ANTHONY FAULKESTHE GENEALOGIES AND
REGNAL LISTS IN A MANUSCRIPTIN RESEN’S LIBRARY
It has long been known that parts of the genealogies in the prologue toSnorra Edda and corresponding parts of the various versions of langfe›gatal
are derived from Old English genealogies.l The closest parallels are in
the lists in Cotton Tiberius B v, foll. 22–3, probably written at Christ
Church Canterbury in the second quarter of the eleventh century.2 But
what has not until recently been recognised is that there is a link between
the prologue to Snorra Edda and the Old English sources in a compilationof genealogical and regnal lists in AM 1 e β II fol., 85v–91r.3 This is acopy made by Árni Magnússon of three pages of a vellum manuscriptthat had belonged to the Danish scholar P. H. Resen (1625–88) and wasdestroyed in the fire in Copenhagen in 1728.4 The lists in Resen’s manuscript were evidently written just after the middle of the thirteenth century,and so could not themselves have been known to Snorri Sturluson (d.
1241), but it is likely that a very similar but rather earlier compilation was.5
1 See E. Sievers, ‘Sceaf in den nordischen Genealogien’, Beiträge zur Geschichte

der Deutschen Sprache und Literatur XVI, 1892, pp. 361–3; K. Sisam, ‘AngloSaxon royal genealogies’, Proceedings of the Bntish Academy XXXIX, 1953, p.
290, note 2.
2 Printed in Reliquiæ Antiquæ II, ed. T. Wright and J. O. Halliwell, London
1843, pp. 169–73. See also D. N. Dumville, ‘The Anglian collection of royal
genealogies and regnal lists’, Anglo-Saxon England 5, ed. P. Clemoes, Cambridge
1976, pp. 23–50; but not all the lists in Tiberius B v that are relevant to Icelandic
sources are printed there.
3 My attention was drawn to this manuscript by Stefán Karlsson, Stofnun ÁrnaMagnússonar á Íslandi, who is planning an edition of all the material in Resen’smanuscript that survives in copies.
4 Árni’s heading reads ‘Exscriptum trium paginarum antiquissimi libri pergameni in folio in Bibliotheca P: Resenii’. Resen’s manuscript is described in his
catalogue, Petri Johannis Resenii Bibliotheca Regiæ Academiæ Hafniensi donata,Hafniæ 1685, p. 371; see also Arne Magnussons i AM. 435 A–B, 4to indeholdtehåndskriftfortegnelser med to tillæg, Kbh. 1909, p. 118. The genealogies areitem 9. See also Islandske Annaler, ed. G. Storm, Christiania 1888, pp. ii–vii.
5 See Gu›mundar sögur biskups I, ed. Stefán Karlsson, Kbh, Editiones

2

GENEALOGIES AND REGNAL LISTS

The three pages in Resen’s manuscript contained eleven lists, some ofwhich are genealogies, some lists of kings, and some a rather ambiguous
combination of the two. On the first page there was first a list containing
eleven of Ó›inn’s ancestors beginning with ‘Sescef’, together with threelines of descent from Ó›inn through two sons, ‘Beldeg’ and ‘Veggdegg’,down to the historical kings of Wessex, Kent, and Deira,6 and a list of thekings of England from Ælfred to Henry III with the lengths of their reigns(lacking in the case of the last king). On the second page there were
genealogical lists of the Skjƒldungar, Ynglingar, and Haleygjajarlar andHla›ajarlar, all with Ó›inn at the head, down to Knútr ríki, Haraldr
hárfagri and his sons, and Hákon Eiríksson. On the third page there were
genealogies from Ragnarr lo›brók that became lists of the rulers of Norway,
Denmark, and Sweden down to the middle of the thirteenth century.
All five lists on the first page of the compilation in Resen’s manuscript
correspond closely to lists in Tiberius B v, and the first four to precisely
the lists in that manuscript in which there is material corresponding to
the genealogies in the prologue to Snorra Edda. They are however
separated from each other in the English manuscript by other material
not included in Resen’s manuscript. Why just these lists were selected is
not clear, but obviously the selection was made by the compiler of theoriginal Icelandic version of the tables in Resen’s manuscript rather thanby the author of the prologue, who simply used everything in the compilation that came to him that he found relevant to his purposes.
The first two lists in Resen’s manuscript, containing the ancestors ofÓ›inn from Sescef onwards and his descendants through Beldeg to thekings of Wessex, correspond to a single list in Tiberius B v under theheading ‘Haec sunt genealogiae regum Occidentalium Saxonum’; but
the genealogy in the English manuscript runs in the opposite direction,
beginning with the kings of Wessex and ending with their remote ancestors. Resen’s manuscript had the following note on Ingeld:

Arnamagnaeanae B 6 (not yet published), introduction, section 1.3. There areother copies of the lists that were in Resen’s MS in DG 36 and AM 1 f fol., but
Arni’s is by far the most careful, and indicates not only every doubtful reading
but also the actual arrangement of the material on the pages of his exemplar.
6 These three lists, and the three lists on the second page, actually lacked thename Ó›inn at the top, but Árni explains that the tops of the pages seemed tohave been cut away, and that at the top of the second page there were traces of
the name Ó›inn remaining. He also notes that the initial letters of many namesin the lists, which were in red, were hardly legible.

GENEALOGIES AND REGNAL LISTS

3Ingeld bro›er vestr Saxa k(onungs). hann var k(onungr) xxxvi. hann let goramustari i Glestinga bvri. si›an foro ﬂeir bader til Rvms oc ƒndu›uz ﬂar.
ﬂessi ero nofn langfe›ga ﬂeira.

This corresponds to Tiberius B v:
Ingeld wæs Ines bro›or Westseaxna cyninges. ond he heold rice .vii. ond
xxx wintra. ond he getimbrade ﬂæt beorhte mynster æt Glæstingabyrig. ondæfter ﬂam fyrde to sancte Petres. ond ﬂær his feorh asealde. ond on sibbegerest. ond hi begen bro›ra waeron Cenredes suna.7

The last five words in the note in the Icelandic version incidentally showthat the list there is derived from one which had the names in the sameorder as Tiberius B v.
Resen’s manuscript also had a note of explanation about Ó›inn at theend of its first list which is not in the English manuscript and was
obviously added by the Icelandic compiler (see below), but otherwise
the lists in the two manuscripts correspond very closely. But the Icelandic
version began with Sescef (though Árni notes that there may have beensomething lacking before the beginning of the extant text), while the Old
English list does not end with Scef. It continues:. . . Bedwig. Sceafing. Se Scef waes Noés sunu. ond he wæs innan ﬂære
earce geboren. Noe wæs Lameches sunu. Lameh Maﬂusalemys. Ma›usalem
wæs Enoches. Enoh. Lared. Malalehel. Caino. Enos. et Adam. primus homo.
et pater omnium qui est Christus.

It has long been recognised that the sentence beginning ‘Se Scef’ wasthe origin of the name Seskef in Icelandic genealogies, and the compilerof the Icelandic version of these lists must have used an English manuscript that had this continuation; but the continuation was obviously
unknown to the compiler of the prologue to Snorra Edda, who mightotherwise not have been inspired to concoct his extension of the genealogy
back from Seskef to Priam, which resulted in versions of the Icelandic
langfe›gatal taking so much longer a route back to Adam than the AngloSaxon genealogies (in which Scef was presumably identified with the
Biblical Shem).
The third and fourth lists in Resen’s manuscript, which give two linesof descent from Ó›inn through Veggdegg, also correspond to two lists inTiberius B v. The fourth list relates to kings of Deira, and appears under

7 Compare the Anglo-Saxon chronicle s.a. 688.

4

GENEALOGIES AND REGNAL LISTS

the following heading in Tiberius B v: ‘Haec sunt genealogie per partes
Brittanie regum regnantium per diversa loca Nor›hymbrorum’. It is thefirst list in the collection of royal genealogies in this manuscript, and theheading applies to some of the following lists too. The third list in Resen’smanuscript relates to kings of Kent (though it has no separate heading inTiberius B v). In the Old English manuscript it comes after the genealogyof kings of Deira, and separated from it by eight other lists that were notin Resen’s manuscript; and before the genealogy of the kings of Wessex,
and separated from it by two other lists that were not in Resen’smanuscript. As with the West-Saxon genealogy, the names in both theselists in the Old English manuscript are in the opposite order to the lists in
Resen’s manuscript, and begin with the most recent kings and end with
their ancestors, but otherwise they correspond closely. All three genealogies
also appear in the early twelfth-century Textus Roffensis, but Resen’smanuscript was more closely related to Tiberius B v.8
Immediately before the collection of royal genealogies in Tiberius B v
there is a list of kings of Wessex (not a genealogy) with the lengths of
their reigns which is similar to the fifth list in Resen’s manuscript, though
it begins right back at Cerdic and extends no further than Æﬂelred, andsome of the figures are rather different. There is a similar regnal table in
Textus Roffensis, foll. 7v–8, which extends from Ine to Æﬂelred, but
again Resen’s manuscript was closer to Tiberius B v. But there are otherversions of this regnal table that in a number of cases correspond moreclosely to Resen’s manuscript in the lengths of reigns than either of these.
One is a fragment of a continuation of the so-called preface to the AngloSaxon chronicle in Cotton Tiberius A iii, fol. 178 (this was originallypart of Tiberius A vi, manuscript B of the chronicle).9 The list in thismanuscript begins with Cerdic and breaks off in the middle of a line at
Edward the Martyr (other versions of this preface extend no further than
the reign of Ælfred). Another is in the Hyde Register, where it begins
8 See Textus Roffensis I, ed. P. Sawyer, Copenh. 1957 (Early English manuscripts in facsimile 7), foll. 102–4. Variations of some of these lists appear inmany Anglo-Saxon sources (e.g. Cotton Vespasian B vi, Corpus Christi College
Cambridge 183, the first chapter of Asser’s Life of Ælfred, the Anglo-Saxon
chronicle s.a. 855; see Sisam’s article cited above, note 1), but the Icelandic
compilation is most closely related to Tiberius B v.
9 See Two of the Saxon chronicles parallel, ed. J. Earle and C. Plummer, I,
Oxford 1892, p. 4 and p. 5, note 5; B. Dickens, The genealogical preface to theAng/o-Saxon chronicle (Occasional papers number II printed for the Departmentof Anglo-Saxon), Cambridge 1952.

GENEALOGIES AND REGNAL LISTS

5

with Ine and goes down to Cnut.10 Neither of these manuscripts contains
the genealogical lists corresponding to the rest of the material on the firstpage of Resen’s manuscript. The English source of this first page must
therefore have contained a compilation similar to that in Tiberius B v,
but with the regnal table in a form more closely related to Tiberius A iii
and the Hyde Register, and extended down to Henry III. After Æﬂelred
the list in Resen’s manuscript gave only the number of years of each
reign (or months if less than a year), while for the earlier reigns the lengths
are often given in three units (years, months, and weeks or days) both in
the Icelandic compilation and in the English versions, though Tiberius
B v is the least detailed. Even so it is likely that the extension was madeby an English scribe rather than by the Icelandic translator, and thecontinuation must have been made (or at least finished) during the reignof Henry III (1216–1272), and is likely to have reached Iceland after
1216. There is in fact another regnal list in the Hyde Register, giving thekings of Wessex and England from Cynegils to Henry V.11 The lengths ofreigns here too are expressed only in years, and there is only partial
correspondence with the Icelandic list.
The list of Ó›inn’s ancestors and the beginnings of the three lines ofdescent from Ó›inn on the first of the three pages in Resen’s manuscript
are incorporated in the genealogy in the prologue to Snorra Edda, and thenames there correspond very closely with those in Árni’s copy of that
page.12 Even some of his hesitation over the readings in his exemplar arereflected in the variants in manuscripts of the prologue. Thus Árni notesthat ‘Godulf’ was apparently written with the ending -r and an i written
above it, but that the r had subsequently been erased. In the prologue, theCodex Regius, the Utrecht manuscript, and the Uppsala manuscript haveGu›olfr, but Codex Wormianus has Gu›olf. Árni was uncertain whether
the son of ‘Vitrgisl’ was Vitta or Pitta, and the first letter is similarly unclear
in the Codex Regius, while Codex Wormianus spells the name with P and
the Utrecht manuscript with V (the name is lacking in the Uppsalamanuscript).
10 Liber Vitæ: Register and Martyrology of New Minster and Hyde Abbey Win-chester, ed. W. de Gray Birch, Hampshire Record Society, London 1892, pp. 94–6
11 Ibid. pp. 12–14.
12 Edda Snorra Sturlusonar, ed. Finnur Jónsson, Kbh. 1931, pp. 4/24–6/2. All
references to the text of Snorra Edda below are to this edition unless otherwise
specified.

6

GENEALOGIES AND REGNAL LISTS

There were some discrepancies between the lists in Resen’s manuscript
and the prologue to Snorra Edda. The prologue makes Sigarr son of
Vitrgils and brother of Vitta instead of son of Veggdegg and brother ofVitrgils, thus displacing the divergence of the two lines of descent by
one generation. This seems to be just a mistake, and it is probably only
coincidence that the Utrecht manuscript is slightly closer to the originalat this point, for it is still not correct, since it makes Vitrgils, Vitta, andSigarr all brothers, and sons of Veggdegg.
There was no indication in Resen’s manuscript, at least at the timeÁrni made his copy, of where the descendants of Ó›inn listed on the firstpage of the compilation ruled, except that Ingeld in the list of descendants
through Beldeg is described as ‘bro›er vestr Saxa k(onungs)’ (the name
Ines is lacking). The compiler of the prologue to Snorra Edda evidently
did not know that the line through Beldeg was the genealogy of the kingsof Wessex and that those through Veggdegg were the genealogies of thekings of Kent and Deira; when he calls Veggdegg king of East Saxony
and Beldegg ruler of Westphalia, he is presumably just guessing.
At the end of the first list in Resen’s manuscript, after the name ‘Voden’,there was the following explanatory note:ﬁat kollum ver Oﬂinn fra honum eru comnar flestar kononga ∂ttir i nor›r halfu
heimsins. hann var Tyrkia k(onungr) oc fly›i fyrir Rvmverium nordr higat.

A similar note, or in some cases part of it, appears in some of the fourteenthcentury versions of the Icelandic langfe›gatal (see below). The first fourwords are included in the prologue to Snorra Edda (5/3), but the prologue
also includes a number of other alternative names that claim to be theNorse equivalents of the English forms in the genealogies, and none ofthese others were in Resen’s manuscript. These associations were presumably
made by the compiler of the prologue (perhaps inspired by the note in
the genealogical list he was using), who in most cases was probably only
indicating what he thought was the corresponding Norse pronunciationof the Old English names, and may not always have intended to imply
identity between the persons in these lists and persons in Norse tradition
who were known by the corresponding Norse names. Thus there neednot be felt to be any contradiction for instance between the appearanceof the name Skioldr as equivalent of Skjaldun (‘Scealdva’ in AM 1 e βfol.; Snorra Edda 4/26) and also as one of the sons of Ó›inn (Snorra
Edda 6/9). On the other hand the compiler may well have thought thatthe names Beldegg and Balldr did represent the same person (Snorra
Edda 5/20).

GENEALOGIES AND REGNAL LISTS

7

The first four words of the note about ‘Voden’ in Resen’s manuscript
indicate that the note is largely the work of the Icelandic compiler, andwould not have stood in the Old English original; there is indeed nothingcorresponding to it in the most closely related Old English genealogicallists. (Perhaps one should not push the meaning of the last word of thenote, higat, so far as to assume that the note was compiled in some partof continental Scandinavia.) But there are parallels in some Old English
sources to the statement ‘fra honum eru comnar flestar kononga ∂ttir inor›r halfu heimsins’, e.g. Bede, Historia Ecclesiastica I, 15:
Uoden de cuius stirpe multarum prouinciarum regium originem duxit.

Compare also the Anglo-Saxon chronicle, E version, under 449 AD:
Fram ﬂan Wodne awoc eall ure cyne cynn, ond Su›an hymbra eac.

William of Malmesbury, Gesta Regum Anglorum I, 5 (cf. also II, 116):
Woden, de quo omnium pene barbararum gentium regium genus lineam trahit.

It is likely that it was partly due to statements such as these in English
sources, and the frequency with which Woden appears in Anglo-Saxon
royal genealogies generally, that Ó›inn was increasingly introduced into
Norse genealogies as a precursor of or replacement for the original
progenitors such as Skjƒldr and Yngvi. Similar general statements also
appear in other Icelandic sources, probably again through the influence(ultimately) of English tradition. In the fragment Upphaf allra frasagna,
which is thought to be derived from the beginning of the lost Skjƒldunga
saga, there is the statement ‘til Ó›ins telja margir menn ættir sínar’,13
and in Ynglinga saga ch. 5, Snorri writes:
Hann (i. e. Ó›inn) átti marga sonu. Hann eigna›isk ríki ví›a um Saxland ok
setti ﬂar sonu sína til landsgæzlu.14

This, however, is presumably a reference to the prologue to Snorra Edda,
where the details are fuller.
The statement that Ó›inn was king of the Turks has no parallel in English
tradition, but there are parallels in several Icelandic sources. The first author
to connect the Norse gods with the Turks is Ari, who begins his genealogyin Íslendingabók with ‘Yngvi Tyrkjakonungr, Njƒr›r Svíakonungr’.15 (The13 Danakonunga sƒgur, ed. Bjarni Gu›nason, Rvík 1982, p. 39.
14 Snorri Sturluson, Heimskringla I, ed. Bjarni A›albjarnarson, Rvík 1941, p. 14.
15 Íslendingabók, Landnámabók, ed. Jakob Benediktsson, Rvík 1968, p. 27.
Ari died in 1148.

8

GENEALOGIES AND REGNAL LISTS

parallel passage in Historia Norvegiæ has no mention of the Turks.16) Ari
is thought to have been influenced, directly or indirectly, by the account of
the origin of the Franks in pseudo-Fredegar, where both Franks and Turks
are said to be descended from survivors of Troy.17 The Turks are there
said to have settled on the shores of the Danube in the Thracian area. The
idea is further developed in Heimsl‡sing in Hauksbók, which may havebeen compiled in the twelfth century. Here it is the nation rather than thegods and the royal family of the Ynglings that is concerned:
A Tracia byg›i fyst Tiras sonr Iafeths Noasonar. fra honum er komen ﬂio› su
er Tyrkir heita. ﬂat er oc mioc margra manna mal at ﬂuí er fornar bœkr visa
til at af ﬂui lande byg›ist Suiﬂío›. en Noregr af Sui›io›. en Island af Noregi.
en Grœnland af Islande.18

The ‘fornar bœkr’ referred to here could well be the works of Ari, and infact the settlement of Sweden by the Turks, of Norway from Sweden, ofIceland from Norway, and of Greenland from Iceland could all be deduced
from the extant Íslendingabók.19
The beginning of Skjƒldunga saga, according to Arngrímur Jónsson’s
account of it, put the origin of the Æsir in Asia, presumably because of
the similarity in sound, and specified their original home as Scythia(‘Huilche ssom ligger Norden for palude Moeotide, og de gammel Norshe
kallede Su<i>thiod hin Store eller Kolde’).20 The fragment Upphaf allra
16 Monumenta Historica Norvegiæ, ed. G. Storm, Kristiania 1880, p. 97.
17 Chronica II, 6 and III, 2, ed. B. Krusch, Monumenta Germaniae Historica,
Scriptores Rerum Merovingicarum II, Hannoverae 1888, pp. 46 and 93; see also
Aimoin, Historia Francorum I, 2, Patrologia Latina CXXXIX, 639. The Turks
may have been introduced because of association of their name with the Teucri,though this association cannot be demonstrated in medieval sources. See A. Heusler,
Die Gelehrte Urgeschichte im Altisländischen Schrifttum, Berlin 1908, pp. 38 ff.
18 Hauksbók, ed. E. Jónsson and F. Jónsson, Kbh. 1892–6, p. 155. As far as‘Tyrkir heita’ is also in AM 764 4to, see Fornmanna sƒgur XI, Kh. 1828, p. 415.
The corresponding passages in medieval Latin writings have no mention eitherof the Turks or of the Scandinavian countries: see Isidore, Etymologiæ XIV, 4,6;
Honorius of Autun, De imagine mundi I, 26; Hrabanus Maurus, De universo XII(Patrologia Latina LXXXII, 505; CLXXII, 128; CXI, 348); Vincent of Beauvais,
Speculum historiale I, 71. The Icelandic writer presumably associated the names
Tyrkir and Trakia.
19 Ed. cit. (note 15 above) pp. 27, 3, 4, and 13.
20 Arngrimi Jonae Opera, ed. Jakob Benediktsson, Hafniæ 1950–57, I, 333.
The words quoted are probably Arugrímur’s own gloss, but it is apparent fromhis account that Skjƒldunga saga contained some reference to the two Swedens.

GENEALOGIES AND REGNAL LISTS

9

frásagna, which is also thought to be based on the beginning of Skjƒldunga
saga, begins:
Upphaf allra frásagna í norrœnni tungu, ﬂeirra er sannindi fylgja, hófst ﬂá er
Tyrkir ok Ásíámenn bygg›u nor›rit.21

This looks very like an attempt to combine the Turkish/Thracian origin
in Ari and Heimsl‡sing with the Asian/Scythian variation in the originalSkjƒldunga saga. Ynglinga saga similarly locates the Æsir in Asia ‘fyrir
austan Tanakvísl’ (east of the Don), but also associates them with Tyrkland.22
In the prologue to Snorra Edda the Æsir come from Troy, which is said
to be in Tyrkland near the middle of the world, which is in Asia.23 The
scene has therefore now moved to Asia minor (Jerusalem is in manysources said to be in the middle of the world 24). Trójumanna saga, inwhich the Trojans are regularly referred to as Tyrkir (presumably throughassociation with the name Teucri), may have been responsible for thisnew localisation, but Thrace is still introduced as the realm of ﬁórr(identified with ﬁrú›heimr).25 Echoes of these localisations appear insome Heroic sagas.26 The mention of the Turks in such a sober document
as the collection of genealogies that appeared in Resen’s manuscript musthave reinforced the association of the Æsir with them in spite ofSkjƒldunga saga. The description of Ó›inn as king of the Turks reappears
in some of the later versions of langfe›gatal.27 There was thus a continuing

21 Danakonunga sƒgur, 39.

22 Heimskringla I, 11, 14, 27.
23 Snorra Edda, 3, 5, 7.
24 Lei›arvísir, Alfræ›i íslenzk I, ed. K. Kålund, Kbh. 1908, p. 22; AM 764 4to,
Antiquites Russes II, Copenh. 1852. p. 443.
25 Snorra Edda, 4. The migration in the prologue could in fact be seen as
starting from Thrace, since there is no mention of ﬁórr’s returning to Troy, or ofhis descendants being kings there. But cf. Snorra Edda 5/8, 7/1–3, 16/19–17/3
and note to 16/20.
26 See Fornaldar sögur Nordrlanda, ed. C. C. Rafn, Kbh. 1829–30, I, 391 ff.,
411; III, 193, 592. The connection of Æsir and Asia is made explicit in AM 162
m fol. (Edda Snorra Sturlusonar, Hafniæ 1848–87, II, 636; originally part ofAM 764 4to, see Stefán Karlsson, ‘Ættbogi noregskonunga’, Sjötíu ritger›irhelga›ar Jakobi Benediktssyni 20. júlí 1977, Rvík 1977, pp. 677–704).
27 AM 415 4to, Alfræ›i íslenzk III, ed. K. Kålund, Kbh. 1917–18, p. 58;
Flateyjarbók, Christiania 1860–68, I, 27; DG 9, Biskupa sögur II, Kh. 1878,
418. In Flateyjarbók I, 26 (‘Ættartala Haraldz fra Odni’) Ó›inn’s grandfather
Burri is said to have ruled Tyrkland, and Ó›inn is called Ásakonungr.

10

GENEALOGIES AND REGNAL LISTS

speculation about origins in the south-east in Icelandic sources from theearly twelfth to the fourteenth centuries.
The last statement about Ó›inn in Resen’s manuscript, that he fled to
Scandinavia because of the hostility of the Romans, also appears elsewhere in Icelandic sources. The prologue to Snorra Edda is rather vague
about the reasons for the migration, saying only that Ó›inn’s gift ofprophecy made him realise that his future lay in the north, and he leaves
Tyrkland voluntarily. In Ynglinga saga this explanation is combined withthat given in Resen’s manuscript.28 In the version of the prologue to Snorra
Edda in Codex Wormianus, the Romans are also introduced as the reason
for the migration, and it is specified that Pompey was their leader.29
Pompey also appears as an enemy of the Franks in pseudo-Fredegar;
according to various Icelandic sources and Saxo Grammaticus, Ó›inn’s
great-grandson Fri›-Fró›i lived at the time of Christ’s birth.30 This lastdetail about Ó›inn in Resen’s manuscript reappears in the version of
langfe›gatal in AM 415 4to.
The regnal list on the first page of Resen’s manuscript seems to havebeen used by Snorri Sturluson in Heimskringla. In his Hákonar saga
gó›a, Snorri is unusually precise about the length of the reign of kingÆﬂelstan, which he gives as 14 years, 8 weeks, and 3 days.31 The list in
Resen’s manuscript gave it as ‘xiiii ar vii vicor .iii. daga’. There is asmall discrepancy in the number of weeks, but it is clear that Snorri’s
information is likely to be derived from a version of the compilation in
Resen’s manuscript rather than from the Anglo-Saxon chronicle, which(s.a. 941) gives the reign as 14 years and 10 weeks. Consequently Snorri’s
account of the length of Æﬂelstan’s reign can no longer be used as
evidence that he had access to a version of the chronicle: it shows onlythat he knew a regnal list such as was in Resen’s manuscript, and moreover
perhaps even suggests that his direct knowledge of Anglo-Saxon
historiography was limited to the sort of information available in Resen’s
28 Heimskringla I, 14. In AM 162 m fol. (see note 26 above) the reason given
is the preaching of St John.
29 Edda Snorra Sturlusonar, Codex Wormianus, ed. F. Jónsson, Kbh. 1924, p. 6.
30 See Stefán Karlsson, ‘Fró›leiksgreinar frá tólftu old’, Afmælisrit Jóns
Helgasonar, Rvík 1969, pp. 332, 341–3; Fredegarii Chronica, ed. cit. (note 17
above), II, 6 (p. 46); cf. Liber historiae Francorum, 2–4, ibid. 242–4. Information
about Pompey was available to Icelandic authors in Rómverja sögur, Fire og
Fyrretyve Prøver af Oldnordisk Sprog og Literatur, ed. K. Gíslason, Kbh. 1860,
pp. 160, 194 ff., 330 etc.
31 Heimskringla I, 153.

GENEALOGIES AND REGNAL LISTS

11

manuscript. But the fact that a compilation related to that in Resen’smanuscript was used both in parts of Heimskringla and in the prologue
to Snorra Edda provides further support for the view that the prologue isalso by Snorri Sturluson.
Nearly all the information on the first page of Resen’s manuscript wasderived from English sources, and the line of ancestors is not taken backfurther than Sescef. The names immediately before Sescef in the Old
Icelandic langfe›gatal are native ones. Although Árni reports that pages
may have been lost before the beginning of the compilation as he foundit, it seems likely that the genealogies in it did not go further back thanSescef, and that they represent a stage in the development of langfe›gatalearlier than that reached in the prologue to Snorra Edda, where the line
begins with Priam, nine generations earlier. The second and third pagesof the compilation are concerned exclusively with families of rulers. The
genealogies in them were used by Icelanders in tracing their own descent,but in Resen’s compilation itself there was no attempt to link the genealogies to Icelandic families, so in this respect too the compilation represents
an early stage in the development of genealogy. Other parts of Resen’smanuscript have associations with the Sturlung family, and since thegenealogies in it seem to have been known to Snorri, there is a possibility
that the compilation of genealogies in it was the work of a member ofthat family or even of Snorri himself (presumably before he compiled
his Edda and Heimskringla).32 The compilation as a whole is the oldest
one of its kind to survive from medieval Iceland (though only recorded
in a late copy), and is for instance the earliest record of the genealogy of
the Haleygjajarlar, and for the list of Skjƒldungar might be considered tohave equal authority with Arngrímur Jónsson’s account of Skjƒldungasaga. The lists of Skjƒldungar, Ynglingar, and Háleygjajarlar on the second
page of Resen’s compilation were presumably derived from Skjƒldunga
saga (or conceivably from a written genealogy also used by the author of
the saga), Ynglingatal, and HáleygjataL The list of Skjƒldungar has somedifferences from the genealogy in Arngrímur Jónsson’s version ofSkjƒldunga saga (some of these reappear in the genealogies of theSkjƒldungs in Flateyjarbók and AM 415 4to), but the variations can mostly
be explained as copying errors or misunderstandings of the saga.33 The
32 See Bjarni Einarsson, Litterære forudsætninger for Egils saga, Rvík 1975,
p. 233 and references there.
33 See Bjarni Gu›nason, Um Skjöldungasögu, Rvík 1963, pp. 162 ff. In fact in
Resen’s manuscript, Danr mikilati was named as successor to Olafr litillati but

12

GENEALOGIES AND REGNAL LISTS

beginnings of the three lists on the third page of Resen’s compilation
may also be derived from Skjƒldunga saga. The Yngling list has somevariants from Ynglingatal as reported by Snorri in common with Ari’s
genealogy in Íslendingabók and the corresponding list in Historia
Norvegiæ.34 It begins ‘[Odinn], Niordr i Noatvnvm, Yngvi Frevr, Fiolnir’,thus replacing Ari’s Yngvi by Ó›inn and identifying Yngvi and Freyr. It is
uncertain how Ynglingatal began, though it would be natural to assume
that Yngvi was the first name in it. While the prologue to Snorra Edda
follows Skjƒldunga saga in making Yngvi son of Ó›inn, Ynglinga saga
follows the genealogy in Resen’s manuscript at this point, though Snorri
is careful to make Njƒr›r successor to Ó›inn, not his son, for this would
have conflicted too obviously with mythology (the list in Resen’smanuscript was ambiguous on this point). In the version of the prologue
to Snorra Edda in Codex Wormianus, Njƒr›r is said to be another namefor Ó›inn, and this is obviously a rather desperate attempt to reconcile thetradition that Freyr was son of Njƒr›r with the one that Yngvi(-Freyr) was
son of Ó›inn, and the tradition (in Íslendingabók) that Njƒr›r was thefirst king of the Swedes with the one (in Skjƒldunga saga) that Ó›inn led
the migration to Scandinavia. At the end of the list of Ynglings, Resen’smanuscript had a list of the children of Haraldr hárfagri by his various
wives. This corresponds to information in various parts of Snorri’s Haralds
saga hárfagra.35 The list of Haleygjajarlar in Resen’s manuscript was
identical with that given by Torfæus in Historia rerum Norvegicarum(Hafniæ 1711), I, 146, except that it adds the two names Eiricr and Hacon
at the end.36 If Háleygjatal really made Sæmingr son of Yngvi-Freyr, as
is specifically not stated to be his son. This was misunderstood by later copyistsof the lists. In Flateyjarbók I, 26–7, the first Skjƒldung list (26/35–27/6)
corresponds to Resen’s manuscript, the first half of the second (27/25–9) toSkjƒldunga saga, but the second half of the second (27/29–34) again to Resen’smanuscript. The genealogy in Arngrimi Jonae Opera I, 148–50 is from Skjƒldunga
saga down to 149/9, the rest, including all the branches, corresponds to Resen’smanuscript (partly to the lists on the second page, partly to the beginnings of thelists on the third). See Arngrimi Jonae Opera IV, 193.
34 E.g. it has the forms Svegﬂir and Domalldr; and Alrecr comes before Agni.
Cf. S. Ellehøj, Studier over den ældste Norrøne historieskrivning, Kbh. 1965,
pp. 109–128.
35 Heimskringla I, 114, 118–9, 126, 143; see also Haralds saga gráfeldar,
ibid. 199.
36 Cf. Heimskringla I, 47, footnote. It is probable that Torfæus’s list was infact taken from Resen’s manuscript rather than direct from Háleygjatal, as it is
not certain that more of this poem was known in the seventeenth century than

GENEALOGIES AND REGNAL LISTS

13

Snorri states in his prologue to Heimskringla, then in this detail too
Ynglinga saga and the prologue to Snorra Edda, which make him son ofÓ›inn, agree with the list in Resen’s manuscript against the poetic
source.37 It would appear that Snorri knew both the genealogies in acompilation similar to that in Resen’s manuscript and the sources on
which they were based but from which they sometimes differed, andfollowed now one, now the other.

This article was originally published in Sjötíu ritger›ir helga›ar Jakobi
Benediktssyni 20. júlí 1977, Rvík 1977, pp. 177–190. It is now supplemented by
my note, ‘The Earliest Icelandic Genealogies and Regnal Lists’, Saga-Book XXIV,
2005, pp. 115–19, where the genealogies and regnal lists in Resen’s manuscript
are printed in full.

survives today. It is apparent from Historia rerum Norvegicarum I, 146 and 374
that Torfæus knew only Snorri’s accounts of the beginning of the poem
(Heimskringla I, 4 and 21, Snorra Edda, 7), not the text itself. But he certainly
knew Resen’s manuscript, and he reproduces the Skjƒldung list from it in Series
Dynastarum et Regum Daniæ, Hafniæ 1702, pp. 211–12. The list of Haleygjajarlar in AM 22 a fol. is probably also derived from Resen’s manuscript. BothSkjƒldung and Yngling lists in it are reproduced by O. Verelius in his edition of
Hervarar saga, Upsalæ 1672, pp. 39–40, via a manuscript related to AM 1 f fol.,
foll. 12–18.
37 Heimskringla I, 4 and 21; Snorra Edda, 7. In his prologue to his separate
Saga Óláfs konungs hins helga (ed. O. A. Johnsen and Jón Helgason, Oslo 1941,
p. 4), Snorri is less definite: ‘oc tal›i hann (Eyvindr Skáldaspillir) langfe›ga til
S∂mings er sagt er at veri Ingunarfreys son Niar›arsonar’.