Well that's a politer reply than I probably merit, but I'd still take issue. It assumes some massive things, for example that the Mabinogion is a version of tales from the neolithic, that's like 4000+ years of oral transmission before it was written down. I think there's probably been a few stories involving spears in Britain, in times when we actually used spears. Why would it illustrate the only story about a spear thrower that we've got in this medieval welsh story? Where's the story about white horses to explain the Uffington horse, or the story for the Wilmington figure or the Cerne giant? Stories that explain ancient places (and I've read a few) seem to be short and sweet.

To appeal to the fact Bryn Walters is a Roman specialist (he's not "an academic" as such, he's not a PhD) doesn't cut much mustard when this figure (if it even exists) isn't from the Roman era. It's like when you see celebrities on adverts, just because someone's good at one thing doesn't mean we should assume they have expertise or credibility in another. False appeal to authority innit? (Lethbridge was honorary keeper of Anglo-Saxon antiquities at the Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology in Cambridge, but that doesn't make his Gogmagog figures any more credible.)

It's interesting that his write-up on the ARA site itself says he's a maverick and he's proud to be called that.

Anyway I'll shut up now I've made my stance, and I'll have my owl service on standby with some ketchup if you like.