Differences Between First King And King Arthur

The Once and Future King, or King Arthur, is a legend that is, despite its age, known by all. Everyone has heard of King Arthur and his loyal knights that make up the Round Table, but the rest of the famous legend is less known. If asked about Arthur’s parentage or birthplace, most people would not know. How many people can name off Arthur’s knights? Everyone knows Arthur’s name, but the details are less defined. Arthurian legend has many parts, the first being how Arthur came into being, then the most well-known part of the legend, but there is also his famous knights, the possibility of a historical Arthur, and how the legend has evolved over the ages.

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.

Knight,” and “Le Morte d’Arthur.” Within these three Medieval stories, the ideals of courtly love

The story of King Arthur is widely known, either his beginnings told in The Sword in the Stone or how he led the Knights of the Round Table. While there are many version of his story T. H. White’s written version and Disney’s animated version of The Sword in the Stone are two of the most recognized versions. Most movies have the ability to embody the original intent of the book they were based upon. Disney’s movie version of T. H. White’s rendition of The Sword in the Stone, however, while portraying the correct story, does not truly convey enough elements of White’s version to be effective in telling the original story. The characterization and Merlyn’s ‘lessons’ within the movie inhibit the film from being an effective portrayal of the

Thomas Malory’s “Le Morte d’Arthur,” and the Gawain Poet’s “Sir Gawain and the Green Knight” are important works that should be considered when studying medieval literature. They both portray the style and structure of medieval romance. They also tackle the same topic of King Arthur and his knights, as well as share the same characters of King Arthur and Sir Gawain. In order to be able to go over these works and understand them, one must understand the aspects of literature of the time.

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.

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.

A king was expected to sit on his throne, give demands to his people and rule his kingdom. It is unheard of for a medieval King to charge around on his horse and organize knights or to look for the Holy Grail. According to the information that has been given; King Arthur has fought in twelve battles. However, based on the facts, these battles took place in so many different times and places that it would have been impossible for one man to participate in all of them. The actions of King Arthur do not correspond with the typical actions of a king because after the death of his mother, Merlin (the powerful wizard) took him away. Merlin gave young Arthur away to Sir Ector, who raised young Arthur as his son. However, Sir Ector did not know that young Arthur was the son of Uther Pendragon (King of Britain). Eleven years later, the young Arthur ends up pulling the sword out of the stone and becomes the king of Britain. For a kid to pull the sword out of the stone subsequently and being crowned after that event is very extraordinary.

Marie De France’s Lanval is a remarkable short narrative that engages the reader into a world filled with unrealistic elements, but enhances on the true meaning of romance, chivalry and nature during the years that King Arthur reigned. “Sir Gawain and The Green Knight” unfortunately does not have an author that can be recognized but this epic poem demonstrates the ghastly adventure of a knight who decides to defend the honor of young King Arthur against a supernatural being in this malicious game of cat and mouse. Both of these pieces of literature have enchanting characteristics that define them as a masterpiece of their era and that’s why they both are easily compared and contrasted. In addition, both Lanval and “Sir Gawain and The Green Knight” can be classified as similar through their themes, style and plots, although they are different through their language and diction. Even though both of these literatures can be viewed as similar as well as contrasting, in the end, each of these tales have illuminated the realm of fantasy throughout the court of King Arthur.

Ideally, a king has an old look, a great amount of power, and naturally rules his domain with an iron fist in literature. In the two works, Le Morte d'Arthur and First Knight see two different versions of how king Arthur is portrayed. Yet the honor and respect that a king should have remains undisturbed, much like how both are products of their time. First Knight is told as a modern retelling of the legend and Le Morte d'Arthur is a minorly altered, much older work. While the depictions of king Arthur are seen as the paramount backbone for arthurian times, these two works have also proven to exhibit differences and similarities, illustrate Arthur’s figure in character, and serve as preservation of the time period.

During the years that King Arthur ruled over England, his reign is always remembered as a time of peace, a golden age, a great era, and a glorious time. However, this all comes to a halt, when two of Arthur’s most noble knights bring an affair into the open, causing his round table and kingdom to fall and bringing Arthur to his death. Written by Sir Thomas Malory in the latter half of the 15th century, books 20 and 21 of Morte D’Arthur (Death of Arthur) describe how over time, the tragic hero, King Arthur slowly loses control over his kingdom due to his ignorance, leading to a few errors in judgement that inevitably lead him to his own demise and to the passing of the great era that was the reign of the legendary King Arthur. King Arthur is a tragic hero due to his ignorance, overly trusting manner, and the careless mistakes that he makes during his time as king.

It can be difficult to define the unifying themes of Sir Thomas Malory’s Le Morte d’Arthur ; it can seem a tangle of random adventures mired with magic and religion, love and fate. What is the purpose behind all the seemingly similar adventures of so many similar knights? And what is the place that the books of Sir Trystram hold? These books make up the longest section of the work, yet Trystram plays no role in the search for the Holy Grail or the downfall of Arthur. There are many parallels drawn between Trystram and Launcelot: they are both the greatest knights of their time, both the greatest lovers, both become mad for a short time, etc. What distinguishes Trystram from Launcelot;

The Arthurian Legend is seen to be extremely influential in benefitting the English people during the Romantic Era. Even if King Arthur is a fictional character of myth and legend in England, his childhood, countless glories and achievements as the king of Camelot, and the final down fall of his strong empire validated his importance to English literature. Proof of King Arthur’s existence would possibly solidify the impact he had on the English culture (Arthurian Legends Vol. 1).

Although King Arthur is one of the most well-known figures in the world, his true identity remains a mystery. Attempts to identify the historical Arthur have been unsuccessful, since he is largely a product of fiction. Most historians, though, agree that the real Arthur was probably a battle leader of the Britons against the Anglo-Saxons in the sixthth century. In literature, King Arthur's character is unique and ever changing, taking on a different face in every work. There is never a clearly definitive picture that identifies Arthur's character. It is therefore necessary to look at a few different sources to get better insight into the character of Arthur, the once and future king.

There are similarities between every ideal and thought imaginable. There are also notable differences between the infintant ideals, tangible or not. The comparisons can seem unlikely however are still comparable and contrastable. Likewise Arthurian characters are closers than they seem at first look. King Arthur and Lord Bercilak compare and and contrast through their ways of hospitalities, principles, and religious views.