亚瑟王
别妄想泡我
604次浏览
2020年08月02日 02:04
最佳经验
本文由作者推荐
什么发挥-淋漓的拼音
[编辑] 历史中的亚瑟王
亚瑟王传说的史实性一直被学者们所争论。有的学派认为亚瑟王在历史上并不存在，他们中的一些人认为亚瑟王是一个几乎被遗忘的，凯尔特神话中神灵的人格化。支持这种理论的学者，常常将它联系到威尔士语源学，他们提出，熊神在传说中被惯称为“Artos”或是“Artio”。但是，据民众所知，这些神是被欧洲大陆的塞尔特人所崇拜，而非大不列颠人。
另一种观点认为，亚瑟是真实存在的人。虽然某些学说提出他是罗马，或者前罗马时代的人物，但依照大多数学说，并符合传统神话的集合，他是生活在公元5世纪末至六世纪初，抵抗盎格鲁撒克逊侵略者的罗马-不列颠领袖。
最近的考古研究指出，在他的假设的生活时期，撒克逊人出现一次断代（generation gap）。他的权力很有可能根植于威尔士、康沃尔或现在英格兰西部的凯尔特族地区。然而，关于他的权力的中心和范围以及他拥有哪些权力的争论一直持续到今天。
持这种观点中最著名的人物杰弗里·阿什（Geoffrey Ashe）和莱昂·弗勒里昂（Leon Fleuriot），主张将亚瑟确认为Riothamus, “Brettones之王”，一个在罗马皇帝安特米乌斯统治时期活跃的人物。不幸的是，Riothamus是一个我们所知甚少的影子一般的人物，而且学者们并不确定此人所领导的“Brettones”究竟是大不列颠人还是布列塔尼人。他们中的其他人主张将亚瑟确认 安布罗修斯·奥里利厄斯（Ambrosius Aurelianus），一位赢得了对抗撒克逊人的重要战役的罗马-不列颠战争领袖，
但在传说中此人活跃的时间要多多少少比亚瑟来得早。由此，某些人主张亚瑟是AmbrosiusThus的副官，可能接替他成为领袖。
中世纪传说他是6世纪的战士，拥护基督教，率不列颠部落击败撒克逊入侵者，539年左右死于卡姆兰战役，后葬于格拉斯顿伯里（Glastonbury）。有一说亚瑟王是因为被部下背叛，王位被篡夺，最后郁郁而终。
在爱尔兰的传说中，亚瑟王与其追随者圆桌骑士们的故事在西欧地区广为流传。还有很多关于他的事迹，如亚瑟王智盗芬利亚首领芬恩·麦克库的猎犬，捕杀凶猛的公猪，杀死巨人、巫师与怪兽。作为群雄之首，他率领着众骑士们出生入死，挥戈天下，在这点上与芬恩·麦克库有许多的相同之处。537年，亚瑟王在与他的外甥莫德雷德交战时，二人都命丧于战场。
传说中的亚瑟是不列颠国王尤瑟王与康沃尔公爵之妻伊格赖因的私生子，在亚瑟一出生开始就被尤瑟王托付给魔法师梅林抚养，梅林便偷偷将襁褓中的亚瑟带离廷塔杰尔城堡，来到一个隐秘的地方将亚瑟抚养成人。后来尤瑟王死后，国内形势动荡不安，众臣趁机争权夺利，然后圆桌骑士要求梅林指点迷津，梅林说：伦敦有一块神秘的石头，有把神剑立在其中，若能从石头中拔出此剑者，那人就会是英格兰的国王。后来骑士们便争相前往拔剑，但都无功而返。多年过后，一位骑士奉梅林之命保护亚瑟前往伦敦去观看一场比武大赛，当时，那骑士看得心痒难耐，跃跃欲试，却发现自己都没带佩剑，遂命亚瑟为他取一把剑来，亚瑟并未意识到石中剑的意义，一举将它从石头中拔出，交给了在一旁膛目结舌的骑士，亚瑟因此成为了王位的继承人。
亚瑟在执政初期，这位年轻的国王对梅林显露出了强烈的依赖。一次在与骑士格斗中，亚瑟王拔剑而出，但意想不到的是神剑却裂成了碎片，不禁让他大惊失色。幸亏梅林及时出手相救，才解救了手无寸铁的亚瑟。沮丧烦恼的国王在湖边四处游荡，突然发现闪闪发光的湖面上出现了一只手臂擎着一柄宝剑缓缓升起，这便是传说中的湖中妖女赐给亚瑟王的新神剑。宝剑失而复得，使得亚瑟王如虎添翼，又恢复了往常的神勇。
他率领着众骑士抵抗外敌入侵，击退盎格鲁撒克逊人。他锄强扶弱，行侠仗义，曾帮助苏格兰王国抵抗爱尔兰，他还率领配下的骑士统一英国，征战于整个欧洲大陆，甚至远征罗马。为了感谢亚瑟的鼎力相助，苏格兰国王将爱女桂妮薇儿许配给了他，但桂妮薇儿深爱的却是英俊的兰斯洛特骑士，即使婚后仍然无法忘怀，之后两人秘密幽会，最终被亚瑟王发现后，兰斯洛特被迫逐出宫廷，远走法
added to it even that early. They were more likely added at some point in the 10th century and may never have existed in any earlier set of annals. The Mount Badon entry probably derived from the Historia Brittonum.[7]
This lack of convincing early evidence is the reason many recent historians exclude Arthur from their accounts of sub-Roman Britain. In the view of historian Thomas Charles-Edwards, "at this stage of the enquiry, one can only say that there may well have been an historical Arthur [but ...] the historian can as yet say nothing of value about him".[8] These modern admissions of ignorance are a relatively recent trend; earlier generations of historians were less sceptical. Historian John Morris made the putative reign of Arthur the organising principle of his history of sub-Roman Britain and Ireland, The Age of Arthur (1973). Even so, he found little to say about a historical Arthur.[9]
Partly in reaction to such theories, another school of thought emerged which argued that Arthur had no historical existence at all. Morris's Age of Arthur prompted archaeologist Nowell Myres to observe that "no figure on the borderline of history and mythology has wasted more of the historian's time".[10] Gildas' 6th-century polemic De Excidio et Conquestu Britanniae (On the Ruin and Conquest of Britain), written within living memory of Mount Badon, mentions the battle but does not mention Arthur.[11] Arthur is not mentioned in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle or named in any surviving manuscript written between 400 and 820.[12] He is absent from Bede's early 8th-century Ecclesiastical History of the English People, another major early source for post-Roman history that mentions Mount Badon.[13] Historian David Dumville has written: "I think we can dispose of him [Arthur] quite briefly. He owes his place in our history books to a 'no smoke without fire' school of thought ... The fact of the matter is that there is no historical evidence about Arthur; we must reject him from our histories and, above all, from the titles of our books."[14]
Some scholars argue that Arthur was originally a fictional hero of folklore—or even a half-forgotten Celtic deity—who became credited with real deeds in the distant past. They cite parallels with figures such as the Kentish totemic horse-gods Hengest and Horsa, who later became historicised. Bede ascribed to these legendary figures a historical role in the 5th-century Anglo-Saxon conquest of eastern Britain.[15] It is not even certain that Arthur was considered a king in the early texts. Neither the Historia nor the Annales calls him "rex": the former calls him instead "dux bellorum" (leader of battles) and "miles" (soldier).[16]
Historical documents for the post-Roman period are scarce, so a definitive answer to the question of Arthur's historical existence is unlikely. Sites and places have been identified as "Arthurian" since the 12th century,[17] but archaeology can confidently reveal names only through in
scriptions found in secure contexts. The so-called "Arthur stone", discovered in 1998 among the ruins at Tintagel Castle in Cornwall in securely dated 6th-century contexts, created a brief stir but proved irrelevant.[18] Other inscriptional evidence for Arthur, including the Glastonbury cross, is tainted with the suggestion of forgery.[19] Although several historical figures have been proposed as the basis for Arthur,[20] no convincing evidence for these identifications has emerged.
NameMain article: Arthur
The origin of the name Arthur remains a matter of debate. Some suggest it is derived from the Roman nomen gentile (family name) Artōrius, of obscure and contested etymology[21] (but possibly of Messapic[22][23][24] or Etruscan origin[25][26][27]). Some scholars have suggested it is relevant to this debate that the legendary King Arthur's name only appears as Arthur, or Arturus, in early Latin Arthurian texts, never as Artōrius (though it should be noted that Classical Latin Artōrius became Arturius in some Vulgar Latin dialects). However, this may not say anything about the origin of the name Arthur, as Artōrius would regularly become Art(h)ur when borrowed into Welsh.[28]
Another possibility is that it is derived from a Brittonic patronym *Arto-rīg-ios (the root of which, *arto-rīg- "bear-king" is to be found in the Old Irish personal name Art-ri) via a Latinized form Artōrius.[29] Less likely is the commonly proposed derivation from Welsh arth "bear" + (g)wr "man" (earlier *Arto-uiros in Brittonic); there are phonological difficulties with this theory—notably that a Brittonic compound name *Arto-uiros should produce Old Welsh *Artgur and Middle/Modern Welsh *Arthwr and not Arthur (in Welsh poetry the name is always spelled Arthur and is exclusively rhymed with words ending in -ur - never words ending in -wr - which confirms that the second element cannot be [g]wr "man").[30][31]
An alternative theory, which has gained only limited acceptance among professional scholars,[32][33][34][35][36][37] derives the name Arthur from Arcturus, the brightest star in the constellation Bo?tes, near Ursa Major or the Great Bear. Classical Latin Arcturus would also have become Art(h)ur when borrowed into Welsh, and its brightness and position in the sky led people to regard it as the "guardian of the bear" (which is the meaning of the name in Ancient Greek) and the "leader" of the other stars in Bo?tes.[38]
A similar first name is Old Irish Artúr, which is believed to be derived directly from an early Old Welsh or Cumbric Artur.[39] The earliest historically attested bearer of the name is a son or grandson of áedán mac Gabráin (d. AD 609).[40]
NameMain article: Arthur
The origin of the name Arthur remains a matter of debate. Some suggest it is derived from the Roman nomen gentile (family name) Artōrius, of obscure and contested etymology[21] (but possibly of Messapic[22][23][24] or Etruscan origin[25][26][27]). Some scholar
s have suggested it is relevant to this debate that the legendary King Arthur's name only appears as Arthur, or Arturus, in early Latin Arthurian texts, never as Artōrius (though it should be noted that Classical Latin Artōrius became Arturius in some Vulgar Latin dialects). However, this may not say anything about the origin of the name Arthur, as Artōrius would regularly become Art(h)ur when borrowed into Welsh.[28]
Another possibility is that it is derived from a Brittonic patronym *Arto-rīg-ios (the root of which, *arto-rīg- "bear-king" is to be found in the Old Irish personal name Art-ri) via a Latinized form Artōrius.[29] Less likely is the commonly proposed derivation from Welsh arth "bear" + (g)wr "man" (earlier *Arto-uiros in Brittonic); there are phonological difficulties with this theory—notably that a Brittonic compound name *Arto-uiros should produce Old Welsh *Artgur and Middle/Modern Welsh *Arthwr and not Arthur (in Welsh poetry the name is always spelled Arthur and is exclusively rhymed with words ending in -ur - never words ending in -wr - which confirms that the second element cannot be [g]wr "man").[30][31]
An alternative theory, which has gained only limited acceptance among professional scholars,[32][33][34][35][36][37] derives the name Arthur from Arcturus, the brightest star in the constellation Bo?tes, near Ursa Major or the Great Bear. Classical Latin Arcturus would also have become Art(h)ur when borrowed into Welsh, and its brightness and position in the sky led people to regard it as the "guardian of the bear" (which is the meaning of the name in Ancient Greek) and the "leader" of the other stars in Bo?tes.[38]
A similar first name is Old Irish Artúr, which is believed to be derived directly from an early Old Welsh or Cumbric Artur.[39] The earliest historically attested bearer of the name is a son or grandson of áedán mac Gabráin (d. AD 609).[40]
Medieval literary traditionsThe creator of the familiar literary persona of Arthur was Geoffrey of Monmouth, with his pseudo-historical Historia Regum Britanniae (History of the Kings of Britain), written in the 1130s. The textual sources for Arthur are usually divided into those written before Geoffrey's Historia (known as pre-Galfridian texts, from the Latin form of Geoffrey, Galfridus) and those written afterwards, which could not avoid his influence (Galfridian, or post-Galfridian, texts).
Pre-Galfridian traditions
The earliest literary references to Arthur come from Welsh and Breton sources. There have been few attempts to define the nature and character of Arthur in the pre-Galfridian tradition as a whole, rather than in a single text or text/story-type. One recent academic survey that does attempt this, by Thomas Green, identifies three key strands to the portrayal of Arthur in this earliest material.[41] The first is that he was a peerless warrior who functioned as the monster-hunting protector of Britain from all internal and external t
hreats. Some of these are human threats, such as the Saxons he fights in the Historia Brittonum, but the majority are supernatural, including giant cat-monsters, destructive divine boars, dragons, dogheads, giants and witches.[42] The second is that the pre-Galfridian Arthur was a figure of folklore (particularly topographic or onomastic folklore) and localised magical wonder-tales, the leader of a band of superhuman heroes who live in the wilds of the landscape.[43] The third and final strand is that the early Welsh Arthur had a close connection with the Welsh Otherworld, Annwn. On the one hand, he launches assaults on Otherworldly fortresses in search of treasure and frees their prisoners. On the other, his warband in the earliest sources includes former pagan gods, and his wife and his possessions are clearly Otherworldly in origin.[44]
One of the most famous Welsh poetic references to Arthur comes in the collection of heroic death-songs known as Y Gododdin (The Gododdin), attributed to the 6th-century poet Aneirin. In one stanza, the bravery of a warrior who slew 300 enemies is praised, but it is then noted that despite this "he was no Arthur", that is to say his feats cannot compare to the valour of Arthur.[45] Y Gododdin is known only from a 13th-century manuscript, so it is impossible to determine whether this passage is original or a later interpolation, but John Koch's view that the passage dates from a 7th-century or earlier version is regarded as unproven; 9th- or 10th-century dates are often proposed for it.[46] Several poems attributed to Taliesin, a poet said to have lived in the 6th century, also refer to Arthur, although these all probably date from between the 8th and 12th centuries.[47] They include "Kadeir Teyrnon" ("The Chair of the Prince"),[48] which refers to "Arthur the Blessed", "Preiddeu Annwn" ("The Spoils of Annwn"),[49] which recounts an expedition of Arthur to the Otherworld, and "Marwnat vthyr pen[dragon]" ("The Elegy of Uther Pen[dragon]"),[50] which refers to Arthur's valour and is suggestive of a father-son relationship for Arthur and Uther that pre-dates Geoffrey of Monmouth.
Other early Welsh Arthurian texts include a poem found in the Black Book of Carmarthen, "Pa gur yv y porthaur?" ("What man is the gatekeeper?").[51] This takes the form of a dialogue between Arthur and the gatekeeper of a fortress he wishes to enter, in which Arthur recounts the names and deeds of himself and his men, notably Cei (Kay) and Bedwyr (Bedivere). The Welsh prose tale Culhwch and Olwen (c. 1100), included in the modern Mabinogion collection, has a much longer list of more than 200 of Arthur's men, though Cei and Bedwyr again take a central place. The story as a whole tells of Arthur helping his kinsman Culhwch win the hand of Olwen, daughter of Ysbaddaden Chief-Giant, by completing a series of apparently impossible tasks, including the hunt for the great semi-divine boar Twrch Trwyth. The 9th-century Historia Brittonum also
refers to this tale, with the boar there named Troy(n)t.[52] Finally, Arthur is mentioned numerous times in the Welsh Triads, a collection of short summaries of Welsh tradition and legend which are classified into groups of three linked characters or episodes in order to assist recall. The later manuscripts of the Triads are partly derivative from Geoffrey of Monmouth and later continental traditions, but the earliest ones show no such influence and are usually agreed to refer to pre-existing Welsh traditions. Even in these, however, Arthur's court has started to embody legendary Britain as a whole, with "Arthur's Court" sometimes substituted for "The Island of Britain" in the formula "Three XXX of the Island of Britain".[53] While it is not clear from the Historia Brittonum and the Annales Cambriae that Arthur was even considered a king, by the time Culhwch and Olwen and the Triads were written he had become Penteyrnedd yr Ynys hon, "Chief of the Lords of this Island", the overlord of Wales, Cornwall and the North.[54]
In addition to these pre-Galfridian Welsh poems and tales, Arthur appears in some other early Latin texts besides the Historia Brittonum and the Annales Cambriae. In particular, Arthur features in a number of well-known vitae ("Lives") of post-Roman saints, none of which are now generally considered to be reliable historical sources (the earliest probably dates from the 11th century).[55] According to the Life of Saint Gildas, written in the early 12th century by Caradoc of Llancarfan, Arthur is said to have killed Gildas' brother Hueil and to have rescued his wife Gwenhwyfar from Glastonbury.[56] In the Life of Saint Cadoc, written around 1100 or a little before by Lifris of Llancarfan, the saint gives protection to a man who killed three of Arthur's soldiers, and Arthur demands a herd of cattle as wergeld for his men. Cadoc delivers them as demanded, but when Arthur takes possession of the animals, they turn into bundles of ferns.[57] Similar incidents are described in the medieval biographies of Carannog, Padarn and Eufflam, probably written around the 12th century. A less obviously legendary account of Arthur appears in the Legenda Sancti Goeznovii, which is often claimed to date from the early 11th century although the earliest manuscript of this text dates from the 15th century.[58] Also important are the references to Arthur in William of Malmesbury's De Gestis Regum Anglorum and Herman's De Miraculis Sanctae Mariae Laudensis, which together provide the first certain evidence for a belief that Arthur was not actually dead and would at some point return, a theme that is often revisited in post-Galfridian folklore.[59]
Legacy as a role modelDuring the Middle Ages, Arthur was made a member of the Nine Worthies, a group of heroes encapsulating all the ideal qualities of chivalry. His life was thus proposed as a valuable subject for study by those aspiring to chivalric status. This aspect of Arthur in the Nine Worthies wa
s popularised firstly through literature and was thereafter adopted as a frequent subject by painters and sculptors. Arthur has also been used as a model for modern-day behaviour. In the 1930s, the Order of the Fellowship of the Knights of the Round Table was formed in Britain to promote Christian ideals and Arthurian notions of medieval chivalry.[124] In the United States, hundreds of thousands of boys and girls joined Arthurian youth groups, such as the Knights of King Arthur, in which Arthur and his legends were promoted as wholesome exemplars.[125]
Legacy in popular cultureArthur's diffusion within contemporary culture goes beyond obviously Arthurian endeavours, with Arthurian names being regularly attached to objects, buildings and places. As Norris J. Lacy has observed, "The popular notion of Arthur appears to be limited, not surprisingly, to a few motifs and names, but there can be no doubt of the extent to which a legend born many centuries ago is profoundly embedded in modern culture at every level."[126]