Comments on: Was King Arthur Real?

By: Pumpkin

Pumpkin — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 20:19:04 +0000

Might be…. However, he obviously wasn’t the character everyone hears about in the stories. He was supposed to have lived sometime around 500 AD. Historian’s have found that there was a great warrior who lead his people in the last victorious battle against the Saxons. He may not have even been a king. They believe this warrior went by the name Arthur (or something close to that) which in a different language means “Bear”. Can’t remember which language – Roman maybe. It most likely wasn’t his true name, just a battlefield name. Either way, the dark ages are just that – Dark. Not much to go on, so through the years they took this great hero, filled in the blanks, and evolved him into something far greater that would survive to this day.

By: Joe falks

Joe falks — Wed, 25 Feb 2009 14:55:23 +0000

This is contradictory, if he did indeed pull a legendary sword out of a stone or found the hole cup Christ used in the last supper, he could become king. He also fought many battles and he founded Camelot in the legends. If he founded a kingdom shouldn’t he be king.
BILLY BOB I’ll talk to you in your language
ur a kid, git a life.

By: BILLY BOB

BILLY BOB — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 00:46:57 +0000

NO, HE WAS FAKE AND IF HE WAS REAL HE WOULD HAVE TO HAVE BECOME KING ANOTHER WAY