It was late afternoon on a windy Autumn day, with high wide clouds scudding across the skies, and fitfull breaks of mild bright sunshine dappled the hills with a moving pattern of light and shade. Three young boys stood idly near the banks of the river Wye, just above its junction with the river Monnow, at the place known as Monmouth. All around them grazed horses, and here and there along the river were other herdsmen.
The boys were dressed in simple shirts like tunics of brightly coloured plaids woven diagonally. Each had a blanket-like cloak around his shoulders. They were dark skinned and carried staves, and were bare legged and barefoot.
The horse herds along the river meadows had been growing all day, as new parties of warriors arrived led by their chieftains. The shields, the spears, the armour and weapons of the helmeted warriors occasionally sparkling and glinting dull in the weak Autumn sunlight. The tree covered hills cast shadows in all directions.
Other groups of mounted men were riding in, some up along the Wye valley from Tintern shouted greetings to each other, some singing, some talking noisily as they rode in. The Princes and Chieftains and their lead and warriors rode magnificent huge horses, mostly chestnut brown, some roan, others gleaming black, and the most prized shining white. The Bonheddig - the freeman followers and Clansmen of the chiefs, rode less valuable mounts and sturdy mountain ponies. It was the year 502 A.D. and the Kings of Southern England - South Wales - were gathering for a meeting.
There was less excitement now than there had been amongst the watchers in the meadows when the first troops had come riding in during the morning. The horses were being unsettled and watered at the river before being hobbled for the night, each warrior carried small sacks of grain and other bags containing their own food, slung around the back and the front of his saddle. The armoured horseman of South Wales could travel to Scotland in one week needing only to stop for water on their way.
The warriors led by their chiefs had strutted off proudly to the great encampment at the halls of Gwrgan fawr-Varius, the Great, son of King Cynfyn and grandson of King Pebiau the Dribbler, leaving a few servants and boys to take care of the horses. Suddenly there was a larger moise, a distant rumbling of many, many hooves a-pounding the earth like a low distant thunder. One of the boys near the stream climbed into the low branches of a leaning tree and his companions scrambled to join him. As they peered westward, shading their eyes against the setting sun, over the brow of the hill above Trelech and Troy, hundreds of bright spear points and helmets gleamed, silver blue and copper red, as a long column of horsemen made their way down the old track road which led from the top of the hill. Clouds of dust rose from the road, and the noise increased as the head of the column came closer, with more and more men still pouring over the ridge of the hill. The arrival of this large army created a commotion which spread through the meadows affecting the grazing herds, and, their watches. One of the three boys in the tree, a lad of about ten years old, called out to a nearby herdsman watering some horses at the river edge.
“What Chieftain is this?” The herdsman laughed quietly. “It's no Chieftain, that is Theoderic, King of all Southern Britain, and his son King Maurice.
The boys in the tree stared as the long column moved across the meadow, closer and closer. Other minor Kings had arrived during the day. Their magnificent armour and horse trappings gleaming gold and silver, and bright blue and red enamel shining brightly. But here was a much larger regiment and there were many princes and chiefs riding in the column.
Agricola Longhand - Aircol Lawhir - the Prince of Dyfed in West Wales had sailed up to the river Severn and anchored his ships at the mouth of the Wye and marched the twenty miles up to the meeting place. King Iddon of the city of Caerwent, on the plains of Gwent on the banks of the Severn, had arrived first, travelling up the Valley. Then had come King Cadwgan, ruler of the lands beyond the Tawe in the West called Carmarthen, and with him came the great warrior princes Tredecil and Rhun from the far West. From the North had come Awst - Augustus - King of Brecon and his sons, and from Powys had come the mighty King Conan Aurelian son of Cadell.
The fields along the river banks as far as the eye could see were filled with horses and scattered groups of men talking, chatting, sitting around small fires.
The procession of King Theoderic had moved down the hill and across the level ground, and the King led his followers with a great splashing and much laughter, into the shallow ford across the river. They churned through the water and the King's Theoderic and Maurice his son, rode out of the river close to the tree where the three boys stood on the thick, low branch.
They had never seen the High King before, and they stared with great interest at the thick-set powerfully built man, aged about fifty-five years, who sat upright on a gleaming huge black Stallion.
The King's face was weather beaten, his dark black curly hair was laced with grey. He was clean shaven as were all the British, and he had piercing grey eyes and a long jagged white, old scar wound ran from his right ear lobe to the corner of his mouth. The king wore a great red cloak fastened across his chest with a solid gold clasp, covering the heavy leather jerkin which was itself covered with gold embossed armoured plates, and scales.
“Good day to you, Lord King.” Shouted one of the boys, and the other two quickly repeated the words.
The king glanced at them, “Good day to you, three men in the tree,” he called back with a laugh, answering the greeting as the custom of the land demanded. Three was considered to be the ultimate magical lucky number of the Celtic race. To be greeted simultaneously by three people the moment he rode his horse across the river onto the land of Gwrgan the Great, his cousin, was obviously a very lucky omen. The significance of the fact that the three were in a tree would be something that the Wise Men and Soothsayers would work out.
King Maurice, son of Theoderic, rode with his father, wearing a light blue cloak with red bands. He was aged about twenty-six, leaner and not so heavily built as the older King. With long straight black hair and with the same piercing grey eyes. He wore the typical round domed helmet, covered in bright blue enamel and circled with rings of ornamental silver and gold, and surmounted by a short spike. His shield was slung over his shoulder and in common with all the other warriors he carried a thick twelve foot spear resting over his other shoulder. The young King’s horse was a magnificent chestnut beast.
“How has the fishing been in the Wye this year?” he called to the three boys.
“Good for Salmon, poor for Trout,” shouted back the boy who had spoken first.
Some of the men laughed, and the procession moved on until at least one thousand armoured horsemen had crossed the river nearest the tree.
This is a story set into South Wales and there is a language problem. The names of those in this story have been Anglicised away from their Welsh form to make them more understandable to the majority of readers. Tewdrig is Theoderic, Meurig is Maurice, Arthwyr is Arthur, and Gwrgan is Vivian and so on. Every Welsh name has its Latin or English translation and so wherever possible these other forms are used. Cattwg Doeth is Cadoc the Wise, and Caradoc Vriechfras is Caradoc Brawny Arm - a learned abbot and a mighty warrior.
This is the epic story of the life of Arthur, thirty-seventh king of Glamorgan and Gwent, King of Britain, the North, and of Brittany. King Arthur leader of the only state in Western Europe, in the Western Empire of Rome which successfully resisted the massive barbarian onslaughts which engulfed the whole of the Empire of the West.
King Arthur created not only a mighty legend, of heroism and noble behaviour but more importantly he created a political situation in Britain which halted the savage barbarian conquests and made possible the long slow process of integration of the races in Britain. British culture was preserved for the benefit of all. With their ancient beliefs in the rights of free speech and of universal franchise, and respect for the rule of law as practiced by Arthur’s people and since 400 BC, and before. Britain would not be what it is today, it would have been far poorer in every respect, were it not for King Arthur. By his victories he created a fifty year period of relative stability and brought order of chaos, stopping the destruction and slaughter. This limited at least temporarily the ambitions of the invading German, Pictish, Irish and Scots tribes, forcing them to settle and develop their own specific areas.
The impact of King Arthur on British history is so enormous it can hardly be gauged. He held his enemies and war-like rebels in peaceful subjection by the sheer terror and might of arms. That he was a military genius is beyond dispute, but he was also a master statesman, capable of dominating the greatly independent and war-like clans of the British.
This story is as closely authentic and accurate as possible. Written in a way that anyone can understand, we have interpreted the now known historical facts as accurately as possible in both time and place.
Modern place names have been used rather than the ancient British or Roman names. So that the events may be easily followed. Arthur the Founder of Britain, the man who began the twelve days holiday at Christmas will compel recognition. Britain today is what Arthur made it.
In a twist worthy of a cinematic epic, Brighton-based filmmaker Matthew Taylor has responded cryptically to swirling rumours that Disney Studios are in early talks to collaborate on a trilogy chronicling the extraordinary true-life story of King Arthur. The working title? King Arthur II – The War King.
Speaking from his home in Brighton, Taylor was asked directly about the rumours that Disney is looking to secure the rights to his controversial King Arthur narrative.
“I can neither confirm nor deny,” he said with a knowing smile, before offering no further comment.
Whispers have circulated for weeks that executives from Disney have been seen in discreet meetings with Taylor. Industry insiders suggest the studio is seeking to revitalise its fantasy-adventure slate with a grittier, more grounded Arthurian tale—one that draws directly from historical research of Alan Wilson, Baram Blackett and Ross Broadstock’s unique reinterpretation of Britain's legendary past.
Taylor, long known for his independent filmmaking, grassroots political campaigning, and claims of Arthurian lineage, has always pushed a bold narrative: that the King Arthur of legend is not simply myth—but a suppressed truth.
Now, with rumours of a multi-film Disney-backed project, speculation is rampant. Could Taylor’s story be the next cinematic universe? Could King Arthur II – The War King become a franchise to rival Star Wars or The Lord of the Rings?
A Disney spokesperson, when pressed, declined to comment. However, Taylor’s coy response has only poured fuel on the fire.
Fans on social media are already imagining casting choices. Some have suggested Henry Cavill as the mature Arthur, others propose relative unknowns, keeping with Taylor’s ethos of authenticity and rebellion against Hollywood gloss.
Whatever the truth behind the curtain, one thing is clear: Matthew Taylor isn’t just making waves—he might be about to reshape the legend itself.
Is the sword once again being pulled from the stone?
In a bold and exciting move, British filmmaker Matt Taylor has set his sights on Hollywood with the ambitious goal of producing a trilogy of King Arthur II films. But this is no ordinary retelling of the Arthurian legend. Taylor aims to break away from the familiar tales of magic swords, knights in shining armour, and wizardry to tell a story grounded in history—one that, for the first time in over 1,500 years, unveils the true life of King Arthur II.
This extraordinary project draws upon the groundbreaking historical research of Alan Wilson, Baram Blackett, and Ross Broadstock. Together, these researchers have pieced together a revolutionary narrative that challenges the mythic, often romanticised, versions of King Arthur, popularised over the centuries. Their work delves deep into ancient texts and Welsh chronicles, revealing an Arthur far more dynamic, powerful, and significant than the legends of Merlin and Excalibur would suggest.
Taylor's vision for the trilogy is rooted in this research and promises to shatter long-held misconceptions. Gone are the tales of pulling swords from stones and fanciful notions of enchanted wizards and tragic love triangles. Instead, Taylor will deliver a thrilling, fact-based portrayal of King Arthur II—an incredible figure whose life story rivals, if not surpasses, any fictionalised version of the legendary king.
For many, the Arthurian legend has long been a blend of French romanticism, mediaeval chivalry, and mystical elements that have become entrenched in popular culture. However, the work of Wilson, Blackett, and Broadstock paints a vastly different picture—one rooted in history, not fantasy. Their research suggests that King Arthur II was a real historical figure who led a series of heroic campaigns, not in the magical realm of Camelot, but in a Britain torn apart by internal strife and foreign invasions during the 6th century.
Their findings depict Arthur as a powerful warrior king who fought valiantly for the survival of his people and his kingdom. This King Arthur wasn't just a legend; he was a leader, a tactician, and a king whose real achievements have been obscured by centuries of mythology. The trilogy will explore his rise to power, the dramatic battles that shaped his reign, and the legacy he left behind—a story more enthralling than any myth ever could be.
Matt Taylor's vision for the films promises to revolutionise the way we view King Arthur. He plans to take audiences on an epic journey that will explore the true political and cultural landscape of Dark Age Britain. By focusing on the historically accurate portrayal of King Arthur, Taylor seeks to correct centuries of misinformation and bring the real Arthurian story to the big screen—one that reflects a more profound, far-reaching legacy than mere myth or legend.
As Taylor himself has stated, this new cinematic trilogy will offer a gripping and powerful narrative that challenges the traditional fairy tale versions of King Arthur. "The true story of King Arthur II is far better and more sensational than any version told before," Taylor said. "This isn't a fantasy. This is history—an amazing life of a king who was larger than life."
The first film in the trilogy is expected to delve into Arthur's early life and rise to power, highlighting the political intrigue and military prowess that defined his reign. The sequels will follow his epic battles and the struggles of his kingdom, all culminating in a dramatic conclusion that will redefine how the world understands one of its most enduring historical figures.
The Arthurian legend has captivated audiences for centuries, but Matt Taylor's upcoming trilogy promises to finally set the record straight. This new approach, built on the meticulous research of Alan Wilson, Baram Blackett, and Ross Broadstock, will offer audiences a fresh perspective on King Arthur—one based on truth rather than the fanciful stories of mediaeval romance.
If Taylor's vision succeeds, it could mark a turning point in how we remember King Arthur—not as a mythical figure of old, but as a real historical leader whose true story is more thrilling and awe-inspiring than any legend could ever convey.
Daniel Mersey’s Arthur – King of the Britons opens with a thought-provoking assertion: “There are two very distinct King Arthurs to consider – the Arthur of children’s stories, literature, and folklore, and the Arthur of history.” This distinction invites us to explore the dichotomy between the legendary figure celebrated in countless stories and the historical reality that may have inspired those tales. Yet, Mersey’s characterisation of these two Arthurs is just one perspective, for recent historical research challenges even this dichotomy. According to historians Alan Wilson, Baram Blackett, and Ross Broadstock, there were not just two King Arthurs, but potentially five, each embedded within the ancient history of Britain. Their findings suggest a far richer and more complex tapestry of Arthurian legend and history than Mersey’s book presents.
The Case for Two Arthurs.
Mersey’s work primarily focuses on the King Arthur of legend – the one who drew the sword from the stone, led his knights of the Round Table, and was mentored by the mystical Merlin. This Arthur, as Mersey details, is a creation of mediaeval romance, rooted in the fertile imaginations of authors like Geoffrey of Monmouth and Sir Thomas Malory. In this narrative, Arthur is the illegitimate son of Uther Pendragon, conceived through the machinations of the sorcerer Merlin. His rise to power is marked by the famous pulling of the sword from the stone, a symbol of divine right and destiny.
However, the work of Wilson, Blackett, and Broadstock offers a radically different perspective on Arthurian history. They argue that the legends are based on the lives of two distinct historical figures, both of whom were named Arthur, and both of whom played pivotal roles in Britain’s ancient history. These two Arthurs were not just figures of legend, but real kings with verifiable genealogies and accomplishments.
The First Arthur: Arthur I, Son of Magnus Maximus.
According to Wilson, Blackett, and Broadstock, the first Arthur was the eldest son of Magnus Maximus, a Roman general who became Emperor and claimed descent from the British Constantine the Great. Arthur I lived from 355 to 388 AD and was a formidable warrior king. His reign is said to have extended Britain’s influence across Europe, conquering territories in Gaul, Spain, Southern Germany, Switzerland, and Italy. This Arthur’s exploits, as recorded in ancient Welsh chronicles, establish him as a significant figure in European history, far removed from the mythical king of mediaeval romance.
The Second Arthur: Arthur II, Unifier of Britain.
The second Arthur, according to this research, was born on Christmas Day in 503 AD, nearly 125 years after the death of the first Arthur. He was the son of Queen Onbrawst and King Maurice, and his grandfather, Theoderic, was a Paramount Pendragon King, a title that linked the lineage back to the Holy Family. This Arthur II is credited with uniting Britain and laying the foundation for the legend that would be immortalised in later centuries. Unlike the legendary figure who battled the Romans, this Arthur fought against the invading Saxons, securing his place in history as a defender of the British Isles. Debunking the Myths: Merlin and the Sword in the Stone.
Mersey’s retelling of the Arthurian legend includes the familiar trope of Merlin as a sorcerer and the fantastical challenge of pulling a sword from a stone. However, the research of Wilson and his colleagues suggests a much more grounded interpretation of these stories. Merlin, they argue, was not a magical being but a powerful warlord and tutor to Arthur II. Far from being an enigma, Merlin was a historical figure who played a crucial role in Arthur’s upbringing, educating him in the arts of war and leadership.
The idea of pulling a sword from a stone, as romantic as it may be, is dismissed as mere folklore. The true path to kingship, as Wilson and his co-authors assert, was through established lineage and recognised heritage. Arthur II’s legitimacy was never in question; his royal blood and leadership abilities were well-documented and recognised by his contemporaries.
Reconciling Legend with History.
The contrast between Daniel Mersey’s portrayal of King Arthur and the historical research presented by Wilson, Blackett, and Broadstock underscores the complexity of the Arthurian legend. While the stories of Camelot, Excalibur, and Merlin have captivated audiences for centuries, the historical Arthurs – if indeed there were more than one – reveal a deeper and more intricate narrative.
The enduring appeal of King Arthur lies in his ability to be reimagined and reinvented across generations. Whether as a mediaeval hero wielding a magical sword or as a historical king defending Britain from its enemies, Arthur’s legacy continues to resonate. As cinema and literature bring these stories to life, it is worth remembering that behind the myths lies a history that is just as compelling, filled with real battles, dynastic struggles, and the forging of a nation.
In the end, the legend of King Arthur is not just a tale of one man, but a reflection of the enduring human desire to connect with a heroic past. Whether through the lens of folklore or history, Arthur remains a symbol of the ideals that have shaped Britain’s identity – courage, leadership, and the quest for unity in the face of division.
King Arthur is the world’s best loved King, as popular as any other King in civilised history, including King Tutankhamun, King Solomon or even the King of all Kings, Jesus Christ. What most people may not be aware of, is that what we know of King Arthur today, is based on a number of misconceptions from the Victorian era. Now for the first time in over 1500 years, historical detectives Alan Wilson and Baram Blackett, have rediscovered the truth about King Arthur, and that there were in-fact two great King Arthur's, who have been mistakenly rolled into one. King Arthur II was a real historical figure, who’s life and times, has been well documented in the ancient Welsh Khurmic records. As the prophecy of King Arthur begins to come true, here are the top 10 misconceptions about King Arthur, based on the historical research of Alan Wilson and Baram Blackett.
The legend of King Arthur is one of the most popular and enduring in British history. However, many of the details of the legend are not actually true. In fact, there is some debate about whether or not there was ever a single King Arthur.
Here are some of the most common misconceptions about King Arthur:
There was more than one King Arthur. There is evidence to suggest that there were actually several different kings who were combined into one figure over time. For example, the names "Arthur" and "Pendragon" were common in Celtic Britain, and there were several different kings who ruled during the 5th and 6th centuries who had these names.
King Arthur didn't pull a sword from a stone to become King. This famous story was first mentioned in the 12th century, and there is no evidence to suggest that it actually happened. In fact, it is more likely that Arthur was a legitimate king who inherited his throne.
Merlin was not a wizard. Merlin is often portrayed as a wise old wizard, but there is no evidence to suggest that he was actually magical. In fact, he is more likely to have been a real person who was a skilled advisor and Warlord in his own right.
Guinevere didn't have an affair with Lancelot. This famous story is also first mentioned in the 12th century, and there is no evidence to suggest that it actually happened. In fact, it is more likely that Guinevere was a faithful wife who was wrongly accused of adultery, though being fair to history, she was a flirt and it was an issue.
King Arthur created The Round Table. The Round Table is a symbol of equality and fellowship, which was actually created by King Arthur. Breaking away from the traditional structure of a rectangle table, King Arthur II created his Round Table, so that everyone was equal.
King Arthur invented the Summer 'Festive' Games. The Summer 'Festive' Games are a tradition that dates back to ancient Greece, and was used by King Arthur to keep his Army and population challenged, pushed and primed for action, during times of peace. In fact, not only did King Arthur create his Summer Games, he actively participated in them.
King Arthur’s son did not kill him. The story of Arthur's death is retold in ancient Welsh poems and chronicles. It is more likely that he died in battle, than at the hands of his son.
King Arthur didn’t give Excalibur to the Lady of the Lake. The story of Excalibur is also complicated and there are many different versions. However, it is more likely that the story of Excalibur is nothing more than Hollywood fiction.
King Arthur didn’t exactly die in battle. The story of Arthur's death is that a native savage speared him in his heart, having just taken his armour off, after a long day in battle against the Red Indians of Kentucky, America. Born a War King, it was destined Arthur would die in battle, rather than any other cause of death.
King Arthur’s Kingdom was destroyed by asteroid debris. This is a new theory that has not been widely accepted by historians. However, it is an interesting possibility that could explain the sudden disappearance of Arthur and his kingdom, explaining the advent of the Dark Ages. A period of 7-11 years when Britain was reduced to a toxic wasteland, and nothing grew.
The truth about King Arthur is that he is a complex figure who has been shrouded in myth and legend for centuries. While there is ample evidence to prove he was a real historical person, much of what we know about him is based on Hollywood fiction.
The legend of King Arthur continues to inspire people all over the world, and it is a reminder of the power of stories to shape our understanding of the past.
Geoffrey of Monmouth and the Confusion of Ancient British History
Geoffrey of Monmouth was a 12th-century historian who wrote a book called Historia Regum Britanniae (History of the Kings of Britain). This book was very popular and influential, and it helped to shape the way that people thought about ancient British history. However, Geoffrey's book was also full of fiction and exaggeration, and it has done much to confuse our understanding of the past.
One of the most famous stories in Geoffrey's book is the story of King Arthur. Geoffrey claims that Arthur was a great king who united Britain and led his knights in the quest for the Holy Grail. However, there is no historical evidence to support Geoffrey's claims. In fact, most historians believe that Arthur was a fictional character.
Geoffrey also made up many other stories about ancient British history. He claimed that King Lear was a real king, and that he was the father of King Arthur. He also claimed that Merlin was a real wizard, and that he helped Arthur to become king. These stories are all fiction, and they have done much to confuse our understanding of ancient British history.
Geoffrey of Monmouth was a talented writer, and his book was very popular. However, he was also a careless historian, and he made up many stories that are not supported by historical evidence. As a result, his book has done much to confuse our understanding of ancient British history.
In recent years, there has been a renewed interest in studying ancient British history. However, historians are still struggling to separate fact from fiction in Geoffrey's book. As a result, our understanding of ancient British history remains incomplete.
Despite the confusion that Geoffrey of Monmouth has caused, his book has also had a positive impact on British culture. The stories of King Arthur and Merlin have inspired countless writers, artists, and filmmakers. As a result, the legend of King Arthur continues to be one of the most popular and enduring stories in British history.
Top 10 Misconceptions about King Arthur
Delivering a steady and staple diet of Hollywood movies, the legend of King Arthur has been told and retold throughout the decades. Prophesied to return in the UK’s darkest hour, King Arthur’s myth has endured throughout the centuries and has never disappeared from the British psyche.
While the main characters of King Arthur’s story are set in stone; namely Excalibur, Merlin, Guinevere and the Round Table, there are a number of common misconceptions about King Arthur which most people don’t know.
The first is that King Arthur didn't need to pull a sword from a stone to become King. He was born to be King.
Rediscovered by historical detectives Alan Wilson and Baram Blackett, the legend of King Arthur is being retold, in a way never heard before since the Dark Ages.
Having published a number of books on the subject, ranging from ‘Arthur The War King,’ ‘Artorius Rex Discovered,’ ‘The King Arthur Conspiracy’ and ‘Moses in the Hieroglyphs’, Alan Wilson and Baram Blackett have finally revealed the true story of our nation’s greatest King, King Arthur II - The War king.
There were actually up to five King Arthur's in Britain’s ancient history. The first King Arthur was the eldest son of Magnus Maximus, grandson of the British Constantine the Great, Emperor of Rome. King Arthur I lived between 355-388 AD in Britain and according to the ancient Welsh chronicles, (the basis of Wilson and Blackett’s research), in 383AD conquered Gaul, Spain, Southern Germany, Switzerland and Italy; maintaining the royal dynasty, which would see the second King Arthur born on Christmas day 503AD, nearly 125 years later.
King Arthur II was born to Queen Onbrawst and King Maurice. Grandson of the Paramount Pendragon King Theoderic, whose royal lineage was claimed to go all the way back to the Holy family, to Anne, sister of Mary, mother of Jesus Christ. King Arthur II united Britain and laid the foundations for the King Arthur legend we remember today. An easy way to differentiate between the two most famous King Arthur’s in British history, is to remember that King Arthur I fought the Romans, and King Arthur II fought the Saxons.
2. King Arthur didn’t pull a sword from a stone to become King
All the King Arthur’s throughout history were born into their roles, and neither King Arthur I nor King Arthur II, needed to pull a sword from a stone to claim their right to rule. Royal inheritance was passed down between father and son; though as was the custom in ancient Celt society, if the son wasn’t fit to rule, then an uncle, cousin or nephew would naturally take over the role. This happened to King Arthur II, whereupon his father King Maurice suffering an injury that left him lame, found himself Paramount King of all Britain at the age of 15-years-old. He would go on to win 12 decisive battles against the Saxons, Picts and Scots; uniting Britain under one King, and building the foundations of a nation we call ‘Great Britain’ today.
The myth that King Arthur pulled a sword from a stone, from which only the rightful King of Britain could pull; is based on the vivid imagination of 15th-century-french-writer Chretien de Troyes, who first wrote about the Arthurian adventures, probably based on the 12th-century-historian Geoffrey of Monmouth's book, 'The History of the Kings of Britain.' Both Alan Wilson and Baram Blackett claim Geoffrey of Monmouth, made the mistake of joining both the historical King Arthur’s into one, and thus muddling ancient British history for centuries to come.
3. Merlin was not a wizard
Fictionalised as a wise old wizard and reinforced by countless Hollywood and TV films and shows, Merlin wasn’t actually a wizard, but a renowned and respected war-lord in his own right, who taught a young King Arthur everything he needed to know about being a great warrior. Quoted from ‘King Arthur The War King’ book; here is a young King Arthur’s school report; “Arthur was not the biggest or the strongest of the youths at Merlin Emry’s castle, yet he was by far the cleverest. In the mock fights and duels which they thought out to practise with their weapons, he was quite often beaten, but when tempers flared, and occasionally fought angrily with each other as boys do, he always emerged the winner.”
Common in 5th-6th century Celtic culture, boys from the nobility aged 7-14-years-old, were either sent into the clergy and taught to the priests, or sent to military camp to become warriors. Luckily for the future of Britain, a young King Arthur II was sent to the North Welsh mountains, to be taught by the old war-lord Merlin and other warriors of note, Moro and Tegid; who taught Arthur (and his peers), warfare, military strategy, how to read and write, count, play guitar, dance and win wars.
4. Guinevere didn’t have an affair with Lancelot
Reinforced by Hollywood as a adulterous wife sneaking behind King Arthur's, back to sleep with his best friend; nothing could be further than the truth, (though with the Chinese Whispers, whispering throughout the centuries, it's easy to see why Guinevere was painted in such a ‘scarlet’ light.) Lancelot was a peer of King Arthur II called King Maelgwyn Gwynedd, and never had any sexual relations with Guinevere!
According to ancient Welsh poems and stories the young Queen Guinevere (spelt Gwenhwyfar in Welsh), did have trouble adapting to court life. (Much the same as today with Meghan Markle's marriage to Prince Harry.) It’s said that Gwenhwyfar had tearful temper tantrums, and during one particular meal the young Queen was deliberately polite and charming to a particular young soldier, to arouse jealousy with her husband for being excluded from state affairs and other such matters of Kings importance. It is recounted that King Arthur wasn’t too happy and banished her to the Queen’s quarters for the next three days. Gwenhwyfar would soon become accustomed to the role as wife of a Paramount King of all Britain, and come to terms with her husband’s responsibilities and needs. Gwenhwyfar and Arthur would go on to have two children, Noe and Morgan.
5. King Arthur created The Round Table
Muddling ancient British history for centuries to come, 12th-century-historian Geoffrey of Monmouth really has made a hash of ancient British history, though to his credit, he did get some things right. For example, King Arthur really did create the Round Table.
Breaking tradition with the established seating plan of the most important people at the top, with the less important people to the left, right and below, King Arthur blew all that elitist tradition away, by adopting a round table, at which everyone had an equal say and presence. King Arthur heralded a new era of equality, leadership and innovation. Many of King Arthur’s innovations, laws and principles, were copied by the Plantagenet royal dynasty, (who reigned Britain from 1154 to 1485); building the foundations of British life today.
6. King Arthur invented the Summer 'Festive' Games
Having driven the Saxon hordes from their lands, and united the Kingdom, King Arthur had brought peace and prosperity to his people, but needed something to keep his highly trained, battle-ready and experienced army, busy and occupied. King Arthur’s Great Festival Games was his answer. Every year to celebrate Easter, he would hold a Summer Festive Games, in which everyone from his Kingdom, from young apprentices, to Freeman, to Nobleman, to battled hardened veterans; could compete against each other, across a wide and varied range of competitions, including horse races, sword-and-shield contests, hounds and falcon competitions, archery, you name it, you could compete in it. It’s mentioned in ‘King Arthur The War King’, that King Arthur himself, ‘laughed and congratulated the winners when he lost, setting the correct example of the games’.
Attracting Kings, Queen’s, Princes, Princesses, Noble-men, Free-men, and travellers from across the nation, (and abroad from Brittany), the Summer ‘Festive’ Games would last for 12 days, (one day for each apostle), and end with an Easter parade lead by King Arthur himself, carrying various Holy relics and his shield, (depicting the Virgin Mary holding the baby Jesus in her arms), through the city, followed by his priests and bishops.
7. King Arthur’s son did not kill him
While incest may have been a concern for 17th and 18th century Saxon and Norman royal dynasties, no such issues were a concern during the lives of the ancient Welsh royal families. Hollywood of the 21st century, has always depicted the demise of King Arthur to be a sordid and murky affair of family incest, betrayal and murder, but contrary to modern gossip and rumour, there was no history of incest, murder and betrayal in any of the Welsh royal dynasties of ancient Britain.
According to the historical research of Alan Wilson and Baram Blackett published in their book ‘Artorius Rex Discovered’, Modred was his nephew and his sons were called Morgan and Noe. King Arthur died sometime in 567AD in Kentucky, America. The truth is often more amazing than fiction, and in the case of King Arthur II, that’s definitely true. Keep reading and you’ll find out just how King Arthur II really died; (no doubt the same way King Arthur I died too!)
8. King Arthur didn’t give Excalibur to the Lady of the Lake
King Arthur didn’t return Excalibur to the ‘Lady in the Lake’, fatally wounded. While the truth of King Arthur II’s death is even more spectacular than most people would ever imagine; the notion that a mysterious amphibious-type woman, lived in a lake, took custody of a sword, is french romantic rubbish and obviously never happened.
The hard truth about the King Arthur story is that there was no ‘magical sword’ called ‘Excalibur’, that mysteriously found itself stuck into a stone. There was no quest for the Holy Grail, and there was definitely never a ‘Lady of the Lake’, who regained ownership of Excalibur upon King Arthur’s final demise.
9. King Arthur didn’t ‘exactly’ die in battle
The truth of how the legendary King Arthur II actually died is more amazing than you'll ever imagine; though luckily for you you're about to find out. He didn't die in battle at the hands of his son Mordred; instead, he died having taken off his armour after a strenuous day battling the red Indians of Kentucky USA. A solitary native Indian boy had slipped through the mediaeval defences and stealthily crept up to him unseen, before plunging his spear into his heart, ending the life of Britain’s greatest hero. Long live the King.
An ancient Welsh poem recalls the story of his body and belongings being wrapped in three deer skins sewn together, and sailed back across the Atlantic, to return his remains to his birth land. Laid in a cave in the Welsh countryside, King Arthur II’s bones were finally laid to rest on the grounds of Christianity's first church, St Peter’s Church in Glamorgan, South Wales. Until today, his remains lay undisturbed.
10. King Arthur’s Kingdom was destroyed by asteroid debris
King Arthur II’s kingdom was destroyed by asteroid debris in 567AD. The destruction has been remembered in history as the ‘Dark Ages’. With most of Britain devastated, the land toxic and unfarmable for between 7-11 years, nothing could stop the Saxons pouring in once the land became habitable again. King Arthur II’s brother Madoc, had just returned from across the Atlantic bringing back a black skinned man, with stories of a great land without Kings. An ancient Welsh poem recounts the dozens of questions King Arthur asked the traveller about the new land. In this time of crisis and a last ditch effort to save his people, King Arthur II salvaged what he could, built 700 ships and sailed his whole army across the Atlantic ocean, up the Mississippi river to Kentucky, before dismantling his ships to build homes, discovering America centuries before Christopher Columbus did.
Having found a new land in which his people could settle and grow, he didn’t take into account the ancient travel routes of the native Red Indians, who regularly travelled through Kentucky, and who took offence at being blocked by this new arrival from across the great sea. Ironically after the great battles with King Arthur’s armies in Kentucky, they avoided the area, going around rather than through, in respect for the many lives lost on both sides, fearful of the fields of blood and the spirits which remained in torment. King Arthur II died sometime in 569AD, assassinated by a native indian savage , and has been remembered as Britain’s greatest King ever since. With Brexit dominating Britain’s politics, isn’t it any wonder that the British hold an inbred hostility towards Europe, and an independent spirit of self-rule. King Arthur II was a real historical figure, and according to Alan Wilson and Baram Blackett, was a King, from a long line of Kings leading all the way back to the Holy family themselves. If you thought the news King Arthur was really amazing enough; simply hold onto your hats, when you hear that according to Wilson and Blackett’s research; Jesus Christ survived the crucifixion and came to South Wales for sanctuary, where after he was known as the Lame Fisher King!
I’ve been writing blogs since 2012, and have gained a controversial reputation within the Truth Movement, as a maverick. As the editor of the million hitting Guerrilla Democracy News, I’ve written the headlines, the journalists from Fleet Street could only dream of writing. Check out my latest articles at Mr.X Investigations, reporting the news, mainstream media dare not report, and follow me on Twitter @GuerrillaDNews, on Facebook and Youtube at MattTaylorTV! - YouTube
.png)
.png)
