Sample Form Of Declaration For Removal Of Us Legend: Fill & Download for Free

Lemon, Chili and Needle hangingIf you observe some houses still hanging the Lemon, Chili and Needle, says it will save our house from badluck, buri najar, kanna drushta... so on.but the fact is, in Ancient India, there were no resources for commutation so they use to walk from city to city, also they need to cross some dense forest area some times in day and some times in night as well.if you check some more about benefits Lemon and Chilli's you will find Lemon keeps your body cool and will not allow you to dehydrate so whenever people walking near by and some sun strokes or something like this, they used Lemon to cure it, this is just an example there are many benefits.Let's come to Chilli, Chilli is nothing but one kind of poison (very mild), whenever and whoever get fits (strokes) they use to smell chili to cure the people and another best example is if snake bites or any poisons insect bites, then people use to try to eat chili, if it taste hot then it's okay if it didn't taste it like normal chili then poison's insect bite comes positive.Needle, In India people use to walk by bare legs no chappals or shoes, so there may be a chance of thorns on the road, so they use needle to take out the thorns from foot.Baudhāyana SulbasūtraPythagorean theoremIt is also referred to as Baudhayana theorem. The most notable of the rules (the Sulbasūtra-s do not contain any proofs for the rules which they describe, since they are sūtra-s, formulae, concise) in the Baudhāyana Sulba Sūtra says:दीर्घचतुरश्रस्याक्ष्णया रज्जु: पार्श्र्वमानी तिर्यग् मानी च यत् पृथग् भूते कुरूतस्तदुभयं करोति ॥dīrghachatursrasyākṣaṇayā rajjuḥ pārśvamānī, tiryagmānī,cha yatpṛthagbhūte kurutastadubhayāṅ karoti.A rope stretched along the length of the diagonal produces an area which the vertical and horizontal sides make together.[6]The lines are to be referring to a rectangle, although some interpretations consider this to refer to a square. In either case, it states that the square of the hypotenuse equals the sum of the squares of the sides. If restricted to right-angled isosceles triangles, however, it would constitute a less general claim, but the text seems to be quite open to unequal sides.If this refers to a rectangle, it is the earliest recorded statement of the Pythagorean theorem.Baudhāyana also provides a non-axiomatic demonstration using a rope measure of the reduced form of the Pythagorean theorem for an isosceles right triangle:The cord which is stretched across a square produces an area double the size of the original square.Sequences of Pythagorean triples used in cryptography as random sequences and for the generation of keys have been dubbed "Baudhayana sequences" in a 2014 paper.[7]Circling the squareAnother problem tackled by Baudhāyana is that of finding a circle whose area is the same as that of a square (the reverse of squaring the circle). His sūtra i.58 gives this construction:Draw half its diagonal about the centre towards the East-West line; then describe a circle together with a third part of that which lies outside the square.Explanation:Draw the half-diagonal of the square, which is larger than the half-side by .Then draw a circle with radius , or , which equals .Now , so the area .Square root of 2Baudhāyana i.61-2 (elaborated in Āpastamba Sulbasūtra i.6) gives the length of the diagonal of a square in terms of its sides, which is equivalent to a formula for the square root of 2:samasya dvikaraṇī. pramāṇaṃ tṛtīyena vardhayettac caturthenātmacatustriṃśonena saviśeṣaḥThe diagonal [lit. "doubler"] of a square. The measure is to be increased by a third and by a fourth decreased by the 34th. That is its diagonal approximately.[citation needed]That is,which is correct to five decimals.[8]Other theorems include: diagonals of rectangle bisect each other, diagonals of rhombus bisect at right angles, area of a square formed by joining the middle points of a square is half of original, the midpoints of a rectangle joined forms a rhombus whose area is half the rectangle, etc.Note the emphasis on rectangles and squares; this arises from the need to specify yajña bhūmikās—i.e. the altar on which a rituals were conducted, including fire offerings (yajña).Voltaire, the famous French writer and philosopher, stated that “Pythagoras went to the Ganges to learn geometry.” Abraham Seidenberg, author of the authoritative “History of Mathematics,” credits the Sulba Sutras as inspiring all mathematics of the ancient world from Babylonia to Egypt to Greece. As Voltaire & Seidenberg have stated, many highly significant mathematical concepts have come from the Vedic culture, such as:• The theorem bearing the name of the Greek mathematician Pythagorus is found in the Shatapatha Brahmanaas well as the Sulba Sutra, the Indian mathematical treatise, written centuries before Pythagorus was born.• The Decimal system, based on powers of ten, where the remainder is carried over to the next column, is first mentioned in the Taittiriya Samhita of the Black Yajurveda.• The Introduction of zero as both a numerical value and a place marker.• The Concept of infinity.• The Binary number system, essential for computers, was used in Vedic verse meters.• A hashing technique, similar to that used by modern search algorithms, such as that of Google, was used in South Indian musicology. From the name of a raga one can determine the notes of the raga from this Kathapayadi system.1. Were the ancients more advanced?Mythological stories are normally treated as a literature material or sometimes a science fiction. But there is a huge possibility that mythological stories in any religion may not merely be a legend or a piece of literature. In this blog, I would discuss some unbelievable correlation between some Hindu mythological stories and well established scientific facts. Take a look…2. Strange Narrations in MahabharataThere are certain narrations in Mahabharata that defies any rational explanations. Some examples are explanations about flying vehicles (Vimanas), Arjuna's travels in a flying chariot across the Himalayas, his visit of the Deva territories (ancient alien base-camp in Tibet?), his battle with the Nivata Kavachas (men in space-suits?), Salwa's attack of the city of Dwaraka in a flying city named Saubha, the triple space-cities of Asuras that revolved around Earth in three circular orbits that was destroyed by Siva using a single projectile weapon, and many more…3. Nuclear weaponsA few excerpts from the Mahabharata have caused doubts in the minds of historians, indicating the possibility of nuclear weapons being used in the Mahabharata war or post-war. This fire of suspicion has further been fuelled by the recent discoveries of green glass and many radioactive samples in certain excavations, in India, which apparently were associated with the Mahabharata war. Green glass is said to form when sand melts at very high temperatures prevalent in Nuclear Explosions.4. Nuclear weaponsIn the Mahabharata the total death toll amounts to around 1.6 billion in a matter of 18 days. How could this be possible unless and otherwise there is an involvement of weapons of mass destruction. Modern archeological surveys have slowly started to provide us valuable clues of the war. The vast amount of devastation found at the site of Mohenjo Daro corresponds exactly to Nagasaki.5. An example of cloningIn Srimad Bhagavatam, it has been mentioned that when His Excellency Nimi was dead, the seers by process of Mantha, (perhaps, human cloning in modern idioms) created a new baby from his dead body. The baby was called Janaka, as it was out of (mantha) cloning of his father. It was called Videha, as it was born out of a non-sexual process. As the baby was born out of a process of mantha it was called Mithila and his kingdom was also named as Mithila.6. An example of cloningIn another episode when Sita and Rama’s son “Lava” was lost, Valmiki produced "Kusha" from grass, which is analogous to cloning. Apparently again, the cloning he did was far more advanced than the cloning techniques of today. “Raktabij” is another similar citing, where every drop of his blood on earth produced his “Adult clone”.7. The birth of KauravasThe science of cloning was well known and practised during the Mahabharatha times. As per Dr. B.G. Matapurkar, the Kauravas "were products of technology that modern science has not even developed yet". He said that according to the description in Mahabharatha, the Kauravas were created by splitting the single embryo into 100 parts and growing each part in a separate container. In other words, "they not only knew about test-tube babies and embryo splitting but also had the technology to grow human foetuses outside human body."8. Romans used nanotechnologyThe Lycurgus Cup is a 1,600-year-old jade green Roman chalice that changes colour depending on the direction of the light upon it. It baffled scientists as they could not work out why the cup appeared jade green when lit from the front but blood red when lit from behind. The mystery was solved in 1990, when researchers discovered that the Roman artisans were nanotechnology pioneers: they had impregnated the glass with particles of silver and gold, ground down until they were as small as 50 nanometres in diameter.9. Embryo transfer and the birth of BalramaEmbryo transfer is done today as In Vitro Fertilization (IVF) or Zygote IntraFallopian Transfer (ZIFT) and in both processes embryo is developed outside the womb and then placed inside. When Kansa had killed six foetuses of Devaki and she got pregnant for the seventh time, transfer of foetus was arranged by Vishnu. He ordered Yogamaya to take out the foetus of Devaki and place it in the womb of Rohini, another wife of Vasudeva who then resided in the house of Nanda in Gokul.10. Abhimanyu, A warrior in the wombIn Mahabharatha, when Subhadra was pregnant, Arjun told her the secret of entering the chakravyuh. When he was explaining the exit procedure, Subhadra fell asleep. Hence Abhimanyu learned the entrance procedure while he was in Subhadra's womb but did not learn the exit strategy. There was a time when people criticized this concept. But modern science says that it is very much possible. In his book "Right Brain Education in Infancy" Dr. Makoto Shichida, says, the right brain is active during gestation.11. Ram Setu was built by Lord RamaRamasethu is an engineering masterpiece. From scientific point of view, the technology once existed to make stones float on water and the architect like Nal and Neel were two architects advanced in building a bridge from India to sri lanka within 5 days with the help of dedicated work force of million Vanaras. Even in Valmiki Ramayana, there is a concept of civil engineering in building this bridge. This bridge was not constructed just by throwing stone with lord name but there were many engineering methods.12. Organ transplantsWe know that there are two types of replacement of body parts: First there are parts like hands, arms, and legs, which are not vital organs. Then there are the transplants of vital organs. The one instance where one can conceive of a combination of the two is transplanting the entire head, which is both an external appendage and the storehouse of the most important organ in the body, namely the brain. Thus, head replacement would be the most sophisticated organ transplant one can imagine.13. Organ transplantsWe find an instance of this in the story of Ganesha. There are several accounts of how Ganesha received his head. According to one, Shani was among the guests at Ganesha's birth. When Shani looked directly at the child, the baby's head turned to ash. Parvati began to wail. When this happened, Vishnu, flew off in search of a substitute head. He found on the bank of a river a sleeping elephant. He severed the beast's head and affixed it on to the body of Ganesha.14. Live TelecastAs Dhritarashtra was blind but wanted to know what was happening at the battlefield, Krishna gifted Sanjay with "Dibya Drishti", so that he could see a “Live Telecast” of “Kurukshetra” and describe that to Dhritarashtra. “Dibya drishti” is analogous to modern television set in the sense that Krishna could not give it directly to Dhristarastra but needed Sanjay.15. Live TelecastImagine a central computer system with wireless links that can accept voice commands or thoughts, then you can understand how cameras in the heaven, as in satellites of these days, would point to the locations which Dhritarashtra asked Sanjay to describe about. Therefore, “Dibya drishti” in modern description is a television set with a wireless link to the satellite and an access right to the system to control the cameras. The access permission was granted by the System Administrator, Krishna.16. Time TravelIf we look into ancient texts we can find a number of references to time travelling. In Hindu mythology, there is the story of King Raivata Kakudmi who travels to meet the creator Brahma. Even if this trip didn’t last long, when Kakudmi returned back to Earth, 108 yugas had passed on Earth, and it is thought that each yuga represents about 4 million years. The explanation Brahma gave to Kakudmi is that time runs differently in different planes of existence.17. Time TravelSimilarly, we have references in the Quran about the cave of Al-Kahf. The story refers to a group of young Christian people, who in 250 AD tried to escape persecution and retreated, under God’s guidance, to a cave where God put them to sleep. They woke up 309 years later. This story coincides with the Christian story of the seven sleepers, with a few differences.18. Tele-visionSanjaya received the faculty of distant vision especially for performing the task of reporting what was going on in the battlefield. Conceptually, it was as if he was watching the unraveling of the scenes on a television screen. It was more than that: He was endowed with full knowledge of history and geography which enabled him to recount to the king in details of the topography of the entire country, and narrate everything that was going on in Kurukshetra.19. Life-principle from the stars: Akash GangaIn Hindu lore there is an interesting account of how the sacred river Ganga which has its origins in the Himalayan range, actually arose. In Ramayana it is stated that the river "rose from the skies and finally came down to earth in the form of a terrestrial stream that has the power to rid us of worldly sins." In this vision, the river's pristine presence in the universe may still be seen as the Milky which is known as Akash Ganga or the Celestial Ganga.20. Life-principle from the stars: Akash GangaWe note that this is perhaps the first instance in history where one put forward the idea of a material something reaching us from the stellar world. The extra-terrestrial origin of meteors was not discovered until the eighteenth century. And it was only in the twentieth century that we became aware of the ceaseless shower of cosmic rays which reach us from the sun primarily, but also from beyond our solar system.21. Sexual orgasmIn a conversation between Yudhishtra and Bhisma, Yudhishthira said, “O king to tell me truly which of the two viz., man or woman derives the greater pleasure from an act of union with each other. Kindly resolve my doubt in this respect.” Bhishma while replying his questions explains a story where a king transformed into women later given an option to again opt for whichever sex he/she likes opts to remain as women with the following explanation for it.22. Sexual orgasmThe lady said, 'I desire to remain a woman, In acts of congress, the pleasure that women enjoy is always much greater than what is enjoyed by men. It is for this reason, O Sakra! that I desire to continue a woman” This is very much acknowledged by modern sexologists.23. Aircrafts of those timesGoing into the history of the Indian sub-continent and the ancient science that prevailed, the hypothesis of "vimanas existed" comes close to true. The Vaimaanika shasthra of Maharishi Bharadhwaja gives description of aircrafts that are much more advanced than our present generational aircrafts. According to the Dronaparva, Vimanas are described as shaped like a sphere and can move along at great speed on a mighty wind generated by mercury. Section XLIII of Vana Parva describes about Arjuna's arival at the city of Indra 'Amaravati' wherein vimanas are mentioned.24. Distance of Earth from SunTwo lines of “Hanuman Chalisa" computes the distance of earth from sun with great simplicity and that too quite accurately - जुग सहस्त्र योजन पर भानु, लील्यो ताहि मधुर फल जानू (Juug Sahastra Yojan Par Bhanu, Lilyo taahi madhur fal jaanun). This means that Sun (Bhanu) is at a distance of Juug Sahastra Yojans (जुग सहस्त्र योजन- Distance Unit in Hindi).25. Distance of Earth from SunAccording to conversion practices that are in use as per Hindu Vedic Literature - 1Juug= 12000; Sahastra= 1000; 1Yojan=8 Miles. Thus 12000 X 1000 X 8 = 96,000,000 miles. 1 miles= 1.6 kms. This means 153,600,000 Km. In the 17th century two scientists Giovanni and Richer have calculated the distance of sun from earth accurately and real close (at 140 million kilometers) to now officially declared figures.26. TeleportationConsider the story of Usha and Chitralekha, which appears in "Srimad Bhagavatam." The beautiful Princess Usha, single and longing for love, had the experience of a handsome youth in her dream one night. The dream was interrupted, and she woke up and exclaimed, "Oh, beloved one, where are you?" She confided the dream to her close friend Chitralekha. Chitralekha said she would find who the young man was and get him to her. But how was she to recognize him?27. TeleportationChitralekha began to draw a series of faces, and asked Usha if any of them resembled the man of her dream. Usha came upon a drawing which was of Aniruddha, a grandson of Lord Krishna. That night, Chitralekha transported herself to Dwaraka where she found Aniruddha. Two aspects of today's world are implicit in this story. First there is the idea that one can identify an unknown person through sketches, a matter that is routinely done in criminal investigations. Then, of course, there is the notion of teleportation.28. Successful Brain SurgeryScientists have discovered the world’s oldest known case of a successful human brain surgery after unearthing a 4300 year old skull from the site of an ancient Civilization site. This discovery was done by the scientists from the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) who found evidence pointing this to be the oldest known case of Trephination in the world meant to treat a skull injury. Trephination is the process of drilling holes in the damaged skull to remove shattered bits of bone from a fractured skull.29. Where did all that technology vanish?The natural question that comes up is that if this were so, where did all that technology vanish? My guess would be that the Mahabharat War was Nuclear in nature and the use of all those divine Astras (aka Nuclear weapons) led to the decimation of not only a large portion of the world population but also the technology and civilizational progress that mankind had achieved till then. Imagine if such a war breaks out today, what would be the condition of humanity in the decades to come?I would like to take this opportunity to mention the most misunderstood myth or truth about Hindu gods, as 33 Core, it’s not 33 Core it’s 33 types.33 Koti Devata ~ The Concept Of 33 Koti Devata( From Veda)The Vedas refer to not 33 crore Devatas but 33 types (Koti in Sanskrit) of Devatas. They are explained in Shatpath Brahman and many other scriptures very clearly."Yasya Trayastrinshad Devaa Ange Sarve Samaahitaa, Skamma Tam Bruhi Katamah Swideva Sah”.(Atharva Veda)Which means: with God’s influence, these thirty-three (supporting devta) sustain the world.In Brhadaranyaka Upanishad while discussing Brahman, Yajnavalkya is asked how many gods are there. He says that there are three hundred and three and three thousand and three gods. When the question is repeated? He says, thirty three. When the question is again repeated he says, six. Finally, after several repetitions he says ONE. (Chapter I, hymn 9, verse 1)The number 33 comes from the number of Vedic gods explained by Yajnavalkya in Brhadaranyaka Upanishad – the eight Vasus, the eleven Rudras, the twelve Adityas, Indra and Prajapati. (Chapter I, hymn 9, verse 2)They are: 8-Vasu, 11-Rudra, and 12-Aaditya, 1-Indra and 1-Prajaapati.8. Vasus are ~ Earth, Water, Fire, Air, Ether, Moon, Sun, and Star. They are called Vasus, because they are abode of all that lives, moves or exists. (also mentioned in Mahabharat, 1/66/18)11. Rudras ~ The ten Pranas (Praana, Apaana, Vyaana, Samaana, Udaana, Naag, Kurma, Krikal, Devadutta and Dhananjaya) i.e. nervauric forces which live in the human body. The eleventh is the human soul. These are called ‘Rudras’ because when they desert the body, it becomes dead and the relations of the deceased, consequently, begin to weep.Rudra means one who makes a person to weep. { also mentioned in Harivansha 13/51-52})12. Adityaas ---the twelve months of a year called Adityaas, they cause the lapse of the term of existence of each object or being. (also mentioned in Mahabharat)1. Indra which is also known as the (all-pervading) electricity, as it is productive of great force.1. Prajaapati , also called the “Yajna” because it benefits mankind by the purification of air, water, rain and vegetables and because it aids the development of various arts, and in it the honor is accorded to the learned and the wise.The master of these 33 Devatas is the Mahadeva or Ishwar who alone is to be worshipped as per 14th Kanda of Shatpath Brahman.1. Indian Scriptures have answers that modern science needs?During the growth of the ancient civilizations, ancient technology was the result of incredible advances in engineering in ancient times. These advances in the history of technology stimulated societies to adopt new ways of living and governance. However, many ancient inventions were forgotten, lost to the pages of history, only to be re-invented millennia later. Here are the best examples of ancient technology and inventions that demonstrate the ingenuity of our ancient ancestors. So, get ready to be awed...2. Saints or scientists?The land of India is known to be the land of saints and Gods. It is filled with various types of unexplainable things. In ancient times, various saints after doing years of hard meditation, their work and with their patience found the secrets hidden in the Vedas 1,000 years ago. These inventions later came to be known as modern science. Some of the saints came out with such amazing inventions that shocked the kings of those times as well. Click on to know…3. The Indian Sage who developed Atomic Theory 2,600 years agoJohn Dalton (1766 – 1844), an English chemist and physicist, is the man credited today with the development of atomic theory. However, a theory of atoms was actually formulated 2,500 years before Dalton by an Indian sage and philosopher, known as Acharya Kanad. Acharya Kanad was born in 600 BC in Prabhas Kshetra (near Dwaraka) in Gujarat, India. His real name was Kashyap. It was Kanada who originated the idea that anu (atom) was an indestructible particle of matter.4. The Indian Sage who developed Atomic Theory 2,600 years agoAn interesting story states that this theory occurred to him while he was walking with food in his hand. As he nibbled at the food in his hand, throwing away the small particles, it occurred to him that he could not divide the food into further parts and thus the idea of a matter which cannot be divided further came into existence. He called that indivisible matter anu, i.e. molecule, which was misinterpreted as atom. He also stated that anu can have two states - Absolute rest and a State of motion.5. Newton’s Law, 1200 Years before Newton“Objects fall on the earth due to a force of attraction by the earth. Therefore, the earth, planets, constellations, moon and sun are held in orbit due to this attraction.” The meaning of these lines is parallel to that of Newton’s Law of Gravity. But these lines are not said by the European scientist. They are said by an Indian - in Surya Siddhanta, dated 400-500 AD, the ancient Hindu astronomer Bhaskaracharya states these lines. Approximately 1200 years later (1687 AD), Sir Isaac Newton rediscovered this phenomenon and called it the Law of Gravity.6. Acharya Charak: Father of medicineAcharya Charak has been crowned as the Father of Medicine. His renowned work, the "Charak Samhita," is considered as an encyclopedia of Ayurveda. His principles, diagnoses, and cures retain their potency and truth even after a couple of millennium. When the science of anatomy was confused with different theories in Europe, Acharya Charak revealed through his innate genius and inquires the facts on human anatomy, embryology, pharmacology, blood circulation and diseases like diabetes, tuberculosis, heart disease, etc.7. Charak SamhitaIn the "Charak Samhita" he has described the medicinal qualities and functions of 100,000 herbal plants. He has emphasized the influence of diet and activity on mind and body. He has proved the correlation of spirituality and physical health contributed greatly to diagnostic and curative sciences. He has also prescribed and ethical charter for medical practitioners two centuries prior to the Oath. Through his genius and intuition, Acharya Charak forever remains etched in the annals of history as one of the greatest and noblest of rishi-scientists.8. Sage BharadwajIn 1875, the Vymaanika-Shaastra, a fourth century BC text written by Maharshi Bhardwaj, was discovered in a temple in India. The book dealt with the operation of ancient vimanas and included information on steering, precautions for long flights, protection of the airships from storms and lightning, and how to switch the drive to solar energy, or some other “free energy” source. Vimanas were said to take off vertically or dirigible. Bharadwaj the Wise refers to no less than 70 authorities and 10 experts of air travel in antiquity.9. Rishi KanvaThe science of wind has been explained by Sage Kanva in Rigveda sections 8/41/6 in Jagati meter of God wind. Sage Kashyapa has described the features and properties of this substance in Rigveda 9/64/26 in the hymns of God Pavamana Soma in meter Gayatri. Kanva was a great Rishi, a descendent of Sage Angirasa. He looked after Shakuntala when she was abandoned by her mother and father (rishi vishwamitra). Bharat, the son of Shakuntala was also brought up by him.10. Sage Kapil Muni: Author of the Sankhya DarshanKapil muni was born equipped with rare intellect, dispassion and spiritual powers. He authored Sankhya Darshan that defined the term "Dhyaan or Meditation" as “the state of mind when remains without any subjectivity / objectivity i.e. without any thought (when the mind is away from worldly objects), is called the "Dhyaan or Meditation”. He teaches that there is an unbroken continuity from the lowest inorganic to the highest organic forms. The source of world according to him is Prakriti (fundamental nature).11. Kapil Muni: Finding how the Universe was createdAccording to Kapil Muni, there are twenty-five principles responsible for the manifestation of the Creation (Samasara), out of which Purusha and Prakriti are eternal and independent of each other. Kapila is not concerned to deny the reality of personal God or Maheshwara. Yet his assertion is that, no arguments can irrefutably establish God's reality. Therefore, in his model of creation the Purusha (Spirit) and Prakrity (matter) are held solely responsible for creation, without acknowledging an Almighty and intelligent Creator, the God.12. Patanjali: The father of YogaThe Science of Yoga is one of several unique contributions of India to the world. It seeks to discover and realize the ultimate Reality through yogic practices. Acharya Patanjali, prescribed the control of prana (life breath) as the means to control the body, mind and soul. This subsequently rewards one with good health and inner happiness. His 84 yogic postures effectively enhance the efficiency of the respiratory, circulatory, nervous, digestive and endocrine systems and many other organs of the body.13. AryabhattHe was a master Astronomer and Mathematician, born in 476 CE in Kusumpur (Bihar). In 499 CE, he wrote a text on astronomy and an unparallel treatise on mathematics called "Aryabhatiyam" He formulated the process of calculating the motion of planets and the time of eclipses. Aryabhatt was the first to proclaim that the earth is round, it rotates on its axis, orbits the sun and is suspended in space - 1,000 years before Copernicus published his heliocentric theory.14. SushrutaBorn to sage Vishwamitra, Sushruta is the father of surgery. 2600 years ago, he and health scientists of his time conducted complicated surgeries like cesareans, cataract, artificial limbs, Rhinoplasty (restoration of a damaged nose), 12 types of fractures, 6 types of dislocations, urinary stones and even plastic surgery and brain surgery. Usage of anesthesia was well known in ancient India. He is the author of the book "Sushruta Samhita", in which he describes over 300 surgical procedures and 125 surgical instruments.15. BhaskaracharyaHe calculated the time taken by the earth to orbit the sun hundreds of years before the astronomer Smart; Time taken by earth to orbit the sun: (5th century) 365.258756484 days. Born in the obscure village of Vijjadit (Jalgaon) in Maharastra, Bhaskaracharya's mathematical works called "Lilavati" and "Bijaganita" are considered to be unparalleled. In his treatise "Siddhant Shiromani" he writes on planetary positions, eclipses, cosmography, mathematical techniques and astronomical equipment. In the "Surya Siddhant" he makes a note on the force of gravity.16. VarahamihiraVarahamihir's book "panch siddhant", noted that the moon and planets are lustrous not because of their own light but due to sunlight. In the "Bruhad Samhita" and "Bruhad Jatak", he has revealed his discoveries in the domains of geography, constellation, science, botany and animal science. In his treatise on botanical science, Varahamihir presents cures for various diseases afflicting plants and trees.17. The galaxy is oval, Earth is sphericalYajur Vedic verse: "Brahmaanda vyapta deha bhasitha himaruja..." describing Shiva as the one who is spread out in Brahmaanda. Anda means an egg depicting the shape of the galaxy. It was the middle east Europians and Greeks who wrongly believed that earth was flat. But Indians, since long have always known that it was spherical. In many scriptures, the word Bhoogala is used, Gola meaning round.18. Existence of Atomic and Sub atomic particlesThe world accounts discovery of atoms and sub atomic particles to Western scientists who coined these words and theories only in the early 17th century. An excerpt from Lalitha Sahasranama, told by Hayagreeva to Agasthya muni, dating back to the distant ages of the past,describes the Goddess as the super consciousness/Brahman that pervades even the sub atomic particles within matter. "Paranjyotih parandhamah paramanuh paratpara". The word "anuvu" means atom. Paramanu is sub-atomic particle, finer than the finest of atom, meaning electrons and the others.19. Ancient times and nuclear weaponsRadiation still so intense, the area is highly dangerous! A heavy layer of radioactive ash in Rajasthan, India, covers a three-square mile area, ten miles west of Jodhpur. For some time it has been established that there is a very high rate of birth defects and cancer in the area under construction. Scientists have unearthed an ancient city where evidence shows an atomic blast dating back thousands of years, from 8,000 to 12,000 years, destroying everything most of the buildings and probably a half-million people.20. Ancient times and nuclear weaponsThe Mahabharata clearly describes a catastrophic blast that rocked the continent. "A single projectile charged with all the power in the Universe...An incandescent column of smoke and flame as bright as 10,000 suns, rose in all its splendor...it was an unknown weapon, an iron thunderbolt, a gigantic messenger of death which reduced to ashes an entire race.” Historian Kisari Mohan Ganguli says that Indian sacred writings are full of such descriptions.21. Ancient ultrasound machines?Using a variety of complicated instruments, gynecologists have gradually come to know how the embryo grows during the period of pregnancy. But the Shrimad Bhagavatam, 3rd canto, 30th chapter, gives a vivid description of the growth of the embryo in the mother's womb. If we compare the information given therein with the information given in a standard textbook such as the embryology section of Gray's Anatomy, there are striking similarities in the information obtained from the two sources.22. Ancient science knows more than modern science?The Vedas claim that there are living entities everywhere - even in fire. Modern science, however, presumed that no life could exist in fire. This presumption is in fact the basis for the process of sterilization. But recent advancements in the field of medicine have shown that microbes called 'fire bacteria' survive even in fire.23. The incredible powers of the ancient Siddhars!Siddhars are a type of saint in India who are said to have had many powers and achieved a ‘god-like’ state through specific secret practices that were known only to them. These powers spanned from controlling time and space, to transforming the body, manipulating matter at the molecular level and achieving immortality. The Siddhars were followers of the God Shiva and according to different texts there were 18 of them. Their teachings and findings were written in the form of poems in the Tamil language.24. Who were Siddhars?There is a debate as to who was the first Siddhar. Some legends talk about Sri Pathanjali, who was considered to be an incarnation of Adiseshan, the celestial five-headed snake associated with God Vishnu. But the prevailing tradition refers to Agasthya (or Agasthyar) as the first Siddhar, one of the seven sages (or Saptarshis) as mentioned in the Vedic texts, and he was the son of the god Brahma of the Hindu creation story.25. Siddhars or scientists?Agathiyar is considered to be the author of a lot of the first Siddhar literature and he was supposed to have lived in the 7th century BC. About 96 books are attributed to him and that includes writings in alchemy, medicine and spirituality. Apart from the legends that exist, the beginnings of the Siddhars’ are lost in time.26. Ashta Siddhis of SiddharsThe powers that the Siddhars possessed were separated in categories. The main category included 8 powers called ashta siddhis: To become tiny as the atom within the atom (Anima); To become big in unshakeable proportions (Mahima); To become as light as vapour in levitation (Laghima); To become as heavy as the mountain (Garima); To enter into other bodies in transmigration (Prapti); To be in all things, omni-pervasive (Prakamya); To be lord of all creation in omnipotence (Isatvam); To be everywhere in omnipresence (Vasitvam)27. Ten Siddhis of SiddharsThere are ten secondary siddhis as described in Bhagavata Purana that include the following: Being undisturbed by hunger, thirst, and other bodily appetites; Hearing things far away; Seeing things far away; Moving the body wherever thought goes (teleportation/astral projection); Assuming any form desired; Entering the bodies of others; Dying when one desires; Witnessing and participating in the past times of the gods; Perfect accomplishment of one's determination; Orders or commands being unimpeded28. Ancient science and SiddharsA famous Siddhar was Tirumular, who was a Tamil mystic and writer of 6th century AD and was also one of the 18 Siddhars according to the Tamil Siddha tradition. His main work is named “Tirumantiram”, a 3,000 verse text, which is the foundation of the Southern Shaiva Siddharta School of philosophy. Another Siddhar, Bhogar (Bhoganathar), who lived between the 3rd and 5th century AD is said to have discovered the elixir of immortality – one his main works is the Pharmacognosy.29. The mystery remains…!Due to the closely-guarded nature of the Siddhar records, the original knowledge of this enigmatic group of saints has remained shrouded in secrecy. The question remains whether their powers were real and, if so, how they managed to attain them. Manipulating space, time and matter would require knowledge far beyond what we have today.source : Shocking scientific inventions by ancient Hindu saints!Our India is great.Thanks for all upvotes.

Credit: Ancient EUContrary to the popular claims in modern times that there is no “evidence” for a King Arthur, the reality is that there is about as much evidence for King Arthur as there is for just about any other major historical figure of the ancient world.Historicity of King Arthur - WikipediaThe King Arthur of legend may or may not be true, but the existence of an early Christian warrior “king” who brought peace and prosperity to the Britons during his lifetime almost certainly did exist, and I intend to explain my findings later in the answer, while also giving the best evidence available with what we already have in regards to who the real King Arthur of history was.Before we delve into the historicity of King Arthur, it should be remembered that this “king” was probably born during the late fifth century, and died in the early decades of the sixth century.Arthur himself has been nicknamed the “Roman King of the Britons”, and not without good reason.Credit: WikipediaAbove: A 1385 Depiction Of King Arthur Sitting On His ThroneKing Arthur - WikipediaThe Romans themselves had only left Britain for good during the beginning of the fifth century: within a lifetime of the historical King Arthur’s birth.In addition, tradition states that Arthur was the illegitimate — and possibly estranged — son of Uther Pendragon; another warrior king who is deemed legendary.However, what is of significance here, is that King Arthur and his father are considered to be direct descendants of the late second century Roman military general, Lucius Artorius Castus (140–197 AD), who helped in establishing a stabilised Roman rule throughout the southern half of modern England, leaving only modern-day Scotland in the hands of the “barbarians”.Credit: WikipediaAbove: Map Of Ancient Briton As It Looked In 540 ADSub-Roman Britain - WikipediaThis Roman general has never been doubted to be a historical character, and in fact, some have even gone so far as to claim that he was King Arthur, because Castus even convened a council of senior officers to form the new Roman Government in the aftermath of the latest rebellion.These men would have ridden on horseback, and many regard this as the inspiration for the Knights of the Round Table.Credit: TV TropeAbove: Romanticised Depiction Of King Arthur Sitting (Top Centre) With His KnightsHowever, if a King Arthur of history did exist — a fact that is very likely — it is unlikely that Castus and his officers were the actual inspiration for the modern legend of King Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table, even though it is quite plausible that Arthur’s lineage would have been influenced by this style of government, when Arthur himself supposedly came to the throne, some three centuries after Castus invaded modern Britain.For the sake of simplicity, King Arthur -- whose real name was, in all likelihood, Ambrosius Aurelianus -- will be the default name used throughout the entirety of this text, except for when I find it suitable to do otherwise.One of the reasons why I have chosen not to refer to King Arthur by his birth name, Ambrosius, becomes apparent once we realise that there were potentially two people associated with the King Arthur story whose names were also Ambrosius Aurelianus.Credit: WikipediaAbove: Fifteenth Century Depiction Of King Arthur’s Uncle, Ambrosius AurelianusAmbrosius Aurelianus - WikipediaThe first one is King Arthur’s own paternal uncle, who is traditionally believed to have been born in 450 AD, some twenty years before the birth of King Arthur. The second Ambrosius Aurelianus dates even earlier to around 400 AD, and who was probably the grandfather or great uncle of the legendary King Arthur.In fact, the historical evidence for King Arthur’s uncle, Ambrosius Aurelianus is so comparably strong when matched against other historical figures living in Britain during this time -- least of all, his own nephew -- that this military general is often proclaimed to be the real King Arthur of legend.However, the stories we have from the earlier centuries make it very clear that King Arthur was the nephew of Ambrosius Aurelianus, and not the same person.Another contemporary of King Arthur’s is the warlord Vortigern, whose claim as a historical individual — while not without its sceptics — is generally accepted as being based on a real person.Credit: King Arthur WikiAbove: An Older Vortigern Depicted In FilmVortigern - WikipediaThe stories behind Vortigern are likely more apocryphal, as he is sometimes regarded as both a friend and archenemy of King Arthur.What is remarkable, however, is that Vortigern is said to have first come into power sometime around the year 428 AD according to some books I have read on the topic. While this was clearly too early for King Arthur or his uncle, it would have fallen conveniently around the time when King Arthur’s grandfather or great uncle was in his prime.And, since they probably all had the same name, later generations may have attributed the interactions with Vortigern and King Arthur’s ancestor as being part of a legend that eventually blossomed into something more fictional than historical.It is imperative to note, however, that despite Vortigern being more widely accepted as a historical figure than King Arthur, nearly all the evidence we have of Vortigern’s existence come from none other than the stories of King Arthur himself.Credit: Coronado TImesAbove: Depiction Of A Younger King VortigernOne of the most plausible locations for Vortigern’s rule is in the modern city of Wroxeter. In more modern times, an ancient ruin said to be that of a royal mansion dating to the fifth century AD has been found near the centre of the city describing the name of a ruler who resided in this place between the years 460-475 AD, who is most generally believed to be none other than King Arthur’s legendary rival.Knowing that Vortigern was regarded as one of Arthur’s archenemies in many legendary stories -- despite the fact that King Arthur was himself merely a child when Vortigern would have historical died -- it is quite plausible that if Arthur was indeed related to Vortigern through his mother’s side, that a young Arthur may have resided either in, or near the mansion at some point during his youth, though we obviously cannot be certain.The strongest evidence we have that Vortigern “supreme king” ruled during this period, is an ancient stone from the late fifth century found near the ruins of the ancient mansion, which proclaims a ruler by the name of Cunorix as having resided here.Credit: Under The InfluenceAbove: Modern Illustration Showing King Arthur’s Cousin, Vortimer, In BattleKing ArthurSince Vortigern would sound like a pretentious name for a ruler during his lifetime (Cunorix does, however, translate to Hound King), the chances that his contemporaries would have regarded him by such -- at least on a personal level -- is slim.Vortigern’s grandfather was said to have been a man by the name of Cuhelyn, and his son, Maquicoline -- “son of the holly” celyn -- Vortigern’s father.The Mammoth Book of King ArthurThe stone commemorates Maquicoline’s son, who resided at the mansion for a period of fifteen years between 460-475 AD, making this a very likely -- though unprovable -- place for where Cunorix (Vortigern) may have resided in his later years.Credit: WikipediaAbove: The Ancient Public Bath Of Viriconium (Wroxeter) Believed To Have Been Located Within The Kingdom Of Powys During Vortigern’s TimeViroconium Cornoviorum - WikipediaNonetheless, even in those stories, Vortigern is often claimed to have been rivals with a man by the name of Ambrosius Aurelianus.ARTHUR’S EARLY LIFENow, let’s look at what life itself looked like in Britain during King Arthur’s early years.In all probability, King Arthur was born between 450–470 AD (with most believing the later date), either in the twilight years of the legendary Christian pope — Saint Pope Leo the Great, whose historical claim has never been seriously questioned — or shortly after the pontiff’s death in 461 AD.Pope Leo is widely credited for having an audience with Attila the Hun, where he persuaded the barbarian to turn away from Rome. Pope Leo -- while not without his human flaws -- was also known for his wisdom, and for giving everything within reason which the church possessed towards the poor, in addition to being seen as such a great writer that he would posthumously become one of only thirty-six Christians to date to receive the title “Doctor of the Church.”Credit: Stanford UniversityAbove: Saint Pope Leo The Great Meeting Attila The Hun In 452 ADIf King Arthur was born during this period, as most believers of the King Arthur story believe, it is beyond certain that King Arthur would have known about Pope Leo’s works, and that he would have been greatly inspired by the pope’s deeds, as King Arthur would also later on become known for his wisdom and religious devotion as much as he was known for his military and political endeavour.Geoffrey of Monmouth is considered to be one of the earliest writers whose works on King Arthur have survived in their entirety (though not the earliest references), and sceptics have pointed out that he had gotten his writings from Latin works as proof that the King Arthur story must be a fictional story dating back to pagan times.However, this argument erroneously assumes that modern English was the spoken language of the Britons at the time. During the late fifth and early sixth century, there was no universal language in the British Isles.Meanwhile, Latin, or a dialect of Latin would have been spoken by the more educated Roman population of the period, whom King Arthur himself was said to be descended from. The use of Latin by the elite classes of fifth and sixth century Britain is comparable to the Scandinavian languages spoken by the educated vikings and their descendants in later centuries, or French during the post-conquest age of William the Conqueror. (Henry V, victor at Agincourt, is said to be the first monarch in British history who learned English as his native language.)Credit: BritannicaAbove: King Henry V Defeating The French At Agincourt In 1415It therefore would not be unreasonable to assume that King Arthur’s strongest language would have been a form of Latin (possibly Vulgar Latin) and not a language that was traditionally spoken amongst most Britons of the period, and least of all, not the English language as we know it today, which is said to have only become more distinguishable during the late ninth century with the introduction of the Frisian language.In the world of Arthur, the Romans -- which he was a direct descendant of -- who came to the British Isles with the intention of “civilising” the Britons would have been comparable to the Europeans “civilising” the Native Americans in the New World a millennium later.Even though the historical Arthur would probably have become accustomed to the languages spoken by the native Britons over the course of his lifetime, it is very unlikely that Arthur spoke any language other than Latin, or a dialect of Latin, during his personal life.The name Arthur itself does not sound Latin, and yet Ambrosius — his uncle’s name, and probably his own personal name — is indeed a very Latin name. There is, in fact, evidence that the name itself may even have its roots in Ancient Greece, and that the name Ambrosius translated to someone who was either divine or immortal. Either way, the name itself is not native to the British Isles, and it was probably integrated into ancient British society with the arrival of the Romans between the first century BC or AD.Credit: BritannicaAbove: Modern Depiction Of King ArthurTo put this into context, Ambrosius Aurelianus was the most likely name given to the historical King Arthur during his lifetime in much the same way Jesus was known as Yeshua, Confucius as Kong Zi, or even Charlemagne as merely Charles.The name Arthur may have been a name posthumously bestowed upon him centuries after his death, when the post-Roman era was beginning to fade, and residents of ancient Britain wanted someone with a name more culturally recognisable to their own.According to one legend, a legendary leader dating to pagan times by the name of Artuir was prophesied to deliver the Britons from their oppression, and that this king would arrive in their hour of need as the messiah of the Britons.This story is said to date back at least two centuries before the birth of the historical King Arthur.That leaves us only four options regarding how we are to treat this story:Ambrosius Aurelianus/King Arthur knew the story and deliberately set out to prophesy the storyIt is a coincidenceThe Britons themselves embellished some claims in order to associate the historical King Arthur with the legendary ArtuirThose who wrote about the character Artuir -- who was a future character when the legend first came to fruition -- successfully predicted King Arthur’s own existenceCredit: Primary FactsAbove: Modern Illustration Depicting King Arthur Leading His Men In BattleKing Arthur: Facts and Information - Primary FactsEither way, I leave that for readers to decide, since my focus is on establishing the existence of a historical King Arthur, as well as his life, and not on whether or not the pagan stories surrounding an even older legendary figure are true or not.One area I do want to look at is the evidence for any rulers named Arthur who may have lived during the same period as King Arthur.In fact, the earliest recorded case of a British king by the name of Arthur, was of a ruler who ruled the Kingdom of Dyfed from 570–600 AD: more than a century after the birth of the King Arthur of legend.Soon afterwards, another ruler by the name of Arthur of Gwent also came along, and -- like Arthur of Dyfed -- has had many stories written about him, which has since resulted in Arthur of Gwent, son of Meurig, being recently declared a genuine candidate for the historical King Arthur.Credit: EntertainmentAbove: King Arthur Fighting The Black Knight In Monty Python And The Holy Grail (1975)https://www.reading.ac.uk/web/files/GCMS/RMS-2000-04_K._Dark,_A_Famous_Arthur_in_the_Sixth_Century.pdfHowever, there is another person who is far more important in identifying not only the historical roots of King Arthur, but in knowing a little bit more about the man himself.To know who King Arthur may have been, one should not go into the past, but into the future.I bring you, now, the historical founder of a united England:KING ATHELSTANThis king has been so closely related to the story of King Arthur, from his contributions, his personality, as well as his historical assumption to being the first true unifier in all of England, that until as recently as half a century ago, King Athelstan was generally accepted to be the true inspiration for the origins of King Arthur.Credit: WikipediaAbove: A Statue Depicting An Infant Athelstan Standing Beside His Aunt AthelfladJust like King Arthur, Athelstan is credited with unifying all of England in a single campaign which played out very similarly to the ones King Arthur is credited for waging.To make matters more interesting, there is no concrete evidence that King Arthur (Ambrosius) was ever married, least of all, to a woman named Guinevere.HOWEVER…King Athelstan’s mother was named Ecgwynn.Just think of the word gwynn and associate that with the name GUINevere.Even the movie, Monty Python and the Holy Grail takes place in the year 932, which was five years after Athelstan is historically assumed to have ascended the throne, and seven years before his death.Credit: Waterville Creates!Above: King Arthur And His Knights In Monty Python And The Holy Grail (1975)Monty Python and the Holy Grail - WikipediaIn all probability, this date was not an error, since Athelstan was widely credited with being the real King Arthur during the 1970s when the film was made, and many people still see it that way.Unlike the movies, however, which have been based on Athelstan (King Arthur) from Monty Python to The Sword in the Stone, it is obvious that Athelstan never became a fish or squirrel; he never defeated the Rabbit of Caerbannog with the Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch; he never got chased by a cartoon monster; nor did he have to ask a bridge troll whether he meant the air-speed velocity of a European or African unladen swallow.Oh, and he most certainly did not see the cricket player, William Gilbert Grace, appearing to him as God.Credit: BBC PlayerAbove: I Was Dominating The Game Of Cricket When The Dinosaurs Were Relevant!On the other hand, Athelstan’s reputation for being a “nice” king is historically founded according to his contemporaries, and his role in unifying England; notably after the Battle of Brunanburh in 937 AD, has helped in solidifying him in the Arthurian Legend.If you go online and type “nicest kings in history” there are more than a few articles which bring Athelstan up, and aside for his efforts in improving charity for the poor, Athelstan’s personality was described as holy by those who knew him.8 of the nicest kings in historyCredit: WikipediaAbove: Medieval Depiction Of King Athelstan Offering A Book To Saint CuthbertAccording to William of Malmesbury, King Athelstan was described as slim, blond and extremely knowledgeable, especially for his time period.Æthelstan, The First King of England (c.893-939).Even though Malmesbury himself was not a contemporary of King Athelstan -- being born a century after Athelstan’s rule -- it is probable that Malmesbury would have gotten his description of Athelstan from contemporary sources, which have all been lost.Athelstan was the grandson of the more well known English monarch, Alfred the Great -- a monarch from modern-day Denmark -- so it is quite probable that Athelstan as a teenager would have looked very similar to the depiction of Athelstan/”King Arthur” as seen in the 1963 animated film The Sword in the Stone.Credit: Movie FoneAbove: King Arthur/Athelstan Pulling The Sword In The Sword In The Stone (1963)No depiction from Athelstan’s lifetime are known to exist, and the ones that do most likely portray a physically inaccurate portrayal of the English monarch who was, until fairly recently, believed to be the inspiration behind King Arthur.For instance, his modern tombstone is believed to date from the fifteen century -- some 500 years after Athelstan’s -- while the earliest known surviving depictions of Athelstan were not created until the late medieval and renaissance period, when dressing styles were far different than they had been in the first millennium.Even modern science cannot help us know what Athelstan would have conclusively looked like, for his body has long since been lost or destroyed. Most historians believe that sometime before the year 1000 AD, his original tomb was destroyed alongside his body by Athelstan’s surviving adversaries.Credit: WikipediaAbove: A Fifteenth Century Depiction Showing Where Athelstan’s Tomb Once Stood At Malmesbury CathedralOn the other hand, many of Athelstan’s supporters treated the disappearance of his body, less than a lifetime after his death, as a sign that he had risen from the dead in much the same way Jesus had centuries earlier.Many critics of the King Arthur story dismiss it as an attempt for the English to have their own equivalent to Charlemagne, ruler of the Carolingian Empire. And yet, through Athelstan, many similarities between himself and Charlemagne can be found, and many of those who know about the relatively unknown English monarch have even declared him to be the English Charlemagne.Here is a brief sample of what they both accomplished:Both of them successfully secured their own territories; Charlemagne largely by checking the Islamic invaders in mainland Europe, and Athelstan by defeating the last significant pagan armies in the British Isles.Charlemagne -- with the help of his predecessors, Charles Martel and Pepin -- declared himself the first true ruler of the Carolingian Empire, which would in time separate into the French, Dutch and German Empires in much the same way that Athelstan is generally regarded as the first undisputed ruler of the modern British, largely with the help of his more famous grandfather, Alfred the Great.Charlemagne created the first universal set of laws in Western Europe since the collapse of the Roman Empire four centuries earlier, while Athelstan himself based many of his laws on the later sets of laws introduced in Charlemagne’s later years.Credit: HistoryAbove: Depiction Of Charlemagnehttps://www.heroicage.org/issues/7/hare.htmlIn many ways, had the two not lived nearly a century apart from one another, it is quite possible that Athelstan and Charlemagne would have become best of friends, despite having their own fair share of philosophical disagreements.Unlike King Arthur, whose written laws -- if they ever existed -- are nowhere to be found, there is more documented evidence regarding the penal code and civil laws created by Athelstan than any other English monarch before the late eleventh century.The laws themselves seem quite arbitrary, though this may be due to Athelstan having two sides to himself:On the one hand, it seems that his personal views were opposed to violence of any kind.On the other, it seems that he was unwilling to allow his personal views to conflict with his role as a monarch.Credit: Historic UKAbove: Athelstan’s Forces Triumphing At The Battle Of Brunanburh In 937 ADBattle of Brunanburh 937ADFor example, most crimes, including the theft of anything valued at more than eight pence, were deemed capital offences.However, Athelstan’s legal code also clearly stated that they were merely legal possibilities, and that local lords who were tasked with overseeing all criminal trials were encouraged to show mercy, even for more serious offences, such as murder and treason.This type of legal system meant that a very uneven legal system could emerge, whereby a lord could have someone executed for stealing an eight pence item, while simultaneously forgiving someone convicted of a far more serious offence.Historians more critical of Athelstan’s legal reforms, who have studied the legal system in Athelstan’s time period later criticised this type of system, for they felt it largely gave lords free reign over when to sentence someone to death, as well as when to give a more lenient sentence at a whim.At first, offenders as young as twelve were eligible for the death penalty, though no sooner than Athelstan introduce his penal code he increased the minimum age by three years from twelve to fifteen years of age.According to contemporary commentators of the period, it was done as both a personal statement that Athelstan was not particularly supportive of the death penalty in itself, and that he was especially opposed to the idea that younger offenders should be executed.Credit: TCM Classic Film FestivalAbove: A Young King Arthur/Athelstan Sitting In A Tree In The Sword In The Stone (1963)To give context regarding Athelstan’s law that nobody under fifteen could ever be executed, we should remember that from the late medieval period until as recently as 1908, children as young as eight could -- and reportedly were, from time to time -- be executed under more recent British legislation.Later on, Athelstan also mandated that all death penalty cases be submitted to himself in advance so that he could decide on whether to approve or disapprove a pending execution.This is generally considered to be the first example in English history where all criminal offenders had the legal right to appeal their convictions and sentences right up to the monarch themselves.Even without such clemency requests, it is doubtful that there were executions being carried out throughout most of Athelstan’s reign; and if there were, they probably weren’t very common, as most rulers at the time -- in England and out -- had written death penalty laws for which the rulers never intended to put into practice.In effect, many death penalty laws at the time were regarded as empty threats in much the same way that the more modern Bloody Code was far less extreme when applied in practice compared to what it appeared in writing.For instance, until as late as 1815, it was a capital offence in England to write a threatening letter to somebody, and yet, I have never heard of a case where someone was given the death penalty for such an offence.Credit: Daily MailAbove: A Public Execution In The UK During The Nineteenth CenturyEven for murder -- the most common reason for being executed during the colonial ages -- more than 70% of those sentenced to death had their sentences commuted, while many others charged with homicide were instead convicted of the far less serious crime of manslaughter.Therefore, while many jurisdictions in medieval Europe allowed for branding, or even the removal of one’s tongue for cursing or slander, it is very unlikely that the majority of rulers actually allowed such laws to be put into practice, and the ones that did were probably regarded as tyrants even by the standards of their own time.During Athelstan’s lifetime, even a lot of countries outside of Europe had ceased on capital punishment. One example was Japan, which had temporarily abolished the death penalty during the reign of Emperor Shomu during the Nara Period (710-784 AD) only for the death penalty to be outlawed once again in 810 AD by the Heian Emperor Saga. The death penalty would not return to Japan until 1156 AD.Credit: WikipediaAbove: Japanese Emperor Saga, Who Formally Abolished The Death Penalty In 818 ADhttps://tbinternet.ohchr.org/Treaties/CCPR/Shared%20Documents/JPN/INT_CCPR_NGO_JPN_94_9324_E.pdfJapan had abolished the death penalty due to the influence of the earlier Chinese Tang Dynasty, which had itself outlawed capital punishment on multiple occasions; making this period one of the most liberal in both Chinese and Japanese history in regards to the treatment of criminal offenders.On the other hand, the general outlawing of the death penalty -- at least in practice -- throughout most of mainland Europe was the result of the legacy left behind by the Roman Empire.Contrary to popular belief, the Roman Empire was actually very liberal when it came to the legal treatment of its citizens.A Roman citizen could not be tortured; they could not be sentenced to an excruciating punishment of any sort; and the death penalty for a Roman citizen was -- with few exceptions -- outlawed by the Roman constitution.So, why did the Romans allow crucifixion, quartering, crushing and burning?Credit: AlchetronAbove: A Young King Arthur/Athelstan With Merlin In The Sword In The Stone (1963)Such punishments were constitutionally limited to slaves, subjects and foreigners convicted of certain offences.A Roman citizen, on the other hand, could only be given the death penalty for very specific offences, such as assassination or attempted assassination of the emperor; or acts of treason committed during wartime.And, when a Roman citizen was convicted of such a crime (assuming they were given the death penalty), they were given the more “humane” option of suicide by either drinking poison or slitting their wrists in a bathtub.In rare cases, a Roman citizen sentenced to death who declined to kill themselves would be given a swift beheading.Credit: EidolonAbove: Death Of Roman Philosopher And Writer, SenecaSince universal Roman citizenship had been granted to all subjects during the third century -- leaving only slaves and foreigners eligible for some of Rome’s grislier penalties -- the practice of not carrying out executions or torturing someone as a means of punishment was largely upheld by most rulers who came to power in the generations immediately following the collapse of the Roman Empire: including, quite possibly, the legendary King Arthur himself.The Codex Theodosianus, written by Emperor Theodosius II between 429 and 438 AD (in multiple drafts), is generally considered to be the first set of legal rights given to prisoners, whose writings have survived, and it would have been very well known in King Arthur’s lifetime, as the code itself would have been only a few decades old at the time Arthur himself came of age.Cathedra Petri. A political history of the great Latin PatriarchateSome basic rights granted by the Codex Theodosianus (Theodosian Code) include the right for prisoners to be given appropriate shelter, food and medical care; that they be given a certain amount of sunlight everyday; that they be allowed to bathe in the prison bath at least once a week for hygiene; that they be allowed to socialise with other prisoners; that they be allowed visitation rights, including their relatives and clergy; and that they be given the right to appeal and know the status of their conviction.Codex Theodosianus - WikipediaEven though not every post-Roman ruler upheld some constitutional rights granted by the Roman constitution, a fair number did so in their own ways, even though their successors would often discard such rights as quickly as they had been granted.Of course, King Arthur himself was indeed regarded as the ancestor of Roman generals, so it is not unsurprising that King Arthur would have adopted many policies that were introduced by the Romans, and use them for his own sake.Remember that during King Arthur’s lifetime, life in modern Britain would have looked far closer — culturally, politically and militarily — like it did in the ancient Roman Empire, than it did early medieval England.Credit: YouTubeAbove: First Knight (1995) Starring Sean Connery As King Arthur Depicts A More Medieval Lifestyle Than Would Have Been The Case In The Sixth CenturyHaving supposedly reigned nearly six centuries before William the Conqueror’s invasion, King Arthur was born in a timeline far closer to that of Julius Caesar and Jesus himself than he was to the first Norman monarchs.Half a millennium before Arthur’s reign, Ancient Egypt itself was still in its death throes, and Alexander the Great had existed only eight centuries earlier -- a period closer to the late fifth century than the age of William Wallace, who lived nearly nine hundred years after King Arthur was presumed to have existed.Hadrian’s Wall had been built less than four centuries before Arthur’s reign by the Romans in an effort to keep the “barbarians” located in modern-day Scotland away from their citizens. Even though the ancient Roman wall was almost certainly in ruins by the time that the later ruler, Athelstan, came to the throne, the walls themselves would have been in far better shape during the early sixth century during the lifetime of the historical King Arthur, and they were probably used as both a way to divide ancient borders, as well as a frontline for many military operations of the period.To make matters interesting, however, is the origins of Camelot itself.Credit: WikipediaAbove: Roman Walls Located In Colchester Believed To Have Been The Borderline Of Camulodunum (Camelot)Camulodunum - WikipediaIn all probability, Camelot is the inspiration of the ancient Roman town Camulodunum, located in modern-day Colchester. This is now the oldest surviving town in England, and yet, if King Arthur himself ever did set foot in this place, he most certainly did not live there, as the political situation during King Arthur’s lifetime were so chaotic that he was probably busy travelling from one region to the next, and could ill-afford to make any one location his permanent residence.On the other hand, King Arthur’s “legendary” ancestor, Lucius Artorius Castus, not only spent far more of his time in “Camelot” than King Arthur did -- seeing as Camulodunum was the only permanent Roman town in Britain during the second century -- it is also quite possible that Lucius himself was the driving force behind giving Camulodunum (later Colchester) its significance.Credit: King Arthur WikiAbove: Ancient Depiction Of Lucius Artorius Castus Wielding A Spear On HorsebackLucius Artorius Castus - WikipediaThis fact alone, added by Lucius’s introduction of a council of military officers, has been used as one of the main arguments regarding the possibility that Lucius Artorius Castus was indeed the King Arthur of legend.However, I personally do not agree with this, for I think that it is far more plausible to believe that Lucius Artorius Castus was the legendary second century “King of the Britons” King Lucius.KING LUCIUSAccording to the legend, King Lucius was the first Christian ruler of England. It is also traditionally said that before he formally converted, King Lucius -- whose real name was probably the Roman general Lucius Artorius Castus -- sent a letter to Pope Saint Eleutherius (reigned 174-189) stating his desire to become a Christian, and for the pontiff to approve of his conversion.Credit: WikipediaAbove: Medieval Stained Glass Depiction Of King Lucius (Centre) In York MinsterLucius of Britain - WikipediaIt is historically known that Lucius Artorius Castus, after having defeated several armies in the British Isles -- particularly the Pictish armies near the modern city of Dumbarton -- was sent back to mainland Europe, where he reportedly died in battle in modern-day Croatia, fighting off an army of Slavic invaders.Likewise, King Lucius -- who has been hastily disregarded as pure fabrication by modern historians -- also came to mainland Europe after winning his wars against the Pagan armies in England, only to be killed in battle, and then subsequently buried in modern-day Switzerland during the same time period.Does this prove that King Lucius was a real person based on Lucius Artorius Castus?No.But then again, I think the coincidences are too strong to be simply ignored.Credit: PinterestAbove: Aerial View Of Camulodunum (Camelot) As It Is Believed To Have Looked In Roman TimesSo, why did Lucius Artorius Castus die in Croatia while King Lucius died in Switzerland?Assuming that there is no doubt regarding the two figures from history being one and the same: it is quite likely that those who wrote the chronicles from that time period had come up with a far more accurate account regarding the place of their demise and burial, and that the confusion was due to centuries of border changes, added by the inevitable loss of documents over that same period.Just as we don’t know the exact location for the Battle of Mount Badon -- even though it would have been known to those living in sixth century England -- it is not inconceivable that a military battle fought by a potential ancestor of King Arthur’s three centuries earlier would be even blurrier.ROMAN SOLDIER CELIBACYThere is another legacy that was introduced during Roman times, and while it was long abolished by the time of King Arthur’s birth, it was nonetheless upheld by the more religious soldiers and rulers of that period: being forbidden from marrying or having sex.After the disastrous defeat at the Battle of Teutoburg Forest in 9 AD, a law was introduced by Augustus Caesar, who forbade his soldiers from marrying or having sexual intercourse.This was due to the ancient Roman policy requiring soldiers to bring their families with them on military campaigns in order to ensure that they were fed and looked after. In return, women and children were expected to help set up camp, and to prepare meals for the soldiers.Credit: BBCAbove: Arminius Leading His Troops As The Roman Forces Are OverwhelmedDuring this particular battle -- one of the most humiliating the Romans had faced since the age of Hannibal more than two centuries earlier -- the Roman soldiers found themselves struggling to survive as their women and children fled from Arminius and his Germanic tribesmen; causing the Roman soldiers themselves to become far more disoriented than they otherwise would have been.The abolition of marriage and sexual intercourse amongst Roman soldiers was intended to prevent a repeat at Teutoburg Forest, and this law would not be abolished until later in the reign of Roman Emperor Septimius Severus (193-211 AD).Septimius Severus and the Marriage of SoldiersCredit: WikipediaAbove: A Bust Depicting The Roman Emperor Septimius SeverusThis means that while Lucius Artorius Castus (140-197 AD) was alive during the early years of Severus’s reign, it is very unlikely that he ever married or had children in much the same way it is probable that his descendant, King Arthur, remained celibate throughout his life.Even if King Lucius (Lucius Artorius Castus) had lived long enough to see the abolition of the law against Roman soldiers marrying, it is equally likely that he would have chosen to remain celibate as a form of piety.So, how did King Lucius become related to King Arthur?Assuming that King Lucius had not broken his vows when becoming a soldier, and had sexual intercourse -- a common trait amongst the less devoted -- it is more probable that King Lucius had siblings or cousins who had children, and one of them was the direct ancestor of King Arthur himself.Credit: Catholic365Above: Pope Saint Eleutherius — The Pope Credited With Baptising King LuciusThe identity of this mysterious sibling or cousin will probably never be known, as there is very little that we know about Lucius Artorius Castus, other than that he was almost certainly a real Roman military general of the second century, who appears in several ancient Christian sources, due to being one of the first high-profile Romans to have converted.We know even less about the legendary King Lucius, even though, in all probability, King Lucius and Lucius Artorius Castus are one and the same.Likewise, the early tenth century monarch, Athelstan -- who was for centuries considered to be the monarch behind the King Arthur story -- was himself succeeded by a brother, King Edmund I, due to not having any offspring of his own.Just like many ancient Roman soldiers, Athelstan was equally devoted to his religion, and he refused to marry or have sexual intercourse; making him one of the few virgin monarchs in world history. He would also have been one of the few known monarchs who lived out his life as a bachelor, comparable to the later English Tudor monarch, Queen Elizabeth.At the time, it was expected that the children of a deceased monarch would upkeep the memories of their father by writing stories and poems about them. The fact that King Lucius, King Arthur and King Athelstan were all probably celibate and childless at the time of their deaths may partially explain the lack of contemporary records regarding King Arthur.However, another equally important detail can be found in King Arthur’s historical contemporary, Saint Gildas, whom I intend to discuss later on.No coins are likely to ever be found dating from the time of King Lucius and King Arthur, because there is no evidence that the English adopted their own modern coinage until the reign of Athelstan’s nephew, Edgar, during the late tenth century.Credit: PinterestAbove: Front And Back Coin From The Early Tenth Century Depicting King AthelstanThe first recognisably modern currency made by the Britons was implemented during the reign of Athelstan, whose grandfather, Alfred the Great, had the original concept already in writing.Between the period after King Arthur, to the reign of King Athelstan (reigned 927-939 AD) local rulers generally created their own currencies and coins. A ubiquitous currency endemic to the British Isles first came into existence during the reign of Athelstan, who demanded that all the Britons be subjected to a single currency.Just like his grandfather, however, Athelstan came across a predicament when the lack of proper resources made the job of creating a permanent currency much more strenuous than what either he or his grandfather had anticipated.Credit: The Book PalaceAbove: King Alfred The Great And The Burned CakesUltimately, the English were left without a recognisable currency until as late as the 970s, when Athelstan’s nephew, Edgar, oversaw the completion of its transition, and subsequently abolished all local currencies in favour of a national monetary system.Naturally, the English coinage system would have been comparably obsolete during the late fifth and early sixth century when King Arthur is most likely to have lived. If any currency did exist during the post-Roman period, it is more than likely that Roman currency was used (similar to how the Euro is today the most recognisable currency in mainland Europe), combined with the ancient system of bartering.Therefore, the lack of coins with King Arthur’s face dating from the sixth century is not proof that this legendary character did not exist, since it is very unlikely that British currency was available during the mid-first millennium AD.THE SAXON INVADERSNow, turning our attention towards the political and military situation during King Arthur’s presumed lifetime (470-537) the situation is apparently dire enough that creating a modern currency was probably not a priority for the Britons.Credit: Historic UKAbove: Modern Reenactment Of Saxon Invaders Preparing For BattleThe Saxons of the north, who may have been the descendants of Scandinavian raiders that later generations would refer to as Vikings, were reputed for their barbarity and “non-Christian” way of life.Even though we may not be able to ascertain with any degree of certainty how truthful the accusations were, some of the things the Saxons were accused of doing included, but were not necessarily limited to:Sacrificing animals and humans alive on the altarCannibalising their sacrificial victimsDestroying churches and Christian burial groundsEnslaving the Christian population not outright killed by the Saxon raiders, and doing less than pleasant things with themEven Saint Patrick, who was said to have been born in 386 AD and died in 460 AD had been a slave by pirates (possibly the Saxons) for more than six years before he was able to escape, when he successfully converted his captors to Christianity.Credit: PinterestAbove: Modern Illustration Showing Saint Patrick Banishing The Snakes From IrelandSaint Patrick also famously “kicked the snakes out of Ireland” though this could be a parable describing the “ungodly heathens” since snakes have long represented the devil in Christianity.This saint, whose historical status is not widely questioned even amongst the less religious, would have lived during the papacy of Pope Leo the Great, and would have died either shortly before or after King Arthur’s birth.In all probability, just as Pope Leo had been able to save Rome from a barbarian invasion, Saint Patrick’s religious influence in helping turn the tide for the Christians within a lifetime of Arthur’s reign would no doubt have convinced the Britons living in modern England to do the same against their Saxon enemies, whose alleged cruelty would have been quite palpable even by the standards of the mid-first millennium AD.Credit: Catholic SaintsAbove: Pope Saint Leo The Great — Many Believe He Was The Later Inspiration For MerlinThe Mammoth Book of MerlinIf such barbarians existed in England during the latter half of the 400s AD, it is not surprising that the Britons would have been in fear for their lives, and would have rallied around any military leader who was deemed capable of driving away the Saxon forces from their homeland.According to tradition, King Arthur’s uncle, Ambrosius Aurelianus, was that man.KING ARTHUR’S LINEAGEAfter the older Ambrosius Aurelianus’s death or retirement, King Arthur — who was himself almost certainly known as Ambrosius during his lifetime — is said to have continued the work of his uncle, and even ruled over a peaceful Britain for forty years after driving away the Saxon armies.The military stories of the young King Arthur are that he won his first war against the Saxons after having fought a series of no fewer than twelve battles, with the Battle of Badon Hill being the decisive battle of the war, which saw peace restored to the Britons.A king with such a great legacy should surely have had far more historical evidence to his name, right?Credit: YouTubeAbove: Modern Painting Depicting King Arthur On Horseback With His KnightsAfter all, there are kings of far lesser “value” who date before the legendary King Arthur, yet they have far more historical evidence attributed to their name.So, why would there be a lack of evidence when it comes to King Arthur?Even though I cannot pretend to have conclusive answers, there are several additional possibilities which I have not yet brought up, that could help clear things up. I will then go through all of them in greater detail:“King” Arthur was never a king in the traditional sense; hence the reason why a plausible King Arthur of legend has never been found amongst the lists of any royal rulers of this periodThe Saxons, who were able to pillage the Britons shortly after the death of the legendary King Arthur, may have sought to erase their “scourge” from historyWe assume that the name for which he is today known in history is what people would have known him as during his lifetime“King” Arthur was never a king in the traditional senseHow does one reconcile such a claim when his claim to fame is as a wise king who united the entire population under his domain?One should remember that there were several kingdoms within modern England at the time of Arthur -- in addition to dozens of local rulers whose “sovereign” territory may have been no bigger than a modern village -- so it is not as though this historical Arthur would have ruled England as a traditional king over an entire population.So how did he become known as “King of the Britons”?Quite possibly, his military achievements against the Saxons may have earned him the reputation of being a protector of the Britons. He was then granted the title of King as a posthumous honour in much the same way we attribute “the Great” to historical figures who would most certainly not have been given such a title during their lifetimes.Likewise, Jesus -- the symbol of the Christian faith -- was never a “king” in the traditional sense of the word, despite being often regarded as the “King of the Jews” or the “King of Kings”.English figures from history who would be more comparable to the historical King Arthur would not be the more successful monarchs of later years, but military generals, such as the Duke of Marlborough or the Duke of Wellington.Credit: India TodayAbove: Arthur Wellesley (Duke Of Wellington) At The Battle Of WaterlooBoth of them were known for their military strengths, and while their most famous battles were fought away from the British homeland, someone with the reputation of the historical King Arthur -- who spent most of his life fighting the northern barbarians, as well as other domestic foes -- would have been valued just as much in his time period as later celebrated British generals are.Aside from what is mentioned above, the Duke of Marlborough and Wellington also fought under a single, recognisable ruler, against other Christian foes. By contrast, King Arthur fought most of his battles against pagans while simultaneously under the service of multiple rulers, who would have likely agreed to contribute a certain amount of aid.It would be erroneous to compare King Arthur to Charlemagne, as so many have tried to do, since the latter was an undisputed ruler of an empire, whereas the former was probably a military general, politician and religious philosopher who never formally ruled over any jurisdiction during his lifetime.Credit: War History OnlineAbove: Joan Of Arc Leading Her French Soldiers Through The A French CityOther French heroes, such as Chevalier Bertrand du Guesclin, or even Joan of Arc would have made far better comparisons, since both of them were French military commanders from the later medieval period who used their religious devotion -- particularly Joan of Arc -- in persuading their armies, as well as their respective French monarchs, to fight for their cause.In that sense, the only things separating King Arthur, are that he lived several centuries before either of them, and that he was fighting wars against a group of pagans who are today considered part of the same country.Knights Of The Round Table?Cadbury Castle has often been suggested as the site for where King Arthur and his Knights of the Round Table discussed political and religious issues, though it is not likely that there was ever a single location for King Arthur’s meetings, since Britain during this time period was palpably unstable.Geographical borders would quickly change from one day to the next, especially during the earlier years of King Arthur, for which he is best remembered. In all likelihood, whenever King Arthur would have had such meetings with his military commanders, he would have done so wherever it was most convenient to do so.The Castus (later Aurelianus) line -- from which King Arthur’s ancestry is said to have originated -- was most well known for being a family of military commanders, and not divine kings like William the Conqueror or Henry the Eighth.And yet, during times of war, skilled military generals could very much have as much influence over the daily lives of the population as though they were a blood king in much the same way as would happen today if a foreign enemy were to invade a country, and martial law was declared; leaving a shrewd military commander to assume overall command.Ultimately, the only evidence we have of the historical Ambrosius Aurelianus — military commander and uncle of King Arthur — are from his military campaigns. Perhaps this is a sad indication for admirers of King Arthur, and for general historians alike, that their relevance petered out during more stable times, and as a result, we have few records of the Aurelianus line not involving some form of military conflict.This means that we are left to fill the gaps during the forty years of relative peace that King Arthur was said to have fulfilled before the second Saxon Invasion in late 536 or early 537 AD.Credit: English MonarchsAbove: Badbury Rings Hillfort Located In Dorset — A Possible Site For The Battle Of Badon HillAs indicated earlier, the most statistically probable answer regarding the personality of King Arthur himself can be found in the life of King Athelstan, whose historical background is far more extensively documented than King Arthur and all his immediate relatives combined.While it would be presumptuous to assume that Arthur and Athelstan were agreeable on everything, I do believe that one of the main reasons why Athelstan seemed to have been intertwined with King Arthur since at least the late medieval period, until fairly recently, is because Athelstan himself behaved so much like the historical King Arthur, that later writers and historians assumed he must have been the inspiration behind the story.Of course, we now know that the King Arthur story is far older than Athelstan himself, as the earliest dated copy we have regarding the specific mention of King Arthur goes back to the year 829 AD in the Historia Brittonum, authored by an early ninth century monk by the name of Nennius.Credit: AmazonAbove: Modern Copy Of Historia Brittonum By NenniusNennius - WikipediaThe problem with dating ancient books and manuscripts is that they need to be proven authentic, and not a forgery. Ultimately, it took many generations of research in order to prove that the stories regarding King Arthur date back to a period far earlier than the thirteenth century historian, Geoffrey of Monmouth, who was, until the late twentieth century, regarded as the earliest historian to mention King Arthur, whose authenticity could be reasonably proven.Monmouth is also credited with being the first documented historian to mention Guinevere, and he helped popularise the more mythical version of the Knights of the Round Table, involving Sir Lancelot and Galahad amongst others.Quite interestingly, however, whereas most stories of King Arthur and his knights depict only a small group of men scavenging the wilderness for holy relics, and fighting larger than life foes, the historical group of knights were actually far more numerous.Credit: ListverseAbove: Medievalised Depiction Of King Arthur And His Knights At The Round TableWriters, such as Thomas Malory, have written by name the identities of up to 150 men who comprised the Knights of the Round Table. In effect, this is the equivalent of an entire company of infantry.Knights of the Round Table - Simple English Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.More likely than not, however, these knights were officers who were each in charge of their own personal unit, who then got together in order to discuss and debate military strategy, and therefore did not fight directly side-by-side in most cases.To date, no evidence of Guinevere in writing has been proven to date any earlier than the thirteenth century, even though there is a famous story -- probably apocryphal -- claiming that Richard the Lionheart had sent his men to Glastonbury to find the graves and remains of King Arthur in order to discredit the Welsh population, who believed that King Arthur was either still alive, or that he had resurrected.Credit: WikipediaAbove: 1860 Painting Of Queen Guinevere By James ArcherGuinevere - WikipediaAt the time, Richard was himself getting ready to embark on a religious crusade, and he was apparently concerned that an open riot in support of the legendary King Arthur could break out while he was absent.However, no grave like that of King Arthur’s was ever found to have existed at the alleged site (many have since claimed the island near Glastonbury to be the historical Avalon), nor are there any writings from within that period that are known to specifically talk about this case; leaving us with only copies of what later writers claimed was discovered.Accordingly, the monks excavated the site and discovered the alleged grave of King Arthur (later versions claim that Guinevere’s grave was also present) and that their bones and tombstone simply disappeared into dust upon being discovered.This all sounds too convenient for two groups of people:Those who want the legend of King Arthur to be trueThose who want to disprove the belief that King Arthur is somehow still aliveCredit: WikipediaAbove: The Ancient Ruins Of Glastonbury Abbey — Located Near The Alleged Site Of King Arthur’s GraveGlastonbury Abbey - WikipediaRichard himself reportedly wanted to find Arthur’s grave for the latter reason, and by claiming that their physical graves were only able to be left exposed long enough to be identified before literally dissolving into history would have made it somewhat more challenging for those living in the late twelfth century and later to challenge the official story of King Arthur’s alleged grave site.The fact that even the oldest versions of this story don’t even mention a Queen Guinevere is all the more telling, as it is likely that if a Guinevere ever did exist (and, as pointed out earlier, Guinevere sounds like the name of Athelstan’s mother, and not Arthur’s wife) it is more likely that she was based on King Arthur’s sister Anna, or that she a high-ranking woman in early British history who was given a stronger connection to King Arthur’s story during the medieval ages.The Mammoth Book of King ArthurKing Arthur’s Guinevere is very comparable to Robin Hood’s Maid Marian. There is historical evidence that the two male figures existed, though very little to suggest likewise for their female companions, who were either outright fabrications invented for later storytelling, or individual women of their own time period who were later associated with the King Arthur and Robin Hood stories.Maid Marian has long been believed to be based on the Virgin Mary, as Robin Hood was known for being religious, and that he did pray to her frequently throughout the course of his lifetime, only for a human character in the form of Maid Marian herself to be later added to the Robin Hood storyline.Credit: WikipediaAbove: Sign Marking The Alleged Spot Of King Arthur’s GraveRevealing King ArthurEven though it is more debatable as to why later Robin Hood stories introduced a Maid Marian, it does make sense from a medieval perspective to invent a Queen Guinevere, for it was considered sacrilege during the early second millennium AD for a monarch to be deliberately celibate, for they were expected to marry and father legitimate children of their own.Quite ironically, by the laws of the thirteenth century -- when Queen Guinevere made her first recorded appearances -- King Arthur would himself have been disinherited from the throne, and he would not have been eligible to inherit and property from his birth parents, since King Arthur was himself the illegitimate son of Uther Pendragon and Igraine, who was the younger sister of Vortigern, and also traditionally the father of Vortimer (which would make Arthur and Vortigern’s son cousins).Vortimer - WikipediaCredit: YouTubeAbove: The Ruins Of Tintagel Castle In Modern-Day CornwallAccording to some legends, Uther himself sneaked into Tintagel Castle because he and Igraine secretly loved each other (some stories claim he had to disguise himself in order to gain entry), even though Vortigern himself hated Uther and his family (possibly because Vortigern had himself been enemies with King Arthur’s great-uncle in his earlier years, and was now in rivalry with Arthur’s father).The castle itself was being besieged at the time by Uther’s forces, and while the end result of this siege cannot be historically known -- thanks to all the fictional accounts which have since permeated the historical siege -- Vortigern himself obviously survived, since he is said to have outlived Uther Pendragon himself.ARTHUR AND THE BATTLE OF BADON HILLEven though the Battle of Badon Hill is traditionally said to have been fought in the year 517 AD, it is now believed that the battle was fought far earlier, with 497 AD now being the most commonly cited date (some even argue that the battle was fought as early as 485 AD).What evidence do we have that the Battle of Badon Hill was fought some two decades earlier than originally believed?Two main pieces of evidence come to mind.Credit: Caliburnus RiseAbove: King Arthur At The Battle Of Badon HillThe first is King Arthur’s contemporary, the English historian Saint Gildas, who claimed that the Battle of Badon Hill was fought on the year of his birth.Even though the exact year of birth of Saint Gildas is unknown, he is generally believed to have been born sometime shortly before 500 AD, with the year 497 being the date most repeated.The second piece of evidence is that of Dionysius Exiguus, an ancient monk who was said to have been born in 470 AD -- the same year as King Arthur, according to tradition -- championed the introduction of the Julian calendar in 525 AD while Arthur himself was still alive.This means that when the Battle of Badon Hill was fought, the modern year system as we know it today did not exist. And, because it is a transition to get dates of events to be adapted to a more modern calendar system, it is probable that the Britons themselves did not change the old calendar system until sometime after King Arthur’s death.Jesus’s birth year is also no longer known, which is ironic, as the Julian Calendar was intended to start with the year of Jesus’s birth. Instead, historical errors made by contemporaries of Arthur and Exiguus resulted in Jesus’s more likely year of birth to fall in the year 6 BC.Credit: WikipediaAbove: Medieval Depiction Of King Arthur’s Contemporary — Dionysius ExiguusDionysius Exiguus - WikipediaAs a bonus, the Battle of Camlann is traditionally said to have been fought in the year 537 AD, and unlike the Battle of Badon Hill, the year that the Battle of Camlann was fought seems to be more accurate, according to the writings of Saint Gildas, who boasted that the victory at Badon Hill brought a peace to the Britons that was to last for forty years.The year 497 is indeed precisely four decades before the Battle of Camlann, and the year 537 -- which was said to have brought winter to the British Isles during the summer months -- is actually backed by historical evidence which will also be discussed in greater detail later on.Ultimately, the date of the battles themselves are not the most important aspects of the King Arthur debate, as it is still unclear as to where exactly these battles were fought, even though there have been several plausible sites.During the Battle of Badon Hill, it is alleged that King Arthur killed 960 men “with his own hands”.Credit: YouTubeAbove: Battle Of Badon Hill Depicted On Screen In The Movie King Arthur (2004)I am almost beyond certain that this was intended as a symbolic, rather than literal interpretation, as it probably implies that 960 Saxons — nearly a thousand — were killed during the battle itself; concluding the first major Saxon invasion in King Arthur’s lifetime, as well as a twenty (or forty) year peace amongst the Britons.A thousand people dying in a single battle — even in a relatively remote part of the world like post-Roman Britain, whose entire population at the time was probably well under a million — is definitely not implausible, as far bloodier battles dating 2,000 years before King Arthur’s existence have been extensively recorded worldwide, from the steppes of Asia, to sub-Saharan Africa.If anything, losing a thousand men in a single battle — after presumably losing eleven previous engagements — when the Saxon population would also have been very low by modern standards, may explain why a battle whose size seems to have been insignificant (being little more than a bloody skirmish in today’s world) would have had such devastating effects.Theoretically, it is possible that Arthur personally executed nine-hundred-and-sixty prisoners with his own hand after the battle, though this is also unlikely, not just because it would be exhausting, but because it would not be an “Arthurian” thing for him to do, as early Christian rulers would have wanted to separate themselves from the pagans they were fighting, and one of those traits was that enemy prisoners were not to be killed for any reason.This practice was followed by all military leaders in the west with few exceptions until at least the crusader era.Credit: PinterestAbove: A More Historically Accurate Depiction Of A Briton Soldier Of The Sixth CenturyOn the other hand, it should be remembered that no matter how “wise” and pious King Arthur may have been, he was still a human being capable of doing things outside of his own characteristic, so it would not be an impossible belief that he resorted himself to killing captives after some of his battles, no matter how rare such incidents were said to be during this period in European history.One of those people Arthur is most famous for killing -- whether directly or indirectly -- was none other than Hueil mab Caw, the brother and contemporary of early sixth century writer, Saint Gildas.ARTHUR’S REPUTATIONEven though King Arthur may be regarded as a heroic figure of legendary status today, his more human side has been neglected to a more godlike stature.Despite the Saxon defeat bringing a forty-year period of relative peace for the Britons, this does not mean that the inhabitants were living in some sort of utopia as described in the stories of Camelot.One of Arthur’s biggest rivals during the years between Badon Hill and Camlann was said to be Saint Gildas’s older brother, Hueil mab Caw.Credit: PinterestAbove: An Ancient Norse Base On The Isle Of Man Believed By Some To Have Been The Site Where King Arthur And Hueil Mab Caw Fought Their Last BattleHueil mab Caw - WikipediaHow and why Arthur killed him has been broken into two versions:A more legendary version, as well as a more plausible version based on history.In the legendary story, King Arthur got into a personal duel with Hueil, in which he lost with an injury to the knee. Arthur forced Hueil to make a promise that he would never reveal the story.Shortly afterwards, however, the young rival general broke his promise, and when King Arthur found out, he challenged him to a second duel, where he either killed him on the spot, or had him executed in public as an example to everyone else.The more historical version of this event, whose earliest records date to the early twelfth century by the writer Caradoc of Llancarfan, who wrote about this event in the book The Life of Gildas, mentions that Hueil -- unlike his younger brother, who was probably still a child at the time -- refused to accept Christianity, and he commanded an army of Picts, who were determined to retain their old pagan roots.This army likely came from modern-day Scotland, and it is said that Hueil’s forces massacred and pillaged all the villages they came across until Arthur was able to respond with his own army.Credit: Historic UKAbove: The Coast Of The Isle Of ManUltimately, Arthur triumphed over the Pictish forces in a series of battles which were fought from the British mainland, all the way to the Isle of Man in Ireland. At that point, the Pictish leader (Hueil mab Caw) was said to have been killed, either in battle, or by Arthur’s own hand upon the batte’s conclusion.Nobody -- including those who lived during this time period -- would know for certain how Hueil would have met his demise, since it appears that the circumstances surrounding his death were divisive, even back then. However, it is quite probable that he was simply killed in battle at the end of a military campaign against Arthur’s forces.Less chivalrously, however, it is equally possible that Arthur -- who was known for his wisdom and benevolence -- may have been so enraged at the destruction inflicted on the inhabitants by Hueil’s army that he had him personally executed in the nearest town square as an example to all other would-be invaders.Either way, most early writers make it clear that Gildas was enraged at the death of his brother, and that his personal hatred towards Arthur for causing the death of his brother -- regardless of the reasons or circumstances surrounding his death -- may have contributed to Gildas deliberately omitting Arthur from his writings altogether, and only mentioning Arthur’s older uncle, Ambrosius Aurelianus.Credit: Travis MikhailAbove: Medieval Depiction Of Arthur’s Presumed Biographer, Saint GildasGildas - WikipediaGerald of Wales (1146-1223) even claims that Gildas -- who had began writing about the legendary King Arthur in his youth because of his personal affection and loyalty for him -- was so resentful at the thought that his childhood hero could have caused the death of his oldest brother that he destroyed a series of books he had already written in dedication to Arthur.Most versions of the story state that only in later life was Gildas able to “forgive” Arthur, after the legendary king personally sought forgiveness from Gildas, and agreed to do penance for the sin of killing his brother.The earliest mention of Arthur killing Hueil, however, does not mention any sort of reconciliation between Arthur and Gildas, and it is quite possible that Gildas remained hateful towards Arthur until his dying day; hence the reason why no written records of Arthur survived.On the other hand, it is quite possible that Gildas did indeed mention Arthur, and that his writings were simply lost over the course of history, as nearly all such writings from this period are, or that they have yet to be found.Credit: GeniAbove: Depiction Of King Arthur And Queen GuinevereEither way, one should not be looking for any specific name for King Arthur written before the early ninth century, since neither Gildas, his contemporaries, nor the immediate generations who lived after the legendary King Arthur would have known him as anyone other than Ambrosius Aurelianus: the most plausible name for the King of the Britons.THE ATTEMPTED BLINDING OF ATHELSTANA similar comparison can be found in the story of King Athelstan, and his brother Edwin.In this story, the latter sibling hatched a plot in which he intended to destroy the young Athelstan by having him blinded and then thrown into a monastery in order to ensure that Athelstan would never be king.Obviously, this was a form of high treason, and Edwin recruited the help of his cousins, as well as some loyal supporters, to help him in this scheme.The plot failed, for Athelstan was able to discover it before it came into fruition.Having them hanged, drawn and quartered was not a legal possibility like it would be in later English history, as such punishments did not exist during Athelstan’s reign.The first documented case of someone in English history suffering such a fate was the rebel and former Prince of Wales, Dafydd ap Gruffyd, who was arrested on December 11, 1282 and executed for treason on October 3, 1283 during the reign of King Edward the First, more than 350 years after King Athelstan convicted his brother and his accomplices in the plot to take his life.Credit: Daily MedievalAbove: Painting Of An Early Form Of Quartering (Late Thirteenth Century)Dafydd ap Gruffydd - WikipediaIf King Athelstan would have chosen to go through with a death sentence, the conspirators would have probably suffered either death by hanging, or a beheading.A choice in sentence would never have to be made, as King Athelstan -- in an act of chivalry -- decided to unconditionally forgive those who had plotted against him.Credit: YouTubeAbove: King Arthur/Athelstan’s Foster Father Asking Forgiveness For His Neglect In The Sword In The Stone (1963)However, many of Edwin’s supporters remained suspicious of the monarch’s intent, and when Edwin died in a shipwreck in 933 AD while travelling to France to work in the newly established embassy between the two nations, Athelstan’s enemies claimed that the king had deliberately ordered the ship sunk in retaliation for the earlier conspiracy on his life.This claim was still being repeated two centuries later when Symeon of Durham wrote in his own history book that he believed that Athelstan had orchestrated the death of his brother, and of the ship’s crew.Either way, King Athelstan agreed to take penance by self-chastisting himself. Whether this was because he really was guilty, or because he was attempting to placate those who would never be convinced of his innocence is debatable, only to the extent that it cannot be proven or disproven either way, despite the near universal consensus pointing towards the latter.The English coast itself is notorious for being one of the most dangerous in the world; rivalled by only a few other coastal islands (such as the Canadian Province of Nova Scotia, located on the opposite side of the North Atlantic), and this would have been doubly true for a wooden ship of the early tenth century.Credit: HistoryAbove: An Ancient Shipwreck Rotting On The CoastEdwin, son of Edward the Elder - WikipediaIn all likelihood, it was simply bad luck, or an act of negligence on the part of the crew itself which resulted in the demise of Edwin and his fellow occupants. By the time of his death in 933, many years had already elapsed since his attempted “assassination” on Athelstan, and he had been working in his service ever since.If Athelstan had any intentions on killing him, he could have done so far earlier, and under far less dramatic circumstances than causing a shipwreck itself.Nonetheless, the story of Athelstan taking penance over the alleged death of his brother is indeed in parallel with the story of the legendary King Arthur taking the same punishment against himself for causing the death of Gildas’s brother, Hueil mab Caw.Is it a coincidence? Did Athelstan and his contemporaries feel inspired to repeat history over the death of Edwin by having Athelstan himself take penance?We will probably never know, though the constant similarities between Athelstan and King Arthur are so strong that it becomes more understandable as to why it was believed for centuries that Athelstan had been the true inspiration for King Arthur until it could be proven that the oldest writings we have left (those of Nennius) predate Athelstan by up to a century.THE “COURT” OF KING ARTHURAs previously stated, there probably never was a physical court of King Arthur, whose identity can be revealed as a single location, since it is not likely that King Arthur was a traditional monarch, and that it is even less likely that King Arthur would have been living in a single place for any appreciable duration during these most turbulent times.Credit: Zen DonaldsonAbove: Romanticised Depiction Of King Arthur’s CourtWhile the Saxons may have been repelled throughout all but the final days of Arthur’s later life, the stories of him fighting the “tyrant” kings of the Britons makes it quite evident that Arthur was dealing with a lot of powerful enemies who were -- at least in theory -- his allies.Locking people up for life in iron cages; blinding them with hot pokers; amputating their hands and feet etc. were common punishments carried out by many of these “tyrannical” rulers during this period as an alternative to the death penalty.Several rulers living in Britain during this period were said to have had a tendency to carry out such grisly punishments quite frequently; sometimes just for their own personal amusement.Credit: All That’s InterestingAbove: Depiction Of Torture During The Late Medieval AgesSome examples of the “tyrant” kings who were thought to have lived in Arthur’s lifetime include, but are not necessarily limited to the following:CUNEGLASUSThe first example is quite interesting, since a small number of historians have recently come to believe that the tyrant may have even been the historical Arthur himself.Gildas refers to Cuneglasus as the “tawny butcher” and talks about how he had his own wife imprisoned for life in a monastery so that he could marry her sister instead, on top of raiding nearby settlements as some of the major “sins” attributed to Cuneglasus.Cuneglasus - WikipediaWould someone with this type of reputation be later remembered as a wise and benevolent “ruler” like Arthur was supposed to have been?Probably not.MAGLOCUNUSHe is often regarded as Maelgwyn, and Gildas seems to have had an even worse opinion on this ruler than Cuneglasus, whom Gildas refers to as “the first evil”.Just like Cuneglasus, Maglocunus has also been accused by Gildas for having disposed of his wife in order to lust after another woman.The Kings & Queens of BritainOnly, Maglocunus does not merely send her to a monastery, but also has her violently executed by a gang of hired assassins.And then, upon finding out that this woman -- his niece on his former wife’s side of the family -- refused his approach, he went over to her brother and had him killed in a similar manner as his first wife in order to intimidate her into marrying him.Credit: English HeritageAbove: The Ruins Of Hadrian’s WallGildas also mentions several other tyrants, including Constantine and Caninus, and mentions a list of sins ranging from “warmongering, fornication, incest and corruption” as some of their negative attributes.According to Gildas and the later writer, Geoffrey of Monmouth, Caninus even had Constantine assassinated in order to usurp the throne for himself.Even though executions during this period were not unheard of, they were also not very common, and it seems that tyrannical rulers who enjoyed torturing their subjects to death did not have a reason to put their opponents to death when they could keep them indefinitely alive under circumstances every bit as repugnant as Dante’s Inferno.LIFE WITHOUT THE ROMANSWhen Arthur was born, he would have known people who were old enough to remember the days when the fleeting Roman presence in ancient Britain was still a reality.Arthur’s generation was therefore one of the first to experience life in Britain after the Roman Government itself left the country for good sometime after 400 AD when the situation in mainland Europe made it impossible for native Roman soldiers to retain a presence in Britain; leaving it up to Arthur and his “Roman” relatives to make the best out of their situation.Despite the Romans no longer having a direct presence in Britain by the time of Arthur’s birth several decades later, the Roman Empire no doubt played a very direct role in the customs and beliefs of Arthur’s generation in much the same way that England continued to play an important role in the governance of Americans for decades after the American Revolutionary Wars.Credit: PinterestAbove: Illustrated Depiction Of A Roman PhalanxRather than the medieval armies of modern Arthurian legend, it is far more likely that the armies in Arthur’s time would have continued to fight in a “phalanx” formation, with spears as the primary weapon, and swords, the secondary weapon.When William the Conqueror faced the Christianised Saxons nearly six centuries after Arthur’s birth at Hastings in 1066 AD, the Saxons were noted to have fought in a walled formation which would have been outdated even by the standards of eleventh century mainland Europe.It is doubtful that the armies of Arthur would have been any more modernised than the Saxon army of Harold Godwinson, especially when the Roman phalanx had been credited for the victory at the Catalaunian Plains in 451 AD -- the “ancient Battle of the Nations” -- less than two decades before Arthur’s likely birth.RISE AND FALL OF KING ARTHURKing Arthur likely won the Battle of Badon Hill either shortly before, or shortly after, the Frankish King Clovis was crowned king of the Carolingian Empire (most of modern-day France and the Rhine region) after formally converting to Christianity on Christmas Day, 508 AD.In later life, King Arthur would have likely experienced the effects of 536 AD, which is said by many to be the worst year in human history.Sometime between December 535 and January 536 AD, Mount Ilopango, located in El Salvador, was said to have erupted with more power than Mount Tambora did in 1815 — Mount Tambora being the strongest volcanic eruption in modern history (1,000 times more powerful than the eruption of Mount Saint Helens, or the 79 AD eruption of Mount Vesuvius).Credit: National GeographyAbove: Mount Ilopango In El Salvador As It Looks TodayThe volcanic effects from Mount Ilopango were said to have been the worst the world had experienced in more than 2,000 years, and that it brought an end to many civilisations from North and South America (such as the Moche civilisation), all the way to East Asia and modern Oceania (Australia).In March 536 AD, a “dark cloud” was said to have formed over the Mediterranean world, and that it lasted for more than three years.Extreme weather events of 535–536 - WikipediaWhen Mount Tambora erupted in 1815, many contemporaries proclaimed 1815 (and, to a lesser extent, 1816) “the year without a summer”.And yet, modern estimates are that Mount Ilopango released ten percent MORE aerosol than Mount Tambora did, which hardly makes it surprising that the eruption of late 535 to early 536 AD would have had such an impact on the world.To make matters worse, however, in 540 AD, a second volcanic eruption with similar power was said to have erupted somewhere in Antarctica, which only prolonged the climatic impact on the world.Mount Vesuvius itself was reported to have had a minor eruption in 536 while Mount Ilopango was reportedly erupting halfway around the world.Mount Vesuvius - WikipediaCredit: PDX RetroAbove: Mount Krakatoa Erupting In 1883Mount Krakatoa -- once believed to have had its last major eruption in 416 AD, before the 1883 eruption -- has also been claimed as a possible volcano that may have contributed to the cause of the weather disasters between 535-540 AD.Sixth-Century Misery Tied to Not One, But Two, Volcanic EruptionsCredit: NASA Visble EarthAbove: Aerial View Of The Gulf Of Carpentaria — Said To Have Been Caused By An Asteroid Hitting The Earth In 535 AD — Triggering The Volcanic Events Of 536–540 ADWhat makes these volcanic eruptions biblical in themselves, is that a common theory explaining why so many powerful volcanoes erupted almost at once (a single volcano of this intensity rarely erupts more than once every few centuries) was due to a powerful asteroid (640 metres long) striking the earth’s surface in Australia; causing the magma chambers under several volcanoes to be ignited almost simultaneously.The Global Cooling Event of the Sixth Century. Mystery No Longer?The eruptions themselves would prove to be only the beginning of the near collapse of ancient civilisations worldwide. Harvests failed because it reportedly snowed during the summer for at least three consecutive years; followed by disease outbreaks which threatened to kill all the survivors who had survived the initial disasters.Credit: ListverseAbove: Romans Dying On The Streets During The Justinian Plague10 Scary Facts About The Justinian Plague - ListverseIn mainland Europe, this epidemic would be known as the Justinian Plague.The Justinian Plague was a predecessor to the more well known Black Death, as both of them are believed to have been caused by the bacteria Yersinia Pestis which is also believed to be responsible for the even earlier collapse of the Neolithic population some 5,000 years ago.Unlike the outbreak of 1348-1352, which killed anywhere between 10-30% of the European population, the Justinian Plague was estimated to have killed anywhere between 40-50% of the population of Europe (most between 540-541) with some historians suggesting it could even be as high as 70%.For decades after the outbreak, smaller outbreaks continued to literally plague the European population; contributing to the start of the Dark Ages, where written documents from that period became comparably harder to find, since it is likely that all of the ancient writers of the early sixth century had either been killed, or were too busy doing farming to concern themselves with recording any historical events.Of course, if dates are to be believed, by 540 AD, when the Justinian Plague’s main outbreak started (it had already been brewing for a few years before that), the Battle of Camlann had already been fought, and King Arthur himself was dead.Credit: About HistoryAbove: Justinian The GreatOn the other hand, he would have been very much alive when Mount Ilopango would have erupted, less than five years earlier.The Ilopango eruption alone proved devastating enough that nations far more durable than post-Roman Britain had historically been, from Europe and Africa, all the way to Asia and the Americas, collapsed very suddenly in the face of this volcanic episode.Harvests failed, and famines would have broken out.More capable rulers would have been desperately trying to confiscate all the grains in an effort to stave off as much of the negative impact which the famines undoubtedly incurred upon the population of this period.Meanwhile, the Saxons, who had yet to convert to Christianity, and who were probably still bitter at having been defeated by an ageing King Arthur nearly half a century earlier, would have seen this as a golden opportunity to strike the Britons while they were at their weakest.Credit: Historical AssociationAbove: Depiction Of Saxon Warriors In The Late First MillenniumEven though King Arthur had been more than capable in defeating the first Saxon invasion during his youth, and in being able to bring relative peace to the Britons during the forty years after the first Anglo-Saxon War, it seems that this second invasion -- in the face of everything else -- proved too overwhelming even for the legendary King Arthur to handle.The Saxons proceeded to pillage the Britons, and during this period, some of his senior officers -- including the character that Mordred is allegedly based on -- may have deserted King Arthur in order to save their own lives.However, most early evidence suggests that Arthur’s nephew, Mordred, died fighting not against, but with Arthur, and that what probably started off as a verbal military disagreement between the two later evolved into Mordred becoming his last nemesis, and ultimately, his assassin.Credit: WikipediaAbove: King Arthur Fighting His Nephew Mordred At CamlannBattle of Camlann - WikipediaWhere this happened is not certain, but some believe that “Camlann” may have been located near the River Avon, as there is evidence that it was regarded as a significant military prize during the early sixth century, due to the ruins of multiple fortifications which were undoubtedly still being inhabited up until around this time.The name “Camlann” is said to be based on an ancient word called camboglanna, which means “crooked bank” and one of the turning points of the river is claimed to be where the final battle took place.Historic Figures of the Arthurian EraSupposedly, Arthur’s body was even said to have been buried on the Island of Avalon; a name very similar to the River Avon.Another candidate is believed to be the modern River Camel, whose geographical features are also similar to the River Avon.Credit: WikipediaAbove: The “Crooked Bank” On The River Camel — Believed By Some To Be The Site For The Battle Of CamlannRiver Camel - WikipediaWhile we may never know which river -- or which part of the river -- the Battle of Camlann was fought: the physical description of the Battle of Camlann does impeccably match at least several spots in modern-day England, so it is far more likely that the Battle of Camlann is indeed based on a historical event, and not pure legend.Top 10 clues to the real King ArthurToday, people might ask themselves why would battles such as Badon Hill and Camlann -- battles which were said to have so much of an impact in early sixth century Britain -- be so “forgotten” that their geographical locations are not known.One should remember that the Battle of the Catalaunian Fields (or Plains), which was fought by the Romans against Attila the Hun less than a lifetime before Arthur, is also no longer known. Several plausible sites for the final major battle with Attila the Hun have been suggested, though none of them have ever proven conclusive.In the grand scheme of things, the defeat of Attila the Hun, and thus, the salvation of Rome itself, would have been regarded as a far more important historical event than Badon Hill or Camlann.Very few people today seriously question that the battle with Attila the Hun really did take place, and that it was one of the main reasons why -- alongside the legendary encounter with Pope Leo the Great -- that Rome itself was never sacked by his army.Credit: The Deadliest BloggerAbove: Attila The Hun Charging At The Battle Of The Catalaunian Plains In 451 ADThe battle of the Catalaunian Fields is also said to have mustered a total of 200,000 men -- half on each side. By contrast, it is unlikely that any battles fought in Britain during this time ever mustered more than a few thousand men at any one time.Battles such as Badon Hill, which probably involved no more than 10,000 men, would have been regarded as a small military engagement, even by late fifth century standards.From the perspective of outsiders, comparing the Battle of Badon Hill to the Battle of the Catalaunian Plains would be like comparing the invasion of D-Day to some tribal fight in a remote corner of the world.The closest that historians have gotten to locating the site for the Battle of the Catalaunian Plains is that they “believe” it probably took place somewhere in north-east France along the Rhine Region, which is a potential area that is about as ambiguous as locating the sites of the far smaller Battle of Badon Hill and its successor, the Battle of Camlann (not to mention the list of other battles fought by King Arthur, whose locations are no longer clear).To conclude, even though the lack of a decisive location for where Arthur’s battles took place is not evidence that they took place, it is also not evidence that they did not take place, either.ARTHUR’S BURIALAs for where Arthur is buried: it is quite possible that he wasn’t.Credit: Wikimedia CommonsAbove: Romanticised View Of King Arthur Being Taken Away To AvalonSince the Justinian Plague was likely underway by the time of Arthur’s demise, sometime in 537 AD -- which was to explode by 540 AD -- it is probable that his body may have been pushed off into the water by inhabitants who were too scared to touch his corpse.During historical plagues of the Justinian Plague variety, it was rare for proper burials to be given, even for a state ruler.Even though it is obviously not sanitary to throw thousands of corpses into a nearby body of water, it is probably something which was very common for ancient people whenever they were dealing with an epidemic, as it was far quicker to throw a body into the water than to bury it, and it was also less likely that a body that sank at the bottom of the river would be able to infect the locals, compared to a body buried beneath their soil.Credit: ListverseAbove: Sixth Century Burial Trench Believed To Contain The Remains Of Some Victims Of The Justinian PlagueSometimes, funeral pyres were created, and thousands of bodies were burned, though this is less likely to be the fate of Arthur’s body, since even the earliest Arthurian legends make it quite clear that he was pushed out into the water, where his body was said to have been laid to rest in Avalon.Knowing that disposing the bodies in water was the second most common option for dealing with plague-ridden corpses, I somehow think that it gives a kernel of truth to the story of Arthur’s body being ceremoniously pushed off into a body of water.Consequently, since King Arthur was most certainly regarded as some sort of messiah by the inhabitants of that time, they may have circulated some sort of rumour that King Arthur was not really dead, but that he had been merely sent off to recuperate from his injuries, and that he would one day return to save his people.Credit: Wikimedia CommonsAbove: Romanticised Depiction Of King Arthur Being Nursed At AvalonToday, many people insist that Elvis is not really dead, and while the many centuries may make it hard for people to grasp the historical events as they occurred during the early sixth century: for people living in that period, a historical event was not just a “moment in time” but an event that was constantly evolving.After the September 11 attacks, many rumours continued to circulate about which have largely been debunked today, but were widely believed at the time. And this is during a time when we have televisions, radios and the internet to help those experiencing a historical moment to understand what was going on.Such media did not exist during the time of Arthur.Additionally, it is also unlikely that writing was a possible form of communication during the years immediately after Arthur’s death, as famines caused by the Justinian Plague were known to force even scholars and writers living near Rome and Constantinople to permanently abandon their old profession, and to resort to farming in order to keep themselves alive.One of the few writers from Britain during Arthur’s time whose identity can be confirmed is, of course, Saint Gildas, who was said to have been born sometime before 500 AD, and was reportedly alive (in modern-day France) living in a monastery until around 570 AD.Credit: Clas MerdinAbove: Close-Up Picture Of The Sign Claiming The Discovery Of King Arthur’s Grave In 1191Even though he never mentions a man by the name of King Arthur -- not surprisingly, considering what I have written about his relationship with King Arthur and the Justinian Plague in earlier paragraphs -- he does make it clear that the victor of Badon Hill was a man by the name of Ambrosius Aurelianus, who wore a plate of armour with the Holy Cross painted on it before driving off the Saxon Army, and killing “nine-hundred-and-sixty men”.Legend states that Arthur became “king” at the age of fifteen, and that he fought twelve battles (or campaigns) with the final one being at Badon Hill.If Arthur was born in 470 AD and he became a “king” in 485 AD, then it would make sense to believe that the final battle would have been fought in 497 AD when Arthur was twenty-six or twenty-seven years old.As for when Ambrosius Aurelianus senior died is unclear, though it is unlikely that Arthur’s uncle would have died before 485 AD, and some believe that the Ambrosius Aurelianus mentioned by Gildas at Badon Hill was not the legendary Arthur at all, but his uncle.CONCLUSIONEven though we will never know beyond proof who the real King Arthur was, it is very unlikely that King Arthur was merely a fictional character who was then repeatedly passed down as fact in the centuries after his death.Credit: VoxAbove: Depiction Of King Arthur In The 2017 Film, King ArthurThe Saxon invasions of 537 AD, and the Justinian Plague, likely destroyed most of the writings dating before the sixth century -- including those which talk about earlier historical figures.On the other hand, it is also quite likely that during the days of Geoffrey of Monmouth six centuries later, a far greater volume of works dating back to ancient Britain would have been known, and that he would have relied on sources for his work, which have long since been lost.The Library of Alexandria, for instance, would have contained much information from the ancient world, and yet barely any information from that period exists, because the library was burned several times throughout its history (most notably in 642 AD) alongside all the scrolls and ancient books stored there.Even books and letters not destroyed in fires could have been lost for any other number of reasons, ranging from floods, accidental mishaps, vandalism or pure negligence.Credit: Ancient World MagazineAbove: Burning Of Alexandria In 642 ADThe earliest biographies of Alexander the Great to have survived into the modern ages were not written until nearly three centuries after his death, and yet we don’t question Alexander the Great as a historical character, even though Alexander would have been of far greater importance throughout the ancient world than King Arthur.In all probability, these historians who wrote about Alexander the Great had gotten their information from writers predating their time.FINAL LEGACYNot all is lost on the King Arthur story, however.Credit: The Vintage NewsAbove: Some Versions Of King Arthur Claim That The Sword Excalibur Was Both The Sword In The Stone, As Well As His Battle SwordEven though King Athelstan most likely never pulled a sword out of a stone as is claimed in the legendary tales of King Arthur, and that he did not become a monarch until he was approximately 33 years of age, there are several obvious traits behind Athelstan which give honour to the more chivalrous and grandiose personality of King ArthurAthelstan is widely regarded as the first ruler of a united England; his penal code -- while harsher in writing -- also encouraged the type of leniency found in many King Arthur stories; he defeated a Viking Invasion in a campaign similar to the one Arthur had fought against the Saxons four centuries earlier; he was a religiously devoted military general, just like his legendary predecessor; Athelstan was reported to have a benign personality comparable to King Arthur…And… last of all… This first true King of England was probably so identical in his personality and contributions that for a long period of time, Athelstan was considered the historical equivalent of King Arthur.In the end, while the King Arthur of history may never have been the king of a unified country, it seems evident that Athelstan -- who would most certainly have been aware of King Arthur’s legacy -- was so inspired by the life of Arthur himself that he decided to emulate his reign after the legendary warrior; making Athelstan the first King of England in body, and King Arthur, the first King of the Britons in spirit.Now, how legendary is that?Credit: YouTubeAbove: A Child Version Of King Arthur/Athelstan In The Sword In The Stone (1963)FURTHER READING:For a real life biography of Robin Hood, see answer below:David Frigault's answer to Is Robin Hood a historical figure?For a real life biography on the English pirate, Blackbeard, see answer below:David Frigault's answer to Who in history is looked at as a terrible person but is actually a hero?

Mythological stories are normally treated as a literature material or sometimes a science fiction. But there is a huge possibility that mythological stories in any religion may not merely be a legend or a piece of literature. In this blog, I would discuss some unbelievable correlation between some Hindu mythological stories and well established scientific facts. Take a look…Strange Narrations in MahabharataThere are certain narrations in Mahabharata that defies any rational explanations. Some examples are explanations about flying vehicles (Vimanas), Arjuna's travels in a flying chariot across the Himalayas, his visit of the Deva territories (ancient alien base-camp in Tibet?), his battle with the Nivata Kavachas (men in space-suits?), Salwa's attack of the city of Dwaraka in a flying city named Saubha, the triple space-cities of Asuras that revolved around Earth in three circular orbits that was destroyed by Siva using a single projectile weapon, and many more…Nuclear weaponsA few excerpts from the Mahabharata have caused doubts in the minds of historians, indicating the possibility of nuclear weapons being used in the Mahabharata war or post-war. This fire of suspicion has further been fuelled by the recent discoveries of green glass and many radioactive samples in certain excavations, in India, which apparently were associated with the Mahabharata war. Green glass is said to form when sand melts at very high temperatures prevalent in Nuclear Explosions.Nuclear weaponsIn the Mahabharata the total death toll amounts to around 1.6 billion in a matter of 18 days. How could this be possible unless and otherwise there is an involvement of weapons of mass destruction. Modern archeological surveys have slowly started to provide us valuable clues of the war. The vast amount of devastation found at the site of Mohenjo Daro corresponds exactly to Nagasaki.An example of cloningIn Srimad Bhagavatam, it has been mentioned that when His Excellency Nimi was dead, the seers by process of Mantha, (perhaps, human cloning in modern idioms) created a new baby from his dead body. The baby was called Janaka, as it was out of (mantha) cloning of his father. It was called Videha, as it was born out of a non-sexual process. As the baby was born out of a process of mantha it was called Mithila and his kingdom was also named as Mithila.An example of cloningIn another episode when Sita and Rama’s son “Lava” was lost, Valmiki produced "Kusha" from grass, which is analogous to cloning. Apparently again, the cloning he did was far more advanced than the cloning techniques of today. “Raktabij” is another similar citing, where every drop of his blood on earth produced his “Adult clone”.The birth of KauravasThe science of cloning was well known and practised during the Mahabharatha times. As per Dr. B.G. Matapurkar, the Kauravas "were products of technology that modern science has not even developed yet". He said that according to the description in Mahabharatha, the Kauravas were created by splitting the single embryo into 100 parts and growing each part in a separate container. In other words, "they not only knew about test-tube babies and embryo splitting but also had the technology to grow human foetuses outside human body."Romans used nanotechnologyThe Lycurgus Cup is a 1,600-year-old jade green Roman chalice that changes colour depending on the direction of the light upon it. It baffled scientists as they could not work out why the cup appeared jade green when lit from the front but blood red when lit from behind. The mystery was solved in 1990, when researchers discovered that the Roman artisans were nanotechnology pioneers: they had impregnated the glass with particles of silver and gold, ground down until they were as small as 50 nanometres in diameter.Embryo transfer and the birth of BalEmbryo transfer is done today as In Vitro Fertilization (IVF) or Zygote IntraFallopian Transfer (ZIFT) and in both processes embryo is developed outside the womb and then placed inside. When Kansa had killed six foetuses of Devaki and she got pregnant for the seventh time, transfer of foetus was arranged by Vishnu. He ordered Yogamaya to take out the foetus of Devaki and place it in the womb of Rohini, another wife of Vasudeva who then resided in the house of Nanda in Gokul.Abhimanyu, A warrior in the wombIn Mahabharatha, when Subhadra was pregnant, Arjun told her the secret of entering the chakravyuh. When he was explaining the exit procedure, Subhadra fell asleep. Hence Abhimanyu learned the entrance procedure while he was in Subhadra's womb but did not learn the exit strategy. There was a time when people criticized this concept. But modern science says that it is very much possible. In his book "Right Brain Education in Infancy" Dr. Makoto Shichida, says, the right brain is active during gestation.Ram Setu was built by Lord RamaRamasethu is an engineering masterpiece. From scientific point of view, the technology once existed to make stones float on water and the architect like Nal and Neel were two architects advanced in building a bridge from India to sri lanka within 5 days with the help of dedicated work force of million Vanaras. Even in Valmiki Ramayana, there is a concept of civil engineering in building this bridge. This bridge was not constructed just by throwing stone with lord name but there were many engineering methods.Organ transplantsWe know that there are two types of replacement of body parts: First there are parts like hands, arms, and legs, which are not vital organs. Then there are the transplants of vital organs. The one instance where one can conceive of a combination of the two is transplanting the entire head, which is both an external appendage and the storehouse of the most important organ in the body, namely the brain. Thus, head replacement would be the most sophisticated organ transplant one can imagine.Organ transplantsWe find an instance of this in the story of Ganesha. There are several accounts of how Ganesha received his head. According to one, Shani was among the guests at Ganesha's birth. When Shani looked directly at the child, the baby's head turned to ash. Parvati began to wail. When this happened, Vishnu, flew off in search of a substitute head. He found on the bank of a river a sleeping elephant. He severed the beast's head and affixed it on to the body of Ganesha.Live TelecastAs Dhritarashtra was blind but wanted to know what was happening at the battlefield, Krishna gifted Sanjay with "Dibya Drishti", so that he could see a “Live Telecast” of “Kurukshetra” and describe that to Dhritarashtra. “Dibya drishti” is analogous to modern television set in the sense that Krishna could not give it directly to Dhristarastra but needed Sanjay.Live TelecastImagine a central computer system with wireless links that can accept voice commands or thoughts, then you can understand how cameras in the heaven, as in satellites of these days, would point to the locations which Dhritarashtra asked Sanjay to describe about. Therefore, “Dibya drishti” in modern description is a television set with a wireless link to the satellite and an access right to the system to control the cameras. The access permission was granted by the System Administrator, Krishna.Time TravelIf we look into ancient texts we can find a number of references to time travelling. In Hindu mythology, there is the story of King Raivata Kakudmi who travels to meet the creator Brahma. Even if this trip didn’t last long, when Kakudmi returned back to Earth, 108 yugas had passed on Earth, and it is thought that each yuga represents about 4 million years. The explanation Brahma gave to Kakudmi is that time runs differently in different planes of existence.Time TravelSimilarly, we have references in the Quran about the cave of Al-Kahf. The story refers to a group of young Christian people, who in 250 AD tried to escape persecution and retreated, under God’s guidance, to a cave where God put them to sleep. They woke up 309 years later. This story coincides with the Christian story of the seven sleepers, with a few differences.Tele-visionSanjaya received the faculty of distant vision especially for performing the task of reporting what was going on in the battlefield. Conceptually, it was as if he was watching the unraveling of the scenes on a television screen. It was more than that: He was endowed with full knowledge of history and geography which enabled him to recount to the king in details of the topography of the entire country, and narrate everything that was going on in Kurukshetra.Life-principle from the stars: Akash GangaIn Hindu lore there is an interesting account of how the sacred river Ganga which has its origins in the Himalayan range, actually arose. In Ramayana it is stated that the river "rose from the skies and finally came down to earth in the form of a terrestrial stream that has the power to rid us of worldly sins." In this vision, the river's pristine presence in the universe may still be seen as the Milky which is known as Akash Ganga or the Celestial Ganga.Life-principle from the stars: Akash GangaWe note that this is perhaps the first instance in history where one put forward the idea of a material something reaching us from the stellar world. The extra-terrestrial origin of meteors was not discovered until the eighteenth century. And it was only in the twentieth century that we became aware of the ceaseless shower of cosmic rays which reach us from the sun primarily, but also from beyond our solar system.Sexual orgasmIn a conversation between Yudhishtra and Bhisma, Yudhishthira said, “O king to tell me truly which of the two viz., man or woman derives the greater pleasure from an act of union with each other. Kindly resolve my doubt in this respect.” Bhishma while replying his questions explains a story where a king transformed into women later given an option to again opt for whichever sex he/she likes opts to remain as women with the following explanation for it.Sexual orgasmThe lady said, 'I desire to remain a woman, In acts of congress, the pleasure that women enjoy is always much greater than what is enjoyed by men. It is for this reason, O Sakra! that I desire to continue a woman” This is very much acknowledged by modern sexologists.Aircrafts of those timesGoing into the history of the Indian sub-continent and the ancient science that prevailed, the hypothesis of "vimanas existed" comes close to true. The Vaimaanika shasthra of Maharishi Bharadhwaja gives description of aircrafts that are much more advanced than our present generational aircrafts. According to the Dronaparva, Vimanas are described as shaped like a sphere and can move along at great speed on a mighty wind generated by mercury. Section XLIII of Vana Parva describes about Arjuna's arival at the city of Indra 'Amaravati' wherein vimanas are mentioned.Distance of Earth from SunTwo lines of “Hanuman Chalisa" computes the distance of earth from sun with great simplicity and that too quite accurately - जुग सहस्त्र योजन पर भानु, लील्यो ताहि मधुर फल जानू (Juug Sahastra Yojan Par Bhanu, Lilyo taahi madhur fal jaanun). This means that Sun (Bhanu) is at a distance of Juug Sahastra Yojans (जुग सहस्त्र योजन- Distance Unit in Hindi).Distance of Earth from SunAccording to conversion practices that are in use as per Hindu Vedic Literature - 1Juug= 12000; Sahastra= 1000; 1Yojan=Miles. Thus 12000 X 1000 X 8 = 96,000,000 miles. 1 miles= 1.6 kms. This means 153,600,000 Km. In the 17th century two scientists Giovanni and Richer have calculated the distance of sun from earth accurately and real close (at 140 million kilometers) to now officially declared figures.TeleportationConsider the story of Usha and Chitralekha, which appears in "Srimad Bhagavatam." The beautiful Princess Usha, single and longing for love, had the experience of a handsome youth in her dream one night. The dream was interrupted, and she woke up and exclaimed, "Oh, beloved one, where are you?" She confided the dream to her close friend Chitralekha. Chitralekha said she would find who the young man was and get him to her. But how was she to recognize him?TeleportationChitralekha began to draw a series of faces, and asked Usha if any of them resembled the man of her dream. Usha came upon a drawing which was of Aniruddha, a grandson of Lord Krishna. That night, Chitralekha transported herself to Dwaraka where she found Aniruddha. Two aspects of today's world are implicit in this story. First there is the idea that one can identify an unknown person through sketches, a matter that is routinely done in criminal investigations. Then, of course, there is the notion of teleportation.Successful Brain SurgeryScientists have discovered the world’s oldest known case of a successful human brain surgery after unearthing a 4300 year old skull from the site of an ancient Civilization site. This discovery was done by the scientists from the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) who found evidence pointing this to be the oldest known case of Trephination in the world meant to treat a skull injury. Trephination is the process of drilling holes in the damaged skull to remove shattered bits of bone from a fractured skull.