According to the triad, Arthur was more exalted than these three, being ‘three nights in prison in Caer Oeth and Anoeth, and three nights imprisoned by Gwen Pendragon and three nights in an enchanted prison under the Stone of Echymeint . . . and it was the same lad who released him from each of these three prisons, Goreu, son of Kustenin, his cousin’ (Bromwich 1961). Nothing in any other source would lead us to believe that Arthur had ever been imprisoned, but we can see some possible antecedents. In Culhwch and Olwen, we have already suggested that Goreu has an anomalous role as giant-killer and erstwhile central character, and we can imagine him connected with other similar Arthurian tales which have not been preserved.
The Stanzas on Graves described Arthur’s grave as ‘Anoeth’ and we remarked how this was used as a place-name in another verse. Annales Cambriae and Historia Brittonum linked Arthur with the span of three nights, in connection with his battles. The whole concept, however, is so different from any surviving Arthurian material that we can only suppose that the writer has a truly independent source, albeit one which does not help us any further with our understanding of the truth behind the legend.
The other triads in the White and Red Books expand on the material surrounding the battle of Camlann. These are particularly interesting as we know that the writer has read a Brut giving Geoffrey of Monmouth’s version, as well as, presumably, the versions of Culhwch and Olwen and the Dream of Rhonabwy in the same manuscript.
One tells us that one of the three harmful blows of the island of Britain was that which Gwenhwyfach struck Gwenhwyvar ‘and for that cause took place afterwards the action of the battle of Camlan’ (Weith Kat Gamlan). These two appear in Culhwch and Olwen, as sisters, but not necessarily as feuding rivals.
An explanation of at least one of these characters is found in the triad of Arthur’s great queens, ‘Gwenhwyvar daughter of Guryt Guent, Gwenhwyvar daughter of Uthyr son of Greidiaul and Guenhuyvar daughter of Ocvran the Giant’. Although, as we shall see, there was material in circulation saying that Arthur’s Guenevere was his second wife, this is unprecedented material. It may be intended to reconcile variant traditions on the parenthood of Guenevere, but it seems to be written here to lead into Arthur’s convoluted marital situation. The next triad is specifically linked with this one ‘and his three mistresses were these: . . .’ Whether the tradition of Arthur killing his own son derived from this sort of background we cannot say, but it does seem very different from Geoffrey’s version which makes Arthur the wronged party. Arthur, Gwenhwyvar and Medraut are linked in another triad, but in an unexpected way: ‘Three unrestrained ravagings of the island of Britain: the first occurred when Medraut came to Arthur’s court at Celliwig in Cornwall, he left neither food nor drink in the court that he did not consume. And he dragged Gwenhwyvar from her royal chair and then struck a blow upon her. The second unrestrained ravaging when Arthur came to Medraut’s court. He left neither food nor drink in the court.’
The motifs of Arthur, Medraut and a blow struck against Gwenhwyvar, suggest a variant tradition on the battle of Camlann. A Cornish location for Camlann would make sense for a return attack after one on Kelliwig, if Arthur and Medraut are considered to be neighbouring rivals. Another triad, the three unfortunate counsels, includes ‘the threefold dividing by Arthur of his men with Medraut at Camlan’, suggesting that they are on the same side. This makes sense of the ideas that Iddawg distorted the messages between them to start a battle, and that the whole thing was plotted by scheming underlings.
There is no way of sorting out the ‘truth’ from these versions. Their value lies in showing that the entry in Annales Cambriae, usually read in the way the story is presented by Geoffrey of Monmouth, could have various interpretations.
The Welsh tales and poems do not derive seamlessly from the historical materials which precede them. They have little in common with the Historia and Annales, still less with Gildas. It is inconceivable that these legendary materials are the source of the historical Arthur. Gereint son of Erbin, and possibly the Stanzas on Graves, may contain historical material, but the rest use Arthur as a convenient leader around whom unrelated heroes congregate.
EIGHT
Between 1100 and 1135, Arthur figured in the lives of several Welsh saints. The Norman lords of England and the Archbishop of Canterbury had been steadily encroaching on the churches and monasteries of Wales. Age-old lands and privileges, traditionally unchallenged, were threatened. The Anglo-Normans now required written proof or they would ignore them.
The Welsh monks responded by writing numerous ‘ancient’ charters in which kings of the sixth and seventh centuries bestowed land on their abbeys and cathedrals. Welsh saints, often commemorated solely in church dedications or local cults, were given detailed ‘historical’ Lives. These generally showed the saints, connected genealogically to local princely houses, humbling their relatives and extracting from them grants of land and custom to stand in perpetuity. For good measure, lest these rights should be challenged by Canterbury, charters were written up confirming the status of St David’s as the Archbishopric of Wales. It was not that the monks were being consciously dishonest. They were committing to writing the customary practices and assumptions their predecessors had forgotten to record.
The saints’ Lives were thus written with an axe to grind. Their denouements invariably involve the extortion of concessions from some hapless lord. Because these often involve land grants, territorial assumptions are those of the twelfth century, not the sixth. Britannia is thus often a synonym for Wales ‘on the borders of Britannia and Anglia, near Hereford’ (Wade-Evans 1944). The context of wars against the invading English is forgotten. The vindication of possession through military victory would do the Welsh writers no good, as it could equally be used by the Anglo-Normans. The temporal horizon of the saints’ Lives, and the charters, is the sixth century. This parallels the Welsh secular material, which also concentrates on this period, often at the expense of older sources pointing to the later fifth century.
Arthur in Historia Brittonum and Annales Cambriae is presented as a paragon of Christianity, fighting against specifically pagan foes. The Celtic Church saw the fifth/sixth centuries as a heroic age, characterised by the activities of missionary saints. In both sources, Arthur’s career is placed in a framework of such saintly activity.
When the saints’ Lives came to be written, we should not be surprised to find Arthur in the company of these saints. What does surprise is that he is apparently their adversary. This lack of continuity, at least, is enough to call into question the evidence of the hagiographers.
All of this warns against the use of the saints’ Lives to illuminate the actual history of sixth-century Wales. These warnings, however, have been ignored by Arthurian writers. John Morris makes great use of the Lives in The Age of Arthur. They form a cornerstone of Ashe’s Riothamus theory and the Llandaff Charters have been given a recent outing in The Holy Kingdom (Gilbert, Blackett and Wilson 1998). It could be that these twelfth-century ecclesiastical materials contain actual sixth-century names, even pedigrees. However, these could have been gleaned from several non-historical sources, place-names, tombstones and intercessions on behalf of donors, for example. That they do not derive from written historical sources is obvious. If such sources existed, there would have been no reason to fake new ones in the twelfth century. Their origins are well-established, arriving at their later forms only in the late eleventh or early twelfth centuries. Where earlier versions exist, they make no Arthurian connections. These arise in later versions, composed when Arthur’s fame was becoming established. However, as they present another possible interpretation, before Geoffrey of Monmouth came to dominate, it is worth examining what they say about Arthur.
The Lives of Sts Illtud, Cadoc, Carantoc and Padarn are from a single manuscript, Cotton Vespasian A14. This was written c. 1200, probably in Brecon or Monmouth Priory (Wade Evans 1944). It also includes Lives of St David and other non-Arthurian saints. The Liv
es themselves were composed in the early twelfth century, apparently uninfluenced by Geoffrey of Monmouth.
The Life of St David was written by Rhigyfarch, son of Sulyen, an eleventh-century Abbot of Llanbadarn Fawr/Bishop of St David’s. Sulyen features in Culhwch and Olwen. If this is the same man, this points to an eleventh-century date for the tale. It is just one of several interconnections between Culhwch and the Lives (Bromwich and Evans 1992).
The shortest notice is in the Life of St Illtud (Iltutus). We have already encountered this saint in the Mirabilia, as the only other person connected to a wonder of Britain. That wonder was in south-eastern Wales, where the saint was the eponymous founder of the church at Llantwit Major. Iltutus has a successful career as a great soldier in Brittany. He hears of the magnificence of his cousin, King Arthur, a great victor, and sails across to Britain. Arthur is seen distributing largesse to a huge company of warriors. Iltutus joins them and is suitably rewarded.
This terse reference has nothing, other than Arthur’s royal status, which could not have been inferred from the Historia. Arthur is a victorious warrior, a contemporary of Iltutus and a fellow denizen of south-west Wales. In accordance with hagiographic principles, the saint is his relative. His grandfather is Anlawd Britanniae Rex, who is also a grandfather of Culhwch in the tale, and, on this evidence, of Arthur as well.
The Life of St Padarn (Paternus), eponym of Llanbadarn, presents Arthur in a different light. The story is set at a time when Malgun, king of the northern Britons, is at war with the southern Britons, in whose lands Paternus lives. We easily recognise Maglocunus, in his role as overthrower of tyrants. Meanwhile, St David and his companions Paternus and Teliau return from Jerusalem, where Paternus has received a seamless tunic. Paternus is recovering from his journey in his church when Arthur, ‘a certain tyrant who was passing through the neighbouring regions’, comes to his cell. Arthur covets the saint’s tunic but is told that it is only fit for a bishop, not for a man of such baseness as him. Furious, Arthur leaves but then returns, against the advice of his companions, raging and stamping the ground. On hearing this, the saint causes the ground to swallow him up, leaving only his head exposed. Arthur, chastened, admits his guilt and praises God and Paternus. Seeking forgiveness, he is released from the earth and receives absolution from the saint, imploring him ‘with bent knees’. On receiving absolution, he takes Paternus as his eternal patron.
This story is not as contradictory of the earlier Arthurian material as it first seems. Arthur is localised in south-east Wales, as expected from the Mirabilia. That he is a tyrant is assumed from the career of Maglocunus and the de Excidio in general. The author may even have read the list of tyrants as sequential, with Vortiporius of Dyfed as one of Maelgwn Gwynedd’s predecessors and victims. Arthur is not exactly shown as a tyrant, in contrast to his role as a Christian leader in the battle-list and Annales Cambriae. Rather, he is a redeemed tyrant, turned to God under the patronage of St Padarn and no doubt ready to fight the good fight. By this means the author is able to make sense of the contradictions in the Historia, that Arthur is a Christian warrior who has also killed his son. The slaying of Anir could, in this model, have taken place before his conversion. The mention of Arthur’s companions indicates a context of the brave men of Arthur suggested by the Welsh sources.
The Life of St Padarn is thus not such a departure from the Arthurian material. Aside from its miraculous element, it has nothing which could not be harmonised with the historical Arthur we have hypothesised. The stumbling block is, however, the historical context. The saints’ Lives imagine Arthur as a (mid?) sixth-century contemporary of Maelgwn, Gildas and St David. Although some of these may have overlapped, it ignores Gildas’s all-important point – that the victor of Badon Hill was a character from the previous generation. The war-leader of Maelgwn’s era would be Outigirn.
There have been attempts to argue that the early to-mid-sixth-century southern Welsh Arthur is the ‘real Arthur’, erroneously displaced to the victory of Badon and the fifth-century British resistance. This misses the point. The character we are interested in is precisely the victor of Badon, the British leader of battles, a figure who must be real. It is unbelievable that he was completely replaced by a relatively insignificant South Welsh hero. It is more probable that the dating of the saints’ Lives is in error. As far as we can tell, the writers intend us to recognise Arthur as the great warrior of the battle-list.
More detailed material on Arthur is given in the Life of St Cadoc. This was composed by Lifris who flourished around 1100. Cadoc is the son of King Gundleius, a minor ruler of ‘the British region which is called Demetia’, and Guladus, daughter of Brachanus, the king from whom Brecon takes its name. They elope when their marriage is opposed by Brachanus. He pursues them, and there is fierce fighting between his men and those of Gundleius, while the lovers seek sanctuary on the hill of Bochriucarn on the borders of the two kingdoms. ‘Behold the three powerful heroes Arthur and two of his knights, that is Cei and Bedguir, sitting together on top of that aforementioned hill, playing at dice.’ Arthur is presented without introduction, in contrast to the contextualising of Gundleius and Brachanus. He is later called ‘king’. His knights are his companions from Pa gur, the best men in the world, with their description as ‘three powerful heroes’ perhaps hinting at a triad.
Arthur tells his friends that he is inflamed with lust for Guladus. The other two censure him for his evil thoughts and remind him that it is their custom to aid the poor and distressed. Arthur gives in with bad grace and sends them down to investigate. Being appraised of the situation, the three warriors rush down and scatter Brachanus’s army. The writer informs us that the countries of Brecheiniog and Gwynllwg take their names from the rival kings. Thanks to the rescue of his parents by Arthur, St Cadoc is born.
The genre of the Life is not the historiography of Historia Brittonum, and the presence of Kei and Bedwyr makes it obvious that this tale has more in common with Culhwch and Olwen. In the latter story, Arthur intervenes between Gwynn mab Nud, who has carried off the maiden Creiddylad, and her husband Gwythyr ap Greidawl. Gwythyr is pursuing them with his army and comes into conflict with Arthur’s men.
Years later, St Cadoc crosses paths with his parent’s rescuer. Ligessauc Lau Hiir (Long Hand), ‘a certain very powerful leader of the Britons’, has killed three soldiers (milites) of Arthur, the very illustrious King of Britain. It is not clear here what extent of Arthur’s power is implied. Later, we discover that Mailgunus rules ‘all Britannia’, where Wales is almost certainly meant. Arthur may therefore be ‘the most famous King of Britain/Wales’, i.e. among others less famous, or conceivably is famous as king of the whole island.
That Arthur is dominant is made clear as he hunts Ligessauc everywhere and no one dares to shelter the fugitive. At last Ligessauc seeks sanctuary with St Cadoc in Gwynllwg (the area of Newport, Gwent) where Arthur tracks him down with a huge band of soldiers. The saint persuades Arthur to submit to arbitration. He summons Sts David, Illtud and Teilo, along with several other clerics and elders from ‘totius Brittannie’ (all Britain/Wales). Their judgement is that Arthur receive three oxen or one hundred cows per man in compensation for those slain. Although Arthur agrees, he will only accept cows of two colours, red at the front, white at the rear. Presumably this ploy is intended to scupper the negotiations, but Arthur has reckoned without the power of the saint, who miraculously produces the parti-coloured animals from single-coloured ones.
The elders next determine that, according to custom, the animals must be handed over in the middle of the ford. Cei and Bedguur rush into the water to grab them but find the cows miraculously transformed into bunches of ferns. This transformation explains why the land, conceded to Cadoc by St Teilo, is known as Tref Tredinauc or Fern Homestead. Arthur, witnessing his power, begs forgiveness from Cadoc. Having taken council with his leaders, Arthur increases the terms of Cadoc’s right of sanctuary. At this the ferns are changed back into cows. The treaty
is later ratified by Arthur, Mailgunus and Rein, son of Brachanus.
Mailgunus is a king, also styled ‘magnus rex Brittonum’ – great king of the Britons – who rules over all Britannia. He is later called ‘King of the men of Gwynedd, that is, the men of Snowdon’.
Towards the end of the Life, Cadoc, digging in a certain fort on Mount Bannauc in Scotland, finds the collar-bone of an ancient hero, monstrous and of incredible bulk, through which a man can ride on horseback. Cadoc miraculously revives the giant, ‘of huge stature and immense, altogether exceeding human size’, who turns out to be Caur of Pictland, who later fathers Gildas!
Bromwich and Evans (1992) draw several interesting connections between the saints’ Lives and Culhwch and Olwen. They suggest that the author of the tale actually had a copy of the Life of St Cadoc. Both feature Arthur, Kei and Bedwyr and the characters Caw of Prydyn, Samson, Sawyl Penn Uchel and Brys mab Bryssethach (an ancestor of Gladus). The Life explains the meanings of Bochriucarn and Rhyd gwrthebau, also explained in Culhwch, and both have the place-names Dinsol and Mount Bannauc. One indication that the author of Culhwch is simply taking names from an existing text is his lack of knowledge of where they are. Dinsol is St Michael’s Mount in the Life, but is placed in the north in Culhwch, for example.
There is little of historical value in this Life, beyond, perhaps, the general Gwent milieu. The status of the kings is confused, though the chronological setting, with Arthur having a long career beginning many years before the reign of Maelgwn, who in turn is older than Gildas, is more plausible than that in the other Lives.
The Reign of Arthur Page 22
