Arthur's dykes

[Anton]

Well worth a read thanks Dave.  It's certainly one to save and come back to more than once.

I was struck by this.

"Chapters 51-5 are about Patrick.  His presence is unexpected as this figure was not considered so much a British saint as an Irish one.  There is no obvious political or religious reason why Patrick is given so much importance."

I've mentioned before that Koch suggests an early chronology for Patrick.  He also thinks Patrick was one and the same as the Patrick who was Macsen's imperial fiscus.  As usual he makes a good case and if he's correct it might explain the above.  It would strengthen the case for him being from Ravenglass too- important local boy in the Northern Memorandum.

[Patrick Waterson]

The Men of The North were a martial lot and would have known how to fight.

That is precisely my point: they would have known how to fight, indeed appear to have been selected on that very basis.  But the impression I gain is that neither they nor their leader knew how to make war effectively.  Anyone who does not know the difference is destined to lose heroically.

The point about y Gododdin is it's a praise poem in a society where tales and stories about war leaders needed to be embellished and given lots of artistic licence

Be that as it may (and I shall not ask for specific examples of artistic licence), they still have to be based on a kernel of factual activity, and had an actual army been involved along with the '300' one would have expected the bards to sing its praises quantitatively, qualitatively or both.

[Jim Webster]

The Men of The North were a martial lot and would have known how to fight.

That is precisely my point: they would have known how to fight, indeed appear to have been selected on that very basis.  But the impression I gain is that neither they nor their leader knew how to make war effectively.  Anyone who does not know the difference is destined to lose heroically.

They probably did know how to make war effectively, 'within the constraints of their culture' which is pretty much all any of us do.

[Erpingham]

The Men of The North were a martial lot and would have known how to fight.

That is precisely my point: they would have known how to fight, indeed appear to have been selected on that very basis.  But the impression I gain is that neither they nor their leader knew how to make war effectively.  Anyone who does not know the difference is destined to lose heroically.

They probably did know how to make war effectively, 'within the constraints of their culture' which is pretty much all any of us do.

A sound point.  Just as the form of the record reflects how their culture understood war, they will will have had a cultural model of effective war making.  This may have revolved around assembling elite warrior households and launching them against one another, rather than mass mobilisation.  What happens when you launch a household after a long campaign of recruitment against its target?  Your opponent knows you are coming and has had time to prepare a defence (although I don't think the Gododdin bothers much with what the enemy is doing - it doesn't even say who they are).

[Anton]

The Bards concentrated on the deeds of the aristocracy. The aristocracy provide for the Bards. We know Bards were regulated by a Bardic Order. Cunedda's nameless Bard mentions it.  It was a transactional relationship but in essence the poems had to truthful.  Most of the audience would have either witnessed the events described or known people who had.

Warriors who were not aristo's might get an occasional mention on mass the "men of Bryneich" in Marwanad Cunedda or the "innumerable spears"in Cynan for example. 

Mostly though we can infer nothing from the absence of mention of the lower ranks from the surviving poems.  The focus was always on the aristocracy. 

[Patrick Waterson]

They probably did know how to make war effectively, 'within the constraints of their culture' which is pretty much all any of us do.

Entirely agree, Jim, the question being whether the constraints of their culture let them appreciate what it took to beat the enemy as opposed to just fighting him.

Warriors who were not aristo's might get an occasional mention on mass the "men of Bryneich" in Marwanad Cunedda or the "innumerable spears"in Cynan for example. 

One would hope the bards remembered to make mention where relevant, although your next comment leaves little hope of this.

Mostly though we can infer nothing from the absence of mention of the lower ranks from the surviving poems.  The focus was always on the aristocracy. 

And what yours truly is wondering is how far this was a two-way process, witrh the aristocracy perhaps being led by this bardic emphasis to disregard the lower orders as being inconsequential in the making of war.

Anyway, I have aired my thought about the Gododdin in case it is of interest to anyone; I cannot prove anything in connection with it, so we can all draw such conclusions as we see fit.

[Jim Webster]

And what yours truly is wondering is how far this was a two-way process, witrh the aristocracy perhaps being led by this bardic emphasis to disregard the lower orders as being inconsequential in the making of war.

This does happen, but normally it needs a period of relative peace, or a few desultory wars against nominal opposition. There's nothing like having the man fighting next to you dragged off his horse and butchered by the lower orders to remind you that they can be effective.
If the 300 had been the sort of nobility who had gathered more for the hunting than war, I could see it being an issue, but all 300 were men who had current experience and much of it against Saxons

[Imperial Dave]

Well worth a read thanks Dave.  It's certainly one to save and come back to more than once.

I was struck by this.

"Chapters 51-5 are about Patrick.  His presence is unexpected as this figure was not considered so much a British saint as an Irish one.  There is no obvious political or religious reason why Patrick is given so much importance."

I've mentioned before that Koch suggests an early chronology for Patrick.  He also thinks Patrick was one and the same as the Patrick who was Macsen's imperial fiscus.  As usual he makes a good case and if he's correct it might explain the above.  It would strengthen the case for him being from Ravenglass too- important local boy in the Northern Memorandum.

Yes and the earlier chronology for Patrick would make a lot of sense and 'fits' quite nicely

[Anton]

One would hope the bards remembered to make mention where relevant, although your next comment leaves little hope of this.

Mostly though we can infer nothing from the absence of mention of the lower ranks from the surviving poems.  The focus was always on the aristocracy. 

And what yours truly is wondering is how far this was a two-way process, witrh the aristocracy perhaps being led by this bardic emphasis to disregard the lower orders as being inconsequential in the making of war.

Anyway, I have aired my thought about the Gododdin in case it is of interest to anyone; I cannot prove anything in connection with it, so we can all draw such conclusions as we see fit.
[/quote]

There is no evidence that the aristocratic warriors or any of the bards thought non noble free men inconsequential in making war.  In the Gododdin the political unit is expressly the tribe and every free man was a member of it. Free status brought military obligations and rights.   In Cunedda the free men of Bryneich are expected to fight alongside aristocratic Cuneddda.  Both Bryneich and Gododdin belonged to the same North British cultural system and shared the same social hierarchy. 

Cunedda was not the most important aristocrat in Bryneich but he had his own court and retinue.  When he was, unexpectedly it seems, killed in a skirmish his bard celebrated his life and mourned his death.  Then, he set out the case for the continuance of the court and the retinue and his own position as bard. In that sense the marwanad was also an appeal to a higher power that could grant continuity.  I think it's a good indication of the bardic perspective.

[Erpingham]

If we are not careful, we will disappear into another generic Arthurian discussion.  Going from what has been reported, Storr says his original dyke builders with their Roman trained engineers operated in the Roman lowland zone.  His views of dykes in Essex, Cambridgeshire and Kent have been reported.  Even if we assume the society depicted in the Gododdin existed in the same period, our evidence is of the North British, on the fringes of Roman rule.  Can we assume a similar model in the post-Roman zone, with its civitates and their Roman-titled oligarchs? 

[Jim Webster]

If we are not careful, we will disappear into another generic Arthurian discussion.  Going from what has been reported, Storr says his original dyke builders with their Roman trained engineers operated in the Roman lowland zone.  His views of dykes in Essex, Cambridgeshire and Kent have been reported.  Even if we assume the society depicted in the Gododdin existed in the same period, our evidence is of the North British, on the fringes of Roman rule.  Can we assume a similar model in the post-Roman zone, with its civitates and their Roman-titled oligarchs?

The trouble is that the 'North British' could be seen as dwellers in what was the 'military zone', the area where there was most likely to be Roman units with engineering capability

[Erpingham]

The trouble is that the 'North British' could be seen as dwellers in what was the 'military zone', the area where there was most likely to be Roman units with engineering capability

But how would we see them having hegemony in what will become Cambridgeshire, Essex and Kent? 

[Imperial Dave]

There is a suggestion (and I cant for the life of me remember where the reference is from!) that Britannia was partially 'recovered' in around 417AD so if this was the case presumably some form of field army would have been present and limitanei of the coastal regions (re)organised...so maybe engineering experience around then.

[Duncan Head]

There is a suggestion (and I cant for the life of me remember where the reference is from!) that Britannia was partially 'recovered' in around 417AD

Based at least in part on the existence of a British field army in the Notitia, updated up to c.425 - see here for an unconvinced assessment.

[nikgaukroger]

Possibly based on this Britannia article from the 1970s.