We shall begin this section of our study by considering the work of a British scholar named Nennius. (The term British means he descended from the original peoples who settled in Britain after the Flood. The modern Welsh are descended from that same stock.) Nennius completed his famous work, the Historia Brittonum, towards the very end of the eighth century AD, and his achievement was to gather together, and thus preserve, a whole series of documents and sources that collectively shed much light specially upon the early pagan (i.e. pre-Christian) history of the early Britons. 16 In the preface to his work, he tells us (in Latin) that he is recording certain facts that the British had stupidly thrown away (quae hebitudo gentis Brittaniae deiecertat.)

As his work proceeds, he lists some of the sources he has used, and we see these ranged from oral traditions to certain written chronicles and annals. As far as his oral sources are concerned, he tells us that certain items in his history were imparted by Irish scholars (sic mihi peritissimi Scottorum nuntiauerunt,) and a certain genealogy was "in the writing of the writer's mind" (set in scriptione mentis scriptoris fuit.) Of his written sources, he lists the annals of the Romans; the Law; "another explanation" (aliud experimentum;) and, lapsing into his native Welsh, informs us that a noble elder named Cuana compiled a British genealogy from a certain Roman chronicle (i Guanach geitilach Breatan a cronicib na Romanach.)

In common with other historical writings from the Saxon period, it has been fashionable for scholars to denigrate much of his work as fictitious or mythical. However, the tide is now turning, and not without good reason. One of the latest scholars to study Nennius' work in any real depth wrote:

"Nennius' SELECT DOCUMENTS (Excerpta) of Early British History is almost unique in ancient and Medieval historical writing, both in concept and form and in originality and quality of scholarship." 17

As with the Irish chronicles, we shall meet with certain corroborations in Nennius' history that confirm the fact he was not just inventing stories to either flatter, deceive or entertain his readers. But before we proceed, let us set our minds at rest over any unease that may be felt regarding the reliability or otherwise of "oral tradition." What type of information can we reasonably expect oral tradition to convey, that is, with any degree of accuracy.

Oral tradition can, in fact, remain surprisingly accurate, even over vast periods of time. Events sometimes become exaggerated during transmission, or lose their chronological sequence, to be sure. But for the most part, they remain recognizable. However, as well as events, oral transmission is especially effective in the preservation of personal names. A most interesting example of this from modern times, and one which illustrates the principle exactly, is the following account. It concerns an old man of a certain author's acquaintance:

"This man was rich in ancient lore. For instance, through tradition handed down from father to son for untold generations, he could trace the poor condition of certain farms to what he called "a bad setback." When pressed for details he would say, "Mi grandfaither told me, and his grandfaither told him, that 'Willy Norman burnt 'em down.' Who 'Willy Norman' was he had no idea. Yet here was a folk memory preserved in local dialect and handed down as a kind of family secret." 18

"Willy Norman," of course, was William, the Norman Conqueror of England, his burning down certain farms in the area was a well-attested historical incident of a punitive raid carried out under William's orders and by his troops. It would, no doubt, have come as a great surprise to the old man who, remembered the incident, to learn no less than 900 years lay between him and the facts behind the story he was so fond of relating! Yet, he was accurately conveying to his listeners, both the name of the culprit and the nature of the crime, in spite of his own unawareness of the passage of so many centuries. And this is typical of oral traditions as a whole. They can be surprisingly accurate in the information they convey, even though time-scales and chronological sequences may suffer in the process, and as we begin our consideration of the rest of Nennius' work, we would do well to bear in mind that the same principle applies to certain ancient written records too.

Nennius, as we have seen, gathered together a number of sources from which he compiled the Historia; one especially, contains remarkable information. He begins chapter ten of his work with the statement he has come across two "alternative explanations" (hoc experimetum bifarie inueni) concerning the origins of the early British people. The first account, which appears in the same chapter, is of doubtful reliability, to say the least, although a historicity of sorts could be argued for some of its details.

However, in chapters 17 and 18, he deals more plainly, with the origins of the British, stating that "I found another explanation.... in the ancient books of our elders, (Aliud experimentum inueni.... ex ueteribus libris ueterum nostrorum.) There then follows a genealogy whose scope embraces a surprising amount of verifiable history. We can only deal with it briefly here, but the genealogy is best understood by studying Table 3 and its accompanying notes. (For the full Latin text, and a translation, see Appendix I.) Here, we may content ourselves with the observation that Nennius has passed down to us the contents of a very ancient document; and he has preserved it warts and all.

    |          |          |          |        |           |           |
  Gauls  ______|______  Medes        |        |           |       Thracians
     Scythians     Goths             |        |      Cappadocians
                                     |        |---------------
                                     |       ________________|______
                                     |       Hiberei  Hispani  Itali
                          ELISHAH        Iobaath
                          Dardanus        Baath
                             |            Izrau
                             |            Ezra
                           Trous          Rhea
        Female line          |            Abir       Male line
        of descent        Anchises        Oth        of descent
                           Aeneas        Ecthet
                          Ascanius      Aurthach
                             |           Ethach
                             |            Mair
                       Numa Pompilius    Simeon
                             |            Boib
                             |           Thous
                             |          Ougomun
                         Rhea Silvia____Fetebir
      Hessitio                    Armenon                   Negue,/pre>
          |                          |                        |
__________|____________________      | _______________________|____________
Franks  Latins  Albans  British      | Bavarians Vandals Saxons Thuringians
                  Goths Walagoths Gepids Burgundians Langobards

TABLE 3. A chart showing the lines of descent to the European nations, including the British

If we compare Nennius' Table of European Nations with Table 1 of Part 1 of this study, the genealogy of Japheth's descendants as based on the Genesis record, we find Nennius and Genesis are in remarkable agreement with one another, yet Nennius adds details not included in Genesis (for natural and obvious reasons.)
*Gomer (1), for example, is merely cited by Nennius as being the ancestor of the Gauls, Nennius omitting the Biblical names of Gomer's three immediate descendants, Ashchenaz, Riphath and Togarmah.
He cites Magog (2) as the ancestor of both the Scythians and Goths, and Madai (3) as the father of the Medes. So far, so good. From this point, however, the document from which Nennius is working shows one or two telltale signs of the (albeit remarkably little) distortion that it has suffered in transmission (oral or written.)
Tubal (4) - (see Part 1, Table 1, no. 13) - was father of a people known to the Assyrians as the Tabali, whose land, (present-day Georgia in the USSR,) lay adjacent to that of Tegaramah. The descendants of Tubal eventually migrated north-east to found the city that still bears their name, Tobolsk. The document Nennius has handed down to us adds the details that from Tubal came the Iberians, the Spanish and the Italians! Such a descent is unlikely on racial grounds alone, yet is an echo of an earlier assumption that was recorded by Josephus some seven hundred years before. (Josephus wrote that Tubal was the ancestor of the Thobelites, who were known as the Iberes - Iberians - of his own day.)
Likewise Nennius' source cites Meshech (5) as father of the Cappadocians, an error that once again had already been recorded by Josephus. (It is doubtful Josephus originated these errors, for he himself relied on even earlier records for his own information.) The confusion was easily brought about, for Genesis does record the existence of two Meshechs, not one! The Meshech with whom we are immediately concerned was a son of Japheth whereas the Meshech with whom he was often confused, was descended from Shem (see Part 1, Table 3, no. 57!)
The people descended from the Semitic Meshech were known to the Akkadians as the Mashu, and to the Egyptians as the Msh'r, both names referring to a people then inhabiting Lebanon (hence Cappadocia.) This is the source of Josephus' error, and of those on whom he relied. We find it perpetuated also here in Nennius.
Other examples of distortion (albeit of a minor nature) are seen in that the Goths are shown as being descended both from Magog, the Biblical patriarch, and from Armenon, the son of Alanus. Armenon himself is stated to have had five sons, yet only four are named. (Five nations are later shown to have descended from him.) Likewise, Negue is stated at first to have had three sons, yet four nations derive from him. The significance of all this is that Nennius could easily have edited out or corrected these points thereby enhancing his own credibility, yet he chose to simply leave them as they are. Almost paradoxically, this enhances his standing as a trustworthy and reliable historian, and it further assures us that we are reading these ancient documents exactly as Nennius read them.
Furthermore, the exactitude of this genealogy in showing both the male and female lines of descent of Alanus from Javan is surprising as it is unusual and rather than contain any overtly mythical material both lines give every appearance of being simple registers of ancestral names.
From Alanus onwards appears a comprehensive table of European nations. One or two of these names were archaic even in Nennius' times, and would long have fallen into disuse. They are all, however, familiar to any historian today whose studies touch upon the history of Europe at about the time of the collapse of the Roman Empire. For some two or three centuries, Europe was a seething cauldron as nation vied with nation in a bewildering array of invasion and counter-invasion and yet not one of the names in this table is historically unattested! (Not even the unlikely sounding Gepids.) Again, this assures us that these names were carefully and faithfully preserved in the document that Nennius copied, and we also note with interest, various nations are seen to have descended from patriarches whose names are also to be found in the Genesis record. (See Appendix I.)
*There is an etymological link between the ancient tribes of Gomer, and the modern Welsh. An equivalent of the adjective "Welsh," is Cambrian, (see Table 4, no. 4. Kamber.) Today, Welshmen still know their country as Cymru, and the link between them and the early peoples of Gomer is illustrated in the following:
"...the ancient Gomery and Cymbry descended of Japhet, the first possessors of this Island, after the dispersion of Babell..." (Stowe, p.1. See Bibliography.) __________________________________________________________________________

A compatriot of Nennius, though he lived some 350 years after him, was Geoffrey of Monmouth who published his own History of the Kings of Britain (the Historia Regum Britanniae) in about 1136 AD. Geoffrey's Historia deserves our closest consideration, not least for the fact that it is today perhaps the most disparaged of all the works of the Middle Ages. Experience has shown, the re-examination of a work that is too readily dismissed by modernist scholars, usually reveals evidence that should not be ignored, and Geoffrey of Monmouth's Historia is no exception to this rule.

Geoffrey's work undoubtedly contains errors, and it is allegedly on these grounds that his Historia is dismissed as myth or plain fiction. Yet, as we have already seen, such errors are exactly what we should expect to find! They in no way indicate that a given work is necessarily spurious. Rather, they are, paradoxically, the very hallmarks of a work's genuineness.

We must also bear in mind the fact that material passed down by Geoffrey, errors and all, is not original to him. Rather, according to his own account, the Historia is merely, for the most part his translation into Latin of a certain ancient British (i.e. Welsh) book (quendam britannici sermonis librum uetustissimum), which was given to him for this very purpose by Walter of Oxford, "a man most learned in all branches of history."

There are admittedly portions of Geoffrey's Historia tend to grate on the modern ear. It contains, for example the usual literary conventions of his time, such as long and flowery speeches, and unlikely tales of heroism. Yet, this is the very stuff and substance of Welsh Bardic lore, and it should come as no surprise to meet it in what was, after all, originally a Welsh book.

However, shorn of its magic tales and accounts of heroic deeds, Geoffrey's Historia is seen to be built around a solid framework of perfectly acceptable historical data. In the first few books of the Historia appear the names of some 110 successive holders of the British crown, and I have arranged these names into their proper genealogical order. (See Table 4 and accompanying notes.) The list is strictly a genealogy only as far as Lucius (54), after whom it becomes a king-list. However, this table embraces a period of history that extended over some 2,000 years, from Brutus (c. 13th century BC) to Yvor, who lived at the end of the 7th century AD.

Set against the acknowledged and expected errors in Geoffrey of Monmouth's work, are the equally expected (though too-rarely acknowledged) historical vindications. As Thorpe was compelled to concede:

"Finally, there is the archaeological evidence, the fact that strange light has been thrown upon certain of the alleged fancies of Geoffrey of Monmouth by subsequent archaeological discoveries." 21

A short discussion of these vindications is given in Appendix II of this article, and together they assure us of the general reliability of most of Geoffrey's historical material. Certainly, scholars in the Middle Ages found little to criticize in this regard. More modern scholars, however, justify their own rejection of Geoffrey's work by pointing out that a near-contemporary of his, namely William of Newburgh, condemned Geoffrey out of hand as a liar. But, such would do well to consider exactly what William was criticizing. In his own words:

"It is quite clear.... that everything this man wrote about Arthur and his successors, or indeed about his predecessors from Vortigern onwards, was made up, partly by himself and partly by others, either from an inordinate love of lying, or for the sake of pleasing the Britons." (Thorpe, p. 17.)

Thus, we see that William of Newburgh's criticism in fact was aimed at only the last portion of Geoffrey's Historia, namely its long section dealing with king Arthur. This, however, had more to do with William's sensitivity as a Saxon-cum-Norman scholar, whose efforts to establish the historical respectability of his Norman masters was not at all advanced by Geoffrey's reminding the Normans (and Saxons) that they were relative newcomers to this island! In this context, however, it is important to note William was careful not to disparage the historical material contained in Geoffrey's work for the ages prior to Arthur! That much, at least, was acceptable even to his jaundiced eye, and it becomes clear that when they reject all of Geoffrey's account on the basis of William of Newburgh's accusation, then modernist scholars can be said to have overstated their case.

Yet, why should Geoffrey's Historia suffer such out-of-hand rejection when a great part of it is verifiable and acceptable history? The answer is not hard to find. On Thursday 6th July 1600, a certain Baron Waldstein visited London's Lambeth Palace. He tells us that in one of the rooms he saw:

"..a splendid genealogy of all the Kings of England, and another genealogy, a historical one, which covers the whole of time, and is traced down from the Beginning if the World." 22

Later, arriving at Richmond Palace on 28th July, he saw in the library:

"...beautifully set out on parchment, a genealogy of the kings of England which goes back to Adam. "23

Such genealogies were immensely popular, and as fascinating to the general public as they were to historians and other scholars. As tables of descent they provide a continuous record of human history from the Creation through the post-Flood era, down to modern times. The material of which they were based was undoubtedly that which Geoffrey of Monmouth has passed down to us as well as various details gleaned from the Saxon records (Table 5.) It is important to realize the disparagement of these genealogies only really began in the 18th century, when so-called Rationalists were already seeking to replace man's recorded history with certain anti-Biblical notions of their own! Such is the extend of their success in this, that today hardly a scholar can be found who would dare to base his history on the truth and reliability of these records. Instead, the student of history is presented with a complete blank when he comes to inquire into the history of Britain for the period preceding the Roman; and when Sellar and Yeatman wrote satirically that history did not begin until 55 BC (the date of the first Roman invasion of Britain,) they were not entirely joking (Appendix II.)

The British chronicles, however, are not alone in suffering such disparagement at the hands of modern sceptics. Rather, their treatment is mirrored exactly in the present-day handling of another set of records that far exceed those of the early British in both quality and quantity:

TABLE 4. A chart showing the line of descent of the early British kings:

 |         Latinus
 |          |
    |      niece
    |_________________________________________    Pandrasus (K. of Greeks)
                                             |       |
                 (2) Corineus          (1) BRUTUS---Ignoge
                        |          _______________|_____________
                        |          |                    |      |
                 (6) Gwendolen---Locrinus---Estrildis Kamber Albanactus
                               |   (3)    |    (7)      (4)     (5)
                               |          |
                        (9) Madden     Habren
                      |                   |
               (11) Mempricius      (10) Malin
               (12) Ebraucus
              |                                 |
       (13) Brutus (Greenshield)          19 sons & 30 daughters
         (14) Leil
         (15) Hudibras
         (16) Bladud
         (17) Leir
  |                              |                           |
(18) Goneril---Maglaurus (19) Regan---Henwinus (20) Queen Cordella---Aganippus
           |                          |                              K. of the
     (21) Marganus I        (22) Cunedaglus                           Franks
                             (23) Rivallo
                                Sisillius I
                              (24) Jago
                                Gorboduc---Judon (25)
                           |                      |
                     (27) Ferrex            (26) Porrex I
                     (28) ? ---Unspecified period of civil war
                    (29) Pinner
                    (30) Cloten
                    (31) Dunvallo---Tonuuenna
                 (32) Belinus                Brennius---Daughter of
                         |                              Eisinglus K.
                 (33) Gurgult (Barbtruc)               of Norwegians
                 (34) Gulthelin---Queen Marcia
                           Sisillius II
                        |               |
                     Kinarius         Danius---Tanguesteala
                                      (35) Morvidus
          |                |                |            |          |
(36) Gorbonianus  (37) Archgallo  (38) Elidurus  (39) Ingenius  Peredurus
          |                |                |            |          |
          ?                |             Gerennus     Idvallo      Runo
        ___________________|_______         |
        |                         |       Catellus
(40) Marganus II       (41) Enniaunus       |
                                         Porrex II
                                 |          |           |
                             Fulgenius    Edadus    Andraglus
                                                   Sissillius III
                                                 |            |
                                        (42) Beldgabred    Archmail
                            (43) Digueillus
                               (44) Heil
                            |        |         |
                        (45) Lud     |      Nennius
                            |(46) Cassivelaunus
                   |                             |
           (47) Androgeus              (48) Tenvantius
                                       (49) Cymbeline
                    |                                      |
           (50) Gulderius                   (51) Arviragus---Genvissa
                                                     (52) Marius
                                                     (53) Coilus
                                                     (54) Lucius
                                                     (55) Geta
                             (56) Bassianus
                             (57) Carausius
                           (58) Ascieplodotus
                               (59) Coel
                        (60) Constantius---Helen
                           (61) Constantine I
                             (62) Octavius
                             (63) Trahern
                            (64) Maximianus
                             (65) Gracianus
                 (66) Constantine II---A British Noblewoman
            |                |                 |
    (67) Constans   (73) Aurelius   (74) Utherpendragon---Ygerna
            |                               ____________|__
            |                               |              |
            |   (69) Hengist        (75) Arthur       Anna---Budicius II
            |          |                    |              |    K. of
?---(68) Vortigern---Renwein       (76) Constantine III    |   Brittany
  |                                         |              |___
  |                               (77) Aurelius (Conanus)      |
__|____________________                     |                Hoel I
|           |         |            (78) Vortporius             |
Vortimer  Katigern  Paschent                |                Hoel II
(70)      (71)      (72)             (79) Malgo              Kings of
                                            |                Brittany
                                     (80) Keredic
                                   3 unnamed "tyrants"
                                     (81) Cadvan
                                     (82) Cawallo
                                  (83) Cadwallader
                         (84) Yvor The last king of British descent

TABLE 4. A chart showing the line of descent of the early British kings.

NB The Line from Noah to Brutus (with the exception of Silvius), is taken directly from chapter 18 of Nennius' Historia Brittonum, and these names thus appear in bold Letters. A other names are from Geoffery of Monmouth's Historia Regum Britanniae.
(1) Brutus. He was the first to colonize the British mainland after the Flood, and was Britain's first king. The land of Britain and its people, the Britons, derived their name from him. His wife, Ignoge, the daughter of a "Greek" king named Pandrasus, was married to Brutus against her will.
(2) Corineus. He joined forces with Brutus in his migration to the British mainland and shared the same ancestry as Brutus, although their exact relationship is unclear. During the process of colonization, Corineus was apportioned that part of Britain that still bears his name - Cornwall. For some time, Cornwall was a separate and independent kingdom.
(3) Locrins. On the death of Brutus the island was divided up between Locrins and his brother. Locrinus' kingdom consisted of what is now England, with the exception of Cornwall, which retained its independence. His kingdom was long known by his name, i.e. Loegria, and even today the Welsh know England as Loegr.
(4) Kamber. His inheritance on the death of Brutus was the kingdom that bears his name, Cambaria, present-day Wales. It is interesting to note that his name is perpetuated whenever we speak of Cambrian and Precambrian rocks.
(5) Albanactus. He was apportioned present-day Scotland which then bore his name, Albany. Nennius tells us in chapter 18 of his own Historia Brittonium that the early Albans were directly related to the early Britons.
(6) Gwendolen. The daughter of Corineus. Loctrinus had married her in accordance with an earlier pledge, but on the death of her father, Loctrinius deserted her in favour of Estrildis. In vengeance, Gwendolen roused up her father's kingdom of Cornwall against Locrinus and Locrinus was killed in the ensuing battle. As now undisputed ruler of Loegria, Gwendolen gave the order to execute by drowning Estrildis, and her daughter Habren, born of Locrinus' adultery. Gwendolen ruled Loegria for a further 15 years, retiring eventually to her native Cornwall, where she died.
(7) Estrildis. Temporarily became Queen of Loegria when Locrinus deserted his legitimate wife. On the death of Locrinus, Estrildis was drowned on Queen Gwendolen's orders.
(8) Habren. The daughter born of Locrinus' adultery with Estridis, she was drowned with her mother in the river that long bore her name, the Habren in the early British tongue. The Romans transposed the name as Sabrina. We know it today as the river Severn.
(9) Maddan. His mother, Gwendolen, abdicated the throne in Madden's favour after ruling for fifteen years. Maddan was to rule in her place for forty years.
(10) Malin. His ambition for the crown on his father's death resulted in his murder at his own brother's hands. The assassination occurred at a conference called between the two brothers.
(11) Mempricius. A noted tyrant, he murdered his brother Malin, deserted his lawful wife in favour of unnatural practices, and generally misruled the kingdom. In the twentieth year of his reign he was separated from his companions in a hunting party, surrounded by wolves, and eaten.
(12) Ebraucus. He took the crown on his father's death, and subsequently ruled the kingdom for 39 years. In an eventful and fondly remembered reign, he sacked Gaul, and founded the city of Kaerbrauc which bore his name. The Romans later preserved his name as Eboracum, modern York.
(13) Brutus. Greenshield Ebraucus' eldest son, he took the crown on his father's death.
(14) Leil. Succeeding the throne on his father's death, he founded the city that still bears his name, Kaerfeil - known today as Carlisle. Leil's reign of 25 years ended in civil war due to his ineffectiveness and lack of resolve as a leader.
(15) Hudibras. Ending the civil war of his father's making, Hudibras ruled for 39 years. This great builder founded the cities of Kaerreint (Canterbury,) Kaerguenit (Winchester) and the fortified township of Paladur, present-day Shaftsbury.
(16) Bladud. Not mentioned by Geoffrey of Monmouth, is the fact that Bladud was a leper. He ruled Leogria for 20 years, founding the city of Kaerbadum, present-day Bath. He outlawed the practise of necromancy throughout his kingdom, and was killed in one of the earliest recorded attempts to fly.
(17) Leir. Leir succeeded his father to enjoy a reign of 60 years. He founded the city of Kaefeir, known today as Leicester, and "immortalised" in Shakespeare's play, King Lear, which recalls the events of his reign.
(18) Goneril. King Leir's eldest daughter, she married Maglaurus, Duke of Albany. (By now Albany, Cambria and Cornwall were duchies subservient to the kingdom of Loegria.)
(19) Regan. Leir's second eldest daughter, she married Henwinus, the Duke of Cornwall. With her sister Goneril, she was to depose Cordelia, the lawful Queen.
(20) Queen. Cordelia After marrying Aganippus, King of the Franks, Cordelia became Queen of all Britain on her father's death. Five years later, she was deposed by her sisters, and committed suicide in prison.
(21) Marganus. I He ruled (unlawfully) the territory north of the Humber. After attacking Cunedagius he was pursued into Wales where he met his death at Cunedagius's hands. The place where he died was long known as Margon (Morganwc - present day Margam.)
(22) Cunedagius. Originally ruling the territory south of the Huber, Cunedagius became King of all Britain in the death of Marganus I.
(23) Rivallo. A notable young king who ruled wisely and "frugally," and is remembered for a "rain of blood" which fell from the skies, (freak weather conditions that produced red showers of rain,) a great swarm of flies, and a plague that took a heavy toll of the population.
(24) Jago. Jago was Gurgustius' nephew, not grandson as the genealogy would imply.
(25) Judon. Gorboduc's queen, Judon was caused much grief over her quarrelling sons. On learning that Porrex had killed Ferrex her favourite, she became insane, and later murdered Porrex in his sleep by hacking him to pieces.
(26) Porrex. He killed his elder brother in battle, and was later murdered by his own mother in revenge.
(27) Ferrex. He constantly quarrelled with his younger brother, over who should succeed their now sterile father. At one point, Ferrex fled to Gaul from where, with the help of Suhard, King of the Franks, he led a military expedition against his brother. He died in the ensuing battle.
(28) An unspecified period of strife and civil war, as five rival kings fought for supremacy. Unfortunately, the lineal royal descent for this period is untraceable.
(29) Pinner. Emerged from the civil war period as King of Loegria. He was later killed in battle by his successor but one.
(30) Cloten. King of Cornwall, Cloten may have been one of the previously unnamed kings. The provinces of Britain had reverted to separate kingdoms during the civil war period.
(31) Dunvallo. (Molmutius) Erstwhile successor to his father Cloten's kingdom of Cornwall, Dunvallo's military prowess gained him the title King of Britain. He codified the Molmutine Laws, a law-code that Geoffrey of Monmouth tells us was still famed and revered in his day. Dunvallo reigned for some 40 years, during which crimes of violence were virtually unheard of in his kingdom, such was the severity of punishment meted out to such criminals during his reign.
(32) Belinus. Dunvallo's eldest son, Belinus ruled Leogria, Cambria and Cornwall. His brother Brennius held Northumbria and Albany. Belinus eventually defeated Brennius, and thus came to rule all of Britain. Geoffery of Monmouth tells us that Belinus was a great road-builder, and that Billingsgate in London was built by and named after him. In an eventful reign, Belinus subdued the then King of Denmark, exacting from him a great tribute.
(33) Gurguit. The son and successor of Belinus, Gurguit was renowned as a "lover of peace and justice." During Gurguit's reign, the King of Denmark withdrew the tribute Belinus had exacted from him, and Gurguit promptly invaded Denmark to assert his authority there. It was during his return from Denmark that Gurguit intercepted the ships of Partholan and his fellow-exiles. Gurguit assigned Partholan the otherwise uninhabited land of Ireland. His death was a peaceful one, and he lies buried in the city of Caerleon-on-Usk.
(34) Guithelin. Succeeding to the crown after his father's death, Guithelin was a noted and benevolent ruler. He married Marcia, a learned woman, who codified the Marcian Laws, the Lew Martiana. King Alfred the Great later translated the code as the Mercian Laws, believing them to have been named after the much later Saxon kingdom of Mercia. Queen Marcia ruled Britain for many years after Guithelin's death, and during their son's minority.
(35) Morvidus. An otherwise heroic ruler, Morvidus was noted and feared for his ferocious and uncontrollable temper. He was also possessed of a merciless cruelty towards those whom he defeated in battle. After one particular attempted invasion of his kingdom, Morvidus personally put to death his prisoners of war, one by one. "When he became so exhausted that he had to give up for a time, he ordered the remainder to be skinned alive, and in this state he had them burnt." During his reign, he received reports a monstrous animal was causing havoc in the west. With typical, if hasty, bravado Morvidus fought the beast single-handedly. The dinosaur killed him and devoured his corpse.
(36) Gorbonianus. He was much renowned for his goodness as a ruler.
(37) Archgallo. He was the very opposite of his elder brother. Such was his tyranny he was eventually deposed by the nobility, and his younger brother elected king in his place.
(38) Elidurus. Surnamed the Dutiful because of the compassion he showed towards his elder brother. Elidrus exercised this compassion to the point of temporarily abdicating in favour of a now reformed Archgallo, whose behaviour as king was now a complete reversal of his former conduct. Archgallo died after ten years, at which point Elidrus resumed the crown. Elidrus' reign, however, was to be interrupted once again...
(39) Ingenius and Peredurus. The two younger brothers of Elidurus, they both organized his deposition by rebellion, during which Elidurus was seized and incarcerated in a tower. Ingenius then ruled the southern half of Britain, and Peredrus ruled the north, including Albany. Ingenius died seven years later, and Peredurus gained the whole kingdom. Peredurus now became a wise and benevolent king, but died after only a short reign. Elidurus thus regained the crown for a third time.
(40) Marganus II. A wise and good king whose reign was noted for its tranquillity.
(41) Ennianus. His tyrannical behaviour brought about his deposition after only a six-year reign.
(42) Beldgabred. This "king surpassed all the musicians of ancient times, both in harmony and in playing every kind of musical instrument, so that he was called the god of the minstrels."
(43) Digueillus. A notably just and fair king.
(44) Heli. Heli ruled for forty years.
(45) Lud. He ordered the rebuilding of London's walls and towers. The city, hitherto known as Trinovantum, thus became the city of Lud, i.e. Kaerlud. This was later corrupted to Kaerfundein, from whence came its present name. Lud was eventually buried in London, close to Ludgate that still bears his name. Lud's sons were not considered fit to succeed him, so the crown passed to his younger brother, Cassivelaunus.
(46) Cassivelaunus. It was this king who withstood, in the year 55 BC, the invading armies of Julius Caesar. Cassivelaunus was starved into submission after betrayal by Androgeus, his brother Lud's eldest son. The British resistance, however, had been great and fierce, evoking from the Roman author Lucan much praise concerning one particular engagement: Territa quaesitis ostendit terga Britannis, when Caesar fled in terror from the very Britons whom he'd come to attack!" (Lucan's Pharsallia, ii, 572. See Thorpe, p. 117.)
(47) Androgeus. In his minority he received the duchy of Kent from his uncle Cassivelaunus. His betrayal of the British forces, later leaving the country, ensured that he would not inherit the crown.
(48) Tenvantius. During his minority, he received the duchy of Cornwall.
(49) Cymbeline. Son and heir of Tenvantius, he received a Roman upbringing in the Imperial household. Like Leir before him, Cymbeline has been "immortalised" by Shakespeare, whose play, Cymbeline, recalls his reign.
(50) Guiderius. On his succession to the crown, he promptly refused to pay tribute to Rome. Emperor Claudius was attacked by Guiderius' forces at Porchester. During the attack, Guiderius was betrayed and killed.
(51) Arvirgus. Taking command of the British forces on the death of his brother Guiderius, Arvirgus emerged victor from a major skirmish with Claudius' troops. He eventually ruled the British as Rome's puppet-king, being interred in the city of Gloucester. British warriors at that time were famed for their ability to fight whilst standing on the pole of the chariot, and Arviragus was particularly adept at this as a certain Roman author testified: "Either you will catch a certain king, or else Arviragus will tumble from the British chariot-pole." (Juvenal, I, 1v, 126-127. See Thorpe, p. 123.)
(52) Marius. Inheriting the crown from his father Marius enjoyed friendly relations with Rome. During his reign, he defeated and killed Soderic, the king of the Picts, in a great battle. The present country of Westmorland was so named in his honour because of the battle and Marius accordingly had a stone inscribed commemorating his victory set up in the county.
(53) Coilus. The son of Marius, he was raised and educated as a Roman and was to rule his kingdom in peace and prosperity.
(54) Lucius. Taking up the crown on his father Coilus' death. According to Bede, Lucius was to become Britain's first Christian king. He died in the year 156 AD.
(55) Geta. His rule marks a break in the strict lineal descent of the British kings. Geta was a son of the Roman Severus, and on the death of Lucius was elected king of the Britons by the Roman Senate. He was eventually killed by his half-brother Bassianus.
(56) Bassianus. The Britons elected Bassianus king after he had killed his half-brother. Like Geta, he was a son of Severus, but by a British noblewoman.
(57) Carausius. After raising a fleet of ships (with the blessing of the Roman Senate,) he invaded Britain. He compelled the Britons to proclaim him king, and killed Bassianus in the ensuing battle. He was eventually murdered by Allectus.
(58) Asclepiodotus. He held the duchy of Cornwall when he was elected king by the Britons in their attempt to break the tyranny of the Roman legate Allectus. Allectus was defeated by Asclepiodotus in the battle of London. It was during his reign that the Diocletian Persecution began, (303-312 AD.)
(59) Coel. Becoming king by rebelling against and killing Ascliepiodotus, Coel is commemorated in the children's nursery-rhyme Old King Cole. He founded the city of Colchester that still bears his name.
(60) Constantius. Originally a Roman Senator, he was sent to Britain as Legate, and reduced Coel to submission. He married Coel's daughter, Helen, and became king on Coel's death.
(61) Constantine I. The son of Constantius and Helen, He ruled Britain on his father's death. He went on to become the famous Emperor of Rome who legalized the Christian religion.
(62) Octavius. He revolted while Constantine was in Rome, and assumed the British crown.
(63) Trahern. He was the brother of Coel, and was ordered by Constantine to put down the revolt of Octavius. Eventually defeating Octavius in battle, Trahern was later murdered by one of Octavius' men.
(64) Maximianus. He was a nephew of Coel, and he held the crown by virtue of that descent. He was, however, later assassinated in Rome by friends of his successor, Gracianus.
(65) Gracianus. He was originally sent to Britain by Maximianus to fight off an invasion by the Picts and Huns. However, upon successfully expelling the invaders, he assumed the crown and ordered the murder of Maximianus. He was himself to suffer death at the hands of an assassin.
(65) Consantantine II. Crowned king at Silchester and later killed by an unknown Pict; he invaded Britain at the request of Guithelinus.
(67) Constans. Constantine's eldest son, he tried to avoid the perils of the crown, becoming a monk at Winchester. He was forcibly crowned by Vortigern, who later had him murdered.
(68) Vortigern. He became king after the murder of Constans. It was Vortigern who invited the Saxon adventurers, Hengis and Horsa, (see Table 5,) to Britain to help fight the Picts. After a disastrous reign, during which he married Renwein, the daughter of Hengist, Vortigern was burned alive in a tower by Aurelius Ambrosius.
(69) Hengist. With his brother Horsa he was invited to Britain by Vortigern to help expel the invading Picts. However, Hengist availed himself of the opportunity to settle his own people permanently in Britain. He gave his daughter Renwein to Vortigern in exchange for the county of Kent. His treachery became Proverbial, and he was eventually caught and executed.
(70) Vortimer. The son of Vortigern by his first wife, Vortimer achieved four notable victories in his attempts to drive out the Saxons, but for this he was poisoned by his Saxon step-mother.
(71) Katigern. The second son of Vortigern by his first wife, Katigern was killed at the battle of Epiford by Horsa, brother of Hengist (69)
(72) Paschent. Vortigern's third son by his first wife, Paschent fled to Germany where he raised an army of mercenaries to invade and defeat Aurelius Ambrosius (73). This invasion failed, and Paschent then fled to Ireland. Raising another army, he was killed at the subsequent battle of Menevia by Utherpendragon.
(73) Aurelius (Ambrosius). Too young to take up the crown, he was smuggled to Brittany on Constans' murder (see 67), and was raised in the household of king Budicius. Eventually declared king, Aurelius planned Vortigern's death. During his reign, Ambrosius forced the Saxons to retreat to Albany (Scotland,) and captured and executed Hengist at Kaerconan, present-day Conisborough. He was eventually poisoned by Eopa the Saxon.
(74) Utherpendragon. Named Uther at birth he assumed the surname pen-Dragon after the appearance of a dragon in the sky. Like his brother Aurelius, he was smuggled abroad on the murder of Constans.
(75) Arthur. Certainly the most glamorous of all the British kings, and the main subject of Geoffrey's Hisioria. Arthur succeeded to the crown at only 15 years of age. After an eventful reign, he died in the year 542 AD.
(75) Constantine III. The son of Cador, duke of Cornwall, he succeeded Arthur in 542 AD. His succession was complicated by an immediate revolt of the Saxons, which was violently crushed. Constantine was struck down some four years later "by God's vengeance."
(77) Aurelius. Conanus Nephew of Constantine III, he gained the crown only by imprisoning another uncle who was next in line to the throne. He reigned for only three years before his death.
(78) Vortiporius. Succeeding Auralius Conanus, he put down an invasion from Germany. His subsequent fate is unrecorded.
(79) Malgo. According to a recorded speech of Cadwallo (82), He had two sons, Ennianus and Run, neither of whom succeeded him.
(80) Keredic. Of unknown origin and descent, he succeeded Malgo. In a subsequent battle, he was driven to seek refuge in Wales.
(81) Cadvan. Of Northern Welsh descent, he "succeeded" to the kingship by engaging in battle Ethelfrid, the king of Northumbria. They divided Britain between them, Cadvan ruling over the southern half.
(82) Cadwallo. The son of Cadvan, he had a relatively long and eventful reign, eventually dying of old age.
(83) Cadwallader. The son of Cadwallo, he succeeded his father as king. Bede knew him as Cliedvalla, and the Welsh knew him as Cadwaladr. He died in 689 AD.
(84) Yvor. Ruled over the remaining Britons who had been driven into Wales. The last king of strictly British descent, during Yvor's reign the British came to be known as the Welsh.

.../Next Page

.../Back to Contents