The Appeal., 1906-04-21

upon the question whether Arthur was
a historic parsonage or only the Gre
alton OF an early chronicler Doctor
Somner, who is acknowledged the fore
most living authority on the subject,
does not commit himself in his almost
exhaustive study, published in 1891
He only halts a moment to remark:
Whether real or NEUROLOGICAL, the
imposing parsonage of King Arthur
has become immortal; he lives on in
song and tradition, and many place
name throughout Britain testifies to.
his renown.'
Milton, Temple and Ltttleton, not 70
mention some lesser students Of
Anglo-SaxOn literature, were of opin-
ion that the valiant hero, his round
table and his doughty knights belong
to mythology. This opinion was based
upon the fact that neither Gildas nor
Bede, two of the earliest English
chroniclers, mentions Arthur. On the
other hand, Hume, who may not salts
fy every student as an authority, was
willing to accept the assertion in Cax-
Thomas Malory's 'sMorte d'Arthur,"s
that Arthur was a real British King.
In this connection it is well to bear
in mind that Caxton puts the authority
of the statement on others.
Malory's work is known to have
been completed Sin the ninth year of
the reign of King Edward w." or 1869
TO- Caxton printed the book in 1885.
some years after he had set UP his
press in Westminster, and consequent
ly must have been more or less famil-
lar with the knights sources. Even
the most gullible to-day would not ac-
cept the '.Morte dArthur" as a truth
full narrative, but the fact that Arthur
is surrounded by such extravagant ro-
nance and made the hero of mani
fest fiction does not invalidate
theory of his reality.
The apparent starting point OF the
Arthurian legend is to be found in the
History Of the Britons," written in
the twelfth century by Geoffrey OF
Monmouth, who died soon after his
conservation as Bishop of st. Asaph.
Godfrey is said to have founded his
remarkable chronicle upon the history
written by Nennius, but it must first
be proved that the Nennius manu-
scripts are veracious before Arthurian
students will accept Arthur as a real
being.
Nennius, Of whom Historic Brito-
n fr
ported to exist, refers to Arthur in
this way:
Then it was that the magnani-
nous Arthur, with all the kings and
military force of Britain, fought
against the Saxons. The first
battle in which he was engaged was
at the mouth of the river Glein; the
second, third, fourth and fifth were on
another river, by the Britons called
Duglas, in the region LINUS. The
sixth on the river Bassas. The seventh
in the wood Celidon. The eighth near
Guinuion Castle, where Arthur bore
the image of the Holy Virgin Mother
of God upon his shoulders, put the
Saxons to flight, and pursued them
the whole day, with great slaughter.
The ninth was at the City Of the
Legion, which they call Cair Lion. The
tenth was on the banks Of the river
Trat Treuroit. The eleventh was on
the mountain Breguoin, which we call
Cat Bregion. The twelfth was most
severe contest, when Arthur pene-
trated to the hill Of Badon.' q
It is regarded as significant that
there is gap OF nearly a generation
IN the Saxon record OF victory on the
British mainland, coincidinK very
nearly with what came to be known
afterward as the Peace OF Mount
Badon is the modern Bath,
and there it was that Arthur, accord
ng to the disputed chronicles, finally /
conquered the Saxons, who held sway |
n the eastern side Of Britain.
Gildas mentions the battle Of Mount |
Badon, which i believed to have been