#Aye. Ken it wis like this....with Tim Walker!

It's Friday again, and time for another addition to my historical background series. 

series image: Dunkeld Cathedral

I'm delighted that Tim Walker has become a contributor to my "#Aye. Ken it wis like this..." series and extend to him a hearty welcome, today.

A couple of years ago I was intrigued by the cover and title of his novel Abandoned, bought a copy and devoured it. I later read Ambrosius which I enjoyed even more.

Knowing very little about the end of the Roman period in Britain, his well-drawn characters made me deviate a little from my late first century A.D. Roman studies to dip into the post-395 A.D. era. Tim's research shone through but till then I had never encountered any connection to the 'King Arthur' legend - that was new to me.

Today Tim is sharing some of the background with us.....

A BLACK HOLE IN OUR HISTORY

Thank you, Nancy, for inviting me to guest on your blog.

In common with a recent guest author on this blog, Mary Anne Yarde, I too have a fascination for that black hole in British history – the Dark Ages. As with ‘Ripperology’, theories on King Arthur abound, each with a slightly different angle than what has gone before.

I’d like to share with you my impressions of historian Miles Russell’s new book, ‘Arthur and the Kings of Britain’. It’s a fascinating read (although couched in fairly solid, often turgid, academic-speak), that sets out the case for his bombshell conclusion that, “Arthur cannot have existed, at least in the form that he is represented.”

Russell has undertaken a careful study of the source material that fed into the two primary sources of the Arthurian legend, ‘The History of the Britons’ by Nennius (thought to have been the work of a number of authors in the ninth century) and Geoffrey of Monmouth’s, ‘The History of the Kings of Britain’ published in 1136. Nennius gives us the twelve battles of Arthur, and Monmouth provides the first telling of the King Arthur story.

Although these two sources have been dismissed by historians as at best, wildly inaccurate, and worst, full of invention (including Monmouth’s fantastic origin myth that Brutus of Troy founded the first British royal dynasty), Russell believes there is value to be extracted from understanding the nature of their source material and how they used it in building their narratives. He maintains that Geoffrey did not ‘make up’ his stories but that they have come from the confusion of multiple sources with conflicting character and place names that he has attempted to make sense of.

Because of these confusions there are repetitions and interwoven stories dating back to the pre-Roman period that bring Russell to the conclusion that, “Arthur is the ultimate composite character, inhabiting a world where everything that happens to him has already happened to other people, there being nothing in his story that is truly original.” His biggest victory over the Saxons at Mount Badon is more likely to have been an accomplishment of Ambrosius Aurelianus, whom historians believe is a more likely ‘real’ historical figure. In fact, much of the Arthur legend, Russell believes, is culled from a folk memory of the achievements of Ambrosius Aurelianus, a figure named in a number of early sources.

courtesy of Tim Walker 

Russell studies and compares his source material to gain a better understanding of Monmouth’s chronology of kings and their dramatic moments, piecing together a more probable history: “In establishing Arthur as a figure independent of Ambrosius Aurelianus, Arviragus and all the other hazily remembered kings of Britain, Geoffrey of Monmouth established a new chapter in British mythology.”

This is a fascinating book that attempts to understand the origins of the Arthur story and the process Monmouth went through to draw his character. Monmouth’s legacy is that he has preserved the earliest foundation myths of Britain, although his work needs interpreting and cannot be taken on face value as a credible record of historical figures and events. His book did catch the imagination of Medieval Europe and the legend was romanticised and further embellished. It is hard to believe that King Henry VII, in trying to justify his dynastic credentials, claimed descent from King Arthur!

But I doubt this book has killed off King Arthur. It will go on the shelf next to dozens of others, more will be written, and the legend will endure. One novel angle is that the reason historians and archaeologists have failed to find evidence of his existence is that they’ve been looking in the wrong place.

Perhaps there was a military leader called Arthur based at a fort on Hadrian’s Wall? Chris Flynn (The Bear, The Dragon and The Wolf) argues the case for a Northern Arthur who is a cavalry commander, possibly drawing on the influence of Sarmatian cavalry units once garrisoned at Hadrian’s Wall, who organise resistance to the spread of Anglo-Saxons in the north-east (www. botrbooks.com/blog). Also in this corner is Alistair Moffat, who puts forward the case for Arthur being a warlord based in the Scottish borderlands north of Hadrian’s Wall in the years after Roman evacuation, in his book, Arthur and the Lost Kingdoms. His case is based on literary sources, historical documents and interpretations of place names that builds a compelling and intriguing case for a Scottish Arthur. Add this to the Welsh chroniclers’ Arthur, and you have a folk hero claimed by three home nations.

What everyone can agree on is that it was a time of chaos and confusion as invaders took advantage of the withdrawal of Rome’s protective shield. Folk memories of kings and perhaps charismatic military leaders have been pulled together to create a legend. Clearly, there was organised resistance to invaders, and tales of bravery told by chroniclers, bards and poets and perhaps missing texts. Arthur is the embodiment of this oral tradition, offering us intangible glimpses of deeds in a period wedged between the gloating records of Roman and Anglo-Saxon conquerors.

***** 

In my historical series, A Light in the Dark Ages, I have created my own imagined history of the period starting with the departure of the Romans and building to the start of the Arthurian legend, loosely based on Geoffrey of Monmouth’s account - putting flesh on the mythical bones of early kings Constantine, Vortigern, Ambrosius Aurelianus and Uther Pendragon, lighting the way for the coming of ‘King Arthur’. Will we ever know what really happened?

Book one – Abandoned! – http://myBook.to/Abandoned

Book two – Ambrosius: Last of the Romans – http://myBook.to/Ambrosius

Book three – Uther’s Destiny – http://myBook.to/Uther

Author website: http://timwalkerwrites.co.uk

Nancy: Fabulous banner, Tim! 

Tim Walker is an independent author based in Windsor, UK. Tim’s background is in publishing, marketing, journalism, and more recently, charity work. He has recently completed a three-book historical series, A Light in the Dark Ages (set in the Fifth Century): Part one, Abandoned (started in 2015 but re-launched in 2018 as a second edition); followed in 2017 by Ambrosius: Last of the Romans, and the third installment, Uther’s Destiny, in March 2018.

His creative writing journey began in July 2015 with the publication of a book of short stories, Thames Valley Tales. In 2016 his first novel, a futuristic/dystopian thriller, Devil Gate Dawn was exposed on the Amazon Scout programme prior to publication. Both titles were re-launched with revised content, new covers and in paperback format in December 2016.

In January 2017 his first children’s book, The Adventures of Charly Holmes, co-written with his 12-year-old daughter, Cathy, was published (second book, Charly & The Superheroes, is due out in September 2018). In September 2017 he published a second collection of short stories – Postcards from London.

Author Website: http://timwalkerwrites.co.uk

Newsletter sign-up: http://eepurl.com/diqexz

Amazon Author Page: http://Author.to/timwalkerwrites

Facebook Page: http://facebook.com/timwalkerwrites

Twitter: http://twitter.com/timwalker1666

Thank you for coming today, Tim, and sharing your background information with us. Being a Roman enthusiast, I like the idea of Arthur being of Roman Descent but....as a Scot, and one who loves the books of Alistair Moffatt, I'm equally drawn to the idea of Arthur being from the  'southern Scotland'  of his era, and a charismatic leader rather than an actual 'King'. 

(ps. I thought I already had 'Uther's Destiny on my kindle tbr pile, since that's one I haven't read yet, but if i don't find it I'll be visiting Amazon later today!) 

Slainthe!