Editing Eadwig (section)

=== Division of the kingdom 957–959 ===
In the summer of 957, the kingdom was divided between Eadwig in the south and Edgar in the north, with the [[River Thames]] forming the boundary.{{sfn|Keynes|2004}} According to "B", "King Eadwig was totally abandoned by the people north [of the Thames]. They despised him for his imprudent discharge of the power entrusted to him. The wise and sensible he destroyed in a spirit of idle hatred, replacing them with ignoramuses like himself to whom he took a liking."{{sfn|Winterbottom|Lapidge|2011|p=75}}

Until the late twentieth century most historians blamed the division on Eadwig's incompetent rule.{{sfn|Biggs|2008|pp=124–125}} [[William Hunt (priest)|William Hunt]] in his entry on Eadwig in the original ''[[Dictionary of National Biography]]'', published in 1889, stated that Eadwig carried on the government foolishly and provoked the Mercians and Northumbrians to rebellion by favouring the West Saxons.{{sfn|Hunt|1889|p=140}} In 1922, [[J. Armitage Robinson]] saw the division as the result of a revolt by the Mercians against Eadwig's misrule,{{sfn|Robinson|1923|p=87}} and in 1984 [[Henry Loyn]] attributed the division to Eadwig having "alienated responsible ecclesiastical opinion".{{sfn|Loyn|1984|p=90}} Stenton commented that it was probably through "mere irresponsibility" that Eadwig lost the greater part of his kingdom, that in the society of his West Saxon friends it is likely that he lost touch with the aristocracy of remoter areas.{{sfn|Stenton|1971|pp=366–367}} In the twenty first century, Christopher Lewis sees the division as the solution to "a dangerously unstable government and a court in deep crisis",{{sfn|Lewis|2008|p=106}} while Miller and Naismith attribute it to an unsuccessful attempt to promote a powerful new faction at the expense of the old guard.{{sfnm|1a1=Miller|1y=2014|1pp=155–156|2a1=Naismith|2y=2021|2p=234}}

Other historians reject the view that the division was caused by Eadwig's failures.{{sfnm|1a1=Biggs|1y=2008|1pp=124–125|2a1=Lavelle|2y=2008|2pp=29–30}} Four versions of the ''Anglo-Saxon Chronicle'' mention the division of the kingdom, and they all describe it as the "succession" of Edgar to the kingship of the Mercians, as if it was a normal and expected event. ''ASC D'' and ''ASC F'' date the division to 955, whereas ''ASC B'' and ''ASC C'' correctly date it to 957.{{sfnm|2a1=Biggs|2y=2008|2pp=129–131|1a1=Whitelock|1y=1979|1pp=224–225|3a1=Yorke|3y=1988|3p=78}} In [[Barbara Yorke]]'s view, the difference in dates may be because it was always intended that Edgar would rule Mercia as a sub-king, but he was unable to act in person until he came of age when he reached the age of fourteen in 957. The Worcester charter S 633{{efn|A charter's S number is its number in [[Peter Sawyer (historian)|Peter Sawyer]]'s catalogue of Anglo-Saxon charters, available online at the [https://esawyer.lib.cam.ac.uk/about/index.html Electronic Sawyer].}} of 956 (see the "Charters" section below) describes Edgar as {{lang|la|regulus}} (underking).{{sfnm|1a1=Yorke|1y=1988|1p=78|2a1=Jones|2y=1958|2p=107}} Charters of 957 to 959 suggest that the division was a peaceful political settlement: ealdormen and bishops with jurisdictions south of the Thames stayed with Eadwig and those with northern ones with Edgar, including those who had been promoted by Eadwig. Almost all [[thegn]]s who attested his charters before the division were loyal to him after it.{{sfnm|1a1=Keynes|1y=2004|2a1=Keynes|2y=2008a|2pp=7–8}} Both Edgar's prominence as an attester of charters up to the division, and his retention as king of Mercia of ealdormen appointed by Eadwig, are evidence of continuity, and that the division of the kingdom was not a coup against Eadwig.{{sfnm|1a1=Roach|1y=2013|1p= 41|2a1=Brooks|2y=1992|2p=19}} Keynes considers both views of the division of the kingdom plausible, commenting that it may have been the result of dissatisfaction with Eadwig's rule north of the Thames, but on the other hand there would have been no presumption at that period that political unity was desirable for its own sake, and it may always have been intended that Eadwig would share the kingship with his brother.{{sfn|Keynes|2004}}

Eadwig seems to have retained some seniority. He is described as "King of the English" in his charters, a title which Edgar only occasionally used; Edgar was mostly "King of the Mercians", and rarely also of the Northumbrians and the Britons.{{sfnm|1a1=Keynes|1y=2008a|1pp=7–8, 13|2a1=Keynes|2y=2008b|2pp=64–65}} All coins, including those issued in Mercia, were in Eadwig's name until his death, and the historian Frederick Biggs comments that if Edgar had seized control of Mercia, it is unlikely that he would have allowed Eadwig to keep control over the area's coinage. Biggs sees the division as a survival of the early Anglo-Saxon tradition of joint kingship.{{sfn|Biggs|2008|pp=124–125, 138}} Benedictine reformers such as Æthelwold opposed division because they wanted uniform monastic observance, which would be jeopardised if different kings supported different practices. Æthelwold criticised Eadwig for dividing the kingdom and praised Edgar for bringing it "back to oneness".{{sfn|Molyneaux|2015|p=215}}

There is no evidence of rivalry between the brothers, but there were disagreements. Soon after becoming king of Mercia Edgar recalled Dunstan from his exile, and he showed his disapproval of Eadwig's treatment of their grandmother by restoring her property when he acceded to the throne of England in 959.{{sfnm|1a1=Lavelle|1y=2008|1pp=29–30|2a1=Molyneaux|2y=2015|2p=33|3a1=Yorke|3y=2008|3p=146}} Æthelstan Half-King appears to have retired around the time of the division; he had been Edgar's foster-father and he may have thought it was the right time to hand over his responsibilities.{{sfn|Keynes|2004}} As Ælfhere was a Mercian ealdorman, he served under Edgar when the kingdom was divided even though he had been appointed by Eadwig, and he became Edgar's senior ealdorman.{{sfn|Williams|1982|p=157}}

[[File:S 594 Diploma of King Eadwig for Ælfwine AD 956.tif|thumb|upright=2.3|alt=Charter of Eadwig|[https://esawyer.lib.cam.ac.uk/charter/594.html Charter S 594:] Eadwig to his familiar, Ælfwine, in 956]]

Little is known of Eadwig after the division of the kingdom. A man called Ælfric became an ealdorman in the south-east in 957, but he probably died in 958.{{sfn|Keynes|2004}} Eadmund, probably Ealdorman of the Western Shires, had usually attested second among the lay magnates after Æthelstan before the division, and after it he moved up to first in Eadwig's charters until Ælfhere's brother Ælfheah was promoted from seneschal to Ealdorman of Central Wessex shortly before Eadwig died, and immediately went to the head of the lay attesters.{{sfnm|1a1=Keynes|1y=2002|1loc=table L|2a1=Williams|2y=2004c |3a1=Jayakumar|3y=2008|3p=91}}