What evidence supports the myth of King Arthur?
“Some people believe that King Arthur is so inextricably tied up in Celtic Mythology that he must, in origin, have been, not a man at all, but a god.” Arthur is claimed as the king of almost every Celtic kingdom known. The 6th century saw many men names Arthur born into the royal families of Britain but, even though, there were many attempts to identify the great man himself amongst them, there can be little doubt that most of these people were only named in his honor. In the late 5th and early 6th centuries, a time known as the dark ages, British won a significant victory over the Saxon invaders of their country, so the Western Roman Empire had to shake off the dominion of the Germans. British tradition credited this victory to Arthur. Arthur wasn’t remembered as a dark age general, but preserved the memory of Arthur’s great legend, still potent in our own way. Arthur was a golden age king who returned to lead his people again. Under his rule, they would regain the land that was theirs and the English would be driven from the island. This legend was so powerful, so believed, that it remained a threat to rulers of England after Arthur’s famous victory of Badon.
Badon is an definite historical fact, but Arthur, according to the current historical consensus, is a figure of a legend. He is studied under medieval literature, not Dark Age British history, since there is no evidence for his existence in up to date British record. But in truth it is not Arthur who is missing from the record; it is record itself which is missing.
“on the ruin of Britain” is the title of the last surviving text from this period, from a monk named Gildas, who addressed this to Britain rulers, warning them of the dire consequences that must follow. “the history of the kings of Britain” is the earliest surviving text to name Arthur in the ninth century, dark age historians concluded that Arthur was invented then. This book written by...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document