THE ARMORICA OF ROMAN CASTUS AND THE BRITAIN OF SUB-ROMAN ARTHUR

Samlesbury Hall

So, having spent years now determining what the most likely reading for the L. Artorius Castus memorial inscription's ARM[...]S lacuna most likely is 

(see https://mistshadows.blogspot.com/2025/02/why-armoricos-reading-for-l-artorius.html), what does the result of that quest yield in terms of a possible identification of a historical Arthur?

Well, newly proposed readings (like my ARM.GENTES) have proven to be unfruitful. Most importantly, with the ARMENIOS reading being set aside due to the age of the Castus stone, and ARMORICOS - combined with Dio's account of the 1500 British spearmen who go to Rome under Commodus - coming to the fore, we are once again free to look at Sawyl of Ribchester as Arthur's father.

Why is Ribchester dependent on an ARMORICOS reading as opposed to an ARMENIOS one? Because Ribchester's Roman fort was home to the Sarmatian veterans. For the Arthur name to have been preserved there I would expect Castus to have been remembered by the descendants of those Sarmations in the Dark Ages or at least for the Artorius name to have been passed down in the royal family. If we read Armenia, Castus served in Britain before the Sarmatians were sent there. If Armorica, then the Sarmatians were already there when Castus arrived in Britain.

Only the other day, while looking up something else, I happened to access this old post:

https://mistshadows.blogspot.com/2024/10/illtud-knight-rides-again.html

Taken with the dozens of others I've written on the subject or related matters, there is no doubt in my mind that Uther Pendragon is St. Illtud. The question remains whether Illtud is Arthur's father, or whether Uther, poetically referred to as the Biblical Samuel ( = Welsh Sawyl), became confused with Arthur's real father, a famous northern chieftain named Sawyl.

I will be reconsidering this question in the following days/weeks.  It is not an easy one, as there is much to recommend Illtud (including a possible connection to the Liddington Badbury; see 

https://mistshadows.blogspot.com/2023/01/illtuds-father-bicanus-and-his-llydaw.html).  What it will ultimately come down to, as always, is where I can best make the case for the theater of the Arthurian battles. 

'PRAEFF' AND TWO LEGIONARY RANKS FOR L. ARTORIUS CASTUS

In the following recent blog post, I set out what seems to me the only possible reading for the ARM[...]S lacuna of the Castus inscription:

https://mistshadows.blogspot.com/2025/02/why-armoricos-reading-for-l-artorius.html?m=1

In short, the now accepted age for the stone (Severan), combined with a proper reading of it, forces us to ARMORICOS rather than ARMENIOS or any other proposed reading.

The only controversial portion of the text was PRAEFF. Generally considered a carving error (see below), I decided to take the word literally. 

The only possible translation for PRAEFF is "prefects." The question I then asked myself was how could Castus of been prefects of the same legion?

Well, this could only have happened when Perennis removed the legionary legates and installed equestrian prefects in their places. Agens vice legati does not seem to have existed until later, but according to Tomlin there are

"Plenty of instances before 200 of procurators and prefects pro legato."

We would thus have two separate ranks:

1) praefectus castrorum

and

2) praefectus pro legato

This could be expressed in shorthand as PRAEFF LEG(IONIS) VI VICTRICIS.

From Roger Tomlin on this idea:

"It's a good idea, and quite possible that he progressed from being Camp Prefect to deputising for the legionary legate (dead or temporarily absent or removed). But I would like to see an inscription which spelt out this progression.

I am not happy with PRAEFF meaning 'prefect twice' [as proposed by Malcor et al]. This would be spelt out with 'bis' or 'iterum'. So far as I know, PRAEFF is only used of an officer who is on the staff of the prefects (plural), especially the (two) Praetorian Prefects. I don't think it is even used of an officer who proceeds from being prefect of one unit to being prefect of another. You would have to find examples even of this. Centurions, for example, who transfer from one legion to another simply repeat the term. He doesn't call himself 'centurions' (followed by a list of legions).

And I would expect you to find me an instance of AVGG meaning 'Emperor twice'!

There is a bad error only two lines below, in BRITANICI|MIARVM. It's easy to miss a typo when you are reading what you expect to read. 

It's even possible that the offending F was plugged with plaster which has since been lost. But I don't think so. Instead it would be a mistake which goes back to the original layout (in charcoal?), when PRAEF was drafted like PRAEP immediately above. But then the stone-cutter, who knew that PRAEF was intended, mistakenly attached an E to A, mis-reading the next letter (E) as the final F?

A mistake – essential a muddle between E and F in the draft, by the stone-cutter mis-reading the cartoon someone else had prepared for him – is easier to suppose than a unique instance of PRAEFF meaning 'prefect twice'."

An alternate scenario would have the legates replaced by equestrians after Castus was sent to Armorica. The result, of course, would be the same: Castus would still be elevated from p.c. to p.p.l.