There is no certain information concerning the ancestry of Wulfnoth, father of Godwin Earl of Wessex. The Vita Ædwardi mentions nothing about Earl Godwin's origins. Alfred Anscombe suggested in 1913 that Wulfnoth, and his supposed brother Æthelnoth Archbishop of Canterbury, were descended from Æthelred I King of Wessex. He based this on a study of the transmission of estates in Sussex, especially Compton in Westbourne Hundred, through supposed members of the same family. He based this on a study of the transmission of estates in Sussex, especially Compton in Westbourne Hundred, through supposed members of the same family. Florence of Worcester records that Earl Godwin was the great-nephew of Eadric "Streona" Earl of Mercia, but this seems unlikely from a chronological point of view as discussed further below. At the other end of the scale, Earl Godwin is the son of a cowherd according to one 12th century source. An obscure origin seems unlikely given Earl Godwin's swift rise to power during the reign of King Canute. However, it seems equally unlikely that King Harold II would not have publicised a noble descent, if he had one, to demonstrate his suitability to accede to the throne in early 1066. Given the importance of name roots in Anglo-Saxon England, it may also be significant, as Frank Barlow points out, that neither the root "Wulf-" in the name "Wulfnoth" nor any name resembling "Godwin" is found among any of the supposed descendants of King Æthelred I.
The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle records that "Beorhtric the brother of the ealdorman Eadric" denounced "Wulfnoth a nobleman of Sussex" to the king in [1008] for unspecified crimes, after which Wulfnoth fled the country only to return, take 20 ships from the king´s fleet, and ravage the south coast and burn the rest of the king´s navy, one manuscript naming him "quendam nobilem virum…Wlnothum (patrem Godwini ducis)".... Florence of Worcester names "Brihtricus, Ælfricus, Goda, Ægelwinus, Ægelwardus, Ægelmærus, pater Wlnothi, patris West-Saxonum ducis Godwini" as the brothers of "Edricum…Ægelrici filium…ducem", and within a few lines in the same paragraph repeats the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle´s report about "Brihtric" accusing "Suth-Saxonicum ministrum Wlnothum" of treachery. This text, and the one quoted above from the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, are contradictory, when read together, in suggesting that Wulfnoth, accused by Beorhtric, was the same person as Beorhtric´s nephew. Freeman argues cogently that Florence did not intend to identify Wulfnoth, the supposed nephew of Eadric, with Wulfnoth, the alleged traitor, arguing along similar lines to what has just been said. He highlights that Florence does not make this connection in his two passages, although the one closely follows the other and it seems surprising that such a link would have been omitted if it had existed. In addition, from a chronological point of view, it is unlikely that Godwin was the grandson of the brother of Eadric "Streona", who died in 1017 and about whom there is no indication that he was very old at that time. The chronology suggests, rather, that Eadric "Streona" and Godwin´s father would have been contemporaries. Another interesting fact is that Ætheling Æthelstan, under his will dated [1014], made a bequest to "Godwine, Wulfnoth's son, the estate at Compton which his father possessed", listed second among the bequests to non-members of the royal family. The wording of the bequest is consistent with the land in question having been confiscated, and such confiscation would have followed if Earl Godwin´s father had been the Wulfnoth Child who was accused of treachery. Freeman highlights that Domesday Book records the two places ini Sussex called Compton as having been held, respectively, by King Harold II (Earl Godwin´s son) and a tenant of Earl Godwin. This strongly suggests that the beneficiary under Ætheling Æthelstan´s will was Earl Godwin, and that he was the son of Wulfnoth Child, the alleged traitor. In conclusion, it appears unlikely that Florence of Worcester was correct in stating that Godwin´s father was Eadric "Streona"´s nephew. Florence of Worcester names "Brihtricus, Ælfricus, Goda, Ægelwinus, Ægelwardus, Ægelmærus, pater Wlnothi, patris West-Saxonum ducis Godwini" as the brothers of "Edricum…Ægelrici filium…ducem". According to Freeman, Florence did not intend to identify this Wulfnoth with "Wulfnoth Child the South-Saxon". Kelly suggests that the name of the father "Æthelric" was a mistranscription for Æthelweard, whom he suggests was the same person as the chronicler, an alleged descendants of King Æthelred I.... It was presumably some time during the course of his banishment and rebellion that Wulfnoth forfeited the land at Compton which was later restored to his son.
His date of death is estimated from the will of Æthelstan, eldest son of King Æthelred II, under which Wulfnoth's son Godwin received his late father's property at Compton, Sussex.
The name of Wulfnoth's wife is not known. 1
Research Notes: