From Scythia to Camelot (Arthurian Characters and Themes)

The notion of an Iranic superstrate informing aspects of the Arthurian cycle of legends is fascinating and, as a read of some of the other reviews here suggests, is the conceptual equivalent of ramming a Sarmatian lance lengthwise through one of the sacred cows of western literature. The mental discomfort and squirming Littleton and Malcor's theory causes various subconciously xenophobic readers is probably justification enough for the book.Sadly, while their theory is fascinating, I am not convinced after reading the book, even if the idea is fascinating.Malcor and Littleton point out a number of parallels to Arthurian legends found in the Nart sagas among the Ossetians in the Caucasus mountains. The modern day Ossetians are the descendants of the steppe nomads, beginning with the Scythians, who spoke languages from the North-Eastern branch of the Iranian language family (of which Ossetian is the sole surviving example) and whose complicated history with more settled European populations in the Balkans and western Europe is attested as far back as Herodotus. The parallels between the Narts and King Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table are pervasive enough that they suggest a relationship rather than independent evolution or random use of common folkloric motifs resulting in similar outcomes.Arguing that the Arthurian legends are based, at least in part, on legends from the Eurasian steppes, Malcor and Littleton then set about putting forward a model to explain this development. There are largely two components to their theory. The first is that British legends pertaining to King Arthur are influenced both by the individual figure of a Roman officer, Lucius Artorius Castus, and the auxiliary force of 5500 Iazyge cavalry imported to Britain from the steppes he may have commanded in northern Roman Britain on or near Hadrian's Wall. The second avenue for introducing steppe elements into the Arthurian romances are the Alans, another Iranic steppe tribe (likely related to the Iazyges enough that they would share religious and mythical beliefs) who overran parts of Roman Gaul (including Brittany) and northern Spain in the closing days of the western Roman empire.The first element, the potential contribution of the Iazyges to the mythology of the British Isles seems to be the higher profile half of the story (i.e. Antoine Fuqua's 2004 film _King Arthur_), the part that gets fans of Arthurian legends most bent out of shape, and, from reading this book, the less tenable of the two possible routes of introducing a steppe/Iranic substrate into the stories. The problem is that, while Littleton and Malcor present evidence suggesting a prolonged presence of the Iazyges in northern Britain after their arrival ca. 175 AD, written records in Britain become minimal to non-existent after the Romans abandoned the province and by the time the situation improves the Iazyges are no longer on the scene as an identifiable group. Proof for (or against) the Iazyges playing a role in formulating early versions of what would become some portion of the Arthurian legends seems scarce, and reading _From Scythia to Camelot_ did not convince me that A) Lucius Artorius Castus did anything we can document which would result in him being locally famous for centuries, whether in northern Britain in general or among the Iazyges auxilaries or B) that there is evidence that the Iazyges either directly had a significant cultural impact in northern Britain or left a lasting impression on the native population. Given the paucity of good records, there is not evidence *disproving* this idea, but obviously the burden of proof is on the theorist to prove their case, rather than to point out that nothing rules out their hypothesis.The potential cultural influence of the Alans in France seems like a stronger argument. The Alans, like the various Germanic tribes they mingled with (modern "Catalonia" is possibly derived from "Goth-Alania," for instance), had a complicated relationship with the late Roman Empire -- sometimes fighting as mercenaries for the Empire, sometimes fighting against it, and sometimes being unofficial states within the state in uneasy equilibrium with the Roman government. One of the regions they settled was northwestern France, in Armorica and Brittany (where many of the itinerant bards and poets who most likely circulated the oral traditions that were the kernel of the Arthurian romances originated from -- and where British/Welsh speaking immigrants from Britain who gave the province its modern name would have mingled with Iranic-speaking Alans after the collapse of Roman authority).Littleton and Malcor provide a range of evidence that suggests an Alan component to the Arthurian legends -- etymology of various names (including Lancelot) suggest either Alanic language roots or point to association with known areas of Alanic settlement. The pagan Sarmatian/Alan religion included worship of the god of war in the form of a sword struck into the soil, and assumption of leadership was ritualized by being the one to draw the sword back out of the earth at the end of religious rituals, as well as the Alans' military strength being based on lance-armed heavy cavalry when western European and Roman cavalry traditions were rather more minimal. The Nart Sagas show a mythological motif of magical cups suggestive of a Holy Grail myth before a Christian context was grafted onto it.Even this portion of the book, however, presents more of a fascinating hypothesis than what I would consider definitive proof -- rather like the Iazyges, record keeping in the centuries after Roman authority collapsed in Gaul is lacking and all we know for certain is that once good records start back up, we don't have a population anywhere in Gaul speaking an Iranic language or identifying as Alans or anything else we can trace back to the steppes.One underlying problem with both _From Scythia to Camelot_ and the critique against it is that both sides of the argument seem to want to approach the issue in an all or nothing manner. Littleton and Malcor argue that the steppe influence is the primary source for the Arthurian legends, their detractors argue that there is no steppe influence. It seems most likely to me that the situation is much more complicated, particularly with regards to the portion of the Arthurian legends coming out of northwestern France, where there was a mixture of Germanic, Alanic, Romano-Gallic, and British populations in the centuries after Rome fell. It seems entirely plausible that the syncretic culture deriving from all of the above to yield French and Breton speaking populations in the later Middle Ages would incorporate stories and cultural motifs from the various component populations.In any case, the book is an interesting read, though the price for a printed copy is a bit high for anyone who is not avidly interested. I opted for the Kindle rental option when I read it, and think it was entirely worth the cost of rental, however.

Everyone is familiar with King Arthur and the Knights if the Round Table. Intrigued as we are when we look for the inspiration for these tales we really do not find an adequate source. Searching the Norse and Celtic mythos we fail to find any meaningful parallels. Looking back in History and further to the East, we find that the Romans conscripted several tribes to fight for them and settled them in different parts of Europe. The tribes were all inter related. Scythian, Sarmatians, Iazagese ,Ossetians and Alans.Not much remains of these tribes. The Ossetians who live in Georgia are descended from the Alans. With them came the Nart Sagas. The Nart Sagas focus around Batraz, who avenges his father to claim kingship. He is aided by a sword and there is a grail like object that he is questing for. Once Batraz dies he commands a warrior underneath him to cast the sword into the lake. This is very similar to the King Arthur mythology. There is the pulling of sword from a stone and retuning it to the source.The parallels are with near eastern mythology from northern Iran. The Scythians were horseback warrior who hailed from the Iranians steps south of Siberia. They are the ones who spread burial mounds through out Europe . They were called the Lizard People due to the scales on their armor. After they settled in motifs started showing scaly warriors. The Sarmatians flew a dragon banner when doing into battle. Hence we can see the source of Pendragon or son of the dragon. The burial mound would have stones with swords driven into them with only the rightful heir being able to pull them out.These parallels are not found in Celtic or any neighboring mythology. Arthur was modeled off of Batraz.Batraz lost his father as did Arthur and he had to claim the sword and avenge his father in Order to get his kingdom. Lancelet as well is a reflection of Batraz as well. The lady of the lake correspond to Lady of the Lake. Seems that many motifs come from Ancient Persia.

The authors provide a real service in acknowledging the role of the Scythians and Alans in European history and culture.The main weakness is an apparent lack of depth of knowledge about Iranian mythology as there are other references that are not mentioned, such as the shape shifting of the “daughter of the king of fairies” into a white serpent in Iranian fairy tales among others.Also important to mention is Dick Davis’ work which makes a convincing argument that suggests that the source for Tristan & Isolde is likely the Parthian romance of Vis and Ramin.

A reexamination of the sources of this legend and tracing it to the Narts of the Caucasus. I heard a lecture sometime in the 1970's along these lines but could never find the documentation for it. This fills that gap.

It has confirmed a lot of the suspicions that I had that the most ancient peoples of the Caucasus (Adyge, Abkhaz, and Alanian) had a significant impact on early history and culture in Europe.

Fantastic book, which reveals the hidden history of Arthur and his knights. It all makes wonderful sense, but will no doubt upset those who believe in Arthur being Celtic in origin. The footnotes provide wonderful detail for those who are interested. The subject is worthy of wider review by others.