King Arthur: A Military History

Feudalism is on the rise; the world is a cold, dark place; the largest and most powerful nation is in a free-fall; pretty much the world is spinning backwards. A boy sees only corruption in the system but in a hope to make this boy great; his father sits him down and tells him the story of Lancelot, King Arthur, Camelot, and the magician Merlin. By telling this boy the fable of King Arthur, his goal is to inspire and teach the boy to be good and that even those people who seem insignificant can accomplish seemingly unattainable goals. This is the same myth that Michael Holmes tries to correct and prove to the reader is a true, real- life story. Michael Holmes marvelously writes the history of the Saxon campaigns throughout Europe and the history of European providences in King Arthur: Military History. Even though all of that is wonderfully told in Holmes book, he never really illustrates the background and evidence connecting the legend of Arthur in the medieval romantic tale Lancelot with the British 6th century leader that he explains as the real King Arthur in the introduction of his book. In the book, Dr. Holmes seems to try to draw parallels between the medieval King Arthur that was made up by the 12th century writers and different historical figures in the 6th century that were head of tribes in Britain and England with similar names. He claims in the first chapter that there is no firm evidence of the life and death of Arthur as told by the medieval writers, except that he was killed in battle, which is historically factual with one of the Germanic tribe leaders that Michael Holmes refers back to. He also repeatedly, in the first couple of chapters, tries to relate the stories to different real-life scenarios but then often says later that they can be proven wrong, as well. Dr. Holmes mentions a man named Artorius, who is of Roman-Celtic descent. Then he somewhat discusses how Arthur could have lived in one of the wealthy British-Roman regions around Gloucester and Cirencester where the sites of many Roman Villages have been found; however, he then states that there is no clear evidence relating King Arthur with the evidence that had been discovered (Page 9). Dr. Holmes quest in getting information on the real King Arthur clearly excites the readers curiosity. In the first chapters, he gives a good insight to the background information that led him to what he writes in his book. However, throughout the book he goes into more details of the invasion of the Saxons. He goes into extreme depths on how early Europeans tried to secure their land from the invading forces. He basically is able to magnificently summarize about the withdrawal of the Roman influence as well as their forces in northern Europe and the attack of the Saxons. He pretty much fails at trying to prove to the reader that there is a real King Arthur that led one of the British tribe

In this fascinating book, author Michael Holmes takes the historical references to fifth and sixth century Britain, and attempts to construct a chronology that fills in the details of this "Dark Age." Combining the information from a number of sources, often interpreted in new ways, he produces a thought-provoking history that helps to explain the different courses taken by Post-Roman Celtic Gaul (later France) and Post-Roman Celtic Britain (later England). Along the way, he finds that the legends passed on by the bards and storytellers ring true: that there was a great military leader named Arthur.This is a fascinating book that I have already read twice. The author presents his argument in such a gripping manner, that reading it seems to pull the reader right into the story. It must be admitted that a good deal of what is presented in this book is deduction and assumption, but the author makes an excellent case for accepting his interpretation of the available (limited) data. If you are interested in the historic King Arthur, then I highly recommend that you get this book.

It is fascinating to read how Michael Holmes gathered evidence from many sources, minus the legendary stuff, to create a marvelous synthesis of the story of King Arthur and his military exploits. Holmes' study of history, archeology and British geography surely points out a plausible account of how Arthur influenced the future history of Britain in contrast to neighboring Gaul (France). After my reading the separate but conflicting histories, and my recent tour of Britain, I am persuaded by Holmes' account that his is most plausible. Any student of military history would also be intrigued and educated by the strategies utilized by Celts, Romans, and Anglo-Saxons in their military campaigns of the late Roman Empire and Dark Ages.

King Arthur: A Military History is one of the best analyses of Arthurian Britain to be published in a long time. Michael Holmes begins with a rather scientific approach to the subject: Roman Gaul and Roman Britain were nearly identical, but greatly different by the beginning of the Middle Ages. Narrowing the divergent influences to the interim Dark Ages, he then uses Gaul as a sort of "control group" to detect Arthur's presence and impact on English and British history. He then undertakes to outline Arthur's career, which I think he has done very well, including offering one of the best, most scholarly analyses of Mordred's role in history that I have ever read. Excellent book!