I agree with what Thiu says, right down to the last point about hindsight and the fact that we cannot judge very well what would be the best choice if we were not there.

(And I really like the depth of Thiu's post. It's having things like this to share and learn from which attracted me to AW in the first place.)

On Byrhtnoth as a savvy commander: I don't feel as confident, after Thiu's defense, that my assessment of the situation is as cut and dried as I would like. (Byrhtnoth as a "chivalric fool" does appear as a rather facile copout, when you look at it the way Thiu has.) As we do not know what quality of troops Byrhtnoth had on hand (mainly in terms of morale, the willingness to fight), and we also do not know the quality of a given Viking army, we must allow that these factors are key in his decision to fight then and there. We also do not know what other forces might have been seriously effected by a big Viking loss: a lost English army would not greatly alter the danger England already faced: Vikings did not take defeat well: when they lost a force in battle, it made the rest of the Vikings more cautious, i.e. it eased the situation for the English of that district for some time to come.