« ForrigeFortsett »
of the duchy, and he set to work to link them together by imaginary ties.
Whatever document came to hand and would serve his purpose, Gallet accepted it with impartial disregard of its historic value. He took Geoffrey of Monmouth in grave earnest. He looked at Colgan's Trias Thaumaterga, and picked out from his notes what he had to say about the sisters of the Apostle Patrick, and about his residence in Letavia. He got hold of Capgrave's Nova Legenda Anglice. He read, besides, the Life of Gildas by the monk of Ruys, and that also furnished him with some names.
Unhappily Dom Morice, in most matters sensible, was led away by Gallet, and in his Histoire Ecclesiastique et Civile de Bretagne, Paris, 1750, he inserts a pedigree that identifies Cynan Meiriadog with Caw of Cwm Cawlwyd, and further marries him to Darerca, sister of S. Patrick.
The pedigree, as he gives it, will be found on the opposite page.
The assumptions and absurdities of this pedigree are marvellous. Cynan Meiriadog, who accompanies Maximus into Gaul in 383, has to wife a sister of S. Patrick, and his grandson Grallo marries another sister. By her Cynan is father of Gildas, who died in 570.
Having ascertained from the Life of S. Cybi that Erbin was son of Geraint and father of Solomon, which is a mistake according to the Welsh genealogies, for by them Geraint was son, not father, of Erbin —he intercalates Conan Meriadoc, whom he identifies with Caw, between Geraint (Gerenton) and Erbin (Urbien). Next, he identifies Weroc I, who died in 550, but whom he throws back to 472, with Riothim, who assisted the Emperor Anthimius against the Visigoths in 468, and was defeated and killed. Moreover, he gives forty-one years for three generations. But the pedigree is so preposterous, that it does not deserve serious notice being taken of it. Yet it was accepted by Deric and printed with amplifications in his Ecclesiastical History of Brittany.
Moreover, this fictitious pedigree has infected the hagiologists of Brittany. For instance, Garaby, in his Vies des Saints de Bretagne, 1839, under Dec. 30, has Sainte Tigride, Reine de Bretagne, and relates how she was daughter of Calpurnius and Conchessa, sister of S. Martin of Tours, and continues, "Ses belles qualites la firent demander, en 382, pour epouse, par Grallon, compagnon d'armes de Conan, puis due de Domnonia, comte de Cornouaille, et enfin, en 434, troisieme roi de Bretagne."
It is astounding how the imagination of modern as well as ancient martyrologists runs riot. Grallo never had anything to do with
Domnonia, and he never was sole king over Armorica. That Grallo, who actually died about 505, should have been companion in arms in 383 with his grandfather, who was also his brother-in-law, is absurd, but the amazing thing is that sensible men writing ecclesiastical history and hagiography should not have seen these anachronisms and avoided them.41
The genealogy of the Counts of Bro-weroc, as well as can be made out, is as follows :—
Wcroc 1 (parentage unknown),
I I ITT I
Canao, Macliau B. Three sons Trihna=Conmore,
550-560, Vannes, Count murdered by
560-577. Canao 550.
Regent at Domnonia, d. 555.
Weroc II, James, killed with S. Tremor or
577-594. his father 577. Gildas Junior.
Vannes, or Bro-weroc, was colonised from Britain at a very early period, but the first chief of whom we hear was Weroc I, who ruled from about 500 to 550. He was succeeded by his son Canao, who murdered three of his brothers and would have killed another, Macliau, if the latter had not fled for his life and taken refuge with Conmore, regent of Domnonia. Canao fell in 560, and was succeeded by his brother Macliau, who was killed in 577, and was in turn succeeded by his son Weroc II.
Such is the epitome of the early history of Domnonia, Leon, Cornubia and Vannes. This latter was not esteemed more than a county, as the British settlers did not obtain possession of the city itself till Macliau, who had got himself chosen bishop, united Bro-weroc under his rule along with the city itself on the death of his brother. But it relapsed after his death, for in 590 the Bishop Regalis complained that he was as it were imprisoned by the Britons within the walls of the city.
Venantius Fortunatus praises Felix, bishop of Nantes (550-582), for having " defeated the British claims, and maintained the covenant sworn to," and he speaks of the Britons as "ravishing wolves," and congratulates him at being able to hold them off.42 There was no love lost between the bishops and denizens of the old Gallo-Roman -cities and the independent Britons who occupied the whole country round.
u The pedigree in my Lives of the Saints of the Princes of Cornouaille and Domnonia is very inaccurate. At the time it was drawn up I lacked sufficient original material. (S. B. G.)
42 " Pro salute grcgis, pastor per compita curris. Exclusoque lupo tuta tenetur ovis, insidiatores removes, vigil arte Britannos." Ven.. Fort., Miscell., iii, c. 8.
These latter were careful to keep on good terms with the Frank kings. We have seen how Rivold of Domnonia would not assume rule till he had received permission to do so from Clothair. The usurper Conmore obtained commission to rule in Armorica as lieutenant for that king. The bishops and abbots did not venture to accept grants of land till these were ratified by the King in Paris. Thus Withur sent S. Paul thither to have his concession of lands confirmed. Brioc in like manner had his ratified, so also had S. Samson. It was not till the battle of Vouille in 507 that Clovis and his Franks became masters of Nantes and of the greater part of Aquitania, but he did not gain dominion over the Britons of Armorica. Procopius says, "The Franks, after their victory over the last representatives of Roman authority in Gaul, finding themselves incapable of contending against Alaric and the Visigoths, sought the friendship of the Armoricans and entered into alliance with them." 43
Not till 558, when Canao of Bro-weroc gave asylum to Chramm, -son of Clothair, king of Soissons, did the Britons embroil themselves with the Franks. Hitherto they had been practically independent, and, at least till the death of Clovis in 511, under their own kings ; 41 after that they rendered acknowledgment of being feudatories to the Frank kings.
After the secular organisation came that which was ecclesiastical. Kinsmen of the settlers who were in the ecclesiastical profession came -over, and were accorded patches of land on which to plant their lanns, and monastic institutions sprang up, that supplied missionaries to the natives who had hitherto been left in paganism, and ministered as well to the colonists, and served as schools for the education of the young. Every monastery had its minihi, or sanctuary, about it, to which runaway slaves, those pursued in blood-feud, and refugees in war, might fly and enter thereby the ecclesiastical tribe. Something like fifty-three of these minihis still bear the name in Brittany.45
The Lann was the mother church, corresponding to the amoit church of the Irish. Subject to these were the trefs, each with its chapel, and served from the mother church. Thus the vast parish of Noyala, in Morbihan, till 1790 comprised the treves of Gueltas, Kerfourn, Croixanvec, S. Thuriau and S. Geran. That of Pluvigner consisted of a conglomeration about the mother church of nine treves, Camors, Baud, Languidic, Landevant, Landaul, Brech, Plumergat, Brandivy and La Chapelle-Neuve. But here, owing to later colonisation of British on a plou that had been settled by the Irish, several of these treves became independent lanns.
4» De Bello Gothico, i, 12.
""Chanao regnum integrum accepit. Nam semper Britanni post mortem -Chlodovechi regis sub potestate Francorum fuerunt, et duces eorum comites, non reges appellati sunt." Greg. Turon., Hist. Func, iv, 4.
45 P. De la Vigne-Villeneuve, in Mint, de la Soc. Arch, d'llle et Vilaine, 1861.
In many districts in Brittany the term lann has fallen away. This was due to the devastation caused by the Northmen in the ninth century, when the country was laid waste, and the inhabitants fled, some far inland into France, some to England, where they were afforded protection by Athelstan. When they returned the old order had changed. The lanns were no longer monastic churches with their treves dependent on them, and the parish was organised on the Latin system, and was called after the founder simply,without the prefix lann.
But this was not all. Not every Armorican mother church bore the title of Lann, for the founders came with colonies and at once established tribes, and the place where each secular chief settled was not called a lann, for there was in the new lands no such a demand for "sanctuary" as in the old, at least not at first, and the settlement took its name as a tribal centre, plou. Thus we have Ploermel, the plou of Arthmael. He was an ecclesiastic and a monk, and we might have supposed that his headquarters would have been designated a lann. But it was not so. In Wales, where the princes were tyrannous, and internecine feuds were habitual, there the llan, the sanctuary of refuge, was a most important feature of the ecclesiastical order, and it afforded a means to the saint for recruiting his tribe. But in Armorica, where the British colonists bore down the natives, and there was no resistance, and there was room at first for expansion without fratricidal war, there the plou became of more importance than the lann.
The monastic founders had each his loc, corresponding perhaps to the Irish cill. It was the place of retreat for Lent, and when the Saint desired to escape from the daily worry of management of a monastery and a colony. These Iocs were originally in very solitary places, in islands, or in the depths of the forest. But about a good many of them villages and even towns have grown up.
As was the case in Wales, so in Brittany, in addition to the trevial churches, there are numerous chapels in a parish. In that of Noyala, already mentioned, there are nine. In that of Ploemeur there were something like thirty-six.