For your information, some bibliographical information on
Charles Thomas, whose work falls within my own part of the
Middle Ages, in both space and time, and secondly some
thoughts on a discovery made by Thomas' excavation team at
Tintagel in August 1998:

Firstly, the book on Class One inscribed stones:

And shall these mute stones speak? : post-Roman inscriptions in Western Britain ; Charles Thomas
Cardiff : University of Wales Press, 1994
Descript xxiv, 353 p,ill., maps ; 26 cm
Series Dalrymple archaeological monographs 2 Dalrymple archaeological monographs 2
Includes bibliographical references (p. 335-340) &
indexes.

This book traces a possible spreading and evolution of
these inscriptions, temporally and geographically, from
Dyfed (Demetia), in the fourth century, through
Brycheiniog, in the sixth (and also into Gwynedd and the
Welsh Borders, as an aside), and into Cornwall in the
seventh century. My own archaeology lecturer (I was an
Undergarduate at UW Bangor at the time), an early medieval
Wales-and-Ireland specialist, advised that we treat this
book with caution, due to its highly speculative nature, and
attenuation (in her view) of the available evidence.

More recently, Charles Thomas has published:

 
Christian Celts : messages & images
Stroud : Tempus, 1998
Descript 224 p,ill maps
Subject Inscriptions, Christian -- Great Britain
 Inscriptions, Latin -- Great Britain
 Christian antiquities -- Great Britain
 Celtic antiquities -- Great Britain
 Great Britain -- Antiquities
ISBN/ISSN 0752414119

On the subject of Tintagel, Thomas has printed much of
usefulness, including:

 
Title Tintagel : Arthur and archaeology
London : B.T. Batsford/English Heritage, 1993
Descript 144 p., [8] p. of plates
English Heritage series
Bibliog. Includes bibliographical references (p. 134-138) and index
Subject Arthur King of Britain
Add author English Heritage
ISBN/ISSN 0713466898
 
A provisional list of imported pottery in post-Roman Western Britain & Ireland
Redruth : Inst.of Cornish Studies, 1981
Descript 32p
Series Special reports/Institute of Cornish Studies 7


And on the subject of pre-Saxon adventus Christianity in
Britain:
  
Christianity in Roman Britain to AD 500 / Charles Thomas
London : Batsford Academic and Educational, 1981
Descript 408p
Subject Great Britain -- Church history -- Primitive and early church, ca.30-600
ISBN/ISSN 0713414421
 
Grave news from Tintagel : an account of a second season of
archaeological excavation at Tintagel Churchyard, Cornwall,
Jacqueline A. Nowakowski and Charles Thomas with a
contribution from Chris Crowe
Truro : Cornwall Archaeological Unit, Cornwall County Council and Institute of Cornish Studies, University of Exeter, 1992
Descript iii,42p ; 30cm pbk
Tintagel (England) -- Antiquities

One caveat is that Charles Thomas is not infrequently
regarded as a 'believer', in Arthur; like Lesley
Alcock and Geoffrey Ashe viewing sub-Roman Britain form
the perspective of 'the Arthurian tail which wags the
Celtic dog.' Some archaeologists and historians therefore
view his works as lacking in 'gravitas.'

An example of this is a find made by Chris Morris, part of
Thomas' archaological team excavating at Tintagel Castle in
August 1998. This find was widely reported in the press at
the time, and on television, but since this time silence on
the subject has been deafening (or does anyone on this list
know better?).

The find in question was of a Class One Inscribed stone
(that is an undressed, rough-hewn slab, with a crudely
etched dog-Latin inscription hinting at Christian funerary
rites), which (a little too conveniently for many, given
the fact that Tintagel is second only to Glastonbury as a
citadel of the Arthurian heritage industry in the UK, and
given the previous intensive excavation of the site)
actually appeared to name Arthur.

The stone reads (and the bad latin is that of the stone):

'Pater Collliavi ficit
Artognou Col ficit'

The translation given by Thomas' archaeologist Morris was:

'Arthur, father of Coll's descendant, has made it.'

At the time (reading this in 'The Guardian' on a train
from Milton Keynes to a wedding in Kendal), I made a few
notes in my pocket book, which I shall share, as this has
provided me with the first opportunity I have had to share
my thoughts (and reservations) on this stone:

First of all the wording of the inscription is unmatched by
any other in either 'Corpus Inscriptione Insulæ
Celticorum', or Nash-Williams 1950, the standard works of
reference for such monuments. These inscriptions are highly
formulaic, with little other evidence of localised variance
from tried and tested formulæ. Secondly, the Latin seems
too bad, even for the late fifth or sixth century, almost
as if it were consciously produced dog-Latin. It seems like
an ill informed later fake, perhaps to promote some later
medieval Arthurian associations with the site, for
pragmatic reasons, a bit like the 1291 'discovery' of
Arthur's grave at Tintagel (with a similar inscription),
by cash-strapped monks at Glastonbury, subsequent to a
major fire and coincident with a visit of Edward I, an
Arthurian enthusiast, to that monastery.

It is true that relative dating for the slate has been
afforded by its being discovered among a quantity of C6th
Phocean Red Slip Ware (A Ware), but this dates the stone,
not the inscription, and also, little mention has been made
in reportage of the find to date, on the condition of the
stratigraphy. It is my understanding than much of this
pottery in-situ at Tintagel has been disturbed since
deposition, not least by other archaeologists who failed to
find this inscribed stone, in a place picked over for
centuries by antiquarians, Celticists and archaeologists
(not to mention tourists and New-Age pilgrims) all out to
prove the Tintagel-Arthur connection.

The inscription also mentions that Arthur, was of the line
of one 'Coll', which seems a little too like the King Cole
of Geoffrey of Monmouths royal geneaology of Britain for
close comfort.

Most other early medieval geneaologies in west Britain,
such as those of Powis and Gwynedd, begin with Constantine
the Great, or with Magnus Maximus. It seems doubtful that
any sub-regulus or warrior chieftain of the sixth century,
whom Gildas, in his satire and denunciation of such petty
tyrants, has garbed in purple as Roman Emperors, would have
instead drawn on his descent from some Iron Age figure
(assuming for a moment that Coll = Cole, of course), whose
relevance to sub-Roman Britain (assuming it had heard of
him) would have been, at best, minimal.

The gist of this is, as I was always advised when studying
sub-Roman Britain, that one should avoiding taking too
firm a grasp of the Arthurian Tale, when dealing with
Celticists such as Charles Thomas. Read also the works of
Arthur sceptics, such as Wendy Davis, or Nancy Edwards.

Has this stayed relevant to Matthew Hammond's message, I
don't think so, and I'm sorry for it, but I'd love to know
what anyone else out there thinks of this thorny issue, and
especially one of its chief sub-texts, the claiming of the
'Arthur Figure' for Christianity.

On the subject of the Anglo-Saxons and Christianity, what
about the thorny issue of Raedwald II's religious faith,
and that of the kingdom of the Angles, as late as the last
quarter of the seventh century. Anglia (based largely on
the evidence of the Sutton Hoo ship burial) seems to have
continued to prosper, and trade and practice foreign policy
on an international and pan-European scale, without having
been converted to Christianity.

What about some serious work on this last remaining pagan
super-power in the British Isles, and its wider role?

----------------------
Graham Williamson-Mallaghan
School of Classics and Theology
Queens Building
Queens Drive
University of Exeter
EX4 4QG

01392-676239

[log in to unmask]
[log in to unmask]
[log in to unmask]

Subscribe to my internet/e-mail discussion forum.
Exchange ideas and make international academic contacts:
http://www.mailbase.ac.uk/lists/later-roman-empire/






%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%