The Scrope family

The Scrope family, of Norman origin, first rose to prominence in 14th-century England. The story begins with Robert le Scrope, the earliest documented ancestor, who established the family’s connection to the noble Gant family in the 12th century. The Scropes’ legacy is marked by their acquisition of noble titles, including Baron Scrope of Masham and Bolton, and briefly, the Earl of Wiltshire. The family’s crest, originally a crab, symbolizes their motto “Devant si je puis,” (Forward if I am able), reflecting a spirit of progress and resilience.

Origins of the Name Scrope

The surname Scroope, also spelled Scrope, has a storied history that intertwines with the fabric of English and Irish genealogy. Tracing its origins back to the Old Norse personal name Skroppr, which translates to “a horse,” the name suggests a connection to strength and endurance. This lineage is first found in Yorkshire, where the Scroope family rose to prominence in the 14th and 15th centuries, becoming a noble house of significant importance, with a lineage unbroken since the Norman Conquest. The Scroopes held numerous high offices of honour in both the Church and State, exemplifying their influence and status in medieval England.

The family’s notoriety is marked by figures such as Richard le Scrope, the 1st Baron Scrope of Bolton, who was an esteemed soldier and courtier under Richard II, and even fought at the Battle of Crecy. His contributions to the English court were substantial, having served as Lord High Treasurer and Lord Chancellor. However, the Scroope family also faced turmoil; Henry, Lord le Scroop, and Archbishop Scroop were both executed for high treason during the reign of Henry IV, indicating the volatile nature of their high-standing positions.

The etymology of the surname, rooted in the Old Norse language, reflects the Viking influence on the British Isles, particularly in regions like Yorkshire where Norse settlers were prevalent. The transition of the name from Skroppr to Scroope signifies the linguistic and cultural assimilation that occurred over centuries. The horse, symbolized by the original Norse name, is a powerful emblem in many cultures, often representing nobility, freedom, and the spirit of conquest, which aligns with the historical narrative of the Scroope family’s rise to prominence.

The Scrope Family

The narrative of the Scropes is intertwined with significant historical events and figures. Richard le Scrope, 1st Baron Scrope of Bolton, served as chancellor of England and was an active adherent of John of Gaunt. His son, William le Scrope, Earl of Wiltshire, was a staunch supporter of Richard II and met a tragic end with his execution at the onset of Henry IV’s reign. Yet, the family’s honour remained intact, as they were pardoned and continued to hold their titles.

Throughout the centuries, the Scropes have been associated with notable estates such as Bolton Castle, their principal residence, and have played pivotal roles in the judiciary and military. Members of the family, such as Henry le Scrope and Geoffrey le Scrope, served as chief justices of the king’s bench, reinforcing their influence within the royal court.

The Scrope family’s story is also one of resilience and adaptation. Despite the political turmoil and the fluctuating fortunes that came with it, they managed to maintain their status and contribute to the fabric of English nobility. Their tale is a testament to the enduring legacy of a family that navigated the complexities of medieval England’s power dynamics, leaving an indelible mark on the country’s aristocratic history.

Their influence is rooted in their noble titles, including Baron Scrope of Masham, Baron Scrope of Bolton, and briefly, the Earl of Wiltshire. Notably, Richard le Scrope served as the Chancellor of England and was knighted at the Battle of Neville’s Cross in 1346. His legacy continued with William le Scrope, who was created Earl of Wiltshire by Richard II and became Treasurer of England. Despite his execution at the onset of Henry IV’s reign, the Scropes maintained their status, with the barony passing down through Roger Scrope’s descendants until 1630.

Bolton Castle

The family’s historical residence, Bolton Castle in North Yorkshire, stands as a testament to their once formidable presence. In the turbulent times of the Border Reivers, Thomas Lord Scrope, as the last West March Warden before the Union of the Crowns in 1603, endeavoured to bring peace and justice to the English West March, despite opposition from influential local families. The Scropes’ commitment to governance and justice, as well as their military and political service, underscores their lasting impact on the shaping of British societal structures and governance.

Their influence began with their prominence in the court of King Edward II and extended through various members who held judicial and political positions, such as chief justices of the king’s bench and chancellors of England. Notably, Richard le Scrope served as chancellor and was an active supporter of John of Gaunt, while William le Scrope, Earl of Wiltshire, was a key figure in the reign of Richard II.

The Scropes’ political engagements, especially their roles in the English West Marches as wardens, were pivotal in maintaining the peace and stability of the borderlands during tumultuous periods. Their governance helped shape the policies and defence strategies against Scottish incursions, influencing the socio-political landscape of the region. The family’s legacy also includes the construction of Bolton Castle, a symbol of their power and architectural taste. Over the centuries, the Scropes’ contributions to law, governance, and military campaigns have left an indelible mark on British society.

Their ancestral home, Bolton Castle, is a prominent landmark within the Dales and remains under the ownership of the Scrope descendants. This castle, a quadrangular fortress built between 1378 and 1399 by Richard le Scrope, has witnessed centuries of history, including the Wars of the Roses and the Pilgrimage of Grace. Despite being damaged during the English Civil War, Bolton Castle has been preserved and is now a Scheduled Ancient Monument and a Grade I listed building.

The current head of the family, Simon Richard Henry ‘Harry’ Scrope, born in 1974, is the steward of this historic legacy. His lineage can be traced back to the influential figures of medieval England, and the family has maintained a presence in the region through various historical upheavals. The Scrope family’s coat of arms, Azure a bend or, is a testament to their enduring heritage and is displayed in over 40 churches across Yorkshire.

Today, the Scrope family continues to play a role in the cultural and historical fabric of the Yorkshire Dales, preserving the legacy of their ancestors and maintaining the ties that bind them to this picturesque part of England.

Another significant site is the Masham family estate, which came into the Scrope family through marriage and was elevated to a barony, thus creating the title Baron Scrope of Masham. This title was held alongside their primary title of Baron Scrope of Bolton, showcasing the family’s accumulation of titles and lands.

The Masham Family Estate has a storied history that dates back to the Norman conquest of England. The Scropes, originally of Norman origin, rose to prominence in the 14th century and established themselves as a notable English family with significant influence and landholdings, including the Masham estate. The family name, pronounced “Scroop,” is believed to be derived from the old Anglo-Norman word for “crab,” a creature that intriguingly featured in the family’s early crest before being replaced by five feathers.

The Masham estate itself has been a central part of the family’s holdings. Over the centuries, it has witnessed the ebbs and flows of the family’s fortunes, including the involvement of Henry Scrope, 3rd Baron Scrope of Masham, in the Southampton Plot against King Henry V, which led to his execution. Despite such tumultuous events, the Scropes maintained their status and contributions to the region, with the estate reflecting the family’s enduring presence in English aristocracy and society.

Today, the history of the Masham Family Estate and the Scrope family is a fascinating tapestry of loyalty, intrigue, and resilience, offering a window into the complex social and political dynamics of medieval and early modern England. The estate’s legacy continues to be a point of interest for historians and visitors alike, symbolizing the rich heritage and enduring narrative of one of England’s old noble families.

Swinton Estate, Masham

The historical records regarding the ownership transition of Swinton Estate to William Danby are not explicitly detailed in the search results. However, it is known that the estate was in the hands of the Danby family for several generations. Sir Abstrupus Danby, who lived from 1655 to 1727, initiated the construction of Swinton Park, and it was his descendants who continued to develop the estate. William Danby, who lived from 1752 to 1833, is credited with significant alterations and extensions to Swinton Park, giving it the Gothic aspect it retains today. It is likely that William Danby inherited the estate from his family predecessors rather than purchasing it from an external party. The Danby family’s legacy on the estate is well-documented, with their tenure marked by architectural and cultural contributions that shaped the Swinton Estate’s history.

The Swinton Estate, with its rich history and expansive grounds, has been a prominent feature in North Yorkshire for centuries. Initially acquired by the Danby family, the estate underwent significant transformations, particularly under the stewardship of William Danby in the late 18th century. His grand tour and subsequent architectural endeavours, employing the likes of John Carr and James Wyatt, left an indelible mark on the property, shaping it into the impressive setting we know today.

The estate’s connection to the Masham Family Estate of the Scopes is intricately linked through marriage and ownership. On 17 June 2000, a union that further solidified this relationship was the marriage of Mark and Felicity, who are styled by courtesy as Lord and Lady Masham. Following their honeymoon, they took residence at Swinton and began managing the family business, marking a new chapter in the estate’s storied legacy.

Swinton Estate’s evolution continued into the 19th century when it was sold to Lord Masham. Later, in the 1880s, it was acquired by Samuel Cunliffe-Lister, a mill tycoon, whose family, the Cunliffe-Listers (the Earls of Swinton), have largely maintained ownership. The estate saw various uses over the years, including acting as a retreat for students during World War I and housing Swinton Conservative College. In 2000, Mark Cunliffe-Lister repurchased the estate, which had been sold to help pay death duties in 1980, and a year later, it was converted into a hotel.

Today, the Swinton Estate stands as a testament to the enduring legacy of the families that have shaped its destiny. It remains privately owned, with some residences within the estate villages of Ilton, Swinton, and Fearby, or within Masham itself. The estate’s history is a tapestry of architectural innovation, social connections, and a deep commitment to the preservation of its natural beauty and heritage.

Other Links in England

The Scrope family also had connections to other estates across England. In Lincolnshire, they held estates in Barton on Humber, while in the East Riding of Yorkshire, they had lands in Flotmanby. These estates further expanded the Scrope family’s reach and influence across the region.

Richards Castle, located in Herefordshire and Shropshire, is another site linked to the Scrope family. It was named after Richard Scrope, who held estates in Herefordshire and Worcestershire in 1066 and was a favourite of Edward the Confessor.

The family’s historical significance is not only tied to their grand residences but also to their roles in the judiciary and military. Members of the Scrope family served as chief justices of the King’s Bench, a position that further solidified their status within the English nobility.

These sites, along with the family’s storied history, paint a vivid picture of the Scrope family’s role in shaping the political and social landscape of medieval England. Their legacy, etched into the stone of these historical sites, continues to be a subject of interest for historians and visitors alike, offering a window into the past and the lives of one of England’s most influential families. The Scrope family’s association with these sites underscores their long-standing influence and the enduring mark they have left on the English heritage.

The Scrope Family in Ireland

The Norman Conquest of Ireland, a pivotal event in the late 12th century, marked the beginning of significant changes in the Irish sociopolitical landscape. The invasion, initiated by Anglo-Norman mercenaries at the behest of Diarmait Mac Murchada, the deposed King of Leinster, led to the establishment of the Lordship of Ireland under the sovereignty of the English crown. Among the many Anglo-Norman families who settled in Ireland during this period were the Scroopes, an influential English family with a history of high-ranking positions within England’s social hierarchy. The Scroopes, like many other Anglo-Norman families, were granted lands and titles in Ireland as a reward for their support and military contributions to the Norman conquests. This solidified their status and facilitated the integration of Norman culture and influence into Irish society.

The Scroopes’ arrival in Ireland was part of a larger movement that saw the transfer of numerous Anglo-Norman families to Irish lands, a process that significantly altered the demographic and political dynamics of the region. These families, including the Scroopes, brought with them distinct cultural practices, architectural styles, and feudal systems of governance, which they imposed upon the lands they controlled. The Scroopes, known for their martial prowess and administrative acumen, quickly established themselves as a prominent force in their new environment. Their influence extended beyond their immediate holdings, impacting the local Irish communities and contributing to the gradual transformation of Irish society.

The legacy of the Scroopes and other Anglo-Norman families in Ireland is enduring, with many descendants of these families still present in Ireland today. Their impact is evident in the numerous castles, churches, and townships they established, many of which remain integral parts of the Irish cultural and historical heritage. The Scroopes, through their integration into Irish nobility and intermarriage with Irish families, became a symbol of the complex interplay between Norman and Irish identities that characterized the medieval period in Ireland.

The Scroopes have roots deeply embedded in the historical tapestry of Connacht, with County Galway serving as the epicentre of their influence. As prominent landowners, their dominion extended over vast tracts of land, which signified wealth and conferred upon them considerable political clout. Their ascent to power was marked by strategic marriages and alliances, which fortified their status within the aristocracy of the region.

Throughout the centuries, the Scroopes’ name became synonymous with leadership and governance. Their involvement in local government was not merely titular; they were instrumental in shaping policies that had lasting impacts on the socio-economic development of Connacht. Their military engagements further underscored their commitment to safeguarding their interests and asserting their authority. The Scroopes were not only participants in military campaigns but often the architects of defence strategies against various threats, both foreign and domestic.

In the realm of justice, the Scroopes were pivotal figures. Their roles as High Sheriffs and Members of Parliament were not merely ceremonial. They were active in legislative assemblies, advocating for laws and reforms that reflected the needs and aspirations of their constituents. Their judicial responsibilities also included overseeing the administration of justice, ensuring that the scales remained balanced and that the rule of law prevailed in their jurisdiction.

The Scroopes’ legacy is also marked by their patronage of the arts and education, which served to elevate the cultural landscape of Connacht. They commissioned works from renowned artists and contributed to the establishment of educational institutions, thereby nurturing a legacy of enlightenment and progress.

Their influence waned with the changing political tides and the advent of modern governance structures. However, the mark they left on the history and identity of Connacht remains indelible. The Scroopes are a testament to the enduring impact a single family can have on the course of regional history, leaving a legacy that continues to be studied and admired by historians and genealogists alike.

The Cistercians in North Yorkshire

The Cistercian Order

The Cistercian Order, known for its strict adherence to the Rule of Saint Benedict, saw the establishment of its first monastery for women at Le Tart Abbey in 1125. This foundation marked the beginning of a significant movement within the Cistercian Order, as women sought a life of contemplation and service under the Cistercian ethos. The nuns of Le Tart, originating from the Benedictine monastery of Juilly, embraced a life of austerity and seclusion, which was further propagated by the influential Bernard of Clairvaux’s sister, Humbeline, at Juilly, a dependency of Molesme Abbey. The spread of Cistercian nunneries across Europe was rapid, with notable establishments such as Tulebras in Spain and the renowned Santa María la Real de Las Huelgas near Burgos, founded by Alfonso VIII of Castile. These nunneries were not only spiritual retreats but also centres of learning and manuscript production, contributing to the cultural and intellectual heritage of their time.

The Cistercian nuns played a pivotal role in the religious landscape, with their abbeys acting as beacons of faith and discipline. The General Chapter of the Order, recognizing the expansion of nunneries, sought to maintain control over this growth to preserve the integrity of the Cistercian way of life. Despite the challenges of the times, including the decline in monastic vocations and the impact of the Black Death, the Cistercian nunneries persisted, adapting to changing circumstances while holding steadfast to their core values.

The Cistercians in England

In England, the Cistercian nuns established influential houses such as Marham Abbey, founded by Isabel, widow of Hugh de Albini, Earl of Arundel, dedicated to the Virgin Mary, St. Barbara, and St. Edmund. These English nunneries, like their European counterparts, were integral to the local communities, providing education, hospitality, and spiritual guidance. The abbey of Marham, for instance, was closely linked to the mother-house of the Cistercian order in England, Waverley Abbey, reflecting the interconnected nature of the Cistercian establishments.

The Cistercians, a Catholic monastic order that branched off from the Benedictines, established a significant presence in Britain during the medieval period. Founded in 1098 at Cîteaux Abbey in France, the order adhered to the Rule of Saint Benedict with a strict emphasis on austerity and manual labour.

The Cistercians, also known as White Monks due to their distinctive white habits, sought to return to a purer form of monastic life, emphasizing prayer, manual work, and self-sufficiency. Their arrival in Britain was marked by the establishment of houses that would become centres of religious life and agricultural innovation.

The first Cistercian abbey in England, Waverley Abbey, was founded in 1128, and from there, the order expanded rapidly across the country. By the end of the 12th century, the Cistercians had established themselves as a major spiritual and economic force, with abbeys such as Rievaulx and Fountains becoming influential within the church and local economies.

The Cistercians were known for their contributions to architecture, with their abbeys reflecting a style that combined simplicity with grandeur. They also played a pivotal role in the development of agricultural techniques and were instrumental in the spread of technological innovations in fields such as hydraulic engineering.

Despite their success, the Cistercians faced challenges during the later medieval period, including the Black Death and the eventual Dissolution of the Monasteries under Henry VIII, which led to the suppression of the order in Britain. Nevertheless, the legacy of the Cistercians in Britain endures, with their former abbeys standing as monuments to a once-thriving monastic tradition.

The Cistercians in North Yorkshire

The Cistercian order made a significant mark on the religious landscape of medieval Europe, particularly in North Yorkshire. Whilst he first Cistercian house in Britain was established at Waverley in 1128, but it was the foundation of Rievaulx Abbey in 1132 that truly signified the order’s establishment in the region. This abbey was the first Cistercian outpost in the north of England, intended as a mission centre from which the order could expand into the north and Scotland.

The Cistercians were known for their rigorous adherence to the Rule of St. Benedict, emphasizing a life of poverty, manual labour, and prayer. Their arrival in Yorkshire was part of a broader expansion, driven by figures like Bernard of Clairvaux, who sought to spread the order’s influence.

The Cistercians’ impact on Yorkshire was profound, not only in spiritual terms but also in terms of land management and the wool trade, which they dominated thanks to their extensive sheep farming. The abbeys, such as Rievaulx and Fountains Abbey, became centres of economic activity and technological innovation, with the monks implementing advanced agricultural techniques and contributing significantly to the local economy. The Cistercian legacy in North Yorkshire is still evident today in the ruins of these great abbeys, which stand as a testament to the order’s once formidable presence in the region.

North Yorkshire was home to several other significant Cistercian abbeys during the medieval period. Byland Abbey, one of the great Yorkshire abbeys, was known for its enormous church and beautiful rose window, rivalling the grandeur of the cathedrals of its time.

Fountains Abbey, near Ripon, is one of the largest and best-preserved ruined Cistercian monasteries in England. Its vast and impressive ruins reflect the abbey’s one-time wealth and influence.

Jervaulx Abbey, situated in the picturesque Yorkshire Dales, played a pivotal role in the development of Wensleydale cheese, showcasing the Cistercians’ innovative spirit in agriculture and commerce.

Bolton Abbey, while not a Cistercian foundation, is often associated with them due to its proximity and the shared monastic culture of the region.

Whitby Abbey, though originally a Benedictine monastery, shares the haunting beauty and historical significance that characterizes the Cistercian sites in Yorkshire. These abbeys stand as a testament to the Cistercians’ architectural ingenuity, economic prowess, and spiritual devotion, which left an indelible mark on the landscape and culture of North Yorkshire.

Finding Bardon – An Arthurian Quest

As a person of Welsh descent, it is disappointing to have to face up to the fact that the Welsh connection to the story of Arthur has been almost irretrievably subsumed by the enthusiastic input of a plethora of external sources.  The filigreed embellishments of an ever-expanding number of Arthurian afficionados have diminished the kudos of dusting off lost fragments of history.  It doesn’t quite stir the imagination somehow.  After all, why spoil a rollicking good adventure by further unsettling shaky realities?

But it needs to be said that the Welsh connection has actually got the real potential to provide a solid trail of tantalizing clues and hints and tangible evidence that can weave a whole new interpretation into the events of the past…

…just by letting the language take the role of leader while you faithfully follow its track, just to see where it goes.

It has worked before with words that don’t confound the English tongue.  We’ve been happy to identify Arthur’s burial ground as being on the Isle of Avalon (an island of apples) and we have no problem accepting this as being a translation of the Welsh word ‘Afal’ – meaning apple, even though the plural for ‘afal’ in Welsh is actually ‘afalau’ (not Afalon).  We accept that Welsh is a funny language, so it’s natural that we might not get it 100% right.

Similarly, it’s generally acknowledged that the name Gwenivere, Arthur’s queen, must be Welsh in some way because “gwen” is the Welsh word for ‘white’, and Gwenivere, at a stretch can be ‘sounded’ in Welsh as “Gwen-eferwi”…which means “bubbling whiteness”.

Arthur’s father, Uther Pendragon, also has a name that has been systematically dissected and explained for its Welshness : ‘pen’ meaning ‘head’, and ‘dracon’ in Old Brythonic (Welsh) meaning ‘leader’, with these two words being the root cause of long-term dramatic results when the Romans historically confused the word  ‘dracon’ with the Latin ‘draco’ meaning ‘serpent’ – thereby giving birth ultimately to the dragon on the Welsh flag.  So that in reality, there were no mythical dragons, just one big fierce-looking, angry-sounding, fire-breathing clan chief.  Curiously also, Uther Pendragon is suspended between reality and myth as a result of his name.  His title ‘Pendragon’ describes his (or anyone else’s) position and standing in the community in pre-Roman/Celtic times, while his given name ‘Uther’ marks him as a particular character with a role in the Arthurian legend.

We accept these snippets of Welshness because they don’t despoil the magical myth, but rather, help to add mystical elements to the story.

But we are not so sure when the Welsh language dares to give us an extra twist, such as, let’s say, a “treigliadd” or a “trickle mutation”, which is a grammatical facility whereby the first letter of a second word changes in order to make it easier to say.  This is what has happened when we learn that Arthur’s final battle took place at the battle of Camlann – or Cam-glan, with the dropped ‘g’ so that it becomes “a crooked (river) bank” in translation – something more mundane than the sound of the word might suggest.

However, none of these oddments can prepare us for the utter misdirection which has resulted from  a misunderstanding of the simple Welsh word for ‘the’ – ‘y’ or ‘yr’.  The confusion over this particular word is so profound that it needs to be isolated and examined in and of itself.

‘Y’ and ‘yr’ have been tragically mispronounced by the English and some serious red herrings have arisen as a result.  ‘Y’ has been used fondly as a mark of respect in the past, as in “Yr Hen” – ‘The Old”, and to this day, the word ‘y’ is still used to name and separate different identities in Wales, as in Jones the butcher, Jones the baker, and Jones the candlestick maker (Jones y Cig, Jones y Bara, Jones yr Olau)

It is not spoken with an ‘i’ sound, or an ‘ee’ sound, but rather as a lazy ‘er’.  In fact, the best way to grasp the pronunciation is to copy the sound of the word ‘Sir’ without the ‘s’.

And this can lead into a whole new field of discovery…which hinges on the word ‘Sir’ as it is derived from the French ‘mon-sieur’ (my lord).  The French connection is important because the legend of Arthur doesn’t really come alive until the French-Norman invasion of Britain in 1066, (co-incidentally about a hundred years after the poem “Y Gododdin” was first recorded in the 9th century).

It is difficult – at this distance in time – to imagine a world where French was the predominant language spoken in Britain, but for 300 hundred years, English was the patois of the peasants, Welsh was the tongue-twisting gobbledegook that the Saxons suppressed as they established their four- hundred-year (6th-10th) reign of dominance, and French became the language of the hierarchy within the castles and courts the length and breadth of the country from 1066 to 1385.

Contrarily, it is easy to imagine how the arrival of the French might have heralded a renewed interest and revival of the Brythonic language since these two Gallic cousins shared many linguistic similarities, with some words even sounding exactly the same : llyfr/livre – book, ffenestr/fenetre – window, mor/mer – sea, mur/mur – wall, trist/trist – sad, pont/pont – bridge, eglws/eglise – church, to list a few examples.  But this crossover and pairing of words with similar Latin roots was not without its problems and mismatched results.  The Welsh word ‘Y’ being one of them.

Just imagine the buzz around the ladies of the French-speaking courts as the Norman castles expanded into the north of the country and into the historic lands of the Brythonic-speaking Gododdyn, and the kingdom of Rheged.  Gossip in different languages would have flowed freely among the peasants and servants in the marketplaces, kitchens and alehouses, and whispered into the ears of the nobility in their private quarters.  Bardic verses about the exploits of warrior heroes would still have been “sung” among the surviving Celts, even though the Saxons had pushed their tribes to the western fringes.  And, for the French, the funny-sounding names would have rolled more easily of the tongue than for the English.  Galahad, Gawain, Tristan, Percival, Gareth, Lancelot, Kay were all names that would have been spoken with an easy familiarity.  Yet these identities were nowhere to be found in Celtic times.

The only name that crops up – in the negative – is that of Arthur in the poem ‘Y Gododdyn’ when Aneurin, the poet, wrote of the leading warrior of the day, saying that he was not Arthur – “ d’oedd o ddim Arthur”.  And, of course, the other name we hear is that of Uther, his father. Added to which, these two names closely resemble the Welsh word “rhuthr” meaning, ‘rush’, or ‘charge’.

Uther, Arthur and rhuthr, all sound the same in Welsh.  In fact, it is too easy to see how they might have been confused and mistranslated as the story was orally narrated down the ages.

Even so, these words only take on special significance when you add the word ‘Y’ to them in the Welsh way.  Then, when spoken out loud in a Welsh accent, the sounds are virtually indistinguishable.  Yr Uther, Yr Arthur, and Y Rhuthr blend into one, meaning : “the leader of the charge”.

In isolation, this might seem like nothing more than an interesting minor detail, but when you apply the same linguistic quirk to some of the other leading “knights of the round” table, a whole new picture begins to emerge.

The most revelatory knight to apply this system of nomenclature to would be Sir Gawain.  Gawain, spelt Gwain in Welsh, is a ‘scabbard’.  Sir Gawain thus becomes “Y Gwain” – The Scabbard.  In the same vein, Sir Galahad, with some adjustment, becomes “Y Galwad” – The Caller.  Sir Kay becomes “Y  Cau” – The Closer.  Sir Percival – becomes “Y Perisigl” The Shaking Spear.  Sir Gareth becomes “Y Garreg” – The Pebble.  Sir Tristan becomes “Y Trist” – The Sad.  Sir Lancelot becomes “Y Llawn-selog” -The (one who is) Full-of-Zeal (Latin).

These adjustments, when you include “Y Rhuthr” – The Leader of the Charge, take on a far more militaristic bias than the original naming of the Knights of the Round table would allow.

The French, with their linguistic penchant for sliding the letters of words into one another, took a functional descriptor and elevated it into a lordly title.  “Y Cau” become(s-S)yr Kay” with sublime ease thereby resulting in the creation of a class of lordly heroes, rather than a band of warriors with a particular role in battle.

A fragile concoction resulted which had nothing to do with the pseudo-historical facts recorded by Gildas or Nennius, but was more in line with the heroic panegyric of Aneurin’s “Y Gododdyn” as it was captured and embellished by the jealous fancies of francophile courtiers to be later fixed into the record books by Geoffrey of Monmouth.

But if that Arthurian fantasy were to unravel at this distance in time, what realities would we be left with?

No-one knows how a Celtic battle might have been conducted back in the 1st– 4th centuries.  Certainly, we know that Roman warfare was highly structured, whereas the Celtic forces they came up against in Gaul and Britain have been depicted as a wild rabble.  They weren’t trained soldiers in the way the Romans were.  But that doesn’t mean that they didn’t have some kind of battle plan and organization.

The Romans overwhelmed the Celts systematically when they took Britain, but as the Roman forces became stretched and weakened along the fringes of Empire, they resorted to parlaying with the local tribes to the north to act as their proxy armies in keeping the untameable Picts at bay.

When the Romans were forced to retreated from the Antonine Wall in 160AD, they made use of a confederation of Brythonic-speaking peoples who saw themselves as being separate groups of equal-standing led by their own chiefs.  Not so much conferring at a “round table”, as at a ‘table of crowns’.  The Welsh word ‘cron’ meaning ‘round’ being indistinguishable, orally, from the word ‘coron’ meaning crown.  Their old beliefs in reincarnation would still have been alive in their minds and would have sustained them in battle.  To be reborn as a more prestigious person by dying courageously in battle would still have mattered in the 2nd century.  Their old battle-cry of : “Escar-i-fore”, meaning ‘a rebirth to the morning’ would have breathed energy into their spirits.

For over three hundred years they patrolled the border in exchange for certain freedoms from the Roman conquerors.  They would have been well-practiced at summoning a makeshift army at short notice and organizing peasant farmers into a defensive force.

So that when a new enemy arrived at their shores in the 5th century, they had established systems to fall back on.

And when Merlin led Arthur to the sacred lake to extract the old long Celtic sword – still shiny from having been preserved in an acidic peat bog, and exposed when the “craig” or “rock” split open as the peat loosened out in summer rains, a new ‘Arthur’ (Rhuthyr) might have extracted that sword, held it aloft and cried out “Escar-i-fore!” – a rebirth to the morning…stirring the idea of a renewal of the old ways.  And his followers might have enthusiastically echoed his words, possibly making the word sound more like ‘Excalibur’ over time.

The sword would not have been raised out of the water by a ‘lady of the lake’.  This is a misunderstanding of translation.  The word for a woman, in Welsh, is ‘gwraig’.  ‘Craig’, the word for ‘rock’, will mutate the ‘c’ to a ‘g’ according to its position in a sentence, and become ‘graig’.  ‘Gwraig’, and ‘graig’ are aurally sufficiently so similar that it is easy to see how the myth of the ‘lady of the lake’ was created.

It is worth noting that a find of an old Celtic sword in the 5th century would have been a precious, rare occurrence.  Most of the weaponry that had been thrown into the sacred waters as an offering to the Celtic Gods would probably have been lifted out of the lakes at the time of Boudica’s (Welsh Buddiga, meaning “victory”) rebellion in the 1st century.  It is rarely stated that this uprising coincided with Suetonius Paulinus’ torching of the sacred groves of the Druids in Anglesey.  The smoke would have been visible throughout Snowdonia and up the west coast of northern Britain, almost to the Lake District.  Those Druids who were not at home on ‘Mon’ at the time of the massacre would have heard the news and furiously led the Celts into the sacred lakes to retrieve whatever weaponry was still useable and carried it across to join Buddiga’s forces. (Bearing in mind that Buddiga’s forces burned the Temple of Claudius and all the people sheltering within it to the ground, it is not impossible to surmise that a few avenging Druids might have been seeking retribution and directing matters covertly from within.)

For the next four hundred years, the Druids and their detested religion were suppressed.  Whatever loyal adherents remained survived by staying hidden. Merlyn’s Druidic provenance would have been kept secret by the northern tribes.  The word ‘merlyn’, in Welsh, means ‘pony’.  Merlyn’s role in any battle plan might have been to keep in the background and muster the reserves of horses. But the old Druidic belief in a rebirth by heroic death, would have been essential to the fierceness of the fighting in battle.  Merlyn’s presence would have given the warriors spiritual sustenance.

The territory between Hadrian’s Wall and the Antonine Wall was patrolled by the men of “Yr Hen Ogledd” – the old north.  Brythonic warriors.  Uniquely, the men of “Yr Hen Ogledd” were a fighting force that managed to hold onto their Celtic identity separate from the excessive influence of the Romans.  They fought in the old way.

If trouble started brewing with the Picts – or even the intermittent incursions of the Irish from across the sea to the rear – then the tribal leaders might meet at a known location, possibly the Camelot (Caer-maelor) of the legend.  ‘Caer-maelor” means, a ‘fort of merchants’, or a ‘trading-post’.  Here, they would exchange information, identify a battleground, talk strategies, decided where and when to assemble and deploy their fighting men.  And the fighting men, from different tribal groups, would need to readily recognize who their troop leaders might be. Simplicity of recognition would be a necessity.  The leaders’ names would have to be understandable to any peasant.

The stone-throwers and slingshots might be assembled under the one called ‘Y Garreg’ – the pebble, and they might be responsible for the opening salvos of the battle.  The spear-throwers would be controlled by ‘Y Perisigl’.  And their reserves of weaponry supplied to them by ‘Y Gawain’ – ‘the scabbard’.  ‘Y Llawnselog’ might ride amongst the fighters stirring up their enthusiasm. ‘Y Galwad’ might call the moves with his Carnyx, or Celtic war-horn.  And when everything was set, then the main attack of mounted swordsmen might gallop into the fray led by the bravest of them all, ‘Y Rhuthr’ – the leader of the charge.  ‘Y Cau’ – the closer, might be bringing up the rear with the last reserves of warriors, and ‘Y Trist’ – the sad, would not be needed until after the battle to help the wounded and deal with the removal of broken bodies.

Circumstances changed, however, and in the 5th century, the Saxons became the primary enemy.

As the Roman Empire began to collapse, Roman armies retreated to defend Rome from the Barbarians and by 410 AD Britain was abandoned.  The string of signalling stations along the Eastern seaboard, known as the Saxon Shore, was left to become derelict.  The most northerly fort on a promontory high above the river Tees at Huntcliff, was occupied – casually – by local Celtic families for a while, but they were murdered by emboldened raiding Saxons and their bodies thrown into a nearby well.

The Celts knew that the Saxons (Saeson) were not to be trusted and monitored their activities from the hillside hidden by the trees as they came in ships from the sea and set up camps along the lower reaches of the Tees river, almost on the mudflats.  The Celts might have prayed to their gods that a great storm would come in from the North Sea and sweep them all away.  The seas had risen almost two feet since ancient times and the Romans had had to retreat to their garrison fort at Catraeth or Cataractonium.

Even though many of the local place names had been given a Latin-sounding equivalent, the Celts knew the area well.  A Celtic hillfort was located nearby.  The ‘Men of the North’ hadn’t ventured down this far in the days of the Romans because it was the territory of the Brigantes.  The Gododdin and the Brigantes would all have had to work together in order to combat the threat from the North Sea.  They had to halt the ever-increasing menace. And their countrymen from the kingdom of Rheged brought their men into the fight too.

But when and where did this great battle take place?

Scholars down the years have disputed the location of the battle of Bardon Hill – the last great battle fought between the Celts and the invading Saxons.  We know that a decisive battle was indeed fought at Catterick, but did it have Arthurian significance?

Some nit-picking Welsh translations might give us direction.

Firstly, with regard to the River Swale.  The derivation of the word ‘Swale’ is given as meaning “fast-flowing” – but this is not enough.  The River Swale is indeed fast-flowing, but the similarity between the word ‘Swale’ and word ‘Wales’ cannot be discounted. ‘Wales’ comes from the Old German word ‘Wealas’ meaning ‘stranger, or foreigner’.  It is not impossible to imagine that the Saxon intruders settled unimpeded on the flatlands of the Tees river because this land had been abandoned as being unstable by the Celts due to the rising sea-levels in the 2nd– 5th centuries.  But as the influx of invaders grew – because their own homelands were being similarly swallowed by the sea – then they would have ventured further inland…until they came across the “foreigners” or ‘wealas’ – Celts, from the river Swale upwards into the hills.

These hills have Arthurian significance.

It is not a small matter that the word ‘Badon’ or ‘Bardon’ has not been assigned a meaning in Welsh.  Particularly not when all other Welsh placenames are highly descriptive.  Yet a key battle was said to have taken place at Badon Hill which everyone participating in would have to know how to find.

To the Celts, who had no signposts or road maps, people and places could only be found if they were appropriately described.  To this day, Jones the butcher, Jones the baker and Jones the candlestick maker would be described as Jones the meat, bread or light. ‘Jones Y Cig’ does not translate as Jones the Butcher, but ‘Jones the meat’…because the simpler form informs a greater number of people who he is, what he does, and where he might be found.

Similarly, with place names.  They are designed to enable a stranger to the district to know what to look for.  “Pen-y-Bryn”, for instance, is a place name which means ‘the-top-of-the-hill’. “Tal-y-Bont” is a pay-bridge, “Betwy-y-Coed” is a ‘prayer-room in the woods’, “Tan-y-Graig” means ‘under-the-rock’.  Places had to be found without signposts in the old days.

It is impossible to imagine that with so many descriptors being employed elsewhere, that the naming of a critical battleground would have been left as a meaningless sound.  Badon Hill is not self-explanatory in Celtic-Welsh.  Badon has no meaning.  Badon, Bardon, Baddon, Mons Badonicus, are just empty noises.  It is a hill which has a place in history, but no geographical location.

To retrieve a meaning from it and a place on the map, we would have to imagine how it might have been mis-spoken or misunderstood by a narrator excitedly telling everyone that a great battle took place at Bardon/ Badon.

In Welsh, a mutation of the initial letter can occur after the word ‘in’, which is either ‘yn’ or ‘ym’ depending on the combination of words.  “In Bardon” becomes “Ym Mardon”.  “Ym Mardon” can shift in emphasis to become the expression “Yma’r don”, meaning “Here are the waves”.  Thus, Bardon becomes a hill from which you can see the waves.

Obviously, with Britain having so much coastline, the number of locations where you can see the waves from a hill are endless.  But the fact that it was worthy of particular note as a place where you could see the waves would seem to suggest that it was something of a surprise that you could do so – in the same way as a place called “Kissing Point” might be identified as an especially romantic location to locals, even though it was possible for ‘kissing’ to happen anywhere, anytime.

Bardon – ‘Yma’r don’ – was a special place because it was possible to see the waves of the sea, as might have been spoken in the Brithonic language – which places Bardon in the north as part of the ‘Hen Ogledd’ – ‘Old North’.  It would have had significance defensively, since most of the threat in the 5th century came from the sea in the form of the invading Saxons…so the view of the sea would necessarily be on the eastern, not the western, coastline.

Bardon, as a naming word, also had a Latinised version in the form of “Mons Bardonicus”, so that it was of strategic importance to the Romans as well as to the Celtic Britons.  But the word would have been originally Celtic since the landscape was there before the Romans arrived.  However, Roman buildings in the form of defensive forts would have been originally identified by their Latin names, and the local Celts would have given those names a Celtic flavour.

The old Roman fort of Catterick, named ‘Cataractonium’ by the Romans, and Catraeth by the Celts, sits in a most advantageous position defensively.  It has the fast-flowing river Swale close by, with its numerous waterfalls – making it highly suitable for the industrialised tanning of leather which was conducted there (Roman army uniforms demanded a constant supply of leather). It sat on top of a small discrete hill, which has a wide stretch of moor on top of it which, to this day, is called “Barden Moor”, and it was at the nexus of a number of Roman roads which radiated out across the inlands of the North.

The territory inland and North had been Celtic for centuries : anything along the eastern shore had already been despoiled by Germanic invaders.  The Celts were people of the hills and the rivers; the invaders were people of the sea.  The Celts only took action when the encroaching Saxons reached the hills…and Bardon Hill was the targeted hill giving access to the higher grounds beyond.

It is often considered that there might have been two battles of Bardon Hill.  The first battle is identified as the last of Arthur’s twelve battles and is dated to have occurred at some time between 500 and 540 AD.  540 AD is a date in history which marks the beginning of a cessation of the massive Saxon invasion.  The first battle might therefore be considered to have been a success.

But the second battle of Bardon Hill, conducted in the same Arthurian style, took place in 595 – fifty years after the original battle – was a noble disaster resulting in the rout of the Celtic army and a collapse of the Celts of the North.  It was the last time that Celtic battle-tactics were employed, and it marked the end of an age and the disappearance of the Brithonic language from ‘Yr Hen Ogledd’.  Somehow the threads of that life and language trickled down to North Wales…fleeing the rear-action assault of the Irish pouring into the Dal Riata region on the western shores as they mauled the remnants of the devastated local inhabitants.

This second Battle of Bardon is the one which Aneurin describes in his epic poem ‘Y Gododdin’.

Aneurin’s poem tries to memorialise the heroic efforts of the “gwyr y Gogledd” in their defence of their homelands at the battle for Catraeth.  It gives away numerous subtle clues.

Aneurin does not mention that it was a battle for the fort of Catterick itself, only that the “three hundred” went to Catterick : “gwyr a aeth Catraeth”.  Neither does he write of any siege tactics such as attacking a gate or scaling walls. Rather, he writes of men who ‘led a charge’ or participated in a charge.  In one case, he writes of a warrior who rode up ‘the slope’.  And yet another who was a ‘good caller’.  Of another warrior, Aneurin writes that he had his men form a wall – indicating that this warrior was probably the head of a clan and had brought other men with him to the battle.  Aneurin uses the word ‘gwr’ (plural – gwyr) meaning ‘men’ to describe the participants in the battle.  Actually, the Welsh word for a man is ‘dyn’, “gwr” means ‘husband’.  This is significant because ‘husbands’ have the responsibility of wives, children and homes. This gives special meaning to the fact that they were ‘fighting for their lands’.

Most tellingly, Aneurin writes of the ‘three hundred’ that they wore the golden torc.  Torcs were only worn by high-order Celtic warriors, which not only designates the three hundred as leaders in charge of other men, but it indicates that there was an effort to maintain a direct connection with the old Celtic way of conducting a battle…a full-out charge by the defenders of the land.

Bardon Hill.

Nennius, Gildas, Aneurin, Taliesin all tried to record great moments in the defence of Prydain, as they knew it.  Historians in their way.  But they failed to take account of the difference in the kind of information a Celtic peasant farmer and a Romano/British General might need in order to get to the battlefield.  A peasant might carry his slingshot across from Carlisle to Catraeth, but a general might need to know the lay-out of the field of action.

Barden Moor would have seen many battles over time which went without notice in the wider world, but the noblest battle of all was fought by the last “Y Rhuthr” – leader of the charge – on a hill where you could see the waves from 30 miles away.

© Janet Williams

(Rough Bibliography)

“When was Wales’” – Gwyn Williams

Y Geiriadur Mawr – 1978 Edition

“Bulfinch’s Mythology”

“Saltburn by the Sea “ – website

“Y Gododdyn by Aneurin” – English Translation by John Williams

Wikipedia

Also – various legends of Arthur in movies, books, magazine articles and websites over a lifetime.

Near Moor, North Yorkshire

Rock Art on Near Moor

Site Notes

For all my Grid Reference i give are from Ordnance Survey outdoor leisure 26 map ”North York Moors” western area.

At SE48090 98917 this Neolithic Pointer lay’s close to a Bronze Age Field System. I have explored this area several times and find that much more time is needed as it is a vast area called Near Moor and was due in pre-history connected to Scratch Wood Moor to the north west. The pointer itself has a tapered cup mark it lay’s in deep heather but don’t show much of erosion. And indeed it points N-W at summer solstice sunset just where the tree line end at far horizon. In Neolithic times it would a been 1 degree to the right on your compass and today it sits 2 degree’s to your left on your compass reading due to earth rotation.

It can be accessed  in several ways or though there is no direct footpath to it , in June 2014 i took the sheep wash – red way route over the top this is the longer way. In July i went over sheep wash- pamperdale ridge which seems shorter  and either way you will come across some boggy area with small beck crossing not to bad due summer month’s I’ll say comes autumn and winter this bog will be deep.

11802790_423184751216515_2676591247286996369_o

 

 

Yorkshire’s “Sacred Vale” – The Dawn of Brigantia

The “Sacred” Vale of Mowbray – Brigantia’s Neolithic Capital?

More than 2,000 years before the discovery and widespread use of Iron an unprecedented bout of monument building in the centre of Brigantia created the Britain’s largest religious monument complex, a place that has been suggested as being Britain’s religious capital during the Neolithic Period.

Whatever it was, these monuments were amongst the largest in Britain and will have been an important part of Brigantia’s cultural heritage.

The first monuments erected within the Vale of Mowbray were the cursus monuments. The largest cursus in the north of England was Scorton Cursus, this was over 2.1km long and is now mostly destroyed by quarrying. The other cursus,Thornborough Central Cursus was smaller at approx. 1.2km and is now mostly destroyed by quarrying.

These are seen as the first communal ritual monuments ands clearly mark out an area that is interpreted as being “ceremonial ways” – places for processions. Cursuses often are associated with a number of funery monuments, as can be seen at Scorton – a number of barrows cluster round it. At Thornborough the cursus is close by a Neolithic mortuary enclosure – a place for the laying out of the dead prior to burial. The cursus monuments, though these have yet to be dated, are believed to date from around 3,500 BC.

These cursus monuments created within the area two sacred spaces that in many ways define the area of the “Sacred Vale” – each is associated with a river – Thornborough/Ure and Scorton/Swale – these two rivers join at Boroughbridge to create a clearly defined region that in later years was to become a very significant place.

Around 3,000 BC, the Sacred Vale was created. The critical locations of Thornborough, Boroughbridge and Scorton (via Catterick) were linked with two great alignments of henges. In all, at least six henges were built – The three at Thornborough, Catterick Hutton Moor, Nunwick and Cana Barn. Catterick was the smallest henge in the Vale at 100m in diameter yet this is still one of Britain’s largest henges. The three henges at Thornborough and those at Hutton and Cana were possibly as large as 300m in diameter originally and had an outer bank and inner segmented ditch that created multiple entrances, this created the largest concentration of henges in Britain and was the largest building project attempted during the Neolithic as far as we can tell.

Thornborough Henges Devil's Arrows Catterick Henge Scorton Cursus Hutton Moor Henge Pickhill Artificial Mound Kirklington Barrow

 

Hutton Moor Henge, North Yorkshire

 

Hutton Moor Henge, North Yorkshire.

Hutton Moor Henge, Photo by Ray Selkirk

 

The Kingdom of Venutius

The Kingdom of Venutius – Brigantia – AD 69

“Inspired by these differences between the Roman forces and by the many rumours of civil was that reached them, the britons plucked up courage under the leadership of Venutius, who, in addition to his own natural spirit and hatred of the Roman name, was fired by his personal resentment towards queen Cartimandua. She was ruler over the Brigantes, having the influence that belongs to high birth, and she had later strengthened her power when she was credited weith having captured king Caratacus by treachery and so furnished an adornment for the triumph of Claudius Caesar. From this came her wealth and the wanton spirit which success breeds. She grew to despise her husband Venutius, and took as her consort his squire Vellocatus, whom she admitted to share the throne with her. Her house was at once shaken by this scandalous act. Her husband was favoured by the sentiments of all the citzens; the adulterer was supported by the queens pashion for him and by her savage spirit. So Venutius, calling in aid from outside and at the same time assisted by a revolt of the Brigantes themselves, put Cartimanua into an extremely dangerous position. Then she asked the Romans for protection, and some of our auxiliary troops, cavalry and infantry, after meeting with indifferent success in a number of engagements, finally succeeded in snatching the queen from danger. The throne was left to Venutius, the war to us.” Tacitus (Histories iii, 45).

Tacitus, Roman historian of the 1st Century AD. has provided us with most of the written history of the Brigantes at the time of the Roman conquest. The above text, written about a time when Nero had fallen and Rome endured several emporers in one year – AD69 clearly illustrates the date when Venutius finally became king of all Brigantia.

The few references thast we have from Tacitus and other Roman authors provide a dim glimpse of the events that surrounded the Roman conquest of Brigantia, yet the story is a tantalising one, a tail of royal adultery, power struggles, revolution and conquest. Brigantesnation.com began life as an experiment to see if it was possible to recreate more accurately this lost history of Brigantia, to see if recent developments in archaeology could help fill the gaps left by those ancient authors.

Firstly, we need to understand the gaps – Source Documents

This map outlines a postulated border for the Brigantia of Venutius in AD69. By this time Venutius had ousted Cartimandua from her throne and was King of Brigantia. A small area to the south shows the territory already lost to Roman rule.

In order to verify this border, this research attempts to locate the defences that Venutius set up in anticipation of the Roman advance.

The map has click zones which identify major military sites available to Venutius, although many have date yet to be proven, most can be demonstrated to be pre-Roman, and therefore available for use.

The southern border, shown in red, complies with the Roman frontier, as implied by fort locations and other dating evidence.

Devil's Arrows Standing Stones  Roman border area AD69 Boltby Scar Hill Fort Roman Rig - Venutius' southeastern border Ingleborough Hill Fort Tor Dyke - Defense Mam Tor Cartimandua's territory Brigantes border with the Parisi Carl Walk Hill Fort Devil's Arrows Standing Stones Stanwick Hill Fort Boltby Scar Hill Fort Rouslton Scar Hill Fort Cleave Dyke Defence System

Cleave Dyke Defensive System, North Yorkshire

Cleave Dyke System

The Cleave dyke system is several Dykes which combine to create a boundary of between 9 and 18 kilometres running north south to the west of Thirsk. To date excavations have found minimal dating evidence, but a pre roman date has been given which means if not built by Venutius the Dyke system was certainly available for use by Venutius. The Dyke itself is in close very close proximity to the hill forts of Boltby and Roulston Scar. Other dykes has been reported to the north and south of this system and it is therefore likely to have been used to define the border and to create a defensive possition against possible Roman (or Parisian) attack.

Interestingly this defence is some distance from the later Parisi – Brigantes border (other side of York) and may indicate (1) That the Parisii occupied a larger area prior to the Roman conquest, (2) Venutius moved the border to a more defensable position, or (3) the apparent “defending the barrows” position was deliberate, aimed a providing a defensive wall for the earlier Bronze age barrows. Or a combination of the three.

Boltby Hill Fort Roulston Scar Hill Fort

Cleave Dyke overview

Tor Dyke, North Yorkshire

Tor Dyke – North Yorkshire

Preliminary Report

Tor Dyke can be seen traced by the full length of the wall seen in the picture, it extends the natural escarpment of Cam Head which can be seen to the far left. This view is from the eastern side looking west.

Introduction

“Around AD70 the rebel Brigantian Chief Venutius built the ditch of Tor Dyke close to Great Whernside as part of a defence system against Roman invasion. Despite a hold on other areas, (including Ingleborough and Gregory Scar north of Grassington), Venutius and his forces were overcome by the Romans.” This reference was taken from one of Mike Harding’s walking guides. A site visit to Gregory Scar has been performed, and although it has been dubbed “Fort Gregory” by the Dales Park Authority it does not appear to be much more than a small, very unusual settlement.

Tor Dyke appears to have been attributed to Venutius which dates it of the period AD 52 – 70. The presence of a legionary size marching camp a few miles to the southwest at Malham certainly indicates an active role in the Roman advance of AD 70. However, given the lack of published research so far a clear picture has yet to emerge.

Summary

The above multimap air photo shows the much scale of Tor Dyke, it streatches almost the entire width of the photo. To the right, almost at the end of the visible works is the entrance shown in photo’s below.

Tor Dyke is a large escarpment type hill fort a 2Km stretch of man – enhanced fortification links with natural escarpment to create a 3+Km defensive rampart.

Location

Tor Dyke is close to Kettlewell in the Yorkshire Dales. OS Landranger 98 1:50,000 ref. 986756

Getting there

The narrow road from Kettlewell to West Witton cuts right through Tor Dyke about 4 Km north of Kettlewell. Immediately after cutting through the dyke the grass verge by a cairn is good for parking. A clear footpath travels the whole length of the fortification. For the best effect, a climb up Great Whernside is not as hard as it looks. The site is always muddy and boggy, although the footpath in the main is free from serious boggy bits.

Warning – Shake holes

The area is strewn with shake holes, which are the remains of mining from later periods. In some cases these are very deep, have steep sides (usually conical) and are filled with water.

On the east side the main entrance is to be found. Way in from the south is to the left of the picture.

Another view of the entrance, to show possible aditional ditch heading south.

This view shows the eastern side of the defences, they follow the wall almost to the point where it takes a sharp left turn to head up Great Whernside. This is an obvious weak spot and it is possible that it had additional defensive works.

Following the rampart towards the western side, in places outer defencive ditches can still be seen to an approximate depth of 2m. This indicates a possible original depth of 6m. Width estimated at 6m.

Further Research

1. Small enclosure located attached to rampart, needs to be investigated and mapped if in period.

2. Diagram of the fortification required.

3. More accurate sizing information for the rampart is required.

4. Excavations happening by Archaeologist Dr. Roger Martlew (University of Leeds) is planning an extensive project to explore the entire area – watching brief.

5. If this dyke defined a frontier, then other defences will have been required in parallel valleys to provide the required level of enclosure. Dykes of this sort will have been used to regulate frontier traffic with minimum manpower commitment.

References

Still looking

The Gallus Frontier – Brigantia against the Romans

The Gallus Frontier – Roman Rig and associated Iron Age Forts

Brough-on-Noe Leicester Lincoln Owmby Hibaldstow Old Winteringham High Cross Mancetter Willoughby-on-the-Wolds Margidunum Thorpe-by-Newark Brough Owston on the Trent Doncaster Chester Camp Farm Whitchurch Wall Pennocrucium Flint Scraptoft Crossing of the Poulter Templeborough Littlechester Chesterfield Mid-point Rocester/Brough-on-Noe Rochester Trent Vale Northwich Wilderspool Mid-point Wall/Littlechester Mid-point Northwich/Brough-on-Noe Broxtowe Marton Pentrich Almondbury Hill Fort Barwick in Elmet Hill Fort Osmathorpe Newton-on-Trent Rossington Bridge Roman Rig Carl Wark hill fort Wincobank hill fort Scholes Coppice Camp

 

 

The Gallus frontier, outlined in blue, south of the line, the Roman fortifications, to the north, Venutius’ kingdom.

The Frontier changes made by Gallus

In “Rome against Caratacus” Graham Webster put forward the proposal that Gallus was forced to remodel the existing Plautian northern frontier on the Humber-Trent line in order to protect Roman interest in the unstable Brigantia. He did this Webster suggested, by moving forward a network of forts towards and into the southern border of Brigantia. It should be noted that specific dating evidence is not available for all forts, and Websters proposal, and our interpretation are based on as much deduction as knowledge.

The above illustration shows the possible northern Roman frontier attributed to Gallus c.57 A.D. At Sheffield, along a significant stretch of this possible frontier, within a couple of miles of the front line forts there is a defensive dyke and possible fort system which has been suggested by some archaeologists as representing the Southern border for an anti Roman section of the Brigantes at in the first century AD. In short, Roman Rig may well have been Venutus’ defence against the Romans in preparation for the Roman invasion C69-71AD.

This research article aims to collate any related research so that a clear body of evidence can either prove or disprove this theory. Currently, there are a small number of positive findings with regards to Roman Rig and the associated Brigantian forts, as well as the Roman counterparts, some evidence is relatively new and still being investigated. However the lack of negative evidence gives a good indication that this key element to the Brigantian jigsaw – Venutius’ south eastern border 69AD.

To investigate the evidence currently to had click on the site indicators that are clickable, this will lead to individual site reports.

The Dyke is built to defend against the south and runs from Sheffield, past Templeborough and carries on almost to Doncaster. If this is an Brigantian dyke it would certainly add weight Websters definition of the border.

By accepting that this dyke may be a Brigantian counterpart to the defences set up in the period of Gallus’ governorship, we may examine the implications of the dyke as belonging to Ventutius or Cartimandua, and thus we can place a possible border for one of the two adversaries at a particular time..

One conclusion could be that the dyke belonged to Cartimandua, built as part of her defences against Venutius. If this were the case then this would date the age of the Dyke to c. 69AD when Venutius is believed to have overthrown Cartimandua and taken control of Brigantia.

The other conclusion is that the dyke belonged to Venutius, in the same period, but built against the Romans as part of his defences after he ousted Cartimandua.

Contact Us
close slider