Germanic names

[D B Campbell]

As a dyed-in-the-wool imperial Romanist, I confess that this late Roman thread is making my head spin. But there is one point that I cannot let pass.

One other source document is the Notitia Dignitatum, which mentioned veterans (or the descendents of retired veterans) operating in Britain long after the departure of the legions. ...
Written about 250 years after the reported presence of Sarmatian cavalry among the Roman forces in Britannia, the list of units reports a cuneus veteranorum Sarmatorum, commonly translated "troop of Sarmatian veterans", at Bremetennacum (now Ribchester in Lancashire).

(1) The Notitia Dignitatum mentions a lot of units which date back to Antonine and Hadrianic times. This is simply testimony to the longevity of Roman regiments and shouldn't be used to support a "special case".

(2) My copy of the Notitia text does not mention a "cuneus veteranorum Sarmatorum, commonly translated 'troop of Sarmatian veterans', at Bremetennacum". The version in front of me just now reads:
cuneus armatarum Bremetenraco
"commonly" ( :wink: ) emended to read cuneus Sarmatarum, Bremetenaco (i.e. cavalry unit of Sarmatians, at Ribchester).

The whole veteran thing rests on one of Sir Ian Richmond's more elaborate flights of fancy. We simply don't know why the Ravenna Cosmography records Ribchester as "Bresnetenaci Veteranorum" -- yes, the RC is the culprit, not the ND --, but it's worth noting that this is not the RC's only divergence from our other sources.

[Alanus]

Hailog, Ron and D.B.

My copy of the ND is the Otto Seek version, and it has no mention of the obviously added reference to the Sarmatians, aka the Iazyges, who, after a span of almost three centuries could not have been a significant cultural presence in late Roman Britain, as Littleton and Malcor so ardently claimed. A far more likely presence of any Sarmat-Alanic tradition, and especailly Germanic names, arriving in Britain, would come from the late fourth century, and likely through the Equites Taifali, and even possibly the Equites Catafractarii.

In this stance, I differ with several historians who have commented in this very forum. Picking up on Ron's mention of Gildas, which is considered a historical document, note that Gildas gives a tirade concerning "the Arian poison that came to this island as if upon a road across the sea." Why did he not mention Pelagianism, which modern authors claim as Britain's great scourge, but instead singles out-- not once but twice-- a heretical religion principally carried into western Europe by the Goths, Alans, and Taifals? This one statement from Gildas adds to my assertion that there was a significant Germanic presence within the military stationed in late Roman Britain. It also is a primary implication that indeed the Equites Taifali were stationed there. The Goths were converted to Arianism beginning in 347 by Bishop Ulfilas, and the Alans by Bishop Ammantius starting in 380, with the Alanic Taifals in that mix.

This presence in Britain gives us names like Nectarid(us) and Fullofades, and particularly Theudebald, or Thiudebalt in Gothic, who could very well have been the last recorded Roman officer commanding in Britain, and a man who may have been known by his own men as "Ufarpandracon," or "Chief over dragonmen." His son, Theodoric, was active (according to Rice Rees) from about 440 to 470, the same period accorded to Riothamus by Ashe. Theodoric, called Saint Tewdrig, was martyred at the battle of Tintern; and according to local legend his death wagon was drawn by "stags." This is an Alanic religious myth passed to the Tyrfingi Goths. Russian archaeologists have interpreted the stags (most often seen as golden deer figures) as "borrowed mounts" used to ride back to "dreamland" and return to this world with "good things." This is in accordance with the undying king, the "once and future Arthur."

Thus Germanic names and those who carried them may have a big play in the Arthurian legend; and the Goths, Alans, and Gothic-speaking Taifals stationed in Britain long after Littleton and Malcor's pet Iazyges, may have been the original source of some of the major legendary components. Curiously, the name Artorius can mean "plowman," whereas Arthur can be linked to Eothar (Alanic) and Othere (Old English Germanic) as meaning "the Bear," and the bear was originally a Uralic Finn protective figure passed to the Alans and Goths... and then carried into Britain by the Equites Taifali, who must have had a significant Alano-Gothic element within their ranks. This Germanic name-- Arthur-- is a significant reminder of a cultutral phenomenon that created one of western civilization's greatest mysteries. And I would venture that Arthur was not a singular person but a Germanic nickname given to several individuals, including Theodoric and Riothamus (whose grandfather was most likely Fraomar, tribune and King of the Alamanni) and thus linking him to the Roman military and Germanic names.

Best regards,
Alanus
A.J. Campbell, apologizing for dragging Arthur into Germanic names, which it probably was.

[Ron Andrea]

I agree. Sorry that I drew my citation of the ND from a secondary source, rather than the ND itself.

One reason Gildas mentioned the plague of Arianism and not Pelagianism might be that the latter was home grown in Britain while the former, as Alanus mentions, came in with the very peoples Gildas saw as such a threat to Britain's existence. Given his religious orientation, their Arian corruption would have made these peoples all the more abhorrent to him.

My theory on Arthur is that defeated Britons, huddling around their campfires in Wales and Cornwall, created a "stew" of legend from all the remembered stories of sub-Roman or Briton leaders defeating or stalling the invading Germans.

That is, I support Alanus' nickname theory with the one change that it was probably the Britons, not the Germans, who started the Arthur tales (hence the Cornish, Welsh, and even Scottish threads) and the English took it as their own when they found the tables turned and them on the defense against invading Danes and Normans.

[Urselius]

A bear in an age of dog-kings would rule the roost. :wink:

Three of Gildas' kings had dog names:

Maglocunus (Maelgwn) "great-hound"

Cuneglassus (Cynglas) "blue-hound"

And Aurelius Caninus "Aurelius the Dog"

Strange how similar the name Cynglas is to the name of the ostensibly Anglo-Saxon king of the Gewissae (West Saxons) Cyngils, then again the founder of the dynasty had a British name (Cerdic = Ceretic = Caradoc = Caratacus).

[Ron Andrea]

Naming conventions--not to mention paternity charts--may have been a bit looser then than later. :wink:

Gildas was quite the literary guy for his day. Of course, he was probably emulating the style of the Bible as he had it, which was/is big on symbology.

[Alanus]

Ron and Urselius,

Not to mention Cunobellus... who was famous enough in his own time. The idea of "bear over dog" is a good one, and of course, the bear would be the biggest cheese.

Professor Toby Griffen has a theory that whomever Arthur was, he himself chose the name because it was easily recognizable for its significance in both Brythonic and Latin. But we can go further and say that the nomen Bear as the Big Cheese would be fathomable to the Germans, Alans, and every other Indo-European language speaker in Britain and the continent.

Sir John Rhys came up with the same basic idea as Griffen back in 1891 (I think that was the date), and figured that the name could be linked to a bear god or goddess (maybe Artia or something like that) and that its greatness was in the connection as "an accident of speech." I rather think it was no accident at all, and that Arthur or a multiplicity of "Arthurs" used the name from roughly 440 to at least 583, when our last (and totally real) Arturius, the son of the northern chieftan Owain (and the Arthur mentioned by the bard Taliesin), fell off the wall (sort of speaking).

Chow, all you dogs
Alanus, aka A.J. Campbell

PS: Notice that the spelling of Arturius is a lot like our old Artorius Castus, the praefect of the Iazyges (as opposed to the My-Sausages). This northern spelling, unlike the Germanic-Alanic-Brythonic one, may show a cultural memory of old Castus himself.

[Ron Andrea]

Writing in the 1940s, J. R. R. Tolkien theorized, "It seems fairly plain that Arthur, once historical (but perhaps not of great importance) was also put into the Pot [the Caldroun of Story]. There he was boiled for a long time, together with many other older figures and devices, of mythology and Faerie, and even some stary bones of history (such as Alfred's defence against the Danes), until he emerged as a King of Faerie." (The Tolkien Reader, pp. 53-54)

In fact, Professor Tolkien wrote a great deal about this whole business of names and events in that essay, refering also to Beowulf, Nordic and Icelandic myths, and English fairy tales.

[Alanus]

Thanks for the tip on Tolkien, pretty much on the money. I'll get the "Reader."

I have always been interested in the sprinkling of Germanic names found in Britain, as presumably brought there by Imperial forces. As mentioned before, the most interesting is "Tewdrig ap Theithfallt," or Theodoric son of Theudebald. Vortigern Studies did a piece on him, using the Latin varient of Theodosius... which to me doesn't sound much like Tewdrig or Theodoric.

Most interesting, this character was a real person who died fighting the Saxons circa 470. He had become a monk, and donned his armor for one last battle, in which he took off his helmet "so the pagans could see who he was." He must have been famous, easily recognizable. His son was Mauric/Meyryc, the father of Anna and King Athruis. The Truman Manuscript says, "Saint Anna, daughter of Uther Pendragon, and mother of Saint David." Historians, starting with Thomas Carte in 1747 and going into the Vickie Period, all claimed that Athruis was Arthur, prince of the Silures. And this does make sense in relation to the dates of Mount
Badon and Camlaun.

But I believe that the original Arthur was Tewdrig/Theodoric, who was far more famous, and became one of the Three Canonized Saints of Britain. If this theory is correct, and it's certainly plausible, then the real Uther Pendragon (which originated as Germanic-- Ufar Pandraco-- "Chief Dragonman") was Theudebald... basically making King Arthur's father a German, and most likely a Goth. This is, of course, blasphamy. But, hey!-- it makes for a wonderously controversial book, and beats the totally goofy scenarios of Wilson and Blackett, and Littleton and Malcor (the latter of which are acedemics working on a rediculous premise: the old Iazyges and Lucius Artorious Castus ploy, which can easily be blown away by the Three Generation Theory.)

Anyway, Tewdrig had all the qualifications, obviously a famous foe of the Saxons; and of course, his death wagon was pulled by "a pair of stags," rather significant, since stags were considered the "borrowed mounts" needed to ride to Dreamland/the Otherworld and come back with "all the good things." This would qualify Tewdrig as the "once and future king." The Good Things were honesty, bravery, and a concern for the People. Strangely enough, Tewdrig's grave is still extant... and it's not in Glastonbury. In any event, Germanic names were the clue that led me to this controversial conclusion.

Clickity-click. Stomp. Stomp. "Yavool, herr General!"

A.J. Campbell

[Ron Andrea]

Very interesting.

And we've circled back to Germanic names, too. The confusion--and fascination--attached to the search for a historic Arthur through the morphing of names highlights both the potential and the peril of doing history at fifteen centuries remove.

Anytime, of course, one person's name relates (even if incorrectly) to multiple gods or antecedents, the possibility increases for his association with the history of each.

[Alanus]

Exactly.

But the search is sometimes worth the effort, if only by putting a new twist on an old genre. A legend often has a basis in reality, and the possibility that this Theodoric character was the original Arthur fascinates me, especially if his father was Germanic. It confutes all the stereotypes.

The other realization is how close the Sub-Roman cavalry in Britain was to the Imperial Model. Luckily, we have a little informantion on it from the Welsh bards. An ala was called a "gosgordd" and consisted of 300 men. Very Celtic, and Three times Three. Making the "Arthurian" horse equal 900 men all total. (We can thank W. Forbes Skene for that tid-bit. There has been a modicum of disdain for the old historians on this thread; but if not for them, we would know less than we do... and men like Skene, Rhys, Collingwood, and Morris, are wrongfully treated with disrespect.)

If we refer to the Brecon manuscript, we discover Theodoric in charge of three tribunes, Agricola, Marcellus, and Boia (who may have been a Frank and a pagan, aka "from the land of the Boii," aka Thuringia.) In two battles between Brecon and Saint David's Point, they lost 200 men; so these alas are prime candidates for the three "gosgordds." Since Theodoric was their high commander, he could very well have been the "dux bellorum" mentioned in Nennius. And I quess we know who that was.

In finality, the signum of the Bear (greater than all those dogs, as Urselius noted), plus the historicity of an actual Sub-Roman cavalry, could account for a tale that grew to the point that Alanus di Insulus exclaimed, "Who does not know of Arthur?" And his name floated through not just the Celtic, Romance, and Germanic languages, but into those of Persia and beyond. Perhaps, at least to me, the greatest tale ever told.

To a steady hand,
Alanus, A.J. Campbell

[Ron Andrea]

Facsinating.

Am unfamiliar with the Theodoric as Arthur theory. Is there a book or sourace where I can read more?

[Alanus]

Yes and no on the Theodoric theory.

The premise that his grandson, Arthwys or Arthwyr, was King Arthur goes back to Thomas Carte in 1747. From Carte, I've followed the line through Hume, Whitaker, Williams, to Turner, then throughout the the 1800s. As of late, Wilson & Blackett (our space cadets) re-proposed it, and so have Barber & Pykitt. Mike Ashley has noted that "Arthwyr" means "grandson of Arth," in other words, granson of the Bear. Common sense tells us-- through Gildas-- that the Battle of Mount Badon took place in his birth year. either 493, 494, or 516. And Arthwyr is too late to be the original Arthur.

Professor Morris was the one who recorded the grandfather as "Theodoric, son of Theudebald." In Welsh, the family runs backwards like this-- Arthwys ab Maurig, ab Tewdrig, ab Theithfallt-- the two first generation Germanic names morphed into Welsh. Primary info comes from the Harlien manuscripts, the Libre Landevensis, the Truman manuscript in the Iolo papers, and other genealogies. Barber & Pykitt claim that Theudebald was the last commander of the Roman fort of Venta Silurium, and that he gained sovereignty over the Silures (I think probably through a marriage). If this theory is correct, then Theodoric was a first generation Briton with a Germanic father, and the original "King Arthur" is a whole new guy.

The Roman cavalry link to the Arthurian knights has been noted by Skene, Rhys, Collingwood, Morris, and Ashe; but no one followed it up. I dug deeper; and I think I've solved a mystery that has been hinted at for more than 250 years. The key was finding John Conyard's original artice on the Equites Taifali on the internet. I believe Theudebald was the last commander of that unit. The Taifali, actually Alans, were a foedeal subtribe of the Tyrfingi Goths for eight generations, and the Tyrfingi nomen for "the bold prince" is Thiudebalt, latinized to Theudebald. The earliest reference to "Ufar" comes from the Gothic bible written by Bishop Ulfilas around 350-370. The connection is more that Roman military, and the horsemen who called their leader "Ufar pandraco" were Gothic speaking... and so we have Germanic names in Britain.

If I can find a publisher, and I think I will, then it could make for a good controversial book, yet backed by reasonable material.

Alanus, A.J. Campbell

[Ron Andrea]

Based on what you've outlined, your theory merits a fuller development. Controversy can be fun...and profitable.

What about the theory that Arthur was really Ambrosius Aurelianus, whose anti-Saxon exploits were documented as early as Gildas? And that some later person's name, perhaps your Theudebald's grandson, became attached. It was a period of many reverses and few records.

Our third century Roman commander Artorius Justus may also have contributed a memory, his name and perhaps even genes to the eventual Arthur.

The similarity of the names Artorius, Arthyr and Arthur, so provocative to modern scholars, may have simmered with the confused histories for five centuries to produce the legend reported by Geoffery of Monmouth.

One small paradox is that the legendary Arthur's main claim to fame is his opposition to the Anglo-Saxon invaders, and you note he may have been the offspring of those invaders. (Such a name, if not personsage, crossover has precedents, like our Saxon leader with the Celtic name, Cerdic.)

Think how much poorer western culture would have been without the Arthurian legend with all its medieval and modern threads.

[Urselius]

To pick up on an earlier reference to Cunobelin (Cunobelinus) the king of the Catuvellauni, the name seems to have lived on in Britain past the Arthurian period and into the Anglo-Saxon conversion period.

Bede lists the brothers of the "Northumbrian" bishop St Chad (all of them have Celtic-derived names), and one of them is called Cynibil, this can hardly be other than a version of Cunobelin.

[Alanus]

Martin has a point. Names are definately repeated in early Britain; and of course, Shakespeare morphed Cunobelin into Cymballene... or something like that.

As for Ron's idea that Ambrosius Aurelianus could have been Arthur, that is possible. I affix him before Arthur, according to Geoffrey of Monmouth, a fabulist who did manage to get the connections correct, albiet he stated Uther and Amrosius were brothers. But the leadership seems to run as Ambrosius and Uther together, then Arthur. This posits Arthur as the second generation, and seems to be confirmed by Alberic, Cronicler of Gaul, and the Annales Cambriae. Robert Vermaat has been working on the Vortigern-Ambrosius period for some time, but little historical advances have come to light. Evidently, all of us are speculators; nothing wrong with that. It's our only alternate. We can theorize more on Ambrosius than Vortigern, which was probably a title. Ambrosius was evidently Romano-Dumnonnian, perhaps the grandson of Ambrosius Aurelianus, Praefect of Gaul prior to 350 and the father of Saint Ambrose of Milan. Many of us believe Ambrosius' father was Constantine Aurelianus, the figure whom Vortigern conveniently removed from the picture.

I do not believe that Ambrosius was a cavalryman nor tied to the Roman Military. Tradition says that he and Uther rode north and revenged the Trechery of the Long Knives somewhere in York, where especially Uther killed Hengist and Vortigern. (What happened to the lovely and talented Rowena, we can only guess wryly. Perhaps she was taken back to Wales where she established a knife-sharpening school.) I posit Theudebald-- our best candidate for Ufar pandraco-- as a more likely candidate as the York hero, simply because he presumably led Imperial cavalry prior to his retirement and second calling around 435-40. Ambrosius is recorded as Emrys Wledig; and I believe a "wledig" was a provincial governor-type, perhaps two wledigs as Sub-Britain's equavalent of Count of the Saxon Shore and Dux Britannicum. In tradition Ambrosius and Uther would then be followed by Arthur/Theodoric. He would be the roving Count of Britain, or as they said, the "dux bellorum."

Martin notes that British names occur in the Saxon community during this period, not only Cerdic, but what about Cymric?-- about as Wesh as you can get. ("Who is this Arthur?" spat the movie Cymric.) We are uncovering a cultural exchange, Germanic names taken after Celtic ones; and this has never been truly explored or acknowledged in recent years. I think Skene may have mentioned it, or maybe Rhys. But not lately. In this cultural mix, we find the probable origins of the Grail and Excalibur/Tryfing... two ritual objects that had Alanic influence.

I think that, as Ron says, our old friend Artorius Castus did leave a nomenal trail; and the name of King Aiden's son Arturius is expression of it. Arturius is well recorded in the Life of Columba and also in Talisian, supposedly dying in battle around 583. But he is late, just as Arthwys/Arthwyr was late. (Interestingly Mike Ashley has recently claimed that "Arthwyr" means "grandson of Arth;" and if we extend that notion back-- Arthwyr ap Maurig ap Thewdrig-- we arrive again with Theodoric as Arth, the Bear.)

Alanus, A.J. Campbell