Arthur

Themes tend to select themselves around this place and just now, the incidents looked at are … the video showing the bridge collapse blocked, the Tucker video disappeared, the references to the orient, plus Ivan’s expected comment … that’s coming up in the next post.

For now … the Arthurian legend:

The man has an a priori angle … that legend usually means myth, as in something not true, not reality. He pursues this tenaciously in an “explain away” mode. But who said it even needed to be explained away?

Legends, to him, are allegorical tales to explain core human behaviour in dramatic form, but to me, they have grains of truth … in other words, things certainly happened way back when and scribes and bards struggled to explain them, except in familiar form. Thus tales of yore formed which did the rounds of Europe and they certainly made good yarns … but rational Modern Man will mock because the accounts are so OTT fictional.

And they are, the accounts are … they even disagree on many elements, many time lines clash … Modern Man looks and crows … there you see, all myth, nothing but myth.

What he’s missed in all this is that original events most likely did occur in some form … the issue comes when bards and scribes, steeped in their own cultures and limits to their own perception, interpret in this highly stylised away. But I say again … why would the events themselves not have occurred? Most likely misinterpreted, agreed … but still more than possible … or at least not impossible.

And then we get to Arthur occurring in how many monarch’s names over the millennia? Cut to talk of the deep state, the real nobility, the real old families and it starts to make more sense. The issue is not if dragons existed or Excalibur or not … but that this hidden Black Nobility … nasty muvvers they are, as we’re seeing now … the issue is that they believe in it. 

Insane? Maybe so. But they’re the movers and shakers of the world … and we’re the eternal victims.