By the ninth century people all over were telling the fabulous tales and romances about Arthur and his kingdom. The common people heard them sung by bards, while in the court poets wrote different versions. In each retelling the speaker would select certain details for emphasis and introduce new elements, so that the story could be adapted to the particular time and audience.
Although most historians believe that there actually did exist an Arthur, they differ on how major his role was on influencing society during his time. To understand the most widely accepted view on when and how Arthur gained fame, one must be aware of the historical time period surrounding Arthur.
The unity that the Roman government imposed on Britain disappeared around 410 AD.
In its place arose small villages whose rulers struggled for political and military supremacy. Around 540, a Welsh monk and historian named Gildas wrote in his book Concerning the Ruin and Conquest of Britain that "The disasters that the British people suffered at the hands of the Anglo-Saxons after the
Roman withdrawal were clear evidence that god was punishing them for their sins." It was during these disasters that the monk was referring to that Arthur held up resistance for the Britons against the Saxons, at a time when Britain was constantly being threatened by invaders. Through being the commander who routed the battles against the enemy and thereby saving the south of Britain from distruction of the Saxons, "Arthur became the image of the hero and savior whose death people refused to believe in and whose return was yearned for." The opinion that Arthur was a genuine figure in history, though not the glorious King Arthur that most people know him to be, is largely based on the writings of Nennius, a Welsh historian, who gave the first and only historical account of Arthur's military career in Chapter 56. The passage starts with a date. "After the death of Hengist, his son Octha came