I mentioned Danes because they were in the opening lines of Beowulf that came to hand, (see also Sorcha's post preceding it) then thought to myself, "somebody will pull me up on that" (I do know they weren't there at the time). I never did get the hang of smilies. My earlier post would probably make it fairly clear that I'm aware that the historical Arthur, if he existed, was not an Anglo-Saxon, but clarification can do no harm. Beowulf is of course quite irrelevant in terms of subject matter, but the metrical form might provide some ideas.

Ian C's points are very sensible. We don't actually know whether this novel is intended to be based on the "historical" or legendary Arthurs, and answers to the question would differ depending on which is the case. It's a long time since I read Geoffrey of Monmouth (or Chrétien de Troyes, for that matter) but the Chivalric literature has formed so much of the Arthurian myth that I don't know how far you can separate out the various strands and have much left. As I say, it depends on the intent of the novel.