Helen Hu

September 21, 2010

3rd Block 1st Semester

King Arthur

The question of the existence of the mythical King Arthur is question that has

remained unanswered for a long period of time. There is evidence to support both sides of

the view, but when weighing the evidence, there’s more that supports the assumption of

King Arthur’s existence than denies it. From archaeological digs to the exploration of

“Arthurian sites” to the historical background of Britain during the 500s, we can logically

assume that the existence of King Arthur is in fact, a reality, and not only a myth.

One of the earliest searches for physical evidence of King Arthur was conducted by

King Henry II during the 12th century (Doherty 102). There was a rumor that the final

resting place of the long-deceased King Arthur was in a cemetery in Glastonbury, which

was perfect, because Glastonbury was wet and swampy, just like the place that Arthur

supposedly lived in. Arthurian expert Geoffrey Ashe noted these similarities between the

King Arthur myths and the historical speculation and documented his findings. Step by

step, historians bridged the mythological and historical gap.

Furthermore in 1190, a tomb was found in Glastonbury, supposedly containing the

dead body of King Arthur. The following words were inscribed on an unearthed stone

above the tomb: “Hic iacet sepultus inclitus rex arturius in insula avalonia,” which means

“Here lies buried the famous King Arthur, with Guinevere his second wife, in the Isle of

Avalon.” (USNEWS) Two skeletons were found in the coffin, one that may have been
Arthur and the other, his wife the Queen Guinevere. It should be noted, however, that

written historical resources of the time of the Age of Arthur were rare and obscure .

Archaeologists had little to use for evidence because most British artifacts from the 1st

century were no longer in existence. Therefore, the little that these historians and

archaeologists could conclude should be taken seriously.

More recently, in 1998, archaeologists dug a large slate out of the ground, dated

back to the 6th century, coincidentally, around the time of Arthur. Inscribed on it was the

label: “Artognou, father of a descendant of Coll, has had this built." Some historians

believed that the name “Artognou” was too similar to “Arthur” to not be an occurrence by

chance. A notable archaeologist, Geoffrey Wainwright, stated: “This is where myth meets

history. It's the find of a lifetime."

Historically, King Arthur would have fit into the time frame and environment. The

protagonist, or hero in the conflict between the British and the Saxons could easily be King

Arthur. He could have possibly been Roman, which would have given him the role of the

Duke of Britain. His job would have been to protect the Roman provinces (BBC) . In many

parts of Britain, King Arthur is still celebrated as a hero, suggesting that the tales of Arthur

were not just stories, but real events. His greatest achievement was winning the battle at

Mons Badonicus, which held the Saxons back for an extended period of time. No other

leader was documented to have fought that battle, so in this case, evidence, or lack thereof,

points to King Arthur as a possible candidate to fit this “coincidental” situation.

 Without a doubt, both belief and denial of the existence of King Arthur has existed

since the beginning of the spread of his legend. 15th century British writer, Sir Thomas

Mallory commented in his book, Le Morte d’Arthur, “…some men say in many parts of

England that King Arthur is not dead… and men say that he shall come again and he shall

win the Holy Cross (Doherty 101)”. Based on my research, I would like to say that I

believe in King Arthur’s existence, but it’s something we’ll never be able to physically

prove.
 Works Cited

Doherty, Paul. King Arthur. New York: Chelsea House Publishers, 1987. 101-103. Print.

"King Arthur." BBC Wales History. BBC, n.d. Web. 21 Sep 2010.

<http://www.bbc.co.uk/wales/history/sites/themes/figures/king_arthur.shtml>.

Koerner, Brendan. "Arthur, Arthur!." Mysteries of History. N.p., 24 July 2000. Web. 21

Sep 2010. <http://www.usnews.com/usnews/doubleissue/mysteries/king.htm>.