Alfgar, The Recalcitrant Earl

by Paula Lofting

The king with his witan

Hexateuch

It was March 1055, and as every year, all the nobles in the land that could, would make their way to the witanegemot, and in this year the council were set to elect the next earl of Northumbria. There were two men in the running: Ælfgar, son of Leofric, Earl of Mercia, and Tostig Godwinson, as his name implied, of the number one clan in the country.

Ælfgar had been elevated to earl of East Anglia in 1051 when Harold Godwinson was forced into exile with other members of his family. In 1052, the Godwinsons made a successful comeback and all their lands and properties were once more restored to them, which meant that Ælfgar had to hand back the earldom to Harold, leaving him with nothing to run. That must have gone down like a treat. However, in the wake of Godwin's death, it was restored to Alfgar after Harold's appointment to Wessex. Tostig had been waiting in the wings for his first appointment since his brothers, Harold and Swegn (the latter now deceased) had both been invested in earldoms 10 years ago. With Harold in Wessex, and Alfgar sorted in East Anglia, Tostig obviously thought that he was up for the Northumbrian post.

Photo c/o Christopher Doyle
and members of Regia Anglorum

And so, at that gathering that year, the proverbial gossips must have had a field day, and anyone with a leaning to intrigue might have found themselves weaving in and out of each contestant's supporters to stir up trouble faction had they a mischievous mind.

This was very much a north and south thing, and even as far back as then, the divide between the two still existed. The last native ruler who'd been in charge of Northumbria had been Uhtred the Bold from the House of Bebbanburgh. In 1016 he was assassinated by Thurbrand the Hold probably on the orders of Cnut whom he was on his way to see. Eadwulf, Uhtred's son succeeded him in Bernicia and Cnut later made the Norwegian, Erik Hlathir, the earl in the south of Yorkshire. The killing of Uhtred was to spark the blood feud in the north that would last more than two generations.

The date when Siward, the Dane took over as earl is sketchy, but it seems to have been around 1030. Siward had a good run, and he must have been a tough old pair of boots to step in to. He had reigned for at least twenty-five years or so. What with managing the wild northerners with their violent bloodfeuds, which the north was notorious for, plus supporting Malcolm Canmore to get his throne back in Scotland, Siward was most likely to have been the most warlike of the earls in England at the time of Edward's reign. 

Battles were fought with the Welsh on the borderlands

In 1054, Siward invaded Scotland by land and sea to overthrow King MacBeth, helping the murdered Duncan's son to resume the throne that Malcolm obviously thought was his. Edward sent many of his own huscarles north to support him, and many of them were slaughtered.The hard fought battle saw Siward losing his son and nephew. MacBeth was defeated, but still alive and pushed north-west to recoup. Malcolm was able to take over the rest of the territories gained from the defeat of his rival. Many lives were lost on both sides in the terrible battle of Dunsinane and the loss of his son and nephew might have hastened Siward's death which eventually came a year later in 1055. Although he had not been a northerner himself, he was a Dane, and many of the men of Yorkshire were of Danish descent, he knew how they thought, how they fought, and they respected him.

Photo c/o Christopher Doyle
and Regia Anglorum

 So who were these men, Tostig and Alfgar, who thought they could step into Siward's rather big boots? Tostig was probably born in Suth Seaxa (Sussex) and as a boy grew up in the Godwin family home of Bosham. The winters were milder and the land not as harsh as in the north. From an early age he most likely spent a lot of time at court under his sister's tutelage, well educated and groomed for an administration job which would have eventually have flowered into an office of high standing. He was also schooled in military matters as most noble sons would have been, and brought up to be ambitious as all of the Godwinson men seem to have been. He also had a lot to prove. His older brother, Harold, was on the rise, and fast becoming the king's number one man, and as Tostig's later actions in the coming years would show, he was, I suspect, envious of his brother, the latter day Golden Balls. Tostig had the blood of the Vikings running through his veins with his mother being daughter of Thorgil Sprakalägg, so called because he was fast on his legs, perhaps because he was purported to have been the son of a bear. (Yes, I know!) Tostig's father's lineage is just as mysterious. (though no bears in the tree) and Wulfnoth, father of Godwin, according to Frank Barlow, apparently could trace his family tree back to King Egbert making him a son of the House of Wessex. Despite the possibility of a royal pedigree and Viking blood, Tostig was a 'soft' southerner, brought up in southern ways and unpalatable to the rough, wild men of the north.

Photo c/o
Christopher Doyle and Regia Anglorum

Alfgar was not so much of an alien perhaps, having been born less south than Tostig. He was the son of Leofric of Hwicce, now absorbed into Mercia. Leofric became Earl of Mercia around 1017, after Cnut had taken the crown following the death of Ironside. Alfgar's mother was Godgifu, who appears to have come from good noble stock herself, considering that she held quite a lot of land in her own right. This might have something to do with the fact that she was a widow when she married Alfgar's father. Alfgar was most likely to have had some military experience seeing as there had been quite a lot of conflict with the Welsh, but nothing is recorded for definite, just how experienced he was or whether he'd had the benefit of a court upbringing like Tostig most likely had. It's quite likely he may well have, it seems to have been traditional for the sons of nobles to be educated at court, though he was probably not of an age that he would have been in Queen Edith's school. However, he did have some experience already, having run East Anglia for a year before Harold's return and for a couple of years after Harold had stepped back out of it and into Wessex. With this in mind, Alfgar, might have thought he was better qualified than his opponent, Tostig.

Photo C/o Christopher Doyle

& Regia Anglorum

Court must have been interesting, with Alfgar and Tostig posturing amongst their supporters. The Mercians vs West Saxons. And when it was announced at the council meeting that Tostig was to be invested with the earldom of Northumbria, there must have been some threatening glares across the feasting boards that evening at supper. What happened after the council met gives us some idea that Alfgar was not happy at what had occurred at the council meeting.

The Anglo Saxon Chronicle is sympathetic to Alfgar. Chronicle C  reports that he was 'outlawed without any fault.' And then the E Chronicle says, 'And the king gave Tostig, son of Earl Godwin, the Earldom which Earl Siward owned before.' The D script tells it the other way round, that Tostig was given the earldom and then later Alfgar was exiled, without 'well-nigh any fault'. Chronicle E tells us that his outlawing took place on the 19th March ( 7 days before mid-lent) and the reason being 'that it was thrown at him that he was a traitor to the king and all the people of the land. And he admitted to this,' but the words evidently left his mouth before he had time to think about what he was saying. This latter version seems to explain things a little clearer, though none of the scribes writing the chronicles seem to have been of a mind to tell us what it was that came out of his mouth. One can imagine there was a lot of expletives about a puppet king whose strings were being pulled by a certain family!

Alfgar's Mercenaries
Photo c/o Richard Price & Regia Anglorum

The usual punishment for treason seems to have been exile, however hanging was also an option. But though exile seems a lenient punishment for such a crime, it was not as simple as you think. You were usually given a limited amount of time to get out of the country, which could be anything from 3 days to a week. In that time you would have to make whatever arrangements you could to gather your wealth if you had any and make arrangements for transport. If you lived nowhere near the coast, the further you were, the more time you would have needed, and if you didn't get out within the time allotted you could be killed on the spot by anyone. But at least you were had a chance, and if you made it like the Godwinsons had done in 1051, you were free to gather forces and whatever mercenary help you could get and force your way back to power.
Alfgar was said to have gone straight to Ireland where he stayed some months recruiting men and ships from amongst the Hiberno-Norse. When he had 18 ships fully crewed, he made his way to King Gruffudd in Gwynnedd to recruit him to his cause. Gruffudd also took advantage of the Englishman's pleas by promising to help him invade England, if he helped him to defeat the king of South Wales, thus realising his dream of a becoming king of a united country. Alfgar was obviously obliging, and supported Gruffudd successfully. Shortly afterwards, the two armies, Alfgar's mercenaries and Gruffudd's Welshfighters, joined together to invade England, and razed Hereford to the ground, causing the deaths of five hundred English mounted warriors.

The lesson to be learned here for the English king, was that execution was more effective punishment than exile. You would think, wouldn't you? Unfortunately, the lesson was not learned and the same thing was to happen again three years later.
~~~~~~~~~~
Paula Lofting is an author and a member of the re-enactment society Regia Anglorum, where she regularly takes part in the Battle of Hastings. Her first novel, Sons of the Wolf, is set in eleventh-century England and tells the story of Wulfhere, a man torn between family and duty. The sequel, The Wolf Banner is available now. Paula is currently working on the third book in the series, Wolf's Bane.

Connect with Paula on her Blog and on her Amazon Author Page. 

The Crowning of a King 1066... Two Views

By Helen Hollick

On January 5th 1066, King Edward, (later known as the Confessor) lay dying at Westminster, London. He passed peacefully away either late on the 5th or in the early hours of the 6th, and Earl Harold Godwinson of Wessex was crowned King in the newly built Westminster Abbey, on the 6th January. The first English King to be crowned there - and the last.

Why Harold?

Edward had no sons - possibly because he had taken a vow of celibacy (unlikely), or he was impotent, or even homosexual. He never blamed his wife Edyth, Harold's sister, for childlessness (even when he temporarily set her aside in the early 1050's after a massive falling-out with the Godwin family.) 

This crowning was the catalyst that started the events of 1066, and there are two views as to the right or wrong of it.

View One
THE NORMANS

Duke William of Normandy believed that Edward had promised him the Crown.
Born some time between 1003 and 1005, from 1017 until 1041 Edward had been exiled in Normandy. His mother, was Queen Emma - daughter of Richard I of Normandy, his father Aethelred (the Unready). When Emma took the Danish Conqueror of England, Cnut, (more familiarly spelt Canute - and yes, he of 'hold back the tide' fame) as her second husband, her sons, Edward and Alfred had to flee. Obviously Normandy under the protection of Emma's kindred was the safest place.

Edward would have known the young Duke William very well. William was the son of Richard II of Normandy, the result of a liaison with the daughter of a tanner. Richard died when William was eight years old, with no other heir, he became Duke. For more than thirty years Edward languished in Normandy (Alfred dying a most horrible death while trying to reclaim England), only recalled to be crowned King when Cnut and Emma's son died. (There were other possible contenders but Emma saw to it that her son got the Top Prize).

Here was a man indoctrinated with the Norman way of life, his friends were Norman, he knew Norman ways, not English customs.The powerful Godwin family - Harold's father had been given the Earldom of Wessex by Cnut, and various Godwin sons held various Earldoms -  had a major falling out with the King in 1051-2

It is possible, though not recorded, that William came to England during this time when the Godwin's were in exile - a legitimate visit to see his Great Aunt, Emma, who was by then elderly. Did Edward promise the throne to his young friend and kinsmen during this visit? Did Emma, perhaps suggest it to her Great Nephew - after all William was kin, the Godwinsons were not.

But the Godwins fought their way back to even greater power, and virtually ruled England in the King's stead. after 1052.

A few years before 1066 (1063/4?) we know that Harold was at William's Court. What we do not know is why. The Normans claimed it was to offer Edward's assurance that the English Throne would still become William's. To ensure Harold's loyalty to this end, he had to swear an oath on Holy relics to support William when Edward died.

He didn't support him. Quite the opposite in fact.

According to the Normans, the crowning of Harold II took place in unnecessary haste and the holy anointing undertaken by Stigand, the illegally placed Archbishop of Canterbury. (Rome had never approved his appointment) thus making the whole ceremony void.

When William heard of the outrage he immediately set about an invasion to secure his rightful place as King.

We know the rest .

View Two
THE ENGLISH

It was unlikely that Edward would have promised the throne. There were other candidates, and the English Earls - even if not supporting Godwin -would never have accepted a Norman as King (fact proven by the way they welcomed Godwin back from exile in preference to Edward's foreign friends.)

For one thing Edward could still, in 1051/2, possibly have his own sons. For another it was English law for the Witan - the council to elect a king - the most 'Kingworthy' man. Yes, normally this was the eldest son for he would have been 'trained' for the job - but Edward had no sons.

There was one other possible heir: another son of Aethelred (not by Emma) was Edmund Ironside. He died fighting Cnut (hence Cnut became King), and his son, another Edward, and family fled - as it turned out, to Hungary, where  he was later found and invited back to England.  Edward the Exile returned to England in 1057, but died almost immediately. (The stories that he was murdered by Harold, who was escorting him, are nonsense. If Harold was going to do away with him why not a) conveniently 'not find him' or b) kill him en route - why wait until they got back to England?)

The Exile's son, Edgar, then about five years old, grew up at the English court and given the designation 'Ætheling' or throneworthy, (i.e. 'heir'). But he would still have been a youth in 1066, so probably regarded as not capable of ruling or leading an army against William. (One can see a parrallel in later years when Richard III was crowned instead of the two young princes - probably for exactly the same reason).

Edgar was briefly declared king after Harold's death in October 1066, but that hope failed against the might of William's army and determination. Edgar's name was absent from any witness lists of Edward's diplomas, and there is no evidence in the Domesday Book that he was a substantial landowner, both possibly indicating his young age.

The next most Kingworthy was Harold - proven as a leader, commander, warlord and administrator. It was also known that William would strongly object - they had to chose a man who was capable (at least in theory) of defeating him.

The coronation was not performed in undue haste - that familiar saying? 'The King is dead; Long live the King!' is there for a reason. Uninterrupted continuity. The Earls, Bishops, important people were gathered at Westminster for the Christmas Court. They had remained longer because the King was dying. They wanted to return to their homes and lands - the next  opportunity for a crowning would have been Easter - so of course the service took place at the earliest possible time. The 6th January.

And Stigand did not crown or anoint Harold - Ealdred, Archbishop of York did. There was no question of his legality.

But what of the claim that Harold had pledged an oath to aid William? It is more likely that Harold went to William hoping to achieve the release of his brother, Wulfnoth, and nephew, Hakon, held hostage by William since that temporary disgrace of Earl Godwin back in 1052. (I'll not go into detail, suffice to say the exile was caused by some Normans stirring trouble in Dover. Godwin refused to take their side, hence his falling out with the King. When Godwin was re-instated the Normans fled and took the two boys with them.)

Harold did return to England with Hakon, but Wulfnoth never saw his freedom again. Harold was probably forced to make that oath of loyalty. If he had not, he and his men would either have been imprisoned or killed - and Saxon honour at this time beheld a Lord to protect his men at whatever personal cost. What was more honourable for Harold? To deny Duke William and see his men slaughtered, or perjure himself to save their lives?

He chose the latter. Good for him.

Harold II Rex

So who do you think was right? Norman or English? 
Feel free to add your view in the comments below. 

Brief bibliography:

The Battle of Hastings Jim Bradbury

The Godwins Frank Barlow

The Life of King Edward the Confessor Frank Barlow

Edward the Confessor Frank Barlow

Harold the Last Anglo-Saxon King Ian W. Walker  

Anglo-Saxon England F.M Stenton

Kingship and Government in Pre-conquest England Ann Williams

Anglo-Saxon England and the Norman Conquest H.R. Loyn

There is a fuller list available on my website

[This is an Editor's Choice post which was published in its original form on 6 January 2016]

~~~~~~~~~~

Helen Hollick lives on a thirteen-acre farm in Devon, England. Born in London, she wrote pony stories as a teenager, moved to science-fiction and fantasy, and then discovered historical fiction. Published for over twenty years with her Arthurian Trilogy, and the 1066 era, she became a USA Today bestseller with her novel about Queen Emma The Forever Queen (UK title A Hollow Crown.) She also writes the Sea Witch Voyages, pirate-based nautical adventures with a touch of fantasy. She has written a non-fiction about pirates and one about smugglers in fact and fiction which is due to be published in 2019.

Same book - different titles
HAROLD THE KING -UK
I AM THE CHOSEN KING - US

Website: www.helenhollick.net

Newsletter Subscription: http://tinyletter.com/HelenHollick

Main Blog: www.ofhistoryandkings.blogspot.com

Twitter: @HelenHollick

Click here for Helen Hollick on Amazon 

Harald Hardrada of Norway

by Peter Whitaker

King Harald Hardrada of Norway was perhaps the most famous Viking of his time when he fought the Battle of Stamford Bridge in Northumbria, England, in 1066. He was a man of large size, his saga writer Snorri Sturluson describing him as being physically larger and stronger than other men, with big hands and feet. Hardrada created a reputation for himself as a successful war-chief of similar proportions. His name was feared from Norway to the Byzantine and with very good reason; he fought countless battles across the early medieval world and it is claimed that he only ever lost two of them; his first and his last.

Harald was born in Ringerike, Norway in 1015 or 1016; records were not exactly precise in those times. His step-father was Sigurd Syr, a minor king who enjoyed wealth and the support of a strong war-band. Harald’s mother, Asta Gudbrandsdatter, made Sigurd her second husband and the union gave Harald three half-brothers, the eldest of whom, Olaf, seems to have had a great influence over him.

In 1030 Olaf returned to Norway from an exile imposed two years earlier and young Harald, at the age of 15, gathered a force of 600 men to support his brother’s return. Later that year the two of them fought at the Battle of Stiklestad, a conflict arising from the seizing of the Norwegian throne by the Danish King Cnut. The battle did not go well, Olaf was killed and Harald was wounded. He escaped but was hunted by Norwegians loyal to the Danish king.

After this disastrous start to his military career Harald headed to Kievan Rus by way of Sweden. During some 3 or 4 years he acquired considerable experience as a commander in the army of Grand Prince Yaroslav. He had brought with him some 500 loyal Norwegian warriors who were to become the backbone of his companions and the cornerstone of his later success.

Harald eventually moved south to Constantinople and with his men joined the Varangian Guard, supposedly the Byzantine Emperor’s bodyguard, but this did not stop Harald from finding himself fighting against Arab pirates in the Mediterranean, sacking towns in Asia Minor, and pushing as far east as the Euphrates in the name of Emperor Michael IV.

His success in various campaigns over such diverse theatres led to Harald becoming the captain of the Varangians. On the orders of the Byzantine Emperor the Varangians and their Norse leader were sent to Sicily to fight against the Saracens who had established an emirate there. They fought alongside Norman mercenaries who were judged to be very effective soldiers. A revolt in Italy saw the Varangians fighting against the same Normans. Michael Doukeianos, the Byzantine Catepan of Italy, commanded the army and was defeated in the Battle of Olivento, and again at the Battle of Montemaggiore in 1041. As Michael was the supreme commander this allowed Harald to continue his claim that he had only known defeat once as a commander, although in truth he was the leader of the Varangian Guard and they fought in both battles.

After the military failure in Italy Harald found himself fighting in Bulgaria, a place where he earned the chilling moniker of ‘Bulgar-burner’ for his actions. During his time with the Varangians Harald enjoyed a series of promotions and honours bestowed upon him for his many successes. However, Emperor Michael IV died in 1401 and Harald quickly fell out of favour with the newly crowned Emperor Michael V. He was imprisoned but escaped and became the leader of the Varangain faction that supported a popular revolt against the new emperor. Harald was both active and prominent in the revolt and even claimed to have dragged Michael out of his hiding place and blinded him.

After the fall of the new emperor Harald Hardrada decided to leave Constantinople but was forbidden to do so by the new Empress Zoe. Despite this restriction he attempted to escape with two ships and a handful of loyal followers. Even though one ship was lost on the infamous chains that stretched across the Bosphorus to protect Constantinople Harald was successful and reached the Black Sea. From here he was able to return to Kievan Rus. During his time in the pay of the Byzantine Army Harald had sent money and valuables to Grand Prince Yaroslav who kept his treasure safe. Upon meeting his friend again Harald discovered that he had amassed a considerable wealth, enough to allow him to marry Yaroslav’s daughter Elisiv. This was a notable achievement considering that the prince’s other daughters were married to Henry I of France and Andrew I of Hungary.

In 1045 Harald Hardrada set off for Norway with the intention of staking his claim to the throne. He arrived in Sweden first and discovered that Norway was now ruled by an illegitimate son of his half-brother Olaf, a man by the name of Magnus. This meant that he was effectively uncle to the King of Norway. Harald joined forces with Sweyn Estridsson, another Norwegian exile who had tried unsuccessfully to usurp King Magnus, and together they raided the Danish coast to demonstrate Magnus’ inability to defend his people.

King Magnus returned to Norway from a foreign expedition with his army but instead of going to war he reached a remarkable compromise in 1046 with his uncle. The terms agreed by Harald Hardrada effectively meant that he ruled Norway alongside Magnus but that he acknowledged his nephew as his senior and handed over half of his treasure.

This agreement lapsed in 1047 when Magnus died without an heir but with a command that Harald inherit Norway and Sweyn take Denmark. The new King of Norway immediately announced his intention of turning upon his former ally and invading Denmark but the army and the nobility frustrated his ambition by refusing to follow his commands. They went further in opposing Hardrada by bringing the body of Magnus back to Norway even though Harald objected. They buried Magnus at Nidros, now known as Trondheim, with one opponent to the new king openly stating that “to follow Magnus dead was better than to follow any other king alive”.

By 1048 Harald had a more consolidated position within Norway and he was able to begin the war that he intended to return Magnus’ rule over Denmark. He probably expected the war to run quickly to a conclusion but King Sweyn proved far more resilient. From 1048 to 1064 the Norwegians met the Danes in a series of inconclusive battles that effectively bankrupted both countries. The great cost of this war drove both King Harald and King Sweyn to swear to a pact in which they would maintain the peace for the rest of their lives and retain their respective kingdoms without change but there would be no form or reparations sought. For Harald this was an ignominious result that damaged his reputation somewhat.

The peace with Denmark led to active opposition to Harald’s rule in Norway and he responded with brutality, earning his name of Hardrada, which means ‘hard ruler’. As he had spent the largest part of is life as the commander of fighting men he displayed a habit of settling disputes with violence. His time in Byzantium did have some uses, however, it is generally accepted that he was responsible for the introduction of a reliable coin based economy and foreign trade with the countries with which he had strong personal links, such as Kievan Rus and the Byzantine Empire. He is also acknowledged as being an advocate for Christianity and expanded it throughout Norway.

When King Edward of England died in January 1066 King Harald of Norway claimed a right to the now vacant crown. His argument depended upon a supposed agreement between King Magnus and King Harthacnut, made in 1038, that whoever died first then the survivor would inherit their lands. When King Harthacnut died without an heir in 1042 Magnus assumed the crown of Denmark and left the English throne vacant for Edward the Confessor to assume. Hardrada’s claim was weak and the Saxon Wittan was not likely to recognise but England was, at this time, a very rich country, and Harald needed to restore both his treasury and his reputation. He joined forces with Tostig Godwinson, the embittered younger brother of Harold Godwinson, Eorl of Wessex, and now King of England. Tostig had been Eorl of Northumbria in 1065 but a popular revolt had seen him deposed. Tostig believed that his borther Harold had sided with the rebels and advised King Edward to exile him. This belief led Tostig to ally himself with the Saxons’ ancient enemy to achieve his revenge.

Together Harald and Tostig invaded Northumbria and sailed to Riccall to attack the city of York. Coincidently the brothers Edwin, Eorl of Mercia, and Morcar, the newly appointed Eorl of Northumbria, were present and on the 20 September 1066 they chose to fight a pitched battle at Fulford Gate. Hardrada defeated the young noblemen, destroyed their army, and captured York. He did, however, fail to capture the brothers.

The campaign had achieved a significant objective with surprising speed and this success seems to have lulled Harald into a false sense of security. On September 25th he rode to Stamford Bridge to accept provisions and hostages from the men of York only to find a huge Saxon army led by King Harold of England bearing down on their position. The Vikings had chosen not to wear their heavy armour, believing that they were only going to accept the homage of beaten men, and they had not expected the Saxons to be able to field another powerful host in such a short time.

The battle that followed was brutal but the odds were stacked against the Norwegians and their allies. King Harald entered the fight but was killed early on. The Saxons eventually made their advantage count and revenged the earlier defeat at Fulford Gate by slaughtering their enemy, including Harold’s brother Tostig. It is estimated that some 300 ships had constituted the Viking fleet when it sailed down the River Humber towards York but that the Viking force that was allowed to leave by Harold Godwinson could only muster crews for 30 ships for the return journey.

The fall of Harald Hardrada saw Norwegian involvement in England wane considerably. A year after his death his body was repatriated to Norway and laid to rest in the Mary Church, Nidaros; modern day Trondheim. A hundred years later his body was moved again and interred at the Helgeseter Priory. On the 940th anniversary of Harald Hardrada’s death it was revealed that the Viking king’s grave lay under a road that was built across the site of the former priory. There were plans to reinter him once again but these were later shelved.

His memory is enshrined in Harald Hardrades plass in Oslo, including a bronze relief on granite by Lars Utne. There is a relief of him on the western façade of Oslo City Hall. Perhaps most fitting is that his name and exploits are remembered in the sagas, particularly the ‘Saga of Harald Hardrade’ by Snorri Sturluson, this being the kind of legacy that the great warrior-chieftains of the Norse always aspired to achieve.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Kindle UK
Kindle US
Kindle CA
Kobo

Peter C Whitaker was born in Kingston Upon Hull and grew up with two brothers. His father was an engineer and his mother worked in the printing industry. After leaving school with mundane grades he went on to study English Literature and Philosophy at the adult education institution of Coleg Harlech, North Wales, going on from there to work in the food industry and the public sector. Having a life-long love of reading a trip down the A1079 from Hull to York gave him the inspiration to begin writing a book about the Battle of Stamford Bridge, a project that turned into 'The Sorrow Song Trilogy' of which 'The War Wolf' is the first instalment. He is married with two children and three cats.