[DIVISION OF MERCIA INTO FIVE DIOCESES.] lium DCC.I., juxta Dionisium, cujus errorem adhuc sancta sequitur ecclesia, anno DC.LXXIX. 1. Worcester. I. Et quia civitas Wigornia, tempore quo regnabant Britones vel Romani in Britannia, et tunc et nunc totius Hwicciæ vel Magesitaniæ metropolis extitit famosa, cathedram erexit pontificalem digniter in ea, parochiarum jam divisarum primam constituens Hwicciam; ad quam de monasterio Hildæ abbatissæ vir strenuissimus ac doctissimus Tatfrithus electus est antistes; sed priusquam ordinari posset, morte præreptus est immatura. 2. Lichfield. II. Secundam autem illam, quæ pertinet ad Episcopatum Licetfeldensem, cui virum religiosum ac modestum Cuthwinum præfecit. 3. Leicester. III. Tertiam vero Mediterraneam Angliam, in qua prædictus Episcopus Saxulfus, quia ita sibi placuit, resedit, pontificali cathedra illi constituta in civitate Leogera. 4. Lindsey at IV. Quartam denique Lindissim provinciam, cui præSidenacester. posuit virum sanctum Ethelwinum, germanum sancti Aldwini, abbatis monasterii quod Partaneum nuncupatur; statuens ei episcopalem sedem in civitate, quæ vocabatur Siddena. 5. Dorchester. V. Quintam vero constituit Suth-Angliame, ad quam de præfato monasterio Hild abbatissæ, singularis meriti et sanctitatis virum Ætlam elegit antistitem, eique præsulatus sedem in loco qui vocatur Dorcacestra constituit. Porro pro Tatfritho venerabilis vir Bosel electus, ab ipso Theodoro sicut et cæteri, ordinatus est Episcopus, habens episcopalem sedem in prædicta civitate Wigorna, quæ tunc temporis altis muris et moenibus pulcris decorata, multis urbibus clarior extitit atque sublimior. [Flor. Wig. in App. ad Chron. M. H. B. 622.] a Florence's statement is too late in date to be received without analysis and criticism. His authorities were, (1) Bede; (2) the lists of the Bishops of the sees of England, which he edits in his Appendix, but of which there are copies a century and a half earlier in date; and (3) the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle and its Latin version, the Worcester edition of which is embodied in his own work. His statements here fall into three classes, (1) those which are confirmed by, that is, were taken by him directly from, his authorities; (2) those which rest entirely on his evidence, so far as we are enabled to test them; and (3) those which are at variance with his authorities or with others of sound authenticity. To the first of these may be referred the fact of the subdivision of Mercia about the time at which he places it, and the names of the Bishops who presided over the newly-organized dioceses to the second, the enumeration of the original subdivisions and the fixing of the number five; the assertion of the synodical act by which the division was made, and the part taken by the king of the Hwiccians in procuring it to the third, the assigning of Lichfield to Cuthwin and of Leicester to Saxulf, which contradicts the evidence of the Lists on which no doubt his statement is founded. The first class of statements may [DIVISION OF MERCIA INTO FIVE DIOCESES.] be accepted, and the third rejected without further question: but the second is fair matter for criticism. The main points are, (1) the number of sees into which Mercia was divided; (2) the identification of the divisions; (3) the statements touching Leicester and Lichfield; (4) the statement touching Dorchester; (5) the formation of the see of Hereford. These are the subjects of the following notes. b The statement of the division of Mercia under King Ethelred into five dioceses may be either an ancient tradition in the church; or (2) an inference from the account given by Bede of the English dioceses, and from other particulars preserved by him; or (3) an attempt to account for the division as it existed in the time of the writer; although the five sees into which Mercia was divided in the 12th century do not coincide with the five into which it fell in the 8th. Either of the former theories would satisfactorily account for it; but a complication arises from the fact, that if Florence's identification of the five be adopted, the division was really into six; for he omits Hereford as one of the five, and introduces Dorchester. Either then the division into five must be given up as devoid of authority, or Hereford must be substituted for Dorchester, or we must suppose that when speaking of Mercia he meant to exclude Hereford as already separated, and not thrown into the general division. This last would be the most probable solution if it were not for other difficulties which are stated below. There are no materials for forming an indisputable conclusion. • This statement about the foundation of Worcester is based on the narrative and clothed in the words of Bede (IV. 23). A charter of Osric, of Nov. 6, 676, founding a nunnery at Bath, and held to be genuine by Kemble (K. C. D. XII.), speaks of the foundation by Osric of a Bishop's see, which would of course be Worcester, as already accomplished "juxta synodalia decreta." But the charter is questionable as to the indiction, and is signed by both Leutherius and Hedda, successive Bishops of the West Saxons. If it is genuine, it only shows that the arrangements for the division may have occupied some years. The statement that Lichfield was placed under Cuthwin and Leicester under Sexulf is contradicted by the evidence of the Lists of Bishops (M. H. B. 623. 624), which place Sexulf at Lichfield and Cuthwin at Leicester. Of Cuthwin nothing whatever is known except this: of Sexulf, Bede tells us that he succeeded Winfrid as Bishop of all Mercia (IV. 6), that he was Bishop of the Mercians, Middle Angles, and Lindisfari, until the year 678; when, VOL. III. Lindsey having been conquered by Egfrid of Northumbria, he relinquished the government of that portion of his diocese to Eadhed (IV. 12); and that he was the founder and abbot of Medeshamsted (IV. 6). We know further from Eddius (XLIV.), that he was dead before A.D. 692, in which year Wilfrid undertook the government of his see (a statement which corrects the A. S. C., where his death is placed in A.D. 705); and from Florence (Lists, M. H. B. 624) that on his death, which must have occured after that of Cuthwin, had reunited both Middle Anglia and Mercia under him, his dioceses were divided between Wilfrid and Headda. On Wilfrid's restoration to Hexham in A.D. 705, they were again united under Headda, and his successor Aldwin; the final separation being made on the death of Aldwin in A.D. 737 (Sim. Dun. ad ann.; M. H. B. 659). The Bishops of Leicester from Totta or Torthelm (A.D. 737) to Ceolred (A.D. 840-869) are called "Legoracensis civitatis' (K. C. D. MCCIV., and cf. the Professions of Bishops Hrethun, A.D. 816, and Ceolred, A.D. 840). From the accession of Alheard, who succeeded Ceolred, they are called Bishops of Dorchester (Flor. Wig. and A. S. C. ad A.D. 897). Florence at A.D. 785 calls Berhthun, Bishop of Lichfield, "Dorcestrensis Episcopus;" but this, as well as the date of Berhthun's death, is disproved by the evidence of charters. The removal of the see from Leicester to Dorchester was undoubtedly occasioned by the conquest of Mercia and Middle Anglia by the Danes, after which the succession at Lichfield also is broken off for nearly fifty years. The Danish conquest of Mercia took place in A.D. 874. William of Malmesbury (G. P.IV. ed. Savile, 165) has confounded the see of Lindsey with that of Dorchester, and placed at Dorchester both Eadhed the Northumbrian Bishop who was set over the Lindisfari in A.D. 678, and Ethelwin who was appointed on the division of Mercia in A.D. 679, with the whole line of his successors; an error arising probably from the fact that the dioceses of Leicester, Dorchester, and Lindsey had been united long before Malmesbury's time, and that the see had lately been transferred to Lincoln. Henry Wharton, in a note (on Chesterfield, A. S. I. 426-428) curiously full of mistakes, supposes that there was an early confusion between Sidnacester and Dorchester, and that on this occasion only one see was founded, and that at the former place. On this head however speculation is unnecessary; for the succession of the Lindsey Bishops, and their position as "Syddensis civitatis," or "Lindisfarorum Episcopi," are points well ascertained, although the exact locality of their see is uncertain. The line K [DIVISION OF MERCIA INTO FIVE DIOCESES.] breaks off, as does that of Lichfield, at the Danish conquest; and reappears in the middle of the 10th century: shortly after which date the dioceses of Lindsey and Dorchester were united. e Florence's statement that the fifth division of the kingdom of Mercia was formed into a diocese with the see at Dorchester requires examination. There can be no doubt that it rests on the mention by Bede of Ætla, a disciple of S. Hilda, as Bishop of Dorchester: for besides this there is no evidence of the existence of a see at Dorchester from the time when the West Saxon see was extinguished to the time when that of Leicester was transferred. Bede gives no clue as to whether Dorchester was in Wessex or in Mercia at the time of Ætla's appointment, and his name does not occur in the lists either of the West Saxon or of the Mercian Bishops. Supposing then that Florence's story is correct, and that Dorchester was in A.D. 679 made a Mercian see, we must conclude that Ætla, like Cuthwin of Leicester, by an early death left the newly created diocese to the government of Sexulf, under whom, as we have seen, the whole of Mercia except Lindsey and Hereford were reunited. Supposing, on the other hand, that Dorchester was still a part of Wessex, we should be inclined to identify Ætla with Hedda, or Heddi, the successor of Leutherius, by whom the West Saxon see was transferred from Dorchester to Winchester. This is not impossible, as several of the Anglo-Saxon Bishops had two names, and Ætla might be a familiar form of Hedda, just as Sigga is of Siegfried (cf. Fl. Wig., M. H. B. 618, Bæd. app. ibid. 288), and Totta of Torthelm (v. Fl. Wig.. M. H. B. 624 et not. ad loc.). This would account for the omission of Ætla, eo nomine, in the Lists, a circumstance extremely difficult to dispose of otherwise. And although Mabillon, arguing on a misreading of Bede, rejects it, it has been accepted by many authorities as the true solution. We have unfortunately no sufficient data to determine at what period Oxfordshire finally became a part of the kingdom of Mercia. It is possible that it may have been seized by Ethelred on the death of Æscwin in A.D. 676, but there is no authority for such a supposition; it is possible that it continued subject to Wessex until the battle of Bensington in A.D. 778 threw it permanently into Mercia. Bensington is very near Dorchester, and that certainly was West Saxon until the conquest by Offa. Gaimar's statement that Dorchester was in A.D. 704 the capital of Mercia is utterly absurd (M. H. B. 784). If Dorchester were indeed Mercian in A.D. 679, the case is very nearly parallel to that of the see of Lindsey: each was the seat of a Bishop belonging to a kingdom which had lately been deprived of the territory over which he presided; and each was a convenient place for Theodore on his system of subdivision to place there a new Bishop with a newly formed diocese. On the whole the matter must remain undecided. The elimination of Dorchester from the list of five Mercian sees would leave the place open for Hereford. As to its original foundation, see above. Putta had been Bishop of Rochester, and although he may for a few years have administered the district of Hecana, or Hereford, as the deputy of Sexulf (B. IV. 12), it does not follow that his presence there constituted it a separate see. Eadhed in A.D. 679 retired from Lindsey to Ripon, yet the latter did not become a see for that reason. It is possible that the final constitution of the see of Hereford was completed at the same time with that of the other divisions. The conclusion that must be arrived at on the view of the whole question, is that Florence has probably massed together under a definite date, A.D. 679, arrangements which had been in progress ever since the council of Hertford: and that by attempting to argue on that fixed date he was compelled to leave Hereford out of his calculations as already existing: the place of Hereford he has filled up with Dorchester, resting his assertion on a passage of Bede which is capable of other explanation, and thus has created a Mercian Bishopric of whose existence there is absolutely no other evidence. [COUNCIL AT ROME, A.D. 679.] Councils at Rome, A.D. 679–680, on the business of the English Church and of Wilfrid a. b 1. A.D. 679, Oct. Council at Rome of seventeen Bishops and thirty-five Priests under Pope Agatho in the cause of the English Church. [Irrespective of Wilfrid, although after he reached Rome.] Council at Rome In nomine Domini Salvatoris nostri Jesu Christi, to remove dif- imperantibus dominis nostris piissimis, Augustis, Conferences in the stantino majore imperatore anno vicesimo sexto, post English Church. consulatum ejus anno decimo, sed et Heraclio atque Tiberio novis Augustis, ejus fratribus, vicesimo secundo, indictione septima, mense Octobri, præsidente Agathone sanctissimo atque ter beatissimo apostolico universali Papa sanctæ Dei catholicæ atque apostolicæ ecclesiæ urbis Romæ, præpositis sacrosanctis evangeliis, in basilica Salvatoris Domini nostri Jesu Christi, quæ appellatur Constantiniana, consedentibus una cum eo gloriosis atque cognoscentibus sanctissimis Episcopis Crescente ecclesiæ Vivonensis Calabriæ, Andrea Hostiensi, Juvenali Albanensi, Mauricio Tiburtino, Johanne Falaritano, Benedicto Mesanensi, Theodosio Siracusano, Deusdedit Narniensi, Paulo Nomentano, Johanne Portuensi, Theodoro Nepesino, Vito Sylvæ Candidæ, Gaudioso Signiæ ecclesiæ, Georgio Agrigentino, Placentio Veliternensi, Georgio Catanensi, Deodato Tullensi; et venerabilibus presbyteris, Bonifacio, Petro, Juvenale, Theodosio, Georgio, Theodorio, Sergio, Theodorio, Sisinnio, Theodoro, Augusto, Benedicto, Paulo, Tribuno, Corono, Petro, Johanne, Sisinnio, Epiphanio, Sisinnio, Decoro, Soleuncio, Theopicto, Martino, Sisinnio, Georgio, Sisinnio, Johanne, Habito, Probino, Johanne, Martino, Petro, Eutichio et Georgio; astantibus quoque Deo amabilibus diaconibus, cunctoque clero. Agatho sanctissimus atque ter beatissimus Episcopus sanctæ catholicæ ecclesiæ atque apostolicæ urbis Romæ consedentibus dixit: "Non credo latere vestram fraternitatem, quamobrem ad hunc venerabilem conventum eam arcisciverim; cognoscere cupio vestram quippe sinceritatem, mecumque tractare, qualis sit ecclesiasticus status in Britannia insula, in qua per Dei gratiam fidelium multitudo concrebuit; nuper exorta est dissensio, cum una sit consonantia fidei, quam ex prædicatione atque doctrina hujus sacrosanctæ atque apostolicæ sedis ac beatæ memoriæ prædecessoris nostri sancti Gregorii [COUNCIL AT ROME, A.D. 679.] exorta ac directa, atque per sanctum Augustinum et ejus socios perceperunt." Andreas et Johannes reverentissimi Episcopi coram omnibus responsum dederunt, dicentes: "Clarum constat universis, quod multo pontificali succursu, ecclesiæ in Britannia insula positæ indigent, primum quidem quod dissensio ibidem inter sanctissimum Theodorum Archiepiscopum, et cæteros ejusdem provinciæ præsules, quam cum Dei præsidio sola possit apostolica auctoritas mitigare, et dissensionis fomitem subtrahere, dum origines scandalorum abscindat, atque superflua et Christianæ conversationi noxia ibidem geri considerata demat, et spirituali medela curet.” Agatho sanctissimus atque ter beatissimus Episcopus sanctæ ecclesiæ catholicæ atque apostolicæ urbis Romæ dixit: "Constat itaque quod vestra consideravit reverenda fraternitas, æquitati competere finienda, quia jam sunt quæ dudum concordi consideratione præviderunt et statuerunt prædecessores nostri; verbi gratia, primus beatus Gregorius hujus apostolicæ sedis pontifex, et totius Saxoniæ apostolicus apex, ejusque successores sancti pontifices usque ad nostra tempora. Et nos prævidimus et constituimus, ut statuta illa, quæ synodalibus decretis jamdudum solidata per beatum Petrum principem apostolorum fuerunt, in perpetuum ab omnibus ecclesiarum Christi præsulibus ibidem constitutis inconvulse atque illibate serventur." Crescens Episcopus ecclesiæ Vivonensis, et Juvenalis sanctæ Albanensis ecclesiæ Episcopus dixerunt: "Universa itaque synodus hæc, quæ una cum sanctissimo atque ter beatissimo Agathone Papa convenit, regulariter definiens, etsi humani generis inimicus, qui bonis seminibus interserere semper conatur zizania, cavendus est, et fidelibus Britanniæ insulæ ecclesias ecclesiarumque præsules adversus invicem excitare molitus est, verum superna clementia non permittit suos fideles usquequaque tentari, sed dat consilium, ut hii qui consulunt et consulantur, cum fide suscipiunt, pariter utrique salventur. Ideoque consideratis omnibus atque tractatis, quæque ex diversorum venientium relatione cognovimus, quæque ex scriptorum diversis vocibus huc ad apostolicam sedem directorum colligi potuerunt, solicitius flagitantes prævidimus communi consensu hanc definitionis sententiam promulgare. Number and ar "Unde ex auctoritate beati Petri apostolorum prinrangements of cipis, cui claves ligandi atque solvendi in cælo et in terra English Bishops. Conditor et Salvator generis humani Dominus noster |