OUR authorities for the genealogy of the early West Saxon kings, apart from some minor points on which we have incidental evidence from other documents, are the Chronicle and Florence of Worcester. These authorities have been carefully examined by Mr. Plummer, who shows that the evidence of the Chronicle is inconsistent, and that of Florence not independent.[2] The evidence of the Chronicle, all of which, so far as it is pertinent to our subject, dates either from the time of King Alfred or earlier, may be classed under four heads: first, the preface, consisting of a regnal table and a genealogy of King Ethelwulf continued to King Alfred; secondly, genealogical fragments contained in annals relating to a period prior to the conversion of Wessex; thirdly, genealogical fragments in annals beginning with the year 648 and ending with the year 728; and, fourthly, a genealogy of King Ethelwulf in the annal of 855.
Mr. Plummer regards the preface and the annal of 855 as being our primary authorities, and treats the annals prior to 728 as secondary and, indeed, as fictitious, so far as they cannot be made to agree with the preface and the annal of 855.[3] This method of dealing with our authorities, however, seems to be by no means free from objection. For example, the annal of 674 contains an elaborate genealogy of King Æscwine, a person of quite ephemeral interest. If the preface and the annal of 855, which were unquestionably written in the ninth century, are primary and the annal of 674 is secondary, we cannot place the composition of the annal of 674 before the ninth century; yet it is difficult to imagine why a genealogy should have been invented
