on the jute, angel and saxon royal pedigrees - 1872/008-02.pdf · 1 asaer says that gfeat was...

18

ON THE JUTE, ANGLE, AND SAXON ROYALPEDIGREES.

BY DANIEL HENRY HAIGH.

EVERY question relating to the origines of our raceshould be especially interesting to men of Kent, forfrom Kent the Teutonization of Britain began. Thepillar-stone, on the shores of the Frith, of Forth, whichmarks the grave of Horsa's grandfather, is to them afamily monument; and rich as their country is in an-tiquities of every age, and worthily appreciated as theseantiquities are, not one memorial of the historic pasthas the value for them which that would have, couldit be found again, which, inscribed with his name,1 forat least 300 years after his. death, preserved the memoryof Horsa himself. To them I offer as it were a familypedigree, the record of the ancestry of their kings,ascending to the 1st century of' our era, collated with,and vindicated by the genealogies of the Goths andLongobards on the one hand, and those of the Anglesand Saxons on the other.

Of this record, the first part is preserved in the'Historia Britonum,' a work originally written in the5th century,2 and (in my opinion) by S. Gildas, whowas contemporary with Horsa and Hencgest in his

1 "In orienfcalibus partibus Cantise" (Ven. Bseda). Qu. at Stonar," the stone of honour," lapis tituli.

2 For the son of Vortigern was still living, and the record of Arthur'stwelve battles is the work of a contemporary.

Archaeologia Cantiana Vol. 8 1872

http://www.kentarchaeology.org.uk/Research/Pub/ArchCant/008%20-%201872/page%20v%20+%20vi.htm

ON THE JUTE, ANGLE, AND SAXON ROYAL PEDIGREES. 19

youth. The earliest known recension of this work,(nearly represented by a MS. at Paris), made in Kent,1

in A.D. 675, the 5th year of the reign of an Eadmund,otherwise unknown, gives the descent Jeta, Folewald,Fin, Fredulf, Frealof, Woden, Wecta, Wicta, Wictgils,Hors and Hencgest; and this alone of all the MSS.spells the names which require it with the Runic wen.The only other MS. (in the Vatican library), whichrepresents this Kentish recension, has the 1st nameGreta, all others have Geata.

The genealogies in the ' Textus Roffensis' uniformlyrepresent Woden as the son of Frealaf. One of these(that of the Lindisfaras) gives his ancestry thus: Fata,Godwlf, Finn, Freodowlf, Frealaf. This dates from theearlier years of the 9th century.

A passage, inserted s.a. 547, in the oldest MS. of theEnglish Chronicle (of A.D. 891), has nearly the sameseries : Great, Godulf, Finn, Freothoivulf, Freotholaf;and of these variations I accept the first as an im-portant, correction of the older genealogy, and rejectthe last on the independent authority of the Edda,which gives us Gutholfr and Fiarlef (Frialafr}. For theintroduction of the name of Folewald (for Folcwald] inthe earlier document, it is easy to account; there wasa king, contemporary with Hencgest,—Fin, son of Folc-walda,—whose memory was fresh in men's minds whenthe ' Historia Britonum' was written; and its author hassimply confounded him with Fin, son of Godwulf.

The MSS. of the English Chronicle, Cotton. Tiber.A. vi. and B. i. (of A.D. 977 and 1046 respectively), haveSceaf, Bedwig, Hwala, Hathra, Itermon, Eeremod, Scyl-dwa fScealdwaJ, JBeaw, and Tcetwa, as ancestors of Geat,

1 For the author of this recension says, " mortuo autem Hencgcsto,Ottha filius eius advenit de sinistrali parte Britanniae ad regnum Can-tuariorum et de ipso omnes reges Cantuariorum usque in hodiernumdiem," where all others hare "transivit" and "reges illius patriaa."

c 2

20 ON THE JUTE, ANGLE, AND SAXON ROYAL PEDIGREES,

but omit Frithwulf; and Asser, writing in A.D. 893, hasthe same, save that for Sceaf he substitutes the nameof the Patriarch Sem; he retains Frithwulf, and insertsFrifhowald between Frealaf and Woden, as does thecontemporary MS. of the Chronicle, C. C. Cambr.clxxiii. (of A.I). 891). The latest genealogy (of the timeof JEthdred II.) in the < Textus Eoifensis,' and the MS.Tiberius B. iv. (of A.D. 1016), omit Ewala and Frithu-wulf. The Edda of Snorro has all these names, saveHwala and Tcetwa, but adds seven others between Sceafand Bedwig. JEthelweard, on the other hand, a cen-tury later than Asser, omits all between Sceaf andScyldwa, and of Sceaf relates a story which belongs toanother hero of antiquity, (as we know from Beowulf);but this story throws light on the origin of the fablein MSS. A. vi., B. i., and B. iv., that Sceaf was a son of"Noe, born in the Ark, and on Asser's substitution of thename of Sem for his.

I think it very probable that our fathers, possessedas they certainly were of the art of writing when theycame to Britain, and inheriting it as a tradition fromdays of very remote antiquity, had records of the an-cestry of their kings ascending to Sceaf; and the moreso, as they seem to have had this tradition in commonwith their Scandinavian kindred; but as we have noother authorities, by the aid of which we might haveformed a judgment as to the credibility of the state-ment which is first presented to us in the 9th century,nor dates whereby we might have verified the chrono-logical succession of his ancestors, I commence withGeat, whose era is satisfactorily ascertained, since hisidentity with Gawt, the ancestor of the OstrogothicKings, is admitted.1 He stands at the head of the

1 Gawt is the correct reading, transformed into Gapt by inaccuratescribes, mistaking wen for p. Gaut is the Goth, equivalent of our Ge&l,and Procopius' Tavroi are our Gedtas. The pronunciation of the wordswas nearly, if not quite, the same.

ON THE JUTE, ANGLE, AND SAXON ROYAL PEDIGBEES. 21

genealogy in the record of S. Gildas, as Gawt does inthat of Jordanis; and if S. Gildas says that he wasreputed to be the son of a god,1 Jordanis tells us thatthe Goths regarded the chiefs, to whose valour andgeneralship they owed the victory they gained over theforces of Domitian, A.D. 86, as something more thanhuman, and called them Anses, i.e. " demigods;" evi-dently intending to mark the period when the line ofthe Anses, (Gawt, Hulmul, etc., as he gives it), com-menced.

A statement, in a genealogy preserved by Langhorne,(from some authority which is now lost), that Geta(first of his family) went to Asgard, and that Woden,his descendant, returned to Germany, may account forthe silence of Jordanis as to his ancestry. In the 1stand 2nd centuries of our era, the Goths were on thesouthern coasts of the Baltic and the mouth of theVistula; early in the 3rd they were infesting Dacia.Of this movement we may regard Geat as having beenthe precursor, the first of the family who came intoconflict with the Eoman Empire, the first who emi-grated to Asgard, i.e. the district whence Woden re-turned to Germany,—the coasts of the Black Sea,where Azov (Asa-hof} still preserves the trace of theirname. In the East, therefore, he was- rega-rded as thefounder of the fortunes of his family; and, perhaps, thedistinguished part which he played on the occasion inquestion, was the first step of their advancement to thesovereignty of the Ostrogoths, which was completed inthe person of his great-grandson Amal. Thus we mayplace the birth of Geat in the first half of the 1stcentury of our era, and with, this date thegenealogy ofhis descendants is consistent throughout.

For, in the middle- ©f the 3rd century, we overtake1 Asaer says that Gfeat was himself the object of divine honours, quot-

ing Sedulius, but with an evident misapprehension of his meaning.

22 ON THE JUTE, ANGLE, AND SAXON ROYAL PEDIGREES.

his 5th descendant Ostrogotha, at the close of hiscareer. He had passed the Danube in the 5th year ofthe Emperor Philip ; Decius was sent against him, buton being saluted Emperor, A.D. 249, made peace withhim, and returned to Italy. Cniva, his successor, pro-bably his son, renewed the war after his death, and itwas in opposing him that Decius lost his life, A.D. 251.During the reign of Constantine, Aoric and Araric arementioned as kings of the Goths; they are not namedin the line of descent, and it is not improbable that thegreat Gothic nation was divided into tribes, each ac-knowledging a distinct succession of kings. In A.D.323, during their reign, Constantine defeated the Gothsin several engagements, drove them out of Illyricum,and carried the war into Dacia with such success, thathe wa,s enabled to boast that he had recovered thatprovince, which, half a century before, Aurelian hadrelinquished to them. The Goths, however, were notsubdued; for in A.D. 381, the Sarmatians sought theaid of Constantine against them; and, when it wasknown that he had espoused their cause, Araric passedthe Danube, ravaged Msesia, and routed the Komanforces, commanded by the Emperor in person. In thefollowing year, under the generalship of the youngerConstantine, the Eomans retrieved their honour, ex-pelled the Goths from Msesia',- pursued them into Sar-matia, and reduced them to submission, exacting fromAraric his eldest son as a hostage. Geberic, 4th indescent from Ostrogotha, if (as is not impi'obable) wemay identify Cnivida with Cniva,. next appears as aking of the Goths. Desiring to signalize the com-mencement of his reign by some deed of glory, hemade war upon the Vandals, who had recently migratedfrom the shores of the western ocean to the borders ofDacia, and so completely defeated them, after an ob-stinate conflict on the river Marosk, that the remnant


of their army, with all who were unfit for war, emi-grated to Panuonia, and were allowed to settle thereby Constantine. The great Hermanaric, who died inA.D. 375, at the age of 110, probably became kingabout the beginning of the 4th century. He was.never in conflict with the Roman armies, but devotedhis energies to the conquest of Central Europe, andsubjected to his authority Southern Russia, Lithuania,Poland, and a great part of Germany. Eventually,after the death of Geberic, he seems to have been ac-knowledged sole ruler of the Ostrogoths. He died, atlast,- by his own hand, because, languishing under theeffects of a dangerous wound inflicted- by a Roxolanchief, he despaired of being able to oppose effectualresistance to the Huns. Withimer and With eric fol-lowed successively; their relation to this line is notstated. Winithari, grandson of Hermanaric's elderbrother Wuldulf, was the next; then Hermanaric's sonHunimund; then his son Thorismund, whose death inthe flower of his age, and the 2nd year of his reign, soafflicted his people, that for 40 years they alloAved noone to occupy his throne; and his son Berimund, dis-daining the supremacy of the Huns, as it is said, butprobably disgusted at being debarred of his rights, fledto the Visigoths. These 5 reigns must have occupieda short period, for, after this interregnum of 40 years,Winithari's grandsons, Walamir, Theodemir, and Withe-mir, appear reigning conjointly and confederate withAttila, Theodemir survived his brothers until A.D. 475,and then was succeeded by his son Theoderic, who diedin A.D. 526. Eutharic, of the younger line, marriedTheoderic's daughter Amalasuinth, and their son Atha-laric died in infancy, the last male representative of hisrace.

Here then we have a genealogical descent, which isnot only intrinsically probable, but consistent, at every


point of contact, with contemporary history; and whichaffords us a fair criterion whereby to measure theparallel descents of the royal dynasties of the Jutes,Angles, and Saxons through Woden from Geat; all ofwhich we shall find to be as nearly accordant with itas we have any right to expect.

In researches of this kind, when our authorities arediscordant, the safest course is to follow the earliest,because it is most probable that they have preservedfor us ancient traditions in their purest form, unless inany particular instance there be reason to suspect anerror. To this principle I shall adhere throughout.- The descendants of Geat, in the line of 'ancestry ofour own kings, were Godwulf, Fin, Frith wulf, Frealaf,and Woden. Frithwald, inserted between the two lastby Asser, and in the earliest MS. (contemporary withAsser) of the English Chronicle, but omitted in theMSS. Tiberius A. vi., B. i., and B. iv., may be safelyrejected on the authority of S. Gildas, of the earliergenealogy in the Textus Roffensis, and of the Norsegenealogies. Woden, then, the 5th descendant of Geat,stands in the same degree as Ostrogotha, who wasliving in A.D. 250; and as his must have been a youngerline, he would be, under ordinary circumstances, Ostro-gotha's junior. The date at which his descendants inthe 4th degree, Horsa and Hencgest, appear in ourannals, and the circumstances of their history, suggestthat he lived during the latter half of the 3rd centuryand the earlier of the 4th, and thus was contemporarywith Hunnuil, Athal, Achiulf and his sons. This in-ference, on the one hand, is quite consistent with thefacts of the Gothic genealogy and history, and, on theother, is abundantly confirmed by the other genealogiesof his descendants, and by the circumstances of his life,as detailed in Scandinavian tradition.

For whatever was the period in which he lived,

ON THE JUTE, ANGLE, AND SAXON EOYAL PEDIGREES. 25

Woden is in truth a historical personage. As such allour early chroniclers regarded him. The author of the' History of the Britons,' writing within a century anda half after his death, without an idea of anythingdivine or mythical about him, records the names of hisancestors; S. Kentigern, in the 6th century, is repre-sented, in his sermons to the Angles, as denouncinghim, as one who had been a mighty king in his day,but had been damned for his crimes; Ven. Beeda, inthe 8th century, says of him in parenthesis, "fromwhose stock the royal races of many provinces derivedtheir origin;" in the 9th, Asser simply mentions him asone of the line of Alfred's ancestors; and in the 10th,JEthelweard calls him " king of a multitude of bar-barians," "king of many nations, whom now somePagans worship as a god." The rest speak of him insimilar terms, in exact accordance with what is relatedof him in the Ynglinga Saga.

The details of his story are by no means improbable.At a time when many chieftains fled from their

dominions, because the Roman generals were goingabout subjecting all nations to the authority of theEmpire, he is said to have left his home at the head ofa powerful force of warriors, whose bravery and nobleappearance, superior wisdom and civilization, causedthem to be regarded, by the ruder peoples throughwhose territories they passed, as more like gods thanmen, and contributed materially to ensure the successwhich everywhere attended them. Woden invaded andconquered in succession Russia, Franconia, East Saxony,Westphalia, and Denmark, and established kingdoms inthese countries for his sons, Suarlami, Sigge, Wsegdasg,Bseldseg, and Scyld. Gylf, the King of Sweden, know-ing that he had no force to oppose him, adopted thewiser policy of receiving him amicably, and allowedhim to form a settlement in his land, in which he


founded the city of Sigtun, built therein a temple, andestablished sacrifices according to the rites of Asaland.Woden then conquered Norway, and gaye it to his sonSeeming, who appears to have been born after hisarrival in the North. Returning to Sweden, and per-ceiving that death was near, he put an end to his life,and left the kingdom to his son Yngve.

In all this there is nothing improbable. It is asimple narrative of an expedition, by a comparativelycivilized race, through regions inhabited by peoples lessadvanced than they, by a race who had the address toconsolidate by the arts of peace the conquests of thesword. No wonder that success everywhere attendedthem, that plenty and prosperity followed them, thatthe dynasties they established remained secure. Theywere, in fact, Goths, far the most civilized of thosewhom Greeks and Romans called Barbarians j1 Wodenand the rest of their chiefs, the Asar, were those whomJqrdanis calls Anses (for As is a Norse equivalent of theGothic Ans, O.E. O's); and, through Woden, Swedes,Danes, Jutes, Angles, Saxons, and many other tribes,each received a royal dynasty of the same blood as thatof the Goths.

It is implied that this expedition was consequent onreverses suffered in conflict with the forces of the Ro-man Empire. Of all the successes which the Romansgained over the Goths, during the period in which wehave ascertained that Woden must have lived, Con-stantine's victories in A.D. 323 seem the most likely tohave occasioned it. Woden must have been far ad-vanced in years at the time, for he had many sons whohad attained to maturity. We shall find the supposi-tion, that his expedition commenced immediately afterthis defeat, confirmed by history, and consistent withthe genealogies of his descendants.

1" Pame omnibus barbaris Gothi sapientiores semper extiterunt, Grsocis-que psene consimiles." (Jordanis, ' De rebus Gebieis,' iii.)


For Sarmatia was Woden's first conquest. In theinterval between A.D. 323 and 331 the Goths had con-quered Sarmatia, and in that country they were even-tually subdued, when Constantine responded to theappeal of the Sarmatians and espoused their cause.

Again, this supposition receives striking confirmationfrom the history of the Longobards, and in turn in-vests with a character of truth their ancient tradition.The Vandals, we are told, making encroachments onthe territories of their neighbours, sent a message tothe Longobards, demanding tribute; they replied theywould rather fight than yield to this demand, and bothnations prepared for war; the Vandals besought Wodento grant them victory, whilst the Longobards, moirewisely, made interest with his wife Ereya, and she soarranged matters that her husband gave the victory tothem. Paul Warnefrid calls this story ridiculous, be-cause " victory is not attributed to the power of men,but rather is dispensed from heaven;" evidently in-timating that the tradition ascribed to human agencythe victory which the Longobards gained; but if weconsider attentively the nature of the case, it does not-appear so very ridiculous. Woden claimed magicalpower. Northern tradition tells us that his peoplebelieved that victory was always his; and that not onlywas he always successful when he commanded in per-son, but that, whenever he sent them on any expedition,he laid his hands upon their heads, and invoked ablessing on them, and that they then went forth con-fident of victory. This mighty chief was in the neigh-bourhood of the place where the Longobards and Van-dals had arranged their forces in preparation for battle;both parties sought that blessing from him, the utter-ance of that charm which would ensure them victory;and it is easy to understand what effect, in raising thespirits of one party, and depressing those of the other,


the knowledge that he had espoused the interests ofthe former would have. Let us, then, compare thistradition with history. The Vandals were actually inmotion at the time we have conjecturally fixed forWoden's expedition. About A.D. 334 they had mi-grated, in the course of one year, from the shores ofthe Western Ocean to the borders of Dacia, where theysuffered defeat at the hands of Geberic. They had,therefore, as Paul says, been pressing on the settle-ments of their neighbours, those of the Longobardsamongst the rest.

The chronology of the Longobards is perfectly con-sistent with the supposition that Ibor and Ayo, theirfirst historic chiefs, were living at this time, and con-temporary with Woden. Although their genealogicalsuccession does not commence before their 3rd king,Lethu; yet, as his reign was of 40 years' duration, andAgelmund's was 33, we may fairly take the successionof their kings as equivalent to a genealogy; and, if weplace Ibor and Ayo in the same line as Ostrogotha andWoden, we observe that Hildigisl, who was 8th insuccession from Ayo, and was slain in A.D. 548, is butone degree above Theoderic the Ostrogoth, who died inA.D. 526. Further, if we suppose Hildigisl to havebeen born about A.D. 500, and allow 30 years averageto the generations, the birth of Lethu would be aboutA.D. 350. Then taking A.D. 333 as the date of thevictory, 10 years of Ibor and Ayo's chieftainship bringus to A.D. 343, Agelmund's 30 years reign to A.D. 376,and Lamissio's 3 years to A,D. 379, for the accession ofLethu (at the age of 29,1 according to the former

1 Paul gives no dates for the succession of these first Icings. Someuncritical hand has interpolated this series in Prosper's Chroncle:—

A.D. 379. Ibor and Ayo conquered the Vandals.389. Agelmund reigned 33 years.423. Lamissio reigned 3 years.

Lefchu's reign, therefore, would be from A.D. 426 to 466; but as this


reckoning). Thus the succession of their kings, forthe most part genealogical, corresponds with the ge-nealogy of the Goths; their history coincides withthat of the Goths; and their chronology is consistentwith the theory, that Woden's career of conquest, com-menced in Sarmatia, had not yet reached Denmark inA.D. 333.

The genealogies of our royal dynasties are very vari-ously stated, in the notes appended to some MSS. ofthe ' Historia Britonum' by some anonymous Cambrianauthority, in the Textus Roffensis, in the EnglishChronicle, and in the Tables of Florence of Worcester ;and in several of the lines of descent we observe, thatthe later chronicles give more names than the earlier.So the Edda interpolates 7 names in the ancestry ofGeat, of which our chroniclers knew nothing, (the sameprocess of amplification); and the Ynglinga Saga illus-trates the way in which it has been brought about.The succession of kings there given may be historical,but cannot be genealogical throughout; so I apprehendthat the additional names, which appear in these latergenealogies, represent elder lines which failed, andmade way for younger branches of the same family.If we take the historical succession of the kings of anyone of the kingdoms of the Octarchy, and suppose therecords of their relationship to have been lost, and theseries represented as genealogical by a writer who knewonly of their names and their succession, we can readilyunderstand this process of augmentation. For instance,Penda, Peada, Wulfhere, JEthelred, Ccenred, Ceolred, asuccession of 6 kings, represent but 3 degrees of theMercian genealogy.

The Cambrian genealogist must have been living a

would scarcely allow an average of 20 years for the 6 succeeding genera-tions, I have no hesitation in discarding these dates. They do not appearin MS, Colbert, (the best of Prosper).

30 ON THE JUTE, ANGLE, AND SAXON ROYAL PEDIGKEES.

century earlier than the time of the compilation of theEnglish Chronicle, for the latest name he gives is thatof Ecgfrith, the son of Offa, who died A.D. 796. I shallventure to quote him as Nennius, for, when he speaksof the baptism of Eadwine, he says, " if any one wish toknow who baptized them, Eun map Urbgen baptizedthem," and MS. Denham, B. ii. 35-6, (one of thosewhich contain the shorter prologue of Nennius), has," if any one wish, etc., thus Bishop Kenchid, and Elbo-deus. the most holy of Bishops, related to me, Runmap ur Beghen (that is Paulinus)," etc. We have,then, a disciple of S. Elbod imparting this information,and Nennius is the only one we know of who satisfiesthis condition, of those whose names are connectedwith editions of this history. The writer of these noteswas evidently well acquainted with the history of thetimes, of which he has left us these fragments, andsupplies, in several instances, information which wehave not elsewhere. In the East Anglian genealogy,for example, he gives a descent which enables us tounderstand the relation of Aldwulf to his predecessors;and in the Mercian we have an opportunity of testinghis accuracy; for the poem of Beowulf tells us thatOffa was contemporary with Hygelac, who was slain inA.D. 511, and Nennius gives 3 generations between himand Penda, who was born A.D. 576, which will answerexactly; whilst the Chronicle and Florence give themanifestly impossible number 7. His authority, there-fore, I do not hesitate to prefer, and shall follow, ex-cept in one instance, in which I think he may possiblyhave been mistaken.

Next in value to these Notes I consider the genea-logies in the Textus Roffensis, originally compiled inA.D. 824, since Ccenwulf of Mercia is the latest whosedescent is traced, and Beornwulf his second successor,who died in that year, the latest who is named.

ON THE JUTE, ANGLE, A.ND SAXON BOYAL PEDIGREES. 31

All authorities are agreed that there were 3 genera-tions between Woden and the brothers Horsa and Henc-gest, and nearly so as to their names,

Hist. JBrit. Bceda. JEthelweard. Florence.(Paris MS.)

Weeta- Uecta, Wither. Uuithar. Wehta.Wicta. Uitta. Wicta. TJuicta. Witta,Wietgils. TJiotgils. Wihtgils. Uuyrhtels. Wihtgils.Hors and Hengisb and .Hengest and Horsa. Hengest andHeucgest. Horsa. Horsa.

Hors and Hencgest arrived in Britain in A.D. 428;Hors fell at Episford, A.D. 435; Hencgest reigned afterhim until A.D. 443, when he was defeated at Conis-brough, fell into the hands of Ambrosius, and was putto death. A Frisian tradition, quoted by Suffridus,tells us that two nephews and namesakes of theirs, sonsof Udolph, Duke of Frisia, and of their sister Svana,completed the conquest of Britain which they hadbegun. It is uncertain what was the authority hefollowed, for he seems to have been mistaken in quot-ing Ocka Scharlensis, who mentions indeed a secondHors and Hencgest, but represents them to have beenthe sons of Odilbalt, King of Frisia; but his storyappears the more probable, inasmuch as he connectsthe second Hencgest with the first, and so accounts forhis succeeding him, and we need have no difficulty inaccepting it. It is by no means unlikely that therewere in the same family more persons than one of eachname,1 and we can easily account for the circumstance

1 There was a Chrocua, an Alamannie chief, in Britain in the begin-ning of the 4th century, and another who figures in the history of Gaulhalf a century earlier. In the West Saxon genealogy we have twoCuthas and three Ceols in two parallel generations, (abbreviated names,which, however, we can write in full by the aid of their history); later,we have amongst the children of Eadweard the Elder, ^Bthelstan, Ead-mnnd, Eadred, Eadgyth, and JElfgifu, and the same 6 names amongstthose of JEthelred II.; and Eadward and Eadmund, sons of Eadgar, sonsof .ZEthelred II., and sons of Eadmund Ironside. The succession in Beowulf,Wiegmund, Wihstan, Wiglaf, is only changed in the case of the Mercian

32 ON THE JUTE, ANGLE, AND SAXON EOYAL PEDIGBEES.

that the second Hencgest is not distinguished from thefirst in our history. In the original records or sagas,from which the English Chronicle was compiled, thename of Hencgest simply was given in the narrative ofhis exploits, in much the same way as we find it inone of the episodes in Beowulf: the chronicler setdown an epitome of what he found recorded, and laterwriters, who knew nothing of a second Hencgest, havecompletely identified the two; just as the author ofthe'Historia Britonum,'in assigning 16 years as theduration of the reign of Constantine of Armorica, hasadded to his 12 years the 4 of Constantine the Tyrant,who was his immediate predecessor, and so confoundedthem together.

We shall be the more ready to admit the possibilityof confusion, such as this, arising out of the unsys-tematic records of the 5th century, if we consider theexactly parallel circumstances of the 10th, a period inwhich the English Chronicle was being regularly kept,and the events of successive years entered as they oc-curred. The history of this latter period is involved inobscurity almost as great as that of the earlier, owingto the frequent recurrence of the same names. Therewere certainly two Anlafs connected with the historyof Northumbria in the 10th century, a son of Guthfrithand a son of Sitric, and one was the other's nephew;princes, "Wiglaf, Wigmund, and Wihstan. JEthelfrith, King of North-umbria, had a son, as well as a brother, named Eanfrith; and the namesof two ancestors of Eadwine, Wuscfrea and Yffe, were given to a son andgrandson of his. In later Northumbrian history we have Erie son ofHarald Blodoxe, and Eric son of Harald Blaatand; and in the Norsegenealogies frequent repetitions of Erode, Halfdan, Ingiald, etc. SoSwane might well have named her sons after her brothers. The feelingwhich usually dictates the choice of names in a family is nothing new.S. John the Baptist's name was objected to by his relations on this veryaccount, that it had been borne by none of his family; and doubtless ithas been the practice in all ages and amongst all peoples, as it certainlywas amongst the Teutonic tribes, to give to children the names of theirkindred or illustrious ancestors.

. ON THE JUTE, ANGLE, AND SAXON ROYAL PEDIGREES. 83

and two Erics, each the son of a Harald; but theChronicle affords us no assistance towards distinguishingthe Anlafs, and only notices one of the Erics; theirhistory could never be unravelled without aid fromother sources. If this, then, be the case with regard tothe Annals of the 10th century, it is no wonder thatthe history of two Hencgests, in the 5th, should havebeen confounded.

This Frisian tradition affords a satisfactory solutionof a difficulty, which otherwise would have been in-superable, the notices of a Hencgest in our history,after the time to which the fall of the first, (recorded inthe Brut, Boece, and Ocka), must be referred, andenables us in part to reconcile the conflicting state-ments in our Chronicles, relative to the genealogy ofthe Kings of Kent. It is the second Hencgest whostands at the head of this genealogy in Nennius' Notes,(a document entirely distinct from, and independent ofthe ' Historia,' in which the ancestry of the first Henc-gest is given), for it is remarkable that this alone is nottraced to Woden, as it could not have been withoutincluding the name of a female, and so departing fromthe universal rule of these genealogies. It is thisHencgest, too, who figures in an episode of the poemof Beowulf, a contemporary of Fin, the son of Folc-walda, and of Hrothgar the Scylding. His death isrecorded in the 40th year of the "coming of theAngles," A.D. 467. •

Again, Boece says that after the death of Octa, inthe last year of the reign of Uther, the Saxons madeanother Octa, a son of his brother, King of England;and, shortly after, he notices his giving Northumbria toColgrim, and going to the south. Buchanan alsospeaks of a second Octa, whom he calls a son of theformer. In the ' Historia Britonum,' the passage, whichimmediately precedes the notice of Arthur's 12 vic-

VOL. VIII. D

34 ON THE JUTE, ANGLE, AND SAXON ROYAL PEDIGKEES.

tones, informs us that Octa went from North Britainto Kent, on the death of his father Hencgest (A.D. 467),and that he \vas the progenitor of all the Kings ofKent. Henry of Huntingdon says that JEsc was Henc-gest's successor; and we know from the EnglishChronicle that the Kings of Kent were called JEscings.JEthelweard enables us to reconcile these statements,by saying that Ese (JEsc) was surnamed Octa; that hewas a son of Hencgest, and grandfather of Eormenric ;and that the Kings of Kent were named Esings (JEsc-ings) after him.

The evidence of these Scottish historians as to theexistence of a second Octa, is equally important withthat of the Frisian tradition of a second Hencgest; itshows how the recurrence of the same names in thisfamily has given rise to the confusion which exists withregard to the ancestry of Eormenric, and enables us tocomplete the restoration of this genealogy. The con-flicting statements of our different authorities appear inthe table subjoined:—

Nennius. Text. Hoff. JEthelwecwd. Florence. Bceda.Hengest. . Hengest. Hengest. Hengest. Hengest.Octha. Ocga. Ese-Octa. Ocga vel Oric. Oerie-Oise.1

Ossa. Eosa. Oesa vel Oiso. Octa.Eormoric. Eormiric. Eormenric. Eormenring. Irminric.

JEthelweard, it will be seen, agrees with Nennius,adding that Octa had also the name of JEsc; and inthis he is supported by the 'Scalse Chronicon,' whichinforms us that Arthur's antagonist, (whom Boece callsOcta, and who is certainly the person whom the En-glish Chronicle and Henry of Huntingdon call JEsc),was named Octa and Osca. He omits the name of hisson, but there can be no doubt that it was Ossa, who,as Henry of Huntingdon says, reigned between JEscand Eormenric, and whose name occurs in this succes-

1 This Oeric-Oisc of Ven. Brada is something like Asser's Mngodwutf.

ON THE JDTE, ANGLE, AND SAXON ROYAL PEDIGREES. 35

sion in the Textus EofFensis, and in the double pedigreewhich Florence of Worcester gives.

Florence appears to have had the two distinct de-scents before him; one the same as that of Nennius,Hengest, Ocga, Oesa, Eonnenring; the other, Hengest,Oric, Oisc; and, not knowing how to reconcile them,has adopted the expedient of writing Ocga vel Oric,Oesa vel Oisc. Oeric and Oisc belong to the firstHencgest; their names certainly followed his in thegenealogy; and although JBseda has represented themas borne by the same person, I suspect that they were,as they appear in Florence's tables, those of a son andgrandson.

Hencgest I. had also a son Octa, who came to Britainsoon after him, and, with . occasional interruptions,reigned in Northumbria until A.D. 466, when he fell inbattle near Verulam; but Octa and Ossa of the gene-alogy belong to Hencgest II. This Octa, generallycalled JEsc, succeeded the first Octa in Northumbria,and on the death of 'Hencgest II., in the followingyear, relinquished it in favour of Colgrim, and reignedin Kent thenceforward until A.D, 491.

In the accompanying table, the conflicting statementsare attempted to be reconciled as follows:—The de-scent from Woden to Hencgest I. is that upon whichall authorities are agreed; that from Hencgest II. toEormenric is derived from Nennius; and the connect-ing link Swane, is supplied by the Frisian tradition.Eormenric, the 8th descendant from Woden, appearsone degree higher than Theoderic the Ostrogoth, andin the same degree as Hildigisl the Longobard, hiscontemporaries.

Our authorities are accordant, with regard to theEast Anglian dynasty, as far as the name of Tytla's sonEni. Beeda notices particularly only the family ofEni's brother Keedwald, and 3 of Eni's sons; and

D 2


Florence represents Aldwulf and JElfwald as sons ofone of these, JEthelhere. Nennius and the TextusRoffensis take up the line of another son of Eni; theformer concluding it with the name of Elric, otherwiseunknown; the latter with that of JElfwald, both agree-ing as to the parentage of Aldwulf.

Nennius. Textus "Roffensis. Florence.Casser. Caser. Casere.Titinon. Tytiman. Tytmon.Trigil. Trygil. Trygils.Rodmimt. Hrodmund. Hrothmund.Rippa. -Hryp. Hryp.Guilhelm. Wilhelm. Wilhelm.Guecha. Weha. Wewa or Wehha.Guffa. Wuffa. Wuffa.Tidil. Tytla. Tytla.Eeni. Erri. Eni.Edrio. .ZEtherric. jEthBlhere.Aldul. Aldulf. Aldulf. JElfwold.Elric.

It is certainly more probable that JElfwald, who diedin A.D. 749, was the grandson of JEthelric, than thathe was the son of ^Ethelric's brother, who died in A.D.664. In this genealogy, Nennius supplies us withvaluable information which we have not elsewhere;saying of Guecha, "he first reigned in Britain over thenation of the East Angles."

Later chroniclers differ from Nennius in insertingfour generations between Eomser and Pybba in theMercian line. 1 have already deduced from Beowulf aconfirmation of his accuracy in this respect, and thelife of S. Guthlac, written in the 8th century, suppliesanother. It is there said, that S. Guthlac was " of theoldest and noblest family in Mercia, who were calledMings;" and if JSthelbald, who was King of Merciawhen this life was written, had been an Icling, theauthor would certainly not have passed over the fact ofS. Guthlac's having been of his family. The Iclings,


therefore, were not then in possession of the throne ofMercia, and Wybba was not of their line.

Wennius.Guedolgeat.Gueagon.Guithleg.Guerdmund.Offa.Ongen.Earner.

Pubba.

Text. Roff.Weodegeot.

WitHseg.Werenmnd.Offa.Angelgeot.Eomer.Icel.Cnebba.Cynewald.Creoda.Pybba.

Mngl. CJiron.

Wihtlag.Wsermund.Offa.Angeltheow.Eomser.Icel.Onebba.Cynewald.Creoda.Pybba.

Florence."Weothelgeat.Waga.Wilitlseg.Wsermund.Offa.Angengeat.Eomser.ica.Cnebba.Cynewald.Creoda.Pybba.

As Creoda was King of the Mercians before Wybba,I think it probable that these four names represent acollateral descent. Nennius' tells' us that Pubba had12 sons, and of one of these-, Penda, we know moreon his authority than on that of any other of ourhistorians.

In the Deiran genealogy, I suspect that Nennius hasfallen into an error, in placing at the head of the linethe ancestors of the Bernicians and West Saxons,Bseldaeg and Brond, instead of their- own Wsegdseg.Nennius.Beldeyg.Brond.Siggar.

Sebald.Zegulfh.

Soemil.Sguerthing,GuilglisiTJsfrean.Iffi.Ulle.

Text. Eoff.Wsegdseg.

Siggar.Swsebdasg.Siggeot.Sasbald.Sffifugal.

Seomel.Wester walcna.WiHglsing.Wuscfrea.Yffe.JSlle.

Engl. CJiron.Wsegdeeg.

Sigegar.Swsebdseg.Sigegeat.Ssabald.Ssefugel.

BJenry Swnt.Wtepdeg.

Sigegeat.Seabald.Sefugil.

Florence.WsBgdeag.

Siggar.Swsebdseg.Siggset.Sasbald.Ssafugol.

Seomel.Westrefalena. Westrefalcna. Westorwalona.Wilgils.Usofrea.Yffe.JSlle.

Wilgils.TTscfrea.Iffa.EUa.

Wilgels.Wysefrea.Yffe.Ealle.

Swsebdseg and Sigegeat I take to be collateral names.Swserta, for which Florence is the only authority, is

38 ON THE JUTE, ANGLE, AND SAXON BOYAL PEDIGREES.

evidently the result of a mistake on his part. Findingthe name Swerting after Seomel, he took it for a patro-nymic, indicating that his father was Swerta. ButSwerting is not a patronymic here; it appears in Beo-wulf as a proper name, and under circumstances whichrender it probable that the person who bore it was thesame as this; it occurs twice in a genealogy given byLanghorne; and probably it was very common, for inthe eleventh century we find it borne by two of theLaw-men of the city of Lincoln, sons respectively ofHarthacnut and Grimbald. In this genealogy, again,Nennius supplies valuable information; saying of Soe-mil, " he first overcame (or separated) Deira and Ber-nica."

In the Bernician genealogy the Chronicle and Flo-rence introduce Brand, the ancestor of the WestSaxons:—

Nennius. Text. Raff". ISngl. Chron, Florence.Beldeg. Braldseg. Beldseg. Bseldeag.

Brand. Brand.Beorneo. Beornic. Beonoc. Beorn.

Beornd.Gechbrond. Wsegbrand. Wajgbrand.

Ingebrand. Ingebrand.Aluson. Alusa. Aloe. Alusa.

Angelgeot. Angenwit, Angengeat.Inguec. Ingwi. Ingengeat.-3Edibrith. ^thelberht. ' JSthelbryht.Ossa. Eosa. Esa. Oesa.Eobba. Eoppa. Eoppa. Eoppa.Ida. Ida. Ida. Ida.

Beornec, the second name in Nennius' list, is evi-dently the Eponymus of this race, the Beornicas; theTextus Koffensis supports Nennius; Beonoc in theChronicle, and Florence's Beorn and Beornd, are falsereadings of the same. Ingebrand may be a collateralname. Angelgeot in the Textus Koifensis, Angenwit inthe Chronicle, Angengeat and Ingengeat in Florence,appear to be variations of one name, Ingwi or Ing-wingeat.


In the West Saxon genealogy, regarding which. Nen-nius is silent, our oldest authority is a pedigree, in theTextus Eoffensis, ending with Ine, and, therefore, ofthe 8th century; supported, where it differs fromthose in the English Chronicle, by the testimony ofAsser:—

Text. Roff.

Basldffig.Brand.

Gewis.

Aluca.Cerdic.Oreoda.Cyneric.

J-sser.

Belde.Broad.

G-ewis.

Elesa.Cerdio.Creoda.Cyneric.

COO. clxxiii.Beeldseg.Brand.Frithogar.Freawine.'Wig.Gewis.Esla.Elesa.Cerdic.

Cyneric.

JOngl. Chiron.A. vi. and S. i.

Bseldseg.Brand.Frithogar.Freawine.Wig.Gewis.Esla.Elesa.Cerdic.Creoda.Cyneric.

J5. iv.Beldseg.Brand.Frithogar.Freawine.

Gewis.

Elesa.Cerdic.Creoda.Cyneric.

To the lists which these authorities supply, all theMSS. of the Chronicle add the probably collateral namesof Frithogar and Freawine, and most those of Wig andEsla; but all, except the most ancient (the CorpusChristi, Cambridge, MS.), agree with them, under A.D.849, in inserting the name of Creoda between those ofCerdic and Cyneric, and this is very important.

Gewis, we may observe, is. the Eponymus of thisrace, as Beornec of the Beornicas.

The Textus Eoffensis gives a second genealogy, ex-tending to the sons of Eadgar; evidently a distinctdocument, derived from, some other source. It agreeswith that stated in the' MS. of the Chronicle, TiberiusB. i.

Florence of Worcester and Henry of Huntingdon arethe only authorities for the genealogy of the EastSaxons:—

Florence.Seaxnete.Gesecg.

Henry.Saxnat.Andesc.

40 ON THE JUTE, ANGLE, AND SAXON ROYAL PEDIGEEES.

Florence. Henry.Antsecg. Gesac.Swseppa. Spoewe.Sigefugel. Sigewlf.Bedca. Biedcan.Ofia. Offa.JEsewine. Erchenwin.Sledda. Slede.

They agree as to the number of descents, but differas to the order in one instance, and as to the names inothers.

.The Textus Roffensis and Florence agree in theirstatements of the genealogy of the Lindi&faras:—

Text. Rqff. Florence.Winta. "Winta.Cretfca. Cretta.Cwsedgils. Queldgils.Casdbajd. Cssdbasd.Bubba. Bubba.Beda. Beda.Biscop. Biscop.Eanferd. Eanferth.Eata. Eatta.Aldfrid.- laldfrith.

We have no direct means of comparing this genealogywith the rest, nor of testing its accuracy, because thepersons named herein are quite unknown in history.Its accuracy, however, may be inferred from the follow-ing considerations r—

A genealogy of Lindisfaras, deduced from Woden,indicates a kingdom of Lindissi in the earliest age ofthe domination of the Angles in Britain. Yet it iscertain that this kingdom had been absorbed into thatof Deira, by conquest or otherwise, early in the 7thcentury. It is evident from Bseda's story of S. Paulinus'mission, that Eadwine was its sovereign about A.D. 630;and Blsecca, the chief man of the province, was onlyprefect of Lincoln; the dominions of Oswine, king ofDeira, must have extended into Northamptonshire, for


the place where he had assembled his forces to repelthe invasion of Oswine was certainly Wilbarston, nearly10 miles north-west of Kettering;1 and, even afterWulfhere had shaken off the Northumbrian yoke,Alhfrith, king of Deira, granted lands at Stamford toS. Wilfrid, A.D. 660. So in the days of Eadwine thekingdom of the Lindisfaras had passed away, and Aid-frith, whorn we may regard as their last king, stands inthe same degree of descent from Woden as ^Elle, Bad-wine's father. There is no authority, now extant, forrepresenting Blaecca as belonging to this, line; but wemust not forget that many MSS. have perished sinceSmith published his edition of Bseda. If he were ason of Aldfrith, he would stand in the same degree ofdescent as Eadwine. Possibly he is represented byBlsecmon, a descendant of Woden in the same degree,through Ida, and a contemporary of Eadwine.

The Danish genealogy, in the Langfedgatal, gives us20 generations down to Eagnar Lodbrok..

Odenn; Skioldr, h. s.,. Fridleifr, h. s.-? Fridfrode,h. s.; Fridleifr, h. s.;. Havare Handrami, h. s.; Frode,h. s.; Varmundr Vitri, h. s.; Olafr Litillate, h. s.; DanrMikillate; Frode Fridsami, h. s. -r Fridleifr; FrodeFsekni, h. s.; Ingialdr (Starkadar fosferi), h. s,; Halfdan,'brodir bans; Helgi oc Eoar, bans synir,' Hrolfr Kraki,Helga son; Hserekr Hnavggvanbaugi, Ingialds son;Frode, h. s.; Halfdan, h. s.; Hasrekr Slavngvanbaugi,h. s.; Haralldr Hilditavn,.h. s.;. Sigurdr Hringr; EagnarLodbrok, h. s.

Eagnar, then, appears to be one degree lower thanthe sons of the West-Saxon JSthelwulf, who werestrictly his contemporaries; but we observe that Dan is

1 In the information supplied to Bseda, the similarity of the namesKettering and Catteriek has been the occasion of confounding one withthe other. Wilfarcesdun, he says, was about ten miles north-west ofCataracton. It has been sought in vain near Cattericlc; but Wilbarstonis in the direction indicated from Kettering) and nearly the distance.

42 ON THE JUTE, ANGLE, AND SAXON KOYAL PEDIGBEES.

not called the son of Olaf, nor Fridleif III. the son ofFrode (though he is so called in the Ynglinga Saga),nor Sigurd the son of Harald.

It is evident that a correct genealogy cannot bededuced from the Ynglinga Saga; for the notices itcontains of contemporary Danish kings show that kingsmust have been erroneously fathered upon their prede-cessors in some instances. Fiolner, the 2nd of thisline, was contemporary with Fridfrode, the 3rd of theDanish; and it is said that Domar the 7th married thesister of Dan, the 9th of the Danish. In the 4th degreeafter Domar we have Aliic and Eric, the latter of whomis said to have married Dag's daughter, Dagrid; sothat it is more probable that Agne was a brother, thanthat he was the son, of Dag. Again, under the reignof On, the 7th from Domar, we are told that duringthese 7 generations, and the 2 intermediate reigns ofAlf and Hugleik, Dan, Frode his son, and Fridleif andHalfdan his grandsons, reigned in Denmark; 7 gene-rations in the Swedish line, and 9 reigns, correspondingto 4 in the Danish. Evidently there is something otherthan genealogical here.

Egil made a treaty with Frode Fsekni; Egil's son,Ottar, perished in conflict with Frode; Ottar's son,Adils, was at war with Helge, Frode's grandson; andHrolf Kraki, Helge's son, perished during the reign ofEystein; so that for 4 generations these lines are ex-actly parallel. For the rest, the Swedish successionappears to be one degree in excess of the Danish, whichis not inconsistent with probability.

It has seemed requisite to enter into these parti-culars, in order to show that this genealogy cannotfairly be collated with the rest. Indeed, it cannotclaim to be considered of equal authority, for it is pre-sented to us, for the first time, in a work of the 13thcentury, whilst those we have had under consideration


come to us on the authority of writers of the 5th, 8th,9th, and 10th ; nor could the evidence of a single docu-ment outweigh that of so many others. Its chief valueconsists in this, that it coincides with and confirms theDanish genealogy, in that part which comprises theimmediate descendants of Woden, and might he re-garded as most open to suspicion ; here and in the laterpart the succession of kings appears to be genealogical,as throughout it is probably historical; but there mustbe some interruption in the direct descent in themiddle, at the very time, too, when a similar interrup-tion is indicated in the Danish succession. I believethis was a real interruption; for nothing less than thesupposition of an invasion and conquest can account forthe extraordinary difference betwen the ornaments, andarmour, and writing of what Mr. Worsaae calls the 1stand 2nd divisions of the late Iron Age in Denmark.He dates the 2nd division commencing about A.D. 700 ;I should be disposed to carry it a century higher, see-ing that Olaf and Dan are in the same degrees respec-tively as Eormenric and JEthelberht of Kent, and Wybbaand Penda of Mercia.

Now, placing these genealogies side by side, we findthe result to be a remarkable vindication of theirgenuineness, and justification of our preference for theearliest authorities. The inequalities in the number ofgenerations, as presented to us by later writers, dis-appear, and, in the 9th degree of descent from Woden,we find JEthelberht, Tytla, Penda, Ida, Cuthwine, andSleda, all of whom were living in the latter half of the6th century; whilst in the 8th degree, besides Eor-menric, (whom we have noticed as being in the samedegree of descent as his contemporary, Hildigisl), wehave Wuffa, the father of Tytla; Wybba, who diedA.D. 597; Eoppa, the father of Ida; Cutha, and his brotherCeawlin, who died respectively in A.D. 571 and 593;

44 ON THE JUTE, ANGLE, AND SAXON EOYAL PEDIGREES.

and .ZEscwine, the father of Sleda. There are, in fact,no greater disparities in this earlier division of thegenealogies than in the later, which is undoubtedlyhistorical,—no greater in the whole series, proportion-ally, than we observe in the dates of the deaths of thegrandsons of JEthelfrith of Bernicia, for example.

It is certain that an average of years, much less thanthe usually estimated number, will suffice for the genera-tions of these early times. The Barbarians married muchsooner than is usual now. It is no uncommon thing tomeet in the Sagas with notices of warriors on the fieldof battle at the early age at which Arthur commencedhis victorious career;, even in his 13th year Eric Blodoxereceived the command of a fleet, and sailed on his firstexpedition; Magnus Barfod was the father of Eysteinat the age of 16, and soine of the Merovingian kingswere fathers at 15; and we may well believe that Gothsand Angles, in the 4th and 5th centuries, followedmuch the same customs as Danes and Swedes in thellth and 12th. In purely historic times the Anglo-Saxon genealogies prove that early marriage was therule with our forefathers. Not to multiply instances,we will take examples from the West-Saxon genealogy,of which we know more than of any of the others.JEthelstan, the eldest son of 2Ethelwulf, died not laterthan A.D. 878, (if he was, as there is every reason tobelieve, S. Neot). Suppose him to have been 70 yearsold at that time, and Ceawlin, who died in A.D. 593, tohave attained to the same age, the average of 11 gene-rations is 26 years; although Cuthwine was a youngerson of Ceawlin, and Ingild a younger son of Coenred.Again, as S. Eadweard the Confessor was born in A.D.1003, and as he was the llth of the children ofJEthelred, his eldest brother Eadmund Ironside couldscarcely be born before A.D. 990. From JElfred, born849, to Eadmund, the average of 5 generations is 28


years, although Eadmund (the grandson of Alfred,) wasthe llth of Eadweard's children; Eadgar, the 2nd sonof Eadmund; and ^Ethelred, the 2nd (or 3rd) son ofEadgar. 'From the birth of Alfred to that of Edward I,Plantagenet, the average of 13 generations is exactly30 years. The longer the series, the greater the chancesof the succession being continued in the lines of youngersons, and, of course, the greater the average; but underunfavourable circumstances it will scarcely exceed 30years; whilst under others, 27 or 28 will be sufficient.

Hencgest came to Britain in A.D. 428, at which timehe was the father of a warrior of full age, and of themaiden who became the wife of Vortigern; so that wemay safely set down his age at about 45, and an averageof 30 years would place the birth of Wecta aboutA.D. 290. The same average, reckoned from the birthsof JElfred, A.D. 849, and Eadwine, A.D. 586, would placethose of Bseldseg in A.D. 309, and of Wsegdseg in A.D. 286.In the case of Penda, born A.D. 576, a larger averagewould be required to bring the birth of Weothelgeatwithin reasonable limits of the same period; but we areexpressly informed that Wsermund was far advanced inyears when Offa was born, that OfFa did not marry untila late period of his life, and that Penda, who came tothe throne at the age of 50, 29 years after his father'sdeath, had 11 brothers, of whom 9, probably, wereolder than himself; and in the collateral descent weseem to have an indication that an elder line had beensupplanted by a younger. In fact, every one of thesegenealogies is perfectly consistent with the theory thatGeat flourished in the latter half of the 1st century;that Woden was born about the middle of the 3rd, andhis 30 sons during a period, of which the central pointwould be about A.D. 300; and that he commenced hismigration about A.D. 325, and conquered SouthernKussia and Germany in the years immediately fol-lowing.


Presenting, then, as these genealogies do, so manyremarkable parallels, they are surely entitled to be re-ceived in good faith. They are, in fact, witnesses, and,(seeing that they are entirely distinct and unconnected),unimpeachable witnesses, each to the truth and genu-ineness of the others. It cannot be believed that theGoths in Eastern, the Longobards in Central, and theScandinavians in Northern Europe, could have inventedso many genealogical series, as nearly coincident withour own as we could have expected to find them, evenif we had been able to verify them historically in eachsuccessive degree. They are, therefore, substantiallygenuine, and Woden's place in history may be consideredas probably determined.

I know it was the name of a god, but it was a namealso borne by men. It occurs so frequently in neigh-bourhoods connected with the memory of Hors andHencgest,—Wodnesborough in Kent, Woodnesboroughand the Wansdyke in Wiltshire, Wednesbury and Wed-nesfield in Staffordshire, Wansford in Northamp-tonshire, Wansford in Yorkshire, and Wansbeck inNorthumberland,—that I am persuaded it was thename of one of their associates. There were Teutonsin England before they came, and the Bishop of Londonwhom Hencgest slew, was Vodin; the same, perhaps, asthe S. Woden to whose memory the church on CoquetIsle is dedicated. After the conversion of our fathersto Christianity, no doubt, the name fell into disuse, aswell as that of Thunor, which appears once in the 1stcentury of our Christianity, in the history of Kent; butin later times both were revived, under Danish au-spices. In the reign of Harthacnut, Thur was Ealdor-man of Middle Anglia; in the days of Eadweard theConfessor, Othin and Thor were moneyers at York;Otin was witness to a deed executed by John, Prior ofHexham, A.D. 1189-94; and about the same time one

ON THE JCJTE, ANGLE, AND SAXON ROYAL PEDIGREES. 47

Thor granted land for the building of a church nearDurham. In Scandinavia, Professor Stephens tells ustheir names frequently occur in charters down to the16th century; and his grand work on Runic monumentspresents us with a brooch of the 4th century, on whichwe can read, in perfectly legible characters, the namesof Wodan and Thonar.

Our Woden bore a name which can be traced to an"antiquity compared with which his age is but as yester-day. In the 6th century before our sera, amongst a raceakin to our own, the Persians, we read it on the rockof Bisitun, the name of one of the conspirators whoaided Darius in his acquisition of the Persian throne,Utana (Herodotus' 'Graves). Ezekiel (xxvii. 19) recordsit as an ethnic name, (and these were the names of an-cestors of races), in connection with Javan,—pi 1 }T),Vadan ve Javan. An Assyrian tablet (W. A. Cun. Inscr.ii. 59. 8) tells us that one of the names of the god ofwar, (and gods were deified men,) was Vadana; andmore remarkable still is the fact that the author of thecivilization of Central America, derived undoubtedlyfrom Central Asia, was another Votan.

APPENDIX.

IT may Tbe useful to add as an Appendix to this Paper thegenealogies referred to as contained in the Textus Roffensis.It will be observed, however, that they are rather of Mercianor Northumbrian, than Kentish, origin; indeed the Kentishgenealogy from Hengest to Woden is the only one which pre-sents any serious error. In other respects they are extremelyvaluable.

Use siint Genealogies per partes in. Britannia Regum Regnan. .Eadwine.1 Weosterwalcna. Swsebdseg. Clapha . . i.JElle. Seomel. Siggar. Odda . . . yiii.Yffe. Ssefugal. Wsegdseg. .ZEthelric. . vii.Wuscfrea. Ssobald. Woden Frealafing. Theodred. . vii.Wilgilsing. Siggeot. Ida2r6gnavitan. x. Osred . . . xi.


Theonred(Eanr) ii. Ceolwlf.Leodwald.Ecgwald.Eadelm.Ocg.Idin.Eadberb,6

XI.

xi.xxi.

i.vi.

viii.iii.x.i.

OsricCeolwlf .Eadberht .Oswlf . .JEthelwaldAlrhed .JEthelred .Alfwold .Osred . .Item .SDthelred vii.Penda3regnavifc

an. . . . xxi.Peada . . . i .Wulfhere . .xvii.2Ethelred . xxix,Cenred . . v.Ceolred . . vii.Athelbald . . xli.Egfrid/*Oswio.^Ethelfrid.JStheric.Ida.Eoppa.Eosa.JEthelberht.Angelgeot.Alusa.Ingebrand.Wssgbrand.Beornie.Bseldfflg.Woden Frealafing,

Item.Ofia . . xxxix.Freodwald . vii.Fussa . . . vii.iEthelfrid xxviii.Eadwine . xvii.Oswald . . viii.Osweo . xxviii.Egfrid . . . xv.Alfrid . . . xx.Eegfrid, cli dies.Cenwulf.Ceolwlf.Beornwulf.Cudwine.*

Item.Alfrid.12

Eata.Eanferd.Biseeop.Beda.Bubba.

JSataLeodwald/ing, Csedba^d.Item. Wordan- Cwssdgils.

hymbrorum.AlAed.'Eanwine.Byrnhom.

Celin.Cynric.Creoda.Cerdic.Aluca.Giwis.Brand.Bseldseg.Woden Freala-

Bofa.Blsechmon.Eadric Iding.Item Merciorum. Withred.

Cretta.Winta.WodenFrealafing,Freodow'lf.13

Finn.Godwlf Hating.

Athelbald.8

Alewig.Eopa.Pybbi.2Ethered.°Penda. "Pybba.Creoda.Cynewald.Cnebba.Icel.Eomer.Angelgeot.Ofia.Weremund.WitLlseg.Weodegeot.

Ecgberht.JUrconberht.Eadbald.JSthelberht.Eormiric.Eose.Ocga.Hengesfc.Witta.Wihtgils.Wcegdsag.WodenFrealafing,

Item.

Aldulf.^BtLerric.Erri.

WodenFrealafing, Tytla.Eegfrid10 Offing. Wuffa.Offa.Tliingferd.Eanwulf.Osmod.Eopa.Pybba.Ceonwlf.11

Cudberht.Bassa.Ceonreow.Centwine.Oudwalh..

Wehh.Wilhelm.Hryp.Hrodmtmd.Trygil.Tytiman.Caser.WodenFrealafing.Yne.16

Cenred.Ceolvvald.Cudwulf.

CentoalAPyb'bi'ng. Cud wine.

Hse sunt genea-, logite Eegum

Occid. Saxo-num.

Eadward & Ead-mund & JSthel-red JEthelingasfuere EadgarEegis filii.

Eadgar.1?Eadmund.Eadward.JDlfred.Athulf.Ecgberlifc.Ealhmund.Eava.Eoppa Ingelding.Ingeld fuit frater

In£B regis West-sax, qui regna-vit xxxvii. an-nis. Is Monas-terium pulcher-rimum Grlaston iasadificavit et pos-tea ivit ad S.Petrum ibiquomortuus requi-esoit. Hujusduofratres fuewCenredi filii.

Cenred.Ceolward.Cutha.Oudwine.Ceawlin.Cynric.Creoda.

ON THE JUTE, ANGLE, AND SAXON EOYAL PEDIGREES. 49

Cerdic. Brand. Eata. Bedwig.Elesa. Bseldseg. Tethwa. Sceaf.Esla. WodenFredlafing. Beaw. Sescef fuit filiusGewis. Frealaf. Scealdwa. Nose Natus inWig. Finn. Heremod. area, etc.Freawine. Godulf. Heraman.Freodegar. [Aliis Geta]. Hadra.

NOTES.1 Eadwine, king of Iforthumbria, A.D. 617-33; his descent from Wo-

den.I Ida and 4 successors, kings of Bernicia; after these should come

Freodwald and 7 successors (placed after OfFa, king of the Mercians), thenOsred and his 11 successors, who follow here down to JEthelred, whosesecond reign commenced A.D. 790.

3 Penda and 6 successors, kings of Mereia; 16 lines lower comes Offa,and 8 lines still lower Ecgfrith and 3 successors to Beornwulf, A.D. 82-13.It is difficult to account for this confusion in the Northumbrian and Mer-cian successions.

4 Ecgfrith, king of Northumbria, A.D. 670-85; his descent from Woden.5 Cuthwine, father of Ccenred, king of Nortbumbria, A.D. 716-8; his

descent from Ida.0 Eadberht, king of JTorthumbria, A.D. 737-58; his descent fromLeod-

wald (see pedigree preceding).7 Alchred, king of Northumbria, A.D. 765-74; his descent from Ida.8 JEthelbald, king of Meroia, A.D. 716-55; his descent from Wybba.9 JEthelred, king of Meroia, A.D. 675-704; his descent from Woden.

!! ncgfrit™king of Mercia' A'D' Sf JQ10II Ccenwulf, „ „ A.D. 794-819;

12 Genealogy of the kings of the Lindisfaras, continued.13 To Eata or Geat.14 JSthelberht, king of Kent, A.D. 748-60; his descent from Woden.15 JElfwold, king of East Anglia, A.D. 713-49; his descent from Woden.16 Ine, king of Wessex, A.D. 688-728; his descent from Woden.The genealogies above seem to have been compiled in the 8th century;

one name alone being mentioned (and that in the succession of kings, notin a genealogy), which belongs to the 9th. The following—

ir Traces the descent of the.ZEthelings, sons of Eadgar, from Sceaf, and-therefore belongs to the reign of Eadgar, A.D. 958-57-

VOL. VIII. E

Kent Archaeological Society is a registered charity number 223382© Kent Archaeological Society

on the jute, angel and saxon royal pedigrees - 1872/008-02.pdf · 1 asaer says that gfeat was...

Documents