Hires cover photo for The Bear's Fort (copyright http://davidgoddard.org/).

Low Res Version of Cover Photo for New Book THE BEAR'S FORT

Barbury Castle, Wiltshire, England.

Please note this is a copyrighted image.

THE PROBABLE BURIAL PLACE OF ARTHUR

The Uley complex as it might have appeared in the second and third centuries AD. The reconstruction image includes the temple, other excavated buildings and possible additional buildings on the edge of the settlement. (Woodward and Leach 1993 fig. 212. Illustration by Joanna Richards. Copyright JFR 1993) 

[http://curses.csad.ox.ac.uk/sites/uley-history.shtml]

For the details regarding the Uley stone church of the 6th century, I would refer my readers to:

http://mistshadows.blogspot.com/2018/01/the-archaeological-phases-of-uley.html

Here I merely wish to make my case for this stone church at the site of an ancient nemeton being the burial place of Arthur.

I base my argument on the church's proximity to the great Uley hillfort.  I believe this site to be Arthur's Camlan, from *Cambolanda, 'Crooked Enclosure' or, perhaps, 'Enclosure of the Cam/Crooked Stream.'

http://mistshadows.blogspot.com/2017/12/uley-bury-and-arthurs-camlan-process-of.html

Unfortunately, we do not know the name of the Uley temple.  Nor do we know the name of the British god worshipped there in the pre-Christian period.  Professor Roger Tomlin may possess material that would at least allow us to guess at the name of this god, but he is not releasing that information until he finishes publishing texts and translations of the lead curse tablets found in the temple grounds.

The presence of a possible 'Avalon' (the Lydney temple, if properly rendered as *Nemetabala, 'Sacred Apple Grove') across the Severn from the River Cam is intriguing, but any association of this place with Arthur would be mythological only.  There is no evidence for continuation of worship, pagan or Christian, at Lydney after the Roman period.  And, besides, as I've shown in my piece on Geoffrey of Monmouth's Avalon (see http://mistshadows.blogspot.com/2018/03/the-avalon-of-geoffrey-of-monmouth.html), Arthur's being ferried to such an Otherworld location seems to be due solely to a misidentification of Camlan with the River Camel in Cornwall, which as it happens has an 'apple' place-name nearby. 

Writing Started on THE BEAR'S FORT: ARTHUR AND THE DEFENSE OF DARK AGE BRITAIN

Or (longer, but more dramatic!) -

THE FORT OF THE BEAR: ARTHUR AND THE DEFENSE OF DARK AGE BRITAIN

Working title only.

This will be my fourth book on Arthuriana.  Completion and publishing dates will be announced here at https://mistshadows.blogspot.com/.  Sample chapters may occasionally also be made available.

Ink Plan of Barbury Castle

(Courtesy https://historicengland.org.uk/listing/the-list/list-entry/1014557)

NOTE: My search for cover art is currently under way.  I've decided on either a photograph of Barbury Castle or an artistic rendering of the same (perhaps a reconstruction/re-creation based on the archaeological record).

Drone Flyover at Liddington Castle (Arthur's 'Badon')

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=agnw1FcaMPU

A NEW ETYMOLOGY FOR THE HWICCE

Bury Hill, Approximate Site of Ariconium (Photo Courtesy Wikipedia)

Before I offer my solution to the etymological problem posed by the tribal name Hwicce, I would urge my readers to seriously peruse the following excellent study on the subject by Dr. Richard Coates:

http://eprints.uwe.ac.uk/25802/7/Coates~HwicceASE~amend.pdf

I feel everyone is working way too hard on trying to come up with an acceptable etymology.  English Hwicce, 'chest, coffin, ark', is just fine.  I would guess that it is an English rendering for Ercing or Ergyng, whose name is to be directly derived from the Roman settlement-name Ariconium.  While I've elsewhere supplied the proper etymology for Ariconium itself (see http://mistshadows.blogspot.com/2016/10/a-new-etymology-for-roman-settlement.html), the early English could easily have applied their own meaning to the Welsh kingdom-name.

Ariconium and the Dobunni
(Map Courtesy Barry Cunliffe)

Ariconium and the Hwicce
(Map Courtesy Della Hooke)

The GPC lists the Welsh name for ark, chest, coffin as follows:

arch2

[bnth. Llad. arca, Crn. C. argh, Llyd. C. arch, H. Wydd. arc]

eb. ac yn eithriadol eg. ll. eirch, archoedd, archau.

a  Cist, coffr; blwch i gladdu neu amlosgi corff ynddo, coffin, ysgrîn; hefyd yn ffig.; ?creirfa:

chest, coffer; coffin; also fig.; ?shrine

Rivet and Smith, in their THE PLACE-NAMES OF ROMAN BRITAIN, have the following entry on Ariconium:

ARICONIUM

Antonine Itinersary : 4853 (Iter XIII) : ARICONIO.

DERIVATION : The name is formed from British *are- (*ari-) 'in front of ' and *conio-, of unknown meaning but perhaps the same as in Viroconium. Among names formed in this way (Holder I. 188) are possibly British Argistillum (and divine name Arnemetia), and abroad Armorici (Aremorici, the people 'in front of the sea'), Arelaunum silva, Areduno vico > Ardin (Deux-Sèvres, France); these do not help to guess a meaning for the present name, though Jackson observes that thc prefix is 'usually used in place-names of regions beside some feature such as a forest, a marsh, the sea, etc.' (Britannia, I (1970), 68).

IDENTIFICATION. The Roman settlement at Weston under Penyard, Herefordshire (SO 6423).

Note. The name has interesting survivals. In EPNS, XL, 192, its first part, with Anglo-Saxon -ingas attached, is recorded as Ircingafeld in the ASC (918) and Arcenfelde in DB, modern Archenfield, a deanery of the diocese of Hereford. There is also Ergyn(g), the Welsh name for a district in Herefordshire. Possibly the first element survives in a different form in the name Yartleton; the Roman site is some three miles to the north-west of this place.

Eilert Ekwall in his CONCISE OXFORD DICTIONARY OF ENGLISH PLACE-NAMES adds early forms Erchenefeld, Erchin, Ercincg. More forms/spellings can be found at http://www.melocki.org.uk/places/A.html:

circ. 380 Ariconium, Iter Anton. ?
915 Ircingafeldes, Yrcingafeld, Iercingafeld, A.S. Chron.
1086 Arcenfelde, Arcenefelde, Dom.
circ. 1120 Jerchynfeld, Glos. Cart.
circ. 1130 Ergyng, Ercincg, Ergin, Erchyng, Erchynfeld, Urcenevelde, etc., Lib. Land.
1138 Erchenefelde, Glos. Cart.
circ. 1147 Erging, Geof. Mon.
circ. 1150 Herchenefeld, Brec. Cart.
1243 Urchenefeld in Wallia, T. de Nev.
1291 Irchenefeld, Yrcheneshome, Tax. Eccl.
circ. 1550 Herchinfield, Leland.
no date Ierchenfeld, Herchenefeld, Glos. Cart.

According to https://eprints.utas.edu.au/19778/2/whole_GrimmerMartinRae2003Vol2_thesis.pdf,

"The name Ergyng derives from the Roman town Ariconium (Weston-under-Penyard, Herefords.). As this is to the east of the Wye and the later region of Archenfield, some historians have suggested that the centre of British Ergyng had retreated westward under Anglo-Saxon pressure (e.g. Sims-Williams, Religion and Literature in Western England, p. 45)."

From "Religion and Literature in Western England", 600-800 by Patrick Sims-Williams:

Barry Cunliffe (via personal communication) had this to say about Ariconium and its relationship to the Dobunni:

"It could just have been on the margins of Dobunnic territory."

Della Hooke, however, insists that

"The Welsh district of Ergyng, a district around the Roman centre of Ariconium, lay outside the kingdom of the Hwicce. This is discussed by Bruce Coplestone-Crow in his BAR book (British Archaeological Reports, British series 214, 1989) Herefordshire Place-Names."

In her thesis, Dr. Sheila Waddington makes the case for Ergyng having once extended all the way to the Severn (see http://etheses.bham.ac.uk/4738/9/Waddington13PhD_-.pdf).  Included in that study is a map displaying the original extent of this kingdom, drawn from Coplestone-Crow's HEREFORDSHIRE PLACE-NAMES:

Figure 7.11 Coplestone-Crow’s depiction of the extent of Ergyng in the sixth and

seventh centuries, extending from the eastern banks of the Wye, Monnow and Dore

across to the western bank of the Severn. The territory of Dunsaete may have been

within the district ‘Cantref Coch’, shown hatched red. Coplestone-Crow,

Herefordshire Place-Names, 3, with additions.

If this is correct, then there are some adjoining boundaries and even "overlap" territory for Hwicce and Ergyng along the Leadon and to the west of the Severn.  Ariconium itself, however, would still be somewhat to the west of the Hwicce's western boundary.  

Now, the Kingdom of Ercing in Wales not only has major Arthurian associations*, it bordered on Uther Pendragon's/Illtud's "Llydaw", i.e. the Vale of Leadon.  And the Vale of Leadon was anciently within the Dobunni tribal territory (a fact confirmed by Barry Cunliffe).  The Leadon later formed the western boundary of the Hwicce (a surmise based on the boundary of the Diocese of Worcester). As the Hwicce appear to have been the sub-Roman inheritors of the Dobunni kingdom, and their name accords with a folk etymology applicable to Archenfield, I would suggest that at some point in the history of Ercing this kingdom had extended its sway over the region once controlled by the Dobunni. Or, conversely, Ercing was merely a sub-kingdom of the larger Dobunni tribal area and, eventually, that area took on the name Hwicce from Archenfield.  This may have happened merely because Ercing supplied a ruler or rulers to the larger region, or because Ercing happened to be the most powerful sub-kingdom at the time.

My solution to the Hwicce name problem has the advantage of relying upon a known place-name (Ariconium) and kingdom-name.  On the other hand, past theories have no foundation in any known place-name or tribal group.  Even Coates must admit that his hypothetical hygwych does not exist in Welsh. I would add that I've been unable to find any other tribal or place-name constructed like hygwych; there simply is no precedent for such a formation.

In conclusion, we can surmise that the Welsh also did not know the real etymology of Ariconium/Ercing/Ergyng.  There is no reason whatsoever to suppose that they did!  They may have linked the name to their own word arch, 'ark, chest, coffin', with the plural eirch, and so prepared the way for the translation into English Hwicce. As modern scholars have not been able to parse Ariconium (until I related it to a Gaulish word meaning "lord"), why should we think the Dark Age Welsh were able to do so?

* Eigyr, Arthur's mother, is the daughter of a king of Ercing in Welsh tradition.  Illtud's mother was also from Ercing.  A son of Arthur is placed there, albeit in the form of a personified stream/wellhead.

FOUR DIFFERENT WAYS TO LOOK AT BADON IN GILDAS

Liddington Castle, Wiltshire

In this blog piece -

http://mistshadows.blogspot.com/2018/05/gildas-and-date-of-mount-badon-battle.html -

I discussed the dating of the Battle of Badon as found in the pages of Gildas's DE EXCIDIO.  In this briefer article, I wish to summarize those findings and try to arrive at a reasonably acceptable revised chronology. 

As I see it, there are principally four different ways to look at Badon.  First, as a sort of qualifying statement, let me say that I am here settling on Liddington Castle as the Badon, based upon reasons I have provided in earlier essays (e.g. http://mistshadows.blogspot.com/2018/05/the-second-battle-of-badon.html).  And this is so despite that fact that linguistically, Badon can only stand for Bath.  So that there may be no confusion on this point, I will again quote from Dr. Richard Coates' "Middle English badde and Related Puzzles" (NOWELLE, Vol. 11, February 1988):

"We must conclude that whilst one of the Badburys may be the historical site of Badon, this may not be safely inferred from the linguistic evidence within English (pace Jackson 1953b). The inference requires the rather casual association of a form [baðón] with the recurrent name-type Baddanburh; there can be no direct etymological connection."

***

1) The battle should be properly dated c. 500 A.D. +/- 20 years. This is the traditional dating for Badon, and is pretty much impossible to dislodge from the combined consciousness of amateur and professional Arthurian scholars.  The problem with this view is this: at the time in question, we have no evidence whatsoever that the English and/or their Gewissei allies had penetrated far enough into England to have accessed either Bath in Somerset or Badbury/Liddington in Wiltshire.

This fact has made pinning down the location and significance of a Badon battle impossible, and all kinds of wild theories have been proposed to account for it happening c. 500 A.D.

2) There is a slight chance the torturous Latin in the Gildas passage on Badon has been mistranslated.  While the majority of scholars render it in the traditional fashion, some have offered other interpretations.  At least one top Latinist I consulted (Professor Michael Herren) claims the Latin states Badon was fought in Gildas's 44th year - not on the day of his birth.  However, even he resorts to the c. 500 date for the battle itself, thus putting Gildas's day of birth around 470.  He does this because the Welsh Annals insist the battle was fought in 516 or thereabouts.  Thus even if we alter the meaning of the Latin, we are still stuck with a Badon fought c. 500 - when it would seem no such decisive battle at the locations in question was possible.

3) Badon was actually not an important battle at all.  It was merely "glorified" because it happened to fall on the day of the birth of St. Gildas.  Over time its rather insignificant nature was exaggerated until it became the most famous battle of sub-Roman Britain.  I have suggested that the battle is, in fact, to be found in the ANGLO-SAXON CHRONICLE under the year entry for 501 A.D.  This battle, fought at Portsmouth in Hampshire, had a combatant named Bieda, whose name in different Saxon dialects could be spelled Beda or Baeda.  His name is the eponym for Bedenham on Portsmouth Harbour.  It is entirely conceivable that it was this battle that became, through the usual process of legend-building, the famous Battle of Badon.  The spelling Badon would be due to confusion with that of Bathum/Bath, a battle-site between the Britons and Gewissei in 577 A.D.

4) However, there is another, better possibility - and one that takes into account the identification of the Second Battle of Badon with Liddington Castle.  We begin by assuming that Badon is Liddington, and that it was actually a battle that was fought shortly after 556 (the indecisive action at Barbury/the Bear's Fort).  An interpolator inserted into the Gildas text the famous battle, but in an effort to apply a nice hagiographical touch to the DE EXCIDIO, chose to place the saint's birth on the day of Badon.  Unfortunately, he wrongly identified a battle at Liddington Castle after 556 with the Bieda battle of 501.  Once the incorrect date for the Badon battle was established in this early text, it soon became sacrosanct and thus later appeared in the Welsh Annals centuries later for c. 516. The date for Camlann (c. 537) had to be adjusted to fit with that of Badon.  The result?  An Arthur "out of time" whose military campaigns could not be understood within the historical or archaeological contexts.

To quote from my article http://mistshadows.blogspot.com/2018/05/arthur-and-beranburhbarbury-critical.html:

Let us start with the early battles in Wiltshire.  I've already mentioned the defeat of the British by Cynric at Old Sarum.  Four years later a battle is fought at Barbury Castle further north.  However, this battle is, significantly, not said to be a victory.  We are merely told there was a battle there.  In 560, Ceawlin succeeds Cynric (see my earlier work for the reversal of the genealogical links for the Gewissei in the ASC).  After Barbury Castle there are no more battles against the Britons until 571 - 15 years later. And the theater of action has changed: the Gewissei are now coming up the Thames Valley.  In 577, the war theater changes again - this time to the west and north of Wiltshire (including the capturing of Bath).  In 584, there is a battle in Oxfordshire, well to the NE of Wiltshire. We do not return to Wiltshire until 592, when a great slaughter occurs at Adam's Grave near Alton Priors resulting in the expulsion of Ceawlin.  In the next year, Ceawlin perishes. 

From the Battle of Beranburh to that of Adam's Grave, 36 years had passed.  Adam's Grave is roughly 15 kilometers south of Barbury Castle.

The question I would put forth is simply this:  who was in Wiltshire for all this time keeping the Gewissei and the English out?  And is it a coincidence that only several kilometers NE of Barbury Castle along the ancient Ridge Way is the Liddington Badbury fort?

I suppose there is really only one question that must be asked at this point: do we stubbornly adhere to the dating of Arthur based upon the questionable testimony of Gildas, and therefore cast Arthur perpetually adrift in a time during which Badon could not have been fought, or do we instead allow for him to be the war-leader of the Bear's Fort who successfully resisted enemy penetration into his territory for just under 40 years?  

Granted, even if we accept this very attractive possibility, problems remain.  The worst of these is the reversal of the Gewissei generations as found in the Welsh and English sources.  I treated of this problem here: http://mistshadows.blogspot.com/2018/05/the-gewissei-and-cuneddas-sons-why-are.html.  Needless to say, I'm not particularly happy with the resolution I proposed there.  Truth is, we cannot know which ethnic group - the Welsh or the English - has the order of generations correct.  I would like to believe the Welsh tradition is the most sound, but many scholars believe the early Welsh genealogies (like those preserved in the Harleian MS. of Nennius) are, in the main, fabrications.  I cannot stress how disconcerting this reversal of generations is for the historian.  Are the battles in the ASC in the right order?  Or should they somehow be reversed to fit the Welsh ordering of the Gewissei generations?  Or do we leave the order of the battles of the ASC intact and instead seek to reverse only the order the the Gewissei who fight in them (something that could only be done in the most arbitrary fashion)?

This problem may well be unsolvable.  About the only thing we can really say is that according to the ASC, a British king or war-leader centered in Wiltshire staved off Saxon conquest for almost 40 years. The best time for the Badon battle - not mentioned in the ASC precisely because it was the worst defeat meted out to the Gewissei - is right after the Battle of Barbury Castle in 556.

If Arthur was not the man defending this region, if he was not the commander at the Bear's Fort, then, sadly, I simply do not know where or when to put him.