There's like 4 different people that King Arthur may have been inspired by. Arthnou is only one of them, and the only evidence that points to him is the inscription on the stone or whatever the hell they found. Truthfully, King Arthur was a fictious figure and wasn't particularly inspired by any king or knight in particular.
Side note: the other people that are said to have been the basis for King Arthur are Lucius Artorius Castus and Riothamus.
No. There may have been a king that he was based on for the legend, but there was no Camelot.
King Arthur is a legendary king and did not exist.
Arthur, who became King Arthur
Merlin was King Arthur's tutor when he was a child.
If you're talking about the real life King Arthur, the only battle that people can decide conclusively that he fought in was the Battle of Badon Hill, where he defeated the Saxons. The battle at the end of the King Arthur film from 2004 is based on that battle. However, we really don't know that much about Arthur from history, as there isn't much archeology supporting his existence. Most scholars don't even think he was a king, but rather a war leader who brought peace to his area for close to half a century. If you were talking about the fantasy Arthur, then I can't really help you.
That's is unknown because King Arthur is a legend and could be based upon various Kings around the time.
King Arthur of Camelot is a major part of Medieval History. Historians have been unable to accurately verify if King Arthur actually existed. Records regarding the Knights of the Round Table and King Arthur’s coronation have varied drastically.
i once red a biography on king Arthur and it sees that king Arthur is based on a British war lord called Art which means bair
King Arthur's dreams relate to the telling of the story. What happens in his dreams relate to how the story is told. He makes his decisions based on his dreams.
No. There may have been a king that he was based on for the legend, but there was no Camelot.
There is no concrete historical evidence to prove that King Arthur was a real living person. The stories of King Arthur are largely based on folklore, legends, and myths rather than documented historical accounts.
King Arthur is a legendary king and did not exist.
Well, from all I've heard King Arther was a fairy tail/or imaginary King,not real, but he was probably based on King Alfred
The legend of King Arthur is a mythological tale, so the idea of his return is not based on historical fact. There is no specific date or event associated with his prophecy.
King Arthur was king of Britain
There is no historical evidence to definitively prove that King Arthur existed. The stories and legends of King Arthur are believed to be based on a mixture of historical figures and folklore. While some scholars argue that there may have been a King Arthur-like figure in early medieval Britain, his existence remains a subject of debate and uncertainty.
king arthur was nice and overprotective