|An Introduction||The History||A Compendium|
|Morgan, Mordred, and Avalon||Perceval and Galahad||Lancelot of the Lake|
|Round Table and True Knights||Queen Guinevere||Camelot|
|Merlin||The Holy Grail||The Lady of the Lake|
|Gawain||King Arthur||Tristan and Isolde|
|Excalibur||Mediæval Sources||Email Glyn Hnutu-healh|
Logres (also Lloeg(y)r, Llogres, LOgres, Lorgres, Logrus, Logurs, Logrys, Log(r)is, Logereis, Loagrais, Lôgroys, Londres, Longres, Laagrais, Laugrais, Lugereis, Locris, Lo(e)gria, Loegrecia, Leogrecia, No(r)gres, and Wrogles; as well as Land of Ogres, Logrian Land, London-in-Logres, and Logres-in-the-Empire) is the name of Arthur’s realm in the Matter of Britain and in a large amount of other literature. Logres is the Kingdom of Adventures. The name appears to derive directly from the Mediæval Welsh word Lloegyr (Lloegr in Modern Welsh), The Lost Territory, a name of uncertain origin referring to England (or ‘Angle-Land’, being a product of the Anglo-Saxon occupation of that part of Britain, after the Arthurian period); perhaps originally derived from the Anglo-Saxon legor, an element found in the place name of Leicester (Ligore-chester), Ligore being an early name of the river which runs through Leicester, now known as the Soar. The true derivation of this legor is indeed puzzling. Maybe the key to understanding the origin of Lloeg(y)r, thereby understanding the very nature and character of Logres, would be to support the contention that the South [of Britain] had remained Romanized.
This idea, as put forth by another author, seems very clear that the derivation is from the Latin genitive plural laicorum (m)/laicarum (f)/laicorum (n), from laicus, of or belonging to the people or laity, not priestly, not consecrated. It follows that if people living in the region concerned were laity, then they were Christian. Not priests, but also not pagans. We are being told that the term laity applied to Arthur of the Romances, as a preeminent Christian king at least, means that he was king of the land of the common Christian folk. Arthur was definitely not king of the priests, nor of the Church. Those belonged to the Pope in Rome. In this context, division of Church and State was evident from a fairly early time. That distinction is vitally important, inasmuch as it is not a reflection of an historical Arthurs time, but of the time in which the Arthurian Romances were written. This Logres was the land of the Christian laity, over which Arthur is said to have ruled. It is not the spiritual realm, over which he held no sway. Applying those concepts, one can easily see the word for that region changing from Laic-r(um) to Lloeg(y)r/Legor to Logres. Of course, the intermediate word forms can only be theorised. But it does shed some light onto the puzzle of the word Legor, or of Lloeg(y)r, becoming the name Logres. The doors are now open for wider possibilties.
In Arthurian contexts, “Logres” is often used to describe the Brittonic territory roughly corresponding to the borders of the geographic area that we now call England before the region was taken over by the Angles and Saxons (with more than a few Jutes and Frisians involved as well). According to Geoffrey of Monmouth’s influential (pseudo)history Historia Regum Britanniae (History of Kings of Britain), the realm (of Locris) was named after the legendary King Locrinus (or Locrine or Logryn), the oldest son of Brutus of Troy. This may or may not be a false etymology. The name Locris (or Locrinus or Logryn) could easily be a form of the word Laicus taken through Laic-r(um) to Lloeg(y)r/Legor, and finally to Logres as a natural linguistic evolution that includes the Mediæval Welsh Lloegyr.
In his Historia, Geoffrey uses the word “Loegria” to describe a province containing most of England excluding Cornwall and possibly Northumberland (yet grouping Cornwall and Loegria together to be governed by London), as in this example from section iv.20 (from the Penguin Classics translation by Lewis Thorpe):
Parishes were apportioned off, Deira being placed under the Metropolitan of York, along with Albany, for the great River Humber divides these two from Loegria. Loegria itself was placed under the Metropolitan of London, along with Cornwall. The Severn divides these last two provinces from Kambria or Wales, which last was placed under the City of Legions.The name Logres was used throughout the Arthurian legends to refer not just to what is now modern-day England, but to the entire British realm of King Arthur. According to Lewis Spence, Logres was the eastern part of ancient Britain. Other sources, Chrétien de Troyes for one, seem to apply the name generally to Arthur’s entire kingdom. In Perceval, or Le Conte del Graal (Perceval, or The Story of the Grail), lines 6169-6170, Chrétien explains the name as signifying “the land of ogres”, which it allegedly was in pre-Arthurian times. So, the actual linguistic development of the name for the region may be what is called a “convergent” etymological development. In other words, multiple origins for the word “Logres” may have feed into each other and fused together to become “Logres”.
‘King Arthur of Logres’ is a fairly common designation in French and German legends, though the texts are often ambiguous as to whether Logres is a territory or a city. In the Vulgate romances, it is both, with the latter named as Arthur’s capital and identified today as London. The site of several Saxon battles at the beginning of Arthur’s reign, Logres (the city) was invested with its own bishop. According to the Post-Vulgate Mort Artu, King Mark of Cornwall invaded and destroyed the city of Logres after Arthur’s death. Brutus had originally built this city and named it ‘La Nueue Troie’ — The New Troy (Tri-Novant/Tri-nouhant meaning Inhabitants of the New Town). Under Roman rule, it was Civitas Trinobantum/Trinovantum (the City of the Trinobantes/Trinovantes), which can be rendered Newtownsmen. At some point, either before or after the Romans (or both), it was named Logres (Locris, Loegria) after Locrinus/Locrine/Logryn (through the previously discussed etymological developments).
In German romance, Logres is often noted as Gawain’s kingdom, since Wolfram von Eschenbach tells us that Gawain married Duchess Orgeluse (Orguelleuse) of Logres; who, previously, had inherited it from her late husband, Duke Cidegast. Though Malory refers to Arthur’s realm as ‘England’, he gives the surname ‘de Logres’ to several knights. Additionally, Logres is the setting of Chrétien de Troyes’ Lancelot, or Le Chevalier de la Charrete (Lancelot, or The Knight of the Cart), and of Perceval, as well as of much of the Vulgate Cycle. Even though it is probably to be identified geographically as England, it is here primarily a poetic creation that is sometimes a vague locus of adventure and romance. The name “Logres” has been modernly used in many works of fantasy set in Britain, for example, C S Lewis’ That Hideous Strength and Susan Cooper’s Over Sea, Under Stone. Unfortunately, Cooper’s work equates Logres precisely with Cornwall. Which by all linguistic accounts is not supported by Arthurian source texts. It is a completely modern equivalence.
Logres is Arthur’s realm (whether represented as a kingdom, territory, or city); and it embodies a chivalric code of integrity, courage, might, honour, compassion, and justice. The usual Arthurian books are a mere shadow of this Circle of Logres sixteen-volume set. Even though most authors attempt to recover the reality behind the myths, legends, and folktales of King Arthur and his realm, they generally restrict themselves to only one explanation for each person, place, and thing. History is not that simplistic nor precise. All of the available evidence is considered and presented in the proper inclusive scheme for the historical and mythological evolution of “all things Arthuriana”.
The difficulty is differentiating between mythologised history and historicised myth (as well as re-historicised mythologised history). This book-set takes those people, places, and things from the myth, legend, and folklore of the whole of Arthuriana and determines (as completely as possible) their historical origins; whether they are based on actual people, places, and things or the “stuff of legends”. It will be shown how every piece of Arthur’s realm is related through genealogical kinship and geographical proximity of both the mythological and historical.
These books have been years in the making. The main goal is to present a high level of scholarship in the coverage of the following topics: Arthur, Gawain, Tristan/Isolde, The Lady of the Lake, The Holy Grail, Morgan le Fay/Mordred/Avalon, Excalibur, Guinevere, The Round Table/Knights, Camelot, Lancelot, Perceval/Galahad, and Merlin. These thirteen books not only explore each topic, but analyse how those subjects represent the material origins and fundamental archetypes of the whole of Arthuriana that are related through cultural locations and familial connections.
In addition to those thirteen, there will be a volume covering the overall historical backdrop from multiple culturally based perspectives (“Circle of Logres: The History”), and another as summaries of the geographies, genealogies, timelines, histories, romances, legends, mythologies, folklores, and beasts of the whole of Arthuriana (“Circle of Logres: A Compendium of Summaries”). The first book (as an introductory volume to the set) is “Circle of Logres: An Introduction”. It outlines the project, and interests the reader in the depth and breadth of its research and influence.
The links on this website lead to the pages of outlines for each of the books. Every outline is meant to be thorough on that particular subject matter. Questions, comments, criticisms, corrections, and encouragement are always welcome. Helping to “tweak” the content not only improves the project itself, but enlightens the Arthuriana community who would find this website useful as an Arthurian Mediæval Source Texts Study. The Circle of Logres: Encyclopædia Arthuriana books will expand the power and usefulness of the website and the overall endeavour as well.
This project is an expanded and re-evaluated view of a 1985 self-authored paper entitled “King Arthur”. The goal here is threefold: to understand the complete Arthuriana of Romance; to recover its People, Places, and Things (be they historical, mythological, or various combinations of the two); and to bring forth the Mythological and Historical Origins and Archetypes contained within the whole of Arthuriana, via Geographical and Genealogical Methodologies. In this endeavour, a multitude of Origins and Archetypes behind the Folklore, the Myth, the Legend, and the Romance shall be presented. The conclusions will be in the minds of the readers.
“There is more of Rome*, than of Romance, about Arthuriana” — Glyn Hnutu-healh
*and Achaea, Akkad, Alans, Anglia, Arameans, Armorica, Assyria, Babylon, Briton, Cambria, Canaan, Cornwall, Crete, Cumbria, Dalriada, Domnonia, Egypt,
Etruscans, ExtraTerrestrials, France, Frisia, Gaul, Greece, Hindavi, Hittites, Huns, Hurrians, Idubor, Ireland, Judaea, Jutland, Lydia, Macedonia,
Mesopotamia, Mycenaea, Narts, Norse, Persia, Phoenicia, Phrygia, Picts, Saxony, Scotland, Semites, Sumer, Ugarit, and Wales — to name a few
This website is best viewed in 1366 x 768 resolution.