Rotting In Lancelyn Green's King Arthur And His Knights Of The Round Table

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.

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 events that have been described in the tale of King Arthur are not linked to any authentic historical events. For example, in the myth of King Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table, when they were searching for the Holy Grail, it was described that they found the Grail but, in reality, the Grail was nowhere to be found. It is quite extreme to believe that the King himself and his

As you can see, Queenie obviously lied about Arthur’s death. The cup in his hand, the position of his body, and his severe head wound all go to prove that Queenie is not telling the truth. All the evidence like the cup not breaking, Arthur lying on his back, and the seriousness of his head injury clearly point out all of the unrealistic factors that would have supposedly caused his

“”Sir Bedivere, weep no more,” said King Arthur, “for you can save neither your brother nor me; and I would ask you to take my sword Excalibur to the shore of the lake and throw it in the water. Then return to me and tell me what you have seen.””(Malory 199) Although Arthur had no belief that his knight Sir Bedivere would disobey his order, he could have prevented his betrayal by just telling him why the sword “Excalibur” was so

King Arthur is a legend with a mix of possible and impossible. Obviously wizards and spells are not real. However, we can't prove or disprove that Arthur lived. On the other hand it could be possible. Though one would think a sword that was stuck a stone for a long time would harm the blade. It is half plausible and half not plausible. The Goddodin is a Welsh poem which resoureces say was written about 1600AD. Aruthur is mentioned in this poem. The document 'The Annals of Wales" gives support to the battle between Aruthur and Modred. But there are no records in British history of a King

King Arthur and the knights of the round table belong to a long line of books and stories of the Arthurian legend. Merlin, Lancelot, The lady of the lake, King Arthur, and Excaliber are all very important in the Arthurian legend. In this essay we will talk about King Arthur, the knights of the round table, and Merlin in the famous story, The sword in the stone.

First of all, Arthur’s corpse was found face first and chest up on the bottom of the stairs. This does not make sense if

This showed how the death of prince Arthur led to the

King Arthur is alive when the Shepherd found the cave and went in it he found lots of gold along with a king and all his nights

King Arthur is alive because He said “‘... And then the King said: ‘you say well; I will sleep once more...” (p.329-330). This demonstrates that King Arthur is not dead because once he died and was sent in a cave to sleep.Then a Shepherd was sent by Merlin to take gold from the King. When the shepherd arrived he hit a bell and woke the King. A long conversation between the king and the shepherd went on for a long time and finally the King went back to sleep. King Arthur is alive because when the shepherd woke the King and the shepherd answered saying “‘...Trembling in terror, cried, he hardly knew why:’No,no!therefore sleep on!’ (p.329). This demonstrate that King Arthur Was not dead because dead people would not wake up from a loud bell that was rung.

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.

The Isle of Avalon has neither a detailed location nor a fixed description in the literary world of Arthurian tales. Geoffrey of Monmouth’s, who lived in 1136 AD, wrote Historia Regum Britanniae. This work is the oldest existing work that includes a reference to Avalon. The reason behind King Arthur traveling to Avalon is because he received a lethal wound, and by traveling to Avalon he hoped that he would be healed on the isle. Avalon's role in Arthurian tales is to preserve King Arthurs life.

These stories kept the thought that Arthur was taken to Avalon to be magically cured and to return to rule Britain. With the fact that there is no known whereabouts of where Arthur was buried after his battle means that there is no proof that he had died in the first place if any of these actions did happen. I feel that with the help of the magic that Arthur had help with means that Arthur could of survived that battle and could of been healed of his injuries in Avalon, but I also don’t believe in magic so Arthur is most likely died in battle and probably didn’t have any magic help in his lifetime, but I’ll let any reader of these stories

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.