THE CASTING OF EXCALIBUR INTO THE LAKE: A THOROUGHLY CELTIC, NOT OSSETIAN STORY

 

Before I withdrew from the "debate" on things Arthurian with Dr. Linda Malcor and her supporters, I had dared state that her one and only strong argument in favor of the Sarmatian influence supposedly present in the romance literature - the one linking the story of the tossing of Excalibur into the lake with another sword deposition found in Ossetic folklore - was, in fact, no argument at all. As her other "proofs" of Sarmato-Alanic origin for Arthurian motifs rely upon gross errors in linguistics and distorted historical/archaeological sequences, the sword-lake tale took on a supreme importance in her overall theory.  Although I had dealt with the Celtic elements of the episode in some depth before (see https://mistshadows.blogspot.com/2020/07/king-arthurs-sword-excalibur-lightning.html), and had gone so far as to begrudgingly concede that a late, Continental romance writer may have had access to a folk motif similar to that of the Batraz story and had cleverly applied it to the Arthurian context, I had never bothered to do a true, comparative-contrast treatment of the two stories.  It is to remedy that oversight that I offer the current blog article.  

To begin, let's discuss the beginning of the Vulgate version (https://books.google.com/books/about/Lancelot_Grail_The_death_of_Arthur.html?id=d-jFvu5lp8EC:

24. The Death of Arthur (Lancelot-Grail, Vol. 7, tr. Norris J. Lacy):

[Arthur:] "Where will you find any man who will use you as well as I have, unless you fall into the hands of Lancelot? Oh! Lancelot, most worthy man and best knight in the world, may it please Jesus Christ that you have this sword and that I know you have it!..."

Then the king called Girflet and said to him, "Go to that hill, where you will find a lake; and throw my sword into it, for I want it to disappear from this kingdom, so that it won't fall into evil hands."

"Sir," he replied, "I'll do your bidding, but I would much prefer, if it please you, that you give it to me instead."

"I won't do that," said the king, "for you would not use it properly."

Then Girflet climbed the hill, and when he came to the lake, he drew the sword from the sheath and began to look at it. And it seemed to him so good and so beautiful that he thought it would be a great pity to throw it into the lake as the king...

As is well known, Girflet is an Old French attempt at Welsh Gilfaethwy, a hero of the MABINOGION.  I have elsewhere discussed the probable etymology of his name and his association with the 'druidic' isle of Anglesey, with its lake of sacred votive deposits (again see https://mistshadows.blogspot.com/2020/07/king-arthurs-sword-excalibur-lightning.html).  

The emphasis on Lancelot in this passage is critical to our understanding of the hidden, sacred nature of the story.  For Lancelot's origin lay in the lake, and he was called 'of the Lake.'  The name/epithet Lancelot of the Lake does not, as Malcor has always claimed, derive from a French version of Alan (itself of Breton name wrongly linked to the Alanic tribe).  It is, instead, transparently (as can be shown through a step progression from Irish and Welsh) from Llwch (W. form of the god Lugh) + Llaw-caled (Ir. Lamh-calad) for "Lugh of the Strong-hand." By saying he wants Lancelot to have the sword, and then casting the weapon into the lake, he is, in effect, giving the precious item to the god of the lake.

We should recall that Arthur's sword came from the lake originally.  It was thus appropriate that it be returned to the same place.  

As for the remainder of the Vulgate account:

The salient points of this account is the triple motif (absent in the Ossetian story), which is classically Celtic.  The double deception on Girflet's part, which brings about the triple attempt to cast away the sword, makes the act especially holy.  Also, the sword is being removed from inferior men, who would use it for ill.  And the sword is a temptation to anyone who is fortunate enough to handle it or even gaze upon it, for it represents the sovereign power of the wielder.  We have, finally, the appearance of the Lady of the Lake, reclaiming the sword for her watery depths. Presumably, it will be given to Lugh.

We now put alongside the Vulgate sword-deposition story that belonging to the Ossetic tradition:

[https://www.scribd.com/book/352426447/Tales-of-the-Narts-Ancient-Myths-and-Legends-of-the-Ossetians]

Finally a small portion of them was left alive, and they beseeched Batraz not to

drive the Nart race to extinction and to offer some chance for them to escape from

his attack. Then Batraz showed mercy toward them and answered that after having

inflicted such misery on them it was enough and that he would die. But up until

that time he had not been able to die because his sword Dzus-qara had not been

thrown away into the sea. He said that he was fated to die only in that way. Other-

wise he would live and bring death upon them until they were all exterminated.

Again, the Narts were in misery. How were they to throw the sword of Batraz

into the sea? They decided to speak as though they had already done so, to per-

suade him that the sword was already thrown into the sea and that the time for him

to die had come. The Narts went and said to sick Batraz, with varying assurances,

that his sword had been thrown away and that the end of his life had come. Batraz

asked them what they had seen when they had thrown the sword away. The Narts

finally answered that nothing special had happened to the sea.

“Thus you must know,” said Batraz, “the sword Dzus-qara has not been thrown

into the sea; otherwise you would have seen several miracles.”

Upon these words of Batraz, the Narts hastened with all their strength and

might to carry out the wish of Batraz. With the help of the few thousand still living

they dragged Batraz’s sword to the shore and threw it into the sea. When the sword

was cast away a great storm rose up and the water erupted into waves. The sea it-

self began to boil and took on the color of blood. The Narts were astonished by

these miracles and their gladness was boundless. They went and related to Batraz

what they had seen. He, persuaded of their truth, at last give up his spirit, after

which it was easy for the Narts to give his remains to the earth.

Firstly, as I have previously explained, there is no possible philological relationship between the names Batraz and Bedwyr (who replaces Girflet in the Stanzaic Morte Arthur and Malory).  Any supposed resemblance of the two names is purely coincidental.

We have a difference right away: it is not a lake the sword is cast into, but the sea.  And the motivation for the respective actions are totally unrelated.  In the Batraz tale, the sword must be gotten rid of before the hero himself can die.  The deception is present, due the reluctance of the Narts to lose the sword.  But the triple motif is absent.  What happens when Batraz's sword is cast into the sea bears no resemblance to what happens when Excalibur is deposited into the lake.  Batraz dies on the spot when his sword has vanished beneath the waves, while Arthur is ferried away to the Isle of Avalon to be healed of his wounds by his sister Morgan.

As far as I can tell, then, the only similarity between these two accounts is that a wounded or soon to be dead hero has someone cast his valuable sword into a body of water.  Now this may well be deemed a motif common to the Arthurian and Ossetic traditions.  But the problem we always have in these kinds of cases is how to determine transmission.  If such transmission can't be demonstrated or seems counter to other evidence or even good argument, then we must allow for the very real possibility that we are dealing with an archetype, i.e. a mythological or folkloristic element that arose independently in two separate cultures.  These occur rather frequently and are due to the identical structure and functioning of the human brain, our shared perception/experience of the world and the uncannily similar belief systems we develop.  

My examination of the two sword deposition stories leads me to believe that they are, in fact, not related through transmission.  We merely have an instance in which two different cultures both had relics in their tradition of the ancient, ritual deposition of weapons in bodies of water.  We know the Celts did this, as we have numerous archaeological examples of such a practice.  I have not studied whether there is evidence of such votive depositions being made by the Sarmatians or related tribes, but I have little doubt that some research might well reveal this to be the case.  

Link to P.C. BARTRUM'S A CLASSICAL WELSH DICTIONARY (FREE PDF DOCUMENTS)

 

I've been asked by a friend to pass this along again:

https://www.library.wales/discover/digital-gallery/printed-material/a-welsh-classical-dictionary This is an invaluable resource for anyone delving into the 'Welsh Arthur." I have used it extensively over the years for research purposes.

CAI AT 'CELLI' IN THE PA GUR: A MEMORY OF THE VICTORY AT GELLIGAER

 

Gelligaer Roman Fort, Glamorgan, Wales

Gelligaer (Artist's Reconstruction)

For quite awhile now I've remained unsatisfied with the identification of Celli ("Grove") in the Welsh poem PA GUR.  We are told in that work that Cai fought bravely at the site, and that the grove was lost (although who exactly lost it is impossible to tell from the context).

The best that top Arthurian scholars have been able to do so far is best summarized in see Nerys Ann Jones' ARTHUR IN EARLY WELSH POETRY, p. 40, Note 33, where it is suggested Celli may be Arthur's Cornish Kelliwic.  

In the past, given that the majority of the PA GUR battle sites are in the North, I've sought to situate Celli in that region of Britain.  The Ravenna Cosmography's Medionemeton or Middle Sacred Grove was a logical candidate.  This nemeton may be Cairnpapple in West Lothian, although the Roman stone temple of Victory called Arthur's O'on on the Antonine Wall has also been proposed.

Alas, I overlooked two things.  One, Cai of the PA GUR is otherwise placed in contests in Derbyshire and in Gwynedd.  He is referred to as a Lord of Emrys (the Ambrosius who supposedly ruled Gwynedd from Dinas Emrys).  And, two, we have Cai in a saint's VITA fighting - and winning! a battle at a place that is literally overlooking the Roman fort of Gelligaer in Glamorgan, Wales.  Gelligaer is, transparently, the 'fort of the grove.'   I'm talking, of course, about Fochriw Carn, where Arthur, Cai and Bedwyr are found sitting in the Life of St. Cadoc:

[http://ancienttexts.org/library/celtic/ctexts/cadog.html]

After a long interval of time the aforesaid king Gwynllyw, depending now on his kingdom, desired with ardent affection on account of the excessive sweetness of her fame that a certain girl should be joined to him in lawful wedlock, born of most noble lineage, of elegant appearance, very beautiful moreover in form, and clad in silk raiment, whose name was Gwladus, the daughter of a certain regulus, who was called Brychan. Accordingly he sent very many messengers to the virgin’s father to the end that they might more resolutely demand that she might be given to him as wife. But the father of the girl, having received the message, was indignant, and, full of anger, refused to bestow his daughter on him, and slighted the messengers, and dismissed them without honour. They, taking this very badly, returned, and told their lord what had been done to them. When he had heard, the king, raving with excessive fury, armed with all possible speed three hundred of his young men to take the aforesaid girl by force. Then starting at once on their journey, when they reached the court of the aforementioned regulus, which is called Talgarth, they found the said virgin sitting with her sisters before the door of her chamber and at leisure in modest conversation, whom they immediately took by force, and beat a hasty retreat. When this was known, her father, Brychan, moved by grief of heart, sorrowing inwardly at the loss of his beloved daughter, called to his aid all his friends and his subjects to recover his daughter. When all his helpers had assembled together, with rapid steps he follows up the enemy and his confederates. Gwynllyw, when he had seen them, ordered that the oft-mentioned girl should be brought up to him, and he made her ride with him. He, carrying the girl cautiously with him on horseback, preceded the army not indeed for flight, but to await his soldiers and to exhort them manfully to war. But Brychan with his men, boldly attacking the savage king and his satellites, slew two hundred of them and followed them up as far as the hill, which is on the confines of either country, which in the Britannic tongue takes the name Boch Rhiw Cam, which means the cheek of the stony way. But when Gwynllyw had arrived at the borders of his land, safe in body with the aforesaid virgin, although sorrowful at the very great slaughter in the fight with his adversaries, lo, three vigorous champions, Arthur with his two knights, to wit, Cai and Bedwyr, were sitting on the top of the aforesaid hill playing with dice. And these seeing the king with a girl approaching them, Arthur immediately very inflamed with lust in desire for the maiden, and filled with evil thoughts, said to his companions, ‘Know that I am vehemently inflamed with concupiscence for this girl, whom that soldier is carrying away on horseback.’ But they forbidding him said, ‘Far be it that so great a crime should be perpetrated by thee, for we are wont to aid the needy and distressed. Wherefore let us run together with all speed and assist this struggling contest that it may cease.’ But he, ‘Since you both prefer to succour him rather than snatch the girl violently from him for me, go to meet them, and diligently inquire which of them is the owner of this land.’ They immediately departed and in accordance with the king’s command inquired. Gwynllyw replies, ‘God being witness, also all who best know of the Britons, I avow that I am the owner of this land.’ And when the messengers had returned to their lord, they reported what they had heard from him. Then Arthur and his companions being armed they rushed against the enemies of Gwynllyw and made them turn their backs and flee in great confusion to their native soil. Then Gwynllyw in triumph through Arthur’s protection together with the afore­said virgin Gwladus, reached his own residence, which was situated on that hill, which thenceforward took from his name the British appellation Alit Wynllyw, that is, Gwynllyw’s Hill. For from Gwynllyw is named Gwynlliog, and Brycheiniog from Brychan.

Fochriw Carn may be one of the cairns on Mynydd Fochriw, but others prefer to identify it with the more significant cairn of Bugail.

https://coflein.gov.uk/en/site/301283/details/carn-y-bugail-gelligaer-common 

 https://coflein.gov.uk/en/site/535709/details/mynydd-fochriw-cairn-ii

https://coflein.gov.uk/en/site/225353/details/mynydd-fochriw-ring-cairn

The folks at CADW, for instance, opt for Carn y Bugail:

[https://cadw.gov.wales/sites/default/files/2019-05/South%20Wales%20Blaenau%20Gwent_EN.pdf]

When Arthur came to Gelligaer

The cairns at Fochriw captured

the imagination of our medieval

ancestors and were drawn into

Arthurian legend. Sometime

in the 1070s or 1080s, a monk

from Llancarfan in Glamorgan

by the name of Lifris wrote a

Latin ‘biography’ of St Cadog,

the Vita Cadoci, and among the

tales he tells about the saint is

an account of his birth.

A local Gwentian king called

Gwynllyw — after whom

Gwynll[g (the western part of

Gwent) was named — eloped

with Gwladys, a daughter of

Brychan, king of Brycheiniog.

Brychan, naturally being

somewhat put out at this unruly

behaviour, gave chase with his

warriors.

When he had almost

caught the couple, Gwynllyw

and Gwladys came to a hill

named Boch Rhiw Carn where

they met Arthur and his boon

companions, Cei and Bedwyr,

playing dice. In later French and

English tales these red-blooded

Celtic heroes were transformed

into the rather surly Sir Kay

and wishy-washy Sir Bedivere.

The ‘three vigorous heroes’

(tres heroes strenui) promptly

defeated Brychan and his men

in a bloody battle, but not

before Arthur has considered

kidnapping Gwladys for himself!

The happy couple went on

their way, and the result of their

newly-wed passion was the holy

St Cadog himself.

Boch Rhiw Carn (‘the cairn of

Fochriw’) is clearly a reference

to Carn Bugail. So here we have

Arthur, Cei and Bedwyr fighting

a battle on the bleak moors

above Rhymney — at least in

the fevered imagination of an 

eleventh-century cleric.

A further reminder of the

story can be found at Capel

Gwladys, about 3 miles (4.5km)

along the Roman road and

about 1 mile (1.5km) from

Bargoed (ST 125993).

Here, within an impressive

boundary dyke, you can see

the restored foundations of a

small, rectangular chapel with a

modern carved cross marking

the site of the altar. Although

tradition has it that the chapel

was founded by Gwladys in the

sixth century, these remains

are medieval in date. A carved

grave slab found here and dated

to the eighth or ninth century

can be seen in the porch of

Gelligaer church.

On the open moorland of

Fforest Gwladys, about 550

yards (0.5km) to the southeast of Capel Gwladys, is one

of the best-preserved and

most accessible of the Roman

practice camps (ST 131991).

The following excellent source tells us more about Fochriw Carn and its relationship to nearby Gelligaer:

https://www.caerphilly.gov.uk/CaerphillyDocs/Equalities/Place-Names-in-Caerphilly-County-Borough-2014.aspx

Fochriw (originally boch+rhiw+garn)

(phonetic: voch-riw)

OS Grid Reference - ST 103 054

The more recent form of the name should correctly be Y Fochriw and the literal translation of this

village name is often given as “slope of the pigs” as the assumption is that the word “moch” (pigs)

has mutated to “foch”. The original word however, was “boch” as the full name for the settlement

is Bochriw’r Garn. This changes the meaning, as “boch”, though usually meaning “a cheek” as on a

face, can also mean a bulge in the ground or a hill, possibly referring to a rounded piece of rock

on the slope (“rhiw”) below the “carn”, the Roman stone found above the village on Gelligaer

Common. Examples of the name can be found as far back as c1170 with Bohrukarn, later y

voyghryw garn c1700 and Y Fochriw in 1867.

Gelligaer (gelli+caer)

(phonetic: gare-ll-ee-guy-rr)

OS Grid Reference - ST 135 969

Literally meaning “grove by the fort”, the village gets its name from its history as a Roman

auxiliary fort and even further back in history from when there was an Iron Age fort on the

adjoining hill, Buarth-y-gaer that is immediately to the east of the village. One of the greatest

Welsh saints of the 6th century, Cadog, was born in Gelligaer (the local ward name is Saint

Cattwg) and legend has it that he was a monk, had magical powers, was a kind and generous host

and was a very successful dairy farmer - in fact the name carries on in Llangadog in West Wales,

famous for the now closed creamery that produced fantastic custard and rice pudding, and you

can still purchase the Welsh Cadog cheese in local supermarkets. The spelling of Gelligaer has

altered over the years in reflection of the way the name has been pronounced e.g. Gelligâr from

1750. Gelligaer Church Hall, erected in 1911 has a plaque with the spelling Neuadd Kell Y Gaer

1911 which is still there. Early map spellings also have the name beginning with the letter K, such

as Kil-gaer 1281, Kylthy-gaer in 1307, Kilthi-gaer in 1349 and Kethlygajer on Pieter van den

Keere's map of Monmouthshire in 1605.

Gelligaer Common / Comin Gelligaer (gelli+caer)

(phonetic: com-in-gare-ll-ee-guy-rr)

OS Grid Reference - ST 125 985

Not so much a settlement as a scattering of dwellings on this open upland, the main population

being Welsh Mountain ponies and other horses. Running roughly northwards across the Common

is the Roman road from Cardiff to Y Gaer, near Brecon and this is still clearly visible above

Fochriw.

I now have no reason to believe that Cai's 'Celli' is anything other than Gelligaer, and the 'grove' was lost to Brychan.

'EIL MEHYN' OF URIEN RHEGED AND THE EILDON HILLS

In THE BOOK OF TALIESIN (VII, 61), a number of battles are listed for Urien Rheged.  While some remain unidentified, we do know the locations of others.  In this blog post I would like to offer a tentative identification for 'yn eil mehyn'.

This place is listed between that of the Lyvennet Beck in Cumbria, the ford of Alclud in Strathclyde (although Alclud makes more sense as Auckland in Durham; see https://spns.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/Alan_James_Brittonic_Language_in_the_Old_North_BLITON_Volume_II_Dictionary_2020_Edition.pdf) , the Manor Water in Scottish Borders and Bremenium/High Rochester in Northumberland.  In the above map I have placed as many of the Urien battles as can be at least tentatively located. We might, then, reasonably expect for 'eil mehyn' to be somewhere in Lowland Scotland, and preferably between the other battles - assuming, of course, we can allow for such a geographical ordering of the various engagements.

On the place-name designation (or description) 'eil mehyn', here is Ifor Williams' note:

It is possible 'eil mehyn' as the fenced/palisaded place may not be a real place-name; it may instead be merely a descriptor.  Some weight is given to this possibility, given that the precededing location is 'eidoed kyhoed', the 'conspicuous defenses.'  Or both eil mehyn and eidoed kyhoed may be one and the same site!

Let us, though, assume for the sake of argument that eil mehyn is an actual fortified site.  

Now, opting to take this angle is interesting, for one of the seriously proposed etymologies for the Eildon Hills, with its Eildon Hill North fort (the largest in all of Scotland), is an English dun preceded by a Cumbric word meaning palisade or fence.   The early forms for Eildon are as follows (see http://spns.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/MayWilliamsonComplete.pdf):

Ældona, 1119-24 (c 1320) Kelso; Eldune, 1143 LSMM; 1166-70 BM; -doun, c 1153 (16th) Dryb; -dunum (acc) 12th SD; -dun, c 1208 BM; Eladune, c 1150 C de M.   

This discussion of the name Eildon is from Alan James, noted expert of place-names in Northern Britain (see http://www.clanntuirc.co.uk/JSNS/V7/JSNS7.pdf, as well as https://spns.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Alan_James_Brittonic_Language_in_the_Old_North_BLITON_Volume_II_Dictionary_2019_Edition.pdf):

"It might include a plural form *eil of *al, which Watson 1926, 32‒33, saw as a cognate of Old Irish ail ‘rock’), alternatively *eil ‘wattle fence or structure’, but Old English ǣled ‘fire’ or ǣlǣte ‘desert, empty place’ (+ OE -dūn ‘hill’) are also good possibilities."

I would propose, therefore, that 'the place of the fence or palisade' is a Welsh rendering of Eildon, and that this is where Urien won a major victory, presumably against the English. [1]   Three heroes for the three Eildon Hills makes sense, and given that the Eildons is not only the most prominent landmark in the Scottish Lowlands, but also sports Scotland's largest hillfort on Eildon North Hill, it seems unlikely that the Welsh panegyricists would have been ignorant of the site.  

NOTE: The fascinating thing about the Urien map is that it shows a war leader a generation after Arthur fighting the English along pretty much exactly that same North-South line.  

[1] Another possibility for the 'fence place' would be the Catrail dyke in the Scottish Lowlands.  The name (see again Alan James) has been etymologized with ail, 'palisade', as its second component.  From James' BLITON:

*eil (m) eCelt *al-jo- > Br *aljo- > M-MnW ail, eil; OIr aile > (in compounds) Ir, G –aile, Mx –ayl. The Celtic root *al- is associated with weaving, and with the construction of fences, buildings, etc using woven wattles. So Welsh eil is ‘a shelter, a shed’, Old Irish aile ‘a fence, a palisade’, Irish/Gaelic buaile, Manx boayl, ‘a cattle-fold’. Williams, PT pp. 85-6, saw this element in Alclüd, suggesting that it referred to wattle-built defences both here and at the unlocated Eil Mehyn BT61(VII), but see also *al and alt. a1) Eildon Hills Rox PNRox pp. 7 and 40 [+OE –dūn ‘a hill’], but see discussion under *al. b1) The Catrail Slk CPNS p. 181 ? + cad- ["battle"] + analogical –r- (for ‘erroneous’ -ï[r]-, cf. CPNE p. 7 and, for similar cases in Gaelic toponymy, SPN² p. 161). A discontinuous series of earthworks crossing upper Tweed, Yarrow, Ettrick and Teviot dales; both its archaeology and its etymology are obscure. c2) Potrail or Powtrail Water Lnk (a headwater of the Clyde) CPNS p. 181n2 ? + *polter-.  

If this great ditch served a military purpose, it may be where Urien fought.

https://canmore.org.uk/search/site?SIMPLE_KEYWORD=Catrail

I would add that the Elei associated with Mabon in the PA GUR poem does not appear to be the river of that name (Elai) in southern Wales. Indeed, there is no good reason for associating Mabon with the River Ely.  Instead, the context of Elei strongly points to a location in the North.* 

One of the other 'raptors of Elei' is Kysceint son of Banon, a slight scribal error for Kysteint, i.e. the Welsh spelling of the Latin name Constantius.  Dr. Simon Rodway of The University of Wales was kind enough to provide me with this information on the name Banon:

"Banon is a woman's name meaning 'queen' (probably originally 'goddess'), cf. Gaulish Banona."

The only famous Constantius we know of in Britain is Constantius Chlorus, father of Constantine the Great.  He launched a punitive expeditions against the Picts north of Hadrian's Wall and died at York.  If Kysteint son of Banon is a folk memory of this emperor, then all the more reason for us to seek 'Elei' in the North.   As for Banon, well, this may stand for Constantius' mother, Claudia, but I also wonder if it may not be a folk development from the Bononia (modern Boulogne) Constantius captured from Carausius?

Celticist Peter Schrijver relates the river-name Elai to the same root word meaning fence or palisade:

If we reconstruct forward from an early Celtic Alesia or

Alisia towards Old Irish, the result is aile, which does

indeed exist: the Old Irish ia-stem aile means ‘fence,

palisade (to prevent cattle from trespassing)’; cf. also the

compound bú-aile ‘cow pen’. Old Welsh has a probable

cognate in the Book of Llandaf ’s Eiliau, Eliau, names of a

village and a villa, respectively, hence originally ‘Pens,

Fences’. These are British Celtic plurals in *-ou > – au,

which have an exact counterpart in Modern Welsh eiliau

‘cattle pens’. They regularly reflect an earlier British plural

*alesj-owes/*alisj-owes. The singular *alesj_ probably

survives as the Old Welsh river name Elei in the Book of

Llandaf (perhaps modern Lai or Ely, Glamorganshire).

The Middle Welsh singular belonging to the plural eiliau,

however, is not *elei but eil ‘cattle-pen, shed’ (e.g., in the

Red Book of Hergest 1035.23 alaf yn eil meil am ved ‘cattle

in a pen, a cup around mead’), which cannot be derived

regularly from *alesja/ *alisja. Middle Welsh eil is probably

a back-formation: on the model of such common plural /

singular pairs as teithieu / teith ‘journey(s)’, drysieu / drws

‘door(s)’ a new singular eil was created beside inherited

eilieu (= Old and Modern Welsh eiliau).

[EMANIA 20, JUNE 2006 

Early Irish Ailenn

An Etymology]

Dr. Simon Rodway, in reviewing Schrijver's argument, said only that "I can't see any problem with this."

If both scholars are right, we can look to the Catrail or "Battle-fence" (or, perhaps better, 'Mighty Fence, with Cadr + ail/eil; accroding to the GPC, cadr is from Celt *kat-ro-) for a good connection with Mabon - or at least with the Mabon name as it is found in an extent northern place.  I am speaking of the Mabonlaw hillfort in the parish of Roberton, a parish which also contains portions of the Catrail dyke.  See the map below.

Elei would be an error of sorts, a more familiar substitution for the northern ail/eil/"palisade" that was itself later further embellished with either cad- or cadr.  

https://canmore.org.uk/site/54125/mabonlaw

*

Given the context in which Mabon appears in the 'Pa Gur', it seems impossible to maintain his presence at the River Ely in southern Glamorgan, Wales.  I am here presenting the relevant portions of the poem as taken directly from Nerys Ann Jones' ARTHUR IN EARLY WELSH POETRY:

The reader will notice that after Mabon is associated with Elei, we are told of the Tryfrwyd battle, which took place at Queensferry (see my book THE BATTLE-LEADER OF THE NORTH).  Mabon is mentioned again - this time with what may be a patronymic, Mellt ('Lightning') - in conjunction with heroes fighting at Edinburgh on the border.  Llwch Llaw-wynnog shows a Welsh attempt at an Irish spelling for the god Lugh.  Lugus is preserved in the regional name Lleuddiniawn, modern Lothian, whose capital was Edinburgh.

Therefore, it seems certain that this particular Mabon does not belong in southern Wales!

According to https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/108609.pdf:

"The name 'Annan Street' in the Yarrow valley, which is also accompanied by a road-side cemetery, may indicate the presence of another lateral route, paralleling those in the valleys of Tweed and Lyne, and to the south over Craik Moor to Raeburnfoot, connecting Trimontium to the head of the Annan."

The Annan was the cult center of the god Maponus.

Noted place-name expert Alan James (BLITON) remarked on this possible route:

"Not unlikely. The head of the Annan is in fact Annanhead Hill, overlooking The Devil's Beef Tub on the Pbl/ Dmf border NT0513. I don't know of any trace of any Roman road (which 'Street' might imply), but there's a lot of evidence of Iron Age settlement round about there, which could well extend into early medieval." 

NOTE ON THE THIRD 'RAPTER OF ELEI', GWYN GODYFRION

The entire section on the Elei, precisely because this was known to be a river-name, shows what appears to be intruded water symbolism.  To explain how this came about, the following note from THE ARTHUR OF THE WELSH (ed. R. Bromwich, A.O.H. Jarman and B. F. Roberts) is helpful:

It should not surprise us, then, that the third of the raptors of Elei bears a very strange epithet - one which has, indeed, been interpreted as a place-name.  As discussed in the volume by Jones:

If not a made-up name for a made-up hero (is this merely a doublet for the god Gwynn son of Nudd?), Gwyn 'Below/Under [the?] Water' looks to be yet another corrupt spelling, like so many that occur in the 'Pa Gur' (again, see my book THE BATTLE-LEADER OF THE NORTH). Alternately, we could look for a real place-name, probably an English, Norse or Gaelic one.  Something, perhaps, like "Nether White Burn/Beck."

In CULHCH AC OLWEN, Gwyn is placed in the North for the story of Creiddylad and Gwythyr.  As his father was Nudd, it may well be that legend associated him with the Nudd son of Liberalis who is to be connected with the Yarrow Stone.  I once explored this Nudd as a possible relation of Uther Pendragon (see https://mistshadows.blogspot.com/2019/06/uther-pen-son-of-nethawcnwython-part-two.html and https://mistshadows.blogspot.com/2019/05/uther-pen-son-of-nethawcnwython.html).  If Gwyn Godyfrion was indeed linked to this chieftain, a possible link with the Eildons as the original site of Elei gains some traction.  See the following maps for the proximity of Yarrow to the Eildon Hills.

Note that the Yarrow Water empties into the Ettrick, a major tributary of the Tweed just upstream from the Eildons.  The Yarrow Stone stands in Whitefield.  The Whitehope Burn runs nearby.   

THE PROBLEM OF UTHER PENDRAGON IN ELAI (VALLEY OF THE RIVER ELY, GLAMORGAN, WALES)

Dinas Powys, Glamorgan, Wales 

https://coflein.gov.uk/en/site/301314/details/dinas-powys-fort-previously-cwm-george-or-cwrt-yr-ala-camp

For quite awhile now I have been bothered by earlier research on the true identity of Uther Pendragon. While I devoted several blog posts to the subject, one of the main ones can be found here:

https://mistshadows.blogspot.com/2017/12/uther-pendragon-discovered-at-last.html

To state the problem as succinctly as possible: Mabon son of Modron in the PA GUR poem as one of the vytheint (? - this word remains unknown in terms of its etymology; guesses have been made, but none are satisfactory) of Elei is unexplainable.[1]  Mabon is not present in the valley of the River Ely (Elai, Elei).  Because he is called the servant of Uther Pendragon, it seems unavoidable to instead seek Uther Pendragon in the Ey Valley, and to thus assign Mabon as his servant there.  The Ely Valley is within what was the early kingdom of Penychen between the rivers Taff and Thaw.  And that kingdom is where we find Illtud serving as chief of the soldiers of Pawl Penychen. Illtud is given military titles in Latin that conform perfectly to the Pendragon title of Uther, and Uther itself is a perfect Welsh translation of the terribilis (miles) applied to Illtud after his death.

Illtud is described otherwise as a cousin of Arthur.  NOT his father.  But we must allow for his being made into an important saint as having influenced his earlier life as a soldier.  He is also made to put away his wife.  I'd conclusively shown that the 'Llydaw' he came from was the Vale of Leadon, anciently part of the Kingdom of the Dobunni.

I dispensed with him as a father of Arthur for the simple reason that the hagiographical tradition did not allow us to identify him with Uther Pendragon.  But since when should we trust the historical accuracy of a saint's vita?  As his military past was downplayed, we might assume that his paternal trace to Arthur might well have been expunged.

Of course, it is also possible Uther Pendragon or Illtud was merely chosen by Geoffrey of Monmouth or his source for no other reason than that Arthur's real father was not known and Uther appeared in conjunction with Arthur in the MARWNAT VTHYR PEN.  Or even that Geoffrey picked Uther totally at random.  Any of this is possible, as Geoffrey is the first to make Uther Arthur's father and pretty much everything in Geoffrey's so-called history is patently fiction.

It is also possible that the Welsh relocated Uther Pendragon to Wales, and that they identified him with Illtud.  Dr. Simon Rodway has assured me that the name + epithet formation of Arthur's father's name should not be seen as anything other than that.  But the possibility that such a name + epithet could have been associated with Illtud cannot be discounted.

Regardless what really happened, we appear to be stuck with Uther in the Ely Valley.  Mabon can't be placed there, nor can can his fellow vytheint of the PA GUR.  The conclusion can only be that Uther belonged there, and these warriors collected around him in legend as his retinue.  

What we make of the Uther Pendragon = Illtud connection is something I am still pondering.  I think given the preponderance of evidence for Arthur in the North, specifically on Hadrian's Wall, and given that Mabon was a Northern deity, it is likely the name Uther Pendragon has fancifully been brought into connection with Illtud's Latin titles.  And that meant that Uther was relocated to southern Wales, at least in the PA GUR. 

We should bear in mind the the maendy or 'stone house' of Mabon in the MABINOGION, while placed at Caer Gloyw/Gloucester, is also a place-name found at Mynydd Maendy, on one side of the Ely River watershed, while there is also a Maendy at Peterson Super Ely.  This part of Wales was once called Glywysing, for an eponymous found Glywys.  This name means 'man of Glevum', i.e. of Gloucester.  So there may be nothing to Mabon at Elei other than a standard folklore relocation. 

[1] I tried very hard to find an Elai/Elei in the North, but have failed to do so.  It seems unavoidable that this is, indeed, the Ely River in South Wales.