Though the search for Arthur’s grave brought me to Glastonbury, once there, the majesty of the ruins made me want to linger. The Abbey ruins, set among manicured lawns and imposing trees, are all that remain of one of medieval England’s greatest monasteries. None of the walls left standing is older than 1184. On 24th May of that year a great fire destroyed the monastery. Many believe the Abbey was the home of the first Christian community in England. Evidence shows that monks and hermits may have lived there as early as the 5th and 6th centuries.

Subscribe Today

• Did you enjoy our article?
• Read more in British Heritage magazine
• Subscribe online and save nearly 40%!!!
 

Glastonbury’s link with King Arthur arose as a result of a discovery said to have been made in the late 1100s within the grounds of the abbey. In 1190, during reconstruction after the fire, the monks claimed to have discovered a grave. They dug down seven feet before reaching a stone slab, below which lay a lead cross, bearing the Latin words: Hic iacet sepultus inclytus Rex Arthurius in Insula Avallonia cum uxore sua secunda Wenneveria. (Here lies the renowned King Arthur in the isle of Avalon with his second wife Guinevere.)

The monks dug nine feet further and found a hollow tree trunk containing the bones of what appeared to be an immensely tall man, plus some smaller bones and a scrap of yellow hair. He appeared to have 10 wounds, all healed except one.

The discovery of the grave was, to say the least, timely, for the monks were in desperate need of funds for rebuilding. And the only sure way to raise money was to attract large numbers of pilgrims.

Today, a simple sign on the neatly trimmed lawn of the abbey marks the grave from which the royal remains disappeared after King Henry VIII ordered the abbey’s dissolution in 1539.

Was King Arthur real? Did he exist as a true king? Was he a Celtic hero, ruler and conqueror or the romantic medieval knight in shining armour? So many theories have been suggested, so much written about him over the centuries that even though the truth may have become somewhat distorted, it’s hard to imagine such a person couldn’t have existed to spawn all those tales.

The tales of King Arthur and his court continue to fascinate countless readers, perhaps because we know so much of the legend and so little of the truth. The most famous sites traditionally associated with Arthur cannot withstand historical scrutiny. While there’s no document to prove Arthur’s existence, and archaeologists have found no objects bearing his name, there’s nothing to say that he didn’t exist.

Then again, the legend of King Arthur may just be a myth–but if so, it’s a good one.

Help HistoryNet by bookmarking to