Little is known of the first twenty years of Egbert's reign, but it is
thought that he was able to maintain Wessex's independence against the
Mercia, which at that time dominated the other southern English
kingdoms. In 825 Egbert defeated
Beornwulf of Mercia at the battle of
and proceeded to take control of the Mercian dependencies in southeastern
England. In 829 Egbert defeated
Wiglaf of Mercia and drove him out of his kingdom, temporarily ruling
Mercia directly. Later that year Egbert received the submission of the
Northumbrian king at
Anglo-Saxon Chronicle subsequently described Egbert as a "bretwalda",
or "Ruler of Britain".
Egbert was unable to maintain this dominant position, and within a year
Wiglaf regained the throne of Mercia. However, Wessex did retain control of
Kent, Sussex and Surrey; these territories were given to Egbert's son
Ęthelwulf to rule as a subking under Egbert. When Egbert died in 839,
Ęthelwulf succeeded him; the southeastern kingdoms were finally absorbed
into the kingdom of Wessex after Ęthelwulf's death in 858.
Political context and early life
Offa of Mercia, who reigned from 757 to 796, was the dominant force in
Anglo-Saxon England in the second half of the eighth century. The
relationship between Offa and
Cynewulf, who was king of Wessex from 757 to 786, is not
well-documented, but it seems likely that Cynewulf maintained some
independence from Mercian overlordship. Charters, which were documents which
granted land to followers or to churchmen, and which were witnessed by the
kings who had power to grant the land, can provide evidence of overlordship
if, for example, a king's appearance on a charter is as a subregulus, or "subking".
Cynewulf appears as "King of the West Saxons" on a charter of Offa's in 772;
and he was defeated by Offa in battle in 779 at Bensington, but there is
nothing else to suggest Cynewulf was not his own master, and he is not known
to have acknowledged Offa as overlord.
Offa did have influence in the southeast of the country: a charter of 764
shows him in the company of
Heahberht of Kent, suggesting that Offa's influence helped place
Heahberht on the throne.
The extent of Offa's control of Kent between 765 and 776 is a matter of
debate amongst historians, but from 776 until about 784 it appears that the
Kentish kings had substantial independence from Mercia.
Egbert of Kent, ruled in that kingdom throughout the 770s; he is last
mentioned in 779, in a charter granting land at Rochester.
In 784 a new king of Kent appears in the
Ealhmund, who according to a marginal note is the father of Egbert of
Wessex: "This king Ealhmund was Egbert's father, Egbert was Ęthelwulf's
father". This is supported by the genealogical preface from the A text of
the Chronicle, which gives Egbert's father's name as Ealhmund without
further details. The preface probably dates from the late ninth century; the
marginal note is on the F manuscript of the Chronicle, which is a Kentish
version dating from about 1100.
Ealhmund does not appear to have long survived in power: after the
Chronicle's record of him in 784, and a charter of the same year in which he
grants land at Reculver, there is no further record of his activities. There
is, however, extensive evidence of Offa's domination of Kent during the late
780s, with his goals apparently going beyond overlordship to outright
annexation of the kingdom, and he has been described as "the rival, not the
overlord, of the Kentish kings". It is possible that the young Egbert fled
to Wessex in 785 or so; it is suggestive that the Chronicle mentions in a
later entry that
Beorhtric, Cynewulf's successor, helped Offa to exile Egbert.
Cynewulf was murdered in 786. Egbert may have contested the succession,
but Offa successfully intervened in the ensuing power struggle on the side
The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle records that Egbert spent three years in
before he was king, exiled by Beorhtric and Offa. This may have been an
error for thirteen years: the error would have been "iii" for "xiii" in the
original. Beorhrtic's reign lasted sixteen years, and not thirteen; and all
extant texts of the chronicle agree on "iii", but many modern accounts
assume that Egbert did indeed spend thirteen years in Francia. This requires
assuming that the error in transcription is common to every manuscript of
the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle; many historians make this assumption but others
have rejected it as unlikely, given the consistency of the sources.
In either case Egbert was probably exiled in 789, when Beorhtric, his rival,
married the daughter of Offa of Mercia.
At the time Egbert was in exile, Francia was ruled by Charlemagne, who
maintained Frankish influence in Northumbria and is known to have supported
Offa's enemies in the south. Another exile in Gaul at this time was Odberht,
a priest, who is almost certainly the same person as
Eadberht, who later became king of Kent. According to a later
William of Malmesbury, Egbert learned the arts of government during his
time in Gaul.
Beorhtric's dependency on Mercia continued into the reign of Offa's
Beorhtric died in 802, and Egbert came to the throne of Wessex, probably
with the support of Charlemagne and perhaps also the papacy.
The Mercians continued to oppose Egbert: the day of his accession, the
that time part of Mercia) attacked, under the leadership of their
Ęthelmund. Weohstan, a Wessex ealdorman, met him with men from
according to a fifteenth-century source, Weohstan had married Alburga,
Egbert's sister, and so was Egbert's brother-in-law.
The Hwicce were defeated, though Weohstan was killed as well as Ęthelmund.
Nothing more is recorded of Egbert's relations with Mercia for more than
twenty years after this battle. It seems likely that Egbert had no influence
outside his own borders, but on the other hand there is no evidence that he
ever submitted to the overlordship of Cenwulf. Cenwulf did have overlordship
of the rest of southern England, but in Cenwulf's charters the title of
"overlord of the southern English" never appears, presumably in consequence
of the independence of the kingdom of Wessex.
In 815 the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle records that Egbert ravaged the whole of
the territories of the remaining British kingdom,
known to the author of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle as the West Welsh; their
territory was about equivalent to what is now
Ten years later, a charter dated 19 August 825 indicates that Egbert was
campaigning in Dumnonia again; this may have been related to a battle
recorded in the Chronicle at Galford in 823, between the men of Devon and
the Britons of Cornwall.
It was also in 825 that one of the most important battles in Anglo-Saxon
history took place, when Egbert defeated
Beornwulf of Mercia at
This battle marked the end of the Mercian domination of southern England.
The Chronicle tells how Egbert followed up his victory: "Then he sent his
son Ęthelwulf from the army, and Ealhstan, his bishop, and Wulfheard, his
ealdorman, to Kent with a great troop." Ęthelwulf drove Baldred, the king of
Kent, north over the Thames, and according to the Chronicle, the men of
Kent, Essex, Surrey and Sussex then all submitted to Ęthelwulf "because
earlier they were wrongly forced away from his relatives."
This may refer to Offa's interventions in Kent at the time Egbert's father
Ealhmund became king; if so, the chronicler's remark may also indicate
Ealhmund had connections elsewhere in southeast England,
However, Wulfred, the archbishop of Canterbury, seems less likely to have
supported Egbert; his coinage was terminated by Egbert, and it is known that
Egbert seized property belonging to Canterbury.
The Chronicle's version of events makes it appear that Baldred was driven
out shortly after the battle, but this was probably not the case. A document
from Kent survives which gives the date, March 826, as being in the third
year of the reign of Beornwulf. This makes it likely that Beornwulf still
had authority in Kent at this date, as Baldred's overlord; hence Baldred was
apparently still in power.
In Essex, Egbert expelled King
Sigered, though the date is unknown. It may have been delayed until 829,
since a later chronicler associates the expulsion with a campaign of
Egbert's in that year against the Mercians.
The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle does not say who was the aggressor at Ellendun,
but one recent history asserts that Beornwulf was almost certainly the one
who attacked. According to this view, Beornwulf may have taken advantage of
the Wessex campaign in Dumnonia in the summer of 825. Beornwulf's motivation
would have been the threat of unrest or instability in the southeast: the
dynastic connections with Kent made Wessex a threat to Mercian dominance.
The consequences of Ellendun went beyond the immediate loss of Mercian
power in the southeast. According to the Chronicle, the East Anglians asked
for Egbert's protection against the Mercians in the same year, 825, though
it may actually have been in the following year that the request was made.
In 826 Beornwulf invaded East Anglia, presumably to recover his overlordship.
He was slain, however, as was his successor, Ludeca, who invaded East Anglia
in 827, evidently for the same reason. It may be that the Mercians were
hoping for support from Kent: there was some reason to suppose that
Archbishop of Canterbury, might be discontented with West Saxon rule, as
Egbert had terminated Wulfred's currency and had begun to mint his own, at
Rochester and Canterbury. The outcome in East Anglia was a disaster for the
Mercians which confirmed West Saxon power in the southeast.
Defeat of Mercia
In 829 Egbert invaded
Wiglaf, the king of Mercia, into exile. This victory gave Egbert control
of the London mint, and he issued coins as King of Mercia.
It was after this victory that the West Saxon scribe described him as a "bretwalda",
meaning "wide-ruler" or "Britain-ruler", in a famous passage in the
Anglo-Saxon Chronicle. The relevant part of the annal reads, in the [C]
manuscript of the Chronicle:
7 žy geare geeode Ecgbriht cing Myrcna rice 7 eall žęt be sužan Humbre
węs, 7 he węs eahtaža cing se še Bretenanwealda węs.
And the same year King Egbert conquered the kingdom of Mercia, and all
that was south of the Humber, and he was the eighth king who was 'Wide
The previous seven bretwaldas are also named by the Chronicler,
who gives the same seven names that Bede lists as holding imperium, starting
Ęlle of Sussex and ending with
Oswiu of Northumbria. The list is often thought to be incomplete,
omitting as it does some dominant Mercian kings such as
Penda and Offa. The exact meaning of the title has been much debated; it
has been described as "a term of encomiastic poetry"
but there is also evidence that it implied a definite role of military
Later in 829, according to the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, Egbert received the
submission of the Northumbrians at
Dore (now a
Sheffield); the Northumbrian king was probably
According to a later chronicler,
Roger of Wendover, Egbert invaded Northumbria and plundered it before
Eanred submitted: "When Egbert had obtained all the southern kingdoms, he
led a large army into Northumbria, and laid waste that province with severe
pillaging, and made King Eanred pay tribute." Roger of Wendover is known to
have incorporated Northumbrian annals into his version; the Chronicle does
not mention these events.
However, the nature of Eanred's submission has been questioned: one
historian has suggested that it is more likely that the meeting at Dore
represented a mutual recognition of sovereignty.
In 830 Egbert led a successful expedition against the
certainly with the intent of extending West Saxon influence into the Welsh
lands previously within the Mercian orbit. This marked the high point of
Reduction in influence after 829
In 830, Mercia regained its independence under Wiglafthe Chronicle
merely says that Wiglaf "obtained the kingdom of Mercia again",
but the most likely explanation is that this was the result of a Mercian
rebellion against Wessex rule.
Egbert's dominion over southern England came to an end with Wiglaf's
recovery of power. Wiglaf's return is followed by evidence of his
independence from Wessex. Charters indicate Wiglaf had authority in
Middlesex and Berkshire, and in a charter of 836 Wiglaf uses the phrase "my
bishops, duces, and magistrates" to describe a group that included
eleven bishops from the episcopate of Canterbury, including bishops of sees
in West Saxon territory.
It is significant that Wiglaf was still able to call together such a group
of notables; the West Saxons, even if they were able to do so, held no such
Wiglaf may also have brought Essex back into the Mercian orbit during the
years after he recovered the throne.
In East Anglia, King
Ęthelstan minted coins, possibly as early as 827, but more likely c. 830
after Egbert's influence was reduced with Wiglaf's return to power in Mercia.
This demonstration of independence on East Anglia's part is not unexpected,
as it was Ęthelstan who was probably responsible for the defeat and death of
both Beornwulf and Ludeca.
Both Wessex's sudden rise to power in the late 820s, and the subsequent
failure to retain this dominant position, have been examined by historians
looking for underlying causes. One plausible explanation for the events of
this years is that Wessex's fortunes were to some degree dependent on
Carolingian support. The Franks supported
Eardwulf when he recovered the throne of Northumbria in 808, so it is
plausible that they also supported Egbert's accession in 802. At Easter 839,
not long before Egbert's death, he was in touch with
Louis the Pious, king of the Franks, to arrange safe passage to Rome.
Hence a continuing relationship with the Franks seems to be part of southern
English politics during the first half of the ninth century.
Carolingian support may have been one of the factors that helped Egbert
achieve the military successes of the late 820s. However, the Rhenish and
Frankish commercial networks collapsed at some time in the 820s or 830s, and
in addition, a rebellion broke out in February 830 against Louis the Pious;
the first of a series of internal conflicts that lasted through the 830s and
beyond. These distractions may have prevented Louis from supporting Egbert.
In this view, the withdrawal of Frankish influence would have left East
Anglia, Mercia and Wessex to find a balance of power not dependent on
Despite the loss of dominance, Egbert's military successes fundamentally
changed the political landscape of Anglo-Saxon England. Wessex retained
control of the south-eastern kingdoms, with the possible exception of Essex;
and Mercia did not regain control of East Anglia.
Egbert's victories marked the end of the independent existence of the
kingdoms of Kent and Sussex. The conquered territories were administered as
a subkingdom for a while, including Surrey and possibly Essex.
Although Ęthelwulf was a subking under Egbert, it is clear that he
maintained his own royal household, with which he travelled around his
kingdom. Charters issued in Kent described Egbert and Ęthelwulf as "kings of
the West Saxons and also of the people of Kent", and when Ęthelwulf died in
858 his will, in which Wessex is left to one son and the southeastern
kingdom to another, makes it clear that it was not until after 858 that the
kingdoms were fully integrated.
Mercia remained a threat, however; Egbert's son Ęthelwulf, established as
king of Kent, gave estates to Christ Church, Canterbury, probably in order
to counter any influence the Mercians might still have there.
In the southwest, Egbert was defeated in 836 at
Carhampton by the
but in 838 he won a battle against them and their allies the West Welsh at
Hingston Down in Cornwall. The Dumnonian royal line continued after this
time, but it is at this date that the independence of the last British
kingdom may be considered to have ended.
The details of Anglo-Saxon expansion into Cornwall are quite poorly
recorded, but some evidence comes from the occurrence of Anglo-Saxon place
At a council at Kingston-upon-Thames in 838, Egbert and
Ęthelwulf granted land to the sees of Winchester
and Canterbury in return for the promise of support for Ęthelwulf's claim to
the throne. The archbishop of Canterbury,
also accepted Egbert and Ęthelwulf as the lords and protectors of the
monasteries under Ceolnoth's control. These agreements, along with a later
charter in which Ęthelwulf confirmed church privileges, suggest that the
church had recognized that Wessex was a new political power that must be
Churchmen consecrated the king at coronation ceremonies, and helped to write
the wills which specified the king's heir; their support had real value in
establishing West Saxon control and a smooth succession for Egbert's line.
Both the record of the Council of Kingston, and another charter of that
year, include the identical phrasing: that a condition of the grant is that
"we ourselves and our heirs shall always hereafter have firm and unshakable
friendships from Archbishop Ceolnoth and his congregation at Christ Church".
Although nothing is known of any other claimants to the throne, it is
likely that there were other surviving descendants of Cerdic (the supposed
progenitor of all the kings of Wessex) who might have contended for the
kingdom. Egbert died in 839, and his will, according to the account of it
found in the will of his grandson,
Alfred the Great,
left land only to male members of his family, so that the estates should not
be lost to the royal house through marriage. Egbert's wealth, acquired
through conquest, was no doubt one reason for his ability to purchase the
support of the southeastern church establishment; the thriftiness of his
will indicates he understood the importance of personal wealth to a king.
The kingship of Wessex had been frequently contested among different
branches of the royal line, and it is a noteworthy achievement of Egbert's
that he was able to ensure Ęthelwulf's untroubled succession. In addition,
Ęthelwulf's experience of kingship, in the subkingdom formed from Egbert's
southeastern conquests, would have been valuable to him when he took the