England started becoming a super power only when King Henry read the book of King Arthur and his Knights of the round table. (King Arthur's story was a false story written by Thomas Malory - while in prison. A convict changed the fortunes of England which was until then a land of misfits and barbarians - by giving them a hero!)
I don't know much English history, but this is surely nonsense. Malory was a late compiler of the Arthurian legends, in no way their originator, and Henry V (whom I assume you have in mind?) was a generation earlier. Besides, history doesn't work this (fairy-tale) way.
You're right. I tried to cut corners and keep it short.
Thomas Malory got the legend of King Arthur from Geoffrey of Monmouth - a Welsh monk who lived in the early 12th century. Good 200+ years before Malory.
But Geoffrey of Monmouth's work was largely unknown until Thomas Malory revived it.
Thomas Malory's book Le Morte D'Arthur became a bestseller because of the right timing - Guttenberg invented his printing press at just about that time.
In either case - the Arthurian legend is entirely made up. Geoffrey of Monmouth weaved the story out of his imagination - which was later picked and spruced up by Thomas Malory.
About the King - I may have to check up on it - may have made a mistake.
Update: did some checking. Thomas Malory: 1405 - 1471.
King Henry VII: 1457 to 1509.
King Henry VII was so influenced by Thomas Malory's work that he also named his first son Arthur (but who didn't live long enough to become the next King...)
Geoffrey of Monmouth (Wales != England) did not invent the Arthurian legend, he reinvented it. The Arthurian legend predates him & appears to have been based on a 'Roman' soldier who remained in the British Isles after the first Roman invasion:
184 - Lucius Artorius Castus, commander of a detachment of Sarmatian conscripts stationed in Britain, led his troops to Gaul to quell a rebellion. This is the first appearance of the name, Artorius, in history and some believe that this Roman military man is the original, or basis, for the Arthurian legend. The theory says that Castus' exploits in Gaul, at the head of a contingent of mounted troops, are the basis for later, similar traditions about "King Arthur," and, further, that the name "Artorius" became a title, or honorific, which was ascribed to a famous warrior in the fifth century.
Thanks sharpn. I'll have to read a bit more history... thanks for the leads.
To not let my lack of knowledge take away from the point of the comment - let me reiterate:
The point is not how Arthurian legends started. The point is King Henry VII got a hero from Thomas Malory's book. And this hero gave him the ambition to change England.
What evidence I can find indicates it was actually the other way around - that Henry VII co-opted the legend to reinforce his legitimacy, rather than being inspired by it. If anything, the other part of your original point (having strong problems to overcome) is probably more apt for that case.
Anyway, your broader point of having heroes is still valid.
I don't know much English history, but this is surely nonsense. Malory was a late compiler of the Arthurian legends, in no way their originator, and Henry V (whom I assume you have in mind?) was a generation earlier. Besides, history doesn't work this (fairy-tale) way.