[226] On the Breton campaign of 1166 see R. Diceto (Stubbs), vol. i. p. 329, and Rob. Torigni _ad ann._ Henry was near Fougères on June 28 (Ep. ccix., Robertson, _Becket_, vol. v. p. 421); he was besieging Fougères itself on July 13–14 (Eyton, _Itin. Hen. II._, p. 96). On the campaigns of 1167 and 1168 see Rob. Torigni _ad ann._, the meagre entries in a Breton chronicle, a. 1168–1169 (Morice, _Hist. Bret., preuves_, vol. i. col. 104; _Rer. Gall. Scriptt._, vol. xii. p. 560), and Chron. S. Albin. a. 1167 (Marchegay, _Eglises_, p. 40), which tells of Louis’s share in the matter. See also the account of Henry’s correspondence with King Arthur in _Draco Norm._, l. ii. cc. 17–22, vv. 941–1282 (Howlett, _Will. Newb._, vol. ii. pp. 695–707). According to this writer, one of the Breton leaders--“Arturi dapifer, Rollandus, consul et idem tunc Britonum” (Mr. Howlett suggests that this may be Roland of Dinan, _ib._ p. 696 note)--wrote a letter to Arthur imploring his aid for Britanny, and received a reassuring answer; Henry also received a long epistle from the blameless king, to which, “subridens sociis, nil pavefactus,” (c. 21, v. 1218, p. 705) he returned a polite and diplomatic answer. Unluckily the good monk omits to say how the letters were conveyed, and gives us no light upon the postal arrangements between Britanny and Avalon--which by the way he places among “silvas ... Cornubiæ, proxima castra loco,” whatever that may mean (c. 20, vv. 1213, 1214, p. 705). It is quite possible that some of the Breton leaders did seek to rouse the spirit of their followers by publishing an imaginary correspondence with the mythic hero-king whose existence was to most of the common people in Britanny at that time almost as much an article of faith as any in the Creed; it is possible too that they were themselves so far carried away by the same illusion as to attempt to work upon Henry by similar means; and in that case it is extremely probable that Henry, with his Angevin tact and sense of humour, would meet the appeal pretty much as the Bec writer represents. But the letters given in the _Draco_ must be the monk’s own composition. Neither Roland nor Henry can have been capable of stringing together such a quantity of pseudo-history, ancient and modern, as is therein contained. [227] Rob. Torigni, a. 1169. [228] R. Diceto (Stubbs), vol. i. p. 337. _Gesta Hen._ [“Benedict of Peterborough”] (Stubbs), vol. i. p. 3. Rog. Howden (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 3. [229] _Gesta Hen._ as above.