The Mammoth Book of King Arthur (7 page)

Following the death of Maximus, Roman control over events in Britain was virtually lost. As Gildas later expressed it, “The island was still Roman in name, but not by law and
custom.” Maximus’s son Victor was killed by a soldier called Arbogast, who set up his own puppet emperor, Eugenius, and sought to make himself king of France. Arbogast, a pagan,
encouraged the return to pagan worship in Britain and Gaul. Theodosius’s two sons, Honorius and Arcadius, were both too young to rule so the Vandal general Stilicho governed the western
empire as regent for Honorius. Stilicho prevailed and, after the deaths of Eugenius and Arbogast, sought once again to shore up defences in Britain. Around the years 395–396, Stilicho sent a
force against the Picts, but it was too little too late. Soon after, in 401–402 Stilicho withdrew further troops from Britain to help fight against Alaric, the Visigoth governor of Illyria,
who had invaded Italy.

Hadrian’s wall was now undefended and all troops had been withdrawn from Wales. Only one legion remained in Britain, at
Chester. The Irish now secured a grip on the
fringes of Britain. The chieftain Eochaid, ruler of the Déisi in present-day Waterford, established a base in south-west Wales, in the territory then known as Demetia (later Dyfed).
Meanwhile the descendants of Cairbre Riata, founder of the territory of the Dál Riata in Northern Ireland, had established settlements in what are now Argyll and Kintyre.

No new Roman coinage entered Britain after 402. Feeling abandoned, and having lost all hope in any further support from Rome, Britain once again chose its own emperors. The first two –
Marcus, a Roman official, and Gratian, a British official – scarcely lasted a few months before both were murdered. This was between December 406 and May 407. The third choice was more
promising, even though he was apparently an ordinary soldier from the ranks. This was Flavius Claudius Constantine, later Constantine III. Constantine marshalled what few troops remained in Britain
and marched on Gaul, winning over the troops both there and on the Rhine. The latter desertion was a disaster for Rome, as the barbarian armies had already crossed the borders of the Empire and the
defences were crumbling. Nevertheless Constantine proved a surprise. His presence seemed to deter the Vandals and other armies, and there was a brief respite in hostilities.

The problem for Britain, though, was that Constantine was now in Gaul. He seemed to have lost interest in Britain, and once again Britain became subject to increasing attacks from Picts and
Saxons. By 408 Constantine had lost his grip on affairs, and the Vandals were again on the move. Britain had enough, and, in 409, expelled all Roman officials. The Greek historian Zosimus, who
lived only a few years after these events, tells the story in his
Historia Nova
(
c
500).

But it proved difficult. There were continued attacks, and in 410 the British wrote to the emperor Honorius (son of Theodosius) pleading for help. Honorius, however, had enough
to contend with, what with the barbarians overrunning the empire and Constantine III seeking to destroy him. According to Zosimus, he replied telling them to look to their own defence. A.L.F. Rivet
and Colin Smith, in
The Place-Names of Roman Britain
, have suggested that Zosimus somehow mistook the town of Bruttium in southern Italy for Britannia – the names in Greek are very
similar – which may mean that Honorius did not officially dismiss the British. However, the British had certainly dismissed the Romans, and Honorius was in no position to respond. Whether by
design or default, and no matter how temporary it may have seemed at the time, Britain was no longer under direct Roman rule.

It now had to defend itself and needed strong men to do so. The Age of Arthur was about to begin.

3

THE DARKNESS DESCENDS

1. British Authority

I have dwelt for some time on the Roman background to the Arthurian age because it is important to understand the state of Britain at the start of the so-called “Dark
Ages”. We have seen that the British had increasingly sought independence during the third and fourth centuries and, as troubles beset the rest of the Roman Empire, had grown wealthy and
financially resilient. Though Germanic, Scottish and Pictish invaders continued to trouble the periphery of Britain, even in the late fourth century, the Romano-British lived in style, in grand
villas with expensive goods imported from elsewhere in the Empire.

The years 409/410, with the apparent end of Roman control in Britain, were part of a process of independence that stretched for over a century. It should not be seen as Britain being abandoned
by Rome, with the sudden desertion of the army leaving Britain at the mercy of the Saxons waiting to pounce. Britain had been steadily deprived of its forces at intervals over the last thirty years
or more. The native British had been well trained and conditioned in Roman ways for nearly four centuries, and British officials would have ensured continuity with the training of their own troops.
The British forces, which no doubt included Germanic mercenaries, may not have been as disciplined as the Roman legions, nor as numerous, but we cannot discount them.

Moreover, there were already plenty of Germanic settlers and
retired soldiers in Britain. The Roman Empire was multicultural, allowing the free movement of people throughout
Europe. Many of the soldiers stationed in Britain were not of strict Roman stock, but from Germanic and other tribes, as we have already seen with the Sarmatians at Bremetennacum. There were many
Friesian cavalry units posted in Northern Britain, such as at Vinovia (Binchester) and Derventio (Papcastle). They even feature in the Arthurian legends.

The dismissal of the Roman administration was no doubt part of a power struggle in Britain, both secular and religious. The British appeal to Honorius had come from the heads of the
civitates
, not the provincial heads or the
vicarius.
Some historians believe this means that the British usurpation of power had come from the provincial governors who had overthrown
the
vicarius
, leaving the
civitates
in a degree of confusion. With no overall diocesan control it meant that after 409 Britain was no longer one single diocese but four provinces,
each with its own governor.

Throughout the Roman occupation, the tribal structure within Britain had led to continuous rivalry and conflict between the British. The Roman administration had stifled this to a degree,
particularly in the south, but it was always there, and would have reasserted itself after the Romans left. In our own time we have seen a similar resurgance of tribalism in Eastern Europe
following the fall of Communism.

To this must be added a conflict in religious views. The Christian faith was still evolving and various sects were emerging throughout the Roman world. At the dawn of the fifth century, the
strongest voice of Christian understanding, and the one regarded as orthodox, was that of Augustine of Hippo. His interpretation of doctrine, including the concept of predestination (that
mankind’s fate is controlled by God and that original sin is inherited) was upheld by Pope Innocent, the most powerful pope of the period. As a consequence, any opposing views were seen as
heretical. One such came from the British monk Pelagius, who had studied law in Rome but turned to the Church around the year 386. Pelagius’s strong opinions apparently made ready enemies. He
held the viewpoint that individuals had free will and could have a one-to-one relationship with God, not requiring the channel of a priest. Pelagius and Augustine were vehemently
opposed, and it was Augustine whose doctrine held sway. Pelagius was first condemned by the Pope in 411, again in 416, and threatened with excommunication by Innocent in 417. Pelagius
did not reform and, in 418, solely through the forcefulness of Augustine, was excommunicated. Pelagius died soon afterwards, in 419, but his views lived on, especially in Britain, where they seem
to have found favour with the aristocracy.

So, not only were there pro-Roman and pro-British views of governance, there was also a pro-Catholic/pro-Pelagian divide in Britain. Effectively Britain would have split into two political
factions, whilst various military leaders established themselves to repel invaders and take over control in their own territories. Combine this with external threats from hostile forces and you
have a Britain where, over a period of time, the social structure cracked through the lack of strong central control.

It is that central control which is so fundamental to the Dark Age history of Britain and where the Arthurian legend has its roots. Even though the British had dismissed the Roman
administrators, it does not mean that the system of administration in Britain ceased overnight. The existing officials, except perhaps the dismissed
vicarius
and his retinue, were probably
already British, being part of the original tribal aristocracy.

In the pre-Roman days, at times of civil upheaval, the tribes would have looked to a High King, usually the most powerful of the tribal rulers. In effect, whoever might take on the role of the
vicarius
in Britain would become the equivalent of a High King.

You might wonder what role the usurper emperor Constantine III played in this, and the answer is very little. Constantine had effectively been dismissed along with all the other Roman officials
after 409. Despite his British origins, he had virtually turned his back on Britain by trying to establish himself within the Empire from his base in Gaul, at Arles. The British officials must have
held a dim view of Constantine as they had appealed not to him, but directly to Honorius. Evidently the appeal was from the pro-Roman faction. In 410, soon after the British expelled the Roman
officials, Rome was itself entered and sacked by the Visigoths under Alaric. The Empire was in turmoil. Constantine’s general, Gerontius, an able man who might have been a capable leader in
Britain, deserted him and changed his
allegiance. He killed Constantine’s son Constans, and raised another general, Maximus, as a rival Emperor. Maximus and Gerontius
took control of Spain and parts of Gaul and Constantine found himself isolated. Unable to function, Constantine surrendered and was executed in September 411. Gerontius, unable to capitalise on
events, was betrayed by his troops and forced to kill himself.

With no help from Europe, Britain was left to its own devices. The approach within each of the four provinces was probably different. With no surviving written record we do not know what
happened and can only surmise from a vague knowledge of later history, all too much of which has to be viewed through the haze of myth. It becomes apparent, however, from the archaeological record,
that every effort was made to continue with Roman life as much as normal. The area most affected was the heavily militarized zone in the north, in Britannia Secunda. Never really acquiring the
civilized benefits of the south, it had been occupied and run by the legions and settled by legions’ families, who dominated and controlled the local British. If there was anywhere where the
old native rivalries would surface, it was going to be in the north.

2. Northern Britain

Britannia Secunda contained the tribes of the Carvetii, Parisii and Brigantes, the last of which was the biggest and most rebellious. This was also the area under the control of
the
dux Britanniarum
who would need to stamp his authority, not only in marshalling troops to fight back the Picts, but also to quell any internal rebellions. We do not know the name of the
dux Britanniarum
at this time, but a name that rapidly comes to the fore is Coel, or “Old King Cole.” The real Coel is so wrapped in legend that it is difficult to get at the
truth.

If Coel was not formally appointed as the Northern
dux Britanniarum
– and he might have been by Constantine III before the latter’s departure for Gaul – he almost
certainly filled that role. His official base was at York, but the flimsy evidence that survives, most of it circumstantial, suggests that he operated primarily from Carlisle. It’s quite
possible that Coel took over
control of the old Roman province of Valentia if, as has been surmised, this was based in the north-west around Carlisle. Valentia had already
shown a strong disposition to independence in the late Roman period, and would certainly have sought to reestablish itself as an independent state soon after the end of Roman authority.

Genealogists would establish a pedigree for Coel, identifying descent from the early pre-Roman kings, with a line direct from Caswallon (
see
Table 3.2
). Some genealogies identify his
father as Guotepauc or Godebog, but most authorities now believe that Guotepauc was an epithet. In the old Brythonic tongue it means “protector” or “defender”, a title that
fits the role of
dux
admirably.

We do not know Coel’s tribal affiliations. Regardless of the genealogies, which suggest a descent from the pre-Roman Catuvellauni tribe, his forefathers could have come from any where,
having been posted to help command Hadrian’s Wall. Coel, if not from the local Brigantes, may have been a seventh or eighth generation settler along the Wall. Coel is also associated with
Kyle in Galloway – indeed some believe Kyle’s name comes from Coel, though really it comes from the gaelic word
caol
meaning ‘strait’ – so he may have been from
the Novantae tribe.