"Ælfthryth appears to have taken her role as an intermediary at court seriously throughout her time as queen consort, using her expanded and expanding institutional powers. Andrew Rabin has identified that the queen took a particular interest in legal proceedings involving women. As he states, a queen was ‘an individual uniquely capable of mediating between different constituencies and subject positions’. Taking a broad view of this statement, it reflects that the developing office of the queen carried an expectation of its holder to serve as an interface between the male, secular, royal court, and those who could neither access nor navigate it. Rabin points to six disputes in which Ælfthryth involved herself, all on behalf of female litigants. Most often, the queen was motivated to join these disputes by familial or political links to the litigants, and all ended in negotiated settlement rather than legal judgement. This bypassed any limitations on women’s direct involvement in legal proceedings and thus also allowed Ælfthryth to draw on the support of other high-status women. Most importantly, however, these settlements demonstrate the queen’s understanding of the male power structures within which she was operating and also that she was possessed of the necessary political skills to navigate them. They also demonstrate that she was effective as an intermediary. In Rabin’s view, Ælfthryth’s legal interventions allowed her to pursue an agenda that expanded women’s legal agency, extended the powers of the queen, and acted in the interests of her partisans.
Ælfthryth’s role as a royal intermediary at the court was not limited to the secular sphere. Regularis Concordia, the foundational document of the tenth-century reforms, issued around 970 under Bishop Æthelwold’s direction, also gave the queen responsibility for the protection of the realm’s nunneries. Catherine Karkov argues that queenship is here envisaged in Marian terms, the first time such a model had been used for a consort of the West Saxon dynasty. The only evidence that Ælfthryth used this newfound authority in a proactive sense occurs in the next phase of her queenship. Nonetheless, throughout her life, Ælfthryth proved herself to be a generous and effective patron to various ecclesiastical institutions. Notable among these are Ely and Peterborough, religious houses that were in proximity to Ælfthryth’s dower lands at Rutland as well as being among those houses refounded by Bishop Æthelwold. Therefore, on the one hand she was participating in local politics by ensuring that she maintained positive relationships with her influential regional neighbours, while on the other she was ensuring her patronage and advocacy privileged those houses most dear to her key clerical ally. Ælfthryth also had a close relationship with Wherwell and Amesbury Abbeys which, according to William of Malmesbury, she founded (G.Pont. ii.78.7, ii.87.1), though that too is a story that properly belongs to the next stage of her life.
The instances of Ælfthryth’s patronage recorded in the histories of Ely and Peterborough Abbeys constituted her persuading the king to act in the houses’ interests. Ælfthryth seems to have garnered a reputation as an effective advocate at the court with influence over royal decision making. Æthelwold certainly benefitted from her advocacy as evidenced by S806, a charter which, though not authentic in form, appears to have some authenticity in its content. Here, in 968, in exchange for certain estates, Edgar granted Æthelwold as Bishop of Winchester a renewal of the privileges of Taunton, Somerset. The charter records that Æthelwold gifted Ælfthryth 50 mancuses of gold wiþ richtes ærendes fultume (for her help in this just transaction). This was not the only instance in which a diploma provided Ælfthryth with wealth, though it is the clearest example of payment for mediation. Most other examples are to be found in wills. The will of Brihtric and Ælfswith, for example, leaves the queen an arm ring worth 30 mancuses and a stallion to forespræce þæt se cwyde standan moste (for her advocacy that this will might stand). While the queen being referred to is almost certainly Ælfthryth, she is not named in the document, nor is it entirely clear when during the period 975 × 983 it was authored, and thus at whose court her advocacy was sought. No matter when it was written, however, Brihtric and Ælfswith clearly understood her to have influence at court and, when S1511 is considered alongside S806, a pattern of payment for intercession comes into focus.
Bequests to the queen also offer further evidence of her factional alliances. Ælfthryth’s alignment with the kin-groups that had been brought to prominence by Eadwig, for example, is indicated by her presence (albeit unnamed) as a beneficiary of the will of Ælfgifu, the repudiated and widowed consort of Eadwig (S1484). Drawn up in the period 966 × 975, Ælfthryth is the recipient of not insignificant gifts: a necklace worth 130 mancuses, an arm ring worth 30 mancuses, and a drinking cup. Of more obvious relevance is the will of Ealdorman Ælfheah, likely drawn up shortly before his death c.972, in which Ælfthryth, ðæs cyninges wifæ (the king’s wife), is given an estate at Shirburn, Oxon (S1485). This fits well with the hypothesised alliance between her family and his. Further emphasising the partisan support being supplied to the queen by the kin-group of Ælfhere, Ælfheah also left wealth to the elder and younger æthelings who are explicitly identified as the children of Edgar and Ælfthryth. In other words, he acknowledges Edmund and Æthelred as Edgar’s heirs and excludes their older half-brother Edward from the succession. However, it was also around 972 that Ælfthryth and Edgar’s eldest son, Edmund, died of unknown causes. The death of Edgar’s designated heir must have thrust both Edward and Æthelred to greater prominence, while at the same time making Ælfthryth’s own position more precarious."
— Matthew Firth, Early English Queens, 850-1000: Potestas Reginae