Two "Versions" of Uther Pendragon (mil uathmar and Manannan mac Lir)

In a recent post (http://mistshadows.blogspot.com/2017/10/degsastan-and-origin-of-mil-uathmarfer.html), I offered my final identification for Uther Pendragon.  It was an old idea, but I'm now convinced it is correct.

However... the conclusion reached in that post is in need of some clarification.  For there is some evidence in the Taliesin poetry that while Uther does seem to originate from the mil uathmar/fer uathmar of the Irish "Conception of Mongan" tale, another parallel tradition existed which actually identified him with that story's Manannan son of Lir.

Several scholars (including Bromwich) call attention to the fact that the Cawrnur in the 'Marwnat Vthyr Pen' or "Death-Song of Uther Pen[dragon]" is also mentioned in the Taliesin poem entitled 'Cadair Teyrnon', "The Chair of the Divine Lord." In this latter poem, it would appear Teyrnon (whose name matches that of Teyrnon Twrf Lliant, 'Divine Lord of the Tumultuous/Turbulent Sea', a sobriquet for Manawydan son of Llyr in the MABINOGION tale "Pwyll Prince of Dyfed") is involved in a horse raid on Carwnur and his sons.  In this poem, Arthur is mentioned.  This has led some (like Thomas Green in his ARTHURIANA: EARLY ARTHURIAN TRADITION AND THE ORIGINS OF THE LEGEND) to wrongly assume that the Teyrnon in question is actually Arthur.

I would make the case instead for Teyrnon in the 'Cadair Teyrnon' being Manawydan (=  in this context, Manannan the father of Mongan, who transformed into Fiachra  in order to lie with Fiachra's queen).

What we have in Uther, then, is a conflation of two characters from the "Conception of Mongan": the mil uathmar (a character created as an eponym for Degsastan as Egesan stan) and Manannan mac Lir.

Neither were the father of Arthur.

THE BEAR KING Now Available in Electronic and Paperback Format at the Following Link

https://www.amazon.com/Bear-King-Arthur-Southern-England/dp/1548982954/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1509299777&sr=8-1&keywords=the+bear+king+august+hunt

Dinas Emrys and the Goddess Euron

In my book THE MYSTERIES OF AVALON and in blog posts here, I've discussed Ambrosius Aurelianus, whose name may well have been interpreted as the 'divine/immortal golden one.' A.A. (as I like to call him) seems to  have been identified in Welsh tradition with the gods Lleu and Mabon.  I also went into some detail as to why the Dinas Emrys hillfort in Snowdonia, the ancient Eryri, might have attracted a sort of fused version of St. Ambrose and his praetorian prefect father.  I've even gone so far as to very tentatively suggest that Medraut/Moderatus may have belonged at Dinas Emrys, chiefly because his name matched in meaning that of the "modest man" Ambrosius (see Gildas).

Yet I remained dissatisfied with these various explanations.  Discounting the supposed previous name Dinas Ffaraon Dandde, the 'Fort of the Fiery Pharaoh', a designation for Vortigern (again derived from Gildas), we had several male figures associated with the place - all of whom bore names containing the word for gold or who were described as having golden hair.  Aside from Ambrosius himself, there was the late story of the usurper Flavius Eugenius (Owain Finddu) fighting the giant Eurnach in the vicinity of the fort.  Flavius, of course, meant 'yellow haired', and Eurnach seems to has as its first element Welsh Eur-/Aur-, for 'gold, golden.'  Granted, Eurnach may (as some scholars think) be mere corruption of the giant Gwrnach.  Then there is the late tradition of the golden-haired boy at Dinas Emrys.

We are reminded of the Welsh mythological hero Gwri Gwallt Eurin, he of the "Golden Hair", who shares qualities with the god Mabon.  The story of Ambrosius/Emrys playing ball as a fatherless child at Campus Elleti in the Ely Valley is paralleled in that of the Irish Mac Og or 'Young Son.'  Mac Og is himself the Irish equivalent of Mabon.  If we then see Emrys in this context as Mabon, and ask ourselves why the latter was transferred to Dinas Emrys, we might arrive at an unexpected answer.

Mabon's mother was Modron, known in the Romano-British period as Matrona, the 'Divine Mother.'  Like the Matres or Matronae across Europe, she was probably once depicted either in triple form, or on occasion as two goddesses.  A relic of this early worship may be present in the Welsh poem KAT GODEU, where we find the lines

"by  Eurwys, by Euron,
by Euron, by Modron;"

The arrangement of the lines, themselves being preceded by two separate joint phrases relating to Math and Gwydion, not only makes these three personages part of the larger grouping of five great enchanters, but strongly suggests that we have here a triple goddess.  All three, in other words, are Modron.  The most recent translator of the poem, Marged Haycock, stresses that the names Eurwys and Euron not only begin with the word for gold/golden, but are almost certainly female.

As I've made clear in the past, the battle of KAT GODEU happens at Nefyn on the Lleyn Peninsula, specifically at the Garn Boduan hillfort.  Only a short distance from this hillfort is another, called Carn Madryn, the Cairn of Modron.  Neither are very far from Dinas Emrys.

The most important of these goddess names for our purpose is Euron.  Welsh –on can come from masculine –onos (e.g. Maponos > Mabon) or feminine –ona (e.g. Matrona > Modron).  But the suffix itself denotes divinity.  Thus in the name Euron we have 'the Divine Golden One.' As it happens, this pretty much exactly matches the meaning of Ambrosius ('divine/immortal') Aurelianus ('golden one').

If Mabon in the guise of Emrys/Ambrosius belongs at Dinas Emrys, could it be that at least part of the reason why the latter was placed at this hillfort was because originally it bore the name of Dinas Euron?

COMING SOON: The Original Divine (Female) Owner of Dinas Emrys

Dinas Emrys

FINAL REVISION - AND REPUBLICATION - OF THE BEAR KING TO BE RELEASED THIS WEEKEND

Once again, I will post the relevant links to both the ebook and the paperback as soon as these become available.

Thanks in advance for your interest!

Appendix XI From the Upcoming Revision of THE BEAR KING (Arthur in the Life of St. Germanus of Auxerre)

APPENDIX XI

Some time ago I posted a blog article on a radical idea, i.e. that the crippled boy in the c. 446-7 A.D. story of St. Germanus and Elafius ( = Elesa, father of Cerdic), as found in Bede's Ecclesiastical History of the English People, was a reference to Arthur/Artorius (or Artri/Arthri).  Now that I've completed THE BEAR KING, which promotes Cerdic of Wessex as the Arthur, I thought I would go ahead and offer this up once more.

Here is the text and modern English translation of the relevant portion of Constantius’s Vita of St. Germanus:

[21] NEC multo interposito tempore nuntiatur ex eadem insula Pelagianam peruersitatem iterato paucis auctoribus dilatari; rursusque ad beatissimum uirum preces sacerdotum omnium deferuntur, ut causam Dei, quam prius obtinuerat, tutaretur. Quorum petitioni festinus obtemperat. Namque adiuncto sibi Seuero, totius sanctitatis uiro, qui erat discipulus beatissimi patris Lupi Trecasenorum episcopi, et tunc Treuiris ordinatus episcopus, gentibus primae Germaniae uerbum praedicabat, mare conscendit, et consentientibus elementis, tranquillo nauigio Brittanias petit.

Interea sinistri spiritus peruolantes totam insulam Germanum uenire inuitis uaticinationibus nuntiabant; in tantum, ut Elafius quidam, regionis illius primus, in occursu sanctorum sine ulla manifesti nuntii relatione properaret, exhibens secum filium, quem in ipso flore adulescentiae debilitas dolenda damnauerat. Erat enim arescentibus neruis contracto poplite, cui per siccitatem cruris usus uestigii negabatur. Hunc Elafium prouincia tota subsequitur; ueniunt sacerdotes, occurrit inscia multitudo, confestim benedictio et sermonis diuini doctrina profunditur. Recognoscunt populum in ea, qua reliquerat, credulitate durantem; intellegunt culpam esse paucorum, inquirunt auctores, inuentosque condemnant. Cum subito Elafius pedibus aduoluitur sacerdotum, offerens filium, cuius necessitatem ipsa debilitas etiam sine precibus adlegabat; fit communis omnium dolor, praecipue sacerdotum, qui conceptam misericordiam ad diuinam clementiam contulerunt; statimque adulescentem beatus Germanus sedere conpulit, adtrectat poplitem debilitate curuatum, et per tota infirmitatis spatia medicabilis dextera percurrit, salubremque tactum sanitas festina subsequitur. Ariditas sucum, nerui officia receperunt, et in conspectu omnium filio incolumitas, patri filius restituitur...

Chapter XXI

Meanwhile evil spirits, flying over the whole island, made known through the involuntary prophecies of their victims the coming of Germanus, with the result that one of the leading men in the country, Elafius by name, came hurrying to meet the holy men without having had any news of them through any regular messenger. He brought with him his son who had been crippled in early youth by a grievous malady. His sinews had withered and the tendons of the knee had contracted and his withered leg made it impossible for him to stand on his feet.

The whole province came along with Elafius. The bishops arrived and the crowds came upon them unexpectedly. At once blessings and the words of God were showered upon them. Germanus could see that the people as a whole had persevered in the faith in which he had left them and the bishops realized that the fallings-away had been the work only of a few. These were identified and formally condemned.

At this point Elafius approached to make obeisance to the bishops and presented to them his son, whose youth and helplessness made his need clear without words. Everyone felt acutely for him, the bishops most of all, and in their pity they had recourse to the mercy of God. The blessed Germanus at once made the boy sit down, then felt the bent knee and ran his healing hand over all the diseased parts. Health speedily followed the life-giving touch. What was withered became supple, the sinews resumed their proper work, and, before the eyes of all, the son got back a sound body and the father got back a son...

When I read the description carefully of Elafius's son's lameness, I happened to think of the following words (from Lewis and Short's Latin dictionary):

arto (not arcto ), āvi, ātum, 1, v. a. 1. artus,
I.to draw or press close together, to compress, contract (not found in Cic.).
I. A.. Lit.: omnia conciliatu artari possunt, * Lucr. 1, 576: “libros,” Mart. 1, 3, 3; Col. 12, 44, 2: “vitis contineri debet vimine, non artari,” Plin. 17, 23, 35, § 209: “angustias eas artantibusinsulis parvis, quae etc.,” id. 3, 6, 13, § 83.—
B. Trop., to contract, straiten, limit, curtail: “fortuna humana fingit artatque ut lubet, i. e. in angustias redigit,” Plaut. Capt. 2, 2, 54 Lind.; Liv. 45, 56: “tempus,” to limit, circumscribe, Dig. 42, 1, 2; 38, 9, 1: “se,” to limit one's self, to retrench, ib. 1, 11, 2 al. —
II. In gen., to finish, conclude, Petr. 85, 4.—Hence, artātus , a, um, P. a., contracted into a small compass; hence, narrow, close; and of time, short: “pontus,” Luc. 5, 234: “tempus,” Vell. 1, 16.

artus , ūs, m. id., mostly plur. (artua, n., Plaut. Men. 5, 2, 102; quoted in Non. p. 191, 12.—Hence, dat. acc. to Vel. Long. p. 2229 P. and Ter. Scaur. p. 2260 P. artibus; yet the ancient grammarians give their decision in favor of artubus, which form is also supported by the best MSS.; cf. arcus.—The singular is found only in Luc. 6, 754; Val. Fl. 4, 310, and Prisc. p. 1219 P.).

I. A.. Lit., a joint: “molles commissurae et artus (digitorum),” Cic. N. D. 2, 60, 150: “suffraginum artus,” Plin. 11, 45, 101, § 248: “elapsi in pravum artus,” Tac. H. 4, 81: “dolorartuum,” gout, Cic. Brut. 60, 217.—Sometimes connected with membra, Plaut. Men. 5, 2, 102: “copia materiaï Cogitur interdum flecti per membra, per artus,” in every joint and limb,Lucr. 2, 282; 3, 703 al.; Suet. Calig. 28; cf. “Baumg.-Crus., Clavis ad Suet.: cernere lacerosartus, truncata membra,” Plin. Pan. 52, 5.—
B. Trop., the muscular strength in the joints; hence, in gen., strength, power: Ἐπιχαρμεῖον illud teneto; “nervos atque artus esse sapientiae, non temere credere,” Q. Cic. Petit. Cons. 10.—More freq.,

II. The limbs in gen. (very freq., esp. in the poets; in Lucr. about sixty times): cum tremulis anus attulit artubus lumen, Enn. ap. Cic. Div. 1, 20, 40 (Ann. v. 36 Vahl.); so Lucr. 3, 7; cf. id. 3, 488; 6, 1189: “artubus omnibus contremiscam,” Cic. de Or. 1, 26, 121: dum nati (sc. Absyrti) dissupatos artus captaret parens, vet. poet. ap. Cic. N. D. 3, 26, 67: “copia concita per artusOmnīs,” Lucr. 2, 267: “moribundi artus,” id. 3, 129 al.: “rogumque parari Vidit et arsurossupremis ignibus artus, etc.,” Ov. M. 2, 620 al.: “salsusque per artus Sudor iit,” Verg. A. 2, 173; 1, 173 al.: “veste strictā et singulos artus exprimente,” and showing each limb, Tac. G. 17: “artusin frusta concident,” Vulg. Lev. 1, 6; 8, 20; “ib. Job, 16, 8.—Of plants: stat per se vitis sine ullopedamento, artus suos in se colligens,” its tendrils, Plin. 14, 1, 3, § 13, where Jahn reads arcus.

artus (not arctus ), a, um, adj. v. arma, prop.
I.fitted; hence,

I. Lit., close, strait, narrow, confined, short, brief: “exierunt regionibus artis,” Lucr. 6, 120: “claustra,” id. 1, 70; so id. 3, 808: “nec tamen haec ita sunt arta et astricta, ut ea laxarenequeamus,” Cic. Or. 65, 220: “artioribus apud populum Romanum laqueis tenebitur,” Cic. Verr. 2, 1, 5: “nullum vinculum ad astringendam fidem jure jurando majores artius essevoluerunt,” id. Off. 3, 31, 111: “compages,” Verg. A. 1, 293: “nexus,” Ov. M. 6, 242: “artostipata theatro,” pressed together in a contracted theatre, Hor. Ep. 2, 1, 60: “toga,” a narrow toga without folds, id. ib. 1, 18, 30 (cf. exigua toga, id. ib. 1, 19, 13): “nimis arta convivia,” i. e. with too many guests, who are therefore compelled to sit close together, id. ib. 1, 5, 29 et saep.—Hence, subst.: artum , i, n., a narrow place or passage: “ventus cum confercit, franguntur in artomontes nimborum,” Lucr. 6, 158 Lachm.: “multiplicatis in arto ordinibus,” Liv. 2, 50; so id. 34, 15: “nec desilies imitator in artum,” nor, by imitating, leap into a close place, Hor. A. P. 134.—

II. Trop., strict, severe, scanty, brief, small: “sponte suā cecidit sub leges artaque jura,” subjected himself to the severity of the laws, Lucr. 5, 1147: “Additae leges artae et ideo superbae quasqueetc.,” Plin. 16, 4, 5, § 12: “vincula amoris artissima,” Cic. Att. 6, 2: artior somnus, a sounder or deeper sleep, id. Rep. 6, 10: “arti commeatus,” Liv. 2, 34; Tac. H. 4, 26; cf.: “in artocommeatus,” id. ib. 3, 13: “artissimae tenebrae,” very thick darkness, Suet. Ner. 46 (for which, in class. Lat., densus, v. Bremi ad h. l., and cf. densus) al.—So, colligere in artum, to compress, abridge: “quae (volumina) a me collecta in artum,” Plin. 8, 16, 17, § 44.—Of hope, small, scanty: “spes artior aquae manantis,” Col. 1, 5, 2: ne spem sibi ponat in arto, diminish hope, expectation, Ov. M. 9, 683: “quia plus quam unum ex patriciis creari non licebat, artior petitioquattuor petentibus erat,” i. e. was harder, had less ground of hope, Liv. 39, 32; and of circumstances in life, etc., straitened, distressing, wretched, needy, indigent (so in and after the Aug. per. for the class. angustus): “rebus in artis,” Ov. P. 3, 2, 25: “artas res nuntiaret,” Tac. H. 3, 69: “tam artis afflictisque rebus,” Flor. 2, 6, 31; so Sil. 7, 310: “fortuna artior expensis,” Stat. S. 5, 3, 117: “ne in arto res esset,” Liv. 26, 17.—Adv.: artē (not arcte ), closely, close, fast, firmly.

I. Lit.: “arte (manus) conliga,” Plaut. Ep. 5, 2, 29: “boves arte ad stipites religare,” Col. 6, 2, 5: “arte continere aliquid,” Caes. B. G. 7, 23: “aciem arte statuere,” Sall. J. 52, 6: “arte accubare,”Plaut. Stich. 4, 2, 39.—Comp.: “calorem artius continere,” Cic. N. D. 2, 9, 25: “artiusastringi,” Hor. Epod. 15, 5: “signa artius conlocare,” Sall. C. 59, 2: “artius ire,” Curt. 4, 13, 34: “artius pressiusque conflictari,” Gell. 10, 6.—Sup.: “milites quam artissime ire jubet,” Sall. J. 68, 4: “artissime plantas serere,” Plin. 12, 3, 7, § 16.—

II. Trop.: “arte contenteque aliquem habere,” Plaut. As. 1, 1, 63; id. Merc. prol. 64: “arte etgraviter dormire,” soundly, Cic. Div. 1, 28, 59: “arte appellare aliquem,” briefly, by shortening his name, Ov. P. 4, 12, 10: “artius adstringere rationem,” Cic. Fat. 14, 32: “abstinentiamartissime constringere,” Val. Max. 2, 2, 8.—

III. Transf.: “arte diligere aliquem,” strongly, deeply, Plin. Ep. 6, 8; so also id. ib. 2, 13.

arthrītis , ĭdis, f., = ἀρθρῖτις,
I.a lameness in the joints, gout (in pure Lat., articularis morbus), Vitr. 1, 6.

From Greek ἄρθρον, arthron "joint," from PIE *ar(ə)-dhro-, suffixed form of root *ar- "to fit together."

The reader will note that these words contain among their meanings "joint", "contract", "lameness" and the like. The lameness of the boy was due in part to the contraction of the tendons of the knee joint.

Could it be that the author of the vita had not derived his story of lameness from the eponym Gewis, associated fancifully with Greek γυιός (guiós, 'lame'), but from the name Arthur/Artorius (or Artri/Arthri)?  These names could well have been wrongly etymologized by drawing on Latin words like artus and arto.  In this way Arthur was thought to mean a boy whose knee joint had suffered contraction of the tendons.

The idea is not as crazy as it sounds.  Professor Stefan Zimmer, in his paper ‘The Name of Arthur’, includes among the formal possibilities for explaining the name Artorius the following:

“Artorius as a genuine Latin formation may belong to the word family of ars ‘art, skill, craftmanship’, and be a derivative of artus, -ūs (masculine substantive) ‘structure, joints’, or, less likely, from artus (adjective) ‘structured, tight’. Artorius might have been a substantivized adjective meaning ‘joiner’ (not necessarily in the restricted sense of the modern English word).”

Professor Joseph Pucci, one of the world’s top experts in Late and Medieval Latin, said in response to my query on this issue:

“I think it is possible for a Latin author to connect the name Arthur to the Latin words you discuss. That sort of etymologizing, in fact, strikes me as foundational to the way early medieval thinkers on language and/or literate people thought about the relationship of words to ideas. Two sources that might be useful: Robert Maltby, A Lexicon of Ancient Latin Etymologies, which will give a sense of this sort of thinking in an earlier context (earlier for your interests); the other is a contemporary, and perhaps more immediately useful, source: Isidore of Seville, Etymologiae, in many editions and several translations, including English.”

Professor Gregory Hayes, another expert in Late and Medieval Latin, added:

“Medieval writers are pretty flexible when they start etymologizing and it wouldn't surprise me to see one connecting the name Artorius with artus (noun or adj.), if there was some advantage to be gained in a particular context by doing so.”

In support of the idea that a word or name in a saint’s life could be used to concoct a story, please see the following blog post on my identification of St. Germanus’s famous Hallelujah Battle:

http://mistshadows.blogspot.com/2016/10/the-location-of-alleluia-battle-of-st.html

If this confusion of the name Arthur/Artorius (or Arthri/Artri) for the Latin artus or similar did happen, then Cerdic son of Elafius/Elesa was quite possibly Arthur! This would appear to be in direct conflict with my idea that Cerdic is Ceredig son of Cunedda.  Kenneth Sisam (supported by David Dumville) attempts to prove that Elesa is a derivative of Aloc/Alusa from the Bernician pedigree.* If so, there is no need to find a Celtic prototype for Elesa/Esla.

Of course, if this is true, then the very early St. Germanus story would have to be dependent on the Anglo-Saxon genealogy that grafted Aloc/Alusa onto the Gewessei line of descent.

*As written, Elafius is a Latin name derived ultimately from Greek elaphos, ‘hind, stag.’  A son of Ceredig son of Cunedda is named Hyddwn, from Welsh hydd, ‘stag, hart.’  He was the grandfather of St. Teilo of the stags. It is possible, then, that Elesa is not from Aloc/Alusa, but is a corruption of Elafius, itself a Latin translation for Hyddwn. I've conclusively shown that the Gewissei pedigree runs backwards in the English sources, and so the Elesa presented to us as the father of Cerdic of Wessex would actually be the latter's son.

Degsastan and the Origin of the mil uathmar/fer uathmar, the Prototype for Uther Pendragon

Map of the Dawston Burn, Scottish Borders

Long ago I proposed that the mil uathmar or "terrible warrior", also called fer uathmar or "terrible man" in the Irish story of the Conception of Mongan, a probable source for Geoffrey of Monmouth's own tale on Arthur's birth, may ultimately lie behind the name/title Uther Pendragon.

At the time, I did not bother to ask myself the next logical question: who was the mil uathmar?

We are told he is brought with the English as a champion of sorts to fight against Aedan of Dalriada (who had a son named Arthur).  The location of this battle is the famous Degsastan, a place still best identified with Dawston in Liddesdale.  The following entry from the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle and an attending note are from English Historical Documents, 500-1042, edited by Dorothy Whitelock:

The reader will note that a fairly common corruption of the battle-site name was Egesan stan.  Suppose it was this spelling that the author of the Conception of Mongan possessed?  Might we not, then, assume that he might have linked Egesan- with these English words (from the Bosworth and Toller Anglo-Saxon Dictionary):

egesa
egsa, ægsa, an; m. [ege fear] Fear, horror, dread; tĭmor, horror, terror, formīdo Him gásta weardes egesa on breóstum wunode fear of the guardian of spirits dwelt in his breast, Cd. 138; Th. 173, 24; Gen. 2866: Beo. Th. 1572; B. 784: Andr. Kmbl. 789; An. 445: Rood Kmbl. 170; Kr. 86: Judth. 12; Thw. 25, 10; Jud. 252. Bútan Godes egsan [MS. B. egesan] without fear of God, Bd. 4, 12; S. 581, 1: Cd. 178; Th. 223, 23; Dan. 124:

EGE
æge, eige, es; m. Fear, terror, dread, AWE; tĭmor, terror, formīdo Eorþcynincgum se ege standeþ terribĭli ăpŭd rēges terræ, Ps. Th. 75, 9. On ðǽm dagum wæs mycel ege fram ðǽm wífmannan in those days there was a great dread of these women, Ors. 1, 10; Bos. 33, 26: Bt. Met. Fox 1, 143; Met. 1. 72. Ege Drihtnes tĭmor Domĭni, Ps. Spl. 18, 10.

If so, then the Conception of Mongan, with its terrible warrior/man, is indirectly informing us that this champion had been wrongly taken as a eponym for 'Egesan'-stan.  In other words, that the battle was, indeed, that of Degsastan/Dawston.

The corollary to the begetting of Mongan by the transformed Manannan son of Llyr is his later slaying by an Arthur son of Bicoir the Briton.

Pen/Ben and chend/chind in the 'Conception of Mongan'

I'm now more convinced than ever that Uther Pendragon is a fiction - if not of Geoffrey of Monmouth, then of his source.  In the 'Conception of Mongan', the word "chend" occurs in the sentence about the fer uathmar.  Here is the relevant text from Kuno Meyer's edition:

Chend is Irish cenn, a word cognate with Welsh Pen (Ben).  It can mean 'head' or 'chief.'  But in the Irish, it could have other meanings as well.  In this particular sentence it means something like the terrible man is brought forward against Aedan.  Such usage of cenn is set forward in the entry for that word in the eDIL:

39 fo ch.¤ towards, against, for (see 21, 45): teacht fam cheann `(to) attack me', Content. xviii 1 . éirghid fo cend mo c[h]reiche they go for my booty, ZCP viii 226.22 . Note also: gabh fád cheann mo chonmharccsa `take upon thee my quarrel(?)', Studies 1924, 243 § 12 

45 i c.¤ in contexts implying motion (us. with prec. vb.) to, in the direction of, towards, against (see 21, 39): na torcair nemh inna ccent `on them', Blathm. 68 . lotir remib hi cend in Brogo, LU 10575 . co torracht C. i c.¤ in droichit cucu, CCath. 1283 . dorat . . . / Conall i cend Chonculaind matched C. against C., Met. Dinds. iii 446.96 . ro cuired cach i ceann araili dona Romanchaib, CCath. 3159 . an uair chuirid i n-a chionn when they oppose him, DDána 96.33 . connsuine . . . do rachadh na cheann, mur atá so: slat ┐ dearg, slaitearg sin which would be assimilated to it, IGT Introd. 10.2 . do tuit an torc a cend a choss fell forward , BCC 324.30 .

53 Various: i mbun na gabla ro boí hi ciund tened over against, LU 9194 ( FB 92 ). a cheann i cind tened, ZCP i 464.33 . gach aon a gceann a dhíre ┐ a dhúthchasa féin in possession of, ML 102.14 . mac S. a cind arrad at the head of nobles, Ériu v 244.194 . in cís d'ícc a cind chruid, LB 133b56 `in respect of', Todd Lect. vi 40.6 .

It would have been quite easy for chend to have been read wrongly by a Welshman, and for the word to have become attached to the terrible man/terrible warrior.  Uathmar = Uthr, warrior = dragon, chend/chind = Pen.  

Alternately, as the mil uathmar/fer uathmar is the champion brought forward against Aedan by the English, this would be sufficient to account for the Pen of Pen-dragon/warrior.  In other words, he was seen as the 'chief warrior' of the English. 

I feel quite confident that there is no longer any need to seek a historical identification for Uther Pendragon.  Simply put, he is an invented character and was not the father of the famous Arthur. 

NOTE: Many years ago I proposed that Bicoir, son of a British Arthur, was not, in fact, the Beccurus found on a memorial stone in Gwynedd, but was instead a simple error for Petuir, one of the spellings of Petr, the father of Arthur of Dyfed.  In medieval MSS., B often substitutes for P, and c and t can be easily mistaken for each other. As Dyfed had a Pembroke or Pen-brog, "End of the Land", the Kintyre of Dalriada, which had exactly the same meaning, , may be a relocation of Mongan's death-place.  In other words, Mongan may have been raiding Pembroke and was killed there by the Dyfed king, Arthur son of Petr.  Conversely, it is not impossible (although less likely) that Arthur son of Petr was raiding Dalriada and killed Mongan there (the Isle of Islay is cited in the Irish source as the actual point of Mongan's death).   

A Precedent for My Idea that the Lame Boy (Son of Elafius) in the VITA GERMANI = Arthur

I'd forgotten that some time ago I had found the site of the Hallelujah Battle of St. Germanus by interpreting the saint's name from the Welsh perspective.  Here, again, is the relevant post:

http://mistshadows.blogspot.com/2016/10/the-location-of-alleluia-battle-of-st.html

I'm in contact now with top hagiographers and will soon be adding their input to the final revision of THE BEAR KING prior to republication.

In brief, there is good reason for believing that this lame son of Elafius (or Elesa) IS Arthur, and that the VITA GERMANI, essentially, proves that Cerdic of Wessex was also known as the 'Bear King.'

A SNIPPET FROM ADDITIONS TO "THE BEAR KING"

In "The Bear King", I identify Arthur with Ceredig son of Cunedda, himself = Cerdic of Wessex.  Here is one of the small, but important additions I've made to the book.  This is more of a teaser than anything else.  I will post separately a revision of an earlier blog post on Elafius's lame son as Arthur/Ceredic.

The Elesa of the early English sources has been identified with the Elafius of the Life of St. Germanus.  I hold to this identification.  As for the former, Kenneth Sisam (supported by David Dumville) attempts to prove that Elesa is a derivative of Aloc/Alusa from the Bernician pedigree.* If so, there is no need to find a Celtic prototype for Elesa/Esla.

Of course, if this is true, then the very early St. Germanus story would have to be dependent on the Anglo-Saxon genealogy that grafted Aloc/Alusa onto the Gewessei line of descent.

*As written, Elafius is a Latin name derived ultimately from Greek elaphos, ‘hind, stag.’  A son of Ceredig son of Cunedda is named Hyddwn, from Welsh hydd, ‘stag, hart.’  He was the grandfather of St. Teilo of the stags. It is possible, then, that Elesa is not from Aloc/Alusa, but is a corruption of Elafius, itself a Latin translation for Hyddwn.

THE BEAR KING TO BE MADE AVAILABLE AGAIN THROUGH PUBLICATION

I not long ago removed my book THE BEAR KING from publication.  I did so out of some uncertainty about the validity of this newer theory on the identity of King Arthur.  Simply put, I came to realize that unless I were able to show with some high degree of probability what the actual name of Arthur's father was that I would be unable to argue my case convincingly.  Readers of my blog here have been witnessing my attempts to pin down Uther Pendragon.  While a few possible candidates seem to hold promise, none of them can be confirmed by utilizing sources external to those produced by the Welsh.  Uther is beyond doubt a title, not a name, and this poses all kinds of problems for the Arthurian researcher.  

Ironically, without knowing it at the time, I did possess the kind of "proof" I needed.  Such textual evidence took the form of a proposed misrendering of the name Arthur as found in the Life of St. Germanus of Auxerre.  A post on this was included as in appendix in the book.  The idea seemed compelling, but rather far-fetched, and I really didn't dare hold to the view that it might be true - until I heard back from several top scholars who were experts in the discipline of late and medieval Latin and hagiography.  They were of the opinion that my thinking was sound on this point.  And this meant, in essence, that I could claim to know Arthur's real father. 

As soon as this supportive material can be added to THE BEAR KING and I have republished the title in electronic and paperback formats, I will make the relevant links available here. 

Maes Gwyddno/Cantre'r Gwaelod - Morecambe Bay?

While re-reading the story of Taliesin, I ran once again into the mystery of the whereabouts of the sunken kingdom of Gwyddno Garanhir.  There seemed to be a couple of good clues as to its location.  First, a chieftain named Seithenhin is mentioned in connection with the place.  Second, he is said to be buried between a Caer Genedr and the sea.

Seithenhin is said to be from Latin Septentinus and this may well be correct.  However, I would see it as a substitution for 'the Setantian', i.e. an eponym of sorts for the Setantii tribe.  This people, according to Rivet and Smith (see THE PLACE-NAMES OF ROMAN BRITAIN), lived between the Mersey (ancient Seteia) and Fleetwood at the mouth of the Wyre.

Genedr looks suspiciously like the River Kent in Cumbria, from an earlier Kennet, probably plus dwr, 'water'.  The 'Caer' in question is probably the Roman fort of Alauna on the Kent just a little south of Kendal, although this could be a reference to the 12th century Kendal Castle.  The River Kent, like the Wyre of the Setantii, empties into Morecambe Bay.  The Kent Channel, in fact, extends out into the bay quite far to the south. Morecambe is described thusly:

"It is the largest expanse of intertidal mudflats and sand in the United Kingdom, covering a total area of 310 km2 (120 sq mi). [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morecambe_Bay]

On the Romano-British Moricambe Aestuarium, Rivet and Smith have this to say:

"In its position on Ptolemy's map the name fits Morecambe Bay and it may be that he has misinterpreted a sinus or gulf as an aestuarium or estuary; if not, the reference can hardly be to the estuary of a single river, since, as noted on p. 135, all the major one here have Celtic names, so that a joint estuary, like that at Cartmel, must be intended."

Cartmel lies directly between the Kent and Leven Rivers.  

By saying that Seithenhin's grave was between the fort on the Kennet and the sea, we are being told that it is in Maes Gwyddno/Morecambe Bay, the Sunken Land.

That Gwyddno may have been relocated to Wales in later legend is suggested by his apparent identification with a Man of the North.  This entry is from P. C. Bartram's A CLASSICAL WELSH DICTIONARY:

MORE THAN A BIT OF A SHOCKER: AN INDISPUTABLE IDENTIFICATION OF UTHER PENDRAGON?

Taliesin in his hide-covered basket

First, my apologies to my readers for pulling my earlier piece on the 'Marwnat Vthyr Pen' or 'Death-Song of Uther Pen[dragon]'.  I had relied overmuch on the faulty translations of others and was further misled by new suggested emendations.  As a result, the idea I presented in that particular blog was seriously flawed.

When I realized my error, I set to work to translate the critical lines of the poem myself - checking with Dr. Simon Rodway of The University of Wales as I went.  The result of this second attempt to analyze the poem was both exciting and somewhat disturbing.

The critical lines run as follow:

Neu vi tywyssawc yn tywyll:

It is I who’s a leader in darkness:

a’m rithwy am dwy pen kawell.

--------------------------------------

Neu vi eil kawyl yn ardu:

It’s I who’s a second kawyl in the gloom:

                                 ---------

                        

I began by asking Dr. Rodway if kawell and kawyl could actually be the same word.  He responded:

"That’s quite possible, in the light of frequent examples of e ~ y in MW, and occasional examples of ll ~ l."

The most obvious word then is "basket".  Long ago I wondered if this basket could have something to do with the hide-covered one (a coracle?) of Gwion Bach/Taliesin.  Going with this idea, I rendered the second, most problematic line as:

Our Lord transforms me, Chief of the Basket

It is this line which may have provided the impetus or inspiration to Geoffrey of Monmouth, who has Uther transformed by Merlin into Gorlois (from gorlassar in the Marwnat Vthyr Pen, a description for Uther himself).  'Chief of the Basket' is a title for Gwion Bach/Taliesin, who spent many magical years in his hide-covered basket.

The last line then reads:

It's I who's a second basket in the gloom

Seems nonsensical, until we remember that Elphin found Gwion Bach's basket in his weir AT NIGHT and that the moment he slit the basket open with his knife he beheld the "radiant brow" that gave Taliesin his name.  

In other words, Taliesin's radiant brow guides his warriors in the dark.  

But if this poem is an elegy pronounced by the dead Taliesin, why is it called 'Marwnat Vthyr Pen'?  And why does he refer to himself as the 'second basket'?

Because, as was the case with Bran the Blessed, it is Taliesin's decapitated head that is speaking - a truly "uthr" (fearful, dreadful, awful, terrible, tremendous, mighty, overbearing, cruel; wonderful, wondrous, astonishing, excellent) head.  The second basket is likely that in which his head is deposited after he is slain.  Marged Haycock in her edition of the poem had asked if the Pen Kawell were the chief basket used to collect the heads of the battle-slain.  Line 18 of the 'Marwnat Vythr Pen'  mentions the 100 heads Uthr cut off during his martial career. 

In other words, he was brought into life in a basket, and he leaves life in a second one.   

The metaphorical term dragon, as I surmised before when I thought Uther Pen might be a designation for Urien Rheged, was added by a copyist who wrongly interpreted Pen in the sense of leader, possibly in an attempt to prevent future confusion.  This act had the unintended effect of producing an entirely new personage, viz. Uther Pendragon, the Terrible Chief-warrior.

If I'm right about this poem, and my translation  is allowed to stand, then we are faced with a very curious conclusion:  the greatest British hero Arthur was a son of none other than the greatest British poet, Taliesin.  

I've drawn from P.C. Bartram's A CLASSICAL WELSH DICTIONARY for what little is known about Taliesin, historically speaking:

The poet's date seems to be a bit late for Arthur.  However, my work on Eliwlad as the 'Prince of Eli'  eagle from Powys (ancient Cornovia; cf. Kernyw/Cornwall, where Arthur was often placed in Welsh tradition) does point to an origin for Uther in that kingdom.  

It is always possible Taliesin of the Terrible Head was not the father of Arthur, of course.  This may have been an invention of just about anybody.  If Arthur's father were unknown, but someone came across his name in the 'Marwnat Vthyr Pen' elegy, such a relationship might well have been assumed.

I would say that this Terrible Head could still be that of Urien Rheged, and Taliesin was merely putting words into the mouth of this decapitated king, but it's difficult - if not impossible - to do so given the references to cawell, 'basket', and its relationship to darkness.   Still, there is that 'gorlassar' which we find otherwise used only for Urien.  Haycock translates gorlassar as 'armed in blue', but the literal meaning is simply 'very blue'. This could refer to armor or weapons or (I would offer) woad tattooing. 

In closing, I would like to include some of Marged Haycock's commentary on the poem.  Here she reflects upon the possibility that some or all of the lines may represent the voice of Taliesin himself:

The speaker of the present poem presents himself in lines 1-25 as a warrior
above all. In the second half, lines 26-35 the emphasis is on the speaker’s poetic
skill, and his ability as a harpist, piper and crowder (player on the crwth). Other
poems in this collection such as §5 Kat Godeu indicate that both martial and
artistic qualities (as well as others) coexist in the delineation of Taliesin himself,
and it is tempting to assume that he is the speaker of the whole poem.
Alternatively, the second half may have been originally a ‘Taliesin’ piece which
became attached to a soliloquy (?by Uthr) because of the very marked egocentric
nature of the two, and perhaps because Taliesin was imagined to have sung the
deathsong of Uthr (not necessarily the first part of our poem), just as he was the
putative author of Dylan’s elegy and the poem on Cunedda (§§22 and 23).

NOTE: M. Haycock also suggests that kawell could be for cannwyll, found with the following definitions in the GPC:

"candle, luminary, transf. of star, sun, moon, lamp; fig. of light, brightness, instruction, leader, hero, choicest or best of anything."

According to Dr Rodway: 

"That seems possible. Perhaps the copyist missed an n-stroke over the a. We find n for nn quite often in medieval MSS, and l for ll occasionally."

If this were the case, the two lines could be rendered differently:

Our Lord the chief luminary transforms me
It's I who's the second light in the gloom.

I would read this as a reference to Uther's star in Geoffrey of Monmouth -

"A star of great magnitude and brilliance, with a single beam shining from it.  At the end of this beam was a ball of fire, spread out in the shape of a dragon.  The star signifies you in person, and so does the dragon beneath the star."

I'd once pointed out that the appearance of this star at the time of the death of Ambrosius, by medieval tradition, would indicate the star represented Ambrosius himself, and not Uther.  This formed part of my earlier argument that Uther Pendragon, the Dreadful Chief-warrior/leader, was merely a designation for Ambrosius, who was the dragon-lord of Dinas Emrys and the dread (timore) of Vortigern.  The French romances called Ambrosius Pendragon, which has misled many into thinking the Pendragon epithet was some sort of inheritable title. 

The 'Marwnat Vythr Pen' is thought by many to predate Geoffrey, but this is not at all certain.  Or we could postulate that Geoffrey knew of this motif from earlier tradition.

Such a translation fits the earlier "leader in darkness" line, and makes sense of the "in the gloom" of the later line.  A leader is, like God, metaphorically the guiding light of the warriors who follow him into the darkness of battle. 

  

JULIAN THE DRAGON AND HIS DRACO STANDARD - ONE MORE TIME

Coin of Emperor Constantine III

In the following blog post -

http://mistshadows.blogspot.com/2017/08/a-new-paradigm-for-vortigern-and-uther_24.html

- I had discussed the "Galfridian framework" upon which at least part of the story of Uther Pendragon seemed to be based.  As it turns out, I should have pushed that particular exploration a bit further.

I had drawn a parallel between Uther and Julian, one of the two sons (the other being Constans) of Constantine III.  My reason was simple: Julian as a name was chosen because the famous emperor Julian the Apostate was the son of Julius Constantius, half-brother of Constantine the Great.  This first Julian was not only called a 'Dragon', but was noted for his favoring of the draconarii, the bearers of the dragon standard.  In fact, Julian was actually crowned by a draconarius (see http://www.fectio.org.uk/articles/draco.htm).

It is in the work of Gregory of Nazianus’s ‘First Invective Against Julian' (see http://www.tertullian.org/fathers/gregory_nazianzen_2_oration4.htm) that we find the Emperor called "the Dragon" (of Revelations).   In the same work, we are told:

“Moreover he shows his audacity against the great symbol [the Chi-Ro of Constantine the Great], which marches in procession along with the Cross, and leads the army, elevated on high, being both a solace to toil, and so named in the Roman language, and king (as one may express it) over all the other standards, whatever are adorned with imperial portraits, and expanded webs in divers dyes and pictures, and whatever, breathing through the fearful gaping mouths of dragons, raised on high on the tops of spears, and filled with wind throughout their hollow bodies, spotted over with woven scales, present to the eye a most agreeable and at the same time terrible show.”

In this last, Gregory in speaking out against the Roman draco or ‘dragon’ standard, which according to Geoffrey of Monmouth Uther Pendragon carried in his wars.  The draco is described as “fearful” and “terrible.”

While some have argued against Geoffrey of Monmouth patterning his Constantine and Constans after Constantine the III and his son Constans, I was able to show a number of things which strongly suggests this is exactly what he did.  

First, Constantine's son Ambrosius is based upon the 4th century Prefect of Gaul, possibly fused with his son St. Ambrose:

Aurelius Ambrosius (337-340)

St. Ambrose (d. 397)

His other son, Constans, begins his career as a monk - which was true historically of Constans, son of Constantine III and brother of Julian.

There were a couple of additional points I did not think to raise in the earlier post.  

First, Julian the Apostate - after whom Julian son of Constantine III was named - had been proclaimed Augustus.  The first Augustus, Octavian, was often of such poor health that he was carried about the battlefield on a litter - just as is said of Uther towards the end of his life.  A similar story is told of the 4th century B.C. general Eumenes in his conflict with Antigonus.  There may be other ancient examples of this motif; I've not bothered to search for more.  A more immediate influence may have come from the 9th century.  Guy Halsall (in "Warfare and Society in the Barbarian West 450-900) relates how at this time "a sick Breton commander had himself carried on a litter in front of battle-line rather than leave his troops leaderless."  The source Halsall derives this statement from (the late Karl Leyser's "Communications and Power in Medieval Europe") calls this Breton commander a duke, although his name is not given.  That name may be in Regino's CHRONICON (875), and I'm currently trying to find that source.*  Strictly from a chronological standpoint, the duke in question may have been Pascwetan, whose name resembles that of Pascent, a son of Vortigern.

Second, we are told Uther died at St. Albans, the ancient Verulamium, which was also known as Cair Mincip ('Fort Municipium) in the 28 Cities of Britain list appended to Nennius's HISTORIA BRITTONUM.  Rivet and Smith ("The Place-Names of Roman Britain") give the early forms of Municipium used for this Romano-British city.  Constantine III and his son Julian, after their defeat at Arles, were beheaded in 411 A.D. on the River MINCIO in Italy.

In his book THE EMPEROR AND THE ARMY IN THE LATER ROMAN EMPIRE, AD 235-395, Mark Hebblewhite has this to say about Julian's use of the draco standard.  The Labarum referred to here employed the chi-rho symbol of Constantine the Great.

This is the actual passage the author alludes to from Ammianus, Books XVI, Chapter XII, 39:

Quo agnito per purpureum signum draconis, summitati hastae longioris aptatum velut senectutis pendentis exuvias, stetit unius turmae tribunus et pallore timoreque perculsus ad aciem integrandam recurrit.

For as he was at once recognized by his purple standard of the dragon, which was fixed to the top of a long spear, waving its fringe as a real dragon sheds its skin, the tribune of one squadron halted, and turning pale with alarm, hastened back to renew the battle.

Ammianus  Book XVI, Chapter XII, 39.

'timoreque' can here be defined as  "fear, dread, apprehension, alarm, anxiety."  Here have a Terrible Chief-dragon, indeed!

The word 'terrible' is also used of Julian outside of the draco context twice in Ammianus Marcellinus:

sine crudelitate terribilis

terrible but free from cruelty 

oculos cum venustate terribilis

his eyes, at once terrible and full of charm

*  https://archive.org/stream/reginonisabbatis00regiuoft/reginonisabbatis00regiuoft_djvu.txt

Yet Another Argument for Uther Pendragon = Urien of Rheged

We should now look more closely at the gloss of the ‘Uther Pen’ poem.  John Koch tells us (in CELTIC CULTURE: A HISTORICAL ENCYCLOPEDIA) that

“…there is a weird elegy issuing from the mouth of the deceased titled Marwnat Vthyr Pen, with mar. vthyr dragon added in another hand at the margin.”

This poem, which I hold to be about the head of Urien, shows how the Pendragon title developed.  Pen was taken wrongly for “chieftain”, and the metaphorical dragon substituted for it.  Someone subsequently put the two together as ‘Pendragon’.  And thus an independent entity was born. 

For my full argument identifying Urien with Uther, please see my prior blog posts.

Line 18 of the Marwnat Vythr Pen mentions the hundred heads Uther took in battle:

neu vi a ledeis cant pen,

it was I who cut off a hundred heads,

A CAER UTHER IN SOUTHEAST DUMFRIESSHIRE?

NOTE: Since writing this piece, I did more map work to make sure I had not missed anything.  Well, I did do so, unfortunately...

There is a Red Cleugh stream originating from a spring on Carruthers Fell.  This is a tributary of the Kirk Burn, upon which Carruthers sits.  The Red Cleugh flows into the Kirk Burn just a little north of Carruthers.

Thus we can safely derive this name from what Alan James has at his BLITON site:

rūδ

IE *h1roudh- (o-grade of *h1reudh-‘(bright) red’) > early Celtic *roudo-/ā- > Br, Gaul *roudo-/ā-

> Old-MW rud > W rhudd, OCorn rud > MCorn ru[y]th > Corn ruth, OBret rud[d] > Bret ruz;

OIr rúad > Middle -MnIr rua, G ruadh, Mx ruy (from earlier oblique form); cogn. Lat rūfus,

Gmc *rauðaz > OE rēad > ‘red’, ON rjöðr, Skt rohita, and cf. (from zero-grade *h1rudh-) Lat

ruber, Gk erythros, Skt rudhira.

‘Red’. In the Celtic languages, especially ‘reddish-brown, ginger, ruddy, russet’.

a2) Names of the ‘Rother’ type are probably rö- + -duβr, see both these elements, but rūδ- + -ar

or –duβr is possible. 

I will leave this article here entire, just so that interested readers may see how tricky place-names can be.  

Burnswark Hillfort with Roman Siege Camps

Carruthers and Carrutherstown in Dumfriesshire have been derived by place-name scholars from Caer Rhydderch, 'the fort of Rhydderch [Hael, King of Strahclyde]'.  This may well be correct.

Carrothres 1334, Caer Ruther 1350, Carrotheris 1372, Carutheris 1495

Certainly, Jocelyn of Furness claimed that St. Kentigern/Mungo established an early monastery at Hoddom only a half dozen kilometers ENE of Carrutherstown.  While there is no further evidence for such an institution, it is undeniable that Rhydderch Hael plays a significant role in the Vita of the saint.  It is possible, therefore, that while Rhydderch was never present in this region, his association with the saint caused his name to be incorporated in a legendary sense during the development of local place-names. 

We must also take into account the Welsh tradition claiming that Rhydderch took part in the battle of Arderydd, now Arthuret in Cumbria.  Caerlaverock, i.e Caer Llywarch, not far to the SW of Carrutherstown, was said to have been the cause of the Battle of Arderydd.  Myddin/Llallogan of Arderydd is found in legendary tales of St. Kentigern and Rhydderch.

There are some other Ruther- place-names in Scotland, including Rutherglen in Glasgow and Rutherford in Tweeddale.  There is a "lost" Carruderes in Berwickshire (?), which I think may be The Camps fort near the Rutherford Burn.  St. Kentigern belonged to Glasgow, and was put in Tweeddale to convert Merlin. However, Alan James of BLITON makes is clear that there may be another etymology for these places that is to be preferred over Rhydderch:

a2) Names of the ‘Rother’ type are probably rö- + -duβr, see both these elements, but rūδ- + -ar or –duβr is possible. They include:
Glenruther Wig (Penninghame)  PNGall p. 150  + cūl- or *cǖl-, see both of these.
Riddrie Lnk (Glasgow: the area south of the Molendinar Burn)  see Durkan (1986) at p. 284.
Rother YWR  ERNp. 348, PNYWR7 p. 136.
Rutherglen Lnk influenced by Gaelic ruadh, = -*glïnn, early Gaelic –glenn, or Scots ‑glen.
Rutter Force, with Low Rutter, Wml (Drybeck)   PNWml2 p. 99, but see also rejadər and treβ.

(1) Culruther, Glenruther looks like a lost stream-name of the ‘Rother’ type, see rö- and rūδ-. Unless Culruther 1462 was a scribal error, this was presumably close to, but not necessarily the same place as, Glenruther; however, this was earlier Clonriddin (sic) 1137; on the basis of that form MacQueen, PNWigMM p. 112, proposes Gaelic cluain-ridir ‘knight’s meadow’, suggesting a possible association with the Templars or Hospitallers; it would also have been a strategic location during the period of division and conflict in the earldom of Galloway in the third quarter of the twelfth century (A. Livingston pers. comm.). 

On the surface of things, then, the identification of the Carruthers place-name with Caer Rhydderch does not necessarily stand on a firm footing. 

I would like to float another idea for Carruthers.  But before I do, we must ask what the Carruthers place-names are referring to GEOGRAPHICALLY.

When one goes to the map, the first thing that becomes immediately obvious is that between the two Carruthers sites is the mighty Burnswark hillfort with its adjacent Roman siege works.  Now, although some toponymists have tried to make a case for Burn- preserving a Celtic name for hill akin to Welsh bryn.  One advocate of this possibility is Alan James of BLITON.

The problem is that this explanation is simply not viable.  Why?  Carruthers is also right next to a Birrens Hill, and the place-name Birren is found at other sites in Dumfriesshire. An alternate spelling found for Burnswark is Birrenswark. In the words of May Williamson (THE NON-CELTIC PLACE-NAMES OF THE SCOTTISH BORDERS COUNTIES), "There are several other examples of the use of birren in Dmf., but all apply to Celtic or mediaeval fortifications."  She goes on to say:

"“Birren” seems to represent OE byrgen, “burial place, tumulus”: cf Birrens Hill, No. XXVII. “Burren”, which is also found in this area (Jam, sv), may be a dialectal variation, or may represent OE burg-æsn, (cf PN La, 85), ME burwain, burren, from which the form birren may have arisen with
the Southern Scots raising of the ME u to ModSc i. A cognate term, probably Irish in origin, is borran, which appears in NW England (PN CuWe, 135)."

Alan James would add this (via personal communication):

"OE byrȝen is literally 'a burial', so the names may refer to barrows, but the word seems to have been used for features (mounds, cairns etc.) that may not really have been burials. The word itself isn't connected with burh, byriȝ, nor any other word related to fortifications, though there may coincidentally have been forts at all these places. Nor is it a hill word, or only if you count mounds as hills."

If the Burns- element were from a Celtic word for hill, we would expect it to be used of other hills in the region that lacked fortifications.  As it happens, it is not. For this reason I'm disposed to believe that Burnswark (with -wark being the English name for a fortification) is a thoroughly non-Celtic name.

This being so, Carruthers - whatever its origin - may well represent a relic of the earlier Celtic name for the Burnswark fort.  But was the fort called Caer Rydderch from the beginnng?  Or could Rhydderch only have become associated with the place at a later date?

Here is my theory - which may well be an untenable one.  Still, I think it at least worth considering.  Let us first look at the Carruthers place-names and that of Burnswark in relation to the Mabon sites in Dumfriesshire:

The reader may recall that earlier I suggested that the reason that Mabon was said to be the servant of Uther was because Uther reigned where Mabon-worship was centered.  We can see on the map that the Burnswark - or, rather, Caer "Rhydderch" - is between Lochmaben and the Lochmaben Stone at Gretna Green.

Suppose the Burnswark was originally CAER UTHER.  And this place-name was at some point wrong taken for a Caer Rhydderch.  This confusion not only led to the spurious tradition that St. Mungo founded Hoddom nearby, but may even have contributed to the Welsh claim that Rhydderch was involved at the Battle of Arderydd.  I have always had a major problem with Rhydderch fighting in this area, a region controlled by his contemporary Urien of Rheged.  According to P.C. Bartram, the earliest date for Urien's death would be 585-6.  Arderydd was fought in 573.  Urien's powerful successor was his son, Owain, much praised in the early poetry. Yet Urien, mysteriously, is not implicated in the events leading up to the Battle of Arderydd.  Nor is he numbered among the combatants. In fact, he is nowhere to be seen.  This seems truly inexplicable to me - unless we accept the possibility that Rhydderch is an error for Uther.  The Welsh Annals say only that the conflict at Arderydd was between the sons of Eliffer and Gwenddolau.   Later tradition imported famous heroes from all quarters. Even Aedan of Dalriada was made party to the devastating military action, possibly because of his c. 603 battle at Degsastan/Dawston in Liddesdale.

As with Gwenddolau son of Ceidio, Uther (whom I've elsewhere identified with Urien of Rheged) may not have been a personal name, but a place-name.  The latter is thought to come from a British word akin to Irish uachtar, meaning 'high, lofty.' Gwenddolau is, transparently, 'White Dales', and may well be a personification of a place-name.  Caer Uther may, then, have been not the Fort of Uther, but merely the 'High Fort.'

I should hasten to add that we have no evidence the Burnswark continued to be inhabited after it was destroyed by the Romans.  It is the suspected oppidum of the Novantae tribe.

P.S.  Alan James provided me with this explanation for the terminal -s of the Carruthers place-name:

"Suffice to say, -(i)s gets added to place-names in southern Scotland very frequently, apparently by Scots speakers, the evidence coming mainly from the late medieval/ early modern period. The conventional explanation is that at some time the landholding was divided into two or more parts, and this is supported by documentary evidence in some cases. But that's not always likely. I raised the question myself recently in the Facebook Scottish Place-Names group and there was some lively discussion, certainly sensible place-name scholars taking part agreed that it's a phenomenon that needs fuller investigation. So I wouldn't consider the -s in Carruthers in isolation."

COMING SOON: Carruthers in Dumfriesshire - Caer Rhydderch or Caer Uther?

The Burnswark, with Roman Siege Camp in Foreground

A NEW-OLD IDENTIFICATION FOR UXELLUM OF THE SELGOVAE

Ward Law, Castle O'er and the River Annan

In recent years, scholars have preferred to identify the Uxellum of the Selgovae tribe with Ward Law in Dumfriesshire (see, for example, Rivet and Smith's THE PLACE-NAMES OF ROMAN BRITAIN).  However, given that I've recently made a case for Annandale being the heartland of Rheged, which itself lay within the ancient Novantae territory, it seems more reasonable to follow earlier antiquarians who sought to place Uxellum at Castle O'er.  

Castle O'er and Deil's Jingle

Castle O'er is strategically situated between the White Esk and the Black Esk.  It may also be associated with the earthwork boundary known as Deil's Jingle, of indeterminate date (though CANMORE suggests medieval).  The River Esk probably served as the bounday between the Selgovae and their neighbors the Novantae to the west.

For more information on Castle O'er, see:

https://canmore.org.uk/site/67376/castle-oer

The Liddel Water may have been the southern boundary of the Selgovae, as Gwenddolau (whether a person or a location, as his name means 'White Dales') immediately to the south of this river was the son of Ceidio/Arthur of Uxellodunum.  And, yes, the Uxello- in Uxellodunum is the same word found in Uxellum.  One is the High Fort, the other merely the High [Place].  

The Twelfth Battle: Mount Badon (from my book, THE ARTHUR OF HISTORY)

St. Ann's Well, Buxton, Derbyshire

Badon is a difficult place-name for an unexpected reason. As Kenneth Jackson proclaimed:

"No such British name is known, nor any such stem." [To be briefly mentioned in the context of Badon is the Middle Welsh word bad, 'plague, pestilence, death' (GPC; first attested in the 14th century), from Proto-Celtic *bato-, cf. Old Irish bath. Some have asked me whether this word could be the root of Badon - to which Dr. Graham I. Isaac, of the National University of Ire-land, Galway, responds emphatically, "No, absolutely no. A (modern) W form _bad_ etc. would have been spelt in the W of the ancient period as _bat_ and there can be no connection since _Bad(on)_ is what we find." Other noteworthy Celtic linguists, such as Dr. Simon Rodway of Aberystwyth University, Dr. Richard Coates of the University of the West of England and Professor Ranko Matasovic of the University of Zagreb, agree with Isaac on this point. Matasovic adds: “Professor Isaac is right; since we have references to Badon in Early Welsh sources, the name would have been spelled with –t- (for voiced /d/). The spelling where the letter <d> stands for /d/ and <dd> for the voiced dental fricative was introduced in the late Middle Ages.”]

Graham Isaac has the following to say on the nature of the word Badon, which I take to be au-thoritative.

His explanation of why Gildas's Badon cannot be derived from one of the Badburys (like Liddington Castle, often cited as a prime candidates for Badon) is critical in an eventual identification of this battle site. Although long and rather complicated, his argument is convincing and I have, therefore, opted to present it unedited:

"Remember in all that follows that both the -d - in Badon and the -th- in OE Bathum are pronounced like th in 'bathe' and Modern Welsh - dd-. Remember also that in Old English spelling, the letters thorn and the crossed d are interchangeable in many positions: that is variation in spelling, not in sound, and has no significance for linguistic arguments.

It is curious that a number of commentators have been happy to posit a 'British' or 'Celtic' form Badon. The reason seems to be summed up succinctly by Tolstoy in the 1961 article (p. 145):

'It is obviously impossible that Gildas should have given a Saxon name for a British locality'.

Why? I see no reason at all in the world why he should not do so (begging the question as to what, exactly, is the meaning of 'British locality' here; Gildas is just talking about a hill). This then becomes the chief crutch of the argument, as shown on p. 147 of Tolstoy's article: 'But that there was a Celtic name ‘Badon’ we know from the very passage in Gildas under discussion'.

But that is just circular: ' "Badon" must be "Celtic" because Gildas only uses "Celtic" names'. This is no argument. What would have to be shown is that 'Badon' is a regular reflex of a securely attested 'Celtic' word. This is a matter of empirical detail and is easily tested; we have vast resources to tell us what was and was not a 'Celtic' word. And there is nothing like 'Badon'.

So what do we do? Do we just say that 'Badon' must be Celtic because Gildas uses it? That gets us nowhere.

So what of the relationships between aet Bathum - Badon - Baddanbyrig? The crucial point is just that OE Bathum and the Late British / very early Welsh Badon we are talking about both have the soft -th- sound of 'bathe' and Mod.Welsh 'Baddon'. Baddanbyrig, however, has a long d-sound like -d d- in 'bad day'. Both languages, early OE and Late British, had both the d-sound and the soft th-sound. So:

1) If the English had taken over British (hy-pothetical and actually non-existent) *Badon (*Din Badon or something), they would have made it *Bathanbyrig or the like, and the modern names of these places would be something like *Bathbury.

2) If the British had taken over OE Baddanbyrig, they would have kept the d-sound, and Gildas would have written 'Batonicus mons', and Annales Cambriae would have 'bellum Batonis', etc. (where the -t- is the regular early SPELLING of the sound -d-; always keep your conceptions of spellings and your conceptions of sounds separate; one of the classic errors of the untrained is to fail to distinguish these). 

I imagine if that were the case we would have no hesitation is identifying 'Baton' with a Badbury place. But the d-sound and the soft th -sound are not interchangeable. It is either the one or the other, and in fact it is the soft th -sound that is in 'Badon', and that makes it equivalent to Bathum, not Baddanbyrig. 

(That applies to the sounds. On the other hand there is nothing strange about the British making Bad-ON out of OE Bath -UM. There was nothing in the Late British/early Welsh language which corresponded to the dative plural ending - UM of OE, so it was natural for the Britons to substitute the common British suffix - ON for the very un-British OE suffix -UM: this is not a substitution of SOUNDS, but of ENDINGS, which is quite a different matter. That Gildas then makes an unproblematic Latin adjective with -icus out of this does not require comment.)

To conclude:

1) There is no reason in the world why a 6thcentury British author should not refer to a place in Britain by its OE name.

2) There was no 'British' or 'Celtic' *Badon.

3) 'Badon' does not correspond linguistically with OE Baddanbyrig.

4) 'Badon' is the predictably regular Late British / early Welsh borrowing of OE Bathum.

Final note: the fact that later OE sources occasionally call Bath 'Badon' is just a symptom of the book-learning of the authors using the form. Gildas was a widely read and highly respected author, and Badon(-is) (from Gildas's adjective Badon -icus) will quickly and unproblematically have become the standard book-form (i.e. pri-marily Latin form) for the name of Bath. Again, all attempts to gain some sort of linguistic mile-age from the apparent, but illusory, OE variation between Bathum and Badon are vacuous."

It is thus safe to say that 'Badon' must derive from a Bath name. However, we must not restrict ourselves to the Southern Bath, which makes no sense in the context of a Northern Arthur.

For as it happens, there is a major Northern ‘Bath’ site that has gone completely unnoticed!

In the the High Peak District of Derbyshire we find Buxton. This town had once been roughly on the southernmost boundary of Brigantian tribal territory (thought to lie along a line roughly from the Mersey in the west to the Humber in the east). It was also just within Britannia Inferior (that part of northern Britain ruled from York), whose boundary was again from the Mersey, but probably more towards The Wash. 

In the Roman period, Buxton was the site of Aquae Arnemetiae, ‘the waters in front of (the goddess) Nemetia’. To the best of our knowledge, Bath in Somerset and Buxton in Derbyshire were the only two ‘Aquae’ towns in Britain.

But even better, there is a Bathum name extant at Buxton. The Roman road which leads to Buxton from the northeast, through the Peak hills, is called Bathamgate. Batham is ‘baths’, the ex-act dative plural we need to match the name Bathum/Badon. -gate is ‘road, street’, which comes from ME gate, itself a derivative of OScand gata. Bathamgate is thus ‘Baths Road’.

The recorded forms for Bathamgate are as fol-lows:

Bathinegate (for Bathmegate), 1400, from W.

Dugdale's Monasticon Anghcanum, 6 vols, London

1817-1830

Bathom gate, 1538, from Ancient Deeds in the

Public Record Office

Batham Gate, 1599, from records of the Duchy of Lancaster Special Commissions in the Public

Record Office.

Buxton sits in a bowl about one thousand feet above sea level surrounded by mountains and is itself a mountain spa. The natural mineral water of Buxton emerges from a group of springs at a constant temperature of 82 degrees Fahrenheit and is, thus, a thermal water. There are also cold springs and a supply of chalybeate (iron bearing) water. The evidence of Mesolithic man suggests a settlement dating to about 5000 BCE and archaeological finds in the Peak District around the settlement show habitation through the Neolithic, Bronze and Iron Ages to the time of the Romans. 

From the historical evidence we can say that Buxton was a civilian settlement of some importance, situated on the intersection of several roads, and providing bathing facilities in warm mineral waters. In short, it was a Roman spa. Place-names in and around Buxton, and Anglo-Saxon finds in burial mound excavations, suggest a continuing inhabitation of the area and probable use of the mineral waters.

It has long been speculated that we should expect to find a military installation at Buxton. However, subsequent archaeological fieldwork, including excavations, in and around suggested locations at the spa town have singularly failed to establish a military presence. A 'ditch feature' identified initially through resistivity survey and then from aerial photography above Mill Cliff, Buxton, gave rise to the almost confident interpretation of this site as being that of the fort: subsequent evaluation in advance of development, however, has shown that these features were geological rather than man-made, and the absence of Roman finds of any description from a series of evaluation trenches suggests that if

Buxton had a fort it was located elsewhere.

Today, the site of the probable Roman baths is covered by the Georgian Crescent building. In this area during the seventeenth and eighteenth century discoveries of lead lined baths, red plaster and building remains were made at some considerable depth in the sediments which surround the area of St Anne's well. In the eighteenth century, Pilkington investigated a mound overlooking the site of the previous discoveries. Here he found a structure which has been interpreted as a probable classical temple - one of only three known from Britain. In the mid-seventies, following the removal of a 20th century swimming pool, a brick structure was exposed and a deposit containing 232 Roman coins, 3 bronze bracelets and a wire clasp ranging in date from the 1st to the end of the 4th century CE was excavated.

This intriguing series of early discoveries lends tangible support to the interpretation of Buxton as the 'Bath of the North', but the character and extent of civilian settlement - and whether this was in association with a military installation or not, remains obscure. A considerable range of small finds, together with occasional glimpses of apparently Roman contexts, from the backgardens of houses has failed to provide a clear sense of the extent of Roman Buxton, let alone a soundly based understanding of its chronology and development. The dating of coinage in the 'votive' deposit from near the Crescent might be seen to indicate heightened frequencies of offer-ings during the third and fourth centuries. To what extent this might correlate with the development of settlement at Buxton is a matter of some conjecture.

At Poole's cavern, Buxton, excavations between 1981 and 1983 by Peakland Archaeological Society and Buxton Archaeological Society produced a large Romano-British assemblage containing a considerable body of metalwork including coins and brooches, rolls of thin sheet bronze, along with ceramics, a faunal assemblage and burials. The dating of the coins and fibulae point to use between the late 1st and 3rd centuries, with the majority being of 2nd century date. Indeed, reanalysis of the material has suggested that the cave saw its principal period of use between 120 and 220 CE. The excavators appeared to reveal some spatial separation of the coin and fibulae finds from the pottery and faunal remains, although this has been questioned.

Discussing the possible character of the use of the site Bramwell and Dalton draw attention to the comparative absence of spindle whorls, loom weights and bone hairpins which might be expected from a domestic site. Instead, they see the evidence as supporting the interpretation of the site as that of a rural shrine or sanctuary.

This too has subsequently been questioned and rejected. Instead, Branigan and Dawley interpret the site as essentially domestic, but with the additional refuse from a metalworker’s activities. They see a link between Poole's Cavern and the growth of Buxton as a spa centre providing a ready local market for small decorative trinkets.

The general trend of the evidence suggests that the Roman site may have consisted of a temple overlooking a set of Roman baths. At Bath we have a clear idea of the layout of a significant bath/water shrine complex which consisted of two major ranges: a temple and a religious precinct, within which lay the sacred spring; along-side this range were a line of three baths within a major building, at one end of which lay a typical Roman bathhouse or sauna. The Bath buildings were lavishly built in a classical style and the whole complex attracted visitors from outside the province.

In essence the Buxton layout mirrors that a Bath: parallel to the spring line is a temple and alongside the springs is a range of possibly Roman baths. As the Buxton temple is two-thirds the size of that at Bath we could assume the Buxton complex was somewhat smaller.

If the grove of the goddess Nemetia continued as an important shrine well into Arthur’s time (and the presence of St. Anne’s Well at the site of the town’s ancient baths shows that the efficacy of the sacred waters was appropriated by Christians), there is the possibility the Saxons targeted Buxton for exactly this reason. Taking the Britons’ shrine would have struck them a demoralizing blow. If the goddess or saint or goddess-become-saint is herself not safe from the depredations of the barbarians, who is?

A threat to such a shrine may well have galvanized British resistence. Arthur himself may have been called upon to lead the British in the defense of Nemetia's waters and her templegrove.

There may be a very good reason why Gildas (or his source, or a later interpolator) may have opted for English Bathum (rendered Badon in the British language of the day). The two famous 'baths' towns were anciently known as Aquae Sulis and Aquae Arnemetiae for the two goddesses presiding over the hot springs. As Arthur is made out to be the preeminent Christian hero, who in the Welsh Annals has a shield bearing the Cross of Christ that he carries during the Battle of Badon, it would not do for the ancient Romano-British name to be used in this context. To have done so would inevitably have referred directly to a pagan deity. Hence the generic and less “connotation-loaded” Germanic name for the place was substituted. This explanation might do much to placate those who insist on seeing Badon as a Celtic name.

And where is the most likely location for the monte/montis of the Baths/Batham/Badon, where the actual battle was fought?

I make this out to be what is now referred to as The Slopes, at the foot of which is the modern St. Ann’s Well, and the Crescent, under which the original Roman bath was built. The Slopes were once called St. Ann’s Cliff because it was a prominent limestone outcrop. The Tithe map of 1848 shows that the upper half of the Cliff was still largely covered in trees. I suspect the spring was anciently thought to arise from inside the Cliff, and that the trees covering it marked the precincts of the nemeton or sacred grove of Arnemetia.

The three days and three nights Arthur bore the cross (or, rather, a shield bearing an image of a cross) at Badon in the Welsh Annals are markedly similar to the three days and three nights Urien is said to have blockaded the Saxons in the island of Lindsfarne (British Metcaud) in Chapter 63 of the HB. In Gildas, immediately before mention of Badon, we have the following phrase: "From then on victory went now to our countrymen, now to their enemies…" Similarly, just prior to mention of Urien at Lindisfarne, we have this: "During that time, sometimes the enemy, sometimes the Cymry were victorious…" It would seem, therefore, that either the motif of the three days and three nights was taken from the Urien story and inserted into that of Arthur or vice-versa.

What is fascinating about this parallel is that Lindisfarne or ‘Holy Island’, as it came to be known, was an important spiritual centre of Northern Britain. The inclusion of the three days and three nights (an echo of the period Christ spent in the tomb) in the Badon story suggests that we can no longer accept the view that Arthur's portage of Christian symbols at Badon was borrowed solely from the Castle Guinnion battle account in the HB. Aquae Arnemetiae, like Lindisfarne, was a holy place. Arthur's fighting there may have been construed as a holy act.

Supposedly, 960 Saxons were slain by Arthur at Badon. In the past, most authorities have seen in the number 960 no more than a fanciful embellishment on the Annals' entry, i.e. more evidence of Arthur as a ‘legend in the making’. But 960 could be a very significant number, militarily speaking. The first cohort of a Roman legion was composed of six doubled centuries or 960 men. As the most important unit, the first cohort guarded the Roman Imperial eagle standard.

Now, while the Roman army in the late period no longer possessed a first cohort composed of this number of soldiers, it is possible Nennius's 960 betrays an antiquarian knowledge of earlier Roman military structure. However, why the Saxons are said to have lost such a number cannot be explained in terms of such an anachronistic description of a Roman unit.

The simplest explanation for Nennius's 960 is that it represents 8 Saxon long hundreds, each long hundred being composed of 120 warriors. To quote from Tacitus on the Germanic long hundred:

"On general survey, their [the German's] strength is seen to lie rather in their infantry, and that is why they combine the two arms in battle. The men who they select from the whole force and station in the van are fleet of foot and fit admirably into cavalry action. The number of these chosen men is exactly fixed. A hundred are drawn from each district, and 'the hundred' is the name they bear at home. What began as a mere number ends as a title of distinction." [Germania 6]

Curiously, in the Norse poem Grimnismal, 8 hundreds of warriors (probably 960) pass through each of the doors of Valhall, the Hall of the Slain, at the time of Ragnarok or the Doom of the Powers.

Osla or Ossa Big-Knife and Caer Faddon

It has often been said that the Welsh Caer Faddon is always a designation for Bath in Avon.

However, at least one medieval Welsh tale points strongly towards the ‘Baths’ at Buxton as the proper site.

I am speaking, of course, of the early Arthurian romance ‘The Dream of Rhonabwy’, sometimes considered to be a part of the Mabinogion collection of tales. Rhonabwy is transported back in time via the vehicle of a dream to the eve of the battle of Caer Faddon. Arthur has apparently come from Cornwall (as he is said to return thither after a truce is made) to mid-Wales and thence to Caer Faddon to meet with Osla or Ossa, a true historical contemporary of Arthur who lies at the head of the royal Bernician pedigree. 

As Arthur is said to progress from Rhyd-y-Groes to Long Mountain, he is traveling to the north-east via the Roman road. In other words, he is headed in the direction of Buxton in the High Peak.

While the romance is entirely fanciful, the chronological accuracy in the context of choosing Osla/Ossa is rather uncanny. Furthermore, it is quite clear that in the tradition the author of the romance was drawing from, Caer Faddon is most certainly not Bath. Ossa is known in English sources for being the first of the Bernicians to come to England from the Continent. Under his descendants, Bernicia became a great kingdom, stretching eventually from the Forth to the Tees. In the 7th century, Deira – which controlled roughly the area between the Tees and the Humber - was joined with Bernicia to form the Kingdom of Northumbria.

In its heyday, Northumbria shared a border with its neighbor to the south – Mercia – at the River Mersey or ‘Boundary River’. The Mersey flows east to Stockport, where it essentially starts at the confluence of the River Tame and Goyt. The Goyt has its headwaters on Axe Edge, only a half a dozen kilometers from Buxton in the High Peak.

If we allow for the story’s author to have properly chosen Ossa as Arthur’s true contemporary, but to have viewed Northumbria in an anachronistic fashion – i.e. as extending to the River Mersey – then Ossa coming from Bernicia in the extreme north of England, and Arthur coming from Cornwall in the extreme southwest, meeting for a battle at Buxton makes a great deal of sense. In fact, Buxton is pretty much exactly equidistant between the two locations.

Ossa would have been viewed as engaging in a battle just across the established boundary.

If I am right about this, the Welsh knew of the ‘Bathum’ or Badon that was Buxton.