AND WHAT DOES IT TELL
US ABOUT THE MEDIEVAL
PERIOD WHEN MUCH OF
IT WAS WRITTEN?
The Arthurian legend sheds a lot of light
on the later periods in which the story
was written and rewritten. For example,
it provides an important reservoir of the
medieval languages in which it was set
down. It also illustrates ways in which ideas
were changing. In the mid12th century,
we experience Arthur as a king and
commander but, by the final decades of
the century, the spotlight had fallen on his
court. For example, writers like Chrétien de
Troyes focussed on secondary figures such
as Perceval, Gawain and Lancelot and
debated issues like attitudes towards
women, the role and responsibilities of high
birth, the foundations of knightly esteem,
lay education and training for knighthood.
The grail stories linked Arthur to
the last supper and the crucifixion.
Such stories illustrate contemporary
concerns regarding conduct appropriate
to elite Christian society.ASIDE FROM ARTHUR
HIMSELF, WHICH PARTS
OF THE LEGEND MIGHT BE
DRAWN FROM HISTORICAL
EVENTS AND FIGURES?
Many Arthurian characters are likely to
have had a literary life before they were
sucked into Arthur’s world, and a few
may have been real people. King Mark of
Cornwall (the uncle of Tristan and husbandof Iseult) bears an obviously Roman name
(Marcus), which occurs on sub-Roman
inscriptions. Tristan may derive from
Drustan, a name known from a ‘Dark Age’
inscription near Fowey in Cornwall but
equally perhaps from legendary Pictish
material (as Drust or Drest). That Chrétien de
Troyes claimed to be telling his own version
of the story suggests that it was circulating
in France in the 12th century, perhaps told
by Breton raconteurs.
The knight Sir Kay (also Cei, Cai) may
come from Gaius, a common Roman
forename (his is one of the earliest names
associated with Arthur in Welsh stories).
Culhwch – the central character of
a medieval Welsh Arthurian prose narrative,
who courts Olwen, a giant’s daughter –
probably draws on other categories of
folktales, not Arthurian storytelling.
Whether or not real people underlay these
literary characters is, though, far from clear.WHERE MIGHT CAMELOT
HAVE BEEN BASED?
Camelot first appears in Chrétien de Troyes’
late 12th-century French romance Lancelot
or the Knight in the Cart. Given that this
story was very much his creation, the name
is likely to have been made up, presumably
based on Geoffrey of Monmouth’s ‘Camblan’
or Wace’s ‘Camble’, with ‘-lot’ added to fit
the rhyme (meaning ‘share’, ‘fate’). There
have, however, been numerous attempts
to identify Camelot. Winchester was
a candidate in the later Middle Ages,
then South Cadbury Hillfort in the reignof Henry VIII, based presumably on nearby
names such as the river Cam.
Colchester in Essex and the Roman fort
at Slack near Huddersfield have also
been put forward as possible Camelots,
because they were called Camulodunum
(literally ‘fortress of the god Camul’)
in Roman Britain.
Before taking any of these too seriously,
we surely have to show that there is a good
chance that Chrétien had drawn the name
from a reliable and near-contemporary
source. That seems highly unlikely.WHAT ARE YOUR
THOUGHTS ON THE
NEW FILM ON ARTHUR?
AND WHAT ARE YOUR
FAVOURITE MODERN
DEPICTIONS OF HIM?
I enjoy discovering what each director
makes of the story, what aspects he/she
chooses to prioritise, and what messages
there are for a contemporary audience.
As for my favourite recent depictions,
Jerry Bruckheimer’s King Arthur (2004)
was entertaining, though hardly “the untold
true story that inspired the legend”!
The greatest ‘Arthur’ films, though, have
to be Disney’s Sword in the Stone and
Monty Python and the Holy Grail,
which still makes me laugh.Nick Higham is emeritus professor in early
medieval and landscape history at
the University of Manchester. His books
include King Arthur.Cadbury Castle in Somerset, one of – but far
from the only – reputed location of King Arthur’s
court, Camelot
A depiction of Layamon, who translated Wace’s
French version of Geoffrey of Monmouth’s
history into EnglishPHOTOS: ALAMY/BRIDGEMAN
91