The House of Godwine: The History of a Dynasty [Hardcover]

"This is an impressive untangling of a complex tale of revenge, double-dealing and deceit." The Sunday Times "A fascinating account" John Hudson, BBC History, July 2004

"A fascinating account"

Harold Godwineson was king of England from January 1066 until his death at Hastings on 14th October of that year. Although he was not the only candidate for the succession to the childless King Edward the Confessor, Harold had a far stronger claim than William of Normandy to the throne. For much of the reign of Edward the Confessor, who was married to Harold's sister Edith, the Godwine family, led by Earl Godwine, had dominated English politics. In The House of Godwine Emma Mason tells the turbulent story of a remarkable family which, until Harold's unexpected defeat, looked far more likely than the dukes of Normandy to provide the long-term rulers of England. But for the Norman conquest, an Anglo-Saxon England ruled by the Godwine dynasty would have developed very differntly from that dominated by the Normans.

Emma Mason's work charts the dramatic rise, and the even more spectacular fall, of the leading aristocratic dynasty in late Anglo-Saxon England.

The House of Godwine provides new perspectives on a well-known historical period, including the House of Godwine in its Nordic context. It puts into context the the Continental dimension of the crisis of 1051 and the "spin" that generated William of Normandy’s fictitious claim to the English throne.

EMMA MASON is Emeritus Reader in Medieval History in the University of London and the author of many books and articles on Anglo-Saxon and Norman England

The House of Godwine: The History of a Dynasty
Chapter 1
The Kingdom of England
When Godwine rose to prominence, the kingdom of England had been in existence for less than a century. In the wake of the Anglo-Saxon migration of the fifth century, many tribal kingdoms emerged, but the less viable were gradually absorbed by their stronger neighbours. Small territories, such as those of Lindsey, the Magonsaeton (the people of a region approximating to the diocese of Hereford), the Middle Angles, Surrey and Wight have left only sketchy traces in the historical records. Other kingdoms, including those of the East Saxons, the Hwicce (approximating to the diocese of Worcester), Kent, and the South Saxons, had a rather longer independent existence. Of the more powerful kingdoms, East Anglia fell to Danish invaders late in the ninth century. Northumbria’s component regions of Bernicia (north of Tees) and Deira (between Tees and Humber) both emerged in the sixth century, and were occasionally – but intermittently – ruled by the same king. The last king of Bernicia submitted to Æthelstan, the first king of all England, in 927. Deira was conquered by Danish invaders early in the tenth century; Mercia, which emerged early in the seventh century, retained its independence for about four hundred years, until its south-western part was taken over by Wessex, the most successful of all these kingdoms. It began to absorb its immediate neighbours even before the Danish invasions of the mid-ninth century, when it took advantage of the ensuing instability to bid for power on a much wider scale.1

The creation of the kingdom of all England owed much to the leadership of Alfred, king of Wessex 871-99, in resisting the Danish invaders and preserving the independence of his kingdom. But just as important as his military campaigns – and perhaps even more so – was the propaganda generated at his court, which probably owed much to his continental advisors. Alfred’s ancestry was traced back through the pagan god Woden to Sceldwa (or Scyld), the legendary founder of the Danish royal line. He in turn is identified as a descendant of the legendary Scaef, supposedly a fourth son of the biblical Noah. The ancestry of Noah was traced back through the Bible to Adam – the first man – who in St Luke’s genealogy of Christ was termed ‘son of God’, so that the West Saxon royal house claimed a divine source for its authority.2 Alfred’s claim to rule was reinforced by a story that he travelled to Rome in 853, when he was a small boy, and was consecrated king by Pope Leo IV. In fact the pope in question was probably not the distinguished Leo but his successor, the lesser-known Benedict III, and the ceremony which Alfred experienced was most likely either confirmation or some form of blessing. Yet this childhood memory was turned to good effect many years later, perhaps inspired by the story of how the sons of the Emperor Charlemagne were confirmed and anointed in 781 by Pope Hadrian I.3

The story of Alfred’s consecration in childhood was publicised by its inclusion in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle.4 The compilation and circulation of this work was one of the chief ways in which propaganda supporting Alfred’s rule was disseminated. It is generally accepted as having been a court product from the outset, although this view is not unanimous.5 The Chronicle is the one direct source of information on Alfred’s achievements. Readers learn only what he wanted them to know. Although its narrative touches occasionally on events outside Wessex, its focus is on Alfred’s predecessors and their victories, and his own, a theme intended to inspire his subjects to persevere in resisting the Danes. The claims of Alfred to lead all those who were still unconquered, including men from outside his frontiers – were reinforced by promoting the idea of an all-embracing identity. The concept of a unified English people can be traced back tentatively to Bede, in the early eighth century, when he wrote of the gens (people) of the Angles or Saxons.6 The term Angelcynn (the English people) occurs in a Mercian charter dating from the 850s, but was then taken up in Wessex. In the 880s and 890s it occurs in texts produced in Alfred’s court circle, and especially in works which contributed to his programme of educational renewal and expansion. In a letter circulated to his bishops, he reminded them of their shared past, while his lawcode claimed to restore to his newly united peoples (including those from outside Wessex who had evaded Danish control), the law which they had lost.7 Victory over the Danes at Edington in 878, was followed by the demarcation of a frontier between them and the Anglo-Saxons. A diagonal border now ran north westwards approximately from London to Chester, and the territory to the east of this line came to be known as the Danelaw. Scandinavian settlements were made in this region, more intensively in some areas than in others. Danish settlement was particularly dense in Yorkshire and to some extent in the territories controlled by the regional alliance known as the Five Boroughs – Derby, Leicester, Lincoln, Nottingham and Stamford. Elsewhere in the Danelaw the Danish presence was less intensive, largely comprising local territorial lords and their immediate following. Over successive generations intermarriage with the longer-established Anglian population led to cultural assimilation between the two peoples, reflected in a distinctly ‘northern’ outlook. Norwegians from the Northern Isles settled in Cumbria, while on the eastern side of England the land north of the Tees very largely escaped Danish settlement, leading to a division of Northumbria. Bernicia remained under its native rulers, while Deira was controlled by Danes. Mercia, too, was divided – in this case by the diagonal frontier which left its eastern lands under the control of the Five Boroughs.