The Votadini exodus to Wales

[Robert Vermaat]

Thanks for that Robert. Would love to hear (or rather read) your thoughts on Vortigern and the Lleyn sometime.

It's all here: http://www.vortigernstudies.org.uk/artwho/dinas2.htm

[Arturus Uriconium]

It's all here: http://www.vortigernstudies.org.uk/artwho/dinas2.htm

I had actually read that article a long time ago and completely forgot about it!

Just to throw something into the mix: if Vortigern is the supreme-king of all three southern provinces he could have had courts, or even have held land in any of them even if he was from the east. Or. conversely, he was from the west but as superbus tyrannus held sway over the east also?

Some questions... again...

Why do you think Vortigern asked Cunedda to deal with the Irish problem and not his Saxons? And why would he need him there unless the region was depleted of forces? Why not ask neighbouring Cornovia/Pagenses/Powys, or whatever it was called then? Was it that he didn't want them spreading their territory?

[Arturus Uriconium]

I thought this quote from The Archaeology of Late Celtic Britain and Ireland, C. 400-1200 AD By Lloyd Robert Laing worth an inclusion:

“While the similarity between two spearheads and a bronze brooch from Kenfig in south Wales and finds from Trapian [Law] can be discounted as evidence for Cunedda’s migration, the similarity between either the rectangular stone-built structures at Gateholm and the final phase at Trapian, or between the enclosed hut groups of the Votadini and those of north Wales, cannot be dismissed so easily. The only stone-built Welsh huts, however, which can with confidence be ascribed to a date after AD 400 are those from Pant-y-Saer and Garn Boduan, and there are comparably few of post-Roman date in the Votadinian area. The similarity of the hut groups in both areas is probably due to a uniform Roman policy, though the polygonal hut groups do compare very closely with a class found in Northumbria. It is possible that Cunedda’s followers, being in the habit of living in such dwellings, and finding them already present in Wales, continued to construct them."

[Robert Vermaat]

Just to throw something into the mix: if Vortigern is the supreme-king of all three southern provinces he could have had courts, or even have held land in any of them even if he was from the east. Or. conversely, he was from the west but as superbus tyrannus held sway over the east also?

Vortigern was no supreme king. Gildas is clear in a statement that he ruled together with a Council. Details unknown as always, but if we can compare that to the Concilia Galliarum (so propose and unattested Concilia Britanniarum), Vortigern may have headed a sort of group of city states (Civitaes) rather than the provinces. If the later genealogies are anything to go by, Vortigern haailed possibly from the Gloucester area, with lands in west Herefordshire and Powys.

Why do you think Vortigern asked Cunedda to deal with the Irish problem and not his Saxons? And why would he need him there unless the region was depleted of forces? Why not ask neighbouring Cornovia/Pagenses/Powys, or whatever it was called then? Was it that he didn't want them spreading their territory?

Good question. Maybe because hiring even more Saxons might have upset a balance? Cunedda, though not a citizen, could at least be seen as a Briton. And why not ask the pagenses? Maybe because there was no military structure in place to ask? Germanic federates were there for the asking, as was Cunedda and his sons, but as far as I know there was no such group of military available in the inner provinces yet.

[Arturus Uriconium]

Vortigern was no supreme king. Gildas is clear in a statement that he ruled together with a Council.

Damn good point!

Good question. Maybe because hiring even more Saxons might have upset a balance? Cunedda, though not a citizen, could at least be seen as a Briton. And why not ask the pagenses? Maybe because there was no military structure in place to ask? Germanic federates were there for the asking, as was Cunedda and his sons, but as far as I know there was no such group of military available in the inner provinces yet.

I was saying Pagneses to include Cornovian territory, but maybe that was Liutcoyt by then. Do you really think there was no military structure in that region?

[Robert Vermaat]

Oh, I almost forgot. Superbus tyrannus is not a title, it's a pun on a man's name. We're not sure if Gildas actually meant Vortigern, but superbus tyrannus (proud usurper) is a very apt pun for a man who probably took the name Vortigern (great ruler) upon accession.

I was saying Pagneses to include Cornovian territory, but maybe that was Liutcoyt by then. Do you really think there was no military structure in that region?

We're not sure what the actual borders of the Cornovian civitas were, nor how large Powys was at times. But they are mostly regarded as the very same territory.
Yes, I'm pretty sure. Although Stuart Laycock lately has argued for some form of tribal identity remaining present throughout Roman occupation, followed by re-arming 'the tribes' in the 4th c., I can see no evidence for that under Roman rule. It would have been unique if in accordance with Roman government, and impossible without it - it would have meant rebellion and secession, something we're sure of did not take place prior to 410 (or whatever date you choose as 'final').

I agree with Laycock about developments during the 5th c., but the inner provinces had no armed tribal (or civitas militia) structure during the 4th c. Remains of posssible military artefacts can be argued as remains belonging to members of the mobile field army, while produced locally.

[Arturus Uriconium]

We're not sure what the actual borders of the Cornovian civitas were, nor how large Powys was at times. But they are mostly regarded as the very same territory.

I've still never seen the solid evidence to say that Pagenses/Powys and Cornovia were one and the same area at this time. If you know of any I'd love to hear about them.

Yes, I'm pretty sure. Although Stuart Laycock lately has argued for some form of tribal identity remaining present throughout Roman occupation, followed by re-arming 'the tribes' in the 4th c., I can see no evidence for that under Roman rule. It would have been unique if in accordance with Roman government, and impossible without it - it would have meant rebellion and secession, something we're sure of did not take place prior to 410 (or whatever date you choose as 'final').

Can't wait for my Laycock book to arrive. It was supposed to be today!

I only think there may have been something in place because Honronius told the cities to look to their own defenses after 410, though there's still the argument that he was referring to an Italian city. If Britannia, or a large part, was still in its regional and provincial state then they would have to look to their borders too. There obviously wasn't enough in some places as Vortigern wouldn't have had to bring in Germans and bring down Cunedag.

I've heard others argue for the forming of warbands in the 4th century going along with the re-using of the hillforts. If it did happen I would have thought it was in the far flung places such as central Powys and Dumnonia. As long as they kept away from Roman activity and places and kept themselves to themselves, they may have got away with it. But you're right, it would be unique.

[Robert Vermaat]

I've still never seen the solid evidence to say that Pagenses/Powys and Cornovia were one and the same area at this time. If you know of any I'd love to hear about them.

Well, not exactly of course. And it takes some time betweeen the last mentioning of the Cornovi civitas before we hear of Powys - but roughly the places attached to early Powys are also thought to have belonged to the Cornovian civitas.

I only think there may have been something in place because Honronius told the cities to look to their own defenses after 410, though there's still the argument that he was referring to an Italian city. If Britannia, or a large part, was still in its regional and provincial state then they would have to look to their borders too. There obviously wasn't enough in some places as Vortigern wouldn't have had to bring in Germans and bring down Cunedag.

Indeed , we are not even sure if Honorius actually wrote to the Britons and not to the Bruttians in Italy instead. It's in a vague part of Zosimus, hemmed in between tales of the war in southern Italy, so at best it's out of place. Persobnally I go for Bruttium, not Britannia.

The best thing 'in place' that I can think of is the example of Synesius in North Africa - a local wealthy man who organised the local defence when no military help was present. britain however seems to have had oplenty of soldiers, even though Gildas could not believe that - they must have been withdrawn all to explain the disaster! :twisted: Morris (I think) explained the move as a strategic plan - Cunedda was a thorn in the side of the Northern Britons, why not give him a free hand in Gwynedd against the Irish? Standard Roman federate policy, and why not?

It's of course possible that the 'Votadini Exodus' never really took place, but was invented by later kings to explain their right to rule. It's even been proposed that it was the dynasty of Mervyn Vrych (which came after the dynasty of Cunedda) invented this story to explain why they, a foreign dynasty, had equal rights to rule because those before them (Cunedda) had also come from foreign lands. Not a weird tale, such things were common enough in the early Middle Ages. Actual proof of a Votadinian move to Wales is still lacking.

I've heard others argue for the forming of warbands in the 4th century going along with the re-using of the hillforts. If it did happen I would have thought it was in the far flung places such as central Powys and Dumnonia. As long as they kept away from Roman activity and places and kept themselves to themselves, they may have got away with it. But you're right, it would be unique.

Hillforts we beginning to be re-used, but I'm not so sure that this was only a military development. Elite settlement (rich guy with a view) and civilian protection may also be the reason.

[Arturus Uriconium]

I'm going to propose a radical theory behind Cunedag's move to north Wales:

As Stuart Laycock mentions, dragon type brooches have been found in both western Brigantia/Rheged and Goutodin territories. This could be for a number of reason, but if we cut it down to two: he fought against them or they were allies, this could give us an interesting scenario. It is said that Cunedag fought at Caer Weir (Durham? Although this may be Caer Wein/Vinovia/Binchester) and Caer Lywelydd (Carlisle), both in Brigantian territory, although Durham could have then been in British Bernician hands by then. If he did marry Coel's daughter then there would be an alliance there. (Though this 'marriage' could be to Gwawl, mening the Wall, so a territorial marriage). As I said earlier, I'm not sure who he would have been fighting in those to places, but they could be Britons or Scotti on east and west respectfully if he's on the Brigantians side, or against Brigantia if he's not?

Brigantia was big and the eastern side could even have been the area of the illusive Velentia (that became Rheged) and, as argued by Laycock, the cause of earlier internal troubles. If it was actually not devoid of military strength and Cunedag, whilst originally from Manau Goutidin but now aligned to them, was with them they would have been a force to be reckoned with and a force possibly experienced/successful at dealing with Scotti raiders. They would also have virtually bordered North Wales. So it could be Velentia/Brigantia/Rheged that were asked to assist and Cunedag was the man for the job. It could also be that they weren't asked at all but had an expansion policy and no one was powerful enough to stop them. Only later was it claimed as a invitation.

Did he take the Ceneus Samatarum of Bremetennacum/Ribchester, or rather the Veteranorum, with him? These were the descendents of the original Sarmatians who settled in the area. I wouldn't make them central to this theory, and just add them as a possibility. I don't want to go down the From Scythia to Camelot route!

If the dragon was the Brigantian symbol - I will refrain from the Sarmatian dragon - is this why it became that of Guenedota and later Wales? It has to be noted that there have been no dragon type brooches for in north Wales, or anywhere in Wales for that matter, but, as they say, absence of evidence does not mean evidence of absence. Was Cunedag the original or inspiration for Utyr pen dragon, the terrible head dragon/warrior?

Probably mad, I know, but there it is to rip apart.

[Robert Vermaat]

Hi Mak,

First of all, although I find the theory very interesting, I’m not convinced that Laycock has offered sufficient proof that behind the distribution of the brooches and buckles indeed lies a recognisable tribal group. Art styles being art styles, they could in my opinion also represent local markets or other explanations. One I could offer if we’d go for a military background of these items, would be the service of Votadinian warriors in the Roman army of North Britain – some would stay and some would go back home. It’s a similar pattern that we can see in earlier items of such a nature, Roman as well as Germanic, where we see the owners take them back into Germany.

As to the links between Coel and Cunedag, we should be careful to discern the material: what we have was written down much later, and it could easily have been changed after the fact to fit the political needs of later times, a totally common thing.
Maybe the ‘marriage’ of Cunedag and his son the to the wall (Gwawl) and the Wall road (Stratwawl) reflect military commands which they held in the regular army, but which later were goofed up by copyists who had no clue what they entailed. Similarly, I have a battle of one of Vortigern’s sons that later ended up as the name of his son!

I’d rather explain it this way than look at the civitates, or tribes as Laycock describes them, being armed and in military conflict with each other as early as the middle of the 4th century! I need not explain what that would tell us about Roman control over the North of Britain, or rather the total lack of it! I’m not supportive of the explanation that has the Romans control the Wall but turn a wilfully blind eye towards the feuding civitates at their back.

About those Sarmatians, I doubt that they were a unit much differing in number and look from the other Roman cavalry units. They were in Ribchester at the turn of the 5th c., or so we may assume. The rest is speculation. However, if Carlisle became the main settlement of Rheged, I could think of the commanders there (about to become local royalty) looking at that group of warriors as something to have close by their side.

The dragon was not a Brigantian symbol. I mean, it’s so wide-spread that it would take special pleading to declare in specifically Brigantian. The draco was a common Roman military object for centuries, I just don’t see why we should declare it Brigantian just because of a distribution of brooches and buckles.

[Arturus Uriconium]

Thanks for that Robert. I've nothing to add.

[Alanus]

Indeed Robert has a good point.
I once thought that dragon buckles could be eqated with the Equites Taifali Iuniores; but when you think about it, they could be ubiquitous, traded upon the market, copied by lost-wax founderies as a popular buckle for its time.
"Hey! Cool dude! A real dragon buckle. Where did you get it?"
"From that huckster who sells Rolexes."
I still believe the dragon symbol of Wales came from the Equites Taifali Iuniores, as did the Bear from the E.T. Seniores, especially when there are no records (either visually, artistically, or otherwise) of the dragon in Celtic society before the period of the E.T. The Sauromate Iazyges were related to the Scythians, not to the Sarmatian Alans which included the Taifali, and it seems highly unlikely that their culture could have survived, un-watered, for over three hundred years after they were tossed into Britain by Marcus Aurelius.

If we have a "dragon" influence in later Britain, it came from the last Alano-Goths stationed upon the isle. And it would appear that the legendary "Uher Pendragon" was their leader under the the epithet (Alano-Gothic) of Ufar pandracon, "Chief dragonman," whom was probably Theithfallt (Thiudebalth), the great-grandfather of Arthwyr (the darling of the Welsh for the personage of Arthur), and a Roman officer credited with marrying a daughter of Cunedda (according to precisely-incorrect genealogy, which in this case does appear correct).

[fasta]

Before the Roman's in the broadest sense of the word, is there any evidence of any Dragon like tribal symbol in Britain?I'm not aware of any.

[Robert Vermaat]

That's difficult to say. What constitutes a 'dragon' and what a 'mythical monster'? Aren't there Celtic legends with dragons that can hardly be attributed to the Romans? I assume that 'dragons' are culturally pre-Roman in Europe.

Where's Dan Peterson when we need him!!

[fasta]

That's difficult to say. What constitutes a 'dragon' and what a 'mythical monster'? Aren't there Celtic legends with dragons that can hardly be attributed to the Romans? I assume that 'dragons' are culturally pre-Roman in Europe.

Where's Dan Peterson when we need him!!

That's the problem. The Dragon doesn't seem to come into legends until after Rome.Don't forget none of the pre-Roman legends were writen down.All we have is stone or metal art work.A serpent has been used for both Snake and Dragon but just because they are similar doesn't mean they are the same.Where is the sharp toothed beastie.

I've never heard of any in Britain nor Western Europe until Rome. That isn't to say there isn't but where are they?

Tribal origins:Why would you adopt a Roman military symbol unless you were still claiming a link with Roman rather than a tribal link?

Some post Roman Germanic art work that is claimed to be a wolf could be argued as a Dragon.But you can't use these to claim any tribal group used it before Rome.

It's not my field but I really don't think we used the Dragon/Draco style symbol until the Romans came. It's not a pre-Roman tribal symbol,but I'm willing to accept it if there is evidence of pre-Roman use in Britain out there.