Malcolm Martin wrote:
> b) whether William *of Malmesbury*, a historian of *English* history,
would
> have been so aware of the oral British tales circulating in Wales (not a
> strong point, I accept);
>From Chapter 287 of the same work:
<<At this time (1066-87) was found in the province of Wales called
R(h)os the tomb of Walwen, who was the not degenerate nephew of Arthur
by his sister. He reigned in that part of Britain which is still called
Walweitha... But the tomb of Arthur is nowhere beheld, whence ancient
ditties fable that he is yet to come. The tomb of the other, however,
as I have said, was found in the time of King William upon the sea
shore, fourteen feet in length [Tom: compare Amr m. Arthur's grave in
HB 73]; and here some say he was wounded by his foes and cast out in a
****pwreck, but according to others he was killed by his fellow-citizens
at a public banquet. Knowledge of the truth therefore remains doubtful,
although neither story would be inconsistent with the defence of his
fame.>>
Looks like a bit of Welsh topographic folklore to me... Indeed, an
allusion to the same tale would seem to be present in the Old Welsh
*Englynion Y Beddau* if we follow Sims-Williams' recent analysis of the
text, as is the claim that 'the world's wonder [*anoeth* = something
very difficult/impossible to find/achieve etc.] [is] a grave for
Arthur' which can be compared to William's 'But the tomb of Arthur is
nowhere beheld, whence ancient ditties fable that he is yet to come'.
> >I am much more inclined to believe Gildas, that Ambrosius was the
victor at
> >the seige of Badon Hill (and that was the REAL business of that period)
and
> >Arthur was a mythical Robin Hood-like figure subsequently historicised.
>
> Ahhh!!!! The age old debate. Did he exist? If not, did we invent him?
I'm not sure Robin Hood is the best comparison for the majority of the
early Arthurian legend, though the framework of *Culhwch ac Olwen*
might be seen in this light, I guess. IMHO the most Robin Hood-like
part of the early legend is perhaps in late 11th-century or very early
12th-century *Vita Sancti Cadoci* where Cei states that 'we are
accustomed to aid the penniless and distressed' - though we shouldn't
forget that Cei is here trying to persuade Arthur not to 'violently'
snatch a pretty young princess and rape her...
Cheers,
Tom, just passing through...
http://www.arthuriana.co.uk
|
