Padel in "The Nature of Arthur" argues that "historical attributes of just the kind that we find attached to Arthur can be associated with a figure who was not historical to start with." If there is a historical basis to the character, it is clear that he would have gained fame as a warrior battling the Germanic invaders of the late fifth and early sixth centuries. Modern scholarship has generally assumed that there was some actual person at the heart of the legends, though not of course a king with a band of knights in shining armor-though O.J. The debate has raged since the Renaissance when Arthur's historicity was vigorously defended, partly because the Tudor monarchs traced their lineage to Arthur and used that connection as a justification for their reign. One of the questions that has occupied those interested in King Arthur is whether or not he is a historical figure. In later romance he is presented as a king and emperor. In early Latin chronicles he is presented as a military leader, the dux bellorum. ![]() Arthur is a near mythic figure in Celtic stories such as Culhwch and Olwen. He is said to be the son of Uther Pendragon and Ygraine of Cornwall. ![]() King Arthur is the figure at the heart of the Arthurian legends.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply.AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |