Apocalypse and Atonement in the Politics of Æthelredian England
This paper discusses contemporary responses to the events of the reign of King Æthelred II (“the Unready”) of England (978–1016). It focuses on two particularly well-evidenced interpretations of the tribulations of the age: the penitential view of these as divine punishment, which might be lifted by an appropriate form of atonement; and the apocalyptic view of them as signs of the approaching Last Judgement and end of time. These have traditionally been treated as distinct and mutually exclusive lines of interpretation; however, it is argued here that they were, in fact, intimately related. On this basis, it is suggested that a closer connection existed between penitential and eschatological thought in the early and central Middle Ages than has hitherto been appreciated.
Public penance in Anglo-Saxon England
In a sermon for Ash Wednesday, after general exhortations to prayer, church-going, and almsgiving during Lent, Wulfstan discusses what is to be done with those guilty of ‘high’ sins: And sume men syndon eac Þe nyde sculan of cyricgemanan Þas halgan tid ascadene mid rihte weorðan for healican synnan, ealswa adam wearð of engla gemanan Þa ða he forworðe Þa myclan myrhðe Þe he on wunode ær ðam Þe he syngode … Leofan men, on Wodnesdæg, Þe byð caput ieiunii, bisceopas ascadað on manegum stowan ut of cyrican for heora agenan Þearfe Þa ðe healice on openlican synnan hy sylfe forgyltan. And eft on Ðunresdæg ær Eastran hy geinniað into cyrican Þa ðe geornlice Þæt Lencten heora synna betað, swa swa hym man wissað; Þonne absolutionem bisceopas ofer hy rædað [agus] for hi Þingiað [agus] mid Þam heora synna Þurh Godes mildheortnesse myclum gelyhtað. And Þæt is Þearflic gewuna, ac we his ne gymað swa wel swa we scoldan on ðisse Þeode, [agus] hit wære mycel Þearf Þæt hit man georne on gewunan hæfde.
Athelstan ‘Half King’ and his family
Anglo-Saxon genealogy is full of pitfalls, and it is not to be wondered that no one has followed the pioneer work of W. G. Searle in reconstructing the pedigrees of some of the noble houses. Much of the source material is suspect, or too vaguely worded for precise conclusions as to family relationships. The whole topic bristles with difficulties, yet its importance is fundamental; for this as for other periods, detailed examination of family ties and estates supplies essential background information for anyone seeking to uncover the interests and pressures which helped to formulate national policy.