Le Morte d'Arthur/Introduction

by Thomas Malory

PREFACE

Sir Thomas Malory has given us no account of himself or his family, but he has left his name and his work. The name Malory is found connected with estates in Yorkshire in the sixteenth century, and with estates in Leicestershire in that which follows. As the name of the knight to whom we owe the Morte Darthur, it is found written not only Malory or Malorye, but also Maleore. It occurred to me some years ago that this fact lent countenance to the statement ascribed to Leland and others, that Sir Thomas Malory was a Welshman; for Maleore reminded me of Maylawr, Maelawr or Maelor, the name of two districts on the confines of England and Wales: a ‘Welsh Maelor’ is included in the County of Denbigh, and an ‘English Maelor’ in that of Flint. How such a name could readily become a surname may be seen from the designation, for instance, of a lord of the two Maelors in the twelfth century, named Gruffud Maelawr. Literally rendered, this would mean ‘Griffith of Maelor.’ Similarly, the name of a Welsh poet of the fifteenth century, Edward ab Rhys Maelor, might now be rendered ‘Edward Price of Maelor.’

Since then Dr. Sommer, in a Supplement to the second volume of his great edition of the Morte Darthur, has called attention to the following passage in Bale’s Illustrium Maioris Britanniæ Scriptorum, fol. 208 verso:—

“Thomas Mailorius, Britannus natione, heroici spiritus homo, ab ipsa adolescentia uariis animi corporisque dotibus insigniter emicuit. Est Mailoria (inquit in Antiquarum Dictionum Syllabo Joannes Lelandus) in finibus Cambriæ regio, Deuæ flumini uicina. Quam et alibi a fertilitate atque armorum fabrefactura commendat. Inter multiplices reipublicæ curas, non intermisit hic literarum studia, sed succisiuis horis uniuersas disparsæ uetustatis reliquias, sedulus perquisiuit. Vnde in historiarum lectione diu uersatus, ex uariis autoribus undique selegit, de fortitudine ac uictoriis inclytissimi Brytannorum regis Arthurii.”

The first edition of Bale’s work was published at Ipswich in 1548, while Malory s Morte Darthur was only completed by him in 1469. These dates are not so far apart that we must suppose either Bale or Leland unable to obtain reliable information concerning Malory’s history and origin. Bale’s statement that Malory was Britannus natione, that is to say, Welsh, brings with it the solution of what was my difficulty,—to wit, the relation between the name Malory and the dissyllabic form Maleore; for one can hardly help seeing that while the latter postulates the Welsh place-name Maelor, the former more naturally connects itself with the derived Latin Mailorius.

Thus far of Malory’s name: we now come to his work, which, as already mentioned, was finished in 1469. It was, however, not printed till 1485, when its publication was undertaken by Caxton. Then followed two editions by Wynkyn de Worde in 1498 and 1529, and before the middle of the seventeenth century four more editions appeared: all these seven were in black letter. The eighteenth century appears to have been content with what the three previous ones had done for the text of Malory; but the nineteenth century has already seen it edited no less than six times, notably by Southey, Wright, Sir E. Strachey, and H. Oskar Sommer. Dr. Sommer’s edition is comprised in three stately volumes, published in London by David Nutt: the first volume, consisting of the Text, appeared in 1889; then followed a volume of Introduction in 1890, and one of Studies on the Sources in 1891. This edition marks an era in the history of the Morte Darthur, seeing that special pains have been taken to make it reproduce the Caxton original, which is not known to exist in more than two copies, one of which is not quite perfect. This latter copy belongs to the Althorp Library, while the other, the perfect copy, once belonged to the Harleian Library. As regards its later history, we are told that it was purchased by the Earl of Jersey for his library at Osterley Park, and that in 1885 it became the property of a citizen of the United States, Mrs. Abby E. Pope of Brooklyn.^[1] Lastly, I must add that no trace of Malory’s own manuscript has ever been found.

The question of the sources of Malory’s work is no new one, and it had been to some extent discussed by M. Gaston Paris and M. J. Ulrich, in the introduction to their Merlin, edited from a manuscript belonging to Mr. Alfred Huth, London, and published in Paris in 1888 by the Société des anciens Textes français; but the exhaustive treatment of the subject was reserved for Dr. Sommer, who has devoted to it his third volume. The space at my disposal will only allow of my mentioning his conclusions in the briefest manner possible. Most of Malory’s originals prove to have been romances written in French, which he, as a rule, reduced greatly in length in the process of giving the work an English garb. His sources, however, were not exclusively French; thus, for instance, he used for his fifth book of the Morte Darthur, a poem composed by the Scotch poet Huchown, which is extant in a manuscript of Thornton’s in the library of Lincoln Cathedral. Here and there Malory alters the sequence of the incidents given in his originals, and in some cases he interpolates facts not contained in them, while in other instances he omits certain incidents which he did not find to his purpose; but he is rarely found to have inserted entire chapters of his own. Taking the work as a whole, Dr. Sommer has succeeded in assigning with more or less precision the originals forming the groundwork of the whole, with one remarkable exception: I allude to Malory’s seventh book, which relates the adventures of Sir Gareth, the story of his first coming to Arthur’s court, of his being fed for a year in the kitchen, and of his receiving the nickname of Beaumayns at the hands of Syr Kay. Dr. Sommer admits that he has failed to trace any part of the contents of this book in any of the numerous manuscripts studied by him. He is inclined to regard it as a folk-tale which had no connection with the Arthurian cycle, until Malory, or some unknown writer before him, adapted it from a French poem now lost, as he conjectures.

After this brief reference to the works used by Malory, we come to a much larger and harder question of source, namely, the origin of the whole cycle of Arthurian stories and romances. For the most fruitful speculations on this subject in our day, one has to thank Dr. Zimmer, professor of Sanskrit in the University of Greifswald.^[2] He believes the romances to be based on stories of Breton rather than of Welsh origin. Briefly described, his theory^[3] sets out with the facts of the permanent conquest of a considerable tract of the east of Brittany by the Normans in the first half of the tenth century, and the intimate relationship which eventually grew up between the great families of Brittany and Normandy. Now, if we suppose the Bretons in their migration from Great Britain to their new country, called after them the Lesser Britain, to have carried with them the stories current about Arthur in the southern districts of this country, it may be further supposed that, ages later, those of their descendants who submitted to the Normans in the eastern portion of Brittany must have translated their popular stories about Arthur into their adopted Norman French. Thus a channel would be opened for Breton stories to reach the ears of Normans and Frenchmen. It is natural, further, to infer that, in the transition from the one language to the other, the Celtic names of most importance in the stories would inevitably undergo a considerable modification of form. This would seem to be countenanced by the circumstance, that certain of these names in the romances cannot be identified with the Welsh ones by merely allowing for the errors in copying and reading incident to the manuscripts of the time in question. Such is the fact, for example, with Galvain, Perceval, Calibor,^[4] as compared with the Welsh Gwalchmei, Peredur, and Caletvwlch. For my own part, I have found this to be much less marked in the case, for example, of the Grail legend, the proper names in which lend themselves, on the whole, more readily to identification with their original, in Welsh. In other words, Professor Zimmer’s views led me to draw the following two-fold conclusion:—(1) The older romances relating chiefly to Arthur and his Men are of Breton rather than of Welsh origin, while (2) the reverse is the case with the Grail romances. The Welsh origin of the Grail legend has been discussed by me elsewhere,^[5] so that I think it needless to endeavour to prove it here. But as to the alleged Breton origin of the romances about Arthur, it is to be observed that if the picture presented in them of Arthur and his Men be mainly Breton, one may expect to find those warriors represented differently in Welsh literature, especially such Welsh literature as one finds to be fairly free from the influence of the romances when they reached the Welsh. So one could, perhaps, not do better than devote the rest of this introduction to a review of the more important passages concerning Arthur in manuscripts which have come down to us from Welsh sources. I have, however, to confess at the outset that those of them which happen to be in Welsh, as most of them are, prove to be couched in very obscure language, so that my rendering must be regarded as only tentative.

The first passage to demand attention is written in Latin, for it occurs in the Historia Brittonum with which the name of Nennius is associated. The year of the composition of the Historia Brittonum was, according to M. A. de la Borderie, no other than A.D. 822,^[6] and the words relating to Arthur read as follows^[7]:—

In illo tempore Saxones invalescebant in multitudine, et crescebant in Britannia. Mortuo autem Hengisto, Octha ejus filius transivit de sinistrali parte Brittanniæ ad regnum Cantiorum, et de ipso orti sunt reges Cantiorum. Tunc Arthur pugnabat contra illos in illis diebus cum regibus Brittonum, sed ipse dux erat bellorum. Primum bellum fuit in ostium fluminis quod dicitur Glein; secundum, et tertium, et quartum, et quintum, super aliud flumen, quod dicitur Dubglas, et est in regione Linnuis. Sextum bellum super flumen quod vocatur Bassas. Septimum fuit bellum in Silva Celidonis, id est, Cat Coit Celidon. Octavum fuit bellum in castello Guinnion, in quo Arthur portavit imaginem Sanctæ Mariæ perpetuæ virginis super humeros suos, et pagani versi sunt in fugam in illo die, et cædes magna fuit super illos per virtutem Domini nostri Jesu Christi, et per virtutem Sanctæ Mariæ virginis genetricis ejus. Nonum bellum gestum est in Urbe Legionis. Decimum gessit bellum in littore fluminis, quod vocatur Tribruit. Undecimum factum est bellum in monte, qui dicitur Agned. Duodecimum fuit bellum in monte Badonis, in quo corruerunt in uno die nongenti sexaginta viri de uno impetu Arthur; et nemo prostravit eos nisi ipse solus, et in omnibus bellis victor exstitit. Et ipsi, dum in omnibus bellis prosternebantur, auxilium a Germania petebant, et augebantur multipliciter sine intermissione, et reges a Germania deducebant, ut regnarent super illos in Brittannia, usque ad tempus quo Ida regnavit, qui fuit Eobba filius, ipse fuit primus rex in Beornicia, id est, im Berneich.

As regards a historical Arthur, the words here cited are very suggestive, for without explicitly saying that Arthur was one of the kings of the Brythons, they make him the general or dux bellorum, in whom one readily recognises the superior officer, known in the time of Roman rule as the Comes Britanniæ. This office, it may be presumed, was continued after the Roman forces left, with the only difference that the man filling it would be himself supreme, having no longer any lord, such as the Roman emperor, over him. This position seems to have been Arthur’s, and one has accordingly no difficulty in understanding how he came to fight battles at places so far apart from one another. For, though the majority of the twelve battles were fought in what we now call the North of England or the South of Scotland, some of them undoubtedly took place in the south of the Island, such as the battle of Urbs Legionis, which must have been either Chester on the Dee or Caerleon on the Usk; and still farther south must have been that of Mons Badonis. In a word, Arthur moved about in Britain just as Agricola or Severus would have done, and without necessarily being one of the kings of the Brythons, he would seem to have been over and above them. This must have been a position which would in time cause all kinds of heroic legends to be associated with the name of the man filling it. Add to this the numerous opportunities for the display of valour on behalf of a bleeding country provided by the invasions of Germanic tribes from the Continent, and by the incursions of Picts and Scots from the outlying portions of the British Isles, and we have the full explanation of no inconsiderable part of the wondrous fame of Arthur and his Men in subsequent ages.

The next references to Arthur, which deserve to be mentioned, occur in the Annales Cambriæ, the oldest existing manuscript of which was completed in 954 or 955.^[8] The first entry occurs under the year 516, and reads as follows:—

Bellum Badonis in quo Arthur portauit crucem domini nostri Ihesu Christi tribus diebus et tribus noctibus in humeros suos et Brittones uictores fuerunt.

The next entry in point comes under the year 537, and runs thus^[9]—

Gueith cam lann[i.e., the Battle of Camlan]in qua Arthur et Medraut corruerunt. et mortalitas in Brittannia et in Hibernia fuit.

The Bellum Badonis of the Annales Cambriæ is the same battle undoubtedly as Nennius’ bellum in Monte Badonis. But the statement as to Arthur carrying the cross of Christ on his shoulders has been surmised to be a mistranslation of Welsh words representing him carrying a figure of the cross in his shield; since the Welsh for shoulder would have been written iscuit or iscuid which would also be spellings of the word for a shield.^[10] This seems to shew that there was a Welsh tradition as to Arthur’s personal appearance at one of his great battles. The other entry is remarkable as representing the death of Arthur and Medraut or Medrod (the Modred and Mordred of the romances) as an ordinary event of war.

The next two passages to be cited occur in the Mirabilia usually associated with the Historia Brittonum; and most of them are probably to be referred to the same date as the Historia itself.^[11] The words in point read as follows:—

Est aliud miraculum in regione quæ dicitur Buelt. Est ibi cumulus lapidum, et unus lapis superpositus super congestum, cum vestigio canis in eo. Quando venatus est porcum Troit,^[12]impressit Cabal, qui erat canis Arthuri militis, vestigium in lapide, et Arthur postea congregavit congestum lapidum sub lapide in quo erat vestigium canis sui, et vocatur Carn Cabal. Et veniunt homines et tollunt lapidem in manibus suis per spacium diei et noctis, et in crastino die invenitur super congestum suum.

Est aliud miraculum in regione quæ vocatur Ercing. Habetur ibi sepulchrum juxta fontem qui cognominatur Licat Amir, et viri nomen, qui sepultus est in tumulo, sic vocabatur. Amir^[13]filius Arthuri militis erat, et ipse occidit eum ibidem, et sepelivit. Et veniunt homines ad mensurandum tumulum; in longitudine aliquando sex pedes, aliquando novem, aliquando quindecim. In qua mensura metieris eum in ista vice, iterum non invenies eum in una mensura; et ego solus probavi.

The Porcus Troit occupies a great place, as Twrch Trwyth, in the story of Kulhwch and Olwen, where Cabal^[14] also occurs in its ordinary Welsh form of Cavall; but the lesson these two passages in common teach us is, that at a comparatively early date Arthurian names had begun to figure in the topography of Wales.

Attention is next claimed by some of the references to Arthur in Welsh literature, and here the Black Book of Carmarthen is entitled to the first place. The manuscript may be supposed to have been written in the reigns of Stephen, Henry II., and Richard.^[15] One of the allusions to Arthur in this manuscript consists of a triplet occurring in the Stanzas of the Graves, apprising the reader of the futility of looking for Arthur’s grave, as follows^[16]:—

⁠Bet y march. bet y guythur.
⁠bet y gugaun cletyfrut.
⁠anoeth bid bet y arthur.

A grave for March, a grave for Gwythur,
A grave for Gwgawn of the ruddy Sword,
Not wise (the thought) a grave for Arthur.^[17]

It might be objected that these lines are of no value here, as the idea suggested by them might have been derived from the romances which represent Arthur departing to the Isle of Avallon to be healed of his wounds, and not dying at all. But it may as reasonably be regarded as an expression of the native belief fixed in various localities, that Arthur and his knights were slumbering in a cave awaiting the destined hour of their return. This prevailed among Arthur’s countrymen from Cadbury to the Eildon Hills, and has never been more charmingly sung than by the poet Leyden, when he speaks of the enchanted sleep to be broken at length by somebody

“That bids the charmëd sleep of ages fly,
Rolls the long sound through Eildon’s caverns vast,
While each dark warrior rouses at the blast,
His horn, his falchion, grasps with mighty hand,
And peals proud Arthur’s march from Fairyland.”

The time likewise is not long past when the shepherds of North Wales used to entertain one another with stories describing one of their number finding his way to the presence of Arthur and his Men, all asleep in a Snowdonian cave resplendent with untold wealth of gold and other treasure: the armed sleepers were believed to be merely awaiting the signal for their return to take an active part in the affairs of this world. In South Wales an elaborate but popular story lodges Arthur and his Knights in a cave at Craig y Ddinas, in Glamorgan,^[18] while the peasanty of South Cardiganshire, relating the same story, locate it elsewhere, and call the sleeping hero not Arthur but Owen,^[19] a name the memory of which used to be kept fresh by ballad singers, who made country fairs ring with such strains as the following:—

Yr Owen hwn yw Harri ’r Nawfed,
Sydd yn trigo ngwlad estronied.

This Owen is Henry the Ninth,
Who lives in the land of strangers.

The Owen of the Cardiganshire legend is known as Owen Lawgoch or Owen of the Red Hand, and he is represented as a man of seven feet in stature with a right hand which was all red. The whole story reminds one of him of the red beard, Frederic Barbarossa. I mention this lest anyone should suppose such stories had anything originally to do with the historical Arthur. Some light is shed on their genesis by a passage in the writings of an ancient author who lived in the first century of our era, namely Plutarch. In his work De Defectu Oraculorum, xviij., he uses words to the following effect^[20]—the Italics are mine:—

“Demetrius further said, that of the islands around Britain many lie scattered about uninhabited, of which some are named after deities and heroes. He told us also, that, being sent by the emperor with the object of reconnoitring and inspecting, he went to the island which lay nearest to those uninhabited, and found it occupied by few inhabitants, who were, however, sacrosanct and inviolable in the eyes of the Britons. Soon after his arrival a great disturbance of the atmosphere took place, accompanied by many portents, by the winds bursting forth into hurricanes, and by fiery bolts falling. When it was over, the islanders said that some of the mighty had passed away. For as a lamp on being lit, they said, brings with it no danger, while on being extinguished it is grievous to many, just so with regard to great souls, their beginning to shine forth is pleasant and the reverse of grievous, whereas the extinction and destruction of them frequently disturb the winds and the surge as at present; often times also do they infect the atmosphere with pestilential diseases. Moreover, there is there, they said, an island in which Cronus is imprisoned, with Briareus keeping guard over him as he sleeps; for, as they put it, sleep is the bond forged for Cronus. They add that around him are many deities, his henchmen and attendants.”

To return to the Black Book, I may mention that another of the Stanzas of the Graves is worth citing here, though it does not name Arthur. It alludes, however, to Camlan, the Camelot of Malory and the romances, and that in the same strain of apparently historical definiteness as the entry in the Annales Cambriæ cited as mentioning Camlan. The lines in question run thus^[21]—

Bet mab osvran yg camlan.
gvydi llauer kywlavan.
Bet bedwir in alld tryvan.

Osvran’s son’s grave (is) at Camlan,
After many a slaughter,
Bedwyr’s grave (is) in Allt Tryvan.

^[22]

We next come to a poem headed Gereint filius Erbin, which describes a battle at a place called Llongborth. Gereint is the poet’s hero, but he introduces Arthur as Gereint’s superior and lord, as follows^[23]:—

En llogporth y gueleise. y arthur
guir deur kymynint a dur.
ameraudur^[24]llywiaudir llawur.

At Llongborth saw I of Arthur’s
Brave men hewing with steel,
(Men of the) emperor,^[24] director of toil.

En llogporth y llas y gereint.
guir deur o odir diwneint.
a chin rillethid ve. llatysseint.

At Llongborth there fell of Gereint’s
Brave men from the border of Devon,
And ere they were slain they slew.

In these triplets the position of Arthur seems to be very clearly indicated: the men fighting on his side are Gereint’s men from Devon. That is to say, Arthur is Gereint’s superior: he fills in fact the rôle assigned him in the Historia Brittonum when he is there termed a Dux Bellorum. This raises the question of Arthur’s title; for passing on from the description of him as a Dux Bellorum, we have him twice in the Mirabilia called Arthur Miles. Further the Vita Gildæ, sometimes ascribed to the twelfth century author, Caradoc of Llancarvan, in giving the story of the carrying away of Guenever by Melwas,^[25] speaks of the latter as rex, or king, reigning over the Æstiva Regio or Somerset, while it styles Arthur a tyrannus. To this must be added the fact that in the story of Kulhwch and Olwen the hero salutes Arthur as Penteyrned yr Ynys honn, or “the Head of the Princes of this Island,” and one should notice that, in common with all these, the passage last cited from the Black Book avoids calling Arthur a king. On the other hand the word ameraudur which it applies to Arthur is one of the forms given in Welsh to the Latin word imperator borrowed; but as it is used of him commonly in the stories of Peredur, Owein, Gereint and others which betray the influence of the French romances, it might perhaps be supposed that its presence in Gereint’s Elegy was due to that influence. There is, however, no evidence, and the way in which the word is used rather inclines me to regard it as spontaneous on the part of the poet: I am only doubtful whether instead of rendering, as I have done, “emperor, director of toil,” it would not have been more correct to write “commander, director of toil”: that is to say, to suppose the word to retain here the meaning which it had primarily in Latin. In any case, the instances which have been adduced will suffice, it seems to me, to shew that it was not due to accident that other terms than that of king were thought more suitable in speaking of Arthur. In that fact one seems to trace one of the logical consequences of Arthur's having, as I have ventured to suppose, occupied the historical position of the Comes Britanniæ, in other words, that of the Imperator himself, which it became when Britain ceased to form a part of the dominions of Rome.

We next have a poem consisting of a dialogue between Arthur and Glewlwyd Gavaelvawr, who in the Welsh stories about Arthur is represented as one of his chief porters; but here he seems to have a castle of his own, the gates of which he appears in no hurry to open for Arthur and his companions. He asks Arthur who he is and what followers he has, which Arthur is made to seize as an opportunity for describing some of them, especially Kei, Malory's Sir Kay the seneschal. Unfortunately, the poem is so obscure that I can only guess its meaning, as follows^[26]:—

Pa gur yv y porthaur.	Who is the porter?
Gleuluid gauaeluaur.	Glewlwyd Gavaelvawr.
Pa gur ae gouin	Who asks the question?
arthur. a chei guin.[27]	Arthur and worthy Kei.
Pa imda genhid.	What following (?) hast thou?
Guir goreu im bid.	The best of men are mine.
Ym ty ny doi.	To my house thou shalt not come
onys guaredi.	Unless thou plead (?) for them.
Mi ae guar[e]di.	I will plead (?) for them.
athi ae gueli.	And thou shalt see them:—
Vythneint elei.	Wythneint of Elei,
Assivyon ell tri.	And the wise men three—
Mabon am mydron.	Mabon son of Modron,
guas uthir pen dragon.	(Uther Pendragon's man)
Kysceint · mab · Banon.	Kyscaint son of Banon,
A guin godybrion.	And Gwyn Godyvrion.
Oet rinn vy gueisson	Sturdy would be my men
in amuin ev detvon.	In defence of their laws—
Manawidan ab llyr.	Manawydan son of Llyr
oet duis y cusil.	Profound in counsel;
Neustuc manauid	(Manawyd brought home
eis tull o trywruid	A pierced buckler from Tryvrwyd).
A mabon am melld.	And Mabon son of Mellt
maglei guaed ar guelld,	Who stained the grass with gore;
Ac anguas edeinauc.	And Angwas the Winged,
a lluch · llauynnauc.	And Llwch Llawynnawc,
Oetin diffreidauc	Who were protective
ar eidin cyminauc	Against Eidyn[28] the gashing.
Argluit ae llochei	His lord would shelter him,
my nei ymtiwygei	My nephew would amend (?),
Kei ae heiriolei.	Kei would plead for (?) them,
trae llathei pop tri	While slaying them three at a time.
Pan colled kelli.	When Kelli was lost
caffad cuelli.	Savagery was experienced.
Aseirolei kei	Kei would plead for them (?)
hid trae kymynhei.	Until he might hew them down.
Arthur ced huarhei	Though Arthur was playing
y guaed gouerei.	The blood was dripping.
'In neuat awarnach	In Awarnach’s hall
in imlat ew a gurach.	A-fighting with a hag,
Ew a guant pen palach.	He slew Pen-palach
in atodeu dissethach.	In the tasks (?) of Dissethach.
Ym minit eidin	On Eidyn’s mountain
amuc · a · chinbin.	He combated with champions (?),
Pop cant id cuitin.	By the hundred they fell—
id cuitin · pop cant,	They fell a hundred at a time
rac beduir bedrydant.	Before Bedwyr…
Ar traethev trywruid.	On the shores of Tryvrwyd;
in amuin a garvluid.	Combating with Garwlwyd.
Oet guythir y annuyd.	Victorious was his wrath
o cletyw ac yscuid.	Both with sword and shield.
Oet guaget bragad	It were vain to boast
vrth kei ig kad.	Against Kei in battle.
Oet cletyw ighad.	His sword in battle was
oe lav diguistlad.	Not to be pledged from his hand.
Oet hyneiw guastad	He was an equable lord
ar lleg ar lles gulad.	Of a legion for the state’s good.
Beduir · A Bridlav.[29]	Bedwyr son of Bridlaw,
Nau cant guarandau.	Nine hundred to watch,
chuechant y eirthau.	Six hundred to attack
a talei y ortinav.	Was his onslaught (?) worth.
Gueisson am buyint	The young men I have—
oet guell ban uitint.	It is well where they are
rac ricu emreis.	Before the kings of Emrys
gueleise · kei ar uris.	Have I seen Kei in haste.
Preitev gorthowis.	Leader of the harryings,
oet gur hir in ewnis.	Long would he be in his wrath;
Oet trum y dial.	Heavy was he in his vengeance;
oet tost y cynial.	Terrible in his fighting.
Pan yuei o wual	When from a horn he drank
yuei urth peduar	He drank as much as four men;
ygkad pan delhei.	When he came into battle
vrth cant id lathei.	He slew as would a hundred.
Ny bei duv ae digonhei.	Unless it should be God’s act[30]
Oet diheit aghev kei.	Kei’s death would be unachieved.
Kei guin a llachev.	Worthy Kei and Llacheu
digonint we kadev.	Used to fight battles,
kin gloes glas verev.	Before the pang of livid spears,
yguarthaw ystawingun.	On the top of Ystavingun
kei a guant nav guiton.	Kei slew nine witches.[31]
Kei win aaeth von	Worthy Kei went to Mona
y dilein lleuon.	To destroy lions.
y iscuid oet mymid	His shield was small
erbin cath paluc.	Against Palug’s Cat.
Pan gogiueirch tud.	When people shall ask
Puy guant cath paluc.	“Who slew Palug’s Cat?”
Nau ugein kinlluc.	Nine score…
a cuytei in y buyd.	Used to fall for her food
Nau ugein kinran	Nine score leaders
A…	Used to…

The manuscript is imperfect, and it breaks off just where one should have heard more about Cath Paluc, or “Palug’s Cat,” a monster, said in the Red Book Triads to have been reared by the Sons of Palug, in Anglesey. The contests here mentioned with monsters, hags and witches, form also a feature of the story of Kulhwch and Olwen, not to mention Irish stories, such as that of Bricriu’s Feast,^[32] which abound in them. Moreover, the majority of Arthur’s followers in the Black Book poem, figure as such in the Kulhwch also, namely Glewlwyd, Kei, Mabon son of Modron, Gwyn Godyvron, Mabon son of Mellt, Angwas Edeinawc, Llwch Llawyniawc, Bedwyr, and Arthur’s son Llacheu; not to mention Manawyddan, who is forced into Arthur’s train in both poem and story. On the other hand, only two of Arthur’s men enumerated in the former, evade identification elsewhere, namely, Wythneint and Kysceint.^[33] Perhaps the most remarkable thing in the Black Book poem, is the position which it assigns to Kei, who there towers far above all the rest of the Arthurian train: he is, in fact, not to be conquered by man or beast, so that his death could only be attributed to the direct interference of the Almighty. The next in importance to Kei was Bedwyr, the Bedewere or Bedyuere of Malory’s Morte Darthur, and the positions of both heroes are relatively the same in the Kulhwch story.

Another allusion to Arthur occurs in the Black Book, to wit in an elegy to Madog son of Meredydd, prince of Powys, who died in the year 1159. The poem is ascribed to Madog’s contemporary, the well-known Welsh poet Cynddelw, who, in alluding to the mourning and grief among Madog’s men, characterises the uproar as being—Mal gavr toryw teulu arthur.^[34]

“Like the shout of the multitude of Arthur’s host.”

This leads, however, to no inference of any importance in this context. The same remark may be made concerning a mention of Arthur in a poem called Gorchan Maelderw in the Book of Aneurin, a manuscript of the latter part of the thirteenth or of the beginning of the fourteenth century: the passage is unfortunately obscure.^[35]

The next manuscript to be mentioned is one of approximately the same data as the last-mentioned: I allude to the Book of Taliessin, where an obscure poem occurs, headed Kat Godeu. There, near the end, we have the following couplet:

derwydon doethur.	Druids erudite,
darogenwch y Arthur.	Prophesy for Arthur.

Another allusion to Arthur in the Book of Taliessin runs thus^[36]:—

heilyn pascadur.	Heilyn of the Passover
treded dofyn doethur	One of three deeply wise
y vendigaw Arthur.	To bless Arthur.
Arthur vendigan	Arthur they will bless
ar gerd gyfaenat	In elaborate song.

Who the Heilyn mentioned here was does not appear, but he may be supposed to have been a priest or a bard.

Other references to Arthur occur in the Book of Taliessin, but the most important by far is the poem known as Preiddeu Annwfn, or the Harryings of Hades, which I subjoin, so far as it is in point, with an attempt to translate into English, as follows:—

⁠Golychaf wledic pendeuic gwlat ri.
⁠py ledas y pennaeth dros traeth mundi.
⁠bu kyweir karchar gweir ygkaer sidi.
⁠trwy ebostol pwyll aphryderi.
⁠Neb kyn noc ef nyt aeth idi
⁠yr gadwyn tromlas kywirwas ae ketwi.
⁠A rac preideu annwfyn tost yt gent.
⁠Ac yt urawt parahawt yn bard ivedi.
⁠Tri lloneit prytwen yd aetham ni idi.
⁠nam seith ny dyrreith o goer sidi.

I adore the noble prince and high king
Who extended his sway over the world’s strand.
Perfect was the captivity of Gwair in Caer Sidi,
Through the warning^[37] of Pwyll and Pryderi.

Before him no one entered into it,
Into the heavy dark chain a trusty youth guarded;
And at the harryings of Hades grievously did he sing,
And till doom will he remain a bard afterwards.
Three freights of Prydwen went we into it—
Seven alone did we return from Caer Sidi.

⁠Neut wyf glot geinmyn cerd o chlywir.
⁠ygkaer pedryuan pedyr y chwelyt.
⁠vgkynneir or peir pan leferit.
⁠Oanadyl naw morwyn gochyneuit.
⁠Neu peir pen annwfyn pwy y vynut.
⁠gwrym am yoror a mererit.
⁠ny beirw bwyt llwfyr ny rytyghit.
⁠cledyf lluch lleawc idaw rydyrchit.
⁠Ac yn Haw leminawc yd edewit.
⁠Arac drws porth vffern llugyrn lloscit.
⁠Aphan aetham ni gan arthur trafferth lethrit.
⁠namyn seith ny dyrreith o gaer vedwit.

I am a seeker (?) of praise, if (my) song be heard:
In Caer Pedryvan…
…from the cauldron it would be spoken
By the breath of nine maidens it would be kindled.
The head of Hades’ cauldron—what is it like?
A rim it has, with pearls, round its border:
It boils not a coward’s food: it would not be perjured.
The sword of Llwch Lleawc would be lifted to it.
And in the hand of Lleminawc was it left.
And before the door of Hell’s gate lamps were burning,
And when we accompanied Arthur, a brilliant effort,
Seven alone did we return from Caer Veddwit.

⁠Neut wyf glot geinmyn kerd glywanawr.
⁠ygkaer Pedryfan ynys pybyrdor.
⁠echwyd amuchyd kymysgetor
⁠gwin gloyw eu gwirawt rac eu gorgord.
⁠Tri lloneit prytwen yd aetham ni ar vor.
⁠namyn seith ny dyrreith o gear rigor.

I am a seeker (?) of praise, (my) song being (?) heard:
At Caer Pedryvan in Quick-door Island,
At dusk and in the blackness (of night) they mix
The sparkling wine, their drink before their retinue.
Three freights of Prydwen went we on sea:
Seven alone did we return from Caer Rigor.

⁠Ny obrynafi lawyr llen llywyadur
⁠tra chaer wydyr ny welsynt wrhyt arthur.

⁠Tri vgeint canhwr a seui arymur.
⁠oed anhawd ymadrawd ae gwylyadur.
⁠tri lloneit prytwen yd aeth gan arthur.
⁠namyn seith ny dyrreith o gaer golud.

I merit not the laurel of the ruler of letters—
Beyond the Glass Fort they had not seen Arthur’s valour.
Three score hundreds stood on the wall:
Hard it was found to converse with their sentinel.
Three freights of Prydwen (were they that) went with Arthur,
Seven alone did they return from Caer Goludd.

⁠Ny obrynaf y lawyr llaes eu kylchwy.
⁠ny wdant wy py dyd peridyd pwy.
⁠py awr ymeindyd y ganet cwy.
⁠Pwy gwnaeth arnyt aeth doleu defwy.
⁠Ny wdant wy yr ych brych bras ypenrwy.
⁠Seith vgein kygwng yny aerwy.
⁠A phan aetham ni gan arthur aurydol gofwy.
⁠namyn seith ny dyrreith o gaer vandwy.

I merit not the laurel of them of the long shields (?):
They know not which is the ruler’s day (or) who (he is),
At what hour of early day he was born (or) where (?),
Who made…went not…
They know not the Speckled Ox with the stout halter,
With seven score joints in his collar.
When we went with Arthur, anxious visit,
Seven alone did we return from Caer Vanddwy.

⁠Ny obrynafy lawyr llaes eu gohen
⁠ny wdant py dyd peridyd pen.
⁠Py awr ymeindyd y ganet perchen.
⁠Py vil a gatwant aryant y pen.
⁠pan aetham ni gan arthur afyrdwl gynhen
⁠namyn seith ny dyrreith a gaer ochren.

I merit not the laurel of those of long…
They know not which is the day of the ruler (and) chief,
At what hour of early day was born the owner,
(Or) what myriad guards the silver of the head.
When we went with Arthur, anxious contest,
Seven alone did we return from Caer Ochren.

Of the eight castles or strongholds mentioned in this poem not a single one has been identified with any real place, and the Isle of the Active Door belongs probably to the same sort of geography as Annwvyn or Hades, and Uffern or Hell. The poem evidently deals with expeditions conducted by Arthur by sea to the realms of twilight and darkness; but the one in quest of the cauldron of the Head of Hades reminds me of that described in the Kulhwch as having for its object the cauldron of Diwrnach the Goidel: Arthur sets out with a small number of men on board his ship Prydwen, and after severe fighting brought away the cauldron full of the money of the country, which was, however, according to the Kulhwch, not Hades but Ireland. But with this difference the stories agree, not to mention that yr Ych Brych, or “the Speckled Ox,” of the poem figures also in the Kulhwch. To do justice to this part of the comparison, and to complete the outline which I have suggested, I should have here to append at length the story of Kulhwch; but as that is out of the question, I will only add that a translation of it into English will be found in the second volume of Lady Charlotte Guest’s Mabinogion. The Kulhwch is contained in the Jesus College manuscript, the Red Book of Hergest, which belongs to the latter half of the fourteenth century; but the present version carries with it some evidence that it was copied from a manuscript written in the Kymric hand usual in Wales before the Norman Conquest and its influences had introduced another hand. On the whole, one cannot go far wrong in supposing that it was composed in the tenth century; and as to its contents, it has been pronounced purely^[38] Kymric by Professor Zimmer,—that is to say, as contrasted with stories in which the influence of the romances cannot, as he thinks, be mistaken.

It is not to be supposed, however, that other manuscripts, whether belonging to the same period as that of the Kulhwch or to later dates, relate nothing concerning Arthur but the echo of incidents occurring in the French romances. Instances could readily be cited to the contrary: take for example the episode in which the Welsh Triads^[39] bring Arthur in contact with Drystan the gal-ofydd or “war-leader” of March and the lover of Essyllt, that is to say, Malory’s Tristram, kynge Mark, and Isoud respectively. Drystan is represented sending March’s swineherd on an errand to Essyllt, Drystan in the meantime taking upon himself the charge of the swine. The story then makes Arthur, assisted by March, Kei and Bedwyr, attempt to get possession of some of the swine by every means in their power, but all in vain, so that Drystan came to be styled one of “the Three stout Swineherds of the Isle of Britain.” Or take another instance, namely the statement that Arthur had not one wife Gwenhwyvar, Malory’s Guenever, but three wives in succession, all called Gwenhwyvar. This strange piece of information likewise comes from the Triads,^[40] and I should be surprised to learn that it found its way into them from the French romances rather than from some far older source.

Speaking generally of the Arthur of Welsh literature, one may characterise him in few words:—His first appearance is found to conform itself with the role of a Comes Britanniæ, on whom it devolved to help the inhabitants of what was once Roman Britain against invasion and insult, whether at the hands of Angles and Saxons or of Picts and Scots: so we read of him acting for the kings of the Brythons as their dux bellorum. We next find his fame re-echoed by the topography of the country once under his protection, and his name gathering round it the legends of heroes and divinities of a past of indefinite extent. In other words, he and his men, especially Kei and Bedwyr, are represented undertaking perilous expeditions to realms of mythic obscurity, bringing home treasures, fighting with hags and witches, despatching giants, and destroying monsters. How greatly this rude delineation of the triumph of man over violence and brute force differs from the more finished picture of the Arthur of Malory’s painting, it would be needless to try to shew to any one bent on the pleasure of perusing the Morte Darthur. Such a reader may be trusted to pursue the comparison unassisted, in the fascinating pages of this incomparable book.

JOHN RHYS.

The more important editions of the Morte Darthur have already been mentioned in the foregoing introduction (see p. vii). But since Principal Rhys wrote it (for the same publishers’ large two-volume edition of 1893–4) many popular reprints and volumes of selections and adaptations from Malory’s romance have appeared. A convenient pocket-guide to the wider field it indicates may be had in Miss Jessie L. Weston’s Survey of Arthurian Romance (in Nutt’s “Popular Studies in Mythology, Romance and Folklore”). The best companion romance-book is The Mabinogion, also republished in “Everyman’s Library.”

1906.

Stephens’ Gododin, pp. 352–3; but I am convinced that the meaning of the words still remains to be discovered.

1. See Sommer’s Malory, ii. 1–3.
2. Now professor of Celtic at Berlin.
3. See Zimmer’s review of the thirtieth volume of the Histoire littéraire de la France in the Göttingische gelehrte Anzeigen for October 1, 1890, pp. 802–4. But M. Loth in the Revue Celtique, xiii. 480–503, has justly charged Zimmer with underrating the Welsh element.
4. See Zimmer’s review, ibid. p. 830.
5. See my Arthurian Legend, pp. 300–27.
6. See l’Historia Britonum attribuée a Nennius et l’Historia Britannica avant Geoffro de Monmouth, par Arthur de la Borderie (Paris and London, 1883), p. 20. Since the above was written Zimmer’s work entitled Nennius Vindicatus (Berlin, 1893) has reached me, and in it he gives it as his conclusion, p. 82, that the Historia Brittonum was put together as early as the year 796.
7. Nennii Historia Britonum ad fidem codicum manuscriptorum recensuit Josephus Stevenson (London, 1838), pp. 47–9.
8. See Phillimore’s edition in the Cymmrodor, vol. ix. p. 144.
9. Ibid. p. 154.
10. In later Welsh the words are ysgwydd, “a shoulder,” and ysgwyd, “a shield.”
11. This is Zimmer’s view in his Nennius Vindicatus, p. 115.
12. Stevenson seems to have found two readings of this word, namely, Troit and Troynt, and he selected for his text the latter, which is gibberish: see his Nennius, p. 60. In Welsh literature the word has the two forms Trwyd and Trwyth.
13. The same manuscript E, which reads Troit, and is supposed by Stevenson to have been written about the beginning of the thirteenth century, reads here amirmur; but, as was to be expected, he inserted in his text a vox nihili, namely Anir: Amirmur=Amir mur “the Great Amir,” and in the Liber Landavensis, Amir is written Amyr; but a man’s name Amhyr occurs also in that manuscript, while the name of Arthur’s son in question is given as Amhar in the Welsh romance of Gereint and Enid: I do not recollect meeting with it elsewhere.
14. It is to be noticed that Cabal with its b and single l belongs to the same school of orthography as the ninth century triplets beginning with Noigrucosam: see Skene’s Four anc. Books of Wales, ii. 2.
15. See Mr. J. G. Evans’ preface (p. xvi.) to his Autotype Facsimile of the Black Book, Oxford, 1888.
16. Ibid. fol. 34^a.
17. I believe that such is the sense of the third line of the triplet, but I cannot attain to any certainty approaching the assurance with which Prof. Zimmer categorically declares that, “sie sagt bloss aus, dass man Arthur’s Grab nicht kenne”:—see the Zeitschrift für französische Sprache und Litteratur, xij. 238.
18. The story is given in the Brython for 1858, p. 162.
19. Ibid. p. 179. The editor, who was, I believe, no other than the Rev. Canon Silvan Evans, adds in a note that this sort of story might be found current also in Cumberland.
20. For the original see the Didot edition of Plutarch, vol. iii. p. 511 (De Defectu Oraculorum, xviij.); it is also to be found printed in my Arthurian legend, p. 367.
21. Evans’ Facsimile, fol. 32^b.
22. There are several mountain tops in the Snowdon district called y Tryfan, “the Tryvan,” and Moel Tryfan, “the round-topped hill of Tryvan.” Lady Charlotte Guest (Mabinogion, ii. 167) has been misled by somebody to indulge in the impossible spelling Trivaen.
23. Evans’ Facsimile, fol. 36^b.
24. I am not certain what documents exactly Prof. Zimmer had in view when he wrote as to Arthur, “Nirgends führt er den Titel amherawdyr”; or whether he would regard ameraudur here as a title or not: see the Gött. gel. Anz. for 1890, p. 524.
25. For the text of that story, see San-Marte’s Nennius et Gildas, pp. 122, 3, also the Romania, vol. x. 491, where it is given by M. Gaston Paris.
26. Evans' Facsimile, fol. 47^b—48^b.
27. Guin, now written gwyn means as a colour adjective white, but it is a very difficult word to render, one of its uses being somewhat like that of French beau in beau pere. On the banks of the Dovey in Mid-Wales a stepfather is respectfully called tad gwyn, literally "white father," and I surmise that it had a somewhat similar force here. It is to be borne in mind that Kei is, so far as I can remember, elsewhere called Kei guin only in the story of Kulhwch. See Red Book Mabinogion, p. 105, and for further remarks on gwyn see my Hibbert Lectures, pp. 527–8.
28. Mention is made of this man in Triads i. 38, 39; iii. 47, 48 (Myv. Arch. vol. ii. 9, 65), where he is described as the slayer of the bard Aneurin.
29. This should probably give the parentage of Bedwyr, and it is natural to suggest as an emendation Beduir ab Bridlav; but in Gereint and Enid he is described as son of Bedrawt: see Red Book Mab. p. 265.
30. With this sentiment compare the following passage put into the mouth of Llew in the Mabinogi of Math son of Mathonwy: Onym llad i auw hagen nyt hawd vy llad i. “Unless God slay me, however, it is not easy to slay me.” See the Red Book Mabinogion, p. 75, also Lady Charlotte Guest’s Mab. iii. 242, where she imparts to her translation a Christian tone not to be detected in the original, thus: “But until Heaven take me I shall not easily be slain.”
31. This looks as if it might be the incident in which the story of Peredur makes that hero take a leading part; he encounters the witches of Caer Loyw at a castle on a mountain, and he together with Arthur and his Men afterwards kills them all at the end of the story: see the Red Book Mab., pp. 210–1, 242–3, and Guest’s Mab. i. 322–3, 369–70.
32. The Irish text is given at length in Windisch’s Irische Texte, pp. 254–303.
33. Kysceint is probably a miscopying of Kysteint, the Welsh form of Constantius; a name Wytheint appears in the Book of Taliessin, as that of one who fights with Gwydion son of Dôn, see Skene’s Four anc. Books of Wales, ii. 158.
34. Evans’ Facsimile, fol. 52^a.
35. For the text see Skene’s Four anc. Books of Wales, vol. ii. 106, and for the translation vol. i. 426. Both will also be found in Thomas
36. See Skene, ii. 456: vol. i. 259, gives a translation differing considerably from the one proposed here with great diffidence.
37. As to this meaning of the word ebostol, see Llyvyr Agkyr Llandewivrevi (in the Anecdota Oxoniensia), p. 159. It is epistola borrowed and sometimes confounded with abostol from apostolus: the sequence of meanings seems to have been a letter, a message or admonition by letter, a warning. See a note on the word by Prof. Powel in the Cymmrodor, ix. 199.
38. In the Göttingische gel. Anzeigen for June 10, 1890, pp. 517, 523–4.
39. Triads i. 30, ii. 56, iii. 101: see the Myv. Arch., vol. ii. pp. 6, 20, 72–3.
40. Triad i. 59, ii. 16, iii. 109: see the Myv. Arch., vol. ii. pp. 12, 14, 73.