An important evolution can be seen in the person of Arthur as depicted in early histories of the Britons. Arthur changes in nature, deed, and significance from the earliest histories onward. His stature in folklore grows as time progresses, and we will examine that growth through the portraits presented by Gildas, Nennius, and Geoffrey of Monmouth. The importance of Arthur to the Britons will become evident as we observe his transformance from a minor historical figure to a major mythic figure.
In the interest of chronological sense we will first analyze the De Excidio et Conquestu Britanniae by Gildas. The most important inference we can draw from his record is the origin of the rancor the Britons felt toward the invading Saxons. We are informed that the Saxons "slaughtered [the Britons] in large numbers," and those who surrendered were as likely as not to be "immediately cut to pieces." The Saxons are further described as "cruel plunderers" and "hangdogs." Hence the understandable reverence for a leader against the invaders; such as Arthur, known in this text as Ambrosius Aurelianus. Under his leadership the Britons "gained strength and challenging the conquerors to battle, by God's favor the victory fell to them.".
The accounts given by Gildas are largely historical, but the account given by Nennius over two hundred years later has a more mythic flavor. In Historia Brittonum, Arthur fights "with the kings of Briton, but he was himself the leader of battles." At the battle of Mount Badon, the incredible number of no less than "nine hundred and sixty men fell to the ground during one onset of Arthur; and no one overthrew them save himself alone, and in all the battles he emerged the victor." Contrast this with Gildas's earlier account in De Excidio et Conquestu Britanniae, in which we find that with regards to the battles after the leadership of Arthur, "at one time our countrymen, yet another the enemy, were victorious.
