Talk:List of monarchs of Northumbria

First comments

Aethelwald Moll has, for the Anglo-Saxon/Latin, a W instead of VV. Which is correct? I'm changing to VV for now. --Golbez 18:46, Jun 11, 2005 (UTC)

Similar problem: Aelle II lacks Æ. Most of the references in aelle's article are Æ, but the article name lacks Æ. If Æ is accurate, the article probably should be moved. --Golbez 18:52, Jun 11, 2005 (UTC)

Another one: Ecgberht. The first entry has the AS as ECGBRYHT and the Latin as the same, but the second entry has the AS as ECGBRYHT and the Latin as ECGBERHT. Which is correct? --Golbez 18:59, Jun 11, 2005 (UTC)

You are quite right, of course. I have also spotted that I have put 'Eardwulf' as Eardvvulf, in fact it should be 'Eardvvlf' (apart from the erroneous 'u', wu was rendered as 'vv' rather than 'vvv' as might be expected.) --JohnArmagh 21:36, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)

---

OK, I think there were some problems in the list, like putting the Bernician Aethelric as having a second reign after Hussa and before Aethelfrith, and putting Aethelfrith as being of a separate dynasty from his predecessors among the Bernicians (of course his predecessors were also "Bernicians"; it was only Edwin who was Deiran), and some other things...I think it should be OK now, but I don't claim to be an expert, so feel free to take a harder look at it and fix anything else. Everyking 10:49, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Kings of Jorvik

I've added a table for the rulers of Jorvik; they seem to be diferent to the rulers of Northumbria. My understanding is, after the Viking conquest the kingdom was divided; the Danes ruled in York, over Yorkshire/Deira, while the Anglo-Saxon dynasty ruled, with varying degrees of independence, over Durham&Northumberland/Bernicia (presumably from Bamburgh). I understand also that they both gradually lost their independence to the kings of England. I'm trying to clarify that, on various pages. Swanny18 (talk) 05:28, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

King of York is just another name for the king of Northumbria, and in fact no contemporary source ever calls them king of York, just king of Northumbria. The "Danes" appear to have ruled as far as the Firth of Forth at some points, but the north was also host to rival claimants to the Northumbrian throne, several of whom were also kings of York/Northumbria. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 08:03, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Well, that’s different o what I was taught; I’d understood that "north" Northumbria and "south" Northumbria were different polities from the beginning, even though they were in one kingdom; and that the difference became more apparent after the Norse conquest. Are you saying the Anglo Saxons in the north were unable to maintain any independence? Or that they weren’t later under the overlordship of the English king in opposition to the Norse kingdom? That isn’t the picture I get from going through the articles on the various kings either. There's a multipicity of titles, co-rulers, overlapping reigns; separate polities within the kingdom makes more sense anyway.

Do you have a book or something that says what you say? Swanny18 (talk) 10:37, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you want. Books that say what? There are recent reliable discussions of Scandinavian Northumbria in Downham, Viking Kings, pp. 63–135, Woolf, Pictland to Alba, pp. 138–91 (google book search), and Hudson, Viking Pirates, passim. The Anglo-Saxons in the north probably were independent at various times (a couple seized the throne of York in this period), some allied to the Wessex kings, and so on, but this is an open question which has no bearing on the Northumbrian kingdom's existence. There is no controversy that the "Kings of York" are kings of Northumbria (that's what English sources call them (e.g. just control + F Northumbria in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle here, here)). Regarding wikipedia's articles, as this area is so complex it is no surprise that most of our articles on this topic are quite bad, and are written by different people who've chosen different titles. What can I say? Let wikipedia be edited by one person? Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 12:32, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for those; I need to read up on this a bit. I wasn't wanting to go 15 rounds over the name; it just seemed that there were two sets of rulers here, like at the beginning of the kingdom, so it made sense to have two lists. But I'm not insisting on it. Swanny18 (talk) 18:17, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Olaf III Guthfrithson

I stumbled over this Battle_of_Brunanburh#Background claiming Olaf_III_Guthfrithson was King of Dublin and York. I was going to create a link pointing to 'King of York' from the first page but then noticed that redirected here and that he didn't appear in the list on this page - Should he be there just before athelston in 927ish?

Olaf aka Amlaíb mac Gofraid, king of 'York' (r. 939-941)? He's there alright. Cavila (talk) 11:41, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Previously unknown king - Harthacnut

Here's a couple recent stories on the Silverdale Hoard: [1][2]. One of the coins lists a king Harthacnut: "The design of the coin relates to known coins of the kings Siefredus and Cnut, who ruled the Viking kingdom of Northumbria around AD900, but Harthacnut is otherwise unrecorded," a museum spokesman said.--Brianann MacAmhlaidh (talk) 07:53, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Halfdan Ragnarsson

Should he be added to the list? His page says 'Sources sometimes title Halfdan King of Jórvík, beginning in 876. Alekksandr (talk) 14:52, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

After Halfdan's death in 877 "a probable interregnum follows in York". Alekksandr (talk) 20:42, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

Rulers of Bamburgh

The following from the above list, who seem to have ruled only the northern part of Northumbria, appear in the article. I suggest that they should be deleted, so that the article shows only those whose control covered the southern part of Northumbria:- 1. Ecgberht II of Northumbria 2. Eadwulf II of Northumbria 3. Ealdred of Northumbria. Alekksandr (talk) 21:18, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

The list would then read as follows

Reign	Incumbent		Notes
867 to 872	Ecgberht I	ECGBRYHT NORÞANHYMBRA CYNING ECGBRYHT REX NORÞANHYMBRA	Puppet king of the Danes
872 to 876	Ricsige	RICSIGE NORÞANHYMBRA CYNING RICSIGE REX NORÞANHYMBRA
876 to 877	Halfdan Ragnarsson
877 to 883	Interregnum
c. 883 to 895	Guðroðr	GUTHFRID NORÞANHYMBRA CYNING GUTHFRID REX NORÞANHYMBRA
late 9th century/early 10th century	Sigfroðr
late 9th century/early 10th century	Knútr		Sigfroðr and Knútr may have been joint kings for part or all of the period between 895 and 905
fl. c. 900—902	Æthelwold
c.902-910	Hálfdan and Eowils		Another king, Ingwær, brother of the above, may have ruled too
914 (or before) to 921	Ragnall		Probably controlled much of Northumbria before finally becoming king of York in 918.
921 to 927	Sigtrygg		Known as Sitric Cáech in Irish chronicles.
927	Gofraid ua Ímair
927 to 939	Æthelstan of Wessex		As King of the English
939 to 941	Olaf Guthfrithson		Known as Amlaíb mac Gofraid in Irish chronicles
941 to 943 or 944	Amlaíb Cuarán		Known in England as Olaf Sihtricson
943 to 944 (with Amlaíb Cuarán?)	Ragnall Guthfrithson
roughly 944 to 946	Eadmund of Wessex		As King of the English
c. 947 to 948	Eric		Eric Bloodaxe
949 to 952	Amlaíb Cuarán (again)
952 to 954	Eric (again)
from 954	Eadred of Wessex		Claiming and enforcing rule from 946; Kingdom absorbed permanently into England after 954

Now done. Alekksandr (talk) 17:02, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Ælla or Ælle II of Northumbria

Ælle II is listed here and redirects to Ælla of Northumbria - which title is more accurate? Should either the link or the title be amended to match? — PhilHibbs | talk 12:35, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

Vernacular representations (?)

I have to question the propriety of the column showing the (supposed) vernacular representations of the kings' names and titles (at least I think that is what those columns are supposed to represent). Many of them contain an odd mix of Latin and Anglo-Saxon alphabets, and though you find the same type of intermingling in the surviving manuscripts, the forms that appear differ from manuscript to manuscript, the preserved versions of the manuscripts are from centuries later and not contemporary practice at all, and likewise it would be Original Research to look at them to see what is used. I strongly suspect many of these are formulaic editor-generated renderings of what they 'should have been', which violates policy. Can anyone give me a reason why this column should stay (one that overcomes my concerns about Original Research and whether these represent valid and noteworthy forms at all)? Agricolae (talk) 19:38, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

I agree with your diagnostic. This column should be removed, not only here but also in Kingdom of Essex#List of kings and List of monarchs of Wessex. The other lists of Anglo-Saxons kings have either no such column (e.g. List of monarchs of East Anglia, a featured list), or a column which states the various styles, withtout any OR attempt at uniformisation (e.g. List of monarchs of Sussex). – Swa cwæð Ælfgar (talk) 12:59, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

I went ahead and removed all three, but the Wessex one is now badly formatted, and I haven't had time to restore the relationships that the patronymics hidden in the vernacular styles were conveying to those in on the secret. Agricolae (talk) 21:09, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

Adulf mcEtulfe?

This name sticks out and can't be found on a google search. Added in the past 50 revisions. Possible hoax? Swil999 (talk) 13:08, 6 May 2022 (UTC)