You thought that when the Romans left, the Saxons came; at least that was what we were all told in school. There are precise dates as well The Romans left in 410 AD and the Saxons came in 440AD. Somewhere in this clear cut time lies a problem called the Arthurian legends. It is as if the clear cut strata in an archaeological dig are subjected to a microscopic analysis to reveal a rather less clear cut profile. Further, we all have a concept of King Arthur that has been handed to us since the time of Mallory. So that was Arthur was it? Wrong. The only invaders were Saxons, right? Wrong. Arthur was something to do with Merlin-right? Wrong. We are always told the truth by historians, right? Wrong. In terms of what we know, the history has been defined within those references which have led to a distortion of the history. Be in no doubt that King Arthur existed and there was more than one. Unravelling the ancient sources such as Gildas, Nennius, Bede and other works leads us out of a fairytale of Hollywood into the harsh reality of the early post Roman empire; a world of Civil war and Celtic invasion. What has been learned is that there was more than one Arthur, in fact many names were repeated and confused, Ambrosius, Ambrosius Aurielanus, Uther, Arthur, Maximus (which one would you like) and Vortigern at a time when not only were the Saxons coming, so were the Scots (the real name of the Irish as conferred by the Romans), Danes at the same time as a tripartite Roman civil war was taking place. So the history of the time is clear?-please read on, its time to become confused.

Spécifications