Nick Hodges wrote:
>The name of the Tyne and the absence of any tributary stream at the hilltop site of South Shields does seem to tell against a river name.
Not so if it is based on the name of the Tyne estuary, which could very well be *Arueia.
>Another oddity about the Arbeia name is that it only appears in a single very late-Roman source. This could be taken to support the notion that the site was renamed in connection with the barcarii Tigrisienses, who did not arrive before the fourth century.
Renaming is possible, but why? I've encountered one instance of two names at one spot (excluding abbreviated forms and names made up by Ptolemy). *Pampocalla of the Ravennas (recorded as Pampocalia) took its name from a wood at Pandon Burn, Pampedenburn 1270-8, which is located 350m east of the Roman fort at Newcastle upon Tyne NZ2563. This fort is commonly equated with the Ponte Aeli of ND xl 34. This could indicate a renaming, or more likely two distinct names, one for the bridge and one for the fort.
>[I]f the name had been a long-used Celtic one derived from local topography, one would expect it to occur in a source such as the Ravenna list, which incorporates earlier, C2 and C3, material.
It would only be listed if the fort existed at the time the map was last updated and if the Cosmographer chose to list it. The Cosmographer comes close, but does not list all of the forts of Hadrian's Wall, or Stanegate. I would be pleased to know what there is of C3 material in the Ravennas. I've been working on it for 18 years now and haven't tried to date it yet.
>In fact that list does contain certain unidentified names, one of which might be an earlier name of South Shields.
I have identified all of the names listed in the Ravenna Cosmography connected to Hadrian's Wall and Stanegate. South Shields is not among them. Newcastle follows Monkwearmouth, perhaps the easternmost sites on the Stanegate.
--
Tom Ikins
|