So now we are suggesting that the kings of Alt Clut had a pony express system in place? I don't believe they did.A pony express rider did it as well 100 miles in a day - overland and in some of the worst country-side possible in the rain. I already said that "Caw was rich enough to own more than one horse" - so if you place a horse at the half-way point, you could average 50 miles on horse #1 and then next 50 miles horse #2, and arrive in a single day.
The standard horse in these parts is the fell pony. Tough, small mounts that were used by the Border reivers until the 17th century. I doubt that early medieval northern kings had thoroughbred chargers.
Incidentally, where are you arriving to?
Can you give me a proper reference please? I've tried, but can't find anything and, if you are right I'd really like to know about it for my own research.As for the coinage that exist in the vaults of the British museum - the existent coins - they were not exactly "struck" or "minted" as we would call it. Coroctius took a Roman coin and struck his own name on top of it.
The only problem being that there is no archaeological evidence (so far as I am aware) for any issues of any post-Roman coinage in Britain before the seventh century. Strangely, there are reasons to think that coinage was still in use but I'd still like to know your source for these assertions.Many of the coins of the post Roman period of the local kings are re-strikes, it was far cheaper than striking and minting new. Only powerful kings or emperors would go for the cost of minting new.
No - you said some Dark Age ceramics had been found (which I assume means B Ware or ARS some sort). You asserted there was a British monastery there by the sixth or seventh century but gave no other evidence for that. Ine's actions are only evidence of the eighth century.Answer given later in former post:
You can't just keep making unevidenced assertions. How do we know what the grains of truth are?"the Lives (both of them - which counts as a source) is not totally historically accurate, but it is the only sources we have - some of them have some grains of truth. Such as Gildas built a hermitage near the river at Glastonbury."
An abbey is a religious institution presided over by a abbot or abbess.A hermitage can be considered an abbey
So do you now say Gildas was a hermit?
They could also be endowed as de novo establishments. If you want to assert that Glastonbury was a religious community before Ine, you have to produce some contemporaneous documentary evidence for that, or some archaeological evidence. I don't think you can do that.- in the terms of the spiritual retreats of the Desert Fathers of 300 AD. It was the shared hermitage that evolved into the first monastic communities -> which become abbeys.
But even if that is right, what you appear to be saying here is that all the stories of individual deeds might be rubbish, but there was a city which was sacked. Yet it is the equivalent detail about individuals in the Life of Gildas which you are happy to accept as true?It is easy to forget that "The Illiad" dates to 7th to 8th Century BC - yet it refers to events and locations 11th to 12th Century BC. That is like 300 years after the collapse of Troy VII, found by a treasure hunter in the 19th Century using "The Illiad" as a treasure map. No, there was no Trojan horse. No there was no Judgement of Paris and all the other mythical things. However, the city was sacked by "someone" - there is 50% to 80% chance that the city was sacked by the Mycenaean Greeks and 99% chance that the Greeks wrote down the oral traditions of its sacking in "The Illiad".
Can you not see what you are doing here? You are accepting anything which is technically plausible as solid fact but anything which isn't technically plausible as fantasy. That isn't a logical position.I will use example - - Saint so-and-so in his saint's life had a silver chalice stolen from him by a bandit, the saint stopped the bandit with a miracle from god (not that I believe in such nonsense), and converted him to Christianity effecting its return.
I'll give you an example too.
I am 170 years old and I was born in Manchester.
So what do you think:-
1. That I am talking rubbish?
2. That I am telling the truth?
3. That I must be talking rubbish about my age but must be telling the truth about being born in Manchester?