The Historical Authenticity of King Arthur | Jorge J. Perez

The Historical Authenticity OF KING ARTHUR JORGE J. PEREZ

LEGENDS OF KING ARTHUR AND THE KNIGHTS OF THE ROUND TABLE HAVE PERSISTED THROUGHOUT THE CENTURIES. THERE IS PLENTY OF DEBATE REGARDING THE HISTORICAL AUTHENTICITY OF THE LEGENDS AS WELL AS THE PERIOD IN WHICH THE LEGENDARY KING LIVED.

Geoffrey of Monmouth

One of the most prolific authors of an Arthurian tale, Geoffrey of Monmouth provided one of the first accounts of King Arthur’s exploits, detailed in an extensive chapter of a book on British kings which he began writing in 1136.

He gave no one but himself access to the documents, leading to accusations and widespread beliefs that Geoffrey’s Arthurian chapter is mostly myth.

Doubting Other Historical Accounts The wildly contradictory records of King Arthur casts doubt upon his existence. One example is the account of Nennius, a Welsh historian, who drew from poetry and recounted the details of twelve of Arthur’s battles that were depicted therein.

The dates and locations of these battles were both erratic and conflicting, rendering it impossible for one individual to have participated in all of them.

In the quest to find a historical figure to be King Arthur, the most promising individual to date is Arturius, a son of the Scottish king Aidan.

Arturius, Son of Aidan

Arturius and Arthur were both princes who fought in wars against the Saxons; as it has been estimated Arthur lived and died in the fifth and sixth centuries, the timelines do seem to align.

Whether the Arthur of legend was a real historical figure will likely remain a mystery.

However, the influence of the myths surrounding this individual, regardless of his true identity, remains prevalent to this day.