Introduction
The largely intact manuscript of the Arthuriad of Catumandus was found in 1969 some one hundred and forty kilometres south of Cairo near El Gafadun on the west bank of the Nile. Like a number of other Greek manuscript finds in Egypt, it was illegally purchased, smuggled out of the country and eventually found its way into the hands of a private Welsh collector.
On the basis of internal evidence, Catumandus -- Cadfan in Welsh -- was born in 471 AD near Lugdunum, the modern city of Lyon, and must have died, probably in Egypt, towards the middle of the Sixth Century. His visit to Britain lasted from 496 to 518 AD.
Why his work, the discovery of which has at last resolved the enigma of Arthur's existence, was concealed in a cache in the desert and so lost for centuries, can only be surmised. Most probably, however, Catumandus' failure to publish in his own lifetime was caused by fear of the Emperor Justinian who would certainly have abhorred his pagan views and penalised him for them.
The Arthuriad is addressed to a certain Ioannes, presumably a friend. Catumandus’ brief dedication suggests that this man may well have been the brilliant Alexandrian Neoplatonist philosopher Ioannes Grammaticus who, under his nickname Philiponus, is famous today for his rejection of Aristotelian dynamics a thousand years before Galileo. The dedication apart, and the likelihood, already suggested, that he did not bask in imperial favour after he had quitted Britain, we remain largely, though, as will now be indicated, not entirely ignorant of Catumandus' later life in Alexandria, nor do we know when he died. However, the El Gafadun discovery includes a discrete document, which would seem to validate the information he provides concerning his birth. There is little doubt that it is an extract from the imperial archives and probably part of those records which, Catumandus also tells us, he obtained by bribery after his return to the Eastern Empire, from officials in Constantinople to protect himself from charges of sexual and also, perhaps, financial impropriety. The extract, written in Latin, is inserted quite early in the narrative and describes the campaign of 470 A.D. waged in Gaul against the Visigoths by the British leader Ambrosius Aurelianus at the behest of the Emperor Anthemius. Besides clarifying events barely revealed in the histories of Jordanes and Gregory of Tours and, even more tantalisingly, in the letters of Sidonius Apollinaris, it describes the role played by the young warrior Arthur in the later stages of the campaign. In consequence, we can at last perceive the epic nature of those deeds the dim memory of which, in course of time, gave rise to those strange tales of Arthur's conquests on the Continent which appear in the pages of Geoffrey of Monmouth or in the medieval Arthurian cycles.
It is also now clear that traces of Catumandus' visit to Britain exist in early Welsh literature, the first in a lay associated with the heroic poem the Gododdin (circa 600 AD) attributed to Aneirin. In the 'Gorchan' or Lay of Cynfelin, the warrior Cynfelin is described as hailing from Gwynedd and being the son of Tegfan and the grandson of Cadfan. Now, as Catumandus tells us that when visiting Gwynedd he fathered a son called Tegfan, the Cadfan mentioned in the Gorchan of Cynfelin can reasonably be identified with Catumandus. The second, though fainter, trace lies in the possibility that the Llacheu named in the poetic dialogue between Arthur and Glewlwyd Strong Grip in the Black Book of Carmarthen, and the Llacheu son of Arthur referred to in the Dream of Rhonabwy, are identifiable with Catumandus for the epithet Llacheu (brilliant) was given him, so the Arthuriad relates, by the students of Illtud's school in Glamorgan. And since Llacheu is most probably Loholt, son of Arthur, in Chrétien de Troyes' Erec et Enide, the 12th century French poet's description of him as 'a young man of great worth' may be a traditional memory of the author of the Arthuriad.
Though Catumandus writes in the 'Attic' Greek used by the educated classes of the Eastern Roman Empire, his prose is lucid nor does he hesitate to employ a more racy Alexandrian style when he considers it appropriate. He does, moreover, use some of the techniques general in the works of classical historians, in particular the set speech, which, however accurately it might present the orator’s intentions, may not be a record of the actual words used. Despite that, the speeches in the Arthuriad can be accepted as being close to the truth for it seems that Catumandus kept a record of his experiences in Britain. However, some of the passages in which he recounts his dreams must be accepted as poetic truth while there can be little doubt that his depictions of character are often coloured by his personal likes and dislikes.
Some minor liberties have, however, been taken in this presentation of the Arthuriad; for example, reported conversation has sometimes been rendered into direct speech and a number of somewhat tedious classical allusions in which, as might be expected, Catumandus revelled, have been deleted. A lack of consistency will, no doubt, be observed in the translation of names. For the most part the Latin names of cities are given -- Constantinople, Rome and London being the main exceptions -- since, transliterated into Greek, they were the names used by Catumandus. But personal names, in which the manuscript itself exhibits considerable variety, and certain other names and phrases may, apart from a few of Anglo-Saxon origin, be in Latin, in British, or, where identification can be made with the oldest Welsh tradition, in Welsh. This is deliberate and intended to suggest the age of cultural and linguistic transition, which the time of Arthur was. Though the modern river names are used, it should be remembered that some of them represent a very ancient, possibly pre-Celtic, substratum of Britain's inheritance.
In short, the objective of this English version has been to translate the original with accuracy while preserving its spirit. For the sake of clarity the otherwise continuous Greek text has, in the English version, been edited according to modern usage, a number of lacunae have been carefully restored to provide continuity, and the entire work has been divided into three Parts: the first relating to Catumandus’ life within the Roman Empire, the second and third devoted to his description of events in Britain.
The Arthuriad is of prime historical importance to Britain and to the nations which have sprung from her not least in its implication, which is now admitted by scholarly authorities, that whereas those countries may use the English language, their peoples are to a substantial extent Celtic and pre-Celtic in origin.
The wealth of material contained in this work will inevitably engage academic research for years to come. In the meantime, in this, the first English version, the most formative period of Britain's history is revealed in intriguing fullness.