R B Warner

Tuathal Techtmar: a myth or ancient literary

evidence for a Roman invasion?

Emania (journal of the Navan research group) 13

(1995), 23-32
 E MANIA 13i It(tj§

. );

Tuathal Techtmar: A Myth or Ancient

Literary Evidence for a Roman Invasion?
by R. 8. Warner
Ulster Museum

An attempt is made to identify the evidence for an incursion into Ireland from the Roman
world within the Irish Early Medieval pseudo-histories and myths. Furthermore it is
suggested that, contrary to received opinion, archaeological evidence provides surprisingly
detailed support for the veracity of these ancient literary sources. In a more general sense the
exercise illustrates the mechanism for the Romanisation of Ireland and ultimately for those
cumulative changes that resulted in the Early Medieval period.

The Problem with Romans
In 1974 I suggested in a lecture, since published (Warner
1976), that there seemed to be archaeological evidence
for Roman military expeditions to Ireland in the first
four centuries AD, and even settlement from the Roman
empire, especially from Britain. Such was the strength
of the received scholarly opinion that Ireland was
never sullied by Roman arms (or feet), other than those
of a few merchants, that my suggestion was treated
with scorn. Admittedly the eyidenc~ I then adduced
was minimal and circumstantial, and my interpretation
of that evidence went far beyond what was strictly
objective. Since then I have not weakened in my opinion,
and most considerately the evidence has increased to
accommodate my views. Curiously J. Killeen, at the
same conference, summarised the literary evidence for
a Roman expedition to Ireland (published as Killeen
1976), and escaped audience disapproval.
I have given readers some glimpses of my more
recent interpretation of the influence of the Roman
world upon Ireland in the later part of the Iron Age in
some recent short papers (for instance Warner 1991a;
Warner 1991b), but the reader will not be getting the
full, authorised version here. I would suggest that
while he waits for this he or she might peruse Barry
Raftery's recent splendid summary of the Iron Age to
see how Roman influence, and even the possibility of
invasion, has become far more acceptable than hitherto
(Raftery 1994, ch. 9).
To return to the 1974 lecture the most telling
objection, and one to which I had then no answer, was
from Michael Ryan who asked why, if there had been
major intrusions only a couple of centuries before the
literary era, they were not referred to in the rich store
of medieval Irish legends. At that time most of us still
had some sympathy for the Jackson (1964) view that
this literature, especially that of the Ulster Cycle, was
a genuine reflection of the recently pagan past. For
instance O'Rahilly's analysis of the legends, and his
opinion that some of the characters and events named
in those stories were real, was very persuasive
(O'Rahilly 1946 passim, and esp. ch. 14). Ryan's
objection was therefore a serious one.
The Problem with Myths
No scholar in the last half century has been naIve
enough to believe that the medieval Irish myths and
legends relating to pagan times were real history.
Nevertheless a generation ago two of our finest scholars
(Kenneth J ackson and Thomas O'Rahilly) believed
that there was enough truth, albeit almost inaccessibly
hidden within the tales, to warrant the term pseudo-
history when applied to some of those myths believed
to relate to the centuries after the 2nd century BC.
Since 1976 historical rationalism has ousted, at least
in younger academic circles, the nativism of past
scholars. The view most fully expressed by Kim McCone
(1990) that the legends were a total fabrication, based
partly on the Old Testament, is now virtually de rigueur,
and woe betide any still twitching nativist who might
believe that any historic truth resides therein. Of
course, this view is an answer to Ryan's objection, for
if the myths are not, nor do they contain, real history
they should not reflect any real historical events.
As I have demonstrated (Warner 1990 for instance)
I remain unashamedly a believer in the historical
value of the myths as reflections both of the beliefs of
a pagan past (in this I am joined by C. J. Lynn 1993, for
example) and of certain realities of that past (here John
Koch 1994 also waives a nativiststandard). I am
encouraged by the slightly fence-sitting opinion ofF. J.
Byrne, one of our leading early Irish historians, that 'It
would be hypersensitive ... to deny that some memories
of Celtic invasions and settlement existed [in the myths
and pseudo-histories], however distorted by the
procrustean schemes of medieval scholars'. He
somewhat lets me down however by continuing
'Linguistic evidence shows Ireland to have been a
Celtic country; untouched by Roman conquest... '(Byrne
1973, 11). So Ryan's question returns - if I believe in
the tales why no Romans therein?
One answer to this dilemma might be that the story-
PAGE 24
tellers were selective about what they chose to relate.
This is not a new idea; selectivity (as well as invention)
operated within the medieval period upon contemporary
records, so it is even more likely that ancient records
were partial. The Ulithi, inhabitants of a western
Pacific atoll, were great storytellers with a rich folklore
(seekers after coincidence will be amazed at the likeness
of this name to that of the people, Ulaid, who were
central to our Irish tales!). Mter a detailed study of
their folktales W. Lessa concluded that they could not
be regarded, except for a few tentative accounts, as
reliable records of historical events. He generalised on
this to observe: 'Speaking of folktales in general, it is
always puzzling to know why certain real happenings,
documented by written re~ords, fail to gain inclusion
into a corpus of folklore.. '(Lessa 1966, 49). Similar
surprise is shown with regard to the failure of the
enormously rich legends and tales of the Yir Yoront
(native Australians) to refer to contacts with the whites,
frequent and bloody though they were, before 1900
(Sharp 1952, 70).
Alternatively I could claim that the survival of the
stories has been selective, a claim with which no-one
could possibly take issue, and that those stories that
referred to the Roman invasions have been lost from
the mythology. Unfortunately, while both these answers
to Ryan might be true they are unacceptable in that
they are unprovable. They are what might be called a
historical cop-out. As it happens, they are not even
necessary for it is my contention that the Irish myths
and pseudo-histories do contain the required references
and the only reason that these have not been recognised
is the traditional antipathy, so clearly stated by Byrne,
to the idea of Roman intrusion. I will, in this article,
discuss only one of these claimed events - the career of
Tuathal Techtmar .
O'Rahilly in particular (1946) has created a sort of
order out of the chaos of the legends and genealogies,
and I have chosen to follow his interpretation where it
seems justified. Thus I accept the general principle
that there were a number of major ethno/political
groups who dominated different areas ofthe country at
different times. For instance, it is reasonable to accept
the importance and primacy of the Erainn (including
the Fir Bolg) over most ofthe country, the less important
and quite unconnected Cruithin, the later Laigin
(includingDomnainn and Galioin) and the latest Goidd
(Goidels). It is more difficult to differentiate their
relative chronologies and their relationships, or to
decide whether or not they are (as I believe them to be)
simplifications of far more complex realities. It is a
quest of mine to attempt to reconcile archaeological
evidence with those parts of the legends that seem to
reflect some sort of reality (pseudo-history), but it must
be borne in mind throughout that so uncertain is the
evidence that my interpretation can be no more than
the merest hypothesis.
Tuathal Techtmar
We owe the most comprehensive study of Tuathal
TUATHAL TECHTMAR
Techtmar to O'Rahilly (1946, esp. ch. 8), and more
recent discussions are summarised by a hOgain(1990,
408). A number of pseudo-historical/mythological texts
detail his career, the earliest 9th century and the latest
17th (though undoubtedly drawing on far earlier
tradition). Briefly, the salient points of his traditional
career are thus. He is represented as a royal exile,
originally from Ireland, who returned from Britain
with an army to regain his rights, and kingdom. He was
the ancestor of the Goidels, the last ethnic group to
enter Ireland in pre-Christian times according to the
medieval scholars. He defeated the other Irish tribes in
a number of battles, some named, imposed a tribute on
the Laigin and carved out a kingdom in the east
midlands known as Mide. His name is from the Celtic
*Teuto-valos, meaning leader of the people. His epithet
is problematic but seems to mean, if originally Celtic,
something like great traveller.
The medieval scholars used two methods of dating
pre-Patrician events. The first was by synchronising
the Irish character or event with a Biblical or Classical
character or event. This w~s a gratuitous process with
no traditional or objective basis, for while we may know
the real dates ofthese foreigncomparanda the medieval
scholars did not! The second method, which was usually
incompptible with the first, was to base the dates of
persons and events upon detailed king-lists with reign-
lengths, controlled by some remembered time-spans
between major P~~~p-)~ajor events. The author of
his earliest history,-MdelMuru, dated his death to
either AD 135 or AD 235, probably on synchronistic
grounds. Other synchronists dated his arrival to ~he
reign of the emperor Hadrian (AD 117-138) and his
death to the reign of Antoninus (AD 138-161) or to
about AD 180. For reasons I have explained elsewhere
(Warner 1990) I am inclined to give credence to, and
only to, the king-list method as used in the Annals of
the Four Masters (AFM). The Four Masters date the
arrival of Tu at ha I (or rather the battle ofAchall )to 'AD
76' Cl will use inverted commas for the AD dates
derived from AFM). They date his death to 'AD 106'.
Eoin McNeill (1921, 5) took Tuathal to have been a
real character as did O'Rahilly (1946, 161f), indeed to
the latter he was the first real character in the list of
actors in the unfolding Irish drama, as told by the
medieval pseudo-historians.O'Rahilly also maintained
that the main ingredients of the stories connected with
him (below) were all historical facts which we know
must have resulted from the Goidelic invasion of the
Eastern Midlands. a ha gain (1990,409) also believed
that he was a real character, but dismissed all the
stories associated with him as fiction. Interestingly
O'Rahilly more or less accepted that the chronologies at
this time had some reality (he preferred the synchronisms
to the king-list chronologies) but because it was, to him
and to contemporary archaeologists, quite unacceptable
to have invasions within the Roman period he pushed
Tuathal back into the first century BC so that he might
be La Tene, the latest time before the medieval period at
which invasion was academically allowable.
. EMANIA 13, 1995 PAGE 2t

Tuathal and Agricola's Prince than to use this as evidence for exiles from Ireland, fm
The late medieval tales tell us how Tuathal was evicted he was wedded to the synchronists' dates. I am, however:
from Ireland, either unborn or as a child, with other struck by this coincidence of both circumstances and
nobility as a result of a plebeian rising, a rebellion of the dates. I know of no reason to believe that the
the non-Goidelic peoples, the aithechthuatha (in 'AD Agricola of Tacitus was known to the medieval Irisb
56' according to the Four Masters). He returned some scholars, or ifit was that they were aware of the dates
time before 'AD 76' to end the twenty-year rule of the of Agricola's campaign. ..

aithech-thuatha at the battle ofAchall (the stories imply May we tentatively suggest that Tacitus confirms
that he went straight to Achall upon landing). This the Irish tale; that there was some sort of a rebellion at
device of returning after exile to seize power is common about the same time as the Romans began their British
in the origin legends of a number ofintrusive tribes and advance (perhaps indeed as a result of this advance, as
persons and is usually likely to be a fiction made neces- I shall explore elsewhere); that a section of Irish nobility
sary by the need to legitimise the claim to royalty of the and their followers settled in Britain for almost a
intruder. Commonly, the only concession made to generation and made themselves useful to the Romans
foreignness is the acceptance that the intruder~ mother (see, for instance, Warner 1983); that with the
was foreign (Tuathal's mother was Eithne, daughter of encouragement, and perhaps active participation of
the king of Alba; Alba was Britain and Eithne is the Romans these Romanised Irish returned as an
originally a Brittonic name). O'Rahilly believed that army to Ireland and seized power some time soon after
the story of the revolt of the aithechthuatha was a AD 82; indeed that Agricola's prince was Tuathal
fiction (1940, 110) and that Tuathal was a foreigner (what a pity that he didrft Bame him).
whose connexion with Ireland began when he invaded I shall now identify some events or places with which
it (1946, 163). As the aithechthuatha were defined as Tuathal is pseudo-historically connected and I will
people of non-Goidelic stock and as Tuathal is repre- discuss these archaeologically.
sented as the leader of the first Goidels there were
clearly no Goidels to be rebelled against before him. Tuathal and Lambay/Drumanagh
However, this does not negate the possibility of a The late medieval tales that relate Tuathal's exile have
plebeian rising against an established non-Goidelic him returning either to an unidentified place Rinn
power-group to which Tuathal belonged. R6mann or Rinn Ruamann (promontory of the
In this particular case there are reasons for thinking incursion?), or to lnber Domnann which appears to be
that the returned exile theme might be true. In the first Malahide Bay or nearby, and thence to Tara. If Tara
place the word Goidil derives from a British name for was intended as the target, as one would expect, a
the Irish which implies that it was given to, and taken landing near Malahide would be logical (Fig. 1). We
up by, an Irish group domiciled in Britain. Secondly, as cannot ignore the fact that early Roman material is
Morris has pointed out (1973, 151), we have the reliable relatively prolific in this area, in particular Lambay
record of an exiled Irish noble in a Roman source. The Island and at Drumanagh promontory fort. Lambay
Roman historian Tacitus (Agricola, ch. 24) tells usthat Island immediately off Malahide Bay, has produced
his father in law, general Agricola, had with him in burials of British Iron Age or Romano-British warriors
about AD 82 while campaigning on the north-western which date to the latter part of the 1st century AD.
British coast an Irish prince, who had been driven from Those buried had come from Roman Britain either just
home by a rebellion; nominally a friend, he might be in advance of the Roman north British campaign or
used as a pawn in the game. Morris went no further shortly after it. Lambay is Limnos island on the map of

,:, [:: i,:::: i: i j,:: i: i: i: [ ~ j, j 1: 1: ,1!,:,:,:: i: i: i: i 1 i: ~: i: (, ~: ~,~ ~ i j i:~! i: [ ~ ~ ~ i ~ \ \ [i [17:

1
~
\~~,jJ;.lj!i:
DRUMANAGH

;,',','.',
:';.;.:':;

Fig. 1: Area around Malahide

MAlAHIDE BAY
Bay, north Co. Dublin, showing
Lambay Island (location of
5km
burials is marked), Drumanagh
promontory-fort and
Damastown (copper ingot).
(Land above 60 m. is shaded.)
PAGE 26
the second century geographer ptolemy (Warner 1991b).
In 1976 I suggested (following an earlier suggestion
by 6 Riordain whose source now escapes me) that the
Lambay warriors were BritishBrigantes (this tribe was
located in what is now northern England). The same
suggestion was independently made at the same tim~
by Etienne Rynne (1976). The context and material
made sense and we had Brigantes also in Ireland
according to Ptolemy. However, Tierney (1976) held
that Ptolemy's Irish evidence was early first century at
the latest and furthermore Ptolemy describes Lambay
Island as deserted which, as we now see, was not true
nearer his own time. In addition he locates the Brigantes
very firmly in the south-east and one is loath to ignore
his evidence just because it is inconvenient. I would
suggest that although the Lambay people had north
British (and thus British Brigantian) connections they
did not necessarily become the south Leinster tribe of
that name. I am now inclined to connect Lambay with
the intrusion of Tuathal.
The great multi vallate promontory fort of
Drumanagh (Loughshinny), on the north Dublin coast
almost opposite Lambay, raises a very similar problem
(Fig. 2). It has now produced, during ploughing and
treasure-hunting, a substantial amount of early Roman
(and some native Irish) material (Raftery 1994, 207).
This has led both myself and Raftery to suggest that
Drumanagh was ptolemy's town of Manapia The
evidence for this is strong, including the name
(Drumanagh ?(Druim Monach) and the fact that in
the Ulster cycle tale 'The Wooing of Emir' a Gaulish
merchant residing at or near Drumanagh is named as
Forgall Monach (see O'Rahilly 1946, 32). To this one
might add that the source for one of the objects at
Lambay,. a decorated mount, might have been the
onomastically identical Gaulish tribe ofMenapii at the
mouth of the Rhine (Lloyd Morgan 1976, esp. fig 1). The
distribution of these mounts heads straight through
DRUMANAGH
Ih U- ROMA: U- - 9
MATERIAL
\\1
!li::
,,'
. 100 m I
Fig. 2: Plan of the promontory fort at Drumanagh,
Co. Dublin (re-drawn from Raftery 1994).
TUATHAL TECHTMAR
midland Britain to Lambay. It is possible therefore
that the invaders included a substantial element of
Gaulish Menapian freebooters, ex-auxiliaries from
Agricola's army (we know that there were Menapian
auxiliaries in Britain). Unfortunately, the Irish tribe of
Manapii and town ofManapia are placed very firmly by
Ptolemy south of Dublin Bay, almost adjacent to the
Brigantes. As O'Rahilly (1946, 32) has noted, the
_descendants of the Manapii and the Brigantes, the Ut
Bairche in south Leinster and the Monaig in Ulster
both claimed descent from Dliire Barrach of the Laigin.
The place on Ptolemy's map that would suit Drumanagh
would be Eblana, capital of the Eblani.
The finds from Drumanagh include native Irish
material. We might interpret this as implying that the
place was cosmopolitan, intrusive and native, perhaps
an entrepot. But we must remember the tradition that
the intruders included at least an element of returning
Irish who had sojourned in western Britain. The
question remains open, but we may be impressed that
the form of the Drumanagh promontory fort recalls
that of the first shore base of the invading Roman army
in Britain forty years earlier, the bivallate promontory
fort of Rutupiae (Richborough, Kent; Cunliffe 1968,
232).
Tuathal and Tara
I have suggested that Tuathal came with his forces, a
combination of Romanised Irishmen and Roman-
Gaulish and Romano-British adventurers, some time
in the latter part of the first century AD. His first major
act was to defeat the Ulaid king Ellim at Achall, n.ow
the Hill ofSkreenjust to the east ofTara. This ofcourse
was a most symbolic act which gave him control of the
Erainn ritual site at Tara. An Iron Age horse-bit was
found in the last century with another (lost) bit and a
Y-shaped pendant between the hills of Skreen and
Tara (Raftery 1983, nos. 79, 207). Curiously Wilde
describes them (1861,605) as having been found on an
ancient battle-field (one would of course have liked to
known whether there was physical reason for this
description or just the tradition ofTuathal's battle). I
would incline, on typological grounds, to date these
bridle ornaments to sometime within the first couple of
centuries AD and they belong firmly within the Irish
cultural milieu and not within any intrusive one. We
accept that there can be no objective claim that this
find is associated with the battle of Achall, but we
mention it nonetheless as a matter of passing interest.
Tuathal of course, as a result of his victory, seized
Tara as his ritual capital and we note that the old, and
1
as yet unpublished, excavations of that particular site
f
at Tara now called the Rath of the Synods produced a
fair amount of Roman material. Although I am as yet
unclear about the precise nature and date of this
material, it seems to belong to the first and/or second
centuries AD and included wine vessels, a brooch,
dividers, two padlocks and a decorated lead seal (Raftery
1994,212). As well as originating from a Roman rather
than Irish milieu the material indicates a high, even
. EMANIA 13, 1995
official status of the residents. Significantly, Irish Iron
Age material was not found with this assemblage, as
far' as I know, and I am therefore inclined to believe
that the occupants were Romans (in the sense of
material cultural allegiance) rather than strictly Irish
persons enjoying the fruits of Roman trade.
In view of the tradition in the B6rama tale (below)
that Tuathal had a habitation at Fr:emain or Fremu
(Frewin Hill in Co. Westmeath, overlooking Lough
OWiel},;it is interesting that from Lough Lene, not far
away, has come an exotic and unique (for Ireland)
Roman boat, unlikely to be later than the first century
AD (Brindley and Lanting 1990). Furthermore, even if
one accepts O'Rahilly's dismissal (1946, 169) of the
claimed connection between Tuathal and th~ ritual
site of Uisneach as a 17th century fabrication, the fact
remains that the place was within the area, Mide, with
which the early Goidels are associated. Therefore the
discovery during the atrocious excavations there by
Macalister and Praeger of a Roman key is, in view of
the Tara padlocks, also of some interest. Finally the
Damastown, Co. Dublin, ingot (Raftery 1994, 208), the
Bohermeen ladle (Bateson 1973, 66) and the St. Anne's,
Randalstown brooch (Hawkes 1981,65), all later first
or early second century and all within this area of
Tuathal's domain might also be best explained as the
result of this intrusion.
Tuathal and Knockaulin
One of the most important ofTuathal's acts was, we are
told in the tales, the conquest of the Laigin and the
imposition of the B6rama (cattle tribute) upon them
(Dillon 1946, 103f; Stokes 1892). The story of this
conquest tells us, as we would expect, that Tuathal
burnt Ailenn, the great ritual capital of the Laigin at
Knockaulin, near Kildare. He also destroyed the wooden
fortress of the Laigin king Bresal, possibly but not
explicitly atAilenn. The archaeology of the great ritual-
enclosure at Knockaulin, as recovered by Bernard
Wailes, does not disappoint us, in that it is not
\':::':'::';'~:':;"~::~~:~~:<.:{:../~:~:): ~:~:~:::~:"::::::::.':';::
::': ~:~::,:/
5 km
LYLES "ILL '~~)nc:/ii'?:~:
:::\?::::,,':;::.
PAGE 27
inconsistent with the legends. The great forty-metre
wooden structure known as mauve to the excavators
had been demolished and partly burnt some time
during the Iron Age (that is sometime between the 3rd
century BC and the 4th century AD). More to the point,
among the relatively scarce artefacts recovered by the
excavators were some Romano-British ornaments
(Wailes 1990, 17; Hawkes 1981, 65). These were two
bronze brooches and a possible button-and-Ioop fastener
(for a sword-belt?), which would dateto the latter half
of the first century AD.
I have previously suggested (1991b) that the Roman
material at Knockaulin represented the intrusive
element that we recognise in the legends of the Laigin.
This is, of course, contrary to what I am now suggesting.'
There is, admittedly, a very strong intrusive Roman
element in the legends of the Laigin. The tribal names
associated with. Leinster on ptolemy's map -
Brigantes, Manapii, Cauci and Coriondi - seem
intrusive from Gaul or from Britain (Warner 1976) and
in the area Roman material outnumbers native Iron
Age. It may be (if Tierney is right in his date of Pto-
lemy's latest sources) that these intrusive tribes, and
the Laigin in general, arrived before the mid first
century, but it is equally possible that the Menapii and
Brigantes ~were part of the original invasion, as we
suggested above, and moved south to Leinster as
Tuathal moved west into Mide. Interestingly the
Domnainn (a sub-group of the early Laigin) are to be
onomastically connected to the Damnonii of Britain and,
as we have seen, the landing place of Tuathal's force
was supposedly Inber Domnann. Perhaps the B6rama .
is to be explained not by Tuathal's conquest ofLaigin
but by the status of some of the Laigin "as co-invaders.
Tuathal and Moylinny
Tuathal died, according to our annalistic dates, in 'AD
106' after a thirty year reign at Tara, in a battleinMag
Line in Ulaid (AFM), specifically at the head of the Six
Mile Water just east ofLarne, Co. Antrim (Fig. 3). Mag
Fig. 3: The Six Mile Water valley
in Co. Antrim, showing locations
of Lyles Hill, Dunadry mound
(site only) and the alleged site of
the battle at which Tuathal died,
according to the Four Masters.
(Land above 200 m. is shaded).
PAGE 28 TUATHAL TECHTMAR

Line (modern Moylinny) was the valley of the Six Mile

Water running west to Lough Neagh at Antrim. It was,
in Early Medieval times, the heartland of the Deil
nAraide (a Cruithen kingdom} The valley also
contained, running for several miles, an extended
cemetery ofNeolithic passage tombs.
On the southern side of Mag Line there is today a
prominent hill, Lyles Hill, which was the site of a major
Neolithic settlement and an Early Bronze Age tomb
(Evans 1953). Around its top was erected, at some
undetermined time between the Neolithic and the Iron
Age, a stone-revetted bank of earth. We are loath to
describe this extensive enclosure as a hill-fort lacking
as it does an external ditch. We note however that the
bank was placed at the)(op of the steep slope of the hill
and would have had something of a defensive property.
Most important for us is the fact that the bank was re-
fortified with wooden posts holding some sort of a
wooden wall (Evans 1953,23; re-excavation described
by Gibson and Simpson 1987) at a date now known to
be within the first or second centuries AD (Warner et
al. 1990,47).
Evans discovered that a cache had been hidden in
the Bronze Age tomb at the centre of Lyles Hill. The
objects include an amber bead, a jet bracelet and a
...
glass bead (Evans 1953, 57). The glass bead has no
close Irish parallel and is best paralleled from Romano-
..
British contexts, being particularly associated with 100 m
Roman military sites of the late first and second
centuries, such as Newstead in Scotland (Guido 1978,
.....
77f., class 9). In addition, a tiny bronze bell has been
recovered as a stray find from Lyles Hill. Its parallels
include some rare small bells from Early Medieval
contexts but also harness-fittings from Roman contexts
(C. Bourke, pers. comm.). We therefore find that Lyles
Hill was re fortified at a date whose bracket is consistent
with Tuathal, and that people with a Roman military Fig. 4: Plan of the hill.fort at Clogher, Co. Tyrone
background might have been present. (later features not shown). Open circles mark
In the valley not far from Lyles Hill there stood until locations of Roman material.
1839 a very large mound which we may assume to have
been one ofthe Neolithic passage tombs already referred which is the earthwork complex at Clogher, Co. Tyrone
to. During its destruction was found, at its top, the (Warner 1982), was constructed by Tuathal himself
skeleton of a large person accompanied by a stone urn, (Fig. 4). Excavations at the site have shown that the
a jet and a glass bracelet, and, some reports indicate, Early Medieval capital of the tribe of the Ui Crimthainn
a glass urn (O'Laverty 1884, 226f; Raftery 1981, 181). was superceded by a hill-fort. The hill-top had been
Only the bracelets exist today and the glass one is surrounded by a sub-rectangular 3-hectare defensive
certainly of Iron Age date, with British parallels. A enclosure some time during the Iron Age (that is before
bronze disc apparently covered either the stone or the fourth century AD). The shape is unique for an
glass urn, and the whole is rather reminiscent of the Irish hill-fort (there is a more typical hill-fort a few
Roman Stoneyford (Co. Kilkenney) burial of the first or kilometres to the north) and recalls rather more some
second century AD. Ajet bracelet was included among British hill-forts and of course the usual Roman type of
the Lambay grave-goods (Raftery 1983, no. 467). . fort or encampment. .

Of particular interest is that no Iron Age material of

Tuathal and Clogher
We are left with one further interesting reference to
Tuathal, though it occurs in relation to his unimportant
son Fedelmid Rechtaid. Under the year 'AD 111'we are
told by AFM that Fedelmid's mother (the local Clogher
Valley goddess Baine!) constructed Reith M6r .in Mag
Lemna. This of course implies simply that Rath Mor,
anlrish cultural type was found during the excavations
but several early Roman items were uncovered. The
most important was a bronze Romano-British brooch
of first century AD date (Langton Down type, Hawkes
1981, p5). This is of particular significance as it had
been gilded, extremely rare amongst such brooches in
Britain and indicating a high status for its owner. Of
..EMANIA 13, 1995
rather less certain attribution are a number of enigmatic
fragments of pottery vessels, Some of these are glazed
'and have been disowned by experts of medieval glazed
wares. They seem to be best paralleled in first century
AD Roman military contexts in Britain (Arthur 1978).
Other sherds can be paralleled among Roman coarse
wares.
A strange find from Killeevan, Co. Monaghan
(Anlore), consisting ofa British horse-bit and a decorated
disc (Raftery 1983, nos. 132,803) comparable with the
Menapian discs referred to above, has defied
explanation. It lies between Tuathal's Mide territory
and Clogher and we may speculate that the objects
were connected to the northern campaigns that resulted
in the digging of the Clogher hill-fort or the death of
Tuathal in Co. Antrim. The onomastic connection
between the Fir Manach of Co. Fermanagh and the
Manapii is mentioned above and this might provide us
with a mechanism for this link. There were also Monaig
not very far from the Six Mile Valley.
The Intrusion of Tuathal
I have described those identifiable places with which
Tuathal is particularly connected in the medieval
pseudo-historical and mYthological tales and have
shown that in every case early Roman material has
been found (Fig. 5). While the quantity of the material
is not large in itself it outnumbers any native Iron Age
material from those contexts. The best explanation for
this Roman material is through the agency of actual
intrusion rather than trade and I have suggested that
the story of Tu at ha I matches such an explanation. The
prince who took refuge with Agricola seems to fit the
story and chronology remarkably well, and we would
surely be unjustified in ignoring the AFM chronology
whi~h so well agrees with the scenario. In other words
it is hoped that, while individually the pieces ofevidence
might be of doubtful value, their sum, the concatenation
of circumstantial agreement must be taken seriously.
I do not suggest that all I have described can be
attributed to a single leader called Tuathal Techtmar
but that he personifies the invasive event which I
believe can be demonstrated and which might well
have covered several decades and occurred piecemeal
(as O'Rahilly also suggests, 1946, 169).
It will also be noted that I have suggested that
Tuathal's invasion was complex, possibly including
British adventurers and Gaulish freebooters from the
Roman army. What I have not suggested, although I
most certainly do not rule it out, is that the intrusion
was official. Killeen and Raftery have drawn attention
to the passage in Tacitus which begins in the fifth year
of campaigning Agricola began with a sea passage, and
in a series of successful actions subdued nations hitherto
unknown and continues, after referring to the Irish
prince, 'I have often heard Agricola say that Ireland
could be reduced and held by a single legion and a few
auxiliaries'. This was in AD 82. In about AD 100
Juvenal wrote that Roman arms 'had been advanced
beyond the shores of Ireland' (Sat. 11,lines 159-161).
PAGE 29
The Roman Nature of Early Medieval Ireland
It has long been acknowledged that Early Medieval
Ireland was, from its very beginning in the fifth century,
highly Romanised. Indeed in many ways Ireland from
the fifth century was a far more sub-Roman culture
than Britain, particularly in material matters. This
has led to an erroneous backdating of artefacts which
clearly have a late Roman inspiration, though not
origin, and of the contexts in which they have been
found. I have drawn attention to this chronological
error elsewhere (Warner 1986, 76). It might be supposed
that this Romanisation was in greater part a result of
Christianisation, this having come from societies that
had, until recently, been part of the Roman Empire.
There is no doubt some truth in this supposition, but
there is also much evidence, superbly summarised by
Charles Thomas (1981, ch. 12), of a strong connection
between Roman Britain and Ireland in the fourth
~
century AD. Thomas, and his sources (excepting myself),
were content to ascribe this material and influence to
trade, perhaps allowing some British slaves and the
influence of the Irish certainly domiciled at this time in
western Britain. Laing (1985) recognised the
overwhelming need to postulate a Romanising of Irish
culture, but also stopped short of suggesting an intrusive
mechanism.
~8
07
04 0
i 83 o~
ro-1
685'
0
0
50 km
Fig. 5: Map showing sites associated with Tuathal's
career (closed circles). Also shown are locations of
early Roman imports (open circles). Key -1 Lambay,
2 Drumanagh, 3 Tara, 4 Lough Lene, 5 Frewin, 6
Uisneach, 7 Killeevan, 8 Clogher, 9 Dunadry and
Lyles Hill, 10 Knockaulin.
PAGE 30
Late Roman Britain and Ireland
However, the changes of the fourth century were
altogether too pervasive and too long-lasting to be
explained by trivial contacts. They suggest, rather,
intervention ofa very high -class and influential nature.
We may not ignore the borrowing of such Roman words
into the Irish language as ship, soldier, army, gold,
tribune and sword. We note, in particular, the increasing
evidence for the presence of inhumation burials in
Ireland at around this time (Raftery 1994, chs. 8 & 9;
Raftery 1981; OBrien 1990). I will, however, confine
discussion to a single object type that epitomises the
story that emerges from all the evidence -thezoomorphic
penannular brooch.
This class of dress fastener was developed in the
northern part of Roman Britain in the 2nd or 3rd
century AD, possibly partly by Irish settlers (Warner
1983). It was designed for use with the sort of heavy
cloak necessary in northern parts, but spread
throughout Britain during the 3rdcentury, apparently
being popular with the army rather than with civilians.
The development of this brooch type has been described
by Kilbride-Jones (1980, but his conclusions and
chronology should not be followed in detail). The
Romano-British forms are his pseudo-zoomorphic and
initial forms. Some Romano-British zoomorphic
brooches have been found in Ireland, but far more
important is the fact than an Irish development of the
brooch can be seen in Ireland from the 4th century, by
which time it had apparently died out in Britain. By the
5th century it is the most distinctive, and commonest
Irish ornament type, which status it retains for the
next half a millennium.
There are many other artefacts of late Roman date
in Ireland, and a few of these are listed by Bateson
(1973). Although most have the same sort ofRomano-
British origin as the penannular brooch few had as
great an influence. The evidence, which will be enlarged
elsewhere, s,uggests that the main area of intrusive
late Roman material and burial types, was into the
Irish Midlands. Into, indeed, that area already the
main object of intrusion by Romans inter alios in the
first century, and late Roman penannular brooches
have been found at N ewgrange, Knowth and Tara - all
within the core area of intrusion (Carson & O'Kelly
1977, pI. 7a; Kilbride Jones 1980, fig. 52). The ritual,
deposition of Late Roman gold ornaments and silver
coins at Newgrange (Topp 1956; Carson & O'Kelly
1977) is most relevant and we might note the
contemporary inhumations that ring the nearby
passage tomb ofKnowth (Eogan, 1974). We have already
referred to an official seal from Tara (Bateson 1973, fig.
1.3) which Thomas (1981, 298) would date to the late
Roman period. The date of intrusion implied by this
materialis the half-century either side of AD 300. The
main early development of the zoomorphic penannular
brooch took place in this same area, spreading outwards
during the next two centuries.
TUATHAL TECHTMAR ~
Eochu Mugmedon
It is impossible to consider this material without
bringing to mind the Early Medieval pseudo-history.
Some time in the fourth century (shortly prior to 'AD
357' according to the Four Masters) a major figure
appears on the legendary scene, almost as important
as Tuathal and with the same claimed Goidelic
background. He isEochu Mugmed6n, Eochu slave-lord,
father of Niall Noigiallach. Tradition (O'Rahilly 1946,
217 f.) represents him as being an Irish raider who
brought back slaves, and Niall's mother, from Britain.
Although we know that Irish raiders were actively
attacking Britain at this time we may justifiably take
this to be a variation on the traditional one of the
returned exile and we may treat it the same way. I
suggest that Eochu, if not British, had spent rather
more time there than legend allows and returned with
his own Romanised Irish followers, as well as non-Irish
adventurers and soldiers, and perhaps even escaped
slaves. His stamping ground was the same east midland
area as that ofTuathal and it is reasonable to use the
term midland Goidels for these people. His descendants
included the UiNeill of the midlands and of the north-
west.
The Three Collas
At about the same time, or slightly before, another
group of exiles returned, according to legend, with an
army. They were the Three Collas - three brothers
sharing the name Colla (from an earlier Conlae). They
are represented as distantly related to Niall (but
believed, I think wrongly, by O'Rahilly to be Niall
himself -1946, 225f.). The Collas had, according to the
Four Masters, been exiled in 'AD 326', returned to
Ireland in 'AD 327' and in 'AD 331' with a largely
midland Irish army took a large part ofUlaid territory
from the Ulaid kings, evicting them from their capital
Emain Macha (N avan) in the process (see O'Brien
1939 for the earliest account). This event apparently
led to the formation of the tribal federation known as '
the Airgialla. One of the main early capitals of the
Collas and their descendants was the site of Clogher,
already referred to in the discussion on TuathaI. It is of
interest, therefore, that the excavations of Clogher
showed that the site was re-occupied in the 4th century.
The site has produced a small Romano- British bracelet
and fragments of what may be late Romano- British
(4th century) pottery. Clogher also became, in the 6th
century, a centre for the production of the developed
zoomorphic pen annular brooch (Kilbride-Jones 1980,
63f, fig. 17).
The Rise of the Goidels
I am in no doubt that the stories ofEochu and the Three
Collas contain a hasic truth that parallels the
archaeological evidence - that there were inrusions
(albeit returns) in the early 4th century that radically
altered the power structure in Ireland (we may accept
that the legends of the Collas and Eochu stand for an
event lasting for several years). It is of interest that
. EMANIA 13, 1995
these later intruders went to places already associated
with Tuathal, for instance the Collas to Clogher, the Vi
Neill into Mide (Fig. 6). It is therefore understandable,
given the use by both the early and late intruders of
Britain as a springboard and their common Roman
cultural background, that the later pseudo-historians
should have regarded all parties as belonging to the
same political or dynastic group - Goidels. They might
even have sprung from the same group of expatriots.
That there was a strong military flavour in the
intrusions, in the sense of the involvement of soldiers,
I doubt not. But I am sure that no mass migrations of
J2.eople were involved. The incomers were, as I have
postulated for the so-called Celts a few centuries earlier
- warrior adventurers and their hangers-on (Warner
1991b; paralleled of course much later by the Anglo-
Norman invasion). It has always been difficult to
understand why the GDidels, and parti~ularly the
dynasties descended from Niall, seemed to appear
from nowhere to gain political dominance in a couple of
centuries. If we equate their rise to the fact that they
came from Britain with all the benefits of Roman
training, weapons and organisation we are less
surprised.
I have concentrated upon the northern campaign of
Tuathal, but have also made reference to the Laigin. I
shall, on another occasion, explore the advance of the
southern Goidels into Munster. Again Roman finds
mark their route, and belong to the same two periods
that I have identified above for the midland Goidels.
50 km
Fig. 6: Simplified intrusive routes, for both the early
and late Roman events (the Collas are late only).
PAGE 31
There seems, indeed, little doubt that both the midland
and southern Goidels were basically the result of the
same influxes, and that the same pattern of division
occurred with each during the early Roman and late
Roman intrusions. It also seems probable, and I will
deal with this in detail elsewhere, that the appearance
of beehive querns in Ireland was a further result of this
intrusive process.
Conclusion
The later part of the Iron Age, contemporary with the
Roman occupation of Britain, was a time of a steady
Romanisation of Irish culture - material, social and
political. The mechanism for this Romanisation was a
series of warrior intrusions from Roman Britain and'
Gaul that are indicated both by the archaeological
evidence and, I argue, the early literary evidence. This
Romamsation, by its cumulative effect over the 1st to
the 4th centuries, ultimately brought about the culture
that we know by the names of Early Medieval or Early
Christian. The refugees from the collapsing Roman
world of the 5th century and the missionaries of the 6th
came into a culture already familiar to them and
reinforced and completed this Romanisation.
References
AFM, Annals of the Kingdom of Ireland, by the Four
Masters (J. O'Donovan ed, Dublin 1854, I).
Arthur, P. (1978) The lead glazed wares of Roman
Britain, in Early Fine Wares in Roman Britain,
Oxford (Brit. Archaeol. Reports no. 57; P Arthur & G
Marsh eds.), 293-396.
Bateson, D. (1973) Roman material from Ireland,Proc.
Royal Irish Academy 73C, 21-97.
Brindley, A. and Lanting, J. (1990) A Roman boat in
Ireland, Archaeol. Ireland 4.3, 10-11.
Byrne, F. (1973) Irish Kings and High-Kings, London.
Carson, R. & O'Kelly, C. (1977) A catalogue of the
Roman coins from Newgrange, Co. Meath, and notes
on the coins and related finds, Proc. Royal Irish
Academy 77, 35-56.
Cunliffe, B. (1968) The development of Rich borough, in
Fifth Report on the Excavations of the Roman Fort at
Richborough, Kent, Oxford (Soc. of Antiqs. Res. Rep.
no. 23; B Cunliffe ed.), 231-251.
Dillon, M. (1946) The Cycles of the Kings, Oxford.
Eogan, G. (1974) Report on the excavations of some
passage graves, unprotected inhumation burials
and a settlement site at Knowth, Co. Meath, Proc.
Royal Irish Academy 74, 11-112.
Evans, E. (1953) Lyles Hill: a Late Neolithic Site in
County Antrim, Belfast.
Gibson, A. and Simpson, D. (19??) Lyles Hill, Co.
Antrim, Archaeol. Ireland 1.2, 72-75.
Guido, M. (1978) The Glass Beads of the Prehistoric
and Roman Periods in Britain and Ireland, London.
Hawkes, C. (1981) The wearing of the brooch: Iron Age
dress among the Irish, Studies on Early Ireland,
Belfast (B. Scott ed), 51-73.
Jackson, K. (1964) The Oldest Irish Tradition: a Window
on the Iron Age, Cambridge.
PAGE 32
Kilbride-Jones, H. (1980) Zoomorphic Penannular
Brooches, London.
Killeen, J. (1976) Ireland in the Greek and Roman
writers, Proc. Royal Irish Academy 76C, 207-215.
Koch, J. (1994) Windows on the Iron Age: 1964-1994,
Ulidia, Belfast (J. Mallory and G. Stockman eds),
229-238.
Laing, L. (1985) The romanization of Ireland in the
fifth century, Peritia 4, 261-278.
Lessa, W. (1966) Discoverer-of-the-Sun: Mythology as
a reflection of Culture, Journ. of American Folklore,
special issue (1966, 3-51. . near the entrance to Newgrange in 1842, Ann. Rep.
Lloyd-Morgan, G (1976) A note on some Celtic discs
from Ireland and the province of Lower Germany,
Proc. Royal Irish Academy 76C, 217-222.
Lynn, C. (1994) Hostels, heroes and tale: further
thoughts on the Navan mound, Emania 12, 5-20.
McCone, K. (1990) Pagan Past and Christian Present,
Maynooth.
McNeill, E. (1921) Celtic Ireland, Dublin (repr. with
notes 1981).
Morris, J. (1973) The Age of Arthur, London.
O'Brien, E. (1990) Iron Age burial practices in Leinster:
continuity and change, Emania 7,37-42.
O'Brien, M. (1939) The oldest account of the raid of the
Collas, Ulster Journ. Archaeol. 2, 170-177.
a hOgain, D. (1990) Myth, Legend and Romance: an
Encyclopaedia of the Irish Folk Tradition, London.
O'Laverty, J. (1884)AnHistoricalAccountoftheDiocese
of Down and Connor, Ill, Dublin.
O'Rahilly, T. (1940) Cairbre Cattchenn, inFeilsgribhinn
Eoin Mhic Neill, Dublin (J. Ryan ed), 101-110.
O'Rahilly, T. (1946)Early Irish History and Mythology,
Dublin (repr. with additions 1964)
Raftery, B. (1981) Iron Age burials in Ireland, in Irish
a
Antiquity, Cork (D. Corrain ed), 173-204.
Raftery, B. (1983) A Catalogue of Irish Iron Age
Antiquities, Marburg.
Raftery, B. (1994) Pagan Celtic Ireland, London.
Rynne, E. (1976) The La Tene and Roman finds from
Lambay, Co. Dublin: a reassessment, Proc. Royal
Irish Academy 76C, 231-244.
TUATHAL TECHTMAR
Sharp, L. (1952) Steel axes for Stone Age Australians,
in Human Problems in Technological Change, New
York (E. Spicer ed), 69-90.
Stokes, W. (1892) The B6rama, Revue Celtique 13, 32-
124.
Thomas, A. (1981) Christianity in Roman Britain to
AD 500, London.
Tierney, J. (1976) The Greek geographic tradition and
Ptolemys evidence for Irish Geography, Proc. Royal
- Irish Academy 76C, 257-266.
Topp, C. (1956) The gold ornaments reputedly found
Univ. of London Inst. of Archaeol. 12,53-62.
Wailes, B. (1990) Dun Ailinne: a summary excavation
report, Emania 7, 10-21.
Warner, R. (1976) Some observations on the context
and importation of exotic material in Ireland, from
, the first century BC to the first century AD, Proc.
Royal Irish Academy 76C, 267-292.
Warner, R. (1982) Irish place-names and archaeology,
Ill; a case study: Clochar macc nDaimini, Bulletin
Ulster Place-name Society 4, 27-31.
Warner, R. (1983) Ulster, Ireland and Scotland in the
Earlier Iron Age, in From the Stone Age to the Forty-
Five, Edinburgh (A. OConnor & D. Clarke eds), 160-
187.
Warner, R. (1986) The date of the start of Lagore,
Journal of Irish Archaeology 3, 75-77. .
Warner: R. (1990) The prehistoric Irish annals: fable or
history?, Archaeol. Ireland .4.1, 30-33.
Warner, R. (1991a) The earliest history of Ireland in
The Illustrated Archaeology of Ireland, Dublin (M.
Ryan ed), 112-116.
Warner, R. (1991b) Cultural intrusion in the Iron Age:
some notes, Emania 9, 44-52.
Warner, R., Mallory, J. P. and Baillie, M. G. L. (1990)
Irish Iron Age sites: a provisional map of absolute
dated sites, Emania 7,46-50.
Wilde, W., 1861, A descriptive Catalogue of the
Antiquities of Animal Materials and Bronze in the
Museum of the Royal Irish Academy, Dublin.