SOME FUN WITH THE ARM.GENTES READING FOR THE LAC STONE

A few days ago I wrote this post:

https://mistshadows.blogspot.com/2024/12/a-new-reading-for-arms-lacuna-of-l.html?m=1

After thinking about the ARM[...]S lacuna, I turned my attention to another later gap:

PROC CENTENARIO PROVINCIAE loo

LI [...] GLADI loo

It has always been assumed that LI- had to represent Liburnia, as no other entity beginning with LI- fulfilled the requirement of the procurator rank. The Libyan provinces formed under Diocletian were each governed by a praeses. 

Yet, it is also true that the LAC stone is our only evidence for the actual existence of a Liburnian province. The possibility that such a province was real is suggested by the presence of LAC's estate in Dalmatia, as well as Artorii in Salona. Still, neither his estate nor Salona are in Liburnia.

What if LAC were merely born in Dalmatia (something several leading scholars hold to be a distinct possibility) and then retired there after his service was completed? What if he was never a procurator of Liburnia because such a province never existed?

Suppose we did this with the LI[...] GLADI lacuna instead... Allowing for standard abbreviations, we substitute  for LIB(URNIAE) IURE GLADII the following:

LIBERAT(AE) GLADIO

"freed by the sword"

The LAC inscription would then say something like this:

LAC was prefect of the Sixth Legion when he was appointed dux. He led British legions (or legionary troops) against armed tribes. As we are not told these armed tribes are external to the province of Britain, we are to assume they are northern British tribes (as is usual for the Sixth, and as fits the context of northern campaigns against tribes under Commodus and Severus). LAC is then made procurator of the province he has just freed by the sword.

Now, before anyone gets too excited (or outraged) by this, let me quickly say that scholars find the whole thing objectionable for any number of reasons. Dr. Benet Salway, for instance, has told me that

"Very unlikely, not least because one would have to assume a one-letter abbreviation of gladio to gladi."

Professor Lawrence Keppie on the same proposed phrase:

"The inscription is filled with official jargon, so I can't imagine unofficial or colloquial phrases will feature."

And as for Tomlin:

"I am not convinced by your 'province freed by the sword' (LIBERTO GLADI!). Libertus doesn't mean this – you need liberatus, and you need it to be feminine and genitive; i.e. LI[BERATAE], which won't fit in the space available. And you can't make genitive GLADI into ablative gladio. And I don't think this is an expression the Romans would have used any way: they would refer to a province being 'recovered' or 'redeemed' (compare the somewhat fanciful restoration of RIB 1051). And in this very explicit inscription, it is suddenly obscure what province is meant."

Prof. Roger Tomlin has no problem with Liburnia for LI-:

"PROVINCIAE spelt out surely requires that the next word will be that of the 'province', and abbreviation isn't much of a problem, since it would adjoin that of the province in which the stone was read. Most US inhabitants would know what was meant by STATE OF CAL.

Certainly LIB IVRE GLADII suggests nothing else to me."

The most critical flaw in seeing Castus as procurator of Britain is that procurators were chosen by the Emperor for smaller provinces. Larger provinces, such as Britain, had governors elected by the Senate. So to have Castus, of the equine class, made Procurator of Britain, something very unusual would have had to have happened. What that would be I can't say. With the execution of Perennis, it is believed the senatorial legates were restored to their positions. And, in any case, Castus would have referred to himself as governor or acting governor, given that Britain was not a procuratorial province.

Having said this, however, it is true that we have some instances of procurators being appointed to assist governors. These procurators were responsible for fiscal matters. For example, Sextus Varius Marcellus was sent as procurator to help the governor Virius Lupus.

As per my previous post, for Castus to be in command of the Sixth and leading other legionary troops within Britain we must account for the absence of the legionary legate. We cannot have him merely removed by Perennis, as Castus is a prefect when appointed dux. Dux at this stage in Roman military history is merely a temporary position given to a junior officer.

Thus we must assume the legate is dead or incapacitated, and thus I feel scholars are right in identifying the general who perished c. 180 on the Wall at the hands of invading tribes as the legate of the Sixth legion.

As second in command, Castus is put in charge of the legionary forces sent north under Ulpius Marcellus. There was simply no time in this emergency situation to find another legate for the Sixth. 

At some point thereafter Castus becomes procurator under a British governor. Castus does not refer to himself as an acting governor (vice-legate).

Really, my only reason for putting this outlandish idea out there is to demonstrate just how ambiguous inscriptions with major lacunae can be. Given that the Romans were particularly adept at condensing texts, often each lacuna can be subjected to several possible reconstructions.

The goal of the epigrapher is to look at possible readings in the hope of eventually settling on what is the most probable one.  The most probable - and the simplest - for the LAC stone is that we have a career Roman officer who served with distinction under Statius Priscus in Armenia. This officer was then made a procurator with the right of the sword for the newly formed and short-lived province of Liburnia, an emergency measure taken at the onset of the Marcomannic Wars.

A NEW READING FOR THE 'ARM[...]S' LACUNA OF THE L. ARTORIUS CASTUS INSCRIPTION

NOTE: Since writing this piece, I've heard back from several leading epigraphers. Roger Tomlin does not like it, for several reasons. Gwyn Davies Salway still favors ARMENIOS, saying -

"I have to say that I prefer the identification of Armenia as the destination for the Castus expeditionary force. To me, the work done identifying our man with other principals of Dalmatian origin and the network of interests that connected them seems very plausible.  

And I would also prefer the simplestof interpretations for the missing text in the inscription with 'Armenios' better fitting both the space and likely context for the conflicts of the period.   Also, given that after this posting he becomes procurator of Prov. Lib (which is a short-lived admin entity), it seems unlikely to me that he was still in Britain during the trouble in 180-184."

I continue to hold with Armenia because I cannot square anything else with the probable foundation date of Liburnia.

But Lawrence Keppie says -

"Your restoration of 'armatas gentes' strikes me, a one-time Latinist, as improbably vague. Usually one expects the name of a town, a tribe, a province etc. So I opt for Armorica, though I couldn't find any epigraphic attestation for this word. I assume you have long since looked at the Clauss-Slaby and Heidelberg epigraphic databases. I wondered if there was any archaeological support for destruction in Armorica at this time. My contemporary and old friend John Drinkwater, the top expert on Gaul, would be the person to consult." [I've just written to Drinkwater on this matter.]

I once made a strong case for Armorica:

https://mistshadows.blogspot.com/2020/06/picards-revolt-of-maternus-rough-google.html?m=1

https://mistshadows.blogspot.com/2023/10/the-case-for-origin-of-deserters-war-in.html?m=1

Benet Salway still insists on a date from AD 193-235 or up to a decade or so later, but remains noncommital as to the proper reconstruction for the ARM[...]S lacuna.

As I hear from more scholars on the issue, I will post their comments here.

"... AGAINST ARMED TRIBES"

When I first read the fragmentary memorial inscription of L. Artorius Castus, I assumed the action described by this man as dux must have occurred in Northern Britain.  

Why did I assume that?

Because during the period we are talking about (the stone, based upon the consensus of leading scholars, is dated from the late Antonine to early Severan) the Sixth legion, based at York, was a northward-oriented force.  Essentially, it was the job of the Sixth to keep back the tribes of the North. Given that Castus was the prefect of this legion, it was difficult for me to imagine him leading legionary forces anywhere but to Northern Britain.

Indeed, other than the temporary transfer of the legion to the Continent by Albinus in 169 A.D., and its permanent withdrawalfrom the privince in the early 5th century, there is no evidence the legion or even a part of it had ever left Britain.

However, various scholars had proposed readings for "ARM[...]S" that led us quite far from a British military mission. 

First, there was the possibility that ARMORICOS (which I was the first to show could actually fit on the stone with allowable ligatures) should be inserted.  People pointed to the Deserters' War in Gallia Lugdunensis.  The problem with this solution is that there is no evidence whatsoever that all of Armorica was rebelling from Rome.  Instead, we had a mix of deserters, bandits, other criminals, runaway slaves, gladiators, peasant farmers and the like.  These were a public enemy or latrones; they were not an Armorican uprising.

Second - and this is still an excellent possibility - is ARMENIOS.  We know the Roman governor of Britain Statius Priscus was sent to command the army in Armenia in the 160s.  Research also appears to show that the province of Liburnia, over which Castus was made procurator, was founded not long after the successful completion of the Armenian War.  The fact that Castus was provided with ius gladii suggests an emergency situation and that seems to only fit this early proposed foundation of Liburnia.    The problem with the Armenia idea is that the country is question is, indeed, distant from Britain.  In fact, it lies at the opposite end of the Roman world.  While it does not seem unreasonable to have Priscus take some troops with him (as troops were drawn from the Rhine and the Danube), we might wonder why the leader of those troops was the prefect of the legion in charge of defending the north of the British province.  We are told that at this time problems were brewing in Britain. Still, Dalmatian connections for Castus and his superiors continues to point rather strongly to Armenia. I personally continue to favor this reading for ARM[...]S.

Other readings for ARM[...]S have failed.  ARMATOS in isolation, for instance, is considered unsatisfactory.  As 'armed men', it does not tell us who these armed men are or where they are to be found.  Professor Roger Tomlin thinks no Roman military officer would state that he had led forces against armed men.  That his enemy was armed would be assumed and not need to be stated. So the term is too vague, ambiguous, nonspecific, etc.  

The funny thing about the human brain is that it tends to shut itself up in a box.  In looking at ARM[...]S again the other day, I decided to ask a rather simple, obvious question: why are we restricting ourselves to just one word in the lacuna?  Might there not be two words here, one perhaps being abbreviated?

With that thought in mind, I began looking for words that might fit and make sense in the context of the inscription.  Again and again I struck out.  I had almost given up when I realized I had missed something.  I had initially dispensed with gentes, 'tribes', because it wouldn't fit.  And then I saw the splendid NTE ligature used for CENT just a little farther along in the same line as ARM[...]S.

Guess what?  Allowing for ARMATAS GENTES, 'armed tribes', written as ARM/GENTES with the NTE ligature, fit perfectly!

I could not find armatas abbreviated, but I did find quite a few other arm- words abbreviated as ARM:

https://www.trismegistos.org/abb/list.php?abb=arm&abb_type=exact&abb_word=&abb_word_type=exact&abb_length=&abb_size=&freq=&comb=AND&search=Search

Armatas gentes itself could be found in Classical sources:

https://www.ancienttexts.org/library/latinlibrary/livy/liv.21.html

https://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.02.0162%3Abook%3D30%3Achapter%3D44%3Asection%3D10

I then needed to ask the professionals whether this formation might work.

This from Dr. Benet Salway:

"Armatas gentes” means “armed tribes” (accusative). The more natural word order would indeed be “gentes armatas” (noun followed by adjective) and I have found that order in some medieval Latin texts. But, as shown by the examples in Livy, in literary Latin it is acceptable to reverse the order. And, as a result of the possible familiarity of the Livian usage, the rather unusual adjective-noun order in this phrase may have had some recognition."

From Professor Roger Tomlin:

"ARMATAS GENTES is an acceptable phrase, of course."

Having established that ARMATAS GENTES was possible for the inscription, the next step was to see if I could figure out what historically known event could be identified with the action Castus describes on his stone.

We can begin by going back to what I believed at the very beginning: his dux mission was in Britain.  An armatas gentes, 'armed tribes' reading, involving a prefect of the Sixth leading legionary forces (probably the entire Sixth legion plus generous vexillations of the other two), could only refer to tribes in the North of Britain.  

We know of two major campaigns in the North for the period under discussion.  In the second, Emperor Severus launched a huge war against the confederated tribes of the Caledonii and the Maeatae. While Dio claims 50,000 Romans died in this war, Simon Elliot (in his SEPTIMIUS SEVERUS IN SCOTLAND: THE NORTHERN CAMPAIGNS OF THE FIRST HAMMER OF THE SCOTS) has shown that this is an error.  Instead, 50,000 is the total number of soldiers Severus assembled for the invasion.  

Nothing in the account describing Severus's war mentions the deaths of legates, etc.  For Castus to have led such a force north suggests the legate of the Sixth was dead or otherwise incapacitated.  

If we go instead to the British victory in the North under Commodus, we have a reference to a general who fell before tribesmen at the Wall (which wall is meant is still being debated; it is now generally thought to be Hadrian's). The debate as to whether this general was a governor or a legate of the Sixth continued for some time, but scholarly consensus now holds to the notion that it was a legate who perished.

From Anthony Birley's THE ROMAN GOVERNMENT OF BRITAIN, pp. 166-7:

And from Patricia Southern's Hadrian's Wall: Everyday Life on a Roman Frontier, Amberley Publishing Limited, Feb 15, 2016:

Way back in 2021, I had floated the idea that Castus as camp prefect had replaced the fallen legate:

https://mistshadows.blogspot.com/2021/05/the-strategos-and-lucius-artorius.html?m=1

Unfortunately, I had not come up with a reading for ARM[...]S that would allow such an interpretation of Castus's dux mission.  

I now have a reading that will do just that.

After the victory against the Northern tribes under the governorship of Ulpius Marcellus, matters got out of hand in Britain.  Mutiny occurred and Ulpius was removed.  He seems to have been in some danger of being punished, but escaped that fate.  We know that eventually things were so bad that the legions tried to raise a certain Priscus to the purple.  He refused, but their attempt caused the Praetorian Prefect Perennis to remove the senatorial legates and replace them with knights (like Castus).  The British soldiers didn't like this and sent a large escort (possibly because they had to pass through territory convulsed by the Deserters' War) with the removed senators to Rome.  There they demanded an end to Perennis and Commodus obliged them.

What we must ask at this juncture is what happened to Castus after the great northern victory that permitted Commodus to assume the Britannicus title.  If this prefect of the Sixth really was the officer who replaced the fallen legate of the Sixth, then his next appointment as procurator with ius gladii looks very much like a reward posting.  It does not look like a position granted to a mutinous soldier.  

I would guess that the new posting came immediately after Castus led the legionary forces to victory in the North.  Certainly, there is nothing whatsoever on the stone to suggest that Castus fought against mutinous troops. Had he done so we would have a phrase in the inscription with the word seditiosos, 'mutineers', or seditionem, 'mutiny'. Rebellles would have been used of rebellious tribes within the province, while hostes would have been used for those outside of it. A proclamation of Hostes publicus, 'public enemy', was used for the deserters of the Deserters' War. 

It is sad that we lack details of the successful British campaign under Commodus.  We only know it was declared a great victory.  Had Castus been a major part of that victory, we might understand how the Artorius name became imprinted on the North.  

NOTE:

Some examples of gentis/gentes used with adjectives in inscriptions:

publication: CIL 03, 00247 = D 00754 = IIulian 00020 = BritRom-14, 00017 = AE 2019, +01631 = GLIA-02, 00332

dating: 362 to 362         EDCS-ID: EDCS-22300504

province: Galatia         place: Ankara / Ancyra

Domino totius orbis / Iuliano Augusto / ex Oceano Bri/tannico vi(i)s per / barbaras gentes / strage resistenti/um patefactis adus/que Tigridem una / aestate transvec/to Saturninius / Secundus v(ir) c(larissimus) praef(ectus) / praet(orio) [d(evotus)] N(umini) m(aiestati)q(ue) [ei(us)]

inscription genus / personal status: Augusti/Augustae;  ordo senatorius;  tituli honorarii;  tituli sacri;  tria nomina;  viri

material: lapis

publication: CIL 03, p 0774 (p 1054, 2328,57) = IGRRP-03, 00159 = IDRE-02, 00394 = Scheid = Cooley-2012a = GLIA-01, 00001 = AE 2007, +00036 = AE 2007, +00037 = AE 2009, +00035 = AE 2013, +00004 = AE 2013, +00005 = AE 2014, +00010 = ZPE-220-281 = AE 2021, 012097

dating: 14 to 14         EDCS-ID: EDCS-20200013

province: Galatia         place: Ankara / Ancyra

Rerum gestarum divi Augusti quibus orbem terra[rum] imperio populi Rom(ani) / subiecit et i<m=N>pensarum quas in rem publicam populumque Romanum fecit incisarum / in duabus aheneis pilis quae su[n]t Romae positae exemplar sub[i]ectum // [1] Annos undeviginti natus exercitum privato consilio et privata impensa / comparavi per quem rem publicam a dominatione factionis oppressam / in libertatem vindicavi eo [nomi]ne senatus decretis honorif[i]ci(i)s in / ordinem suum m[e adlegit C(aio) Pansa et C(aio) Hirt]io consulibus consula/rem locum s[ententiae dicendae simu]l [dans et i]mperium mihi dedit / res publica n[e quid detrimenti caperet] me pro praetore simul cum / consulibus pro[videre iussit p]opulus autem eodem anno me / consulem cum [consul uterqu]e in bel[lo ceci]disset et triumvirum rei publi/cae constituend[ae creavit] / [2] qui parentem meum [trucidaver]un[t eo]s in exilium expuli iudiciis legi/timis ultus eorum [fa]cin[us] et postea bellum inferentis rei publicae / vici b[is a]cie / [3] [b]ella terra et mari c[ivilia ex]ternaque toto in orbe terrarum s[aepe gessi] / victorque omnibus v[eniam petentib]us civibus peperci exter[nas] / gentes

 publication: CIL 03, p 0774 (p 1054, 2328,57) = IGRRP-03, 00159 = IDRE-02, 00394 = Scheid = Cooley-2012a = GLIA-01, 00001 = AE 2007, +00036 = AE 2007, +00037 = AE 2009, +00035 = AE 2013, +00004 = AE 2013, +00005 = AE 2014, +00010 = ZPE-220-281 = AE 2021, 012097

dating: 14 to 14         EDCS-ID: EDCS-20200013

province: Galatia         place: Ankara / Ancyra

exter[nas] / gentes

hostium gentis utr[ius]que cop[iae] / caesae sunt in acie et com[plu]ra oppida capta in Aethiopiam usque ad oppi/dum Nabata perventu[m] est cui proxima est Meroe in Arabiam usque / in fines Sabaeorum pro[ces]sit exercitus ad oppidum Mariba / [27] Aegyptum imperio populi [Ro]mani adieci Armeniam maiorem inter/fecto rege eius Artaxe c[u]m possem facere provinciam malui maiorum / nostrorum exemplo regnum id Tigrani regis Artavasdis filio nepoti au/tem Tigranis regis per T[i(berium) N]eronem tradere qui tum mihi privignus erat / et eandem gentem postea d[e]sciscentem et rebellantem domitam per Gaium / filium meum regi Ariobarzani regis Medorum Artaba[zi] filio regen/dam tradidi et post eius mortem filio eius Artavasdi quo [i]nterfecto Ti[gra]/ne(m) qui erat ex regio genere Armeniorum oriundus in id regnum misi pro/vincias omnis quae trans {H}Adrianum mare vergunt ad orien[te]m Cyre/nasque iam ex parte magna regibus eas possidentibus et antea Siciliam et / Sardiniam occupatas bello servili reciperavi / [28] colonias in Africa Sicilia Macedonia utraque Hispania Achai[a] Asia S[y]ria / Gallia Narbonensi Pi[si]dia militum deduxi Italia autem XXVIII [colo]ni/as quae vivo me celeberrimae et frequentissimae fuerunt me[a auctoritate] / deductas habet / [29] signa militaria complur[a p]er alios d[u]ces amissa devicti[s ho]st[ibu]s re[cipe]/ravi ex Hispania et [Gallia et a Dalm]ateis Parthos trium exercitu(u)m Romano/rum spolia et signa re[ddere] mihi supplicesque amicitiam populi Romani / petere coegi ea autem si[gn]a in penetrali quod est in templo Martis Ultoris / reposui / [30] Pannoniorum gentes qua[s] ante me principem populi Romani exercitus nun/quam adit devictas per Ti(berium) [Ne]ronem qui tum erat privignus et legatus meus / imperio populi Romani s[ubie]ci protulique fines Illyrici ad ripam fluminis / Danu(v)i citr[a] quod [D]a[cor]u[m tr]ansgressus exercitus meis ausp[iciis vict]us profliga/tusque [es]t et pos[tea tran]s Da[n]u(v)ium ductus ex[ercitus me]u[s] Dacorum / gentes

aliae gentes exper[tae sunt p(opuli) Ro]m(ani) fidem me prin/cipe quibus antea cum populo Roman[o nullum extitera]t legationum / et amicitiae commercium / [33] a me gentes Parthorum et Medorum

 publication: AntAfr-2002/03-1210 = D 08959 = AE 1907, 00159 = AE 2003, 02024          EDCS-ID: EDCS-30100148

province: Mauretania Caesariensis         place: Ain Roua / Ain Rua / Horrea

] / Bavarum gentes

publication: CIL 08, 08379 = CIL 08, 20216 = AE 1893, +00066          EDCS-ID: EDCS-24400867

province: Mauretania Caesariensis         place: Fdoules

CE[3] in monti [3]VX piges [3]SAR OBL consu[3]/erbus et rex gentis VCVTAMANIIVGIII[3]/ontinens / omnes (h)onestos gentis

 publication: D 09351 = CLE 01916 = ILCV 00779 (add) = BCTH-1976/78-152 = BCTH-1990/92-160 = CLEAfr-01, p 120 = CLENuovo p 138 = Hamdoune-2016, p 169 = AfrRom-19-1000 = AE 1901, 00150 = AE 1993, +01780 = AE 2016, +01832

dating: 370 to 370         EDCS-ID: EDCS-16800401

province: Mauretania Caesariensis         place: Ighzer Amokrane / Fundus Petrensis

Praesidium aeternae firmat prudentia pacis / rem quoque Romanam fida tutat undique dextra / amni praepositum firmans munimine montem / e cuius nomen vocitavit nomine Petram / denique finitimae gentes

 publication: ILCV 00055 (add, em) = CLE 01394 = AE 2001, +00179          EDCS-ID: EDCS-23500692

province: Roma         place: Roma

Culmen opes subolem pollentia regna triumphos / exubias proceres moenia castra Lares / quasque patrum virtus et quae congesserat ipse / Ceadual armipotens liquit amore dei / ut Petrum sedemq(ue) Petri rex cerneret hospes / cuius fonte meras sumeret almus aquas / splendificumque iubar radianti carperet haustu / ex quo vivificus fulgor ubiq(ue) fluit / percipiensq(ue) alacer redivivae praemia vitae / barbaricam rabiem nomen et inde suum / conversus convertit ovans Petrumq(ue) vocari / Sergius antistes iussit ut ipse pater / fonte renascentis quem Chr(ist)i gratia purgans / protinus albatum vexit in arce poli / mira fides regis clementia maxima Chr(ist)i / cuius consilium nullus adire potest / sospes enim veniens supremo ex orbe Britann(us) / per varias gentes

publication: CIL 03, p 0774 (p 1054, 2328,57) = IGRRP-03, 00159 = IDRE-02, 00394 = Scheid = Cooley-2012a = GLIA-01, 00001 = AE 2007, +00036 = AE 2007, +00037 = AE 2009, +00035 = AE 2013, +00004 = AE 2013, +00005 = AE 2014, +00010 = ZPE-220-281 = AE 2021, 012097

dating: 14 to 14         EDCS-ID: EDCS-20200013

province: Galatia         place: Ankara / Ancyra

hostium gentis

publication: AE 2010, 01426 = CERom-30, 01473

dating: 301 to 305         EDCS-ID: EDCS-59600036

province: Moesia inferior         place: Murighiol / Halmyris

post debell]atas [hostium gentes profuturum i]n ae[ternum rei publicae praesidium constituerunt(?)]

inscription genus / personal status: Augusti/Augustae;  tituli honorarii;  tituli operum;  viri

material: lapis

publication: GLIHalmyris 00002

dating: 301 to 305         EDCS-ID: EDCS-58800092

province: Moesia inferior         place: Murighiol / Halmyris

[Impp(eratoribus) Caess(aribus) C(aio) Aur(elio) Val(erio) Diocletiano] / [et M(arco) Aur(elio) Val(erio) Maximiano Piis Fel(icibus) Invictis Augg(ustis)] / [et Fl(avio) Val(erio) Constantio et Gal(erio) Val(erio) Maximiano] / [nobb(ilissimis) Caess(aribus) Germanicis max(imis) Gothicis max(imis)] / [Sarmaticis max(imis) Britannicis max(imis) Persicis / [max(imis) post debell]atas [hostium gentes] / [profuturum i]n ae[ternum rei publicae] / [praesidium constituerunt]

inscription genus / personal status: Augusti/Augustae;  tituli operum;  viri

publication: GLIHalmyris 00003

dating: 301 to 305         EDCS-ID: EDCS-58800093

province: Moesia inferior         place: Murighiol / Halmyris

[Impp(eratoribus) Caess(aribus) C(aio) Aur(elio) Val(erio) Diocletiano] / [et M(arco) Aur(elio) Val(erio) Maximiano Piis Fel(icibus) Invictis Au]gg(ustis) et / [Fl(avio) Val(erio) Constantio et Gal(erio) Val(erio) Maximiano] / [nobb(ilissimis) Caess(aribus) Germanicis max(imis) Gothicis max(imis)] / [Sarmaticis max(imis) Britannicis max(imis) Persicis] / [max(imis) post debellatas hostium gentes] / [profuturum in aeternum rei publicae] / [praesidium constituerunt]

inscription genus / personal status: Augusti/Augustae;  tituli operum;  viri

material: lapis

publication: ZPE-119-228 = GLIHalmyris 00001 = CERom-16, 00720 = CERom-18, 00812 = Actes-11-2, p 556 = AE 1995, 01345 = AE 1997, 01318 = AE 1999, +01323 = AE 2003, +01550

dating: 301 to 305         EDCS-ID: EDCS-03300824

province: Moesia inferior         place: Murighiol / Halmyris

[Impp(eratoribus) Caess(aribus) C(aio) Aur(elio) Val(erio) Diocletiano] / [et M(arco) Aur(elio) Val(erio) Maximiano Piis Fel(icibus) Invictis Augg(ustis)] / [et Fl(avio) Val(erio) Constantio et Gal(erio) Val(erio)] Maximia[no] / [nobb(ilissimis) Caess(aribus) Germanicis max(imis) Got]hicis max(imis) / [Sarmaticis max(imis) Britannicis] max(imis) Persicis / [max(imis) post debellatas hosti]um gentes / [profuturum in aeternu]m rei publicae / [praesidium constitue]r[unt]

inscription genus / personal status: Augusti/Augustae;  tituli operum;  viri

material: lapis

publication: Actes-11-2, p 555 = Kaschuba-1994, 00067

dating: 298 to 299         EDCS-ID: EDCS-71800006

province: Moesia inferior         place: Ruse / Russe / Sexaginta Prista / Sexaginta Prisca

Imperatores Caes[s(ares)] Gaius Aur(elius) Val(erius) Diocletianus et M(arcus) A[u]r(elius) Val(erius) / Maximianus Pii Fel(ices) Invicti Aug[g(usti) et Fl(avius)] / Val(erius) Constantius et Ga[l(erius)] Val(erius) Maximianus [nobb(ilissimi)] Caes[s(ares)] / Germanici maximi [V] Sarmat(ici) maxim[i IIII] Persici m[ax(imi) II] / Brit{t}annici [max(imi)] post debellat(as) hostium gent(es) / confirmata [or]bi s[u]o tranquillitate profuturum in aeternum rei publicae / praesidium constituerunt

inscription genus / personal status: Augusti/Augustae;  milites;  tituli operum;  viri

publication: IScM-04, 00089 = Actes-11-2, p 555 = AE 1936, 00010 = AE 1999, +01323 = Kaschuba-1994, 00068

dating: 292 to 299         EDCS-ID: EDCS-16000029

province: Moesia inferior         place: Silistra / Silistria / Durostorum

[Impp(eratores) Caess(ares) C(aius) Aur(elius) Val(erius) D]iocletianus / [et M(arcus) Aur(elius) Val(erius) Maximianu]s PP(ii) FF(elices) Invict[i] / [Augg(usti) et Fl(avius) Val(erius) Constanti]us et Gal(erius) Val(erius) / [Maximianus nobbilissimi] Caess(ares) German(ici) / [max(imi) V Sarmat(ici) max(imi) III]I Gothici max(imi) / [Britan(nici) max(imi) post debella]tas hosti(u)m / [gentes confirmata orbi su]o tr[anquil]/[litate in aeternum rei publicae praesi]/[dium constituerunt]

inscription genus / personal status: Augusti/Augustae;  tituli operum;  viri

material: lapis

publication: CIL 03, 06151 (p 1349) = D 00641 = Actes-11-2, p 555 = AE 1966, 00357 = AE 1999, +01323 = Kaschuba-1994, 00069

dating: 294 to 299         EDCS-ID: EDCS-27800928

province: Moesia inferior         place: Tutrakan / Transmarisca

Imperatores Caess(ares) Gaius Aur(elius) Val(erius) Diocletianus / et M(arcus) Aur(elius) Val(erius) Maximianus Pii Fel(ices) Invicti Augg(usti) et Fl(avius) Val(erius) / Constantius et Gal(erius) Val(erius) Maximianus nobb(ilissimi) Caess(ares) Germani/ci maximi V Sarmat(ici) maximi IIII Persici max(imi) II Brit{t}an(n)ici maximi / post debellatis hos[tium] gent<e=I>s confirmata orbi suo / [tranquillitate profuturum in aeternum rei publi]cae praesidiu/[m constituerunt]

inscription genus / personal status: Augusti/Augustae;  tituli operum;  viri

material: lapis 

A REEXAMINATION OF 'ARTHURIBURGUM' AT STANWIX IN LIGHT OF ARTHUR'S PLACEMENT ON THE WALL

[Could Arthur have descended from the remnant of the Petriana garrison? Did the Dalriadans take the Arthur name from the Britons of Alclud, Adamnan's Petra Cloithe, because of the Petriana connection?  Did the Dyfed prince Pedr/Petrus name his son Arthur because of the same Petriana link?]

Now that I have finally decided to be satisfied with an Arthur based on Hadrian's Wall, with a prime candidate for his ruling center being Banna/Birdoswald, it is important that I once again discuss the other possible capital: Stanwix, where there was a Roman fort called Uxellodunum (nicknamed Petriana).

Many years ago I wrote a series of blog posts on the site, and it's apparent identification in sources heralding from the 1600-1700s as 'Arthur's Burg':

On Stanwix (Arthuriburgum?):

https://mistshadows.blogspot.com/2018/10/an-early-piece-on-arthur-and-stanwix.html

On the Ala Petriana the late period garrison of the fort:

https://mistshadows.blogspot.com/2017/09/more-on-ala-petriana-of-stanwix-roman.html

https://mistshadows.blogspot.com/2017/09/a-selection-from-mike-mccarthys-roman.html

https://mistshadows.blogspot.com/2017/10/a-nice-article-on-roman-cavalry-in.html

I never really took Stanwix as Arthur's Fort very seriously.  Why?  Well, the lateness of the reference to the tradition for one.  Still, there were a number of things I liked a lot about Uxellodunum/Petriana.  To begin, there was this from Roman scholar Shepherd Frere:

“The western sector of the Wall was the most dangerous… both on account of the nature of the ground and because of the hostile population beyond it. It is not surprising to find, then, that at Stanwix near Carlisle was stationed the Ala Petriana… Such regiments are always found on the post of danger; and the prefect of this Ala was the senior officer in the whole of the wall garrison. Here, then, lay Command headquarters, and it has been shown that a signaling system existed along the road from Carlisle to

York, which would enable the prefect at Stanwix to communicate with the legionary legate at York in a matter of minutes.”

I recently wrote to Professor Roger Tomlin about this, and he replied:

"I would agree with Frere on anything – and indeed, I often did. I even dug for him once, on an excavation. 

Stanwix was certainly the base of the ala Petriana, the only milliary ala in Britain, so its prefect would have been senior to the other prefects and tribunes on the Wall. Its geographical location also is significant, as Frere says."

That analysis by Tomlin made me realize that I should not so hastily dispense with the Arthuriburgum idea.

I suppose the question I should have asked myself, all those years ago, is this:

WHY WAS STANWIX (FOR ETTERBY IN STANWIX PARISH) THOUGHT BY SOMEONE IN THE REGION TO BE ARTHUR'S FORT?  

It's a reasonable line of inquiry.  I mean, presumably by the time of Joseph Nicolson and Richard Burn there were already no signs of the Stanwix fort hard by Etterby.  Given that it is hard to account for the place-name element Etter- (from Etardeby 1246, Etard being a French name from OHG Eidhart) having been somehow miscontrued as representing the name Arthur, we are left scratching our heads when seeking a plausible connection. 

Authorities in Stanwix and Carlisle, in response to my queries, have failed to produce any evidence of the Etterby = Arthur's Burg tradition prior to the time of Nicolson and Burn. Yet these same parties were insistent on defending the integrity of Nicolson's 2 volume compilation "The history and antiquities of the counties of Westmorland and Cumberland". 

In other words, this man is believed to have faithfully recorded traditions that were in his uncle's collection. He does not seem to have created or promulgated forgeries in the manner of Iolo Morganwg in Wales.

And then there was this... the Petriana cavalry group at Stanwix had been named for a Roman Titus Pomponius Petra.  When seeking to explain why Pedr (from L. Petrus) of Dyfed had named his son Arthur, I dared entertain the following notion:

Could Pedr had called his son Arthur because the famous Arthur, just a generation earlier, had hismelf descended from the Petriana at Stanwix?

As anyone with even a rudimentary knowledge of Latin knows, the relationship of Petra and Petrus is extremely close.  Here are the relevant entries from the Lewis and Short Dictionary at Perseus:

pē^tra , ae, f., = πέτρα,

I.a rock, a crag, stone (pure Lat. saxum; cf.: rupes, scopulus): petrarum genera sunt duo, quorum alterum naturale saxum prominens in mare; “alterum manufactum ut docet Aelius Gallus: Petra est, qui locus dextrā ac sinistrā fornicem expletur usque ad libramentum summi fornicis,” Fest. p. 206 Müll. (of the latter signif. there is no other example known): petris ingentibus tecta, Enn. ap. Fest. 1. 1. (Ann. v. 366); Sen. Herc. Oet. 804: “aquam de petrā produxit,” Vulg. Isa. 48, 21 et saep.: “gaviae in petris nidificant,” Plin. 10, 32, 48, § 91: “alga, quae juxta terram in petris nascitur,” id. 32, 6, 22, § 66; 34, 12, 29, § 117; Curt. 7, 11, 1.

πέτρα , Ion. and Ep. πέτρη , ἡ,

A.rock; freq. of cliffs, ledges, etc. by the sea, “λισσὴ αἰπεῖά τε εἰς ἅλα πέτρη” Od.3.293, cf. 4.501, etc.; χῶρος λεῖος πετράων free from rocks, of a beach, 5.443 ; “π. ἠλίβατος . . ἁλὸς ἐγγὺς ἐοῦσα” Il.15.618, etc.; χοιρὰς π. Pi.P.10.52; also, rocky peak or ridge, αἰγίλιψ π. Il.9.15, etc.; “ἠλίβατος” 16.35, etc.; λιττὰς π. Corinn.Supp.1.30, cf.A.Supp.796 (lyr.); π. Λενκάς, ?ωλενίη, etc., Od.24.11, Il.11.757, etc.; π. σύνδρομοι, Συμπληγάδες, Pi.P.4.209, E.Med.1264(lyr.); πρὸς πέτραις ὑψηλοκρήμνοις, of Caucasus, A.Pr.4, cf. 31, 56, al.; π. Δελφίς, π. δίλοφος, of Parnassus, S.OT464(lyr.), Ant.1126(lyr.); “π. Κωρυκίς” A.Eu.22; π. Κεκροπία, of the Acropolis, E.Ion936.

2. π. γλαφυρή a hollow rock, i.e. a cave, Il.2.88, cf. 4.107; σπέος κοιλῇ ὑπὸ π. Hes. Th.301; δίστομος π. cave in the rock with a double entrance, S.Ph.16, cf. 937; κατηρεφεῖς αὐτῇ τῇ π. Pl.Criti.116b; “π. ἀντρώδης” X.An.4.3.11; “τόπος κύκλῳ πέτραις περιεχόμενος” IG42(1).122.21 (Epid.); ἕως τῆς π. down to virgin rock, PCair.Zen.172.14 (iii B.C.), OGI672 (Egypt, i A. D.), cf. Ev.Matt.16.18.

3. mass of rock or boulder, Od.9.243, 484, Hes.Th.675 ; “πέτρας κυλινδομένα φλόξ” Pi.P.1.23 ; “ἐκυλίνδουν πέτρας” X.An.4.2.20, cf. Plb.3.53.4.

4. stone as material, π. λαρτία, Τηΐα, SIG581.97 (Crete, iii/ii B. C.), 996.13 (Smyrna, i A. D.): distd. from πέτρος (q. v.), which is v.l. in X.l.c.; πέτρᾳ shd. be read in S.Ph.272 ; the distn. is minimized by Gal.12.194.

II. prov., οὐκ ἀπὸ δρυὸς οὐδ᾽ ἀπὸ πέτρης, etc. (v. δρῦς); as a symbol of firmness, “ὁ δ᾽ ἐστάθη ἠΰτε π. ἔμπεδον” Od.17.463; of hard-heartedness, “ἐκ πέτρας εἰργασμένος” A.Pr.244; “ἁλίαν π. ἢ κῦμα λιταῖς ὢς ἱκετεύων” E.Andr. 537 (anap.); cf. “πέτρος” 1.2 . (Written πε-τε-ρα in a text with musical accompaniment, Pae.Delph.5.)

πέτρος , ὁ (in later Poets ἡ, AP7.274 (Honest.), 479 (Theodorid.)),

A.stone (distd. from πέτρα, q. v.); in Hom., used by warriors, “λάζετο πέτρον μάρμαρον ὀκριόεντα” Il.16.734 ; “βαλὼν μυλοειδέϊ πέτρῳ” 7.270, cf. 20.288, E.Andr.1128 (never in Od.); “ἔδικε πέτρῳ” Pi.O.10(11).72; “ἄγαλμ᾽ Ἀΐδα ξεστὸν π. ἔμβαλον στέρνῳ” Id.N.10.67; “νιφάδι γογγύλων πέτρων” A.Fr.199.7; “ἐκ χερῶν πέτροισιν ἠράσσοντο” Id.Pers.460; “λευσθῆναι πέτροις” S.OC435; “πέτρους ἐπεκυλίνδουν” X.HG3.5.20, etc.; ἐν πέτροισι πέτρον ἐκτρίβων, to produce fire, S.Ph.296; of a boulder forming a landmark, Id.OC1595; “τόνδ᾽ ἀνέθηκα π. ἀειράμενος” IG42(1).125 (Epid., iii B. C.).

2. prov., πάντα κινῆσαι πέτρον 'leave no stone unturned', E.Heracl.1002, cf. Pl.Lg.843a; of imperturbability, “καὶ γὰρ ἂν πέτρου φύσιν σύ γ᾽ ὀργάνειας” S.OT334, cf. E.Med.28.

II. a kind of reed, Peripl.M.Rubr.65.—The usual Prose word is λίθος.

I even went beyond this at one point - probably foolishly - when I also sought to explain how the name Arthur had reached Scottish Dalriada.  As I knew the Cenel nGabrain had intermarried with the British, doubtless of Strathclyde, I reminded my readers of the Latin Petra Cloithe rendering of Al Clut, the name of the capital of Strathclyde at Dumbarton Rock.  I then went even more crazy by pointing out that Arthur son of Bicoir had killed Mongan with a stone (although it now seems that stone is a folklore remnant based on the monolith at Dun Beachaire in Kintyre; see 

https://mistshadows.blogspot.com/2024/11/arthur-son-of-bicoir-of-kintyre.html).  Although I don't recall, I may even have ventured to float the Irish art- 'stone (?)', a word of dubious existence found only in early Irish glossaries. 

While it is certainly attractive to think of Arthur as a leader of cavalry based at Petriana, critics immediately pounced on that, citing the proximity of Stanwix to Carlisle, claiming (as one still finds in respectable Arthurian publications!) that Carlisle is the Carduel of Chretien de Troyes.  

Well, I can only say -

CARDUEL IS NOT CARLISLE!

Carduel is said to be in Wales (Gales). However, it has long been customary to identify this site with Carlisle, the Roman Luguvalium, in Cumbria. The "d" of Carduel is said to be due to dissimilation of the first "l" of Carlisle (Welsh Caerliwelydd). I have always thought this linguistic argument to be highly questionable.

Carduel is also hard by the Red Knight's Forest of Quinqueroy and not far from the castle of Gornemont of Goort. Goort is here definitely Gower. Quinqueroy is Welsh gwyn plus caer, a slight error for Caerwent.

While Kerduel in Brittany is derived from Caer + Tudwall (information courtesy Jean-Yves le Moing, personal correspondence; cf. Caer Dathyl in Arfon, from Irish Tuathal = Welsh Tudwall, possibly Caer-fawr or Caernarfon, information courtesy Brian Lile of The National Library of Wales, citing Ifor Williams' Pedair Keinc Ymabinogi, 1951), I think Carduel (Car-dyou-EL) probably derives from Caer +d'iwl, Iwl (pronounced similar to English 'yule', according to Dr. David Thorne of the Welsh Department at Lampeter) being the Welsh form of Julius, the name Geoffrey used for Aaron's partner, St. Julian.

When Perceval first comes to Arthur's court, it is at Carduel; but when Arthur sets off after Perceval when the latter sends the Haughty Knight of the Moor to the court, the king leaves Caerleon. In between the king's placement at Carduel and Caerleon, Anguingueron and Clamadeu find Arthur at Dinas d'Aaron, the Fort of Aaron/Caerleon. In other words, Caerleon and Carduel are the same. Indeed, Anguingueron and the Haughty Knight are sent to Arthur's court by Perceval, who knows only that Arthur is at Carduel. This means that Dinas d'Aaron and Carduel have to be Caerleon.

And Arthur's Quarrois? When Erec of Erec and Enide says he will not loiter anywhere until he has "come to the court of King Arthur, whom I wish to see either at Quarrois or Carduel", he seems to be implying that Carduel and Quarrois are near each other. Because Quarrois is mentioned only in conjunction with Carduel, it is more than likely the -queroy of Quinqueroy, i.e. Quarrois = the Caer that is Caerwent.

Carduel's relationship with Chrietien de Troyes' Camelot supplies us with additional reason for placing the former at Caerleon.

According to Chretien, Camelot is ‘in the region near Caerleon’. For some reason, most authorities have seen fit to ignore this statement, insisting that Camelot was placed near Caerleon simply because of Geoffrey of Monmouth’s glorified description of the latter site as a major Arthurian centre. If we do take

Chretien’s statement seriously, we can for the first time arrive at a satisfactory identification of this most magical of royal cities.

The second clue to the location of Camelot is from the later romance The Quest for the Holy Grail, wherein Arthur escorts the Grail questers from Camelot to a point just shy of Castle Vagan.

A third clue, from the prose Tristan, places Camelot either on or very near the sea. The last clue is from the Morte Artu; in this source, the castle of Camelot is on a river. It goes without saying that we need to look for a CASTLE or, at the very least, the site of an earlier hill-fort of some significance.

Castle Vagan is St. Fagan’s Castle (W. Ffagan) four or five miles west of Cardiff. 

According to the HB, Campus Elleti, the ‘Field or Plain of Elleti’, was said to be in Glywysing, the later Morgannwg/Glamorgan.  The same place-name is found in the Book of Llandaf as Palud Elleti (see https://mistshadows.blogspot.com/2020/06/the-red-herring-of-llanilid-uther.html).

In my opinion, Campus Elleti, with Latin Campus rendered as French Champ (the p of which eventually became silent), became Camelot:

Cham(p) ellet(i) > Camelot

So, if I'm right about all that (am I'm pretty sure I am), then we cannot look at Etterby (Stanwix) as Arthur's Fort as being a near-miss for Carlisle.  Instead, we must still look at Petriana/Uxellodunum in isolation as Arthuriburgum.

Once upon a time I put out there that the Arthur Penuchel mentioned in a corrupt Welsh Triad may be an oblique reference to Arthur having ruled from Uxellodunum, the 'High Fort'.  Uxello- becomes in Welsh uchel.  Dr. Simon Rodway of The University of Wales, a noted expert in the Welsh language, recently informed me that Uxellodunum in Welsh would have become *Uchelddin.  However, Welsh place-names show a shift in the order of components, so that one would expect a Din Uchel or Dinas Uchel. 

Welsh Uther is cognate with Irish uachtar.  Its original meaning was (citing Professor John Koch here) 'high, lofty.'

Is all of this sufficient for us to seriously consider Stanwix as THE Arthurian center?

I'm not sure.  Need to think on it some more.  

Željko Miletić's "Lucius Artorius Castus and the borders of the province of Liburnia with Italy under Marcus Aurelius"

Fig. 5. Map with the ideal borders of the province of Liburnia. Prepared by Dora Štublin.

Professor Željko Miletić has recently made available his new study on L. Artorius Castus.  The link to the article is here:

https://storicamente.org/miletic_bekavac_castus_liburnia_italy

I urge my readers to check out his piece, as it confirms the reading of ARMENIOS for the L. Artorius Castus memorial stone.

A NEW THEORY ON THE 'CONCAVATA' NAME FOR THE ROMAN FORT AT DRUMBURGH

Drumburgh Moss Looking North

Some time ago I discussed the Roman-period name of the Roman fort at Drumburgh:

https://mistshadows.blogspot.com/2019/04/a-northern-prototype-for-arthurian.html

https://mistshadows.blogspot.com/2019/04/a-note-on-recent-post-northern.html

https://mistshadows.blogspot.com/2019/04/more-on-andematunnum-of-drumburgh.html

My idea, in brief, was that we could go with this being a sort of Grail Castle, in so far as the Latin word gabata for a particular kind of service dish had been likened to a similar platter preserved in the word grail.  I acknowledged, of course, that such a name would imply some geographical characteristic was being referred to as Concavata, 'the hollowed-out' place or, according to Professor Roger Tomlin, the "dish-like" place.  Tomlin had already guessed this had to do with the hill the fort stood upon which could be imagined as an upside-down serving platter.

I now think that guess, though a good one, may not be correct.

Instead, my research of the immediate environs of the Concavata fort showed the Drumburgh Moss just to the south.  This is a very unusual and, indeed, unique landscape feature. 

From https://crossingthemoss.wordpress.com/tag/drainage/:

Peat forms at the rate of about 10cms every 100 years and, because the raised mires are essentially ‘trapped’ within post-glacial depressions, they grow upwards to form a shallow dome, like an inverted saucer. But the growth of the Solway Mosses has not been a simple accumulation of peat. Cores show layers of peat separated by sand (watch the video of Alasdair Brock explaining this while taking a core sample on Wedholme Flow), indicating that in places there were several incursions by the sea, and there were regions that initially remained as ‘islands’. Nor did all the wetlands form in an empty bowl, because here and there melting glaciers had dumped their burden of rocks and till, leaving small, tear-drop-shaped hills or drumlins.

Frank Mawby throws more light on the Solway Mosses: “The classic image of a raised mire as a bog in a slight saucer-shaped depression doesn’t fit for Wedholme, Bowness and Glasson – they all have a glacial topography and all have grown over ridges and mounds. Bowness, of course, is a classic of glacial topography in that it never overwhelmed the Rogersceugh drumlin, although it did almost cover another lower, parallel ridge to the north. But Drumburgh Moss is in a saucer and probably fits the classic mire model.”

If I'm right about this, does the identification of the 'hollowed-out' place with the Moss take away our desired cauldron symbolism?

Not necessarily.  I had treated of the cauldron as itself being symbolic of a lake or marsh.  It is well-known that cauldrons are common votive deposits in bogs.  My argument for the Welsh Ceridwen's cauldron as being emblematic of Penllyn itself was detailed in my book THE MYSTERIES OF AVALON:

Ceridwen

Her name means the ‘Bent or Crooked Woman’ and she is the quintessential hag or crone, associated in this case with Llyn Tegid or Bala Lake in north-western Wales. The true nature of her magical cauldron will be revealed when we take a closer look at her son, Morfran Afagddu (q.v.).

Creirwy (or Creirfyw)

Crierwy, one of the three fair maidens/ladies or fair queens (gwenriein) of Welsh Triad 78, is the daughter of CERIDWEN.  Her name derives from creir, a common Welsh variant spelling for crair, ‘relic, holy thing, talisman, treasure, richly decorated article, object of admiration or love, darling, safe-guard, strength, hand-bell, church-bell’. -wy is merely a feminine suffix, as in Gwenonwy, while the alternate terminal –fyw (byw) means ‘lively’. This etymological analysis does not, however, shed much light on Creirwy’s character. We will see below that Ceridwen’s son MORFRAN, ‘Sea-raven’, is a black cormorant deity of Bala Lake/Llyn Tegid. The Welsh word for ‘lake-monster’ was afanc, actually the word for beaver, being derived from the word for river, afon, and meaning literally ‘water-dweller’. The Irish cognate word is abhac, meaning ‘dwarf, supernatural being’, but this last is also used for a beaver and even a small terrier. Beavers reside in streams, not large lakes, but otters (otter as a word is etymologically related to ‘water’) do live in lakes and are, in fact, found in Bala Lake. One of Ceridwen’s assumed forms when pursuing Taliesin is that of an otter. All of which brings us back, albeit rather circuitously, to Creirwy. It would seem reasonable to assume that this sister of Morfran the divine cormorant and daughter of Ceridwen the divine otter ought to be another submarine denizen of the same lake.  Fortunately, a saint’s life comes to our rescue: there is a 6th century Breton saint heralding from Wales of the same name (Chreirbia), and she isintimately associated with the goose. It is likely that the Llyn Tegid Creirwy is the same personage, and she should be paired as a divine lake bird with her brother Morfran.  Perhaps significantly, there is a Welsh folk belief in Caernarvonshire of geese on a lake at night being transformed witches.  This was especially true on the first Thursday night of the lunar month.  In Welsh Thursday is Ddydd Iou or the ‘Day of Jove’, i.e. Jupiter, the Classical counterpart of the Norse Thor of Thursday.  It is noteworthy, perhaps, the Jupiter’s consort Juno is known for her sacred geese.

Morfran

The son of the crone Ceridwen of Penllyn, the ‘Chief Lake’ that is now known as Lake Tegid or Bala Lake, was named Morfran Afagddu. This name means ‘Sea-Raven the Utterly Dark’. Because he is on Lake Tegid and we have Irish Fiach Mara or ‘Sea-Raven’ as a name for the cormorant, this tells us much about Ceridwen’s cauldron. Morfran was set at the cauldron to wait for the magical drops to come flying out. Gwiawn Bach, the first incarnation of the poet Taliesin, was set to tend the fire under the cauldron, while a blind man stirred it. Anyone who observes cormorants is aware of their peculiar habit of spreading their wings for several minutes to heat up in the sun before they begin their daily fishing in a lake or the sea. This is what Morfran is doing in front of the cauldron which is symbolic of Penllyn itself. The fire Gwiawn Bach keeps perpetually stoked is the sun, which warms the waters of the lake. The waters of the lake are stirred by the wind, and this accounts for the blind man of the story. Perhaps significantly, the Irish also call the cormorant the Cailleach Dubh, i.e. the ‘Black Hag’. So it is quite possible that the story-teller mistakenly assumed Morfran was a second character, when in reality the cormorant was Ceridwen herself in bird form. Lakes were possessed of great spiritual power for the ancient Celts as they were liminal places, in essence being portals to and from the Otherworld. This is why sacrificial victims were submerged in bogs and why weapons and other items, often first ritually destroyed, were deposited as votive items. We have recovered many cauldrons from bogs. A human figure is being submerged in a cauldron on the Gundestrup, which itself was found in a bog.  

Thus there may be a mythological link between the inverted saucer that was the Drumburgh Moss itself and any ritual cauldron that may have been constructed to represent the Moss. 

As for any goddess we can associate with the South Solway Mosses, I would point again to Dea Latis, whose altars were found at Birdoswald and Burgh-By-Sands (the 'Avalon' Roman fort only a half dozen kilometers or so east of Drumburgh).  As the preeminent 'Lake Goddess' of the region, Drumburgh Moss would not only have belonged to her, but would actually, by natural extension, be her. After all, the goddess, the lake and the cauldron were one. 

I did approach Professor Roger Tomlin with this idea. He had once discussed the hill as as possible gabata, but when I sent him the information on the moss and pointedly asked him

"Such hills are not at all unusual for forts.  No chance we could be talking about the saucer-shaped Drumburgh Moss, which would be a much more distinctive feature?"

He responded:

"Quite possibly.  It's many year since I was there (on foot from Newcastle), and I don't remember the topography, but I can accept the idea." 

WHY I DON'T BELIEVE UTHER WAS EVER IN WALES: MY DECISION ON A SOUTHERN VS. A NORTHERN ARTHUR

Arthur's Battles in the North, Along with Magnis of the Dalmatian Garrison, Banna of the Dacian Draco and Dea Latis/Lake Goddess, Camboglanna/Camlann and Aballava/Avalon, also of Dea Latis (Not Labelled is Concavata Just West of Aballava, a Possible Prototypical Grail Castle)

A few days ago I wrote the following piece in which I asked myself whether I could use a reading for Pen Cawell that would support a theory identifying Uther Pendragon with Cunedda:

https://mistshadows.blogspot.com/2024/11/coming-soon-caer-dathal-pen-mynydd-and.html

After reviewing all my past work on the subject, and considering the best possible reading for the critical lines  MARWNAT VTHYR PEN, I've come to the conclusion that, in all likelihood, Uther's placement at Caer Dathal/Dinas Emrys in Gwynedd is a folklore or literary invention relocation.  

Before I get into why Uther was situated at Dinas Emrys, a quick review of how I think the elegy lines should be rendered.:

Neu vi tywyssawc yn tywyll:

It is I who’s a leader in darkness:

a’m rithwy am dwy pen kawell.

‘May our God, the Chief of the Sanctuary, transform me’ or

(with yn adwy) ‘May the Chief of the Sanctuary transform me in the

breach’ or (with yn ardwy) 'May the Chief of the Sanctuary transform me

as a defence'

Neu vi eil kawyl yn ardu:

It's I who's like a candle (luminary, transf. of star, sun, moon, lamp; fig. of leader) in the gloom.

There is little doubt in my mind that the Pen Cawell of the second line does, indeed, refer to God.  As Dr. Simon Rodway of The University of Wales pointed out to me, cawell could here have the meaning of later cafell, 'sanctuary', as both words derived from the same Latin word and at an early enough period cawell could well have carried a double semantic meaning.  When Geoffrey of Monmouth told the transformation story he utilized an earlier line of the poem in which Uther calls himself gorlassar, a heroic epithet from which Geoffrey conjured his Gorlois.  But Geoffrey also has Merlin, called Ambrosius (the 'divine/immortal one') do the transforming.  So Merlin here stands in for God.

Line 3 was used by Geoffrey to create the story of the dragon-comet, which he says represents Uther himself.  The figurative meaning of leader for cannwyll ties back to the tywyssawc/leader of the first line.

This is simply the best rendering of these elegy lines and also has the benefit of requiring the least amount of emendation.  A reading that makes good sense that requires the least amount of emendation has the best chance of being correct.

Now, as for Uther's relocation to Wales...

I have made my case for Banna on Hadrian's Wall being Uther's ruling center.  The Roman fort was garrisoned right up until the end of Britain by a Dacian force.  A sub-Roman royal hall complex is in evidence at the site. The Dacians were noted for their own version of the draco standard, and if I'm right about the inscription on the Ilam Pan the fort itself was alluded to as 'the Aelian Dragon.'  Professor Roger Tomlin has told me that it is quite possible that this garrison may have continued to use its own draco as a sort of unit emblem, similar to their falx weapon which appears on carved stones at Birdoswald.  A ruler who descended from a mixed Dacian-British population may well have been referred to as the Chief Dragon. Or Pendragon may be a relic of the late Roman rank of magister draconum.

If we allow for Uther being from Banna, transplanting him to NW Wales would be an easy matter.  Gwynedd, ever since Gildas referred to Maelgwn as the Dragon of the Isle, was replete with serpent symbolism.  I've written many articles on this fact, and a few of them may be found here:

https://mistshadows.blogspot.com/2016/10/that-pesky-dragon.html?m=1

https://mistshadows.blogspot.com/2019/11/the-true-identity-of-uther-pendragon.html?m=1

https://mistshadows.blogspot.com/2019/11/the-dragon-of-emrais-and-dragon-of.html?m=1

We must also consider the source from which we obtain information on Uther's presence at Caer Dathal in Wales: the Mabinogion tale CULHWCH AC OLWEN.  This is hardly a reliable historical account of Arthur.  

It is for these reasons that I've decided to forsake any attempt to identify Uther with an entity whose origin lies in Gwynedd.  Instead, I will be sticking with a father for Arthur based on Hadrian's Wall.

My book THE BATTLE-LEADER OF THE NORTH will be my final expression of that theory.  

https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B0B5CG54RT/ref=tmm_kin_swatch_0?ie=UTF8&dib_tag=se&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.Eq-AAIpUgOc7JPPNM39d1Q.upLToA_6VR7YJrx3GY_b8f1fCbJp9TmYsdeOEAGKNZk&qid=1733325790&s