Talk:Synod of Chelsea

London Low‑importance

	London portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of London 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.LondonWikipedia:WikiProject LondonTemplate:WikiProject LondonLondon-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Anglo-Saxon Kingdoms Low‑importance

	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.

Christianity Low‑importance

	Christianity portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity 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.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

Latest comment: 16 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Peter Rex in "The English Resistance" mentions the Synod of Chelsea as producing a statement that kings should not be illegitimate - or rather "conceived in adultery", as well as that they were to rule well and properly etc. This is significant in that it appears to be the first written constitution. It is also significant in that Athelstan, Harald Harefoot and William I were all illegitimate but Athelstan and Harald were not "conceived in adultery", since their fathers were not married until after their births, but I do not think this was so with William.

Also Ethelred the Unready was restored in 1014 after he promised to rule better - in accordance with the terms of the Synod of Chelsea. I need to source this before I post it on the article and I am trying to find the relevent text. Can anyone help ? Streona (talk) 01:33, 24 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

Add topic