April 23, 1016: Death of Æthelred II the Unready, King of the English.

Tags

Æthelred II the Unready, Battle of Maldon, Cnut the Great of Denmark, East Anglia, Edgar the Peaceful, Edward the Martyr, King of the English, St. Brice's Day massacre of 1002, Sweyn Forkbeard

Æthelred II (c. 966 – 23 April 1016), was King of the English from 978 to 1013 and again from 1014 until his death.

Æthelred was the son of King Edgar and Queen Ælfthryth. He came to the throne at about the age of 12, following the assassination of his older half-brother, Eadweard the Martyr. His brother’s murder was carried out by supporters of his own claim to the throne, although he was too young to have any personal involvement.

Æthelred II the Unready, King of the English

Name

Æthelred’s first name, composed of the elements æðele, “noble”, and ræd, “counsel, 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 Æthelwulf (“noble-wolf”), Ælfred (“elf-counsel”), Eadweard (“rich-protection”), and Eadgar (“rich-spear”).

Æthelred’s notorious nickname, Old English Unræd, is commonly translated into present-day English as “The Unready” (less often, though less inaccurately, as “The Redeless”).The Anglo-Saxon noun unræd means “evil counsel”, “bad plan”, or “folly”.

The element ræd in unræd is the same element in Æthelred’s name that means “counsel”. Thus Æþelræd Unræd is an oxymoron: “Noble counsel, No counsel”. The nickname has also been translated as “ill-advised”, “ill-prepared”, thus “Æthelred the ill-advised”.

Because the nickname was first recorded in the 1180s, more than 150 years after Æthelred’s death, it is doubtful that it carries any implications as to the reputation of the king in the eyes of his contemporaries or near contemporaries.

Æthelred’s father, King Edgar, had died suddenly in July 975, leaving two young sons behind. The elder, Eadweard (later Eadweard the Martyr), was probably illegitimate, and was “still a youth on the verge of manhood” in 975. The younger son was Æthelred, whose mother, Ælfthryth, Edgar had married in 964. Ælfthryth was the daughter of Ordgar, ealdorman of Devon, and widow of Æthelwold, Ealdorman of East Anglia.

At the time of his father’s death, Æthelred could have been no more than 10 years old. As the elder of Edgar’s sons, Eadweard – 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.” In any case, a number of English nobles took to opposing Eadweard‘s succession and to defending Æthelred’s claim to the throne; Æthelred was, after all, the son of Edgar’s last, living wife, and no rumour of illegitimacy is known to have plagued Æthelred’s birth, as it might have his elder brother’s.

Both boys, Æthelred certainly, were too young to have played any significant part in the political manoeuvring which followed Edgar’s death.

Æthelred II the Unready, King of the English

Eadweard reigned for only three years before he was murdered by members of his brother’s household. Though little is known about Eadweard‘s short reign, it is known 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’ traditional patronage. The end of his firm rule saw a reversal of this policy, with aristocrats recovering their lost properties or seizing new ones.

Marriages and issue

Æthelred married first Ælfgifu, daughter of Thored, earl of Northumbria, in about 985.[14] Their known children are:

* Æthelstan Ætheling (died 1014)
* Ecgberht Ætheling (died c. 1005)
* Edmund Ironside (King of England, died 1016)
* Eadred Ætheling (died before 1013)
* Eadwig Ætheling (executed by Cnut 1017)
* Edgar Ætheling (died c. 1008)
* Eadgyth or Edith (married Eadric Streona)
* Ælfgifu (married Uchtred the Bold, ealdorman of Northumbria)
* Wulfhild? (married Ulfcytel Snillingr)
* Abbess of Wherwell Abbey?

In 1002 Æthelred married Emma of Normandy, sister of Richard II, Duke of Normandy. Their children were:

* Edward the Confessor (King of England, died 1066)
* Ælfred Ætheling (died 1036–37)
* Godgifu or Goda of England (married 1. Dreux de Vexin, Count of Mantes, Valois and the Vexin also known as: Drogo of Mantes and 2. Eustace II, Count of Boulogne)

The chief problem of Æthelred’s reign was conflict with the Danes. After several decades of relative peace, Danish raids on English territory began again in earnest in the 980s. Following the Battle of Maldon in 991, Æthelred paid tribute, or Danegeld, to the Danish king, Sweyn Forkbeard.

St. Brice’s Day massacre of 1002

Æthelred ordered the massacre of all Danish men in England to take place on November 13, 1002, St Brice’s Day. No order of this kind could be carried out in more than a third of England, where the Danes were too strong, but Gunhilde, sister of Sweyn Forkbeard, King of Denmark, was said to have been 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.

Sweyn Forkbeard, King of Denmark

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 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 the losses they sustained in East Anglia, perhaps from the very severe famine which afflicted the continent and the British Isles in that year.

In 1013, King Sweyn Forkbeard of Denmark invaded England once again, as a result of which Æthelred fled to Normandy in 1013 and was replaced by Sweyn. However, he returned as king for two years after Sweyn’s death in 1014. Æthelred’s 37-year combined reign was the longest of any Anglo-Saxon king of England, and was only surpassed in the 13th century, by Henry III. Æthelred was briefly succeeded by his son, Edmund Ironside, but he died after a few months and was replaced by Sweyn’s son, Cnut the Great, King of Denmark and Norway.

Over the next few months Cnut conquered most of England, while Edmund rejoined Æthelred to defend London when Æthelred died on April 23, 1016. The subsequent war between Edmund and Cnut ended in a decisive victory for Cnut at the Battle of Ashingdon on October 18, 1016. Edmund’s reputation as a warrior was such that Cnut nevertheless agreed to divide England, Edmund taking Wessex and Cnut the whole of the country beyond the Thames. However, Edmund died on 30 November and Cnut became king of the whole country. Another of Æthelred’s sons, Eadweard the Confessor, became king in 1042.

Æthelred was buried in Old St Paul’s Cathedral, London. The tomb and his monument were destroyed along with the cathedral in the Great Fire of London in 1666. A modern monument in the crypt lists his among the important graves lost.

Who was the first King of England ?

Tags

Bretwalda, Cerdic of Wessex, East Anglia, Egbert of Wessex, Essex, Heptarchy, Kent, King Alfred the Great, King Athelstan, King John of England, King of Bavaria, King of the Anglo-Saxons, King of the English, Kingdom of Prussia, Kings and Queens of England, Mercia, Northumbria, Sussex, Wessex, William the Conqueror

Figuring out who was the first King of Prussia or the first King of Bavaria was, is pretty easy given the fact that these kingdoms developed late in European history, early 18th and 19th to be precise. However, there are other kingdoms that stretch way back into history and figuring out who the first king of that nation or kingdom was, is rather difficult and subject to opinion. I am beginning a short series where I will identify the first king of England, Scotland, Denmark, Norway and Sweden. I’m going to do something special with France and also ask who was the last King of the Franks? I may have touched on this before but I will also examine who was the first Holy Roman Emperor?

Alfred the Great: King of the West Saxons & King of the Angles and Saxons.

The reason why it can be hard for historians to determine who was the first king of these nations were because the idea of a unified nation-state came long after these monarchies began to develop. At first the king was more like a tribal chief over a people rather than a nation. All of these nations had many kings ruling over these territories and as time went on these smaller kingdoms either died off or were absorbed or defeated until one singular king remained. There are also other complexities special for each kingdom that I will address separately.

Today I will start with England.

Most books or lists of the Kings and Queens of England begin with William the Conqueror in 1066. Some may briefly mention the Saxon period but all-in-all a wide majority of books on this subject begin with William. However, there was far more royal history before him. After the fall of the Roman Empire there began a rise of small petty kingdoms in the British Isle. These small Anglo-Saxon kingdoms were known as the Heptarchy and they consisted of East Anglia, Mercia, Northumbria, Kent, Essex, Sussex, and Wessex. It was from the gradual unification of these early medieval kingdoms that the kingdom of England emerged. During the 9th century Vikings upset the balance of power between the English kingdoms, and native Anglo-Saxon life in general. One of the effects of the Viking invasions was that it slowed down English unification.

During the period of the Heptarchy, the most powerful king among the Anglo-Saxon kingdoms might be acknowledged as Bretwalda, which translates to High King, over the other kings. However, the tendency for one of the kings of the Heptarchy to become the Bretwalda was short lived as the decline of the other Saxon kingdoms allowed Wessex to become more powerful. Wessex soon came to be the most powerful kingdom on English soil as it absorbed the kingdoms of Kent and Sussex in 825. In 827, Northumbria submitted to King Egbert of Wessex (802-839) Thus Egbert briefly became the first king to reign over a united England. Most sources that list Egbert as the first King of England use either 827 or 828 as the starting point of his reign as Bretwalda even though his reign as king of Wessex began in 802. 

Was Egbert of Wessex the first King of England? He often is considered as such by some historians for his reign signaled that Wessex had indeed become the most powerful kingdom within England and would eventually subsume the position as the dominant kingdom over all others. Egbert was given the title Bretwalda and instead of viewing him as the first king of England I tend to view him as the last Anglo-Saxon king to hold the title Bretwalda. Incidentally, as mentioned at the start, most books or encyclopedias list William I as the starting point of the Kings and Queens of England, but those that do list or mention the Kingdom of Wessex often start with Egbert of Wessex as its first king, even though Cerdic of Wessex was actually the First King of Wessex in 519.

In 886, King Alfred the Great (871-899) retook London from the Danes and some historians mark this as the point when all of England came under one monarch. The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle says that “all of the English people (all Angelcyn) not subject to the Danes, submitted themselves to King Alfred.” After retaking London he began massive reconstruction of the city and making it habitable once again. Historians cite that it may have been at this point that Alfred assumed the new royal style ‘King of the Anglo-Saxons.’ Alfred’s son, Ædward the Elder (899-924), was also titled King of the Anglo-Saxons, however during his reign the Danes still held York.

It would be a few more years until England was completely united. On July 12, 927 the remaining monarchs of Britain gathered at Eamont in Cumbria to recognize Æthelstan (924-927) as “King of the English.” This has be considered by some historians as England’s ‘foundation date’, although the process of unification had taken almost 100 years. Even after 927 England was not completely united as Northumbria repeatedly changed hands between the English kings and the Danish and Norwegian invaders. Northumbria was definitively brought under English control by King Ædred (945-955) in 954, completing the unification of England. At about this time, Lothian, the northern part of Northumbria (Roman Bernicia), was ceded to the Kingdom of Scotland. England has remained in political unity ever since.

It is interesting to note that from the time of King Æthelstan until the reign of King John (1199-1216) the title which the monarch used was “King of the English,” in Latin, Rex Anglorum . In 1199 King John changed the title to Rex Anglia, “King of England” and this remained in effect until the unification of England and Scotland as the Kingdom of Great Britain in 1707.

It is difficult to pin down the first king of England. Egbert is often chosen because he was the king that brought Wessex to prominence over the other English Kingdoms. Alfred the Great is often chosen because he brought most of England under his rule but his grandson, Æthelstan as “King of the English,” finalized English unification. Any of these could be considered the first King of England. Personally, I tend to view Alfred the Great as the first King of England because his unifying of the nation was the one that stuck and lasted. What is your choice?

The Common Touch

Tags

14th Earl of Strathmore and Kinghorne, East Anglia, Essex, Heptarchy, Kent, King Edward VIII of the United Kingdom, Mercia, Norman Conquest of England, Northumbria, Prince Charles, Prince Phillip of Greece and Denmark, Sussex, Wessex

HRH The Duchess of Cambridge is a very popular member of the British Royal Family. She is young and beautiful with a friendly and warm personality and married to a dashing handsome prince who is destined one day to be king. These are what make up fairy tales and Hollywood movies. Another aspect of this fairy tale is that she does not come from either royalty or the titled nobility herself. Long gone are the days when royals married royals. This has not done any damage as some have feared. I have met some individuals who have supported the class system to the point where they thought that when a royal married a commoner that it lessened their royal status and that of their children. I do not agree with this view at all.

Through the centuries it has been ironic that commoners and every ordinary person has had the freedom to select the mate of their choice. Royalty, on the other hand, has not always had that luxury. Marrying into your station in life is still practiced throughout the world. There are always whispers and gossip if someone is seen to be marrying someone who is not part of their social group and status. This human proclivity is readily apparent in royal circles and has been for ages. Even in the days of the Heptarchy, members of the royal families of  Northumbria, Mercia, East Anglia, Essex, Kent, Sussex and Wessex married into one another’s houses. Even after the Norman Conquest of England this trend continued.

Looking at a genealogy chart of the royal family through history it mirrors much of the political climate at the time. From the Norman Conquest until the reign of Edward III (1327-1377) we can see many French princesses and those of the French nobility marry into the English royal family. This mirrors the many conflicts between England and France that royal alliances were hoped to resolve. From the reign of Edward III to the times of the Tudors we see a lot of marriages of the royal family into the English nobility. The Tudor dynasty was a hodgepodge of marriages with foreign countries and the English nobility..and even with commoners. The Stuarts married into Danish, French, Dutch and Portuguese royal houses.

With the arrival of the German House of Hanover onto the British throne in 1714 we begin to see the tradition of marrying into other German royal and noble families. This tradition lasted up until World War I (1914-1918) when the German and Russian royal houses were swept off their thrones. It was at that time when George V permitted his children to marry members of the British aristocracy. We all know the trouble Edward VIII had in selecting a wife that was not from either royal or noble stock, he gave up the throne for his marriage to Wallis Simpson. His sister Mary, The Princess Royal, married the future Earl of Harewood. George VI, married Lady Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon, the daughter of Claude Bowes-Lyon, 14th Earl of Strathmore and Kinghorne. Prince Henry, The Duke of Gloucester, married Lady Alice  Montagu Douglas Scott, the daughter of John Montagu Douglas Scott, 7th Duke of Buccleuch. The youngest surviving son, Prince George, Duke of Kent, married into royalty. In 1934 the Duke of Kent married Princess Marina of Greece and Denmark.

Princess Marina’s cousin, Prince Philip of Greece and Denmark married the future Queen Elizabeth II in 1947. In recent years we have seen members of the royal family marrying people from untitled families. The Queen’s sister, Princess Margaret, married Antony Armstrong-Jones, whom Her Majesty ennobled granting him the title 1st Earl of Snowdon. Of the queen’s children only the first marriage of the Prince of Wales, to Lady Diana Spencer, was a marriage to a member of the nobility. All the other children of the queen married untitled commoners.  In the future it may still be possible for a member of the British royal family to marry another royal or even a member of the nobility and if this happens it will happen just like anyone else meets their spouse, through friends or activities. I am all in favor of royals marrying the person they love and the person of their choice. The only drawback for me personally is I enjoy reading old genealogy charts and seeing how many ways the royals are connected. In the future these royal and noble families will be less connected by marriage.

With such hard-working and warm friendly people such as The Duchess of Cambridge, The Duchess of Cornwall and the Countess of Wessex as members of the royal family they demonstrate that being royal is not about birth, it is about conduct and service and being an honourable representative of your country. Being married into the royal family is not just a part-time job, it is a full-time lifestyle. These ladies have demonstrated that dignity and class are attributes that we can all emulate and one does not have to be high-born to display those qualities. In the future as Prince Harry and other members of the royal family select the spouse of their choice, let’s hope that they all demonstrate that common touch.