Don't go see "King Arthur"

[Apologia100]

Sure, no problem. Here you go:

Adomnan's Life of St. Columba (circa 7th cent. AD)http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/basis/columba-e.html

Aneirin's Gododdin http://camelot.celtic-twilight.com/poetry/aneirin1.htm

The Annals of Ulster records Artur dying at the battle of Battle of Manu in 582 fighting the Picts.

While it is true that there are no historical documents that directly outline the historical Arthur, it appears he was a war leader, the son of an established king named Aidan, and died fighting the Picts, and had a half-sister named Morgan.

[naprous]

I'd like to see a little more about the composition date and manuscript tradition of those texts before taking them as gospel. And maybe I was missing something, but a quick romp through the life of St. Columba didn't yield much for me. (admittedly, it was a very quick romp! ) And remember, saint's lives are hagiographical, not historical -- the life of St. Columban (with an N) is also the earliest source for the Loch Ness Monster.

http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/basis/columban.html

I wasn't particularly impressed by the Celtic Twilight site. Lots of wishful thinking, but not much history.

I think this BBC site does a pretty good job of taking one through the early sources, and showing how one might *wish* Arthur was historical, but that none of the early sources actually prove that.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/ancient...rthur_01.shtml

Each page (there are 7) are quite short, but put together, I think they're quite persuasive.

Naprous