King Arthur in Cornwall.
by W. Howship (William Howship) d.i.c.kinson.
PREFACE
The following pages present an attempt to bring together what may be accepted with regard to the personality and actual life of King Arthur, while putting aside everything that is obviously or probably fabulous. I have endeavoured to give due weight to the evidence, both positive and negative, rather than to work up to a pre-determined conclusion. With regard to the evidence of a positive kind, if so it may be called, I have given especial weight to the details of topography, more particularly in Cornwall, with the Arthurian localities of which I happen to be more familiar than with those elsewhere.
The fame of Arthur as expressed by the a.s.sociation of his name with places is greater than that of any other personage save one who can claim this sort of connection with our island. On this showing, Julius Caesar and Oliver Cromwell sink into insignificance as compared with the Cornish Chief. Only the Devil is more often mentioned in local a.s.sociation than Arthur. That name, indeed, is almost ubiquitous, since it is to be found wherever local peculiarities exist which were not explicable to our forefathers save by infernal agency. The Devil"s d.y.k.e, The Devil"s Bridge, the Devil"s Jumps, the Devil"s Frying Pan, the Devil"s Post-Office, the Devil"s Punch-Bowl, are a few instances among many. Next to the Devil in bestowing names on localities comes Arthur. But the two names are distributed in a very different fashion: that of the Devil is scattered impartially, being placed at random wherever thought suitable; that of Arthur is limited to certain districts in which according to history or tradition the hero lived or moved. This dissemination and limitation of the name must have some origin, and may be most obviously and reasonably explained by connecting them with an individual to whom it actually belonged. I hold Arthur to have been as real a person as Caesar or Cromwell, though less advantageously circ.u.mstanced for the recording of his deeds. The British Chief lived in the dark interval between two civilisations, between the departure of the Romans from the island and the establishment of the Saxon polity. The west and the north, which were the seats of his exploits, were remote from what had been the centres of Roman learning, and it may be presumed that Arthur"s fighting men were only less illiterate than the Saxons with whom they contended. There may have been priests among them, for Christianity had already reached Ireland and touched the western extremity of England, but the priests, if priests there were, were probably more religious than literate. There was no Xenophon in Arthur"s army, and perhaps no one who could read or write. No ma.n.u.script has come down to us from Arthur"s time and place, though we have reason to believe that among his contemporaries and immediate successors were some who could compose and others who could learn, recite, and remember with advantages the deeds of a leader who made an impression on his countrymen which will probably never be obliterated. What was crystallised in metre was easily remembered and handed down with something approaching to verbal accuracy. The narratives not so expressed gathered exaggeration as they went on, until in the course of time both the facts and the fiction acquired the permanence of writing. Oral tradition is not to be ignored; indeed, a large proportion of ancient history must have had this origin.
Putting aside obvious and inevitable exaggerations, the general outlines of Arthur"s story are consistent with historic probability and with his great fame, which cannot be otherwise explained; while, as will presently be seen, many details are strikingly confirmed by the correspondence of the topography with the traditions.
I have not attempted to construct a biography of Arthur, nor even to arrange in chronological sequence the deeds attributed to him and the circ.u.mstances which, according to tradition, preceded his birth. So far as I have used the order of time, it has had to do with the records to which I have referred rather than with the events of which I have made mention.
I
INTRODUCTORY
_Ex nihilo nihil fit._ For the story of King Arthur there must be some foundation, however the primary facts may have been distorted and exaggerated. Two rules may be safely laid down with regard to tradition: it usually has some truth to rest upon; that truth is not accurately presented to us, but has been altered and probably magnified by verbal transmission. We may believe that Troy was besieged and captured by the Greeks, though we hesitate to accept the many instances of divine intervention which the siege afforded; we may believe that Ulysses met with many adventures at sea, though we may have our doubts concerning the Sirens and Polyphemus. The creative power of man"s mind is small; he is more ready to embellish than to invent. We may give to tradition a credence as to something which has an origin in fact, though it is not always easy or possible to separate that fact from the superstructure by which it has been overlaid. Tradition, first oral and latterly written, pointed to the grave of Agamemnon: a skeleton with a gold mask was found there, after the lapse of 3,000 years, with surroundings which appeared to indicate that it was that of the King of Men. Tradition preserved the memory of a church at Perranzabuloe which was buried in sand and lost to view--some say in the 8th or 9th century--certainly at a remote period of English history. In the year 1835 a great storm shifted the sand and exposed the minute archaic edifice where tradition had placed it, and where it had been hidden for we cannot say how many centuries.
A tradition came down from Druidical to recent times to the effect that near the Cheesewring in Cornwall the Arch-Druid had his seat, and there dispensed wine to hunters out of a gold cup, which, like the widow"s cruse, was inexhaustible. In the year 1837 a gold cup was found in Rillaton Barrow, within a quarter of a mile of the supposed seat of the Druid. This cup was decided by archaeologists to belong to the Bronze Age.[1]
In looking at the legend of King Arthur one is immediately struck with its wide distribution. Originally of Celtic origin, it has taken root in certain localities, and held its place in them notwithstanding that the people among whom it originated have suffered admixture or even been entirely replaced by other races. There are four groups of what are called "Arthurian localities"--localities in which the name "Arthur" is frequently used in connection with places or structures, or in which some name or tradition is retained which connects Arthur with them. Some of the designations referred to are certainly ancient, some of doubtful antiquity, some obviously modern.
The four groups of "Arthurian localities" are:--
1. In North Cornwall, from Boscastle to Wadebridge. This is the most interesting, and the traditions belonging to it are the most explicit, and relate not only to Arthur"s life, but to events which preceded it.
To mention some of the Arthurian names in Cornwall, and the names of places with which Arthur is traditionally connected, we find King Arthur"s Castle, the famous stronghold at Tintagel, where we may believe that he was born; Damelioc, whereby hangs a tale; and Kelly Rounds, which, if I am correct in identifying it with Kelliwic, has also a place in Arthurian lore. Allusive names without circ.u.mstance are numerous in the same district. To mention some, we have King Arthur"s Hall, Hunting Seat, Bed, Quoit, Cups and Saucers, Tomb, and Grave. I may add Pentargon, which Mr.
Baring-Gould interprets as "Arthur"s Head." Many of these designations declare nothing more than the prevalence of the name in a certain district and the readiness of our ancestors to apply it indiscriminately. "Arthur"s Tomb" bears the name of Latinus, but is a.s.signed to Arthur because he was erroneously thought to have been killed in the vicinity, and the inscription is difficult to be read. (See page 33). "Arthur"s Grave" is a barrow also called the "Giant"s Grave," of which the occupant is unknown.
"Arthur"s Quoit" is the top stone of a cromlech which has no probable relation to King Arthur, excepting that it is in Tintagel. "Arthur"s Cups and Saucers" are excavations made by weather in Tintagel Head. These bare names prove nothing beyond the vague retention of a memory in the district to which they relate, but so much they may be held to indicate. The names which are a.s.sociated with traditions are more suggestive and will receive further consideration.
2. In Britanny, probably a mere offshoot from Cornwall--Britanny and Cornwall being closely connected geographically and by ident.i.ty of race.
As there is no reason to suppose that Arthur was ever in Gaul, I do not propose to dwell upon the French localisation of the Arthurian legend, nor have I the necessary local knowledge.
3. In Wales, chiefly in the south, with Caerleon-upon-Usk as a centre, but involving the north to a lesser extent. I may touch briefly upon the Welsh localisations, though it is not my purpose to dwell upon them in detail.
The Welsh legends or traditions are more circ.u.mstantial than those I shall presently refer to as Scottish or c.u.mbrian. Caerleon-upon-Usk was known as the City of Legions, because in the time of the Roman supremacy a legion (the Second Augustan) was stationed there. It was an Archiepiscopal See, and as such was held by Dubricius, who plays a prominent part in Arthurian mythology. According to Nennius, one of Arthur"s battles was fought here. Welsh names, local and personal, abound in Arthurian literature, and the connection of Arthur with South Wales was accepted by both Hume and Gibbon as sufficient to warrant them in regarding him as a prince of the Silures. As will presently be seen, I have not adopted this hypothesis.
4. In Scotland and the North of England, reaching from north of Edinburgh to south of Carlisle, and comprising the Lowlands and c.u.mberland. Cornwall and Wales belong to what Sir William Harcourt once called "the Celtic fringe"; in the Lowlands and c.u.mberland the Celt has been superseded by other races, who have taken, together with his territory, some reminiscence of his traditions. In the north Arthurian names are more widely scattered than anywhere else, though there is an absence of the details which connect the Cornish localities with the personality of Arthur. Mr. Skene in his "Four Ancient Books of Wales,"[2] a work to which I owe much, has discussed with learning the military career of Arthur, and shown that there is reason to believe that many of his battles took place in the north, including that in which he met his end. Mr. Stuart Glennie has followed on the same side, in the endeavour to prove that the north was "the historical birthland of the Arthurian tradition." I venture to think, as will presently be seen, that there is satisfying evidence that Scotland was the scene of the later events of Arthur"s life and probably of his death.
The Arthurian district of the north reaches from Penrith to Strathmore, and has supplied Mr. Skene and Mr. Stuart Glennie with a large number of Arthurian names. Arthur"s Seat occurs three times, Arthur"s Round Table twice; besides which we have Arthurstone, Arthur"s O"on (oven), Arthur"s Chair, Camp, Lee, Fountain, Hill, Tomb. There are also to be found Merlin"s Fountain, Merlin"s Grave, Mordred"s Castle, and Camlan or Camelon. The local a.s.sociation of Mordred and Camlan is of especial interest; for Camlan, wherever it be, is the name given in Arthurian literature to Arthur"s last battle. Whether this is to be placed in Scotland or in Cornwall is a question which will receive further consideration. I have no doubt that this list of Scottish place-names which refer to Arthur might be considerably increased. Ben Arthur is to be found at the head of Loch Long, and Dumbarton Castle was known in the time of David II. as Castrum Arthuri, near which, according to Mr. Skene"s reading, occurred Arthur"s ninth battle. Many of these names may be purely fanciful--applied, we know not how recently, to the places they denote; but at any rate it may be regarded as probable that someone, presumably a Celtic chieftain (for the word "Arthur" is of Celtic origin), left the memory of the name, if of little else, widely scattered over Scotland and the North of England.
In addition to the localisation of Arthurian names it will presently be seen that many, or I may say most, of the battles attributed to Arthur, including that in which he died, have been placed in this district. The conclusion is not to be avoided that at some remote time, imperfectly presented to us by history, one Arthur was a prominent person in the south of Scotland and the north of England, left his name widely scattered in the Lowlands, and fought many battles hereabouts.
II
TRADITIONS AND HISTORY BEARING UPON THE LIFE OF ARTHUR
Apart from the evidence of names, we may inquire what is to be found in the way of history or circ.u.mstantial tradition.
Arthur has been regarded as a somewhat shadowy character; it has even been doubted whether he was not wholly imaginary. Milton[3] thus expresses his uncertainty: "Who Arthur was, and whether any such person reigned in Britain, hath been doubted heretofore, and may again with good reason." It is said that Tennyson, who has partaken of Arthur"s immortality, doubted his existence; and so much has the Arthurian story been overlaid with romance that it is no easy matter to discover the historical facts which are concealed under the superstructure of fiction.
So much has the story of Arthur been magnified and embellished by the romancers of the twelfth and subsequent centuries, so much has it been glorified by impossible details and inflated by obvious anachronisms,[4]
that we cannot wonder that the whole tale was distrusted where there was so much reason for rejecting the greater part. The later Arthurian story presents conditions rather befitting the Black Prince than the British king. To get to the foundations, we must dig below the superstructure, which is mostly of French origin, and examine the records, scanty though they be, which belong to Arthur"s country and as nearly as may be to his time. The ancient literature of Cornwall, if there ever was any, has perished with its language, but there remains much of that of Wales, some going back possibly to the time of Arthur, probably to the century in which he lived. Some of the Triads and some of the songs of the bards are confidently believed to have been handed down from the sixth century, though we possess no ma.n.u.scripts which have an earlier date than the twelfth. Among these survivals are many allusions to Arthur, mentioning him by name and referring to him as a fighting man and a leader, and more than one a.s.sociating him with Cornwall, and with a particular earthwork which, I venture to think, can still be identified. One of these writings is ent.i.tled "Triads of Arthur and His Warriors,"[5] and is thus translated:
Arthur the chief lord at Kelliwic in Cornwall, and Bishop Betwine the chief Bishop, and Caradawe Vreichvras the chief elder.
This is referred to by Dr. Guest[6] as "a poem of the sixth century, whose genuineness no scholar has ever doubted."[7] The Triads do not deal with narrative; their purpose is served when three names are linked together.
The mention of Cornwall in connection with Arthur may be taken to indicate that he was a Cornish rather than a Welsh potentate; while that of Kelliwic, as will presently be shown, is of especial interest as indicating the locality to which he belonged. The "Black Book of Caermarthen" contains a poem of somewhat uncertain date and authorship, in which the same place is referred to in connection with Arthur:
he killed every third person When Celli was lost.
Celli is evidently the place elsewhere referred to as Celliwig, another form of the name Kelliwic. The same "Black Book" gives a poem relating to Geraint, who was killed in the course of it. Arthur was there, and attracted the notice and commendation of the author:--
In Llongborth I saw Arthur, And brave men who hewed with steel, Emperor and conductor of the toil.
I presume that Llongborth is a place elsewhere spoken of as Longporth, and believed to be Portsmouth; and the battle referred to, one between Arthur and Cerdric.
The same ma.n.u.script gives a poem ent.i.tled "The Verses of the Graves." Many graves are mentioned which are not to the present purpose; that of Arthur is referred to as unknown in the following line:--
A mystery to the world the grave of Arthur.
Taliessin was a Welsh bard who, among others, is a.s.signed to the sixth century. He refers to Arthur frequently as the Guledig--a term, according to Skene, equivalent to Ruler or Imperator. That Arthur was not Imperator of all Britain will presently appear; that he held some position of supremacy in the west may well be believed. Taliessin refers to Arthur frequently, once as "Arthur the blessed":--
on the face of battle, Upon him a restless activity.
The same poet describes with much repet.i.tion a certain expedition, of which one stanza may serve as a sufficient sample:--
And when we went with Arthur, a splendid labour, Except seven none returned from Caer Vedwyd.
The same poet alludes to "the steed of Arthur" in a poem which enumerates memorable horses. In the "Book of Aneurin," a Welsh poet who belonged, as it is thought, to the sixth century, Arthur is made use of as a standard of comparison. A certain warrior is thus referred to:--
He was an Arthur In the midst of the exhausting conflict.[8]
Further quotations from similar sources might be brought together, but enough have been adduced to show that the name of Arthur was so widely celebrated by the Welsh bards, and was so connected by them with place and circ.u.mstance, that it is not possible to doubt that the traditions had reference to a real person. Whether any of the bardic effusions which have come down to us are correctly a.s.signed to the sixth century, as Welsh scholars believe, I am not competent to decide. Many of them are obviously of later date; but if we may accept what is generally believed, we must attribute some of these poetic remnants to a time when Arthur was a recent memory, and give credence to them as at least founded on fact. By the bards Arthur was represented as a military chief paramount in the country to which their knowledge extended; as a soldier of exceptional activity, and one who attracted the admiration of those who fought under him; as concerned in a variety of fights in a variety of places, most of which are not now to be exactly identified, but one of which was Kelliwic, a place of strength which will receive further notice; and as resembling another great leader in the invincible obscurity which shrouded his place of rest.
"In the lost battle borne down by the flying," his sepulchre may have been the maws of kites.