This belief, Prof. Chadwick thinks, went back to exceedingly early times[[619]], and he regards it as well-founded:
"It is true that the Angli of Britain seem never to have included themselves among the Danes, but the reason for this may be that the term Dene (Danir) had not come into use as a collective term before the invasion of Britain[[620]]."
Doubtless the fact that the name of a Danish king Scyld or Sceldwa is found in a pedigree of West-Saxon kings, as drawn up at a period certainly not later than 892, points to a belief, at that date, in some kind of a connection. But we have still to ask: How close was the connection supposed to be? And how old is the belief?
Firstly as to the closeness of the connection. Finn also occurs in the pedigree—possibly the Frisian king: Sceaf occurs, possibly, though not certainly, a Longobard king. Noah and Adam occur; are we therefore to suppose that the compiler of the Genealogy believed his kings to be of one blood with the Hebrews? Certainly he did: but only remotely, as common descendants of Noah. And the occurrence of Sceldwa and Sceaf and Finn in the genealogies—granting the identity of these heroes with Skjold of the Danes, Sceafa of the Longobards and Finn of the Frisians, might only prove that the genealogist believed in their common (Germanic) race.
900 950 1000 1050 1100 1125
| | | | | |
| A. Chron | W. Chron.
_| Parker MS ______________________________| MS Cott, Otho B. XI, 2.
/ | c. 890-900 | c. 1025
/
/ | Asser
/______________________________________| MS Cott. Otho A. XII,
/ \ | c. 1000
/ \________________________________________________________| Textus Roffensis I,
/ | c. 1120
Transcript of \ ................ | B. Chron.
Chronicle from Copy sent to Abingdon, : presumed : /| MS Cott. Tib. A. VI,
which all kept there till c. 977__: Abingdon :/ | c. 1000
extant \ : copy, c. 977 :\ | C. Chron.
MSS are \ :..............: \_______________| MS Cott. Tib. B. I,
derived \____________ | c. 1050
Copy sent to Ripon\
\ | D. Chron.
\_________________________________| MS Cott. Tib. B. IV,
\ | c. 1050
\ | Common original
\_| compiled about _
| 970 \
\ \____________________________________| Textus Roffensis II,
\ | c. 1120
\ | Genealogy
\_| MS Cott. Tib. B. V,
| c. 1000 ________________________________| Icelandic
| Genealogies
==>
Secondly, how old is the belief? The Anglian genealogies (Northumbrian, Mercian and East Anglian), as reproduced in the Historia Brittonum and in the Vespasian MS, form part of what is doubtless, as is said above, the oldest extant English historical document. But in this document there is no mention of Scyld. Indeed, it contains no pedigree of the West-Saxon kings at all. From whatever cause, the West-Saxon genealogy is not extant from so early a date as are the pedigrees of the Northumbrian, Mercian, East Anglian and Kentish kings[[621]]. Still, this may well be a mere accident, and I am not prepared to dispute that the pedigree which traces the West-Saxon kings to Woden dates back, like the other genealogies connecting Old English kings with Woden, to primitive and heathen times. Now the West-Saxon pedigree is found in many forms: some which trace the royal house only to Woden, and some which go beyond Woden and contain a list of names by which Woden is connected with Sceaf, and then with Noah and Adam.
(1) The nucleus of the whole pedigree is to be found in the names between Cynric or Cerdic and Woden. These occur in every version. The pedigree in this, its simplest form, is found twice among the entries in the Chronicle which deal with the events of heathen times, under 552 and 597. These names fall into verse:
[Cynrīc Cerdicing], Cerdic Elesing,