Arthur: I am Arthur, King of the Britons. Peasant: Well I didn’t vote for you.

@davideveritt6685

8 ай бұрын

Women lying in ponds distributing swords is not a solid basis for government. It depends on a mandate from the masses.

@ahseaton8353

8 ай бұрын

If I went around saying I was an emperor just because some moistened bint had lobbed a scimitar at me, they’d put me away!

@jdghok

8 ай бұрын

@@ahseaton8353 😂😂😂

@hellomoto2084

8 ай бұрын

​@@ahseaton8353ah , the second comment about Monty python lol.😂😂

@kevinh.2244

8 ай бұрын

i dont know, how do if you identified as one, these days some retards would carry you the whole way. but i would vote for yah, if you had a scimitar that you pulled out of some old toffee. Andy for Emperor! lol

This presentation doesn’t mention the Welsh King Owain Ddantgwyn whose battle name “Arthur” means the bear', coined from Brythonic Celtic word 'Arth', and the Latin word 'Ursus' - both meaning 'bear' - thereby 'Arthursus' and later being shortened to 'Arthur'. He ruled Gwynedd and Rhôs in Wales, circa 500 AD. His fathers battle name was Uther Pen Dragon (The terrible head dragon in welsh), as in the popular Arthurian tales.

@helenamcginty4920

6 ай бұрын

I learned about him years ago at a weekend Eng lit seminar that either was on Arthurian legend or partly so. Thanks for reminding everyone.

@gingerredshoes

5 ай бұрын

Interesting, please cite sources so we can all read up.

@NoelWesley

5 ай бұрын

I read Graham Phillips' book and it is very compelling. I don't know why it's hardly ever mentioned in these documentaries. It's very well researched and presented. It's the most plausible study I've seen.

@johndoe......

4 ай бұрын

so he WAS real!

@danquaylesitsspeltpotatoe8307

4 ай бұрын

"REAL" history of a fictional character! LOL NO!

King Arthur will never die. King Arthur is an idea, a legend of the good king, and ideas never die.

@theoryofpersonality1420

3 ай бұрын

They do when you tell people the truth. That it's a lie and all those people who were killed and their lands occupied and their people genocided over a lie will rise and take revenge.

1981 Excalibur was my favourite movie as a kid, and I still love it.

@Justinicus24

7 ай бұрын

I had great times watching that classic with you😊

@Davidsavage8008

7 ай бұрын

It was insanely amazing . And in the movie the Mormans raised the boy that drew the sword from the stone. Amazing movie in 81. Simply amazing....

@RobinLynnGriffith

7 ай бұрын

Right!?!🤩

@thechampion1671

7 ай бұрын

Talk is for lovers Merlin, I need the sword to be king.

@Timmydope

7 ай бұрын

AAH EEEH OH OOOHHHH ...... AAAH EEEH OH OOOOH, AAAAH EEH OH OOOOH OOOH OOOOH OOOOOOOH

I'm a 40yo autistic who LOVES king arthur and just wants to say, the man explaining is AMAZING. Love and peace!!!! I hope you are blessed. Thhis is an AMAZING presentation of the true story of King Arthur

This has to be one of the better documentaries on the legend of Arthur.

Arthur is a title , The Bear. Welsh war leader. He was a war leader for Uthyr Pen Dragon. The Dragon. A tough bunch of fighters. Of course, Wales was simply CRAWLING with bards. Who knew how to embellish. And spin out a tale. Bless them.

@zoetropo1

7 ай бұрын

That of course is the basis of Geoffrey of Monmouth’s story. But there’s more: Arthur and Uther are witnesses in the Cartulary of Redon, which Geoffrey could have read. The name Uther Pendragon is in imitation of Eudon Penteur, sometime ruler of Brittany. His emblems are shown on the Bayeux Tapestry: they are ermine, a dragon’s head, and a gryphon’s head.

@zoetropo1

7 ай бұрын

In fact, the myths understate the history.

@legolasgreenleaf1961

5 ай бұрын

Bless them???

@SandraNelson063

5 ай бұрын

@@legolasgreenleaf1961 I have an odd sense of humor. What we think to be true is just the glitzy stories put out hundreds of years AFTER what really happened. Glamorized tales that had choked the facts to death under a heavy layer of hokum. Once upon a time has smothered the truth.🫅🏰🪄🗡️

@legolasgreenleaf1961

5 ай бұрын

@@SandraNelson063 oh totally agree lol! If only the quackademics knew that there actually were real people behind the romance nonsense that came so much later. Unfortunately they fail to see past the end of their noses when it comes to royal British genealogies, nevermind corroborating it with anything else that just might shed a light on the real Arthur and his 'knights'. But fortunately we have the work of Alan Wilson to show us the way😉

Mary Stewart's The Crystal Cave and the Hollow Hills are the best ever stories of this!

@janiced9960

2 ай бұрын

I bought them when they were first published and can't remeber how many times I have read them as an Historian I know they are not factual but how I do wish they were. Brilliant books in spite of the criticism from some areas that the roles of women were not prominent enough. If that is what you want go read Wonder Woman.

@irenejohnston6802

19 күн бұрын

Great trilogy. The Crystal Cave, The Hollow Hills, The Last Enchantment. Myrddin (grows up to be Merlin), yng boy in Welsh Court, disdained. Mother Welsh princess. Father unknown. Kidnapped to Brittany. Meets Ambrosius Aurelianus, and brother Uther. Drawn from oldest legends. Romano/Briton post empire. The old tribal people exist in the hills. Not interested in courtly knights of the round table Morte d'Arthur et al

@embassyofbellerose8344

10 күн бұрын

@@janiced9960 Women were brave too, and had to fight with their own lives, at times, trying to save their children. Also, Queen Boudica was a very brave leader & warrioress. I believe the Romans killed her, her husband, & her two daughters_so terribly sad.

"CAMELOT" with Richard Harris as Arthur, will always be my vision❤❤❤❤👍👍👍👍👍

@TheSchemer1

2 ай бұрын

It's only a model

Matt Lewis is easily one of, if not my favorite presenters on HH. I like them all a lot but everyone who focuses on dark age to medieval and prior is on my short list of favs haha

@RalphEllis

7 ай бұрын

There is no King Arthur and his court prior to the 12th century, with Geoffrey of Monmouth and Walter of Oxford. That was just 40 years after the First Crusade, and 5 years after the Knights Templar. Remember that the First Crusade went to Edessa first, not to Jerusalem. No doubt they found some interesting manuscripts in Edessa. The next problem is that two of the original manuscripts say that Arthurian Legend was written by Josephus Flavius. And the primary hero of Arthurian Legend was Joseph of Arimathaea. Think about that, for a moment. The truth is, that Arthurian Legend was an account of the secular Jesus as a king of Edessa, a real king who became the King of the Jews (his mother, Queen Helena, became the defacto Queen of the Jews in AD 50). But this account was written in a semi-fictional fashion, so that the authors would not be burned at the stake. See ‘The GraiI Cypher’ Ralph

@patriciajrs46

Ай бұрын

​@@RalphEllisHmmm. Thinking.

"We are the knights of Camelot, we eat jam and ham and spam a lot..." (I have to push the pram a loooooot!)

@str.77

17 күн бұрын

You mean "We're knights of the Round Table, we dance when we're able. .... We eat ham and jam and spam a lot."

The story of King Arthur has inspired, and fascinated my since I was a little boy in the early 70s. The thrill of fining out any new piece to add to the puzzle and slowly make up the whole picture, never leaves me. His tale has been told many times in films, myths, and poems, some quire comical in the telling, others can almost have us believe that their version is the true story. And other just pass it all off as just a fable to tell kids in front of the fire. The biggest missing piece of the puzzle is of course that most famous of swords. How that would throw new light on the whole story. Great video. Thank you for making it.

@RalphEllis

7 ай бұрын

There is no King Arthur and his court prior to the 12th century, with Geoffrey of Monmouth and Walter of Oxford. That was just 40 years after the First Crusade, and 5 years after the Knights Templar. Remember that the First Crusade went to Edessa first, not to Jerusalem. No doubt they found some interesting manuscripts in Edessa. The next problem is that two of the original manuscripts say that Arthurian Legend was written by Josephus Flavius. And the primary hero of Arthurian Legend was Joseph of Arimathaea. Think about that, for a moment. The truth is, that Arthurian Legend was an account of the secular Jesus as a king of Edessa, a real king who became the King of the Jews (his mother, Queen Helena, became the defacto Queen of the Jews in AD 50). But this account was written in a semi-fictional fashion, so that the authors would not be burned at the stake. See ‘The GraiI Cypher’ Ralph

@jasoncox7257

7 ай бұрын

@@RalphEllis The fact that Arth and Pen are Welsh words for bear and head/chief are massive clues to where we should look.

@Russia-bullies

7 ай бұрын

The story ain’t complete yet.

@Inquisitor_Vex

7 ай бұрын

This video is just English propaganda. The oldest attestation of Arthur is from the 5-600’s and that’s referring to someone else as “not the equal of Arthur”

@zoetropo1

7 ай бұрын

@@jasoncox7257In Cornish and Breton, too!

My favorite 30 minutes of Arthur content ever. Very well done, very informative.

🌟Love King Arthur's tales🌟 Tyvmuch

Alan Wilson and Baram Blackett for years did research and exploration to find Arthur. They found Arthur, both of them!

@zoetropo1

7 ай бұрын

They missed some!

@chriswood3370

7 ай бұрын

@@zoetropo1 no, they didn't. they did a comprehensive job and uncovered the truth thankfully.

@zoetropo1

Ай бұрын

@@chriswood3370 Not so.

@chriswood3370

Ай бұрын

@@zoetropo1 in your opinion

King Arthur is a Celtic king who is first mentioned in the Mabanogion and altered by the English to claim him

@teiloturner2760

7 ай бұрын

Tell em

@Kitsylove28

7 ай бұрын

Right names of the Welsh heroic-age subcategory of war-like Animal names associated with Welsh aristocracy Such as the Bear Raven Wolf Badger Hound and Stallion.

@Melissa.Garrett

5 ай бұрын

Actually, much of what we think of as Arthurian legend today was written by the French.

@Kitsylove28

5 ай бұрын

@@Melissa.Garrett Right shame their Arthurian Legend is laden with Colonial significance.

@willcaro92

4 ай бұрын

We dont know anything about Celts though

Matt Lewis strikes again! A fascinating account, and one which stops a few gaps in my own knowledge of the links between Arthurian legend and the subsequent kings.. Thanks Matt & team! 👍⭐

@bernardbryson6829

7 ай бұрын

😊

Another wonderful historical coverage video shared by (history Hit)channel ....thank you for sharing

Very interesting. Like to travel to these spots. Beautiful footage. Thanks!🙏

King Arthur and Ragnar Lothbrok are pretty much the same type of figure, they where both semi-mythological figures of which both their origins and their backstories are completely speculative on if both ever existed to begin with and both figures are most likely an amalgamation of the deeds of different lords,kings and warriors from the time period.

@markashworth8353

8 ай бұрын

That's interesting

@lifeschool

8 ай бұрын

They would say Odin never existed, and that all the Viking stories are based on nothing. Same with Jesus Christ. There is evidence that these people existed, but the myths and stores based around them are often not based on any evidence, and are a complete fabrication passed down through folk tales and hear-say.

@rhzyo

8 ай бұрын

That's a good analysis I never thought of King Arthur being like Ragnar in that way. Thanks 😊

@monkeytennis8861

7 ай бұрын

​@@rhzyowhat, a made up legend?

@rhzyo

7 ай бұрын

@@monkeytennis8861 connection of them, while Ragnar is probably a combination of stories I'd say Arthur is more "made up" so to speak

Always moves me , thank you 👏🏻

I like the legend and history of King Arthur I admired him ❤

Arthur probably didn’t even speak English, right? But I still am an absolute sucker for the Arthurian Legends 😂👏🏾

@kev3d

8 ай бұрын

Surely not, if he lived at all. "English" as we think of it today, didn't exist until the blending of Norman French and Anglo Saxon (and a little Norse and Latin thrown in) which happened gradually after 1066.

@truthbeforeopinions941

8 ай бұрын

Arthur and his origins come from Wales, not England, and certainly not France. Anything written after the 900s is pure fantasy designed to ridicule and muddy the waters in regards to his origins.

@lifeschool

8 ай бұрын

Both Kings called Arthur spoke Celtic Brittonic. The dialects split around 550AD; brittonic, cornish, welsh, cumbrian, pictish etc; but before that split, everyone spoke the same Gallic language from Gaul; which we misguidedly today call 'Celtic', today surviving as Gaulikh/Gaelic languages.

@LewisLittle66

8 ай бұрын

Correct. "English" as a language didn't exist until about 500 years later. Arthur would have spoken a Brittonic language, most closely related to Old Welsh.

" In Search of Merlin " , a book I've read delves into this subject. The grey area between myth and reality. Spicy.

A fascinating "what if" should Arthur Tudor not have died young, we might have been spared Henry 8th and all that entailed.

@stephenferguson9756

4 ай бұрын

That would also mean no Elizabeth I and all that entailed. No Elizabethan golden age. England may not have become a world power, at least not till later. The country would most likely have stayed Catholic, since Anne Boleyn would not have had the influence she had.

@str.77

17 күн бұрын

@@stephenferguson9756 No Elizabeth? What a great idea! No Anne Boleyn? Wonderful!

You should do a breakdown on arthurian legend in movies and tv i think it would be very insightfull

@Davidsavage8008

7 ай бұрын

The 1981 movie was incredibly done. Down to the Mormons that raised the boy who drew the sword . Amazing .

@monkeytennis8861

7 ай бұрын

Definitely wouldn't be, as they're mostly utter pony

Start in Wales! Also, Read and listen to the people who were contemporary with him instead of dismissing them because they came from Wales. This ofcourse will not happen as if he was alive today he’d be known as “Welsh” - which obviously did-proves the English narrative that Wales was never unified. This is why academics can be transfer him to England or France without objection.

@sharonkaczorowski8690

8 ай бұрын

I agree…I think the original story began there, based on one or more individuals.

@kernowboy137

8 ай бұрын

While the early myth is Welsh in origin, Arthur is also a legendary figure in Cornwall and Brittany for obvious reasons!

@helenamcginty4920

6 ай бұрын

Well the English colonised first most of Britain, then Ireland, India and parts of Asia, Africa N America. Why not steal the myths and legends, true or not for their own.

@gjclark2478

6 ай бұрын

Helena, it's been widely known that king Arthur was welsh. Just watch Wilson and blacket's videos on the subject. Please state all the myths we English stole, I'll wait.......... The clergy at the time in England did use it to milk ££££££ in pilgrimage, but that is just business not history. It's no different to Winnie the pooh, A.A. Milne's books (English writer) sold to Disney then milked to death for $$$$$, it's just commerce. At school in the 80's, we were taught Arthur ( there was 2) were Welsh, England had no claim and most of this Camelot and knights etc, was bogus. Most "history" is BS. Anyone can say English man bad....... But judging by your surname you have a hatred built in by your country........🙄

@StuartAnderson-xl4bo

6 ай бұрын

​@helenamcginty4920 couldn't even colonise the indeginous scots or Irish you anglo/saxon/jute/roman/brithonic/viking/Norman

While England tried to create a Mythical Arthur, we in Spain have Don Rodrigo Diaz de Vivar, "El Cid," and his Tomb and Swords are been displayed at the Cathedral of Burgos along his tomb.

@LlywelynapGruffydd

5 ай бұрын

Wales, the English are who this dude fought against.

@patriciajrs46

5 ай бұрын

What about Don Diego de la Vega?

@CarlosGarcia-fi4yu

5 ай бұрын

Don Diego de la Vega was a fictitious character.@@patriciajrs46

@patriciajrs46

5 ай бұрын

@@CarlosGarcia-fi4yu Okay. Was he not based on a real Mexican?

@Qrtuop

5 ай бұрын

El Cid was a mercenary. Spanish right wingers make s big deal out of him but that was all he was.

This wasn’t taken in the 12th & 13th century but King 🤴 Arthur and the knights of the round table had been around the 5th & 6th century AD after the Roman Empire had taken its toll

Fascinating, thank you 🙏🙏🙏👵🇦🇺

Really interesting

Up till 1878 Welsh Children were Taught about King Arthur in History lessons and had been for more than a Thousand years, Yther Penddraig was a Grandson of Meurig King of Glamorgan Buried at Lyswyrnwy in the Vale of Glamorgan, his Son was Arthur the Second killed in Battle at Mynydd Baiden against the Saxons in 489 or 499 the Battle date is probably the earlier one where the Saxon King Hengist was killed, the 499 Battle was another defeat for the Saxons at Coed y Mwstyr ( Pen y Bont ) Bridgend Mid Glamorgan, there was also a Saxon Defeat at the same place Two Centuries Later. Mynydd Baiden above the Villages of Ffordd y Gyfraith and Llangynwyd is also the place of the Early 6th Century Bodvoc Stone which is a stone Commemorating the Victory over the Saxons in 489 , this stone is in the Margam Abbey Stones Museum, Bodvoc in name terms is the Cymric Brythonic name for Victory " Buddug" in latin or English Boadocaea Boudicca , the O in that written Cymric of Bodvoc is sounded as a U so it is Bud the V is a double dd so Buddu C in old Cymric was a G so Buddug, by the way the Buda in Buda pest means victory also, it is Celtic. The area at Mynydd Baiden is full of History three large Hillforts dating from 4000BC till 1000 AD, Four Roman Forts within five Miles, one actually on Mynydd Baiden, even the Ordnance survey maps show " British Entrenchments that are all over Mynydd Baiden and Margam Mountain. So if you want to look for Arthur and the Museum of Wales is looking for his burial, you will have to look in the Graves of 167 British Cymric Kings that are in Britain, Ireland and France, these Kings predate the Romans by about a 1000 Years and they are dated up till 1048 AD, I can tell you that Arthurs burial has been located and is being kept Secret, I would opine that he is in the Grave of Meurig in Lyswyrnwy so to Yther Arthmael Arthur the First Cadfan and possibly Caradoc a King from 29AD up till his return from Rome in 57 AD, but his Grave is in an Extremely Large Burial Mound at Caer Caradoc on Mynydd y Mynwent (Mountain of the Burials) , above the Ancient Village of Brynnau Gwynion in Glamorgan. They are opening up Burials all over Britain 16 in Scotland 115 in Wales 7 in Ireland and there are another 39 sites in England but many of the Old Cymric Burials were not destroyed by the Romans but were by the Saxons who robbed them , there are still 4 Surviving around the London area that are from the Bronze age, Burials in Brittany but also in Gallia ( Northern France) from Normandy at Caen and Carentan to Calais and Ypres there are Cymric Burials that are from Pre Roman Times, they were Kings in their own rights, most of France spoke the same Language as Britons. This was British History and not the Bullshit of the Unvenerable Bede, Arthur is mentioned in Three Poems and not one poem, Taliesin in the 7th Century wrote a number of lines to the Man who was a Known King, Mabinogi names him along with Trystan and Ysyllt so to Gwenfer and Yther, there are small Early Christian texts in Latin by the Monks of Llancarfan a 5th Century Monastic College also in writings of the Collegiate at Llanilltyd Fawr of Arthur. It is a Fact that the 12th Century Destroying of these ancient Colleges by the Normans was not done on a whim, they also Destroyed the 4th Century Church on Mynydd Baiden, why to cover up the History of the British, yet the Plantagenet knew of the Britons from France they were of the same genes in Part, many Historians look at the name Plantagenet and try to find its beginnings, it Certainly is NOT Norse, but the Cymric word Plant means " Child" a Genet Child of Genet in Brythonic Cymric it is Cenydd, he was a British King in the 9th Century in what is Morlais near Dieppe he is buried with the the Ancestors of William the Bastard. Arthur in Cymric means " long Bear" many of the early Coats of Arms of the Kings of Celtic Britain had a Bear . Also it must be told that Many Romans in Britain were Britons, with the leaving very quickly of the Romans it is understandable they stayed, it is also a great possibility that Marcus Aurelius was a Briton, so Magnus Maximus who is called Macsen Wledig in Brythonic. More and More we are now searching our Lost Heritage, I am extremely Certain in the near future your answer to the Arthur question will be forthcoming, perhaps we will claim Lloegr ( Lost Lands)back. Prynhawn da, pob Hwyl.

@Garwfechan-ry5lk

4 ай бұрын

Hengist is probably Buried near Llangan and is outside the Church of St Mary because he was a Heathen, by 489 all Celts were some sort of Christian. there are Burial pits of Saxons at Mynydd Baiden and a Number of Celtic Mound burials. YOU cannot Metal detect there, permission will NOT be allowed. There are another 10 Battle sites with Saxons in South Wales all within 12 Miles of Mynydd Baiden and there are NONE to the West of that area, they were all defeats for the Saxons Rhiwsaeson Ystradowen Pendeulwyn Gwaelog ( Llantrisant) are the Closest apart from Llangan and the Bridgend sites.

@patriciajrs46

Ай бұрын

This is very interesting. I won't even try to pretend that I can understand your language. I do believe Arthur was real.

@str.77

17 күн бұрын

Was Uther the father of Arthur or just one of his knights?

The home of Arthur was a large tin mine. The sword from the stone was a logo. All this "protection" and "concurring" was the export of tin.

@zoetropo1

Ай бұрын

Evidence?

Loved #Mordred with the gold #LayneStaley mask

The true rightful heir and ruler of Britannia sacrificed himself to save Wales 🗿🏴󠁧󠁢󠁷󠁬󠁳󠁿

How she could say that Winchester was never a capital beats me. It was the capital city of the kings of Wessex, of whom Aethelstan was the first to unite the warring kingdoms into what became the first recognisable kingdom of England.

@zoetropo1

7 ай бұрын

Also of the British kingdom that preceded Wessex. The House of Wessex was probably Cornish.

@light-bringer294

5 ай бұрын

@@zoetropo1 She sounded American, which maybe explains it, or excuses it. lol

@patriciajrs46

5 ай бұрын

​@@light-bringer294I'm going to accept this because America has so screwed up her own historical records that it bears the idea that Americans are not taught proper history, ours or world history.

@theoryofpersonality1420

3 ай бұрын

Because it's all a lie based on a children's story.

@theoryofpersonality1420

3 ай бұрын

The problem is you people call books written by people to entertain, history.

so many people forget that form 1066 to the middle of 1400 the kings of England were in fact french and spoke french.

King Arthur was probably a Romano British war leader from Gloucester/Cirencester/Bath who beat the Saxons at/near Bredon Hill near Tewkesbury and thus won a peace until the Saxons won the Battle of Deorham. The rest is myth, but the moment weapons are found in the right place, I expect my recognition :-)

@tjmul3381

7 ай бұрын

Until then, your 'myth' is your own.

@zoetropo1

7 ай бұрын

Ambrosius Aurelianus, alias Riothamus, king of the Romano-Britons in both Britain and Brittany. He is attested to by Sidonius, Gregory of Tours, Jordanes, Cassiodorus and Gildas.

@andyj39

Ай бұрын

@@zoetropo1 Isn't this the theory Geoffrey Ashe puts forth in one of his books? It's been many years since I read it.

The problem for Arthur is that when people look for "King" Arthur and try to find "Camelot", "Excalibur", "The Round Table", "Lancelot" and "Gawain", there will always be no other outcome but disappointment because these things and people never existed in the first place, so Arthur gets dismissed. As much as I adore all the stories, myths and legends and have read them all countless times and will re-read them countless times again, that's all they are. I have however, no doubt in the existence of Arthur the Warrior/Dux Bellorum leading the Britons in campaigns against the Saxons, Scots and Picts.

What a Fabulous Treat...And there is No Doubting that the Wisdom Inherent in the Round Table Was the Guardianship and Society of the Ancients and Ancestors Long Intended from Earliest Sacred❤️‍🔥 Benevolent Dignified Protectors of Lands and Peoples

I always think different parables in the Game of Thrones characters. I theres synchronicities in the jorrah who was grabbed by that grayscale and put in isolation and Longclaw was really his familys and his father was castle black commander.

The truth is that he drank too much wine and forgot exactly where he left the sword 😂

The story is 100% true. Merlin was dragon Lord through his father. Medicine was used to help King Arthur. That knowledge was past to Haigh Hall ancestor's & cousins. They still have Merlins books because King Henry 8th used Merlins magic. Queen Elizabeth I followed the traditional, as well, as Harry Potter series. The only evidence you have is books & knowledge. Which Haigh Hall 29 Lord Crawfords, which married 14 Royal connections. Along with 20 ķings & Queens from King Robert II too King Charles III. Merlin is still mentioned in film's. He isn't made up, that's my ancestor tree calling. Good bless Royal ancestor's & cousins.

@craigfowler7098

6 ай бұрын

Think you need a doctor's appointment

@patriciaredmond3996

4 ай бұрын

​@@craigfowler7098😆 my thoughts exactly

@zoetropo1

Ай бұрын

Fine words. We still need evidence.

The replica table in Winchester Great Hall was bastardised by Henry VIII. He added two extra seats for his portrait - then removed the original symbol in the middle of the table and replaced it with the Tudor Rose. His ego was more important than our history!

What I find incredible about the evolution of the story of Arthur, is that had he existed at all he would have been a proto Welsh - speaking Briton who fought the ( prtoto English - speaking )Anglo Saxons . However, over the centuries,the story evolved to such a degree that Arthur somehow became 'English'. Oh,the irony

@doityourself5351

5 ай бұрын

isn't this exactly the point that was made in the video.... some echo in these comments boy

@geraintjones8785

3 ай бұрын

I think what @cymro6357 is saying is that if anyone knows history at all, then they know Even if Arthur lived and died in the land that is now called England, he was most definitely not English. To call him English and knowing the history of the land is to completely contradict yourself. The language that existed during the time, that became modern English, would have been completely foreign to Arthur.

@zoetropo1

Ай бұрын

He was a cousin of the English king.

@cymro6537

Ай бұрын

@@zoetropo1 Oh, really? What English king would that be?

@cymro6537

Күн бұрын

3:42 the (Roman) Empire's evacuation of 'England' - uh ...nope ,*Britain* actually.

Many of these stories have a grain of truth. Arthur most likely was a real person, though that's probably not his name. In the name of chivalry, they took a real story and blew it up into what would eventually be filmed as Excalibur.

@zoetropo1

7 ай бұрын

Arth (bear) was a popular element in British names or titles. The Latin form is Urs. Example: Aurelius Urticinus, owner of the Hoxne Hoard in Suffolk.

@Tywithay

5 ай бұрын

Took a page out of the christianity playbook

@theoryofpersonality1420

3 ай бұрын

No, there is no truth in this. A man chased out of France as a disgrace, went to the place he was exiled to and took a book written for children and used to kill, steal and destroy the land and people of over 176 nations. Calling a fairy tale his history. The so called royals are imposters and never have and never will be actual royals. You people still do the same to this day. You are no one important and you come from nothing important.

you are right about the story of one specific King Arthur whom I met being around the 12th Century to 13th Century (1236) to be exact. there were also exactly about 10 King Arthurs (also King David, it was just his first name), would've continued but he had a fake son who had no clue about fencing.

Myth. King Arthur was first mentioned by Geoffrey of Monmouth, Welsh monk with Norman heritage. He wrote a nonfictional treatise called, “History of the Kings of Britain,” with King Arthur having a fleeting mention. The knights of the Roundtable were first written by Cretien de Troyes’ in France. The tales of King Arthur are legends written by poets and writers of the middle age with their own specific narrative.

The late Queen Elizabeth II acknowledged and confirmed that King Arthur was not a myth but real.

@helenamcginty4920

6 ай бұрын

Oh. That makes it true then?

@carolbuzelim

2 ай бұрын

@@helenamcginty4920 if he existed they hang out

The 'dd' in Welsh is more similar to 'th' in English than it is to 'd' in Either language.

@roxiekooi865

4 ай бұрын

I'm not Welsh myself, but a dear friend of mine spent a semester abroad in Wales, and she learned [and taught me] enough of the Welsh alphabet that every time Matt mispronounced a Welsh name, I flinched.

The Monty Python Documentary about Arthur is much more accurate.

@Maggie-rr8gi

6 ай бұрын

Reality at its best!😅

The REAL story about a fictional story. Nice

Oh, damn. I know all the factual info about him. I know there's nothing new. Doesn't matter. Put "King Arthur" in the title, here I am. EDIT: I didn't know everything. That was most interesting!

Seems like there is & will be more to the history.

King Arthur was the Rex Alba, the king crowned on a stone throne which was broken up and scattered all over Britain when the Christian Normans invaded, while fighting a battle in France he was mortaly wounded and returned to the isle of Albion aka Avalon aka Britain where he died and was buried in Secret. The rest of the surviving British Celts were either conquered and enslaved or pushed back into Scotland while the Cymry became death incarnate for anybody that crossed Offa's Dyke. The Alba is the Gaelic for Scottish or Albannach but at one time Albannach were the true British and they still have a piece of the stone throne aka the Stone of Scone aka the Stone of Destiny. The Rex Alba became corrupted to Excalibur and the High Druid's title was Merlin who returned from Ireland after the Romans left. This is my story and I'm sticking to it because it makes more sense than faeries and magic.

I want Time-team to make a dig in the supposed grave of king Arthur

Historic Fiction possibly at its best. The Christian connexion of Arthur's 12 Nights of the Round Table and Merlin as the Spiritual Mediator, and of course Sir Lancelot as the Traitor; All types of The Apostles, Jesus and Judas. And the Isle of Avalon as the great culmination of Arthur's journey as The Earthly King and His last and just Reward, Immortality.

@zoetropo1

Ай бұрын

That's all a stretch.

@str.77

17 күн бұрын

12 Nights? I only know Shakespeare's Twelfth Night.

@MrMonoyo

17 күн бұрын

@@str.77 Historic Fiction: The Arthurian Knights of the Round Table symbolize the 12 Apostles or Disciples that followed Jesus around during His Ministry.

@str.77

17 күн бұрын

@@MrMonoyo Even if that was so (and there is a kernel of truth, but no more) but it has no concern for what I wrote, Mr Night.

@MrMonoyo

16 күн бұрын

@@str.77 Then, since I misread what you wrote, please rewrite your comment referring to my specific comment if you will it.

will King Arthur rise as predicted to protect his people ?

When you refer English you mean the Angle or Saxon because when it's believed Arthur lived there was no such place or people as England and English. The elephant in the room re the round table is the Tudor Rose smack bang in the middle of the table. No mention of Edward wiping out the Druids which also wiped out the Druid history of the Cymru royal lineage enabling further bending of the truth in the legend

Didn't Excalibur get tossed into some obscure puddle/lake? What if the round table is just a figure of speech and it's really just men sitting around a fire on the battle field area? So you may never find the table. Arthur's story is fighting for his countrymen.

@dr.monreauphd8488

3 ай бұрын

All kings sit at the head of a table what if the table was round so all sat round it were equal even arthur ! if you wish to believe the story is based on truth like all stories are , that not even a king puts himself beyond the laws of his fellow men all are equal , maybe if true to me that alone would make a great king and a worthy one too ., that is the idea for the round table !

WARNING: This is a good video but FAR TOO MANY ADS! Watch at your own risk! LOL

Actually Alfred the Great really did exist. His grandson was the one who united the separate kingdoms to create England. But Alfred put a stop to the Vikings. He also had the bible translated into the English of the time and had copies put into churches. He was far more interesting.

I think he may have been a Roman soldier who lived in Wales. I've also read that there are two real life contenders for the real Arthur , which one is not known. I'm descended from one of them.

I've never heard it claimed that King Arthur was English, as these 'experts' here now claim. King Arthur has always been a Briton who fought against the Anglo Saxons who later became the English. Arthur is therefore related to all of us on these Islands including the English as we are all descended from those ancient Britons. However, he wasn't English himself, and ive never heard anyone ever claim he was, before this programme.

@kevinjohnbetts

8 ай бұрын

I would say that you misunderstood the argument presented. The 'experts' never claimed Arthur was anything. What they did was argue that Arthur, or more accurately his legend, was co-opted by the English (technically still Norman by lineage) kings to bolster their legitimacy whilst undermining the 'Welsh'. It's worth bearing in mind that if Camlann was in Cornwall and Avalon was/is Glastonbury then that's all in England at the time of Henry II. By the time of Henry VII what we know as 'Wales' is part of England. So Arthur could legitimately be claimed as English if one wanted.

@truthbeforeopinions941

8 ай бұрын

No, a nation doesn’t get to pass of another’s king as their own because they came to control it centuries after they lived. It doesn’t work like that. Yes, he was co-opted, and there is no legitimacy around such an act.

@johnbrereton5229

8 ай бұрын

​@@kevinjohnbetts Look at the transcript around 16.38. Dr Cindy Wood : 'He was English..... very very English' ????? No he wasn't, he was always known to be an ancient Briton.

@kevinjohnbetts

8 ай бұрын

@@johnbrereton5229 You've taken that totally out of context. She doesn't say that Arthur *is* '.... very very English' only that he has been *made* very very English at the time of the exhumation of his supposed bones.

@johnbrereton5229

8 ай бұрын

@@kevinjohnbetts It's not taken out of context, the context is all there in black and white.

The focusing on the King on the painting on the table is a complete disregard for what the roundtable meant it meant as we all sit at this table we are all the roundtable meant as we sit here and gather for meals and tails we are all equal so it's a complete disregard for what the roundtable stood for which is as we sit at this table we're all equal

Arthur the lord of war but never a king 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿🏴󠁧󠁢󠁷󠁬󠁳󠁿🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿 he is a true brit 🇬🇧

2:02 - 2:13 that sounds so cool. Forget Cnut's North Sea Empire, forget the Angevin Empire, for the British Empire, let's have the Artorian/Albion Empire instead, let's make it canon.

You have to start with the original, native British literature- i.e. Welsh. Arthur was appropriated and co-opted by the Anglo-Normans; his origins are as a quasi-Herculean warrior lord of the native Brythonic peoples, and a fierce enemy of the invading Angles and Saxons. Ignoring this is ignoring not only the importance of literary history, but an extension of what amounts to English cultural imperialism.

@richardjohnston3359

7 ай бұрын

I read some where he was a Roman soldier whom settled brutain during the Roman invasion and obviously saw him self as british when the Anglo saxons started coming over ?

@Vanastar

7 ай бұрын

​@@richardjohnston3359 Arthur couldn't have been contemporary with both the Roman invasion and the Anglo-Saxon invasions - these two sets of invasions were 400-600 years apart. You do often see the theory that he was a member of some vestigial, last remenant of the Roman culture during the Anglo-Saxon period, but personally I don't buy it; the kingdoms collectively known as Prydain - from Cornwall to Scotland - had pretty much reverted back to being Celts by the time the Engles and Saxons invaded.

@truthbeforeopinions941

7 ай бұрын

There were two King Arthur’s that’s Why!!! One who was half Roman who fought on behalf of the Britons against Rome (Gratians usurpation) under Magnus Maximus and his direct descendant being Arthwys Ap Meurig who fought the Saxons. The seconds Kingdoms were Glamorgan and Gwent. Named after his son and wife Morcant and Gwenivere.

@kw3stone

7 ай бұрын

@@VanastarI thought the hero of Prydain was an assistant pig keeper by the name of Taran

Arthur couldn't be fitted in the church and his body wasn't there . He had disappeared so I doubt he died..

@dr.monreauphd8488

3 ай бұрын

maybe in them times they burnt his body on a boat out of respect for the king who knows ! a once and future king would have too die and at some place and time be born again for that saying to hold water ! which sounds alot like a Bible story too .

The picture in the beginning looks like me 5 years ago

Excalibur!!!!!🗡

Take heart for when Albans need is greatest Arthur will rise again ❤❤❤❤❤

Appears King Arthur was born in Caledonia today's Scotland in the 5th century, he wasnot English as there was no English till 200 years later.

@truthbeforeopinions941

7 ай бұрын

Even if he had been, Scotland then was majority Briton (Welsh) anyway.

@Valhalla88888

6 ай бұрын

@@truthbeforeopinions941 must be delusional Englishman Caledonia ie Scotland was not Welsh more Pictish

I like to think he was real. I want to anyways. It would be be cool if more evidence of him existence was uncovered

King Arthur the II .. the Arthur conspiracy will blow your mind

Having seen so many people in the comments offering so many corrections and inconsistencies with sources, i think I'll give this one a miss

I thought the roundtable was in Stonehenge :)

Someone probably made a certain type of method to forge the steel for the sword that could cut through other swords & armor

@dr.monreauphd8488

3 ай бұрын

was said to be a magical sword so id blame Merlin for its creation lol

Clive owen did a spectacular job as king Arthur, but the absolute best was sean Connery...he is how i imagined Arthur to be

His 'knights' truly were bloodthirsty murderous thugs as you say. Arthur himself was Merlin's protégé, a pupil of Merlin the druid, for seven years.

I believe that Arthur, if he existed, was Welsh or Cornish. For the English to take over the Celtic people and their stories is history all over again.

That table was used to make movies

So why is there so much information on a “MYTH”??? 😊

It wasn’t a round table so that all were equal. It was actually a giant lazy Susan

I ask you? Why would Edward the First go to all the trouble of having a replica of the Round Table made !

a 30 minute video is a good intro, but there are literally entire university courses about this topic, multiple books presenting theories of "The true Arthur". No one knows.

“ On second thought let’s not go to Camelot. It is a silly place.”

Gweneth please

Aanal Nathrak, eath'bath bethuud.. de'yokel denthii nuff said and dont you forget it (edit) i cant help but think there is a link between "Camaledunum" (modern day Colchester) and "Camelot" its not much of a stretch to see how the roman name changed to the old English also, when you look at the castle there, in style its definately Norman but it doesnt look like any other Norman castle in the country is there a link?.. probably not.. but the legend of Arther is pulled from so many sources.. so you never know

Not /ee gododin/ mate. It's pronounced /uh godothin/ the th being pronounced as in "there" and spelt "Y Gododdin" in modern Welsh. Cymru has the emphasis on the first syllable, not the second as you pronounce it.

Matt Lewis needs to learn how to pronounce Welsh names like Gwynedd and Deheubarth. His work is seriously undermined by the efforts (or lack of) in this video.

@teiloturner2760

7 ай бұрын

The man looks pretty welsh and the Lewis name

Not avin it that Arthur is all myth! Alan Wilson has written a series of books after deep dive into the suppressed Welsh/British history. Greatest British hero in history and no one knows who he is. Remarkable.

@skepticalbadger

8 ай бұрын

Then you simply don't understand how history works.

@mikotagayuna8494

8 ай бұрын

You are both right and wrong. The greatest historical consensus is that Arthur is likely a syncretized figure based on several folk heroes from many different cultures and mythologies.

@lifeschool

8 ай бұрын

@@mikotagayuna8494 - the con-sensus is wrong. Arthur was real. The myths and stories are not real.

@craigmoyle2924

8 ай бұрын

Alan Wilson sadly passed away 2 days ago

@jasoncox7257

8 ай бұрын

@@mikotagayuna8494 I am not wrong, thank you very much. I've studied him for over 5 decades and I was always an A grade student in history. If you read what I said I don't believe Arthur is "ALL" myth. So I know he is a combination of 2 historical men with the courtly romances and even esoterica of later periods. Other cultures and agendas have adopted the legends, he may have even been there but in only one langauge does Arth mean bear and pen mean head or chief. If you actually study the books I've mentioned you wouldn't have such a thin and flimsy understanding. I'm also intrigued by what you mean by "The greatest historical consensus" ? I suspect you mean the shoddy, half hearted orthodox academic history. Which appears to me to be so bedazzled by aboriginal "myths " that they have neglected to investigate properly, at least not in the depth Alan Wilson or Laurence Main has. Did I say their conclusions are correct? No I did not. But they do put forth a much more compelling argument than legends are all dreamt up and the British people are totally delusional about their own history.

yes he had a great great great great 💜💜

Ascension glossary rise of king arthur Look up king arthurs castle in grand canyon

They didn’t have tv back then…so this could have very well been their version of a good fiction story, not unlike Superman. Arthur is a story that was told & retold, building on the original.

It’s Ironic that dr cindy wood and the presenter of this video would say that the monks of Glastonbury abbey “made Arthur very English” , because as historians, they know England didn’t even exist in the time Arthur was purported to have lived. Indeed his enemies were the people who would give rise to the idea of England as a nation. If anything this story more highlights the fact that large parts of England were once the land of welsh ancestors rather then making Arthur part of “England”.

The real history of the King Arthur is that there were actually many more "King Arthurs" that helped make the story about only one of them

I think it was mostly mythical stories but these were based on real people that lived at an earlier time in the 9th century and 'King Arthur' was Alfred the Great...and the other characters were based on other people that were alive at that time.

Arthur was born in Cornwall, Merlin hung out in Wales.

@monkeytennis8861

7 ай бұрын

Yeah ok

@kernowboy137

Ай бұрын

The Welsh Triads do place Arthur in Cornwall. See: KILHWCH AND OLWEN, places one of three courts of King Arthur at “Gelliwig” near modern day Callington (Kellington or Killiwick) in (Cernyw) Cornwall.