Greetings,

This past summer I began researching 5th Century England to finally start a KAP great campaign. What I want to do is start the action in 466-7 and bring the PK in as landless warriors with Aurelius Ambrosius and Uther as they kick Vortigern and Hengist in the teeth and set up the new, knightly order. This should lead to the PK's establishing lines that play out over the BoU and GPC.

So, I've now exhausted what I can find on the interwebs about Ambrosius' battles and this early warlord period (I'm grateful in particular to Ikabodo's "Oath of Crows" GPC on Obsidian Portal). It's obviously going to play out very loosely in terms of social aspects and I can swing that, but I'm wondering--

If anyone else has developed material on the battles of this period. There appear to be several noteworthy items:


"Battle" of Isea Dumnoniorum (466)- where Ambrosius arrives and confronts Vortigern; battle is in quotes because in some sources there is not even a conflict--Vortigern capitulates, tosses a bunch of land at Ambrosius in the hopes of making him happy, and flees.

Siege of Caer Leon (Carlion, 466-7) - Ambrosius pens the bulk of Vortigern's army in the Castle of Carlion, but flees himself to his new fortress in Snowdonia. After subduing Carlion Ambrosius does a victory lap of Logres before confronting Vortigern again.

Siege in Snowdonia (468) - Vortigern ends up burning alive in his castle, after which Ambrosius calls the High Council of Britain and is declared the High King.

Battle of Maisbeli (469) - Ambrosius meets Hengist along the line of hillforts that mark the northern bound of Gwiccae, defeats him and pursue him to Conigsborough.

Battle of Conigsborough (469) - Conigsborough (Caer Conan) is not large enough to accommodate Hengist's 200,000-person group (I assume this is a mix of fighting men and their families, probably scoured from Gwiccae ahead of the suddenly triumphant Britons). I can *guess* that there's between 20k and 40k Saxon warriors. Eldol drags Hengist out of his heorthgeneats and Octha retreats to Eburacum with 2000 men; Eldol kills Hengist in revenge for the Night of Long Knives murders and Octha surrenders at York after being confirmed as King of Kent under Ambrosius.

War against Duke Paul (470): Uther Pendragon is unleashed by his brother against Duke Paul of Clarence. Uther smashed his armies to pieces, stripping him of Wuerensis and Marlboro, which both pledge to Uther.

Battle of Bourges and Déols (Gaul, 472) - Uther accompanies Riothamus [Ambrosius?] to Gaul and conquers Bourges before returning to Britain. Riothamus and his 12,000 are smashed by the Visigoths before linking up with the Roman army--possibly betrayed by Arvandus in an effort to evict Ambrosius from his holding at the bend of the Loire. Riothamus retires to Burgundian land and eventually back to Britain sans much of his army.

Battle of Windsor (473) - A large Saxon force (confident of victory!) marches into the upper Thames Valley and is opposed by an army raised by Ambrosius, who loses in a major Saxon victory. Saxons begin to ravage the land.

Battle in Demetia (473) - Meanwhile, Uther is putting down a rebellion by Pascent, Vortigern's grandson via Cattigern.

Saxon conquest of Sussex (477) - 477: Aelle arrives from the Continent.

War against the Saxon Homeland (478-9) - Ambrosius leads a fleet against the Saxon homeland, ravaging Saxony and subduing Frisia, preventing further reinforcements for a time.


And then the BoU timeline picks up. Plenty to work with here so my question is whether anyone else would like to share battle info/stats or otherwise comment/add to this?

As a secondary matter the BoU mentions that Ambrosius unleashed Uther to smash anyone who didn't want to submit to his new legal/social order. I assume that refers to the war against Duke Paul, but if I'm missing something else here I'd love to hear about it. Also, if I've missed a source of info/timelines on the Ambrosius period please point me to the proper Pendragon book for that!

Thanks,
--Khanwulf

The forthcoming Book of Sires (currently in final editing mode with Greg) has background material from 439 to 485 to encompass campaigns set in Logres. Similar to the chapter on Salisbury in KAP 5.0 and 5.1, it does the same for almost all of Britain as well as Aquitaine and Brittany. There is a chapter for Ambrosius specifically from his landing in 466 to the destruction of Vortigern and then normal events per region reassert themselves as Ambrosius breaks up the grand army, its mission accomplished, and becomes the High King.

There is a bit of 463 - 479 history in Saxons! -book, but as long as you add Maisbeli and Conisbrough to KAP 5.1 family history (as indicated by BoU), then you pretty much already have as complete a timeline you are about to get from what is currently in print.

I am unaware of this Duke Paul and Riothamus' campaign in any Pendragon products so far. Are they from another campaign or something you developed yourself? For instance, Duke Eldol is the Duke of Glevum and there is no Duke of Clarence until 495 or so, when Uther bestows that title to Sir Heli. Also, Riothamus is NOT (KAP's) Aurelius Ambrosius (although you are of course free to make him so in your own campaign), since he is alive and well in 473 fighting Saxons at Windsor and dying in 480 in Salisbury, rather than in fighting Visigoths in Gaul in early 470s. Also, Battle of Menevia (your Battle of Demetia) should be in 480, too, not 473 (see BoU or the GPC extension).

As for Hengist's 200 000 'men in arms' at Maisbeli, I'd rack that up to scribes making a mistake with an extra zero or the bards exaggerating. 20 000 Saxons is much more believable (and in line with what you'd expect in KAP-style battles), and it still gives them 2:1 odds against 10 000 strong army that Aurelius Ambrosius is reported to have in that fight.

I am unaware of this Duke Paul and Riothamus' campaign in any Pendragon products so far. Are they from another campaign or something you developed yourself?


Duke Paul is new to me, but Riothamus's campaign was a historical event, which Geoffrey Ashe hypothesized was the original of King Arthur's Roman war in Geoffrey of Monmouth, with Riothamus as the "real Arthur". (Whether that's the case in real history or not, I won't go into here, but I certainly don't think that it would match "Pendragon" history in the current sourcebooks - and might not fit Ambrosius either. In the KAP universe, Riothamus might work best as merely a Breton king. I recall that he showed up in "The Boy King" - the map on page 12 - and that its mention of him suggested a Breton king - if one who migrated from Britain to the Continent in 458-60.)

Yes, I knew of Riothamus-Arthur theory, but I couldn't recall him being mentioned in KAP. Thanks for the reference to Boy King (4th edition), where (p.12):
"2. Second Migration to Brittany. (c. 458-460). Led by Riothamus, establishment of Domnonie."
No mention of his subsequent campaign against the Visigoths, though.

The forthcoming Book of Sires (currently in final editing mode with Greg) has background material from 439 to 485 to encompass campaigns set in Logres.

This is very encouraging Hzark! Thanks! Even if it arrives "late" I'll still be able to incorporate background material into my own histories. Hope Greg can finish soon, however!

I do have Saxons! and it has been a fine source--as you can see I've also cast the net wider to see what else can be found, and done quite a bit of reading to puzzle out this period. Navigating the theories is mind-bending to be sure. The book does mention (only) Conigsbrough, but not Maisbeli; that could be a response to space constraints?

"Duke Paul" is a mistake--that turns out to be from a campaign site I copied into my notes and then didn't edit out. Oops--apologies! That still leaves the question of who Uther was bringing to heel during Ambrosius' early years: per BotW, p.17 "...King Aurelius put everyone in Logres under a single set of rules, which after a few minor rebellions, everyone agreed to." Also, from BoU, p.65: "...Aurelius Ambrosius made a single set of rules for all rulers, nearly all of whom agreed. The few who did not were crushed by young Sir Uther...." Now, these conflicts may have been <200 knight scale and not qualify as battles, but I do hope the Book of Sires will detail who contested Ambrosius' reforms/high kingship. (I do need to go back through the personalities in both these books to see if there are any notes on rebellions before they kneel to Uther.)

Most likely "200,000" is a scribal error, because Octha eventually takes refuge with 2000 warriors, which looks more like a decent surviving band around a prince from a large battle defeat. I speculate that the larger number is not a mistake, but reflects the overall horde of Saxons gathered in migration away from the resurgent British. Oddly enough, Geoffry of Monmouth considered the second battle at Conigsbrough to be more prospective for the Saxons than the first, so either they faced a tactically disadvantaged situation at Maisbeli (flat field perfect for Ambrosius' horses + forced action due to threat to civilians?) that really threw them off, or even after being beaten once putting their backs to the wall really helped. Ambrosius wins Conigsbrough thanks to a further reinforcement from Brittany.

Riothamus (clearly a title, not a name), yes, is mentioned once--though most scholarship I've read suggests he came directly from Britain, landing on the coast to be received by Arvandus. The proper time frame would be c.470, so it seems a bit of a lost opportunity if this historical element is not in fact Ambrosius returning with his expeditionary army (on loan from Gaul/Armorica) plus those reinforcements. Euric apparently took him seriously enough to prevent him from linking up with the Romans, but got mauled badly enough he ended up withdrawing and never again attempted to annex Gaul. An Ambrosius shorn of his army (with survivors returning to homes on the continent) would have little trouble reaching Britain by 472/473--just in time for the Saxons, emboldened by reports of his disaster, to raid up the Thames. If he just "went back" that might also explain why we have no further historical mention of a Riothamus. So, *shrug* it will be up to Greg and crew to decide how he wants to play things out in Book of Sires.

And you're right, the "Battle of Menevia" (not of Demetia) should be in 480 in the KAP timeline; I was working from Wiseman's "Then Arthur Fought" and he had it 7 years after coronation. His history generally meshes poorly with KAP, I think.

So, definitely strike #6 and #9 from my list.

I'll be happy to take any suggestions for the remainder at this point, given that we don't have the Book of Sires and have likely covered the in-print KAP references. Keep in mind this is the first time I'll be running KAP/battles! :)

--Khanwulf

Re: Maisbeli.

Historia Regum Britanniae:
"And when he [Hengist] had thus spirited up all of them and put them in stomach to fight, he advanced towards Aurelius as far as a field that was called Maesbeli, through the which Aurelius would have to pass, for he was minded to make a sudden and stealthy onslaught and to fall upon the Britons at unawares. Howbeit Aurelius got wind of the design, but so far from delaying on that account to approach the field, he rather marched forward with the greater speed."

So Hengist's intent seems to have been to make an ambush as the Britons are marching through the field, but Aurelius caught wind of that and formed up his men on the other side of the field.

But if you wish to make it an exodus of a whole people, you can. Of course, then you'd have to explain why Kent still exists in Aurelius' time, if he has caught all the Saxons with their families. Why are they still able to muster an army mere 4 years later in 473? Why do they still exist as a nation after 469 and not a particularly subdued one at that?

Re: Maisbeli.

Historia Regum Britanniae:
"And when he [Hengist] had thus spirited up all of them and put them in stomach to fight, he advanced towards Aurelius as far as a field that was called Maesbeli, through the which Aurelius would have to pass, for he was minded to make a sudden and stealthy onslaught and to fall upon the Britons at unawares. Howbeit Aurelius got wind of the design, but so far from delaying on that account to approach the field, he rather marched forward with the greater speed."

So Hengist's intent seems to have been to make an ambush as the Britons are marching through the field, but Aurelius caught wind of that and formed up his men on the other side of the field.

But if you wish to make it an exodus of a whole people, you can. Of course, then you'd have to explain why Kent still exists in Aurelius' time, if he has caught all the Saxons with their families. Why are they still able to muster an army mere 4 years later in 473? Why do they still exist as a nation after 469 and not a particularly subdued one at that?

Thanks. I'm going to agree with you, by long way around.

Explaining Kent is easy, but likely to turn your hair white: it may be that Hengist was not originally based in Kent at all. (Put down your knife.)

The key passage is in Historia Brittonum end of 31 "Vortigern welcomed the Saxones and handed over to them the island that is called Tanet, in British it is called Ruoihin"; Frank D. Reno in his Historic Figures of the Arthurian Era: Authenticating the Enemies and Allies starting with p.121 (https://books.google.com/books?id=34AwCgAAQBAJ&pg=PA122&lpg=PA122&dq=River+Tanat+just+to+the+south+of+Ruthin,+which+ is+a+territorial+boundary+marker&source=bl&ots=QhEg0zBYpA&sig=7G7TjPhSqjgNWEZrTlWr_ZOQimk&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjVg-rhmerPAhWD5CYKHT6aCe4Q6AEIHDAA#v=onepage&q=River%20Tanat%20just%20to%20the%20south%20of%20R uthin%2C%20which%20is%20a%20territorial%20boundary %20marker&f=false) goes into the trouble assigning "Tanet" to the "Isle of Thanet" where it is not spelled as such in the original HB, and instead argues "Tanet" refers to the River Tanat and "Ruoihin" to the hillfort Ruthin.

The "Isle of Tanet" then would refer to a large region in the upper midlands roughly where we think Vortigern held his central power, and roughly where the Gewiccae were located as federates before being shoved into the Thames and later (577) returned (Who were the Hwicce? by Edward Dawson (http://www.historyfiles.co.uk/FeaturesBritain/EnglandHwicce01.htm)).

Now *IF* all this were the case, then it could explain things about Vortimer's struggle, which otherwise appears limited to Kent proper even though Hengist's network of holdings and kin-allies extended all the way to the border of Lothian. Reno goes on to identify alternative, and to him more plausible, battle sites for Vortimer's recorded action; this does not replace the Kentish battles, which we also have in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, but concludes with the retiring of Hengist's men from "his" lands, which would leave a large number of scattered Saxon settlements throughout the midlands, along with the apparently untouched East Anglia, Diera, Lindsey and Nohaut regions.

Anyway, this is outside of my original query and would fall solidly within "home game" takes on history. And from a practical standpoint re-reading Monmouth shows Hengist returning from his retreat with 300,000(!!!) men, a logistical feat barely reached by the Germans of the 20th century! Even if he managed 30,000, terrifying the lords into meeting for the Night of Long Knives massacre and then went on to savage the castles of Britain, Vortigern wouldn't have built his new fortress in Snowdon if it was next-door to Hengist's lair--which by then must have been Kent, Lindsey or Diera/Nohaut.

So back to Maesbeli: we could assume from any of these locations that Hengist could have made good time by road to Maesbeli--assumed to be either in the upper midlands or west of the Pennines across the pass from Caer Conan, once he heard of Ambrosius' coronation as High King (or at least of Vortigern's death if I'm mixing order up).

So, yes, that 200,000 wouldn't include "civilians", even if there was a midlands rabble to be evicted by Ambrosius to join the Saxons in "the uninhabited [by British] parts of the land", following Hengist's defeat.

My assumption on how Ambrosius did well at Maesbeli could be explained by his good ordering of the 2k+ cavalry that must have been present, on terrain perfect for them. Caer Conan on the other hand had the Saxons literally with their backs to the castle, uphill, with time to prepare mentally if not physically. No wonder then it took reinforcements for Ambrosius to win.

--Khanwulf

Explaining Kent is easy, but likely to turn your hair white: it may be that Hengist was not originally based in Kent at all. (Put down your knife.)

The key passage is in Historia Brittonum end of 31 "Vortigern welcomed the Saxones and handed over to them the island that is called Tanet, in British it is called Ruoihin"; Frank D. Reno in his Historic Figures of the Arthurian Era: Authenticating the Enemies and Allies starting with p.121 goes into the trouble assigning "Tanet" to the "Isle of Thanet" where it is not spelled as such in the original HB, and instead argues "Tanet" refers to the River Tanat and "Ruoihin" to the hillfort Ruthin.


Well, if we go down that road, then the whole historicity of Hengist (and definitely what we know of Uther and Arthur!) is on a very wobbly footing. :)

As far as KAP is concerned, it is not really an issue, since within the KAP history, Hengist DOES exist and is given (half of) Kent as bride price for fair Rowena. Thus, while you can argue for a different setup for Hengist in your campaign, that is not what the KAP history has.



My assumption on how Ambrosius did well at Maesbeli could be explained by his good ordering of the 2k+ cavalry that must have been present, on terrain perfect for them. Caer Conan on the other hand had the Saxons literally with their backs to the castle, uphill, with time to prepare mentally if not physically. No wonder then it took reinforcements for Ambrosius to win.


I see Maisbeli more of a 'crap, our ambush didn't work, this is going all wrong, disengage!' and Conisbrough as 'our backs are to the wall, retreat is no longer an option, we will either fight and win or die like men'. What was it that Sun Tsu said: "When you surround your enemies, leave an opening; do not push too hard on the enemies who are desperate."

Well, if we go down that road, then the whole historicity of Hengist (and definitely what we know of Uther and Arthur!) is on a very wobbly footing. :)

As far as KAP is concerned, it is not really an issue, since within the KAP history, Hengist DOES exist and is given (half of) Kent as bride price for fair Rowena. Thus, while you can argue for a different setup for Hengist in your campaign, that is not what the KAP history has.


I see Maisbeli more of a 'crap, our ambush didn't work, this is going all wrong, disengage!' and Conisbrough as 'our backs are to the wall, retreat is no longer an option, we will either fight and win or die like men'. What was it that Sun Tsu said: "When you surround your enemies, leave an opening; do not push too hard on the enemies who are desperate."

Personally, I like to try and mix historicity with good story and compatible [KAP] game material. There are holes in the legends big enough to drive a Saxon army through, and it's fun to try and shore them up--it helps put the mind into the places of the characters who (in this case) will be shaping the future story. If we wanted to build a "true" historical setting then you have to strip out everything that makes KAP what it is, and that's no fun. Better a "yes and" approach to build as many interesting and plausible bits in as feasible to show how the politics affect the setting in significant ways. Population figures and the movements of people appear to be a major concern during this migration period (Vortigern wouldn't have needed Germanics except for the plague of 432, etc. etc.).

So yes, Hengist gets much of Kent because Vortigern can't keep his pants on--possibly to go with holding smaller and larger in the midlands and Lindsey (and Thancaster). He certainly was ambitious! Yes, the Night of Long Knives happens as advertised despite not appearing in Gildas. And, Hengist dies after Conisbrough even though some (Saxon) sources attribute him to the Thames raid in 473 (after which he vanishes for good).

And yes, your take on Maisbeli is entirely sound. The account certainly reads like Hengist, despite his numbers, was not ready to bring them to bear and would have preferred to retreat and use the ambush tactics the Saxons were known for. Vortimer had certainly handled him on multiple occasions, so Hengist was well aware that he could be beaten by the British (weak as he viewed them). Conisbrough could have even been an extended feigned retreat to draw out the British before turning on them--and it almost worked! I'll again speculate that much of the punch for Ambrosius' army came from an over-representation of cavalry, which he used to keep pace with and reform quickly on Hengist.

Ambrosius... is not a battle commander who gives the impression of brilliance. He comes across (to me) as more of a lover than a fighter, who's most at home in rapid logistics and diplomacy and law--all of which would make sense if he's been classically educated and cut his teeth fighting as a cavalry officer in Gaul. After (barely) defeating Hengist his wars are strategic or tactical failures: only the Great Uther Raid and strike on Frisia and Saxony are broadly successful, and that episode shows him going on the logistical offensive again and using his organizational skills to greatest effect where opposition would be disorganized in the face of his speed. When he has to raise an army for Windsor he gets roundly beaten, if he's Riothamus then he mauled the Visigoths but it was a strategic disaster, and he could only check Aelle and not throw him back.

--Khanwulf

Personally, I like to try and mix historicity with good story and compatible [KAP] game material. There are holes in the legends big enough to drive a Saxon army through, and it's fun to try and shore them up--it helps put the mind into the places of the characters who (in this case) will be shaping the future story. If we wanted to build a "true" historical setting then you have to strip out everything that makes KAP what it is, and that's no fun. Better a "yes and" approach to build as many interesting and plausible bits in as feasible to show how the politics affect the setting in significant ways. Population figures and the movements of people appear to be a major concern during this migration period (Vortigern wouldn't have needed Germanics except for the plague of 432, etc. etc.).

I like mixing real history in, too, when it works. You may have noticed a thread that I started making the Roman War more historical by replacing Emperor Lucius with King Theoderic the Great of the Ostrogothic Kingdom. Or making France more explicitly Merovingian with fractured fraternal kingdoms fighting one another, rather than 'France' from Hundred Years War.

And yes, I would also agree that the legends are full of plotholes. My point was that if we rely too much on history and archeology, then we will pretty much have to toss out Uther, Arthur and possibly Hengist and Horsa, too. So that clearly doesn't work, if we still wish to King Arthur Pendragon game, as you also pointed out. The second point was that since the KAP history is resting on Vortigern giving Kent to Hengist, then that is where Hengist's Kingdom is, rather than somewhere in Midlands. If you alter that (and I see you don't intend to), then you will have to make many more alterations to the story, too.

EDIT: Links to the threads I referenced in the above:
Roman War: http://nocturnalmediaforum.com/iecarus/forum/showthread.php?2612-Making-the-Roman-War-more-historical
Franks: http://nocturnalmediaforum.com/iecarus/forum/showthread.php?2613-Making-Clovis-and-the-Franks-more-historical