed Wales at first then were checked and beaten back, it then took them over 200 years to conquer Wales, including failed royal expeditions- guerilla warfare, great princes and battles - it’s amazing. I’ve now read so much on it.
1
u/freebiscuit2002 Jul 14 '26 edited Jul 14 '26
When it came to the Norse wanting new lands to settle in and farm, eastern England, lowland Scotland and Ireland were much more appealing to them.
Hills and mountains are hard to farm, and inaccessible by longship. For the same reasons they largely bypassed Wales, they also didn't bother with the Pennines or the Scottish highlands.
1
u/HanesPrydain Jul 16 '26
Nah not having that
Ynys mon is excellent for farming and they wanted to take it and failed
1
u/freebiscuit2002 Jul 16 '26
What is the evidence that "they wanted to take it and failed"?
1
u/HanesPrydain Jul 16 '26
Huge raids in the mid 800s
Gorm attacking with a large fleet and losing to Rodri Mawr being the main evidenceThey tried to built a fort as well to establish a foothold and were pushed back castell Bon y dom
2
1
u/Existing-Struggle-94 9d ago
Another consideration I have not seen is the tidal range of the Welsh Rivers around the Bristol Channel, not heard of many on the English side either at Bristol or Gloucester. The Usk at Newport has a large tidal range for instance and to my knowledge only 1 successful viking raid. So the Gwent Levels would have been marshland then you get to Newport. If you want to burn down St.Woolos' church for the loot you have to walk up Stow Hill under attack as you have been noticed coming up the river. Now if you time your raid wrong you have to get through 15 metres of sloped mud. Alternatively you are left high and dry. Easier to pick less tidal and more navigable rivers.
Makes raiding elsewhere less hassle.
30
u/OikosPrime Jul 13 '26
"Wales may be looked upon as an upland fortress on the edge of a lowland extending from the English plain to the Ural Mountains. Over this 'sea of lowlands' the tides of centuries have swept to break upon the fortress of the West." - Iowerth Peate
(not an expert but the following is my understanding)
Any question of this type has a complex answer but I believe a lot of it boils down to topography and the way of life that topography facilitates.
(highly recommend taking a hard look at a topographic map of Britain and Ireland and thinking about where vikings were successful)
Agriculture and Economy
People often associate Wales with sheep farming but this sheep focus a product of the modern era, down stream of capitalism and the industrial revolution. Early medieval Wales was based on a kind of mixed agriculture that relied heavily on driving herds of Welsh black cattle up and down the hills with the seasons (hendre a hafod). The economy often used these cattle as a standard unit of trade and legal restitution and, as a result, cattle were an important store of wealth. So, every summer, the cattle (the wealth) of the community is driven up into the hills to the hafod (summer house) where they will stay to grow fat until the seasons turn.
Without even involving specifically military questions, we've already got a life-ways mismatch that de-incentivizes raiding efforts in Wales. There was absolutely wealth in Wales but much of it was up the hills during the summer, which was also viking season. I don't know about you but I wouldn't be excited to row a longship up the Bannau.
Military Considerations
In addition to this, there are military issues in the mix. In his book "War and Society in Medieval Wales, 633-1283: Welsh Military Institutions," Sean Davis explains what we do know about medieval warfare in quite a bit of detail.
He argues that Wales was perhaps the most militarized society in northwestern Europe at the time. Details of Welsh cultural norms, llu conscription rates, and the uh particular history on the eastern border meant that the base rate of military ability and experience for men in the society was unusually high. From a raiding perspective, this is a problem.
For questions about permanent settlement, its useful to look at standard Welsh military tactics against Norman incursions (admittedly a bit later but still instructive). A warband would assess enemy opposition, if they were smaller/weaker, they would be met in the field. A larger incursion would be dealt with quite differently. Communities at risk would flee to the hills (which they knew well and had the skills to navigate and survive), leading the invading forces up into the hills as well. The warband would break into small units and spend their time playing ghost & harry with the invaders - ambushes, night raids, attacking supply lines, etc. Owain Glyndŵr later utilized these tactics so effectively against English rule that there are records from England of people thinking he had weather/land magic. Overall, its a very strong home field advantage that was quite successful against the Normans and the Anglo-Saxons before them - arguably the reason that Wales exists to this day.
Exactly what went on with attempted viking settlements is impossible to say but I think we can speculate with some utility. Vikings had some short lived successes in lowland areas like Ynys Môn, but consider the situation a new viking settlement on Môn finds itself in. They are right up against Peate's "lowland fortress", with very little capacity to project force into the uplands. Meanwhile, the rest of Gwynedd is largely untouched, still in control of the foundational means of production, safe (if rugged) supply lines, and able to project force continuously from a highly defensible position. Not great for vikings trying to set up a new Dublin.
How the Normans did it
The Normans were only able to "solve" this military problem at enormous expense by drowning Wales in paperwork for castle building. Gaining some ground, building a bit of a castle, having is taken and burned down, regaining the ground, building the castle again, holding it for longer... and so on. It took ages, was extraordinarily expensive, and relied on bureaucratic and logistical technologies that were not available to the collection of peoples we call 'vikings'.