Alfred of Wessex and Ceolwulf of Mercia

[Duncan Head]

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2015/dec/10/watlington-hoard-viking-silver-coins-alfred-the-great

http://theminiaturespage.com/boards/msg.mv?id=442781

I seem to have missed this article from last month about newly-found coin types which throw new light on the relationship between these two kings - both kings are shown enthroned together as if equals. The TMP discussion raises the interesting question of who actually minted them - the Guardian article suggests a joint issue but doesn't say whether this is unambiguously shown by the coin-legends, or why it is so believed.

[Patrick Waterson]

They seem to think that both kings issued the coins; one might imagine this would be to demonstrate their allied status.  The article surprisingly does not seem to consider the Viking conquest of Mercia as having had any role in ending the alliance.

[Tim]

One would not expect the Grauniad to print anything that might be interpretted as showing imigrants in a bad light...

[Duncan Head]

The article surprisingly does not seem to consider the Viking conquest of Mercia as having had any role in ending the alliance.

Isn't that the wrong way round? It was the Viking invaders who actually put Ceolwulf on the throne (at least according to the ASC version), so before the invasion there was no basis for an alliance between Wessex and Ceolwulf, who wasn't King. A Wessex-Ceolwulf alliance is more likely to have meant that he subsequently turned against his Viking patrons.

[aligern]

The ASC reference to Ceolwulf likely has more to do with the later situation in which Wessex wanted to de legitimise his rule. Portraying him as only a thegn makes sense if you are trying to take over and establish West Saxon hegemony. We do not know if Ceolwulf had a line with a claim that might have challenged Alfred's settlement. Earlier on an alliance with Ceolwulf mght have made sense, to try and detach him from the Vikings.
Roy

[Patrick Waterson]

The article surprisingly does not seem to consider the Viking conquest of Mercia as having had any role in ending the alliance.

Isn't that the wrong way round?

Yes, actually it is.  Sorry.

The ASC reference to Ceolwulf likely has more to do with the later situation in which Wessex wanted to de legitimise his rule. Portraying him as only a thegn makes sense if you are trying to take over and establish West Saxon hegemony. We do not know if Ceolwulf had a line with a claim that might have challenged Alfred's settlement. Earlier on an alliance with Ceolwulf might have made sense, to try and detach him from the Vikings.

One suspects Alfred may have been encouraging Ceolwulf to declare openly against the Vikings; Ceolwulf may have tried to please both sides for a while and eventually Alfred may have run out of patience with such double-dealing which we might regard as expediency but which he would see as a betrayal of the Anglo-Saxon people - particularly if when Ceolwulf finally did come off the fence he took the side of the Vikings, as the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle entry seems to imply.  Alfred was quite a forgiving king - witness his treatment of Guthrum - so I do not think he would have displaced Ceolwulf without a very good reason.