A Welsh King Arthur
Historians accept primary sources as the best evidence–and sometimes the only evidence–of historical events. (https://about.jstor.org/blog/digitally-archived-primary-sources-are-imperative-to-higher-education/) When it comes to King Arthur, the only sources for his existence that have survived date to the 12th century, begining with Geoffrey of Monmouth, author of The History of the Kings of Britain. To many historians, this is the first acceptable evidence that King Arthur existed. And it, of course, is a fantastical story, which can’t be taken seriously as a historical document. From an anthropological perspective, history is far more compelling if we think of it as the anthropology of the past. The job is to translate the past for a modern audience, and look for meaning rather than truth. That doesn’t mean data is not important. It’s just that it is possible to include a far broader definition of evidence, encompassing how people Read more…