# So, King Arthur is a real person? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [September 30, 2006, 7:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-king-arthur-is-a-real-person/374765 "2006-09-30T19:49:02Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 12\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![What\_Exit](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/what_exit/32/10652_2.png) [@What\_Exit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/What_Exit)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2006, 8:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-king-arthur-is-a-real-person/374765/21 "2006-10-02T20:36:23Z")
[QUOTE=CookingWithGas] I must say that although the OP has done some annoying things in other threads, it looks like he is being jumped on here without proper provocation. The point of the title coupled with the story at the link was clear to me, though possibly with too great an economy of expression. At most I might have asked: “I thought Arthur was a legend. This article says otherwise. What’s the Straight Dope?” The boad is filled with such brevity. A gentle suggestion might be in order, but I think a rebuke from a mod is overkill. Also, if everyone used Google and other online resources skillfully and exhaustively before posting to this forum, there would be damn few threads. Half the fun here is in the discussion that ensues, not just the dry, scholarly answer. [/QUOTE] Perhaps you should join us [in this pit thread](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=390325) if you wish to continue the discussion. It might give you an understanding of some of the apparent hostility. Jim ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2006, 8:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-king-arthur-is-a-real-person/374765/22 "2006-10-02T20:43:21Z")
[QUOTE=CalMeacham] I have an entire collection of books claiming to identify particular historical persons as King Arthur, starting with Geoffrey Ashe’s 1985 book **The Discovery of King Arthur** (which pegged Riothamus). [/QUOTE] I would be interested in your opinion of “The Real King Arthur” by P.F.J. Turner, I think. It’s something I ran across in the library and somehow it caught my attention. It’s a startling and puzzling (two-volume) work. First of all, it seems to have been printed on a circa 1982 dot-matrix printer – the maps are made with ASCII characters. And it makes its claims in rather conclusory language – that Arthur was a Roman named Lucius Artorius Castus (or something), that Lancelot and Mordred were the same person, that the reason that it seems that Arthur fathered a child on his sister has really to do with the complex Roman system of adoption rather than incest (in other words, Arthur and Morgan were not blood siblings and Mordred was Arthur’s adopted heir, or something). It seems a thoroughly eccentric work and it has that kind of charm. I fully expect it to be a work of a total crackpot, but I have this kind of sentimentality towards it for its earnestness. ---
**Author:** ![Colibri](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/colibri/32/1841_2.png) [@Colibri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colibri)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2006, 8:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-king-arthur-is-a-real-person/374765/23 "2006-10-02T20:57:31Z")
[QUOTE=Captain Amazing] Now, I hjave no idea what the “KC” is. I don’t recognize it as a legitimate post-nominal recognition in the British Honour system, at least. [/QUOTE] Knights of Columbus? 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Hypnagogic\_Jerk](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hypnagogic_jerk/32/4252_2.png) [@Hypnagogic\_Jerk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hypnagogic_Jerk)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2006, 9:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-king-arthur-is-a-real-person/374765/24 "2006-10-02T21:06:29Z")
[King’s Counsel](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queen's_Counsel)? ---
**Author:** ![CalMeacham](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/calmeacham/32/35_2.png) [@CalMeacham](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CalMeacham)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2006, 9:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-king-arthur-is-a-real-person/374765/25 "2006-10-02T21:26:30Z")
> [@](#): > > I would be interested in your opinion of “The Real King Arthur” by P.F.J. Turner, I think. It’s something I ran across in the library and somehow it caught my attention. It’s a startling and puzzling (two-volume) work. First of all, it seems to have been printed on a circa 1982 dot-matrix printer – the maps are made with ASCII characters. > > And it makes its claims in rather conclusory language – that Arthur was a Roman named Lucius Artorius Castus (or something), that Lancelot and Mordred were the same person, that the reason that it seems that Arthur fathered a child on his sister has really to do with the complex Roman system of adoption rather than incest (in other words, Arthur and Morgan were not blood siblings and Mordred was Arthur’s adopted heir, or something). > > It seems a thoroughly eccentric work and it has that kind of charm. I fully expect it to be a work of a total crackpot, but I have this kind of sentimentality towards it for its earnestness. I have to admit that I was shockingly ignorant of this one until set straight by this very Board. This one is entirely different from the other claimants, in that he doesn’t fit the time period at all. The idea was proposed by Malone in 1924, and tries to account for Arthur being a mounted knight and for apparent Central European associations of Arthurian legend by claiming that this significantly-named Roman brought those traditions to Britain at the end of Roman rule. See the Wikipedia article: > **[Lucius Artorius Castus](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucius_Artorius_Castus)** > > Lucius Artorius Castus (fl. 2nd century AD) was a Roman military commander. A member of the gens Artoria, he has been suggested as a potential historical basis for King Arthur, although this connection is no longer considered feasible. The origins of Lucius Artorius Castus and his name are obscure. Celtic, Messapian, Etruscan, and Greek origins/etymologies have been suggested. It has been theorized that the Latin name Artorius is a Latinized form of the Celtic patronym \*Arto-rīg-ios. It has also ... This formed the basis of the recent motion picture **King Arthur** , which was pretty good when it concentrated on Roman stuff, asnd laughable when it tried to introduce woefully out-of-place elements like Lancelot and Merlin in this eaerly Romano-Celtic venue. Nifty photography and battle scenes, though. [http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0349683/](http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0349683/) In short, interesting theory, but I don’t buy it. I have to add, in all fairness, that I haven’t read an extended work advancing and defending this thesis. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2006, 9:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-king-arthur-is-a-real-person/374765/26 "2006-10-02T21:27:00Z")
Yes, but I don’t see how that would work in this case. It’s kind of hard to be a King’s Counsel when there’s no King. ---
**Author:** ![Antonius\_Block](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/51bf81/32.png) [@Antonius\_Block](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Antonius_Block)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2006, 9:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-king-arthur-is-a-real-person/374765/27 "2006-10-02T21:28:05Z")
[QUOTE=severus] King’s Counsel? [/QUOTE] But that would not have been a possibility in 1990 (it would have been “Queen’s Counsel”) – and is in any case rather an _unlikely_ career move even for the esteemed Prof. Goodrich (and hubby!). [QUOTE=colibri] Knights of Columbus? [/QUOTE] I don’t think that they’ve ever admitted women. _[Although I have to admit it would be **wonderful** if Prof. Goodrich could have linked Columbus to Scotland, perhaps via the Knights Templars, Freemasons, and [Henry Sinclair](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Sinclair). Umberto Eco would love it! We don’t **really** know where Columbus was born. Perhaps he was really **Kit McCollum**?]_ There’s also [Knight of the Crescent](http://www.regiments.org/biography/orddec-a.htm), but (despite the Union Flag next to the “KC” in the link) that appears to be a Turkish honor. In other words, I got nuthin’. ---
**Author:** ![Hypnagogic\_Jerk](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hypnagogic_jerk/32/4252_2.png) [@Hypnagogic\_Jerk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hypnagogic_Jerk)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2006, 10:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-king-arthur-is-a-real-person/374765/28 "2006-10-02T22:53:26Z")
[QUOTE=Captain Amazing] Yes, but I don’t see how that would work in this case. It’s kind of hard to be a King’s Counsel when there’s no King. [/QUOTE] I have to admit. I guess I figured that maybe she could have received this honour when there _was_ a King, but apparently her title would have changed to “QC” anyway. On the other hand: > [@Antonius Block](#): > > Perhaps the knighthoods were conferred in some Celtic neo-Arthurian ceremony (_Monty Python_ would have been **so** proud, given that their own [Arthurian romp](http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0071853/) was filmed in Scotland), and the phrase “knighted into British royalty” refers to a royal house **other** than those upstart Mountbatten-Windsors? :dubious: Maybe she received her KC from the _real_ King of Scotland? Maybe [this guy](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idi_Amin)? :eek: 😃 ---
**Author:** ![AskNott](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asknott/32/5790_2.png) [@AskNott](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AskNott)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2006, 11:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-king-arthur-is-a-real-person/374765/29 "2006-10-02T23:03:51Z")
King is Bea Arthur’s son, isn’t he? 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Sonia\_Montdore](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/90ced4/32.png) [@Sonia\_Montdore](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sonia_Montdore)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2006, 11:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-king-arthur-is-a-real-person/374765/30 "2006-10-02T23:18:58Z")
Well, there is such a thing as a Knight Companion, but the designation is always follwed by the name of the order of knighthood, i.e., “Knight Companion of the Bath” or “Knight Companion of the Garter.” Not that there is any chance that this woman have been a member of either order, which are pretty exalted. Anyway, she wouldn’t be a knight, she’d be a dame. ---
**Author:** ![Sonia\_Montdore](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/90ced4/32.png) [@Sonia\_Montdore](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sonia_Montdore)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2006, 11:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-king-arthur-is-a-real-person/374765/31 "2006-10-02T23:20:28Z")
[QUOTE=AskNott] King is Bea Arthur’s son, isn’t he? 😉 [/QUOTE] No, he’s her rottweiler. ---
**Author:** ![Antonius\_Block](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/51bf81/32.png) [@Antonius\_Block](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Antonius_Block)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2006, 1:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-king-arthur-is-a-real-person/374765/32 "2006-10-03T01:15:14Z")
Continuing the “knighthood” hijack, which I think has _partial_ relevance to the OP, since Prof. Goodrich made her name establishing the truth behind the myths of a possible member of British Royalty who is now deceased, and we here at the SDMB seem to be turning the (Round?) tables on her! Okay, [here](http://universitycommunications.uvm.edu/newsarchives/h.%20Spring-Summer%201993/Commencement-Speaker-Announced) is a press release from the University of Vermont dated April 16, 1993, and saying: > [@](#): > > Every summer she traveled to Britain with her husband, John Hereford Howard. > \ > In recognition of their work, Goodrich and Howard were knighted into British royalty in 1990. So we know that the “knighted into British royalty” claim dates back at least 13 years, and thus was not invented after her death by her assistant, nor was it a misunderstanding by the writer of her obituary in the _LA Times_. Having made my little joke in [post #27](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=7831744&postcount=27) about Columbus being Scottish too, I did a :smack: and realized that of course [St. Columba](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St_Columba) really was in Scotland in the 6th Century AD – that’s when he brought Christianity (back) to Scotland! Now, most of what we know about St. Columba is from the _Vita Columbae_ by Adomnán. The linked Wikipedia page continues: > [@](#): > > The earliest recorded example of the name Arthur in a British document occurs, as _Arturius_, in Adomnan’s _vita_. There it occurs as the name of a prince among the Scots, the son of Áedán mac Gabráin, king of Dál Riata from AD 574, far from the legendary King Arthur’s familiar haunts in the southwest. What’s more, the [Knights of St. Columba](http://www.ksc.org.uk/order.htm) are a Scottish Catholic Fraternal Order, in many ways similar to the [Knights of Columbus](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knights_of_Columbus)!! Could this be the source of the mysterious “ **KC** ”? Unfortunately, the Knights of St. Columba do not admit women, and in any case the initialism is “ **KsC** ” not “ **KC** ”. Darn. If only she were still alive, I’m sure we could get to the bottom of this (but she would probably have said the same about Arthur). _[It’s a shame she couldn’t have been KsC, since [this authoritative-looking site](http://www.illuminati-news.com/shadow-gov.htm)😉 manages to link the Knights of Columba with Opus Dei, the Freemasons, and the Illuminati…]_ [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-king-arthur-is-a-real-person/374765.md?page=1)