I have been told that, in terms of the archeological and written evidence, King Arthur and Jesus are quite equal. In the claims I have heard, people tell me there is not a single written or archeological account for either of them, aside from the New Testament of course.
But generally, of the two, who has better case for historicity and for which one of do we have more evidence?
Basically what the title says. I know the consensus is he either didn't exist or it's an amalgamate of multiple characters and folk history. Is there any historian who defends his existence? Mostly because I like to hear the "other side" to see what they have to tell.
Seems like a king ordering the murder of every child under two years of age would be an event significant enough to be mentioned by historians and writers at the time, yet it seems like no such mention exists. What do scholars make of this event in Mathew’s infancy narrative?
Come with me on a journey. It may lead into a brick wall. But those bricks might be made out of moon rocks?...
Here is the main ETH address I'll be referencing. There is a lot of interesting activity, and eveything listed below originates from this wallet. It contains ERC20, ERC721 and ERC1155 transactions, the first of which happened on Jan 15, 2021.
https://etherscan.io/address/0x2AEcBC133f54833eb843A8242b9daFf614ffF68E
Ethereum Name Service (ENS)
ENS ryancohen registered on Jan 25, 2021 at 4:48pm UTC;
https://app.ens.domains/name/ryancohen.eth/details
https://etherscan.io/tx/0x2b896c25f6c1169ca1e74811ff2c74bba33f809a5c3a3d6065aa39e91c1b449c
ENS deepfuckingvalue registered on Jan 25, 2021 at 3:39am UTC;
https://app.ens.domains/name/deepfuckingvalue.eth/details
https://etherscan.io/tx/0xeb6683ffdf8ff20d4bb935e9dcb32ed5ce00b3694939602de8092091683b079a
ENS artorious registered on Jan 26, 2021 at 10:52am UTC;
https://app.ens.domains/name/artorious.eth/details
https://etherscan.io/tx/0x6ddedea8f53db1162eb122bc2af339c553e1bb2e8f5e1459405f330b5740d438
Keep in mind, this ETH wallet also owns all the following ENS domains, so very well could be a speculator...or someone is putting in WORK. Domains are in order from oldest to newest, all registered between Jan 19 and Jan 25, 2021.
*edruscha, gerhardrichter, johnbaldessari, yvesklein, josephbeuys, damienhust, barbarakruger, contemporaryart, james,turrell, yaoyikosuma, ssense, mrporter, arnoldshcwarz, backcountry, brunellocucinelli, rafsimons, endclothing, selfridges, materialise, iriduim, stadiumgoods, dickssportinggoods, desktopmetal, ark-funds, matchesfashion, grailed, investorplace, pacsun, tactics, moosejaw, leisurepro, 511 tactical, equityzen, flywire, westelm, roguefitness, kettlebell, technogym, mytheresa, ermenegildozegna, firebase, c3ai, nextvr, angieslist, thumbtack, 99designs, classpass, brandless, truecar, brightidea, sunpower, clearbit, flosports, ourarin
... keep reading on reddit ➡**EDIT: I have reached some compromise.
Two users have convinced me to alter my view to some extent.
u/scarletmonarda changed my view that race changes to iconic European characters can be done in a good way, in the form of changing the context and backstory of the character to justify the race change. For example, Sleeping Beauty can be set in an African kingdom with African characters and unique African cultural elements slightly altering the story. However, it is still in poor taste to simply jarringly race change a character without changing the larger context, such as making Rapunzel a black woman but keeping her within a Bavarian Medieval European environment where her presence makes no sense.
Another user, u/tinyroctopus also convinced me that if the population of a certain European nation is majority in favour of race changes to the folklore created in their country, that it is acceptable and nine of the business of other European countries. In other words, if more than half of British want to change their culture and have Robin Hood and James Bond be black, that is their prerogative and other Europeans have to make peace with it. It is still unacceptable however for the Brits and Americans to race change the cultural products of other countries, like The Witcher, Les Miserables and The Trojan War story.**
ORIGINAL VIEW:
Why are there so few original black characters on the level of fame as white characters like Robin Hood, King Arthur, James Bond, William Wallace, etc? Why do we rely so much on race changing characters or historical inaccuracy to have black characters in film and TV?
There are talks of casting a half Zimbabwean black man to play James Bond after Daniel Craig. Of course the Anglophone press is heavily in support of this, despite there being more than enough eligible white Male actors who would be more appropriate and in keeping with the vision of Bond's original white creator. But why are we in this situation? Why is it necessary to fight over which poc gets to break the glass ceiling and "defeat racism" by playing a famous and popular white character? It is still the white man's creation.
Why isn't there a famous spy character who is black and who isnt Bond? Why isnt there a story about a black man in Africa who helps the poor and oppressed against the chieftain class, etc? wouldn't that be a better way to achieve representation?
Sir Cumference.
Hi everyone! Remember me? I want to thank you all for responding to my previous surveys for my dissertation, I thought I would take this opportunity to update everyone on what's happened. Next week I hand the finished work, including my practical make and the written dissertation. Everyone's comments on here were so lovely, they put a smile on my face with all the positivity and so I thought I would announce who the character I recreated was.. The results of my feedback lead to a possibility of three different characters; Guinevere, Morgana and Nimueh and I can announce that the character's costume I had recreated was...
https://preview.redd.it/w3nolskxs1471.jpg?width=2048&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=a1271572df06ee237ff4edb42829aebefa06d95e
Morgana...
Her costume is inspired by Vita Merlini by Geoffrey of Monmouth were she is mentioned to live on the Isle of Apples alone, practicing the arts of healing. My costume was based on Ancient Celtic Fashion. Subtle hints were the triskelion neckline and hem of the gown which was used in the TV show as the druid symbol, the colours of the fabrics which I naturally dyed were also the common colours she worn in the TV show.
I am so excited to share this with you all, I haven't told anyone else. I want to thank you all for your support and lovely comments. Long Live King Arthur.
Sir Cumference.
Sir Ratcha was the spiciest.
The legend of King Arthur is central to the idea of England today, going back to romantic literature from the Middle Ages through contemporary culture like Monty Python’s Holy Grail. There is no firm proof of his existence, though there are plenty of alluring hints and circumstantial evidence, leading to an intense debate about his historicity going back many decades. What is the truth behind the stories?
Many of the “popular” features of Arthurian legend (the Round Table, the quest for the Grail, the marriage to Guinevere and betrayal by Mordred) are almost certainly literary constructions of the French Arthurian romances, popular pieces of literature like Le Mort d’Arthur and Romans de Brut from the 12th to 15th centuries. Scrape away these fictional elaborations, however, and there remains a wealth of circumstantial evidence that these romances, which themselves draw from earlier Welsh and Breton legend, may have a vague basis in reality. In this post, I will go over some of the evidence for and against a historic Arthur from the academic literature, drawing from a number of primary and academic texts, most notably N. J. Higham’s “King Arthur: Myth-making and history”. Full sources at the bottom.
Background: A truly Dark Age in post-Roman Britain
Historians today are generally skeptical of the term “dark age” in reference to the European Middle Ages. However, the term still applies fairly well to at least one area and time period. From the time of the last Roman military withdrawal in the beginning of the 400s to the first reliable chronicles recording events in the 600s, we have almost no primary sources on any events in much of Britain. Besides very brief sources like graveyard inscriptions, our sources can be summarized as follows:
- Annales Cambriae (henceforth the Annales), a Welsh chronicle which was probably put together somewhere around the 10th century, and with entries going back to the middle 400s (full text here);
- Historia Brittonum (henceforth Historia), an 8th or 9th century history of the British people generally heavy on myths and light on facts (full text here);
- De Excidio et Conquestu Britanniae (henceforth Gildas), a 6th century sermon by the British priest Gildas which extensively discusses various historical topics ([full text here]
>So, you love the tales of King Arthur? You've read every book you can find, watched all the films and documentaries, debated everywhere... And now you just want to have fun with it.
>Or maybe you're someone just learning about the legends of Arthur, excited to ask questions an explore the wide variety of stories and concepts that the "canon" (to speak loosely) embraces.
>C'mon in! This is a community for the discussion of any and all aspects of the Arthurian legends, from the possible historical inspirations to the many reimaginings of the tales over the years.
>We're about friendly discussion with a sense of humour. Jokes are fine, silliness is acceptable, yet serious discussion is entirely welcome. Just come in ready for a more relaxed atmosphere. We're serious in here, but that doesn't mean we can't have a good time.
Sir-ching.
(As soon as I typed the punchline I realized how bad it looks written out. Is this okay, or should I delete?)
SIR PRIZE!
ALL-KNIGHTERS
The Witnesses to the Historicity of Jesus by Arthur Drews (1912)
The Non-Christian Witnesses
>"In view of the vagueness, effectiveness, and vulnerability of the evangelical accounts of Jesus, as far as his historical reality is concerned, the witnesses in non-Christian literature have always occupied a prominent place in the question of his historicity. As early as the first few centuries of the present era pious Christians searched the Jewish and pagan writers for references to Jesus, convinced that such references ought to be found in them; they regarded with great concern the undeniable defects of tradition, and, in the interest of their faith, endeavoured to supply the want by more or less astute “pious frauds,” such as the Acts of Pilate, the letter of Jesus to King Abgar Ukkama of Edessa, the letter of Pilate to Tiberius, and similar forgeries. Greater still was the reliance on the few passages in profane literature which seemed to afford some confirmation of the historical truth of the things described in the gospels. As these so-called non-Christian witnesses are again brought forward to rebut the denial of the historicity of Jesus, in the discussion which has followed the appearance of The Christ Myth [1910], and are even pressed upon us as decisive testimony, we must make a comprehensive inquiry into the value of those references in profane writers which seem to support the belief in an historical Jesus."
- The Jewish Witnesses
- The Roman Witnesses
- [Pliny and Suetonius](https://en.m.wikisou
Last I heard was that it was thought he probably existed but his kingdom was far smaller than is commonly thought, composing only southern Norway as we think of it today. Anyone got any thoughts on the current state of his historicity?
Ok so I love the legends of King Arthur. So much so that I took several English classes dedicated to them in college. My advisor joked that if my school had a degree in Arthurian literature I would qualify. So I've had this OI idea in my head for at least 2 months.
Plot: A girl of 17 goes into surgery related to her Cerebral Palsy and the last thing she remembers is going under the anesthesia. A young man of about 18 wakes her saying 'Come with me. As the sword of the King you deserve a far more noble death." When she asks "Who are you?' He replies "Merlin." Before reaching for her hand with a knowing smile etched upon his face.
Thinking of calling it something like I became Excalibur. Where the girl is not isekaied as an actual sword, but as the King's best fighter with supernatural strength and devotion. Possible love triangle between her, Merlin and a young King Arthur.
Currently rewatching Merlin and in S4E13 Merlin tells Arthur the story of how the 5 Kingdoms came to be. Merlin says the first king of Camelot was Bruta, Arthur's ancestor. But I remember a scene when Uther and Arthur were in a duel and Uther said that Arthur was handed the kingdom while Uther had to win it. Is this another plothole or did I misunderstand something?
Sir Cumference
Sir Cumference.
Sir Cumference, he had eaten too much pi.
Would there be any historical difference, if the legends, stories and poems of king Arthur didn't exist? Did the stories even have an impact on world history?
Sir Cumference
