Dec. 13. 1851.] 



NOTES AND QUERIES. 



469 



to Hengist than it has to the man-in-the-moon; 

 and GoxMER might liave suspected that a version 

 which, without rule or reason, deprived historic 

 personages of their renlity, could not have been 

 correct. Every proper name mentioned in the 

 Gododin may be .shown unthout any alteration to be 

 those of persons living between 577 and 642. Tlie 

 proof of this assertion, when carefully examined, 

 is all but overwhelming ; but here I can only cite 

 a few of the most tangible facts. The design of 

 the poeiu is thus described by the bard himself: — 

 " O ved O vueliii. 

 O Gattraeth werin, 

 Mi a na vi Aneuriiv 

 Ys gwyr Taliesni, 

 Oveg cyvrenhiii 

 Neu cheiiig Ododln 

 Cyn gwawr dydd dilin." 

 These lines may be thus translated : — 

 " Of mead from tlie mead horn, 

 Of the host of Cattraeth, 

 I, Aneui'ln, will do 

 What is known to Taliesin, 

 A man of kindred disposition. 

 Will I not sing of what hefell 

 Gododin, before the break of day?" 



From frequent notices in other parts of the 

 poem, we find that the subject is the defeat of 

 (the Otuidini) the men of Gododin, in a battle 

 which took place in the year 603, near Cattraeth, 

 which may be identified with the Cataracton of 

 Ptolemy, the Cataract of Bede, and the present 

 Catterick in Yorkshire. The men of Gododin- in 

 tliis- campaign were in league with the Novantee of 

 Wigtonshire, the Britons of Strathclyde, the Scots 

 of Argyle, and the Picts of Fife and Perth. Of 

 this army the chiefs alone amounted to three 

 hundred and sixty ; but, to use the words of the 

 bard, " Mead brought shame on the best of ar- 

 mifes ;" and the chiefs, on account of temporary 

 success over a part of EtheUrith's Northumbrian 

 army, spent the night in wild carousal. Over- 

 tures of peace were made to them by Etheltrith, 

 and contemptuously rejected ; they' rushed pell- 

 mell to battle before the break of day; and 

 the bard, seeing them falling helj)lessly drunk 

 from their horses, "drew a veil over his face and 

 fled, weeping on his way." I here assume tha,t 

 Cattraetli and Cataract are the same place ; and 

 to cite only one of many evidences, the position of 

 tlie Ottadini in the immediate neighbnurho<3d of 

 Catterick, lends this view strong confirmation. 

 But there is here another assumption, to which I 

 invite the attention of English antitjuaries. The 

 Anglo-Saxon Chronicle relates tlie occurrence of a 

 great battle bctw(;en Etiielfiith of Northumbria 

 and the northern Britons in the year 60;i : of that 

 battle tlie site is variously named Degstan, Dscg- 

 sanstane, and Egcsanstane ; but aMti([uarian re- 

 searches have not determined where Egcsanstane 



was. Some place it at Dawston, near Jedburg, in 

 Scotland, and others at Dalston in Cumberland ; 

 but all confess uncertainty. Now I' assume that 

 the place called Egesanstane is more likely to be 

 Siggeston, in the North Riding of Yorkshire, 

 which is about five or six miles east of Catterick ; 

 and this conjecture is strongly supported by the 

 fact that Ethelfrith in this case was not the in- 

 vader but the invaded, as it is said, " Hering, the 

 son of Hussa, led the enemy thither," to the do- 

 minions of Ethelfrith, which were then but little 

 else than the eastern coast of Northumberland and 

 Yorkshire. If this view be correct, our antiquaries 

 have hitherto been in error on this point ; the site 

 of the great battle of 603 is no longer unknown ; 

 and Egesanstane and Cattraeth are only two names 

 for the same battle, just as another battle-field is 

 variously named the battle of Waterloo by us, and 

 that of Mont St. Jean by the French. 



Probert places the death ofAneurin in 570: 

 the Gododin shows him to have been an eye- 

 witness of an event which took place in 642. 

 Davies, whose works are striking evidences of a 

 powerful intellect completely led astray, makes 

 the subject to have been the reported massacre at 

 Stonehenge, which possibly never took place, but 

 which heYixes in 472. Now I have cited a pas- 

 sage which, referring to Taliesin as an authority, 

 implies that Aneurin was his junior; and Taliesin 

 was living in 610. Again, Davies makes an 

 abortive attempt to get rid of the last poem of 

 Llywarch Hen, which sliows him to have been 

 living as late as the year 640, when most of his 

 sons had fallen in battle. Llywaixh himself was 

 either at the battle of Cattraeth, or assisted in 

 organising the campaign ; for thougli not men- 

 tioned by Aneurin, he himself alludes to the time 

 " when we attacked the great-smoker-of-towns- 

 (Ethelfrith)." 



At this battle Aneurin was taken prisoner, and' 

 confined in " an earthen house," from which he 

 was released " by the bright sword of Cenau, the 

 son of Llywarch." The son of Llywarch could 

 scarcely have been living in 472 ; and Davies in 

 vain essays to get rid of this obstinate fiict. This- 

 passage in Aneurin — 



" XJnder foot was gravel, 



Stretched out was my leg 



In the subterranean house, 



And an iron chain 



Was hound al)out ray knees," 

 shows the use of under-ground hovels to have 

 extended far into the hist(>ric period. 



One fact more, and this demonstration that 

 Aneurin has been ante-dated will be complete. 

 The bard in three several places mentions a battle 

 of JMannan, in much the same way as we at this 

 day s]x'ak of Waterloo; and it is evident that, in 

 the estimation of the bard and his countrymen, 

 i the battle of Mannan was the last great event 



