1921 EARLY WEST SAXON KINGS 169 century kings ^Ethelheard, Cuthred, Sigebryht, Cynewulf, and Beorhtric. Since this ninth-century phrase occurs so frequently in the preface it is reasonable to suppose that other phrases in the preface expressing the relationship of kings to their pre- decessors, and especially the words, * Ceolwulfes brothur sunu ', added to the name of Cynegils, are also due to the Ethel wulfian chronicler. The words, ' Ceolwulfes brothur sunu ', may have grown out of a misunderstanding of the annal of 676, from which the chronicler derived ' Ceolwulfes sunu ', the word ' brothur ' being inserted to bring the statement into harmony with the annal of 688, which postulates, not Ceolwulf, but Cuthwine, as the name of the father of Cynegils. There is no reason, however, why Ceolwulf should not have been the brother of Cuthwine, and accordingly I have accepted the statement in this sense, though I do not altogether trust it. Apart from the list of kings with the number of years that each reigned, the ninth-century chronicler had one or more written sources from which he derived the names of kings and princes who fought battles, with the names of the places at which such battles were fought and with occasional details as to the name of the enemy, the persons killed, and the results achieved. What chronological information the chronicler found in his sources beyond the length of each king's reign it is difficult to determine. There are traces of an octennial arrangement of the sixth-century battles and a septennial arrangement of the early seventh-century battles, but if the chronicler found this arrangement in his sources, he must have modified it considerably in reducing his materials into the form of annals. We have no less than four dates for the beginning of Wessex, 494, 495, 500, and 519. The two earlier dates are assigned to the invasion, and the two later dates to the establishment of the monarchy, but the primitive tradition is hardly likely to have made this distinction, which may with some confidence be attributed to an effort on the part of the chronicler to harmonize the chronological discrepancies which existed, either in his sources, or in his interpretation of them. If we assume that the pedigree, Cerdic begat Cynric, Cynric Ceawlin, Ceawlin Cuthwine, Cuthwine Cynegils, is correct, we shall see no reason to quarrel with the dates assigned for the reigns of Cerdic (519-34), Cynric (534-60), Ceawlin (560-92), and Cynegils (611-43). Tradition, however, seems to have known other kings ; and, accordingly, we have indications of a tendency to introduce additional names. The existence of divergent traditions respecting the origin of the kingdom is indicated by the annal of 501 relative to Port, Bieda, and Msegla, and by the annals of 514, 534, and 544, so far as they relate to Stuf and Wihtgar. The period subsequent to the invasion seems
