St Bride's Mystery

In 'The Wonderful History of the Sword in the Stone' (see previous blogs for details) I float the theory that in the Roman and post-Roman periods a temple complex ran along the north bank of the Thames in London from the Tower in the East to Westminster Abbey in the West.  We know there was a temple or shrine to Balan aka Bran, the Raven, at the Tower of London.  Archaeological remains have been found under the White Tower. 

Next came the shrine of his brother Balin, no remains alas but the name is preserved in Billingsgate (Balin's Gate).  The principal shrine on the highest point in the City of London was the site of the temple to Lud, the Sun God and Don, the mother goddess which gives the city its name (Lu'n Don in both Celtic and Cockney).  This site is now occupied by St Paul's Cathedral.  To the west the shrine of Merlin was on the Isle of Thorns or Thorney Island, then completely surrounded by water, which is where Westminster Abbey stands now.  However this configuration left me with a big gap even allowing for the river channel where one would expect one. 

I had nothing to fill in the space between Ludgate Circus at the bottom of Ludgate Hill which leads up to St Paul's and Covent Garden (Tyburn which in Celtic means house on the edge of a stream so this is probably where the river channel started) although we know that throughout the Middle Ages this area was filled with religious houses but recently I was doing some research for quite other reasons into the history of St Bride's Church in Fleet Street which revealed an intriguing mystery.

St Bride's church in flames in 1941 with only the steeple left standing

St Bride's was heavily bombed during the Blitz in 1941 and the church destroyed except for its distinctive tiered 'wedding-cake' spire.  The church was subsequently rebuilt but I was interested to learn that prior to its rebuilding archaeologists excavated the site and discovered beneath the foundations a 'mysterious building' dating to the second century AD. The archaeological team could not decide what this mysterious building was but I think it may have been the next temple in line dedicated to Brigid/Aranrhod, the daughter of Don and sister of Lud and be a missing link in this long run of Romano-Celtic temples. 

The church website currently concludes that the dedication to St Bride's (or St Brigid) refers to St Brigid of Kildare.  She was a real person, an Irish princess who became an influential leader in the Celtic Church, but she did not live until the 5th century so the second century building cannot have been dedicated to her.  In many stories about her she is confused with the earlier Celtic goddess Brigid and it seems likely that - given the traditional association of the site with a Brigid - that the second century shrine was dedicated to her predecessor. 

I don't know what became of the archaeological information collected by the dig but I would love to hear from anyone who knows where it is and whether there is any more evidence to back up my theory.

Lud's Church

This week Claire Balding on BBC's Radio4 is presenting a programme describing a ramble through Lud's Church.  The name instantly caught my eye.  Although I once lived in that neck of the woods I confess I had never heard of it before.  It's a narrow fissure in the rocks of the Peak District where the cliffs reach at one point a height of 150 feet.  Hardly the Grand Canyon but an unusual natural feature in the British landscape and apparently quite impressive when you are inside.

But what about the name?  To correct two errors I found on the internet although it is in the Peak District Lud's Church is not in Derbyshire but in North Staffordshire and the name has nothing to do with Luddites.  The Luddites were 19th century machine-breakers.  There is no historical evidence to suggest they were engaged in secret worship.  The official tourist website suggests that the name derives from its use by 15th century Lollards but I think the name is much older than that. 

There is also a tradition that it is the original of the 'Green Chapel' described in the fourteenth century story 'Sir Gawaine and the Green Knight' which, if true, suggests that the religious history of the site pre-dates both the Luddites and the Lollards.  As the translator of 'The Wonderful History of the Sword in the Stone' (to see details view earlier blogs) the 5th century book that lies at the heart of Malory's Morte Darthur I was immediately attracted by this link with Arthurian romance. 

Sir Gawaine is a character in the 5th century book.  He is one of the sons of Lud. Who was Lud?  He was the Celtic God of the Sun whose cult seems to have dominated Druidism in Roman and post-Roman Britain.  According to the writer of The Sword in the Stone his cult came to Britain at around the same time as Christianity circa 40 AD just before the Roman invasion.  His cult seems to have originated around the city of Arras in Northern France then spread as far south as Lyons and northwards and weswards to Normandy, Brittany and the British Isles.  His name is recorded in many British place names in its various forms Lud, Lludd, Lydd (which is how you pronounce Lludd, Nudd, Nidd and Nodens (Brythonic Celtic incorporates the same mutation as modern Welsh whereby you change the initial letter of certain words if preceeded by 'the'.  In England at any rate this seems to have involved switching L for N).  In The Sword in the Stone King Evelake (Welsh - Afallach or Mistletoe) comes to Britain with Joseph of Arimathea bringing their respective gospels.  These theologies had so much in common that by the mid-5th century the two churches were able to merge which is what 'The Quest for the Holy Grail' is all about.  In that story King Mistletoe literally passes away and hands over to the Celtic Church.  Lud's Church is an important site in helping us to piece together this vital period of intellectual development in Britain's post-Roman history.  I must visit it soon.

Not Jane Again!

The latest literary news in the UK is that much respected crime author P.D. James is planning to write a murder mystery based on Jane Austen's Pride and Prejudice. Regular readers of this column will know that I am not a great fan of Jane Austen and that I can't stand the works, collected or otherwise, of the Bronte sisters and deplore their domination of women's literature.  Frankly the only reason they have such a dominant position is because for years they were deemed the only female novelists suitable to be read by delicately nurtured females who could have no greater ambition than to make a mercenary marriage.  Both featured on the curriculum at my girls' grammar where the headmistress, even in the 1960s fondly liked to imagine we were 'gels'. (We weren't!)  More politically minded and rather better novelists like Maria Edgeworth, Elizabeth Gaskell and Mary-Anne Evans (George Eliot) did not get a look in.  Oddly this restrictive approach to literature did not apply to male writers.  I studied John Osborne's 'Luther' at A-level which influenced me far more than Jane Austen or Charlotte Bronte.  I have always liked writers with ideas. 

Even more irritating is the effect on the film industry.  How many versions of Jane Eyre do we need?  The latest remake is now on general release.  If a film isn't based on an actual Jane Austen novel it seems it is either Jane Eyre or it's a modern re-telling of a Jane Austen novel (Bridget Jones Diary, Clueless etc).  Enough surely!  The most exciting event in Persuasion is when someone catches a cold.  Puh-lease!  If I pitched that story to a TV executive I would be out on my ear faster than I could say 'Jane!'  Every pointless remake is a brand new original film that doesn't get made.  Please, everybody, give it a rest. 

I am full of admiration for these women in getting their work published - difficult enough at the best of times - and more than a little annoyed at publishers who still think this is the standard of literature required for 'women' (why do women need a separate category anyway like children?) - I just wish the books were more ambitious.  To Jane and Charlotte, Anne and Emily may I just say Maria, Mary-Anne and Elizabeth all did it.  Wrote proper grown-up books I mean.  Why didn't you at least give it a try?

By the way I have nothing against Janes in general.  My father never called me anything else.

Costume Drama - getting it right.

In London Fashion Week I have been watching two television dramas where fashion is all important - a re-run of the BBC's "The House of Elliot" about a 1920s London fashion house and the current series of "Downton Abbey".  The hats alone are worth the price of admission.  I have a personal weakness for 1920s cloche hats and "The House of Elliot" is stuffed with superb examples. Attention to detail in the costume department is apparent in both series.  Sadly the characters are thinly drawn and the drama weak to insipid and so slow.  The clothes are fabulous but just as the best actors can fail to shine without a good script the same can be said for costumes.  

Then there is the authenticity of the dialogue which must match the costumes if a historical drama is to have any credibility.  Now as a writer of historical fiction I am aware that this is a tricky area.  Do you stick faithfully to the language of the period and run the risk that the audience will not understand a word of it or chance the occasional anachronism in the interests of clarity? 

I am inclined to go with the latter provided it does not stick out like a sore thumb.  For one thing perceived anachronisms often turn out on close inspection not to be anachronistic at all. In Jane Austen dramas for instance adaptors faithfully follow the books making the characters speak in perfectly grammatical complete sentences but Jane Austen is following a literary convention.  No-one actually spoke like that.  If you check out late 18th and early 19th century afterpieces, short playscripts which record the language as it was spoken, all classes uses the same contracts - can't, won't, didn't etc - as we do. 

I have two historical films currently in progress. "The Lady in Grey" based on the life of French writer Guy de Maupassant is set in 19th century France but fortunately the characters all speak English so the problem of precise idiom is neatly side-stepped.  The second period piece "Master Merryman" is set in 1497 when English was drifting somewhere between Chaucer and Shakespeare and  yet to be fully formed.  The language would be so unfamiliar to a modern audience they would miss all the jokes so both the original Medwall play which lies at the heart of the story and the swashbuckling adventure around it will be in modern English so the comedy will work for modern film-goers.  If it doesn't - well there's always the costumes which will be gorgeous.  And the hats! Oh the hats!

The Lady in Grey and Master Merryman are both available as novels either in Kindle or paperback editions.

Assange autobiography

Julian Assange doesn't want his autobiography published (which is apparently not an autobiography at all but a biography compiled from interviews by a ghostwriter, the morality of which we might also consider while we're at it).  His argument is that the ghostwriter has no right to publish this material without his consent.  The irony that the person objecting is only noteworthy as the head of Wikileaks which exists to publish material without consent will not have escaped the general public but that aside what is the copyright position?

The Duke of Wellington famously responded to the insistence of a former mistress that she could publish her memoirs detailing their scandalous affair with a curt "Publish and be damned" which was consistent with his other famous riposte on the subject "I do not like what you say Sir but I will defend to the death your right to say it."  On the whole I think the Duke had the right idea.  If every individual can exist that effectively his or her life is copyright then no newspaper, no writer, no blogger come to that would be able to reproduce that individual's words or actions without being liable to the allegation of breach of copyright even if, as in the Assange case, the material has been provided freely and willingly.  This would be on top of the already existing laws of libel and defamation which surely should be sufficient protection.  Lord knows where this would leave us with phone-hacking!

Best to stick to the line the writer can say what they like without consent and you have the right equally to defend yourself in print on the same basis then leave it to the court of public opinion.  If people like  you they won't believe the libel and if they really like you they won't take any notice of it if they do.  But as to deceiving the public by selling a book you claim to have written when it has actually been written by somebody else - now that really shouldn't be allowed.

Kindle Bestsellers

The Serpent's Cove and The Wonderful History of The Sword in the Stone have made it onto the Amazon Kindle bestsellers list. My foray into direct publishing seems to be paying off.  Hooray!

New improved photo of The Serpent's Cove

Blogger have updated their system with new improved photo system so I am trying it out.

Latest news: The Serpent's Cove entered the Kindle Bestseller List and doing quite nicely.  This was my very first novel which I wrote principally to see if I could write a novel.  I had written a couple of plays for the BBC and decided to try this new form.  It's a light regency romance - I decided trying to write The Great Novel would entail twenty years of writing Chapter One and getting no further - and I wrote it in three weeks and had it accepted for publication within six.  I had no idea at the time how lucky I was in achieving such a quick success.  Nothing else has been quite that quick or easy. Here is the cover by way of a test photo. How does it look to you?