The Mammoth Book of King Arthur (20 page)
Read The Mammoth Book of King Arthur Online
Authors: Mike Ashley
The river
Derguentid
is usually translated as the Darent in Kent, and is therefore equated with the battle at
Crecganford
in 456.
Crecganford
itself is usually translated as
Crayford, in northwest Kent, though this is not on the Darent, but the neighbouring river Cray. Though Darent is an accurate translation of
Derguentid
, which means “river where oak
trees grow”, that name must once have applied to scores of rivers, and is still plentiful in such modern names as Derwent, Darwen, Dart or Derwen. Of these the Yorkshire Derwent joins the
Ouse just at its estuary with the Humber, only 25km (16m) from Althorp. As for
Crecganford
, whilst it might conceivably be Crayford, there may be another explanation.
The name may be derived from the original Celtic word
chrecwen
, meaning laughter and revelry. The same word in Saxon is
gleam
, as reflected in Glanford Bridge, now known as Brigg, in
the Ancholme Valley, just 10km (6m) from Bonby in Lincolnshire.
Gleamford
was where people gathered for games. It could be that this is also the location of Arthur’s first battle in
Nennius’s battle list (
see
Chapter 7).
The
ASC
entry says that after their defeat the British fled to
Lundenbyrg
from
Centlond
, usually treated as London and Kent. However if this battle was at Brigg or along the
Derwent the British must have fled elsewhere. 10km east of the Derwent is Londesborough
(Lodenesbyrg
in the Domesday Book). Near here was the Roman town of Delgovitia, an ideal haven. Kent
was usually rendered as
Cantwara
not
Centlond
, but just east of Doncaster is Cantley and though its name is Saxon
(Canteleia)
that may be how Nennius knew it.
Finally, the Gallic Sea was the standard name for the sea between Gaul and Britain, which continued round the coast of Essex and East Anglia until it merged with the Germanic Sea somewhere
around Lincoln. No inscribed stones survive in this area. In fact, they are extremely uncommon in eastern England and are found mostly in the west, but this is because so many of these stones were
destroyed and plundered by generations of farmers and settlers. However, at the point where the Humber enters the sea is a town called Humberston where there used to be a boundary stone.
Vortimer’s victory over the Saxons was short-lived because, as Nennius tells us, they did not bury him where he requested. Nennius recounts the consequences in §45
and §46. With Vortimer dead, Hengist regathers his strength. He knows he now has Vortigern under his thumb, and asks Vortigern and his nobles to come to a meeting to ratify a treaty. When they
have been wined and dined, Hengist’s men draw their knives and murder all 300 of Vortigern’s noblemen. Only Vortigern is spared, and, in return for his life, grants the Saxons the
territories of Essex, Sussex and Middlesex, as well as others of their choosing.
The story of how Hengist killed Vortigern’s men is the stuff of legend, and similar tales appear in other countries’ myths. It may well have a basis in fact, but the nub of it
suggests that the Saxons had overrun south-east Britain by this time, probably in the 460s before Ambrosius’s counterattack.
According to Nennius (§47), Vortigern flees to his fortress in Gwrtheyrnion, where Germanus prays for his sins. Curiously, it is at this point that Nennius recounts the story of the
Alleluia battle, with Germanus leading the army and driving the “enemies” back into the sea.
Vortigern now flees to his castle of Caer Gwrthegirn in Demetia, followed by Germanus. But after three days and nights the castle is destroyed by fire from heaven, killing Vortigern, his wives
and all the inhabitants. This sounds like a repetition of the Benli episode, in reverse. It could have been Vortigern and not Benli who died by fire and allowed Cadell to succeed to the throne of
Powys.
After providing a summary of Vortigern’s wickedness, Nennius tells us that Vortigern:
48. [Vortigern] had three sons: the eldest was Vortimer, who, as we have seen, fought four times against the Saxons, and put them to flight; the second was Categirn who
was slain in the same battle with Horsa; the third was Pascent, who reigned in the two provinces Builth and Guorthegirnaim, after the death of his father. These were granted him by Ambrosius,
who was the great king among the kings of Britain. The fourth was Faustus, born of an incestuous marriage with his daughter, who was brought up and educated by St. Germanus. He built a large
monastery on the banks of the river Renis, called after his name, and which remains to the present period.
Categirn is a variant of Catotigirn which, according to Peter Bartrum, means “war-lord” or “battle-king”. This Categirn is recorded as being the father
of Cadell. With their deaths it is the
third son Pascent, who becomes king, ruling the territories of Builth and Gwrtheyrnion as vassal to Ambroisus.
Table 6.1 The Family of Vortigern
The final reference is to the fourth, incestuous son, who was educated by Germanus and established a monastery at Renis. This sounds very similar to Faustus, bishop of Riez, who is usually
accorded the dates 405–490, though if he really were a later son of Vortigern he must have been born in the early 410s and would have been an adolescent when Germanus visited Britain in 429.
Faustus was known as “the Briton”, and accounts of his life make much reference to his mother but none to his father. If Nennius’s account is true, then we may believe that
Faustus and his mother were sent by Vortigern to Armorica, where he was taken into the care of Germanus.
Faustus was probably sent to Armorica when he was a young child, perhaps soon after the end of Roman administration in 410. Germanus was then the governor of Armorica. Faustus trained as a
lawyer but entered the monastery at Lérins in the 420s, becoming head of the monastery in 433, and bishop of Riez around 462. What is intriguing about Faustus is that in a surviving letter
his friend, the Roman aristocrat Sidonius, refers
both to “your Britons” and to a friend of Faustus called Riocatus, who is returning some of Faustus’s books
to Britain. Riocatus appears in the genealogy of Vortigern given by Nennius in his final paragraph on the king:
49. This is the genealogy of Vortigern, which goes back to Fernvail, who reigned in the kingdom of Guorthegirnaim, and was the son of Teudor; Teudor was the son of
Pascent; Pascent of Guoidcant; Guoidcant of Moriud; Moriud of Eltat; Eltat of Eldoc; Eldoc of Paul; Paul of Mepurit; Mepurit of Briacat; Briacat of Pascent; Pascent of Guorthegirn
(Vortigern); Guorthegirn Guortheneu of Guitaul; Guitaul of Guitolion; Guitolion of Gloui. Bonus, Paul, Mauron, Guotelin, were four brothers, who built Gloiuda, a great city upon the banks of
the river Severn, and in British is called Cair Gloui, in Saxon, Gloucester.
Riocatus is the name copied in error as Briacat, from the original
map Riacat
(“son of Riocatus”). This makes Riocatus the son of Pascent, and thus nephew of
Faustus. Riocatus possibly succeeded Ambrosius as commander of the British forces and probably succeeded Pascent in the territories of Builth and Gwythernion. The name Riocatus means “king of
battles” which strikes a chord with Arthur’s title as “duke of battles”. Table 3.9 gives Riocatus the dates 460–530 making him an exact contemporary of Arthur of
Badon. It makes a convincing connection and suggests there may be some truth to the legend. It also raises the tempting idea that Faustus could have been the anonymous compiler of the
Gallic
Chronicles.
He certainly would have had knowledge of events in Britain at that time and a clearer understanding of their import than his contemporaries.
Since we have touched on Armorica and mentioned the like-sounding Riocatus, it is appropriate here to consider Riothamus and his Arthurian connections.
2. Riothamus
In 1019, a Breton monk called William wrote a life of St. Goeznovius,
Legenda Sancti Goeznovii
, in which he refers to Vortigern and Arthur, “King of the
Britons”. William stated that his information came from a now lost book called
Ystoria Britanica
, the only known reference to this source:
In due course the usurper, Vortigern, to strengthen the defence of Britain, which he held unrighteously, summoned warriors from the land of Saxony and made them his
allies. Since they were pagans and possessed by Satan, lusting to shed human blood, they brought much evil upon the Britons.
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.