Page:EB1911 - Volume 01.djvu/327

 at the river Idle by Rædwald of East Anglia, whom Edwin had persuaded to take up his cause.

ÆTHELING, an Anglo-Saxon word compounded of æthele, or ethel, meaning noble, and ing, belonging to, and akin to the modern German words Adel, nobility, and adelig, noble. During the earliest years of the Anglo-Saxon rule in England the word was probably used to denote any person of noble birth. Its use was, however, soon restricted to members of a royal family, and in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle it is used almost exclusively for members of the royal house of Wessex. It was occasionally used after the Norman Conquest to designate members of the royal family. The earlier part of the word formed part of the name of several Anglo-Saxon kings, e.g. Æthelbert, Æthelwulf, Æthelred, and was used obviously to indicate their noble birth. According to a document which probably dates from the 10th century, the wergild of an ætheling was fixed at 15,000 thrymsas, or 11,250 shillings. This wergild is equal to that of an archbishop and one-half of that of a king.

ÆTHELNOTH (d. 1038), archbishop of Canterbury, known also as or, was a son of the ealdorman Æthelmaer, and a member of the royal family of Wessex. He became a monk at Glastonbury, then dean of the monastery of Christ Church, Canterbury, and chaplain to King Canute, and on the 13th of November 1020 was consecrated archbishop of Canterbury. In 1022 he went to Rome to obtain the pallium, and was received with great respect by Pope Benedict VIII. Returning from Rome he purchased at Pavia a relic said to be an arm of St Augustine of Hippo, for a hundred talents of silver and one of gold, and presented it to the abbey of Coventry. He appears to have exercised considerable influence over Canute, largely by whose aid he restored his cathedral at Canterbury. A story of doubtful authenticity tells how he refused to crown King Harold I., as he had promised Canute to crown none but a son of the king by his wife, Emma. Æthelnoth, who was called the “Good,” died on the 29th of October 1038, and his name appears in the lists of saints.

ÆTHELRED, king of Mercia, succeeded his brother Wulfhere in 675. In 676 he ravaged Kent with fire and sword, destroying the monasteries and churches and taking Rochester. Æthelred married Osthryth, the sister of Ecgfrith, king of Northumbria, but in spite of this connexion a quarrel arose between the two kings, presumably over the possession of the province of Lindsey, which Ecgfrith had won back at the close of the reign of Wulfhere. In a battle on the banks of the Trent in 679, the king of Mercia was victorious and regained the province. Ælfwine, the brother of Ecgfrith, was slain on this occasion, but at the intervention of Theodore, archbishop of Canterbury, Æthelred agreed to pay a wergild for the Northumbrian prince and so prevented further hostilities. Osthryth was murdered in 697 and Æthelred abdicated in 704, choosing Cœnred as his successor. He then became abbot of Bardney, and, according to Eddius, recommended Wilfrid to Cœnred on his return from Rome. Æthelred died at Bardney in 716. (See .)

ÆTHELRED I., king of Wessex and Kent (866–871), was the fourth son of Æthelwulf of Wessex, and should, by his father’s will, have succeeded to Wessex on the death of his eldest brother Æthelbald. He seems, however, to have stood aside in favour of his brother Æthelberht, king of Kent, to whose joint kingdoms he succeeded in 866. Æthelred’s reign was one long struggle against the Danes. In the year of his succession a large Danish force landed in East Anglia, and in the year 868 Æthelred and his brother Alfred went to help Burgred, or Burhred, of Mercia, against this host, but the Mercians soon made peace with their foes. In 871 the Danes encamped at Reading, where they defeated Æthelred and his brother, but later in the year the English won a great victory at “Æscesdun.” A fortnight later they were defeated at Basing, but partially retrieved their fortune by a victory at “Mæretun” (perhaps Marden in Wiltshire), though the Danes held the field. In the Easter of this year Æthelred died, perhaps of wounds received in the wars against the Danes, and was buried at Wimborne. He left a son, Æthelwold, who gave some trouble to his cousin Edward the Elder, when the latter succeeded to the kingdom. Æthelweard the historian was also a descendant of this king.

ÆTHELRED II. (or ) (c. 968–1016), king of the English (surnamed, i.e. without rede or counsel), son of King Edgar by his second wife Ælfthryth, was born in 968 or 969 and succeeded to the throne on the murder of his step-brother Edward (the Martyr) in 979. His reign was disastrous from the beginning. The year after his accession the Danish invasions, long unintermitted under Edgar the Peaceful, recommenced; though as yet their object was plunder only, not conquest, and the attacks were repeated in 981, 982 and 988. In 991 the Danes burned Ipswich, and defeated and slew the East Saxon ealdorman Brihtnoth at Maldon. After this, peace was purchased by a payment of £10,000—a disastrous expedient. The Danes were to desist from their ravages, but were allowed to stay in England. Next year Æthelred himself broke the peace by an attack on the Danish ships. Despite the treachery of Ælfric, the English were victorious; and the Danes sailed off to ravage Lindsey and Northumbria. In 994 Olaf Tryggvason, king of Norway, and Sweyn, king of Denmark, united in a great invasion and attacked London. Foiled by the valour of the citizens, they sailed away and harried the coast from Essex to Hampshire. Æthelred now resorted to the old experiment and bought them off for £16,000 and a promise of supplies. Olaf also visited Æthelred at the latter’s request and, receiving a most honourable welcome, was induced to promise that he would never again come to England with hostile intent, an engagement which he faithfully kept. The Danish attacks were repeated in 997, 998, 999, and in 1000 Æthelred availed himself of the temporary absence of the Danes in Normandy to invade Cumberland, at that time a Viking stronghold. Next year, however, the Northmen returned and inflicted worse evil than ever. The national defence seemed to have broken down altogether. In despair Æthelred again offered them money, which they again accepted, the sum paid on this occasion being £24,000. But soon afterwards the king, suspecting treachery, resolved to get rid of his enemies once and for all. Orders were issued commanding the slaughter on St Brice’s day (December 2) of “all the Danish men who were in England.” Such a decree could obviously not be carried out literally; but we cannot doubt that the slaughter was great. This violence, however, only made matters worse. Next year Sweyn returned, his hostility fanned by the desire for revenge. For two years he ravaged and slew; in 1003 Exeter was destroyed; Norwich and Thetford in 1004. No effectual resistance was offered, despite a gallant effort here and there; the disorganization of the country was complete. In 1005 the Danes were absent in Denmark, but came back next year, and emboldened by the utter lack of resistance, they ranged far inland. In 1007 Æthelred bought them off for a larger sum than ever (£36,000), and for two years the land enjoyed peace. In 1009, however, in accordance with a resolution made by the witan in the preceding year, Æthelred collected such a fleet “as never before had been in England in any king’s day”; but owing to a miserable court quarrel the effort came to nothing. The king then summoned a general levy of the nation, with no better result. Just as he was about to attack, the traitor Edric prevented him from doing so, and the opportunity was lost. In 1010 the Danes returned, to find the kingdom more utterly disorganized than ever. “There was not a chief man in the kingdom who could gather a force, but each fled as he best might; nor even at last would any there resist another.” Incapable of offering resistance, the king again offered money, this time no less than £48,000. While it was being