What did King Arthur become famous for? Hero of Britain

Modern researchers consider it quite likely that King Arthur from legends and novels had a historical prototype, perhaps one of the leaders of the Britons who led an uprising against the Saxon invaders in the early 6th century, but his existence has not yet been confirmed.

The legendary king, the hero of Celtic folk legends and later medieval chivalric romances, the ideal leader of the Knights of the Round Table and the living embodiment of knightly ideals - honor, valor, courage, moral nobility and, in the case of medieval epic, courtliness. Modern researchers consider it quite likely that King Arthur from legends and novels had a historical prototype, perhaps one of the leaders of the Britons who led an uprising against the Saxon invaders in the early 6th century, but his existence has not yet been confirmed. Different literary sources refer to different times in King Arthur's life and associate him with different eras and cultures, from the ancient Britons to the ancient Romans. In the 19th century there was a significant surge of interest in Arthurian themes, and in the 20th century, thanks to cinema and television, the legends of King Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table found a second life, and the number of films, TV series, plays, novels, computer games and even musicals are incalculable.

The name Arthur is still a subject of debate. It has etymological connections with the Celtic word "artos", meaning both "bear" and "warrior". Among the Celtic goddesses there is a bear named Artio. Perhaps the form "Arthur" was formed from "Arto-rix", i.e. "king of warriors", has changed greatly over time. Historians note that the 6th century saw a sharp increase in the popularity of various forms of the name Arthur (Arzur, Arzul, Arthus, Artus or Arthur), suggesting that there was a certain personality who left a lasting impression on his contemporaries.

Today, the origins of the Arthurian legends trace back to several roots. The first hypothesis is Welsh, based on the fact that King Arthur first appears in Welsh legends. According to her, Arthur was born around 470-475 somewhere in Wales, but the exact location of his capital, Camelot, remains a mystery. He did participate in the fight against the Saxons, but was never crowned king. Perhaps he was a major military leader and fought under the banners of the kings of the ancient Britons.

The second version considers the prototype of King Arthur to be the Roman commander Lucius Artorius Castus, who lived in the 2nd century AD, who, apparently, served in Britain and participated in the defense of Hadrian's Wall. But this version is very unstable.

And finally, the following hypothesis logically assumes that the image of King Arthur over time combined the features of several ancient British kings and princes who bore this name, which was quite common among the Celtic aristocracy.

The earliest mention of King Arthur, in the Welsh poem Y Gododdin, dates back to the late 6th or early 7th century. Later, both historians and bards wrote about him, but the legends about King Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table took their modern form already in the Middle Ages, when the courtly novels of Chrétien de Troyes, Wolfram von Eschenbach and other authors. The final completion of the universe of King Arthur was given in the 15th century by Sir Thomas Malory with his epic of eight novels under the general title Le Morte D'arthur.

So, Arthur's father was King Uther Pendragon, who had his eye on someone else's wife, Duchess Igraine. He lay down with Igraine in the guise of her husband, the Duke of Gorlois, which was facilitated by the wizard Merlin, who demanded the baby as payment for his services. After the Duke's death, Uther married Igraine, but they had no more sons. Merlin gave Arthur to be raised by the noble and kind Sir Ector, who raised his adopted son as his own son. After Uther's death, there was no heir to the royal throne, and the ruling lords gathered in the capital to elect a new king. Sir Ector with his son Kay and Arthur also headed to the capital.

The cunning Merlin placed the sword in a stone, and on the stone inscribed: “Whoever pulls out this sword is the king of Britain.” At the tournament, Sir Kay, who was several years older than Arthur, had his sword broken, and he sent Arthur, his squire, to get a spare one. Arthur could not find a spare one and then pulled the sword out of the stone, thus becoming the king of Britain. Merlin revealed the secret of his origin and after checking - none of the lords could pull out the sword, again placed in the stone, and only Arthur succeeded easily - young Arthur was crowned in the presence of the most influential and famous lords of Britain.

He ruled for a long time, fighting injustice in any of its manifestations, and saved the country from disastrous civil strife. His sword, which struck without a miss, had its own name - Excálibur. His wife was the beautiful Guinevere. Arthur gathered around him the most famous, brave and noble knights of his time, called the Knights of the Round Table - the table really was round, so that everyone sitting at it would be equal. Alas, even the best of people are not immune from betrayal; this is what happened to King Arthur. Guinevere's betrayal of Lancelot led to a rebellion that destroyed the entire army of Britain. King Arthur also fell in the last battle. True, the legend says that Arthur did not die - seriously wounded, he was taken to the magical island of Avalon. In the hour of great need, Arthur will awaken and come to the aid of Britain at the head of the greatest army.

King Arthur is a true warrior king, a British national hero, a figure in whom one can easily recognize both a real historical character and a mythical hero. For many, he is a ray of light in a troubled time in Britain's history.

Only at the mention of the name of King Arthur do images of knightly fights, images of lovely ladies, mysterious wizards and treachery in the castles of traitors appear in the imagination. But what is hidden behind these seemingly romantic stories of the Middle Ages?

Of course, King Arthur is a literary character. There is a cycle of legends that relate to knightly romances about Arthur, for example in Celtic literature. However, what is the real hero? Is there any reason to believe that the stories about the great king of Britain, who led his compatriots in brutal battles against the Saxons, are real historical events?

The Legend of King Arthur (briefly)

Briefly, the legend of King Arthur is this. Arthur, the firstborn son of King Uther Pendragon, was born in Britain during difficult and troubled times. The wise wizard Merlin advised to hide the newborn so that no one would know about his real origin. After the death of Uther Pendragon, Britain was left without a king, and then Merlin, using magic, created a sword and stuck it in the stone. On the weapon was inscribed in gold: “Whoever can pull the sword out of the stone will be the successor of the King of Britain.”

Many attempted to do this, but only Arthur was able to pull out the sword, and Merlin crowned him. When Arthur broke his sword in the battle with King Pellinore, Merlin took him to the lake, from the waters of which a magic hand with the famous Excalibur appeared. With this sword (which the Lady of the Lake gave him) Arthur was invincible in battle.

Having married Guinevere, whose father (in some versions of the legend) gave him the round table, Arthur gathered the greatest knights of those times and settled in the castle of Camelot. The Knights of the Round Table, as they came to be called, protected the people of Britain from dragons, giants and black knights, and also searched for treasures, in particular the cup from which Christ drank during the Last Supper, the legendary. Arthur took part in many bloody battles against the Saxons. Under his leadership, the British achieved their greatest victory at Mount Badon, after which the Saxon advance was eventually stopped.

But unpleasant news awaited King Arthur at home. The valiant knight Lancelot fell in love with his wife Guinevere. Soon they found out about this affair, and Guinevere was sentenced to death, and Lancelot was expelled. But Lancelot returned to save the queen and took her to his castle in France. Arthur and his loyal warriors rushed to find Lancelot. Meanwhile, Mordred (Arthur's son from his half-sister Morgana, a witch with whom he had an affair in his youth when he did not know who she really was) wanted to seize power in Britain.

When Arthur returned, father and son fought at the Battle of Camlan. Arthur killed Mordred, but he himself received a mortal wound. They put him in a boat and sent him down the river. The boat landed on the island of Avalon, where his wounds were healed by three amazing queens in black robes. Soon after the news of King Arthur's death spread. Lancelot and Guinevere died of grief. But Arthur's body was never found. They say that he is dozing somewhere under a hill, waiting in the wings when he will again need to gather his knights to save Britain.

King Arthur - history (mentioned)

King Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table are reported in a number of sources, and their time range is quite wide. The first known mention is in the History of the Britons, written around 825 by the Welsh monk Nennius. In this work, King Arthur is presented as a great commander: Nennius named twelve battles in which the king defeated the Saxons. The most important of them was the victory on Mount Badon. Unfortunately, the geographical names of the places where the battles described by Nennius took place have not existed for a long time, so to date it has not been possible to accurately determine their location.

The Annals of Cumbria (Welsh Annals) states that Arthur and his son Mordred were killed at the Battle of Camlan in 537. The location of this battle is still unknown, but there are two versions. It has been suggested that the battle took place in the village of Queen Camel in Somerset (near South Cadbury, which some researchers consider the famous Camelot), or a little further north, near the Roman fort of Birdoswald (in Castlesteads on Hadrian's Wall).

Researchers mainly draw information about Arthur from the History of the Kings of Britain, written by the Welsh priest Geoffrey of Monmouth around 1136. Here, for the first time, noble warriors are mentioned, who will later be associated with King Arthur and his knights, the rivalry with Mordred is described, there is the sword Excalibur, and the wizard, the king’s advisor, Merlin, and also tells about Arthur’s last journey to the island of Avalon.

But Sir Lancelot, the Holy Grail and the Round Table were not mentioned in the History. Contemporaries of Geoffrey of Monmouth criticized his work (he also published two books about the prophecies of Merlin), considering them nothing more than the fruit of wild imagination. It should be noted that most modern scientists share this opinion.

As happened with the works of the ancient Greek historian Herodotus, archaeological finds gradually appeared that were consistent with some of Geoffrey's statements. As an example, it is possible to name the King of Britain Tenvantius. Until recently, the only source of information about him was Geoffrey's History. But as a result of archaeological excavations, coins with the inscription “Taskiovantus” were found among Iron Age artifacts. As you can see, this is the Tenwantius mentioned by Geoffrey. This means that Galfried’s works require rethinking. Perhaps other episodes of the biography of King Arthur, which are mentioned in the History of the Kings of Britain, will one day find documentary evidence.

With the advent of Sir Thomas Malory's book Le Morte d'Arthur, published in 1485, the story of King Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table acquired the form in which it has reached our time. In his work, Malory, who was originally from Warwickshire, draws on earlier books by the French poets Maistre Vas and Chrétien de Troyes, who in turn used fragments of Celtic mythology, as well as the work of Geoffrey of Monmouth. The disadvantages of these literary sources include the fact that they were written no less than 300 years after the death of Arthur, approximately in 500. How can we restore this gap in time and reveal the real basis of this story?

Curious are the cursory references to Arthur dating back to the 6th century in early Celtic literature, especially in Welsh poems. The oldest of them, as can be seen, is "Goddin", the authorship of which is given to the Welsh poet Aneirin: "He fed the black ravens on the bastion, although he was not Arthur." In the “Black Book of Carmarthen” there are “Grave Stanzas”, which contain the following lines: “There is a grave for March, there is a grave for Gwythyr, a grave for Gugaun of the Scarlet Sword, and it is a sin to think about the grave of Arthur.” These words mean that the burial places of the heroes from the legend are known, but the grave of the king himself cannot be found because King Arthur is still alive.

In "The Treasures of Annwyn" from the Book of Taliesin, Arthur and his army went to the Welsh underworld of Annwn in search of a magical cauldron "warmed by the breath of nine maidens." It was not just a magical object - it is said to be a relic, a symbol of the religious beliefs of the Celts. He is also mentioned in the myth about the supreme god of Ireland, Dagda, who kept a cauldron that could bring the dead back to life. Arthur's search in the other world turned into a tragedy: only seven warriors returned from the journey. There is an obvious parallel between the quest for Arthur in Celtic mythological literature and the quest for the Holy Grail, but the mythical Arthur is clearly different from the image of the warrior who stopped the Saxons in 517.

Perhaps archaeological data will guide researchers on the right path and make it possible to piece by piece reconstruct the image of the real King Arthur. In literature, the western part of England is more often associated with the name of Arthur: Tintagel is the estate in which he was born; Camelot, where the Knights of the Round Table met, and the supposed burial site of Glastonbury. The tombs of King Arthur and Queen Guinevere, which were allegedly found in 1190 by the monks of Glastonbury Abbey, are now considered a successful hoax. The monks came up with this deception in order to increase the income of the abbey, which had recently been damaged by fire.

But some researchers believe that Glastonbury actually had something to do with King Arthur. The area around Glastonbury Tor (today the mound is outside the city) may well be the Isle of Avalon, where Arthur was sent after receiving his mortal wound at the Battle of Camlan.

Just twelve miles from Glastonbury is Cadbury Castle, which dates back to the Iron Age and which regained strategic importance during the Dark Ages and is increasingly associated with Camelot these days. In the 6th century, the fortress was turned into a vast citadel with huge defensive bastions. A number of objects have been found here, including wine jugs, which were imported from Mediterranean countries, indicating that for a century this place was the residence of an important and influential nobleman. Could the castle have been the seat of King Arthur's power?

According to another version, Camelot is called Tintagel Castle, which is considered to be the birthplace of Arthur. It is located in the county of Cornwall, where quite a few geographical names are associated with the name of King Arthur. The structure was built in the Middle Ages, but archaeological excavations carried out at Tintagel show that the castle was an important stronghold and trading center even earlier: many jugs for wine and oil from Asia Minor, North Africa and the Aegean coast were discovered here.

1998 - a small piece of slab was found, on which there was an inscription in Latin: “Artognon, the father of a descendant of Coll, built this.” Artognon is the Latin variant of the Celtic name Artnu, or Arthur. However, is this the Arthur described in the legend? Unfortunately, no one knows this. As in the Cadbury Castle version, we are again dealing with an important fortress and trading center, which, no doubt, was the residence of a powerful British ruler who lived in the 6th century, when the Arthurian legend began. So, some facts that served as the basis for the legend were found out, but this is all the information that is available today.

Nowadays, there is active debate regarding who Arthur could have been if he had been a real historical character. According to one version, he was the ruler of a Roman colony in Britain named Ambrosius Aurelius. He fought against the Saxons, but not in the 6th century, but at the end of the 5th century, a couple of decades after the Roman legions left Britain. Other researchers, relying on materials from researcher Geoffrey Ashe, consider Arthur to be the military leader Riothamus (circa 5th century), who in one of the sources is designated as “King of the Britons.” He fought on the side of the Romans, took part in a military campaign in Gaul (France), directed against the Visigoth king Eric.

But around 470, his traces were lost in the territory of Burgundy. The name Riothamus is probably a Latinization of "highest ruler" or "high king", and is therefore a title rather than a proper name and is not related to Arthur. A striking detail that supports the Riothamus-Arthur theory is the fact that this king of Britain was betrayed by a certain Arvandus, who wrote a letter to the Gotts. He was soon executed for treason.

In one medieval chronicle, the name Arvandus sounds like Morvandus and resembles a Latinized version of the name of Arthur's treacherous son Mordred. Unfortunately, apart from meager information about his activities in Gaul, nothing is known about Riothamus, so it is impossible to establish with certainty whether the legend of King Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table originates from here.

Judging by archaeological and textual evidence, the most likely version is that the image of Arthur is a collective one. The legend is based on one or more real characters - rulers who defended Britain from the predatory raids of the Saxons. The legend contains elements of Celtic mythology and the plots of medieval romances, which made up the image of King Arthur that we know today. Thus, the legend of King Arthur is based on real historical events. And the legend of Arthur lasted for so long only because this image touched the depths of people’s consciousness and met their inner needs not only for a hero, but also for a king who would embody the spirit of the British lands.

Houghton Brian

ed. shtprm777.ru

King Arthur

“...In the picture we show an image of a cross from a tomb considered today to be the tomb of King Arthur. The inscription on it is of great interest. You can consider it written in Latin: “Here lies...” and so on. At the same time, we can assume that the inscription begins with the Greek word NICIA, that is, NICEA, or NIKA, which means WINNER in Greek. Further, it is extremely interesting to see how the name of King Arthur is represented in the inscription. We see that it is written like this: REX ARTU RIUS. That is, KING OF THE HORDE RUS or TSAR OF THE RUSSIAN HORDE. Please note that ART and RIUS are separated from each other, written down as two separate words... Later, apparently, starting from the 18th century, the name of the king began to be written in a new way, as ARTURIUS, combining two words together, HORDE and RUS . And, thereby, slightly clouding the rather clear Russian-Horde origin of this name-title...”

In ancient times, the Slavic-Aryans lived on the territory of Foggy Albion and had a decisive influence on the culture and customs of the local people. In recent years, historians of the United Kingdom have also been forced to admit this...

In 2004, Hollywood released a new version of the story about the world famous King Arthur - the main character of the ancient British epic, the legendary leader of the Britons who defeated the Saxon conquerors in the 5th century AD. The version by Antoine Fuqua, director of the film King Arthur, shocked viewers with its unexpected interpretation of the canonical plot.

In the film, King Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table are in the service of Rome and are a kind of special forces protecting the westernmost borders of the Roman Empire in the province of Britain from Saxon raids. The most shocking detail in the plot of the film was the origin of the famous knights. They turned out to be “barbarians” - Sarmatians from the steppes Northern Black Sea region.

It probably goes without saying that such a seditious interpretation of traditionally British events was received with indignation in the West, and even in Russia. Critics placed the film in the category of "cranberry", on a par with the pseudo-historical "Gladiator". Their reaction is quite understandable. From childhood, everyone was brought up on the fact that King Arthur and his knights of the Round Table, the wizard Merlin and the Lady of the Lake are natives of Foggy Albion and the exclusive property of British history. It seems that there is nothing more English, and for a more enlightened public, Celtic, than the legends of the mysterious city of Camelot and the magic sword Excalibur.

What do we see in the film? A complete mockery of the “sacred” symbols of Britain. Noble English knights wear “barbaric” Sarmatian military clothing, profess their “barbaric” faith and shout out their battle cry before attacking in an equally “barbaric” manner “RU-U-U-S!”

There is something to be puzzled about and irritated by.

However, having abandoned their emotions, indignant critics were still forced to admit that there is no real, documentary evidence of the existence of King Arthur. Information about him was not preserved either in state decrees, or in lifetime chronicles or private letters. However, about many events of those “dark” centuries, only scattered rumors have reached us, recorded from hearsay many centuries later. So Arthurian history, as we know it, was finally formalized in 1139 (more than 500 years after the alleged events), when Bishop Geoffrey of Monmouth completed "History of the Kings of Britain" in twelve volumes, two of which were dedicated to Arthur. It was there that he was first named king.

Despite the fact that for the vast majority of British people the idea that the legends of King Arthur are based on the myths of the Sarmatian tribes from the Northern Black Sea region is almost sacrilegious, it was English historians who refuted the traditional version.

A book was published in New York and London in 2000. Scott Littleton And Linda Melko (L. Malcor and S. Littleton)"From Scythia to Camelot: a thorough revision of the legends of King Arthur, the Knights of the Round Table and the Holy Grail" (From Scythia to Camelot: Radical Reassessment of the Legends of King Arthur, the Knights of the Round Table and the Holy Grail). The book caused a real sensation. The authors explored the parallels between the legendary epics of the ancient British and Narts, which researchers trace back to the ancient inhabitants of the Black Sea steppes: the Scythians, Sarmatians and Alans, and convincingly proved the Scythian-Sarmatian basis most of the main elements of the Arthurian cycle.

For example, one of the key elements of Arthurianism is the cult of the sword: Arthur extracts it from the stone, and is therefore recognized as the rightful king of Britain; the Lady of the Lake gives him the sword and then gets it back again, etc. It is known that the Alans worshiped the god of war in the form of a sword planted in the ground, and the sword of Batraz, the main character of the Nart epic, after death is thrown into the sea, and it is picked up by a hand emerging from the waves. The image of King Arthur is associated with the symbol of the dragon. It was dragons that were used on the standards of the warlike Sarmatians and Alans as a tribal symbol.

But when could Slavic myths penetrate British territory?

The answer to this question is given by Doctor of Anthropology from Cambridge University and ethnographer Howard Reed (Howard Reid). In 2001, his book “King Arthur - the Dragon King: How a Nomadic Barbarian Became Britain's Greatest Hero” was published. (Arthur the Dragon King: How a Barbarian Nomad Became Britains Greatest Hero). He studied 75 primary sources and came to the conclusion that the legends about King Arthur, Queen Guinerva, the wizard Merlin, the knights of the Round Table go back to the history of the Rus who lived in the steppes of the Northern Black Sea region. Reed drew attention to objects with images of dragons stored in the St. Petersburg Hermitage; these items were found in the graves of nomadic warriors in Siberia and date back to 500 BC. Dragons similar to the Sarmatian ones are noted in an illustrated Irish manuscript written around 800. By the way, the British cavalry is still called dragoons today (dragoons).

Reed claims that the first troops tall, fair-haired horsemen, protected by metal armor, under banners with images of dragons, appeared in the Roman army in Britain in 175. Then about 5,500 Sarmatian mercenaries arrived on the island. It was they and their descendants who gave the basis to the legend of Arthur.

It is known that neither the Celts nor the Britons had professional cavalry, but the Russians did. Back in the 1st century AD, Plutarch colorfully described the heavily armed cavalry, the so-called cataphracts, who formed the core of the Sarmatian horsemen: “... they themselves are wearing helmets and armor made of Marcian, dazzlingly sparkling steel, and their horses are in armor of copper and iron.”

The Byzantine encyclopedic dictionary of the 10th century described in great detail the combat power of the cataphracts. Neither the Romans nor the autochthonous tribes of Foggy Albion had anything like this in the 5th, 6th or even 7th centuries AD. Cataphracts were not known in Europe before the arrival of the eastern “barbarians” there, and this means another shock for fans of chivalric novels - the origins of medieval European chivalry should be sought in the east, in the steppes of the Northern Black Sea region.

Reed suggests that the prototype of King Arthur could be the leader (king) Alan (rex alanorum) Eohar (Eothar) or Gohar, who lived in the 5th century and was an ally of the Romans in Gaul for 40 years. By the way, the author notes that the word "Alan" possibly comes from the word "Aryan", which meant “noble” and which today is given a certain racial stereotype, surprisingly coinciding with the description of the ancient Alans as tall, stately blondes with fierce blue or green eyes.

By the time the Romans gradually abandoned their possessions, the Sarmatians (Alans) had already become influential landowners, while fully maintaining their military position and influence, maintaining their reputation as the best cavalry in the world. The Sarmato-Alans occupied a high position of power in Europe until the 12th century. Among them were many bishops and even one saint named Alan. Many noble European families bore the same name. At least until the beginning of the 10th century AD, the counts of Brittany were called Alanus. By the way, Wilgelm the conqueror, the one who conquered Britain in the 11th century, claimed that his Breton mother was descended from King Arthur, and invited the Breton Count Alan the Red (Alan the Red) lead his cavalry at the Battle of Hastings, where many high-ranking nobles fought who also bore the name Alan.

French historian Bernard Bachrach wrote the book “The History of Alan in the West”, in which he argued that the West owed the emergence of medieval chivalry, first of all, to Scytho-Sarmatians, whose role in the conquest of Europe in the “dark” centuries is ignored by modern scientists, despite the fact that they lived for a long time in the territory of modern France, invaded Italy, together with the Vandals entered Spain and conquered Africa. In the book he notes that “...the highest circles of medieval society considered horse hunting with the pursuit of an animal as the main sport. Hunting of this kind was part of the life of the Alans during their nomadic times, and perhaps, having become landowners during the early Middle Ages in Europe, they continued to hunt deer and wolves for pleasure rather than for food, as they had previously done.".

It is worth remembering that to this day fox hunting is a traditional pastime for English aristocrats.

Based on the above arguments of serious European scientists, one can draw an unambiguous conclusion, which these scientists themselves were embarrassed to make, due to the political bias of historical science. This conclusion sounds very simple: famous English King Arthur was a Slav- a Sarmatian warrior, and all of Europe in ancient times spoke Russian and was inhabited by the Slavs, who came there from Southern Siberia after the onset of cold weather.

King Arthur, the hero of the British epic, in the 20th century became one of the most popular characters in world mass culture.

Writers from different countries devote their works to his adventures, classic and modern. King Arthur is the main character of many films, as well as computer games. In 1982, the International Astronomical Union named a crater on one of Saturn's moons after King Arthur.

The first mention of the name Arthur dates back to around 600 AD. Welsh bard Aneirin, describing the Battle of Catraeth between the Anglo-Saxons and the kings of the "Old North" Koyla the Old, compares the leader of the Britons with Arthur.

Bard Taliesin Around the same time, he devotes the poem to Arthur’s journey to Annwn, the Welsh otherworld. It should be noted that the biography of both bards is not very well known, which makes them themselves legendary characters.

King Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table. reproduction

He wrote Arthur

The first historical chronicle to mention Arthur is the History of the Britons, written around 800 by a Welsh monk named Nennius. It says about Arthur that he won twelve victories over the Saxons, finally defeating them at the Battle of Mount Badon.

In the 12th century, priest and writer Geoffrey of Monmouth created the work "History of the Kings of Britain", in which the first consistent account of the life of King Arthur appears.

Geoffrey of Monmouth is considered the founder of the Arthurian tradition in its current form.

It must be said that even a number of contemporaries of Geoffrey of Monmouth considered his works pseudo-historical. William of Newburgh, the author of the History of England, which describes the history of this state in the period from 1066 to 1198, spoke of Geoffrey of Monmouth as follows: “It is quite clear that everything written by this man about Arthur and his heirs, and indeed his predecessors from Vortigern, was invented partly by himself, partly by others - either out of an irrepressible love of lies, or to amuse the Britons.”

Nevertheless, the work of Geoffrey of Monmouth became well known in Europe, and new versions of the story of King Arthur began to appear based on it. Thus, folk legends collected and processed by Geoffrey of Monmouth became the basis for the creation of new legends.

Arthur receives the sword Excalibur from the Lady of the Lake. Drawing by N. C. Wyeth, 1922. reproduction

Leader against the Saxons

In the 15th century Thomas Malory created the epic “The Death of Arthur”, which united all the most common legends about Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table.

According to most researchers, Arthur could be a leader or military leader of the Celtic tribe of Britons who inhabited the territory of England and Wales at the beginning of the 6th century.

Celtic Britain during this period faced an invasion of the barbarian Saxons. The real Arthur, according to this hypothesis, during his life managed to successfully resist the Saxons, which made him a popular hero of folk legends. However, subsequently, after the death or at the end of Arthur's life, the invasion continued and led to the capture of the southern part of the British Isles by the barbarians.

There are several specific historical figures who were "auditioned" for the role of Arthur.

Death of King Arthur. James Archer. reproduction

Contenders for the “role” of the legend

Roman general Lucius Artorius Castus commanded auxiliary cavalry units Legion VI Victorious in the 2nd century AD. The legion was based in Britain, on Hadrian's Wall. Researchers, however, note that Lucius Artorius Castus lived three hundred years earlier than the supposed “Age of Arthur.”

Ambrose Aurelian. reproduction

The Roman-British commander, who lived in the 5th century, like Arthur, was able to seriously repel the Saxon invaders. This allows some to consider him the prototype of King Arthur himself. However, Geoffrey of Monmouth also mentions Ambrose Aurelian as Arthur's uncle, brother and predecessor on the royal throne Uther Pendragon, father of the legendary king.

Another candidate for Arthur's prototypes is Arthuis ap Mor, king of the Pennines, Ebruk and Culchwynedd, who lived in the 5th - 6th centuries in Britain. Arthuis, having inherited part of his father's possessions, successfully expanded the territory of the state and repelled attacks from enemies, including the Saxons.

Researchers have noted similarities in the biography of the legendary Arthur with a number of real historical characters who acted both in the “Age of Arthur” and somewhat earlier. As a result, most historians come to the conclusion that Arthur is a collective character, whose story arose both from real stories that took place in the lives of the leaders and military leaders of Britain, and from the fiction of unknown and famous writers, such as Geoffrey of Monmouth.

King Arthur's secret identity revealed

– one of the most famous figures in the literature of the Middle Ages. He was glorified in novels and chronicles, in poetry and prose in all major European languages. In the memory of mankind, there are three King Arthurs - the historical Arthur, the Arthur of legends and the Arthur of chivalric novels, and one image smoothly flows into the other.

Therefore, it is quite difficult to separate historical truth from fiction, given the antiquity of the legends, the first of which appeared in the 6th century AD. e. It is no coincidence that these centuries are covered with fantastic stories about the great King Arthur and his famous Knights of the Round Table, who accomplished a lot of incredible feats.

By the beginning of the 3rd century, the Romans conquered the British Isles and controlled them until the beginning of the 5th century. When England was conquered by the Romans, civil strife stopped there, roads were built, and the nobility began to adopt "Roman style" England was protected from the attacks of the Picts - the inhabitants of Scotland - by a huge rampart built by Emperor Hadrian.

But the onslaught of barbarian tribes was growing on the European continent, and the Roman Empire was weakening; it no longer had time for the provinces.

Rome was threatened by the Gothic hordes, and the Romans abandoned the colony. In 410, Emperor Honorius recalled Roman troops from Britain, giving the indigenous population the opportunity to build their own lives. Less than half a century had passed before the Saxon tribes attacked Britain.

Then the tribes of the Britons and the remnants of the descendants of the Romans united and began to fight the conquerors. Although they inflicted a number of defeats on them, by 1600 the conquest of the main part of the island by the Saxons was complete. The story of King Arthur, who became the hero who led this struggle, dates back to these times.

According to legend, the Celts began to quarrel with each other again- the kingdoms that formed after the departure of the Romans did not want to give in to each other. One of these kingdoms was ruled by Uther Pendrasion. He seduced the wife of one of his rivals, the beautiful Igraine. From this union Arthur was born, who was raised by the magician Merlin.

Growing up, Arthur learned that royal blood flowed in his veins - thanks to the magic sword Excalibur, which he managed to pull out of the rock.

Arthur put an end to civil strife, united the English lands and drove out the Saxon conquerors. Together with his wife Guinevere, legend says, he ruled, living in a beautiful city called Camelot. There, in the palace, his faithful knights gathered around a large round table...

The historical prototype of the legendary monarch was, apparently, the military leader of the Britons, who lived at the end of the 5th century and led their fight against the Saxons. He fought several major battles, ending ca. 500 with a victory at Mount Badon in southern Britain. And although the Saxons eventually prevailed, Arthur's glory did not fade.

With the advent of Christianity in the Celtic lands, this poetic legend became overgrown with moral teachings, but the spirit of magic was preserved and came to us thanks to medieval authors.

The Welsh monk Nennius was the first to mention King Arthur. "History of the Britons" (826). Using an ancient narrative, he told the following: Arthur was a commander chosen by the kings, because they did not want this role to go to any one of them.

Nennius lists Arthur's twelve victories over the Saxons in chapter 56, and in chapter 67 two British "divas of wonder" are associated with Arthur - evidence that local legends at this time were already associated with his name.

Another Latin chronicle produced in Wales c. 955, Annals of Cumbria, mentions not only the victory at Badon, but also the Battle of Camblanna in 529, in which Arthur and Modred, his nephew, fell.

In early Welsh literature, Arthur appears in a completely different capacity - mythical and fabulously adventurous. In the poem “The Spoils of Anwynn” (10th century), he leads a detachment to storm the fortress of Anwynn (aka the underworld of the Celts) with the disastrous intention of taking possession of magical talismans.

Thus, the documents reflecting the early stage of the legend are of Welsh origin. But Arthur's fame went far beyond the borders of Wales. Residents of Cornwall and even continental Brittany, related to the Welsh in language and culture, also paid tribute of admiration to the British hero. The Bretons spread the Arthurian legend, taken from the British Isles, throughout the European continent.

The most detailed description of the life and great deeds of this man is given by the History of the Kings of Britain (1136) by Geoffrey (Geoffrey) of Monmouth - the first bestseller of that era. This author justified Arthur's role as the conqueror of the Saxons. The "history" begins with the founding of the British kingdom by Brutus, a direct descendant of Aeneas, through whom British antiquity becomes connected with the glorious past of Troy and Rome.

In Geoffrey's account of the life and deeds of Arthur, the central character of the entire book, Merlin plays a prominent role. Arthur is portrayed not only as the conqueror of the Saxons, but also as the conqueror of many European nations. In the war that began after his refusal to pay tribute to the Romans, Arthur and his allies defeated the enemy in battle and would have conquered Rome if not for Modred, who treacherously took possession of his throne and queen. Geoffrey describes the death of Arthur in the battle with Modred and then the gradual disintegration of the empire he created until its final destruction in the 7th century.

This source contains most of the fantastic stories and characters that inspired numerous medieval bards.

It is no coincidence that the British considered the History of the Kings of Britain to be a kind of accurate reference book and did not understand why historians living on the continent did not know about their glorious king.

After all, he made a “campaign all the way to Rome” and defeated the troops of Emperor Lucius in order to forever free Britain from the threat of foreign invasion and turn his reign into a golden age of peace and abundance...

In 1155, the History was translated into verse into French by the Norman poet Vas, receiving the title The Romance of Brutus. You were the first of the authors known to us to be mentioned in his poem by the Round Table, built by order of Arthur in order to avoid disputes about seniority. He also reports the Bretons' belief that Arthur is alive and is on the island of Avalon.

The first English poet to sing the praises of Arthur was Layamon, the parish priest of Arleigh Regis (Worcestershire). His poem Brutus, written in the last decade of the 12th century or slightly later, is an extended retelling of Vas's poem.

Although Layamon's poem survives in only two copies, in contrast to the large number of manuscripts containing the texts of Geoffrey and Vas, its existence proves that Arthur was hailed as a hero even by the descendants of his Saxon enemies.

It is worth noting that the pseudo-historical tradition founded by Geoffrey of Monmouth does not include the stories of Tristan, Lancelot and the Grail, which became widely known in the Middle Ages thanks to French novels. In the French romances of the Arthurian circle (second half of the 12th century), Arthur's court is depicted as the starting point of the adventures of various heroes, but Arthur himself does not play a central role in them.

However, the authority of the legendary king was so great that his image drew subjects of very different origins into Arthur’s orbit. One of these stories, and the earliest, turned out to be the sad story of Tristan, which circulated in France around 1160. The historical prototype of Tristan was a certain Pictish king of the late 8th century, the legends of which, like the legends of Arthur, were kept by one of the defeated Celtic peoples.

Some versions of the legend of Tristan highlight an exciting plot - adventures, escapes, intrigues, but in the French novel by Thomas of Britain (1155-1185) and in the German masterpiece of his follower Godfrey of Strasbourg (circa 1210), the main thing is the development of characters and the tragic conflict between feelings and debt.

The legend of Tristan was already known when Chrétien de Troyes, one of the most popular authors of the 12th century, began to write. Almost all of his major works, created between 1160 and 1190, are based on Arthurian stories that circulated among the Bretons.

Chretien rarely came up with anything of his own, but his interest in psychological conflicts, born, in particular, of the irreconcilability of the dictates of love and knightly duty, enriched the content of the legends. Chrétien's last novel, Percival, or the Tale of the Grail, whose theme is the education of the hero in terms of chivalry, remained unfinished. Young Percival (Parsifal, Parzival) who came to the court of King Arthur is ignorant and childishly unresponsive to the suffering of others.

He quickly learns the external attributes of chivalry and proves himself to be a valiant fighter beyond his years, but fails where prudence and compassion are required. In the castle of the crippled fisherman king, Percival did not ask who the food was intended for in the Grail, a large dish that is carried through the castle chambers by a maiden in a mysterious procession.

He remained silent because his mentor warned him not to talk. Then this silence is reproached to him: if he had asked a question, the fisherman king would have been healed. Despite the fact that Percival faces terrible punishment for this mistake, he, not knowing fear, sets off on a journey to look for the Grail Castle. At the point where Chrétien's text breaks off, poor Percival is beset by all sorts of troubles.

His further fate is described in the German “Parzival” (1195–1210) by Wolfram von Eschenbach, partly based on Chrétien’s work.

At the end of the 12th and beginning of the 13th centuries, various versions of the legend about the search for the Grail were widespread. At this time, the Grail, which originally had magical properties, was drawn into the sphere of Christian tradition and reinterpreted as the communion cup (monstrance).

Arthurian literature of the 13th century is generally characterized by a transition from poetic forms to prose, further Christianization of legends and a tendency to combine texts into a cycle. The so-called Arthurian Vulgate consists of five prose French novels:

• “The Story of the Holy Grail”, containing initial information about the Grail and its miraculous properties;
• "Merlin" is an expanded adaptation of Robert de Born's "Merlin" with additions from other sources;

3. "Prosaic Lancelot"- a story, equipped with various details, about Lancelot’s childhood, about his upbringing with the wise Lady of the Lake; about how he grew up as an unrivaled knight of King Arthur, how he loved Guinevere and lamented his sinful passion, because of which he was not allowed to achieve the Holy Grail, and how he conceived Galahad with the daughter of the crippled king;

4. "Feat in the name of the Holy Grail" where the central character is Lancelot’s son Galahad, who, thanks to his spiritual perfection, surpassed all other knights of the Round Table; and finally

5. "Le Morte d'Arthur"- a story about the collapse of the Brotherhood of the Round Table, which began with the fact that Lancelot, despite his previous repentance, again returned to his sinful love, and ending with the betrayal of Modred, the death of Arthur and the departure of Guinevere and Lancelot from the world into seclusion and repentance.

The 13th-century Arthurian prose cycle had a powerful influence on later chivalric romances in France, Italy, Spain, the Netherlands, Ireland, Wales and England. His influence especially affected the most famous English Arthurian book, Le Morte d'Arthur by Thomas Malory. The author's title of the book is unknown:

"Death of Arthur" was the name given by printer William Caxton to the volume he published in 1485, which remained Malory's only text for centuries until the Winchester Manuscript was discovered in 1934. In general, Malory follows closely his sources, both English and French, but his role is not limited to translation.

Like his predecessors, he reinterprets Arthurian legends in the spirit of his time. His version highlights the heroic features of the epic, while the tastes of the French were closer to refined spirituality.

In England, Arthurian legends remained alive after the Middle Ages thanks to the pseudo-historical work of Geoffrey of Monmouth and the first printed edition of Caxton, which was published five times by the beginning of the 18th century. The Romantic Revival revived interest not only in Malory, but also in other Arthurian texts. In the 19th century, the most significant modifications were made by A. Tennyson and R. Wagner.

Tennyson's Idylls of the King (1859–1885) brings Malory's stories into the framework of Victorian morality, showing how the sinfulness and frivolity of the Knights of the Round Table undermined Arthurian ideals. R. Wagner in the musical drama “Tristan and Isolde” (1865) turns to the version of Gottfried of Strasbourg and raises the legend to the heights of tragedy, however, colored by the philosophy of Schopenhauer and Novalis, where love and death are one.

Wagner's Parsifal (1882) follows Wolfram von Eschenbach's Parsifal, but also draws on 19th-century philosophy. These adaptations are essentially independent works and belong to the 19th century, using medieval material as an entourage.

How likely is it that the cycle of legends about King Arthur reflects any historical reality? And did this person even exist?

This question was asked back in the 15th century. The English pioneer William Caxton, already mentioned above, in his publication "Le Morte d'Arthur" in the listed evidence of the existence of the king, he pointed to various relics, including a round table kept in the town of Winchester, a piece of wax with the seal of Arthur (on it he was called the emperor of Britain, Gaul, Germany and Dacia) and even the sword of Sir Lancelot, Arthur’s closest friend .

But it turned out that all these items were made later - to attract pilgrims. The famous oak round table, six meters in diameter, was made in the 13th century, when Henry III and his heirs sought to revive the Arthurian epic.

Researchers also turned to the geography of Arthurian legends. It turned out that many of the places mentioned in them were preserved. For example, in the north of the Cornish peninsula there are the ruins of Tintagel Castle, built from slate slabs, where the famous king was allegedly born.

Another “Arthurian place” keeps many unsolved secrets - Glastonbury, which is located in the very west of Great Britain. Situated on the vast plains of Somerset, close to the Bristol Channel, the complex now includes a town, an abbey and a huge volcanic rock with the ruins of a church sloping down in terraces. It should be noted that people have lived here since time immemorial. The remains of settlements discovered by archaeologists date back to the era of the Roman invasion of the islands.

Glastonbury Abbey is a unique historical site for many religions. It is believed that on the grounds of Glastonbury there was for a long period a temple of Druid priests who worshiped snakes. Then they were replaced by the Romans. But the most significant mark was undoubtedly left by Christians. According to legend, Joseph of Arimathea (the man who buried the body of Christ) moved to Glastonbury and built the first church in Great Britain here.

On the ruins of the abbey, thorns bloom every Easter. People say that when Joseph ascended the rock after his arrival, he leaned on his staff while praying. One day he left it there and the staff turned into a tree.

The tree took root, and since then the Glastonbury thorn tree has served as a local landmark. Ireland's most revered saint, Saint Patrick, also lived and died here.

From the more than 150-meter top of the rock you can observe the area for 70–80 kilometers around. The volcanic terraces bear traces of human cultivation, and may have once served as a path for Christian pilgrims to worship and pray here. A majestic monastery was built here, named in honor of St. Michael. The founding date of the monastery is considered to be 705.

It was then that King Aine issued a decree on the construction of the monastery, and in the 10th century the Benedictines settled here. Those church ruins that modern tourists see date back to the 13th century. They remained from the temple, destroyed by order of King Henry VIII during his fight against Catholicism (16th century). According to legend, Glastonbury Mountain is the place where King Arthur once lived, and also, concurrently, the secret entrance to the underground kingdom of the lord of the elves.

It is believed that in the 6th century Saint Collen entered here in an effort to end demonism. He performed the rite of exorcism, and upon contact with the holy water, the elven palace disappeared with a roar, leaving the ascetic alone on the empty top of the rock.

As the final resting place of King Arthur and his wife, Glastonbury has gained fame since the 12th century. Until now, the authenticity of this fact is confirmed only by legends. So, for example, Excalibur, the legendary sword of Arthur, thrown into the water by Sir Bedwir at the request of the king mortally wounded in the Battle of Camelin, could have been drowned in the local Lake Pomparles.

Unfortunately, this once vast reservoir has now been drained and it is no longer possible to verify the veracity of the oral tradition.

A great misfortune (which, however, also brought some benefit) happened at Glastonbury in 1184. A terrible fire then destroyed the abbey almost to the ground, but during reconstruction the monks began a large-scale search for Arthur’s grave.

And in 1191, a real sensation was caused by the monks’ statement that King Arthur’s grave had been found! Carefully tapping the stone floor slabs, the Benedictines discovered at a depth of three meters - below the modern masonry - an even older one, with a hollow chamber in it. Having opened the floor, the monks made their way to the legendary tomb.

Two huge coffins, impregnated with wood-preserving resins, appeared to their amazed gaze! A magnificent reburial of the remains was organized. And soon a large lead cross appeared over the new grave with the inscription:

“Here on the Isle of Avalon lies the illustrious King Arthur.” In 1278, the remains of the monarch were reinterred in a special tomb made of beautiful black marble.

But researchers noticed many suspicious details about this “discovery.” The first question that interested them was: how were they able to identify the remains of King Arthur in the skeleton? The monks argued:

“According to his noble stature...” The archives of the abbey preserved a detailed report on the examination of the bodies of the deceased. The man’s skeleton was striking in its height – 2 m 25 cm.

His skull was damaged, but the cause of the injury could not be determined, although it could have been a trace of a wound. The woman's head has perfectly preserved blond hair. But all this is not proof that it was Arthur and his wife.

The first modern scientific exploration at Glastonbury began in 1907. The historical and archaeological expedition was led by the English scientist Frederick B. Bond. His employees made significant progress: they discovered the remains of an unknown chapel.

Comparing its geographical location with the general plan of the abbey, Bond came to the conclusion that it was built according to the laws of sacred geometry used by the ancient Egyptians and later by the Freemasons.

However, the venerable researcher had the imprudence to publicly declare that he received all the instructions for searching for antiquities with the help of mediums, communicating with the souls of deceased monks. A major scandal broke out and Bond was fired.

There is another mysterious geographical name in the legend of Arthur that cannot be tied to any real place on Earth - the legend sends the wounded king to the magical island of Avalon, the path to which is open to few.

Elves and fairies live on this island; time passes so slowly there that the heroes of legends may still live in paradise, not knowing that one and a half thousand years have passed over the planet. How possible is the existence of a ghostly Avalon?

Some of the mystics of the Middle Ages believed that Avalon disappeared not in the physical, but in the sacred sense of the word. Like the Russian Kitezh, the island moved into another – magical – dimension and disappeared from the eyes of people.

Many historians of the 19th century explained the disappearance of Avalon in a much more prosaic way. They believed that the cause of the death of the island was a banal flood. To support their hypothesis, scientists cited a true story dating back to the 11th century. It was about a very low island in the English Channel, protected by dams and locks.

One day, after some celebrations, the drunken guards forgot to close them, and unchecked tidal water rushed into the city. All the local nobility perished in the waves (except for the king, who escaped by swimming on horseback), and the island itself was covered by the sea. It was the historically reliable incident described above that led researchers to the idea that Avalon could have suffered the same fate.

But there could be another explanation for Avalon's disappearance. It could merge with the mainland, connected to it by man-made embankments. This could happen if the island was located close enough to the coast of Britain.

It should be noted that not only European scientists were interested in the history of the island of Avalon. M.A. Orlov in the book “The History of Relations between Man and the Devil” (1904) indicates that Avalon was often described by the ancient poets of France. Thus, in the poem about William Snubnos, we find a mention that Avalon was extremely rich, so that there has never been another such rich city.

Its walls were made of some special stone, the doors were made of ivory, the houses were lavishly decorated with emeralds, topazes, hyacinths and other precious stones, and the roofs on the houses were golden! Magical medicine flourished in Avalon.

The most terrible diseases and wounds were cured here. In one of the novels of that time, this island is described as a place where all the inhabitants spend time in eternal holiday, without knowing worries and sorrows. The word “Avalon” itself was related to the words of the ancient Breton language “Inis Afalon”, which means “island of apple trees”.

Many modern foreign researchers also express different opinions about the mysterious island. But all these are just hypotheses that are not able to reveal the secret of Avalon.

However, what can we say about the location of the elusive island if it is still unclear where the much more material Camelot was located! Most people associate it with southwest England, an area referenced in tales of wizards, ladies of the lakes and knights in shining armor.

This version of the legend was popular in the Middle Ages, especially among English kings, poets and nobles, who considered Arthur's Camelot and the Knights of the Round Table to be an ideal royal court. In the county of Somerset in the 1970s, archaeologists unearthed a strange hill that was perceived as Camelot, the capital where King Arthur lived.

The top of the hill was surrounded by a strong wall of stone and wooden beams around the perimeter. It was a hall that, apparently, was intended for communal meals. Perhaps this is where the Knights of the Round Table gathered?

However, another version is becoming increasingly popular among scientists. It says that the legend originated north of the Anglo-Scottish border. One of the promoters of this point of view is Hugh MacArthur, a historian from Glasgow.

He claims that Guinevere, Arthur's wife, could be a representative of the Picts who lived in the north of Scotland. There is other historical evidence that Arthur came from what is now Scotland rather than Cornwall or anywhere else.

According to MacArthur, the legend is based on the figure of Arthur, the leader of an armed group who ruled Strathclyde, a kingdom of Welsh-speaking Britons stretching from Loch Lomond in Scotland to north Wales, in the 6th century. The capital of the kingdom was the city of Dumbarton in west-central Scotland.

According to the researcher, there are many names in this area that may be associated with Arthur. In Dumbarton itself is Arthur's Castle, and to the west of Loch Lomond is Mount Ben Arthur, on which there is a place called Arthur's Seat.

According to MacArthur, this is only one of seven Arthurian thrones he found in Scotland. In total there are about 50 places whose names mention Arthur. And although we are not necessarily always talking about the legendary ruler, in most cases the name is apparently still given in honor of him.

MacArthur also believes that the island of Avalon, where, according to legend, Arthur received his sword Excalibur and where he was brought mortally wounded, is none other than Loch Lo-mond. Local historians also believe that Arthur's major battles, described by the 9th-century Welsh monk Nennius, took place nearby.

The researcher claims that the legend of Arthur began to migrate south during the process of Christianization of Scotland. In addition, the narrowing of the area of ​​use of the Welsh language and its localization in Wales and Cornwall contributed to the formation of the idea that the famous warrior and ruler lived in the southwest of England.

Yet most scientists believe that there is only indirect evidence of the existence of King Arthur. Having analyzed in detail folklore and other sources, historians have drawn a certain collective image of a leader who used a Roman military title and organized successful resistance to foreigners.

He may have assumed the imperial title when the battles ended. But this is just a hypothetical portrait, for there is no evidence of King Arthur's contemporaries. It is no coincidence that skeptics continue to claim that he was invented by the indigenous people of Britain as the ideal of a glorified hero whose exploits lived on in the popular consciousness.

And yet, some researchers continue to insist on the historicity of the famous image. As the Englishmen Peter James and Nick Gorn write, archaeological excavations indicate a sharp influx of invaders into Britain around 450 and a noticeable slowdown around 500. Apparently, someone successfully organized resistance to foreigners. Probably a former commander of the Roman army. And why not accept the legends about the exploits of King Arthur?

As a final strong argument in favor of its reality, they also put forward the fact of the popularity of the name Arthur: at the end of the 5th and beginning of the 6th centuries, six or more British princes were named by it. Most likely, this phenomenon had an origin - King Arthur lived in people's memory...