[InsureAmerica]

Good entertainment, that film. I liked it because he is portrayed more as a battle commander than the stereotypical king and I've always thought that was the case.............

[infidel29]

HERE IS A LINK to a portion of the index in the book "The History of the Kings of Britain" by Geoffrey of Monmouth. Not saying this is the be all end all on the Arthur discussion, but we read this book in my "Medieval Studies" class back in college. I wish I still had the book to post something more than just an index page.

My own opinion of the Arthur legend is somewhere between the classical romantic view of Camelot and the Knights of the round table and the film. (great flick BTW)

The book cited above tends toward the romanticized view, but does reference historical facts.

[rintense]

I find the theory that Arthur was a soldier of Rome a very intriguing one.

[muawiyah]

I think of the whole Arthur thing like this ~~ Boudicca, also formerly better known as Boadicea, got her name in the Annals of the Kings of Brittain from the most ancient of times.

Her title/name translates simply as:

Bo ~ Mac

Ad ~ Arthur

Dic ~ Ruler/King/Queen

Ca ~ And if you weren't sure, there is the feminine form.

Not only have we lost track of the names of the people described in the Annals we also lost track of Boudicca herself.

Now, to answer a question raised in a latr post, most appropriately two years later (on yet another night with a showing of King Arthur, with Arturius as a male Roman officer) it's entirely possible that the Picts were not Celtic, nor, in fact, even related to any of the other known Western, Central or Eastern European groups.

Instead, it's now hypothesized they were essentially the same in origin as the modern Sa'ami in Scandinavia, or the first European modern human population.