Ancient Welsh City Found? (Caer Caradoc)

[alumni72]

Ancient Welsh city found
14/8/2006

Caer Caradoc at Mynydd y Gaer, Glamorgan, is one of the most important locations in all of ancient British history. It is the fabled fortress city of King Caradoc 1, son of Arch, who fought the Romans from 42-51AD.

And now, a small team of dedicated researchers working with historians Alan Wilson and Baram Blackett, say they have been able to pinpoint the location of this site. "It is great news for the local, regional and national economy," said Alan Wilson today. "We have been making these discoveries for many years and with the Electrum Cross discovered at nearby St. Peter's in 1990, it looks like a boost for jobs is likely."

"What is more," added research team leader Baram A Blackett, "this is but one of several South Wales sites we are currently investigating. And the others are arguably bigger news than this!"

"This is one of many remarkable places", he added.

"What we have is a clearly-defined walled city in exactly the place the records tell us it should be. The Welsh manuscripts and supporting records are always precise and allow us to make major progress in terms of identifying royal burial mounds, tombs, artefacts and more," said Wilson.

Aerial photographs obtained by the research team via Google Earth are available for viewing on the Internet via, realhistoryradio.blogspot.com

A Caer is a fortress and Caers were major fortress cities and towns for example: Caer Lllundain (London), Caerdydd (Cardiff) Caergrant (Cambridge) and Caer Loyw (Gloucester).

Historical references to Caer Caradoc are many and include statements in the Brut Tyssilio (684 AD) and the later Gruffyd ap Arthur (1135 AD) where Merddyn Emrys (Martin Ambrosius) and his mother are said to have met with the Ambassdors of Vortigern at St. Peter's Super-Montem Church at Caer Caradoc, where they lived.

(The ruin of the ancient St. Peters' Super-Montem Church, owned by Alan Wilson and Baram Blackett, is still on the low mountain immediately above the city of Caer Caradoc. The church is similarly ancient, dating to the 1st Century AD as shown in the 1990 dig at the site.)

Another reference is that of Teithfallt/Theodosius, who buried the 363 British noblemen murdered by treacherous Saxons at the notorious "Peace ConfereThe team say the Mynwent y Milwyr, "monument to the soldiers", is still to be found on the second highest point of Mynydd y Gaer above the city of Caer Caradoc that they have found.

A third reference is that of the "Uthyr Pendragon" , King Meurig/Maurice, who lies buried at the giant circle at Caer Caradoc. There is, at this location, a gigantic ditch and mound shaped like a boat, next to St. Peter's Church ruin. In this 180 yards by 70 yards wide earth mound and ditch feature there is the huge grave mound of Meurig.

At the highest point of the Mynydd y Gaer, "Fortress Mountain", lies the burial mound known at "Twyn Caradoc", for King Caradoc 1 who returned from Rome in 59AD.

The area around St. Peter's Church is called Portref, or "Supreme Manor Place", and other place names include "the throne of the knight," "the ridge of the soldiers" and the "pass of the soldier". King Lleirwg (King Luke) rebuilt St Peter's circa 160AD and an archaeological dig undertaken there in 1990 showed four successive ancient church rebuildings dating back to the 1st Century AD. The illustrious Welsh records known as the Triads state that the Caer Caradoc church was the most important in Britain.

Around 150 yards away from St Peter's ruins are the ruins of a thick castle wall and the bases of two gate towers where a castle once stood allowing watchman the best possible views of the coastal views of Glamorgan and the Severn Estuary.

There was a major battle near Caer Caradoc in 51 AD where the Khumric-Welsh claimed victory over the Romans. This battle site was located north west of Mynydd y Gaer near Merthyr (Merthyr Tydfil today), or vale of the Martyrs.

After winning the battle, Caradoc went north to get assistance from the Queen of the Brigantes, Aregwedd, misnamed Cartismandua by the Latins. Instead, the Queen, known as the "traitor", handed Caradoc over to the Romans. He was subsequently taken to Rome where he resided for seven years before returning home.

The team say tthe discovery of Caer Caradoc, a pre-Roman British city is a severe embarrassment to academics who take no notice of Welsh records. Despite this, they now have clear photographic evidence, proof positive, of a rectangular walled city located on the flatlands just city south of St. Peter's and north of Brynna village. Although they are not yet allowed on-site, as it is privately owned, the site can be seen easily.

This city, Caer Caradoc, was once the capital of the Paramount King of Britain, and the team started to look for its precise location in 1990 but it was not until the development of the aerial imaging programme, Google Earth, that they were able to make the identification, and this was a difficult process of checking and re-checking.

There is further conclusive evidence based upon Tithe Maps. These are a detailed record of every Welsh field. Each field had a designated number, details of the owner and tenant farmer and, importantly, the field's name. Every field had a name and often described what had occurred there, if anything. Around St. Peters, the field names show it to be the location of the Peace Conference of 456 took place. "Field of the Conference, "Field of the Quarrel," "Field of the Blood". Copies of Tithe maps are easily obtained.

The team say this is a major find by any standards and they welcome questions, queries and requests for further detail from all comers. (Link below)

Source: Real History Radio
Web Link

I'm sorry - perhaps I'm becoming a sceptic as I get older, but I can't help but wonder - if this ancient Welsh city of Caer Caradoc is

a clearly-defined walled city in exactly the place the records tell us it should be

...then why such a reliance on Google?

This city, Caer Caradoc, was once the capital of the Paramount King of Britain, and we started to look for its precise location in 1990 but it was not until the development of the aerial imaging programme, Google Earth, that we were able to make the identification, and this was a difficult process of checking and re-checking.

Yet it is a victory for academics.

The discovery of Caer Caradoc, a pre-Roman British city is a severe embarrassment to academics who take no notice of Welsh records.

Which is it? I'm not arguing that this is a fantastic find, but please - you can't have it both ways! Either you found it because of ancient documents or because of Google. As far as I can tell, the two are mutually exclusive.

 

[escargot]

Have we had tea yet?

 

[Timble2]

Real History Blogspot

I looked at the image they've got on their site then had a look at on GoogleEarth, myself. I can see something that could be artificial structures (terraces?) in the pentagonal field, but nothing that really fits their description.

Possibly a bit of wishful thinking. (even if it is archeology, it could be from practically any period of history)

 

[PeniG]

Either you found it because of ancient documents or because of Google. As far as I can tell, the two are mutually exclusive.

Why should they be mutually exclusive? I think you're being distracted by the careless use of the term "exactly." The documents won't have had map grid references or latitude-longitude coordinates, but will have said something along the lines of "West of this landmark and north of that landmark, where three streams gushed from the rock" or whatever. I could tell you exactly where the Alamo was when it was built in terms that would enable a 17th-century friar to find it, and you'd still stand a good chance of getting lost looking for it, especially since "the Alamo" as a tourist attraction is different from the historical Alamo, which as an archeological site has been largely built over by Alamo Plaza, some hotels, and a water garden.

What google did for them was allow them to avoid the costly process of digging innumerable test holes in a grid pattern all over the area where they expected to find Caer Caradoc by showing them patterns in aerial view that would have been much less obvious at ground level. The glee with which they speak of embarrassing certain academics makes me think there's been an ongoing dispute with someone whose hand was on the purse strings: "See, the documents clearly show that it's got to be in this three-square-mile area." "Those documents are half myth and all puffery and if you think I'm going to divert funds to digging up three square miles of roads and subdivisions when I could be testing the theory I've been working on since 1968, you've got another think coming."

Science is all very well, but office politics guides the cash.

 

[almond13]

These guys have been researching the ancient Welsh records for decades at their own expense. It seems that this part of history was dammed for poetical expediency in the past and they are trying to redress the balance. The rewriting of textbooks is always accompanied by resistance for obvious reasons and their researches into the origins of King Arthur alone would cause an explosion.

 

[Timble2]

...and their researches into the origins of King Arthur alone would cause an explosion.

But didn't, I've read the book, and it's just shuffling around the usual evidence again, and arriving at yet another set of conclusions

Unless someone turns up some major new sources, the historicity or otherwise of Arthur, remains largely speculative.

 

[CuriousIdent]

I think the key issue hear is that a lot of academics and historians dismiss the old Welsh records as being utterly unreliable, because while they are in many cases quite well kept and extensive, they aren't easy to consider as proper helpful documentation.

We talking about extensive record kept from an age so long before effective mesuring, or even a standardised measure of measurement was possible...

And so they aren't of much help of physically finding sites of note on there own. But with extensive arial photography such as that which Google supplies you archeologists can take a look at the landscape having found a landmark such s the Cross mentiuoned and go "Well the recortds say location X is a good day's walk in that direction from the cross... ah, yes. it could be there."

They can't be 100% sure without properly going over the terrain, of course, but obviously the more landmarks you find the easier it becomes to find another.

I think there also is a tendency by historians to write off this period of British history as 'just the spoutings of some dozy Welshmen,' and consider the Kings of old, and Arthur in particular, to be unreliable figures of folklore. They'll write off the whole period as nothing more than speculation, after all 'these are same people who used to worship Horses as Gods!' or some such tripe.

The bottom line is that before the Romans the BRitish as we refer to them were quite largely Celts, and King Arthur was very definitely Welsh. It's much easier to write of these earlier centuries of British history as just savages in mud huts, rather than to actually think of an organised society that didn't fit neatly into current historical model of Great Britain. If archeologists could prove that all these cities existed and were mapped correctly it would totally blow apart historical theories to date, and upset a lot of people.

The problem is of course, that it is very difficult to prove...

You know, when I saw the thread's title I was so hoping this would be a discovery of details of Cantref y Gwaelod, the effective Atlantis of Wales. Now that really would be a find.

 

[Peripart]

You know, when I saw the thread's title I was so hoping this would be a discovery of details of Cantref y Gwaelod, the effective Atlantis of Wales. Now that really would be a find.

I was hoping the same - the story of Cantref y Gwaelod is fascinating (even if most of what I know about it comes from BBC's Coast!) Sadly, Google Earth would not the the most useful tool for that job, unless someone helpfully drained Cardigan Bay first. Still, I'd love to think that the ancient tree-stumps exposed by the low tide were indicative of some great lost land, and that the sarnau were the remains of the motorways of their day.

Sadly, as you say, CuriousIdent, this isn't that story, so we'll have to carry on waiting...

 

[Timble2]

There seems to be a growing theme here that the Welsh records are ignored.

What's being contested is Wilson and Blackett's interpretation of the records.

There're another of a long line of people who're attempting to pin the the events down geographically, unfortunately a millenium or more after the events, what was probably perfectly obvious to the chroniclers and bards who knew where the places were, isn't so obvious to us.

I think there also is a tendency by historians to write off this period of British history as 'just the spoutings of some dozy Welshmen,' and consider the Kings of old, and Arthur in particular, to be unreliable figures of folklore. They'll write off the whole period as nothing more than speculation, after all 'these are same people who used to worship Horses as Gods!' or some such tripe.

The bottom line is that before the Romans the BRitish as we refer to them were quite largely Celts, and King Arthur was very definitely Welsh. It's much easier to write of these earlier centuries of British history as just savages in mud huts, rather than to actually think of an organised society that didn't fit neatly into current historical model of Great Britain. If archeologists could prove that all these cities existed and were mapped correctly it would totally blow apart historical theories to date, and upset a lot of people.

What historical theories are you talking about?

No-one now seriously considers that in post-Roman Britain people were savages who lived in mud-huts. The society underwent massive changes and fragmented into smaller kingdoms - probably not unlike the set-up before the Romans came - and that it's becoming increasingly clear that it was a sophisticated society with its own centres.

BTW: King Arthur in legend and the possible real life prototype(s) are post-Roman. He wasn't "definitely Welsh" the terminology didn't exist until the Anglo-Saxons came, he (they) could have come from the Celts of Cumbria and lowland Scotland, or from the those who became the Cornish, or, possibly less likely, the Godelic speaking Celts of Ireland and parts of Scotland or the Picts.

Finding a post-Roman pre-Saxon settlement wouldn't blow any theories apart, it'd just show us where some the people when after the Roman infrastructure fell apart and some Roman centres were abandoned (and of course some weren't).

[/quote]

 

[almond13]

Four days later, however, when Roman ships with 500 cavalry soldiers and horses also tried to make the channel crossing, they were driven back to France by bad weather. The same storm seriously damaged many of the Roman ships on the beach at Deal. This quirk of fate resulted in Caesar's initial landing force having no cavalry, which seriously restricted the mobility of the 55 BC operations. It was also disastrous for the planned reconnaissance since the legionary soldiers were forced to repair the ships and were vulnerable to the British forces who began new attacks.
Thus immobilized, the Roman legions had to survive in a coastal zone, which they found both politically hostile, and naturally fertile. The need to procure food locally resulted in scouting and foraging missions into the adjacent countryside. Caesar reports abundant grain crops along a heavily populated coastline; and frequent encounters with British warriors in chariots. After repairing most of the ships, Caesar ordered a return to Gaul, thus curtailing the reconnaissance of 55 BC.
http://www.athenapub.com/caesar1.htm

The above is said to be based on Ceasar’s own historical account of the failed conquest. The British/Welsh account says that it was a resounding victory with Caesar losing his sword and the victory celebration in London (as I recall). The truth about the battle is probably somewhere between the two.
I find the reference to primitive chariots somewhat strange as the warlords of Britain would have known about the methods of the Romans and would have been expecting the invasion even if they didn’t know the date.

 

[GwilymGam]

Blackett and Wilson are using Welsh versions of Geoffrey of Monmouth History which they claim are reliable sources for the period in question. Academic historians disagree.

I have read their books and they haven't proved their case that I can see. Caradoc/Caractacus was strangled in Rome.

> BTW: King Arthur in legend and the possible real life prototype(s) are post-Roman. He wasn't "definitely Welsh" the terminology didn't exist until the Anglo-Saxons came, he (they) could have come from the Celts of Cumbria and lowland Scotland, or from the those who became the Cornish, or, possibly less likely, the Godelic speaking Celts of Ireland and parts of Scotland or the Picts.

Gildas tells us the post Roman Britons saw themselves as one distinct people divided into a number of separate kingdoms. Wales, Cumbria, Cornwall etc were all inhabited by Britons who could understand each others language.

So Arthur who if he existed probally spoke British and Latin is Welsh in as much as the strength of the Welsh Language makes it the most British place (in its ancient sense) in the UK. Plus of course the earliest mentions of Arthur are written by Welshmen so if he was made up he is a Welsh invention

 

[Rugbyexpat]

I'm sorry - perhaps I'm becoming a sceptic as I get older, but I can't help but wonder - if this ancient Welsh city of Caer Caradoc is



...then why such a reliance on Google?



Yet it is a victory for academics.



Which is it? I'm not arguing that this is a fantastic find, but please - you can't have it both ways! Either you found it because of ancient documents or because of Google. As far as I can tell, the two are mutually exclusive.

Hello, I was born in a village (Gillfach Goch) over 70 years ago and now live in Texas. There was a hill between us and Heol y Cyw named Mynydd y Gaer, is this the same one noted in this discussion?
If so what is the location of this supposed Welsh city of Caer Caradoc and the church mentioned.
Adding some info from old stories of this area - a famous battle was fought and a Knight was killed and apparently buried in the old church of Llandyfodwg (sp?)
Not sure how much truth here as we never located the actual burial spot at this church.
Also closer to Heol y Cyw there was an "Iron Age"? Fort location. So I was told.

A hoard of Roman coins was actually found when a pipeline was installed on this mountain , coins now in the Museum of Wales. So threads of this original posting may/could have some truth.
Are there books on locations and % of probability re the St Peter Church and Caer Caradoc.
Many thanks..

 

[AgProv]

a place with a name like Mynydd y Gaer is a bit of a dead giveaway - Castle Mountain...