CAER DATHAL, PEN MYNYDD AND PEN CAWELL or THE PROBLEM OF UTHER PENDRAGON IN WELSH TRADITION

[Since writing this piece, I've made a decision regarding Uther at Dinas Emrys and the proposed Cawell/Ceawlin identification. In the next couple of days I will be posting a piece detailing that decision and how I arrived at it.]

                        Dinas Emrys

I was recently asked by a reader why I departed from the Welsh tradtion concerning Uther Pendragon. To be honest, I really don't have a good answer to that question. What it prett looy much comes down to is that I have a strong preference (read 'bias') for a poo northern Arthur and the9 Welsh does not provide me with that. In addition, I can account for the preservation of the Artorius name in the North, but must resort to the use of a decknamen in the South.

Still, can I afford to continue ignoring what seem to be fairly solid identications of Uther with Cunedda/Ceawlin?

I've decided to explore that question here - in a more purely philosophical vein than I've permitted myself to indulge in before. 

I long ago offered a complex and rather comprehensive argument for Uther = Cunedda/Cuinnid-Maquicoline/Ceawlin. This argument was extended to Cunedda's son Ceredig, who I identified as Cerdic of Wessex. CeredigCerdic, in turn, made for a very good Arthur.

Three later developments seemed to bolster my Cunedda theory. One, I showed that Uther's lost Caer Dathal was, in fact, Dinas Emrys. And two, Pen Kawell, taken literally as Chief Basket, perfectly matched the West Saxon Ceawlin (as AS ceawl = basket). Ceawlin itself could be explained as deriving from Cunedda's other name, Cuilenn/Coline (W. Celyn). Finally, three, the Uther elegy mentions a Pen Mynydd and a place of that name on Anglesey is linked to the Gwynedd dynasty and contains place-names and a corresponding folktale that parallels the dragon story of Dinas Emrys (https://mistshadows.blogspot.com/2021/10/uther-and-dragons-of-gwynedd.html).

I had known for years that Emrys' presence at Dinas Emrys was a mere folktale. Vortigern had not given all of western Wales to Ambrosius. Instead, that region had fallen under the control of Cunedda and his "sons." That we find a Cunorix son of Maqui-Coline at Wroxeter/Viroconium (= Cynyr son of Gwron/"Hero" son of Cunedda) suggests that the Gewissei served whoever was the high king at the time in Wales.

And there we have it for the pre-Galfridian tradition concerning Uther.

Can we ignore that for no other reason than we can better account for the Arthurian battles in the North? And because L. Artorius Castus was stationed at York in the 2nd century A.D.?

Well, to treat of the second problem is an easy matter. Ceredig son of Cunedda has three bear names in his immediate line of descent. In addition, the Afon Arth with its headland fort is in Ceredig's kingdom of Ceredigion. Thus if Ceredig himself had possessed a bear epithet or title, the Latin Artorius might well have been substituted for it. There is nothing impossible about this and, indeed, it is quite allowable. We have precedents for it, in fact.

In addition, the Segontium unit was withdrawn in the late Roman period and stationed in Illyricum. L. Artorius Castus' Dalmatia was a part of Illyricum. It is not impossible that someone returned to Gwynedd when his term of service was complete and the Artorius name travelled with him.

But then there are the battles as those are found listed in the HISTORIA BRITTONUM and ANNALES CAMBRIAE. Yes, they can be made to conform to Gewissei battles contained in the ANGLO-SAXON CHRONICLE. I myself am comfortable with the result, but others have not been. They will always opt for the cleaner arrangement in the North.

What this all comes down to for me, at least, is this: 

CAN PEN KAWELL OR 'CHIEF BASKET', AS A DESIGNATION FOR CEAWLIN, BE PERMITTED TO STAND? IF NOT, AND THIS READING IS EITHER WRONG OR A COINCIDENCE, WHAT SEEMS OUR ONLY SURE IDENTIFICATION OF UTHER WITH A KNOWN, HISTORICAL PERSONAGE WHO ORIGINATES FROM CAER DATHAL IS LOST.

Clearly, I need to make a decision. One that is several years overdue.

NOTE:

Allowing for Uther to be Cunedda, who was Irish, helps explain why all the subsequent Arthurs belonged to Irish-founded dynasties in Britain.

The "Mabon son of Modron servant of Uther Pendragon" of the PA GUR poem also, unexpectedly, points to Uther at Caer Dathal/Dinas Emrys.  

How?

Well, Mabon in that poem is placed at the River Ely in Glamorgan. This is hard by the location of Campus Elleti (Palud Elleti in the Book of Llandaf).  The story of Ambrosius there, a boy without a father playing a ballgame, is a motif copied from the Irish story of Oengus Mac Og or Oengus the "Young son".  As Mabon the 'Divine Son' is even closer to Elleti (Gileston was once the Church of Mabon of the Vale), my guess from many years ago that Ambrosius, a name that means 'the divine or immortal one', is in this context merely an honorific used for the god Mabon seems to be correct.  And if Ambrosius in this context is Mabon, then Mabon as Uther's servant makes perfect sense given the association of both Ambrosius and Uther with Dinas Emrys/Caer Dathal.

I thus wasted a lot of time and effort trying to place Uther at the River Ely when it is obvious now that he belongs at Dinas Emrys.  It is merely his servant Mabon who also happens to be one of the champions of Ely.  

THE NIEDERBIEBER DRACO: AN ANATOMICAL ANALYSIS

The Niederbieber Draco

Rather than attempt to compare the Niederbieber Draco with various mythological beasts known from other places and times, I thought it would be fun to address the anatomy of the standard in the context of real known animals.  

Three features strike me as being the most important in this regard.  First, the position of the crest (if interpreted literally, i.e. if we assume the maker had modelled that particular feature after an actual animal he was acquainted with) removes from our consideration both fishes and lizards.  This is because both of those classes of animals have crests or anterior dorsal fins that begin behind the head, and behind the eyes. Yes, there are plenty of crested lizards about, and there are even some that have a similar number of spiny projections beginning at the base of the skull and running towards the tail.  

Blue-Crested Lizard

Forest Dragon

But only birds have a crest that stands on the very tops of their heads and can begin either above the eye or just in front of the eye.  Such a crest also does not continue down the neck, as is the case with the draco. So, again, if we are looking for the crest of a existing versus an imaginary animal, we would have to identify that of the draco as being avian.  The ancient Greek basilisk (mythical) or "little king" may have contributed the idea of a crest-like crown and this snake was later associated with the cockatrice, which sported a cock's comb.  

Second, while the draco has sometimes been described as being earless, it most certainly is not.  The maker has included a lizard's tympanum or external eardrum in just the right location.  We can tell the feature in question is a tympanum, as the surrounding scales are not of the same perfect tear-drop shape, and have their more pointed ends on the opposite side.  More importantly, the scales are keeled. Reptiles are often described as having either keeled or unkeeled scales.  The lack of a keel on the isolated feature at the side of the head identifies it as a tympanum.  Everything from the brow ridge, eye and chin back is definitely saurian - with the exception of the crest, of course.  Snakes do not have tympani. Lizards do.  Finally, despite its shape, the feature is too small to be the pectoral fin of a fish.  

Green Lizard in Germany Showing Tympanum

Most interesting to me (as a person who has studied the Dacian wolf-headed draco in considerable detail) is the pronounced furrowing of the muzzle and the total lack of scalation present there.  The furrowed muzzle is clearly meant to portray a snarling beast, and the one whose muzzle most perfectly accords with this image is the wolf.  

In fact, the correspondence of the draco muzzle with that of a snarling wolf is so complete that the number of furrows on the former match those found on the canine.  Thus while the Niederbieber Draco is often said to be just that - a dragon - a major element of it retains an important component of the Dacian draco, i.e. the wolf.  

I would then conclude that the Niederbieber Draco is a composite (tripartite) beast, part lizard, part bird and part wolf. That is, if we ascribe to its maker a rudimentary knowledge of natural history!  

Coming Soon: MY ANATOMICAL ANALYSIS OF THE NIEDERBIEBER DRACO

A Wolf-head Insignia for the Dacians at Banna/Birdoswald?

In answer to critics who thought it impossible that the 5th-6th century people of Birdoswald could still have been using a Dacian-style draco in their wars, I put the following question to Professor Roger Tomlin.  Although we cannot necessarily extrapolate the survival of such a standard from the time of the Roman withdrawal to Uther's time, such ethnically significant, venerated objects tended to be retained for long periods.  

My rambling question:

"We don't know a lot about what devices Romans used on their shields, unit flags, etc. Apparently, legions had their eagle, cohorts their draco. The Notitia Dignitatum shows shields in  the later period, but the authenticity of these has been called into question.

I was thinking about the Dacian unit at Banna/Birdoswald, whose soldiers were permitted to retain their falx as a regimental symbol on carved stones.  Coulston says: 

"The Birdoswald falces may indicate a unique regimental badge or the carrying of falces, instead of spathae, by the Dacian auxiliarii. A jealously guarded regimental tradition such as is suggested would have a close modern parallel in the Gurkha soldiers with their kukris. A tentative comparison might be made with the ethnic dress of the Chester ‘Sarmatian’; and, according to Hyginus, irregular Dacian units were used in the later second century. The use of falces therefore bears consideration. It is certainly unusual for an auxiliary cohors to depict a regimental weapon or badge in sculpture."

BUT... Dacia is symbolized on Roman coins holding the wolf-headed draco.

As the Dacians had a wolf-headed draco, might we assume that any unit device might depict just that mythical beast?

Yes, I realize that by the 4th century the draco had become standardized (pun intended!) in the army. But would the Dacian unit have been allowed to retain their wolf-headed dragon as the unit's special insignum?

Reasonable? Or is this something the Romans would have forbidden them to use because of its ethnic significance?

Could the field signa militaria of a normal Roman auxiliary unit such as the cohors I Aelia Dacorum have been their wolf-headed draco? 

Unless it were outlawed, I find it hard to believe the Dacians would abandon their own draco?"

To which Professor Tomlin replied:

"I see no reason why the Dacian cohorts would not have been allowed to use a wolf flag. True, it was 'ethnic' like the falx, but it had been conquered by the Romans, since it is depicted among the Roman trophies on Trajan's Column. And the Dacian auxiiaries were now 'Romans'.  Note that I'm here using the term 'flag' loosely – I only meant a windsock, the animal's head attached to a cylinder of fabric which streamed out behind in the breeze.

I don't object to the idea that the Birdoswald cohort might have had a wolf's head windsock!"

Some articles I've done on the draco and its possible presence at Banna/Birdoswald:

https://mistshadows.blogspot.com/2024/01/the-wolf-serpent-standard-of-dacians.html

https://mistshadows.blogspot.com/2024/02/there-is-absolutely-no-evidence-for.html

https://mistshadows.blogspot.com/2019/04/the-draco-standard-by-jc-n-coulston.html

https://mistshadows.blogspot.com/2022/06/birdoswaldbanna-fort-of-draco-of-aelius.html

https://mistshadows.blogspot.com/2024/01/more-scholarly-support-for-my-reading.html

C

ARTHUR SON OF BICOIR OF KINTYRE DISCOVERED

T627.6

Mongan son of Fiachna Lurgan, stricken with a stone by Artur son of Bicoir Britone died. Whence Bec Boirche said:

Cold is the wind over Islay;

There are warriors in Cantyre,

They will commit a cruel deed therefor,

They will kill Mongan son of Fiachna.

Thanks to my discussion with Professor Patrick Sims-Williams about the etymology of the Bicoir name, and its possible relationship to the Irish word for 'beekeeper' [1], I feel fairly confident in allowing for Arthur son of Bicoir, who is said in Tigernach to be in Kintyre, to be a son of either the beekeeper Beachaire or a son of a British *Bikkorix or similar in Kintyre whose name was later replaced by the Gaelic beekeeper word.  

Note Beacharr is on the coast of Kintyre, facing Islay.  Hence the cold wind blowing over the latter island in the Annal entry.  

There is no need, therefore, to attempt to link this Arthur to the Beccurus name found on in stone in NW Wales.  Very difficult to account for a son from Gesail Cyfarch ending up in Kintyre.  

Instead, this son of Bicoir would be an Arthur named after the earlier Dalriadan one, son of Aedan or Conaing, as Kintyre was a part of Dalriada.  This Arthur may or may not have been a "Briton", but his name surely was.  

Bannerman (STUDIES IN THE HISTORY OF DALRIADA, pp. 112-113) says the forts of the Cenel nGabrain (a dynasty that included the earlier Arthur) were Dunaverty in southern Kintyre and Tarbert in the north.  Beacharr is directly between these two strongholds. 

There is a dun at Beacharr, as well as a rather famous chambered cairn and standing stone.

Dun Beachaire

Standing Stone

Plan of Chambered Cairn

https://canmore.org.uk/site/38560/beacharr

https://canmore.org.uk/search/site?SIMPLE_KEYWORD=Dun%20Beachaire

Brittonic place-name expert Alan James was kind enough to send me this on the Dun Beachaire site:

"I see that Beacharr(a) is apparently the scotticised name for the chambered cairn, which is located on the Gaelic-named Dùn Beachaire, with Allt Beachaire flowing by. As I said, I think if the name was used specifically for the cairn, then it was likely to be *Am Beachair in the sense of ‘beehive’. But if Dùn Beachaire was the primary name, then it could have been ‘beekeeper’s fort’.

 

The neighbouring  Beachmenach and North and South Beachmore add complication. My best guess would be that Beach- might be a contracted *Beachach, ‘abounding in bees’ used nominally for a ‘bee-place’ . If so, Beachmennach would be *Beachach (nam) manach’, ‘monks’ bee-place, monastic apiary’, which seems quite plausible given that this was probably a possession of the Saddell Abbey across the peninsula. And, if so, the beachair may have been the Cistercian bee-keeper: I think of my friend Fr Benedict of Pluscarden Abbey taking his beehives in summer to a rather similar location in Moray.

 

As for Lann Becuir/Bechaire, it would have helped if you’d explained where this is – both in your email and in your blog! I’ve managed to track it down thanks to Google, to Col. White’s 1905 article quoting Joyce – it was at Bremore, Balrothery, near Balbriggan, on the Irish Sea coast about 20 miles N of Dublin? So in the same Irish Sea zone as Kintyre.

 

But I would be reluctant, at least on a matter like this, to disagree with Patrick S-W, and indeed come to the same conclusion, that Becuir is unlikely to be Bechaire, though both it and Bicoir might be a personal name with the *bekk- ‘little’ root plus a suffix, and such a name could have suggested the ‘beekeeper’.

 

And it’s certainly interesting that St Molaga acquired that epithet.  St Moluag, though pretty surely not the same in origin (both saints are obscure, and probably amalgams of several Mo-Lugs) was a very important figure in Argyll – especially associated with Lismore, where he was regarded as the founder of the church there, and venerated at two Kilmoluags, in Kintyre and Knapdale, as well as having dedications in several of the southern Hebrides and Mann. But again, the cult of Moluag was very much promoted by the Cistercians, especially from Mellifont, ‘honey-spring’, mother-house of Saddell , whose founding abbot St Malachy seems to have played a part in promoting Moluag - though there doesn’t seem to be any evidence for the bee-keeping connection in the Scottish sources for Moluag.

 

Still, I’d agree that it’s possible that Dùn Beachaire was associated with Moluag, and so with Molaga and with bees and honey . But I think the origin of that association is to be found among the 12th century Cistercians, not necessarily any earlier.

I'd agree that the dùn might have been associated with Bicor. In the 7th ct Islay and Kintyre would certainly have been Gaelic-speaking, so the name (whether Welsh, Clyde British or Pictish) would have been Gaelicised to something like *Biocoir, and - whether they knew anything of the story or not - the 12th ct Cistercian monks would have been happy to turn this obscure, and possibly pagan, warlord into their bee-keeping saint!"

St. Molaga is interesting in another way: his bees came from St. David's in Dyfed, Wales.  And he had, apparently visited St. David's.  See https://www.omniumsanctorumhiberniae.com/2014/01/saint-molagga-of-timoleague-january-20.html?m=1.  Arthur son of Petr of Dyfed has an estimated birthdate of 560.  

The Stone that "Killed" Mongan at Dun Beachaire?

I'm thinking that the "stone" used by Arthur son of Bicoir to kill Mongan may be a error for the stone where Mongan was killed.  And the stone in question is the great standing stone at the site.  From 

https://journals.socantscot.org/index.php/psas/article/download/7797/7765/7753:

(a) Beacharra Standing Stone (fig. 2, No. 6 on map).—The dimensions

of this stone are given in the Old Statistical Account as 16 feet above

ground, 4 feet broad, 2| feet thick, while in the Neiv Statistical Account

it is further stated that "a grave at the base of the obelisk, covered

with turf, is 18 feet 7 inches in length, and 4J feet in breadth." In

June 1892 this " grave," known locally as " Leac-an-fhamhair " (i.e. " the

flagstone of the giant"), was excavated by the Kintyre Scientific Society,

when it was found to consist of three cists. From these were recovered

six clay vessels, one flint implement, and one jet object, now preserved

in the Museum at Campbeltown. An account of these operations, fully

illustrated, was printed in the Proceedings of this Society ten years later.4

These six round-bottomed urns are representative of the types of vessels

belonging to the period of the late Stone Age.

It was learned from the tenant of Beacharra recently that the excavations

above referred to only embraced the northern portion of the burial

area, as the southern portion was found to have been excavated on some

unknown former occasion.

The Beacharra standing stone, which so far as the writer is aware is

the highest in Kintyre, may easily be seen against the skyline to the left

of the main road by anyone travelling south, shortly after passing

through the village of Killean. It is situated 105 feet to the south-westof the burial cairn (magnetic bearing 38°), while at a distance of 120 yards

to the south-west of the standing stone there are the remains of a stone

fort where many large embedded stones still lie scattered all over the

turf-covered site, some apparently in their original positions.

At the present time, the standing stone serves as a " straining post"

for a wire fence, three wires of which encircle it at a height from the

ground of 2 feet 5 inches, 3 feet 3 inches, and 3 feet 10 inches, the fence

running south-east from the stone. It is perhaps desirable to note this,

as instances have occurred where the pressure of fence wires has resulted

in a series of grooves of somewhat mysterious appearance. No cup-marks

were observed on the Beacharra standing stone.

Dimensions: the measurements quoted above from the Old StatisticalAccount were found to be almost correct, but the height might be more

accurately recorded as 16 feet 4 inches, while the breadth at base is 4 feet

6 inches.

This was the "stone of the giant", and there are many folklore stories about giant's hurling stones for this or that purpose.  Quite possibly there was some local folklore about Arthur using this great standing stone to kill Mongan.

Arthur threw Queen's Crag at Guinevere in Northumberland.

And see the several Arthur's Quiots or cromlechs, called for large flat roof stones of dolmens. Quiot from ME coyte "flat stone".

[1]

Patrick Sims-Williams in his “The Celtic Inscriptions of Britain: Phonology and Chronology, c. 400-1200″, provides a couple of etymologies for the name Beccurus.  His first is that the name comes from British *Bikkorix or “Little King”.  His alternate derivation would be a name from *bekko-, “beak”.  He does not, however, make the connection to an attested Irish noun, Becuir, found as a variant of Bechaire or “bee-keeper” in the church name Lann Becuir/Bechaire.  The “bee-keeper” references either St. Modomnoc or St. Molaga of this religious establishment.  The former brought his bees with him from Wales, where he had been educated under St. David (born c. 485?) at Mynyw/Menevia/St. David’s in Dyfed.  The latter had been to both Scotland and Wales (St. David’s again) and had obtained some bees from Modomnoc.

When I asked Professor Sims-Williams about the possiibility that Bicoir could be related to the Irish Becuir, he responded:

“I’m not sure that Becuir can be a variant of Bechaire. The place name Lann Bechaire could be a distortion/rationalisation of Lann Becuir, and the latter name may have nothing to do with bee-keeping, though it could be related to Bicoir.”

THE BATTLE-LEADER OF THE NORTH (Final Book)

Ironically, after many reiterations over the past several years, my final Arthur book ends up being a reinforced version of the argument I first offered at the Croatian Arthurian symposium in 2019.

https://www.amazon.com/Battle-Leader-North-Definitive-Identification-Legendary-ebook/dp/B0B5CG54RT/ref=sr_1_1?crid=13BGM4NFMXXTZ&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.Eq-AAIpUgOc7JPPNM39d1Q.9azT-jCV10f1QXiXMr3rC36OCJjehl755y3NdZ_ANm8&dib_tag=se&keywords=the+battle-leader+of+the+north+august+hunt&qid=1731541756&sprefix=the+battle-leader+of+the+north+august+hunt%2Caps%2C174&sr=8-1

Bicoir, Beccurus and Petuir/Petr: A Last Look at My Earlier Mistaken Identification of Two Arthurian Fathers

Gesail Cyfarch (under a dozen kilometers from Caer Dathal)

For quite a few years now, I have floated the idea that the Bicoir of the Irish Annals, father of an Arthur, may be the same as Petuir, a spelling for Petr, father of Arthur of Dyfed.

Alas, I have been freed of that delusion!

Dr. Simon Rodway of The University of Wales was kind enough to treat of my idea, and as it turns out, there is nothing to it:

"'P and B' do not 'often substitute for each other' and neither do c and t. /p/ mutates to /b/ in neo-Brittonic languages under very specific grammatical circumstances, e.g. Middle Welsh penn 'head', y benn 'his head'. t is sometimes misread by scribes as c and vice versa. The two phenomena are completely different. The second could be relevant here, but the first certainly not - I know of no examples of a Brittonic / Latin word being adapted into Irish with B- instead of P-, neither do you find variation of P- ~ B- in Brittonic contexts. The mutation is irrelevant here.

At any rate, you do not account for the change e > i.

Therefore no."

Dr. Rodway is in agreement with the possibility that Bicoir could be the same name (although not necessarily the same person!) as the Beccurus found on the Gesail Cyfarch stone in NW Wales:

https://www.ucl.ac.uk/archaeology/cisp/database/stone/pmrfa_1.html

"Yes it could (with Irish raising of /e/ > /i/)."

In an article written years ago, I had the following for the etymology of Beccurus:

Patrick Sims-Williams in his “The Celtic Inscriptions of Britain: Phonology and Chronology, c. 400-1200″, provides a couple of etymologies for the name Beccurus.  His first is that the name comes from British *Bikkorix or “Little King”.  His alternate derivation would be a name from *bekko-, “beak”.  He does not, however, make the connection to an attested Irish noun, Becuir, found as a variant of Bechaire or “bee-keeper” in the church name Lann Becuir/Bechaire.  The “bee-keeper” references either St. Modomnoc or St. Molaga of this religious establishment.  The former brought his bees with him from Wales, where he had been educated under St. David (born c. 485?) at Mynyw/Menevia/St. David’s in Dyfed.  The latter had been to both Scotland and Wales (St. David’s again) and had obtained some bees from Modomnoc.

When I asked Professor Sims-Williams about the possiibility that Bicoir could be related to the Irish Becuir, he responded:

“I’m not sure that Becuir can be a variant of Bechaire. The place name Lann Bechaire could be a distortion/rationalisation of Lann Becuir, and the latter name may have nothing to do with bee-keeping, though it could be related to Bicoir.”

But whatever the etymology of the name, given that I've reestablished the connection in Welsh tradition of Uther and Arthur with Caer Dathal/Dinas Emrys, it is worth noting (see the map above) that the Beccurus stone and Dinas Emrys are under a dozen kilometers from each other.

Thus, there may be one of two things going on here.  In the first instance, a later Arthur son of Beccurus, whose origin lay at or near Gesail Cyfarch, may have been confused with the earlier, more famous Arthur, son of Uther.  Or... Beccurus = Uther Pendragon, despite the major problem of chronology when we take into account the chronology for Arthur son of Bicoir as found in the Irish Annals.  Arthur son of Bicoir is said to have killed Mongan (Annals of Tigernach) in 627.  Estimated birthdate for Arthur son of Petr is c. 560 (Bartrum), while that of Arthur son of Aedan (or Conaing) died c. 590.  The established dates for Arthur son of Uther are c. 516 and c. 537.

In the Gorchan of Tudfwlch, the hero – from Eifionydd in Gwynedd, an area in north-west Wales covering the south-eastern part of the Llŷn Peninsula from Porthmadog to just east of Pwllheli  – is called the serpent with a terrible sting, and his place of origin is alluded to as the snakes’ lair.  Eifionydd, named for Ebiaun son of Dunod son of Cunedda, is the northern half of the kingdom of Dunoding and is hard by Dinas Emrys in Arfon. In fact. Beddgelert the town was in Eifionydd, with Dinas Emrys is just on the other side of the border in Arfon.

As it happens, Gesail Cyfarch is in Eifionydd.

Arthur son of Bicoir is important, as he is claimed as the slayer of Mongan son of Fiachna. Mongan was begat on Caintigern (whose name in truncated form probably became Geoffrey of Monmouth's Igerna) by Manannan mac Lir, the sea god, in a transformation story that is exactly paralleled by that of the birth of Arthur son of Uther.

In my mind, none of this harms my theory that the earlier Arthur belonged in northern England, either at York or on the Wall.  These other Arthurs all post-date him.  However, if we allow for an Arthur son of Beccurus near Caer Dathal, then we may use that to explain the Welsh traditional association of Uther and Arthur with Caer Dathal. Or even if we merely allow for this Gwynedd Beccurus to have been misidentified with Bicoir father of Arthur we can still account for the Arthurian presence at Caer Dathal. The real Bicoir might well belong elsewhere.  After all, his son is said to be with warriors in Kintyre (Dalriada).

The Arthur who was in Gwynedd was not THE Arthur, but a subsequent one named, doubtless, like Arthur of Dyfed and Arthur of Dalriada, after the more famous one.  

Two Terrible Magister Militum Candidates and the Northern Battles: Or What is a Theorist to do?

Coin of the Usurper Constantine III

It is so easy to put oneself in a box when it comes to formulating Arthurian theory.

For some time now (years, actually - I'm ashamed to admit!), I've tried to decide on which terrible magister militum stood the best chance of being Uther Pendragon.  There are two candidates in the tradition for the latter.  In the first, as represented best by the Galfridian material, Uther Pendragon is the MM/MVM Gerontius of the early 5th century.  A Welsh tradition recorded in the PA GUR seems pretty specifically to identify Uther with Illtud, who is also a terrible soldier and a magister militum.

https://mistshadows.blogspot.com/2024/07/a-dumnonian-or-penychen-magister.html

https://mistshadows.blogspot.com/2024/10/after-one-last-review-of-galfridian.html

Neither man works.  The PA GUR equation almost certaintly was done simply because someone recognized an apparent or desired identification of Uther and Illtud.  Otherwise, the saint's life does not permit us to do anything with him that would suggest he actually was Uther.  Chronologically, he is better than our other alternative, Gerontius.

The latter is attractive because we can propose that the Uther Pendragon descriptor/rank that was originally applied to Gerontius came to be applied, either intentionally or accidentally, to a later Gereint.  We have some evidence that such a Gereint existed at the right time to be Arthur's father.

What is not to like about a Gereint whose forts are situated in the extremity of the Cornish peninsula?

Well, for starters, I'm quite sure the Arthurian battles belong in the North.  Decades of research has confirmed this, and I still offer the only good identifications for these battle-sites based on the best and more current place-name and language research.  If we opt for a Cornish Arthur who ends up fighting up and down Dere Street in the North, we would have to assume he was merely a mercenary being employed by rulers in that region.  Not an impossibility, but rather unlikely.  

In addition, we can easily account for the preservation of the name Artorius in the North, and in exactly the area where the battles are situated.  We cannot do so with an Arthur born in Cornwall.

So, this would seem to create an insoluable dilemma for us.  But does it, really?

To begin with, I think we can settle on Uther as Gerontius.  As I wrote once:

I have solved the Uther riddle once and for all.

My final clue came in the form of one of those nagging bits of place-name studies' results from Cornwall. I had noticed a couple of Gorlois names attached to Gereint sites. This made sense not within the body of any extant tradition, but only in my proposed identification of Uther Pendragon/gorlassar as the terrible MM/MVM Gerontius of the early 5th century. This famous, though ill-fated British general's military rank, so I had suggested, might have been assigned to a later Gereint, Arthur's actual father.

The whole idea came from the pseudo-history of Geoffrey of Monmouth. In that work, Vortigern the "superbus tyrannus" kills Constans, who was initially a monk. There's good reason for thinking that Vortigern was associated with Magnus Maximus "the tyrant". Hence the story of Vortigern and Ambrosius at Eryri - a reflection of Maximus and St. Ambrose at Aquileia.

This represents a strange conflation/confusion of history. For Constans I, who had actually gone to Britain, was killed by one Magnentius (a name based on the same root as Magnus). Magnentius is killed by a Constantius.

Constans II, the historical monk, is killed by Gerontius the magister militum and magister utriusque militiae. Gerontius is killed by another Constantius.

The vytheint elei Kysteint is Welsh for Constantius.

It has occurred to me that the problem has to do with the origin point of Gerontius.  I had become so fixated on the Cornish Gereints to the point where I neglected to consider that Gerontius probably came from Northern Britain.  

Anthony Birley had written the following about Constantine III:

"Sozomen gives no real explanation for the British soldiers’ action, except to

comment on Constantine, that they chose him, ‘thinking that as he had this

name, he would master the imperial power firmly [beba≤wß=constanter], since

it was for a reason such as this that they appear to have chosen the others for

usurpation as well’. The magic of the name of Constantine, in Britain above

all, needs no documentation. Orosius has a similar version: Constantine was

chosen ‘solely on account of the hope in his name’. Sozomen’s remark that

this applied to the others as well probably just means that the soldiers had

thought that Marcus and Gratian too ‘would master the imperial power

firmly’.¹³² Constantine’s appeal to the memory of Constantine the Great, who

had been proclaimed emperor in Britain almost exactly a century earlier, is

made even more obvious by his assumption of the names Flavius Claudius.

Further, his sons were called Constans, made Caesar in 408 and Augustus in

409 or 410, and Julian, who received the title nobilissimus.¹³³"

To address this problem, I approached Professor Roger Tomlin with the following query:

"Roger,

Your opinion on this idea...

We all know Constantius Chlorus died at York, and Constantine the Great was declared emperor there.

So, Constantine III was declared emperor in Britain in 407, and actually named sons after close relative of Constantine the Great. 

Is it reasonable, do you suppose, to assume that continuing with this line of propagandist presentation that the usurper in 407 would have had himself declared by the troops at York?"

And, furthermore, is it reasonable to assume Gerontius was drawn from the same region?"

His reply:

"I don't see that York would be chosen deliberately for the magic of its association with Constantine (if remembered!), but nonetheless it is likely to be where Constantine III was proclaimed, since it was capital of the northern province (Britannia Inferior and its successor(s)) and also a major military base, if not the military base. His army was probably based there, even if it was operating elsewhere at the time.

As for Gerontius, yes, York is quite credible."

Needless to say, this was a shocker to me.  It shouldn't have been, but it was. Any identification of Gerontius with a later supposed Cornish namesake would be mere spurious tradition,i.e. yet another instance of echoes of history being transferred away from areas long controlled by foreign powers to the Celtic Fringe.  

What this all means, of course, is that if we allow for Uther Pendragon (as depicted in the Galfridian tradition) to be Gerontius, while we can't float the latter as Arthur's father due to the chronology, we can allow for either the actual descent of Arthur from this Gerontius or a fanciful genealogy utilizing Gerontius being applied to Arthur's ancestry for the sake of added legitimacy.  There is nothing new about royal pedigrees being manipulated in our early British and Welsh sources.  We have evidence for such aplenty.

More importantly, the best place for the preservation of the Artorius name is York (or Carvoran and environs on Hadrian's Wall, where there was a Dalmatian garrison in the late Roman period).  L. Artorius Castus would have been fairly famous in certain circles.  A prefect of the Sixth at York who led legionary detachments to Armenia, one of the largest successful campaigns ever embarked on by Rome, who eventually became the procurator of the emergency-founded province of Liburnia with the right of the sword.  He may have been born in Dalmatia, but seems to have had other Dalmatian connections, in any case.  There were Artorii in Salona, Dalmatia, and we have a woman from Salona being buried at Carvoran.  As I've detailed before, there was also a Dalmatian unit in the late period at or hard by York.  

We can, then, suggest the following plausible portrait for an Arthur of the North:  a man born of the line of Gerontius (or who as assigned to that line for propgandist purposes) at York or on the Wall whose name could be traced back through a couple of centuries to Castus.

What I love about this idea, obviously, is that it allows us to retain a solid interpretation of tradition regarding Uther without sacrificing the Northern battles of Arthur.

I'm now offering a revised version of the following title, and this will represent my final work on a historical King Arthur:

https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B0B5CG54RT/ref=tmm_kin_swatch_0?ie=UTF8&dib_tag=se&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.ssLlRH4XKsFpxTcA60zrPe0mpAsZfRfu0bhKonOfVVDGjHj071QN20LucGBJIEps.VR-gpL-kaVMMXSAVlITfx3wBmmyU-AWDhkXoFUeizlU&qid=1731338640&sr=8-1

WHY ARCHAEOLOGY FORCES ARTHUR TO NORTHERN BRITAIN

The Arthurian Battles, Along with Banna, Magnis and Aballava

Many people (including myself) have tried to make the case for a Southern Arthur.  Unfortunately, none of us have properly taken the archaeological record into account when doing so.

The following three very helpful maps are taken from Nicholas Higham (King Arthur:Myth-Making and History).  They show the Saxon settlements as evinced by cemetaries for the entire Arthurian period.

When it comes to considering Arthur as a historical entity, we are confined chronologically to the only dates we are provided with for the hero - c. 516 for Badon and c. 537 for Camlann.  

If we opt for the South as the location for his battles, we must be able to define a frontier zone.  We must then be able to show that either this frontier was held for a significant period of time or the enemy was actually pushed back. Lastly, we must be able to make linguistically sound identifications of the battle sites that reflect those conditions and military theater.

As it turns out, we cannot.  Plain and simple.

On the other hand, what was going on in the North perfectly dovetails with the best possible (and in some cases ONLY possible) battle-site identifications. Any attempts to distort/contort or creatively etymologize place-names (through language-match substitutions, "looks like" or "sounds like" comparisons, etc.) are doomed.  Trust me; I know this by sobering and often bitter experience. 

I would urge my readers to consult the work of Dr. Ken Dark, who has argued convincingly for the necessary presence in the North of a sub-Roman dux Brittanniarum-like figure.  Such a personage would have been based either at York or on Hadrian's Wall.  

Arthur's battles, as I have laid them out in the North, nicely track along the Roman Dere Street, defining an obvious boundary between the invading Saxons to the east and the Britons to the west.  Badon at Buxton (referred to by the early Saxons as Bathum, as indicated by the existence of the Batham Gate Roman road) fits well with such an arrangement of battles, and Camlann can be allowed to stand for Camboglanna/Castlesteads on the Wall.  

Survival of the Artorius name can also be demonstrated in the North.  The same cannot be said for the South.  

What this all means, of course, is that archaeology forces Arthur to Northern Britain.  I predict that any future attempts to place him in the South will, ultimately, fail.  The only way out of this predicament is to propose much earlier dates for Arthur in the South, and I don't see how we can justify doing that given the current state of our knowledge of things Arthurian.

Campus Elleti and Arelate: How Ambrosius Came to be in Southern Wales

Coliseum at Arles

For years now, I have made a case for how and why Ambrosius ended up in Britain.  

The association of this saint (who might well have been confused/conflated with his father, a prefect of Gaul) with Eryri in Wales is simple to account for.  The story of Dinas Emrys, featuring Vortigern and Ambrosius (= W. Emrys), is merely a folk reflection of the meeting of Magnus Maximus (Maximus the Tyrant) and St. Ambrose at Aquileia.

But the occurrence of Emrys at Campus Elleti in Glamorgan, known as Palud or 'swamp, marsh' of Elleti in the Book of Llandaf, is harder to account for.  I have pointed out the fact that the motif of the ballgame at Elleti and Emrys's being called a bastard is echoed in the story of the Irish god Aengus Mac Og at Bri Leith.  I've also reminded everyone that the Welsh counterpart of Mac Og - Mabon - is found at Gileston, the earlier Church of Mabon of the Vale, just across the River Thaw from the location of Campus/Pauld Elleti.  This "coincidence" suggests that Ambrosius, a Latin name meaning 'the divine or immortal one', may have been associated with the youthful god Mabon.

However, I then went on to wonder if Campus Elleti, which might have been Maes Elleti in Welsh, could have represented a fanciful relocation of the River Moselle, the location of Trier, the favored birthplace of St. Ambrose.  Yet this seemed a stretch and I did not push the argument.

I'm now thinking that Palud Elleti, the Marsh of Elleti, holds the clue to explaining why Ambrose was situated in Glamorgan.  

"In 395 CE, Arelate became the seat of the Praetorian Prefecture of the Gauls and in 408 CE was designated as his capital by Constantine III shortly after he was declared emperor in 407 CE."

Prior to Arles being the seat of the Gallic Prefecture, Trier had held that honor.  Most scholars now thin that St. Ambrose was born at Trier, but there is a tradition that he was born at Arles.

http://www.roamintheempire.com/index.php/2019/08/28/arelate-part-i/

St. Ambrose, Bishop of Milan, lived from 374 to 397.  There are traditions that he was born probably 340 at Trier, Arles, or Lyons and he died 4 April, 397.

https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01383c.htm 

The toponym Arelate is a Latinized form of the Gaulish *Are-lati, meaning 'by or in front of the marsh'. [Delamarre, Xavier (2003). Dictionnaire de la langue gauloise: Une approche linguistique du vieux-celtique continental.]

As for the story of Ambrosius at Wallop fighting the grandfather of Vortigern (proof positive of the chronological shift involving Ambrosius, showing him to be 4th century and not a later figure), I have shown how this came about:

https://mistshadows.blogspot.com/2024/08/the-battle-of-ambrosius-and-vitalinus.html

It is yet another folktale and not a historical episode.

RESTORING DINAS EMRYS TO ARFON: THE CAER DATHAL = DINAS EMRYS EQUATION SEEMS TO BE CORRECT

Beddgelert in Is Gwyrfai, Arfon
(Map Courtesy https://historical-boundaries-of-wales-rcahmw.hub.arcgis.com/)

Years ago now - in fact, as long ago as 2021 - I had made what I thought to be an important discovery regarding the location of Caer Dathal:

https://mistshadows.blogspot.com/2021/01/dinas-emrys-as-caer-dathal-late.html

Unfortunately, I was told that this could not be right by an expert at the Historic Place-Names of Wales project with the RCAHMW.  According to this person, Dinas Emrys was never in Arfon, but had been in Dunoding or, more precisely, the Eifionydd portion of Dunoding.

As a result of this information, I abandoned the idea and instead pursued a somewhat satisfactory argument to prove Caer Engan in Nantlle was Caer Dathal.  I was particularly happy with the idea, as it Dathal be from Irish Tuathal, who had somehow been corrupted, despite the Welsh cognate Tudwal being present in the St. Engan context.  Still, it was better than nothing, and made some sense of the movements of the primary characters of MATH SON OF MATHONWY to and from Caer Dathal.

Well, I never completely let go of my Caer Dathal = Dinas Emrys theory.  And only recently I had another go at making sure the latter fort was never in Arfon.

As it turns out, it was.  While it is true Beddgelert parish spread through several cantrefs and commotes, the fort itself was definitely within the cantref of Arfon.

https://cy-m-wikipedia-org.translate.goog/wiki/Arfon_Is_Gwyrfai?_x_tr_sl=cy&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en&_x_tr_pto=sc

https://cy.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arfon_Is_Gwyrfai

"The main military center of the comwd was Dolbadarn Castle , which defended Nant Peris at the foot of Yr Wyddfa . In Nant Gwynant in the south-east stood the old defense of Dinas Emrys which is associated with Myrddin , king Gwrtheyrn and the history of the Red Dragon and the White Dragon."

I have had this confirmed by several good sources, maps and personal correspondence from Welsh experts in historical and political geography.

What does this mean for my Arthurian research?  Well, pretty much EVERYTHING.

Firstly, it helps us relate the two apparent pre-Galfridian references to Uther's locations found in the PA GUR, CULHWCH AND OLWEN and the HANESYN HEN.  

The PA GUR seems to relate Uther, via Mabon son of Modron, his servant, to the Ely River in Glamorgan.  I have shown that Gileston just the other side of the River Thaw from the old kingdom of Penychen, which included the Dinas Powys and Caerau forts, had been called the Church of Mabon of the Vale.   And that between that church and the Penychen forts was to be found Elleti, the place of Ambrosius/Emrys.

CULHWCH AND OLWEN tells is that Uther had relatives at Caer Dathal.

The HANESYN HEN tract adds that Gwyn Godybrion of the Ely was a son of Iaen from Caer Dathal.

It also tells us Arthur took a wife from Caer Dathal.

A couple of other sources may also be important in localizing Uther and Arthur in NW Wales.

A Stanza of the Grave puts the tomb of Mabon in Nantlle, not far from Dinas Emrys.

Finally, the "Dialogue of Arthur of the Eagle"'s Eliwlad son of Madog son of Uther is patterned after Lleu of Nantlle, and there is even an identical placename involved (Cutmadoc in Cornwall, Coed Madoc in Nantlle) which would appear to suggest that the character has been relocated from the north to the south.

As we know, Ambrosius and Uther were closely associated in the Galfridian tradition.  So much so that both kings are buried at Stonehenge hard by Amesbury, a place-name linked to the personal name Ambrosius.  The two urns at Dinas Emrys contained 'dragons' originally in the sense of the cremated remains of two great warrior chieftains.  We thus have a linking in story of Dinas Emrys with the Burg of Ambrius.

Now, it is not my purpose in this short blog piece to delve once again into the identities of Ambrosius and Uther (who might even be the same mythological person - although there are other possibilities).  But what I can say is that it makes a great deal of sense to identify the Caer Dathal of Uther with the Dinas Emrys of Ambrosius.  And, in fact, knowing as I do now that Dinas Emrys was in Arfon, I consider the mystery of the whereabouts of the lost fort of Dathal solved.