Romance writers gave Arthur multiple stepsisters to account for all his adult nephews. There is no suggestion of this in Geoffrey. Thorpe compounds the problem by misreading Loth’s wife as ‘Ambrosius’s sister’, then clearing the ‘confusion’ by making Hoel Ambrosius’s nephew! There is nothing to warrant this. Geoffrey shows no confusion over Hoel’s parentage; he is the son of Arthur’s sister. His descendants do continue to rule Brittany at least to the end of the seventh century, giving some vindication of Merlin’s prophecy.
Many years pass, Uther becomes ill and Octa escapes to gather the Saxons. Predictably, they invade Scotland and the ‘English’ Britons have to repulse them. Loth, acting as general and regent during Uther’s sickness, fights unsuccessfully against them. Uther sets out in a litter to lead the defence, but finds the Saxons have taken St Albans in their first appearance in south-east England since the days of Vortigern. Octa is killed and Uther recaptures the city. The Saxons retreat to the north but some of their spies succeed in poisoning Uther. The stage is set for the long-awaited reign of Arthur.
Loth features in the Life of St Kentigern, as the saint’s grandfather. Geoffrey subsequently used Kentigern-related material in Vita Merlini. The Life further adds that Lothian was named after Loth, an etymology which Geoffrey surprisingly does not give. This may be correct. Soon after the expedition to Catraeth, the lands of the Gododdin became known as Lothian, presumably derived from a personal name. This process of Dark Age leaders giving their names to kingdoms is identifiable in the case of Ceredigion and Glamorgan. Loth’s name is Lleu in Welsh (the Life uses the form Leudo), and Gododdin is called Lleu’s country in Y Gogoddin.
Geoffrey’s pre-Arthur story incorporates two different types of material. The first derives from and embellishes sources which we already know. The rest is magical material surrounding the figures of Merlin and Uther Pendragon. Although Merlin was to become one of the major figures in the Arthurian legends, he is clearly intruded into the History. Geoffrey has simply connected the late sixth-century prophet Myrddin to the most famous incidence of prophecy in Historia Brittonum.
Merlin may similarly have been attached to the stories of Uther Pendragon. These can function just as well without him, especially if Uther is himself an enchanter. If Uther and Merlin were connected before Geoffrey, it is odd that we do not find the connection in other Myrddin material or in Vita Merlini. If Geoffrey did find Uther and Merlin connected in a source, this would imply that Geoffrey alone is responsible for placing Uther Pendragon in the generation after Vortigern. This depends on Geoffrey’s conflation of the apparently late sixth-century Merlin with the much earlier (fifth-century?) Ambrosius. If Uther was already associated with Merlin, then his ‘true’ chronological position is after the reign of Arthur, and he cannot possibly be his father.
It is difficult to give credence to Uther’s status as King of Britain and member of the dynasty of Constantine III and Ambrosius. His name, Uther, and surname ‘Chief Dragon/Warlord’ seems to give him more affinity to the other ‘Celtically’ named figures, Arthur the Leader of Battles and Maglocunus, Dragon of the Island, than with the last of the Romans. The stories told of him are just as legendary as those about Ambrosius in Historia Brittonum, but whether, like them, they conceal a historical reality is impossible to determine.
Loth is the brother of Urianus and Auguselus, ‘sprung from a royal line’ regali prosapia orti (HRB IX.9), presumably of Scotland, though Loth is later shown as related to the King of Norway. Urianus is Urien of Rheged of the Taliesin poems, another late sixth-century figure. Geoffrey later mentions Urianus’s son, Hiwenius, the historical Owain, son of Urien Rheged. Loth and Urianus are linked in the same generation in the Life of St Kentigern, in which Urien’s son and Loth’s daughter are Kentigern’s parents.
Urien was known to the Welsh as the son of Kinmarch, so post-Geoffrey Welsh sources made all the brothers sons of Kinmarch. Geoffrey had heard the name. He uses it for an ancient king of Britain and, under variant spellings, for the duke of Canterbury and a Welsh leader at Arthur’s court. He makes no connection with it and the three northern ‘brothers’.
The synchronism of Uther, Merlin, Urianus and Loth fractures Geoffrey’s link with Historia Brittonum, in which Urbgen (Urien) lives after Arthur’s victory at Badon. Geoffrey’s chronological scheme, with Malgo ruling after three other ‘tyrants’ ought, if anything, to push Arthur and Urianus even further apart.
For Geoffrey, Urianus and Hiwenius have little role to play in the events of Arthur’s reign. We might speculate that they have become enmeshed in the Arthurian cycle because they are connected with Loth of Lodenesia. Loth is connected with Uther Pendragon, who is connected with Merlin, who is a late sixth-century figure, as is Urien. If Geoffrey’s source connects some or all of these characters, then they have been displaced in time either by Geoffrey’s equation of Merlin with Ambrosius, or by making Uther Pendragon Arthur’s father. Geoffrey seems to be trying to assimilate existing material into a framework which does not precisely accommodate it. This suggests that Uther, Urien and Loth share a source, relating to the late, not the early, sixth century.
Geoffrey of Monmouth’s Arthur – the last campaigns
TEN
Geoffrey of Monmouth’s story of Arthur falls into two uneven parts. The first follows the expected line: Arthur is a king who fights wars against the Saxons, in the company of other kings of the Britons, wins the battle of Badon but dies in a civil war at the battle of Cam(b)lan. It is a fictionalised account extrapolated from surviving sources. It is little different from the romanticised versions of the lives of Anglo-Saxon kings spun out by William of Malmesbury and Henry of Huntingdon.
The larger part is almost completely unexpected. It tells how, after his victories over the Saxons, Arthur crossed to Brittany to embark on a series of overseas conquests. Having conquered northern France, he takes on the Romans and is only prevented from making himself emperor by the revolt of Modred.
It was these continental wars, with the attribution to Arthur and his men of French territories which gave the legends a new lease of life among the French aristocrats. They featured in all subsequent retellings of the story, even at the expense of the Saxon campaigns and Mount Badon. They were to be the prime cause of the destruction of Arthur as a historical character.
When renaissance scholars reviewed the Arthurian material, they were not put off by the legendary aspects. No one argued that Arthur was not historical because he was associated with the Holy Grail, the Round Table and Avalon. They drew attention to the fact that the wars in France had no support in any continental source.
When Arthur (supposedly) left these shores, in the late fifth or early sixth centuries, he would have been leaving a land caught in the darkest of Dark Ages. Literary sources, bar the writings of Gildas and Patrick, had dried up. Large parts of the island were overrun by illiterate pagans.
None of this was true across the Channel. The literate Catholic Church continued to thrive in the old Roman urban centres. The Empire itself existed, centred on Byzantium but, by the reign of Justinian, with Italy and some of southern France under its sway. Even the barbarian conquerors were Christian and were quick to use the framework of laws and legal tenure to bolster their positions. It was not a milieu where details of Arthur’s battles and conquests could be lost.
The work of the sixth-century historian Gregory of Tours survives, preserving the work of still earlier historians. There is nothing in it to suggest that late fifth/early sixth-century Paris was ruled by the Tribune Frollo on behalf of the Emperor Leo, still less that Frollo was a gigantic man killed in single combat by Arthur, King of Britain. The western Emperor Lucius Hiberius, Procurator of the Roman Republic and ruler of Rome, makes no appearance in the annals of Rome or Byzantium. Ashe argues that Arthur does appear in the continental sources, under the name of Riothamus (Ashe 1982). We have to say, though, that even if that was the case, apart from the bare facts of fighting in France, there is no
connection between the military exploits of the two leaders. The nearest Geoffrey comes to acknowledging the historical campaigns fought by Britons/Bretons in the fifth century are some minor wars of Arthur’s ally, King Hoel of Brittany. We shall return to this continental material, but first we shall consider the material which draws on known sources.
On the death of Uther Pendragon, Arthur was declared king by an assembly of Britons convened at Silchester. Although he was only fifteen, his candidature was urged by Archbishop Dubricius of Caerleon as the only response to the renewed threat of the Saxons. That Arthur should peacefully succeed his father as King of the Britons is very much in Geoffrey’s idiom. Nothing we have read so far suggests that Arthur was hereditary king of all Britain. The choice of Silchester is strange. It is hard to imagine any genuine tradition passing this on, especially as Geoffrey preserves no British or Latin name for it. It may just have been knowledge of the Roman remains there which prompted it.
Although Arthur’s military campaign is against the Saxon leader Colgrin, it follows a familiar pattern. The first battle is on the banks of the River Dubglas, somewhere near Saxon-held York, which Arthur then proceeds to besiege. Cador of Cornwall accompanies Arthur in the siege. Later we discover that Constantine of Cornwall, Arthur’s successor, is the son of Cador, and Arthur’s cousin. We can infer that Cador is an uncle of Arthur. St David is also called Arthur’s uncle.
The siege is unsuccessful, as a new influx of Saxons led by Cheldric arrives from Germany and seizes Scotland. Having killed off Octha in the previous generation, Geoffrey fills the gaps with fictitious Saxons. Cheldric may owe his name to Cerdic of the West Saxons, but at this point is located in Scotland.
Arthur returns to London to take council. Geoffrey knew perfectly well from Historia Brittonum that Arthur fought with the reges Brittonum. However, for him, Britain (England, that is) is not fragmented into separate kingdoms. Arthur is the sole King of Britain. To resolve the paradox, Geoffrey has Arthur send to Brittany to his sister’s son, King Hoel. Hoel arrives in Southampton with 15,000 Breton warriors, who join Arthur. Arthur therefore, literally, does fight with the king and soldiers ‘Brittonum’, here read as ‘of the Bretons’.
The combined forces set off for the rest of Historia Brittonum’s battles on the Dubglas. They fight the Saxons in the Lindsey (Linnuis) region, raising the siege of Lincoln. Geoffrey has a list of British towns, similar to that in Historia Brittonum, which he uses to give authenticity to his claim that his source book is in British. However, many of his identifications are incorrect and seem to originate with him. For instance, he gives Paladur as the ancient name of Shaftesbury, as it incorporates the British word for spear. However, its true identity is Trapain Law, a hillfort of the Gododdin. In this campaign, Geoffrey wrongly guesses that Lincoln is the British Kaerluitcoit, which is actually Wall-by-Lichfield.
Missing out the battle on the Bassas, Geoffrey has Arthur pursue the Saxons to the Caledonian wood. There is no certainty that Geoffrey understands this as in Scotland (his name for Scotland is Albania). He may imagine that it is nearer to Lincoln. Arthur blockades the Saxons in the wood until they are forced to make peace, surrendering hostages and tribute. But the Saxons, instead of returning to Germany as promised, turn back to land at Totnes, ravage the West Country and besiege Badon.
The Saxons land at Totnes, a recurring feature in Geoffrey. Brutus, Vespasian, Constantine and later Ambrosius and Uther land at this obscure spot. Although peculiar as a point of arrival for Saxons from the north aiming at Bath, the location makes sense if we assume a Breton perspective on the most obvious ‘gateway to Britain’.
Now comes the great battle of Badon. The Saxons raid up to the Severn until they reach the country of Badon (pagum Badonis), where they besiege the town. As we hear later that Badon is in the province of Somerset, we know Geoffrey equates Badon with Bath. He made this clear when he related the establishment of the baths of Kaer Badum ‘which is now called Bado’ (Geoffrey’s actual nominative form. I have kept Badon for ease of reference).
The Saxons thus provide the siege. The Britons drive them back to a neighbouring hill (Gildas’s Mons Badonicus) after a day of fighting. On the second day the Britons fight their way up the hill, defeating with great slaughter the Saxons who flee eastwards to the Isle of Thanet.
The action of the battle could easily be spun out from evidence available to Geoffrey. The first indication that he has another source is the fact that his siege and battle last at least three days, which seems to be the import of the entry in Annales Cambriae. Geoffrey, however, had not read the Annales, but probably has that information from a related source.
Interestingly, Arthur is the lone named participant. Hoel is left behind ‘ill’ in Alclud and Cador does not appear until the mopping-up process. Geoffrey seems to have arrived at the same conclusion as we have, that ‘no-one slew them save him alone’ did not mean that Arthur acted single-handedly, but that he won the battle without his allies. He also has no support from the famous champions who feature prominently in his later campaigns.
Aside from conventional scenes and speeches inspired by the crusading rhetoric of the twelfth century, only one element of the battle sticks out as externally derived – a description of Arthur’s arms and equipment: ‘Arthur himself put on a breast-plate (lorica) worthy of so great a king. On his head he placed a golden helmet, with a crest carved in the shape of a dragon, and across his shoulders a circular shield (clipeus) called Pridwen, on which there was painted a likeness of the Blessed Mary, Mother of God, which forced him to be thinking perpetually of her. He girded on his peerless sword (gladius), called Caliburnus, which was forged in the Isle of Avallon. A spear (lancea) called Ron graced his right hand.’ Geoffrey ends this tour-de-force with a line of poetry (of his own composition?) ‘this spear was tall and broad and ready for slaughter’ (HRB IX.4).
Geoffrey interprets the phrase from the Historia battle-list about Arthur carrying the image of the Virgin Mary on his shoulders without difficulty ‘humeris . . . suis clipeum . . . in quo . . . imago sancte Marie . . . impicta’ – ‘On his shoulders a shield painted with the image of St Mary’. It is not true that the line can only be understood with recourse to a lost Welsh original. Geoffrey’s explanation may not be the right one, but it is still based on the Latin text as its stands. William of Malmesbury, incidentally, interprets Historia Brittonum by saying the image is ‘sewn upon his armour’ (White 1997).
Even if the Roman-style descriptions of Arthur’s equipment may be inspired by classical epics rather than preserved fifth-century descriptions, the fact remains that Geoffrey knows some very archaic names for them. Both Caliburnus and Ron are earlier versions of the Welsh names given in Culhwch and Olwen. Geoffrey’s naming of Arthur’s shield, rather than his ship, as Pridwen, seems the earlier tradition. Further, these names have come to Geoffrey in written form. One possibility is that he has a Latin poem which contains the names, with the surviving hexameter line as proof. Other lines or half lines of poetry crop up through the work, and one small section near the beginning is entirely in verse. I am inclined to view these as Geoffrey’s own experiments with verse forms. His next work, the Vita Merlini, was entirely in verse.
The only source for Arthur’s equipment must be a very ancient book in the British language, pre-dating Culhwch and Olwen. From this fragment we cannot deduce that it was an orderly and consecutive narrative of the kings of Britain. We cannot even tell whether the context was Arthur’s battle of Mount Badon. Geoffrey has added to it the description of Arthur at Castellum Guinnion, at least, and the only place-name associated with it is Avallon, of which more later. Nevertheless, the passage gives us unequivocal evidence of earlier British source-material being used in Historia Regum Britanniae. A list of Arthur’s named equipment, however, seems unlikely to derive from a strictly historical source.
After Badon
Gildas had described the siege of Mount Badon as almost the last victory, and this is how Geof
frey presents it. Cador is sent to harry the retreating Saxons as far as Thanet by land and sea. He swiftly corners and kills Cheldric.
Meanwhile, Arthur returns north to raise the siege of Alclud where Hoel is trapped by the Picts and Scots. Defeating them, Arthur advances on Mureis (Moray?). Having seen off an Irish invasion fleet, he treats the Picts and Scots ‘with unparalleled severity, sparing no one who fell into his hands. As a result all the bishops of this pitiful country, with all the clergy under their command, their feet bare and in their hands the relics of their saints . . . fell on their knees and besought him to have mercy’ (HRB IX.6; Thorpe 1966:219).
This scene is similar to the saints’ Lives. Arthur is cruel and rapacious and the clergy have to bring him to heel. Geoffrey has simply recast this to justify Arthur’s essentially defensive and patriotic functions, and to stress that the clergy are powerless and subordinate petitioners. There is an affinity with Culhwch and Olwen, which also includes an episode of clergy humbly begging Arthur for clemency.
Like Ambrosius, Arthur completes his British triumphs by re-establishing the churches and monasteries and by restoring lands to those disinherited by the Saxons. Prime among these disinherited are three brothers from Scotland: Urianus of Murefensium, Loth of Lodonesia and Auguselus of Albany.
The section ends with Arthur’s marriage to Guanhuvara/Gwanhumara, a woman of Roman descent, brought up in the household of Duke Cador – the most beautiful woman in the whole island. She is of course Queen Guenevere, the Gwenhwyvar of the Welsh sources. Arthur’s wife is found in Welsh material and Caradoc’s Life of Gildas so, clearly, Geoffrey has her from a pre-existing British source. This will be reinforced later when we analyse the role she plays in the story.
The Reign of Arthur Page 27
