Talk:Æthelweard (historian)

Æthelweard's descent

Note 4 on Æthelweard's descent is not the full picture. Wormald in ODNB says "Æthelweard's prefatory letter to her claims descent from Æthelred I, Alfred's elder brother, and he later says that Æthelred was his atavus (great-grandfather, great-great-grandfather, great-great-great-grandfather, or merely ancestor)." Sean Miller in the Wiley-Blackwell Encyclopedia says great-great-grandson. There is obviously disagreement among historians how to translate atavus. Dudley Miles (talk) 17:10, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

I found the atavus reference later in the work, the existing page said it was in the intro, and I was surprised not to find it there, but then I found Anscombe's reference to it being in Book IV (which I confirmed in the original chronicle). Those giving a specific relationship put a lot of emphasis on what they see as a parallelism Æthelweard is drawing between the two relationships: Matilda/Alfred and himself/Æthelred. Anscombe also points to Æthelweard's use of the term to relate Hengist to Woden, again great-great-grandchild, like with Matilda. However, if it means the more generic 'ancestor' then it would be equally appropriate and the Hengist and Matilda descents sharing the same number of generations would be just a misleading coincidence. That is why I chose to give Matilda's specific relationship to Alfred but avoid indicating this is what Æthelweard means by the term in reference to his own (even though Anscombe and Kelley both come down firmly on in meaning grandchild's grandchild). If you have a better way of addressing this, have at it.

There are two published studies on the family of Æthelstan Half-King that link Æthelweard to his immediate family in different ways, and perhaps at least the more recent merits mention as a counterweight to the Barlow/Kelley reconstruction. One is by Cyril Hart, in ASE 2, 1973, 115-144 (the other is a much older one in a genealogical periodical that I only vaguely remember seeing, so that will be harder to find unless Hart cites it). Agricolae (talk) 20:07, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Found the reference. Fenton Aylmer, "Æthelstan, the Half-King", Miscellanea Genealogica et Heraldica, 1924/5, 5th ser., 6: 341-347. Probably too old and too far from modern scholarship to merit mention. Agricolae (talk) 21:42, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Unusual literacy?

Wasn't it unusual for a man like Aethelweard to be literate - let alone literate in Latin? Yet, the article makes no mention of his literacy being unusual. Perhaps, it wasn't. But my impression has always been that illiteracy was general amongst the population of Dark Age/Early Medieval Europe. And that the nobility were no exception to that (excluding the ones destined for the church one assumes).

Be curious if anyone has anything to offer about this?

PainMan

Given he was a member of the highest nobility with close familial and social links to the royal family, and with Latin being the language of the church and of learning, it doesn't seem that surprising to me. Still, it is not whether we find it unusual that is important - the important question is whether any reliable source has found it so. If you find such a comment in the scholarly literature, then we can consider including it, but not based on our own feelings about it. Agricolae (talk) 22:17, 3 April 2017 (UTC)