Strelets Forum

Welcome to the Strelets Forum.
Please feel free to discuss any aspect of 1/72 scale plastic figures, not simply Strelets.
If you have any questions about our products then we will answer them here.

Strelets Forum
Start a New Topic 
Author
Comment
Hasting 1066 Normans & Anglo-Saxons and Stamford Bridge Vikings & Welcoming Party

Well, finally the ships have hit the shores here in the U.S. and Strelets Home-Invasion parties of their new Normans, Anglo-Saxons and Vikings have disembarked and have already broken down my door and are pillaging my desk, computer, table tops, night stand and refridgerator (so much for my fresh groceries).

These new military miniatures are sculpted in realistic action-packed poses and are heavily detailed and very handsome and healthy. I opened all three boxes and laid out all the sprews to take in the beauty of this latest sculpting.

Over the years, I'd bought a few sets of Normans just to have with no clearly educated battles in mind - I just liked the figures and they reminded me of "The War Lord" movie. But now, with a full range of multiple Dark Ages Armies, plus checking out some very well done documentaries on YouTube for Hasting 1066 and Stamford Bridge, it's clear that no matter which army wins your battles, Strelets should achieve a clear victory with their customers with this new Range.

All three colors, the Normans in a Metallic Dark Silver, Anglo-Saxons in Terracotta Reddish-Brown and Vikings in a nice flat, mid-gray, all the details jump out at you even in this scale, and the soft plastic feel is life-like to my hands. These latest sculpts as well as all earlier Mini releases are well proportioned and I can't wait to see them on my battle fields. I plan on enjoying my armies just as is, and I appreciate the way Strelets has maintained it's quality control in plastics and colors.

I can't over-emphasize, I'm so glad I bought the entire Range of these new sets including Norman Army Camp and all the earlier releases. I had never been excited before about the Dark Ages, but Strelets has not only released top of the line military miniatures, but have opened up some lessons in history.

Thank you Strelets Team - Well done!

Re: Hasting 1066 Normans & Anglo-Saxons and Stamford Bridge Vikings & Welcoming Party

welcome to the dark side.

Question Re: Stamford Bridge - Does Anyone Know ... ?

... what the actual Stamford Bridge looked like? Design, how long, how wide, materials, ... ? I've Googled and YouTubed everything and all I find is inconsistency. Even Conte Collectibles who has a Playset looks different than the internets resources.

I'd like to make one or buy one for my new Strelets sets.

Thanks in advance if you have any ideas - GC

Question Re: Stamford Bridge - Does Anyone Know ... ?

The original bridge is gone and no one nows how it really looked like. So here's a guess by experts of the local Stamford Bridge Societety (who know the area): "probably a simple wooden beamed structure, laid atop stone pillars; wide enough for a cart to cross and probably around 70 to 80 feet long".

http://www.saxonsinthemeonvalley.org.uk/the-battle-of-stamford-bridge-society

Question Re: Stamford Bridge - Does Anyone Know ... ?

if the story is true it would have to be wide enough for a viking to swing an axe to hold up the saxons for a while.

Question Re: Stamford Bridge - Does Anyone Know ... ?

The battle of Stamford bridge BBC «In Our Time» 2June 2011 shows a partial drawing of the bridge. Perhaps the Marx ACW or the Airfix check point bridge in 1/32 scale could be used if indeed the drawing is anywhere near correct. I don't know though. Hope this may be a help to you Garrison. All the best! Cappy

Question Re: Stamford Bridge - Does Anyone Know ... ?


i also wait for this ordered new sets.. :)

Yhe bridge itself is as you pointed gone..
There is a beuatiful plate of Mr Angus Mc Bride showing the famous story of the Norse axemen reppelling saxons on top of the simple, wooden bridge (around 2m wide)

I took a Griping Beast 28mm plastic viking in order to represent this big and fearsome warrior fighting the poor strelets 1/72 saxons :)

Question Re: Stamford Bridge - Does Anyone Know ... ?

http://s0.geograph.org.uk/geophotos/01/77/18/1771853_a8a5b85d.jpg

Question Re: Stamford Bridge - Does Anyone Know ... ?

GarrisonClay
... what the actual Stamford Bridge looked like? Design, how long, how wide, materials, ... ? I've Googled and YouTubed everything and all I find is inconsistency. Even Conte Collectibles who has a Playset looks different than the internets resources.

Dear Friends all,

Thank you so much for your resources input. I've read the texts you kindly recommended, looked at the Google images of Angus McBride and others, and seen as many You Tube videos as possible, and also took to heart your personal stories also.

First, Tom, yes, I've gone over "To the Dark Side." I found the sculpting powers of these Saxons and Vikings to have rendered me completely powerless against them!

Next, in the pictures, it seems overwhelmingly to have been a wooden bridge as PNA suggests in his picture by McBride. Yet, in Sax's text and other sources Cappy contributes, it suggests wood over stone supports. And Paint Dog's photo looks like stone over stone. Did the Saxons build it, or did the Romans leave something behind? If I were in charge, I'd design wood supported by stone. So ...

My first Conversion will be the Italeri Battle Field Accessories #6030 Set wooden bridge and paint the gabions (included) gray and attach underneath. This should give the impression of wood on stone. The sets retail for about $20 U.S. so I'll need maybe four (4) so I can make a bridge long enough to be 70 - 80 feet (Luckily I have some already!).

I don't want to bore you guys further, so please feel free to make more suggestions of materials to make another design.

Link to PSR's (Thank you PSR) review of Italeri's set:

http://www.plasticsoldierreview.com/review.aspx?id=547

Thank you again my Friends all!

Question Re: Stamford Bridge - Does Anyone Know ... ?

Just some ideas:

- The village Stamford Bridge had a small mill back then. So the bridge had to be wide enough to enable at least one cart with crops or other usually load to cross. It was not necessary that two carts could pass and use the bridge at the same time.

- If built by Romans the bridge would have been made of stone. But 1066 the Romans were long gone and this was Viking territory for centuries. They preferred to use wood. Stone pillars would keep the wood from rotting in the water.

- The river must have been too wide and too deep to wade with full kit. Otherwise the Anglo-Saxon Army would have skipped the berserk on the bridge by wading through the water.

- Swimming wearing chainmail was no option. A reenactor told me that he tested it in a swimming pool and nearly drowned. Just 15 kilos of chainmail!

- There might have been a railing. If the story about the berserk is true, archers easily could have shot him if there had been free sight to the target. But a railing and masses of Anglo-Saxons on the bridge might have covered the Viking hero.

Question Re: Stamford Bridge - Does Anyone Know ... ?

sax
Just some ideas:

- The village Stamford Bridge had a small mill back then. So the bridge had to be wide enough to enable at least one cart with crops or other usually load to cross. It was not necessary that two carts could pass and use the bridge at the same time.

- If built by Romans the bridge would have been made of stone. But 1066 the Romans were long gone and this was Viking territory for centuries. They preferred to use wood. Stone pillars would keep the wood from rotting in the water.

- The river must have been too wide and too deep to wade with full kit. Otherwise the Anglo-Saxon Army would have skipped the berserk on the bridge by wading through the water.

- Swimming wearing chainmail was no option. A reenactor told me that he tested it in a swimming pool and nearly drowned. Just 15 kilos of chainmail!

- There might have been a railing. If the story about the berserk is true, archers easily could have shot him if there had been free sight to the target. But a railing and masses of Anglo-Saxons on the bridge might have covered the Viking hero.

Dear Sax,

I like your points. I wonder the size of the river back then. You Tube shows some videos only being the equivalent of a stream. Hence the Saxon who dealt the fatal spear thrust from under the bridge killing the giant Viking only simply had to wade under the bridge. But other recounts mention a Saxon floating under the bridge in a barrel.

And you're right about the Roman influence. Surely there would have been several "100 Year Event" floods that would have washed away any bridges of those times.

Where I live now, we have been having a 100 year flood and rain. My dirt circular driveway was hard as concrete, but now a foot of the topsoil is washed away and the roadway ditches are full of silt and mud. T.V. warned us, 6 inches of rushing water is enough to knock you off your feet and 2 feet of water will carry you away. So like you mention, there could be many factors why the fully kitted soldiers would not want to risk wading across the river.

I couldn't imagine any bridge without rails. A groggy mule could easily steer a load off the edge without rails besides losing a few of the town's party-goers on a weekly basis.

I suppose until Dr. Who takes his time-booth back in one of his episodes, we'll never know the facts. So until then, lets have fun sleuthing, and besides, no matter what bridge design all of us come up with, one should be as good as the other!

OK, my friend - Cheers!

Question Re: Stamford Bridge - Does Anyone Know ... ?

Late to this debate, but here are a few thoughts, near here there is a Saxon church, one of the few left post 1066 and all that, a well built stone structure, so the Saxons were up to building lasting stone churches/bridges, also near here is Tar steppes , a basic stone bridge over a very fordable river, it gets washed away every few years of late with our increased rain fall, but there could be no sneaking up there. Also very near here a battle in Alfred`s time where the Anglo Saxons crept up while the Danes were asleep, took them by surprise and killed nearly all the army, only enough to man one long boat escaping, similar tactics at Stamford bridge ? . We will never know the truth and there will be some embellishment of any story over a thousand years. On to Hastings modern historians think battle hill where the battle was always thought to have been, may now not be the location, the actual battle site is looking like it was a short distance away on the edge of a marsh with both flanks protected by that marsh, battle hill can be easily out flanked, once again we may never know for sure.

Question Re: Stamford Bridge - Does Anyone Know ... ?

It seems likely as theres a Roman road at Stamford bridge that the Romans would have built a stone piered bridge to cross the river, but I dont think its where the current bridge is but possibly a bit downstream running in line with the road more or less... I'm not sure if you can say more then that, sure the Anglo Saxons built stone buildings but these were more to ensure their assendency to heaven.. a bridge doesn't do that and they tended to use what was already available...

Hastings: my view is that Hastings was fought at a bottleneck where the london road passes on to what was then the Hastings penninsula, Harald had only to survive and hold his poistion to Win, it was a purely defensive battle on the part of the Anglo-Saxons/Danes....
With the Normans not being able to break out the Army would have suffered over the winter likely eating thier horses(and dogs) to survive, and finally if not coming to terms bieng butchered peacemeal in the spring....



Question Re: Stamford Bridge - Does Anyone Know ... ?

sax
The river must have been too wide and too deep to wade with full kit. Otherwise the Anglo-Saxon Army would have skipped the berserk on the bridge by wading through the water.


Good point, and less than 300yards from the present bridge and the site of the medieval bridges in the village there is a natural ridge of rock in the river bed which, at the time would have been a fording point except in times of flooding ( the area is prone to flooding at times). There is some belief that the name of the place is derived from "Stone Ford Bridge".

A mile or so south of the village however, there is a roman road on both banks of the river which archaeologists have determined was linked by a bridge.

From Here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Stamford_Bridge

I wonder was the bridge where Harold's army crossed a wooden Saxon bridge built on the remains of a Roman bridge. Does the distance of this Roman bridge from the village and the proposed battle site help to explain why the Norse army were surprised by Harold's forces and why it was defended by such a small force until the rest of the Norse army got their act together.

The speed of Harold's advance on York is put down to the fact he marched on a good Roman road, Watling street, basically the current A1. Another Roman road, the current A166 led from York to Stamford Bridge and presumably crossed the river by the aforementioned bridge.

Question Re: Stamford Bridge - Does Anyone Know ... ?

if i remember right once the saxons were able to get over the bridge,they did it in a very quick way.forming up and suprising the vikings.it had to be a fairly wide and stable bridge at the time to allow thousands of saxons to get past it fast.