The stories of King Arthur and his knights have been swirling around for centuries, igniting imaginations and sparking endless debates. Rooted in the shadowy world of Dark Age Britain, where historical records are as scarce as hen’s teeth, the existence of a real King Arthur remains shrouded in mystery.
While some scholars throw their hands up in the air and declare Arthur a pure figment of imagination, others have been tirelessly digging through the scant historical evidence, hoping to unearth the truth. Enter Riothamus, a 5th-century king of the Britons, who’s become a prime suspect in the hunt for the historical Arthur. But is this connection just wishful thinking, or is there some real substance behind it? Let’s pull on our detective hats and delve into the intriguing world of Riothamus and the enduring legend of King Arthur.
Introducing Riothamus: A King in the Shadows
Before we dive into the “Arthur” connection, let’s get to know Riothamus a little better. Our knowledge of him comes from a couple of dusty old texts, neither of which were actually written in Britain. First, we have a letter penned by Sidonius Apollinaris, the Bishop of Clermont, essentially acting as a medieval mediator. He writes to Riothamus on behalf of a disgruntled citizen who’s accusing some pesky Britons of stealing his slaves. The fact that Sidonius appeals to Riothamus suggests he held some serious sway over these Britons, hinting at his royal status.
Our second source is a bit more action-packed. Jordanes, a 6th-century historian, recounts the Visigothic wars in Gaul, led by the fearsome King Euric. According to Jordanes, the Western Roman Emperor Anthemius, facing a serious Visigothic threat around 470 AD, sent out a desperate plea for help. And who answered the call? None other than King Riothamus, who reportedly sailed in with a whopping 12,000 men, ready to rumble. Unfortunately for Riothamus, the Visigoths proved a bit too tough to handle. He was defeated by Euric and forced to flee, eventually seeking refuge with the Burgundians, a neighboring tribe who were chummy with the Romans.
Why Riothamus Might Be Arthur
So, why do some historians believe this somewhat obscure figure might be the legendary King Arthur? After all, Arthur isn’t just remembered as a military leader who fended off Saxon invaders; he’s the hero of epic quests, the ruler of Camelot, and the champion of chivalry.
The link to Arthur gains traction thanks to Geoffrey of Monmouth, a 12th-century historian who penned the “Historia Regum Britanniae.” This book threw some serious fuel on the Arthurian fire, depicting Arthur as a conquering hero who stomped across Gaul, snatching up a huge chunk of the Western Roman Empire. He spent years expanding his territory, ultimately clashing with the Romans and their allies in a colossal battle. Here’s the kicker: Riothamus is the only historically documented “king of the Britons” who actually led an army to Gaul around the time Arthur would have been alive. This makes him a tempting candidate, especially when you consider that the name “Riothamus” might translate to “Highest King,” a title certainly befitting the legendary Arthur.
The 20th-century historian Geoffrey Ashe championed the Riothamus-Arthur theory, and it’s gained quite a bit of popularity since then. He and other supporters point to potential parallels between other historical figures and characters from the Arthurian legends, further strengthening their case. For instance, they link the Roman Emperor Lucius in Arthurian tales to the historical Emperor Glycerius, and the Arthurian Emperor Leo to the real-life Emperor Leo I. They even suggest that the Pope Supplicius mentioned in Arthurian stories corresponds to Pope Simplicius.
Ashe goes even further, arguing that Riothamus was betrayed by a certain Arvandus, drawing a parallel to Arthur’s infamous betrayal by his treacherous nephew Mordred. Finally, they highlight the fact that Riothamus fled to Burgundian territory, near a city called Avallon. Could this be the inspiration for the mythical Isle of Avalon, where Arthur is said to have been taken after his final battle?
More Affairs
Why Riothamus Might Not Be Arthur
While the Riothamus-Arthur theory has its allure, it’s not without its holes. One of the biggest issues revolves around the very foundation of the theory: that Riothamus even came from Britain. Jordanes, our main source, simply states that Riothamus arrived in Gaul “by way of the ocean.” This has been interpreted as confirmation that he sailed from Britain, but it’s not explicitly stated. In fact, Britons had already settled in what is now Brittany, in northwest Gaul, by Riothamus’s time. Could he have been a king of these continental Britons, rather than a king from the British Isles?
Then there’s the glaring difference in their exploits. While Arthur is celebrated for his military prowess and vast conquests, Riothamus, well, he didn’t exactly have a winning streak. There’s no historical record of him achieving any military victories in Gaul. In fact, he was soundly defeated and forced into exile. It’s a bit of a stretch to imagine how such a crushing defeat could morph into tales of glorious conquest over time.
Furthermore, Riothamus was an ally of the Romans, while Arthur, in the legends, was their adversary. This mismatch in political alliances casts further doubt on their connection.
The proposed parallels between historical figures and Arthurian characters also crumble under scrutiny. The link between Emperor Lucius and Emperor Glycerius relies on a misdated chronicle, and the identification of Pope Supplicius with Pope Simplicius ignores chronological inconsistencies. Even the supposed connection between Arvandus and Mordred is flimsy, as their alleged betrayals bear little resemblance to each other. As for the city of Avallon being the inspiration for the mystical island of Avalon, well, one is a city and the other is an island, making that link rather tenuous.
A King, but Perhaps Not The King
So, was Riothamus the real King Arthur? Based on the available evidence, it’s highly unlikely. While Riothamus was undoubtedly a real historical figure, a king of the Britons who fought alongside the Romans, his story differs significantly from the legendary Arthur. Their military campaigns, political alliances, and overall narratives simply don’t align. The parallels drawn between historical figures and Arthurian characters are often based on shaky ground and chronological inconsistencies.
While the search for the historical Arthur continues, it seems Riothamus is likely to remain just another intriguing figure from the murky depths of Dark Age history, a king in his own right, but perhaps not the legendary king we’ve come to know through myth and legend. The real King Arthur, if he ever existed, remains elusive, his true identity lost to the mists of time. However, the ongoing quest to uncover his secrets keeps the legend alive, reminding us of the power of stories to captivate and inspire us, even centuries later.
