King Arthur ............?

Question

They now believe he was a real person but not sure who it was although there are a couple of men who could have been him- maybe combination of people. Trouble is I cant remember who they said he may be based upon, so I am asking you who which historical figure he may have been based upon ?

any idea's?

Answer 1

The historical basis for the King Arthur legend has long been debated by scholars.

Hundreds of years, in fact.

Still is.

We do not know who Arthur was, if he was a king, if he was a Roman, or if he ever existed.



One school of thought, citing entries in the Historia Brittonum (History of the Britons) and Annales Cambriae (Welsh Annals), sees Arthur as a genuine historical figure, a Romano-British leader who fought against the invading Anglo-Saxons sometime in the late 5th to early 6th century.



In 1924 it was suggested that the character of King Arthur was ultimately based on one Lucius Artorius Castus, a career Roman soldier of the late 2nd century or early 3rd century. This was suggested that the Arthurian legends were influenced by the nomadic Alans and Sarmatians that settled in Western Europe in Late Antiquity.



All that is known about Artorius’ life comes from two Latin inscriptions discovered in the 19th century in Podstrana on the Dalmatian coast. After a long and distinguished career in the Roman army as a centurion and then primus pilus, Artorius was promoted to praefectus legionis of the VI Victrix, a unit that had been stationed in Britain since c. 122 AD and headquartered at Eboracum (York).

After this (and no doubt due to his long, loyal service to Rome) he became civilian governor (procurator centenarius) of the province of Liburnia, where he seems to have ended his days - likely at an advanced age – and was buried



King Arthur, the 2004 film directed by Antoine Fuqua, with Clive Owen as the title character, Ioan Gruffudd as Lancelot, Keira Knightley as Guinevere, and Ivano Marescotti as Bishop Germanus was based on this premise.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_Arthur_(film)



The other text that seems to support the case for Arthur's historical existence is the 10th-century Annales Cambriae, which also link Arthur with the Battle of Mount Badon. The Annales date this battle to 516–518, and also mention the Battle of Camlann, in which Arthur and Medraut (Mordred) were both killed, dated to 537–539.



Some scholars argue that Arthur was originally a fictional hero of folklore – or even a half-forgotten Celtic deity – who became credited with real deeds in the distant past.

They cite parallels with figures such as the Kentish totemic horse-gods Hengest and Horsa, who later became historicised.

Bede ascribed to these legendary figures a historical role in the 5th-century Anglo-Saxon conquest of eastern Britain.



It is not even certain that Arthur was considered a king in the early texts. Neither the Historia nor the Annales calls him "rex": the former calls him instead "dux bellorum" (leader of battles) and "miles" (soldier).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_basis_for_King_Arthur



Personally, I want to believe that he was a great and mighty Celtic warrior and ruler that once lived in the area of what is modern say Wales.

That Avalon exists just the other side of the mists and the Round Table sits inside Camelot filled with the likes of Sir Galahad, Sir Gawain, Lancelot, and Tristan .... and that they were real "knights in shining armor".

And that Arthur Pendragon was and is the Once and Future King.

Answer 2

Sort of related but just to show how various aspects have come together to the story today is the history surrounding the legend of Merlin.

Merlin is a legendary figure best known as the wizard featured in the Arthurian legend.

The standard depiction of the character first appears in Geoffrey of Monmouth's Historia Regum Britanniae, written c. 1136, and is based on an amalgamation of previous historical and legendary figures.

Geoffrey combined existing stories of Myrddin Wyllt (Merlinus Caledonensis), a North British madman with no connection to King Arthur, with tales of the Romano-British war leader Ambrosius Aurelianus to form the composite figure he called Merlin Ambrosius (Welsh: Myrddin Emrys).



Geoffrey's rendering of the character was immediately popular, especially in Wales, later writers expanded the account to produce a fuller image of the wizard.

Merlin's traditional biography casts him as a cambion; born of a mortal woman, sired by an incubus, the non-human wellspring from whom he inherits his supernatural powers and abilities.



Merlin matures to an ascendant sagehood and engineers the birth of Arthur through magic and intrigue.

Later authors have Merlin serve as the king's advisor until he is bewitched and imprisoned by the Lady of the Lake.



Many retellings of the tale have expanded it into myth and folklore, as above the true arther is actually a combination of many people and tales.

Answer 3

Nobody knows who, if anyone, might have been the real-life model for King Arthur. That's why they're called the Dark Ages.

Answer 4

Ok, King Arthur was probably of least of Roman descent. he was a general or chief of some kind(Pendragon can translate as leader etc.) at Camulodunum, a roman city named after the Celtic God of War Camulos, cause the Romans being doers and respecters of any God with power accepted him as they're own. After all he'd done a good job with the Celts. (Same happened with Ascepilos, Greek God Of Healing after cured Romans left his temple during a plague.)



When the Romans left, the city became celtic and was named Camelot. Today, modern Colchester.



When the Saxons invaded, Arthur and his band of knights repelled them at Mons Badonicus in 500 AD. He and his knights made a great table, with 25 seats, kept by King Leodegrance, father of Guinevere.



Eventually, he had 13 courts across the isle of Britain and 150 knights loyal to him. However, only the 25 would seat at the round table.



Each of Arthur's most trusted Knights were given a court of which were of seven definates and 3 possibles. he ruled from Camelot.



Then came the dreaded day in Carlisle, the Court of Sir Lancelot, when Arthur noticed his wife missing, to discover her in his most loyal knights bed chamber. He dragged him to France, to Britanny, to be judged. However, Mordred, bastard son of Arthur and Arthur's Sister in a drunken evening, ceased control of the Kingdom.



They fought, the armies of Mordread and Arthur outside Mordred's court in more researched versions of the tale, at the battle of Camlann, the battle of the crooked bank, identical to the crooked banks of the River Camlann in the Effionydd, Wales. Here, was Merlin's prophecy fulfilled, and Arthur killed by his own blood, has Arthur, striking for the final blow with Excalibur, was blocked and stabbed by Mordred with Clarent, the Sword in the Stone, which shattered after its oathes of peace had been broken. modred was then killed by Lancelot who repaided his debt to Arthur by taking him to Avalon to remain immortal, to return on the day of Dragon's coming. The Final day. When the Imperial Dragon would come and destroy the world. but man wouyld have one representative, the man who could fight with his brains and his wits. A Celtic man. Arthur, rex quondem rexque futurus. The Once and Future King.



Or so the story goes.



Probably based on a Celtic king who repelled the Saxon invasion in the Middle Ages and brought temporay peace to Britannia. But want do i know...

Answer 5

Different historians have different theories of who he was. The person you're probably thinking of was Lucious Artorius Castus, a Roman general who lived several centuries before the deeds that are ascribed to Arthur. The theory that tales of him became entangled with the fifth and sixth centuries has gained more notoriety since the making of the 2004 film "King Arthur" which was marketed on the falsely claim that it was a true story which inspired the legend.



The reality is that different historians have different theories of who Arthur was. But there exists certain information that there was a powerful leader at about the time Arthur is said to have lived, who ruled something like a small empire across Britain, defending it from the invaders Arthur is said to have fought against. A hill in Cadbury has been found to contain the remains of a prominent fortress dating from that time, and pottery remains indicate that luxury goods were being imported from across the Channel during that time. One popular name that has been put forth for who this individual was is Riothamus, a king who was in power during that time, and who also marched on Rome, as Arthur is said to in one of the most prominent texts which made him famous.

Answer 6

Graham Chapman! no doubt about it!!

Answer 7

That no funny.