King Arthur Research Paper

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.

King Arthur was an ideal person to many people during the medieval time period. He was brave, fair, fearless, supernatural, and honorable. These characteristics made King Arthur a legendary person. Many stories of the King Arthur legend exist today. These stories have many similarities and differences such as in Morte d'Arthur and Sir Gawain and the Green Knight. In both stories, the author's use the code of chivalry and fantasy, but one author decides to let King Arthur die and the other does not.

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.

King Arthur is an outstanding British leader of the 5th and the 6th centuries, son of Uther Pendragon and the Lady Igraine. Arthur is one of the greatest mythical heroes that the world has ever known. Arthur has had a great influence on other people and many of them looked up to him. The coming of Arthur was prophesied years before he was even born. Arthur was born into a world of chaos and disorder, full of love and tragedy. Nowadays, many of the scholars continue to argue whether or not King Arthur was a real person or just a mythological figure. Based on facts however, many believe that Arthur was not a real person; just a legendary British leader in the 5th and 6th centuries. According to history, there wasn't anyone named King Arthur

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.

For years there has been a debate over the fact if King Arthur was either a real person or if he was a legendary myth. Many articles, books, and papers have been written about King Arthur. For centuries, no hard evidence has been found to prove the existence of Arthur and the Knights at the Round Table. His existence can not be proven, because back then they did not keep records of who was born and when they died. They did not have the technology that we have today. “No one is certain that King Arthur is dead.”(Malory). Even if King Arthur existed he would not be alive in 2017. If he existed in the late 5th century, and early 6th century there is no possible way he would still be alive. The average human lifespan is only 79 years of age. Then again, back in that time they did not have the medicine that we have today. Most of the citizens were dying from diseases. The point here is that there is no way that King Arthur would be alive, he would be thousands years old.

King Arthur is one of the most popular literary figures of all time, capturing the hearts and minds of people for centuries. Hundreds of literary works have been created about the great medieval king. However, the debate goes on as to whether King Arthur was a real person or a fictional hero. Historians have yet to verify the actual existence of King Arthur.

    In all the long history of literature, some fictional characters have loomed above others, written about again and again by various authors of various eras. Arthurian literature is one area of fiction that has always been popular for writers to recreate in new versions, and one of the most intriguing characters of all Arthurian literature is Merlin, the magician/ prophet who aids Arthur early in his reign. As the Arthurian saga develops, so does Merlin, changing from an aloof, druidical character into a more human, magical being, though always retaining some traces of his Welsh origins.

King Arthur is placed into two categories amongst historians. The first is a legend of King Arthur but it’s nothing more than a myth. The second is historical Arthur, which believes that he did exist. Arthur is a prominent figure in history regardless of the debate over his existence. Historians and archeologists have spent a great amount of time trying to prove who Arthur is and many of these researches have different objectives and ideologies to this monumental figure in history. Arthur has supporters but also has critics in the issue of his existence. R.G. Collingwood, Geoffrey Ashe, and Leslie Alcock are all advocates of Arthur, but they have different arguments, methodologies and writing styles for the “historical” Arthur. Collingwood

He won many battles against them (Power). Many historians have different opinions on if Arthur actually existed. Some scholars have guessed that Arthur could have been Ambrosius Aurelianus. His background matches what they believe is Arthur's. They also suggest that it could have been Lucius Artortus Castus, but others believe Arthur is just a mythological person (King).

What role did the great King Arthur play in the way English Literature is perceived? Did King Arthur honestly exist? “Whether King Arthur existed or not is doubtful. However if King Arthur did exist, then he would have lived sometime between 400 AD and 600 AD, a time of turmoil in Britain following the Roman withdrawl. And a time when written literature did not exist, therefore events during this period are only known about from folklore passed down several generations before being written down, or from modern archeology giving insights from excavations of sites. If there was ever a true King Arthur in history, he would probably be Romano-British warleader, probably named Artorius, which is a Roman name for Arthur. Though the Roman

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.

If we say "yes," that would imply that this magnificent medieval monarch existed and reigned, at some time or other, in his glorified medieval court as described as by Malory, Tennyson and the romances. Of course, he didn't. There is no such person as King Arthur, in that sense; it's quite an impossible idea. So we cannot say "yes," directly, but to say "no" is also misleading because that implies that he is completely fictitious, that he was all made up in the middle ages when these stories were first told, and that there is no sort of background or original person behind the stories, at all. That, too, is misleading. This is a puzzle, a very difficult question.

Many know of the epic hero Arthur, but don’t know what it is that makes him so. Though there isn’t one solid story, like Beowulf, there are multiple stories that agree on the same things, such as Arthur’s allegiance to the Knights of the Round table, his companion Merlin, his relationships with his fellow knights, family, and close friends, and the legendary sword Excalibur. When all aforementioned qualities are explained and put together, it can truthfully define Arthur as an epic hero.