paper, as clearly establishing this proposition, although the inferences we draw from it are not the same:-- “Thus, in the north, Ceaster usually means York, the Roman capital of the province; as when the ‘Chronicle’ tells us that ‘John succeeded to the bishopric of Ceaster;’ that ‘Wilfrith was hallowed as Bishop of Ceaster;’ or that Æthelberht the Archbishop died at Ceaster.’ In the south it is employed to mean Winchester, the capital of the West Saxon kings and overlords of all Britain; as when the ‘Chronicle’ says that ‘King Edgar drove out the priests at _Ceaster_ from the Old Minster and the New Minster, and set them with monks.’ So, as late as the days of Charles II., ‘to go to town’ meant, in Shropshire, to go to Shrewsbury, and in Norfolk, to go to Norwich. In only one instance has this colloquial usage survived down to our own days in a large town, and that is at Chester, where the short form has quite ousted the full name of Lega Ceaster. But in the case of small towns, or unimportant Roman stations, which would seldom need to be mentioned outside their own immediate neighbourhood, the simple form is quite common, as at Caistor in Norfolk, Castor in Hants, and elsewhere.”[45] I must explain very carefully the difference between Mr. Allen’s point of view and my own. While I see the true English name in the English word “Ceaster,” and look upon its prefixes as merely added to distinguish one “Ceaster” from another--just as in “East Bergholt” (Suffolk) and “West Bergholt” (Essex), or in the widely separated “East Grinstead” and “West Grinstead” of Sussex, we recognise the original name of each village as “Bergholt” and “Grinstead” respectively--Mr. Allen, by the absolutely converse process, would see the true English name in the full compound, such as “Glewanceaster,” whether formed by simply Anglicising a Latin “_Glevum castrum_” (see p. 423), or, as he elsewhere holds (p. 434), by using the “Romanised title alone, with the addition of ‘Ceaster.’” He consequently sees, in the simple “Ceaster,” not the original form, but a corruption, a “colloquial usage:”-- “As a rule, each particular Roman town retained its full name (?), in a more or less clipped form, for official uses; but in the ordinary colloquial language of the neighbourhood they all seem to have been described as ‘Ceaster’ simply, just as we ourselves habitually speak of ‘town,’ meaning the particular town near which we live, or, in a more general sense, London.”[46]