lδθ THE SAXONS IN ENGLAND. [book i.
O'sric1 and O'shere2; AvSelweard3, AJSelheard4,
AJSelric5 and in all probability 0'swudu, between
an. 704-709. A few years later, viz. between an.
757 and 785, we find three brothers Eanberht6,
Ealdred7 and Uhtred8 claiming the royal title in
the same district, while Ofia their relative swayed
the paramount sceptre of Mercia. That other parts
of that great kingdom had always formed separate
states is certain : even in the time of Penda (who
reigned from 626 to 656) we know that the Middle
Angles were ruled by Peada, his son9, while Mere-
wald, another son, was king of the West Hecan or
people of Herefordshire10. In the important battle
of Winwidfeld, where the fall of Penda perhaps
secured the triumph of Christianity, we learn that
thirty royal commanders fell on the Mercian side11.
Under Æ^ilræd, Penda’s son and successor, we
find Beorhtwald calling himself a king in Mercia12.
During the reign of Centwine in Wessex, we hear
of a king, Baldred, whose kingdom probably com-
1 Cod. Dipl. No. 12.
3 Ibid. No. 56.
5 Ibid. No. 57.
7 Ibid. Nos. 125, 131,146.
9 Beda, Hist. Eccl. iii. 21.
11 Beda, Hist. Eccl. iii. 24.
2 Ibid. Nos. 17, 36.
1 Ibid. No. 53.
β Ibid. Nos. 102, 105.
8 Ibid. Nos. 117, 118, 128, 148.
ɪ0 Flor. Wig. App. Mercia.
“ Ioito ergo certaniine, fugati sunt et
caesi pagani, duces regii trigin ta qui ad auxilium л enerarɪt репе oɪnnes
interfecti.” The Saxon Chronicle is more detailed ; an. 654 : “ Hér
θ'swiɪi cyng ofsloh Pendan cyng on Winwidfelda and Prittig Cynebearna
mid him ; and ‰⅛ wæron sume cyningas. Dsera sum wæs Æftelhere
Annan bro‰r, Eastengla cyningas.”
12 Cod. Dipl. No. 26. William of Malmesbury, it is true, says of
him, “ Non quidem rex potestate, sed subregulus in quadam regni
parte.” Vit. Aldhelmi, Ang. Sacra, ii. 10. But it was not to be ex-
pected that Malmesbury would understand such a royalty as Baldred’s.
сн. Vi.]
THE KING-.
161
prised Sussex and part of Hampshire1 ; at the same
period also we find ÆSilheard calling himself king
of Wessex2, and perhaps also a brother ÆSilweard3
unless this be an error of transcription. Fri1Suwald
in a charter to the Monastery of Chertsey, men-
tions the following subreguli as concurring in the
grant : O'sric, Wighard and ÆSelwald 4.
There was a kingdom of Elmet in Yorkshire,
and even till the tenth century one of Bamborough.
The same facts might easily be shown of Eastanglia5,
Essex and Northumberland, were it necessary;
but enough seems to have been said to show how
numerously peopled with kings this island, always
fertilis tyrannorumβ, must have been in times where
of history has no record. As a chronicler of the
twelfth century has very justly said, “ Ea tempes-
tate venerunt multi et saepe de Germania, et oc-
Cupaverunt Eastangle et Merce sed necdum sub
uno rege redacti erant. Plures autem proceres
certatim regiones occupabant, unde innumerabilia
bella fiebant : proceres vero, quia multi erant, no-
mine carent7.”
From all that has preceded, it is clear that by
the term King we must understand something very
different among the Anglosaxons from the sense
* Will. Malm., Ant. Glast. an. 681, pp. 308, 309. Cod. Dipl.
Nos. 20, 28, 71, 73.
2 Cod. Dipl. No. 76. 3 Ibid. No. 73. ‘ Ibid. No. 987.
“ Igitur rex unus ibi erat aliquando, multi aliquando reguli.”
Henric. Hunt. Kb. v. “ Rex autem Eadmundus ipsis temporibus reg-
navit super omnia régna Eastanglorum.” Sim. Dunelm. an. 870.
fivaι δe καl πoλυaι>dpωτrov τηv vησov. .. .βaσιKtιs re κai δυvaστas
troλλoυr eχeuz. Diod. Sic. v. 21.
7 Henric. Hunt. lib. ii.