Monday, February 17, 2025

THE DISCOVERY OF THE MAEATAE

Ptolemy's Map of Britain Showing the Caledonii

0
Manau Gododdin (Map Courtesy John Koch)

The Miathi Hillforts and the Manau Place-Names

Research on the Maeatae (known as the Miathi in early medieval sources) has been scant. This is in large part because the name of the tribe itself, combined with Cassius Dio's claim that it was a confederation of tribes (a claim he repeats for the Caledonii), has led to the belief that its amorphous nature makes it impossible to pin down geographically.

Before I point out why I think that is faulty logic, here is Rivet and Smith's treatment of the Maeatae from their THE PLACE-NAMES OF ROMAN BRITAIN:

* Rivet & Smith, p. 404 :

SOURCE

- Xiphilinus 321 (summarising Cassius Dio LXXVI, 12) : Maiatai (= MAEATAE; twice);

- Jordanes 2, 14 (also quoting Cassius Dio) : Meatae

DERIVATION. Holder II. 388 thought the name Pictish, and it is discussed by Wainwright PP 51-52; it may survive in Dumyat and Myot Hill, near Stirling and thus north of the Antonine Wall. Watson CPNS 58 seems to take the name as wholly Celtic, as is surely right in view of the Continental analogues he cites for the second element or suffix : Gaulish Gais-atai 'spearmen' (*gaison 'spear'), Gal-atai 'warriors' (*gal 'valour, prowess'), Nantu-atai (-ates) 'valley-dwellers'; he notes also the presence in Ireland of the Magn-atai. See also ATREBATES, with further references. One might therefore conjecture that in this name at least the force of the suffix is 'those of. . . '. The first element might be the same as in Maia, probably 'larger', in which case a sense 'larger people' or more strictly 'people of the larger part' may be suitable. It is to be noted that Cassius Dio, as quoted by others, seems to say that Britain north of the Antonine Wall was divided between the Calidonii and the Maeatae, these having subsumed lesser tribes, and it could well be that the Maeatae were the 'people of the larger part'. The name was still in use in Adamnan's day : Miathi in his Life of St Columba, I, 8.

IDENTIFICATION. A confederation of tribes in the southern part of Scotland (the northern part being occupied by a similar confederation of Calidonii, q.v.). As noted above, place-namcs indicate that they extended into Stirlingshire and their northern limit was probably the Mounth, but their southern extent is disputed and depends on the interpretation of the statement of Xiphilinus that they lived 'near the cross-wall which cuts the island in two'. Collingwood (Roman Britain and the English Settlements, Oxford, 1937). 157) interpreted it as the Antonine Wall and in this was followed by Richmond (Roman Britain (Harmondsworth, !963), 57~59), but Frère (1974, 188) prefers Hadrian's Wall and attaches the Selgovae (q.v.) to them.

And the Maeatae mentioned by Rivet and Smith in the context of their treatment of the CALIDONII:

IDENTIFICATION. Ptolemy locales a specifie tribe of this name in the area of the Great Glen, but it may be significant that Tacitus never uses the tribal name as such but always a periphrasis (habitantes Caledoniam, etc.). In general classical usage the name came to be applied to all the inhabitants of Scotland north of the Forth-Clyde isthmus, but in the reference by Xiphilinus (= Cassius Dio) they are specifically a confederation of tribes occupying northern Scotland, as opposed to the Maeatae (q.v.) who occupied the south".

Now, assumptions or judgments made on such names can seriously lead us astray. There are, in reality, only four things we can say for certainty:

1) The name of the Maeatae may be simply a standard, boastful tribal designation. They called themselves the Greater Ones - with the obvious meaning that they considered themselves to be greater than their neighbors. Tribes could be quite small - something place-names and historical studies tell us when we look at Ireland, Wales, Scotland. Ptolemy did not say the Caledonii was a confederation. It is even quite possible that by claiming both the Maeatae and the Caledonii to be confederations, the size of Rome's enemies was amplified for the usual propagandistic reasons. Finally, just because Ptolemy didn't know of the tribe doesn't mean it didn't exist at his time. He might well simply not have known about them. The Ptolemaic place and tribal names for Britain represent only a fraction of the names that would have been used by the native Britons themselves. Most place-names are major centers on the Romam roads, for example.

2) The Maeatae were below the Caledonii.

3) The Maeatae were near a wall that divided the island in half. Given that the two Miathi forts are just north of the east end of the Antonine Wall, it makes no sense to seek them next to Hadrian's Wall. And to opt for the latter would mean accepting that the Maeatae as a confederation included among its members the Novantae, the Selgovae and the Votadini.

4) Artur of Dalriada is said to have perished fighting the Miathi. If he did (and I have elsewhere suggested a possible confusion with a tradition concerning an earlier Artorius), then he would have been fighting to the northeast, possibly close to the Antonine Wall (see below). He would not have been fighting near Hadrian's Wall.

Is this all is so, where were the Maeatae?

Well, before I answer that question, as the Miathi forts appear to be in the ancient region known as Manau Gododdin, it would benefit us to see if we can get a better geographical fix on the latter.

Conventional wisdom points to the Clackmannan and Slamannan place-names and defaults to a general region centered there. But Dalmeny (see below) needs to be considered in this context, as does the etymology of the Manau name itself.

To begin, let's take a look at possible derivations for Manau as these are discused in Alan James' BLITON:

*man-  

205 IE *mṇ- (zero-grade of *men- ‘jut, project’,  see mönïδ, *mönju and *mönǭg)  > eCelt *mon- > Br * Mon-, Man- (in p-ns), cf. (< IE participial *mṇ-t-) W mant ‘mouth, lip’; OIr Man- (in p-ns); cf. (< IE o-grade *mon-) O-MnIr, G moniu ‘upper back’; cf. (IE *men-) Latin mentum ‘chin’, prōmineō ‘I project’. The Indo-European status of this root is supported by Hittite and Avestan forms, see OIPrIE §18.5 at p. 298, but cf. Sims-Williams (2000) at pp 3-4.  See also mönïδ. The root implies ‘projecting’, especially of facial and other bodily features: in place-names, the sense is presumably ‘outstanding, prominent, high’. With the suffix –awā-, it is seen in the North in the territorial name Manaw HB14.62, CT59(V) (and probably CT29(XI)), and in OIr forms at AU[582]583, AT[579]583, AU[710]711, AT[710]711, but see LHEB §47(1), pp. 375-6, YGod(KJ) pp. 69–75, and  discussion of Clackmannan under *clog. Elsewhere, a similar form underlies the Isle of Man, Ellan Vannin (see PNRB pp. 410-11 and DMxPN p xi) and Ynys Môn, Anglesey (see PNRB pp. 419-20, DPNW p. 17). There are as many as fourteen related place-names in Ireland (Anglicised Mannin etc.: D Mac Giolla Easpaig at SNSBI Conference, Douglas IoM, 7.4.2001). Manaw, like Ynys Môn and some of the Irish places, is not outstandingly mountainous, and some other sense seems needed. A deity-name, perhaps associated with water, might be indicated – cf. the legendary personal name Manawydan/ Manannán (see PCB pp. 412 ets, DCML pp. 139-40, DCM pp. 2856) – or else an ethnic name: see Muhr (2002) at p. 41. The line o berth maw ac eidin CT29(XI) might be amended to include a place-name with pert[h] +  -Manaw (but see pert[h]). In mediaeval Welsh literature generally, especially in the poetry, Manaw is used of a more-or-less legendary location in the North that could equally well be the Isle of Man or Manaw Gododdin, but is best not equated with either; see Haycock (2013) pp.10 and 30-1 n44, and Clancy (2013), pp 160-1; this applies, for example, to mynaw in BT 59 (V), pace Williams at PT p. 63. For a full review and discussion of this name, see Tayor (2020), pp. 54-60.  The name Manaw may be preserved in:  c2) Dalmeny WLo  CPNS pp. 103-4 and 515 n104, PNWLo pp. 3-4  + dīn-: early forms may favour *man- with analogical Gaelic genitive sg. –an, but see also maɣn and -īn. The specifier may be a saint's, or other personal, name, see A. Macdonald, PNWLo loc. cit., also Taylor's discussion of Kilmany Fif, 2010 p. 457. However, the territory-name Manau is possible here in a Gaelic formation with genitive –an: contra Watson, CPNS p. 104, Dalmeny could have been close to the eastern end of that territory; but see Taylor (2020), pp. 54-5. Slamannan WLo CPNS p. 103, WLoPN p. 4, with sliabh ‘hill-pasture’, again with a Gaelic genitive form -*Mannan. Clackmannan, across the Forth from our area, is probably + clog-, Gaelicised clach-, again with analogical gen. sg. –an. Pace Watson and Macdonald (CPNS and PNWLo loc.cits.), there is no overriding reason why all three of these should not have been included in, or affiliated to, the territory of Manaw. The specifier –manyn occurs in the earliest forms for Dalmeny and Slamannan; it does occur also in the earliest form for Kilmany Fif PNFif4 pp. 456-7), which is most unlikely to have been associated with Manaw, but the origin need not have been the same in all cases. 

After reading that, I engaged in a long question and answer session with Alan.

Me:

What about an early borrowing of the following Latin word or a British cognate?



mano, manas, manare A, manavi, manatum
Verb
Translations
to flow
to pour
to be shed
to be wet
to spring

According to Rivet and Smith, the Forth is believed to be from *Voritia, the 'slow running one'.

The other Manaws are islands in the sea. Surrounded by currents.

Suppose Manaw Gododdin is simply the region where the river flows?

In fact, I'm reading that Stirling is the tidal limit.  An early Welsh name forth the Firth of Forth is Merin Iodeo, or the 'sea of Iudeu', with the latter being (according to the consensus view) a name for Stirling.


If Manau (borrowed early from Latin, or a cognate?) refers to the sea rise and fall affecting the river, or to sea currents, where is it?

Alan James:

Yes, Stirling is still the limit, at least of spring tides. But in the early-mid  1st millennium, it would have flowed further up. I'm familiar with the tides in the North Channel, Solway Firth, Menai Straits etc., and very tricky they are. I'm also aware that the relative sea-levels on the west Coast/ Irish Sea side have dropped by about 1mm p/a since the last glaciation, but that news from the Forth came as a surprise. Undoubtedly the IoM and Ynys Mon have serious and complicated tidal flows. And of course Mannanan is Mac Lir, 'son of the sea' - though whether he's named after the IoM or v.v. is debated, and personally I think both may preserve an older deity-name - so, yes, it might be that Manau was named from such a sea-god.

I’m especially interested in archaeologist John Morris's finding that the mean high tide at Cambuskenneth at the time of the Battle of Stirling Bridge was a metre higher than today. Half a millennium earlier it would have been even higher, what’s now the Carse would have been regularly under water, and the Stirling Rock would certainly have dominated the head of the Firth, the Merin Iodeo. 

Me:

The Forth Estuary begins at Queensferry and ends at Kincardine.  In my Arthurian research, I have shown how the Welsh Manawyd is associated with the trajectus (Tribruit/Tryfrwyd) at Queensferry.

Looking at Slamannan and Clackmannan and drawing an imaginary line connecting the two, they do fit Kincardine.

Dalmeny, which you have shown me has an early form ending in the specifier -manyn, is at Queensferry, the beginning of the Estuary. 

The same exercise with the Miathi forts shows Stirling to be in Miathi territory.

We might propose this:

Manau is the Forth Estuary from Queensferry to Kincardine (or slightly farther west, given higher water levels in the Dark Ages). From that point west is the river and Miathi lands. Their chief citadel would be Stirling.

James:

That's about the way I think they may have been.

Me:

Dumyat looks over the Allan and Devon where they enter the Forth.

Stirling is on the Forth.

Myot Hill looks over Carron.

I think we could see in these fortresses the Maeatae border guarding sites in the east.

As Dio says the Maeatae were near the Antonine Wall, and we have Myot at the Carron, it seems reasonable to propose that the Maeatae occupied the Forth (including the Teith) and Carron catchment basins.



In addition, they would have held Strathallan and the River Devon.

James:

Indeed, I think at the time of Columba, that would have been the likely land of the Miathi. Also a good place for Artur of Dalriada to have fought them.

CONCLUSION:

Manau Gododdin would be that part of Gododdin territory that lay along the Forth Estuary, roughly between Queensferry and Kincardine. The remainder of Gododdin, at least in the Roman period, stretched from Edinburgh and North Berwick Law south past Traprain Law and thence to Hadrian's Wall. We do not know the extent of the kingdom in the Dark Ages, but as an army from Edinburgh was able to attack the English at Catterick, we might assume Gododdin covered basically the same area as had the Votadini.

If I'm right and the Maeatae kingdom was just north of the Antonine Wall, in the middle of the isthmus and running north to border on the Caledonii, then the Roman Emperor Severus and his sons were dealing with an incursion into Lowland Scotland. 

NOT, as some have hypothesized, with an invasion past Hadrian's Wall.

As Professor Roger Tomlin has confirmed, "The general view is that the Antonine Wall was likely abandoned soon after the death of Antoninus in 161."

But if this is so, a major force such as that employed by Severus would indicate that Lowland Scotland was still of interest to Rome - if for no other reason than the tribes there were considered allies or were client kingdoms.


at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.