This article, although short, describes the feats Arthur achieved to become revered as heroic. It describes the battles he fought in and who most brought these to life in the last few centuries. It then goes on to state a brief history of King Arthur and his demise.
This article picks apart the origins of the word chivalry and how it applies to people. It goes on to say the chivalric people must be noble and must display the seven major virtues to counteract the seven deadly sins. It uses Richard the Lionheart as a primary example as his trek in the middle east proved much better than that of the crusaders before him.
This article is 3 steps to becoming a hero in real life. I found this interesting because it goes along with the modern vs ancient hero in that you don't have to have super powers to be a hero. It describes the basic tools mentally you'll need such as the mindset and actions taken in every day life.
This article is of a local news station interviewing somebody on what they believe a hero is. This is a look into the mind of the average person and what they believe a hero is, and to them it's someone to look up to. They go on to say that heroes are the people that give us things to aspire to be or do.
The author being a student in college taking a class on mythology in other cultures breaks down his learnings in the class and shows how they apply in psychology. He goes into detail about the universal themes in mythology and how they are key in defining it. He also goes into detail about the psychology behind it all and how we as humans need heroes to exist in society.
This is a page of comic strips which dumbs down each of the six types of heroes into short pictures. It gives examples of each in literature and is an accurate guide to each type. It breaks down each category into its key parts and how they develop the hero as a whole.
Just like the title of this article says, it shows in the authors opinion what makes a hero. It goes into the concepts of what molds people into becoming good and evil and how there is more for the latter. It also goes into how the author believes heroism is different than altruism and compassion and uses evidence from his five year study.
The author goes into detail about how the Arthurian legend embodies hinduism and the chakras. It attempts to explain how each event correlates with a breaking or overcoming of a chakra and how it connects to the story. It depicts excalibur again as stated in an earlier article as truth and Arthur as the chosen who overcame ignorance.
CNN analyzes the different psychological influences that make up a hero. They state that altruism has been around as early as caveman and that we make up heroes to promote societal standards. They also go into military studies that test soldiers who keep their mettle or break after combat and what drove them there.
The article delves into the psychology behind heroism and what qualities make a hero. The two main points presented are the risk taking and generosity of people, as well as their personality. It also explores the aspect of nature vs nurture and how heroes are shaped by it.
This article is showing of how we have developed as a species and clearly shows the line we are walking down. Since ancient times heroes have been idealized by populations around the world for their amazing strength and leadership skills as well as fighting prowess. However heroes have changed with the times and modern heroes are no exception, as with each generation the term hero is redefined to fit their needs and standards. In medieval times people needed a strong figure who fought for the common people and held the most righteous morals, and so those people took to adopting those morals and society changed. This continued for generations as people took the qualities they saw as ideal and befitting in heroes and fit them into their own lives. Cut to present day and you have what the modern generation describe as heroic. I believe modern heroes fall into three different categories which can be blended; these are the leader, the good samaritan, and the hero of sacrifice. The leader is one who in todays world is the leader of a country or some form of government such as the UN. These people seek the common good for everyone through diplomacy and shows of power and avoid large conflict if at all possible. The next is the good samaritan and these people are aid workers and missionaries, they seek to spread happiness through good deeds to parts of the world where famine and disease run rampant. The last is the hero of sacrifice, these are people such as emergency services like the firefighters, police officers, and paramedics who responded to catastrophic events such as the tsunamis in Japan, or 9/11 in America. Another example is the soldier who fights and sacrifices his life defending the innocent from the evils of the world such as terrorism. These are just a few of the ways modern heroes have evolved and learned from those of legend.
This article describes how Excalibur and its symbolizing Arthurs divine right to kingship are just as much characters as Arthur himself. It states that his right to kingship and excalibur are one in the same and that it is a symbol of responsibility. Excalibur was Arthurs birthright and thus becoming king of Britain was as well, although he was not given this birthright until Merlin deemed him responsible enough to handle it. This is seen again when Arthur misuses his power and attempts to fight Lancelot with the sword; as he does so it shatters and he looses it, showing he is not responsible enough for it at the moment. He is returned the sword by the lady of the lake after contemplating his actions and repenting for taking such measures and is redeemed responsible enough for the sword back. It's almost like Arthurs dad is the sword and when he messes up the sword disappearing is his dad being disappointed in him. The sword in the stone in my opinion is the correct telling of the story as it shows Arthurs acceptance of his destiny even though he knows his power will fade eventually. Also this quote from the article is pretty funny, and it is another reason why i believe the rock is the better story, "Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government. You can't expect to wield supreme power just because some watery tart threw a sword at you!", although the same can be said for swords in rocks as well.
This article dives deep into the psychology and meaning behind heroes in modern society and the role they play in shaping it. The author first starts by introducing Carl Jung and Joseph Campbell who are two leads in the field of the psychoanalogy and tracing of myths and their effects on society. It goes on to describe archetypes and how these repeating occurrences are prevalent in human society. This is the point where i differ from the author in terms of stance, he states that "heroes are constructions; they are not real." and goes on to state how different societies have made hero stories that sound similar and this is because humans have a need to express themselves on a deeper level. While this is true, i believe that some of these heroes, although romanticized through literature, did exist and were portrayed with a some degree of accuracy. He then goes into something i found interesting, he dives into how heroes are necessary in a society to reproduce its values and imprint them onto the next generation and this i can agree with him on. Heroes although if they are not real are real to us, and this plays into the psychology of it all as every little kid wants to be the one who is chosen or to some degree important. He then goes into how heroes can be harmful which is awesome because it shows that heroes aren't entirely perfect. As in the past these heroes were used to justify war crimes and promote violence as a means to solve problems and promote a single group rather than cooperation. This is where Arthur stands out as even though violence is ultimately sought to repel the invaders, within the kingdom cooperation is strived for and brings about prosperity.
This article stands out because it highlights what i think makes a hero a hero. The fact that at their core a hero is broken to the point where they can no longer relate to the people they are saving. As it states with Achilles in the odyssey he wishes he could have been known for being a humble part of humanity instead of being known for his feats in battle, as he would not have caused and suffered as much pain. The same goes with Gilgamesh as he has to learn to value others lives as much as his own, like he learned with Enkidu, to become a leader fit for governance of Babylon. With these two as well there is a point in which they wittness someone sacrifice themselves so that they may proceed and fulfill their mission, such as Petroclus with Achilles and Enkidu with Gilgamesh. However with Homeric epics such as the Odyssey and Illiad these are key aspects to make the hero, as with Odysseus and Achilles these bitter qualities is what helps them disassociate themselves from society and do whatever necessary to achieve their goal. But Arthurian legend differs slightly from this, as now the hero sacrifices himself so that his ideals may be realized instead of others sacrificing themselves for them.
This article explores how little we actually know about Arthur and how his tale tells us more about ourselves than anything else. It starts with saying that we don't actually know that much about Arthur and that he probably wasn't the ideal middle ages king we hoped he was, but rather a warlord who managed to keep the saxons at bay. Then it goes on to say that Arthur could have just been a title and that he could not have existed in the way we know him today. It shows that how people made him into a legend is more important the the man himself, as we took our own ideals and pasted them onto the ideal king. A just and holy man who embodied our ideals to the tee. This shows that the human psyche is constantly trying to find ways to push our ideals subconsciously into the world. And how through culture we transfer this message and our ideals for generations hoping to find peace and prosperity for humanity such as Arthur desired for Britain.
This article sums up the heroic sacrifice of modern TV into three categories, the beginning of the story, the middle of the story, and the end of the story. The beginning of the story is usually the death that will set the tone or plot fro the rest of the series and is used as a plot device to push the main character forward. In the case of Arthur, this can be seen with Uther and his sacrifice to keep Arthur alive so that he may one day reclaim his birthright and save Britain. The middle is usually a death to push the main character on further, or where the main character dies in a heroic way which inspires others to undertake heroic actions and morals. Although not that prevalent in King Arthur, one could draw comparison to the quest for the grail and Galahad's sacrifice to the grail in exchange for the others finding out that the grail was merely an ideology and that it was within them the entire time. Finally, there is the end sacrifice and this is when the hero is unafraid to die and sacrifices himself to achieve the ultimate goal. This can be seen in the final moments of King Arthur as he fulfills his prophecy and is mortally wounded saving Britain from Mordred, in such he inspires others to take up arms and defend the country as well as promote a sense of national pride. These things help to define Arthur and his knights and provide a better understanding of the role they played in the world.
This article, make an interesting case for everyday heroes and how small sacrifices can change the world around you. In my opinion the small sacrifices hero model in which she is talking about stems from the bible, which she quotes. This model stems from Jesus and his golden rule of loving your neighbor as yourself. The sacrifices and tasks Jesus took on, even if not God's son, are still humbling and eye opening. The accounts of him feeding thousands and paying attention to the lowest fo the low in society truly speak for the man he was. After all he went through in his life he made the ultimate sacrifice which is the model for the now modern hero, the hero of self sacrifice. Like in a previous article i went over this one speaks of self sacrifice and how we can be everyday heroes, although on a much smaller scale than the other article. The author goes on to say how sacrificing small things that seem insignificant, like waking up early and sacrificing you sleep to get coffee with a friend, can make the biggest differences in your world. That these small ripples in the ocean of your everyday routine can cause a chain and make the world a slightly better place. Although not the extreme hero that society is used to seeing, these heroes are necessary to keep the world going round on a much smaller and less threatening scale.
Arthurian legend is something that has lasted from the Victorian era to modern times and for good reasons. Humanity has always needed heroes, not just as entertainment but as a reminder that there is always good worth fighting for and something to aspire to be. To me that is what a hero is, a person who is willing to give everything they have to achieve the dreams they wish to see flourish in their world. Heroes promote a sense of common unity as the more strive to be like them, as we try to realize our dreams together. The article goes into saying humanities desire for myths goes back to people wanting to live a good life with good morals, but i would argue its deeper than that. Humanities fascination with myths stems from a deeper urge to look inside of our selves and find that we have the same qualities as they do hidden within, and the want to take those qualities and project them onto the world. The thing with Arthurian legend is that even though you can argue that it's just a story or that the morals it portrays don't apply in todays society, you can still pull something from it. People can still draw hope from the bleakest of situations and once they see that even in death the hero was able to realize his dream and attain victory, they believe that whatever they are doing is possible.
Lancelot was not merely a point for which King Arthur to progress as a leader, but also a model for chivalry and humanity. Lancelot never failed to serve Arthur in all his days at the round table and was known to be on the of the nicest, courageous, and chivalrous knights of King Arthur's court. However in being this prime example for chivalry and knighthood, Lancelot also shows his human and relatable side as he falls to sin in his affair with Guinevere. While the ordeal marks the beginning of the downfall for Camelot and King Arthur and moves the story along to the point of no return for the remaining knights, it also serves as a reminder to the everyday person. Even the best of the King of Knight's men is still human, and makes mistakes just like the rest of us. Ours may not end in an all out bloodbath between father and son but the relation is still there. It also serves as a humbling tool for Lancelot and Guinevere as once they see the destruction the set into motion the go into a convent and hermitage respectfully and end their days worshipping God and repenting for their actions while honoring the man they both admired and loved. This leads back to King Arthur being a keystone for modern day values and chivalry as Lancelot serves as the ultimate testament to mans falling to sin. He sets the example by repenting and although this does not fix the damage he has caused, he is on the right track to redemption. In doing this he sets the example for the every-person to not hide in the shadows of their mistakes but to own up to them because even if the most chivalrous knight who betrayed his mentor and had an affair with his wife can do it, so can they.
Avalon represents the utopia after death, or the afterlife rather with bright shiny gates ready to welcome the worthy with open arms. This mystical island originates from Celtic mythology and is said to grow apples all year as its name in old British has aval or apple in modern english. The legends say that the island grows crops all year round without need to cultivate and that anyone who lives there will see 100 plus years on the earth. It is also believed to take influence from the norse mythology's island of the dead, and in the golden fleece it is referenced to be on the island of Mallorca. The fact that this paradise appears so much throughout history raises the question, is it real. The answer may never be known but the island stands as a reminder to every civilization is mentioned in that their afterlife exists and that eternal glory awaits them for following good morals and doing right by the world. Overall it stands as a testament to what king Arthur really stood for, a beacon of hope and an example to follow virtues put in place to better society and to follow morals that will ensure a better tomorrow.
I was absorbed into this article because of its brutal honesty and connection to our own reality. I believe this article will be a higher up on my mentor article list as it puts forward a number of interesting points such as how the modern hero has evolved from killing to saving. The first set of painstaking reminders of the world we live in comes in the first paragraph as the author says the 14th anniversary was the Friday of when this article was written; he then goes on to mention the total number of law enforcement, firefighters, and medics that died that day saving lives. Then the author stems off into talking about how ancient heroes, such as Achilles, were centered around fame by conquer and killing more than saving. The author then says that a transition began to occur after WW1 to the tellings of these stories more predominantly than others in mainstream life. Then he cuts to saying how the medal of honor is an amazing example of this as it dates back to the civil war and is a commendation earned not by the taking of life but of saving it. He then ends off by stating that one of the lead models for this was Jesus of Nazareth who died on the cross for all humanity, sacrificing himself for the greater good. Compare this to King Arthur however and although the killing part is spot on for the King of Knights, the sacrifice is also there. As he led his last knights against his son Mordred Trying so desperately to hold onto the ideals that brought him so close to Avalon and the united Britannia he so desired.
This article is interesting to say the least as it explores King Arthurs symbolism and connection to Indian epics and teachings. It relates moments form the legend to that of Indian and Hindu teachings such as overcoming chakras, while also speaking of God and the Holy Spirit. The author goes on to say that his pulling of Excalibur (truth) from the stone (false ego) he overcame his false ego and took his place on the path of destiny. His first slip up was using his birthright to challenge Lancelot in which Excalibur broke due to his misuse of power. After realizing his mistake and repenting, the lady of the lake (The Holy Spirit) came to him and brought Excalibur back, The author then says that this time the stone was not necessary because the truth had already been awakened and he had been tested by God. The kingdom prospered until worldly possessions took hold of all and innocence had been lost symbolized by Lancelot and Guinevere's affair. It then goes on to state that the quest for the holy grail was the quest for the highest state of mind and that it was within them the whole time. Then the final battle with the evil one was where Arthur overcame his second and third chakras and died, his spirit residing to be born again.
The round table represented unity to many who have read the legend, but in addition to that it also represents equality for all regardless of wealth or status. The round table was designed to be the meeting place for Arthur's knights, where they would share tales of awe inspiring adventures and quests they had partaken in. However it had more symbolic meaning that was revolutionary for the age it took place in. Traditional tables were long and rectangular with the king sitting at the front signifying power above the rest, but the round table was different, because it was round. This design ensured that no member would be placed higher or lower than the rest, and there in lies the beauty. In a time when land and wealth signified power above everyone else. The round table ensured everyone had a say in the matter and was at its core an early system of democracy, although the king still had absolute power. It raised the individuals value beyond that of land and weapons but of that of his chivalry and character as a knight, and although only knights sat at the table it was a step in the right direction. King Arthurs table served as a unifying force to the rest of his kingdom signifying that you didn't have to have ultimate power to have a say in things and promoted equality while his knights of Avalon inspired hope in the people.
This article will probably be my mentor article because it encompasses what i believe a hero is, someone willing to sacrifice it all and in doing so brings about a better tomorrow whether the effects are apparent or not. The article goes on to state that the hero is the one willing to sacrifice everything to achieve the greater good, they are willing to see their life taken away to achieve the thing they strove for their entire life. But then we get to the point where i disagree with he article. It says that the hero doesn't die, and instead is left with others who sacrifice themselves for the hero because they believe they could never do what the hero does. On the contrary I believe the sacrifice of life to be one of the defining characteristics of a hero. The hero usually lays broken or betrayed in some way before or after the main conflict, but still they hold steady and keep true to their values (it'd be a lot easier to say this instead of type it). Arthur is betrayed by his two closest companions in life, his kingdom lays in ruins and his knights lay dead beside him or standing with him. He charges onto the battlefield watching his brothers die beside him, and in the end he stands atop a pile of bodies (metaphorically speaking). But he still holds onto the values which drove him there in the first place, then he dies a broken man betrayed by the things that drove him. The same can be said of Seigfreid in German or Norse mythology, after defeating Fafnir the dragon he is asked more and more to do things by the ungrateful villagers to the point where they straight up murder him. In his dying breaths the only thing he wanted to do was help them but he was betrayed by his values. Joan De Arc is another example, she fought to save France only to be betrayed by the same people she fought to protect. She stood at the steak with blood soaked hands and asked God to forgive them because they didn't understand what they were doing. She was burned alive for being a "witch" by the same people she sacrificed her innocence for.
This text is great because it compares two ancient heroes of legend, Beowulf and King Arthur. It shows the complexity of King Arthur as a hero compared to Beowulf as Arthur was used as a tool to promote higher moral standards in society and to lead by example. Beowulf on the other hand was a story about a man who protected others from what they themselves could not defeat. King Arthur had several defining moments in his life, he stood for unity and pride in ones country as others not only laid claim to Britain but said it was under them. While Beowulf only had three, two of which included the monster Grendel and his mother. Overall, however, the overarching heroic tendencies of the two are not so separate according to the author, as the desire to show physical strength, live and die with honor in their later years, and most importantly to save other people by any means.
This text explores Arthurian legend through the ages but also shows how it adapted and evolved with the times. Archdeacon of Monmouth Geoffrey first popularized King Arthur's story around 113 in his book, "History of the Kings of Britain" which he claims he took inspiration for from an earlier British source. Geoffrey continues his writing saying it relates partially to Celtic mythology and drew to the conclusion that Arthur was defending Britain from the invading Romans who had laid claim to the land. Though many historians dismiss Geoffrey's claims, he was the only person to mention King Tenvantius of Britain up until modern archaeologists discovered coins bearing his name in Britain. The next continuation of Geoffrey's version came from the French medieval poet, Chrétien de Troyes who brought us most of the characters we know today along with the romance, such as Lancelot and Yvain along with the court of the grail. He also translated the names from welsh to the French versions we know today. He finishes after mentioning 4 more alterations that it owes it modern popularity to Alfred, Lord Tennyson as his poetic elegy entitled "Idylls of the King" gave people a reborn interest into the life of the King of Knights.
This article takes the legend and breaks it down into the most modern and kind of revolting version of the stories in this legend. We start off with the author telling us that England and Cornwall have been in this everlasting war that starts when someone remembers it. Then Uther (Arthurs dad) decides he likes the duke's wife and declares war on them; Merlin then disguises him as the Duke so when the duke dies in battle she can't tell the difference. The next is of Gawain, and he has a dispute with the lord of some castle named Ablamar. Long story short he destroys him in combat and as he is about to decapitate him his wife jumps in front and takes the blow "head" on. The king then offers for his survival that he wear her head back to Camelot around his neck. The next one isn't that bad it's just Lancelot getting drugged into rape by Lady Elaine, then of him getting tricked into thinking Elaine is Guinevere and seduced again. The last is the most disturbing and it involves Arthur and his sister. So Arthur ended up making love to another king's wife after he sent her as an envoy (Morgawse is her name), she then turns out to be his sister Morgana Le Fey. He then tries to round up all the babies with the same birthday and send them on a boat to sink, all the kids died except Mordred who Merlin predicted would be the end of Arthur hence the drowning. This raises the question of if legends are all they're cracked up to be and If the heroes in them are really good people.
King Arthur has always had a profound effect on history and this article explores those effects such as in the works of Geoffrey of Monmouth and Chretien de Troyes. Geoffrey brought about the vision of a chivalrous king who was great in times of peace and war, while also showing his conviction to his values as he conquered to keep his home safe. It brings up the question did Arthurs honor and steadfastness ultimately lead to his downfall. Arthur wanted nothing but unity for his kingdom and peace for his citizens and friends but to achieve this he had to endure the exact opposite which lead to a corruption of the things that kept him grounded. This is first seen when Arthur looses Excalibur the first time while challenging Lancelot; he would never have done something like that in times of piece but to keep the order of his growing nation he was forced to. I digress, but the main part of this article isn't to talk about Arthur beliefs, it's to talk about how they resonated in others across the ages and brought about many inspirations and changes in the public. Such as with his revival in the 19th century, as it brought back emphasis on his values and their meanings and tried to get rid of the historical barrier that made it seem like a myth too far from reality. In the end the author believes that King Arthur is about reassuring people in models of the past and showing them that it was not to different from modern times.