Propaganda and King Arthur

So we\’ve a number of Froggies telling us that Arthur is simply English propaganda, changed and fitted up from the original very sketchy stories to suit whatever happens to be the cultural and political needs of Perfidious Albion over the years.

Even if a character who vaguely resembled the fabled leader did exist, he would probably have been a Welshman with strong connections to Brittany and whose sworn enemies were the Anglo-Saxons, they said.

The organisers of a conference and exhibition to be held at Rennes university in northern France next month said they will provide ample evidence that the Arthurian legend has continually been updated, often as a sop to English nationalists attempting to revive the Age of Chivalry.

The event, "King Arthur: A Legend in the Making", will highlight the argument that historians were joined by artists and writers in creating the "fiction" of the legend.

My word, gosh, you don\’t say? So unlike the Frogs and Roland at Roncevaux, don\’t you think?

7 thoughts on “Propaganda and King Arthur”

  1. So Much For Subtlety

    How about Joan of F88king Arc?

    The French spent a couple of hundred years nagging the Vatican to make this nut job a Saint when her only claim to fame is hating the English and hearing voices. Given the Vatican’s well known dislike of the English, the fact it took so bloody long ought to be evidence of her real credentials.

    No doubt the EU is going to make it all illegal now anyway.

    Mind you, I think you’ll find most King Arthur stories are openly anti-German rather than anti-French.

  2. But I can tell you quite authoritatively that Washington did, in fact, cross the Delaware.

    There are many, even here in the US, who doubt this story but if they want proof, I can take and show them the river–no more than a couple miles from here.

    The cherry tree story I’m not so sure of.

  3. Wasn’t there a request from France a few years ago, that Waterloo Station be renamed because it was insulting to French sensibilities?

  4. That Wikipedia article on Roland was complete crap.

    “The wisdom of crowds” clearly can’t write for toffee.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *