Talk:King Arthur's messianic return

Removed material

The following was removed as ref is not clear and I'm not sure that the play is notable enough for inclusion; my opinion only, of course... anyone else?? Hrothgar cyning (talk) 21:55, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Finally, in her play The Return of the King, Steph DeFerie imagines Arthur returning to England in September, 1940 to save the country from Nazis. ref Baker's Plays /ref

It's not notable enough. Thanks for the removal.--Cúchullain ^t/c 22:28, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Death

On another note, I think this article could be expanded to contain all material on Arthur's death and the legends and literature surrounding it. Any thoughts?--Cúchullain ^t/c 22:38, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

I would agree on this point: it seems likely that, at the very least, we had a concept of Arthur as still-living, one of him being killed at Camlann, and one of him dying at the paws of a cat-monster in pre-Galfridian tradition, so the conflicting ideas go all the way back. Maybe when I get the chance...! Cheers, Hrothgar cyning (talk) 21:47, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Arthur and England

Arthur was not originally associated with the expulsion of the Saxons from Britain; this development is not recorded until the Historia Brittonum and before Geoffrey of Monmouth it was restricted only to works derived from the Historia. Further, no early prophetic work associated Arthur's return with the expulsion of the Saxons. I'm skeptical of the Mab Darogan connection, I would like to see direct quotes as to when that developed (but is surely wasn't in the "early Middle Ages"). It is important to be rigorous with this, as there's a lot of conventional wisdom floating around that claims Arthur is supposed to return to defeat the English.

Traditions of Arthur's death and return are very early, but there are several different surviving conceptions about it. This is why I would like to shift the article's focus towards being about the traditions surrounding his death, not just his "messianic return".--Cúchullain ^t/c 18:12, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

The connection with Mab Darogan cannot be included without good sources. The only one given so far is just a passing reference mentioning that during the time of Henry Tudor, poetry named the Mab Darogan after various figures such as Arthur; it does not claim that the concept of the "Son of Prophecy" or the association with Arthur is old. Also, it says nothing about Henry's association with the figure. Again, we need to be rigorous with what we say here, because the subject is so shady.--Cúchullain ^t/c 23:18, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Please don't be so hasty with your editing, Cuchullain. You seem to be both misunderstanding the context - this is about the legendary Arthur, not the historical figure - and the myth of his return. If you knew something first-hand about medieval Welsh literature and tradition you would know how important the prophetic tradition is. It certainly predates Geoffrey by several centuries at least (granted it later became quite heavily influenced by his work); witness Armes Prydain, an early 10th century poem prophesying a sort of Celtic alliance between the Welsh, their fellow Brythons (Men of the North, Bretons and Cornish), together with the Irish, driving the English out of Britain. In that poem Cadwaladr and Cadwallon return to lead the Brythons. I'm surprised to hear you say "there's a lot of conventional wisdom floating around that claims Arthur is supposed to return to defeat the English" - well, he would hardly return to save them, would he? That would be ironic. Even in the modern period the Arthur of the Welsh is a different figure to that seen in English or indeed Anglo-American culture and remains a potent figure and symbol in Welsh national consciousness, which is something else that could be brought into the article, perhaps (not that anybody believes in his literal return, of course!). Enaidmawr (talk) 00:09, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

I've added a reference to a fairly well-known poem by Dafydd Llwyd o Fathafarn identifying Henry with Arthur etc. I could give numerous other examples given the time to hunt them out. Most of the late medieval prophetic verse remains in the manuscripts, although sometimes quoted. I have copies of several hundred myself, but realise of course that they can't be used here, which is rather frustrating (a collection of them, attributed to Taliesin, may soon be published...). Please do not revert this - I don't want a futile wiki edit war. If you want more you can have it, but not tonight! Enaidmawr (talk) 01:04, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

First, my only point about Henry Tudor was that the only source you gave concerning the Mab Darogan did not mention a connection to Henry, and so the sources needed improvement. There is still nothing saying when the Mab Darogan tradition arose, or when it became associated with Arthur.

As for medieval Welsh literature and tradition, I know quite a bit about it, thanks. I did not say the prophetic tradition didn't predate Geoffrey; I only said that the prophetic tradition surrounding Arthur's defeat of the Saxons does not predate Geoffrey. If there is anything to contradict this, please fill me in. In fact, I know of no source that associates Arthur with defeating the Saxons prior to Geoffrey besides the Historia Brittonum and works derived from it. You will note that Arthur is conspicuously absent from the Armes Prydein which you mention; you'd expect to find him there if he was truly considered the premier Saxon-fighter at the time. There were several concepts of Arthur's death (or lack thereof) from very early on, and Arthur was always seen as a protector of Britain from assorted threats, but repulsing the Saxons is a late development in his legend. My point about there being a lot of conventional wisdom surrounding Arthur as a Saxon fighter was that a lot of folks claim that Arthur was always associated with fighting the Saxons and therefore must always have been conceived of as returning to expel them from Britain; however this is demonstrably not the case.--Cúchullain ^t/c 08:40, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Cuchullain is quite correct in all of the above, and Arthur's absence from Armes Prydein is arguably very significant in this context, as is argued in Padel's Arthur in Medieval Welsh Literature (Uni. of Wales Press, 2000) and T. Green, Concepts of Arthur (Tempus, 2007), for example. The trail of evidence runs roughly as follows: we have the Englynion y Beddau reference from probably the mid-late 9th century (Jenny Rowlands dating, from her monumental Early Welsh Saga Poetry (Cambridge 1990)) which is quite plausibly a reference to the fact that Arthur was considered unkillable/never to have died. However, NO mention is made of a future return or Saxons here, and a better comparison is probably with the description of Cei as similarly unkillable in Pa Gur (as pointed out in Green 2007, pp.74-5(?)). The second datable reference is by Herman (of Tournai?), who relates that a riot was nearly started in 1113 in Cornwall when a Cornishman started to bicker with a Frenchman (as the Bretons also apparently did), saying that Arthur still lived. However, once again, no Return and no Saxons are mentioned [Bromwich is, incidentally, wrong is she says that the return is mentioned, but I don't have time to check TYP to see if she really does say this]. Then we have William of Malmesbury in c.1125, who mentions that Arthur is meant to return, but again no Saxons. ALL other references to Arthur's return - and all which associate him with a return to expel British enemies - are post-Galfridian. Furthermore, as Padel has pointed out (2000, pp.61-3), all the early references to Arthur's return and potential deliverance of the Britons from the Anglo-Norman yoke occur in NON-Welsh materials, not in the native texts. Indeed, Arthur is entirely absent from the Welsh prophetic tradition until the end of the Middle Ages e.g. he is absent from Armes Prydein (10th), he is absent from Cyfoesi (13th?) and its list of future rulers of Britain etc etc. So, in sum, the text needs to reflect this IMHO. Cheers, Hrothgar cyning (talk) 20:51, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I've made some edits to the text based on the above comment. I can see what you are saying re: Arthur as the 'son of prophecy', but there are no properly medieval (pre-c.1485) Welsh prophetic poems which refer to him as such and this needs to be recognized. The references you give are interesting but seem not to be particularly appropriate as currently used; I've tried an alternative use that seems legitimate for part of it; perhaps the other bits would be better placed in the section on Henry VII's use of Arthur?? Cheers, Hrothgar cyning (talk) 21:27, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I'm done for now :) Comments welcome; my version isn't polished btw and may need some revision if left to stand, due to time constraints! All the best, Hrothgar cyning (talk) 21:36, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, Hrothgar, your edits are a vast improvement. On the Bromwich quote, my edition of the Triads (the 2006 edition) must have different page numbering, but I looked under "Arthur" in "Notes to Personal Names", and she says nothing of the kind. This needs to be dealt with, as I can't imagine Bromwich would have made such a glaring mistake, but I have no access to the older editions and so I can't vet the quote myself.--Cúchullain ^t/c 23:04, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

You are both missing the point. I provided a reference to a Welsh prophetic poem adressed to Henry Tudor before Bosworth and you removed it. Why? And as for "there are no properly medieval (pre-c.1485) Welsh prophetic poems which refer to him as such and this needs to be recognized", I can only say that you are quite wrong. You seem to misunderstand the tradition as well. It was not neccesary or the usual practice to refer to the Mab Darogan by that name when identifying a Welsh leader with "Owain", Cadwaladr, Arthur, etc in the context of driving out the English from Wales and the Island of Britain; the context itself makes the association clear: if a leader is a second Cadwaladr/Arthur/Owain who will lead the Welsh to victory against you-know-who then everybody would know he was the Mab Darogan. Another point is that I made it clear that Arthur is one figure, amongst several, associated with the MD, not the sole. I also did not claim that he had always been associated with the Mab as such (i.e. from whatever point in time - prior to "Nennius" - that his legend began to grow. Neither did I say that his inclusion in the "list" is early (it's unprovable): however, he most definitely is there alongside the others in the late medieval prophecy ("Owain" takes the lion's share) and comes especially to the fore in poems dating to the period of the Wars of the Roses (notably those adressed to Jasper Tudor, who almost stole the mantle of his then young nephew) and the road to Bosworth. Between you you have deleted just about everything I added. This is a complete waste of time. I was going to add some more quotes from late medieval poetry (yes, pre-1485), but why bother if you're just going to revert them? And if you think my scholarship is not reliable or that I'm out to propound some fringe theory I suggest you take a look at my track record of weeding out such material and differentiating between OR/pet theories and accepted academic views (see "Cynllibiwg" for example, which I've had a long relationship with, and not through choice either). Enaidmawr (talk) 00:49, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Enaid, I'm truly sorry this whole thing has made you so upset. I know you to be an excellent editor who has had a resoundingly beneficial effect on our articles on Welsh subjects. I agree with Hrothgar that some of your material about the Mab Darogan may be appropriate for another section, but we must be clear about the context of Arthur's association with the Mab Darogan. For instance, this edit of yours takes it for granted that Arthur was always associated with driving out the Saxons and hence was a suitable historical model for the "Son of Prophecy". This edit says that Arthur had been a figure of the prophetic tradition "for centuries in Wales" and in the "early Middle Ages" though it is demonstrable that he is not associated with routing the Saxons until the 12th century except in the Historia Brittonum and works directly based on it. Where, when, and for what purpose Arthur eventually became a figure of Welsh prophecy is interesting, but we must take nothing for granted about the earlier development of the legend.--Cúchullain ^t/c 03:28, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

In a related note, the quote from Bromwich's TYP: "At a comparativley early date the Arthurian tradition must also have struck firm root in Brittany, since by the early twelfth century the name of Arthur was known among the Bretons as that of the promised deliverer of the British people. An echo of this belief is perhaps to be found in the line in the Beddau stanzas which claims that Arthur's grave is unknown - anoeth bit bet y arthur.", which Hrothgar pointed out contains a false statement, has been removed from the latest edition (2005). The reference to previous traditions and the Beddau stanzas now reads thusly: "[Geoffrey] could have amplified [his sources, the Historia Brittonum and the Annales Cambriae] from still-current popular traditions... which may have included one relating to Arthur's unknown grave, as this is remembered in the Beddau stanzas: Anoeth bid bet y Arthur 'The world's wonder is Arthur's grave'". (p. 281 of the current edition).--Cúchullain ^t/c 03:45, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I've had time to cool down a bit and stand back (temperamental Celts!). I guess what got me exasperated was the fact that two fellow-editors whom I respect seemed to be going out of their way to misconstrue what I'd actually said. Looking at the edits pointed out by Cuchullain above I see that the blame may lie on the possible interpretaion within the context of the rest of the article. To take the first example, "taking full advantage of the ancient Welsh prophetic tradition which saw him [Henry] proclaimed as the Mab Darogan, the leader who, like a re-born Arthur, would lead the Welsh to victory against the English..." (here). Cuchullain assumed that this "takes it for granted that Arthur was always associated with driving out the Saxons and hence was a suitable historical model for the Son of Prophecy". However, I said "like a reborn Arthur" because this is about Arthur and he is identified with the Mab Darogan (MD) in late medieval Welsh prophecies (pre-1485). I had not intended to imply that Arthur himself had always been associated with the MD but was simply referring to that figure (i.e. I could substitute "Owain" for "Arthur" and the sentence itself would remain valid).

As for the second edit, "For centuries in Wales, Arthur was one of the central figures in the Welsh prophetic tradition, propounded by the bards and others, which prophesised the coming of the Mab Darogan to defeat the English and restore Britain to the Welsh as the descendants of the Brythons." ([here), I admit on reflection that "for centuries" is ambiguous and imprecise; "several centuries" or "in the late medieval period" would have been better. Again I was merely linking Arthur to the prophetic tradition. I referred to Armes Prydain as possibly the earliest surviving text of that tradition (there are prophetic poems in Llyfr Taliesin as well, but I'm not about to enter that particular minefield just now!); it is a text I'm familiar with having read it a number of times and so of course I would have to be particularly stupid to try to use it as evidence for Arthur as a pre-Norman Mab Darogan.

As for Bromwich, I was using the 1991 edition ("reprinted, with corrections"!) and will of course take your word for it that she has amended her position (Brittany etc). I tend to trust her implicitly as she is such a model scholar, although I was frustrated by the lack of a source, which is most unusual for her.

I also willingly forgive you both for your doubts and uncertainties regarding the Welsh prophetic poetry. Unfortunately it rests for the most part (apart from a relatively small number of poems by professional poets and some partial quotes) in the MSS and so remains largely ignored or relegated to footnotes, which is a great pity. You'll just have to believe me when I say that I've consulted about 250 MSS over the years and transcribed several hundred poems. The texts are daunting, to say the least, but all the evidence is that what has survived is just the tip of the iceberg as this was mainly the work of the Clêr, the popular poetasters scorned by the "accredited" professional bards, and others. I'm not claiming for an instant that Arthur's place is comparable to Cynan and Cadwaladr (almost always paired) or "Owain", but he is there, and even if that is largely or even entirely due to the Great Medieval Novelist himself it is that which matters. (I am well aware that some of the later poems are datable to the early years of Henry's reign, but I'm talking about poems which can be dated earlier than that on linguistic grounds, possibly as early as the mid-14th century, or which clearly refer to the Wars of the Roses and are not addressed to Henry Tudor).

Enough. This discussion is longer than the article. Nos da. Enaidmawr (talk) 23:41, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

King James

I was researching Fleance and found an interesting source about how King James claimed to be a descendant of Arthur's through Fleance's marriage with a Welsh princess. The citation for this is in the "Sources" section of the Fleance article and would probably be a good addition here or somewhere. Wrad (talk) 01:24, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on King Arthur's messianic return. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080512153652/http://www.blaenau-gwent.gov.uk/8035.asp to http://www.blaenau-gwent.gov.uk/8035.asp

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:36, 10 December 2017 (UTC)