Edmund was born sometime between 990 and 993 to KingÆthelred the Unready. Little is known about Edmund's life before 1015; the first concrete evidence of his agency was from the late 1000s and he seems to have been close with his brotherÆthelstan. Although Edmund possibly fought alongside his father in the campaigns of 1009 to 1011 and the campaign of 1013, when the royal family was forced to flee to Normandy due toSweyn Forkbeard's invasion that year, Edmund stayed in England with Æthelstan. Æthelstan died in June 1014 and in his will Edmund was the main beneficiary, receiving the sword ofOffa and estates in theDanelaw. Edmund inherited Æthelstan's connections in theFive Boroughs, and when his close alliesSigeferth andMorcar were executed with the permission of King Æthelred, he revolted, illegally marrying Sigeferth's widow and occupying the Five Boroughs, even issuingcharters.
Edmund's revolt was suddenly ended by theinvasion of Sweyn's son Cnut in the summer of 1015. To contest Cnut's occupation inWessex, he attempted to raise armies alongside his father andEadric Streona,Ealdorman of Mercia, but they all collapsed due to mistrust. A third force raised withUhtred of Bamburgh unravelled as Uhtred submitted to Cnut when the latter threatenedBamburgh. Æthelred died on 23 April 1016 and Edmund soon claimed the throne. He fought in four battles with Cnut atPenselwood,Sherston,Brentford, and possiblyOtford, and received military success. By the time he faced Cnut at theBattle of Assandun, he was backed by the "whole English nation" but Eadric Streona fled, causing a decisive English defeat. After a possible sixth battle, Edmund was forced to partition the kingdom at Alney, with Cnut receiving everything except for Wessex, held by Edmund.
Edmund died on 30 November under suspicious circumstances, and there is historical debate as to whether foul play was involved. Afterwards, Cnut received the whole of England and exiled or executed Edmund's family and supporters. The Danish line founded by Cnut would end in 1042 and theHouse of Wessex was restored temporarily under Edmund's much younger half-brother,Edward the Confessor.Edgar the Ætheling, Edmund's grandson, was a claimant to the English throne for some time. Edmund's reputation was praised in medieval sources, and he is generally seen as a brave and capable king who fought Cnut to a standstill, forcing compromise.
Beginning in the 9th century,Scandinavian raids on English soil had steadily escalated, and they conquered much of England.[1] This came during a period of state formation in Scandinavia, withNorway,Sweden, andDenmark consolidating into kingdoms at about the same time as England was in the 10th century.[2] Although many foreign writers referred tokings of Denmark, there were in fact many petty kings and princes.[3] The largely English writers of theAnglo-Saxon Chronicle and other sources, writing for an English audience, oversimplified the nature of the raiders and focused on their plundering effects within England.[4]
The Anglo-Saxon kingdoms were poorly built to withstand Viking attack, butAlfred the Great reformed the West Saxon military system and declared himselfKing of the Anglo-Saxons, and his descendants would unite England.[5] ByEdward the Elder's death in 924, the remaining Danish polities south of the Humber were in English hands.[6] His sonÆthelstan was finally coronated as King of England in 927, and by the early 10th-century, the kingsEdward the Elder,Æthelstan, andEdmund I of England were increasingly forcing out the last vestiges of independent Viking rule from England.[7] Famously, Æthelstan and his brother Edmund, who succeeded him as king, fought at the bloodyBattle of Brunanburh, an English victory.[8] Edmund and his brotherEadred, who succeeded him as king because Edmund's own sons were too young, both lost and had to reconquer the north during their reigns.[9]
In 959, Edmund's second sonEdgar, known as "the Peaceable," was crowned asKing of England,[10] after the difficult reign of his elder brotherEadwig.[11] Edgar was able to claim suzerainty over Scotland, and it was during his reign that Viking raids on England significantly lessened.[12] Edgar would die in 975, which caused a succession dispute between the faction of his elder son,Edward, and his younger son,Æthelred, in which Edward was successful.[13] Edward was murdered in March 978 and was succeeded by Æthelred.[14] Towards the later Anglo-Saxon period, particularly the reign of Edmund's father,Æthelred, the Viking armies that invaded England expanded drastically in both professionalism and size.[15] Further, despite their efforts, the kings of all England could hardly rely on the support of their subjects within the formerDanelaw.[16] Æthelred's own character did not seem capable of addressing these issues. He is frequently compared to Alfred the Great in their contrasting success in dealing with invasion, although Keynes attempted to contextualise their differences. Frank Stenton attributed "spasmodic violence," to Æthelred but this is also contested more recently.[17] In the 1000s Æthelred would begin a programme of rearmament among the Englishwarrior class.[18]
TheAnglo-Saxon Chronicle (also known as ASC or Chronicle) as we know it likely has its origins in the late ninth century, under the rule ofAlfred the Great.[19] The annals of manuscripts (MSS) C, D, and E covering the period of 983 to 1022 are known as theÆthelredian Chronicle by some scholars, and display a tendency to praise Edmund for his vigor and effectiveness, but are strongly opposed to the policies of Æthelred and his advisors.[20] Ian Howard divides Edmund's character as depicted in the ASC into two phases: the first phase begins in 1015 and ends by Æthelred's death in April 1016, and the second begins with Æthelred's death and ends with Edmund's own death in November.[21] Although Howard calls the ASC "largely factual and also credible," the chronicler's recollection of events was colored by hindsight towards the events in question.[22] Levi Roach comments in his biography of Æthelred that "foreknowledge of the eventual English defeat haunts his writing at every turn."[23]
The anonymous author of theEncomium Emmae Reginae, often simply referred to as "The Encomiast," identifies himself in the text as a monk of theAbbey of Saint Bertin. He mentions that he wrote the work at the specific request of his patroness Emma, to whom he shows some gratitude, and that he had witnessed Cnut when the king visited the abbey on his journey homeward.[24] He probably began his work during the reign ofHarthacnut at the insistence of his patron, Emma of Normandy, and the Encomium was meant to signify the legitimacy of Emma and her children.[25] Thus, he was more willing to manipulate factual history to serve political purpose than the chronicler.[26] There are three contemporary sources on the period that are in the form of Norsepoetry, theKnútsdrapa, theVíkingarvísur, and theLiðsmannaflokkr, the last of which being even more vague in place names than the former two. All three serve to promote the reputation ofCnut the Great.[27]
Silver penny,Agnus Dei type, minted by Edmund's father, King Æthelred.[28]
The exact date of Edmund's birth is unclear, but it could have been no later than 993 when he was a signatory to charters along with his two elder brothers. Historian David McDermott suggests a birth year of 991.[29] He was named after his great-grandfather,Edmund I.[30] He was the third of the six sons of King Æthelred and his first wife, possibly calledÆlfgifu, who was probably the daughter ofEarl Thored of Northumbria. His elder brothers wereÆthelstan and Egbert (died c. 1005).[31] His younger brothers wereEadred,Eadwig and Edgar.[32] He had four sisters, Eadgyth (or Edith), Ælfgifu, Wulfhilda, and the Abbess of Wherwell Abbey.[31]
There is significant evidence that he was born in Wessex, possibly atÆthelingadene (modern-daySingleton), and raised by his grandmother,Ælfthryth.[33] This gave him ties with the sons ofOrdgar, who were powerful in the West Country.[34][b]Ordwulf, Ordgar's son was called "first among the men of Devon."[34] Given his later career, Edmund was probably taught in the use of arms, religion, andvirtues, though this is speculation.[35] He was possibly taught atWherwell Abbey, and likely in his mother's company.[36]
Edmund's birth was preceded by disorder in England, caused by a famine in 986, and escalating raids in the 980s that culminated in the decisive English defeat at theBattle of Maldon and tribute payment to Vikings.[37] Beyond the tribute of 10,000 pounds, the battle also saw the death of EaldormanByrhtnoth ofEssex.[37] As a result, Æthelred's attitude changed significantly.[38] In 993, at Pentecost, he summoned a council at Winchester admitting to wrongdoing and setting out to correct his supposed errors.[39] Æthelred promoted the cult ofEdward the Martyr, and reconciled with the reform movement in England.[40]
From 997, there had been constant raids in England, with only a pause in 1000 which made their way to Edmund's place of upbringing at Æthelingadene in 1001.[41][42] In 1002, Æthelred ordered theSt Brice's Day Massacre. The Danes were seen as a moral threat, and furthermore Æthelred may have doubted their loyalty, although they were unlikely to form afifth column.[43] Scandinavian raids continued led bySweyn Forkbeard ofDenmark from 1003 to 1004, and again in 1006, forcing the English into another tribute payment in 1007.[44][c] A large coalition led by the powerfulThorkell the Tall ravaged Southern England from 1009 to 1011, and found Æthelred's military response largely ineffective.[46] After his men sackedCanterbury and killedArchbishop Ælfheah, Thorkell defected to Æthelred as a mercenary. Though unrecorded, Edmund may have gained some early military experience fighting in the campaigns of 1009–1011, and later in 1013.[47][d] From 1005,Eadric Streona began to monopolise control at the king's court, forcing out many of Æthelred's former courtiers.[50] Both Eadric andUhtred of Bamburgh would marry daughters of Æthelred.[51]
Edmund (bottom) and his father Æthelred (top) on a 14th-century English genealogical roll
Edmund's mother died around 1000, or alternatively may have been repudiated.[52] Afterwards his father remarried, this time toEmma of Normandy, who had two sons,Edward the Confessor andAlfred and a daughterGoda. Æthelstan and Edmund seem to have been personally close and political allies, and they probably felt threatened by Emma's ambitions for her sons.[53]Edward the Confessor may have been born to Emma around 1004–1005, Godgifu 1007–1008, and Alfred 1011–1012.[54]
Sometime between 1007 and 1014, the church of Sherborne leased Edmund land atHolcombe Rogus.[55] Edmund's lease, witnessed by his household servants, and his brother's will later on allows for a partial understanding of the æthelings' households.[56] It was also witnessed by BishopLyfing of Wells (laterArchbishop of Canterbury), BishopÆthelric of Sherborne, Bishop Æthelsige of Cornwall, andÆthelmær the Stout, suggesting a connection with these men.[57] In addition, ArchbishopWulfstan of York and Eadric Streona witnessed the lease, seemingly acting as the king's representative in the negotiations for the grant.[58]
Sweyn launched an invasion of England in 1013 alongside his son Cnut.[59] After landing at Sandwich in August, he routed some initial resistance before heading northwards, receiving the submission of the English north ofWatling Street.[60] He then made his way south of Watling Street, at which point his men "did the greatest damage that any army could do," according to the ASC C.[61] Sweyn first attacked London, but lacking success he secured the rest ofWessex, receivingEaldorman Æthelmær's submission. Isolated, London surrendered, forcing Æthelred to flee for Normandy with his family, except for his two eldest living sons, Edmund and Æthelstan.[62]
It seems that those two had chosen to stay in England rather than fleeing with their father.[63][e] Sweyn died in February 1014, and his supporters, concentrated at Lindsey, and the Danish army, accepted Cnut as king. However, Cnut was untested militarily, and Sweyn's death had weakened the Danish cause in England.[65] Meanwhile Æthelred returned to England around Lent and raised an army from London, with which he attacked Cnut in April. Cnut was quickly defeated and fled to Denmark.[66]
Æthelstan "almost certainly" died in June of 1014.[67] In his will, Edmund was the main beneficiary in his brother's will; he received three swords (one fromOffa), a silver trumpet, land inEast Anglia andDerbyshire, and the responsibility of fulfilling a number ofbequests.[68] Æthelstan's will also reflected the close relationship between the brothers and the nobility of the East Midlands.[69] Edmund maintained Æthelstan's alliance with the Danelaw brothersSigeferth andMorcar against Eadric Streona.[70] One possible reason for their enmity was that Eadric was sympathetic to the claim of Emma's children, but there is no definite evidence.[71] Edmund became the heir presumptive for the throne, and headed the princes on the king's charters.[72]
In early 1015, at an assembly inOxford, Sigeferth and Morcar were tricked and executed by Eadric Streona. Æthelred, who was complicit, took over their lands and forced Sigeferth's wife, usually called Ealdgyth, to retire to a monastery atMalmesbury.[73] He may have chosen Malmesbury because it was a defensible royalburh, and also to drag her away from unrest in the midlands over the brothers' execution.[74][f][g]
Edmund reacted by rescuing Ealdgyth from Malmesbury and marrying her against the king's will.[80][h] Aside from the killing of his political allies, Edmund may have been provoked by the promotion of Emma of Normandy, her son Edward, and Eadric Streona at court.[82] There were many incidents at the time of noblewomen being taken and married, although some of these women probably colluded in their own abduction.[83]William of Malmesbury had access to the monastery's records on the topic, and he claims that upon seeing the widow, Edmund was taken with her.[84] More practically, by marrying her, he could reinforce his prestige and consolidate his support in Mercia.[85] Given his willingness to disobey his the king, Edmund may have lost his respect for his Æthelred's commands.[86]
Edmund probably used Malmesbury as a base to summon supporters before, with his new bride marching northwards along theFosse Way–an old Roman road–to theFive Boroughs, possibly with the addition ofTorksey (orDerby) andYork.[87] He then received the submission of the people of theFive Boroughs, and seized Sigeferth and Morcar's lands.[88] This would have been significant property. The ASC C calls the brothers "the chief thegns belonging to the Seven Boroughs," and Morcar's lands were concentrated inDerbyshire.[89] To gain support, Edmund issued at least two charters, granting land inNorthamptonshire andSuffolk, and may have issued more. On his diplomas, he went so far as to call himselfKing Edmund Ætheling, which may have exacerbated the situation, but changed to simply calling himself the son of the king.[90] Edmund's actions in the year were near-treasonous in nature.[91][i] The events probably took place between August and September, based on the accounts of thechronicle andJohn of Worcester, which date them to between theAssumption andNativity of Mary.[94]
After being ejected from England, Cnut was at Denmark, where his brotherHarald ruled.[95] Possibly taking advantage of the upheaval created in England, he launched his invasion and landed at Sandwich.[96] From here, rather than heading northward, where he would face Edmund, Cnut travelled deeper into Wessex to sack Dorset, Somerset, and Wiltshire.[97] Both Edmund and Cnut had influence with the midlands, and Edmund now directly controlled much of it, but Edmund's first few attempts to bring armies against Cnut were unsuccessful. The situation was confused; Æthelred lay bedridden atCosham and Edmund was formally in revolt. Still, Edmund raised an army from the Five Boroughs and joined with Eadric's own force by late September or early October.[98] This force also disintegrated, allegedly due to betrayal on Eadric's part, who then quickly surrendered to Cnut.[99]
Map of the 1015–1016 campaign in England
Eadric was followed by the West Saxons, who gave Cnut hostages and supplies.[100] By the end of 1015, Æthelred's control over his kingdom was collapsing, while Edmund controlled the Danelaw and Eastern Mercia, and Cnut held central Wessex.[101] In January of 1016, Cnut and Eadric advanced intoHwicce andWarwickshire where his men "ravaged and burnt, and killed all they came across" according to theASC C.[102] In response, Edmund raised an army amongst the Mercians, however they demanded that King Æthelred join them alongside the Londoners. It has been suggested that this was due to Edmund's lack of distinction as king, however there are other examples of powerful noblemen raising armies in Anglo-Saxon England, even in the campaign of 1015–1016. The Mercians probably lacked confidence of victory without the London garrison, and were outnumbered by Cnut and Eadric.[103]
Æthelred sent out orders for another general summons which Edmund carried out, threatening penalties on those who did not comply.[104] On the pleading of his son, Æthelred agreed to travel north from London, where he had fled after Wessex, with as many men he could muster, possibly meeting Edmund atSt Albans. However this force collapsed too as Æthelred fled due to perceived treachery.[105] TheASC C claims that "those who should support him" were the perpetrators.[106][j] At this point Edmund travelled northwards where he met Uhtred, his brother-in-law, either atBamburgh orYork. Together, they attacked Staffordshire, Shrewsbury, and Cheshire, which had defected to Cnut. He may have intended to attack Eadric’s support base and may have consciously refused battle with Cnut.[108] Cnut attacked the regions loyal to Edmund and headed to Northumbria along theGreat North Road.[109] His lands threatened, Uhtred rushed north and surrendered to Cnut upon hearing of this, but was executed.[110]
Soon afterwards, Edmund returned to his weakening father at London, possibly with the additional intention of raising troops.[111] Æthelred would die on 23 April 1016 with Edmund by his side, who quickly arranged his burial atOld St Paul's Cathedral, London. Father and son had made peace.[112] The citizens and councillors in London chose Edmund as king and probably crowned him.[113] The majority of the English magnates, in aWitan meeting atSouthampton, elected Cnut.[114] In McDermott's view, factors working in Edmund's favor for the election included his presence at London, the destabilising affect of Streona's switching sides, and Cnut's campaign in the country.[115] There was another claimant to the throne by Æthelred's death, Emma's son Edward, but his claim lacked support in England.[116]
In Pauline Stafford's view, there was "properly no English resistance" before the death of Æthelred.[117] After his election, Edmund marched into Wessex andJohn of Worcester claims that the West Saxons enthusiastically submitted to him.[k] However the more likely option was that Edmund had to use force and faced some resistance, as the West Saxon aristocracy was sharply divided in supporting Edmund.[121] Welsh support of Edmund is attested contemporaneously inThietmar's Chronicle and theLiðsmannaflokkr. Given Eadric Streona's prior raids into Wales, they were probably motivated by opposition to the ealdorman.[122] Beyond this, Edmund probably also relied on "deep wells of loyalty" to the royal family in Wessex, and may plausibly have had access to Scandinavian mercenaries left over from Æthelred.[123] With his new base, he began raising an army, possibly from the shires of Somerset, Wiltshire, and Dorset.[124]
After Edmund had left for Wessex, Cnut arrived atGreenwich around theRogation days on 7–9 May and promptly besieged London.[125] Unable to capture the city, Cnut campaigned into Wessex and faced Edmund atPenselwood. Generations later, Anglo-Norman narratives give the victory to Edmund,[126] and this is accepted by multiple modern historians.[127] However,Florence of Worcester claimed that Edmund was unable to raise enough troops in time, which James uses to suggest that Edmund would not have initiated fighting and that Cnut was victorious.[128] Alternatively, the result of Penselwood may have been inconclusive or even embarrassing for Edmund, causing reticence in the ASC.[129] By this argument, the Anglo-Normans declared Edmund the victor for ideological reasons.[130]
If the English were in fact defeated, then according to James, Edmund may have broken off from fighting and made his way towardsBath, inSomerset, while being pursued by Cnut.[131] In any case, the subsequentBattle of Sherston took place in the last week of June, and the Danish army was probably led by Cnut himself.[132][l] According to the ASC C, "a great number on both sides fell there."[106] Although Sherston was exhausting for both sides, Edmund, who is reputed to have fought bravely, seems to have won a marginal victory, maintaining the field.[134] Sherston strengthened Edmund's position in Wessex, and Malmesbury claimed that the remaining West Saxons submitted to Edmund, which is supported by repeated mentions of him raising troops from the region.[135] As a result, Sherston was a watershed moment, which gave Edmund the support base to maintain his resistance to Cnut.[136][m]
Cnut returned to besiege London, and Edmund raised a third army from Wessex before travelling to the town's relief.[138] As he marched, Edmund kept north of the Thames and launched a surprise attack fromTottenham, causing the Danes to flee to their ships.[139][n] Edmund stayed in London for two days before renewing the pursuit, crossing the Thames around Brentford and attacking Cnut, who had used the time to establish himself elsewhere, possibly at Brentford.[141] Edmund defeated Cnut and the Danes were forced to flee, however many of Edmund's men drowned in the river Thames, and he returned to Wessex to raise troops.[142] In the English king's absence, Cnut renewed the siege, and from the perspective of the Londoners this may have made Brentford a hollow victory.[143]
Cnut made little progress, and possibly around September, went on a plundering detour into Mercia.[144] Cnut's army returned to Kent by theRiver Medway, but Edmund quickly rallied another army and pursued the Danes to theIsle of Sheppey, likely having routed them in battle atOtford. However, he ceased his pursuit when Eadric Streona came over to him atAylesford.[145] It is clear that by this point Edmund was increasingly gaining influence over a wide area, even beyond his support bases in the Five Boroughs and Wessex, and the war was turning in his favour.[146] But his decision to allow Eadric back into his ranks was criticised heavily by the ASC, of which the C manuscript says that "no greater folly was ever agreed to."[147] Afterwards, Edmund returned to Wessex for a short time.[148]
Possibly in retaliation to Eadric's betrayal,[149] Cnut's army raided intoEssex and then Mercia.[150] According to the ASC C, Edmund raised an army from "the whole English nation," which likely refers to a wide base of support more than a nation in arms, and pursued the Danes as they returned into Essex, whereupon he overtook Cnut.[151] The East Anglians, led byUlfcytel, took up a significant portion of Edmund's army alongside his supporters in the Five Boroughs. The king was also joined by BishopEadnoth of Dorchester, and possibly his younger brotherEadwig.[152] TheBattle of Assandun is unusual in how precisely it can be dated, taking place on 18 October, lasting from just after noon to just before midnight, which itself is exceptional for its length.[153] Although he had claimed the high ground, Edmund charged downhill onto Cnut's army, and the Danish line appeared to buckle.[154] Either due to prior planning or fear in battle, Eadric fled from the battle, which opened the door to a decisive Danish victory.[155] The battle is recounted in the ASC C:
When the king learnt that the army had gone inland, for the fifth time he collected all the English nation; and pursued them and overtook them in Essex at the hill which is called Ashingdon, and they stoutly joined battle there. Then Ealdorman Eadric did as he had often done before: he was the first to start the flight with the Magonsæte, and thus betrayed his liege lord and all the people of England. There Cnut had the victory and won for himself all the English people. There was Bishop Eadnoth killed, and Abbot Wulfsige, and Ealdorman Ælfric, and Godwine, the ealdorman of Lindsey, and Ulfcetel of East Anglia, and Æthelweard, son of Ealdorman Æthelwine, and all the nobility of England was there destroyed.[147]
Death of Edmund Ironside in the Cambridge University Library.
Edmund suffered significant losses at Assandun including the deaths of many of his allies, as listed by the ASC.[156] He remained eager to continue the fight, but his ability to do so was weakened by his defeat.[157] The king travelled to Southern Mercia in an attempt to raise fresh forces, but was closely pursued by Cnut. There may have been one further battle in theForest of Dean, which is recorded by skaldic, rather than English sources, and if there was, it turned out to be an English defeat.[158]
Afterwards, Cnut and Edmund began negotiations atDeerhurst, and agreed to partition England at the Treaty of Alney. Cnut received Mercia and Northumbria, while Edmund received Wessex.[159] Also, the two paid off Cnut's army.[160] The fighting must have caused devastation over a wide area.[161] Edmund died on 30 November 1016, possibly at London, Oxford, or an unknown royal estate.[162]
Contemporary accounts do not suggest that he was murdered, but soon after the Norman Conquest,Adam of Bremen wrote that he had been poisoned, and twelfth-century writers stated that he was stabbed or shot with an arrow while sitting on a toilet. The suspicious circumstances of Edmund's early death and terse reporting of the ASC on the matter have caused significant debate on the cause, particularly the potential of foul play. According to the historian M.K. Lawson, these stories "doubtless owe more to folklore than history."[55] Timothy Bolton says that it is equally possible he died due to campaign fatigue and injuries as to assassination.[163] Cnut had a proven record for assassinating his opponents, and McDermott attributes some merit toAdam of Bremen's claim that Edmund was murdered.[164] He summarises some of the arguments either way, but concludes that Edmund more probably died from a mix of exhaustion, wounds, and illness.[165]
Mortuary chest of King Edmund, possibly Edmund Ironside.[166]
Edmund was buried near his grandfatherEdgar atGlastonbury Abbey inSomerset.[55] On the 15th anniversary of Edmund's death, Cnut would visit his tomb, laying a cloak of peacocks over it symbolising salvation andresurrection of the flesh. This was intended as continuity, but Cnut may have also held Edmund in high regard for his prowess; when he founded a new monastery atBury St Edmunds, he chose the anniversary of Assandun for its consecration.[167] Glastonbury Abbey was destroyed during theDissolution of the Monasteries in the 16th century, and any remains of a monument or crypt may have been plundered; hence the location of his remains is unclear. They may have been moved to the mortuary chest of a "King Edmund" at Winchester Cathedral.[166]
Cnut would secure the whole of England soon after Edmund's death.[168] He executed Eadric Streona in 1017, and implanted his own followers inMercia.[169] In dealing with Edmund's old supporters and family, he faced a potential usurpation attempt, and responded with expulsions and executions.[170] He also shored up his political support by marryingEmma of Normandy, which had the benefit of continuity and ensuring that Normandy would not back any usurpation attempts from the remaining æthelings.[171] Cnut's dynasty lasted until 1042 with the death of his sonHarthacnut and restoration of Wessex inEdward the Confessor, the last uncontested Anglo-Saxon king of England. He would be succeeded byWilliam the Conqueror in the wake of theNorman Conquest.
An 11th-century (1054) entry of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle
A lost source derived from the ASC, which Howard refers to as theLife of King Edmund Ironside for simplicity, introduced the by-names of Ironside around 1057 for Edmund and Streona for Eadric, and also informedJohn of Worcester's history.[172] By the mid-11th century, the by-name Ironside must have already been known.[173] Indeed, it may even have been contemporary to Edmund.[55] By the 12th century, the perception of Edmund had only improved.[166] TheAnglo-Norman chroniclers often inserted new information not present in 11th-century sources. Consistently, they characterised Edmund as an indefatigable and capable warrior, contrasted strongly with Æthelred, whomWilliam of Malmesbury was the harshest in criticising.[174] Literary invention was common, as was borrowing from classical and folkloric traditions to craft and augment narratives.[175]
Edmund's short reign led to academic neglect.[176] However, there is a positive historical consensus on the quality of Edmund's leadership. In Lawson's view, he was "probably a highly determined, skilled and indeed inspiring leader of men," whose efforts against Cnut were only matched in intensity byAlfred the Great.[55]Frank Stenton, although he believed that England's fate had already been decided in 1009–1012, remarked that Edmund "had a reputation of the kind which made a king formidable in disaster."[177]Levi Roach, at the end of his biography of Æthelred the Unready, called Edmund a "worthy successor."[178] McDermott's assessment of Edmund is as such:
The brevity of Edmund's reign has led to him being overlooked, but he should be accorded the recognition that is rightfully his. In the space of six months he proved himself to be a talented military leader, possessed of an indomitable will. He summoned five armies, relieved the siege of London and won all but one of his engagements against the Danes. His single defeat was the result not of incompetence but betrayal. Edmund did not live long enough to enact any laws, reform the Church or transform the country's military structures, but his brief reign saw the reappearance of something that had been absent in Anglo-Saxon England for several generations: a dynamic, resolute and successful warrior-king.[179]
Some historians have been less charitable towards Edmund. Richard Bolton characterises him in contrast to Cnut as the straightforward warrior facing off against a more cunning and underhanded rival.[180] He does not conclude that the conflict was a one-sided affair, rather one that rested on the shifting resolve of the English aristocracy.[180] According to Howard, Edmund's rebellious actions in 1015 became so severe that Æthelred ultimately "feared for his life when in [Edmund's] company."[181] Edmund's short reign to Howard was "no more than a postscript" to Æthelred's.[182] Where Lawson felt that Edmund's successes, contrasted with his father's misfortunes, showed proof that the late Anglo-Saxon state was still effective under good leadership,Simon Keynes has argued many of Æthelred's failures were due to factors beyond his reach.[o]
In 1015, Edmund married the widow of Sigeferth, who is supposedly namedEaldgyth. With her, he had two known children, both of whom were sent away by Cnut to secure his own position:[55]
^Numbers were not used to identify kings until well after the Norman Conquest of 1066, so their use to identify Anglo-Saxon kings is anachronistic. However, sinceEdmund I is usually identified as such, Edmund Ironside is sometimes referred to in the same manner.
^Ordgar was Edmund's great-grandfather through Ælfthryth
^Historin Levi Roach gives several arguments against completely discrediting Æthelred's use of the practice.[45]
^The martial footing of his elder brother Æthelstan's household,[48] whom he was close with (see below), and that Edmund had just reached military age, suggest they could have been campaigning against the Norsemen.[49] The chronicler may have wished to save Edmund of embarrassment by omitting unsuccessful campaigns he engaged in.[42] He may have also fought with his father in 1013.[42]
^Alternatively, the sons may have found a separate hiding spot in Ireland. Abels even expresses doubt that Æthelstan was still alive at this point.[64]
^Most historians accept that she was forced to and detained at Malmesbury.[75] However, David McDermott cautiously suggests that she could have been held for her own protection at Malmesbury, as the abuse of widows for their wealth was recognized in Anglo-Saxon society.[76]
^While not justifying Æthelred's action, which she called a "gross infraction of the laws of hospitality," Williams does provide possible explanations for Æthelred's decision, including suspicion of renewed disloyalty.[77] By contrast, Roach attributes it to the domineering influence of Eadric: "they suggest that Æthelred was increasingly a pawn in Eadric's powerful and grasping hands."[78] McDermott, echoing historians including Simon Keynes andPauline Stafford, offers both their submission to Sweyn and potential scheming with Edmund to depose Æthelred.[79]
^In a law code of Æthelred's, it is established that widows must stay unmarried for at least a year, after which point they could marry as they wished. Edmund's decision to marry Ealdgyth was thus illegal.[81]
^It's possible Edmund had attempted to claim the throne between Sweyn's death and Æthelred's return to England, but that would have been recorded in no annals or histories, and has little evidence either way.[92] If Sigeferth and Morcar colluded with Edmund in this endeavor, this may explain their executions.[93]
^The identity of the perpetrator is not known, however possibilities include Danish mercenaries, relatives of Sigeferth and Morcar, or even Edmund himself.[107]
^Anglo-Saxon nobles had access to paid household troops, based on a tradition deriving from thecompanions of Germanic leaders.[118] They could be calledhiredmenn,hearthweru, orcnihts, and acted as professional bodyguards to a lord and companions in battle.[119] For this and other services they received the legal and physical protection of their lord.[120]
^While the Encomiast claims that the Danes were led by Thorkell the Tall, this is contradicted by the earlierKnútsdrapa, and is itself suspect.[133]
^Bolton argues that Sherston was part of a general defection against Edmund for Cnut, though his argument is specifically referring to a group of noble English defectors.[137]
^The ASC uses the term "Clayhanger," now identified with Clayhill Farm in Tottenham.[140]
^Æthelred's culpability in the Danish conquest of England is a topic of debate among historians. SeeBackground section.
Howard, Ian (2013). "Promoting Royal Authority in England: the Making of Edmund Ironside". In Owen-Crocker, Gale; Schneider, Brian (eds.).Royal Authority in Anglo-Saxon England. Oxford, UK: BAR Publishing. pp. 29–35.ISBN978-1-4073-1158-6.
Howard, Ian (2003).Swein Forkbeard’s Invasions and the Danish Conquest of England, 991-1017. Bowdell Press.ISBN9780851159287.
McDermott, David (2020), Langlands, Alexander; Lavelle, Ryan (eds.),"Wessex and the Reign of Edmund II Ironside",The Land of the English Kin, Studies in Wessex and Anglo-Saxon England in Honour of Professor Barbara Yorke, Brill, pp. 336–352,ISBN978-90-04-34949-0{{citation}}: CS1 maint: work parameter with ISBN (link)
Mynors, R. A. B.; Thomson, R. M.;Winterbottom, M., eds. (1998).William of Malmesbury: Gesta Regum Anglorum, The History of the English Kings (in Latin and English). Vol. I. Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press.ISBN978-0-19-820678-1.
Stafford, Pauline (1989).Unification and Conquest: A Political and Social History of England in the Tenth and Eleventh Centuries. Edward Arnold.ISBN9780713165326.
^Keynes, Simon (2014). "Appendix I: Rulers of the English, c.450–1066". InLapidge, Michael (ed.).The Wiley-Blackwell Encyclopedia of Anglo-Saxon England. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.ISBN978-0-470-65632-7.
^Kirby, D. P.The Earliest English Kings. London and New York: Routledge.ISBN978-0-4152-4211-0.
.svg)
.svg)
.svg)
.svg)
.svg)
.svg)
.svg)
