'Ardrey delivers a bombshell... fascinating stuff'
- Los Angeles Times

'A brilliant piece of detective work... enthralling'
- Scots Magazine

Jun 26, 2016

9th June 2016

Arthur and Moses

If I had been an Israelite and someone had parted the Red Sea to let me go safely across I think I would have remembered that, and not gone gamboling about a Golden Calf ten minutes later.

But some people take more convincing than others.


Merlin's teacher was said to be a man called Blaise.

This is just a corrupt version of the Gaelic for Blasphemer - Blaispheum.

This makes sense if Arthur was Arthur Mac Aedan, a Scot.

If he was not Arthur Mac Aedan it is a non-sense name.



View and add comments >>
Jun 12, 2016

5th June 2016 #2

History Deniers and The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance.

My last blog was more accessible than the one before but...

...let's cut to the chase.

It was said in The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance - "When the legend becomes fact, print the legend."


The legend of Arthur has become fact. We should print the facts.

Arthur (c.559-596CE) and Merlin (c.540-c.618CE) were real historical figures. 

If you disagree - perhaps you are a history denier?

View and add comments >>
Jun 12, 2016

30th May 2016

There is no historical Arthur in the south, far less a Glein battlefield.

In the north, we have an historical Arthur and a Glein battlefield and they are self-corroborating.

The Glein Challenge 

If you Google-search 'Arthur and Glein' you will not be able to find a sensible location for the legendary Arthur’s legendary battle of Glein. (The battle of the River Glein is the first Arthur-battle on the battle-list of Nennius.)

The battle of the River Glein only makes sense with reference to Arthur Mac Aedan.

Arthur Mac Aedan’s father Aedan won the battle of Delgon in 574CE.

In Finding Arthur I identified the Delgon battlefield as Ealain da Ghallagan, West Loch Tarbert, Argyll, Scotland.

In 574CE Arthur/Arthur Mac Aedan was about sixteen years old and about to embark on the military career that would make him famous.

Given the battle of the River Glein is the first Arthur-battle on the battle-list of Nennius it is reasonable to suppose, if the battles on the list are in chronological order, that Arthur was relatively young when it was fought. 

(I have shown in Finding Arthur that the battles on the battle-list of Nennius were fought in Chronological order.)

I was unable to find a single, sensible location for the River Glein battlefield when I was writing Finding Arthur.

I came to the conclusion that there was no one single battle of the River Glein. I concluded that as Arthur was a young man, enjoyng his first independent command, he was probably only in charge of mopping-up operations in the aftermath of Delgon, and that, consequently, the reference to the battle of the River Glein should properly be understood as the battles of the rivers and the glens.

I looked everywhere except one place, right under my nose.

In 2014 a German scholar, Kurt Leibhard, following-up on my work, found the answer.

I had been right that the young Arthur had been engaged in mopping-up after Delgon, but not that this involved a guerrilla campaign fought by generic rivers and in generic glens.

Kurt Leibhard found the battlefield of the River Glein two kilometres from Arthur Mac Aedan's father's Delgon battlefield (which I had located at Ealain da Ghallagan).

Two kilometers from Delgon-Ealain da Ghallagan is Abhainn Gillean – that is, the River Gillean.

The names River Glein and River Gillean are similar in the extreme, if not synonymous.

The location, smack bang next to Aedan’s Delgon, fits perfectly.

The timing, immediately after Delgon, when Arthur was young, and so unlikely to be in command in a great battle and more likely to be in command in a follow-up battle, clearly makes sense.

The questions, who; where; when; why? all have answers if the River Glein is Abhainn Gillean.

This is self-corroborating evidence.

This evidence is too much of a coincidence to be mere chance.

I challenge everyone to come up with a better Glein battlefield.

View and add comments >>
Jun 4, 2016
1st May 2016

Why Scotland should be independent and why Scotland should not be independent.

Warner Bros 'King Arthur' trilogy, the first film of which will be released in March 2017, will atrract tourists to Tintagel and Glastonbury but not to Scotland unless Scotland does... something.


Tintagel has no historical Arthur.

Tintagel is only connected with Arthur because Geoffrey of Monmouth, who wanted to curry favour with his patron who owned the place, wrote about Tintagel it in his Arthur blockbuster, The History of the Kings of Britain.

Check English Heritage’s website – the whole tourist industry of the Tintagel area is based on this fiction.


Glastonbury too has no historical Arthur.

Glastonbury is only connected with Arthur because the monks of Glastonbury needed money to repair their monastery after it burned down in the late 12th century, and so they said they had ‘discovered’ Arthur’s grave. Arthur brought tourists (pilgrims) and tourists brought money.

Check out Glastonbury’s website - Glastonbury's whole tourist industry is based on this scam.


Unlike Tintagel and Glastonbury Scotland has an historical Arthur - Arthur Mac Aedan (c.559-596CE).

Unlike Tintagel and Glastonbury, Scotland no Arthur-tourist industry. 

If Scotland was populated by Americans, something would have been done about this by now.

This is why Scotland should be independent and this is also why Scotland should not be independent.

We should do something about this.



View and add comments >>
Jun 4, 2016

16th May 2016

Where is Avalon?

Avalon is said to be an island "set in the western sea" where Arthur was taken after his death.

These are the essentials. You can forget all that Arthur is not-dead and is coming back stuff - we are talking of history here, not of the supernatural.

I say Iona was Avalon.

Iona is set in the Western Sea and was the burial place of the historical Arthur Mac Aedan’s family.  

There is a fair wheen of other evidence (anent the name, the church and the women who took Arthur to Avalon, for example) but I am sticking to the essentials here.

If anyone knows of a more likely Avalon than Iona, let me know.

Here are three alternatives:

Oxford Dictionary of Celtic Mythology – “… [Avalon] usually thought to lie in the western seas but sometimes identified with Glastonbury.” Note that ‘but’. That ‘but’ is there because Glastonbury is inland; that is, Glastonbury is not an island. This is usually explained by claiming that Glastonbury was marshier then than it is now – but this is bunkum. Besides, Glastonbury has no Arthur, far less a reason why any hypothetical Arthur might have been buried there.

Geoffrey Ashe in his The Discovery of King Arthur says “… the real Avalon is in Burgundy where Arthur’s career ends...” but “...his remains might have been brought back later for re-interment in [Glastonbury].” Glastonbury, Geoffrey Ashe says, "Glastonbury was not far from being an island early in the Christian era, when the water level was different.”  Note that “not far from being an island”. That is, Glastonbury was not an island. Not everyone is as honest as Geoffrey Ashe. Remember, Glastonbury has no ‘Arthur’. Geoffrey Ashe’s Arthur is a man called Riothamus who fought and died in France.

The estimable Stuart McHardy in his The Quest for Arthur says “...there is a good location for Avalon [in Scotland] within the environs of the [River] Forth… the Isle of May…” Besides the fact that the Isle of May is in the eastern, not the western sea there is nothing to connect it with an historical Arthur. On the same page Stuart McHardy says “we have a model [for the burial of Arthur] in Scottish historical practice in the Isle of Iona.”  Like W.F. Skene, Queen Victoria’s Historiographer Royal, who came so close so often, Stuart McHardy hears the echoes of the evidence but does not go on to make, what I think is, the obvious connection - Iona is Avalon.

In my book Iona was not a model for Avalon, Iona is Avalon - it is an Occam ’s Razor thing.

View and add comments >>
Jun 4, 2016

19th May 2016

Merlin's Grave - Drumelzier-Dunipace not Stobo (Duh!)

On page 125 Tim writes about the Scottish writer, George Chalmers. In his Caledonia (1807) Chalmers doubted that Merlin’s grave was at Drumelzier-Stobo, observing that Drumelzier-Stobo did not lie close to the heartland of Strathclyde, which is where he placed the Merlin legend’s origins.

I think Chalmers was right about Drumelzier-Stobo not being in the right place.

I 'found' another Drumellzier, Drumelzier-Dunipace, or, at least, I connected it with Merlin (the people who live there already knew it was there)- see Finding Merlin. 

Not only does Drumelzier-Dunipace lie close to the heartland of Strathclyde; it is also, as the Vita Merlini Silvestris says it is, 30 miles from Glasgow - Drumelzier-Dunippace is where it should be if it is the place where Merlin was buried.

Just as I said in my Where is Avalon? blog 16th May 2016 - people come so close and then miss the obvious. Of course, it may be, that Chalmers simply did not know about Drumelzier-Dunipace. 

View and add comments >>
Jun 4, 2016

19th May 2016

Merlin: A Medieval Legend and its Dark Age Origins by Tim Clarkson

I read Tim Clarkson’s Merlin: A Medieval Legend and its Dark Age Origins with interest, it is especically good on the medieval legend bit. 

As for the origins bit, Tim and I disagree a bit.

For me, once the obvious fiction is recognised and put to one side the historical Merlin can be seen to be a man of the north, a man of Scotland, plain and simple.

As I understand Tim's Merlin he gives more weight to the southern, the Welsh sources. 

We also disagree about whether Merlin was a druid of the old way (me) or a Christian (Tim).

These are matters for antother day.

For now, I say again, the evidence, I repeat the evidence proves that Merlin was a man of the north - an historical figure.

The only reason people say he did not exist in history or that, if he did exist in history, he was of the south is becauase thet have not looked at the evidence. 

Worse, they have looked at the evidence, noted that it pointed north and decided to run with the traditional, convenient, fictional / southern Merlin.

In my book Merlin is an inconvenient truth, especially for Christians... but then, as I have just said, that is a matter for another day.

For now, I am pleased to have an ally in the Merlin was real and of the north argument.

View and add comments >>