ELEUTHERIUS AND HIS SON GWRCI OF YORK: A REFLECTION OF ROMAN PERIOD NAMES IN THE DARK AGE NORTH?

Roman York

In the past, I suggested that the Dark Age Eliffer of York, from an original Greek name Eleutherius, was likely derived from a title given to Constantine the Great.  This was actually quite a good idea, but here I would like to offer another possibility.

Dr. Linda Malcor and colleagues have recently proposed a new reading for the memorial stone of Lucius Artorius Castus.  The claim is made by these scholars that Artorius was actually the acting governor from the period 187-191 A.D.  As it happens, an Eleutherius at Rome was pope from 174 to 189 A.D.  In other words, Artorius and Eleutherius were exact contemporaries.

Another suggestion I once made was that Gwrci, literally 'Man-dog', a son of Eliffer, was a Welsh attempt at the name Virius Lupus, Roman governor of Britain from 197 to c. 200  Eliffer's other son, Peredur, is simply 'Praetor.'

The corrupt TRIAD which makes an Arthur Penuchel the son of Eliffer immediately comes to mind.  While we cannot trust this corrupt reading - and it is chronologically impossible, in any case - I've often observed that it can scarcely be a coincidence that the one Dark Age Arthur of the North that we have a record of in the Welsh sources just happens to have been placed at York.  If nothing else, this may indicate a folk memory of the presence of Lucius Artorius Castus/LAC at that city during the Roman period.

So, what do we make of these apparent correspondences?  Do we assume that the 2nd century names have merely been brought forward several centuries to fill gaps in the historical or genealogical knowledge of the writers who themselves were composing works several centuries after the supposed reign of a Dark Age Arthur?  Or do we instead allow for the continued use of names in places where those names had been made famous?

Well, we cannot answer that question directly.  I think it quite possible that a 6th century Arthur was based at Ribchester, and have made my argument for that in previous posts.  We also know, thanks to archaeology, that someone in the sub-Roman and Dark Age North was trying his best to replicate the rule of the Roman period Dux Britanniarum.  And the effort paid off, for the North kept itself free of Germanic invaders for a considerable time, while the South, by comparison, did not fare at all well.

***

NOTE: Eleuthereos was also a title of the god Zeus, the Roman Jupiter.  This is interesting, given that the Arthur birth story is paralleled in that of Herakles, son of Zeus.

"ELEUTHEREUS (Eleuthereus), the form Eleutherius is certainly used in the sense of the deliverer, and occurs also as the surname of Zeus. (Plut. Sympos. vii. in fin.; Pind. Ol. xii. 1; Strab. ix. p. 412; Tacit. Ann. xv. 64.)" [https://www.theoi.com/Cult/ZeusTitles.html]

***

Some might wonder if the story of Eleutherius and Lucius of Britain should be given any currency.  In other words, might Lucius have been LAC?

Unfortunately, this does not seem at all likely.  According to WIKIPEDIA:

"In 1904 Adolf von Harnack proposed that there had been a scribal error in Liber Pontificalis with ‘Britanio' Britannia being written as an erroneous expansion for 'Britio' Birtha or Britium in what is now Turkey. The full name was 'Britio Edessenorum,' the citadel of Edessa, present day Şanlıurfa in Turkey. The name of the King of Edessa was Lucius Aelius Abgar.

See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abgar_IX.