WHEN IS A COINCIDENCE NOT A COINCIDENCE?: WHY I CAN'T LET GO OF ILLTUD AS UTHER

Liddington Castle (Badbury)

The testimony of the PA GUR concerning the very real possibility that Uther Pendragon is a Welsh rendering of military titles and descriptors given to Illtud when he served in a fort on/near the Ely (either Dinas Powys or Caerau, the latter being the old Silures oppidum) is not easily set aside.

Why?

Because of the age of the poem itself.  Most scholars (see p. 30 of Nerys Ann Jones' ARTHUR IN EARLY WELSH POETRY) give the date of the PA GUR's composition as between 900 and 1100.  But John Koch (footnote to same cited source) says that an 8th century composition is not implausible.

In several articles, I have discussed the striking coincidence between the Welsh Bicknor (Llancustennin/ St. Constantine's Church) and Lydbrook claimed as Illtud's home and the Bican Dyke and Lydbrook at Liddington Castle/Badbury.  The real question is: can we possibly encounter a coincidence this immense?  I mean, Liddington Castle was a Badbury, the Second Battle of Badon in the Welsh Annals is almost certainly at this Badbury, and there is a Barbury or Bear's Fort and Durocornovium (a very nice Cernyw) hard by.  

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

https://mistshadows.blogspot.com/2023/01/illtuds-father-bicanus-and-his-llydaw.html

https://mistshadows.blogspot.com/2018/05/arthur-and-beranburhbarbury-critical.html

What I haven't done yet is determine whether Illtud's presence at Durocornovium fits in with archaeology.  The sites in SE Wales might well be the result of relocation to the Celtic Fringe, a result of the original location having long been in English and Norman hands.  But if the area of Liddington Castle was already English by Arthur's time, then clearly Illtud was not born at Durocornovium.  

The following two helpful maps are drawn from Higham.  The third map is the location of Liddington Castle for the sake of comparison.

When we look at these maps, we need to bear in mind that Arthur's Badon victory is c. 516, while his death at Camlann is c. 537.  

What these clearly show us is that, in fact, Liddington Castle and its immediate environs were still in British hands during Arthur's floruit.  They fit in with a battle at Badon c. 516.

But what about Camlann?  I have made a case for a "Dobunni theater" Camlann at Uley Bury hillfort, a 'Crooked Enclosure' on a Cam stream in Gloucestershire.  Here is Higham's map of 560 Britain, along with another showing the location of Uley.

Interestingly, Uley is literally right on the frontier zone.

So, when it comes to the possiibility of Illtud hailing from Durocornovium, we must answer in the affirmative.  And, in fact,  both a battle at Badbury and another at Uley make really good sense when we plug those into the archaeological maps.

On the viability of Liddington Castle itself during the Arthurian period:

https://historicengland.org.uk/listing/the-list/list-entry/1016312?section=official-list-entry

"A small scale excavation in 1976 found that the rampart was constructed in at least four phases, the latest being a re-fortification during the Saxon period."

NOTE: 

The C&O tradition that links Uther and Arthur to Caer Dathal in Arfon is in direct conflict with the PA GUR's apparent localization of Uther at the River Ely.  I will turn my attention to this remaining problem in a future blog post.

CAER DATHAL VERSUS ELEI AND THE CORNISH TRADITION FOR ARTHUR: WEAVING TOGETHER THE STRANDS OF LEGEND INTO A GRAND UNIFYING THEORY?

Beginning of the MARWNAT VTHYR PEN

As a result of completing my last blog post (https://mistshadows.blogspot.com/2024/10/caer-dathal-and-irish-problem.html), I find it necessary to once again look towards the very real possibility that Uther is actually Cunedda.  

Sometimes, when I look for a nice, simple, clean Arthurian theory, I become myopic. And I also tend to relinquish a very good theory in favor of a newer one that I find more exciting. These are errors of methodology that I'm seeking to redress.

I once was certain I had discovered the real Uther Pendragon when I was able to draw a connection between the Pen Kawell of the Uther elegy and Ceawlin of the ANGLO-SAXON CHRONICLE. In brief, Welsh cawell is "basket", as is AS ceawl. As I had long ago proven Ceawlin to be Cunedda "Maqui-Coline", my textual evidence for Cerdic of Wessex/Ceredig son of Cunedda = Arthur accumulated to a satisfying degree.

Why did I move away from a theory that seemed so solid (and even, in some ways, desirable)?

Primarily because while I felt instinctively that the Gewissei battles belonged to Arthur, I had a more attractive and more literally interpreted set of battles for him in the North. 

AND, I had stumbled upon what I thought was an identification of Uther with St. Illtud, himself having been wrongly identified with Arthur's real father, Sawyl Benisel. The argument is long and involved and can be found in multiple blog posts on this site. But as Sawyl belonged to the North, I could have my preferred Northern battles.

Of course, the whole case for Sawyl collapses if we do one of two things. The first is that we disallow the occurence of Sawyl as a metaphor for Uther in the elegy. Sawyl is, there, an emendation. The text actually has kawyl.

Or we can accept that while Mabon the servant of Uther was present at the Ely River where Illtud was master of soldiers, it does not follow that Uther himself was there. Mabon is in the area because Gileston was originally called the Church of Mabon of the Vale.

What it comes down to is shifting Uther from the Ely River to Nantlle. What does this mean for Uther's historical identity?

Well, Illtud would be out of the picture (as would any attempt to show that the saint had been wrongly identified with Sawyl Benisel). Instead, Cunedda Maqui-Coline/Ceawlin once again comes to the fore.

A standard rule when emending an early Welsh poem like the MARWNAT VTHYR PEN is to make as few alterations as possible in order to achieve good meaning. I once did this with certain critical lines in the elegy.

The important words in the poem that appear to require emendation are here highlighted:

Neu vi luossawc yn trydar:

It is I who commands hosts in battle:

ny pheidwn rwg deu lu heb wyar.

I’d not give up between two forces without bloodshed.

Neu vi a elwir gorlassar:

It’s I who’s styled ‘Armed in Blue’:

vy gwrys bu enuys y’m hescar.

my ferocity snared my enemy.

Neu vi tywyssawc yn tywyll:

It is I who’s a leader in darkness:

a’m rithwy am dwy pen kawell.

Our lord transforms me, Chief kawell.

Neu vi eil kawyl yn ardu:

It is I who's like (or who's a second) kawyl in the gloom:

ny pheidwn heb wyar rwg deu lu.

I’d not give up without bloodshed [the fight] between two forces.

For the GPC attestations of these words and the related cafell, see the NOTE at the bottom of this post.

If we do nothing with kawell at all, then we have pen kawell, which seems ridiculous. It could be kafell, "sanctuary", and so God in the line would be Chief of the Sanctuary. This is certainly possible.

Or we can do as I've already suggested above and allow Chief Basket to stand as a Welsh rendering of Ceawlin/Cunedda.

Kawyl can be given an n (indicated by a mark by a copyist and thus easily omitted) to make it kanwyl[l], a term meaning 'candle' that could also denote a star or a leader. The kawyl line parallels the line above the kawell line, which describes a leader in darkness. So a luminary (or star) leading in the gloom makes the most sense here. 

Also, as I've pointed out before, Uther as as a star explains Geoffrey of Monmouth's dragon-comet, which he identifies with Uther himself. Geoffrey also invents Gorlois out of Uther's gorlassar epithet.

These two emendations represent the smallest and simplest changes we can exert upon the text and still yield sensible meaning.  More than sensible, really, as we provide an explanation for the Galfridian dragon-comet as a motif deriving ultimately from the elegy itself. 

The question is whether we're justified in keeping cawell in preference to cafell.

Well, if I didn't already have a good argument an entire book-length long (THE BEAR KING: ARTHUR AND THE IRISH IN WALES AND SOUTHERN ENGLAND), I would say no. But when my theory for Arthur = Ceredig son of Cunedda/Cerdic of Wessex is carefully considered, the correspondence of cawell and Ceawlin feels positively providential. 

But what about the emphasis placed in the tradition on the Cornish Arthur and Uther?

One possibility has to do with archaeology. It is generally believed the English made their way up the Thames Valley before they began infiltrating Hampshire. This is opposite of the ASC testimony, but then again the ASC reverses the early generations of the Gewissei. 

If the Thames push was first, and the Gewissei were fighting for the British, not against them, then Durocornovium and Liddington/Badbury and Barbury would have made a good advance base of operations against the invaders.

However, the presence of the grave of Cunorix/Cynric son of Maqui-Coline/Ceawlin at Viroconium/Wroxeter in the heart of the old Cornovii kingdom suggests a more attractive reason for associating Cunedda and his family or teulu/warband with Cornwall. I have theorized that the Gewissei were acting in a federate capacity, holding NW Wales for the high king at Wroxeter in return for military service against the Saxons. In this sense, then, the Gewissei became associated in legend with a "Cornwall." Eliwlad the eagle/grandson of Uther may have been put in Cornwall (although he clearly originates in Nantlle) because he was associated with the Eagle of Eli, a place in the heartland of the old Cornovii kingdom.  

What does all this signify, then?

That our best bet for Arthur is Ceredig son of Cunedda, and that his battles are to be identified with battles of the Gewissei.

NOTE:

14g. IGE² 37, Cenglynrhwym bob congl unrhyw, / Cafell aur, cyfa oll yw.

15g. GO xxxii. 29-30, Tai melys win, teml y saint, / Tair kavell, tŷ y’r kwvaint.

15g. DE 119, o gyfarch yn y gafell / i dduw a mair oedd ym well.

1567 LlGG 104a, yn y Gauell [:- gangell] lle bo’r Voreul ar Brydnonawl weddi wedir ordenio i dywedyd.

1632 D, Cafell, Chorus Ecclesiae, Adytum.

1671 C. Edwards: FfDd 212, ymhen isafl cafell Baccus … y mae alior Fenus.

1722 T. Evans: PS 35.

13g. LlDW 1021, [gwerth] kauell teylyau .1.

14g. IGE 214, Balchach wyf gilio’r bolchwydd / O’r cylla rhwth cawell rhwydd (Iorwerth ab y Cyriog).

c. 1400 R 13407, gwamal bwyt gawal. budyr y gawell.

c. 1400 [RB] WM td. 10012-14, nachaf gwr diruawr y veint … yn dyuot y mywn achawell gantaw.

15g. DGG 127, Deuthum a’r cawell trum cau / Ar fy nghefn, oer fy nghofau.

15g. FfBO 48, deu gawell yn llawn o wedilly[on] bordeu.

15g. GGl 98, Mae’n ei gawell facrelliaid.

1547 WS, Panier kawell A pannyer.

1567 LlGG (Sall) 75a, a’ei gawell yn llawn o hanwynt [saethau].

1588 Ecs ii. 3, [c]awell iddo ef o lafrwyn.

1620 Jer v. 27, Fel cawell yn llawn o adar.

1632 D, Cawell, Sporta, corbis, cuna.

1753 TR, cawell … a cradle.

1763 ML ii. 547, Roedd Huw wedi dwyn iddo sachlen o wiail o’m gwig helyg, i wneuthur o honynt gewyll, Ang., baskets, i wragedd y Llannerch.

10g. (Ox 2) VVB 64, cannuill, gl. lichinum vel cantela vel teda.

13g. C 304-6, Kin myned im guerid imiruet. in tywill heb canvill im gorsset.

13g. C 8511, kanuill kangulad.

13g. LlDW 239-13, kanuyllyd … a del[y] pen ekanuylleu a tenh[o] ay ddannet.

14g. T 1517, canhwyll yn tywyll a gerd genhyn.

1346 LlA 39, tebic ynt y gann()yll yn goleuhav y ereill.

14g. WM 12324-6, peredur tec … blodeu y milwyr achanhwyll y marchogyon.

id. 43016-18, gwedy llosgi cannwyll o honei hi yn oleuad itaw ev vrth wiscaw.

14g. GDG 294, Gorffwyll am gannwyll Gwynedd.

c. 1400 R 103229, tec agannwyll pwyll y dyn.

c. 1400 MM 50, Kymryt kanhwyll o wer deueit.

15g. GGl 203, Cannwyll yw’n canu llawer / I beri clod a berw clêr.

1567 TN 104b, Canwyll [:- Goleuad] y corph yw’r llygat.

1588 Diar xiii. 9, cannwyll y drygionus a ddiffoddir.

1595 Egl Ph [ix], Pwy a gymmer arno chwilio’n lwyddiannus yr Arabieit … heb y gannwyll ymma yn gynrithawl o’i blaen?

FINAL EVIDENCE FOR CAER ENGAN IN NANTLLE AS CAER DATHAL

Caer Engan Relative to Penarth in Arfon

When I was trying to find Caer Dathal, known to contain relatives of Uther Pendragon and home to a wife of Arthur, I had tended to favor Caer Engan in Nantlle.  However, there were some indication that the site might be farther north in Gwynedd.  I talked about Dinas Dinorwig, Hirael (where one of the Sons of Iaen appears to have been buried) and Caernarvon.  

Alas, although I had mentioned MATH SON OF MATHONWY'S Pennardd in passing, I had not bothered to look for it.  Instead, I had merely considered it close to Caer Dathal.  In fact, the story tells us that when the troops mustered for the fight against Pryderi the war trumpet summoning them together could be heard from Caer Dathal.

Now, war trumpets could be heard for miles.  As it turns out, Pennardd is modern Penarth, whose position relative to Caer Engan can be seen at the top of the article.  A couple other fortresses are in the same area.  Y Foel (treated of separately below) is a little over 2 kilometers from Penarth (known for its cromlech). Craig-Y-Dinas on Llyfni is 2 kilometers away.  And Caer Engan is only 5 kilometers distant (i.e. only some 3 miles).  

What this means is that Caer Engan is still our best candidate for Caer Dathal.  Sites in northern Gwynedd - like Caernarvon and Dinas Dinorwig - are too far from Penarth.

All the material below was made available previously in a study on the location of Caer Dathal.  

***

Math has as his virgin footholder Goewin, daughter of Pebin.  The name Pebin is found at Dol Bebin in Nantlle, very close to the Caer Engan hillfort.

Dol Bebin with Caer Engan hillfort to the west

(and some of the Coed Madoc sites)

(https://coflein.gov.uk/en/site/302412/)

This is more than just a coincidence.  For if we allow Dathal to be from Irish Tuathal, but then accept Tuathal itself as an Irish substitution for Welsh Tudwal, Caer Dathal magically appears from the mists of time. [Conversely, a W. Tudwal could have later been substituted for an original Irish Tuathal, which the Welsh had pronounced Dathal/Tathal.]

As it happens, there was a local St. Tudwall whose name is preserved in Gwynedd:

"TUDWAL, ST. There is a group of two islands off the south coast of the Llŷn peninsula called St.Tudwal's Isles. On the eastern island, the larger of the two, there was formerly a small chapel, under Llanengan, dedicated to St.Tudwal (PW 86). It is mentioned in the Taxatio of 1291, p.291, as “Eccl'ia Prions de Enys Tudwal”. Ffynnon Dudwal formerly existed on Penrhyn, in the parish of Llanengan (LBS IV.274). Tudwal may have given his name to Tudweiliog, a parish in Llŷn on the opposite side of the peninsula, although the dedication is to St.Cwyfen. Compare Rice Rees, Welsh Saints, p.134." [P.C. Bartrum A CLASSICAL WELSH DICTIONARY]

The Engan (W. Einion) of Llanengan is exactly the same name as we find in Caer Engan.  But could he be the same man?  The Llanengan Einion is none other than -

EINION FRENIN ab OWAIN DANWYN. (b. circa 470)

The saint of Llanengan in Llŷn (PW 86). He was the son of Owain Danwyn according to

Bonedd y Saint (§9 in EWGT p.56). His commemoration is on February 9 (LBS I.70). See further LBS

II.422-4. [Bartrum]

What I am suggesting is simple: the Tudwall/Tuathal/Dathal of Llanengan at some point also gave his name to the hillfort on the Llyfni.  Thus Caer Dathal is Caer Engan next to Dol Bebin.

Uther, then, would have relatives at Caer Engan.  In my book THE BEAR KING, I argue for Uther being the great Cunedda - not a Briton from Manau Gododdin in the far north, but Cuinedha Mac Cuilinn, an attested Dark Age Irish chieftain from Drumanagh just across the Irish Sea from Gwynedd. Einion and Owain were, in fact, descendents of Cunedda.

Cunedda of the Ciannachta belonged to Brega in Mide. Mide was traditionally founded by Tuathal Techtmar, a king who had spent time in Britain and who had married the daughter of an British king. It is not beyond the realm of the possible that the Irish at Caer Dathal has named the fortress after this legendary leader.

I had long ago demonstrated the Madog son of Uther was the Madog whose place-names are found in Nantlle, and the Eliwlad belonged there as well (the Coed Madoc in Nantlle was relocated to Cutmadoc in Cornwall, and Eliwlad the death-eagle in an oak was copied from the story of the dead Lleu in the oak tree at Nantlle). According to the Stanzas of the Graves, the god Mabon, servant of Uther Pendragon in the PA GUR, was buried in Nantlle. Finding Uther's Caer Dathal so close to Nantlle is a happy result of my research. 

And, yes, there is good reason to believe (as I have written about extensively before; see, for example, https://mistshadows.blogspot.com/2022/06/notes-on-cornish-place-name-tintagel.html) that Geoffrey of Monmouth's Tintagel is a relocation of Caer Dathal.    

BRYNGWYDION

Now, while we are not told about such a place in "Math Son of Mathonwy", Welsh tradition does know of a Caer Wydion, named for Gwydion, nephew of Math.  

"Caer Wydion is attested as a Welsh name for the Milky

Way, and there are traditions of a son of Gwydion named

Huan ‘sun’ (on which, see Blodeuwedd); compare with

this the similarity of Lleu and Welsh lleuad ‘moon’."

- John Koch CELTIC CULTURE, p. 867

Could it be that in terms of mythical landscape, Caer Wydion is to be identified with Bryngwydion just a little north of the Afon Llyfni and the Craig-Y-Dinas promontory fort?

Probably, as Bryngwydion has its own ancient enclosure (see http://www.heneb.co.uk/hlc/caernarfon-nantllethemes.html), designated a smaller 'ring-fort.'  This placed would have been thought of as where Gwydion lived.  

A NOTE ON CAER ARIANRHOD

Caer Arianrhod is another important locator in 'Math Son of Mathonwy.' It is within both walking and boating distance of Caer Dathal (Caer Engan) and Dinas Dinlle, the 'Town of the Fort of Lleu.'

Traditionally, Caer Arianrhod has been identified with a coastal rock between Dinas Dinlle and Maen Dylan, the 'Stone of Dylan.'  Dylan was the god Lleu's twin brother, another son of Arianrhod.

I think, however, the real Caer Arianrhod was an entirely different place.  

The Bryn Arien mentioned as lying on the way to Caer Arianrhod along the sea from Dinas Dinlle has been identified with a hill near Brynaerau (see Sir Ifor Williams, Pedeir Keinc y Mabinogi , Cardiff, Second Edition, 1951, pp. 278-9).  Cefn Cludno or Cefn Clun Tyno was thought by Sir Ifor Williams to be in Capel Uchaf and others have since agreed (see 150 Jahre "Mabinogion" - deutsch-walisische Kulturbeziehungen by Bernhard Maier and Stefan Zimmer, Walter de Gruyter, 2015).  There is a Coed Tyno just a little north of Capel Uchaf. 

Foel Hillfort near Tyno

Foel Hillfort

(https://coflein.gov.uk/en/site/95338/images)

If Gwydion and Lleu really did take horses from Coed Tyno, then the most obvious fort close by is that of Foel.  

However, there is a Bryngwydion, 'Hill of Gwydion', just a little north of the Craig-Y-Dinas promontory fort.  And as Dylan's Stone is near the mouth of the Afon Llyfni, the 'port' of Arianrhod must be at the mouth of the river.  Note also the Lleuer (= W. lleuar, 'light, brightness'?; see https://www.academia.edu/35985785/Some_Cornish_place_names_with_lyw, citing Enwau lleoedd sir Gaernarfon by John Lloyd-Jones, Gwasg Prifysgol Cymru, 1928, for lleu-erw: lleu 'goleu') place-names at Craig-Y-Dinas, which may well hearken back to the god Lleu. The Llyfni flows through Lleu's Nantlle, and Dolbebin in Nantlle was named for the father of Math's virgin footholder, Goewin.

Craig-Y-Dinas

(https://coflein.gov.uk/en/site/93534/)

Either of these forts could be Caer Arianrhod.  The deciding factor might be that when Gwydion and Lleu take horses from Coed Tyno, they are not said to have crossed or forded the Llyfni.  To have gone to Brynaerau, thence to Coed Tyno and on to Craig-Y-Dinas would mean they were doubling back on their course needlessly. The mouth of the Llyfni could serve just as well as the 'port' of the Foel hillfort.  Finally, the two Lleuer places are south of the Llyfni, so more accessible from Foel.  Craig-Y-Dinas is on the north side of the river.  The hill of Foel is over 220 meters high, making it much more imposing in the landscape than Craig-Y-Dinas.

There is another reason for rejecting Craig-Y-Dinas as Caer Arianrhod - and it is a big one.  When Gwydion goes to the stronghold of Pennardd to follow the sow that will lead him to Lleu in Nantlle, we are told that this place lies downstream from Dyffyrn Nantlle or the Valley of Nantlle.  This can only be Craig-Y-Dinas on the Afon Llyfni which is, in fact, downstream from Nantlle.  

In another episode we are told that Math musters an army and takes it to Pennardd. During the night, Gwydion and his nephew Gilfaethwy return to Caer Dathal. At dawn the following day they return to Pennardd.  The context plainly suggests that Caer Dathal and Pennardd are close to each other, and this fits Craig-Y-Dinas and Caer Engan.  

For these reasons, I think we must favor Foel as Caer Arianrhod.  

Rachel Browich and others have favored Aran- for the first component of Arianrhod's name.  If such scholars are correct, it might be that Aranrot was originally a name for the hill of Foel.

The following discussion of the meaning of her name is from the TRIADS (p. 284):

The standard line of reasoning for the etymology of Aran is set forth by Dr. Richard Coates in https://www.snsbi.org.uk/Nomina_articles/Nomina_35_Coates.pdf.  

However, John Koch (in CELTIC CULTURE: A HISTORICAL ENCYCOLPEDIA) is surely right in settling for Arianrhod as the correct spelling of the name:

WHAT HAPPENS IF WE PUSH THE ILLTUD = UTHER THEORY TO ITS LIMIT

Barbury Castle, Wiltshire

My readers will know that I just recently reposted the following piece:

https://mistshadows.blogspot.com/2023/01/illtuds-father-bicanus-and-his-llydaw.html

The concern is that the PA GUR's apparent identification of Uther Pendragon with Illtud the warrior-monk, something that I've managed to more or less escape from by postulating a confusion or conflation of Uther with Sawyl Benisel, might instead point to Illtud being the real father of Arthur.

This is not a possibility that can be summarily dismissed.

As I've discussed before, given the way folkloristic developments occur it is quite conceivable that Uther Pendragon as a metaphorical name/title for Illtud the terribilis miles and magister militum/princeps militum may simply have taken on a separate personality. After all, Geoffrey of Monmouth successfully created Gorlois, Duke of Cornwall, out of the gorlassar epithet Uther uses for himself in his elegy poem. 

In addition, Arthur in the hagiographical literature is uniformly represented as a secular ruler who is ignorant of Christianity's teaching and thus in need of didactic correction.  It may be that Illtud, a leader of soldiers during the first part of his life, was "separated" out from his former objectionable self by relegating his martial career to the Terrible Chief of Warriors.

If we allow this to have happened, and trace the relevant place-names regarding Illtud's parentage to the Badbury Liddington, near to the 'Bear's Fort' of Barbury and the Roman city of Durocornovium, we have to acknowledge that Arthur himself must have belonged to a kingdom that had descended from the Roman-period Dobunni.  Such a geographical fix for the great British champion would mean he was on the very border of an expanding Saxon kingdom of Wessex.  And it would mean that the Arthurian battles should be found in the South, not the North.  Or, if some of them are found in the North, there had been an attempt already by the 9th century (the date of the HISTORIA BRITTONUM) to place Arthur everywhere in Britain.  In other words, the historical figure had already been transformed into a superhero of sorts, whose 12 Herculean battles found in defeating foes all over the Island.

Because the only really good source we have that seems to identify Uther is the PA GUR, and in the PA GUR Uther seems to be Illtud, it would seem a wise course of action to yet again investigate potential Southern Arthurian battle sites.

However, I've already done that - many times over. And the result?

THE BATTLES, AS FOUND LISTED IN THE HB, ARE IN THE NORTH. 

Still, the Bicknor/Lydbrook-Bican Dike/Lydbrook matchup and the link with a Badbury that may well be the Badon does not allow me to summarily dismiss the tradition.

So, with a deep sigh of resignation, I will look for the battles in the South one last time. I have a feeling that much of the work I've done on the Gewissei battles will come into play, with some variation.

 

Playing-Out the Illtud = Uther Scenario

 

[This post is dedicated to my friend Robert Vermaat, who first published some of early works many years ago. Robert has always preferred the idea of a Southern Arthur, with a focus on Liddington Castle as Badon - although he is wise enough not to espouse a belief based upon lack of evidence.]

As I have insisted all along, the only good reason not to accept Illtud as Uther is the apparent placement of the Arthurian battles in the North. Well, that and the possible 'Sawyl' that exists in the MARWNAT VTHYR PEN elegy as a poetic metaphor for Uther.

For those who wish a sort of summary of Illtud's origin point, please see the following link:

https://mistshadows.blogspot.com/2023/01/illtuds-father-bicanus-and-his-llydaw.html

This is one of only a great many articles on the subject of Illtud, but it does provide at least the general geographical sense for this personage, at least according to my current thinking on the matter.

As with much of the early Welsh poetry, the Uther elegy contains many "opaque" passages that seem rooted in errors of copying.  The two best possible readings for one critical section at at odds with each other, and send us in completely opposite directions.

In the first, Uther boasts about God, the Chief Luminary (or candle, lamp, sun, moon, star, leader), transforming him, and that he thus became a 'second Samuel (W. Sawyl).'  It is this interpretation which allowed me to pursue the identification of Arthur's real father with Sawyl Benisel in the North.

In the second, we allow God to be Chief of the Sanctuary and have Uther transformed into the cannwyll (star, etc.) in the gloom.  This would fit the earlier reference to Uther as leader in the darkness, and allow us to posit that Geoffrey of Monmouth's comet/star, which is said to be Uther himself, has its origin in this rendering of the lines.  

If, for the sake of argument, we go with No. 2, we are allowed to hypothesize that the great war general Illtud was removed from the Arthurian orbit when he was transformed (pun intended) in hagiographical literature to a pacifist saint.  In the process, he became not Arthur's father, but his cousin.  This might seem a strange development were it not for the fact that Arthur himself is always viewed in saints' lives and didactic poems in a decidedly negative light. 

Is is possible that Illtud really was Arthur's father?

Well, there are a lot of things attractive about the notion.  An Arthur centered at Durocornovium would agree with the hero's supposed Cornish origin.  Badbury at Liddington does appear to be identified in the Welsh Annals as the site of the second Badon battle - which would imply it was also the scene of the first Badon battle.  Barbury Castle, the 'Bear's Fort', is nearby and could have easily been given its name by the English because they bought into the Welsh tendency to link Arthur's name with their word arth, 'bear.'  A Dobunnic Arthur would place our hero on the very frontier with the expanding English invaders.  

So what's stopping me from embracing this particular Arthurian theory?

Again, it's the battles that are the problem.

Sure, it may well be that sites in the South are now extinct, buried beneath English and Norman names.  In which case, obviously, we will never find them.  But when we are faced with a battle-name like that of the Celyddon Wood, we are forced to admit one of two things: either some of these battles are made up and properly belong to a later, Northern Arthur (like the Dalriadan one) or they are corruptions of Southern names.  Playing the corruption game is a dangerous one - as I have discovered more than once.

The most logical approach would be to see a Southern Arthur as a foul against the Gewissei, and to try and match up his battles with theirs.  I have actually done this, but the result has really convinced no one of the veracity of such hypothetical identifications.  

An excellent example of the kind of confusion that can occur when looking at these battles is manifest in that of the Tribruit.  I long ago showed that this was an exact Welsh translation of the Roman Latin trajectus.  But while the PA GUR poem seems to place this site in the North, the only place actually called this in our scant, extant ancient geographies is Trajectus near Bitton, not far from both Dyrham and Bath.  Part of the "proof" of the battle's Northern location is Manawydan's involvement.  This points to the Manau Gododdin region.  However, in CULHWCH AND OLWEN we learn that Manawydan is also at/in the Severn, which is where the Trajectus crossing is found.  Thus it is distinctly possible that the PA GUR has relocated the battle to the far North, when in reality it belonged in the South.

Some other place-names, like the Bassas River, can only be identified with a Northern site with a bit of a strain.  The fact remains that (as Dr. Graham Isaac long ago assured me) the most perfect candidate for it exists at Bassingbourn in Cambridgeshire. This is deep in what would have been English territory as Arthur's time, but if we are dealing with an effective British counter-offensive, no matter how short-lived, Bassingbourn is not impossible.  Those who argue that an English name cannot have found its way into the Arthurian battle list are simply ignorant of how many English names can be confirmed to be present in the early Welsh literary materials.  I and others have written about several of these.

I will not again delve into the Arthurian battles in the South.  Simply put, only a couple of them can be satisfactorily placed there.  There is absolutely nothing we can do with the majority of them.  Why throw up our hands in despair when the battles can be found up and down the Roman Dere Street in the North - EXACTLY WHERE WE WOULD EXPECT TO FIND THEM IF AN ARTHUR FROM RIBCHESTER WERE FIGHTING AGAINST THE SAXONS ALONG A WELL-DEFINED FRONTIER?

In only one sense do I hold Sawyl in some disfavor: I still think that the ARM[...]S of the L. Artorius Castus stone could read ARMENIOS.  If it did, then Castus was in Britain before the Sarmatians were there, and the preservation of the Artorius name at Ribchester of the Sarmatian veterans did not happen.  That would free us up to put Arthur elsewhere.  I have flirted with a situation for him on the Wall, for instance at the Banna Roman fort.  But such a placement negates his ancestry, for we can't perfunctorily stick his father Uther at Banna (despite the known draco association with the late Roman Dacian garrison of that fort).

Epigraphers, archaeologists and historians all place the L. Artorius Castus stone in a time range that allows for either ARMENIOS or ARMORICOS to be the reading for the fragmentry ARM[...]S of the inscription.  And if it were ARMORICOS, then Sawyl of Ribchester works very well for Uther.  He gives us the Northern battles (which I have come to see as almost a certainty) of Arthur and preserves a pedigree that seems to be embedded in the Welsh tradition, albeit imperfectly.  

Must We Stick with Illtud as Arthur's Father or Will Sawyl Do?

              Ribchester Roman Fort

My previous blog post (https://mistshadows.blogspot.com/2024/10/illtud-knight-rides-again.html) was, essentially, an acknowledgment of defeat, for I have unable to shake off what seems incontrovertible evidence supporting an identification of Uther with St. Illtud.

I've never much liked the Uther =Illtud equation, and for the many reasons I've previously expressed. I have from time to time supported the idea that Illtud the Terrible Chief of Dragons had himself only been made into Arthur's father because he had been wrongly confused/conflated with Sawyl Benisel of Ribchester.  This idea worked on many levels. Most importantly, it allowed me to retain Arthur's Northern battles. I was not forced to forsake the many clues provided by tradition which solidly placed the battles there. I did not have to throw my hands up in despair while trying in vain to conjure good arguments for situating the battles in the South.

In this present article I wish to briefly run through the case made in favor of Sawyl as Arthur's father with an eye towards determining whether the theory is truly valid.

We may begin by listing the Illtud/Uther-Sawyl "correspondences", such as they are:

1) If we go by a strict end-rhyme requirement for the MARWNAT VTHYR PEN, Uther claims to have been transformed by God, 'Chief of the Lamp', into a 'second Sawyl (Samuel).'

2) In Illtud's Vita, his men raid St. Cadoc's monastery and are punished for the sacrilege; but in Cadoc's Vita, it is Sawyl's men who commit the misdeed.

3) In Geoffrey of Monmouth, Eldad/Illtud uses the Biblical Samuel as a model for action against the Saxons.

4) Uther is master of Mabon. Maponus was worshipped at Roman Ribchester. Llansawel, the Church of Sawel, has within its parish the fort of Mabon the Giant.  Illtud's Llantwit Major is only a very short distance from Gileston, anciently called the Church of Mabon of the Vale.

5) Uther's son Madog and grandson Eliwlad may well be a reflection of Sawyl's son Matoc Ailithir. Cf. an Eli-(g)wlad construction with Aili-tir. Name and epithet would both mean 'Other-land.' In Irish, Ailithir means "pilgrim", i.e. a person from another country.

That is all from memory, of course. There may have been some other fine points to the argument that are lurking somewhere in the many blog posts I've created on the subject.

Now onto the memorial stone of L. Artorius Castus...

Several years of intensive research involving communication with the top scholars has shown conclusively that the fragmentary ARM[...]S of the Castus inscription could stand for either ARMENIOS or ARMORICOS. Both are equally possible. 

In support of ARMENIOS is our knowledge of the Roman governor of Britain, Statius Priscus, being sent to command the army that retook Armenia, as well as the probable early date for the foundation of Castus's Liburnia.

In favor of ARMORICOS is knowledge of the Deserters' War in the reign of Commodus being centered in Gallia Lugdunensis, the proximity of Armorica to Britain, and the march to Rome against Perennis of the 1500 British spearmen. The force described by Dio exactly matches in number what we would expect from three legionary vexillations - like those found on Castus's stone - and this force is the only one of its kind mentioned in the sources for the time period we are considering.

ARMORICOS is necessary for a Ribchester Arthur, as that firt housed the Sarmatians, both as garrison troops and later as settled veterans. Armenia would mean Castus was in Britain before the Sarmatians arrived there. Armorica means he could have used Sarmatian troops in Britain and perhaps even on the Continent. For his Artorius name to have been preserved at Ribchester, he would, therefore, have had to fight in Armorica, not Armenia.

Now for what I have chosen to call "The Irish Problem"...

Whenever we deal with a historical Arthur of the early to mid-6th century, we must be able to account for why the name crops up again ONLY in two Irish-descended dynasties in Britain, viz. those of Dyfed and Dalriada.

Thus far, no one has been able to explain this fact.

Now, Sawyl of Ribchester, as it happens, married a princess who hailed from NE Ireland. Her kingdom had ties with Dalriada, and Arthur of Dyfed killed a member of a tribal group who were enemies of this particular kingdom. The Dalriadan royal family brought a British woman into its fold. I have explained the particulars of all this elsewhere. All I need say here is that an Arthur originating from Ribchester and achieving a high degree of fame in the North, and himself being noble Irish on his mother's side, may well have endeared himself reputation and name-wise to fledgling Irish principalities in Britain who were trying to emphasize their "Britishness."

CONCLUSION:

Sawyl Benisel of Ribchester is the best candidate for Arthur's historical father that I can come up with. Many will not be satisfied with my having arrived at this decision. But that is merely a symptom of the sad state Arthurian Studies has found itself in of late; no one is satisfied with a theory unless it is their own. Unique ownership of personal truth is paramount. The real truth thus remains elusive.

To once again quote Montaigne, "We most firmly believe that which we least know."

https://www.amazon.com/Battle-Leader-Ribchester-Definitive-Identification-Legendary-ebook/dp/B085VQQ43L/ref=sr_1_1?crid=3S5VF7S5KP756&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.gqv0kUqecPGaRYMpuruAjg.NBjFf2O46qpYBLxv4QCEvRcH1sJ8-XzKtkjkhGm8-2s&dib_tag=se&keywords=the+battle-leader+of+ribchester+august+hunt&qid=1728403857&sprefix=the+battle-leader+of+ribchester+august+hunt%2Caps%2C159&sr=8-1

Mabon the Prisoner of Illtud

                           

My readers by now know all too well how in past research I've demonstrated the very strong possibility that Uther Pendragon is a Welsh rendering of Latin descriptors and ranks given to Illtud in that saint's VITA. You also know that I've done everything in my power to destroy the theory, chiefly because I dislike trying to place Arthur's battles in the Southern arena.

Well, maintaining this anti-Illtud stance has become impossible.

I kept asking myself why Mabon is called the servant/slave (W. gwas) of Uther in the PA GUR. We know of only one instance in which Mabon could have been a slave, and that's during his long imprisonment in Gloucester. Bromwich and Evans, in their addition of CULHWCH AC OLWEN, discuss Mabon and his cousin Eiddoel, who are both prisoners at Caergloyw, otherwise called the fort of Glivi (Glefi), an eponym for Gloucester. 

This Eiddoel becomes Geoffrey of Monmouth's Eldol, ruler of Gloucester, while we find Eldad ( = Illtud) as that city's bishop.

C&O says of Mabon that he is yng ngharchar 'in prison', although the Triads call him a prisoner:

52. Three Exalted Prisoners of the Island of Britain. Llyr Half-Speech, and Mabon son of Modron, and Gwair son of Geirioedd.

Tri goruchel garcharawr ynys prydein. Llyr lledyeith. a mabon uab modron. a geir uab geiryoed.

https://faculty.arts.ubc.ca/sechard/492triad.htm

According to the GPC, carcharwr meant not only prisoner, but also slave.

carcharwr 

[carchar+-wr] 

eg. (un. b. carcharwraig, ll. carcharwragedd) ll. carcharwyr.

Carcharor, caethwas:

prisoner, slave. 

I've pointed out before that the small kingdom of Penychen in southern Wales where Illtud was master of the soldiers was in the region of Glywysing, from Glywys, "men of Gloucester."

The PA GUR is much later than some scholars have thought, as it contains 

Cymracized forms of both Gaelic and English place-names. Thus the influence of Galfridian tradition, while not plainly evident, cannot be discounted.

With Illtud the terribilus miles, magister militum and princeps militum being a chief of warriors in Glywysing and then represented in Geoffrey's fiction as a bishop of Gloucester, and given, furthermore, the presence of the Church of Mabon of the Vale (modern Gileston) so close to Llantwit Major, I don't feel I can any longer deny the likelihood that Illtud as Uther is the master of Mabon.

What this means for subsequent Arthurian theory is something I'm going to have to take a long, hard look at once again.

And, of course, the specter of Sawyl Benisel continues to haunt the whole thing. As does, ultimately, rejecting the reading of ARMENIOS on the LAC stone in favor of ARMORICOS. In addition, we would be embracing the Irish connection implicit in an identification of Arthur's real father with Sawyl - a connection which explains the Arthurs who belong to Irish-descended dynasties in Britain. As a bonus, I get to keep my precious Northern Arthurian battles.