Karl der große or Charlemagne?

[soopaman2]

Originally Posted by Oberon

I'd say that there probably was an 'Arthur' (although I doubt he was actually called that), but things like Merlin, Camelot and the Knights of the Round table are stretching it a little.
More likely Arthur was a figurehead in sub-Roman Britain, but certainly never rose to Bretwalda or the like. Still, makes for good reading, and L'Morte d'Arthur is good reading.

I must admit I've had a growing interest over the past couple of years in regards to sub-Roman Britain, and the era of 'Bretwalda', but it's not the easiest era to get firm information on, thanks to Norsemen burning our records. But it's definitely a very interesting time, and the likes of 'Brytenwalda' for Mount and Blade: Warband, and 'The Rood and the Dragon' for Civilization III awakened my interest in the era.

Post Romano British history is so elusive due to massive raids from Proto vikings and angles and saxons, like you said, due to destruction of records.

I am not saying a man who rallied the populace, and gave hope in a time of pillage and rape, never existed.

I just don't think he pulled a sword out of a rock.

I am more in opposition to the supernatural crap attributed to this person. I understand how legends can pop up, considering the supernatural/religious state peoples of that era held dear.

Arthur was certainly based on someone, no idea is original, I just think he was given more gravitas than he deserves.