ARTORIUS

REX
DISCOVERED
THE AUTHENTIC DISCOVERY OF KING
ARTHUR, INCLUDING THE INSCRIBED
MEMORIAL STONE AND TOMB

By ALAN WILSON and BARAM
BLACKETT









All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any
form or by any means electronic or mechanical, including photocopying,
recording or by any information storage and retrieval system. The findings,
theories, proofs and discoveries are unique and are the sole property of the
publisher. No imitation or plagiarism no matter how subtle and indirect will be
tolerated.
Copyright August 1985 by ALAN WILSON and BARAM BLACKETT
Third Edition 2017
ISBN - 0-86285 0061
AII rights reserved under Pan American and International Copyright
Conventions

 FOREWORD
Before beginning their research more than 40 years ago, Alan Wilson and Baram
Blackett both realized that something was abhorrently twisted about how
historians say our ancestors founded ancient Briton. Since then, they have
challenged the conventions of history. They refused to accept the mantra borne
of loose standards in contemporary academia. They became authors, explorers,
lecturers and documentarians. They blazed old trails and revealed the truth told
by ancient records.

Their work is seminal and an international treasure, to say the least. With its
originality, however, come a few rough edges. In the years since this work
originally appeared in 1986, Wilson and Blackett have discovered errors. They
found they made assumptions in some of their earliest material, including
"Artorius Rex Discovered," which you are about to read. For instance, the Celts,
referenced several times in the following text, had been generally assumed part
of the history of the British Isles. Wilson told me that, upon further investigation,
he found no such people existed anywhere on Briton. In fact, nothing was ever
mentioned about the Celts until about 1700. Wilson says talk of the Celts gained
momentum only during the reign of George II.

Not everyone sees value in their work. Clandestine factions have made attempts
on their lives more than once in an effort to keep their message from reaching
the world. This isn't a spy novel; this is academia at large and the Crown choking
out the truth.

During several meetings these past few years, Wilson told me that history is
weighted by personalities of those who purvey it, but the truth makes it real
despite the purveyor. I am proud to be part of this mechanism injecting truth into
history. As we continue to collaborate, I hope the world will be ready to purvey
it.

This account of the lineage of the second known King Arthur is one of many yet
to come from Wilson and Blackett's investigations. Many of their publications
are out of print or simply unavailable. Others disappeared from store shelves
under mysterious circumstances. Fortunately, as their representative, I have
every piece of their work to preserve and reproduce. This has been a long and
daunting task to reproduce these earth-shattering truths. Many unsung volunteers
have been quietly and diligently putting forth enormous effort to regain
the understanding of these world truths. There are those who don’t want this
work to see the light of day. Wilson and Blackett, these two brave men, have
endured criticism and attack both physically and legally over four decades. Yet
much more of their astonishing library has yet to be published. In reality, they
ran out of time, so The Welsh Cultural Endeavor of Northeastern Pennsylvania
assumes the future direction of this treasured collection.

George C. Horwatt
Representative for Alan Wilson and Baram Blackett
Founder, The Welsh Cultural Endeavor of Northeastern Pennsylvania


















Winston Smith works as a clerk in the Records Department of
the Ministry of Truth and Information where his job is to rewrite
historical documents so that they match the current party line.
This mainly involves rewriting history books and newspaper
articles, and editing photographs, mostly to remove 'non
persons', people who have fallen foul of the party
From "1984," George Orwell












 INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this book is to tell clearly how the successful search to identify
and locate the fabled King Arthur was undertaken. The intention is to present the
tangible and vital documentary evidence in a concise and laconic manner
designed for those who do not wish to find themselves submerged in endless and
intricate mundane academic arguments.
This volume presents the true nature of the history of the British nation,
exhibiting its culture and achievements and restoring the dignity of our British
ancestors. It will show exactly who the legendary King Arthur actually was,
where he lived and precisely where he rests today. The evidence is
comprehensive, even massive, and is both authentically documented and of a
physical and tangible nature. There can no longer be any doubts about the fabled
and legendary King Arthur.
The authors have several times issued a worldwide challenge to debate the issue
publicly, and there have been no takers.
Alan Wilson began his research part time in 1956, whilst Baram Blackett started
his work in 1976 shortly before persuading Alan to collaborate with him in an all
out serious attempt to locate the mysterious king. Both have worked full time on
the project since 1979, when it became apparent that a positive result was
imminent. There has been no government or administrative help or cooperation
of any sort whatsoever, despite the numerous attempts by the discoverers to alert
every central and local government and administrative agency known to them.
None of the multitude of agencies and councils set up to assist in the creation of
opportunities or promotion of learning ever showed the slightest interest. Every
approach to officialdom proved to be a total waste of time, energy and money – a
depressing exercise in the art of bureaucratic obstructiveness.
Therefore this whole enterprise is a private and individual project. No part of the
establishment in Britain has been involved, and now their interference is not
required. It remains the clear duty of central and local Government and
organisations to support and protect the King Arthur discoveries in the interest of
the British Nation.



Lives of great men remind us,
We can make our lives sublime,
And departing leave behind us,
Footprints in the sands of time.
Longfellow




CONTENTS

PART ONE: THE ARTHURIAN DYNASTY

PART TWO: THE COURTS OF KING ARTHUR

PART THREE: THE WARS OF KING ARTHUR

PART FOUR: THE STRUGGLE OVER THE SUCCESSION TO

THE THRONE

PART FIVE: THE SEARCH FOR BRITISH KINGS AND

SAINTS: ST. GILDAS AND THE BARD ANEURIN

PART SIX: WHERE THE OTHER KINGS LIE

PART SEVEN: THE FINAL EVALUATION














PART ONE: THE ARTHURIAN
DYNASTY
This volume is an abridged version of the Blackett/Wilson papers known as the
King Arthur Research Project. The intention in this book is to set out the most
basic of information indicating the ancestry of the fabled King Arthur, and
showing why the kings of South East Wales had Imperial ideas.
The story in this volume is that of the discovery of the tombs of King Arthur ap
Meurig ap Tewdrig. Examination of the historical reconstructions of the Dynasty
snows that this King Arthur was probably born around 503 A.D. and died around
579 A.D. He therefore lived in the era of the Battles of Arthur including Baedan
and Camlan. It can be shown that his sphere of influence included areas like
Caerleon, where the King Arthur of Legend ruled. It can also be shown that his
actions and deeds match those of the King Arthur who is known as the king of
the Round Table. He can also be shown to be related to the Celtic saints in whose
Lives he is mentioned as the legendary Arthur.
Therefore it is possible to show that this King Arthur, the 61st hereditary king of
Glamorgan and Gwent, is the King Arthur of Round Table fame. The discovery
of his tombs in his native area of Glamorgan makes this a certainty.
We will demonstrate that the burial customs of these kings can be established,
and that the tombs of a considerable number of them can be found, often with
inscribed memorial stones naming them. There were three distinct phases in
burial customs – first, in the pre-Christian era up to around 200 A.D. huge
tumulus grave mounds were built over dead kings – second, from roughly 200
A.D. to around 450 A.D. these huge tomb mounds were built at the South West
corner of mortuary chapels – and third, the tomb mound was abandoned and the
kings were buried inside the churches, normally in "the right hand of God"
position close to the altar.
The reason for King Teithfallt – Theodosius, great-grandfather of Arthur, being
styled "Emperor" will become clear. Equally, the basis upon which King
Tewdrig son of King Teithfallt was similarly styled, as was his son King Meurig
– the "Emperor Marcian", also becomes apparent. That King Arthur son of
Meurig was referred to as the "Emperor Arthur" in ancient literature is in fact
quite logical.
Study of the burial customs shows that early period kings are named and
recorded at existing huge tumulus burial mounds. Second phase burial mounds
alongside mortuary churches are again named to match the kings of this later
period, and third phase tombs inside churches are again recorded and named to
match the rulers of this third period. Memorial stones and tombstones abound,
correctly naming the kings of the dynasty down through the centuries. We find
Gorddyfwn of around 200 A.D. on his inscribed stone and King Crair, who is
Carawn of Menevia, who is Emperor Carausius of Britain, on his stone after his
death in 293 A.D. The stone of King Caradoc II is in Cornwall where the
Glamorgan histories state that he went to retire. There also is the stone of
Brochwael son of King Tewdrig Uthyrpendragon I. We find four stones in
Glamorgan naming King Arthur – Arthfael or Arthmael or Arthrwys – the great
son of King Meurig Uthyrpendragon II. The Prince Budic of Britanny befriended
by King Tewdrig has left his name on a stone, with those of his ancestors. King
Howell of Britanny, known as "Pompey the Great", has left a stone, as did
several others. Time and again kings who are ancestors or descendants of King
Arthur ap Meurig turn up, along with other close relatives and contemporaries.
There is an academic paranoia evident in England whereby Welsh historical
sources and evidence is consistently and completely ignored. Then after ignoring
ninety per cent of the available evidence – a mystery is proclaimed.
Our detailed research explained in other volumes shows that the Welsh were
Gnostic Christians from around 58 A.D. when the young King Bran – then a
youth – returned from Rome and brought the Christian cult with him. This was
the reason for the Welsh refusal to co-operate with the Roman Catholic St.
Augustine in 597 when he came to try to convert the Saxons to Christianity. This
can be shown comprehensively. What it means is that there was a fully-fledged,
long established Christian kingdom in Britain, which memory became enshrined
in the Arthurian Legends. This led to dating confusions and misinterpretation of
facts, and extended to concealment and deliberate destruction of evidence once
the Roman Catholic Church gained the ascendancy on the coattails of the
Normans after 1100 A.D.
THE SECRET OF THE MISMATCHED DATES
It was not until mid-1984 that we were able to crack open the problem of
mismatched dates in Dark Age British-Welsh history. The answer lay with the
nature of British Christianity, for the Dark Age British were Gnostic Christians.
The only period date offered in the Bruts of England is the date of the death of
King Arthur. This event is said to have taken place "five hundred and forty-six
years after the incarnation of our Lord." This is deceptively easy.
We have to realise that when the Christian religion was being invented in the
early centuries of the Christian Era, there was considerable dispute over the
nature of Jesus the Nazarene. There were three basic propositions as to his
nature.
1. Jesus was human until he was crucified at the age of 33, and then he became
spiritually divine.
2. Jesus was both human and spiritually divine during his lifetime, and then
simply spiritually divine after his crucifixion.
3. Jesus was never human at all. He was spiritually divine throughout his stay on
Earth and also after his crucifixion.

The boat grave of King Ceri ap Caid at Hen Eglwys on the gravelly cliff. A perfect boat shape of some
80 yards.
Photograph by Chris Barber.

The high gravelly cliffs at Nash Point, Glamorgan, with Hen Eglwys on the top.
Photograph by Chris Barber

What this means is that Historians have taken the Roman Christian idea and
misinterpreted the date of 546 years after "the incarnation of our Lord". To
Roman Christians this would mean 546 A.D. but the British-Welsh were not
Roman Christians and to them the statement meant something totally different. It
meant 546 years after the incarnation at the time of the crucifixion, which
traditionally took place in 33 A.D. Therefore, the death of King Arthur took
place in 33 plus 546, or 579 A.D.
This matches other important information including the misdating of whole
groups of princes and events. For example Olwen the daughter of Rhodri Mawr
and Angharad of North Wales married King Morgan Mawr of Glamorgan. The
second son of Morgan and Olwen was Rhydderch, who was killed in the same
battle as his grandfather Rhodri Mawr at the age of 15. This could not have
happened in 877 A.D. as usually supposed, but is certainly possible in 910 A.D.
– 33 years later. The same mismatch occurs in many other records. The Battle of
Badon is far more likely in 551 A.D. than in 518 A.D., some 33 years earlier.
The meaning of "incarnation" has been mistaken for centuries.
What we have is not so much a mystery as an academic muddle. A series of
misdirections and misinformation, created for Mediaeval political ends by both
church and state. The truth about the Dynasty of King Arthur affected the
legitimacy of the British Monarchy, and therefore the truth was obscured and
distorted. Facts and evidence were proclaimed as false and legendary by the fake
Tudor kings, and the slanders they and their minions perpetrated have been
supported by fearful academics who have failed to investigate the truth for
generations.
There has even been a recent attempt to portray the Fifteenth century manuscript
of the Life of St. Genovesius as "new evidence". It was published in 1922, 63
years before becoming new in 1985. The idea is that St. Genovesius, a pupil of
St. Illtyd, was writing about King Arthur. This is possible as St. Illtyd lived
roughly between 510-590 A.D. and St. Genovesius would have been at his
college at Llantwit Major – Llan Illtyd Fawr in Glamorgan around 540-580. The
kings of Glamorgan at the time were the Teyrn or Monarch King Meurig, and the
Ail-teyrn, or Regent, his son, King Arthur. What is quite amazing is that St.
Genovesius is transferred back 100 years to around 450-470 A.D., and removed
from St. IIltyd's college over to France. This then allows for the misleading
guess that one Rhiotavwys (Rhiothamus) is none other than King Arthur alive
and well in France 60-70 years before the Battle of Badon recorded as in 517
A.D. and some 80-90 years before the Battle of Camlan. All very odd – but it is
consistent with a long term pattern whereby the English Establishment dare not
admit that King Arthur was exactly who he was – the 61st paramount king of
Glamorgan and Gwent.
Dozens of connecting relationships show that Genovesius was of the 550 A.D.
period and not of the 100 years earlier Rhiotavwys of the Soissons region. There
was a British king at Soissons around 450-480 A.D. and he was Aegidius the
king of Soissons and Seven Cities. This is the King Aegidius to whom the
British sent a famous letter. Regardless of the obvious truths of this, the English
political Academics persist in misidentifying the letter to Aganypus – Acanypys
– as being to a Roman Aetius, and not to King Aegidius. Thus they distort the
dates being the histories.
What is even more bizarre is that not only are Illtyd and Genovesius transported
back 100 years out of time along with King Arthur and others, the absurd and
ridiculous claim is made that William, the son of Charles Windsor and his wife
Dianna, is a direct descendant of this thoroughly bogus King Arthur. There are
no lengths to which they will not go to conceal the truths, and to obliterate the
Glamorgan and Gwent histories. This we discuss in detail elsewhere.
THE HEREDITARY ROMAN EMPERORS, B.C. 44-68 A.D.
Julius Caesar founded the first line of hereditary Roman Emperors. He foolishly
invaded Britain in 55 B.C. and again in 54 B.C., and was twice driven out by
Caswallon son of Llud ap Beli Mawr ap Manogan – the regional king in the
North Thames Area, legate of the British king. According to Nennius, the second
and larger invasion by Julius Caesar had difficulty in landing and had to make
two attempts. Caswallon had driven huge log stakes encased in lead into the
riverbed of the Thames, and the Roman ships ran foul onto them.
After successfully flinging out Caesar, the British Triad records tell how
Caswallon celebrated with a great feast where 120,000 animals were killed. The
Roman poet Lucan confirms the defeat and humiliation of the Romans.
In haste he turned and showed his back,
To the British he had attacked.
So for a period Britain remained free of Roman aggression. Cynvelyn, a
successor of Caswallon, is said to have visited Rome, and caused a sensation
there. Cynvelyn denotes "Yellow Head of Hair". Cynvelyn son of Lludd ap Beli
Mawr ap Manogan.
The inevitable collision between the British and the Romans appears to have
come as a direct consequence of the Roman attacks and conquest of Northern
Gaul – now Normandy and Britanny. These areas were the territories of the
Venitti, who presumably like the other Venetti of Venice in Northeast Italy,
would have been descendants of the Trojans. As the British also claimed Trojan
descent, it is easy to see how Caesar's aggression against the Venetti of Northern
Gaul would involve the British kings.
Matters appear to have worsened when the mistress of King Caswallon, a lady
named Fflur – Flora – was abducted and taken to Gaul. It seems that Arvarwy, a
nephew of Caswallon, may have been responsible, for he fled Britain and sought
Roman help. This of course was the classic route of Roman expansionism. Time
and again they had involved themselves in the internal politics of other nations
all over the Eastern Mediterranean and Asia, to back refugee claimants against
the ruling kings. Again British traditional record states that Caswallon and his
two nephews, Gwenwynwyn and Gwanar crossed over to Gaul with a large army
to try to recover Fflur from "Mwrchan" – not a name but "the Thief".
Perhaps Caswallon was chasing after Avarwy and Fflur, but much more likely he
was moving to recover the territories along the western coast of the European
continent. In the ensuing conflict the British claim to have defeated Julius Caesar
and this is supported by the Roman Poet Lucan.
The second Roman attempt to invade Britain was a huge affair in the reign of
their Emperor Claudius, at the time of King Caradoc I ap Arch of Britain. In 42
A.D., almost a century after Julius Caesar made his abortive attempts, Roman
armies again crossed over into Eastern Britain. This time they won some
victories and gained a foothold. Again they exploited political divisions between
British rulers, and some - notably Cogidubnus on the South coast became
Roman allies and client kings.
The Romans did not however achieve a conquest of Britain. They simply got
footholds and held some areas in Southeastern Britain. They were in fact facing
a long, expensive and possibly disastrous campaign. Early victories along the
Thames estuary where Teneuvan – Togodumnus to Romans – was killed simply
defeated the local military strength. The British king of the area was now King
Gweirydd – Arviragus – and he was by no means defeated by the Generals of
Claudius. King Gwierydd – Arviragus – is said to have married with a daughter
of the Emperor Claudius named Genissa. This patched up some form of
coexistent arrangement between the South Eastern British and the Romans.
King Gwierydd, however, already had another wife named "Voada" – possibly
Gwyar – who was a daughter of King Caradoc ap Arch, the senior British king.
This does not appear to have presented any great problems. There is of course
the perennial problem of academics, particularly English, who will not accept
British-Welsh evidence of any kind. This is a longstanding political manoeuvre
and should be regarded as such. There is however some corroborative evidence
showing that King Gwierydd was much in evidence in the time of Nero, who
succeeded Claudius 54-68 A.D. A poem survives showing that Gweirydd as
Arviragus worried Nero, and it states that Nero might be fortunate if Arviragus
slipped from his chariot pole.
British tradition then reveals that the daughter of King Gwierydd from his wife
"Voada" was married to his son from his wife Genissa. So with half-brother
marrying half-sister a diplomatic union of some magnitude was formed. The son
of Gwierydd – Arviragus and Genissa was a grandson of the Emperor Claudius,
whilst the daughter of Gwierydd and "Voada" was a granddaughter of King
Caradoc I ap Arch of Britain. These two then had a son of their own.
"King Blegywryd, who was buried magnificently at Caerleon." The great tumulus mound known as
the Mynd – this King Blegywryd was of around 120 B.C.

Baram ap Ceri fought the Romans many times and he always defeated them. The tumulus tomb
known as Twyn-Barlwm – The Barrow (grave) – guards the plains of Gwent just as King Ceri's grave
guards the Glamorgan shore.

This intermarriage between the British kings and the Roman Imperial House
forms the basis of the future of several Hereditary Roman Emperors. Mediaeval
writers list Gwierydd and his son, Marius, together with a nephew, Coellius. The
Glamorgan and Gwent records list Coe lap Lleirwg and so we get a different
descent.

The Glamorgan and Gwent record takes us far as King Lleirwg and his son
Crallo. The name Crallow became synonymous with a "complete fool", which
Commodus Britannicus most certainly was. Mediaeval descents firmly believed
that Septiumus Severus was a descendant of King Gwierydd (Arviragus) –
Marius and Lleirwg. The whole matter makes perfect sense, especially with the
memorial of Septiums Severus still in North Wales. There is, of course, the
Cardiff church now called St. Mellons, but originally and properly it was
Llanlleirwg, dedicated to King Lleirwg.
King Lleirwg could by this descent claim that he was a grandson or great-
grandson of King Caradoc of Britain, of King Cynvelyn, and of the Emperor
Claudius. The British senior line of kings continued independently, however, for
King Caradoc, son of Arch, was made king when his elder brother, King Caid ap
Arch died. After Caradoc was captured by the Romans, the throne reverted
correctly to his nephew King Ceri ap Caid ap Arch. This we exhibit, and it
explains the strange dual kingships of this period.
FAR TOO MANY KINGS
Anyone making the most cursory study of the kings of Glamorgan and Gwent
could not fail to identify three very peculiar features concerning the kings of the
period between roughly 100-240 A.D.
First, there are far too many kings for a stable, well-organised dynasty.
Second, the normal practice of descent through the eldest son of the king –
except where irrational behaviour or juvenile heirs occur – does not apply during
this period.
Third, quite contrary to normal custom, there appears to be dual kingships and
election of kings from two or even three lines of the family, instead of strict
adherence to the senior line.
Clearly, something very peculiar was happening during this rough period 100-
240 A.D. In order to understand what was happening we have to turn to the
Emperors of Rome for the answers. Very clearly, Rome was ruled by Hereditary
Emperors from the Julian and Aemilian families from 27 B.C. to 69 A.D. With
the exception of Augustus 27-14 B.C. and Claudius 41-54 A.D., these rulers
provided an incredible line of deviant, mentally unbalanced and viciously
dangerous incompetents. The recorded lives of these other six – Tiberius,
Caligula, Nero, Galba, Otho and Vitellius – tell a sordid story of misrule,
treachery and debauchery.
In order to rid themselves of this appalling tyranny of mad government, the
Roman Senate accepted the rule of five successive Generals. These could be
called the Good Generals, although one of them, Domitian, was in many ways
capriciously unstable in his actions. First came Vespasian, a notable General,
ruling as Emperor from 69 A.D. to the year 79 A.D. After Vespasian came his
elder son, Titus, from 79-81 A.D., followed by the younger son, Domitian, from
81-96 A.D. Next came Nerva from 96-98 A.D. and then Trajan from 98-117
A.D.
Many historians classify these successive imperial shifts as follows:
The Julian-Claudian Dynasty Hereditary Emperors
Julius Caesar Julius Caesar

Augustus 31 B.C. – A.D. 14 Augustus

Tiberius 14 – 37 Tiberius

Gaius Caligula 37 – 41 Caius Caligula

Claudius 41 – 54 Claudius
Nero 54 – 68 Nero
 Civil War Dynasties Galba
Galba 68 – 69 Otho
Otho 69 Vitellius
Vitellius
Flavian Dynasty Elected and Adoptive
Emperors
Vespasian 69 – 79 Vespasian
Titus 79 – 81 Titus
Domitian 81 – 96 Domitian
Adoptive Generals Nerva

Nerva 96 – 98 Trejan
Trajan 96 – 98 Hadrian

Hadrian 117 – 138

This system is not one likely to trace the origins of these Emperors after 96 A.D.
Galba, Otho and Vitellius can all be traced into the descent of the Julian-
Claudian lines, and are therefore Hereditary Emperors. We are simply trying to
establish which Emperors were Hereditary and which were Elective or Adoptive.
There can be no doubt that the tendency was always to establish Dynastic rule,
as is shown by Vespasian being followed by his two sons – Titus and Domitian.
Domitian actually succeeded in making himself so unpopular that he was denied
burial by the Senate. This then appears to have moved matters into an era of
nominated and ratified Emperors. From the time of Trajan onwards, there
developed a system of Emperors nominating a close relative as their successor,
and this nomination being ratified by the Senate. This was a system of choice – a
son, cousin, or nephew, or uncle, of the current Emperor to be his co-Augustus
and successor. The question that has to be posed and answered is: Where did the
Romans find a Royal House capable of providing suitable Hereditary Emperors?
The question of where did the Roman Senate find a legitimate Hereditary line of
Emperors, brings us back to the marriage between King Gweirydd - Arviragus
and Genissa, the woman said to be the daughter of the Emperor Claudius.
Descendants of this marriage, which would have taken place around 43-44 A.D.,
would have been eminently suitable candidates for nomination as Emperors
some 80-100 years later.
The period from roughly 138-238 A.D. certainly records far too many kings in
South Wales. There is also an illogical switching of seniority between three lines
of royal descendants. Primarily the senior descent is through King Caradoc and
on back to Brutus.

THE ASTONISHING PARALLEL

British King Emperor of Rome

Alan Alerw ap Ysbwyth Antonnius Pius c. 138-161
Titus Aurelius Fulvius Boionius Arrius Antoninus Pius.
King IMleirchion Vawdilwyr Marcus Aurelius c. 161 co-Emperor
Marcus Anninus Aurelius Verus
King Lleirwg Lucius Aurelius Verus c. 161-169
Lucius Ceionius Commodus Verus
Crallo ap Lleirwg Commodus Britannicus c. 179-192
Lucius Aelius Marcus Aurelius Antonninus Commodus
The Legate of Britain Pertinax c.192. Chosen by the Senate of Rome Publius
Helvius Pertinax
King Corrwg - Gorwg Clodius Albinus c. 192-197 co-Emperor
Didius Clodius Septimus Albinus
Severini Septimus Severis c. 192-211. Tombstone in
North Wales
Lucius Septimus Severus
King Gorddyfwn Caracalla c. 211-218. Tombstone South Wales
Marcus Aurelius Antonninus Bassianus
Caracallus
King Gwrthl Geta. c. 209-211 co-Emperor
Publius Septimus Geta
King Meirchion ap Rhun Macrinus c. 217-218
Marcus Opellinus Severus Macrinus
King Ensyth Elagabulus c. 218-222
Varius Avitus then Marcus Aurelius Antoninus Gessius
Bassanius Alexianus
 adopted as heir by Elagabulus
King Arthfael Marcus Alexander c. 222-235
Marcus Aurelius Alexander Severus
King Gwrgan Ffrych Gaius Varus c. 235-238 (Gwrgan = Varus)
Gaius Julius Varus Maximianus
King Meurig ap Meirchion Maximinianus 238 nominated by the Senate of Rome
Maximinianus Clodius Pupienus Maximus
King Crair - Carawn Carausius Emperor of Britain. Tombstone in
son of Meurig Wales. 286-293
Carausius
King Casnar Wledig Chrysanthus. (Asclepiodotus)
son of Crair Legate of Britain
King Meuric ap Casnar Maxentius
usurped the Empire of Britain and Gaul in
350-353
King Mascen Wledig Magnus Maximus
son of Llewellyn usurped the Empire of the West in 383-388

This list shows an astonishing parallel of names, relationships and career
characteristics between the traditionally recorded British kings and the Emperors
of Rome who lived at exactly the same times.
The first of the alter ego king emperors we list is King Alan-Alerw and Titus
Aurelius Fulvius Boionius Arrius Antoninus Pius, 138-161 A.D. The British list
his father as Ysbwyth ap Manawydan who appears to parallel Marcus Ulpius
Traianus born in Seville; is it not possible that Ysbwyth means Ulpius. Traianus
or Trajan nominated his ward and cousin, Hadrian, as his successor on his
deathbed, and there is a suspicion that he did no such thing – his wife Plotina
having invented the deathbed adoption.
Certainly, the British practice was to name a man by his name plus that of his
father, grandfather, great-grandfather and so on. These Roman Emperors are
doing something very similar – naming their most important ancestors to
emphasise their claims.
1. King Arch
2. King Caid – Eochaid lies buried in his tomb mound at Pen-nant-twrch as
stated clearly in the "Songs of the Graves". Central Glamorgan.
3. King Caradoc I, enemy of the Romans, lies buried in his tomb mound at Twyn
Caradoc on Mynydd y Gaer in central Glamorgan. Mynydd y Gaer is Fortress
Mountain.
4. King Ceri Hir Llyngwyn lies buried in his boat shaped tomb mound at the Hen
Eglwys above Nash Point, as stated in the "Songs of the Graves". West of Porth
Ceri – Ceri's Port or Harbour – close to Font-y-Gary, or Fynnon Ceri, Ceri's
Fountain.
5. King Baram lies in his huge mound tomb at the East end of his great mountain
fortress of Twyn Baram now Twnbarlwm above Risca.
6. King Llyr seized Cornwall and cleared all Wales of foreigners including
Romans and Irish. He retired and died in Cornwall.
7. King Bran also went to reside in Cornwall, which was the major strategic area
in repelling the Romans; he left his son as regent in Morganwg – Siluria. There
is a burial mound named for Bran in Pembrokeshire – Dyfed.
8. King Caradoc II is often mistaken for King Caradoc I, who fought Ostorius
Scapula and other Roman imperialists between 42-51 A.D. He also retired to
Cornwall where his inscribed tomb/memorial stone still stands.
9. King Cyllin son of Caradoc II was St. Sillian of Glamorgan, remembered at
the church Eglwyssilian above Pontypridd, and at Tresilian glen leading to
Tresilian Bay two miles East of Nash Point. Probably buried at Eglwyssilian.
10. King Owain builder of the buried palace at Caermead and or the St. Donats
Palace. He lies buried under his huge grave mound at Ystrad Owain in the centre
area of the Vale of Glamorgan.
The fact that the graves of these kings can be accurately traced from old records
is proof of the accuracy of the historical record of Britain. The strange
connection between the Arthurian Dynasty located in East Wales, and Cornwall
is established and explained. There is more proof here than in any other ancient
history.

A section of the triple earth banks and ditches of the fortifications of Arthur's buttresses at Caerau
Fortresses. This massive hill fort is the key to the ancient defence system of the Glamorgan Valleys.
Below is Rhiw Saeson – The Ridge of the Saxons – where local tradition says the river ran red with
their blood.

The seaward defensive side of the promontory fort at Nash Point opposite the grave of King Ceri at
Hen Eglwys.

These kings of the period roughly 150-300 A.D. are difficult to trace. Two of
them who are clearly traceable are of enormous importance in the proving of the
histories. They are No. 3 King Gorddyfwn (46) and King Crair – Carawn (53).
1. King Meirchion – Eirchion Fawdilwyr, or Meirchion, the Thumb-Soldier,
resisted the oppression of the Christians, which coincides with the Laws of
Persecution of both Druids and Christians coming out of Rome around 170 A.D.
His record fits with that of his first cousin, Lleirwg, who sent a celebrated
Embassy to Elutherius, Bishop of Rome, around 170 A.D.
2. King Corwg is remembered by the valley and town of Glyncorrwg. There are
three very large burial mounds on two hills above the town. The river is Avon
Corrwg with traces of fortification, whilst west is the Mynnyd Corrwg Fechan.
3. King Gorddyfwn, deposed and exiled for bad rule, has his memorial burial
stone at Llandefaelog, three miles north of Brecon town. It names him as
"Gorddyfwn the Exile" in the ancient alphabet. Dated approximately 180-200
A.D.
4. King Rhun is said to have followed the Roman pattern of legalised immunities
for skilled and literate persons, and to have promoted science and learning. He
followed the pattern of his father, Gorwg, in introducing Roman-type
agricultural methods.
5. King Einydd may appear to be a shadow figure, yet the histories make a most
remarkable statement concerning him. They say that he was the first Welsh king
to build towns after the Roman fashion. This is of enormous importance, for it
fits with all the other evidence that solidly denies and disproves a Roman
occupation of Wales.
6. King Arthfael Hen the Aged followed these peaceful policies building many
towns, villages and churches. Again, this points to "Roman remains" in Wales
being British.
7. King Gwrgan Frych the Freckled rearmed the nation enacting that all men
should carry a bow and a sword. Clearly, the 250-270 A.D. period was moving
toward chaos as the Roman Empire was overrun and destroyed before
Aurelianus restored it.
8. King Meirchion followed Gwrgan and continued the policy of town building
and of support for science and learning.
9. King Meyryg was a warrior king, and in his time, the Irish-Picts attacked
Wales. The king successfully defeated them, but was assassinated at Meyrig’s
Wood in Dyfed. He built a palace at Boverton in Glamorgan, here "Roman"
remains are found.
10. The upheavals and collapses of the Roman Empire continued, and King Crair
– Carawn – finally declared all Britain independent of Rome in 286 A.D. This is
indisputable.
These records tell of kings who built towns, villages and churches in the same
manner as the Romans, "in the Roman fashion". This offers the most remarkable
clue to the erection and location of "Roman" towns and buildings in Wales. The
Dark Age Welsh kings were simply doing what Third World and underdeveloped
nations do in this modern era – the were important Roman technology.

These kings occupy the period roughly 270 to 480 A.D. This was an era of
continued attempts to get rid of both the Romans, and other Irish and Saxon
invaders.
1. King Crair is one of the best recorded of all Dark Age British kings. He
declared Britain and Northern Gaul – Britanny – to be independent of Rome in
286 A.D., and to the Romans he was Carausius the Admiral and Emperor of
Britain, also known as Carawn of Menevia, St. David's, and sometimes as
Ceiriawn. His gravestone was found at Penmachno. His palace at Caermead
confirmed the story of attack and murder.
2. King Casnar Wledig or Chrysanthus the Legate, is a shadowy figure, who left
a clear line of descendants. He was a Dragon of Gwent – obviously a warrior
king. He was king at the same time as Euddav-Octavius, and would have taken
part in the wars against Constantine the Great's generals. In his time the great
Roman fortress of Caerleon was finally overthrown in 337 – the year after
Constantine's death.
3. King Edric is virtually unknown and said to be an unwise glutton.
4. King Erbin is mentioned in some histories and not in others. He seems to have
been joint-king with Edric, his brother. The stone pillar in the Llandock church is
inscribed "IRBIC" and shows a man on a horse, and a crowned head, and is
probably for Erbin.
5. King Bran, son of Edric, was another failure. A frantic, wicked king who died
of anger and rage – he probably had a heart attack.
6. King Tryhaern was haughty and impetuous. In his time, the Saxons came to
Gower, and the king failed to attack them. For this reason he was put to death.
This might be the great Saxon and Pict raids of 367 A.D., for the Picts are
mentioned with the Saxons.
7. Erb, son of Erbin, was a king at some time around 400 A.D., and later he
appears to be a junior contemporary of the more powerful King Nynniaw ap
Erbin, his brother.
8. King Nynniaw is again a famous figure. He is better known in his alter ego
guise as St. Ninian, who founded the church of Ynys Wyrdin in Aballach –
Whithorn Abbey on the Solway Firth in Galloway. He was a warrior who
cleared the country of its enemies.
9. Pebiau, the son of Erb, was another regional king who appears to have had
some form of junior or joint rule with the more powerful King Teithfallt, son of
Teithrin. Pebiau is well recorded, and is undoubtably yet another very real
person. His effigy was in a Hereford church, and he probably lies buried there.
10. King Teithfallt ap Teithrin Theodosius, son of Theordore, is usually said to
have succeeded his grandfather, King Nynniaw. Probably his father, Teithrin,
died young. He is buried in his church on the Gower at Llandudvwch.

The tomb of King Gradlon at Landevenec. He was son of King Conan and the second King of
Brittany – first cousin to St. Guennole, who founded the Abbey with his help – ruled circa 410-435
A.D.

The tomb of St. Guennole at the Landevenec Abbey in Brittany. He was the third son of Prince
Brychan – Fracan, the brother of King Conan Meriadauc. He and King Gradlon were grandsons of
King Euddav in Britain.

King Teithfallt would have been a contemporary of Emrys Wledig – Ambrosius
Aurelian – the military leader appointed to drive out and subdue the Saxons. His
father Teithrin would have been alive at the time of the usurper Gwytheyrn –
Vortigern – and the upheavals that took place in what is now England.
1. King Tewdrig – Theoderic the Uthyr Pendragon I, mortally wounded at
Tintern and buried at Mathern. Stone coffin twice excavated in 1625 and in
1881.
2. King Meurig – Maurice the Uthyr Pendragon II, builder of Llandaff Church,
and buried there, which is well-attested by all sources. Stone of Brochwael, his
brother, in Cornwall.
3. King Arthwyr – Arthur, the legendary Round Table king. Buried in the Cave
of Pavillions in the Forest of Mystery. The Uthyr Pendragon III, well attested in
all records. The stones of his brothers Pawl and Idnerth are at Merthyr Mawr and
Llandewi Brefi.
4. Frioc – brother of Arthur. Outlived him and reigned after King Arthur's death.
He was killed by Morgan ap Arthur in a struggle for the succession when
Morgan grew up.
5. King Morgan Mwynfawr – the traditional founder of Murgan – now Margam
Abbey – where he is said to be buried. Morgan was an infant when his father
died, and the supreme power of the kingdom passed away at this time.
6. King Ithael – brother of Morgan. Well-attested in Llandaff and Llancarfan
Charters. Probably the King Ithael of the Rex Ithaeulus stone at Llanilltyd Fawr.
The stone names Samson, son of Arthur's sister, Anna, King Ithael, Illtyd son of
Gweryla, the sister of King Meurig, and Arthmael Teyrn – Arthur the Monarch.
7. King Ithael ap Morgan – again well-attested in the Charters. It is possible that
he is the King Ithael named on the Llanilltyd Fawr stone and not his uncle.
8. King Rhys – another well-recorded king. Named on a stone cross at Llanilltyd
Fawr.
9. King Howell ap Rhys – also named in the same dedication on the stone cross
at the church of Llanilltyd Fawr, which he had carved.
10. King Arthfael or Arthur III – said to have married Cenhedlon of Powys.
Actually the brother of King Howell and King Meurig, who is misnamed as his
son. Probably the King Arthur who defeated the army of Rhodri Mylwonog at
Pencoed in 721 A.D. This king said to be buried at St. Margaret's Church in
Cardiff.
The chart we exhibit here contains only the names of the major princes. These
rulers held the throne during the upheavals of the Germanic invasions and wars
beginning around 450 A.D. At the end of their period around 880 A.D. the
Heptarchy of Seven Kingdoms had emerged in England and the Five
Confederated States coexisted within Wales. This pattern was about to be
violently disturbed by the Danish-Viking invasions of England and Ireland.
THE DATING OF THE DEATH OF KING ARTHUR
The most vexing question of all the uncertainties that have long surrounded King
Arthur is the question of the date of his death. Various guesses and assessments
have been made – usually on the most fragile grounds – and the general
tendency has been to orient the estimates around the 537-542 A.D. period. This
guessed dating tends to then distort the history of the period.
Our own assessments in the volume "King Arthur's Invisible Kingdom"
demonstrate old King Meurig dying around 570 A.D. at a great age, then his son,
King Arthur, dying around the year 575 A.D. These calculations were based on a
mass of complimentary facts drawn in the most part from the Llandaff Charters,
and the Historical scraps, which are available including the "Lives of the Saints".
This hypothesis of King Meurig dying aged around 90 or more only some nine
years before his son Arthur is supported by the Nennius statement of 822 A.D.
that Arthur was not yet king when he led the British armies. It is also supported
by the Glamorgan traditions of King Arthur keeping his queen at Llan-ail-teyrn,
now Llaniltern, just north of Cardiff. Ail-Teyrn implies an "alternative king", or
a Viceroy or a Regent.
The Mediaevals were under no illusions about the dating of King Arthur's death.
This can be demonstrated from the "Brut of England". We have in our other
researches shown quite clearly that all the early English Manuscripts definitely
identify King Arthur as "the king of Glamorgan". Remarkably these early
records of England give only one date in the pre-Saxon period of British history.
Events are recorded in plenty, but no dates except one. This single dated event is
the date of the death of King Arthur. The importance of this event can easily be
seen, for Arthur "the Wall of Steel" of Welsh poetry, held the tribes of Germanic
invaders in check until his death – and not until 577 A.D. did they resume their
attacks.
Chapter 88 of the "Brut of England" concludes with this:
Arthure was born to Auyoun pe xxij zere of his regne. After pe Incarnacious of
oure lorde Ihesu Crist v.C and xlvj zere.
So we are being told that King Arthur went or was taken to Aballach – Valentia
in the 22nd year of his reign, and that this was five hundred and forty-six years
after the date of the Incarnation of Jesus Christ. The Christians believe without
exception that the death of Jesus Christ occurred in Jerusalem in 33 A.D., and
his believed ascension to heaven followed. Therefore with an "incarnation" in 33
A.D. and King Arthur going to Aballach some 546 years later we have the year
579 A.D.
Dating is made even more difficult when we realise that most scholars place the
birth date of Jesus at 4 B.C. and not 0 or 1 A.D. So King Arthur is believed to
have died between 575 and 579 A.D. Given the concealment of his death and
burial, this is as accurate as can be expected. There is a date given in the Brut,
and therefore until it is disproved by logical argument, it stands.
Details such as Gildas being recorded as being in Ireland in 570 A.D. and then
being reconciled with King Arthur after his return make sense under this
chronology. Arthur is recorded as executing Huail ap Caw the brother of Gildas
at Ruthin, and this caused the division between the king and the saint.
As Gnostic Christians, the Welsh would have believed that the "Incarnation"
dated from the time of the supposed crucifixion. Later, Roman Catholic scholars
blundered in misreading dates from the time of the birth of Jesus the Nazarene
instead of from his death. So we have a 33-year error running through the
datings. King Arthur dying in 579 instead of 546, the Battle of Badon taking
place in 550-551 instead of 517, and the Battle of Camlann occuring in 572
instead of 538 A.D. The huge Christian dilemma of whether their God was
human on Earth and spiritual in "heaven", or simply spiritual all the time lies at
the root of the dating problems. "Incarnation" meant different things to different
sects.

PART TWO: THE COURTS OF KING
ARTHUR
Various amateur attempts have been made to locate the court or courts of King
Arthur, and this included an extensive archaeological dig on a large hillfort in
Somerset in England where King Arthur never was. These attempts cannot
succeed because they are founded on a romantic hope rather than careful
analysis of the situation. In order to locate the king and his courts, it is necessary
to examine the practice and custom of the sixth century Celtic kings of the
British, and to understand their lifestyle. Once this is done, the quite precise
location of the Courts of Arthur is in fact possible.
The most obvious location is the court of Arthur at Caerleon, where numerous
historical, Triad, poetry, folklore, and Mabinogion references state that he held
most of his courts. With typical blindness and obsession for things Roman, the
archaeologists have missed the obvious. The Celtic kings had a number of
Courts that were set out on their estates. The kings were in the habit of touring
around these Courts, which were administered by stewards in their absence.
They would spend varying periods of time at each Court with their retinues and
then move on the next Court. Much depended on the size of the estate, and it was
not at all uncommon for the king and queen and also their heir apparent – the
Edling – to each go to a small estate with part of the king’s retinue, gathering
together again at the larger courts.
Now at Caerleon, there was a great ruin of the Roman Legionary Fortress, which
covered over forty-eight acres. This was abandoned long before the time of King
Arthur ap Meurig ap Tewdrig and was not occupied during the sixth century.
Nonetheless, this has not prevented the inquiry after King Arthur from being
directed at this ruined Roman site. This is in fact foolish, for the Celtic kings did
not occupy huge stone fortresses set on flat, indefensible plains. They used the
techniques of their forefathers and occupied hillforts, set on the top of steep-
sloped, easily defended hills. Significantly the ideal spot for the defence of
central Gwent is a very steep hill that stands just half a mile to the north of the
Roman ruins at Caerleon. The view from the top of this hill is stupendous. It
dominates the tidal reaches of the River Usk down the shores of the Severn, and
stands above the entrances of the valleys of the Usk and Ebbw rivers and central
Gwent.
On top of this hill there stands what is left of the earth embankments of the sixth
century hill fortress. This is exactly where the stories say that it is, high above a
curve of the River Usk dominating Caerleon. There can be no doubt that this
hillfort is in fact the Court of King Arthur, king of Glamorgan and Gwent, which
is referred to in the various sources and records. One mediaeval story tells of
King Arthur watching people arriving at his court across the Malpas. The
Malpas is now a district of North Newport, and its name derives from there
being a very muddy ford across the River Ebbw. The point is that it is not
possible to see the Malpas ford site from the old Legionary Fort, but it is easily
seen from the commanding heights of the hill where the sixth century hillfort
stands, four hundred feet above the River Usk winding below.

The strategic plan is in

fact very evident when modern maps are surveyed, for the Caerleon hillfort is
the centrepoint of a defensive system of hillforts, which are flung out in a screen
around it. It is the hub of the defensive strategy of Western Gwent – the centre of
the "spiders web". A visit to the different sites to stand on these remains of the
old Celtic forts soon confirms this, and there can be no doubt that the king of
Gwent would have used the hillfort above the Usk over Caerleon. The hill at
Caerleon is named Lodge Hill, which is an obvious English corruption of the old
Welsh name. The old name seems to be the hill of the Llys, and this is Welsh for
Court and somehow Llys has become Lodge. There may be some translated
similarity inferring "hunting lodge", but the fort of Arthur is still there. The fact
that noone has taken any notice of it at all must be one of life's great mysteries
when one considers the interest in King Arthur.
Now in 1981 – September – the old hillfort of King Arthur above Caerleon is in
great danger from the mindless bureaucrats. They are building houses all over
the hill. It is incredible, for there are thousands of hills in South Wales, and to
build on this one is vandalism. For the present, the views that King Arthur would
have had, a clear view over the Usk estuary and away across the Severn and
down to Cardiff are uninterrupted. The defensive slopes are obvious and the
whole construction easy to pick out. On the 21st of September, 1981, we wrote
to the Welsh Office asking that building be stopped, for we regard the main
Court of King Arthur as a national monument. They ignored us.
The easy way, in fact the only way, to understand these defensive fortress
networks is to visit the hills and sites and to climb up to the tops. As we have
said, "Lodge" Hill above Caerleon is the strategic hill in controlling the entry
into the Monmouthshire valleys and central Gwent. Six and a half miles to the
southwest down on the shores of the Severn, the coastal plain of Gwent, is
guarded by the hillfort of Wilcrick Hill, barring the approach along the flat plain
from the east, an approach towards Caerleon Chepstow Hill north of Langstone.
The ancient Roman road passes through this gap. As expected the gap is
protected by the hill fortress, which dominates this pass, set high above
Cathouen (Cats Ash) over six hundred feet above the plains. These two forts at
Wilcrick and on the Western end of Kemeys Ridge bar the way from the east,
and the Kemeys fort also dominates the upper valley of the Usk River, which is
very narrow at this point.
On the opposite side of the valley, across from the Kemeys Ridge fort on the top
of the high hill on the other side, is the hill fortress on Cae Camp. This is three
miles northeast from the central court at Caerleon, and the linking of these forts
is clearly designed to obstruct any advance by hostile forces moving down from
Raglan and Monmouth and from the Midlands of England. This third fort in the
defensive screen is at Llan-sor Fawr on Llanhennock Fawr. The next fort is
almost two miles due north of the central Caerleon Court. The Afon Lwyd runs
down the valley south of this fort on its way to join the larger River Usk, and the
effect is that this Llanfrechfa fort dominates the north side of the valley coming
down from Pontypool and the Caerleon Court dominates the south side of this
valley.
The Llys Court, King Arthur's hill fortress and court above the Usk at Caerleon – the sixth century
hill fort is on the hill centre of the picture – the Roman legionary ruin is on the riverside, right of
picture.

The Caerleon Court hill fortress of Arthur – eastern slopes. The mounds indicate the outline of the
defences. The whole site is in danger of builders and developers. It stands unexcavated over 400 feet
above the river.

Over to the west of the Caerleon Court fort is another set of screen forts. These
are set to dominate the entry into the western valleys of Gwent and Glamorgan
valleys. They block the way up onto the valleys leading to Risca, Crosskeys and
Bargoed, Blackwood, Oakdale, and Newbridge, and they secure the entry to the
valley running west through Bedwas and Machen to Caerphilly and the way into
the centre of Glamorgan. One hillfort is placed on the Gaer hill on the West of
Newport, standing three hundred thirty feet above the River Ebbw as it flows
down from the valleys and guarding the east side of the river. This fort is three
and a half miles south west of the Central Hill fort at Caerleon. Across from this
Gaer fort on the hill above the other side of the River Ebbw is another hill fort
guarding the other top, less than a mile from the Gaer fort opposite and due east.
Then one mile slightly west of north of this position at the point where the two
other running west through Machen and Bedwas, there is a third fort of the same
earthwork type on the other end of the hill ridge above Rhiwderin. The Maes
Arthur hillfort is three hundred eighty feet above the river and the outstanding
feature of all these defensive positions is the panoramic views available from all
of them. They really do dominate the whole area.
This set of forts to the southwest of Caerleon stands above the low plain between
Newport and Cardiff. Just over a mile to the southwest of the Maes Arthur fort,
there is another hillfort on the top of the hill ridge leading from Caerleon through
Malpas on above Kernew to St. Mellons and Cardiff. This hillfort at Penylan is
over four hundred feet above the low sea level plains of Marshfield. It is
necessary because the ridge on which it stands clearly obstructs the view from
Maes Arthur and the Caerleon forts network to the west. This hillfort is the vital
link between the fort network encircling Caerleon and the similar network
around Cardiff.
The final links in this circle of hillforts flung out around Caerleon seem to be
missing, for there should be something to the northwest of Caerleon. In fact just
over three miles due northwest of the Caerleon Court hillfort there is a place
named Castell-y-Bwch, or the Castle of the He-Goat, or Billy Goat. This is in the
right place, but the Earthwork fort, which should have been there, is not visible,
or at least not obvious. Two miles due west of this site is the hill fort of
Twmbarlwm, high on its nine hundred-foot hill, exactly where it ought to be
above Risca and Crosskeys. This fort seals off penetration from the north and
northwest. So what we have is a complete defensive circle of hill forts flung out
around the central position at "Lodge" Hill above Caerleon.
To understand all this, it is necessary to understand the purpose of the Celtic
hillfort in Britain. Their forts were not defensive positions to be held against a
seige by an opposing army. The Norman and other mediaeval castles were built
so that they could be defended by the minimum number of men for the
maximum period of time. This was possible because the Norman and other
nobility in general had become completely divorced from and alienated to the
people of the countryside. They literally did not give a damn what happened to
the farms, the people, the peasants, their crops and livestock. Usually they were
regarded as oppressors and were defending themselves against the Welsh and
Irish, whom they oppressed. Therefore, the mediaeval castle performed an
entirely different function to the Celtic hill fortress. The hillfort of Arthurian
times and earlier was primarily a watchtower – a lookout point from which
invaders could be spotted. In South Wales along the coastal areas, this invariably
meant attack by forces crossing the waters of the Severn estuary. The hillforts
places where the horses of the soldiers could be corralled safely for the night, for
the warhorses were the key to victory. This same camp, with its long walls, could
also serve as a corral for the cattle and sheep of the local people in times of war
to prevent them from being driven off by swift moving invaders. Unless they
were faced with an overwhelming force, such as the people of the southern
coasts of England were faced with when Vespasian attacked their hillforts with
his Legions, then the hillforts were not places of long-term refuge. The tactics of
Dark Age warfare demanded that food supplies be obtained quickly, to keep
armies in the field, and the invading army itself would be composed of men who
had their own business of farming and herding to attend to in their own lands. So
campaigns were short, as supply problems and the absence of regular armies
dictated events. Celtic codes of warrior conduct demanded that invaders be
fought, and so battles took place, and the hillforts, having served as watchtowers,
were places for gathering the women, children and the old with the animals and
supplies.

View to the north from King Arthur's Caerleon hill fort and court – dominating the valley to
Cwmbran – the Valley of the Raven, King Bran.

View from King Arthur's Caerleon Court looking southwest across the Usk Estuary and Marshfield
Plains with Malpas clearly visible to the right.

The gathering together of the king's armies also required that there should be
places for the regiments to assemble and camp. This also was a function by the
hill fortress. To sit up in a hillfort whilst an enemy ravaged the lands around and
below was a practice totally alien to the sixth century warrior codes of the
British.
The complete obviousness of King Arthur's citadel towering over the entrances
to the valley at Caerleon is laughable when the literary and historical fuss over
his location in Britain is considered. All the records say that he was at Caerleon,
but none of them say that he was at the Roman legionary fortress down in the
valley alongside the river. The "historians" and "archaeologists" have
mesmerised by bits of Roman walls, and old Roman stones. The idea of King
Arthur ap Meurig using the massive ruin of the Legionary barracks is wrong; it
does not fit with the historical facts. The king would have located himself high
up in his "eagles nest" of a fort on the very steep hill, which blocks the valleys
entrances. The remains ofArthur's Llys – Court – are still very clear on the
hilltop, and the choice is to accept the Histories of Tyssilio and Gryffydd ap
Arthur, the Bardic poems, the Triads, the Mabinogion tales, and so on, which say
that he dwelt there, and held court there – or to reject this evidence and leave the
old ruin of the hillfort to the house builders and the developers. King Arthur's
Court at Caerleon is on Lodge Hill – fact – probably Lodge is a derivation of
Llys.
As we can locate the Court of Arthur at Caerleon, then what of the Mediaeval
legends of his Court at Camelot. The idea of Camelot being a pure invention is
weak, for the Dark Ages, and the Mediaeval Middle Ages were not periods of
either literary or artistic invention. As the Caerleon Court exists, then so also
must the Camelot Court. Now we should say "Camelot" very carefully for it is a
Norman French rendering of an old Welsh name. Therefore we are not looking
for a place actually named "Camelot", but for a court of the king of Glamorgan
and Gwent, which had a name that was twisted or converted into "Camelot". As
the bulk of the evidence available shows that the kings of Glamorgan and Gwent
tend to be concentrated in the areas radiating out around Caerleon in the east,
and Cardiff and the Vale of Glamorgan in the west, we can localise our search.
We can also be certain that we are looking for a typical sixth century site. A
simple method, which we therefore adopted, was to first list all the possible sites
– all of them with no exceptions. We then took the word "Camelot" and broke it
up into "Ca" for caer – fortress – and "melot". The clue we needed was to
discover just what this "melot" might have derived from, so we took a Welsh
dictionary of 1688 A.D. and one of 1861 A.D. and made a list of all the similar
"M" words. Several words seemed promising, but top of the list we came up
with "melyn", meaning yellow, and "melin", meaning a mill.
There were other sets of words, but none seemed to fit any of the listed sites. In
fact, we were able to come up with one site that uniquely fitted both whereas no
other site fitted either. There is a fortress site of the period, which can be
connected with word "melyn", yellow, which is also in close proximity to sites
long named for "melin", mill. We find Mill Road, Mill Farm, and so on, yet it is
"melyn", yellow, which is the clue to the identification of Camelot, for the
Mediaeval Camelot was the corruption of Caer-Melyn, the Yellow Fort.
Once again, when the site of the Yellow Fort is visited, it is situated exactly
where it clearly should be, and it requires very little imagination at all to
conceive of this place as the favourite residence of the king. The site is clear and
at present in no danger of being vandalised by local councils and developers.
Fortunately, it is not in Cardiff where it would almost certainly have been
destroyed by a council whose record of destruction is consistent.
As we have tried to explain earlier and elsewhere, a major problem of any search
for the Dark Age Arthurian kings of Southeast Wales lies with the archaeologists
who are literally "Roman Mad". For example, when two schoolboys found the
Roman site at St. Hilary after the 1939-1945 war, the archaeologists rushed onto
the site with Bulldozers, and they literally scraped off the top two and a half feet
of earth to get down to the Roman bits and pieces of walls. They did not give a
damn what had gone on this site during the period 300 to the present day. Who
knows what might have happened at the place during the Dark Ages and later. In
fact, apart from the Legionary Fortress at Caerleon below the hill of Arthur's
Court, the Castle at Cardiff, and the two walled towns of Caerwent and
Carmarthen, there is scant evidence of Roman occupation and domination in the
area. There are the important villas at Cardiff and Caerworgan – Llantwit Major.
It was probably at Caerworgan in the palace built for King Owen (circa 120-150
A.D.) that King Eleath – Alectus – killed King Crair – King Carawn or the
Emperor Carausius of Menevia – around 300 A.D. The general picture is one
where the locals were left very much to their own devices once the Romans had
established their trading centres.
So let us return to the stories and traditions of King Arthur holding his courts at
both Caerleon and Camelot, and also occasionally at Cardiff, Carmarthen, and
Caerliw which is also probably in South Wales, and as we show elsewhere it is
not Carlisle in the North of England. The net has been cast too wide, and

The Camelot hill fort and court site from the northeast. The Caermelyn Fortress site is centre of the
picture and the site dominates the Cardiff plain. The fort is on the end of a spur jutting out from Cefn
on ridge.

View from the Caermelyn, or Camelot, court fort. The Severn to the Usk at Newport are in the
distance below the hill. The site is about 330 feet above sea level.

Arthur's personal territories were much more localised into South Wales. We
have identified the hillfort of King Arthur on the steep hill above Caerleon and
the Legionary Fortress of the Romans was abandoned at the period 280-300
A.D. We have seen how the Caerleon hillfort is the focal point of the network of
hillforts forming the defensive system of Gwent. Elsewhere we have seen how
the Malpas ford is visible from the Caerleon Hill fort, but not from the Roman
fortress, so the story of Arthur watching people cross the Malpas has to refer to
the hillfort.
Nearer our own times, the last of the "true Bards" – he was maintained by the
lords of Gwent in the capacity of a Bard – was Daffydd Benwyn. Daffydd
Benwyn's knowledge of Welsh history was encyclopaedic, in common with the
other Bards. Over three hundred thirty closely written pages of his work survive,
and these contain many poems directed towards his patrons and extolling them
and their illustrious ancestors. He constantly names great numbers of the ancient
princes of the area, and brings in the ancestral kings in their correct context.
Amongst the many often used names of these ancestors of the Morgans, the lords
of Gwent – is of course the mighty Arthur. Now Daffydd Benwyn names Arthur
as Arthur Machen, and everyone living in South Wales knows exactly where
Machen is. The location of Machen in what we elsewhere identify as the ancient
area of Cerniw, and Arthur described as Arthur Machen. Gelli-Wig was of
course King Arthur's main military camp. All this helps to put the main pieces
together in the search for the courts of the king, who, like his contemporaries,
would have had several courts or manors scattered around his personal
landholdings. These he would tour with his retinue literally eating up the
accumulated produce. All these reference areas lie in South East Wales. In his
writings of around 1550-1600 A.D., Daffydd Benwyn also fixes Gelli-Wig and
Cerniw into South East Wales.
So having located the famous Caerleon Court of King Arthur correctly, and also
having now established that the Cerniw area which contained Gelli-Wig, the
main army camp is the same general area, it is perfectly reasonable to begin to
look for the elusive Camelot in the same South Wales area. We have described
how we broke down the word "Camelot" to get some sense out of it, and we
definitely had no intention of being misled by the late Mediaeval nonsense about
Cadbury Hill in Somerset in England. There are in fact more than 500 identified
hillforts in Wales, but as King Arthur was king of Southeast Wales, it was logical
to concentrate our efforts there. Then using old Daffydd Benwyn as a guide, we
have the descriptive name of Arthur Machen. So we are able to concentrate our
attention onto the border areas of Gwent and Glamorgan, into the old area of
Cerniw.
All forts were caers, the word meaning just that, so the place of the king would
logically be caer-this or caer-that, and sometimes exceptionally llys meaning
court. We have now no need to bother with the caer part of the name, we have to
concentrate on the second part, melyn or melin, or something close to that. We
know that the forts of caers were named for their owners, or for the general areas
in which they stood, or for some nearby geographical feature, or for colour. The
colour naming principle is immediately attractive and worth examining, for we
have "white" forts, "red" forts, "black" forts, and so on. The word ending "melot"
in Norman French seems to have affinities with the Welsh word melyn – yellow
– and other languages have similar words for this colour. We find the Greek
word is "melinos" meaning apple-coloured or yellow, and the Latin "melleus"
meaning "honeyed" and honey is, of course, yellow. We were conscious that the
ancient Roman town of Melodunum in Gaul means "din-mael" or the fort of
steel, now it is Melun, but Melyn as Yellow was the word that seemed to offer
the best possibility in the Welsh context. If this was the case, then we were
looking for Caer-Melyn, the Yellow Fort, when we looked for Camelot.
Southeast corner of the Camelot, Caermelyn, site in Castle Field, known in mediaeval times as Eybwr
or Kibbor Castle. The enclosures cover roughly two acres. Caer, or castle, and Melyn, or yellow, are
names for the sulphur spring on Yellow Wells Farm.

The Camelot, or Caermelyn, Fortress defences looking north with Cefn on the Ridge in the
background. The fort is on the eastern edge of the Cantref of Cyber and Cefn-On marks the northern
boundary.

Any search of this nature in Britain is vastly aided by the mainly unrecognized,
always unrewarded, and generally disregarded work of the countless parish
priests and ministers of the churches who have laboured to preserve the history
of their parishes over the long generations. They have beavered away over the
years quietly and painstakingly recording and preserving the detailed history of
their areas, noting inconsequential and seemingly unimportant facts, keeping the
dusty files and recording and preserving the place names. We pay genuine tribute
to these countless unknown and unsung workers, and never at any time when we
sought help from any churchman were we refused. In this case we now had the
search for Camelot down to a specific area, and we were therefore able to see
what had been still preserved in the area. In fact the prize for Preserver of the
History goes to the Reverend A. L. Dowse, Vicar of Llanishen and Lisvane in
the North of Cardiff, who has laboured to keep the history and identity of his
parish to remarkable effect.
East of Lisvane, which means the "Court of the Van", on the road to Cefn Mably,
there lays the site of an unidentified ancient fort. Its position is magnificently
chosen for it dominates the whole of the Cardiff plain where the city now stands.
Its situation is on the end of a spur of land that extends from the east end of the
very steep Cefn On ridge. It certainly qualifies to be in the ancient area of
Cerniw, or at worst very close to it. And it also qualifies as being close to
Machen, which at the present day is just over two miles north, and at Machen
there is the site of a Roman settlement. The visible mounds show that this was
obviously a caer of some importance, for considerable work was done to build a
large abutment on one side to carry the defensive mound walls; these would have
been topped with wooden palisades. More important, it lies close to two very old
farms, one is called Bethllwyds Church Farm, and the other is Yellow Wells
Farm. The Yellow Wells is so called because there were anciently sulphur pits on
the land, and in Welsh it would be Ffynnon Melyn or something like that. The
name of the fort would probably, therefore, be Caer Melyn, which is easily
corrupted into Camelot in Norman French. The farmhouse alongside is Graig
Llwyn, which seems to mean "stone-turning" in the sense of a potter's wheel.
Geographically, the fort is right where it should be for there was clearly a place
of the laws close at hand. This was Lisvane, just a mile to the west, and there
was also the other court where laws might have been made and kept at Rhaith,
now Roath in Cardiff, two and a half miles due south. Where the law courts
were, then there would be the king, and this is clearly the area. Hopefully, the
law courts were fairer and better run than the appalling and corrupt mess that
masquerades as law in Britain today.
The area dominated by this Caer is anciently known as part of the Commote of
Cibbor, also spelled as Kibor, Kibbor, Cibbwr and so on. The name has never
been satisfactorily explained in modern terms, but we have no objection to
making a try at it, as we do not fear to be laughed at or to be wrong. We seem to
have Cy and Bwr, two words, and this is straightforward enough. The term "Cy"
indicates a mutual action, something done together. The second word "Bwr" is
more difficult and seems to be a version of Bwrdd, which means "table" and if
this is the case then we have "Cybwr" meaning simply "mutually together at the
table". This then is an obvious invitation to infer that "mutually together at the
table" is the place of the origin of the stories of the Round Table of King Arthur.
It certainly makes more sense than most other explanations. The close proximity
of the place of Law making at the Rhaith and the place of Law administration at
Lisvane certainly argues that this was the place where the paramount king of the
Silures would meet with his senior kings and princes.
This is not all, for the men of the commote of Cybwr enjoyed certain privileges
and these privileges were in fact upheld even after the Norman invasions. Their
considerable privileges of rights and freedom of taxation, do have certain ancient
parallels in Welsh law, and were in the other known cases the result of
conspicuous bravery by the men of the area concerned in fighting against
enemies of the nation. The Laws of King Howell Dda of West Wales, which
were compiled in 942-943 A.D., record such privileges for the men of Arvon in
North Wales, which derived from service in a war fought in Powys by King
Cadwallon at around 600 to 630 A.D. again for military services of great valour,
and this was also perpetuated down to the time of the Normans. It is reasonable
to assume, therefore, that the privileges of the men of Cybwr were the result of
some special mutual act of bravery, just when and under which king we do not
know – the temptation is of course to see the actions as those of Arthur and his
men.
The Rhaith was a form of grand jury or council, which was called to sit with the
king, and its numbers varied according to the circumstances and the subject. It
could be as small as five men in some Rhaiths, or as many as 500 in others.
Rhaith in Cardiff, now Roath, was therefore a very important place in King
Arthur's kingdom – now it is a funeral home. The old Elizabethan Great House
of Roath, built around 1500 A.D. on the site, was knocked down by the Cardiff
City Council around 1960 and a modern building put up on the site.
As for Cybwr, there is one strange variant spelling in one Harleian manuscript,
where it appears as Bewber, which is unintelligible. There is also one other
strange name, which occurs in connection with both the Court of the Rhaith and
the general Llys-van – Lisvane – area. It is the name Bedd-y-Cu-Du, which is
modern day Dogfield Street in remembrance of this, and a field at the north of
Llanishen Church carried the same name. Frankly we think that there is
something wrong with this, for Cu does not mean Dog, it means "Beloved" or
even "dearly beloved", whilst Cy is Dog. So we more than likely have not the
"Grave of the Black Dog", but instead the "Grave of the Dearly Beloved One
with Black Hair".
Who this is there is no way to tell. At a pure guess we can offer Arthur ap Uther
ap Mascen Wledig, who is twice recorded as Arthur Ddu – Arthur the Black
Haired – but is 100 percent romantic speculation. It is however, more realistic
than a Dog's Grave, with the proviso that many of the Dark Age British warrior
chiefs carried the appellation of "Great Hound" or "Hound Prince" and so on,
just as a raider from the north was a Raven, and a raider from over the seas was a
Boar. However, even if this were the case, it would be Arthur I, obviously not
King Arthur, son of King Maurice, whom we have located elsewhere.
Up in Lisvane, close to our Yellow Fort, we find an old road name as Pen-
yrheol-felyn, which is quite literally "Head of the Road Yellow". It reminded us
of "The Wizard of Oz" with the song and tale of following the Yellow Brick
Road, for there are certain to be those who will mock our attempt to locate
"Camelot". Further over behind the All Saints Church in Rhiwbina is a field
named Cae Meich – the Field of the War Horses – so it may be that we even
know where the Glamorgan and Gwent kings grazed their War horses, odd is it
not?
The new M4 motorway bypass around the North of Cardiff runs just south of the
Caer-Melyn site and cuts through the general surrounding area. It is, however, in
a cutting and at a lower level and does nothing to alter the view and atmosphere
of the place. The Reverend Dowse reports that there have been reports of
masonry found on the Yellow Wells Farm and on the Church Farm, but no
serious investigation was ever undertaken. Similar remains of what appeared to
be three pillars were found when a council estate was built in the early 1950s at
Llanishen, but the occupant of the house rooted them out and never reported it –
he did not want to be bothered by officials. We finish up with a Hill Fortress at
Caerleon, half a mile north of the Roman site, correctly placed in Celtic sixth
century strategy, a site called Gelly-Weg the main army camp identified by Rees
in 1834 A.D., and Caer-Melyn fort site as Camelot close to the two courts of the
law in Siluria. The whole area is the one dominated by King Arthwyr ap Meurig
ap Tewdrig, also known as Arthur Machen, and Arthur Penuchel – the ancient
name of Glamorgan. The Army camp of Gelly-Wig or Weg is said to be in
Cerniw and we can prove part of the area to have been known as Cerniw, so the
old records are correct. Some sites we have watched being destroyed by
development, but there was nothing we could do about it.
Camelot was no great city with walls and battlements; it was simply one of the
main Manor House Courts of the Glamorgan kings. Being close to the Law
Courts where the councils of the Rhaiths were called, it was the obvious
gathering place for the kings of the area, and if Cybwr means what we think it
means, then it means a place where equals dined together at the table. We have
all the necessary bits and pieces of the core of the Arthurian Stories, which
evolved in the Dark Ages and were carried out into Europe by the Normans. In
fact, the tales of Arthur were probably well known in Europe before the
Normans entered Britain, for several Welsh kings and presumably many of their
followers, attendants, and priests, are recorded as visiting Rome.
Finally, there is obviously some possibility that there is something at Machen,
for the Caer-Melyn we describe stands at the end of the Cefn On ridge and there
is a road over from the uplands north of the Cardiff plain leading to Machen,
only two miles off to the north. There is a "Roman settlement" site there.
Whether it is actually Roman, and which Arthur was called Arthur Machen is
not certain. The field in which the Yellow Fort stands has always been known as
Castle Field, and there is somewhere in the area a mysterious Cybwr Castle
mentioned several times in mediaeval manuscripts, but never identified in
modern times. So if Cybwr is the Round Table Castle and it is our Yellow Fort,
which seems likely, all the evidence points to Cybwr being Caer Melyn and so
Camelot.
The indications are that there are a number of place names in and around the
Lisvane and Llanishen area that are derived from or associated with colours.
This gives some further indication that the Norman-French name "Camelot" is in
fact Caer-Melyn, or Yellow Fort. The present Church Farm was formerly
Bethllwyd meaning the Grey Hedge, and Llanishen was Caer Llwyd, the Grey
Field, and there is Pant Glas – the Blue Hollow. There is Y Scibor Wen, which is
a farm, which means the White Barn, which is near Ty- Coch, the Red House, a
farm now built over with houses. There was also the Ty-Glas, another farm
which means the Blue House, and this is worth mentioning as it was a perfectly
sound, good solid house dating from at least 1520 A.D. when the Cardiff City
Council demolished it in 1960 to build modern council houses. It was in fact still
occupied by a Mr. Wride. It is incredible that this could happen when even in
1980-81, one town council spent £50,000 trying to restore a farmhouse of
slightly older period. As the Reverend Dowse says, "The house was in excellent
condition and its destruction is one of those local government crimes that it is
very difficult to forgive". He is wrong; it is unforgivable. However, we then have
Ty-Gwyrdd the Green House, south of Llanishen where Gwern Rhyddu Road is
built. So it would not be at all unusual to find a Yellow Fort in such an area. We
even have Pen-waun Lwyd or the Head of the Brown (or Grey) Meadow, and of
course Penyrheolfelin – the Head of the Yellow Road.
There is also Mill Road, Heol Melin, near the Castle Field and also Nant Felin,
the Mill Brook. Whether or not these Melins are late corruptions of Melyns is
not known. In fact the presence of a mill increases the importance of the area, for
mills were commonly the sole property of the kings and bishops. Either way the
whole point of the exercise is to drag "Camelot" out of the realm of the Fairy
Tales and into reality. This, as we demonstrate, is a feasible project.
Over the years the historians have created a scholastic muddle of Arthurian
history. They mistook Cerniw in Gwent and Glamorgan for Cornwall. They
mistook the Roman Legionary fort, on the flat riverbank of the Usk, for the Hill
Fort Court of King Arthur a half a mile to the north on another bend of the Usk.
And then they thought that "Camelot", which is in fact Caer-Melyn, the Yellow
Fort, was a fiction. A simple map drawn to show the defensive systems flung out
around the main courts of the king explodes this muddle. The peculiar thing is
that none of these people (paid good money to do these things) ever thought to
draw a simple map.
THE CLUE IN THE LAWS
Any study, no matter how cursory, of the Welsh Laws, will show that they are
extremely well constructed and advanced in their composition. There is a very
careful distinction made between the sovereign power and the executive
authority, and the legislative authority. They make sure that there is a very
cautionary limitation on magisterial discrimination, and discretion. There is an
exact delineation of the rights of the governors and the governed, the husband
and the wife, parent and child, master and servant. Enlightened provision is
made for upholding the Arts and Sciences, and generous care is made for the
needs of ministers of religion. In fact esteem and privileges are awarded to men
of science. There is an obvious acquaintance with political forces, and a concern
for the interests of commerce. There is accurate definition of both crimes and
punishments, and just provision for the due punishment for offences.
It should be no surprise, therefore, that as these Laws of 942-943 A.D. are
revisions of the earlier revisions of circa 450 B.C. by King Dyfnwal that there
would be a military court, and a civil or executive court with its branches of
legislature, council, judicial criminal proceedings, and so on. The military court
was the Court at Caerleon, surrounded by the ring of outpost forts of Goldcliffe,
at Wilcrick, at Kemeys at Cae Camp, at Llanfrechfa at Castell-y-bwch at
Twmbarlwm, at Rhiwderin, at MaesArthur, at Gaern and so back to Goldcliff.
The administrative centre is similarly surrounded by a ring of fortresses also set
in a great circle. The Court of Caer Melyn, "Camelot", the Yellow Fort, is
surrounded by first Cardiff Castle, and then going anti-clockwise, Penylan Fort,
then one at Cae Castell, at Penylan-Cerniw, at Maes Arthur, at Rhiwderin, at
Twmbarlwm, at Mynydd Machen, at Cefn Carnau, at Caer, at Arthurs Buttresses,
at Caerwigau, at Caer Trehil, at Caerau Ely, and so back to Cardiff. Both the
Caerleon Court and the Caermelyn Court are at the centre of the great rings of
outpost forts as we show in diagrams and maps, and the Cardiff area court of
Caermelyn is close to the Llys-Courts, of the Rhaith – the Laws – and other
courts at Llys-maen or van, and Llystalybont. It makes sense given the
organization of the laws of the country, with King Arthur ruling as senior king in
Glamorgan and Gwent.
THE LATER EVIDENCE CONCERNING CYBBWR
Anticipating that there may be the usual wave of scepticism over what we say
about Cybbwr (spell it Cibbwr, or Kibbuor, or Kibbor, or Klbwortn, or whatever,
it is the same place) and its identification as Camelot, we referred to Rice
Merrick (Rhys Meurig) writing in 1578 A.D. and John Leland of around 1534
A.D. Both writers referred to the "Hundred" or Commote of the area of Kybor or
Kibworth, and accurately identified it as lying between the River Taff to the west
and the River Rumney to the east, and bounded by the Cefn-On ridge to the
north. What is extraordinary is that Merrick recorded that even after the arrival
of the Normans in the area, special privileges belonging to those living in
Cybbwr were preserved, allowing for the statutory presence in Courts of all
freemen of the Area. This in itself is peculiar.
Rice Merrick further states that the "Hundred" area in which the shire town of
Cardiff lies was formerly called the "Hundred" of Kybor, indicating clearly that
Kybor was the chief place of the area, and not Cardiff itself, which had existed in
one form or another as a settlement around the Roman site since around 76 AD
Most of this Hundred in the old time was called Kybor, which was endued with
liberties and privileges above the rest as before I have remembered, and
therefore termed in Welsh, ‘Comod Bryniol’.
Commote of Bryniol is itself a problem with some translating it as Breninol,
which means royal, or the king's Commote, and others thinking Breiniol means
privileged.
John Leland also notes the peculiarity, stating, "If Cardiff be not a Commote in it
self, it seemith to be in Kibworth". There can be little doubt that the chief place
in the whole area was this now almost-vanished castle or fort on the spur of the
Cefn-On ridge known as the castle of Cybbwr.
For reasons best known to himself Robert Fitzhammon, who dispossessed lestyn
ap Gwrgan as the ruler of Glamorgan in 1091 A.D., allowed privileges to
continue in this one area, and no-one seems to know why.
On the south side of this Cefn-On hill, and not impossibly at Cybbwr, was born
Richard Williams, the ancestor of Oliver Williams, misnamed as Oliver
Cromwell in the History books, the Lord Protector of England. Actually old
Oliver Williams (Cromwell) knew that he was descended from kings of Powys,
and he appears also to be descended of the Glamorgan kings from his coat of
arms, and it is quite hilarious that a descendant of Arthwyr ap Meurig actually
ruled over England and Wales from 1649 to 1660 A.D. Why he did not take the
crown is a mystery as he had by these definitions a better claim to it than the
others. Needless to say he was a far superior man to the lecherous Stewart kings.
The Williams family supported Henry Tudor in his conquest of England, and
some of the sons moved to England to enjoy the rewards that the conqueror gave
to his followers. The name Cromwell was adapted from Thomas Cromwell the
minister of Henry VIII, when the families intermarried. Williams, however, was
the correct name and Cromwell an Alias.
Cibbwr is undoubtably the central fort of the linked system lying between the
Caerleon System and the Vale of Glamorgan Systems based on Pentremeurig. As
such it is a place of obvious importance.

THE WHEEL PATTERN OF DEFENCE SYSTEMS
The Welsh-British had an outstanding characteristic of refusing to change their
customs and lifestyles unless absolutely necessary. It is therefore no surprise that
their patterns of defensive strategy should remain basically the same when they
planned their fortresses.

We can see how Mynydd Dinas – Mountain of the City – the place of Brutus
legend, is sircled by a defensive fan system of hill forts flung out as a defence
screen around it. This is a defence system, which may well date to around 500
B.C. with the arrival of King Brutus. It is the prototype for the other South Wales
systems. The Mountain of the City is covered by a defensive screen, and so is
the whole of the dangerous 30 miles of sea cliffs of the Vale of Glamorgan. This
fort system has its hub at Pentremeurig – Head Town of Meurig – just as the
Mynydd Dinas is the hub of the forts of the Port Talbot System.

It should be no surprise to find that the Caerleon Fortress Court is the hub of a
complete circle system of hill forts, and the Caermelyn Fort Court is the hub of a
similar system east of the Caerleon System. The pattern is consistent with circles
and arcs of out forts set around the central fortresses and courts of the kings.
The systems are clear and well defined, and they tell a great deal about the times
of the Arthurian kings; the mistake has been to see them in simple isolation.
When we are considering these intricate fortress networks that stretch clear
across the whole of South East Wales, it is relevant to look at what the
Glamorgan Bards were writing many years ago. Around 1780 A.D., Edward
Williams was translating and recording from the 1560 A.D. Manuscripts of
Llewellyn Sion, and the vital thing to remember is that neither our old Llewellyn
Sion of around 1480-1560 A.D. nor Edward Williams of around 1740 tocirca
1810 A.D. had any access to modern Ordnance Survey maps as we do today.
There is no possible way that they could have known and demonstrated how
these fortress systems worked, and they make no listing or description of them.
Yet they do say that these systems of linked signalling and communications
stations designed to give early warning against an attack of the kingdom were in
existence. Even more they say that these systems were set up and planned and
activated by none other than King Arthur himself.
Edward Williams was one of the few South Wales bards who in fact failed to
correctly identify King Arthur. He failed because he confused Morgan ap Adras
ap Morgan ap Gwrgan Mawr with King Morgan ap Arthur ap Meurig ap
Tewdrig. Actually both King Arthur ap Meurig and Adras ap Morgan were
grandsons of Gwrgan Mawr, for Arthur's mother Queen Onbrawst was the
daughter of Gwrgan Mawr. Possibly Morgan ap Adras was a bishop and as such
he would be the bishop of Margam confused with King Morgan.
However, the main point is that Edward Williams recorded that King Arthur set
up fort systems of early warning signalling for defence purposes. This is correct,
for we can trace them even today. None of the old hill forts are situated simply
because there was a convenient hill available to the local community. They are
where they are, because of the huge system that stretches for over 60 miles along
the coast of South East Wales, and extends for many miles deep inland to the
mountains.
Edward Williams says that Llewellyn Sion recorded in 1560 A.D. that "Adras
son of Meurig was a very heroic sovereign who frequently put the Saxons to
flight, killing and destroying them. He enacted many laws and ordinances for
civil and ecclesiastic government, and was the first who instituted a class of
equestrians for the maintenance of correct comportment in war and due
discipline in arms. And also to guard the country, and to watch carefully its
enemies, and to establish an efficient system of communication against
hostilities and legislature".
Although he is clearly describing King Arthur organizing his knights –
equestrians a system of hill fort and coastal defences – for some inexplicable
reason Edward Williams did not identify King Adras ap Meurig as King Arthur.
He was probably simply quietly avoiding mindless scholastic derision and
scepticism. Even in 1982, when one of the locations of one of the coastal forts
established by King Arthur was sold on Sully Island, it was amazingly described
in the London dominated press as a "Viking" fort. When within weeks the
ancient castle of the Glamorgan kings in the woods at Dinas Powys was sold for
£3,000, this was again described as a "Norman" castle – for God's sake, the place
was abandoned in 1091 A.D. when the Normans first penetrated South Wales,
when King lestyn ap Gwrgan left it. The place is pre-Norman.
The fortress system devised by King Arthur stands as mute and powerful
evidence of his own genius and capacity. The systems are made up of linked
circles of hill forts, each circle having a central base fort or court at its centre.
The West Gwent system is centred around the hill fortress on Lodge Hill above
the Usk, and half a mile north of the Roman Legionary ruin down on the
riverbanks. This is one of the best known of all King Arthur's courts, constantly
spoken of in the Mabinogion, the Triads and the Romances. To the west of this
system of forts lies the East Glamorgan circle of hill fortresses, which uses some
of the western forts of the Caerleon Gwent system in common. Again, this
widespread system of linked hill bases, each visible to its neighbours, has a
central court as a focal point. This time it is the fort court at Cibbwr or Caer
Melyn, which we explain elsewhere is the "Mutual together table" or Yellow
Fort, with Caer Melyn becoming Camelot.
The next system lying to the West of the Camelot system is the Vale of
Glamorgan system, and this is a huge interlinked fort system, which lines the
cliffs of the Glamorgan coast from Cardiff to Ogmore over 20 miles west, and on
another 15 miles to Neath, before running up along the river and down to Cardiff
again. The whole system is again centred on a court situated centrally to the
entire system at Pentremeurig – The Head Town of Meurig – the King Meurig
was of course King Arthur's father. So once again the whole defence system not
only makes geographical sense, but it also has a correct central headquarters
with a correct meaningful name. As was common in South Wales, King Arthur
and his father, King Meurig, ruled at the same time. There was no nonsense
about waiting for the old king to die.
Other fort systems link onto these three major coastal systems, and the most
curious of all these arrangements is in the Aberavon – Port Talbot area – where
the fort system is quite differently orientated. Whereas the main Arthurian
systems are based inland with outer shoreline defences, this small system, based
on Mynedd Dinas, has a shoreline base and other outer forts spread inland in the
form of a semi-circle beachhead. In other words it appears that this system was
one of a people coming ashore and defending themselves from inland attacks,
whilst all the other systems are those of a settled nation based inland and then
defending itself outwardly along the shores against invasion. This is partly the
reason why we place this area as being the invasion point where King Brutus
landed around 500 B.C. with his 6,000 warriors and their families. This is the
point where the British nation first set foot on their new homelands. We can't
prove this yet, certainly we don't have birth, death, marriage and other
certificates or land deeds and passports for Brutus and his people, the so dearly
loved and so-called evidence of conventional historians – particularly those on
the eastern side of Offa's Dyke. The names and the situation fit the story and the
tradition, and so far every time that it is possible to get some evidence, it has
proved to be positive and has substantiated the traditional histories and folklore.
How old these fort-signalling systems are is hard to say. King Arthur may have
built them, or he may have simply reactivated them. It is not impossible that they
were in use in the period 600 B.C., and the systems could have been used in
Roman times when successive Silures kings flung back the Romans. This would
explain why the funeral mound of the mighty Baram is at the top of Twyn
Barlwm, one of the highest and most important forts of the Caerleon system in
Gwent. King Baram, successor to Ceri ap Caid, would have used this defensive
early warning system. In the same way as Baram was buried on the mountain top
overlooking all eastern Gwent and the direction from which Roman attacks
would come, so also King Ceri, who built fleets, was buried in a boat shaped
grave on the sea shore cliff. Both serve as ghostly talismans and phantom
defenders of their fatherland.
We constantly have to come back to the fact that Edward Williams recorded that
King Arthur set up these systems in South Wales, around 1770 A.D. The systems
are there, and there is no way that Edward Williams could have known that
physically, when he recorded two centuries ago. So the much-derided Bard is
correct, and the fort systems provide massive evidence of his truthfulness.
As for Brutus around 500 B.C., we deal with this in detail in our next volume.
What is undeniable is that all the evidence points to King Brutus landing on
Aberavon Beach around 500 B.C.
THE DEFENSIVE SYSTEM ALONG THE NORTHERN BOARDERS OF
MORGANWG
We have so far described the defensive systems erected and reactivated by King
Arthur along the coasts of Gwent and eastern and mid-Glamorgan. There
systems of defensive signal hill forts continue on along around the Swansea area
in the west of Glamorgan. The system is not, however, purely coastal or centred
around the Vale of Glamorgan, for it does in fact encircle the entire kingdom of
Morganwg. These hill forts, each of which is visible to its neighbours, run up
along the Eastern borders along the Wye Valley, and continue around the old
Ewyas and Ergyng areas – western Hereford. The system follows the river
valleys stretching westward across the northern borders of Gwent and
Glamorgan, and enclosing much of what is now Brecon and wrongly identified
as part of Powys.
The lines of the rivers Usk, Monnow, Bran, Honddu, Tyvi, and others are used as
frontiers and lines of sight. The result is the most marvellous system of linked
hill forts, each visible to at least two of its neighbours on either side. The lines of
sight between the forts span across lower hills and marshes, or straight down the
cuts of valleys. In some cases, the Romans used the same locations, and later the
Normans did the same. Yet, the old pattern can be clearly traced and identified.
The total distances spanned between this immense ring of hill forts, which
completely surround the land of the Silures in Morganwg, is about 200 miles,
and the whole system reveals an immense feat of military engineering.
These forts or hill encampments were not castles in the Norman stone castle
sense. They are an early warning defensive system to alert and alarm the whole
nation from the Wye to Carmarthen, and from the seashores to the mountains 50
miles inland. Signal fires or a system of mirrors would allow an alarm to be
flashed around the whole system in an incredibly short space of time. The
pallisade fences of the hill forts would serve as the horse and pony corrals of the
guards at each point, and as places where farm animals and people could be
gathered in times of danger. The soldiers of Morganwg could not sit behind
defensive fences and watch their country destroyed, and so they would gather
and be ready to meet the invaders.
Just as the coastal defensive circle systems are based on Caerleon Llys, on Caer-
Melyn, and Pentremeurig, so also there is a clearly defined control fortress on
the northern borders of the kingdom. This is the remarkably obvious Pendeyrn.
Pen, in this case, means "head place of", and Deyrn is Teyrn mutated when
linked to Pen; Teyrn means "monarch". So we have the "Head place of the
‘Monarch’" to the north of Hirwaun and Merthyr Tydfil. There can be little
doubt that this headquarters of the Northern system made use of the Roman
roads, which run up from the coast in the South, and from the old Roman fort at
Caelbren to the west of Pendeyrn on up to Brecon. Another Roman road runs
west out of Brecon to Landovery, following the line of the River Usk, and then
that of the River Gwydderis. To the north east of Brecon the fortress system
stretches up past Crockadarn and on to Lyswen – the White Court – and to Three
Cocks before encircling Hay-on-Wye. From Hay-on-Wye the line of the forts
continues down the Golden Valley along the River Dore to Pontrilas, and then it
follows the River Monnow. Here another circle system surrounds Abergavenny
the Roman Gorbannuim, and stretches east to Digestow.
The placing of these linked forts, each visible to its neighbours, shows a
remarkable grasp of geography. The military mind, which is recorded as having
constructed the systems of hill fort defence and of signalling by the Glamorgan
and Gwent Bards, is the mind of King Arthur son of Meurig and grandson of
Tewdrig. The great king literally turned his kingdom of Morganwg into one giant
fortress, and the remains of the hill forts are still there to prove the bards correct.
The defence system is in fact a monumental proof of the location of King Arthur
as king of Morganwg.
The Mabinogion Tale called "Geraint and Enid" actually mentions this system in
an oblique way when Madoc Twrgadarn arrives at the court of King Arthur.
Madoc is stationed at Twr-Gadarn – the Strong Tower in the Forest of Dean.
This is on King Arthur's eastern borders. In the same way, the Life of St. Illtyd
tells how Illtyd came as a young soldier to the court of the great King Arthur
where he saw large numbers of soldiers. He served Poulentius, who is Pawl, the
brother of Arthur, and was assigned to guard duties on the coastal system, being
stationed at the mouth of the Thaw River. This is where the Aberthaw power
station now stands. Illtyd had a dream, and as a result, he gave up the military
life of a knight and entered the church. The main point is that his life tells of
King Arthur's defence systems. The whole system is staggering in its concept
and execution, and even today it could be made to work.
Later kings used it and defended it and as late as the tenth century they opposed
land grabbing by the Dyfed Princes along the northern frontiers. Crickhowell
takes its name from the Stones of Howell the Glamorgan king of this era.
The linked fortress systems, which surround the entire kingdom of Morganwg,
and also encircle integral parts of it, indicate more than a complex defensive
system. The Morganwg kingdom was ruled at the top by a paramount king, who
was the Teyrn or Monarch. Under him was a system of lesser kings who ruled
parts of Morganwg, and these lesser kings were in fact more probably Dukes,
Earls, Counts, and Barons. It appears that these lesser kingdoms conform to the
areas encircled by the individual fortress circles, and that these under kings held
military appointments responsible for the various encircled areas.

Teyrn Monarch Paramount king, of all the Isle of Britain
Brenin (king) King Glamorgan, Gwent Brecon, Tawe Area
Brenin (king) Duke Cerniw, Gower, Ewyas, Ergyng
Brenin (king) Earl Ruler of small areas, Cibwr, Senghenydd
Brenin (king) Baron In charge of a fort

The area of Ewyas is very clearly enclosed by a circle of hill forts which run
along the northwestern border along the valley of the Wye River from Llyswen –
The White Court – to Hay-on-Wye, and then across to Newton below
Middlewood and down the northeast frontier of Golden Valley and the River
Dore to Ewyas Harold. The Southern frontier runs in a great curve from Ewyas
Harold and Rowlstone, to Crickhowell in the west and on to Wenallt Isaf at
Talybont. The western frontier of the Vale of Ewyas is linked from Talybont up
through Llanfilo to Llyswen. In this way the whole area is encircled, with the
Western and Southern forts forming part of the frontiers of linked areas.
The three linked areas of Lower Gwent centred on Llys Caerleon, Cerniw based
on Caermelyn (or Camelot), and Glamorgan based on Pentremeurig are very
clearly shown on the maps as we exhibit them. By identifying the military
districts and defensive areas we identify the areas under the command of the
lesser kings. Upper and Lower Gwent, or Gwent Uchcoed and Gwent Iscoed, the
area of the Nether Gwent, Glamorgan and all the others are to be traced in a clear
pattern following the areas encircled by fortress rings. The notion that local
inhabitants simply picked a suitable hill and fortified it needs to be overthrown.
It is an insult to the capability, the culture, the achievement and the basic
intelligence and skill of our ancestors.
The tracing of the massive defensive strategy of the kingdom of Morganwg
shows very clearly that this was a special area. It was the place of a different
race, a people of high culture and organization, whose own legend tells clearly
and precisely that they were Trojans from ancient Troy. As such, they are the
descendants of the Hittites and the inheritors of a long and great culture.
Certainly they bear no resemblance to the strange picture drawn by Julius Caesar
of woad-covered naked warriors. The shoreline dykes and the quite amazing
linked hill forts system tell their own story, and exhibit the reality and greatness
of King Arthur of Morganwg.
This was once a magic land where armoured knights did actually ride out to do
the bidding of the king. Where there were and are White Castles, and White
Courts, and Red and Grey and Black Castles and Forts. As the central fortress
kingdom of the British kings it was the citadel of the British, and whoever held it
held Britain. The size and scale of some of the hill forts are breathtaking, and
amongst the most spectacular is the Caer of King Baram ap Ceri ap Caid above
Risca, with its sheer slopes of almost 1,500 feet, and the magical cliff protected
Din Dryfran – Dun Raven – held by Bedwyr – Sir Bedivere – and not least, the
great fortress of Arthur himself at Caerau – Arthur's Buttress of Walls. This was
where Cuneda and his sons came from when they set out to liberate North and
Mid Wales – "Cuneda Wledig and his 900 horsemen", and presumably his
10,000 footsoldiers. This was where Emrys Wledig raised his Monument of the
Soldiers on Caer Caradoc – Mynydd y Gaer above Llanharran – and this was the
homeland of the mighty Arthur himself – the founder of Britain and defender of
the Celtic Church.
The very names of the forts and the stone monuments fit the truth of the
genealogies and story records. Immediately below the great fortress of Arthur's
Walls, the next link-fort which guards the upper reaches of the River Ely and
entry to the Vale of Glamorgan, is Caer Gwyndaf, and we know that Gwyndaf
Hen was the son of Emyr Lydaw, who is clearly Emrys Wledig or Ambrosius
Aurelianus, and so Gwyndaf Hen was a contemporary of King Arthur and his
father King Meurig. Up in Brecon, north of Pendeyrn – Head Place of the King –
is the stone of Dervacci, a son of lusius or Dewrath Wledig son of lestyn, a
descendant of King Euddav, and Dewrath Wledig was father of Rhufon Befr, the
cavalry general of King Arthur. Time and again the places, the pattern and the
names fit together.
There is a strange echo of the British-Welsh hill fort defensive system to be
found up in the North of Scotland. Around 550 A.D. the Picts sent for the son of
King Maelgwn of Gwynedd to be their king, and so Breddau went up and
became king of the Picts. He had his capital at Inverness, and around the centre
he set up a huge ring of signalling hill forts. These are remembered as the forts
of Breiddau and can still be traced out by simply using Ordnance Survey maps.
This same practice seems to have been adopted by whoever visited Florida in the
Dark Ages, and this is more likely to have been King Arthur around 555 A.D.
than Prince Madoc ap Owen Gwynedd around 1070 A.D.

The fact that all these hill forts scattered through Wales can be identified into
well planned strategic systems again throws new light upon the cultural and
organizational level of civilized development of the British of the pre-Christian
era and the Dark Ages up to known historical times. We are not examining a
people of scattered communities who simply chose convenient hills here and
there to build their earthbanked camps; instead, we are dealing with an organized
state whose leaders were well able to plan the defences of the nation on a huge
scale. The assumption that all hill forts are probably prehistoric, and not used
after Roman times has been completely disproved during the last 20 years and it
is quite clear that these fortress systems were in use during the Arthurian period.
These old British were not a crowd of defenseless, frightened Roman town
dwellers at all. There is no proof and no evidence for this long-held assumption.
In fact, Welsh record is that once the Roman "Raj" disappeared and their empire
was no more, the Roman traders left Britain and went back to their own country,
and the towns were abandoned. The vast mass of the British people, certainly
those in Wales, lived outside these Roman centres under their own kings,
following their own customs.
In dealing with this subject of continuity and lifestyles, we have an extraordinary
set of circumstances. The various ancient sources give us some idea of the shape
and style of the courts and manors and hunting lodges of King Arthur and his
comtemporary kings. There old manor halls, large farmhouse type courts with
the chieftain's hall, are again in evidence in the Laws of Howell Dda, who ruled
West Wales from 900 to 948 A.D., and so nothing had changed. Then as late as
the time of Henry VII, Henry VIII, and Elizabeth I, the Welsh nobility, who had
helped to put the Tudors on the English throne, were still living in and still
building these same style manor halls. They dined in the hall and their retainers
sat at long tables, and they supported the Bards. Fortunately, several of these
manor halls of the Tudor period still survive, many of them in excellent
condition, and what we have in effect are surviving examples of just how these
Arthurian kings and princes lived. Even the halls built around 1520-1570 A.D.
were still built in the same old traditional style. The later halls were built in stone
whereas many of the Dark Age structures were in timber, but the style and
concept were the same. It is still possible to visit these places today to get a good
impression of what it was like.
Two halls built by Welshmen who were rewarded by Henry VII for helping to
defeat the English King Richard III at Bosworth Field in 1485 A.D. still stand in
excellent condition up in North Wales. These are still well maintained today and
exhibit the type of hall traditional in ancient Wales.
The old Tudor hall at Tredegar House near Newport, Gwent, still remains quite
perfect, and it would have been here that our old friend Daffydd Benwyn would
have acted as Bard to the owner William Morgan. Here, as according to ancient
custom, the local clan chief sat at the head of the long table with his friends and
retainers. It survived as a hall, simply because, when the house was enlarged, it
became the servants hall. Another house mentioned by Daffydd Benwyn is the
nearby Plas Machen, the home of Towland Morgan, which was also built in the
early Tudor period. This house has a magnificent window set in the hall,
possibly taken from a despoiled abbey or monastery, and marvellously painted
rafters carrying the ceiling. Another dwelling was that of William Morgan at
Llantarnam Abbey. Edmund Morgan lived at Bedwellty, and the Herberts –
William lived at St. Julians, Newport, now very much altered, and George lived
at the Murringer House still standing in the main street of the town of Newport.
The Hall at Tredegar House, being built in the style of the time of King Morgan
Mawr 900-1000 A.D. and the style of Morgans seeming to accurately reflect the
Arthurian period, gives us some chance to envisage quite closely what the
lifestyle was like on the noble manors scattered around the various estates of the
kingdom in Arthur's time. These Morgans were the inheritors of the long line
descended from the ruling princes of Caerleon, their pedigrees being well known
and easily traced. Some idea of the clan system in South Wales can be gained
from the story of Edmund Mathew, the sheriff of Glamorgan, accused of using
the office for self enrichment, backed up by force and rioting. Sir William
Herbert and Edward Lewis raised their followers and overawed Edmund
Mathew at Cardiff with 400 men in county armour, where they assaulted the
town jail and released John Herbert. All this is in the time of Henry VIII, and
well recorded in the subsequent dealings in the king's star chamber court. The
allegation by old Edmund Mathew was that Glamorgan abounded in the
subversion of justice. Later, in the reign of James I, the king issued a warrant
against Edmund Mathew, who had no hesitation in summoning more than 100 of
his armed followers to defend his house at Radyr. This resistance of a chancery
decree resulted in the king's officers going back to London with their tails
between their legs. In 1545 there was a rising of the clans of the Morgans and the
Herberts, which also ended in a Star Chamber Court hearing. It started when the
wild, young William Herbert quarrelled with one of the young Morgans, over a
dog. This incredible piece of trivia erupted when William Herbert drew his knife
and stabbed Morgan, and a full scale clan riot boiled over on this Sunday
morning in Newport. William Herbert fled out of town and took refuge in
Llantarnam Abbey, and the general rising of the two clans was only reduced to
calm with great effort. There appears to have been no hesitation whatsoever to
taking arms to defend their rights by these Tudor period clansmen. However, the
point is that enough remains from these periods when customs had not changed
down the long centuries for us to see an echo of what lifestyle was like in
Arthur's Manor courts.
The placing of rings of hill forts around the central Courts of Caerleon and
Caermelyn is of course quite obvious when pointed out, as is the great 30-mile
arc of coastal forms around the hub of Pentremeurig in the Vale of Glamorgan.
This is exactly the same strategy as used by the Normans, particularly in Ireland,
some centuries later. The castle at Shannon is a particularly good example, with
the central Castle being surrounded by a ring of strong outpost towers set out to
encircle it. These ruins are in quite good condition, even today, and the defensive
strategy is clear.
The position of the castle, which we have identified as Caermelyn or the Yellow
Fort, transcribed into Camelot by the Normans, clearly indicates its importance,
as it is central to the entire defence system of the Cardiff area.
There are many mediaeval references to a castle named Cybwr as we have said,
and owners of this castle are named; yet, no one is able to say where it is or was.
It is spelled as Cybor, Kibour, Kybbor, and a dozen other ways, and is well
recorded by name but not location. Godfrey Clark in his "Genealogies of
Morgan and Glamorgan" believes it to be the home of Rhun ap Griffth Ychan ap
Grono ap Llewarch, and Rhun's daughter Crisly married Sir Griffith Gethyn. Out
of this marriage came Matthew, who founded the Matthews family of Llandaff.
Mr. Clark believed the Castle of Cibbwr to be situated between Draethen
Penygraig and Cefn On, which fits the location of this Caermelyn, which we
identify. This is in fact the area of the Commote of Cibbor, and this castle field
site is on the edge of the eastern fringe of the Commote. It is important, as the
location of the previously legendary Camelot is an important piece of our
history. In the Cefn Mably records – Cefn Mably is less than a mile east of the
site, it is said that John ap Henry Kemeys of Baglan married Janet, the daughter
of Rhys ap Sisyllt (Cecil), the Lord of Kibbor. John is dated around 1374-1392
A.D. As this Rhys ap Sisyllt does not appear in the lists of either Cardiff or
Senghenydd it seems that Cibbwr or Kibbor was his home, and the location of
the wedding at nearby Cefn Mably indicates this Castle site. The Cybwr,
variously spelled, appears time and again, and we believe that our interpretation
of Cy – mutual, and Bwr (dd) – table, meaning Round Table is the only possible
explanation. Add the yellow from the sulphur pits on Yellow Wells Farm, to get
Melyn, Caer-Melyn, and so Camelot and the strange privileges of the men of the
area in ancient times all makes sense.
There was a modern Parliamentary Division of the Hundred of Kibbor, not quite
the same area as the old Welsh Commote of Cybwr. The old Centre of Penuchel
included all the land between the Taff and Rhymney Rivers from the seashore to
the borders of Brecon. It spread over 125,000 acres, and contained three
Commotes. The northern Commote was Uwch Caiach, which was the area north
of Caiach Brook running through Llancaiach (now incongruously Nelson), and
over to Quakers Yard. South of this stream, down to the north slopes of Cefn On
Ridge was Is Caiach, and south of Cefn On Ridge to the seashore was the
Commote of Cybwr(dd), or as misspelled Cibbwr or Kibbor, and so on. There is
reference to Arthur Penuchel in the Brecon Manuscripts dealing with his cousin,
King Brychan, and his family, and this is the Penuchel Cantref and Daffydd
Benwyn calls him Arthur Machen – and Machen is in Is Caiach. In 1158 Ifor
Bach the Lord of Senghenydd took Cardiff Castle, and carted Earl William of
Gloucester and his wife and children off to Senghenydd, and kept them there
until every penny of the rents of the Cardiff Bewber area were paid to him as
these lands were his. This "Bewber" is identified as Cybwr, and the geography of
the area and conflict make it to be Cybwr set below the slopes of the Cefn On
Ridge. Land grants to the Augustine Monks at Bristol which enabled them to
found and then run their Abbey at Keynesham in Somerset, were made by
William, Earl of Gloucester in 1189 A.D., and by Gilbert de Clare around 1314
A.D., just before he got himself killed at Bannockburn. These grants were in the
Welsh Commote of Kibbor – another example of Welsh money building English
churches – however, a survey of the year 1903 A.D. identified these land grant
areas, and they lay just north and northeast of Cardiff. Much of what was the
Cardiff Heath, is bounded by Cefn Coed and Cyncoed on its eastern boundary.
So we know where Kibbor or Cybwr was. This was how several of the manors
of the area became associated with the name Keynesham, for example the old
Rhaith Court of Arthur's time became Roath-Keynesham and so on.
Whoever was Lord of Cybwr, needed a Court of Manor Castle, and logical place
is at the Castle Field site, which we identify as Camelot. This is also the most
likely location of the strange ancient wooden hall of the Mabinogion story of
"The Dream of Rhonabwy", which is inferred to be the hall of Arthur and his
men in this tale. There is no other identifiable site in the area at all, and the site
we have is central to dominate the entire hill fort defensive system of the area.
As far as we know, none of these important central Court sites have ever been
examined. At least three should relate directly to King Arthur – Caerleon,
Caermelyn, and Pentremeurig. The other outer defensive sites would also fit the
defence of the period, particularly as two of these fortresses are named for
Arthur. The first is the Maes Arthur Fort, just west of Newport, and the other is
the giant hill fort near Llantrisant, now Caerau – but in mediaeval times, it was
Arthur's Buttress. The pattern is clear, and the way should be open for properly
financed excavation and discovery.
By seeing the hill forts as part of a system and part of a well-constructed plan of
solid defence in depth, we can start to put the picture together. Most of all we
must not see these British ancestors as primitive and barbaric people, but rather
as educated, civilized, and cultured, as they were.
THE LOCATION OF CERNIW
There are elements of the ridiculous in the discovery of the identity and location
of King Arthur. Yet of all the misunderstandings, which have bedeviled the
search for King Arthur, none are so fundamental as the simple meaning of one
word. That word is Cerniw.
Cerniw appears many times in the old manuscripts, and like all ancient names, it
has many spellings. It is alternatively Cerniw, Cernyw, Kerniw, Kernyw,
Gernyw, and so on, but in the end, it is Cerniw. As we shall see it is a very
special word, for it is in Cerniw that the great war king of the British nation had
his main military camp. This was the camp fort at Gelly Weg, and here King
Arthur gathered his armies.
With an understandable simplicity, the mediaeval writers in England translated
the name Cerniw as Cornwall – for it looked something similar. So if Cerniw
was Cornwall, then Gelly Weg was in Cornwall, and King Arthur with his main
camp at Gelly Weg was safely into England, in Cornwall. All appears very neat
and tidy, but with one very big difficulty, for although every stone has been
turned and every bush searched, there is no Cerniw and definitely no Gelly Weg
in Cornwall. How this loss of Gelly Weg could occur seemed to bother no one.
This is strange, for the logic must be – find Cerniw, then you find Gelly Weg,
then having found this main army camp you are close to finding Arthur.
Finding Cerniw is in fact surprisingly easy, and the truth is that the academics
have all been totally inept when it comes to asking the right questions. By
following the mediaeval assumption that Cerniw was Cornwall, they failed to
ask the most important of all the necessary questions – Where is Cerniw? Well,
Cerniw is where it has always been in South East Wales; it is still marked on the
Ordnance Survey maps, lying along the border area of Gwent and Glamorgan.
This is precisely where we should expect to find the central power base of the
king of Glamorgan and Gwent, and King Arthur ap Meurig ap Tewdrig was this
king. It should be no surprise therefore to learn that as far back as 1834 A.D.
Rhys noted the location of Gelly Weg in Western Gwent, and did so in a
published work. That the king of the British-Welsh should have his main camp
in the centre of his territories should surprise no one.
There is in fact evidence all over the place, not least in the "Lives of the Saints."
There is St. Pedrauc, son (or descendant) of Clements, the Prince of Cerniw. We
only have one Clemens, and he is Magnus Clemens Maximus who became
Emperor of the West, and certainly his son Victor – Uther – was connnected with
Caerleon and Cardiff in this area. With this connection we have, King Euddav is
recorded as having personal lands in Ergyng and Euwas in the East Gwent/West
Hereford area, and also Cerniw. It is ridiculous to suggest that Euddav had land
in Cornwall when he rules Wales.
Next we have Kynvarwy, son of Awy, son of Llehenog Arglwydd (Lord) of
Kernwyw. His church is not in Cornwall; instead, it is where it should be, in
Gwent, at Llechgynvarwy. There is more, for the famed St. Gwladys is said to
mother of St. Cadoc and of Glywys Keirnyw. In fact, all the family members
were very firmly of South Wales, and in particular from Western Gwent/Eastern
Glamorgan, which is still Cerniw. St. Gwladys married to Gwynilliw, king of the
area, son of Glywys (also recorded as Glywys Cerniw), son of Tegid, son of
Cadell Deyrn Llug – king of Powys. Another saint who leads us to information
is Digain, son of Cystennhin Gorneu, for his church of Llangerniw is in Wales,
in Denbighshire and possibly also Gwent.
The muddled histories of Tyssillio and Gryffydd ap Arthur both give indications
of the true location of Cerniw, for they name several princes of Cerniw. It is well
established that Cuneda Wledig was the son of Eternus, so it is no surprise to
find Cuneda ap Einion in the histories. This Cuneda has a son named Rhiwallon,
and this fits the geneaologies, the poems, and all other sources. What is
interesting is the father of Cuneda is named as the tywyssog – Prince of Cerniw.
This link proves conclusively that Cerniw cannot be Cornwall. Amongst the
other princes of Cerniw named, there is Glydno larll (Count) of Cerniw who is
possibly correctly named as father of King Dyfnwal Moel Mud the great law
codifier of the British-Welsh. We find Dyfnwal Hen son of Hengwyn or
Ednyfed, the larll of Cerniw, in the genealogies of South Wales, and this
Dyfnwal certainly had a grandson name Gwyddno Garanhir. Certainly these are
South Wales families, although one reference in the "Lives of the Saints" states
that Dynfnwal Moelmud is of the family of Coel. The whole lot were in fact
hopelessly intermarried, and Moelmud may mean "going bald" and so may be
the same person as Dyfnwal Hen – the old. The main point is that their location
is definitely Wales.
It all comes back to the initial question of – where is Cerniw? The formula has to
be, find Cerniw, find Gelly Weg, find Arthur.
We have mentioned St. Cadoc who was probably the most celebrated of all the
Welsh Celtic saints, a Prince of Glamorgan and Gwent. His mother Gwladys was
buried at her chapel on Gelly Gaer Common, where her tombstone was found;
Cadoc and Gwladys being close relatives of King Arthur. Cadoc's grandfather
was Glywys Cerniw, who later seems to have given his name to this area of
Gwent/Glamorgan, and this is how the name got "lost". In addition to Pedrauc
son of Magnus Clemens Maximus, Prince of Cerniw, we have Mechyll, daughter
of Cynfarwy of Cerniw, who is St. Kynvarwy of Gwent with a church at
Llechgynvarwy. Now St. Mechyll is of interest for one "Life of the Saints"
identifies her as a descendant of Arthwys, who is our King Arthur of Gwent and
Glamorgan. The other prominent ancestor of Mechyll is old Dyfnwal Hen of
Cerniw the ancestor of Cynfarwy. St. Digain is in all probability St. Digad son of
King Brychan of Brecon, who was King Arthur's first cousin, so we get Digan of
Llangerniw.
It would not be too uncommon an occurrence for the name Cerniw to be altered
to Glywysswg (Glue-wuss-soog) after King Glywys. The area had to be named
something before the time of Glywys the grandfather of Cadoc, or Glywys, the
brother of St. Cadoc. The outcome is that the main military camp of King
Arthur, the king of Gwent and Glamorgan, is in the centre of that area. The main
feature which emerges is that the scope of the Arthurian stories were cast too
wide, for instead of three courts of Arthur at Caerteon in Gwent, Gelly Weg in
Cerniw in Cornwall, and at Penrhyn Rhionedd (Glasgow) in the North, we have
Caerleon in Gwent, Gelly Weg in Cerniw in Gwent, and probably Penrhyn in
Gwent. Instead of Penrhyn Rhionedd, we have Penryhn "Austin" of the Penrhyn
Penwedic mentioned in the old Traids as in Cerniw (Triad No. 101. M.A.). As
we can locate Arthurian sites in Glamorgan close to these in Gwent, including
"Camelot", we have a conventional picture of a sixth century Celtic king going
around his various manor courts in a fairly compact area. As Gelly Weg is in
Cerniw, and Cerniw is in Gwent, we propose to forget Cornwall once and for all
in relation to King Arthur. Where else would the main camp of the king of
Glamorgan and Gwent be other than in the centre of Glamorgan and Gwent.
No less important is the identification of King Dyfnwal Moelmud. This Dyfnwal
Hen or Dyfnwal Moelmud is said to be the son of the ruler of Cerniw in Gwent.
He is also said to be the grandson of King Lear, made famous by William
Shakespeare, and as we can show relationship between various rulers that place
King Dyfnwal at around 440 to 470 this is important. The same principles of
overstatement apply to Dyfnwal as to Arthur, for he is said to be king of Britain,
and this meant Wales. King Lear probably ruled the Leicestershire area and not
all of England.
Another entry states that Cuneda was son of Einion, Prince of Cerniw, and this
again is of considerable importance, for it gives the reason for Cuneda Wledig
and his sons being sent out to clear the Irish invaders from North and West
Wales. The seat of power of the British kings was in South East Wales, and
logically Cuneda would come from there, and not from some weird nowhere
land in the North of Britain. It shows Cuneda the British-Welsh Wledig-Legate
around 430 to 470 A.D., and his family as a cadet branch of the line of the
Silurian kings of South East Wales. Einion who is in the genealogies Etern(us),
is said to be married to Ragau, the daughter of King Lear-Llyr of Lloegres. As a
contemporary of this Einion is King Accanipys, the king of the Franks, who is
married to King Lear's youngest daughter, we can date matters at around 440 to
460 A.D. King Accanipys is clearly King Aegidius, the Prince of the Rhondda
Valley, who migrated to France around 440 with huge numbers of his people. He
ruled the area of the Seven Cities, and was for twelve years elected king of the
Franks as well. This is another genuine historical figure and again the
imagination boggles at the incredible muddled thinking of academics in their
dream towers when they herd like sheep to claim that Accanipys was Aetius, a
Roman Consul and General, and not the obvious King Aegidius. In fact Aetius
does not fit, but King Aegidius fits perfectly. Prince Einion, Cuneda Wledig, his
son, of Cerniw, and King Aegidius and King Lear all make sound sense and fit
chronologically.
However, there is also an Iarll Cattwr of Chattwr of Cerniw, who is remarkably
an ally and supporter of King Arthur. This poses the old problem of which
Arthur. Is it Arthur the half brother of Victor ap Magnus, or is it Arthur ap
Meurig ap Tewdrig? This Cattwr has a son named as Meurig and this may help
solve the problem. Cattwr is probably Cadwr or something close to that, possbily
Cador.
Then around the period 580 to 610 A.D. we get a Bledric Tywyssog Cerniw,
Bledric, Prince of Cerniw. This Bledric of Cerniw, meaning Gwent, is the ally of
King Morgan of Glamorgan, and of King Brochweal Ysgythrog (Buck Teeth) of
Powys and all three fight a well-recorded battle with King Ethelfrith of
Northumbria around 609 A.D., and win with great slaughter. It makes sense for
three princes whose territories border on each other to ally in this fashion, but it
is nonsense for a king of Powys, whose lands are divided from those of the king
of Glamorgan by Gwent, to ally with a prince from the remote confines of
unrelated Cornwall. The battle was after the Battle of Chester, which Ethelfrith
won against old Brochwael Ysgythrog alone, and where, incited by the Catholic
Church of Rome to attack the Celts, he killed 1,200 monks of the independent
Celtic Church. As the three territories of Powys, Cerniw (Gwent) and Glamorgan
border on each other this is the most likely form of alliance against the Angles.
Remarkably, whilst the English for centuries continued to attack and destroy in
Wales, the Welsh, with only one exception, never invaded England – there is a
moral in that somewhere.
It was the custom of Rome to record victories, but wherever possible to play
down or to simply not report defeats. The Victorian Imperialists of England
followed the same pattern and many still do today. They record the victory of
King Ethelfrith over Brochwael Ysgythrog, but totally ignore his subsequent
hammering by the combined King Morgan, King Brochwael and Prince
Blaedric-Bleddyn. The result of the repulse and defeat of Ethelfrith was
recognition of the Wise Cadfan of North Wales as titular head king of Britain
and the restriction of Ethelfrith to north of the Humber. However, this battle and
its circumstances does exhibit the location of Cerniw, and response of its prince
to a threat from Northern England. Cornwall just does not enter into this
situation.
BISHOP BEDWINI OF CERNIW
Mabinogion and traditional tales of King Arthur state that he was attended by a
bishop named Bedwini at his Gelly Weg camp in Cerniw. The Triads also carry
this tradition, but the problem is to trace the elusive Bedwini. All Celtic bishops
and Abbots of the Arthurian era were of the blood of the Royal Clans, and so in
normal circumstances old Bedwini should be traceable. Either he will turn up in
the genealogies, or he should be listed in amongst the saints; this is at least the
expectation. The surprise is that this bishop of Arthur's does not appear listed
anywhere, and this does not appear to be a result of his being first a soldier and
then later a clergyman under another name. Even St. Illtyd who came from
Amorica may simply be Alltud, meaning foreign origin.
Bedwini is interesting for he is said to be the Bishop of Cerniw, and we have
already had enough trouble locating Cerniw. Apart from all the other evidence
locating both the major kings Arthur, I and II, in Cerniw Gwent there is of
course the continuing identification of Cerniw in Gwent on modern government
Ordnance Survey maps. So now that we have got Kerniw and Coed Kerniw, it is
a further nuisance to have to locate the strangely elusive Bedwini. Study of the
Harleian 4181 manuscript and Vespasian A XIV B.M. gives us St. Berwin m
Brachen y Kernyw – St. Berwin son of King Brychan Brecheiniog in Cerniw,
this being later Latinised and construed as Cornwall. Berwin is also Berwyn, and
although a second cousin of Arthur, he may now be Bedwini.
So we have a problem, for saints not having any children are often only traceable
by their inclusion in the lists of the "Lives of the Saints". The geneaologies
concentrate on the descent of the kings and princes, with saints who are
noticeably thrown in almost as a series of afterthoughts or additions.
The answer must be that Bedwini was one of the several suffragen bishops of
Llandaff who were active in the area at the same time, and located at Cerniw in
Gwent. The maps help a little by locating places with religious name
connections, "head of the cross", "field of the cross", Penylan, "head of the
Church estate", and so on. We find the Carn Croes Einion, – "the cairn of the
cross of Einion" in the Cerniw area, and this may be Einion, the Iarll of Cerniw,
the father of Cuneda Wledig, named in genealogies and in the Brut of Tyssilio.
As stated earlier, W.J. Rhys identified Gelly Weg in Cerniw, Gwent, in 1834. On
the maps we find the valley villages of Bedwas and Machen to which we will
allude later, for there is no harm in speculating at this stage that Bedwas is a
derivation to Bedwini – in fact it is likely. The Bedwin Sands lie in the Severn
off the Gwent coast, as marked on OR maps today.
Next we decided to turn to the ancient poetry in the hope that we could turn up
some clue to Bedwini the bishop of Arthur. The relationship may well have been
similar to that of the fabled Robin Hood and his Friar Tuck. We were in fact able
to find something on Bedwini, a reference in a poem reputed to be of the period
around 600 A.D., written in the ancient short triplet Triadic style of the very
early Bards. The author is not known, and it may have been written by Golyddan
or Meigant. The poem’s content is a long list of these short epigramatic triplets,
each one concerning one of a great number of late fifth and sixth century kings,
princes, bishops, and Abbots of the Royal Clans of Britain. Almost all the names
are very well known and recorded, and one verse is descriptive of Bishop
Bedwini. Here we may have the answer to the mysterious Bishop of Arthur.
The poem is called Englynion y Klywit – Elegies – which should be heard, and it
appears on pages 127-130 of the Myvyrnion Archaiology. It names dozens of the
real-life kings, princes, bishops and Abbots of the period 450 to 600 A.D. and
significantly no person who died later that 630 at the latest is named. This
indicates the antiquity of the work, which states prominent people of the
Arthurian Sixth Century Britain. On the mysterious Bishop Bedwini, we find the
following lines:
A glweisti a gant Bedwini Oed escwab donyauc diffri Racreitha dy eir kyn noi
dodi.
This tells us that it was the circle of fate of Bishop Bedwini, his destiny, to rule
over a disorderly house, and to be flung out with nothing and not be allowed to
take anything with him. Here we have the explanation of the absence of church
or any other records of Bishop Bedwini; no one wanted to be associated. What
disorders he presided over we do not know, he and his monks may have been
drinking to excess, or being over-indulgent in matters of sex – no one knows.
Whatever the reason or cause, the outcome was the expulsion of Bedwini –
presumably by King Arthur. The result is a vanished bishopric in Cerniw in the
Aberystwyth Welsh border area between North Wales and South Wales.
We can trace one bishopric, which was dissolved in Arthur's time, and this is the
Bishopric of St. Padarn. Close to the site of Padarn's foundation is a mound ruin
called Llys Arthur, or the court of Arthur, and Padarn and Arthur had a famous
squabble over taxes, so this seems correct. Now tradition maintains that the
second bishop here was murdered by his monks, which was not uncommon or
unique in recorded annals. This fits the fate of Bishop Bedwini, and it seems that
the tale of Arthur stripping the coat from Padarn's back means that he flung him
out and then appointed Bedwini, who was then murdered by the monks. The
same thing happened to the Bishop of Llandaff, Rhodri ap King Morgan Hen,
who was poisoned by the monks in 961 A.D.
The purpose or real meaning of the title Iarll of Cerniw is obscure, and just
where Bedwini had his monastery we do not know. Hopefully someone will
come up with the solution. The last of the "true bards" was Daffydd Benwyn,
who served the Lords of the Morgan Clan ruling the area around 1540 to 1600
A.D. Significantly, he called King Arthur – Arthur Machen – and this focuses
attention onto the two villages lying along the valley between the West extremity
of Newport and Caerphilly. One is named Machen and the other Bedwas, and
they follow the Rumney River boundary between Glamorgan and Gwent.
Certainly, Daffydd Benwyn thought that Cerniw and Gelly Weg were in Wales as
late as 1540-1600 A.D. In fact, by examining other early mediaeval poems we
get exactly the same message over location. Early Middle Age poems often
named places in the extreme northwest of Wales and other places in the extreme
southeast to illustrate the length and breadth of Wales. One poem by Goronwy
Gyriawg written between 1310 and 1360 A.D. and dedicated to Bishop Madawg
of Bangor, exhibits such typical illustrations. It names Bangor in the northwest
and Gelly Weg in southeast. The same type illustration is used by Meurig ap
Iorwerth writing a poem to Hopcyn ap Thomas, also around the period 1320 to
1370 A.D. and again the poet uses Bangor and Gelly Weg. As Cornwall had
been very firmly in English hands and quite separate from other Celtic areas for
many centuries, these poets are obviously stating that Gelly Weg is in Wales, and
in South East Wales in particular.
The answer to the riddle of the Iarlls of Cerniw in South Wales appears to be that
they were the descendants of the line of Magnus Maximus, who were not kings.
This accounts for the prominence of members of this family in the period 750 to
1000 A.D., and mention of the death of some of them in the Annals. Their
importance lay in their imperial descent, and their close relationship to the
Glamorgan and Gwent kings.
The location of Cerniw or Cernyw is important to the correct understanding of
the kingdom of King Arthur. One thing is definite, and that is that Cerniw is not
Cornwall, and all the thousands of printed versions of King Arthur's real and
romantic stories are wrong when they bring Cornwall into the place of Cerniw.
Cerniw was the old name for the earldom of small kingdom, which was part of
the much larger kingdom of South Wales. It lay alongside old Penuchel – now
Glamorgan. Its sea outlet was at Newport on the mouth of the Usk, and River
Usk was its navigable water entry.
The Iarlls of Cerniw were the Lords of this area, which around 470 A.D.,
became known as the kingdom of Glywyswg, after one of the rulers, King
Glywys, and then it became known as the kingdom of Gwynllwg after King
Gwynlliw ap Glywys, a very common naming practice in old Wales. The
kingdom lay up from Newport along the side of the Bargoed Valley, and it
included the areas of Abertillery and Ebbw Vale, stretching across to Pontypool
and the town of Usk.
Cerniw appears as a major Cantref, and area held by a son or even a daughter of
the paramount king of Britain. Around 400-436 A.D., it was held, not by an Iarll,
but by a noble who ranked as a king. This was King Owen Vinddu, who was a
descendant of King Euddav through Helen the daughter of Euddav, and who was
son of Magnus Maximus, the king elect of Lleogres, who ruled from London,
and who was later Emperor of the West. So although of a very high rank this
King Owen held only his mother's share of the South Wales kingdom. This share
was Cerniw.
Next came Cadell Deyrnllwg, who was elevated to be king of Powys by
Garmon. He was not son of King Owen as far as can be seen. Then came King
Tegid ap Cadell Dyrnllwg, who may again have held the area through female
descent. He would have been at some time around 460-480 A.D. After Tegid
came his son, King Glywys, who was very significantly named Glywys Cerniw,
and after King Glywys Cerniw, who caused the area to be misnamed Glywyswg,
there came his son King Gwynlliw the Warrior – who had an argument near
Bedwellty with old King Brychan of Brecon, which was settled between them by
King Arthur. Again King Gwynlliw gave his name to this Cantref Earldom and it
was again misnamed Gwynllwg. Even today part of it is called Wentlloog. King
Gwynlliw was married to Gwladys, a daughter of King Brychan.
So if we seek these kings of Cerniw, we should logically expect to find them in
their own small kingdom, where they could found a church to be buried in or
alongside just as Egyptian Pharoah's founded pyramids. This turns out to be
correct. King Owen Vinddu has his great funeral mound alongside the church at
Llanhileth, as recorded by the Bards, King Gwynlliw was elevated to sainthood
with his wife, Gwladys. He lies at St. Wooloos Cathedral in Newport – Wooloos
is a corruption of Gwynlliw. Over on the west borders of the Earldom, the
tombstone of Queen Gwladys turned up at the site of her abbey foundation on
Gelligaer Common and the Gluvoca stone of Glywys at Aberdare.
The second or third King Tegid also turns up inside the small kingdom, for at
Bargoed just below Gelligaer Common in the valley, there is the stone of
Tegurnus, son of Martus, which is assessed as being fifth or sixth century. So we
have King Tegid safely buried in his own church and little kingdom.
In a land where there were no coins – literally no money – no one accumulated
wealth, and a king only needed enough land to support himself and his retinue
and household. It was that simple and straightforward. It was also a system that
worked, and the Welsh enjoyed their own unique moneyless states for centuries
until forced into the "Greed" system by the late advent of the Normans, and the
subsequent influx of English notions imposed upon them.
So when the Mabinogion Tales tell of the Iarll of Cerniw attending King Arthur,
they do in fact mean just that, the Earl of Cerniw in South Wales, nothing at all
to do with Cornwall. It is only by getting the locations of King Arthur and his
allied kingdoms right that we can get the story accurate. kings and queens were
able to give land to found churches in their own territories, and therefore, we can
confidently expect them to be buried in their own territories. Cerniw kings lie in
the Cerniw area, and Glamorgan kings lie in the Glamorgan area. The exceptions
are allied kings from the North of Britain or from Britanny, who are often found
in South Wales, Budic or Bodvoc, and Cynvarch Oer at St. Kinnemarks, and so
on.
Cerniw in South Wales somehow got confused into Cornwall, and all this played
a part in confusing the epic story of King Arthur and his people. Even the
grandfather and father of Cuneda Wledig were styled Iarlls of Cerniw. This
means that they were from South Wales and although no one ever suggests that
they came from Cornwall, they are then mysteriously said to have come from the
North – another example of the policy obscuring South Wales.
With King Owen Vinddu, a king of Cerniw, dying in 436 A.D., his claims were
taken up by Cuneda Wledig and his sons, descendants of Lords of Cerniw.
Cuneda Wledig would have moved to North Wales around 437 A.D. to clear out
the Irish settlers and other foreign immigrants. Here lie the seeds of the split in
Wales between North and South, with Cuneda's descendants descended from
Imperial Lloegres lines, and King Arthur's line descended from Silures kings.
The location of Cerniw is probably best illustrated by the simple fact that the last
of the Glamorgan kings – excluding Morgan ap Hywel ap lorwerth, who was
declared king of all Wales in 1294 A.D. – was Iestyn ap Gwrgan, and one of his
sons was named Godwyn of Cerniw. It would be utterly extraordinary, in fact
unbelievable, that a son of the king of South East Wales was the ruler of
Cornwall in 1090 A.D., and not ruling the small Earldom of Cerniw in Eastern
Glamorgan and Western Gwent.
We appreciate that this probably means revising or rewriting several history
books, but there is no avoiding the point. As for King Morgan ap Hywel of 1294
A.D., all five states of the Welsh nation rose against their oppressor, the English
King Edward I, and Morgan of Morganwg led Maelgwn of Ceredigion, Madog
of Gwynedd, Cynan of Brecon, and the Prince of Powys. The popular story tells
how the Welsh waited for the English king to set sail for France, and rose against
him too early when contrary winds delayed his fleet. The truth is that Morganau
Min, the Bishop of Bangor, turned traitor and informed. The last area in Wales to
be once again overrun by Edward I was Morganwg, and the ill-fated Morgan
was confined to Cardiff Castle, where he had apparently been proclaimed as king
of Wales, in 1300 A.D. It was after this in 1301 that Edward I came up with his
brainchild that only Englishmen should be allowed to be head of state in Wales,
and called his son the Prince of Wales. Significantly he did this in Gwynedd only
and not in the South, where there was another major war in 1315 A.D. This first
English prince was sixteen years old in 1301, and he was the second son of the
English king.
Glamorgan Manuscript evidence is in fact totally concentrated upon the history
of their kings being the history of South Wales in particular, and Wales in
general. It was the not unnatural error of mediaeval writers, which distorted the
history of South Wales into the history of Britain. Cerniw was a part of the South
Wales kingdom, and the battle between Cuneda Wledig and Morgan, grandsons
of King Llyr Lwyd through their mothers Rhagau and Gonorilla, was a war
between princes of the Welsh. It took place, according to several Glamorgan
records, at Eglwysunnydd in Glamorgan – the place of the Pompeius Car
Antorius – and it is from this Morgan that the area is said to have taken its name.
This same information was recorded by Rice Merrick (Rhys Meurig) in his
examination of ancient Glamorgan Manuscripts of 1578 A.D. What is now
Margam was then Morgan, and the Abbey was correctly Morgan's Abbey and
not corrupted to Margam Abbey. It seems that Morgan was in the area making
war, and Cuneda was appointed as the Wledig – Commanding General – actually
Legate – of the Army, to destroy him. Rice Merrick makes the point that Morgan
is the Welsh spelling and pronunciation, and Margam is the northern style. The
detail of what occurred is forgotten but the whole story and conflict seems to be
localised into Wales.
There can be no doubt that once the stories are localised into South Wales, then
they become logically understandable. There is the well-known Glamorgan tale
of Dafydd Ddu Gynllwynwr who, when 13 men came armed to kill him, pulled
the first one into the room in which he was defending himself and killed him.
Then he took the arms and armour of the man and proceeded to kill 11 more as
he let them force their way in one at a time. The last man fled, hotly pursued by
the intended victim. This story was simply lifted and grafted into the Arthurian
Romances as an exploit of Sir L'Ancelot. Then there is the record of the kings
who were great grandsons of King Arthur, which was again misused by
Gryffydd ap Arthur in 1135 A.D. as the story of Archgallo and Elidurus. It is the
story of Ffernwael and Rhys and Meurig. When Ffernwael went off to Rome for
three years, he simply failed to tell anyone that he was going, and so his brother,
Rhys, took over the control of his part of the kingdom. Then, just as suddenly as
he had gone, Ffernwael reappeared with a Roman wife, and his brother offered
him his lands back.
The story of King Maelgwn's election after the wounding of Arthur is
remarkably well authenticated in a linked notation. In a thirteenth century note
added to a manuscript copy of the Laws of Wales, referred to as those of Howell
Dda, the identity of Maeldav the Elder who presided over Maelgwn's election is
made clear. He is differentiated as being the Maeldav ap Ynhwch Unachen the
chief of Moel Esigidion in Merionydd, and Ynhwch lived at Caerynhwch near
Dolgellau, and Moel Esgididion is the hill overlooking the back of this place.
The note is deliberately stating that he was not Maeldav ap Manwyd of Pernardd
in Arvon, who lived at the time of King Iago ap Bell ap Rhun ap Maelgwn ap
Gwynedd. This Maeldav ap Manwyd descended from Ririd ap Raol ap Tegog ap
Einion Yrth ap Cuneda WIedig. The fact that it was necessary to differentiate so
closely between the two Maeldav's indicates the authenticity of the story, and the
detail with which records were kept.




PART THREE: THE WARS OF KING ARTHUR
The first and most overriding necessity is to differentiate between the wars and
campaigns of Arthur I, and of Victor, son of Magnus Maximus, and those of
Arthur II, son of Meurig son of Theoderic. The continental campaigns of Arthur
and Uther (Victor) are probably easier to follow and are better recorded. They
begin with the transportation of an immense army from Britain over into France
– the Gaul of the Romans. The army was jointly led by Magnus Maximus, now
an old man who had married Helen the daughter of King Euddav – Octavius of
Britain – with his sons, Marcellus and Victor, and his other son, Arthur, who
seems to have actually commanded the armies. With them went Conan
Meriadauc, the son of Euddav, and his brothers and sons. As Magnus Maximus
seems to have been the grandson of Trahairn, a cousin of King Euddav and a
brother-in-law or uncle of Constantine the Great, he clearly did not want to leave
Conan behind in Britain, and he compensated him, for Magnus, being king of
Britain, by giving Conan the kingdom of Britanny in Gaul.

The Welsh Triad variously number the army at 63,000 men or 20,000 men, and
clearly Magnus and his family needed a large force as they were attacking
Gratian the Emperor of Rome in the West and of Constantinople in the East.
There was a great battle to open the war and the British won it. It took place in
the Soissons region in 383 A.D. and the British remembered it as the Battle of
Sassy, when Gruffydd ap Arthur wrote about it in 1135 A.D. The Emperor
Gratian was defeated and fled to Lugdunum – Lyons – with 300 horsemen as a
guard. The victorious General Arthur went after him and caught him in the city
of Lyons. The Emperor surrendered and then Arthur set up a banquet and
promptly murdered Gratian, who was too dangerous to be left alive. Now, either
before the Sassy battle or shortly after it, the British laid seige to the city of
Paris, which seems to have resisted, and the resistance would have been led by
the Lady of Paris – the legendary St. Geneviere. Whether the all-conquering
Arthur took her as his wife and so started the Queen Guinevere legends is
uncertain. The story of this lady saint tells of her leading the defence of the city
against attack, and the only attack of the era was the one launched by Magnus
Maximus and his family.
The story of this warlord Arthur then moves south into Switzerland where there
is the mountain over the pass near Geneva, called Chat d'Arthur, or Arthur's Cat.
This is a fairly obvious corruption of the Welsh word "cad" meaning battle, and
it seems that it was here that the forces mustered by the Bishop Ambrose of
Milan were gathered to try to stop Arthur from moving down through the Alps
into Italy. The name Geneva is not without its own quite possible significance.
Paradin, writing his description of Savoie many years ago, describes the pass
named Val d'Antrona, where there was the Castello di Merlino, and the pass
through which Hannibal led his armies into Spain, became the Mont du Chat
Artus – the Mountain of Arthur's Cat (Chat, Cat, really Cad, which is Welsh for
Battle). The older Italian name for Geneva is quoted by a nineteenth century
author as Ginevra, which he takes from Guinevere.
British Mediaeval poems describe King Arthur then attacking the city of Milan,
accompanied by various others including Sir Cleges and the Captain of Cardiff.
As Sir Cleges is also described as visiting the mighty Uther Pendragon (Victor,
son of Magnus) at Cardiff in another poem, a picture starts to form. As the
Roman Imperial Court was at the time very certainly centred on Milan and not
Rome, there was every reason for Arthur to attack the city. He was possibly
interested in reducing the rival power in Italy, which would oppose his family's
imperial claim in Western Europe, and would also have been after Valentinian II
the successor to the Emperor Gratian.
A carving at Modena Cathedral depicts this Arthur attacking a city with several
of his armed knights, and this carving was done before Gryffydd ap Arthur wrote
in 1135 A.D. to publish the fame of Arthur to the Norman world. The city on the
carving is not named, and it is defended by a Lady named Guinevere and a
warrior named Modred. The city is either Paris or Milan (or so we conjecture)
and it may indicate the start of the stories of the abduction of Arthur's wife. A
further mosaic in the very bottom tip of Italy, at the city of Otranto, also shows
King Arthur – this time he is armed and born on Christmas Day. What is
revealed is that Arthur seems to have travelled the whole length of Italy, and in
fact Arthurian tales were very popular in Sicily.
It is well known that in 383 A.D. the armies of Magnus Maximus, now Emperor
of all the West, met with the armies of Theodosius, the Emperor of
Constantinople, in the East, at Sisica on the Sica River in what is now
Yugoslavia. The armies of Magnus were commanded by Arthur, his elder son,
now given the title king of Greece. Theodosius brought a huge coalition of
mercenaries and barbarians to supplement his imperial army, and he won the
battle. The consequences of the outcome of this struggle have never been fully
appreciated by modern historians. The seizure of the Western Empire by Magnus
Maximus and the victories won by his grandson, Arthur, were greeted with great
enthusiasm throughout West Europe, and also in North Africa and Egypt. With a
strong Imperial family in the West backed by powerful British kings in Britain
and Britanny, the Empire of the West would never have fallen as easy prey to the
Germanic warrior nations as it did in 406 A.D. The economic and therefore
military strength of Europe could have been preserved, and the whole history of
the West would have been very different indeed. Theodosius, who brought huge
numbers of barbarian armies into the civilized confines of the Empire and failed
to control these Asians and Germans, was the author of the downfall of the West.
Strangely, this megalomaniac who thought only of placing his two young sons
on the throne of the East and West, was remembered as "the Great".
However it is believed that Arthur the elder son and general of Magnus
Maximus was killed in the great battle fought in June 383 A.D. on the Sica River
in Yugoslavia. So the first great Arthur is identifiable and passes into history.
The second of these great conquering Arthurs was King Arthur son of Maurice,
again a military genius and full ruling king of Britain. His situation was
different, for the foolish actions of Theodosius the Great Emperor of
Constantinople had brought destruction to Western Europe. Huns and Franks had
effectively manipulated the last emperors of the West, and huge barbarian
mercenary armies had destroyed its stability. Without strong rulers the West was
open to the attacks of the Vandals, Alans Suevi, the Huns and Heruls, and all the
dozens of other destructive nations. The final fiction of Empire of the West had
dissolved, Gaul was divided between the Franks, the Visigoths, the Goths, and
the British, and some Roman remnants. Spain was split between native peoples,
Roman princes and Suevi and Alans, and some part of the Vandals. The
Ostrogoths ruled Italy, and Vandals held North Africa. Even in Britain, Germanic
tribes were infiltrating, and Theodosius had introduced a whole Saxon tribal
nation under its King Fraomar into the island along with the many other foreign
mercenary settlements.
The main invasion route into Britain for the foreign invasion was in the North,
where the Scots and Irish crossed from Ireland into the island areas around the
Clyde estuary in the West, and the Angles, Saxons, and others crossed the North
Sea to enter around the Tay and Firth of Forth, and down along the coast to the
Tyne and to the Humber. There were Saxons in Kent who had been recruited by
King Gwytheyrn – Vortigern – Victorinus around 450 A.D. to aid him against a
threatened invasion from Britanny by his kinsmen, who contested his rights to
the throne. Generally, the main threat came from the invaders infiltrating the
wild North. Whereas the Romans constructed artificial barriers in the shape of
walls, the British went for natural boundaries like rivers and lakes. The Roman
walls built by Antonine up on the Clyde and Forth and from the Tyne to the
Solway Firth, were useless, long abandoned barriers. These walls had in fact run
across Britain leaving large numbers of British people up to the North outside
their protection, and had no military significance for the for the British.
The long and difficult coastline of Britain was impossible to defend, and
immigrants were constantly slipping ashore in large and small groups, and
finally enemy kings came with their warriors in force. The Romans had settled
large groups of foreign mercenaries all over Britain, particularly in the North.
Now these self-contained settlements were proving safe havens for arriving
raiders, and Britain had been totally destabilized by the Romans. Foreigners had
immediate locations to head for, where there would be food, shelter, and
defences against attack. Always, the problem for the British was the same – the
danger from the North, from the great scramble of mountains and hills, the dense
forests, the hundreds of islands, and innumerable beaches and hidden bays.
Finally in the time of Arthur ap Meurig, the immigrants had become too many,
and they sought to try their own strength against the British king.
The mobility of Dark Age armies is something which has always been
underestimated, and there can be no doubt that they were capable of ranging the
whole length and breadth of Britain and further. Already, the invaders had
attacked the British Tiger in his lair in South Wales. Old Theoderic the
grandfather of Arthur had been killed at Din-Deyrn on the River Wye, helping
his son King Meurig drive off the raiders. An earlier raid, probably 455 A.D.,
had taken place in the time of King Teithfallt, the father of Theoderic – Tewdrig.
Further, in the time of King Meurig, several sons and daughters of King Brychan
of Brecon had been killed by Saxon raiders, and Brychan was the son of Queen
Marchel, the sister of King Meurig. The anger of the British kings is easy to
imagine, and seething with fury over these sudden, unexpected sneak attacks,
they prepared to root out the foreigners once and for all. The British strength lay
in mainly what is now Wales and the border countries, in the areas least affected
by the Roman occupation.
As far as can be gauged, old King Theoderic fell in the fighting around 509
A.D., and his grandson fought his wars to clear Britain of the dangerous
immigrants around 518-530 A.D. Undoubtably, the paramount British king
would have made himself master of the South before he moved North from
South Wales to attack his more powerful enemies in the North. His own
grandfather, Tewdrig, had warred in Cornwall, defeating the local Prince
Guinner and his Irish allies, and had dictated affairs as far afield as Britanny,
where he restored King Budic to his throne. The crisis point in Britain itself had
been reached when the whole clan of the Northern Princes around Edinburgh in
the area known as Gododdin was all but annihilated in a great massacre with
invading German tribes. The battle was fought at the place known at Cattraeth –
not the modern Catterick in Yorkshire 100 miles away. Of the 363 British clan
princes involved, only three of them survived, and doubtless a large number of
their followers were also killed. With this massacre at a Peace Conference, the
whole of Britain was in turmoil, and the North was open to colonization.
Surviving princes fled seeking shelter and help, and the heir, Teithfallt, arrived to
lead the armies, and there is more than sufficient evidence of this. So it was up in
the North of Britain that the new war kings of the British had to fight their
battles. Nothing had changed since the time when the Romans first came to
Britain – the North and the zone of the walls was the danger area and the
invasion route. The preparations for the campaigns were on a huge scale, for the
whole army of King Howell - the king of Britanny was transported across to the
British mainland. The king of Britanny was repaying his debt to his kinsmen
who under King Theoderic – Tewdrig – had restored Budic to his Britanny
throne. Then the whole combined force must have set off for the North to
destroy the colonies of their enemies.
Nennius recorded that King Arthur ap Meurig fought no less than 12 major wars,
and he listed them in his work around 822 A.D. All of them are traceable in the
northern battle zones, and they tell a story of three distinct campaigns set into the
major war in the North. All fit into a logical campaign pattern with the king of
Britain, and his ally king, Howell of Britanny, fighting some four hundred miles
and more from the Glamorgan and Gwent headquarters. For some inexplicable
reason, English historians have a mental block which prevents them from
understanding that a king from South Wales could make war up in Scotland.
They accept that Alexander III from Macedonia fought 3,000 miles away in
India, as well as all over Asia. They accept that Romans from Italy fought all
over Britain, including Scotland, and so on, but they seem to have a weird notion
that all British Dark Age kings fought in their own backyard and were immobile.
There is nothing wrong with the king from Glamorgan and Gwent defeating
enemies on the Clyde and around the Firth of Forth, just as Angle kings from
Germany crossed the North Sea and raided as far west as Anglesey.
However, the Triads, the poems, and the Bruts combine to give a picture of the
events of King Arthur's times. The Bard Aneurin wrote the great elegaic poem
called "Y Gododdin", to immortalize the warriors who fell at Cattraeth, and
probably later Aneurin ap Caw joined the church and took the name Gildas ap
Caw, and then wrote the "De Exidio". The genealogies of the princes and from
the "Lives of the Saints" help to fit the jigsaw of people and events together as
do remembered place names of ancient hill forts and churches. So it is possible
to reconstruct King Arthur’s great campaigns of liberation and clearance of the
North of Britain.
The first targets of the British king and his allies were the Saxons, Scots and
Irish settlements in what is now the Western side of the Lowland Scotland. He
needed to clear this Western coast to secure his communications with Wales and
to bring his supply and support fleets ashore as they sailed up past the Isle of
Man and Morecombe Bay and to the Solway Firth, and then North to the Clyde
estuary. Victory in this area would cut off the escape route to Ireland and prevent
any reinforcements from reaching his enemies. With this perspective, the list of
King Arthur's battles given by Nennius when he wrote around 822 A.D. follow a
logical military pattern in what appears to be a correct order.
Hengist the Saxon is said to have had a son named Oesc, and a Saxon named
Octa, who may be the son of Oesc, raided and ravaged to Orkneys with the
nephew Ebissa(r), before settling around the Firth of Forth. Octa and Ebissa are
said to have come in 40 ships, and the number of their followers depends upon
the size of their ships. Sixty men in each ship would give 2,400 men, and 30 men
in each ship would give 1,200 men. How many others would then follow with
the women and children in the years that followed is anyone's guess, but it is
certain that the numbers flooding in would be large once the advance guard had
established a safebase. Immigrants have trickled into Britain since 1950 A.D.,
and their numbers are not even known, but a safe bet would be 5 million within a
few years. A half million Italians are now in Britain after the E.E.C. merger, and
uncontrolled immigration has always resulted in huge numbers. The British
elected King Arthur ap Meurig as their war king called the Dux Bellorum –
Duke of War – by Nennius, and he was not having Britain taken over by
immigrants, and so the armies rolled North.
The first battle took place at the place described by Nennius as "in ostium
fluminus quod dictur Glein", and so we know that the battle was at the River
Glein. There is a River Glein in Northumberland where the venerable Bede,
writing around 700 A.D., said that Paulinus baptised the Angles in 627 A.D.
There is, however, a more likely River Glein in Ayrshire that rises in the
mountains separating Ayrshire from Lanarkshire, and runs down to fall into the
River Irving in the Parish of Loudoun. This is the most likely place for Arthur to
begin to drive back the tide of infiltration into Britain. As King Arthur won all
his battles, it would seem obvious that any of his enemies who escaped the
fighting would have fled North, up across the Clyde toward Lake Lomond and
Dumbarton.
It is no surprise, therefore, that the next four battles all took place in that area.
Nennius says that battles II, III, IV and V took place at "super aluid flumen quod
dictur Dubglas et est in regione Linnisis". So we are above a River Douglas in
the area of Linnius, which is in modern terms Lennox. There are many rivers
named Douglas, but only two are in Lennox. These are the Upper and Lower
Douglas which both fall into Lake Lomond, one running through Glen Douglas
and the other through Inverglas. There is every reason to suppose that the Saxons
and their various allies would have made a determined stand here to prevent
King Arthur from breaking through to open the whole of Northern Scotland. The
sea in Loch Long runs to within a mile of the head of the long Lake Lomond,
and so the fighting could be confined to a narrow front, with the Saxons
defending a prepared position. This appears to be correct, for at the head of Loch
Long between the two Douglas Rivers is a hill named Ben Arthur.
Four times the enemies of Arthur stood to face him in battle at this place, and
although outnumbered, he still destroyed them. Now the British king could break
out into the whole of the North and go after the remnants of the Saxons, Scots,
and Irish fleeing with their herds and women and children. This appears to be
exactly what happened, for with King Arthur now dominating the whole of the
Western coasts of Britain, and his fleets controlling the seas over to Ireland, the
Saxons fled and regrouped at a place which Nennius calls Bassas. This time it
does not appear to be a river battle, at least by name. The word Bass has been
construed as a mound in the estuary or bed of a river, and there is of course the
Bass rock. The Ury River in Aberdeenshire is called the Bass of Inverury, but
more positively there are two mounds on the bank of the River Carron known as
Dunipace – Duni-Bass – where the River Bonny flows into the Carron. On the
south bank of the Carron was the Roman town named Camelon, and as early as
1293 A.D. an ancient ruin on the other side of the river was called Furnus Arthur
and later Arthur's O'on. All this gave rise to much speculation about Camelon
being Camelot, and so on. The name associations do, however, point to this
being the sixth battle site of Bassas. Here King Arthur would have slaughtered
the remnant of the Saxons, in keeping with his vow to drive them clear out of
Britain. All of the West and North of Britain now lay in his hands, and there
remained the Saxons and Angles of the east coasts around the Firth of Forth and
down the coast towards Northumberland. Here, south of Edinburgh, was the
Cattraeth area where the men of Gododdin were defeated and their princes slain.
The Germanic settlement appears to have spread inland across the whole of the
fertile areas of Lothian and Berwick, and along the River Tweed. The first
campaign was over and it now seems that King Arthur moved south down to the
Solway Firth before launching his attack on these invaders in the East. Here he
could link up with his fleets and receive supplies and reinforcements. He took
his armies up Annandale and then turned east through the Tweedsmuir Hills,
probably moving between the peaks of Broad Law and Hart Fell, and along the
headwaters of the River Yarrow. Here in the hills the lake is named St. Mary's
and it is a strong tradition that King Arthur carried a shield with the Virgin Mary
upon it, and he was partial to that saint. To the east, the River Yarrow and the
River Ettrick in the next valley a few miles south, run through what was the
Great Celydon Forest. Our recorder Nennius calls the next battle the Battle of
Cat Coit Celyddon, and so we have cat, cad, battle, then coit, wood or forest, and
then Celyddon. The present forests of Selkirk and Ettrick once formed a part of
this great Coed Celydon.
The Saxon kings, of whom the chief is by tradition named Cheldrick, must have
heard of King Arthur's approach and decided to meet him in the woods. A
favourite German tactic in their wars with the Romans was to fell trees and build
a maze of defensive barriers in thick deep woods and forests. These barriers
were designed to force an attacker into all manner of disadvantageous positions,
and to prevent him from organising his forces properly. It is no accident or
surprise, therefore, that the invaders who wished to seize Britain took on the
British war king in a dense forest in a prepared position, for they must have
known that he would have to come through the passes and along the Yarrow or
Ettrick Rivers to get at them. The result was another victory for the invincible
King Arthur, and then he was out of the forests and into the open country along
the River Tweed at Galashiels and Melrose, and on to the broad plains of the
coasts.
The Germans were now forced to retreat before the advancing king and they
moved up the valley now called Wedale where the town of Stow stands. Wedale
is from the Dale of Woe and this again gives a clue to its significance as the
battle site, for Wedale is a name given to the place by the Saxons. Here run the
Rivers Gals and Heriot near the parish of Stow, which was anciently Stow in
Wedale. Again, the church at Stow is dedicated to St. Mary, and it was at this
battle that King Arthur was said by Nennius to have carried a shield with the
image of St. Mary upon it. The Harleian manuscript says that he carried the
image on his ysgywd, which is his shoulder, and Henry of Huntingdon says
shield, which was ysgwydd. The name given to this battle was the Battle of
Castello Guinnion, which indicates the White Fort, and General Roy identified
the remains of a Roman fort in this area, which, it seems, would have had white
stone walls.
There does not appear to be much doubt over this second campaign of King
Arthur when he destroyed the power of the Angles and Saxons of the North East
in two battles, just as he had annihilated the Saxons, Scots, and Irish of the West
in his first campaign. This was by no means the end of the war, for King Arthur
had merely been clearing up all the western and east coastal Saxon expansion
before attacking their main power base along with their allies, the Picts. The
Saxon and Pict strength lay along the Firth of Forth and in the central area
between present day Edinburgh and Glasgow, with the Picts concentrated up
north of the Forth along the eastern half of present day Scotland. Control of the
whole area lay in the hands of whoever controlled the vital zone between the
Firth of Forth to the Clyde. The Romans had understood this when they built
their Antonine Wall from Crammond near Edinburgh over to Glasgow. There
were two fortresses that anchored each end of this defensive system. One lay at
Stirling in the east, at the head of the Forth estuary, and the other was
Dumbarton, which dominated the approaches of the Clyde. These were the
fortresses that King Arthur had to attack and seize in order to isolate the Picts
and Saxons south of the line between the Forth and the Clyde.
The war now entered a new and deadly phase, for Arthur had clearly
demonstrated his iron will in not merely clearing invaders out of territory below
the Clyde, but in pursuing them mercilessly up through the wilds of the North
clear to the River Carron. His line of march on his first campaign would have
taken him up across Rannoch Moor and through Inverness, up along the line of
Loch Lochy and Loch Ness and then along the coasts to the Dornoch Firth. Now
the struggle was reaching its climax, as King Arthur moved to seize the vital
centre area to gain control of all the North. This time his enemies had learned his
true purpose, and the war took on a totally different nature, as they now refused
to stand against Arthur in the open battlefield. All the four great conflicts that
were to follow were to be assaults upon fortresses. Unless Arthur could take the
strategic fortresses, he had won only battles and not a war. His enemies would
still be able to dominate the area, and would return again when he finally turned
south and went home.
The first battle of this third campaign again followed the pattern of freeing the
West, for Nennius records this ninth battle as being at "in Urbe Legionis" –
 Legionis, in the Harleian manuscripts, and Leogis in the Vatican manuscripts.
Nennius then says that in this area it was fought at Kaer Legion, and there has
been argument over Kaer Legion, and Kaerlium and Kaerlion. The Irish Nennius
states that the battle was at Leamhuin, and the Baltimore Text names the town of
the battle as Cathraig in Leomhan. Now Leomhan is the town on the Leven
River, and all this gives is a positive identity, for the town on the Leven was
Dumbarton. The Mediaeval Bruts place one of King Arthur's battles at Alclyd,
which indicates a place on the Clyde, which is of course Dumbarton. In addition
King David II of Scotland has left a note in his Parliamentary record of 1367
A.D., which actually records Dumbarton as the Castrum Arthur. So it seems that
with clear military logic the king launched his armies against the fortress, which
was the Western kings’ hinge on the defence door that dominated the centre of
old Albany – now Scotland.
After defeating the defenders who were probably Picts and Saxons, and maybe
Irish and Scots, Arthur held Dumbarton and totally controlled all the West of
Britain. Therefore it is not surprising that the evidence of his next battle points to
the seizure of the other hinge of the defence line 40 miles to the east at Stirling.
The tenth battle, which we see as the second of the third campaign phase, is
listed as the Battle at Treuruit, or Treath or Trath Truiroit. Two poems in the
ancient Black Book of Carmarthen give two old Cymric forms of the names as
Trywruid and Trathen Trywruid. This is good information for Trathen meant
seashore, a sandy beach or estuary, probably. Many scholars tackled this
identification and they generally came up with solid reasoning, which interpreted
the problem as follows. An old description of Scotland said to be of 1165 A.D. is
as follows for this area: "regne Anglorum et Scottorum et currit juxta oppidum
de Strivelin was Scottice vocata Froch, - Briannice Werid".
The logic goes like this: the Welsh for Forth was Gwyrd, a word made up of Gwr
ending with "d". The Irish translation of Welsh Gwr was Fear and in its old form
was For, and the Irish word ending instead of "d", was "ch" and "th" in Pictish.
So instead of Gwryd they said "For-ch" or "For-th". In relation to the British
name Werid, which is given as the 1165 A.D. translation of Forth above, there is
a small river entering the River Dee near Bala, which is called Tryweryn. Werid
is really no different from wruid, and so Try-wruid and Try-werid are the same
place description. The word Werid or Wruid is a mutation of the original
Gwruid. This makes Treatheu-Try-wruid to be: The Links on the Forth.
William of Worcester writing in the later 12th century in his itinerary actually
says that King Arthur called a meeting of his Round Table at Stirling: "Rex
Arthurus custodiebat le round table in Castro Styrlyng aliter Snowden West
Castle".
What seems to have happened was that the assault on the rock at Stirling by
King Arthur must have thoroughly alarmed all the Saxons and Picts of the North,
and being too many to crowd onto the ancient rock fortress, they met him in
battle on nearby sand links along the Upper Forth. After this victory there only
remained the final assault on the surviving centres of Pictish and Saxon power,
where they had expanded into British territory south of the Forth estuary, in the
lands of Gododdin.
With the whole of the North and West sealed off in his grip, and supported by his
fleet now able to lie right up river in the Clyde, King Arthur turned his attention
to the fortress of Mons Agned – now Edinburgh. Very likely this was the same
rock upon which Edinburgh Castle now stands. The Nennius description is "in
monte qui dictur Agned", which is Myned of the old British, and unquestionably
Edinburgh. Just as Arthur's name was preserved after the battles on the River
Douglas by naming the hill above Mynyd Arthur or Ben Arthur, which is
Arthur's Head (land), so also the rugged escapement to the east above Edinburgh
became named Arthur's Seat. Very likely the king camped in the area whilst the
seige of Mynyd Agned went on, with lookouts watching the seas and the coasts
for possible reinforcements coming to try to aid their beleagured kinsmen.
"Scedes Arthuri" is Arthur's Seat, and the quotation is "Scedes Arthuri" - "contra
illos que nos Cathregannum" and "contra illos que nos Cathbregyon appelianus",
and so this Cathbregyon was the Pict stronghold over against Arthur's Seat. The
Picts had broken their ancient agreement with the British, who in legendary
times had granted them lands north of the Forth when they came to Britain
seeking homes. Now they had no doubt allied south to the invading German
tribes, and Arthur was rooting them out.
The destruction of this third great fortress in King Arthur's 11th battle brought
the whole war to a climax with only one great stronghold remaining to the
invaders. Finally King Arthur moved against it, and here the remnants of his
enemies would have assembled to make their last stand. They were now
effectively cut off from all possible help, for Arthur controlled the whole of the
West and cut them off from Ireland. His fleets in the Clyde and his possession of
Dumbarton sealed off the West, and his grip on Dumbarton and Stirling gave
him mastery and control over the North and all the central lands. To the east he
had taken Mons Agned or Edinburgh and he had wiped out all opposition along
the Eastern plains south to the Tweed. The leader of the Saxons at this last battle
is by tradition, one Ossa Cyllellur, and he stood waiting for Arthur at the hill fort
of Mount Baden. Right where it should be is a large double-banked hill fort
above the River Avon near Linlithgow, and it is known as Bouden Hill. In 1710
A.D., a Mr. Sibbald, writing his account of Linlithgowshire, states that:
On Bouden Hill are to be seen the vestiges of an outer and an inner camp. There
is a great cairn of stones upon Lochcote Hill against Buden Hill and in the
adjacent ground there have been found chests of stones with bones in them, but it
is uncertain when or with whom the fight was.

Well, the fight was between King Arthur and the invading German tribes, and
their Pict and possibly Scots and Irish allies. The description given by Sibbald
indicates that Arthur came to the fortress and found his enemies behind a wall
and then he adopted the Roman tactic of building an outer wall to keep them in
and prevent their escape. Here at the last great battle King Arthur spent three
days storming the defended position, and legend tells of how 960 of his enemies
fell in one charge by the British.
The battles listed by Nennius are entirely consistent with the military campaigns
pursued by a British paramount king moving up from the south to clear out
invaders around the Clyde and Forth estuaries, and who were spreading South.
The Bruts tell how Arthur drove the Picts from the area of Alclyd into Mureif, a
"country otherwise termed Reged". These are quite definitely northern areas, and
Reged, also known as Mureiff, was the area between Stirling and the Forth in the
East, and Dumbarton and the Clyde in the West. The word "Mur" is "wall" and
indicates this defensive and vital area north of the Antonine Wall between
Stirling and Dumbarton.
The old British Triads and the Mediaeval Bruts are consistent with this Northern
campaign, and they state that King Arthur set up three allied kings to govern the
area. There were Urien, Llew, and Arawn – three brothers. This is consistent
with the tradition in these histories of King Arthur driving the Picts out of the
Alclyd – Clyde – area, and the Picts taking refuge along Loch Lomond – where
the four great battles on the River Douglas were fought. Urien got the territory of
Rheged, his brother Llew got Lodoneis or Lothian, and Arawn got Yscotland or
Prydain – Prydyn. Setting up other kings to defend and protect the area was
probably the only reasonable policy open to King Arthur, and three brothers
could possibly be expected to stick together in time of trouble better than three
strangers.
There is the additional fact that Cynfarch Oer, who was the father of Llew,
Arawn, and King Urien, went to South Wales from the northeast when the
barbarians overran his lands, and he died and was buried at St. Cynfarch's, now
St. Kinnemark near Chepstow. Significantly the Llandaff Charters record the
Grant by King Arthwyr – Arthur – to this church, whilst his sister Gwyar
married Llew.
An ancient poem attributed to Taliesin the adopted bard and teacher of Elphin
tells of the victory of King Arthur at Mount Baden - Buden Hill in Linlithgow. It
also gives the true reason for Arthur's campaigns in the North.
Woe was to those infatuated men, when occurred the battle of Badon;
Arthur was at the head of the brave, the blades were red with blood.
He avenged on his enemies the blood of warriors,
Warriors who had been the defence of the northern kings
As Taliesin was a contemporary of Arthur, this poem has to be given due
historical significance. Elphin was put in prison by King Maelgwn Gwynedd,
and Taliesin successfully appealed for his release, and King Maelgwn was a
definite contemporary of King Arthur. Here Taliesin is clearly saying that the
princes of the northern clan had been slaughtered at the battle of Cattraeth, and
King Arthur was now exacting revenge for the death of his clan kinsmen at the
Battle of Badon. For some inexplicable reason, many scholars have held to a
theory, which has zero evidence, that the battle of Cattraeth where the men of the
Gododdin were killed took place after the Northern campaign of Arthur when in
fact is was the primary reason for the great king to take his armies to the North.
The flight of a great many nobles from the North down into Wales proves this
beyond doubt. The original Welsh of Taliesin's poem is in Archbishop Usher's
Britannae Ecclesiastica Antiquita, p. 254.
What happened after this is part of the traditional fabric of British history? No
precise written record is preserved, but thousands of bards over many
generations knew what had then happened. King Arthur by tradition and name
association, and by mention in "Saints' Lives", was occasionally over in Britanny
where the places of his lodges are still known in the local folklore. Back in
Britain, one of the three kings appointed in the North by Arthur was King Llew
of Lothian, and he had a son named Modred. This Modred rose in rebellion
against Arthur, aided by a vast army of Picts and a further wave of Saxons. All
hell broke loose in Britain, and again there is historical confusion for Caradoc,
the brother of Queen Onbrawst, the mother of King Arthur, had a son named
Caurdaf whose son was Medrawd. This resulted in the idea that King Arthur's
nephew Medrawd ap Caurdaf ap Caradoc had risen against him, instead of
Modred ap Llew. In fact Modred ap Llew may have been a nephew of Arthur as
traditional Welsh genealogy has a notice of Arthur's sister Gwyar as marrying a
Northern prince who was named as Llew ap Cynfarch.
What happened in detail is difficult to disentangle, for the events were
considered to be so well known that much essential detail was not actually
recorded. There was a colossal battle at a place called Camlan, which was
remembered with shudders by the Welsh for 1,000 long years. It became a
centrepiece of their folklore and history, for at this titanic battle, the British were
divided against themselves. Prince Modred had been the young general entrusted
with the safety of the northern frontier, and he had allied himself to the enemies
he was expected to keep out and was trying to make himself king. King Arthur
returned from Britanny and was opposed in landing by Modred, which means
that Modred had moved south from the area around Glasgow to Edinburgh, and
was in South Wales or along the southern coast of England. He failed to stop
Arthur getting ashore and then fled inland to make his stand at Camlan, where
the fate of the British was settled. The battle is recorded in cryptic form in the
Welsh Annals and in a great many Triads and poems. The northern British and
their allies the Picts and the Saxons ranged against the Southern British, who had
fought to free them from these very same Saxons and Picts.
The beaches near Long Borth in Cardigan Bay where King Arthur would have landed his armies to
fight the rebel Modred.
Photograph by Chris Barber

What happened was an appalling slaughter, and the battle finally went in favour
of King Arthur's forces. The Annals date the events in either 537 or 542 A.D.
and the cryptic record there tells of Arthur and Modred, but it is not very clear
whether "Arthur and Modred died", meaning both died, or "Arthur and Modred
died" meaning Arthur fought Modred who died. It is certain that Modred died,
and there is an enormous tradition that King Arthur was badly wounded, and
taken to an island to be healed. The location of these events has become a
mystery over the ages, and yet there is evidence that points to a logical and
traceable pattern of events.
First there is a poem by Llywarch Hen, an aged prince and a great poet who was
a pensioner at King Arthur's court long before he died. Llywarch composed an
elegy to Geraint, son of Erbin, the king of Cornwall, who died at the end of the
great pestilence, which struck most of Central and Southern Britain, and so died
around 562 A.D. One of the verses of the elegiac poem that deals with King
Geraint's achievements in life actually tells of King Arthur fighting at
Llongborth, a place identified with Portsmouth but actually Penbryn-Llongborth
at Cardigan, and this is consistent with King Arthur returning from Britanny to
Britain and fighting his way ashore somewhere along the coast of Cardigan Bay.
The poem is published in several books, including the Myvyrnian Archaeology
and Heroic Elegies of Llywarch Hen, p. 9.
 At Llongborth were slain Arthur,
Valiant men, who were hewn down with steel;
He was the Emperor and conductor of the toil of war
One complication is that King Geraint may, according to the poem, be accounted
as falling in the Llongborth battle. Much depends however on the interpretation
of the translated archaic Welsh, for the Life of Teilo tells of St. Teilo sending a
stone coffin from Britanny for the dying Geraint around 562 A.D.
Mediaeval historians were probably wrong in imagining that King Arthur landed
at Portsmouth in England when he came back from Britanny to defeat the rebel
prince Modred. This supposition is in line with their inability to conceive of a
Britain containing a number of kingdoms, each existing alongside the others.
This reality would destroy the English claim to supremacy over Ireland,
Scotland, and Wales, which was the vital cornerstone of English aggression in
the British Isles. Aggression against the smaller nations had to be justified
somehow.
Welsh tradition is firm that King Arthur landed at Penbryn in Troed yr Aur in
Cardigan, a place some eight and one-half miles east, northeast of Cardigan
town, probably on Treath Saith beach. There is ample evidence in the area to
support the tradition that this was the place where King Arthur landed with his
armies to fight the northern and Saxon and Pict hordes of Modred. The field
called Llongborth is still there, and Llywarch Hen accurately places the battle
site at Llongborth. There is Maes Glas – the Bloody Field. There is Pwll Glas –
the Bloody Pool or Pit – and Clas Glas meaning the Enclosure of Slaughter, Glas
being a shortened version of Galanas. The Maes Glas or Bloody Plain or Field
would have been where the battle was fought. Also in the area is the Llech yr
Ochain – the Stone of Lamentation – and the Ffynon Waedog, thought to mean
the Bloody Well.
The Pass of Camlan, view is from the north, the battle site is at the centre of the picture where the
road twists out of site. Jan. 1983

The Camlan Valley, or Crooked Glen, looking south from the probable battle site where King Arthur
fought with Modred around 562 A.D.

Close to the field of Llongborth, the battlefield where King Geraint ap Digain ap
Cystennyn was killed, there is the farm of Porth Geraint, where by tradition King
Geraint lies buried. The whole surrounding area teems with burial mounds and
fortifications. A five-foot stone near the local church was read 200 years ago as
being inscribed "COR BALENCI IACIT ORDOVS", (see Llwyd). Close by is
the mound fort of Castell Nadolig, which had a paved roadway leading north,
and several tumuli and numerous banked fortifications. On Cefn Lletre Farm is a
castle of triple earthbanks. Another in the area is Castell, with triple banks and a
central mound, and yet another mound known as Castell Prydd. At Blaenhovnant
there is yet another very large carnedd and two smaller ones. In fact many large
funeral mounds of old British kings are misidentified as Castel or Castle
mounds, when they are in fact huge grave mounds.
Welsh tradition preserved the memory of the Llongborth battlefield, and
Llywarch Hen set it down in his epic poem on King Geraint's death. In this he
records King Arthur's mighty presence at Llongborth, and the place names in the
Penbryn area bear mute witness to the battle, which decided the fate of Britain.
From here the rebels and their allies would have fled in retreat up to Camlan,
south of Dollgellau, where King Arthur finally caught up with them again. There
is no reason whatsoever to mistrust these traditional battlesite identifications.
What must be remembered is that the Mediaeval English had a vested interest in
trying to falsely prove the Welsh historical record to be wrong.
So it looks as if King Arthur fought his way ashore against Modred at Penbryn
near Cardigan. This is consistent with the Triads, which relate that King Arthur
ate the food at one of Prince Modred's courts, and that Modred did the same at
one of Arthur's. If King Arthur visited the far north then he would probably have
made use of a court that he had given to Modred in the first place anyway. Then
for Modred to have used a court of Arthur ap Meurig he would have had to come
down to South Wales. The story makes sense.
Next the Triads relate that Modred's wife, Gwenhwyfach, had a squabble and
that blows were struck with Arthur's queen hitting the upstart queen. Again, this
is consistent with the over-confident Modred moving down into South Wales in
Arthur's absence, and with his wife logically being contemptuous of the furious
Gwenhwyfar who doubtless raged at these people insulting and dispossessing
her. Following his failure to defeat King Arthur on the beaches, Modred would
have been forced to retreat into South Wales to collect his family, including his
wife, and if Arthur's queen was left in South Wales whilst he was in Britanny,
here is the start of the tale of Modred seizing the queen. It is probably true.
Modred could have seized the new Queen Gwenhwyfar verch Gwythyr ap
Greidiawl, who may have been estranged from Arthur when he took
Gwenhwyfar verch Ocurvran Fawr as his new consort.
So with a furious King Arthur pounding after him, Modred would have arrived
back in Arthur's South Wales, and then set off north to try to escape trouble. So it
becomes logical to look for the Camlan battle site somewhere in Mid Wales,
where King Arthur would have gone tearing after the fleeing Modred and his
allies. Now Camlan, where this epic battle took place, is a descriptive name, for
Camlan means crooked glen. We, therefore, know something of the appearance
of the place. There is only one logical military route from South East Wales up
into North Wales, and the route winds up through an ever-narrowing pass
between great slab-sided hills a few miles south of Dollgellau. Here is a natural
defensive position, a quite obvious Thermopylae where a few could hold off
thousands. The bottom of the narrowing valley floor pitches upwards into a great
jumbled heap of rock at Ochr y Bwlch, and the name of this place is Camlan. It
is still printed on maps, just as it always has been. Any army moving up from
South East Wales into North Wales would have to get through the awesome pass
at Camlan.

The area of Camlan at the top of Camlan Valley looking north. This is the natural Thermopylae of
Wales where Modred stood at bay against Arthur.

The site of the Camlan Battle of 562 A.D. between King Arthur and Modred; the view looks to the
south. The road pitches down steeply into the twisting valley.

There are in fact several North Wales traditions that tell of the Emperor Arthur
being at war in North Wales and actually being ambushed in a pass. The folklore
tells of a shower of arrows and spears being flung at Arthur's column and of
King Arthur being wounded by one of them when he was taken by surprise. The
location of this event is vague, and some versions attempt to place the folklore
tale up near Snowdon. There is another source of evidence that supports this, for
the poet Taliesin went to the court of King Maelgwn Gwynedd, the most
powerful ruler in North Wales, and publicly cursed King Maelgwn in his own
court in a poem, which he declaimed. Taliesin cursed Maelgwn for the wrongs
which he had done to the race of Arthur, and then he walked from the court and
no one laid a hand on him.
This is what Taliesin wrote and declaimed before King Maelgwn of North Wales
who went on to become the Sir L'Ancelot of Mediaeval history:
Be neither blessing nor success to Maelgwn Gwynedd;
May vengeance overtake him for the wrong,
The treachery and the cruelty, he was shewn to the race of Arthur.
Waste lie his lands, short be his life,
Extensive be vengeance on Maelgwn Gwynedd.
A strange animal shall come from the Marsh of Rhianedd,
Shaggy, long toothed, and fire eyed;
 This shall do vengeance on Maelgwn Gwynedd
Maelgwn was a complex character to say the least. He was reputed to be the
largest man in all Britain and a very powerful warrior, and he rose against his
uncle who was king in North Wales. Later he repented and entered a monastery
in the kingdom of King Arthur in South Wales. Here he became involved in
homosexuality, mixing with young men, and later he left to go north again and
claim the Gwynedd Kingdom. He is reputed to have murdered his wife, and then
he murdered his own nephew so that he could marry his nephew's widow. The
mind of the mighty Maelgwn is shown by his keeping 24 bards at his court,
when all other kings traditionally kept only 12 to sing their praises. A great deal
is known of this strangely capricious king, much of it to do with his constantly
changing attitude to the church and the saints and bishops.
The Life of St. Cadoc tells of the sons of Maelgwn raiding into South Wales, and
Taliesin is clearly castigating King Maelgwn of either standing aside and failing
to aid King Arthur or possibly aiding Arthur's enemies. St. Gildas wrote in his
"Dei Excidio" concerning King Maelgwn, who was referred to as Maglocunus
and The Dragon of the Island, for later Maelgwn became king of Britain. St.
Gildas was scathing in his descriptions of this warrior-monk-king, and certainly
he was a strange character.
However, King Arthur, although wounded, had won the battle at Camlan. Both
sides in the conflict suffered huge losses, and with his military following
decimated, King Arthur was no longer as powerful as he had been. What
happened next has probably caused more trouble than any other event in Dark
Age history. We know a great deal about the battle of Camlan from the Triads
and from the "Lives of the Saints", and nowhere do they state that King Arthur
was killed. In the Triads we are told the names of some of the men who planned
the battle of Camlan, and this makes it quite clear that there was some form of
ambush or battle in the manner of defending a narrow pass. The logical action of
a victor after a battle is to enter the lands of his enemies and to seize and pacify
them; it always happens. So King Arthur went to Afallach, which is Valentia,
between Hadrian's Wall and the Clyde and Forth estuaries. This shows that he
was alive and well. Only by the hopeless confusion of Aballach as Avalon or
Glastonbury did the idea of his dying arise.
We are told in the "Lives of the Saints" who it was who actually fought hand to
hand with the mighty Arthur at Camlan. Entry No. 42 in the Harleian
manuscripts No. 4181 in the British Museum lists –
Eda Elyn Mawr was son of Gwynber Dorchog son of Mug Mawr Drefydd, son of
Alla Gyllell Vawr, and was the man who fought with Arthur in the battle of
Modred.
In fact Eda is remarkably like Ida, and the entry is tantilising in its brevity.
Another detail of the battle preserved in the Triads is of how Alan Fyrgan, the
son of Emhyr Llydaw, was placed with his men astride a road and how he failed
King Arthur when he either moved his men or was forced to retreat. Triad No.
81 of Series 3 tells of the three incontinent troops of soldiers – meaning those
who were cowardly and not in control of their bowels in a battle. The third troop
named is – "Third was the clan of Alan Fyrgan who turned back without contact
with their lord, and stole away and left him with the young men at the pass at
Camlan, at the place marked for killing".
There are names of those who escaped the battle although the reasons for their
survival are somewhat peculiar. All in all, there can be no doubt that the battle of
Camlan took place, and that it was a civil war that crippled the military power of
Arthur at least temporarily. That it took place at Camlan at Ochr y Bwlch below
Dollgellau is, we believe, a certainty.
So with the rebels defeated, and the mighty King Arthur wounded, what
happened next? Here we need to consider the military situation confronting
Arthur, for the danger to the Trojan-British civilization came as always from the
North. Having defeated the rebel Modred, King Arthur now needed to re-
establish his supremacy over the North immediately, and this appears to be
exactly what he did. Undoubtedly he had a considerable fleet at his disposal and
generally it is forgotten that the British confederation of Britanny, Wales
(Britain), the North (north of present England and Southern Scotland), and
probably Cornwall and the Isles of Man, Anglesey, and Scilly, was a maritime
empire, whose princes possessed powerful fleets.
Whole armies were regularly transported between Britain and Britanny, just as
the later Danes and Norsemen transported their armies in their smaller and
lighter craft. The Triads tell how Geraint of Cornwall had 120 ships, each of
which would carry 120 men and that Gwenwynwyn ap Naf and March ap
Meirchion also had a similar fleet. The written word of Julius Caesar, who had
first hand knowledge of British ships some 500 years earlier, confirms the early
British capacity for building ocean-going ships. Travel by sea was the easiest
way of getting about British lands for many centuries after King Arthur (see
Triad No. 68).
After the battle of Camlan, King Arthur appears to have had his fleets follow
him to somewhere in Cardigan Bay, and from there he sailed to the Isle of Arran.
By locating himself on the Isle of Arran, King Arthur could threaten the whole
of the vital central area of the North. He could also prevent any further invasions
from Northern Ireland, which was the favourite invasion area for the Scots of
Northern Ireland and the Irish, and even for Germanic and Norse tribes coming
around via the Orkneys and Shetland Isles.
We also know that St. Ninnian was active up in the Western area of Northern
Britain around 400 and no one was a saint unless he were of the Royal clan. This
fits with King Ninniaw, or Nennius, or Neptune, or Ninnian, the brother of King
Pebiau Clavarwg, the direct ancestors of King Arthur ap Meurig. So it is
eminently possible that King Arthur went up to the monastery on the Isle of
Aballach, to the foundation set up by his great-great-grandfather, King Ninniaw
– St. Ninnian. From the Isle of Arran he could command the sea routes to
Northern Britain from Ireland and threaten all the disturbed districts of the
North. It is not impossible that he went to Ynyswrydin near Abergavenny in
Gwent in his ancestral lands, but on balance, the Isle of Arran, namely the
province of Valentia makes more sense.
With the paramount king wounded, all Britain was in turmoil, and it is possible
to pick out roughly what happened next. One ancient Welsh manuscript, which
was in the possession of John Lewis Esq. of the estate of Llanwenny in the
county of Radnor at the time of Queen Elizabeth I of England, is now the
Harleian manuscript No. 4181 of the British Museum. Its entry No. 42 says,
"Eda Elyn Mawr was the son of Gwynber Dorchog, the son of Mug Mawr
Drefydd, the son of Alla Gyllell Vawr, and was the man who fought with Arthur
at the battle of Modred". So we have the identity of the personal opponent who
crossed swords with King Arthur at the battle of Camlan.
Amongst those people said to have taken part in the battle of Camlan, was the
second Merlin – Myrddyn Wylt or Merlin the Wild – a tragic figure in this age of
heroes. The first Merlin was of course Merlin Emrys or Emrys Wledig, also
known as Ambrosius Aurelianus or Emhyr Llydaw. Poor Myrddyn Wylt killed
the warrior who fate brought against him at the battlefield of Camlan only to find
that he had killed his own nephew, the son of his own sister Gwendydd.
Apparently Merlin the Wild was fighting for King Arthur, and his nephew was a
follower of Modred. The discovery of what he had done drove Merlin to
distraction, and it is not unlikely that this is how he became known as "the wild".
His story interweaves with the history of what followed, as we shall see.
Tradition holds firmly that King Arthur was not killed at the Battle of Camlan,
but that he was wounded at the end of the battle. A North Wales tradition holds
that King Arthur was in fact seated, resting after the fighting was over, when a
young man approached and without warning flung a spear at the king. This is
how he was wounded, and apparently the would-be assassin was killed by
Arthur's guards. This follows the North Wales tradition that the king was riding
north in pursuit of Modred when he rode into an ambush and was wounded by a
missile. Either way the king was unable to continue as the Pendragon of all the
British, and so he handed the crown and leadership over to Cystennhyn Gornau –
Constantine the Crowned. Constantine can be traced, and he was the ruler of
Devon and Cornwall. He was probably installed there when King Theoderic
defeated Guinner. This King Constantine was followed by his son Erbin, who
was succeeded by his nephew Geraint. Again, according to traditions and
historical evidence, Constantine went after the sons of Modred, chasing one into
a monastery where he sought sanctuary, and killing him, and then disguising
himself as a monk and waiting inside a church to butcher the other. The idea of a
grim, mail-clad king waiting silently at the altar with a monk's cloak and cowl
over his armour in order to kill his enemy who was seeking the protection of the
church, gives a vivid insight into the life of Arthur's times.
A number of sources then place Arthur ap Meurig as back down in his own
territories in South Wales, and the Llandaff Charters are definite about his
outliving the great plague, which killed King Maelgwn Gwynedd. As Maelgwn
succeeded Arthur as senior king and Pendragon of the British, the evidence
points to Arthur's injuries preventing him from going to war for some
considerable time. The fighting was not yet over, for there was more squabbling
in the North. Five kings ruled in the southern territories of the British –
Vortiporex ruled Dyfed in West Wales; Maelgwn ruled North Wales in
Gwynedd; Constantine ruled the South West of Devon and Cornwall;
Cunoglassus ruled North East Wales in Clwyd; and Conan Aurelian ruled the
area of Gloucester, Wiltshire and Somerset. Conon Aurelian was the ambitious
Conmore, or Comorre, or Count Conomurus, also known as King Mark or
March. In the centre of this circle of five rulers lay the kingdom of the Silures at
Morganwg, and here the badly wounded Arthur was with his aging yet
dangerous father King Meurig.
Glldas wrote with a pen dripping with venom against these recklessly ambitious
kings from the shelter of the power base of Arthur in Morganwg. As we have
seen, Taliesin reprimanded King Maelgwn publicly in his own court, and then a
new paramount king was appointed. The choice fell upon Maelgwn Gwynedd,
and the story is told in a copy of the Welsh Laws:
After taking the crown and sceptre of London from the nation of the Cymry and
their expulsion from Lloegres they instituted an inquiry to see who should be
supreme king. The place they appointed was on Traeth Maelgwn at Aber Dyvi
and there came the men of Gwynedd, the men of Powys, the men of South Wales,
of Reinwg, of Morganwg, and Seissllwg. And there Maeldav the Elder, son of
Unhwch Unachan, chief of Moel Esgidion in Merionedd placed a chair
composed of waxed wings under Maelgwn, so when the tide came in an flowed,
no one was able to remain excepting Maelgwn because of his chair. And then by
(ha!| means Maelgwn became supreme king with Aberfraw for his principal
court and the Jarll Mathraval, and the Jarll Dinevwr, and the Jarll Caer Llion
subject to him. And his word was paramount over all, and his law paramount,
and he not bound to observe their law.
The expulsion from Lloegres was brought about by the Mercian-Vandal invasion
and settlement. The River Dovey or Dyvi at Cardigan Bay is the estuary, which
by ancient tradition divides North and South Wales, and so it is the natural
meeting place. To the North are the mountains and hills stretching over to
Merioneth. On the South of the estuary are extensive dreary moors followed by
green knolls and then hills reaching down to Cardigan, but between the moor
and the estuary is a flat, sandy beach called Cors-Fachno – the sandy shore – and
this is Traeth Marlgwn. There was obviously some contention over who should
be paramount king at this affair of Fachno of the Druid Bards, and a ruse was
adopted to secure the election of Maelgwn.
This now places Maelgwn firmly into the role of the mediaeval folk hero
L'Ancelot who was said to have avenged King Arthur after first standing aside
from the titanic struggles of the civil war. Just as King Arthur's sister had been
married to a northern king, so now the son of King Maelgwn was sent north, and
Prince Breidei became king of the Picts by marrying the heiress. Then in 573
A.D. came another major battle in the North of Britain known as the Battle of
Armterid (Bellum Armterid). This time the struggle was between Gwenddolau,
son of Ceidiaw, with his ally, Aeddan Vradog – the Traitor – on the one side, and
Rhydderch Hael and King Maelgwn Gwynedd as their enemies. Again this later
struggle was a tragedy for Merlin the Wild, for his immediate overlord was
Gwenddolau ap Ceidiaw, and when Rhydderch Hael and Maelgwn won the
battle, the unfortunate Merlin lost his lands. Merlin, or more properly Myrddyn
Wy|t ap Morwyn, became a wanderer, travelling over Britain and Britanny. He
had apparently been born at Caerwertherin near Celadon Forest – Dunkell in
Scotland – and he is reputed to have lived for some time as a wild recluse in the
forest near his former home. He seems to have visited Wales, as a poetical
dialogue between Merlin and Taliesin sets on record, and Welsh tradition has
him dying as an old man in the monastery on Enlli – Bardsey Island. He also has
a traditional grave in Britanny, and another tale tells of him being killed by
bandits in the Celydon forests.
The Batt|e of Armterid settled matters, at least temporarily, in the North, and
Rhydderch Hael the Generous took the title of king of Strathclyde, ruling from
De|ent up to the Firth or Clyde. It seems that Aeddan Vradog – Traitor – got his
name from this battle by turning traitor on his ally, the unfortunate Gwenddolau
ap Ceidiaw, for he afterwards became king of Dalriada. He was crowned by St.
Columba. King Aeddan lived on to invade Bernicia with an immense army in
603 A.D., as recorded by Bede. The story tells how there were 80,000 of the
Cymry at the Battle of Armterid, and this fits the type of figures given for other
wars and expeditions. In effect new kings were struggling to take over and fill
the vacuum caused by the fall of the rebel houses, which had risen against King
Arthur, and the power map of Northern Britain was being redrawn.
It is possible to make a reasonable guess as to the place where this Battle of
Armterid took place. Nine miles north of Carlisle on the western bank of the
River Esk, there are two small hillocks or knolls of rising ground, which were
called the "Knows of Arthuret". Further to the north a stream runs down a ravine
called Carwinelow, and it flows on to fall into the River Esk. Carwinelow is
really Caer Wendolew from Gwenddolew or Gwenddoleu, with Caer meaning
city or fortress. And so we have the Fortress of Gwenddoleu. North of this
stream the ground rises to a cliff above the River Liddel, and here there are the
remains of an earth-banked fort called the "Moat of Liddel". The area is a natural
place for the battle for the term Arthuret at the knolls describes another name for
this place, which is Roddwydd Ardderyd or the Pass of Ardderyd. This is in fact
the great western pass up to the north from the old Roman wall of Hadrian and
Septimus Severus.
All this now brings us to yet another rethink situation, for we have King
Maelgwn Gwynedd alive at this 573 A.D. battle, when he is generally supposed
to have died either in 547 or 562 A.D. It seems obvious that the Yellow Plague
of Rhos, which killed King Maelgwn, was not the same Great Plague that
devastated Britain from 555 to 562 A.D., and the assumption that Maelgwn died
at the end of the Great Plague is wrong. He appears to have died from a later,
different epidemic, and may have lived past 580 A.D. Indeed, one eminent
scholar of 150 years ago was of the opinion that King Maelgwn died as late as
586 A.D. It is all too easy to forget that the old British kings ruled at the same
time as their sons and even grandsons, in dual and triple kingships. So the
accession and rule of a younger king does not mean that the older king was dead.
It all fits with the Llandaff evidence of King Arthur living to around 579 A.D.
The new ruler of the North was Rhydderch Hael, and he proceeded to recall St.
Kentigern from the territories of King Maelgwn in Gwynedd, which is another
indication that Maelgwn still lived. St. Kentigern was the son of Thenew, the
daughter of King Llew, who was one of the three kings set up by King Arthur to
control the North. As such he is probably the grandson of the Princess Gwyar or
Gwawr, the sister of Arthur, who was married to Llew. His mother would thus be
Christian, but Modred the son of Llew might be of another pagan wife of the
King Llew, and only half brother to Thenew.
What is certain is that King Morgan followed King Arthur in South Wales, and
when Ethelfrith of Northumbria attacked King Brochwael Ysgirthog –
Protruding Teeth – at Chester in 603 A.D., King Morgan marched north to gather
with the other Welsh princes to defeat the invading king of Northumbria at
Bangor Orchard. This was of course one of the holy wars encouraged by the
Roman church to try to stamp out the independent Celtic church in Britain, all
egged on by the fanatical Augustine in Kent. Everything points to King Arthur
and King Maelgwn being generally misdated and said to die too early in the
sixth century.
THE FORGOTTEN WAR
All this brings us to the very important period between the Northern Wars of
King Arthur and his Civil War, and this later War of Rhydderch Hael and
Maelgwn. During this time between 537 and 573 A.D. there was another great
war in Britain, which has been half forgotten, in fact never remembered by
northern historians like Nennius and Bede, for it never touched the kingdoms in
which they lived, nor even those of their neighbours. This was the war where
King Arthur returned to lead his people in their major battle for survival.
It is beyond dispute that in 533 A.D., the Emperor of Constantinople, Justinian,
sent his fleet and an army under the General Belissarius to destroy the Vandal
kingdom of North Africa. For over 100 years the Vandals had dominated the
Mediterranean from their seaport capital at Carthage plundering Rome in the
process and making the Mediterranean a German lake. It was the Vandal nation
and their allies who had been primarily responsible for the ultimate destruction
of the Roman Empire of the West by ravaging France (Gaul), Spain (Iberia), and
finally Italy, and seizing the rich grain fields of North Africa. Then, in 533, when
they were ruled by a weak king, they were defeated by Belissarius, and the
German kingdom of North Africa crumbled. For 15 long years the savage war
went on in North Africa as the Vandal nation struggled to regain its lands.
Finally with time and hope running out, they gathered their fleets and left to find
new lands, taking their women, children and their animals with them. All this
was recorded in detail by a war correspondent named Procopius who was sent
with Belissarius by the Emperor Justinian. So in 548 A.D., when the Vandals
finally gave them up and left North Africa, they vanished from the mainstream
of the Imperial histories.
So the question arises: where did the Vandal nation go when they sailed from
North Africa? It is absolutely certain that they went past Gibraltar, for they
vanished from the histories of all the nations of Africa, Italy, Spain, France and
Greece, whom they had long terrorised. These histories are well known in detail,
and there can be no doubt that the Vandals left the Mediterranean. So where did
this very large and very powerful sea-going nation go? They would not have
sailed away in a vast fleet without a preplanned and well-known destination.
Therefore they must have gone to lands that were attractive to them, and that
means the Western Coasts of Europe or Britain or Ireland. They did not go to
any part of Spain, France, the Low Countries, or Germany and Scandanavia;
there is no record of their arrival. They did in fact invade Ireland and then
Britain, and the histories record this event. The Vandal invasion of Ireland was
the last mass invasion recorded in Ireland.
Over in Wales the Vandal invasion was recorded in the history of Tyssilio, and it
should be remembered that Tyssilio was a grandson of King Brochwael
Ysgirthrog the King of Powys who ruled around 570 to 608 A.D. Tyssilio
himself died at some time around 630 and lies buried in the church of St. Suliac
(St. Tyssilio), on the banks of the River Rance, some 9 1/2 miles from St. Malo
and St. Servan in Britanny. The invasion of Ireland and then Britain by the king
of Africa – the Vandal king – and his armies, is also recorded by Gryffydd ap
Arthur around 1135 from ancient Dark Age Welsh documents. Even more
illuminating, the longest and most detailed of the ancient Mabinogion folk tales
is the story of "Culhwch and Olwen", and this tale details the war fought
between King Arthur and the king of the Vandals. The Vandal war in Britain was
confined to South Wales, before the Vandals broke out across the River Severn
into what is now central England. The war did not touch the Northern kings of
Britain, nor those in North Wales, and their histories therefore never recorded
them.
All the indications in the "Culhwch and Olwen" tale are of ferocious fighting and
very, very heavy casualties. The Vandals were, after all, desperate for a new
homeland, and they were the most powerful of all the warlike Aryan nations.
The Trojan nation of South Wales was without doubt fighting for its very
survival, and they were fortunate in being led by their most proficient war king –
the Mighty Arthur. What is extraordinary is that this great war fought in
Southern Ireland and then in South Wales, is never mentioned by those who style
themselves "Arthurian scholars"; yet it undoubtedly happened. How else did the
nation of the Mercians suddenly appear in Central Britain? This war must have
exhausted the kingdom of Arthur in South Wales, and because of the exact
dating of the Vandal departure from North Africa, it is the one War of Arthur that
can be accurately dated. The Vandal War would have taken place between 548
and 550 A.D.
Information in the Llandaff Charters and the wrongly maligned "Lives of the
Saints", tells of a great pestilence in Britain between 555 and 562 A.D., and also
that King Arthur ap Meurig was alive after the end of the pestilence. Therefore,
it is wholly credible that King Arthur led his nation against the Vandals exactly
as "Culhwch and Olwen" says that he did. It is a matter of historians and
academics taking too narrow a view of what is, in fact, information, and refusing
to widen their scope of approach to the problem. The evidence is overwhelming
and there can be no doubt that he was alive and in South Wales during the years
548 to 550 A.P. and afterwards. This we have shown in our volumes "King
Arthur – King of Glamorgan and Gwent" and "Arthur and the Charters of the
Kings". The Vandal king was like all Aryan kings, represented by the Boar
emblem, which was worn generally on the helmet. So the "Culhwch and Olwen"
allegorical history of the war between the Vandals and King Arthur's people of
South Wales where the mightiest of all Boars and his nine Piglets do battle with
King Arthur. This simply means that the Vandal king – Twrcg Trwyth, "a hog
which lies" – as the great Boar, and his chieftains as the nine piglets. The action
is clearly defined, with Twrch Trwyth invading Southern Ireland and King
Arthur gathering his armies and transporting them over into Ireland to help fight
against the gigantic invasion. The Vandals of Twrch Trwyth first fought with the
Irish in a fierce and bloody contest, and then they were engaged by part of King
Arthur's army in a second struggle. Marriage ties with the Irish kings may have
prompted this move by King Arthur, for his father Meurig and Anlach ap
Coromac were brothers in law, with Marchel, the sister of Meurig, married to
Anlach.
The shifting battle scenes of the Twrch Trwyth War, which raged across South
Wales in 548 A.D., have left indelible marks in the form of remembrance place
names. The story of the war was told down the centuries as a great Boar hunt,
and the places where the major events of the drama unfolded were remembered
and named. Many have traced the war across South Wales and have amazingly
failed to realise that this is an actual history of a war, so we will detail the
geographical evidences.
The early stages of the "Culhwch and Olwen" story tell very briefly of Gormont,
son of Ricca, and the story of Rhitta Gawr, the giant slain on the shoulder of
Snowdon by King Arthur, is well known, and the army route is preserved in
tradition and traceable. Then later comes the story of Cai killing the giant
Wrnach who is the historical Urnach Wyddel whose genealogy was well
preserved in South Wales, and this, if nothing else, should have alerted scholars
to the fact that they were dealing with factual history and not children's stories.
The entry in the Brut of Gryffydd ap Arthur telling of the king of Africa
invading Ireland and then Britain, should have woken everyone up to the facts,
especially with the well known Germanic prediliction for placing Boar symbols
on the helmets of kings and Chieftains. So after clearing out the Irish immigrant
chieftains from Britain, in 548 A.D. King Arthur and his confederate kings and
princes were faced with an invasion by the Vandals displaced from North Africa
by the Emperor of Constantinople.
The Vandal king – Twrch Trwyth – was accompanied by nine piglets or small
boars, who were his leading chieftains or princes, and they first invaded Ireland.
Arthur is earlier said to have been active in Ireland accompanied by Odgar, son
of Aedd the king of Ireland, and in pursuit of the people of Sergi – Gwrgi Severi
– and so we are told that Ireland was, like Britain, a collection of various nations,
some of which were kinsmen of the British. So at last King Arthur collected his
entire army and sailed over to Ireland and went to Ysgeir Oervei where Twrch
Trwyth was with seven young pigs. The war opened with a harrying of the
Vandal forces, and then the Irish army fought a pitched battle with them. On the
next day King Arthur attacked the Vandals with his army, and on the third day
Arthur himself attacked Twrch. The conflict raged for nine days and only one of
the Vandal "piglets" - princes, was killed.
After this, negotiations were opened and Arthur's herald spoke with Grugyn
Silver Bristle, clearly an older senior Vandal prince. The Vandal situation must
have been serious but they were in an appalling position, being a nation without
a homeland, and nowhere to go. Then, taking King Arthur by surprise, the
Vandals took their ships and sailed from Ireland and the threat shifted from
Ireland to Wales. King Arthur set sail immediately and from his own fleet he saw
the Vandals going ashore at Porth Cleis in Dyfed. Porth Cleis is still a small
creek on the shore near St. David's in Dyfed. King Arthur then landed his army
and marched to Mynyw – Menevia – St. David's, arriving there at night. Next
day he was told that the Vandal king had marched inland past him, and so Arthur
went after him. They caught up with the Vandals as they were slaughtering cattle
belonging to Kynwas Cwryvagyl at Deu-Gleddyv, which is Milford Haven,
where men and beasts had been slain.
When King Arthur approached, the Vandal forces, led by Twrch Trwyth,
immediately fled north to Presseleu, which means the wild uplands of the
Prescelli Mountains of Dyfed. The problem facing King Arthur was to root them
out, and so he moved to Nevern and spread out his army to sweep inland along
both banks of the River Nyver, which is of course the River Nevern. Twrch the
Vandal king now moved from the glen of Nevern and went to Cwm Kerwyn in
the Prescelli Mountains, and stood to fight. Here two battles took place, and four
leading British champions or princes were killed in each. All are named and one
was Gwydre, son of King Arthur. At daybreak next day more of King Arthur's
forces spread out searching for Twrch Trwyth, made contact, and another fight
saw three more named men killed. This appears to have given time for Arthur to
come up with more of his army, and he fought with the Vandals at Penliniauc,
which is believed to be the area between Llandewi Felfry, and Henllan Amgoed,
and Laugharne, the Whitland and Llandyssilio area. The battles were gruelling
and fierce and four more illustrious names are added to the roll of the dead. Once
more the Vandals broke off the fighting and they appear to have crossed the
Laugharne Burrows and crossed from Ginst Point to Aber Towy, where another
fight took place and two leading British princes were killed. Rhyswyr means
champion and Bedd Rhyswyr is a carn at Prescelli, which should have four
skeletons in it.
Next Twrch Trwyth fled to Glynn Ystun, and there can be no doubt that the
Vandal king was fighting a series of rearguard actions whilst his women and
children moved ahead. Clyn Ystyn is now a farm midway between Carmarthen
and the old junction of the Amman and Lychwr railway tracks. The fighting was
broken off as Arthur sent scouts to find the main body of the Vandals, and one
scouting party in the Dyffryn Llwchwr – Loughor Valley – was attacked by two
Vandal princes – Grugyn Silver Bristle and Llwydawg the Killer. The scouts
were massacred in what may have been an ambush, but one man escaped to tell
King Arthur, who now brought up the main army for the first full scale battle
since the armies crossed from Ireland, and Twrch Trwyth, the Vandal king,
joined in the battle. Once again the Vandals were forced to withdraw, and they
went eastward to Mynydd Amanw where another battle was fought. Aman is
probably Aber-aman in North Glamorgan near Aberdare, where there is Bryn
Amman Mountain. Here another piglet was killed, and then after a fierce fight
two more were killed – Twrch Llawain and Gwys (pig). The word Banw is
"pig", and many scholars have iIlustrated that Amman and Ammanw are place
names derived from the events of this "boar hunt."
Once again Twrch the Vandal king withdrew, this time to Dyffryn Amanw,
which is still Dyffryn Amman – the Valley of Amman – and the River Amman
runs down to fall into the Lychwr. Another battle was fought here and two more
piglets were killed, and the pattern is clear, with Arthur trying to locate and get
to grips with the invaders, and the Vandal king trying to evade him, and setting
ambushes, and fighting rearguard actions whilst the mass of his people got away.
This time the Vandals were mauled, and only the king Twrch and Grugyn Silver
Bristle, and Llwydawg the Killer escaped. This time they fled to Llwch Ewin,
which is the Lake of Ewin, and this is now a bog close to and above the Llwch
Farm in the parish of Bettws on the southern slope of the Amman Valley. In
1882 A.D., John Rhys identified it on an old map as Lwch is Awel, meaning the
"Pool below the Breeze". Here King Arthur attacked again, and three more
British noblemen were killed.
The Vandals continued retreating and this time Twrch and Llwydawg went to
Llwch Tawy, and Grugyn split off to go to Din Tywi, and headed for Ceredigion.
Din Tywi is believed to be Towy Fort at Grongar Hill near Llandeilo, and Garth
Grugyn is in Ceredigion. Here King Arthur sent forces after Grugyn led by
Trachmyr and Eli, and they killed him after a very fierce tight.
Llwydawg split off from Twrch in an attempt to evade Arthur and went to Ystrad
Yw, which is in Brecon. Today, Ystrad Yw is Llanbedr, the church estate of
Peter. Ystrad is in the old hundred of Crickhowell, close to where the Grwynw
Fawr and Grwyne Fach Rivers join. The ancient Red Book lists Cruc Howel and
Ystrad Yw as separated Cantrefs in the 14th century. The Peniarth manuscript
118, names Hafod Grugyn at Brechfa in Ceredigion, although this area is today
Carmarthenshire, and Maelgwn Vychan is noted as strengthening the castle at
Garth Grugyn in 1242 A.D.
It has been pointed out that the Taxation of Pope Nicholas IV in 1291 A.D.
includes the name of Stratdeu, and this is probably the Norman French "strat
d'eue", which pronounces Ystrad Yw in Welsh. A great deal of tracing has been
done of the Yw stream to Lygad Yw at the home of the ancient Gunter family,
and also of the Belin Lygad Yw or "Gaer" fortress between the four Upper,
Middle, Lower and Pen Gaer farmhouses at the Strath of Yw.
However, all that Twrch Trwyth could now do was to head for the Severn and try
to get out of King Arthur's Wales. Here we get the real reason for Llwydawg and
Grugyn splitting off on their own. They were diversionary movements designed
to draw King Arthur away from Twrch and the main body of the Vandal people.
We get the exact route of Twrch as he is said to pass between Tawy and Ewyas,
and King Arthur summoned the warriors of Devon and Cornwall to come up to
the battle, and this is where Osla Big Knife, the Saxon prince, joins the battle
against Twrch Trwyth. King Arthur prevented Twrch from turning south into
Cernyw in South Wales, and forced him east toward the Severn. There at some
unnamed crossing point a tremendous struggle took place in the water and on the
riverbanks, probably along the stretch of river from Llangorse Lake to Glasbury.
The Vandals succeeded in getting across the river, and again named princes were
killed and drowned. Twrch Trwyth fled to Cornwall and with him went Aned
and Aethlem, and further unlocated fighting followed. Large tumulus mounds
around Glasbury indicate the battle.
This then is the story of the Boar Hunt of Twrch Trwyth, which is the history of
the 548 A.D. invasion of the Vandals. The course of the campaign can be easily
followed and seen today, and this certainly appears to be the war that marks the
arrival in Britain of the people known as the Mercians. Like the Vandals, they
were not Christian, and as we show, their "Dynasty of Kings" reveals name
matchings that identify them as the Vandals from North Africa. They were the
senior royal tribe of the Scythian-Vandal confederation, and it is their language
that is spoken as English today. It is from this royal clan called the Icinglas that
the English take their name, an event recorded in the Welsh Brut Y Tywyssogion
in 826 A.D. Interestingly the Welsh "Song of the Graves" records the tomb of
Peada, a Mercian king, named as Ptys.
Llandewi Brefi Church in Dyfed. The mutilated stone of Idnerth ap Meurig, the brother of King
Arthur ap Meurig is in the church wall.
Photograph by Chris Barber

The gravestone of the sons of Arthur in Pembrokeshire, presumed to be Llacheu, Gwydre or Nowi,
killed in the 548 A.D. Vandal Wars.
Photograph by Chris Barber

By knowing that at least some of their forebears are the Vandal nation, the
English can trace their own long and great history back to the plains of Southern
Russia where they were the Scythians – a warrior nation capable of toppling
Assyria and ancient Egypt, and whose remains Russian archaeologists are
digging up from the permafrost, well-preserved to this day.
The Vandal history does in fact show them to be master tacticians with a fine
grasp of both logistics and geography, and they took to their ships and put out to
sea. No doubt King Arthur and his Irish allies were more than pleased, but the
shock came when the Vandals sailed straight over to South Wales leaving King
Arthur and the army stranded over in Ireland and the country virtually
unprotected. So in great haste King Arthur pursued the greatest of all the Boars
back to his own homeland, where the boar and piglets were busy pillaging and
looting and carving out territories. Any large army with dependents would have
to split up to find food, and so the Boar hunt now spreads out as a huge war
across South Wales with parties of Arthur's warriors hunting down the various
Piglets. The strategy portrayed in the story is clear, for King Arthur had no
intention of allowing the Vandals to get back to their fleet which probably lay in
the Severn. The fighting raged from Pembrokeshire through Cardigan and
Carmarthenshire, and then west into the lands of Brecon, Glamorgan and Gwent.
Finally the great Boar was brought to battle in the Ford of the Severn, and even
the Saxons came to help King Arthur in the terrible battle – Osla Big Knife.
Gormund, the Vandal king, led over 160,000 people. The Saxons did not want
them taking their land either, so together they roughly equalled the Vandals in
number.
The Boar did in fact break out into what is now central England across the River
Severn, and it is no surprise to find the Mercian nation under its own kings in
these Midlands by 590 A.D. Like the Vandals they were fiercely anti Roman
Church, although they tolerated the Aryan Christians. This then is how the area
known as Lloegres was lost to the British of Wales. King Arthur kept them out
of South Wales, but without the aid of the other British kings, he could not
prevent them from settling into the Midlands of Britain. There was probably no
nation so feared in Europe as the Vandals, whose total destruction of Roman
Gaul and Spain and their subsequent sack of Rome itself became a by-word in
history. Their name "Vandal" entered the languages of Europe as a term for
wanton and total destruction. To the Welsh, the Vandal king was simply the king
of the Africans, a reference to their rule over North Africa from 423 to 548 A.D.
Bellisarius fought the Vandals in 533 A.D., but they did not leave North Africa
until 548 A.D. – fact.
There are reasons for this lack of accuracy about the history of King Arthur's
Britain. Some are political to preserve the absurd fiction that Germans who are
used as kings of England are "princes of Wales", and others stem from the
stunted educational criteria that are prevalent in the English upper class school
and university system. Great emphasis is placed upon conformity, no authority
must be challenged no matter how absurd, no one must attempt to do anything
that might set him as above or different from his fellows, for false modesty is the
most prized characteristic. Historically the mind of the bureaucrat prevails, they
demand contemporary documents, birth certificates, marriage lines, death
registers, and other bunkum, and pedantry rules over common sense. The
evidence lies in the tales, the poetry, the Triads, King Lists, etc., because that is
how the old British set about preserving them in line with their own culture. The
graves of kings bear their silent and unshakable testimony, and the stories, when
followed, prove geographically accurate. Wales, like Scotland and Ireland, was
and is a kingdom.
In studying the Welsh evidence of their own history, it is necessary to remember
that when in "Culhwch and Olwen", King Arthur swears that he will not let the
Vandal king enter Cerniw, he means emphatically Glamorgan and Gwent and not
Cornwall, which is a wishful and false English mistranslation. In the same way,
the Earl of Cerniw, who attends Arthur in the "Dream of Rhonabwy" is the Iarll
of Glamorgan and Gwent, just as are all the other larlls of Cerniw in the Triads,
the Histories and the poems. The name Cerniw is still preserved and used there.
The larlls mentioned in the tale of Maelgwn Gwynedd's election as king are
similarly Chiefs Elder or Lords of the Councils. Significantly, in the Maelgwn
story the larlls of three of the other four kingdoms support Maelgwn – Caer
Legion, which is Chester, which is Powys; Mathraval, which is Powys; and
Dinevwr, which is Mid Wales, whereas Glamorgan, Gwent and Brecon do not. If
Kaer Llion is Caerleon in old Morganwg, then the kings of Morganwg obviously
supported Maelgwn, whereas, if it is Chester, then they did not. What we do not
have is the date of Maelgwn's election as king of Britain, and it could be much
later than previously thought, when Arthur finally died and Morgan ruled in
South Wales.
There is ample evidence in the Triads, the Poems and folk-tales that King Arthur
was having problems subduing and holding down the turbulent princes of the
North. He fought with Owen the son of Urien, just as he had to fight with
Modred the son of Llew, and he also had to fight with Hued, the son of Caw, and
the brother of Gildas. Hueil was executed by King Arthur in the town square at
Ruthin, where the stone on which the head of Hueil was cut off still stands in the
square. It is not impossible that King Maelgwn of Gwynedd was raised to be
paramount king of Britain when Arthur died around 579A.D. This would make
the war and Battle of Armterid, involving King Maelgwn and Rhydderch Hael
and their opponents Gwenddolau ap Ceidiaw and his ally Aeddan, a war to sieze
and settle power after the death of Arthur. As this great battle was fought a
around -575 579 this Is the most likely explanation. Certainly the Llandaff
Charters and a mass of other evidence make King Arthwyr ap Meurig to live
until around 573-575 A.D.
As for the invasion of Britain and Ireland by the king of the Africans in 548 A.D.
and the destructive havoc of such a war, it is significant that after decades of
inactivity, the Saxons record a victory at Salisbury in 552 A.D. The accuracy of
this date is, of course, questionable, but it fits in with King Arthur being forced
to fight another large and exhausting war in 548-550 A.D., and losing control of
central Britain after the Vandal invasion. The battle at Salisbury would have
been in the zone controlled by King Mark, also known as March, Marcius,
Conomurus, Count Comorre, and so on. This troublesome rival of King Arthur
ruled a polyglot area containing British of varying origins – Saxons, Norsemen,
and possibly Irish migrants. As Count Comorre, he figures in Breton history, and
made attempts to gain control of Britanny, as recorded by Gregory of Tours and
the various British stories. He failed and was killed in the battles of 556 A.D. in
Britanny.
As for Myrddyn Wylt – Merlin the Wild – his error in killing his sister's son at
the battle of Camlan cost him more than grief, for the surviving poems name the
son of Rhydderch Hael as his sister's husband. This is how Rhydderch took his
lands and his famous orchard when he defeated Gwenddolau ap Ceidiaw, the
Lord of Martin WyIt, at Armterid in 573-575 A.D. The poem "Affallanau
Myrddin" attributed to Martin, laments his loss. The story of the times emerges
clearly from the poetry, for Taliesin, who poured scorn on Maelgwn in his own
court, also wrote no less than twelve poems praising Urien ap Cynvarch who
was one of the three northern kings set up by Arthur. Even this King Urien was
murdered, by treachery, by Morgant, the brother of Rhydderch Hael, and the
names of the two assassins used by Morgant were Dyfnwal ap Mynyddawg and
Llovan Llawddino of Dinas Eiddyn – Edinburgh. As King Urien is extolled by
the Bard Taliesin in fighting 12 great battles, it is clear that the battle for
supremacy in Britain was a long drawn out affair. What we do not know is
whether these battles were fought before or after King Arthur waged war in the
North of Britain, although all the signs are that they were after Arthur's
campaign, and the murder of Urien was followed by the war between the
unlucky Gwenddolau and Martin and their enemy Rhydderch Hael and his ally
King Maelgwn. The celebrated Llywarch Hen was also dispossessed in the war
against Rhydderch Hael, for he was a kinsman of Urien. It seems that the British
of the far North tore each other to pieces, and the British of Wales were divided
into South Wales under King Arthur and North Wales under Maelgwn Gwynedd.
The historical scenario distills very clearly to reveal a picture where King
Arthur, lying wounded, no longer able to dominate the turbulent British princes,
held onto South Wales. Up in the North of Britain, the border king, Urien ap
Cynvarch, was forced to fight a long and ferocious war against the Saxons,
Angles and rival British princes headed by Rhydderch Hael. In North Wales the
scene was dominated by the ambitious Maelgwn Gwynedd. An assumption that
the plague that killed Maelgwn was the same pestilence that struck Britain
between 555 and 562 A.D. is clearly wrong, for the Yellow Plague of Rhos must
have been a different outbreak. The necessary revisions are to place Urien as
being murdered by Morgant and his assassins around 570 A.D., and not around
595 A.D. as generally thought, and King Maelgwn living on long after 542 A.D.
to die some time after King Urien, possibly as late as 586 A.D. The evidence for
this lies in the Saxon Chronicles and the poems of Llywarch Hen, for the Saxons
recorded their victory at Gloucester, Cirencester, and Bath in 577 A.D. when the
kings Conmail, Condidan and Farinmail fell. On the Welsh side old Llywarch
Hen put the matter into poetry and sang of Maelgwn Gwynedd, Cynddylan of
Powys and Caranmael. The danger of literal misinterpretation is ever present and
the "fall" of three kings means that they were defeated in battle - not killed.
King Urien is dated too late at 595 A.D., and King Maelgwn is dated too early,
dying around 547 or 562 A.D.
The resumption of Saxon wars followed the death or disappearance of the
mighty King Arthur from South Wales, with the fighting at Gloucester in 577
A.D., the attack on Chester by King Ethelfrith of Northumbria in 603 A.D. and
his massacre of the monks at Bangor Iscoed, for which he paid when the Welsh
kings, including Morgan ap Arthur, destroyed him at Bangor Orchard. Selyv ap
Cynan led the armies of King Brochwael of Powys at Chester and Morgan was
chief king.
THE IMPORTANCE OF MANNANAN AS THE ISLE OF ARRAN
Many of those who delve into British Dark Age history encounter Brychan
Brecheiniog, and quite often they overestimate his status and importance. As we
show elsewhere, they also confuse him with Brychan, son of Euddav, and
Brychan, descended from Llywarch Hen. Much is said of this first cousin of
King Arthur being given his mother's allotment of Brecon in the Morganwg
Kingdom as his fief under the high king.
What is quite happily forgotten is that whilst Brychan Brecheiniog was a son of
Marchel, the daughter of King Tewdrig, his father was Anlach, who ruled a quite
substantial part of Ireland. Therefore, Brychan would have territorial claims on
the inheritance of Anlach. So where were these territories of Anlach?
We can actually get some clues from the places that are named as the burial
places of Brychan Brecheiniog and several of his children. In the B.M.
Vespasian A XIV and the Harleian 4181 manuscripts, we get the location of
graves of several of the family. King Anlach has his sepulchre at Llanespetit, and
several sons and daughters of Brychan are to be located in Glamorgan and
Brecon. Others lie in North Wales and on Anglesey, but the interesting
information is that King Brychan himself and several sons and daughters lie
buried on the Isle of Manniam. More significantly, King Brychan lies on a small
Isle close to Manniam.
Sepulchrum Brachan (Brychan) est in insula que uocatur Enys Brachan
que est iuxta Manniam.
So King Brychan lies on a small island named after him, which is close to the
larger isle, which is called Manniam.
We believe that we have a wide spread of locations across Wales for Brychan's
progeny because we are dealing with the children of three or more King
Brychan's, encompassing different areas. In relation to Manniam however, we
are either at the Isle of Man or we are at Manannan or the Isle of Arran – Isle of
Bute. There is a small isle south of Man called the Calf of Man, but there is also
a small isle to the east of Mannanan or Arran as it is today. It seems that the
British kings maintaining control of the island areas allowed unfiltration into
Britain from Ireland that could be used to prevent Pict and Scandinavian raids by
sea.
As for the three King Brychans, we need only look at Gurycon Godheu, the
daughter of a Brachan (Brychan), who is the wife of Cadrod Calchfynnydd, to
see that this cannot be a daughter of King Brychan ap Anlach, the cousin of
Arthur. Cadrod Calchfynnydd is of the early fifth century, 100 years earlier, and
so this is a daughter of King Brychan ap Euddav. We even get the information of
a King Brychan buried in Menevia:
Brichan iacet in Mynav in valle que dicitur Vallis Brichan
So he is buried in a wall called Brychan's wall in or near St. David's – Menevia –
over 300 miles from the Isle of Man and over 400 miles from the Isle of Arran.
Therefore this is an earlier or later Brychan, and probably Brychan ap Llywarch.
THE LOCATION OF THE BATTLE OF CATTRAETH
The epic poem "Y Gododdin" tells the story of the heroism of British warriors in
a major battle, extolling and praising their courage and bravery. The obvious
question of this great poem by the Bard Aneurin, son of Caw, has to be: Why
write such a poem about a disastrous defeat? There is only one answer which
suggests itself to us, and that is that the Bard was attempting to motivate others
to avenge their fallen kinsmen.
The popular conception that the Cattraeth Battle took place at Catterick in
Yorkshire is, we believe, based on a simply untenable guess – the names look
similar. As we have stated, the truth is that there was no battle of Cattreath, and
it took years to sort out the muddles surrounding the event. The fact is that this
"Y Gododdin" was written as a wake-up call to the British. A Peace Conference
held at the request of the traitor King Trahaearn and the Saxon Hengist resulted
in the massacre of 363 leaders of the British, – princes, generals, noblemen, and
clergy around 456 A.D. The battle of Cattraeth, where 363 British leaders were
killed, is nothing more nor less than a clear account of this infamous massacre
where too much beer was drunk and a planned mass murder was affected.
Aneurin y Coed Aur, alias Gildas, was rebuking his kinsmen for not learning the
lesson of history.
King Nynniaw of South Wales, campaigning up in the North of Britain, and
founding his church at Whithorn in modern Galloway in Northern Britain around
400 A.D. This church of Bangor Wydrin or Wyrdin was of great importance to
the British and was listed as such in the Triads. Therefore, it is wholly reasonable
to assume that there was a sizeable British population in the area. This was the
population that the Saxon invaders would have had to defeat if they came into
this area. Whithorn or Wydrin is close to the shores.
The Saxon Chronicles and Henry of Huntingdon tell of how two Saxon kings
landed at the area of Yarmouth in 495 or 497 A.D., and identifies them as Cerdic
and Cenric. Henry then tells of War in 508 A.D. between the British king named
as Nazaleod and Ceredic and his son Cenric, and this story is repeated in the
Bruts of England. It parallels the account in the Llandaff Cathedral Charters
describing the death of King Theoderic –Tewdrig the son of King Teithfallt, who
attacked Cornwall and killed Guinner, alias Gorlois, in this war in Cornwall –
and was the old Uthyr Pendragon at this time. Theoderic is Nazaleod. However,
Cerdic sought help against Nazaleod from King Aelle and Esc in Kent to fight at
Cerdichesford.
Next we know that King Theoderic retired to Tintern on the Wye, and his son
Maurice took over as king, presumably in 508-509 A.D. when Theoderic was
mortally wounded in the battle. The Anglo-Saxon chronicles record the death of
Nazaleod the chiefmost British king in 509 A.D., and in popular history
Theoderic was Uthyr Pendragon.
Next we are told by Henry of Huntingdon that in 530 A.D., King Cerdic of the
Saxons was fighting at the place named as Witgares-burg. This, we believe, was
Wydrin or Nlhithorn. We are given a number of interesting pieces of
information. Cerdic is said to have died in Northumbria in 534 A.D. In the 538
A.D., the fifth year of King Cenric, his son, there was a solar eclipse in the "third
hour in March." In the seventh year of his reign there was an eclipse from the
"third to ninth hour" in June or July. In the 544 A.D., an important man named
Witgar died. Then in a battle at Witgaresburg in Witland, there was yet another
great slaughter in 548 A.D in the time of Cenric.
It is no accident that the Galloway area is split into two countries. One is
Kirkcudbright, with Kirk meaning church. The other is Wigtown, and it is in
Wigtown that Whithorn and the ancient church of King Nynniaw is situated.
Wigtown is easily identifiable as Witgaresburg, with burg meaning town. Again,
it is no accident that the Saxons led by Cerdic and Cenric were called West
Saxons, as Wigtown and Whithorn are in the extreme west of Northern England,
old Northern Britain. King Nynniaw founded strong settlements and a major
cathedral church of the British on a great promontory of Wigtown in Galloway
to block foreign immigrants from crossing over from Ireland, and to prevent
landings by Saxons sailing around Scotland to come ashore on these
northwestern shores. Here Mabon, son of Urien, was captured by pagan invaders
– Mabon, whose mother was Modren, the daughter of Afallach – Valentinian.
This whole northern area was the Province of old Valentia-Affallach. The story
of Mabon is told in the Mabinogion, and it tells how King Arthur rescued Mabon
from the pagans.
The final analysis is that Aneurin ap Caw wrote the great epic poem "Y
Gododdin" to inspire the kings to come to the aid of their kinsmen in the North,
in Lancashire, Cumbria, Galloway, Northumberland and Durham, and right up
through Southern Scotland. His brother, St. Gildas ap Caw, wrote his sermon
history, De Excidio, for the same purpose, hurling invective and righteous scorn
at the kings who he thought were inactive and luxurious in not rushing to the
rescue of the men of the beleaguered North. This stirred the great paramount
king of the British named Arthur to move north from South East Wales and to
fight and win his 12 epic battles as are described by Nennius. Then came the
Vandal Mercian invason from North Africa in 548 A.D.
It was not until 552 A.D. that Cenric the Saxon attempted to move south, when
he fought a battle at Salisbury in the 18th year of his reign. Then in 556 A.D.,
Cenric and his son, Ceaulin, fought a huge battle at Banbury, where they were
fiercely opposed by nine divisions of Brltlsh, arranged in the Roman manner.
The result was a draw, a no-decision battle with the British standing firm in the
central areas of Britain. It seems that Cenric and Ceaulin were taking advantage
of the Vandal invasions of Twrch Trwyth in 548 A.D. and the resulting chaos in
Britain. Not until 579 A.D. did Ceaulin and his son, Cuthwine, fight as far south
and west as Deorham – Dyrham in Gloucestershire – a few years after the death
of King Arthur ap Meurig in South Wales.
Around this period, King Cridda, the first king of Mercia, emerged followed by
the second Vandal king, his son, Wippa. Ceaulin, the West Saxon, had a brother
named Chute whose son was Coelric and grandson was Kinigils. It was Kinigils,
aided by Kichelm, who attacked the British at Bampton in Oxfordshire in 614
A.D. Oxford is, of course, the British town of Rhydychen. The picture is,
therefore, of a spread of West Saxons from the northwest down southward
through the centre of Britain, and not spread up from the Southern Coasts.
This helps to place the location of the battle of Cattraeth and to find the reason
for the battle and the subsequent campaings of King Arthur in the North.

THE LOCATION OF THE SITE OF THE BATTLE OF BADON

It is doubtful if any lost battlesite has been so long and frequently speculated
over as the site of King Arthur's epic battle of Badon.
The situation is not made any easier by the fact that there were two Battles of
Badon, which apparently took place about 150 years apart. The site of Badon is
without doubt located upon a hill, for Nennius records "Badon Hill". The dates
given are suspect to the point of irrelevance because dating as we know it was
not introduced until the time of Prince Hywell Dda of West Wales, around 940
A.D. So there are problems involved in locating Badon Hill.
Our investigations reveal that the powerful Arthurian Dynasty was located in
South East Wales. Further, there was a large body of history in this area, which
became unpopular around 1800 A.D., when the whole area of the Arthurian
kingdom was again pushed into limbo and conveniently forgotten. Therefore, it
is worth looking in the South Wales area to see if there is a Badon Hill battle site
still remembered.
Now "Badon" is a meaningless term in Welsh or in Latin, and that is peculiar, for
we can be certain that all ancient British-Welsh names have definite meanings.
Therefore, there is a strong possibility that spellings are incorrect or that place
names have become modified during the past 1,500 years. Monks and copyists in
Dark Age and later mediaeval times were notorious as careless or inaccurate
spellers.
In the Llynfi Valley set in Mid-Glamorgan, there is a most interesting site. The
830 feet of Mynydd Baedan stands above Bryn-Llywarch – the Slopes of
Llywarch. The name means Boar or the Mountain of the Boars. This is in itself
evocative, for the Boar was invariably associated with Angle and Saxon kings
and Warriors. On the north slopes just above Bryn-cynan – the Slopes of Cynan
– the side of the mountain has a name. The area is called Maes-cad-lawr, and this
translates as follows: Maes, which is field; Cad, which is battle; and Lawr, which
is earth or area. So we have on the north slopes of Mynydd Baedan an area
named as "The Battlefield Area".
Some modern maps in fact name the bare mountain as Mynydd Baidan spelling
it with an "i" instead of an "e". The word baidan implies a daring or a challenge
and this again seems to indicate that this is the place where the gauntlet was
thrown down at some time between two warring parties.
As Llywarch Hen was a follower of King Arthur and a pensioner at his courts,
the name of Bryn Llywarch appears to be relevant. So also does the name of
Bryn Cynan, with Cynan being the name of several contemporary sixth century
noblemen under Arthur. Just north of the Battlefield Area is Llangynwyd, which
breaks down into the Llan, or "holy estate of", and Cynwyd, who may be
Cynwyd Cynwydion – another well-attested, real person.
These facts form part of the consistent pattern and framework of South East
Wales history, which emerges from detailed study of the area. The massive array
of such facts, which can be assembled in support of the histories, clearly
indicates that these are no coincidences.
The relationships involved can be shown as follows:
As with almost every other detail of Dark Age British History, the location of the
site of the Battle of Badon needs interpretation. There were in fact two Battles of
Badon and they took place some 150 years apart. What we have are not only two
battles but also two very credible battlesites. One is this remarkable site in the
Maesteg valley, and the other is Bouden Hill in Scotland.
In the volume "King Arthur's Invisible Kingdom", we identified the Bouden Hill
battlesite as the probable place where King Arthur II ap Meurig fought his great
battle. This site is at the ruin of an ancient double-banked hill fort, which stands
above the River Avon at Linlithgow west of Edinburgh.
The best way to summarise this situation is as follows:
1. Arthur, son of Magnus Maximus, fights his great battles in Europe between
383 and 384 A.D., and may have been involved in repulsing the great treachery
of the planned three-pronged raid by the Irish, the Picts, and the Saxons in 367
A.D.
2. King Arthur II ap Meurig ap Tewdrig fought the great battle of Baedan in the
year 551 A.D., dated 517 years after the "incarnation of the Lord" – in Gnostic
Christian terms, 517 plus 33 (or 34) years is 551.
3. A second battle of Baedan Hill or Mynydd Baedan was then fought in either
667 or 700 A.D. Again, the chronology depends upon Gnostic or Catholic
datings from the death or the birth of the Lord. This time King Arthrwys –
Arthur III – son of King Ithael ap Morgan Mwynfawr ap Arthur II, was the
victor. He was unfortunately killed in the fighting but his army won the battle.
The location of the Battle of Baedan site. Mynydd Bean is approached by Ffordd y Gyfraith, or Road
to the Tumult. On the great open sweep of the Maes-Cad-Lawr, or field of the battle area, are several
large grave mounds, or war cemeteries.

The Llandaff Charters record how King Ithael ap Morgan and his son Meurig
gave grants at the Church of Tituuc at Henllan on the Wye for the soul of his son
Arthwyr – Arthur. The site at the Maesteg Valley is clearly the site of at least one
of the great Battles of Baedan. There is no point in wasting time looking for a
Badon Hill or Mount Badon, as the English scholars have done. The English
language did not exist at the time of the battles. In fact, it did not evolved until
centuries later. Therefore, we have to pursue the logical Welsh-British name of
Mynydd Baedan.
Whatever the truth of all this, the battlefields tell a story of great struggles. At
Bouden Hill and Lothcote Hill in Scotland there is a large grave cairn, and
several smaller gravesites. This Bouden Hill was also spelled Buden Hill at one
time. The Welsh site is equally spectacular, and the evidence of conflictis still
visible.
The Baedan site near Maesteg is upon the long sweeping slopes of a smooth hill
that juts out into a spur pointing out at the valley. High up on the angle of the
long straight slope and the spur there is a great grave mound. This is some 50
yards by 60 yards, the earth for the mound being scooped out of the top of the
hill slope above the great mound. Lower down toward the centre of the top
slopes of the long, bare straight hill, there is another huge mound. This is again
made of earth scooped out from the hill slope above the mound, and it equals the
mound higher up. Interestingly there are three other smaller grave mounds near
this large lower heap. These would seem to be for individual important
noblemen who were buried where they fell. Again there is a strange echo of
historical truth, for by tradition King Arthur II ap Meurig fought and defeated
three Saxon kings in his battle of 518 A.D.
So whichever King Arthur fought at Maesteg, there is some ground for
investigating further. Certainly, it appears that one of the two Badon battles was
fought on the fields of Maescadlawr - Battlefield Area - on Mynydd Baedan in
Glamorgan. Maybe Arthur II fought here, and the British dead lie buried in the
higher grave, and their Saxon enemies in the lower mound. Certainly, the
location in Glamorgan indicates Arthur II.
The presence of such local names as Bryn Llywarch right below Maescadlawr,
and Llangynwydd and Cynwydd close by all reinforce the possibility of the
Welsh site being the place where King Arthur II ap Meurig of the Round Table
fought his great battle.
The only way to fully appreciate the site is to visit it. There is an open sloping
smoothness about the Maescadlawr site that makes it indisputably the place
where a battle would have been fought. It is in fact a most perfect battlesite. The
size of the grave mounds clearly indicates a very big battle, and they compare
with mounds at Celle-Belsen concentration camp site, which hold thousands of
bodies. The correlation between the place names is extraordinary. The road
leading up from the army gathering site, on through Cefn-Cribwr to Mynydd
Baedan is called Ffordd-y-Gyfraith, meaning "the road to the Tumult".
Everything in the area speaks of this being the battle site of Mynydd Baedan –
Mons Badonicus of Nennius and the Welsh Annals.
The Macs-Cad-Lawr, which are the fields of the battle area on Mynydd Bean in the Maesteg Valley.
This view looks north, with the lower set of main grave mounds in the centre of the picture.
Photograph by Chris Barber

The method of locating the site of the Mynydd Baedan Battlefield is simple.
First the ancient Mabinogion Tale of the "Dream of Rhonabwy" tells how the
hero Rhonabwy sleeps at an ancient semi-deserted hall, and lies upon a yellow
ancient oxhide. This we then identify as the Yellow Fort or Caer Melyn, which
became Ca'Melot in Norman French. It was also known as Cu-bwrd or "The
Mutually Together Table". In the morning, Rhonabwy and his companions travel
across a wide plain, and this would be the Cardiff plain where the city now
stands. They meet Iddawg the Churn (the Churner up of strife, in modern Britain
he would be called a "stirrer") who takes them along an ancient road, and this
would be the Roman road across the Vale of Glamorgan.
Finally they arrive at an island on the Banks of the Severn, and this can only be
the island and defended areas at the Banks of the Severn where the Ogmore and
Ewenny Rivers join the mighty Severn Estuary. Here King Arthur is gathering
his armies at early morning to go off to fight the Battle of Badon at noon. An
odd incident is recorded when a youth fails to recognise the king, and splashes
him when he excitedly rides his horse in the river. This could easily happen at
the ford alongside Ogmore Castle even today.
So we took a map and estimated that an army of cavalry and infantry would
probably move about six to seven miles by noon. We then measured out six and
seven miles with a pair of compasses and scribed two circles from the island
between the Ogmore and Ewenny Rivers. There, north, northwest of the army
gathering site, and just 6 ½ miles away was Mynydd Baedan. So we had a clear
and accurate story emerging.
At Mynydd Baedan we have as stated the place name of Maes-cad-lawr or "Field
of Battle Area", and place names for Cynan Garwyn and his father Cynwyd
Cynwydion, and Bryn Llywarch for old Llywarch Hen, all supporters of King
Arthur. There is also a small valley called the Place of Chastisement, where
presumably the defeated were driven and slaughtered. Also at the north end of
Maescadlawr there is the ancient manor hall site of Gad-Ilys, which means
simply battle court. It is the Baedan equivalent of Battle Abbey over at Hastings.
The final piece of evidence comes from the end of the Dream of Rhonabwy
story, where King Arthur instructs his followers to gather at Cerniw that night.
This Cerniw cannot be Cornwall, which is almost 300 miles away by land
routes, and well over 100 by sea. Instead it is Cerniw, just west of Cardiff some
20 miles west of Mynydd Baedan. It is in this area of Cerniw – still marked on
the maps – that Caer Melyn or Ca'Melot is situated.
After spending the night at the home of Heilyn Coch ap Cadwgan ap Iddon the
three searchers Rhonabwy, Cynwrig Ffrych, and Cadwgan Glew, cross the plain
of Argryngrog in Rhonabwy's Dream. The name Heilyn Coch ap Cadwgan ap
Iddon is unmistakably Glamorgan-Gwent descent, and the yellow oxhide upon
which Rhonabwy sleeps is indicative of Caer Melyn – the Yellow Fort – at
Cerniw on the east boundary of Cardiff. Therefore, the name Argryngrog needs
analysis.
The Maes-Cad-Lawr, or the fields of the battle area of Mynydd Bean. This view is from the lower
grave mounds in the centre of the battlefield looking southeast.
Photograph by Chris Barber

Argryngrog means ruffled or folded in the sense of a series of folds. This is a
quite perfect description of the now Vale of Glamorgan area, which stretches
west from Cardiff to the joint estuary of the Ewenny and Ogmore Rivers. At this
estuary the armies are gathering close to the Rhyd y Groes, or ford of the cross.
Not only is Argryngrog a perfect landscape description of the Vale of
Glamorgan, the old road across the "ruffled folds" or land in the Vale arrives at
Groes Ewenny, now Ewenny Cross, where there was formerly a ford and now a
bridge over the river. This highly probable Ford of the Cross is just a mile from
the army gathering place on the shores of the Severn, and the Dream of
Rhonabwy story tells how the army's tents stretched for a mile from the ford of
the Cross to where Arthur was.
History records two Battles of Baedan, and certainly one of them took place on
the Maes-cad-lawr or Fields of Battle Area on Mynydd Baedan in the Maesteg
Valley.

Mynydd Baedan, the view looking northwest across the Maes-Cad-Lawr or battlefield area with
grave mounds in the centre.
Photograph by Chris Barber











PART FOUR: THE STRUGGLE OVER THE
SUCCESSION TO THE THRONE
The epic of King Arthur embodies in it the story of a struggle for power within
the Isle of Britain. The seeds of the struggle were ages old, and can be discerned
in the simple statement in the Mabinogion tale of Branwen, daughter of Llyr,
where the news is brought that Caswallon ap Beli of the Lloegres (England)
area, has usurped the leadership of Britain from Bran ap Llyr Llediath of the
South Wales area, whilst Bran was over in Ireland. In later centuries this
resolved itself into a rivalry between the House of Bran in South Wales and the
House of Coel based in York and the far North.
At some time around 500 to 520 much of the East and North was over-run by
invaders, a confederation of Germanic tribes including the Saxons and Angles,
together with Irish and Scots from Ireland, and the Picts of Northern Britain.
This caused a great number of the leaders of the Northern British to move South
into Wales. There seem to have been many battles fought in the northern areas of
Britain, and there seems to have been a constant pressure on the princes of both
East and Northern Britain.
One of the many notable princes who fled south was Cynfarch Oer, a leading
prince of the Royal Clan of Coel. Remarkably we find a very positive reference
to Cynfarch Oer in the records of the Book of Llandaff, where King Arthwyr ap
Meurig – Arthur – makes a land grant concerning the church and tomb of St.
Cynfarch. Many kings and princes retired to a life of contemplation when they
grew old, and they often founded small churches, which were named after them.
In this way they became saints, for the superstition of the age was such that a
man's name written in a Holy Book in a church guaranteed heaven, as did a
name carved on a stone in such a location. To be actually buried in a church
which one had founded was the ultimate guarantee.
The importance of this Cynfarch Oer was that he had three sons, and these were
Llew, Arawn and Urien. One of these, Llew, married Gwyar the daughter of
Meurig ap Tewdrig, the sister of King Arthur. The probability is that the whole
family was in South Wales during the period when the invaders overran their
northern lands. The existence of the grave of Cynfarch Oer in South Wales
indicates this. From this wedding of Llew and Gwyar came certainly one and
probably two sons. One was Gwalchmai, the Hawk of May, and the other was
Modred, the prince who rebelled against King Arthur. The location of the
battlesites of Arthur demonstrates that the paramount king of the Southern
British marched up to the North and drove out the invaders who were
threatening all Britain. A number of sources tell of how he made Llew, Arawn
and Urien, all kings in the distant North, and it is quite clear that he restored their
lands to them. So we have yet another important figure in the Arthurian saga
actually locatable, buried in Gwent. The present church of Cynfarch is now St.
Kinnemark just outside Chepstow and here the grandfather of Modred ap Llew is
said to lie, all giving greater substance to the whole of the Arthurian drama.
From the Book of Llandaff we can learn that King Arthwyr – Arthur – had two
brothers named Idnerth and Frioc. Whether or not the elder King Meurig, the
father of these three, was in some way incapacitated and unable to lead the
armies is conjecture, but it would seem to be the case. The succession to the
crown of Britain would seem to be secure through King Arthur and his son,
Nowi, and alternatively through his brother, Idnerth. For some reason the third
brother, Frioc, seems to have been unsuitable, as we will see. The other heirs
who would be considered would have been the sons of King Arthur's three
sisters who were Anna, married to Amwn Ddu, Affrella, married to Umbraefael,
and Gwyar, married to King Llew ap Cynfarch. All three had sons who were
nephews of King Arthur, and all would have been eligible for election as king. In
Britain, kings were elected; the idea of patriarchy is English. The intention was
to get the best man. In modern times the election of presidents is a development
of this thinking. The sons of Anna and Affrella were religious types however,
and seem to have been unsuited to warfare and kingship. The most famous of
them was Samson, who held office in several Welsh monasteries before spending
much of his life as Bishop of Dol in Britanny. He returned to die and be buried in
Britain. This left the sons of Gwyar, who were Modred and Gwallchmai.
The Charters of Llancarfan tell of how there was a murder plot and Idnerth, the
brother of King Arthur, and Arthen ap Brychan Brechiniog were, along with a
third man, killed by a group of assassins led by Euan Burr. Most likely the
murderers were hoping to kill Arthur and Idnerth, but they only got Idnerth. The
whole plot was covered up by the Abbots Cadoc and Illtyd, who were probably
trying to prevent a civil war, and Euan Burr was hidden secretly to begin a 14-
year sentence of penitence in a monastery run by Cadoc at Usk in Gwent. This
action, however, usurped the law, for it avoided the payment of a blood fine to
the dead man's near relatives. It took King Arthur seven years to find Euan Burr
hidden away in the monastery at Usk, and the king called in the Judges who
awarded him the blood fine of 300 cows. Arthur chose the valuable red and
white cows, which seem to be the forerunners of todays Hereford animals. The
fine was paid after seven years and the Welsh laws confirm that certain
monasteries could offer seven years sanctuary.
This blow to the ruling family was followed by another, for there can be little or
no doubt that the son of King Arthur was killed in the War of the Vandal
Invasion in 548-549 A.D. There is in the Llandaff Charters the Charter of Prince
Nowi, son of Arthur, where estates are granted to aging Bishop Dyfrig in West
Wales – Dyfed. Other sources give, not the name of Arthur's son but his
description. In Mabinogion Tales and in Poetry he is described as "Llacheu", and
this is not a name, for it means the Gleaming One or the Glitterlng One. It
requires very little stretch of the imagination to see that the son and heir of the
king-emperor of all Britain would be a prince plastered with gold and silver
ornaments and armour. It seems that we have Nowi-Llacheu, or Noah the
Glittering One, or more loosely Noah the Magnificent. Gruffydd ap Arthur
included a mention of the grave of the son of King Arthur in Herefordshire – the
old area of Ergyng, and referred to as the prince as Anir, just as the Mabinogion
Tales of "Geraint and Enid" identify him as Amhar. Again, this does not appear
to be a name, and the tradition of Ergyng was in folklore that Anir was killed by
Arthur himself. This tangle again seems to resolve itself into a situation where a
description has been confused with a name. Here we have Nowi-Llacheu being
involved in the war with the Vandal king of Africa – a correct description, and
with Vandal forces scattered across Northern Glamorgan, Brecon, and Hereford,
there can be little doubt that Prince Nowi and others were under orders to locate
the Vandal army and not to engage it until King Arthur and the others came up.
One way or the other the son of Arthur was killed, and the Culhwch and Olwen
story calls him "Gwydre".
The answer to Amhar or Anir as Nowi-Llacheu lies in the terms used in the
Welsh laws, for with mab, the word for son, we have mab anwar, a son who,
having it in his power, defeats his father's will – he disobeys. This has become
corrupted to Anir and Amhar. The other word gwydre is simply glass or vitreous,
and again it seems to be a derivation of the word gwrda or good man. Certainly,
there is the mound of stones at Licat Anir in Ergyng in Herefordshire – Ergyng,
which marks the traditional site. The stone at Dorstone in Hereford, close to the
Brecon border, is by some traditions that of a king foolish enough to disobey
King Arthur. Whether or not he died of rashness through disregarding military
orders or was possibly killed by Arthur is conjecture. Certainly the evidence in
charters, poems and Bruts, as well as other sources, would have preserved note
of the enormous crime and sin if King Arthur had killed his own son. Even the
killing of minor princes in any other circumstance than war with foreign enemies
provoked an uproar. As for gwydre, meaning glass or vitreous, this is probably
another old adjective denoting shining or glittering.
The scenario that we believe emerges is one where King Arthur is the executive
king and his father, King Meurig, is semi-retired into an advisory role. The
Prince Idnerth has been murdered, and Prince Nowi ap Arthur has been killed in
the war with the Vandals from North Africa. For some reason or other, Frioc ap
Meurig is either ineligible or unsuitable and Samson, son of Anna, together with
the other sons of Anna and Affrella are becoming men of the church. The only
direct heirs left to succeed King Arthur are Modred and Gwallchmai, the sons of
his sister Gwyar married to King Llew ap Cynfarch Oer. There can be no doubt
that under these circumstances around 570 A.D., the Prince Modred would have
been utterly and completely confident of succeeding Arthur as ruler of Britain.
Here we come to the event that caused the civil war, which broke the power of
the British. It is a certainty that King Arthur took another wife and married
again. The Triads name three Gwenhwyfars – Guineveres – at King Arthur's
court, see Triad No. 59 in series I, where we find "the three chief queens of
Arthur", Gwenhwyfar, daughter of Gwythyr, son of Greidiawl; Gwenhwyfar
Gawryd Ceint (who caused the quarrelling and fighting); and Gwenhwyfar, the
daughter of Ogyrfran Fawr. In series II, the Triad No. 16 states: "The three chief
queens of Arthur were Gwenhwyfar, daughter of Guryt of Gwent, and
Gwenhwyuar daughter of the son of Gredyawl, and Gwenhwyuar daughter of
Ocurvran Gawr". This is repeated in Series 3, Triad No. 109, "Three Brides of
Arthur, who certainly were the three chief queens, none above Gwenhwyfar,
daughter of Gwythyr, son of Greidiawl; and Gwenhwyfar daughter of "Gawrwyd
Ceint"; and Gwenhwyfar, daughter of Ogyrvran Gawr". Here "Gawrwyd Ceint",
meaning shouting and quarrelling, is written as a name. Actually, Welsh tradition
gives Arthur two wives, and the story of his executing Hueil ap Caw involves
Arthur chasing a mistress. Triad No. 110 supports this by naming three "love-
wives" or mistresses of King Arthur. It states: "Three chief mistresses of King
Arthur, first Garwen, daughter of Henyn Tegyrn Gwyr at Ystrad Tywy, and
Gwyl, daughter of Eutaw of Caerworgorn, and Ideg, daughter of Afarwy of
Maelienydd. Caerworgorn was of course later called Llanilltyd Fawr and now is
corrupted to Llantwit Major. These love-wives would be common law wives in
our day.
Into the confusion of this power struggle we have to include the strange figure of
King Mark, whom we have identified as the Mediaeval Romance King Mark, the
Welsh March ap Meirchion, the Breton, Count Comorre, and the Frankish Count
Conomurus. We know of the tradition that Mark was the persistent rival of King
Arthur, and his enemy. So who exactly was King Mark?
We believe that he was yet another alias brought about through the changes in
translation, in pronunciation, and spellings. The position in Britain was simply
that King Arthur ap Meurig was the leading ruler of the Southern House of Bran,
and that King Mark was the leading and rival ruler of the House of Coel based in
York in the North. King Arthur can be said to have dominated Britain, which
was then Wales, and Mark dominated Lloegres, which is now England. They
were contemporary rivals, with Mark older than the young Arthur.
In piecing together the genealogy of the House of Coel, we find a leading Prince
at this time. He was Cinmarc ap Meirchaun ap Gurgust ap Cenen ap Coel. In
Welsh tales we find March ap Meirchiaun. The Triad evidence is the same, and it
is either a case of Merchiaun having two sons named Cinmarc and Marc or
March, or that these are the same man. It does appear that Cinmarc is close to
Marc or March or Mark and that Cinmarc, who is Cinfarch, and Marc, who is
March or Mark, were brothers.
The importance of this identification is that Cinmarc or Cynfarch was the father
of Urbgen known as Urien, and also of Arawn and Llew. This brings us back to
the three kings set up by King Arthur in the old Roman province of Valentia –
Affallach – to hold the North of Britain. As we know that Prince Modred ap
Llew ap Cinmarc ap Merchiaun led the great civil war rebellion against King
Arthur, we again tie back to the traditional enmity between old Cinmarc, who is
Marc, and King Arthur. The story can be taken further, for Cinmarc appears as
Cynfarch and is buried there. So if this Cinmarc, who is Cynfarch, is King
Mark’s brother, as it appears he is, we have a remarkable piece of historical
evidence. Under his alias Count Conomurus, King Mark was killed in a well-
recorded battle in Britanny in 556 A.D., where a charge by British cavalry
decided the issue. This is clearly recorded by the history of the contemporary
historian Gregory of Tours.
Remarkably, the Llandafff Charters record that King Arthwyr ap Meurig made a
Charter grant to the church containing the tomb of St. Cynvarch in Gwent.
There is nothing unusual at all in Cynfarch being translated to sainthood simply
because he was royal and buried in a holy church. What is remarkable is that this
is very direct and clear evidence that our King Arthur – Arthwyr ap Meurig –
was well and truly alive after 556 A.D. He may well have made his donation to
the church of Cynfarch as a form of peace offering for killing King Mark, or
simply because his sister, Gwyar, was married to Llew son of Cynvarch.
It is wholly significant that the Welsh record March – King Mark – as being
allied, and ruling over people who spoke five languages, and including the hated
Saxons, Norsemen and the other German allies. In identical fashion, his
grandson Modred ap Llew ap Cinmarc fought King Arthur with a huge number
of Germanic and Pict allies. There is a consistent thread running right through
these bare facts.
The matter explodes even further when we take into account the fact that
Meirchiaun's own brother was named Eleuther, also known as Elydir or Elifyr
(Oliver). This Eleuther was married to Eurgain, the daughter of King Maelgwn
Gwynedd – Sir L'Ancelot – and when he also got ideas about seizing the crown
of Britain, he was killed by Rhun, the successor of King Maelgwn in North
Wales. This again is an example of the struggle. The sons of Eleuther were the
princes Gurci and Peredur, and these were princes of York who were killed
around 580 A.D. These same princes Gwrgi and Peredur are found named with
Arthur Penuchel in the old Brecon Manuscripts – Vespasian A XIV – Harleian
4181 Manuscripts, and Arthur Penuchel indisputably means Arthur of
Glamorgan. It is very difficult to accept that Arthur Penuchel and Gwrgi and
Peredur are of different generations with Arthur dying as early as 537 A.D. and
Gwrgi and Peredur in 580 A.D. All the evidence in Triads and elsewhere is that
they were contemporary.
King Mark, March, or Marc, his brother, being Cynvarch, is therefore traceable
as being buried at the church of St. Kinnemark near Chepstow in Gwent, and
King Arthur again has to be recognized as living on to around 575 A.D. In thus
tracing King Mark of legend we go another stage further in bringing the epic of
Arthur back to stark reality, and from out of the muddle of folklore and myth.
As for old Conomurus or King Mark, we find him stirring up trouble in Britain
and Britanny and getting himself killed along with his German allies at
Ploueneur Menez in 556 A.D. Then probably around 562 A.D., his great nephew
Modred also pits himself against King Arthur, and the result is again a death and
defeat of the Northern prince and his German and Pict allies. A remarkable
number of the cast of this drama are traceable even in death, with King Tewdrig
– Theoderic buried at Mathern in Gwent, and Cynvarch – Cyn- march not far
away at St. Kinnemark in Gwent. The son of Tewdrig was King Meurig and he
lies at Llandaff, and his son, King Arthur, lies at Coed-y-Mwstyr in Glamorgan.
A strong tradition holds that King Morgan, son of Arthur, lies at Margam Abbey
in Glamorgan, and amongst others Pabo Post Prydain – Pompey the Pillar of
Britain lies at Llanbabo in Anglesey in North Wales where a tombstone exists –
he was nephew of Meirchiaun, whose own father was Gurgust. Sawyl, the son of
Pabo, lies at Llanasa in Flint in Wales, a first cousin of Meirchiaun; and Eleuther,
the brother of Meirchiaun, was killed near Caernarvon at a brookside hill named
after him. King Urbgen – Urien son of Cynvarch – killed by his cousin Morcant
Bulc ap Cincarbrant ap Bran Hen ap Dumngual ap Garbaniawn ap Coel Hen, at
some time around 590 A.D. in the North. The princes Gwrgi and Peredur fell at
York around 580 A.D.
The fall of Britain is really the collapse of Prydain meaning the Northern
Kingdom, and as such the loss of Lloegres. The people known as the Welsh were
never driven West into Wales, for they were there all the time for centuries. They
stood fast and held their land and accepted kinsmen from the North of England.

The family tree chart above tells a significant story, and it assists in
demonstrating that conventional scholars place King Arthur and others far too
early in the sixth century. Dunawd or Dunaut the son of Pabo Post Prydain is the
Dunawd, who was a great soldier who then turned Abbot, and as a very old man
he disputed the rights of St. Augustine in Britain in 597 A.D. This hardly fits
with Modred, the great-grandson of Meirchiaun who was a first cousin of
Dunawd's grandfather, fighting with King Arthur in 537 A.D. Equally, King
Urbgen-Urien was killed around 590-596 A.D. by Morcant Bluc, and as Urien
was brother of Modred's father, Llew, it is an anachronism if Urien dies 53 to 59
years after his nephew is killed as a grown man and general. In the same way
both Gwrci and Peredur were first cousins and contemporaries of Cinmarc –
King Mark – and so great uncles of Modred, and again it is not acceptable that
these family contemporaries of Modred's grandfather die around 580 A.D., some
43 years after the Battle of Camlan.
The other clear anachronism is Eleuther ap Gurgust the brother of Meirchiaun,
the great-grandfather of Modred. If Eleuther married Eurgain, the daughter of
King Maelgwn Gwynedd, and was killed by Rhun around 560-575 A.D. or later,
then there is no way that Modred could have fought and died at Camlan in 537
A.D. The battle with King Arthur has to be around 562 A.D., with Modred a
young man against Arthur in his 50s.
The death of March – King Mark – at Ploueneur Menez in 556 A.D. also argues
against the time of the Battle of Camlan and Modred's death being in 537 A.D.
As Cinmarc was the grandfather of Modred he would hardly be active in battle
some 20 years after his grandson's death. Simple commonsense dictates that after
March died, the military leadership of the northern clan passed to Modred. This
would place the Battle of Ploueneur Menez in 556 A.D., which is not open to
dispute, and the Battle of Camlan several years later probably in 570 A.D.
The battle of Ploueneur Menez saw the British allied to the Franks against
Conomurus and Chramn, the son of King Clothair, the king of the Franks, and
Tristan, the son of Tallwch. Drustans, son of Conomurus – King Mark – seems
to have been involved as the Germanic forces sent to aid Mark landed in the Bay
of Douarnenez at the Isle of Tristan. The story of the battle and of Conomurus-
Mark's attempts to seize Britanny by political intrigue and marriage is well
known. He sought to take over the lands of the recently dead Canao in Vannes
and Riwal in Domnonee-Dumnonia. In fact the three powerful princes of
Britanny all died within a few years of each other – Budic, Canao and Riwal.
THE PATTERN OF EVENTS DURING THE REIGNS OF THE
ARTHURS
In our volumes "King Arthur – King of Glamorgan and Gwent" and "Arthur and
the Charter of the Kings", we concentrated on establishing the identities of the
kings. So much had been written which was false and misdirected that the first
task was to reinstate both the mighty Arthurs to their rightful places – Arthur ap
Mascen Wledig as the conqueror of Western Europe between 383-388 A.D., and
Arthur ap Meurig ap Tewdrig as the mighty defender and liberator of Britain
between 518-575 A.D. We did not attempt in those first volumes to set the
events of the sixth century into their proper order, for it was necessary to
resurrect King Arthur as the paramount king of South Wales. Now we can begin
to explain what happened in his time that was so extraordinary.
The chronology of the period goes as follows. Early Welsh Chronicles are simple
lists of years, 100 years to a page in four vertical columns of 25 years. Entries
are then made against dates between the columns. No one seems to have
considered that an entry written between two columns might conceivably have
meant reference to the year on the right or to the left. So with the tradition that
King Arthur ap Meurig ap Tewdrig was born in 503 A.D., he would have been
only 15 years old if the Battle of Badon took place in 518 A.D. If the Battle of
Badon were in 543 A.D., however, King Arthur would have been 40, a king-
emperor at the height of his power. In the same way, the Modred rebellion
couldn’t have taken place in 537 A.D.; the date is too early.
But 562 A.D. is marvelously corect. The terrifying pestilence of the "Holy Grail"
struck Britain between 555-562 A.D. when all plants and vegetation died, and all
men, animals, birds, fish and even reptiles, and the whole population fled to
Brittany until it was safe to return. So in 562 A.D., Modred was prepared to take
his chance to seize the reviving lands from his uncle, King Arthur, who was still
over in Britanny until it was safe to return. In 562 A.D., King Arthur would have
been 59 years, and in 570 A.D. he would have been 67 years old, and his nephew
Modred would have been somewhere around 35 to 40, and would have very
much fancied his chance against the older Arthur.
In addition to this we know that a great battle was fought at Llongborth –
Penbryn – where King Arthur was present, hewing down his enemies. Here
Geraint ap Erbin, king of Cornwall and Devon, was killed, and the Life of St.
Teilo tells how Teilo sent a stone coffin for the dying King Geraint in 562 or 570
A.D. All the ancient histories tell how Modred attempted to stop King Arthur
from landing from Britanny, and this fits the battle fought at Llongborth, with
King Arthur fighting his way ashore. A great number of ancient manuscripts
were copied haphazardly by novice monks learning to read and write, and what
we have may be the work of a left-handed writer, or a casual copyist. What is
clear is that by reading the dates to the right in preference to those on the left, the
events of the sixth century make sense and fit – otherwise, they do not.
It is, for example, nonsense to accept that King Arthur set up the Regent Urien
ap Cynvarch before 537 A.D., and that Urien was killed by Morgant in 595 A.D.
The revisions put Urien as being murdered around 595 A.D. and the war
between the British of the North following with the correctly dated Battle of
Armterid in 573 A.D. King Arthur died around 579 A.D., and King Maelgwn
Gwynedd, the Sir L'Ancelot of mediaeval legends, died around 590-596 A.D.
Here we have another of the great unsubstantiated assumptions of history, for
King Maelgwn died in a plague known as the "Yellow Plague of Rhos", which
has been wrongly identified with the "Great Plague". There is no evidence
whatsoever to show that this was the same plague. In fact all the evidence shows
that these were separate events, and King Maelgwn died much later than the end
of the Great Plague in 562 A.D. King Morgan, who followed Arthur as king of
South Wales, is clearly of around 579 A.D. at earliest and he had to kill Frioc a
brother of Arthur to succeed until 667 A.D., and it is therefore inconceivable that
his father King Arthur died in 537 or 542 A.D.
There is the added peculiarity of King Mark – March ap Meirchion – of the
South Gloucester and Wiltshire area also being over in Britanny around 555-556
A.D. and he was perhaps also trying to escape the Pestilence. In Britanny, Mark
was known as Conomurus or Count Comorre, and he attempted to seize power
by usurpation. Fortunately, a contemporary historian, St. Gregory of Tours,
recorded the events that fit exactly with Breton folktales and ruins. King Mark or
Count Comorre and his allies were defeated and destroyed in battle in 556 A.D.,
and the decisive factor was a charge by British cavalry. As King Arthur was over
in Britanny at the time, having probably gone to escape the Plague, which began
in 555 A.D., it is entirely probable that he put matters in order and restored the
rightful ruler, Ithael, in the region of Eastern Dumnonia. In British tradition,
King Arthur and King Mark were inveterate enemies, and the Llancarfan
Charters prove them to be of the same period.
So we can now sort out the muddle and begin to get the events into order, and
the picture that then emerges is stark and clear. One point that needs to be taken
into account is that when a king is recorded as falling in battle, the "fall" means
defeat, and not necessarily death. We have used every possible source of
information available to reconstruct the events of the reign of King Arthur, and
the story is as follows:
500-503 A.D. King Arthur is born, son of King Meurig the Uthyr Pendragon, and grandson of King Tewdrig ap
Teithfallt. His mother is Onbrawst, the daughter of Gwrgan Mawr.

509 A.D. The Saxons again raid Morganwg, and are defeated by King Meurig. The old King Tewdrig is
killed in the fighting at Brochwaels Pool at Tintern, and buried at Mathern in Gwent. King
Meurig is remembered in Glamorgan as "Meurig is a great name". The Anglo Saxon Chronicle
records King Tewdrig's death as Natanleod.

518-520 A.D. The young King Arthur is commanding the armies as the AilTeyrn or Regent under King
Meurig.

530-540 A.D. The Saxons under Cerdic and Ceaulin attack the Northern British and win a decisive battle at
Cattraeth. This is recorded in the epic poem of the Gododdin by Aneurin ap Caw who was one of
three surviving British noblemen out of 363 at the battle. How many ordinary men died is not
known.

535-545 A.D. King Arthur as war king for his father, the paramount King Meurig, leads the combined British
armies to recover the North. Twelve great battles are fought to destroy and drive out the
immigrant Saxons, Angles, Picts, Irish and Scots. Modern archaeology confirms an Anglo-Saxon
return into Germany at this time. Nennius the Northern historian records the twelve battles in 822
A.D. Kings from all over Britain and Britanny support Arthur in his wars, including Howell,
king of Britanny.

548-549 A.D. The Vandals, defeated in North Africa in 534 A.D by Belissarius the General of Justinian, the
Emperor of Constantinople, finally leave North Africa after a 15-year struggle and invade Ireland
and then Britain. They are opposed by King Arthur in Ireland and in the war in South Wales,
where the sons of King Arthur are killed. These are the sons of Gwenhwyfar, daughter of
Garawyd Ceint. The Vandals are driven out into Mercia and become the Mercians, and the war is
recorded in the Culhwch and Olwen story of the Boar Hunt of Twrch Trwyth.

549-550 A.D. King Arthur takes a second wife to get sons and heirs. At some time or other his brother Idnerth
is murdered in a plot recorded in the Llancarfan Charters and the Life of St. Cadoc. His second
queen, Gwenhwyfar, daughter of Ogyrvran Gawr, who began a scandalous affair with Medrawd
ap Caurdaf ap Caradoc Vreichfras, fled to Perthshire in Scotland, where King Arthur caught her
and allowed his war dogs to tear her to pieces.

550-556 A.D. The upheavals in the North had displaced many princes and one March ap Meirchion, a very
senior prince known as King Mark, or Count Comorre, or Connomurus, becomes greatly
troublesome, finally attempting to dominate all Britanny. At this time King Arthur is establishing
Llew, Arawn and Urien, the sons of Cynvarch Oer, the brother of March ap Meirchion, as
northern kings. In 556 A.D. March is killed in battle in Britanny; his Norse and Saxon allies are
routed.

555-556 A.D. * The disaster of the great pestilence and plague following the near collision of the Comet
subsequently known as the Holy Grail devastates Britain. Great areas become uninhabitable and
many migrate to Britanny. At this time, the heirs to King Arthur are his nephews Gwalchmai and
Medrawd, the sons of Llew ap Cynvarch and Gwyar, the sister of Arthur. King Arthur's brothers
St. Pawl and Frioc are for various reasons ineligible.

562 A.D. King Arthur either declares that Gwalchmai is the Edling or Heir Apparent, or more likely he
marries a third queen to get sons and heirs. This is Queen Gwenhwyfar, daughter of Gwythyr
Mawr. Either way this provokes Medrawd ap Llew to revolt and to attempt to seize Britain. He
follows his uncle March ap Meirchion in allying with the Angles, Saxons, Irish and Picts, to
oppose Arthur. King Arthur returns from Britanny with his army and lands at Cardigan Bay,
 where Geraint of Cornwall is killed as recorded in the poem of Llongborth. The rebel Medrawd
flees to Camlan in Mid-Wales and there the terrible civil war battle is fought out. After the battle,
King Arthur moves on up into Affalach-Valentia and proceeds to devastate the northern kingdom
of Medrawd. Alan Fyrgan, son of Howell of Britanny supports King Arthur.

562-563 A.D. King Arthur perhaps dominates the North from the Isle of Arran. The Great Wasteland of central
Britain is becoming rehabitable. Britain is now terribly weak following the triple tragedy of the
Vandal Wars, the Comet Plague, and the Civil War caused by Medrawd ap Llew. The central
control of the British kings is slipping. At this time King Meurig still lives as senior king, and at
some unspecified date, Cynfeddw attempts to obtain control in South Wales, probably with
Meurig old and Arthur wounded. King Meurig reacts and murders Cynfeddw as recorded in the
Llandaff Charters. The British state holds together.

562-579 A.D. King Arthur and his third queen have three sons, Morgan, Ithael and possibly Gweadnerth. These
young princes are the future heirs to the British Crown. Unlike the Irish high king, both Arthur
and Meurig avoid all-out conflict with the church. The murderer of Prince Idnerth serves seven
years sanctuary imprisonment at Usk, and when the time expires, King Arthur is waiting outside
the gates for him. The judges are called and Euan Burr is sent for a new second term of seven
years sanctuary as a result of St. Cadoc ap Gwynlliw paying 300 Hereford cows for the life of
Idnerth.

570-572 A.D. King Meurig dies at a great age, probably near 100 years. Now King Arthur is around 70 and has
young sons.

575-579 A.D. King Arthur dies, and Morgan is too young – not yet 14 – and cannot inherit. The death of the
king is kept secret, and his embalmed body is taken by his close kinsmen to the cave of Lingarth
at Coed y Mwstyr where old St. Illtyd, the first cousin of Arthur and senior churchman of the
Morganwg clan, lives. Here St. Illtyd secretly buries the king as described in Section 22 of the
Life of St. Illtyd. King Arthur is probably said to be voyaging in the North or over in Britanny
and the secret holds.

577-578 A.D. Morgan comes of age and is declared king of the British. This results in a furious quarrel with
Frioc ap Meurig, the brother of Arthur, and King Morgan is forced to fight and kill his uncle.

570-578 A.D. Without an active king, the Welsh clans meet on a beach and elect Maelgwn Gwynedd as
paramount king. With Arthur dead, fighting breaks out in the North. A great battle is fought at
Armterid near Carlisle involving Gwenddolau ap Ceidiaw and Aeddan, and Rhydderch Hael and
Maelgwn Gwynedd. Previous revolts were crushed by King Arthur who executed Huail ap Caw
on a stone still seen in the centre of Ruthin. King Maelgwn Gwynedd is "Sir L'Ancelot".

578-590 A.D. The whole of the North falls under the domination of King Urien Rheged who was a main
supporter and ally of King Arthur. King Urien moved up north from the Gower and Dyfed area
to his ancestral lands, and the stories of his 12 great battles with the Angles are recorded in epic
poetry. He drives the Angle king onto Lindisfarne.

590-595 A.D. King Urien is murdered by Morcant, the brother of Rhydderch Hael, who is his great rival for
power in the North. King Morgan ap Arthur rules South Wales but the British kingship is split,
never to be reunited under another great paramount king-emperor. King Morgan moves North to
destroy the army of King Ethelfrith who invaded North Wales around 612 and is in his turn a
very great Morganwg war king. The northern princes destroy each other's power, as the Angle
power grows, and the Mercian kings grow in strength in the Midlands, and North Wales is no
longer under the control of the Welsh kings in the southeast.

*AUTHORS' NOTE: FULL, DETAILED EVIDENCE OF THE COMET GIVEN IN KING

ARTHUR'S INVISIBLE KINGDOM".

This is what emerges from the mass of scattered scraps of evidence available to
us, and there is in fact no shortage of evidence available. The three great
kingdoms of the future England are forming in Northumbria of the Angles,
Mercia of the Vandals, and in Wessex of the West Saxons. The Britain that we
know today is taking shape, and whilst in England the old British and the
immigrant population slowly begin to merge together, Wales and the British stay
separate and distinct. The division is reinforced by the new religious differences,
as the Church of Rome infiltrates into the new Germanic kingdoms, and the old
Celtic church of the British remains different and uncorrupted in Wales. Wars
take on a religious nature and a frontier of separation as firm as any Iron Curtain
now grows to divide the two different national groupings.
The achievement of King Arthur in preserving the nation's separateness and
identity at a time when all other states of Western Europe were submerged by the
Barbarian flood of invasion, is remembered and preserved in his homeland of
South East Wales. Here the old story was preserved until the coming of the
Normans, when it was spread all over Europe. The descendants of Arthur
survive mainly in Morganwg and the kings last until mediaeval times.
The evidence of the secret burial still remains at Coed y Mwstyr cave – the Cave
of the Pavillions in the Forest of Mystery.
MEDRAWD THE TRAITOR
The Welsh Triads, the Historical Bruts, the Folklore and Poems, all tell of the
traitor named Medrawd who was a nephew of King Arthur. This immediately
raises a very strange problem, for we have to decide on the identity of Medrawd.
The name is as usual variously spelled in the old manuscripts, and appears as
Medrawd, Medrawt, as Modred and even as Melwas. The difficulty is that King
Arthur had two relatives named Medrawd.
First we have Medrawd ap St. Caurdaf ap Caradoc Vreichfras. This Caradoc was
a brother of Queen Onbrawst who as wife to King Meurig was the mother of
King Arthur. So Medrawd ap Caurdaf qualifies as a second cousin, but may have
been called nephew.
Second we have Medrawd ap Llew ap Cynvarch Oer, and Llew married to
Gwyar the sister of King Arthur. So Medrawd ap Llew is a nephew of King
Arthur.
Geographically we know that Caradoc Vreichfras was generally thought to have
held authority in South Wales and on occasion in Britanny. His son Caurdaf had
his monastery at the woods at Miskin, where it still stands in remarkable
preservation. This monastery was a mere 1½ miles from Llaniltern, and here
young Medrawd ap Caurdaf would have lived with his parents. Welsh saints and
clergy were habitually married. This is important, for tradition strongly asserts
that King Arthur the Ail-Teyrn or Viceroy lived at Llaniltern with his second
wife, Gwenhwyfar. King Arthur was around 45 to 50 years old and his sons from
his first marriage were all killed in the Vandal War of 548 A.D. Whilst he was
away on business, the young queen formed a liason with Medrawd, and they met
frequently at a grove still identified as the Thicket or Grove of Medrawd or
Melwas. Llwyn Melwas is a farm just north of Llaniltern.
The outcome of this illicit affair was that the young lovers decided to run away,
and they fled 500 miles to Perthshire in Scotland. The enraged King Arthur
pursued them, and when he caught up with them he allowed his war dogs to tear
the young queen to pieces. This happened at Alyth and the queen's remains were
buried in the next parish of Meigle where her mound tomb and remarkable
tombstone are still preserved today. The amazing thing is that the identical
folktale was remembered down the ages both at Llaniltern and at Meigle, two
places 500 miles apart (Alaeth means "great lamentation").
The close proximity of the monastic residence of St. Caurdaf to Llaniltern
identifies Medrawd ap Caurdaf as the seducer of King Arthur's young queen.
This solves half of the problem of who was the traitor Medrawd.
The other Medrawd ap Llew ap Cynvarch Oer can be placed further away to the
North and he would have found it very difficult to carry on a clandestine affair
with the queen. Llew ap Cynvarch was appointed as northern king, and is
variously supposed to have ruled areas in Southern Scotland and to have held
Caer Evrawg. The North was the area held by Llew and his brothers Arawn and
Urien Rheged, and there can be little doubt that Medrawd ap Llew ap Cynvarch
lived in what is now Northern England and Southern Scotland. He was married
and had grown sons, and so we can be fairly sure that King Arthur executed
young Medrawd ap Caurdaf around 550 A.D., and this second Medrawd, who
raised a rebellion against King Arthur around 562 A.D. is the son of Llew.
The Medrawd ap Llew, who began a civil war against King Arthur around 562
A.D., had Irish, Pict and Saxon allies, and this definitely places him as coming
from the far north of Britain. The rebellion ended in failure, and Medrawd was
killed at Camlan, just south of Dollgellau in Mid-Wales, by King Arthur. The
sons of Medrawd were pursued and killed by Cystennyn Gornau who was
appointed as his successor by the wounded King Arthur. King Arthur went north
and ravaged Valentia-Afallach, the areas of the North from where the rebels had
come, and the war ended.
So to answer the question – Which Medrawd was the traitor to King Arthur? It is
simply, "Both of Them". One seduced his second wife, and the other started a
civil war or rebellion, probably when King Arthur took a third young wife. If
this third queen produced sons, as she did, then Medrawd ap Llew and his
brother Gwalchmai were no longer the heirs to King Arthur through their mother
Gwyar who was Arthur's sister. The final result was that the sons of Arthur by
this third marriage of his old age were too young to inherit when the great king-
emperor died, and so he was buried in secret, in a cave, by his first cousin St.
Illtyd, until the eldest son, Morgan Mwynfawr, was old enough to claim the
throne of South East Wales.
In a strange way King Arthur had a similar problem to Henry VIII, the king of
England, just 1,000 years later. Henry married six times and Arthur had three
queens and three common-law wives. Both needed to leave sons and heirs. Both
also executed queens for adultery, which shamed the king.
THE CHOIRS OF BRITAIN
The correct identification of Afallach as Valentia, a province that is today the far
North of England, and the Southern half of Scotland, has other historical
consequences. There was a custom amongst the British clergy of maintaining
places of perpetual services to God. They carried on singing and praying nonstop
24 hours a day, seven days a week, all the year around. Apparently the monks
took it in turns in well-organised shifts to maintain the perpetual prayers. These
religious houses were very famous, although not of the immense antiquity of the
cathedral church of Llandaff, which is literally Apostolic. The Triads identify
these three important places of the "choirs" where singing praises to the God
went on non-stop. We find descriptions in Triad No. 80 in Series I, and in Triad
No. 84 in Series III, and the inference is that they were pre-Arthurian.
Triad No 80 in Series I names the places of the three choirs as being at Caer
Caradoc, at Bangor and at Afallach. This is better recorded in Triad No 84 of
Series III where we find the locations at the Bangor of Illtyd Farchog – "the
Knight" – at Caerworgorn; second, the Cor Emrys at Caer Caradoc; and third,
the Cor of Bangor Wydrin at Ynys Afallach. These three locations are first
Caerworgorn – Llantwit Major in Glamorgan, the name Llan Illtyd Fawr being
corrupted to Llantwit Major. Here the monastery church is still in use, with a
marvellous collection of very ancient stones and even some very old murals. The
second location is Mynydd-y-Gaer, the place formerly known as Caer Caradoc,
and here there is an ancient church. The third choir is the one located at Bangor
Wydrin in Ynys Afallach, and this we can now trace. First Ynys Afallach is the
old Roman Valentia, and so we are looking north of Hadrian's Wall. The word
Wydrin gives the real clue, for it means "spreading out", and this is precisely
what the revered king Nynniaw – St. Ninnian – did when he founded his
missionary church at Whithorn in old Galloway.
Previously, the wild speculation of many writers had fostered the mistaken idea
that the Bangor Wydrin in Ynys Afallach was the site of the Abbey church at
Glastonbury in Somerset. This had far reaching effects fostering further
unfounded speculation on the reason for King Arthur to visit Afallach. Instead of
being seen as a victorious conqueror moving up to take over possession of his
defeated enemies' lands, and to reclaim his own holdings, he was mistakenly
seen as going to a monastery to be either healed or to die – again speculation. We
can safely rule out Glastonbury from the scene together with all its bogus stories.
Excavation in Whithorn in Galloway has revealed the ruin of a very ancient
church and only the worst sceptic can maintain that this was not the stone-built
church of Nynniaw. The British tradition records its foundation in 398 A.D.
immediately after the visit to Britain of Victricius, the disciple of Ambrose, and
Martin of Tours. This Victricius was Bishop of Rouen in Gaul, and his visit to
spread the ideas of Martin in Britain amongst British bishops and to the king
may have prompted the foundation of the missionary church – the spreading out
Wydrin – of Nynniaw. The venerable Bede recorded that Nynia built the church
in the name of Martin at Candida Casa known as the White House at Whithorn,
and remarked that it was in stone – a method of building not used by the
northern peoples of Britain.
The writings of St. Patrick show that the Picts or at least part of them were
lapsed Christians. Whether Whithorn was destroyed and rebuilt again is not
clear. Certainly, the Irish knew of the Whithorn monastery and they called it
Rosnat, and it seems to have been a very important monastery school from 450
A.D. onwards, if not earlier clear through from 398 A.D. Possibly, the impact of
the thinking of Martin transmitted by Victricius triggered off the thinking of the
British and the spread of their ideas which, reached a pinnacle in Morgan –
Pelagius – the greatest and most polished writer and thinker of his day. That
there was a very important monastery at Whithorn long before King Arthur took
his army into defeated Afallach after the battle of Camlan is beyond dispute.
Triad No. 80 of Series I states, "The three perpetual choirs of the Island of
Britain: one was in the Isle of Afallach (at Whithorn in Valentia now North
England and South of Scotland); the second in Caer Caradoc (Mynydd-y-Gaer in
Glamorgan – St. Peters); and the third at Bangor (Llantwit Major in Glamorgan).
In each of these three Abbeys there were 2,000 religious persons, 100 being
appointed to attend the choir for each hour so that they chanted in rotation
without intermission, and in the course of the day and night the whole performed
their duty, that the service of God might be without ceasing".
Tradition states that King Bran introduced the Christian cult in 58 A.D. and that
King Lleirwg – Lucius – founded or refounded the Llandaff Church around 160
A.D. The founding of Caerworgorn, later Llanilltyd Fawr, was by Cystennyn
Bendigaid – King Constantine the Blessed and King Teithfallch – Theodosius,
the son of King Nynniaw and great-grandfather of King Arthur ap Meurig. This
has been another source of endless scholastic muddle, for with consistent and
typical lack of research, King Teithfallch – Theodosius – has constantly been
confused with the Emperor Theodosius the Great who died in 395 A.D. As
Cystennhyn Bendigaid is known to have been ruling the Lloegres areas around
440-450 A.D., the imagination boggles at the thought of the Emperor
Theodosius who died in 395 A.D. coming from Constantinople to Glamorgan in
South Wales to found a monastery with King Cystennhyn. It is even more
unbelievable when there already was a King Teithfallch – Theodosius ap
Nynniaw ap Erbin ap Euddav – ruling Glamorgan and Gwent at the time.
However, it seems that Caerworgorn was founded at around 450 A.D. at the time
of St. Garmon's mission to Britain. We know that Whithorn in Afallach was
founded by King Nynniaw ap Erbin in 398 A.D., and tradition holds that the Cor
at Caer Caradoc was founded in the time of Emrys Wledig, alias Emyr Llydaw,
alias Merlin Emrys, alias Ambrosius Aurelianus, so it would have been around
480-490 A.D.
Everyone seems to keep forgetting that the kings of South East Wales were the
only Royal family that was consistently Christian in Britain, and that all Celtic
saints, bishops and abbots were very definitely royal. So St. Nynniaw or Ninnian
cannot be other than King Nynnian ap Erbin, and Theodosius cannot be other
than King Teithfallch ap Nynniaw, and the dates for these people and their
actions fit. The lesson is clear – ignore the kings of South Wales and British
history is a muddle without shape or form. Study them and the picture is shown
in simple stark clarity.
As for Glastonbury in Somerset, well, it is likely that Joseph of Arimathea went
there, or certainly other early Christians. The connection with King Arthur is,
however, a spoof. If St. Patrick went to Bangor Wydrin, then he went to visit
Whithorn and not Glastonbury. And if St. David did visit Bangor Wydrin, then
he also made the journey to Whithorn. In the case of King Arthur, the obvious
route for any king and his army coming up out of Wales and heading for
Valentia, was the sea route from North Wales across to the north shore of the
Solway Firth, where the great monastery, founded by his ancestor, stood at
Whithorn. King Arthur had set up King Llew and King Urien and King Arawn
as kings of Valentia, and Prince Modred ap Llew ap Cynvarch Oer had rebelled
against him. Their lands were Arthur's obvious target.
The correct location of Afallach in Northern Britain is a vital part of the
redefinition and correct reorientation of the story of the Arthurian period. The
Northern princes were clearly the cause of the dissension and collapse of united
British power, and the southern kings were obviously forced to make great
efforts to civilize and Christianize, and so stabilize the area. The mute remains of
the old church excavated at Whithorn are testimony to the struggle between the
House of Bran in South East Wales, and the House of Coel in the North. The
quite remarkable folktales from Llaniltern in Glamorgan and from Meigle in
Perthshire 500 miles away to the North, show clearly that Modred – Medrawd –
took King Arthur's second queen, Gwenhwyfar, up to the far North. King Arthur
followed and had his second queen torn to pieces by his hounds. Then he went
home and married a third queen and the dead run-away was buried in Meigle in
Perthshire where her tombstone still stands.
KING ARTHUR'S JOURNEY TO AFALLACH
The remarkable thing about the Arthurian tale is its simple truths – truths so self-
evident that it is difficult to understand how they have been misinterpreted and
misunderstood for so long. We have demonstrated how the poem ascribed to
Llywarch Hen, which is the third poem listed in the ancient "Black Book of
Carmarthen", is not only the Elegy of Geraint ap Erbin ap Cystennhin, but also a
description of King Arthur's return to Britain from Britanny. The story of King
Arthur having to fight his way ashore in the Llongborth area, with Modred and
his allies lining the beaches to prevent him landing, is revealed in this poem.
This verifies the mediaeval tales of Arthur then pursuing Modred up to Camlan
where the great decisive battle of the civil war was fought out to a finish. As we
have shown, the Battle of Camlan took place at Camlan, still listed on maps as
the great crooked glen south of Dollgellau in mid Wales. The word Camlan
means crooked glen, and the geography is absolutely correct. The next fact is
that after the battle, King Arthur went to Ynys Aballach or Ynys Afallach. This
is where more nonsense has been written in the past by more scholars than is
believable. Whilst Ynys means island, it is also used to mean "an open or cleared
area" or an "estate" or a "province or area". So Ynys in this case does not
necessarily mean an island in the sea. It is when we get to the word Aballach or
Afallach that things have tended to become confused in the past.
In the lists of interchangeable names that we provided in "King Arthur and the
Charters of the kings", we showed how the ancient Welsh name Afallach or
Aballach became Balawn in mediaeval times. What we held back was that the
English Sir Balawn, who was a Welsh Afallach, was the equivalent in Latin
Valentinian. So Sir Balawn and Sir Balan are simply Valentinian and Valens.
This means that after the Battle of Camlan, King Arthur headed for the Isle of
Valentinian or the Isle of Valentia. Not only is it quite straightforward to find the
Isle of Valentinia, but there is a very obvious strategic reason for Arthur to go
there. This we will now detail.
The Romans designated five major regions in the island of Britain to the south of
the River Clyde and the Firth of Forth. The south of present day England,
stretching from Kent in the east to Cornwall in the west they called Britannia
Prima. The country of Wales to the west of the River Severn and the Dee they
called Britannia Secunda. Over to the east of Wales in the central area of
England, the lands north of the River Thames, east of the River Severn and south
of the River Humber, they called Flavia Caesariensis. Then north of the Humber
and up to the line of Hadrian's Wall, which runs from Newcastle upon Tyne to
the Solway Firth, was the province of Maxima Caesariensis. Then in the area
south of the Rivers Clyde and Forth down to the north of Hadrians's Wall there
was the province of Valentia, named after the Emperor Valentinian.
So we can identify that the Ynys Afallach as the Isle or Province of Valentia.
There is some evidence that the Isle of Arran, now better known as the Isle of
Bute off the Clyde estuary, was known as the Isle of Afallach, and this we will
look at later. The significant thing about the Province of Valentia is that this was
the major area freed from Barbarian invasion by King Arthur in his great
Northern campaigns, which we have already described. After his conquests King
Arthur is recorded in histories and in Triads as establishing three kings to hold
the Province of Valentia, and these were princes of the Northern Dynastic House
of Coel of York, as their pedigrees clearly show. These allied kings who King
Arthur set up were Llew ap Cynvarch, his brother Arawn ap Cynvarch, and a
third brother Urien ap Cynvarch.
Llew ap Cynvarch had a son and this son was named Modred, and this was the
man who led a rebellion from the North against King Arthur. The Brut Tyssilio
and Triads hold that Llew married a sister of Arthur named Gwyar and that she
had a son named Gwalchmai, meaning the Hawk of May. Whether Gwyar was
the mother of Modred or whether he was the son of another wife is not clear. It
does however explain how Modred is then said to be the nephew of King Arthur.
What is clear is that after crushing Modred and his various allies, said to be
Northern British, Picts, Saxons, Scots, Irish, and so on, King Arthur moved on
up from the battlefield in mid-Wales in pursuit of the fleeing remnant of his
enemies. He naturally moved into the territories of the rebels and this was the
Ynys Afallach – the Province of Valentia. There is every reason to support this,
for he would have had to exterminate the rebels and pacify the area. This is
shown by the emergence of new leaders in the area, principally Gwenddolau and
Aeddan, who were later faced with all-out war in Valentia with King Urien's
survivors and with Rhydderch Hael as the battle for supremacy between the
princes supporting the House of Bran and King Arthur collided with the princes
of the House of Coel. The story of Myrddyn Wylt – Merlin the Wild – illustrates
this confused northern situation, for Myrddyn Wylt was from this northern
region. At the battle of Camlan, this second Merlin, the first being Merlin
Emrys, alias Emrys Wledig, Emys Llydaw, alias Ambrosius Aurelianus – Merlin
Wylt fought on the side of King Arthur and tragically killed his own nephew
who was fighting for the rebel Prince Modred. Later, Merlin lost his lands in the
North when the Confederation of Princes, led by Gwenddolau, was defeated by
the group led by Rhydderch Hael. This we can deal with later.
What we have is a perfectly clear description of a huge military campaign, with
King Arthur over in Britanny probably to avoid the great pestilence of the Comet
from 555 to 562 A.D., and his nephew, the Prince Modred, invading from the
North with a great army of mixed Northern British, Gaels, Picts and various
Germanic tribes. Then, the furious Arthur returned to Britain and had to fight his
way ashore at Llongborth as described in the old contemporary poem of
Llywarch Hen. At this fight, Geraint ap Erbin ap Cystennhyn was very badly
wounded, and the Life of St. Teilo tells how Teilo sent a stone coffin from
Britanny for the dying Geraint at the time of the end of the pestilence. Next,
Modred and his allies fled from the all conquering Arthur, who was presumably
gathering his friends and allies from all quarters, and Modred went up from the
Penbryn area into mid-Wales no doubt heading for difficult mountain refuges,
and moving towards Ireland and passage across past the Isle of Man to Valentia.
So King Arthur went after Modred and his allies, and caught up with them at
Camlan a few miles south of Dollgellau. Here the great battle of the civil war
was fought out amidst immense carnage, and Arthur was victorious. Then King
Arthur moved on up to the homelands of the rebels to seize and pacify the area
known as Valentia or Afallach.
There are numerous echoes of this, with persistent North Wales tales of King
Arthur being attacked from ambush in a difficult pass, and arrows and missiles
showered on him and his army. One tale records how after the battle where
Briton slaughtered Briton, the king was seated resting when a youth approached
casually and without warning he flung his spear at Arthur, wounding him in the
leg. The treacherous youth was pursued and killed, and this old story has a
strange ring of truth about it, for in a civil war of the sort fought at Camlan, no
one would be quite sure who was friend or foe. All the North Wales stories tell
of Arthur being wounded with a missile, the common feature being a surprise
attack. There is also the strange mediaeval notion of King Arthur going across
the sea in a boat with three queens to the place of Afallach. This is explicable, as
the normal route from North or Mid-Wales to Valentia was by ship up past the
Isle of Man to Galloway, and the Solway Firth. The three queens would come
into the folklore for Arthur had set up three kings, and now he had been forced
to destroy them in battle and to crush their clan. Glastonbury down in Somerset
has nothing whatsoever to do with the events of the civil war and its aftermath. It
is simply an English take-over bid for the great British king and his legend.
There is further connection with Valentia and the House of the South Wales
kings, which supports the situation already outlined. For if King Arthur visited a
monastery in the Isle of Valentia, there certainly was one there for him to visit.
Not only was there a monastery in Afallach – Valentia – but it was a religious
house set up and built by one of King Arthur's own ancestors. Around 400 A.D.,
St. Ninian set up his celebrated monastery church at Whithorn on the Galloway
coast along the north side of the Solway Firth. As we have shown earlier, all
Celtic saints were members of the Royal clan, as were the abbots and bishops,
and therefore Ninian must have been of this clan. Ninian in English is Nennius
in Latin, and it is Nynniaw in Welsh. So we have to look and see if there is a
Nynniaw in the Royal clan around 400-440 A.D. This is no great problem for
there is such a Nynniaw in the House of Bran, the Royal clan of South East
Wales, at this period. Not only is there such a person, but this is in fact the only
area of Britain which is recorded as being Christian at this period, the Royal
family having adopted the cult around 58 A.D. Our Nynniaw was the son of
King Erbin and grandson of the mighty Euddav – Octavius – who threw off the
yoke of Constantine the Great. The descendants of this King Nynniaw were his
son, the King Teithfalch, Theodosius of South Wales; and then his grandson
King Tewdrig – Theoderic. As we know, King Tewdrig was succeeded by his
son, King Meurig, and his son was King Arthwyr – Arthur. So if King Arthur
visited a monastery in the Isle of Afallach, he visited the old institution set up by
his ancestor, King Nynniaw turned bishop. The church of this St. Ninian was
built of stone and limewashed white, as recorded by the venerable Bede in his
History of the English Church, and Bede was borncirca 673 A.D. and died in
731 A.D. The stone-built church was an oddity in Northern Britain where
buildings were routinely of timber, but it gives a clue to building practice in
South Wales.
King Nynniaw has a brother King Erb, whose son was Pebiau Clavawrog –
Phoebus the Dribbler. This King Pebiau was father to a King Cynfyn, who was
father of Gwygan Mawr, who is probably Gwrgant Barmbutruch, and Gwrgan
had a daughter named Onbrawst who married King Meurig and became the
mother of King Arthur. Another of Pebiau's children was Eurddil who was the
illegitimate mother of St. Dyfrig – Dubricius, who in addition placed a crown on
the head of King Arthur. Either way, all the evidence points to Nynniaw ap Erbin
as being the warrior king turned saint who built the monastery church on the
north of the Solway Firth around 400 A.D.
The reasons for King Arthur going up to Valentia – Afallach – after his victory at
Camlan are self-evident. In addition, there are persistent traditional references to
Arthur having problems with Owen ap Urien in the area, and negotiating with
him. If we add to this the remembrance of Arthur executing Hueil ap Caw, the
brother of Gildas, for raiding into Clwyd and Powys, we get a better picture.
There is later additional corroborative evidence from the marriage of a daughter
of King Maelgwn Gwynedd named Eurgain to Elidyr Mwynfawr – Elliffer or
Oliver Gosgordd Fawr, or Eliffer of the Great Retinue. King Maelgwn is said to
have had murdered his wife, then had an affair with a nun, then had a
homosexual relationship, and finally to have had murdered his nephew so that he
could marry the murdered man's widow. The result of all this was that his son,
Rhun, was probably illegitimate, and Elidyr thought that he should succeed
Maelgwn by virtue of his marriage to the legitimate daughter, Eurgain. The
young King Rhun was having none of this and he killed Elidyr in Caernarvon.
This brought a reprisal from the Northern kinsmen of Elidyr, and they rashly
invaded the territories of old King Maelgwn, further enraging Rhun. The result
was that they were speedily driven out, and Rhun proceeded to march his whole
army up through the entire province of Valentia – now Scotland. As King Rhun's
own brother Breiddau was now king of the Picts, the presumptuous Northern
princes were caught in the middle and none of them dared to come out to fight
with Rhun as he paraded the "Hosts of Maelgwn" through their lands. It is all
recorded in the Welsh Laws. King Rhun was repeating the campaigns led by
King Arthur in his Northern wars of conquest and the expedition to pacify
Valentia after the Battle of Camlan.
The princes who fled from Rhun were Rhydderch Hael, and Nudd Hael,
Clyddno Eiddyn of Edinburgh and Mordav ap Sevari – all leading princes of the
area. The battle where Elidyr was killed was fought at Cadnant or battle-brook,
at the efflux of the Medwydus near Caernarvon, and Elidyr Bank marks the
place where he fell. Rhun certainly marched to the River Gweryd and this
appears to be the River Wear.
What we have is a situation where the Province of Valentia, between the Roman
Wall of the Emperors Hadrian and Septimus Severus and the Rivers Clyde and
Forth in the North, has by some incomprehensible speculation been translated
into Glastonbury in Somerset, some 400 miles south. The Welsh, who always
had difficulty with the letter V, called Valentia in their own tongue Afallach or
Aballach, and this, by simplistic thinking, became confused with the term
Avillon for the Glastonbury area. The area of Valentia was one where there was
constant conflict and problems, and it was the weak spot of Britain – the danger
area for foreign infiltration and immigration. Eleven of King Arthur's great
battles can be traced to the area, the 12th being in the far north of present day
Scotland. As we shall see, King Maelgwn Gwynedd was forced to campaign in
the area when he ruled as high king. It is wholly logical that King Nynniaw
should set up the church at Whithorn in an attempt to try to bring the area under
control by civilizing it through education. The church of Nynniaw was dedicated
to St. Martin of Tours, and St. Martin was a close friend of Magnus Maximus the
near relative and clansman of King Nynniaw.
It is really a record of the rivalry between the Royal House of Bran in South East
Wales and its cadet branches in the North, and the House of Coel based in York.
Neither would submit to the other, each claiming seniority, and the result was
division, civil war, weakness and finally destruction.
As we will now see, the Isle of Afallach was known to the Irish and they seem to
have identified it in exactly the same area of Valentia. Some scholars have been
too literal in dealing with the word Ynys or Isle and have then identified
Afallach as the Old Isle of Arran, now known as the Isle of Bute in the ocean
estuary of the Clyde, off the coast of Afallach or Valentia proper. Nonetheless,
they place Afallach in the correct region. The sea between Northern Ireland and
Valentia is only some 30 miles across, and it is the natural crossing point for
Irish sailors and invaders. The area closest to Ireland is now Galloway from
Gallwyddel – Gwyddellians being Irish – and so it preserves the movement
between Valentia and Ireland in the name. The Irish remembered famous sailors
who navigated between Ireland and Afallach, and preserved the memory in their
manuscripts. They confirm its location and so help to clear up the confusion,
which has been invented over Arthur's movements after the Battle of Camlan.
There is nothing unusual about King Arthur having numerous wives and
mistresses, and most important kings did the same. Even his nephew, King
Brychan Brecheiniog, had three wives, and such notable historic characters as
Julius Caesar had six wives. Mark Antony had five, whilst King Charlemagne of
the Franks had five wives. Further back in time, Herod the Great had nine wives.
What the precise situation was with Arthur we cannot tell, but certainly one of
his queens was either contentious or more likely the centre of a great argument.
It seems that around 550 to 555 A.D., with Modred appearing to be a certainty to
succeed him as his heir, King Arthur married a new Queen Gwenhwyfar. With
Gwenhwyfar the mother of the dead Nowi-Llacheu past childbearing age, the
new queen transformed the situation. This would certainly have caused "great
shouting and contention", and when the new young queen proceeded to bear
sons, Modred erupted into open rebellion against his uncle, King Arthur. Every
tradition and history tells how Arthur was over in Britanny when the attempt by
Modred to seize the throne of Britain was launched. There is support for this in
the simple fact that Arthur's son of his middle-age was named Morgan, which
means sea-born, implying that Morgan was born over the seas in Britanny. So
with King Meurig an old man, and with Arthur around 60, the birth of Morgan
triggered the civil war. King Arthur reacted predictably and came storming back
to Britain where Modred and his allies, who included Saxons, Picts and
Irishmen, met him on the beaches at Llongborth. Here Arthur fought his way
ashore amidst much slaughter, and the rebels fled. The king of Dumnonia –
Greater Devon – named Geraint ap Erbin ap Cystennhyn was fatally wounded
here and his Elegy by Llywarch Hen tells the story.
The rest of the story is well known, with King Arthur chasing Modred up into
the mountains and passes of mid-Wales where the Battle of Camlan was fought
just south of Dollgellau. Prince Modred was killed and, after the battle, a sneak
attack wounded King Arthur, who carried on going north and sailed across from
North Wales to the homelands of the rebels. This area between Hadrian's Wall at
the Tyne and Solway Firth in the south and the Clyde and the Forth in the north,
was known by its Roman name of Valentia. This in British was Afallach or
Aballach, and in mediaeval times it became "Avillon" in literature.
The Llandaff Charters give King Arthur ap Meurig four sons. First Nowi, who
appears as a child of Arthur's youth and probably his first marriage, and then
separately three others who appear as sons of his late middle age. These three are
Morgan, Gwaednerth and Ithael, and their dating can be estimated by the
witnesses who appear in the Charters in which they are named. Possibly Modred
rebelled before Morgan was born, and the fact that Arthur was wounded at or
after the Battle of Camlan was used to try to cast doubt on Morgan's parentage, if
there was any such doubt. Weapons were frequently smeared with poisons and a
wound was either fatal or caused sickness and often impotence.
Whatever happened, Morgan succeeded Arthur as king, with the very old Meurig
dying around 570 A.D. and Arthur at some time around 575-580 A.D. There
were still serious problems for young King Morgan, for if, as we believe, the
Battle of Camlan were fought in 562 A.D., he would have been at some age
around 20 when he was left to fight for the crown of South Wales. Morgan was
opposed by Frioc ap Meurig, the brother of Arthur, and so he was forced to kill
his uncle Frioc, again recorded in the Llandaff Charters. The Triads record that
Morgan was indeed king of Britain, although not crowned (see Triad No. 42
Series 3). The Bruts record that he marched north with his armies to meet the
invasion of Aethelfrith of Northumbria in 602 A.D. after the Angle king attacked
Brochwael Ysgyrthog of Powys and together with the other princes he smashed
Aethelfrith at Bangor Orchard. The Triads record that the army of Morgan was
the most successful and popular together with the army of Arthur and that of
Rhun ap Beli. Triad No. 25 Series I names these three as "Rhuddfoawg"
meaning "red with blood" from Rhufoag meaning "fighter". The same is found
in Triad No. 24 Series II, where Llew law Gyffes is added, and also in Triad No.
31 Series III, and here they are said to have been unbeatable and that they
attracted huge numbers of followers. King Morgan is Morgan Mwynfawr.
This then was the political climate when King Arthur died, probably in 575
A.D., and his passing was kept secret to allow his young son Morgan time to
consolidate his grip of the throne of South Wales, to build up his power base and
political following, and to grow a few years older. So the body of King Arthur
was taken at the dead of night to his close kinsman Illtyd at Caer Oer and
Anoeth. Illtyd, the close kinsman of King Arthur, son of Bicanys, the brother of
Emrys Wledig – Ambrosius Aurelianus – buried him secretly in the cave. Even
in death King Arthur won a victory for men thought that he still lived, Morgan
was given time, and the king sacrificed his fine tomb in a church to win that
time. The story is one of a struggle for the crown, and the reason for Arthur
being over in Britanny was probably the presence of the pestilence of the Comet.
When this cleared, Modred made his bid for power.
The idea that the ancient personal name Afallach – Valentinian – was in some
way Avillon or Glastonbury in Somerset, England becomes quite hilarious when
other evidence is taken into account. There are several references to Afallach,
and they record that a prince who bore that name around 450-520 A.D. had a
daughter named Modron. Even more they record that Modron married Urien,
and that they had a son named Mabon. This Mabon figures in Triads and in the
Mabinogion story of "Culhwch and Olwen". He was one of the three notable
prisoners of Britain, being either beseiged or captured with all his family by the
Gwyddel Ffichti – the Irish Picts. The tradition in the tales is that the Irish Picts
either beseiged or captured Mabon, son of Modron, daughter of Afallach, which
is also a name, and that King Arthur went and set Mabon free from these non-
Christian people. The Mabinogion Tale uses the old Temple of Nodens at
Lydney on the Severn as a local focal point for the story in "Culhwch and
Olwen", but the historical truth lies in the fact that the Gwyddel Ffichti were
located in the North of Britain up around the Clyde and the Western Isles. They
would therefore have moved down into the Strathclyde, Galloway, and possibly
Cumbria area, and the most likely location of Mabon would be in what is now
Galloway. All this fits with the history of King Arthur waging war in the North
of Britain and Scotland exactly as his grandfather "Uthyr" Pendragon – King
Tewdrig or Theoderic – also did before him.
The situation is clear when the surviving evidence records that Modron, daughter
of Afallach, was one of the wives of King Urien Rheged, the son of Cynvarch
Oer. Other children of Urien were his successor King Owen, another son Elphin
and Merwydd, a daughter, and there were more. With Afallach being the father
of Modron and grandfather of Mabon, and being known in Latin terms as
Valentinian, the notions about Glastonbury have to collapse under the weight of
their own idiocy. In ancient times, the lands along the north of the Solway Firth
were in fact known as Mabon and Galwyddel, and this is how they became
Galloway. The borders between the territories of Mabon and Galwyddel were
apparently around the River Dee, and so Whithorn, founded by Nynniaw, had
fallen into the hands of the invading Irish Picts. Here is the genesis of the Mabon
story as told in the Mabinogion, and in the Triads. The story reinforces the
history of Arthur clearing the invading pagans out of Northern Britain. Afallach
– Valentinian –was a man, not a monastery.
It is doubtful whether there is any historical parallel to the turning upside down
and falsification of history to match the twisting of history which sought to
transfer King Arthur out of his homeland in South Wales, and down into
Cornwall, the land where his grandfather, King Theoderic, had had to go to
conquer an enemy named Guinner. The English stole the Book of Teilo and took
it to Lichfield and called it the "Book of Chad" to cover the theft. They also took
the Palladium cross of gold carried before the Welsh princes and called it the
"Cross of Westminster" to cover up the theft. They finally even stole King
Arthur himself, or at least tried to, and nearly got away with it. So it is no
surprise to find that there is a clear demonstration of the theory of evolution
published several times for Charles Darwin to take advantage of and build upon
– which he certainly seems to have done, for there is no sign of how he got his
basic thesis worked out in his diaries. Even John Williams of St. Asaph, writing
in 1844 A.D., makes interesting reading. He says, "The remains of the numerous
Druidical circles throughout the land, are standing monuments of the skill of our
ancestors in mechanics, and probably of their proficiency in the science of
astronomy". So there has been plenty of traditional evidence that individual
standing stones were for the lines of sighting and the Druid circles were
observatories and not temples. As usual in Britain no one took any notice, least
of all of Welsh records.
Anyone sifting through the mass of surviving noble pedigrees will see that in
many of them Beli and his wife Anna are listed at around 100-50 B.C., and they
have a son and grandson who are named Alfech and Afallach. These are the
earliest British recorded Valens or maybe Valerius, and Valentinian. It makes
nonsense of the Ynys Afallach being "Avillon" and so Glastonbury from the
beginning. We will discuss the relationship and descent of the British kings from
their recorded intermarriage with the Royal Hasmonnean house of Judea in our
volume "The Origins of Arthur". Nothing is quite as it seems to be.
THE PRINCE GWALCHMAI AND THE PRINCE MODRED
The death of the Prince Nowi-Llacheu, the son and heir apparent to the mighty
Arthur, the war king of the British, must have opened the way for a nephew of
the king to succeed as we have seen. With Samson and his brothers, the sons of
Anna, becoming religious men, and the sons of Affrella doing the same, only the
sons of Gwyar, the third sister were candidates, for Idnerth, the king's brother,
was dead, and the third brother, Frioc, was in some way not eligible or suitable.
In these circumstances it is easy to overlook the fact that Gwyar married to King
Llew ap Cynvarch had two sons.
In the civil war and insurrection stirred up by the Prince Modred or Medrawd,
the other son of Gwyar and King Llew fought on the side of King Arthur. So we
have a strange and very tragic situation of two brothers fighting on opposing
sides – something that epitomises the tragedy of civil war. It is also easy to
overlook the fact that Gwalchmai – The Hawk of May – was by tradition holding
high rank at the courts of King Arthur, and all the indications are that Arthur
may have been considering appointing him as the Edling or Heir Apparent. In
fact the king may have actually made his decision, and this may have been the
spark that set off the anger of Modred and caused him to make his bid for power
in Britain. Otherwise it is difficult to see why Gwalchmai fought against Modred
at the Battle of Camlan.
The bloody struggle at Camlan resulted in the death of both of the sons of Gwyar
and Llew, Gwalchmai falling to the soldiers of his own brother, Modred, and
Modred being killed by King Arthur's men. So neither of them lived to even
have a chance of succeeding Arthur. A good indication of the status of
Gwalchmai may lie in the fact that traditionally he is said to have been given the
overlordship of Pembrokeshire, and the Prince Nowi-Llacheu was previously in
a similar position. The Charter grants of Prince Nowi ap Arthur to the old
Bishop Dyfrig in the Book of Llandaff indicate this. Whether or not Gwalchmai
was the Edling we will never know, for it is possible that he was simply more
shrewd and patient that Modred and prepared to wait and see what happened as
Arthur grew older.
It is not impossible that Gwalchmai was either the Edling, or was playing a
waiting game, or was even disinterested in the succession to King Arthur as
paramount king. Certainly if Arthur had not taken his second Queen
Gwenhwyfar before the Camlan Battle, then he would have been forced to
remarry after the battle with Nowi dead before and now both of his eligible
nephews dead in the fighting.
The result was the birth of Morgan, of Gwaednerth, and Ithael. First Morgan,
indicating "sea-born", may have been born on ship or in Britanny, and
Gwaednerth seems to have been named for the murdered Idnerth, the brother of
Arthur. On balance, it seems that the second marriage of Arthur to a new queen
took place before the Battle of Camlan, as is indicated by the Triad evidence that
there was a disturbance over the marriage of the new Gwenhwyfar. The
indications are that the first Queen Gwenhwyfar, now past childbearing age,
stirred up trouble, and may have fomented the growing discord between an
Arthur, aged just over 70, and his young and ambitious nephew.
A vital consideration would of course be the fact that the South Wales kingdom
as a whole would simply not accept a son of a northern king in either Modred or
Gwalchmai, and only Gwalchmai had sense enough to see it. This was the senior
British clan line and kingdom, and only a direct king of its own line – either a
brother of the king or sons of the king and his brothers would be acceptable.
Wives married kings out of the family and area, and so Gwyar marrying King
Llew in the North would not produce acceptable sons in South Wales. Whatever
the politics were, Gwalchmai remains an enigma by fighting against his own
brother, and it is not impossible that he knew that any attempt to defeat Arthur
would inevitably fail, and so he saw his brother Modred as fighting a lost cause.

So we have two fairly clear scenarios that explain the pattern of events in the
civil war.
First (1) Prince Nowi-Llacheu is killed in the Vandal War of 548 A.D. (2)
Princes Gwalchmai and Modred are the logical favourites to succeed Arthur. (3)
Arthur marries the second Gwenhwyfar, and the older queen gets angry. (4) The
Prince Gwalchmai bides his time, but Prince Modred rebels and tries to seize the
crown fearing the birth of sons to the new young queen. (5) Both Gwalchmai
and Modred are killed in the civil war. (6) Arthur marries his third queen as the
second was unfaithful with Modred and so Morgan is born.
Second (1) Prince Nowi Llacheu is killed in the Vandal War of 548 A.D. (2)
The Princes Gwalchmai and Modred are the logical choice as his nearest
successors. (3) The Prince Gwalchmai is chosen as the Edling by Arthur. (4)
This causes his brother Modred to rebel and try to seize the crown. (5) A civil
war erupts and Prince Gwalchmai sticks with Arthur, as his heir. (6) Both
Gwalchmai and Modred are killed in the Battle of Camlan, and Arthur is
wounded. (7) With no heirs suitable Arthur is forced to marry again and Morgan
is born. (8) Because Arthur's second queen was unfaithful with Modred, Arthur
takes a third queen and so Morgan, Gwaednerth and Ithael are born.
The most likely date for the Battle of Camlan is 570 A.D. and not 562 A.D. with
the Vandal war in which Nowi-Llacheu, Noah the Glittering One was killed in
548 A.D. This means that if Morgan, the son of the second Gwenhwyfar, born
around 562 A.D. or slightly earlier, was very young, around 1 year old when his
grandfather, King Meurig died around 570 A.D. and 10 years old when his
father, King Arthur, died around 579 A.D., then here is the reason for Arthur's
secret burial at night. There would have been a need to keep everyone guessing
about King Arthur, until Morgan's position was strengthened. If no one was sure
whether Arthur was dead or not, Morgan had a few priceless years to grow older
and to become strong enough to hold the kingdom. This appears to be the case
and there is supporting evidence. The youngest of Arthur's brothers was Frioc,
and the young King Morgan had to kill him in a contest for the throne of South
Wales. This is described in the Llandaff Charters.
The three young sons of Arthur's old age and second marriage grew up to
succeed him in South Wales, but there was no way that Morgan could follow his
ancestors as paramount kings of Britain. The drama of the true story of Arthur,
as we can reconstruct, it is staggering; no author of fiction could have invented
it. The faithful clan followers taking the dead king's body to the secret cave of
the Abbot-Druid Illtyd at the dead of night, then Illtyd, his close relative, burying
the body secretly in the cave at the place of mystery. The queen, who was
younger, would have remained silent and tense, protecting the rights of her
young sons. The cave closed up with stones by St. Illtyd remained secret, and all
men wondered where the great king had gone. Whilst they were uncertain
whether Arthur lived or not, the ambitious and greedy still feared Arthur, so
much so that they remained afraid and cowed by the terror of his name. Morgan
grew older and the clan gathered around him, until he, too, was a mighty king, a
warrior recorded as one of the three great generals, and three great leaders in the
Triads. In the early years of his reign, Morgan stayed quiet whilst other older
kings who were not of the Royal House of Bran in South Wales led the nation.
Gildas recorded them, and it was then that the magic of kingship of the leading
clan was lost.
So it was that the Northern Dynasty of the House of Cuneda Wledig obtained the
leadership in the person of Maelgwn Gwynedd, and when that happened, the
political unity of the country was shattered forever. The kings were from South
Wales, and in times of national emergency, other military leaders could be
appointed as Commanding Generals known as Wledigs, but not kings. Now the
situation changed and whilst the hereditary kings ruled South Wales, other kings
in Gwynedd ruled the North. When he was a mature man Morgan led his armies
North, just as his father King Arthwyr and his great-grandfather King Tewdrig –
The Uthyr Pendragon – had done before him. The Angle King Edelfled had
attacked Powys where the aged Brochwael Ysgythrog and his son, Cynan
Garwyn, and his grandson, Sleyf, ruled. Then, urged on by the priests of Rome,
the Angle king pushed in toward Gwynedd, pursuing a holy war to kill off the
Celtic Christians who were stubbornly independent of Rome. As the Celtic
Church was founded by Bran in 58 A.D. and was, therefore, before the Church
of Rome and was also the independent church of the nation, Rome had no rights
in Britain anyway. So King Morgan caught Edelfled at Bangor Orchard with the
other Welsh rulers with him. The result was a shattering defeat and Edelfled ran
for his life. After this, the rulers of Gwynedd failed to see sense, and pursued
their policies of aiming for superiority, and this led to inevitable disaster.
In the subsequent wars the army of the South Wales kings stayed at home and
the Angles were more evenly matched with the men of North Wales alone. If the
traditional recognition of the South Wales kings as paramount had been
maintained, then they would have regarded any attack on Powys or Gwynedd as
an attack on their territory and would have reacted violently just as Tewdrig,
Arthur and even Morgan had done. As it was, they stayed at home and watched
North Wales upstarts destroy themselves. The unity of Wales was broken for
good, and geographically it is impossible to dominate Britain from Gwynedd,
whilst it was just the opposite in South Wales. The lower Severn along Gwent
and Glamorgan is an ideal strategic location.
What might have happened in Britain if Nowi-Llacheu had lived no one knows.
What would have happened if Gwalchmai or even Modred had been allowed to
succeed Arthur peacefully is again anyone's guess. The desire of the ambitious
princes of Gwynedd to rule, together with the collapse of Druid moral authority
and the invasion of the church of Rome, was too great an obstacle to be
overcome and Wales was dissolved into south and north, the kings of Powys
maintained a centuries-long close contact with the Glamorgan and Gwent kings,
for the invasion route in the South was by way of the upper Severn and through
Hereford and Brecon. The princes of the North expanded out to sometimes
control the North, the North East, Mid Wales and West Wales, and sometimes to
be confined back into Gwynedd. The southern kings seem never to have again
held sway over the North, and only once around 1060 A.D. did a northern king,
Gryffydd, attempt to dominate the South. As a result, the king of Gwent killed
the previously unbeatable Gryffydd, and that was the end of the matter. The
death of Nowi-Llacheu was probably the most significant event in British Dark
Age history, recorded in Triads, poetry and the Mabinogion.
It is in fact extraordinary that the death of King Arthur's son, which is well
recorded, has aroused so little interest. For if the Prince Nowi had lived there
would have been no later quarrel over the succession between Modred and
Gwalchmai, the nephews of Arthur, and Nowi's first cousins, for Nowi was the
Edling. If Nowi had lived, there would have been no need for King Arthur to
take a second wife, a new Queen Gwenhwyfar, and no squabbles with the old
queen conspiring over the matter. There would have been no civil war, no Battle
of Camlan, and no vacuum of power when Arthur eventually died aroun 575
A.D. The poetic and other records state that Nowi-Llacheu was in fact a mighty
warrior, great in battle, and quite obviously he would have been at the height of
his power when the rebellion of Modred occurred around 562 A.D. When King
Arthur ap Meurig died in 575 A.D., he was an old man still greatly feared, and
his eldest son by the second Gwenhwyfar was a stripling of around 15 years old.
There was a grandfather and grandson situation, and the strong man of around
50, who would have been Nowi, was dead.
The murder of the King's other brother Idnerth ap Meurig by Euan Burr was a
further tragedy denying the possibility of another elder statesman figure. The
youth of Morgan and his brothers Gwaednerth and Ithael, and the early death in
conflict of Nowi-Llacheu, and his first cousins Modred and Gwalchmai, left the
nation split at the worst possible time. The Vandals had settled into central
Britain and were organizing their state under Peanda and his son, Penda. The
Angles were growing strong in the divided North. Even the Saxons in the South
were becoming aggressive. Worst of all, the unity of the nation's institutions was
under attack because of the ambitious intrusions of the Church of Rome.
The Grant of Nowi to the aged Bishop Dyfrig is listed in the Llandaff Charters as
Section 10 of Book 11. Here the land grants are mainly in Pembrokeshire and
Carmarthenshire, in South West Wales, and the clerical witnesses Dyfrig,
Arwystyl, Ufelwy, leuan, Junabui, Cynfran, Gworfran, Aelhaiarn, Iddneu,
Gwardogwy, and Gwernabwy, serve to place the grant around the 545 A.D.
period. The place of the grave of the slain Nowi-Llacheu is mentioned in the
poem "Ymryson Gwyddneu a Gwyn ap Nudd", a poem attributed to the Bard
Gwyddno. If Gwyddno was the Gwyddno Garanhir of Centref Gwaelod, whose
lands the sea flooded around 556 A.D. and whose son was Elffin, the foster
father of Taliesin, then the dating is about right. Llacheu meaning the Glittering
One or the Gleaming One is mentioned in other ancient poetry, and he is also
recorded in the Mabinogion Tale "The Dream of Rhonabwy". There is also
mention of Gwydre, killed in the war with Twrch Trwyth – the Vandals – in the
"Culhwch and Olwen" tale. Here the term "Gwydre" means that Llacheu ignored
his father's orders and got killed in the fighting. There is then another mention of
amhar in the Mabinogion in the "Geraint and Enid" story and amhar meant out
of order. Gwydre possibly meant "Gleaming" in the sense of shining enamel, or
vitreous glazed substances, and this would have meant highly decorated armour.
It is clearly beyond dispute that King Arthur had a son who was Nowi, and that
he was fond of gleaming and glittering decorated armour.
So the tragedy of Modred arose out of the death of Nowi, and Llacheu and the
favour shown Gwalchmai by King Arthur had the same origin. The grave of
Gwalchmai, who became in one guise Sir Walwayne, was excavated in the time
of the Normans in Pembrokeshire, whilst Nowi probably lies buried under his
mound in Herefordshire. Remarkably, King Arthur was in roughly the same
position as Henry VIII of England, having to marry again to get sons and leaving
a boy, Morgan, as his successor. Like Henry VIII, the record shows Arthur as
having two or even three wives who were queens, and three common-law wives;
six in all. After the betrayals of the North by Modred, and later Maelgwyn
Gwynedd, the kings of Britain in South Wales withdrew to hold their own
personal territories, and the hegemony of the British states was lost forever.
Mediaeval and modern historians have totally ignored the House of the South
Wales kings of Britain, and in Wales, they have concentrated upon the upstart
House of Cunedda in the Northern principality of Gwynedd, which was of later
origin and from South Wales proper. This was partly done to foster the claims of
the sons of English kings to be successors to the Gwynedd princes, and to create
a myth that these princes ruled Wales. What it means is that whereas no one
other than an American can be President in the United States, and no one but an
Irishman can be President in Ireland, and Frenchmen in France, and Germans in
Germany, and so on for Israel, Russia, etc. The English Establishment says that
no Welshman shall ever be Head of State in Wales. Poor old King Arthur must
be spinning in his grave like a top at the level to which his nation has sunk.
THE DATING OF THE BATTLE OF CAMLAN
The date of the Battle of Camlan has always bedeviled the history of King
Arthur's reign. The idea of reading the date reference found between two
columns of dates, each of 25 years, and reading the date to the right to get 562
A.D., is not the solution. After this book was first published it was realized that
the only date in the Bruts of England was that of King Arthur’s death which was
"546 years after the incarnation of the Lord". In Roman Church terminology, this
is A.D. 546, but to the British Church, 33 plus 546 is 579. This fits with a
number of other very significant historical refences
Glamorgan Record states Owain Vinndu, the brother of Arthur I, was killed
fighting the Irish in 434 A.D., and Cuneda replaced him. Nennius states that
Maelgwn Gwynedd was 146 years after Cuneda, which is 434 plus 146 equals
580. As Arthur II died in 579 and Maelgwn succeeded in North Wales in 580
this makes perfect sense. From this moment on all the historical muddles and
difficulties dissolve and vanish and clarity emerges.
The date of 537 A.D. is an anachronism. Arthur’s opponent was his nephew,
Medrawd ap Llew, and Medrawd is said to have had two grown sons who were
later murdered by Cystennyn Gorneu. First, we find that March ap Meirchion –
Count Comorre or King Mark – was killed in 556 A.D., and Medrawd was his
great-nephew. Medrawd ap Llew ap Cynvarch Oer, with March and Cynvarch
being brothers, sons of Meirchion Gul.
Then, Urien Rheged – of the Gift – was killed around 595 A.D. As Urien
Rheged was an uncle of Medrawd, we have the same time problem. The uncle is
killed by Morgant 58 years later than a nephew who is a man with grown sons.
This is almost as bad as the March situation with a great-uncle being killed in
battle some 20 years after his mature great-nephew. None of this hangs together
if the date of Camlan is 537 A.D. Only 570 A.D., or less likely 562 A.D., makes
any sense at all.
Baram Blackett on the sixth century promontory fort at Spaniard's Point on the Gower, M.S.
Blackett is in the defence ditch. A Spanish galleon sunk here.

Baram Blackett and Alan Wilson at the ruin of St. Cennydd’s Chapel at Spaniard’s Point. St.
Cennydd, son of St. Gildas, was father of Fili and Bishop Ufelwyn of Llandaff.

The Life of Oudoceus describes his arrival in Wales in 570 A.D. after the great
plague. This can be evidenced by the Life of Teilo and the death of Geraint,
nephew of Erbin ap Cystennyn. In 570 A.D., at the end of the plague, Bishop
Oudoceus was welcomed into Wales by King Meurig ap Tewdrig and his son
Arthwyr, who is King Arthur. This makes Arthur fit, well, and alive in 570 A.D.
The most telling factor has to be the battle fought in North Wales between King
Morgan Mwynfawr, the son of Arthur and Ethelfrith of Northumberland in 614
A.D. after the Angle king had defeated Brochwael Ysgithrog of Powys. If King
Arthur died at Camlan in 570 A.D., this is possible. If King Arthur died at
Camlan in the other date of 537 A.D., we are being asked to believe that his son,
Morgan, was an active middle-aged man some 77 years later. This is nonsense.
The whole history of the South Wales Dynasty exhibits clearly that no king
could have held courts in Morganwg unless he were king of Morganwg, and this
completely rules out any possibility that some mysterious unconnected King
Arthur rules at Caerleon in Morganwg at the same time as King Arthwyr ap
Meurig. King Morgan campaigning into North Wales aged about 90 is laughable
enough.
If this is not enough, we know that Medrawd or Modred married St. Kwyllog,
and the whole scheme of relationships exhibited in the generations of the princes
of Arthurian Britain is pulled all over the place if St. Kwyllog is marrying
around 510-520 A.D., and her husband, Medrawd, is killed in 537-539 A.D. This
date is too early and the correct date has to be 570 or 562 A.D. This makes sense
and the early date makes nonsense.
Fortunately, we know that Cynvarch Oer, the grandfather of Medrawd, married
Nevyn, the daughter of King Brychan Brecheiniog, as distinct from King
Brychan ap Euddav, and Brychan ap Gwyngen ap Llywarch Hen ap Elidyr.
There is no earthly way that this marriage between a great-granddaughter of
King Tewdrig ap Teithfallt (Nevyn daughter of Brychan son of Marchel daughter
of King Tewdrig) could have taken place around 470 A.D. to accommodate the
theory that the Battle of Camlan took place as early as 537 A.D.
We also know that Eurddil, the daughter of Cynvarch Oer and Nevyn, was
married to Elffin ap Gwyddno ap Seithennin Vrenhin. Again, there is a distortion
if this marriage is pushed back to any earlier period around 490 A.D. – the Welsh
laws and customs provided for marriage of women when they reached the age of
14. Urien Rheged, the brother of Llew, who was the father of Medrawd, was
married to Modron the daughter of Aballach – Valentinian – and again this
would be greatly distorted if Urien married her around 490-500 A.D. The
descendants and ancestors of these people being too well known, and Urien
dying in Battle around 595 A.D. makes nonsense of this.
Even more conclusive evidence arises from the marriage of Owen ap Urien ap
Cynvarch Oer to Dwynwen the daughter of Lewdwn Luydauc of Dinas Eidin
(Edinburgh). We know that the well-known Hugi ap Gwynlliw ap Glywys, king
of Glywysswg – Cerniw in South Wales – and that his son was St. Bueno, who
had dealings with King Brochwael Ysgithrog of Powys and Cadvan of
Gwynedd. As both these prominent kings reigned around the 600-620 A.D.
period it is quite inconceivable that the daughters of Lewdwn Luydauc were
marrying around 500 A.D. with St. Bueno, one of their sons, active around 600-
630 A.D. Hugi married Pfeferen, daughter of Lewdwn Luydauc of Dinas Eidin.

We can then link this family with that of Cynvarch Oer and Urien Rheged.

This type of identification and linking can be undertaken time and again, and
always it locates associated personalities into a timescale that makes the Battle
of Camlan an impossibility in 537 A.D. – unless it were fought between infants
and suckling babes, and others who were bulges in their mothers’ bellies or
twinklings in their fathers’ eyes.
We find a war between Rhydderch Hael and Aidan Voeddawg and we get the
following:

As Geraint ap Erbin ap Digain had five easily traceable children who became
saints, it is no problem to time-fix this family. Geraint was buried in a stone
coffin sent from Britanny by St. Teilo and this can be dated at 562 A.D. Aiddan
and Rhydderch were fighting it out around 580 to 590 A.D.
Another opponent of Rhydderch Hael was Gwenddolau, and this again brings us
to one of the best known characters of Arthur's period, none other than Myrddin
Wylt – Martin the Wild – often mis-translated as Merlin Wylt. As we have
shown Myrddin Wylt was said to have fought at the Battle of Camlan on Arthur's
side, and in the battle he killed his own nephew; his sister's son was fighting on
Medrawd's side. By a rough calculation this would seem to make Myrddin Wylt
around 40 at the time of the battle, yet he was embroiled in the wars between his
lord Gwenddolau and Rhydderch Hael around the 573-580 A.D. period or even
later. After this, Myrddyn, who was dispossessed by Rhydderch, went to
Britanny and attempted to marry an heiress and failed. He later returned to
Britain and was either killed by bandits in the Celydon woods or died and was
buried on Enlli, which is more likely. The Life of Myrrdyn Wylt does not fit in a
timescale of his being born around 495-497 A.D., fighting at Camlan at the early
date of 537 A.D., being mixed up in the Gwenddolau war with Rhydderch from
a time around 573 A.D. or even as late as 580-590 A.D., and then trying to
marry an heiress in Britanny after all this. Only a Myrddyn Wylt fighting at
Camlan around 562 A.D. fits.
Finally we are drawn to the major characters of the Arthurian drama. St. Gildas
ap Caw – and here we are talking of Caw o'Frydain and not the later Caw
Cowllog ap Geraint – is one of the best attested figures of the period. He wrote
the famous "De Excidio", which is still extant in copy form and is linked with a
great number of contemporary kings and saints. The Welsh Annals mention his
presence in Ireland in 570-575 A.D. before he went over to Britanny where he
built the monastery at Rhuys where he lies buried. There is little doubt that St.
Gildas lived around the period 505 or 510 to about 580 A.D. or later. The
scenario that this presents is as follows: Gildas born in 505 A.D. then married
around 525 A.D. He has several sons and daughters. One is St. Kwyllog, and if
she was his eldest child she would be of the marrying age of 14 in 540 A.D. This
is very important indeed, for St. Kwyllog then married with Medrawd ap Llew
the rebel who fought King Arthur at Camlan, and was killed there. It is
impossible for St. Kwyllog to marry with Medrawd and have two grown sons
who were pursued and killed by old Cystennyn Gorneu after the battle, by the
date 537 A.D. It is perfectly possible for St. Kwyllog to be the mother of two
grown sons by the later date of 562 A.D. The grandsons of St. Gildas would not
be of age until the 556-557 A.D. period at the earliest.
There is again the situation that everything else is wrong if the Camlan date at
537 A.D. is accepted. What we have is a copy of a more ancient manuscript
made around 1100 A.D. and it is highly likely that the young man doing the
copying wrote out four vertical lists of 25 years to cover 100 years on one page.
He then either misread or simply mis-transcribed the information on Camlan,
placing it between 537 A.D. on the left and 562 A.D. on the right. The date of
537 A.D. does not hold up to any analytical approach whatsoever. We are forced
to conclude that this entry is in error. If Gildas had grown grandsons by 537
A.D., then he would himself have been born around 480 A.D. and this appears as
a clear anachronism. In fairness, we have to state that one "Saint's Life" gives St.
Kwyllog as a sister of Gildas, not a daughter, which makes the Medrawd
relationship barely credible.
Some of the most important considerations concern King Arthur himself. We are
asked to accept that the king born in 503 A.D., according to the Cottonian
manuscripts Titus D. XXII 1, died in 537 A.D. at Camlan at age 34. Yet all
Welsh traditions insist that King Arthur had grown sons who were killed in the
Twrch Trwyth War, one being Llacheu, meaning the glittering one. This is clear
in ancient poetry, in the Triads and in the Mabinogi. Folklore supports this. To
back this up there is a consistent reference to the king having two or even three
queens who are clearly identified. It seems logical that a king whose grown sons
were killed would marry again to get heirs, and this is apparent from the
Glamorgan and Gwent histories. In addition King Arthur is said to have had
three common law wives in the Triads. All this is difficult to reconcile with King
Arthur supposedly dying at age 34, and it is another obvious anachronism. If, to
get around this, we imagine Arthur to be born earlier, we then have confusion in
time of the Morganwg Dynasty and time problems around his father King
Meurig and his grandfather King Tewdrig.
The Llandaff Charters represent King Arthur alive after 562 A.D. and the
Mabinogion represents him alive at the time of the Twrch Trwyth Vandal
invasions of 548 A.D. Every tradition supports a long and safe reign of the king,
and not a very short and brief rule. Again the early date of Camlan in 537 A.D.
proves to be the stumbling block. Worst of all, there is the obvious problem of
King Arthur's son, Morgan, who could not have been born before 537 A.D. and
led his armies around 614 A.D. Even Hueil, the brother of St. Gildas, presents a
problem, for Arthur executed him whilst Gildas was over in Ireland, and the
Welsh Annals place Gildas in Ireland around 570-575 A.D. As we do not
consider that everything else is wrong to accommodate the date in the copy of
the Welsh Annals, which survives, we have to conclude that the Battle of
Camlan took place in 562 A.D. or later.
It is absolutely illogical to consider that a Medrawd, about age 20, would raise
sufficient support to attack King Arthur, about age 34, at the height of his power.
It is, however, wholly credible that a Medrawd, aged about 40, would attack
Arthur, aged 59, with Arthur's warrior sons dead in battle, and his brother,
Idnerth, murdered by Euan Burr. With Medrawd's great uncle March – Mark,
Count Comorre – killed in 556 A.D., Medrawd would take up the power struggle
in 562 A.D. after his great uncle. His first cousin, Urien, lived to die violently,
probably as late as 596 A.D., and that Medrawd died a mature man in 537 A.D.
just does not fit in any way at all.
We have to remember that the Welsh Annals were recopied as we have them
today, some 550 years after the events of King Arthur's reign. Therefore, we
have to examine their credibility from all possible angles, and the date of 537
A.D. does not stand up to examination. There will be lunatics who will say that
King Arthwyr ap Meurig ap Tewdrig was not King Arthur of Legend, but some
other unknown, totally isolated, and disconnected king. There is no chance that
this is so. The weight of Welsh evidence points overwhelmingly to the king of
Morganwg. The whole history of South East Wales demonstrates clearly that no
outsider would ever have dared to try to hold court at Caerleon and Caer Melyn
in Gwent and Glamorgan. The acts of King Arthwyr ap Meurig described by the
Morganwg historians exactly match the acts of the legendary King Arthur, and
of that there can be no dispute. It is inconceivable that we have two
contemporary kings in the same place, bearing the same name.
In addition to Dwynwen marrying Owen ap Urien ap Cynvarch, we find
Pfeferen, another daughter of Lewdwn Luydauc, marrying with Hugo ap
GwynIliw, the father of St. Bueno, and again this is a marriage that cannot be as
early as required to fit a scheme of relationships geared to the Battle of Camlan
taking place as early as 537 A.D.
A third daughter of Lewdwn Luydauc married Nudd Hael, and she was Thebri,
who was the mother of St. Baglan and Dingat. Again this cannot be as early as
required to fit a Camlan scheme of events around 537 A.D., and the date of 570
A.D. is a much more credible fit. Here we are dealing with Nudd Hael ap Senyllt
ap Cedig ap Dyfnwal Hen etc., and not with Nudd ap Ceidiaw ap Arthrwys ap
Mor ap Morydd ap Cenau ap Coel. All these genealogies can be fully listed and
matched, and marriage linked by association, and it is clear that the scheme of
the marriages of the three daughters of Lewdwn Luydauc does not support a
Battle of Camlan where Medrawd died, being fought in 537 A.D. Ceidiaw, the
father of Nudd, was also father of Cov and Gwenddolau – of the "Dusky Birds"
– and again this points to the middle of the sixth century for marriages and not
the beginning of it.
A large number of similar associated relationships demonstrate exactly the same
situation. Amongst these are Elwiri, daughter of Urien Rheged ap Cynvarch, and
first cousin of Medrawd ap Llew ap Cynvarch, getting married to King Morgan
Mwyntawr ap Arthur. Their son was King Ithael of Morganwg, and the
associations of Ithael and Morgan and other kings and bishops etc, again points
directly to a marriage in the last quarter of the sixth century and definitely not in
the first quarter.
The pedigree of St. Mellangell and her father Cyvwlch – Culhwch – and twice
married mother Ethni Wyddels reinforces these associations and timings beyond
dispute. If the Battle of Camlan took place as early as 537 A.D., then every
linked pedigree and genealogy is very badly distorted. We can even trace Gwaith
Hengar, another grandson of Urien Rheged, getting married to Cheirwy –
Euronwy, the daughter of Clydno Eidin. Kyndeyrn Garthwys or the well-known
St. Kentigern was a son of Owen ap Urien and Dwynwen of Lewdwn of
Edinburgh, which explains St. Kentigern founding a Glasgow monastery. He
also completely fails to fit a set of family relationships embracing a Camlan
Battle around 537 A.D.
A date of 562 or 570 A.D. is once again shown to be the only possible fit for the
Battle of Camlan.
Time and again we find tendencies to date kings, princes, and saints far too early
in order to meet a false timescale. Pabo Post Prydain, whose tombstone exists,
has been placed around 450-500 A.D., and his children equally early. Yet, look at
the evidence below.
It is known that Urien Rheged and his sons fought with Flamddwyn – the
Flamebearer – in either 572-579 A.D. or 586-593 A.D. As Flamddwyn is
generally held to be a king named Theoderic, known as King Deodric or
Aedlfred, then the 586-593 A.D. period is most likely. As we find this in
Nennius, we are on safe ground. Ancient Welsh poetry confirms these wars. We
also know that a sister of Edelfred – King Ethelfrith – married a noble named
Cynfor Cadogwy, and that Ethelfrith was young enough to be militarily active
around 603-614 A.D. We further know that the aggressive Rhydderch Hael was
warring in the North in the 590-605 A.D. period, and maybe as early as 580 A.D.
The information on Ethelfrith's sister is in Triad 45 and we get a mass of
genealogical information on the family of Cynfor Cadogwy and Rhydderch Hael
in the Dyfed King Lists. All this helps to form a picture that places these people,
and therefore those related to them and associated with them into their correct
periods of time. This we can illustrate in a family tree.
The Triads record that Merwedd, a daughter of Urien Rheged, and a first cousin
to the rebellious Medrawd, had an affair with Cynon the son of Clydno Eidin. As
we will see, Clydno Eidin was active around 600 A.D., probably old, but that his
son should be chasing Merwedd, a first cousin of a Medrawd supposedly killed
in 537 A.D. as a mature man is not a credible proposition at all.
THE MUDDLE OF THE EASTER ANNALS
Of all the confusion surrounding King Arthur, and indeed the whole of the
period of the sixth century, there is probably nothing more misunderstood than
the documents known as the Welsh Annals. This is in the Harleian 3859
manuscripts, and basically, it is a listing of 533 years numbered off
consecutively starting at year one. Dating of year one is attempted by reference
to the entry against year nine that "Easter is changed on the Lord's day by Pope
Leo the Bishop of Rome". As this is known to have occurred in 455 A.D. in
Rome, the year nine in the Welsh Easter Annals is dated as 455 and so year one
becomes 447 A.D.
As the Easter Annals in question were almost certainly compiled at Menevia –
St. Davids – this immediately introduces an element of considerable doubt. First,
it takes no account whatsoever of the fact that St. David’s was devastated,
pillaged and burned on a number of occasions, and any document written
around, say 980 A.D., and purporting to have historical content, must be suspect
as to exact dating. It has to have been compiled from surviving scraps,
remembrances and other sources.
What is of even more importance is the fact that the apostolic Welsh church was
not subject to Rome for centuries after 455 A.D. and Pope Leo. Indeed major
religious wars were fought between the Welsh and the English who were egged
on by Augustine of Canterbury and his successors, because the Welsh church
refused to accept Roman practices. One very important difference between the
two churches was in fact the difference in the method of calculating the date of
Easter. The Welsh traditionally calculated their Easter according to the Liturgy of
St. John, and the day fell on any day of the week as it occurred. Whilst the
Roman church reorganised things to ensure, with due bureaucratic administrative
efficiency that Easter Day always fell on a Sunday.
Even a cursory study of the history of the Welsh shows that in 755 A.D., when
Cynan Tindaethwy became Prince of Gwynedd in North Wales, the Bishop of
Bangor – who was Elvod – made an alteration to the date of Easter to come into
line with Rome. All the other Welsh bishops refused to follow this practice. The
result was that the Saxons (now Christians and followers of Roman notions)
invaded South Wales and fought the king of Morganwg in 720 A.D. The battle
was at Coed Marchan, and the king of Morganwg won the battle. The matter did
not end there, however, as Cyvelach, the Bishop of Llandaff, was then slain in an
affray in the Morganwg border area of Hereford and again the Saxons were the
attackers. In 777 A.D., the Llandaff clergy decided to end the senseless quarrel
and began to use the Roman way of calculating Easter.
This did not end the matter. In 809 A.D., the bishops and clergy of Llandaff and
St. David's decided to again go their own ways. Bangor remained the only
cathedral church to follow Rome on Easter Day in Wales. Again a religious war
broke out, and in 810 A.D., the Saxons raided by sea and burned down St.
David's cathedral. The Roman church did not even hesitate to destroy other
Christian churches, or to kill Christians who did not bow to the absolute
authority claimed by Roman bishops. Things changed, however, when in 817
A.D. Cynan died in North Wales, and his line died with him. The new dynasty
under Mervyn Frych, the king of the Isle of Man, made alliances with the Danes
to combat the English kings Egbert of Wessex and Cenulph of Mercia. This
brought the Danes into Britain and this was an act to change the history of
Britain for all time.
In 831 A.D., the Mercians raided into Morganwg and destroyed the monastery at
Sengenydd where the Mound of the Queen of Heaven is, and in return, the
Morganwg army devastated Mercia. The religious war was still on.
The quarrels persisted and in 860 A.D. a huge Saxon raid resulted in the
destruction of almost every church in Glamorgan, Gwent, Dyfed and Cardigan.
There can be no doubt that the targets of these raids were the churches, and the
difference in religious practices caused them. This is clear when in 870 A.D., the
Saxon-English again attacked Bangor in North Wales. Whilst the English and
Welsh fought the battle, the Bishop of Bangor took the side of the English. The
bishop, who was clearly fighting the cause of Roman Easter Day, was killed, as
were most of his English allies.
Just when the Welsh church was finally forced to become oriental Roman is not
clear. We know that King Edgar of the English made a raid into Morganwg in the
962 A.D period and burned the famous monastery and college at Llantwit Major.
We know that Owen ap Hywel Dda, the prince of West Wales, raided into
Morganwg in 958 A.D. and burned down Llantwit Major and Llancarfan
Abbeys, because he found English scholars there. It is obvious that he objected
to English, and therefore Roman church, customs.
There is the well-known English complaint that Welsh clergy refused to
associate with the English clergy. They refused the kiss of friendship, refused to
eat with them, and after any contact they rigorously scrubbed themselves and
items the English clerics had touched. That there were wide differences in
church practice in Wales was evident. The bishops, abbots and priests all had the
right to marry and many church offices were in fact hereditary. Lands granted to
the church most often remained in the hands of the family that owned the land
due to the remarkable system of lay-abbots. The head of the family who owned
the property simply carried out the church services although he was not a priest,
and so the church was prevented from land grabbing. Giraldus Cambrensis
describes in detail just such a lay – abbot around 1130 AD – and Welsh clergy
went on marrying long after that. Later, as in the rest of Europe, the Roman
church was able to pursue its policy of greed and lust for wealth, strange in an
organisation whose supposed founder preached poverty.
A late Bishop of Bangor named Madoc Min earned an undying reputation for
treason to his nation, by twice betraying them. Here again there seem to be the
seeds of religious differences motivating the traitor Bishop Madoc Min. What is
significant is that around 942 A.D., the prince of West Wales, Hywel Dda, went
off to Rome to study the legal codes of other nations, concluding that the Welsh
Laws, drawn up at Ty-Gwyn a'r Daf, were the most suitable for Wales. It would
seem that the Easter Calendar, which contains the Welsh Annals, was drawn up
after this date, and therefore no great reliance can be placed upon the exact
dating of King Arthur, his Battles of Camlan and Badon or anything else as far
back as the sixth century in such a document. The entry about Pope Leo altering
the Easter date in 455 A.D. proves this to be just moonshine, as it was not for
centuries after that the Welsh came near to adopting the Roman Easter system.
Leslie Alcock, in his book "Arthur's Britain", appears to sense that there is
something wrong, but being an Englishman he fails to comprehend the true
nature of the Welsh nation and its states. He does in fact postulate that there
could well be a scribal error in the transcription of ancient documentary evidence
around 970 A.D. when these Welsh Annals were compiled. Unfortunately, he
goes backward in the wrong direction, indicating that a Battle of Badon in 518
A.D. could be in fact a battle fought in say 490 or 493 A.D. He does recognise
that an entry written between two columns of figures could have been read in the
wrong direction to, say, the left instead of the right. If this reasoning does in fact
apply, then the 518 A.D. date could equally be 548 or 543 A.D., by going
forward instead of backward.
In fact, all the dates concerning these major events appear to be too early in time
in the sixth century. Not least, King Maelgwn Gwynedd is dragged forward to
too early a date. The entry about Leo, the Bishop of Rome, is a dead giveaway,
and it can have no credibility as a genuine early Welsh historical remembrance
or record. The whole concept of an Easter Calendar calculated in the manner of
the Roman invention of 455 A.D. is spurious and patently, obviously, false. In
589 A.D., the combined Welsh church, which had been founded 440 years
earlier, before there was a Church of Rome, told Augustine of Canterbury that
they would have nothing to do with him or Rome, and particularly with the
Roman Easter. In 750 A.D. and much, much later, they were prepared to fight
wars in defence of their religious ideas. There can be no credibility in a Welsh
Easter Calendar containing supposed Annals, which dates back to 447 A.D. and
has as its first entry a notation of the arch-enemy of the Welsh church and nation
– the Bishop of Rome instituting his new Easter Calendar. English writers,
bedazzled by Augustine and Canterbury, totally failed to recognise this simple
and very obvious fact.
The Welsh clergy went on their own way, marrying and having children, long
after the entry of the Normans into Britain. There are records of their doing so
even in the time of King John. The obvious answer to all this, is to study the
Anglo-Saxon Chronicle and the various Welsh records in conjunction. This tells
of Ceredic fighting aggressive battles as late as 547 A.D., and if this is near
Oxford, and then Badon and Camlan came later. Of this there can be no doubt.
In fact, we find the ignorance of Welsh history amongst English historians in
search of British King Arthur to be truly monumental. An essential prerequisite
must be a study of Welsh Dark Age history. All the endless deliberations,
arguments, and theories about the dates of King Arthur in the Welsh Annals
based on an Easter Calendar are as meaningless as a puff of wind. The Dark Age
British simply did not use the Easter Day Roman Calendar, and so at best we
have a document compiled around 980 A.D. that tells us some of what King
Arthur did in his time, but cannot be relied upon for dating purposes. What we
do find is that the South East Wales/Morganwg dating evidence preserved by
Morganwg historians is generally accurate on Morganwg affairs, whereas this
much-discussed Easter Annals document comes from the rival area of Dyfed. As
King Arthur was a Morganwg King, it would seem logical that Morganwg
evidence is to be preferred to this much later questionable list from Dyfed. Any
ideas that the early entries of the Welsh Annals are even near contemporary have
to be a mass of unfounded optimism. The centuries-long squabble between the
Apostolic Church of Wales and particularly Morganwg, and the younger Church
of Rome, proves this.
All we know from this is that there were Battles at Badon and Camlan and no
more. We have to arrive at the dates of King Arthur's battles, and of his reign by
other methods. The disputes between the Church in Wales and the Roman
Church are matters of very solid historical fact, and they were disputes over the
Easter Calendar. The Welsh never used it, certainly not for hundreds of years
after King Arthur's time, for they were Gnostic Christians.
Glamorgan and Gwent histories exist from the translations made from Welsh
into English from around 1600 A.D. onwards. They stand up to examination
very well indeed, and there is no valid reason to ignore them. The irony of the
situation is that the London based government passed laws for centuries against
the Welsh language and when the Glamorgan and Gwent Bards translated their
works into English they were then disregarded as being "not original".
Nonetheless, they remain provably accurate.
THE FUNERAL ODE TO KING ARTHUR
The more we study the evidence available, even before we discovered the tomb
of Arthur, the more we are convinced that the old British of South Wales were
having a long, silent, secret laugh at the Angle and Saxon kings. They may have
given them the skeleton of King Gwrgan ap lestyn and his wife who were buried
at Giastonbury as dummies and kept silent about Arthur. Alternatively, King
Henry II of England invented the whole thing himself and no Welsh Bards were
involved.
The greatest of the Bards of the time of King Arthur was Taliesin, the Chief of
Bards, and, with Llywarch Hen, with Golyddan, with Gwyddno, with Myrddyn
Wylt, and the great Aneurin, he wrote many of the great funeral odes to the great
kings and princes of his day. One of these remarkable funeral odes was
published in the Myvyrnian Archaiology in 1801 A.D., an ode attributed to
Taliesin, adopted son of Elphin ap Gwyddno. It is entitled the "Marwnad Uthyr
Pendragon". Now this title, "Marwnad Uthyr Pendragon", indisputably translates
into "The Funeral Ode to the Wonderful Pendragon". An alternative to
"wonderful" could be the word "astonishing". Therefore this funeral ode has a
title which is descriptive of the dead king, who we will see was King Arthur.
It must be one of the most ludicrous jokes of all time that there never ever was a
king named "Uthyr Pendragon", the brother of Ambrosius Aurelianus – Emrys
Wledig. There was one Uther – Victor – the son of Magnus Maximus and the
half brother of Arthur king of Greece, but he died in 388 A.D. Previously, we
went along with the fiction of Uther Pendragon, the brother of Ambrosius
Aurelianus, to protect the secret of Arthur's grave. Actually, the old Bruts give
the lie to this, for they call Ambrosius – Emrys Wledig – the last of his line
related to the Roman Imperial House, so he could not have had a brother. Read
Nennius, for it is written clear enough. Equally Gryffydd ap Arthur tells of
Myrddyn Emrys prophecying before Uthyr Pendragon – The Wonderful
Pendragon – and Emrys could not prophecy before his brother for he would need
to be dead before this brother took over. There would be no problem at all with
Myrddyn Emrys prophecying before King Arthur, with Myrddyn retiring and
Arthur taking over. However Uthyr means "Wonderful" or "Astonishing" and is
not a name, and also this is Arthur.
Remarkably, no one seems ever to have translated this widely published poem
into English, and so we will remedy this as best we can.
Marwnad Uthyr Pendragon – The Funeral Ode to the Wonderful
Pendragon
Line

1 The emotional longing and lamentation of the multitude

2 Does not cease to arise throughout the host.

3 They earnestly desire the joyful gain of blue enamel.

4 Your stone there was with your name became a riddle (clear evidence of a stone).

5 They likewise wish for their prince (to return).

6 All around appears the rule of order at the head of the feast.

7 They wish to dress the head of the feast with black.

8 They do not cease to pass blood between the warbands.

9 They long for your defence and your succor

10 In the vanishing of the kinsman of Caesar.

11 They will shout in blood and anger.

12 The sword that was in the van in taming the brothers of Caw of the Wall (or "of Giants").

13 They crave with longing for a portion of your cause

14 And the refuge in the manliness of Arthur (clear identification of Arthur).

15 They long for your coming in a hundred fortresses.

16 A hundred manors long for your assurances.

17 They long for your donations in a hundred schools.

18 A hundred chieftains long for your coming,

19 The great and mighty sword that supported them.

 20 They look for your best judgements of merit,

21 The restoration of Principalities.

22 Your sayings are remembered, soothing the muscular (meaning violent)

23 Not without faith or the bellowing of your offspring.

24 The eloquence of the praises of the Bards is not skilful enough

25 Toiling like beavers with eagerness for weeks.

26 With the names of men and warbands to compare with you

27 With determination to spread the Jewel of your order through the four quarters of mankind

28 Climbing to heaven with hunger for you

29 Above the Eagles, above the fear of disorder.

30 I am the one who is with the great Warrior.

31 I am the Bard, I am the Bagpiper, I am with the Creator.

32 Seventy musicians create the great rhapsody of the first power.

33 A lime white ox is managed by three.

34 The cap of one who is trained in learning

35 Your sons – Your Judges

36 Your Mayors, remain silent.

37 Your great Creator relates your funeral Ode

38 Sowing with stones, resounding over the world.

39 In the meantime the knife of great longing pervades over Britain.

40 The Leader of Heaven has left the nation without a roof.

Stone of Devacci Fili Justus, or Dewrath Wledig, son of Iestyn, descended from King Euddav 312-367
A.D. Dewrath, father of Rhufon Bevr, King Arthur’s cavalry commander.
Photograph by Chris Barber

Bedd Taliesin – the grave of Taliesin Merlin ap Henwg at Talybont in Dyfed. Taliesin died around
600-620 A.D.
Photograph by Chris Barber

Perhaps nothing better expresses the passing of the great King Arthur better than
the last line of Taliesin's Funeral Ode. "The Leader of Heaven has left the nation
without a roof". What this elegy does is to first identify exactly, accurately and
without question the Uthyr Pendragon as King Arthur. It names him as such in
line 14. Then, secondly, it clearly relates him to Caesar – an allusion to the
relationship with Magnus Maximus, Constantine the Great, and so on. Next, the
poem speaks of "the bellowing of your offspring", and this exactly tallies with
the evidence of the Triads and the Book of Llandaff. King Morgan ap Arthur was
listed as one of the three great war leaders of Britain, and one of three who were
"red with blood". His brother Gwaednerth was so violent that he was forced to
give up his territories, and Morgan killed Frioc, who was his uncle and Arthur’s
brother. Line 35 refers to "your sons".
"Marwnad Uthyr Pendragon" shows sorrow and mourning on the grand scale,
and it speaks of the secret burial and disappearance of Arthur in line 10, "the
vanishing of the kinsman of Caesar". It goes on in line 33 to speak of a "lime
white Ox". The first Oxen were used to draw funeral carts, and white animals
were the symbol of death. In the next line, which is No. 34, we are told of "The
cap of one who is trained in learning", and this appears as a direct reference to
St. Illtyd, who buried his kinsman, King Arthur, and who was immensely
learned. There is also reference to the stone in line 4 – which we have now
recovered.
The whole poem needs very careful study, and so do many others not yet
translated. There is no harm now in exposing the fiction of "King Uther"
Pendragon, the joke has gone too far when it also deceives the Welsh. It is not
just a matter of King Arthur, however, for there is a poem to Llud Mawr, which
brings King Llud of London's Ludgate fame back into focus; there are poems to
Cuneda, to Elphin, many to Urien ap Cynfarch, others to Geraint, to Llyr ap
Brochwel (King Brochwael Ysgyrthrog), to Cynvelyn, to Gwallawg ap Llenawg,
and dozens of others. Hundreds of other personalities are also mentioned in these
poems of the Age of Arthur. The most important, however, deal directly with
Arthur and his close companions. One is a dialogue between Arthur, Cai, and
Glewlwyd, and another a dialogue between Arthur and Gwenhwyfar. Then there
is the older dialogue between Arthur ap Mascen Wledig and his nephew Eliwod
ap Madog ap Uther ap Mascen Wledig, situation around 573 A.D., and a
dialogue between Gwalchmai and Trystan involving Arthur, back to around 530-
550 A.D., or even later.
As for "Uthyr" Pendragon meaning "The Wonderful" Pendragon, there is another
instance of King Arthur being called Uther or Uthyr in the "Dialogue between
Arthur, Cai and Glewlwyd" in line 8:
Mab a Mydron gvas Uther Pendragon.
Sons to Mydron the servant of the Wonderful Pendragon.
Then, in the poem "Ymryson Gwyddneu a Gwyn ab Nudd", there is another
clear reference to King Arthur the Wonderful. The poem is in the ancient short
three line verses, which were so popular in the period, and verse 22 holds the
evidence:
 Mi a wnn Lle y Has Llacheu I have been to the place where Llacheu was killed
Mab Arthur uthr yngherteu The son of Arthur the wonderful counsellor Ban
ryerhint brien ar Kreu Where the crows screamed over blood (high strength and
privileges I pray for)
The poem clearly uses the term Uthyr or Uther for King Arthur and we find no
other king so described. The same poem describes not only Llacheu ap Arthur as
Llas meaning Blue, but it also uses the word to describe several other warrior
kings, including Bran ap Gweirydd, Gwenddoleu ap Ceidiaw, Neiric ap
Kerreian, Gwallawc, possibly son of Goholeth ap Lleenawc, and the Llas or
Blue soldiers of Britain. As there are many other instances of this including the
famous Taliesin, who was known as Bardd Glas or Llas – the Blue Bard. It all
recalls the line No. 3 of the Funeral Ode to Arthur the Wonderful Pendragon,
where the soldiers and host long for blue enamel. The whole thing harks back to
the time of Julius Caesar who described the British he met as painting
themselves blue, and clearly in Arthur's time they were still painting their
armour Blue. In fact, Caesar appears less than accurate in his descriptions of the
British, who seem to have been painting leather and metal armour with blue
enamel, actually pewter, as in the helmet discovered, and wearing Red horsehair
in their helmets. Llas may be intended for Lladd, which means slain, but it still
means blue.
The poem on Arthur, Cai, and Glewlwyd, also mentions the ubiquitious Gelli or
Kelli or Gehli, who we believe bought the "Book of Tello" for Llandaff, and this
adds substance to the tradition that St. Gildas wrote it. It was stolen after the
reign of Cromwell and taken to Lichfield where the clergy renamed it the "Book
of St. Chad" to disguise its identity and hide the fact that it was stolen property
from Llandaff. They even sent the manuscript to a bookbinder who mutilated the
priceless notations of the margins.
What these poetic references do beyond question is to establish that Uthyr
Pendragon is only a title or description bestowed upon King Arthur himself, and
the only reference to a real Uther lies in the histories concerning Victor, son of
Magnus Maximus, who was long dead before even King Arthur's grandfather,
King Tewdrig, was born. The poem of Englynion Ymddiddan, where Arthur has
a strange dialogue with a nephew named Eliwlod, or more correctly Liwlod, is
one where Liwlod claims that his father is Madog ap Uther. In fact, the word
"Uthyr" meaning wonderful, is used to rhyme with "Uthwr" intended as a name.
 Arthur gleddyddawg uther
Ni sai dim gan dy ruther
Mi yw mab Madog ab uther.

Arthur of the swordsmanship wonderful
A number are at rest, are nothing because of your assault
I am the son of Madog son of Uthur.
The introduction to this poem states that Arthur is the son of Uther. It also states
that a man named Liwlod, meaning brown-coloured, man had a father named
Madog and a grandfather named Uther and that Liwlod was related to Arthur
and obviously his nephew. As relationships in official terms extended out to
cousins of the sixth degree, it is difficult to place Liwlod or Madog or Uthur.
Analysis of the poem shows that there is a hidden story held in it. What is
happening is that Liwlod has disappeared and is lost. Actually, we as researchers
got lost, and muddled the poem with the Mabinogi Tales. We thought that Arthur
goes in search of Liwlod and it is found that a pig is behaving strangely. The pig,
instead of eating its normal diet in its usual place, rushes off when let out and
goes to a tree. Here an emaciated eagle sits on the topmost branches, and its
flesh drops from its body. Down below, the pig devours the flesh of the eagle.
This is not too difficult to explain, for the eagle represents the Royal House or
Clan and its Roman Imperial connections. The pig represents the invading
Germanic tribes, which are eating up the body and sustenance of the indigenous
native British as they migrate into Britain and notoriously breed faster than the
British themselves.
In a dialogue with the almost skeletal eagle, King Arthur establishes a trust, and
slowly the eagle descends through the branches to the safety of his lap. The
eagle is established as being the vanished Liwlod and finally restored by Arthur.
Here there is something more to go on, for Liwlod, or Eliwod, may be a real
historical character. In the Dyfed King Lists there are in lists No. 2 and No. 4
families tracing descent from Maxim Guletic, who is of course Mascen Wledig,
or Magnus Maximus. We know that Magnus Maximus had several sons, and
these included Marceflus and Victor. Victor the Augustus of Gaul is a younger
brother of Arthur the king of Greece, or alternatively his half brother. This great
King Arthur and his half-brother Victor – Uther – are the core of the muddle
over King Arthur ap Meurig, although they died at least 100 years before he was
born. Nonetheless, this first Arthur leaves a list of descendants in King List No.
4 starting with his daughter, Eidinet, and King List No. 2 identifies another line
of descendants of Magnus Maximus, starting with Dimet, who may actually be
Eidinet ap Arthur ap Magnus Maximus. Either way, Eidinet in list 4 has a son,
Tutagual, and descendants, and Dimet in list 2 has a son, Nimet, and
descendants. So Tutagual and Nimet are either brothers or first cousins. We
believe that the elected king of Britain named Owen, descended from Magnus
Maximus, is probably Eidinet, and that the Llwlod or Eliwod of the poem
represents this family losing their lands to the invading immigrant Saxons. The
pig in the poem represents the Saxons eating up the prosperity of these
descendants of the House of the Eagle – The Imperial House – then it is Arthur,
the son of Meurig, who restores them and gives them back their lands. The tree
in which the Eagle sits is Britain and the higher up one is in the branches then
the nearer to death and to heaven. It is in fact a simple enough story and a
pleasant way of telling history.
The name Liwlod, which was later mutilated to Eliwod, is not a name. It is a
descriptive word and it means a brown-skinned man. Mistakes were made when
in a Welsh dictionary of 1688 A.D. we were able to find the following entry:
"Lliwed, Cenedl, popl, Ilu", meaning "A nation, a people, also an army, a troop,
a generation". From this a more modern set of terms are these: Llyw, meaning a
ruler; Llywed, which means to rule, to direct and so on; Llywedu, which means
to rule, to guide; and Llyweddydd, which means a director; and Llywedyddiaeth,
which means a directorship and governance. Back in the older dictionary,
Llywodraeth again meant rule, government, and also good ordering of matter.
Arthyr is "Arthur ben cadoed Cernyw", which seems to mean "Arthur of the
head throne of Cernyw – South East Wales". Alternatively, with Cad meaning
battle, and Oed, meaning ancient, and Cadair meaning chair, it could mean
several things. It could mean, "Arthur head of the ancient battle, strength of
Cernyw". Either way, it places him in Cernyw, which is in South Wales.
It would have been strange beyond belief if there had been no "Marwnad" or
Funeral Ode to the great King Arthur. What is remarkable is that no one seems to
have taken any notice of it, and yet countless people have wondered about
Arthur and many have made a living by writing about him. That King Arthur
was Uthyr Pendragon is beyond dispute.
In the poem Englynnion Ymddiddan containing the dialogue between King
Arthur and Liwlod, this Liwlod claims to be a son of Madog, and there is a
prince named Madog very clearly exhibited in the Cathedral Charters and "Lives
of the Saints" and other ancient records as a son of King Meurig and a brother of
King Arthur ap Meurig. If King Meurig is an Uthyr Pendragon – as it turns out
he is– then Madoc becomes of huge significance.
There is a clue in the Dialogue between King Arthur and Liwlod where late in
the poem, Arthur is asked to honour Cynan. This could simply mean "the
chiefs".
THE ANCESTORS OF TALIESIN - MERLIN
Taliesin was by birth an important prince of the Glamorgan royal clan. He
clearly was druidic and a bard, of course, and seems to have had no illusions
about Christianity.
He was the son of St. Heinwg and his ancestors are listed as follows: Taliesin –
Merlin ap Heinwg ap Fflwch ap Cynin ap Cynvar ap Clydawg ap Gwynnar ap
King Caid ap Cadren ap King Cyllin ap King Caradoc ap King Bran ap King
Llyr Lediath. This list is also remarkable in making Bran a son of Llyr Lediath –
Lear the Stamerer – and it points to there being two King Caradocs.
Taliesin’s ancestor, King Caid was the father of King Ceri of the Longsword,
buried at Nash Point near Porth Kerry, and the grandfather of the great King
Baram, buried at Twyn Barlwm in Gwent. As a royal druid-bard, Taliesin would
have been intimately connected with King Arthur, his kinsman. He may well
have been of the same generation.
THE DATING OF THE DEATH OF KING ARTHUR
The most vexed question, of all the uncertainties that have long surrounded King
Arthur, is the question of the date of his death. Various guesses and assesments
have been made, usually on the most fragile grounds, and the general tendency
has been to orient the estimates around the 537-542 A.D. period. This guessed
dating tends to then distort the history of the period.
Our own assesments in the volume "King Arthur's Invisible Kingdom"
demonstrate old King Meurig dying around 570 A.D. at a great age, then his son,
King Arthur, dying around the year 579 A.D. The calculations were based on a
mass of complimentary facts drawn in the most part from the Llandaff Charters,
and the historical scraps that are available, including the "Lives of the Saints".
This hypothesis of King Meurig dying aged around 90 or older, only some nine
years before his son, Arthur, is supported by the Nennius statement of 822 A.D.
that Arthur was not yet king when he led the British armies. It is also supported
by the Glamorgan traditions of King Arthur keeping his queen at Llan-ail-teyrn,
now Llaniltern, just north of Cardiff. Ail-Teyrn implies an "alternative king", or
a viceroy or a regent.
The mediaevals were under no illusions about the dating of King Arthur's death.
This can be demonstrated from the "Bruts of England". We have in our other
researches shown quite clearly that all the early English manuscripts definitely
identify King Arthur as "the King of Glamorgan". Remarkably, these early
records of England give only one date in the pre-Saxon period of British history.
Events are recorded in plenty, but no dates except one. This single dated event is
the date of the death of King Arthur. The importance of this event can easily be
seen, for Arthur "the Wall of Steel" of Welsh poetry, held the tribes of Germanic
invaders in check until his death – and not until 579 A.D. did they resume their
attacks.
Chapter 88 of the Brut of England concludes with these lines:
Arthur was born to Auyoun pe xxij zere of his regne. After pe
Incarnacioun of oure lorde Ihesu Crist v.C and xivj zere.
So we are being told that King Arthur went or was taken to Aballach in the 22nd
year of his reign, and that this was 546 years after the date of the Incarnation of
Jesus Christ. The Christians believe without exception that the death of Jesus
Christ occured in Jerusalem in 33 A.D., and his believed ascension to heaven
followed. Therefore, with an incarnation in 33 A.D. and King Arthur going to
Aballach some 546 years later we have the year 579 A.D. Aballach actually
means "a place given up for other purposes" e.g., a graveyard.
Dating is made even more difficult when we realise that most scholars place the
birth date of Jesus at 4 B.C. and not 0 or 1 A.D. So King Arthur is believed to
have died between 575 and 579 A.D. Given the alleged concealment of his death
and burial, this is as accurate as can be expected. There is a date given in the
Bruts, and, therefore, until it is disproved by evidence and logical argument, it
stands. Significantly all the horrendous muddles of sixth century British history
immediately evaporate and disappear once we adopt this more correct dating.
Recorded details such as Gildas as being in Ireland in 570 A.D. and then being
reconciled with King Arthur after his return make sense under this chronology.
Arthur is recorded as executing Huail ap Caw, the brother of Gildas, at Ruthin,
and this caused the division between the king and the saint.
As apostolic gnostic Christians from 35 A.D., the Welsh would have believed
that the Incarnation dated from the time of the supposed crucifixion. Later
Roman Catholic scholars blundered in misreading dates from the time of the
birth of Jesus the Nazarene, instead of from his death. So we have a 33-year
error running through the datings, with King Arthur dying in 579 A.D. instead of
546 A.D., the Battle of Baedan taking place in 550-551 A.D. instead of 517
A.D., and the Battle of Camlan occurring in 572 A.D. instead of 538 A.D. A
huge Christian dilemna of whether their God was human on earth and spiritual in
heaven, or simply spiritual all the time lies at the root of the dating problem. The
word incarnation meant different things to different sects and the British were
the oldest sect.









PART FIVE: THE SEARCH FOR BRITISH KINGS
AND SAINTS: ST. GILDAS AND THE BARD
ANEURIN
The matter of the stones and what they tell us through their inscriptions is no
simple one, and in the volume "King Arthur – King of Glamorgan and Gwent"
we threw out some clues to see just who, if anyone, would pick them up. One
such problem involves the famed St. Gildas, the sermonising commentator on
sixth century Britain who wrote around 580-590 A.D. This St. Gildas, so-called
the historian, poses a problem, for there is a case to be made for two St.
Gildases. This is possible but improbable as there is no other duplicated saint,
and certainly no reference to two Gildases. Historically, all we have is the
genealogical reference to Gildas, the son of Caw, and Caw was a northern prince
who lost his lands in a war between his lords and their enemies.
The first difficulty is that people entering the church in the Dark Ages often
changed their names when they did so, particularly if the name they had held
some significance which might not be suitable to more gentle and holy ways.
The puzzle starts with the sons of Caw, for one of them was Aneurin the Bard,
who was one of only three or four noblemen who escaped alive from the epic
massacre described in the ancient poem "Y Gododdin". The poem was written
by Aneurin ap Caw telling of the three surviving princes out of 363 noblemen
involved. Just as the establishment in England mourned its lost generation after
the 1914-1918 World War, taking no concern for the millions of lower class
casualties, so the poem "Y Gododdin" did the same almost 1,500 years earlier.
The numbers killed in this epic massacre of the British by the Saxons at Caer
Caradoc are not stated. Only the loss of the princes is bemoaned in what is
perhaps one of the world’s great epic poems. There is no doubt that the massacre
was a catastrophe for the families of the British nobility So with this poem, and
other surviving poems ascribed to Aneurin, we know something about the man
who was remembered down through the ages as a lesser British Homer.
The first point that emerges is that whereas the Latin or Saxon name used to
identify Gildas was in fact Gildas, the Welsh seem to have used Aneurin. In fact
Welsh genealogists are said to have regarded the names as interchangeable, and
in this case we have the Soldier Bard as Aneurin and the Priest Gildas as the
same man. References to these names occur as (1) Gildas, (2) Gildas y Coed
Aur, (3) Aur y Coed Aur, and (4) Aneurin y Coed Aur. The meaning of Coed
Aur is golden grove or golden wood, and there is an obvious connection. This
could simply be that both Aneurin and Gildas were sons of Caw and hailed from
the same area. As we have said, however, the Welsh always regarded the names
as interchangeable or convertible.
Evidence of this duality of the names Aneurin and Gildas is found in the
ancestry of the Bishop Ufelwyn, who was a disciple of St. Dyfrig, who crowned
Arthur, and who was one of several suffragan bishops of the Llandaff diocese
during the middle period of the sixth century. The Bishop Ufelwy was located
and probably buried at the village just west of Cardiff, now misnamed St.
George’s. In Latin, he is styled Ubilvynus, and there are important genealogical
references to him and his father, St. Cennydd. We have the following:
Ufelwy son of Cennydd son of Aneurin y Coed Aur the Saint at St. George’s
Efili son of Cennydd son of Gildas y Coed Aur at Rhos Fili now Rhosili on the
Gower
So, Cennydd has a father alternatively named Aneurin and Gildas, both of Coed
Aur. This will make sense if Aneurin, the Soldier Bard, joined the church and
changed his name to become known as Gildas. Both Cennydd and Ufelwy are
well attested. The Bishop Ufelwy was given a land grant by King Meurig ap
Tewdrig, father of King Arthwyr – Arthur – and this is listed in the Llandaff
Charters; there are several witnesses named. The same Ufelwyn is named as a
church witness to a land grant made by King Pebiau Clavaurwg – Phoebus the
Dribbler – to Archbishop Dyfrig. This is all quite feasible and correct, and
Ufelwyn has to be of the blood of the royal clan to be a bishop. The sixth century
stone inscribed "Eta Fili" is at Merthyr Tydfil.
The historical importance of Bishop Ufelwyn is in fact great. The Welsh know
him as the Bishop Ufelwyn or Ffili the son of Cennydd, the son of Aneurin-
Gildas. He can be definitely placed into the period 500-560 A.D., the time of
King Arthwyr, by his own land grant from King Meurig and his witnessing of
other grants. We mentioned this Bishop Ufelwyn or Ffili in the volume "King
Arthur – King of Glamorgan and Gwent" when we dealt with Ogmore, to see if
anyone was capable of following the clues. We identified Ogmore as the place
where King Arthur was said to have gathered his armies before the Battle of
Mount Baedan, and we mentioned an inscribed stone. Historically Ogmore was
clearly a place of kings, as names such as Coed y Brenhin – The Kings Woods –
Kingshall and other names testify. Here in the ruins of the Ogmore Castle was
found an inscribed stone upon which was written:
(Sciendum) EST OMNIB(US) QUOD DED (IT) ARTHMAIL AGRUM DO ET
GLIGWS ET MERTAT ET FILI EPI
This inscription can be translated as follows:
Be it known to all that Arthmail has given this field to God and to Gliwys and to
Nertat and to Bishop Ffili
So the stone is in fact a deed of a land grant made by Arthmail, and Arthmail is
one of the many renderings of Arthur, Arthmail, Arthmael, Arthfael, Arthwyr,
etc. Arthmael means iron bear. The logical approach is to look at the three
beneficiaries. We have Gliwys, and we know that St. Cadoc, the cousin of King
Arthur, had a brother named Gliwys – Glywys. In fact, St. Cadoc's paternal
grandfather was also named Glywys, so we have either the grandfather of Cadoc
or Cadoc’s brother, St. Glywys – more likely the brother. Both could easily be
alive at King Arthur's time. Second, we have Nertat who is almost certainly
Nyuein, the daughter of the first cousin of Arthur – King Brychan of Brecon.
There were marriages between the families of Brychan Brecheiniog and that of
Cadoc, so this is possible, indeed probable. Then, finally, and most importantly,
we have Bishop Ffili, who is the Bishop Ufelwy or Ffili of the Llandaff Charters,
the grandson of Gildas – Aneurin. Caerphilly in Glamorgan is probably named
after Ffili; his gravestone is at Merthyr Tydfil.
As St. Cadoc persuaded his father King Gwynlliw Vilwyr – the Soldier – to
become a saint and found St. Gwynlliw's – St. Woollos – cathedral in Newport,
Gwent, and he also persuaded his mother to become St. Gwladys and to live in a
nunnery on Gelli Gaer Common in mid-Glamorgan, it is not surprising that he
talked his brother Glywys into entering the holy life of the church as well. Both
Nertat and Glywys are local West Glamorgan saints, both being named on the
Merthyr Mawr Conebelinus Cross – The Cynfelyn Cross. The Ogmore Stone is
therefore a land grant by King Arthur to his cousins Glywys and Nertat,
probably married to each other, and to Bishop Ufelwy-Ffili, probably their
chaplain or religious instructor. There is no other King Arthmail – Arthmael – to
be found at this period.
The tombstone of St. Gwladys the mother of St. Cadoc is at Gelligaer Church,
being taken there after being found at Capel Gwladys – Chapel of Gwladys – on
the West of Gelli Gaer Common.
As for St. Cennydd, the father of Bishop Ufelwy-Ffili, he founded a chapel on
the lonely small island of Burry Holms off the Gower coast. He also set up a
church at Llangennith on the Gower Penninsula, 16 miles west of Swansea, in
addition to Capel Kenyd on Burry Holms Island. His tombstone is in the
Llangennith Church on the mainland, and he probably retired to his island to
spend the Lent period in fasting. As we know that St. Gildas, the father of St.
Cennydd, is buried behind the altar of the monastery of Rhuys in Britanny, we
can get a good historical trace on the family. In addition to all this, there is in the
parish church of Merthyr Tydfil – Tydful the Martyr (a daughter of King
Brychan Brecheiniog killed by Saxon raiders) – a stone that is inscribed ETA
FILI. So we have a gravestone or memorial stone of Bishop Ffili, the ubiquitous
Bishop Ufelwy, Ubilvynus in Latin, of Ffili.
There is also the much debated subject of there being two St. Gildases, and that
the second Gildas was the person who wrote the "De Excidio" sermon history of
Britain around the 580-590 A.D. period. Historically, it is important for the
Aneurin/Gildas connection is a clear historical pointer to the disaster that
overwhelmed Britain and parts of Ireland in the Mid Sixth century. The Saxon
invasions were the cause of King Arthur having to fight his great northern
campaigns to free and liberate those Northern kingdoms. It helps place the great
massacre of Cattraeth at Caer Caradoc in South East Wales. There is no proof or
evidence to support the view that Cattraeth was a battle fought around 600 A.D.
All evidence of princes fleeing from the Northern kingdoms around the 480-530
A.D. period are not attributable to the massacre, but instead to the great comet
disaster. A host of others testify to this mass withdrawal and flight during this
period. The Wars of Liberation, launched by the mighty Arthur the war king of
the Silures nation, launched against known named invading Saxon and Angle
kings, and the battle locations are correctly in the North of England and southern
and central Scotland, and the whole nation flocked to support him as their
champion. The problem is whether these wars preceded the great comet debris
disaster circa A.D. 562 or followed afterward.
The question as to whether Gildas y Coed Aur is another person separate from
Gildas Badonicus, who is said to have written the "De Excidio", is a problem but
no catastrophe. The basic scenario is one where large numbers of people,
including the nobility, fled from the North into Wales. This can only have
happened because invaders had dispossessed them and driven them from their
own lands. This would in fact account for the savage invective used by Gildas
Badonicus in his writing. He criticises the kings of Wales, for he is desperate to
get them to move north to free his original homeland – the area known as
Prydain. So King Arthur – identifiable as Arthwyr, Arthwys, and in the Brut of
Tyssilio as Arthyr – went North and cleared the Saxons out of Prydain in
particular, and Britain in general. It is not impossible that the "De Excidio" was
written as late as 562-570 A.D. or alternatively as early as 530-540 AD
THE SEARCH FOR THE OLD BRITISH KINGS
We have shown in the volume "King Arthur – King of Glamorgan and Gwent",
that it is possible to track down the old kings who led the royal clans of Britain.
There should be no real surprise at the discovery and location of King Arthur, for
there are a large number of memorials existing which identify kings, princes, and
royal bishops of the British royal clan, and these are in fact generally well
known.
In Britanny, there is the tomb of King Conan Meriadauc at the old Cathedral at
Pol-de-Leon. This first king of Britanny went over with Magnus Maximus,
Victor, Marcellus, and Arthur in 383 A.D. Conan Meriadauc means Chief of
Denbighshire in North Wales, and he was a nephew of King Euddav of Britain
whose daughter Helen was then married to Magnus Maximus the Emperor. The
story tells how Magnus was the dominant force in British politics, running the
Roman forces whilst King Euddav ran British affairs and was general of the
British armies. Conan was very powerful and Magnus gave him Britanny as
compensation to avert any ambition to become the top king in Britain. The tomb
of Conan is in granite in the old cathedral of the Chapelle du Kreisker, founded
originally in the period 400-500 A.D. after St. Kirec an archdeacon of Leon
cured a sick maiden. St. Pol, who is buried in the other cathedral, is none other
than Paul-Aurelian, who is well recorded in Wales as a contemporary of King
Tewdrig and King Meurig the father of King Arthur. Conan, the first king of
Britanny, probably died around 420-430 A.D.
The second king of Britanny was Gradlon – Gratian – and his well-preserved
tomb is at the monastery of Llandevenec, which was founded by his first cousin,
St. Guennole, the third son of Brychan, the brother of Conan Meriadauc. Other
royal tombs are traceable in Britanny. Over in Wales, there are other tombs of
kings of this period, and the best known is that of King Theoderic Tewdrig,
grandson of Ninniaw, the father of King Meurig who in turn was Arthur II's
father. This British king died in 508 A.D., and is Natanleod – high king of the
British who is recorded as being killed in the Anglo Saxon Chronicle. He is
known to have died from head wounds suffered in a battle at Tintern on the
River Wye where Saxons were being driven out east across the ford. The Book
of Llandaff records his death and burial at Mathern Martyred Teyrn. The Bishop
of Llandaff excavated his coffin in 1625 A.D. The bishop dated King Tewdrig
and got it wrong by about 100 years, for he guessed at 600 A.D., which is
conveniently after Austin – Augustine – arrived to spread Romam Catholicism
to the Saxons and Angles in A.D. 597, and he fashioned a plaque to mark the
tomb. A further excavation took place at the church at Mathern in Gwent in 1881
A.D. when the stone coffin of King Tewdrig was dug up, and found to contain
the skeleton of a man.
The son of Tewdrig was the well-recorded King Meurig, who was father of
Arthur. Tewdrig had sponsored the church of Llandaff, and now Meurig –
Maurice – his son, built the first cathedral. We thought he was buried in the
cathedral that was enlarged in 1120 A.D., and there is the tomb in the founder’s
position in the north wall close to the altar – which is the founder's position.
King Meurig died around 570 A.D. having built this church on land granted by
his father, King Tewdrig. When the church was enlarged in 1120 A.D., the
Bishop Urban brought the bones of St. Dyfrig, the great bishop who crowned
Arthur, back from the Island of Bardsey. Dyfrig's remains were buried with great
ceremony in the new Cathedral. Significantly, the tomb of St. Dyfrig lies also in
the north wall, but behind the founder's tomb, further from the altar. We were
wrong about Meurig, for he is the Uthyr Pendragon buried in the giant boat-
shaped circle at Caer Caradoc.
The bishop who followed Dyfrig at Llandaff was St. Teilo, who then followed
St. David who succeeded Dyfrig as metropolitan archbishop, to become the third
archbishop. The date of David's death is uncertain but it is thought to be around
544-554 A.D., and St. Teilo would have died around 565-575 A.D. The tomb of
this other archbishop who served Arthur is directly opposite the tomb of St.
Dyfrig, and it lies in the south side of the nave. All these tombs are the carved
structures of 1120 A.D. and onward when the rebuilding and reburials took
place. Both the bishops are shown as full-fleshed and lifelike in the stone effigies
lying on the tombs, and this indicates that as holy men and priests of their God
they are incorruptible. There is a stark contrast with the tomb of the founder,
where the stone effigy is shown as a skeleton of a man, being a king or earl and
not a holy bishop or saint he was corruptible, and so is represented as a skeleton.
The thinking is quite clear and quite consistent. The position of God is at the
altar at the east end of the church, and so the right hand of God is the north wall
close to the altar. Here lies the founder and behind him Dyfrig, the greatest of the
Welsh saints. This is a standard pattern positioning the founder's tombs and
saints are commonly found buried either behind the altar or beneath it. St. Gildas
is buried behind the altar at the Rhuys Monastery in Britanny, and the bones of
St. David lie in a casket behind the altar in his cathedral at Menevia – St. Davids
in Pembrokeshire.
All these tombs are important, as they are those of near relatives, ancestors, and
the bishops of King Arthur. They tell a great deal of the nature of his kingdom
and demonstrate the accuracy of their records. St. Dyfrig is important as the
leading churchman during the reigns of King Tewdrig and King Meurig, and he
did, in legend and record, crown Arthur as king of all Britain. One St. Dyfrig
was the son of Eurddil, the daughter of King Pebiau Clavawrog – Phoebus the
Dribbler of Ergyng – who was an uncle of the King Teithfallch –Theodosius –
the father of King Tewdrig. In fact, it appears probable that his father was Pabo
Post Prydain – Pompey the Pillar of Britain – a prince who was driven from his
lands in the North by invasions. Old King Pebiau came home from fighting and
hunting and would not hear of the marriage idea, and so St. Dyfrig was either of
virgin birth or he was illegitimate. The other Dyfrig was a son of Brychan of
Brecon, a first cousin of King Arthur ap Meurig. Pabo Post Prydain lived out his
old age in a monastery in North Wales, and we can find his tomb or memorial
stone in the church of Llanbabo up in Anglesey in North Wales. All this is
important for it is another link, another piece in the jigsaw puzzle – a prince well
recorded in histories, Triads, folktales, and poems of ancient Bards. Tomb
hunting is necessary to put together the story of these real life characters after
muddles created by generations of so-called scholars dealing with Arthur. Pabo's
stone was carved with his effigy, and it says:
Hic Jacet Pabo Post Prud Corpors … Te …Prima
Here lies Pompey the Pillar of Prydain (body) buried … Te … the First
In tracking down the leading characters of the great Arthurian era, we are
uncovering much about of their way of life, their religious ideas, and the fact that
King Arthur's kingdom was indeed strongly apostolic Christian.
Williams, in his 1784 History of Monmouthshire (Gwent), notes, "that there is in
a church in the Golden Valley area of Hereford, a district which was part of
Wales until stolen in 1536 by the English Parliament, a statue of King Pebiau
Clavawrog. The statue or image shows the king with two attendants who are
wiping his mouth; he had a strange complaint which caused a constant flow of
rheum from his mouth". This carving is again of a great-grandfather of Arthur,
and the grandfather of St. Dyfrig, and so it is important. What church contains it
is not stated, but it is a trace on King Pebiau.
The legendary friend of Arthur was St. Gildas, the author of "De Excidio", and
Gildas wrote of five other Welsh-British kings who were active at the time of his
writing. One of these was Vortiporex – Dyfed – the Ruler of West Wales, who
became Porrex in the muddle histories of mediaeval times. Even so, Vortiporex,
which seems to mean protector, was a contemporary king during the time of
King Arthur. The stone memorial or Vortiporex is no in the museum at Castell
Dwyran in Carmarthen. This Vortiporex is probably the son of Aircol, one of the
five rebellious kings castigated by St. Gildas. As we have detailed elsewhere, the
most powerful of the five rebellious kings who were so bitterly criticized by St.
Gildas in his "De Excidio" was King Maelgwn Gwynedd – Maglocunus. The
Stone of Maglocunos is at the Church of Nevern, along with the Stone of
Vitalianus, and Vitalianus was King Gwythelyn, or in English, Vortimer, son of
Vortigern, and in Latin, Victorinus and Victorius. So we have two memorial
stones for two of the five kings, and no one has really started looking in earnest
yet. Add to this Vitalianus – Victorinus – King Gwythelyn stone, for the legend
and histories tell of how, when King Gwythelyn-Vortimer lay dying, he asked
that he be buried on the seashore as a talisman to ward off future invaders. His
men, however, carried him back from Kent and buried him in his own land of
Britain – Wales – and the Stone at Nevern is a definite indication of the truth of
this event around 460-470 A.D.
Maglocunus – The Great Hound – is identifiable as Maelgwn, king of Gwynedd,
and also in the role of Sir L'Ancelot in the Romance Tales. Several Mediaeval
romances of the Arthurian Saga state that L'Ancelot is the king of North Wales,
and the life story of the strange King Maelgwn Gwynedd fits that of L'Ancelot
with great accuracy. Tradition has it that King Meurig ap Tewdrig was associated
with the Nevern Church, and with stones to commemorate the valiant King
Gwythelyn who battered the Saxons around 450 to 460 A.D., and the powerful
King Maelgwyn Gwynedd who died around either 582 or 594 A.D., this is
possible.
King Arthur ap Meurig had a son named Ithael, and a grandson also named
Ithael ap Morgan, and he also had a nephew named Samson, the son of Anna,
the sister of Arthur. As we have stated, there are various spellings of King
Arthur's name; as Arthmael, Arthfael, Arthmail, Arthwyr, Arthwys, Arthyr, and
so on. This brings us to the stone at Llantwit Major – more properly Llanilltyd
Fawr – the ancient Caerworgan. One stone there is inscribed with the names of
King Ithael, of Artmali, and Samson, all set in the inscribed panel on the large
quadrangular pillar of Samson. There is also a set of inscriptions on the cross of
Samson with other names. Four panels contain the names Iltu, Samson Regis,
Samuel and Ebisar. The names can be related as Illtyd was the first cousin of
King Arthwyr ap Meurig, Samson was nephew of Arthwyr and Ebissar was a
Saxon enemy of Arthur according to historical tradition. He may have been
captured and made into a monk, for there is also an Ebissar stone at Coychurch.
As for St. Gildas, the writer of "De Excidio", he is buried behind the altar of
Rhys monastery in Britanny, his son Cynnydd is buried at Llangennith in the
Gower, and his grandson Ufelwy, also known as Fili, leaves a stone at Merthyr
Tydfil. This brings us to the Arthmael Stone found at Ogmore Castle with detail
of a land grant from King Arthmael to Nertat, Gllwys, and Ufelwy. The
relationship of Nertat as Nyuen or Nefydd, daughter of King Brychan
Brecheiniog, as a niece of King Arthur, Gliwys as Gliwys Cerniw brother of St.
Cadoc, and so cousin of Arthur, and Ufelwy as grandson of Gildas, ties this
down to King Arthur (Arthmael) son of Maurice. We even find the tombstone of
St. Gwladys, mother of this Gliwys and Cadoc, at her chapel on Gelligaer
Common, and the mound grave of King Gwynlliw Vilwyr at Newport, the
husband of St. Gwladys, father of Gliwys and Cadoc. So it is possible to trace
whole groups of interrelated personalities who form part of the story of King
Arthur. Elsewhere, we also describe the stones of St. Barrock and St. Vaches, the
drowned disciples of St. Cadoc, and at Llanvaches there is the grave of St.
Thatheus who ran the monastery school at Caerwent in the time of Ynyr Gwent,
a contemporary of King Meurig ap Tewdrig. The saints are important for they
are the contemporary relatives of the kings and princes, and linked with them
through charters and land grants. They are, in fact, indispensable to the search
for the kings. St. Tatheus was a descendant of Emrys Wledig, and not an
Irishman as the Department of the Environment states.
The stone Eta Fili at Merthyr Tydfil may be for Bishop Fili, also known as
Ufelwy. The church is that of Tydfil, the daughter of King Brychan of Brecon,
another niece of Arthur. The tower of this church was rebuilt in 1829, and a
stone coffin was unearthed, with of course a skeleton. It may be old Bishop
Ufelwy, who knows? The important thing is that this form of tangible evidence
matches very well with the known historical facts. There are the stories of the
flight of King Budic from Britanny to Wales and his restoration by King
Theoderic, we find the Bodvoc/Budic stone at Margam; there was in fact another
Budic of Britanny in Arthur's time. Equally there is the famous Pompeius Car
Antorius stone at Margam, meaning we believe, Pompey the Friend of Arthur.
This could fit Pappay, the son of King Brychan, but is more likely Emhyr Lydaw,
who rejoiced in the title of Pompey the Great (car can mean "close kinsman").
The evidence is lying all about all over the place, for there are other important
stones up in North Wales. At Llangadwallader in Anglesey, the church is named
for King Cadwallader who died in Rome in 688 A.D., and here is the stone of
Cadvan. This is King Catomanus Cadafael ap Iago ap Beli ap Rhun ap Maelgwn
Gwynedd, and he ruled North Wales from circa 630-660 A.D. Before the time of
King Cadwallader, the church was called Eglwysael. Just as other kings'
memorial stones are used as window sills, the inscribed stone of King Cadvan is
used as a door lintel and it has been remarkably misread as:
Catamanus Rex Sapientisimus Opinatisimus Omnium Regum
Cadwallader is not a name and it means "ruler of a separate part of the state".
Some historians place King Catomanus death around 613 A.D. simply because
his alleged successor, King Cadwallon, was active at this time. This is not
necessary to prove the death of an old king for Welsh. The problem is that "ap"
can mean "son of" and also "successor to". Cadvan was, in fact, foster father to
King Edwin of Northumbria, whom he brought up. A lot of good that did, for
Edwin spent most of his time attacking and trying to destroy Cadwallon and his
people. Cadwallon finally killed him at Heathfield, believed to be near
Doncaster, in 632 A.D. There are several other North Wales stones, all with
Latin inscriptions, recording a judge or justice, priests and even a doctor who is
named Nelius Medicus, and all this reveals a highly civilized and well-ordered
society. Now this brings us to the Penmachno stone, which actually records that
it was made in the time of Justinus the Consul, Iestyn in Welsh, and the problem
is that Justinus was Consul of the Eastern Empire in 540 A.D., unless there was
another Justinus. The only man claiming the title of Emperor in Britain at the
time was Arthur, the king-emperor. Justinus is Iestyn in Welsh. The stone of
Dewrath Wledig, the son of lestyn, stands alongside the old Roman Road in
Brecon. Dewrath was father of Rhuvon Bevr – King Arthur's cavalry
commander. This explains Justinus, who can be traced back to King Euddav.
Then we have the stone of the Prince Llywarch Hen, one of the very famous
figures of Dark Age British history. Old Llywarch Hen became Sir Lamorack in
Mediaeval Arthurian Romance literature. He is said to have lived to the age of
150 years, being born around 484 A.D. and dying at around 634 A.D. Old
Llywarch suffered the misfortune of seeing his 24 sons killed in battle and lost
his lands in warfare. He was a pensioner at the court of the mighty Arthur, and is
well recorded in the Triads as a member of Arthur's court. Later he was
supported by the Prince Cynddylan of Powys, on whose death Llywarch wrote
one of his greatest poems. For the very old Llywarch was one of Britain's great
poets, and several of his works still survive. The stone of Llywarch Hen is at
Aber Ciog now Dol Giog in Machynllech in Montgomeryshire. The inscription
reads very simply:
Llywarch Hen son of Elydir Lydanwyn
Lydanwyn was up in Ystrad Cwyd in the North, now part of Scotland. Prince
Cynddylan of Powys died around 605 A.D. and Llywarch's famous lament over
the dead Cynddylan and his deserted court at Llys Pengwern – Shrewsbury – is a
great and beautiful poem. Another of Llywarch's poems celebrates the life and
death of King Geraint ap Erbin of Cerniw, another well known figure of Arthur's
time and linked as a knight in mediaeval romances. He also wrote Elegies on
King Cadwallon ap Cadvan, on Urien Rheged, to Maenwyn, and others, and on
his own life and sons, which survive.
There should in fact be no surprise that kings of the Arthurian era can be traced,
for they were ruling over a highly civilised, well-organised and developed
culture. It cannot be emphasised too strongly that the concepts of a Britain,
which was servile and weak under Roman domination, are totally wrong and the
ideas based in this assumption are greatly mistaken. The British view of the
Romans is well expressed in Triad No. 8.
There were three invading tribes that came to the Isle of Britain and went out of
it. The first are named as Llychlynnwys under Urb Lluyddawg and are by
tradition from Denmark – a tribe ejected by the British. The second are listed as
the Lluoedd Ganfal Wyddel, who invaded Gwynedd in North Wales until they too
were ejected, and these are the Irish who were driven out by Cuneda and his
sons with Cadwallon Lawhir finally killing Sergi and his men on Anglesey
around 500 A.D. The Danish invasions were later, probably around 800 A.D.,
then the third invasion. The third were the Caesarians, who harassed the island
for more than 400 years until they went to Rome to oppose the irruption of the
Black Horde, from whence they never returned to the isle of Britain, nor did any
of them remain in the island save women and little children under nine years of
age and these became Cymru.
The invasions are listed in reverse order, the Black Horde are of course the Huns
who were ravaging Eastern and Western Europe from around 380-455 A.D.
These were the Northern Huns who circled the Black Sea and entered the
Balkans. The use of the term "Black Horde" and not the later generic terms
"Huns" is a clear sign of the antiquity of the Triad. It demonstrates the reason for
the Roman withdrawal, and it clearly expresses the relationship between the
British and the Romans, who were seen as an invading tribe. "Caesarians" is the
term for Romans.
To get back to tombs and graves as evidence, there is the often quoted and well-
known Englynion-y-Beddau, the "Song of the Graves" (Myvyrnian Archaiology
i 82), and several other old poems as sources. There are also several poems
containing historical references to names, locations and relationships. The "Canu
Llywarch Hen low Henaint A'i Veibion" gives grave locations, and other similar
detail is scattered through many of the ancient poems.
As for the invaders, Sergi the Irishman was buried at Llan-y-gwyddl or Eglwys-
y-Bedd after being killed at Holyhead; it means the Church or the Grave of the
Irishman. In some strange way, Sergi became a saint after Cadwallon Lawhir
slaughtered him and his people, and this is not too surprising as the Welsh record
states that these immigrants were in the area for over 120 years. In fact, St.
Patrick was thought to be of Irish people in North Wales, and so was a natural
choice to preach Christianity in Ireland. It would make him Irish by descent of
Irish settlers in North Wales. The subject of Irishmen brings us to the strange
Grave of the Irishman in North Glamorgan, a 70-foot-long raised earth cross,
probably the grave of Prince Anlach Coronog, the husband of Marchel, daughter
of King Theoderic. As for Sergi, Irish raiders took his shrine back over to Dublin
Cathedral. St. Patrick, as we will show, came from Mid-Glamorgan in King
Arthur's kingdom.
In piecing all this together we come to the church at Llangors in Breconshire,
and the stone of Paul Hen found there, and Paul or Paulinus is one of the most
important of the saints in getting the story of Arthur's kingdom in South Wales
into focus. Paulinus was the teacher of St. David according to Rhigyfarch,
whereas much of the other well-authenticated and quite considerable evidence
on St. Paulinus makes him the fellow pupil of St. Samson – Arthur's nephew, St.
David – Arthur's archbishop after Dyfrig, St. Gildas – Arthur's friend and the
author of De Excidio – all being educated at Ynys Pyr or Caldey Island at the
early monastery of St. Illtyd - Arthur's brother-in-law. The stone found in Caio
Parish says:
Servator Fidaei Patrieqve Amator Hic Pavlinvs lacit Cvltor Pientismvs Aeqvi
Preserver of the Faith, Constant lover of his Country. Here lies Paulinus the
Devoted Champion of the Righteousness
It was Paulinus who went to fetch St. David from his monastery at Llanthony
Abbey to the Synod of Victory at Llanddewi Brefi. Whether he is one and the
same as St. Paul Aurelian who went to Britanny is uncertain, but possibly not.
The stone from Caio, being the stone of St. Paulinus, returned to Wales leaving
the black granite slab at St. Pol de Leon over in Britanny as the slab over the
tomb of King Conan Meriadauc and not as some think of Paulinus. It was this St.
Paulinus, who refused to serve as a bishop for Conomurus or King Mark, who
caused all the uproar in the South of England and in Britanny before he was
killed around 556 A.D. in Britanny. We have St. Paul, Paul Hen, Paulinus and
Paul Aurelian; four similarly named saints.
Mention of this King Mark then brings in the stone of Drustans, for there is an
inscribed stone standing seven feet high near Fowey in Cornwall which records:
Drustans Hic lacit Cunomori Filius
Drustans here lies Conomurus' Son
This is Drustans the son of King Mark, King March, Conomurus, Count
Conmor, or Comorre in Britanny. Some have tried to see this Drustans as Sir
Tristan of later romances, yet every Welsh source is clear that Tristan was
definitely the son of one Tallwch. Maybe they are the same man, for Tristan is
never a knight of Arthur, but the odds are that Tristan ap Tallwch and Drustans
ap Cunomori are two very different men who were later confused. Nonetheless,
King Mark is here recorded by mention with his son. Also in Cornwall is the
stone of Brochwael, son of Natanleod, who is King Tewdrig, a brother of King
Meurig.
Finding King Meurig and King Tewdrig, the father and grandfather of King
Arthur, was possible. As we will see we can also trace the stone of King Einion
and the church of King Doged, both cousins of King Maelgwn Gwynedd and
early contemporaries of King Arthur. So if it is possible to trace (1) King Conan
Meriadauc, (2) King Gradlon, (3) the Prince Pabo Post Prydain, (4) Prince
Pappai, (5) King Gwythelyn – Vortimer – Victorinus, (6) King Vortiporex, (7)
King Catomanus, (8) King Maelgwn Gwynedd, (9) the Prince Llywarch Hen,
(10) King Doged, (11) King Bran, (12) King Owain ap Cyllin, (13) King Owain
Ffinddu, (14) King Caradoc, (15) King Ceri, (16) King Baram, (17) King
Blegywryd, (18) King Einion, (19) St. Illtyd, (20) St. Dyfrig, (21) St. David, (22)
St. Teilo, and many others, why not locate King Arthur? These kings and royal
bishops named above span the nine generations from around 350 A.D. (birth of
Conan Meriadauc) to King Cadvan, and the strange thing is that no-one has set
out after Arthur before. The whole situation is perfectly logical. The answer
probably lies in the constant aggression of English governments and kings who,
over 900 years, did their utmost to kill off not only the Welsh language but also
even learning itself. When a foreign king, not even English, passes acts through
his Parliament that not only make teaching unlawful in Wales, but also make it
impossible for Welshmen to hold office in Wales, and even prohibit the bringing
of writing materials into the country, and this goes on for centuries – well what
can you expect? As late as 1880 the Victorian Imperialists were persistently
passing acts that prohibited the speaking of the Welsh language, an obvious
attempt to blot out Arthur's kingdom, to protect bogus religious and political
views.
Far too much credibility has been given to Bede, the English monk historian who
wrote his History of the English Church. Old Bede lived around 673-735 A.D.,
and the significant point about him is that he never went further than 12 miles
from his birthplace at Wearmouth, now Sunderland, in his whole life. He stated
that when St. Ninian built his stone church, that this was contrary to the normal
custom of the British, and this has been interpreted as the proof that the British
never built in stone before that or elsewhere. This is simply not true, and the
work of Bede makes it clear that he had virtually no knowledge at all of the
major British kingdoms. No one should be afraid to publish the truth of their
own history simply because it differs from the propaganda versions pumped out
from the English universities and other sources. Most history was written to
conform with and support the English establishment dreams of empire, and it
was suitably doctored to suit this aim and provide the right background of
superiority, culture, military, and also governance and academia. The Irish and
Welsh cultures, which were originally far superior, were crushed and then lied
about, and the Irish and Welsh portrayed as joke and fool characters by this new
so-called master race of the British establishment, and we are still stuck with this
class system today.
The task of finding the real life members of the British Royal clans of the
Arthurian Period from around 400-650 A.D. and onward is far more rewarding
than chasing the phantom Pharoahs of Egypt around the sands. The information
is precise, the sites are identifiable and the real life kings and bishops turn up in
their territories. The family of the great Cuneda Wledig offers a great deal of
opportunity to anyone seeking old kings, as we can quite easily demonstrate.
One of Cuneda Wledig's grandsons was named Einion Frenhin, which is King
Einion, and he is traceable as Einion Frenhin ap Owain Danwyn ap Einion Yrth
ap Cuneda Wledig. This would make him a king around 490-515 A.D., and this
fits with the tale of Maelgwn Gwynedd taking the throne of Gwynedd from an
uncle in 516 A.D. According to tradition King Maelgwn Gwynedd deposed a
near relative, said to be his uncle. In fact, Einion Frenhin and Maelgwn
Gwynedd are first cousins, for Maelgwn traces back through his father
Caswallon Lawhir ap Einion Yrth ap Cuneda VUledig. We have elsewhere
traced the memorial stone of Maelgwn Gwynedd – Maglocunus to the church of
Nevern in Pembrokeshire – Dyfed. Remarkably we can also trace King Einion to
an inscribed stone in the church at Llanengan on the Lleyn Peninsular in
Gwynedd. This stone in the Carnarvonshire church is marked as follows:
ENEANUS REX WALLAE FABRICAVIT
EINION (AENEAS) KING OF THE ROMANS (WELSH) BUILT THIS
The British Welsh, claiming ancient kinship with the Romans as both came from
Troy and were of Trojan descent, so took upon themselves the titles of the
"fallen empire". Whether King Einion – possibly Aeneas – is buried in the
church is not known. If he is buried there, then the place to look is in the north
wall of the chancel close to the altar.
Another character of this period from the Clan of Cuneda is St. Afan of Buallt,
another cousin of King Einion and King Maelgwn, a great-grandson of Cuneda
Wledig. His mother was Tegwedd, the daughter of Tegid Foel of Penllyn,
Merioneth, and she married Enlleu. Two "Lives of the Saints" gives a perfect
example of how names are omitted from genealogies in the overriding urge to
get back to the great ancestor. Here it is, Cuneda Wledig, unless of course
Tegwedd married twice.

We know that Teilo is buried in Llandaff Cathedral, and St. Afan of Buallt is to
be found buried in the church of Llanafan Fawr in Brecon. An inscribed stone
there records this:
HIC IACET SANCTUS AVANUS EPISCOPVS
HERE LIES SAINT AFAN THE BISHOP
So we can build up yet further proof of genealogical record, with another burial
of around 560 A.D. The brother of St. Afan was King Doged, and he is a very
interesting king indeed. The Mabinogion Tale of Culhwch and Olwen opens with
the statement that Culhwch is the son of Cilydd ap Celyddon, and that his
mother was Goleuddydd, daughter of Amlodd Wledig, the fourth king of
Britanny. This makes Culhwch a correctly placed historical character, and this is
confirmed when the tale relates how, when Goleuddydd died, Culhwch's father
killed King Doged and took his wife. As a result King Doged became St. Doged,
and his church is now that of Llandoged where he is presumably buried. So
Doged Vrenhin is traceable.
Culhwch is most probably St. Cynfelach of Llangyfelach in Glamorgan – Tir
Gwyn. The whole point is that the various sources of evidence: the stones, the
"Saints Lives", the genealogies, the folktales and histories are all consistent, and
that the facts are all correct where provable. The evidence consistently turns up
in the correct places, even with such very famous men as Illtyd and Paulinus. As
is well established, St. Illtyd was the first cousin (or uncle as one reference
states) of King Arthur ap Meurig. He was also the Abbot and leading teacher at
the great monastery school at Caerworgan, later known as the Llanilltyd Fawr or
Llantwit Major. Up in Brecon, there is that chapel of Illtyd and close to it is a
tumulus known as the Bedd Gwyl Illtyd – the Grave of Illtyd. Here therefore, is
the burial place of one of the most famous of all the British, the warrior knight
who turned Druid doctor and Christian Abbot, a relative and knight of Arthur's
court.
In the same way the stone of the great teacher Paulinus turned up in the church
of Llandewi Brefi in the parish of Caio, and so we can trace St. Paulinus, a man
who probably died around 500-530 A.D. So it goes on with everyone turning up
just as they should, just where they ought to be. The inscription is "PAVLI FILI
MA …" and Glamorgan Bards record St. Paul, the son of King Meurig ap
Tewdrig the brother of King Arthwyr – Arthur.
Another tombstone was found in the churchyard of Llanwnws in Cardiganshire
(see the Myvyrnian Archaiology VII and Meyrick's "Cardiganshire") with the
inscription "CANOTINN" upon it. This is identifiable as the stone of Canudyn,
or Cynudyn, who can be traced as follows:

This makes Cynudyn a contemporary of King Arthur and his son, King Morgan,
living some time around 520–600 A.D. King Morgan is, of course, buried at
Margam Abbey.
There are a great many similar examples, and some tie in the families of the
houses of the leading princes of the period. One example is St. Talhairn, who
was son of Garthwys ap Mor ap Ceneu ap Coel, and was reputed to be the
chaplain of Emrys Wledig – Aurelianus Ambrosius. Talhairn is said to have
lived at Caerleon, and when he was old, he retired up to a quiet place in
Denbighshire. There we find Llanfair – Talhairn, and this would be his chosen
place of retirement and then burial.
This is the story of St. Cadoc, visiting the island of Flat Holm with two of his
disciples, who were Barruch and Vaches (Ffaches), and when they got back to
the mainland they found that St. Cadoc's book had been left on the island. So he
got angry and sent the two young men back, and told them not to return without
it. Is this an old wives’ tale or is it reliable truth? It is too easy to scoff and play
devil's advocate. The two young monks were trapped in their frail boat by the
enormous tides of the Severn, 39 feet at Cardiff and 40-42 feet at Barry, and both
were drowned. St. Cadoc was heartbroken, and one, Barruch, was washed up on
what is now Barry Island, named after him; the other, Vaches, was washed up on
the Flat Holm Island, then known by its proper Welsh name of Echni. Welsh
names should not be disposed of in favour of English. The chapel of St. Barruch
was then built on Barry Island, and was a spot where many ancient monks’
graves were found. This definitely appears genuine. There is also a flat stone on
the Island of Echni, with a cross upon it, and this was said to commemorate
Vaches, or St. Gwalches, as he is more properly known. The point is that the
evidence backs up the story in full. Giraldus Cambrensis in his work of 1188
A.D. described the old ivy covered chapel of St. Barrok, and so did John Leland
in 1534 A.D. All that is left of a hermit's chapel stood at Redbrink Crescent, near
the railway station. There were also ruins, said to be monastic, and a so-called
Roman well. All the bits and pieces of the story were there to be seen.
Even St. Tyssilio, writer of one of the earliest of Welsh-British histories, a prince
turned bishop who died around 620 A.D., is traceable. He was son of King
Brochwael Yshythrog, the king of Powys, who was ally of King Morgan the son
of Arthur, and he lies buried at the church of St. Suliac – his Breton name – a
village 10 miles from St. Malo in Britanny. It may seem odd but unless we turn
up with graves and bones to match the stories, then the stories are normally
taken as suspect.
The search for the British kings does throw up a few problems, but it also
presents a great number of opportunities. There is at Llantwit Major a buried
villa, said in Welsh tradition to have been built for King Owen ap Cyllin ap
Caradoc ap Bran, who ruled around 120-150 A.D. This eight-acre palace was
partly excavated around 1888 A.D., and a number of buried bodies were found,
together with strong indications of an assault and destruction at around 300 A.D.
Now this again alighns with history, for the British kings would have used the
palace until this time, and the king who ruled the area from 266-293 A.D. was in
fact King Crair, also known as King Carawn. This Crair or Carawn was known
as Carawn of Menevia, where presumably he was born. Menevia is now St.
David's in Pembrokeshire. Some idea of the continuing importance of the British
kings can be gauged from the fact that in the tense conditions of the times they
were in fact very important to the recovery and survival of Rome. In 269 A.D.
the whole of the Western Empire had collapsed in a heap. Queen Zenobia seized
Africa; the Goths invaded and seized the Balkans under their Judex, the mighty
Arthanaric; Tetricus seized and held Gaul independently; the Alemanni had
invaded and seized much of Italy; and more Goths and Alans had invaded Asia
Minor. At this time L. Domitius Aurelianus earned the title of "restitutor orbis",
or restorer of the world. Four successive Roman Emperors between 270-284
A.D. fought to defeat these insurrections and outside invasions. Over in Britain,
King Carawn was placed in charge of the defences, and in particular, he was
given command of the fleets. Well, in 293 King Carawn took his chance and
declared Britain an independent Empire and used the fleets and his control of
Northern Gaul to enforce his independence.
So what has this to do with the villa at Llantwit Major? Well, King Crair was
probably living there, for it was the palace of the kings. The reason for King
Crair's revolt may have been the persecution of the Christians launched by
Diocletian and Maximian, for the Welsh say that he burned Roman London.
Certainly, someone burned it down. Another British prince was over in Rome
however, and he appears to have been a close kinsman of King Crair, now ruling
Britain as the Emperor Carausius and independent of Rome. The ambitious
kinsman was Alectus – Eleath – and he murdered King Crair when he came to
Britain with two legions lent to him by Rome. This is the probable answer to the
attack and murders at the villa at the king’s Palace at Llantwit Major. There is a
large tumulus just north of the villa site, and at a pure guess this is the burial
place of a king. There are some coins of this King Carawn in his style of
Carausius the Emperor, and it is strange that whereas Roman Emperors wear a
wreath of leaves on their head, Carausius wears three eagle feathers in his hair.
There is of course the inscribed gravestone of King Crair-Carausius.
There is name/place identification of Crair – Carawn – in North Wales, at
Tregaron and the River Caron. Alectus did not get away with his crime, for the
Prince Aesclepiodotus of Cerniw rose up and went after him. The result was the
speedy death of Alectus. So is there anything to indicate this, and if so, what?
First, we can trace that one Eleath Vrenhin is said to have been associated with
the Cor Seiriol Monastic College at Penmon in Anglesey. Eleath is Alectus,
whether he is the Alectus who killed Crair is problematic, and King Einion –
Einion Vrenhin – founded the monastery. So is this Einion, the man named
Aesciepiodotus by the Romans, the avenger of Crair? Or are these two years
apart? As there is an Einion Vrenhin ap Owain Danwyn ap Einion Yrth ap
Cuneda Wledig, and this King Einion was a cousin of Maelgwn Gwynedd, and
probably the kinsman deposed by him. There is an earlier King Eleath who was
son of Meirchion ap Idno, a contemporary of Crair-Carawn-Carausius. It is a
mystery at present.
It is not too difficult to trace the kings of Britain. Basically, it is a matter of
following the directions given. One requirement is to stop listening to the
incredible nonsense that occasionally pours out of London and elsewhere about
Celtic Gods and so on. Historical figures are historical figures, and not the
imaginary deities of some false, primitive and barbaric nation. The "Englynnion
y Beddau Milwyr Ynys Prydain" by Taliesin ap Heinwg, the Druid tutor of
Elphin ap Gwyddno (Elegaic Poem of the Graves of the Soldiers of Britain), tells
of the location of the grave of the Prince Pryderi. Yet by some extraordinary
circumstance Pryderi is widely spoken of as a Celtic God or mythical figure by
many authors. This is inconceivable, as he lies buried at Abergenoli quite an
achievement for a phantom of the imagination.
It requires positive and not negative thinking. King Beli is a Welsh ancestor
figure, not a god, and the same applies to all the other ancient figures. There is a
clear policy of playing down and obscuring any British achievement before the
entry of the Saxons into Britain by the majority of authors. They are at great
pains to state that Magnus Maximus was Spanish and not British. This is not
true. Magnus Maximus was the only son of Crispus Flavius Caesar, the eldest
son of Constantine the Great and his first wife, Minerva. We find several large
units of British auxiliary soldiers in the Roman army, probably 6,000 men in
each, and stationed in Spain, Egypt, Macednia, etc. Magnus was first married to
Ceindrech a British princess of the highest possible rank, and associated with his
uncle Julian the Apostate. It must remembered that Magnus was a confirmed
orthodox Christian, hardly likely in a Spaniard, but very certain in a British
prince born around 300-310 A.D.
The same applies to Constantine the Great, the Emperor of both east and west.
He was also Christian, and his mother, the Queen St. Helen of the Cross, was
definitely British. So also was Septimus Severus married to Marcia, who was
British. Roman princes did not marry nobodies. Magnus Maximus burned or
executed heretics, and his friend St. Martin rebuked him for being too severe.
British kings were Christian from 35 A.D. onward. The certainty is that Magnus
Maximus was the only son of Crispus Caesar, who was Constantine the Great's
eldest son. His grandmother was the British Helen of the Cross, mother of
Constantine. This Trahairn was sent by Constantine to oppose King Euddav
(Octavius) when Euddav made himself independent in the British kingdom, and
after 10 years of fighting between 312-322 A.D., Trahairn was killed. A
marriage between a descendant of Trahairn – Magnus or Mascen, and the
daughter of Euddaf – would be the natural way to patch up peace, as was the
marriage between the Eastern House – Constantine – and the Western House of
Euddav in Wales – A normal dynastic British marriage, no less.
This is important when considering the search for King Arthur, for it is very
necessary to get rid of the establishment thinking completely. Having disposed
of the Glastonbury and Cornwall invention we were able to turn our attention
onto a specific area elsewhere, where the old British/Welsh king was active. We
also had a fair pattern of how things were done, and how the Dark Age British
thought, and we knew how to interpret some of what they preserved verbally and
later in copied manuscripts. There is no point in screaming for unobtainable
proofs – there will be no birth certificates, no marriage certificates, no death
certificates, or passports. There is however, every point in simply following the
directions given in what survives. We knew it was certain that there was an
answer, for to look for Arthwyr ap Meurig ap Tewdrig is far different from
looking for some imagined stray Roman adventurer or leftover Gothic general.
The business of burying church founders in the north wall of the chancel close to
the altar is in fact well attested. One good example in Glamorgan is the founder’s
tomb at the church of Llantrisant. Here the original church dedication is to the
three saints, Illtyd, Wonno and Dyfodwg. The later church was probably a
Norman period edifice, and set into the north wall is the tomb and effigy of
Cadwgan Fawr ap Dafydd ap Cynfrig Vychan, a descendant of King lestyn ap
Gwrgan and the Glamorgan kings. This Cadwgan Fawr can be dated around
1250 A.D., a supporter of Welsh customs against Gilbert de Clare who, like all
those who have come after him, tried to introduce English customs. Mute
evidence of the early sixth century saints is shown on a large slab stone bearing
three crosses. The centre one is in a wheel circle, and the outer two smaller and
plain. It seems to be a representation of the Christian story of the crucifixion.
Cadwgan Fawr was the Lord of Miskin, and Gilbert de Clare got himself killed
by the Scots at Bannockburn.
There is a similar founder’s tomb set into the north wall of the church of
Llantrithyd and here the effigy figure is not an armed knight but a civilian or
Priest. Similarly, the old Llanveithyn church monastery was dedicated and
probably founded by St. Meuthin. Like many old stone churches, it ended up as
a farmhouse, and when alterations were carried out around 1930, sure enough, a
skeleton was found buried into the foundation of the wall. There is another of
these founder’s tomb wall cavities close to the altar at the church of Ilston, and
Ils-ton may be from the son of King Ithael ap Moryan ap Arthur. There are in
fact a great number of founder’s tombs in north walls close to the altar.
Identifying founders is sometimes a problem, as rebuilt churches were often
rededicated to other saints in later times, as foreign influence from the Normans
and English spread. Some of the most important founder’s tombs are fortunately
well in evidence, and these include the grave of King Tewdrig at Mathern, and
that of King Meurig in Llandaff.
The pattern of royal funeral mounds alongside mortuary churches is exhibited all
over Wales. There is one at Little Newcastle in Kemmes in Pembrokeshire,
where a huge mound lies close to the church. The huge mound of Walwayns
Castle, or correctly Castell Gwalchmai lies west of Milford Haven and is not a
castle mound but more likely his funeral mound, which was excavated around
A.D. 1100. Another huge funeral mound lies alongside the church at Hay-on-
Wye on the Brecon-Radnor border, and the mound of Trev Ednyfed, when
excavated some 200 years ago, revealed a cistvaen and burial urn.
The tombstone of the Prince Idnerth, the brother of King Arthur, is at the West
Wales church of Llandewi Brefi. This was a well-known and much recorded
stone of great historical interest and importance, yet in the rebuilding program of
the English Church around 1850 this stone, too, was mutilated as was the
Gwenora – Gwenhwyfa or Guinevere – stone at Llaniltern, the Maglocunus
Maelgwn Gwynedd stone at Nevern, and many, many others. The stone of
Idnerth was cut into two and used in the church wall. Part of one half is still
visible, and the other half is somewhere facing inward and not at present
identifiable. There was an obvious attempt to destroy the evidence of the Welsh
kings, probably to try to avoid further unpopularity for the Hanoverian German
kings of England who now call themselves Windsor.
The mound at Morganstown on the Taff just north of Cardiff is probably
Morgans Twyn, meaning King Morgan's grave mound. The mound Bedd (Grave
of) Morgan Mwynfawr is near Pyle and Margam. The two mounds at Rhiwbina
and the Wenallt in North Cardiff on the east bank of the Taff are other probable
royal grave mounds. The Wenallt mound is thought to be a castle mound, and
may be an early fort preparatory to Morgraig Castle on top of Caerphilly
mountain – assuming that it is not a grave mound.

Margam Abbey was said to be originally founded by King Morgan ap Arthwyr.

The number of very ancient stones and monuments indicates the truth of this. The Abbey was rebuilt
and refounded by Robert the Consul in 1147 A.D. – the Norman Welsh Prince of Glamorgan –
reputed son of Henry I of England and Nest, granddaughter of King lestyn ap Gwrgan, last of the
Welsh kings of Glamorgan. Note: other Norman-Welsh descendants of lestyn ap Gevrgan lived at
Coetty Castle and maintained the title of kings of Glamorgan until 1403-5.




PART SIX: WHERE THE OTHER KINGS LIE
The proof of the existence of old British kings in South Wales lies partly in
finding them, and we anticipate the usual flood of negative criticism from the
Oxbridge-type establishment. Was there a king named Ceri ap Caid who fought
the Romans whilst his uncle, King Caradoc, was held in Rome, and in the Gilded
Cage at Caermead? The Bards say that there was. In the Song of the Graves we
find the location of the grave of Ceri ap Caid who built a fleet and led the fight
for freedom against Rome.
The grave of Ceri with the long sword is in the confine of Old Church,
In the gravelly cliff,
The Bull of conflict is corbre in the churchyard of Corbre.
So as we know that Ceri ap Caid was fighting in South East Wales we should
look for his burial in his homeland. We are told that it is on a cliff, and that the
cliff is gravelly, not of a granite nature, and there are cliffs in Glamorgan and
Gwent only along the seashore from Penarth to Ogmore. This is a start, for many
of these cliffs are of loose limestone, and are therefore gravelly.
Next, we know that Ceri lies buried in Old Church, and this make matters easier,
for at Nash Point, along past Barry there is a strange very large Boat Grave, and
this lies on top of a high cliff above the sea, and the cliff is limestone and loose-
formed. The name of this site is "Y-Hen-Eglwys" meaning the old church. So
this we firmly believe is the place of Ceri ap Caid, and we include a photograph
of this vast boat grave. It has to be remembered that Ceri is recorded as building
fleets, and so the boat-shape grave is given another clue.
Next we can turn our attention to King Owen Ffinddu, great grandson of Magnus
Clemens Maximus, who was the first king of Glywyswg lying up the valley from
Newport to Abertillery. We know that King Owen was of around 400-436 A.D.,
and so there is every chance that he lies buried in a church in his kingdom.
Again we can refer to the Song of the Graves:
Having worn robes of Red, Brown, and White colour,
And ridden fine and handsome steeds,
Owain has his own grave in Llanheledd.
The brown, red and white robes are symbolic of the offices held by King Owain,
red being the warrior’s colour, white the druid or lawmaker’s colour, and brown
possibly the religious and Christian colour. Again, the handsome horses are
indicative of his soldiers’ occupation leading the armies. Then we can take
Llanheledd, for Llan means church estate, and so Owain lies in a Christian
church. This is not too difficult, for Llanheledd is Llanhileth, just outside the
town of Abertillery where the ancient church foundation is dedicated to St.
Illtyd. So it is a safe bet that King Owen of Glywyswg lies alongside Llanhileth
Church, which is inside the old sub-kingdom of Glywyswg. He is under the huge
funeral mound alongside the church.

The Headless Cross of Sampson and the Stone Cross of King Rhys at Llantwit Major Church.

The Pillar of St. Samson at Llantwit Major. It names Arthur the Teyrn; Samson, his nephew; King
Ithael, his son; and Illtyd, his first cousin. Prince Richard Hopkins lies in the front right.

Other Glamorgan kings can be located by their church foundations, for there
should be no more than one king per church, each king building a suitable
church sepulchre just as Egyptian Pharoahs built pyramids. King Arthfael ap
Rhys ap Ithael ap Morgan ap Arthwyr (Arthur), who is in effect King Arthur III,
died fighting the Saxons in a battle which his armies won. He would possibly
have died around 660-700 A.D. He was buried at Roath Church, and his wife
was the Princess Cenhedlon. The Roath Church is the rebuilt St. Margaret's at
Roath Court, in Cardiff.
King Rhys ap Ithael ap Morgan ap Arthwyr built the church at Peterston-super-
Ely, he also fought wars with the Saxons and he should be buried at Peterston-
super-Ely church. This is a very ancient church.
Gwierydd ap Brochwael ap Howel ap Rhys also fought many wars with the
Saxons and he would have died around the 750 A.D. period; he built Caerau
church. This was formerly called Llanweirydd – Llan of Gweirydd (Arviragus),
and he therefore should be found buried there. There was another Llanwerydd,
which is now St. Donats or San Dunwydd.
Further back in time, King Ithael ap Morgan ap Arthur built his church at St.
Nicholas, and although he aided other churches, this is where he should be
buried. The great grandfather of Arthur was the king-emperor Teithfallt –
Theodosius – who endowed Llanilltyd Fawr, but there may be an alternative
burying place for him. In the same way King Blegwyrd is said to have been
magnificently buried at Caerleon, and there is another huge funeral mound at
Caerleon.
King Owen ap Morgan Hen had his castle and church at Ystrad Owen near
Cowbridge, and is said to be buried in the churchyard. There is in fact a very
large tumulus grave in the churchyard to prove this, for King Owen ap Morgan
Hen is said to lie beneath it. In the same way, Ithael ap Owen, his son, lived at
Ton Ithael Ddu, now called Ton Ddu at Llangynwydd five miles north of
Bridgend. Llangynwydd is known as the Old Parish, and its church foundation is
very ancient, being dedicated to St. Cynwyd ap Cynfelin, who was at St. Cadoc's
Llancarfan monastery. There was a very old castle site here, referred to in 1307
A.D. as an ancient castle. It was used by the Normans for a while and was in
existence in 1257 A.D., and by 1295 A.D. a castle burned in the war. It was
some 440 yards west of the church, and there are very old earthwork signs at the
site. It is in a hollow and is not a typical Norman site at all, being overlooked by
high ground, and so this is more likely the home of Ithael ap Owen ap Morgan
Hen, the friendly native lord of the area. There are ancient stones in the much
restored and altered church, and very likely one is for Ithael ap Owen.
In the case of the Tumulus at Ystrad Owen, this is said in local tradition to be the
place of King Owen ap Cyllin ap Caradoc of around 100 A.D. In fact we are
dealing with such an enormous time span and with so many kings using the same
names, that there are bound to be these problems of dual identity. The sheer size
of the tumulus, just like the one at Caerleon, is sufficient indication to suggest
that this is the place of King Owen ap Cyllin ap Caradoc.

Wern Tarw, the Mound of the Dead from the battle between King Caradoc and Ostorius Scapula in
51 A.D. at Heol Cyw in Pencoed, Glamorgan. This view is from below Caer Caradoc and Cor Emrys
from the east.
Photograph by Chris Barber

Grave mound of King Owain Vinddu, the son of Magnus Maximus, who died circa 434. This is a
stage-two burial with the mortuary chapel in the background to the left.

Perhaps the most interesting of the inscribed stones are, we believe, the Bodvoc
stone at Margam and the Vendumaglos stone at Capel Llaniltern, six miles
northwest of Cardiff. The Bodvoc stone we believe is for Budic-Sir Burt in
Romance Literature about King Arthur, and it names his father as Catotigernus
and his grandfather as Vedomglos Eternalis. That Bodvoc is one of at least two
Britanny kings is well known. One Budic fled to Britain as was aided by the
mighty King Tewdrig ap Teithfallt to regain his lands in Britanny from which he
had been driven by his brother Maxentius, and so was restored to Quimper in
Britanny at some time before 509 A.D. King Tewdrig sent the fleet of Agricola
Longhand of Dyfed to restore Budic. In grateful thanks, Budic later called one of
his sons Theoderic. One son of Budic was Cato, and there is the much-quoted
reference to Arthur being in Dumnonia in Britanny where Cato ruled. So we
have Cato – Tigernus – which is probably Cato the Splendid, from tegwch
meaning "fair or beauty". Four records identify Cato – Cathonius.
So if Budic is the Prince of Quimper, and Cato the Splendid ruled part of
Dumnonia in Britanny, we come to another kinsman of Budic who is called
Vendumaglos, and who is buried in the church of Llaniltern six miles northwest
of Cardiff on the road to Llantrisant. We can be reasonably sure that he has
strong connections with Britanny. Vendumaglos is, we believe, Gwyther Mawr.
Actually tracing Eternalis – Eteyrn – solves the problem.
The identity of Vendumaglos is, we believe, unravelled as follows: around 451
A.D. King Selyf I or Solomon I ruled in Britanny. His son was King Amlodd
Wledig, and to try to resolve the problems of succession in what is now central
and southern England, they sent Constantine the Blessed – Cystennhin
Bendigaid, the brother of Amlodd Wledig – to rule from the London citadel of
Magnus Maximus. King Gwytheyrn was driven off in the subsequent wars, won
by Gwythelyn ap Teithfallt, and the Saxons were beaten back. King Constantine
cooperated with the Welsh King Teithfallt – Theodosius– and together they set
up a monastic college at Caerworgorn, now Llantwit Major in Glamorgan.
When Constantine the Blessed died, his sons claimed his patrimony, and they
were named Emrys Wledig or Ambrosius Aurelianus, and Gwythur or Uther or
Victor. Both these are famous as the leaders of central Britain who fought and
defeated the persistent Saxon invaders. Their close kinsman in South Wales was
King Tewdrig ap Teithfallt and his son King Meurig – Maurice. This is all
history, for Gwythelyn perhaps a son of Teithfallt won the Battle of Wallop in
Hampshire, which was decisive in crushing the Saxons around 461 A.D., and
when he was mortally wounded in the last battle of the war, his kinsmen took
him home to bury him. Gwythelyn in Welsh is Vortimer to the English and he is
Vitalianus in Latin. His gravestone still stands plain for all to see at the door of
the church at Nevern in Pembrokeshire on the West Wales coast. Much of the
muddle we have stems from the fact that Gwythelyn – Vortimer – is wrongly
often thought to be son of Gwytheyrn – Vortigern – whereas he was son of King
Teithfallt of South Wales. The Glamorgan Bards were quite clear about this.

The stone of Huail in Ruthin town square. On this stone, King Arthur ap Meurig beheaded Huail ap
Caw, the brother of St. Gildas ap Caw.
Photograph by Chris Barber

The tumulus of Tewdwr Mawr – Tudor the Great – alongside his church on Mynydd-Islwyn in
Gwent. He was a son of Emrys Wledig and father of St. Canna of Canna-town, or modern-day
Cardiff.
Photograph by Chris Barber

His supposed brother named Cattegirn, also killed fighting the Saxons, is
probably his alter ego, with Cad-Teyrn meaning war king, which he was.
With Gwythelyn dead, King Tewdrig, the other son of King Teithfallt, succeeded
to the Welsh throne, to be followed by his son King Meurig – Maurice – and
then by his son, King Arthwyr – Arthur. King Arthur had three queens as well as
three common-law wives. The third queen (possibly second) was Gwenhwyfach,
the daughter of Gwythur, son of Greidiawl, which is a corruption of Gwent. So it
seems that we have King Arthur married to the daughter of Gwythur, who is
Uther or Victor the brother of Emrys Wledig. As they were the grandsons of
King Amlodd Wledig of Britanny, they would have lands in Britanny, and under
Welsh law, women had rights of inheritance. This meant that when Gwythur
died, his daughter, Gwenhwyfach, inherited at least part of his Britanny estates,
and this explains how King Arthur had estates over in Britanny – through his
wife's inheritance.
So we are right down to Vendumaglos, which breaks down into Vendu-Mawr, or
Vendu the Great. Now we have to translate Vendu, and "Ve" in Welsh is "Gw",
and "Ven" is "Gwen" or "Gwy", and the letter "d" is then "th", and with "u" as
"ur". Altogether, we arrive at Gwythur. What emerges is that Vendumaglos is
Gwythur Mawr or Victor the Great (Uther). It solves the final part of the great
King Arthur riddle, for Arthur, the son of Meurig, was the son-in-law of
Gwythur – Uther – and not his son. The additional simple confusion of the name
Uther – Victor or Gwythur – with the title Uthyr Pendragon completes the
muddle. Uthyr Pendragon, as explained elsewhere, means the Wonderful Head
Dragon, and was a title adopted by many kings of Glamorgan and Gwent. These
include Casnar Wledig, cousin of King Euddav, and King Casnar, son of Euddav.
Later, Bran ap Erbin was also Dragon of Gwent, and so also was King Tewdrig,
and King Arthur. Quite possibly Teithfallt, Tewdrig, Meurig and Arthur all used
the title.
In this instance we have Gwythur Mawr who was brother of Emrys Wledig, and
father-in-law to King Arthur, buried at Llanfair, just north of Cardiff in
Glamorgan, and his tombstone is there to prove it. The church is dedicated to St.
Illtyd, a close relative of both King Arthur and of Gwythur Mawr. The pattern is
utterly consistent with all the evidence and all the other old kings are exactly
where they should be, or might be expected to be.
For those interested in Vendumaglos, or Gwythur Mawr, or Uther or Victor the
Great, call it whichever you wish, we are able to give a little more pinpointing
information. In the year 1924 Captain Harry Lewis of Pentwyn, at Pentyrch,
wrote: "This stone I am informed by a man who had lived in the parish all his
life, was previous to the rebuilding of Llaniltern Church (subject to St. Fagan's)
lying close to a barn near the so-called Monastery of Llanvair (Estate of Mary).
He also remembered another inscribed stone there 'with a lot of writing upon it'.
This is now lost. To the south of the brook, on the opposite side of the road, stood
a rectangular building, from which the tenant took away a quantity of stones. In
this field marked on the ordinance survey map as 'Site of Monastery' is a
rectangular earthwork. The name of the farm opposite is Llanvair, and a little
dingle there is called Bailey Coch".
So we can probably get exactly to the point where Gwythur Mawr, the father-in-
law of King Arthur, lies. Further there is somewhere in the close area on this
farm, another ancient and fully inscribed stone, that should not be too difficult to
find given further cooperation. The letter of Captain Lewis shows how great
damage was done to ancient sites in Wales in modern times as the deliberate
planned policy of Englishizing Wales was ruthlessly carried out by aggressive
London Governments. As the local history faded, and the culture and language
was destroyed, so this type of unthinking vandalism spread.
One feature of the seemingly endless muddle of misidentifications is the total
lack of proper realization by many who have made so-called identifications of
what they were dealing with. Far too often, an idea propounded centuries ago
has never been questioned or challenged by anyone. This is particularly true of
the huge grave mounds of the early kings, which were heaped up to enormous
sizes. Almost without exception these are so large that they have been called
castle mounds in the vague belief that some unknown Norman baron heaped up
the great piles to put his first stockade fort of wood on top. Conveniently, this
wooden stockade of the quickly abandoned fort has utterly vanished after 900
years. All this is pure theory and utterly unfounded. The grave mounds are in
places said by the Bards to be the burial places of the kings. They are wrongly
sited to have ever been castles of any sort, and they are clearly of a hollow
pattern and therefore not castle mounds. They are very close alongside the
churches founded by the kings, and are what they were anciently recorded to be
the graves of the kings.
King Bran ap Llyr Lediath died around 80 A.D., and there is a great mound or
Cor, with its hollow centre, right alongside the Church at Tre-Vran, dedicated to
St. Ilid, the chaplain of Bran. Next, the huge identically shaped mound of King
Owain ap Cyllin ap Caradoc ap Bran is right alongside the ancient church at
Ystrad Owain, four miles north of Cowbridge, right where it is said to be. In the
same way, there is the huge mound of King Owen Vinddu ap Mascen Wledig
who died around 436 A.D. at the church of St. Illtyd above Aberbeeg in old
Glywyswg, and up on the mountain top west of the ruin of St. Peter's church is
the great mound that must be for King Caradoc ap Bran ap Llyr Lediath who
probably died around 100 A.D. Is the great mound at Ton Ddu at Llangynwydd a
castle mound or a grave mound of a king? It is in the wrong place for a castle,
below high slopes and difficult to defend, at best it could be a country home,
occupied by a lord of the people amongst whom he lived. At Caerleon is the
great mound of King Blegywryd who was of around 150-120 B.C.
When customs changed and great tumulus mounds began to be replaced by
burial inside churches in the case of paramount kings, there was again a pattern.
No longer was there a great mound alongside the church. Now, there were royal
tombs set into the north walls of the churches, with one king per church. We
have discussed King Tewdrig at Mathern, King Meurig Uthyr Pendragon at the
Great Circle at Caer Caradoc, and King Morgan Mwynfawr in a great mound
near Margam, but there should be no surprise to find others. The village of
Penmark was formerly Pen March Howel, meaning the head (place) of Howell
the Knight. In the very ancient church at Penmark, there is a recess in the north
wall, the Right Hand of God position, with a tomb slab set into it. We can rule
out Howell ap Rhys ap Arthfael, who died in Rome in 888 or 884 A.D., which
leaves King Howell ap Rhys ap Ithael ap Morgan, who would have died at some
time around 730 A.D. There is also King Howell ap Morgan Hen ap Owen, who
is said to have died at age 110 around 1020 A.D., but speculatively, the slab
tomb is that of Howell ap Rhys ap Ithael ap Morgan.


Grave mound of King Owain ap Cyllin ap Caradoc, circa 150 A.D. at Ystrad Owain Church,
Glamorgan.

Baram Blackett in the chancel area of Cor Emrys or St. Peter’s on Caer Caradoc, Glamorgan. The
ancient cathedral church of the British – Matthew of Westminster and Gryffydd ap Arthur both say
that Emrys Wledig and Arthur as Uthyr Pendragon are buried here.

Again in West Wales, we were able to locate another carved figure of a skeleton
in a north wall grave inside a church. This follows the pattern of kings and
princes being corruptible and shown as skeletons, whereas bishops, abbots and
saints were incorruptible and shown as fully fleshed in body. The age of the
carvings is immaterial, as there was a great deal of old time rebuilding and
reburying of churches and bodies of important men. Some one would have been
buried or reburied in Llandaff Cathedral when the new building was erected in
A.D. 1120.
If we can find the kings and establish the patterns, then we have evidence to help
to prove that the records of South Wales are true. We have the burning of Roman
London, the buried Roman villa palace at Caermead, the skulls from the River
Walbrook, the graves of King Tewdrig at Mathern, and Meurig at Caer Caradoc
Gwynlliw at Newport, the mound tombs of Owain Ffinddu ap Magnus, of King
Bran, of King Owain ap Cyllin ap Caradoc, and several others. All this is
evidence, just as the grave of Ceri Longsword is evidence on the gravelly cliff.
Having established the timescale yardstick of the family tree of the British kings
in Glamorgan and Gwent, it is then reasonable to seek and to find those kings
buried in Glamorgan and Gwent. The Egyptian Pharoahs were buried in Egypt
and therefore Welsh kings should be found buried in their own patrimonial lands
or in Wales in general. In addition, there now should be consistent burial
customs to be observed as with every other highly civilised nation of antiquity.
Before the years A.D., there were great tumulus funeral mounds, many with the
names preserved identifying the occupants. After A.D., there came the practice
of placing the tumulus mounds close to the church founded by the king as his
house of God, and finally, probably around 450 A.D., there came the practice of
burying the king in his church at the right hand of God position, close to the altar
in the north wall. The catastrophe of A.D. 562 caused unexpected reversals in
custom.
The early kings had a function in death, for they acted as phantom spirit
guardians serving to protect the land against invaders and enemies. That is why
the tumulus of the mighty King Baram is on top of the highest hills in Gwent
dominating the plains of the shores and the East against Roman approaches. In
the same way King Ceri, father of Baram, the Ceri who built fleets, lies on a cliff
guarding the Glamorgan coasts, buried in a boat-shaped tomb. And it should
surprise no one to find the Twyn-Caradoc or the Barrow-grave of King Caradoc
placed high on Mynydd y Gaer protecting the fertile Vale of Glamorgan.
Mynydd y Gaer means Mountain of the Fortress. There are no obvious fortresses
on it, until Alan Wilson and Baram Blackett discovered the ruins of circular
tower bases and thick monumental walls in 1991. It may be that Tacitus was
describing Methyr Mawr just northwest as the scene of the great battle between
King Caradoc and the Romans under their General Ostorius Scapula. King
Caradoc was, of course, the war king of the Silures – Essyllwg – of South Wales
and not as many authors wrongly state the son of Cynvelyn of the areas North of
London. King Caradoc lies at Twyn-Caradoc on Mynydd y Gaer.
Another of the powerful Essylwg-Silures kings was, of course, King Crair (the
South Wales style), also known in Wales as Carawn. As we have said, he threw
the Romans out and ruled as an independent Emperor. The Romans in their
language knew him as the Emperor Carausius – their version of Crair or Carawn.
As we also stated, the Welsh kings were Christian, and the religious persecutions
of the reign of Diocletian probably roused King Crair to anger and he burned
down Roman London and made himself independent. Archaeology today proves
the Bards to be correct, for Roman London was burned down. Well, so great a
king as Crair, or Carawn, should also be easy to find, particularly if he were
Christian. Up at Penmachno a small stone was found, just 2 feet, 5 inches, and
upon it was inscribed:
Caravsivs Hic lacit in Hoccom Seriesla Pidvm
Above the inscription was a Chi-Rho type cross proving that Carausius was a
Christian. So the stone of King Carawn also appears, and he is remembered in
Wales by place names at the River Carron and at Tregarron. He died around
A.D. 293.
All this establishes the reality of old British history and the accuracy of their
records, and brings substance to the true stories of the past.
THE COMPANIONS OF KING ARTHUR
We have already demonstrated in other books that King Maelgwn Gwynedd can
certainly be put into the role of the romance period Arthurian hero Sir L'Ancelot.
Maelgwn Gwynedd was known as Maglos, and his tombstone marked
"Maglocunus" is at the Church at Nevern.
So what of the other close companions of King Arthur? What of, say, Sir Kay
and Sir Bedivere? We believe that they can be traced and the proof is as follows.
Up at Penmachno in Caernarvonshire there is another stone, and this is inscribed
as follows:
 CANTIORI HIC IACIT IENEDOTISCIVEPNT
ONSORRINO MAGLI MAGISTRAT
This means "Here lies Caitiori the cousin of Maglos the Magistrate", and this can
be sorted out with some accuracy. First King Maelgwn Gwynedd is well and
often recorded as one of the Three Chief Elders appointed by King Arthur to
help to run his kingdom – quite literally they were the magistrates or chief
judges. So if we have King Maelgwn in his role of magistrate and chief elder, we
now have to look to see who his cousin was. King Maelgwn's pedigree was
Maelgwn ap Caswallon Lawhir ap Einion Yrth ap Cuneda Wledig, and we find
that he had a cousin named Cai who was Cai ap Cynyr Farfdrwch ap Gwron ap
Einion Yrth ap Cuneda Wledig.
It requires no great stretch of the imagination to place Cai ap Cynyr as Sir Kay.
Sir Bedivere is found by a different route. The "Song of the Graves" tells where
he lies. It goes like this:
The tomb of the son of Ogyrvran is in Camlan,
After much slaughter
The tomb of Bedwyr is on the steep of Tryvan.
So we are told that Ogyrvan's son was killed in the terrible Battle of Camlan
when King Arthur was forced to destroy his nephew Medrawd or Modred.
Further, we are told that he lies at Camlan, and so all we need to do is to locate
Camlan. As we know that Camlan is still where it always has been, a few miles
south of Dollgellau in a steep winding valley, it means that we seek a tomb on a
steep hill slope. There is such a tumulus mound on the side of a steep hill very
close to Camlan on a slope near Nant Gweinion near Mallwyd. We cannot
identify any other tumulus grave in the area at all, so presumably this is the
grave mound of Arthur's brother-in-law. As his father is named Ogyrvran, we
also know that he was the brother-in-law of King Arthur, for Arthur married a
daughter of Ogyrvran, named Gwenhwyfar as one of his three queens. The
history is accurate, and the physical evidence supports the record yet again.
The grave of Bedwyr, who is Sir Bedivere in folk romance, is in Tryfran and on
the steep. Tryfran is Dindryfran, which is an ancient Glamorgan castle. It is now
known corruptly as the meaningless English Dunraven, at Southerdown on the
Glamorgan coast. A small peninsula juts out into the sea, and is defended on
three sides by high cliffs and dangerous rocks. The south side, lying landwards
to the north, rises in steep slopes to a line of ancient banks and ditches. Inside
these formidable fortifications there is a further steep slope rising up to an inner
line of bank and ditch roughly 100 yards behind the outer defences. Behind this
defensive line, the ground falls away steeply to a small plateau, hidden from the
landward side, and here there are the remains of buildings. On the steep slope
between the outer and inner defensive walls there is a large funeral mound, about
fifty yards from the cliffs. This is the funeral mound on the steep at Tryfran
described in the "Song of the Graves", and belonging to Bedwyr ap Pedrawg and
the General and friend of King Arthur.
Remarkably all this is blindingly obvious to any fair-minded researcher. Even
the tombstone of the redoubtable King Cystennhyn – Constantine – who was
handed the crown by the King Arthur, son of Magnus Maximus, was traced into
Wales, and his stone was found in the 12th century at his brother's church in
North Wales. Sadly, this is now lost, but may yet turn up in the fabric of the
much rebuilt and restored church one day when some repairs or alterations are
done.
All we need to do is to get rid of the it-can-happen-in-Egypt-or-Assyria-but-not-
here mentality, and the whole thing can be sorted out. The Normans excavated
the grave of the hero Gwalchmai in the time of William II, and in digging into
his West Wales grave, they clearly understood the reality of the stories of King
Arthur and his knights.

The grave mound of Bedwyr – Sir Bedivere, on the steep of Din Tryfan, now Dun-Raven Castle, as
specified in "The Songs of the Graves".
The ancient headland fortress of Din Tryfan at Southerdown. The mound walls are on the left and
three sides are guarded by high cliffs and the sea.

OTHER STONES
If money and time were available, a worthwhile examination of all the ancient
inscribed stones might well be a revealing exercise. In most cases, the
information on the stones is insufficient to allow for a complete identification,
but very reasonable and very solid conclusions can still be drawn.
The Book of Llandaff exhibits a number of charters that name Abbot Sadwrn, an
early sixth century figure of some importance. Now Sadwrn translates as
Saturninus, and so we see the stone found at Llansadwrn inscribed as:
SATVRNINVSS IACIT ET SVAS [Link]
As the lettering is believed to be sixth century, it seems obvious that here we
have the holy Abbot Sadwrn, and a good historical tie-up.
Other stones are more tantalising in their identity. We have consistently tried to
show how all the evidence in the Bruts (histories), the poems, the royal
genealogies, the riddle histories of the Mabinogi, and the inscribed stones, all
form part of a composite truth. By legalistic standards, none are absolute proof
in themselves, but by sheer weight of evidence and close corroboration, they all
help to prove each other. Two other inscribed stones – and there are some 200 -
help to prove this.
One is the Llanerfyl stone from Montgomeryshire, which records the following
data:
HIC TVMVLO IACIT ROSTE ECE FILA PATERNINI ANU XIII IN PA
(PA is probably pace, or peace)
Here in this tomb lies Rustica, the daughter of Paternus – year thirteen – in
peace
We know from the royal genealogies that the grandfather of Cuneda Wledig was
named Paternus, and we find no one else so listed or named. If we look at the
name of his daughter, Roste – Rustica – we again have a Welsh equivalent name
in Rhain or Rhiannon. Then we see that Paternus was named for his cloak –
Patern Pesrud – of the red robe. This is thought to mean senatorial dignity and a
purple robe. In the Mabinogi we find that the Princess Rhiannon is daughter of
one Heveydd the Old, also known as Heveydd One Cloak. The Emperors would
be the British Emperors, maybe Magnus Maximus, Constantine, or Owen then
Constantine the Blessed, or Teithfallt – Theodosius – of Morganwg. We do not
know if this is the Mabinogi Rhiannon, but it looks that way.
There is another stone from Eglwys Gynyn in Carmarthenshire, which is marked
as follows:
AVITORIA FILIA CVNIGNI
Avitoria the daughter of Cunoglassus
If we take Avitoria, we have what was probably Aregwedd and became
Angharad, and in the Mabinogi we find Angharad Golden Hand at the Court of
King Arthur, the lady chosen by Peredur. Gildas names Cunoglassus as a
contemporary of Arthur, and the Brecon Manuscripts link Peredur directly with
Arthur Penuchel-Arthur of Glamorgan. It is all very close.
We have rightly criticised the archaeologists of Britain for being Roman Mad, as
indeed they have been. There is one major site that now proves our contention.
The fourth largest Roman built city in Britain was Wroxeter, and this is the only
known major Roman city site that is not covered by a modern town or city. The
city of Wroxeter extended over 170 acres and was the fourth largest Roman city
in Britain. It was called Viroconivm Cornoviorvm, and was intended to be the
tribal capital of the Cornovii nation. The town started as a Roman military camp
believed to have lasted from 58 A.D. to around 75 A.D. and gradually grew into
a town, being formally built as a trading colonising city by the Emperor Hadrian
in 130 A.D. This is known because the Emperor's dedication stone has been
found in the excavated forum.
What is now emerging at Wroxeter is that the Roman departure took place
around 300 A.D. as we have predicted. This was the period of the revolt by King
Carawn of Menevia (known as King Crair of Gwent and Glamorgan), who was
the British Emperor Carausius to the Romans, followed by the more successful
revolt of his successor King Euddav in 312 A.D. This was Euddav, who would
be Octavius to the Romans, and who ruled Britain independently from 312 A.D.
Significantly, the native population used the town after the Roman withdrawal,
and archaeologists are now finding clear evidence of large numbers of timber
buildings erected inside the larger Roman public buildings in the central area.
These houses are of two storeys, and they use one or more of the standing
Roman walls. The major upheaval in Britain happened around 300 A.D. and not
at some time around 500-550 A.D. as fondly imagined by historians wedded to
the theory of an Anglo-Saxon conquest. These native timber houses give
evidence of the Dark Age British people and their lifestyle. Even the tomb
structure of King Gradlon – second king of Britanny – who died around 430-440
A.D. is in the form of a two storey house.
At Wroxeter the mad mistake of plunging down to Roman levels is not being
made, otherwise all British Dark Age evidence would be destroyed.
Unfortunately a great deal of other possible evidence has been lost for good
elsewhere by these Roman enthusiasts who seem to have swallowed the lies of
British barbarism. The same picture that we predicted is now emerging from
Cotswold villa excavations and examinations, with continuity of life pattern
from around 300 A. D. and onward. That there was a great upheaval in Britain is
correct, but it occurred long before 500-550 A.D. and the Saxons; it was the
reassertion of power by the native kings. This makes the Welsh records of the
leading kings of South Wales to be correct, for, as we state elsewhere, evidence
shows King Carawn-Crair burned down Roman London.
There is also another find of importance to our story at Wroxeter, for a stone has
been found with "Conurix fili Maqqos Colini" inscribed upon it. This has been
suggested to be of the period 460-475 A.D. and said then to have been a possible
Irish chief settled there by the Romans. The grounds for this piece of nonsense
are that Maqqos or Macus is said to be the ancient Irish for "son". How can this
be? The town was abandoned by the Romans around 300 A.D., the British
finally washed their hands of Rome in 411 A.D., so how in the name of heaven
do the Romans settle an Irishman at Wroxeter around 460-474 A.D.? No one
seems to have thought of looking at the British record that should be the obvious
starting point. St. Gildas, writing his "De Excidio" states that there were five
rebellious kings in Britain and one he names as Cunoglassus, a murderous and
violent warlord. There is a tradition that this Cunoglassus ruled the North East
Wales area, and Cunorix seems to be Cuno-Rex or Cuno the king. Equally the
Welsh records are emphatic that all Irish immigrants in North Wales were
eliminated by the General Cuneda Wledig and his sons around 440-450 A.D.
The probability is that Cunorix is the King Cunoglassus of St. Gildas.
Wroxeter was destroyed around 562 A.D., and its end is highly likely a result of
the huge devastations caused by the cometary impacts. It may even have been
reoccupied for some period afterwards.
The story is the same all over ancient Wales, with kings and prince Bishops
buried everywhere. King Dingat retired to a church life and lived quietly before
being buried as a saint; he is said to be buried in his church and if we look there
we will probably find him exactly as stated.
VITALIANUS AND POMPEIUS
In the volume "King Arthur – King of Glamorgan and Gwent" we referred to the
famous stone at Nevern Church that marks the place of "Vitalianus". This is a
stone that we would identify as probably that of King Vortimer in English and
King Gwythelyn in Welsh. The popular identity of Gwythelyn is to assume that
he was a son of King Vortigern – Gwytheyrn – yet the Welsh record and belief is
different, and he was the succeeded by a King Teithfallt-Theodosius the father of
King Tewdrig –Theoderic – the grandfather of King Arthwyr – Arthur.
Gwythelyn was probably a descendant of Victorinus, which explains why
Gwythelyn was brought back to Wales for burial. Vortigern was not a South
Wales king and he was refused entry to the country and it is very difficult to see
how his son would have been buried there. After Vortigern had plunged Britain
into catastrophe it is also logical that with the King Teithfallt claiming
overlordship and the Empire of Britain, that King Gwythelyn would also have
moved against the Saxons and driven them from a leaderless Lloegres.
Again, it calls for a historical revision, but we no longer accept the untenable
theory that Vortimer was a son of Vortigern, particularly in the face of the
Glamorgan record and clear explanation.
We also referred to the Pompeius Car Antorius stone as being the stone of
Pompey the kinsman of Arthur. This we believe is correct. We suggested that
Pompey was possibly Pappai the son of King Brychan of Brecon. He might also
be a kinsman of King Arthur in Britanny, who was Riwal or Howell who ruled
Dumnonia in Britanny. Apparently Riwal or Howell rejoiced in the title name of
Pompeius Regulus, and he had lands in Britain and Lesser Britain or Britanny
where he lived at St. Brieuc. It would not be unusual for Riwal-Howell to be
buried in South Wales, and he certainly was the friend of King Arthur. Whether
the stone is for King Howell, who was Pompieus Regulus, or for Pappai ap
Brychan we will probably never know.
THREE QUEENS NAMED GWENHWYFAR
The identification of the stone of Vendumaglos as that of Gwythyr Mawr was a
matter upon which we were prepared to be judged. We were in fact so
preoccupied with a number of other matters that we did not look as deeply as we
might into the local traditional history of the church at Llaniltern. In
conversation with Frederick Osbourne, the Chief Executive of the Cardiff
Chamber of Commerce, we found that the President of the Chamber, Merlin
John, lived at Llaniltern and possessed copies of the local parish histories and
traditions. These state quite firmly that Queen Gwenhwyfar, the wife of King
Arthur, lies buried at the old church at Llaniltern – the ruined monastery site.
This we learned in September 1982, and it fits with her father, Gwythyr Mawr,
being buried there.
The Triads are firm that King Arthur had three queens, and so the tradition that
Queen Gwenhwyfar, the daughter of Gwythyr Mawr, being buried at Llaniltern,
does not conflict with the very strong tradition that Queen Gwenhwyfar lies at
St. Julian's in Gwent. This would be Gwenhwyfar, the daughter of Ogyrfan Gawr
or Gwenhwyfar Gawryd Ceint (Gawrwyd Ceint), who may be one and the same
person. Either way, it makes no sense of the Glastonbury farce.
For English scholars, Gwenhwyfar, daughter of Gwythyr Mawr, is interesting for
Gwythyr's father was Greidiawl, whose name appears as the monster in Beowulf
– the great enemy of the Saxons. The major point of this, however, is that there
is somewhere in or near a barn on a farm at Llaniltern a very large inscribed
stone taken there around 100 years ago from the ruin of the monastery. This may
well be the tombstone of Queen Gwenhwyfar. Again, the correct place to look
for the tombstones of the wives of King Arthur, king of Glamorgan and Gwent,
is in Glamorgan and Gwent. The stone should not be difficult to find if the
search is organised.
The Triads and folklore consistently credit King Arthur, son of Meurig, with
three queens named Gwenhwyfar. This situation appears to have been
misunderstood by many who speak of King Arthur's queen or wife. As he had
three queens and three common-law wives the first question is – which one?
At Llaniltern church, there is a long-standing tradition that a Queen Gwenhwyfar
lies buried there. If this is so, then she should be the daughter of Gwythur Mawr,
who still lies buried in the ruins of the Llanvair Fawr Monastery just a quarter
mile away. His stone was taken from Llanvair to Llaniltern church less than 100
years ago. The obvious place to look for Gwenhwyfar would be in the north wall
of Llaniltern church. Around 1780, old Iolo Morganwg – Edward Williams –
went looking, and there above he saw a stone set in the Western gables. It read:
"Hic lacet Gwenora", which means, "here lies Gwenhwyfar".
Apparently, this stone and the strong local tradition upset the so-called scholars
in 1822 A.D. who attempted to say that it read all sorts of nonsense, when in fact
it simply states "Here lies Gwenhwyfar". It seems that they were still
mesmerised by the fakes in Somerset and Cornwall.
This Queen Gwenhwyfar accounts for the daughter of Gwythur Mawr. In fact
some two miles away northwest lies Caer Gwyndaf – the Castle of Gwyndaf
Hen. He was a son of Emrys Wledig – Ambrosius Aurelianus – and is shown in
the genealogies to be married to Gwenonwy, a sister of King Arthur ap Meurig.
Just two and a half miles due north lies the great hillfort castle of Arthur's
Butresses or Arthur's Walls, the authentic Caer of the great king, which is larger
than Cadbury.
In Llaniltern itself just 100 yards from the church is the manor house of
Pencoed, which is again by tradition the true manor house of King Arthur and
this Queen Gwenhwyfar, the daughter of Gwythur Mawr. Where the other five
wives were lodged, we are not sure. There is in fact no reason to doubt that the
ancient and very beautiful manor house does not mark the ancient site of King
Arthur's home, and much has been written of this.
Around it there is a traditional Glamorgan folktale. This tells how the king was
away on his eastern borders along the Wye dealing with Saxon infiltration and
his queen was at home. She had a former lover from before her marriage named
Melwas, and the two began an affair whilst the king was away, meeting in a
nearby grove still called Llwyn Melwas, or the Bush of Melwas. The two lovers
planned to run away together, and in a pre-arranged plan to frighten off the
queen's maids she absconded with Melwas. Word was quickly taken to King
Arthur, who organised a pursuit and had the lovers hunted down. The luckless
queen was caught by his hunting dogs and torn to pieces.
Cressy, writing in 1688 A.D., transfered this tale over to Somerset, out of Wales
and into England. Here, he says that Guinevere was stolen by Melwas, and taken
to Glastonbury, and that King Arthur pursued them to that place. A battle
between King Arthur and Melwas was prevented by the Abbot of Glastonbury,
and St. Gildas, attended by many monks, and the queen was restored to King
Arthur. Then both kings made large and generous gifts to the church. As King
Arthur ap Meurig died around 575 A.D., and Glastonbury was not founded until
the period 950 A.D., all this is of course very strange. In fact we can find only
one Melwas in any of the records and genealogies, and he did live around the
670-700 A.D. period, well after the time of King Arthur ap Meurig. It seems that
King Arthfael ap Rhys ap Ithael ap Morgan ap King Arthur is the king intended
by this story. This King Arthfael, or Arthur III, did in fact also fight Saxon wars
around this 670-700 A.D. period.
What we have to remember however is that Cressy was probably making the
same mistake as everyone else, and translating Affallach or Aballach as
Glastonbury or Avillon, when the correct translation should be Valentinian or the
Province of Valentia. So instead of King Arthur pursuing Queen Gwenhwyfar
and Melwas south across the Severn into Somerset, he was in fact chasing them
north up toward Scotland, with Valentia being the area set between Carlisle and
Newcastle upon Tyne in the south and Glasgow and Edinburgh in the north. If
we get away from the Glastonbury nonsense we get sense and reason. So what is
the evidence in the far north?

The Venumaglos – Gwythur Mawr Stone at Llaniltern Church – records Victor the Great, father of
Queen Guievere the second. The Gwenora-Guinevere Stone is somewhere in the fabric of the church.
Photograph by Chris Barber

The copper plate on the wall of Cadoxton Church at Neath records Philip Williams and family died in
1717 A.D. back to Iestyn ap Gwrgan and so to King Arthur. Another records Rose Williams’ death
March 24, 1680.
Photograph by Chris Barber

The answer lies in Perth in Scotland. Here there is the ancient parish of Meigle,
and here also there is a folktale that is almost identical to the Llaniltern story. It
tells how King Arthur's queen fled toward the ancient druidic stones where she
could claim sanctuary, and how she was overtaken before she reached them and
was torn to pieces by King Arthur's war dogs. Even more, there was a grave
mound said to be that of the queen, and upon it sat an elaborately carved stone.
The stone is massive, being eight feet tall and three feet, three inches wide, and it
was said to mark the grave of Queen Gwenora. On one side there are the figures
of five mounted knights riding in pursuit, and below in the centre of the stone
there is the figure of a woman who is being attacked on both sides by several
large dogs, and on the bottom is what appears to be an entanglement of bushes
and other figures. On the other side of this remarkable stone is carved a large
wheel cross at the top, and below is an enclosure filled with strange beasts that
seem to be horses and camels with serpent-like heads. The stone has to be one of
the great monuments of Britain. The local tradition states in detail that the queen
was held captive in the neighbouring parish of Alyth where she was torn to
pieces, either by the dogs or wild animals, and then brought to Meigle and
buried. The Welsh word alaeth means great lamentations, and there is close to
Meigle a place named Arthurstone.
The explanation appears to be that this Queen Gwenhwyfar is either the daughter
of Ogyrvran Gawr or the daughter of Gawrwyd Ceint (also referenced as
Gawryd Ceint and Guryt Gwent) and the abductor is Medrawd the Traitor and
not Melwas. Medrawd, the son of Llew ap Cynvarch, was from Northern Britain
– old Affallach or Valentia – and had Scots, Picts and Saxon allies. This fits
perfectly well with the story of King Arthur fighting his way onshore at
Llongborth or Penbryn where King Geraint of Cornwall was mortally wounded,
pursuing Medrawd through Mid-Wales to Camlan just south of Dollgellau, and
then chasing his remaining enemies up into Affallach – Valentia – and on up into
Perth to capture the runaway queen. No paramount king of Britain could suffer
the insult of a runaway queen, and he would obviously have pursued her to the
ends of the earth if necessary. So the story of the Queen Gwenora torn to pieces
by hounds at Alyth and buried at Meigle is, we believe, true. She would seem to
be the daughter of Ogyrvran Gawr.
This accounts for two of King Arthur's three queens, and the very strong Welsh
tradition that the Queen Gwenhwyfar was buried at St. Julians in Newport,
Gwent, close to King Arthur's court on Lodge Hill at Caerleon, accounts for the
third queen. She would be Gwenhwyfar Guryt Gwent, or Gawryd Ceint, or
Gawrwyd Ceint.
All this very satisfactorily solves the problem of the three queens of King Arthur
ap Meurig, and is very well supported by tradition. We actually have two
gravestones of two of these three queens. This is interesting, for the fake
excavation and bogus discoveries over in Glastonbury in 1190-1191 A.D. did not
claim to be discoveries of King Arthur, they claimed to be discoveries of the
Welsh King Arthur and his one Queen Guinevere – Gwenhwyfar. As we now
have one Gwenhwyfar in Glamorgan, one in Gwent and one in Perth in Scotland,
and also King Arthur himself in Glamorgan, there is something with a very bad
odour at Glastonbury.

Baram Blackett at the ruins of King Meurig’s hilltop castle residence at Miskin. The ruin is of a royal
residence or castle and its adjoining monastery of St. Caurdaf.

Baram Blackett at the monastery ruin immediately alongside King Meurig’s fortress on the east side
of the hill. It is the ruined monastery of St. Caurdaf ap Caradoc Freichfras, the father of Modred,
who eloped with Gwenhwyfach to Meigle in Perth.

The original site of the Vendumaglos-Gwythyr Mawr stone and the missing
stone of the Llaniltern area, was the monastery ruin of Llanfair Fawr. This ruin,
now simply mounds of earth, lies in a field alongside the road about a quarter of
a mile due south of the Llaniltern church. This Llanvair monastery was the
traditional site of the grave of Queen Gwenhwyfar, daughter of Gwythyr Mawr,
and wife of King Arthur. This does not conflict with the tradition of
Gwenhwyfar Garawyd Ceint, or Gwenhwyfar, daughter of Ogyrfran Gawr,
another of Arthur's three queens having been buried at St. Julian’s in Newport,
Gwent.
The Llaniltern church is dedicated to and was therefore founded by St. Elideyrn
the brother of St. Edeyrn who founded his church on the other side of Cardiff.
Both were sons of King Gwytheyrn, known in English as King Vortigern, and
this indicates the antiquity of these foundations at around 470-500 A.D. The
ruined monastery at Miskin is similarly the site of St. Caurdat, the son of
Caradoc Vreichfras, and therefore through Triads and other references a direct
contemporary of King Arthur. As we pointed out in a previous volume, St.
Caurdaf had a son named Medrawd, who can be confused with Medrawd ap
Llew ap Cynvarch Oer.
It should be possible to trace the missing stone, as it is almost certainly still on
the farm, and possibly in a building erected or extended about 100 years ago. All
the names of the older places of this area are unmistakably of the period of
Arthur, even to the fort that guarded the upper reaches of the Ely below the
fortress of Arthur's Walls, being the Caer of Gwyndaf. With two of King Arthur's
wives so located in Glamorgan and Gwent, it becomes ever more difficult to see
how anyone can believe the unfounded fictions of Cadbury and Glastonbury in
Somerset, and Tintagel in Cornwall.
THE LLANILTERN FONT
One additional tale of Llaniltern is the folktale that King Meurig had his son the
infant Arthwys – Arthwyr or Arthur – baptised in the font at the church. This has
been said to be ridiculous as the font is 12th century in design. True, so it is. Yet
this so-called proof of date is no proof at all. The fact is that very ancient
original fonts were, after the arrival of the Normans much later around 1100
A.D., constantly recarved and modernised. The ancient massive rough carved
fonts of the early Dark Ages were reshaped and recut to suit the later tastes of
contemporary 12th, 13th and 14th centuries and the process went on and on
down to the 19th century.
Mr. Illtyd Gardiner made an exhaustive search into the fonts in Hereford and
Gwent in 1917 and included several fonts from all over England to help draw his
conclusions on the old Hereford and Gwent fonts. He was able to show by
detailed study that very ancient fonts were simply reshaped, cut down in size,
decorated and suitably altered, but they were in fact ancient fonts modernised by
the carvers of mediaeval times.

Rear side of the tombstone of Queen Guinevere the second. It has a circled cross and below several
long-necked fantastic animals common to Egyptian and Mesopotamian sculpture.

Front side of Guinevere’s stone. It shows King Arthur at the top with his huntsmen and dogs; below
are his knights; at the bottom, his war dogs tear the unfaithful queen to pieces.

So there is in fact no way of knowing whether or not the infant Arthur was
actually baptised in the font at Llaniltern. What we can say is that many Dark
Age Welsh kings and princes were not baptised until they were on their
deathbeds, and in this way they hoped after baptism to enter heaven with all their
sins washed away. There is some indication that people may have been baptised
more than once however, and so there could easily be an infant and a deathbed
baptism. Is the Llaniltern font the same one as was in use in the 500 A.D.
period? Well, very likely it is, and it has simply been remodeled down the ages,
for this was general practice.
The whole subject is fraught with dlfficulty. Was the Vendumag los Stone at
Llanfair Fawr as the letter of Harry Lewis says? Is it the same stone that Iolo
Morganwg and others saw and argued about, under the west gables at Llaniltern
stating "Gwenora hic iacit?" There is no proof that we are not talking about two
stones – two not one. The Gwenora grave store read:
Hic iacit Gwenora, or Here Lies Gwenhwyfar
The other stone reads:
Vendumagli hic iacet, or Gwythyr Mawr lies here
The stone in the north wall of Llaniltern Church is not the same stone as
identified by Edward Williams above this height and near the Western gables. As
the church was rebuilt after the arguments of 1822 A.D. over Gwenhwyfar and
Llaniltern, what we have is the removal of Gwythyr Mawr's stone from Llanvair
some 400 yards away and its placement in the Llaniltern Church north wall, and
the disappearance of the Gwenora-Gwenhwyfar stone at the same time. We have
two stones, not one.
The Gwenora stone was in the west wall in 1780 and caused controversy in 1822
A.D. (see the work of O. Morien Morgan of 1911). Then in 1862, Lady Windsor
paid to have the church rebuilt, and George Edward Street did the work. He was
a good architect, but less than honest and the Gwenora stone vanished. Then in
1898 along came T. Bird as the rector, and between 1898 and 1920 he moved the
Vendumaglos stone from the Llanvair barn to its place near the font in the North
Wall of the church. The muddle is a simple and straightforward matter, and
somewhere in the wall of the church or in the exterior wall there is the stone of
Queen Gwenhwyfar, whilst her father's stone decorates the North Wall.
The loss at Llaniltern is typical of many such happenings in the extensive church
rebuilding programmes in Wales in the 19th century. The architects were mainly
English, and out of sympathy with, and ignorant of the history and heritage of
Wales, and so the monuments that held vital historical evidence disappeared
from view.
Four miles to the southeast lies Llandaff where King Meurig, the father-in-law of
Gwenhwyfar, lies buried together with St. Teilo the Archbishop, and where the
bones of St. Dyfrig lie after their reburial in 1120 A.D. Everything fits. The
history of South East Wales explains how exactly the same folktale of King
Arthur is at Llaniltern in Glamorgan and at Meigle in Perth, Scotland, 500 miles
to the north.
As we might expect, there is even a dual interpretation of the name Llaniltern.
Most take the view that as St. Elideyrn ap Gwytheyrn founded the church, it is
Llanelideyrn corrupted into Llaniltern. Some antiquarians, however, maintained
that Llaniltern is a compound name meaning Llan-ail-Teyrn, the Chapel of Ease
of the Viceroy or Regent, from Ail-Teyrn meaning the other or alternative
Monarch. There may be something in this, as King Meurig ap Tewdrig lived to
around 570 A.D. and his son, King Arthur, to around 575 A.D. and so he would
be the Viceroy or Regent just as Nennius said he was in 822 A.D.
None of King Arthur's sons from the first marriage survived the Vandal War of
Twrch Trwyth in 548 A.D. His second queen was unfaithful with Medrawd ap
Caurdaf. The sons of his third marriage were young when he died, and so his
death was kept a secret and he was originally buried in Coed-y-Mwstyr Cave,
known as the Cave of the Pavillions in the Wood of Mystery, until Morgan was
old enough to take effective control.
Arthur's three common-law wives were (1) Garwen, daughter of Henyn Tegryn
Gwyr of Ystrad Tywy in South Wales; (2) Gwyl, daughter of Eutaw of
Caerworgorn, Llantwit Major; (3) Indeg, daughter of Afarwy Hir of Maelienydd,
presumably the woman over whom Arthur quarrelled with Huail ap Caw, and
subsequently beheaded Huail at Ruthin on the stone in the square. Prince Idnerth
ap Meurig lies buried at Llandewi Brefi where his stone is in the church wall.
ST. PAUL PENYCHEN – BROTHER OF KING ARTHUR
As we might expect, there is a complication over the Celtic St. Paul, for there
appear to be four saints named Paul. There is a tradition of St. Paul, known as
Paulinus, and as Paul Hen the Aged, and there is a Paul Aurelian. Exactly which
is which or whether they are the same man is a mystery, but there is a Paul
Penychen who is clearly from Central Glamorgan, a Paul Hen the Aged, a Paul
Aurelian, and a Paulinus of York who died in 644 A.D. There was a Paul or
Paulinus who taught St. Dewi, and who is mentioned in the lives of many other
saints. In Britanny, he was known as Paul – Aurelian of St. Pol-de-Leon. In the
year 884 A.D., a monk at St. Pol-de-Leon named Wrmonoc wrote the "Life of
St. Paul Aurelian", splitting it into two parts – one part on his life in Wales, and
the second for his life in Britanny.
This Life tells of Paul-Aurelian being born at Brehant Dincat, and the town of
Llandovery in Carmarthenshire has the parish of Dincat in it, and that Paul was
of noble origin having eight brothers and three sisters. Two brothers who became
monks like Paul Aurelian were named Notolius and Potolius, and one sister was
Sitofolla. Paul studied on the island of Pyrus in Demetae where St. Illtyd had
founded a monastery, and Ynys Pyr is Caldey Island in Dyfed where Illtyd did
have a monastery. David, Samson, and Gildas are all associated with Paul
Aurelian. When he was 16 years old, Paul Aurelian went back to his father's
estates and built small religious cells where he and his brothers Notolius and
Potolius lived, and there were 12 priests at this place. In Carmarthenshire is the
village of Llandeusant – the church estate of two saints – and the two were
Notolius and Potolius. There used to be an annual fair at Llandeusant on the
October 10 called the festival of St. Paulinus. So with Llandovery and
Llandeusant being close together, and with Digad Parish church in Llandovery,
and two small chapels dedicated to St. Paulinus in Dingad at Capel Peulin and
Nant-y-Bri and a holy well called Ffynon Beulin –St. Paul Aurelian is traceable.
In fact, it seems that St. Paul Aurelian spent most of his life in Wales, for the
Life of St. Teilo tells how he went to study with Paulinus, and as Teilo's main
monastery was at Llandeilo Fawr near Llandovery, this appears to be true. It was
there that Teilo met St. David. The Life of St. David by Rhigyfarch tells how
Paulinus went to fetch David to the Synod of Llandewi Brefi.
In fact a stone found at Caio is inscribed:
SERVATVR FIDAEI PATRIOVE SEMPER AVIATOR HIC PAVLINVS IACIT
CVLTOR PIENTISIMVS AEQVI
Which is believed to mean
Preserver of the Faith, constant lover of his country, here lies Paulinus, the
devoted champion of righteousness
Now by tying down Paul Aurelian to West Wales, we can turn to the Glamorgan
St. Paul, for there was one, and tradition says quite firmly that he was Paul ap
King Meurig ap King Tewdrig, which makes him a brother of King Arthur. At
Llangors in Brecon, there are two chapels: one is named Llanbeulin, and the
other Llan-y-Deuddeg Sant – estate of the 12 saints – and these would be the 12
monks recruited by Paul ap Meurig ap Tewdrig, to match the notion of the 12
Apostles. They would live at one chapel and the Royal Paul at the other.
At the church of St. Teilo in Merthyr Mawr in Glamorgan there is a damaged
slab stone which is inscribed as PAVLI FILI MA …, and it is wholly reasonable
to suppose that this is Paul the son of Meurig, with Meurig being Mavrivis in
Latin or something very like that. So this appears to be the tombstone of Paul the
brother of King Arthur, whose chapel is in the South East Wales kingdom at
Brecon.
The dates of the festivals of St. Paulinus, St. Paul Aurelian, and St. Paul give the
clues, for Wrmonoc in ninth century Britanny gives us March 12 as the Saints'
Day for Paul Aurelian. St. Paulinus of York is said to have died on October 10,
644 A.D. Then, in a 16th century Welsh calendar, we find the date of Gwyl Polin
Escob on the November 22. This last date of November 22 is very likely that of
Paul of Glamorgan, brother of Arthwyr. Inevitably everything got tidied up and
all three saints were compounded into one, and the date of October 10
appropriate to Paulinus of York in England was substituted for the dates of the
West Wales Paul-Aurelian and that of the South East Wales St. Paul ap Meurig.
This has again tends to obscure the royal family of South East Wales, and the
stone of Paul at Merthyr Mawr is important, for it is less than a half mile from
the Caer of Oeth and Anoeth where the hollow hill stands with its cavern,
fortress and chapel. A cave going straight down into a great pit at the top of a hill
is a very unusual geographical feature indeed.
The church of St. Teilo at Merthyr Mawr is itself a little strange for it has an
enormous font area, and the present modern edifice is on the site of the ancient
original, the site of which is marked by paving on the south side. Oddly, there
are two ancient piscinas and this infers two altars or a church with a chapel
attached. Our interest is in tracing the St. Paul who was brother to King Arthur,
and differentiating between him and the other two saints – Paulinus of York and
Paul Aurelian of West Wales. Notably, the Life of St. Cadoc ap Gwynlliw tells
how his uncle Paul of Penychen (Glamorgan) gave him his lands for a
monastery.
St. Iestin is another well-connected saint of this same period around 540-620
A.D. He was buried at Llaniestin near Beaumaris in Anglesey. This is noted in
the Myvyrnian Archaiology where the authors make the point that the reading of
the inscription by Rowland in his Mona Antiqua p. 156 is correct. The descent of
Iestin was through the following line: Iestin ap Geraint ap Erbin ap Cystennhin
ap Cynfor ap Tutwal ap Eurmwr ap Caden ap Cynan – Conon Meriadauc – ap
Euddav (King Euddav ap Crair-Octavius ap Carawn). These ancestors of Iestin
were the rulers of Devon, and Geraint is well recorded in the Mabinogi and other
Arthurian tales.
St. Kynvarch has his stone at Llangollen in Dyffryn Clwyd. This Kynvarch is
very important for he may be the Kynvarch who was father of Llew, Aron and
Elw, all princes who were appointed by Arthur. Gwalchmai, the knight and
nephew of Arthur, was son of Llew. The Llandaff Charters say that Cynvarch is
buried at St. Kinnemark near Chepstow.
The fact that all saints were of the royal clans is an immeasurable aid to sorting
out the problems of who was who, and where and when, in the Arthurian period.
Aron is King Arawn and Elw is King Urien Rheged.
THE MOST HOLY PLACES AND THE MYNYDD Y GAER
Not enough people take the time to visit the bare and lonely heights of Mynydd
y Gaer, the great hill that dominates the plains and Vale of Glamorgan. The view
from this long commanding hill is in fact extraordinary, allowing a clear sight of
the coast, and the river estuaries 20 miles away and more, and an unparalleled
view of the Severn. It is an extraordinary place for all British people, for it
embraces much of their ancient history. It was a very holy place, and a very
important place.
Down below Mynydd y Gaer, lies Trevran, the Town of Bran. We know that
King Bran descended of King Caradoc who fought the Romans from 42 A.D. to
51 A.D. We know from the old Triads that Llyr Lediath, the general and father of
Bran, was somewhere besieged by Ostorius Scapula the Roman General. We
know that the kings Bran and Caradoc brought St. Ilid and other Israelis back
from Rome with them in 58 A.D. and became Christians. At Trevran is the
church of Llan-Ilid. We also know that an ancestor of Caradoc was King Ceri,
who lies buried at Nash Point near Porth-Kerry on the Severn shores, and at
Trevran there is Ceri's Wood – Coed – and Ceri's Fountain – Ffynnon. The
annual festival of the Llan-Ilid church is also Gwyl Ceri, or the Wake of Ceri,
and strangely they did not bother to change the date of this when the new
Gregorian calendar was introduced.
So the heights above Trevran are important as defensive lookout station points,
commanding the whole of Glamorgan and much of Gwent, and therefore it is no
accident that King Bran and the war King Caradoc were located there. The
Glamorgan people called these southern slopes Bryn Caradoc, Caradoc's Hill or
Heights. The whole mountain is Mynydd y Gaer, meaning the Mountain of the
Fortress, and there is a fortress. On the southern spur of the mountain
overlooking Llanbad is the mound ruin of the Caer – the Caer of Caradoc. This
is important for about 200 yards northeast of this Caer Caradoc lies a tumulus
mound on the very highest point, and this is Twyn Caradoc, or the Mound of
Caradoc.
This brings us to a very important matter indeed, for around the period 480-500
A.D. the war king, or elected chief general, was Emrys Wledig, who the English
call Ambrosius Aurelian. After he won his wars, Emrys Wledig erected a
monument of the soldiers on Caer Caradoc. In Welsh, this is the Mynwent y
Milwyr, and there on the western peak of the Mynydd y Gaer are the remains of
the ancient Mynwent y Milwyr. Unfortunately, the Ordinance Survey Office has
persisted in placing heavy concrete markers onto and into the monument, what
else can be expected from British bureaucrats?
This now takes us to something that is even more interesting. The Triads relate
that there were three Perpetual Choirs of Britain. These were situated at
Caerworgorn, at Bangor Wyrdin and at Caer Caradoc. Now a Perpetual Choir
consisted of a church served by relays of monks working shift work to keep holy
chants and services going for 24 hours a day, seven days a week, and for 52
weeks a year. The services and worship literally never stopped. This all got very
confused in mediaeval times, when there was a great desire on the part of
English kings to construct a bogus heritage for themselves, so that they could
claim a false supremacy and right over Scotland and Wales, and possibly Ireland.
They simply expanded the base kingdom of Arthur to mean all Britain instead of
Morganwg – Glamorgan, Gwent, Brecon, Hereford and much of West Wales. So
whilst Caerworgorn was correctly identified as Llan-Illtyd Fawr, now Llantwit
Major, they moved the locations of Bangor Wrydin and Caer Caradoc to suit
their invented and bogus historical claim. Bangor Wrydin was, of course, the
church established by the paramount King Nynniaw who was St. Ninian around
400 A.D., to serve the northern kinsmen of the British who ruled all Northern
Britain from the River Humber up to the Clyde and Forth. This was transferred
to the bogus Glastonbury site that was not founded until 950 A.D. The site of
Caer Caradoc suffered the same fate, for this was obscured from Glamorgan and
now written down as Salisbury. The utter incredibility of this was furthered by
the identification of Stonehenge as Mynwent y Milwyr. The arch villain was
unfortunately Gryffydd ap Arthur, who seems to have been hell-bent on
spreading King Arthur all over Britain.
On the Mynydd Y Gaer at Caer Caradoc is the ruin of a very ancient church – St.
Peter Super Montem. This is the church of perpetual service. So with Llantwit
Major still standing, and Bangor Wrydin excavated at Whithorn in Galloway,
and the Caer Caradoc church still extant, we find all three. The outstanding
feature of the church at Caer Caradoc – 200 yards from the Fort-Caer – is that it
is larger than the usual mortuary chapels and churches of the kings. There were
hundreds of these small churches scattered across Wales, with one royal person
per church. This was the pattern, and it is consistent. This mountain church is
nowhere near any centre of population, and therefore its size and position is
curious. This is partly explained by the fact that it was a national shrine of
perpetual worship listed twice in the Triads as being at Caer Caradoc.
The identification of this mountain and its ruins as Caer Caradoc is indeed
momentous, for we have the Twyn – burial mound – of King Caradoc who
fought the Romans. We have the slopes of Bryn Caradoc and above them a Caer,
or castle, which is therefore logically Caer Caradoc. At the Western end of the
mountain we have a monument known today and down through the centuries as
the Mynwent y Milwyr – The Monument of the Soldiers – built at Caer Caradoc.
As the war King Teithfallt is clearly said to have built the Mynwent y Milwyr at
the place known as Caer Caradoc, this is proof positive of the identification.
It is what follows next that is to us stupendous in its simple clarity. Emrys
Wledig not only raised the Mynwent Milwyr at Caer Caradoc, St. Peter’s church
at Caer Caradoc is stated to be the meeting place between the Prince Myrddyn
Emrys and the ambassadors of Gwrtheyn – Vortigern – in the historical Bruts.
The grave mound of King Caradoc ap Arch who fought the Romans circa 42-51 A.D. on the highest
point of Mynydd Y Gaer and Caer Caradoc.
Photograph by Chris Barber

The ruins of Caer Caradoc – the castle of Caractacus on Mynydd Y Gaer – fortress mountain. Here
Caradoc lived circa 20-51 A.D. and here the treachery of the Long Knives plotted by Hengist the
Saxon took place circa 456 A.D.
Photograph by Chris Barber

The Triads of Brllain say in Series III, Triad No. 84:
The three principal choirs in the i|le of Britain – Bangor llltyd
Ffarchog (the knight) in Caer Worgorn – Cor Emrys in Caer
Caradoc – and Bangor Wydrin in the isle of Afallach
In the Essay on Coelbren 9 Breirdd, this is expanded to:
The three congresses of continued song of the isle of Britain –
the Congress of Beiscawen in Dyfnwal; the Congress of Caer Caradoc
in Lloegres, and the Congress of Bryn Gwyddon in Cymru
From this it is obvious that the church of Cor Emrys at Caer Caradoc was a very
important place indeed. As a perpetual choir, the monks worked on a shift-work
basis, keeping the services and chants going all through the day and night. On
and on they went with their holy services 24 hours a day, seven days a week, and
for 52 weeks a year; the services never stopped. Emrys Wledig was the great
British Battle Leader before King Arthur, and he not only built the Mwynwent y
Milwyr up on Caer Caradoc at Mynydd y Gaar, he was also buried there by the
church called Cor Emrys. So the original name of the ruin on Caer Caradoc was
Cor Emrys, and only in Norman times, some time after around 1200 A.D., did it
become known as St. Peter Super Montem.
Emrys Wledig – Ambrosius Aurelian – should lie in the Mynwent y Milwyr as
stated. The identification of this great national shrine of the British nation is
however only part of the story. It was the nation's church of Notre Dame, or
Westminster Abbey, a place of great national remembrance and sanctity.
THE STORY OF CAER CARADOC ON MYNYDD Y GAER
The story of Caer Caradoc on the Mynydd Y Gaer is told in the Brut of Gryffydd
ap Arthur, the Brut of Tyssilio and the Triads. It is possibly the true place where
King Caradoc fought the Roman legions under the General Ostorius Scapula; it
was Caradoc's stronghold. The traditional site of the battle between the British
king of South East Wales and the Roman invaders is Hereford Beacon above
Colwall in Hereford, on the Eastern borders of the Silures kingdom. A huge
hillfort crowns the hilltop, and the site fits the secondhand description recorded
by Tacitus. Caradoc would have had to fight on his eastern borders as he had
several hundred thousand women, children and old people to protect. Whereas,
the mercenaries of the Roman legions had only themselves to consider.
As we said, the town of Bran is close to the slopes of Caradoc's heights, and
there is the huge grave mound of Bran. There also is the church of Ilid, the
chaplain of Bran, and the fountain and wood of Ceri, the ancestor of Caradoc.
The fort on Caradoc's heights is that of Caradoc – Caer Caradoc.
The story of the mountain opens with the seizure of power by King Gwytheyrn
Vortigern around 455 A.D. Constantine, the Blessed of Lloegres, was dead, and
his son Constans was used first as a puppet by Gwytheyrn, and then either died
or was murdered by Gwytheyrn. The old drunkard Gwytheyrn is said to have
lived in fear of Emrys, the brother of Constans, who was over in Britanny, and so
he brought Saxons under Hengist and Horsa into Britain as allies. After failing to
control the Saxons, war broke out and Gwytheyrn was thrust aside by King
Gwythelyn, the son of Meurig of Dyfed. The Saxons were crushed, and then
Gwythelyn was either poisoned or died of battle wounds. Old Gwytheyrn again
seized power, and a peace conference was arranged between the defeated Saxons
and the victorious British. The conference was held at Caer Caradoc, which we
now know is on Mynydd y Gaer.

The tomb of St. Dyfrig who crowned King Arthur. The tomb was rebuilt in A.D. 1120 by Bishop
Urban.

The remains of the Circle of the Soldiers Monument by Emrys Wledig – Ambrosius Aurelian – at
Caer Caradoc on Mynydd Y Gaer.
Photograph by Chris Barber

There can be little doubt that crafty old Gwytheyrn arranged this peace meeting,
where both sides were to attend unarmed. Well, as everyone knows, the Saxons
as usual broke their word, and brought concealed weapons with them. When
much beer had been drunk, at a prearranged signal, they drew their weapons and
murdered their hosts. Gwytheyrn had married Rowena, the daughter of the
Saxon chieftain Hengist, and he alone was spared and taken in chains. Three
British noblemen escaped, one being Eldol the Duke of Gaerloyw. Now Eldol is
said to be the brother of St. Eldad, who was a very real person traced back to the
mighty king, so our understanding of the horrific massacre at Caer Caradoc is on
solid ground.
The Saxons turned and fled into Lloegres in England destroying as they went,
and seizing towns and property. Emrys Wledig came storming over from
Britanny and went after Hengist and his brother Horsa, leading the furious
British armies. Hengist was caught and executed by Duke Eldol, and Horsa and
the Saxon remnant were given lands to settle in the North in Scotland. The now-
terrified Gwytheyrn fled back to Morganwg and was refused entry. So he fled to
his stronghold at Nant Gwrtheyn in North West Wales. Em means jewelled or
crown, and Rhys means prince. So Em-Rhys Wledig means the Crown Prince
and Legate. And he was actually King Teithfallt.
Emrys Wledig came back to Caer Caradoc on Mynydd y Gaer in Glamorgan
where the bodies of the murdered lords lay, and he raised up the monument
known as Mynwent y Milwyr at Caer Caradoc, and buried the dead. This
Mynwent y Milwyr is still clearly marked upon modern maps. It was
remembered down through the ages, and every Welsh man, woman and child
remembered the story of the massacre all through the long centuries.
Caer Caradoc is still there and the Mynwent y Milwyr is still there. Close to the
Caer of Caradoc is the Twyn or Grave Mound of King Caradoc high on the
mountain. Next Emrys Wledig had a church rebuilt at Caer Caradoc, and this
still stands in ruin upon the mountain - a silent witness of the British nation's
past. Down below the Mynwent y Milwyr is another grave mound called the
Grave of the Soldiers, traditionally the grave of the soldiers killed in defeating
the Saxons, buried below the dead lords on the hill-top.
Last of all Emrys Wledig died around 500 A.D., and he was buried at Caer
Caradoc. There can be no doubt that he lies here near Cor Emrys on the
mountain. There was never any population here on this mountain, and there is no
apparent reason for building a church, which was very large by sixth century
standards. The reason is that it is the memorial to the dead of the massacre, a
monument of national remembrance, and the tomb of the much loved and
victorious Emrys Wledig.

The Secret Valley of Nant Gwytheryn from about 1,000 feet. The Castle of Gwytheyrn-Vortigern is on
the seashore below the trees at the bottom left corner.

The castle mound of Vortigern with the grave of Gwytheyrn at the bottom right.

The collection of five ancient monuments, all named, on one mountain is unique.
The story of what happened on the mountain is one of the best known and
remembered in all British history. What it means is that all three of the great war
kings of Britain can be located very accurately. King Caradoc ap Arch in his
mound tomb; Emrys Wledig ap Cystennhyn Bendigaid, near his Mynwent y
Milwyr; King Meurig in the Giant Circle; and King Arthur, a few miles south in
his cave at Coed y Mwstyr woods above the Ewenny River, which runs down
from Mynydd y Gaer, before being brought up for burial on the Mynydd Y Gaer.
There is corroborative evidence of all this in the story of King Tewdrig ap
Teithfallt being up at Garthmarthrin in Brecon with his magistrates and senators
when the Saxon war erupted. The king sent his daughter, Marchel, west to
Ireland, and her bodyguard fought off Saxon attacks at three named places
before she took ship at the great port of the West for Ireland. There she married
Anlach Coronog and their son was Brychan of Brecon. It was the practice for the
commanding general of the British to be chosen from all the royal clan, and only
if the king was the best man was he chosen as the military leader. After Emrys
Wledig, the military power passed to King Tewdrig under his title the Uthyr
Pendragon, which means the Wonderful Commander in Chief.
A few miles northeast of the Cor Emrys on Mynydd y Gaer, one of his sons
named Tewdwr Mawr has his huge tumulus mound alongside the church at the
top of Mynydd Islwyn. A bare three miles south east of the tomb of Emrys,
another of his sons is place named at Caer Gwyndaf, and Gwyndaf Hen married
Gwenonwy, a daughter of King Meurig and sister of King Arthur. The Prince
Tewdwr Mawr is probably the father of St. Canna of Canton in Cardiff and
Pontcanna fields in the city. She married the well-recorded St. Sadwrn of
Llandock, also in the city of Cardiff. None of this is coincidence; it is all very
solid fact. A third son of Emrys was Alan Ffyrgan, who is remembered at Coed
Alan and Castle upon Alan in Glamorgan. This Prince Alan is again well
recorded in the Triads as fighting for King Arthur at the famous Battle of
Camlan.
Quite amazingly, the Brut of Gryffydd ap Arthur, Matthew of Westminster and
the Brut of Tyssilio place Emrys Wledig at Caerwynt – which is Caer Went, a
huge fortress ruin still standing in Gwent – yet this is translated as Winchester in
England.
THE GRAVE OF KING GWYTHEYRN – VORTIGERN
Inevitably, the story of Gwytheyrn has duplicate sites. We have mentioned the
tale told by Florence of Worcester locating Gwytheyrn on the Wye at Little
Dorward, which may or may not be true for Gwytheyrn I. There appear to be
two kings named Gwytheyrn, however, and one of them is well authenticated as
located on the Lleyn Peninsula in North Wales. Here in a hidden and almost
totally inaccessible valley, King Gwytheyrn had his castle stronghold close to the
cliffs. The valley is surrounded on three sides by precipitous mountain cliffs,
which fall steep and sheer for 900 feet, and on the fourth, north side, lies the sea,
a rock-strewn beach and tumbled cliffs. Even today getting into Nant Gwrtheyrn
is a scramble down the so-called modern track cut into the mountainside. Here a
slate mining village and two farms were established, and now both lie derelict.
The village was reconstructed as a Welsh language centre, a mile and a half from
LIithfaen.

Vortigern’s Castle in Nant Gwytheyrn close to the seashore at the northern end of the Hidden Valley.
Some vestiges of walls remain on the fort, which is surrounded by a marsh.

The grave of King Gwytheyrn-Vortigern below his castle on the cliffs above the sea. A square of
stones lays where a tall man was buried.

The castle of Gwrtheyrn is on the eastern shore of the valley, close to the sea,
and vestiges of old earth and stone walls are still on top of the very steep hill
with its flat top. Down below, the castle, on a shelf on land between it and the
sea cliffs, is the grave of King Gwrtheyrn. Samuel Lewis describes the opening
of the grave in his book of 1833, when the skeleton of a tall man was unearthed
– the king. The grave resembles a Dark Age church ruin shape, surrounded by
low stone walls. The castle itself is surrounded by bog land and must be one of
the most difficult places to approach in all of Britain. Whether this is Gwrtheyrn-
Vortigern of around 470 A.D., or King Gwrtheyrn II of around 570 A.D. is
possibly debatable. North Wales tradition holds that the seashore castle of
Gwrtheyrn was struck by lightening and burned. There is a sombre magic about
the fortress valley, and once again a king's body was found exactly where it was
said to be.
THE GRAVE OF KING RHYDDERCH AP LESTYN
KING OF WALES 1021-1031 A.D.
It would be remarkable if the senior kings of Wales as late as the 11th century
A.D. were buried in unknown graves – lost and forgotten. We know that King
Rhydderch ap lestyn ruled as paramount king of Wales from 1021-1031 A.D.
and that this warrior king was killed in a battle with the Saxons. Probably a
combined Danish-Saxon army, for England was then under foreign kings as it is
now. King Rhydderch – Richard – who was killed defending his country, would
have earned the gratitude and respect of his nation, and he should therefore be
respectably buried in the land he was killed defending.
Above the centre of the town known today as Bridgend there is a hill. On this
hill stands the scant ruin of a castle. As usual we are immediately confronted
with the false English propaganda that this cannot be a Welsh castle on the
grounds that of all the nations of Europe, only the advanced culture of the highly
civilised and developed Welsh were incapable of castle building. Leaving the
lies aside, we can proceed to this castle, where at least two rectangular buildings
have been located by excavating archaeologists in the precincts. This fits Welsh
custom of two halls, one for the king and one for visitors and guests. One of
these buildings has or had a central hearth, again an ancient feature.
Close to this Welsh castle ruin there is a church. This again is a common Welsh
feature with the church adjoining the castle. Formerly the church was dedicated
to a St. Leonard in Mediaeval times but has since been rededicated to St. Illtyd.
It has been suggested that the present vicarage stands on the site of the original
church, and apparently some of the vicarage architecture dates back to the 1100-
1200 A.D. period.

Church of St. Illtyd Tombstone of King Castle of King

Bridgend with new Rhydderch under the Rhydderch, a replica
castle of King church towe. of the castle of Iestyn
Rhydderch behind the Rhydderch was king of ap Gwrgan at Denys
church. all Wales from 1021 to Powys.
1031 A.D. Photographs by
Chris Barber

The general rule of Welsh churches of ancient origin was one king or prince per
church. So all ancient church foundations have to be viewed as potential Royal
mortuary churches. The reason for looking in the Glamorgan area in general for
King lestyn's son, King Rhydderch, is simple. Whereas, both King Aedan ap
Blegwyrd was killed in battle in North Wales fighting the Prince Llewellyn ap
Iorwerth, and so was his successor King Meurig ap King Hywel, the King
Rhydderch ap Iestyn was killed defending his homeland from the hordes of the
Danish King Canute of England. Therefore, both Aedan and Meurig would
probably have mound graves near the battlefields in the North. The King
Rhydderch would have a religious burial somewhere in Glamorgan.
At the Bridgend church of St. Illtyd, there is an ancient tombstone. Fortunately
this stone, which ties beneath the tower, is inscribed. The inscription has been
estimated as of the period around 1000 A.D. and this is obviously very
interesting. The stone is of the coped type with a curved top. Along the length of
the apex of the stone there is a stylised row of entwined lozenges representing
the Tree of Life, so popular with the western church. The trunk of the tree
finishes with a cross of expanded limbs. Above are interlaced designs, and on
the right side is an inscription. This is in capitals, and has been judged to be from
around 1000 A.D. It reads:
HIC IACET RICARDVS EONIT HURRVON LAPIDEON
Here lies Rhydderch the true shepherd lit – with his true sheep
So we have Rhydderch, Ricardus in Latin, which becomes Richard in English.
Then there are two other inscriptions on the stone. They read:
ONERERB FECIT LAPIDEON EONIT HUREVON LAPIDEON
Mererb made the stone Hurewon bought the stone
So Mererb, which is Merchiawn, made the stone and Hurewon, who is
Herewald, bought it. The probability is that Merchiawn and Herewald are sons
of King Rhydderch and brothers. This is born out by several Llandaff Charters
that name Merchiawn ap Rhydderch as an important prince of the period, and the
Charters of Merchiawn are witnessed by the important cleric Herewald. This
Herewald later became Bishop of Llandaff and continued in that office until he
died at over 100 years around 1104 A.D. It is again standard practice for the
Bishop of Llandaff, the chief Bishop of Wales, to be a son or brother of the king.
The evidence of the Dynasty of the kings of Glamorgan and Gwent goes on
piling up. Here we have King Rhydderch, king of all Wales and all the British.
He represents one of the last opportunities of the British-Welsh to resist the
Norman-Danish-English flood of destruction. Had he survived the battle in
which he drove back the Danish-English armies, then the whole history of Wales
and Britain might have been different, and Gryffydd ap Llewellyn would never
have risen in North Wales to tear the country in two. He was in fact the last
Arthurian king to rule all Wales.

The effigy of the Great Martyr at Merthyr Mawr in the centre of the old church site. It’s almost
certainly King Aidan, son of Blegywyrd, king of Wales, 1000-1019 A.D. The tomb was covered by a
roof until around 1860 when a new church was built. It is now eroding badly, but the main features,
including the dog at the King's feet, can still be seen.



PART SEVEN: THE FINAL EVALUATION
Baram Blackett first approached Alan Wilson in mid 1976 and suggested that
they both collaborate in setting up a definitive search for King Arthur of Britain.
It was agreed at the outset that the investigation should be conducted on the lines
of a detailed modern industrial engineering survey. In all the various major
master-planning activities in which Alan Wilson had participated, there had
always been what he could only describe as at least one unknown or
unanticipated factor. There was no reason why the King Arthur project should
not also throw up at least one unexpected or unknown factor in the same way.
The exercise was designed to examine all relevant information in minute detail
and it was hoped that two possible sources of new information would now be
uncovered. First it was anticipated that there might have been significant
misidentifications that could be cleared up, and that there might also be
something somewhere that everyone else had missed or ignored as the second
source.
The first source of misidentification proved to be an area of almost unbelievable,
very good quality, new information. Any study of the history of the kings of
South East Wales shows that beyond all shadow of doubt, no king could have
held courts there at either Caerleon or Camelot – Caer-Melyn – unless he was a
king in the area, and head of the royal clan of the House of Bran. Therefore King
Arthur had to be one and the same with his alter ego or contemporary King
Arthwyr ap Meurig ap Tewdrig. On top of this, there was the quite extraordinary
muddle over Uthyr Pendragon, with Uthyr, which means wonderful or perhaps
amazing – being confused with Uther, a derivation of the name Gwyther
meaning Victor. On top of this, there is the quite extraordinary lack of interest in
correctly dating Tewdrig ap Teithfallt listed as killed in battle in 509 A.D. in the
Anglo-Saxon Chronicles.
Misidentifications abound as the historical story became distorted, and more and
more facts were twisted in order to fit the corrupted tale. The Crooked Glen of
Camlan, which lies clearly marked on maps of all periods, just south of
Dollgellau, is somehow transferred to some place in Cornwall. The area of
Affallach or Aballach, which was the Roman Valentia, so named after the
Emperor Valentinian, is also inexplicably transported into southern England,
when it is clearly the area between Hadrian's Wall of the Tyne and Solway Firth,
and Glasgow and Edinburgh on the Forth and the Clyde in the North. Cerniw in
South East Wales becomes confused with Cornwall, and the whole geography of
King Arthur's Britain is pulled all over the place. The muddle is in fact
enormous, and the effort to transfer Arthur away from his main kingdom in
South East Wales becomes frantic and also unscrupulous. There are in fact too
many misidentifications and mistakes.
Only by sticking to the prescribed, industrial-type investigation is it possible to
get the story right. The Invisible kingdom of Britain re-emerges from the mists
of time, and King Arthur takes his place amongst the line of kings of this chief
dynasty of Britain. Whilst the process of identifying mistakes and
misidentifications turned up a mass of information – almost too much to handle
– the other more important target of seeking out some fact that everyone else had
missed proved more difficult. What was unusual was complete lack of previous
research into the burial customs of the kings of Britain. The transition from great
tumulus mounds to a Christian combination of tumulus mound and church as a
form of royal mortuary chapel had not been identified, nor had the disappearance
of the tumulus mound altogether and the transition to burying the king inside the
chuch in the right-hand-of-God position.
The Glamorgan and Gwent Bards preserved a great deal of information on the
burial places of the kings of the area, and this had generally been ignored. The
Songs of the Graves in the Black Book of Carmarthen – Englynion Beddau
Milwyr ynys Prydain – and the Song of Graves from the Book of Thomas
Williams – Physgwyr – and the Book of William Salisbury of Lanrwst – the
Englynnion y Beddau – both give a vast mass of traceable information. Other
ancient poetry and antiquarian information also contains much similar
information on the last resting places of the kings and princes. Even the Book of
Llandaff mentions the graves of some of the kings. All we find on King Arthur
in the Songs of the Graves is that his grave is not known, and this in itself is
utterly extraordinary in a country where ancestry was the one paramount
obsession, and where the graves of the kings, princes, saints, abbots and bishops
were marked, recorded, and identified, and the information passed on down
through the generations. To actually lose the most important and the greatest of
the kings was, in fact, impossible.
The situation was even more bizarre as it was possible to identify the grave of
King Tewdrig ap Teithfallt, the grandfather of King Arthur, with certainty. Even
the grave of King Meurig ap Tewdrig, the father of King Arthur, can be located
in the rebuilt church at Llandaff which he built around 500-550 A.D. The grave
is 12th century, rebuilt when the cathedral was rebuilt and enlarged and lies at
the right-hand-of-God location. By the skeleton effigy, it is clearly that of the
king and not an incorruptible abbot or bishop. The son of King Arthur is said to
lie at Margam, and the stone slab to the north side of the ruined abbey may well
cover King Morgan Mwynfawr. By tradition, the saint and bishop, Dyfrig,
crowned King Arthur, and this close kinsman of the royal clan lies also in
Llandaff, close to the founders tomb in the North Wall, just where he was
reburied in 1120 A.D. after his bones were dug up and brought from Bardsey
Island. The next chief Bishop of Arthur was the fanatical David, and his bones
lie in a chest behind the altar of his western cathedral in Menevia – St. David's.
The third bishop of Arthur was Teilo, another leading saint, and he lies opposite
Meurig and Dyfrig in Llandaff.
With all Arthur's close ancestors and bishops so readily traceable, the mystery
over the location of the king's grave is even more incredible. The only possible
explanation to offer itself in the investigation was that the secrecy of the king's
burial was part of a very deliberate plan. Nothing much could harm King Arthur
once he was dead, and so there was only the obvious reconstruction of King
Arthur's first and older son Llacheu, or Llecheu, being killed in the Vandal War
of 548 A.D., and the king, choosing Gwalchmai, his nephew, in preference to
Medrawd – Modred – his brother as his heir. With both these warlike nephews
killed in the civil war battle at Camlan near Dollgellau, King Arthur married
again. When he died around 575 A.D., his sons Morgan, Ithael and Gwaednerth,
were all very young. One brother of Arthur still lived and he was Frioc.
Whatever the details of the political situation at the time, it was deemed
necessary to keep Arthur's death a very close secret. Later, as the Book of
Llandaff records, the young King Morgan killed his uncle Frioc the brother of
Arthur and everything points to a dynastic struggle.
At first, the investigation was itself misled by the common historical notion that
St. Illtyd might have died in the early part of the sixth century. This was not
borne out by the many parallels with the personalities said to have been kinsmen,
associates, or pupils of St. Illtyd, and the way in which they seemed to fit into
the historical picture. Examination of a very old mediaeval "Life" text of St.
Illtyd showed something quite extraordinary, for there in this story of the Life of
this very close kinsman of King Arthur was a clear description of a secret burial.
The reason for the secret burial was not stated, but in a land where all important
burials of important people were a matter of common knowledge, and recorded
in song and poetry, any secret burial is an extraordinary event. It is totally alien
to the entire philosophy and culture of the nation. So we have two exceptional
situations, as the only major king whose burial place is unknown is King Arthur,
and also this clear and factual description of an event contrary to all custom and
tradition – a secret burial. This information held in Section 22 of the "Life of
Illtyd" now assumed new and unbelievably exciting importance in the
investigation. All along, the whole study had been rigidly and inflexibly
controlled, treating all matters large and small in the same analytical manner.
Now there was information that was of a new dimension and the same discipline
had to be imposed.
Remarkably, the "Life of Illtyd" stated exactly where the saint had been living in
a cave at one stage of his life. It was not clear in the story whether he was still in
the same cave when he carried out the secret burial or elsewhere, but the odds
seemed to favour the fact that he was. The problem with Illtyd was the same as
with almost all Welsh saints, for he moved around the kingdom. His most
frequent location was the great teaching monastery college at Caerworgan, now
Llanilltyd Fawr, and here along the seacoast were a great number of caves. There
are also churches dedicated to Illtyd on the Gower and here also there are caves
of some importance. Illtyd himself lies buried in Brecon, and again there are
caves. Yet the location mentioned in the story of his life is the Ewenny River
right in the centre of Glamorgan, and along this river there are churches
dedicated to Illtyd, and there is a cave. The cave is above the junction of the
Ewenny and the Ogmore rivers, a huge strange cavern, and another great cave
lies at Coychurch just north of Bridgend, again a mystic cave. There are others in
the mountains of the Blaenau of Glamorgan where the river rises. The story even
names the cave, calling it Lingarth, and there is a cave in the Garth Mountains.
Lingarth, however, appears to mean smooth, or even cobweb cave.
The investigation had now reached a stage that was far beyond the anticipation
of the researchers when they had first begun to search for the enigmatic king
named Arthur. There was now information that named a cave close to the
Ewenny River in central Glamorgan as the dwelling of St. Illtyd, and the place
where the body of a very important man was brought in secret for burial.
Everything pointed to this event being the burial of King Arthur himself, and it
was now possible to actually plan the search of clearly known locations with the
definite objective of actually digging up the king. We now had much better
information with which to work, and the whole detailed exercise of painstaking
and rigorous examination of everything from scratch was beginning to pay off.
Enough was known about the habits and customs of the Welsh of King Arthur's
time to now make an attempt to find the king.
The kings were Christian, so there would necessarily be a Christian burial. All
saints, abbots and bishops were members of the royal clans, so the holy man
performing the burial of King Arthur would be someone close to him. This ruled
out David, Teilo and Asaph, and several others, who were of the west and north
sections of the royal clans, and the holy man would have had to be a close
kinsman of King Arthur – either from Glamorgan and Gwent or from Britanny.
Two immediate candidates for the job were St. Paul ap Meurig ap Tewdrig, a
brother of King Arthur ap Meurig, and the King's uncle St. Cyhylyn ap Tewdrig
ap Teithfallt, a brother of Arthur's father Meurig. The older St. Gwythelin ap
Teithfallt, an uncle of Tewdrig, was not a possible candidate, and in the absence
of any clear information on these members of the king's immediate family, we
were left with St. Illtyd, who is said in the "Life of Illtyd" to have had dealings
with King Paulinus who is probably the St. Paul ap Meurig whose tombstone is
at Merthyr Mawr near the sea.
Illtyd was regarded as being the wisest of the wise men, even rated above Cadoc
Doeth – Cadoc the Wise – and the very learned Gildas, and he would be a
natural choice to turn to for help in a time of crisis. The problem was to locate
Illtyd at the time when he carried out the strange, secret burial. Examination of
his life story gave very definite directions, for the saint was earlier said to be
living in a cave above the Ewenny River. This information was contained in the
story of how St. Gildas made a bell and then sent it as a present to St. David. The
monk who carried the bell rang it as he walked along, and the noise of the bell
was heard by Illtyd who was living secretly in isolation in his cave near the
Ewenny River. So Illtyd came out of the cave and spoke to the surprised monk,
and admired the bell that Gildas, the friend of Arthur, had made. When this story
was related to St. David down at Menevia in Dyfed, he told the monk to take the
bell and give it as a present to St. Illtyd who had admired it, and this the monk
did. At the time it seems that no one had seen Illtyd for a year and a day, or three
years and three days in some antiquarian records, and his reappearance when he
heard the bell was something of a surprise to everyone.
So we have Illtyd firmly placed in an isolated cave somewhere near some part of
the Ewenny River. If we knew the starting place of the monk's journey to Dyfed
to see David, we might have better information to reconstruct the route.
However, further on in the story of Illtyd's life, we have the information that he
was dwelling in a cave called Lingarth. So we have the actual name of the cave
in the sixth century, and the assumption that we tentatively made was that Illtyd
was living in the same cave, and had not moved. There is, in fact, nothing
unusual about old Welsh saints living in caves, for the common belief appears to
have been that to deprive oneself of the pleasures and good things in this life was
a practice that accumulated merit and made certain of a better life in the heaven
of the hereafter. The strange story of the secret burial is in Section 22 of the
"Life of Illtyd", and it is as follows:
On a certain day as he sat in the mouth of the cave, he saw a small ship
proceeding and approaching the shore, that it might come to the sea side, and he
beheld two very respectable persons rowing in the ship. And so Illtyd went out to
meet it, and with gladness uttered words of salutation – and they after a short
conversation gave to Illtyd the perfumed body of a certain very holy man,
mentioning his name and after mentioning it, forbade him ever to publish it, and
having consigned the body to the blessed St. Illtyd they returned. These things
having taken place he brought the body with the altar which was on the face of
the very holy man, and honourably buried it in the cave – with the altar placed
over the body as it had been supported by divine power, through which many
miracles were performed on account of its holiness.
There appeared to be only one possible candidate for this strange burial, and that
one is King Arthur. Here we are concerned only with Arthur and the fact that of
all the kings and princes only King Arthur was buried secretly. We also had a
second written reference to a grave/altar stone.
The first and possibly the most misleading assumption that could have been
made was that the cave of Illtyd was on the seashore or near it, and this needed
to be tested. In fact by going to the headwaters and tributary streams of the
Ewenny River where they run down from the Glamorgan hills, it was easily
possible to establish that a very clear view of the estuary of the Ogmore and
Ewenny Rivers was available. On most days, when there was no rain about,
small boats could in fact be seen in the estuary from these heights some 10 to 12
miles away. So taking into account the fact that the "Life of Illtyd" had been
recopied and rewritten around 800 years ago, many centuries after the time of
Arthur and Illtyd, it was not safe to interpret the statement of the ship coming to
the seashore too literally. The story is too brief and cryptic, and messengers
could easily have been sent in advance to Illtyd, who could have been waiting
for the ship to arrive.
We therefore split the different areas where Illtyd might have been into zones.
There was the Gower Zone where Illtyd dedicated churches are found, but that
was not a very strong possibility at all. Then there was the Llanilltyd Fawr Zone,
taking in the area around Illtyd's colleges and monastery along the seashores at
Llantwit Major, and this again was included as a means of covering all
possibilities and leaving out no possible area that might prove to be the right
one. Most important however, was the Ewenny River Zone, which was then
divided up into areas for search. These areas were the Area 1 based on the
conjunction of the Ogmore and Ewenny Rivers to the south of Bridgend, and the
Area 2 based on the Coychurch Mid-Glamorgan area through which the Ewenny
River flows, North of Bridgend; and finally, Area 3 which was the headwaters
area of the Ewenny River up in the Llanharan, and Llanharry, and Mynedd y
Gaer and Mynedd Garth areas.

On its face, this now

appears to be a very straightforward exercise, but this is in fact far from being
the case. There was always an acute shortage of money, no matter how simply a
search is done it requires money. Then there was the fact that modern South East
Wales is a very heavily populated area, and there was a definite requirement to
keep the search as quiet as possible, and to attract as little attention as possible.
Most of the problems arose however out of the sheer size of the areas that had to
somehow now be searched and examined in detail. A small army of helpers was
wanted, and there was only Baram Blackett, Alan Wilson and Michael Blackett,
a brother of Baram Blackett, to do the job. At one stage, a meeting was arranged
with some expert cavers in the Midlands, with the intention to recruit assistance
of a specialized and expert nature. These people failed to turn up to a second
meeting, and it was clear that they regarded the project and probably the
searchers as quite mad. This was the normal response in Britain to any
approaches made at any level.
One major problem was that whilst it was clear that the monk carrying the bell
from Gildas to David was heading for Menevia, his starting point for the journey
was unknown. The most likely monastery from which he set out would be either
Llancarfan or Llanilltyd Fawr, both set in the Vale of Glamorgan. But there was
nothing to indicate that he might not have set out from Usk, Caerleon or one of
several other places. This meant that it was difficult to estimate just where on the
old road system he would have forded the Ewenny River, for this tracing of a
possible route would have been of some value in estimating where he might
have met with Illtyd. That the story of the bell is true was never doubted, for
there is too much known of this famous bell. It is preserved in Llantwit Major
today, and is also part of recorded history. When in 962 A.D., Edgar, king of the
Saxons, raided South Wales, he burned the colleges and monastery of the very
civilised Llanilltyd Fawr and stole the bell of St. Illtyd. Then, on his way back
home, this superstitious man became worried about the holy bell, and so he sent
it back to Llanilltyd Fawr. The bell was to remain where it belonged. Whether
the bell there today is the genuine relic or not is of no concern to this search, but
certainly the Llanilltyd Fawr bell had a momentous and very unusual history. It
is difficult to imagine the shrieks that would have come out of England if the
Welsh or Scots burned down Oxford Cambridge.
As we will show, there are several routes that could have been taken by the bell-
carrying monk on his way from St. Gildas to St. David in the far West. This
meant that he could have crossed the river at three different places, and much
depended upon where he was when he set out on his journey. So the search of
the zones began, and in order to preserve secrecy, there was no all-out
concentration on one area at a time. If people are seen too frequently in areas,
then local inhabitants wonder who they are, and what they are doing, and they
start to ask questions. The investigation was switched around from area to area,
in order to avoid raising curiousity. Wet weather proved to be very favourable
for moving about, for most people stay indoors, or keep their heads down in
poor, wet visibility and are less likely to notice anyone else. There was an
element of the bizarre about the whole situation, for there are some 2.5 million
people living in the South Wales area – all moving around between the relics and
remains of King Arthur's kingdom. To conduct a search for a king who died
some 1,400 years ago, in secret, in such an area where most of the population
works in modern industry, needs some mental adjustment. Ancient kings seem to
be associated with Egyptian deserts, and mud-baked Mesopotamian plains. In
Britain, the academics appear always to have headed for rural areas away from
modern centres of heavy population. Possibly, they let their imagination play too
great a part in the mental process of evaluating the evidence, and seek places that
even today resemble what they imagine was sixth century Britain. There is also
the peculiar desire to steal Arthur and transfer him into what is today England,
and possibly this is a fruitful area for psychiatric examination.
It was possible to eliminate the Llanilltyd Fawr Zone after a search of the coastal
caves showed absolutely nothing. Further to this the undoubted coastal erosions
of 1,400 years of time would have probably moved the cliff line back a
considerable distance and destroyed any shoreline cave used by Illtyd. There was
the famous holy cave at Tresilian Bay to evaluate, for this is not far from
Llanilltyd Fawr. Here there was a cave that was for a long period used for
marriage ceremonies, and this continued into modern times. The parents of
General Picton were said to have been married in this cave – Picton was one of
the senior commanders under the Duke of Wellington at the Battle of Waterloo,
and the practice was only ended by church pressure around 1800 A.D. Welsh
marriage customs were by tradition anciently a civil matter of contract and not a
matter for church interference.
Further to the west, the caves of the Gower Penninsula were looked at simply
because they were close to areas of churches with Illtyd dedications. They are
nowhere near the Ewenny River, but they had to be eliminated from the search.
These Gower caves have, in fact, been extensively explored, and they have
yielded unusual information. One cave at Paviland is well known for here in
1823, a Dr. Buckland found the skeleton of a man, which he thought was a
woman. The skeleton became known as the Red Lady of Paviland and was
pronounced to be early Stone Age. The bones were indeed red in colour. This
was ascribed to the seepage of water through ore bearing rocks, causing
discolouration of the bones. The problem is, however, one where human beings
frequently dig down deep to bury the dead, and so the level at which the bones
were found in the strata of cave floor probably bears no resemblance to the level
of the period in which the man lived. Now, 100 years later, there is another story,
with the Red Lady or Paviland Man being described as a Bronze Age hunter,
from a period when it was customary to colour the bones of the dead with red
ochre. Another cave nearby is called the Goat's Hole. One very unusual cave lies
at Port Eynon, and is known as the Culver Hole. It is remarkable because there
were buildings inside it, what appears to have been a three storey defensive
structure. So at some time there was a fortified dwelling in the cave or
alternatively a prison. The problem with the Gower was too many caves, and no
connection with the Ewenny River, but nonetheless, they provided clear
evidence of cave burials and cave dwellings of masonry.
The Paviland Man skeleton is now at the Swansea Institute.
There could be no doubt that regardless of cold analytical approaches and rigid
disciplines of evaluation of facts, the best chances of finding anything connected
with either St. Illtyd or King Arthur lay in the three areas of the Ewenny River
zone. Here the weight of back-up evidence that was needed to support the field
researches was in fact extraordinary. The diagrams that we exhibit best illustrate
this.
Area 1 of the Ewenny River zone was basically the area surrounding Ogmore
Castle and the Ewenny Priory. This area is close to the shores of the Severn, and
it is here that the two rivers, the Ogmore and the Ewenny, join about a half mile
from the Severn. The result is a Y-shaped water feature, and the area within the
fork of the Y is of considerable importance. It is the only place along the Severn
River inside the territories of King Arthur that matches the description of the
gathering place of King Arthur's armies before the epic Battle of Badon as
described in the Mabinogi Tale known as "The Dream of Rhonabwy". As we
will show, the area has remarkable features that may connect with Arthur
including inscribed stones of Paul, his brother, St. Cyhelyn, his great uncle, and
the gravestone of Nertat.
Area 2 of the Ewenny River zone basically centres in the area surrounding
Coychurch, where again there are connecting features and possible links with the
sixth century saints. The Coychurch area is steeped in antiquity, for here the
stones inscribed to Ebissar were found. They date from the sixth century period,
and name Ebissar as the founder of the church there. The only person named
Ebissar who can be identified anywhere is the opponent of King Arthur named
Ebissar, and it was not unusual for a defeated enemy to be allowed to live if he
became a Christian monk; this is exactly what Arthur's grandfather King
Tewdrig did to the Irish chieftain Fingar when he defeated him in Cornwall. The
old church is dedicated to St. Crallo another saint of this sixth century period,
and so there may well have been a monastic institution here. No evidence of this
survives, and it is not impossible that this is one of the unidentified charter areas
of Llandaff, or that none of the charters relating to it survived.
A mile north of Coychurch is the site of the Gaer – the ancient fort. The location
of no less than two important Dark Age battle sites on the hill above the Coed y
Mwstwr woods indicates that this was a main highway route of some
importance, and a fording point across the River Ewenny. There is, therefore,
every possibility that the travelling monk carrying the bell from Gildas to Illtyd
crossed the Ewenny here. This again points to the bone cave cavern hidden in
the woods at Coed y Mwstwr above Coychurch, and quite close to the River
Ewenny. Illtyd or other early monks could have used the place as a dwelling.
We know that a powerful king like Arthur would have been properly buried no
matter his manner of death. We also know that the place was, to most Welsh
recorders of the Bardic orders and the church, a complete mystery. This points to
his burial being a secret affair, and the reason for secrecy can only be guessed.
Possibly, his son Morgan was too young to be able to exert any real authority,
and his enemies had to be kept from knowing that Arthur was dead. The
historical signs are that old King Meurig was alive up to this period of Arthur's
death, and there may have been a great weakness in the kingdom if there had
been a civil war. Someone would have to know where Arthur lay buried, and this
means that members of his family would know. The burial would have to be
done by a close relative who was a bishop or abbot, and these people are well
known to us. There can be no doubt that it would be a Christian burial, and some
church would be associated. There also are the persistent folklore legends that
King Arthur lies in a cave.

We have, therefore, a set of specific guidelines to follow. We can rule out

bishops like David and Teilo, for they were of the clan of Cuneda, and were
associated with the ruling families of the North and the West. St. Dyfrig was
probably dead, and that leaves figures like St. Cadoc and St. Illtyd. St. Cadoc is
unlikely because of his distant kinship and his great quarrels with Arthur when
Cadoc hid the murderer of Arthur's brother, Idnerth, and his nephew, Argan. So
there has to be a limit on who would have buried Arthur, and who could have
been trusted sufficiently to keep silent. There is also St. Gildas to consider, for
he was reputedly a friend of Arthur – they even managed reconciliation after
Arthur killed Hueil, the brother of Gildas – and lived for a long time in Gwent
and Glamorgan. Gildas is also connected with a cave, for when Saxon pirates
burned his chapel on the Island of Echni – now misnamed Flat Holm – he hid in
a cave on the island until a British ship took him off. The cave was investigated
before World War I, 1914-1918, but all three chambers were found to be empty.
There were signs of human habitation and use however, recorded by the
expedition. Caves were frequently used by these meditative and hermit-like
saints. The cave on Echni is now dangerous to enter, but it could be cleared to
look at the Gildas story. We were able to do very little there, and it was with
Illtyd that the answer finally lay.
Several learned men have made attempts to actually calculate the date of the
death of Illtyd by using information from the Vita Secunda of Samson, a
manuscript from between 600-700 A.D. This records a conversation between
Samson at Dol in Britanny, and St. Isan of Lisvane and Arthoclus (St. Dionysius
became St. Denis in English; and St. Isan in Welsh). It says that Illtyd will die
and that Arthoclus will die 15 days later, and then Isan will die only 40 days
after that. As St. Isan is celebrated in December 16, some form of calculation is
perhaps possible. Frankly, we doubt this, for the introduction of the Gregorian
present day calendar interferes with even these tenuous calculations. The
evidence indicates that Illtyd buried Arthur.
The cave with which Arthur is connected in the Triads (No. 50, Series 1) is the
cave of Oeth and Anoeth. In the Triad, Arthur spends three days in this cave and
is rescued by his cousin or nephew Gwalchmai – The Hawk of May. The term
Oeth and Anoeth appears to mean "the place of past and future" or the "timeless
creation place". It is the place of the timeless abyss, a place deep in the bowels of
the earth. Our interpretation is the literal one, concealed and revealed, as we will
show. The Triad tells of three most famous prisoners, or recluses and then adds
Arthur as a fourth, who was even greater than the other three. The key word in
the Triad is "Ilech" which has been translated as "flagstone" when it should read,
"skulking". The Triad indicates a king who was shut up in a fortress by a
beseiging enemy king, and not four kings who were actually at different times
put into prison. King Arthur had been caught possibly unprepared, and shut up in
the fortress where the cave of Oeth and Anoeth is, and the person who had done
this was Wen Pendragon. The Wen Pendragon is the White Commander in Chief,
meaning the Lloegrian or the Saxon Leader; it is probably the Saxon. So Arthur
is caught by surprise in a fortress by the Saxon Chief General, and there is a cave
inside the fortress. It is also reasonable to judge that this fortress is close to the
sea in order for this to have occurred. The Triad tells how Gorneu, son of
Cystennhin, the first cousin of Arthur, releases him, or in other words comes to
the relief of the fortress.
The position becomes even more interesting when Triad No. 61 Series 3 also
names Oeth and Anoeth prison caves. This time it names Gair, son of Geirion,
the Lord of Geirionydd, who is shut in the caves prison by the law of the nation
and the people. As later castles often had prison dungeons, so it seems that
somewhere there was a cave that served this purpose. The situation resolves
itself with a fortress in the Glamorgan and Gwent defence systems that has a
cave inside it. This also should be near the sea where Saxon raiders could come
ashore and besiege it before the general alarm could arouse the whole
countryside. The fortress that fits the description is in fact Chapel Hill above the
confluence of the Ewenny and Ogmore Rivers. There are the remains of the
well-situated fort on the top of the hill, just a mile from the beaches, close to the
tidal estuary. The outstanding feature is that within the perimeter of the
earthbank walls of the fort, there is a great pit leading to a system of caves. As
there is a stream running through deep down in these caves, there is a very
plentiful water supply, and possibly a secret escape route underground. What the
Triads are saying, therefore, is that a strong Saxon force came ashore at the
Ewenny and Ogmore Estuary and attacked the fortress above the river, and that
by some chance Arthur was at the fort. The defence held out for three days
before relief came led by Gorneu ap Cystennhin.
Welsh kings were not put into prison by anyone, they could be besieged and shut
up in their fortresses in this way – but not imprisoned. The modern interpretation
of the Triads is both wrong and far too literal. What is also of great importance is
that the "Song of the Graves" says clearly that King Arthur is buried at Anoeth,
and we know that Anoeth and Oeth are a cave or cave system. This statement
has been mangled into a strange construction meaning a mystery. All that is
necessary is to find and identify the caves of Oeth and Anoeth. We had, in fact,
arrived at the conclusion that there were caves named Oeth and Anoeth, and that
we could locate them through other means of analysis, as we can describe. The
first indication from the references to Oeth and Anoeth is that one is a cave set
within a fortress, and there is such a fortress. What we are saying is that the
location of Arthur's grave, given in the "Englynion Beddau Milwyr Ynys
Prydain", is a statement of fact, and not the declaration of a mystery.
It says, "Anoeth bit bet y Arthur", which means, "Anoeth (so) be it is the grave of
Arthur", or, "A mystery", or, "Not known is the grave of Arthur".
The burial in a cave does not mean that the king was buried in a place that was
not holy, for many Dark Age saints had their oratories, chapels and even
dwellings in caves. St. Gildas over in Britanny, and St. Illtyd in Glamorgan to
name only two both closely connected with King Arthur. The reason for the
Triad stating that Arthur was skulking in the caves of Oeth and Anoeth for three
days is simply that to stand a seige in a fort was in conflict with the heroic, non-
strategic and non-tactical codes enshrined by the Bards in their poetry. If King
Arthur had acted in accordance with their death and glory ideals he would have
rushed out to be killed in a glorious and quite useless charge. Instead he sat tight
and waited for reinforcements, nothing dramatic or heroic, just good military
tactics. So the Bards, who were rather like modern journalists looking for stories,
called it skulking at Oeth and Anoeth.
As we will see, the strange fortress with caves inside its defences was also a holy
place with a church, and ancient holy stones and crosses. It was also a place of
saints, and so to be interred in the caves in the fortress walls was also to be
interred in a holy place. So we were able then to set up a separate exercise to
approach the problem from a totally different direction, and relying on totally
different sources of information. The answer as we will show was exactly the
same.
The actual discovery of the King Arthur Stone was, like all the other steps along
the way: a series of stops and starts and false trails. We knew that King Arthur in
folklore had been buried in a cave and was believed to be still alive. This was
part of the simulation of the parallel with the Christian tales of Jesus, the son of
Mary, a herald who was of Virgin birth, a birth on Christmas Day, and a cave
burial and non-death or resurrection. We also knew that the close kinsman of
King Arthur who was St. Illtyd was recorded as carrying out a secret burial of a
king in the middle of the night, and in a cave. We further knew that this all took
place close to the Ewenny River in Glamorgan. As we know where King
Tewdrig, the grandfather of Arthur, lies buried, and we can be equally sure of the
burial place of King Meurig, his father, and King Morgan, his son, we are left
with King Arthur as the only candidate for a midnight burial. In fact King Arthur
is the only king who is recorded as being buried somewhere unknown.
So we now knew that we should seek out the grave of King Arthur close to the
River Ewenny. Now, even this is not as simple as it first appears to be, for the
Ewenny River runs from the line of the Glamorgan hills across the Vale to join
the Ogmore a mile from the sea. This is a fair stretch of river, and we
immediately had several potential sites. There were two major cave sites that
were obvious, yet they were too obvious. One was at Chapel Hill above the point
where the Ogmore and Ewenny Rivers join, a place of significant antiquity,
complete with an ancient hillfort, a very ancient chapel, and a huge cavern
descending into the centre of a hilltop. Another cave lay in the woods above
Coychurch to the north of Bridgend, a spot close to very old battle sites of 721
A.D. and 982 A.D. This also is a large cave quite capable of allowing human
habitation, and this is central to area 2 of the Ewenny Zone.
Both these sites offered possibilities, but there was the drawback that St. Illtyd
had been living in isolation and no one knew where he was. Both the areas
around these two caves are in fertile areas and the Llandaff records show that
there were villages close to them in Arthurian times. They were not therefore
particularly isolated. Nonetheless they were caves and as such they were
possibilities.

The castle ruin at Ogmore where the ancient Treaty Stone of King Arthmael – Arthur – was found
granting land to Nertat, Glywys ap Gwynlliw and Bishop Fili ap Cennydd.
Photograph by Chris Barber

The Ogmore Stone of King Arthur. Front and side are shown.

We looked and searched, and we found nothing. We did not even know what we
should expect to find. What would be found if a place had been concealed
around the year 575 A.D.? Fourteen hundred years is a very long time. Maybe
there would be a pile of stones heaped up to cover a fissure, or perhaps a great
big flat stone in a misplaced position? Finally, we were at a dead end again. We
had come up with nothing at all. The Coychurch area 2 had the bone cave, and
this could equally be Oeth or at least Anoeth.
Then, Baram Blackett decided that the only way was to trace all the tributary
streams of the River Ewenny to their source, and to follow each one all the way
down to the sea. We were proposing to search the whole river all the way down
to the sea. There was no doubt in our minds that the story of St. Illtyd, the close
kinsman of Arthur, and the midnight burial was correct. There would have to
have been a burial somewhere, and some few people at least would have known
of it – someone had to do the burying. A close member of the royal clan of
Glamorgan would have been required in the role of priest. Secrecy would have
been necessary if King Morgan was very young when his father died, and also to
enact the religious and resurrection parallel. This involved a shift of emphasis to
area 3 of the Ewenny zone.
We knew that the church of Llanharry was dedicated to St. Illtyd, and we knew
that Illtyd was said to have retired to solitude at Llanhamlach. Was Llanhamlach
now Llanharry or nearby Llanharran? Certainly these places close to the
inhospitable Glamorgan mountains were nearer to barren isolated areas.
Certainly, they were also close to the royal lodge at Miskin, said to be built by
King Meurig. The body of a dead king would not be transported too far in
secrecy at night. With these considerations, the headwaters and beginnings of the
Ewenny in the hill area began to look a little more encouraging. The constant
problem was to search quietly and with stealth, and to arouse no interest or
curiosity in anyone. This was not easy. Farmers and others do not appreciate
strangers examining their land. So we had to vary the site search between the
Chapel Hill area, above the Ogmore-Ewenny, the Coychurch cave, and the
headwater hill areas. There was still a very strong set of circumstances that all
seemed to favour the Chapel Hill site near Ogmore, as we will see. Although we
had quite a lot of evidence, it was in no way simple. The hill church of St. Peter
was also close to the ancient fortress of Y-Gaer on Mynydd-y-Gaer – again a fort
church combination.
One famous tale from the "Life of St. Illtyd", the frontrunner to be the priest who
carried out the burial, tells of how St. Giidas was sending a bell to St. David. The
monk carrying the bell was ringing it, and when Illtyd heard the noise, he came
out of his cave and met the monk to admire the bell. This was a surprise to the
monk, as no one knew where Illtyd had withdrawn to, and when he told St.
David of the incident, David sent the bell as a gift to Illtyd. The question
remains: was Gildas at the large Monastery at Usk, or was he at one of the
others, perhaps Llancarfan, nine miles west of Cardiff? Again, where was
David? Was he at Llanthony, or Caerleon, or Menevia, or somewhere else? A
route from Llancarfan to Menevia could cut along the old Roman road out
through Cowbridge, and across the ford at the place where Ewenny Priory now
stands. Equally, the traveller could go north along Ystrad Owain and take the
inland route, keeping away from the coast and the dangerous river estuaries. The
first route would take the traveller past Chapel Hill, and the second might take
him near Llanharry and Llanharan, and possibly close to Coychurch cave, and
this is the most likely route to Menevia.
The other possibility is that the travelling monk was coming from Usk or
elsewhere in Gwent, and this would almost certainly mean that he would be
moving along inland, hilltop routes, with no need to go down into the Vale of
Glamorgan. This left the wild and inhospitable hill areas of the source of the
River Ewenny as a clear favourite if the journey of the monk began at Usk. As
the Usk Monastery was Cadoc's headquarters, this appeared to be a most
unlikely situation.
As we will show, the Chapel Hill site offered a number of alternative
possibilities and could not be dismissed easily, and we were stretched out over a
13-mile length of the river. The task would have been immensely easier had we
had any government or other support. But as usual in Britain, our numerous
approaches had resulted in nothing, and had in fact wasted more of our precious
time and limited funds. If we had said we wanted to dig up Egypt or to build an
Asian community centre in England or run a Jamaican carnival, they would have
fallen over themselves to give us money. What we were doing was essentially
British and in Wales, and the authorities were not even remotely interested. It's
time they forgot the empire and took a little interest in people in the British Isles.
However, we were interested in Chapel Hill and this is why.
The final drive to locate King Arthur followed a logical sequence. We were
looking for a king of Gwent and Glamorgan. We knew his correct name and his
identity in the family tree of the kings of the House of Bran. We also knew a
great deal about many of his close relatives, and there was an accumulation of
evidence in the form of inscribed stones with his name. Finally it went as
follows:
There was a stone recording a land grant by King Arthmael – Arthur – to his
cousins – Nertat, the daughter of King Brychan of Brecon, Arthur's first cousin;
and to Gliwys Cerniw a saint who was also a cousin of Arthur. This Gliwys was
a brother of St. Cadoc and son of King Gwynlliw ap King Gliwys. The chaplain
to these two royal persons, Nertat the Nun, and Gliwys the Monk, was Bishop
Fili, or Ufelwy ap Cennydd, who was grandson of St. Gildas. So all these four
are correctly placed chronologically. This stone was found at Ogmore Castle.
The next clue was the stone at the Chapel of St. Roche, half a mile northwest of
Ogmore Castle, a massive slab cross known as the Conbelanus Cross. This also
records Nertat and Gliwys as saints and also Conbelanus – Cunhelyn or
Cynvelyn. So the reasonable proposition is that Gliwys and Nertat, who were
probably married, built their chapel here at Merthyr Mawr on the land that King
Arthur gave them. So Arthur founded the chapel or church. St. Cuhelyn was the
brother of King Teithfallt, great grandfather of King Arthur ap Meurig.
Bedd Illtyd, or the grave of St. Illtyd, the first cousing of King Arthur, in Brecon. The knight-abbot
who buried Arthur at Coed-y-Mwstyr near Brigend.
Photograph by Chris Barber

The Sacred Lake over the mountain from Treherbert. Here a shrine stood on oak logs in the centre of
the lake, and swords, sickles and metal couldrons were thrown into the waters as offerings.
Photograph by Chris Barber

The ancient chapel of St. Roche stands in what was an ancient earth banked fort
on a hill above the branch of the Ogmore River close to where the Ewenny and
Ogmore Rivers join. The next move was to look for stories of the area, and to
remember that folklore persistently states that King Arthur is buried in a cave,
and so was Jesus of Nazareth. We find that the "Life of St. Illtyd" states that
Illtyd, who was Arthur's close kinsman, was living in a cave close to the River
Ewenny. This is nothing strange, as the old bishops and abbots frequently lived
in the most abject poverty and under great privation in order to gain holy merit
marks. It was considered holy to try to live in tents of skin and caves, and to only
eat bread and water. This is not all, however, for the story of Illtyd and his cave
then takes a remarkable turn, for a "very important man" is brought to Illtyd in
the small boat secretly. The very important man is not named, but he is dead and
has to be buried. Now Illtyd himself was the grandson of a king of Britanny and
nephew of King Meurig and so first cousin to Arthur. So when the story tells of a
very important man, it means just that. So Illtyd takes charge and buries this
important person in his cave, and he places the altar stone on top of the buried
body. This again marks the dead man as a very high-ranking person indeed. Next
St. Illtyd takes stones and covers up the body in the cave and in this way
conceals the burial.
This remarkable story is told very briefly, and there can be no doubt that it is
simple and unvarnished truth. It tells of no great false miracle by the saint. It
tells nothing at all which either enhances or diminishes the saint’s reputation. It
is a statement of fact and nothing else. So we have an actual record of the burial
of a king in secret in a cave, for there can be little doubt that the dead man was a
king. The similarities between this burial and the story of the burial of Jesus of
Nazareth must have been a source of much concern to the Roman church in later
times, for Arthur was not only said to be born on Christmas Day, he was
crowned by St. Dyfrig on Christmas Day, and now buried in a cave, and believed
to be alive after death – or not dead. The story is also roughly located as being
somewhere near the Ewenny River. The time is correct for the burial to be that of
Arthur by virtue of the fact that Illtyd was his first cousin.
So what about the chapel of Gliwys and Nertat on land granted to them by
Arthur? Well, the grandfather of Arthur was King Tewdrig, who was killed
defending the country against the Saxons at Tintern. He was buried at Mathern,
which became so named from Martyred –Teyrn – the word Teyrn meaning
monarch. The Gliwys and Nertat chapel is at Merthyr Mawr, and this means very
directly the Great Martyr. So who is the Great Martyr? There is one certainty in
the society of South East Wales of the Dark Ages, and that is he was very
certainly a royal person. At this stage, we have a place named for the Great
Martyr, who could be anyone, two stones with contemporary cousins of Arthur
named on them, and the name of a contemporary bishop and a King Arthmael –
Arthur – on one of them. We also have St. Illtyd living in a cave near the
Ewenny River, and burying the body of a very important man in the cave in the
dead of night. It was no surprise to find that a few yards from the St. Roche
chapel at Merthyr Mawr there is a large fissure pit in the ground leading to
caves, the old signposts and directions are clear and accurate once again. The
name St. Roche is one that has no explanation, or at least none that we can find,
but we will attempt an explanation. The old Welsh word rhoch means "roaring",
and this links to the story recorded by Gryffydd ap Arthur who has King Arthur
describing a hole or pit in the ground near the sea, which fills quietly and then
empties with a rush and a roar.
There is an underground stream that leaves the River Ogmore just north of this
cave system, and it comes to the surface again in a small sunken dell close to the
village road, before flowing on into the Ogmore and the sea about a half a mile
below the juncture. The River Ogmore is subject to the colossal tides of the
Severn, and there can be little doubt that this had the simple effect of backing up
water in the stream passing through the cave system. There is therefore no St.
Roche or St. Rorques at all, for no one of this name is recorded anywhere. The
name implies the Roaring Chapel, taking this name from the noise of the
underground stream and the huge pit in the ground behind the chapel. It makes
sense and the evidence and facts fit together. This story in Gryffydd's "History of
the kings of Britain" again links Arthur with this area.

Chancel area of Mathern – Martyred Teyrn or Martyred Monarch – in Gwent. The church was built
by King Meurig over his father’s grave in 509 A.D. King Tewdrig the Uthyrpendragon I is buried
there.

Memorial slab set up around 1625 by Bishop Morgan above the excavated tomb of King Tewdrig
Uthyrpendragon – the date is guessed at 600 A.D. when it should read 509 A.D. The tomb was
excavated in 1609 and 1881.

The modern church of St. Teilo, which is built in the village below the hill, is
built over an ancient foundation, and there are ancient inscribed stones there.
One stone is marked: "PAVLI … FILI MA …", with a cross on the back, and a
six-foot sandstone slab has a cross with strange decoration and a mutilated
inscription leaving only the characters P O clear. Other mutilated effigies are in
the churchyard and incised slabs, one of which is very probably of around 1000-
1100 A.D. St. Paul ap Meurig – Pavli fili Mavricvis – was of course one of King
Arthwyr ap Meurig's brothers.
The most likely explanation of the story of one of the 12 wonders of Britain told
by King Arthur in Gryffydd ap Arthur's "History of the kings of Britain" is, we
think, as follows. The king describes a great pit near the sea and tells how this
periodically fills with water. Then, when the tide goes out, the water in the huge
pit suddenly escapes with a great gurgling and splashing roar. The explanation
seems to be that the stream that leaves the river just north of the hill of this cave
pit carries with it branches and other debris, and this gets into the cave system
below the pit, and at slack water with the high tide, it blocks the passage through
the caves. This then causes an accumulation of river water that rises up in the pit
behind the chapel of St. Roche, until finally the pressure of this head of water is
so great that the blockage is broken and forced out of the system of caves below.
When this happens the effect is the same as pulling a plug from a water- filled
kitchen sink, and initially the water boils upwards as air from pipes or passages
below surges up. Then the water flows out with a great gurgle and roar. This
results in the name of the Oratory Chapel being Rhoch in old Welsh, or Roar. It
is one further point of accuracy for Gryffydd ap Arthur.
The best way to describe this strange pit on the top of the hill is to liken it to a
small scale or mini Castillo of Chichen Itza, the sheer sided pit of water into
which the Mayan people of South America threw sacrificial victims. That is the
first impression, which struck us, with the vines trailing down over the vertical
rock sides. Trees stand close all around the sheer pit, and it is a place that has a
mystery all of its own. There is a steep path down on the south side, and this is
how old St. Illtyd and others would have gotten down there. So we have
definitive association on inscribed stones of King Arthur and the Bishop Ufelwy,
the grandson of Arthur's friend, St. Gildas, and his second cousin St. Illtyd,
living in a cave, and the secret burial of a very important man in the cave. And
not only did the king grant the land, he also knew of the strange pit and cave,
according to Gryffydd ap Arthur. This is how we hoped to solve the King Arthur
mystery, bearing in mind the stone of St. Paul son of Maurice – King Arthur's
brother – at Merthyr Mawr.
The founder’s slab in Llandaff Cathedral – founded by King Meurig Uthyrpendragon II around 530-
540 A.D. The tomb was rebuilt in 1120 A.D., and it shows a skeleton, indicating a king who would be
corruptible, lies there. Whereas, a saint would be incorruptible.

Alan Wilson investigating the empty tomb of King Arthur cut from the solid rock in the Cave of the
Pavilions in the Forest of Mystery.

No king or bishop of high rank would have died and then would not have had his
name recorded in some way on a stone to mark his passing, and so it proved with
Arthur, the son of Meurig. It was the result of patient evaluation of clues and
facts, resulting in final proof. The choice of place probably has nothing to do
with the Celtic veneration of fountains and wells, and their fascination with
caves. It was simply to find the right place occupied by the right holy man,
Illtyd, and the burial had to be secret. So it was secret, and yet a holy place. Yet
Ogmore, Chapel Hill and Merthyr Mawr produced nothing.
Anyone reading Triad No. 61, Series 3, and Triad No. 50, Series 1, and being
able to imagine for one minute that the King Llyr Lledaith, father of King Bran
and grandfather of King Caradoc, was in prison and that Mabon ap Medron was
also imprisoned by the Irish Picts or Painted Picts in Scotland, or that Gair ap
Geirion was imprisoned at Caer (Castle) Oeth and Anoeth, should see a
psychiatrist. Even more, to imagine that anyone could imprison the mighty
Arthur for three days takes a special form of lunacy. The old words mean a soft
form of skulking – meaning beseiged. Both Arthur and Gair were caught and
attacked in the fort of Caer Oeth and Anoeth, a real place, where there was also
the cave of Oeth and Anoeth. Wen Pendragon means White Commander in
Chief, and that means the Saxon leader, and no one else. Llyr Lledaith was, in
fact, beseiged by Oeuroswydd Wledig, who is Ostorius Scapula. This was the
Roman General who took charge of the Claudian invasion and the war against
the British in 47 A.D. It is that simple, and the Triad records it.
As we have already said, the search around Ogmore and Chapel Hill produced
nothing. Everything appeared to point to it being the right place – or a good
possibility, to say the least. We were not too sure what we hoped to find – maybe
a pile of weed-infested stones and rocks at the surface, a filling up of a cave
mouth. It was difficult to even guess what this would be like after 1,400 years.
The next cave at Coychurch, just north of Bridgend, was also very attractive for
a number of reasons. It is hidden in a dense wood, and so could be the retreat of
a holy man seeking solitude away from the rest of the world. It also might lie on
a route from Llancarfan to Menevia. Best of all, it appears on Ordnance Survey
maps of 1904 as "the Bone Cave", and anyone with any knowledge of the Triads
will recognise the possibilities of this name in connection with Oeth and Anoeth.
This cave is very clearly one in which a person could have lived, of that there is
no doubt whatsoever.
We remained certain that the story, which we had extracted from the "Life of St.
Illtyd" was the basis upon which any discovery would be made. We knew that he
was essentially a Saint of Glamorgan; we knew that he lived periodically in a
cave; and we knew that this cave lay along the Ewenny River. We also knew that
any secret burial of a king would probably have to be fairly close to the main
residences of the Glamorgan kings, and we could not get too far from Cardiff,
Radyr, Miskin or Cibbwr.
Alan Wilson had visited the Coed-y-Mwstwr cave site many years previously,
and it offered much stronger possibilities as the place of St. Illtyd's seclusion.
The cave is set into a cliff of tumbled rock face, deep into a wood that has in all
probability never been anything else but a wild wood on a rock-strewn, stone-
scattered hill. The cave entrance is over five feet high, and about six feet wide.
Inside there is ample space for a rough and probably uncomfortable habitation.
Certainly a holy man seeking to remove himself from the pleasures and luxuries
of the world could well have lived there.
The search was for a cave above the Ewenny River and close to it where St.
Illtyd would have lived, and Coed-y-Mwstwr is close to Ewenny. So the holy
man could have lived on berries, the woods are full of blackberry plants, hares,
rabbits and maybe woodpidgeons, and fish from the river. The important feature
that was looked for was a burial of a king in the cave, or signs of this burial.
About 10 yards from the cave entry there is a curious manmade feature. A trench
or pit has been dug out across the cave, and this measures some four feet across
by 10 feet long, and is around four feet deep. The axis of this pit along its 10-
foot length lies east to west, which would accord with Christian religious
notions. There is therefore an empty grave inside Coed-y-Mwstwr cave deep in
the woods, and this fits exactly with the story of St. Illtyd burying the embalmed
body of a very important man secretly in the cave near the Ewenny.
Mass evidence demonstrates that this empty grave once held Arthur's body, and
the facts remain that with Arthur born around 500 A.D. and dying around 575
A.D., and King Morgan Mwynfawr his son living around the 575-667 A.D.
period. Arthur left a very young son as successor to his throne. Supporting this,
the Triads tell of two (possibly three) queens married to King Arthur, and Triads,
Bruts, and Mabinogion and poetry, tell of the death of his elder sons in war
around 548 A.D. He was in roughly the same position as Henry VIII of England
who married six queens in desperation to get a son and heir. Only King Arthur
was secretly buried, only this life of his close kinsman Illtyd tells of a secret
burial, at this very period – and in the centre of King Arthur's own kingdom. So
we have a positive piece of evidence in the empty grave trench, lying east to
west across the Coed-y-Mwstwr cave, close to the Ewenny River. The story of
St. Illtyd's life was true.
The word used to name the cave is Lingarch, and this may be Lin-carch or Lin-
garth. If it is Lin-carch, then it may mean a form of prison cave, with "carchar"
meaning Prisoner. This presents a problem, for both the Chapel Hill cave and the
Coychurch cave could have been used as prisons. From the dictionaries we find
that Llin means either fine thread, or a fibre, or the grain of wood, or a line or
flax. This does not help too much at all, unless it refers to the spiders’ webs in
the Coychurch cave. Alternatively, it may refer to the quite infinite number of
fine lines in the smooth stalactite covering the walls of the cave. This seems
likely as the word Ilinar means of a smooth nature, and this is an accurate,
precise, description of the Coychurch cave. Most Welsh records appear to be
precise and so we should accept the mutation of "c" to "g" in Llinar – carchau –
becoming Lingarth. This makes the cave at Coychurch on the west bank of the
Ewenny absolutely certain to be the cave spoken of in the "Life of St. Illtyd",
which later tells the story of the secret burial. Large numbers of rare spiders do
in fact live in the Coychurch/Llin-carch cave.
Fortunately, the Coychurch cave is again isolated and on private property, and
therefore it appears in what must be a near identical state and setting today as
that of the time of St. Illtyd and King Arthur 1,400 years ago. Equally fortunate,
several of the deserted churches, which were not included in the great rebuilding
programs of around 1800-1860 A.D. are also in secluded situations and rarely
visited.
The authors discovered that there was a mound of earth and mud at the mouth of
the Coychurch cave. This was causing rainwater to run into the cave, as it
cascaded from the rock cliff and slopes above. Alan Wilson and Baram Blackett
decided to remove this obstruction so that water would flow out of the cave,
rather than into it. The earth mound was in fact covering the remains of an
ancient dry stone wall, which had been built across the mouth of the cave. This
wall, in addition to the manmade vent hole in the roof of the cave, provided clear
evidence of human habitation. Most important, there is the huge rock-cut gravea
work of immense labour in any age.
So the situation now was that when Morgan was grown and a powerful warrior
king in his own right, he had his father disinterred and given another burial. King
Morgan is in fact placed with King Arthur in the Triads as a successful warrior
king who drew great numbers of followers. So now it was a question of a
reburial, and where Arthur could have been taken after he was removed from the
cave. King Tewdrig, his grandfather, was the Martyr Tewdrig, for he died
defending his Christian country. In the same way the daughter of King Brychan
was the Martyr Tydfil, and martyrdom was often the title bestowed on those who
died in violent circumstances at the hands of pagans. Down at Merthyr Mawr
below the Chapel Hill site was the Merthyr Mawr church dedicated to St. Teilo.
Who was the Great Martyr, for Merthyr Mawr means Great Martyr. A stone that
appears to have been the stone of St. Pawl ap Meurig, a son of King Meurig and
King Arthur's brother or half brother, is there. The only problem is that such a
reburial and naming of the Great Martyr would have become common
knowledge.
Then there was the problem that a secret burial pointed to a quiet death, and not
a death in battle, which could not have been concealed. So the idea of
martyrdom is difficult to sustain. Equally, there could be another site, and a
reburial along the Ewenny, and yet another burial, so the search had to continue.
Reburials were commonplace in ancient Dark Age times, and many saints and
some kings were shifted about all over the place to protect their bones and to
enhance the status of their new burial places. It goes back to Oeth and Anoeth
and the interpretation of "Concealed and Revealed". A reburial pointed very
definitely to a church situation, and there could be little doubt that this would
have been in the central area of Glamorgan. There were now three possibilities:
(a) the grave was in the Coed-y-Mwstwr cave and was now destroyed; (b) the
more likely event was that the body had been moved to a new grave, most
probably a church; and (c) that Coed-y-Mwstwr was the place and another
location still lay untouched.
Baram Blackett at the west corner of the rock grave in the Ogof y Pebyll. The grave lies due east to
west in Christian fashion. It is square-cut, and here Abbot St. Illtyd buried his first cousin, King
Arthur, around 579 A.D.

King Arthur’s first burial tomb, 12 feet by 3 1/2 feet by 4 feet deep, in the Cave of the Pavilions in the
Forest of Mystery. Later, King Arthur was reburied elsewhere. In this image, Alan Wilson stands in
the centre of the cave grave cut out of the solid. Later, King Arthur was reburied elsewhere.

How on earth could anyone even guess at the motives and actions of King
Morgan Mwynfawr, the successor of Arthur ap Meurig? Was King Morgan, the
son of the third Queen Gwenhwyfach, or very improbably was he a son of King
Arthur's three cariad-gwraig or "love-wives" or simply "mistresses"? All three
are named in the Triads. One clue to the workings of the mind of Morgan lies in
the ancient poem, which lists the sayings or mottoes of the kings.
Hast thou heard the saying of Morgan Mwynfawr?
He is not wise who does not conceal his intentions
King Morgan was also a hard man who killed his uncle Frioc in a dispute that
may have been over the right to succeed Arthur. As a warrior, he marched to
North Wales to crush a king of Northumbria – Ethelfrith – who had attacked
Powys and then invaded Gwynedd. There is no evidence of anyone coming near
or into his kingdom, and it is possible that he was as much feared as his father
was. Certainly no one would have desecrated the tomb of Morgan's father in the
reign of Morgan, and later in the time of Ithael and Rhys and the others, and
bearing in mind the relationship with the church shown in the Llancarfan and
Llandaff Charters, everything points to a proper reburial of King Arthur.
Reburial meant searching ancient churches, and we were faced with too many of
them. Coychurch and the Ebissar stones, the ancient St. Mary Hill with Arthur
possibly keen on Mary as he was said to have had her image on one of his
shields, then also there was Llanilid - already taken for King Bran, and Merthyr
Mawr already taken for King Paul ap Meurig, also a saint, which left Llanharran
and Llanharry and St. Peter's on the mountain were possibilities. And there was
also the monastery ruin of St. Caurdaf, the cousin of King Arthur at Miskin.
The story of the "Life of St. Illtyd" is obviously true, for there is a cave suitable
for human habitation in the correct place by the Ewenny, and there is an empty
grave pit in the forest. With King Tewdrig buried at Mathern, King Meurig
building Llandaff and almost certainly buried there, and King Morgan building
Margam and traditionally lying there, the reburial was in fact again almost
certain. This is what turned out to be the case.
At this time there was intense frustration; there always appeared to be some
additional and unexpected problem. Even if the authors found some ancient flat
slab, what would it prove if there had been a burial under it? Would there be any
remains or would acids and alkalines in the soil have completely dissolved
everything away? What we were certain of was that some persons somewhere
had known the truth, and that they were those who buried Arthur. This then
brought us back to his family, for surely King Morgan Mwynfawr, his son and
successor would have known. If this were the case then it would be incredible if
there were no church nearby to mark the place of the great king who was in all
references a Christian ruler. The records in the Llandaff Charters told us nothing
positive, and we knew that there might be Charters lost forever, or spelling
mistakes and mistranslations down the ages, which could lead us in circles.
The third area of search had no cave that we knew of, but it was wild and remote
and of a barren and uninhabited form even today. Up on Mynydd-y-Gaer – the
Mountain of the Fortress – lay the tumulus mound of the hero King Caradoc,
known as Twyn Caradoc. Near to this lay the deserted ruin of the old church of
St. Peter upon the Mountain, and this was interesting, for although very ancient,
it was not dedicated to any Celtic saint as are all the others of the Dark Age
period. This was abandoned at some time around 1750 as far as we could tell,
and the gravestones in the yard show many deaths of young people around 1728,
indicating a bad plague in the area, possibly the reason for the desertion. This
was interesting for the great period of church rebuilding in Wales when
innumerable ancient monuments were moved and lost, came around 1850 and so
this was an undisturbed site in modern times.
The area of the headwaters of the Ewenny up along the Garth mountain and the
Mynydd-y-Gaer present no problems of detail in respect of the story of the burial
in the "Life of Illtyd", for ships can clearly be seen entering the Ogmore and
Ewenny estuary down on the coast.
The situation that we had developed was one of reducing analysis. The
apparently awesome problem of King Arthur had been ground down to specific
tiny land areas, one of which was the most probable by a long way by virtue of
the fact that the actual grave of the king, who was buried by his first cousin St.
Illtyd, was still there. Already the search was far ahead of any other search ever
undertaken.
These were the facts:
1. Alan Wilson and B. Blackett had reduced the King Arthur problem from all
Britain to the specific area of South East Wales, by study of genealogy.
2. They had located the Clan burials into the concentrated area of Glamorgan
and in particular they were in the Glamorgan Vale and surrounding hills.
3. They had further reduced the problem by study of the Royal burial customs.
All Royal graves were well exhibited and prominent alongside trackways, on
hilltops and in known churches.
4. They knew that the grave mounds later were supplemented by grave mounds
alongside the kings' mortuary church, and then the burials were moved inside the
churches. Later, the practice of grave mounds appeared to have been restored
following the barbarian raids on the Welsh churches.
5. They knew that they had finally reduced the problem to the secret burial of a
king by St. IIltyd the first cousin of King Arthur, in the Lingarth cave above the
Ewenny River. They knew that of all the kings, only Arthur was recorded as
conceales in burial, and this meant the grave in the cave. Five folktales in Wales
supported this.
6. They also knew that almost all Welsh kings had memorial stones. King
Carawn-Carausius the Emperor, King Cadvan, King Maelgwn Gwynedd, King
Gwythelyn-Vortimer, King Budic-Bodvoc and many others had been found. In
Britain, where cloth, wood, parchment, and even metals rot away, the only
possible chance of record after 1,400 years was stone, and there was always a
chance of a marked stone. Three sources state that there was an Arthur marked
stone.
With the "Gwenora hic iacit" stone of Llaniltern, and the Gwenora stone at
Meigle up in Perthshire, and also the Vendumaglos stone of Llanfair Mawr, it
was clear that at least two of King Arthur's wives and one father-in-law were
recorded on memorial stones. Even Maelgwn Gwynedd as Sir L'Ancelot had his
Maglocunus stone, and King Arthur's uncle Brochwael son of Tewdrig was
recorded on the Brocagnus son of Natanleod stone in Cornwall where he may
have died on the campaign against Guinner, also called Gorlois.
Alan Wilson and Baram Blackett had the colossal advantage of now knowing
exactly where to search. The area immediately around the cave was the favourite
spot, and the strong chance of a possible memorial stone at nearby churches
offered other precise locations. The church of St. Peter Super Montem, which
they had identified as Cor Emrys, the burial place of Emrys Wledig, was the
outstanding possibility. To any sane man, they had located the cave grave of
King Arthur, but they knew that they were going to be faced with the pedantry of
the dry-as-dust academic. So the process of looking for stones and turning them
over went on. They had in fact been turning over likely looking stones all over
the hills and woods for some years, and it had become a habit. They sought a
possible old stone cross, carved in the ancient fashion, or some form of pillar
stone. They very seldom discussed their chances of finding anything. The usual
joke was that it was a good way of keeping fit.
Then, one day when they were going to pack up and go home, they finally
discovered something. Their work on writing up the story of King Arthur and his
people was going ahead and they were going to publish in any case. The day was
over and it was time to go home. There, right under their noses, where they
should have looked first, but did not because it was probably too obvious, was a
stone, partially buried, covered in moss, but with a strange shoulder shape.
Baram Blackett was convinced that the shoulder angle looked to be unnatural
and man made, and so in the gloom and dusk they heaved and tugged to get at
the stone. There was in fact little light and the stone was plastered in moss, but
by scratching it away they began to convince themselves that there were
markings upon it. Finally they put it back and resolved to cover it and return in
good daylight and clean it off. They even thought that they were imagining
markings, a quite common happening when looking for inscribed stones.

Uthyr Pendragon III Uthyr Pendragon II

King Arthur King Meurig
Cor Emrys fortress mountain Llandaff Cathedral

The well of King Tewdrig ap Teithfallt in Gwent near to the King's Grave at Maryred Teyrn, which
means monarch. Tewdrig, or Theorderic, actually died in 509 A.D.
Photograph by Chris Barber

The stone proved to be the memorial of King Arthur, son of Maurice, and the
inscriptions read as follows:
REX ARTORIVS FILI MAVRICIVS
So the mystery had finally been solved. We knew from the "Life of St. Illtyd"
that the saint had spent time in a cave on the Ewenny River. We knew that this
was identified around 1140 as "Lingarch" – which now revealed itself as
"smooth ridges" – and this either meant the nature of the cave or the giant sand
dunes at the sea estuary of the Ewenny River. We knew that Illtyd buried the
king in the cave at Coed-Y-Mwstyr and the grave pit dug out of the solid rock
still existed as a great rectangular hollow box dug out of the cave floor.
The Life of Illtyd specified that there was a stone with the embalmed body, and
that both were taken to the cave. Added to this, the "Death Elegy to Uthyr
Pendragon" by Taliesin first specified the stone on line 4:
Your Stone there was which became a mystery (riddle)
Then line 14 identified the dead Uthyrpendragon as Arthur. So with two clear
references to the stone, we had a legitimate objective to search for it. We further
knew that three ancient historical sources stated that an Uthyrpendragon lay
buried at Caer Caradoc, and the ancient church of St. Peter's, formerly Cor
Emrys was at Caer Caradoc. We knew that in this period, the Uthyrpendragon I –
King Tewdrig – lay buried at Mathern; the Uthyrpendragon II – King Meurig ap
Tewdrig – turned out to be buried in the grave mound in the Giant Circle at Caer
Caradoc. Therefore, the missing Uthyrpendragon at Caer Caradoc was King
Arthur ap Meurig. That is precisely what the stone stated.
The histories that locate an Uthyrpendragon at Caer Caradoc are: (1) Matthew of
Westminster around 1500 A.D.; (2) Gryffydd ap Arthur of 1135 A.D.; and (3)
the Brut Tyssilio of circa 1000 A.D. or earlier. They are correct and refer to King
Meurig and with the clear exposition of Mynydd Y Gaer (Fortress Mountain) as
Caer Caradoc the information is traceable and proved right.
We now knew that King Arthur ap Meurig had been transferred to near the Caer
Caradoc and Cor Emrys church some time after the cave burial. The Coed Y
Mwstyr woods lie right below the mountain standing on their own low hill, and
the sea estuary of the Ewenny can be seen just beyond them. The headwaters of
the Ewenny run along below the mountain. Below the church ruin is Bryn
Caradoc, and to the west above is Twyn Caradoc, with Mynwent Y Milwyr
beyond the Twyn. We located the grave of Arthur II in 1994.
What was unexpected was the corroboration of the story of the secret burial and
the subsequent reburial in the church in the Nennius manuscripts. As Nennius
was writing around 801-822 A.D., the complete, detailed and conclusive
corroboration that he provided completely authenticated the information in
Taliesin, the "Life of Illtyd" and the three histories of Tyssilio, Matthew of
Westminster and Gryffydd ap Arthur.
When we first announced our finding the grave and tomb of Arthur, we were met
with a volley of abuse and derision from various so-called experts. One "expert"
stated that he could demonstrate mistakes on every page we wrote – this we
would like to see. Another "expert" stated that the Stone should say "filius"
instead of "fili" as (1) the Romans had just left Britain (in 580 A.D.?) and so
everyone was speaking perfect Latin. (2) "fili" was bad Latin and therefore a
fake. Actually we can point instantly to no less than 10 of the most famous sixth
and pre-sixth century stones, all of which are inscribed "fili". And the Romans
were booted out of Britain long before 580 A.D. Another genius "expert" failed
to differentiate between King Tewdrig, son of King Teithfallt, and the much later
Tewdrig ap Llywarch Hen ap Elidyr Lydanwyn who married Enynny, a daughter
of Urien Rheged. He stated that King Tewdrig, who married Govein, instead
married Enynny, and as King Morgan ap Arthur ap Meurig ap Tewdrig married
Elwiri a daughter of Urien, we had the ludicrous situation that a great-
grandfather and his great-grandson married two sisters. The so-called expert
goes further, for Ithael son of Morgan ap Arthur is said to be none other than
"King Aethelbald of Mercia" in disguise. All this throws the historical pattern
out by 100-150 years. Another "expert" who has made a huge reputation out of
the imaginary "Arthur of Glastonbury" simply wrote letters to influential parties
denigrating and deriding our work which he had never read.
We make no claim on Cloud Cuckoo Land, and leave it entirely to the
established "experts" who trace nothing, decipher nothing, and find nothing.
THE STONE OF MIRACLES
We have stated that the account of King Arthur's secret burial appears in Section
22, of the life of "St Illtyd", copied by a Norman monk around 1140 A.D. In
1984, the well-known author and researcher Chris Barber, a collaborator and
friend, examined our manuscript and brought it to our attention that there is an
earlier account of this same secret burial, although he was unable to remember
where he had seen it. We searched and found it in Nennius.
The historian monk Nennius writing in 822 A.D. added an appendix to his
history, which tells of the Many Marvels of Britain. Two of these concern and
name King Arthur directly. One tells of the grave of his son, Anir, and the other
tells of his dog's grave, Bedd Caval. These two references are quoted ad
nauseum. The ninth marvel, however, also concerns King Arthur, although it
does not mention him. It tells of the same secret burial carried out by St. Illtyd,
first cousin of Arthur.
If the text of the Marvels is original to Nennius, then it means that we have an
account of the secret burial of the king in the cave by St. Illtyd written in 822
A.D. This would be only 243 years after King Arthur ap Meurig's death in 579
A.D. The account is as follows:
There is another wonderful thing in Guyr (Ogwr)*, an altar is in the place which
is called Loyngarth*, which is held up by the will of God. The story of that altar
it seems to me better to tell than be silent. It happened when St Illtyd was
praying in a cave that is by the sea, which washes the land above the said place,
the mouth of the cave is toward the sea – that behold a ship sailed toward him
from the sea and two men sailing in it. And the body of a holy man was with
them in the ship and an altar above his face, which was held up by the will of
God. And the man of God (Illtyd) went forth to meet them and the body of the
holy man and the altar was continuing inseparably above the face of the holy
body. And they said to St. Illtyd, ‘This man of God entrusted it to us that we
should conduct him to thee, and that we should bury him with thee and that thou
shouldst not reveal his name to any man, so that men should not swear by him’.
And they buried him and after the burial the two men returned to the ship and set
sail
But that St. Illtyd founded a church about the body of the holy man and about the
altar, and the altar held up by the will of God remains to this day.
There came a certain regulus (king) to make a test carrying a rod in his hand.
 He bent it around the altar and held the rod on either side with his two hands,
and drew it towards him. And he tested the truth of the matter, and afterwards he
did not live for a full month.

Estuary of the Ogmore-Ewenny rivers. The sea is on the left. The Llyfn-garth, or smooth ridges of the
Merthyr Mawr sand dunes are in the background.

Junction of the Ogmore river, left with the Ewenny River. Merthyr Mawr church is at centre, and
Ogmore Castle is at the far right.

And another (king) looked under the altar and lost the sight of his eyes, and he
 finished his course before a full month."
*LoynGarth is modern Llyfn-Garth it means Smooth Ridges, which are Sand Dunes; **Guyr is still called
as O-gwyr.

There can be no doubt about the location of St. Illtyd's cave in Guyr, or the
Ogmore or Ogwr, areas. In "The Life of Illtyd" the cave is described as
Lingarch, as we have discussed, here in Nennius it is Loyngarth.
The "Life of St. Illtyd" calls the area Lingarch, and the 801-822 Nennius
manuscripts state that the place or area is called Loyngarth. The name Loyngarth
gives us a vital clue. It is undoubtably Llyfn-garth, which is the smooth ridges,
and this is a perfect description of the very large area of sand dunes at the joint
estuary of the Rivers Ogwr (Guyr) and Ewenny. These are the largest sand dunes
in Britain. The precise and exactly described location can no longer be disputed.
There are a number of copies of Nennius surviving. We had been using the W.
Gunn/Vatican manuscripts, 1819, and the J.A. Giles manuscripts, 1841,
translations and editions. Neither of these contains the passage detailing the
secret burial. Not until we consulted the 1882 Joseph Stevenson, Latin copy and
the Wade-Evans and English Manuscript Society Volumes, did we see the story
of St. Illtyd and the secret burial.
The Welsh do not change their place names. Many names have become
corrupted by English interference and the obnoxious habit of renaming, just as
they renamed Sri-Lanka as Ceylon, and Zimbabwe as Rhodesia, etc.
Nonetheless, the old Welsh forms are even then preserved.
Earlier in Section 16, the "Life of St. Illtyd" actually states that Illtyd was at his
cave above the Ewenny river. This naming of the Ewenny River, which is still so
named today, is final evidence if any were required. It runs through O-gwyr –
old Guyr or Guhyr – and it meets the sea at the great Sand Dunes also called
Loyn Garth or Llyfn-Garth.
The proof that the church where Illtyd later reburied his first cousin King Arthur
close to the mountain church of Cor Emrys – St. Peters, is overwhelming. Place
names abound and clearly prove the location of the church.
We have four sources of the most impeccable evidence:
1. In the "Mawrnad Uthyrpendragon Arthur", or "Grave Elegy of Arthur the
Uthyrpendragon", by Taliesin ap Henwg, around 580 A.D., line 4 speaks of the
stone.
Your Stone there was with your name which became a mystery.
2. In the Nennius manuscripts of the "Historia Britanorum", there is a clear and
precise statement in the section of the Marvels of Britain telling of the secret
burial by St. Illtyd, the first cousin of Arthur. The "Chartres Manuscript" of
Nennius contains a reference to the first day of January falling on the 12th day of
the moon. This dates the original writing to 801 A.D.
3. We have the "Life of St. Illtyd" written in the Dark Ages and recopied by a
Norman monk in 1104 A.D. As we have shown, this clearly illustrates the burial
of King Arthur in a cave above the Ewenny River in Ogwr. Nennius, from far
North Wales, calls it Guyr.
4. We have the physical evidence of the great rock tomb in the cave cut from the
solid granite. We have the physical evidence of the ruined church and the now
recovered miracle stone, spoken of by Taliesin, by Nennius and by Illtyd's monk.

The sixth century stone of St. Pawl, son of King Meurig, at centre, at Merthyr Mawr church. He
appears as King Poulentious in the "Life of St. Illtyd". St. Pawl was a brother to King Arthur ap
Meurig.

Land grant stone of King Arthur at Ogmore Castle. It names the king and Nertat, daughter of King
Brychan, his first cousin; St. Glywys, a son of King Gwynlliew; and Fili the Bishop, Ufelwyn,
grandson of St. Gildas, bishop of Llandaff.

The story of the secret burial and of the cave grave is consistent. Nennius goes
further however and states that St. Illtyd then built a church in which to rehouse
the embalmed body and the Miracle Stone. This is correct as we have found, and
the mediaeval idea of King Arthur's body being transported in a ship appears to
have been founded in truth.
Very important is the reference to the church being constructed or reconstructed
by St. IIltyd, for it eliminates the church of Merthyr Mawr – the great martyr
from all speculation. The royal effigy of the great martyr we ascribe to King
Aidan ap Blegwyryd of 1000-1019 A.D. – king of All Wales.
If the Academics are not prepared to accept Nennius, then they are clearly not
prepared to accept anything. It will be interesting to hear from those who make
literary fortunes out of so-called Arthurian books, on just how they never saw all
this whilst quoting from old Nennius and "Lives of the Saints" ad nauseum.
If we add to all this the Triad evidence that Cor Emrys was built by Emrys
Wledig and is at Caer Caradoc, we get the antiquity of the church at Caer
Caradoc. In addition, the Triads cite Cor Emrys as the most important of all
British Dark Age churches.
With three histories stating that an Uthyrpendragon lies buried at Caer Caradoc,
the picture of evidence becomes complete. The English muddle of failing to see
that uthyrpendragon was a royal title used by a number of kings appears to have
caused endless confusion. Being foreigners, they failed to understand Welsh
history. Certainly, Uthyrpendragon killed Guinner of Cornwall and destroyed
him at Castle Dameilock in Cornwall, and certainly Uthyrpendragon took the
wife of Guinner as a prisoner from Tintagel Monastery. He was King Tewdrig
Uthyrpendragon I, and he killed Guinner, whom the English call Gorlois.
Certainly, Uthyrpendragon was father to King Arthur. He was the mighty King
Meurig Uthyrpendragon II. And again certainly Merlyn – Taliesin ap Henwg –
prophecied before Uthyrpendragon – he was King Arthur Uthyrpendragon III.
Again, the statement that an Uthyrpendragon lies buried at Caer Caradoc is
correct. He is this same King Arthur Uthyrpendragon III. Englishmen trying to
write Welsh history have always made the same catastrophic blunders of identity
and location – rather like an Eskimo trying to decipher Mandarin Chinese.
King Tewdrig Uthyrpendragon is buried at Mathern and his son, King Meurig
Uthyrpendragon II, is at the Giant Circle at Caer Caradoc, so the only
Uthyrpendragon missing, who could also be at Caer Caradoc, is King Arthur
Uthyrpendragon III. Other Uthyrpendragons were King Gwythelyn – Vitalianus
in Latin – and his inscribed stone is at Nevern; and King Carawn or Crair – who
is Carausius in Latin – and his stone was found at Penmachno.

The entrance to the Ogof y Pebyll or Cave of the Pavillions in the Coed y Mwstyr – Forest of Mystery
– where the ship brought the embalmed body of the dead King Arthur to his first cousin St. Illtyd,
who buried him.

Alan Wilson in the northwest corner of the grave pit in the Ogof y Pebyll or Cave of the Pavilions in
the Coed y Mwstyr – Forest of Mystery. The pit is about 10 feet long, four feet wide and four feet
deep.

THE BURIAL EVIDENCE
In total we have no less than six and possibly seven, ancient sources that clearly
point to King Arthur ap Meurig being buried near the located church ruin.
1. There’s a clear story in the "Life of St. Illtyd", copied from an older
manuscript in 1140 A.D. Several other passages in the Life of Illtyd specify
exactly that he spent time at a cave above the Ewenny River in Ogwyr. The
burial tale tells of a ship coming to a shoreline near a cave - Lingarch. It tells of
a boat coming up a river estuary, and of the secret burial of the very important
man in the cave together with his tombstone.
2. The more important and older reference is in the Nennius "Marvels of Britain"
from around 801-822 A.D. Again, the ship comes to a shore – Guyr, now Ogwyr.
The sea line area is Loyngarth – Smooth Ridges – the giant Merthyr Mawr Sand
Dunes. Again, the embalmed body and magical stone are taken upriver to the
cave and buried by the same St. Illtyd. However, the body is later taken and
reburied in a church together with the stone.
3. Taliesin – Merlyn son of Henwg – in his Death Elegy to the Uthyrpendragon
Arthur, said to be of circa 580 A.D., again states that there was a stone, line 4,
and later names King Arthur as the dead Uthyrpendragon.
4. Matthew of Westminster, a very important Norman historian writing around
1150 A.D., records that an Uthyrpendragon was buried at Caer Caradoc. The
church ruin is at the place known as Caer Caradoc, and this is well proven. The
Uthyrpendragon King Tewdrig is buried at Mathern in Gwent, and his son the
Uthyrpendragon King Meurig is buried at Caer Caradoc. Therefore, the missing
Uthyrpendragon at Caer Caradoc has to be the Uthyrpendragon King Arthur son
of Meurig, buried by his first cousin St. Illtyd, and he also may be at Caer
Caradoc.
5. Gryffydd ap Arthur writing in 1135 A.D. also records that an Uthyrpendragon
was buried at Caer Caradoc. As stated, the church is at Caer Caradoc.
6. The "Brut of Tyssilio", circa 1000 A.D. (St. Tyssilio actually lived around 630
A.D.) also states that an Uthyrpendragon lies buried at Caer Caradoc.
7. The physical evidence is that the shoreline is definitely Lyfn-garth – smooth
ridges – the giant Merthyr Mawr Sand Dunes. The river is specified as the
Ewenny in the "Life of St. Illtyd", again correct. The area is named as Guyr, and
today is still Ogwyr, and bastardised into English as Ogmore. The cave exists.
The great grave cut into the solid rock of the floor of the cave also still exists.
The church ruin exists at Caer Caradoc. The magic stone exists; we have found
it. Therefore there is only one logical conclusion: that King Arthur lies under the
altar at the ruined church of Cor Emrys at Caer Caradoc.
The manuscript evidence is accurate, and when followed, it reveals simple truth.
As we show King Arthur and St. Illtyd were first cousins, and therefore
contemporary.

The stone of Idnerth is at Llandewi Brefi, and the stone of Pawl is at Merthyr
Mawr, whilst Illtyd is at Bedd Illtyd in Brecon. Gweryla and King Meurig were
brother and sister, so the story is very understandable. St. Govein lies at her
chapel in West Wales, King Tewdrig at Mathern, or Martyred Theyrn, which
means Martyred Monarch, and King Meurig is at Llandaff Cathedral.
8. The famous Llandaff Charters tell how King Morgan Mwynfawr, the son of
Arthur, killed Frioc, son of Meurig, the fourth brother, to seize power. This
correlates with the indications that King Arthur was first buried in secret because
Morgan was an infant.
9. The remarkably accurate "Song of the Graves" from the "Black Book of
Carmarthen", of around 1050-1200 A.D. states that:
Concealed is the grave of Arthur
Again, dead right. Whilst five Welsh folk tales say he is buried in a cave, two
from South Wales, one with five geographical notes that lead to St. Illtyd's
Ewenny Cave.
Actually, it was all very logical. Whoever buried King Arthur knew where he
was. His immediate family including his sons King Morgan and King Ithael, and
their close kinsmen and advisors would have known the secret. So also would
some of the monks of Illtyd who were close to him and in the secret. So a stone
of King Arthur was not impossible. What they had might be just a stone with
cracks or grooves and no inscription, or it could be a stone of some insignificant
prince, or Monk of later age. They had to go back and make certain. What they
had found was the stone of King Arthur, son of Meurig, and their search was
over.
The Coed-y-Mwstyr cave site is the one described in the "Life of St. Illtyd", that
is quite certain. On one later visit to the cave in 1982, they walked the fields with
Mr. Leyshon, the owner of the Coed-y-Mwstyr Farm. The whole area of the farm
is important, significantly as two major battles of Welsh history were fought in
its fields above the woods and behind the farm barns. One took place in 721
A.D. and the other in 982 A.D., and in both cases, the invading armies from
North Wales and West Wales stood on the hill above the west bank of the
Ewenny River. This means two things. First, they were afraid to cross the river
and be trapped against it if the battle went against them. And second, there must
have been a ford across the river at this point, across which the Morganwg army
came climbing the hill to attack the invaders. This is very important to the story,
found in the "Life of St. Illtyd", of a monk carrying a bell from St. Gildas –
probably setting out from Llancarfan in the Vale of Glamorgan – and heading for
Menevia and St. David in West Wales. The monk was crossing the Ewenny at
the same ford used by the defending armies of Morganwg in 721 A.D. and 982
A.D. The cave used by St. Illtyd is right above this ancient crossing point.
This also explains why the mighty stronghold of Coety Castle was built where it
is, to stand astride the main road route from East to West Wales a few miles from
Coed-y-Mwstyr farm. So the picture forms of a main road to the west crossing
the river near the cave where Illtyd dwelt as a hermit Abbot. What was
fascinating to us was that Mr. Leyshon, without knowing the exact nature of our
investigation, took us to the fields above the cave and pointed out that the two
rivers, Ogmore and Ewenny, can be seen joining away down to the south, and
that the estuary and the seashore of the Severn is clearly in view. Even a small
boat entering the estuary from the sea, and coming up-river can be seen clearly
from this site. This fits the story told in the "Life of St. Illtyd" to perfection.
There can be no doubt in the mind of any reasonable man that the cave in which
St. Illtyd, the first cousin of King Arthur, dwelt is the cave on Coed-y-Mwstyr
Farm. The woods in which it is hidden are primaeval, the terrain and boulders
show that it has never been anything but woods or forest. In fact, the woods are
under a strict preservation order. So it is perfectly feasible for Illtyd to have
remained hidden there if he wished to do so. Even the farm has only been
recovered from common wasteland in relatively modern times.
The rock cut grave in the Coed-y-Mwstyr cave was examined in 1930 by Mr.
Leyshon’s father, who is now a venerable gentleman of 94 years. Mr. Leyshon,
now in his 60s, went to see it as a boy in 1930 as well. There is no doubt that it is
a manmade grave, and we mention these facts to forestall the cynics who might
attempt to imply that the rock cut grave is some form of hoax. The square cut
tomb has been there for as long as anyone can remember, and is clearly the grave
Illtyd cut out for King Arthur in the secret burial. Alan Wilson was born in 1932,
Baram Blackett several years later, so they cannot be ever said to have fabricated
this evidence, both being born after the elder Mr. Leyshon examined the rock
grave. C.J.O. Evans, writing in 1938, when Wilson was 6 years old and Blackett
was not born, described the Coed-y-Mwstyr cave and its great antiquity.
The whole of Britain owes a debt to Mr. Leyshon of Coed-y-Mwstyr Farm, for
he was, within the past four years, advised by the police to dynamite the cave to
avoid accidents in it. Fortunately, he has a keen sense of the history of his farm,
and did not do so. It would have been a tragedy of the first magnitude if the
original grave of King Arthur had survived for around 1,420 years, only to be
dynamited in 1980.
As for the battles at Coed-y-Mwstyr Farm, Mr. Leyshon knew of the 721 A.D.
battle and its site, but was uncertain of the 982 A.D. battle, although he knew its
site accurately. In his top field behind the barns there was grazing land, but once
there was an attempt to plough it, and all across the field the plough turned up
discoloured patches of soil. It is fairly certain that these strange discoloured
patches resulted from the decomposition of the bodies and bones of fallen
warriors of the Dark Age battle of 982 A.D.
We did some research on the battles from the historical Bruts and the Charters of
Llandaff. Like the other Welsh documents and histories that we used, the Life of
St. Illtyd proves to be completely accurate, and geographically sound and
correct. In fact we find no evidence for the too-often-repeated cynical slur of
muddle or inaccuracy often stated by English so-called scholars. There is no
reason why Welsh history should fit the invented and fabricated English
versions, which exhibit nothing but muddle and inaccuracy.
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN KING ARTHUR, WHO WAS
SECRETLY BURIED, AND ST. ILLTYD, WHO CARRIED OUT THE
ONLY SECRET BURIAL
We have stated that of all the kings and princes, only King Arthur was secretly
buried, and there is only one record of a contemporary secret burial in the area of
his South Wales kingdom.
We have stated that King Arthur was in roughly the same position as King Henry
VIII of England, desperately marrying younger wives to get a male heir after the
death of his son, or sons, in the Vandal Wars of Twrch Trwyth in 548 A.D.
The Triads name three queens of King Arthur, and also three common law
wives. This total of six is another strange parallel with King Henry VIII. The
tradition of King Arthur's second young queen having an affair with his usurping
nephew Modred ap Caurdaf ap Caradoc may well be true. This would give the
reason for the king taking a third official queen.

The ruin of Cor Emrys at Caer Caradoc where King Arthur lies buried. The high point, center right,
in Twyn Caradoc or the tumulus grave of King Caradoc ap Arch who fought the Romans. The
Mynwent y Milwyr grave Emrys Wledig is at the high point to the extreme left.

Baram Blackett stands at the main western door of Cor Emrys – St. Peter’s Church on Caer
Caradoc. The Mynydd Por-tref, or Mountain of the Supreme City, is in the background.

As we show, the civil war with Modred was probably fought in 562 A.D., and so
when King Arthur finally died around 575 A.D., he would have left his three
sons too young to take over. The eldest was Morgan, who was a child, and he
had to be 14 to succeed to the throne. There was, therefore, every reason to keep
the death of King Arthur a secret.
We have stated that St. Illtyd – the Golden Chained Knight – was the closest
senior abbot or bishop to Arthur in blood relationship. There is every reason
therefore for Illtyd being the churchman chosen to carry out the secret burial of
his close kinsman and king. How close Illtyd was to the kings of Morganwg can
be seen in the simple chart below.

St. Illtyd emerges as a first cousin of the paramount king of Glamorgan and
Gwent, and a son-in-law of the senior king of Britanny, who was a close relation
of the Morganwg kings. As a man renowned for his wisdom and learning, Illtyd
is the obvious choice for the task of concealing the death of King Arthur.
We have one secret burial in Glamorgan around 550-580 A.D. and we have one
king of Glamorgan secretly buried around 575 A.D. The two facts match
perfectly. We also have a holy Abbot who was a first cousin of the dead King
Arthur carrying out the secret burial. The facts are indisputable. We then have a
minor confusion in Glamorgan tradition over the succession of the young King
Morgan ap Arthwyr, and on top of that we have an inscribed stone indicating a
later reburial and identifying Arthwyr ap Meurig, close to the area of the cave
inhabited by St. Illtyd near the Ewenny River, where the manmade rock hewn
tomb still exists for all to see. The inscribed stone gives the final evidence of
King Arthur's reburial in the church.
Reburial in a church site is wholly predictable for a Christian king, whose
grandfather, father and son were all buried in churches in South Wales. Sense
and reason take over from mystery and speculation once King Arthur is
identified as Arthwyr ap Meurig ap Tewdrig ap Teithfallt ap Nynniaw of
Glamorgan and Gwent. The 1,500 year old confusions can be resolved by a well
constructed, properly organised detective operation.
Previous attempts have been characterised by the typically British approach of
trying to take shortcuts and to avoid hard work. Delving through the maze of
Welsh genealogies, the king lists, the "Lives of the Saints", the Charters, the
poetry, the inscribed stones and the riddle histories is hard work if done
thoroughly, and straightening out Welsh history into a history of Wales and not
only one of Gwynedd is equally difficult. Only by reconstructing the kingdom of
the Morganwg kings, customs, organisation, religion, civilization and
achievements, could we hope to get a clear idea of exactly who King Arthur was
and what might have happened. Then we are able to make the final moves to
accurately locate and trace the great king. There were no shortcuts, and driving
straight for King Arthur oblivious of all else would undoubtedly have been a
mistake. If we had simply concentrated on the traditional limited number of so-
called authentic historical scraps recorded on King Arthur, we also would have
finished up in the same maze of blind alleys as others.
Baram Blackett stands in the chancel area of Cor Emrys, or the Choir or Emrys, up on Caer
Caradoc. The view faces east toward the altar area. King Arthur lies buried in this church as the
Uthyrpendragon III.

Pendeyrn, head place of the monarch. The royal centre fortress of the defensive system of North
Glamorgan and Gwent. The view is from the north looking south toward the central fortress of the
entire northern system.

The history of Gwynedd is not the history of Wales, and whilst historians from
North Wales made no claim on King Arthur, South Wales historians certainly did
in large numbers. We traced King Arthur because we traced the neglected and
politically unpopular history of South East Wales. We managed to find him by
tracing his family, and by "surrounding" King Arthur with his family.
In August 1982 we looked at a little-known book of around 1777 A.D. in the
Cardiff Central Library. This work, entitled "Yr Hynafion Cymraeg", is an odd
volume as it consists of two parts, each printed on different paper and in
different typesetting. In the second part of this volume, there is a discussion on
page 70, "Am y Brenin Arthur", which clearly exhibits Arthur ap Meurig ap
Tewdrig descended from Bran ap Llyr Lediath. The Queen Gwynhwyfar is
stated to be daughter of the Iarll of Cerniw or Cernyw, which we state is
Cernyev, still identifiable by Coed Cerniw and Llangerniw in the Cardiff and
Newport area. Even more, the author explains exactly as we have done that
Uthyr Pendragon was a title and not a name, and that it meant "Wonderful
Pendragon" -this is on page 66, in a long note. The author, the Rev. N. Owen,
identified Meurig ap Tewdrig as Uthyr Pendragon, whereas we identify his
father, Tewdrig ap Teithfallt as Uthyr Pendragon, and in the "Death Poem of
Uthyr Pendragon" by Taliesin, the Uthyr is clearly Arthur ap Meurig. It appears
that all three used the title. This long note on page 66 again states that Arthur
was the son of Meurig, and names Anna as his sister. The Prophecies of Merlin
again appear as being by Taliesin – Merlin – to King Arthur as Uthyr Pendragon.
The same King Arthur identification is made in Williams’ "History of
Monmouthshire" of 1784, and made several times more tentatively. The same,
quite precise, identification is made by Robert Owen in his "Kymry" of 1891. On
page 77, it reads, "Arthur the Map Uthyr or ‘the terrible’ was in fact the son of
Meurig, son of Theoderic of Tintern, prince of the Silures". And on page 84,
"Gwent is chiefly illustrated by the heroism of Arthur grandson of Theoderic of
Tintern". The common feature of all the older works that we find identifying
King Arthur correctly is an intimate knowledge of the Welsh genealogies and in
most cases a close study of the Welsh kings of South Wales.
It was the close study of all the information available, and in particular the
family relationships exhibited in all the various sources, which finally enabled us
to obtain a comprehensive understanding of King Arthur's kingdom. Then we
were able to track him down through his first cousin, St. Illtyd.
Basically, it is a matter of understanding that Welsh records are true and correct.
Where a student or historian fails to interpret the records, it means that he, the
historian, is wrong and inadequate. Whereas, the common, mainly English
reaction has been that anything that the historian finds confusing is wrong and
the historian is right. The old saying is true, "a bad workman always blames his
tools". Much remains to be done and hopefully others will see opportunities, and
new fields to conquer following the study that we have made. The phrase "it all
began in 1066" needs to be cast out with the rest of the garbage as swiftly as
possible, and for good.

The entry to the Cave of Pavilions in the Forest of Mystery where the Golden Chained Knight St.
Illtyd buried his first cousin King Arthur ap Meurig.

Baram Blackett examines tombstones of descendants of King Iestyn ap Gwrgan dating from the 16th
and 17th centuries.

The value of multi-source information is shown in this final search for Arthur
through Illtyd. The "Life of St. Illtyd" tells of how a King Poulentius was the
patron of Illtyd. As Illtyd was of a very high rank indeed, this means that King
Poulentius is an extremely important royal person in Glamorgan. Strangely the
Llandaff and Llancarfan Charters, the Dyfed King Lists, the Glamorgan and
Gwent histories, all say absolutely nothing about a King Poulentius. Yet the lists
of Glamorgan saints collected by lolo Morganwg exhibit a St. Pawl – Paul – and
place him at Merthyr Mawr in Glamorgan. They further identify St. Pawl as a
son of King Meurig ap Tewdrig, the paramount king. So we have a royal prince
Pawl ap Meurig, a brother or half brother of Arthur ap Meurig, and this fits in
the time scale of Illtyd. As all Welsh saints were of the royal clan we can be
fairly certain of St. Paul ap Meurig. At Merthyr Mawr, there is the ancient
inscribed tombstone of Pawl fili Ma …, and this is, to any reasonable man, Pawl
ap Meurig – the King Poulentius of St. Illtyd's life story. On its own, the King
Poulentius story in Illtyd's life is nonsense, yet from other sources it can be
shown to be true and accurate.
The lolo Morganwg manuscripts contain a poem said to be from the work of
Lewys Morganwg around 1520 A.D. and held in the Book of Thomas ap Ievan
of Tre'r Bryn around 1620 A.D. The poem is one about St. Illtyd ap Bicanys ap
Cenais, and from line 13 to 18 we find:
A Knight of the great battle fighting Arthur
From his own country he crossed the sea
To become a Saint in this Island
To visit the Warriors
And the three festivals of Arthur and his host
And the king of the warlike land of Morgan
St. Illtyd crosses from Britanny to Britain and visits Arthur in the land of
Morgan, and that means Glamorgan and Gwent. It’s another straw in the wind
and another identification of King Arthur as king of Glamorgan.
THE FOLKLORE OF THE CAVE
There are in Wales no less than five folktales, all of which tell of King Arthur
being buried in a cave. In each case the king lies sleeping with his warriors
around him, waiting for the day when he will be needed to come to the rescue of
his country and free it from the bondage of the English. John Rhys catalogued
these tales with some accuracy in 1882 and we decided to examine them to see if
they bear out.

Baram and Michael Blackett at Penmaen Church, Gower. Inside are several 15th and 16th century
tombstones of descendants of King Arthur.

Tombstone of several descendants of King Iestyn ap Gwrgan, and so of King Arthur by extension,
dating between 1600-1720.

One story is from Anglesey, and it concerns the totally unsuitable sea cave of
Ogof Arthur at Mynydd-y-Cnwc. Another is a Merioneth tale, apparently told at
Bala Fair and printed in the "Brython" of 1858 on page 179. This also seems to
lack substance. A third tale from North Wales tells of a cave on Snowdon
Mountain, and as John Rhys shows clearly, it confuses the history of Rhitta
Gawr (Gormont, son of Rhitta or Ricca in the Culhwch and Olwen Tale) with
King Arthur. What is now Arthur's Cairn was Rhitta Gawr's Cairn. The mountain
was or is Wydfa Rhita – Gwydfa Rhita – and the cairn Carned y Gawr – Giant's
Cairn – with Rhita being the giant. In 1420 A.D., the Bard Rhys Goch Eryri –
Rhys the Red of Snowdon – wrote of it:
On the ridge cold and vast
There the giant Ricca lies.
The supposed cave is Ogof Lanciau Eryri – the young men of Snowdon's cave –
and a latter poet also wrote of the Cairn:
At Arthur's Carn on the shoulder of Snowdon
Lie the remains of the famous Giant Ricca
(Reueth killed by Arthur I son of Magnus Maximus in A.D. 363)
The campaign of Ricca preserved in the folktales, and Arthur's march, to kill
Rhitta – Ricca – is recorded from Dinas Emrys up over Hafod y Borth, on over
to Aran and Braich yr Oen, and then to Tregaran, before finally climbing
northeast to reach Bwlch y Saethau – the Pass of the Arrows – where Arthur was
wounded. This story was in the "Brython" of 1861 on page 331. The tradition of
King Arthur killing the Giant Rhitta Gawr was a blind spot, and finally it
became clear that Arthur I, son of Magnus Maximus, killed the Irish Prince
Reueth in A.D. 363 and Reueth became Rhitta Gawr, or Ricca, or King Ryons of
the Arthurian romance tales.
The other two stories come from Glamorgan and Gwent, and are substantially
the same with King Arthur and his followers lying sleeping in a cave. One tale
was preserved by a Gwent farmer named Craigfryn Hughes and told to John
Rhys in the Gwentian tongue. It is called the Story of Bwrca'r Trwyn. The one
that offered the most promise, however, was the fifth story, which was told by
Edward Williams – lolo Morganwg. This was recorded by one Elijah Waring in
his "Recollections of Anecdotes by Edward Williams". It gives four direction
and location identities to the place of the cave, and these are (1) in the parish of
Llantrisant, (2) Ystrad Dyfodwy, (3) Vale of Towy, and (4) Craig y Dinas. Well,
as we now already have the cave and gravesites, we decided to test this story,
which at first appears to give locations in East Glamorgan, in West Glamorgan
(Towy), or even West Wales, up in Brecon – Craig y Dinas – nowhere in
particular.
First we took Llantrisant, for although present day Llantrisant Parish is a small
area, the area of Llantrisant in the Dark Ages and mediaeval times was quite
different. It was first the Commote of Llantrisant when all Glamorgan consisted
of seven very large areas, and then the Hundred of Llantrisant when all
Glamorgan was split into 10 still large areas. Our cave with Arthur's tomb is in
these old areas. So the general location is correct. Next we took the easy piece –
St. Dyfodwg – whose church is very well known at Llandyfodwg on the North
West of Mynydd y Gaer. This is in the most ancient Commote of Glyn Ogwr and
on the north border of the old Llantrisant Commote. The information is,
however, of the Road of Tyfodwg – Ystrad Dyfodwg – and so we reasonably
have a road to Llandyfodwg.

The David tombstone in Penmaen Church; this tombstone traces David ap David who died in 1623
back to King Iestyn ap Gwrgan and so also to King Arthur.

The Richard Davies tombstone in Penmaen Church shows the Arms of Iestyn ap Gwrgan. This is a
further tombstone of the Davies family of 1672.
Images courtesy of the Curate Penmaen Church

As Tyfodwg was at the Illtyd monastery at Llantwit Major, it is reasonable that
the Ystrad-Dyfodwg ran up from the Vale of Glamorgan through the Llantrisant
Commote and on up to the Llan of St. Tyfodwg. This brings in the next location
information, which is the Vale of the River Towy. In terms of the Vale of
Glamorgan and Llantrisant Commote, this is in modern spelling wildly wrong.
However, the River Thaw has its headwaters in the Llantrisant Commote before
running through the vale to the sea. Again, we can look at old references, and we
find that John Leland, the king's antiquary, in 1536 A.D., calls it the Taue River
and seems to mean Taff, and the Thaw is Thawan. We cannot prove it, but there
seems to be possible confusion between the River Tawy, now Towy or Tawe, and
the Thaw. The Thaw in the Vale of Glamorgan is the Towy or Tawe in the Vale
in the folkstory. If this is so, then the folkstory makes sense and is accurate. It
gives us directions through the ancient Commote of Llantrisant, with a road
coming up from the River Thaw in the Vale of Glamorgan and running on up to
Llandyfodwg. This road would have to cross the River Ewenny and would do so
at the same ancient ford below King Arthur's cave where the Glamorgan armies
crossed to fight the battles of 721 A.D. and 982 A.D. on Coed-y-Mwstyr Farm.
This all exhibits an arrangement that matches the ancient folktale preserved by
Elijah Waring in his book over 150 years ago. He was writing down what he
heard the then-dead Edward Williams saying, and spellings in such oral
traditions and circumstances may not be as precise as we wish. There is,
however, still a problem with this folktale, for it tells of a Craig y Dinas. This
should mean a prominent or high exposed rock or natural stone outcrop, and this
is what diverted Taliesin Williams off up to Graig y Dinas on the Brecon and
Glamorgan borders, a long way off. There should be a dinas or settlement and a
rock or rocks close to the Coed-y-Mwstyr cave if the folktale is correct. Well, the
dinas or settlement part is easy for there are earthwork remains on the hilltop
about a half-mile to the west above the cave. The rock was solved by Mr.
Leyshon, owner of Coed-y-Mwstyr farm, for in the field immediately above the
burial cave, he led us to a place where there had been exposed rock. What had
happened was that from time immemorial, sheep had been left to graze the field,
but now cattle grazed there. Slowly over 50 years, the cattle droppings had fallen
on the large exposed stone area. Earth had stuck, and grass had grown, and now
the whole area was almost concealed. Mr. Leyshon remembered that there
formerly appeared to be carvings on the stone surfaces some 50 years ago circa
1930 and gave us permission to clear the stone and look for them.
Well, it may be that our explanation is contrived a little and not 100 percent
academically correct. But it does offer a coherent explanation to a folktale that
had endured down the ages, but has been misread in modern times. We have the
ancient Commote of Llantrisant, Llandyfodwg and the Road of Tyfodwg across
the river ford. And we have an area called the Vale and a River Thaw, or Tawe or
Towy. And finally we have an ancient dinas and the rock of the dinas close to the
cave. The story does, therefore, appear to be substantially correct even in detail.
A further piece of evidence lies in the local church Llandyfodwg village a mile
from the farm, where an effigy of a king or saint lies holding what appears to be
a bell. This exhibits the monk carrying the bell from Gildas to David and back to
Illtyd in his cave at Coed-y-Mwstyr.
It is another testament to the accuracy of the Glamorgan Bards and to lolo
Morganwg, the last of his kind. The story adds even more weight to the already
overwhelming evidence proving that Coed-y-Mwstyr cave was King Arthur's
first burial place. The dinas or settlement north of the Coychurch village and just
west of Coed-y-Mwstyr is simply called the gaer. Most interesting, however, is
the fact that there are no records of any ancient church lands in the Coychurch
area, yet at least two very ancient sixth century religious stones are at the village
church. They were presumed to be brought from nearby. This points straight at
the Coed-y-Mwstyr Farm, where the farmhouse is down in a hollow and, very
peculiarly, the farm buildings are distant on the hilltop above the woods and
cave. The finding of the ancient stone shrine carved out of one solid block at
these farm buildings where it had been used as a pigs’ trough confirms that this
was a place of a religious house, probably a monastery where pilgrims could
stop over after visiting the cave grave of King Arthur. The line in the "Songs of
the Graves" simply says "Anoeth bid bed Arthur", for "concealed is the grave of
Arthur" is, in fact, the third of six lines precisely describing where Arthur II was
buried, with "Anoeth" meaning a bare or exposed place so be it the grave of
Arthur.
It is appropriate here to give a word of warning about the incredible fantasies
dreamed up by a Professor John Rhys of Oxford University in the 1870-1890
period. This academic was a cultural charlatan who twisted and bent words and
facts to fit a weird theory that all the ancient kings and princes of British history
were not real people at all. They were, according to Rhys, gods and mythological
people – totally unreal. It is incredible that this nonsense is still often quoted
under the title "Hibbert Lectures" and the damage that Professor Rhys did to the
history of his native land of Wales is well nigh incalculable. What he said and
wrote was of course immensely popular with the so-called master race of the
upper class Victorian Empire of English London. The transformation of Welsh
and Irish history into primitive and barbaric myth was exactly the propaganda
that they wanted. We intend to restore these histories to the great nations of the
Welsh, the Irish and to the Northern English. The comic tragedies of Rhys John
Rhys, of J. Gwenogfran Evans, of Griffith John Williams and others all eagerly
jostling to destroy their authentic native heritage, are nothing if not
extraordinary. None stopped at twisting and bending a phrase here and a word
there to completely alter the whole context of ancient Welsh poems. It was all to
support the false theory of Celtic gods. In the poem of "Ymryson Gwyddneu a
Gwyn ab Nudd", deliberate mistranslation was the order of the day for the Rev.
Robert Williams, whose quite amazing inventions are still faithfully reproduced.

From Rhys, we see a most obvious invention is his interpretation of "The Songs
of the Graves". In listing the graves of kings, Rhys interprets one line to read,
"Not wise the thought a grave for Arthur". It should be, "Concealed is the grave
of Arthur". Rhys' gross mischaracterization implies Arthur has no grave, when
really, the poem says it is hidden. The weight of this fallacy hit hard, and finally
prompted a closer look at the "The Songs of the Graves".
REFERENCE MANUSCRIPTS AND BOOKS
1. Bonedd y Saint ynys Prydain (Lives of the Saints of the Isle of Britain) from
the Book of Hafod Y Ychdryd as published in the Myvyrnian Archaiology
2. Bonedd y Saint neu Achau Saint Ynys Prydain as published in the Myvyrnian
Archaiology
3. "Hanes Crefydd yn Nghymru" or "The History of Religion in Wales", from
the arrival of the Cymry to the present times, Rev. David Peter, Carmarthen,
1810
4. "Acta Santorum", the Jesuit work
5. "Nova Legenda Angliae" or Capgrave's "Lives of the Saints", printed Wynkin
de Worde, 1516
6. "Lives of the Saints, Fathers, Martyrs" etc. by Butler in 12 volumes, Dublin
7. "Church History of Brittany", R.F.S. Cressy, 1668. Be careful of the works of
Cressy, who was not always honest.
8. "Vitae Sanctorum Wallensium, numero xvi" the Cottonian MSS British
Musem, Vespasion [Link] – 12B
9 "Calendarium in quo Sancti Wallici praecipue memorantur" – Cottonian MSS
Vespasian [Link] 1B
10. The pedigrees of several British Saints, the Harleian MSS British Museum,
No. 2289
11. "Fragmentium Vitae Sti Davidis Menevensis Archiepiscopi", The Harleian
MSS 310
12. "Giraldus Cambrensis de vita Davidis Menevensis Episcopi Historia", The
Harleian MSS 624
13. The Early English Historians – these are principally Matthew of
Westminster, Matthew of Paris, William of Malmesbury, Henry of Huntingdon,
Bede of Sunderland, the Annals of Wighorn, Ranulph and many others including
Roger of Hovendon.
14. The MSS of Carte in the Bodelian Library
15. Celtic Researches – non the origins, traditions and language of the ancient
British, The work of Edward, London 1804
16. "The History of Welsh Ehroes by threes or Triads in Welsh and English", The
Harleian MSS 4181; see the work of Hugh Thomas
17. "The History of Brecknockshire", by Theophillus Jones
18. "The Genaeological History of the Ancient and Present Nobility and Gentry
of Wales", the planned work of Hugh Thomas, the Harleian MSS 6823, 6831 and
6870
19. "Descents of Some Welsh Families", the Harleian MSS 1979
20. A collection of Welsh descents including the names of the conquerors of
Brecon and Glamorgan, the Harleian MSS 1997
21. A collection of the pedigrees of Welsh families, Hugh Thomas, the Harleian
MSS 1143
22. A collection of Welsh pedigrees, Hugh Thomas, the Harleian MSS 2291
23. A large collection of Welsh pedigrees, Hugh Thomas, the Harleian MSS
2299
24. The descent of Welshmen who obtained great titles, honour and worship in
England, the Harleian MSS 1143, 1370
25. "The Arms of the Founders of Welsh Families", the Harleian MSS 1386,
1441
26. "The Arms of Welsh Families", Harleian MSS 1993
27. The arms of the old founders of Welsh families beginning with Brutus, the
Harleian MSS 1946
28. The arms of divers old Welsh families, the Harleian MSS 1961; the arms and
descents of several Welsh families, the Harleian MSS 1970
29. Descents of divers old Welsh families, the Harleian MSS 1412, 1976, 1977,
1978, 1995, 6102, 6122
30. A collection of Welsh pedigrees, the Harleian MSS 1935
31. The descent of the British kings and princes from Brutus to Rhese Gryg, who
died in 1233 A.D., the Harleian MSS 1949
32. Descents of the many nobility and gentry who have resided or possessed
lands in Pembrokeshire, Caermarthenshire, Glamorgan, Brecon, Cardiganshire,
etc., Harleian 1975
33. Descents of many Welsh families, including those of the 15 tribes of North
Wales, the Harleian MSS 1969
34. "Pedigrees and Arms of Welsh Families", the Harleian MSS 1933
35. "Pedigrees of Some Welsh Families", the Harleian MSS 2414
36. Welsh pedigrees, etc., the Harleian MSS 3538; various Welsh pedigrees etc.,
the Harleian MSS 4031; "Arms of Welsh Families", the Harleian MSS 4291;
"Genaelolgies of Welsh Families", the Harleian MSS 5058; "Various Welsh
Pedigrees", the Harleian MSS 6153
37. Pedigrees of some Welsh families including Mansells of Margam, the
Harleian MSS 2218
38. Vincents Wales in the Heralds Office, volumes folio marked 135 and 136
39. "The Myfyrnian Archaiology of Wales", a collection of ancient manuscripts
in three volumes, London, 1801 and 1807
40. "Vindication of the Old Welsh Poems", Sharon Turner 8 vo. in 1804
41. "The Brut y Tywyssogion: the Chronicle of the princes", Caradoc of
Llancarfan circa 1135, first made widely public by the Rev. Josiah Rees of
Gelligron, Glamorgan, in the "Eurgrawn Cymraeg" Welsh magazine in 1770
42. "The Chronicle of the Kings of Great Britain", the translation from Welsh by
Peter Roberts in 1811 in London; the Brut attributed to Tysilio, the grandson of
King Brochwael Ysgythrog of Powys circa 630 A.D.; notes on Gildas, on British
origins, on the laws of Dyfnwal Moelmud, and on the ancient British apostolic
church
43. "The History of Cambria Now called Wales", David Powel using the
translation of H. Lloyd, printed in 1584 and reprinted n 1811; primarily a history
of Gwynedd
44. "The History of Wales", William Wynne, 8 vo. in 1697, reprinted in 1702
and 1774
45. "The History of Wales", the Rev. W. Warrington 2 vo. reprinted third edition
in 1791
46. The history of Great Britain etc., John Lewis, a folio of 1759
47. "A History of Great Britain from Noah’s Flood to Cadwalladr", John Lewys
of Llynwene, 1611, the Harleian MSS 4872
48. "A Short History of Wales from 668 to 936", the Harleian MSS 3325
49. "History of the British Kings Chiefly Arthur", the Cottonian MSS, Titus [Link].
214
50. Nomina regum Brittaniae et episcoporum Landavensium, cum variis
recordationibus, Gallice, Cottonian MSS Vitelius C.x. 92
51. The history of the principality of Wales, etc., Robert Burton, 1370 A.D.
52. "A True Account of the Ancient Britons", [Link], a "Cambro Briton", 1716,
London
53. "The History of Manchester", in four books, the Rev. Whittaker, 1773,
London
54. "The Genuine History of the Britons", the Rev. Whittaker, 1773, London
55. "British Antiquities Revived", Robert Vaughan, 1662, Oxford
56. "The Royal Tribes of Wales", P. Yorke, 1799
57. "Owen’s History of the Ancient Britons", 1743
58. "Achaelogica Britannica", Edward Lluyd, 1707, Oxford
59. "Heroic Elegies of Llywarch Hen", translated by William Owen, 1792
60. "The Cambrian Biography", William Owen, 1803
61. "Specimens of the Poems of the Ancient Welsh Bards", the Rev. Evan Evans,
1764
62. "Jones Musical Relics of the welsh Bards", in two volumes
63. "An Historical Account of the Ancient and Modern State of Wales", Sir John
Dodderidge, 1714, London, from the Cottonian MSS Brit. Mus. Vitel. C.x. 220;
the Harleian MSS 305, 1980, 2159
64. "The Breviary of Britayne", the English translation of the Humphrey Llwyd
version in Latin, 1573, London
65. A chronicle of Wales from King Cadwallader to Llewellyn ap Griffith ap
Llewellyn, Humphey Llwyd, 1559 (this is another history of North West Wales
or Gwynedd, not a history of all Wales), the Cottonian MSS Cat. [Link].1
66. Ejusdem Fragmentum ex Chronico Wallico ab ipso Wallice scripto, the
Cottonian MSS [Link].217
67. Cantredae Walliae, the Cottonian MSS Domitian viii.119
68. Notula quando Cantredae sive Centurae Walliae primo inceperint, the
Cottonian MSS Domitian viii.124.b
69. Extenta terrarum Ecclesiae Leges et Consuetudines Walliae, the Harleian
MSS 4776
70. "A Topographical Dictionary of the Dominion of Wales", Nicolas Carlisle,
1811,
71. "Camdens Britannia", Gough's edition,
72. "Gross Antiquities of Wales"
73. "Horsley's Britannia Romana"
74. "A Description of Britain", translated from Richard of Cirencester, London,
1809
75. "Draytons Pollyolbion", with Seldens Notes
76. "The Worthiness of Wales", Thomas Churchyard, 1587
77. Vrsus Rhythmici de Wallis", the Cottonian MSS Titus [Link].101
78. The letters of Edward Lhuyd to Dr. William Nicholson, the Harleian MSS
2289
79. The many manuscripts of the work of Giraldus Cambrensis in early
mediaeval times, including Harleian MSS 1757; Cottonian MSS Dom.i.56;
Cottonian MSS Dom.i.111.b; Cottonian MSS VItel C.x.1; Cottonian MSS Nero
[Link].116; Harleian MSS 359; Cottonian MSS Vitel [Link].98.B; Cottonian MSS
[Link].123.b; Harleian MSS 912, 551
80. "Notitia Cambrobritannica", with much more information of funeral
monuments and antiquity, Thomas Dinely, 1684, Badminton Library
81. Lelands Itinerary and Lelands Collectanea
82. Lhwyd Map of Wales, Saxtons maps of 1579, Speeds maps of 1610, Lewis
Morris' maps and charts of 1737-1741
83. Numerous tours and walks through wales between 1750-1840
84. "The Liber Landavensis", the "Llandaff Cathedral Charters", published by
the Welsh Manuscript Society
85. The Harleian MSS 4181 and the Cottonian Vaespasian [Link]
86. The Iolo Morganwg manuscripts, published by the Welsh Manuscript Society
87. The "Lives of the Saints", Rees and Rhys
88. "The Mabinogion", from the "Red Book of Hergest" in Jesus College
Oxford, Lady C. Guest
89. "The Llancarfan Charters"
90. "The Black Book of Carmarthen"
91. "De Excidio", St. Gildas, many editions, Giles and Skeene
92. "The History of Britain", Nennius, many translations and editions
93. "Four Ancient Books of Wales", Skeene
94. "The Brut of England", edited by Frederich Brie, 1906-1908, published by
the English Manuscript Society.
95. "The History of the Kings of Britan", Gryffydd ap Arthur circa 1135 A.D.,
misnamed Geoffrey of Monmouth in English; translated to English by Aaron
Thompson in 1718 from Commelin's Latin version of 1587; by J.A. Giles in
1842 and 1848, and by Sebastian Evans in 1912 from the 1854 Latin version of
A. Schultz. The Welsh version of the Myfyrnian Archaiology is probably the
best, along with the Brut Tyssilio and the modern Lewis Thorpe version by
Penguin Classics.
96. "The Brut y Tywyssogion", or the "History of the Princes"
97. "The Brut Y Saeson" or the "History of the Saxons"
98. "Brut Ieuan Brechfa"
99. "Hanes Gryffydd ap Cynan"
100. Poems by Edward Williams, the Welsh Bard, in two volumes
101. "Monasticon", Dugdale; "Notitia Monastica", Tanner; "Anglia Sacra",
Wharton; "Survey of the Cathedral of Llandaff and St. David's", Browne Willis
102. "Baronage", Dugdale
103. The manuscripts at Cardiff Library
104. "The History of Monmouthshire", David Williams, 1784
105. The works of Archbishop Usher
106. "The Taylors Cussion", a collection of manuscripts of South Wales, part of
Gough's manuscript collection
107. "Philosophical Transactions", no. 243, p. 279; and no. 252, p. 186; the
Edward Llwyd discussions on South Wales stones
108. Map of South Wales, Nathaniel Coltman
109. "A Book of the Antiquities of Glamorganshire", Sir Rice Merricke, or Rhys
Meurig, of 1578, reprinted by James Andrew Corbett of London, 1887
110. "The Winning of the Lordship of Glamorgan", Sir Edward Stradling of St.
Donats; see the Harleian MSS 368
111. A collection of records concerning Wales and pedigrees of Glamorgan,
Monmouth and others, the book of George Owen, the Harleian MSS 6068
112. "The History of the Franks", the contempory sixth century history, Gregory
of Tours
113. The Llandaff Charters
Papers relating to Llandaff Diocese in Bishop Tanners Bodelian Collections no.
146
The Cottonian MSS Titus [Link] Ecclesiastical Chronicles of Llandaff
The Cottonian MSS Vitel.C. x.26 excerpts of Llandaff Antiquities
The Cottonian MSS Vitel.C. x.47 life of St. Oudoceus and various charters
The Cottonian MSS Vitel.C x.97.b the register and calendar of Llandaff, the
Popes and the English King; see also the The Cottonian MSS Vitel.C. [Link]., the
Vitel C.x.105, the Vitel C.x.95, The Cottonian Otho [Link].72.b
The Harleian MSS 838 various annals of Llandaff
The Harleian MSS 128
The Harleian MSS 595
114. "The Annals of Margam Abbey", as inserted in Gales Scriptores History,
Ang. Volume 1
115. Excerpts from the library of the Abbey of Neath of 1595 in Harleian MSS
2273
116. Glamorganshire, with Cardyff and Llandaff described, John Speed, 1610
117. "Glamorganshire Comitatus Australis Cambria Descripto", Saxton, 1578
118. "A History of the County of Brecknock", Theophillus Jones, in two
volumes, 1805
119. "De Situ Brecheniauc", the Cottonian MSS Vespasian [Link].10.b
120. A geographical description of Brecknockshire, the Harleian MSS 7017, and
the History of Brecknock from Meyrick, King of Britain (Meurig ap Tewdrig),
until 1603 in the same MSS
121. A history of Brecon and Glamorgan from the time of Meurrick, King of
Brittaine (Meurig ap Tewdrig), until the year 1606, Harleian MSS 6108
122. Collections of very early Brecon genaelogy and pedigrees, the Cottonian
MSS Dom1.157.b; the Harleian MSS 2289; Harleian MSS 128; Cottonian MSS
Julius D.x.28
123. Maps by Speed, Kitchen, Morden, Bowen
124. A colleciton of Carmarthenshire pedigrees, the Harleian MSS 2300, and the
Harleian MSS 128
125. "History and Antiquities of the County of Cardigan", S.R. Merick A.B.,
London, 1808
126. "Bishops and Benefactors of St. David's", the Rev. Thomas Burgess, and
many other manuscripts of the cathedral history and associated rulers: Harelian
MSS 359, 544, 595, 838, 1249, 1563, 6077, 6280; the Cottonian MSS
Cleopatra.E.i.90; [Link].76.b; Dom.1.138; Dom.1.155.b; Dom.V.21
127. "The Tenby Guide" Swansea, 1810
128. "The Anglo Saxon Chronicles"
129. "Asserius Menevensis de Alfraedi Rebus Gestis"
130. "Radnor, Brecknock, Cardigan, et Caermarden quatuor Australis Cambria
Comitatium, B. Deheubart.A., South Wales, Descriptio" Saxton, 1578
131. The Countie of Radnor described and the shyre towne's situation, John
Speed, 1610
132. "The Chronicle of Wace"
133. "Chronicle Poem of Layamon"
There are numerous other references and books that are relevant, particularly the
mass of evidence from Brittany and the Roman evidence from classical sources
and the Cambridge Ancient and Mediaeval History. Very important are the
works of writers like Procopius and Cassiodorus, and the early Christian writers
and editors, including Orosius, Eusebius, Origen, Sextus Africanus, Jerome and
Tertulian, etc. Also, there are the masses of mediaeval chronicles – Roger of
Hovenden, Florence of Worcester, Froissart and even the romance writers Walter
Map, Chretien de Troyes, Marie de France, Eschenbach and others. In fact,
altogether too much has been written too often and the trail of King Arthur
became obscured. The list we give above should be sufficient to allow any
interested perosn to study, with the priviso that the conventional Welsh histories
that display the history of the Princes of Gwynedd as the History of Wales are in
this misleading. Almost every manuscript has been translated and the majority
are available in good libraries.
The principal manuscript used by Edward Williams of Glamorgan:
The Manuscripts of Hafod Uchtryd
Manuscripts of Watkyn Giles of Penyfai in Glamorgan
The Long Black Book of Thomas Trueman of Pant-y-lliwydd, Glamorgan
The Book of Thomas Hopking of Coycurch on Ogwr, Glamorgan
Manuscripts of Thomas ap Evan of the Bryn, transposed circa 1670
The Book of Mr. Cobb of Cardiff, Glamorgan
Manuscripts of Twrog
Anthony Powell's manuscripts Tir Iarll, Glamorgan
Ieuan Deulwyn, the Royal Lineage of Coetty, circa 1450-1470, Glamorgan
The Peniarth Manuscripts, the Hengwrt Manuscripts, the Harleian Manuscripts
The Bodelian Laud 610, Bodelian Rawlinson 502 and 3468
Harleian Manuscripts 3859
Jesus College 20 – Cardiff no. 1 and no. 25
Manuscripts at the Welsh School in London