Explorations in Arthurian
History
The Importance of Geography
Part 2: Nennius and Arthur's 12
Battles
Sometime in the 9th century (most scholars say c.
830), a monk named Nennius wrote the Historia Brittonum. This
History of the Britons goes back to the very beginning with a short
course on human genealogy, starting with Adam. It soon reaches the
Roman emperors who ruled over Britain, then glides backward again to
recount the "finding" of Britain by Brutus
the Trojan.
In Nennius we are treated to glimpses of
Ambrosius
and Vortigern
and the story of the prophet who saw the two fighting dragons. This
prophet whom Geoffrey
of Monmouth later identified as
Merlin
is in Nennius simply Ambrose, who says a Roman consul was his father.
Also popping up are Vortigern and his son Vortimer, who is said to
have fought four great battles against the Saxons in breaking with
his father, who was bound by honor and by marriage contract (his wife
was Saxon leader Hengist's
daughter) to honor his commitment not to attack the Saxons. In
Nennius it is made clear for the first time that Vortigern is
responsible for bringing the Saxons to the Isle of Thanet
and later Kent
and other places west. Nennius also mentions the visits of
Germanus
and the later genealogies of the Saxon kings.
With discussions of fighting against Saxons
naturally comes a discussion of Arthur. Nennius calls him
"magnanimous" and says he fought as dux bellorum in 12 great
victories over the Saxons. Historians, in trying to pinpoint the
sites of these battles, have taken great pains to apply the
site-names to places of the country in which they want Arthur to have
been located; this has given rise, in part, to the rival claims that
punctuate the Matter of Britain.
For the record, this is what Nennius
said:
|
"Then it was, that the magnanimous
Arthur, with all the kings and military force of Britain,
fought against the Saxons. And though there were many more
noble than himself, yet he was twelve times chosen their
commander, and was as often conqueror. The first battle was
in the mouth of the river which is called Glein. The second
and third and fourth and fifth on another river which is
called Dubglas and is in the region Linnuis. The sixth
battle on the river which is called Bassas. The seventh
battle was in the forest of Celidon, that is Cat Coit
Celidon. The eighth battle was near the fort Guinnion, where
Arthur bore the image of the Holy Virgin, mother of God,
upon his shoulders, and through the power of our Lord Jesus
Christ, and the holy Mary, put the Saxons to flight, and
pursued them whole day with great slaughter. The ninth
battle was fought in the city of the Legion. He fought the
tenth battle on the shore of the river called Tribruit. The
eleventh battle was fought on the hill called Agned. The
twelfth was a most severe contest, when Arthur penetrated to
the hill of Badon. In this engagement, nine hundred and
forty fell by his hand alone, no one but the Lord affording
him assistance. In all these engagements the Britons were
successful."
|
Let us examine each site in
turn:
- The River Glein is thought to be the
River Glen, of which Britain has two today--one in
Lincolnshire and one in Northumberland.
- The Dubglas River and Linnuis are
more problematic. Dubglas can be translated as "black
water," a common name in those days and today. A branch
of the Medway River, the Kent, was called "Le Black" for
hundreds of years and was probably called that in
Arthur's time. Linnuis conceivably provides better clues,
as it is an extension of the Roman Lindum, which
is now Lincoln. If Lindum can be Lincoln, then
Linnius can be Lindsey. Indeed, Geoffrey of
Monmouth identifies Arthur as fighting two battles very
soon after assuming the kingship: one on the River
Douglas and one at Lincoln. The River Bassas is very
problematic for historians, although it is thought by
some to be near Baschurch in Shropshire. The Celidon
Forest is generally believed to be the Caledonian Forest,
in what is now Scotland. Geoffrey of Monmouth, of course,
places this battle in a wood north of Lincoln; but he can
be forgiven for one little slip, no?
- The fort Guinnion is thought to be
either Caer-Gwent in Gwent or Winchester in Hampshire,
the former being an obvious derivation and the latter
being based on the Romano-British equivalent of
Win-Chester: Caer Guinn.
- The City of the Legions is identified
by Geoffrey of Monmouth as Caerleon. However, modern
research tends to focus on Chester, which was identifed
in the Annales Cambriae as Urbs
Legionis.
- Tribruit can be thought of as
Tryfrwyd, a battle mentioned in a tale from the Black
Book of Carmarthen that mentions Arthur as well. This
battle was pegged as being near the Firth of
Forth.
- Agned is identified by Geoffrey of
Monmouth as Edinburgh. Modern historians
agree.
- We come at last to Badon, site of
Arthur's greatest victory over the Saxons and historians'
greatest debate over the true location of that victory.
Interpretations abound: Badbury Rings, Banbury, Little
Solway Hill, Little Solsbury Hill; the list goes on and
on. Geoffrey of Monmouth places the battle near Bath.
Indeed, Badon may be a derivation of Bath-on.
|
|
It should be apparent by now that what is not
known about Arthur, his status, his home, and his sympathies far
outweighs what is known. What is clear is that everyone wants to
claim Arthur as his or her own king. The interpretations of Nennius
tend to filter into two camps: a northern campaign and a southern
campaign.
- The proponents of the northern campaign have
some important evidence on their side but have this important
question to answer: If the battles were against Saxons, who were
in the southern part of the island, then why should the 12 battles
be located in Scotland, where only Angles were marauding and only
then not in brute force? We know that Badon Hill was a
victory over the Saxons. We know that it halted the Saxon advance
for a very long time.
- The proponents of the southern campaign have
geography and history on their side, but several of the battle
sites are still purely speculation as to their exact location.
Yes, Badon was a victory over Saxons and yes, Saxons were
marauding across the southern countryside, but why then do we have
Arthur fighting in the Caledonian Forest and at Edinburgh, which
are far to the north?
The list of partial possibilities is positively
labyrinthine:
- Arthur could very well have fought most of his
battles in the north and then fought the Saxons at Badon in the
south.
- Arthur could very well have fought most of his
battles in the south and also emerged victorious in a few battles
in the north.
- Arthur could have roved around the country,
fighting where he was needed. This would fit the mold of the
dux bellorum, the commander in chief.
- The sources could be fragmented, their
translations confused, etc.
Given that we are examing events that are already
1,500 years old and manuscripts are at least 1,000 years old, we
might tend to embrace the latter.
Having ranged all about the country searching for
Arthur, let us now zero in on some specific sites. These can be taken
in any order or in the order specified:
Click on any of the links above or
here
to begin the
tour
Back to
Explorations in Arthurian History and
Legends
Main
Page
Other
Contact
author
© 2000 DW and DDTMedia
Productions, Ltd.