| Note: | Images of the original pages are available through Internet Archive. See http://archive.org/details/cu31924074466586 |
KING ARTHUR IN CORNWALL
BY
W. HOWSHIP DICKINSON, M.D.
HONORARY FELLOW OF GONVILLE AND CAIUS COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE
LONGMANS, GREEN, AND CO.
39 PATERNOSTER ROW, LONDON
NEW YORK AND BOMBAY
1900
All rights reserved
The following pages present an attempt to bring together what may beaccepted with regard to the personality and actual life of King Arthur,while putting aside everything that is obviously or probably fabulous. Ihave endeavoured to give due weight to the evidence, both positive andnegative, rather than to work up to a pre-determined conclusion. Withregard to the evidence of a positive kind, if so it may be called, I havegiven especial weight to the details of topography, more particularly inCornwall, with the Arthurian localities of which I happen to be morefamiliar than with those elsewhere.
The fame of Arthur as expressed by the association of his name with placesis greater than that of any other personage save one who can claim thissort of connection with our island. On this showing, Julius Cæsar andOliver Cromwell sink into insignificance[Pg vi] as compared with the CornishChief. Only the Devil is more often mentioned in local association thanArthur. That name, indeed, is almost ubiquitous, since it is to be foundwherever local peculiarities exist which were not explicable to ourforefathers save by infernal agency. The Devil’s Dyke, The Devil’s Bridge,the Devil’s Jumps, the Devil’s Frying Pan, the Devil’s Post-Office, theDevil’s Punch-Bowl, are a few instances among many. Next to the Devil inbestowing names on localities comes Arthur. But the two names aredistributed in a very different fashion: that of the Devil is scatteredimpartially, being placed at random wherever thought suitable; that ofArthur is limited to certain districts in which according to history ortradition the hero lived or moved. This dissemination and limitation ofthe name must have some origin, and may be most obviously and reasonablyexplained by connecting them with an individual to whom it actuallybelonged. I hold Arthur to have been as real a person as Cæsar orCromwell, though less advantageously circumstanced for the recording ofhis deeds. The British Chief lived in the dark interval between twocivilisations, between the departure of the[Pg vii] Romans from the island andthe establishment of the Saxon polity. The west and the north, which werethe seats of his exploits, were remote from what had been the centres ofRoman learning, and it may be presumed that Arthur’s fighting men wereonly less illiterate than the Saxons with whom they contended