Page images
PDF
EPUB

III.

COINAGE OF ETHELBALD OF WESSEX.

TORHT

ETHELBALD, the eldest son of Ethelwlf, succeeded his father upon the united throne of Wessex and its dependencies, late in the year 857 or early in that of 858. With respect to this date there is considerable difference amongst historians. The numismatic authors differ also. Ruding gives the date of his accession as 857. Hawkins states that he reigned from 855 to 860. Professor Freeman, who is generally very accurate in his dates, in his History of the Norman Conquest leads us to infer that Æthelbald succeeded to his father's throne in 858. The Saxon chronicle clearly states that he reigned five years expiring in 860, in which year Asser also states that he died. Florence of Worcester also gives this date as being the year in which "Ethelbald died, having licentiously governed the kingdom of Wessex for two years and a half." William of Malmesbury affirms the period of his reign to have been from 857 to 862, and Roger of

Wendover, from 857 to 861. Roger of Hoveden, in his list of the kings of Wessex, mentions Ethelbald as having reigned five years; but in his text, after referring to the death of Ethelwlf A.D. 856, states that the latter being dead and buried at Winchester, his son Æthelbald, during two years and half, after the reign of his father, governed the West Saxons and died in 860. The dates of his accession and death are given in Ethelwerd's Chronicles as 857 and 861 respectively. That Ethelwlf could not have died before 856 at all events, is proved by a grant dated A.D. 856, and set forth by Mr. Walter de Gray Birch in his very useful Cartularium Saxonicum, by which Ethelwlf conveys to the thegn Aldred land at Aescesbyrig, or Ashbury, in Berkshire, clearly within Wessex territory. In this grant Ethelwlf designates himself as Altithroni favente clementiâ rex Occidentalium Saxonum." To understand the effect of these varying dates, and to be able to draw anything like an accurate conclusion from them, some consideration is required of the very few historical facts in connection with Ethelbald that have

[ocr errors]

been handed down to us. It appears indisputable that Ethewlf had, at some time previously to his death, nominated his son to the kingdom of some appanage or dependent state, yielding subjection to the then great kingdom of Wessex. Ælfred, a younger son, who after the successive deaths of Ethelbald, Æthelbearht, and Ethelred, succeeded to the throne and is known to us as Alfred the Great, was the favoured son of his father, who had sent him to Rome between the years 853 and 855 for the purpose, it is stated, of securing the succession to him. The Pope, Leo IV., went through the form of anointing him with holy oil and of consecrating him as king. Thither Ethelwlf, also, shortly afterwards pro

ceeded, and while abroad espoused Judith, the daughter of Charles the Bald, King of the Franks. During Ethelwlf's absence from the shores of this country, a revolt was organized against him in connection with the general discontent prevailing. This was headed by Ethelbald, and on the king's return civil war appeared inevitable. The disturbance was, no doubt, to a great extent caused by the jealousy experienced by Æthelbald at the consecration of his younger brother Ælfred, and which he naturally regarded as being the first step towards the latter being nominated successor to the throne of Wessex. Fortunately for all parties, an amicable arrangement was effected, and according to Sir Francis Palgrave, a valuable authority on all that appertains to Anglo-Saxon history, Ethelwlf took to himself the government of the eastern states belonging to Wessex, namely, the ancient kingdom of Kent, together with Sussex, Surrey, and perhaps Essex, whilst the kingdom of Wessex proper, which of right belonged to the head of the family, became the portion of Æthelbald, though with a nominal subjection to his father. Evidence is not wanting upon the coins of Ethelwlf of the concurrence, or perhaps sequence of events referred to, as although on some the somewhat ungrammatical inscription OCCIDENTALIVM SAXONIORVM occurs, others bear the type and character of the East Anglian A, and others again the word CANT for Kent and DORIBI for Canterbury in monogram. With regard, however, to the conflicts of dates mentioned in the beginning of this paper, it seems clear that as the general consensus of opinion on the part of the old chroniclers is to the effect that Ethelbald reigned five years, and that he reigned two years and a half after his father, one half of his reign must have

occurred during the lifetime of his father under the amicable arrangement before referred to.

On the balance of authority he must have died in 860, and I am therefore of opinion that he did not succeed his father, in the possession of the whole kingdom, until 857. It is, however, of course, possible that this might not have occurred until the early part of 858. That after the partition between the father and son, the former still styled himself "King of the West Saxons," is no matter for surprise, as titles were not so distinctive and exact as they are now, and it is even possible that some further changes took place which have not been duly recorded. In addition to this it was by no means uncommon for a king and his successor to have joint authority, and the Saxon Chronicle, at a later date puts upon record that on Ethelwlf's death, thelbald took upon himself the government of the West Saxons, and his brother Æthelbearht that of Kent, Essex, and other provinces. After his father's decease Ethelbald contracted an incestuous marriage with his step-mother Judith, and it is to this that the chroniclers refer when they talk of his licentious reign. Beyond this and the scandal caused by it, there is little recorded subsequently concerning him or his doings, except that having after some time put away Judith, he repented of his sin and ruled his kingdom for the remainder of his life in peace and righteousness. Having regard to the preceding outline of the history of Æthelbald, it is possible that he might have coined money, either during his father's lifetime or afterwards. The reigns of his brothers Ethelbearht and Ethelred who successively came after him, extended jointly over a period of eleven years only (excluding the term of Æthelbearht's reign in Ethelbald's lifetime), and yet

the pennies of both are fairly numerous and are of several types. There appears, therefore, to have been no sufficient reason why Ethelbald alone of the three brothers (always excluding from consideration Ælfred, whose reign was so much longer, and whose coins both in number and type were more than porportionately abundant), should have neglected to have left a record of his name and effigy upon the coinage of the time. There were not the disturbances and troubles in his reign caused by the Danish incursions to the extent, or anything like the extent, which they attained after his death, and particularly in the reign of Æthelred I., when, according to Professor Freeman, the second period of the invasions may be said to have fairly begun. In the first period of these invasions there was constant plundering on the part of these northern freebooters, and plunder, merely, seemed to be their object. In the second period their object was clearly no longer mere plunder, but settlement. Their operations would be less likely to have diverted thelbald from the privilege, then so highly appreciated, of coining money, than was the case with his immediate successors. Nor, of course, on the other hand, had the necessities of the realm arrived at the pitch attained in the reign of Ethelred II., appropriately called the Unready (not in its modern sense, but because he was so wanting in "raed," i.e. counsel) when possibly money was often coined for the express purpose of its being paid away in bribes to the Danish invaders. In his work on the Silver Coins of England (2nd. edit. p. 116), Mr. Hawkins refers to a penny of Ethelbald, which is engraved as No. 168 in the plates attached to that work. This coin, however, is given upon the authority of a plate drawn under the auspices of the notorious Mr.

« PreviousContinue »