King Arthur was said to be a great king, who ruled over Camelot in the fifth or sixth century. King Arthur estimated to have been born around 475 A.D., “Tintagel has come to be associated with King Arthur as his birthplace, depicted by the Welsh monk Geoffrey of Monmouth” (Walker para 5). Arthurian Literature commonly depicted daring sword fights, chivalrous knights, damsels in distress and even magic. Though there are few records of a true King Arthur does not mean there is not a man behind the great legend that came forth in the mid twelfth century. “The legend of King Arthur may have been based on the life of one or more Celtic warriors who fought the Anglo-Saxon invaders of England in the late fifth and early sixth century.” (Wiggins 171), this could mean that there was more than one King Arthur in history or more than one inspiration for the legend. Proof that King Arthur was a real person is shown through historical evidence, geographical proof and Arthurian Literature.
Historical evidence proves King
…show more content…
Proven that King Arthur was a real person shown through extensive historical evidence, geographical proof and comparison of Arthurian Literature. King Arthur was once a great King who brought peace and a sense of political stability to the land. King Arthur ruled with his wife by his side and a hammer in hand. King Arthurs reign over Camelot last through the early sixth century, “He died in 519 or 542…” (Lienhard para 6). Though the true death date of the mastermind and influence is unknown this does not mean that King Arthur was not real. King Arthur’s legacy will live on for many more years to come as the one and true king in history. The real King Arthur may not be the same as the one is known through literature but he still ruled with the same honor and stability as the Arthur from the great legends. The proof of a real King Arthur remains debated but who’s to say that King Arthur did not go on daring quest or have a great kingdom that all