Who was Arthur or the leader at Badon in Gildas?

Who Was Arthur continued / part 3.

On Badon and Ambrosius:

I don't think anyone can be so sure that Gildas didn't or did mean Ambrosius lead at Badon. The evidence from Gildas is too difficult to be sure either way. Though there are some reasons for believing Gildas did mean Ambrosius was the leader:

(1) Arthur in the HB & HRB must be someone between Ambrosius and Constantine or Maelgwn in the DEB. Of the only mentioned Vortigern + "ancestors/grandfather" + Ambrosius + "progeny/descendents" + 5 tryants in the DEB Vortigern and the progeny and/or 5 tyrants can't be Arthur as they each are "castigated" and don't match Arthur's nature, so Ambrosius is the only one that could be Arthur (excepting Maelgwn's uncle).

(2) modest duce Ambrosius leader at Badon in Gildas may match magnanimous dux Arthur leader at Badon/Guinnion in Nennius.

(3) Ambrosius might not have been so old, the order of the "3 battles" and the dates/years are not so certain or easy to figure out. But some Welsh sources do say Arthur was an old man. Ambrosius sounds young when Gildas says he alone was left alive and his parents had been slain. Other old persons then were St Patrick (Nennius), Conan (Gildas).

(4) From the reading of different translations of Gildas no one can assume/assert that Gildas "does not" have Ambrosius as the leader at Badon, nor that he says he was, though the evidence would seem to favour/imply that Ambrosius was or must have been the leader. The theory that there is a gap between the Ambrosius and Badon is supposed to be untrue/uncertain.

All I see in the DEB is

Introduction:
her disobedience and subjection, (Claudius?)
her rebellion, (Boadicea?)
2nd subjection and dreadful slavery—
of her religion, persecution, holy martyrs, heresies of different kinds— (Lucius, Alban, Pelagian?)
of her tyrants, (Maximus)
her 2 hostile & ravaging nations— (Picts/Scots/Saxons?)
of her 1st devastation, (Scots/Picts)
her defence,
her 2nd devastation & 2nd taking vengeance— (Scots/Picts)
of her 3rd devastation, (Picts/Scots)
of her famine, and the letters to Agitius— (Aetius)
of her victory and her crimes— (Halleluyah/Germanus?) *
of the sudden rumour of enemies—
of her famous pestilence—
of her counsels— (Vortigern)
of her last enemy, far more cruel than the 1st— (Saxons)
of the subversion of her cities, and
of the remnant men that survived/escaped; (Ambrosius)
& finally the peace by God's will in these our times. ("final victory", Badon) *

Main 2 texts:
(1) "1st battle" under unnamed (section 20),
(2) "in the meanwhile... the poor remnants of our nation (to whom flocked ... our miserable countrymen ...), being strengthened by God, ... that they might not be brought to utter destruction, took arms under the conduct of Ambrosius Aurelianus, a modest man, who ... was ... alone ... left alive. His parents... had been slain." (Giles)
Or
"God gave strength to the survivors. Wretched people fled to them from all directions, and begged ... that they should not be altogether destroyed. Their leader was Ambrosius Aurelianus, a gentlemen who... alone ... had ... survived ... his parents... had ... been slain...."  (Korrel & Winterbottom/Bowman).
(section 25),
(3) "2nd battle":
"(and now) Ambrosius' degenerate progeny/grandchildren/descendants in (these) our day(s)... provoke to battle their conquerors, and by the goodness of our Lord obtain the victory" (Giles)
Or
"Under him (grandfather/ancestor Ambrosius) our people ... challenged the victors to battle. The Lord assented, and the battle went their way." (Korrel & Winterbottom/Bowman).
("2nd battle", end of section 25),
(4) "after this / from then on / from that time" "sometimes Britons won, sometimes enemy won" (start of section 26) ("the 44 yrs"?),
(5) "lasted uptill / (up) until" almost last slaughter of foes at Badon hill under unnamed leader ("3rd battle") (section 26),

(6) civil wars of Conan,
(7) so great a war against own countrymen of Cuneglas,
(8) Maelgwn deprived many tyrants & strong in arms,
(9) Maelgwn's uncle's previous courageous bands of soldiers whose countenances in battle were like lions.

If Giles' translation were correct then this can't mean that 4 was during or after 3, because the "after this" of 4 can't come after the previous "and now" of 3. The last part of the sentence after the comma about the "2nd battle" under the progeny may not be the main subject (which before the comma was Ambrosius) but may be just like an inserted side remark (it should be in brackets), and the "after this" is continuing on from before the comma in the previous sentence. So number 4 is continuing on about Ambrosius and so is during/under Ambrosius. Though the "until" between number 4 and number 5 makes it diffult to be sure whether it was under Ambrosius or his progeny or between them. Though it would seem to be part of the "after this" (4) coming before the "and now" (3).

In Winterbottom/Bowman & Korrel the leader in number 3 is Ambrosius, so the following 4 & 5 is surely Ambrosius too despite the "after this" and "until".

Anyway, Badon can only have been fought under either:
1 Germanus (but he can be because the 1st battle comes before Badon, unless the 1st battle matches Arthur's 1st one), or
2 Ambrosius, or
3 the unnamed father between "grandfather/ancestor" Ambrosius and his "grandchildren/descendants/progeny" (but I doubt this one), or
4 Ambrosius' progeny (but these are castigated and so doubtful), or
5 Maelgwn's uncle.
So we are left with Ambrosius or Maelgwn's uncle.

In the main text the "1st battle" before Ambrosius (DEB 20) sounds like the Halleluyah Victory of Germanus maybe (also in Bede)?

(5) Geoffrey of Monmouth said "Their names and acts are recorded in a book which Gildas wrote concerning the victory of Aurelius Ambrosius; and what is delivered in so bright a treatise, needs not to be repeated here in a meaner style." (HRB/DGB bk 4 chap 10, OEC pg 156).

(6) Bede has "1st victory of Ambrosius" which is similar to Arthur's 1st of battles?

Gildas' saying "From then on, victory went now to our countrymen, now to the enemy" matches Nennius'/Mark's 12 battles?

"Until Badon" of Gildas might match "Until Ida" of Nennius?

(True Gildas has sometimes enemy won, while the HB has 12 victories. But how do you know there were no draws or losses in between each of the 12 battles? There is no other place in Gildas that can match the 12 battles except Maelgwn's uncle. Besides which other similar descriptions to Gildas occur in other places like the HB on Urien & Guallauc which are also similar to Arthur's battles. Unless the "3 battles" in Gildas match Arthur's 3 x 3/4 battles in Nennius?

The only other place that can match the 12 battles is "provoke to battle their conquerors, and by the goodness of our Lord obtain the victory", which in Giles is under/during Ambrosius' progeny but in Winterbottom/Bowman & K... is udner/during Ambrosius due to differing translations of Gildas' Latin words.)

(2/7) Arthur leader of battles of the kings of the Britons in Nennius may match
"... the survivors. Wretched people fled to them from all directions, and begged ... that they should not be altogether destroyed. Their leader was Ambrosius"
or
"the poor remnants of our nation (to whom flocked ... our miserable countrymen ...)... took arms under the conduct of Ambrosius Aurelianus"
or
"... the survivors.... Their leader was Ambrosius Aurelianus"
or
"Under Ambrosius our people ... challenged the victors to battle"
in Gildas,
and may match "our people ... challenged the victors to battle",
and may match "sometimes Britons won, sometimes enemy won".
(Compare also the Round Table.)

(7) Ambrosius/Embres-guletic might match either Vortimer or Ermenric. Vortimer is the best Arthur candidate there is followed maybe by Aethlebert (though "Arthur was a dux not a king")? Emrys & Amr & Vortimer are similar. Arthur's name is very similar to the Welsh spellng of Vortimer, and Vortimer's 4 battles are similar to Arthur's 4 x 3 battles.

(6/7) Btw no Vortimer's battles *and* Arthur's battles in the DEB. So the 2 might be same?

(8) Arthur's victories by God/Cross/Christ/Mary in the HB (Nennius) & the AC/WA match with Gildas saying 'by God's will" (uncertain section), & "God gave strength" / "being strengthened by God" (Ambrosius section), & "by the goodness of the lord obtain the victory" / "the Lord ascented and the battle went their way" (Ambrosius or progeny section).

So Arthur or the leader of Badon in the Gildas' DEB must be either Ambrosius or Maelgwn's uncle.
Maelgwn's uncle sounds similar to Arthur, and Maelgwn similar to Mordred or Melwas.

See my paper 'Who Was Arthur' for more evidence on Ambrosius and other Arthur candidates. (Except I haven't added new bit on the uncle of Maelgwn in the DEB.)

Gildas doesn't say 44 yrs from Badon. It is not certain whether Gildas' words meant Badon 44 years after some event (the arrival of Saxons in Bede) or 44 years before Gildas' writing the DEB, and not certain whether Gildas' birthday (generation/period/times or year/month/day date or anniversary day/month date) was 44 years before Badon or in the generation/times/period/year/day/date of Badon or 44 yrs after Badon. Bede does seem to support that Badon was 44 yrs after arrival of Saxons, and Hergest has a period of 3 x 43 from Vortigern to Badon. I listed all the possible matches I've found for the 43/44 yrs in my blog article 'When Was Arthur?' One of the most intriguing matches is the 44 yrs of St Columba in the ASC 560 entry.

There is a dispute between the 44 yrs and the 150 yrs which are both in Gildas.

Reference diagram of combined 44 yrs theories:
Vortigern - arrival Saxons (bday?) - 44/150 yrs? - Badon (bday?) - 10/44 yrs - Gildas wrote (bday?) - Maelgwn died.

If Ambrosius was the leader of Badon then Ambrosius had adult grandchildren at the time of Nennius' writing the HB, which means either Badon was quite some time before the writing, or Ambrosius was fairly old at Badon.

Where was Arthur?
https://www.academia.edu/44354289/Narrowing_down_where_King_Arthur_was
12 Battles of Arthur Saxon Shore location theory
http://www.allempires.com/forum/ebook_view.asp?BookID=101

(Arthur's battles match either Saxon Short forts, or Vortimer's battles, or ASC battles from "Aylesford" to 500s/600s, see Who Was Arthur part 1.)

When was Arthur?
http://iwillnotbeassimilated.blogspot.com/2020/11/when-was-king-arthur.html

Who was Arthur?
https://www.academia.edu/44454010/Who_is_Arthur
Arthur's Origins (Who was Arthur missing bit, Who part 2)
https://2rbetterthan1.wordpress.com/2021/02/14/arthurian-origins/
Who was leader at Badon in Gildas? (Who was Arthur part 3)
https://iwillnotbeassimilated.blogspot.com/2021/04/who-was-arthur-or-leader-at-badon-in.html
 

-------------

Update:

I'm adding this bit to my blog post:

I've reviewed the evidences and I'm now sure that Ambrosius of the DEB matches Arthur of the HB, and that he is the leader of Badon in the DEB. Although the DEB doesn't name the leader of the one battle/siege of Badon it does name Ambrosius as the (only) leader of all the set of [12] battles as seen by these verses:

(2) "in the meanwhile... the poor remnants of our nation (to whom flocked ... our miserable countrymen ...), being strengthened by God, ... that they might not be brought to utter destruction, took arms under the conduct of Ambrosius, a modest man...." (Giles)
Or
"God gave strength to the survivors. Wretched people fled to them from all directions, and begged ... that they should not be altogether destroyed. Their leader was Ambrosius Aurelianus, a gentlemen ...." (Korrel & Winterbottom/Bowman).
(section 25),

(3) "Under him (grandfather/ancestor Ambrosius) our people ... challenged the victors to battle. The Lord assented, and the battle went their way." (Korrel & Winterbottom/Bowman).
(end of section 25),

The first verse (number 2) is clearly like the start of the HB battles section abot Arthur leader of battles of kings of Britons.

The second verse (number 3) likewise similar to same HB verse plus the HB saying victorious in all these battles. It also maybe is similar to the 1st victory of Ambrosius in Bede.

So I'm certain Ambrosius is the Arthur of the HB, and that the Badon in the DEB must be part of the set of battles of Ambrosius in section 25.

Of all the persons mentioned before, in and after sections 25 & 26 only Ambrosius can be the leader.

List of all the persons:
unnamed leader of "1st battle" (Germanus?)
Vortigern.
ancestors of Ambrosius progeny.
Ambrosius' parents.
remnant men that survived / survivors.
ancestor/grandfather Ambrosius.
unnamed father/son between Ambrosius & grandchildren.
an unnamed leader of Badon?
Maelgwn's unnamed uncle.
progeny/grandchildren of Ambrosius.
5 tyrants.

The DEB introduction also only has one event (the peace) after the survivors, it doesn't have Ambrosius' battle(s) and then Badon.

---------

Text of section 25 & 26 in original:

tempore igitur interueniente aliquanto, cum recessissent domum crudelissimi praedones, roborante deo reliquiae, quibus confugiunt undique de diuersis locis miserrimi ciues, tam audie quam apes alueari procella imminente, simul deprecantes eum tot corde et, ut dicitur, innumeris 'onerantes aethera uotis', ne ad internicionem usque delerentur, duce ambrosio aureliano uiro modesto, qui solus forte romanae gentis tantae tempestatis collisione occisis in eadem parentibus purpura nimirum indutis superfuerat, cuius nunc temporibus nostris suboles magnopere auita bonitate degenerauit, uires capessunt, uictores prouocantes ad proelium: quis uictoria domino annuente cessit.

(De postrema patriae victoria quae temporibus nostris Dei nutu donata est.)

ex eo tempore nunc ciues, nunc hostes, uincebant, ut in ista gente experietur dominus solito more praesentem israelem, utrum diligat eum an non: usque ad annum obsessionis badonici montis, nouissimaeque ferme de furciferis non minimae stragis, quique quadragesimus quartus (ut noui) orditur annus mense iam uno emenso, qui et meae natiuitatis est.

Rough translation of above text by Google Translate:

at the time, therefore, because of the tie after, when she had departed, the house of the most cruel of all pirates, the strength of God, a remnant, by which they have taken refuge from all sides about the different places of their most wretched fellow-countrymen, as they get older than bees hive a storm was imminent, was at the same time, begging for him with all our hearts, and, as is said, countless ': Load up the skies, offering up the prayers, so as not in the pit, as far as would be wiped out, under the leadership of a certain Ambrosius Aurelianus a discreet man, who is alone, by chance of the Roman nation, of so great a storm, a collision in which his parents and purple, and of course, neighbors, clothed most had survived this, and it is now, in our days an ancient, much to their hereditary goodness has degenerated, regained their strength, our victory, in that ye provoke us to fight! who is the victory of God 's favor submitted.

(The final times for our country's success has been given the nod.)

from that time even now the natives, and now their enemies, prevailed, so that in the Church the nations will know by experience the lord of the manner customary to the present Israel, as to whether he loves Him or not: as far as to the year of the siege of Mount Badon, the newest facts about the gallows, not the least of Carnage, and who, these forty the fourth (that I know) he began to speak, and the year in the month of one of the decisions, of my nativity, and who it is.

Rough word by word and sentence/verse-part by sentence/verse-part translation:

tempore igitur interueniente aliquanto,
time therefore tie more,
(for sometime then because of the tie,)

cum recessissent domum crudelissimi praedones,
and/whenyou retired house ruthless thepirates,
(when they left home relentless pirates,)

roborante deo reliquiae,
invigorating God survivors
(God's strength remains,)

quibus confugiunt undique de diuersis locis miserrimi ciues,
which withfled round about sundry/diverse locations unhappy citizens, 
(which they have taken refuge in various places would be very miserable on every side from the citizens,)

tam audie quam apes alueari procella imminente,
and Iused and bees hive squall overhung,
(as they got older than a bee hive threatening storm,)

simul deprecantes eum tot corde et, ut dicitur,
together weencouraged him to/all heart and, and said,
(at the same time begging for im with all our hearts and, as is said,)

innumeris 'onerantes aethera uotis',
countless 'load aether/air complying',
(numerous loaded the air with his wishes,)

ne ad internicionem usque delerentur,
donot to nosurvivors and destroyed,
(not to go to the pit as far as would be wiped out,)

duce ambrosio aureliano uiro modesto,
leader Ambrosius Aurelianus man modest,
(Ambrosius Aurelian was a modest man,)

qui solus forte romanae gentis tantae
and/which only chance Roman thenation great

tempestatis collisione occisis in eadem
tempest/weather collision afterkilling in thesame

parentibus purpura nimirum indutis superfuerat,
parents purple namely dressed survived,

(the collision of killed the men of the nation, of so great a tempest, the Roman, who alone, by chance of course, clad in purple, and in which his parents had survived this,)

cuius nunc temporibus nostris suboles
which now seasons our suckers

magnopere auita bonitate degenerauit,
great grandfather/life/and goodness degenerated,

(much of which is now in the time of our main stock of the goodness of their hereditary degenerated,)

uires capessunt, uictores prouocantes ad proelium:
strength safety, victory provoking to battle:
(regained their strength our victory in that ye provoke unto battle:)

quis uictoria domino annuente cessit.
and/who thevictory master/lord motioned retired.
(who won the favourback.)

(De postrema patriae victoria quae temporibus
(About final country victory what seasons

nostris Dei nutu donata est.)
our God/the nod donated itis.)

((The final times for our country's success has been given the nod.))

ex eo tempore nunc ciues, nunc hostes, uincebant,
from it time now thecitizens, now theenemy, overcame,
(from that time even now the natives, and now their enemies, prevailed,)

ut in ista gente experietur
and in will nation taste

dominus solito more praesentem israelem,
master/lord asusual more present Israel,

(the owner of these things in the usual way as in the present to the nation of Israel will know by experience,)

utrum diligat eum an non:
whether love him or not/I:
(whether they love him of not:)

usque ad annum obsessionis badonici montis,
and to year siege Badonic mount(ain),
(as far as to the year of the siege of Mt Badon,)

novissimaeque ferme de furciferis non minimae stragis,
andthenewest almost about/of gallows/villian/rogue/thief/wild/you/it not/I small carnage,
(... not the smallest and the newest facts about the massacre,)

quique quadragesimus quartus (ut noui)
who fortieth fourth (and thenew)

orditur annus mense iam uno emenso,
hebegan year themind/month/measure already one decisions,
(those forty fourth (and new) began the year with one month has elapsed,)

qui et meae natiuitatis est.
and/which and my nativity itis.
(and one of my nativity of it.)

Reply to David Rohl's unfair/untrue treatment of me

Everyone bear witness to David Rohl's mean and unfair/untrue treatment of me on facebook. He can influence the two admins to block me from posting in the two groups on his New Chronology, but he can't block me from posting and commenting on his untrue/unfair claims in my own pages/blogs/groups.

Quote of his last reply:

"Sean, you seriously need to back off, do some proper study using reputable sources, listen to what other people/scholars have to say, stop your non-sensical musings, grow up, and just cease your ramblings. * If I see you here again, I will ask the admins to remove you permanently. As for the New Chronology former Yahoo group, it is up to them what they do with you. I have seen what you have written and you had better be careful. The folk on there are high-quality scholars with really serious research and knowledge to contribute to the group. They don't respond to your posts because they know that most of what you contribute is nuts. Your posts are siting there in a parallel universe of ignorant and childish fantasy. You need to find yourself an alternative-universe group that may accept you ... but even those people will tire of your posts after a while."

(See previous and other replies of his to my posts in the Rohl NC group page on facebook.)

Being told to back off really means I am not allowed to publish any of my own information or ideas on anything, and allowing them to rule.
How can I back off when whenever I post or comment or reply all I ever get is mean negative or else mean silence/nothing?
How come yous don't all have to back off posting all your outrageous anti-truth anti-biblical wrongs/lies? So yous are all free to keep promoting wrong/lies and I am not allowed to answer them?

I have done plenty of proper studies.
What specific things do I need to study?

I have used numerous sources covering a whole spectrum range of . I have used plenty of sources considered to be"reputable". And just because a source is or isn't considered "reputable" or "disreputable" by the elite or others doesn't necessarily mean it really is, as they may be lying or wrong.
Name any of my sources?
What sources of mine are not ruptable?
Name what sources are reputable, and what reputable sources you think I should study.

I always do "listen to what other people/scholars have to say", but if I think the evidences don't agree with them I don't have to accept or agree with their sayings.
Rather people won't listen to me.

Things I posts are not "non-sensical musings"
What things specificall are "non-sensical"?

"grow up": I may not be perfect and I may have a few faults and flaws, but most of the blame/fault is others not mine.

"cease your ramblings":
They are not ramblings.
What specific things are ramblings?
I have just as much right to post my evidences as you/others do.

My posts are not ignorant or childish or fantasy or nuts.
Prove to me any specific thing is such.

Notice all of Rohl's post doesn't deal with any specific matches details evidences, but only vague mere words attacks. By avoiding fair discussion of specific matches details they cleverly block the tru evidences of ours being posted.

Note that Rohl ignored a challenge to an open fair publlic (or private debate) on any topic like Joseph in Egypt or Moses in Egypt. Didn't decline or reply but totally ignored. So it is not me but them who are really the worse, because they don't want to give my evidences a fair hearing and consideration but they want to supress us and they are not interested in any evidences of our because they are only interested in pushing their own agenda/interests.

People are always using force and banning and blocking and other power and control and persecution tactics to block us from being able to speak/write/say/do truth/evidence/good so they can keep ruling and controling.
How many forums and groups and email contacts have unfairly meanly/hearshly blocked/banned me: Historum, Arthurnet, Rohl, Peter Sullivan, my mother, Lawyer Michael Hoffman-Body, Christianity Board, Stirpes, Casebook, Skadi forum, CFFD, CFF, Acts, etc etc etc.
How many people blocking me from everything I try to do.
How many forcings being done to hinder our ability: fluoridation.
How many persecutions: noise.
How many other evils like spammers, immodest adverts/pictures everywhere.

"The folk on there are high-quality scholars with really serious research and knowledge to contribute to the group.

They may and/or may not really be high quality.
I might not be so low-quality asyou imply.
This is an unfair/untrue insult and treament and exclusivist elitism blocking "nonelite".

"They don't respond to your posts because they know that most of what you contribute is nuts."

No one has said that that is the reason no one responds. It might be but there are plenty of other possible reasons too.
And even if it is their (not the) reason, it doesn't mean it is true/right, as like you and many others they may be unfairly/untruly or wrong or lying about my or their evidences.

How can I or they or others learn if they don't pick some specific matches details examples and fairly discuss them and allow either or us to prove or disrove whether they are "nuts"?

People are always making me out to be bad, but they never admit the far worse things being/been done to me are bad.
People unfairly/untruly make me out to be all wrong/dumb/bad/sick, and themselves to be all right/good. How can I be good when its all negatives and not positives?

I challenge Rohl or anyone else to a fair debate on any topics related to Joseph in Egypt and Moses in Egypt. Because only by discussing the matches details evidences matters, not just all these clever mere words agruments and insinuations attacks.

I challenge you that you can't disprove my Jacob = Khufu/Cheops match.
And I challenge anyone on numerous more Egyptian & Biblical matches.

(In time placements, I roughly agree with Rohl on Moses and David and Shishak. But I disagree with him on Abraham and Joseph (in Egyptian and/or in Mesopotamian.)

In places placements we majorly clash on the placements of Eden, Goshen, Ramses, the "Red Sea", Mt Sinai, Tomb of Jesus.

To prove that Rohl is not all superior and right and I am not all just inferior or wrong or no value see my proof that Rohl has no Joseph in his 12th dynasty here http://earlywritings.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=7876

all day every day mean cruel hell wrongs

God is unjust mean and cruel.
This regime/elite are mean cruel unjust slavers.
Everyone is mean cruel unjust.
Christians don't care.
The neighbours are mean and unjust.

Because they all refuse to stop doing long ongoing constant daily mean cruel hell wrongs to me, and because no one cares a stuff.

No one can blame me here or on judgment day, because I can not do anything when suffering such mean cruel hell wrongs all day every day.

This ringing sound in my flat is still going constantly all day every day (for last 1-3 yrs so far) and everyone still purposely refuses to stop it. They know they are forcing me to keep suffering it all day every day for rest of my "life".

This fluoridation is still being forced in me every meal every day and the purposely refuse to stop it.

And lots of other hell wrongs too.

If I could kill my self I would. But unfortunately I have no way except ways which are too horrible like sticking my finger in the power meter.

I hope you all get a big buzz making me suffer mean daily cruel hell wrongs and slavery.

Some day in centuries to come you will all have it all come back on your heads, even if there is no God. I know you don't believe me but it is certain even if there is no God.

Some day I will die and you won't be able to make me suffer hell anymore.

This hell can't keep going on forever without me sooner or late ending up dead or in mental ward or in prison or similar. (And if I end up in court I have over 50 pages of evidences and proofs prepared.)

I can not and will not suffer hell in silence. And I will never submit or stop opposing you because you won't stop doing mean cruel wrongs.