The Battle of Stamford Bridge

Talks that may or may not have anything to do with Hala or NWN

Moderator: Top Team

Post Reply
_JM_
Honor Guard: Church of Pants
Posts: 1073
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 8:23 am

The Battle of Stamford Bridge

Post by _JM_ »

In conversation people began accusing Jayem of being heroic. After disclaiming this due to his greater knowledge of his own history he moved onto the opinion that heroism and strategy are often incompatible. Sending the large group of soldiers to attack and open the poorly guarded gate is good strategy. The lone guard or pair of guards that hold the gate against that are heroes, because their superiors didn’t deploy enough guards there. The example Jayem gave was a legend which I had to admit OOC was not imaginative on my part.

Wiki:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Stamford_Bridge

Badass of the Week (Language warning… he likes his swearing):
http://badassoftheweek.com/stamfordbridge.html

So Jayem’s opinion, as he expressed, was Good strategy by King Harold in getting his army north so fast and taking Harald Haralda and his Vikings by surprise. Bad strategy by the Vikings in leaving weapons and armour back at their ships and not having scouts out to guard the approaches. Heroism by the Viking at Stamford Bridge in holding the bridge, and good strategy in choosing where they could only come at him from one direction in smaller numbers. And Good strategy by the fellow who floated down the river to stab up through the slats of the bridge to finally down the Viking.

Of course he/I could have continued on to the battle a few weeks later at Hastings. Marginally poor strategy by King Harold in getting his army south so fast as there is a consensus that he could have taken a little longer and gathered more troops, though at cost of letting William of Normandy more time to ravage south-east England. Good strategy by King Harold in choosing a fine defensive spot on a hill that blocked the advance of William’s army and gave the Saxon shield wall the advantage over Norman cavalry and archers. Excellent strategy, if simple, by William in seeing a group of Saxons pursue fleeing Normans and thus staging some fake retreats to draw more Saxons down from their hill and into breaking their shield wall so they could be killed.

But what makes this post worth writing is what Jayem, Victoria, and Kildera did after they bid farewell to Sarakin. They went to visit the Blackfire Orcs on the Isle of Iron on Arkax and comparisons can be drawn with Stamford Bridge and Hastings, even if on a much smaller scale.

There are bridges amongst those Orcs and like the Viking at Stamford bridge the trio held the narrow bridge against the superior numbers. Like the Saxons at Hastings they sometimes held their position on top of a hill or at the top of stairs, though this was to use crossbow and bows to send bolts and arrows down rather than purely defensive. And like William of Normandy ordered they staged fake retreats to draw Orcs out of position, and towards where the passes or doorways were narrower and they could again emulate the Viking at Stamford Bridge (yes, or the Scots at Stirling Bridge… English armies do like squeezing onto narrow bridges to deny themselves the advantage of numbers).

And to make it more fun the Battle of Hastings, by some accounts, opened by William’s minstrel charging the Saxon lines alone and singing epic songs at them. This gave heart to the Normans who were a little… uncertain… at the sight of a solid mass of armour and shields and axes. The Saxons weren’t too bothered and replied to the epic song by killing the minstrel and continuing with their rather simpler song of “Ut! Ut! Ut!” Thankfully the analogy does break down as neither of the bards died against the Orcs, but the bard song did inspire and a nice sonic “boomph” did work well to get the last lot of Orcs to all try to squish into the same doorway.

So in the history Jayem might have told as “legend from somewhere” we have holding the bridge, using the hills, preventing the use of superior numbers against yourself, staging false retreats to draw foes out of position, and inspirational bards. And in the venture that same night we had the same. :)
davicurtistaggart
Honor Guard: Holy Church of Big Mouths
Posts: 449
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2010 9:10 am
Location: qwestionable

battle of stamford,etc.

Post by davicurtistaggart »

not exactly a direct IG relation,but i was fascinated to learn that the conqueror's half-brother,a bishop and instigator of the bayeux tapestry,was the origin of d&d's rule against clerics using sharp or pointy weapons;according to legend,he led several of the charges at hastings wielding a horsemace in order to obey in a technical sense a papal prohibition against men of the cloth "shedding blood"
also,you reminded me of one of my big complaints about the film"braveheart";where's the !@#$%^&*()_+ bridge?!?!?
seriously,great post,jm,and a great reminder why i've missed playing with"mister jayem"
_JM_
Honor Guard: Church of Pants
Posts: 1073
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 8:23 am

Post by _JM_ »

You do have to be careful with exact wording. The Venetian governor of their colony of Negropont surrendered to the Turks on the understanding he would keep his head (on his shoulders). So the Turkish Sultan had him cut in half at the waist.

And as to shedding blood a couple of hundred years earlier the Mongols did decide against spilling the blood of the Caliph when they destroyed the Islamic Caliphate. They put the Caliph in a sack and trampled him to death with their horses, thus making him not bleed as much as if he had been cut or stabbed and the sack trapping and absorbing what blood did come out of him so it was not “spilt”.
davicurtistaggart
Honor Guard: Holy Church of Big Mouths
Posts: 449
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2010 9:10 am
Location: qwestionable

battle of stamford,etc.

Post by davicurtistaggart »

icky!no doubt this was a result of playing rpgs in their youths! :)
Post Reply