Chapter Three:
THE ARTHURIAN BATTLES AND L. ARTORIUS CASTUS DURING THE BRITISH WAR OF SEVERUS
My extensive research on the Arthurian battles as these are found in the HISTORIA BRITTONUM and the ANNALES CAMBRIAE led me to conclude that all save Badon were in the North of Britain. For a detailed discussion of each identified site, I would refer my reader to my blog. For the purposes of this book the following simplified list will have to suffice:
primum bellum fuit in ostium fluminis quod dicitur glein.
Mouth of the Northumberland River Glen near Yeavering (the later AS royal center of Ad Gefrin).
secundum et tertium et quartum et quintum super aliud flumen quod dicitur dubglas et est in regione linnuis.
Devil's Water at Linnels ("Lake elbow; there are several lakes/pools here) near the Corbridge Roman fort. Richard Coates has approved both etymologies.
sextum bellum super flumen quod uocatur bassas.
Dunipace, "Fort of the Shallow", directly between the two Miathi forts and hard by Arthur's Oven Roman monument. This comes from Scottish place-name expert John Reid, further developed by Brittonic expert Alan James.
septimum fuit bellum in silua celidonis, id est cat coit celidon.
The Caledonian Wood in Highland Scotland, to the east of the Great Glen and along or the west of the Gask Ridge Roman forts.
octauum fuit bellum in castello guinnion, in quo arthur portauit imaginem sanctae mariae semper uirginis super humeros suos et pagani uersi sunt in fugam in illo die et caedes magna fuit super illos per uirtutem domini nostri iesu christi et per uirtutem sanctae mariae genetricis eius.
Binchester Roman fort of Vinovia. Once thought impossible, a slight one-letter, common change brought it back to life. See Rivet and Smith.
nonum bellum gestum est in urbe legionis, *id est cair *legion.
York, where Castus and his Sixth Legion were stationed
decimum gessit bellum in litore fluminis quod uocatur *traith tribruit.
The trajectus at Queensferry's Ardchinnechena[n] or Height of the Dog's Head on the Firth of Forth. The original, literal meaning of W. Tryfrwyd is 'pierced-through.' This is a shore name, not a river name. It accords perfectly with the L. trajectus (Graham Isaac of Galway). The Dog-heads Arthur fights there are reflected in the headland name or perhaps in the Venicones tribe (hunting or kindred hounds; Andrew Breeze and John Koch, respectively). Roman historians (see Simon Elliot) now believe the trajectus on Caracalla coins represent the Queensferry crossing.
undecimum bellum in monte qui dicitur breguoin, *id est cat bregion.
The High Rochester Roman fort of Bremenium, Urien's Brewyn. Agned is an error for agued, a word meaning "dire straits", found applied to Catterick in the Gododdin poem. That poem contains the earliest known reference to Arthur. Thus Agned may refer to either High Rochester or to Catterick. [Again, that from Graham Isaac.]
Could a Dark Age Commander Have Fought in These Places?: One Expert Says No
I've asked a sub-Roman/Dark Age and Arthurian expert - Professor Christopher Snyder - about the Arthurian battles.
Essentially, in order not to bias him, I sent the map of HB sites as I've laid those out - not telling him, though, that these are my Arthurian site identifications. Instead I asked him if he thought the arrangement reasonable or at least possible for a sub-Roman ruler. Or if they looked instead like something we'd find under Ulpius Marcellus or Severus.
Included was a note to the Caledonian site, as well as to the Miathi one (Arthur's Bassas appears to Dunipace, directly between the two Miathi/Maeatae forts, and Artur of Dalriada is said to have died fighting the Miathi). All of this with no specific reference to Arthur, of course.
Basically, I wanted his honest take on whether it was possible for a man of the newly fractured, post-Roman Britain to have fought battles in these theaters, or whether the pattern instead looks decidedly Roman.
RESPONSE (7 April 2025):
"Looking at your map, I would say that they are more likely to represent campaigns of a Roman general. We know practically nothing about campaigns of post-Roman British military commanders. If these are conjectured locations of battles from the Historia Brittonum, I would not use them as evidence for the fifth or sixth centuries."
I next needed to know what a historian of Roman Britain thought of my map.
Professor Roger Tomlin on the Arthurian
Battles
The map and accompanying notes were subsequently sent to Professor Roger Tomlin.
Prof. Tomlin's response:
“Their axis is from the Antonine Wall to York, north to south, suggesting resistance to penetration from the north rather than to seaborne invasion from the east, but that's all that I can say. Suggestive of Roman advance from York or subsequent breakthroughs from the north, so I would go for Roman period.”
Conclusion
The reader will have noticed that Arthur’s Badon was not included in my list of Arthurian battles. I once tried to make the case for Badon being for Buxton, where the English Batham Gate Roman road preserves a form of Bathum, which quite naturally became Badon in British. But a great deal of thought on the ‘Badon Problem’ now has me agreeing with Prof. Nicholas Higham, who recently expressed to me his opinion on the battle and its dubious attribution to the British Dark Age hero:
“I have no doubt the HB list is a fantastical fiction put together c. 800 using whatever the author had available to pad out the required 12 battles (it was clearly a struggle). The only one which fits the right sort of timeframe for his purposes is Badon, which was the siege he took from Gildas, but I have argued elsewhere this was not a particularly significant engagement, merely one of three ways Gildas sought to fix the date when the current era, in his view, began.”
Also
missing from the list of Arthur’s Camlan.
That, too, was by design and is not an accidental omission. While I’ve
proven that Welsh tradition firmly situates Camlan at the Afon Gamlan in NW
Wales
(https://mistshadows.blogspot.com/2016/08/arthurs-thirteenth-battle-camlann.html), the presence of the Camboglanna Roman fort on Hadrian’s Wall almost certainly indicates that once again we are dealing with a folk memory of L. Artorius Castus. Archaeology has shown that Severus and Caracalla were rebuilding and quite possibly fighting on Hadrian’s Wall, and their presence is attested as Castlesteads/Camboglanna and the Birdoswald/Banna Roman fort in the same Irthing Valley (see https://mistshadows.blogspot.com/2025/02/camboglanna-roman-fort-and-l-artorius.html).
The
Welsh legendary material, utilized later by the authors of Arthurian romance,
focuses on the Aballava/Avalana/’Avalon’ Roman fort just west of Castlsteads
and the Roman fort of Drumburgh/Concavata (a possible Grail Castle prototype;
see
https://mistshadows.blogspot.com/2024/12/a-new-theory-on-concavata-name-for.html).
The presence of the Roman period Dea Latis or ‘Lake Goddess’ in this region seems to have contributed to the story of the Lady of the Lake.
The
Irthing Valley itself (according to place-name expert Andrew Breeze; see
https://mistshadows.blogspot.com/2016/10/the-bear-river-of-birdoswald-banna-and.html) may be from a British name meaning “Little Bear”. I have hypothesized that the British *Artenses ( = the Welsh eponym Arthwys) lived in the Irthing Valley. Given that Artorius or Arthur was associated by the Welsh with their own bear word, arth, it is tempting to wonder about some king of relationship existing between an Arthur/Artorius at Camboglanna in the Irthing Valley and an indigenous bear tribe.
In short, as it is entirely historically plausible that L. Artorius Castus was present at Camboglanna during the Severan British War and may have even fought there, we really have no reason to accept as factual the invention of an Arthur at the Afon Gamlan in Wales. This last would be simply a fairly typical relocation of a famous earlier figure from the North to the Celtic Fringe.
That Medrawd of the Welsh Camlan story is plainly a borrowing of Medard of Gaul (https://mistshadows.blogspot.com/2025/06/medraut-at-camlan-final-reveal.html), improperly inserted into the Camlan narrative either through error or creative intent, does not help us view the Welsh tradition any kinder.
Chapter Five:
ARTHUR AND THE MIATHI, ARTORIUS
AND THE MAEATAE?
Although all the Arthurian battles in the HISTORIA BRITTONUM and ANNALES CAMBRIAE (with the exception of Badon) belong in the North of Britain, three are especially important for identifying Arthur with Castus. These battles are the Bassas River, the Caledonian Wood and the shore of the Tribruit. I will devote the next three chapters to these battles.
The Bassas River battle first…
In the Irish sources on Dark Age Dalriada, Arthur son (or grandson) of Aedan mac Gabran is said to die in two different places. Various attempts to explain this difficulty have been attempted. Probably the best is by John Bannerman in his STUDIES IN THE HISTORY OF DALRIADA:
https://archive.org/details/studiesinhistory00john/page/n11/mode/1up?q=Miathi
What I found the most interesting about an Arthur fighting the Miathi is that my best identification of the HB's Bassas River put the battle site at Dunipace. My identification was based on place-name expert John Reid's etymology for Dunipace as hill or fort of the bas/"shallow" and the presence nearby of Arthur's Oven. The oven was probably a Roman building which took on Arthur's name in folklore.
Dunipace itself is in the territory of the Miathi, the Classical period Maeatae. In fact, it is very close to Myot Hill, one of the forts of the Miathi.
Thus in my earlier Arthurian writings I tentatively suggested a link between Arthur of Dalriada in the Miathi lands and the HB Arthur at Dunipace. My thinking then was that Bassas in the HB might represent an intrusion into the battle list from Arthur of Dalriada's martial exploits. Such conflation of the various Arthurs has long been suspected.
But given the revised age for the Castus inscription, coupled with my ARM.GENTES reading for that inscription’s lacuna, there is another, better possibility.
The largest campaign every launched against Northern Britain by the Romans took place under Severus. The emperor's governor, Virius Lupus, had tried unsuccessfully to tame the Maeatae. Instead, he ended up buying them off. But they did not remain peaceful for long. They attacked to the South again, this time in league with another tribal confederation, the Caledonii. Severus was forced to go to Britain himself and gave orders for the northern tribes to be utterly destroyed. Although his desire for genocide was not accomplished, it is likely a great deal of damage was inflicted upon the tribes.
What I thought to myself was simply this: would not it be an astonishing coincidence had Artorius fought the Maeatae, the same Maeatae (Miathi) Arthur of Dalriada and/or Arthur of the HB were said to have fought?
And then I dared go one step further: what if it were not a coincidence?
What if the folk memory of the genocidal war Artorius engaged in against armed tribes had so impressed itself upon the traditions of the Northern British that later Arthurs were mistakenly, through easily garbled oral history and heroic songs, given a battle against the Maeatae/Miathi that had originally belonged to Artorius?
While this notion is impossible to prove, of course, it is not so hard to believe. It seems, at the very least, rather credible.
Now, it is time for me to make an important confession. I've been working in the Castus inscription pretty steadily since 2019. It has become more than a bit of an obsession. But while I concentrated on the two generally accepted readings - ARMORICOS (since I showed it would fit on the memorial stone) and ARMENIOS - I have always harbored a secret desire for a designation that would allow us to put Castus in northern Britain.
I feel this way for this reason: if we accept the premise that the Artorius name was preserved in the North only to resurface in the 5th-6th centuries as British Arthur, then it follows that the original bearer of that name must have done something in the North that gave his name currency among the populace. It would have had to be something truly noteworthy. Had Castus been just another Roman officer who had his glory days elsewhere, and who retired in Dalmatia (where there are several Artorii), the idea that his name was preserved in Britain is pretty unsustainable.
Granted, everything rides on that stated premise. And that premise will be rejected by many. It may make others squirm. Both parties would doubtless prefer that the name Arthur is just a name and that its cropping up in Dark Age Britain is no more special than Tom, Dick or Harry popping up at a much later date. "A rose by any other name would smell as sweet."
Still, I would add another premise to the first one. Is it unreasonable to assume that had an Artorius been instrumental in the first Hammer of the Scots' (Simon Elliot's term for Severus) exceptionally brutal campaign against the Northern tribes that he might have been remembered in the North well enough for his name to have been preserved among the ruling elite south of the Wall? In this case, we need not adhere to the idea that there was a Dark Age Arthur. His existence becomes superfluous.
I, personally, do not find this an unreasonable assumption at all.
The Discovery of the Maeatae
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?
https://www.latin-is-simple.com/en/vocabulary/verb/4844/
https://www.nihilscio.it/Manuali/Lingua%20latina/Verbi/Coniugazione_latino.aspx?verbo=mano+&lang=EN_
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.
See map. Stirling rose from the middle of the carse lands.
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 the 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.
https://www.sepa.org.uk/media/74972/doc-12-river-carron.pdf
https://www.sepa.org.uk/media/74959/doc-11-river-forth.pdf
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.
The onomastic evidence is indeed exiguous,but does seem to indicate that the homeland of the Maeatae was in the central belt, north of the Antonine line. I don’t think Dumyat, although not recorded early (so far as we know, there’s a lot of work still to be done on Stirlingshire p-ns) is likely to be an antiquarian invention: a learned fellow in the time of such speculations might have invented *Dùn Miathi on the analogy of Dùn Breatainn, but Dumyat looks to have passed through Gaelic speech. Not of course definite proof, it could be a trace of Gaelic folklore misplacing the Miathi, but on the other hand, I don’t think it’s a good reason for special pleading.
As to the archaeology, I don’t claim specialist knowledge, but I try to keep up-to-date, and my understanding – based especially but not only on the major work being undertaken by David J. Breeze as Chair of the International Congress of Roman Frontier Studies (find his videos etc. online) – suggests that the prevailing consensus is that the frontier of the Empire was not a simple linear boundary, but quite a deep buffer-zone (maintained in a wide range fo different ways) between the border provinces and the ‘barbarians’. Viewed that way, the withdrawal to Hadrian’s Wall was not so much a retreat as a strategic development. I’m aware of growing evidence for Roman military presence and activity in land north of the Wall well after it had become the southern boundary of the limes, and of generous material encouragements to co-operative regional rulers in the inter-wall zone.
So, I see no problem with the Maeatae and Calidones taking advantage of a time of Roman distraction and military weakness to launch an invasion of the frontier zone. They probably weren’t aiming to attack Hadrian’s Wall, but the fact that they got that far was (reportedly) mentioned by Dio to emphasise how serious the threat was to the province of Britannia. And, in any case, compared to goings-on along the continental European, Levantine and African limites, the distance from the Forth to the Wall is relatively negligible.
Adding to the opinion of Alan James, I would cite a brief, but important personal communication on the matter of the Maeatae from Professor David J. Breeze, perhaps “the” expert on the Roman frontier in Britain:
“ My basic position has not changed since my The Northern Frontiers of Roman Britain, London, 129, which is that the Maeatae lived in the territory to the north of the east end of the Antonine Wall, supported by the place-names.”
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.
The Miathi and Circinn
I’ve discussed above the confusion expressed in the Irish sources regarding an Arthur’s death in either the territory of the Miathi or in a region/kingdom called Circinn.
The problem is, we really don’t know where Circinn was! There have been several guesses, but nothing concrete has materialized to help us pinpoint its location.
The clue, I think, is to be found in the name of a lost site within Circinn.
Tigernach Annals Year Entry752.4
“Cath Asreith in terra Circin inter Pictones inuicem, in quo cecidit Bruidhi mac Maelchon.”
Where is Asreith? Find that place and we solve the riddle of Circin(n)'s location. How?
Well, we know from the Second Life of St. Patrick that Fordoun in Strathmore was in Mag Gerginn. Unfortunately, the difference in spelling between Circinn and Gerginn has caused considerable debate. So much so that some scholars have sought to distinguish the two place-names and have attempted to place them in different locations. The best recent example of such an attempt is that of Dr. Nicholas Evans at The University of Aberdeen. His study may be read here:
I've always thought that the two names were, in fact, the same name, merely variant spellings. But noted Brittonic place-name expert Alan James thinks otherwise. He holds to Watson's opinion on the names, believing not that they are variant spellings, but due to scribal substitution of similar appearing/sounding names:
https://archive.org/stream/historyofcelticp0000unse/historyofcelticp0000unse_djvu.txt
“We
may now take the districts separately. Cirech means in Gaelic, ‘ crested,’ from
cir, a comb, a crest ; Crus mac Cirig, ‘Crus, son of Cirech,’ was the chief
warrior of the Cruithnigh.?, In the Pictish Chronicle the name is given as
Circinn and Circin, which is the genitive of Circenn, ‘Crest-headed’ (P.S., p.
4), and this corresponds to some of the other old forms : Cath Chirchind, ‘
battle of Circhenn ’ (Tighern., 596); cath Maigi Circin, ‘battle of the plain
of Circen’ (YBL fes., 192 b 30) ; Magh Circinn i nAlbain (Mac Firbis—Hogan).
Alongside of these we have a form Gergenn :
Koganacht maigi Dergind (read Gergind) i nAlbae, ‘ the
1 Skene, P.S., p. 186. There are other variations. 2 Ib., p. 41.
TERRITORIAL DIVISIONS 109
Koganacht of the plain of Gergenn in Scotland’ (Rawl., B 502, 148); Eoganacht maigi Gergind i nAlpae (LL 319) ; Koganacht maige Gerrghind a nAlbain (BB 172 b 4); Eoghanacht mhuighe Geirrghinn (Keating, ii. 386); Cairbre Cruthneachan a Muigh-gearrain, ‘Cairbre C. from Maghgearrain’ (Celt. Scot., iii. 475); defunctus est Palladius in Campo Girgin in loco qui dicitur Fordun (Colgan). The fact that Fordun was in ‘ the plain of Girgen’ shows that Girgen was the name of the Mearns or rather that the Mearns was in Girgen.
We have thus three forms of the name—Cirech, Circhenn, Ger(r)genn, of which the first two go together. The last form, Gerrgenn, suggests comparison with the Irish name Gerrchenn, ‘ Short-head.’ In the Tain Bo Cualnge a man of this name appears as father of the warrior Muinremur, ‘Thick-neck,’ who is styled Muinremur mac Gerrchinn, with variants—all in the genitive—Gerginn, Gercinn, Gerrcinn, Hirrginn, Erreinn; and nominative Cergend. There is also Gerrchenn mac [lladain, with variants Gerchenn, Gerrgen, Cerrcen, and, in the genitive, Gerrce, Errge.1_ Here ‘Cerrcen’ seems to be owing to confusion with the name Cerrchenn, ‘Wry-head’ (Tighern., A.D. 662). This com- parison leaves little doubt that the Irish writers who used the form Mag Gergind, etc., understood it as ‘ Gerrchenn’s Plain.” With regard to the other forms, the first 7 of Cirig is long, and if as I have assumed, Circinn is the genitive of Circhenn, ‘ Crest-headed,’ with its first 7 also long, it is difficult, if not impossible, to correlate it with Gerginn.”
But if I were to prove this correct, I needed an Asreith somewhere in the vicinity of Fordoun. This seemed a futile quest.
That is, until I seemed to recall that in medieval Irish MSS. r could often be miscopied as s. I put this question to Professor Jurgen Uhlich, an expert in such matters. When asked if this happened, his response was:
"Yes, all the time basically! Especially when a Continental scribe was ignorant of Irish and the Irish script variety."
With that possibility in mind, I created a form ARRETH (as Asreith was in the genitive). Suddenly, I had a place-name that looked a lot more Gaelic. Of course, as Alan James pointed out, there could be a problem with a Gaelic name in Strathmore in the early period. "Gaelic wasn’t being spoken, still less naming places, in Angus before 600." But, the Tigernach Asreith battle is dated in the 8th century, and we know Fordoun of the Second Life of Patrick is a Gaelic name. It is also possible that a Gaelic name was substituted at a later date for an earlier Pictish one, perhaps even one with a similar or idential meaning.
"It's a difficult business, and I certainly don't claim to be within my depth with it. It's similar to the controversies around Nechtansmere/ Dunnichen (which may or may not have been in the same neck of the woods). Battles and other events mentioned in the Irish Annals and other early sources at places with apparently Gaelic names, but seemingly in locations where we wouldn't expect that language to have been current, and even less likely to have established place-names, at the time of the event. It's a problem that historians seem to me to skate over, but I'm reluctant to say anything firmly - there was a lot going on that's not at all easy to explain from the scanty documentary evidence, and as onomastic research and archaeology progress, the problem only seems to become more complicated."
However, proceeding with a hypothetical Arreth, it didn't take me long to find a viable candidate for Asreith: Arrat near Brechin.
https://fife-placenames.glasgow.ac.uk/placename/?id=1069
A couple of different etymologies are offered for this place, but James finds one the most likely:
"I think the Arraty Burn [in Fife] is probably different, so there's only one *Airecht. But I don't think that's so improbable, as a name for what shows every sign of being an ancient territory that might well have been a territory governed by an assembly of heads of leading families (cf. DIL definitions). The only problem is, that it would presumably have had a different name in Pictish; it probably wouldn't have acquired a Gaelic one as early as ca.600, ca.750 would still be interestingly early, but perhaps."
Arrat is only 20 kilometers as the crow flies from Fordoun to the north.
If Arrat is Asreth, then Circinn = Mag Gerginn, and the latter would definitely be the ancient Gaelic name for Strathmore.
By, if so, why the Circinn name? What is that a reference to?
The etymology of Circinn is not really in doubt. It means 'Crest(ed?)-head'. One tends to think of some geological formation, like a hill or headland that has a crest-like summit, perhaps formed of a spine of crags.
It was only when I noticed the proximity of the Caterthun forts (to both Arrat and Fordoun) that I realized the 'crest' in question might well have been a man-made one.
The double fort complex at the Caterhuns represents one of the largest and most impressive such sites in Scotland. White Caterhun, especially, is noteworthy. Its very high walls were made of a whitish stone and the various ramparts would have been surmounted by palisades. Seen from a distance this would have resembled a crest on the rounded hilltop. I would propose that this fort represents the crest of Circinn.
https://canmore.org.uk/site/35007/white-caterthun
https://canmore.org.uk/site/34969/brown-caterthun
Alan James' response to this idea was succinct, but encouraging:
"I think you can make a reasonable case."
And so here I am, doing so!
The question remains as to how far the Kingdom of Circinn extended. Natural boundaries are often important in such cases, and as the Caterthuns are approximately at the midpoint of Strathmore, I would suggest that the kingdom was composed of Strathmore itself.
"Strathmore (The Great Glen) forms a wide valley between the southern Grampians and the Sidlaw Hills, extending from Perth in the southwest to Stonehaven in the northeast and including the districts in the northeast known as the Mearns and the Howe of Angus.
Its principal rivers are the Tay, Isla, Dean Water, North Esk and South Esk.
It is approximately 50 miles (80 km) long and 10 miles (16 km) wide. Strathmore is underlain by Old Red Sandstone but this is largely obscured by glacial till, sands and gravels deposited during the ice age."
https://visitangus.com/things-to-see-do/attractions/valley-of-strathmore/
Before
concluding, I should point out that the Roman fort of Stracathro was very near
to Arrat.
Kair House Roman camp, just on the opposite of the Bervie Water from Fordoun, is believed to have been built by Severus (according to Simon Elliott), and we know of that emperor's presence at Ardoch on the south end of Strathmore. Thus we can be sure his forces were in the heartland of Circinn, although as yet archaeology has not confirmed this for us.
This fact may be important for Arthurian Studies. I have suggested that the Miathi of both the Dalriadan Artur and of the HISTORIA BRITTONUM Arthur (Bassas battle) and the Caledonian Wood battle of the latter may be reflections of the ghost of L. Artorius Castus, a man who might well have led legionary forces in the North under Severus. As the Severan campaign was against both the Maeatae and the Caledonii, the Tigernach reference to Artur son of Aedan's death in Circinn - where action against the Roman period Caledonii would certainly have been undertaken - in my opinion bolsters the likelihood that we are looking at Roman battles in the Arthurian tradition. Not Dark Ages ones.
Note: I've been asked if Arthur's City of the Legion might not be York, but instead the legionary fortress of Inchtuthil. I would answer no. To quote from Simon Elliott's SEPTIMIUS SEVERUS IN SCOTLAND: THE NORTHERN CAMPAIGNS OF THE FIRST HAMMER OF THE SCOTS:
"The fortress at Inchtuthil was occupied for only a short time, being evacuated in AD 86/87. It was never reused, even during the Severan incursions in the third century...
Chapter Six:
The Caledonian Wood Battle and Severus Against the Caledonii
I've had a chance to review my old work on Arthur's Caledonian Wood battle. Alas, as is so often the case, I've found it sorely lacking in the quality of its argument and conclusion.
When treating of the battle initially, I had, of course, sought a way to make it conform to a list of battles that were all supposedly fought against the Saxons. I had arrived at what I thought a clever solution, equating Celidon with a Scottish river-name that may have contributed to the original Caledonian Wood being relocated from the Scottish Highlands to the Scottish Lowlands. By doing this, I was able to situate a plausible battle site near Dere Street, where several of the other battles were aligned. For my earlier argument, please see
http://mistshadows.blogspot.com/2016/08/arthurs-seventh-battle-celidon-wood.html
I now realize I must dispense with this idea. Why?
Well, I began by re-reading studies such as "Calidon and the Caledonian Forest", Clarke B., Bulletin of the Board of Celtic Studies xxiii, 191–201, 1969. And one thing became immediately clear: the Caledonian Wood before or up to the 10th century (the date of the HISTORIA BRITTONUM, although the substance of the Arthurian battle list likely predates the actual writing of the HB) could not have been in the Scottish Lowlands. This is, literally, quite impossible. The Lowlands did not become Scottish until much later in the Middle Ages.
So, we must allow for Arthur's Caledonian Wood battle to be in the actual Caledonia, a region covering, essentially, the Grampian Mountains in the Highlands of Scotland. This location is the only reasonable candidate for Arthur's Caledonian Wood.
Needless to say, this wrecks havoc with the HB's claim that all Arthur's battles were fought against the Saxons. More than any other battle, that of the Caledonian Wood has given fits to Arthurian researchers (such as myself) who have opted for the Saxon champion over one who may have been either the ghost of L. Artorius Castus or a fusion of several Arthurs, with the extreme northern battles belonging to the later Arthur of Dalriada.
This problem intensifies when the battles of Bassas and the Tribruit are thrown into the mix. Best arguments for those two sites, as I've explored in great depth, are Dunipace (between the two Miathi/Maeatae forts near the Arthur's Oven Roman monument) and North Queensferry. These sites also do not point to an Arthur fighting Saxons. The Dogheads at Tribruit in the PA GUR may owe their existence to the name of the headland at Queensferry, although the Roman era Venicones tribe ('hunting hounds' according to Andrew Breeze, or 'kindred hounds' according to John Koch) held the territory north of Queensferry.
When
taken as a group, then – Dunipace, Caledonia and Queensferry – it is
practically impossible not to prefer L. Artorius Castus as the man who was
doing the fighting in these places.
Chapter Seven:
Tribruit of Arthur, Trajectus of Artorius – Another Echo of the Severan Campaigns in the North?
A couple of decades ago (!), I first proposed that Arthur's Tribruit battle, found in the HISTORIA BRITTONUM's list, represented a trajectus or crossing-point at Queensferry in Scotland. Although linguistically and geographically sound, and a solution that respected the source material, the idea did not catch on. Basically, the idea has been ignored. Amateur Arthurians continued to put the Tribruit shore wherever they wanted it to be - as they still do to this day.
But since I came up with a new possible reading for the ARM[...]S lacuna of the L. Artorius Castus stone (https://mistshadows.blogspot.com/2024/12/a-new-reading-for-arms-lacuna-of-l.html), I remembered that it was believed by some highly respected scholars that a trajectus across the Forth at Queensferry was built by Caracalla, son of the Emperor Severus. I had actually mentioned this in my treatment of the Tribruit place-name (see entire discussion pasted to the bottom of this post). Without the context of the Artorius inscription, however, it was merely an interesting observation.
Pages 151-152 from Simon
Elliott's SEPTIMIUS SEVERUS IN SCOTLAND: THE NORTHERN CAMPAIGNS OF THE FIRST
HAMMER OF THE NORTH are particularly illuminating for localizing Caracalla’s
trajectus and describing the significance of this river-crossing.
There is a nice article available by a coin expert who agrees with Elliott’s localization of the trajectus. The link is given for this online piece, as well as the Conclusions reached by the author.
"Conclusions
It’s probably fair to say that we’ll never know for sure if these coins represented bridges in Scotland, never mind knowing where they would have been. However, their dates coincide perfectly with the British campaigns which were such a large undertaking that it’s hard to believe that the coins could represent something else. The fact that they were celebrated on coins suggests that they were important undertakings related to the war, rather than a run-of-the-mill bridges constructed in safe territory.
The arguments against Severus’ coins being a bridge in Scotland do not stand up well to scrutiny. There was time to build a large permanent bridge over the Tay because it’s not necessary to insist it to be monumental, and not necessary to assume that work could only begin once Severus himself arrived at the building site, ready to clock on for a shift of hard graft. There was a reason to build a permanent bridge over the Tay, and reasons why a boat bridge wouldn’t have been suitable.
The arguments for Caracalla’s bridge to be over the Tay don’t fare well either due to the topology of the river. A one-off boat bridge over the Forth, where a permanent bridge would have been impossible and unnecessary, makes much more sense."
If the Tribruit of Arthur is the trajectus of Caracalla, then we must add this HB battle to that of the Bassas (https://mistshadows.blogspot.com/2025/01/arthur-and-miathi-artorius-and-maeatae.html) as being Artorius battles. Given that Arthur is also said to have fought in the Celidon Wood, and Artorius would have fought the Caledonii, this battle, too, becomes highly suspect. I have always identified Arthur's City of the Legion battle with York and, of course, that was the city where Artorius the prefect's Sixth Legion was garrisoned. [It is unlikley we are talking about the legionary fortress of Inchtuthil in Highland Scotland, as this was evacuated in 86/87 and "never reused, even during the Severan incursions in the early third century" - Simon Elliott, SEPTIMIUS SEVERUS IN SCOTLAND, p. 129.]
Indeed, all of the Arthurian battles of the HB with the exception of Badon fit very nicely into the Severan campaigns as described by Simon Elliott. The mouth of the Northumberland River Glen, the Devil's Water at its lakes near Linnels (Dubglas in Linnuis), Dunipace (Bassas), Binchester (C. Guinnion) and High Rochester (Breguoin; perhaps also Agned/agued, although this last could be for Catterick, called the place of agued, 'distress', in the GODODDIN) – all make the best sense for Castus, not for someone else.
The Tenth Battle: Shore of the River Tribruit
The location of the shore (W. traeth) of the river Tribruit has remained unresolved. The clue to its actual whereabouts may lie in the two possible meanings assigned to this place-name.
According to Kenneth Jackson
(_Once Again A thur's Battles_, MODERN PHILOLOGY, August,
1945), Tribruit, W. tryfrwyd, was used as an a jective, meaning "pierced through", and sometimes as a noun meaning "battle". His rendering of traeth tryfrwyd was "the Strand of the Pierced or Broken (Place)". Basing his statement on the Welsh Traeth Tryfrwyd, Jackson said that "we should not look for a river called Tryfwyd but for a beach." However, Jackson later admitted (in The Arthur of History, ARTHURIAN LITERATURE IN THE MIDDLE AGES: A COLLABORATIVE HISTORY, ed. by Roger Sherman Loomis) that "the name (Traith) Tribruit may mean rather 'The Many-Coloured Strand' (cf. I. Williams in BBCS, xi [1943], 95).
Most recently Patrick Sims-Williams (in The Arthur of the Welsh, THE EARLY WELSH ARTHURIAN POEMS, 1991) has defined traeth tryfrwyd as the "very speckled shore" (try- here being the intensive prefix *tri-, cognate with L. trans). Professor Sims-Williams mentions that 'trywruid' could also mean "bespattered [with blood]." I would only add that Latin litus does usually mean "seashore, beach, coast", but that it can also mean "river bank". Latin ripa, more often used of a river bank, can also have the meaning of "shore".
The complete listing of tryfrwyd from The Dictionary of Wales (information courtesy Andrew Hawke) is as follows:
tryfrwyd
2 [?_try-^2^+brwyd^2^_; dichon
fod yma fwy
nag un gair [= "poss. more
than one word here"]]
3 _a_. a hefyd fel _e?b_.
6 skilful, fine, adorned;
?bloodstained; battle,
conflict.
7 12g. GCBM i. 328, G\\6aew yg
coryf, yn toryf,
yn _tryfrwyd_ - wryaf.
7 id. ii. 121, _Tryfrwyd_ wa\\6d
y'm pria\\6d
prydir, / Trefred ua\\6r, treul
ga\\6r y gelwir.
7 id. 122, Keinuyged am drefred
_dryfrwyd_.
7 13g. A 19. 8, ymplymnwyt yn
_tryvrwyt_
peleidyr....
7 Digwydd hefyd fel e. afon
[="also occurs as
river name"] (cf.
8 Hist Brit c. 56, in litore
fluminis, quod vocatur
_Tribruit_; 14 x CBT
8 C 95. 9-10, Ar traethev
_trywruid_).
Tryfrwyd itself, minus the
intensive prefix,
comes from:
brwyd
[H. Grn. _bruit_, gl. _varius_,
gl. Gwydd. _bre@'t_
`darn']
3 _a_.
6 variegated, pied, chequered,
decorated, fine;
bloodstained; broken, shattered,
frail, fragile.
7 c. 1240 RWM i. 360, lladaud
duyw arnam ny
am dwyn lleydwyt - _urwyt_ /
llauurwyt escwyt
ar eescwyd.
7 c. 1400 R 1387. 15-16, Gnawt
vot ystwyt
_vrwyt_ vriwdoll arnaw.
7 id. 1394. 5-6, rwyt _vrwyt_
vrwydyrglwyf rwyf
rwyd get.
7 15g. H 54a. 12.
The editors of GCBM (Gwaith
Cynddelw
Brydydd) take _tryfrwyd_ to be a
fem. noun =
'brwydr'. They refer to Ifor
Williams, Canu Aneirin
294, and A.O.H. Jarman, Aneinin:
Y
Gododdin (in English) p. 194 who
translates
'clash', also Jarman, Ymddiddan
Myrddin a Thaliesin,
pp. 36-7. Ifor Williams, Bulletin
of the
Board of Celtic Studies xi
(1941-4) pp. 94-6 suggests
_try+brwyd_ `variegated,
decorated'.
On brwydr, the National
Dictionary of Wales has
this:
1 brwydr^1^
2 [dichon ei fod o'r un tarddiad
a@^
_brwyd^1^_, ond cf. H. Wydd.
_bri@'athar_ `gair']
3 _eb_. ll. -_au_.
6 pitched battle, conflict,
attack, campaign,
struggle; bother, dispute,
controversy; host, army.
7 13g. HGC 116, y lle a elwir . .
. y tir gwaetlyt,
o achaus y _vrwyder_ a vu ena.
7 14g. T 39. 24.
7 14g. WML 126, yn dyd kat a
_brwydyr_.
7 14g. WM 166. 32, _brwydreu_ ac
ymladeu.
7 14g. YCM 33, llunyaethu
_brwydyr_ a oruc
Chyarlymaen, yn eu herbyn.
7 15g. IGE 272, Yr ail gofal,
dial dwys, /
_Brwydr_ Addaf o Baradwys.
7 id. 295.
7 1567 LlGG (Sall) 14a, a' chyd
codei _brwydyr_
im erbyn, yn hyn yr ymddiriedaf.
7 1621 E. Prys: Ps 32a, Yno
drylliodd y bwa a'r
saeth, / a'r _frwydr_ a wnaeth yn
ddarnau.
7 1716 T. Evans: DPO 35, Cans
_brwydr_ y
Rhufeiniaid a aethai i Si@^r
Fo@^n.
7 1740 id. 336, _Brwydrau_ lawer o Filwyr arfog.
Dr. G. R. Isaac of The University of Wales, Abe ystywyth, in discussing brwyd, adds that:
"The correct Latin comparison is frio 'break up', both < Indo-European *bhreiH- 'cut, graze'. These words have many cognates, e.g. Latin fr uolus 'friable, worthless', Sanskrit bhrinanti 'they damage', Old Church Slavonic britva 'razor', and others. The Old British form of brwyd would have been *breitos. It is sometimes claimed that there is a possible Gaulish root cognate in brisare 'press out', but there are difficulties with that identification.
It may be worth stressing that the 'tryfrwyd' which means 'very speckled' and the 'tryfrwyd' which means 'piercing, pierced' are the same word, and that the latter is the historically pri mary meaning. The meaning 'very speckled' comes through 'bloodstained' from 'pierced' ('bloodstained' because 'pierced' in battle). But I do not think this has any bearing on the arguments.
Actually, Tryfrwyd MAY mean 'very speckled', but that is conjecture, not certain knowledge. Plausible conjecture, yes, but no more certain for that."
That "pierced" or
"broken" is to be preferred as the meaning of Tribruit is plainly
demonstrated by lines 21-22 of the _Pa Gur_ poem:
Neus tuc manauid -
"Manawyd(an) brought
Eis tull o trywruid - pierced
ribs (or, metaphorically, "timbers", and hence arms of any kind,
probably spears or shields; )
from Tryfrwyd"
Tull, "pierced", here obviously refers to Tribruit as "through-pierced".
Professor Hywel Wyn Owen, Director of the Place-Name Research Centre, University of Wales Bangor, has the following to say on traeth + river names (personal correspondence):
"There are only two examples of traeth + river name that I know of, both in Anglesey (Traeth Dulas, Traeth Llugwy) but there may well be others. The issue is still the same however. Where a river flows into the sea would normally be aber. The traeth would only be combined with the river name if the river name was also used of a wider geographical context, and became, say, the name of the bay. Hence traeth + bay name rather than traeth + river name directly."
In the poem, the shore of Tryfrwyd battle is listed one just prior to Din Eidyn and once just after the same fort (I will have more on the Pa Gur battle sites below). The Gwrgi Garwllwyd or ‘Man-dog Rough-grey’ who is also placed at Tryfrwyd has been associated with the Cynbyn or ‘Dog-heads’ Arthur fought at Din Eidyn.
Manawyd's role at Tryfrwyd may suggest that this river or its shore is to be found in or on the borders of Manau Gododdin, which was the district round the head of the Firth of Forth, whose name remains in Slamannan and Clackmannan.
The Fords of Frew west of Stirling have been proposed as the site of the battle, but Jackson claims W. frut or ffrwd, ‘stream’, cannot have yielded frwyd. Jackson also countered Skene's theory that this was the Forth, on the grounds that the Welsh name for the Forth, Gweryd, which would be *Guerit in OW.
The poem may be even more
specific, in that Traeth Tryfrwyd is said to be 'ar eidin cyminauc'
(line 28), ‘at Eidyn on the border’. Now, the ‘bo der’ here could be the Firth of Forth, but it is much more likely to be the line of division between Gododdin proper and Manau Gododdin.
The Cynbyn or ‘Dog-heads’ may partly owe their existence to the Coincenn daughter of Aedan, father of the Dalriadan Arthur, and to the Coinchend in the Irish story The Adventure of Art son of Conn. In this Irish tale, Art battles a monstrous woman named Coincenn or ‘Doghead’ who is a member of a tribe bearing the same name.
The Coincenn of the Irish are thought to be a reflection of the Classical Cynacephali.
Ole Munch-Pedersen cites the following note from Cecile Ó Rahilly text of the Irish heroic epic Cath Finntrágha or the “Battle of the White Strand” (Irish traigh is cognate with Welsh traeth):
"The Coinchinn or Coinchennaig are frequently mentioned in Irish literature. From the 8th cen-tury on the name was applied to pirates who ravaged Ireland. Cp. Thurneysen, Zu Ir. Hss., p. 24. In the Adventures of Art mac Cuinn they are represented as living in Tir na nIngnad whose King is called Conchruth (Éiriu III. 168). They are mentioned in a poem in the Book of the Dean of Lismore (Rel. Celt. I. 80) and in a poem is Duanaire Finn (xxxviii) where they are said to have invaded Ireland and been defeated by Finn. In the YBL tale Echtra Clérech Choluim Cille (RC XXVI 160 § 45, 161 § 48) men with dogs' heads are 'of the race of Ham or of Cain'. Similarly in the late romance Síogra Dubh the Caitchean-naigh and Coincheannaigh and Gabharchean-naigh are said to be do chinéal Caim mic Naoi (GJ XIX 99 5-6, cp. LU 122)." (Cath Finntrágha, (1962), lch. 65).
From the English translation of the Battle of Ventry/Cath Finntragha
(http://www.maryjones.us/ctexts/f20.html):
“'O soul, O Glas son of Dreman,' said the king of the world, 'not a harbour like this didst thou promise my fleet would find, but shores of white sand where my army might assemble for fairs and gatherings whenever they were not fighting.' 'I know a harbour like that in the west of Erinn,' said Glas, 'namely, Ventry Harbour… They went onward thence to Ventry, and filled the borders of the whole harbour so that the sea was not vis-ible between them, and the great barque of the king of the world was the first to take harbour, so that thenceforward its name was Rinn na Bairci (The Point of the Barque). And they let down their many-coloured linen-white sails, and raised their purple-mouthed speckled tents, and consumed their excellent savoury viands, and their fine intoxicating drinks, and their harps were brought to them for long playing, and their poets to sing their songs and their dark conceits to them...
Now, these hosts and armies came into Ciarraige Luachra and to red-maned Slieve Mis, and thence to Ventry Harbour. 'O Tuatha De Danand,' said Abartach, 'let a high spirit and courage arise within you in the face of the battle of Ventry. For it will last for a day and a year, and the deed of every single man of you will be related to the end of the world, and fulfil now the big words ye have uttered in the drinking- hous-es.' 'Arise,O Glas, son of Dreman,' said Bodb Derg the son of the Dagda ,'to announce combat for me to the king of the world.' Glas went where the king of the world was. 'O soul, O Glas,' said the king of the world, 'are those yonder the fi-anns of Erinn?' 'Not they,' said Glas, 'but anoth-er lot of the men of Erinn, that dare not to be on the surface of the earth, but live in sid-brugs (fairy mansions) under the ground, called the Tuatha De Danand, and to announce battle from them have I come.' 'Who will answer the Tuatha De Danand for me?' said the king of the world. 'We will go against them,' said two of the kings of the world, namely, Comur Cromgenn, the king of the men of the Dogheads, and Caitch-enn, the king of the men of the Catheads, and they had five red-armed battalions in order, and they went on shore forthwith in their great red waves.
'Who is there to match the king of the men of the Dogheads for me?' said Bodb Derg. 'I will go against him,'said Lir of Sid Finnachaid,'though I have heard that there is not in the great world a man of stronger arm than he.’”
It is the Dogheads who would appear to hold the key to unravelling the Traeth Tryfrwyd mystery. Thanks to Lothian native and place-name expert John Wilkinson, who consulted a friend on the matter, I have learned the following:
“Ardchinnechena<n> is a place which the St. Andrews Foundation Account B says was where Hungus son of Forso placed the head of the de-feated Saxon king Athelstan on a pole “within the harbour which is now called Queen’s Ferry” (i.e. North Queensferry?); and which the shorter Account calls Ardchinnechun. Simon Taylor’s Fife Vol 3 offers ‘height/promontory of the head’ for the first and hints at a dindshenchas con-taining con ‘dog’ (in genitive) for the second.”
Ardchinnechena[n] is generally supposed to be the headland used by the Railway Bridge (see “Place-names of Fife”, vol. 1, 381-2, vol.3, 582-3).
This ‘Height of the Dog’s Head’
in North Queensferry Harbor reinforces my view that the Welsh tryfrwyd,
‘through-piered’, is an attempt to translate Latin trajectus, which has the
exact literal meaning. However, trajectus
also was the word used for a river-crossing, like the one at Queensferry. Frere
(in his BRITANNIA, p. 162) discusses TRAJECTUS on a coin of Caracalla for a
boat-bridge over the Forth or the Tay or both.
***
