New Post
Search
Help
ArchivesOn the meaning of Arthur
In the Meaning of Arthur we can read: It could be derived from the Celtic elements artos "bear" combined with viros "man" or rigos "king".
I would like to mark that the Celtic artos not only means "bear", but also "stone", which seems to be more important for the Celtic Culture.
Indeed, it would be, for example, the stone in which is Excalibur previously to be pulled from by the king Arthur.
I would like to mark that the Celtic artos not only means "bear", but also "stone", which seems to be more important for the Celtic Culture.
Indeed, it would be, for example, the stone in which is Excalibur previously to be pulled from by the king Arthur.
1
Replies
I want to correct my misleading claim. Artos means "bear" and also "king", meanwhile "stone" is arta, which simbolizes the royal agreement in the Celtic tradition, so the stone is counterpart of the king.
1
Do you have a source for this?
1
I take this from the proceedings of a Conference on Celtic Culture. Concretely from the paper of the Galician historian Blanca García Fernández-Albalat. These proceedings have some texts in Spanish and other in Galician. The reference is
La soberanía femenina céltica y sus huellas de culto en el Oeste peninsular, Fernández-Albalat, in Os Celtas da Europa Atlántica. ACTAS DO 1º CONGRESO GALEGO SOBRE A CULTURA CELTA. Ferrol, agosto 1997, 171-194 (1999)
La soberanía femenina céltica y sus huellas de culto en el Oeste peninsular, Fernández-Albalat, in Os Celtas da Europa Atlántica. ACTAS DO 1º CONGRESO GALEGO SOBRE A CULTURA CELTA. Ferrol, agosto 1997, 171-194 (1999)
1
Excalibur is a late addition to the legend, and has no bearing on the name. Given that in the early post-Roman period most Welsh leaders had Latin or even Germanic names (Germanic tribes such as the Franks, Goths and Vandals forming not only the Empire's fighting power, but also it's military leadership), a Celtic origin is not strictly necessary, and there are problems with the suggested Celtic origins, in that they would not normally produce a name of the form and pronunciation of Arthur which occurs in the known texts. In the Latin name theory we hit a dead end, as the proposed family name (Artorius) is itself probably not Latin in origin, and potentially a Latinised version of a pre-Indo-European name thus now indecipherable (many "Greek" names have the same problem).
1