Guinevere Depicted... Etc. King Arthur

¶ … Guinevere depicted... etc.

King Arthur (2004) and the Historicity of Guinevere

Jerry Bruckheimer's 2004 movie "King Arthur" claimed to be the true story of King Arthur, based on recently discovered archeological facts. This description is somewhat inaccurate, as the premise of the film is based on "speculation put forward by the historian Kemp Malone in 1924 that Arthur was a Roman military officer Lucius Artorius Castus who commanded an equestrian garrison made up of Sarmatian troops defending regions around Hadrian's Wall towards the end of the Second Century a.D." (Scheib) However, this theory does not entirely line up with what little is recorded about the historical Arthur, including the fact that, according to the contemporary Annals of Wales, Arthur was alive and fighting in 516 AD when he won the decisive the Battle of Badon in "which Arthur carried the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ for three days and three nights on his shoulders and the Britons were the victors," (Ford) driving the Saxon invaders from the land for years to come. Prior to the Battle of Badon, the Saxons were never so sufficiently defeated, and it is evident that this battle is the one which is referenced at the movie's end. This movie seems to condense a two hundred year history of post-Roman Briton into a matter of months. So the historical accuracy of this piece in terms of actual events cannot be represented as being very high. That said, one may still be able to analyze the historical and literary accuracy of the individual characters who may be more or less accurate depending on their representation. The goal of this paper is to analyze the degree to which Guinevere is portrayed in a historically accurate way in Bruckheimer's film. A more in-depth analysis of the details of this film and what is known about the "historical Arthur will serve to provide a sense of what may be known about his queen. This is made more difficult by the historical liberties taken by the film. However, one might be able to additionally discuss the work's accuracy regarding the historical era without necessarily attempting to claim that these events happened as set forth in a given era. Finally, it seems advisable to refer back to the long-standing Arthurian literary tradition to compare that longstanding perspective with the character of Guinevere presented in this film. When all these are taken into account, it will be found that Bruckheimer's account does not appear historically factual, and that it's accuracy in terms of the culture of the era has relatively significant flaws.

The difficulty of pinning down an accurate Guinevere is that she is defined primarily by her relationship with Arthur, and it is almost impossible to prove anything more about Arthur himself than that he was a general that existed sometime between the 3rd and 6th century and led groups of the Romanized Celts against the "barbarians." Indeed, one essay argues Arthur was not the name of an individual but was rather a title which was given to more than one individual: "Was Arthur a living king? No. 'Arthur' was a real living title." (Davey) This may be the only reasonable explanation for the multitude of characters who have been identified as the real Arthur over a period of more than a hundred years. Other critics suggest that the uncertainty of Arthur's existenceis such that "if we add anything to the bare statement that Arthur may have lived and fought the Saxons, we pass at once from history to romance." (Myres, in: Britannia) Those who do argue for Arthur's true existence argue from the evidence for a variety of identities -most of them loosely associated with the Romans or that he was Welsh. In this author's look at relevant sources, at least six different individual leaders were presented, along with valid claims that they constituted the real Arthur. However, only a few of these has plausible links to anyone named Guinevere. So in looking for the historical Guinevere, it may be best to limit one's exploration to those figures.

The name Guinevere appears to come from Welsh tellings of the King Arthur story. In these tales, Gwenhwyfar (whose name means "white fairy enchantress") is rescued by Arthur from the Otherworld, where she is held prisoner on a glass island. In these tales, Arthur is a heroic warrior whose father was a magician and a shape-changer, and who himself does not seem associated with the Romans. In these tales, she seems at once innocent and magical, and also self-assured and forthcoming, as indicated in one long poem in which she mocks her former captor as being unmanly. Gwenhwyfar later became "Guinevere" when the story was retold by the French. Subsequent stories about her surely withdrew farther and farther from the truth. "The poets' conception of Gwenhwyfar probably changed during the 14th-century from a victim of abduction to a willing adulterer." (Green) However, as this only happened after centuries of misrepresentation by non-Celtic writers, one can assume the original queen to be faithful. In this respect, the heroine of the 2004 movie is more like the original than are the heroines of most Arthurian fiction. The Guinevere that Bruckheimer presents doesn't seem to have much else in common with this heroine, other than their culture. This Guinevere is not a warrior, but rather is rescued by Arthur. She may be magical, in some sense, as indicated by her Otherworldly origins and her presence in a mythological story. Little more is known about her, other than what can be intuited by her culture.

Another understanding of Arthur, drawn from reading of historical rather than colloquial sources, suggests that "At that time the Northern British War Chief, ' Great Warrior' or 'PenDragon' to give him his proper title, was one Gwenddolau of Arddrydd... It is not a big step from 'King of Arthuret' to 'King Arthur', especially allowing for the British passion for titles and their grammar." (Davey) He is a good candidate for the position, due to his association with a Myrddin, or Merlin, and the presence in his era of many of the famous warriors of the round table, and a nearby circle of stones known as Arthur's Seat-- the round table. This king is relevant because of the way in which a wife's title would be formulated-- the first part of his name would have been translated into hers, leaving Gwenhifar (which would later be Guinevere) as a possible name. Unfortunately, nothing is known about Gwenddolau's wife from which we can extrapolate about the historical accuracy of Bruckheimer's creation.

In addition to these two possible examples of Guinevere existing in a historical sense, one ought also examine the positive historical claims made on her behalf in the movie. First, it is suggested that she is a Celtic warrior, and not loyal to Rome. Secondly, she was imprisoned by Romans who apparently mistook her for a heretic (she does not actually appear to be Christian at all), and upon being freed fights against the Saxons. There are several inaccuracies built in here. First, the time frame is a little skewed. if, as the movie notes, this is taking place in a.D. 467, then Guinevere would not be still fighting against the Romans, who actually withdrew well before that. Ambrosius, who was Roman, actually returned from exile - he had been taken from Britain with his brother Uther as a child when the Romans withdrew - by 450 the Britons had rallied behind Ambrosius (who, not incidentally, is speculated to have actually been either the uncle of Arthur son of Uther, or to actually have been Arthur). So in AD 467 Guinevere would have been in league with the Romans who were actively fighting off the Saxons, rather than opposing them in their withdrawal.

Timeline from: Llys Arthur)

As to being a Celtic warrior, one cannot actually analyze to what degree it is likely that King Arthur was attached to a strong, warlike female. However, one can ask whether or not it was even possible that such a woman might have existed. It has become rather common in modern movie-making to create strong female characters where they are not necessarily historically accurate. One of the common complaints in reviews of this movie was that Guinevere could not be historically accurate because she was portrayed as a half-naked warrior. This is described as "plainly ridiculous Hollywood inventions [such as] Guinevere's outfits" (Hoeij) However, this is not ridiculous in the way that backrow historians might expect. Guinevere's outfit is indeed anachronistic, but not in the way one might expect. It is not prurience at work in altering the historical record here, but prudery: " Most Celts scorned the use of armour and before about 300 B.C. preferred to fight naked." (Crystalinks) When they did wear clothing into battle, it was minimal, and highly decorated with knotwork - not at all unlike that worn by Guinevere in the movie. "Dressed in skins (meaning leather) and decorated with woad, a blue dye... [their] art is distinguished for its extensive curves and intricate knot work which is used to form complex decorations for weapons, jewelry and body tattooing." (Crystalinks) it seems that Guinevere is actually wearing a good deal more than one would expect from a Celtic warrior, and her knotty outfit is fitting. However, critics are fair in complaining that she might perhaps be wearing a bit too little for the weather. Speaking of minor inconsistencies, it seems a bit odd that Guinevere's broken hands heal almost overnight - and subsequently don't interfere with her shooting.

Guinevere's clothing and hands are not the only thing critics point to; they also suggest that she is being presented in a historically inaccurate way as a female warrior. In many movies it may be true that women are ahistorically buffed up - however, this is not necessarily one of those cases. While the historical Gwenhyvar is unlikely to have been a warrior, there is no historical reason to suggest that she was not a warrior. Celtic women were considered equal with the men, and many of them went into battle. An article published in Keltria: Journal of Druidism and Celtic Magic, explains how primary sources indicate that "Celtic women also took an energetic part in melee. It was said that a Celtic man with his wife could hold off an entire troop of Roman soldiers... On the whole, these female champions are described as both beautiful and courageous....Sometimes referred to as Ban-faith or 'prophetess' they were experts in divination and supernatural wisdom." (Hansen)

That Guinevere might be such a warrior-prophetess would explain her close relationship with Merlin, and also the meaning of her Celtic name Gwenhyvar (which, as mentioned above, labels her as an enchantress). Celtic women were not only active in military arts, they were leaders in society and frequently considered to be in charge of the initiation and training of male warriors. This historical element may contribute to the way in which Guinevere in this story selects Arthur and prepares him for battle.

Celtic culture was matrilineal, which is to say that inheritance and power is determined not in the passage from father to son, but from mother to child. Most great warriors were training in their craft by women, and one assumes that if Arthur had lived among the Celts as a young child and come to military age among them, he no doubt would have been trained by a woman - particularly in a mythical sense, as he was destined to be a great hero. Another great mythical hero of that era, Cu Chulain, sought out his female war-teacher across the water on an island of shadows (not unlike Arthur's quest to find Guinevere in old Welsh texts). This warrior queen "was reputed to be the matron of self-defense and female independence as well as the guardian of young people who seek to know their full potential. Men came from further afield than Gaul to train with. her, and if they passed her rigorous tests they were more feared than any other fighting men." (Fox) Cthulain was then trained by her to be the strongest warrior in land. Arthur may be related to Chulain in terms of mythological development or even historically, as many of the same stories are associated with them. The warrior-queen who trained Cthulain was also Ban-faith, an enchantress, and this creates a new sense of why the 2004 movie portrays Guinevere as a warrior. The transformation of Guinevere becomes appropriate in this sense - that because her name indicated her being an enchantress in the original texts, and because there is a strong historical link between female warriors and enchantresses, she becomes a warrior in this version and responsible for Arthur's rise to power.