Nennius's "History of the Britons" Together With "The Annals of the Britons" and "Court Pedigrees of Hywel the Good" Also "The Story of the Loss of Britain"

Citation preview

N E N N IU S ’S “ H IS T O R Y O F T H E B R IT O N S ”

NENNIUS’S HISTORY OF THE BRITONS TOGETHER W ITH

“ T H E A N N A LS O F T H E B R IT O N S ” AND

“ C O U R T P E D IG R E E S O F H Y W E L T H E G O O D ” ALSO

“ttbc Storç of tbe Xoss of Britain" BY

A . W . W A D E -E V A N S Author of Welsh Medieval Law, Life o f St• David, IVeltk Christian Origins Contributor to the Encyclopaedia Britannica, etc«

Published f o r the Church H isto rica l Society

LONDON S O CIETY FOR PROMOTING CHRISTIAN KNOWLEDGE

First Published 1938

M a de in G reat B ritain

CON TENTS PAG ES

-

-

-

-

-

7 -3 4

THE PREFACE

-

-

-

-

35

THE AGES OF THE WORLD

-

-

-

-

3 5 -3 6

-

-

3 6 -4 5

I n t r o d u c t io n N e n n iu s :

THE PEOPLING OF BRITAIN AND IRELAND THE ROMANS IN BRITAIN

-

-

-

-

4 5 -5 3

VORTIGERN -

-

-

-

-

5 3 -7 2

ST. PATRICK

-

-

-

-

7 2 -7 4

ARTHUR

-

-

-

-

7 4 -7 6

ANGLIAN GENEALOGIES

-

-

-

-

7 6 -7 9

WARS OF BRITONS AND ANCLES

-

-

-

7 9 -8 3

CALCULI

-

-

-

-

8 3 -8 4

THE CITIES OF BRITAIN

-

-

-

-

114 -116

-

-

-

116 -12 1

-

-

-

8 4 -10 1

ood

-

-

10 1-114

-

-

i 2 2 -15 3

MARVELS T

he

A n n als

of th e

C o u r t P e d ig r e es

of

B r it o n s H yw el

th e

G

THE STOBT OF THE LOSS OF BBITAIN Som e W

orks

Index

-

C it e d

-

-

-

-

*54

-

-

-

-

* 5 5 -* 5 6

V

INTRODUCTION N e n n iu s , otherwise N em nius or N em niuus, is men­ tioned as a known w riter in 820. H e had (we are told) put to silence a Saxon scholar, who had tw itted him that the Britons had no alphabet o f their own, by straightway inventing one out o f his own head ana subm itting it there and then before his auditor ; and this he did ut vituperationem et hebitudxnem deieceret gentis sucey “ that he m ight cast off the censuring and charge o f stupidity against his own nation.” T hese words are so like what w e find in the opening sentence o f the Preface to the H istory o f the Britons, “ I, N ennius, disciple o f Elvodugus, have provided to w rite some excerpts, quce hebitudo gentis Britanmee detecerat, which the stupidity o f the nation o f Britannia had cast off,” as at least to suggest (with other reasons) that N ennius’s book w ith its Preface had already been w ritten, that is before 820.1 H is am bition was modest, m erely to put together excerpts or scraps o f inform ation, bearing on Britain, drawn from various sources, w ritten b y previous authors, which he felt im pelled to do b y what seemed to him the stupidity o f his countrym en, who neglected such memoranda. A nd yet he allows that m any had taken the m atter in hand, but had given it up, perhaps owing to wars or pestilences or it m ay be because the task was difficult. H e apologizes for presuming to attem pt where so m any had failed. H e made no pretence to high learning, and was w illing to yield to him who knew m ore. H e describes him self as a disciple o f Elvodugus, i.e. Elfoddw or E lfodd, w ho w ould seem to have been 1 Ifor Williams, Bulletin , vii, 380*2. Cormac mac Cuilenniin, bishop-king o f Cashel, killed in 908, quotes Nennius by name in his Psalter o f Cashel (C .M ., 1x7).

7

8

Nennius ’s “ history of the britons ”

the m ost outstanding figure in W ales in the eighth century. F or he it was who induced the W elsh for the sake o f the Catholica Unitas to give up their anti­ quated manner o f calculating the date o f Easter in favour o f the later and better m ethod adopted by Rom e and in current use in that city. T h is he did as early as 768, for he lived forty years later, dying in 809. D oubtless this revolution (for it was nothing less) was accompanied b y corresponding changes in the direction o f unity. U nfortunately, however, we know very little o f this famous man, who becam e archbishop (the only archbishop so styled in the Annals o f the Britons) in G w ynedd. H e is said to have been the son o f T ecw lid in Caergybi,1 i.e. H olyhead. In an O de to G od by Einion ap Gwalchmai,* c. 1200, occurs a line, Mad, dyuod Eluod eluyt Geleu, “ as the coming o f E lfod to the land o f G eleu ,” which associates him (if he be the man) with A bergele, where is still found his holy w ell Ffynnon E lfo’ m N orth-East W ales. A nd in tw elfth-centuiy lists o f so-called “ Bishops o f St. D avids ” * and “ Bishops o f L landaif ” 4 his name seems to have been inserted at the proper period, suggesting his presence for at least his influence) in those tw o divisions o f tne South. O ne can hardly doubt but that he m ust have been regarded as chief bishop o f all W ales, for towards the end o f his life or a little after we perceive the rise o f something like territorial bishops, such as Sadym fyw at M ynyw (d. 831) and Cadwared5 in South-East W ales. 1 Additions to Bonedd y Saint (Arch. Comb., 1931, p. 170). 1 Anwyl's Gogynfeirdd, 119, col. 2. * Gerald's Itinerary through Wales, ii, 1, where Elave, Elam , Ehtdged, Ebtoed, two to four removes before Sadymfyw (d. 831), may refer to Elfoddw. 4 “ Elvogus ” in the time o f M eurig, Rhys, Ffem fael, and Rhodri, sons o f Ithael, King o f Glywysing (B .L.D ., 206). For Ffem fael and Rhys see Pedigrees 28, 29, and Annals at [775] for Ffem fael’s obit. 4 There are nine grants to Bishop Cadwared recorded in B .L .D ., 206-212, witnessed by Ffem fael, his brothers, or sons. For. the absence of diocesan bishops in Wales in pre-Norman times and the origin of Llandaif, see W .C.O ., 155 if.

INTRODUCTION

9

T h e earliest known copy o f the H istory was dis­ covered at Chartres1 in the late nineteenth century. Incom plete, poorly transcribed, and dating from c. 900, it contains the follow ing passage: E t in tem pore G uorthigirni, régis Britanie, Saxones peruenerunt in Britanniam , id est, in anno incarnacionis C hristi, sicut [S]libine, abas Iae, in Ripum ciuitate inuenit uel repent, ab incam acione D om ini anni. D . usque a[d] lu. Ian. in X II luna u t a[i]unt alii intis. C C C . annis a quo tenuerunt Saxones Britanniam usque ad annum supradictum . In order to make sense out o f this, only one slight correction is needed, nam ely to read itis for die gibberish intis; where the scribe possibly m istook some stroke above the first i as a mark o f contraction for if. W ith this change the passage translates thus: A nd in the tim e o f V ortigem , K in g o f Britain, the Saxons arrived in Britain, that is, in the year o f the Incarnation o f C hrist, even as Slibine,2 A bbot o f Iona, found or discovered in the city o f Ripon, from the Incarnation o f the L ord , 500, till the Calends o f January on the tw elfth day o f the moon, as some say, 300 years having passed from when the Saxons arrived in Britain till die aforesaid year. T h e coincidence o f January is t and the tw elfth day o f the moon occurred in a j >. 801, when three centuries èxactly had passed from a j >. 500. It m ay be, there­ fore, that the author o f the passage, which the scribe o f the Chartres M S . was copying c. 900, was writing in 801.3 1 See the Chartres Historia Brittonum {Arch. Comb., 1937, pp. 64-85). * Slebhine, Abbot of Iona, ruled from 752 till his death on March 2, 767. * On the other hand, the calculation of 300 years from Vortigem ’s reception of the Saxons may only have been an attempt to fix the year when the Saxons, according to their own prognostic (see Loss [to]), were to quit Britain for ever.

IO

NENNIUS’S “ HISTORT OP THE BRITONS ”

A gain, as the last dateable person mentioned in the H istory o f the Britons is E cgfrit, K in g o f M ercia, who reigned only a few months in 796 (see § 60), it is possible that that was the very year when Nennius finished his book, so that w e may lim it its first appear­ ance between 796 and 801. It is notable that o f the eleven manuscripts, which Mommsen distinguished as w orthy o f prim e con­ sideration for the study o f the history o f the Britons, all except the Chartres fragm ent contain in some form the following passage: A prim o anno quo Saxones uenerunt in Britanniam usque ad annum quartum M erm ini regis suppu­ t a n te anni C C C C X X V IIII. (From the first year in which the Saxons came into Britain up to the fourth year o f K in g M erfyn are reckoned 429 years.) F or reasons given later the fourth year o f K in g M erfyn seems to have been a j >. 830, so that N ennius’s book, if indeed it first appeared before 820 and as early as 796 or 801, was again issued in 830. A s a disciple o f Elfoddw , who died in 809, Nennius m ay w ell have survived till 830 and been responsible for this hypo­ thetical re-issue. O ther editions1 appeared later (for 1 As, for example, one dated the fifth year of King Edmund,

c. 945, and another dated the thirtieth year of Anarawd, K ing o f Anglesey, “ who now rules the realm of Gwynedd,” the date given as a .d . 912. A certain Samuel, who describes himself as a disciple o f “ Beulan,” presbyter, is a “ reviser ” who has left several traces o f his w o n and has even been mistaken for Nennius 1 Certain obscure verses o f his (erroneously attributed to Nennius) survive (C.M ., 144). He adds to the text a pedigree of the Britons going back to the accursed Ham, son of Noah, saying, “ Thus have I found, as I, Samuel, child of my father, Beulan presbyter, have written it for thee. But this genealogy was not written in any vohtmen Britannia, tome o f Britannia [*.«. Wales], but in the writing o f the mind of die writer ” (ib., 152). The bishop Renchidus (otherwise unknown) and die most holy o f bishops, Elfoddw, had transmitted to him that Rhun fab Urien, who baptized Edwin, was Paulinus of York. “ But since the genealogies o f the Saxons and the genealogies o f other nations seemed useless to my master,

INTRODUCTION

II

the work attained popularity) with a variety o f changes b y different hands. T h e eleven m anuscripts, selected b y M om m sen, m ay now be arranged as follows with the capital letters used by him to denominate them : Z = C hartres 08 (c. 900). M = Vatican R eg. 1964 ( n th cent.); N —Paris 11108 (12th cent.). H = B .M . H arleian 3859 ( n th cen t.); K = B .M . C ott. V esp. D xxi (12th cent.). C = C am b. C orp. Christi 139 (12th cent.); D = Durham B n (12th cent.). L = C am b. U niv. L ib . F f. I , 27 (13th cent.); G = L o n d o n Burney 310 ( a j >. 1381). P = B .M . C ott. Caligula A v iii (12th cent.) ; Q = B .M . C ott. N ero V III (13th cent.). T o revert to the Chartres fragm ent, not only was this badly transcribed, but it is evident that the book, from which it was copied, was itself barely more than a selection. It contained abbreviated passages, trans­ positions, corrections, alterations, substitutions, and even independent additions. It also om itted whole sections. T h e w riter clearly had some particular interest in view other than the main theme o f the book. It was not so m uch the history o f the Britons which concerned him as the doings o f S t. Germ anus amongst them . A nd this appeared from the headline, nam ely

Exberta Run filii Uroagen de Ubro S t. Germant inuenta, “ Excem ts o f Rhun son o f U rien found in the Book o f S t. Germ anus.” N ow towards the end o f the ninth century H eiric o f Auxerre m et at Soissons a bishop, named M arcus, who was a Briton, educated in Ireland, and who in Beulan presbyter, I have declined to write them, but I have written of the cities and marvels o f the Island o f Britain, as writers have written before me ” (*&., 207). Nennius was translated into Irish by G illa Coem iin, who died in 1072, which translation, including \the Preface, is known as Lebor Bretnach. Geoffrey of Monmouth appears to have had a Welsh version, now lost (see p. 17 below).

i2

Nennius ’s “ history op the britons ”

his old age had retired to the continent to become a recluse in the monastery o f S S . M edard and Sebastian. From this venerable man H eiric gleaned some informa­ tion as to S t. Germ anus’s doings in Britain, which he afterwards (c. 876) inserted in his M iracula Germani, stating that M arcus assured him they were to be found in Britain preserved in w riting. T h is report could not but have started inquiries as to the w riting in question. O ur scribe or another seems to have procured a copy o f the H istory (as presum ably it was in 801) with the information that the excerpts from the Book o f S t. Germ anus had been made by Rhun son o f U rien (who figures in §§ 57, 63, and is there made to have been an adult in a .d . 627). H e seems to have failed to detach the excerpts made by Rhun, which are four in number and interwoven with the story o f H ors and Hengist and with the wonder-tale o f Am brosius’s fortress in the Snowdonian m ountains, and to have treated the composite m atter from § 31 as all by Rhun; hence the above quoted heading. From some sim ilar abbreviated copy o f the H istory, written c. 945, which omitted the Preface, is derived the Vatican exem plar, denominated M , which actually attributes the work to the above-mentioned Bishop M arcus. O ther abbreviated copies, such as P and Q , transcribed after the appearance o f G eoffrey o f M onm outh's H istoria Regum Êritanmee in 1136, ascribe the work to S t. G ildas as G eoffrey him self seems to do,1 who at least does not name N ennius.1 1 Geoffrey names Gildas tfeven times: in I, 1, where he means “ The Loss of Britain in I, 17, “ Gildas hystoricus,” who gave an account (so he says) o f the contention that arose on the re­ naming of Trinovantum as Kaer Lud; in II, 17, “ the blessed Gildas ” on the Molmutine laws; III, 5, “ Gildas hystoricus,” who translated die Molmutine laws from fe tis h into Latin even as Alfred translated them from Latin into English; IY , 20, where Gildas is made to have written a book “ on the victory of Aurelius Ambrosius ” ; V I, 13, where Gildas is made to recount Germanus’s miracles (this doubtless is from Nennius); X II, 6, “ Gildas histori­ a n ” with quotations from “ The Loss of Britain.” * Geoffrey’s “ very ancient book in the British tongue” from Brutus to Cadwaladr could hardly have been other than some

INTRODUCTION

13

T h e contents o f the H istory o f the Britons m ay be tabulated as follow s, which appear in some form in all the eleven m anuscripts and also the Irish translation except where otherwise stated. (Z breaks o ff in the m iddle o f § 3 7 ): 1. T h e Preface N ot in H K M N P Q Z . 2. T h e S ix A ges o f the W orm (1-6) N ot in K N or Irish. 3. O f Britain, etc., inhabitants, in­ vaders, etc. (7-49) 4. S t. Patrick (5°~5S) N ot in N . 5. A rthur (56) 6. A nglian Genealogies, etc. (57"65) In H K only (with § 66). 7 . T h e C ities o f Britain (66 bis) 8. T h e M arvels o f Britain, etc. (67-76) N ot in M N . It w ill be observed that only in one m anuscript does the whole o f N ennius’s book appear (and even in this without the Preface), that is in H , the Harleian M S . 3859 in the British M useum , which was at one time in the «possession o f O vidius M ontalbensis (16011671), professor o f M athem atics, Physics and M oral Philosophy at the U niversity o f Bologna, and was bought for the Harleian Library on January 5, 1729. Its previous history is unknown. A s it contains two lengthy and valuable interpolations, nam ely, («) the Annals o f the Britons, ana (b) W elsh Genealogies o f the tim e o f H yw el D da (d. 950), one can hardly doubt that it is a copy (niade about 1100) o f a m other manu­ script com piled m the m id-tenth century. version o f Nennius or at least o f material used by Nennius, which ended with die plague of 664-5, when Cadwaladr died, which, be it noted, was contemporaneous with the Battle o f Badon. v

14

NENNIUS *S “ HISTORY OF THE BRITONS ”

' Â s all the manuscripts (except Z) contain the passage (in § 16) which refers to “ m e fourth year o f K in g M erfyn,” i.e. 830, and as these ten also (with the Irish translation as well) contain § 25, wherein C air Segeint in A rfon is provided with an English alias, viz. M irm anton, ije. M erfyn ’s town, it is clear they derive in the main from a copy written in M erfyn’s tim e. M erfyn, K in g o f Gwynedd (Pedigree 1), known as M erfyn Frych, “ the Freckled,” was on the side o f his m other, E tthil, the grandson o f Cynan Tindaethw y (d. 816) o f the line o f M aelgwn G w ynedd, greatgrandson o f Cunedda W ledig. Notwithstanding the m astery o f Anglesey and Gwynedd attained by in­ dividuals o f this line, it is doubtful whether its claim to such w ide sovereignty had ever remained unchal­ lenged. O n the side o f his father,1 G w riad ab E lidyr ap Sanddef, he was the great-grandson o f Celenion,* daughter o f T udw al, K in g o f the Isle o f M an (Pedigree 4), o f the line o f Antonius, son o f M axim us, the Roman emperor (d. 388). H ence his description as M erfyn Frych o D ir Manazo*— “ M erfyn the Freckled from M anxland.” It is probable that his descent from M axim us, who was associated w ith Segontium in A rfon, the above-mentioned C air Segeint, now also styled “ M erfyn’s tow n,” would make him more acceptable in A rfon and those other parts o f Gwynedd and A nglesey which had not hitherto perm anently succum bed to the rule o f princes o f the stock o f Cunedda W ledig. > O n the paternal side, too, he was descended from Llyw arch H en,14 * the famous hero o f the poetry which goes by his name and which dates from about M erfyn’s 1 Jesus College Pedigree 19 (Y Cymmrodor, V III, 87). Gwriad’s tombstone in Man has the inscription Crux Guriat, h u “ Cross.” • O r Celemion, cf. Cair Celemion in § 66 bis. * Skene, ii, 222; Phillim oie, Owen's Pembrokeshire, ii, 208. 4 Jesus College Pedigree 17 (Y Cymmrodor, V III, 87).

INTRODUCTION

15

tim e.1 H e was, therefore, o f the line o f C oel, K in g o f K v le (in m odem Ayrshire). A ll this indicates the nature o f his claim to supremacy in N orth-W est W ales. T h at his son, Rhodri the G reat, was remembered as “ Rrodri vab K am w ri ” * is ex­ plained b y Phillim ore* as proving that M erfyn was regarded by some as an oppressor; on the other hand the word ‘ ^Kam wri ” here m ay mean “ valour.” 4 *1 H is grandfather, Cynan, had to contest for Anglesey w ith H yw el, who is made in “ B rut y Tyw ysogion ” to have been his brother, but not so in “ the Annals o f the Britons,” a m uch earlier and better authority. H yw el was probably the son o f Caradog o f the line o f the K ings o f Rhos (Pedigree 3). T h is Caradog is called K in g o f G w ynedd, who was killed by the English in 798. Fifteen years later H yw el attacks Cynan to recover the suprem acy exercised by his father and defeats him . N ext year he proceeds further, winning Anglesey and driving Cynan out, but two years later H yw el in his turn is driven from die island, and then Cynan dies. In 817 occurs the A ction o f Llanfaes (doubtless in A nglesey), but no particulars are given. In the meantime die English invade Rhufoniog and Snowdonia. T h ey also waste D yfed in the south. In 822 they destroy Degannwy and bring Powys under control. In 825 H yw el dies. T h en apparendy M erfyn the M anxm an comes to rom inence, whether as oppressor or restorer or both. >y 827 he is K in g o f G w ynedd, being acclaim ed as such in 830, the fourth year o f his reign, in N ennius's H istory o f the Britons, wherein, too, C air Segeint in A rfon is said to be also known as “ M erfyn's tow n.” T h at same year, 830 (ante-dated 828 b y error in the A nglo-Saxon Chronicle), Egbert o f W essex is said to have entered W ales and forced the W elsh to obedient

Ê

1 Ifor Williams, Poems 0/ Llytoarch Hen, 32; Canu LXyvmch Hen, x d . * Ancient Lotos of Wales, i, 342. * Owen’s Pembrokeshire, ii, 209. 4 Lloyd-Jones, Gdrfa, s. kamhwri, kamwri.

i6

Nennius ’s “ history op the britons

subjection. T h is can hardly mean more than his recognition o f M erfyn as K in g o f Gwynedd and other changes which had occurred in W ales. M erfyn strengthened his position by m arrying N est,1 sister o f Cyngen, K in g o f Powys (Pedigree 27), who erected the famous cross in the Vale o f Llangollen. W hen he died at Rome in 854, the rule o f Powys passed to his nephew, Rhodri the G reat, who was M erfyn's son. It would in fact seem as though the advent o f M erfyn the M anxman inaugurated a new forceful period in the history o f W ales, extending to the days o f H ywel D da {d. 950) and M organ H en (d. 974). In Ireland his court was known as a rendezvous o f learned m en, and an Irish w riter is m uch concerned lest some o f his brethren “ m ight be made to blush in the presence o f M erfyn, the glorious K in g o f the Britons.” * Nennius skilfully arranged his “ excerpts ” accord­ ing to plan, that is to conform with the scheme o f “ m e Story o f the Loss o f B ritain,” which he takes as his basis, from which he often quotes short passages, and which he closely follows throughout, although (as coundess others have done) he frequently m is­ understands it, overlooking or ignoring its chrono­ logical sequences and missing some o f its salient points. In short it may be said that N ennius's H istory o f the Britons is a commentary on- the “ Story o f the L oss o f B ritain.” T h ey both begin with the tim e that Britain was first inhabited, and the last great event recorded by both is a decisive batde, wherein the English m et w ith disaster. It is, therefore, essential for the purposes o f this book to provide for reference a fresh and close transla­ tion o f the de exddio Britannice, the Story o f the Loss o f Britain, divided, in accordance w ith the 1 Jesus College Pedigree 18, “ Rodri Mawr mab Nest meich Cadell Pywys ” (Y Cymmrodor, V III, 87).

,

* Gougaud, Christianity in Celtic Lands 252-3.

17

INTRODUCTION

author’s own plan, into its original tw enty-six sections. A s w ill be seen, these sections on their own evidence were written 19^ years after a supposed first arrival o f the English in Britain, w hich last event occurred some considerable interval after the T h ird Consulship o f A ëtius in a j >. 446. B y the first coining o f the English he meant the landing o f the Jutes in Hamp­ shire in ajd. 514, from which tim e there was warfare between the English and W elsh for 150 years, terminat­ ing w ith the Battle o f the Badonic H ill in a j >. 665. T h is is the last great event m entioned in the Story o f the L oss o f Britain. N ennius, however, had been persuaded that the Battle o f Badon was the last 01 A rthur’s victories nearly two centuries before. So for the W elsh victory at Badon in 665 he gives the crowning victory o f the Piets over the Northum brians at L lyn Garan or Nechtansm ere on M ay 20, 685. It is relevant at this point to refer to what has long proved the crux o f G eoffrey o f M onm outh’s famous rom ance, entitled .the H istory o f the K ings o f Britain. H e tells us (i, 1, xii, 18) o f “ a very ancient book in the British tongue ” given to him by W alter, Archdeacon o f O xford (from m i to 115 1), which this same W alter had brought out o f Britannia, i.e. W ales,1 and which contained the history o f the Britons from Brutus, their first king, down to Cadwaladr son o f Cadw allon. T h is ancient British book could hardly have been other than a W elsh version o f Nennius or o f m aterial used by N ennius. But whatever it was (and I see no reason to doubt G eoffrey’s credibility on the m atter), the point here is that it began like Nennius and the Story 01 the Loss o f Britain w ith the tim e that Britain was first inhabited, and ended w ith the death o f Cadwaladr son o f Cadwallon. In other words, it ended w ith an event w hich synchronized with the 1 For Britannia = Wales, see W .C .O ., ch. iii. Even as late as 1526 in “ The M artiloge,” one reads opposite March 1, “ In Brytayne now Wales . . . the feast of saynt Dauid.”

2

l8

NENNIUS’S “ HISTORY OF THE BRITONS

Battle o f the Badonic H ill in 665, for Cadwaladr died in the great plague which raged from Britain to Ireland in 664-5 (Bede, iii, 27, N ennius, § 64). §§ 1-18 . O f B ritain and its I nhabitants A fter a short Preface, with prelim inaries on the Ages o f the W orld, Nennius begins like the Loss w ith die geography o f Britain, which (he says) was form erly in­ habited throughout by the Bntons or W elsh. L ike the Loss, too, he starts from the tim e that Britain was first occupied, which gives him the opportunity to tell the story o f the Trojan origin o f the W elsh in the T h ird A ge o f the W orld, when E h judged Israel and the A rk o f the Covenant was taken. E ight centuries later the Piets arrived in the Orkney Islands, but it was in subsequent tim es that they in­ vaded Britain, drove the W elsh out o f the country beyond Forth and C lyde, and occupied Pictland. L ater the Scots arrived in Ireland (this was in the Fourth A ge o f die W orld) and held it throughout. From Ireland they entered Britain and took D alrieta, i.e. A rgyll, also die Isle o f M an, also D yfed, G ow er, and Cedw eli (in South-W est W ales), but they were expelled from all W elsh districts by Cunedda and his sons. Learned Irishm en gave another account o f the Irish occupation o f Ireland and D alrieta, which occurred when Brutus was consul in Rome, from whom consuls began to be. N ennius, m isunderstanding the Loss, says o f the Piets and Scots that they used to com bine forces to attack Britain, which they did incessandy, the Piets from the north and the Scots from the w est, because the Britons were unarmed. T h en after a long interval o f tim e the Romans became masters o f the w orld, after whose rule in Britain the Saxons at V ortigem ’s invitation entered Britain. T h is happened some four centuries before “ the fourth year o f K in g M erfyn,” which appears to be AJ). 830. H aving discovered another account o f Brutus from

INTRODUCTION

*9

“ old books o f our ancestors ” and o f the peopling o f Europe b y descendants o f Japheth son o f N oah, he adds this excerpt to the rest. §§ 19-30. T he R omans in B ritain N ennius is now hard put to in an attem pt to weld the story o f Roman Britain as told in the Loss w ith an old British list o f seven Roman emperors who had stood on British soil. A ccording to the Loss it was after the Parthian peace o f 20 b .c . that Roman armies first arrived in Britain. T h ey came four tim es in all, twice at the Roman conquest to conquer, and tw ice after the Revolt o f M axim us to repel the Piets and Scots, when the Stone W all from sea to sea was bu ilt. Each o f these four Roman armies returned to Rom e im m ediately after accom plishing its task. T h e first tim e they left rulers behind, whom the Britons prom ptly slew , and the second tim e they left taskmasters w ith whips. F or the author had no conception o f a Roman m ilitary occupa­ tion o f Britain extending over three centuries and a half. W hat Nennius perceived clearly from all this was that a successful Roman arm y had landed in Britain on four occasions, and had then returned to Rome in trium ph. Overlooking or ignoring the lim its o f tim e provided by the mention o f the Parthian peace o f 20 b .c . and o f the Revolt o f M axim us in a j >. 383, he begins w ith the land­ ing o f Julius Cæsar in 55 b .c ., who comes twice (if not thrice), but only succeeds on his third attem pt. T h is, therefore, is made to equate w ith the first Roman army o f the Loss, which conquered Britain and left rulers behind, whom the Britons slew. T h e second Roman arm y o f the Loss to conquer Britain is made to have arrived under Claudius, who however ceased to receive tribute from the Britons be­ fore his death, it being paid to British emperors instead (which, o f course, is pure invention). So Nennius assumes that the Roman leaders left behind by this second arm y were slain like the form er ones. T h e third arm y o f the Loss, which came to repel the

20

Ne n n iu s ’s “

h is t o r y o f t h e b r it o n s

”

Piets and Scots, is made to have arrived under Severus, who built the Stone W all from sea to sea. Severus is made to have been slain by die Britons together w ith his leaders, which is again pure invention. T h e fourth arm y o f the Loss arrives under Carausius, who wrought vengeance on the Britons for the death o f Severus and his leaders. T h u s (says Nennius) on three occasions were the Roman leaders slain by the Britons. A nd he proceeds to recapitulate' in this fashion. O w ing to the attacks o f Piets and Scots, the unarmed Britons were wont to seek help o f the Romans, expressing deep sorrow for killing the leaders, bearing w ith them rich presents, and prom ising obedience. T h e Romans would come w ith an arm y, appoint emperors w ith leaders, and return to Rome. T h is went on for 348 years. A nd again the Britons, owing to Roman oppression, would s k y the leaders and m en solicit help. T h e Romans would come to avenge the em pire, spoiling Britain in the meantime o f its gold, silver, bronze, cosdy garments, and honey, but always going back to Rome when their work was done. N ennius, who like the Loss always distinguishes ^between the Romans and the Britons, states that finally the Britons overthrew the dominion o f the Romans, re­ fusing to render tribute to them , declining to receive their kings, till the Romans dared no more to rule in Britain, for that their leaders were always being slain. §§31-49. VORTIGERN T h e clim ax o f the Story o f the L oss o f Britain is reached w ith the Saxons, who are made to land in the island for the first tim e at the invitation o f a “ proud tyrant ” and his counsellors some long interval after 446. Nennius identifies the “ proud tyrant ” w ith' Vortigem , and devotes nearly a quarter o f his book to re­ counting V ortigem ’s career, but com pletely ignores the tim e-lim it o f 446. N ow according to the Loss the political situation in

INTRODUCTION

21

Britain some considerable interval after A ëtius’s third consulship in 446 was as follows. T h e Piets occupied the country beyond the C lyde and Forth, w hilst the Britons, i.e. the W elsh, occupied all the rest. In other words, the W elsh were in fu ll possession o f the L ow ­ lands, the whole o f England ana all W ales, there being as yet no English in the island. T h ey were under the single rule o f a “ proud tyrant,” to w it, V ortigem . T h is o f course is not history, but such was the situation as presented in the Loss. Nennius had first and foremost a pedigree, which gave the line o f V ortigem up to his great-grandfather, a man o f G loucester, and down to Ffem fael, who was reigning in a .d . 830 (fifteen generations in all) over the two districts o f G w rtheym ion and Buellt (on either side o f the river W ye in m odem Radnorshire and Breconshire), the form er o f which derives its name from V ortigem him self. V ortigem , therefore, so far from being king o f ^11 Britain, south o f C lyde and Forth, was a man o f the W est, ruling in W ales. M oreover, being the eleventh ancestor o f Ffem fael, who lived in 830, his period was in the early fifth century. O f hardly less importance than this pedigree Nennius had four excerpts taken from a Book 01 S t. Germ anus by Rhun son o f U rien, a cleric who was busy in 627. T hese are o f great value, being long prior to the Loss and constituting with the pedigree our prim ary author­ ity for a study o f the historic V ortigem as distinct from the sham one. T h ey bring him race to face w ith St. Germ anus o f Auxerre on his first visit to Britain in 429, locate him in various parts o f W ales, and record his death at the fortress, still bearing his name, on the river T eify , prior to S t. Germ anus’s departure in 430. M ore­ over, the only crim e w ith which he is charged is that o f incest, not a hint being given o f any dealings on his part with Saxons, who are not even mentioned. N ennius's hard task was to harmonize this early material with the stories which had gathered around the name o f V ortigem after the Loss had declared him to be the villain who had first received the Saxons into

22

•

Nennius ’s “ h istory op the britons ”

Britain. T h e year o f the Saxon arrival he fixed at 401 (according to the system o f Victorius o f Aquitaine), which is our a j >. 428. But he knew o f another date, viz. a .p . 347 (according to the system o f Prosper), which is our AJ>. 275. It tells for his good faith that he gives these two irreconcilable dates. M oreover, Bede had erroneously supposed that the first landing o f the Saxons, as tola by the Loss, had occurred in K ent. A fter reading “ the Story ” Bede had made inquiries o f his Canterbury friends, who told him o f two brothers who had invaded that district, Hengest andH orsa,the latter o f whom had a monument in eastern K ent bearing his name. Nennius had heard the same tale w ith further particulars. H engist and Hors had arrived as exiles, to whom V ortigem had presented the island o f Thanet, and afterwards the whole o f K ent in return for H engist’s pretty daughter. D ifferent as this K entish story w ith its em bellishm ents is from that told in the Loss, Nennius does his best to harmonize them . T o these reports from distant K ent he attaches names and incidents from W ales. T h u s a W elsh ruler, named Gwrangon, whose fort on the T e ify is only some seven miles from that o f V ortigem , whom V ortigem had possibly displaced, who also figures in traditions o f Gwent, is turned into an im aginary K in g o f K ent, secretly dispossessed o f his realm in favour o f H engist, whose daughter V ortigem wished to m arry. A gain, Vortim er and C attigim , two sons o f V ortigem , are transported from W ales to K ent. T h e form er, V or­ tim er, was historically a man o f G w ent, whose possible activities in the Forest o f D ean, known in W elsh as L lw yn Danet, are converted into blockades o f Thanet, w hilst four obscure K entish battles are turned into W elsh victories won under his leadership. T h e second son, C attigim , who historically was K in g o f Powvs, is also made to have fought in K ent and even to have fallen there in the same battle as the m ythical Hors. T o make the story m ore convincing, W elsh equivalents are invented for K entish place-nam es. Another ingredient in this very composite account o f a .p .

INTRODUCTION

23

V ortigem is a wonder-tale o f a contest between him and his dreaded rival, Am brosius, in the heart o f the Snowdonian m ountains. T h e story, doubtless o f ancient ..origin, has been re-fashioned to make it harmonize not only with the fictitious V ortigem o f the Loss but also w ith the no less fictitious Vortim er o f K ent. A m b r o s iu s

Am brosius, son o f a Roman consul or em peror, sojourned as a boy in G lyw ysing in the neighbourhood o f w hat is now Llansannor in Glam organ. W hilst V ortigem reigned from 425 to 430, he lived in dread o f Am brosius, and before his death had surrendered to him the stronghold o f Dinas Em rys in A rfon and the suprem acy o f the Britons, whereby he becam e Em rys W ledig or Ruler. A s ruler he bestowed the two provinces o f G w rtheym ion and B uellt on V ortigem ’s son, Pascent, whose descendants still held them in a j >. 830. In 440 occurred the Battle o f G uoloph between Am brosius and V italinus, o f whom nothing is known save that his name, being identical w ith that o f V ortigem ’s grandfather, points to his being o f that fam ily. §§ 5 °"5 5 - S t . P a t r ic k

Contem porary w ith V ortigem and his successor, Am brosius, was S t. Patrick, some account o f whom , therefore, fitly appears here. T h e m ission o f Paladius, the ordination o f Patrick and his departure for Ireland are derived directly from M uirchu’s L ife o f S t. Patrick, but N ennius had some additional matter. T h e description o f Patrick’s experience on Cruachan E ile seems not to be taken directly from Tirechan, but to depend on another source, whence Tirechan also drew. T h e three petitions o f Patrick are identical and correspond verbally w ith those which are added in the Book o f Arm agh to the incom plete text o f Tirechan. T h e four points o f comparison w ith M oses are also found in the same order among these additions to T irechan.1 1 Buty (278-9).

24

NENNIUS’S “ HISTORY OF THE BRITONS

§ 56. A r t h u r T h is famous section, which contains the earliest account o f A rthur, consists o f four paragraphs. T h e first and fourth are deductions from the Loss made bv Nennius him self. T h e second is a valuable English tradition from K ent, that O ctha, the father o f O eric O ise, settled in K ent from N orth Britain. T h e third is an old list o f the victories o f A rthur, whose name is suddenly sprung on the reader as that o f one so re­ nowned as to need no introduction. H is period clearly follows close on that o f Am brosius, and synchronizes with the arrival o f O ctha in K en t. T h e list shews indubitable traces o f the influence o f the Loss in the m atter o f A rthur’s last victory, where a clum sy attempt is made to identify it w ith the siege o f the Badonic H ill fought in 665 some two centuries later. T h u s: HK

T h e eleventh battle on the mountain called A gned. T h e tw elfth on M ount Badon. MN T h e eleventh is named Breguoin, “ which we call C at Bregion.” T h e twelfth on M ount Badon. C D G L P Q T h e eleventh on the mountain called Agned C at Bregom ion. T h e tw elfth on M ount Badon. Irish T h e eleventh (om itted in all M SS .). T h e twelfth (name omitted in all M S S .).

T h e two last victories were evidently Agned and Breguoin, with Badon as intruder from the Loss. One group ejects Breguoin to find room for Badon, another ejects Agned, w hilst the m ajority overcome the diffi­ culty by compressing Agned and Breguoin into one. T h e Irish translator, unable to find a solution, omits the eleventh victory altogether, and leaves the twelfth unnamed. T h e special mention o f “ Cat Bregion ” shews it was once w ell remembered. It. seems to stand for Cat

INTRODUCTION

*5

Breguoin or Breguoinion, which m ight yield in m odem W elsh Cad Fryw ain (or Fryweinion), i.e. the Battle o f Bravonium , the Rom ano-British town at Leintw ardine, H erefordshire. §§ 57-61. A n g l ia n G e n e a l o g ie s Between A rthur's victories and Ida o f N orthum bria in 547 (an- interval o f over fifty years) Nennius provides not a sm gle excerot. (Y et this was the interval when Cerdic m ied the G ew issi and the Jutes were called in.) Fortunately, however, he here interposes a short but precious tract, containing genealogies o f English kings. T hese are remarkable in that they all go back into Rom ano-British tim es, even in the case o f the O iscings o f K en t, who, as he has already told us, arrived there from N orth Britain near the W all. (N o genealogy is provided o f the kings o f the G ew issi, or o f the W est Saxons, or o f any other Saxons.) Although in some instances these pedigrees are pro­ longed into the eighth century, one can hardly doubt that they were originally drawn up in the century before, possibly during die reign o f Ecgbert, K in g o f K en t (664-673), w ith whom that royal line ends. T h e tract certainly dates from before the appearance o f the Loss, for it betrays no knowledge o f any “ year o f the Saxon advent ” (which is nothing but an invention o f that work) or o f any expulsion o f Britons into the W est. O n the contrary the English kings are made to have sprung from ancient insular stocks who lived in Britain in Roman tim es. In other words they were not invaders, but m en o f Britain. Rem arkable, too, is the fact that, whereas the M ercian genealogy is prolonged to 796 with m ention o f Æ thelred (675-704), Æ thelbald (716-757) and Offa (757-796), there is no reference whatever to Penda’s famous son, W ulfhere (659-675), in whose tim e occurred the Batde o f the Badonic H ill. T h is omission can hardly be other than intentional (the mention o f W ulfhere and Badon being suppressed). On the other hand, much is

26

NENNIUS’S “ HISTORY OF THE BRITONS ”

said o f the overthrow o f Ecgfrid o f Northum bria at L lyn Garan (or Nechtansmere) in 685, which is the last battle recorded. §§62-65. W a r s

of

B r it o n s

and

A n gles

These sections, again, seem to date in their original from the seventh century,1 certainly before the publica­ tion o f the Loss, for it is the English, and not the Britons, who are on the defensive. N ot a hint is given o f any retreat to the west on the part o f the W elsh. O n the contrary, it is the W elsh who attack either from the western Lowlands or from W ales. W hoever inserted the quotation in § 63 from the Loss (a) o f the Britons being sometimes victors and some­ tim es the Saxons identified these battles rightly w ith those which were fought before and after a j >. 600, so that they should have ended (as in the Loss) with the obsession o f the Badonic H ill in 665, when W ulfhere reigned in M ercia. But in their present form these sections om it any reference to W ulfhere or to Badon. T h e last battle referred to is L lyn Garan in 685, so that it is not im probable that Nennius quietly dropped Badon, which he had been persuaded was a victory o f A rthur two centuries previously, and substituted the English disaster o f 685. §6 6 . C alcu li

These (except the last) fall into three groups, which I mark a, 6, and c, as follows. In 457 Victorius o f Aquitaine adopted the G reat C ycle o f 532 years for the construction o f his Easter T able, the object o f which was to enable the clergy to find the day on which Easter was to be kept in any particular year. Victorius gave the names o f the consuls for each year, the week-day o f January is t, the age o f the moon on that day, the date o f 1 A precise date, 679, was inferred for an earlier text by Zimmer and Thumeysen from § 64, Egfrid film s Osbiu regnavit nomem amis. The last incident mentioned before 679 is the death of Cadwaladr in the plague of 664-5, which also is the date of Badon.

INTRODUCTION

27

Easter, and the age o f die moon on that day; and fo r security o f reference he prefixed the Year o f the Possum. N ow the Y ear o f the Passion according to Victorius equates w ith the D ionysian a j >. 28, w hen the two G em ini, Fufius and Rubelius, were consuls, so that we have the following equations:

a .p . a .p .

(«) i = AJ>. 28 (Fufius and Rubelius, coss.). 430 = a j >. 457 (Constantine and Rufus, coss. T h e Year o f the W orld, 5658).

(*) i = a .d . 28 (Fufius and Rubelius, coss.). 373 = a .d . 400 (Stilicho, cos.). 401 ±= a .d . 428 (28 years from Stilicho, V ortigem reigning). a .p . 413 = a .d . 440 (12 years from last item , C at GuoIopK). a .p . a .p . a .p .

(c) a .p .

398 = a .d . 425 (Theodosius and Valentinianus, coss.). a .p . 401 = a .d . 428 (Felix and T aurus, coss. A r­ rival o f the Saxons). T hese calculations revolve round the notion that Saxons were first let into Britain b y V ortigem in A.D. 428 (§§ 31). System atically they are all correct, except that some bungler, who calculated from the Incarnation, altered “ Passion ” into “ Incarnation ” in the last item (as into “ N ativity ” in § 16). T h is same bungler was responsible for the final calculation o f § 66, w hich is a jum ble o f errors, wherein D ecius and Valerianus appear for A ëtius and Valerius, the consuls for a .p . 40c = a J). 432, the year o f Bishop Patrick’s arrival in Ireland. Instead 01 adding 27 to A.p. 405 to reach the correct D ionysian Y ear o f the In­ carnation, he added 32 (as in § 16) and reached a j >. 437.

28

Nennius’s “

history op the britons

From this he proceeded to subtract a j >. 348 ( = a .p . 347 according to rrosp er’s system , the year o f the Saxons as in § 30), bungled again by m isreading it as 368, and reached 437 m inus 368 = 69. § 66 bis.

T

he

T

w e n t y -E ig h t

C it ie s

of

B r it a in

T here were 28 cities in Britain (says the Loss), which had all been destroyed b y the Saxons and were now lying desolate and deserted. B ut here w e have a list o f 28 said to be “ the names o f all the cities which are in the whole o f B ritain.” M ost o f them , so far as they can be identified, represent Roman towns or forts, but certainly they are not all such, nor is it even suggested that any o f them are uninhabited. T h e one link between the Loss and this list is the num ber, 28, the source o f which is unknown, nor is it known on what principle (if any) it was reached. Certainly it is not a list from Roman tim es, nor is it the translation o f such a list. Som e dozen o f them are identified by general agreement. A s it was patently drawn up by a Briton, who like his fellows knew little or nothing o f England, especially towards the east, one should expect to find most o f the sites in W ales and the west, w hilst the remainder would be mere attem pts to translate English names or at least to throw them into some sem blance o f British form . §§67-76. M a r v e l s T w en ty in num ber, the first four o f them (specially numbered) are outside W ales— (1) Loch Lom ond, (2) Éstuary o f the T ren t, (3) H ot Pool (at Bath), (4) Salt W ells (at D roitw ich). T h e next ten are in South W ales— (5) T h e “ two kings ” o f Severn, (6) A ber L lyn Llyw an on Severn, (7) G uur H elic in Cynllybiw g, (8) W ondrous apples at W ye-m outh, (9) W yth G w ynt blow-hole in G w ent, (10) Suspended A ltar in G ow er (Illtud), (11) Pw ll M eurig in G w ent, (12) C am G afall in B uellt (Arthur), (13) Gam ber Head, Archenfield (Arthur), (14) C ra g M aw r, near Cardigan. T h e next

INTRODUCTION

29

four in Anglesey— (15) A sea-less beach, (16) A gyrating h ill, (17) A vadum rising and falling w ith thé sea, (18) À walking stone. T h e rem aining two in Ireland, — (19) T h e Luchlein swam p, (20) T h e L u ch Echach swam p. T H E A N N A L S O F T H E B R ITO N S

T hese appear in the Harleian M S . 3859 as an integral part o f the H istory o f the Britons, and were edited for the Monumenta H istorica Britannica, 1848, under a name apparently concocted for the occasion, to w it, Annales Cam bria, “ T h e Annals o f Cam bria.” U nder this name they were published a second tim e, inter­ woven w ith two later copies in the R olls Series, i860. O f this nineteenth-century title, Annales Cam bria, it m ust be said at once that it was (and is) m ost unfortunate. A s the work has no title and reads con­ tinuously in the H arleian H istory o f the Britons as an integral portion o f that book, it may w ell have been styled Annales Brittonum , “ the Annals o f the Britons,” after the manner o f Nennius him self, who in his Preface speaks o f the annals o f the Romans and the annals o f the Scots and Saxons.1 F or (apart from other reasons) neither in the Annals them selves nor in the whole o f Nennius does the word “ Cam bria ” ever appear, nor is it to be found in any L atin document relating to W ales prior to the publication o f G eoffrey o f M onm outh’s History o f the Kings o f Britain in 1136.* T h e title, therefore, is apocryphal and most m isleading. In 1888 they were again edited (together w ith the Genealogies and the Catalogue o f Cities which follow ), this tim e by a W elsh scholar o f the first rank, M r. Egerton Phillim ore, in Y Cym m rodor, ix, 143-183. “ Both Annales and Genealogies (he tells us) in their present form shew marks o f having been composed in the last h alf o f d ie tenth century. T h e years o f the 1 Williams* Christianity in Early Britain, 405. 1 For the late term Cambria = Wales, see W .C .O ., 46-47.

30

Nennius’s “

history of the britons

”

Annales are written down to 977, though the last event recorded is the death o f Rhodn ab H yw el D da in 054; w hilst the omission o f the battle o f Llanrw st, wm ch was fought in the very next year (955) between die sons o f Idwal and those o f H yw el D da (especially on the part o f an annalist who, if also the composer o f the Genealogies, would seem to have been a partisan o f H yw el's fam ily in their contest for the suprem acy o f W ales), certainly points to the Annales having been finished as they are now in the year 954 or 955, and never subsequendy retouched. T h e Genealogies com­ mence w ith that (given both on the father’s and on the m other’s side) o f Owen ab H yw el D da, who died in 088, and they m ust therefore have been compiled during his reign, and before that year.” It should be added, however, that Pedigree 1, though it includes Owen, m ust have been originally com piled in the reign o f his father, ............................1 950. For as the initial letters Owen and H ywel are omitted in order to be filled in later by an illum inator, which does not occur in the case o f any other o f these Pedigrees, it would seem that Pedigree 1 originally began not with [0 ]uen, but w ith [HJiguel, i.e. H yw el. T h at the Annales ultim ately derive from an Easter T able or Tables is shewn by the scantity and brevity o f the notices, as they necessarily would be if taken from the margins o f such com pilations, and also by the fact that every annus is entered, whether any event is recorded or not.1 T h e choice o f Annus i ( = a .d . 445) dépends on the last paragraph o f § 66, which im m ediately precedes the Annals, and which (as we have already seen) is a jum ble o f errors. T h is last paragraph was to open w ith an illum inated capital, which was never filled in, so that 1 It has been observed that the “ Annals ” provides a list o f 533 years (errors apart), as though it represented an original Table of a Great Cycle of 532 years, beginning with Annus i ( = a j >. 445) and ending with Annus dxodi ( = a ^>. 976), followed by a fresh Annus i ( = A.D. 977), the commencement o f a new Great C yde o f 532 years.

INTRODUCTION

it marks a fresh departure from what w ent before. reads as follow s:

31

It

[A]b anno quo Saxones uenerunt in Brittanniam et a G uorthigim o suscepti sunt usque ad Decium et Ualerianum anni sunt sexaginta nouem. “ From the year in which the Saxons came into Britain and were received b y G uorthigim up to D ecius and Valerianus are 69 years/* O ur annalist found “ the year o f the Saxons ” at the end o f § 3 1, nam ely 347, from the Passion o f Christ as counted by Prosper, which (by adding 28) is a j >. 375. T h en by adding 69, as the paragraph directs, he arrived at a j p . 416 ( — a .d . 444), after which he commenced his Annals with the year following, i.e. Annus i ( = a .d . 445). T h is, however, was not the meaning or intention o f the original author o f the paragraph in question. T h e object in his case was to calculate the interval between “ the year o f the Saxons ” and that o f the arrival o f Bishop Patrick in Ireland. It was the chronological relationship between a great event in Irish history and what he had been led to believe (from the Story o f the Loss o f Britain! was an equally great event in British history that ne sought to establish. W e have seen how he bungled in this endeavour. N ow it is known that in a .d . 432 Patrick took with him to Ireland a prospective Paschal T ab le o f a C ycle o f 84 years.1 T h is C ycle began that same year, which was consequently distinguished by the names o f its consuls, to w it, A ëtius and Valerius. It extended from 432 to 515. Between these years in the Annals o f the Britons are five entries only, four o f which relate to Ireland and one to the dating o f Easter. T h en at 516 appears the first British entry and another at 537, both considerably postdated. Between them at 521 are two Irish notices, and a third at 544. A ll this points to an Irish source for the opening o f our W elsh Annals, which aimed, though unsuccessfully, at com m encing with the arrival o f Bishop Patrick in Ireland in 432. 1 Bury, 283.

32

NENNIUS'S “ HISTORY OP THE BRITONS

PED IG REES

T hese from the entourage o f H yw el D da, K in g o f W ales, embrace most o f the royal and princely lines o f the Britons as recognized by him in what apparently he regarded as the order o f their importance. T h ey are only found so in this one M S ., the Harleian 3859, and were com piled at the same period as the Annals and probably by the same person. Being “ largely concerned with the same historical personages and events, they extensively illustrate one another.” 1 T h e date o f the m anuscript being some century and a h alf later than that o f the com position o f both Annals and Pedigrees, and being written in an English hand o f about a j >. 1100, it “ bears marks o f intermediate transcription by one or more copyists from an earlier M S . in the older * H ibem o-Saxon ' character used in W ales up to the end o f the eleventh century. T h e frequent and serious mistakes, both o f m isspelling and wrong division, made in the transcription o f the commonest or most typical W elsh names and words, also show that at least one o f the intermediate tran­ scribers cannot have been a W elshm an.” * T h e Pedigrees are printed in this book in colum ns, as reproduced by Phillim ore from the M S ., but w ith certain obvious corrections and also notes to help the reader to understand them . T H E P IL L A R O F E L ISE G

O f earlier date than these Pedigrees, and like them o f first importance in the study o f early W elsh history, is an inscription which was cut on the shaft o f a tall cross erected in the V ale o f Llangollen by Cyngen fab C adell, the last K in g o f Powys o f the old line, who died at an advanced age in Rome in 854 (see Pedigree 27). ^It was his sister, N est, whom lu n g M erfyn m arried and through whom their son, Rhodri the G reat, acquired suprem acy over Powys. N ow known as the Pillar o f E liseg, it stands near the ruins o f V alle Crucis. 1 Phillimore, Y Cymmrodor IX , 142.

* lb., 145-6.

INTRODUCTION

33

A bbey in the parish o f Llandysilio yn Ial, D enbigh­ shire. W hen the celebrated W elsh scholar, Edward L huyd, examined it in 1696, it had been thrown down, its crosshead had disappeared, and the shaft was broken in two. Lhuyd made a facsim ile o f what remained o f the inscription, which facsim ile was photo­ graphed to accompany an illum inating article on the subject by Sir John Rhys.1 T h e inscription consisted o f some 31 lines, divided into paragraphs, each intro­ duced b y a cross. A s far as it cou ld (or can) be de­ ciphered, it was approxim ately as follow s: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 0. 7. 8. 9. 10. 1 1. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 3 : 19. 20. 2 1. 22. 23. 24. 25.

t Concenn film s C attell Catell nlius Brohcm ail Brohcm ail filius Eluseg Eliseg filius G uoillauc -f- Concenn itaque pronepos E liseg edificauit hunc lapidem proauo suo Eliseg f Ipse est E liseg qui nec xit hereditatem Pouosi ex manu cat’em per u e potestate Anglo rum et cum gladio suo et igne j* Quicum que récitât manescrip turn det benedictionem supe r animam Eliseg t Ipse est Concenn qui nactus est M C itm g manu sua quæ ad regnum suum Puois pertinebant et apud

monarchiam M axim us Brittanniæ Pascent Maucannan f Britu autem filius G uarthi gim quem benedixit Germ anus quem que peperit ei Seuira filia M axim i regis qui occidit regem Romano

1 Rhys, Y Cymmrodor (1908) X X I, 1-62; see also Sayce, Arch. Camb. (1909), 43-48, and especially Macalister, Arch. Comb. (1935), 330-3*

3

34 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 3 1.

Ne n n iu s ’ s “ h is t o r y o f t h e b r it o n s ”

rum j* Conm arch pinxit hoc chirografum rege suo poscente Concenn j* Benedictio dom ini in Con cenn et in tota fam ilia eius et in tota regione Pouois usque in [diem iudici].

j- Concenn son o f CadeU, Cadett son o f BrockmaU, BrockmaU son o f Eliseg, Etiseg son o f Guoillauc. See Pedigree 27. f A nd so Concenn, great-grandson o f Eliseg, erected tins stone fo r his great-grandfather Eliseg. j* This is that Eliseg, who joined together the inheri" f the power o f the Angles riting, let him give a blessing on the soul o f Eltseg. f This is that Concenn who captured with his hand eleven hundred acres which used to belong to his kingdom o f Powys and . . . O ne or more paragraphs, illegible, follow . M axim us is the em peror who tell m 388. T h e words monarchiam and B rittannia suggest the song entitled “ Vnbeinyaeth Prydein,” the M onarchy o f Britain, which the Bard o f the K in g ’s Household sang before the troops in the day o f battle.1 F or Pascent, Maucannan, see Pedi­ grees 22, 27. j* B ritu son o f Vortigem , whom Germanus blessed, and whom Sévira bore to him, daughter o f M aximus the king, who killed the king o f the Romans.* j* Conmarch painted this writing at the request o f king Concenn. j* The blessing o f the Lord upon Concenn and upon Ms entire householcl and upon a ll the region o f Powys until [the day o f doom]. 1 W .M .L ., 22,167. 1 For Britu, modem Brydw, see Pedigree 23.

N E N N IU S ’S “ H IS T O R Y O F T H E B R IT O N S ” [PREFACE]

I, N e n n iu s , disciple o f Elvodugus,1 have taken care to w rite some exceipts,* which the dullness o f the nation o f Britannia had cast aside, because teachers had no knowledge nor made any m ention in books o f the island o f Britain.* B ut I have got together every­ thing which I found as w ell from the annals o f the Romans as from the chronicles o f the sacred fathers, Jerome, Eusebius, Isidore, Prosper, and from the annals o f the Scots and o f the Saxons and from the tradition o f our ancestors. Seeing that many teachers and book­ men4 have attem pted to w rite, I know not how it is they have abandoned it, whether it is too difficult or owing to very frequent pestilences or the oft-recurring calam ities o f wars. I beg that every reader, who shall have read this book, w ill pardon m e, who have dared after so many to w rite so many things as these, as it were a chattering bird or a sort o f weak witness. I yield to him , who shall have known more in this kind o f knowledge than I do. § i . 6 From 2,242 years. From From From

the beginning o f the world to the flood, the flood to Abraham , 942 years. Abraham to M oses, 640 years. M oses to D avid, 500 years.

1 See Introduction, pp. 7-8. * Nennius’s book is to consist o f excerpts from previous writers. * illius. Note the distinction between Britannia, i.e. Wales, and Britannia, i.e. the Island o f Britain. 4 librarii. The word Jibrarius yielded the Welsh Uyfrawr (W .C.O., 208-10). * §§ 1-6, although supposed to be taken from ancient Irish sources, are omitted in the Irish translation, having doubtless become obsolete in this old form.

35

36

NENNIUS’S “ HISTORY OF THE BRITONS ”

§ 2. From D avid to Nebuchadnezzar are 569 years. From Adam to the transm igration to Babylon are 4,879 years. § 3. From the transmigration to Babylon to Christ 566. From Adam in fact to the Passion o f Christ are 5,228 years. § 4. From the Passion o f C hrist are completed 796 years. From H is Incarnation are 831 years.1 , § £. T h e first age o f the w orld, then, from Adam to N oah. T h e second from N oah to Abraham . T h e third from Abraham to D avid. § 6. T h e fourth from D avid to D aniel. T h e fifth from D aniel to John the Baptist. T h e sixth from John to the Judgement, wherein our L ord , Jesus Christ, w ill com e to judge the living and the dead, and the world by fire. § 7 . T h e Island o f Britain, called from a certain Brutus,* a Roman consul. Situated towards the west, 1 As 796 years o f the Passion were completed, the current year was A.P. 797. By adding 32 we arrive at 829 as the current year of the Incarnation. I f this is correct, the computist would appear to have written D C C C X X X I in error for D C C C X X IX . But see §16. a Jerome, the Year of Abraham, 1507, says that “ at Rome after the kings were ended, consuls began to be from Brutus ” (C .M ., 147, n. 1). Absurd as the descent of the Welsh from Brutus may seem to a modem, yet it was an effective way of conveying the fact that the Welsh were Romans as well as Britons, in short, that they were Romano-Britons or “ Welsh " as the English rightly styled them. For “ the Anglo-Saxon Wealh, plural Wealas {Walas) was doubtless used by the Teutonic invaders, as it was used on the Continent, to denominate those who lived under Roman jurisdiction and spoke the Latin language. Wekch-land is the German word for Italy, and Welscktmss, like our English Wahait, is the nut growing on Romance soil. Fick thinks it was anciently the term applied to the Voka, a Celtic people on the French shore of the Mediterranean, but in historic times it meant Roman pure and simple ” (M cClure, 142, n. 1). The name of the Volcae survives in Welsh as gtoalch “ hawk," whence Gualchttud, “ the Hawk o f M ay," and Gtoalchhaifed, “ Galahad."

NENNIUS’S “ HISTORY OF THE BRITONS ”

37

it extends from the south-west to the north, being eight hundred m iles in length, two hundred in breadth. In it are tw enty-eight cities and innumerable headlands, w ith countless strongholds1 made o f stones and brick. A nd in it dw ell four nations, the Scots, the Piets, the Saxons, and the Britons. § 8. It has three large islands, one o f w hich lies over against the A nnonças, and is called Inis Gueith,* W ight; the second is situated in the m iddle o f the sea between Ireland and Britain, and is called b y its name Eubonia, that is M anau, Manazo, M an; the other is situated in the extrem e lim it o f the circle o f Britain beyond the Piets and is called O re, Orkney. So in an ancient proverb it is said, when reference is made to judges or kings, “ H e judged Britain w ith its three islands.” * § 9. In it are many rivers, which flow to all parts, that is to the east, to the w est, to the south, to the north, but nevertheless there are two rivers excelling the other rivers, the Tham es and the Severn, as it were two arms o f Britain, along w hich form erly vessels were borne in the conveyance o f riches for the sake o f com m erce.14 * T h e Britons form erly filling it from sea to sea judged it.* § 10. I f anyone w ould wish to know at what tim e 1 For these two statements as to Britain’s position and extent and its 28 cities, etc., see Loss of Britain (a), with this striking difference, that the cities in Nennius still exist, whereas in the Lott they are all. overthrown and uninhabited. * Ynys Wyth in Welsh, from Vectis, the ancient name o f W ight * “ Britannia with its three islands ” yields no sense if by Britannia is meant the Island of Britain. It is the author of the Lott o f Britain who confuses the island with Roman Britain as, too, with the Britannia o f the west, i.e. “ Welsh-land,” from Man to W ight (including Anglesey). 4 l i e description of the two rivers is almost word for word from the Loss (a). * That the Britons, i.e. the Welsh, occupied the whole Island o f Britain is a notion taken from the Lost.

38

Ne n n iu s ’ s “ h is t o r y o f t h e b r it o n s ”

after the Flood this island was inhabited ,11have found an account o f this in twofold form . In the annals o f the Romans it is written thus: Æ neas, after the Trojan war, came with his son Ascanius to Italy, and, having vanquished Turnus, took to wife Lavinia, the daughter o f Latinus, son of Faunus, son o f Picus, son o f Saturn; and after the death o f Latinus he obtained the kingdom o f the Romans or Latins— but Ascanius* built A lba— and afterwards married a w ife, and she bore him a son named Silvius. And Silvius married a w ife and she was pregnant. And it was told Æ neas that his daughter-in-law was pregnant, and he sent to Ascanius his son, that he should send his magus, m agician, to. examine the wife to search what she held in her wom b, whether male or female. And the m agician examined the w ife and returned. It was on account o f this prediction that the magician was slain b y Ascanius, for that he said to Ascanius that the woman held in her womb a m ale, “ and he w ill be filiu s mortis, a son o f death, because he w ill slay his father and his m other, and he w ill be hated o f all men.” So it happened; the woman died at his birth, and the son was nurtured and was called by the name Britto. A fter a long interval, in accordance with the pre­ diction o f the magician, while he was playing with others, he slew his father w ith die shot of an arrow, not o f design but by accident. A nd he was driven from Italy and was armitnUs.* A nd he came to the islands o f the Tyrrhene Sea and was driven out by the G reeks on account o f the death o f Turnus, whom Æ neas had slain. A nd he arrived among the G auls, and therè founded the city o f the Turoni, which is 1 The Loss (b) begins with the time when the island was first inhabited. * The M SS. H and K erroneously read Æneas for Ascanius. Jerome (C.M ., 150, ». 1) says that “ before Æneas there reigned in Italy Ianus, Satumus, Picus, Faunus, Latinus also “ Ascanius, son of Æneas, built the city of Alba and that “ Ascanius brought up Silvius Postumus his brother, the son of Æneas by Lavinia.” ' Some would read ab Italia termims fugit, “ fled from the bounds o f Italy.”

NENNIUS’S “ HISTORY OF THE BRITONS ”

39

called T u m is, Tours. A nd afterwards he arrived in this island, which took a name from his name, to w it, Britain, and he filled it w ith his own stock, and he dw elt there. From that day Britain has been in­ habited even to this d a y .. § 1 1. Æ neas reigned three years over the Latins. Ascanius reigned thirty-seven years. A fter whom Silvius, the son o f Æ neas, reigned tw elve years, Postum us thirty-nine years, from whom the kings o f the Albani are called S ilvii, whose brother was B ritto. W hen Britto was reigning in Britain, E li the priest was judging in Israel, and at that tim e the A rk o f the Covenant was seized b y aliens. Postum us his brother was reigning among the Latins.1 § 12. A fter an interval o f many years, not less than eight hundred, the Piets* came and occupied the islands which are called Orcades, the Orkney Islands, and afterwards from the islands devastated m any regions and occupied them in the northern part o f Britain, and there they rem ain, holding a third part o f Britain to this day.* 1 Silvius Postumus (son o f Æneas and father o f Britto) becomes here two persons, Silvius and Postumus, father and son, with Britto as the latter’s brother. T he particulars in this section are based on Jerome (C .M ., 153, notes). 1 The Piets, so far from having entered Britain centuries after the Britons, as the Loss (k) and Nennius would have us be­ lieve, were “ the earliest inhabitants o f these islands whom we can with tolerable certainty regard as Celts ” (O ’Rahilly, 8) They are first mentioned under the name of Piets about a .d . 296, in a panegyric which speaks Of the Piets and the Irish as being the only enemies with whom the Britons had to deal prior to the landing of Julius Caesar in 55 B.c. T heir name Picti seems to be a Latin translation of Pritenes («plained as meaning "fig u re d ” ), itself from Pritem or Prêtons. That the Piets formerly lived beyond Pentland Firth and entered Britain from due north to attack the Britons is a notion derived from the Loss (k). Bede (i, 1) supposed they came from Scythia. * I.e. Pictland, in Welsh Prydyn, north o f Clyde and Forth, or as the Welsh would say, ultra montent Bannaue, " beyond Mount Bannauc,” one of the heights near Bannockburn in Stirlingshire (Life of St. Cadog, § 26).

40

Ne n n iu s ’ s “ h is t o r y o f t h e b r it o n s ”

§ 1 3 . M uch later came die Scots1 from parts o f Spain to Ireland. First came Partholomus* w ith a thousand persons, both men and wom en, and they increased to four thousand persons, and there came a pestilence upon them , and m one week they all perished, and there remained not even one o f them . Second came Nim eth to Ireland, a son o f Agnom en, who is reported to have navigated on the sea for a year and a half, and afterwards took port in Ireland w ith his vessels broken, and there abode for many years, and again set sail with his followers and returned to Spain. And afterwards came three sons o f a soldier o f Spain* with thirty keels with them and w ith thirty w ives in every keel, ana there they remained for the space o f one year. A nd after­ wards they saw a glassy tower in the m idst o f the sea, and they used to see persons on the tower and sought to speak to them , and never did they reply. And after one year they hastened to attack the tower with all their keels and with all their wom en, except one keel which was broken in shipwreck, wherein were thirty men and 1 The Scotti appear for the first time in history under this name in the account by Ammianus Marcellinus (xx, 1) of an invasion o f Roman Britain by the Piets and Scots in A .D . 360 : “ From the seventh century onwards a succession o f learned men in Ireland busied themselves with recording, arranging, and in­ venting the history of the past. T he culmination of their labours is seen in the treatise known as * Lebor Gabäla ’ ” (O’Rahilly, 27-8). “ According to this compilation the conquerors of Ireland after the Flood were successively: (1) Partholôn, (2) Nemed, (3) the F ir Bolg, etc., (4) the Tuatha Dé Danann, and, lastly, (5) the sons of M il Espune, i.e. the Goidels " (tb., 28). Nennius has drawn from some early form o f this Irish work. • Partholôn mac Sera, “ Bartholomsus, son o f the Syrian.” This first invasion is ** a learned invention, suggested in part by Isidore, but mainly by a gloss of St. Jerome's ” (O’Rahilly, 28). • I.e. M il Espdine. The name is a borrowing o f the Latin miles, soldier. Scotta, his wife, is merely the Latin for “ Irish­ woman.” T he names o f his three sons, Eremön, Eber, and Ir, “ were apparently suggested by different forms of the name of Ireland. Spain was selected as the country from which the in­ vaders came for no better reason than that the Irish literati fancied that there existed a close connexion between the names Hibernia and Iberia ” (O ’Rahilly, 30).

NENNIUS'S “ HISTORY OF THE BRITONS ”

41

so many wom en. A nd the other ships sailed to attack the tower, and when all had disembarked on the shore which was about the tower, the sea overwhelmed them and they were drowned, and none o f them escaped. A nd from the household o f that keel which was left owing to the w reck the whole o f Ireland was filled even to this day. A nd afterwards they arrived by degrees from parts o f Spain and held very many regions. § 14. M uch later came Damhoctor1 and dwelt there w ith all his kin to this day. In Britain, Istoreth son o f Istorinus held Dalrieta* with his followers. Builc* with his followers held the island o f Eubonia, M an, and others round about. T h e sons o f Liethan4 obtained in the region o f the D em eti, D yfed, and in other regions, that is G uhir, Gower, and Cetgueii, K idw elly, until they were expelled by Cunedda and by his sons from all British districts.6 § 15. I f anyone would wish to know when or at what tim e Ireland was uninhabited and waste, thus have the most learned o f the Scots informed m e. W hen the children o f Israel came through the Red Sea, the Egyptians arrived and pursued them and were drowned, as is read in the L aw . There was a nobleman o f Scythia among the Egyptians with a great house-host, 1 dam odor in Irish signifies a group o f eight persons, here apparently treated as a personal name. * Dalriada, otherwise Argyll. The Irish Nennius says they occupied the Orkneys. * Builc, i.e. Builg, whence F ir Bolg, “ men o f the Bolg,” i.e. Belgi and Belgæ, pre-Scottic invaders o f Ireland who, after their defeat at M ag Tuired in Co. Sligo, fled to various islands, Arran (or Aran), Islay, Man, Rathlin, etc. (O’Rahilly, 7, 8, 20). 4 Liethan, in Welsh Llwydon, as in flo emir Uwydon, “ the host o f Efwr Utoydon ” (“ Black Book of Carmarthen,” fo. 54), which Efwr may well be he o f Dinefwr (anglice Dynevor), “ die Fort o f Efwr,” which was afterwards the stronghold of the Welsh kings o f “ the South ” in the heart o f Ystrad Tyw i. The three cantrefs of this last, wherein Gower and Cedweli lay, were annexed in the eighth century by Seisyll, K ing of Ceredigion (see Pedigree 26, and PhiUimore in Owen’s Pem., II, 385). Nennius distinguishes the two districts named from Dyfed. 4 Cunedda is remembered at A llt Cunedda near Kidwelly. See 80, 101, 113.

42

NENNIUS’S “ HISTORY OF THE BRITONS ”

and he was driven from his kingdom , and was there when the Egyptians were drowned, and went not forth to pursue the people o f G od. Those who survived took counsel to expel him , lest he should attack and seize their kingdom , because their strong men had been drowned in the Red Sea; and he was expelled. A nd he for forty-tw o years wandered in A frica; and they came to the altars o f the Philistines through the Lake o f the Salt-pits, and came between Rusicada and the mountains o f A zaria, and came by the river M alva and crossed over through M aritana to the Pillars o f Hercules ; and they sailed the Tyrrhene Sea and arrived as far as Spain, and dwelt there for many years and increased and m ultiplied exceedingly and their race was m ultiplied exceedingly. A nd afterwards they came to Ireland after a thousand and two years from when the Egyptians were drowned in the Red Sea, and to the regions o f DaHlrieta in the tim e when Brutus was reigning among the Romans, from whom the consuls began to be, then the tribunes o f the people and the dictators. A nd the consuls again obtained the republic for four hundred and forty-seven years, which had form erly been lost to the kingly dignity.1 T h e Britons arrived in Britain in the third age o f the w orld; the Scots obtained Ireland in the fourth. But the Scots, who are in the w est, and the Piets from the north were wont to fight with one mind and in one onset against the Britons unceasingly* because the Britons were wont to be w ithout arms.* A nd after a long interval o f tim e the Romans obtained the monarchy o f the whole world.4 1 Jerome, Year o f Abraham, 1507. “ After the kings were ended, consuls first began to be at Rome from Brutus, then tribunes o f the people and dictators, and again consuls obtained the republic for nearly 464 years up to Julius Caesar, who first seized sole rule.” * The unceasing joint-attacks o f Piets from the north and o f Scots from the north-west did not begin, according to the Lots (k), until after Britain was exposed to their raids by reason o f Maximus's revolt in 383. * That the Britons were unarmed is also from the Lott (A). 4 From the Loss (c).

NENNIUS’S “ HISTORY OF THE BRITONS ”

43

§ 1 6 . From the first year in which the Saxons came to Britain to the fourth year o f K in g M erfyn1 are com­ puted four hundred and twenty-nine years. From the Nativity* o f the L ord to the advent o f Patrick among the Scots are four hundred and five years. From the death o f Patrick to the obit o f Saint Bridget are sixty ears. From the nativity o f Colum ba to the death o f tridget are four years.

Ï

•T h e beginning o f the computation : twenty-three cycles o f nineteen years from the Incarnation o f the L ord to the advent o f Patrick in Ireland, and they make four hundred and thirty-eight years in num ber. A nd from the advent o f Patrick to the cycle o f nineteen years, in which w e are, are twenty-two cycles, that is four hundred and twenty-one years, there being two years in the ogdoad to this year in which w e are. 1 This computation o f 429 yean from the year o f the Saxons cannot be from a.d. 428 (§§ 31, 66), which would carry us beyond M erfyn’s death in 844, but (as is dear from the next sentence) is to be reckoned from a.p. 401 (according to Victorius), erroneously treated as A.D., which brings us to A.D. 830 (cf. § 4). * “ N ativity ” is an error for “ Passion ” (as in § 66), for Bishop Patrick arrived in Ireland in A.P. 405 (according to Victorius), i.e. (by adding 27) a.d. 432. * The second half o f § 16 is an attempt to explain the fin t by a computist, who followed the system of Dionysius (note how he arrives at 437 for Bishop Patrick’s arrival in Ireland by adding 32 instead o f 27 to a.p. 405). He takes the opening sentence of $ 16 at its face-value by adding 429 to 428 = 857, and proceeds thus— From the Incarnation to Bishop Patrick’s advent (23 X 19)=437 years, i.e. the 438th. From Bishop Patrick’s ad­ vent ........................... (22X19) ■“ Add two years of the og­ doad o f a new cyde ... 857

A.D. 857 is the third year of the ogdoad (i.e. the first eight yearsas the endecad is the last eleven) o f the C yde of Nineteen, which began in 855.

44

NENNIUS'S “ HISTORY OF THE BRITON8 ”

§ 17. I have discovered another account concerning this Brutus from old books o f our ancestors. T h e three sons o f Noah divided the world into three >arts after the F lood: Shem in A sia, Ham in A frica, apheth in Europe,1 enlarged their borders. T h e first man to com e to Europe o f the stock o f Japheth was A lan w ith his three sons, whose names are H essitio, Arm enon, N egue. H essitio had four sons: these are Francus, Rom anus, Britto, Albanus.* Arm enon had five sons: G othus, Valagothus, G ebidus, Burgundus, Longobardus. N egue had three sons : Vandalus, Saxo, Boguarus. From H essitio are sprung four nations : the Franks, the Latins* the Albanians,* and Britons. From Arm enon five: G oths, Valagoths, G ebidi, Burgundians, and Lom bards. From N egue four : Boguarii,, Vandals, Saxons, and T u rin gi. These,nations were subdivided throughout the w hole o f Europe. A lan, as they say, was the son o f Fetebir, son o f Ougom un, son o f T h o i, son o f Boib, son o f Sim eon, son o f M air, son o f Ethach, son o f Aurthach, son o f Ecthet, son o f O th, son o f A b ir, son o f R a, son o f Ezra, son o f Izrau, son o f Baath, son o f Iobaath, son o f Iovan, son o f Japheth, son o f N oah, son o f Lam ech, son o f M ethuselah, son o f Enoch, son o f Iareth, son o f M alalahel, son o f Cainan, son o f Enos, son o f Seth, son o f Adam , son o f the living G od. T h is inform ation have I discovered in the tradition o f the ancients as to who were the inhabitants o f Britain at first. § 18. T h e Britons are from Brutus. Brutus son o f H isitio; H isition o f Alaneus; Alaneus son o f Rea Silvia; Rea Silvia daughter o f Num a Pam pilius, son o f Ascanius; Ascanius son o f Aeneas, son o f Anchises,

Î

1 T his account o f the peopling o f Europe by descendants o f Japheth, son o f Noah, was m e n by Nennius from an old list, supposed to have been compiled in about a.d. 520 in Brittany. The Britons in it are primarily the Bretons, which accounts for die prominence o f the name Alan, which was popular with the Bretons from early times (C .M ., 159, ». 4). * Albanus for Alatnannus, Albani for Alamanni, i.e. Germans.

Ne n n iu s ’ s “ h is t o r y o p t h e b r it o n s ”

45

son o f T ro u s, son o f Dardanus, son o f Flisa, son o f Iuvan, son o f Japheth.1 N ow Japheth had seven sons: the first, G om er, from whom the G au ls; the second, M agog, from whom the Scythians and G oth s; the third, M adai, from whom the M edes; d ie fourth, Iuvan, from whom the Greeks ; the fifth , T u b al, from whom the Iberians and the Spaniards and the Italians; the sixth, M osoch, from whom the Cappadocians; d ie seventh, T iras, from whom the Thracians. T hese are the sons o f Japheth the son o f N oah, the son o f Lam ech* A nd I now w ill return to that point from which I departed. 1 19. T h e Rom ans, when they had obtained the dom inion o f the whole world,* sent ambassadors to the Britons that they m ight receive o f them hostages and tribute even as they were receiving them from all regions and islands. T h e Britons, as they were tyrannical and swollen with pride, despised the embassy o f the Romans.14 ** A t that time Julius Caesar, inasmuch as he was the first to receive and to hold sole rule,* was highly incensed and came to Britain w ith sixty keels and landed at the mouth o f the Tham es, where his ships suffered shipwreck, w hile he him self was fighting w ith D olobellus,6 who was proconsul to the 1 Genesis x, 4, Elisa, son o f Iavan. * Jerome on Genesis x, 2 (C .M ., 161, n. 3). * From the Loss (c), with this difference, that, whereas the Loss refers to the Roman invasion after the Parthian peace of 20 B .C ., i.e. to the invasion under Claudius in a . d . 43, Nennius, ignoring this lim it, begins with the invasions of Julius Caesar in B.c. 55, 54 (cf. Orosius, vi, 9). 4 The Loss devotes a whole section (6) to “ the contumacy ” o f the Britons. * Jerome, Year of Abraham, 1968, “ Gaius Iulius Caesar was the first Roman to hold sole rule.’* Note that only four of the emperors are made by Nennius to bring over armies into Britain, viz., Julius Caesar, Claudius, Severus, and Carausius. * apud Dolobellum, otherwise unknown. Geoffrey (iv, 3) alters this into ad Dorobellum oppidum the town o f Dorobellum. The name seems to derive from some misunderstanding o f dob belli, “ war-craft,” with reference to the “ cetilou ” below.

,to

46

N e n n iu s ’ s “ h is t o r y o f t h e b u tto n s ”

British king, who was called Bellinus1 and was the son o f M inocannus, who held all the islands o f the T yrrhene Sea. A nd Julius returned without victory, his soldiers slain and his ships broken. §20. A nd again after the space o f three years he came* w ith a great arm y and three hundred keels, and arrived at the m outh o f the river which is called Tham es. A nd there they joined battle, and many fell o f his horses and soldiers, because the above mentioned proconsul had placed iron stakes and seed o f war, that is cetilou,* seeds o f war, in the shallows o f the river; a source o f m uch disconcertment was this invisible art to the soldiers o f the Romans. A nd they departed again without peace. W ar was waged for the third tim e by the place w hich is called Trinovantum .4 A nd Julius acquired dom inion over the British race fortyseven years before the N ativity o f Christ, and five thousand two hundred and fifteen years from the Beginning o f the W orld. Julius, therefore, was the first who arrived in Britain and ruled both kingdom and race. A nd in his honour the Romans decreed that the month Q uintilis should be called July. A nd on the Ides o f M arch is G aius 1 Bellinus clearly stands for the second element o f the name Cuno-belinus (Cynfelyn, “ Cymbeline ” ), i.e. Belyn. Bellinus filius Minocanm goes back through Orosius’s gibberish Minocynobellinum Britarmorum régis filium to Suetonius’s Adminio, CynobeUstd Brittamurum régis filio, “ to Adminius, son of Cunobelinus,” etc. Adminius, a fugitive from Britain, fled to Caligula, the emperor. From Nennius’s Bellinus is derived the Beli fab Mynogan o f uie Mabinogi (Ellis and Lloyd, i, 46). * Note that Julius is made to und twice, if not thrice, but only succeeds at the third attempt. Nennius would seem to have regarded the two invasions o f B .C . 55 and 54 as failures, and so postulated a third attempt, which proved successful. * Cetilou, from eat (modem cat), “ battle,” and hUou (plural of hä), “ seeds.” T he plural, did it survive in modem Welsh, would be häau, but is hsUon. * Trinovantum, a place-name invented from the name o f the Trinovantes (