Could Alfred the Great be the "real" King Arthur?

[Jerry Kraus]

I can't help but note the apparent similarities between the achievements of Alfred and Arthur -- both achieved miraculous and unexpected victories against barbarian hordes and managed, against all odds, to consolidate and maintain English rule in southern England. Could Arthur simply be Alfred viewed through the later medieval prism of Courtly Love and Chivalry? Is there any real necessity for an late Roman Empire Arthur to inspire the Arthurian legend, at all? I realize some evidence has been found to substantiate the existence of a late Roman Empire Arthur, but it is quite limited, I believe.

[Brian M. Scott]

On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 12:56:31 -0700 (PDT), Jerry Kraus
<jkrau...@gmail.com> wrote
in<news:d38a6b4f-8d26-4710...@googlegroups.com>
in soc.history.medieval:

> I can't help but note the apparent similarities between
> the achievements of Alfred and Arthur -- both achieved
> miraculous and unexpected victories against barbarian
> hordes and managed, against all odds, to consolidate and
> maintain English rule in southern England. Could
> Arthur simply be Alfred viewed through the later

> medieval prism of Courtly Love and Chivalry? [...]

No: he appears too early. For a fairly comprehensive
discussion of the whole Arthurian issue see

<http://www.arthuriana.co.uk/historicity/arthur.htm>.

Brian
--
It was the neap tide, when the baga venture out of their
holes to root for sandtatties. The waves whispered
rhythmically over the packed sand: haggisss, haggisss,
haggisss.

[Jerry Kraus]

Perhaps I should clarify. While the earliest references to Arthur do pre-date Alfred by three-quarters of a century or so, it is acknowledged in the article you cite that Arthur is a composite figure. While legends of a great warrior named Arthur do pre-date Alfred the Great, this would not seem necessarily to exclude the possibility that much of the actual legend of Arthur might incorporate the personality and actions of Alfred the Great, who might constitute, as such, the essential model for the legend of King Arthur. As I've indicated, the parallels between Alfred and Arthur do seem rather striking.
Put another way, in the absence of Alfred the Great as a genuine historical figure, would the legend of King Arthur, as such, have ever fully developed in its present form?

[Brian M. Scott]

On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 14:51:38 -0700 (PDT), Jerry Kraus
<jkrau...@gmail.com> wrote
in<news:b7da8e8b-e525-4efb...@googlegroups.com>
in soc.history.medieval:

> On Monday, September 14, 2015 at 4:30:13 PM UTC-5, Brian
> M. Scott wrote:

>> On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 12:56:31 -0700 (PDT), Jerry Kraus
>> <jkrau...@gmail.com> wrote
>> in<news:d38a6b4f-8d26-4710...@googlegroups.com>
>> in soc.history.medieval:

>>> I can't help but note the apparent similarities between
>>> the achievements of Alfred and Arthur -- both achieved
>>> miraculous and unexpected victories against barbarian
>>> hordes and managed, against all odds, to consolidate
>>> and maintain English rule in southern England. Could
>>> Arthur simply be Alfred viewed through the later
>>> medieval prism of Courtly Love and Chivalry? [...]

>> No: he appears too early. For a fairly comprehensive
>> discussion of the whole Arthurian issue see

>> <http://www.arthuriana.co.uk/historicity/arthur.htm>.

> Perhaps I should clarify. While the earliest references
> to Arthur do pre-date Alfred by three-quarters of a
> century or so, it is acknowledged in the article you
> cite that Arthur is a composite figure. While legends
> of a great warrior named Arthur do pre-date Alfred the
> Great, this would not seem necessarily to exclude the
> possibility that much of the actual legend of Arthur
> might incorporate the personality and actions of Alfred
> the Great, who might constitute, as such, the essential
> model for the legend of King Arthur. As I've
> indicated, the parallels between Alfred and Arthur do
> seem rather striking. Put another way, in the absence of
> Alfred the Great as a genuine historical figure, would
> the legend of King Arthur, as such, have ever fully
> developed in its present form?

That really should be ‘in its present forms’, since there
isn’t a canonical version.

The absence of Alfred the Great would be a major historical
change, one likely to have all sorts of repercussions.
It’s entirely possible that Arthurian tales would have
taken a different form or enjoyed a different degree of
popularity, but I see no reason to attribute any such
change specifically to the absence of the figure of Alfred
rather than to the general consequences of his absence.

[Jerry Kraus]

Alfred the Great is, I believe, the only English King seriously considered for canonization. Many Catholics do consider him to be a Saint. His successful defense of Christianity in the Kingdom is highly consistent with the legendary Arthur's devout Christianity and the stories of the Holy Grail. Alfred modeled his Kingdom largely on Charlemagne, whose influence on the whole of medieval thinking is unquestionable. An English Charlemagne would inevitably attract the attention of medieval poets, and inspire a kind of legendary status, along the lines of Arthur. Alfred was a great scholar, whose learning may have even exceeded his military prowess, or, quite possibly, have been the source of it. Again, the medieval poets could hardly fail to find a scholar/king, a kind of English Solomon, unappealing in a unique way. But, poets are not historians. They write of legends, not of reality. Isn't it rather plausible that they created the legend of Arthur on the basis of an essential historical reality that only really conforms to the persona of Alfred the Great?

[The Horny Goat]

On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 16:29:05 -0700 (PDT), Jerry Kraus
<jkrau...@gmail.com> wrote:

>Alfred the Great is, I believe, the only English King seriously considered for canonization. Many Catholics do consider him to be a Saint. His successful defense of Christianity in the Kingdom is highly consistent with the legendary Arthur's devout Christianity and the stories of the Holy Grail. Alfred modeled his Kingdom largely on Charlemagne, whose influence on the whole of medieval thinking is unquestionable. An English Charlemagne would inevitably attract the attention of medieval poets, and inspire a kind of legendary status, along the lines of Arthur. Alfred was a great scholar, whose learning may have even exceeded his military prowess, or, quite possibly, have been the source of it. Again, the medieval poets could hardly fail to find a scholar/king, a kind of English Solomon, unappealing in a unique way. But, poets are not historians. They write of legends, not of reality. Isn't it rather plausible that they created the legend of Arthur on the basis of an
>essential historical reality that only really conforms to the persona of Alfred the Great?

How about Edward the Confessor? I've read stories about how he was
considered for beautification though obviously the actions of Henry
VIII with respect to the Papacy might impact that!

[Yusuf B Gursey]

In <1brqmq96y8fbf.x...@40tude.net>, Brian M. Scott wrote on
9/15/2015:

> On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 12:56:31 -0700 (PDT), Jerry Kraus
> <jkrau...@gmail.com> wrote
> in<news:d38a6b4f-8d26-4710...@googlegroups.com>
> in soc.history.medieval:
>
>> I can't help but note the apparent similarities between
>> the achievements of Alfred and Arthur -- both achieved
>> miraculous and unexpected victories against barbarian
>> hordes and managed, against all odds, to consolidate and
>> maintain English rule in southern England. Could
>> Arthur simply be Alfred viewed through the later
>> medieval prism of Courtly Love and Chivalry? [...]
>
> No: he appears too early. For a fairly comprehensive
> discussion of the whole Arthurian issue see

For one thing Arthur battled the Saxons and was not their king, As
Alfred.

>
> <http://www.arthuriana.co.uk/historicity/arthur.htm>.
>
> Brian

[Kenneth Young]

In article <e65ec9ef-257f-4e21...@googlegroups.com>,

jkrau...@gmail.com (Jerry Kraus) wrote:

> Alfred the Great is, I believe, the only English King seriously
> considered for canonization

That is incorrect Edward the Confessor used to be the patron saint of
England.

[Jerry Kraus]

Yes, you're right on that point. But, otherwise, Edward was a lousy King, and Alfred was a "great" one. They're both considered to have been devout and extremely important Christians. The point stands, though, that Alfred corresponds rather well to Arthur's achievements, much better than anyone else in English history. All we have of "Arthur" prior to Alfred the Great is some kind of Warrior circa 500 AD. Isn't it kind of obvious that the Arthurian poets were simply tacking on Arthur's name and time to the achievements of Alfred the Great? One could, also, see the scholar-king Alfred as the genesis of both the Arthur and Merlin characters, since Alfred's successes were largely the result of his superior intellect.

[Brian M. Scott]

On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 13:16:31 -0700 (PDT), Jerry Kraus
<jkrau...@gmail.com> wrote
in<news:4168e6c9-39ee-472e...@googlegroups.com>
in soc.history.medieval:

[...]

> Isn't it kind of obvious that the Arthurian poets were
> simply tacking on Arthur's name and time to the

> achievements of Alfred the Great? [...]

No, not in the least.

[Jerry Kraus]

On Tuesday, September 15, 2015 at 3:33:54 PM UTC-5, Brian M. Scott wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 13:16:31 -0700 (PDT), Jerry Kraus
> <jkrau...@gmail.com> wrote
> in<news:4168e6c9-39ee-472e...@googlegroups.com>
> in soc.history.medieval:
>
> [...]
>
> > Isn't it kind of obvious that the Arthurian poets were
> > simply tacking on Arthur's name and time to the
> > achievements of Alfred the Great? [...]
>
> No, not in the least.
>
> Brian
> --

Splendid, Brian. Who, other than Alfred, successfully defended Southern England and Christianity from barbarian pagan hordes, against all odds? Who else used superior wisdom to do it? Who else set up a great Court and legal system in England that paralleled the great systems of the past, on the basis of his great scholarship and wisdom? Who else did all of the above, which King Arthur did, as well? Who else did all these things prior to the creation of the Arthurian legends by medieval poets? Where else would they have got the idea for all these things?

[Surreyman]

And his round table's in Winchester. QED.

[Eric Stevens]

Are you not thinking of Windsor?
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

[ml...@le.ac.uk]

> In article <e65ec9ef-257f-4e21...@googlegroups.com>,
> jkrau...@gmail.com (Jerry Kraus) wrote:
>
> > Alfred the Great is, I believe, the only English King seriously
> > considered for canonization
>

On Tuesday, 15 September 2015 12:16:51 UTC+1, Kenneth Young wrote:
> That is incorrect Edward the Confessor used to be the patron saint of
> England.

There were also saints Edmund, the king of East Anglia who was martyred by the Danes and is commemorated in the name of the town of Bury St Edmund (feast days 20 November and 29 April), Ethelbert, king of Kent (20 May), Ethelred of Kent (4 May), Kenelm of Mercia, revered as a king though probably not actually one (17 July) and Oswald, king of Northumbria (5 Aug). And remarkably Canute was regarded as a saint by some - his feast day was celebrated at Evesham on 20 July.

Matt Tompkins

There were also several

[Brian M. Scott]

On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 13:43:16 -0700 (PDT), Jerry Kraus
<jkrau...@gmail.com> wrote
in<news:473d1fa9-b8d9-46af...@googlegroups.com>
in soc.history.medieval:

> On Tuesday, September 15, 2015 at 3:33:54 PM UTC-5, Brian
> M. Scott wrote:

>> On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 13:16:31 -0700 (PDT), Jerry Kraus
>> <jkrau...@gmail.com> wrote
>> in<news:4168e6c9-39ee-472e...@googlegroups.com>
>> in soc.history.medieval:

>> [...]

>>> Isn't it kind of obvious that the Arthurian poets were
>>> simply tacking on Arthur's name and time to the
>>> achievements of Alfred the Great? [...]

>> No, not in the least.

> Splendid, Brian. Who, other than Alfred, successfully
> defended Southern England and Christianity from
> barbarian pagan hordes, against all odds? Who else
> used superior wisdom to do it?

Intelligence, not wisdom, and the ability to learn from
mistakes. Possibly also the ability to learn from the
Carolingians.

> Who else set up a great Court and legal system in England
> that paralleled the great systems of the past, on the
> basis of his great scholarship and wisdom?

Alfred didn’t.

> Who else did all of the above, which King Arthur did, as
> well? Who else did all these things prior to the
> creation of the Arthurian legends by medieval poets?

The core of the Arthurian legends was not created by
medieval poets. To the extent that any identifiable
individual is responsible, it’s Geoffrey of Monmouth.

> Where else would they have got the idea for all these
> things?

Why on earth do you think that a single external source is
needed?!

[Brian M. Scott]

On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 16:29:05 -0700 (PDT), Jerry Kraus
<jkrau...@gmail.com> wrote
in<news:e65ec9ef-257f-4e21...@googlegroups.com>
in soc.history.medieval:

[...]

> Isn't it rather plausible that they created the legend of
> Arthur on the basis of an essential historical reality
> that only really conforms to the persona of Alfred the
> Great?

No. But as you obviously have a bee in your bonnet that
precludes rational discussion, I’ll cease to disturb you.

[Jerry Kraus]

On Thursday, September 17, 2015 at 5:57:56 AM UTC-5, Brian M. Scott wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 13:43:16 -0700 (PDT), Jerry Kraus
> <jkrau...@gmail.com> wrote
> in<news:473d1fa9-b8d9-46af...@googlegroups.com>
> in soc.history.medieval:
>
> > On Tuesday, September 15, 2015 at 3:33:54 PM UTC-5, Brian
> > M. Scott wrote:
>
> >> On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 13:16:31 -0700 (PDT), Jerry Kraus
> >> <jkrau...@gmail.com> wrote
> >> in<news:4168e6c9-39ee-472e...@googlegroups.com>
> >> in soc.history.medieval:
>
> >> [...]
>
> >>> Isn't it kind of obvious that the Arthurian poets were
> >>> simply tacking on Arthur's name and time to the
> >>> achievements of Alfred the Great? [...]
>
> >> No, not in the least.
>
> > Splendid, Brian. Who, other than Alfred, successfully
> > defended Southern England and Christianity from
> > barbarian pagan hordes, against all odds? Who else
> > used superior wisdom to do it?
>
> Intelligence, not wisdom, and the ability to learn from
> mistakes. Possibly also the ability to learn from the
> Carolingians.

Fair enough. I don't really see the distinction, though.

>
> > Who else set up a great Court and legal system in England
> > that paralleled the great systems of the past, on the
> > basis of his great scholarship and wisdom?
>
> Alfred didn't.
>

Alfred's Court was modeled on Charlemagne's.

> > Who else did all of the above, which King Arthur did, as
> > well? Who else did all these things prior to the
> > creation of the Arthurian legends by medieval poets?
>
> The core of the Arthurian legends was not created by
> medieval poets. To the extent that any identifiable
> individual is responsible, it's Geoffrey of Monmouth.

I'm using the term "poet" to refer to literary figures, in general. As far as that goes, Geoffrey's "Life of Merlin" is written in poetic verse.

>
> > Where else would they have got the idea for all these
> > things?
>
> Why on earth do you think that a single external source is
> needed?!

I've already stated that Arthur is a composite figure. I'm merely noting that Alfred the Great more closely parallels his achievements than any other prominent figure in British history prior to the time of the Arthurian legends, and was thus likely their primary inspiration.

[Jerry Kraus]

Pot/Kettle, Brian.

[nyi...@bellsouth.net]

Touche. I once counted Brian as a friend -- we are fellow general
topologists, who had very friendly conversations at mathematical
converences. We go all the way back to 1973, when Brian was
a grad student at U. of Wisconsin and I a postdoc at U of Chicago.

Brian, however, decided in 2000 that loyalty to Paul Gans
in soc.history.medieval was incompatible with friendship with me.

By the way, Brian quit research in topology well before that, and
my guess is that he has lost all interest in it.

Which is a shame, because a special issue of _Topology And Its Applications_
in honor of Mary Ellen Rudin, his old mentor, will be coming out soon.
I contributed a lot to it, including being one of two guest editors
for over twenty fine articles that will appear in it.

Peter Nyikos
Professor, Dept. of Mathematics -- standard disclaimer--
University of South Carolina
http://people.math.sc.edu/nyikos/
nyikos "at" math.sc.edu

[D. Spencer Hines]

Remarkably Candid, Peter!

Very convincing...

...And Also Very Well Stated.

DSH

Prosecutio stultitiae gravis vexatio est, executio stultitiae coronat opus.

Quintus Aurelius Stultus [38 B.C. - 14 A.D.]

wrote in message
news:991d6cd8-265e-4bd6...@googlegroups.com...

[Weland]

You've over generalized as well as committing the post hoc propter hoc. Few of the details match up, and the general sweep you claim is rather forced.

[Jerry Kraus]

You know, King Arthur's "Round Table" could simply be Alfred the Great's relatively egalitarian Anglo-Saxon legal code -- "Doom very evenly! Do not doom one doom to the rich; another to the poor! Nor doom one doom to your friend; another to your foe!"

[David Amicus]

I read that Henry VI wanted the canonization of King Alfred the Great. But because it didn't happen King Alfred's memory was kept safe when England became protestant.

Does anyone know whether there is a current cause open for King Arthur's canonization?

[Tiglath]

On Monday, September 21, 2015 at 4:31:21 PM UTC-4, nyi...@bellsouth.net wrote:

>
> Touche. I once counted Brian as a friend -- we are fellow general
> topologists,

I'm getting misty.

> who had very friendly conversations at mathematical
> converences. We go all the way back to 1973, when Brian was
> a grad student at U. of Wisconsin and I a postdoc at U of Chicago.
>
> Brian, however, decided in 2000 that loyalty to Paul Gans
> in soc.history.medieval was incompatible with friendship with me.
>

Intelligence and wisdom.

[Yusuf B Gursey]

In <c336f8f5-b674-4dd6...@googlegroups.com>, David

He indulged "heathen" practices like sleeping with his half-sister and
sorcery and besides didn't leave behind relics.

[Robert Mulain]

On Monday, 21 September 2015 21:31:21 UTC+1, nyi...@bellsouth.net wrote:
> On Friday, September 18, 2015 at 2:03:29 PM UTC-4, Jerry Kraus wrote:
> > On Thursday, September 17, 2015 at 6:01:21 AM UTC-5, Brian M. Scott wrote:
> > > On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 16:29:05 -0700 (PDT), Jerry Kraus
> > > <jkrau...@gmail.com> wrote
> > > in<news:e65ec9ef-257f-4e21...@googlegroups.com>
> > > in soc.history.medieval:
> > >
> > > [...]
> > >
> > > > Isn't it rather plausible that they created the legend of
> > > > Arthur on the basis of an essential historical reality
> > > > that only really conforms to the persona of Alfred the
> > > > Great?
> > >
> > > No. But as you obviously have a bee in your bonnet that
> > > precludes rational discussion, I'll cease to disturb you.
> >
> > Pot/Kettle, Brian.
>
> Touche. I once counted Brian as a friend -- we are fellow general
> topologists, who had very friendly conversations at mathematical
> converences. We go all the way back to 1973, when Brian was
> a grad student at U. of Wisconsin and I a postdoc at U of Chicago.

A 'General Topologist' indeed! I had no idea there were other types - what sort are you I wonder Peter?

> Brian, however, decided in 2000 that loyalty to Paul Gans
> in soc.history.medieval was incompatible with friendship with me.

That doesn't have anything to do with Topology though, does it? IMHO, unlike the fanciful subject of mathematics, such a choice and decision is merely a matter of common sense, reason and natural logic? I thought better of you Peter than to follow the cretinous George W in that 'all who are not with us, are against us!'

> By the way, Brian quit research in topology well before that, and
> my guess is that he has lost all interest in it.

I have to say, not a difficult thing to do, or course to take. I myself found any study of arithmetic tedious, and even recently found five dimensional Pythagorian mathematics a bit much. As an aside, do you favour Pythagoras or Aristotle I wonder? Personally I find Aristotle fatally flawed logic-wise, but that's just me... I'd never claim to be a maths expert!

> Which is a shame, because a special issue of _Topology And Its Applications_
> in honor of Mary Ellen Rudin, his old mentor, will be coming out soon.
> I contributed a lot to it, including being one of two guest editors
> for over twenty fine articles that will appear in it.

Such modesty Peter! But then, you have so much to be modest about...

[greed...@gmail.com]

I agree totally my good man

[SolomonW]

On Wed, 27 May 2020 21:36:07 -0700 (PDT), greed...@gmail.com wrote:

> I agree totally my good man

If you made the requirements of King Arthur loose enough then I suppose
anyone could have been the real "King Arthur."

[clarast...@gmail.com]

On Monday, 14 September 2015 15:56:35 UTC-4, Jerry Kraus wrote:
> I can't help but note the apparent similarities between the achievements of Alfred and Arthur -- both achieved miraculous and unexpected victories against barbarian hordes and managed, against all odds, to consolidate and maintain English rule in southern England. Could Arthur simply be Alfred viewed through the later medieval prism of Courtly Love and Chivalry? Is there any real necessity for an late Roman Empire Arthur to inspire the Arthurian legend, at all? I realize some evidence has been found to substantiate the existence of a late Roman Empire Arthur, but it is quite limited, I believe.

I for a very long time have considered the same resemblance between King Arthur (the title name the bear) and King Alfred. Much of the time science and history get time periods incorrect. The exploits of each character are a witness to this great possibility.