This will be a on going topic soon about castles, history, some myth and lore, with a little of the Romantic thrown in, a definite Military view point, and many of the items that make us what we are as we were in all history's, human.

I've been researching for some time now a non standard view point (nothing new for me) concerning a certain king and his twelve knights, and twelve possible castles.

I'll use one of Andrews images as an example for right now until I can get some others scanned in, can you name them?
Bamburgh
In this castle's lowest area is supposedly a ancient wooden beam with an inscription possibly with a date. This is a rumor since I've never seen it but the ceilings arch is of a design that would predate the accepted buildings age.

The basic design of this keep is peculiar in many ways and yet they are remarkably the same with few minor deviations.
I've been able to find 10 of them and are still looking for the other two as my studies are mostly of Scotland and some of Ireland.
I'll be posting a map of where the 10 are and how those areas played a huge part in England's history.

Much of the dating of castles is related to human vanity.
example: This Royal person had built this new tower and renovated the old one so we shall say he had the castle built in his lifetime.
You add to that all the ages in between with some fraud thrown in and things can get jumbled up.

As far as the King and his fabled castle that will come a wee bit later, lets just say for now we know he was a good military leader and took advantage of all possible locations as in the Roman built Caerleone his summer residence.
According to many facts and Chronicles of the age this king fought a crusade against the Romans and even conquered Rome. He declined the honor of ruling there and returned home to the Isle of Britain.
This is in no way the actions of a savage chieftan and speaks of far too much history that is kept under wraps.
There can be many reasons for this and most of them all are the human factor.

Hopefully we can shed some light on a fragmented history and myth with some new view points.

If I can assist with any other pictures (and please freely use the ones I sent you), just let me know.

Would one of those castles happen to be Beaumaris in Wales? I recently purchased a postcard showing King Arthur's Steps.

This too is a topic I have researched in depth (and still in process of). Finding maps was a wee bit harder than had expected, but a few still exsist. Noting, many boundaries were different than what they are today, and noting that many villages & towns have come, gone and changed names.... just curious, have you checked out the area that is known (present day) as Whales at all? Some research has lead to a good portion of proven historical events and locations being there as well.

A most fascinating hunt for such a famous historical figure. Funny how many theories there are and how much research is behind them. Can't wait for the new house and the research library space....more books!!

Oh yes, Wales is one of our research areas as all of the UK and other country's.
There's a topic in the library about name changes and a few other bits and bobs that might be of interest.

I'll let you know if its Beaumaris in a few minutes, gotta go check on that becouse I'm tired enough I can't remember, sorry.

Nope, not one of the twelve, just look for the type of keep that Joyouse Gard has.

actually, doesn't the Brittany region of France lay claim to this legend also? Seems that there are places connected with Arty and the boys there. Brittany is Gaelic.

Not so much the whole of the legend just much of it. Theres country's all over Europe with claims and supposed sites.

I'm a little ignorant on it. I always just figured it was more Wales. I was a bit surprised by the France claims.....I need to re-examine ancient and medieval geography. Though, it does make sense as Brittany is sort of across the channel on the Atlantic.

We have a small collection of poems and storeys on site called
King ARTHUR

Meg and I were married on the Isle of Avalon in the Lady's Chapel of the Glastonbury Cathedral where supposedly his and his last wife were married and subsequently buried.
I bring this up only because of the political aspect of the burial find and why and by whom the cathedral was damaged.

A good portion of the problem lies with the fact that Joseph of Arimathea was his Uncle and the religious and political aspects there in.
It's a known fact that Arthur was born in the UK and chose the early Christ-ian believes.
Also much of the history has been locked away or lost due to those reasons.
One of which is the linage of the now British Monarchy which is not originally from the UK.
Joseph and his very well to do family owned property and had working mines in the Mid East, Europe and all over the UK and Ireland, except in Scotland.
Wealth that did influence the Holy Roman Empire and what is now the Vatican it self, no doubt.

Even the ex-spurts are lacking in much of the history and even in the myth area. So am I believe me!
But I do find the reality parts very interesting and what is missing speaks volumes of what must have happened.
It's far more then a children's fairy tale and a medieval romance that has been rewritten over and over again.
Although I never really tire of rereading them either and yes I believe in a code of honor also.

To me its a fascinating history and legend that spans the ages and brings you to our life and times.

What a load of codswallop, all based on medieval fictions which were corrupted from the ancient Welsh poems, which all derived from 1, the Goddodin, which means men of the north. Galla is right, boundaries were different then, if in fact there were any, but the Goddodin refered to by the Welsh are the 'welsh' speaking peoples of the area now known as Scotland.
Arthur fits well into the role of war leader in the Celtic style from an age where the term king would not have been recognised as we know it. The entire country was made up of small family or clan holdings, these clans or tribal groups joining together to form war parties when need dictated. At such times a war leader would be appointed, ie one who could general the men, hold the respect of all across tribal boundaries.
Dumbarton was the 'capital' of Strathclyde, kingdom of the Britons, Camelon in Falkirk was the site of a large former Roman colony known as the City of the Legions, just across the Firth of Forth is the Isle of May, aka the Isle of the Maidens which is associated as the Isle of Avalon, and all the Battles of Arthur can be placed within a logistical route across the central belt of Scotland attacking important pagan sites associated with the Nine Maidens and fertility cult ritual. We have Arthurs Seat, Dubh Glas, family ties with 'King Lot' of the Lothians based at Trapprain Law, the stone of the britons, Vanora's Mound (Guinevere), Merlins Grave, Merlins Ford, Ben Arthur, Arthur's Castle ( now preserved as a possible site of Bruce's death place of Cardross across the Leven to Dumbarton Castle) Arthur's Castle was also the name used for Dumbarton Castle in records dating back to the 12thc. ................and the list is endless.......................To be honest, a chap called Stuart McHardy has written a book called 'The Quest for Arthur', and if you give it a read, you'll never associate Arthur with Glastonbury or Tintagel again! The circumstantial evidence and McHardy's hypothesis certainly need to be considered seriously once you cut out the Medieval claptrap and get into what life in the dark ages was all about, there were no castles then, no Knights in shining armour, Caledon Wood certainly existed as Ettrick Forest...and is the King's Knot at Stirling castle really the round table?
At least the latest Hollywood version got the locations in the right part of the country!

You know, a good story spreads through trade and commerce, and everybody loves a good folk hero. That's why the folks of Nottingham corrupted a good story
to create Robin Hood, whose real name incidently was.............................
................................ ......................................................................
...................................William Wallace, who robbed from the rich English to give to the poor scots, was married to Mirren/Marion, spent half his active time living in Ettrick forest with a motely crew of assorted outlaws and criminals, and organised them in to a fairly decent military unit..........................

The first thing I would have to say is that the whole aspect of Arthur is still un proven because of so much being changed through out history.
The best known story's are those that have been spoke of in the last posts and those are the ones I started with hoping to get to Scotland's claims later in the topic as now.

There are country's of the old USSR that lay claim to the tales with less prove then either Scotland or Wales.
Even the Roman name of the City of Legion(s) come from a true Latin source and even they can't pinpoint to which country either was in with all certainty because they have listed several city's by those names across the UK.

I've noticed in the storeys of how the King and his knights was able to respond to the Saxon threat in what is now Scotland with a far faster time then I'd thought possible unless there were contingency's posted in all of the Island.

That alone is one fact to be looked at and the others you brought up also bear a closer investigation.
Truthfully I have giving what you said much thought since yours and my last discussion on this matter.
As I've said in the earlier posts I've not made up my mind and maybe that book you mentioned will help with that, but I do know I'm still lacking enough data to say factually one way or the other.

But one fact that stands above all else is that Geoffrey Ashe should have stayed a tour guide instead of putting his "truths" and "supposed facts" into print.

I'm not sure about the knights since Rome used cavalry extensively and did build forts known as Castellums and whole city's surrounded by walls.

Armour was indeed used, but shiny? There again is a wee bit of the unknown.
Lances were a normal Roman Army issue and there were different ones for the foot and cavalry.

But of the story being corrupted there is no doubt. It is a tale that spans the ages and makes for great reading as well as to spur the imagination and topics.

The problem with Arthur is as you say it is all un-proven, indeed probably unprovable. At least with the Wallace story there are the biased records of the English which portray him as a scoundrel and outlaw, however in such cases as folk heroes, even in writng history the victor cannot hide the truth of the matter. Propaganda can only be effective to a certain extent, and in Wallace's case they just couldn't keep it down, and the strength of the story allowed it to surive in folklore. I suspect it is the same scenario with the man named Arthur, and certainly MacHardy argues as such. As with Wallace the story has certainly spread across borders, but with Arthur the strength of the story has caused us to lose it's source. It is interesting though that even in an age when pagan rituals and superstision were so frowned upon as not to be spoken of, that what is obviously a pro christian story supports so much pagan myth. Does this indicate the true source of the story? Who knows, the truth will remain as elusive as the Grail itself!

I need to pick up that book next payday as I enjoy reading about this topic.
I agree with what you posted and Wallace certainly does bring that to light like no other folk hero.

You statement about the pro Christian and Pagan parts is interesting as some more learned then I, have put forth the ideal of the story actually being part of the Celtic tradition and spread with the migration across Europe.
This exodus from an uncertain part of the Globe pretty much ended in Ireland but only after a stop over in Scotland.
There is an old saying that the Scottish is the Irish is the Scottish and so on.
That is a known fact amongst all the supposition about this myth and legend.

But to the fact that it was re-written so many times and made to fit in with the readers of that age and century can not be doubted.

The Grail and the sword has just a far reaching hold on the imagination.
My question is why should this story with stand the test of time and still grab and hold peoples hearts and minds unless like Wallace the story is based in fact.

Some great facts and theories presented by you both. Being as we actually didn't live in those times makes it very difficult to pinpoint the one truth, but again, some theories are grand and make great sense. All stories get changed through time to fit personal needs. Every perspective changed by each interpretation - such as the Bible. So it goes.

I would love to pick up a copy of the book as well. Sounds like a grand read. Thanks for the referral!

Gordon had a good idea and He's going to start a topic on him soon.
To read an excellent article on Sir William Wallace or any of the many others hes either wrote or collected on Gordon's Scottish Castles Resource Page

Good idea. He was definately a major historical person who had quite a bit of history to himself. Grand discussion topic!

The article is not mine, only lnked to my page,
here's the URL to save time,
http://www.highlanderweb.co.uk/wallace/truth1.htm

Just been reading through all this, and a thought unusually popped into my head. Nothing to do with my already pre-established bias on Arthurian sites, but once in the Firth of Forth, once a small island, now under re-claimed land in Bo'ness, was a castle illustrated in Pont's map of 1596, known as Carrig Leon...Caerleone????
Caer =fort, Carrig/Carrick =rock, phonetiacally not dis-similar, Camelon at Falkirk only a few short miles away and the Isle of May(maidens) just across the Forth, 4-5 miles as the crow flies???? 2+2 =25, 50, .....??



Time for more coffee, need to waken up and stop dreaming, been at work for 12 hours now, need nicotine, caffeine and sweet dreams.......zz.zz..zz. .oops!

I'm finding all this very interesting and extremely informative on several levels. I have to admit that so far the Scottish stand point is pretty strong and I have no bias one way or the other.
Yet
I've got a few questions after presuming we are talking about Arthur being a Roman officer.

One of them is what was the king or last remaining high standing officer in what was left of the army doing up in the Highlands after the Roman occupation had left the Island.

Fortress's were scarce as was the comforts a Roman office had by rights that could only have been enjoyed further south as in the baths and larger fortifications with in the walled city's.

London had been the Roman capital and was still considered to be the seat of power long after the army's of Rome had left the area decaying slowly from the lack of Rome's influence.

The Pict's were returning to their normal life's according to all accounts I can find that is.
Only the Saxons were raiding, killing and later trying to gain a foot hold on the land which they did some years before Arthurs death because he offered them land if they would act reasonably.

In some of the older stories a ravine is mentioned that Merlin helped Arthurs father to ride his horse across. After thinking about that one I can answer it pretty truthfully, the Highland mists can be as thick as the land it self.

What about the sword, where was the Lake? And was there ever a mention in the Scottish side about the Lady of the lake?

Roman officer? No the Romans did not occupy Scotland as they did in England and Wales. The use and mention of Roman sites does not signify that he was trying in any way to re-establish Roman lifestyles, they never existed in Scotland. The suggested concentration of Roman ruins around Camelon would fit with it being a port and major Roman city based at the eastern end of the Antonine Wall, and the outlines were still discernible in the 19thc. But the Roman occupation here was brief. They had originally a turf wall across the border area, and moved northeven building roads up the east coast well beyond Perthshire, and beyond Dundee. But all their constructions were of a military nature, except perhaps Camelon, where one would expect a trading centre to be established as their main supply base. To reinforce their stay They built the turf Antonine Wall across the waist of Scotland from wall Bowling on the Clyde to Bo'ness on the Forth. But the occupation lasted relatively briefly, though they did come back for a longer stay. I'd need to check, but thay retired south and didnt return after about 120AD. At this stage they reinforced their original turf 'dyke' in the borders and built in Stone, Hadrians Wall. They stayed in England for a few more centuries after that.
Arthur is thought to originate around the early 6th.
Think rather of Arthur trying to re-establish one important part of Roman life here, Christianity. McHardy not only analyses the written material, but draws heavily upon the oral tradition too. Remember what I said about Wallace, and that his impact was such that despite the English victories , a lack of written evidence, and the post Bannokburn Propagandaism of the Bruces, in the eyes of the common population, Wallace singlehandedly defeated the might of England, and paid for it through the most horrible of deaths.
Although Ninian and Columba had done their work, St Patrick recorded that there was at least a partial return to Paganism. McHardy argues that if Arthur was involved in leading a Christian attack on sites associated particularly with those associated with the cult of the nine maidens, and Nennius guilty of distorting the order of the battles to fit his prose style, then a logical progression across the waist of Scotland and into the southern highlands can be mapped as a logical stratagem. McHardy also discusses the battle sites suggested byGlennie & Skene in the 19thc.
Heres one or two to think on... I'm not going to re-type a whole book.
Cadmuir hill, Peebles..Cad More means big battle.
RIver Glein..River Glen Ayrshire, Dubh Glas...Douglas 2 possibles, Douglas in South Lanarkshire, or Glen Douglas more traditionally associated with his battle site and mentioned also as Linnius, which could be the River Leven from Loch Lomond to Clyde, but bear in mind also that the family of Lindsey from Crawford in south lanarkshire may have taken their name from a more ancient name for their lands.

Cat Coit Ceildon, the Caledon Wood, now surviving in diminutive form as Ettrick Forest, close to Drumelzier, site of Merlins Grave.
Tribuit, the Carse of Stirling, where many a battle has raged over Scotlands future, key crossing of the Forth, main highway from north to south, and a breast shaped fortified hill, Stirling Rock, probable nine maidens site.
Agned, Edinburgh Castle Rock, as Dunbarton and Stirling, associated with the Nine Maidens, and once known as maiden castle.
Mount Badon, abounding in Arthurian stories under its present name of Bouden Hill, Linlithgow.
City of the legions, Dunbarton, a sea port at the western end of the Antonine wall whose castle is recorded in Royal Charter of 1367 as Castrum Arthurii, or more likely Camelon at the east.
Dolorous Gard, the physical description of the topography of the site fits perfectly with Castle Campbell, once known as Castle Gloom or Glume. The Burns of care and sorrow protect this ancient site on the south of the Ochils north of Stirling, above a town called Dollar.
There is a tradition that the sword /lake story arises from a Loch in Dumfries and Galloway, need to read the book again to find out which one, but the local tradition was strong, it also exists for Loch Lomond.

I agree about the Roman occupation of Scotland and how important a role in Arthurian history with many sites confirmed it has.
Many of the items you mentioned makes it even more possible but who was he if not a Roman officer?
All very good points and I'll have to buy the book next payday to read more.

The trip you played tour guide for the three of us we went to several of these sites I believe, I'll have to look in my photos to see what has survived.

Loch Moan Galloway has a tradition that Arthur threw excalibur into the loch, but excalibur didn't appear in the earliest records. I referred earlier to the Goddoddin, Arthur is named as leader of a raiding party which came to a tragic consequence, and left the Edinburgh area to attack 'Cattraeth', which many consider to be Catterick in Yorkshire.
Nennius writing in Wales wrote the story basing it in places with which he was familiar, ie south britain, but makes a statement that Arthur fought with the Kings of Britain, and was their war leader. Y Goddodin refers specifically to Gwr Y Gogledd...The men of the North. Curiosly, in Nennius' History of Britain, the Arthur stories are written alongside that section which deals with North Britain and the battles with the Angles of Northumbria.
2 points on this, the term King seems to have been added by the later writers such as Nennius, applying contemporary terms to the tribal leaders of the past.
If we look at the celtic model of warfare from those times, and continuous in Scottish Clans into the 18thc (Rob Roy is the best known example), the chiefs didn't lead in battle, they delegated that to an experienced and renowned warrior, a general if you like, whom the men respected and were willing to follow. This could work across tribal divisions when a common enemy arose, such as Calgacus at Mons Graupius, and possibly even Wallace in a later age( at the Steward's or even Bruce's instigation...such use of earlier Celtic practices was not uncommon with Bruce, the Celtic side of him is often seen as more prominent than his Norman ancestry suggests-but his mother was the very Celtic Countess of Carrick, an area with exceptionally strong ties to Ireland and Kintyre) off topic!.
It is also thought that such warriors often sent a message of intent by adopting the name of a mythical figure to instill fear amongst their enemy, and this could be done by adopting the name of a fabled warrior or pagan god for battle purposes.
If say 100 years after Bannockburn someone launched a campaign against the English and called themselves Wallace, and the English still like the pagans had beleived that you drew your strength from the power of your ancestors and could invoke their assistance, they might beleive that he had come back from the otherworld to fight the battle. This is where all the tales of Arthur and his warriors sleeping under hills like Arthurs Seat, Ben Arthur and the Eildon Hill comes from.
Tie this in with burial practice of buiding cairns atop notable hills such as Tinto, and you will begin to get a feeling for the dark ages.
Historians trying to establish whether Arthur was factual or mythical are divided. But typically being argumentative sorts they miss the obvious compromise and likely solution, that he was both! A Celtic war leader who adopted or was given the name of a renowned or godlike predecessor. This might be why there is so much pagan ritual instilled even in Monmouth's tales.
Incidently, there is also a theory that Arthur was Artair MacAedan, son of one of the early kings of the Scots of Dalriada, but the dates miss out by a paltry 50 years. He certainly was a war leader, and the Kilmartin Valley area around their capital at Dunadd has one of the most dense collections of ancient burial cairns, stone circles, etc etc, dating as far back as Megalithic times. Step off the road and you cant move for falling over them!
http://www.kilmartin.org/
Here's a tale of one 8thc paganistic flashback to the nine maidens,
http://www.dundeemessenger.co.uk/myths/maidens.htm
McHardy did a 'Quest' for them too
http://www.luath.co.uk/acatalog/Q9M.html
Here's the publshers summary of the Arthur book...first hand,
http://www.luath.co.uk/cgi-bin/sh000000.pl...84282_20012_205

Incidently, you can also forget the idea of the battles resisting a Saxon Invasion, established historical thinking has the Saxons gradually migrating over a number of centuries, not a mass invasion as depicted in the past.

Others snippets
http://www.scottish-towns.co.uk/perthshire...le/history.html
http://www.taexalia.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/vanora.htm
and this one deserves a careful and thorough read.
http://www.tafac.freeuk.com/vol1.pdf

Some more links, mainly pics
http://www.rampantscotland.com/castles/blc...s_dumbarton.htm
Dumbarton, capital of the Britons of Strathclyde, a nine maidens site, 'Castrum Arthurri' , ? city of the legions, ?camelot?
It is confirmed that part of the medieval castle at Dumbarton was the Red Hall, the exchequer paying for repairs in the 14thc. Clan McArthur claim to be descended from Smervie Mor, a son of Arthur born in the Tower of the Red Hall on the south side of Dumbarton Rock. The Galbraiths ( of Britonnic descent, rather than Gaeldom)also have an old gaelic rhyme confirming the existance of the hall,
'Briton of the Red Hall, your name's the noblest race in Scotland'. The Galbraiths were often captains of Dumbarton.


An interview in the Scotsman with Jerry Bruckheimer...I think his interpretation is a bit off, but the other interview with McHardy is interesting,
http://news.scotsman.com/features.cfm?id=800602004

Arthurlie, Barrhead south west of Glasgow
http://www.eastrenfrewshire.gov.uk/leisure..._cross_page.htm

Some great photos of Ben Arthur, a mountain which lies on 'the border' between the Briton's Strathclyde, and Dalriada of the Scots.
http://www.armin-grewe.com/holiday/scotlan...the-cobbler.htm
Another Arthurian landmark is only 3-4 miles away as the crow flies, the Clach nam Brettain, or stone of the Britons, another border marker in Glen Falloch at the head of Loch Lomond, 28 miles north of Dumbarton, 13 miles north of the Dubh Glas, where Arthur fought a series of battles, and on Loch Lomond which some old tales state is the lake with the lady & excalibur.

Loch Moan
http://www.geo.ed.ac.uk/scotgaz/features/f...efirst2105.html
http://www.geo.ed.ac.uk/scotgaz/towns/townhistory1092.html

The Isle of May
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isle_of_May

Me? I'm still learning way too much to draw conclusions.

Although the reference to Smervie Mor has me for a loss, none of my books or data base mentions that name and the only Mor is referred to as the Great Grand Father of Merlin.
Is there a different pronunciation maybe?


Lancelot is a different subject because Meg has traced his lineage past Arthurian times.
Click to view attachment

A couple of my links that might help,

THE CAMELOT PROJECT is designed to make available in electronic format a database of Arthurian texts, images, bibliographies, and basic information. The project, begun in 1995, is sponsored by the University of Rochester and prepared in The Robbins Library, a branch of Rush Rhees Library. The Camelot Project has been designed by Alan Lupack, Director of the Robbins Library, and Barbara Tepa Lupack.

The Catholic University of America

ibiblio the public's library and digital archive

Mor just means big or great, as in Glen More, the great glen, or Malcolm Canmore.......Cean More Big head, or more kindly great leader...which is open to debate!
Smervie Mor I've only come across in the context given, but then lots of the clans have tales of their 'mythical' past, as did the Scots as a nation...refer Declaration of Arbroath!

That was my fault. I got so caught up in trying to find info I lost site on the obvious

http://www.electricscotland.com/webclans/m/macarth2.html
A history of Clan Arthur, and the Smervie Mor reference.
An excerpt;
'According to the legendary account of the Highland clans in early Gaelic manuscripts, given by Skene in Appendix VIII. of his Celtic Scotland, Cailean Mor, from whom the modern chiefs of the Campbells take their patronymic, and who is known to have been slain in the famous pursuit on the Sraing of Lorne, was the grandson of Dugall Cambel or "Crooked Mouth," from whom came the name of Campbell. Dugall’s great-great-grandfather was Duibne, whose daughter, according to the legend of Norman descent from De Campo Bello, carried the chiefship to a family of that name; and Duibne was great-grandson of Arthur, son of Uther Pendragon, son of Ambrosius. The Red Book of Argyll declares the ancestor of the race to have been Smervie Mor, son of King Arthur of the Round Table, and the statement is supported by the fact that the badge of the clan is the Lus mhic righ Bhreatainn—" the plant of the son of the King of Britain," wild thyme.

Here we have a link which may well startle the student of Highland history, an actual claim in early manuscripts that the Clan Arthur and the Clan Campbell are descended from the famous Arthur of British history, whose deeds have formed the favourite subject of romancer and poet almost from his own time till the present day. The claim is, however, by no means so strange or so entirely unlikely as it looks. Elsewhere in his Celtic Scotland Skene has shown that the actual historic Arthur fought his battles, not in the south of Wales, as modern readers of Tennyson, Swinburne, and Matthew Arnold are apt to suppose, but in the Lowlands of Scotland and on the fringes of the Highlands, on Loch Lomondside, and the northern district of Northumberland. The pages of Nennius, the historian of those early centuries, remain as undoubted evidence of this fact. It can be easily shown how all subsequent Arthurian literature has had Nennius for its original, and also how the popular tales of the deeds of Arthur have followed the Cymric, British, or Welsh language as it ceased to be spoken in the Scottish Lowlands and early princedom of Strathclyde, and came to have its chief seat in Wales and Cornwall. The present writer has shown elsewhere, from documentary evidence, that, as son of Eugenius, or Owen ap Urien, King of Reged or the Lennox, in the sixth century, St. Kentigern or Mungo, the patron saint of Glasgow, was grand-nephew of this historic Arthur, and the fact may be taken to show how not at all unlikely is the claim of the ancient Gaelic manuscripts for an Arthurian origin of the Clan Arthur and Clan Campbell. There are many enduring memorials of the great King Arthur in Scotland, including some two hundred place-names, from Arthur’s Seat in Midlothian to Ben Arthur in Argyll; but surely none of these is so interesting as the memorial remaining in this name of the ancient Highland clan which had its seat under the shadow of Ben Arthur itself on the shore of Loch Fyne.'

and this;
http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=707342004

It is this quote from Geoffrey Ashe
'"There’s no denying the original Arthur might have been in Scotland, but the evidence of where his roots are seems to me to point very clearly to the south and south-west rather than the north," he said.

"He was fighting against Saxon invaders coming much more from the south-east than in the north. They hadn’t really got to the north at that time."

Well Mr Ashe, the latter part of your statement is erroneous since modern historians agree that the Saxons migrated gradually and did not mass invade, which leaves your statement as only 'There’s no denying the original Arthur might have been in Scotland'!!!!!!

Mass invasion? No...as I said earlier it was more of a acclimation for both peoples as the Saxons did raid the North and both sides of the Nation.

There can be no doubt that Arthur was in Scotland nor that he had fortifications and troops there.

I'll not be so polite, Ashe should have stayed a tour guide and just read from the scripts.

http://www.regia.org/history/history.htm
The gradual Saxon invasion.
Reading through this and trying to spot a time when Arthur would have been active, you could say, yes he was resisting the saxon push which marginalised the Britons into Scotland, Wales, and Cornwall, but if the legends are right and Arthur was succesful, how did this happen? The next point at which he would fit, would be in the re-establishment of Christianity, fighting the pagan revival, and where did that victory eventually come from? Iona toward the south. Somewhere round about this time, was Arthur active as the military wing of this fightback, with Columba doing his monastic bit? Adomnans Life of Columba tells he was active in having Aedan elected 'King' of Scots, when the traditional election by peers within the tribal group was overcome. It tells that Artair MacAedan was the son of a Princess of the Britons of Strathclyde. Columba prophesised Artairs death in Battle, and he did against the 'barbarian-?meaning Pagan' Miathi, based around central Scotland. The problem with all this is that most other references refer to Artairs death around the end of the 6thc, whereas Arthur seems to have died early in the second third of that century, Camlaan being in 539 (Welsh Annals).
There is another connection though, in Life of St Kentigern, the Battle of Arderydd in 573(from Welsh Annals), is when merlin went mad.This tale of Merlin's (Welsh Annals) madness is remarkably similar to the tale of Lailoken, who goes mad and retires to the forest after the battle. Kentigern was based in Glasgow, and was son of Thenew and Arthurs nephew. Lailoken/Merlin? Dates discrepancy in the Annals?
Artair Macaedan/ King Arthur??

There were two Merlin's supposedly, one that went mad and one that was a sorcerer.
The one that lived in Scotland during the time of Vortigern and Arthur was called Myrddin Wyllt and was considered to be of high intelligence with extremely advanced knowledge for his time.
Some suggest he was a high ranking Druid with links to other Celtic Deities.

Haven't heard that one before, tell me more.

:photo20:

I don't have much on him yet and the only reference I do have is from a researcher that is slanted towards the Welsh interpretation so of course according to him what I wrote couldn't be the REAL Merlin.
Much of the info available on the net is also from this slant and most are referring to this Merlin as being the crazy hermit in Caledonia wood.
Again I think a little political byplay is in effect.

The aspect of there being two Merlins have cropped up through out history but this supposed going mad to live in a forest seems to be from the 15 c and later.
What was it in those days living like a hermit was the thing to do if a person had a problem?

Maybe just fear, no treatments for paranoia is those days, possibly just sheer fear
that everyone and everything was going to harm him drove him to hide.

IMHO I don't think this was the man who was a hermit, that individual appears in many storys and has generally the same personalty aspects where as the man with advanced knowledge is different.

This all re-inforces the Celtic myth aspect of the whole Arthurian concept, one of McHardy's favourite tools in the book is to cross reference myths from the different Celtic areas within Britain and illustrate the common background or themes, to make the point that many of the stories may have a common source, so ancient that it is forgotten.
A quote as example
talking about natural activity and observations which led to deer being revered as symbols of fertility, McHardy says;
" this might tie in, because the island to the south of Corryvreckan is Jura, derived from the norse for deer isle. It is tempting to see some similarity between the traditional tale of the Cailleach and the Corryvreckan, and the idea of Hvergelmer, the Roaring Cauldron of Norse mythology which equates with the sea milloperated by nine sea maidens, that grinds out the physical universe from the bodies of the ice giant Ymir, slain by the gods at the start of our world"
Two merlins, two tales , a similar source. To give a more Arthurian example;
"WF Skene who was extremely interested in all things Arthurian, went so far as to suggest that the stories of Arthur and Finn McCoul among the Gaels, might have originated in the area where these two different groups lived alongside each other, and thuis might have had a common root".

from http://www.loc.gov/loc/kidslc/cr-background.html ;
"A Giant of a Man
Fionn mac Cumhail (Finn MacCoul, Finn MacCool) was the greatest leader of the Fianna; the military elite of ancient Ireland responsible for guarding the High King. The Fianna were founded in 300 B.C. by the High King Fiachadh (fee-a-kuh). Until Fionn mac Cumhail implemented a code of honor among them, the Fianna had a reputation of being a somewhat unruly bunch of men who considered themselves, to some small degree, above the law, due to their position of power. Fionn challenged the Fianna to become champions of the people; to make of themselves models of chivalry and justice that others may aspire to. The tales of the Fianna are argued to be the basis of those of the Knights of the Round Table of England, with Arthur as their leader as Fionn was leader of the Fianna. He was also father of the great poet Oisín (o-sheen).

One of the most celebrated characters in Irish mythology, he became the leading warrior of the Fianna, the band of fierce Leinster warriors. "

Even this site admits that parts of McCouls story, based earlier than Arthur, held elements of even more ancient stories.
http://www.shee-eire.com/Magic&Mythology/W...cCool/Page1.htm

This is Arthur's family tree from the Masonic side of things

Click to view attachment

Mmmmm, I'd like to see the evidence that the guy used to produce that one, sounds a bit like 'Scotland's Madder Myths' to me

I would be interesting wouldn't it?
I'm not sure which came first the poplar believe or the Masonic

Masonic? or Messianic?....I have no Masonic connections by the way, despite the name, though I am sick of old jokes!

I can only imagine how much you've had on that account.

I've never posted anything on any forum before so bear with me...but if your interested in more info. on King / Clan Arthur, Merlin history etc. I have research links from my 15 years of part-time geneology research on my MySpace site:

http://www.myspace.com/lady_pendragon3

I've heard em all!...Masonic jokes that is.

Interesting web site thank you for the link.
By the way you will be able to upload avatars if you wish after 5 posts and the new Gallery is operational, I'm afraid your other image was evidently removed during set up my apology's.
Welcome to the forums!!

Thanks for the welcome...I just finished adding a blog to my site. It's an edited version of a research letter I sent out to family a while back.

I noticed the , have you been here?

Yes, twice thanks. Words cannot describe...
My husband & I would like to go back to stay.
Oban was our favorite.

A beautiful place, busy despite it's remote location, and a gateway to the isles. Where else did you go?

Sorry for the lag time...my computer network has been buggering up lately.

We've been to...St. Andrews for the Kingdom Gathering conference in 97 & 98...Edinburgh town, castle, Holyrood, St. Giles, Arthur's Seat, Kingdom of Fife, Perthshire, Stirling...shopped the town, Stirling Bridge, Wallace Monument, & Castle. Glasgow we only drove through on our way to the conference. Stayed in a B & B called Stuckgowen (sp?) off Lock Lomand, Glen Finnan...saw Prince Charlie's Monument off Lock Sheil, The Great Glen, Glencoe, Ft. William, Ben Navis...my husband just HAD to go through the wiskey tour. Invarary...twice...we got lost and ended back there from Stuckgowen!, Dunstaffnage, Oban, Mull, & Iona. We never made it to Sky...it was pouring rain!

You've seen some beautiful places then, Loch Lomond is my favourite place, and I know where Stuckgowan is. Skye ...you missed a treat.