It is clear to see that clearly there are literary ties between the Arthurian legend and that of the Sarmatians tales of the Narts. Bases on this, Littleton and Thomas then turn in their article to the archaeological and historical evidence. Based on evidence found in ancient Roman campsites as well a carving and drawing found in monasteries, historians and archaeologists alike have surmised that Sarmatians settled in a camp at Bremetennacum and were fully assimilated into society by A.D. 400. Because of the evidence found in the Ossetic tales, it could very well be that Arthur was a member of this group. It is also very likely that is was the British who adopted the tales of the Sarmatian people and took them on as their own.
There is even more evidence in the name Arthur itself. The name Arthur is not Celtic, but comes closer to the Roman or Latin name Artorious. In fact, according to etymological studies, there is no other person in all of England, Ireland, Scotland, or Wales to bear that name until several years after Arthur disappears from history. The Sarmatians had a leader by the name of Artorious Lucius Castus. He was a good leader, and evidence from archaeological excavations of the camps shows his men were treated well. Military evidence also encourages this fact as the weapons used by the Romans and Sarmatians fit the descriptions given in the legends. Artorious' band preferred to use a heavy spear, long sword, and fight from horseback, rather than on foot with a short sword. The Sarmatians also tended to identify their warriors by symbolic insignias on their armor. This could parallel the very basis on which one of the most infamous names of Arthur, Pendragon comes from. Arthur was known for the red dragon that was emblazoned upon his armor and banners.
The evidence that Littleton and Thomas relate in their article gives those who quest for the real King Arthur and new theory to ponder. Indeed, it shakes the very foundations upon which his legend is grounded. Was King Arthur even British? In light of these new discoveries of the Sarmatians, one is likely to surmise that Arthur was an immigrant to Britannia, and either Sarmatian or Roman.
If these assumptions are true, then the figure of King Arthur - Pendragon, warlord, the great bear, rex que futures - is all the more splendid and wonderful. Because it makes him more than just another European king riding through glory into the pages of legend and history. It makes Arthur almost universal. He know longer belongs to the annals of ancient Western Europe, but to the world. Perhaps that is the way Arthur would have preferred it. In legend he was a man fighting for the equality and happiness of all his subjects. In life, as Sir Winston Churchill described him, he is the “true inheritance of mankind.” Perhaps then, Arthur is not truly dead. Perhaps there is a piece of him in all of us.
http://sarahzar.blogspot.com/