A Tale of Two Cities

“According to the old British chronicles, King Lud, the sixty-eighth ruler after Brutus, fortified London in about 70 BC and gave it its present name, a corruption of Lud-Dun, Lud's fortress. His name is also remembered in Ludgate Circus and Ludgate Hill, the site of St. Paul's Cathedral. The old Lud Gate itself, the western entrance through the city walls, displayed heroic statues of  king Lud and his two sons. When the gate was taken down in 1760, the statues were preserved and are now to be seen in the Church of St Dunstan in Fleet Street” [1]

Archaeology has failed to reveal a British settlement pre-existing Roman London. Judging by the number of votive deposits found in the Thames and it tributary waters the area must have been a liminal zone sparsely populated by the native population. Debate continues as to why the Romans founded Londinium where they did.

Many archaeologists favour the origin of the town as a settlement of merchants and officials planted on the north bank of the Thames some years after the Roman conquest, emerging as a major commercial centre during the 1st century AD. The Roman City of London developed on two previously unoccupied hills; Cornhill and Ludgate Hill, the site of St Paul's Cathedral. Between the two flowed the sacred waters of the Walbrook.

In 2006 archaeologists from the Museum of London discovered a series of ditches, the western boundary of a double-ditch enclosure on the east bank of the Walbrook, which has been interpreted as evidence of the first, short-lived London fort; the latest wisdom being that London appears to have first emerged as a frontier port, where Claudius amassed his army in 43 AD before the advance on Colchester some 60 miles to the north-east.

The earliest Arthurian associations with the City of London are found to be limited to the Mabinogi tale Brânwen Daughter of Llyr and the ancient Celtic cult of the Living Head. Now we turn to two influential medieval insular writers and their storytelling of Arthurian London who place their tales in two distinct parts of the capital; a tale of two cities.

Sir Thomas Malory on occasion has Arthur located near Westminster in London but, like Geoffrey of Monmouth some three hundred and thirty years before him, fails to make the city the centre of Arthur's rule. Malory has his Camelot based at Winchester but the most famous Arthurian event in London is the drawing of the sword from the stone.

Geoffrey of Monmouth consumes most of his writing on London with the earlier Brutus dynasty who he claims established a pre-Roman settlement on the banks of the Thames. It is apparent that Geoffrey has in mind the early Roman settlement as he has the city walls subsequently refortified by King Lud. Later, he has the Britons loosing London to the Saxons before recapturing it. Geoffrey has Arthur hold the first council of his reign in London but fails to mention any further visits to the city by the King.

Book the First: The New Troy
In his 12th century 'pseudohistorical'  work Historia Regum Britanniae (History of the Kings of Britain) Geoffrey, following the outline story contained in the Historia Brittonum, narrates the history of the British Kings up to Cadwaladr (ap Cadwallon), the last of the line that began with Brutus of Troy.

Geoffrey names London as one of the three noblest cities along with York and the City of the Legions (Caerleon-on-Usk), calling these the seats of the three Archflamens. By this term Geofffrey probably meant pagan Arch-Druids who, after “being delivered from idolatry, where made Archbishops”. [Book IV, Chap. 19] [2] Geoffrey has Vortigern take Constans to London to be made King. Following the slaughter of the British princes at the temple of Ambrius (Stonehenge) on the kalends of May, Vortigern grants all of the Saxon's demands. They take London, before advancing on York, Lincoln and Winchester. Vortigern retired to Cambria (Wales) and consulted his wise men.

Geoffrey is clearly influenced here by the story contained within the anonymous 9th century Historia Brittonum. [3] Vortigern is advised by his twelve wise men to retire to the remote boundaries of his kingdom and build a citadel; but three times the building collapsed. To make the fortress stand up Vortigern was advised to: “find a child born without a father, put him to death, and sprinkle with his blood the ground on which the citadel is to be build”. The boy Ambrose is brought to Vortigern who explains that the fortress will not stand because it is sighted above a subterranean pool containing two dragons, one red, the other white. This first account of the boy Ambrose (also known as Emrys) is without doubt a contributory inspiration in Geoffrey's later creation of Merlin and his apparent obsession with the art of prophecy.

Vortigern and Merlin by Alan Lee

The burial of the dragon's is accounted for in the later tale of Lludd and Llefelys as the second plague of King Lludd's reign: a shriek which came on every May-eve over every hearth in the Island of Britain. His brother Llefelys said the second plague was due to a dragon in Lludd’s kingdom and another dragon of a foreign race is fighting with it. To overcome this plague he would need to bury them in the strongest part of the island, which was in Snowdonia (Eryri: 'the abode of eagles'), at a place then called Dinas Ffaraon, after that the spot was called Dinas Emrys, and from then on the May-eve shriek ceased. The tale clearly has similarities with the stories of Brân and Vortimer and the failure to honour the talisman is once again blamed as the reason for the Saxon invasion of Britain, as we have seen in Arthurian London. 

However, the tale of 'Lludd and Llefelys' was omitted by Geoffrey from his original Latin chronicle but is included in several Middle Welsh versions of his work known as Brut y Brenhinedd (Chronicle of the Kings), collectively known as the Brut, (a chronicle commencing with Brutus) in which the redactor would make minor corrections to errors possibly occurring in translation or additions appertaining to local tradition. The presence or absence of the tale of 'Lludd and Llefelys' has been used to classify the early versions of the Brut, with the tale being included for the first time in the mid-13th century manuscript Peniarth MS 44.[4]

However, the tradition of Brutus as founder of Britain is older than Geoffrey's History of the Kings of Britain and appears for the first time in the 9th century Historia Brittonum, clearly one of Geoffrey's main sources. Yet despite figuring so prominently in the Historia Brittonum, Brutus failed to make a major impact on Welsh tradition and according to material pre-dating Geoffrey, after conquest the Island of Britain was named after Prydein son of Aedd Mawr. [5] Yet we find that no genuine tradition of Prydein has survived and he is more elusive than Brutus.

In describing the origins of the Britons, the Historia Brittonum states that the island of Britain derives its name from Brutus, “a Roman consul who conquered Spain, and reduced that country to a Roman province. He afterwards subdued the island of Britain, whose inhabitants were the descendants of the Romans, from Silvius Posthumus.” After the Trojan war Aeneas arrived with his son in Italy and obtained the kingdom of the Romans. Aeneas was the father of Ascanius and Silvius, the latter was called 'Posthumus' because he was born after the death of his father. [6]

Aeneas, having been informed that his daughter-in-law was pregnant by Ascanius ordered his son to send his magician to examine her and find out whether the child were male or female, but in so doing the wizard also foretold of a tragedy. The grandson of Aeneas was named Brutus who, in fulfilling the wizard's prophecy, killed his father Ascanius. He was driven from Italy and after some time in Gaul “came to this island which is named Britannia from his name.” The Historia Brittonum provides a second account of Brutus: “after the deluge, the three sons of Noah went to three different parts of the earth: Asia, Africa, and  Europe. The European was Alanus, with his three sons, Hisicion, Armenon, and Neugio. Hisicion had four sons: Froncus, Romanus, Alamanus, and Brutus from which the Britons were so named.”  [7]

In his History of the Kings of Britain, Geoffrey, as was his way, elaborates on the story, but ignored the second account of Brutus from the Historia Brittonum. He has Brutus as Aeneas's great-grandson, whereas the anonymous author of the Historia Brittonum has him as either the grandson then later his great-great-grandson. Aeneas, an important figure in Greek and Roman legend, is a character from Homer's Iliad. Aeneas's journey from Troy and the founding of a enclave south of Rome, is recounted in Virgil's Aeneid. He is one of the few Trojans not to have been killed or enslaved during the fall of Troy. Geoffrey, clearly influenced by the description of the Trojan diaspora in the Aenid, extends this to northern Europe and incorrectly claims Homer as a source for Brutus' foundation of the city of Tours.

Geoffrey has Brutus depart from Greece and arrives to an uninhabited island called Leogecia. At a desolate city on the island they come across a temple of Diana. Brutus consults a statue of the goddess and then falls asleep in front of the altar. During his sleep the goddess comes to him and foretells that he should go to an island in the western sea which was once possessed by giants, and there raise a second Troy.

After a detour through Gaul and meeting up with a second group of Tojans led by Corineus, Brutus arrives on the coast of the promised land at Totnes. The island was called Albion and inhabited by none but a few giants as the oracle had foretold. After driving the giants into the mountains Brutus then named the island 'Britannia' after himself. He came to the river Thames and then built his city, the New Troy: Trinovantum. Corineus and his followers go on to found Cornwall. Brutus's sons Locrinus, Kamber and Albanactus provide names for England (Loegria), Wales (Kambria) and Scotland (Albania), respectively. Brutus's three sons appear to be entirely Geoffrey's creation as they are found in no other source pre-dating his work. [8] 

And, so Geoffrey's story goes, that at the time of the Roman invasion of Britain, Lud became King and rebuilt the city that King Brutus the Trojan had founded and had named as the New Troy (Troia Nova), which according to Geoffrey was the original name of Trinovantum, no doubt influenced by the name of the home of the Trinovantes, one of the Iron Age tribes of pre-Roman Britain, whose homeland was on the north side of the mouth of the Thames, south of the lands of the Iceni. The Trinovantes were considered the most powerful tribe in Britain shortly before Julius Caesar's expeditions into Britain in 55 and 54 BC. Their name is thought to mean "very new"  in the sense of "newcomers" and has nothing to do with ancient Troy.

London Wall, Cooper's Row

According to Geoffrey the city was later refortified and renamed by King Lud as 'Kaerlud' the stronghold or city of Lud, an act that caused a quarrel between Lud and his brother Nennius who wanted to maintain the name of Troy. Geoffrey goes on to say that Gildas deals with this quarrel at length, but of this occasion Gildas remains silent. [9] Geoffrey tells us that the name later became corrupted to 'Caerlundein', which the Romans apparently took up as Londinium, and thus became modern day London. Geoffrey's account of London is typical of his style throughout his work; a combination of a tantalising fragment of tradition greatly elaborated into an obviously self constructed story complete with a multitude of errors, sending many a historian on a wild goose chase.

Lud’s name persists in present day Ludgate Circus and Ludgate Hill, on which St. Paul's Cathedral now stands, Ludgate being a major gateway into the old City of London. Crumbling statues of King Lud and his two sons, Androgeus and Tenvantius, which formerly stood at the gate, now stand in the porch of the church of St Dunstan-in-the-West on Fleet Street in London. At one time there was even a public house at Ludgate Circus called the "King Lud".

Yet the etymology of the name of England's capital city remains a mystery and probably derives from something similar to the original name of modern day Lyon in France: Lugdunum, named after the ancient pan-Celtic deity Lugus, of which  Lud(d) is a Welsh variant.

Legend claims that King Lud was buried in an entrance to the city that still bears his name, Ludgate, his father Beli Mawr supposedly buried at Billingsgate and the legendary burial place of King Brutus is Bryn Gwyn, the White Mount, at the site of the Tower of London. It is here, according to the Mabinogion, that they buried the head of Brân after the ill-fated journey to Ireland in which none save seven returned.


Copyright © 2012 Edward Watson
http://clasmerdin.blogspot.co.uk/


Next: Book the Second: The 'Knyght Presoner' 

*

Notes & References
1. John Michell, The Traveller's Guide to Sacred England, Gothic Image, 1996.
2. Geoffrey of Monmouth, Historia Regum Britanniae ("History of the Kings of Britain"), c.1136.
3. Later editions of the Historia Brittonum are often ascribed to a 'Nennius', however, the earliest version dated to c.829/830 AD remains anonymous.
4.  Rachel Bromwich, Trioedd Ynys Prydein: The Triads of the Island of Britain. University Of Wales Press, 2006.
5. Bromwich, Ibid. The Names of the Isle of Britain (Enweu ynys Prydein) - “The first name that this island bore, before it was taken or settled: Myrddin's Precinct. And after it was taken and settled, the island of Honey. And after it was conquered by Prydein son of Aedd Mawr, it was called the Isle of Prydein (Britain).”
6.  John Morris, ed. and trans., History of the British (Historia Brittonum), in Nennius: British History and the Welsh Annals, Phillimore, 1980.
7. Morris, Ibid.
8. Karen Jankulak, Geoffrey of Monmouth, University of Wales Press, 2010.
9. Jankulak, Ibid.

* * * 

Excavation Records reveal Saxon glass-making at Glastonbury Abbey

New research led by the University of Reading has revealed that finds at Glastonbury Abbey provide the earliest archaeological evidence of glass-making in Britain.

Excavations at Glastonbury Abbey began in 1907 following the purchase of the site by the Church of England. Since then, 34 seasons of excavations up to 1979 exposed most of the plan of the medieval church and evidence of earlier phases of the monastery, yet to date very little of this evidence has been published.

Ralegh Radford, the Director of excavations 1951 from to 1964, published an interim report in 1981 which suggested a series of churches, a Saxon enclosure ditch, potentially the earliest cloister in Britain, and craft-working activities including unique glass furnaces.

Attempts at full publication were not possible until after Radford's death in 1999 when his excavation archive was placed in the care of the National Monuments Record at Swindon, making the publication of a full report possible for the first time. Consequently, the Glastonbury Abbey Excavation Archive Project was launched to study the records of the archaeological excavations now available in an attempt to unravel some of the mystery of the Abbey.

The project is a collaboration between the Abbey and the Archaeology Department at the University of Reading, funded by the Arts and Humanities Research Council. The research is being led by Professor Roberta Gilchrist and Dr Cheryl Allum from the University of Reading working closely with Janet Bell and John Allan, the Curator, and Consultant Archaeologist of Glastonbury Abbey, respectively.

The archive shows that during the 1955-57 excavations at Glastonbury Abbey glass residues and fragments of clay crucibles were recovered which was interpreted as three, or perhaps four, 9th-10th century glass furnaces that were destroyed during the pre-Conquest construction of the Abbey cloister. Some doubts remain as to whether the entire glass working site was excavated.

On re-examination of the excavation records Professor Gilchrist has determined that the finds at Glastonbury Abbey provide the earliest archaeological evidence of glass-making in Britain. Radiocarbon dating has revealed that the furnaces date approximately to the late 7th century and are likely to be associated with a major rebuilding program at the Abbey under the direction of King Ine of Wessex around 680 AD. Historical documents record glass-making at York and Wearmouth in the 670s but Glastonbury provides the earliest and most substantial archaeological evidence for glass-making in Saxon Britain.

This new research has identified the remains of five furnaces together with fragments of clay crucibles and glass for window glazing and drinking vessels, mainly of vivid blue-green colour. The glass is yet to be analysed chemically to provide further information on the sourcing and processing of materials but it is thought likely that specialist glassworkers were brought in from across the channel in France to work at Glastonbury.

Professor Gilchrist, who  is to publish the full archive of excavations, said: "Glastonbury Abbey is a site of international historical importance but until now the excavations have remained unpublished. The research project reveals new evidence for the early date of the monastery at Glastonbury and charts its development over one thousand years, from the 6th century to its dissolution in the 16th century."

The story of the Abbey's pioneering role in medieval crafts and technology is currently being shown in an exhibition at Glastonbury Abbey Museum, ‘From Fire & Earth' until 16 September 2012.



Source: Glastonbury Abbey excavations reveal Saxon Glass Industry - University of Reading Press Release 08 May 2012

* * *

Arthurian London

A Sacred Landscape
London is rarely mentioned in connection with the Post-Roman warlord Arthur which is at odds with Londinium being a major city of Roman Britain; we could justifiably expect to find, arguably, one of the most important literary figures of the period to have significant associations with the capital city. Yet classic Arthurian medieval literature, from Geoffrey of Monmouth to Thomas Malory, makes no claim on the capital city being Arthur's base. Furthermore, archaeological evidence for a Post-Roman presence in London is surprisingly slight, indeed most historians believe Londinium appears to have emerged from scratch with a complete absence of evidence for Geoffrey’s New Troy and Caer Ludein, the city of Lud.

It is suspected that Londinium went into rapid decline by the end of the 5th century and was practically abandoned following the Roman withdrawal of Britain in 410 AD. Even traces of Saxon London remained elusive to archaeologists for a number of years until excavations carried out by the Museum of London Archaeological Service (MOLAS) a mile or so to the west of the Roman town contained roughly within the square mile of the City walls found evidence of the early Saxon town underlying what is today the West End and the Aldwych, a name which itself may refer to the 'old town'. On the site of the extension to the Royal Opera House they unearthed evidence of ‘Lundenwic’ including a metre thick solid gravel road running through the site, which is thought to be the 'King's Highway'. In 2008 an Anglo-Saxon cemetery was discovered at Covent Garden indicating that Germanic migrants had begun to settle in the area at least as early as the 6th century and possibly in the 5th.

The Battersea Shied found  in
the Thames at Battersea Bridge

Although there is scant evidence of major settlement before Londinium, a prehistoric presence is attested by the large numbers of Bronze and Iron Age weaponry found in the river and along the banks of the Thames making it tempting to suggest, as some have, that this was once an important boundary with the weapons evidence of tribal warfare. An important boundary yes definitely, but a warfare frontier seems highly unlikely as most of these weapons, and other deposits, had never been used before being thrown to the watery depths. Some had been deliberately bent or broken, and would appear to be evidence of ritual deposits to Otherworld gods. A similar concept is found with the deposit of Neolithic stone axes; brittle and highly polished, they can never have been intended to be used as cutting implements. Indeed, many would have been completely useless as tools and would have shattered on impact, yet must have taken many, many hours to manufacture and were exchanged far and wide, and finally frequently deposited in rivers and marshes. The majority of the raw material removed from ancient mines and quarries has never been accounted for; suggestive that most weapons and tools must have been deposited in wetlands and remains to be found. The very retrieval of the raw material and then manufacture was such an arduous, painstaking task, with the craftsmen in ancient times toiling many hours mining, polishing or metalworking knowing that the finished product would simply be tossed into the water; the whole process, from the onset, must have carried religious significance. Were these items dropped into the water by family members for their ancestors to use in the Otherworld; a realm that is always the other-side of a water boundary? These deposits suggest the Londinium area around the ancient Thames (Tamesis) must have been regarded as a sacred river in prehistoric times, much like the Ganges remains today.

Bronze Age Barrows have been identified at Greenwich and recent evidence has shown that the south bank of the Thames, at Southwark, was used as a religious area for some 3,000 years following the discovery of the site of a Bronze Age barrow. A Roman well was found in Southwark cathedral with a cult figure, a hunter god possibly Cunomaglos, the Lord of the hounds, at the bottom of the shaft, and a few hundred yards from the cathedral an extensive Romano-Celtic temple complex has been discovered. We must consider the possibility that in prehistoric times the area around London was a ritual landscape and purposefully kept 'clean'.

The Living Head
The archaeological record of London indicates a break in activity between the departure of the Romans and the arrival of the Saxons. Evidence of Post-Roman Britons in London may yet be unearthed but is currently faint at best, yet an old Celtic custom being carried out in the city is recited in the Mabinogion. The collection of tales from medieval Welsh manuscripts known as the Mabinogion was thought to have been written down during the 13th century and later, but the tales are clearly much older than the existing manuscripts and display strong characteristics of pre-Christian Celtic religious iconography. The Four Branches depict the classic hallmarks of a primitive supernatural belief system, notably, with the tale of Brânwen uerch Llyr (Brânwen daughter of Llyr), containing the story of the ‘Living Head’ portraying the Celtic obsession with the head as a cult object.

In Brânwen uerch Llyr, the second Branch of the Mabinogi, Bendigedfran (Brân the Blessed) travels to Ireland to rescue his sister Brânwen, who is being abused by her husband the king. During the horrific battle for his sister Brân is fatally wounded, pierced in the foot. Realising he is dying he demands his companions cut his head off and take it with them back to Prydein (Britain). This battle is said to have killed all of Ireland except for five pregnant women and all of the army of the Island of the Mighty except for seven survivors who Brân's talking head guides to the other side, feasting on magical isles for fourscore and seven years yet never growing older.

Brân tells the seven survivors, Pryderi, Manawyddan, Gluneu Eil Taran, Taliesin, Ynawc, Grudyen the son of Muryel, and Heilyn the son of Gwynn Hen, to take his head to the White Mount, in London, and bury it there, with the face towards France:

The Head of Bran - Alan Lee

“And then Bendigeidfran ordered the severing of his head. 

'Take the head' said he 'and bring it to the White Hill in London, and bury it with its face towards France. And you will be on the road a long time. In Harlech you will be seven years in feasting, the birds of Rhiannon singing to you. The head will be as good company to you as it was at its best when it was ever on me. And you will be at Gwales in Penfro for eighty years. Until you open the door facing Aber Henvelen on the side facing Cornwall, you will be able to abide there, along with the head with you uncorrupted. But when you open that door, you will not be able to remain there. You will make for London and bury the head. Cross over to the other side.'”

“........They journeyed forth with the head towards London. And they buried the head in the White Mount, and when it was buried, this was the third goodly concealment; and it was the third ill-fated disclosure when it was disinterred, inasmuch as no invasion from across the sea came to this island while the head was in that concealment.” [1]

The head of Brân is clearly a talisman, believed to possess supernatural powers of protection and even after its burial the head was still thought to retain its power in defending the Island of the Mighty. The Third Branch, The Mabinogi of Manawydan, opens with a continuation of the scene at the White Mount:

“After the seven men we spoke of above had finished burying the head of Bendigeidfran in the White Hill in London, facing France, Manawydan gazed at the township of London, and at his companions, and gave a heavy sigh, and felt great grief and longing in [his heart].” 

And thereafter the White Mount in London is not mentioned again in the Four Branches.

Celtic scholar Anne Ross suggests the form of the legend of the Talking Head as we have it in the Mabinogi has its roots clearly in the ancient Celtic past:

"This legend, appearing in a medieval Welsh tale, is unique in containing verbal verification of all that is implicit in the material representations of the human head. Bran is clearly a god in origin, and the story of the decapitation is probably a later rationalisation of an original cult legend about a wonderful supernatural head. In this head are combined all the powers with which the human head was accredited by the Celts. It is apotropaic (it averts danger of invasion); it is prophetic (it reveals future events); it is divine (it presides over the Otherworld feast at which the wonderful birds of Riannon, the Great Queen, British equivalent of the Gaulish horse goddess Epona, sing ceaselessly). The name Beridigeitfran, Blessed Raven, carries, a Christian connotation. It is probable that originally the element Pen was present, the original name being Bran the . . . Head." [2] 

The Triads of the Island of Britain (Trioedd Ynys Prydein) later refer to King Arthur removing the head because he thought himself able to defend the island alone, with no need for help from such things. The episode is recalled in the Three Fortunate Concealments of the Island of Britain:

The Head of Brân the Blessed, son of Llyr, which was concealed in the White Hill in London, with its face towards France. And as long as it was in the position in which it was put there, no Saxon Oppression would ever come to this Island; The second Fortunate Concealment: the Dragons in Dinas Emrys, which Lludd son of Beli concealed; And the third: the Bones of Gwerthefyr the Blessed, in the Chief Ports of this Island. And as long as they remained in that concealment, no Saxon Oppression would ever come to this Island.

And they were the Three Unfortunate Disclosures when these were disclosed. And Gwrtheyrn the Thin disclosed the bones of Gwerthefyr the Blessed for the love of a woman: that was Ronnwen the pagan woman; And it was he who disclosed the Dragons; And Arthur disclosed the Head of Brân the Blessed from the White Hill, because it did not seem right to him that this Island should be defended by the strength of anyone, but by his own. [3]

The 9th century Historia Brittonum claims Vortimer fought four battles against the Saxons: “.......But Vortimer soon after died. Before he died he told his followers to set his tomb by the coast, in the port from which (the English) had departed, saying 'I entrust it to you. Wherever else they may hold a British port or may have settled, they will never again live in this land'. But they ignored his command and did not bury him where he had told them: for he is buried in Lincoln” [4]

This earlier account is at odds with the Triad in stating that his tomb was in one port from which the Saxon's departed, almost certainly in the south east, but one thing all accounts agree on is that the failure to honour the talisman led to the arrival of the Saxons.

The Blessed Raven
The name 'Bendigedfran ap Llyr' means 'Blessed Raven, son of the Sea' in Welsh: 'fran' from 'brân' = 'raven', and the element 'bendiged' = 'blessed' is ultimately derived from the Latin 'benedictus' and not the usual Welsh term for 'holy, otherworldy' = 'gwyn', possibly because the name Brânwen had already been taken by his sister. The term 'bendiged' is usually only found attached to medieval Welsh figures, like Cadwallader Bendiged or Vortimer Bendigeit (Gwerthefyr the Blessed) the son of Vortigern (Gwrtheyrn the Thin), as cited in the Triad above, who's bones were interred at the chief ports of the Island again to act as a talisman against invaders. [5]

It is claimed that Cadwallader founded the church standing on the north side of Ludgate Hill in 677 AD. However, the church of St Martin's at Ludgate Hill is first mentioned c.1138. The present church, rebuilt after its destruction by the Great Fire, is of 1677-86 and has always been attributed to Wren. This church is the legendary burial place of Cadwallader and King Lud.

We find further parallels in early Irish sources where the heroes are buried with their face toward the enemy. In addition to the accounts of Bendigedfran ap Llyr and Vortimer Bendigeit we find a local tradition of talismanic burial in North Wales extant in the 19th century. In this story Arthur falls dead under a hail of arrows whilst pursuing an unnamed enemy from Dinas Emrys, the place where Vortigern's dragons were concealed. The site of Arthur's fall is commemorated in the 'Pass of the Arrows' (Bwlch y Saethau) near the summit (Yr Wydffa) of Snowdon. Arthur is said to be buried here under a cairn of stones known as 'Carnedd Arthur', “so that no enemy might march that way so long as Arthur's dust rested there”. On the other side of the ridge is a valley called Cwm-y-Llan (Camlann?).  Arthur's knights that survived the battle are said to be sleeping in Ogof Llanciau Eryri (the Cave of the Young Men of Snowdon), below the cliff on the left-hand side near the top of Llyn Llydaw. [6] This is further evidence of belief in the potency of talismanic burial.

The White Mount - from the Mabinogion, Jones & Jones

Consequently we have Brân, the raven, at the White Hill, which is now known as Tower Hill, the site of the Tower of London, renown as a site for beheading. Today, perhaps we find a continuation in the talsimanic value of Brân's head at Tower Hill  with the popular belief that if ravens leave the Tower of London the monarchy and the tower itself will fall. The story goes that Charles II of England heard this prophecy in the 17th century and ordered the wings of six (sometimes seven) ravens in the Tower be trimmed, thus preventing their flight from the White Hill. Today the ravens of the Tower are cared for by the Yeoman Warders. But this is thought to be largely an invented tradition. The official Tower of London historian Geoff Parnell scrutinised over a thousand years of records and can could find no trace of the raven legend further back than the late 19th century. [7]

Yet, the link with the head at White Hill, the raven and the head of Brân must be more than coincidental and has persisted over a remarkable length of time.

Continued:
A Tale of Two Cities
Book the First: The New Troy
Book the Second: The Knyght Presoner
Book the Third: London Stone


Copyright © 2012 Edward Watson
http://clasmerdin.blogspot.co.uk/

*

Notes & References
1. Will Parker, Second Brânch: Brânwen Daughter of Llyr, from The Four Brânches of the Mabinogi, Bardic Press: 2005.
2. Anne Ross, The Human Head in Insular Pagan Celtic Religion, Proceedings of the Society, 1957-58.
3. Rachel Bromwich, 37 R. Three Fortunate Concealments of the Island of Britain in Trioedd Ynys Prydein: The Triads of the Island of Britain, Wales University Press, Third Edition, 2006.
4.  John Morris, ed. and trans. History of the British (Historia Brittonum) by in Nennius: British History and the Welsh Annals, Phillimore, 1980.
5.  Mary Jones, Celtic Encyclopedia, Bendigedfran ap Llyr
6.  John Rhys, Celtic Folklore, Welsh and Manx, Vol 1, 1901.
7. Tower's raven mythology may be a Victorian flight of fantasy – The Guardian, 15 November 2004

* * *

St Brice's Day Massacre or Viking Execution?

The grisly remains of nearly forty Scandinavian bodies discovered at St John’s College, Oxford, initially thought to be evidence of the the well documented St Brice's Day Massacre, may be a band of tenth century Viking raiders.

The King of England Æthelred the Unready, c.968 – 1016 AD, had paid tribute, or Danegeld, effectively a tax to the Danish King, from 991 in order to prevent the land from being ravaged by Viking raiders. On 13th November 1002, Æthelred ordered the massacre of all Danish settlers in England. The St Brice's Day Massacre ultimately led to King Sweyn Forkbeard's invasion of England in 1003 following the death of his sister Gunhilde in the storm.

Justifying the massacre Æthelred displayed a complete lack of remorse in exploiting popular ethnic hatred, recording the events in Oxford himself in a Royal charter to St Frideswide’s church two years later:

“For it is fully agreed that to all dwelling in this country it will be well known that, since a decree was sent out by me with the counsel of my leading men and magnates, to the effect that all the Danes who had sprung up in this island, sprouting like cockle amongst the wheat, were to be destroyed by a most just extermination, and thus this decree was to be put into effect even as far as death, those Danes who dwelt [in Oxford],in the afore-mentioned town, striving to escape death, entered this sanctuary of Christ [St Frideswide’s], having broken by force the doors and bolts, and resolved to make refuge and defence for themselves therein against the people of the town and the suburbs; but when all the people in pursuit strove, forced by necessity, to drive them out, and could not, they set fire to the planks and burnt, as it seems, this church with its ornaments and its books. Afterwards, with God's aid, it was renewed by me."

‘The Massacre of the Danes’.

Engraving after a drawing by Samuel Wale

Historians generally regard the massacre as a reaction of people who had been continually slaughtered and pillaged for a decade, yet not directed at the inhabitants of the Danelaw but at mercenaries who had turned on their employers, arguing the massacre could not have been carried out in the Danelaw with any success where the Danes would have been too strong and was probably confined to frontier towns such as Oxford, and larger towns with small Danish communities.

This view seems to be upheld by the findings of the excavation during 2008 at St John's College, Oxford. Prior to commencing construction work of new student accommodation at the Oxford University college archaeologists were summoned to investigate the site in January 2008. Following  just a few hours of digging the archaeologists discovered the remains of a Late Neolithic earthwork enclosure, or henge, close to the north-south road.

The previously unknown henge monument, constructed c.2300 BC, highlights the fact that the Neolithic monument was still a feature in the landscape during these turbulent times. The ditch excavated here is up to 8m across and at least 2.5m deep and based on the small part of the plan exposed would have enclosed an area of at least 150m diameter, encompassing all of what is now Keble College and the Pitt Rivers Museum, qualifying the earthwork as one of the largest of Britain’s prehistoric henges.

The skeletons of between 34 and 38 young men, aged 16 to 25, were found disrespectfully dumped in the henge ditch. They were more robust and taller than average, some bearing older scars indicative that they were professional warriors and all initially thought to be Danes killed during the St Brice's Day Massacre. The severity of the wounds suggests the young Viking men were brutally slaughtered, the skeletons showing evidence that each individual was stabbed many times shortly before death.

There is also evidence of charring on some of the skeletons, showing they may have been exposed to burning before burial and thrown into the makeshift grave of the henge ditch. The evidence of knife wounds and the burning of the bodies is consistent with the documented account of the St Brice's Day Massacre at St Frideswide’s Church, rather than having died in combat.

Following further study of the skeletons Oxford University academics have suggested that the victims may have been Viking raiders who were captured and then executed rather than settlers of the Danelaw. Chemical analysis of the teeth suggests they could have been a group of professional warriors, rather than a group of residents of Danish origin who were later rounded up and executed. They also had a substantial amount of seafood in their diet which was higher in marine protein than that found in the typical local Oxfordshire population. Radiocarbon analysis fits the date of 1002 AD.

The study team compared data to previous research in which isotopic analysis of 51 decapitated skeletons found in a burial pit at the Weymouth Ridgeway in Dorset had identified the victims as Viking raiders from Scandinavia, dated between 970 and 1025 AD. The isotopic analysis of the Dorset group compared favourably with the individuals found in the mass burial site at St John’s College, Oxford, suggesting similar origins for the groups of raiders and indicates that the Saxons were capable of being quite ruthless when dealing with Viking raiders.



Source
A Viking Mystery - David Keys, Smithsonian magazine, October 2010

* * *

Arthur's Stone

The last resting place of King Arthur? 

Arthur's Stone is one of the most notable of all Neolithic burial monuments in western Britain. Located at Grid Ref: SO319431, between the villages of Dorstone and Bredwardine, west Herefordshire, England. This dolmen is associated with the legend of the last resting place of King Arthur and set within a picturesque area of gently rolling countryside lying in the lee of the Black Mountains of Wales, with stunning views to the north-east over the Wye valley.

To find the tomb leave Dorstone by the B4348 heading towards Peterchurch. As the road crosses the river, turn off left at a sharp right-angled bend and head uphill past Dorstone Hill Wood. Some distance further up the western slope of the ridge turn into Arthur's Stone Lane. Continue along the lane, here on your left, overlooking the natural depression of the River Dore known as the Golden Valley, is Arthur's Stone. 

Arthur's Stone is Herefordshire's oldest man-made structure, constructed between 3,700BC and 2,700BC, meaning this stone chamber is older than Stonehenge. Excavations by George Nash in 2006 established that Arthur's Stone was a long mound and not a round mound as officially stated by English Heritage on the site information board.

Arthur's Stone is one of eighteen tombs that dominate the Neolithic landscape of the northern reaches of the Dore, Upper Wye and Usk valleys of Breconshire and neighbouring Herefordshire, that lie within the fertile hinterlands of the Black Mountains of mid Wales and the English Marches and is considered the best preserved of the group. The first phase of this monument comprised a circular mound with a 10ft passage with a sharp right-angled turn leading to a small rectangular gallery with antechambers either side. There appears to be intentionally no visual access between the chamber and the facade beyond; the 90˚ kink in the passage alignment presenting a restriction which appears to be a deliberate demarcation between the realms of life and death; it is at this point that the living would have come into contact with the dead.

The site is a northerly outlier of the Cotswold-Severn Group of chambered tombs yet similar to other monuments of the Black Mountains Group, such as Gwernvale and Pipton Long Cairn but contrasts to other members of the group in the form and nature of the chamber and passage which faces the distinctive mountain spur of Hay Bluff (Penybegwn) at 2,221ft on the northern tip of the Black Mountains providing a dramatic view when emerging from the passage. As with many other chambered tombs from this period Arthur's Stone is not on the highest point of Merbach's summit but slightly below. Significantly the tomb cannot be seen from any part of the Golden Valley; as with many other chambered tombs, clearly visual access played a major part in the siting of these monuments.

The northern edge of Arthur's Stone Lane runs past the monument and across the spine of Arthur's Stone ridge from Merbach Hill to Dorstone Hill which forms part of the Parish boundary between Dorstone and Bredwardine leading to suggestions that the monument may have once served as a territorial marker. The chamber and passage were originally incorporated into a long mound, aligned north-south, which extended well over 100ft in length with a south facing entrance. In the fields to the east of the lane is a selection of stones that do do not appear to be natural and may have comprised one end of the monument, the destruction happening at least before the early 18th century with one piece reputedly taken away for use as altar in the church at Peterchurch.

The low exposed burial chamber is topped by a huge cracked capstone, measuring 18ft x 8ft,  estimated to weigh between 25 – 30 tons resting on nine upright orthostats. A large section has fallen from its underside indicative of its decline in recent times; a century ago it measured 19ft x 12ft  and the mound is now almost completely eroded. The Old Red Sandstone capstone is oriented north-east/south-west, the line of the solar solstices, with the south-western end end directed toward the southern section of the Golden Valley.

Once referred to as 'Artil's Stone', other accounts refer to the tomb as Thor's Stone or Thor's Altar, locally it is know as Arthur's Stone. The name of the village Dorstone seems to be derived from 'dwr' meaning simply 'water' in Welsh, referring to the river Dore. We see similar usage of the word such as in the waterfall Pistyll Rhaeadr, one of the seven wonders of Wales, from Rhaea + dwr, 'the water of Rhea'. The massive capstone in all probability was originally referred to as the Stone at Dore, or Dore-Stone; it is not a massive leap to see the Thor element as a later corruption of this name. Like many chambered tombs and megalithic monuments of Wales and western Britain the site has a secondary name associated with the legendary King Arthur.

Legend claims the site is either the tomb of Arthur himself or a giant that he killed. One stone bears the marks of the giant's elbows when he fell dying,  another slab has marks said to have been made by Arthur's knees where he knelt in thanksgiving after the duel. Alternatively the identations may have been made by Arthur's fingers as he played quoits with the capstone; many cromlechs in Wales are named Arthur's Quoit and it is tempting to think that the name may once have also been used for the mighty capstone at Dorstone. By implication Arthur must have been a giant of a man himself; these huge beings were said to be the first inhabitants of the Island of Britain, indicative of Arthur's great antiquity and rightful association with these ancient monuments.

We find another Arthur's Stone, also known as Maen Ceti, or Coetan Arthur, in West Glamorgan, South Wales. One day, so the story goes, when Arthur was walking through South Wales near the site of modern Llanelli he became irritated by a pebble in his shoe. He removed it and threw it towards the sea. The pebble finally landed several miles to the south on a ridge of land in the Gower Peninsula just below the summit of Cefn Bryn. The pebble forms the capstone of another exposed burial chamber, a huge slab of granite measuring 14ft x 6ft, overlooking the estuary of the river Lougher.

All the guidebooks will tell you that these ancient monuments were in use some 4,000 years before the time of Arthur. But they fail to explain the association. Yet the names attached to these landscape features of natural rocks and prehistoric antiquities are the visible remains of the tales of  Arthur’s adventures and as such have had a remarkable persistence through the centuries in their portrayal of the earliest Arthur as attested by the Mirabilia of the 9th century Historia Brittonum.

As Oliver Padel points out, what is so impressive is the vitality and consistency of the tradition in the various Brittonic areas and the fact that this folklore remains largely unaffected by the later Arthurian literary cycle and retained its character throughout the period.


Copyright © 2012 Edward Watson
http://clasmerdin.blogspot.co.uk/


Notes & References
Mary Andere, Arthurian Links with Herefordshire, Logaston Press, 1996.
Neil Fairbairn, Kingdom's of Arthur, Evans Brothers, 1983.
George Nash, The Architecture of Death, Logaston Press, 2006.
O J Padel, The Nature of Arthur, Cambrian Medieval Celtic Studies No 27, 1994.

* * *

The Forty Tasks of Culhwch

The Oldest Arthurian Tale 

The tale of 'How Culhwch won Olwen', known as the Oldest Arthurian tale, is included in the compilation of Middle Welsh texts found in two late-medieval manuscripts, a complete version in the Red Book of Hergest (Llyfr Coch Hergest) and a fragmented version in the earlier White Book of Rhydderch (Llyfr Gwyn Rhydderch).

The Red and White book manuscripts were complied in the 14^th century, yet from orthographic evidence scholars have established the tale of 'How Culhwch won Olwen' was written earlier than 1100 AD, and probably in the St Davids area.

This collection of medieval texts was initially edited and translated by Lady Charlotte Guest in the early nineteenth century and published as 'The Mabinogion', although the name first appears in the Cambrian Register of William Owen Pughe in 1795. However, the term 'Mabinogion' is somewhat of a misnomer yet it has persistently adhered to this collection since Guest popularised it. The collection usually consists of the 'Four Branches of the Mabinogi', 'The Three Romances' and 'Four Native Tales'. Guest's collection included the Hanes Taliesin.

How Culhwch won Olwen is the most archaic text in the Mabinogion collection and one of the most important texts in the study of the Arthurian cycle preserving the older Arthurian tradition of the hunting of Twrch Trwyth which certainly has antecedents in earlier Celtic tradition. It features an Arthur far removed from the emperor of Geoffrey of Monmouth and the knight of later Arthurian Romance. Here Arthur and his retinue are dealing in the realm of the supernatural, in combat against giants and witches and enchanted boars.

The tale is known for the quality of its storytelling and the humour of the author. However, the tale also contains many bit parts as betrayed by its duplications and contradictions, evidently based on ancient tales of a similar content woven together by a later redactor.

The tale type is known to folklorists as 'The Giants Daughter’ or ‘Six Go Through the World’ in which the hero is required to accomplish a number of impossible tasks by a giant who is fated to die when his daughter weds and consequently will do all he can to prevent the marriage taking place.

We find a Celtic parallel to the tale in the Middle Irish saga 'The Wooing of Emer' (Tochmarc Emire) and a related tale in the Greek story of 'Jason and the Argonauts'. Culhwch enlists the help of Arthur and his retinue of super-talented followers to complete the difficult tasks, or anoethau. Yet Culhwch well-nigh disappears from the tale after visiting Ysbaddaden Pencawr's fortress with Arthur then taking centre stage until Culhwch's return at the end of the tale to marry Olwen.

It is the longest surviving Welsh prose tale, consisting of three parts:

The first tells of Culhwch's birth and how he has a destiny (geis) imposed upon him by his wicked step-mother which brings him to Arthur's court. Once Arthur recognises him as his cousin, Culhwch demands a boon and invokes his help and all the warriors of the court in his quest for Olwen, the giant's daughter. The second part details Culhwch and his followers at the fortress of Ysbaddaden chief-giant and receiving the forty difficult tasks, or anoethau. The third and final part describes the attainment of some ten of these tasks, climaxing in the hunting of the Twrch Trwyth to obtain the comb and shears between the boar's ears to groom the chief-giant.

The first and second parts both end with long lists; the so-called 'Court List', a roll-call of some 260 warriors and ladies from the court, on which Culhwch calls in his quest for Olwen; the second ends with the long list of the anoethau.

The Forty Tasks (anoethau) of Culhwch

Culhwch sets out with a small band of warriors led by Cei and Bedywr, Arthur's foremost companions, and meets a giant herdsman who advises him to go no further. A meeting is arranged with Olwen who refuses to elope with Culhwch because of a pledge she has made to her father, Ysbaddaden chief-giant. She pleads with Culhwch to demand her from the chief-giant.

Consequently, Culhwch is set forty difficult, or impossible tasks, anoethau, to complete as the price for the Giant's daughter in marriage. Each task receives the same response from Culhwch, 'It is easy for me to get that, though thou think it is not easy.'

Olwen's father, the chief-giant, returns with yet another task, 'Though thou get that, there is that thou wilt not get.' And so on:

1. The great thicket yonder. I must have it uprooted out of the earth and burnt on the face of the ground so that the cinders and ashes thereof be its manure; and that it be ploughed and sown so that it be ripe in the morning against the drying of the dew, in order that it may be made into meat and drink for thy wedding.

2. A husbandman to till and prepare that land, other than Amaethon son of Don.

3. Gofannon son of Don to come to the headland to set the irons.

4. The two oxen of Gwlwlydd Wineu, both yoked together to plough well the rough ground

yonder.

5. The Melyn Gwanwyn (Yellow-palewhite) and the Ych Brych (the Speckled Ox), both yoked together,

6. The two horned oxen, one of which is beyond Mynydd Bannawg [A mountain In Scotland, possibly the Grampians], and the other this side-and to fetch them together in the one plough. Nyniaw and Peibiaw are they, whom God transformed into oxen for their sins.

7. Dost see the hoed tilth yonder? When first I met the mother of that maiden, nine hestors of flax seed were sown therein; neither black nor white has come out of it yet, and I have that measure still. I must have that in the new-broken ground yonder, so that it may be a white veil for my daughter's head on the day of thy wedding-feast.

8. Honey that will be nine times sweeter than the honey of a virgin swarm, without drones and without bees, to make bragget for the feast.

9. The cup of Llwyr son of Llwyrion, in which is the best of all drink; for there is no vessel in the world which can hold that strong drink, save it.

10. The hamper of Gwyddneu Long-shank

11. The horn of Gwlgawd Gododdin

12. The harp of Teirtu to entertain me that night.

13. The birds of Rhiannon

14. The cauldron of Diwrnach the Irishman, the overseer of Odgar son of Aedd king of Ireland, to boil meat for thy wedding guests.'

15. The tusk of Ysgithyrwyn Chief Boar I must have, wherewith to shave myself. I shall be none the better for that unless it be plucked from his head while alive.

16. There is no one in the world can pluck it from his head save Odgar son of Aedd king of Ireland.

17. I will not entrust the keeping of the tusk to any save Cadw of Prydein (Pictland)

18. I must needs dress my beard for me to be shaved. It will never settle unless the blood of the Black Witch be obtained, daughter of the White Witch, from the head of the Valley of Grief in the uplands of Hell.

19. The blood will be of no use unless it be obtained while warm. There is no vessel in the world will keep heat in the liquid that is put therein save the bottles of Gwyddolwyn the Dwarf, which keep their heat from the time when the liquid is put into them in the east till one reaches the west.

20. Some will wish for milk, but there will be no way to get milk for every one until the bottles of Rhynnon Stiff-beard are obtained. In them no liquid ever turns sour.

21. The comb and shears that are between the two ears of Twrch Trwyth son of Taredd Wledig, the only comb and shears in the world wherewith my hair may be dressed, so exceeding stiff it is.

22. Twrch Trwyth will not be hunted till Drudwyn be obtained, the whelp of Greid son of Eri.

23. There is no leash in the world may hold on him, save the leash of Cors Hundred-claws.

24. There is no collar in the world can hold the leash, save the collar of Canhastyr Hundred-hands.

25. The chain of Cilydd Hundred-holds to hold the collar along with the leash.

26. There is no huntsman in the world can act as houndsman to that hound, save Mabon son of Modron, who was taken away when three nights old from his mother. Where he is is unknown, or what his state is, whether alive or dead.

27. Gwyn Dun-mane, the steed of Gweddw (as swift as the wave is he!), under Mabon to hunt Twrch Trwyth.

28. Mabon will never be obtained, where he is is unknown, till his kinsman Eidoel son of Aer be first obtained; for he will be untiring in quest of him. He is his first cousin.

29. Garselit the Irishman, chief huntsman of Ireland is he. Twrch Trwyth will never be hunted without him.

30. The two whelps of the bitch Rhymhi. [omitted from the list in Culhwch] 

31. A leash from the beard of Dillus the Bearded, for save that there is nothing will hold those two whelps. And no use can be made of it unless it be twitched out of his beard while he is alive, and he be plucked with wooden tweezers. He will not allow any one to do that to him while he lives, but it will be useless if dead, for it will be brittle.

32. There is no huntsman in the world will hold those two whelps, save Cynedyr the Wild son of Hetwn the Leper. Nine times wilder is he than the wildest wild beast on the mountain.

33. Thou wilt not hunt Twrch Trwyth until Gwyn son of Nudd be obtained, in whom God has set the spirit of the demons of Annwn,

34. There is no horse in the world that will avail Gwyn to hunt Twrch Trwyth, save Du (black) the horse of Moro Oerfeddawg.

35. Until Gwilenhin king of France come, Twrch Trwyth will never be hunted without him.

36. Twrch Trwyth will never be hunted without the son of Alun Dyfed

37. Twrch Trwyth will never be hunted until Aned and Aethlem be obtained. Swift as a gust of wind would they be; never were they unleashed on a beast they did not kill.

38. Arthur and his huntsmen to hunt Twrch Trwyth.

39. Twrch Trwyth can never be hunted until Bwlch and Cyfwlch and Syfwlch be obtained, sons of Cilydd Cyfwlch, grandsons of Cleddyf Difwlch. Three gleaming glitterers their three shields; three pointed piercers their three spears; three keen carvers their three swords; Glas, Glesig, Gleisad, their three dogs; Call, Cuall, Cafall, their three horses; Hwyrddyddwg and Drwgddyddwg and Llwyrddyddwg, their three wives; Och and Garym and Diasbad, their three witches; Lluched and Neued and Eisywed, their three daughters; Drwg and Gwaeth and Gwaethaf Oll, their three maid-servants. The three men shall wind their horns, and all the others will come to make outcry, till none would care though the sky should fall to earth.

40. The sword of Wrnach the Giant; never can he [Twrch Trwyth] be slain save with that.

Finally the chief-giant warns Culhwch, 'Though thou get that, there is that thou wilt not get. Wakefulness without sleep at night shalt thou have in seeking those things. And thou wilt not get

them, nor wilt thou get my daughter.'

Culhwch replies, 'Horses shall I have and horsemen, and my lord and kinsman Arthur will get

me all those things. And I shall win thy daughter, and thou shalt lose thy life.'

A Tale of Two Boars
These forty tasks are all concerned with two prime objectives; the wedding feast and the grooming of the giant on the night of his daughter's wedding, which ultimately requires the hunting of the Twrch Trwyth to obtain the tonsorial equipment lodged between the boar's ears. This is the ultimate challenge and the climax to the whole tale.

The final part of the tale details the attainment of ten of the tasks by Arthur and his retinue with the completion of four others stated without further detail; all but one (the tale of the lame ant) relate directly to the hunting of the Twrch Trwyth. The tale makes no mention of the accomplishment of the other eighteen of the anoethau.

The list contains many contradictions and duplications in its final form that are indicative of the author of the tale drawing on many earlier traditions and blending them into one tale.

For example, many of the characters once listed in the Court List disappear from the text, the only overlap being limited to persons listed in the boar hunts, some of which are merely mentioned as being slain by the Twrch Trwyth. Similarly, the chief giant stipulates that Arthur and his huntsmen are required to hunt the Twrch Trwyth (38) but he is already central to the tale with Culhwch now missing until the finale of the story.

Culhwch sets off to obtain the last task first, The sword of Wrnach the Giant (40). The chief-giant tell us the sword is required to kill the supernatural boar, but the Twrch Trwyth is not killed; at the end of the tale he is last seen disappearing into the sea off the Cornish coast pursued by the two hounds Aned and Aethlem. Following the accomplishment of this, the first task, Arthur then says “which task shall we obtain first?” suggesting that this task is a later addition to the original list.

In the initial list of the anoethau, Culhwch is charged to retrieve the comb and shears (21) from between the ears of the enchanted boar, the Twrch Trwyth. But later in the tale a razor is added to the items required to groom the chief giant. Presumably the author has forgotten that the tusk of Ysgithyrwyn Chief Boar has been demanded by the chief-giant to shave himself (15). It is Odgar son of Aedd who is charged with extracting the tusk from the boar, Ysgithyrwyn's head (16) but is actually Cadw of Prydein who draws the tusk yet he is charged with simply guarding it (17).

Further, the author himself draws our attention to yet another discrepancy that it was not the dogs which the chief-giant had named to Culhwch that killed the boar Ysgithyrwyn but Arthur's own hound Cafall. Here the author seems oblivious to the fact that the chief-giant does not name any dogs in the hunting of Ysgithyrwyn.

A further confusion is the apparent omission of the two whelps of the bitch Rhymhi (30) from the list of the anoethau but is clearly implied by the two tasks following, the leash from the beard of Dillus the Bearded to restrain the two whelps (31) and Cynedyr the Wild to hold them (32).

The list contains several doublets such as the two boar hunts, the release of two prisoners and Goreu son of Custennin who is the double of Culhwch and perhaps the hero of a variant tale, although outside of this tale he is almost unknown in Welsh tradition. Goreu, like Culhwch, is cousin to Arthur, his mother is also one of the five daughters of Anlawdd Wledig and therefore also cousin to Culhwch. Goreu's father, Custennin, is brother to Ysbaddaden who is therefore his uncle. Ysbaddaden has dispossessed Custennin and is responsible for the deaths of twenty three of his sons; being the last remaining Goreu was brought up in hiding from the giant. Goreu appears in the attack on the fortress of the giant Wrnach and is later named as one of the hunting party in pursuit of the Twrch Trwyth. Goreu is not heard of again until the end of the tale when he beheads Ysbaddaden and so avenging his father and brothers.

The narrative in its final 14th century form as we have it would appear to be an assemblage of at least two variants of an ancient tradition of a supernatural boar hunt in which Arthur and his hound participated.



Notes & References
Rachel Bromwich and D Simon Evans, eds. Culhwch and Olwen: An Edition and Study of the Oldest Arthurian Tale, University of Wales Press, 1992.
Idris Llewelyn Foster, Culhwch and Olwen and Rhonabwy's Dream, pp.31-39, in Roger Sherman Loomis, ed. Arthurian Literature in the Middle Ages, Oxford University Press, 1959 (Sandpiper edition 2001).
Brynley F Roberts, Culhwch ac Olwen, The Triads, Saints' Lives, pp.73-81, in Rachel Bromwich et al ed. Arthur of the Welsh, University of Wales Press, 1991.
Thomas Jones and Gwyn Jones, The Mabinogion, 1949.

* * *

The Stones of the Sons of Arthur

“And then he [Twrch Trwyth] set out from Glyn Nyfer and came to Cwm Cerwyn, and there he stood at bay. And he then slew four of Arthur's champions, Gwarthegydd son of Caw, Tarawg of Allt Clwyd, Rheiddwn son of Eli Adfer, and Isgofan the Generous. And after he had slain those men, again he stood at bay against them there, and slew Gwydre son of Arthur, Garselit the Irishman, Glew son of Ysgawd, and Isgawyn son of Banon. And then he himself was wounded.” [1]

The Boar Hunting Party
In Culhwch And Olwen, considered the oldest Arthurian tale, Culhwch invokes almost 260 personages as guarantors of the privileged gift, or boon, which he demands on recognition of his kinship as Arthur's first cousin, symbolised by the act of Arthur cutting Culhwch's hair. Culhwch demands 'My claim on thee is that thou get me Olwen daughter of Ysbaddaden Chief Giant. And I invoke her in the name of thy warriors.'  [2]

Culhwch's extensive invocation of individuals from Arthur's Court, occupying over two hundred lines in the tale, draws upon the names of both historical and mythological British personages and a lesser number of Irish, in addition to a number of obviously invented farcical characters. Many appear here for the first time and are unknown outside Culhwch.  Some fail to appear again in the tale and other characters are introduced later who do not appear in the list. Thus, this so-called 'Court List' contains an accumulation of Celtic literary figures unique to Culhwch, probably added to at each recital and by later copyists.

The Chief Giant Ysbaddaden exacts forty impossible tasks, or 'anoethau', from Culhwch as the price for obtaining his daughter Olwen as his wife. Achieving the anoethau constitutes the rest of the tale, with the most important, and central to the whole story, is the hunting of the enchanted giant boar, the Twrch Trwyth. The hunt begins in Ireland and Arthur and his retinue follow the boar across the Celtic Sea to south Wales.

Four of Arthur's champions killed by the Twrch Trwyth at Cwm Cerwyn, Pembrokeshire, south west Wales, are referred to in the passage from Culhwch And Olwen cited above. Tarawg of Allt Clwyd is previously unmentioned, Rheiddwn son of Eli Adfer, and Isgofan the Generous appear to have been transplanted from the Court List with no further references. However, the fourth champion Gwarthegydd appears from the long tradition of the sons of Caw of Prydyn (Pictland). The Court List mentions nineteen sons of Caw but omits Gwarthegydd ('cattle raider'). The inclusion of Gwarthegydd concurs with early Welsh genealogical tradition that lists twenty sons of Caw, including Gildas and Hueil, and one daughter. Outside of Culhwch, Gwarthegydd son of Caw is found seated next to Bedwini, the Bishop, as part of the assemblage of Arthur's counsel in the late 13th century Middle Welsh tale The Dream of Rhonabwy.

The Stones of the Sons of Arthur
According to local lore the site of the battle of Cwmcerwyn is marked by a series of ancient monuments. Legend recalls that Arthur sat and watched his men fighting the Twrch Trwyth from a  spot marked by a standing stone known as Eisteddfa Arthur (Arthur's Seat), slightly north of Brynberian, on the northern side of the main ridge of the Preseli Hills.

The Stones of the Sons of Arthur are located on the lower flank of Foel Cwmcerwyn, the highest top in the Preselis at 1760ft (537m) and the source of the Afon Clydach. On the ridge above are said to be The Stones of the Knights, (Cerrig Marchogion - SN102322). [3]

The Stones of the Knights are difficult to locate, if they survive at all today, and I suspect the four ancient cairns, the highest at 5ft tall, seen prominently along the skyline of Foel Cwmcerwyn, were probably the original draw to the legend of Arthur's battle with the Twrch Trwyth, as often they are called by the alternative name of The Stones of Arthur's Knights, no doubt commemorating Arthur's four champions, Gwarthegydd, Tarawg, Rheiddwn and Isgofan that the giant boar killed here. The western most cairn was excavated in the early nineteenth century, uncovering a typical Early Bronze Age cremation in an inverted urn. However, the other cairns appear to be empty.

The next site marking the continuing battle with Twrch Trwyth is marked by The Stones of the Sons of Arthur (Cerrig Meibion Arthur – SN118310), where two erect stones stand about 8m apart,  some140m south-east of Ty Newydd farm in Cwm Cerwyn, Mynachlog-ddu, on the southern side of the Preseli Hills. The stones are said to be a monument to Arthur's sons killed here by the Twrch Trwyth which had swum over from Ireland.

The Stones of the Sons of Arthur are part of the Glynsaithmaen group of standing stones located in the moorland around Ty Newydd farm in the hollow beneath Foel Cwmcerwyn in the boggy ground near the headwaters of Afon Wern. The name 'Glynsaithmaen', (valley of the seven stones), suggests the group originally consisted of seven monoliths or seven arrangements of stones, only six are obvious today, although other large stones in and around the farm and track behind the The Stones of the Sons of Arthur possibly account for the seventh. Alternatively, it has been suggested that the name may refer to certain stones considered particularly potent for arrow sharpening.

Copyright Ordnance Survey

If the four cairns atop Foel  Cwmcerwyn commemorate Arthur's four champions lost here in the battle with the Twrch Trwyth, the site of The Stones of the Sons of Arthur must mark the traditional spot where Gwydre son of Arthur, Garselit the Irishman, Glew son of Ysgawd, and Isgawyn son of Banon were all killed by the beast, although only one of these boar hunters is named as Arthur's son.

The Sons of Arthur
The boar hunt in Culhwch recalls only one son of Arthur, Gwydre, yet here we find two large standing stones. In Welsh tradition Arthur has three sons, Llachau and Amr completing the trio. We know from the Mirabilia (Marvels, or Wonders of the Island of Britain) appended to the 9th century Historia Brittonum that Amr's tomb is to be found at the source of the river Gamber, the spring called Llygad Amr (the eye of Amr) in the district of Ercing (Archenfield, near Hereford):

"There is another miracle in the region which is called Ercing. A sepulcra is shown near a spring which is given the name Licat Amr, and the name of the hero who's grave is in the tumulus, it follows, was called Amr. He was the son of Arthur the soldier, and he himself has killed him in that very place and done the burying. And men come to measure the tumulus in length: sometimes it is six feet; sometimes nine; sometimes twelve; sometimes fifteen. For whatever the measurement you will measure it in such a succession, again you will not find it with the same measurement; and even I have made confirmation on my own."

Isgawyn son of Banon has been compared with the name Kysceint mab Banon who appears in the incomplete poem Pa Gur? (from the first line Pa Gur yv y Portaur - 'What man is the porter?') found in the The Black Book of Carmarthen. [4] This early Arthurian poem, usually dated to the 11th century, begins as a dialogue between Arthur and Glewlwyd, the porter or gate-keeper, and develops into a list of Arthur's retinue and their feats, with many of the names and references being similar to those found in Culhwch and Olwen, suggesting a common early source for the two works. [5]

Arthur's son Llachau is mentioned in Pa Gur? Considering the similarity between the Black Book poem and Culhwch it seems odds that Llachau does not appear in the later.

“Cei the fair and Llachau, 
they performed battles 
before the pain of of blue spears (ended the conflict)” [6]

In later Medieval Romance Kay murders a son of Arthur called Loholt, which has been interpreted that Cei must have killed Llachau. Yet the passage above from Pa Gur? seems to suggest that Cei and Llachau fought on the same side.

Another poem from the Black Book of Carmarthen, The Dialogue of Gwyddneu Garanhir and Gwyn ap Nudd, refers to Llachau's death, and at first glance the passage fails to provide the location:

“I have been where Llacheu was slain, son of Arthur marvellous in song, when ravens croaked over his blood.”

Only six stanzas previous the poem recalls a battle before Caer Vandwy, [7] an Otherworld fortress. Assuming the poem follows sequential events, it is reasonable to expect Llacheu's death to have followed the assault on Caer Vandwy. The only other early Welsh poem to name this fortress is the Spoils of Annwn, recalling Arthur's raid on the Otherworld. [8] Considering that the theme of the raid on the Otherworld is common to Culwch and Spoils of Annwn with similar elements appearing in the poem Pa Gur? we should therefore expect to see Llachau in Culhwch. We can therefore deduce that Llachau's death occurred after the journey to the Otherworld. In Culhwch the Otherworld is euphemised as Ireland; significantly Arthur's son(s) are killed in south-west Wales after pursuing the Twrch Trwyth from Ireland.

Further, there is a reference to Llachau in the early Triad, Three Well-Endowed Men of the Island of Britain:

'Gwalchmai son of Gwyar,
and Llachau son of Arthur,
and Rhiwallawn Broom-Hair'

Gwalchmai belongs to the earliest stratum of the Arthurian legend and appears along with Cei and Bedwyr in Culhwch. Lllachau appears along with Cei in Pa Gur? Coupled with this early Triad it is apparent that Llachau belongs to the earliest part of the Arthurian mythos. According to a poem in the Black Book of Carmarthen, Llachau dies following a journey to the Otherworld. The second monolith of The Stones of the Sons of Arthur must surely mark the spot where Llachau, along with Gwydre, was killed by the Twrch Trwyth.

Cerrig Meibion Arthur 

In Culhwch, Garselit the Irishman (Wydel), is named in the Court List and appears again in the tale as Garselit Wydel, penkynyd Iwerdon, "the chief huntsman of Ireland" before he is killed by the enchanted boar at Cwm Cerwyn. Glew the son of Ysgawd is unknown outside of this passage.

Arthur's son Gwydre is not mentioned in the Court List, but we do find a Gwydre son of Llwydeu by Gwenabwy daughter of Caw. Significantly, Gwydre son of Llwydeu is not mentioned again in Culhwch, the name Gwydre appears but once more in the whole tale; at the battle of Cwm Cerwyn.
Is this the same character? If so he must be of questionable parentage. The apparent insignificance of Gwydre's passing has led to suggestions that he was illegitimate. [9] And there may be good reason to accept this claim.

Gwenabwy is the sole daughter of Caw mentioned in the Court List. According to this list she has a son, Gwydre, by Llwydeu son of Nwython. The Saints Lives alludes to a tradition of hostility between Arthur and the Pictish warrior Hueil. Caradoc of Llancarfan's Vita Gildae (Life of Gildas) describes Hueil as an "active warrior and most distinguished soldier", who led a number of violent and sweeping raids from north of the Wall plundering Arthur's lands.

In Culhwch, Hueil is said to have never submitted to a lord's hand and the enmity between him and Arthur is further alluded to in the Court List which refers to an incident in which Hueil stabbed his nephew, Gwydre son of Llwydeu. The ensuing feud between Arthur and Hueil ended in the death of the latter suggesting Gwydre was more than simply Arthur's nephew. It is possible that Gwydre son of Llwydeu was identical with Gwydre son of Arthur, implicative of Arthur's infidelity with Gwenabwy, daughter of Caw.

The Medieval historian Gerald of Wales claims Gildas threw all mention of Arthur in his books into the sea because he killed his brother Hueil.

*

Notes & References:
1. Culhwch And Olwen, from The Mabinogion, by Gwynn Jones & Thomas Jones, 1949.
2. Ibid.
3. Chris Barber & John Godfrey Williams, The Ancient Stones of Wales, Blorenge, 1989.
4. Rachel Bromwich & D Simon Evans, Culhwch and Olwen, University of Wales Press, 1992.
5. Patrick Sims Williams, The Early Welsh Arthurian Poems, in Arthur of the Welsh, ed. Bromwich et al.1991
6. Ibid.
7. Translated as 'Fortress of God's Peak' by Sarah Higley, text and translation, Preiddeu Annwn: "The Spoils of Annwn", at The Camelot Project, or 'the Fort of the Divine Place' by John T Koch & John Carey, The Celtic Heroic Age, Celtic Studies Publications, 4th revised edition, 2003.
8. Thomas Green, Concepts of Arthur, Tempus, 2007.
9. Norris J Lacy, The Arthurian Handbook, Garland, 1988.

* * *