longer inscription to suggest that Castus
led ‘British’ troops to Armorica
(ie Brittany) – which is later reflected
in the 12th-century writer Geoffrey
of Monmouth’s depiction of King Arthur
leading his armies into Gaul to fight
the Romans. However, the better reading
of this inscription has “Armenia”,
not “Armorica”, suggesting that he led
‘British’ troops to war in the east.
Another figure sometimes identified
with Arthur is the British king Riothamus,
who was defeated by the Goths near
Bourge, central France in c470.
Riothamus means ‘most-kingly’, which
led the 20th-century historian Geoffrey
Ashe to suggest that this was a title, rather
than a name – and that Riothamus’s true
name was Arthur.
Conversely, it has been suggested
that ‘Arthur’ is a title, and that the ‘real’
name of this elusive man was Owain
Ddantgwyn, an obscure figure known only
from a late Welsh genealogy. Another
theory is that Arthur should be identified
as Arthwys ap Mar, a name that occurs
in the later medieval ‘lineages of the
saints’. While each theory has supporters,
none stand up to close examination.WHAT DOES THE NAME
‘ARTHUR’ TELL US
ABOUT HIS POSSIBLE
ORIGINS?
It allows three possible sources. There is
the Old Welsh ‘Arth-’ and Old Irish ‘Art-’
meaning ‘bear’, and so perhaps suggesting
a Celtic origin. But Old Welsh ‘Bear-man’
gives us ‘Arthwr’, not the ‘Arthur’ that
we find in all the early texts, so this
appears unlikely.
Could ‘Arthur’ be derived from
the Greek name Arktouros? It’s possible.
However, this was known in the west only
as a star-name (Arcturus is the brightest
star in the northern night sky), never as
a personal name.
A stronger case can be made for the
Roman family name Artorius, which was
used from the late Republic through to
at least the third century AD, and shows
up on inscriptions in various western
provinces – though in neither Gaul nor
Britain. The shift from Artorius to Arthur
fits sound changes in Brittonic/Old Welsh
that we know were occurring in the late
Roman and sub-Roman periods. There
were several figures called Arthur or Artúr
(the Irish equivalent) from the late sixth
century onwards, one of whom may havebeen the source of the name used
in the History of the Britons.MUCH OF THE
ARTHURIAN LEGEND
COMES FROM LATER
MEDIEVAL WRITERS.
WHY DID HE BECOME
SUCH A CELEBRATED
FIGURE AT THIS TIME?
The architect of Arthur’s fame was Geoffrey
of Monmouth, whose History of the Kings
of Britain, written in Latin in the 1130s,
built on the vision of history offered by
the ninth-century History of the Britons.
The new work proved immensely popular
and was translated/adapted into French
by Wace in c1150 and English by Layamon
in c1200–20. The legend provided
an ideal space in which to explore such
contemporary issues as the source, natureand obligations of royal authority,
chivalry and knighthood, and
Christian behaviours appropriate to
the lay aristocracy.
We find Arthurian storytelling in virtually
every language spoken in medieval Europe
but its focus was French, which was
the most important language of the period
and the one most closely connected with
the crusades and knightly activity more
generally. By the 13th century, his stories
were increasingly imbued with Christian
meaning, and no longer a narrative account
of his supposed reign.HOW MUCH OF THE
MEDIEVAL ARTHUR
MIGHT BE BASED ON
EARLIER SOURCES,
AS OPPOSED TO PURE
LITERARY INVENTION?
There have been numerous attempts
to see ancient origins in various aspects
of the medieval Arthur, including the sword
in the stone, the grail, and the sword in
the lake. But for any of these to be
convincing there has to be a credible line
of descent from the earlier occurrence to its
arrival in French literature around 1200.
Take the claim that the medieval sword in
the stone and grail stories derive from
Scythian (nomadic people from central Asia)
practices, which were documented in the
works of Herodotus in the fifth century BC.
This requires a complex explanation as
to how they were carried to western
Europe in the Roman period and remained
embedded there until reappearing almost
a millennium later in France.
In both instances, it seems likelier
that the medieval stories had more recent
origins. The grail arguably derives from
depictions of St Mary bearing a dish
from which the Holy Ghost rose as flame,
an image later combined with the cup of
the last supper. The ‘sword in the stone’
may have originated in a miracle that
was associated with St Galgano in
late 12th-century Italy.HOW DOES THE ARTHUR
LEGEND ADD TO OUR
UNDERSTANDING OF
‘DARK AGE’ BRITAIN?
The Arthur legend is unlikely to tell us
anything much about the British ‘Dark Ages’,
unless and until we are reasonably sure that
we can identify him as a historic figure.
That time seems a long way off, and may
never come.A stone replica of Excalibur at Podstrana,
Croatia, home to two inscriptions on the life
of the Roman soldier Lucius Artorius CastusThe search for
Arthur is
compromised by
the lack of
surviving
sources from
‘Dark Age’ Wales
PHOTOS: GETTY IMAGESKing Arthur
History
90