Artognou stone

Archaeological description

The stone's dating relies on two methods: it was found in a securely stratified layer alongside imported pottery of known fifth- to sixth-century types, and the forms of certain letters match those on British inscribed stones from Scotland to Cornwall dating after 500, with known examples from sixth-century north Cornwall, part of the kingdom of Dumnonia. At the top right of the fragment is a deeply cut motif showing a letter A and an incomplete character on either side of a large diagonal cross, likely a Christogram—the Greek letters Alpha and Omega flanking a Chi, the initial of Christos.

Below and to the left, a smaller, lightly incised Latin inscription reads: PATERN[--] COLI AVI FICIT ARTOGNOU. This appears repeated lower down and to the right, with only COL[.] and FICIT visible. The repetition, overlap with the Christogram, and shallow carving suggest the inscription is graffiti rather than formal. The Celtic Inscribed Stones Project translates it as 'Artognou descendant of Patern[us] Colus made (this).

Colus made (this). The sixth-century fort at Tintagel also yielded remains of expensive pottery, glasswork, and coins from Visigothic Spain and the Byzantine Empire, excavated in the 1930s by C. A. Ralegh Radford.

Arthurian controversy

After its discovery, popular news media promoted the stone as possible evidence for a historical King Arthur, suggesting Artognou was a variant of Arthur, and it was called the 'Arthur stone'. The stone's dating fits the general timeframe for a historical Arthur, and a tradition first recorded by Geoffrey of Monmouth places Arthur's conception at Tintagel Castle.

However, Celticist John Koch and other scholars reject this idea, arguing against a connection between the names. Koch notes that Artognou means 'bear-knowledge', while Arthur likely derives from Latin 'Artorius'. Poet Damian Bullen has proposed that artognou is based on Artogenous, meaning 'of the genus/family of Arthur'.