Oooh, ooh, can I put in a claim for possibly-mythical Aelle, as the first listed bretwalda, assuming that he knew what a bretwalda was, that he existed, and that bretwalda means what we think it mean which it might not...? He's delightfully hazy.
Or I quite like Alfred, on the grounds that he started what Athelstan finished, and was the one who kind of set the ground rules what with 'liberating'/ conquering Mercia...
I do have a soft spot for Offa, particularly as he's a descendent of Penda who is my favorite pagan king, but I don't think he can really be king of England, because he's from the West Midlands and we can't possibly have a king from there, it just wouldn't be very English.
People call their kids after Alfred not Offa, even though Offa is a much cooler name. This is odd.
Yes, that's right - sorry, was I confusing? Alfred, then Edward, who built on that and tidied up a lot of loose ends, then Athelstan the Historical Golden Boy.
Athelstan seems to get a good writeup as kings go, but most of what he achieves is based on the foundations laid by Alfred, so it might seem a bit odd to hand him an exciting new historical hat that Alfred and Edward didn't have. Though you could argue otherwise (and people do, that's the fun of it after all).
I'd avoided the whole bretwalda question, though the claims of Athelstan and Edgar to be kings of Britain (Edgar uses basileus rather than rex, IIRC, possibly paying some tribute to Byzantine models) perhaps makes some appeal to it.
The problem with Offa is that his heirs are unable to maintain Mercian dominance or defend England against incursions by the Danes; Alfred becomes the (re)unifier and national hero.
Have you heard a theory that I rather like, that Alfred really is just the conquering hero of Wessex, and because most of the records come through Wessex, the Mercian viewpoint has been lost? A theory I rather liked when I read it. Alfred certainly took Mercia but whether the Mercians wanted to be taken is another matter. Later generations presented this as liberation rather than conquest. I wish I could remember where I came across it, but it was rather a long time ago now...
Though I think if you argue that, you could also argue that Wessex is what eventually becomes England when it reaches a certain size, so Offa couldn't have been king of England, as he lived outside it at the time.
Re bretwaldas: my understanding is that the derivation of the word is unclear, and it doesn't necessarily imply anything to do with the word Britain? Though it does seem unlikely that in the 5tyh century there was a clear concept of an England for Aelle to be king of, that could apply to Alfred too. Or even Athelstan.
I'm glad we didn't earn your disapprobation by naming Frodo-lad 'Alfred'! Mainly, though, I was thinking that if we did, half the time we'd end up calling him Arthur ;-) (You know, 1066... , "Then slowly answered Alfred from the barge", by Arthur Lord Tennyson.)
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2008-09-03 11:22 am (UTC)Or I quite like Alfred, on the grounds that he started what Athelstan finished, and was the one who kind of set the ground rules what with 'liberating'/ conquering Mercia...
I do have a soft spot for Offa, particularly as he's a descendent of Penda who is my favorite pagan king, but I don't think he can really be king of England, because he's from the West Midlands and we can't possibly have a king from there, it just wouldn't be very English.
People call their kids after Alfred not Offa, even though Offa is a much cooler name. This is odd.
no subject
Date: 2008-09-03 12:44 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-09-03 12:55 pm (UTC)Athelstan seems to get a good writeup as kings go, but most of what he achieves is based on the foundations laid by Alfred, so it might seem a bit odd to hand him an exciting new historical hat that Alfred and Edward didn't have. Though you could argue otherwise (and people do, that's the fun of it after all).
no subject
Date: 2008-09-03 08:06 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-09-03 10:38 pm (UTC)The problem with Offa is that his heirs are unable to maintain Mercian dominance or defend England against incursions by the Danes; Alfred becomes the (re)unifier and national hero.
no subject
Date: 2008-09-04 12:00 pm (UTC)Though I think if you argue that, you could also argue that Wessex is what eventually becomes England when it reaches a certain size, so Offa couldn't have been king of England, as he lived outside it at the time.
Re bretwaldas: my understanding is that the derivation of the word is unclear, and it doesn't necessarily imply anything to do with the word Britain? Though it does seem unlikely that in the 5tyh century there was a clear concept of an England for Aelle to be king of, that could apply to Alfred too. Or even Athelstan.
no subject
Date: 2008-09-06 07:23 pm (UTC)