MERCIA
They came from three very powerful peoples of Germany, that is, the Saxons, the Angles and the Jutes… From the Angles, that is, the country which is called Angulus, and which is said, from that time, to have remained desert to this day, between the provinces of the Jutes and the Saxons, are descended the East Angles, the Middle Angles, the Mercians, all the race of the Northumbrians, that is, of those nations that dwell on the north side of the river Humber, and the other peoples of the Angles.Bede Historia Ecclesiastica Gentis Anglorum I, 15
Mercia – the kingdom of the Mercians, i.e. Marcher-people (borderers) – which eventually encompassed the whole of the English midlands, stretching as far south as the Thames-Avon line, apparently developed from settlements around the upper Trent .[*] Mercia’s influence reached its zenith during the reign of Offa in the latter half of the 8th century. Wessex (the kingdom of the West Saxons), however, became the dominant power after decisively defeating the Mercians in 825. Later in the 9th century, Mercia was conquered by the Danes. The country was partitioned – the western half remained in Anglo-Saxon hands, whilst the eastern half was settled by the Danes. The West Mercians accepted the overlordship of Alfred the Great, king of Wessex. Mercia was never again an independent kingdom.
King of the Mercians
585 ? – 593 ? Creoda ?
593 ? – 597 ? Pybba ?
597 ? – 626 ? Cearl
The early history of Mercia is very obscure. Felix, in his ‘Life’ of St Guthlac, says (Chs.1–2) that Guthlac’s father was “a certain man of distinguished Mercian stock named Penwalh”, and that: “the descent of this man was traced in set order through the most noble names of famous kings, back to Icel in whom it began in days of old.” In an Old English translation/paraphrase of Felix’s Latin work, which survives in a single late-11th century manuscript (British Library MS Cotton Vespasian D xxi), Guthlac’s father is said to be: “of the oldest and noblest family, who were named Iclingas [from Icel of course].”
The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, s.a. 626, provides the following genealogy: “Penda was son of Pybba, Pybba of Creoda, Creoda of Cynewald, Cynewald of Cnebba, Cnebba of Icel, Icel of Eomær, Eomær of Angeltheow, Angeltheow of Offa, Offa of Wærmund, Wærmund of Wihtlæg, Wihtlæg of Woden.”
mercia01
Offa ruled Angeln, Alewih the Danes,
who was the bravest of all these men [a list of various Continental rulers precedes this passage],
but he did not outmatch Offa in courage,
for Offa, first among men, fought for and won
the greatest of kingdoms even while a youth.
No one of like age was warrior enough to achieve
greater deeds of valour…Widsith lines 35–41
… that chief of heroes,The extant Beowulf text proceeds to say: “From him [Offa] arose geomor”. Scholars generally amend geomor (which means ‘sad’) to the name Eomer (i.e. Eomær in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle genealogy).[*] The text then says that Eomer is the nephew or grandson (the word nefa can be either) of one Garmund. Garmund is generally taken to equate with Wærmund in the Chronicle. All this being the case, the Beowulf text apparently presents Eomær as the son of Offa – not the grandson, as the Chronicle and other sources do.
of all mankind, as men have told me,
the best between the two seas,
of all the races of men; therefore Offa,
in gifts and battle, spear-bold man,
was widely honoured, and held in wisdom
his own homeland…Beowulf lines 1954–1960
Presumably(?), Icel was regarded as the founder of Penda’s dynasty because it was he who migrated from the Continental Anglian homeland to Britain.
Bede makes a passing reference (HE II, 14) to “Cearl, king of the Mercians”, being the father-in-law of the exiled future king of Northumbria, Edwin. This would put Cearl, who does not feature in any extant genealogy, on the Mercian throne at some time between about 604 and 616.
Henry of Huntingdon states: “The kingdom of Mercia began, and so far as I can gather from what has been written down, Creoda was the first to possess it.” (HA II, 26). Henry implies that this was in 585. Following an elaborated account of a battle placed s.a. 592 in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, Henry notes: “After this Creoda, king of Mercia, died. His son Pybba succeeded him.” (HA II, 27).[*] And then, with an implied date of 597: “After Pybba, there reigned Cearl, who was not his son but his kinsman.” (HA II, 27). The next Mercian reference made by Henry is the notice (HA II, 31) of the accession of Penda, complete with his genealogy, as per the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, where the event is placed s.a. 626. There is no reason to suppose that Henry’s statements concerning the succession of the previous kings are anything other than conjectures based on Bede and the Chronicle.[*]
Mercian history, in effect, begins with Penda.
626 ? – 655 Penda
Son of Pybba.
The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle s.a. 626: “Penda held the kingdom 30 winters; and he was 50 winters old when he succeeded to the kingdom.”[*] It is highly unlikely that Penda was fifty when he became king of Mercia (far more likely that he was fifty when he was killed), and it is also possible that he didn’t actually become king until considerably later than 626.
In 628, according to the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle: "Cynegils [the West Saxon king] and Cwichelm [Cynegils’ son] fought against Penda at Cirencester, and afterwards came to an agreement.” It seems likely that Cynegils ceded Cirencester and territory along the Severn to Penda – the Mercian sub-kingdom of the Hwicce (roughly, Worcestershire, Gloucestershire and western Warwickshire) quite possibly dates from this period.[*]
Bede (HE II, 5) reports that Edwin, the Christian king of Northumbria, secured the overlordship of “all the inhabitants of Britain, both English and Britons, except only the people of Kent”. Penda was obviously ambitious, and he saw a further opportunity to increase his power when Cadwallon, king of Gwynedd, rebelled against Edwin.
… [Cadwallon] was supported by the vigorous Penda, of the royal family of the Mercians, who from that time governed that nation for 22 years with varying success. A great battle being fought in the plain that is called Hæthfelth [usually identified as Hatfield Chase, near Doncaster], Edwin was killed on the 4th of the Ides of October [12th October], in the year of our Lord 633, being then 48 years of age, and all his army was either slain or dispersed.[*] In the same war also, Osfrith, one of his sons, a warlike youth, fell before him; Eadfrith, another of them, compelled by necessity, went over to King Penda, and was by him afterwards slain in the reign of Oswald, contrary to his oath.
At this time a great slaughter was made in the Church and nation of the Northumbrians; chiefly because one of the commanders, by whom it was carried on, was a pagan, and the other a barbarian, more cruel than a pagan; for Penda, with all the nation of the Mercians, was an idolater, and a stranger to the name of Christ; but Cadwallon, though he professed and called himself a Christian, was so barbarous in his disposition and manner of living, that he did not even spare women and innocent children, but with bestial cruelty put all alike to death by torture, and raged through all their provinces for a long time, intending to eradicate all the race of the English within the borders of Britain.HE II, 20
Presumably Penda soon returned to Mercia. Cadwallon remained in the Northumbrian provinces for a year, “ravaging them like a furious tyrant” (HE III, 1), before he was defeated and killed by Edwin’s eventual successor, Oswald, who succeeded in re-establishing Northumbrian supremacy. Oswald and Edwin were, however, from rival Northumbrian dynasties – Edwin had exiled Oswald – so, presumably, it was as a conciliatory gesture towards Oswald that Penda killed Edwin’s son, Eadfrith, who had previously surrendered to him (mentioned by Bede above).
On 5th August 642, Penda’s forces defeated the Northumbrians “in a great battle … at a place called in the English tongue Maserfelth” (HE III, 9). Oswald was killed – “the king who slew him [i.e. Penda] commanded his head, and hands, with the arms, to be cut off from the body, and set upon stakes” (HE III, 12).[*] The battle site, Maserfelth, is usually, though not with absolute certainty, identified with Oswestry (‘Oswald’s tree’).
The, somewhat erratic, Historia Brittonum (§65) seems to imply that it wasn’t until after Maserfelth (“the battle of Cocboy”) that Penda became king of Mercia:
Penda son of Pybba reigned ten years. He first separated the kingdom of the Mercians from the kingdom of the Northerners. And he killed Anna, king of the East Angles, [in 654] and Saint Oswald, king of the Northerners, [in 642] by treachery. He fought the battle of Cocboy, in which fell Eowa son of Pybba, his brother the king of the Mercians, and Oswald, king of the Northerners; and he gained the victory by diabolical art. He was not baptized and never believed in God.
This is echoed by another Welsh source, the Annales Cambriae, which states: “The battle of Cocboy in which Oswald king of the Northerners and Eowa king of the Mercians fell.”[*] It may well be that Penda and Eowa were joint kings of Mercia at the time – such arrangements were not uncommon in other Anglo-Saxon kingdoms – and Penda became sole king on Eowa’s death.
Round about this time (it may have been before or after Maserfelth – Bede doesn’t provide a date and other evidence, such as it is, is not conclusive): “the nation of the Mercians, under King Penda, made war on the East Angles” (HE III, 18). Sigeberht and Ecgric, the ex-king and incumbent king of the East Angles, were killed.
Penda evidently (HE III, 7) married-off his sister (her name is not recorded) to, the pagan West Saxon king, Cenwalh. Cenwalh unwisely discarded her, and took another wife. In 645, Penda drove him from Wessex. For three years, Cenwalh was an exile in East Anglia, where he had been given refuge by Anna, who had succeeded Ecgric as king there. During his time with Anna, Cenwalh was converted to Christianity, and in 648, perhaps with the help of Anna, he recovered the West Saxon throne. There is no record of any subsequent conflict between Penda and Cenwalh. Around 650, Penda attacked East Anglia and succeeded in, temporarily, expelling Anna.
Penda also harassed Northumbria. At one time, before 651, Bede reports that:
… the hostile army of the Mercians, under the command of Penda, cruelly ravaged the regions of the Northumbrians far and near, even to the royal city which has its name from Bebba, a former queen [i.e. Bamburgh]. Not being able to take it by storm or by siege, he endeavoured to burn it down; and having pulled down all the villages in the neighbourhood of the city, he brought thither an immense quantity of beams, rafters, partitions, wattles and thatch, wherewith he encompassed the place to a great height on the land side, and when he found the wind favourable, he set fire to it and attempted to burn the city.
At that time, the most reverend Bishop Aidan [bishop of Lindisfarne, d.651] was dwelling in the Isle of Farne, which is about two miles from the city; for thither he was wont often to retire to pray in solitude and silence; and, indeed, this lonely dwelling of his is to this day shown in that island. When he saw the flames of fire and the smoke carried by the wind rising above the city walls, he is said to have lifted up his eyes and hands to heaven, and cried with tears, “Behold, Lord, how great evil is wrought by Penda!” These words were hardly uttered, when the wind immediately veering from the city, drove back the flames upon those who had kindled them, so that some being hurt, and all afraid, they forebore any further attempts against the city, which they perceived to be protected by the hand of God.HE III, 16
The Northumbrian king Oswiu did not have as much authority as his brother Oswald had enjoyed. He was king in Bernicia only. In 651 Oswiu had the king of Diera, the other half of Northumbria, murdered. Oswald’s son, Œthelwald, then appears as king of Diera. Later events tend to suggest, however, that Œthelwald owed his position to the support of Penda, rather than the benevolence of, his uncle, Oswiu.
The several different peoples who occupied the eastern Midlands, the buffer between Mercia and East Anglia, were collectively known as the Middle Angles. In 653 Penda made his son, Peada, who was, says Bede (HE III, 21), “an excellent youth, and most worthy of the name and office of a king”, ruler of the Middle Angles. (There is no evidence that the Middle Angles had been ruled as a single unit before this.) Peada promptly visited Oswiu:
… requesting to have his daughter Alhflæd given him to wife; but he could not obtain his desire unless he would receive the faith of Christ, and be baptized, with the nation which he governed. When he heard the preaching of the truth, the promise of the heavenly kingdom, and the hope of resurrection and future immortality, he declared that he would willingly become a Christian, even if he did not obtain the maiden; being chiefly prevailed on to receive the faith by King Oswiu’s son Alhfrith, who was his brother-in-law and friend, for he had married his sister Cyneburh, the daughter of King Penda.HE III, 21
The newly baptized Peada, accompanied by four priests, journeyed to his new realm.
The aforesaid priests, arriving in the province with the prince, preached the Word, and were heard willingly; and many, as well of the nobility as the common sort, renouncing the abominations of idolatry, were daily washed in the fountain of the faith.
Nor did King Penda forbid the preaching of the Word even among his own people, the Mercians, if any were willing to hear it; but, on the contrary, he hated and despised those whom he perceived to be without the works of faith, when they had once received the faith of Christ, saying, that they were contemptible and wretched who scorned to obey their God, in whom they believed. These things were set on foot two years before the death of King Penda.HE III, 21
In 654 Penda attacked the East Angles, killing their king, Anna. It will soon become apparent that Anna’s successor, his brother, Æthelhere, was quite possibly appointed by Penda.
After a period of seemingly peaceful toleration, in which a daughter and a son of Penda married a son and a daughter of Oswiu, Penda renewed his campaign against Oswiu.
… King Oswiu was exposed to the cruel and intolerable invasions of Penda, king of the Mercians, whom we have so often mentioned, and who had slain his brother; at length, compelled by his necessity, he promised to give him countless royal ornaments and gifts, greater than can be believed, to purchase peace; provided that he would return home, and cease to waste and utterly destroy the provinces of his kingdom.HE III, 24
A somewhat confused report in the Historia Brittonum (§§64–65) suggests that Penda and his allies, “the kings of the Britons”, besieged Oswiu in a stronghold called Iudeu (widely, but by no means certainly, identified with Stirling): “Then Oswiu delivered all the wealth, which was with him in the city, to Penda; who distributed it among the kings of the Britons; that is the ‘restitution of Iudeu’.” It may have been at Iudeu that Oswiu was obliged to hand over his son, Ecgfrith, to Penda as a hostage – the boy being sent into the care of Penda’s wife in Mercia.
Bede, however, says that Penda would not to come to terms with Oswiu:
The pagan king refused to grant his request, for he had resolved to blot out and extirpate all his nation, from the highest to the lowest; whereupon King Oswiu had recourse to the protection of the Divine pity for deliverance from his barbarous and pitiless foe, and binding himself by a vow, said, “If the pagan will not accept our gifts, let us offer them to Him that will, the Lord our God.” He then vowed, that if he should win the victory, he would dedicate his daughter to the Lord in holy virginity, and give 12 pieces of land whereon to build monasteries. After this he gave battle with a very small army; indeed, it is reported that the pagans had an army thirty times larger; for they had 30 legions, drawn up under most noted commanders. King Oswiu and his son Alhfrith met them with a very small army, as has been said, but trusting in Christ as their Leader; his other son, Ecgfrith, was at that time kept as a hostage in the province of the Mercians, at the court of Queen Cynewise. King Oswald’s son Œthelwald, who ought to have helped them, was on the enemy’s side, and led them on to fight against his country and his uncle; although at the very time of fighting he withdrew from the battle, and awaited the outcome in a place of safety. —
— The engagement began, the pagans were put to flight or killed, the 30 royal commanders, who had come to Penda’s assistance, were almost all of them slain; among whom was Æthelhere, brother and successor to Anna, king of the East Angles. He [Penda] had been the occasion of the war, and was now killed, having lost his army and auxiliaries.[*] The battle was fought near the river Winwæd [unidentified], which then, owing to the great rains, was in flood, and had overflowed its banks, so that many more were drowned in the flight than destroyed in battle by the sword.[*]… King Oswiu concluded this war in the region of Loidis [Leeds], in the thirteenth year of his reign, on the 17th of the Kalends of December [i.e. 15th November, the year being 655], to the great benefit of both nations; for he delivered his own people from the hostile depredations of the pagans, and, having made an end of their heathen chief, converted the Mercians and the adjacent provinces to the grace of the Christian faith.HE III, 24
Bede includes Edwin and Oswald, Oswiu’s predecessors, in a list (HE II, 5) of seven Anglo-Saxon kings who secured the overlordship of all the English kingdoms south of “the river Humber and the borders contiguous to it” – a distinction later given the title Bretwalda by the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle. Penda does not feature in the list, but at the time of his death he was certainly the most powerful of the Anglo-Saxon kings (as testified by the coalition he mustered for the final showdown with Oswiu). Bede, being both Christian and Northumbrian, can hardly be described as an impartial reporter, and he tends to depict the contest between Penda and Oswiu as ‘belligerent pagan baddy’ versus ‘decent Christian goody’. It seems reasonable, though, to suppose that it was actually a war fought with equal vehemence by two equally ambitious rulers. After Penda’s death, Oswiu secured control of all Northumbria, annexed Mercia and acquired overlordship of the other southern English kingdoms. He is the final name on Bede’s list, and, consequently, the seventh Bretwalda listed by the Chronicle.[*]
655 – 658 Northumbrian rule
In 653, Penda’s son, Peada, had introduced Christianity to Middle Anglia (where he ruled for his father) as a condition of his marriage to Oswiu’s daughter, Alhflæd. Bede reports that Peada:
… received four priests, who by reason of their learning and good life were deemed proper to instruct and baptize his nation … These priests were Cedd and Adda, and Betti and Diuma; the last of whom was by nation a Scot [i.e. an Irishman], the others English… But when he [Penda] was slain [15th November 655], and the most Christian king, Oswiu, succeeded him in the throne [i.e. he annexed Mercia] … Diuma, one of the aforesaid four priests, was made bishop of the Middle Angles and also of the Mercians, being ordained by Bishop Finan [bishop of Lindisfarne]; for the scarcity of priests made it necessary that one prelate should be set over two peoples.HE III, 21
… King Oswiu ruled the nation of the Mercians, as well as the other peoples of the southern provinces, for three years after King Penda was killed … At this time he gave to the above-mentioned Peada, son of King Penda, because he was his kinsman, the kingdom of the Southern Mercians, consisting, as is said, of five thousand families, divided by the river Trent from the Northern Mercians, whose land contains 7 thousand families; but Peada was foully slain in the following spring [656], by the treachery, as is said, of his wife, during the very time of the Easter festival.HE III, 24
658 – 675 Wulfhere
Son of Penda.
Bede states that:
Three years after the death of King Penda, the leaders of the nation of the Mercians, Immin, and Eafa, and Eadberht, rebelled against King Oswiu, setting up for their king, Wulfhere, son to the said Penda, a youth whom they had kept concealed; and expelling the ealdormen of the foreign king, they bravely recovered at once their liberty and their lands; and being thus free, together with their king, they rejoiced to serve Christ the true King, for the sake of an everlasting kingdom in heaven. This king ruled the nation of the Mercians 17 years …HE III, 24
Having liberated Mercia, Wulfhere proceeded to expand his borders and establish his supremacy over the other southern English kingdoms.
The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, s.a. 661, records an offensive against the West Saxons: “and Wulfhere son of Penda committed ravage on Ashdown.[*]… And Wulfhere son of Penda committed ravage on Wight, and gave the people of Wight to Æthelwold, king of the South Saxons, because Wulfhere had received him at baptism.”[*] Æthelwold is called Æthelwalh by Bede, who says (HE IV, 13) that Wulfhere, in fact, gave Æthelwalh: “the province of the Meonware, in the country of the West Saxons” (i.e. the Meon valley, in what is now Hampshire, opposite the Isle of Wight), as well as the Isle of Wight (which still had its own king at this time).
In 664 a devastating plague struck Britain. At the time, Sigehere and Sæbbi were co-kings of the East Saxons, but they were: “subject to Wulfhere, king of the Mercians” (HE III, 30). Cedd, bishop of the East Saxons, died of the plague. In the hope of fending off the sickness, Sigehere led a pagan revival in his territory. Wulfhere sent Jaruman, bishop of the Mercians (including the Middle Angles and also Lindsey): “to correct their error, and recall the province to the true faith. He [Jaruman] acted with much discretion, as I was informed by a priest who bore him company in that journey … and travelling through all the country, far and near, brought back both the people and the aforesaid king to the way of righteousness … Having thus accomplished their works, the priests and teachers returned home with joy.” (HE III, 30). When the bishop of Winchester, Wine, was expelled by the West Saxon king, Cenwalh, probably in 666, he: “took refuge with Wulfhere, king of the Mercians, of whom he purchased for money the see of the city of London [chief town of the East Saxons], and remained bishop thereof till his death.” (HE III, 7).
In 666, Wilfrid, at that time bishop of York designate, returned from Gaul, where he had been ordained, to find that Chad (brother of Cedd) had been made bishop of York during his, prolonged, absence. Stephen the Priest, Wilfrid’s biographer, says (Ch.14) that Wilfrid: “returned to his post of abbot of the monastery and humbly dwelt once more in Ripon for 3 years, except for the frequent occasions when Wulfhere, king of the Mercians, out of sincere affection for him, invited him into his realm to fulfil various episcopal duties.” Bishop Jaruman had died, but, for the time being there was no archbishop of Canterbury to ordain a replacement, so Wilfrid was ‘temping’ in Mercia. Stephen continues: “The Lord raised up for himself this most kindly monarch, who, amongst his other good deeds, for the benefit of his soul, granted our bishop many pieces of land in various places, on which he forthwith founded monasteries for the servants of God.”
In 669, Theodore (a monk from Tarsus who had been selected and ordained by the pope) at last arrived in Britain to begin his tenure as archbishop of Canterbury. Theodore judged that Chad’s position at York was illegitimate, and he had to relinquish it to Wilfrid. Mercia needed a bishop, so Wulfhere asked Theodore:
… that a bishop should be given to him and his people; but Theodore would not ordain a new one for them, but requested of King Oswiu that Chad might be their bishop. He then lived in retirement at his monastery, which is at Lastingham, while Wilfrid administered the bishopric of York, and of all the Northumbrians, and likewise of the Picts, as far as King Oswiu was able to extend his dominions… Chad having received the bishopric of the nation of the Mercians and of the people of Lindsey, took care to administer it with great perfection of life, according to the example of the ancient fathers. King Wulfhere also gave him land of the extent of 50 families, to build a monastery, at the place called Ad Barvae, that is ‘At the Wood’ [Barrow on Humber?], in the province of Lindsey, wherein traces of the monastic life instituted by him continue to this day.
He had his episcopal see in the place called Lichfield, in which he also died, and was buried, and where the see of the succeeding bishops of that province [i.e. Mercia] continues to this day.Bede, HE IV, 3
Chad died in 672.
In his place, Theodore ordained Wynfrith, a man of good and sober life, who presided, like his predecessors, in the office of bishop for the provinces of the Mercians, the Middle Angles, and the people of Lindsey; of all which, Wulfhere, who was still living, was king.HE IV, 3
Lindsey covered much of modern-day Lincolnshire – indeed, it is named after the Roman name for Lincoln (Lindum Colonia). Its borders are fairly precisely known: the river Humber to the north; the sea to the east; the Foss Dyke and river Witham to the south; in the west, the river Trent, but including the Isle of Axholme, in the marshes (now drained) to the west of the Trent. Bede refers to Lindsey in the way that he refers to kingdoms, but he does not mention any kings of Lindsey. Lindsey was evidently, however, a kingdom. The pedigree of a king of Lindsey called Aldfrith appears in the Anglian Collection, though his reign cannot be securely dated.[*] Lindsey has no recorded independent history. From 627 – its earliest appearance in the record: “the province of Lindsey, which is the first on the south side of the river Humber, stretching as far as the sea” (HE II, 16) – it appears as a satellite of either Northumbria, as was the case in 627, or, as here in Wulfhere’s day, Mercia.
The Mildrith Legend texts provide some details of relations between Mercia and Kent. Wulfhere was married to Eormenhild, daughter of Eorcenberht, king of Kent. Wulfhere’s brother, Merewalh, was married to Domne (‘Lady’) Eafe, daughter of Eorcenberht’s brother. In one of the Mildrith Legend texts, found in the Historia Regum, Merewalh is called “king of the Mercians”. In two other texts[*], however, it is made clear that he ruled a western part of Mercian territory, i.e. the Westerna, usually called the Magonsæte (Herefordshire and southern Shropshire).
Eorcenberht died in 664, and was succeeded by his son, Egbert. Egbert was involved in the murder of his two cousins, Æthelberht and Æthelred, the brothers of Domne Eafe, which is the central event of the Mildrith Legend. Merewalh and Domne Eafe had separated by this time, and, in recompense for the murders, Egbert gave Domne Eafe land on the Isle of Thanet, where she founded a monastery (Minster Abbey), and became its first abbess. (Her daughter, Mildrith, succeeded her.) Egbert died in 673. The date of the succession of his brother, Hlothhere, is, however, somewhat uncertain. The dynastic rivalries apparent from the Mildrith Legend may have resulted in a dispute over the kingship. Possibly Wulfhere opposed Hlothhere’s succession, and it may be that Kent was without a king of its own for a year, leaving Wulfhere in control. What is clear is that, about the time of Egbert’s death, Surrey, which had been in Egbert’s hands, was taken-over by Wulfhere – a charter (S1165) records a land-grant to the monastery of Chertsey made by one Frithuwald, who was ruling Surrey as Wulfhere’s sub-king (subregulus). The grant was witnessed by a further three sub-kings (Osric, Wigheard, and Æthelwald), whose provinces are not named, and confirmed by Wulfhere at his residence at Thame, Oxfordshire.
There is no direct evidence of Wulfhere’s involvement in East Anglia, nor does Bede place him in his list (HE II, 5) of overlords of the southern English (i.e. south of the Humber) – and, consequently, he is not named as a Bretwalda by the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle – but it seems very likely that in 673 Wulfhere was, indeed, in that position. The following year, being “proud of heart and insatiable in spirit”, says Stephen the Priest (Ch.20), Wulfhere decided to extend his overlordship north of the Humber also. Accordingly, he “roused up all the southern nations” and invaded Northumbria. Wulfhere’s plan went woefully awry. The Northumbrian king, Ecgfrith, “by the help of God overthrew them with his tiny force. Countless numbers were slain, the king [i.e. Wulfhere] was put to flight and his kingdom laid under tribute”. As a result of Wulfhere’s defeat, Lindsey was taken back into Northumbrian ownership.[*]
Wulfhere’s grip on power in southern England had been loosened, and in 675 he would appear to have faced a West Saxon challenge: “Wulfhere son of Penda and Æscwine [“son of Cenfus” adds MS E] fought at Biedanheafde [unidentified]; and the same year Wulfhere died, and Æthelred succeeded to the kingdom.” (ASC s.a. 675).[*] Bede records Wulfhere’s death only in the annalistic summary at the end of HE (V, 24): “In the year 675, Wulfhere, king of the Mercians, when he had reigned 17 years, died and left the government to his brother Æthelred.”
675 – 704 Æthelred (St Ethelred)
Son of Penda.
Mercian authority over the other major English kingdoms south of the Humber would appear to have crumbled following the defeat of the combined southern forces of Wulfhere, Æthelred’s predecessor and brother, by, the Northumbrian king, Ecgfrith. Indeed, Stephen the Priest (Ch.20) says that, as a result of the defeat, Mercia was “laid under tribute” to Northumbria.
Without further explanation, Bede reports (HE IV, 12):
In the year of our Lord 676, when Æthelred, king of the Mercians, ravaged Kent with a hostile army, and profaned churches and monasteries, without regard to pity, or the fear of God, in the general destruction he laid waste the city of Rochester; Putta, who was bishop, was absent at that time, but when he understood that his church was ravaged, and everything taken away from it, he went to Seaxwulf, bishop of the Mercians, and having received of him a certain church, and a small piece of land, ended his days there in peace; in no way endeavouring to restore his bishopric …
If Æthelred’s attack was an attempt to re-establish Mercian overlordship of Kent it would appear to have failed – a charter of the Kentish king, Hlothhere, dated May 679 (S8) exhibits no sign that Æthelred had any authority in Kent. Perhaps Æthelred’s purpose was rather more limited – to deter Hlothhere from attempting to take back Surrey or extend his influence in London (it is clear, from a law-code in the names of Hlothhere and his nephew, Eadric, that the Kentish kings had commercial interests in London).
At some stage, Æthelred had married Ecgfrith’s sister, Osthryth. Nevertheless, in 679, Æthelred and Ecgfrith fought “a great battle … near the river Trent” (HE IV, 21), from which Æthelred emerged as the victor. Ecgfrith’s young brother, Ælfwine, was killed in the fighting. In order to prevent the situation escalating into a protracted, bloody, feud, Theodore, archbishop of Canterbury, brokered a peace agreement. Æthelred paid the appropriate wergild to compensate Ecgfrith for the loss of Ælfwine: “and this peace continued long after between those kings and between their kingdoms.” (HE IV, 21). When Wulfhere had been defeated by Ecgfrith in 674, Lindsey (the northern half of modern-day Lincolnshire) had been taken into Northumbrian ownership. As a result of his victory on the Trent, Æthelred regained Lindsey, which thereafter stayed in Mercian hands.
It seems likely that, after securing Lindsey, Æthelred pushed his area of authority into, what is now, northern Wiltshire, at the expense of the West Saxons – he features in charters dated 681 (S71, S73), granting land to Abbot Aldhelm of Malmesbury, in company with his “relative”, Cenfrith. (Cenfrith is described as comes and patricius, titles borrowed from Roman usage, indicating a person of rank and command, equating to the Anglo-Saxon ‘ealdorman’.)
When, in 681, Wilfrid, bishop of York, was expelled from Northumbria by Ecgfrith, he found refuge, according to Wilfrid’s biographer, Stephen the Priest (Ch.40), with a nephew of Æthelred’s called Berhtwald. But when Æthelred and Osthryth heard about it, they pressured Berhtwald (“if he valued his own safety”) into expelling Wilfrid from Mercian territory – “This they did to flatter King Ecgfrith”, says Stephen. (Wilfrid made his way to Centwine, king of the West Saxons.) Perhaps it was this same Berhtwald who, on 30th July 685, granted land to Abbot Aldhelm (S1169) as Æthelred’s sub-king.[*]
In 685, the West Saxon Cædwalla began his meteoric career. In 688, by which time he was in control of all the English south of the Thames, and probably the East Saxons too, he abdicated and travelled to Rome. (He was baptized there, and died a week later.) At the time of Cædwalla’s ascendency, the East Saxons were ruled by kings Sigehere and Sæbbi. Charter evidence indicates that Sigehere aligned himself with Cædwalla and assisted him in his take-over of Kent (S233). Sæbbi, on the other hand, possibly didn’t support Cædwalla. In 689, Swæfheard, Sæbbi’s son, was sharing the rule of Kent with Oswine, a member of the Kentish royal family – but one “of doubtful title”, opines Bede (HE IV, 26). Both Swæfheard and Oswine recognized Æthelred as their overlord (S10, S12). Since by this time Sigehere has disappeared from history, it may be that Æthelred and Sæbbi had acted in cahoots to eradicate the influence of Cædwalla and Sigehere, and plant rulers of their own selection in Kent. However, in late-690 or 691, Wihtred – the “lawful king” of Kent, says Bede (HE IV, 26) – would seem to have overthrown Oswine. Swæfheard, though, retained his share of the kingdom until sometime between July 692 and July 694, at which time Wihtred became sole king of Kent – neither Sæbbi nor Æthelred retaining any authority there.
The kingdom of the East Saxons included the, presumably, once independent province of the Middle Saxons (modern-day Middlesex and south-eastern Hertfordshire), and London was the main East Saxon town. Charters indicate that Æthelred acquired authority in London and the Middle Saxon lands, but not in the East Saxon heartland. Possibly, Pæogthath, who appears with the title comes, in the company of one of Sæbbi’s successors, granting land in Twickenham to the bishop of London, “with the authorisation of King Æthelred” (S65, dated 13th June 704), was the Mercian representative in Middle Saxon territory.
Surrey had been in Wulfhere’s possession in about 673 (S1165), by 688 it was in Cædwalla’s hands (S235), and by 693 Æthelred was in control there (S1248).
Stephen the Priest (Ch.43) says that Archbishop Theodore, in his old age and bad health, was troubled by his conscience for his complicity in Wilfrid’s overthrow.[*] In about 686–7, having made his own peace with Wilfrid, Theodore wrote to various worthies, urging reconciliation with Wilfrid. Stephen quotes the letter written by Theodore to Æthelred, which commences:
To the most glorious and excellent Æthelred, king of the Mercians, Theodore, by the grace of God, Archbishop – Everlasting salvation be yours in the Lord. Most beloved son, may your wondrous holiness know that I have made peace in Christ with the venerable Bishop Wilfrid, and therefore, beloved, I urge you with paternal love, and I charge you by the love of Christ, to grant your protection to his holy devotion to the utmost of your ability, with the help of God, all your life long, as you have always done; because for a long time, while deprived of his own possessions, he has laboured much in the Lord among the heathen…
Accordingly, Æthelred:
… received our bishop gladly and in a canonical manner, returned him many monasteries and lands in his own right, treated him with the utmost respect, and continued his faithful friend without ceasing until the end of his life.
Ecgfrith’s successor, Aldfrith, also responded favourably to Theodore’s entreaties, and, in 687, recalled Wilfrid to Northumbria. In 692, however, Wilfrid was expelled again. He “went to his faithful friend Æthelred, king of the Mercians, who received him with great honour”, says Stephen (Ch.45). Æthelred gave Wilfrid employment as bishop of the Middle Angles. Archbishop Theodore had died on 19th September 690, and his successor, Berhtwald, would not be in place until 31st August 693. The bishop of the Hwicce, Bosel, had become too ill to perform his duties, and so, in the absence of an archbishop, Wilfrid, “by order of King Æthelred” (HE IV, 23), consecrated Oftfor, Bosel’s replacement.
Wilfrid spent some eleven years under Æthelred’s wing, but he clearly hadn’t abandoned his claim to the see of York. In about 703, after Aldfrith and Archbishop Berhtwald had tried to force Wilfrid to give-up all his property except the monastery at Ripon (North Yorkshire), where he was to remain quietly and not carry out any duties as a bishop, Wilfrid, with the backing of his loyal friend Æthelred, decided to plead his case before the pope.
Bede brings his Ecclesiastical History to a conclusion with a annalistic summary (HE V, 24). It contains the entry: “In the year 697, Queen Osthryth was murdered by her own nobles, to wit, the nobles of the Mercians.” Nothing else is known about this occurrence. The next-but-one entry reads: “In the year 704, Æthelred, after he had reigned 31 years over the nation of the Mercians, became a monk, and gave up the kingdom to Cenred.”
704 – 709 Cenred
Son of Wulfhere.[*]
There are no chronicled incidents, but Cenred would appear to have had his work cut out fighting the Welsh. Felix, in his ‘Life’ of St Guthlac, begins an anecdote: “Now it happened in the days of Cenred king of the Mercians, while the Britons, the implacable enemies of the Saxon race, were troubling the English with their attacks, their pillaging and their devastations of the people …[*]” (Ch.34).
Charter evidence indicates that Cenred continued the relationship with the East Saxons established by his uncle and predecessor, Æthelred – that is, he had authority in London and Middle Saxon territory, but not in the East Saxon heartland.[*] The control of Surrey appears to have remained a contentious issue. The purpose of a council at Brentford – mentioned in a letter from Waldhere, bishop of London, to Berhtwald, archbishop of Canterbury, written in 704 or 705 – may have been to address the issue. Certainly, not long after, Surrey was transferred from the London diocese to the, West Saxon, Winchester diocese.[*]
Meanwhile, Bishop Wilfrid had been in Rome, putting the case for his reinstatement at York to the pope. The pope (John VI) had composed an open letter (Vita Sancti Wilfrithi, Ch.54) to Æthelred, who was still king of Mercia at the time the letter was written, and Aldfrith, the Northumbrian king who had, back in 692, expelled Wilfrid, in which he ordered Archbishop Berhtwald to convene a synod to finally work out an agreement that was acceptable to all parties. In 705, Wilfrid arrived back in England. Stephen the Priest reports that: “our holy bishop came to King Æthelred who had once reigned over the kingdom of the Mercians and was always a most faithful friend of his. The king actually wept through excess of joy; they kissed and embraced each other, and Wilfrid was as usual most honourably received by his friend.” (Ch.57). At Æthelred’s insistence, Cenred agreed to support Wilfrid. Aldfrith, though, was immovable – he would have nothing to do with Wilfrid. By the end of 705, however, Aldfrith was dead, and Berhtwald held a synod the following year, in the reign of Aldfrith’s son, Osred. The matter was settled – Wilfrid returned to Northumbria, though he was not restored to the see of York[*].
In 709:
… Cenred, who had for some time nobly governed the kingdom of the Mercians, much more nobly quitted the sceptre of his kingdom. For he went to Rome, and there receiving the tonsure and becoming a monk, when Constantine was pope [708–715], he continued to his last hour in prayer and fasting and alms-deeds at the threshold of the Apostles. He was succeeded in the throne by Ceolred, the son of Æthelred, who had governed the kingdom before Cenred.Bede HE V, 19
Cenred was accompanied to Rome by a rather obscure East Saxon ruler called Offa, who similarly became a monk and spent the rest of his life there.[*] Actually, a note in the Liber Pontificalis (Book of the Popes) suggests that neither Cenred nor Offa survived for very long in Rome: “In his [Constantine’s] time two kings of the Saxons came with many others to pray to the apostles; just as they were hoping, their lives quickly came to an end.” It seems a reasonable bet that the “two kings of the Saxons” were Cenred and Offa.
709 – 716 Ceolred
Son of Æthelred.
It is said that Ceolred’s mother was not Osthryth, the wife of Æthelred who was murdered in 697. Assuming that to be true, and that Ceolred was born in wedlock to a subsequent wife, then he cannot have been older than eleven when he succeeded to the throne. Bede says nothing about him. He evidently retained the overlordship of London and the Middle Saxons that his father established and Cenred continued,[*] and at some point during his reign, his eventual successor, Æthelbald, was driven into exile.[*]
Stephen the Priest puts words in the mouth of Bishop Wilfrid: “our two abbots Tibba and Eabba are here [Ripon], sent from Ceolred, king of the Mercians, asking me to go to confer with him, and they have persuaded me to consent to this for the sake of the position of our monasteries in his kingdom; for he promises to order his whole life after my instruction.” (Ch.64). Ceolred had just become king at this time. Unfortunately, since the new king was evidently in dire need of the bishop’s “instruction”, Wilfrid died whilst en route to meet with him[*]. The ‘Apostle of Germany’, St Boniface, and a number of other Continental bishops, sent a long letter of criticism to Ceolred’s successor, Æthelbald, in which the following passage appears:
… after the Apostolic Pope Saint Gregory sent preachers of the Catholic faith from the Apostolic See, and converted the race of the English to the true God, the privileges of the churches in the kingdom of the English remained untouched and unviolated up to the time of Ceolred, king of the Mercians, and Osred, king of the Deirans and Bernicians. At the suggestion of the devil these two kings showed, by their accursed example, that these two deadliest of sins could be committed publicly against the evangelical and apostolic precepts of our Saviour. And lingering in these sins, namely lust and adultery with nuns and the destruction of monasteries, condemned by a just judgment of God, they were cast down from their royal thrones in this life, and surprised by an early and terrible death; deprived of the light eternal they were plunged into the depths of hell and the bottom of the abyss.[*]
The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle entry for the year 715 reads: “In this year Ine [king of the West Saxons] and Ceolred fought at Woddesbeorge.” Woddesbeorge (or Wodnesbeorge), i.e. ‘Woden’s barrow’, is identified with a Neolithic long barrow known as Adam’s Grave, Wiltshire. The outcome of the battle is unknown.
The Chronicle entry for the next year, 716, reports: “Ceolred, king of the Mercians, died, and his body lies in Lichfield, and Æthelred’s, the son of Penda, at Bardney.[*] Then Æthelbald succeeded to the kingdom of the Mercians, and held it 41 winters.”[*] The previously cited letter of Boniface et al. to Æthelbald describes the manner of Ceolred’s death:
… while Ceolred, your worthy highness’ predecessor – as those who were present testify – was feasting splendidly among his nobles, an evil spirit, which by its persuasions had seduced him into the audacious course of breaking the law of God, suddenly turned him in his sin to madness; so that without penitence and confession, insane and distraught, conversing with the devils and cursing the priests of God, he departed from this light assuredly to the torments of hell.
716 – 757 Æthelbald
Son of Alweo, Alweo of Eowa (Penda’s brother).
The monk Felix, in his Vita (Life) of St Guthlac, written about 730–740, says that Æthelbald had been driven into exile by his predecessor, Ceolred. Æthelbald would visit Guthlac – a reclusive monk living in the Middle Anglian fens at Crowland, in modern Lincolnshire, and himself of Mercian royal descent with a military background[*] – for advice and guidance. Guthlac is said to have counselled him to be patient because he had prayed on his behalf, and God would help him gain the kingdom:
… He will bow down the necks of your enemies beneath your heel and you shall own their possessions; those who hate you shall flee from your face and you shall see their backs; and your sword shall overcome your foes.Vita Sancti Guthlaci Ch.49
Guthlac died in 714 and was buried in his chapel. A year later, his body, when it was being transferred to a new tomb, was found to be incorrupt (a sure sign of saintliness). Guthlac is purported to have appeared to Æthelbald in a vision, prophesying his succession to the throne within a year – “and now, built around it [Guthlac’s tomb], we behold wonderful structures and ornamentations put up by King Æthelbald in honour of the divine power: here [at Crowland] the triumphant body of the great man rests in blessedness until this present time” (Ch.51).
Anglo-Saxon Chronicle s.a. 716: “Ceolred, king of the Mercians, died … Then Æthelbald succeeded to the kingdom of the Mercians, and held it 41 winters. Æthelbald was son of Alweo, Alweo of Eowa, Eowa of Pybba[*]”.
Felix calls the Britons: “the implacable enemies of the Saxon race [i.e. the English]” (Ch.34). Indicating the year 722, the Annales Cambriae record: “the battle of Hehil among the Cornish, the battle of Garth Maelog, the battle of Pencon among the south Britons, and the Britons were the victors in those three battles.” Clearly, it was the English who were defeated in all the battles (the site of none of them is known with certainty). Since it was the Cornish Britons who were the victors at Hehil, it would have been the West Saxons who were the losers. The “south Britons” are the natives of southern Wales, and the English beaten at Pencon and Garth Maelog would have been the Mercians.
Bede reports (HE V, 23) that in 731, the time he was writing, all the “southern provinces, as far as the boundary formed by the river Humber, with their several kings, are subject to Æthelbald, king of the Mercians.” Remarkably, though, Bede had previously (HE II, 5) not included Æthelbald in his list of similarly qualified overlords. Similarly, the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, which grants the title Bretwalda to all the kings in Bede’s list of overlords of the southern English, does not accord the honour to Æthelbald – although, in a charter of 736 (S89), he is styled rex Britanniæ, which, it might reasonably be supposed, is the Latin equivalent of Bretwalda.[*] At any rate, Bede doesn’t give any indication of the means by which Æthelbald achieved such pre-eminence, but messy successions after the death of Wihtred in Kent (725) and abdication of Ine in Wessex (726), both of whom had reigned for over thirty years, probably provided the opportunity.
The boundary between Mercia and Wessex was, in effect, marked by the rivers Thames and Avon. The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, s.a. 733, notes that “Æthelbald captured Somerton”. Somerton (in Somerset) was in West Saxon territory, indeed, Æthelweard (II, 14) calls it a “royal vill”. Somerset wasn’t the only area where Æthelbald appropriated territory from the West Saxons – he gave the monastery of Cookham, in Berkshire, to the church of Canterbury (S1258).[*] An entry in the ‘Continuation’ of Bede’s Historia Ecclesiastica reports, s.a. 740, that: “Æthelbald, king of the Mercians, through wicked deceit, wasted part of Northumbria, their king, Eadberht, with his army, being employed against the Picts.” Possibly Æthelbald was, here also, intent on making territorial gains at the expense of his neighbour. The freedom with which his charters show Æthelbald operating in the province of the Middle Saxons and London, indicate that ownership of those territories finally passed from Essex to Mercia during his reign.
In 746 or 7, Archbishop Boniface and a number of other Continental bishops sent a joint letter to Æthelbald. It begins innocuously enough, with compliments:
We have heard that thou givest many alms, and upon this we congratulate thee … We have heard too that thou dost strongly check theft and iniquity, perjury and rapine, and art known to be a defender of widows and the poor and hast peace established in thy kingdom. And in this too, praising God we have rejoiced …
However, this is just a preamble to the main reasons for the letter:
But among these reports one rumour of evil character concerning your highness’ life has come to our hearing; we were cast down by it, and wish that it were not true. From many sources we have learned that thou hast never taken a wife in lawful marriage… If thou hast determined to act thus because of chastity and abstinence, that thou mayst abstain from intercourse with a wife for the love and fear of God, and hast shown this to be something truly accomplished for God’s sake, we rejoice thereat; such a course deserves not blame, but praise. If, however, as many say – God forbid – thou hast never taken a lawful wife nor preserved a chaste abstinence for God’s sake, but, under the sway of lust, thou hast destroyed by licence and adultery thy glory and renown before God and men, we are greatly grieved: such conduct must be regarded as criminal in the sight of God and destructive of your reputation before men. And what is worse, those who tell us this, add that this crime of deepest ignominy has been committed in convents with holy nuns and virgins consecrated to God. There can be no doubt that this is a twofold sin… Fornication is more grave and repellant than almost any other sin and can truly be called a noose of death and a pit of hell and an abyss of perdition… If indeed the race of the English – as is noised abroad through these provinces, and is cast up to us in Francia and in Italy, and made a reproach even by the heathen – spurn lawful wedlock and live a foul life in adultery and licence like the people of Sodom, from such intercourse with harlots, a people degenerate, unworthy, mad with lust, will be born, and in the end the whole nation, turning to lower and baser ways, will cease to be strong in war or steadfast in faith, or honourable before men or beloved of God … Besides, we have been told that thou hast violated many privileges of churches and monasteries, and taken from them many revenues. And this, if it be true, must be regarded as a great sin … And it is said that thy prefects and ealdormen [comites] use greater violence and oppression towards monks and priests, than other Christian kings have ever done before… And so, beloved son, putting forth just counsel, we beg and pray through the living God and through His Son Jesus Christ, and through the Holy Spirit, that thou mayst remember, how fugitive is this present life, and how short and momentary is the delight of the impure flesh, and how ignominious it is for a man with his short life to leave an evil example for ever to posterity. Begin, therefore, to order thy life by better laws and to correct the past errors of youth, so that here thou mayst have praise before men and for the future rejoice in glory eternal. That thy highness may fare well and advance in good morals is our wish.[*]
Æthelbald may have been stung by this criticism, since, in 749, he issued a grant of privileges to the ecclesiastical establishments of Mercia (S92), releasing them from all obligations: “except alone those which are to be done in common and which all people are ordered to do by edict of the king, that is the building of bridges and the necessary defences of fortresses against enemies.”
Meanwhile, in 740, Cuthred had succeeded to the West Saxon throne. In 743 Æthelbald and Cuthred, together, “fought against the Welsh” – no further detail is provided by the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle. Possibly Cuthred was duty-bound to accompany Æthelbald, his overlord, on campaign. Cuthred, however, was not content to be subject to Æthelbald – the Chronicle, during its report of his accession, had commented that: “he warred boldly against Æthelbald, king of the Mercians.”[*] In 752, Cuthred: “fought at Beorhford [unidentified] against Æthelbald,[*] king of the Mercians, and put him to flight.”[*] Wessex was apparently independent of Mercia until Cuthred’s death four years later. Cuthred’s successor, Sigeberht, ruled for only a year before he was overthrown and Cynewulf took the West Saxon throne. Perhaps Cynewulf owed his position to Æthelbald’s support, since he immediately appears as witness to a charter in which Æthelbald grants land in Wiltshire to a certain Abbot Eanberht (S96) – Æthelbald is styled: “king, not only of the Mercians but also of the neighbouring peoples”. Clearly, Æthelbald was Cynewulf’s overlord. However, later the same year, 757, as reported in the ‘Continuation of Bede’: “Æthelbald, king of the Mercians, was treacherously and miserably murdered, in the night, by his own guards”. The Chronicle adds that he “was slain at Seckington [in Warwickshire]; and his body lies at Repton”.[*] Æthelbald’s killing precipitated civil war in Mercia. Cynewulf was able to capitalize on the situation. He evidently recovered territory previously lost to Mercia – he could grant land freely in Wiltshire (as demonstrated by S260, dated 758), and he took the monastery of Cookham, in Berkshire, into his own ownership.[*] He also annexed land from the Mercian sub-kingdom of the Hwicce (S265).
How the Staffordshire Hoard helmet might have looked. The Hoard contained a pair of cheek-pieces and a pair of crest terminals, which tends to suggest the remains represent just one helmet, but it is possible that there are pieces of more than one.
Photo courtesy of