Decision Time: An Arthur of the Sixth Century or a Ghost from the Second or Third?

          Dunipace, Scotland, Site of

          Arthur's Bassas Battle in the

          Territory of the Maeatae

          

So, after over 3 decades of Arthurian research, it has come down to two possibilities: the Arthur of British legend was a sub-Roman war-leader, probably based on Hadrian's Wall,  OR he was the ghost of the late 2nd or early 3rd century Roman officer L. Artorius Castus. 

If the latter, I have to use my proposed ARM.GENTES (armed tribes) reading for the lacuna on the Castus memorial stone.

But here's the thing: except for Badon (which has long been thought to be an intrusion into the Historia Brittonum list and is the only demonstrably English place-name present), all the Arthurian battles of the HB are exactly where we would expect Castus to have fought on a major northern campaign either under Ulpius Marcellus or under the Emperor Severus.  Badon as Buxton is quite far south for Castus and we can't account for a battle there in the 2nd-3rd centuries.

Camlan, though, remains the main sticking point. And I'm doing some more serious thinking on that problem.

SO HERE IS THE QUESTION I NEED TO ASK MYSELF: IF THE BATTLES, MINUS BADON, PERFECTLY ACCORD WITH LOCATIONS CASTUS MIGHT WELL HAVE FOUGHT AT, HOW CAN I CLAIM THAT A DARK AGE FELLOW FOUGHT IN EXACTLY THE SAME PLACES?

I will be deciding which way to go over the next few days, and that decision will determine the content of my final Arthurian nonfiction book.