"The Britains almost severed from the World." VIRGIL, Bucolics i, 67.
"At length he (Brutus-the-Trojan) came to this island named after him 'Britannia,' dwelt there and filled it with his descendants." NENNIUS, 10.
THE historicity of the traditional Ancient British Chronicles which has thus been established in regard to the coming of the Brito-Phoenician king of the Scots, Part-olon, about 400 B.C., to the land of the Picts, by means of his own Newton Stone inscriptions and associated evidence, presumes that the earlier portion of these Chronicles, dealing with the somewhat earlier period, also contains genuine historical tradition.
Now this earlier portion of the Chronicles records circumstantially the first arrival of the Britons by sea, in Albion under "King Brut-the-Trojan" about the year 1103 B.C., and his colonization and first civilization of the land, and his bestowal thereon of his "Trojan" (Aryan) language and his own patronymic name "Brit," in the form of "Brit-ain" or "The Land of the Brits or Brit-ons." This tradition, we shall now find, is fully confirmed and established by a mass of new historical facts and associated evidence.
These Ancient British Chronicles are nowadays known only through the Latin translations, made by early British moms,
Gildas Albanius (fifth century A. D.)1 Nennius (about 822 A.D.)2 and Bishop Geoffrey of Monmouth (about 1140 A.D.),3 and the Welsh and Irish-Scot fragmentary versions of the same.4 These Ancient Chronicles are stated by their various editors to have been translated or compiled from earlier versions-"in the (ancient) British tongue" says Geoffrey-which, being presumably on parchment, have now perished.
The ancient tradition was thus handed down in writing from generation to generation by the Britons, who, we shall find, were familiar with writing long before their arrival in Britain. And, as usual, it would be modernized from time to time into the vernacular of the period by later transcribers, just as modern writers modernize Chaucer and the early versions of the Arthur Legend. This tradition was universally regarded as genuine history down till about a century ago.5 The Brut or "Brutus" tradition was current in early Welsh bardic literature and formed a class styled "The Bruts," including Layamon's. And Geoffrey's version was a mine from which our great poets and dramatists have drawn materials and inspiration for many of their romances on British life in the pre-Roman period, such as Shakespeare's King Lear and Cymbeline.
The arbitrary rejection of these traditional Ancient British Chronicles as a source of pre-Roman British History by
modern writers since about a century ago1 is based upon a kind of objection and mere dogmatic assertion which, if applied to early Greek and Roman History and to the Old Testament tradition, would equally entail their total rejection also.
The common allegation that there was no higher civilization in Britain before the Roman occupation, and that the Britons were "painted savages roaming wild in the woods" is not supported by any evidence whatever, and certainly not by Caesar himself, nor by any other authoritative Roman historian. In his remarks upon the people of Britain, based upon his own observations during his few months' campaign in Kent and South Herts, and on what he was told by interpreters, Caesar describes the people generally as civilized. He states that they were settled agriculturalists, lived under kings, of whom there were no less than four in Kent alone; that "the Kentish men [the only men he passed amongst] were civilized people . . . and their customs are much the same with those of the Gauls "2-that is to say, a people highly civilized and richly and luxuriously clothed. He also says that Britain " is well peopled and has plenty of buildings much of the fashion of the Gauls, they have infinite store of cattle, make use of gold money, and iron rings which pass by weight, the midland countries produce some tin, and those nearer the sea iron."3 And many Early British coins have been discovered in France and Belgium4 attesting pre-Roman Briton international trade. It was only the uncivilized people of the interior-whom he calls the "interiores," and who were, as we have seen, the non-Briton Pictish aborigines-in regard to whom he says that they stain their skins blue and "they seldom trouble themselves with agriculture, living on milk and flesh, and are clad with skins.''5
Caesar also records the high military efficiency of the Briton troops: "the legionary soldiers were not a fit match for such an enemy," and "the enemy's horse and war-chariots . . . inspired terror into the (Roman) cavalry."1
And here it is significant to note that the dreaded warchariots of the Briton cavalry (which were peculiar to the Britons and unfamiliar to the Romans), and of which Cassivellaunus, the "Catti," alone retained 4,000 after he disbanded his army2 were of the same type as those of the Hittites or Catti, as described and sculptured by Ramses II. (c. 1295 B.C.) at the Battle of Kadesh, a port of the Hitto-Phoenicians3 (see Fig. 23).
This unexpected formidable opposition by the civilized Britons, despite the secessions from Cassivelaunus, contrived by the invidious diplomacy of Caesar, explains why the latter so promptly abandoned his second intended conquest of Britain and retired speedily to Gaul within a few weeks, without
making any serious attempt at subjugating Britain. And the later Roman occupation of Britain by overwhelming forces, beginning with Claudius in 43 A.D., may perhaps be more justly paralleled to the present political occupation of the Rhine Valley by the allied forces after their "civilized" enemy was hopelessly crippled by superior force, than the mere military occupation of an "uncivilized" country.
The objectors to the pre-Roman Civilization in Britain - whose objection merely rests on their credulous acceptance of the dogmatic teaching of some generations of uninformed teachers obsessed with exaggerated notions of Roman influence on Briton-also shut their eyes not only to the inconvenient testimony of the pre-Roman coins of Early Britain, but also to the testimony of the early scientific navigating explorer Pytheas,1 who, about 350 B.C., or about three centuries before Caesar, circumnavigated Britain and first mapped it out scientifically with latitudes. He was a native of Phocea, north of Smyrna in Asia Minor, and a place-name which is obviously a contraction for " Phoenicia," as the adjoining sea-port on the headland on the AEgean was called "Phoenice." A colony of his countrymen were settled at Marseilles, engaged in the export tin trade from Cornwall, from which the tin was transported overland through Gaul by pack-animals from a Brittany port to save the dangerous sea-passage by the Bay of Biscay and the Pillars of Hercules. Sailing from Marseilles, presumably to exploit the tin-producing country of Britain, which he calls "Pretanic,"-in series with Aristotle's reference to it, in 340 BC., as "Britannic"2 - he visited first the Old Phoenician tin export-port of Ictis or St. Michael's Mount in Penzance Bay (see Fig. 24), then, sailing round the west coast, surveying and landing at several places, he eventually reached Shetland (his Thule). He found the people every-
where settled, peaceful agriculturalists, and even in Shetland they were agricultural and made wine from "corn and honey."1 And over a century before Pytheus, the Phoenician admiral Himlico, from Carthage, voyaged, about 500 B.C., round part of Britain to report on the tin-producing region there. He states that the Phoenicians of Gades and Carthage were in the habit of sailing the British seas, and refers to "the hard-folk" of Britain.2
The further excuse for rejecting these Early British chronicles, that there are no contemporary inscriptions to support their ancient tradition, is one which, if accepted, would sweep away not only the early traditional history of Greece and Rome, which is accepted although resting on mere literary tradition, but also nearly all the Old Testament History, and much of the history of the Early Christian Church. There is absolutely no inscriptional evidence whatsoever, nor any ancient classic Greek or Roman reference, for the existence of Abraham or any of the Jewish patriarchs or prophets of the Old Testament, nor for Moses, Saul, David, Solomon, nor any of the Jewish kings, with the mere exception of two, or at most three, of the later kings.3 All of these are accepted and implicitly believed to be historical by our theologians merely on the strength of their having been believed by our Christian ancestors, because they were believed by the Jews themselves. The only difference between the accepted Jewish tradition and the rejected British tradition is that the former is actively taught as true by incessant repetition in church and Sunday schools to everyone from childhood upwards; whereas the equally well authenticated Early British traditional history is actively disparaged and stigmatized by modern writers, the one mechanically repeating the other, as mere fabricated
fables or forgeries, despite the above-cited facts to the contrary. But there is inscriptional evidence, as we shall see.
Nor is the alleged objection that there is no classic Greek or Roman reference to the name of King Brutus,1 even were it true, which it is not, sufficient grounds for rejecting the circumstantial British tradition regarding him. There is no classic reference to the Aryan ancestors of the historical Greeks nor to the names of the other descendants of AEneas, that, Homer states, revisited and re-occupied Troy in the dark period following its sack and destruction by the Achaians. Nor is there any classic Greek or Roman reference to any of the Jewish patriarchs, prophets and kings or even to the Hebrews themselves. But I find, as detailed in Appendix IV, that Homer does appear to mention King Brutus as "Peirithoos" repeatedly, both in his Iliad and Odyssey, as one of the most famous of immortal heroes and associated with Hercules of the Phoenicians. Moreover, the Homeric hero who was the confederate of Peirithoos, namely, Coronos Caineus, appears to be Brutus' colleague in the conquest of Albion, the Phoenician prince "Corineus" of the British Chronicles.
Even for the traditional birth-place of Brutus-the-Trojan being located in the Tiber province of Latium, some evidence also is now forthcoming which connects Latium directly with both Troy and Ancient Britain. The Roman tradition of AEneas the Trojan-and the traditional great grandfather of Brutus-preserved by Virgil relates that Aeneas, in his flight from Troy after the great war, carried with him, on his ship, his "household guardian 'gods' (penates)" from Troy to Latium in Italy.2 Now in Latium were unearthed two prehistoric shrines (see Fig. 24 for one of them) which might possibly be the actual ones brought by AEneas there. They are of the same hut-like form as the sacred buildings figured
on Hitto-Sumerian seals of the Sun-cult along with Crosses and Swastikas,1 and the surface of this Latium shrine, Fig. 24, is also covered by Crosses and Swastikas of exactly the same pattern which occurs on the solar amulets of Troy (see Fig. 46)2 and on the rock-sculptures and ancient solar monuments and coins in the British Isles (see Fig. 47 and later Figs).3 And the prehistoric inscriptions in Britain, now deciphered for the first time in Chapter XVIII are of the Trojan type and invoke God and his archangel by the same names as the Trojan.
This establishes the fact that the same solar religion with identical symbols as the Trojan was introduced into Latium, the birth-province of Brutus, as was introduced by Brutus and his Trojan Britons into Early Britain.
The now rehabilitated Early British Chronicles are found to be fairly trustworthy sources for the Coming of the Britons and the Early History of pre-Roman Britain. In their present form they no doubt contain, as similar traditional records do, many trivial details introduced by later generations of transcribers and translators, which may have been
marginal notes on the older texts suggesting incidents based on conjectural etymologies of the proper names. The genuineness of the texts is also suggested by the frank record of the vicious traits of several of the kings as well as the virtues of others; and the circumstantial accounts of court intrigues, assassinations and the tyrannical feudal abuse of the sovereignty, reflect a very life-like picture of human happenings. Indeed, it appears probable that the earlier textual tradition was, like the earlier tradition of the Indo-Aryan or Eastern branch of the Barats, little more than a bare consecutive list of the kings from the founder of the first dynasty with the chief events in the life of the founder and of one or two others of the more important later kings.
And many of the expanded details may be the additions of later copyists and bards embodying their personal opinions or conjectures, just as Tennyson admits having taken great licence with-the old Arthur legend in his Idyls of the King. But it appears unlikely that there was any deliberate falsification, or that the main outlines of the tradition were materially altered.
Of the existing versions of these Chronicles those of Nennius and Geoffrey of Monmouth are obviously the most authentic and fullest, and they are in general agreement. Nennius tells us that his was a compilation by himself from the ancient British texts and the annals of the Romans and other authorities whom he specifies; whereas Geoffrey states expressly that his was a translation into Latin of "an ancient book in the British tongue." The following extracts and summary of the life and voyage to Britain of "King Brut-the-Trojan" are from Geoffrey's text, and refer only to Nennius when he differs therefrom or supplies additional details.
We shall now let the Old British Chronicles speak for themselves: in recording the arrival in Albion of the Britons under King Brutus about 1103 BC., and his civilization and Aryanization of this land:1 (for reference to chief place-names see Map.)
Birth and Early Life of Brutus-the-Trojan.
"After the Trojan war, AEneas, fleeing with Ascanius from their destroyed city, sailed to Italy. There he was honourably received by King Latinus,1 which raised against him the envy of Turnus, King of the Rutuli, who thereon made war against him. Engaging in battle, AEneas got the victory, and killing Turnus, obtained the kingdom of Italy (Latium); and with it Lavinia, the daughter of Latinus.2 After his death Ascanius, succeeding to the kingdom, built Alba on the Tiber, and begat a son named Sylvius, who . . . took to wife a niece of Lavinia . . . and had a son called Brutus.
"At length, after fifteen years were expired, the youth accompanied his father in hunting, and killed him accidentally by the shot of an arrow. . . . Upon his father's death he was expelled from Italy, his kinsmen being enraged at him for so heinous a deed."
Brutus in Greece.
"Thus banished, he went into Greece, where he found the posterity of Helenus son of Priamus kept in slavery by Pandrasus, King of the Greeks. For, after the destruction of Troy, Pyrrhus, son of Achilles, had brought hither in chains Helenus and many others; and to revenge on them the death of his father had commanded that they be held in captivity. Brutus, finding they were, by descent, his old countrymen, took up his abode among them, and began to distinguish himself by his conduct and bravery in war, so as to gain the affection of kings and commanders; and above all the young men of the country. . . . His fame spreading over all countries, the Trojans from all parts began to flock to him, desiring under his command, to be freed from subjection to the Greeks.
There was then in Greece a noble youth named Assaracus, a favourer of their cause, for he was descended on his mother's side from the Trojans. . . . Brutus having reviewed, the number of his men and seen how Assaracus's castles lay open to him, complied with their request." [It is then related that Brutus fought a battle with the army of Pandrasus at the river Akalon, and eventually routed the enemy and captured the
king and extracted from the latter his consent for the Trojans to depart from Greece, provided with the ships and provisions necessary for this purpose and "gold and silver," as well, as the hand of his beautiful daughter Ignoge for Brutus.] . . . "He (Pandrasus) accordingly delivered to the Trojans three hundred and twenty-four ships, laden with all kinds of provisions and gold and silver, and married his daughter to Brutus."
Cruise of Brutus and His Fleet from Greece to Gades.
"The Trojans now released from his (Pandrasus') power, set sail. . . . The winds continued fair for two days and a night together, when at length they arrived at a certain island called Leogecia [Leugas the modern Leucas, about 35 miles south of the mouth of the Acheron River of Epirus; see Map], which had been formerly wasted by pirates and was then uninhabited. . . . In it was a desolate city in which they found a temple of Diana and in it a statue of that goddess, which gave answers to those that came to consult her. . . Then they advised their leader to go to the city, and after offering sacrifices to enquire of the deity of the place what country was allotted to them for their place of settlement. . . . So that Brutus, attended by Gerion the augur and twelve of the oldest men, set forward to the temple. Arrived at the place, and presenting themselves before the shrine with garlands about their brows, as the ancient rites required, they made three fires to the three deities Jupiter, Mercury and Diana, and offered sacrifices to each of them. Brutus himself, holding before the altar of the goddess a consecrated vessel filled with wine and the blood of a white hart, prayed:-
'Goddess of Woods, tremendous in the chase
To the mountain boars and all the savage race!
Wide o'er the ethereal walks extend thy sway,
And o'er the infernal mansions void of day
Look upon us on earth! unfold our fate,
And say what region is our destined seat?
Where shall we next thy lasting temples raise?
And choirs of virgins celebrate thy praise?'1
"After repeating this prayer, he took four2 turns round the altar, poured the wine into the fire and then laid himself down upon the hart's skin, which he had spread before the altar,
where he fell fast asleep. In the night, in his deep sleep, the goddess seemed to appear before him and thus responded:-
'Brutus! there lies beyond the Gallic bounds
An island which the western sea surrounds,
By giants once possessed; now few remain
To bar thy entrance, or obstruct thy reign.
To reach that happy shore thy sails employ;
There Fate decrees to raise a second Troy,
And found an empire in thy royal line
Which Time shall ne'er destroy, nor bounds confine.'1
"Awakened by the vision . . . he called to his companions and related the vision at which they greatly rejoiced and were urgent to return to their ships and hasten westwards in pursuit of what the goddess had promised.
"Without delay they set sail again and after a course of thirty days came to Africa. From thence they came to the Philenian Altars [volcanic sunken rocks east of Carthage; see map]2 and to a place called Salinae [port Selinus in S.W. corner of Sicily], and sailed between Ruscicada [Ras Sidi (ali-el-mekki) Cape at what was later Carthage Bay],3 and the mountains of Azara [the Auza Mts. in Algeria], where they underwent great dangers from pirates, whom they nevertheless vanquished and captured their rich booty.
"Three hapless barks
Caught by the southern blast on rocks unseen -
A ghastly ridge emerging 'mid the waves,
by Tuscan seamen 'Altars' called-are hurled."
-- Virgil, AEneid, i, 129-131.
South of Etna near Malta or Pantellaria, are some sunken volcanic
rocks, which still abound in hot springs with jets of steam (see
Geographie Universelle i, 571); and this last-named feature would
suggest "Altars." But the title "Philenian" clearly associates the
locality with the African coast of Libya where there was a port of "Philaenon" on the shore of Cyrene. There were also two heroic "Carthaginian" brothers called "Philani" who submitted to be buried
(or drowned ?) alive for the sake of their country, who presumably
derived their name from this Libyan port. The title of "Altar"
suggests that they were of the same volcanic formation as those of Pantellaria.
3. The rocky cape forming the northern headland of the Bay of Carthage is now called "Ras Sidi," wherein the term Ras appears to be the Akkadian Resu or "Head," so that Ras or Resu may have been used in remote times for "head-land" by Akkadian mariners such as the Phoenicians were. And significantly Ras is the name for headlands on the coast of Levantine Phoenicia.
"From thence, passing the river Malua [Wady Mulaye, west of Oran, forming the cast frontier of Morocco) they arrived at Mauretania [Morocco], where, for want of provisions, they had to go ashore. . . . When they had well stored their ships, they steered to the Pillars of Hercules . . . and came to the Tyrrhenian Sea [Gulf of the Tyrian-Phoenician city of Gades or Cadiz]. Upon its shores they found four several clans descended from the banished Trojans who had accompanied [the Trojan Phoenician] Antenor1 in his flight. The name of their commander was Duke Corineus, a modest man in council, but of great courage and boldness who could overthrow even gigantic opponents. When they learned from whom he was descended they joined company with him and those under his government, who from the name of their leader were afterwards called the 'Cornish' people.
Voyage from Gades to Albion
"From thence they came to Aquitaine, and, entering the mouth of the Loire, cast anchor. Goffarius Pictus, who was king of Aquitaine at that time, hearing of the arrival of a foreign people with a great fleet upon his coasts, sent messengers to demand whether they brought peace or war. The messengers met Corineus, who was come ashore with two hundred men to hunt in the woods. They demanded who gave him permission to enter their king's forests and kill his game. Corineus answered there was no occasion for asking leave, upon which one of them, named Imbertus, rushing forward with full-drawn bow, shot at him. Corineus, avoiding the arrow, ran up to him. and with his bow in hand broke his head, and the rest escaped with the news to Goffarius. The Pictavian raised an army to revenge the death of his messenger." [Here follows an account of the battle between the Picts and the legion of Brutus and Corineus, in which the latter performs herculean prodigies of slaughter single-handed with his battle-axe, and the Picts are put to flight. Brutus pursued them through Aquitaine "to the place where the city of Tours now stands, which he afterwards built,"2 and called it after "a Trojan named Turonus, the nephew of Brutus," who was slain and buried there. Brutus "enriched his men with the spoils of the slain."]
"Brutus, afflicted to observe the number of his forces daily lessened, while that of the enemy increased . . . at last determined to return to his ships while the greater part of his followers was yet safe and hitherto victorious, and to go in
quest of the island the goddess had told him of. So, with the consent of his company, he repaired the fleet and, loading it with the riches and spoils he had taken, set sail with a fair wind to the promised land, and arrived on the coast of Totnes.1
Arrival in Albion and Colonization of the Country as "Brit-ain" about 1103 B.C.
"The island was then called Albion,2 and was inhabited by a few 'giants.' Notwithstanding this, the pleasant places, plenty of rivers abounding in fish, and its pleasing woods made Brutus and his company desirous to fix their habitation in it. They therefore passed through all the provinces, forced the 'giants' to fly into the caves of the mountains, and divided the country among them according to the directions of their commander.
"After this they began to till the ground and build houses, so that in a little time the country looked like a place long inhabited. At last Brutus called the island after his own name 'Brit-ain' and his companions 'Brit-o-ns' . . . from whence afterwards the language of his nation, which at first bore the name of Trojan [Doric] or rough Greek, was called 'British.'
"But Corineus, in imitation of his leader, called that part of the island which was given to him as duke, 'Corinea'3 and his people 'Corinene' [Cornish men] after his own name; for though he had his choice of provinces before all the rest, yet he preferred this country [Corn-wall], which is now called, in Latin, 'Cornubia.' For it was a diversion to him to encounter the said 'giants,' which were in greater numbers there than in all the other provinces. Among the rest was one detestable monster named Goemagot. . . . On a certain day, when Brutus was holding a solemn festival to the gods in the port where they first landed, this 'giant,' with a score of his companions, came in upon the Britons, making great slaughter. The Britons at last killed everyone but Goemagot, who was spared to wrestle with Corineus.4 . . . Corineus, snatching him on his shoulders, ran with him to the shore and from the top of a high cliff hurled down the savage monster into the sea.
The place where he fell is called Lam Goemagot, that is, 'Goemagot's Leap' unto this day.1
Founding in Britain of New Troy "Tri-Novantuna" or "London" about 1100 B.C.
"Brutus, having thus at last set eyes upon his kingdom, formed the design of building a city, and with this view travelled through the land to find a convenient site. And coming to the river Thames, he walked along the shore and at last pitched upon a place fit for his purpose. Here he built a city which lie called 'New Troy,' under which name it continued for a long time after, till at last, by corruption, it came to be called 'Tri-Novantum.' But afterwards, when Lud, the brother of Cassibellaun, who made war against Julius Caesar, obtained the government of the kingdom, he surrounded it with stately walls and towers and ordered it to be called after his own name, 'Kaer-Lud,' that is, the 'City of Lud' [or 'Lud-Dun,' corrupted into 'Lon-don'].2
Making Laws for Government
"After Brutus had finished building the city, he made choice of the citizens that were to inhabit it, and prescribed them laws for their peaceable government. . . . At the same time also, the sons of Hector, after the expulsion of the posterity of Antenor, reigned in Troy; as in Italy did Sylvius AEneas, the son of AEneas, the uncle of Brutus, and the third king of the Latins.
Death of King Brutus about 1080 B.C. and Division of Britain
"During these events Brutus had by his wife Ignoge three famous sons, named Locrin, Albanact and Kamber. These, after their father's death, which happened in the twenty-fourth year after his arrival, buried him in the city which he had built; and then, having divided the kingdom of Britain [excepting Cornwall] among them, retired each to his government. Locrin, the eldest, possessed the central part of the island, called afterwards from his name 'Laegria,' Kamber had that part which lies beyond the river Severn, now called Wales, but which was for long named 'Kambria,' and hence the people
still call themselves in their British tongue 'Kambri.' Albanact, the younger brother, possessed the country he called 'Albania,' now Scotland.
"After they had a long time reigned in peace together, Humber, king of the Huns arrived in Albania, and having killed Albanact in battle, forced his people to flee to Locrin for protection. Locrin, on hearing this news, joined his brother Kamber and went with the whole strength of the kingdom to meet the king of the Huns . . . and put him to rout.
"Locrin married Corineus' daughter named Guendoloena . . . and had a son named Maddan, who was put under the care of his grandfather Corineus to be educated." [The Chronicles record the succeeding reigns down to the Roman period. In the reign of Ebraucus or York (who founded York and Dun Barton) occurred the annexation of Germany by Britons.]
Civilization of Germany by Britons about 950 B.C.
"The sons [of King Ebraucus, fourth in descent from Brutus1], under the conduct of their brother Assaracus, departed in a fleet to Germany, and having, with the assistance of [the descendants of] Sylvius Alba, subdued the barbarian2 people there, obtained that kingdom."3
Several points raised by this traditional British Chronicle regarding the voyage to and conquest of Alban or Britain by King Brutus-the-Trojan-who, we have found, was the great Homeric hero Peirithoos (see Appendix IV)-now call for examination.
The sea-route reported to have been followed by him in his voyage from the Acheron (or Akalon) River in Epirus to Britain is clearly and unequivocally evident by the complete identification, which I have made,4 of all the places, without any exception, mentioned in the narrative. These places follow one another in strict geographical order (see map). It is seen that the course taken was at first due south until the Libyan coast of Africa was sighted at Philoenon in Cyrene. And as the sunken rocks called "Altars" were
also sighted by AEneas on fleeing from Troy to the Tiber, according to Virgil's tradition, this suggests that the Trojan (and Phoenician) sailors, in voyaging westwards along the Mediterranean, were in the habit of sailing due south until the coast of Africa was sighted, and then coasting along that sea-board, guided by its well-known rocky headlands as landmarks.
The time taken for the first stage of the voyage, from the mouth of the Acheron or the city up that river to Leogecia, the ancient Leugas and modern Leucas, (which is south of Corfu), that is, a distance of about 15 miles, is stated to have been "two days and a night." This seems quite probable in view of the difficulties in starting off such large fleet of small boats and the necessity for them keeping together. The second stage from Leogecia to the coast of Africa at Philaenon, which is in a direct line due south only about five hundred miles, is stated to have taken "thirty days." This long period may have been due to contrary winds, or the "thirty days" may perhaps refer to the whole time under sail from the re-embarking at Leogecia till the next landing in Mauretania (see Map).
The "Vision" of Brutus at the temple of Diana may or may not have really happened. It is only said to have occurred in a dream. The mere offering of worship to this popular goddess of the Chase and of Destiny, with a cup of wine and few drops of hart's blood poured upon the altar fire. was a very probable occurrence, especially as Brutus was bent on a "chase," and was begged by his men to make the offering as we are told. Similar and more bloody sacrifices were often made by Alexander the Great - coming front the land of the same Parthini tribe in Epirus - at popular native shrines. And it was the usual practice amongst sailors to worship the local divinity on starting on voyages; and we have seen that the goddess called "Diana" by Geoffrey was a form of the Phoenician tutelary Britannia.
The account of this "Vision" occurs in a fragmentary portion of the lost earlier version of the Chronicles by Prince
Gildas the Elder of Dunbarton. He was a famous Briton poet, and either he or still earlier redactors of these Chronicles may have introduced it as a bardic embellishment to signalize worthily so important an historical event as the first coming of the Britons to Britain. Such prophetic visions, not to mention their familiar frequency in the Jewish Old Testament, are not unknown in the case of such historical personages as Alexander the Macedonian and even Caesar, to signalize some particular achievement or foretell a fate. So this vision in no wise detracts from the historicity of the British tradition.
Besides, it now becomes clear that Brutus was no Columbus in the discovery of Albion or Britain. Nor did he require any such adventitious aid as a supernatural vision to inform him of the existence of Albion and its attractiveness for annexation. Albion was already, at that period, well known to the Phoenicians, we shall find, as a rich tin-producing country, and Cornwall was already occupied by a small colony of the rival relatives of Brutus, before he arrived there. It thus appears that Brutus doubtless deliberately set sail with his fleet from the River Acheron for the express purpose of annexing and occupying Albion.
The colony of four clans of fellow-Trojans found by Brutus "on the shores of the Tyrrhenian Sea," outside the Pillars of Hercules, is of immense historical and ethnological importance in establishing the affinity of the Trojan descendants of Dardanus with the Phoenicians, and the kinship of Brutus with the Phoenicians. The settlement of these Trojans on this "Tyrrhenian Sea " was, of course, Gades, which was traditionally visited by Hercules,1 and contained one of his most famous Phoenician temples.2 It was founded traditionally as a colony by the Phoenicians of Tyre,3 which thus accounts for the name of its gulf as the "Tyrrh-enian Sea" - a title also applied to the Gulf of Tuscany where there was similar Phoenician or Punic colony at "Punicum" bordering Latium, in a province ruled by the Phoenician "Tyrrh-eni"
or Tyrians. This Phoenician settlement at "Gad--es," or "The House of the Gads or Phoenicians," was presumably founded mainly as a "half-way house" to the tin-mines of Cornwall and its off-lying isles of the Cassiterides, now sub- merged by the sinking of the land. Herodotus records that the chief source of the supply of tin, which was essential for the manufacture of bronze, for the ancient world came from the Cornwall Cassiterides. He says
"The Cassiterides from which our tin comes. . . . It is nevertheless certain that both our tin and our amber are brought from these extremely remote regions (the Cassiterides and North Sea) . . . in the western extremities of Europe."1
This tin-trade and its distribution were entirely in the hands of the Phoenicians.2 And it now seems that the "Tin-land beyond the Upper Sea" (or Mediterranean) of the Amorites subject to Sargon I. about 2800 B.C., was the Cassiterides of Cornwall, see App. VI.
The "Trojan" traders whom Brutus found settled at Gades were under the leadership of Duke Corineus, bearing this significantly Greco-Phoenician name,3 and a former associate-in-arms of Brutus. The four clans of these Trojans of Gades are stated in our text to have been the descendants of "banished Trojans who had accompanied Antenor." This Trojan hero, it will be remembered, is described by Homer as a leading prince of Troy, who rode in the same chariot with King Priam as ambassador at the parley with the Achaian Greek invaders.4 He was spared by the latter in their massacre of the Trojans on account of his honourable conduct in indignantly rejecting the proposal of a party of Trojans to murder the Achaian ambassadors, Ulysses and Menelaus, and was thus allowed, with the remnants of his family, to escape along with AEneas and his son Ascanius. He sailed to Italy with attendants called Veneti, like AEneas, but chose Illyria at the head of the Adriatic, and there founded Padua5 adjoining "Venice," which latter name seems to preserve his ethnic title of "Phoenice" or
"Phoenician." And he was so celebrated that he received a statue as a demi-god from the Phoenicians at Tyre.1
Antenor's descendants and their relationships to Brutus are displayed in the following genealogical Table2:-
The four clans, therefore, at Gades, of the descendants of the banished Trojans who accompanied the exiled Antenor, were presumably the descendants of the four sons of his son "King Agenor-the-Phoenician," who was so famous a sailor that he was called "Son of Poseidon or Neptune." These sons are seen in the Table to be Kadmos or "Cadmus," Phoinix, Kilix and Thasos, the first two of which are usually called by ancient classic writers, "Phoenicians," as well as their father. And incidentally it is seen that the famous King Minos of Crete was also a Phoenician. It seems possible that Duke Corineus, through his Homeric title of "Koronus Kaineus" was a descendant of Antenor's eldest son Koon (see
Table), who was slain by Agamemnon. The Table also shows the inter-relationship by marriage between Antenor-the-Trojan and King Priam and AEneas, the great grandfather of Brutus. Their ancestor Aisuetao of the "ancient barrow" (or funeral mound) at Troy1 was presumably a descendant of Dardanus, the founder of the royal dynasty of Troy,2 and thus kinsman of AEneas and Brutus.
The place of landing of Brutus in Alban is stated to have been Totnes, in the sound of the Dart in Devon; and it is in keeping with the fateful -fitness of things that the first harbour selected by the great admiral Brutus and his early Phoenician Britons for their first British fleet in Albans waters should have latterly been the favourite resort of the British "sea-dog" Sir Walter Raleigh, and be the location of the "Britannia" training ship for our navy of the modern empire of Britain. There still exists at Totnes, on the foreshore street, the traditional stone called "Brutus Stone" (which I have seen) with the local tradition that upon it Brutus first set foot when landing in Alban.
This tradition of his landing at Totnes and not in Cornwall seems confirmed by the record in Nennius' version of the Old Chronicles, which states that there were already some relatives of Brutus in possession of Alban, and presumably at the tin-mines in Cornwall, before the arrival of Brutus. He states:-
"Brutus subdivided the island of Britain whose [previous] inhabitants were the descendants of the Romans [properly Trojans from Alba on the Tiber] from Silvius Posthumus. He was called 'Posthumus' because he was born after the death of AEneus his father: his mother was Lavinia, . . . He was called 'Silvius' . . . from whom the kings of Alba were called 'Silvan.' He was [half-] brother to Brutus . . . but Posthumus, his brother, reigned among the Latins."3 And he had, according to Geoffrey,4 a son called Sylvius Alba.
This tradition of the prior rule in Alban, presumably by deputy, of the Alban Silvius, the "half-brother," or rather half-uncle, of Brutus, is also preserved in the early Scottish
Chronicle of the Alban Duan of 1070 A.D., which was composed presumably for the coronation of the Scottish king Malcolm III, whose queen was the famous Margaret, and who was crowned in that year and to whom it was addressed. This poem, however, represents the intruder under the title of "Alban" as the son of Ascanius or "Isicon" instead of the grandson of AEneas by his Latin wife, which latter tradition appears to be correct. It is also noteworthy that the form of the name in this Scottish poem for Brutus as "Briutus" approximates more closely the Homeric "Peirithous" and the Latin "Pirithous." The poem says:-
"What was the first known invasion
Which grabbed the land of Alban ?
Alban grabbed it with many of his seed,
He, the elder son of Isicon [Ascanius];
Brother was he of Briutus, yet scarce a brother,
He named Alba of Boats.
But banish'd was this big brother
By Briutus across the 'Sea of Icht,'
Briutus grabbed Albain for his ain
Its far as wooded Fotudain [Tweed ?]."1
The precise relationship of Brutus to his "big brother, yet scarce a brother," Silvius Alba, the "Alban" of this Scottish poem, whom he evicted from Alban, is seen in this genealogical Table, which I have compiled from the Chronicles of Geoffrey and Nennius:-
It is thus seen that "Alban" or "Albanus who occupied part of the south of Alban before the arrival of Brutus, and presumably about 1130 B.C., the supposed date of founding of the Phoenician settlement at Gades, was the son of a half-brother of the grandfather of Brutus.
The "Sea of Icht," across which Briutus banished his senior relative Sylvius Alba, or his agents, derived its name (in series with the Isle of Wight), as we have seen, from the same Pictish source as "Ictis," the title used by classic Greek writers for the tin-port of St. Michael's Mount in the Bay of Penzance-which latter name also is now disclosed to be based presumably on one of the many place-names of "Phoenice" bestowed on their settlements by the Phoenicians, especially as a former name of Penzance, as we shall see later, was "Burriton," a dialectic form of Baraton or "Briton."
St. Michael's Mount or Ictis is physically like the type of the strategic islets so frequently selected by the seafaring Phoenicians for their ports, such as Tyre, Gades, etc. It is an islet contiguous to the mainland and admirably adapted for defence on the landside, yet open to the sea (see Fig. 25). Its towering, graceful, spiry crest stands up, an unmistakable landmark seen far out at sea:-
"Here Here the Phoenician, as remote he sail'd
Along the unknown coast, exulting hail'd,
And when he saw thy rocky point a-spire,
Thought on his native shore of Aradus or Tyre."
It was also called "Fort of the Sun (Din-Sol)" presumably from its Phoenician Sun-temple, of which see later.
The neighbouring mainland off St. Michael's Mount, and extending to Land's End and along the West Coast of Cornwall to Carnbrae, is still honeycombed with the old tin and copper workings of the Phoenicians, amongst the mounds of which I have several times rambled, and which are still locally ascribed to the Phoenicians.
It would thus appear from the use of the name "Sea of Icht," that it was from the tin-mines and tin-port of Ictis in
Cornwall that Brutus banished his big "brother" Sylvius Alba, or his agents, across the Sea of Icht-that is, back in the direction of his own kingdom on the Tiber.
This prior occupation of Cornwall by kinsmen of Brutus would now seem to explain why Brutus landed at Totnes instead of Cornwall, which was already in the possession of his rival exploiters. It also explains why Duke Corineus, the commander of the four Phoenician clans at Gades, who were mainly dependent on the tin-mining industry in Cornwall, from which they were presumably ousted or forestalled by their rival kinsmen from the Tiber, so readily joined Brutus in his expedition to annex Alban, and doubtless so on the express stipulation that he would receive Cornwall with its monopoly of the tin trade. It also would explain why Brutus handed over the duchy of Cornwall to Corineus to conquer without going there himself, whilst he personally moved on to the Thames Valley and settled there.
The date for this invasion Valley Alban by Brutus and his associated Phoenicians is fixed directly by totalling up the
reported years of reign in Britain of Brutus and his continuous line of descendants and successors down to Cassivellaunus and his successors in the Roman period, as the traditional length of the reign of each king is recorded (see details in Appendix I.) There is nothing improbable or at all surprising in a ruling race of Phoenician ancestry having preserved a complete written list of their kings with the length of reigns of each on parchment records, the originals of which have now perished ; for the Phoenicians are admitted by the ancient Greek classic writers to have introduced the art of writing into Europe; and writing was a practical necessity for these early industrial sea-traders in the keeping of their accounts-a class of documents which form the majority of the ancient records recovered by excavations on early oriental civilized sites.
These regnal years in the Early British Chronicles, when totalled up, give the epoch of Brutus' arrival in Alban or Britain at about 1103 B.C. (see Appendix I.). This date is corroborated by the usually-accepted date for the Fall of Troy at "about 1200 B.C."1; for, as Brutus was of the third generation from Aneas, and was already a mature hero of many exploits at the epoch of his arrival, this would place his invasion somewhere about 1100 B.C. Geoffrey's Chronicle also states that, after Brutus had finished the building of his new city on the Thames, "the sons of Hector (son of Priam), after the expulsion of the posterity of Anterior, reigned in Troy," which would yield a corresponding date. It is also highly suggestive of such a date for Brutus' arrival, as well as for the independence and veracity of these British Chronicles, that their compilers, in bringing AEneas past the bay which was latterly occupied by Carthage, should, unlike Virgil, who brings AEneas to Carthage, nevertheless make no mention of Carthage. This was obviously owing to the fact that Carthage was not founded traditionally until about
850 B.C., that is, about two and a half centuries subsequent to the passage of Brutus and his fleet.
The date for the prior arrival of Sylvius Alba's party may probably be placed, from the relative age of that Tiberian king (as seen in above Table), at a few decades before the arrival of Brutus, about 1103 B.C., though we shall find from the evidence of the Stone Circles and the prehistoric cup-markings that Sumerian Barat-Phoenician merchants had formed isolated mining and trading settlements in Albion before 2800 B.C.
It was, perhaps, a memory of this invasion of the Land of the Picts in Albion by Brutus and his kinsman Duke Corineus, the descendant of the canonized Phoenician King Anterior, whose son was King Agenor (see Table, p. 161), which is referred to in a fifteenth-century Chronicle of the Scots, containing a rather confused account of the history of the Picts, when it states:-
"Ye Pechtis [war] chasyt out of yir awin landis callit Sichia [? Icht] be ane prynce of Egipt callit Agenore [the Phoenician]."1
This migration of King Brutus and his Trojan and Phoenician refugees from Asia Minor and Phoenicia to establish a new homeland colony in Albion, which event the British Chronicle historical tradition places at 1103 B.C. (see Appendix I) was probably associated with, and enforced by, not merely the loss of Troy, but also by the massacring invasion of Hittite Asia Minor, Cilicia and the Syria-Phoenician coast of the Mediterranean by the Assyrian King Tiglath Pileser I. about 1107 B.C. to 1105 B.C.2