King Arthur, An Enduring Legend

King Arthur, An Enduring Legend

Clodfelter 1 Christopher Clodfelter English 201 Mr. Miller February 14, 1999 King Arthur, an Enduring Legend The mystical references to Arthur and his adventures are dated in literature in some form for over 1400 years, verifying the enduring appeal of this romantic character. Since the beginnings of the English language there have been legends of great heroes. The first settlements of Britain produced stories rooted in ancient Celtic and Germanic imagination; of the many, Arthur is undoubtedly preeminent. The earliest known description of Arthur’s noble endeavors was written by Gildas, (ca. 490-540) the author of De excidio et conquestu Britanniae makes reference, albeit vague, to an Arthurian figure; however, the name Arthur is not mentioned in the story (Strayer 564). The full flourish of writings associated with his miraculous feats and victories do not reach a crescendo for several hundred years after Gildas (Strayer 564). During the Middle Ages, however, Arthurian myth was prominent and en vogue and attempts to discover the truth behind the myth have been pursued for generations. Arthur's history, as Geoffrey Ashe reminds us in The Discovery of King Arthur, is more than just a medley of yarns, more than just a saga in the romanticism of myth. It puts him within a definite period. It names definite places and takes him to definite countries (3). It is this fact and the fragmentary, often contradictory references of an Arthur (the Latin Artur,Arturius, or Artorius) from ancient records, that lends enough validity to the story to set researchers on the Clodfelter 2 trail of the legendary king. However, progress has been stymied for a number of reasons and even now we can say little of substance about the man behind the myth. A major difficulty facing researchers is that the role of the historian in the Dark Ages was rather flexible; a mixture of storyteller and propagandist whose regional traditions, personal prejudices, and loyalties were bound to greatly influence the nature of its material (Coglan 214).

In Arthur, Richard Barber clarifies this fact and speaks of the early tendency to use history as …an inspiration or as a warning to the men of the present, or as part of a vast divine scheme for man's spiritual salvation (Coglan 7). Another problem facing historians is that the earliest sources we have are never originals, but copies, and considering their age we must allow for the propagation of errors. One possible such error is found in the Annals of Wales, written in the tenth century. Its entry concerning the Battle of Badon claims that Arthur carried Christ's cross on his shoulder for three days, but it’s likely that shoulder should instead be shield, due to confusion between the Welsh words scuid and scuit (Alcock 51-52). The search for the truth of legend continues. Perhaps the best known of all Arthurian legends is that of Geoffrey of Monmouth. His History of the Kings of Britain, (ca. 1136) Besides planting highly erroneous notions of British history,...supplied a basis and framework for Arthurian romance and exerted an influence extending through Spenser, Shakespeare, and many others (Coglan 209). In it, Geoffrey recounts the history of Britain's leaders back to their beginning in 1115 BC to King Cadwallader's death in AD 689. Geoffrey's account, though most agree not strictly factual, offers a clear look into the events surrounding Arthur's death and is the starting point for much investigation (Coglan 214). Geoffrey's work was immensely popular and was not criticized during his lifetime Clodfelter 3 (Goodrich 45). Modern historians, however, have many reasons to be skeptical of Geoffrey's work. The most obvious problem is its anachronistic representation of a supposedly 5th century king in a very Norman England; as was typical of historians in his day, Geoffrey superimposed his contemporary culture upon his depiction of the past (Goodrich 47). Many inaccuracies exist in his description of the period. If there is an Arthur, he will not be a magnificent Christian king sitting astride a heavy Byzantine charger, accoutered in Norman plate armor. He will not be basking in a mighty castle between European excursions with a band of international knights; rather, he will be no more than an unkempt and possibly pagan military leader with little if any armor. He will likely have a small entourage of hired regional soldiers and live in no better than a crude wooden fortress. Amazingly, Geoffrey's glaring inaccuracies were convincing enough to find their way into the Oxford History of England, written in 1937 (332).