WESSEX

Wessex – the kingdom of the West Saxons – would seem to have its origins in the upper Thames valley. This group of Saxons were at first called the Gewisse, and apparently only became known as the West Saxons towards the end of 7th century, by which time they had made significant territorial gains in the south and southwest. West Saxon expansion north of the Thames and Avon, though, was thwarted by the powerful kingdom of Mercia. In 825, the West Saxon king Egbert won a resounding victory over the Mercians, that allowed him to combine Kent, Essex, Sussex and Surrey into a West Saxon sub-kingdom. By this time, however, the Vikings were making their presence felt. They eventually conquered Northumbria, East Anglia and Mercia. It was Egbert’s grandson, Alfred – the only English monarch that history has honoured with the epithet ‘the Great’ – who halted their advance. The kings of Wessex would become the kings of England.

The Alfred Jewel is about 2½ inches long, 1½ inches wide and ½ an inch thick. It was ploughed-up from a Somerset field in 1693, and is now in the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford.

A teardrop-shaped rock-crystal protects a cloisonné enamel figure, the whole being encased in a gold frame. There is a decorative socket to allow the jewel to be mounted on a rod of some kind. The openwork lettering on the side of the frame reads: + AELFRED MEC HEHT GEWYRCAN (Alfred ordered me to be made). There is little doubt that the Alfred in question is King Alfred the Great (r.871–899).

King Alfred personally translated a number of books from Latin into English. In a preface to his translation of Pastoral Care, by Pope Gregory I (590–604), Alfred writes: “I will send a copy to every bishopric in my kingdom; and in each there will be an æstel worth fifty mancuses.[*] And I command in God’s name that no man may take the æstel from the book, or the book from the church.” It is not certain what an æstel is, but since the word probably derives form the Latin hastula (a little spear), it is widely supposed that it was a rod used as a pointer or placemarker. Certainly those being presented by Alfred were very expensive items. Putting two and two together, it is popularly suggested that the Alfred jewel is the terminal from such an æstel. Stretching the conjecture a little further, is the proposal that it would be appropriate to interpret the enamel figure as a personification of ‘Sight’.

King of the West Saxons

519 ? – 534 ? Cerdic

Son of Elesa.

534 ? – 560 ? Cynric

Son of Cerdic or Creoda.

The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle records the founding of Wessex in the following entries[*]:

495	In this year came two chieftains to Britain, Cerdic and Cynric his son, with 5 ships, at the place which is called Cerdices ora; and on the same day fought against the Welsh [i.e. the Britons].
The West Saxon king-list and genealogy of King Alfred (r.871–899), that serves as a preface to Manuscript A of the Chronicle, places the above event in 494, then adds:
[500]	And 6 years after they landed they subdued the West Saxons’ kingdom; and they were the first kings who conquered the West Saxons’ land from the Welsh …
A statement to the same effect is made by the late-10th century West Saxon chronicler Æthelweard.
501	In this year came Port to Britain, and his 2 sons, Bieda and Mægla, with 2 ships, at the place which is called Portes mutha [Portsmouth],[^] and there slew a very noble young British man.[*]
508	In this year Cerdic and Cynric slew a British king, whose name was Natanleod, and 5 thousand men with him; after that the land was named Natan leaga [Netley] as far as Cerdices ford [Charford].
514	In this year came the West Saxons to Britain, with 3 ships, at the place that is called Cerdices ora,  and Stuf and Wihtgar Stuf and Wihtgar, and fought against the Britons and put them to flight.[*]
519	In this year Cerdic and Cynric assumed the kingdom[^]; and in the same year they fought against the Britons, where it is now named Cerdices ford [Charford][^].
527	In this year Cerdic and Cynric fought against the Britons at the place which is called Cerdices leaga.[*]
530	In this year Cerdic and Cynric took Wihte ealond [the Isle of Wight], and slew a few men at Wihtgarabyrg.[*]
534	In this year Cerdic died, and Cynric his son succeeded to the kingdom, and reigned on for 26 winters; and they gave Wihte ealond to their two nephews, Stuf and Wihtgar.[*]
544	In this year Wihtgar died, and they buried him at Wihtgarabyrg.
552	In this year Cynric fought against the Britons at the place which is named Searobyrg [Old Sarum], and put the Britons to flight.
556	In this year Cynric and Ceawlin fought against the Britons at Beranbyrg [Barbury Castle].
560	In this year Ceawlin succeeded to the kingdom in Wessex ...

There are many problems with the story told by the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle. It implies that the Isle of Wight (Wihte ealond) and its stronghold, Wihtgarabyrg, are named from Wihtgar. They are, though, derived from the island’s Latin name: Vectis (pronounced ‘Wectis’).[*] Like Wihtgar, Natanleod and Port are also mythological characters derived from place names, rather than the reverse.[*] Indeed, by the same token, it is possible that Cerdic himself, the purported founder of the West Saxon kingdom, is an invention. The name Cerdic, however, is apparently British – a form of Ceretic (modern: Caradog) – which would, perhaps, be a strange choice for the mythological founder of a Saxon kingdom.[*] As for Cynric; whilst the Chronicle is clear that he is Cerdic’s son in the above annals, elsewhere Creoda, Cerdic’s son, is said to be Cynric’s father.

The arrival of Cerdic and Cynric is placed in 495, and, apparently, again in 514. Annal 527 may well duplicate the event recorded in 508. Similarly, the reference made in the preface to Manuscript A and by Æthelweard, dating the establishment of the West Saxon kingdom to 500, is repeated by annal 519. In short, the story is told twice – the second time nineteen years after the first.[*] This duplication has lengthened the timeframe, and accounts for the unlikely implication that Cerdic and Cynric spent twenty-four years battling against the Britons before their position was secure.

There are further chronological inconsistencies. The preface to Manuscript A of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle is one of a number of versions of a text that has been dubbed the ‘West Saxon Genealogical Regnal List’. It records the reigns of West Saxon kings (and one queen) from Cerdic to Alfred. Working backwards from the slightly firmer chronological ground of Cynegils’ reign (611–642), the regnal lengths given by the List suggest yet more possible dates for the kingdom’s beginnings. One theory that seems to be gaining favour is that the purported foundation of the West Saxon kingdom and start of Cerdic’s sixteen year reign should be located a further nineteen years later, i.e. in 538, and, consequently, Cynric’s succession dated 554.[*]

Be that as it may, the notion that Wessex was carved out from the Hampshire coast does not sit comfortably with the later, properly-historical, record, and archaeological evidence, which suggests that the original West Saxon homelands were in the upper Thames valley. Further, Bede says (HE I, 15) that the Isle of Wight, and the opposite mainland, was settled by Jutes, not Saxons. Bede also says (HE III, 7) that the West Saxons were originally called the Gewisse, and he tells (HE IV, 16) how: “After Cædwalla had obtained possession of the kingdom of the Gewisse [in 685/6], he took also the Isle of Wight … and by merciless slaughter endeavoured to destroy all the inhabitants thereof, and to place in their stead people from his own province”. Up to that time the island had had its own ruling dynasty, which Cædwalla ruthlessly crushed. Asser records that King Alfred’s grandfather (his mother’s father) was: “descended from the Goths and Jutes – of the seed, namely, of Stuf and Wihtgar” (§2).

560 ? – 591 ? Ceawlin

Son of Cynric.

The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle places Ceawlin’s accession to the West Saxon throne in 560, and indicates that he ruled for thirty-one years. In the West Saxon Genealogical Regnal List, however, his reign is given as seven or seventeen years (depending on manuscript).[*] Ceawlin’s chronology is, therefore, very uncertain.

Ceawlin emerges as the victor in the first battle recorded between two English kingdoms. The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle states, s.a. 568: “Ceawlin and Cutha fought against Æthelberht, and drove him into Kent; and slew two ealdormen at Wibbandune”.

Although the traditional identification of Wibbandune with Wimbledon is no longer considered to be acceptable, it is likely that it was in that vicinity, and that Ceawlin’s dispute with Æthelberht, king of Kent, was over the control of Surrey. According to the reign lengths given by the List, Ceawlin cannot have been king before 571, and his reign lasted no later than 589,[*] though the Chronicle apparently places the end of his reign in 591. Exactly when Æthelberht began to reign is also uncertain, but there are indications that it may have been c.590. If that really is the case, then the battle between Ceawlin and Æthelberht should probably be placed at the start of Æthelberht’s reign, c.590.

Ceawlin is second in a list of seven kings whom Bede says (HE II, 5) were recognized as overlord of all the English kingdoms south of the Humber (“the second, Cælin, king of the West Saxons, who, in their own language, is called Ceawlin”) and, consequently, also appears as the second Bretwalda listed by the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle. Ceawlin’s successor to that honour was Æthelberht.

Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, s.a. 571: “In this year Cuthwulf fought against the Britons at Bedcanforda [unidentified], and took 4 towns; Lygeanburg [Limbury, Bedfordshire], and Ægelesburg [Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire], Bænesingtun [Benson, Oxfordshire], and Egonesham [Eynsham, Oxfordshire]; and the same year he died.”

The controversial aspect of annal 571 is the implication that there was still territory controlled by the British in that area at that time.

In his The English Settlements (1986, Chapter 6, p.166), J.N.L. Myres writes: “this annal seems to describe quite clearly a movement from Middle Anglia south-westwards through the vale of Aylesbury to the upper Thames. This is, in fact, exactly the movement which successive archaeologists from E.T. Leeds [Archaeology of the Anglo-Saxon Settlements, 1913] to the present day have proposed as the main source of the Saxon concentration in this area from the fifth century onwards. It would be therefore a natural conclusion from the archaeological evidence that this entry for 571 has simply been dated by the Chronicle’s compilers a century, or a century and a half, too late. There is no reason to suppose that they had any firm basis for the date they attached to a saga story of this kind. If this emendation is accepted most of the difficulties felt by historians in its interpretation can disappear at once.” Frank Stenton (Anglo-Saxon England Third Edition, 1971, Chapter 1, pp.27–28) acknowledges the problem: “On geographical grounds, though by no means impossible, it is somewhat unlikely that at this late date a belt of unreduced British territory should have separated the Saxon settlements west of the middle Thames from those of Cambridgeshire and Bedfordshire. It is not surprising that many scholars have been disposed to deny the historical character of this annal, or at least to regard it as a misplaced tradition of events which were already remote in the year 571.” Professor Stenton, though, argues that “it is almost incredible that the battle of Bedcan ford … should have been placed out of its proper sequence”, and proposes: “that the battle of 571 meant, not the conquest of lands which had always been British, but the recovery of territory won in the first energy of the Saxon invasion and lost after the defeat at Mons Badonicus. It can at least be said that on this view the two chief objections which have been brought against the annal disappear. It ceases to imply that the British occupation of the plain beneath the Chilterns was unbroken for a century and a half after the severance of Britain from the empire. And it no longer conflicts with the archaeological evidence for an early connection between the Saxons of Berkshire and the original settlers in the valleys of the Ouse and Cam.”

Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, s.a. 577: “In this year Cuthwine and Ceawlin fought against the Britons, and they slew 3 kings, Coinmail, and Condidan, and Farinmail, at the place which is called Deorham [Dyrham, Gloucestershire], and took 3 cities from them, Gloucester, and Cirencester, and Bath.”

The significance of such a victory by the West Saxons would be that it effectively drives a wedge between the Britons of, what was to become, Wales and those in the south-western peninsula.

Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, s.a. 584: “In this year Ceawlin and Cutha fought against the Britons at the place which is named Fethanleag, and Cutha was there slain; and Ceawlin took many towns, and countless booty; and wrathful he thence returned to his own [land].[*]”

Fethanleag (which can be interpreted as ‘Battle wood’), on the strength of a 12th century reference to a wood named Fethelée, can probably be placed at Stoke Lyne, north-east Oxfordshire. Ceawlin is said to have returned home “wrathful”, which would seem to imply that his campaign was not actually a great success.

It seems that Ceawlin was overthrown in 591 – the Chronicle simply records the beginning of the reign of Ceawlin’s nephew, Ceol (son of Cutha), in that year. Then, in 592: “there was a great slaughter [“in Britain”, adds MS E] at Woddesbeorge, and Ceawlin was driven out.” Woddesbeorge (Wodnesbeorge in MS E), i.e. ‘Woden’s barrow’, is identified with a neolithic long barrow known as Adam’s Grave, in Wiltshire. Finally, in 593: “Ceawlin and Cwichelm and Crida perished”.[*]

Mainline ►

591 ? – 597 ? Ceol

Son of Cutha, Cutha of Cynric.

597 ? – 611 Ceolwulf

Son of Cutha, Cutha of Cynric.

The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle entry for 591 states: “Ceol reigned 5 years.”

Presumably Ceol was responsible for the overthrow of his uncle, Ceawlin. There is no record of his exploits.

The Chronicle annal for 597 announces: “In this year Ceolwulf began to reign in Wessex, and he constantly fought and strove against either the Angle race [i.e. the English], or against the Welsh [i.e. the Britons], or against the Picts, or against the Scots.”

And s.a. 607: “In this year Ceolwulf fought against the South Saxons.”

Ceolwulf would certainly seem to have been remembered as a considerable warrior, but, although clearly not impossible, it does seem unlikely that he had any dealings with the Picts or the Scots. In 611, Ceolwulf’s successor, Cynegils, is reported to have taken to the throne.

611 – 642 Cynegils

Son of Ceol or Ceolwulf.

The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle s.a. 611: “In this year Cynegils succeeded to the kingdom in Wessex, and held it 31 winters.”[*]

In 614: “Cynegils and Cwichelm fought at Beandune, and slew 2 thousand and 46 Welsh [Britons].” Cwichelm was apparently Cynegils’ son.[*]

In what might have been a dispute over the control of Surrey, the three brothers who ruled the East Saxons marched, perhaps in 623, against the West Saxons. It is not recorded by the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, but it is mentioned by Bede. Something else not recorded by the Chronicle, but mentioned by Bede, is that the West Saxons were not as yet known as the West Saxons – they were actually called the Gewisse. At any rate: “marching out to battle against the nation of the Gewisse, they [the three East Saxon kings] were all slain with their army.” (HE II, 5).

It would appear that the early West Saxons (or, strictly speaking, the Gewisse) also employed a system of multiple kingship – the dominant king, e.g. Cynegils, sharing his rule with kinsmen, e.g. Cwichelm. Bede reports (HE II, 9) that, in 626, “the king of the West Saxons, whose name was Cwichelm” sent, for unspecified reasons, an assassin to kill Edwin of Northumbria (who, being Bretwalda, was also overlord of the West Saxons). The assassination attempt failed, but Edwin was wounded. Following his recovery, he: “raised an army and marched against the nation of the West Saxons; and engaging in war, either slew or received in surrender all those of whom he learned that they had conspired to murder him.” Manuscript E of the Chronicle notes, s.a. 626, that Edwin: “went against the West Saxons with an army, and there slew 5 kings, and many of the people.” Edwin evidently failed to eliminate Cwichelm.

The Chronicle reports that, in 628: “Cynegils and Cwichelm fought against Penda [king of Mercia] at Cirencester, and afterwards came to an agreement.” It seems likely that Cynegils was obliged to cede Cirencester, and territory along the Severn, to Penda.[*]

The threat posed by Penda, who killed Edwin in 633, probably prompted Cynegils to seek an alliance with Edwin’s eventual successor, Oswald (who was Christian). Bede reports that:

… the nation of the West Saxons, in former times called the Gewisse, in the reign of Cynegils, received the faith of Christ through the preaching of Bishop Birinus, who came into Britain by the counsel of Pope Honorius [625–638]; having promised in his presence that he would sow the seed of the holy faith in the farthest inland regions of the English, where no other teacher had been before him… but on his arrival in Britain, he first came to the nation of the Gewisse, and finding all in that place confirmed pagans, he thought it better to preach the Word there, than to proceed further to seek for other hearers of his preaching.
Now, as he was spreading the Gospel in the aforesaid province, it happened that when the king himself, having received instruction as a catechumen, was being baptized together with his people, Oswald, the most holy and victorious king of the Northumbrians, being present, received him as he came forth from baptism, and by an honourable alliance most acceptable to God, first adopted as his son, thus born again and dedicated to God, the man whose daughter he was about to receive in marriage. The two kings gave to the bishop the city called Dorcic [Dorchester-on-Thames], there to establish his episcopal see …
HE III, 7

Bede doesn’t date this event, but the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle places it in 635: “Cynegils was baptized by Birinus the bishop at Dorchester, and Oswald [“king of the Northumbrians”, adds MS E] received him.” At some stage, Oswald was recognized as Bretwalda, but 635 was only a year after he had won his own kingdom, and, though he probably witnessed Cynegils’ grant to Birinus, it is highly unlikely that Oswald had the power to grant land in Cynegils’ kingdom.[*] Neither is there any suggestion that Oswald compelled Cynegils to adopt Christianity.

The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle notes, s.a. 636, that: “Cwichelm was baptized at Dorchester, and in the same year died.” And s.a. 639: “Birinus baptized Cuthred at Dorchester, and received him for son.” Manuscripts B, C and F say “King Cuthred” (in fact, Manuscript F also titles Cwichelm ‘king’ in its version of annal 636). Cuthred was apparently Cwichelm’s son.[*]

Cynegils died in 642, and was succeeded by his son, Cenwalh.[*]

642 – 673 Cenwalh

Son of Cynegils.

The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle grants Cenwalh a reign of 31 years, but this isn’t quite the case.

Bede:

When the king [Cynegils] died, his son Cenwalh succeeded him on the throne, but refused to receive the faith and the mysteries of the heavenly kingdom; and not long after he lost also the dominion of his earthly kingdom; for he put away the sister of Penda, king of the Mercians, whom he had married, and took another wife; whereupon a war ensuing, he was by him deprived of his kingdom, and withdrew to the king of the East Angles, whose name was Anna, where he lived three years in exile, and learned and received the true faith; for the king with whom he lived in exile was a good man, and blessed with a good and saintly offspring …
HE III, 7

The Chronicle places Cenwalh’s expulsion in 645, and his baptism in 646.[*]

645 – 648
No ruler is recorded for this period. Presumably the West Saxons were subject to Penda.

Cenwalh evidently regained the throne in 648. According to the anonymous, late-12th century, Liber Eliensis: “With King Anna’s assistance, Cenwalh returned after a while to Wessex, and successfully wrested his father’s kingdom from his enemies.” (I, 7). The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle records that in 648: “Cenwalh gave to Cuthred his kinsman 3 thousands of land by Ashdown [Berkshire Downs].[*] This Cuthred was son of Cwichelm, Cwichelm of Cynegils.”[*] It is possible that Cenwalh shared his rule with Cuthred.[*]

Bede:

… when Cenwalh was restored to his kingdom, there came into that province out of Ireland, a certain bishop called Agilbert, a native of Gaul, but who had then lived a long time in Ireland, for the purpose of reading the Scriptures. He attached himself to the king, and voluntarily undertook the ministry of preaching. —

— The king, observing his [Agilbert’s] learning and industry, desired him to accept an episcopal see there and remain as the bishop of his people. Agilbert complied with the request. And presided over that nation as their bishop for many years.
HE III, 7

Agilbert became bishop of the West Saxons in 650.

The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle states that, in 652: “Cenwalh fought at Bradford-on-Avon.” And, in 658: “Cenwalh fought against the Welsh at Peonnum, and put them to flight as far as the Parrett.”[*] The Chronicle fails to mention who Cenwalh’s enemies were in the 652 battle. William of Malmesbury, however, writes that Cenwalh: “totally defeated in two actions the Britons, furious with the recollection of their ancient liberty, and in consequence perpetually meditating resistance; first at a place called Wirtgernesburg [meaning “Vortigern’s stronghold”], and then at a mountain named Penne” (GR I §19). This seems to imply that Wirtgernesburg is synonymous with Bradford-on-Avon, and that the enemy was, therefore, the Britons. Æthelweard, though, in his rendition of the event (II, 7), uses the phrase “civil war”, which presumably means that he believed the battle to be an internal dispute, or, at least, against other Anglo-Saxons.

In 655, Penda had been killed by, the Northumbrian king, Oswiu. For the three year period following Penda’s death, Oswiu was at the height of his powers. He took direct control of Mercia, and was recognized as Bretwalda – overlord of the south-Humbrian English kingdoms. Cenwalh and his bishop, Agilbert, apparently enjoyed cordial relations with the Northumbrian court – particularly with Oswiu’s son, Alhfrith, who ruled Deira (southern Northumbria) on his father’s behalf.

Relations between Cenwalh and his bishop, however, deteriorated. Bede writes:

At length the king, who understood only the language of the Saxons, weary of his [Agilbert’s] barbarous tongue, privately brought into the province another bishop, speaking his own language, by name Wine, who had also been ordained in Gaul; and dividing his province into two dioceses, appointed this last his episcopal see in the city of Venta, by the Saxons called Wintancæstir [Winchester]. Agilbert, being highly offended, that the king should do this without consulting him, returned into Gaul …
HE III, 7

The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, s.a. 660: “In this year Bishop Agilbert withdrew from Cenwalh; and Wine held the bishopric for 3 years”. It seems more likely, however, that Agilbert left Wessex in 663 and, in the first instance, travelled to Northumbria.

Bede says (HE III, 25) Agilbert was “a friend of King Alhfrith and of Abbot Wilfrid”, and that he had: “come into the province of the Northumbrians, and was staying some time among them”. At the request of Alhfrith, the bishop ordained Wilfrid as Alhfrith’s priest. Agilbert’s presence seemingly acted as the catalyst for a synod, held at Whitby in 664, and presided over by Oswiu, to decide whether the ‘Celtic’ doctrine or the Catholic doctrine was “the truer tradition, that it might be followed by all in common”. Because of his inability to speak proper English, Agilbert nominated Wilfrid to argue the Catholic case, which he did successfully – the ‘Celtic’ clergy were obliged to either convert to Catholicism or to leave Northumbria. Alhfrith decided that Deira should have its own bishop, and, with his father’s agreement, sent Wilfrid off to Gaul to be consecrated. Oswiu, however, despatched his own candidate, Chad, off to Canterbury to be consecrated. When he got to Canterbury, Chad found that Archbishop Deusdedit, who died in July 664 (probably of the devastating plague that swept through the British Isles in that year), had not been replaced. He travelled on to Wessex, where he was consecrated by Wine, who was the only Catholically ordained bishop in Britain at the time. Meanwhile, Agilbert withdrew to Gaul – he was one of a number of bishops who officiated at Wilfrid’s consecration, which took place at Compiègne – and by 668 he had become bishop of Paris. Wilfrid returned to Northumbria in 666, only to find Chad occupying the see (York) that Alhfrith (now vanished from history ) had intended for him.[*]

In 658, the Mercians had rebelled against Oswiu, and installed Penda’s son, Wulfhere, on the Mercian throne.

The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, s.a. 661:

In this year Cenwalh fought at Easter at Posentesbyrg; —

— and Wulfhere son of Penda, committed ravage as far as Ashdown.[*] And Cuthred son of Cwichelm and King Cenberht died in one year.[*] And Wulfhere son of Penda, committed ravage on Wight, and gave the people of Wight to Æthelwald, king of the South Saxons, because Wulfhere had received him at baptism.[*] And Eoppa the mass-priest, by order of Wilfrid and King Wulfhere, first brought baptism to the people of Wight.

Bede says (HE IV, 13) that when Æthelwalh (as he calls the South Saxon king) was baptized, Wulfhere, his godfather, actually gave him: “two provinces, to wit, the Isle of Wight [which still had its own king], and the province of the Meonware, in the country of the West Saxons.”[*] This occurred, says Bede, “not long before” Bishop Wilfrid’s arrival in Sussex. Wilfrid, having been exiled from Northumbria by Oswiu’s successor, Ecgfrith, arrived in Sussex in 681. Bede’s comment might suggest that this particular aspect of the above Chronicle annal should be dated considerably later than 661 (though it would obviously have to be at some point before Wulfhere’s death, which was in 675). Presumably “Eoppa the mass-priest”, mentioned by the Chronicle, is the same priest that Bede calls Eappa, who worked in Sussex, but apparently not the Isle of Wight. According to Bede (HE IV, 16), Wilfrid entrusted the conversion of the inhabitants of the Isle of Wight to Beornwine, his nephew, and Hiddila, and that was after the deaths of both Wulfhere and Æthelwalh.

Bede:

Not many years after his [Agilbert’s] departure out of Britain, Wine was also expelled from his bishopric by the same king [i.e. Cenwalh], and took refuge with Wulfhere, king of the Mercians, of whom he purchased for money the see of the city of London, and remained bishop thereof till his death. —

— Thus the province of the West Saxons continued no small time without a bishop. During which time, the aforesaid king of that nation, sustaining repeatedly very great losses in his kingdom from his enemies, at length bethought himself, that as he had been before expelled from the throne for his unbelief, he had been restored when he acknowledged the faith of Christ; and he perceived that his kingdom, being deprived of a bishop, was justly deprived also of the Divine protection. He, therefore, sent messengers into Gaul to Agilbert, with humble apologies entreating him to return to the bishopric of his nation. But he excused himself, and protested that he could not go, because he was bound to the bishopric of his own city [Paris] and diocese; notwithstanding, in order to give him some help in answer to his earnest request, he sent thither in his stead the priest Leuthere, his nephew, to be ordained as his bishop, if he thought fit, saying that he thought him worthy of a bishopric. The people and king received him honourably, and asked Theodore, then archbishop of the church of Canterbury, to consecrate him as their bishop; and having been consecrated in that same city, he for many years administered the bishopric of the Gewisse [i.e. of the West Saxons] alone, by synodical authority, with diligent governance.
HE III, 7

The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, s.a. 670: “Leuthere, the nephew of Bishop Agilbert, succeeded to the bishopric over the West Saxons, and held it 7 years”. Whereas Birinus and Agilbert, the first two bishops of the West Saxons, were based at Dorchester-on-Thames, Wine and, now, Leuthere were based at Winchester. Mercian expansionism had placed Dorchester on the front-line. It was never the seat of a West Saxon bishop again, and in fact, about 679, it became, briefly, a Mercian see under Bishop Ætla.

In his Historia Abbatum (History of the Abbots, of Wearmouth and Jarrow) Bede says (§4) that, Northumbrian nobleman turned monk, Benedict Biscop, having returned to Britain after a journey to Rome: “decided he should visit Cenwalh, king of the West Saxons, whose friendship he had enjoyed and whose kindness had helped him more than once. But just then Cenwalh died unexpectedly and before his time, and at length Benedict turned again to his own people and the land of his birth”. (Benedict then founded the monastery of Wearmouth, and a few years later, Jarrow.) The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle places Cenwalh’s death s.a. 672, but the reign lengths attributed to Cenwalh and his successor indicate that 673 is more appropriate.

673 – 674 Seaxburh

Widow of Cenwalh.

674 – 676 Æscwine

Son of Cenfus.

676 – 685/6 Centwine

Son of Cynegils.

Bede notes (HE IV, 12) that, when Cenwalh died: “sub-kings [subreguli] took upon them the government of the nation, and dividing it among themselves, held it for about 10 years”. The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle and the West Saxon Genealogical Regnal List, however, present an orderly line of succession, starting with the one year rule of Cenwalh’s widow: “Seaxburh his queen”.[*] Neither source gives any detail about her or her brief reign.[*] “Then Æscwine succeeded to the kingdom”, states the List, “whose kin reaches to Cerdic, and held it 2 years.” The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, s.a. 674: “In this year Æscwine succeeded to the kingdom in Wessex; he was son of Cenfus, Cenfus of Cenfrith, Cenfrith of Cuthgils, Cuthgils of Ceolwulf, Ceolwulf of Cynric, Cynric of Cerdic.”[*]

Though he isn’t accorded the title Bretwalda, it seems that, by this time, Wulfhere, king of Mercia, was, indeed, overlord of the south-Humbrian English kingdoms. In 674 he “roused up all the southern nations”, says Stephen the Priest, which would of course include the West Saxons, with the intention of gaining the overlordship of Northumbria also. Wulfhere’s forces, however, were roundly defeated: “Countless numbers were slain, the king [i.e. Wulfhere] was put to flight and his kingdom laid under tribute”.[*] As a consequence, Mercia lost control of Lindsey (essentially, the northern half of modern Lincolnshire) to Northumbria, and Wulfhere’s grip on the southern English kingdoms was loosened. The Chronicle reports that in the following year, 675, Æscwine and Wulfhere: “fought at Biedanheafde”. The outcome is not mentioned, and the site of the battle is unidentified. Wulfhere died in the same year.[*]

The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, s.a. 676: “In this year Æscwine died … and Centwine succeeded to the kingdom [“of the West Saxons”, adds MS E]. And Centwine was son of Cynegils, Cynegils of Ceolwulf.”[*] Centwine was, therefore, Cenwalh’s brother. The West Saxon Genealogical Regnal List gives Centwine a seven or nine year rule depending on manuscript.

The line of succession given by the Chronicle (i.e. Cenwalh, Seaxburh, Æscwine, Centwine) is shown in a table, which displays both the succession and genealogy of the West Saxon kings, found in the collection of various lists and genealogies prefixed to the Chronicon ex Chronicis of Florence of Worcester. The accompanying text, however, offers an alternative line of succession: “his [Cenwalh’s] queen Seaxburh reigned one year after him. Then Cenfus reigned two years, according to the Sayings of King Alfred, but according to the English Chronicle his son Æscwine reigned nearly three years. He was succeeded by Centwine, son of King Cynegils, and he died in the 8th year of his reign.” It is generally supposed that the “Sayings [Dicta]” of King Alfred cited here is the same work as the “Handbook” of King Alfred to which William of Malmesbury had access (e.g. GP V §188). The work is no longer extant.

Mercia was enjoying a revival in its fortunes under Wulfhere’s successor, Æthelred. In 679 he defeated Ecgfrith, the Northumbrian king who had defeated Wulfhere in 674, and recovered Lindsey. In the miscellany that precedes the Chronicon ex Chronicis, a reorganization of the Mercian bishoprics is said to have followed, in which Dorchester-on-Thames, erstwhile seat of the bishop of the West Saxons, was made the seat of one of Mercia’s bishops.[*] Evidently, Æthelred also extended his 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 Aldhelm , abbot of Malmesbury – and, in 685, one Berhtwald granted land to Abbot Aldhelm (S1169) as Æthelred’s sub-king. There is, though, no evidence to suggest that Æthelred was Centwine’s overlord.

The entry s.a. 682 in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle is famously enigmatic: “In this year Centwine drove the Britons as far as the sea.”

In his paper ‘The Westward Expansion of Wessex’ (1960), W.G. Hoskins writes (§5): “The battle of 682 was fought in a place which will never be identified, but the phrase about driving the Britons as far as the sea becomes clear and unequivocal if we locate this unnamed battle somewhere west of the Taw and north of Dartmoor. As a result of a crushing defeat, the British were pushed westwards to the very coast of the Atlantic, into what is now north-east Cornwall… With the battle of 682 the West Saxons virtually completed their conquest of the eastern half of Dumnonia, the part that later became the county of Devon.[*]… It is probable that north Devon remained loosely in British hands for another generation, for it was largely moorland and poorish land, with little that was worth fighting for except around the Taw-Torridge estuary.” St Boniface, the ‘Apostle of Germany’, was a West Saxon whose given name was Wynfrith. He was born round about 675 (later tradition says in Crediton, Devon), and entered a monastery at Exeter, which was ruled by an English abbot, whilst still a boy.

The battle of 682 is the only event of Centwine’s reign recorded by the Chronicle, but Aldhelm (abbot of Malmesbury, and then, from 706 until his death in 710, bishop of Sherborne), a contemporary of Centwine – indeed, possibly his son[*] – in a poem (Carmina Ecclesiastica III) written to commemorate a new church built by a daughter of Centwine during the reign of Ine (688–726), says that Centwine was victorious in three battles, although his opponents are not named. Aldhelm also says that Centwine converted to Christianity and gave generously to the Church. Having ruled successfully “for several years”, he abdicated and entered a monastery.

The Chronicle annal for 685 announces that: “Cædwalla began to strive for the kingdom.”

685/6 – 688 Cædwalla

Son of Cenberht.

In 681, Wilfrid, the exiled erstwhile bishop of York, arrived in Sussex, and under the patronage of the South Saxon king, Æthelwalh, set about converting the South Saxon populace to Christianity. Wilfrid’s biographer, Stephen the Priest, writes:

Now in those days, when by the labours of our bishop the Church of God was increasing abundantly from day to day and the glory of His name was growing wondrously, there came a certain exile of noble descent from the desert places of Chiltern and the Weald whose name was Ceadwalla. He earnestly asked for the friendship of our holy father, praying Wilfrid to be his true father, to teach and help him, while he, on his side, promised him with a vow that he would be an obedient son. This compact, which they undertook with God as their witness, was faithfully fulfilled.
Vita Sancti Wilfrithi Ch.42

In fact, although he was seemingly drawn towards Christianity, Cædwalla had not yet been baptized. Bede (HE IV, 15) calls him “a young man of great vigour, of the royal race of the Gewisse”, and the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle provides his pedigree: “Cædwalla was son of Cenberht, Cenberht of Cadda, Cadda of Cutha, Cutha of Ceawlin, Ceawlin of Cynric, Cynric of Cerdic.”[*] His father, Cenberht, had, until his death in the 660s, apparently ruled as a sub-king during Cenwalh’s reign. Cædwalla (which is actually an Anglicized form of, the British name, Cadwallon) had evidently gathered a considerable following during his wanderings in “the desert places”. At some time between 681 and 685:

Cædwalla … an exile from his country, came with an army, slew Æthelwalh, and wasted that province [i.e. Sussex] with cruel slaughter and devastation; but he was soon expelled by Berhthun and Andhun, the king’s ealdormen, who afterwards held the government of the province. The first of them was afterwards killed by the same Cædwalla, when he was king of the Gewisse, and the province was reduced to more grievous slavery.
Bede HE IV, 15

Centwine, king of the West Saxons (or, strictly speaking, the Gewisse), had abdicated to enter a monastery. The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle notes, s.a. 685: “Cædwalla began to strive for the kingdom.” Bede (HE IV, 12) says: “the sub-kings were subdued and removed, and Cædwalla received the supreme authority.” Stephen the Priest, who makes no mention of the slaughter of Wilfrid’s former patron, says that Wilfrid:

… helped the exile [Cædwalla], who was often in difficulties, assisting and supporting him in various ways, and strengthened him until he was powerful enough to overcome his enemies and to get the kingdom. When Cædwalla had come to the throne and, after slaying or subduing his foes, was reigning over all the land of the West Saxons, he immediately, in all humility, summoned St Wilfrid our bishop to come to him; for Wilfrid, who was converting the heathen population of Sussex to God, and through his efforts wondrously glorifying the name of the Lord, was his venerable father and dearest of all to him.
Vita Sancti Wilfrithi Ch.42

Aldhelm, who was abbot of Malmesbury during Cædwalla’s reign, writing after the king’s death (Carmina Ecclesiastica III), says he was “a powerful occupant of the throne and its rightful heir.”

In 686: “Cædwalla and Mul, his brother, ravaged Kent and Wight”, notes the Chronicle[*]. Perhaps the second attack on Sussex mentioned by Bede, when Ealdorman Berhthun was killed and the South Saxons were brought under Cædwalla’s control, also belongs to this time. The Jutish provinces of the Isle of Wight and of the Meonware (the Meon valley, in what is now Hampshire, opposite the Isle of Wight) had been gifted to Æthelwalh by Wulfhere, king of Mercia. Presumably Cædwalla had already wrested control of the Meonware from the South Saxons when he launched his assault on the Isle of Wight.

Bede writes:

After Cædwalla had obtained possession of the kingdom of the Gewisse, he took also the Isle of Wight, which till then was entirely given over to idolatry, and by merciless slaughter endeavoured to destroy all the inhabitants thereof, and to place in their stead people from his own province; binding himself by a vow, though it is said that he was not yet regenerated in Christ, to give the fourth part of the land and of the spoil to the Lord, if he took the island. He fulfilled this vow by giving the same for the service of the Lord to Bishop Wilfrid, who happened at the time to have come thither from his own people. The measure of that island, according to the computation of the English, is of one thousand two hundred families, so possession of the land of 300 families was given to the Bishop. The part which he received he committed to one of his clergy, whose name was Beornwine, and who was his sister’s son, assigning to him a priest named Hiddila, to administer the Word and laver of life to all who wished to be saved.
I think I must not pass over in silence here that, among the first fruits of those of that island who believed and were saved, two royal boys, brothers to Arwald, king of the island, were crowned with the special grace of God. For when the enemy [i.e. Cædwalla] approached, they made their escape out of the island, and crossed over into the neighbouring province of the Jutes, where, when they had been brought to a place which is called Ad Lapidem [perhaps Stone, Hampshire], believing that they would be concealed from the victorious king, they were betrayed and ordered to be killed. This being made known to a certain abbot and priest, whose name was Cyneberht, who had a monastery not far from there, at a place which is called Hreutford, that is, ‘the ford of reeds’ [Redbridge], he came to the king, who then lay in concealment in those parts to be cured of the wounds which he had received whilst he was fighting in the Isle of Wight, and begged of him, that if the boys must needs be killed, he might be allowed first to instruct them in the mysteries of the Christian faith. The king consented, and the abbot, having taught them the Word of truth and cleansed them in the font of salvation, assured to them their entrance into the eternal kingdom. Then the executioner came, and they joyfully underwent the temporal death, through which they did not doubt they were to pass to the life of the soul, which is everlasting. Thus, in this manner, after all the provinces of Britain had received the faith of Christ, the Isle of Wight also received the same; yet because it was suffering under the affliction of foreign subjection, no one received the office or see of a bishop before Daniel, who is now bishop of the West Saxons.[*]
The island is situated opposite the borders of the South Saxons and the Gewisse, being separated from it by a sea, three miles wide, which is called Solvente [the Solent]. In this sea the two tides of the ocean, which break all round Britain from the boundless northern ocean, daily meet in conflict beyond the mouth of the river Homelea [Hamble], which runs into the aforesaid sea through the lands of the Jutes, which belong to the country of the Gewisse; and when their conflict is over they flow back into the ocean whence they came.
HE IV, 16

In 687 Wilfrid was recalled to Northumbria.[*]

Bede knows nothing of Cædwalla’s brother, Mul, mentioned by the Chronicle. Following their invasion of Kent, Cædwalla apparently installed Mul as king there – a later Kentish charter (S10) refers to his reign. Cædwalla secured control of Surrey.[*] He granted land for the foundation of a monastery at Farnham (S235), and he granted an estate at Battersea to the monastery of Barking (S1246) – which tends to suggest that he was overlord of Essex too. This is also indicated by a grant (S1171) made to Barking by a kinsman of, the co-king of the East Saxons, Sæbbi, which has West Saxon witnesses. A charter (S233), recording a grant of land at Hoo in Kent to an Abbot Ecgbald, made by Cædwalla, suggests that the West Saxons had East Saxon assistance in their takeover of Kent – the East Saxon king Sigehere, Sæbbi’s co-ruler, is featured in the witness-list, and within the body of the document there is a reference to Sigehere’s conquest of Kent. Perhaps Mul shared the rule of Kent with Sigehere.

In 687, says the Chronicle: “Mul was burnt in Kent, and 12 other men with him; and in that year Cædwalla again ravaged Kent.” Perhaps he received further wounds, or maybe he was seriously ill – for whatever reason, Cædwalla seems to have realized his death was approaching. The next year, 688:

… Cædwalla, king of the West Saxons, having most vigorously governed his nation for two years, relinquished his rule for the sake of the Lord and an everlasting kingdom, and went to Rome, being desirous to obtain the peculiar honour of being cleansed in the baptismal font at the threshold of the blessed Apostles, for he had learned that in baptism alone the entrance into the heavenly life is opened to mankind; and he hoped at the same time, that being made clean by baptism, he would soon be freed from the bonds of the flesh and pass to the eternal joys of Heaven; both which things, by the help of the Lord, came to pass according as he had conceived in his mind. For coming to Rome, at the time that Sergius was pope, he was baptized on the Holy Saturday before Easter Day, in the year of our Lord 689, and being still in his white garments, he fell sick, and was set free from the bonds of the flesh on the 12th of the Kalends of May [i.e. 20th April], and obtained an entrance into the kingdom of the blessed in Heaven. At his baptism, the aforesaid pope had given him the name of Peter, to the end that he might be also united in name to the most blessed chief of the Apostles, to whose most holy body his pious love had led him from the utmost bounds of the earth. He was likewise buried in his church, and by the pope’s command an epitaph was written on his tomb, wherein the memory of his devotion might be preserved for ever, and the readers or hearers thereof might be stirred up to give themselves to religion by the example of what he had done.
Bede HE V, 7

Bede proceeds to quote the epitaph which is, in effect, a poetic rendition of what Bede has just said in prose. The inscription concluded (the tombstone itself is now lost):

Here was buried Cædwalla, who is also Peter, king of the Saxons, on the 12th of the Kalends of May, in the 2nd indiction, aged more or less 30 years, in the reign of our most pious lord the Emperor Justinian, in the 4th year of his consulship, in the 2nd year of the pontificate of our Apostolic lord Pope Sergius.[*]

688 – 726 Ine

Son of Cenred.

“When Cædwalla went to Rome, Ine succeeded to the kingdom, being of the royal stock”, states Bede (HE V, 7). The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, s.a. 688, provides a genealogy: “Now Ine was son of Cenred, Cenred of Ceolwald, Ceolwald was brother of Cynegils; and they were the sons of Cuthwine, son of Ceawlin, Ceawlin of Cynric, Cynric of Cerdic.”[*]

Ine’s father, Cenred, was alive when Ine succeeded to the throne. Ine is the first West Saxon king known to have issued a law-code – the earliest surviving specimen of Anglo-Saxon legislation outside of Kent – and, in the preamble, “Cenred, my father” is the first of those he credits with assisting in its compilation. Cenred appears to have ruled as a sub-king under his son – he is called “King Cenred” by Æthelweard (III, 4), and in a charter dated 692 (S45), issued by a king of the South Saxons named Nunna (also called Nothhelm), he features in the witness-list with the title ‘king of the West Saxons’ (taking precedence over Ine, who is given no title).[*]

Ine had inherited control of Sussex from Cædwalla – Bede says (HE IV, 15) that Ine oppressed the South Saxons in the same way as his predecessor had “for many years”. The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle reports that, in 710: “Ine and Nunna his kinsman fought against Geraint, king of the Welsh [i.e. the Britons of Dumnonia]”.[*] The Chronicle doesn’t mention the outcome, but according to Florence of Worcester Ine and Nunna: “routed [Geraint] and put him to flight.”

Cædwalla’s brother, Mul, who was ruling in Kent, had been killed in 687. Cædwalla had “ravaged Kent” in response, but West Saxon authority there evidently did not outlast his abdication the next year. Influence in Essex was also lost, and it may be that Mercian/East Saxon collusion had broken the West Saxon hold on Kent.[*] However, the Chronicle records that, in 694: “the people of Kent” paid compensation to Ine: “because they had formerly burned Mul.”[*]

Surrey apparently remained under West Saxon control following Cædwalla’s departure – in the acknowledgements that precede his law-code, Ine refers to both Hædde, bishop of the West Saxons, and Eorcenwald, bishop of London, whose diocese included Surrey, as “my bishop”. In 693, however, Æthelred, king of the Mercians, who had acquired authority in the western part of East Saxon territory (i.e. London and the Middle Saxons), is found exercising power in Surrey – confirming a grant, made by Cædwalla, of land at Battersea, in Surrey, to Eorcenwald, for the monastery founded by the latter at Barking, in Essex (S1248). Æthelred abdicated in 704, to become a monk. His successor, his nephew Cenred, inherited the overlordship of London and the Middle Saxons. A letter, written c.705 by Waldhere, bishop of London (Eorcenwald seemingly having died in 693), to Berhtwald, archbishop of Canterbury, tells of disputes between Ine and “the rulers of our country”, a phrase which could include Cenred as well as the East Saxon kings (there was shared rule at the time). It seems possible, perhaps likely, that the cause of the disputes was the control of Surrey. A peace treaty had been arranged – the East Saxons agreed not to shelter West Saxon exiles, Ine agreed not to carry out his threats – and Waldhere was keen to attend a council at Brentford to settle the matter. Waldhere apparently had to seek the archbishop’s leave to attend because the West Saxons were being blackballed for not complying with an edict concerning “the ordination of bishops”, which is generally seen as meaning that the archbishop’s instruction to divide up the, unwieldy, West Saxon diocese had not been carried out. At any rate, when Hædde, bishop of the West Saxons, died, in 706, his diocese was divided – Daniel was appointed to Winchester (Hædde’s erstwhile see), and Aldhelm, abbot of Malmesbury, was appointed to the new see of Sherborne. Subsequently, Surrey was transferred from the bishop of London’s jurisdiction to the bishop of Winchester’s.[*]

Bede writes:

… Hædde, bishop of the West Saxons, departed to the heavenly life … Upon his death, the bishopric of that province was divided into two dioceses. One of them was given to Daniel, which he governs to this day;[*] the other to Aldhelm, wherein he presided most vigorously 4 years; both of them were fully instructed, as well in matters touching the Church as in the knowledge of the Scriptures. Aldhelm, when he was as yet only a priest and abbot of the monastery which is called ‘the city of Maildufus’ [i.e. Malmesbury[*]], by order of a synod of his own nation, wrote a notable book against the error of the Britons, in not celebrating Easter at the proper time, and in doing divers other things contrary to the purity of doctrine and the peace of the church; and, through the reading of this book, many of the Britons who were subject to the West Saxons were led by him to adopt the Catholic celebration of the Lord’s Easter.[*] He likewise wrote a famous book on virginity, which, after the example of Sedulius, he composed in twofold form, in hexameters and in prose. He wrote some other books, being a man most instructed in all respects, for he had a polished style, and was, as I have said, of marvellous learning both in liberal and ecclesiastical studies. On his death, Forthhere was made bishop in his stead, and is living at this time, being likewise a man very learned in the Holy Scriptures.
Whilst they administered the bishopric, it was determined by a synodal decree, that the province of the South Saxons, which till that time belonged to the diocese of the city of Winchester, where Daniel then presided, should itself have an episcopal see, and a bishop of its own. Eadberht, at that time abbot of the monastery of Bishop Wilfrid, of blessed memory,[*] called Selaeseu [Selsey], was consecrated their first bishop. On his death, Eolla succeeded to the office of bishop. He also died some years ago, and the bishopric has been vacant to this day.
HE V, 18

St Boniface, the ‘Apostle of Germany’, was a West Saxon, originally called Wynfrith. According to his biographer, Willibald, who wrote soon after the saint’s death, Boniface got his break when he was assigned to act as Ine’s envoy:

… a sudden and urgent situation arose in the reign of Ine, king of the West Saxons, for a new dissension had sprung up; and immediately, by the counsel of the aforesaid king, a synodal council of the servants of God was held by the primates of the churches. And as soon as all were assembled, there took place among the priestly grades of the ecclesiastical order a most wholesome inquiry and deliberation about this recent dissension. And forming the more prudent resolution, they decided that envoys, faithful in the Lord, should be sent to the archbishop of the city of Canterbury, Berhtwald by name, lest if they were to act without the advice of so great a pontiff it should be attributed to presumption or temerity on their part. And when this prudent discussion was concluded and all the council and the whole order of clerics assented, the king at once addressed all the servants of Christ and asked to whom they would entrust the performance of this legation. Then quickly the abbot highest in Christ, Wynberht by name, who ruled over the aforesaid monastery [i.e. Nursling], and Wintra, who presided over the monastery which is called Tisbury, and Beorwald, who governed by the divine ordinance the monastery which is called by the name given of old, Glastonbury, and also many other fathers of this holy way of life, summoned this holy man [i.e. Wynfrith] and brought him to the king. And the king charged him with the message and business of this legation, appointed companions for him, and sent him off in peace. And when this legation had been committed to him, he arrived, according to the command of the elders, in Kent after a prosperous journey, and skilfully disclosed to the archbishop, who was endowed with the badge of the highest pontificate [i.e. the pallium], everything in due order, just as the king had instructed him. And when he had received a favourable answer, he returned not many days later to his country, and wisely reported to the aforesaid king and the aforementioned servants of God present with him the favourable reply from the venerable archbishop, and gave great joy to all. Thus, by the wonderful benevolence of God’s dispensation, his name was henceforth spread abroad and held in honour among all, secular dignitaries as well as men in ecclesiastical orders, with the result that he advanced from this time on and very often took part in their synods.
Vita Bonifatii Ch.4

These events would appear to have happened in the vicinity of 705–12. Wynfrith was named Boniface by Pope Gregory II at Rome in 719, and was given the task of preaching to the pagan peoples of Germania. He never returned to England. He was ordained bishop, without a fixed see, in 722. A decade later he was made archbishop. Eventually, in 746/7, his see was fixed at Mainz. In 754 Boniface was killed by pagans whilst on missionary work in Frisia.

In 715 Wessex was evidently invaded by the Mercians, since the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle states: “Ine 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. Who won the battle is, though, not recorded.[*]

The Annales Cambriae indicate it was in 722 that there occurred: “the battle of Hehil among the Cornish … and the Britons were the victors”. Hehil has not been convincingly identified, but presumably it was Ine’s forces that were defeated.

During the late years of his reign, Ine’s authority appears to have been challenged by rival princes. The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle notes, s.a. 721: “Ine slew Cynewulf the ætheling.[*]” The entry s.a. 722 says: “In this year Queen Æthelburh destroyed Taunton, which Ine had previously built. And Ealdberht the exile withdrew into Surrey and Sussex; and Ine fought against the South Saxons.[*]” Then, s.a. 725: “Ine fought against the South-Saxons, and there slew Ealdberht the ætheling, whom he had before driven out.[*]”

Frank Stenton calls the above comment about Æthelburh’s destruction of Taunton: “remarkable but by no means luminous”, and warns:

There is a real danger of treating as fact the fiction with which medieval writers embroidered statements like these, and thus giving to Ine’s history a colour and substance for which there is no ancient authority.
Anglo-Saxon England (Third Edition, 1971) Chapter 2 (p.71)

Medieval writer Henry of Huntingdon:

In the thirty-sixth year of his reign,[*] Ine moved his army forward into Sussex and fought powerfully and victoriously against the men of Sussex, and in the same battle he slew Ealdberht, whom he had first put to flight from a stronghold called Taunton. That stronghold had been built by King Ine. But when the said ætheling, Ealdberht, who was the king's enemy, entered the stronghold, Queen Æthelburh, wife of Ine, captured it by arms and destroyed it, and compelled him to flee into Surrey and Sussex.
HA IV, 9

The following year, 726, Ine abdicated. Bede writes:

When Cædwalla went to Rome, Ine succeeded to the kingdom, being of the royal stock; and having reigned 37 years over that nation, he in like manner left his kingdom and committed it to younger men, and went away to the threshold of the blessed Apostles, at the time when Gregory was pope [Gregory II, 715–731], being desirous to spend some part of his pilgrimage upon earth in the neighbourhood of the holy places, that he might obtain to be more readily received into the fellowship of the saints in heaven. This same thing, about that time, was wont to be done most zealously by many of the English nation, nobles and commons, laity and clergy, men and women.
HE V, 7

William of Malmesbury:

… after his triumphal spoils in war, after many successive degrees in virtue, he [Ine] aspired to the highest perfection, and went to Rome … There, not to make the glory of his conversion public, he was shorn in secret, and, clad in homely garb, that he might be acceptable in the sight of God alone, grew old in privacy. Nor did his queen, the author of this noble deed, desert him, but as she had before incited him to undertake it, so, afterwards, she made it her constant care to soothe his sorrows by her conversation, to stimulate him when wavering by her example; in short, to omit nothing that could be conducive to his salvation. Thus united in mutual affection, in due time they trod the common path of all mankind. This was attended, as we have heard, with singular miracles, such as God often deigns to bestow on the virtues of happy couples.
GR I §37

Roger of Wendover (s.a. 727):

On his arrival [in Rome], with the consent and approbation of Pope Gregory, he [Ine] built a house in the city, which he called ‘the English School’ [Schola Anglorum]; to the end that, when the kings of England and the royal family, with the bishops, presbyters, and clergy, came hither to be instructed in the catholic faith and doctrine, nothing heterodox, or contrary to catholic unity, might be taught in the English church, and that so they might return home confirmed in the faith… He built, moreover, nigh to the aforesaid house, a church in honour of the blessed virgin Mary, wherein the divine mysteries might be celebrated for the English who came to Rome, and in which they might be buried, if any of them chanced to die at Rome. And to give strength and perpetuity to all this, it was ordered by a general decree, throughout the entire kingdom of the West Saxons, in which the aforesaid Ine reigned, that every year, one penny, which in English is called ‘Romescot’, should be sent from every family for the blessed Peter and the Roman church, that the English who sojourned there might from thence be furnished with necessary subsistence.[*]

Helena Hamerow, in British Archaeology (Issue 66, August 2002), writes:

For much of the 20th century, historians and archaeologists believed that the 7th and 8th centuries AD were economically disastrous for Britain and North-West Europe…
Anglo-Saxon Southampton – or Hamwic as it was then known – has, more than any other site, helped to reshape our thinking about the fate of long-distance trade and the origins of towns in England during this critical period. It has long been known from written sources that Hamwic was a port and market during the 8th and early 9th centuries. Indeed, we now know that, far from being a ‘dark age’, this period saw an economic resurgence in Anglo-Saxon England… Hamwic (also known as Hamtun) must have possessed considerable administrative importance, as by the middle of the 8th century it had given its name to the shire – Hamtunscire, that is, Hampshire.
… Because occupation had shifted by the 10th century to the site of the medieval town of Southampton, mid-Saxon Hamwic, which lay on the west bank of the River Itchen, has remained relatively well preserved.
… the site at Six Dials in the northern part of the settlement [where archaeological excavations were carried out during the period 1977 to 1989] … provided the most informative window yet opened onto Hamwic. Over 60 mid-Saxon buildings were uncovered as well as large numbers of pits containing datable assemblages of finds and animal bones. Six Dials showed conclusively that Hamwic possessed, from the outset, a planned system of well-maintained, gravelled streets as well as defined plots and properties. This was crucial evidence for it implied that the settlement had been created by a centralized authority – presumably the king of Wessex, maybe Ine.
As a result of Six Dials and over 50 other excavations within Hamwic, we now know that the wic was founded in about 700, and possibly somewhat earlier, it occupied at least 100 acres (42 ha), and is likely to have had a population of 2,000–3,000. This new type of settlement – so different in size, appearance and function from the farms and monasteries of the period – must have been perceived by contemporaries as a radical innovation, although whether its founder thought he was establishing a ‘town’ remains a moot point…

The evidence which Hamwic yielded for long-distance and regional trade also set it apart. Its wide-ranging trade contacts with the Continent as well as other parts of England are reflected by the provenance of the many coins found there, and by imported goods. Most prominent among these are quernstones from the Rhineland, Frankish glass and pottery. Some 18 per cent of the excavated pottery had been imported from abroad, especially from northern France, the Rhineland and the Low Countries, although some was almost certainly brought by the traders for their own use.
… it is difficult to define Hamwic’s trade connections with any precision, particularly as most of the exports known from written sources to have left England in this period – such as hunting dogs, wool, cloth, hides and slaves – have left no archaeological trace.
Many different crafts were practiced at Hamwic, including metalworking, textile production, bone and antler working, and glass working. We can perhaps assume that much of this production served the needs of the local community. Some items, however, must have been marketed more widely. Hamwic was certainly well connected by road and river to its hinterland and, of course, to Winchester.

… The archaeology indicates that by the mid-9th century, like other English wics, Hamwic was in severe decline, almost certainly caused by the disruptive impact of Viking raiding on long-distance trade and the vulnerability of an undefended riverside site. By the 10th century, Hamwic had been largely abandoned in favour of a site a short distance to the south-west, where a defended settlement was established.

… Work at Hamwic continues. The most recent excavations on the site of Southampton Football Club’s new stadium have uncovered richly-furnished 7th century burials containing weaponry and gold jewellery (BA August 2000) possibly associated with a royal ‘vill’ or settlement at the north-eastern edge of the wic. These suggest that the date of the founding of Hamwic may need to be pushed back to before 700, thus corresponding more closely with the founding of the wics at London [Lundenwic] and Ipswich [Gypeswic].

The first Anglo-Saxon coins produced in silver (superseding earlier gold issues) are known as ‘sceattas’.[*] The pictured, ‘secondary phase’ (c.710–c.760), coin of the sceatta type (12mm diameter, 0.97g) features a mustachioed head on the obverse, whilst the reverse shows a walking bird. As usual for sceattas, there is no inscription to indicate its provenance. Findspots of this particular style of coin, however, are typically in and around Hamwic, which is almost certainly where they were minted. According to Helena Hamerow: “the highly restricted distribution of so-called ‘H’ sceattas [as pictured] which were minted at Hamwic suggests that it may have been a coin-using enclave within a non-coin-using hinterland”.

Wessex continued ►