But, is there any truth behind these accounts of this, seemingly amazing, man? The answer, sadly, is probably very little.

We should remind ourselves that Arthurian stories came to prominence and popularity largely as a result of the work of the 12th century writer, Geoffrey of Monmouth, in his “History of the Kings of Britain” – compiled some five, or six, hundred years after the supposed lifetime of Arthur. Geoffrey claimed that his work was based on “a very ancient book in the British tongue”, but it is more likely that he used a number of purportedly “historical” sources – some of which, themselves, are of dubious integrity – embellishing and amalgamating these with aspects of Celtic poetry, tradition and mythology.

Furthermore, subsequent authors, such as Sir Thomas Malory in the 15th century, latching onto public approval for all things Arthurian, embroidered the material – interweaving, for example, other Celtic tales – further diluting any truth or substance in the original works.

So, if these later accounts are not to be trusted, where should we look for the “truth” about the “real” Arthur?

A popular source is, “The History of the Britons”, by the 9th century historian, Nennius. Nennius describes Arthur as “dux bellorum” (literally, “duke of battles”), rather than “king”, and his work includes, amongst others, a rather fanciful account of the battle of Mount Badon, in which Arthur, he claims, slaughtered nearly 1,000 men with his own hand. Nennius, however, by his own admission, “made a heap of all I could find” – it is probable, therefore, that this included elements of the folklore and legend of the time – so large sections must be taken with a generous pinch of salt. One account, for example, involving Arthur’s dog, Cabal, and the hunt for the great boar, Troynt, is suspiciously close to the primitive Welsh tale of “Culhwch and Olwen”.

The battle of Mount Badon is also recorded by the 6th century monk, Gildas Bandonicus, in his “The Ruin and Conquest of Britain”. Interestingly, this more contemporary (in Arthurian terms) account, mentions little of Arthur’s prowess in battle.

The earliest reference to Mount Badon, and indeed, to Arthur, can be found in the work of the great bard, Taliesin (c.534 – c.599). His poem, “Journey to Deganwy”, describes Arthur, again, not as king, but “chief giver of feasts”. Taliesin, nevertheless, bears testament to Arthur’s valour – “with his tall blades red from the battle which all men remember.” Various dates and locations have been suggested for the battle, based on the limited literary evidence available, but no single case is particularly compelling.

The “Annales Cambriae” records another – indeed, perhaps the most famous – of Arthur’s battles, that at Camlan, “the dim, weird battle of the west”, during which Arthur, traditionally, met his end.

A number of plausible candidates exist for the role of the “real” Arthur, including a 6th century king of Dyfed, named Arthywr, and a 7th century king of Ergyng, in south-east Wales, named Arthwys, whose placement in the same region as Caerleon – a fashionable, contemporary choice for the site of Camelot – adds, perhaps erroneously, to his appeal.

However, the truth is, very likely, that “King Arthur”, like many other characters from a time rightly called “The Dark Ages”, is an amalgamation of a number of significant historical figures. In all probability, following the 5th century Anglo-Saxon invasion, when the Celtic peoples were driven into Wales and Cornwall – the areas synonymous with Arthurian legend – an astute commander, or commanders, possibly of Roman descent, emerged, and perhaps, for a period, united the Brittonic tribes.

The same also appears to be true, unromantically, of the legendary sorcerer and prophet, Merlin. Geoffrey of Monmouth’s character, for example, is a composite of a man described in ancient northern tales – known as “Llallwg”, or “Lailoken”, with the epithet “Myrddin” (“madman”) – who went mad following the battle of Arfderydd, and the real historical Roman leader, Ambrosius Aurelianus (who, according to Gildas Bandonicus, was Arthur’s adversary at the battle of Mount Badon).

The legend of King Arthur remains, now, and probably forever – to quote an altogether different wartime leader of the Britons, Winston Churchill – “a riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma”. But perhaps, just perhaps, Britain has not seen the last of its “once and future king”?

• Aethelfrith Anglo Saxon King of Northumbria - By : Fred Watson
  
• 1006AD. Uchtred (The bold) - High-Reeve of Bamburgh - By : Fred Watson
  
• 466AD. Hengest and Horsa (stallion and Horse) - Kent - By : Fred Watson
  
• Hereward Legendary Hero - By : Fred Watson
  
• History of Ancient Egypt Simplified - By : Robert D. Thomson
  
• History Of Freshwater Cultured Pearls - By : Robert D. Thomson
  
• The Tower of London: A Glance into History - By : Adam Singleton
  
• The Battle Of Stamford Bridge - By : Fred Watson
  
• Theban Pharaohs Take Back Their Country - By : Fred Watson
  
• Ivarr The Boneless Ragnarsson - By : Fred Watson