10-25-2006, 04:09 PM
Thank you for the lead.
Of course, most scholars agree that Arthurian legend did not come from a single source but was a "stew pot" of myths and legends from a variety of sources, including some potential Roman or sub-Roman Briton.
We need only to look at the evolution of Arthur as we find him among the medieval sources--Geoffery of Monmouth, Wace, Lazamon, Mallory, etc.-- to see both details and tone changing with each iteration.
My interest here was to seek historic Roman antecedents for that mix of stories, not necessarily the "historic" King Arthur. That a competent Roman centurion with a similar name may have served in Britannia several hundred years before the supposed Historic Arthur (not a king nor with round table, knights, Lancelot, Merlin, etc.) is certainly suggestive...and adds to the fun.
Thanks again.
Of course, most scholars agree that Arthurian legend did not come from a single source but was a "stew pot" of myths and legends from a variety of sources, including some potential Roman or sub-Roman Briton.
We need only to look at the evolution of Arthur as we find him among the medieval sources--Geoffery of Monmouth, Wace, Lazamon, Mallory, etc.-- to see both details and tone changing with each iteration.
My interest here was to seek historic Roman antecedents for that mix of stories, not necessarily the "historic" King Arthur. That a competent Roman centurion with a similar name may have served in Britannia several hundred years before the supposed Historic Arthur (not a king nor with round table, knights, Lancelot, Merlin, etc.) is certainly suggestive...and adds to the fun.
Thanks again.
"Fugit irreparabile tempus" (Irrecoverable time glides away) Virgil
Ron Andrea
Ron Andrea