Science Evidence of Merlin’s grave unearthed in Scotland: Was King Arthur’s wizard adviser real?

Article / Archive
By Hannah Sparks
Published Sep. 8, 2024, 3:43 p.m. ET

There may be some truth to the myth of Merlin.

On Tuesday, archeologists in Scotland revealed evidence of the legendary wizard’s death in Drumelzier between the 6th and 7th centuries — and the findings could change the way we tell Merlin’s tale.

Merlin was said to have been a loyal advisor to King Arthur amid the Dark Ages before being imprisoned, killed and buried along the river Tweed, according to Vita Merlini Sylvestris (the Life of Merlin of the Forest), a medieval manuscript of his life which is currently held at the British Library.

Merlin’s Grave.JPG
According to Vita Merlini Sylvestris, a medieval manuscript dedicated to the life of Merlin, the wizard was said to have been imprisoned, killed and buried on the banks of river Tweed in Drumelzier.

A new geological survey of the region, near the site of Tinnis Castle, detected a grave-like pit.

Further excavation showed signs of inhabitation during the alleged period of Merlin’s life.

“The Drumelzier legend contains pre-Christian customs, ancient Cumbric names and was associated with local sites where archaeology now shows could credibly have given rise to the story,” lead researcher Ronan Toolis told the National.

According to Toolis, who serves as CEO of GUARD Archaeology in Glasgow, such a prominent grave structure in this region would have been “quite rare” for the period in which it was dated. “It seems to be a remarkable coincidence that the one hillfort associated with this local legend dates to exactly the same time as the story is set,” he noted.

The results of the study two years in the making were published last week in Archeology Reports Online.

Ancient Map.JPG
Merlin’s Drumelzier legend “paints a much darker picture” of the great wizard’s life as a close adviser to King Arthur.

“The new archaeological evidence does not prove that the local story was true but instead demonstrates that the legend likely originated in Drumelzier itself, rather than being brought here by a wandering medieval storyteller who roped in various random sites in the vicinity,” Toolis explained. “Perhaps it originated as a folk memory, to be embellished over the centuries before it spread far and wide and changed out of almost all recognition.”

Their discovery helps “[to paint] a much darker picture” of the wise and revered Arthurian figure, said Toolist. “That of a rather pitiful fellow prone to uttering nonsensical riddles and bewildering prophecies, and kept prisoner by an obscure petty tyrant of a forgotten kingdom, before dying a gruesome death, the victim of royal intrigue.”
 
Their discovery helps “[to paint] a much darker picture” of the wise and revered Arthurian figure, said Toolist. “That of a rather pitiful fellow prone to uttering nonsensical riddles and bewildering prophecies, and kept prisoner by an obscure petty tyrant of a forgotten kingdom, before dying a gruesome death, the victim of royal intrigue.”
This is what they're rewriting King Arthur as?
 
Their discovery helps “[to paint] a much darker picture” of the wise and revered Arthurian figure, said Toolist. “That of a rather pitiful fellow prone to uttering nonsensical riddles and bewildering prophecies, and kept prisoner by an obscure petty tyrant of a forgotten kingdom, before dying a gruesome death, the victim of royal intrigue.”
Based on literally what?
 
No, he wasn't real. King Arthur was a mix of folk legends of maybe real people who lived in 6th century Britain (a primitive shithole where people lived in mud huts) and Welsh mythology that medieval Britbongs really liked and kept writing fanfic for (when they learned how to write again, that is). The IRL versions of King Arthur or Merlin or whoever have practically zilch to do with Arthurian legend. They're about as related to reality as the 21st century anime version where King Arthur is a blonde chick with big boobs.
 
This is what they're rewriting King Arthur as?
Based on literally what?
Having National Heroes or Mythic is bad if you are White m’kay? Also, the Fay aren’t real and national parks don’t exist to appease them.

No, he wasn't real. King Arthur was a mix of folk legends of maybe real people who lived in 6th century Britain (a primitive shithole where people lived in mud huts) and Welsh mythology that medieval Britbongs really liked and kept writing fanfic for (when they learned how to write again, that is). The IRL versions of King Arthur or Merlin or whoever have practically zilch to do with Arthurian legend. They're about as related to reality as the 21st century anime version where King Arthur is a blonde chick with big boobs.
I know it’s like believing that the Trojan War was real when consensus of people say it’s a mix of forgotten battles. Agamemnon and Odysseus were not real people either.
 
The idea there's no existence beyond the physical [including simple "fairytales"]
Having National Heroes or Mythic is bad if you are White m’kay? Also, the Fay aren’t real and national parks don’t exist to appease them.
Even so, he could've been a druid who did shrooms and had visions or something who just so happened to be imprisoned and tortured to death. There's nothing to suggest he was some kind of milk-fed gimp. This motherfucker just pulled that out of his ass.
 
Back