King Arthur - The Medieval Legend | Documentary
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 20 ก.ค. 2023
- The legendary King Arthur - his name is inextricably linked with heroic deeds and a golden age of chivalry.
Discover the enthralling world of King Arthur, the legendary figure synonymous with heroic deeds and a glorious era of chivalry. In this captivating documentary, we delve into the captivating tales and timeless allure of the medieval age, where the magical prowess of Merlin and the noble quest of the knights of the round table in search of the Holy Grail have captured the hearts of readers and audiences alike.
While some remain skeptical about the existence of King Arthur, our journey takes us on a quest to uncover the truth behind the legend. Though many scholars view him as a symbol of an idealized era, intriguing glimpses of real events and historical figures emerge from the shadows. King Arthur, a tantalizing phantom of history, continues to fascinate and elude us.
Documentary: Legendary Heroes - King Arthur
#documentary #kingarthur #history #medieval
----
Further videos on hazards and catastrophes :
┕ God's Reset - Noah's Fight Against the Biblical Flood | Documentary
▸ • God's Reset - Noah's F...
----
Interesting links and sources:
www.britannica.com/topic/King...
www.smithsonianmag.com/histor...
www.history.com/news/was-king...
----
This channel offers you full episodes of high quality documentaries. Enjoy and don't forget to subscribe :)
----
Other channels you might be interested in:
criminals and crimefighters: / @criminalsandcrimefigh...
space and science: / @space-and-science - วิทยาศาสตร์และเทคโนโลยี
If anyone is interested, there's a fabulous "historical" retelling of the Arthur myth in Rosemary Sutcliffe's "Sword at Sunset". One of my favourite books of all time.
I love British history documentaries I haven’t yet seen. Thank yoouu
I really hope there’s more from this series. I love this
Love watching documentaries like this.
With all the time they had on their hands back then it's no surprise they came up with such wonderful stories. Stories have developed and destroyed societies many times in history.
One of the things that fascinates me is thinking about how long the stories had been told orally through the generations, maybe updated over the years. Some the these stories like Arthur could date back longer than we could imagine and have been updated by storytellers over the centuries before finally being written down. I don’t actually know that that’s even possible lol but it’s one of the fun questions I have and one reason I love history so much!
Lol what time? They didn't have grocery stores Amazon or Uber. They had to work for every meal build their shelters defend their earnings and feed their families and animals apart from defending themselves and others in fairly frequent travel. Even the scribes were incredibly busy following the war and it's heros through weather we only hope to never experience on horseback or foot. They had little spare time but because most were illiterate, stories were told and exaggerated . But at least the story isn't boring lol
Canadian author Jack Whyte wrote an amazing series of books about author Pendragon forward to Arthur, Merlin and the battles against the Saxons. Extremely great reading.
Excellent! A big, "Thank you!", to all concerned.
Don't let it be forgot ,
That once there was a spot ,
A brief and shining moment that was known as , CAMELOT
Love this!! Keep up with the story please
The Arthur of Avallon bore the title Riothamus; his name was Ambrosius Aurelianus.
He was a friend and probably a distant relative of the 5th century Bishop and Senator Sidonius Apollinaris, through Aurelia Aureliana of Carlisle who married Ulpius Apollinaris in the early 200s.
Sidonius was married to a daughter of the Emperor Avitus. Riothamus was renowned for his humility, courage, honour and loyalty to his men; he was an ally of Emperor Anthemius.
The real King Arthur was WELSH and he was King of Glamorgan & Gwent. King of all Britons! Arthwyr ap Meurig.
Everyone’s got a theory lol
Lol it’s the story of the sun traveling through the zodiac. It’s astro-theology. That’s why it’s timeless and gives rise to so many theories I assume.. like the New Testament of the Bible… the moment people try to link it to history they miss out on something so much more beautiful and profound.
@@BEDLAMITE-5280ft. King Arthur has nothing to do with zodiac or bible. His royal lineage is traceable. Saint Dubricious crowned him. And he was a 6th century welsh King. His father Meurig ap Tewdrig. Tewdrig his grandfather.
@@MonikaEscobar1965 interesting. That’s awesome. But how important in that information? When I read King Arthur is that something that has any impact on the story? How useful is focusing on that kind of data is it?
There is no history of a court of Glamorgan that fits Arthurian legend.
A one-line comment, is not a history.
Besides, it is said that the court had the most beautiful women,
So this could not be a Welsh story.
R
very interesting!!
If Arthur was to come back when Britain needed him most, one wonders why he didn't rise up during the Blitz and World War 2. I guess this proves most of King Arthur is indeed a mythical hero.
They didn’t need Arthur they had Winston Churchill
@@mikealvord55 quite True
Arthur saved Europe from Napoleon.
In WW2, he was Alan Brooke.
I think 530. bc was more difficult.
In fact he has come back. Arthur was a prince of Wales who became king and his paramour was the Saxon lady Camille. Camille is of course the French form of Camilla. Arthur became king of Logres, Wales.and Scotland.
Our Prince of Wales has now become king of England Wales and Scotland. One of his given names is Arthur. His paramour was Camilla (of English extraction) when he was married to Diana and is now his wife.
There is no King Arthur and his court prior to the 12th century, with Geoffrey of Monmouth and Walter of Oxford. That was just 40 years after the First Crusade, and 5 years after the Knights Templar. This story came back from the east, with the Templars.
Note that two of the early manuscripts say the story was written by Josephus Flavius - in the 1st century. Note also that the First Crusade went to Edessa first, not to Jerusalem. No doubt they found some interesting manuscripts in Edessa, about the 1st century king of Edessa who led a Revolt against Rome.
This is what this story is really about. The Templars rewrote and preserved this history, because it was closely linked to Gospel events in Judaea. Many of the characters are biblical. That is why Sir Perceval was the nephew of Nicodemus, and owned the donkey that belonged to Joseph of Arimathaea. See the GraiI Cypher.
Ralph
1:28 in and there's already a mix-up between AD and BC. i think I'll give this one a miss.
I am no wiser now than I was before!
Are there more episodes to this series? I can’t find it anywhere
The man was a real person. One day they will find proof. 1500 years wasn't yesterday, however.
❤❤❤
There’s nothing mythical about King Arthur, he’s mentioned in the Llyfr Teilo, the book of Llandaf giving lands to the church and Bishop Gomeric , he was the King of Glamorgan and Gwent, he was born Arthwyr , a monk down in west Wales wrote it down Arthur , the cave at Llwynarth where Saint Illtud his cousin placed his body is in Glamorgan, before taking the body up to the church, but of course all this evidence is ignored
You say that Arthur was said to have been conceived and born at Tintagel but this is untrue. He was only said by Geoffrey to have been conceived at Tintagel and there is no evidence at all as to where he was born.
There’s actually some pretty good evidence that he lived there, or had some connection there. Born? Who knows. Before Real records were kept, there’s no way of knowing where anybody was BORN, much less conceived, even somebody highborn. It didn’t matter, you know? You were born. How may people know where conception was even now? He’s talking the legend.
Another version King Arthur's venture in Europe was he was part of the Roman Army with a real tour sign up for a while, I guess prior to him settling in England again.
Library books stating this.
Disappointing that the actors and scenes portrayed here appear to be from the High Middle Ages although King Arthur, if he ever existed at all, was lived in the 5th or 6th century, and these castles and fashions did not exist in Britain at that time.
Okay I tried to be quiet but there were two King Arthur the grandfather and the grandson the grandfather fought against the Romans the grandsons fought against the sexson they were from the House of Lee his brother Mordred was King all Welsh history so how you ain't know it was 2 King Arthur.. is crazy and I'm from America???
What about the Welsh claim that the tale of King Arthur was actually Welsh tale , which the Brits adapted for their own?😅😂😊😮
Ambrosivs aurelianus fought against the Romans.. was the son of Constantine 2.. had a brother name Uther Pendragon .. around 415-450.. the great grandson was name athrwys ap meuring king of gwent and glywysing in Wales son of meuring aptewdrg a direct descendant of aurelianus...🤷🤷.. it always been there people just don't read...?
For future times we have a william arthur and catherine but watch out because we also have a morgana and mordred living in america
I thought that the tale of King Arthur was Welsh in origin that the Brits adopted?
They have found his buried place, she is real. He has a real history. King Robert II followed traditional.
Where is this burial place?
The Proto-Celtic word artos, is related to the Greek word ἄρκτος (arktos) ‘bear’;
a myths is something literally in every aspect true!!! thats the true literal meaning of the word. so yes king arthur is a myth because he literally exsisted, exactly as the legends telll!
Following the grandiosity of Rome and it’s departure; It’s almost as if Welsh bards set up Britain to desire the Monarchy/ Figure head ideal. Which is still in play. 🧐
Film gives people the title Literary Scholar. That means he/she has Read Books. That's it. Not a lot to be respected there. And their environment seems to be a minimum security facility.
The bear!
The Great Bear at center of the zodiac.
The zodiac at Hamat Teverya on the Sea of Galilee.
This was a Near Eastern story.
R
Modred and Guinevere? I thought it was Lancelot and Guinevere?
It is. Lancelot is based on her earlier lovers. In the chronical tradition started by Monmouth her lover is Mordred
Looking over all the lack of evidence. What I have figured out, was the story was first written about a king named Lancelot. See how the name "Camelot" (half way over the hill?) is to close to "Lancelot"?
Supposedly "King Arthur" found Lancelot few years after building Camelot..
.
Pulled an enchanted sword from the destiny stone. Britain claims they have that stone..
.
It's all fake. Story after story.
.
Plus, King Arthur has a completely different name then his entire family??
The hand lady needs to be edited out she annoyed me
i think its always miss spelled i cant say the name without hearing king "author" its authority title in double king of authority and evidently a metal alchemist it takes fire and stone to draw the metals before you could have the sword thats the original pulling out of stone before that is the idea of a sword and likely drawing it ..himself being the stone ..then later locking it back in stone and so many only come to pull the hilt without a mind of how else to acheive it might help to know the sword had a opening and a cross bar and set in stone when concrete was wet an easy monet maker for failing witts to pay up lost bets ..you should tell em im bringan a hammer and a chisel fire and water and it the only way ill aproach the bet craking the tablet of stone to pull it out ...young minds dont think of this and they make extra rules that wasnt said yet symbolance takes battle into relationship as the man is the sword and the stone is the sheith the sheith is the wombans only weapon and the sword is the mans only weapon her battel is to lock and cover the sword her solidity is loyalty and atractiveness that keeps the sword in its place finding its clues are in finding its other charactors....luther sugest lutherian beleifer or monk pendragon suggest writership as biblican term of king jaimes basicly only says writertude born out of writership so likely everyword is analitical to its representatonal meaning instead of dorect peoples ie allegorical figur symbol of what the name represents if that nature was a person ...but luther rather ulther or uther another way to say other writer or writing ...another tacktic of batttel is always rumour and intimadation and deception to be looking for a non exhistant face a wild goose chase but alterior methods of distraction misleadance of an enemy to have them hunting else where hunting a ghost leaves the real people off to the side under cover but ok tdc or odc they can f.o ...parental initials only spelt mer'rel plus min nsl = merrelns'l coicidentaly interesten funny too backward = rel'mer.... WAS SOMEONE PSYCKIC too but only tiny hints to shrug ..as for guine'vere in nature probly coser to saying go winni vere ie go win trueth as guines for high and vere as verealy trooh also guine vire high closeness...as far as round table its not about whos closest its round world round table round clock king at the north almost hints at a nordic santos position aka nordic meaning northic northern person or people so regeons probly more than the smaller state regions represented...anyways relations with trooht might have been less about violations as many assume to a situation similar especialy in alegoric figuratives but like relations with wisdom it only becomes wrong if your intention is to abuse that knowlege and most of what ive read showed king as content not distraught just a different type of role than comonly expected but thats what makes alegory tuff tells it represents differently than comon emotional expectations to regular relations some also have a poser for public veiw and real lover is a secretly protected by that secrecey...but idk
Stephan VON Blois?!!! Who the hell translated this?!!! Either sy it in English "Stephan OF Blois" or you say it in the original language, French "Stephan DE Blois". Why the hell do you use the german translation?!
Unzurna
King of the who?
Tired of propaganda films. Hes supposed to fight the romans and the saxons. Roughly 250 year gap. Means there are 2, not 1. Definitely not middle ages. Wish these so called experts did some more research. Oh, by the way, look up the bruts of england and welsh history
King Arthur, as we know him, is indeed the creation of Geoffrey of Monmouth, who based him on Alan Rufus, a Breton whose deeds outshine the legend.
Alan was the most senior witness to the foundation of Monmouth Priory.
The other early Arthurian writers, Geffrei Gaimar and Wace of Jersey, extolled Alan’s prowess in the Battle of Hastings, where he devastated the English at the very moment they were about to win.
Alan’s epitaph identifies him with the star Arcturus, as he was the guardian of two ‘bears’, William Major and William Minor.
He was the architect and master builder of the beautiful St Mary’s Abbey York, which records Alan’s brother Count Stephen of Tréguier as the one who opened England’s first Parliament in 1089 at York. This was during Alan’s time as Lord of Richmond and Earl of East Anglia.
Count Stephen’s wife Hawise, Lady of Guingamp, is thought by some to be King Stephen’s aunt.
Two of Count Stephen’s sons fought in the Anarchy: Geoffrey for Empress Matilda, Alan for King Stephen.
Alan’s and Stephen’s father was Eudon Penteur, regent of Brittany: Eudon appears in the Song of Roland as ‘Eudon, Lord of Brittany’.
Alan’s mother was Orguen, sister of Hoël, Count of Cornouaille.
His uncle Duke Alan III was poisoned while besieging a rebel, the same fate as Geoffrey of Monmouth attributed to Ambrosius Aurelianus, in tradition an ancestor of their family, as was Riothamus (which may be AA’s title).
Alan is the internal narrator of the Bayeux Tapestry, designed by Scolland, a Breton master illuminator.
Paradoxically, Alan’s beloved was Gunhild of Wessex, daughter of King Harold Godwinson.
Yet that can be explained by Alan’s acquaintance with Harold prior to 1066, including a stay in England serving under Eudon’s younger cousin King Edward.
Of all the magnates, Alan gathered by far the greatest number of English lords under his wing, while excluding Normans from his lands in Yorkshire.
The Domesday Book was likely a project by Alan Rufus, as it has a strong resonance with his lands, all the principal figures were in his circle, and he had the talents, standing and motivation to plan it.
In 1088, the greatest Norman barons rebelled against William II. Alan was the strongest of the loyalists, and they allied with the English people to win the war.
In late January 1091 Alan stood with William II at Dover. A few days later, an army of Englishmen sailed to Normandy and conquered it, to the applause of the Norman population, causing the French king such great trepidation that he persuaded Pope Urban II to negotiate peace for land: Upper Normandy was granted to the Crown of England.
Another of Alan’s brothers, Brian of Brittany, was appointed Earl of Cornwall, but left England to aid the Hautevilles in Italy and Thessaly, where his experience was pivotal in the victory over the Romans at Dyrrhachium.
After the defeat at Larissa, Brian held Kastoria until his officers urged surrender.
Brian then returned to Brittany briefly to meet Alan Rufus and their eldest brother Geoffrey Boterel, but travelled back to Italy to serve as Constable of Apulia.
Anna Komnena’s “Alexiad” describes Brian as “the most courageous and most honourable of the Gauls”.
The DNA of Eudon’s male-line descendants has been analysed in detail: it originates in Republican-era Rome.
The Breton emblem, ermine, became synonymous with honour and sovereignty across Europe, largely because of Alan’s chivalric example and magnificent legacy.
Read that there was never any such person.
This is appallingly BAD! Almost nothing relevant about King Arthur and his existence, or not, his battles, or none, his life if he had lived, archaeology for or against, oral tradition - anything relevant!. It is all about what people thought 500 years later!
Terrible
Save the "acting" scenes and stick to archaeology.....this is cringy as hell......!
If u want archaeology only, u might as well switch books🤷🏻♀️
After Christianism destroyed almost all historical knwledge in Britain and even the esatblished christianist feudal aristocracy had no identity but the most brutal expansion of christianism the was a somewhat quite episode without slauthering every day. In thhose days the aritocracy felt empty. In order to fill the mental emptyness some people invented stories about some strange and unreal former king. They gave the name "Arthur" to the figure. Well, inventing stories had been a christianist thing for centuries.
No such thing happened
@@chriscuomo9334 Clarify.
@@wilhelmmeyer89 christianity has no interest in destroying anything but satan’s presence in our hearts and lives. If catholic mary idol worshippers want to burn a library or invade jerusalem and worship mary idols, that’s on them but it’s certainly not christianity.
Let me know if you have any more questions about distinguishing christianity from things that satan wants you to think are christianity. God bless
@@chriscuomo9334 Clarify.
@@wilhelmmeyer89 no need to
Reread