- I had discussed the "Galfridian framework" upon which at least part of the story of Uther Pendragon seemed to be based. As it turns out, I should have pushed that particular exploration a bit further.
I had drawn a parallel between Uther and Julian, one of the two sons (the other being Constans) of Constantine III. My reason was simple: Julian as a name was chosen because the famous emperor Julian the Apostate was the son of Julius Constantius, half-brother of Constantine the Great. This first Julian was not only called a 'Dragon', but was noted for his favoring of the draconarii, the bearers of the dragon standard. In fact, Julian was actually crowned by a draconarius (see http://www.fectio.org.uk/articles/draco.htm).
It is in the work of Gregory of Nazianus’s ‘First Invective Against Julian' (see http://www.tertullian.org/fathers/gregory_nazianzen_2_oration4.htm) that we find the Emperor called "the Dragon" (of Revelations). In the same work, we are told:
“Moreover he shows his audacity against the great symbol [the Chi-Ro of Constantine the Great], which marches in procession along with the Cross, and leads the army, elevated on high, being both a solace to toil, and so named in the Roman language, and king (as one may express it) over all the other standards, whatever are adorned with imperial portraits, and expanded webs in divers dyes and pictures, and whatever, breathing through the fearful gaping mouths of dragons, raised on high on the tops of spears, and filled with wind throughout their hollow bodies, spotted over with woven scales, present to the eye a most agreeable and at the same time terrible show.”
In this last, Gregory in speaking out against the Roman draco or ‘dragon’ standard, which according to Geoffrey of Monmouth Uther Pendragon carried in his wars. The draco is described as “fearful” and “terrible.”
It is in the work of Gregory of Nazianus’s ‘First Invective Against Julian' (see http://www.tertullian.org/fathers/gregory_nazianzen_2_oration4.htm) that we find the Emperor called "the Dragon" (of Revelations). In the same work, we are told:
“Moreover he shows his audacity against the great symbol [the Chi-Ro of Constantine the Great], which marches in procession along with the Cross, and leads the army, elevated on high, being both a solace to toil, and so named in the Roman language, and king (as one may express it) over all the other standards, whatever are adorned with imperial portraits, and expanded webs in divers dyes and pictures, and whatever, breathing through the fearful gaping mouths of dragons, raised on high on the tops of spears, and filled with wind throughout their hollow bodies, spotted over with woven scales, present to the eye a most agreeable and at the same time terrible show.”
In this last, Gregory in speaking out against the Roman draco or ‘dragon’ standard, which according to Geoffrey of Monmouth Uther Pendragon carried in his wars. The draco is described as “fearful” and “terrible.”
While some have argued against Geoffrey of Monmouth patterning his Constantine and Constans after Constantine the III and his son Constans, I was able to show a number of things which strongly suggests this is exactly what he did.
First, Constantine's son Ambrosius is based upon the 4th century Prefect of Gaul, possibly fused with his son St. Ambrose:
Aurelius Ambrosius (337-340)
St. Ambrose (d. 397)
His other son, Constans, begins his career as a monk - which was true historically of Constans, son of Constantine III and brother of Julian.
There were a couple of additional points I did not think to raise in the earlier post.
First, Julian the Apostate - after whom Julian son of Constantine III was named - had been proclaimed Augustus. The first Augustus, Octavian, was often of such poor health that he was carried about the battlefield on a litter - just as is said of Uther towards the end of his life. A similar story is told of the 4th century B.C. general Eumenes in his conflict with Antigonus. There may be other ancient examples of this motif; I've not bothered to search for more. A more immediate influence may have come from the 9th century. Guy Halsall (in "Warfare and Society in the Barbarian West 450-900) relates how at this time "a sick Breton commander had himself carried on a litter in front of battle-line rather than leave his troops leaderless." The source Halsall derives this statement from (the late Karl Leyser's "Communications and Power in Medieval Europe") calls this Breton commander a duke, although his name is not given. That name may be in Regino's CHRONICON (875), and I'm currently trying to find that source.* Strictly from a chronological standpoint, the duke in question may have been Pascwetan, whose name resembles that of Pascent, a son of Vortigern.
Second, we are told Uther died at St. Albans, the ancient Verulamium, which was also known as Cair Mincip ('Fort Municipium) in the 28 Cities of Britain list appended to Nennius's HISTORIA BRITTONUM. Rivet and Smith ("The Place-Names of Roman Britain") give the early forms of Municipium used for this Romano-British city. Constantine III and his son Julian, after their defeat at Arles, were beheaded in 411 A.D. on the River MINCIO in Italy.
In his book THE EMPEROR AND THE ARMY IN THE LATER ROMAN EMPIRE, AD 235-395, Mark Hebblewhite has this to say about Julian's use of the draco standard. The Labarum referred to here employed the chi-rho symbol of Constantine the Great.
This is the actual passage the author alludes to from Ammianus, Books XVI, Chapter XII, 39:
Quo agnito per purpureum signum draconis, summitati hastae longioris aptatum velut senectutis pendentis exuvias, stetit unius turmae tribunus et pallore timoreque perculsus ad aciem integrandam recurrit.
For as he was at once recognized by his purple standard of the dragon, which was fixed to the top of a long spear, waving its fringe as a real dragon sheds its skin, the tribune of one squadron halted, and turning pale with alarm, hastened back to renew the battle.
Ammianus Book XVI, Chapter XII, 39.
'timoreque' can here be defined as "fear, dread, apprehension, alarm, anxiety." Here have a Terrible Chief-dragon, indeed!
The word 'terrible' is also used of Julian outside of the draco context twice in Ammianus Marcellinus:
sine crudelitate terribilis
terrible but free from cruelty
oculos cum venustate terribilis
his eyes, at once terrible and full of charm
In his book THE EMPEROR AND THE ARMY IN THE LATER ROMAN EMPIRE, AD 235-395, Mark Hebblewhite has this to say about Julian's use of the draco standard. The Labarum referred to here employed the chi-rho symbol of Constantine the Great.
This is the actual passage the author alludes to from Ammianus, Books XVI, Chapter XII, 39:
Quo agnito per purpureum signum draconis, summitati hastae longioris aptatum velut senectutis pendentis exuvias, stetit unius turmae tribunus et pallore timoreque perculsus ad aciem integrandam recurrit.
For as he was at once recognized by his purple standard of the dragon, which was fixed to the top of a long spear, waving its fringe as a real dragon sheds its skin, the tribune of one squadron halted, and turning pale with alarm, hastened back to renew the battle.
Ammianus Book XVI, Chapter XII, 39.
'timoreque' can here be defined as "fear, dread, apprehension, alarm, anxiety." Here have a Terrible Chief-dragon, indeed!
The word 'terrible' is also used of Julian outside of the draco context twice in Ammianus Marcellinus:
sine crudelitate terribilis
terrible but free from cruelty
oculos cum venustate terribilis
his eyes, at once terrible and full of charm
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.