Jane S to the contrary, there is a scrap of pottery found at Tintagel which apparently has a name like Artorius scratched on it. As well as the oral tradition, there is ample evidence that the Battle of Badon Hill, where he is reputed to have killed 900 Saxons with his own hand, did take place and set back the Saxon invasion of England by about a hundred years.
Robert Graves has pointed out that the Normans would have been interested in him as he was a horseman, as they were, and an enemy of the Saxons, who they conquered at Hastings. And this affects most of the tales we hear about him. They are almost all propaganda for the ruling classes until Tennyson’s Idylls of the King which certainly contains such propaganda but also a more modern sensibility which forces him to consider the individual responsibilities of the figures he is talking about. It is in such a context that you can talk about Arthur’s Philanthropy. In Malory, Chretian de Troyes (sp.) and so forth Arthur is supposed to be nothing more than the type of the Just King — the template which monarchs are supposed to follow. Loving is not exactly a word you would use for him. And generous means his table was open to knights and other travellers of good quality.
If Arthur lived, it would have been at the start of the dark ages, though, which was a centuries-long period when methodical record keeping was absolutely not going to happen. References :
Jane S. is lacking some info, read the Mabinogion it’s a book of Welsh Myths and Tales and Arthur and his Court figure very prominently, also Tennyson le Morte de Artur-this is a poem not too factual. good luck. References :
3 Responses for "Any evidence King Arthur was a loving person? Did he show philanthropy?"
There is no evidence that King Arthur even existed.
Legend records his relationship with Guinevere and Lancelot as true love of wife and best friend.
References :
Jane S to the contrary, there is a scrap of pottery found at Tintagel which apparently has a name like Artorius scratched on it. As well as the oral tradition, there is ample evidence that the Battle of Badon Hill, where he is reputed to have killed 900 Saxons with his own hand, did take place and set back the Saxon invasion of England by about a hundred years.
Robert Graves has pointed out that the Normans would have been interested in him as he was a horseman, as they were, and an enemy of the Saxons, who they conquered at Hastings. And this affects most of the tales we hear about him. They are almost all propaganda for the ruling classes until Tennyson’s Idylls of the King which certainly contains such propaganda but also a more modern sensibility which forces him to consider the individual responsibilities of the figures he is talking about. It is in such a context that you can talk about Arthur’s Philanthropy. In Malory, Chretian de Troyes (sp.) and so forth Arthur is supposed to be nothing more than the type of the Just King — the template which monarchs are supposed to follow. Loving is not exactly a word you would use for him. And generous means his table was open to knights and other travellers of good quality.
If Arthur lived, it would have been at the start of the dark ages, though, which was a centuries-long period when methodical record keeping was absolutely not going to happen.
References :
Jane S. is lacking some info, read the Mabinogion it’s a book of Welsh Myths and Tales and Arthur and his Court figure very prominently, also Tennyson le Morte de Artur-this is a poem not too factual. good luck.
References :
Leave a reply