The Irish King Arthur

A few months ago, I published a book about King Arthur called 'Arthur, Prince of Mar'. I argued that King Arthur was a king of the Picts who fought alongside the native Britons against the Anglo-Saxons in the 5th century AD. I had good reason to believe that this was the case. In an old Welsh genealogy called the Descent of the Men of the North, there is a famous king called Arthwys son of Mar who lived during the 5th century. I identified Mar as the province of Mar in Aberdeenshire. Furthermore, the French monk, Lambert of St Omer explained in the early 12th century that King Arthur was a ‘Dux Pictorum’, a leader of the Picts. Any Arthurian enthusiast will be familiar with the term ‘Dux Bellorum’, which means leader of battles. A Welsh monk called Nennius explained in the 9th century that King Arthur was a Dux Bellorum who fought 12 battles against the Anglo-Saxons in his famous work, Historia Brittonum. The Picts were the native tribes of Scotland who united with the Gaels in 843AD to form the kingdom of Alba. There were also Irish Picts in the province of Ulster known as the Cruithne. I argued that a Pictish king called Gartnait who died in 537AD may have been the same individual as Arthwys son of Mar. Gartnait seems to have been a popular name in Mar around the 10th/11th centuries. Other names for Gartnait included Garthnach and Garnard. According to the legends, King Arthur was killed at the battle of Camlann in 537AD by his nephew Mordred, who was also killed. Gartnait is therefore a possible candidate for the historical King Arthur. Another Pictish king who lived during the time of King Arthur was called Drust Gurthinmoch who reigned for around 30 years, whereas Gartnait only reigned for 7 years. The meaning of Gurthinmoch is unknown. However, I would suggest ‘bear prince’ as a possible translation. The name Arthur of course means bear. The words Garth or Gurth may have been the Pictish equivalent.

During the course of writing my book on King Arthur, I found an entry in the Irish annals which suggested that King Arthur was an Irish high king. In the Annals of the Four Masters, there’s an entry for the year 538AD which explains that the Irish high king, Tuathal Maelgarbh was killed at Greallach Eillte by Maelmorda, who was immediately killed afterwards. This has close parallels to the legend of the battle of Camlann. The name Maelgarbh means ‘rough prince’ and Maelmorda means ‘prince Morda’. According to the Annals of the Four Masters,

After Tuathal Maelgarbh, son of Cormac Caech, son of Cairbre, son of Niall, had been eleven years in the sovereignty of Ireland, he was slain, at Greallach Eillte, by Maelmor, son of Airgeadan, who was the tutor of Diarmaid mac Cearbhaill; and Maelmor fell in revenge of it thereof immediately, of which was said,

“The fate of Maelmor was not slow,
it was not a just deed he accomplished,
The killing of the mighty Tuathal,
he himself fell for it.”

In this entry, Maelmorda is referred to as Maelmor. However, other sources refer to him as Maelmorda. Tuathal Maelgarbh was the grandson of Cairbre Mac Niall, one of the sons of Niall of the Nine Hostages, the high king of Ireland and ancestor of the O’Neil dynasties. The Cenel Cairbre were based at Granard in County Longford, the old Irish kingdom of Tethbae. The small town of Granard would have been the capital of North Tethbae. At Granard, there is a Norman Motte and Bailey castle on the site of an older hillfort. There is also an interesting link between Granard and the province of Mar in Aberdeenshire. Clan Forbes were based in Mar. They have three bears’ heads as their coat of arms, which may be related to the Arthurian legends. In the 17th century, clan Forbes were granted the Earldom of Granard in County Longford. Arthur Forbes was the first Earl of Granard. The second Earl of Granard was also called Arthur Forbes. This may be a complete coincidence, or there may be more to it. In county Longford, there is also a River Camlin, a tributary of the River Shannon. Could this be where King Arthur fought his final battle against Mordred?

Tuathal Maelgarbh may have raided Britain and been recruited as a mercenary by the native Britons to fight against the Anglo-Saxons, where he ended up leading the native Britons, before claiming the Irish high kingship. Or he may have been exiled to Britain which was quite common for Irish princes and kings. The death of the high king of Ireland would have surely been big news in Ireland and Britain, especially if he was the historical King Arthur. To the Irish, King Arthur is simply a legendary British figure. Paradoxically, English kings have used the Arthurian legends to justify their invasions of Wales, Scotland and Ireland. But what if the Irish have more of a claim to the Arthurian legends than they think? Although I’m not quite willing to abandon the idea of a Pictish King Arthur, it’s tempting to think that King Arthur had mixed Irish and Pictish heritage and was based at a place like Galloway in the south west of Scotland where he would have been able to build a vast empire from Tara to Aberdeenshire and Hadrian’s wall in the south, in the chaotic decades after the Romans withdrew from Britannia. On the south coast of Galloway, a dark age hillfort known as Trusty’s hillfort, which is probably derived from the Pictish name Drust, is receiving a lot of attention from archaeologists and historians. The mysterious Pictish symbols are carved in the rock at the entrance of the hillfort, far away from the lands of the Picts to the north. Could this be King Arthur’s Camelot?