Arthur may actually hae existed.He may have been
either a single warlord or a amalgam of several
British leaders who lived during the specific
period between the fifth and sixth centuries
that the Arthurian stories take place.

I have seen three creditable theories about Merlin:

1) There may have been a ritual priesthood whose leader was called Myrddin or the Myrddin, perhaps as a title, perhaps as only part of the title, referencing a god - equivalent to Gwidion or Mabon or similar to Cernunnos. Although Christianity would have been spreading, this priesthood would still have had great influence.

2) The "mad Merlin" of VitaMerlini was probably a poet living almost a century after Arthurian times. He was probably also named Myrddin, like #1, and may in fact have been one of the last of that priesthood.

3) Bishop Dubricus, one of Arthur's advisors. He seems to have been descibed as a short man dark, either because of his black clothing or his full beard. His demeanor was often described as fierce. He could easily have aquired a nickname from the merlin, a small, dark, fighting hawk.

If Dubricus was truly Arthur's Merlin, the idea of sorcery probably came at the time of the founding of the arch-bishopric of York. York, which was founded by Patricius, was one possible site for the honor, the other had been founded by Dubricus. The proponents of York, started circulating the stoties we know of Patrick's origins, including his slavery in and conversion of Ireland, and either intentionally or otherwise, confusing "Dubric the merlin" with the pagan Myrddin(whether #1 or #2).

So, how do you picture the Historical Arthur.
Basically, No Triangle, no Grail, and no castles

No Knights that say Ni!

No, we now say "Ecky-Ecky-p'tang-z'whoop!"

Careful, oh former Knights Of Ni, or I'll start mentioning the word you most hate ? In addition, the Special Patrol Group would like to interview you about the murder of a "Noted Historian"...
You have been warned....

I know it's been almost two and a half years since the last serious post here, but Chris Diehl's post on the movie Excalibur prompted me to write.

The various versions of the "Matter of Britain" come from so many different sources, widely separated by both time and geography that it is difficult to sort out the "history" from the embellishments. For example, Lancelot seems to have been an invention of Chretien de Troyes, and his affair with Guenivere an even later addition borrowed from Tristan and Isolde. This is why in many modern retellings, Lancelot is replaced by Bedevere, who along with Kay and Gawain is one of Arthur's closest companions in the oldest stories, but who is barely a background character in the later ones.

However, no matter how much "original" material each writer added, he usually was basing it on older stories, many of which have been lost. It is difficult and uncertain, but it is possible to detect two different strains underlying the tales.

They can be referred to as the Gawain/Gareth strain and the Percival/Galahad strain.

In the Gawain/Gareth strain, the knight is related to Arthur through their mothers (Gawain's and Gareth's mother Morguase is the daughter of Arthur's Mother Igraine). The knight is often described as small and dark-featured. Often the knight's first battle is against "the Black Knight," after which he becomes the new Black Knight. Subsequent battles are mostly against Giants and Red Knights. There is usually more pre-Christian magic involved in this strain than in the other

In the Percival/Galahad strain, the knight is often related to Arthur through their fathers (Percival's father Pellinore is Arthur's cousin on his father's side, Galahad's grandfather Pelles is Pellinor's brother.) The knight is often described as tall and fair. Often the knight's first battle is against "the Red Knight," after which he becomes the new Red Knight. Subsequent battles are mostly against dwarves and Black Knights. Most Grail quest stories involve knights of this strain.

This observation does not hold true in all cases, especially the later stories: Gawain is the Grail Knight in one German tale. Malory has Gareth's initation fighting the Black Knight, but the battle with the Red knight is also part of the initiation, and so are battles with knights of three or four more colors.

But it is true often enough to suspect that the "giants" the Gawain/Gareth strain fought were the tall, red-headed paternal-side cousins of Arthur, and the dwarves that the Percival/Galahad strain fought were Arthur's small, dark maternal-side relatives.

This is also suggested by the similarity of the "crimes" committed by the dwarf/giant in one story to the "heroic deeds" of the Black/Red Knight in another. The stories most likely tell of the battle for rival heirs to Arthur between the Romanized (Christianized) tribes which had followed Uthur and accepted Arthur as the king because he was Uthur's son, expecting paternal descent for the next king -- the Percival/Galahad strain, and the more pagan Western and Northern tribes (Picts, Cornish, and Scotti) who followed Arthur because of the magic of the women of Igraine's family.

Normally the legends based on such a struggle eventually all reflect the bias of the winners of the struggle, (it is always clear which side is good and whic evil) but because the Anglo-Saxons over-ran both factions before there was a winning side, the half-forgotten tales did not weed out one side's view in favor of the other.