King Arthur

by Christopher Hibbert

At this point, there is no evidence in the record that Arthur was a king. But his name, which in its Latin form is Artorius, suggests that he may have come from a distinguished family in some way connected with Rome. More than one Roman named Artorius lived in Britain during the empire’s occupation, and one, Lucius Artorius Castus, led the sixth legion on an expedition to Armorica in the middle of the second century. Some scholars have proposed that an ancestor of the British Arthur may have served under him and that, proud of this service, he gave his son his leader’s name, which was handed down from generation to generation. But such a conjecture is not necessary. The name Artorius implies that Arthur was of Roman descent, and the fact that he succeeded Ambrosius as leader implies that Arthur may well have been related to Ambrosius. According to Geoffrey of Monmouth, Ambrosius was Uther Pendragon’s brother and therefore Arthur’s uncle - although Uther is probably a product of Geoffrey’s imagination. Another possibility: that after his triumph over the Saxons, Arthur’s men might have named their leader king, following the example of the Roman legions in fourth-century Britain who proclaimed their general, Maximus, emperor.