I don't know how many peopel ar elef tot read this, but here goes...

The Misst of Avalon was not Pron [er sey, but was very Anti-Christain, and before w discuss hwo it eflects the Hisotry accuraclty of how Christainity sprrad by deciet and mrider, lets face reality.

Christainised Rome didnt conwuer Brittain. Pagan ROme did. Teh gaulic sieges where lead by None other than Julius Caeser, aroudn 60 BC. So no, the CHristain roman Empire did not COnquer Brittain. Hwck, it woidl be three centiries after the time of CHrist before Rome became a Christain state. By then it had alreayd Largly Withdrawn form Brittain.

Second off, the "Old Religion". OK, soem of you may rpefer to thin the Neo-Pagan crap in the book and movie was actually how the Ancient Celtic rleigion worked. They worshipe the great mother Goddess, and celebrated Beltain, and you can pracite this religion today in Modenr Wicca and the like.

This is all false.

The Celtic religion was largley disorginised and not Uniform form region to region, and the few connecting strands where a few Universal gods. Plural, not singular. Andnot a one fo them an overarchign feminine charecter known simpely as "The Goddess".

The chief Diety was avutlaly male, called "The Dahgda." This means the All Father.

Others where the Morrigan, goddess of deaht and war, and Aridrannah.

The rest where geenrlaly reigonal deities and tribal cheif gods.

Likewise, the Ancient celtic rleigion relied on Head Huntign and Himan Sacrifice. We find soem victims today inthe Marshes still.

Theyw here less civilised than the ORman Pagans who conwuered them, and the Pagans of ORme didnt even worship a Great Goddess. They used thr Latinised Olympian Polytheistic system, headed by Jupiter, and MArs as their Patron deity.

The "Old rleigion" foudn in this book, andmovie, are Anachonisms. The prodict of 20th Century wishful thinking, projected onto a past that didnt exist.

Also, the idea that the Christasn treated women as second class citezend, where the Pagans treated them fairly and with respect is pure bunk. The clets treatedtheir Horses better than women. Christendom was seen as an imporvement in their lives. At leastthey wher recognised then as people.

Don't beleive me? Look it up in real hisotyebooks sometime.

This brigns us to how Brittian was acutlaly Christainised.

Not through conwueast, deciet, and murder of the Pagans, and suppresionof their ways. THe CHristainfaith wasnt shoved down their throats.

It acutlaly happened slowly and in two waves. Threeif you count Ireland, th last land converted.

The first wave was when Joseph of Arnimethea took the Grial their int he firts palce. He founded the Celtic Chruches which thrived, but didnt rellay do much to the surroundign culture.

The next wave was from Augustine the Less, first Archbishop pf Canterburry. He reconciled the desperate Celtic CHruches to Rome. He also managed to convert mostof th celts. PEacefully.

Again, look it up on such soruces as Wikipedia, or University hisotry courses. DOtn take my word for it.

Learn hwo the Old Rleigion just didnt exist at the time, and by the time Arthur ( who himself if he existed was CHristain) was not a Pagan and did not rellay exist to brign abotu a aba;ance between "The Old rleigion" and Christendom.

The book is terrible on the fact htat hisotry alone dispiroves it. then the lines they feed Christaisn into, such as blamign the guilt they feel on it, and blaming the problems largley on "Patriarchy" and Christainisation, is idiocy. Espeiclaly when taken withthe Hisry that Brittainwas alreayd a Christain nation at the time.

Do you peopel even know Hisotry?

I doubt it.

Sorry for a sloppy post, byt the last post Ir ead is two years old, so didnt feel liek doiugn a proper job. Just expressing outrage here.Outrage that many peoepla cutlaly beleive htis drivel is indivcative of anyhting rtemotlry hisotrical.