+- RomanArmyTalk (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat)
+-- Forum: Research Arena (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+--- Forum: Allies & Enemies of Rome (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/forumdisplay.php?fid=10)
+--- Thread: Sub-Roman Britain (Cavalry etc) (/showthread.php?tid=6780)
Re: Sub-Roman Britain Cavalry - ArthuroftheBritons - 09-28-2010
No, not literally. :wink: Usually you give up before then, the people here are most persuasive.
Re: Sub-Roman Britain Cavalry - M. Demetrius - 09-28-2010
Quote:people here are most persuasiveYeah, if they disagree stridently enough, they'll mail you a box of raw fish heads. That's strong persuasion. :| shock: :?
Re: Sub-Roman Britain Cavalry - Alanus - 09-28-2010
Quote:Yeah, if they disagree stridently enough, they'll mail you a box of raw fish heads. That's strong persuasion. :| shock: :?
Yup! And when they get really adamount they mail you a cracked amphora of garum!
hock: :mrgreen:
Re: Sub-Roman Britain Cavalry - cagwinn - 09-29-2010
Quote:Hello Matt,
When we find Saxon leaders even in quasi-history, and named Cerdic and Cynric, what are we to think? They look like politically displaced Britons out to reclaim lost privaleges, not like braid-bearded baby killers in smelly furs. 8)
Cynric is a perfectly normal Saxon name (cyn "people, race, kin" + ric "power, dominion, rich") - it is nit Brittonic. Cerdic is of less certain origin (it's possibly borrowed from Brittonic, but I doubt it), but can also be etymologized as Anglo-Saxon (perhaps originally a place name, cer- "turn, bend" + dic "mound, bank, dyke").
Re: Sub-Roman Britain Cavalry - Alanus - 09-29-2010
Hello Chris,
Point well taken, and thanks for knowledgable imput. The insinuation came not from me only, but borrowed from something I read, from Snyder I think. "Cyn" and "Cym" are so similar that both might be taken as Celtic. The attachment "ric," like in Meuric or Mouric (from a famous Celtic family), can be found beyond Saxon and in Gothic-- such as Alaric or Theodoric-- where it means the same thing, alluding to power or high status, as in "reiks." A hundred years ago, the background of Cerdic and Cynric would never have been questioned, but I was borrowing from modern authors. And my point was intended to illustrate the possible, even probable, upheaval during the latter stages of Britonic power in post-Roman Britain.
Re: Sub-Roman Britain Cavalry - Robert Vermaat - 09-29-2010
Oh, we're going OT with this!!!
Hi Chris,
Quote:Cynric is a perfectly normal Saxon name (cyn "people, race, kin" + ric "power, dominion, rich") - it is not Brittonic. Cerdic is of less certain origin (it's possibly borrowed from Brittonic, but I doubt it), but can also be etymologized as Anglo-Saxon (perhaps originally a place name, cer- "turn, bend" + dic "mound, bank, dyke").I'd like to see this as less absolute as you do. After all, not every etymologist is of the same opinion, or at least not as absolute. Cynric could be a Saxon variant of a celtic Cunorix, as we also see with some place-names that are originally British or Latin, and continue to develop as Anglo-Saxon. That's possible when you have names that sound alike, although with different meaning in both languages. I'd say that Cynric is a possible, as is indeed Cerdic. Of course it 's possible to etymologyse Cerdic as Anglo-Saxon, but it's a bit stressed. I'd like to keep an open mind instead of declaring both names to be 'only' Anglo-Saxon. I see no reason to do so.
Re: Sub-Roman Britain Cavalry - cagwinn - 09-30-2010
Quote:Oh, we're going OT with this!!!
Hi Chris,
cagwinn:2cbryvcm Wrote:Cynric is a perfectly normal Saxon name (cyn "people, race, kin" + ric "power, dominion, rich") - it is not Brittonic. Cerdic is of less certain origin (it's possibly borrowed from Brittonic, but I doubt it), but can also be etymologized as Anglo-Saxon (perhaps originally a place name, cer- "turn, bend" + dic "mound, bank, dyke").I'd like to see this as less absolute as you do. After all, not every etymologist is of the same opinion, or at least not as absolute. Cynric could be a Saxon variant of a celtic Cunorix, as we also see with some place-names that are originally British or Latin, and continue to develop as Anglo-Saxon. That's possible when you have names that sound alike, although with different meaning in both languages. I'd say that Cynric is a possible, as is indeed Cerdic. Of course it 's possible to etymologyse Cerdic as Anglo-Saxon, but it's a bit stressed. I'd like to keep an open mind instead of declaring both names to be 'only' Anglo-Saxon. I see no reason to do so.
It's quite unlikely (and a lot of etymologists have not looked at this problem with a critical eye - the Cunorix = Cynric mem has become received wisdom) - the 5th century pronunciation of Britonic Cunorix (which was already well on its way to becoming Old Welsh Cinir) would not easily become Saxon Cynric through any normal linguistic process.
Re: Sub-Roman Britain Cavalry - cagwinn - 09-30-2010
Quote:Hello Chris,
Point well taken, and thanks for knowledgable imput. The insinuation came not from me only, but borrowed from something I read, from Snyder I think. "Cyn" and "Cym" are so similar that both might be taken as Celtic. The attachment "ric," like in Meuric or Mouric (from a famous Celtic family), can be found beyond Saxon and in Gothic-- such as Alaric or Theodoric-- where it means the same thing, alluding to power or high status, as in "reiks." A hundred years ago, the background of Cerdic and Cynric would never have been questioned, but I was borrowing from modern authors. And my point was intended to illustrate the possible, even probable, upheaval during the latter stages of Britonic power in post-Roman Britain.
Mouric does not contain a "ric" suffix, but rather a Latin -ic (as it comes from Latin Mauricius "Moorish").
Re: Sub-Roman Britain - Robert Vermaat - 09-30-2010
Hi Chris,
Quote:It's quite unlikely (and a lot of etymologists have not looked at this problem with a critical eye - the Cunorix = Cynric mem has become received wisdom) - the 5th century pronunciation of Britonic Cunorix (which was already well on its way to becoming Old Welsh Cinir) would not easily become Saxon Cynric through any normal linguistic process.I must disagree there, it's by no means as clear-cut as you suggest (or beat your colleagues around the ears with). For as long as we date the inscription on the Wroxeter stone to the later 5th century, there is evidence to suggest that Cunorix was a form still in use during that period. Therefore I think it a possibility (not: "it is") that the name Cynric went back on a British name. Mind you, even so, that does not mean that the person also was a Briton, or spoke British. Attila is a good example.
Re: Sub-Roman Britain Cavalry - Alanus - 09-30-2010
Quote:Alanus:3pfap70q Wrote:The attachment "ric," like in Meuric or Mouric (from a famous Celtic family), can be found beyond Saxon and in Gothic-- such as Alaric or Theodoric-- where it means the same thing, alluding to power or high status, as in "reiks." A hundred years ago, the background of Cerdic and Cynric would never have been questioned, but I was borrowing from modern authors. And my point was intended to illustrate the possible, even probable, upheaval during the latter stages of Britonic power in post-Roman Britain.
Mouric does not contain a "ric" suffix, but rather a Latin -ic (as it comes from Latin Mauricius "Moorish").
"Thank heaven for leetle girls.
They're getting smaller every day"
Mauricius Chevalier
(or was it Inspector Clouseau as Mauricious Chevalier?
hock: )At least I got the Alaric and Theodoric part correct! Two out of three doesn't make me a totally ignorant buffoon, only a partially ignorant one. But who cares? The whole thing has become extremely off-topic. What I was driving at is in my last quoted sentance: ie, the dividing line of power in post-Roman Britain was getting blurred between Saxon and Briton. I'll stand by that, because I don't think I'm wrong. :wink:
Re: Sub-Roman Britain (Cavalry etc) - Robert Vermaat - 09-30-2010
I've altered the topic title to Sub-Roman Britain (cavalry etc.), since I gather were exhausted that (part of the) topic.
Re: Sub-Roman Britain - cagwinn - 10-01-2010
Quote:Hi Chris,
cagwinn:lpsecp7r Wrote:It's quite unlikely (and a lot of etymologists have not looked at this problem with a critical eye - the Cunorix = Cynric mem has become received wisdom) - the 5th century pronunciation of Britonic Cunorix (which was already well on its way to becoming Old Welsh Cinir) would not easily become Saxon Cynric through any normal linguistic process.I must disagree there, it's by no means as clear-cut as you suggest (or beat your colleagues around the ears with). For as long as we date the inscription on the Wroxeter stone to the later 5th century, there is evidence to suggest that Cunorix was a form still in use during that period. Therefore I think it a possibility (not: "it is") that the name Cynric went back on a British name. Mind you, even so, that does not mean that the person also was a Briton, or spoke British. Attila is a good example.
The spelling Cunorix reflects an archaic Brittonic orthographic tradition (though the name itself was probably Irish), not a phonetic rendering of the name as it was then pronounced (which was surely *Kunari by this date). See Patric Sims-Williams, The Celtic Inscriptions of Britain, pp. 26-27 (which you can view on Google Books: [url:lpsecp7r]http://books.google.com/books?id=vn0g6ItICtUC&pg=PA26#v=onepage&q&f=false[/url]). Orthographic standards rarely keep pace with phonetic changes (the dichotomy between written and spoken Modern English is a perfect example of this!).
It is unlikely that any 5th century Saxon would have picked up a Celtic name like Cunorix via a written source - if there was any borrowing, it would more probably have been via an oral source. In the 5th century, the Brittonic form of the name was pronounced something like *Ken@ri:" (later in the century, *Kener, which would, a few centuries later, be rendered Cinir in Old Welsh) and, as I have just mentioned, its Irish cognate, *Kunari (later to become Old Irish Conri). Neither one is likely to have given us a Saxon Cynric.
By the way, Old High German Gothic had words related to the Saxon name Cynric - OHD kunirichi and Goth kunirihhi, meaning "kingdom"; their Old English cognate was cyneri:ce "kingdom" (later kinrik, literally "nobleman-dominion", cyne- being a variant of cyning "king", from Germanic *kuniz "[royal] kindred"). See D.H. Green, Language and History in the Early Germanic Word, pp. 130ff. Also viewable online: [url:lpsecp7r]http://books.google.com/books?id=RONb2alF0rEC&pg=PA130#v=onepage&q&f=false[/url]
In Gothic society, the head of a kuni (tribe) was a reiks "lord, king".
I have been looking into Cerdic some more - there was a possible Saxon name *Cearda, attested by the place names Cerdan hlaew and Caerdan-dun (perhaps Chardstock, too) and Cerdic could easily be a pet-name form if it (the suffix -ic formed hypocoristic names in A-S, compare Taetica, Baldic, et al.). Perhaps (seeing that we also find the spelling Ceartic) it is a dialectal form of Old English ceart (MoEng chart) "moor, woodland, overgrown/rough land/ground"?
Re: Sub-Roman Britain (Cavalry etc) - Medicus matt - 10-01-2010
Quote:I've altered the topic title to Sub-Roman Britain (cavalry etc.), since I gather were exhausted that (part of the) topic.
After only 4 years? Are you sure?
Maybe you could split some of this thread out into a sub section called 'Theoretical etymological wrangling that will never be resolved'?
Re: Sub-Roman Britain (Cavalry etc) - Alanus - 10-02-2010
Quote:Maybe you could split some of this thread out into a sub section called 'Theoretical etymological wrangling that will never be resolved'?
Thanks for that suggestion, Matt! :wink:
You're the reiks in my book. :lol:
Re: Sub-Roman Britain (Cavalry etc) - cagwinn - 10-02-2010
Quote:Vortigern Studies:3rzovpdt Wrote:I've altered the topic title to Sub-Roman Britain (cavalry etc.), since I gather were exhausted that (part of the) topic.
After only 4 years? Are you sure?
Maybe you could split some of this thread out into a sub section called 'Theoretical etymological wrangling that will never be resolved'?
Yes, god forbid anyone should have to be forced to read (because reading every post here is compulsory) anything other than the minutia of Sub-Roman spear tips and breast plates.