DE REGUM FRANCORUM

Primus rex Francorum Chloio.

Chloio genuit Glodobode.

Ghlodobedus genuit Mereveo.

Mereveus genuit Hilbricco.

Hildebricus genuit Genniodo.

Genniodus genuit Hilderico.

Childericus genuit Chlodoveo.

Chlodoveus genuit Theodorico, Chlomiro, Hildeberto, Hlodario.

Chlodharius genuit Chariberto, Ghundrammo, Chilberico, Sigiberto.

Sigibertus genuit Hildeberto.

Hildebertus genuit Theodoberto et Theoderico.

Et ante Hilbericus genuit Hlodhario.

Hlodharius genuit Dagabertum.

CANTWARA

Aeðelberht Uihtreding

Uihtred Ecgberhting

Ecgberht Erconberhting

Erconberht Eadbalding

Eadbald Eðilberhting

Ęðilberht Iurmenricing

Iu:menric Oes[…]

Oese Ocging

Ocga Hengesting

Hengest Uitting

Uitta Uihtgilsing

Uihtgils Uegdaeging

Uegdaeg Uodning

Uoden Frealafing

At first glance, early medieval genealogies such as these present information on origins and ancestry, and therefore seem to provide the basis for an understanding of ethnicity. However, examination of these texts rapidly reveals that their claims are by no means accurate, that they were constantly reworked, and that they are highly selective in content. It is doubtful whether Merovech and Hengest – let alone Woden – were real historical figures; certainly, they accrued a body of fantastic legend attached to their names. Meanwhile, the selection in these two texts completely bypasses all the women who must have played essential roles in the descent of these kings. The genealogies’ applicability, moreover, was malleable: the first claimed to represent all the Frankish kings, its neatness hiding multiple kingdoms and dynastic complexity; the second is entitled merely the Kings of Kent, but Hengest came to be seen as the forefather of all Anglo-Saxons. We must, therefore, investigate the context, reception and adaptation of the genealogical formulations in order to understand how descent and ethnicity interacted.

This chapter investigates the impact of the Viking Age on genealogy produced in England and Francia. Anglo-Saxon and Frankish genealogies produced before the mid-tenth century were restricted to royal lines. Concepts of ethnicity in these texts were therefore entangled with issues of royal legitimacy. Early medieval genealogies emerge as complex texts which, far from being simple records of biological descent, were ultimately ideological statements. As such, they are indeed invaluable evidence for identity, not biological but social: they represent the subjective perception and political impact of constantly evolving ethnic relations.

We may therefore expect the events of the Viking Age, in which Scandinavians became a political force and significant demographic within England and Francia, to be reflected in genealogical texts.