Runboard.com
Слава Україні!



Runboard.com       Registered Members Will See No Ads - CLICK TO REGISTER FOR FREE  LOGIN

 
addi30 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Moderator
 


Registered: 12-2003
Location: In my own little world....
Posts: 1107
Reply Quote
The Real King Arthur?


King Arthur's Camelot has long captured the hearts and imagination of those familiar with the legends. But could King Arthur have been more than just a legend? Some archeologists believe the King Arthur legends were based on a war leader found in the area near South Cadbury Village in the United Kingdom. This possibility was first introduced in written form by John Leland in 1542. More recently, archeological evidence has suggested that he may indeed have been correct in his supposition, despite naysayers of that time. Was Cadbury Hill the basis for the legendary Camelot? Was Glastonbury Tor once known as Avalon? Information regarding archeological evidence can be found at the following sites:

http://www.uidaho.edu/student_orgs/arthurian_legend/england/arch/

http://www.britannia.com/history/cadcast.html

http://www.jammed.com/~mlb/arthur.html




Last edited by:
addi30, 26/May/04, 2:21


---
To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." - Theodore Roosevelt
25/May/04, 18:05 Link to this post Email   PM 
 
Museum Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Senior Member
 


Registered: 05-2003
Posts: 218
Reply Quote
Re: The Real King Arthur?


I rather have the legend.
8/Jun/04, 18:23 Link to this post PM 
 
addi30 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Moderator
 


Registered: 12-2003
Location: In my own little world....
Posts: 1107
Reply Quote
Re: The Real King Arthur?


lol - it's ok Muse, you still get to keep the legend. emoticon

---
To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." - Theodore Roosevelt
8/Jun/04, 18:25 Link to this post Email   PM 
 
Lermontov Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Member
 


Registered: 03-2004
Posts: 19
Reply Quote
Re: The Real King Arthur?


Addi, what on earth is going on in your avatar!!!!!? emoticon

I can't remember the exact quote now but in the classic Western 'Who Shot Liberty Valance?' it goes something along the lines of: "If the legend is more interesting than the facts, print the legend."
29/Sep/04, 4:02 Link to this post Email   PM 
 
addi30 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Moderator
 


Registered: 12-2003
Location: In my own little world....
Posts: 1107
Reply Quote
Re: The Real King Arthur?


Er...if you're trying to piece together some sort of storyline, you're going to be very disappointed. Though I'd be interested to hear what you come up with. emoticon

---
To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." - Theodore Roosevelt
29/Sep/04, 6:49 Link to this post Email   PM 
 
Blood Stone Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

New Member
 


Registered: 06-2004
Posts: 1
Reply Quote
Re: The Real King Arthur?


I still prefer the Legend rather than the probably reality. :P

---
Dare I disturb the Universe?

Where possums lurk, and ferrets imagine, this is where the magic happens!
12/Oct/04, 10:23 Link to this post Email   PM 
 
addi30 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Moderator
 


Registered: 12-2003
Location: In my own little world....
Posts: 1107
Reply Quote
Re: The Real King Arthur?


Me too. emoticon

---
To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." - Theodore Roosevelt
12/Oct/04, 16:06 Link to this post Email   PM 
 
Alpha Centauri Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Administrator
 

Runboard user emeritus

Registered: 02-2004
Location: Athens, Hellas
Posts: 1988
Reply Quote
Re: The Real King Arthur?


Welcome aboard, Blood Stone... Have fun... Nice to see you here (and your cat, of course)...

emoticon

---



12/Oct/04, 16:42 Link to this post PM 
 
Firlefanz Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Senior Member
 


Registered: 05-2003
Location: Germany
Posts: 560
Reply Quote
Re: The Real King Arthur?


Same here - the legends are the stuff for dreams.

Did you ever read the Rosemary Sutcliff book where King Arthur appears as character? "The Lantern Bearers" Very good, that one, and quite moving.

 emoticon

---
- Firlefanz

Reading: Anthology Stories
Rewriting: "The Cloth-Merchant's Daughter", 2nd Lar Elien book

My board - Schreiberlinge unter sich
13/Oct/04, 12:50 Link to this post Email   PM  Blog
 
addi30 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Moderator
 


Registered: 12-2003
Location: In my own little world....
Posts: 1107
Reply Quote
Re: The Real King Arthur?


I haven't read that one - will look into it though.

I like "A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court" - but I think it's more because of the story behind Twain writing it than the story itself, which can be rather dry at times.

I had a book as a kid that I can't even remember the name of now, but it was a really old book (one of those cloth/board covers) and it was all short stories of various King Arthur legends. I loved that book! emoticon

---
To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." - Theodore Roosevelt
13/Oct/04, 15:56 Link to this post Email   PM 
 
Firlefanz Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Senior Member
 


Registered: 05-2003
Location: Germany
Posts: 560
Reply Quote
Re: The Real King Arthur?


Addi, just a little warning. "Lantern Bearers" is about the time when the Romans leave Britain, and Arthur is not the main character. But I love the book for the way it shows how change affects people and how cultures clash and mix at the same time.

You might end up finding it in the YA section, actually. Rosemary Sutcliff wrote in the 1940s and 50s, and her books have often been classiefied as children's books. That doesn't do her justice, though. She's one of the authors I admire for style. Oh, and have a pack of tissues ready when you read it. emoticon

---
- Firlefanz

Reading: Anthology Stories
Rewriting: "The Cloth-Merchant's Daughter", 2nd Lar Elien book

My board - Schreiberlinge unter sich
13/Oct/04, 18:26 Link to this post Email   PM  Blog
 
Knight oftheAire Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

New Member
 


Registered: 01-2005
Location: Northern, AZ
Posts: 5
Reply Quote
Re: The Real King Arthur?


The Knight enters the room. Stomping the dust off his boots, brushing the horsehair from his coat, the only sound a rattling of brass and steel from his holstered sword.

As he walks across the floor he calls out to no one in particular: "I bring you greetings from my King - Arthur!"

He looks around, the village is safe, he has done his job.
26/Jan/05, 2:14 Link to this post Email   PM  Yahoo  Blog
 
Draggoness Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Member
 


Registered: 11-2005
Posts: 35
Reply Quote
Re: The Real King Arthur?


It sounds weird, but the theory that I have heard most recently is that the Legend of King Arthur is an adaptaion of a Celtic/Pagan story written down and adapted by Christian Monks. That would mean that Arthur wasn't really a great Christian King but a powerful Trbal Chieftain/King. Actually even if this is true we really should thank the monks for writing the story down (even if they changed some of the facts) because the early civilizations in England had strictly oral traditions. Without the writings of the monks it is possible that the story of Arthur (real or legend) would have been lost to the tides of time.
15/Nov/05, 4:30 Link to this post Email   PM 
 
C Berenice Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Moderator
 


Registered: 04-2004
Posts: 1100
Reply Quote
Re: The Real King Arthur?



Draggoness wrote:Actually even if this is true we really should thank the monks for writing the story down (even if they changed some of the facts) because the early civilizations in England had strictly oral traditions. Without the writings of the monks it is possible that the story of Arthur (real or legend) would have been lost to the tides of time.

How right you are! I believe that many a country should thank its monks and priests for preserving history and legent through writing.



---

15/Nov/05, 10:27 Link to this post PM 
 
Alpha Centauri Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Administrator
 

Runboard user emeritus

Registered: 02-2004
Location: Athens, Hellas
Posts: 1988
Reply Quote
Re: The Real King Arthur?



C Berenice wrote:
How right you are! I believe that many a country should thank its monks and priests for preserving history and legent through writing.

I wonder, hasn't anyone here ever heard the word palimpsest??? emoticon

In what twisted way the purposeful destruction of ancient (as of hundreds of years BC) vellum manuscripts, in order to be re-used, due to the dearth of writing material, could (or should) ever be considered ...preservation of history???

emoticon

Now, imagine loads of ancient manuscripts containing the knowledge and wisdom of, say, Archimedes, or Pythagoras, or Sophocles, being looted from the post-roman-era libraries, by the thousands, scraped off beyond recognition, and used again by the middle-ages monks and clergy in order for ...psalms to be scribed upon their erased surface... Some history preservation, uh?

emoticon

One should also keep in mind that the Greek ancient civilization (seen as a whole - with the possible exception of the Aristotle's geocentric astronomical theory) were considered pagan by both Catholic and Orthodox churches... How convenient, as far as raw material was concerned...

History and knowledge preservation, done by the clergy? Yeah, right... Much like the Cortez hordes preserved the Mayas and Incas ancient civilization in the New World... So, thanks but no thanks!

emoticon

---



15/Nov/05, 14:12 Link to this post PM 
 
C Berenice Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Moderator
 


Registered: 04-2004
Posts: 1100
Reply Quote
Re: The Real King Arthur?


I agree with you up to a point AC...it was wrong to destroy documents with the mere excuse that they were pagan. However I do not find it wrong to use manuscripts due to lack of other writing material available.
Think what would have happened if these priests and monks DIDN"T use this way -however unorthodox-. Would we know anything today about the rest of the history besides ancient?

For the sake of arguement, let's suppose that such was the case of the Greek clergy during the 400 years of Turkish occupation ( I don't think it was, but let's suppose). They were risking their lives to teach our language and history (ancient Greek history and philosophy, too) to the Greek children, hiding the <schools> in dark caves, up in the mountains, under the light of one candle at best, or -more often than not- by the aid of the moon-light alone.
They used the Bible as textbook in order to teach them reading and -as far as I am concerned- if they had to use "ancient vellum manuscripts" in order to teach them writing, then so be it. Because if they hadn't done that, you and I wouldn't speak Greek today and nobody would be able to read (whatever is preserved from) those "ancient vellum manuscripts".

We only have partial knowledge of the writings of the great philosophers, I recognize that but, we also have partial knowledge of the rest of the history as it developed through the centuries (at least until writing material became abundant). Personally, I prefer to have a taste, an idea... a picture if you will, of everything that has happened in the history of the world than one whole detailed book of one certain era and nothing more after that!

So, sue me!!!... emoticon

---

15/Nov/05, 22:27 Link to this post PM 
 
Alpha Centauri Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Administrator
 

Runboard user emeritus

Registered: 02-2004
Location: Athens, Hellas
Posts: 1988
Reply Quote
Re: The Real King Arthur?


I think you're still missing the whole picture. I find your example to be completely irrelevant as well as historically inaccurate; you yourself have said that you doubt your example ever was the case. Yet you prefer/insist on basing your whole argument upon an admittedly made-up "supposition" of your own, which -of course- lacks any historical credibility and/or validity.

You just cannot deal with historical facts this way. I suggest you read my previous post again, then come back with a real/valid/accurate opposite argument -if any...

Arguing just for the sake of the argument has never been MY cup of tea.

emoticon

---



15/Nov/05, 23:21 Link to this post PM 
 
Draggoness Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Member
 


Registered: 11-2005
Posts: 35
Reply Quote
Re: The Real King Arthur?


I agree that much of what the clergy did to pre-existing writings is inexcusable, right up there with the burning of the library at Alexandria. However, they are responsible for the preservation of stories from strictly oral traditions. Even if they corrupted the material some to suit thier purpose, they still recorded a version of history. Oral traditions are easily lost and even a altered versions are better than no recording at all.
15/Nov/05, 23:31 Link to this post Email   PM 
 
Alpha Centauri Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Administrator
 

Runboard user emeritus

Registered: 02-2004
Location: Athens, Hellas
Posts: 1988
Reply Quote
Re: The Real King Arthur?


Yes, I can go along with that. In fact, I might take it even further, and say that the clergy -eventhough purposelessly, indirectly and to a very small extend- did somehow contribute to the preservation of history, in the following sense: Modern science and technology was able to recover only a few palimpsests of the early medieval era, thus restoring the underlying original documents... Still, the damage done was by far larger, so it's not preservation but purposeful destruction, instead.

I also agree with what you say about legends and stuff (although legends lack historical credibility more often than not). Still they're part of a country's culture, no doubt about it...

What I strongly object to is CB's initial suggestion according to which every country should give thanks to the clergy for preserving the whatever historical data...


Last edited by:
Alpha Centauri, 16/Nov/05, 0:36


---



16/Nov/05, 0:26 Link to this post PM 
 
C Berenice Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Moderator
 


Registered: 04-2004
Posts: 1100
Reply Quote
Re: The Real King Arthur?



Alpha Centauri wrote:What I strongly object to is CB's initial suggestion according to which every country should give thanks to the clergy for preserving the whatever historical data...


It seems to me Alpha that you need to read my post once again. First off, I said <many a country> and that's a far cry from <every country>. I said it thus, because I am aware that not in every country people tried to preserve history; that in some countries they purposely destroyed the past in the name of the new faith. But I am also aware of that diference between the people (clergy or laymen) who destroyed documents driven by a false sence of loyalty in the Orthodox faith and those who honestly tried to preserve their history and legend but had no material available on which to do so.
 
Next I used a story known to you as hypothetical example because of the very fact that it was known to you and you could, hopefully, relate.
I know all about palimpsests -so do a lot of people, I am sure- and I have already stated that I agree with you in principal. I condemn the distruction of documents on the mere excuse that they are pagan -I stated that clearly too, in my post! -Yet, I am a firm believer of the motto that (when there is no other way out) <the end justifies the means>. I wish there was another way for the rest of the history and legend to be preserved but, if the only way to get something down to writing was to use parts of older documents, -and for that reason only- I do not find the idea so objectionable. These people tried to do the best they could to preserve the history of their times, working whith whatever means they had available. I do not believe they need to be persecuted!





---

16/Nov/05, 9:04 Link to this post PM 
 
Alpha Centauri Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Administrator
 

Runboard user emeritus

Registered: 02-2004
Location: Athens, Hellas
Posts: 1988
Reply Quote
Re: The Real King Arthur?



C Berenice wrote:
Next I used a story known to you as hypothetical example because of the very fact that it was known to you and you could, hopefully, relate.

Will you please read my lips?

You can neither evaluate nor object to historical facts by using hypothetical examples! It's as simple as that...

emoticon

---



16/Nov/05, 16:52 Link to this post PM 
 


Add Reply






You are not logged in (LOGIN)