Arthur

The Quest for the King

Ask ev'ry person if he's heard the story;

And tell it strong and clear if he has not:

That once there was a fleeting wisp of glory

Called Camelot.

Camelot!

King Arthur is probably the most well known monarch in the history of the western world. Tales of his valor and victories have gone from the early illuminated scrolls of the Historia Regum Britanniae, to French romances in the Middle Ages, such as Mallory's Le Morte d'Arthur, to poetry of the early 19th century, to a Broadway musical, to Hollywood blockbusters, and even an animated Disney classic. Books about Arthur's reign and Camelot have been written by such authors as Thomas Hardy, T.H. White, and Mark Twain. Through all of these tellings of the tale, we see a virtuous king, courageous in battle, bound by his honor to fight for the betterment and protection of his kingdom. He has become through the passage of centuries, a symbol for the ideal monarch, warrior, and man.

With all of this material providing us with the story of the legendary king, it would seem that we have stored up and passed down a lot of information about this amazing hero. Most of us will call to mind the glittering court of Camelot, where knights in shining armor jousted in lists adorned with heraldic tapestries and standards, where ladies dressed in silk gowns vied for the attention of the boldest knight, and the code of chivalry threaded its way through daily life. An idyllic moment in history, where the world seemed poised on the verge of a golden age the likes of which had not been seen in centuries. Unfortunately for those of us fascinated by the romance this vision embodies, it is historically impossible that this was Arthur's kingdom. This "fleeting wisp of glory" is the culmination of centuries of reshaping the original legend, which may or may not have been based on an actual historical ruler. The Timeline of Middle Ages Kings of England details the time frames of the reign of kings in chronological order, and nowhere does the name Arthur appear. This forces us to look further back in history on our quest to find a historical King Arthur. Because knights in shining armor did not exist prior to the Middle Ages, we must sadly admit that the glorious jousting lists were simply a fabrication of later writers adding to the existing story. Adding to our trials, the records kept during the earlier Dark Ages also do not mention Arthur as a ruler. So, was the Once and Future King really ever a king at all?

Historians agree that the King Arthur of legend is just that, a legend created by a story that has captured and recaptured the popular imagination ever since the earliest days of written narrative. The debate is about whether the legend was originally based in fact with the life and deeds of true English king as inspiration. There are several contenders for the role of the true and historic Arthur. One of these men may have been the model for the legend that grew from there, or the deeds of several may have combined in popular memory to build the basis for the Arthur we think we know today. The theories are widespread, but a few of the more popular candidates include a Welsh Prince, a Roman Commander, a Sarmation cavalry officer, and a king of Brittany.

The Welsh prince, Macsen Wledig is a legendary figure of the fifth century in his own right. He was known as Magnus Maximus, a name which means "great." A fitting superlative surely for the man to inspire Arthurian legend. He was a successful war leader who had strong ties to Rome, which was still a significant, though dwindling power at the time. His main claim, or possibly contribution, to the role of Arthur seems to be his stronghold known as Carmarthen, which could easily have been transformed into Camelot by early writers working with translations of Welsh and Latin sources.

The Roman Commander proposed as historical basis for King Arthur was Ambrosius Aurelianus. He was the supreme Roman Commander in Britain during the later years of the Roman occupation. As war leader, it is likely he would have ridden into battle bearing Roman standards, and possibly a Celtic long-sword, commonly adopted by Roman elite at the time. He led the Britons in fighting against the Saxon invaders, achieving great victories and unifying the Britons against their common enemy. Beyond his acknowledged status as a warrior and leader, the greatest argument for Aurelianus as Arthur suggests that his name could easily have been translated to Artorius and then Arthur.

Another candidate with a tie to the name of the great king has come to the forefront with Lucius Artorius Castus, who was a SarSarmation cavalry officer under Roman Britain. He certainly would have fought his battles against the Celts from horseback, perhaps giving rise to the tradition of knights charging their horses to war. Sarmation culture also revered the sword as an almost magical extension of the warrior who carried it. A common religious icon for tribal worship was a sword driven into the ground. When a Sarmation warrior was killed, it was customary that his sword be thrown into the sea by his companions as part of honoring his death. It is easy to see similarities between these cultural traditions and the legend of Excalibur, the sword in the stone, and the Lady of the Lake. The 2004 film, "King Arthur" was based on this theory as another revision of the legend.

The king of Brittany is known as Riothamus, a name meaning "highest king" in early English. This gives rise to the possibility that this was a title, rather than his true name; however, a historical prince by this name is recorded to have existed and ruled sometime around AD 470. He is known to have fought the Gauls in cooperation with Rome, and is supposed to have been grievously wounded in a battle not far from the ancient Burgundian town of Avallon. The connection to Arthur's mortal injury and long sleep on the mystic isle of Avalon may have its roots in this story.

These theories may give us some clue as to the historical origin for our King Arthur. Historians have already begun proposing that some of these candidates may have been one person who was known by different names and titles. It is easy to see, then, how the story of one man may have been built upon and combined with the great deeds of others to result in the Arthurian saga we are familiar with today. Further archeological evidence is needed before we can begin to definitively point to one man who was the impetus for Arthur. We may never sort through the layers of imagination and mythology to find the reality at the beginning.

In the end, the true Arthur, if he ever truly existed, was a man who fought for what he believed was right; for freedom, for country, and for the idea that might should not make right. In this way, the King will return to us when he is needed, in the spirit of every person who is willing to stand against the wrongs in the world and search for what is right.

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/King_Arthur

http://www.britainexpress.com/History/King_Arthur.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_Arthur

https://www.goodreads.com/work/quotes/1140206-the-once-and-future-king

http://www.biography.com/people/king-arthur-9190042#awesm=~oBEkUNS7L13Ggt

http://www.lordsandladies.org/the-real-king-arthur.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riothamus

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ambrosius_Aurelianus