The lack of credible material and written sources related to the narratives of Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table might suggest that historical Arthur did not even exist.
Yet, the prevalence of Arthurian legends in European culture require particular caution from historians who address the issue.
Depending on what attitude historians have about oral tradition, its significance and role, different, sometimes even completely opposite, answers are formed to the question of whether or not legends are based on truth.
Some historians still deny the existence of King Arthur today, while others emphasize his enormous role in sixteenth-century British history.
The truth, as usual, is probably somewhere in between, so today is the most accepted viewpoint that speaks in favor of the existence of Arthur, but only as a warlord or local lord of some of the disparate areas inhabited by the Celtic tribes - the Britons.

Learn more on King Arthur on

#learnwithBrainly

5 0

2 years ago

Natalija [7]

Because they couldn't decide on whether slaves counted as a person at all or not.

5 0

3 years ago