Talk:Æthelberht of Kent

B Class Article
I am sure this article should be a B class article, so I am changing it to B. Asturrulumbo 01:53, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Bertha
According to Barbara Yorke, "Kings and Kingdoms of Early Anglo-Saxon England", p. 28, Bertha was a Frankish princess, but "not a particularly prestigious one". It would be nice to understand why Yorke says this and incorporate this comment into the article. Mike Christie (talk) 03:24, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I also think it would be get to find a source for her death date; the WP entry on Bertha of Kent gives no source for their death date of c. 612. Bede says Eadbald married Æthelberht's "second" wife; presumably his stepmother.  The article says nothing about this wife except to mention that Eadbald married her. Mike Christie (talk) 01:35, 4 September 2007 (UTC)


 * There is material in Higham's Convert Kings which might be useful. Higham devotes 80 or so pages to Æthelberht and his conversion, quite a lot of it dealing with Francia. Bertha's father died in 567, so she wasn't the daughter of a ruling king. Although she may not have been especially important in Francia, but a marriage to any Frankish princess, even a cousin of a king, put the Kentings on much the same level as the Visigoths and Lombards, so she was undoubtedly important to Æthelberht and his father. Anyway, I don't see how Bertha's death could be dated. Her date of birth of 540x550 given by e.g. Riché presumably rests on the assumption of a long reign for Æthelberht, but since a shorter reign seems to be favoured now, that can't really be relied upon unless we're to suppose that he married a rather middle-aged Bertha. Angus McLellan (Talk) 10:10, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Bertha is reported as an insignificant Merovingian princess but there is more to Bertha than we are told ... from the Merovingian point of view. Let's start by her father: Charibert: King of Paris. Paris was his capital but his kingdom as such covered about half of nowadays France becuase he was Chlothar's eldest surviving son (hence the largest share). Charibert commits the crime to die son-less with one legitimate daughter Bertha and another daughter Chrothechilde or Clothilde the Superb who will make quite a fuss in later years as a nun. Son-less, his kingdom is split between his three surviving brothers&half-brother. Sighebert dies about 8ys later leaving at least a male heir; but Gunthram is not lucky as his sons die and same goes for Chilperic who due to his marital vagaries either loses his sons via violent deaths or illness. And you start to see where we are going. 1 daughter and 2 childless uncles; if we had that the surviving nephew was born from Brunehaut who hates Chilperic's ongoing wife Fredegunde... we start to see that possibly Bertha was much higher up in the hierarchy. Childless uncles especially Gunthram who spent his last years playing nephew against nephew (Chilperic dies leaving a 4mth old orphan (whose parentage remains debatable: Gunthram accepted him as his nephew after asking 300! witnesses on his brother's widow). If baby Chlothar had been proven a bastard, you see how high dear Bertha was to rise). I am not saying that a girl is much worth in a Salian Law ruled kingdom. But just like Brunehaut's father was hoping for a grandson to take over his kingdom since he had no son. it may well be that Bertha's groom was chosen only after long deliberations.

Marrying off the great grand daughter of Chlodoweg/Clothildis to a pagan (Atleast, Visigoths and Langobards were Christians if verging heretics, but Kent was Pagan) was a way to nullify any claim of a Kentish prince to the Frankish realm. Let's not forget Chlodoweg has forcibly eliminated all the would be males who had claims on his crown, Chlothar had personally himself eliminated his nephews!. Bertha was a girl with prospects. Had Chilperic 'son been seen as a bastard, the realm would have been divided between the Austrasiam faction and the Neustrian faction... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.176.105.136 (talk) 14:28, 30 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Walter Goffart (in Barbarian Tides) says [t]he Catholic daughter of the Frankish king Childebert I married “a gentleman of Kent,” the pagan son and heir of King Eormanric. But Childebert I had only two daughters, neither apparently called Bertha. Goffart gives as a source Gregory of Tours, Historiae 4.25, 9.26, ed. Krusch-Levison, pp. 156–57, 445. Alas, I have misplaced my copy of the Krusch-Levison edition, so I can't check it. Goffart is very good with his sources, but is this a case where Homer has nodded? Childebert lived from 496 to 558: Charibert from 517 to 567. Charibert became King of Paris shortly after Childebert (his uncle) had died. Keeping track of Merovingians is tricky, but has anyone an idea what is correct? Thomas Peardew (talk) 08:35, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Infelicity
"Æthelberht was later canonised for his role in restoring Christianity to the island of Great Britain". Ahem! Would "Æthelberht was later canonised for his role in establishing Christianity among the Anglo-Saxons" do? Angus McLellan (Talk) 23:40, 8 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Oops. Done.  I realized that the source given does actually not say why he was canonized; it's not controversial, but if you spot a source that does give the details, it would be good to add it. Mike Christie (talk) 05:41, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
 * As I understand it, people don't get canonized as a reward for what they did in life; they get canonized because miracles can be attributed to them or because they were martyred. —Angr If you've written a quality article... 20:05, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I think the Saint Ethelbert who was a miracle-working saint may not have been the King of Kent. There is a Saint Ethlebert who was king of somewhere else buried in Hereford Cathedral. He may even have been martyred,but I can't remember the full story. Nennius, 8/1/08 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.100.147.51 (talk) 23:59, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Nowadays. sainthood is attributed through a Godly life and miracles. Clovis was/is a saint and his wife is also a saint. I may be French, but I am not blind to the fact Clovis was a rather intense and war-loving death-giving king. In these days, Sainthood was generously given to any king who converted and thus converted his people. Roman Papal and Byzantine schismatic politics were a reality, plus Aethelbert was converted following the Roman tradition; not the Briton, not the Irish ones. Too often, biographers forget the bigger picture — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.4.105.164 (talk) 22:34, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Eadbaldobv.1.jpg
Image:Eadbaldobv.1.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 06:33, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Forms of name
The forms of name at the top should, I think, be restricted to just the forms used in modern reliable sources. Including every form of name ever used for an Anglo-Saxon king would lead to dozens of names. PASE has 34 different spellings listed, for example. Hence I've cut a recent addition of a form of Æthelberht's name with an eth in it. If there's any disagreement let's discuss it here. Mike Christie (talk) 12:37, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Then you should also change List of monarchs of Kent --Bluezy (talk) 12:58, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

WTF IS THIS
WTF is this "Æ" thats not even a letter. Is it supposed to be A or E or Ae or what. I dont care what crazy letters they make up in Britian, there shouldnt be an article with letters you cant make on the keyboard. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.166.47.139 (talk) 03:22, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Maybe you should calm down a bit and not be insulting. It's a letter in the Danish and Norwegian alphabets and was a letter in the Old English alphabet. And as you have copy and paste, if you'd just copied it into the search box on the left you'd see an article explaining what it is and how to make it on the keyboard. As you are in the US (Washington State University) you can use the advice given in the article that says "The Æ character (among others, including Å and ø) is accessible using AltGr+z on a modern US-International keyboard". Dougweller (talk) 08:26, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Forms of the name cut
I see The Man in Question has cut some forms of Æthelbert's name, including Æthelbert, Aethelberht, and Aethelbert. Any particular reason? Those names were included because they appear in modern secondary sources -- there are many other forms of the name used in old sources, which we don't need here, but I think it is worth including a form of his name at the start of the article if that's how you might have to look him up in a modern reference work. Mike Christie (talk) 10:50, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I've restored them. He really should be using edit summaries - he's making similar changes at other similar articles (and I'm waiting for an answer to a question I left on his talk page about something to do with spelling a name of a living person differently from the way the subject spells it). Dougweller (talk) 12:35, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

SVG map
I redrew the map as an SVG:



Is it good enough to replace the existing map? Marnanel (talk) 14:04, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Law code
Two quick points: An article on Æthelberht’s laws would be a good addition, perhaps it will be done in the fullness of time. Regards, Notuncurious (talk) 15:46, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
 * re explanation of requirement to pay twofold for crimes committed when the king is present: rather than say it related to the custom of a 'traveling' king, perhaps say it related to crimes committed in the king's presence (ie, violating the dignity) ... that was common penalty multiplier in various law codes. As for a 'traveling' king, that was a characteristic of kingship for several reasons, and I doubt that the penalties for crimes committed in the king's presence differed depending on where he was at the time (but I'm not certain here).
 * re ensuring that the widow/divorcee was provided for, perhaps that relates to the situation where a woman had owned property in her own right: I think the law says that she could not be alienated from that property (eg, when she came to a marriage already owning property) if her husband died or divorced her.

A detail, often overlooked is that Clovis and his heirs (Bertha being Clovis's great grand-daughter) applied a similar weregelt system. "The Law of the Salian Franks (Pactus Legis Salicae) was a written code that most likely originated during the reign of Clovis. It combined customary law, Roman law and royal edicts, and it followed Christian ideals. Salic Law would influence French and European law for centuries." This is not disrespecting Aethelbert's laws. It simply states that similar laws were existant and Aethelbert was the first Anglo-Saxon to put it down in writing. Interestingly enough, Venatius Fortunatus, the poet/bishop wrote that Chariber. Bertha's father was showing a great interest in law-making (plus said Charibert seems all in all to have been a lot less blood-thirsty as his brothers/uncles etc and any king who does divorce his wife and does not kill her in that era must be given kudos) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.4.105.164 (talk) 22:11, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Burial place
Just wondering why the article does not mention where Æthelberht was buried. Bede says (II.5) it was in St. Peter and St. Paul, with Bertha. Ælfgar (talk) 11:56, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
 * It's been a while since I wrote that section but my recollection is that I was avoiding statements that could be sourced only from Bede and weren't repeated in the secondary sources. I think it would be OK to add this with "according to Bede" attached. Mike Christie (talk - contribs -  library) 12:29, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I actually found the information while browsing the Oxford Dictionary of Saints, but I guess its author was merely repeating Bede. Ælfgar (talk) 17:55, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

After visiting Canterbury, I add the following details: Aethelbert was originally buried like his wife at St Martin's Canterbury. Later, probably after their son Eadbald made peace with the Catholic Church, he had his parents reburied at the Abbey, where apparently they still are as per the guide book. Eadbald is also buried near his parents and other Kentig kings and thus grand sons. great-grand sons... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.4.105.164 (talk) 22:27, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Typo in reference Bede 112
With the recently improved check of reference names and content consistency some minor glitches in referencing become better visible. Ref name "Bede_112" page 112 is defined with "Ch. 5" and with "Ch. 15". One of them is likely a typo, but this one requires the source to fix it. GermanJoe (talk) 12:06, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks for pointing that out; now fixed. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 12:43, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

TFA nomination
I am working on a TFA nomination for the 1400th anniversary of Æthelberht's death on 24 February 2016. Jonathunder (talk) 02:29, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

Æthelberht on the Calendar of saints (Episcopal Church) - May 27 - source?
That information should be sourced with a RS, although it is likely correct. I only found 2 reliable web sources talking about a proposed feast day in 2006 (see this source page 10 - the proposal was still on status "proposed" in 2009). But I wasn't able to locate a reliable source clearly listing this as officially accepted feast day. GermanJoe (talk) 02:33, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
 * It is confusing because The Episcopal Church does not have one liturgical calendar; it has three. Major observances are in the Book of Common Prayer, others are in Lesser Feasts and Fasts. For some years, a newer comprehensive calendar called Holy Men, Holy Women has been approved for trial use and has gone through several revisions as it slowly moves toward final approval. It is only in the 2009 and newer versions that Æthelberht and Bertha are listed together with a feast day of May 27. That trivia may interest liturgy geeks, but I think it's far too much for this article. Perhaps we could just say that the feast day of Æ&B together is May 27 in TEC and give the HMHW page number as a source. Jonathunder (talk) 19:50, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the clarification. The current phrasing is probably OK as is then ("... is honored ...") - but it definitely should have some kind of source. I completely agree with you, that additional liturgical details are not relevant for this article. GermanJoe (talk) 20:06, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I cited this page on the Episcopal Church's official website. Jonathunder (talk) 23:22, 9 February 2016 (UTC)