Editing Æthelwulf, King of Wessex (section)

== Early life ==
Æthelwulf was first recorded in 825, when Ecgberht won the crucial [[Battle of Ellandun]] in [[Wiltshire]] against King Beornwulf of Mercia, ending the long Mercian ascendancy over southern England. Ecgberht followed it up by sending Æthelwulf with [[Eahlstan]], [[Bishop of Sherborne]], and Wulfheard, Ealdorman of [[Hampshire]], with a large army into Kent to expel sub-king Baldred.{{efn|The historians [[Janet Nelson]] and [[Ann Williams (historian)|Ann Williams]] date Baldred's removal and the start of Æthelwulf's sub-kingship to 825,{{sfnm|1a1=Nelson|1y=2004a|2a1=Williams|2y=1991a}} but David Kirby states that Baldred was probably not driven out until 826.{{sfn|Kirby|2000|pp=155–56}} [[Simon Keynes]] cites the ''Anglo-Saxon Chronicle'' as stating that Æthelwulf expelled Baldred in 825, and secured the submission of the people of Kent, Surrey, Sussex, and Essex; however, charter evidence suggests that Beornwulf was recognised as overlord of Kent until he was killed in battle while attempting to put down a rebellion in East Anglia in 826. His successor as king of Mercia, [[Ludeca of Mercia|Ludeca]], never seems to have been recognised in Kent. In a charter of 828 Ecgberht refers to his son Æthelwulf "whom we have made king in Kent" as if the appointment was fairly new.{{sfn|Keynes|1993|pp=120–21}} }} Æthelwulf was descended from kings of Kent, and he was sub-king of Kent, and of [[Surrey]], [[Kingdom of Sussex|Sussex]] and [[Kingdom of Essex|Essex]], which were then included in the sub-kingdom, until he inherited the throne of Wessex in 839.{{sfnm|1a1=Williams|1y=1991a|2a1=Stenton |2y=1971|2p=231|3a1=Kirby|3y=2000|3pp=155–56}} His sub-kingship is recorded in charters, in some of which King Ecgberht acted with his son's permission,{{sfn|Nelson|2004a}} such as a grant in 838 to Bishop [[Beornmod]] of Rochester, and Æthelwulf himself issued a charter as King of Kent in the same year.{{sfn|Smyth|1995|p=673, n. 63}} Unlike their Mercian predecessors, who alienated the Kentish people by ruling from a distance, Æthelwulf and his father successfully cultivated local support by governing through Kentish ealdormen and promoting their interests.{{sfn|Keynes|1993|pp=112–20}} In Abels' view, Ecgberht and Æthelwulf rewarded their friends and purged Mercian supporters.{{sfn|Abels|2002|p=88}}{{efn|[[Canterbury Cathedral|Christ Church, Canterbury]] kept lists of patrons who had made donations to the church, and late 8th and early 9th century patrons who had been supporters of Mercian power were expunged from the lists towards the end of the 9th century.{{sfn|Fleming|1995|p=75}} }} Historians take differing views on the attitude of the new regime to the Kentish church. At Canterbury in 828, Ecgberht granted privileges to the [[Bishop of Rochester|bishopric of Rochester]], and according to the historian [[Simon Keynes]], Ecgberht and Æthelwulf took steps to secure the support of Archbishop Wulfred.{{sfnm|1a1=Keynes|1y=1993|1pp=120–21|2a1=Keynes|2y=1995|2p=40}} However, [[Nicholas Brooks (historian)|Nicholas Brooks]] argues that Wulfred's Mercian origin and connections proved a liability. Æthelwulf seized an estate in [[East Malling]] from the Canterbury church on the ground that it had only been granted by Baldred when he was in flight from the West Saxon forces; the issue of [[archbishop|archiepiscopal]] coinage was suspended for several years; and the only estate Wulfred was granted after 825 he received from King [[Wiglaf of Mercia]].{{sfn|Brooks|1984|pp=136–37}}

In 829, Ecgberht conquered Mercia, only for Wiglaf to recover his kingdom a year later.{{sfn|Stenton|1971|pp=232–33}} The scholar David Kirby sees Wiglaf's restoration in 830 as a dramatic reversal for Ecgberht, which was probably followed by his loss of control of the London mint and the Mercian recovery of Essex and Berkshire,{{sfn|Kirby|2000|p=157}} and the historian Heather Edwards states that his "immense conquest could not be maintained".{{sfn|Edwards|2004}} However, in the view of Keynes:

{{blockquote|It is interesting&nbsp;... that both Ecgberht and his son Æthelwulf appear to have respected the separate identity of Kent and its associated provinces, as if there appears to have been no plan at this stage to absorb the southeast into an enlarged kingdom stretching across the whole of southern England. Nor does it seem to have been the intention of Ecgberht and his successors to maintain the supremacy of any kind over the kingdom of Mercia&nbsp;... It is quite possible that Ecgberht had relinquished Mercia of his own volition; and there is no suggestion that any residual antagonism affected relations between the rulers of Wessex and Mercia thereafter.{{sfn|Keynes|1995|pp=40–41}}}}

In 838, King Ecgberht held an assembly at [[Kingston upon Thames|Kingston]] in Surrey, where Æthelwulf may have been consecrated as king by the archbishop. Ecgberht restored the East Malling estate to Wulfred's successor as Archbishop of Canterbury, [[Ceolnoth]], in return for a promise of "firm and unbroken friendship" for himself and Æthelwulf and their heirs, and the same condition is specified in a grant to the see of Winchester.{{efn|The authenticity of the Winchester charter is accepted by [[Patrick Wormald]] and [[Nicholas Brooks (historian)|Nicholas Brooks]] but disputed by [[Simon Keynes]].{{sfnm|1a1=Wormald|1y=1982|1p=140|2a1=Brooks|2y=1984|2p=200|3a1=Keynes|3y=1994|3p=1114 n. 3|4a1=S 281}} }} Ecgberht thus ensured support for Æthelwulf, who became the first son to succeed his father as West Saxon king since 641.{{sfnm|1a1=Wormald|1y=1982|1p=140|2a1=Keynes|2y=1994|2pp=1112–13}} At the same meeting, Kentish monasteries chose Æthelwulf as their lord, and he undertook that, after his death, they would have freedom to elect their heads. Wulfred had devoted his archiepiscopate to fighting against secular power over Kentish monasteries, but Ceolnoth now surrendered effective control to Æthelwulf, whose offer of freedom from control after his death was unlikely to be honoured by his successors. Kentish ecclesiastics and laymen now looked for protection against Viking attacks to West Saxon rather than Mercian royal power.{{sfnm|1a1=Nelson|1y=2004a|2a1=Keynes|2y=1993|2p=124|3a1=Brooks|3y=1984|3pp=197–201|4a1=Story|4y=2003|4p=223|5a1=Blair|5y=2005|5p=124}}

Ecgberht's conquests brought him wealth far greater than his predecessors had enjoyed and enabled him to purchase the support which secured the West Saxon throne for his descendants.{{sfn|Yorke|1990 |pp=148–49}} The stability brought by the dynastic succession of Ecgberht and Æthelwulf led to an expansion of commercial and agrarian resources, and to an expansion of royal income.{{sfn|Pratt|2007|p=17}} The wealth of the West Saxon kings was also increased by the agreement in 838–839 with Archbishop Ceolnoth for the previously independent West Saxon minsters to accept the king as their secular lord in return for his protection.{{sfn|Kelly|2005|p=89}} However, there was no certainty that the hegemony of Wessex would prove more permanent than that of Mercia.{{sfn|Abels|1998|p=28}}