AN UNEXPECTED REVELATION: WHY THE ALLOWED RETENTION OF A SINGLE WORD IN THE UTHER ELEGY CHANGES EVERYTHING

Tywyll, Pen Kawell and Kawyl in the 'Marwnat Vthyr Pen'

The Discussion of 'proest' in Jenny Rowland's EARLY WELSH SAGA POETRY, p. 335

Several years ago I thought I had made an amazing discovery: a single word in the ancient Welsh poem 'Marwnat Vthyr Pen' ("The Death-Song of Uther Pen[dragon]) had allowed me to definitively identify Arthur's father with Ceawlin of the ANGLO-SAXON CHRONICLE.  While the idea to some seemed outlandish, even crazy, I had before this shown that there was a strong likelihood the Arthurian battles as found listed in the HISTORIA BRITTONUM were, in fact, Welsh renderings of the Gewissei battles of the ASC.  Many other correspondences were forthcoming, and all of them seemed to be confirmed by my interpretation of the Uther elegy.

Alas, because I was assured by three preeminent Celticists that kawell couldn't stand as is, that the word must be emended to fit the end-rhyme scheme of the poem, I had to settle for W. kannwyll in this position for the relevant line.  Such a emendation forced me to abandon the notion that Uther = Ceawlin, and I was spun off in different directions for all subsequent future research and theorizing.  

Well, as it turns out, the scholars in question were mistaken.  I've only come to realize this recently, at the end of a long road of ongoing communication with other academincs specializing in early Welsh poetry.  My journey of rediscovery began with the following message from Dr. David Callander:

"I have not studied this specific example in detail, but of possible relevance to your enquiry is the Welsh poetic technique known as proest. With this, vowels of the same length can "rhyme" so e.g. "yll" and "ell". I believe that this is discussed as part of the metrical study in the introduction to Jenny Rowland, Early Welsh Saga Poetry."

I had not heard of proest before, and thought that pursuing that technique might bear fruit.  So, once again, I began writing queries.

I started with Dr. Simon Rodway.  In a two part question, I asked first if proest might be present in the Uther elegy, and second if kawell could be left when operating under such a principle.  He responded, respectively:

"This is a good point."  

and

"Perhaps."

I then heard back from Dr. Ben Guy on this issue:

"I'm glad to hear that you're using Marged Haycock's edition in her Legendary Poems from the Book of Taliesin, which is the best general guide on the poem. Regarding your specific question, it would be fine to keep tywyll together with kawell from the point of view of the metre (Sawyl is less important in this sense since it's not an end-rhyme) - the final consonant is the same in both (-ll) but the vowel varies (-y-, -e-), so it's 'proest' rhyme rather than full rhyme, but that's fine in poetry like this."

This gave me a glimmer of hope, and I once again reached out to Prof. Marged Haycock herself.  In the past, she had failed to respond to my query.  This time, however, she was kind enough to get back to me in a timely fashion:

"Kawyl is not at the end of the line so is not in this case involved in any prescribed rhyme  (tywyll, kawell are proest rhymes). The tywyll and kawell do not form a full rhyme, and are not strictly speaking a normal type of proest (which is a half rhyme where the vowels vary, but consonants match). This is because tywyll contains a diphthong -wy- whereas kawell just has simple vowel. However, some -wy- sounds can morph into a clear -y, in which case tywyll might form a sort of proest with kawell. It seems near enough to pass muster."

This statement is utterly authoritative.  While it is important to add that she went on to say -

"However, the slight irregularity might suggest to some an emendation to a word ending in -wyll, or alternatively the fem. form of tywyll which is tawell (that would give you full rhyme)."

- the important thing to recognize is that kawell is acceptable.  I would, of course, go well beyond that conclusion.  Why?

Because if we save kawell, and instead emend the following kawyl to kannwyll, we 1) follow the law of Occam's Razor, changing only one word instead of two (as otherwise kawyl has to be altered to Sawyl by proposing a copying error known as eye-skip, where the scribe accidentally transfers the k from kawell on the previous line to sawyl on the following line), and 2) emending kawyl to kannwyll allows us to have Uther transformed into a star (cannwyll has the transf. meaning of 'star"), and this would account for the Galfridian dragon-star which is said to be Uther himself.  

[Geoffrey of Monmouth used the gorlassar epithet which Uther applies to himself in the elegy to conjure an entirely separate personage - Gorlois, Duke of Cornwall - but then acknowledges that Gorlois is Uther by having the latter magically transform into the former!]

Reading the poem in this way would allow us to reject the emendation Sawyl entirely.  We would no longer have to seek some connection between Uther and Sawyl, whether this connection involves St. Illtud or any other figure, including Sawyl on the North.  In short, with Sawyl missing from the poem, and Uther as a star being present there instead, we are free to utilize kawell as a Welsh reference to Ceawlin.

Because of this, I will shortly be reissuing my book THE BEAR KING.  At this point, I do not anticipate having to do any future work on Arthur, as every important aspect of his story that could be treated of is dealt with in detail in this volume.