Sleepy History - King Arthur

Episode Date: February 9, 2025

King Arthur—a legendary figure whose tales of courage, chivalry, and magic have captivated imaginations for centuries. From the sword in the stone to the mystical Isle of Avalon, his story is woven with knights, quests, and the search for the Holy Grail. But who was King Arthur, and how much of his story is rooted in truth? Tonight, journey into the enchanting world of King Arthur and the legends surrounding him, as this timeless story guides you into a peaceful and dream-filled sleep.Narrated by: Simon MattacksWritten by: Alicia SteffannAbout Sleepy History Delve into history's most intriguing stories, people, places, events, and mysteries, delivered in a supremely calming atmosphere. If you struggle to fall asleep and you have a curious mind, Sleepy History is the perfect bedtime companion. Our stories will gently grasp your attention, pulling your mind away from any racing thoughts, making room for the soothing music and calming narration to guide you into a peaceful sleep. Sleepy History is a production of Slumber Studios. To learn more, visit www.slumberstudios.com.

This is Sleepy History. Sleepy History is a production of Slumber Studios. To listen ad-free, get access to bonus episodes, and support the ongoing production of this show, Check out our premium feed. This is the Sleepy History of King Arthur, narrated by Simon Mattox, written by Alicia Steffen. The man who pulled the sword from the stone. The leader of the Knights of the Round Table. The comedic main character in Monty Python's movie about the quest for the Holy Grail. Whatever form it's taken, you've likely heard of King Arthur.

Was there ever a real man behind the legend? And if so, where did he originate? Tonight we'll take you on a quest for answers. Whether you seek courageous deeds, magic, or romance, you'll find it in these legends of the past. So just relax and let your mind drift as, on the rocky coast of Cornwall, a storied castle perches just above the cold, churning sea. According to legend, this is the birthplace of one of literature's greatest and most intriguing figures, King Arthur. Along with his beautiful queen, Guinevere, and his brave knights of the Round Table,

Arthur has captured the imaginations of scores of generations for over a thousand years. Although his story is rarely told the same way twice, it never loses its appeal. Around the year 1470, an Englishman named Thomas Mallory wrote a book that would come to be known as Le Morte d'Arthur, or in English, The Death of Arthur. It was certainly not the first story about the legendary king. On the contrary, Arthur had already been around for nearly a thousand years. But Mallory's book was important for numerous reasons. In it, he related dramatic tales of King Arthur, his knights of the Round Table, Guinevere, Merlin and Sir Lancelot. For virtually any person living in a Western culture today,

as well as many across other parts of the globe, these names inspire instant recognition. This particular 15th century version of Arthur's Tales has set the stage for most of the modern interpretations of the Camelot story. However, many people don't realise it was a blend of existing folklore and Mallory's active imagination. Mallory's work has become one of the best-known interpretations of the Arthur legend, and his embellishments are now as widely accepted in fiction as the story of Arthur himself. accepted in fiction as the story of Arthur himself. It ended up being one of the first books ever printed in England. From that point, it was reprinted with a variety of alterations for about 200 years. But then it went out of fashion, its legends lying dormant until the Romantics rediscovered Arthur and his world many years later, bringing it new dimensions and new meaning.

Even today, many hundreds of years later, countless writers and filmmakers continue to evolve and interpret the stories of Arthur and the other fascinating characters in his orbit. These tales take on new dimensions, changing with the times to fit narratives that speak to modern audiences. There is much to relate about the travails of the story of Camelot, which morphed and changed constantly throughout the centuries. But Mallory's manuscript became the subject of discussion in 1934. That was the year that an assistant headmaster at Winchester College discovered a version of it hiding in the college library, making it important news once again.

Debates ensued about what version the manuscript represented and how close it was to Mallory's original. And while these details will never be known for certain, it was an argument important enough that American author John Steinbeck revisited it decades later. In his posthumously published book, The Acts of King Arthur and His Noble Knights, which he started in 1956, he offered his own retelling of what became known as the Winchester Manuscript.

In doing so, he translated the book. Not only did he rewrite the antiquated English into a prose that was easily accessed by modern readers, he explored psychological depths that would never have been conceived of by a writer of Malory's own version, to Winchester College and John Steinbeck, is one of the countless examples of how King Arthur's legend has captivated the world for so long. In the process, we have lost track of who the original King Arthur was, or if he even existed. In fact, the lines between the factual origins of Arthur's story and its fictional trappings

are now virtually indistinguishable from each other. For many hundreds of years, most scholars believed that Arthur was a real person, and there is some evidence that he was. But today, there is much debate about how much of the real Arthur is still traceable to the modern narratives we all love so much. If we start at the beginning, the story of Arthur takes us back to a time long before Thomas Mallory. In fact, we have to go back to a time before any recorded tales existed. Arthur's earliest possible origins have been pinpointed to the late 5th or early 6th century. There are two medieval sources scholars turn to in order to understand how the real Arthur might have emerged.

The first source is called the Historia Britonum. It was written in the 9th century, and although the identity of the author isn't certain, the manuscript is usually attributed to a Welsh monk named Nennius. The Historia claims to tell an early history of Britain, which includes a British military leader named Arthur bearing the image of St Mary, either on a cross or a shield. According to the history, that warrior fought off the invading Anglo-Saxons in twelve important battles, culminating with a conflict called the Battle of Badon Hill. Unfortunately, the dates of the twelveles are a mystery. Further, modern scholars strongly suspect that the book

melds fact and existing folklore, making it unreliable for historical purposes. The second source that suggests the origins of the real Arthur is called the Annelis Cambriae, or the Welsh Annals, which was a compilation by diverse sources. Written somewhat later, in the 10th century, it supports the tales from the Historia. The Welsh Annals links Arthur to the Battle of Badon Hill, which it places in the years 516 to 518. Further, it mentions a conflict called the Battle of Camlan between the years 537 and 539, in which it claims Arthur was killed. One other tantalising reference occupies historians. It comes from the oldest existing Welsh poem, which is called Agadothin.

The poem speaks of a battle that took place around the year 600, and it praises a great warrior by saying that he was valorous, although he was not Arthur. He fed black ravens on the rampart of a fortress, though he was no Arthur. Among the powerful ones in battle, in the front rank, Gwarthor was a palisade. The existing text of the poem dates to the 13th century, but it is widely believed that the poem is much older.

As such, it is worth considering when validating the real story, because it implies Arthur was already a legend at that time. Modern scholars raise numerous reasonable questions about both the Welsh Annals and the Historia. To begin with, these accounts were written hundreds of years after the original events. In today's terms, it would be like trying to correctly represent battles from the 1700s with few sources. For example, some historians argue that there was no way a single man could have been involved

with all twelve of the battles Nennius mentions, and in fact nobody really knows where or when they took place. Further, having likely religious motives, Nennas might have fabricated some details to the advantage of the church. Likewise, some say that the Welsh annals were too much a blend of fiction and fact to be reliable. Interviewers from Smithsonian Magazine spoke with medievalist Nicholas Hyam on the topic. He explained that historians of the time often embellished history for religious or political purposes. In the time of Neneas, it would have been desirable to tell of a pious warrior who fought against the Saxons,

who were considered to represent barbarism. Hyam believes that Nennius based Arthur on a general from the Punic Wars in the 3rd century BCE, in order to make the heroes seem more Roman and therefore noble in origin. However unreliable they might have been, the veracity of these early stories wasn't questioned at all by the next major chronicler of the Arthur story, a 12th-century bishop named Geoffrey of Monmouth. century bishop named Geoffrey of Monmouth. Writing in Latin, he tried to demonstrate the superiority of the Celtic-speaking Britons

and, by association, the Welsh. In his version, Monmouth invented a noble history for Arthur that he claimed to trace backward through a hundred kings. Whereas Arthur had previously been merely attributed with military exploits, Monmouth invested him with an entire backstory and an entourage. He claimed his version of Arthur's story had come from an ancient Welsh history book, evidence of which, conveniently, has never been found. In a choice that would generate a wealth of future tourism,

he claimed that the seat of Arthur's power was on a rocky headland in Cornwall called Tintagel. The English heritage site for Tintagel suggests that Monmouth selected this area due to its previous use by Cornish kings. Indeed Nicholas Hyam points out that excavation of the area does indicate that an unusually prosperous society existed in that area, when most of Britain had been plunged into darkness and hardship. However, there is no reliable proof that it was ruled by King Arthur. In his book, History of the Kings of Britain, Monmouth invented Arthur's origin story as the offspring of the bewitched woman, Ygrayn and King Uther Pendragon.

His story also introduced the character of Gwynevere and her eventual infidelity to Arthur, as well as the wizard Merlin, who may have been a combination of earlier Welsh prophets. Monmouth also suggested the story of the sword Caliburn, later known as Excalibur, which is now central to the Arthur legend. Monmouth was also the writer who first told of Arthur becoming mortally injured and being transported to the mythical Avalon, with the promise of an eventual glorious return. Even at the time it appeared, renowned medieval historian William of Newburgh said Monmouth's entire story had been made up.

Nevertheless, his fabrications grabbed hold and lived on, spreading far and wide. The 12th century chronicler Alain Delil wrote at one point, What place is there within the bounds of the Empire of Christendom, to which the winged praise of Arthur the Briton has not extended? In 1198, a group of monks in Glastonbury, England, claimed to have unearthed the grave of Arthur and Guinevere at their abbey. Riffing on the Monmouth text, they claimed that Glastonbury was Avalon, and thus Arthur's final resting place. Apparently, the abbey had suffered a devastating fire a few years before and was in dire financial straits.

The discovery of Arthur's grave was a perfect tourism draw. They were in luck. Their story captured the public imagination and stuck. Richard, Earl of Cornwall, was one of the people enchanted by the legend. In 1233 he traded away a number of his other properties for the Tintagel area, where he subsequently built a castle. By doing this he was able to begin calling himself the successor of Arthur, a claim for which he paid rather dearly in other assets. Less than fifty years later, in 1278, King Edward I reinforced the hoax of Arthur's burial by visiting the Glastonbury grave.

Somewhat ghoulishly, he insisted that the bodies be disinterred, because he wanted to stress that Arthur was a mere mortal, and that he would not be returning to challenge the current king. Two sets of remains were in fact produced and then rewrapped in silk and returned to their resting places. Arthur's legend continued to grow, and according to Smithsonian magazine, it became the dominant narrative of the Middle Ages. The article states that over 1,000 copies of the Monmouth text were sold and distributed around the courts and monasteries of Europe, making it the second most popular text of the era after the Bible.

Around the time that Monmouth's version dropped off in popularity, a French poet named Gretien de Troyes picked up the baton, bringing a poetic version to France. It was de Troyes who can be credited with the addition of the character of Sir Lancelot, as well as the creation of the realm of Camelot and the story about the quest for the Holy Grail, which was the vessel used by Jesus at the Last Supper. In her interview with the Smithsonian, medievalist Leah Tether called de Troyes the ultimate medieval storyteller.

Unexpectedly, his new version ended up translated into Old Norse and Swedish and was inscribed on doors across Iceland in the 12th century. Suffice to say, it supercharged Arthur's story once again, and the tales spread even further, also arriving in Germany and Italy over the next hundred years. As the legend of Camelot traveled throughout the 13th and 14th centuries, it picked up new characters and storylines like a fairy tale. It even generated stories that were not really focused on Arthur, starring other characters in his orbit.

One of the most influential of those stories was the late 14th century tale of Sir Gawain and the Green Knight. This Arthurian narrative poem was written by an unknown person, often known now as the Gawain Poet. It draws upon Welsh, English and Irish traditions, and also incorporates French ideals of chivalry. In keeping with the motifs of a chivalric romance, the Gawain story is about a knight who goes on a quest and who resists mortal temptations, especially by women.

This focus on honor and virtue were reflective of medieval values. Above all, a knight must obey God and King, while somehow appeasing and avoiding the Queen as well. And now our search for Arthur brings us full circle, back to Thomas Mallory from the beginning of tonight's story. Mallory was an intriguing figure in his own right, and his true identity cannot be confirmed. He called himself a Knight Prisoner, which has led some to link him to a Thomas Mallory who was imprisoned during the War of the Roses. Whatever the case, he did write the first English prose text about the Arthurian legend,

the most popular version having been published in London in 1485. This was the book titled Le Morte d'Arthur that eventually would come to be known as the Winchester Manuscript, later inspiring John Steinbeck. And in many ways, Mallory's additions to the story were the last major piece of the legend we have all come to take for granted today, but they also illustrated the mood of the times. Remember that Sir Gawain and the Green Knight represented the values of chivalry and obedience that dominated the Middle Ages. But as the Renaissance dawned, Malory's world was destabilizing those values. Feudalism was beginning to fall apart,

and with it those cherished ideals of chivalry. Accordingly, Malory's version of Camelot showed the round table in turbulent times. As part of that, the figure of King Arthur was a weaker sovereign. Ultimately, the characters in Malory's story fell prey to their weaknesses, and his fictional Camelot broke apart. Some elements of the Mallory tale have become so central for modern audiences that it's hard to imagine Arthur without them. For example, what would Camelot be without the tale of the teenaged Arthur

pulling the sword from the stone? Hundreds of years later, even Disney centered their own animated version of Arthur's tale on this important event, which established Arthur as the divinely appointed ruler of Camelot. The words of Malory's story declared, The nerds of Mallory's story declared, "'Who so pulleth out this sword of this stone and anvil is rightwise King, born of all England."

And the British took that quite seriously. The ruling class in England was unfazed by Mallory's dark view of the end of chivalry. Arthur's popularity as a noble hero thrived, and the Tudors sought to associate themselves with him. Where earlier monarchs had embraced Arthur for his supposed Celtic roots, the Tudors claimed him as an ancestor, with their direct descent conferring his right to the throne.

Henry VII even baptised his son Arthur, perhaps, to make that point. And even as Henry VIII raided the monasteries, condemning Monmouth's printed copies of King Arthur to be discarded, the actual mythology of Arthur was alive and well. If a printing as old as that of Geoffrey of Monmouth was no longer in style, it didn't matter. Other versions had evolved and adapted to current events and social mores, and had taken its place. In her interview with Smithsonian magazine, Leah Tether explained this phenomenon. She says that it was the very elasticity of Arthur's world that made it so enduring. world that made it so enduring. Passed on both orally and in countless manuscripts, the details of his story, its characters,

and their morals and motivations could always change to fit the mood of the moment. So, in the most meaningful sense, when Arthur is called the King that was and the King that shalt be, it explains him completely. From the warrior who pushed back the Saxons to the ruler who legitimised the Tudor kings, Arthur continued to change with history, never completely losing his relevance. Mallory's book had an amazing run, going strong for well over a century. After that, it lost relevance for a time. Its last printing of the era seems to have been in 1634.

King Arthur took a bit of a back seat for a couple of hundred years, but he endured, appearing mainly as a vehicle for political allegories or even as comedic material. However, with the Victorian era there was a resurgence in the ideals of male chivalry. In 1816, Le Mord d'Arthur was reprinted once again. Poets such as Wordsworth and Tennyson began to write new versions of various Arthurian stories. Against the unsettling backdrop of the Industrial Revolution, Victorians were struggling to keep their bearings in turbulent times.

The social order was in upheaval, and with it, the values and morals people had so long accepted. Like Mallory, the poet Tennyson created a Camelot where both humans and their institutions were fallible. In his series of poems, known as Idylls of the King, he told of the love triangle that destroyed the knights of the Round Table. His poems were instantly popular. Published in 1859, they sold 10,000 copies in just a week. As was typical for the time,

much judgment in Tennyson's work was placed upon Guinevere and her infidelity. For the Victorians, female virtue was of the utmost importance. Mallory had made Arthur ineffective and Guinevere a tragic but dignified figure. Tennyson, in his time, portrayed Arthur as an ideal man, while casting Guinevere as a more pathetic figure, allowing Arthur to forgive her at the end. Another important feature of Tennyson's version was that it brought the Arthurian story back to Tintagel, further establishing the location in the Camelot origin story. Idils of the King inspired a huge resurgence of interest in Arthurian stories,

and many new versions were written by the end of the 19th century. The enthusiasm extended to the United States, where author and humorist Mark Twain even took part in the trend, writing his classic A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's court. In that tale, an American engineer is seemingly transported back in time and uses his knowledge to convince the Arthurian court that he is a magician. Variations on the original legends abounded at that time, with Arthur serving as inspiration. The wave of popularity was dampened by World War I, when chivalry fell out of favour.

However, as he always did, Arthur lived on quietly in stories, paintings, plays and operas. And of course, he still managed to create a stir via the rediscovered Winchester Manuscript of 1934 that you heard about earlier, despite the early 20th century being a time of grinding real-world conflict. When World War II was passed, writers like John Steinbeck came on the scene, reimagining and adapting King Arthur and his court for a new era. In addition to Steinbeck's unique take on the age-old tale, there were many others. T.H. White's The Once and Future King was published in 1958, though the four shorter novels that comprise it, including

The Sword and the Stone, were released between 1938 and 1940. It was followed by Mary Stewart's The Crystal Cave in 1970, which featured Merlin as the main character. It was the first in a series of five novels. From 1965 to 1977, author Susan Cooper published The Dark is Rising Sequence, a collection of five young adult novels that drew heavily on Arthurian legends as well as Celtic and Norse mythology and British folklore. They are predominantly set in both Cornwall and Wales and include many landscapes and landmarks associated with the legendary king. King Arthur even inspired a comic strip called

Prince Valiant that has run since 1937 and is still going strong today. In 1982 Marion Zimmer Bradley published The Mists of Avalon, which may have been the first Arthurian legend absorbed by many of the young readers of the era. In contrast to many previous retellings, it also focused predominantly on the often-aligned female characters, giving them a moment in the spotlight. As before, each of these new versions of King Arthur's world represented an evolution, to contain new priorities, morals and ideals. As mentioned, Mary Stuart's first three Arthurian books were told from Merlin's point of view,

and Marian Zimmer Bradley created a feminist focus that would have given the Victorians a run for their money. These new takes on the old stories were quite a journey from where the legend started. There is also a more light-hearted side of Arthur that was embraced during the latter half of the 20th century. For example, Lerner and Lowe produced a musical called Camelot in 1960, based on T.H. White's book. And an entire generation of the English-speaking world

can rattle off quotes from the comical 1975 movie Monty Python and the Holy Grail. In 2004, it was adapted into a Broadway musical called Spamalot. An internet search for a comprehensive list of all the works about King Arthur generates a Wikipedia page almost too long to read. Today, if you ask the average person whether or not King Arthur was real, you'd probably get a lot of thoughtful silences. There are those who insist that the legends are true.

The flood of tourists certainly continues to arrive in Cornwall with the hope of visiting Tintagel. Academics still pour over tomes and excavate sites, hoping to prove the existence of that elusive man who started it all. But among all the fragments of pottery, the mysterious standing tombs, the etchings, and the artifacts, the best we can do is find theories. One thing is certain, whoever it was that inspired those first heroic tales, he would be amazed to see the mythology that grew around him, spanning more than a thousand years. Perhaps John Steinbeck best captured the point of it all

when he said, "'So many scholars have spent so much time "'trying to establish whether Arthur ever existed at all, "'that they have lost track of the single truth that he exists over and over. Although the March of Time has turned Arthur into a much more complex character than he once was, that evolution is what has made him one of the most enduring legends in Western culture. As T.H. White suggested in his own take on Camelot,

if people reach perfection, they vanish, you know. That's why the world will keep listening to Arthur's stories and sympathizing with his trials. Perhaps they're trying to see something of themselves in his past. You You You You You You You You You You The You You You You You You you