CHAPTER V

ARTHUR IN ENGLISH LITERATURE

English Arthurian romance before Malory, with the conspicuous exception

of _Sir Gawayne and the Grene Knight_--an alliterative poem composed in

the fourteenth century by an unknown author to whom three other poems,

_The Pearl_, _Cleanness_, and _Patience_, are ascribed,--possesses

little literary charm or distinction. The wearisome monotony and the

generally jejune character of the common metrical romances of his day,

with their stereotyped phraseology and futile rhymes, had probably

as much to do as anything with Chaucer’s attitude towards the newer

romantic matters. His _Tale of Sir Thopas_ is so openly contemptuous

a burlesque of the methods of the romantic rhymers of the time that

we may safely assume that the poet had little more respect for their

themes.

“Into his sadel he clamb anon,

And priketh over stile and stoon

An Elf-queene for tespye;

Til he so longe hadde riden and goon

That he foond in a pryvë woon

The contree of Fairye,” etc.

It was scarcely possible for one who could write so irreverently as

this of Elfland and its denizens to attune himself to the mood required

for grave poetical treatment of Arthurian story. An Arthurian setting

of a sort is indeed given to _The Wife of Bath’s Tale_; but the

facetious tone of the opening lines only too plainly reveals Chaucer’s

sense of the unreality of it all.

“In tholdë dayes of the Kyng Arthour,”

he writes,

“Al was this land fulfild of faërie.

The elf-queene with hir joly compaignye

Danced ful ofte in many a grenë mede.”

But, he adds, there are no fairies now; “lymytours and other holy

freres” have effectually driven them away.

“For ther as wont to walken was an elf,

Ther walketh now the lymytour hymself.”

With the elves had gone the knights-errant, and Chaucer’s poetical

genius was not of the kind to restore either to their original pride of

place in imaginative literature.

It was Malory who gave new life to the Arthurian legends, and to

him, more than to any other writer, is due the fascination which

Arthurian story has had for so many modern English poets. Malory’s

book, as we know from Ascham’s testimony, was exceedingly popular

in the Elizabethan age; but there were other causes of the interest

then so widely felt in ancient British legends. Throughout the

sixteenth century chroniclers were busy in recording, and antiquaries

in investigating, the early annals of Britain; and, in the reign of

Elizabeth herself, the heightened patriotic feeling of the day was a

potent stimulus to all who sought to discover material for, and to

reconstruct from it, the history of their country. Hence Geoffrey of

Monmouth’s Latin chronicle in its first printed forms comes to be one

of the most eagerly studied books of the time. And it is, perhaps, not

fanciful to find in the new interest aroused in the annals and legends

of early Britain the influence of the reigning Tudor dynasty. On what

other grounds are we to account, for example, for Spenser going out of

his way to remind Elizabeth that she can boast of a genuine British

ancestry, and that among her forebears is no less a person than the

great King Arthur himself?

“Thy name, O soveraine Queene, thy realme and race

From this renowned Prince derived arre,

Who mightily upheld that royall mace

Which now thou bear’st, to thee descended farre

From mighty kings and conquerours in warre,

Thy fathers and great Grandfathers of old,

Whose noble deeds above the Northern starre

Immortall fame for ever hath enrold;

As in that old man’s booke they were in order told.”

Here is a compliment of which Geoffrey, could he have foreseen it,

would have been as proud as of his inclusion in Chaucer’s ‘Hous

of Fame.’ To have been singled out for honour as one “besy for to

bere up Troy” was much; it was more to be quoted, by a poet no less

illustrious, as an authority for the Arthurian descent of the greatest

of British queens. The glorification of the House of Tudor, and of

Elizabeth’s Welsh descent, is obvious enough in the lines in _The

Faerie Queene_ which refer to the “sparke of fire” that shall

“Bee freshly kindled in the fruitfull Ile

Of Mona, where it lurked in exile:

Which shall breake forth into bright burning flame

And reach into the house that bears the stile

Of roiall majesty and soveraine name:

So shall the Briton blood their crowne agayn reclame.

Thenceforth eternal union shall be made

Betweene the nations different afore.”[115]

In the second book of _The Faerie Queene_ Spenser, following

Geoffrey’s “auncient booke hight Briton moniments,” gives a versified

“chronicle of Briton kings

From Brute to Uther’s rayne,”

thus further emphasising the newly-discovered importance of early

British history. The same patriotic fervour accounts for the production

of such poems as William Warner’s _Albion’s England_ and Michael

Drayton’s _Polyolbion_. Warner is eminently practical, and, in his

reproduction of Geoffrey’s Arthurian narrative, leaves out its more

romantic incidents. Arthur’s

“Scottish, Irish, Almaine, French and Saxone battelles got

Yeeld fame sufficient: these seeme true, the reste I credite not.”

Drayton is inclined to trust Geoffrey more implicitly, and even takes

up the cudgels on his behalf against the critics who were then seeking

to disparage him. The “adversary says,” writes Drayton, that “Geoffrey

Monmouth first our Brutus did devise,” whereas the fact is that

“pregnantly we prove, ere that historian’s days,

A thousand-ling’ring years, our prophets clearly sung

The Britain-founding Brute.”[116]

Drayton’s poem, so largely topographical as it is in its character,

affords him many opportunities of making effective use of Arthurian

traditions. When he comes, for example, to the river Camel, he

remembers that Arthur was born as well as slain in that tract of

western country,

“As though no other place on Britain’s spacious earth

Were worthy of his end, but where he had his birth.”[117]

Again, referring to the songs of the ancient Britons, he tells us--much

in Geoffrey’s manner--of Caerleon with

“her temples and her groves,

Her palaces and walls, baths, theatres, and stoves.”

With all his garrulous “asides” and prosaic disquisitions, Drayton’s

_Polyolbion_ is a well-intentioned poem, and its sympathetic treatment

of the legends entitles it to an honoured place in the Arthurian

library. Like Caxton, Drayton bewails the indifference of British poets

to the wealth of native tradition which lay ready for their use, and

regrets that a British Homer had not been found to rise to “the height

of its great argument”;

“For some abundant brain, oh, there had been a story,

Beyond the blind man’s might to have enhanced our glory.”

Although Elizabethan poets, from patriotic and courtly motives, were

so much interested in the early British legends as presented to them

by the English chroniclers of their time, it is somewhat strange that

these legends, and Arthurian story in particular, did not appeal

strongly to the imagination of the playwrights of our greatest

dramatic period. The only Arthurian drama of any consequence written

during the Elizabethan period was _The Misfortunes of Arthur_ by

Thomas Hughes, which was acted before the Queen in February 1588; and

the plot of that play is derived, in the main, not from Malory, but

from Geoffrey. In one important detail, however, Hughes departs from

Geoffrey’s narrative, and, like many of the later romancers, represents

Modred as Arthur’s son; and he is in touch with Malory in making the

tragedy of Arthur’s doom the nemesis that comes upon him for his sin.

The drama, as a whole, is a standard example of the Senecan type of

tragedy, so much in vogue at the time of its production, and action

and characterisation are altogether subordinated in it to narration.

Some life, however, is given to the characters of the two protagonists,

Arthur and Modred; and the introduction of the ghost of Gorlois at the

beginning and at the end of the play adds not a little to its general

dramatic effect. In his final speech the Ghost, exulting over the ruin

of the sinful house of Uther, is made to pay an adroit compliment to

Queen Elizabeth,

“That virtuous Virgo, born for Britain’s bliss,

That peerless branch of Brute,”

and gives utterance to the hope that she

“Shall of all wars compound eternal peace.”

We are still without a great English drama based upon a theme drawn

from Arthurian story; but what the Elizabethan dramatists, and most of

their successors, rejected as either too unreal or too intractable for

their purposes, continued even down to the Victorian age to haunt and

challenge the imagination of the poets.

“The mightiest chiefs of British song

Scorn’d not such legends to prolong”[118];

and yet we possess no great Arthurian epic in English verse any more

than a drama. Milton and Dryden both cherished the ambition of writing

one, but both, in different ways, found the pressure of circumstances

too strong for the accomplishment of their design. When Milton,

after the turmoil of the Civil Wars and his entanglement in public

controversy, once more turned his attention to poetry, he had need of

higher argument for his long-projected ‘heroic poem’ than

“to dissect

With long and tedious havoc fabl’d knights

In battles feign’d.”[119]

Arthurian memories, however, lingered with him to the last, for even in

_Paradise Regained_ he cannot help referring to what once charmed him

in stories

“Of fairy damsels met in forest wide

By knights of Logres, or of Lyones,

Lancelot, or Pelleas, or Pellenore.”

Dryden, again, who had aspired to write an Arthuriad, as he tells us,

“for the honour of his native country,” found himself obliged to turn

to more immediately profitable forms of literature,--“being encouraged

only with fair words by Charles II., my little salary ill-paid, and no

prospect of a future subsistence.”[120] But it is doubtful whether he

was quite the kind of poet who, in Scott’s words, could

“in immortal strain

Have raised the Table Round again,

But that a ribald King and Court

Bade him toil on to make them sport.”

Scott’s assumption, at any rate, is scarcely justified by the

character of the “dramatic opera” called _King Arthur, or the British

Worthy_, which Dryden composed shortly before Charles II.’s death.

This “opera” was written with a courtly, if not exactly a patriotic,

motive; it was meant to be a glorification of King Charles’s public

policy, but, unfortunately, Charles died before any performance of it

could be given. It was produced on the stage, ultimately, in 1691, to

music by Purcell; but, at that time, William and Mary were the reigning

sovereigns, so that the original point of the play was lost, and it

had to be “improved” to suit the changed conditions of the day. Thus,

what Scott calls an “ingenious political drama” was turned into “a mere

fairy-tale” without “any meaning beyond extravagant adventure.”[121]

The story of Arthur, also, is in many of its main features turned in

this play into something very different from its familiar forms up

to Dryden’s time. Several new characters are introduced into it, the

most notable being a blind girl, Emmeline,--a creature of Dryden’s

own invention,--who, in defiance of all tradition and of Guinevere’s

well-attested rights, becomes the wife of “the British Worthy.”

The Restoration age, despite its literary pre-occupation with ‘heroic’

plays and ‘heroic’ poetry, was unpropitious for the production of a

romantic epic worthy of the Arthurian, or any other similar theme. A

brave attempt, however, to achieve the impossible was made by “the City

Bard or Knight Physician,”[122] Sir Richard Blackmore, who in 1695

published _Prince Arthur, an Heroick Poem in Ten Books_, and followed

it up in 1697 with another ‘epic,’ in twelve books, called _King

Arthur_. These ponderous poems, written in heroic couplets, are really

political allegories, in which Arthur stands for the Prince of Orange,

and his Saxon enemy, Octa, for James the Second. But they aim at being

‘epics’ as well. Supernatural ‘machinery,’ evidently suggested in many

of its details by _Paradise Lost_, is introduced, and just as the gods

used to intervene in the struggles of the epic heroes of antiquity,

so angels like Uriel and Raphael watch over the fortunes of Arthur.

Indeed, the whole heavenly host befriends him, while Lucifer and the

rebel angels are the patrons of his foes. Blackmore, whatever else

may be said on his behalf, can claim to be at least faithful to the

tradition which represents Arthur as “the chief and best of the three

Christian kings,” for he makes him the supreme champion of Christendom

in his day:--

“This great deliverer shall Europa save,

Which haughty monarchs labour to enslave;

Then shall Religion rear her starry head,

And light divine through all the nations spread.”[123]

But, alas, who now reads Blackmore? The world generally is quite

content not to know him, and ready to echo Dryden’s pious wish--“peace

be to the _Manes_ of his Arthurs.”

Blackmore, grotesque and even ludicrous though his methods are of

allegorising the Arthurian stories, could, of course, claim high

poetical sanction for this particular use of them. Spenser had, long

before, “laboured to pourtraict in Arthure, before he was king, the

image of a brave knight, perfected in the twelve private morall

virtues, as Aristotle hath devised,”[124] and had also, though somewhat

obscurely, sought to “shadow forth” in him “a modern gentleman” of the

Elizabethan court,--the Earl of Leicester. There is not much to choose

between Leicester and William of Orange as “modern” types of Arthur,

but Spenser has, at least, succeeded in giving a romantic glamour to

his poem which helps us to forget its allegorical intent and takes us

back to the legendary Arthur’s native “land of faerie.” So, in _The

Faerie Queene_, Arthur appears in a rôle somewhat similar to that which

he plays in the romances as the helper and deliverer of sorely-beset

knights; and what the poet tells us about his person, his prowess,

and his accoutrements is, in spirit though not always in the letter,

quite in accord with romantic tradition. Delivered at birth to a faery

knight, “to be upbrought in gentle thewes and martiall might,” he was

put under the tutelage of Timon,[125]

“Old Timon, who in youthly yeares had beene

In warlike feates th’ expertest man alive,”

and who dwelt

“Under the foot of Rauran mossy hore,”

--the Merionethshire mountain, Yr Aran, where the river Dee has

its source. “Thither,” so Prince Arthur’s tale of his own history

runs,--[126]

“Thither the great magician Merlin came,

As was his use, oft-times to visit me;

For he had charge my discipline to frame

And Tutors nouriture to oversee.”

It was Merlin

“which whylome did excell

All living wightes in might of magick spell,”

who forged for Arthur his shield and sword and armour. Spenser,

however, departs from the romancers in calling Arthur’s sword

“Morddure,”[127] and in stating, what is nowhere told of Excalibur,

that it could not be

“forst his rightful owner to offend.”

Nor do we hear in the romances of such marvellous details about the

prince’s shield as those which Spenser gives; it was made of “diamond

perfect, pure and cleene,” and when Arthur chose to uncover it,

“Men into stones therewith he could transmew,

And stones to dust, and dust to nought at all;

And when him list the prouder lookes subdew,

He would them gazing blind, or turne to other hew.”[128]

Spenser, again, finds none of the knights of the Round Table suitable

for the main purposes of his allegory--the only prominent one who is

brought into the poem is Tristram, and he is introduced only as quite a

subordinate character. As the poet expressly tells us in his prefatory

letter that his purpose is to “pourtraict” Arthur “before he was king,”

_The Faerie Queene_, even had it been completed, could hardly have

contained any reference to the later, and more especially the tragic,

features of Arthurian story. Neither did Spenser’s general design admit

of any treatment of them. There could be no Guinevere in his poem, as

Arthur was destined at the end to marry Gloriana, the Fairy Queen, in

whom “I mean Glory in my generall intention, but in my particular I

conceive the most excellent and glorious person of our soveraine the

Queene, and her kingdom in Faery land.” There is indeed some excuse

even for Blackmore’s “particular intentions” in his egregious epics

when we remember that a really great poet was capable of thus imagining

Arthur, even in allegory, as the husband of Queen Elizabeth.

The uses to which Spenser and Blackmore, each in his own way, put the

Arthurian legends are not, after all, so dissimilar to those which

underlie the most popular, and on the whole the most successful,

poetical treatment of them in the nineteenth century.[129] _The Idylls

of the King_ have a palpably symbolical, not to say an allegorical,

meaning, and “a message for the times.” It may be that in no other way

could any new life be infused into stories of which Swinburne says that

“their day is done,”--

“Their records written of the winds, in foam

Fly down the wind, and darkness takes them home.”[130]

At any rate, Tennyson frankly confesses that what he presents in his

‘Idylls’ is a

“tale

New-old, and shadowing Sense at war with Soul”;

and the new element in it is a didactic purpose suited to the moral

and sentimental temper of the Victorian era, and embodying what a

severe critic calls “the ethics of the rectory parlour.”[131] Tennyson

himself is responsible for revealing the “particular intention” which

equates the Arthur of the ‘Idylls’ with the Prince Consort; for he

dedicates the poems to his memory,

“since he held them dear,

Perchance as finding there unconsciously

Some image of himself.”

It is hardly likely, however, that Tennyson, when he first thought

of the Arthurian stories as a poetic theme, had any very definite

idea of putting them into the form of an allegory such as most of

his interpreters now discover in them; but that he, from the first,

intended a “modern meaning” is plain from the lines appended to the

_Morte D’Arthur_ at the time of its original publication,--

“To me, methought, who waited in a crowd,

There came a bark that, blowing forward, bore

King Arthur, like a modern gentleman

Of stateliest port; and all the people cried

‘Arthur is come again: he cannot die.’”

That the ‘Idylls,’ when finally completed and put into their present

order, had “an allegorical or perhaps a parabolic drift,” in them,

is certain, for the words quoted are Tennyson’s own.[132] Tennyson,

however, complains that critics had “taken his hobby and ridden it

too hard, and have explained some things too allegorically.” “The

general drift of the ‘Idylls,’” he continues, “is clear enough. ‘The

whole ... is the dream of man coming into practical life and ruined

by one sin. Birth is a mystery and death is a mystery, and in the

midst lies the tableland of life.’” Modern though this “drift” may

be, it is perennial and universal enough in its appeal to save the

‘Idylls’--notwithstanding the references to the “modern gentleman” and

the Prince Consort--from being a merely Victorian poem, or series of

poems. They do not, together, constitute an Arthuriad: they are not

meant to represent “the epic, some twelve books” with “faint Homeric

echoes” which Tennyson may have been meditating in his earlier years

when he published his _Morte D’Arthur_. “He produced no epic, only a

series of epic idyllia. He had a spiritual conception, ‘an allegory

in the distance,’ an allegory not to be insisted upon, though its

presence was to be felt. No longer, as in youth, did Tennyson intend

Merlin to symbolise ‘the sceptical understanding,’ or poor Guinevere

to stand for the Blessed Reformation, or the Table Round for Liberal

Institutions. Mercifully Tennyson never actually allegorised Arthur in

that fashion.”[133]

Tennyson’s King Arthur is certainly modern enough in sentiment and

speech, but the position which he holds in the ‘Idylls’ is, in many

ways, in harmony with that which he occupies in history and romantic

legend. Tennyson himself warns his readers that they must not expect to

find in the ‘Idylls’

“that gray king whose name, a ghost,

Streams like a cloud, man-shaped, from mountain peak,

And cleaves to cairn and cromlech still; or him

Of Geoffrey’s book, or him of Malleor’s.”

Rather they ought to discern in him

“Ideal manhood closed in real man.”

All the same, Tennyson’s pre-occupation with “ideal manhood” did not

prevent him from bestowing painful labour upon knowing the “real

man,” so far as the records, historical and romantic, reveal him; and

one of the outstanding features of _The Idylls of the King_ is their

remarkable fidelity to the details of Arthurian story as given in its

time-honoured literary sources. “Geoffrey’s book,” and “Malleor’s,” had

been carefully studied by the poet, and he had even been at pains to

garner all he could from early Welsh poetry and from the _Mabinogion_,

as presented in Lady Charlotte Guest’s charming translation. While

Malory is their main source, the ‘Idylls’ contain much that shows

how familiar Tennyson was with Arthurian lore generally in its most

primitive forms. The story of Geraint, for example, as told by him,

follows closely the Welsh version of it given by Lady Charlotte

Guest.[134] Again, the description of Britain in the opening lines

of _The Coming of Arthur_ as a country where each “petty king” was

ever waging war upon some other, and where the children “grew up to

wolf-like men, worse than the wolves,” until

“King Leodogran

Groan’d for the Roman legions here again,”

recalls vividly the bitter lamentations of Gildas over the degeneracy

of his countrymen. The account which Lancelot gives of Arthur’s wars in

_Lancelot and Elaine_ is an expansion of the record in Nennius of the

twelve Arthurian battles. And Tennyson’s general conception of Arthur

as the flower of kings who

“Drew all the petty princedoms under him,”

and “made a realm” in Britain, is far more in keeping with that of

the early chroniclers than with the picture given of him in the later

romances.

But it is not in such incidental features alone that the ‘Idylls’

are true to the older Arthurian tradition. Modern in their sentiment

and ethics though they may be, Tennyson’s main purpose in them of

“shadowing Sense at war with Soul” is not altogether unjustified by

the general literary history of the legends. Malory, at any rate, had

some such purpose, for Caxton assures us that the _Morte Darthur_

was “written for our doctrine, and for to beware that we fall not

to vice nor sin, but to exercise and follow virtue.” “In Malory’s

compilation, and in later mediæval romance, the fate of Arthur means

the fate of the chivalrous ideal, whose irreconcilable elements were

incorporated in him. In the romantic historians the fate of Arthur is

the fate of the Christian Britons in conflict with heathenism from

without and treason from within. Even in the old myths, his fate, if

we may trust Professor Rhys, is the fate of the culture-hero combined

with Father Sky, in conflict with the powers of Darkness and the

Nether-world. It was by a true inspiration that Tennyson was drawn to

the old legends, and reading into them his secret found it to be their

own. Accordingly, this identity of feeling with his predecessors kept

Tennyson on the track of the story.... Thus the ‘Idylls’ are both

truer to the authorities and nearer our own feelings than any other

of the adaptations of Arthurian story. Though the adventures are now

regarded from a modern point of view, this point of view is in the same

spiritual watch-tower from which the framers of the legend looked:

but it is the platform at the top, not a loop-hole on the winding

stair.”[135]

After all, however much the ‘Idylls’ may be cavilled at on the score of

their modern sentiment and occasional homiletic strain, their general

setting and atmosphere are genuinely romantic and in thorough keeping

with the far-off things of which they sing. Tennyson is true enough to

his sources in his descriptions of scenery and in his entire survey

of the traditional Arthurian country. “It is no land dwelt in by bold

bad men we see, when Arthur rides through the mountains and finds the

diamonds; when Geraint and Enid go through the green gloom of the

wood; when Galahad rides over the black swamp, leaping from bridge to

bridge till he sail to the spiritual city; when Lancelot drives through

the storm to the enchanted towers of Carbonek seven days across the

sea.”[136] In none of the ‘Idylls’ do we perhaps breathe more of the

atmosphere of pure romance than in the first and the last. Mystery and

magic surround both the coming and the passing of the King;

“From the great deep to the great deep he goes.”

This “weird rhyme” of Merlin’s comes into Bedivere’s memory as he sees

the barge with the three dark Queens bearing Arthur away into the

distance

“till the hull

Look’d one black dot against the verge of dawn.”

And the last scene closes with the faithful Bedivere left wondering

whether Arthur will “come again,” and whether, “if he come no more,”

the three Queens who bore him away be “friends of Arthur, who should

help him at his need?” So, Tennyson, like Malory and the romancers,

leaves Arthur’s “return” an open question; but Bedivere goes away

comforted by what seemed an assurance that “all was well” with Arthur

whither he had gone.

“Then from the dawn it seem’d there came, but faint

As from beyond the limit of the world,

Like the last echo born of a great cry,

Sounds, as if some fair city were one voice

Around a king returning from his wars.”

ADDITIONAL NOTES

_Note A, p. 9._--The Grail and the Round Table, as originally drawn

into Arthurian story, were in all probability survivals of features in

old Celtic nature-worship.

_Note B, p. 26._--Cavall, it may be noted, is referred to in the Welsh

romance _Geraint, Son of Erbin_, as taking part in a stag-hunt under

the leadership of Arthur, and is there called “Arthur’s darling dog”

(_annwylgi Arthur_).

_Note C, p. 94._--Argante--afterwards known as Morgain, or Morgan,

_la fée_ or _le fay_--is first heard of, in literature, in the poem

called _Vita Merlini_, commonly dated 1148 and ascribed to Geoffrey

of Monmouth (see p. 112). She there appears as a maiden, possessed of

magic powers, who heals Arthur’s wounds after the battle of Camlan.

Although she is usually spoken of by the romancers as being Arthur’s

sister, she is also represented as one who hates, and is involved in

certain malign schemes against, him. Her place in Arthurian story is

one of the many points at which the records and popular legends of “the

British King” touch the borders of fairy-land. The fairy element in

Arthurian romance is a fascinating, albeit intricate, subject of study,

but the scope and purpose of this little book allow only the briefest

references to it. Those who are interested in the subject will find a

very full, and suggestive, treatment of it in _Studies in the Fairy

Mythology of Arthurian Romance_, by Lucy A. Paton (Radcliffe College

Monographs, Boston, U.S.A., 1903).

_Note D, p. 101._--Chrétien himself, in the opening lines of _Cligés_,

states that he had written of “_le roi Marc et Iseut la blonde_.”

_Note E, p. 105._--Tristram, or Tristan, is the most accomplished of

all the heroes who are associated with Arthur. In the romances he is

pre-eminent as hunter, horseman, linguist, musician, harp-player. He is

also a liar of infinite resource.

_Note F, p. 115._--Malory, it should be said, is indebted for some of

his most picturesque touches in his account of the passing of Arthur

and of other incidents to an unknown English poet who, probably in

the fourteenth century, composed a metrical _Le Morte Arthure_. As

the first edition of the present book has been accused of having

done “grave injustice to our vernacular Arthurian literature before

Malory” through failure to recognise the merits of “the unknown but

most true poet whose rightful laurels have so long been worn by the

prose writer,” an extract from the poem may be given in order to enable

the reader to judge to which of the two, from a purely literary point

of view, the “rightful laurels” ought to belong. Here is the poet’s

account of the flinging of Excalibur:--

“The knyght was bothe hende and free;

To save that swerd he was fulle glad,

And thought, whethyr it better bee

Yif neuyr man it after had;

An I it caste in to the see,

Off mold was neuyr man so mad.

The swerd he hyd undyr a tree,

And sayd, ‘syr, I ded as ye me bad.’

‘What saw thow there?’ than sayd the kynge,

‘Telle me now, yiff thow can;’

‘Sertes, syr,’ he said, ‘nothynge

But watres depe, and waives wanne,’

‘A, now thou haste broke my byddynge!

Why hast thou do so, thow false man?

Another bode thou muste me brynge,’” etc.

_Note G, p. 130._--It would be impossible, within the limits of such a

book as this, to pass in review all the English Arthurian literature

of the nineteenth century. William Morris’s _Defence of Guinevere_,

_King Arthur’s Tomb_, and other Arthurian poems doubtless breathe much

more of the primitive romantic spirit of the legends than Tennyson’s

_Idylls_, but they are but slight experiments in comparison with

Tennyson’s elaborate design. Then there are other works like Heber’s

_Morte Arthur_, Lytton’s _King Arthur_, and Hawker of Morwenstow’s

_Quest of the Sangreal_, which claim a place in any full survey of

modern Arthurian literature, but are hardly of sufficient importance

to have required notice in so brief a chapter as the last had,

necessarily, to be.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

[The following list comprises only a brief selection of books likely to

be of most use and interest to the English reader. Welsh, French and

German authorities are left entirely out of account.]

Six Old English Chronicles. Translated by J. A. Giles. Bohn’s Series.

(Contains useful translations of Gildas, Nennius, and Geoffrey of

Monmouth.)

Geoffrey of Monmouth. History of the Kings of Britain, translated by

Dr Sebastian Evans. The Temple Classics (Dent).

The Four Ancient Books of Wales. Edited, with translations, by Dr W.

F. Skene. Edinburgh, 1868.

The Mabinogion. Translated by Lady Charlotte Guest. The best popular

edition is that of A. Nutt, and is especially valuable for his

critical notes at the end.

Layamon’s Brut. Edited by Sir F. Madden. 3 vols. London, 1847.

Malory’s Morte Darthur. Edited, in 3 vols., by H. O. Sommer (Nutt).

---- With introduction by Sir J. Rhys (Dent).

---- Edited, with introduction, by Sir E. Strachey (Macmillan--Globe

Series).

Dickinson, W. H. King Arthur in Cornwall.

Fletcher, R. H. The Arthurian Matter in the Chronicles (Harvard

Studies and Notes, 1906).

Maccallum, M. W. Tennyson’s Idylls and Arthurian Story.

Newell, W. W. King Arthur and the Table Round. Boston, 1897.

(Contains excellent summaries of Chrétien de Troyes poems.)

Nutt, Alfred. Celtic and Mediæval Romance. (Popular Studies in

Mythology and Folklore.)

---- Legends of the Holy Grail. (Popular Studies, etc.)

---- Studies in the Legend of the Holy Grail (1888).

Rhys, Sir John. The Arthurian Legend (1891).

---- Celtic Folklore (1901).

Schofield, W. H. English Literature, from the Norman Conquest to

Chaucer.

Squire, Charles. The Mythology of the British Islands.

Stephens, Thomas. The Literature of the Kymry (1872).

Weston, Jessie L. King Arthur and his Knights. (Popular Studies in

Mythology and Folklore.)

---- The Legend of Sir Gawain (1897), and other works included in

Nutt’s ‘Grimm Library’.

INDEX

Æneas, 60, 67

_Æneid, The_, 67

Agned, 15

Airem, 13, 54

Alanus de Insulis, 31

_Albion’s England_, Warner’s, 120

Alexander the Great, 5, 70

Almesbury, 115

Ambrosius Aurelianus; _see_ Emrys

Amir, 24

_Aneirin, the Book of_, 40

Anna, 75

_Annales Cambriæ_, 21, 26

Aran, Yr (Rauran), 128

Argante (_Morgan le fay_), 92, 94, 138

Arnold, Matthew, 39, 45, 105

Ascham, 7, 118

Astolat, 98

Aurelius Ambrosius, 74

Avalon, 76, 91, 93

Avallach (Avalon), 53

Badbury, 20

Badon, Mount, 16, 19, 21, 22, 26, 29, 32

Baddesdown-hill (Mount Badon), 28

Baldulph, 76

Bassas, 15

Bath, 76

Bayeux, 82

Bec, 33

Bede, 28, 71, 72

Bedwyr; _see_ Bedivere

Bedivere, 25, 42, 55, 78, 82, 111, 114, 137

Beornicia, 16

Béroul, 106

Blackmore, Sir Richard, 126

Bledri (Bledhericus, Bleheris), 109

Boccaccio, 6

Bodel, Jean, 3

Bodmin, 31

Brân the Blessed, 53

_Branwen, daughter of Llŷr_, 53

_Bricriu’s Feast_, 50

Brittany, 31, 58, _seq._

Broceliande, 98

Brooke, Stopford, 136

Brutus, son of Æneas, 60, 67

Brythons, the, 13, 29, 36

Builth, 23

Cador (Kadwr), Earl or Duke of Cornwall, 51, 76, 83

Cadwallader, 72

Cadwallo, 72

Caerlleon upon Usk, 2, 3, 57, 78, 97, 121

Caledvwlch (Excalibur), Arthur’s sword, 46

Cambula (Camel), 27

Camden, 85

Camel, 57, 83, 98, 121

Camelford, 27, 93

Cameliard, 98

Camelot, 6, 98

Camlan, 26, 53

Caradoc of Llancarvan, 87

Carbonek, 98, 136

Carlisle, 73, 97

_Carmarthen, The Black Book of_, 2, 12, 26, 40, 74

Carnwennan, Arthur’s dagger, 46, 50

Cavall (Cabal), Arthur’s dog, 24, 25, 138

Caxton, 1-10, 11, 37, 135

Celidon, 15

Ceredig, 18

Charlemagne, 8, 70

Chaucer, 60, 103, 116

Cheldric, 34, 76

_Chevalier au lion_, 101

_Chevalier de la Charrette_, 100, 102

Chinon, 82

Chrétien de Troyes, 41, 90, 100, 138

_Chronicle_, The Saxon, 29

Colgrin, 76

_Comes Britanniæ_, 17, 18

_Comes littoris Saxonici_, 17

_Coming of Arthur, The_, 134

Constantine, 83, 94

_Conte del Graal_, 101

Cormac, 84

Cornwall, 31, 34, 49, 56-58, 83, 105

Cradock, 6

Cunedda, 18

Dafydd ap Gwilym, 77

Dante, 103

Dares the Phrygian, 60

David, St, 81

Dictys the Cretan, 60

Dimilioc (Damelioc), 57, 74

Dover Castle, 6

Drayton, M., 86

_Dream of Rhonabwy, The_, 12, 18, 26, 50-52, 56

Dryden, 123, 127

Dubglas, 15

Dubricius, 75, 78, 81

_Dux Britanniarum_, 16

Edern, son of Nudd, 51

Ehangwen, Arthur’s hall, 46

Eilhart von Oberge, 106

Elbodugus (Elfodd), 14

Elizabeth, Queen, 118, 123, 130

Emmeline, 125

Emrys (Ambrosius Aurelianus), 18, 21, 23, 28, 32

Eosa, 74

Ercing (Archenfield), 24

_Erec_, 41, 101

Etáin, 54

Evans, Dr Gwenogvryn, 39, 45

Evans, Dr Sebastian, 3, 35, 65, 67

Excalibur (Caliburn), Arthur’s sword, 26, 46, 76, 93, 114, 129

_Faerie Queene, The_, 119, _seq._

Finn, 84

Flollo, 78

Galahad, 106, 136

Gawain, 2, 6, 32, 75, 77, 107, 110

Gelli (or Kelli) Wic, 49, 56

Geoffrey of Monmouth, 2, 4, 14, 19, 27, 60 _seq._

Geoffrey Gaimar, 85

Geraint, 47, 136

_Geraint, son of Erbin_ (Welsh romance), 2, 52, 101, 138

_Geraint, filius Erbin_ (Welsh poem), 41

Germany, 16

Gildas, 18, 21, 22, 28, 72, 88, 134

_Gildas, Life of_, 88

Giraldus Cambrensis, 5, 84, 87, 109

Glamorgan, 65, 79

Glastonbury, 6, 84, 89, 98

Glewlwyd of the Mighty Grasp, 42, 45

Godfrey of Boulogne, 8

Goleuddydd, 17

Gorlois, 57, 74, 122

Gottfried von Strassburg, 106

Grafton, 85

Grail, The Holy, 8, 9, 98, 107, 138

Griffin of Carmarthen, 92

Guest, Lady Charlotte, 37, 134

Guido de Colonna, 60

Guinevere (Gwenhwyvar), 46, 53, 76, 82, 100, 115

Guinnion, 15, 20

Gwalchmei (Gawain), 110

Gwenn, Arthur’s mantle, 51

Gwledig, 17

Gwynn, son of Nudd, 47, 48

Gwythur, 2, 53

Hawker, R. S., 140

Heber, _Morte Arthur_, 140

Hengist, 15, 33

Henry II., 84

Henry of Huntingdon, 19, 33, 71

_Hergest, The Red Book of_, 27, 101

Higden, 6

_Historia Brittonum_, 14

_Historia Regum Britanniæ_, 64, _seq._

Hoel, King of Armorica, 76

Holinshed, 85

Huel, King of Scotland, 88

Hughes, Thomas, 122

Ida, 16

_Idylls of the King, The_, 4, 130, _seq._

Igerne, 57, 74

Iseult (Essyllt), 54, 100, 104

Joseph of Arimathea, 98, 109

Joyous Gard, 98

Juvenal, 12

Kadwr; _see_ Cador

Kay (Kei), 42, 52, 54, 78, 82

_King Arthur, or The British Worthy_, 125

_Kulhwch and Olwen_, 17, 25, 44, 45, _seq._

_Lady of the Fountain, The_, 3, 18, 52, 101

Lancelot, 6, 10, 100, 103, 107, 115, 136

_Lancelot and Elaine_, 134

Lang, Andrew, 133, 134

_Lanval_, 58

Laon, 31

Layamon, 27, 67, 84, 85, 89, 91, _seq._

_Le Morte Arthure_ (poem), 139

Legion, City of, 15, 19

Leicester, Earl of, 127

Leodogran, 134

Lincoln, 97

Linnuis (Lindisia, Lindsey), 15, 20

Llacheu, Arthur’s son, 43

Llamrei, Arthur’s mare, 25

Llandaff, 64

London, 53, 96

Lot (of Lodonesia), 75, 77, 112

Lucius Hiberius, 53, 81

Lyonesse, 98, 105

Lytton, _King Arthur_, 140

_Mabinogion, The_, 2, 3, 12, 17, 18, 37, 39, 101, 110, 134

Mabon, son of Mellt, 43

Mabon, son of Modron, 42, 48

Maccallum, M. W., 136

Maelgwn Gwynedd (Maglocunus), 22

Malory’s _Morte Darthur_, 1-10, 36, 113-115, 118, 135, 139

Manawyddan, son of Llŷr, 42, 47

Map, Walter, 64, 101, 103, 104

Marie of Champagne, 100, 103

Marie of France, 58

Mark (March, son of Meirchion), 2, 51, 54

Maxen Wledig, 18

Meleager, 48

Melwas (Meleaguant, Mellyagraunce), 89, 102

Merlin, 69, 75, 94, 111, 128, 137

_Merlin, The Prophecies of_, 69, 112

Milton, 50, 123

_Misfortunes of Arthur, The_, 122

Modred (Medrod, Medraut), 26, 27, 34, 52, 75, 82, 112, 122

Monmouth, 65

Mont St Michel, 66

Morris, William, 140

_Morte Darthur_; _see_ Malory

_Morte D’Arthur_ (Tennyson’s), 131

Mynneu, Mount, 52

Natanleod, 30

Nennius, 17, 19, 20, 22, 23, 29, 41, 71, 134

Neustria, 78

Nutt, Alfred, 45, 50, 107

Octha, 15, 74

Owen and the ravens, 50

Palug’s Cat, 53, 54

_Parzival_ (Wagner’s), 4

Pembrokeshire, 23

Perceval (Peredur), 10, 52, 100, 101, 107

_Peredur_ (Welsh romance), 52, 101

Picts, The, 16, 27

Polydore Vergil, 85

_Polyolbion_, 86, 120

_Prince Arthur, an Heroick Poem_, 126

Prince Consort, The, 131, 132

Pridwen, Arthur’s ship, 44

Priwen, Arthur’s shield, 76

Pryderi, 54

_Pwyll, prince of Dyved_, 54

Rhongomyant (Rhôn), Arthur’s lance, 46, 76

Rhys, Sir John, 2, 12, 13, 17, 38, 44, 49

Ritho, of Mount Eryri, 81

Robert de Borron, 109, 112

Robert, earl of Gloucester, 65, 73

Robert of Gloucester (chronicler), 85

Robert Fitz-Hamon, 65

Robert of Torigni (Robert of the Mount), 33, 66

Rome, 67

Round Table, The, 6, 80, 91, 93

Sackville, 86

St Asaph, 64

St Michael’s Mount, 80

Sarras, 98

Saxons, The, 11, 15, 16, 27, 28

Scots, The, 16, 27

Scott, Sir W., 123, 125

Severus, 16

Shaftesbury, 74

_Sir Gawayne and the Grene Knight_, 91, 111, 116

Skene, W. F., 39

Somerset, 89

Spenser, 56, 86, 118, 127

Stubbs, 28

Swinburne, 105

Tacitus, 12

Taliesin, 17, 37, 47

_Taliesin, The Book of_, 40, 43

Thomas de Bretagne, 106

_Thopas, Tale of Sir_, 61, 116

Tennyson, 7, 21, 26, _seq._

Timon (Sir Ector), 128

Tintagel, 57, 74, 105

Triads, The, 26, 38, 52-55

Tribruit (Tryvrwyd), 15, 43

Tristram (Tristan, Drystan), 10, 52, 54, 100, 104, 114, 129, 139

_Tristan und Isolde_ (Wagner’s), 4

Troy, 60

Trwyth, the Boar (_porcus Troit_), 24, 25, 49, _seq._

Uther Pendragon, 42, 57, 74, 122

Virgil, 68

_Vita Merlini_, 112

Vivien, 112

Vortigern, 30, 32, 69

Vortimer, 32

Wace, 58, 67, 85, 89

_Wales, The Four Ancient Books of_, 39, _seq._

Walter, archdeacon of Oxford, 68, 71, 83

Warinus, 33, 34

Warner, William, 86

Westminster, abbey of, 6

Weston, Miss J. L, 108, 109, 110

White Mount, The (in London), 53

_Wife of Bath’s Tale, The_, 117

William of Malmesbury, 2, 28, 31, 66, 71

William of Newburgh, 5, 28, 69, 86

William of Orange, 127

Winchester, 6, 97

Wolfram von Eschenbach, 107

Wordsworth, 20, 62, 86

Wygar, the smith, 92

Wynebgwrthucher, Arthur’s shield, 46

Yspaddaden (Pen Kawr), 26, 45, 50

PRINTED BY

TURNBULL AND SPEARS

EDINBURGH

FOOTNOTES:

[1] ‘The Songs of the Graves,’ in the twelfth century _Black Book of

Carmarthen_. “A grave there is for March (or Mark),”--so the lines

run,--“a grave for Gwythur, a grave for Gwgawn of the Ruddy Sword; a

mystery is the grave of Arthur”: or, as Sir John Rhys translates, “not

wise the thought--a grave for Arthur.”

[2] William of Malmesbury (_Gesta Reg. Angl._, Bk. III.), referring

to the discovery in Wales of the grave of Gawain, Arthur’s nephew,

speaks of the grave of Arthur himself as being unknown--hence, he says,

ancient songs (_antiquitas næniarum_) prophesy his return.

[3] The opening words of the Welsh romance, ‘Gereint, Son of Erbin.’

_Cf._ also the first sentences of ‘The Lady of the Fountain,’ as given

in Lady C. Guest’s _Mabinogion_.

[4] See Geoffrey’s _History_, Bk. IX. Ch. 12, in the excellent

translation by the late Dr Sebastian Evans (Temple Classics).

[5] The three great romantic “matters” are thus categorised in a

well-known passage in the _Chanson de Saisnes_ by the twelfth century

writer, Jean Bodel,--

“Ne sont que trois matières à nul home attendant,

De France et de Bretaigne et de Rome la grant.”

[6] _Hist. Rerum Anglic._ Proemium (Chronicles of Stephen, etc., Rolls

Series, 1884-85).

[7] See note _A_ on p. 138.

[8] See a poem entitled ‘Gereint, Son of Erbin,’ in _The Black Book of

Carmarthen_, and several passages in the _Mabinogion_,--especially in

‘The Dream of Rhonabwy,’--which are referred to later on.

[9] It is worth noting, by the way, that the “Saeson,” or Saxons,

against whom he is presumed to have fought most of his battles, are not

even mentioned in the Welsh Arthurian romances.

[10] The name _Artoria_ occurs is Tacitus, _Annals_, xv. 71; _Artorius_

in Juvenal, _Sat._, iii. 29. It was common enough in Rome.

[11] Rhys, _Arthurian Legend_, p. 48. In Chap. I. of the same work Rhys

puts and answers the main question suggested in these pages as follows:

“How did Arthur become famous above other (Welsh, or British) heroes,

and how came he to be the subject of so much story and romance? The

answer, in short, which one has to give to this hard question must be

to the effect, that besides a historic Arthur there was a Brythonic

divinity named Arthur, after whom the man may have been called, or with

whose name his, in case it was of a different origin, may have become

identical in sound owing to an accident of speech” (_A. L._, p. 8).

[12] The chief authorities on Nennius are Mommsen (see his edition

of the _Historia_, and of Gildas, in _Mon. Germ. Hist._, Berlin,

1898), and Zimmer (_Nennius Vindicatus_, Berlin, 1893). See, also,

Fletcher (_The Arthurian Matter in the Chronicles_, Boston, 1906) and

M. R. James (_Camb. Hist. of Eng. Lit._, Vol. I. Ch. 5). Thurneysen

(_Zeitschr. f. Deutsche Philologie_, 1897) fixes 827 as the date of the

completion of the _History_.

[13] This date must be accepted if we are to believe Nennius’s

statement that he was a disciple of Elbodugus, or Elfodd, bishop of

Gwynedd.

[14] Chap. 56.

[15] _ipse dux erat bellorum._

[16] This is simply the Welsh (modern, _cad coed_) for “the battle of

Celidon Wood.”

[17] Rhys, _Arthurian Legend_, p. 7.

[18] _Arthurian Legend_, p. 7.

[19] A number of chieftains are styled _gwledig_ in the _Mabinogion_

(see index to edition of Welsh _Red Book_, text by Rhys and Evans, p.

342). Among them is one Amlawdd, or Amlodd, who in _Kulhwch and Olwen_

is the father of Goleuddydd, the mother of Kulhwch, “a boy of gentle

birth and cousin unto Arthur.” In a poem ascribed to Taliesin the deity

even is called _gwledig_--“gwledig nef a phob tud,” “ruler of heaven

and of every land.”

[20] Viz., to the tale, included in Lady C. Guest’s _Mabinogion_,

called ‘The Dream of Maxen Wledig.’ The glorification of Maxen, or

Maximus, in Welsh tradition suggests many points of analogy with the

story of Arthur.

[21] Lloyd, _Hist. of Wales_, Vol. I. p. 100.

[22] See the opening words of ‘The Lady of the Fountain,’ “Yr

amherawdyr Arthur oedd yng Kaer Llion ar Wysc.” See also _The Dream of

Rhonabwy_, _passim_.

[23] _Arthurian Legend_, p. 7. See also _The Welsh People_ (Rhys and

Jones), pp. 105 _sqq._

[24] The most elaborate and ingenious expositions of this theory will

be found in Skene’s _Four Ancient Books of Wales_, Vol. I. Chap. 4, and

Stuart-Glennie’s _Arthurian Localities in ‘Merlin’_ (Early Eng. Text

Soc., 1869).

[25] “Mons Badonicus” is still unidentified. Guest, in his _Origines_

_Celticæ_ (ii. 187-189) makes a brave attempt to prove that it was

Badbury in Dorset.

[26] _Hist. Reg. Brit._, Bk. IX. Ch. 4.

[27] _Ecclesiastical Sonnets_, i. 10.

[28] _Coming of Arthur._

[29] The translation is that of Dr H. Williams in his edition of Gildas

(Cymmrodorion Record Series, London, 1901), p. 63.

[30] Such, at any rate, is Rhys’s opinion. See Preface to Dent’s

_Malory_, p. xxxv.

[31] See p. 142 in Nutt’s reprint of Lady C. Guest’s _Mabinogion_.

[32] _Op. cit._, p. 139.

[33] See note _B_ on p. 138.

[34] Tennyson, _The Passing of Arthur_.

[35] Skene’s _Four Ancient Books of Wales_, Vol. I. p. 311.

[36] _Op. cit._, p. 291.

[37] Layamon, in his _Brut_ (l. 28,533), is the first to locate the

battle definitely at this place.

[38] Preface to Rolls Edition of Roger of Hoveden’s _Chronicle_.

[39] For an interesting comparison between the _Chronicle_ and Nennius

in respect to the Arthurian period, see Fletcher, _Arthurian Matter in

the Chronicles_, pp. 21-23.

[40] The account of this incident is given in Migne’s _Patrologia_,

156, col. 983.

[41] _Prophetia Anglicana_, etc. (Frankfort, 1603), Bk. I. p. 17.

[42] _Hist. Reg. Angl._, Bk. III.

[43] Published in Rolls Series, _Chronicles of Stephen_, etc., iv. p.

65.

[44] Quoted from the Epilogue to the late Dr Sebastian Evans’s

translation of Geoffrey’s _History_ (Temple Classics, 1904).

[45] Lady Charlotte Guest’s translation contains twelve tales, but one

of these, the _History of Taliesin_, is from a late sixteenth century

MS. and has no claim to rank with the rest as a genuine mediæval

production.

[46] _Arthurian Legend_, p. 6. “The Triads give us the oldest account

of Arthur, and this now and then in a form which the story-tellers and

romance-writers found thoroughly untractable and best ignored.”

[47] There are, of course, more than four “ancient books” in the Welsh

language--for example, the MS. of what is known as the Venedotian code

of the laws of Wales, and _The White Book of Rhydderch_, the contents

of which have recently been made accessible to Welsh readers in Dr

Gwenogvryn Evans’s fine edition. But Skene’s “four books” contain all

the oldest Welsh poetry that is of any account. These four, named

in chronological order, are known as _The Black Book of Carmarthen_

(twelfth century), _The Book of Aneirin_, _The Book of Taliesin_, and

_The Red Book of Hergest_.

[48] _The Study of Celtic Literature._

[49] See Skene, _Four Ancient Books_, Vol. I. p. 295.

[50] See Gwenogvryn Ewans’s edition of _The Black Book_, p. 103.

[51] Skene, _Four Ancient Books_, I. p. 426.

[52] Skene, _Four Ancient Books_, I. p. 308.

[53] Rhys, Preface to Dent’s edition of _Malory_, p. xxv, where a full

account of these three poems is given.

[54] Skene, _Four Ancient Books_, I. p. 266.

[55] Tryvrwyd, in the form _Tribruit_, is one of the twelve battles

recorded by Nennius. See _ante_, Chap. I.

[56] All the names here cited are found also in the prose story of

_Kulhwch and Olwen_. The connection of the poem with _Kulhwch_ is

referred to later on.

[57] See Preface to Dent’s _Malory_, where a translation of the whole

poem is given, and its correspondences with _Kulhwch and Olwen_ are

pointed out.

[58] _The Study of Celtic Literature._ Rhys’s opinion that the

primitive form, and substance, of this tale date from the tenth century

has been already referred to. Dr Gwenogvryn Evans, in the Preface to

his edition of _The White Book_ ‘_Mabinogion_,’ without assigning to

it so definite a date, holds that _Kulhwch and Olwen_ “is the oldest

in language, in matter, in simplicity of narrative, in primitive

atmosphere,” of all the tales to which the general name ‘mabinogion’

is given. Mr Alfred Nutt, while holding that portions of _Kulhwch and

Olwen_ are of “pre-historic antiquity, far transcending in age any

historic Arthur,” assigns the story in the form we have it to the

twelfth century, on the strength, mainly, of its affinities to eleventh

century Irish sagas.

[59] The Welsh name for “Excalibur.”

[60] Sir John Rhys does this in his _Celtic Folklore_ (Vol. II. pp.

512 _sqq._). See the whole of Chap. IX. in that work for a learned

discussion of the significance of the names, both local and personal,

in _Kulhwch_.

[61] Milton, _Paradise Lost_, ix. The prominence given to these

descriptions in the tale is emphasised by its brief epilogue. “And this

tale is called the _Dream of Rhonabwy_. And this is the reason that

no one knows the dream without a book, neither bard nor gifted seer;

because of the various colours that were upon the horses, and the many

wondrous colours of the arms and of the panoply, and of the precious

mantles and virtuous stones.”

[62] The Emperor (Lucius Hiberius, called in the Welsh narratives Llês)

is said by Geoffrey _(Hist. Reg. Brit._, X. xi) to have been killed by

“an unknown hand.”

[63] Rhys, _Arthurian Legend_, Ch. II.

[64] The most brilliant of these re-builders of “the Celtic Pantheon”

is Sir John Rhys. See, especially, his _Arthurian Legend_ and _Celtic

Heathendom_.

[65] Spenser, _Faerie Queene_, Bk. I. Canto 9.

[66] Dickinson, _King Arthur in Cornwall_ (Longmans), p. vi, where an

interesting account is given of Arthur’s Cornish associations.

[67] _Roman de Brut_, 1. 9994

[68] See above, p. 31.

[69] See the final chapter, on “Great Britain and Little Britain,” in

Rhys’s _Arthurian Legend_.

[70] _Ariegal and Elidure._

[71] _Hist. Reg. Brit._, Chap. I. (Dr Sebastian Evans’s translation).

I have used this translation for nearly all the extracts from Geoffrey

given in this chapter.

[72] This hypothesis is ingeniously elaborated by the late Dr Sebastian

Evans in the epilogue to his translation of Geoffrey (Temple Classics,

1903).

[73] This explanation of the name “Britain” is not, as has been pointed

out (pp. 60, 61), original to Geoffrey. It is his elaboration of the

Brutus legend that is significant.

[74] William of Newburgh, the severest of all Geoffrey’s critics,

writing about 1190, suggests that either this, or his own “love of

lying,” was the motive of the work. “It is manifest that everything

which this person wrote about Arthur and his successors, and his

predecessors after Vortigern, was made up partly by himself and partly

by others, whether from an inordinate love of lying or for the sake of

pleasing the Britons.” William also held that Geoffrey’s account of

events before the time of Julius Cæsar was either invented by himself,

or “adopted after it had been invented by others.”

[75] Jusserand, _Lit. Hist. of the English People_, Vol. I. p. 131.

[76] One MS of the _History_, preserved at Bern, contains a double

dedication addressed to both Robert, and King Stephen. I have given

some account of this MS, and of its bearing upon the date and character

of the _History_, in a paper on Geoffrey published in the _Transactions

of the Cymmrodorion Society_ (London, 1899).

[77] Where, apart from “the British book,” Geoffrey derived the name

and history of Uther, still remains an unsolved problem. It is worth

noting, however, that “Uther Pendragon” is mentioned in a poem in _The

Black Book of Carmarthen_ noticed in the previous chapter (see p. 42).

[78] Dubricius, or Dyfrig, is a well-known early Welsh saint, but

the archbishopric of the City of Legions is entirely a creation of

Geoffrey’s fancy.

[79] I have italicised the words “noble Roman family” here, because

this “Roman” descent of Guinevere would seem not to have been derived

from a Welsh source. In the Triads we read of a Guinevere who is

described as “the daughter of Ogrvan the Giant” (see _ante_, p. 53).

She is, apparently, the one among “the three Guineveres” who is best

known to Welsh tradition as the wife of Arthur. She is mentioned both

in a poem by the famous Welsh poet of the fourteenth century, Dafydd

ap Gwilym--referring to her adventure with Melwas--and in an old Welsh

rhyme, which gives her a somewhat disreputable character (see Rhys,

_Arthurian Legend_, Chap. III.).

[80] It is interesting to note, incidentally, that after the

“solemnity” at Caerleon, Dubricius is reported to have resigned his

archbishopric, and “David, _the King’s uncle_, was consecrated in his

place, whose life was an ensample of all goodness unto them whom he had

instructed in his doctrine.”

[81] This statement appears to indicate quite explicitly that Geoffrey

was indebted to Walter for oral information as well as for the British

book.

[82] The best-known account of the affair is given by Giraldus

Cambrensis (_De Principis Instructione_, viii. 126-9).

[83] There are, for example, thirty-five in the British Museum and

sixteen in the Bodleian.

[84] No copies of Gaimar’s version are known to exist, but his

rhymed chronicle of Anglo-Saxon and Norman kings has been edited and

translated by Duffus Hardy in the Rolls Series.

[85] _Polyolbion_, Song x.

[86] Hueil, and the cause of his quarrel with Arthur, are incidentally

mentioned in _Kulhwch and Olwen_. Hueil, we there read, had stabbed his

sister’s son Gwydre, “and hatred was between Hueil and Arthur because

of the wound.”

[87] Rhys, who doubts Caradoc’s authorship of the _Life of Gildas_, is

“certain that the story” of Melwas “is ancient, for Chrétien de Troyes

in his _Erec_ speaks of Maheloas as the Lord of the Glass Island--‘Li

sire de l’isle de voirre.’” _Arthurian Legend_, p. 52.

[88] Layamon’s _Brut_, ll. 42, 43.

[89] The question of the mythological origin of the Round Table is

one of the many indeterminate problems of Arthurian “criticism.”

For a suggestive study of the question see Brown, _The Round Table

before Wace_ (_Harvard Studies and Notes_, Vol. VII., 1900), where he

confidently states that “the Round Table was a very early Pan-Celtic

institution.”

[90] _Brut_, ll. 19,254 _sqq._ (Madden’s edition).

[91] ll. 28,610 _sqq._

[92] ll. 22,910 _sqq._

[93] See note _C_ on p. 138.

[94] Camelot is, apparently, first heard of in Chrétien de Troyes’

_Chevalier de la Charrette_.

[95] Tennyson, _Merlin and Vivien_.

[96] See note _D_ on p. 138.

[97] So much has been clearly proved in the case of _Peredur_, for

instance, in a French essay on the composition of that romance recently

published from Paris by Dr Mary Williams, formerly Fellow of the

University of Wales.

[98] This, of course, is an obvious variant of the story told in the

_Life of Gildas_, already mentioned, of Guinevere’s abduction by Melwas.

[99] _Nonne Prestes Tale_, l. 392.

[100] See note _E_ on p. 139.

[101] Matthew Arnold, _Tristram and Iseult_.

[102] Swinburne, _Tristram of Lyonesse_.

[103] M. Bédier, in his edition of Thomas’s _Tristan_, maintains that

the original of all the various versions of the story was a single poem

composed in England. This is a disputed point among scholars, but it is

generally agreed that the story is of British origin.

[104] See Tennyson, _The Passing of Arthur_.

[105] A. Nutt, _The Legends of the Holy Grail_ (Popular Studies in

Mythology and Folklore), p. 72.

[106] For a learned and suggestive study of the various versions of

the Grail legend, see Miss J. L. Weston’s _The Legend of Sir Perceval_

(2 vols.) in the Grimm Library (Nutt). Miss Weston there distinguishes

three stages in the growth of the legend as “the Folklore, the

Literary and the Mystical.” In the Mystical, an element which she

holds to be “entirely foreign to the original tale,” viz., the Grail

quest, “modified and finally transformed it.” The folk-tale “assumed

an ecclesiastical and mystical character. The hero became a champion

of Christianity and Holy Church, and as such displayed the qualities

most approved by the religious views of the time: he became not merely

chaste, but an ascetic celibate, and any connection with women was

dropped altogether” (Vol. I. p. 117).

[107] This, of course, raises a vexed question,--two schools of

critics, one German, and the other English, French and American,

being at feud upon it. In connection with the alleged Welsh origin of

some of these traditions, it may be mentioned that the suggestion has

been recently made that the first collection of them for “romantic”

purposes was due to a Welshman variously known as Bledri, Bleheris, or

Bledhericus, who lived probably in the eleventh century, and is spoken

of by Giraldus Cambrensis as a ‘_famosus fabulator, qui tempora nostra

paulo prævenit_.’ See Weston, _Legend of Sir Perceval_, Vol. I. Ch. 12.

[108] He is made the actual achiever of the quest in the German poem

_Diu Krône_, by Heinrich von dem Türlin.

[109] See _The Legend of Sir Gawain_, by Miss J. L. Weston (Grimm

Library).

[110] See the _Sir Gawayne_ romances edited by Sir F. Madden for the

Bannatyne Club (London, 1839).

[111] Strachey, Introduction to Globe Edition of _Le Morte Darthur_.

[112] _Morte Darthur_, Book XVIII. Chap. 25.

[113] Book XXI. Chap. 5.

[114] See note _F_ on p. 139.

[115] _Faerie Queene_, Bk. III. Canto iii.

[116] _Polyolbion_, Song X.

[117] _Polyolbion_, I.

[118] Scott, _Marmion_, Introduction to Canto I.

[119] _Paradise Lost_, Book IX.

[120] _Discourse on Satire._

[121] Scott’s edition of Dryden, Introduction to the play.

[122] Dryden so designates him in his _Preface to the Fables_.

[123] _King Arthur_, Book I.

[124] Introductory Letter to the _Faerie Queene_.

[125] The Sir Ector of Malory.

[126] _Faerie Queene_, Book I. ix.

[127] _Faerie Queene_, II. viii. 21.

[128] _Faerie Queene_, I. vii. 35.

[129] See note _G_ on p. 139.

[130] Dedication to his tragedy, “Locrine.”

[131] Lord Morley, _Studies in Literature_ (“On ‘The Ring and the

Book’”).

[132] _Lord Tennyson, A Memoir_, by his Son, Vol. II. v. 127.

[133] Andrew Lang, _Tennyson_ (Blackwood’s “Modern English Writers”),

p. 103.

[134] How closely it does follow the Welsh tale has well been pointed

out by Mr A. Lang in the work just quoted, from pp. 119 _sqq._

[135] M. W. Maccallum, _Tennyson’s Idylls and Arthurian Story_.

[136] Stopford Brooke, _Tennyson_, Chap. 10.

TRANSCRIBER’S NOTES:

Italicized text is surrounded by underscores: _italics_.

Obvious typographical errors have been corrected.

Inconsistencies in hyphenation have been standardized.

Archaic or variant spelling has been retained.

King Arthur in history and legend · 第 5 / 5 章