I've been reading Adam Ardrey's popular history books Finding Arthur and Finding Merlin in which he makes a reasonable case for Arthur Mac Aedan. But to me, a lot of the evidence he puts forward seems a bit too convenient for it to be overlooked by historians for the past thousand years or so. Being inquisitive, I've searched the internet for some sort of scholarly response to his claims but have come up with a dearth of information. If anyone is familiar with his work, can you give me a convincing argument against Arthur Mac Aedan as the legendary Arthur?