Home
Period
Medieval
The Vikings mutilated and maimed their defeated enemies. So why did Alfred the Great spare their leader?

The Vikings mutilated and maimed their defeated enemies. So why did Alfred the Great spare their leader?

When confronted with the Viking foe who had threatened to take his land – and his life – King Alfred of Wessex chose to forgive his defeated Norse opponent

A portrait of Alfred the Great, Anglo-Saxon king of Wessex

James Osborne

Published: September 11, 2026 at 11:20 AM

Save

How should a leader who has achieved victory on the blood-soaked field of battle treat their defeated opponent?

Throughout history, the usual answer has been: without mercy.

Take two examples. In AD 70, Roman forces crushed the First Jewish Revolt and retook Jerusalem, devastating the city, destroying the Second Temple – the holiest site in Jewish life – and imposing an onerous religious tax.

And in 1919, after defeat in the First World War, Germany was forced to sign the Treaty of Versailles – accepting loss of territory, severe military restrictions and huge reparation payments.

In both instances, the defeated were humiliated, politically subdued and economically debilitated – arguably fuelling renewed conflict in decades to come. Hence Winston Churchill’s declaration after the Second World War that the Allies should show “In victory, magnanimity” to halt an ongoing cycle of violence.

He wasn’t the first to see the wisdom in this approach. As early as the ninth century, an Anglo-Saxon king who paved the way for the foundation of England came to the same conclusion.

How Alfred the Great defeated the Viking invaders

King Alfred of Wessex – widely known today as ‘the Great’ – ruled at a time when Norse invaders seemed set to topple the Anglo-Saxon kingdoms of Britain. Wessex was, as the cliché goes, the last stronghold resisting the Great Heathen Army – a marauding force of Vikings battering the British Isles.

Later illustration imagining Viking longships attacking Anglo-Saxon forces at sea during the age of Alfred the Great.

Viking ships attack Anglo-Saxon England in a later illustration. Alfred the Great’s reign was dominated by conflict with Viking armies, culminating in his victory over Guthrum at Edington in 878. The subsequent peace and Guthrum’s baptism marked a turning point in the struggle between Wessex and the Vikings | Credit: Getty Images

One by one, the kingdoms fell: Northumbria, East Anglia, Mercia. By the time the Viking forces – now led by the enigmatic warlord Guthrum – turned their attention to Wessex, the outcome seemed inevitable.

The first of many pivotal moments came at the end of the Christmas period in 878. Alfred, a staunch Christian, was at Chippenham in early January, no doubt pondering how best to repel the Vikings. Surely he had a moment of respite: not only was it a holy season, but also winter – not the time for warfare.

Guthrum did not agree.

“This Viking army doesn’t play by the rules,” says Dr Eleanor Barraclough, speaking on the HistoryExtra podcast. “It attacks at the time of a very holy Christian holiday.” Guthrum’s force launched its attack on Chippenham, probably on the night of 6 January – the feast of Epiphany – taking Alfred by surprise. He fled in panic, taking a small warband, and hid in the marshes of Somerset.

During his short time in the wilderness, Alfred gathered the remaining strands of Wessex resistance, bringing together disparate warbands and marshalling his people. With his renewed military force, he marched east to confront his foe, winning victory at the battle of Edington in what’s now western Wiltshire. Eventually, “ tired, hungry, cold, despairing, defeated, Guthrum surrenders to Alfred,” says Barraclough.

What did Alfred the Great do with his defeated enemy?

Having regained control of Wessex, how should Alfred treat his defeated foe – the enemy who had taken his land and killed his men? “This is a story that we would expect to end in the death of at least one of the leaders,” says Barraclough. “And it doesn't.”

Faced with his deadly enemy, Alfred instead turned to his Christian faith. He had Guthrum baptised, and sponsored the Viking warlord as his godson. Guthrum took the baptismal name Æthelstan – the same as Alfred’s later grandson – and subsequently ruled East Anglia. Alfred forgave him, “and they feast together for days afterwards,” adds Barraclough. “This is not only a political allyship but the start of what essentially is a personal relationship.”

Read more | Meet the mysterious leaders of the Vikings’ most fearsome army

For their remaining years, Alfred and Guthrum ruled as neighbours, largely in peace. Guthrum embraced Christianity, minted coins in his new name in an Anglo-Saxon style, and ruled in the manner of previous Anglo-Saxon kings.

Later illustration depicting the baptism of the Viking leader Guthrum following his defeat by Alfred the Great in 878.

Alfred the Great stands as godfather at the baptism of his former enemy Guthrum in 878. The ceremony followed Alfred’s victory over Guthrum’s Viking army at Edington and the subsequent peace settlement: Guthrum’s conversion to Christianity helped transform a bitter military rivalry into a new political relationship between the two rulers | Credit: Getty Images

With the defeat and conversion of Guthrum, the Great Heathen Army’s campaign was essentially brought to an end. Alfred’s war against the pagan men from across the North Sea did not resume in earnest, at least during his lifetime.

Alfred’s actions didn’t demonstrate pure mercy – strategic thinking also played a part. “One of the most useful things you can do with the defeated Viking is to make them an ally,” explains Barraclough. “If you can do that, not only are you cutting off that source of violence, you've also got someone who also is invested in not suffering more Viking attacks. The best way to do that from a Christian perspective – and, as we know, Alfred is a very religious man – is to convert your enemy.”

A pause in the Viking violence

True, the Viking threat later returned to haunt Anglo-Saxon England. Alfred’s own descendants – his daughter Æthelflæd and grandson Æthelstan among them – were forced to face the Vikings at battles such as Brunanburh (in 937), as were later kings such as Edmund Ironside and Æthelred the Unready.

Indeed, in the early 11th century, the mighty Sweyn Forkbeard and Cnut the Great – Danes in the Viking tradition – dominated the Anglo-Saxons completely, becoming kings of England and, under Cnut, bringing the country into the short-lived North Sea empire.

Sweyn Forkbeard’s invasion of England may, at least in part, have been motivated by revenge after Æthelred the Unready had, contrary to the example set by Alfred, ordered the killing of Danes whom he believed had betrayed him – an outburst of violence remembered as the St Brice’s Day Massacre.

In bringing Guthrum onside, rather than killing him and attempting to subjugate his people, Alfred won relative peace for years. And he did it with magnanimity. In his unremittingly violent era, that is an achievement worth reflecting on.

Dr Eleanor Barraclough was speaking to James Osborne on the HistoryExtra podcast. Listen to the full conversation.

Authors

James OsborneSenior content producer

James Osborne is a senior content producer at HistoryExtra