by Mike Ashley
Presently their pride was limited for a while through the great Arthur, king of the Britons. They were largely expelled from the island and reduced to subjection. But when this same Arthur, after many glorious victories which he won in Britain and in Gaul, was summoned at last from human activity, the way was open for the Saxons to again enter the island and there was great oppression of the Britons, destruction of churches and persecution of saints. This persecution went on through the times of many kings, Saxons and Britons fighting back and forth.
In spirit this agrees closely with Gildas’s passage in §25 and §26, but without mention of Ambrosius. In William’s summary Arthur follows on from Vortigern, separated only by the key word “presently”. In the original language this was postmodum, meaning “soon afterwards” or “shortly”, certainly not after twenty or thirty years. William is unlikely to have confused Arthur and Ambrosius as they must have been identified by name in the original document. This could suggest that Arthur and Ambrosius were the same person – but if so, then Arthur/Ambrosius must have been very young in the 460s to have fought so victoriously at Badon in the 490s and still be fighting at Camlann twenty years after.
This summary is also significant because it identifies Arthur as “king”, not dux, and states that Arthur won victories in Britain and Gaul, possibly the source for Arthur’s European campaign against Rome that we will find in Geoffrey’s account. This could suggest that there were two major campaigns, one by Ambrosius and a separate one by Arthur, which brought him to Gaul.
This is where the shadowy figure of Riothamus rides briefly into the light. During the mid fifth century Gaul, like Britain, was subject to attacks from Germanic tribes and after 466 was under threat by the new Visigoth king Euric. The newly appointed Emperor, Anthemius, was determined to restore order. He brought in mercenaries, including a a sizable force under the command of Riothamus. The account of this is recorded by the sxith century historian, Jordanes in De Rebus Gothicis.
Euric, king of Visigoths, aware of the frequent change of Roman Emperors, endeavoured to take Gaul by his own right. The Emperor Anthemius, hearing of this, asked the Brittones for aid. Their king Riotimus came with 12,000 men into the state of the Bituriges by way of Ocean, and was received as he disembared from his ships. Euric, king of the Visigoths, came against them with an innumerable army and, after a long fight, he routed Riotimus, king of the Brittones, before the Romans could join him. So, when he had lost a great part of this army, he fled with all the men he could gather together and came to the Burgundians, a neighbouring tribe then allied to the Romans. But Euric seized the Gallic city of Arverna, for the emperor Anthemius was now dead.
Anthemius was killed in 472, so Jordanes’s account must take place between 467 and 472. Ian Wood in The Merovingian Kingdoms dates the battle in 469.
Riothamus is called “king of the Brittones”, which probably means the British in Armorica. This is supported by the fact that the Roman senator Sidonius had written several letters to Riothamus appealing for help over some rebellious Bretons. Yet, if Riothamus was in Armorica, why did Jordanes say that he arrived in ships “by way of the Ocean”? Riothamus travelled into the “state of the Bituriges” (now Bourges) which is near the river Arnon a tributary of the Loire which marked the southern border of Armorica. 12,000 troops is a large force and it is likely that Riothamus brought in reinforcements from others fleeing Britain, who would have sailed around Armorica and down the Loire valley.
It seems that William’s Arthur is Riothamus. But if that is so, why did William call him Arthur, a name he presumably took from the Ystoria Britanica? Like Vortigern (“supreme ruler”) Riothamus is an epithet, meaning “great king”. Arthur, in the Brythonic, as Ardd-ri, also means “High King”. The author of Ystoria Britanica, knowing the meanings of both Rio-thamus and Ardd-ri, may have assumed they related to the same ruler.
Somehow this explanation feels unsatisfactory. If Riothamus’ real name was Arthur, we might have to recognise that someone old enough to be king and to command troops – let us say 25 – in 469 could still have been victorious at Badon in around 493x497 – aged about 50 – and perhaps have fought at Camlann in 514x518 at the age of 70. The bigger question, though, is: why would a king in Armorica, already defeated by the Goths, re-emerge in Britain over 20 years later? And, if he were a king of Armorica, why does his name not appear in the king lists? The names of the rulers of Armorica (see Table 3.10) during the fifth century are confusing because there were waves of settlers whose chieftains claimed princedoms in various parts of Armorica, in particular Dumnonée in the north and Cornouaille in the south. However, there are some clues that may help clarify the problem over names.
The Cartulary of Quimperlé lists four early comes, or counts, of Cornubia (Cornouaille), amongst whom is Iahann Reeth or Regula (king). Iahann is an early version of John and two generations later lived another John or Ionas Riotham. The second one died in 540, while the first, Iahann Reeth, had come to Armorica with a large fleet of ships in the 450s. He could easily have been the king who fought against Euric and whose name became confused with Ionas Riotham, who lived so soon afterwards.
3. A Tentative Chronology
So we come back full circle to the lifetime of Vortigern. By all accounts he was banished and killed soon after the death of his son Vortimer which means he must have died around the year 460. Into the vacuum, so Gildas tells us, stepped Ambrosius, who rallied the British and fought against the Saxons, leading to the major British victory at Badon. In studying these events, it seems increasingly likely that Badon had to come at the end of the fifth century, most likely around 493–497 and not the later date (518) listed in the Welsh Annals. According to the annals, it was Arthur who was the victor at Badon. By now Ambrosius must have been an old man, and a new general was leader.
This appears to be the background to Arthur, and it is only now in Nennius’s miscellany that Arthur appears. Nennius provides a battle list which is one of the most discussed and analysed sections in all Arthurian lore. It appears as a separate section and I discuss it fully in the next chapter.
Nennius makes only two other brief references, both in his catalogue of the wonders of Britain and both of which really belong in the section of Welsh tradition. He tells of a stone at Cam Cafal, in the province of Builth, that apparently bears the imprint of Arthur’s hound. The other is a tomb in the province of Ergyng, which is called Llygad Amr. According to legend, Amr (or Amhar) was Arthur’s son, whom he killed and buried there. These two sites, along with the statement in the battle list that Arthur alone had cut down over nine hundred men, show that already Arthur’s status had taken on the trappings of legend. The sites also help us locate associations with Arthur in both Builth and Ergyng, territories in south-east Wales already linked with events we have discussed. A pattern is emerging of activities linking Arthur to south Wales and to earlier connections with Vortigern and Ambrosius, stretching across southern Britain, especially around Gloucester and Hampshire. But we also have to recognise the conflicts in the north, especially in Lindsey, and that Ambrosius’s and Arthur’s theatre of operations was far broader than southern Britain.
Table 6.2. Chronology from Roman withdrawal to Badon
From the last few chapters, we can piece together a chronology which gives us a framework to fifth century Britain, and see where Arthur fits.
410
Britain secedes from Roman Empire. Incursions by Picts and Saxons on the increase.
410–425
Coel serves as dux. Wars in North. Remaining Romans hide their wealth. Rise to power of Vitalinus in rivalry with Ambrosius the Elder. Clergy support Pelagianism.
425–430
Treaty reached between Coel and Cunedda. Cunedda moves south to Wales. Vortigern rises to power. Conflict with Ambrosius the Elder continues.
428
Possible first major Saxon adventus. Perhaps under Gewis.
429
Visit of Germanus of Auxerre.
Possible date for the Alleluia victory over the Picts and Saxons.
436
Possible second visit of Germanus, though this may be confused with mission of Irish monk Garmon.
437
Conflict between Vortigern/Vitalis and Ambrosius culminates in Battle of Guoloph. Vortigern now takes on full power and becomes superbus tyrannus.
441
Saxon infiltration into Britain now so complete that Gallic chronicler (Faustus?) believes Britain has fallen to the Saxons. Continued civil wars and plague lead to poor harvests and famine. Further waves of British settle in Armorica.
446–452
Vortigern appeals to Aëtius to send reinforcements to Britain. None is forthcoming.
449–455
Vortigern negotiates with Saxons to provide mercenaries to help fight Picts.
455–460
Saxons under Hengist revolt against Vortigern and mount campaign to win territory in Britain. Vortigern is expelled. Vortimer leads British resistance but is killed in battle, as is his brother Categirn. Horsa killed. Saxons are driven back and there is a brief respite. Further waves of settlers in Armorica, amongst them Iahann Reeth/Riothamus.
460s
Saxon forces return. Massacre of British nobles. Vortigern flees and is killed. Start of counter campaign, perhaps initially by Garmon and then Ambrosius the Younger, supported by Aircol of Dyfed. Rise to power of Pascent and Brychan.
469/470
Riothamus and army of “Brittones” fight the Visigoths. Defeated, Riothamus survives the battle but disappears from recorded history.
470s–485
Further waves of Saxon warriors. Ambrosius’s campaign has mixed results. Main opponents are Octa and Aelle.
480s
Dyfnwal Hen, Lord of Strathclyde and Arthwys, Lord of the Pennines.
485
Aelle fights British at Mearcraedes burn. Start of possible new campaign under Arthur. Rise to power of Cadell and Riocatus.
488
Octa succeeds to the kingdom of Cantwara.
491
Massacre at Anderida by Aelle. Rise to power in Dyfed of Vortipor.
493x497
Victory of Arthur at Mount Badon. Death of Aelle and perhaps of Octa. Partition of Britain.
495x516 or 538
Arthur’s reign, Pax Arthuriana.
514x518 or 535x539
Battle of Camlann; Cerdic assumes power over West Saxons.
536x540
Gildas writes De Excidio.
7
ARTHUR’S BATTLES – SEEKING THE SITES
1. Nennius’s Battle List
One of the most discussed items in all Arthuriana is Nennius’s list of twelve battles. It is a list which seems to offer so much, and yet reveals so little. Clearly identifying the battle sites should enable us to pinpoint Arthur’s theatre of operations, and ultimately identify him. Unfortunately the sites almost defy interpretation. Despite valiant and ingenious efforts by scholars over two centuries there is not a single site on which there is universal agreement. It is yet another mystery within a web of mysteries, making it all the more fascinating.
As we shall see, suggested locations are scattered the length and breadth of Britain. One might imagine that if Arthur were fighting a common foe such as the Saxons, then the battles would be along a frontier. Alternatively, if he were a ruler of a specific territory then those battles might be within or around its borders. However, if Arthur were fighting several enemies, either as High King or dux bellorum, the scattering of sites would be more random. We also have to consider whether or not the list is of the battles of several kings, which might reveal a different pattern.
Nennius’s battle list is his first and – bar the two items in his “wonders” – only reference to Arthur. Here is what he says:
56. At that time, the Saxons grew strong by virtue of their number and increased in power in Britain. Hengist having died, his son Octha came from the northern part of Britain to the kingdom of the Kentishmen and from him are descended the kings of Kent. Then Arthur, with the kings of Britain, fought against them in those days, but Arthur himself was the dux bellorum. The first battle was at the mouth of the river which is called Glein. The second, third, fourth, and fifth battles were above another river which is called Dubglas and is in the region of Linnuis. The sixth battle was above the river which is called Bassas. The seventh battle was in the forest of Celidon, that is Cat Coit Celidon. The eighth battle was at the fortress of Guinnion, in which Arthur carried the image of holy Mary, the everlasting virgin, on his shoulders [shield]; and the pagans were put to flight on that day. And through the power of our Lord Jesus Christ and through the power of the blessed Virgin Mary his mother there was great slaughter among them. The ninth battle was waged in the City of the Legion. The tenth battle was waged on the shore of a river which is called Tribruit. The eleventh battle was fought on the mountain which is called Agned. The twelfth battle was on Mount Badon in which there fell in one day 960 men from one charge by Arthur; and no one struck them down except Arthur himself, and in all the wars he emerged as victor. And while they [the Saxons] were being defeated in all the battles, they were seeking assistance from Germany and their numbers were being augmented many times over without interruption. And they brought over kings from Germany that they might reign over them in Britain, right down to the time in which Ida reigned, who was son of Eobba. He was the first king in Bernicia, that is, in Berneich.
As many commentators have noted, Arthur is called not a king but a dux bellorum, a “duke of battles”. We are in a Britain being carved up by petty kings, but they still look toward an overall military command.
This happens, according to Nennius, after Hengist dies (in 488, according to the ASC). Octha [Octa] comes down from northern Britain, probably either from Lindsey or the territory by the Wall, triggering the start of a campaign of twelve notable battles between the British and the Saxons, culminating, as Gildas also cites, in Badon. We have already dated Badon to around 493–497, allowing Arthur’s campaign to last for five to ten years, a believable span of time for twelve battles which are unlikely to have been crammed into one season.
There were probably other battles. Nennius’s list almost certainly comes from a now lost battle-song commemorating the victories and ignoring the defeats. John Koch, in The Celtic Heroic Age, believes that it is possible to reconstruct the rhyming scheme of the original poem. He adds that the reference to Badon fits into that rhyme, and therefore was part of the original list and not added later due to Arthur’s prestige. Arthur was associated with Badon from whenever this poem was first told, possibly during his lifetime. However, if it was composed a century or two later, the memory of Badon and the other battles may have become blurred.
We know that Gildas wrote of Ambrosius’s campaign, so we cannot discount the possibility that the battle list belonged primarily to Ambrosius. Or it may have been a catalogue of major victories over the Saxons, regardless of commander, and thus could include Vortimer’s campaign. One factor in favour of this theory is the reference to four battles taking place on the river Douglas, which could mean either a concentrated campaign in one area, or that several battles spread over time took place on more than one river Douglas.
The third sentence seems to suggest that all of Arthur’s battles were against the Saxons, and, more specifically, against Octha and the men of Kent. It may, however, be that this sentence did not originally follow on from the previous two, but began a new section. “Them” may not refer solely to the Saxons, but to a more general enemy. The list does not suggest a civial war.
The title dux bellorum has been discussed extensively. Although its literal translation is “duke of battles”, a tremendous amount has been read into it. Firstly, because Arthur fought “with the kings of Britain”, many have suggested he was not a king himself, but a military commander. The title dux, of course, was one previously owned by the dux Britanniarum, the commander based in the north
but having control over all of Britain’s military. It was doubtless appropriated by Coel and possibly passed on through his descendants, one of whom was Arthur of the Pennines.
Does Nennius’s phrasing preclude Arthur from also being a king? Clearly he is set apart; fighting alongside kings suggests equal, or superior, rank. Dux Britanniarum was a very senior role, almost equal to vicarius, and if that role had continued in some form the rulers of the smaller kingdoms would certainly have looked up to the dux as their senior commander. He may not have held the title of High King, but he could have wielded the same authority.
Perhaps we should not take the title dux too literally. By Nennius’s day, the understanding of the role of dux may have been lost, so only the title survived. It may have had some vestigial prestige attached, so that any military commander who brought various kings together to fight a common foe might have been given this title without it meaning anything specific. This means Arthur need not have been stationed in the north (where the battle-hardened Men of the North probably didn’t need a commander), but may have been based in Wales or in the south. Indeed, if the southern factions had had no kings of stature since the old Roman provinces crumbled, they probably needed a commander to bring them together.
In some ways it does not matter. The dux would have to be of royal blood in order to command kings, as they would not serve alongside someone whom they regarded as inferior. We might not find Arthur ruling a kingdom, but he’ll be in the pedigrees. So if Nennius’s battles provide us with locations and we can fine tune the time, we should be able to identify him.