[ Reply to This ]
Re: Forget Cornwall, King Arthur ruled from Shropshire by VirtHist on Wednesday, 08 June 2005 (User Info | Send a Message) | Alistair Moffat's conclussion that Arthur was probably of the Votadini/Gododdin is the same as Steve Blake's. After all, the poem Y Gododdin is probably the earliest mention of him. The only difference is that Steve and Scott Llyod's research questions where the Votadini/Gododdin kingdom was and where the battle of Catreath happened. (I know there are some in Scotland who argue that Artorius is the bases of Arthur, but it hardly seems likely that a prince of the Scotti is going to become a hero of the Britons). I think the more research that goes in to who and where the Votadini were the closer we'll get to an answer... if that's possible. | [ Reply to This ]
Re: Forget Cornwall, King Arthur ruled from Shropshire by Thorgrim on Thursday, 09 June 2005 (User Info | Send a Message) | When you talk of 5th century Scotland you have to be careful not to bring in the Scottii. They were still in Ireland and beginning to settle on the west coast of Scotland. However, at the same time, Cunedag from Manau Guotodin (Manau of Goddodin - British kingdom on the Forth) went south with his Votadini to reconquer Wales from other Irish invaders. The point that I'm keen to make is that people moved around Britain and took their legends and folk heroes with them. Arthur probably fought over a very wide area. Many of his battles were probably against other post-Roman British warlords in the north and in the west, but his fight against the incoming English must have been in the areas they were coming into. That means places like Catterick, Lincolnshire and the east coast in general. I remain convinced that the real resistance hero was Ambrosius. Gildas is the only near contemporary writer and he says nothing of Arthur. He does talk of Ambrosius and the decadence that came after him and he does imply that he was the victor of Badon.
Ambrosius gave his name to Amesbury and to many other places in the south east (Essex/Herts) - all hillforts or defensive settlements. That was where the real resistance to the Saxons was. After their final defeat, many British settlements remained in the south-east, even around London (look for place names with a Wal element or a ***** element) Others went westwards and took their embroidered stories of a great resistance leader with them. Somehow Ambrosius Aurelanius became shortened to a nickname - Arthur "the Bear". | [ Reply to This ]
Re: Forget Cornwall, King Arthur ruled from Shropshire by Thorgrim on Thursday, 09 June 2005 (User Info | Send a Message) | Significant that Gildas, Bede, Nennius and Geoffrey all give credit to Ambrosius as the British resistance leader.. see here | [ Reply to This ]
Re: Forget Cornwall, King Arthur ruled from Shropshire by VirtHist on Thursday, 09 June 2005 (User Info | Send a Message) | I think you're absolutley right about Ambrosius, but that's because I don't think Arthur was a king. Welsh writings call him a 'dux bellorum' or 'pen tueli' - a battle leader. If anything he was probably fighting for someone like Ambrosius.
I only bring the Scotti into it because some Scots claim Artorius to be the bases of Arthur, which seems a little odd really.
As for the Gododdin/Votadini, there is still no absolute proof of their Scottish origins. Even the etymology that says the word Gododdin comes from Votadini (Otadini as mentioned by Ptolemy c. 140) is extremely weak. To quote Steve's book:
"It should also be noted that the phrase Manaw Gododdin only appears in a single instance in one manuscript, all other references being to either Manaw or Gododdin but never the two together."
There are a number of references in ancient Welsh literature that place Manaw in Wales. One refering to a known Welsh king (d844) that says:
"Mervyn Frych from the land of Manaw".
So there is just as much litereary evidence for Manaw being either in North Wales or even the Isle of Man.
| [ Reply to This ]
Re: Forget Cornwall, King Arthur ruled from Shropshire by Anonymous on Friday, 18 November 2005 | It does seem that Ambrosius is the significant name that leaps out of those times. When I travel up the M5 and pass Bredon hill - an outlier of the Cotswolds I understand - I can't help my imagination running away with me that this is Badon. That a large force of Saxons came west to detroy the power of the sub-Roman kingdoms, driving Ambrosius until they met at Bredon Hill. But I am informed that Baddan near Bath is a better contender for Badon and that Bredon simply means 'Hill Hill'. There is so little information from those times that my conclusion is that we just do not know but as C.S.Lewis makes the point in 'That Hideous Strength' the whole legend of Arthur fits into the times by place names, personal names and national character.
| [ Reply to This ]
Re: Forget Cornwall, King Arthur ruled from Shropshire by Thorgrim on Friday, 18 November 2005 (User Info | Send a Message) | Yes, my money is on Ambrosius as the real Arthur which is a nickname possibly meaning "the Bear" and also possibly arising from a bear skin robe or head dress as worn by Roman standard bearers. Not certain about the Shropshire angle, but Ambrosius/Arthur had a wide ranging commission and fought all over Britain.The decisive battle of Badon is the key and I feel that it must be one of the heights around Bath. Badon is a Saxon term meaning Bath hill and "Bad" still means bath or spa in modern German place-names | [ Reply to This ]
Re: Forget Cornwall, King Arthur ruled from Shropshire by Anonymous on Tuesday, 20 February 2007 | Bath makes no sense at all for the site of the battle of Badon. To get to Bath the Saxons would first have to get past Cirencester, Gloucester and Salisbury and there is no evidence that they penetrated this far until 577AD, well after the battle of Badon was fought.
I agree about Ambrosius Aurelianus being the real hero of the piece but he may have been supported in his later battles by Arthur (maybe with Sarmatian heavy cavalry from Ribchester) | [ Reply to This ]
Re: Forget Cornwall, King Arthur ruled from Shropshire by Anonymous on Thursday, 01 December 2005 | Skimming through the various comments I noticed the reference to Badon and Bredon and Hill. Just south of Shrewsbury there is an area named "Bayston Hill". Could this be what you are looking for? A stone's throw from Bayston Hill is a pool called Bomere Pool. I recall a long time ago hearing that this pool had some connection with King Arthur. Not being particulary knowledgeable on this subject I am unable to recall what the link referred too. Has anyone else heard anything similar? | [ Reply to This ]
Re: Forget Cornwall, King Arthur ruled from Shropshire by Thorgrim on Thursday, 01 December 2005 (User Info | Send a Message) | The pool sounds like one of the many places identified as the location where Arthur received Excalibur from the Lady of the Lake. Or - where Bedevere returned it by throwing it into the water as Arthur lay mortally wounded. The last legend is very interesting because we know from hundreds of finds, that Iron Age swords were cast into lakes, bogs and rivers either as sacrifices or else on the death of their owners.. Some swords were even "killed" by being deliberately bent or broken and then thrown into the water. | [ Reply to This ]
Re: Forget Cornwall, King Arthur ruled from Shropshire by Thorgrim on Wednesday, 08 June 2005 (User Info | Send a Message) | Well I always thought that Catreath was Catterick in North Yorkshire and the Votadini were based around Berwick on Tweed according to the OS map of Roman Britain. Other Arthurian battles have been located in Lincolnshire. This puts Arthur in northern and eastern Britain and not the west as is generally supposed. The one simple fact which seems continually to escape the authors of Arthurian books is that the people who told the tales of Arthur would have been those people who retained their British culture and language the longest. That doesn't mean that Arthur only operated in Wales, Shropshire or Cornwall. Over in the east, the Anglo-Saxon takeover was far more rapid and complete. The language and the legends died out or were deliberately ignored by the incomers who just didn't want stories of a British folk hero around. So Arthurian folk tales and exploits survived in Wales, Cornwall, Strathclyde and Cumbria. Few people today realise that Cumbria and Cumberland actually mean the same as Cymru - ie the land of the Cymry - the pre Saxon native British - Arthur's people.
I laugh when I read books that pretend that they have located Camelot -that was a medieval French literary invention along with Lancelot and all that stuff! | [ Reply to This ]
Re: Forget Cornwall, King Arthur ruled from Shropshire by VirtHist on Thursday, 09 June 2005 (User Info | Send a Message) | Catreath is generally assumed to be Catterick and the Votadini to be of the Scottish lowlands, but this is what Blake and Lloyd have challenged, amongst many other things. You'll have to read The Keys to Avalon to draw you're own conclussions. | [ Reply to This ]
Re: Forget Cornwall, King Arthur ruled from Shropshire by sem on Sunday, 12 June 2005 (User Info | Send a Message) | I don't know anything about this battle but from the name I suspect it took place on a beach. Treath is Cornish for beach and traeth in Welsh, so presumably they derive from the same source.
As for the cat part, cad is Welsh for battle and the letter D can mutate to a T. Thus ca(d)treath = battle beach.
Hope this confuses the situation even more. | [ Reply to This ]
Re: Forget Cornwall, King Arthur ruled from Shropshire by VirtHist on Monday, 13 June 2005 (User Info | Send a Message) | Not at all sem, in fact this is the very same conclussion Blake and Lloyd came to. To quote their book again:
"The name 'Catraeth' breaks down into two elements: 'cat' and 'traeth'. Sir John Rhys points out that 'cat' is cognate with 'cad', which means 'battle', and 'traeth' is still in modern usage, meaning 'shore' or 'beach'. Therefore 'Catreath' simply means the 'Battle Shore. However, Catterick in Yorshire is 50 miles inland!
J. Gwenogfryn Evans draws our attention to 'the lands of Catraeth' in North Wales within a 12th-century poem by Elidir Sais: 'Gallas dreis ar direw catraeth' (able to take force the land of Catraeth). These lands were captured by Rodri ap Owain Gwynedd (d. 1195), who never left Wales yet waged many battles against his half-brother Dafydd on both the Menai Starits near Anglesey and the River Conwy. All the available evidence suggests that the lands of Catraeth lie somewhere along the North wales coast, possibly on an estuary. This is further confirmed be reference in The Gododdin to the battle taking place at Mordei, which menas that it took place near the sea ('mor' is Welsh for 'sea'."
You can take or leave their findings but they're food for thought. | [ Reply to This ]
Re: Forget Cornwall, King Arthur ruled from Shropshire by VirtHist on Monday, 13 June 2005 (User Info | Send a Message) | Sorry for all the spelling mistakes in that!
Mak | [ Reply to This ]
Re: Forget Cornwall, King Arthur ruled from Shropshire by Anonymous on Monday, 19 March 2007 | Hi all
Thorgrim states:
"I laugh when I read books that pretend that they have located Camelot -that was a medieval French literary invention along with Lancelot and all that stuff!"
Dont laugh too loudly. The welsh triads also have tales of Lancelot. They call him LLachau, which is basically his epithet - from lach/loch lake. Now re-read the triads and see Lancelot du Lac.
I know who Arthur was and Ambrosius, Mordred, Uther and Vortigern. I am currently writing up my findings. Arthur was not anyone that has been considered before. The whole line of Constantine and the imaginary Uther and Arthur were later additions after GOM. These were put in because by the 12th C no one knew who the real Arthur and Uther were. I would love to tell all but I have to be patient and write up the book and my findings. I have a hell of a lot of research to do yet.
The lines of Magnus Maximus are also wishful thinking. There was another Maximus who Kynan may be tied to and one that places him in the early 5th C not the late 4th.
I have found so much. Arthur was not from Shropshire, but he did fight his wars for his Welsh relatives and so would have fought in Shropshire, Wales, Bernicia, Reged, and north of the Wall. He would have fought at Badon as a miles militis : soldier, warrior or knight , under the leadership of Ambrosius his cousin the King. Although at this time 493 he would have been a sub king or Lord as he inherited his kingdom in about 479/480 when he was still a youth of 15/16 but had not as yet claimed it. So of the three definitions I would make him a Royal Knight. He was most likley Magister Equitum, leader of Horse or Knights, a term translated into the welsh as `Pen Dragon'.
Regards
Danep
| [ Reply to This ]
|