Editing Alfred the Great (section)

=== Burghal system ===
{{See also|Burghal Hidage}}
[[File:Anglo-Saxon burhs.svg|thumb|A map of [[burh]]s named in the [[Burghal Hidage]]]]
[[File:winchesterwalls.jpg|thumb|The walled defence round a [[burh]]. The [[Winchester city walls|City Walls]] of Alfred's capital, [[Winchester]]. Saxon and medieval work on Roman foundations.]]

The foundation of Alfred's new military defence system was a network of burhs, distributed at tactical points throughout the kingdom.{{Sfn|Pratt|2007|p=95}} There were thirty-three burhs, about {{Convert|30|km|mi|abbr=off}} apart, enabling the military to confront attacks anywhere in the kingdom within a day.{{Sfn|Hull|2006|p=xx}}{{Sfn|Abels|1998|p=203}}

Alfred's burhs (of which 22 developed into [[borough]]s) ranged from former [[Roman Britain|Roman towns]], such as Winchester, where the stone walls were repaired and ditches added, to massive earthen walls surrounded by wide ditches, probably reinforced with wooden [[revetment]]s and palisades, such as at [[Burpham]] in West Sussex.{{Sfn|Tait|1999|p=18}}{{Sfn|Welch|1992|p=127}}{{Sfn|Abels|1998|p=304}}{{Efn|The Alfredian burh represented a stage in the evolution of English medieval towns and boroughs. Of the twenty two burhs that became boroughs three did not attain full town status.{{Sfn|Tait|1999|p=18}}{{Sfn|Loyn|1991|p=138}}}} The size of the burhs ranged from tiny outposts such as [[Pilton, Devon|Pilton]] in Devon, to large fortifications in established towns, the largest being at Winchester.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bradshaw|1999}}, which is referenced in {{Harvnb|Hull|2006|p=xx}}</ref>

A document now known as the ''[[Burghal Hidage]]'' provides an insight into how the system worked. It lists the hidage for each of the fortified towns contained in the document. [[Wallingford, Oxfordshire|Wallingford]] had a hidage of 2,400, which meant that the landowners there were responsible for supplying and feeding 2,400 men, the number sufficient for maintaining {{Convert|9900|ft|mi+km|abbr=off}} of wall.{{Sfn|Hill|Rumble|1996|p=5}} A total of 27,071 soldiers were needed, approximately one in four of all the free men in Wessex.{{Sfn|Abels|1998|pp=204–207}} Many of the burhs were twin towns that straddled a river and were connected by a fortified bridge, like those built by Charles the Bald a generation before.{{Sfn|Keynes|Lapidge|1983|p=14}} The double-burh blocked passage on the river, forcing Viking ships to navigate under a garrisoned bridge lined with men armed with stones, spears or arrows. Other burhs were sited near fortified royal villas, allowing the king better control over his strongholds.{{Sfn|Abels|1998|pp=198–202}}

The burhs were connected by a road system maintained for army use (known as [[herepath]]s). The roads allowed an army quickly to be assembled, sometimes from more than one burh, to confront the Viking invader.{{Sfn|Lavelle|2003|p=26}} The road network posed significant obstacles to Viking invaders, especially those laden with booty. The system threatened Viking routes and communications making it far more dangerous for them. The Vikings lacked the equipment for a siege against a burh and a developed doctrine of [[siegecraft]], having tailored their methods of fighting to rapid strikes and unimpeded retreats to well-defended fortifications. The only means left to them was to starve the burh into submission but this gave the king time to send his field army or garrisons from neighbouring burhs along the army roads. In such cases, the Vikings were extremely vulnerable to pursuit by the king's joint military forces.{{Sfn|Abels|1988|pp=204, 304}} Alfred's burh system posed such a formidable challenge against Viking attack that when the Vikings returned in 892 and stormed a half-built, poorly garrisoned fortress up the [[Lympne]] estuary in Kent, the Anglo-Saxons were able to limit their penetration to the outer frontiers of Wessex and Mercia.{{Sfn|Abels|1998|pp=287, 304}} Alfred's burghal system was revolutionary in its strategic conception and potentially expensive in its execution. His contemporary biographer Asser wrote that many nobles balked at the demands placed upon them even though they were for "the common needs of the kingdom".<ref>Asser, translated by {{Harvnb|Keynes|Lapidge|1983}}</ref>{{Sfn|Abels|1998|p=206}}