He Argues the First King of England Should Get His Due

Long before the Battle of Hastings or the Magna Carta, a visionary king quietly forged the nation of England—yet few today know his name. As Britain marks 1,100 years since Æthelstan's coronation, a new push led by historian David Woodman aims to restore the first king of England to what some believe to be his rightful place in history. Woodman, joined by other historians, is rallying for more public recognition of the king who "became the first to rule over an area recognizable as 'England'" in AD927, as a University of Cambridge article explains—potentially via a public memorial and widespread inclusion in school curricula.

"There has been so much focus on 1066, the moment when England was conquered," says Woodman, who has written a new biography of Æthelstan. "It's about time we thought about its formation, and the person who brought it together in the first place." Why has Æthelstan languished in obscurity? Woodman blames it partly on a lack of medieval PR. While his grandfather, Alfred the Great, had a biographer to trumpet his deeds, Æthelstan's reputation was quickly eclipsed by later kings like Edgar. Some also argue his kingdom fragmented after his death in 939 with the Viking seizure of York, but "just because things broke down after Æthelstan's death doesn't mean that he didn't create England in the first place," Woodman tells the BBC.

Æthelstan's legacy, Woodman claims, is robust: He subdued Viking strongholds in the north, drew Welsh and Scottish kings into fealty, and scored a defining win at the Battle of Brunanburh in 937—a clash Woodman says belongs in the same league as Hastings. As Clare Downham writes in a review of The First King of England for the Conversation, "overall, Woodman presents Æthelstan as a European king, a scholar, with ruthless ambitions and a strong streak of piety."