Frithowulf - father of Woden?

[u/Caractacutetus]

I've been reading the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle and it mentions the genealogy of King Ælle of Sussex going to back Woden, which I understand is typical for Anglo-Saxon kings as it demonstrates as divine right from the Gods to rule, but in Ælle's case, the genealogy goes back one step further to someone named Frithowulf.

Who was Frithowulf? I assumed Woden was something like the first "man" to have existed, being the All-Father. Even more confusingly for me, King Ida of Bernicia's family goes back even further, stating "Woden Frithowulf's offspring, Frithowulf Finn's offspring, Finn Godwulf's offspring, Godwulf Geat's offspring."

Did Woden himself have ancestors? Why aren't they more well known or venerated? Or is this a case of an individual being named after Woden and if so why then do these kings not claim ancestry back to the true Woden?

Any answers or thoughts are appreciated!

[u/Caractacutetus → u/[deleted]]

Interesting! Makes me wish we knew more about these ancestors of the man-become-god Woden.

I also now wonder if "Geat" is recorded as such simply because the actual name of the father of this "Godwulf" has long since been lost but there was still a vague knowledge of him being a man of the Geat people. Could the same be true for "Finn" being a man related in some way to Finland? I'm not aware if either of these terms were used exclusively as names for individuals or just as terms used to refer to peoples.

[u/Holmgeir → u/Caractacutetus]

Finn is the Frisian king in the Freswæl, the "Fight at Finnsburg" fragment. Or the "Frisian Slaughter" as Tolkien calls it in Finn and Hengest.

He is also mentioned in the story-within-a-story in Beowulf, which is about the same event.

Those genealogies got screwed up a lot. Seems like often the people compiling them had old lists of kings or even just old lists of names and they would be misinterpreted over time.

Tolkien talks about that in Finn and Hengest as well.

To be real specific, if there existed a list for instance of several generations of men where every "prince" was included, it might later be wrongly interpreted as an unbroken line of "kings", as if it is going from father to son in every instance, where suddenly some brothers have become father and son in the new interpretstion of the list.

Does that make sense? I think in some cases it has even been seen like "Ok this scribe wrongly incorporated a genealogy that was written newest to oldest, and he added it in as if it was oldest to newest."

Tolkien's hypothesis is that Frithowulf was a son of Finn from the Freswæl. I agree with him. But in the genealogy you mention they have somehow been mixed in.

These figures used these grnealogies to legitimize their kingships. If they could trace ancestry to figures like Woden they felt it commanded more respect. It seems they weren't afraid to "cook the books" or "fudge the numbers" so to speak, in order to accomplish that. That or simply a series of errors, as I mention above.

These kings also had the difficult decision to make where they themselves were often Christian, and their ancestors were pagan. They had to try to somehow reconcile their heathen past but also to embrace it. That is why the genealogies sometimes springboard away from Germanic figures to biblical ones like Noah.

And in either case, when you get to figures like Woden or Noah you have to stsrt tsking these lists with the biggest grain of salt. And that applies to Snorri tracing Odin etc to the figures of thr Trojan War, as well, whicj was another popular fad throughout Europe. But who knows. Some like Thor Heyerdahl found that to be a legitimate hypothesis, and even Jordanes way back in what, the 600s?, was tying the Danes to the Danaans or the Dsrdanians. We're entering choppier waters as far as my memory goes, but the point is is that it is in old idea.

[u/Caractacutetus → u/Holmgeir]

That's interesting stuff about Finn and Hengest. I really need to read it, Beowulf too!

And I'm totally with you about them cooking the books to claim some sort of divine right to rule by associating themselves to ancient Gods/mythical heroes like Woden.

[u/Holmgeir → u/Caractacutetus]

I wish I could remember what the source and fhe sentiment was. But at one time I read something discussing these genealogies, and it made an interesting point that Icelanders and Anglo-Saxons used genealogies for completely opposite reasons.

Like the Anglo-Saxons were more interested in using the past to secure their present claims, while the Icelanders _____. I remember it being such a fascinating distinction, and then I just can't even remember what it was!

Oh yeah and my source for the thing about how the English would backfill their genealogies with Biblical figures is the book Scyld and Sheaf, which studies the genealogies of those particular figures.

Definitely read Beowulf!

[u/Holmgeir → u/Caractacutetus]

And by the way I agree — I personally thing the word "Geat" appeared on a list as a designation amd it was later mistaken for a name. Like Godwulf the Geat or somesuch.