The Dark Ages:
The time of
King Arthur.
By Mary Anne Yarde
1846 William John Thoms, a British writer,
penned a letter to The Athenaeum, a British Magazine. In this letter, he talked
about “popular antiquities.” But instead of calling it by its common name, he
used a new term — folklore.
What did Thoms mean by this new word? Well,
let’s break it down. The word folk referred to the rural poor
who were for the most part illiterate. Lore means instruction.
So folklore means to instruct the poor. But we understand it as verbal
storytelling. Forget the wheel — I think storytelling is what sets
us apart. We need stories, we always have and we always will.
The Dark Ages is, I think, one of the most
fascinating eras in history. However, it does not come without challenges. This
was an era where very little was recorded in Britain. There are only a handful
of primary written sources. Unfortunately, these sources are not very reliable.
They talk of great kings and terrible battles, but something is missing from
them. Something important. And that something is authenticity. The Dark Ages is
the time of the bards. It is the time of myths and legends. It is a period like
no other. If the Dark Ages had a welcoming sign it would say this:
“Welcome to the land of folklore. Welcome to the land of King
Arthur.”
 |
| The King Arthur statue at Tintagel. The statue is called Gallos, which is Cornish for power. The sculpture is by Rubin Eynon |
Who was the real King Arthur?
Throughout the years there have been many
arguments put forward as to who King Arthur was, what he did, and how he died.
England, Scotland, Wales, Brittany and France claim Arthur as their own. Even
The Roman Empire had a famous military commander who went by the name of Lucius
Artorius Castus. There are so many possibilities. There are so many
Arthurs. Over time, these different Arthurs became one. The Roman Artorious
gave us the knights. The other countries who have claimed Arthur as their own,
gave us the legend.
We are told that Arthur and his knights
cared, for the most part, about the people they represented. Arthur was a good
king, the like of which has never been seen before or after. He was the perfect
tool for spreading a type of patriotic propaganda and was used to great effect
in the centuries that were to follow. Arthur was someone you would want to
fight by your side. However, he also gave ordinary people a sense of belonging
and hope. He is, after all, as T.H. White so elegantly put it, The Once and Future King. If we believe in the legend, then we are assured that
if Britain’s sovereignty is ever threatened, Arthur and his knights will ride
again. A wonderful and heartfelt promise. A beautiful prophecy. However, there
is another side to these heroic stories. A darker side. Some stories paint
Arthur in an altogether different light. Arthur is no hero. He is no friend of
the Church. He is no friend to anyone apart from himself. He is arrogant and
cruel. Likewise, history tells us that the Roman military commander, Lucius
Artorius Castus, chose Rome over his Sarmatian Knights. He betrayed them and
watched as Rome slaughtered them all. It is not quite the picture one has in
mind when we think of Arthur, is it? It is an interesting paradox and one I
find incredibly fascinating.
King Arthur and Edward III
However, Arthur, to many people is a hero.
Someone to inspire to. This was certainly true for Edward III. Edward was
determined that his reign was going to be as spectacular as Arthur’s was. Edward believed in the stories of Arthur and his Knights. He had even started to have
his very own Round Table built at Windsor Castle. Edward also founded The Order of
the Garter— which is still the highest order of chivalry that the Queen can
bestow. Arthur, whether fictional or not, influenced kings.
 |
| Edward III |
So how do we separate fact from fiction?
In our search for Arthur, we are digging up
folklore, and that is not the same as excavating relics. We have the same
problem now as Geoffrey of Monmouth did back in the 12th Century when he
compiled The History of the Kings of Briton. His book is now
considered a ‘national myth,’ but for centuries his book was considered to be
factually correct. So where did Monmouth get these facts? He borrowed from the
works of Gildas, Nennuis, Bede, and The Annals of Wales. There
was also that mysterious ancient manuscript that he borrowed from Walter,
Archdeacon of Oxford. Monmouth then borrowed from the bardic oral tradition. In
other words, he listened to the stories of the bards. Add to the mix his own
imagination and Monmouth was onto a winner. Those who were critical of his work
were brushed aside and ignored. Monmouth made Britain glorious, and he gave us
not Arthur the general, but Arthur the King. And what a king he was.
So is Arthur
a great lie that for over a thousand years we have all believed in? Should we
be taking the Arthurian history books from the historical section and moving
them to sit next to George R. R. Martin's, Game of Thrones? No.
I don’t think so. In this instance, folklore has shaped our nation. We should
not dismiss folklore out of hand just because it is not an exact science. We
should embrace it because when you do, it becomes easier to see the influence
these ‘stories’ have had on historical events.
References:
(Author
Unknown) — The Anglo-Saxon Chronicles (J.
M. Dent, New edition, 1972)
Bede — Ecclesiastical
History of the English People (Bloomsbury Publishing Plc, 2012)
Geoffrey of Monmouth — The History of the Kings of Britain (Penguin Books Ltd, 1966)
Gildas — On
the Ruin and Conquest of Britain (Serenity Publishers, LLC, 2009)
Matthews, John, Caitlín — The
Complete King Arthur: Many Faces, One Hero (Inner Traditions, 2017)
Nennius — The
History of the Britons (Dodo Press, July 2007)
Pryor, Francis — Britain AD: A Quest for Arthur, England and the Anglo-Saxons (HarperCollins
Publisher, 2005)
Wood, Michael — In Search of the Dark Ages (BBC Books, 2005)
Images:
Stonehenge — TheDigitalArtist
/ 5052 images, Pixabay
Edward III — Scanned from the book The National
Portrait Gallery History of the Kings and Queens of England by David
Williamson, ISBN 1855142287. Reproduction of a painting that is in the
public domain because of its age.
The Du Lac Prophecy
(Book #4 of The Du Lac
Chronicles)
Two Prophesies. Two Noble Households. One Throne.
Distrust and greed
threaten to destroy the House of du Lac. Mordred Pendragon strengthens his hold
on Brittany and the surrounding kingdoms while Alan, Mordred’s cousin, embarks
on a desperate quest to find Arthur’s lost knights. Without the knights and the
relics they hold in trust, they cannot defeat Arthur’s only son – but finding
the knights is only half of the battle. Convincing them to fight on the side of
the Du Lac’s, their sworn enemy, will not be easy.
If Alden, King of Cerniw,
cannot bring unity there will be no need for Arthur’s knights. With Budic
threatening to invade Alden’s Kingdom, Merton putting love before duty, and
Garren disappearing to goodness knows where, what hope does Alden have? If
Alden cannot get his House in order, Mordred will destroy them all.
Mary
Anne Yarde
Mary
Anne Yarde is the multi award-winning author of the International Bestselling
series — The Du Lac Chronicles — and the
founder of The Coffee Pot Book Club.
Yarde grew up in the southwest of England, surrounded and influenced by
centuries of history and mythology. Glastonbury — the fabled Isle of Avalon —
was a mere fifteen-minute drive from her home, and tales of King Arthur and his
knights were a part of her childhood.
Connect
with Mary Anne:
Such an interesting post, Mary Anne!
ReplyDeleteThank you, Beatrice!
Delete