Page:Englishhistorica36londuoft.djvu/176

 168 TEM GENEALOGY OF THE April which are inconsistent with those of 648 to 728. There is reason to believe that these annals of 597 and 611 are ninth-century work. The preface to the Chronicle, Alfredian in its present form, but obviously based upon a document of the time of Ethelwulf, contains material from an early source, independent of the source from which the annals of dates prior to the con- version of Wessex were drawn. This early source, however, though it doubtless gave the kings' names, their order of succes- sion, and the number of years that each reigned, cannot have given the relationship of each king to his predecessor, because the clauses expressing these relationships can be shown to be, in the main, 6i ninth-century origin. The preface uses a phrase, 1 whose kin goes to Cerdic ', which corresponds with that which occurs in the annals of 755 and 784, but in none of the other annals. Mr. Chadwick writes : But between the years 754 and 823 we find probably only five West Saxon entries in sixty-eight years. Moreover, these differ entirely in character from the preceding entries. The entries for 755 and 784 are summaries of reigns which must have been written after the reigns were ended. . . . There seems to be reason therefore for supposing that the materials for the ninth-century chronicle included a collection of West Saxon annals extending to the middle of the eighth century or somewhat later, and that this collection was brought up to date by the addition of a few entries giving summaries of the reigns of Cynewulf and Berhtric, which were of course not beyond the reach of living memory in the time of Ethelwulf. 1 We may, therefore, reasonably attribute to the time of Ethelwulf the phrase, ' whose kin goes to Cerdic ', wherever it occurs in the preface. He used it in all cases where he found a genealogy of a king in the annals of 648 to 728, except in the case of Cent wine. He would have been well advised to use it in this case also, but unfortunately he erroneously identified Cynegils the father of Cent wine with King Cynegils, and consequently thought it sufficient to add ' Cynegilsing ' to Centwine's name. He also used the phrase for Ceolwulf (597-611), but not for Cynegils (611-43), though each of these kings has a genealogy in the annals of the period preceding the conversion. Hence we conclude that the genealogical part of the annal of 611 is not earlier than the ninth century. The other genealogy, that of Ceolwulf, occurs in the annal of 597, which, from its reference to Picts and Scots, appears to be of late origin. 2 The phrase, ' whose kin goes to Cerdic ', is also used in the preface for the eighth - 1 Op. cit. p. 26. 8 Oman, p. 249, suggests that the statement that King Ceolwulf (597-611) fought with Picts and Scots is due to confusion with Ceolwulf of Northumbria (729-37). If so, the annal can hardly have been composed before the ninth century.