The Laws of Wihtræd, 695 AD
The text is known only through the copy that survives in Textus Roffensis (c.1123). Wihtræd ascended the throne of the kingdom of Kent probably in the autumn of 691 and reigned until his death on 23rd April 725. He was for a brief period joint ruler with Swæfheard, an invader, the son of King Sebbi of the East Saxons, who ruled Kent from 688. But by July 694 it seems that Wihtræd was sole ruler.1
Note on the Old English text
The arrangement of the text approximates that of the manuscript though word division has been normalised according to modern editorial convention. Where a single word is split over two lines, this is indicated by a hyphen. The basic punctuation mark (the punctus) has been converted to a comma wherever appropriate, though there is no attempt to re-order punctuation. Abbreviations, wherever they can be clearly understood, have been expanded and the expanded part is written in italics; however, the Tironian nota ‘7’ is preserved (this is equivalent to the modern ‘&’). Scribal alterations (erasures and overwriting) of individual letters are not noted, with the exception of one very obvious erasure (see footnote 5). Letters or words inserted above the line or in a margin have been included in the line proper and have been italicised. The insertion mark and corresponding text in the bottom margin of folio 6r have been represented as they appear in the manuscript; the lines of the text have therefore not been re-ordered. Any scribal errors relating to grammar or spelling have not been corrected in the text but are noted in footnotes.
Transcription
5r (select folio number to open facsimile)
Ðis synd wihtrædes
domas cantwara cyninges.2 Ðam mildestan cyninge cantwara, wihtræde
rixigendum þe fiftan wintra his rices,
þy, niguðan gebanne, sextan dæge rugernes, in
þære stowe þy hatte berghamstyde, ðær wæs
gesamnad eadigra geheahtendlic3 ymcyme, ðær
wæs birhtwald bretone heahbiscop, 7 se ærnæm-
da cyning, eac þan hrofesceastre bisceop se ilca
gybmund wæs haten, andward wæs 7 cwæð, ælc
had ciricean ðære mægðe anmodlice mid þy
hersuman folcy. Þær ða eadigan fundon mid
ealra gemedum ðas domas, 7 cantwara rihtum
þeawum æcton swa hit hyr efter segeþ 7 cwyþ.
Ciricean freolsdome4 gafola 7 man for cyning ge-
bidde, 7 hine buton neadhæse heora willum weor-
þige_n.5 Ciricean mundbyrd sie ·l· scll swa cin-
ges. Vnrihthæmde mæn to rihtum life mid syn-
na hreowe tofon, oþþe of ciricean genaman,6 ascadene
sieN. Æltheodige mæn gif hio hiora hæmed
rihtan nyllað, of lande mid hiora æhtum 7 mid
synnum gewiten, swæse mæn in leodum ciriclicæs
gemanan ungestrodyne þoligen. Gif ðæs geweor-
þe gesiþcundne mannan ofer þis gemot þæt he un-
riht hæmed genime ofer cyngæs bebod 7 biscopes
7 boca dom, se þæt gebete his dryhtne ·c· scll, an
ald reht. Gif hit ceorlisc man sie, gebete ·L· scll,
7 gehwæder þæt hæmed mid hreowe forlæte. Gif
priost læfe unriht hæmed, oþþe fulwihðe,7 untru-
mes forsitte, oþþe to þon druncen sie þæt he ne mæ-
ge, sio he stille his þegnungæ oþ biscopes dom.
Gif bescoren man steorleas, gange him an gest-
liðnesse gefe him man ænes 7 þæt ne geweorðe bu-
ton he leafnesse hæbbe þæt hine man læng feor-
mige. Gif man his mæn an wiofode freols gefe,
se sie folcfry, freolsgefa age his erfe ænde
wergeld, 7 munde þare hina, sie ofer mearce ðær he
wille. Gif esne ofer8 dryhtnes hæse þeowweorc wyr-
ce an sunnan æfen efter hire setlgange oþ monan
æfenes setlgang ·Lxxx· scll se dryhtne9 gebete. Gif
esne deþ his rade þæs dæges ·vi· se wið dryhten gebe-
te oþþe sine hyd. Gif friman þonne an ðane for-
bodenan timan sio he healsfange scyldig, 7 se man
se þæt arasie he age healf þæt wite 7 ðæt weorc. Gif ceorl
buton wifes wisdome deoflum gelde, he sie ealra his
æhtan scyldig, 7 healsfange, gif butwu deoflum
geldaþ, sion hio healsfange, scyldigo 7 ealra æhtan.
Gif þeuw deoflum geldaþ ·vi· scll gebete, oþþe his hyd.
Gif mon his heowum in fæsten flæsc gefe, frigne ge
þeowne halsfange alyse. Gif þeow ete his sylfes
ræde ·vi· scll oþþe his hyd. Biscopes word 7 cynin-
ges sie unlægne buton aþe. Mynstres aldor
hine cænne in preostes canne, preost hine clæn-
sie sylfæs soþe in his halgum hrægle ætforan
wiofode ðus cweþende, Veritatem dico in christo non
mentior, swylce diacon hine clænsie. Cliroc
feowra sum hine clænsie his heafodgemacene
7 ane his hand on wiofode oþre ætstanden aþ
abycgan. Gest hine clænsie sylfes aþe on wiofode ⁜10
7 ðissa ealra að sie unlegnæ. Ðanne is cirican
⁜ swylce cyninges ðeng.11 Ceorlisc man hine feowra
sum his heafodgemacene on weofode,
canne riht, gif man biscopes esne tihte oþþe cy-
ninges cænne hine an gerefan hand oþþe hine
gerefa clensie oþþe selle to swinganne. Gif man
gedes þeuwne esne in heora gemange, tihte his
dryhten hine his ane aþe geclænsie gif he husl-
genga sie, gif he huslgenga nis hæbbe him in aþe
oðirne æwdan godne,12 oþþe gelde, oþþe selle to swin-
ganne. Gif folcesmannes esne tihte ciricanman-
nes esne oþþe ciricanmannes esne tihte folces-
mannes esne, his dryhten hine ane his aþe ge-
clensige. Gif man leud ofslea an þeofðe, licge
buton wyrgelde. Gif man frigne man æt hæb-
bendre handa gefo þanne wealde se cyning ðreo-
ra anes, oððe hine man cwelle, oþþe ofer sæ selle,
oþþe13 hine his wergelde alese. Se þe hine gefo 7 ge-
gange healfne hine age, gif hine man cwelle, geselle14
heom man ·Lxx· scll. Gif þeuw stele 7 hi man15
alese ·Lxx· scll swa hweder swa cyning wille, gif
hine man acwelle þam agende hi man16 healfne
agelde. Gif feorran cumen man oþþe fræmde
buton wege gange, 7 he þonne nawðer ne hryme,
ne he horn ne blawe, for ðeof he bið to profi-
anne oþþe to sleanne, oþþe to alysenne.
Translation17
These are the judgements of Wihtræd, king of the Kentish people
To the most gracious king of the Kentish people, Wihtræd – reigning in the fifth winter of his rule,18 in the ninth indiction, 19 the sixth day of Rugern20 - there was gathered, in the place which is called Bearsted,21 a council of noble men. There was present Berhtwald,22 archbishop of Britain,23 and the aforementioned king, also the bishop of Rochester who was called Gebmund.24 And every ecclesiastic of that people’s Church spoke in unison with the loyal populace.25 There, with the agreement of all, the noble men instituted these judgements,26 and they added to the lawful customs of the Kentish people as it hereafter states and declares:
[There is to be] freedom of the Church from taxation; and one should pray for the king and do him honour of their own free will, without compulsion.
Violation of the protection of the Church shall be 50 shillings,27 as the king’s.
Persons in unlawful sexual unions should take up a lawful life with repentance of sins,28 or be excommunicated from the Church.
Foreign persons, if they will not make their sexual union lawful, they must depart from the land with their possessions and their sins; our own countrymen should suffer excommunication, without forfeiture of property.
If afterwards, in contravention of this meeting, it should happen that a sith-born29 person takes up an unlawful sexual union, against the command of the king and bishops and the decrees of the books,30 he should pay to his lord 100 shillings, according to ancient law.
If it is a man of the rank of ceorl,31 he should pay 50 shillings, and both should give up the sexual union with repentance.32
If a priest allows an unlawful sexual union,33 or neglects the baptism of the sick,34 or is so drunk that he is incapable, he should refrain from his ministry until the bishop’s judgement.
If a tonsured man, not under rule,35 seeks for himself hospitality, one may give it him once but it should not happen that one sustains him for longer, unless he has permission.36
If a person gives his man freedom at the altar, he will have the freedom of the people;37 the freedom-giver shall have his inheritance and wergild and protection of the household;38 he [the freed man] may be over the border where he wishes.39
If an unfree labourer,40 by his lord’s bidding,41 carries out slave-work between the sunset on the eve of Sunday and sunset on the eve of Monday,42 the lord should pay 80 shillings.43
If an unfree labourer does it on that day by his own counsel, to his lord he should pay six [shillings], or his hide.44
If a freeman [works] in this forbidden time, he should be liable for healsfang;45 and the one who discovers it, 46 he shall have half the fine or the work.47
If a ceorl, without his wife’s knowledge, should make an offering to devils,48 he shall be liable for all his property, or healsfang; if both make an offering to devils, they shall [both] be liable to healsfang or all [their] property.49
If a slave makes an offering to devils, he should pay 6 shillings,50 or his hide.
If a person gives meat to his household during fasting,51 he should redeem both freemen and slave with healsfang.
If a slave eats such, of his own counsel, 6 shillings or his hide.
The word of a bishop and a king shall be incontrovertible without an oath.52
A head of a minster53 should clear himself upon a priest’s exculpation;54 a priest should acquit himself with his own truth in his holy vestments before the altar, declaring thus: ‘I speak truth in Christ, I do not lie’;55 a deacon should similarly acquit himself.56
A cleric should acquit himself as one of four of his rank,57 but only his hand on the altar; the others should stand by to defend the oath.58
A stranger should acquit himself with his own oath at the altar; similarly, a king’s thegn.59 A person of the rank of ceorl,60 as one of four of his rank, at the altar. And the oath of all these shall not be questioned.
Hereafter is the right of exculpation of the Church: if a person accuses an unfree labourer of a bishop or king, he should clear himself by the hand of the reeve;61 either the reeve acquits him or delivers him to be flogged.62
If a person accuses a community’s bonded servant in their midst,63 his lord should acquit him with his oath alone, if he is a communicant; if he is not a communicant, he should have with him another, an oath-supporter, otherwise he should pay, or deliver him to be flogged.64
If a layman’s unfree labourer accuses a churchman’s unfree labourer, his lord should acquit him with his oath alone.
If a person slays a man who is thieving, [the one killed] is to lie [dead] without wergild.65
If a person captures a free man red-handed,66 then the king should rule one of three things: either one should kill him, or sell him overseas, or release him for [the price of] his wergild.
He who captures and delivers him should obtain half for [surrendering] him;67 if he is killed, one should give them 70 shillings.
If a slave steals and one redeems him, that one should give 70 shillings; if he is killed, half of his [value] is to be paid to the owner,68 whichever the king wishes.69
If a person who comes from afar, or a foreigner, goes off the highway, and he then neither shouts out nor does he blow a horn, he should be considered a thief, to be either killed or redeemed.70
Cited works
Blair, John, The Church in Anglo-Saxon Society (Oxford University Press, 2005).
Cheney, C. R. (ed.) and Michael Jones (revised by), A Handbook of Dates for Students of British History, New Edition (Cambridge University Press, 2000).
DOE, The Dictionary of Old English: A to I online, ed. Angus Cameron, Ashley Crandell Amos, Antonette diPaolo Healey, et al (Dictionary of Old English Project, 2018); available to subscribers or free but with limited access. Click here
Kelly, S. E. (ed.), Charters of St Augustine’s Abbey Canterbury and Minster-in-Thanet, Anglo-Saxon Charters IV (Oxford University Press, 1995).
Monk, Christopher, ‘Defending Rihthæmed: the Normalizing of Marital Sexuality in the Anglo-Saxon Penitentials’, in SELIM. Journal of the Spanish Society for Medieval English Language and Literature, vol. 18 (2011), pp. 7-48, published online 2019. Click here
Oliver, Lisi, The Beginnings of English Law (University of Toronto Press, 2002).
The Blackwell Encyclopaedia of Anglo-Saxon England, ed. Michael Lapidge, John Blair, Simon Keynes, and Donald Scragg (Blackwell Publishing, 1999).
Whitelock, Dorothy (ed.), English Historical Documents c.500-1042, Second Edition (Eyre Methuen and Oxford University Press, 1979).
Footnotes
Use your browsers 'back' button to jump back to the text.
1 For a detailed chronology of the kings of Kent, see S. E. Kelly, pp. 195-203; Wihtræd and Swæfheard are discussed at pp. 196-98; a summary of the chronology is given on p. 203.
2 The rubric (heading in red ink) is provided by the Textus Roffensis scribe; it is not considered to be part of the original law code.
3 Oliver, p. 152, emends this to geþeahtendlic.
4 The word spacing here is particularly confusing, as noted by Oliver, p. 152 and p. 153, note e. I have followed Oliver’s example in order to give better sense.
5 The manuscript has an erasure between the letters e and n.
6 In line with Oliver, p. 154, this should be emended to gemanan, meaning ‘community’, and in the context here relates to excommunication; see the translation, below.
7 Oliver, p. 154, emends this to fulwihte.
8 Oliver, pp. 156-57, suggests this should read of not ofer, and thus translates it as ‘according to’ rather than ‘against’. Whitelock, p. 157 translates it the same. I follow their example in my own translation, below.
9 Oliver, p. 156, emends this to dryhten.
10 The main Textus Roffensis scribe realised he had omitted some text from his exemplar and so provided an insertion mark – a red dotted black cross with a long descender terminating in a red curl – to indicate where the omitted text, appearing in the bottom margin and correspondingly marked, should be.
11 Oliver, p. 158, corrects ðeng to ðegn, i.e. ‘thegn’.
12 The letter n is inserted above the line.
13 The letter þ is inserted above the line.
14 selle is added in the right margin.
15 Oliver, p. 162, emends this to hine man.
16 Oliver, p. 162, emends this to hine man and suggests him man may be preferable grammatically.
17 My thanks go to Elise Fleming for kindly proofreading the translation and notes.
18 Or, ‘fifth year’.
19 The indiction was a method of reckoning time, originally going back to imperial Rome, and was used as an element in the dating of documents. It is based on a cycle of fifteen years, the first being counted from the year 312. For a detailed explanation, see Cheney and Jones, pp. 2-4.
20 Rugern, meaning ‘rye-harvest’, giving us a probable date for Wihtræd’s law code of 6th September, in the year 695; see Whitelock, p. 396, introduction.
21 Near Maidstone, Kent.
22 There are various spellings of his name; I’m using that used in The Blackwell Encyclopaedia of Anglo-Saxon England, p. 63; Oliver, p. 153, uses Brihtwald; Whitelock, p. 396, uses Brihtwold.
23 In effect, archbishop of Canterbury, as there was no archbishopric in York until 735. He was elected as archbishop in 692 (consecrated in 693) and his term ended at his death in 731.
24 Appointed about 678, died between 699 and 716.
25 Literally, ‘folk’, from Old English folc.
26 Or, ‘decrees’.
27 The mundbyrd was the legally recognised expectation of peace or ‘protection’ offered by any free person in their home or, as with the king, within their jurisdiction; here it is extended to the institution of the Church. In effect, were someone to cause a breach of the peace inside a church, they would have violated that protection and incur a penalty, a fine of 50 shillings, a considerable amount of money.
28 Unlawful sexual unions would not only have included those living together without marriage but any who were married to someone to whom they were too closely related, according to the rules of consanguinity of the Church at that time. In that sense, these unions would be irregular and unlawful, and anyone realising the unlawful status of their own union was expected to end the union and repent, otherwise be excommunicated. Also included would be bigamous or adulterous unions, where a spouse had been put away unlawfully to enable one to remarry someone else. Oliver discusses unlawful matrimony in Wihtræd’s law at pp. 167-8; for a more detailed and broader discussion of the concept of ‘unlawful sexual union’ in early medieval England, see Monk, pp. 23-34.
29 Or ‘gesith-born’, which appears to refer to an individual of a high rank, not a mere ceorl, the lowest rank of freeman. See Whitelock, p. 396, n. 4, where the comparison to eorlcund ‘of noble birth’ is made.
30 Probably referring to Scripture and canon law. Note Oliver’s comment, p. 167, that this clause may correspond to one laid out by the Synod of Hertford in 672: ‘On marriage. That nothing be allowed but lawful wedlock. Let none be guilty of incest, and let none leave his own wife except for fornication, as the holy gospel teaches.’ My own emphasis.
31 Translating ceorlisc man, a free person of the lowest rank, a ceorl.
32 Presumably meaning that both the higher and lower ranked persons are expected to end the unlawful union.
33 The inference is that the priest has officiated at an unlawful marriage.
34 Though ‘baptism’ is the clear meaning here, it seems likely that this stood for, or should be understood as alluding to, the neglect of any sacramental office for the sick, including the administering of confession. Oliver notes the similar rulings against clerical abuses in the roughly contemporaneous ‘Penitentials of Theodore’: Oliver, pp. 168-69.
35 I.e. not under monastic rule; one who has left his monastic community without permission.
36 Both Whitelock, p. 397, note 2, and Oliver, p. 169, make mention of the ruling at the Synod of Hertford in 672 against clerics wandering from diocese to diocese at will, perhaps suggesting that this law would have been applied to secular clerics as well as those in monastic orders. Interestingly, the synod ruling places equal culpability on the one showing undue hospitality; like the errant cleric, he risks excommunication should the cleric not return when summoned by his bishop.
37 Literally, ‘be folk-free’.
38 The wergild, ‘man-price’, was the amount of money legally equating to one’s life, and it had to be paid, by the slayer, to the next of kin should that one be killed; the amount varied according to rank. Oliver, p. 170, discusses the possible meanings of this clause: ‘First, the previous owner is responsible for protecting the claims to inheritance, wergild, and protection of the new freeman, who may well not have any free kinsmen to help guaranteed these rights. Second, should the newly freed man die without naming his beneficiaries, his inheritance reverts to the previous owner. If he has been killed, the wergild would also be paid to that owner; if anyone stands under the freedman’s protection, that protection is similarly taken up by the owner.’
39 Indicative of the fact that slaves were typically captives from warfare with other Germanic kingdoms in Britain, or indeed from among the colonised British natives. Such a manumitted person may wish to return to his own people, ‘over the border’.
40 An unfree individual who is temporarily bonded to a master to carry out agricultural work; see the discussion of esne at Slaves and the Unfree in the Laws of Æthelberht — Rochester Cathedral.
41 Following previous translators in amending Old English ‘ofer’ to ‘of’; see Oliver, pp. 156-7.
42 I.e. between Saturday sunset and Sunday sunset, marking the Sabbath period.
43 Oliver, p. 157, considers ‘shillings’ to be an error for ‘sceattas’ in view of what she reads as an unreasonably high fine. For a helpful discussion relating to this and the following clauses concerning the transgressing of Church laws concerning the Sabbath, pagan idolatry, and fasting, see Oliver, pp. 170-174.
44 Alternatively, ‘or be flogged’.
45 The healsfang is in essence a fine; it may have been at some point in history a monetary substitution for corporal punishment. DOE, heals-fang: ‘(in laws) a legal payment to be paid as a due or fine, or to be received by/on account of an injured party; a portion (possibly ten to twenty percent) of ‘wergild’; the term may originally have denoted a crime (lit. ‘seizing by the neck of throat’, cf. feaxfang ‘seizing by the hair’) for which it was also the penalty, or it may have described a form of corporal punishment for which it became a monetary substitution, i.e. the cost of saving one’s neck.’
46 This is overt encouragement for neighbours to expose one another if they fail to keep the sabbath laws.
47 Seemingly meaning half the profit from the work carried out, the other half presumably going to the public coffers. Oliver, p. 157, note g, observes that it is possible to translate Old English ‘and’ here as the adversative ‘or’, giving ‘half the fine or the work’.
48 The essential meaning of the Old English verb gyldan, used here, is ‘to pay (back), render’. It is used elsewhere in the context of worship of pagan deities: see DOE, gyldan, C. However, I am reluctant to translate it as ‘sacrifice’, as is given as an option in DOE (and, indeed, is Whitelock’s choice, p. 397), as this immediately biases our reading of what is actually being alluded to here in this text; it implies the killing of something in a ceremonial sacrifice and fosters rather melodramatic notions of devil worship, things that are not justified by the choice of wording. Thus, ‘make an offering’ seems to me more judicious.
49 The implication in this clause is that the wife does not lose her personal property or have to pay healsfang for herself should she be unaware of her husband’s actions, and, moreover, that the wife was viewed legally as a separate entity.
50 Both this clause and the one below concerning fasting are interesting for showing that slaves in Kent at this time could potentially have their own money.
51 A religiously determined period of fasting, such as during Lent, when meat was forbidden.
52 The bishop and king do not need to make an oath at the altar: their word was truth!
53 ‘Minster’ has quite a broad meaning in relation to early medieval England; note John Blair’s definition: ‘A complex ecclesiastical settlement which is headed by an abbess, abbot, or man in priest’s orders; which contains nuns, monks, priests, or laity in a variety of possible combinations, and is united to a greater or lesser extent by their liturgy and devotions; which may perform or supervise pastoral care to the laity, perhaps receiving dues and exerting parochial authority; and which may sometimes act as a bishop’s seat, while not depending for its existence or importance on that function.’ Blair, p. 3, italics his own. Note that during Wihtræd’s time, Minster-in-Thanet (founded in Kent around 660) was an abbey run by an abbess, so I would suggest that this law points to the probability that certain women at this time in Kent had the legal right to swear oaths.
54 DOE, cennan, B.2.c.ii: ‘with reflexive: to clear oneself, exculpate oneself’; the use of this verb in this very specific sense occurs only in Wihtræd’s laws. The exculpation, or clearance, refers to the public oath or declaration of one’s innocence in the face of an accusation of wrongdoing; it results in one’s acquittal. Note from the preceding clause that a bishop or king does not need to make such an oath. Oliver discusses exculpation at pp. 174-77.
55 The words to be uttered are in Latin: Veritatem dico in Christo, non mentior.
56 The verb clænsian, ‘to cleanse’, is used here in the sense of acquitting or clearing oneself, rather than in the sense of expiating or atoning for wrongdoing. See DOE, clǣnsian, 5.
57 Or, ‘order’; in this case one from among the minor ecclesiastical orders. Oliver, p. 159, note d, suggests ‘cleric’ ‘includes the positions of doorkeeper, psalmist, reader, exorcist, acolyte, and subdeacon’.
58 He has to bring along three others to defend his oath, though only he touches the altar. This seems similar to the arrangement for ‘oath-supporters’, referred to below in the clause concerning the accusation against a community’s bonded servant, and which is also in place in the Laws of Hlothere and Eadric.
59 A nobleman in service to the king; see Oliver, p. 175.
60 Or, ‘freeman’; literally, a ‘ceorlish man’.
61 The bailiff of the estate or area to which the unfree labourer belonged; see Oliver, p. 176.
62 Or, ‘beaten’.
63 The structure of the preceding clauses suggests the ‘community’ here equates to the ‘minster’, so this bonded labourer, an esne (see note 40, above), belongs to a monastery or other religious community.
64 A communicant (Old English husel-genga) is someone who receives Holy Communion. However, the precise use of the term here is unclear. Oliver, p. 176, discusses several possibilities. It may simply refer to whether the ‘lord’, or owner, of the bonded servant is a member of the particular religious community concerned. A possible alternative meaning is that this clause alludes to a clerical member, who regularly receives Holy Communion, as opposed to a member of the laity within the community who is not a regular communicant. Though perhaps more convoluted, I would also suggest a further possibility, that the ‘he’ who is or is not the communicant is actually the bonded servant. This would mean that this individual’s status as a Christian – one who receives Holy Communion – has a bearing on the determining of his innocence. If he is a Christian, his lord/owner’s oath is sufficient; if he’s not a Christian, then the owner must bring along an oath supporter to back up his swearing to the bonded servant’s innocence. As there are no other sources upon which we can draw to help us understand exactly what was happening in this regard in Kentish communities at the end of the seventh century, we have to leave the matter open.
65 I.e. no ‘man-price’ would be due to the slain person’s next of kin. A person had the right to kill someone who was attempting theft.
66 I.e. the thief has the goods on his person.
67 Presumably half of the money from selling him, or half the wergild.
68 Oliver, p. 163, note d, suggests the ‘owner’ here means the owner of the property that was stolen, not the slave-owner, who is legally culpable for allowing his slave to commit the crime. This makes sense. The choice before the king then is: the slave-owner can redeem his thieving slave with a payment of 70 shillings, which goes to the owner of the stolen goods; or, if the slave is executed, the owner of the stolen property is compensated with half that amount. See Oliver, pp. 178-79.
69 I have made the translation less awkward by moving ‘swa hweder swa cyning wille’, ‘whichever the king wishes’, from the middle to the end of the sentence.
70 This clause mirrors one in the laws of Ine, king of the West Saxons (r. 688-726). Dating to between 688 and 694, these laws slightly pre-date Wihtræd’s; see Oliver, pp. 179-80; Whitelock, p. 32, introduction.