Ref:

(1) Who's Who in Roman Britain and Anglo-Saxon England- Richard Fletcher, Shepheard-Walwyn. pp.22-3
(2) An Introduction to Anglo-Saxon England- Peter Hunter Blair, Cambridge University Press- pp.34-5; The Anglo-Saxons- John Campbell, Eric John, Patrick Wormald, Penguin Books- p. 26
(3) Anglo-Saxon Royal Genealogies- Kenneth Sisam, Proceedings of the British Academy- Vol. 39, pp.287-348 (1953)
(4) The Beginnings of Wessex- H.H. Howorth, The English Historical Review- Vol. 13, No. 52 (Oct. 1898), pp. 667-71

Wikipedia article on Cerdic at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cerdic_of_Wessex

d. 581

Cynric of Wessex ruled as king of Wessex from 534 to 560. Everything known about him comes from the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle. There he is stated to have been the son of Cerdic, and also (in the regnal list in the preface) to have been the son of Cerdic's son, Creoda. During his reign he is said to have captured Searobyrig or Old Sarum, near Salisbury, in 552, and that in 556 he and his son Ceawlin won a battle against the Britons at Beranburh, now identified as Barbury Castle. If these dates are accurate, then it is unlikely that the earlier entries in the chronicle, starting with his arrival in Britain with his father Cerdic in 495, are correct. David Dumville has suggested that his true regnal dates are 554-581.

The name Cynric has a straightforward Old English etymology meaning "kin-ruler." However, as both his predecessor, Cerdic, and successor, Ceawlin, have Celtic names an alternative etymology has been postulated from "cunorix" which would mean "hound-king" in Old British (rendered as "cynwrig" in Old Welsh). In 1967 a stone was found at Wroxeter in a Sub-Roman context with the inscription CUNORIX MACUS MA QVI COLINE. This wording contains both the name Cunorix and another which is reminiscent of "Ceawlin."

Issue-

3I. CEAWLIN- d. 592

Ref:

Wikipedia article on Cerdic at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cynric_of_Wessex

d. 592

The chronology of Ceawlin's life is highly uncertain. His reign is variously listed as lasting seven, seventeen, or thirty-two years, and the historical accuracy and dating of many of the events in the Chronicle have been called into question. However, it appears that under Ceawlin Wessex acquired significant territory, though some was later lost to other Anglo-Saxon kingdoms. Ceawlin is also named as one of the eight "bretwaldas": this was a name given in the Chronicle to eight rulers who had overlordship over southern Britain, though the actual extent of Ceawlin�s control is not known.

Ceawlin died in 593, having been deposed the year before, possibly by his successor, Ceol. He is recorded in various sources as having two sons, Cutha and Cuthwine, but the genealogies in which this information is found are known to be unreliable.

In the fifth century, raids on Britain by continental peoples had developed into full-scale migrations. The newcomers are known to have included Angles, Saxons, Jutes and Frisians, and there is evidence of other groups as well. These groups captured territory in the east and south of England, but at about the end of the fifth century, a British victory at the battle of Mons Badonicus halted the Anglo-Saxon advance for fifty years. Beginning in about 550, however, the British began to lose ground once more, and within 25 years it appears that control of almost all of southern England was in the hands of the invaders.(1)

The peace following the battle of Mons Badonicus is attested partly by Gildas, a monk who in about the middle of the sixth century wrote De Excidio Britanniae, or �On the Ruin of Britain�. This essay is a polemic against corruption, and Gildas provides little in the way of names and dates. However, he does make it clear that peace had lasted from the year of his birth to the time he was writing.(2) The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle is the other main source that bears on this period, in particular in an entry for the year 827 that records a list of the kings who bore the title "bretwalda", or "Britain-ruler". That list shows a gap in the early sixth century that matches Gildas�s version of events.(3)

Ceawlin�s reign belongs to the period of Anglo-Saxon expansion at the end of the sixth century. Though there are many unanswered questions about the chronology and activities of the early West Saxon rulers, it is clear that Ceawlin was one of the key figures in the final Anglo-Saxon conquest of southern Britain.(4)

The two main written sources for early West Saxon history are the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle and the West Saxon Genealogical Regnal List. The Chronicle is a set of annals which were put together in about 890, in the reign of King Alfred the Great of Wessex.(5) They contain earlier material for the older entries, which were assembled from earlier annals that no longer survive, as well as from saga material that was perhaps transmitted orally.(6) The Chronicle dates the West Saxon arrival in Britain to 495, when Cerdic and his son, Cynric, land at "Cerdices ora", or Cerdic�s shore. Almost twenty annals describing Cerdic�s campaigns, and those of his descendants, appear interspersed through the next hundred years of entries in the Chronicle. Although these annals provide most of what is known about Ceawlin, it should also be noted that the historicity of many of the entries is uncertain.(7)

The West Saxon Genealogical Regnal List is a list of kings of Wessex, including the lengths of their reigns. It survives in several forms, including as a preface to the [B] manuscript of the Chronicle. Like the Chronicle, it was composed during the reign of Alfred the Great, and both the List and the Chronicle are influenced by the desire of their writers to trace the lineage of the Kings of Wessex through Cerdic to Gewis, the legendary ancestor of the West Saxons, through a single line of descent. The result served the political purposes of the scribe, but is riddled with contradictions for the historian. The Regnal List is now separated from the main body of the Chronicle, and as result the manuscripts are recorded separately in the British Library, as MS Cotton Tiberius Aii, f. 178 (for the Regnal List), and MS Cotton Tiberius Avi, ff. 1�34 (the [B] manuscript of the Chronicle). (8)

This can be seen clearly by calculating dates by different methods from the various sources. The first event in West Saxon history the date of which can be regarded as reasonably certain is the baptism of Cynegils, which occurred in the late 630s, perhaps as late as 640. The Chronicle dates Cerdic�s arrival to 495, but adding up the lengths of the reigns as given in the West Saxon Genealogical Regnal List leads to the conclusion that Cerdic�s reign started in about 532, a difference of 37 years. However, neither 495 nor 532 can be treated as reliable; the latter date relies on the assumption that the Regnal List is correct in presenting the kings of Wessex as having succeeded one another, with no omitted kings and no joint kingships, and that the durations of the reigns are correct as given. None of these assumptions can be made safely.(9)

The sources are also inconsistent on the length of Ceawlin�s reign. The Chronicle gives it as thirty-two years, from 560 to 592, but the Regnal Lists disagree: different versions give it as seven or seventeen years. A recent detailed study of the Regnal List dates the arrival of the West Saxons in England to 538, and favours seven years as the most likely length of Ceawlin's reign, with dates of 581�588 proposed.(10) The sources do agree that Ceawlin is the son of Cynric, and he is usually named as the father of Cuthwine. There is one discrepancy to be noted in this case: the entry for 685 in the [A] version of the Chronicle assigns Ceawlin a son, Cutha, but in the 855 entry in the same manuscript, Cutha is listed as the son of Cuthwine. Cutha is also named as Ceawlin�s brother in the [E] and [F] versions of the Chronicle, in the 571 and 568 entries, respectively.(11)

Whether Ceawlin is a descendant of Cerdic is a matter of debate. Subgroupings of different West Saxon lineages give the impression of separate groups, of which Ceawlin's line is one. Some of the problems in the Wessex genealogies may have come about because of efforts to integrate Ceawlin's line with the other lineages: it was very important to the West Saxons to be able to trace their ancestors back to Cerdic. Another reason for doubting the literal nature of these early genealogies is that the etymology of the names of several early members of the dynasty do not appear to be Germanic. The name Ceawlin is one of the names that does not have a convincing Anglo-Saxon origin; it seems more likely to be British.(12)

It should also be noted that the earliest sources do not use the term "West Saxon". According to Bede's Ecclesiastical History of the English People, the term is interchangeable with the Gewisse, meaning the descendants of Gewis. The term "West Saxon" only appears in the late seventh century, after the reign of C�dwalla.(13)

The kingdom of Wessex ultimately occupied the southwest of England, but the initial stages in this expansion are not apparent from the sources. Cerdic�s landing, whenever it is to be dated, seems to have been near the Isle of Wight, and the annals record the conquest of the island in 530. In 534, according to the Chronicle, Cerdic died, and his son Cynric took the throne; the Chronicle adds that "they gave the Isle of Wight to their nephews, Stuf and Wihtgar". It should be noted that these records are in direct conflict with Bede, who states that the Isle of Wight was settled by Jutes, not Saxons; the archaeological record is somewhat in favour of Bede on this.(14)

Subsequent entries in the Chronicle give details of some of the battles by which the West Saxons won their kingdom. Ceawlin�s campaigns are not near the coast, they range along the Thames valley and beyond, as far as Surrey in the east, and the mouth of the Severn in the west. Ceawlin is clearly part of the West Saxon expansion, but the military history of the period is difficult to understand. In what follows the dates are as given in the Chronicle, though as noted above these are likely to be too early.

556: Beran byrg

The first record of a battle fought by Ceawlin is in 556, when he and his father, Cynric, fought the British at "Beran byrg", or Bera's Stronghold. This is now identified as Barbury Castle, an Iron Age hill fort in Wiltshire, near Swindon. Cynric would have been king of Wessex at this time.(15)

568: Wibbandun

The first battle Ceawlin fought as king is dated by the Chronicle to 568, when he and Cutha fought with �thelberht, the king of Kent. The entry says "Here Ceawlin and Cutha fought against Aethelberht and drove him into Kent; and they killed two ealdormen, Oslaf and Cnebba, on Wibbandun." The location of "Wibbandun", which can be translated as "Wibba�s Mount", has not been definitely identified; it was at one time thought to be Wimbledon, but this is now known to be incorrect. This battle is notable as the first recorded conflict between the invading peoples, previous battles recorded in the Chronicle are between the Anglo-Saxons and the British.(16)

571: Bedcanford

The annal for 571 reads: "Here Cuthwulf fought against the Britons at Bedcanford, and took 4 settlements: Limbury and Aylesbury, Benson and Eynsham; and in the same year he passed away." Cuthwulf's relationship with Ceawlin is unknown, but the alliteration common to Anglo-Saxon royal families suggests Cuthwulf may be part of the West Saxon royal line. The location of the battle itself is unidentified. It has been suggested that it was Bedford, but what is known of the early history of Bedford�s names does not support this. This battle is of interest because it is surprising that an area so far east should still be in British hands this late: there is ample archaeological evidence of early Saxon and Anglian presence in the midlands, and historians have generally interpreted Gildas's De Excidio as implying that the British had lost control of this area by the mid-sixth century. One possible explanation is that this annal records a reconquest of land that was lost to the British in the campaigns ending in the battle of Mons Badonicus.(17)

577: The lower Severn

The annal for 577 reads "Here Cuthwine and Ceawlin fought against the Britons, and they killed 3 kings, Coinmail and Condidan and Farinmail, in the place which is called Dyrham, and took 3 cities: Gloucester and Cirencester and Bath." This entry is all that is known of these British kings; their names are in an archaic form that makes it very likely this annal derives from a much older written source. The battle itself has long been regarded as a key moment in the Saxon advance, since in reaching the Bristol Channel the West Saxons divided the Britons west of the Severn from land communication with those in the peninsula to the south of the Channel. Wessex almost certainly lost this territory to Penda of Mercia in 628, when the Chronicle records that "Cynegils and Cwichelm fought against Penda at Cirencester, and then came to an agreement."(18)

It is possible that when Ceawlin and Cuthwine took Bath, they found the Roman baths still operating to some extent. Nennius, a ninth-century historian, mentions a "Hot Lake" in the land of the Hwicce, which was along the Severn, and adds "It is surrounded by a wall, made of brick and stone, and men may go there to bathe at any time, and every man can have the kind of bath he likes. If he wants, it will be a cold bath; and if he wants a hot bath, it will be hot". Bede also describes hot baths in the geographical introduction to the Ecclesiastical History, in terms very like Nennius's.(19)

Wansdyke

Wansdyke, an early medieval defensive linear earthwork, runs from south of Bristol to near Marlborough, passing not far from Bath. It was probably built in the fifth or sixth centuries, perhaps by Ceawlin.(20)

584: Fethan leag

Ceawlin�s last recorded victory is in 584. The entry reads: "Here Ceawlin and Cutha fought against the Britons at the place which is named Fethan leag, and Cutha was killed; and Ceawlin took many towns and countless war-loot, and in anger he turned back to his own [territory]." There is a wood named "Fethel�e" mentioned in a 12th century document that relates to Stoke Lyne, in Oxfordshire, and it is now thought that the battle of Fethan leag must have been fought in this area. The phrase �in anger he turned back to his own� probably indicates that this annal is drawn from saga material, as perhaps are all of the early Wessex annals. It has also been used to argue that perhaps Ceawlin did not in fact win the battle, and that the chronicler chose not to record the outcome fully � a king does not usually come home �in anger� after taking "many towns and countless war-loot". It may be that Ceawlin�s overlordship of the southern English came to an end with this battle.(21)

The entry for 827 in the [C] manuscript of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, listing the eight bretwaldas. Ceawlin's name can be seen in the fifth line, spelled "Ceaulin".About 731, Bede, a Northumbrian monk and chronicler, wrote a work called the Ecclesiastical History of the English People. The work was not primarily a secular history, but Bede provides much information about the history of the Anglo-Saxons, including a list early in the history of seven kings whom, he said, held �imperium� over the other kingdoms south of the Humber. The usual translation for �imperium� is �overlordship�. Bede names Ceawlin as the second on the list, though he spells it "Caelin", and adds that he was "known in the speech of his own people as Ceaulin". Bede also makes it clear that Ceawlin was not a Christian�Bede mentions a later king, �thelberht of Kent, as "the first to enter the kingdom of heaven".(22)

The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, in an entry for the year 827, repeats Bede�s list, adds Egbert of Wessex, and also mentions that they were known as "bretwalda", or "Britain-ruler". A great deal of scholarly attention has been given to the meaning of this word. It has been described as a term "of encomiastic poetry", but there is also evidence that it implied a definite role of military leadership.(23)

Entry for 827 in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle listing the eight bretwaldas. Ceawlin's name is in the fifth line and is spelled "Ceaulin".

Bede says that these kings had authority "south of the Humber", but the actual span of control, at least of the earlier bretwaldas, was no doubt less than this. In Ceawlin�s case the range of control is hard to determine accurately, but Bede's inclusion of Ceawlin in the list of kings who held imperium, and the list of battles he is recorded as having won, indicate an energetic and successful leader who, from a base in the upper Thames valley, dominated much of the surrounding area and held overlordship over the southern English for some period. Despite Ceawlin's military successes, the northern conquests he made could not always be retained: Mercia took much of the upper Thames valley, and the north-eastern towns won in 571 were in territory subsequently under the control of Kent and Mercia at different times.(24)

Bede's concept of the power of these overlords must also be regarded as the product of his eighth-century viewpoint. When the Ecclesiastical History was written, �thelbald of Mercia dominated the English south of the Humber, and Bede's view of the earlier kings is doubtless strongly coloured by the state of England at that time. For the earlier bretwaldas, such as �lle and Ceawlin, there must be some element of anachronism in Bede's description. It is also possible that Bede only meant to refer to power over Anglo-Saxon kingdoms, not the native Britons.(25)

Ceawlin is the second king in Bede�s list. All the subsequent bretwaldas followed more or less consecutively, but there is a long gap, perhaps fifty years, between �lle of Sussex, the first bretwalda, and Ceawlin. The lack of gaps between the overlordships of the later bretwaldas has been used to make an argument for Ceawlin's dates matching the later entries in the Chronicle with reasonable accuracy. According to this analysis, the next bretwalda, �thelberht of Kent, must have been already a dominant king by the time Pope Gregory the Great wrote to him in 601, since Gregory would have not written to an underking. Ceawlin defeated �thelberht in 568 according to the Chronicle. �thelberht's dates are a matter of debate, but recent scholarly consensus has his reign starting no earlier than 580. The 568 date for the battle at Wibbandun is thought to be unlikely because of the assertion in various versions of the West Saxon Genealogical Regnal List that Ceawlin's reign lasted either seven or seventeen years. If this battle is placed at around 590, before �thelberht has established himself as a powerful king, then the subsequent annals relating to Ceawlin's defeat and death may be reasonably close to the correct date. In any case, the battle with �thelberht is unlikely to have been more than a few years on either side of 590. The gap between Aelle and Ceawlin, on the other hand, has been taken as supporting evidence for the story told by Gildas in De Excidio of a peace lasting a generation or more following a British victory at Mons Badonicus.(26)

�thelberht of Kent succeeds Ceawlin on the list of bretwaldas, but the reigns may overlap somewhat: recent evaluations give Ceawlin a likely reign of perhaps 581�588, and place �thelberht's accession in about 589, but these analyses are no more than scholarly guesses. Ceawlin�s eclipse in 592, probably by Ceol, may have been the occasion for �thelberht to rise to prominence; �thelberht was very likely the dominant Anglo-Saxon king by 597. �thelberht�s rise may have been earlier: the 584 annal, even if it records a victory, is the last victory of Ceawlin�s in the Chronicle, and the period after that may have been one of �thelberht�s ascent and Ceawlin�s decline.(27)

Ceawlin lost the throne of Wessex in 592. The annal for that year reads, in part: �Here there was great slaughter at Woden�s Barrow, and Ceawlin was driven out.� Woden�s Barrow is a tumulus, now called Adam�s Grave, at Alton Priors, Wiltshire. No details of his opponent are given. The medieval chronicler William of Malmesbury, writing in about 1120, says that it was "the Angles and the British conspiring together", Alternatively, it may have been Ceol, who is supposed to have been the next king of Wessex, ruling for six years according to the West Saxon Genealogical Regnal List. According to the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, Ceawlin died the following year. The relevant part of the annal reads: "Here Ceawlin and Cwichelm and Crida perished." Nothing more is known of Cwichelm and Crida, though they may have been members of the Wessex royal house � their names fit the alliterative pattern common to royal houses of the time.(28)

According to the Regnal List, Ceol was a son of Cutha, who was a son of Cynric; and Ceolwulf, his brother, reigned for seventeen years after him. It is possible that some fragmentation of control among the West Saxons occurred at Ceawlin's death: Ceol and Ceolwulf may have been based in Wiltshire, as opposed to the upper Thames valley. This split may have also contributed to �thelberht's ability to rise to dominance in southern England. The West Saxons remained influential in military terms, however: the Chronicle and Bede record continued military activity against Essex and Sussex within twenty or thirty years of Ceawlin's death.(29)

Issue-

Ref:

(1) An Introduction to Anglo-Saxon England- Peter Hunter Blair, Cambridge University Press- pp.13-6, 204; The Anglo-Saxons- John Campbell, Eric John, Patrick Wormald, Penguin Books- p. 23
(2) Anglo-Saxon England- Frank M. Stenton, Clarendon Press, 1971-pp.2-7
(3) The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle- Michael Swanton, Routledge, NY, 1996- pp.60-1
(4) Anglo-Saxon England- Frank M. Stenton, Clarendon Press, 1971-p.30
(5) Alfred the Great: Asser's Life of King Alfred and other contemporary sources- Simon Keynes, Michael Lapidge, Penguin Classics, NY, 2004- p.41
(6) The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle- Michael Swanton, Routledge, NY, 1996- p.xix; Kings and Kingdoms of Early Anglo-Saxon England- Barbara Yorke, Seaby, London, 1990- p. 132
(7) The Earliest English Kings- D.P. Kirby, Routledge, London, 1992- pp.50-1, 55; The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle- Michael Swanton, Routledge, NY, 1996- pp.14-21
(8) The Earliest English Kings- D.P. Kirby, Routledge, London, 1992- p. 49
(9) Ibid- pp. 50-1
(10) Ibid; The West Saxon Genealogical Regnal List and the Chronology of Wessex- D.N. Dumville, cited in Yorke, Kings and Kingdoms p. 133
(11) Swanton's Anglo-Saxon Chronicle- pp. 18�19. For tables showing the variations in the Wessex genealogy, see also figures 3 and 4 in Kirby, Earliest English Kings- pp. 223�224.
(12) Kings and Kingdoms of Early Anglo-Saxon England- Barbara Yorke, Seaby, London, 1990- p. 133; Why did the Anglo-Saxons not becomes more British?- B. Ward-Perkins, The English Historical Review- June 2000, p. 513
(13) The Earliest English Kings- D.P. Kirby, Routledge, London, 1992-pp. 48, 223
(14) The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle- Michael Swanton, Routledge, NY, 1996- pp. 14-21; The Earliest English Kings- D.P. Kirby, Routledge, London, 1992- p. 49; Anglo-Saxon England- Frank M. Stenton, Clarendon Press, 1971-pp. 22-3
(15) The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle- Michael Swanton, Routledge, NY, 1996- pp. 14-21; Anglo-Saxon England- Frank M. Stenton, Clarendon Press, 1971-pp. 26-8
(16) The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle- Michael Swanton, Routledge, NY, 1996- pp. 14-21; Two Saxon Chronicles Parallel- Charles Plummer, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1972- Vol. 2, p. 16; A History of the Anglo-Saxons- H.R. Hodgkins, Oxford University Press, 1935- p. 188
(17) Anglo-Saxon England- Frank M. Stenton, Clarendon Press, 1971-pp. 26-8
(18) The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle- Michael Swanton, Routledge, NY, 1996- pp. 18-9, 24-5; Anglo-Saxon England- Frank M. Stenton, Clarendon Press, 1971-pp. 29, 45
(19) The Anglo-Saxons- James Campbell, Eric John, Patrick Wormald, Penguin Books, London- pp. 40-1
(20) Who's Who in Roman Britain and Anglo-Saxon England- Richard Fletcher, Shepheard-Walwyn, London- pp. 25-6
(21) Who's Who in Roman Britain and Anglo-Saxon England- Richard Fletcher, Shepheard-Walwyn, London- pp. 25-6; Anglo-Saxon England- Frank M. Stenton, Clarendon Press, 1971-pp. 29-30; The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle- Michael Swanton, Routledge, NY, 1996- pp. 14-21
(22) Ecclesiastical History of the English People- Bede- II, 5
(23) The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle- Michael Swanton, Routledge, NY, 1996- pp. 60-1; Anglo-Saxon England- Frank M. Stenton, Clarendon Press, 1971-pp. 34-5; The Earliest English Kings- D.P. Kirby, Routledge, London, 1992- p. 17
(24) The Earliest English Kings- D.P. Kirby, Routledge, London, 1992- p. 55; Anglo-Saxon England- Frank M. Stenton, Clarendon Press, 1971-p. 29; The Anglo-Saxons- James Campbell, Eric John, Patrick Wormald, Penguin Books, London- pp. 53-4
(25) The Earliest English Kings- D.P. Kirby, Routledge, London, 1992- p. 17; The Anglo-Saxons- James Campbell, Eric John, Patrick Wormald, Penguin Books, London- pp. 53-4
(26) The Earliest English Kings- D.P. Kirby, Routledge, London, 1992- pp. 50-1, 56; Anglo-Saxon England- Frank M. Stenton, Clarendon Press, 1971-p. 19
(27) The Earliest English Kings- D.P. Kirby, Routledge, London, 1992- 31-4, 56; Kings and Kingdoms of Early Anglo-Saxon England- Barbara Yorke, Seaby, London, 1990- p. 133; Anglo-Saxon England- Frank M. Stenton, Clarendon Press, 1971-p. 30
(28) The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle- Michael Swanton, Routledge, NY, 1996- pp.14-21; Anglo-Saxon England- Frank M. Stenton, Clarendon Press, 1971-p. 30; The Earliest English Kings- D.P. Kirby, Routledge, London, 1992- p. 56; Two Saxon Chronicles Parallel- Charles Plummer, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1972- Vol. 2, p. 17; Kings and Kingdoms of Early Anglo-Saxon England- Barbara Yorke, Seaby, London, 1990- p. 143
(29) The Earliest English Kings- D.P. Kirby, Routledge, London, 1992- p.17

Cuthwine did not inherit the throne from his father as it passed to his cousin Ceol.

Issue-

Ref:

The Earliest English Kings- D.P. Kirby, Routledge, London, 1992
Kings and Kingdoms of Early Anglo-Saxon England- Barbara Yorke, Seaby, London, 1990

Issue-

6I. CEOLWALD-

Ref:

The Earliest English Kings- D.P. Kirby, Routledge, London, 1992
Kings and Kingdoms of Early Anglo-Saxon England- Barbara Yorke, Seaby, London, 1990

Issue-

Ref:

The Earliest English Kings- D.P. Kirby, Routledge, London, 1992
Kings and Kingdoms of Early Anglo-Saxon England- Barbara Yorke, Seaby, London, 1990

It is possible that Cenred ruled alongside his son Ine for a period. There is weak evidence for joint kingships, and stronger evidence of subkings reigning under a dominant ruler in Wessex, not long before his time. Ine acknowledges his father's help in his code of laws, and there is also a surviving land-grant that indicates Cenred was still reigning in Wessex after Ine's accession.

Issue-

Ref:

The Earliest English Kings- D.P. Kirby, Routledge, London, 1992- pp.120-2
Kings and Kingdoms of Early Anglo-Saxon England- Barbara Yorke, Seaby, London, 1990- pp.145-6

Issue-

b. 706

Issue-

b.c.730
m. Princess of Kent

Issue-

Ealhmund, was King of Kent in 784. The only contemporary evidence of him is an abstract of a charter dated in that year, in which Ealhmund granted land to the Abbot of Reculver. (1) By the following year Offa of Mercia seems to have been ruling directly, as he issued a charter without any mention of a local king.(2)

There is a general consensus that he is identical to the Ealhmund found in two pedigrees in the Winchester (Parker) Chronicle, compiled during the reign of Alfred the Great. The genealogical preface to this manuscript, as well as the annal entry (covering years 855-859) describing the death of �thelwulf, both make king Egbert of Wessex the son of an Ealhmund, who was son of Eafa, grandson of Eoppa, and great-grandson of Ingild, the brother of king Ine of Wessex, and descendant of founder Cerdic, and therefore a member of the House of Wessex. A further entry has been added in a later hand to the 784 annal, reporting Ealhmund's reign in Kent. Finally, in the Canterbury Bilingual Epitome, originally compiled after the Norman conquest of England, a later scribe has likewise added to the 784 annal not only Ealhmund's reign in Kent, but his explicit identification with the father Egbert.(3) Based on this reconstruction, in which a Wessex scion became king of Kent, his own Kentish name and that of his son, Egbert, it has been suggested that his mother derived from the royal house of Kent,(4) a connection dismissed by a recent critical review.(5) It has likewise been suggested that Ealhmund might actually have been a Kentish royal scion, and that his pedigree was forged to give son Egbert the descent from Cerdic requisite to reigning in Wessex.

Issue-

Ref:

(1) Genealogical Flights of Fancy. Old Assumptions, New Sources- M.L. Bierbrier, Foundations: Journal of the Foundation for Medieval Genealogy- Vol.II, pp. 379-87
(2) The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle- G.N. Garmonsway, Ed., J.M. Dent & Sons, Ltd., London- pp.xxxii, 2, 4
(3) Ibid- xxxix-xxxx, 52
(4) The House of Aethelred- David H. Kelley, in Studies in Genealogy and Family History in Tribute to Charles Evans- The Association for the Promotion of Scholarship in Genealogy, Salt Lake City, occasional publication No. 2, pp. 63-93
(5) Genealogical Flights of Fancy. Old Assumptions, New Sources- M.L. Bierbrier, Foundations: Journal of the Foundation for Medieval Genealogy- Vol.II, pp. 379-87

b.c.770
m. REDBURGA
d. 839

Egbert (also spelled Ecgberht) was King of Wessex from 802 until 839. In the 780s Egbert was forced into exile by Offa of Mercia and Beorhtric of Wessex, but on Beorhtric's death in 802 Egbert returned and took the throne.

Little is known of the first twenty years of Egbert's reign, but it is thought that he was able to maintain Wessex's independence against the kingdom of Mercia, which at that time dominated the other southern English kingdoms. In 825 Egbert defeated Beornwulf of Mercia at the battle of Ellendun, and proceeded to take control of the Mercian dependencies in southeastern England. In 829 Egbert defeated Wiglaf of Mercia and drove him out of his kingdom, temporarily ruling Mercia directly. Later that year Egbert received the submission of the Northumbrian king at Dore, near Sheffield. The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle subsequently described Egbert as a bretwalda, or "Ruler of Britain".

Egbert was unable to maintain this dominant position, and within a year Wiglaf regained the throne of Mercia. However, Wessex did retain control of Kent, Sussex and Surrey; these territories were given to Egbert's son �thelwulf to rule as a subking under Egbert. When Egbert died in 839, �thelwulf succeeded him; the southeastern kingdoms were finally absorbed into the kingdom of Wessex after �thelwulf's death in 858.

The only source for the wife of Egbert is a later medieval manuscript at Trinity College, Oxford, which relates that Egbert married Redburga, regis Francorum sororia, thought to indicate sister, sister-in law or niece of the Frankish Emperor. More specifically, sororia means "pertaining to someone's sister", hence sister-in-law. This seems consistent with Egbert's strong ties to the Frankish royal court and his exile there, but lacks contemporary support.(1) Redburga or Raedburh may have been the sister-in-law of Charlemagne as the sister of his fourth wife, Luitgard; other sources describe her as his sister (although Charlemagne's only sister was named Gisela) or his great-granddaughter (which would be difficult to accomplish in the forty-six years after Charlemagne's birth) or the daughter of his sister-in-law or his niece. Some genealogies identify her as the granddaughter of Pepin the Short and great-granddaughter of Charles Martel; other scholars doubt that she existed at all, other than as a name in a much later manuscript, her existence might been forged to link the early Kings of England to the great West Emperor. According to some accounts, Charlemagne arranged Raedburh's marriage to Egbert in the year 800. Egbert, who had been forced into exile at Charlemagne's court by Offa, King of Mercia, returned to England in 802. Raedburh was also, according to this version of events, the grandmother of Thyra Dannebod Queen of Denmark, who was the wife of the Viking King Gorm "the Old" of Denmark and the mother of Harald Bluetooth Blataand King of Denmark.

Egbert's father Ealhmund does not appear to have long survived in power: there is no record of his activities after 784. There is, however, extensive evidence of Offa's domination of Kent during the late 780s, with his goals apparently going beyond overlordship to outright annexation of the kingdom, and he has been described as "the rival, not the overlord, of the Kentish kings". It is possible that the young Egbert fled to Wessex in 785 or so; it is suggestive that the Chronicle mentions in a later entry that Beorhtric, Cynewulf's successor, helped Offa to exile Egbert.(2)

Cynewulf was murdered in 786. Egbert may have contested the succession, but Offa successfully intervened in the ensuing power struggle on the side of Beorhtric. The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle records that Egbert spent three years in Francia before he was king, exiled by Beorhtric and Offa. The text says "iii" for three, but this may have been a scribal error, with the correct reading being "xiii", that is, thirteen years. Beorhtric's reign lasted sixteen years, and not thirteen; and all extant texts of the chronicle agree on "iii", but many modern accounts assume that Egbert did indeed spend thirteen years in Francia. This requires assuming that the error in transcription is common to every manuscript of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle; many historians make this assumption but others have rejected it as unlikely, given the consistency of the sources. In either case Egbert was probably exiled in 789, when Beorhtric, his rival, married the daughter of Offa of Mercia.(3)

Beorhtric's dependency on Mercia continued into the reign of Cenwulf, who became king of Mercia a few months after Offa's death.(4) Beorhtric died in 802, and Egbert came to the throne of Wessex, probably with the support of Charlemagne and perhaps also the papacy.(5) The Mercians continued to oppose Egbert: the day of his accession, the Hwicce (who had originally formed a separate kingdom, but by that time were part of Mercia) attacked, under the leadership of their ealdorman, �thelmund. Weohstan, a Wessex ealdorman, met him with men from Wiltshire.(6) According to the Chronicon Vilodunense, a fifteenth-century source, Weohstan had married Alburga, Egbert's sister, and so was Egbert's brother-in-law. The Hwicce were defeated, though Weohstan was killed as well as �thelmund. Nothing more is recorded of Egbert's relations with Mercia for more than twenty years after this battle. It seems likely that Egbert had no influence outside his own borders, but on the other hand there is no evidence that he ever submitted to the overlordship of Cenwulf. Cenwulf did have overlordship of the rest of southern England, but in Cenwulf's charters the title of "overlord of the southern English" never appears, presumably in consequence of the independence of the kingdom of Wessex.(7)

In 815 the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle records that Egbert ravaged the whole of the territories of the remaining British kingdom, Dumnonia, known to the author of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle as the West Welsh; their territory was about equivalent to what is now Cornwall. Ten years later, a charter dated 19 August 825 indicates that Egbert was campaigning in Dumnonia again; this may have been related to a battle recorded in the Chronicle at Galford in 823, between the men of Devon and the Britons of Cornwall.(8)

It was also in 825 that one of the most important battles in Anglo-Saxon history took place, when Egbert defeated Beornwulf of Mercia at Ellendun�now Wroughton, near Swindon. This battle marked the end of the Mercian domination of southern England.(9) The Chronicle tells how Egbert followed up his victory: "Then he sent his son �thelwulf from the army, and Ealhstan, his bishop, and Wulfheard, his ealdorman, to Kent with a great troop." �thelwulf drove Baldred, the king of Kent, north over the Thames, and according to the Chronicle, the men of Kent, Essex, Surrey and Sussex then all submitted to �thelwulf "because earlier they were wrongly forced away from his relatives." This may refer to Offa's interventions in Kent at the time Egbert's father Ealhmund became king; if so, the chronicler's remark may also indicate Ealhmund had connections elsewhere in southeast England.(10)

The Chronicle's version of events makes it appear that Baldred was driven out shortly after the battle, but this was probably not the case. A document from Kent survives which gives the date, March 826, as being in the third year of the reign of Beornwulf. This makes it likely that Beornwulf still had authority in Kent at this date, as Baldred's overlord; hence Baldred was apparently still in power. In Essex, Egbert expelled King Sigered, though the date is unknown. It may have been delayed until 829, since a later chronicler associates the expulsion with a campaign of Egbert's in that year against the Mercians.(11)

The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle does not say who was the aggressor at Ellendun, but one recent history asserts that Beornwulf was almost certainly the one who attacked. According to this view, Beornwulf may have taken advantage of the Wessex campaign in Dumnonia in the summer of 825. Beornwulf's motivation would have been the threat of unrest or instability in the southeast: the dynastic connections with Kent made Wessex a threat to Mercian dominance.(12)

The consequences of Ellendun went beyond the immediate loss of Mercian power in the southeast. According to the Chronicle, the East Anglians asked for Egbert's protection against the Mercians in the same year, 825, though it may actually have been in the following year that the request was made. In 826 Beornwulf invaded East Anglia, presumably to recover his overlordship. He was slain, however, as was his successor, Ludeca, who invaded East Anglia in 827, evidently for the same reason. It may be that the Mercians were hoping for support from Kent: there was some reason to suppose that Wulfred, the Archbishop of Canterbury, might be discontented with West Saxon rule, as Egbert had terminated Wulfred's currency and had begun to mint his own, at Rochester and Canterbury, and it is known that Egbert seized property belonging to Canterbury. The outcome in East Anglia was a disaster for the Mercians which confirmed West Saxon power in the southeast.(13)

In 829 Egbert invaded Mercia and drove Wiglaf, the king of Mercia, into exile. This victory gave Egbert control of the London mint, and he issued coins as King of Mercia. It was after this victory that the West Saxon scribe described him as a bretwalda, meaning "wide-ruler" or "Britain-ruler", in a famous passage in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle. The relevant part of the annal reads, in the [C] manuscript of the Chronicle:

� 7 �y geare geeode Ecgbriht cing Myrcna rice 7 eall ��t be su�an Humbre w�s, 7 he w�s eahta�a cing se �e Bretenanwealda w�s. �

In modern English:
� And the same year King Egbert conquered the kingdom of Mercia, and all that was south of the Humber, and he was the eighth king who was 'Wide Ruler'. � (14)

Later in 829, according to the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, Egbert received the submission of the Northumbrians at Dore (now a suburb of Sheffield); the Northumbrian king was probably Eanred. According to a later chronicler, Roger of Wendover, Egbert invaded Northumbria and plundered it before Eanred submitted: "When Egbert had obtained all the southern kingdoms, he led a large army into Northumbria, and laid waste that province with severe pillaging, and made King Eanred pay tribute." Roger of Wendover is known to have incorporated Northumbrian annals into his version; the Chronicle does not mention these events. However, the nature of Eanred's submission has been questioned: one historian has suggested that it is more likely that the meeting at Dore represented a mutual recognition of sovereignty.(15)

In 830 Egbert led a successful expedition against the Welsh, almost certainly with the intent of extending West Saxon influence into the Welsh lands previously within the Mercian orbit. This marked the high point of Egbert's influence.(16)

In 830, Mercia regained its independence under Wiglaf�the Chronicle merely says that Wiglaf "obtained the kingdom of Mercia again", but the most likely explanation is that this was the result of a Mercian rebellion against Wessex rule. Egbert's dominion over southern England came to an end with Wiglaf's recovery of power. Wiglaf's return is followed by evidence of his independence from Wessex. Charters indicate Wiglaf had authority in Middlesex and Berkshire, and in a charter of 836 Wiglaf uses the phrase "my bishops, duces, and magistrates" to describe a group that included eleven bishops from the episcopate of Canterbury, including bishops of sees in West Saxon territory. It is significant that Wiglaf was still able to call together such a group of notables; the West Saxons, even if they were able to do so, held no such councils. Wiglaf may also have brought Essex back into the Mercian orbit during the years after he recovered the throne. In East Anglia, King �thelstan minted coins, possibly as early as 827, but more likely c. 830 after Egbert's influence was reduced with Wiglaf's return to power in Mercia. This demonstration of independence on East Anglia's part is not surprising, as it was �thelstan who was probably responsible for the defeat and death of both Beornwulf and Ludeca.(17)

Both Wessex's sudden rise to power in the late 820s, and the subsequent failure to retain this dominant position, have been examined by historians looking for underlying causes. One plausible explanation for the events of these years is that Wessex's fortunes were to some degree dependent on Carolingian support. The Franks supported Eardwulf when he recovered the throne of Northumbria in 808, so it is plausible that they also supported Egbert's accession in 802. At Easter 839, not long before Egbert's death, he was in touch with Louis the Pious, king of the Franks, to arrange safe passage to Rome. Hence a continuing relationship with the Franks seems to be part of southern English politics during the first half of the ninth century. Carolingian support may have been one of the factors that helped Egbert achieve the military successes of the late 820s. However, the Rhenish and Frankish commercial networks collapsed at some time in the 820s or 830s, and in addition, a rebellion broke out in February 830 against Louis the Pious; the first of a series of internal conflicts that lasted through the 830s and beyond. These distractions may have prevented Louis from supporting Egbert. In this view, the withdrawal of Frankish influence would have left East Anglia, Mercia and Wessex to find a balance of power not dependent on outside aid.(18)

Despite the loss of dominance, Egbert's military successes fundamentally changed the political landscape of Anglo-Saxon England. Wessex retained control of the south-eastern kingdoms, with the possible exception of Essex; and Mercia did not regain control of East Anglia. Egbert's victories marked the end of the independent existence of the kingdoms of Kent and Sussex. The conquered territories were administered as a subkingdom for a while, including Surrey and possibly Essex. Although �thelwulf was a subking under Egbert, it is clear that he maintained his own royal household, with which he travelled around his kingdom. Charters issued in Kent described Egbert and �thelwulf as "kings of the West Saxons and also of the people of Kent." When �thelwulf died in 858 his will, in which Wessex is left to one son and the southeastern kingdom to another, makes it clear that it was not until after 858 that the kingdoms were fully integrated. Mercia remained a threat, however; Egbert's son �thelwulf, established as king of Kent, gave estates to Christ Church, Canterbury, probably in order to counter any influence the Mercians might still have there.(19)

In the southwest, Egbert was defeated in 836 at Carhampton by the Danes, but in 838 he won a battle against them and their allies the West Welsh at Hingston Down in Cornwall. The Dumnonian royal line continued after this time, but it is at this date that the independence of the last British kingdom may be considered to have ended. The details of Anglo-Saxon expansion into Cornwall are quite poorly recorded, but some evidence comes from place names. The river Ottery, which flows east into the Tamar near Launceston, appears to be a boundary: south of the Ottery the placenames are overwhelmingly Cornish, whereas to the north they are more heavily influenced by the English newcomers.(20)

At a council at Kingston-upon-Thames in 838, Egbert and �thelwulf granted land to the sees of Winchester and Canterbury in return for the promise of support for �thelwulf's claim to the throne. The archbishop of Canterbury, Ceolnoth, also accepted Egbert and �thelwulf as the lords and protectors of the monasteries under Ceolnoth's control. These agreements, along with a later charter in which �thelwulf confirmed church privileges, suggest that the church had recognized that Wessex was a new political power that must be dealt with. Churchmen consecrated the king at coronation ceremonies, and helped to write the wills which specified the king's heir; their support had real value in establishing West Saxon control and a smooth succession for Egbert's line. Both the record of the Council of Kingston, and another charter of that year, include the identical phrasing: that a condition of the grant is that "we ourselves and our heirs shall always hereafter have firm and unshakable friendships from Archbishop Ceolnoth and his congregation at Christ Church".(21)

Although nothing is known of any other claimants to the throne, it is likely that there were other surviving descendants of Cerdic (the supposed progenitor of all the kings of Wessex) who might have contended for the kingdom. Egbert died in 839, and his will, according to the account of it found in the will of his grandson, Alfred the Great, left land only to male members of his family, so that the estates should not be lost to the royal house through marriage. Egbert's wealth, acquired through conquest, was no doubt one reason for his ability to purchase the support of the southeastern church establishment; the thriftiness of his will indicates he understood the importance of personal wealth to a king. The kingship of Wessex had been frequently contested among different branches of the royal line, and it is a noteworthy achievement of Egbert's that he was able to ensure �thelwulf's untroubled succession. In addition, �thelwulf's experience of kingship, in the subkingdom formed from Egbert's southeastern conquests, would have been valuable to him when he took the throne.

Egbert was buried in Winchester, as were his son, �thelwulf, his grandson, Alfred the Great, and Alfred's son, Edward the Elder. During the ninth century, Winchester began to show signs of urbanization, and it is likely that the sequence of burials indicates that Winchester was held in high regard by the West Saxon royal line.(22)

King Egbert's Mortuary Chest- Winchester Cathedral

Issue-

13I. AETHELWOLF- m.1. OSBURH, 2. Judith of France, d. 858

Ref:

(1) Anglo-Saxon Bishops, Kings, and Nobles- W.G. Searle, London, 1899- p. 343; Britain's Royal Families: The Complete Genealogy- Alison Weir, p. 4
(2) The Earliest English Kings- D.P. Kirby, Routledge, London, 1992- pp.165-9
(3) The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle- Michael Swanton, Routledge, NY, 1996- pp.58-63; Anglo-Saxon England- Frank M. Stenton, Clarendon Press, 1971-p. 220; Who's Who in Roman Britain and Anglo-Saxon England- Richard Fletcher, Shepheard-Walwyn, London- p. 114
(4) Anglo-Saxon England- Frank M. Stenton, Clarendon Press, 1971-p. 209-10
(5) The Earliest English Kings- D.P. Kirby, Routledge, London, 1992- p. 186
(6) The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle- Michael Swanton, Routledge, NY, 1996- pp.58-63
(7) Anglo-Saxon England- Frank M. Stenton, Clarendon Press, 1971-p. 225
(8) The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle- Michael Swanton, Routledge, NY, 1996- pp.58-63; The Earliest English Kings- D.P. Kirby, Routledge, London, 1992- pp. 125, 189-195
(9) Anglo-Saxon England- Frank M. Stenton, Clarendon Press, 1971-p. 231
(10) The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle- Michael Swanton, Routledge, NY, 1996- pp.58-63; The Earliest English Kings- D.P. Kirby, Routledge, London, 1992- p. 186
(11) The Earliest English Kings- D.P. Kirby, Routledge, London, 1992- pp. 189-195
(12) Ibid
(13) The Earliest English Kings- D.P. Kirby, Routledge, London, 1992- pp. 189-195; The Anglo-Saxons- James Campbell, Eric John, Patrick Wormald, Penguin Books, London- p. 128
(14) The Earliest English Kings- D.P. Kirby, Routledge, London, 1992- pp. 189-195; The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle- Michael Swanton, Routledge, NY, 1996- pp.60-1
(15) The Earliest English Kings- D.P. Kirby, Routledge, London, 1992- p. 197; The Anglo-Saxons- James Campbell, Eric John, Patrick Wormald, Penguin Books, London- p. 139; Kings and Kingdoms of Early Anglo-Saxon England- Barbara Yorke, Seaby, London, 1990- p. 51
(16) The Earliest English Kings- D.P. Kirby, Routledge, London, 1992- pp. 189-195
(17) The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle- Michael Swanton, Routledge, NY, 1996- pp. 58-63; The Earliest English Kings- D.P. Kirby, Routledge, London, 1992- pp. 189-195; The Anglo-Saxons- James Campbell, Eric John, Patrick Wormald, Penguin Books, London- pp. 128, 138; Kings and Kingdoms of Early Anglo-Saxon England- Barbara Yorke, Seaby, London, 1990- p. 51; Anglo-Saxon England- Frank M. Stenton, Clarendon Press, 1971-pp. 233-5
(18) The Earliest English Kings- D.P. Kirby, Routledge, London, 1992- pp. 189-195
(19) The Earliest English Kings- D.P. Kirby, Routledge, London, 1992- pp. 189-195; Kings and Kingdoms of Early Anglo-Saxon England- Barbara Yorke, Seaby, London, 1990- p. 32; Alfred the Great: War, Kingship and Culture in Anglo-Saxon England- Richard Abels, Longman, 2005- p. 31
(20) The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle- Michael Swanton, Routledge, NY, 1996- pp. 58-63; The Earliest English Kings- D.P. Kirby, Routledge, London, 1992- pp. 189-195; Kings and Kingdoms of Early Anglo-Saxon England- Barbara Yorke, Seaby, London, 1990- p. 155; Cornwall: A History- Philip Payton, Cornwall Editions, 2004- p. 68
(21) The Earliest English Kings- D.P. Kirby, Routledge, London, 1992- pp. 189-195; The Anglo-Saxons- James Campbell, Eric John, Patrick Wormald, Penguin Books, London- pp. 128, 140; Anglo-Saxon England- Frank M. Stenton, Clarendon Press, 1971-pp. 233-5; Kings and Kingdoms of Early Anglo-Saxon England- Barbara Yorke, Seaby, London, 1990- pp. 148-9
(22) Kings and Kingdoms of Early Anglo-Saxon England- Barbara Yorke, Seaby, London, 1990- pp. 148-9, 168-9, 310
Dictionary of National Biography- Leslie Stephen, Ed., Oxford Unviersity Press
Tim Powys-Lybbe's web page at: http://www.tim.ukpub.net

b.c.795
m.1. OSBURH- d. of Earl Oslac of the Isle of Wight
2. Judith, d. of Charles the Bald, King of France
d. 13 Jan. 858 Stamridge, Wessex
bur. Steyning church, moved to Winchester Cathedral

�thelwulf, or in Old English ��elwulf, means 'Noble Wolf'. He conquered Kent on behalf of his father in 825. Thereafter he was styled King of Kent until he succeeded his father as King of Wessex in 839, whereupon he became King of Wessex, Kent, Cornwall, the West Saxons and the East Saxons. He was crowned at Kingston upon Thames.

�thelwulf had a worrying style of Kingship. He had come naturally to the throne of Wessex. He proved to be intensly religious, cursed with little political sense, and too many able and ambitious sons. One of the first acts �thelwulf did as King, was to split the kingdom. He gave the eastern half, that of Kent, Essex, Surrey and Sussex to his eldest son Athelstan (not to be confused with the later Athelstan the Glorious). �thelwulf kept the ancient, western side of Wessex (Hampshire, Wiltshire, Dorset and Devon) for himself.(1)

In the year 840 AD, the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle states that �thelwulf fought at Carhampton against thirty-five ship companies of Danes, whose raids had increased considerably. His most notable victory came in 851 at "Acleah", probably Ockley or Oakley in Surrey. Here, �thelwulf and his son Ethelbald fought against the heathen, and according to the chronicle it was "the greatest slaughter of heathen host ever made." Around the year 853, �thelwulf, and his son-in-law, Burgred, King of Mercia defeated Cyngen ap Cadell of Wales and made the Welsh subject to him. The chronicle depicts more battles throughout the years, mostly against invading pirates and Danes. This was an era in European history where nations were being invaded from many different groups; there were Saracens in the south, Magyars in the east, Moors in the west, and Vikings in the north. Before �thelwulf's death, raiders had wintered over on the Isle of Sheppey, and pillaged at will in East Anglia. Over the course of the next twenty years the struggles of his sons were to be "ceaseless, heroic, and largely futile." (2)

Religion was always an important area in �thelwulf's life. As early as the first year of his reign he had planned a pilgrimage to Rome. Due to the ongoing and increasing raids he felt the need to appeal to the Christian God for help against an enemy "so agile, and numerous, and profane." In 853 �thelwulf, sent his son Alfred, a child of about four years, to Rome. In 855, about a year after his wife Osburh's death, �thelwulf followed Alfred to Rome. In Rome, he was generous with his wealth. He distributed gold to the clergy of St. Peter's, and offered the Blessed Peter chalices of the purest gold and silver-gilt candelabra of Saxon work. During the return journey in 856 he married Judith a Frankish princess and a great-granddaughter of Charlemagne. She was about twelve years old, the daughter of Charles the Bald, King of the West Franks.(3)

Upon their return to England in 856 �thelwulf met with an acute crisis. His eldest son �thelbald (Athelstan had since died) had devised a conspiracy with the Ealdorman of Somerset and the Bishop of Sherborne to oppose �thelwulf's resumption of the kingship once he returned. There was enough support of �thelwulf to either have a civil war, or to banish Ethelbald and his fellow conspirators. Instead �thelwulf yielded western Wessex to his son while he himself retained central and eastern Wessex. The absence of coins in �thelbald's name may also suggest that West Saxon coinage was in �thelwulf's name until his death. He ruled there until his death on January 13, 858. The family quarrel, had it been allowed to continue, could have ruined the House of Egbert. �thelwulf and his advisors deserved the adoration bestowed upon them for their restraint and tolerance. That the king should have consented to treat with his rebellious son, to refer the compromise to a meeting of Saxon nobles, to moderate the pugnacity of his own supporters, and to resign the rule over the more important half of his dominions- all this testifies to the fact that �thelwulf�s Christian spirit did not exhaust itself in the giving of lavish charities to the Church, but availed to reconcile him to the sacrifice of prestige and power in the cause of national peace.(4)

�thelwulf's restoration included a special concession on behalf of Saxon queens. The West Saxons previously did not allow the queen to sit next to the king. In fact they were not referred to as a queen, but merely the "wife of the king." This restriction was lifted for Queen Judith, probably because she was a high ranking European princess.

He was buried first at Steyning and then later transferred to the Old Minster in Winchester. His bones now reside in one of several mortuary chests in Winchester Cathedral.

The gold ring, is about an inch across, richly decorated with religious symbols, is inscribed �thelwulf Rex and was found at Laverstock, Wiltshire, in 1780, it was believed to have been a gift from �thelwulf to a loyal follower.

Issue- all children by Osburh

Ref:

(1) The Saxon Kings- Richard Humble, Weidenfeld and Nicolson, London, 1980- p. 41
(2) Great Britain to 1688: A Modern History- Maurice Ashley, University of Michigan Press, 1961- p. 34; The Anglo-Saxons- Geoffrey Hindley, Robinson, London, 2006- p. 186
(3) The Saxon Kings- Richard Humble, Weidenfeld and Nicolson, London, 1980- p. 41; A History of the Anglo-Saxons- R.H. Hodgkin, Oxford University Press, London, 1935- p. 512
(4) Ibid- p. 515

Dictionary of National Biography- Leslie Stephen, Ed., Oxford Unviersity Press
Tim Powys-Lybbe's web page at: http://www.tim.ukpub.net

b. 849 Wantage, Berkshire
m. EALHSWITH (d. 5 Dec. 905, bur. St. Mary's Abbey, Winchester)- d. of �thelred Mucil, Ealdorman of the Gaini
d. 28 Oct. 901

Statue of Alfred the Great at Winchester

Alfred the Great, also spelled �lfred, was king of the southern Anglo-Saxon kingdom of Wessex from 871 to 899. Alfred is noted for his defence of the kingdom against the Danish Vikings, becoming the only English king to be awarded the epithet "the Great". Alfred was the first King of the West Saxons to style himself "King of the English". Details of his life are described in a work by the Welsh scholar Asser. Alfred was a learned man, and encouraged education and improved his kingdom's law system as well as its military structure.

At five years old, Alfred is said to have been sent to Rome where, according to the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, he was confirmed by Pope Leo IV who "anointed him as king." Victorian writers interpreted this as an anticipatory coronation in preparation for his ultimate succession to the throne of Wessex. However, this coronation could not have been foreseen at the time, since Alfred had three living elder brothers. A letter of Leo IV shows that Alfred was made a "consul" and a misinterpretation of this investiture, deliberate or accidental, could explain later confusion.(1) It may also be based on Alfred later having accompanied his father on a pilgrimage to Rome and spending some time at the court of Charles the Bald, King of the Franks, around 854�855. On their return from Rome in 856, �thelwulf was deposed by his son �thelbald. �thelwulf died in 858, and Wessex was ruled by three of Alfred's brothers in succession.

Asser tells the story about how as a child Alfred won a prize of a volume of poetry in English, offered by his mother to the first of her children able to memorise it. This story may be true, or it may be a myth intended to illustrate the young Alfred's love of learning.

During the short reigns of his two eldest brothers, �thelbald and �thelbert, Alfred is not mentioned. However with the accession of the third brother, �thelred, in 866, the public life of Alfred began. It is during this period that Asser applies to him the unique title of "secundarius", which may indicate a position akin to that of the Celtic tanist, a recognised successor closely associated with the reigning monarch. It is possible that this arrangement was sanctioned by the Witenagemot, to guard against the danger of a disputed succession should �thelred fall in battle. The arrangement of crowning a successor as Royal prince and military commander is well-known among other Germanic tribes, such as the Swedes and Franks, with whom the Anglo-Saxons were closely related.

In 868, Alfred is recorded fighting beside his brother �thelred, in an unsuccessful attempt to keep the invading Danes out of the adjoining Kingdom of Mercia. For nearly two years, Wessex was spared attacks because Alfred paid the Vikings to leave him alone. However, at the end of 870, the Danes arrived in his homeland. The year that followed has been called "Alfred's year of battles". Nine martial engagements were fought with varying fortunes, though the place and date of two of the battles have not been recorded. In Berkshire, a successful skirmish at the Battle of Englefield, on 31 December 870, was followed by a severe defeat at the Siege and Battle of Reading, on 5 January 871, and then, four days later, a brilliant victory at the Battle of Ashdown on the Berkshire Downs, possibly near Compton or Aldworth. Alfred is particularly credited with the success of this latter conflict. However, later that month, on 22 January, the English were again defeated at Basing and, on the following 22 March at the Battle of Merton (perhaps Marden in Wiltshire or Martin in Dorset) in which �thelred was killed. The two unidentified battles may also have occurred in between.

In April 871, King �thelred died, and Alfred succeeded to the throne of Wessex and the burden of its defence, despite the fact that �thelred left two young sons. Although contemporary turmoil meant the accession of Alfred, an adult with military experience and patronage resources, over his nephews went unchallenged, he remained obliged to secure their property rights. While he was busy with the burial ceremonies for his brother, the Danes defeated the English in his absence at an unnamed spot, and then again in his presence at Wilton in May. Following this, peace was made and, for the next five years, the Danes occupied other parts of England. However, in 876, under their new leader, Guthrum, the Danes slipped past the English army and attacked Wareham in Dorset. From there, early in 877, and under the pretext of talks, they moved westwards and took Exeter in Devon. There, Alfred blockaded them, and with a relief fleet having been scattered by a storm, the Danes were forced to submit. The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle states that they withdrew to Mercia but, in January 878, made a sudden attack on Chippenham, a royal stronghold in which Alfred had been staying over Christmas, "and most of the people they reduced, except the King Alfred, and he with a little band made his way by wood and swamp, and after Easter he made a fort at Athelney, and from that fort kept fighting against the foe." From his fort at Athelney, a marshy island near North Petherton, Alfred was able to mount an effective resistance movement while rallying the local militia from Somerset, Wiltshire and Hampshire.

A popular legend originating from early 12th century chronicles, tells how when he first fled to the Somerset Levels, Alfred was given shelter by a peasant woman who, unaware of his identity, left him to watch some cakes she had left cooking on the fire. Preoccupied with the problems of his kingdom, Alfred accidentally let the cakes burn and was taken to task by the woman upon her return. Upon realising the king's identity, the woman apologised profusely, but Alfred insisted that he was the one who needed to apologise.

Memorial to the Battle of Ethandun

Another story relates how Alfred disguised himself as a minstrel in order to gain entry to Guthrum's camp and discover his plans. This supposedly led to the Battle of Ethandun, which may have been fought near Westbury, Wiltshire. The result was a decisive victory for Alfred. The Danes submitted and, according to Asser, Guthrum and 29 of his chief men received baptism when they signed the Treaty of Wedmore. As a result, England became split in two: the southwestern half was kept by the Saxons, and the northeastern half including London, thence known as the Danelaw, was kept by the Vikings. By the following year (879), both Wessex and Mercia, west of Watling Street, were cleared of the invaders.

Coin of King Alfred, London mint, c.880

For the next few years there was peace, with the Danes being kept busy in Europe. A landing in Kent in 884 or 885 close to Plucks Gutter, though successfully repelled, encouraged the East Anglian Danes to rise up. The measures taken by Alfred to repress this uprising culminated in the taking of London in 885 or 886, and an agreement was reached between Alfred and Guthrum, known as the Treaty of Alfred and Guthrum. Once more, for a time, there was a lull, but in the autumn of 892 or 893, the Danes attacked again. Finding their position in Europe somewhat precarious, they crossed to England in 330 ships in two divisions. They entrenched themselves, the larger body at Appledore, Kent, and the lesser, under Haesten, at Milton also in Kent. The invaders brought their wives and children with them, indicating a meaningful attempt at conquest and colonisation. Alfred, in 893 or 894, took up a position from whence he could observe both forces. While he was in talks with Haesten, the Danes at Appledore broke out and struck northwestwards. They were overtaken by Alfred's oldest son, Edward, and were defeated in a general engagement at Farnham in Surrey. They were obliged to take refuge on an island in the Hertfordshire Colne, where they were blockaded and were ultimately compelled to submit. The force fell back on Essex and, after suffering another defeat at Benfleet, coalesced with Haesten's force at Shoebury.

Alfred had been on his way to relieve his son at Thorney when he heard that the Northumbrian and East Anglian Danes were besieging Exeter and an unnamed stronghold on the North Devon shore. Alfred at once hurried westward and raised the Siege of Exeter. The fate of the other place is not recorded. Meanwhile the force under Haesten set out to march up the Thames Valley, possibly with the idea of assisting their friends in the west. But they were met by a large force under the three great ealdormen of Mercia, Wiltshire and Somerset, and made to head off to the northwest, being finally overtaken and blockaded at Buttington. Some identify this with Buttington Tump at the mouth of the River Wye, others with Buttington near Welshpool. An attempt to break through the English lines was defeated. Those who escaped retreated to Shoebury. Then after collecting reinforcements they made a sudden dash across England and occupied the ruined Roman walls of Chester. The English did not attempt a winter blockade but contented themselves with destroying all the supplies in the neighbourhood. Early in 894 (or 895), want of food obliged the Danes to retire once more to Essex. At the end of this year and early in 895 (or 896), the Danes drew their ships up the Thames and Lea and fortified themselves twenty miles north of London. A direct attack on the Danish lines failed, but later in the year, Alfred saw a means of obstructing the river so as to prevent the egress of the Danish ships. The Danes realised that they were out-manoeuvred. They struck off northwestwards and wintered at Cwatbridge near Bridgnorth. The next year, 896 (or 897), they gave up the struggle. Some retired to Northumbria, some to East Anglia. Those who had no connections in England withdrew back to Europe.

After the dispersal of the Danish invaders, Alfred turned his attention to the increase of the navy, partly to repress the ravages of the Northumbrian and East Anglian Danes on the coasts of Wessex, and to prevent the landing of fresh invaders. This is not, as often asserted, the beginning of the English Navy. There had been earlier naval operations under Alfred. One naval engagement was fought in the reign of �thelwulf in 851 by Alfred's brother, �thelstan, and earlier ones, possibly in 833 and 840. The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, however, does credit Alfred with the construction of a new type of ship, built according to the king's own designs, "swifter, steadier and also higher/more responsive (hierran) than the others". However, these new ships do not seem to have been a great success, as we hear of them grounding in action and foundering in a storm. Nevertheless both the British Royal Navy and the United States Navy claim Alfred as the founder of their traditions.

Alfred's main fighting force, the fyrd, was separated into two, as stated in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle: "so that there was always half at home and half out". The level of organisation required to mobilize his large army in two shifts, of which one was feeding the other, must have been considerable. The complexity which Alfred's administration had attained by 892 is demonstrated by a reasonably reliable charter whose witness list includes a thesaurius, cellararius and pincerna�treasurer, food-keeper and butler. Despite the irritation which Alfred must have felt in 893, when one division, which had "completed their call-up (stemn)", gave up the siege of a Danish army just as Alfred was moving to relieve them, this system seems to have worked remarkably well on the whole.

One of the weaknesses of pre-Alfredian defences had been that, in the absence of a standing army, fortresses were largely left unoccupied, making it very possible for a Viking force to quickly secure a strong strategic position. Alfred substantially upgraded the state of the defences of Wessex, by erecting a net of fortified burhs (or boroughs) throughout the kingdom that were also planned as centres of habitation and trade. No area of Wessex would be at more than 20 miles of one of these burhs. During the systematic excavation of at least four of these burhs (at Wareham, Cricklade, Lydford and Wallingford), it has been demonstrated that in every case the rampart associated by the excavators with the borough of the Alfredian period was the primary defence on the site. The obligations for the upkeep and defence of these and many other sites, with permanent garrisons, are further documented in surviving transcripts of the administrative manuscript known as the Burghal Hidage. Dating from, at least, within twenty years of Alfred's death, if not actually from his reign, it almost certainly reflects Alfredian policy. Comparison of town plans for Wallingford and Wareham with that of Winchester, shows that they were laid out in the same scheme, thus supporting the proposition that these newly established burhs were also planned as centres of habitation and trade as well as a place of safety in moments of immediate danger. Thereafter, the English population and its wealth were drawn into such towns where it was not only safer from Viking soldiers, but also taxable by the King.

Alfred is thus credited with a significant degree of civil reorganisation, especially in the districts ravaged by the Danes. Even if one rejects the thesis crediting the "Burghal Hidage" to Alfred, what is undeniable is that, in the parts of Mercia acquired by Alfred from the Vikings, the shire system seems now to have been introduced for the first time. This is probably what prompted the legend that Alfred was the inventor of shires, hundreds and tithings. Alfred's care for the administration of justice is testified both by history and legend; and he has gained the popular title "protector of the poor". Of the actions of the Witangemot, we do not hear very much under Alfred. He was certainly anxious to respect its rights, but both the circumstances of the time and the character of the king would have tended to throw more power into his hands. The legislation of Alfred probably belongs to the later part of the reign, after the pressure of the Danes had relaxed. He also paid attention to the country's finances, though details are lacking.

Alfred the Great�s most enduring work was his legal code, called Deemings, or Book of Dooms (Book of Laws). Sir Winston Churchill believed that Alfred blended the Mosaic Law, Celtic Law, and old customs of the pagan Anglo-Saxons.(2) Dr. F.N. Lee traced the parallels between Alfred�s Code and the Mosaic Code. Alternatively, Thomas Jefferson, a man involved in the rebellion described in King George's Proclamation of Rebellion, concluded after tracing the history of English common law: "The common law existed while the Anglo-Saxons were yet pagans, at a time when they had never yet heard the name of Christ pronounced or that such a character existed". Churchill stated that Alfred�s Code was amplified by his successors and grew into the body of Customary Law administered by the Shire and The Hundred Courts. This led to the Charter of Liberties, granted by Henry I of England, AD 1100.

Asser speaks grandiosely of Alfred's relations with foreign powers, but little definite information is available. His interest in foreign countries is shown by the insertions which he made in his translation of Orosius. He certainly corresponded with Elias III, the Patriarch of Jerusalem, and possibly sent a mission to India. Contact was also made with the Caliph in Baghdad. Embassies to Rome conveying the English alms to the Pope were fairly frequent. Around 890, Wulfstan of Haithabu undertook a journey from Haithabu on Jutland along the Baltic Sea to the Prussian trading town of Truso. Alfred ensured he reported to him details of his trip.

Alfred's relations with the Celtic princes in the western half of Britain are clearer. Comparatively early in his reign, according to Asser, the southern Welsh princes, owing to the pressure on them of North Wales and Mercia, commended themselves to Alfred. Later in the reign the North Welsh followed their example, and the latter cooperated with the English in the campaign of 893 (or 894). That Alfred sent alms to Irish as well as to European monasteries may be taken on Asser's authority. The visit of the three pilgrim "Scots" (i.e. Irish) to Alfred in 891 is undoubtedly authentic. The story that he himself in his childhood was sent to Ireland to be healed by Saint Modwenna, though mythical, may show Alfred's interest in that island.

Very little is known of the church under Alfred. The Danish attacks had been particularly damaging to the monasteries, and though Alfred founded two or three new monasteries and enticed foreign monks to England, monasticism did not revive significantly during his reign. The Danish raids had also an impact on learning, leading to the practical extinction of Latin even among the clergy: the preface to Alfred's translation of Pope Gregory I's Pastoral Care into Old English bearing eloquent, if not impartial witness, to this.

Alfred established a court school, following the example of Charlemagne. To this end, he imported scholars like Grimbald and John the Saxon from Europe, and Asser from South Wales. Not only did the King see to his own education, he also made the series of translations for the instruction of his clergy and people, most of which survive. These belong to the later part of his reign, probably the last four years, of which the chronicles are almost silent.

Apart from the lost Handboc or Encheiridion, which seems to have been merely a commonplace book kept by the king, the earliest work to be translated was the Dialogues of Gregory, a book greatly popular in the Middle Ages. In this case the translation was made by Alfred's great friend Werferth, Bishop of Worcester, the king merely furnishing a foreword. The next work to be undertaken was Gregory's Pastoral Care, especially for the good of the parish clergy. In this, Alfred keeps very close to his original; but the introduction which he prefixed to it is one of the most interesting documents of the reign, or indeed of English history. The next two works taken in hand were historical, the Universal History of Orosius and Bede's Ecclesiastical History of the English People. The priority should likely be given to the Orosius, but the point has been much debated. In the Orosius, by omissions and additions, Alfred so remodels his original as to produce an almost new work; in the Bede the author's text is closely stuck to, no additions being made, though most of the documents and some other less interesting matters are omitted. Of late years doubts have been raised as to Alfred's authorship of the Bede translation. But the skeptics cannot be regarded as having proved their point.

Alfred's translation of The Consolation of Philosophy of Boethius was the most popular philosophical handbook of the Middle Ages. Here again Alfred deals very freely with his original and though the late Dr. G. Schepss (3) showed that many of the additions to the text are to be traced not to Alfred himself, but to the glosses and commentaries which he used, still there is much in the work which is solely Alfred's and highly characteristic of his genius. It is in the Boethius that the oft-quoted sentence occurs: "My will was to live worthily as long as I lived, and after my life to leave to them that should come after, my memory in good works." The book has come down to us in two manuscripts only. In one of these(4) the writing is prose, in the other(5) a combination of prose and alliterating verse. The latter manuscript was severely damaged in the 18th and 19th centuries, and the authorship of the verse has been much disputed; but likely it also is by Alfred. In fact, he writes in the prelude that he first created a prose work and then used it as the basis for his poem, the Lays of Boethius, his crowning literary achievement. He spent a great deal of time working on these books, which he tells us he gradually wrote through the many stressful times of his reign to refresh his mind. Of the authenticity of the work as a whole there has never been any doubt.

The last of Alfred's works is one to which he gave the name Blostman, i.e., "Blooms" or Anthology. The first half is based mainly on the Soliloquies of St Augustine of Hippo, the remainder is drawn from various sources, and contains much that is Alfred's own and highly characteristic of him. The last words of it may be quoted; they form a fitting epitaph for the noblest of English kings. "Therefore he seems to me a very foolish man, and truly wretched, who will not increase his understanding while he is in the world, and ever wish and long to reach that endless life where all shall be made clear."

Beside these works of Alfred's, the Saxon Chronicle almost certainly, and a Saxon Martyrology, of which fragments only exist, probably owe their inspiration to him. A prose version of the first fifty Psalms has been attributed to him; and the attribution, though not proved, is perfectly possible. Additionally, Alfred appears as a character in The Owl and the Nightingale, where his wisdom and skill with proverbs is attested. Additionally, The Proverbs of Alfred, which exists for us in a thirteenth century manuscript contains sayings that very likely have their origins partly with the king.

The Alfred Jewel, discovered in Somerset in 1693, has long been associated with King Alfred because of its Old English inscription "AELFRED MEC HEHT GEWYRCAN" (Alfred Ordered Me To Be Made). This relic, of unknown use, certainly dates from Alfred's reign but it is possibly just one of several that once existed. The inscription does little to clarify the identity of the central figure which has long been believed to depict God or Christ.

Alfred is venerated as a saint by the Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church and is regarded as a hero of the Christian Church in the Anglican Communion, with a feast day of 26 October, and may often be found depicted in stained glass in Church of England parish churches. Also, Alfred University, in New York State, was named after him; a large statue of his likeness is in the center of campus.

In 868, Alfred married Ealhswith, daughter of Ealdorman of the Gaini (who is also known as Aethelred Mucill), who was from the Gainsborough region of Lincolnshire. She appears to have been the maternal granddaughter of a King of Mercia. They had five or six children together, including Edward the Elder, who succeeded his father as king, Ethelfleda, who would become Queen of Mercia in her own right, and �lfthryth who married Baldwin II the Count of Flanders. His mother was Osburga daughter of Oslac of the Isle of Wight, Chief Butler of England. Asser, in his Vita Alfredi asserts that this shows his lineage from the Jutes of the Isle of Wight. This is unlikely as Bede tells us that they were all slaughtered by the Saxon under Caedwalla. However, ironically Alfred could trace his line via the House of Wessex itself, from King Wihtred of Kent, whose mother was the sister of the last island king, Arwald.

Alfred died on 26 October. The actual year is not certain, but it was not necessarily 901 as stated in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle. How he died is unknown, although he suffered throughout his life with a painful and unpleasant illness - probably Crohn's disease, which seems to have been inherited by his grandson King Edred. He was originally buried temporarily in the Old Minster in Winchester, then moved to the New Minster (perhaps built especially to receive his body). When the New Minster moved to Hyde, a little north of the city, in 1110, the monks transferred to Hyde Abbey along with Alfred's body. During the reign of Henry VIII his crypt was looted by the new, Anglican owners of the old church in which he had been laid to rest. His coffin was melted down for its lead and his bones were unceremoniously reburied in the churchyard. This grave was apparently excavated during the building of a new prison in 1788 and the bones scattered. However, bones found on a similar site in the 1860s were also declared to be Alfred's and later buried in Hyde churchyard. Extensive excavations in 1999 revealed what is believed to be his grave-cut, that of his wife Eahlswith, and that of their son Edward the Elder but barely any human remains.(6)

Issue-

Ref:

(1) Oxford Dictionary of National Biography- Patrick Wormald, Oxford University Press, 2004
(2) The Island Race- Winston Churchill, Corgi, London, 1964- Vol. II, p. 219
(3) Zu Konig Alfreds Boethius- Dr. G. Schepss, Archiv fur das Studium der Neueren Sprachen- Vol. XCIV (1895), pp. 149-60
(4) Bodleian Library- Oxford- MS Bodley 180
(5) British Library- Cotton MS Otho A. vi
(6) The Royal Tombs of Great Britain- Aidan Dodson, Duckworth Press, London, 2004

Dictionary of National Biography- Leslie Stephen, Ed., Oxford Unviersity Press
Tim Powys-Lybbe's web page at: http://www.tim.ukpub.net

b.c.870
m.1. Alflaed- d.s.p.
2. EDGIFU- d. of Sigehelm, Ealdorman of Kent
3. Ecgwynn
killed 17 July 924 Farndon, Northants
bur. New Minster, Winchester

Edward the Elder (Old English: Eadweard se Ieldra) was king at a time when the Kingdom of Wessex was becoming transformed into the Kingdom of England. The title he normally used was "King of the Anglo-Saxons"; most authorities do regard him as a king of England, although the territory he ruled over was significantly smaller than the present borders of England.

Asser's Life of King Alfred reports that Edward was educated at court together with his youngest sister �lfthryth. His second sister, �thelgifu, was intended for a life in religion from an early age, perhaps due to ill health, and was later abbess of Shaftesbury. The youngest sibling, �thelweard, was educated at a court school where he learned Latin, which suggests that he too was intended for a religious life. Edward and �lfthryth, however, while they learned Old English, received a courtly education, and Asser refers to their taking part in the "pursuits of this present life which are appropriate to the nobility".(1)

The first appearance of Edward, called filius regis, the king's son in the sources is in 892, in a charter granting land at North Newnton, near Pewsey in Wiltshire, to ealdorman �thelhelm, where he is called filius regis, the king's son. Although he was the reigning king's elder son, Edward was not certain to succeed his father. Until the 890s, the obvious heirs to the throne were Edward's cousins �thelwold and �thelhelm, sons of �thelred, Alfred's older brother and predecessor as king. �thelwold and �thelhelm were around ten years older than Edward. �thelhelm disappears from view in the 890s, seemingly dead, but a charter probably from that decade shows �thelwold witnessing before Edward, and the order of witnesses is generally believed to relate to their status. As well as his greater age and experience, �thelwold may have had another advantage over Edward where the succession was concerned. While Alfred's wife Eahlswith is never described as queen and was never crowned, �thelwold and �thelhelm's mother Wulfthryth was called queen.

When Alfred died, Edward's cousin �thelwold, the son of King �thelred of Wessex, rose up to claim the throne and began �thelwold's Revolt. He seized Wimborne, in Dorset, where his father was buried, and Christchurch (then in Hampshire, now in Dorset). Edward marched to Badbury and offered battle, but �thelwold refused to leave Wimborne. Just when it looked as if Edward was going to attack Wimborne, �thelwold left in the night, and joined the Danes in Northumbria, where he was announced as King. In the meantime, Edward is alleged to have been crowned at Kingston upon Thames on 8 June 900.

In 901, �thelwold came with a fleet to Essex, and encouraged the Danes in East Anglia to rise up. In the following year, he attacked Cricklade and Braydon. Edward arrived with an army, and after several marches, the two sides met at the Battle of Holme. �thelwold and King Eohric of the East Anglian Danes were killed in the battle.

Relations with the North proved problematic for Edward for several more years. The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle mentions that he made peace with the East Anglian and Northumbrian Danes "of necessity". There is also a mention of the regaining of Chester in 907, which may be an indication that the city was taken in battle.

In 909, Edward sent an army to harass Northumbria. In the following year, the Northumbrians retaliated by attacking Mercia, but they were met by the combined Mercian and West Saxon army at the Battle of Tettenhall, where the Northumbrian Danes were destroyed. From that point, they never raided south of the River Humber.

Edward then began the construction of a number of fortresses (burhs), at Hertford, Witham and Bridgnorth. He is also said to have built a fortress at Scergeat, but that location has not been identified. This series of fortresses kept the Danes at bay. Other forts were built at Tamworth, Stafford, Eddisbury and Warwick.

Edward extended the control of Wessex over the whole of Mercia, East Anglia and Essex, conquering lands occupied by the Danes and bringing the residual autonomy of Mercia to an end in 918, after the death of his sister, �thelfleda (��elflaed). �thelfleda's daughter, �lfwynn, was named as her successor, but Edward deposed her, bringing Mercia under his direct control. He had already annexed the cities of London and Oxford and the surrounding lands of Oxfordshire and Middlesex in 911. By 918, all of the Danes south of the Humber had submitted to him. By the end of his reign, the Norse, the Scots and the Welsh had acknowledged him as "father and lord". This recognition of Edward's overlordship in Scotland led to his successors' claims of suzerainty over that Kingdom.

Edward reorganized the Church in Wessex, creating new bishoprics at Ramsbury and Sonning, Wells and Crediton. Despite this, there is little indication that Edward was particularly religious. In fact, the Pope delivered a reprimand to him to pay more attention to his religious responsibilities.

He died leading an army against a Welsh-Mercian rebellion, on 17 July 924 at Farndon-Upon-Dee and was buried in the New Minster in Winchester, Hampshire, which he himself had established in 901. After the Norman Conquest, the minster was replaced by Hyde Abbey to the north of the city and Edward's body was transferred there. His last resting place is currently marked by a cross-inscribed stone slab within the outline of the old abbey marked out in a public park. Edward's eponym the Elder was first used in the 10th century, in Wulfstan's Life of St �thelwold, to distinguish him from the later King Edward the Martyr.

Edward married (although the exact status of the union is uncertain) a young woman of low birth called Ecgwynn around 893, and they became the parents of the future King �thelstan and a daughter who married Sihtric, King of Dublin and York in 926. Nothing is known about Ecgwynn other than her name, which was not even recorded until after the Conquest.(2)

When he became king in 899, Edward set Ecgwynn aside and married �lffl�d, a daughter of �thelhelm, the ealdorman of Wiltshire. Their son �lfweard may have briefly succeeded his father, but died just over two weeks later and the two were buried together.

Edward married for a third time, about 919, to Edgiva, aka Eadgifu, the daughter of Sigehelm, the ealdorman of Kent. Eadgifu outlived her husband and her sons, and was alive during the reign of her grandson, King Edgar. William of Malmsbury's history De antiquitate Glastonie ecclesiae claims that Edward's second wife, Aelffaed, was also alive after Edward's death, but this is the only known source for that claim.

Issue- first two children by Edgifu, last child by Ecgwynn

Ref:

(1) Dictionary of National Biography- Leslie Stephen, Ed., Oxford Unviersity Press
(2) A History of England Under the Anglo-Saxon Kings- Johann Lappenberg, J. Murray Pub., pp.98-9

Wikipedia article on King Edward at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_the_Elder
Tim Powys-Lybbe's web page at: http://www.tim.ukpub.net

m.1. St. ALFGIFU (d. 944, bur. Shaftesbury, Dorset)
2. Athelflaed
d. 946 Pucklechurch, Gloucestershire

Edmund I (or Eadmund) called the Elder, the Deed-Doer, the Just or the Magnificent, was King of England from 939 until his death. He was a son of Edward the Elder and half-brother of Athelstan. Athelstan died on October 27, 939, and Edmund succeeded him as king.

Shortly after his proclamation as king he had to face several military threats. King Olaf I of Dublin conquered Northumbria and invaded the Midlands. When Olaf died in 942 Edmund reconquered the Midlands. In 943 he became the god-father of King Olaf of York. In 944, Edmund was successful in reconquering Northumbria. In the same year his ally Olaf of York lost his throne and left for Dublin in Ireland. Olaf became the king of Dublin as Olaf Cuaran and continued to be allied to his god-father. In 945 Edmund conquered Strathclyde but conceded his rights on the territory to King Malcolm I of Scotland. In exchange they signed a treaty of mutual military support. Edmund thus established a policy of safe borders and peaceful relationships with Scotland. During his reign, the revival of monasteries in England began.

One of Edmund's last political movements of which we have some knowledge is his role in the restoration of Louis IV d'Outremer to the throne. Louis, son of Charles III and his Anglo-Saxon queen Eadgifu, had resided at the West-Saxon court for some time until 936, when he returned to be crowned king of France. In the summer of 945, he was captured by the Norsemen of Rouen and subsequently released by Duke Hugh the Great, who however, held him in custody. The chronicler Richerus claims that Eadgifu wrote letters both to Edmund and to Otto I in which she requested support for her son; Edmund responded to her plea by sending angry threats to Hugh, who however, brushed them aside.(1) Flodoard's Annales, one of Richerus' sources, report:

Edmundus, Anglorum rex, legatos ad Hugonem principem pro restitutione Ludowici regis dirigit: et idem princeps proinde conventus publicos eumnepotibus suis aliisque regni primatibus agit.... Hugo, dux Francorum, ascito secum Hugo Nneigro, filio Richardi, ceterisque regni primatibus Ludowicum regem, ... in regnum restituit. "Edmund, king of the English, sent messengers to Duke Hugh about the restoration of King Louis, and the duke accordingly made a public agreement with his nephews and other leading men of his kingdom.... Hugh, duke of the Franks, allying himself with Hugh the Black, son of Richard, and the other leading men of the kingdom, restored to the kingdom King Louis." (2)

On 26 May, 946, Edmund was murdered by Leofa, an exiled thief, while celebrating St Augustine's Mass Day in Pucklechurch (South Gloucestershire). From the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle: "Here King Edmund passed away on St Augustine�s Day [26 May]. It was widely known how he ended his days, that Liofa stabbed him at Pucklechurch. And �thelfl�d of Damerham, daughter of Ealdorman �lfgar, was then his queen." (3) John of Worcester and William of Malmesbury add some lively detail by suggesting that Edmund had been feasting with his nobles, when he spotted Leofa in the crowd. He attacked the intruder in person, but in the event, Edmund and Leofa were both killed. The description of the circumstances remained a popular feature in medieval chronicles, such as Higden's Polychronicon: "But William, libro ij� de Regibus, seyth (says) that this kyng kepyng a feste at Pulkirchirche, in the feste of seynte Austyn, and seyng a thefe, Leof by name, sytte [th]er amonge hys gestes, whom he hade made blynde afore for his trespasses -- (quem rex prios propter scelera eliminaverat, whom the King previously due to his crimes did excile) -- , arysede (arrested) from the table, and takenge that man by the heire of the hedde, caste him unto the grownde. Whiche kynge was sleyn -- (sed nebulonis arcano evisceratus est) -- with a lyttle knyfe the [th]e man hade in his honde [hand]; and also he hurte mony men soore with the same knyfe; neverthelesse he was kytte (cut) at the laste into smalle partes by men longyng to the kynge." (4)

Edmund's sister Eadgyth, wife to Otto I, died (earlier) the same year, as Flodoard's Annales for 946 report: Edmundus rex Transmarinus defungitur, uxor quoque regis Othonis, soror ipsius Edmundi, decessit. "Edmund, king across the sea, died, and the wife of King Otto, sister of the same Edmund, died also." (5)

Edmund was succeeded as king by his brother Edred, king from 946 until 955. Edmund's sons later ruled England as:

Edwy of England, King from 955 until 957, king of only Wessex and Kingdom of Kent from 957 until his death on October 1st, 959.
Edgar of England, king of only Mercia and Northumbria from 957 until his brother's death in 959, then king of England from 959 until 975.

Issue-Children by Alfgifu

Ref:

(1) Historiae- Richerus, Book II, chapters 49-50
(2) Les Annales de Flodoard- Philippe Lauer, Ed., Picard, Paris, 1905- p. 946
(3) The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle- Michael Swanton, Routledge, NY, 1996
(4) Chronicon- John of Worcester, 946; Gesta Regum- William of Malmesbury, Book 2, chapter 144; Polychronicon Ranulphi Higden Monachi Cestrensis- Ranulf Higden, Oxford University
(5) English Historical Documents c.500-1042- Dorothy Whitelock, London, 1979- p.345

Dictionary of National Biography- Leslie Stephen, Ed., Oxford Unviersity Press
Tim Powys-Lybbe's web page at: http://www.tim.ukpub.net

b.c.943
m.1. �thelflaed
2. �LFTHRYTH- m.1. �thelwald, son of �thelstan Half-King, she was d. of Ealdorman Ordgar
mistress- Wulfthryth
d. 8 July 975
bur. Glastonbury

King Edgar- All Souls College Chapel, Oxford- 15th Century

Edgar ' the Peaceable' was the younger son of Edmund I of England. His cognomen, "The Peaceable", was not necessarily a comment on the deeds of his life, for he was a strong leader, shown by his seizure of the Northumbrian and Mercian kingdoms from his older brother, Edwy, in 958. A conclave of nobles held Edgar to be king north of the Thames, and Edgar aspired to succeed to the English throne. Upon Edwy's death in October 959, Edgar immediately recalled Dunstan (eventually canonised as St. Dunstan) from exile to have him made Bishop of Worcester (and subsequently Bishop of London and Archbishop of Canterbury). The allegation Dunstan at first refused to crown Edgar because of disapproval for his way of life is a discreet reference in popular histories to Edgar's abduction of Wulfthryth, a nun at Wilton, who bore him a daughter Eadgyth. Dunstan remained Edgar's advisor throughout his reign.

Though Edgar was not a particularly peaceable man, his reign was a peaceful one. The Anglo-Saxon kingdom of England was at its height. Edgar consolidated the political unity achieved by his predecessors. By the end of Edgar's reign, England was sufficiently unified that it was unlikely to regress back to a state of division among rival kingships.

The Monastic Reform Movement that restored the Benedictine Rule to England's undisciplined monastic communities peaked during the era of Dunstan, Aethelwold, and Oswald. (Historians continue to debate the extent and significance of this movement.)

Edgar was crowned at Bath, but not until 973, in an imperial ceremony planned not as the initiation, but as the culmination of his reign (a move that must have taken a great deal of preliminary diplomacy). This service, devised by Dunstan himself and celebrated with a poem in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, forms the basis of the present-day British coronation ceremony.

The symbolic coronation was an important step; other kings of Britain came and gave their allegiance to Edgar shortly afterwards at Chester. Six kings in Britain, including the kings of Scotland and of Strathclyde, pledged their faith that they would be the king's liege-men on sea and land. Later chroniclers made the kings into eight, all plying the oars of Edgar's state barge on the River Dee. Such embellishments may not be factual, but the main outlines of the "submission at Chester" appear true.

Edgar died on 8 July 975 at Winchester, and was buried at Glastonbury Abbey. He left two sons, the eldest named Edward, the son of his first wife Ethelfleda (not to be confused with Ethelfleda, Lady of the Mercians), and Ethelred, the youngest, the child of his second wife �lfthryth. He was succeeded by his eldest son, Edward. Edgar's illegitimate daughter Eadgyth became a nun at Wilton and was eventually canonised as St. Edith.

Glastonbury Abbey

According to William of Malmesbury (book II, chapter 139), the beauty of Ordgar's daughter �lfthryth was reported to King Edgar. Edgar, looking for a Queen, sent �thewald to see �lfthryth, ordering him "to offer her marriage [to Edgar] if her beauty were really equal to report." When she turned out to be just as beautiful as was said, �thelwald married her himself and reported back to Edgar that she was quite unsuitable. Edgar was eventually told of this, and decided to repay �thelwald's betrayal in like manner. He said that he would visit the poor woman, which alarmed �thelwald. He asked �lfthryth to make herself as unattractive as possible for the king's visit, but she did the opposite. Edgar, quite besotted with her, killed �thelwald during a hunt.

Due to �thelred's youth, �lfthryth served as regent for her son until his coming of age in 984. By then her earlier allies �thelwold and �lfhere had died, and she withdrew from the court at this time. However, she remained an important figure, being responsible for the care of �thelred's children by his first wife, �lfgifu. Although her reputation was marked by the murder of her stepson, �lfthryth was a religious woman, taking an especial interest in monastic reform when Queen. Late in life she retired to Wherwell where she died on 17 November, between 999 and 1001.

From Edgar�s death to the Norman Conquest there was not a single succession to the throne that was not contested. Some see Edgar�s death as the beginning of the end of Anglo-Saxon England, followed as it was by three successful 11th-century conquests � two Danish and one Norman.

Issue- first child by �thelflaed, next two by �LFTHRYTH, last by Wulfthryth

Ref:

Edgar, King of the English, 959-975- Donald Scragg, Manchester Centre for Anglo-Saxon Studies, Boydell Press, 2008
The Death of Anglo-Saxon England- Nick Higham, Stroud, 1997- pp. 7-14
Dictionary of National Biography- Leslie Stephen, Ed., Oxford Unviersity Press
Tim Powys-Lybbe's web page at: http://www.tim.ukpub.net

b.c.968
m.1. �LFGIFU- d. of Thored, Earl of Northumbria
2. EMMA (d. 6 Mar. 1052, bur. Old Minster, Winchester), d. of Richard the Fearless, Duke of Normandy
d. 23 Apr. 1016

��elr�d, nicknamed Unr�d, "ill-advised", was King of England from 978 until 1013, and 1014 to 1016. He was a son of King Edgar and his queen �lfthryth. The majority of his reign (991�1016) was marked by a developing, defensive war against Danish invaders.

The story of �thelred's notorious nickname, "Ethelred the Unready", from Old English ��elr�d Unr�d, goes a long way to explaining how his reputation has declined through history. His first name, composed of the elements ��ele, meaning "noble", and r�d, meaning "counsel" or "advice", is typical of the compound names of those who belonged to the royal House of Wessex, and it characteristically alliterates with the names of his ancestors like, for example, �thelwulf ("noble-wolf"), �lfred ("elf-counsel"), Edward ("prosperous-protection"), and Edgar ("rich-spear"). His nickname Unr�d is usually translated into present-day English as 'The Unready', though, because the present-day meaning of 'unready' no longer resembles its ancient counterpart, this translation disguises the meaning of the Old English term. The noun Unr�d is defined in various ways, though it seems always to have been used pejoratively. Generally, it means "evil counsel", "bad plan", "folly". It does not describe a person directly, it most often describes decisions and deeds. The element r�d in unr�d is the element in Ethelred's name which means 'counsel'. Thus ��elr�d Unr�d is a pun meaning "Noble counsel, No counsel". The nickname has alternatively been taken adjectivally as "ill-advised", "ill-prepared", "indecisive", thus "Ethelred the ill-advised".

The epithet would seem to describe the poor quality of advice which Ethelred received throughout his reign, presumably from those around him, specifically from the royal council, known as the Witan. Though the nickname does not suggest anything particularly respectable about the king himself, its invective is not actually focused on the king but on those around him, who were expected to provide the young king with god r�d. Unfortunately, historians, both medieval and modern, have taken less an interest in what this epithet suggests about the king's advisers, and have instead focused on the image it creates of a blundering, misfit king. Because the nickname was first recorded in the 1180s, more than 150 years after Ethelred's death, it is doubtful that it carries any implications for how the king was seen by his contemporaries or near contemporaries.(1)

Sir Frank Merry Stenton remarked that "much that has brought condemnation of historians on King �thelred may well be due to in the last resort to the circumstances under which he became king." Ethelred's father, King Edgar, had died suddenly in July of 975, leaving two young sons behind him. The elder, Edward (later Edward the Martyr), was Edgar's son by his first wife, �thelfl�d, and was "still a youth on the verge of manhood" in 975. The younger son was Ethelred, whose mother, �lfthryth, Edgar had married in 964. �lfthryth was the daughter of Ordgar, ealdorman of Devon, and widow of �thelwold, Ealdorman of East Anglia. At the time of his father's death, Ethelred could have been no more than 10 years old. As the elder of Edgar's sons, Edward - reportedly a young man given to frequent violent outbursts - probably would have naturally succeeded to the throne of England despite his young age, had not he "offended many important persons by his intolerable violence of speech and behaviour." (2) In any case, a number of English nobles took to opposing Edward's succession and to defending Ethelred's claim to the throne; Ethelred was, after all, the son of Edgar's last, living wife, and no rumour of illegitimacy is known to have plagued Ethelred's birth, as it might his elder brother's. It must be remembered that both boys, Ethelred certainly, were too young to have played any significant part in the political manoeuvring which followed Edgar's death. It was the brothers' supporters, and not the brothers themselves, who were responsible for the turmoil which accompanied the choice of a successor to the throne. Ethelred's cause was led by his mother and included ealdorman �lfhere and Bishop �thelwold of Winchester while Edward's claim was supported by Dunstan, the Archbishop of Canterbury and Saint Oswald of Worcester, the Archbishop of York among other noblemen, notably �thelwine, Ealdorman of East Anglia, and Byrhtnoth, ealdorman of Essex. In the end, Edward's supporters proved the more powerful and persuasive, and he was crowned king before the year was out. (3)

Gold Mancus of King �thelred Unraed, c.1005

Edward reigned for only three years before he was murdered by his brother's household. Though we know little about Edward's short reign, we do know that it was marked by political turmoil. Edgar had made extensive grants of land to monasteries which pursued the new monastic ideals of ecclesiastical reform, but these disrupted aristocratic families' traditonal patronage. The end of his firm rule saw a reversal of this policy, with aristocrats seizing, or seizing back, land. This was opposed by Dunstan, but according to the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography "The presence of supporters of church reform on both sides indicates that the conflict between them depended as much on issues of land ownership and local power as on ecclesiastical legitimacy. Adherents of both Edward and Ethelred can be seen appropriating, or recovering, monastic lands." Nevertheless, favour for Edward must have been strong among the monastic communities. When Edward was killed at Ethelred's estate at Corfe Castle in Dorset in March of 978, the job of recording the event, as well as reactions to it, fell to monastic writers. Stenton offers a summary of the earliest account of Edward's murder, which comes from a work praising the life of Saint Oswald of Worcester: "On the surface his [Edward's] relations with �thelred his half-brother and �lfthryth his stepmother were friendly, and he was visiting them informally when he was killed. [�thelred's] retainers came out to meet him with ostentatious signs of respect, and then, before he had dismounted, surrounded him, seized his hands, and stabbed him. ... So far as can be seen the murder was planned and carried out by �thelred's household men in order that their young master might become king. There is nothing to support the allegation, which first appears in writing more than a century later, that Queen �lfthryth had plotted her stepson's death. No one was punished for a part in the crime, and �thelred, who was crowned a month after the murder, began to reign in an atmosphere of suspicion which destroyed the prestige of the crown. It was never fully restored in his lifetime." (4) Nevertheless, at first, the outlook of the new king's officers and counsellors seems in no way to have been bleak. According to one chronicler, the coronation of Ethelred took place with much rejoicing by the councillors of the English people. Simon Keynes notes that "Byrhtferth of Ramsey states similarly that when �thelred was consecrated king, by Archbishop Dunstan and Archbishop Oswald, 'there was great joy at his consecration�, and describes the king in this connection as �a young man in respect of years, elegant in his manners, with an attractive face and handsome appearance�." Ethelred could not have been older than 13 years of age in this year. During these early years, Ethelred was developing a close relationship to �thelwold, bishop of Winchester, one who had supported his unsuccessful claim to the throne. When �thelwold died, on 1 August 984, Ethelred deeply lamented the loss, and he wrote later in a charter from 993 that the event had deprived the country of one "whose industry and pastoral care administered not only to my interest but also to that of all inhabitants of the country." (5)

'LonCross' penny of Aethelred II, moneyer Eadwold of Canterbury, c. 997-1003.

The cross made cutting the coin into half-pennies or farthings (quarter-pennies) easier.

England had experienced a period of peace after the reconquest of the Danelaw in the mid-10th century by King Edgar, Ethelred's father. However, beginning in 980, when Ethelred could not have been more than 14 years old, small companies of Danish adventurers carried out a series of coast-line raids against England. Hampshire, Thanet, and Cheshire were attacked in 980, Devon and Cornwall in 981, and Dorset in 982. A period of 6 years then passed before, in 988, another coastal attack is recorded taking place to the south-west, though here a famous battle was fought between the invaders and the thegns of Devon. Stenton notes that, though this series of isolated raids had no lasting effect on England themselves, "their chief historical importance is that they brought England for the first time into diplomatic contact with Normandy." During this period, the Normans, who remembered their origins as a Scandinavian people, were well-disposed to their Danish cousins who, occasionally returning from a raid on England, would seek port in Normandy. This led to grave tension between the English and Norman courts, and word of their enmity eventually reached Pope John XV. The pope was disposed to dissolve their hostility towards each other, and took steps to engineer a peace between England and Normandy, which was ratified in Rouen in 991.(6)

However, in August of that same year a sizable Danish fleet began a sustained campaign in the south-east of England. It arrived off Folkestone, in Kent, and made its way around the south-east coast and up the river Blackwater, coming eventually to its estuary and occupying Northey Island. About 2 km east of Northey lies the coastal town of Maldon, where Byrhtnoth, ealdorman of Essex, was stationed with a company of thegns. The battle that followed between English and Danes is immortalized by the Old English poem The Battle of Maldon, which describes the doomed but heroic attempt of Byrhtnoth to defend the coast of Essex against overwhelming odds. Stenton summarizes the events of the poem: "For access to the mainland they [the Danes] depended on a causeway, flooded at high tide, which led from Northey to the flats along the southern margin of the estuary. Before they [the Danes] had left their camp on the island Byrhtnoth, with his retainers and a force of local militia, had taken possession of the landward end of the causeway. Refusing a demand for tribute, shouted across the water while the tide was high, Byrhtnoth drew up his men along the bank, and waited for the ebb. As the water fell the raiders began to stream out along the causeway. But three of Byrthnoth's retainers held it against them, and at last they asked to be allowed to cross unhindered and fight on equal terms on the mainland. With what even those who admired him most called 'over-courage', Byrhtnoth agreed to this; the pirates rushed through the falling tide, and battle was joined. Its issue was decided by Byrhtnoth's fall. Many even of his own men immediately took to flight and the English ranks were broken. What gives enduring interest to the battle is the superb courage with which a group of Byrhtnoth's thegns, knowing that the fight was lost, deliberately gave themselves to death in order that they might avenge their lord." This would be the first of a series of crushing defeats felt by the English at the hands of first Danish raiders, then organized Danish armies. (7)

The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle (Cotton Tiberius manuscript) says for the year 991:

Her w�s Gypeswic gehergod, 7 �fter ��m swy�e ra�e w�s Byrihtno� ealdorman ofslagan �t Meldune. 7 on �am geare man ger�dde ��t man geald �rest gafol Deniscum mannum for �am myclan brogan �e hi worhton be �am s�riman, ��t w�s �rest .x. �usend punda. ��ne r�d ger�dde �rest Syric arcebisceop.

Here Ipswich was raided. Very soon after that, ealdorman Byrhtnoth was killed at Maldon. And on that year it was decided to pay tax to Danes for the great terror which they made by the sea coast; that first [payment] was 10,000 pounds. Archbishop Sigeric decided first on the matter.

In 991 Ethelred was around 24 years old. In the aftermath of Maldon, it was decided that the English should grant the tribute to the Danes that they desired, and so a gafol of 10,000 pounds was paid them for their peace. Yet it was presumably the Danish fleet that had beaten Byrhtnoth at Maldon that continued to ravage the English coast from 991-93. In 994, the Danish fleet, which had swollen in ranks since 991, turned up the Thames estuary and headed towards London. The battle fought there was inconclusive. It was about this time that Ethelred met with the leaders of the fleet, foremost among them Olaf Tryggvason, and arranged an uneasy accord. A treaty was signed between Ethelred and Olaf that provided for seemingly civilized arrangements between the now-settled Danish companies and the English government, such as regulation settlement disputes and of trade. But the treaty also stipulates that the ravaging and slaughter of the previous year will be forgotten, and ends abruptly by stating that 22,000 pounds of gold and silver have been paid the raiders as the price of peace. (8) In 994, Olaf Tryggvason, already a baptized Christian, was confirmed as Christian in a ceremony at Andover; King �thelred stood as his sponsor. After receiving gifts, Olaf promised "that he would never come back to England in hostility." Olaf then left England for Norway and never returned, though "other component parts of the Viking force appear to have decided to stay in England, for it is apparent from the treaty that some had chosen to enter into King �thelred's service as mercenaries, based presumably on the Isle of Wight."(9)

In 997 Danish raids began again. According to Keynes, "there is no suggestion that this was a new fleet or army, and presumably the mercenary force created in 994 from the residue of the raiding army of 991 had turned on those whom it had been hired to protect."(10) It harried Cornwall, Devon, western Somerset, and south Wales in 997, Dorset, Hampshire, and Sussex in 998. In 999 it raided Kent, and in 1000 it left England for Normandy, perhaps because the English had refused in this latest wave of attacks to acquiesce to the Danish demands for gafol or tribute, which would come to be known as Danegeld, 'Dane-payment'. This sudden relief from attack Ethelred used to gather his thoughts, resources, and armies: the fleet's departure in 1000 "allowed �thelred to carry out a devastation of Strathclyde, the motive for which is part of the lost history of the north."(11)

In 1001 a Danish fleet - perhaps the same fleet from 1000 - returned and ravaged west Sussex. During its movements, the fleet regularly returned to its base in the Isle of Wight. There was later an attempted attack in the south of Devon, though the English mounted a successful defence at Exeter. Nevertheless, Ethelred must have felt at a loss, and in the Spring of 1002 the English bought a truce for 24,000 pounds. Ethelred's frequent payments of immense Danegelds are often held up as exemplary of the incompetency of his government and his own short-sightedness. However, Keynes points out that such payments had been practice for at least a century, and had been adopted by Alfred the Great, Charles the Bald, and many others. Indeed, in some cases it "may have seemed the best available way of protecting the people against loss of life, shelter, livestock, and crops. Though undeniably burdensome, it constituted a measure for which the king could rely on widespread support."(12)

Charter of King �thelred to his man �thelred in 1003. (British Library- MS Stowe Ch. 35)

Ethelred ordered the massacre of all Danish men in England on St Brice's Day, 13 November 1002. No order of this kind could be carried out in more that a third of England, where the Danes were too strong, but Gunhilde, sister of Sweyn Forkbeard, King of Denmark, was said to be among the victims. It is likely that a wish to avenge her was a principal motive for Sweyn's invasion of western England the following year. By 1004 Sweyn was in East Anglia, where he sacked Norwich. In this year a nobleman of East Anglia, Ulfcytel Snillingr met Sweyn in force, and made an impression on the, until then, rampant Danish expedition. Though Ulfcytel was eventually defeated, outside of Thetford, he caused the Danes heavy losses and was nearly able to destroy their ships. The Danish army left England for Denmark in 1005, perhaps because of their injuries sustained in East Anglia, perhaps from the very severe famine which afflicted the continent and the British Isles in that year.(13)

Excavation of the Mass Grave- St. Brice's Day Massacre

An expedition the following year was bought off in early 1007 by tribute money of 36,000, and for the next two years England was free from attack. In 1008 the government created a new fleet of warships, organised on a national scale, but this was weakened when one of its commanders took to piracy, and the king and his council decided not to risk it in a general action. In Stenton's view: "The history of England in the next generation was really determined between 1009 and 1012...the ignominous collapse of the English defence caused a loss of morale which was irreparable." The Danish army of 1009, led by Thorkell the Tall and his brother Hemming, was the most formidable force to invade England since Ethelred became king. It harried England until it was bought off by 48,000 pounds in April 1012.(14)

Sweyn then launched an invasion in 1013 intended to make him king of England, and showed himself to be a general above any other Viking leader of his generation. By the end of 1013 English resistance had collapsed and Sweyn had conquered the country, forcing Ethelred into exile in Normandy, but the situation changed suddenly when Sweyn died on 3 February 1014. The crews of the Danish ships in the Trent immediately gave their allegiance to Sweyns's son Canute, but leading Englishmen sent a deputation to Ethelred to negotiate his restoration. He was required to promise to be a true lord to them, to reform everything of which they had complained, and forgive all that had been said and done against him. The terms are of great constitutional interest as the first recorded pact between a king and his subjects, and also as showing that many noblemen had submitted to Sweyn because of their distrust of Ethelred. (15)

Ethelred then launched an expedition against Canute and his allies, the men of Lindsey. Canute's army had not completed its preparations, and in April 1014 he decided to withdraw from England without a fight, abandoning his Lindsey allies to Ethelred's revenge. The debacle damaged the young and inexperienced Canute's prestige, but in August 1015 he was able to launch a new invasion with the assistance of his sister's husband, Eric of Hlathir. He returned to a complex situation in England. Ethelred's son, Edmund Ironside, had revolted against his father and established himself in the Danelaw, which was so angry at Canute and Ethelred for the ravaging of Lindsey that it was prepared to support Edmund against both of them. Over the next months, Canute conquered most of England, and Edmund had rejoined Ethelred to defend London when Ethelred died on 23 April 1016. The subsequent war between Edmund and Canute ended in a decisive victory for Canute at the Battle of Ashingdon on 18 October 1016. Edmund's reputation as a warrior was such that Canute neverthess agreed to divide England, Edmund taking Wessex and Canute the whole of the country beyond the Thames. However, Edmund died on 30 November and Canute became king of the whole country.(16)

Ethelred's government produced extensive legislation, which he "ruthlessly enforced." Records of at least six legal codes survive from his reign, covering a range of topics. Notably, one of the members of his council (known as the Witan) was Wulfstan II, Archbishop of York, a well-known homilist. The three latest codes from Ethelred's reign seemed to have been drafted by Wulfstan. These codes are extensively concerned with ecclesiastical affairs. They also exhibit the characteristics of Wulfstan's highly rhetorical style. Wulfstan went on to draft codes for King Cnut, and recycled there many of the laws which were used in Ethelred's codes.(17)

The King and his Witan- 11th Century

Despite the failure of his government in the face of the Danish threat, Ethelred's reign was not without some important institutional achievements. The quality of the coinage, a good indicator of the prevailing economic conditions, significantly improved during his reign due to his numerous coinage reform laws.

Later perspectives of Ethelred have been less than flattering. Numerous legends and anecdotes have sprung up to explain his shortcomings, often elaborating abusively on his character and failures. One such anecdote is given by William of Malmesbury (lived c. 1080-c. 1143), who reports that Ethelred had defecated in the baptismal font as a child, which led St. Dunstan to prophesy that the English monarchy would be overthrown during his reign. This story is, however, a fabrication, and a similar story is told of the Byzantine Emperor Constantine Copronymus, another medieval monarch who was unpopular among certain of his subjects.

Efforts to rehabilitate Ethelred's reputation have gained momentum since about 1980. Chief among the rehabilitators has been Simon Keynes, who has often argued that our poor impression of Ethelred is almost entirely based upon after-the-fact accounts of, and later accretions to, the narrative of events during Ethelred's long and complex reign. Chief among the culprits is in fact one of the most important sources for the history of the period, the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, which, as it reports events with a retrospect of 15 years, cannot help but interpret colour events with the eventual English defeat a foregone conclusion. Yet, as virtually no strictly contemporary narrative account of the events of Ethelred's reign exists, historians are forced to rely on what evidence there is. Keynes and others thus draw attention to some of the inevitable snares of investigating the history of a man whom later popular opinion has utterly damned. Recent cautious assessments of Ethelred's reign have more often uncovered reasons to doubt, than uphold, Ethelred's later infamy. Though the failures of his government will always put Ethelred's reign in the shadow of the reigns of kings Edgar, Aethelstan, and Alfred, historians' current impression of Ethelred's personal character is certainly not as unflattering as it once was: "�thelred's misfortune as a ruler was owed not so much to any supposed defects of his imagined character, as to a combination of circumstances which anyone would have found difficult to control."(18)

Ethelred has been credited with the formation of a local investigative body made up of twelve thegns who were charged with publishing the names of any notorious or wicked men in their respective districts. Because the members of these bodies were under solemn oath to act in accordance with the law and their own good consciences, they have been seen by some legal historians as the proto-type for the English Grand Jury. Ethelred makes provision for such a body in a law code he enacted at Wantage in 997, which states:

"��t man habbe gemot on �lcum w�penkace; & gan ut �a yldestan XII �egnas & se gerefa mid, & swerian on �am haligdome, �e heom man on hand sylle, ��t hig nellan n�nne sacleasan man forsecgean ne n�nne sacne forhelan. & niman �onne �a tihtbysian men, �e mid �am gerefan habba�, & heora �lc sylle VI healfmarc wedd, healf landrican & healf w�pentake."(19)

that there shall be an assembly in every wapentake, and in that assembly shall go forth the twelve eldest thegns and the reeve along with them, and let them swear on holy relics, which shall be placed in their hands, that they will never knowingly accuse an innocent man nor conceal a guilty man. And thereafter let them seize those notorious [lit. "charge-laden"] men, who have business with the reeve, and let each of them give a security of 6 half-marks, half of which shall go to the lord of that district, and half to the wapentake.

But the wording here suggests that Ethelred is perhaps revamping or re-confirming a custom which already existed. He may actually have been expanding an established English custom to be used among the Danish citizens in the North (the Danelaw). Note that the term "wapentake" specifies the north and north-eastern territories in England which were at the time largely governed according to Danish custom. No mention is made of the law's application to the hundreds, the southern and English equivalent of the Danish wapentake.

Previously, King Edgar had legislated along similar lines in his Whitbordesstan code:

"ic wille, ��t �lc mon sy under borge ge binnan burgum ge buton burgum. & gewitnes sy geset to �lcere byrig & to �lcum hundrode. To �lcere byrig XXXVI syn gecorone to gewitnesse; to smalum burgum & to �lcum hundrode XII, buton ge ma willan. & �lc mon mid heora gewitnysse bigcge & sylle �lc �ara ceapa, �e he bigcge o��e sylle a�er o��e burge o��e on w�pengetace. & heora �lc, �onne hine man �rest to gewitnysse gecys�, sylle ��ne a�, ��t he n�fre, ne for feo ne for lufe ne for ege, ne �tsace nanes �ara �inga, �e he to gewitnysse w�s, & nan o�er �ingc on gewitnysse ne cy�e buton ��t an, ��t he geseah o��e gehyrde. & swa ge��dera manna syn on �lcum ceape twegen o��e �ry to gewitnysse." (20)

It is my wish that each person be in surety, both within settled areas and without. And 'witnessing' shall be established in each city and each hundred. To each city let there be 36 chosen for witnessing; to small towns and to each hundred let there be 12, unless they desire more. And everybody shall purchase and sell their goods in the presence a witness, whether he is buying or selling something, whether in a city or a wapentake. And each of them, when they first choose to become a witness, shall give an oath that he will never, neither for wealth nor love nor fear, deny any of those things which he will be a witness to, and will not, in his capacity as a witness, make known any thing except that which he saw and heard. And let there be either two or three of these sworn witnesses at every sale of goods.

The 'legend' of an Anglo-Saxon origin to the jury was first challenged seriously by Heinrich Brunner in 1872, who claimed that evidence of the jury could only been seen for the first time during the reign of Henry II, some 200 years after the end of the Anglo-Saxon period, and that the practice had originated with the Franks, who in turn had influenced the Normans, who thence introduced it to England. Since Brunner's thesis, the origin of the English jury has been much disputed. Throughout the twentieth century, legal historians disagreed about whether the practice was English in origin, or was introduced, directly or indirectly, from either Scandinavia or Francia. Recently, the legal historians Patrick Wormald and Michael Macnair have reasserted arguments in favour of finding in practices current during the Anglo-Saxon period traces of the Angevin practice of conducting inquests using bodies of sworn private witnesses. Wormald has gone as far as to present evidence suggesting that the English practice outlined in Ethelred's Wantage code is at least as old as, if not older than, 975, and ultimately traces it back to a Carolingian model (something Brinner had done). However, no scholarly consensus has yet been reached.(21)

Issue- first ten children by Aelfgifu, last three by Emma

Ref:

(1) A Tale of Two Kings: Alfred the Great and �thelred the Unread- Simon Keynes, Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, 5th Series 36 (1986)- pp.195-217
(2) Anglo-Saxon England- Frank M. Stenton, Clarendon Press, 1971-pp. 372, 374
(3) The Death of Anglo-Saxon England- Nick Higham, 1997- pp.7-8; Edward the Martyr- Sean Miller in The Blackwell Encyclopedia of Anglo-Saxon England, 1999; Saint Edward the Martyr- G. E. Phillips, in The Catholic Enclyclopaedia, 1909- Vol. 5, p. 323
(4) Anglo-Saxon England- Frank M. Stenton, Clarendon Press, 1971-p. 373
(5) A Tale of Two Kings: Alfred the Great and �thelred the Unread- Simon Keynes, Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, 5th Series 36 (1986)- pp.195-217
(6) Anglo-Saxon England- Frank M. Stenton, Clarendon Press, 1971-p. 375
(7) Ibid- pp. 376-7
(8) Ibid- pp. 377-8
(9) A Tale of Two Kings: Alfred the Great and �thelred the Unread- Simon Keynes, Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, 5th Series 36 (1986)- pp.195-217
(10) Ibid-
(11) Anglo-Saxon England- Frank M. Stenton, Clarendon Press, 1971-p. 379
(12) A Tale of Two Kings: Alfred the Great and �thelred the Unread- Simon Keynes, Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, 5th Series 36 (1986)- pp.195-217
(13) Anglo-Saxon England- Frank M. Stenton, Clarendon Press, 1971-p. 380
(14) Ibid- pp. 381-4
(15) ibid- pp. 384-6
(16) Ibid- pp. 386-93
(17) The Making of English Law- King Alfred to the Twelfth Century- Patrick Wormald, Vol. 1: Legislation and its Limits, 1999- pp. 356-60; Wulfstan and �thelred the Lawmaker- Patrick Wormald, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, 2004; Die Gesetze der Angelsaschen- Felix Liebermann, 1903- Vol. I, pp. 216-70
(18) A Tale of Two Kings: Alfred the Great and �thelred the Unread- Simon Keynes, Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, 5th Series 36 (1986)- p. 217
(19) Die Gesetze der Angelsaschen- Felix Liebermann, 1903- Vol. I, pp. 228-32
(20) Ibid- pp. 206-14
(21) The Origins of the Medieval English Jury: Frankish, English or Scandinavian?- Ralph V. Turner, The Journal of British Studies 7 (1968)- pp. 1-10; The Making of English Law- King Alfred to the Twelfth Century- Patrick Wormald, Vol. 1: Legislation and its Limits, 1999- pp. 4-26; Neighbors, Courts, and Kings: Reflections on Michael Macnair's Vicini- Patrick Wormald, Law and History Review 17 (1999), pp. 597-601

Dictionary of National Biography- Leslie Stephen, Ed., Oxford Unviersity Press
The Complete Peerage- St. Catherine Press, London- Vol. IX, p. 704
The Feudal Kingdom of England 1042-1216- Frank Barlow, Longman, 1999- p. 374
Domesday Descendants- K.S.B. Keats-Rohan, Boydell Press, 2002- p. 1101
Tim Powys-Lybbe's web page at: http://www.tim.ukpub.net

b.c.981
m. ALGITHA- m.1. Sigeferth, thegn of the Seven Boroughs
d. 30 Nov. 1016

Edmund Ironside or Eadmund was surnamed "Ironside" for his efforts to fend off the Danish invasion led by King Canute. Edmund was King of England from 23 April to 30 November 1016.

Edmund was the second son of King �thelred Unraed and his first wife, �lfgifu of Northumbria. He had three brothers, the elder being �thelstan, and the younger two being Eadred and Ecgbert. His mother was dead by 996, after which his father remarried, this time to Emma of Normandy.

�thelstan died in 1014, leaving Edmund as heir. A power-struggle began between Edmund and his father, and in 1015 King �thelred had two of Edmund's allies, Sigeferth and Morcar, executed. Edmund then took Sigeferth's widow, Ealdgyth, from Malmesbury Abbey where she had been imprisoned and married her in defiance of his father. During this time, Canute the Great attacked England with his forces. In 1016 Edmund staged a rebellion in conjunction with Earl Uhtred of Northumbria, but after Uhtred deserted him and submitted to Canute, Edmund was reconciled with his father.

�thelred II, who had earlier been stricken ill, died on 23 April 1016. Edmund succeeded to the throne and mounted a last-ditch effort to revive the defence of England. While the Danes laid siege to London, Edmund headed for Wessex, where he gathered an army. When the Danes pursued him he fought them to a standstill. He then raised a renewed Danish siege of London and won repeated victories over Canute. However, on 18 October Canute decisively defeated him at the Battle of Ashingdon in Essex. After the battle the two kings negotiated a peace in which Edmund kept Wessex while Canute held the lands north of the River Thames. In addition, they agreed that if one of them should perish, territories belonging to the deceased would be ceded to the living.

On 30 November 1016, King Edmund II died in Oxford or London and his territories were ceded to Canute who then became king of England. The cause of Edmund's death has never been clear, with many accounts listing natural causes, while others suggest that he was assassinated. According to The Bathroom Companion, by James Buckley, Jr. Edmund was "stabbed from beneath as he answered a call of nature" (p.68). Edmund was buried at Glastonbury Abbey in Somerset. His burial site is now lost. During the Dissolution of the Monasteries any remains of a monument or crypt were destroyed and the location of his body is unknown.

Edmund had two children by �ldgyth: Edward the Exile and Edmund, who both were sent by Canute the Great to Sweden, in order to be murdered but were sent from there to Kiev, ending up in Hungary.

Issue-

Ref:

Dictionary of National Biography- Leslie Stephen, Ed., Oxford Unviersity Press
The History of the Anglo-Saxons from the Earliest Period to the Norman Conquest- Sharon Turner, Baudry's European Library, 1841- Vol.II, p. 28
The Feudal Kingdom of England 1042-1216- Frank Barlow, Longman, 1999- p. 374
Tim Powys-Lybbe's web page at: http://www.tim.ukpub.net

m. AGATHA
d. Feb. 1057

Edward the Exile, also called Edward �theling, son of King Edmund Ironside and of Ealdgyth, gained the name of "Exile" from his life spent mostly far from the England of his forefathers. After the Danish conquest of England in 1016 Canute had him and his brother, Edmund, exiled to the Continent. Edward was only a few months old when he was brought to the court of Olof Sk�tkonung, (who was either Canute's half-brother or stepbrother), with instructions to have the child murdered. Instead, Edmund was secretly sent to Kiev, where Olof's daughter Ingigerd was the Queen, and then made his way to Hungary, probably in the retinue of Ingigerd's son-in-law, King Andr�s.

The Funeral of Edward the Confessor- Bayeux Tapestry

On hearing the news of his being alive, Edward the Confessor recalled him to England and made him his heir. Edward offered the last chance of an undisputed succession within the Saxon royal house. News of Edward's existence came at time when the old Anglo-Saxon Monarchy, restored after a long period of Danish domination, was heading for catastrophe. The Confessor, personally devout but politically weak, was unable to make an effective stand against the steady advance of the powerful and ambitious sons of Earl Godwin. From across the Channel William, Duke of Normandy also had an eye on the succession. Edward the Exile appeared at just the right time. Approved by both king and by the Witan, the Council of the Realm, he offered a way out of the impasse, a counter both to the Godwins and to William, and one with a legitimacy that could not be readily challenged.

Edward, who had been in the custody of Henry III, the Holy Roman Emperor, finally came back to England at the end of August 1057. But he died within two days of his arrival. The exact cause of Edward's death remains unclear, but he had many powerful enemies, and there is a strong possibility that he was murdered, although by whom it is not known with any certainty. It is known, though, that his access to the king was blocked soon after his arrival in England for some unexplained reason, at a time when the Godwins, in the person of Harold Godwinson, were once again in the ascendant. This turn of events left the throne of England to be disputed by Earl Harold and Duke William, ultimately leading to the Norman Conquest of England.

Edward's wife was a woman named Agatha, whose origins are disputed. Their children were Edgar �theling, Saint Margaret of Scotland and Cristina. Edgar was nominated as heir apparent, but was too young to count for much, and was eventually swept aside by Harold Godwinson.

Issue-

Ref:

Dictionary of National Biography- Leslie Stephen, Ed., Oxford University Press
Domesday Descendants- K.S.B. Keats-Rohan, Boydell Press, 2002- pp.1106-7
Feudal Kingdom of England 1042-1216- Frank Barlow, Longman, 1999- pp.374-5
Time Powys-Lybbe's web page at: http://www.tim.ukpub.net