I have been looking at some of the early Anglo-Saxon genealogical traditions and came across some references from the 19th century to the Cat Stane. The Cat Stane is an inscribed memorial that dates from the late 5th or early 6th century, and is located on the grounds of the Edinburgh Airport. The text is fragmentary: IN OC T(damaged) MVLO IAC( )T VITTA F(damaged) VICT#(damaged) [# = a character read variously as A, R or I] The current preferred reconstruction of this is that it should be read as In oc t[v]mvlo iac[i]t Vitta f[ilia] Vict[ricus] In this tomb lies Vitta, daughter of Victricus At least one author, based on this inscription, has made a special point of the fact that the two names on the stone are both Roman names, yet the second name is only Roman because someone decided to fill in the blank that way, while the first name, Vitta, is only Roman (or female) if you want it to be - a couple of 19th century scholars read this as Vitta filius Victa, the Witta Wecting of Hengest's pedigree (according to Bede and ASC - the order is different in the Anglian Collection, apparently followed by Snorri, and differently different in AEthelweard's Chronicle). Is anyone aware of this artifact familiar with the basis for completing it as in the modern reconstruction (daughter of Victricus)? taf

On 30/05/2016 2:42 PM, taf via wrote: > I have been looking at some of the early Anglo-Saxon genealogical traditions and came across some references from the 19th century to the Cat Stane. The Cat Stane is an inscribed memorial that dates from the late 5th or early 6th century, and is located on the grounds of the Edinburgh Airport. The text is fragmentary: > > IN OC T(damaged) > MVLO IAC( )T > VITTA F(damaged) > VICT#(damaged) > > [# = a character read variously as A, R or I] > > The current preferred reconstruction of this is that it should be read as > > In oc t[v]mvlo iac[i]t Vitta f[ilia] Vict[ricus] > In this tomb lies Vitta, daughter of Victricus > > At least one author, based on this inscription, has made a special point of the fact that the two names on the stone are both Roman names, yet the second name is only Roman because someone decided to fill in the blank that way, while the first name, Vitta, is only Roman (or female) if you want it to be - a couple of 19th century scholars read this as Vitta filius Victa, the Witta Wecting of Hengest's pedigree (according to Bede and ASC - the order is different in the Anglian Collection, apparently followed by Snorri, and differently different in AEthelweard's Chronicle). > > Is anyone aware of this artifact familiar with the basis for completing it as in the modern reconstruction (daughter of Victricus)? > I don't know the answer, perhaps it's no more than an old guess that has yet to be improved on - in any case the rationale is perhaps discussed in one of the two 20th-century references cited here https://canmore.org.uk/event/552011. The reconstruction presumably should read: "In [h]oc tumulo iacet Vitta filia Victricii" - "iacit" is from the infinitive "iacire", to throw (not from "iacere", to lie), and the father's name ought to be genitive. Peter Stewart

On Sunday, May 29, 2016 at 9:42:32 PM UTC-7, taf wrote: > a couple of 19th century scholars read this as Vitta filius Victa, the > Witta Wecting of Hengest's pedigree (according to Bede and ASC - the > order is different in the Anglian Collection, apparently followed by > Snorri, and differently different in AEthelweard's Chronicle). I might as well lay this out. These pedigrees have been analyzed backwards and forwards for almost two centuries. Grimm addressed this specific sequence of names in the context of determining whether Wecta and Waegdaeg were intended to represent the same son of Woden. Bede (and ASC) gives: Woden, Wecta, Witta, Wihtgils, Hengest Other Bede mss give: Woden, Wecta, Wihtgils, Hengest In the script of the time, the 'c' in Wicta and the 't's in Witta may have looked quite similar, perhaps leading to accidentally skipping from one to the other when transcribing, leading to the missing name. The existence of versions with Wihtgils as son of Wecta may have led to the rearrangement that Grimm calls attention to in Snoori's Prose Edda, where Wihtgils and Witta are reversed. Snorri shows it as: Odin, Vegdeg, Vitrgils, Pitta, Hengest Grimm just used this to show that by the time of Snorri either Waegdaeg (of the Diera pedigree) was considered to be the same as Wecta of the Kent pedigree, or that Snorri conflated them (Pitta is Witta, misreading a thorn for a 'p'). Grimm did not have access to the Anglian Collection, or he would have known Snorri's version was not his own: Anglian Collection shows: Woden, Waegdaeg, Wihtgils, Witta, Hengest Even though it is not explicitly stated to have been the case, the use of the form Waegdaeg in both Kent and Deira pedigrees by the A C shows that very early they considered Bede's Wicta to be the same as Waegdaeg. This led Douglas to conclude that Kent had spliced their royalty onto a Deira pedigree to show a political alliance. AEtheweard is different: Wothen, Wither, Wicta, Wihtgils, Hengest Like the Chronicle but exchanging the order of Witta (Wither) and Wecta (or perhaps just so botched in representing the names in Latin that it just appears to be the case). It is also noteworthy that while some of the sources differ in the fine details, there is a notable difference in the associated Deira pedigree. ASC: Woden, Waegdaeg, Sigegar A C: Woden, Waegdaeg, Siggar Snorri:Odin, Vegdeg, Vitrgils, Sigarr H B: Woden, Beldeg, Brond, Siggar Snorri has moved the Kent/Deira split one generation farther down the Kent pedigree, but Historia Brittonum has gone and replaced it entirely. Usually this is said to be the Wessex root, and it is: A C: Woden, Baeldaeg, Brand, Giwis (the eponymous West Saxon) But I think it more noteworthy that is matches the ASC version of the Bernicia root: ASC: Woden, Baeldaeg, Brand, Benoc (i.e. Beornic, eponymous Bernician) Sisam made a strong argument that the Wessex line was coopted from Bernicia, but I would argue further that what Historia Brittonum has done is reflect the union of Bernicia and Deira into Northumbria by transferring the Deira tree onto the Bernicia root. If so, then if one follows Douglas, HB is giving Kent what was once the Deira ancestral line, while removing it from Deira and replacing it with that of Bernicia. taf