The Many Versions of The Legend of King Arthur
There are countless versions of the legend of King Arthur and the knights of the Round Table. Most English versions are based on Sir Thomas Malory's Le Morte d'Arthur, but where did these tales originate, and what different interpretations are there today? This essay seeks to examine the roots and different renditions of the various legends circulating today. The first section deals with the origins of the legend. The second section speculates on who the "real" King Arthur could have been. A comparison of several different versions, and suggestions of why they differ are given in the third section, and the conclusion presents an analysis on the ambiguity of the legend.
The first question is, when and where did these tales originate? It is said that the earliest stories concerning King Arthur are the Welsh tales "Culhwch and Olwen" and "Dream of Rhonabwy" dating from before the 1lth century (Ford web page).
Around 1139 Geoffrey of Monmouth wrote "Historia Regum Britanniae" (History of the Kings of Britain) which 'glorified Arthur and made him an international warlord' (Green web page). There seems to be much debate over whether Geoffrey made these stories up or whether he took most of his information from an earlier British source unknown to us as he claims. It cannot be denied, however, that regardless of their historical credibility, it was because of them that the name of Arthur, strictly regional until then, spread to and inspired people all over the world.
The French medieval poet, Chretien de Troys, brought most of the characters and stories we know today to the legend at around 1160-90. He transformed the names of Geoffrey's charact...
... middle of paper ...
...hat it is the fact that nothing can be concluded that appeals to us and draws so many people into the enchantment of this legend. The room left for imagination is what made King Arthur and his knights immortal
Websites:
http://britannia.com/history/arthur/
-Britannia's website on King Arthur. Includes a timeline, an interview with Geoffrey Ashe, chronology, biography on characters, and much more.
http://freespace.virgin.net/david.ford2/arthur.html
-David Nash Ford s website on King Arthur. Includes a detailed research on the roots of the legend, along with speculations on the identity of the king. Sympathetic to Geoffrey of Monmouth.
http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/tomgreen/figures.html
-Thomas Green's website on King Arthur. Explores various aspects of the Arthurian legend and literature. Includes various theories on characters.
King Arthur, a courageous man, who was able to pull out a sword from a rock as simple as possible. As for everyone else who tired, it was almost impossible. This was just the beginning stage of Arthur becoming a king. The thing that Merlin didn’...
King Arthur, was he man of truth or myth? King Arthur was a real person, not just a fictional character. While many believe that King Arthur was a non-fictional character, others feel that he was a fictional character. This was because there is no written record of a King Arthur in any area where he was reportedly born or deceased. King Arthur was real because there many people recall King Arthur or who have known personal stories of him, his family, and the wars he so bravely participated in. There are many people who recall King Arthur or know someone he was based off of. King Arthur was not real because it was not recorded in history that there was ever a “King Arthur.”
Who was King Arthur? Most people would tell of a great King; a devoted circle of heroic knights; mighty castles and mightier deeds; a time of chivalry and courtly love; of Lancelot and Guinevere; of triumph and death. Historians and archaeologists, especially Leslie Alcock, point to shadowy evidence of a man who is not a king, but a commander of an army, who lived during the late fifth to early sixth century who may perhaps be the basis for Arthur. By looking at the context in which the stories of King Arthur survived, and the evidence pertaining to his castle Camelot and the Battle of Badon Hill, we can begin to see that Arthur is probably not a king as the legend holds.
The figure of Gawain throughout Arthurian literature is an interesting one; he appears in more texts as a secondary character than any other knight named, and often gains glory even at the expense of the main hero (Busby 1980, 5). The first characteristic which separates him from the other knights is his relationship to Arthur: it is usually stated that he is Arthur's sister's son, a kinship that is found from William of Malmesbury's Gesta Regum Anglorum (c. 1125) and Geoffrey of Monmouth's Historia Regum Britanniae (c. 1136) onward (Busby 1980, 31). However, it is notable that Gawain often seems more like a type than an individual; in Old French literature he is never the subject of a biographical romance, as are most of the other knights, he never has one particular lady's name associated with him, and he is frequently used as a constant against which other knights are judged, the perfect embodiment of good qualities, more a symbol of perfection than an actual person (Busby 1980, 7).
The world of Arthurian literature is filled with magic and adventure that enchants readers of all ages. T.H. White has done a fantastic job of turning the childhood adventures of Arthur by turning his narrative into spellbinding, cartoon like interpretation of the sword in the stone legend. Moral values are apparent from the beginning of White’s novel. White has cleverly connected all the educational adventures of Arthur, along with the people and animals encountered to the pulling the sword out of the stone. This marvelous amalgamation of key elements not only ties the loose ends of Arthur’s adventures together, they also solidify the reasoning behind Arthurs’ predetermined path to becoming the king of England.
The Arthurian cycle shows a sporadic awareness of the impossibility of mere humans fulfilling all the ideals that Arthur and his court represent. The story of Lancelot and Guenevere, Merlin's imprisonment by Nimu‘, and numerous other instances testify to the recognition of this tension between the real and the unrealistic.
Sir Gawain is, undoubtably, the most varied of the Arthurian characters: from his first minor appearance as Gwalchmei in the Welsh tales to his usually side-line participation in the modern retelling of the tales, no other character has gone from such exalted heights (being regarded as a paragon of virtue) to such dismal depths (being reduced to a borderline rapist, murderer, and uncouth bore), as he. This degree of metamorphosis in character, however, has allowed for a staggering number of different approaches and studies in Gawain.
The passage (130-202) of Sir Gawain and the Green Knight describes the appearance of a strange knight in King Arthur's court. The anonymous author of the epic describes the rider in great detail, emphasizing the importance of this character. The passage is intended to arouse readers' curiosity, and at the same time, to introduce the mighty danger that the main character, Sir Gawain, will have to face. Furthermore, the strange knight is shown to be a test or trial for King Arthur and his knights. Finally, the passage presents the actual dynamics of Arthur's court as incompatible with the poet's initial praising of nobility, justice and chivalric ideals.
The Court of King Arthur in the Tales of Lanval and Sir Gawain the Green Knight
In the Medieval Period, knights dedicated their lives to following the code of chivalry. In Sir Thomas Malory’s Le Morte d’Arthur, a number of characters performed chivalrous acts to achieve the status of an ideal knight. Their characteristics of respect for women and courtesy for all, helpfulness to the weak, honor, and skill in battle made the characters King Arthur, King Pellinore, and Sir Gryfflette examples of a what knights strove to be like in Medieval society. Because of the examples ofchivalry, Le Morte d’Arthur showed what a knight desired to be, so he could improve theworld in which he lived.
Malory, Thomas, and Keith Baines.Malory's Le morte d'Arthur: King Arthur and the legends of the Round Table. 1962. Reprint, New York: New American Library, 2010.
When Chretien de Troyes began his first Arthurian Romance, Erec et Enid, around 1170, the Arthurian legend had already spread throughout Western Europe, told by crusading armies in the Middle East. It is important to note that not only was the popularity of the Arthurian complex already a pan-European phenomenon, but the lines of communication between its courtly Franco-Norman audiences and its native Welsh sources were already well-established (Parker). Chretien is described as a poet, with an inferred clerical background, whose Arthurian projects were sponsored by the Houses of Champagne and Flanders, nominal vassals of the king of France. Hi...
"Arthurian Legends." U*X*L Encyclopedia of World Mythology. Vol. 1. Detroit: UXL, 2009. 120-124. Gale World History In Context. Web. 24 Feb. 2011.
Stories of kings and queens have captivated readers for centuries, and arguably, the tales of King Arthur and Guinevere are among the most enchanting. Arthur ruled the kingdom of Camelot, and Guinevere was his queen. But were they real people or fictional characters? The debate has continued for centuries. Though many scholars have found evidence that the legendary Arthur was, at the very least, based on a real person who lived in Britain roughly between 450 and 1[Marker for question 1] 500 CE. They continue to search for the historical identity of Guinevere.
The Arthurian legends are well known in today's society. However, very few people know of the "real" Arthur -- who he was and what his accomplishments were. This paper will establish a difference between legend and truth, show evidence to support and explain who the real Arthur was, and shed some light on the sometimes confusing Arthurian legends.