The Forgotten Battle between the Saxons and Welsh at Cirencester

Added: 2026-05-09

[00:00:00]Hi everyone. One of the most famous and historically significant battles in the 6th century in Britain was the Battle of Dyrham. Now, according to the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, this was a battle fought between the the West Saxons and the Britons. It occurred in the year 577 and the outcome was an Anglo-Saxon victory. You see, this battle was fought at Dyrham, obviously, but it involved the capture of three cities: Gloucester, Bath, and Cirencester. So, when the West Saxons won this battle, the Battle of Dyrham, they they conquered those three cities and so they established themselves very firmly over that whole area. Now, one of the reasons why this is such a significant battle is because, traditionally speaking, it's viewed as representing the moment in which the Anglo-Saxons were able to finally cut off the Britons in Wales from the Britons in the West Country. But, while that is interesting, obviously, in its own right in the traditional sense, there is another reason why I personally find the Battle of Dyrham so interesting.

[00:01:03]You see, in my opinion, the reference to the Battle of Dyrham is actually a kind of tacit reference to an earlier battle, which isn't actually mentioned in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle. According to archaeology, the area of Cirencester was already inhabited by the Anglo-Saxons before the middle of the 6th century.

[00:01:25]There are Anglo-Saxon cemeteries there at Cirencester, and not just any kind of Anglo-Saxon cemeteries, but specifically the the remains that have been found show evidence of having been the rulers of Cirencester. You see, the there are two Anglo-Saxon bodies that were found just outside the administrative center of Cirencester dating to before the middle of the 6th century. So, for that and other reasons, it's been suggested that these particular Anglo-Saxons who were found may have been the rulers of Cirencester. Another suggestion is that they were part of an embassy, but that seems very much like imposing a modern concept on the medieval era. I'm not aware of any other trace of embassies in in this early time period. So, for me, that evidence about the Anglo-Saxon graves that have been found just outside Cirencester, just outside the administrative center of Roman Cirencester, that to me is strong evidence that the the first suggestion, the first of those two suggestions, is in fact correct, that they were the rulers of Cirencester. And it's not just those remains that have been found, there are other Anglo-Saxon remains in the area just outside Cirencester, which are also Anglo-Saxon and which date from before the middle of the 6th century.

[00:02:45]So, this all leads to a very interesting scenario, because let's think about this. If the Anglo-Saxons were already in control of Cirencester before the middle of the 6th century, but yet the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle records them conquering it as well as Gloucester and Bath in the year 577, then well, why did they need to conquer it if they already had control of it decades before? Well, I don't know about you, but to me, the logical explanation there is that at some point between those two time periods, the middle of the 6th century and the 570s, they had lost control over Cirencester, hence why they then needed to conquer it once again at the Battle of Dyrham. So, that suggests that at some point, probably well before 577, because if it was just before, then why bother mentioning the recapture of it? So, it would suggest to me that at some point decidedly before the 570s, or at least before 577, but after the middle of the 6th century, or not necessarily after the middle, but around the middle at the latest, the Britons defeated the Anglo-Saxons there.

[00:03:56]They expelled them from Cirencester and they recaptured the city of Cirencester, meaning that later on at the Battle of Dyrham in 577, the Anglo-Saxons had to conquer it again alongside Bath and Gloucester. That to me is the logical explanation. In other words, the reference to the Battle of Dyrham in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, combined with the archaeological evidence, subtly but definitely demonstrates that there must have been an earlier battle between the Anglo-Saxons and the Britons, one in which the Britons overthrew the Anglo-Saxons from that city. Although it's not mentioned in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, I believe that when we combine these two pieces of evidence together, that is the logical conclusion that we come to.

[00:04:42]Now, this gets even more interesting when we combine this with other information that we know. Remember, in my video about when King Arthur really lived, I presented the argument there that the earliest information about the Battle of Badon and about Gildas and various other related factors indicate that the Battle of Badon occurred in the middle of the 6th century. Now, the most logical and natural explanation for how this could be the case while at the same time accommodating the information from the Annales Cambriae is that the information from the Annales Cambriae has mistakenly dated the Battle of Badon from the death of Jesus rather than from his birth, and that is a phenomenon that we do see in the medieval records. So, given the strong evidence that I presented in that video in the past about the Battle of Badon having actually occurred in the middle of the 6th century, the most logical explanation is that the reason why the Annales Cambriae dates it to 516 is because it's misdated it because it's dated it in relation to the death of Jesus rather than his birth. So, if we then go forward 33 years, that takes us to 549 for the true, corrected date for the Battle of Badon, and that ties in perfectly with all the other information uh that I presented in that video, such as the connection with the reign of Ida, which started in 547. Now, you might be thinking at this point, what has that got to do with the Battle of Dyrham and this uh this unmentioned battle between the Anglo-Saxons and the Britons before the Battle of Dyrham that expelled the Saxons from Cirencester? What has the Battle of Badon got to do with that?

[00:06:26]Well, firstly, the most the most likely location for the Battle of Badon is either Bath or, in my opinion, most likely a place in Southeast Wales. Now, you might think that's too far west.

[00:06:41]Let's have a look at that another time, okay? I'll present a full argument for that in another video. It deserves a whole video about it, but certainly Bath is a good candidate as well, and a place in Southeast Wales. Now, if we take either of those two locations, then what would be the consequence of that having occurred in the middle of the 6th century? Well, logically, they may the Britons may have expelled the Anglo-Saxons from surrounding areas as well. Now, as it happens, in Geoffrey of Monmouth's Historia Regum Britanniae, that is exactly what we find. And to be clear, there is a lot of evidence, a lot of many demonstrable examples of Geoffrey of Monmouth preserving authentic traditions, not just things that he was making up himself, even things as far back as the era. There are many demonstrable examples of him preserving accounts of things that happened which come from, well, from lost records, records that we don't have now. So, Geoffrey did preserve authentic traditions. So, what he says about the Battle of Badon isn't historically worthless, although obviously, we do need to take it with a pinch of salt.

[00:07:50]But, nevertheless, when we look at what he said, it's very interesting. So, in describing the victory at Badon, Geoffrey says, "The Britons, seeing this, followed their leader in great multitudes and made slaughter on all sides, so that Colgrin and Baldulf, his brother, and many thousands more fell before them. But, Celdric, in this imminent danger of his men, betook himself to flight.

[00:08:12]The victory thus being gained, as in the the victory at Mount Badon, the king commanded Cador, Duke of Cornwall, to pursue them while he himself should hasten his march into Albania.

[00:08:22]In the meantime, the Duke of Cornwall, who had the command of 10,000 men, would not as yet pursue the Saxons in their flight, but speedily made himself master of their ships. After this, he hastily pursued the enemy according to Arthur's command and allowed no quarter to those he could overtake. So, that they, whose behavior before was so cruel and insolent, now with timorous hearts fled for shelter, sometimes to the coverts of the woods, sometimes to mountains and caves, to prolong a wretched life. At last, when none of these places could afford them a safe retreat, they entered the Isle of Thanet with their broken forces. So, the long and the short of it is that after the Battle of Badon, after the Britons' victory there, Arthur set Cador loose on the Anglo-Saxons. He made Cador pursue the Anglo-Saxons over to the eastern part of the country. Now, obviously, I'm not saying that the the Britons necessarily actually pursued them as far as the Isle of Thanet, right on the other side of Britain. Maybe that's just an exaggeration. It could well be. But, the point is that there's this tradition that the the Britons were able to pursue with considerable success the Anglo-Saxons. So, they pushed them out of that whole area, that whole region.

[00:09:35]That is what the tradition claims. So, the Battle of Badon taking place in the middle of the 6th century, either in Bath or in Southeast Wales, being followed by this grand expulsion of the Anglo-Saxons from that region, specifically by Cador, the Duke of Cornwall, in reality Cadwy, the the uh ruler of the entire West Country, pretty much. Domnonia in any case. So, he would then have pursued the Anglo-Saxons, expelled them from that area, which surely included the Anglo-Saxons who had settled in and around Cirencester. So, in my opinion, that is the explanation for how we have this phenomenon of the Anglo-Saxons already inhabiting Cirencester before the middle of the 6th century, but yet the Battle of Dyrham showing them conquering it in 577. The explanation is that just after the Battle of Badon, in the aftermath of that event, the Britons expelled the Anglo-Saxons from Cirencester and the whole surrounding area. That is the event that Geoffrey of Monmouth describes in the Historia Regum Britanniae. Although it's considered to be historically worthless, Geoffrey provides the explanation for this historical conundrum.