The historicity of the Arthur of legend has long been debated by scholars. One school of thought believes that Arthur had no historical existence. [1] Some hold that he originally was a half-forgotten Celtic deity that devolved into a personage (citing sometimes a supposed change of the sea-god Lir into King Lear) or a possibly fictive person like Beowulf. Supporters of this theory often link it to the Welsh etymology of Arthur's name as derived from "bear", proposing bear gods named Artos or Artio as the precedent for myth, but these deities are known to have been worshipped by the continental Celts, not the Britons.
Another view holds that Arthur was a real person, who by most theories was a Romano-British leader and lived sometime in the late 5th century to early 6th century and fought against the invading Saxons. Recent archaeological studies show that during this alleged figure's lifetime, the Saxon expansions were halted until the next generation. If he existed, his power base would probably have been in the Celtic areas of Wales, Cornwall, or the west of modern England. However, controversy over the centre of his supposed power and the extent and kind of power he would have wielded continues to this day.
In the tales, Arthur marries Lady Guinevere, but Guinevere is having a secret affair with Lancelot, one of Arthur’s best knights. Guinevere and Lancelot’s love affair divides Camelot; during the conflict with Lancelot, Arthur discovers the Saxons' plan to attack. He fights and defeats them, while at the same time, his half-brother Mordred plans to take over the throne. Arthur fights Mordred in a battle that leaves many knights dead. Arthur kills Mordred but before Mordred dies, he mortally wounds the King. After Arthur dies, the Lady of the Lake takes him to the island of Avalon, where, it is said, he is not dead but asleep. He will awake and come to the aid of Britain in its hour of greatest need.
[edit]
Ambrosius Aurelianus
Some members of the historical school have argued for identifying Arthur with Ambrosius Aurelianus, a Romano-British war leader who won important battles against the Saxons but whose traditional dates of activity are somewhat earlier than Arthur's. Thus, some have argued that Arthur may have been one of Ambrosius' lieutenants, and may have succeeded him as overall leader.
[edit]
Lucius Artorius Castus
Other writers, such as Kemp Malone and Linda Malcor, suggest that King Arthur should be identified as one Lucius Artorius Castus, a Roman dux of the 2nd century, who might have (though this is far from certain) led a numerus of Sarmatian, which was based at Ribchester and which campaigned at and north of Hadrian’s Wall. Castus' alleged military exploits in Britain and Armorica may have been remembered for centuries afterward. This is linked to a theory by C. Scott Littleton and Linda A. Malcor which suggests that the folk narratives carried by the Alano-Sarmatians as well as history associated with various groups of Alano-Sarmatians formed the core of the Arthurian tradition. The "Sarmatian connection" hypothesis was used as the basis of the film King Arthur.
The Alano-Sarmatians were steppe nomads who fought from horseback with a kontus ("lance"), longsword and bow, carried a shield with a tamga marking (similar to heraldic markings), and who wore scale armor and conical helms. There are also strong connections between Alano-Sarmatian legends and customs (such as placing swords in the ground) and details in the Arthurian legend (such as the Sword in the Stone) as well as the Cup of the Narts ("Nartyamonga"), which appeared at feasts, delivered to each person what he liked best to eat, and which was kept by the bravest of the Narts ("Knights") and the magical woman, dressed in white, associated with water, who helps the hero acquire his sword and the Lady of the Lake. In fact, the modern Ossetian tale of the "Death of Batraz" (the leader of the Narts) matches Malory's tale of the death of Arthur almost point for point, except the sword is thrown into a sea rather than a lake (The Ossetians are the descendants of the Alans). While Castus and the Sarmatian forces lived three hundred years before the traditional dates of Arthur's battles, many oral narratives survive much longer than that, with the adventures of subsequent historical figures often credited to "heroes" who lived many centuries earlier. Some Sarmatian details, like the Sword in the Stone itself, may have been added later in French romances, possibly entering the tradition as the result of the impact of the Alans on Europe in the fifth century C.E. [citation needed].
However, those who do not accept the Sarmatian connection would argue that the obscurity surrounding Castus makes this identification unlikely, as there seems to be little reason for him to have become a major legendary figure. No Roman historical source actually mentions him, or his alleged exploits in Britain. Nor is there actually any firm evidence that he ever commanded Sarmatians. Also, the greatest resonances of Arthurian tales with Sarmatian ones occur in very late writings, relatively speaking, such as Malory's Le Morte Darthur (when Arthur and his men were already developed into "knights in shining armor") and none appear in the earliest Welsh legends, such as those in the Mabinogion — which lead some to conclude that Sarmatian influence was limited to the development of the tales instead of historical basis, if at all. (See [2])
[edit]
Arthur as an alias
The origin of the name Arthur is itself a matter of debate, and is very much connected to the debates concerning his historicity. Some, like the above, see it as derived from the Latin "Artorius", a Roman family name meaning "plowman" which became "Arturius", among other variants, in Roman inscriptions. The 5th to 6th century Welsh art (arth is a later form) means “bear”. Thus, theories for the Welsh origin of the name Arthur have been proposed. One has art + ur, “man of the bear” or “bear-man”, thus giving us Artur. Also, the Latin form of Arthur appears as Arturus in the earliest writings, never Artorius. The supposition of the Latin "-us" could suggest the original name was the Welsh Artur. Yet "Artorius" in its later forms when pronounced in Celtic languages could have yielded "Arthur" as well as "Arturus", both of which forms do occur in the medieval literature.
Toby C. Griffen links the name Arthur to Arcturus, the brightest star in the constellation Bo̦tes, and the third brightest in the night sky. The word Arcturus is in Classical Latin, and would have been Arturus in the Late Latin of the 5th Р6th century. Griffen and others believe that Arthur might not be derived from a Latin original such as Artorius, as proponents of the above theories suspect, but could have been a nom de guerre used by or an epithet bestowed upon the leader who fought against the Saxons. This becomes even more intriguing if Arthur derives from "The Eagle of Thor", as fantasy author A. A. Attanasio has it [citation needed]. If it really does, Saxon (or other Scandinavian-related) enemies might have ascribed it to him as a term of grudging respect.
Griffen goes on to state that the star Arturus was associated with the Great Bear. Its position in the sky, near Ursa Major, led people to call it the “guardian of the bear”, and it was regarded as the leader of the other stars in Boötes. In Welsh, the conveniently similar Artur (or possibly Arturos) meant “bear-man”. If the man we call Arthur used Arturus (and Artur[os]) as his nom de guerre(s), its meaning(s) would have been easily understood by both the Romano-British and native British alike; a stout bear-like defender against the invaders. (See [3])
Graham Phillips and Martin Keatman argue for their variant of the nom de guerre theory in their book, King Arthur: The True Story. For them, the name has two components. The first would be the Welsh art meaning bear, and the second a repetition in Latin, ursus, making the original name "Artursus". They maintain that he would have been one of the Votadini of Gwynedd, possibly Owain Ddantgwyn, King of Rhôs. However,their theory has not gained widespread acceptance.
In any case, the name Artur and its variants was used by at least four leaders who lived after the traditional dates of Arthur’s battles, suggesting to Griffen and others that it was not used as a personal name until “the” Arthur himself did so. This idea is reinforced by the fact that Arthur's father is named Uther, phonetically similar to Arthur.
[edit]
Artur mac Ãedáin
Another theory proposes that the real Arthur was Artur mac Ãedáin, a war leader of the Scots and Brythons. By this theory, Artur was predominantly active in the region between the Roman walls — the Gododdin. Artur was never "king" per se, but rather the son of the Scottish king Ãedán mac Gabráin, who ruled from about 574 AD. As claims this website ([4]), Artur led a loose coalition of the Christian Celts against their pagan invaders — effectively holding them off for about one hundred more years. This is the solution proposed by Michael Wood. However, Artur is merely one of the aforementioned four leaders who were probably named after the original Arthur. In modern times, Artur's name is spelled Artuir.
[edit]
Bronze Age leader
John Darrah and Arthur Cummins propose an Arthur who lived in the Bronze Age, circa 2300 BC. They argue that pulling a sword from a stone and an anvil is a metaphor for making a sword from ore and hammering it into shape on an anvil. This is disputed by those who say that the Sword in the Stone is an embellishment in the first place. [citation needed]. Roderick MacLeish's book Prince Ombra includes this metaphor in its telling of the Arthurian legend.
The late historian John Morris made the alleged reign of Arthur at the turn of the 5th century the organising principle of his history of sub-Roman Britain and Ireland under the rubric The Age of Arthur: A History of the British Isles from 350–650' (1974), even though he found little to say of a historic Arthur, save as an example of the idea of kingship, one among such contemporaries as Vortigern and Cunedda, Hengest and Coel.
[edit]
Earliest traditions of Arthur
Arthur first appears in Welsh literature. In a surviving early Welsh poem, The Gododdin (ca. AD 594), the poet Aneirin (ca. 535-600 AD) writes of one of his subjects that "he fed black ravens on the ramparts, although he was no Arthur." However, it is not possible to determine if this passage is a later interpolation based on current manuscripts of the poem. The following poems attributed to Taliesin are possibly from a similarly early date: The Chair of the Sovereign, which refers to "Arthur the Blessed"; Preiddeu Annwn ("The Treasures of Annwn"), mentions "the valour of Arthur" and states "we went with Arthur in his splendid labours"; and the poem Journey to Deganwy, which contains the passage "as at the battle of Badon with Arthur, chief giver of feasts, with his tall blades red from the battle which all men remember."
Another early reference to Arthur is in the Historia Britonum, attributed to the Welsh monk Nennius, who is said to have written this compilation of early Welsh history around the year 830. In this work, Arthur is referred to as a "leader of battles" rather than as a king. Two separate sources within this compilation list twelve battles that he fought, culminating in the Battle of Mons Badonicus, where he is said to have single-handedly killed 960 men. According to the 10th century Annales Cambriae, Arthur was killed at the Battle of Camlann in AD 537.
Arthur makes appearances in a number of well known vitae ("Lives") of 6th century saints, most of them written at the monastery of Llancarfan in the 12th century. For example, in the Life of Saint Illtud, from internal evidence apparently written around 1140, Arthur is said to be a cousin of that churchman. Many of these appearances portray Arthur as a fierce warrior, and not necessarily as morally impeccable as in later romances. According to the Life of Saint Gildas (died ca. 570 AD), written in the 11th century by Caradoc of Llancarfan, Arthur killed Gildas' brother Hueil, a pirate on the Isle of Man.
In around 1100, Lifris of Llancarfan writes in his Life of Saint Cadoc that Arthur was bettered by Cadoc. Cadoc gave protection to a man who killed three of Arthur's soldiers, and Arthur was awarded a herd of cattle from Cadoc as wergeld for his men. Cadoc delivered them as demanded, but when Arthur took possession of the animals, they were transformed into bundles of ferns. Such episodes serve to portray a holy man besting a worldly leader. Similar incidents are described in the late medieval biographies of Carannog, Padern, Goeznovius, and Efflam.
Arthur also appears in the Welsh tale Culhwch and Olwen, a narrative that is usually associated with the Mabinogion. In that work, Culhwch visits Arthur's court to seek his help in winning the hand of Olwen. Arthur, who is described as his kinsman, agrees to the request and fulfils the demands of Olwen's giant father Ysbaddaden, which includes his hunt for the great boar Twrch Trwyth described at length by the author.
This may be related to legends where Arthur is depicted as the leader of the Wild Hunt, a folk motif that is also recorded in Brittany, France; Galicia, Spain; and Germany. Roger Sherman Loomis has listed a number of these instances (Loomis 1972). Gervase of Tilbury in the 13th century and two 15th century writers assign this role to Arthur. Gervase states that Arthur and his knights regularly hunt along an ancient trackway between Cadbury Castle and Glastonbury (which is still known as King Arthur's Causeway [5]), and that he with his company of riders may be seen by moonlight in the forests of Britain or Brittany or Savoy. Loomis alludes to a Scottish mention in the 16th century, and that many of these beliefs were still current in the 19th century at Cadbury Castle, and in several parts of France.
Later parts of the Trioedd Ynys Prydein, or Welsh Triads, mention Arthur and locate his court in Celliwig in Cornwall. Celliwig was identified by older Cornish antiquaries with Callington.