Why is it so hard to find truth in the life of one individual man and why and why do historians continue to try to unlock the myth. Though King Arthur is well established as a historical figure, there appears to be little evidence that he existed (Fishbaugh, 2002). The evidence that does exist is somewhat contradictory. He continues to batter the minds of historians because of the respect he has gained from his victories. The real Arthur if there was such a person, was not a king at all. This is about the only indisputable fact scholars can agree on (Michaels, 2000). .
If there is a clear historical basis to the character of King Arthur, it is clear that he would have gained fame as a warrior battling the Germanic Invaders (Samson, 2002). Since there is no conclusive evidence for or against Arthur's historicity, the debate will continue. But what cannot be .
.
King Arthur 3.
denied is the influence of Arthur on literature, art, music, poetry, and society from the Middle Ages to the present. .
Many associate him with such historical Arthurian items as The Knights of the Round Table, Excalibur, and the Holy Grail. These items have helped historians in many ways to distinguish fact from fiction. In reality these things play only a small part in the quest to uncover the myth of King Arthur. Many believe the famous Arthurian items are what keep the search for truth alive today (Knox & Hammerstein, 2001). .
King Arthur is a figure at the heart of the Arthurian legends (Michaels, 2000). He is said by many to be the son of Uther Pendragon and Igraine of Cornwall. Arthur is a near mythic figure in Celtic stories such as Culhwch and Owen. In early Latin chronicles he is presented as a military leader. In later romance he is presented as a king and emperor. No matter what Kingdom you are referring to it seems as though Arthur claimed to reign as the King of nearly every Celtic nation of his time (Samson, 2002).
