Dear Bernard Cornwell, I recently asked you why you had felt it necessary to attribute Alfred’s military victories to the fictional character Uhtred, and why you felt obliged to portray Alfred as priest-obsessed as well as an ineffectual soldier. You replied that you were puzzled by my question, as there is plenty of evidence that Alfred was both extremely pious and physically ill for long periods. In reply I would say that Alfred probably was very pious, but in the Saxon books you turn his piety into a joke. With a new exceptions (such as Brother Pyrlig) Christians are portrayed in a very negative light. I’m not a Christian myself and I’m pretty sure you’re not either, but it just strikes me as an example of an author’s personal prejudice overriding the facts. Just because Alfred was pious doesn’t mean he was a buffoon. As to his physical capacity to fight, the precise nature of Alfred’s illness and how much it affected him remains unclear. But if you wish to stick to evidence, then whatever his illnesses the facts are that he was strong enough to fight long campaigns and lived to his fiftieth year. There is nothing in the known facts to suggest that he was an inept soldier. Unless I’m missing something??

David