EXTRACTS: Frank Bellamy's King Arthur and his Knights: The Complete Adventure © 2008 The Book Palace (116 PAGES in Full edition)

6 FRANK BELLAMY appears in a 13th century MS of the Historia Brittonum but which appears to be from the late 10th century. The documents are calculations of the dates when Easter falls and were known as Easter Tables. They would have been copied numerous times, but it is generally presumed that events noted in previous versions would also be copied over. As they date events from the first table, it is in year 72 that the Battle of Badon is noted “in which Arthur carried the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ on his shoulders for three days and three nights and the Britons were victors”. In Year 93, “The strife of Camlann in which Arthur and Mordred perished. And there was plague in Britain and Ireland”. The latter note is missing from some versions of the documents and the similarity in wording between the comment for year 72 and the description by Nennius for Arthur’s eighth battle at the fortress of Guinnion (“in which Arthur carried the image of holy Mary ever virgin on his shoulders; and the pagans were put to flight on that day”) seems to make it clear that the comment was inspired by Nennius. The date of these documents is debated but the general consensus is that year 72 would be around 516-18 and year 93 around 537-39. No clear picture of Arthur emerges from these historical records: all dates are tentative and locations are open to wide interpretation, placing Arthur everywhere from Cornwall to Southern Scotland at various times. O. J. Padel neatly sums up the situation when he says: “The generally received view of the historical Arthur today is that he was probably a sixth-century battle leader of the British against the English, as portrayed in the Historia Brittonum attributed to Nennius. This view relies on that source and the two references in the Annales Cambriae , records composed three to four centuries later. But the Historia Brittonum also contains a contrasting portrayal of Arthur as a giant-like figure of legendary folklore. It is a matter of taste how one views this contrast in the earliest Arthurian document. It may show a historical Arthur already turning into a figure of legend, or a legendary Arthur becoming historicized. The weight of early evidence, and the absence of his name in Gildas, both favour the latter idea.” 10 * * * * * If there was a historical figure at the back of Arthurian legend, he is barely discernable by the time we reach the early 1950s and the tale of ‘King Arthur and his Knights’ as it appeared in Swift . The story was told in 41 episodes between 30 July 1955 and 5 May 1956 and immediately followed a 41 week adaptation of Johann Wyss’ classic novel Swiss Family Robinson (9 October 1954 to 16 July 1955). The King Arthur story was scripted by Clifford Makins, who had become the sub-editor of the then newly launched Swift in 1954 when he accepted a position as personal assistant to editor Marcus Morris. He had met Morris, founder of the Eagle comic by chance and was, at the time, working in the accounts department of Faber & Faber and writing the occasional review for the Times Literary Supplement . Makins’ background in theatre – he had been assistant stage manager for the Travelling Repertory Theatre founded by Basil C. Langton and later stage manager of the Ballet Negre – gave him a common interest with Morris, who was keen on film and theatre and had married an actress, Jessica Dunning. How many stories Makins wrote for Swift is unknown but he was certainly fortunate to have Frank Bellamy as his artist for the strips he is known to have scripted. When Bellamy moved to Eagle , Makins was his scriptwriter for ‘The Happy Warrior’, ‘The Shepherd King’ and ‘Montgomery of Alamein’… by which time good fortune presumably had nothing to do with it and editorial choice teamed writer and artist together. Bellamy’s work on King Arthur was a substantial improvement over his earlier adaptation of Swiss Family Robinson . The layout of the strip meant that, rather than ten cramped frames to a page, he now spread them over two pages, allowing a far more dramatic story to emerge. This was a swashbuckling strip in the style of swashbuckling movies and Bellamy’s single frames across the width of the small tabloid-sized pages of Swift , gave the story the look of wide- screen cinema. Bellamy made fine use of his wide-screen panels in some of the story’s most dramatic moments: Arthur’s escape – with the aid of Lancelot – from a ruined castle, the later attack on Lancelot’s French stronghold and the jousting scenes between Lancelot and various knights. They were all given the space they deserved in the comic equivalent of Cinemascope. The story dips into the Arthurian legends but retells only a fraction of the saga. We have the episodes of the sword in the stone and the Lady in the Lake, the Round Table, plus a few lesser- remembered elements such as the battle with King Lot at Sherwood Forest. After that, the story concentrates on intrigues within Camelot – with Mordred almost a comedy villain for the piece, complete with handlebar moustache – and the split between Arthur and Lancelot following a failed assassination attempt (by Mordred) against Arthur. The scene is set for some thrilling action as Arthur, convinced that Lancelot is his enemy, takes his army of Knights of the Round Table to France to attack those loyal to Lancelot. Meanwhile, Mordred is left in charge of Camelot, Merlin is imprisoned and his only hope is that Sir Kay will reach France to warn Arthur. The look of the strip is very much in the tradition of how King Arthur and his knights have been portrayed in the past. By the time of the Vulgate Cycle, which brought together all the main elements of the Arthurian legends for the first time, the illuminated manuscript was also established and a romance such as that of King Arthur was often richly illustrated. Since there was no description of Arthur and no reference for French illuminators to work from, the images they created were of then-contemporary fashion, resplendent with heraldic symbols, and colourful imagery of Arthur and his court. Thus, although King Arthur was supposedly active in the dark ages, his image dates from the late medieval age. The story is one of friendship and loyalty tested to their very limits. The hero of the story is really Sir Lancelot: when he is tested he is found to be brave, loyal and a true knight. Lancelot is, however, already a knight when he is first introduced. Arthur, on the other hand, is still young and has to learn the chivalric code. Whether he lives up to what is expected of him as the chosen King of Britain you will be able to discover for yourself in the following pages. Steve Holland , Colchester, 2008 1 Geoffrey of Monmouth was influential in persuading his friend, Caradoc of Llancarfan, to write a biography of Gildas. 2 It was suggested by French scholar Gaston Paris that the change was made to avoid any association of Myrddin with the French work merde. 3 Lucius Tiberius was a fictional character created by Geoffrey of Monmouth. No emperor of this name exists in Roman history. 4 P. J. C. Field, ‘Sir Thomas Malory’, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, Oxford University Press, Sept 2004; online edn., Jan 2008 (accessed 7 July 2008). 5 From the translation of Joseph P. Clancey, London & New York, Macmillan, 1970. 6 From the translation of William F. Skene, Edinburgh, Edmonston & Douglas, 1868. 7 St. Elbotus, or Elvodugus, is thought to be the Welsh bishop Elfoddw of Gwynedd (d. 809). 8 From the translation of Alan Lupack, http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/nennius.html (accessed 7 July 2008). 9 In its most widely available translation by J. A. Giles, Mons Badonicus becomes Bath-hill and the battle raged “forty-four years and one month after the landing of the Saxons, and also the time of my own nativity”. Gildas’ birth is variously dated c.498, c.504 or 516. 10 O. J. Padel, ‘King Arthur’, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography , Oxford University Press, Sept 2004; online edn., Jan 2008 (accessed 7 July 2008).