Talk:Wulfnoth Cild

	Anglo-Saxon England portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anglo-Saxon Kingdoms, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Anglo-Saxon Kingdoms on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Anglo-Saxon KingdomsWikipedia:WikiProject Anglo-Saxon KingdomsTemplate:WikiProject Anglo-Saxon KingdomsAnglo-Saxon Kingdoms articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Biography

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles

Middle Ages Low‑importance

	Middle Ages portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Middle AgesWikipedia:WikiProject Middle AgesTemplate:WikiProject Middle AgesMiddle Ages articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

England

	England portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Ancestry[edit]

There seems to be a constant trickle of edits trying to make Harold and Godwin and Wulfnoth into members of the West Saxon royal family. There don't seem to be any historians who accept this. Fleming's article on Harold in the DNB says: "The origins of this parvenu are extremely obscure ... Godwine was the quintessential new man, described as such even by his family's apologist, the author of the life of King Edward. There is some evidence to suggest that Godwine was the son of the late tenth-century renegade and pirate Wulfnoth of Sussex, who had rebelled spectacularly against Aethelred the Unready and had purloined his fleet; and judging from the location of Godwine's estates it does appear that the family had long been established as thegns in Sussex and Hampshire." If the Vita Ædwardi Regis knows nothing of Godwin's royal ancestry, that seems to be quite decisive. Had Godwin been descended from Alfred's elder brother, that's something that we'd expect to be told. Angus McLellan (Talk) 18:40, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

I shall put something on the article page under "Controversy over Ancestry". The Houses of Alfred and Ethelred are out of kilter generation-wise, but this is no reason to dismiss them as Freeman does. My own family has an average of 38 years between generations (my son d.o.b. 1998, me, 1958, my son's grandmother 1924 and great grandmother 1882) In the same time period a family given to teenage births would fit in another 3 generations - as does the Line of Ethelred over a slightly longer period Streona (talk) 20:18, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The position as to Harold, Godwin and Wulfnoth's relationship with the West Saxon Royal Family needs closer research. The House of Wessex Family Tree referenced at the base of this article and others sets out the gist of this claim and follows research from Professor Kelley available through the Foundation for Medieval Genealogy. Is the Vita Edwardi an apologia for Godwin or for Edward ? The legend, put about by Florence of Worcester that Godwin was a wandering herdsman who guided Knut's horse through the mist is often still trotted out, but is no longer believed. Your quote is contradictory in describing Godwin as a "new man" and yet also says his family had long been established as thegns in Sussex and Hampshire. Also Wulfnoth may have been a renegade, but he commanded a squadron of ships in the Navy under his uncle who was the feet commander- which does not indicate that he was some obscure matelot (or "butsecarl")as Fleming loftily suggests. The land of Compton, which was granted to Godwin in Athelstan's will, had formerly been that of his father Wulfnoth, which had been willed to Ethelred Is son by Alfred the Great. The dating of some of these grants creates some problems which need further research, but if it can be established that Wulfnoth was the son of Aethelmaer the Stout then the FMG quote a charter of Ethelred II naming Aethelmaer as the son of Aethelweard the Historian, who traces his ancestry back through Eadric of Washington, Aethelthryth and Ethelhelm to King Ethelred I. This is an impotant issue for if this is correct, then the House of Ethelred is in fact the Senior line- not a cadet branch, which would make King Harold NOT a usurper at all, but the rightful king by primogeniture (actually Sweyn Godwinsson would have been, had he not been dead). Also if Aethelmaer is Wulfnoth's father, this would make him Brihtric's brother and Eadric Streona's brother too.Streona (talk) 19:52, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If it is correct, yes. But it's strange that this ingenious theory doesn't seem to have registered in the wider world. Until it can be established, by reference to published work, that Wulfnoth was a descendant of Æthelred, it seems premature to include it. That Æthelmær son of Æthelweard was the same person as one or both of the ealdormen of that name seems possible but uncertain, but that's not the issue: what's missing is a link from Æthelmær to Wulfnoth. Angus McLellan (Talk) 20:35, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. There are many internet references in people's supposed personal genealogies, but it is difficult to nail this one. I think that the link between them is often assumed through the office of "Cild of Sussex", but this is not conclusive, although it is suggestive. People have often imagined that Eadric Streona was the son of Aethelric of Mercia because he succeeded him in a supposedly hereditary position, but this is not so, since Aethelric was fired. I am not awed by the lack of recent acceptance- there is a monograph which supports this view called "The House of Ethelred" by David Kelley, but I have not read it- it mentioned on the FMG website. What is strange, if this is so, is that Godwin did not press his own claim to the throne over that of Edward the Confessor. There is a discontinuity introduced by Cnut. It may even have been politic for Godwin to deliberately obscure hid ancestry, since after 1016, Cnut systematically assassinated the sons of Ethelred the Unready and Athelweard, the son of Aethelmaer Se Greata simply because of who they were. Godwin proved himself and his loyalty meritocratically. Streona (talk) 23:17, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alfred Anscombe "The Pedigree of Godwine" Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, 3rd ser. vol 7, pp129 - 150 appears to be the first reference to the Ethelred/Harold theory. Streona (talk) 00:47, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also- N.A.Scleicher "The House of Godwin (Journal of Ancient & Medieval History V) Utah 1988

D.H. Kelley 2The House of Ethelred" Brook LL ed.1989 Studies in Genealogy & Family History & Tribute to Charles Evans on the event of his 80th birthday.

PASE say on Aethelmaer 22 (et al) "the issue of Aethelmaers in the late 10th or early 11th centuries is not an easy - or perhaps a possible one to resolve". Whilst the PASE characteristically refer to upto seven Aethelmaers in the period several of these are likely the same, but it looks like there were probably two. Our boy is Aethelmaer Se Greata, son of Aethelweard 23 Streona (talk) 23:31, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can I refer you to the discussion on RootsWeb:GEN-MED (http/archiver.rootsweb.com/th/read/GEN-MEDIEVAL/1995/-12/0819306036) which is very good- and supportive of my contention, because a lot of these genealogy websites are very unreliable. To precis, Chris Bennett says this, to the question "What answer does your source give for the parentage of Harold's grandfather, Wulfnoth. Both Freeman and Barlow have concluded that they could find no evidence of who Wulfnoth was andd without this the rest of the chain is invalid ?"

The short answer is Florence of Worcester, who gives an ancestry that Godwin was the son of Wulfnoth, son of Aethelmaer, son of Aethelric and brother of Eadric Streona. This evidence was rejected by Freeman but accepted by Barlow "Can we conceive of Eadwrad marrying the great great neice (Ealdgyth) of his own brother-in-law. Can we believe that Edward belonged to the same generation as his wife's great grandfather (Aethelmaer).

To which Kelley replies that Ealdgyth - Edward's sister, married a substantially older man (Streona) when Edward was only 5 years old and Edward married in his 40s to a wike 15 years his junior. The dates work weven if the genealogy is odd. Kelley also accepts Anscombe's argument that Aethelric is an error for Aethelweard (Aethelric was Streona's predecessor as Ealdorman of Mercia, as I said above, but not his ancestor). The evidence of Atheling Athelstan's will, willing Compton to Godwin was possibly not available to Freeman or Barlow.

Florence is also the originator of the claims that Godwin and Eadric Streona were of "low birth". Perhaps this is a reference to character rather than pedigree, since he evidently contradicts himself (and it is not true) and what he meant is better idiomatically translated as "low-life" rather than "birth".

Streona (talk) 10:16, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

John of Worcester is normally quite well informed, but Barlow in The Godwins doesn't repeat his story as such. Surely if it was the general belief that Godwin was the great-nephew of the detested Eadric Streona someone would have remembered it after Harold was dead and it would have been every Norman history. Angus McLellan (Talk) 21:02, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not if it supported Harold's claim to the throne, and I am not aware that anyone dissed Eadric the Wild because Streona was his uncle. William claimed to have an hereditary claim to the English throne- which was extremely tenuous - but which was claimed to be greater than Harold's. Streona (talk) 15:36, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And it would still have been better than Harold's: Edward promised William the throne, Harold swore to uphold William's claims. It would be a fairly incompetent writer who couldn't make a good case from that.

Can you add references? I doubt if random readers will known who D.H. Kelley is, and where he said whatever it is that he said. I certainly don't. Angus McLellan (Talk) 01:30, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wiliiam had two claims 1. was hereditary and 2. designation from Edward the Confessor. The hereditary claim was that his great aunt was Emma, second wife of Ethelred the Unready. Which is like saying the nephew of Camilla Parker-Bowles or the Spencers have a claim to the throne - quite apart from the question of illegitimacy (which to be fair never stopped Athelstan, but was an issue with Harald Harefoot). The question is whether or not Edward had the right to give the country away by designation. Again the issue between Hardicanute and his illegitimate half-brother Harald Harefoot was that of designation by Canute. King Edmund I made a treaty with the Danes that whoever lived longest would inherit the entire kingdom. Luckily it was him (just). I would suggest that the decision was in the hands of the Witanegemot. A witanegemot elected - or acclaimed- Canute, although a different witanegemot simultaneously acclaimed Edmund; he sill felt it necessary to establish some legitimacy. The usual process was that the Witanegemot chose from the candidates who were "aetheling" - usually descended from Cerdic. And that is the question we started with.

I suggest that Harold may not have opposed Williams candidature, but that the witan would have rejected it anyway, having taken into account Edward's wishes, they still were not going to select a foreign psychopathic bastard (I do not mean these as insults). Certainly many of the witan, such as Stigand, may have been close to the Godwins, but that was the point- William had few links with England and Harold was a successful and proven military leader and adminstrator.Streona (talk) 09:57, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but the reader still won't know where D.H. Kelley wrote this because there's no reference. Angus McLellan (Talk) 15:36, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dunnit. - Uncle EadricStreona (talk) 18:22, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Meaning of Name[edit]

Does anyone know enough Old English to guess what the name "Wulfnoth Cild" means? Wulf is obviously "wolf," and apparently "Cild" is child, but what about "noth"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:41:C101:A790:A0D5:F8BA:D43A:278D (talk) 02:04, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]