King Arthur

by Frank T. Thompson

In a prequel to Knights of the Round Table, a vastly outnumbered Arthur and his knights are sent by the Roman Empire to defeat a bloodthirsty Saxon conqueror and his powerful army, a mission that takes a romantic turn when Arthur, Lancelot, and the knights rescue the beautiful Guinevere. Original. (

• Format: Mass Market Paperback
• Language: English
• ISBN: 0786890835
• ISBN13: 9780786890835
• Release Date: June 2004
• Publisher: Voice
• Length: 348 Pages
• Weight: 0.44 lbs.
• Dimensions: 1.0" x 4.3" x 6.8"

Customer Reviews

????????????????? i don't understand ????

Why is everyone bashing this book and movie?? yes its not historically accurate, BUT WHO CARES!! nobody knows who arther really was or even guinevere or what that particular time period was REALLY like..HISTORICALLY SPEAKING!! and no ones ever going to know. are there any people out there with a time machine??..raise your hands..?..you guys all seem to think you know what really happened so educate the rest of the world please..theres so many different versions of the legend that its hard to tell whats real and whats not and honsestly..who cares!!! it was a good book and i personally loved the movie just as much. that dosent give anybody the right to go on the internet and bad mouth someone elses work, saying its "terrible" and "not a good read" people who write things like that on a review should be ashamed of themselves. its fine when you give an opinion on what you think but when you write things like "I destroyed The Book" thats going too far....hey if anyone has an opinion like that do us all a favor and ...KEEP IT TO YOURSELF!! PLEASE. i hope that everyone looking to buy this book wont be persuaded by all these nasty reviews and not buy this because it really is a good one.

The Sarmatian Knights of the Dragon Standard

I cannot vouch if this book accurately reflects the movie because I have not yet seen the movie. What I can say is that this book can stand on its own as a gripping read that holds your interest. I normally do not read novelizations of films but I bought this one on a whim- and I am glad that I did. The author does a remarkable job of writing battle and action scenes in an exciting and believable manner. Plus, I finished this entire three-hundred and fifty page book in a single weekend without once being tempted to set it aside out of boredom- that is a mark of an excellently written piece of historical adventure fiction. The premise that Arthur and his knights were Sarmatian is interesting. Sarmations (from the Black Sea- Caucasus region) did serve in Roman Albion- and around the Wall. Nor is the idea that Romans would uproot a people and place them on a hostile frontier thousands of miles from their home ridiculous- it was common imperial policy. However, there are some questionable historical inaccuracies- if I am not mistaken, Mt. Baden is far to the south where it strategically protects Cornwall and Wales (the traditional area associated with Arthur.) Plus, the Legions left around 407 C.E.- and the Battle of Mt. Baden occurred about 500 A.D. There is also the little fact that the Saxons were INVITED in by the Romanized Britons to REPLACE the withdrawn Legions. In spite of all this I still found the story to be readable and interesting. After all- research DOES place Merlin in the north- perhaps he was a spiritual/war leader of the "Picts"... I'm not saying that this movie is exactly anti-Catholic, but the Church is portrayed as the enemy of free will and the chief promoter of serfdom in the coming Dark Age. Arthur is however shown to be an enlightened follower of the heretic Pelagius- and fights with an image of an avenging warrior Christ upon his shield. The rest of the Knights are unabashed pagans. Once again, just to be accurate, the idea that the Pope would be commanding Legions during this period does not seem very plausible- unless you are really talking about the Emperor in his role as Pontifex Maximus....

Fantastic

It was a wonderful book. I could not put it down. Now I can't wait until I see the movie.

The Truth...and not the Fiction

Both the book, and the film are as close to an accurate telling of the true life of King Arthur, or Artorius, as the current archaeolgical record can provide. I have been mystified by the legends of this great man since my early childhood. But alas, as legend is legend, things become distorted and changed, and exagerated over time....such has been the case with the tales of glory of Arthur, his friends, and his family.They myths that we commonly associate with Arthur are just that, myth. A mythos created out of a necessity for hope. Current historical record places the true Arthur, or Artoritus, in approximately the 6th century AD. While some of the history in the book and the movie are slightly off, there are far more things accurate:1) The Picts, or Woads as they are called in the film, were a formidable force in Britannia during this time. Renowned for their prowess on the battlefield, documentation by Roman soldiers that have been preserved through the ages tell of "blue painted barbarians" whose "bare breasted women" fought just as viciously, and with as much skill as any of the male warriors that they encountered. 2) The Celtoi word for 'leader' is very similar in both spelling and pronunciation to the word Merlin. It is through mistranslation over the ages that this shamanic leader has turned into the wizard of legend. As the child of such s leader, Guinevere held high rank amongst her people as both warrior and political force. The tribal societies of Britan at this time were egalitarian, and women held ranks of rulership, owned land, and enlisted as soldiers in time of need. One small detail pertaining to this greatly impressed me with the film. During the battle scenes against the Saxons Guinevere wore a torqe...which was a symbol of royalty amongst Celtic tribes.Those who argue against both book and film based on differences associated with the legends and myths really need to get their hands on a recent history book dealing with the subject. They will see just how on the mark this book and the subsequent film are. If you wish to maintian your romantic fantastical view of King Arthur and idealistic Camelot...then by all means avoid this book, for it will shatter all of the illusions. If, however, you wish to find some of the truth behind the myth then this book is a must.

Why all the negativity?

I don't understand why people seem to not like this book. If you want mythology then it's obviously not for you, but the alterations people are complaining about are from the myths, not the history, and so aren't really that great of an arguement.This book is not completely historically accurate, but it can't be since so little is known of Artorius and the others including Guinevere. However, it is the best attempt I've ever seen. Stuff like Guinevere being a warrior IS accurate, there are several records of her fighting, though that's not something mythological fans would have read. I saw the movie yesterday and the book & movie are fast becoming some of my all time favorites, right up there with J.R.R. Tolkien's "The Silmarillion" and Marion Zimmer Bradley's "The Firebrand".