Mystery Files (2010–…): Season 1, Episode 7 - King Arthur - full transcript
What were the origins of the real King Arthur?
Arthur,
legendaryking of the Britons.
From his castle of Camelot,
Arthur and his knights
in shining armor become
the ultimate symbol
of chivalry and honor,
bringingenlightenment to the Dark Ages.
The Arthurian legends are
soenduring because they give us
a leader who is
strong, who is noble--
a leader whom we can trust.
Archaeologists and historians
now believe that
his myth holds clues
to Arthur's true identity.
Piecing together evidencedating
back 1,500 years,
can Britain's most elusivehero
finally be revealed?
As we open the mystery
files on King Arthur.
The legend of King
Arthur we know today
was forged in an
unlikely setting.
Here, in Britain's
most infamous prison--
the Tower of London.
Written by Sir Thomas Malory,
a former member of Parliament,
who was awaiting trial
for robbery, extortion,
attempted murder, and rape.
Around 1469, while the
bloodyWars of the Roses rages
outside, Malory completeshis
great work of prose,
Morte d'Arthur.
It's the definitive collectionof
the King's noble deeds.
Dr. Tobias Capwell is
anexpert on medieval history.
The Arthurianlegend
is not just one story.
You have to picture it asa
kind of giant snowball,
rolling down a hill.
And it picks up all kindsof
things as it accelerates
down the hill through history.
And many of the most
famouselements that we associate
with the legend of
King Arthur were
picked up at different times.
In Malory's books,
Arthur is the embodiment
of a virtuous hero.
He strives to create a peacefulland
from his civilized court
at Camelot, and surroundshimself
with chivalrous knights
of the Round Table.
His bravest,
mostcelebrated knight, Lancelot,
epitomizes Arthur's ideals
ofchivalry-- the code of conduct
that leads towards
truth and honor.
Sir Lancelotis
probably the most famous
of all of Arthur's knights.
Malory calls him,
in many places,
the greatest knight
in the world.
But this
blissfulscene does not last.
Arthur is betrayed.
Lancelot has an affair with
hisunfaithful queen, Guinevere.
Disloyalty all the more
devastating because
of their perceived purity.
His Utopian dream
shattered, Arthur
is double-crossed again,
and coaxed into fighting
his scheming nephew, Mordred.
Arthur is morally wounded.
Taken to the magical
Isle of Avalon,
Arthur now rests
in eternal sleep,
waiting to rise again whenthe
nation needs a savior.
Perhaps yearning for
a virtuous world,
fast disappearing whenhis
country is in turmoil,
it is Malory who produces
the legend of Arthur
in all its glory and tragedy.
Mallory didn't actually
invent very much new material.
But what he did was he builta
framework, or a structure,
onto which he could fit
everything together.
And he built it into one
continuous narrative,
and tried to get all
of the characters
from different
parts of the story,
to all be in one
single, ultra legend.
Malory's Arthur was
easily recognizable--
knights in shining armor,
fighting for honor,
and living by a strict
code of chivalry.
Key to Malory's
vision is the sporting
contest, when two nightsface
each other in combat--
the joust.
If you
lookcarefully in the Malory story,
all of his technical referencesto
armor and mounted combat
refer specifically
to the equipment
and practices of his
owntime, of the 15th century.
That experts confirmthat
a King Arthur could not
have lived in the 15th century.
Well, we have good records,
we have good histories all
theway through the Middle Ages,
all the way into
the Renaissance--
it's quite clearly the
case that Arthur was
not a knight in shining armor.
This iconic
imageof the iron-clad knight
is Malory's embellishmentof the story.
It makes Arthur relevant
to the 15th century.
And like Malory,
earlier writers add
other elements to the
myth that reflects
the times in which they lived.
Lancelot and the Knights
of the Round Table
are created in the 12th centuryby
French romantic authors,
reacting to the upheaval
of the Crusades.
Arthur's knights take
up the Christian cause,
and go in search of
the cup of Christ--
the Holy Grail.
Each reversion of
Arthur's mythical story
embraces the
prevailing principles
of justice and decency.
The French also
incorporatethe Gallic ideals
of chivalry, derived fromthe
French word chevalier--
meaning horsemanship.
But the earliest surviving
textwhich records King Arthur's
righteous exploits
is not imagined
by Malory, or French authors.
It is actually a
factual account,
written about another
turbulentperiod in British history.
It may help to uncover
whothe real man might be--
and when he lived.
Professor Snyder has
published extensively
on early British history.
Arthur first appears
in writing in a work calledThe
History of the Britons,
written in the ninth
century AD, and ascribed
to a monk named Nennius.
When we get to Arthur,
Nennius writes, "then he
fought against the
Saxons in those days,
together with the
kings of the Britons.
But he was their
leader in battles."
And then Nennius goes on
todescribe Arthur defeating
the Saxons in 12 great
battles, culminating
in the Battle of Badon Hill.
Nennius
isrecalling the fifth century
Anglo-Saxon invasion, and
Badon Hill is the site
of a well-documented conflict.
The wars marked the
start of the Dark Ages,
when the Romans withdraw,
and ancient Britain is left
defenseless againsthordes
of barbaric tribes
coming across the sea
fromwhat is modern-day Europe.
And archaeological evidencefound
at sites previously
only connected to
Arthur by folklore
appear to confirm this date.
In the legends,
Tintagel, in Cornwall,
is an important
Arthurian landmark.
Archaeologist, Stuart Prior,
from Bristol University,
has studied the
discoveries made here.
The real evidence is
actually fairly concealed now--
it's buried.
There's a whole collection,
a huge assemblage of pottery.
And we know this
stuff essentially
has come from North Africa.
It's called red slipwear,
and it's been imported
here in massive quantities.
And we can link theearly
importation of that
to the time frame that
we've got for Arthur.
The pottery
found at Tintagel dates
to the fifth century.
It carried wine,
oil, and a Roman
fish delicacy called garum--
goods more likely to bevalued
by a civilized society.
Somebodywho's
very, very powerful
is importing these fantastic
goods into Tintagel.
Significantly, archaeologists
have found the same potteryat
one other fort in Britain.
And it also has links to Arthur.
Cadbury castle is
often reputed to be
the site of Camelot,
thelegendary court at the heart
of King Arthur's kingdom.
Today, all that remains
is a hill looming
out of the surrounding valleys.
But excavations have revealedthat
1,500 years ago, Cadbury
was a major stronghold--
fit for a king.
The outer wall was
4.8 meters thick,
and ran for 1.2 kilometers.
Inside was a wooden hall,
and at its southwest corner,
was a gatehouse,
with a cobbledstreet running through it.
The fort had the largestprotected
area known in England
in the fifth century.
The fragments,
dug up insideCadbury's assembly hall,
mirrors the Roman
potteryunearthed at Tintagel.
It links the two sites,
andsuggests that the region was
populated by organized,
stable communities, when
a King Arthur may have lived.
You've
gotplaces that are mentioned
in the myth actually having
realgood archaeological evidence
attached to them,
and I guessit's no leap of imagination
to link the two together.
And the archaeological
finds fit Nenius's
time frame for King Arthur--
the fifth century.
Much of the country
is under attack,
as the Anglo-Saxon sweepinland,
destroying everything
that stands in their way.
It's from the Romano
British population
who stayed to defend the
countrythat some historians have
identified a man who
helps unite the people
in their hour of need.
He is a possible candidatefor
the real King Arthur--
Ambrosius Aurelianus.
Historian and writer,
Geoffrey Ashe,
is an expert on the
Arthurian legend.
There is a man named
Ambrosius,
who appearsduring the fifth century,
as a resistance leader.
And Arthur, itself,
is a Roman name--
it's a Welsh form of Arturius.
So he is one possibility.
Ambrosius's feats in battle
are recorded by a
monk called Gilder,
in one of only a
handful of documents
to survive from the period.
He's a ruler from
highranking Roman lineage, so
one who would ride into battle.
Ambrosius might
also help to explain
one of the most enduringelements
of Arthur's story--
the magical Excalibur.
Hector Cole is a
blacksmith, specializing
in ancient weaponry.
The Romansevolved
the Celtic long sword,
and they found that that
was ideal for horseback,
and was far more
effective than the very
short blade,
which theyhad with the foot soldiers.
As a mounted officer, Ambrosius
would have carried one
ofthese Celtic long swords.
These weapons have a
fearsome reputation--
they are immortalized
in Wagner's opera
when Siegfried slays the dragon.
And the word, Excalibur,
is a French translation of
the Welsh, for notch and hard.
Excalibur as a magical weapon
was a long sword, I--
I would think.
The better swords
of the Roman period
tended to be what we
call pattern welded.
Pattern
weldingforges a simple blade
into a magnificent and
distinctive weapon.
Here we go.
Iron rods are
firsttwisted together, and then
repeatedly hammered
andheated, like kneading bread
to iron out impurities,
and manufacture
a blade of superior strength.
Once it's of the right
quality and shape,
it's filed to remove the
outer layer of carbon
left by the coal furnace.
Then it is polished,
andrubbed with a strong acid
to wipe off the final
layer of impurities,
and reveal the blade's
distinctive pattern.
I think the legend of Excalibur
came film the actual
patternwelding of the blade,
because it is that patterningthat
gives the sword its magic.
Ambrosius-- a
fifth century fighter,
defending Britain
againstthe Saxon invaders,
carrying a mighty sword.
These are all traits
embedded in the myth.
But historians haveestablished
important details
of King Arthur's
legendAmbrosius does not share.
I think wemust
accept that Ambrosius is
an important person,
but I don't think
he accounts for everything.
He is not a king, he
doesn't flourish over
a long enough
period to be Arthur.
There is no clear evidenceas
to how much actual leading
of the Britons he did.
If some historiansthink
Ambrosius alone cannot
account for the King
Arthur of legend,
then there are others
who believe that,
buried deep in chroniclesfrom
the fifth century,
there is another
character who matches
key elements of the myth.
One candidate
for an historical KingArthur
is a fifth century
Briton named Riothamus.
The fullest account of
the career of Riothamus
comes from a writer
named Jordanes, who
wrote the history of the Goths.
And it's Jordanes who describeshim
as King of the Britons.
Historian
GeoffreyAshe has investigated
the Latin name, Riothamus.
When translated into ancientEnglish,
it becomes Rigotamos--
Rig is the word for
king, and Thomas
is the superlative, highest.
Rigotamos means
the highest king.
It's not uncommon, you know,
historically.
The men we all think of asGenghis
Khan, for instance--
his name wasn't
Genghis Khan, actually.
It was Temujin.
But Genghis Khan meant,
the supreme leader.
Further evidence that Riothamus
is an influential
sovereign comes
from Jordanes' accounts,
writtenonly 100 years after he ruled.
He records how Romepetitions
Riothamus for help
for the battle in France.
Riothamus sails to their
aid with 12,000 men.
He probably lands in
modern day Brittany,
and then heads for Burgundy.
And to bring themby
sea, means having a fleet.
And the lead who could
do this was evidently
a very important person.
Riothamus intends
toreinforce the legions fighting
another savage Germanic tribe--
the Visigoths.
But what he doesn't know is
thatthere's a traitor in his midst.
A lieutenant called Arvandusbetrays
Riothamus's position,
and the enemy is waiting.
The warload Euric,
king of the Visigoths,
has already captured largeparts
of Rome's western Empire.
Taken by surprise,
Riothamus is overpowered.
Jordanes' sixth century
character tallies
with portions of Arthur's life.
And there is another similarity.
One
parallelbetween the story of Arthur
and that of Riothamus
is that both men
were betrayed by lieutenants.
Mordred, of course,
betrayed Arthur.
And a man named Arvandus
betrayed Riothamus.
700 years later,
in the French chronicle,
the two deserters appear
toundergo a transformation.
There isa
very interesting mix-up
about the betrayal of Arthur.
In one of the earlier accounts,
the man who betrays him
is called more Morvandus.
The name Morvandusis
a combination of Arvandus,
the man who actually
betrays Riothamus,
and Mordred, the man
who, in folklore,
double-crosses Arthur.
Someone who knew the story
from both points of view,
and ran the names together.
There is one
finalconnection between the mythical
King Arthur and Riothamus--
the place he is
taken when wounded
by the treacherous Mordred,
the magical Isle of Avalon.
The legend says,
Arthur sleeps here,
ready to rise again and
restoregoodness back to the land.
But even this most
Biblical of fables
could be partly rooted in fact.
Because there is anancient
village of Avalon,
not far from Riothamus's
final battle.
There is one real place called
Avalon, which is in Burgundy.
The last we see of
Riothamus is actually
going in that direction,
tryingto escape from the Goths.
As in the final chapter
of Arthur's legendary
life, Riothamus is not
killed outright, but wounded.
And like Arthur,
he couldhave made his way to Avalon.
So it is quite possible that he
died in Avalon--
quite genuinely, may
even be buried there.
Riothamus, a supreme king,
and a leader in fifth
century Britain, who
commands a vast army, is
a loyal ally, and dies,
betrayed, near Avalon.
And yet, in the same
time frame, evidence
exists of a Roman
commander, Ambrosius,
who wields a mighty sword.
He helps liberate Britainfrom
Anglo-Saxon tyranny,
and facing dark age
barbarismwith civilized society.
Some historians believe thatthe
answer to which of these two
men is the real
King Arthur can be
found in the first fullversion
of his noble deeds ever
written.
The most famous historical--
or would-be historical
account of Arthur
is my Jeffrey of Monmouthin
the 12th century,
which is very-- a verywell
read, and very famous.
Jeffrey of Monmouth writes
his book, The History of
theKings of Britain, in 1134.
Jeffrey describes
a fifth century
Arthur, King of the Britons,
defeating the Saxons
with a magical sword,
andbringing peace to Britain,
like Ambrosius.
But he also fights
battles in France,
and dies near a
place called Avalon--
like Riothamus.
It is the starting point
for the Arthurian myth.
There are many elements
in the careers of both
Ambrosius Aurelianus,
and Riothamus, that
could have contributed
to the legend of Arthur.
Writers like Jeffrey
of Monmouth would
have taken these
elements, and helped
construct a career for Arthur.
In Jeffrey of
Monmouth's anthology,
Riothamus and Ambrosius
appearto have merged to become
the fictional King Arthur.
This mythical Arthur is,
then, gradually transformed
into the legendary figure
who embraces loyal,
and moral knights,
living inthe perfect world of Camelot.
Eventually,
betrayed bythose he trusts the most.
In times of unrest
and conflict, Arthur
reappears, adorned with
thecharacteristics most prized
by the writers of the day.
The Arthurian myth will
continueto be reinvented, the hero
for our changing world.
But his historical roots
maybe finally coming to focus.
legendaryking of the Britons.
From his castle of Camelot,
Arthur and his knights
in shining armor become
the ultimate symbol
of chivalry and honor,
bringingenlightenment to the Dark Ages.
The Arthurian legends are
soenduring because they give us
a leader who is
strong, who is noble--
a leader whom we can trust.
Archaeologists and historians
now believe that
his myth holds clues
to Arthur's true identity.
Piecing together evidencedating
back 1,500 years,
can Britain's most elusivehero
finally be revealed?
As we open the mystery
files on King Arthur.
The legend of King
Arthur we know today
was forged in an
unlikely setting.
Here, in Britain's
most infamous prison--
the Tower of London.
Written by Sir Thomas Malory,
a former member of Parliament,
who was awaiting trial
for robbery, extortion,
attempted murder, and rape.
Around 1469, while the
bloodyWars of the Roses rages
outside, Malory completeshis
great work of prose,
Morte d'Arthur.
It's the definitive collectionof
the King's noble deeds.
Dr. Tobias Capwell is
anexpert on medieval history.
The Arthurianlegend
is not just one story.
You have to picture it asa
kind of giant snowball,
rolling down a hill.
And it picks up all kindsof
things as it accelerates
down the hill through history.
And many of the most
famouselements that we associate
with the legend of
King Arthur were
picked up at different times.
In Malory's books,
Arthur is the embodiment
of a virtuous hero.
He strives to create a peacefulland
from his civilized court
at Camelot, and surroundshimself
with chivalrous knights
of the Round Table.
His bravest,
mostcelebrated knight, Lancelot,
epitomizes Arthur's ideals
ofchivalry-- the code of conduct
that leads towards
truth and honor.
Sir Lancelotis
probably the most famous
of all of Arthur's knights.
Malory calls him,
in many places,
the greatest knight
in the world.
But this
blissfulscene does not last.
Arthur is betrayed.
Lancelot has an affair with
hisunfaithful queen, Guinevere.
Disloyalty all the more
devastating because
of their perceived purity.
His Utopian dream
shattered, Arthur
is double-crossed again,
and coaxed into fighting
his scheming nephew, Mordred.
Arthur is morally wounded.
Taken to the magical
Isle of Avalon,
Arthur now rests
in eternal sleep,
waiting to rise again whenthe
nation needs a savior.
Perhaps yearning for
a virtuous world,
fast disappearing whenhis
country is in turmoil,
it is Malory who produces
the legend of Arthur
in all its glory and tragedy.
Mallory didn't actually
invent very much new material.
But what he did was he builta
framework, or a structure,
onto which he could fit
everything together.
And he built it into one
continuous narrative,
and tried to get all
of the characters
from different
parts of the story,
to all be in one
single, ultra legend.
Malory's Arthur was
easily recognizable--
knights in shining armor,
fighting for honor,
and living by a strict
code of chivalry.
Key to Malory's
vision is the sporting
contest, when two nightsface
each other in combat--
the joust.
If you
lookcarefully in the Malory story,
all of his technical referencesto
armor and mounted combat
refer specifically
to the equipment
and practices of his
owntime, of the 15th century.
That experts confirmthat
a King Arthur could not
have lived in the 15th century.
Well, we have good records,
we have good histories all
theway through the Middle Ages,
all the way into
the Renaissance--
it's quite clearly the
case that Arthur was
not a knight in shining armor.
This iconic
imageof the iron-clad knight
is Malory's embellishmentof the story.
It makes Arthur relevant
to the 15th century.
And like Malory,
earlier writers add
other elements to the
myth that reflects
the times in which they lived.
Lancelot and the Knights
of the Round Table
are created in the 12th centuryby
French romantic authors,
reacting to the upheaval
of the Crusades.
Arthur's knights take
up the Christian cause,
and go in search of
the cup of Christ--
the Holy Grail.
Each reversion of
Arthur's mythical story
embraces the
prevailing principles
of justice and decency.
The French also
incorporatethe Gallic ideals
of chivalry, derived fromthe
French word chevalier--
meaning horsemanship.
But the earliest surviving
textwhich records King Arthur's
righteous exploits
is not imagined
by Malory, or French authors.
It is actually a
factual account,
written about another
turbulentperiod in British history.
It may help to uncover
whothe real man might be--
and when he lived.
Professor Snyder has
published extensively
on early British history.
Arthur first appears
in writing in a work calledThe
History of the Britons,
written in the ninth
century AD, and ascribed
to a monk named Nennius.
When we get to Arthur,
Nennius writes, "then he
fought against the
Saxons in those days,
together with the
kings of the Britons.
But he was their
leader in battles."
And then Nennius goes on
todescribe Arthur defeating
the Saxons in 12 great
battles, culminating
in the Battle of Badon Hill.
Nennius
isrecalling the fifth century
Anglo-Saxon invasion, and
Badon Hill is the site
of a well-documented conflict.
The wars marked the
start of the Dark Ages,
when the Romans withdraw,
and ancient Britain is left
defenseless againsthordes
of barbaric tribes
coming across the sea
fromwhat is modern-day Europe.
And archaeological evidencefound
at sites previously
only connected to
Arthur by folklore
appear to confirm this date.
In the legends,
Tintagel, in Cornwall,
is an important
Arthurian landmark.
Archaeologist, Stuart Prior,
from Bristol University,
has studied the
discoveries made here.
The real evidence is
actually fairly concealed now--
it's buried.
There's a whole collection,
a huge assemblage of pottery.
And we know this
stuff essentially
has come from North Africa.
It's called red slipwear,
and it's been imported
here in massive quantities.
And we can link theearly
importation of that
to the time frame that
we've got for Arthur.
The pottery
found at Tintagel dates
to the fifth century.
It carried wine,
oil, and a Roman
fish delicacy called garum--
goods more likely to bevalued
by a civilized society.
Somebodywho's
very, very powerful
is importing these fantastic
goods into Tintagel.
Significantly, archaeologists
have found the same potteryat
one other fort in Britain.
And it also has links to Arthur.
Cadbury castle is
often reputed to be
the site of Camelot,
thelegendary court at the heart
of King Arthur's kingdom.
Today, all that remains
is a hill looming
out of the surrounding valleys.
But excavations have revealedthat
1,500 years ago, Cadbury
was a major stronghold--
fit for a king.
The outer wall was
4.8 meters thick,
and ran for 1.2 kilometers.
Inside was a wooden hall,
and at its southwest corner,
was a gatehouse,
with a cobbledstreet running through it.
The fort had the largestprotected
area known in England
in the fifth century.
The fragments,
dug up insideCadbury's assembly hall,
mirrors the Roman
potteryunearthed at Tintagel.
It links the two sites,
andsuggests that the region was
populated by organized,
stable communities, when
a King Arthur may have lived.
You've
gotplaces that are mentioned
in the myth actually having
realgood archaeological evidence
attached to them,
and I guessit's no leap of imagination
to link the two together.
And the archaeological
finds fit Nenius's
time frame for King Arthur--
the fifth century.
Much of the country
is under attack,
as the Anglo-Saxon sweepinland,
destroying everything
that stands in their way.
It's from the Romano
British population
who stayed to defend the
countrythat some historians have
identified a man who
helps unite the people
in their hour of need.
He is a possible candidatefor
the real King Arthur--
Ambrosius Aurelianus.
Historian and writer,
Geoffrey Ashe,
is an expert on the
Arthurian legend.
There is a man named
Ambrosius,
who appearsduring the fifth century,
as a resistance leader.
And Arthur, itself,
is a Roman name--
it's a Welsh form of Arturius.
So he is one possibility.
Ambrosius's feats in battle
are recorded by a
monk called Gilder,
in one of only a
handful of documents
to survive from the period.
He's a ruler from
highranking Roman lineage, so
one who would ride into battle.
Ambrosius might
also help to explain
one of the most enduringelements
of Arthur's story--
the magical Excalibur.
Hector Cole is a
blacksmith, specializing
in ancient weaponry.
The Romansevolved
the Celtic long sword,
and they found that that
was ideal for horseback,
and was far more
effective than the very
short blade,
which theyhad with the foot soldiers.
As a mounted officer, Ambrosius
would have carried one
ofthese Celtic long swords.
These weapons have a
fearsome reputation--
they are immortalized
in Wagner's opera
when Siegfried slays the dragon.
And the word, Excalibur,
is a French translation of
the Welsh, for notch and hard.
Excalibur as a magical weapon
was a long sword, I--
I would think.
The better swords
of the Roman period
tended to be what we
call pattern welded.
Pattern
weldingforges a simple blade
into a magnificent and
distinctive weapon.
Here we go.
Iron rods are
firsttwisted together, and then
repeatedly hammered
andheated, like kneading bread
to iron out impurities,
and manufacture
a blade of superior strength.
Once it's of the right
quality and shape,
it's filed to remove the
outer layer of carbon
left by the coal furnace.
Then it is polished,
andrubbed with a strong acid
to wipe off the final
layer of impurities,
and reveal the blade's
distinctive pattern.
I think the legend of Excalibur
came film the actual
patternwelding of the blade,
because it is that patterningthat
gives the sword its magic.
Ambrosius-- a
fifth century fighter,
defending Britain
againstthe Saxon invaders,
carrying a mighty sword.
These are all traits
embedded in the myth.
But historians haveestablished
important details
of King Arthur's
legendAmbrosius does not share.
I think wemust
accept that Ambrosius is
an important person,
but I don't think
he accounts for everything.
He is not a king, he
doesn't flourish over
a long enough
period to be Arthur.
There is no clear evidenceas
to how much actual leading
of the Britons he did.
If some historiansthink
Ambrosius alone cannot
account for the King
Arthur of legend,
then there are others
who believe that,
buried deep in chroniclesfrom
the fifth century,
there is another
character who matches
key elements of the myth.
One candidate
for an historical KingArthur
is a fifth century
Briton named Riothamus.
The fullest account of
the career of Riothamus
comes from a writer
named Jordanes, who
wrote the history of the Goths.
And it's Jordanes who describeshim
as King of the Britons.
Historian
GeoffreyAshe has investigated
the Latin name, Riothamus.
When translated into ancientEnglish,
it becomes Rigotamos--
Rig is the word for
king, and Thomas
is the superlative, highest.
Rigotamos means
the highest king.
It's not uncommon, you know,
historically.
The men we all think of asGenghis
Khan, for instance--
his name wasn't
Genghis Khan, actually.
It was Temujin.
But Genghis Khan meant,
the supreme leader.
Further evidence that Riothamus
is an influential
sovereign comes
from Jordanes' accounts,
writtenonly 100 years after he ruled.
He records how Romepetitions
Riothamus for help
for the battle in France.
Riothamus sails to their
aid with 12,000 men.
He probably lands in
modern day Brittany,
and then heads for Burgundy.
And to bring themby
sea, means having a fleet.
And the lead who could
do this was evidently
a very important person.
Riothamus intends
toreinforce the legions fighting
another savage Germanic tribe--
the Visigoths.
But what he doesn't know is
thatthere's a traitor in his midst.
A lieutenant called Arvandusbetrays
Riothamus's position,
and the enemy is waiting.
The warload Euric,
king of the Visigoths,
has already captured largeparts
of Rome's western Empire.
Taken by surprise,
Riothamus is overpowered.
Jordanes' sixth century
character tallies
with portions of Arthur's life.
And there is another similarity.
One
parallelbetween the story of Arthur
and that of Riothamus
is that both men
were betrayed by lieutenants.
Mordred, of course,
betrayed Arthur.
And a man named Arvandus
betrayed Riothamus.
700 years later,
in the French chronicle,
the two deserters appear
toundergo a transformation.
There isa
very interesting mix-up
about the betrayal of Arthur.
In one of the earlier accounts,
the man who betrays him
is called more Morvandus.
The name Morvandusis
a combination of Arvandus,
the man who actually
betrays Riothamus,
and Mordred, the man
who, in folklore,
double-crosses Arthur.
Someone who knew the story
from both points of view,
and ran the names together.
There is one
finalconnection between the mythical
King Arthur and Riothamus--
the place he is
taken when wounded
by the treacherous Mordred,
the magical Isle of Avalon.
The legend says,
Arthur sleeps here,
ready to rise again and
restoregoodness back to the land.
But even this most
Biblical of fables
could be partly rooted in fact.
Because there is anancient
village of Avalon,
not far from Riothamus's
final battle.
There is one real place called
Avalon, which is in Burgundy.
The last we see of
Riothamus is actually
going in that direction,
tryingto escape from the Goths.
As in the final chapter
of Arthur's legendary
life, Riothamus is not
killed outright, but wounded.
And like Arthur,
he couldhave made his way to Avalon.
So it is quite possible that he
died in Avalon--
quite genuinely, may
even be buried there.
Riothamus, a supreme king,
and a leader in fifth
century Britain, who
commands a vast army, is
a loyal ally, and dies,
betrayed, near Avalon.
And yet, in the same
time frame, evidence
exists of a Roman
commander, Ambrosius,
who wields a mighty sword.
He helps liberate Britainfrom
Anglo-Saxon tyranny,
and facing dark age
barbarismwith civilized society.
Some historians believe thatthe
answer to which of these two
men is the real
King Arthur can be
found in the first fullversion
of his noble deeds ever
written.
The most famous historical--
or would-be historical
account of Arthur
is my Jeffrey of Monmouthin
the 12th century,
which is very-- a verywell
read, and very famous.
Jeffrey of Monmouth writes
his book, The History of
theKings of Britain, in 1134.
Jeffrey describes
a fifth century
Arthur, King of the Britons,
defeating the Saxons
with a magical sword,
andbringing peace to Britain,
like Ambrosius.
But he also fights
battles in France,
and dies near a
place called Avalon--
like Riothamus.
It is the starting point
for the Arthurian myth.
There are many elements
in the careers of both
Ambrosius Aurelianus,
and Riothamus, that
could have contributed
to the legend of Arthur.
Writers like Jeffrey
of Monmouth would
have taken these
elements, and helped
construct a career for Arthur.
In Jeffrey of
Monmouth's anthology,
Riothamus and Ambrosius
appearto have merged to become
the fictional King Arthur.
This mythical Arthur is,
then, gradually transformed
into the legendary figure
who embraces loyal,
and moral knights,
living inthe perfect world of Camelot.
Eventually,
betrayed bythose he trusts the most.
In times of unrest
and conflict, Arthur
reappears, adorned with
thecharacteristics most prized
by the writers of the day.
The Arthurian myth will
continueto be reinvented, the hero
for our changing world.
But his historical roots
maybe finally coming to focus.