KING ARTHUR and ROBIN HOOD, Legend or Realilty? And Nessie (Famous Monster) in Scotland?

Answer 1

I think King Arthur- true. Robin Hood and Nessy Monster sooo fake!

Answer 2

There is proof that the first 2 existed as people, but yeah, the stories are mostly going to be made up, although some might hold some truth. Nessie.....yeah, no real proof there, not even much of a story really, don't think there's even been a sighting in the last 20 years or so.

Answer 3

All can be examined historically, you should NOT expect one-liners when dealing with history. Nessie - certainly does NOT exist. King Arthur and Merlin and magic swords - never, ever existed, heap of nonsense. Robin Hood - Maid Marion, Friar Tuck - and gang of people living in a wood - a huge elaboration on a few simple events. Arthur the Romano-British 5th century WAR LEADER in the period after the Romans left. TRUE , and backed by plausible historical evidence.

Answer 4

They are all myths based on some historic events. Arther was probably a Saxon or Celtic leader of a small kingdom. Robin Hood is probably based on a number of outlaws some of whom may well have help some poor people and the Loch Ness Monster probably arises from some sightings of animals that have fallen in the water or large fish and have been exaggerated after a few pints. One thing it cant be is some sort of marine dinosaur as like any air breathing marine animal it would have to come to the surface regularly like whales and dolphins and would have been seen long ago

Answer 5

Robin Hood was probalby most likely fake and built up to give people hope and all that jazz. Nessie...false.
King Aurther was a real person. He was a warlord though and not a great king. The fantasy was put in there by the pagans, and you have to admit that it makes a good story.

Answer 6

King Arthur is now believed to have existed, though without the trappings of the stories we know--no Merlin, no Holy Grail, etc. Last I read, he had been tentatively dated to about 500AD (pardon, CE). So no knights in plate armor either.
Robin Hood is more of a composite character; I don't think there was an actual "Robin Hood," but a number of bandits and Saxon patriots whose more interesting qualities were combined and adjusted to create the tales we know.
Nessie? Well, it would be fun, and just barely in the realm of the possible--though not in the size often reported.

Answer 7

well History shows king Arthur,and there was a Robin, but as far as anyone can say it's just a legend, as far as Nessie, there has been lots of fake sightings and some that no one can prove either way, so that one is down to you to decide

Answer 8

King Arthur, yes I believe so was real, but apparently I had been told before it is something to do with a particular star constellation and england. it totally confused me!
Robin hood yes, he's real I think but Nessie, I don't think so, along with big foot I think they are bogus

Answer 9

King Arthur and Robin Hood - both good pubs. As for nessie, she's only available after the water of life has flowed well ! ! !

(SORRY - I couldn't resist it after a lousy day!)

Answer 10

nessie is very real to all those who have seen it.......... robin hood is real............... local folklaw stand in the uk you know......

not so long ago they declined planing permission for a house to be build because the locals believed fairlies lived on the land .......... and folk law has to be taken into consideration ......

so a law is a law... meaning arthur and robinhood and nessie all exist..... at least when it comes to planning permision with their local county council it seems