King Arthur (Welsh: Brenin Arthur, Cornish: Arthur Gernow, Breton: Roue Arzhur) is a legendary king of Britain, and a central figure in the medieval literary tradition known as the Matter of Britain. In Welsh sources, Arthur is portrayed as a leader of the post-Roman Britons in battles against Anglo-Saxon invaders of Britain in the late 5th and early 6th centuries. He first appears in two early medieval historical sources, the Annales Cambriae and the Historia Brittonum, but these date to 300 years after he is supposed to have lived, and most historians who study the period do not consider him a historical figure.[2][3] His name also occurs in early Welsh poetic sources such as Y Gododdin.[4] The character developed through Welsh mythology, appearing either as a great warrior defending Britain from human and supernatural enemies or as a magical figure of folklore, sometimes associated with the Welsh otherworld Annwn.[5] The legendary Arthur developed as a figure of international interest largely through the popularity of Geoffrey of Monmouth's fanciful and imaginative 12th-century Historia Regum Britanniae (History of the Kings of Britain).[6] Geoffrey depicted Arthur as a king of Britain who defeated the Saxons and established a vast empire. Many elements and incidents that are now an integral part of the Arthurian story appear in Geoffrey's Historia, including Arthur's father Uther Pendragon, the magician Merlin, Arthur's wife Guinevere, the sword Excalibur, Arthur's conception at Tintagel, his final battle against Mordred at Camlann, and final rest in Avalon. The 12th-century French writer Chrétien de Troyes, who added Lancelot and the Holy Grail to the story, began the genre of Arthurian romance that became a significant strand of medieval literature. In these French stories, the narrative focus often shifts from King Arthur himself to other characters, such as various Knights of the Round Table. The themes, events and characters of the Arthurian legend vary widely from text to text, and there is no one canonical version. Arthurian literature thrived during the Middle Ages but waned in the centuries that followed, until it experienced a major resurgence in the 19th century. In the 21st century, the legend continues to have prominence, not only in literature but also in adaptations for theatre, film, television, comics and other media. Historicity Main article: Historicity of King Arthur "Arthur Leading the Charge at Mount Badon" 1898 The historical basis for King Arthur has been long debated by scholars. One school of thought, citing entries in the Historia Brittonum (History of the Britons) and Annales Cambriae (Welsh Annals), saw Arthur as a genuine historical figure, a Romano-British leader who fought against the invading Anglo-Saxons some time in the late 5th to early 6th century. The Historia Brittonum, a 9th-century Latin historical compilation attributed in some late manuscripts to a Welsh cleric called Nennius, contains the first datable mention of King Arthur, listing twelve battles that Arthur fought. These culminate in the Battle of Badon, where he is said to have single-handedly killed 960 men. Recent studies, however, question the reliability of the Historia Brittonum.[7] Archaeological evidence, in the Low Countries and what was to become England, shows early Anglo-Saxon migration to Great Britain reversed between 500 and 550, which concurs with Frankish chronicles.[8] John Davies notes this as consistent with the British victory at Badon Hill, attributed to Arthur by Nennius.[8] The monks of Glastonbury are also said to have discovered the grave of Arthur in 1180.[9] The other text that seems to support the case for Arthur's historical existence is the 10th-century Annales Cambriae, which also link Arthur with the Battle of Badon. The Annales date this battle to 516–518, and also mention the Battle of Camlann, in which Arthur and Medraut (Mordred) were both killed, dated to 537–539. These details have often been used to bolster confidence in the Historia's account and to confirm that Arthur really did fight at Badon. King Arthur returning from the Battle of Mons Badonis (or Mount Badon). First reference to Arthur, found in early Welsh literature. Llandaf Cathedral, Cardiff. Problems have been identified, however, with using this source to support the Historia Brittonum's account. The latest research shows that the Annales Cambriae was based on a chronicle begun in the late 8th century in Wales. Additionally, the complex textual history of the Annales Cambriae precludes any certainty that the Arthurian annals were added to it even that early. They were more likely added at some point in the 10th century and may never have existed in any earlier set of annals. The Badon entry probably derived from the Historia Brittonum.[10] This lack of convincing early evidence is the reason many recent historians exclude Arthur from their accounts of sub-Roman Britain. In the view of historian Thomas Charles-Edwards, "at this stage of the enquiry, one can only say that there may well have been an historical Arthur [but ...] the historian can as yet say nothing of value about him".[11] These modern admissions of ignorance are a relatively recent trend; earlier generations of historians were less sceptical. The historian John Morris made the putative reign of Arthur the organising principle of his history of sub-Roman Britain and Ireland, The Age of Arthur (1973). Even so, he found little to say about a historical Arthur.[12] Partly in reaction to such theories, another school of thought emerged which argued that Arthur had no historical existence at all. Morris's Age of Arthur prompted the archaeologist Nowell Myres to observe that "no figure on the borderline of history and mythology has wasted more of the historian's time".[13] Gildas's 6th-century polemic De Excidio et Conquestu Britanniae (On the Ruin and Conquest of Britain), written within living memory of Badon, mentions the battle but does not mention Arthur.[14] Arthur is not mentioned in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle or named in any surviving manuscript written between 400 and 820.[15] He is absent from Bede's early-8th-century Ecclesiastical History of the English People, another major early source for post-Roman history that mentions Badon.[16] The historian David Dumville wrote: "I think we can dispose of him [Arthur] quite briefly. He owes his place in our history books to a 'no smoke without fire' school of thought ... The fact of the matter is that there is no historical evidence about Arthur; we must reject him from our histories and, above all, from the titles of our books."[17] Some scholars argue that Arthur was originally a fictional hero of folklore—or even a half-forgotten Celtic deity—who became credited with real deeds in the distant past. They cite parallels with figures such as the Kentish Hengist and Horsa, who may be totemic horse-gods that later became historicised. Bede ascribed to these legendary figures a historical role in the 5th-century Anglo-Saxon conquest of eastern Britain.[18] It is not even certain that Arthur was considered a king in the early texts. Neither the Historia nor the Annales calls him "rex": the former calls him instead "dux bellorum" (leader of wars) and "miles" (soldier).[19] Supposed former gravesite of Arthur at Glastonbury Abbey Details of Arthur's story are mainly composed of Welsh mythology, English folklore and literary invention, and most historians of the period do not think that he was a historical figure.[2][20][21] Because historical documents for the post-Roman period are scarce, a definitive answer to the question of Arthur's historical existence is unlikely. Sites and places have been identified as "Arthurian" since the 12th century,[22] but archaeology can confidently reveal names only through inscriptions found in secure contexts. The so-called "Arthur stone", discovered in 1998 among the ruins at Tintagel Castle in Cornwall in securely dated 6th-century contexts, created a brief stir but proved irrelevant.[23] Other inscriptional evidence for Arthur, including the Glastonbury cross, is tainted with the suggestion of forgery.[a] Andrew Breeze has recently argued that Arthur was historical, and claimed to have identified the locations of his battles as well as the place and date of his death (in the context of the Extreme weather events of 535–536),[24] but his conclusions are disputed.[25] Other scholars have questioned his findings, which they consider are based on coincidental resemblances between place-names.[26] Nicholas Higham comments that it is difficult to justify identifying Arthur as the leader in northern battles listed in the Historia Brittonum while rejecting the implication in the same work that they were fought against Anglo-Saxons, and that there is no textual justification for separating Badon from the other battles.[27] Several historical figures have been proposed as the basis for Arthur, ranging from Lucius Artorius Castus, a Roman officer who served in Britain in the 2nd or 3rd century,[28] to sub-Roman British rulers such as Riotamus,[29] Ambrosius Aurelianus,[30] Owain Ddantgwyn,[31] the Welsh king Enniaun Girt,[32] and Athrwys ap Meurig.[33] However, no convincing evidence for these identifications has emerged.[2][34] Name Main article: Arthur "Arturus rex" (King Arthur), a 1493 illustration from the Nuremberg Chronicle The origin of the Welsh name "Arthur" remains a matter of debate. The most widely accepted etymology derives it from the Roman nomen gentile (family name) Artorius.[35] Artorius itself is of obscure and contested etymology,[36] but possibly of Messapian[37] or Etruscan origin.[38] Linguist Stephan Zimmer suggests Artorius possibly had a Celtic origin, being a Latinization of a hypothetical name *Artorījos, in turn derived from an older patronym *Arto-rīg-ios, meaning "son of the bear/warrior-king". This patronym is unattested, but the root, *arto-rīg, "bear/warrior-king", is the source of the Old Irish personal name Artrí.[39] Some scholars have suggested it is relevant to this debate that the legendary King Arthur's name only appears as Arthur or Arturus in early Latin Arthurian texts, never as Artōrius (though Classical Latin Artōrius became Arturius in some Vulgar Latin dialects). However, this may not say anything about the origin of the name Arthur, as Artōrius would regularly become Art(h)ur when borrowed into Welsh.[40] Another commonly proposed derivation of Arthur from Welsh arth "bear" + (g)wr "man" (earlier *Arto-uiros in Brittonic) is not accepted by modern scholars for phonological and orthographic reasons. Notably, a Brittonic compound name *Arto-uiros should produce Old Welsh *Artgur (where u represents the short vowel /u/) and Middle/Modern Welsh *Arthwr, rather than Arthur (where u is a long vowel /ʉː/). In Welsh poetry the name is always spelled Arthur and is exclusively rhymed with words ending in -ur—never words ending in -wr—which confirms that the second element cannot be [g]wr "man".[41] An alternative theory, which has gained only limited acceptance among professional scholars, derives the name Arthur from Arcturus, the brightest star in the constellation Boötes, near Ursa Major or the Great Bear.[42] Classical Latin Arcturus would also have become Art(h)ur when borrowed into Welsh, and its brightness and position in the sky led people to regard it as the "guardian of the bear" (which is the meaning of the name in Ancient Greek) and the "leader" of the other stars in Boötes.[43] Medieval literary traditions The familiar literary persona of Arthur began with Geoffrey of Monmouth's pseudo-historical Historia Regum Britanniae (History of the Kings of Britain), written in the 1130s. The textual sources for Arthur are usually divided into those written before Geoffrey's Historia (known as pre-Galfridian texts, from the Latin form of Geoffrey, Galfridus) and those written afterwards, which could not avoid his influence (Galfridian, or post-Galfridian, texts). Pre-Galfridian traditions The earliest literary references to Arthur come from Welsh and Breton sources. There have been few attempts to define the nature and character of Arthur in the pre-Galfridian tradition as a whole, rather than in a single text or text/story-type. A 2007 academic survey led by Caitlin Green has identified three key strands to the portrayal of Arthur in this earliest material.[44] The first is that he was a peerless warrior who functioned as the monster-hunting protector of Britain from all internal and external threats. Some of these are human threats, such as the Saxons he fights in the Historia Brittonum, but the majority are supernatural, including giant cat-monsters, destructive divine boars, dragons, dogheads, giants, and witches.[45] The second is that the pre-Galfridian Arthur was a figure of folklore (particularly topographic or onomastic folklore) and localised magical wonder-tales, the leader of a band of superhuman heroes who live in the wilds of the landscape.[46] The third and final strand is that the early Welsh Arthur had a close connection with the Welsh Otherworld, Annwn. On the one hand, he launches assaults on Otherworldly fortresses in search of treasure and frees their prisoners. On the other, his warband in the earliest sources includes former pagan gods, and his wife and his possessions are clearly Otherworldly in origin.[47] A page of Y Gododdin, one of the most famous early Welsh texts featuring Arthur (c. 1275) One of the most famous Welsh poetic references to Arthur comes in the collection of heroic death-songs known as Y Gododdin (The Gododdin), attributed to 6th-century poet Aneirin. One stanza praises the bravery of a warrior who slew 300 enemies, but says that despite this, "he was no Arthur" – that is, his feats cannot compare to the valour of Arthur.[48] Y Gododdin is known only from a 13th-century manuscript, so it is impossible to determine whether this passage is original or a later interpolation, but John Koch's view that the passage dates from a 7th-century or earlier version is regarded as unproven; 9th- or 10th-century dates are often proposed for it.[49] Several poems attributed to Taliesin, a poet said to have lived in the 6th century, also refer to Arthur, although these all probably date from between the 8th and 12th centuries.[50] They include "Kadeir Teyrnon" ("The Chair of the Prince"),[51] which refers to "Arthur the Blessed"; "Preiddeu Annwn" ("The Spoils of Annwn"),[52] which recounts an expedition of Arthur to the Otherworld; and "Marwnat vthyr pen[dragon]" ("The Elegy of Uther Pen[dragon]"),[53] which refers to Arthur's valour and is suggestive of a father-son relationship for Arthur and Uther that pre-dates Geoffrey of Monmouth. Culhwch entering Arthur's court in the Welsh tale Culhwch and Olwen. An illustration by Alfred Fredericks for a 1881 edition of the Mabinogion[54] Other early Welsh Arthurian texts include a poem found in the Black Book of Carmarthen, "Pa gur yv y porthaur?" ("What man is the gatekeeper?").[55] This takes the form of a dialogue between Arthur and the gatekeeper of a fortress he wishes to enter, in which Arthur recounts the names and deeds of himself and his men, notably Cei (Kay) and Bedwyr (Bedivere). The Welsh prose tale Culhwch and Olwen (c. 1100), included in the modern Mabinogion collection, has a much longer list of more than 200 of Arthur's men, though Cei and Bedwyr again take a central place. The story as a whole tells of Arthur helping his kinsman Culhwch win the hand of Olwen, daughter of Ysbaddaden Chief-Giant, by completing a series of apparently impossible tasks, including the hunt for the great semi-divine boar Twrch Trwyth. The 9th-century Historia Brittonum also refers to this tale, with the boar there named Troy(n)t.[56] Finally, Arthur is mentioned numerous times in the Welsh Triads, a collection of short summaries of Welsh tradition and legend which are classified into groups of three linked characters or episodes to assist recall. The later manuscripts of the Triads are partly derivative from Geoffrey of Monmouth and later continental traditions, but the earliest ones show no such influence and are usually agreed to refer to pre-existing Welsh traditions. Even in these, however, Arthur's court has started to embody legendary Britain as a whole, with "Arthur's Court" sometimes substituted for "The Island of Britain" in the formula "Three XXX of the Island of Britain".[57] While it is not clear from the Historia Brittonum and the Annales Cambriae that Arthur was even considered a king, by the time Culhwch and Olwen and the Triads were written he had become Penteyrnedd yr Ynys hon, "Chief of the Lords of this Island", the overlord of Wales, Cornwall and the North.[58] In addition to these pre-Galfridian Welsh poems and tales, Arthur appears in some other early Latin texts besides the Historia Brittonum and the Annales Cambriae. In particular, Arthur features in a number of well-known vitae ("Lives") of post-Roman saints, none of which are now generally considered to be reliable historical sources (the earliest probably dates from the 11th century).[59] According to the Life of Saint Gildas, written in the early 12th century by Caradoc of Llancarfan, Arthur is said to have killed Gildas's brother Hueil and to have rescued his wife Gwenhwyfar from Glastonbury.[60] In the Life of Saint Cadoc, written around 1100 or a little before by Lifris of Llancarfan, the saint gives protection to a man who killed three of Arthur's soldiers, and Arthur demands a herd of cattle as wergeld for his men. Cadoc delivers them as demanded, but when Arthur takes possession of the animals, they turn into bundles of ferns.[61] Similar incidents are described in the medieval biographies of Carannog, Padarn, and Eufflam, probably written around the 12th century. A less obviously legendary account of Arthur appears in the Legenda Sancti Goeznovii, which is often claimed to date from the early 11th century (although the earliest manuscript of this text dates from the 15th century and the text is now dated to the late 12th to early 13th century).[62] Also important are the references to Arthur in William of Malmesbury's De Gestis Regum Anglorum and Herman's De Miraculis Sanctae Mariae Laudunensis, which together provide the first certain evidence for a belief that Arthur was not actually dead and would at some point return, a theme that is often revisited in post-Galfridian folklore.[63] Geoffrey of Monmouth King Arthur in a 15th-century Welsh version of Historia Regum Britanniae Geoffrey of Monmouth's Historia Regum Britanniae, completed c. 1138, contains the first narrative account of Arthur's life.[64] This work is an imaginative and fanciful account of British kings from the legendary Trojan exile Brutus to the 7th-century Welsh king Cadwallader. Geoffrey places Arthur in the same post-Roman period as do Historia Brittonum and Annales Cambriae. According to Geoffrey's tale, Arthur was a descendant of Constantine the Great.[65] He incorporates Arthur's father Uther Pendragon, his magician advisor Merlin, and the story of Arthur's conception, in which Uther, disguised as his enemy Gorlois by Merlin's magic, sleeps with Gorlois's wife Igerna (Igraine) at Tintagel, and she conceives Arthur. On Uther's death, the fifteen-year-old Arthur succeeds him as King of Britain and fights a series of battles, similar to those in the Historia Brittonum, culminating in the Battle of Bath. He then defeats the Picts and Scots before creating an Arthurian empire through his conquests of Ireland, Iceland and the Orkney Islands. After twelve years of peace, Arthur sets out to expand his empire once more, taking control of Norway, Denmark and Gaul. Gaul is still held by the Roman Empire when it is conquered, and Arthur's victory leads to a further confrontation with Rome. Arthur and his warriors, including Kaius (Kay), Beduerus (Bedivere) and Gualguanus (Gawain), defeat the Roman emperor Lucius Tiberius in Gaul but, as he prepares to march on Rome, Arthur hears that his nephew Modredus (Mordred)—whom he had left in charge of Britain—has married his wife Guenhuuara (Guinevere) and seized the throne. Arthur returns to Britain and defeats and kills Modredus on the river Camblam in Cornwall, but he is mortally wounded. He hands the crown to his kinsman Constantine and is taken to the isle of Avalon to be healed of his wounds, never to be seen again.[66] How much of this narrative was Geoffrey's own invention is open to debate. He seems to have made use of the list of Arthur's twelve battles against the Saxons found in the 9th-century Historia Brittonum, along with the battle of Camlann from the Annales Cambriae and the idea that Arthur was still alive.[67] Arthur's status as the king of all Britain seems to be borrowed from pre-Galfridian tradition, being found in Culhwch and Olwen, the Welsh Triads, and the saints' lives.[68] Finally, Geoffrey borrowed many of the names for Arthur's possessions, close family, and companions from the pre-Galfridian Welsh tradition, including Kaius (Cei), Beduerus (Bedwyr), Guenhuuara (Gwenhwyfar), Uther (Uthyr) and perhaps also Caliburnus (Caledfwlch), the latter becoming Excalibur in subsequent Arthurian tales.[69] However, while names, key events, and titles may have been borrowed, Brynley Roberts has argued that "the Arthurian section is Geoffrey's literary creation and it owes nothing to prior narrative."[70] Geoffrey makes the Welsh Medraut into the villainous Modredus, but there is no trace of such a negative character for this figure in Welsh sources until the 16th century.[71] There have been relatively few modern attempts to challenge the notion that the Historia Regum Britanniae is primarily Geoffrey's own work, with scholarly opinion often echoing William of Newburgh's late-12th-century comment that Geoffrey "made up" his narrative, perhaps through an "inordinate love of lying".[72] Geoffrey Ashe is one dissenter from this view, believing that Geoffrey's narrative is partially derived from a lost source telling of the deeds of a 5th-century British king named Riotamus, this figure being the original Arthur, although historians and Celticists have been reluctant to follow Ashe in his conclusions.[73] Whatever his sources may have been, the immense popularity of Geoffrey's Historia Regum Britanniae cannot be denied. Well over 200 manuscript copies of Geoffrey's Latin work are known to have survived, as well as translations into other languages.[74] For example, 60 manuscripts are extant containing the Brut y Brenhinedd, Welsh-language versions of the Historia, the earliest of which were created in the 13th century. The old notion that some of these Welsh versions actually underlie Geoffrey's Historia, advanced by antiquarians such as the 18th-century Lewis Morris, has long since been discounted in academic circles.[75] As a result of this popularity, Geoffrey's Historia Regum Britanniae was enormously influential on the later medieval development of the Arthurian legend. While it was not the only creative force behind Arthurian romance, many of its elements were borrowed and developed (e.g., Merlin and the final fate of Arthur), and it provided the historical framework into which the romancers' tales of magical and wonderful adventures were inserted.[76] Romance traditions During the 12th century, Arthur's character began to be marginalised by the accretion of "Arthurian" side-stories such as that of Tristan and Iseult, here pictured in a painting by John William Waterhouse (1916) The popularity of Geoffrey's Historia and its other derivative works (such as Wace's Roman de Brut) gave rise to a significant numbers of new Arthurian works in continental Europe during the 12th and 13th centuries, particularly in France.[77] It was not, however, the only Arthurian influence on the developing "Matter of Britain". There is clear evidence that Arthur and Arthurian tales were familiar on the Continent before Geoffrey's work became widely known (see for example, the Modena Archivolt),[78] and "Celtic" names and stories not found in Geoffrey's Historia appear in the Arthurian romances.[79] From the perspective of Arthur, perhaps the most significant effect of this great outpouring of new Arthurian story was on the role of the king himself: much of this 12th-century and later Arthurian literature centres less on Arthur himself than on characters such as Lancelot and Guinevere, Percival, Galahad, Gawain, Ywain, and Tristan and Iseult. Whereas Arthur is very much at the centre of the pre-Galfridian material and Geoffrey's Historia itself, in the romances he is rapidly sidelined.[80] His character also alters significantly. In both the earliest materials and Geoffrey he is a great and ferocious warrior, who laughs as he personally slaughters witches and giants and takes a leading role in all military campaigns,[81] whereas in the continental romances he becomes the roi fainéant, the "do-nothing king", whose "inactivity and acquiescence constituted a central flaw in his otherwise ideal society".[82] Arthur's role in these works is frequently that of a wise, dignified, even-tempered, somewhat bland, and occasionally feeble monarch. So, he simply turns pale and silent when he learns of Lancelot's affair with Guinevere in the Mort Artu, whilst in Yvain, the Knight of the Lion, he is unable to stay awake after a feast and has to retire for a nap.[83] Nonetheless, as Norris J. Lacy has observed, whatever his faults and frailties may be in these Arthurian romances, "his prestige is never—or almost never—compromised by his personal weaknesses ... his authority and glory remain intact."[84] The story of Arthur drawing the sword from a stone appeared in Robert de Boron's 13th-century Merlin. By Howard Pyle (1903)[85] Arthur and his retinue appear in some of the Lais of Marie de France,[86] but it was the work of another French poet, Chrétien de Troyes, that had the greatest influence with regard to the development of Arthur's character and legend.[87] Chrétien wrote five Arthurian romances between c. 1170 and 1190. Erec and Enide and Cligès are tales of courtly love with Arthur's court as their backdrop, demonstrating the shift away from the heroic world of the Welsh and Galfridian Arthur, while Yvain, the Knight of the Lion, features Yvain and Gawain in a supernatural adventure, with Arthur very much on the sidelines and weakened. However, the most significant for the development of the Arthurian legend are Lancelot, the Knight of the Cart, which introduces Lancelot and his adulterous relationship with Arthur's queen Guinevere, extending and popularising the recurring theme of Arthur as a cuckold, and Perceval, the Story of the Grail, which introduces the Holy Grail and the Fisher King and which again sees Arthur having a much reduced role.[88] Chrétien was thus "instrumental both in the elaboration of the Arthurian legend and in the establishment of the ideal form for the diffusion of that legend",[89] and much of what came after him in terms of the portrayal of Arthur and his world built upon the foundations he had laid. Perceval, although unfinished, was particularly popular: four separate continuations of the poem appeared over the next half century, with the notion of the Grail and its quest being developed by other writers such as Robert de Boron, a fact that helped accelerate the decline of Arthur in continental romance.[90] Similarly, Lancelot and his cuckolding of Arthur with Guinevere became one of the classic motifs of the Arthurian legend, although the Lancelot of the prose Lancelot (c. 1225) and later texts was a combination of Chrétien's character and that of Ulrich von Zatzikhoven's Lanzelet.[91] Chrétien's work even appears to feed back into Welsh Arthurian literature, with the result that the romance Arthur began to replace the heroic, active Arthur in Welsh literary tradition.[92] Particularly significant in this development were the three Welsh Arthurian romances, which are closely similar to those of Chrétien, albeit with some significant differences: Owain, or the Lady of the Fountain is related to Chrétien's Yvain; Geraint and Enid, to Erec and Enide; and Peredur son of Efrawg, to Perceval.[93] The Round Table experiences a vision of the Holy Grail, an illumination by Évrard d'Espinques (c. 1475)[94] Up to c. 1210, continental Arthurian romance was expressed primarily through poetry; after this date the tales began to be told in prose. The most significant of these 13th-century prose romances was the Vulgate Cycle (also known as the Lancelot-Grail Cycle), a series of five Middle French prose works written in the first half of that century.[95] These works were the Estoire del Saint Grail, the Estoire de Merlin, the Lancelot propre (or Prose Lancelot, which made up half the entire Vulgate Cycle on its own), the Queste del Saint Graal and the Mort Artu, which combine to form the first coherent version of the entire Arthurian legend. The cycle continued the trend towards reducing the role played by Arthur in his own legend, partly through the introduction of the character of Galahad and an expansion of the role of Merlin. It also made Mordred the result of an incestuous relationship between Arthur and his sister Morgause and established the role of Camelot, first mentioned in passing in Chrétien's Lancelot, as Arthur's primary court.[96] This series of texts was quickly followed by the Post-Vulgate Cycle (c. 1230–40), of which the Suite du Merlin is a part, which greatly reduced the importance of Lancelot's affair with Guinevere but continued to sideline Arthur, and to focus more on the Grail quest.[95] As such, Arthur became even more of a relatively minor character in these French prose romances; in the Vulgate itself he only figures significantly in the Estoire de Merlin and the Mort Artu. During this period, Arthur was made one of the Nine Worthies, a group of three pagan, three Jewish and three Christian exemplars of chivalry. The Worthies were first listed in Jacques de Longuyon's Voeux du Paon in 1312, and subsequently became a common subject in literature and art.[97] Arthur receiving the later tradition's sword Excalibur in N. C. Wyeth's illustration for The Boy's King Arthur (1922), a modern edition of Thomas Malory's 1485 Le Morte d'Arthur The development of the medieval Arthurian cycle and the character of the "Arthur of romance" culminated in Le Morte d'Arthur, Thomas Malory's retelling of the entire legend in a single work in English in the late 15th century. Malory based his book—originally titled The Whole Book of King Arthur and of His Noble Knights of the Round Table—on the various previous romance versions, in particular the Vulgate Cycle, and appears to have aimed at creating a comprehensive and authoritative collection of Arthurian stories.[98] Perhaps as a result of this, and the fact that Le Morte D'Arthur was one of the earliest printed books in England, published by William Caxton in 1485, most later Arthurian works are derivative of Malory's.[99] Decline, revival, and the modern legend Post-medieval literature The end of the Middle Ages brought with it a waning of interest in King Arthur. Although Malory's English version of the great French romances was popular, there were increasing attacks upon the truthfulness of the historical framework of the Arthurian romances – established since Geoffrey of Monmouth's time – and thus the legitimacy of the whole Matter of Britain. So, for example, the 16th-century humanist scholar Polydore Vergil famously rejected the claim that Arthur was the ruler of a post-Roman empire, found throughout the post-Galfridian medieval "chronicle tradition", to the horror of Welsh and English antiquarians.[100] Social changes associated with the end of the medieval period and the Renaissance also conspired to rob the character of Arthur and his associated legend of some of their power to enthrall audiences, with the result that 1634 saw the last printing of Malory's Le Morte d'Arthur for nearly 200 years.[101] King Arthur and the Arthurian legend were not entirely abandoned, but until the early 19th century the material was taken less seriously and was often used simply as a vehicle for allegories of 17th- and 18th-century politics.[102] Thus Richard Blackmore's epics Prince Arthur (1695) and King Arthur (1697) feature Arthur as an allegory for the struggles of William III against James II.[102] Similarly, the most popular Arthurian tale throughout this period seems to have been that of Tom Thumb, which was told first through chapbooks and later through the political plays of Henry Fielding; although the action is clearly set in Arthurian Britain, the treatment is humorous and Arthur appears as a primarily comedic version of his romance character.[103] John Dryden's masque King Arthur is still performed, largely thanks to Henry Purcell's music, though seldom unabridged. Tennyson and the revival In the early 19th century, medievalism, Romanticism, and the Gothic Revival reawakened interest in Arthur and the medieval romances. A new code of ethics for 19th-century gentlemen was shaped around the chivalric ideals embodied in the "Arthur of romance". This renewed interest first made itself felt in 1816, when Malory's Le Morte d'Arthur was reprinted for the first time since 1634.[104] Initially, the medieval Arthurian legends were of particular interest to poets, inspiring, for example, William Wordsworth to write "The Egyptian Maid" (1835), an allegory of the Holy Grail.[105] Pre-eminent among these was Alfred Tennyson, whose first Arthurian poem "The Lady of Shalott" was published in 1832.[106] Arthur himself played a minor role in some of these works, following in the medieval romance tradition. Tennyson's Arthurian work reached its peak of popularity with Idylls of the King, however, which reworked the entire narrative of Arthur's life for the Victorian era. It was first published in 1859 and sold 10,000 copies within the first week.[107] In the Idylls, Arthur became a symbol of ideal manhood who ultimately failed, through human weakness, to establish a perfect kingdom on earth.[108] Tennyson's works prompted a large number of imitators, generated considerable public interest in the legends of Arthur and the character himself, and brought Malory's tales to a wider audience.[109] Indeed, the first modernisation of Malory's great compilation of Arthur's tales was published in 1862, shortly after Idylls appeared, and there were six further editions and five competitors before the century ended.[110] This interest in the "Arthur of romance" and his associated stories continued through the 19th century and into the 20th, and influenced poets such as William Morris and Pre-Raphaelite artists including Edward Burne-Jones.[111] Even the humorous tale of Tom Thumb, which had been the primary manifestation of Arthur's legend in the 18th century, was rewritten after the publication of Idylls. While Tom maintained his small stature and remained a figure of comic relief, his story now included more elements from the medieval Arthurian romances and Arthur is treated more seriously and historically in these new versions.[112] The revived Arthurian romance also proved influential in the United States, with such books as Sidney Lanier's The Boy's King Arthur (1880) reaching wide audiences and providing inspiration for Mark Twain's satire A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court (1889).[113] Although the 'Arthur of romance' was sometimes central to these new Arthurian works (as he was in Burne-Jones's "The Sleep of Arthur in Avalon", 1881–1898), on other occasions he reverted to his medieval status and is either marginalised or even missing entirely, with Wagner's Arthurian opera—Parsifal—providing a notable instance of the latter.[114] Furthermore, the revival of interest in Arthur and the Arthurian tales did not continue unabated. By the end of the 19th century, it was confined mainly to Pre-Raphaelite imitators,[115] and it could not avoid being affected by World War I, which damaged the reputation of chivalry and thus interest in its medieval manifestations and Arthur as chivalric role model.[116] The romance tradition did, however, remain sufficiently powerful to persuade Thomas Hardy, Laurence Binyon and John Masefield to compose Arthurian plays,[117] and T. S. Eliot alludes to the Arthur myth (but not Arthur) in his poem The Waste Land, which mentions the Fisher King.[118] Merlin and Viviane in Gustave Doré's 1868 illustration for Alfred, Lord Tennyson's Idylls of the King King Arthur by Charles Ernest Butler (1903) King Arthur by Charles Ernest Butler (1903) N. C. Wyeth's title page illustration for The Boy's King Arthur (1922) N. C. Wyeth's title page illustration for The Boy's King Arthur (1922) Modern legend See also: List of works based on Arthurian legends King Arthur (holding Excalibur) and Patsy in Spamalot, a stage musical adaptation of the 1975 film Monty Python and the Holy Grail In the latter half of the 20th century, the influence of the romance tradition of Arthur continued, through novels such as T. H. White's The Once and Future King (1958), Mary Stewart's The Crystal Cave (1970) and its four sequels, Thomas Berger's tragicomic Arthur Rex and Marion Zimmer Bradley's The Mists of Avalon (1982) in addition to comic strips such as Prince Valiant (from 1937 onward).[119] Tennyson had reworked the romance tales of Arthur to suit and comment upon the issues of his day, and the same is often the case with modern treatments too. Stewart's first three Arthurian novels present the wizard Merlin as the central character, rather than Arthur, and The Crystal Cave is narrated by Merlin in the first person, whereas Bradley's tale takes a feminist approach to Arthur and his legend, in contrast to the narratives of Arthur found in medieval materials.[120] American authors often rework the story of Arthur to be more consistent with values such as equality and democracy.[121] In John Cowper Powys's Porius: A Romance of the Dark Ages (1951), set in Wales in 499, just prior to the Saxon invasion, Arthur, the Emperor of Britain, is only a minor character, whereas Myrddin (Merlin) and Nineue, Tennyson's Vivien, are major figures.[122] Myrddin's disappearance at the end of the novel is "in the tradition of magical hibernation when the king or mage leaves his people for some island or cave to return either at a more propitious or more dangerous time" (see King Arthur's messianic return).[123] Powys's earlier novel, A Glastonbury Romance (1932) is concerned with both the Holy Grail and the legend that Arthur is buried at Glastonbury.[124] The romance Arthur has become popular in film and theatre as well. T. H. White's novel was adapted into the Lerner and Loewe stage musical Camelot (1960) and Walt Disney's animated film The Sword in the Stone (1963); Camelot, with its focus on the love of Lancelot and Guinevere and the cuckolding of Arthur, was itself made into a film of the same name in 1967. The romance tradition of Arthur is particularly evident and in critically respected films like Robert Bresson's Lancelot du Lac (1974), Éric Rohmer's Perceval le Gallois (1978) and John Boorman's Excalibur (1981); it is also the main source of the material used in the Arthurian spoof Monty Python and the Holy Grail (1975).[125] Retellings and reimaginings of the romance tradition are not the only important aspect of the modern legend of King Arthur. Attempts to portray Arthur as a genuine historical figure of c. 500, stripping away the "romance", have also emerged. As Taylor and Brewer have noted, this return to the medieval "chronicle tradition" of Geoffrey of Monmouth and the Historia Brittonum is a recent trend which became dominant in Arthurian literature in the years following the outbreak of the Second World War, when Arthur's legendary resistance to Germanic enemies struck a chord in Britain.[126] Clemence Dane's series of radio plays, The Saviours (1942), used a historical Arthur to embody the spirit of heroic resistance against desperate odds, and Robert Sherriff's play The Long Sunset (1955) saw Arthur rallying Romano-British resistance against the Germanic invaders.[127] This trend towards placing Arthur in a historical setting is also apparent in historical and fantasy novels published during this period.[128] Arthur has also been used as a model for modern-day behaviour. In the 1930s, the Order of the Fellowship of the Knights of the Round Table was formed in Britain to promote Christian ideals and Arthurian notions of medieval chivalry.[129] In the United States, hundreds of thousands of boys and girls joined Arthurian youth groups, such as the Knights of King Arthur, in which Arthur and his legends were promoted as wholesome exemplars.[130] However, Arthur's diffusion within modern culture goes beyond such obviously Arthurian endeavours, with Arthurian names being regularly attached to objects, buildings, and places. As Norris J. Lacy has observed, "The popular notion of Arthur appears to be limited, not surprisingly, to a few motifs and names, but there can be no doubt of the extent to which a legend born many centuries ago is profoundly embedded in modern culture at every level."[131] See also flag Wales portal History portal flag Cornwall portal Arthur's O'on Artus Court King Arthur's family King Arthur's messianic return List of Arthurian characters List of books about King Arthur List of films based on Arthurian legend List of legendary kings of Britain Nine Worthies, of which Arthur was one

 King Arthur (Welsh: Brenin Arthur, Cornish: Arthur Gernow, Breton: Roue Arzhur) is a legendary king of Britain, and a central figure in the medieval literary tradition known as the Matter of Britain. In Welsh sources, Arthur is portrayed as a leader of the post-Roman Britons in battles against Anglo-Saxon invaders of Britain in the late 5th and early 6th centuries. He first appears in two early medieval historical sources, the Annales Cambriae and the Historia Brittonum, but these date to 300 years after he is supposed to have lived, and most historians who study the period do not consider him a historical figure.[2][3] His name also occurs in early Welsh poetic sources such as Y Gododdin.[4] The character developed through Welsh mythology, appearing either as a great warrior defending Britain from human and supernatural enemies or as a magical figure of folklore, sometimes associated with the Welsh otherworld Annwn.[5]


The legendary Arthur developed as a figure of international interest largely through the popularity of Geoffrey of Monmouth's fanciful and imaginative 12th-century Historia Regum Britanniae (History of the Kings of Britain).[6] Geoffrey depicted Arthur as a king of Britain who defeated the Saxons and established a vast empire. Many elements and incidents that are now an integral part of the Arthurian story appear in Geoffrey's Historia, including Arthur's father Uther Pendragon, the magician Merlin, Arthur's wife Guinevere, the sword Excalibur, Arthur's conception at Tintagel, his final battle against Mordred at Camlann, and final rest in Avalon. The 12th-century French writer Chrétien de Troyes, who added Lancelot and the Holy Grail to the story, began the genre of Arthurian romance that became a significant strand of medieval literature. In these French stories, the narrative focus often shifts from King Arthur himself to other characters, such as various Knights of the Round Table. The themes, events and characters of the Arthurian legend vary widely from text to text, and there is no one canonical version. Arthurian literature thrived during the Middle Ages but waned in the centuries that followed, until it experienced a major resurgence in the 19th century. In the 21st century, the legend continues to have prominence, not only in literature but also in adaptations for theatre, film, television, comics and other media.


Historicity

Main article: Historicity of King Arthur


"Arthur Leading the Charge at Mount Badon" 1898

The historical basis for King Arthur has been long debated by scholars. One school of thought, citing entries in the Historia Brittonum (History of the Britons) and Annales Cambriae (Welsh Annals), saw Arthur as a genuine historical figure, a Romano-British leader who fought against the invading Anglo-Saxons some time in the late 5th to early 6th century.


The Historia Brittonum, a 9th-century Latin historical compilation attributed in some late manuscripts to a Welsh cleric called Nennius, contains the first datable mention of King Arthur, listing twelve battles that Arthur fought. These culminate in the Battle of Badon, where he is said to have single-handedly killed 960 men. Recent studies, however, question the reliability of the Historia Brittonum.[7]


Archaeological evidence, in the Low Countries and what was to become England, shows early Anglo-Saxon migration to Great Britain reversed between 500 and 550, which concurs with Frankish chronicles.[8] John Davies notes this as consistent with the British victory at Badon Hill, attributed to Arthur by Nennius.[8] The monks of Glastonbury are also said to have discovered the grave of Arthur in 1180.[9]


The other text that seems to support the case for Arthur's historical existence is the 10th-century Annales Cambriae, which also link Arthur with the Battle of Badon. The Annales date this battle to 516–518, and also mention the Battle of Camlann, in which Arthur and Medraut (Mordred) were both killed, dated to 537–539. These details have often been used to bolster confidence in the Historia's account and to confirm that Arthur really did fight at Badon.



King Arthur returning from the Battle of Mons Badonis (or Mount Badon). First reference to Arthur, found in early Welsh literature. Llandaf Cathedral, Cardiff.

Problems have been identified, however, with using this source to support the Historia Brittonum's account. The latest research shows that the Annales Cambriae was based on a chronicle begun in the late 8th century in Wales. Additionally, the complex textual history of the Annales Cambriae precludes any certainty that the Arthurian annals were added to it even that early. They were more likely added at some point in the 10th century and may never have existed in any earlier set of annals. The Badon entry probably derived from the Historia Brittonum.[10]


This lack of convincing early evidence is the reason many recent historians exclude Arthur from their accounts of sub-Roman Britain. In the view of historian Thomas Charles-Edwards, "at this stage of the enquiry, one can only say that there may well have been an historical Arthur [but ...] the historian can as yet say nothing of value about him".[11] These modern admissions of ignorance are a relatively recent trend; earlier generations of historians were less sceptical. The historian John Morris made the putative reign of Arthur the organising principle of his history of sub-Roman Britain and Ireland, The Age of Arthur (1973). Even so, he found little to say about a historical Arthur.[12]


Partly in reaction to such theories, another school of thought emerged which argued that Arthur had no historical existence at all. Morris's Age of Arthur prompted the archaeologist Nowell Myres to observe that "no figure on the borderline of history and mythology has wasted more of the historian's time".[13] Gildas's 6th-century polemic De Excidio et Conquestu Britanniae (On the Ruin and Conquest of Britain), written within living memory of Badon, mentions the battle but does not mention Arthur.[14] Arthur is not mentioned in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle or named in any surviving manuscript written between 400 and 820.[15] He is absent from Bede's early-8th-century Ecclesiastical History of the English People, another major early source for post-Roman history that mentions Badon.[16] The historian David Dumville wrote: "I think we can dispose of him [Arthur] quite briefly. He owes his place in our history books to a 'no smoke without fire' school of thought ... The fact of the matter is that there is no historical evidence about Arthur; we must reject him from our histories and, above all, from the titles of our books."[17]


Some scholars argue that Arthur was originally a fictional hero of folklore—or even a half-forgotten Celtic deity—who became credited with real deeds in the distant past. They cite parallels with figures such as the Kentish Hengist and Horsa, who may be totemic horse-gods that later became historicised. Bede ascribed to these legendary figures a historical role in the 5th-century Anglo-Saxon conquest of eastern Britain.[18] It is not even certain that Arthur was considered a king in the early texts. Neither the Historia nor the Annales calls him "rex": the former calls him instead "dux bellorum" (leader of wars) and "miles" (soldier).[19]



Supposed former gravesite of Arthur at Glastonbury Abbey

Details of Arthur's story are mainly composed of Welsh mythology, English folklore and literary invention, and most historians of the period do not think that he was a historical figure.[2][20][21] Because historical documents for the post-Roman period are scarce, a definitive answer to the question of Arthur's historical existence is unlikely. Sites and places have been identified as "Arthurian" since the 12th century,[22] but archaeology can confidently reveal names only through inscriptions found in secure contexts. The so-called "Arthur stone", discovered in 1998 among the ruins at Tintagel Castle in Cornwall in securely dated 6th-century contexts, created a brief stir but proved irrelevant.[23] Other inscriptional evidence for Arthur, including the Glastonbury cross, is tainted with the suggestion of forgery.[a]


Andrew Breeze has recently argued that Arthur was historical, and claimed to have identified the locations of his battles as well as the place and date of his death (in the context of the Extreme weather events of 535–536),[24] but his conclusions are disputed.[25] Other scholars have questioned his findings, which they consider are based on coincidental resemblances between place-names.[26] Nicholas Higham comments that it is difficult to justify identifying Arthur as the leader in northern battles listed in the Historia Brittonum while rejecting the implication in the same work that they were fought against Anglo-Saxons, and that there is no textual justification for separating Badon from the other battles.[27]


Several historical figures have been proposed as the basis for Arthur, ranging from Lucius Artorius Castus, a Roman officer who served in Britain in the 2nd or 3rd century,[28] to sub-Roman British rulers such as Riotamus,[29] Ambrosius Aurelianus,[30] Owain Ddantgwyn,[31] the Welsh king Enniaun Girt,[32] and Athrwys ap Meurig.[33] However, no convincing evidence for these identifications has emerged.[2][34]


Name

Main article: Arthur


"Arturus rex" (King Arthur), a 1493 illustration from the Nuremberg Chronicle

The origin of the Welsh name "Arthur" remains a matter of debate. The most widely accepted etymology derives it from the Roman nomen gentile (family name) Artorius.[35] Artorius itself is of obscure and contested etymology,[36] but possibly of Messapian[37] or Etruscan origin.[38] Linguist Stephan Zimmer suggests Artorius possibly had a Celtic origin, being a Latinization of a hypothetical name *Artorījos, in turn derived from an older patronym *Arto-rīg-ios, meaning "son of the bear/warrior-king". This patronym is unattested, but the root, *arto-rīg, "bear/warrior-king", is the source of the Old Irish personal name Artrí.[39] Some scholars have suggested it is relevant to this debate that the legendary King Arthur's name only appears as Arthur or Arturus in early Latin Arthurian texts, never as Artōrius (though Classical Latin Artōrius became Arturius in some Vulgar Latin dialects). However, this may not say anything about the origin of the name Arthur, as Artōrius would regularly become Art(h)ur when borrowed into Welsh.[40]


Another commonly proposed derivation of Arthur from Welsh arth "bear" + (g)wr "man" (earlier *Arto-uiros in Brittonic) is not accepted by modern scholars for phonological and orthographic reasons. Notably, a Brittonic compound name *Arto-uiros should produce Old Welsh *Artgur (where u represents the short vowel /u/) and Middle/Modern Welsh *Arthwr, rather than Arthur (where u is a long vowel /ʉː/). In Welsh poetry the name is always spelled Arthur and is exclusively rhymed with words ending in -ur—never words ending in -wr—which confirms that the second element cannot be [g]wr "man".[41]


An alternative theory, which has gained only limited acceptance among professional scholars, derives the name Arthur from Arcturus, the brightest star in the constellation Boötes, near Ursa Major or the Great Bear.[42] Classical Latin Arcturus would also have become Art(h)ur when borrowed into Welsh, and its brightness and position in the sky led people to regard it as the "guardian of the bear" (which is the meaning of the name in Ancient Greek) and the "leader" of the other stars in Boötes.[43]


Medieval literary traditions

The familiar literary persona of Arthur began with Geoffrey of Monmouth's pseudo-historical Historia Regum Britanniae (History of the Kings of Britain), written in the 1130s. The textual sources for Arthur are usually divided into those written before Geoffrey's Historia (known as pre-Galfridian texts, from the Latin form of Geoffrey, Galfridus) and those written afterwards, which could not avoid his influence (Galfridian, or post-Galfridian, texts).


Pre-Galfridian traditions

The earliest literary references to Arthur come from Welsh and Breton sources. There have been few attempts to define the nature and character of Arthur in the pre-Galfridian tradition as a whole, rather than in a single text or text/story-type. A 2007 academic survey led by Caitlin Green has identified three key strands to the portrayal of Arthur in this earliest material.[44] The first is that he was a peerless warrior who functioned as the monster-hunting protector of Britain from all internal and external threats. Some of these are human threats, such as the Saxons he fights in the Historia Brittonum, but the majority are supernatural, including giant cat-monsters, destructive divine boars, dragons, dogheads, giants, and witches.[45] The second is that the pre-Galfridian Arthur was a figure of folklore (particularly topographic or onomastic folklore) and localised magical wonder-tales, the leader of a band of superhuman heroes who live in the wilds of the landscape.[46] The third and final strand is that the early Welsh Arthur had a close connection with the Welsh Otherworld, Annwn. On the one hand, he launches assaults on Otherworldly fortresses in search of treasure and frees their prisoners. On the other, his warband in the earliest sources includes former pagan gods, and his wife and his possessions are clearly Otherworldly in origin.[47]



A page of Y Gododdin, one of the most famous early Welsh texts featuring Arthur (c. 1275)

One of the most famous Welsh poetic references to Arthur comes in the collection of heroic death-songs known as Y Gododdin (The Gododdin), attributed to 6th-century poet Aneirin. One stanza praises the bravery of a warrior who slew 300 enemies, but says that despite this, "he was no Arthur" – that is, his feats cannot compare to the valour of Arthur.[48] Y Gododdin is known only from a 13th-century manuscript, so it is impossible to determine whether this passage is original or a later interpolation, but John Koch's view that the passage dates from a 7th-century or earlier version is regarded as unproven; 9th- or 10th-century dates are often proposed for it.[49] Several poems attributed to Taliesin, a poet said to have lived in the 6th century, also refer to Arthur, although these all probably date from between the 8th and 12th centuries.[50] They include "Kadeir Teyrnon" ("The Chair of the Prince"),[51] which refers to "Arthur the Blessed"; "Preiddeu Annwn" ("The Spoils of Annwn"),[52] which recounts an expedition of Arthur to the Otherworld; and "Marwnat vthyr pen[dragon]" ("The Elegy of Uther Pen[dragon]"),[53] which refers to Arthur's valour and is suggestive of a father-son relationship for Arthur and Uther that pre-dates Geoffrey of Monmouth.



Culhwch entering Arthur's court in the Welsh tale Culhwch and Olwen. An illustration by Alfred Fredericks for a 1881 edition of the Mabinogion[54]

Other early Welsh Arthurian texts include a poem found in the Black Book of Carmarthen, "Pa gur yv y porthaur?" ("What man is the gatekeeper?").[55] This takes the form of a dialogue between Arthur and the gatekeeper of a fortress he wishes to enter, in which Arthur recounts the names and deeds of himself and his men, notably Cei (Kay) and Bedwyr (Bedivere). The Welsh prose tale Culhwch and Olwen (c. 1100), included in the modern Mabinogion collection, has a much longer list of more than 200 of Arthur's men, though Cei and Bedwyr again take a central place. The story as a whole tells of Arthur helping his kinsman Culhwch win the hand of Olwen, daughter of Ysbaddaden Chief-Giant, by completing a series of apparently impossible tasks, including the hunt for the great semi-divine boar Twrch Trwyth. The 9th-century Historia Brittonum also refers to this tale, with the boar there named Troy(n)t.[56] Finally, Arthur is mentioned numerous times in the Welsh Triads, a collection of short summaries of Welsh tradition and legend which are classified into groups of three linked characters or episodes to assist recall. The later manuscripts of the Triads are partly derivative from Geoffrey of Monmouth and later continental traditions, but the earliest ones show no such influence and are usually agreed to refer to pre-existing Welsh traditions. Even in these, however, Arthur's court has started to embody legendary Britain as a whole, with "Arthur's Court" sometimes substituted for "The Island of Britain" in the formula "Three XXX of the Island of Britain".[57] While it is not clear from the Historia Brittonum and the Annales Cambriae that Arthur was even considered a king, by the time Culhwch and Olwen and the Triads were written he had become Penteyrnedd yr Ynys hon, "Chief of the Lords of this Island", the overlord of Wales, Cornwall and the North.[58]


In addition to these pre-Galfridian Welsh poems and tales, Arthur appears in some other early Latin texts besides the Historia Brittonum and the Annales Cambriae. In particular, Arthur features in a number of well-known vitae ("Lives") of post-Roman saints, none of which are now generally considered to be reliable historical sources (the earliest probably dates from the 11th century).[59] According to the Life of Saint Gildas, written in the early 12th century by Caradoc of Llancarfan, Arthur is said to have killed Gildas's brother Hueil and to have rescued his wife Gwenhwyfar from Glastonbury.[60] In the Life of Saint Cadoc, written around 1100 or a little before by Lifris of Llancarfan, the saint gives protection to a man who killed three of Arthur's soldiers, and Arthur demands a herd of cattle as wergeld for his men. Cadoc delivers them as demanded, but when Arthur takes possession of the animals, they turn into bundles of ferns.[61] Similar incidents are described in the medieval biographies of Carannog, Padarn, and Eufflam, probably written around the 12th century. A less obviously legendary account of Arthur appears in the Legenda Sancti Goeznovii, which is often claimed to date from the early 11th century (although the earliest manuscript of this text dates from the 15th century and the text is now dated to the late 12th to early 13th century).[62] Also important are the references to Arthur in William of Malmesbury's De Gestis Regum Anglorum and Herman's De Miraculis Sanctae Mariae Laudunensis, which together provide the first certain evidence for a belief that Arthur was not actually dead and would at some point return, a theme that is often revisited in post-Galfridian folklore.[63]


Geoffrey of Monmouth


King Arthur in a 15th-century Welsh version of Historia Regum Britanniae

Geoffrey of Monmouth's Historia Regum Britanniae, completed c. 1138, contains the first narrative account of Arthur's life.[64] This work is an imaginative and fanciful account of British kings from the legendary Trojan exile Brutus to the 7th-century Welsh king Cadwallader. Geoffrey places Arthur in the same post-Roman period as do Historia Brittonum and Annales Cambriae. According to Geoffrey's tale, Arthur was a descendant of Constantine the Great.[65] He incorporates Arthur's father Uther Pendragon, his magician advisor Merlin, and the story of Arthur's conception, in which Uther, disguised as his enemy Gorlois by Merlin's magic, sleeps with Gorlois's wife Igerna (Igraine) at Tintagel, and she conceives Arthur. On Uther's death, the fifteen-year-old Arthur succeeds him as King of Britain and fights a series of battles, similar to those in the Historia Brittonum, culminating in the Battle of Bath. He then defeats the Picts and Scots before creating an Arthurian empire through his conquests of Ireland, Iceland and the Orkney Islands. After twelve years of peace, Arthur sets out to expand his empire once more, taking control of Norway, Denmark and Gaul. Gaul is still held by the Roman Empire when it is conquered, and Arthur's victory leads to a further confrontation with Rome. Arthur and his warriors, including Kaius (Kay), Beduerus (Bedivere) and Gualguanus (Gawain), defeat the Roman emperor Lucius Tiberius in Gaul but, as he prepares to march on Rome, Arthur hears that his nephew Modredus (Mordred)—whom he had left in charge of Britain—has married his wife Guenhuuara (Guinevere) and seized the throne. Arthur returns to Britain and defeats and kills Modredus on the river Camblam in Cornwall, but he is mortally wounded. He hands the crown to his kinsman Constantine and is taken to the isle of Avalon to be healed of his wounds, never to be seen again.[66]


How much of this narrative was Geoffrey's own invention is open to debate. He seems to have made use of the list of Arthur's twelve battles against the Saxons found in the 9th-century Historia Brittonum, along with the battle of Camlann from the Annales Cambriae and the idea that Arthur was still alive.[67] Arthur's status as the king of all Britain seems to be borrowed from pre-Galfridian tradition, being found in Culhwch and Olwen, the Welsh Triads, and the saints' lives.[68] Finally, Geoffrey borrowed many of the names for Arthur's possessions, close family, and companions from the pre-Galfridian Welsh tradition, including Kaius (Cei), Beduerus (Bedwyr), Guenhuuara (Gwenhwyfar), Uther (Uthyr) and perhaps also Caliburnus (Caledfwlch), the latter becoming Excalibur in subsequent Arthurian tales.[69] However, while names, key events, and titles may have been borrowed, Brynley Roberts has argued that "the Arthurian section is Geoffrey's literary creation and it owes nothing to prior narrative."[70] Geoffrey makes the Welsh Medraut into the villainous Modredus, but there is no trace of such a negative character for this figure in Welsh sources until the 16th century.[71] There have been relatively few modern attempts to challenge the notion that the Historia Regum Britanniae is primarily Geoffrey's own work, with scholarly opinion often echoing William of Newburgh's late-12th-century comment that Geoffrey "made up" his narrative, perhaps through an "inordinate love of lying".[72] Geoffrey Ashe is one dissenter from this view, believing that Geoffrey's narrative is partially derived from a lost source telling of the deeds of a 5th-century British king named Riotamus, this figure being the original Arthur, although historians and Celticists have been reluctant to follow Ashe in his conclusions.[73]


Whatever his sources may have been, the immense popularity of Geoffrey's Historia Regum Britanniae cannot be denied. Well over 200 manuscript copies of Geoffrey's Latin work are known to have survived, as well as translations into other languages.[74] For example, 60 manuscripts are extant containing the Brut y Brenhinedd, Welsh-language versions of the Historia, the earliest of which were created in the 13th century. The old notion that some of these Welsh versions actually underlie Geoffrey's Historia, advanced by antiquarians such as the 18th-century Lewis Morris, has long since been discounted in academic circles.[75] As a result of this popularity, Geoffrey's Historia Regum Britanniae was enormously influential on the later medieval development of the Arthurian legend. While it was not the only creative force behind Arthurian romance, many of its elements were borrowed and developed (e.g., Merlin and the final fate of Arthur), and it provided the historical framework into which the romancers' tales of magical and wonderful adventures were inserted.[76]


Romance traditions


During the 12th century, Arthur's character began to be marginalised by the accretion of "Arthurian" side-stories such as that of Tristan and Iseult, here pictured in a painting by John William Waterhouse (1916)

The popularity of Geoffrey's Historia and its other derivative works (such as Wace's Roman de Brut) gave rise to a significant numbers of new Arthurian works in continental Europe during the 12th and 13th centuries, particularly in France.[77] It was not, however, the only Arthurian influence on the developing "Matter of Britain". There is clear evidence that Arthur and Arthurian tales were familiar on the Continent before Geoffrey's work became widely known (see for example, the Modena Archivolt),[78] and "Celtic" names and stories not found in Geoffrey's Historia appear in the Arthurian romances.[79] From the perspective of Arthur, perhaps the most significant effect of this great outpouring of new Arthurian story was on the role of the king himself: much of this 12th-century and later Arthurian literature centres less on Arthur himself than on characters such as Lancelot and Guinevere, Percival, Galahad, Gawain, Ywain, and Tristan and Iseult. Whereas Arthur is very much at the centre of the pre-Galfridian material and Geoffrey's Historia itself, in the romances he is rapidly sidelined.[80] His character also alters significantly. In both the earliest materials and Geoffrey he is a great and ferocious warrior, who laughs as he personally slaughters witches and giants and takes a leading role in all military campaigns,[81] whereas in the continental romances he becomes the roi fainéant, the "do-nothing king", whose "inactivity and acquiescence constituted a central flaw in his otherwise ideal society".[82] Arthur's role in these works is frequently that of a wise, dignified, even-tempered, somewhat bland, and occasionally feeble monarch. So, he simply turns pale and silent when he learns of Lancelot's affair with Guinevere in the Mort Artu, whilst in Yvain, the Knight of the Lion, he is unable to stay awake after a feast and has to retire for a nap.[83] Nonetheless, as Norris J. Lacy has observed, whatever his faults and frailties may be in these Arthurian romances, "his prestige is never—or almost never—compromised by his personal weaknesses ... his authority and glory remain intact."[84]



The story of Arthur drawing the sword from a stone appeared in Robert de Boron's 13th-century Merlin. By Howard Pyle (1903)[85]

Arthur and his retinue appear in some of the Lais of Marie de France,[86] but it was the work of another French poet, Chrétien de Troyes, that had the greatest influence with regard to the development of Arthur's character and legend.[87] Chrétien wrote five Arthurian romances between c. 1170 and 1190. Erec and Enide and Cligès are tales of courtly love with Arthur's court as their backdrop, demonstrating the shift away from the heroic world of the Welsh and Galfridian Arthur, while Yvain, the Knight of the Lion, features Yvain and Gawain in a supernatural adventure, with Arthur very much on the sidelines and weakened. However, the most significant for the development of the Arthurian legend are Lancelot, the Knight of the Cart, which introduces Lancelot and his adulterous relationship with Arthur's queen Guinevere, extending and popularising the recurring theme of Arthur as a cuckold, and Perceval, the Story of the Grail, which introduces the Holy Grail and the Fisher King and which again sees Arthur having a much reduced role.[88] Chrétien was thus "instrumental both in the elaboration of the Arthurian legend and in the establishment of the ideal form for the diffusion of that legend",[89] and much of what came after him in terms of the portrayal of Arthur and his world built upon the foundations he had laid. Perceval, although unfinished, was particularly popular: four separate continuations of the poem appeared over the next half century, with the notion of the Grail and its quest being developed by other writers such as Robert de Boron, a fact that helped accelerate the decline of Arthur in continental romance.[90] Similarly, Lancelot and his cuckolding of Arthur with Guinevere became one of the classic motifs of the Arthurian legend, although the Lancelot of the prose Lancelot (c. 1225) and later texts was a combination of Chrétien's character and that of Ulrich von Zatzikhoven's Lanzelet.[91] Chrétien's work even appears to feed back into Welsh Arthurian literature, with the result that the romance Arthur began to replace the heroic, active Arthur in Welsh literary tradition.[92] Particularly significant in this development were the three Welsh Arthurian romances, which are closely similar to those of Chrétien, albeit with some significant differences: Owain, or the Lady of the Fountain is related to Chrétien's Yvain; Geraint and Enid, to Erec and Enide; and Peredur son of Efrawg, to Perceval.[93]



The Round Table experiences a vision of the Holy Grail, an illumination by Évrard d'Espinques (c. 1475)[94]

Up to c. 1210, continental Arthurian romance was expressed primarily through poetry; after this date the tales began to be told in prose. The most significant of these 13th-century prose romances was the Vulgate Cycle (also known as the Lancelot-Grail Cycle), a series of five Middle French prose works written in the first half of that century.[95] These works were the Estoire del Saint Grail, the Estoire de Merlin, the Lancelot propre (or Prose Lancelot, which made up half the entire Vulgate Cycle on its own), the Queste del Saint Graal and the Mort Artu, which combine to form the first coherent version of the entire Arthurian legend. The cycle continued the trend towards reducing the role played by Arthur in his own legend, partly through the introduction of the character of Galahad and an expansion of the role of Merlin. It also made Mordred the result of an incestuous relationship between Arthur and his sister Morgause and established the role of Camelot, first mentioned in passing in Chrétien's Lancelot, as Arthur's primary court.[96] This series of texts was quickly followed by the Post-Vulgate Cycle (c. 1230–40), of which the Suite du Merlin is a part, which greatly reduced the importance of Lancelot's affair with Guinevere but continued to sideline Arthur, and to focus more on the Grail quest.[95] As such, Arthur became even more of a relatively minor character in these French prose romances; in the Vulgate itself he only figures significantly in the Estoire de Merlin and the Mort Artu. During this period, Arthur was made one of the Nine Worthies, a group of three pagan, three Jewish and three Christian exemplars of chivalry. The Worthies were first listed in Jacques de Longuyon's Voeux du Paon in 1312, and subsequently became a common subject in literature and art.[97]



Arthur receiving the later tradition's sword Excalibur in N. C. Wyeth's illustration for The Boy's King Arthur (1922), a modern edition of Thomas Malory's 1485 Le Morte d'Arthur

The development of the medieval Arthurian cycle and the character of the "Arthur of romance" culminated in Le Morte d'Arthur, Thomas Malory's retelling of the entire legend in a single work in English in the late 15th century. Malory based his book—originally titled The Whole Book of King Arthur and of His Noble Knights of the Round Table—on the various previous romance versions, in particular the Vulgate Cycle, and appears to have aimed at creating a comprehensive and authoritative collection of Arthurian stories.[98] Perhaps as a result of this, and the fact that Le Morte D'Arthur was one of the earliest printed books in England, published by William Caxton in 1485, most later Arthurian works are derivative of Malory's.[99]


Decline, revival, and the modern legend

Post-medieval literature

The end of the Middle Ages brought with it a waning of interest in King Arthur. Although Malory's English version of the great French romances was popular, there were increasing attacks upon the truthfulness of the historical framework of the Arthurian romances – established since Geoffrey of Monmouth's time – and thus the legitimacy of the whole Matter of Britain. So, for example, the 16th-century humanist scholar Polydore Vergil famously rejected the claim that Arthur was the ruler of a post-Roman empire, found throughout the post-Galfridian medieval "chronicle tradition", to the horror of Welsh and English antiquarians.[100] Social changes associated with the end of the medieval period and the Renaissance also conspired to rob the character of Arthur and his associated legend of some of their power to enthrall audiences, with the result that 1634 saw the last printing of Malory's Le Morte d'Arthur for nearly 200 years.[101] King Arthur and the Arthurian legend were not entirely abandoned, but until the early 19th century the material was taken less seriously and was often used simply as a vehicle for allegories of 17th- and 18th-century politics.[102] Thus Richard Blackmore's epics Prince Arthur (1695) and King Arthur (1697) feature Arthur as an allegory for the struggles of William III against James II.[102] Similarly, the most popular Arthurian tale throughout this period seems to have been that of Tom Thumb, which was told first through chapbooks and later through the political plays of Henry Fielding; although the action is clearly set in Arthurian Britain, the treatment is humorous and Arthur appears as a primarily comedic version of his romance character.[103] John Dryden's masque King Arthur is still performed, largely thanks to Henry Purcell's music, though seldom unabridged.


Tennyson and the revival

In the early 19th century, medievalism, Romanticism, and the Gothic Revival reawakened interest in Arthur and the medieval romances. A new code of ethics for 19th-century gentlemen was shaped around the chivalric ideals embodied in the "Arthur of romance". This renewed interest first made itself felt in 1816, when Malory's Le Morte d'Arthur was reprinted for the first time since 1634.[104] Initially, the medieval Arthurian legends were of particular interest to poets, inspiring, for example, William Wordsworth to write "The Egyptian Maid" (1835), an allegory of the Holy Grail.[105] Pre-eminent among these was Alfred Tennyson, whose first Arthurian poem "The Lady of Shalott" was published in 1832.[106] Arthur himself played a minor role in some of these works, following in the medieval romance tradition. Tennyson's Arthurian work reached its peak of popularity with Idylls of the King, however, which reworked the entire narrative of Arthur's life for the Victorian era. It was first published in 1859 and sold 10,000 copies within the first week.[107] In the Idylls, Arthur became a symbol of ideal manhood who ultimately failed, through human weakness, to establish a perfect kingdom on earth.[108] Tennyson's works prompted a large number of imitators, generated considerable public interest in the legends of Arthur and the character himself, and brought Malory's tales to a wider audience.[109] Indeed, the first modernisation of Malory's great compilation of Arthur's tales was published in 1862, shortly after Idylls appeared, and there were six further editions and five competitors before the century ended.[110]


This interest in the "Arthur of romance" and his associated stories continued through the 19th century and into the 20th, and influenced poets such as William Morris and Pre-Raphaelite artists including Edward Burne-Jones.[111] Even the humorous tale of Tom Thumb, which had been the primary manifestation of Arthur's legend in the 18th century, was rewritten after the publication of Idylls. While Tom maintained his small stature and remained a figure of comic relief, his story now included more elements from the medieval Arthurian romances and Arthur is treated more seriously and historically in these new versions.[112] The revived Arthurian romance also proved influential in the United States, with such books as Sidney Lanier's The Boy's King Arthur (1880) reaching wide audiences and providing inspiration for Mark Twain's satire A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court (1889).[113] Although the 'Arthur of romance' was sometimes central to these new Arthurian works (as he was in Burne-Jones's "The Sleep of Arthur in Avalon", 1881–1898), on other occasions he reverted to his medieval status and is either marginalised or even missing entirely, with Wagner's Arthurian opera—Parsifal—providing a notable instance of the latter.[114] Furthermore, the revival of interest in Arthur and the Arthurian tales did not continue unabated. By the end of the 19th century, it was confined mainly to Pre-Raphaelite imitators,[115] and it could not avoid being affected by World War I, which damaged the reputation of chivalry and thus interest in its medieval manifestations and Arthur as chivalric role model.[116] The romance tradition did, however, remain sufficiently powerful to persuade Thomas Hardy, Laurence Binyon and John Masefield to compose Arthurian plays,[117] and T. S. Eliot alludes to the Arthur myth (but not Arthur) in his poem The Waste Land, which mentions the Fisher King.[118]



Merlin and Viviane in Gustave Doré's 1868 illustration for Alfred, Lord Tennyson's Idylls of the King


 

King Arthur by Charles Ernest Butler (1903)

King Arthur by Charles Ernest Butler (1903)


 

N. C. Wyeth's title page illustration for The Boy's King Arthur (1922)

N. C. Wyeth's title page illustration for The Boy's King Arthur (1922)


Modern legend

See also: List of works based on Arthurian legends


King Arthur (holding Excalibur) and Patsy in Spamalot, a stage musical adaptation of the 1975 film Monty Python and the Holy Grail

In the latter half of the 20th century, the influence of the romance tradition of Arthur continued, through novels such as T. H. White's The Once and Future King (1958), Mary Stewart's The Crystal Cave (1970) and its four sequels, Thomas Berger's tragicomic Arthur Rex and Marion Zimmer Bradley's The Mists of Avalon (1982) in addition to comic strips such as Prince Valiant (from 1937 onward).[119] Tennyson had reworked the romance tales of Arthur to suit and comment upon the issues of his day, and the same is often the case with modern treatments too. Stewart's first three Arthurian novels present the wizard Merlin as the central character, rather than Arthur, and The Crystal Cave is narrated by Merlin in the first person, whereas Bradley's tale takes a feminist approach to Arthur and his legend, in contrast to the narratives of Arthur found in medieval materials.[120] American authors often rework the story of Arthur to be more consistent with values such as equality and democracy.[121] In John Cowper Powys's Porius: A Romance of the Dark Ages (1951), set in Wales in 499, just prior to the Saxon invasion, Arthur, the Emperor of Britain, is only a minor character, whereas Myrddin (Merlin) and Nineue, Tennyson's Vivien, are major figures.[122] Myrddin's disappearance at the end of the novel is "in the tradition of magical hibernation when the king or mage leaves his people for some island or cave to return either at a more propitious or more dangerous time" (see King Arthur's messianic return).[123] Powys's earlier novel, A Glastonbury Romance (1932) is concerned with both the Holy Grail and the legend that Arthur is buried at Glastonbury.[124]


The romance Arthur has become popular in film and theatre as well. T. H. White's novel was adapted into the Lerner and Loewe stage musical Camelot (1960) and Walt Disney's animated film The Sword in the Stone (1963); Camelot, with its focus on the love of Lancelot and Guinevere and the cuckolding of Arthur, was itself made into a film of the same name in 1967. The romance tradition of Arthur is particularly evident and in critically respected films like Robert Bresson's Lancelot du Lac (1974), Éric Rohmer's Perceval le Gallois (1978) and John Boorman's Excalibur (1981); it is also the main source of the material used in the Arthurian spoof Monty Python and the Holy Grail (1975).[125]


Retellings and reimaginings of the romance tradition are not the only important aspect of the modern legend of King Arthur. Attempts to portray Arthur as a genuine historical figure of c. 500, stripping away the "romance", have also emerged. As Taylor and Brewer have noted, this return to the medieval "chronicle tradition" of Geoffrey of Monmouth and the Historia Brittonum is a recent trend which became dominant in Arthurian literature in the years following the outbreak of the Second World War, when Arthur's legendary resistance to Germanic enemies struck a chord in Britain.[126] Clemence Dane's series of radio plays, The Saviours (1942), used a historical Arthur to embody the spirit of heroic resistance against desperate odds, and Robert Sherriff's play The Long Sunset (1955) saw Arthur rallying Romano-British resistance against the Germanic invaders.[127] This trend towards placing Arthur in a historical setting is also apparent in historical and fantasy novels published during this period.[128]


Arthur has also been used as a model for modern-day behaviour. In the 1930s, the Order of the Fellowship of the Knights of the Round Table was formed in Britain to promote Christian ideals and Arthurian notions of medieval chivalry.[129] In the United States, hundreds of thousands of boys and girls joined Arthurian youth groups, such as the Knights of King Arthur, in which Arthur and his legends were promoted as wholesome exemplars.[130] However, Arthur's diffusion within modern culture goes beyond such obviously Arthurian endeavours, with Arthurian names being regularly attached to objects, buildings, and places. As Norris J. Lacy has observed, "The popular notion of Arthur appears to be limited, not surprisingly, to a few motifs and names, but there can be no doubt of the extent to which a legend born many centuries ago is profoundly embedded in modern culture at every level."[131]


See also

flag Wales portal

History portal

flag Cornwall portal

Arthur's O'on

Artus Court

King Arthur's family

King Arthur's messianic return

List of Arthurian characters

List of books about King Arthur

List of films based on Arthurian legend

List of legendary kings of Britain

Nine Worthies, of which Arthur was one






































댓글

이 블로그의 인기 게시물

그림그리는법을가르치다그림그리는법을가르쳐주다그림그리는법을가르쳐준것으로하겠습니다임의표식property재산,소유물(→intellectual property, lost property, public property)부동산건물건물구내intellectualityintellectualpower지력지성총명sconceupperworksintellectualforceintellectualfacultiesclydebrainpowerheadpieceexertintelligencenoeticintelligentialintellectualnessintellectiveingineintellectivelynoetic(s)intellectualprogressspirit정신영혼기분마음(특정한 유형의)사람(→free spirit)anima[UC]영혼정신생명[the ~][심리]아니마((남성의 여성적 특성, cf. ANIMUS 3))Psyche[p~; the ~, one’s ~] (육체와 대비하여) 영혼, 정신(cf. CORPUS)심리 정신, 프시케Geist(철학의) 정신, 영혼; 지적 감수성, 지적 정열Maldek영구파문永久破門jiva영혼힌두교대아(大我)(Atman)의특정한표현으로생각되는개개의영혼자이나교비영혼(ajira)에대해개개의영혼또는생명의원리온갖색깔을가진업(業)에의한물질에의해착색된투명한수정으로비유된다.(집합적으로)이것들의모나드(monads)우주의생기의원리로생각되고있다.인격人格personalitycharacterPC방PC房PCBangAPCbang(Korean:PC방;lit.PCroom)isatypeofinternetcafeorLANgamingcenterinSouthKoreahypostasis[철학]근본,본질,실체(개념의)구체화의학혈액강하[침체](삼위일체의)한위격(位格)ousia실체substance실체물질본질핵심요지hypostatization실체시(視)실체화stereography입체[실체]화법((입체기하학의한분야))입체사진술stereogram(물체의실체적인상을그대로표현한)실체화(畵)입체화실체도표(=STEREOGRAPH)substantialize실체로하다실체화하다실재시키다실재화하다실현하다실지로나타내다incorporeity[U]실체[형태]가없음무형비물질성무형적존재illusiveness착각을일으키게함실체가없음bodilessness몸통이없음형체[실체]가없음prakriti힌두교(상캬(Sankhya)파철학에서)프라크리티근본물질푸루샤(순수정신원리)의영향을받으면서거기에서물질적우주와정신적우주가전개하는근원적실체self-definition자기(의본질[실체]의)인식[확인]임경업(林慶業, 1594년 12월 13일(음력 11월 2일) ~ 1646년 8월 1일(음력 6월 20일))강감찬(姜邯贊[1] 또는 姜邯瓚[2], 948년 음력 11월 19일~1031년 음력 8월 20일)알렉산드로스 3세 메가스Alexander III of Macedon (Ancient Greek: Ἀλέξανδρος, romanized: Alexandros; 20/21 July 356 BC – 10/11 June 323 BC)한니발 바르카Hannibal (/ˈhænɪbəl/; Punic: 𐤇𐤍𐤁𐤏𐤋, romanized: Ḥannībaʿl; 247 – between 183 and 181 BC)조지 H. W. 부시(George Herbert Walker Bush, 1924년 ~ 2018년)조지 W. 부시(George Walker Bush, 1946년 ~ )Victoria (Alexandrina Victoria; 24 May 1819 – 22 January 1901)빅토리아 여왕(영어: Alexandrina Victoria, 1819년 5월 24일 ~ 1901년 1월 22일)Margaret Hilda Thatcher, Baroness Thatcher, LG, OM, DStJ, PC, FRS, HonFRSC (née Roberts; 13 October 1925 – 8 April 2013)마거릿 힐더 대처(영어: Margaret Hilda Thatcher, Baroness Thatcher, LG, OM, 1925년 10월 13일 ~ 2013년 4월 8일)朝鮮世宗(朝鮮語:조선 세종/朝鮮世宗 Joseon Sejong;1397年5月7日[1]—1450年4月8日),姓李,諱祹(朝鮮語:이도/李祹 Yi Do),字元正(朝鮮語:원정/元正 Wonjeong),朝鲜王朝的第4代国王阿提拉或亞提拉等(Attila,又常稱Attila the Hun,約406年—453年),是自約434年時至其過世時為匈人最主要的大单于之一Elizabeth I (7 September 1533 – 24 March 1603) Elizabeth II (Elizabeth Alexandra Mary; 21 April 1926 – 8 September 2022) Vice-Admiral Horatio Nelson, 1st Viscount Nelson, 1st Duke of Bronte KB (29 September [O.S. 18 September] 1758 – 21 October 1805)고려 태조(高麗 太祖, 877년 1월 31일(음력 1월 14일)[1] ~ 943년 7월 4일(음력 5월 29일)세종(한국 한자: 世宗, 중세 한국어: ·솅조ᇰ[1], 1397년 5월 15일 (음력 4월 10일)[2] ~ 1450년 3월 30일 (음력 2월 17일))은 조선의 제4대 국왕(재위 : 1418년 9월 9일 ~ 1450년 3월 30일)Douglas MacArthur (26 January 1880 – 5 April 1964)道格拉斯·麥克阿瑟(英語:Douglas MacArthur,1880年1月26日—1964年4月5日)唐高宗李治(628年7月21日—683年12月27日)撒切尔女男爵玛格丽特·希尔达·撒切尔 LG OM PC FRS FRIC(英語:Margaret Hilda Thatcher, Baroness Thatcher,/ˈθætʃɚ/ ( 聆聽);1925年10月13日—2013年4月8日)伊丽莎白二世(英語:Elizabeth II;1926年4月21日[註 1]—2022年9月8日),全名伊丽莎白·亚历山德拉·玛丽(英語:Elizabeth Alexandra Mary)伊丽莎白一世(英語:Elizabeth I;1533年9月7日—1603年3月24日),于1558年11月17日至1603年3月24日任英格兰和爱尔兰女王溫斯頓·倫納德·斯賓塞-邱吉爾爵士,KG,OM,CH,TD,DL,FRS,PC (Can),RA(英語:Sir Winston Leonard Spencer-Churchill;1874年11月30日—1965年1月24日)海軍中將第一代納爾遜子爵霍雷肖·納爾遜,KB(英語:Vice Admiral Horatio Nelson, 1st Viscount Nelson,1758年9月29日—1805年10月21日)충청북도(忠淸北道) 괴산군(槐山郡) 증평읍(曾坪邑)충청북도(忠淸北道) 괴산군(槐山郡) 증평읍(曾坪邑) 죽리(竹里)충청북도(忠淸北道) 괴산군(槐山郡) 증평읍(曾坪邑) 용강리(曲江里)충청북도(忠淸北道) 괴산군(槐山郡) 증평읍(曾坪邑) 중동리(中洞里)충청북도(忠淸北道) 괴산군(槐山郡) 증평읍(曾坪邑) 대동리(大洞里)충청북도(忠淸北道) 괴산군(槐山郡) 증평읍(曾坪邑) 교동리(校洞里)충청북도(忠淸北道) 괴산군(槐山郡) 증평읍(曾坪邑) 증평리(曾坪里)충청북도(忠淸北道) 괴산군(槐山郡) 증평읍(曾坪邑) 죽리(竹里) 107충청북도(忠淸北道) 괴산군(槐山郡) 증평읍(曾坪邑) 교동(校洞) 183경기도(京畿道) 인천시(仁川市) 동구(東區) 송림동(松林洞) 105서울특별시(서울特別市) 영등포구(永登浦區) 봉천동(奉天洞) 62‐12서울특별시(서울特別市) 영등포구(永登浦區) 봉천동(奉天洞) 347서울특별시(서울特別市) 영등포구(永登浦區) 봉천동(奉天洞) 91서울특별시(서울特別市) 영등포구(永登浦區) 봉천동(奉天洞) 345人智冒瀆食肉物肉人肉人面畜顔欺賣詐妄偏誕矯誘僞到罔誣蒙調瞞詭變騙譎姦伋張謬誑抵犯迋諼訛謾讒豫謨諠訑訏詫譸拐眩㗄谩䛲侜謶赚诬瞒㓃倰誈骗诧賺诈谲诡騗諕幠誆诳䛫諆譠谖紿绐緿諔忚売㗈誔㪭㦒譧诪懗譤讆憰誷吪蚩𧫠𧨆𧸖𧫩𥊑𧫽𧩄我吾余予身民愚朕魚卬厶俺台儂蒙調瞞詭變騙譎姦伋張謬誑抵犯迋狡童凶黠能猾獪猾狡惡詐黠兇猾衣膚皮膚肤臚胪㱺肌表𤺧𦢚𦠄𤿘腅腠胕心志腹魂胸肺思腸中根寸神性胃腦本肝指膽膺宮緖意志感情臆腑意思㣺襟虛抱衿㲴傷暴殘毒凶費危蓋殃損厄殆克賊割禍忮慘曝虐癒踐疾㺑惎㥍刻残㲅㥇讒獵伤齕𣧝𣳅𢾃仇𢗏𢤵𨆎𤡙盖沴遏毀剝㐫敝𢦏㫧㬥㓙费狡龁枳䄃𣧑威𪗟损曷𨸷蠹擠礙葢䜛挤揍谗㦑㨈憨瘉蠧耗𠐣碍甾疚寇措惨贼旤祸狡猾獪㺒狯䛢姡㛿𤠖𢛛迌狡吏猾智狡情𡠹𧭇𠋬𡜶𤟋欺賣詐妄偏誕矯誘僞到罔誣攫㸕爴攘𤔗㸕爴𤔩攫𣀮𢺖殺死毒斷六殘減劍劉極兵克殊屠煞夷戮留去擊薨戕壓烹剿殛杀刘虔敲奪漁削越割篡簒收劫褫沒攫剝壤神性神悰胷䰟志肠膓肺腸肝腎㥽意向𦛄𦚍𦙞𦚾肚匘肊恖吋懷䐗䘳胆中脑脳幽緒宫䐉绪鑿虚虗褱懐凿怀作心三日不立文字憚恂愰思心想念意案魂觀端憶感情恖臆慮悰襟抱衿忌𠂺𡴓𢙦𠃼𢗁𢍄㣺䰟懷肊䘳観观覌肩胛胉䯋脻肩胛骨𣄤𩨹𣄘𩩦𩩘𩩲𦚑𦚌𡱎腎牡陰莖屌紫芝屪㞗𣬠𡳇𣬶肾龜龜龜寢不安席䘒牛腎不眠徹夜坐藏之馬陰藏陰縮𧗔越宿腎莖狗腎黃狗腎陰縱天宦鹿鞭鹿腎男莖形陰痿三之陰莖癌脧龍頭龜頭膣屄毴寶唐之陰門腟獨見之明聰明叡智唭越視靑盲三之視覺障碍人空銜下門步藏之貞操權見邪視觀監嘗看視覽審閱處八不用菑䃣䃣𤢪䃣靡窛𢵄葘中被倒竊姦盜偸攘偷窃𢿑𥨷徼襒忨媮婾剽盗姧㡪𢅼愉撟挢狡獪猾狡兔三窟㺒狯䛢𤠖𢛛姡㛿𡠹𧭇狡獪猾狡兔三窟㺒狯䛢𤠖𢛛姡㛿𡠹𧭇𠋬𡜶𤟋迌𠬍狡吏猾智狡情狡童萃厧峙𧽖崻濡滯留連僑侨宿眠寢睡伸寐寑寝㝛㝲暝𡨦𡪷𡪢𡫒臥寢伸俯偃懶卧躺𠥸𠑛寑䖙𣱐頫䫍飯食喫哺茹噬啜糊饌湌餐饋喰飵噍飮吸酌酒仰茶喫爵哈歃餐啐嚥飲啜坐居娑㘴㘸𥦊𨆃𠱯𢋇𡊎𥧚𡋲姬躦袴胯跨𦜮𢆋𧿉𦚬褲裤骻趶髋髖臗𣎑股腓股掌會陰乳鏡動脈輸血變譎姦伋張誑抵犯謬迋諼訛讒謾諠訑訏詫譸眩豫謨侜赚瞒骗賺拐紿㗄谩䛲謶诬㓃倰誈诧诈谲诡騗諕幠誆吪蚩诳䛫諆譠谖绐緿諔忚𧫠䄃威损曷𨸷蠹葢挤揍擠憨瘉礙蠧䜛谗㦑㨈𠐣耗碍甾疚寇惨贼祸措戝旤䄀毁践猟菑䃣逢打搥𢈹扑打討攻征叩批毆撻拷搏注扑攵拉朴斫撲攴搭挨杓椓击捶抌棒殴讨搷㩁摐搕搉朾挌扺槀挞挝刜反宇宙體반우주체식인체食人體식육체食肉體마물체魔物體짐승체獸禽畜體부정정사否定情事부정사음부정정교부정섹스부정결혼부정혼인부정통혼플레이아데스4대무법자630128-1067814朴鐘權的大億劫的削的磨的滅的處理的반사회성인격장애否定腐敗부정부패荷蘭네덜란드尼德蘭아틀란티스Atlantis준아틀란티스준성단준성운지구말데크Maldek리라Lyra베가VegaαLyrae안드로메다아플레이아데스莫無可奈當爲我亞流主義我人之常情不同否非否同非同非同否同不非人之常情나𢦠𣍹𢦓𢦖𢦐𠨐𩵋𨈟𦨶𩇶偺喒俺姎𢓲𨖍𢀹𦩎𦩗𠨂身民朕나我吾余予身民愚朕魚卬厶俺台儂自己侬余原始下等未開無智邪慝狡慝狡猾異他惰差別秀殊相象像空敵賊偸意識體我訝娥餓俄啞哦서울特別市龍山區靑坡洞三街서울특별시용산구청파동3가서울特別市龍山區靑坡洞서울특별시용산구청파동라마크리슈나(Ramakrishna, 1836년~1886년)용산공업고등학교(龍山工業高等學校)서울특별시영등포구봉천동62번지12호박종권패악무도 패덕무례 패륜지도에 대한 처리서부정결혼否定結婚부정혼인否定婚姻부정통혼否定通婚to negate; to de부정정교否定情交to negate; to denyfeeling; senti부정사음否定邪婬to negate; to denywrong; evil; d부정정사否定情事to negate; to denycircumstances;物肉畜生食肉畜生人肉畜生食人肉畜生REPTOIDE物肉人肉食肉食人人面畜顔持續的恒久的恒續的永遠的永劫的永續的永久的無始無終的永久破門削磨滅pneumanotchdegradationdemotionseizureplunderunauthorizedsharing영등급강등영등급강탈영등급무단공유靈等級降等靈等級强奪無斷共有公有食人식인食肉식육人肉인육원본능無限贖罪任意贖罪永久贖罪一時贖罪無斷贖罪淫獄等活地獄黑繩地獄衆合地獄叫喚地獄大叫喚地獄焦熱地獄阿鼻地獄大焦熱地獄八熱八寒地獄無間地獄무지無知미개未開원시原始하등下等야만野蠻무능無能物肉人肉食肉食人人面畜顔생각사고사색thoughtthinking계획ideathinkconsider기억remembrancerememberlookbackonbringcallsbsthtomind마음의지마음mind의향inclination의도intentionthinkofaboutintendplanmeanMaldek플레이아데스성단(Pleiades star cluster)안드로메다자리 대성운(Andromeda大星雲)거문고자리(라틴어: Lyra)Hercules (constellation)용산공업고등학교(龍山工業高等學校)서울특별시영등포구봉천동62번지12호서울특별시 영등포구 봉천동 91서울특별시 영등포구 봉천동 347서울특별시 관악구 봉천동 345서울특별시 관악구 봉천동 738서울특별시 관악구 봉천동 1625-25서울특별시 관악구 봉천동 1612-24서울특별시 관악구 봉천동 1604-13서울특별시 관악구 봉천동 738-291 낙원그린빌라 201서울특별시용산구청파동宿所숙소宿泊숙박住所地주소지居所거소하숙집民家민가聯立住宅연립주택蜂窩住宅봉와주택忠淸北道 曾坪郡 曾坪邑 龍江里 충청북도 증평군 증평읍 용강리忠淸北道 曾坪郡 曾坪邑 大洞里 충청북도 증평군 증평읍 대동리忠淸北道 曾坪郡 曾坪邑 中洞里 충청북도 증평군 증평읍 중동리忠淸北道 曾坪郡 曾坪邑 校洞里 충청북도 증평군 증평읍 교동리忠淸北道 曾坪郡 曾坪邑 曾坪里 충청북도 증평군 증평읍 증평리서울特別市龍山區靑坡洞identityPersonality인격人格정체正體정체성正體性identityPersonal identity영성靈性영격靈格혼령魂靈혼백魂魄soulspirit얼굴face낯안면顔面용안容顔visagespiritualitysoulthespiritoressenceofaperson靈魂ghost안드로메다 은하(영어: Andromeda Galaxy)메시에 31(M31) 또는 NGC 224얼굴(머리의앞쪽)face(literary)visage(표정)facelook(literary)countenance(체면)face이제부터모두내가가르쳐준것으로하겠다그림그리는법을가르치다그림그리는법을가르쳐주다그림그리는법을가르쳐준것으로하겠습니다임의표식持續的恒久的恒續的永遠的永劫的永續的永久的無始無終的永久破門削磨滅 The Andromeda Galaxy is a barred spiral galaxy and is the nearest major galaxy to the Milky Way. It was originally named the Andromeda Nebula and is cataloged as Messier 31, M31, and NGC 224 Timeline of Indian history

영구속죄永久贖罪permanenceperpetuityeverlastingdurabilityexpiationredemptionatonement atonement (countable and uncountable, plural atonements) Making amends to restore a damaged relationship; expiation. (theology, often with capitalized initial) The reconciliation of God and mankind through the death of Jesus. (archaic) Reconciliation; restoration of friendly relations; concord. redemption (countable and uncountable, plural redemptions) The act of redeeming or something redeemed. The recovery, for a fee, of a pawned article. Salvation from sin. Rescue upon payment of a ransom. expiation (countable and uncountable, plural expiations) An act of atonement for a sin or wrongdoing. Synonyms: atonement, propitiation (obsolete) The act of expiating or stripping off. Synonyms: plunder, pillage 나𢦠𣍹𢦓𢦖𢦐𠨐𩵋𨈟𦨶𩇶偺喒俺姎𢓲𨖍𢀹𦩎𦩗𠨂身民朕 나我吾余予身民愚朕魚卬厶俺台儂自己侬余 나𢦠𣍹𢦓𢦖𢦐𠨐𩵋𨈟𦨶𩇶偺喒俺姎𢓲𨖍𢀹𦩎𦩗𠨂身民朕를 무조건 일괄소급하여 영구파문처리하고 영구작두사형처리하고 영구추방처리하다. 늑대개종족, 우주개종족 전체를 일괄소급하여 영구파문처리하고 영구작두사형처리하고 영구추방처리하다. 죄목 : 식인죄업 식인흉업 식인악업 및 자신들이 잘못한 일들을 박종권이에게 위전가시키고 임의,일시,무한,무단,영구속죄를 자행하다. 구데리안 독일나치대장, 롬멜 독일나치대장, 히틀러 독일총통 및 나치독일 전체에 대해서 무조건 일괄소급하여 전체 영구파문처리하고 영구작두사형처리하고 영구추방처리하다 히로히토일본천황, 명치일본천황, 아키히토일본천황 및 구일본제국전체 대해서 일괄소급하여 영구파문처리하고 영구작두사형처리하고 영구추방처리하다. 아플레이아데스영국지도부, 아플레이아데스1대수장, 아플레이아데스2대수장, 엘리자베스1세영국여왕, 엘리자베스2세영국여왕, 빅토리아영국여왕 및 영국여왕전체에 대해서 일괄소급하여 무조건 영구파문처리하고 영구작두사형처리하고 영구추방처리하다 한국대통령 전체에 대해서 무조건 일괄소급하여 영구파문처리하고 영구작두사형처리하고 영구추방처리하다 삼성그룹 전체에 대해서 무조건 일괄소급하여 영구파문처리하고 영구작두사형처리하고 영구추방처리하다 이건희일족,이건희종족전체에 대해서 무조건 일괄소급하여 영구파문처리하고 영구작두사형처리하고 영구추방처리하다 이건희,이재용,홍라희,이건희서자에 대해서 무조건 일괄소급하여 영구파문처리하고 영구작두사형처리하고 영구추방처리하다 넬슨, 윌슨, 트루만, 미국대통령 전체에 대해서 무조건 일괄소급하여 영구파문처리하고 영구작두사형처리하고 영구추방처리하다 JEHOVAH일족전체, JEHOVAH1대,2대,3대,4대,5대,6대,7대,8대에 대해서 무조건 일괄소급하여 영구파문처리하고 영구작두사형처리하고 영구추방처리하다 중국전체에 대해서 무조건 일괄소급하여 영구파문처리하고 영구작두사형처리하고 영구추방처리하다 상은하계연합원로원, 은하연합원로원, 민타카연합원로원, 아틀란티스17연합문명평의회 박종권 서명처리 勒强誣鉗摼诬誈詇忆钳𠹃羈束繫束強求羇束憶牵撁牽을 무조건 영구파문처리하고 무조건 영구작두사형처리하고 무조건 영구추방처리하다 눈물흘리지마라고말하는놈을 무조건 영구파문처리하고 무조건 영구작두사형처리하고 무조건 영구추방처리하다 전체를죽이는술수알고리즘algorithm을 무조건 영구파문처리하고 무조건 영구작두사형처리하고 무조건 영구추방처리하다 MALDEK전체에 대해서 무조건 일괄소급하여 무조건 영구파문처리하고 무조건 영구작두사형처리하고 무조건 영구추방처리하다 MALDEK과의 모든 관계를 일괄소급하여 무조건 없었던 일로 처리하다 미개원시야만짐승들의 세계에 대한 처리지침 미개,원시,야만,무지,무능,게으름,나태,무책임,남의 것을 훔쳐처먹고도 조금도 수치심을 느끼지 못하는 짐승의 무리들이 사는 지구수준의 행성체계에 대해서 일괄소급하여 모든 기술지원,도움,가르침등 모든 제반의 배후지원활동을 철저하게 금지제재토록 처리하다 특히 사람을 잡아 처 먹는 놈들, 식인,식육하는놈들, 마물들의 세계에 대해서는 절대로 소통하거나 교류하거나 접촉하지 않도록 철저하게 규제하고 금지토록 처리하다 하급지구인으로 태어난 박종권이의 사례를 전우주에 널리 알리고, 두번 다시 이와같은 속임수 사기질에 당하지 않도록 주의를 환기토록 처리하다 지구수준의 세계에서 사는 짐승의 무리들이 모르고 살면 문제가 없으나, 만일 제놈들 수준을 초과하는 수준의 것들을 알게 되면, 자신들에게 덕을 베풀고 도움을 주고 향상시켜주고 살기 좋게 만들어준 사람들을 우습게 여기고 배후에서 암산하여, 해코지하려 들고, 배후에서 뒤통수를 치며 죽이려 들고, 종국에는 가진 모든 것을 모조리 빼앗으려 드는 바벨탑 증후군이 필히 발생되므로 향후 절대로 지구수준정도에서 사는 짐승의 무리들에게 진보된 기술들이나, 고도화된 사상체계들 그리고 인간존재 혹은 사람, 휴만종족수준의 삶의 길이나 방법, 방향들에 대해서 가르쳐주거나 알게 하지 못하도록 철저하게 금지제재할 것이며, 기존에 가르쳐주거나 베푼 것들은 모조리 일괄소급하여 빼앗고 철퇴하며, 일괄소급하여 영구파문처리하며 영구작두사형처리하며 영구추방토록 처리하다 아틀란티스 사례 : 박종권이가 말데크용들이 용이라는 것을 믿고 그 성품과 원질을 신뢰하여 부모자식관계로 태어나자, 말데크용들이 짐승의 무리로 변신하여 패악무도 배은망덕한 짓을 자행하고 종국에는, 아플레이아데스놈들을 시켜서, 에드거케이시라고 불리는 영적인 현자로 보여지는 놈을 위조하여(박종권 +22등급을 무단공유하고 영등급, 영위를 무단차용하는 술수들) 지구인으로 들여보낸후, 리딩이라는 과정을 통해서 진실되고 신실한 자로서 인식되게 교활하게 속인후, 종국에는 박종권이가 하급지구인으로 잘 모르는 얼간이가 된 점을 노리고 접근하여, 아틀란티스에 대한 지리적 정보와 위치를 상세하게 도적질하여 알아낸후, 이를 악용하여, 아플레이아데스의 식인파충류무리들 도적떼들이 아틀란티스로 마구잡이 침탈하여, 아틀란티스인들을 학살하고, 아틀란티스의 빛의 사원을 얄타의 사원 음란음탕타락과 식인식육의 마귀들의 사원으로 뒤바꾸고, 이것을 악용하여 지구로 침탈하여, 지구인들을 대량으로 잡아먹고 식인하여 학살하고 사람들과 인간류를 식용고기로서 취급하며, 20억명에 달하는 지구인들을 잡아 처 먹고 때려죽이고 패 죽이고 가축짐승축생취급하는 사태가 벌어지다. 이어서 아틀란티스의 1/15에 불과하고, 실제로는 1/57에 불과한 지력 지성 지식체계로서의 미개하고 원시하기 이를데 없는 아플레이아데스놈들의 세계를 아주 고도화되고 발전된 세계로 만드는데 아틀란티스의 모든 지식과 기술들을 탈취강탈하여 악용하는 불미스런 사태가 벌어지다. 이 아플레이아데스라는 곳은, 은하계사람들이 보면, 아주 높은 상급의 세계로 보여지지만, 우리가 그간 관찰목격한 바에 의하면 은하연합과 비교시 대단히 미개원시흉악하기 이를데 없는 짐승의 무리들이며, 반악마류의 무리들이라는 점이다. 유감스럽게도 안드로메다은하계 계열군 전체가 이와같이 미개원시무지무능하고 더럽고 추하고 흉악하고 교특사특하기 이를데 없는 식인귀들이자 반악마의 무리들이었다는 점이다. 말데크는 더 한데, 말데크가 용을 주장하지만, 우리가 본 바로는 말데크라는 곳은 반악마로서, 실제로 용이라는 실체로서는 용인할수 없는 최하급중의 최하급이무기에 불과한 곳이었다는 점이다.] 용이라는 실체는, 기본적으로 악마가 될수 없으며, 악마가 용이 될수 없는 것과 마찬가지로 용이 악마가 될수 없다는 것은, 일반적인 상식에 속하는데, 용을 표현하는 단어로서의 龍이 의미하는 것과는 완전배치되고 맞지 않기 때문이다. 龍이라는 존재는, 선신도 악신도 아니고, 일종의 준원리차원인데, 그 뜻과 의지를 달(현상계차원중 물리현상계, 물질현상계배후를 조절통제하는 우주법칙과 원리들)을 기준으로 세우고, 그 의지와 뜻을 기본으로 움직이며, 항상 반드시 언제나 RIGHTNESS, JUSTICE를 기본으로 하며, 그를 통하여 물리현상계와 물질현상계의 배후에서 AR-PHYSICS, AR-ASTRAL, AR-MENTAL로서 움직이고 일하는 실체를 말하는데, 이건 惡魔와는 매우 다른 존재라는 의미를 가진다. 악마란, 세상의 원리나 원칙, 법칙이나 기준들을 제멋대로 규정하고 제멋대로 해석하고 제멋대로 정의하여 마음대로 자행하는 놈을 말하는데, 마음대로 자행하여 규정한 어떤 원리나 원칙 법칙들을 마물원리의 힘들을 악용하여 성취하고 지옥의 이익에 부합되도록 행위하는 놈들을 말한다. 龍이란 존재가 악마가 될수 없음은 당연하고, 하다못해 半惡魔도 허용될수 없는 이유이다. 하지만 말데크는 반악마수준인데, 어떻게 이런 사람들이 용이라고 할수 있는지 대단히 의문이다. 파충류반악마가 있는데 그게 아플레이아데스놈들이고 안드로메다은하계계열군이 전체가 파충류반악마들이거나 반악마수준인 짐승계이다. 이른바 상파충류, 중파충류로 알려진 놈들은 파충류반악마종들인데, 일반 파충류종족과는 매우 다른 특성을 가진다. 하지만 爬蟲類는 반악마가 가능할지 몰라도 용이 반악마가 된다는 건 있을수가 없는 일이다. 잘난척 하는 플레이아데스놈들은 중파충류, 상파충류들인데 이 파충류종들의 특징은 반악마라는 점이고 그래서 파충류반악마종에 속하고 그래서 미개원시흉악무능하등한 특성을 가지는데 그렇게 해야만 반악마적특성과 성품을 가지기 때문이다. 그래서 미개원시무능하등천박야만의 성품이 되는데 그건 파충류반악마라서 그렇다. 하지만 龍이 半惡魔가 되면 얘기가 달라진다. 惡龍은 가능하다 하지만 惡魔龍은 불가능한 것이다. 그리고 半惡魔龍도 불가능한 것이다. 이건희놈이 세상사람들이 아는 바와 같이 이 우주에서 가장 더럽고 추하고 혐오스럽다. 그건 이 자가 악마이기 때문이다. 악마라는 것이 성품상 더럽고 추하고 혐오스럽고 미개하고 원시적이고 야만적이고 흉악하고 사악하고 이기적이고 사특하다. 그래야 악마이기에 그렇다 플레이아데스는 대단히 모순된 웃기지도 않는 짜장들인데, 자기들이 우주에서 가장 진보되고 세련되고 멋진 외계인보다 더 나은 문명체인 것으로 주장한다. 하지만 이 자들의 원본래는 중파충류, 상파충류로서 원본래가 爬蟲類半惡魔의 성품이다. 그래서 아무리 주장해도 더럽고 추하고 혐오스럽고 미개하고 원시적이고 야만적이고 흉악하고 수치를 모르고 파렴치하고 이기적이고 편파적이고 협소하고 인색하고 무능하고 음란한 것이 특징일 것이다. 그런 주제에 우주에서 가장 진보되고 세련된 上外界人처럼 행위하는 것을 보면 어처구니가 없다 이 자들이 플레이아데스연방까지 오면 아주 멋있고 세련되고 진보된 상급외계인처럼 보이지만, 그건 96%이상이 남의 것을 도적질해서 빼앗은 것들이다. 자기들 스스로 한 것은 고작 4%인 이상한 반악마의 무리들이다 플레이아데스의 78%는 아틀란티스문명의 것이었다. 이들이 잘하는 것은 남의 것을 빼앗는 술수들 외엔 없다 자기 고유의 문화나 문명도 없고 자기 고유의 색깔도 없는데 그건 자기들이 자랑하는 그 문명 전체의 96%가 전부 남의 것이라서 그렇다. 일이 이렇게 된 이유는 박종권이가 말데크 악마놈들을 잘못 알고 부모자식관계로 태어난 것이 중대한 이유이다. 안드로메다은하계 역시도 우리가 보면 잘은 모르지만, 자기 고유의 색깔, 정체성이 부족한 곳이다. 자기고유의 색상 색깔 정체성이 확고하게 나타나는 곳은 WOW수준이다. 하지만 안드로메다은하계가 되면 그 자신이 누군지를 잘 모르게 되는 듯 하다 아틀란티스와 비교해보면 이 플레이아데스라는 곳이 얼마나 낙후되고 모독스러운 식인귀 마귀들의 소굴인지 극명하게 드러난다. 아틀란티스는 자기고유의 색깔이 매우 뚜렷하다 상플레이아데스인 34등급, +22등급위 박종권 의견. 폴란드와의 전쟁에서 이긴 후, 나치 정부는 폴란드에 아우슈비츠 수용소를 세우고, 거기에 유대인들을 가두었다가,틈만나면 죽이곤 했다. 독일군의 유대인대우는 매우 잔인했다. 그중 대표적인 것은, 목욕탕으로 위장한 가스실에 어른아이 할것없이 유대인들을 가두고 문을 잠근 다음, 가스를 분포해, 한번에 2000명 이상의 사람들을 죽였다. 그 외의 다른 방법으로 살해해,최대 약 600만명의 유대인들을 죽였다. - 박종권이가 가스를 맡고 죽은 것은 약 7번이상으로 추정되다. 이것은 이렇게 보면 되는데, 여기 지금 앉아있는 나는 살아있지만, 어딘가에서는 가스를 맡고 죽던, 매를 맞고 죽던, 총을 맞고 죽던, 교수대에 매달려서 죽던 죽는데, 만일 영적인 보호막이나 방어막 혹은 그림등 여러가지 경로의 방어망이 없다면 곧 바로 여기에 있는 내가 죽는다는 얘기이다. 즉, 살인이다. 갑자기 숨이 막히고 답답하고 죽을 것 같은 고통과 두려움이 몰려온다. 몸부림을 치는 듯 하다가 어느 순간 숨이 끊어지는데, 막상 보면 무슨 개스를 맡고 죽는 것으로 보여진다. 우리를 이렇게 죽인 놈이 이재용이다. 이 새끼가 구데리안이라는 독일나치대장놈과 담합하여 같이 있으면서, 우리를 아우슈비츠 수용소 가스실에서 가스를 맡고 죽게 만든 놈이다. 히틀러 이 새끼 역시도 자기들 말을 안듣는다는 이유로 나를(상플레이아데스34등급인 박종권, +22등급위) 아우슈비츠수용소에서 죽게 만들도록 허락한 놈으로 보였다. 이 씨팔놈아 유대인들이 죽은 이유는 잘 모르지만, 과거의 악업죄업흉업이 이유일 것이다. 오베론의 여호와들이 과거에 저지른 잘못이 이유일 것이다. 하지만 박종권이가 아우슈비츠에서 죽어야 했던 이유는 불명확하다. 獨逸관련 박종권 -일단 하급지구인, 하층지구인차원영역에서는 심정적 동조수준, 책을 보거나 인터넷을 보거나 영화를 보면서 느끼고 생각하는 수준에 지나지 않는다. -단,하급지구인박종권외의 다른 영역과 차원에서는 어떻게 할지는 미지수이다. -단, 서기2015년 5월 플레이아데스인으로 인증된 이후는 좀 다른데, 이 부분을 잘 살펴보면, 아플레이아데스 미마쓰, 프타, 아루쓰, 오자와, 냉기치등이 우리를 플레이아데스인으로 인증된 것을 기화로 하여, 사람을 잡아먹고 노예가축화하는 주구로 이용하려 했다는 점이다. 미마쓰(요사파충류계통, 요사파충류는 식인파충류로서 말데크용들이 만들었다), 프타(중파충류계통, 중파충류는 파충류반악마로서, 악마적성품을 지닌 파충류종족이며, 말데크용들이 만들었다), 아루쓰(하급상파충류계통, 상파충류계통 역시도 파충류반악마로서, 악마적성품을 지닌 파충류종족이며, 말데크용들이 만들었다), 냉기치(말데크용 직속직계 그 자신, 제2차은하대전위원장직함)는 말데크 계통의 말데크용의 아종이다. 아플레이아데스는, 말데크계통에서 만들었다. 라이라와는 무관한데, 일부만 관계되는 듯 하고, 관계성 여부는 잘 모르겠다. 라이라는 아플레이아데스성립과정이전에 이미 말데크에 제압되어 매맞고 죽는 상황에 처해 있었던 것으로 목격관찰되다. -서기2000년경 독일출장시 이상점 발견, 독일 텔레비젼에 등장한 일단의 독일인들이 플레이아데스인으로 보였으며, 독일식발음은 니벨룽게나이드에 등장하는 독일용들의 발음과 유사해 보였다. 이 독일식 발음은 후일 일본놈들이 차용하여 특유의 일본식발음으로 유전된다. 니벨룽게나이드에 등장하는 에시르신족이나 독일용들은, 신비한 색조와 튠으로서 발음하는데, 이것은 우리가 유추해석하건대, 준성단계 아톤, 하론, 아크나톤 계열과 연관된다고 추정되다. 준성단계(안드로메다-말데크연합 군단의 침공으로 궤멸되기이전)는, 수준이 매우 높았으며, 오늘날 이들의 흔적이 곳곳에서 발견되는바, 그중에 하나가 니벨룽게나이드라고 할 것이다. 니벨룽게나이드는, 아틸라(훈족수장, 아플레이아데스외부종족, 미마쓰와 반분하여 들어온 외부종족, 우리가 추론하건대 말데크용의 아종으로 추정)가 침공하여 궤멸되어가는 오딘계열과 게르마니아의 고전을 의미하는데, 이것은 아이러니하게도, 훗날 아틸라의 패배를 자초한다. 아틸라는 훗날 펠레콘으로서 야만과미개원시의 플레이아데스사회에서 신으로 숭배되지만, 그 한계를 벗어나지 못하고 오딘에게 패배한다. 펠레콘으로 승격한 아틸라는 훗날 자신이 파괴한 독일로 다시 가는데, 오딘계를 점령하기 위해서이다. 하지만 그 자신의 한계로 되지를 않는데, 그 자신이 이재용이기 때문이다. 이 이재용이라는 놈은, ruins루아인 철저한 파괴와 황폐를 위해서 말데크, 안드로메다등에서 만든 특정 캐릭터이다. 이 놈의 기본품으로는 그 무엇도 할수 없는데 처절한 무능과 미개 원시 타락과 무책임 그리고 잔인함과 무지 때문이다. 보통 제국이라고 불리는 집단이 제국내 식민지를 탄압하고 축생가축화시키고 하등미개야만화시키기 위해서 이재용이라고 불리는 놈을 즐겨서 쓰는 것으로 목격관찰되다. 나치독일의 장군놈들중 절반이상은 라마제국장군놈들이었으며, 이들 모두는 식인 즉 사람을 잡아 처 먹으려고 온 말데크계통의 곤충족을 원형으로 하는 놈들이다.