I read that the BBC is to film a historical documentary likely to rob England of King Arthur, one of the nation’s most treasured legends.
Film-makers are due to arrive in Croatia next month (july) to begin filming the programme with British historian John Matthews, who believes Arthur was really Roman general Lucius Artorius Castus
And Robin Hood was black, Sir Winston Churchill a closet muslim and the "BBC" isn't really the British Broadcasting Corporation…
So what? St George was Turkish. As was Santa.
Why is this a big deal?
Oh, right, the BBC are anti English. Sorry, forgot.
Arthur probably enjoyed a bit of poovery on hampstead Heath, took drugs and was partial to a rent boy or two.
I doubt if Artorius whotsisface had a round table, camelot, Merlin, the lady in the lake, Guinivere etc. So the fact that Artorius sounds a bit like Arthur must be the only basis for this revisionist historians belief?
How much is this pathetic programme going to cost us I wonder?
Actually Arthur wasnt English, he was British or Brythonic – i.e. Welsh (or Celto-Roman). I think Arthur is an English hero as well as a Welsh one though I am not quite sure why we have a hero famous for slaughtering English people.
Exactly! king Arthur was a Celtic Welsh king who beat the anglo saxons and saved his people and his country which still exists today Wales. Also Stonehenge was nothing to do with the english it was a celtic place of worship built by the celts way before the anglo saxons were even in Britain and actually used stones from Wales.
Arthur is an English creation, but the myth surrounding him is not English. As Frances said, the foundation for the story comes from Welsh mythology.
Mailman
I just thought I should mention that as when I tried claiming Arthur for the Englsih a bit ago I was told that it was irriting to the Welsh.
Its just the thing the "British" Broadcasting Corporation is good at taking the "British" out of a myth.
Let them try that on Alfred the Great
On reflection I am not sure I am being helpful – though the article linked to seems muddled talking about Arthur not being a Briton, then about people in England being upset. Anti-British?
Sounds like an absolutely dire programme anyway, these historical documentaries attempting to prove some far fetched alternative theory normally are, slow, overlong, annoying reconstructions, lousy history – I have watched way to mnany of them. Generally historical documentaries are awful, especially pre 20thc ones. Such a shame as the age of Arthur is such a fascianting one and a good way to draw people into a bit of history. However you cant start a dcoumentary with filming you actually have to have content. As we know style, appearance and drama always gets put first when it is just a prop.
Making a good historical documentary ought to be fairly easy – find an engaging historian from a good university, work out what history you are going to cover and what evidence to discuss and use the wonders of television to illustrate it. Have interesting content told in an engaging way and you dont need pseudo dramatisation and dodgy reconstructions. A BBC that was worth anything would understand it but I have been fooled into watching enough longwided iritating documentaries to know that it is congenitally incapable of doing so.
One of the few good things on the BBC is the sky at night, which with BBC 4, is now on earlier in the evenign albeit on a secondary channel. I doubt it costs much and just has Patrick Moore talking and discussing interesting astrological things for half an hour and illustrates it with beautiful pictures. An illustration of how the BBC could be and should be but is far from being. To make the obvious pun, making public service television isnt rocket science, especially for documentaries.
Sorry for waffling on.
Who cares, he probably wasn't – just like barely any of our other monarchs were English
I find it odd that the historian is worried he can prove Arthur wasn't english when it's impossible to prove if he even existed – John Matthews already tried some general revisionism in the latest Clive Owen film
But of course I'm sure this is bias – not like the bbc already have a 'Merlin' tv series that has Arthur as English…
Radio 5 having a discussion about replacing the national Anthem. Needless to say w've got all the "we're a multi cultural society" shit being spouted by the usual camp liberals.
Oh and David Vance the awful Rachel Burdeon was going on about the "wonderful" all Ireland national anthem.
De-Normanization will begin tommorow at sundown. Death to the Normans, death to the invaders, kill the queen, kill the christians,
RED IS THE COLOUR OF REDEMPTION
Allah, don't you people know anything about British History.
King Arthur was actually Caliph Ahmed a great scholar who gave equality to women, gave Jews who had been kicked out of racist Spain a home and invented everything from the Nuclear fission to the I(slam) pod.
Arthur possibly being Romano-British is a mainstream viewpoint that predates any liberal media manipulation of history.
There's another viewpoint that the guy probably never existed at all, not in any sense recognisable from the legends ( which were written 800 years after the events they purport to describe )
I find myself agreeing with your interpretations of BBC bias most of the time David, but not on this one.
Word verification = 'aletherm' – how Anglo Saxon does that sound ?
Anonymous @ 1:20 AM
De-Normanization will begin tommorow at sundown. Death to the Normans, death to the invaders, kill the queen, kill the christians,
RED IS THE COLOUR OF REDEMPTION
Good. Maybe you people will start pronouncing "restaurant" properly and not like a French whore.
maybe king arthur wasnt "english"..
not many folks know that there was a "British" language
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_language_(Celtic)
language of the "Britons".
"English" would be the language of the "Angles" – the Anglo Saxons who came from the east in a post Romano Britain.
it is a fascinating history all the same. there definitely was a dividing line between West Britainnia (most Latin/Briton) and the invading Anglo-Saxons in East Brittainia (Germanic language. ancestor of "English")
Arfur Mullard.
It is no coincidence that Arfur Mullard always appeared with Queenie Watts.
Think about it.
martin
questioning the national anthem is a pretty valid point and has been a regular debate, usually sparked by the fact that nobody knows it anymore
people don't want a song about the monarchy and a god most of us don't believe in anymore
King Arthur was, in fact, an ancient Muslim scholar-Prince who ruled over England in the C10th. Everyone know that!
"people don't want a song about the monarchy and a god most of us don't believe in anymore"
Yes they are too busy destroying everything that went before in the notion that it's progress – progress to nihilism I suspect.
Would your life change if "King Arthur" was discovered to be a Martian rent-boy (down Martin!), or even never existed. Who cares? Only the people trying to earn a living peddling inconsequential bogus stories – one British historian and lots of film makers. And of course BBC programme buyers, antennae up quivering for anything anti-British.
To the BBC mind anything that ties Britain, especially England, to its past must be discredited. The public must see that their traditions and value systems are defunct; only then will the public truly accept the multi-cultural Eurabian future that "they" have decided is our destiny.
"nobody knows it anymore"
Everyone knows the words to the national anthem – except Gary Neville.
I think we're a grown up enough nation to survive with or without our "treasured legends" being challenged on a historical basis, but rather than coming up with a bullshit conspiracy theory can't the Beeb actually do some proper history. Something on the Celtin Romano-Brit Anglo-Saxon Norman progression would be interesting for a start and suitably multicultural.
Can't wait for the BBC follow-up on the Prophet Mohammed claiming he was really Jewish.
There is no actual contradiction here .
If Arthur existed he was a Briton fighting against the English/Saxon invaders . In all probability he would have classed himself as a Roman citizen as well and may have had a Roman as well as a British name .
No one is getting "robbed" of anything , except , perhaps , the journalist who wrote this who has clearly been robbed of his senses .
Francis 11:59
You make a good point about the low quality of BBC history documentaries. Dumbed down content which could be condensed to about 5 minutes, always slanted to follow the BBC's left-wing narrative and loud, intrusive ,mindless music rendering the commentaries inaudible, not that it probably matters much.
The BBC at its very awful worst.
Word verification "pantstsm". Sounds very BBC somehow !
David Preiser 2:01
As a matter of interest, how do you know how a French whore pronounces "restaurant" ????
(Hat tip DP – useful to know if checking up on the credentials of the lady you just met in a bar)
The 'Hail Brussels' brigade, prevalent in Nulabor, dislike Britain's heritage and history to such an extent that they (reportedly) spend millions of taxpayers' money attempting to re-write it.
The once independent TV channels are now outlets for left wing propaganda and 'social engineering'.
Yes he was a Briton but certainly not English.
I normally go along the cases being being put forward of BBC bias being shown up here, but this is plain wrong.
Cockney said…
"Everyone knows the words to the national anthem – except Gary Neville."
Do any of you know anything beyond the first verse of the national anthem?
The BBC, like all good fascists are rewriting history as THEY would like it to be.
And we pay them to do it.
> Do any of you know anything >beyond the first verse of
> the national anthem
"God grant that Marshall Wade,
May by thy mighty aid, victory bring,
May he sedition hush,
and like a torrent rush,
Rebellious Scots to crush,
God save the King"
johnse18 said…
"God grant that Marshall Wade,
May by thy mighty aid, victory bring,
May he sedition hush,
and like a torrent rush,
Rebellious Scots to crush,
God save the King"
That's good. We ought to hear the full version more often
Grant @ 8:44 AM
Can't wait for the BBC follow-up on the Prophet Mohammed claiming he was really Jewish.
So long as they don't say that he was born uncircumcised. That would freak them out.
BTW, I've always found it amusing that (except for Beeboids pronouncing names of cities in non-white countries) the British don't pronounce words in foreign languages properly, except for French. (Not that we really do in the US, of course.)
Samurai is "sam-you-rai", Don Juan is Don "Joo-an", but French words are pronounced according to French pronunciation. I'm aware of the close history between the two countries, influence on language after the Norman Conquest, etc., and I know we United Statesians pronounce nothing properly at all. I just think it's funny. No offense meant.
In answer to your question: a music conference in Cannes. Never found out her rates, though.
For anybody interested, I would recommend Arthurs Britain – Prof Leslie Alcock. originally published in 1971, but still the primary text I think. Gives a fantastic overview from archaeological and historical sources then current. Still available in Penguin Classic History titles, I believe.
And recently updated.
David Preiser a few years back the bBC went out of their in which to inform the great unwashed how to pronounce words such as;
Hezb-allah
Nasrallah
In fact all the words they brought out belonged to terrorism. But for some reason the bBC wanted us all to be able to pronounce correctly the words they hold dear.
"Dhimmi. Now you say it children. Ddimmee"
Francis 11:59 July 1:
"One of the few good things on the BBC is the sky at night, which with BBC 4, is now on earlier in the evenign albeit on a secondary channel. I doubt it costs much and just has Patrick Moore talking and discussing interesting astrological things for half an hour and illustrates it with beautiful pictures."
I am also a fan of the Sky at Night, but surely you mean *astronomical* and not *astrological* things.
Astronomy is the science of the stars; astrology is definitely not to be taken seriously !
Mark (posting as Anon)
David Preiser 3:32
I can't comment on the price of prostitutes in Cannes, but look forward to a BBC documentary on brothels in muslim countries.
Why does every town have a brothel ?
Is it in accordance with the Kuran ? We should be told !
But your point about the BBC going out of their way to pronounce non-english words "properly" is so right , when they struggle with the english language.
I always laugh at them when they try to pronounce, let's say, chinese or japanese words.
But, the funniest is when it comes to arabic.
Jeremy Bowen's attempts at arabic are hilarious !
There's a Welsh Arthur, a Breton Arthur, a French Arthur and a British Arthur – but no English Arthur!
Lord Stansted 6:22
What about Arthur Daley ?
Always thought Arthur was a Norman attempt to ingratiate themselves with the English who loathed their guts for centuries after the defeat of 1066.
Still do really except they are now the liberal left establishment. Same people same oppression. Now a documentary on Hereward would be interesting. Bit too English for the BBC though so he has become a non person.Remember rule 16 of the BBC rule book.
The English do not exist.
Of course, to be historically pedantic, King Arthur can't have been English. The legend comes from the dark ages between the rule of the Romans and the invasion of the Anglo Saxons. But it's still irritating that the Beeb are going to distort an ancient myth to suit their multicultural agenda. There is a kids programme that my neice enjoys about Merlin. Half the cast appear to be rastafarians.
What next, a black Friar Tuck?
this is actually an interesting story, whatever attracted the bbc to it.
However, bbc history documentaries are universally awful, even the celebrated ones.
oh for some decent history
Arthur English was a spiv.
English people are descended from ancient Britons like Arthur, so they have every right to claim him, even if it upsets Welsh nationalists who grew up with Victorian invasion myths, or the pro-minorities, anti-majority BBC.
Huh? The English people aren’t decended from ancient britons. The English are Angles, Saxons, Vikings etc. Either the ancients Britons were assimilated, or else they were massacred and driven out, that is the debate.
Anyway, Arthur is a myth, and a vague one at that. Who gives a monkeys?