4/3/2023:
Dr. David Mason, the primary excavator of the Binchester Roman fort, has responded to my query at last. As a result, I am more convinced than ever that Binchester/Vinovia is, indeed, Arthur's Castello Guinnion.
"Castellum or castrum/castra could have been used as terms for Binchester in that period, as earlier.
The latest of the two forts here was approximately 5.6 hectares or 14 acres in size and continued to be occupied in some form or another for about 600 years after Britain ceased to be part of the Roman Empire as evidenced by industrial and animal processing activities and a cemetery."
Dr David Mason FSA MCIfA
Principal Archaeologist
Archaeology Section
Environment & Design
Environment
Neighbourhoods & Climate Change
Durham County Council
3/31/2023:
A response from Professor Roger Tomlin on whether or not Binchester/Vinovia could have been referred to as a castellum:
"Yes, it [Binchester] could [be referred to as a castellum]. Modern writers use 'castra' of legionary fortresses, 'castellum' of auxiliary forts, which I would think reflects Roman usage. One of the Vindolanda tablets even refers to 'reditus castelli', the financial accounts of the 'fort'. Binchester was an auxiliary fort, so no different in terms of its classification than Vindolanda. I don't have the figures to hand, but the two forts would have been much the same size. Housing 500 men, as against the 5,000 of a legion."
A response from Professor Roger Tomlin on whether or not Binchester/Vinovia could have been referred to as a castellum:
"Yes, it [Binchester] could [be referred to as a castellum]. Modern writers use 'castra' of legionary fortresses, 'castellum' of auxiliary forts, which I would think reflects Roman usage. One of the Vindolanda tablets even refers to 'reditus castelli', the financial accounts of the 'fort'. Binchester was an auxiliary fort, so no different in terms of its classification than Vindolanda. I don't have the figures to hand, but the two forts would have been much the same size. Housing 500 men, as against the 5,000 of a legion."
As this is doubtless correct (although, I am still waiting to hear back from Dr. Mason, excavator of Binchester), there is now little reason not to accept Anscombe's plausible suggestion that Guinnion is an error for Guinuion, which makes for a perfect British rendering of the Vinovia Roman fort.
3/31/2023 update:
Whitchester as Winchester on both Speed's and Blaeu's maps (1600s):
Whitchester as Winchester on both Speed's and Blaeu's maps (1600s):
Blaeu
Speed
3/30/2023 update:
I am asking Professor Roger Tomlin about the use of castellum. It seems to be used for a small fort, a fortlet, a watch-tower and the like - exactly like the mile castles we find on Hadrian's Wall. Which is why I like Whitchester/Wynecestre/Winchestr (Mile Castle No. 15) near Rudchester so much. It is not hard getting from a white fort (perhaps a borrowing of the Vindo- of the neighboring Vindobala/Rudchester) to the 'white people', i.e. the people of the white fort, the Vindiones. So stay tuned!
It is difficult to sustain the argument for Binchester as a castellum, regardless of its late period garrison. And it seems unlikely that the castellum in the Historia Brittonum is to be interpreted as interchangeable with castrum.
In addition, I have taken the liberty of writing to the chief excavator of Binchester, Dr. David Mason. I literally came out and asked him if he thought there was any possibility that Vinovia could have been classified as a castellum.
Both responses will be posted here, and I will then proceed with further work on pinning down Arthur's Guinnion.
MOST RECENT UPDATE:
From
From
Arthurian Names: Arthur
William A. Nitze
PMLA, Vol. 64, No. 3 (Jun., 1949), pp. 585-596 (12 pages)
"But, if following Anscombe we read Guinuion (that is, read u for n, since these letters are often confused), Jackson admits that "this could come from a Br. *Vinoviones ('the people of Vinovia'). Just what Jackson means by saying : "we have no right to alter it [Guinnion] for the sake of upholding an identification previously made on mistaken grounds," is not clear. Are we to take no account of circumstantial evidence?"
I must side with Nitze on this point. We need only look at all the other variant spellings for the HB battle-site names in the various MSS. I do not have a problem with Guinuion for Guinnion, honestly. This allows for us to identify a people we know of from the historical record, and one who is within the orbit of the Northern Arthur, and in a place where he might have fought the Saxons at the time. Opting for Carwinning in Ayrshire produces problems, and I am not comfortable choosing the site, as it would represent an extreme outlier when compared with all the other battle sites. And besides Carwinning, there are no good alternatives. My idea for Whitchester/Winchester mentioned below provides us only with the 'white' word, minus the important elements that follow it.
For this reason, after much vacillation, I am going to stick with Binchester as Arthur's Guinnion.
I am also in agreement with Professor P.J.C. Field, who in Arthuriana, Vol. 18, No. 4, In Memoriam: Elisabeth Brewer, Derek Brewer (WINTER 2008), pp. 3-32 (30 pages)
https://www.jstor.org/stable/27870935, said that "The castellum [of the Guinnion entry] shows that this must have been a Roman fortified site, which limits the possibilities." This sentiment is shared by all the top scholars who have taken a look at Guinnion. An umpressive hillfort in the Lowland Scottish hinterland like Carwinning would not have qualified as a castellum.
Peter Verburgh (personal communication), who is quite knowledgeable when it comes to the Roman army, has informed me that
"The term "castellum" is equally interesting : in the Roman military nomenclatura this was specifically used to designate a fort which was occupied by Auxiliary troops , castrum/castra being preserved for forts with Legionary troops - the garrison of Binchester, especially the later smaller fort, housed precisely such a unit - and although in the later Roman army the distinction between auxiliary and legionary largely disappeared, perhaps the name was a remnant of a ( hypothetical ) "Castellum Vinoniensum" , or something similar."
And from the Roman military writer Vegetius: “And if no ancient fortifications are to be met with, small forts [castella] must be built in proper situations, surrounded with large ditches, for the reception of detachments of horse and foot, so that the convoys will be effectually protected. For an enemy will hardly venture far into a country where he knows his adversary’s troops are so disposed as to be ready to encompass him on all sides.”
John Koch has this on the Irish:
"The Old Irish word caisel ‘fort, castle, fortified settlement’ reflects a borrowing from Latin castellum. The change of Latin st to Irish s marks out caisel as an early loan (c. ad 500 or earlier). The word is thus suggestive regarding contacts between the early Irish and the Romans or Romanized Britons, probably specifically— given the meaning of the word—contacts in the military sphere."
CELTIC CULTURE:A HISTRORICAL ENCYCLOPEDIA
NOTE:
As I wrote this piece, I was going by what Alan James had just passed along to me about Rudchester near Whitchester on Hadrian's Wall:
"And Rudchester seems likely to have been red! I've not got the records for that name, but it does seem that, in OE eyes, the fort and the milecastle were red and white respectively. So why the Britons thought the fort was white but the Angles thought it was red is a puzzle!"
"And Rudchester seems likely to have been red! I've not got the records for that name, but it does seem that, in OE eyes, the fort and the milecastle were red and white respectively. So why the Britons thought the fort was white but the Angles thought it was red is a puzzle!"
This does not agree with Ekwall (The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Place-Names), where Rudchester (Rodecastre 1251, Rucestre 1256; the dates for Whitchester - see below - precede the dates for Rudchester) is said to derive from 'Rudda's ceaster', Rudda being a personal name!
This appears to be the consensus view on this place-name, as The English Place-Name Society site at http://kepn.nottingham.ac.uk/map/place/Northumberland/Rudchester has:
Rudchester
'Rudda's Roman site'.
Elements and their meanings
pers.n. (Old English) pers.n. Personal name
ceaster (Old English) A city; an old fortification; a Roman site.
If these sources are correct, then Whitcastle as a Win- castellum could still owe its name to Vindobala.
I will, in James' defense, remind my readers of this:
I will, in James' defense, remind my readers of this:
"Rudchester means 'Red Camp' and there is a reason for its name. It stands, in fact, upon the site of Vindobala, one of the Wall forts, and when in 1924 part of that fort was excavated it was found that many stones had been turned red by burning. Here was evidence of a tragedy long before the first of the Rudchesters built his tower out of the ruins."
When I discussed that view with James, he replied:
"Mind, the info on the KEPN site isn't necessarily 'recent', in this case it's simply following Ekwall, as there's been no full survey of Ntb (and it seems Mawer didn't include Rudchester). The name Rudda is in the Durham Liber Vitae, Ruddington Notts, and possibly elsewhere. But I was mistaken in thinking of OE ruda as an adjective, it's a noun 'redness', the adj. is rudig 'ruddy'
There's also a Ruchester Farm on the Military Road, in Chollerton parish, which Smith (probably following Mawer) sees as OE ruh- 'rough'; I can't find the exact location, but it must be some way to the west of Rudchester, and only accidentally (and confusingly!) similar.
The only authority given for the assertion about burnt stones being red is Paul Brown's Friday Books of North Country Sketches (a selection of 'Friday Articles' from the 'Newcastle Journal' published from 1934)', not I think a very weighty one, and Mr. Brown evidently made the same mistake as I did. Ekwall gives Rodecastre 1251 (also Rucestre 1256, but I wonder if that might be Ruchester, see my previous message). I'm not entirely convinced that it's the pers. n. Rudda, but it's not likely to be 'red'."
It is possible, then, a white fort name became red only very recently, when the burned stones were discovered and the name applied. However, Wincestr for Whitchester may show an earlier relic, one preserving the Vindo- of Vindobala. If this is the case, then the site would make for a splendid Guinnion, in Jackson's terms a fort of the 'White People' (Vindiones).
I will be working on this idea and alter this blog post accordingly, if I think doing so is desirable or necessary.
I will be working on this idea and alter this blog post accordingly, if I think doing so is desirable or necessary.
Carwinning Hillfort
Carwinning Hillfort
For many years now, I have accepted that Binchester was Arthur's Guinnion. However, as we now possess inscriptions showing the Vinovia spelling of the place, we can no longer fall back on the convenient argument presented in Rivet and Smith's THE PLACE-NAMES OF ROMAN BRITAIN:
"Note (3). A further interesting survival is discussed by O. G. S. Crawford in Antiquity, IX (1935), 287. Arthur's eighth battle was fought, according to Nennius (56), in castello Guinnion. Crawford notes that objection had been made to the identification of this with Vinovia on phonetic grounds, rightly; but Crawford seems not to have noted that Ptolemy's alternative Vinnovium (British *Uinnouion) brings us very close to the later name set down by Nennius. There is still a problem, however, in that Vinnovium should have given in Old Welsh at this stage a form in -wy, or similar; but it could be that -ion has been maintained as a learned form. Crawford, even without this support, thought that theidentification should not be entitrely rejected, and he was surely right (Holder III, 354 supported the equation too)."
Kenneth Jackson appears to have been right when (in his 'Once Again Arthur's Battles') he said:
"Actually OW. Guinnion would come from a British *Vindion- or *Vinnion-; probably the former, as it contains the known stem *vindo-, 'white whereas there is no known Br. *vinn-. It might stand for Br. *Vindiones, 'The White People,' something like *Dunon Vindionon = Castellum Alborum; the MW. plural of gwynn, 'white' (Br. *vindos) was gwynnion, from OW. guinnion, Br. *vindiones. This cannot be Binchester."
We cannot justify opting for a form in Ptolemy, as the name would certainly have come not from that source, but from a tradition known to the early medieval Welsh. In other words, Guinnion comes from a place-name they were familiar with, not from a Greek text.
Alan James, noted expert on Brittonic place-names in the North, told me that
"Crawford and Holder pre-date Jackson's LHEB, and though R&S were a generation later, they paid inadequate attention to his treatment of the loss of terminations. And Sims-Williams since has confirmed Jackson's finding, there is no evidence whatever for such final syllables being 'maintained as a learned form', they were gone by mid-6th ct."
But if not Binchester, then where is C. Guinnion? Certainly, in the North, as all the surrounding battle site names are situated firmly in that region.
Well, we could opt for White Castle hillfort in East Lothian, or even Whitley Castle Roman fort in Cumbria. Both of these sites would fit the range of Arthurian battles, although, admittedly, Whitley Castle is awfully far west. And there are other 'white' hillfort names in Northumberland and Lowland Scotland, e.g. Whistcastle Hill, White Meldon, Whiteside Hill. A good example of one on Hadrian's Wall is Milecastle 14 at Whitchester, Witcestre 1221, Whitcestr 1244 (Ekwall), which was (according to Camden; see https://www.lakesguides.co.uk/html/LakesTxt/cam2p219.htm, https://www.visionofbritain.org.uk/place/9774/names, http://kepn.nottingham.ac.uk/map/place/Northumberland/Whitchester and p. 40 in https://trepo.tuni.fi/bitstream/handle/10024/78311/gradu02047.pdf?sequence=1) once called Winchester, perhaps having been influenced by the nearby Rudchester Roman fort, Vindobala.
"Beyond the Wall rises the river Pont; and running down by Fenwick-hall, the seat of the eminent and valiant family of the Fenwicks,* for some miles fronts the Wall, and had its banks guarded by the first Co∣hort of the Cornavii at Pons Aelii,* built by [the Em∣perour] Aelius Hadrianus, and now called Pont-Eland.* Here Henry the third concluded a peace with the King of Scots, in the year 1244. and near it the first Cohort of the Tungri lay at Borwick,* which the Notitia Provinciarum calls Borcovicus.* From Port-gate the Wall runs to Waltown, which (from the agreeableness of the name, and its twelve miles di∣stance from the eastern sea) I take to be the same Royal Borough which Bede calls Ad murum;* where Segebert, King of the East-Saxons was baptiz'd into the Christian Church byoPaulinus. Near this is a Fort call'd Old Winchester,* which I readily believe to be Vindolana;* where, as the Liber Notitiarum says, the fourth Cohort of the Galli kept a Frontier-garrison. Thence we went to Routchester, where we met with evident remains of a square Camp joyning close to the Wall. Near this is Headon, which was part of the Barony of Hugh de Bolebec; who, by the mother,* was descended from the noble Barons of Mont-Fichet, and had no other issue than daughters, marry'd to Ralph Lord Greistock, J. Lovell, Huntercomb, and Corbet."
Page 20 of this source -
- has more to say on Whitchester as Winchester:
"The earthwork which gave its name to Whitchester (or Winchester as it is called by Camden, in Speed's and other early maps, and occasionally in documents)... Winchester is certainly Whitchester... For the form Wynecestre see Northumberland Assize R. (S.S. Vol. lxxxviii.) P. 171."
"The earthwork which gave its name to Whitchester (or Winchester as it is called by Camden, in Speed's and other early maps, and occasionally in documents)... Winchester is certainly Whitchester... For the form Wynecestre see Northumberland Assize R. (S.S. Vol. lxxxviii.) P. 171."
And here is the relevant assize:
https://books.google.com/books?id=CtEKAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA171&lpg=PA171&dq=%22Wynecestr%22&source=bl&ots=a8irHfr9q4&sig=ACfU3U2FECvDFqhuMDgMrqx4h5Tf09aWFQ&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjBl4X514H-AhWaAzQIHXPbBVsQ6AF6BAgHEAM#v=onepage&q=%22Wynecestr%22&f=false
https://books.google.com/books?id=CtEKAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA171&lpg=PA171&dq=%22Wynecestr%22&source=bl&ots=a8irHfr9q4&sig=ACfU3U2FECvDFqhuMDgMrqx4h5Tf09aWFQ&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjBl4X514H-AhWaAzQIHXPbBVsQ6AF6BAgHEAM#v=onepage&q=%22Wynecestr%22&f=false
The problem with all of them is, of course, their English names. We can never prove that Guinnion underlies such. Badon is an exception to the norm, as the English name for this last was chosen as a substitute for the markedly pagan name from the Roman period (Aquae Arnemetiae). We are not justified in seeing in Guinnion a Welsh translation of an English 'white' place-name.
As Alan James puts it,
"The fact that somewhere called Vindo- in early Brittonic might have been called Hwit- in OE is not very persuasive, both words were used pretty commonly for a wide variety of relatively light-coloured features."
There is, fortunately, a good alternative for Guinnion - one I considered and dispensed with years ago because I was unaware of the location's connection with the Virgin Mary. I am referring to Carwinning in Ayrshire. [1]
Carwinning Ayrs (Dalry) CPNS p. 366 + personal, presumably saint’s, name -Winnian; cf.
Balfunning under bod, and note that Kilwinning Ayrs is adjacent.
We know that the Guinnion battle is the one in which Arthur carried the image of St. Mary on his shield. This is interesting, as
"Kilwinning was a Tironensian Benedictine monastic community, named after Tiron in the diocese of Chartres. The abbey was dedicated to Saint Winning and the Virgin Mary, and founded sometime between 1162 and 1188 with monks coming from Kelso."
The site is listed with good information at
"KILWINNING
Kilwinyn 1202, Pais. Reg.
Kylwynnyn 1315, RMS
Kylwynin 1320, RRS v
Kylvynnyne 1357, RMS
Kylwenyne 1426, Dryb. Lib.
SAINTS IN THIS PLACE-NAME
Findbarr, Bairrfind, Bairre, Uinniau, Finnén etc (ns) (certain)
Finnian m. Cairpre of Moville (probable)
Finnian m. Findloga of Clonard (probable)
Bairre m. Amairgin of Cork (maybe)
RELATIONSHIPS WITH OTHER PLACE NAMES
Is source of Kilwinning, Kilwinning, parish
MONASTERIUM SANCTAE MARIAE ET SANCTI WYNNYNI
monasterio Marie Sancte et Sancti Wynnyni 1364, RMS
SAINTS IN THIS PLACE-NAME
Mary, Mary the Blessed Virgin, Our Lady (ns) (certain)
Mary the Blessed Virgin (certain)
Findbarr, Bairrfind, Bairre, Uinniau, Finnén etc (ns) (certain)
Finnian m. Cairpre of Moville (probable)
Finnian m. Findloga of Clonard (probable)
Bairre m. Amairgin of Cork (maybe)
NOTES
This is the site of a Tironensian abbbey, founded in the twelfth century. But the name, coined with Gaelic 'cill', suggests that the abbey was built on an earlier ecclesiastical site. NMRS records the present thirteenth-century remains, destroyed shortly after the Reformation, and partially repaired for use as a parish kirk until 1775. Various other rebuilds and restorations have taken place since.
While the St. Mary foundation date is late, it is widely believed the bit about Mary at Guinnion is a later gloss.
Even better, there was a hillfort at Carwinning:
"Carwinning fort occupies a splendid situation, 658ft OD, on the W side of the valley of the Pitcon Burn, the flank of which is here particularly steep. Now much wasted, it consists of a central enclosure about 300ft in diameter, lying within the remains of an outer wall some 100ft away. A small central enclosure, about 100ft in diameter, formed by a stony mound, could be intrusive and might represent the robbed remains of a dun (R W Feachem 1963).
D Christison 1893
This fort, situated on a promontory with steep natural slopes on the N, E and S, consists of a vague central mound about 30.0m in diameter, surrounded by the remains of a much spread, grass-covered, stone wall 3.0m wide and 0.5m high were best preserved, and about 65.0m in diameter. On the W of the fort, varying between 34.0m and 40.0m from the inner wall, is a further wall 3.0m wide, with a maximum height of 1.2m ending on the natural slopes to N and S. For part of its length this wall is surmounted by a field wall. Running from the centre of the fort to the E slopes is a modern field bank 3.0m wide and 1.0m high. Quarrying has been started on the E face of the hill.
Though the NSA (1845) asserts that traces of a ditch may be seen at the foot of the hill, nothing was noted during investigation.
Visited by OS (DS) 4 September 1956
This fort is generally as described in the previous field report; the ramparts are now no more than 0.5m high, while the central mound is too denuded to be accurately surveyed. The quarrying mentioned above appears to have been abandoned.
Surveyed at 1:2500.
Visited by OS (JTT) 28 October 1964
The site of this robbed fort is being excavated in advance of quarrying. Excavation of several areas totalling some 1250 square metres showed (a) the central area, about 30.0m. in diameter (A on sketch plan by OS (DS) proved to be several cairns. One of these cairns consisted of a low mound of angular rubble enclosed by a badly robbed rubble kerb, covering a collared urn, a bronze chisel (?) and half a stone battle-axe, reused as a hammer. Overlying the N cairn is a wall of massive boulders, which may be part of a defensive enclosure on the hilltop. (b). The ramparts are all severely robbed and their construction is unclear. (c). In the interior of enclosure 'B', stone-packed post holes have been located, but no trace of their associated floor has survived. (d). The whole of the outer earthwork (c) appears to be a relatively recent field dyke and its apparent ditch proved to be a shallow scrape for bedrock.
T Cowie 1977.
Further work in 1978 showed that on the summit of the hill the remains of a single low Bronze Age cairn are overlain by the footings of a boulder wall, apparently associated with a posthole lined entrance, but no further evidence has emerged for the date of these features. The construction of the main defensive enclosure was clarified: a palisade slot embanked with rubble and/or soil appears to have existed in place of or replacing the palisade. Within the enclosure, but not certainly associated with the palisade, excavation revealed the stone-packed postholes of a porched circular structure, and in the same area traces of post-Medieval occupation. Along the course of what was superficially taken to be a robbed enclosure wall, were located the remains of a series of very shallow but severely eroded interrupted depression, up to 7m by 2m in extent but no more than 0.2m deep. In the subsoil, on their interior, was a series of shallow postholes running along the line of the low bank of upcast material and stone.
T Cowie 1978
Photographed from the air.
D A Edwards and E A Horne 1978
A further phase of quarrying operations has destroyed the NE part of this fort, and much of the interior detail established by excavation to be archaeological features. Only a roughly circular segment of this interior detail, some 0.4m high, survives, and this has no recognisable form. The enclosure works around the hill, visibly indicating more than one phase of activity, survive as described on the W and S. At the time of investigation active quarrying had once more ceased.
Revised at 1:2500.
Visited by OS (JRL) 28 February 1983.
The battle-axe is a grooved example of the Intermediate-Developed form. It is held in Glasgow Art Gallery and Museum, and has been petrologically attributed to group XXVIII (quartz dolerite from various sources in Scotland and Northern England).
T H McK Clough and W A Cummins 1988."
Now, it is true that a British Arthur of the 5th-6th centuries A.D. would not be fighting the invading English at Carwinning. But if Carwinning is the right site, we may have another intrusion into the battle-list of a place where the Dalriadan Arthur fought. I have suggested that Bassas, if Dunipace, was also a Dalriadan Arthur battle, as the Hill/Fort of the Shallow is between the two Miathi forts, and Arthur son of Aedan is said to have fallen fighting the Miathi. The Finnian in question at Kilwinning may be the saint under whom St. Columba studied. Columba was a contemporary of Arthur son of Aedan.
Alan James commented thusly on the idea that Guinnion could be Carwinning:
"Carwinning is an interesting possibility, not too difficult to derive from *cair-winnion. Winnian is identified by many scholars with the Vennianus who corresponded with Gildas, and also with Finnian of Moville (at the head of the Ards peninsula in Co Down, within sight of the Rhinns and easy sailing distance from Irvine) who in turn is identified as the tutor of Columba. And Thomas Owen Clancy has even proposed that he might also be the 'real' Ninian of Whithorn. If the Gildas and Columba links are valid, he would have lived in the early 6th century, he'd have been quite well-known in the time of HB, early 9th, so the place-name might have existed by then."
But might we salvage Carwinning for Arthur son of Sawyl of Ribchester? As it happens, yes, we can, if we are willing to allow for a battle against an enemy other than the English. Sawyl had married a daughter of a famous king of the Dal Fiatach, and the Dal Fiatach held the Ards peninsula mentioned by James in the context of Finnian of Moville. We might see in the Castello Guinnion battle an action on the Dal Fiatach's part against Strathclyde - an action in which Arthur took part. Granted, this is a bit of a stretch, but it is not at all impossible.
[1]
Andrew Breeze in https://sciendo.com/pdf/10.1515/scp-2016-0001 says the following about Guinnion:
I've not been able to track down when Clarkson made this identification. I show an independent online publication of the idea (albeit rejected in the context) dated THURSDAY, JULY 28, 2016 (https://mistshadows.blogspot.com/2016/07/the-arthur-of-history-chapter-three.html). The book containing that identification had been published sometime before the blog post. "The fort of Guinnion will not (as this writer previously thought) have been at Kirkgunzeon, near Dumfries in south-west Scotland; it was surely (as proposed by Tim Clarkson of Manchester) Carwinning, a minor defence three kilometres west-south-west of Kilbirnie, in south-west Scotland."
Note: there is no fort at Kirkgunzeon. The Corra Castle found there is of 17th century date.
Hence, I am not sure who should be given precedence as the originator. I have written to Dr. Clarkson and will supply the missing information here as soon as I manage to obtain it.
3/28/2023 - I received Dr. Clarkson's response:
"Nothing has been published yet on my Carwinning theory. Andrew Breeze is the first person to know about it and has cited it a couple of times. I first mentioned it to him a few years ago during an email conversation about locating Arthur's battles in South West Scotland. This is as far as I've gone with the theory. At one point I did consider putting it up on my blog but my entire blogging activity has been mothballed for a while."
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.