12-21-2007, 11:08 AM
Hi Martin,
Although I thoroughly enjoyed reading John Morris’ Age of Arthur at the time (as much as I enjoyed Lesley Alcock’s Arthur's Britain, History and Archaeology AD 367-634), I think that the book is not strong enough. Not to mention to horrible note apparatus, but in the last decade or so, much better studies have been written, and are to be preferred. I can recommend:
Dark, Ken R. (1994): Civitas to Kingdom, British Political Continuity 300-800, Studies in the Early History of Britain, (Leicester).
Dark, Kenn R. (2000): Britain and the End of the Roman Empire, (Tempus, Stroud).
Esmonde Cleary, A.S. (1989): The Ending of Roman Britain, (London).
Jones, Michael E. (1996): The End of Roman Britain, (Cornell).
Snyder, Christopher A. (1998): An Age of Tyrants, Britain and Britons AD 400-600, (Stroud).
And I bet I forgot a few more.
As to the ‘move’ of any Cornovii to Dumnonia, that is so far a theory by the late John Morris alone, unsubstantiated in any way but for a similarity of the names. In my opinion, the explanation of the original name of Cornwall by Charles Thomas (the element corn- meaning ‘horn’, which describes the shape of the land.
As to the ‘prime objective’, the expulsion of the Irish, best read:
Rance, Philip (2001): Attacotti, Déisi and Magnus Maximus: the Case for Irish Federates in Late Roman Britain, in: Britannia 32, pp. 243-70.
It seems it can be defended that Irish settlers were invited into (southwest) Wales by the Romans. At what stage these settlers or different invaders became a problem (or to whom) is unclear. Besides that, the whole episode reads more like a foundation legend from Maelgwn Gwynedd’s royal archives, promoting the ancestry of his dynasty, the right to rule North Wales and the supposed origin of the cantrefs of Gwynedd as rightful conquests of Cunedda’s sons. Which immediately raises the questions a) why, if supposedly the Irish had settled deep into the north Welsh hills, no traces of them can be found there (with regards to the very many signs of Irish settlement in Dyfed), and
b) why if Cunedda and his sons supposedly made short work of the Irish to begin with, Maelgwn had to do the job all over again.
Anyway, the point is that this material about Cunedda (although it may well be correct) is most probably the view from the later 6th c. at the earliest (which is by itself very valuable information), looking back to Roman times, and may not be a literal account.
I can also recommend for early Irish and British interaction.:
Miller, Molly (1978-80): Hiberni Reversuri, in: Proc. Soc. Antiq. Scot. 110, pp. 305-27, at:
http://ads.ahds.ac.uk/catalogue/adsdata ... 05_327.pdf
As to the source for Cunedda, the first information that we receive about that move is from the 9th-century Historia Brittonum which claims that:
Dumville, David N. (1984): Gildas and Maelgwn: problems of dating, in: Lapidge and Dumville, Gildas: New Approaches, pp. 51-60.
Miller, Molly (1978a): The Foundation-Legend of Gwynedd in the Latin Texts, in: Bulletin of the Board of Celtic Studies 27, part 4 may pp. 515-532.
While we can’t even date Maelgwn with certainty, the problem of dating Cunedda is even more problematic. Cunedda is described as Maelgwn’s atavus, which literally means ‘great- great- great- grandfather’, or rather more simply ‘ancestor’. In most pedigrees, Cunedda is only the great-grandfather of Maglocunus. But Cunedda was already of advanced age when he came to Wales, his sons being old enough to fight battles. If we should date Mealgwn‘s death to AD 547 (but see http://www.vortigernstudies.org.uk/artsou/gildwhen.htm ), this could mean that Cunedda came to Gwynedd 146 years before Maglocunus’s reign, which would put him in the time of Magnus Maximus. Indeed, that would mean that Cunedda came to Wales with Roman approval (to say the least). But since Magnus Maximus also settled Irish in Wales we must keep in mind that the later account of this move is then at least contradictory where the objective of that move is concerned.
Although it goes way out of the range of this topic, a small note on Cyndyllan:
Cynddylan (or Kyndylan) was not ‘the last notable ruler’ of Powys, but a 7th-c. sub-king of Powys. Apart from the very moving (indeed!) poetry about the demise of his house (see http://www.kmatthews.org.uk/history/can ... index.html ), we have no detailed idea about where he ruled and what the extent of his rule was. He is situated in the area between Wroxeter and Shrewsbury, his kingdom being called Pengwern, most probably a sub-kingdom of Powys bordering Mercia.
The end of the Powys dynasty can be read here: http://www.ancientwalesstudies.org/id14.html
Although I thoroughly enjoyed reading John Morris’ Age of Arthur at the time (as much as I enjoyed Lesley Alcock’s Arthur's Britain, History and Archaeology AD 367-634), I think that the book is not strong enough. Not to mention to horrible note apparatus, but in the last decade or so, much better studies have been written, and are to be preferred. I can recommend:
Dark, Ken R. (1994): Civitas to Kingdom, British Political Continuity 300-800, Studies in the Early History of Britain, (Leicester).
Dark, Kenn R. (2000): Britain and the End of the Roman Empire, (Tempus, Stroud).
Esmonde Cleary, A.S. (1989): The Ending of Roman Britain, (London).
Jones, Michael E. (1996): The End of Roman Britain, (Cornell).
Snyder, Christopher A. (1998): An Age of Tyrants, Britain and Britons AD 400-600, (Stroud).
And I bet I forgot a few more.
Quote: There is evidence that the late Roman authorities tried to make use of native British military resources to bolster their rule. Unfortunately there wasn't very much left of British military capabilities after centuries of Roman de-militarisation of native societies. The only Roman regional army unit recorded is named after a NW Midlands tribe, the Cornovii. It can be no coincidence that it was elements of the Cornovii that were tranferred to Dumnonia (Devon and Cornwall) to oust Irish invaders, whence the name Cornwall derives.I’m not sure I agree with the conclusion about military capabilities. I mean, Gaul was occupied and Romanized for a longer period, yet soldiers from Gaul were described in the Late Roman period as the best infantry. Why would British citizens be different?
As to the ‘move’ of any Cornovii to Dumnonia, that is so far a theory by the late John Morris alone, unsubstantiated in any way but for a similarity of the names. In my opinion, the explanation of the original name of Cornwall by Charles Thomas (the element corn- meaning ‘horn’, which describes the shape of the land.
Quote: The ancestor of most of the later Welsh princely houses Cunedda Wledig was imported to Wales from Manau (Votadini) in the Edinburgh area north of the wall. He had the same task as the Cornovii, dealing with Irish invadersWell, for the Cornovii, see above.
As to the ‘prime objective’, the expulsion of the Irish, best read:
Rance, Philip (2001): Attacotti, Déisi and Magnus Maximus: the Case for Irish Federates in Late Roman Britain, in: Britannia 32, pp. 243-70.
It seems it can be defended that Irish settlers were invited into (southwest) Wales by the Romans. At what stage these settlers or different invaders became a problem (or to whom) is unclear. Besides that, the whole episode reads more like a foundation legend from Maelgwn Gwynedd’s royal archives, promoting the ancestry of his dynasty, the right to rule North Wales and the supposed origin of the cantrefs of Gwynedd as rightful conquests of Cunedda’s sons. Which immediately raises the questions a) why, if supposedly the Irish had settled deep into the north Welsh hills, no traces of them can be found there (with regards to the very many signs of Irish settlement in Dyfed), and
b) why if Cunedda and his sons supposedly made short work of the Irish to begin with, Maelgwn had to do the job all over again.
Anyway, the point is that this material about Cunedda (although it may well be correct) is most probably the view from the later 6th c. at the earliest (which is by itself very valuable information), looking back to Roman times, and may not be a literal account.
I can also recommend for early Irish and British interaction.:
Miller, Molly (1978-80): Hiberni Reversuri, in: Proc. Soc. Antiq. Scot. 110, pp. 305-27, at:
http://ads.ahds.ac.uk/catalogue/adsdata ... 05_327.pdf
As to the source for Cunedda, the first information that we receive about that move is from the 9th-century Historia Brittonum which claims that:
Quote: Mailcunus magnus rex apud Brittones regnabat, id est in regione Guenedotae, quia atavus illius, id est CunedagRead also:
Dumville, David N. (1984): Gildas and Maelgwn: problems of dating, in: Lapidge and Dumville, Gildas: New Approaches, pp. 51-60.
Miller, Molly (1978a): The Foundation-Legend of Gwynedd in the Latin Texts, in: Bulletin of the Board of Celtic Studies 27, part 4 may pp. 515-532.
While we can’t even date Maelgwn with certainty, the problem of dating Cunedda is even more problematic. Cunedda is described as Maelgwn’s atavus, which literally means ‘great- great- great- grandfather’, or rather more simply ‘ancestor’. In most pedigrees, Cunedda is only the great-grandfather of Maglocunus. But Cunedda was already of advanced age when he came to Wales, his sons being old enough to fight battles. If we should date Mealgwn‘s death to AD 547 (but see http://www.vortigernstudies.org.uk/artsou/gildwhen.htm ), this could mean that Cunedda came to Gwynedd 146 years before Maglocunus’s reign, which would put him in the time of Magnus Maximus. Indeed, that would mean that Cunedda came to Wales with Roman approval (to say the least). But since Magnus Maximus also settled Irish in Wales we must keep in mind that the later account of this move is then at least contradictory where the objective of that move is concerned.
Quote: The Cornovii, later calling themselves the Pagenses (Powis), were the last Welsh of lowland Britain (excepting the Cornish) to remain independent of English rule in modern Shropshire and Cheshire. Cynddylan, their last notable ruler, is the subject of some rather moving poetry.
Although it goes way out of the range of this topic, a small note on Cyndyllan:
Cynddylan (or Kyndylan) was not ‘the last notable ruler’ of Powys, but a 7th-c. sub-king of Powys. Apart from the very moving (indeed!) poetry about the demise of his house (see http://www.kmatthews.org.uk/history/can ... index.html ), we have no detailed idea about where he ruled and what the extent of his rule was. He is situated in the area between Wroxeter and Shrewsbury, his kingdom being called Pengwern, most probably a sub-kingdom of Powys bordering Mercia.
The end of the Powys dynasty can be read here: http://www.ancientwalesstudies.org/id14.html
Robert Vermaat
MODERATOR
FECTIO Late Romans
THE CAUSE OF WAR MUST BE JUST
(Maurikios-Strategikon, book VIII.2: Maxim 12)
MODERATOR
FECTIO Late Romans
THE CAUSE OF WAR MUST BE JUST
(Maurikios-Strategikon, book VIII.2: Maxim 12)
