King Arthur

This is an essay I wrote to (very) briefly cover the history of the Arthurian Legend with emphasis on the earlier portions of the story. I would like to eventually do something a little more in depth on certain characters or portions of the story, such as Merlin. Check it out, and I hope you enjoy it.
King Arthur, Man, Myth, And Legend

Hurrah for Good Old Southern Manners (and guns)

In my Arthurian Literature class this week, we have been discussing Chivalry (how you act as a warrior) and Courtly Love (How you act as a lover) in the romances of Chretian de Troyes. Most of the young men in the class still open doors for ladies and give up their seats on the bus (To be fair, there were a good number of Corps people there). What was interesting was the small number of girls who would want their boyfriend to be a 'courtly lover', a grand total of zero. I think the reason was the impression that such a friend would be a push over. Maybe, maybe not, I have no experiance in that area so I can't talk much lest I set my foot firmly in my mouth.

What I can talk about a little, and was slightly disappointed we did not discuss, was Chivalry, a code of conduct for combat. If they have no code of conduct, are you still bound by one? Obviously there are boundaries, i.e. if they use human shields or launch missles from hospitals you can't do it either. However, the practice of taking prisoners is dependent to a large degree on the assumption that the prisoner will not suddenly blow up in your face or pull a knife when you turn your back.

Also, in combatives this morning we learned something very interesting. Who always wins an unarmed fight?

The guy who's buddy with a gun shows up first.

Notes on a New Arthurian Story

So I'm thinking about trying to create a new Arthurian story, and while trying to decide how to start it off a few interesting things came to mind that are helping me shape the context of the story.

1. Arthur's name, and the names of some of his knights, are puzzles that nobody can solve to everybody's satisfaction, since they seem to have qualities of Latin and Gaelic names. Also, a number of his knights have Gaelic names.


2. The accounts of Arthur all agree on two important things. He was a mighty warrior and both he and his men were known for their ability to fight on horseback.


3. Most accounts of Arthur place in him a period of great unrest and bloodshed in Britain.


4. The earliest accounts of Arthur are all from Welsh sources. The Historica Brittonum and the Annales Cambriae both Welsh histories compiled by Welsh monks and scribes and nearly all of the early legends that mention Arthur are Welsh in origin, most prominantly the the tale of Culhwch and Olwen, and the Welsh Triad.

Combine these suggestive facts together and they point to one particular period of time and to a particular type of Arthur; a Celt raised by Romans who stayed behind with his sword brothers and tried to served protect Briton against the raiders after the Roman Legions left.

During the Roman occupation of Britain the primary inhabitants of the land were Celts from various tribes who later became the Welsh and Irish. It was common practice for Romans to take the sons of prominent members of various kingdoms or tribes and raise them as romans. This served the practical purpose of holding the natives in check, providing soldiers to help garrison the Roman forts, and eventually to spread Roman customs and beliefs among the Celts when the young men were finally released from Roman "hospitality". Such mingling would create names that would be difficult to attribute to either side, since especially toward the end of Roman occupation in Brition, the Celts would have influenced the Romans almost as much as the Romans had influenced them.

If a young Celt was brought up into the Roman occupying army, it is very likly that he would be attached to the cavalry auxilia. They were not meant to do the heavy fighting that legionares were, being used primarily for scouting and tipping the tide a pivital points in the battle. Even so, wearing roman armor and weilding roman weapons, the auxilia would be far ahead of any weaponry deployed by the occupied Celts and later, the invading barbarians from Northern Europe. On horseback, armored and armed with Roman steel against lightly armed raiders with iron weapons, a relativly small mounted company backed by a larger, if poorer armed, local force could dominate a battlefield.

If Arthur were a hero who had defended early Britain against Saxon invaders, we would expect to find numerous mentions of him in Welsh and Irish stories, legends, and chronicles, which is exactly what we find.

On a more personal note: as much as the film King Arthur tried to be true to the scant historical evidence that we have (they even included the battle of Badon Hill), they messed up on at least three basic counts. First, ancient peoples did not use modern cuss words with anything approaching the regularity that Arthur's knights did throughout the film. Second, longbows and crossbows were far, far in the future when Rome fell. Third, and most importantly, Lancelot has nothing to do with Arthur, having been added in by a Frenchman named Chretien, who has singlehandedly done more damage to the Arthurian story than any other single man in history.

From the Ivory Tower

King Arthur and Lancelot

I have always enjoyed the legends of King Arthur but a source of constant annoyance and frustration has been the depravity of Lancelot and the ruin it brings upon Arthur's kingdom. I can understand the fact that a knight may fall into sin and thus bring ruin upon a kingdom, but what has always annoyed me is the way in which Lancelot has been regarded as a tragic hero and his failing as a terrible, if unavoidable, mistake. This is due in a large part to the misunderstanding of 'true love'. Wonderful words, but they have come to represent a sick concept. It is because of how the Arthurian legends have been used to peddle this idea of love that I have come to dislike most recountings of it.

When Lancelot falls in love with Guenevere, it is often portrayed as some kind of inevitable bond that is beyond their control. Their adultery is often explained away or excused on account of them "being in love". Because they were in love, the argument goes, they couldn't help themselves.

True love does what is best for the object of that love, it does not follow the basis of the lover's selfish actions. Yes, I am looking at you Anakin Skywalker. The theme of True Love excusing any number of harmful actions has only been magnified over the years, and it is seen with special poignancy in Episode II of Starwars. This goes back to what I mentioned in an earlier article on interesting things in the Fantasy Genre. Most of the things I listed were funny, but this one just makes me sick. In the name of true love, a male character can get away with almost anything.

There is actually a word for what Lancelot's version of True Love has become. It is lust. I know, it doesn't sound as good, that's why they say True Love.

The Lay of Arthur, part first

This is the first in a series about Arthur and his knights that I have been working on. And a heads up to everybody, Lancelot does not appear.
THE LAY OF ARTHUR
Part I
So. In the mists of time long past
Of the great kings of lore was born the last
Into realm with strife and greed riven
by kings with no thought of Lord or heaven
For Uther's crown did the mighty strive
And many men did of life deprive.
Nigh' London Town they met in great array,
And in battle joined at the break of Day.
Black the ravens flew soared
above the writhing battle horde.
The field with blood ran red that day
As each man as well as he might did slay
those who challenged his king's right
to rule the throne of Britain's might.
As Darkness slow began to fall
and stretch forth its darkened pall,
Did Merlin on a hill appear, with lightning fey
and ended the slaying for that day.
“That in this land I may war
avert, a test for all, near and far
I now proclaim.” Quoth He
“The Victor Uther's True heir shall be.”
“What shall this test of thine be?”
Cried Lot, Proud King of Orkney.
And Lo! Onthe hill appeared a stone,
And in it a blade as if from heaven thrown.
“Whoever sword from stone can part,
Thou the king of England art”
Then one and all did strive the sword to free
That King of England they might be.
Yet though great and strong the sword did try
Yet none could begin to pry
it from the cold hard stone,
till they stopped, weary heart and bone.
Then Lot again in Furry spake
“What manner of Jest doth thou make?”
Dost thou think us to mock?
A blade in Stone Thou doth lock
So no hand I warrant can free it but thine,
No son of Twlwyth Teg shall be king of mine!”
Then did Merlin swift wax wroth with rage
To be thus challenged, yet within a cage
He checked his passion, and did not balk,
but carefully, wisely crafted his talk
“This stone and I are bound by my word
Uther's heir alone may wield that sword!"
And with that he was gone, they knew not where
Only that he was no more there.