Talk:Æthelbald, King of Wessex

Forced his father to abdicate?

Does anyone have a concrete source stating that Ethelbald forced his father to abdicate? The sources I have looked at seem to contradict themselves. I have removed the statement for now. --Cameron (t|p|c) 21:10, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

"In 855 Æthelwulf went on pilgrimage to Rome and divided Wessex between his sons Æthelbald and Æthelberht who ruled west and east Wessex respectively. It might have been expected, following the precedents of Caedwalla and Ine, that Æthelwulf would not return from his journey, but the trip seems if anything to have rejuvenated him. When he came back in 856 Æthelwulf brought with him a twelve-year-old bride, Judith, a daughter of the West Frankish king Charles the Bald. Æthelbald, with the support of the bishop of Sherborne and the ealdorman of Somerset, rebelled and tried to prevent his father's return, but a compromise was reached by which Æthelwulf ruled the eastern half of the main West Saxon kingdom of Æthelbald the western." [Barbara Yorke, Kings and Kingdoms of Early Anglo-Saxon England, p. 150]

"What [Æthelwulf] found when he returned home is uncertain. According to Asser, during the time that Æthelwulf was away Æthelbald, with the support of Eahlstan, bishop of Sherborne, and Eanwulf, ealdorman of Somerset, plotted that he would would not be received back into his kingdom (Life of King Alfred, ch. 12). This action has been seen as a rebellion against an unpopular king whose martial qualities were few and whose excessive piety took him to Rome at a time of Viking danger at home; pictured in this light, Æthelwulf's marriage to Judith was a response to rebellion at home. Æthelwulf, however, whose entry as a young man into minor orders is hagiographical legend, was a military leader who had distinguished himself against the Vikings in 851 ... and his journey to Rome and back was a prestige-enhancing success. It is also barely conceivable that Charles the Bald would have sent his daughter as an anointed queen, with all that implied, into an overseas kingdom already known to be in revolt against her new husband. What is more likely is that Æthelbald's rebellion occurred after the marriage." [D. P. Kirby, Earliest English Kings, pp. 200–201]

"[Æthelwulf's] eldest surviving son Æthelbald, who had been entrusted with control of Wessex in his absence, rebelled and Æthelwulf was obliged to end his reign ruling only part of his former kingdom." [Barbara Yorke, "Æthelwulf", in The Blackwell Encyclopedia of Anglo-Saxon England]

So, no, not to abdicate, but to share power. Angus McLellan (Talk) 21:51, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Ethelbald's rebellion

I understand what went on in 855.

In 855, King Ethelwulf made a pilgrimage to Rome. He was king of Wessex, stretching from the county of Kent in the east to Devon in the west. Before leaving he bisected the kingdom into the Kingdom of Kent and the Kingdom of Wessex(-proper). Where the split came exactly is unknown, but almost certainly the Kingdom of Kent comprised what is now Kent, Surrey, Sussex, West Sussex, part of Berkshire and Middlesex south of the Thames; and the Kingdom of Wessex comprised Hampshire, Wiltshire, Dorset, Somerset and Devon. This latter kingdom is sometimes known as Wessex-proper to differentiate it from the name of the whole kingdom. Ethelwulf made his two eldest sons, Ethelbald and Ethelbert, kings in these territories: Ethelbald became king of Wessex-proper and Ethelbert became King of Kent. Ethelwulf (with the infant Alfred the Great, brother of Ethelbert and Ethelbald) spent a year in Rome and on his return married Judith, daughter of Charles the Bald, king of the Franks, in October 856 in France.

On Ethelwulf's return, Ethelbald refused to hand back Wessex-proper to his father but Ethelbert gave up the kingship of Kent. There was some kind of military clash between Ethelwulf and Ethelbald, which apparently ground into a stalemate, leaving Ethelwulf king of Kent and Ethelbald still king of Wessex-proper. Ethelwulf died January 858 and Ethelbert resumed his kingship of Kent. Ethelbald remained king of Wessex-proper until his death in 860, at which point Ethelbert stitched the whole kingdom together as Wessex again. Notably, Ethelbald's death marked Kent's last moment as a separate kingdom.

Much of the rest of this article is either wrong or misleading. Unfortunately, as a newbie I lack the knowledge and skills to rewrite it.

Dantes Warden (talk) 11:04, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Requested move 21 February 2017

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved. Noting this does not set a precedent for any other pre-conquest monarchs. Jenks24 (talk) 12:20, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

---

Æthelbald of Wessex → Æthelbald, King of Wessex – This name would be clearer, would conform with other articles such as Stephen, King of England and John, King of England. He is shown as "Æthelbald (d. 860), king of the West Saxons" in the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, but other sources such as A Biographical Dictionary of Dark Age Britain and The Wiley-Blackwell Encyclopedia of Anglo-Saxon England have "of Wessex", and I think this would be clearer for readers than "of the West Saxons". If this move is accepted, I would suggest a similar change for other Anglo-Saxon kings. Dudley Miles (talk) 20:57, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Specifically and generally I agree. It's hard to argue with the ODNB's way of doing things here. On the Wessex/West Saxons points, I am attracted by the idea that early Medieval Kings are Kings of people, not places, but this is a minor detail. Angus McLellan (Talk) 21:10, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

For this one I agree, but I'd have to look at the others. I think Ælle of Sussex and Penda of Mercia, for example, might be best left where they are. Are you confident that the sources are consistent on this? I've no objection to consistency within Wikipedia in principle, but I'm less keen on it if it makes gives us article titles that nobody else uses. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 01:45, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

I agree that each case needs looking at individually, and I should have made clear that I am not (currently) planning to suggest moves for earlier kings as I have limited knowledge of AS history before 800. I think there would be a similar case for Æthelberht, King of Wessex and Æthelred I, King of Wessex. I have not yet looked at the sources for later kings. Dudley Miles (talk) 10:17, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Consanguinity

If that's the word I'm after. I didn't mention this at FAC just now (enthusiastically supporting) as it isn't relevant to the FA process, but I'm interested to know if there was any canonical ban at the time on marrying one's widowed stepmother. I assume the pope said nothing, as you don't mention him, but I suppose that could be either because there was no current rule against the practice or that there was but the pope felt it expedient to overlook a breach of it. Tim riley talk 11:30, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

There was a ban. Pope Gregory the Great condemned marriage with a step-mother in his Libellus responsionum, his answer in 601 to theological queries by Augustine of Canterbury, which is recorded in book 27 of Bede's Ecclesiastical History. Whether the Pope in the 850s condemned that specific marriage is a different matter. It is very much a matter of chance what survives from that period but I guess that Asser would have made much of it if there had been any official denunciation. The very little evidence that survives suggests that the marriage was not an issue at the time, though there was no doubt much muttering by churchmen. I guess that the Pope would probably only have got involved if appealed to by an English bishop. Dudley Miles (talk) 16:32, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

Interesting. Thank you, Dudley. Tim riley talk 18:18, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

Brother's death

His article reasonably suggests that Æthelbald's older brother died in the early 850s, not the 860s as stated here. As this is a featured article, i won't change it silently, but i'd suggest we want to reconcile the two and ensure that whichever isn't correct is changed. Happy days, Lindsay^Hello 19:21, 25 January 2020 (UTC)

This was vandalism which I have reverted. The version before today has 850s. Dudley Miles (talk) 20:49, 25 January 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, Dudley Miles. I looked at the history, but didn't go back many hours earlier because, well, to be honest, i figured that as it's TFA it had been checked for vandalism fairly regularly. My bad! Happy days, Lindsay^Hello 21:01, 25 January 2020 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Ecgberht, King of Wessex which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 07:47, 4 January 2022 (UTC)