Editing Æthelbald, King of Wessex (section)

== Division of the kingdom ==
[[File:Æthelwulf and sons.png|thumb|The two possible interpretations of Asser's description of the divided Wessex]]

Æthelwulf spent a year in Rome. On his way back he stayed for several months with Charles the Bald, King of the West Franks, and married Charles's twelve-year-old daughter [[Judith of Flanders |Judith]], a great-granddaughter of [[Charlemagne]]; the [[bishop of Rheims]] ceremonially consecrated her and Æthelwulf conferred the title of queen on her.{{sfn|Firth|2024|pp=179-181}} Æthelwulf returned with his new wife in October 856,{{sfnm|1a1=Abels|1y=1998|1pp=75, 85|2a1=Nelson|2y=2004}} and according to Alfred the Great's biographer, Bishop [[Asser]], during his absence a plot was hatched to prevent the king's return and keep Æthelbald on the throne. Asser regarded it as "a terrible crime: expelling the king from his own kingdom; but God did not allow it to happen, nor would the nobles of the whole Saxon land have any part in it". Asser stated that a great many men said that the initiative for "this wretched incident, unheard of in all previous ages" came from Æthelbald's chief counsellors, [[Eahlstan]], [[Bishop of Salisbury|Bishop of Sherborne]] and Eanwulf, Ealdorman of Somerset, who had been two of Æthelwulf's most senior advisers, while many blamed Æthelbald himself.{{sfn|Keynes and Lapidge|1983|p=70}}

Historians give varying explanations for both the marriage and the rebellion. [[David Peter Kirby|D. P. Kirby]] and [[Pauline Stafford]] see the match as sealing an anti-Viking alliance. Another factor was Judith's descent from Charlemagne: a union with her gave Æthelwulf a share in [[Carolingian]] prestige.{{sfnm|1a1=Kirby|1y=2000|1pp=165–167|2a1=Stafford|2y=1981|2p=139}} Kirby describes her anointing as "a charismatic sanctification which enhanced her status, blessed her womb and conferred additional throne-worthiness on her male offspring."{{sfn|Kirby|2000|p=165}} These marks of a special status implied that a son of hers would succeed to at least part of Æthelwulf's kingdom, and explain Æthelbald's decision to rebel.{{sfn|Firth|2024|pp=210–22}} He may also have feared that he would be disadvantaged if his father returned to rule Wessex while his brother kept Kent.{{sfn|Kirby|2000|pp=165–167}} Michael Enright argues that an alliance against the Vikings between such distant territories would have served no useful purpose. He sees the marriage as following Æthelbald's rebellion and being a response to it, intending that a son of Judith would displace Æthelbald as successor to the throne.{{sfn|Enright|1979|pp=291–301}} [[Janet Nelson]] goes further, seeing Æthelwulf's pilgrimage as intended from the start to enhance his prestige to assist him in facing down filial resentments.{{sfn|Nelson|2013|pp=239–240}} Kirby and Sean Miller argue that it is unlikely that Charles would have agreed to his daughter being taken to a country in a state of civil war, so Æthelbald's revolt was probably a response to the marriage, which threatened to produce sons who had a stronger claim to the throne than he had.{{sfnm|1a1=Kirby|1y=2000|1p=166|2a1=Miller|2y=2004}} [[Richard Abels]] argues that Æthelbald probably hoped that his rule would be permanent: "All knew the dangers that attended a pilgrimage to Rome and were aware of the possibility that Æthelwulf would not return. His departure to Rome all but invited the prowling of hungry æthelings."{{sfn|Abels|1998|p=70}} Charles may have agreed to the marriage because he was under attack both from Vikings and from a rising among his own nobility, and Æthelwulf had great prestige due to his victories over the Vikings.{{sfn|Stafford|1981|pp=139–140}} The marriage added the West Saxon king to the network of royal and princely allies that Charles was creating.{{sfn|Nelson|1997|p=143}}

Rivalry between east and west Wessex may have also been a factor in the dispute. The ancient [[Selwood Forest]] marked the boundary between the bishoprics of Sherborne in the west and [[Bishop of Winchester|Winchester]] in the east. In the eighth century, the connections of Ecgberht's family were with the west, but in the early ninth century, the family became close to the clergy of Winchester, who helped them to establish an exclusive hold on the throne for their royal branch. According to Asser, the plot to rob Æthelwulf of his throne was concocted in "the western part of Selwood", and Æthelbald's chief supporters, Eahlstan and Eanwulf, were western magnates who probably resented the favour shown by Æthelwulf to the eastern Winchester diocese, and to [[Swithun]], who was appointed by Æthelwulf as Bishop of Winchester in 852. Æthelbald's patronage was mainly directed at Sherborne.{{sfnm|1a1=Yorke|1y=1984|1p=64|2a1=Yorke|2y=1995|2pp=23–24, 85, 99|3a1=Keynes and Lapidge|3y=1983|3p=70}}

[[File:Memorial to Ethelbald and Ethelbert in Sherborne Abbey.jpg|thumb|260px|Memorial to Æthelbald and Æthelberht in [[Sherborne Abbey]]]]

Asser is the sole source for the dispute between Æthelwulf and Æthelbald, which is not mentioned in the ''Anglo-Saxon Chronicle'', and according to Asser when Æthelwulf returned to England he agreed to divide the kingdom to avoid a civil war. Most historians state that Æthelbald kept Wessex while Æthelberht agreed to surrender the south-eastern kingdoms of Kent, Essex, Surrey and Sussex to Æthelwulf, although [[Simon Keynes]] thinks that Æthelwulf kept a degree of sovereignty.{{sfnm|1a1=Stenton|1y=1971|1p=245|2a1=Keynes and Lapidge|2y=1983|2p=15|3a1=Williams|3y=1991|4a1=Dumville|4y=1996|4p=23}} Some historians argue that it is more likely that Wessex itself was divided, with Æthelbald keeping his power base west of Selwood, Æthelwulf taking the east and Æthelberht keeping Kent. Pauline Stafford and D. P. Kirby point out that Asser implies that Judith became queen of the West Saxons in 856.{{sfnm|1a1=Stafford|1y=1981|1p=143|2a1=Kirby|2y=2000|2pp=166–167}} Sean Miller observes that Asser complained that the "son ruled where by rightful judgment the father should have done; for the western part of the Saxon land has always been more important than the eastern", and since Kent had been conquered only thirty years previously, it did not make sense to speak of it as having always been a less important part of the kingdom.{{sfnm|1a1=Keynes and Lapidge|1y=1983|1p=70|2a1=Miller|2y=2004}}