Arthur: Fact or Fiction?
King Arthur lived around the time of approximately 400 A.D., a time in which stories were blurred and details changed. Like many other books centered around the Arthurian Legend, The Once and Future King, by T.H. White, contains many inaccurate details. These inaccuracies are due to the story’s long history and constant retellings. The true story is still there, but it has been covered by a couple hundred years worth of exaggeration. This has turned the history into the mythical tale it is today. While the novel includes many topics worth discussing, seven of the more important topics include: Merlin, King Uther, Lancelot and Guinevere's affair, medieval manors, the Sword in the Stone, the Round Table, and most importantly, …show more content…
However, eventually he becomes a king, one of the greatest kings ever. He unites Camelot and works to make peace. This peace lasted for many years, however eventually his kingdom and its peace is brought to an end when his illegitimate son, Mordred, betrays him. King Arthur has hundreds of writings about him over many centuries and the facts have become buried underneath the legend. However, “Arthur's history is more than just a saga in ‘dream time’ of myth it puts him in definite periods, it names definite places and takes him to definite countries” (Ashe 3). Almost all the facts known about Arthur come from Geoffrey of Monmouth, author of Historia Regum Britannine. He claimed to have writings that only he knew about, however these writings have been lost and also seem to have had many inconsistencies. Some things that are known is that Arthur’s death was anywhere from 450-550 and there are records that he was in twelve battles against the Saxons. Both of these facts have faults, for example it is historically impossible for Arthur to have been in all twelve battles. (Wood) There are two possible historical basis’ for King Arthur: Ambrosius Aurelianus and Artorius Dux Bellum. Ambrosius is mainly known for fixing Rome’s economy, but Artorius was known for much more. He was Ambrosius’ successor, was a warlord and a military strategist. It is likely that both men contributed to Arthur’s character, however Artorius had more of an effect than Ambrosius. (Day 14) It will never be known who exactly the real King Arthur was, but he definitely was a real person with real actions. Despite how much they match with King Arthur’s actions in The Once and Future King, there will always be a basis of truth to find somewhere under the
King Arthur lived around the time of approximately 400 A.D., a time in which stories were blurred and details changed. Like many other books centered around the Arthurian Legend, The Once and Future King, by T.H. White, contains many inaccurate details. These inaccuracies are due to the story’s long history and constant retellings. The true story is still there, but it has been covered by a couple hundred years worth of exaggeration. This has turned the history into the mythical tale it is today. While the novel includes many topics worth discussing, seven of the more important topics include: Merlin, King Uther, Lancelot and Guinevere's affair, medieval manors, the Sword in the Stone, the Round Table, and most importantly, …show more content…
However, eventually he becomes a king, one of the greatest kings ever. He unites Camelot and works to make peace. This peace lasted for many years, however eventually his kingdom and its peace is brought to an end when his illegitimate son, Mordred, betrays him. King Arthur has hundreds of writings about him over many centuries and the facts have become buried underneath the legend. However, “Arthur's history is more than just a saga in ‘dream time’ of myth it puts him in definite periods, it names definite places and takes him to definite countries” (Ashe 3). Almost all the facts known about Arthur come from Geoffrey of Monmouth, author of Historia Regum Britannine. He claimed to have writings that only he knew about, however these writings have been lost and also seem to have had many inconsistencies. Some things that are known is that Arthur’s death was anywhere from 450-550 and there are records that he was in twelve battles against the Saxons. Both of these facts have faults, for example it is historically impossible for Arthur to have been in all twelve battles. (Wood) There are two possible historical basis’ for King Arthur: Ambrosius Aurelianus and Artorius Dux Bellum. Ambrosius is mainly known for fixing Rome’s economy, but Artorius was known for much more. He was Ambrosius’ successor, was a warlord and a military strategist. It is likely that both men contributed to Arthur’s character, however Artorius had more of an effect than Ambrosius. (Day 14) It will never be known who exactly the real King Arthur was, but he definitely was a real person with real actions. Despite how much they match with King Arthur’s actions in The Once and Future King, there will always be a basis of truth to find somewhere under the