Comparing King Arthur's Once And Future King

Historically legends and the figures they are about have been ways that civilizations have retold their history. The difference is that through the retelling of these stories the events become exaggerated and the figures become larger than life. This point is no truer than in the life and lordship of Britain’s “Once and Future King,” Arthur. Of all legends, those of King Arthur stand out above the rest. The great king who led his army with a just and fair hand and ruled over a legendary utopia that lasted only as long as his rule. Many historians argue over the historicity of the character citing how there are no definitive remains, and the locations and periods of both his kingdom and great battles are next to impossible to pinpoint. The goal of this paper is to discuss a couple of the debated points of the Arthurian legend. The main points of interest are, the figures that historians believe Arthur to be based on and the possible locations of Camlann the final battleground of Arthur. The first objective to finding the historical Arthur is to strip him of all of the romanticized depictions. To do this one must first cast out the mental images of the gallant knights following a benevolent king. The reason for this is …show more content…
Much of his work in The Lost Tomb of King Arthur, is review from his earlier work King Arthur: the True Story. Phillips argues that the etymology of the epithets of “Bear” and “Dragon” points to a Chieftain by the name of Owain Ddantgwyn as his candidate for the Arhur legend . Owain was the son of Enniaun (whom Gildas referred to as the Dragon ) and the father of Cuneglasus (refered to as the commander of something “that had once been the Bear’s ). It was because of these descriptions, and the fact that Owain was killed by his nephew Maglocunnus in a war for power (similar to the account of Mordred and Arthur), that led Phillips to the conclusion that Owain was a possible figure for the Arthur legend