Quote:
Originally posted by 250:
the king arthur isn't real???? you kidding me. people can fiction heros, fiction mages, fiction dragons, but how can one fiction a king? especially it is tales of Europe. it wouldn't spread out if the king is "fictioned"
there must be some background to it. and I believe there is a real king which king arthur is dedicated to.
|
There may have been a LOCAL warlord called Arthur, on which part of the legend is based. There is no hard evidence for this. At the time Arthur was supposed to rule (6th Century AD) there WAS NO ENGLAND. So there could have been no King of England. England at this time was made up of small local 'kingdoms' which were not under centralised rule. Northumbria was for example an area under local rule.
BTW, I'm an archaeologist who specialises in Roman and Early Medieval Britain. I'm not saying that you can't have a different viewpoint to me, of course you can, but I can assure you that I DO know what I'm talking about. You have picked my specialist subject.
Also, the reason so many people know about the story is that Malory's book is widely published around the world, and WALT DISNEY made a cartoon which was loosely based on the book which was shown worldwide.
Hope this clarifies things.
------------------
Time is an illusion. Lunchtime doubly so.