The Medieval Times

May 30, 2014

MEDIEVAL TIMES
Alexis Soto | Period 1

Table of Contents
King Arthur: Man or

Myth?
The Story
The Supporting

Argument
The Opposing

Argument
The Verdict?
Important Characters

in Arthurian
Literature
Queen Guinevere
Merlin
Mordred
Citations

King Arthur: Man or Myth?

King Arthur: Man or Myth?

Everyone is familiar with the story of King Arthur
or at least, a version of the story. The truth is, there is no
one official tale. Since he was first mentioned in
Nenniuss History of the Britons in the early 9th century,
Arthurian lore has grown exponentially, beginning
almost simultaneously throughout medieval Europe,
and spreading all throughout the world today. Most
people regard him as being strictly mythical, but is it
possible this legendary king actually existed? Historians
today are still debating this phenomenon, uncovering
new evidence to support both sides of the argument
everyday. Since no indisputable evidence has been
1

The Medieval Times

Important Characters
in Arthurian Literature

May 30, 2014

found at this point, whether or not King Arthur was a

real man or just another fictional hero has become a
matter of opinion, rather than fact. In this article, both
sides of the argument will be examined in the hope of
uncovering the truth.

The Story
Before we can determine whether or not Arthur
existed, we must first have an understanding of his
story. As I mentioned earlier, there is no official legend
of this romanticized king, but there are commonalities
between many of the tales that can give a fairly good
overview of who this man was (or was thought to be).

Queen Guinevere
Queen Guinevere is the
surpassingly beautiful and
desirable wife of King Arthur.
Her role in early Arthurian
literature was small, acting
merely as Arthurs love interest.
In the late 12th century,
Chrtien de Troyes introduced
the first story with an
extramarital relationship
between her and Lancelot, one
of the kings most trusted
knights. In some stories,
Guinevere is also involved in
Mordeds treachery to Arthur,
though more often than not it is
not out of her own free will.
Guinevere is killed by her lover,
Lancelot, in many stories, who
finds out about her role in the
treachery against Arthur and
slays her out of vengeance.

Today, Arthurs legend is extremely elaborate. He

has always been portrayed as a valiant king, but rather
than there being just one simple tale, there are
hundreds, involving everything from warlocks to
adulterous wives. Though the amount of contradictory
information between stories can be overwhelming, the
similarities seen throughout can provide a general
outline of an typical Arthurian tale.

King Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table

King Arthur: Man or Myth?

The Medieval Times

Arthur is almost always portrayed as

a kind, thoughtful ruler who is more than
capable in battle. In fact, his sword itself
has a name: Excalibur. (Excalibur plays an
important role in many of Arthurs
adventures, including one of the most well
known Arthurian legends, the Sword in the
Stone.) The noble king presides in his
kingdom of Camelot, where he gathers his
great army of knights, the most elite of
which are given positions at his famed
Round Table. These knights were Arthurs
most trusted, and he considered himself
their equal. (The Round Table was made in
its distinct circular shape in order to create
this sense of equality, since there was no
head to the table.) Arthur is married to the
beautiful Guinevere. In more modern tales,
Guinevere is also involved in an adulterous
relationship with Lancelot, one of the
kings most trusted knights.
Overall, Arthurs story is one of
honor, bravery, and compassion. While
details and plot points may vary by origin
or author, the above aspects create a
sense of unity that is the foundation for
Arthurian literature. It is also these
commonalities that create a back bone for
several arguments supporting the possible
existence of King Arthur.

The Supporting Argument

While the idea that King Arthur
existed is not very popular, the points
brought up by historians who back this
theory are equally as thought-provoking
as those of the opposing side of the
a rg u m e n t . B e l i e v e r s h a v e w r i t t e n
numerous books trying to prove the

King Arthur: Man or Myth?

May 30, 2014

existence of this famed medieval ruler,

and continue to hunt for conclusive
evidence to further support their theory.
Unfortunately, since the majority of
historians (and people in general) believe
that Arthur is nothing more than a myth,
the arguments made by this group are
often overlooked. Nonetheless, they
should not be ignored.

Artwork from the The History of the Britons

The main argument made by this

group pertains to the first official mention
of Arthur. The History of the Britons, written
by the Welsh monk Nennius, was written
with the intent of accurately recording the
history of the Welsh (the Britons) up until
that point. The book goes into great detail
on the Saxon invasion of Britain, which is
where Arthur comes into play. He is
described as a dux bellorum, which means
military leader, or miles, which means
warrior or soldier, rather than a king. While
this is different than how we traditionally
think of Arthur, it is possible that his status
increased in later on tellings of the tale.
3

The Medieval Times

Important Characters
in Arthurian Literature

Merlin
In early Arthurian literature,
Merlin began as a mere prophet,
but over time, his role in King
Arthurs story grew. Today he is
not only known as a prophet, but
as a magician and advisor to
Arthur as well. Born with the
name Emrys, he was originally
supposed to be the
counterweight to Jesus Christ,
but decided instead to use his
powers for good. He is involved
in Arthurs life from the very
beginning, when he helps Uther
(Arthurs father) win over Ygerna
(Arthurs mother). When Arthur
was a young boy, Merlin tutored
him, and created the sword in the
stone to ensure that he would be
king. Merlin received this sword,
Excalibur, from the Lady of the
Lake, whom he persuaded to
give the sword to Arthur. While
doing this, however, he fell in
love with her. He taught the Lady
of the everything he knew, but
eventually she grew more
powerful than he, and captured
him. According to the stories, this
is why Merlin was unable to save
Arthur at the Battle of Camlann.

King Arthur: Man or Myth?

May 30, 2014

This information suggests that King Arthur could

have existed for several reasons. First, it seems unlikely
that Nennius would have been writing to preserve
history, and then add in a man who did not exist. At this
time, monks were the only people trying to hold on to
the knowledge of the past, since the rest of the world
was more focused on trying to stay alive in the harsh
times that were the Middle Ages, so altering the
information would not have been beneficial to their
cause. Another reason this text supports the theory that
Arthur was a real man is that it correlates with another
piece of medieval text, The Annals of Wales. This
collection of dates documents important events from
the mid-5th century to mid-10th century includes two of
the battles mention in Nenniuss work, the Battle of
Badon and the Battle of Camlann. They state:

The Annals of the Wales

516 - The Battle of Badon, in which Arthur carried the

Cross of our Lord Jesus Christ for three days and three
nights on his shoulders and the Britons were the victors.
537 - The battle of Camlann, in which Arthur and
Medraut fell: and there was plague in Britain and
Ireland.

The Medieval Times

T h e s e r e f e r e n c e s t o A r t h u r,
combined with those in the The History of
the Britons, make it seem highly likely that
there was at some point a real Arthur.
Believers in this theory continue to search
for conclusive evidence everyday, and
someday, we may eventually know the
truth.

The Opposing Argument

As previously mentioned, this side
of the debate is far more popular than the
side of those who believe in the existence
of Arthur. One of the main reasons for this
is because there is simply a lack of
credible historical evidence. While The
Annals of Wales and The History of the
Britons are fairly convincing, they also
contain many errors, so most historians do
not believe them to be a reliable source.
Not only are these two texts inconsistent in
their accuracy, but they are the only two of
their time period to mention him in a
historical context. Other stories and tales
of Arthur began introducing elements of
magic and the supernatural, making them
clearly myth.

May 30, 2014

Many of the historical texts written

around the time period in which Arthur
should have existed also raise questions
about whether or not he truly existed.
Gildas, a historian who would have been
alive around the same time as the
legendary king, wrote a polemic titled On
the Ruin and Conquest of Britain that
actually mentioned the Battle of Badon.
However, his account of the event did not
include any mention of anyone named
Arthur. He is also absent from many other
early post-Roman sources, such as the
Ecclesiastical History of the English People,
which also mentions Mount Badon.

Present day Mount Badon

Many of these skeptics have agreed

on a theory of how Arthur came to be
associated with history. They believe that
at some point in time, long before
Nenniuss time, King Arthur was originally
a hero of folklore, or possibly even a Celtic
deity, who was all but forgotten over time.
When historians then later began to recall
the events of the past, these legends were
confused for fact and added into their
historical records by mistake.

Arthur pulling the sword for the stone

King Arthur: Man or Myth?

The Medieval Times

Important Characters
in Arthurian Literature

May 30, 2014

Believe it or not, skepticism was not always as

common as it is today. Actually, this attitude towards
Arthur is relatively recent. Not too long ago, more
people used to believe that the king was a historical
figure, rather than strictly a man of myth. This level of
belief began to decrease, however, when people began
wanting more solid evidence to support their belief,
and found themselves struggling to find any.

Mordred
Mordred is another character
whose role changed drastically
over time. In early Welsh tales,
Mordred is portrayed as a hero,
but today, Mordred is the main
antagonist in most of Arthurs
stories. In most stories, Mordred
is usually of close relation to
Arthur, and becomes a member
of the Round Table. Then, when
Arthur goes off on his Roman
Campaign, Mordred seizes the
throne and Queen Guinevere,
whom he forces to be his bride.
In attempt to regain his throne,
Arthur fought Mordred at the
Battle of Camlann, where
Mordred killed Arthur. Some
versions of the story say that
Arthur dealt him a deadly blow as
well, and they both died at each
others hands, while others say
that Mordred survived the battle,
only to be slain by Lancelot after
the fact

!
!
!
King Arthur: Man or Myth?

Merlin, a recent television series based off of Arthurian myths and

legends

The Medieval Times

May 30, 2014

The Verdict?
Based on the evidence we have
discovered thus far, it is impossible to say
whether or not King Arthur ever existed.
When you look at each school of thought
individually, it seems almost common
sense that what they are saying must be
correct, but when you look at the two
together, it is hard to judge which sides
argument hold more water.
Whether Arthur was real or not, he
remains an important part of Medieval
culture, as well as modern culture. Maybe
this is the reason the debate of his
existence remains so popular to this day.
Historian Nowell Myres once said "No
figure on the borderline of history and
mythology has wasted more of the
historian's time, and it is true. But with
King Arthurs influence continuing to
remain so prevalent in the world around
us, even after over a millennium, is not it

understandable that we would want to

know as much as we can about how this
figure came to be? If there is even a
possibility that this man could have lived, it
is not surprising that it will continue to be
investigated until the truth is uncovered.
So what is the verdict? Were the
stories of the brave King Arthur that I was
told every night before bed really nothing
more than stories? Or were they more
than that legends based on a great man
who existed in a time entirely different
then our own? The truth is, we may never
know. All we can do is hope that one day,
the debate will be over. There will be no
more sides, only cold, hard, indisputable
facts, evidence that reveals the truth about
the real (or mythical) King Arthur. Until
then, the last page of Arthurs story will
remain blank, waiting to be filled with
answers.

What Camelot may have looked like

King Arthur: Man or Myth?

The Medieval Times

May 30, 2014

Citations

King Arthur: Man or Myth?