The World of King Arthur and His Court: People, Places,… (2024)

I checked this book out from the library on a whim. I just stumbled upon it in the kids’ section and thought, Arthurian legends? A cool map? Illustrations? Right up my alley! Once I started reading it I knew I had to review it.

Guidoriccio da Fogliano, Simone Martini

The Meeting at the Golden Gate (detail), Giotto di Bondone

Let me start with the positives. It’s colourful! And the illustrator, Peter Malone, shifts back and forth between making the illustrations look like the art of Giotto di Bondone for the smaller pictures and then making them look like Simone Martini’s for the more detailed pages and two page pictures. As a part of the illustrations there’s a map of British sites that in one way or another are related to Arthurian legend. These sites are not that well known to the average person despite the fame of the legends. I found that this book is good with places in general. He also presents an interesting view on the Lady of the Lake. Her, or their multifaceted nature he likens to the characteristics of water, multidimensional and fluid. Water can be a healer, nurturer, or destroyer. This was the first time I heard someone explain her character or should I say their characters that way.

In its entirety the book is a good introduction for children to Arthurian legend. Though I still wish the author mentioned the originators more, especially in connection with the aspects they added to the story, like drawing the sword from the stone, which though has parallels to other folklore was first introduced to the legends by Robert de Boron. The book talks about Marie de France and she even has her own section surprisingly, but for the most part this book concerns itself with mainly Chretien de Troyes and Thomas Malory, with quite a few mentions of Geoffrey of Monmouth. The Welsh tales are mentioned though, the Mabinogi by name even, well the ‘Mabinogion’ to be exact. Some of the stories and characters are actually explored a little. Not much mind you, but due to the nature of this book, nothing is truly explored in depth. Sadly the only mention of Breton lais is in the Marie de France section and explained as short story poems. It would’ve been nice if he briefly explained the origins of lais, and that the romance writers got some of their inspirations and themes from the lais. I don’t know why the author didn’t mention the Breton lais, because the troubadours get a whole section to themselves. Making knowledge of the source materials, poems, romances, the lives of saints, and old stories more accessible will keep people interested. No one likes hitting their head against a wall.

There’s little differentiation between real knighthood and the concept of chivalry, except to say that most knights fell short of the chivalric code. Again, like the Breton lais, I don’t want dissertation on the subject but some distinction between the behaviour of real knights and the knights of the legends would help keep things clear when the author switches from one to the other. The regurgitating of old myths gets me more. For example, saying that knights in full armour couldn’t mount horses or pick themselves up off the ground. This was originally published in 1998 and I’m reading the 1999 version, I think. So this is a note to future publications, you would have more room to put mentions of the original sources if you got rid of the Arms and Armour section, or, you know, you could fix it. That would work too! In the same part there is mention of a seax, likening it to a long penknife. You’ll find that a seax is a much larger blade. Right above this sentence it mentions Anglo-Saxons, Celts, and Vikings. Now what he says about them is true and this is very minor, a non issue really, but instead of alphabetically I prefer it listed historically, Celts, Anglo-Saxons, and Vikings. Yeah, this is just one of my weird ticks.

He mentions how in different versions Merlin is trapped in a cave, stone, or tree and even one which says that he lives in a glass house. But when it comes to the grail, the author only presents it in the form of a cup. Nothing about a rock, a spear, or any of the forms the grail has taken. Nor any mention of the cauldron and the quest for it that most likely inspired stories of the grail. The Fisher King and the Maimed King can be different figures in the Arthurian tradition but often get merged together in the legends, like Elaine the Daughter of Pelles and Elaine of Astolat, or in later modern works Morgan and Morgause. The author doesn’t ever make a distinction between the Maimed and the Fisher he just calls the figure the Fisher King. This is probably a purest complaint but it would have been refreshing for a book to address this.

The biggest problem I have with this book is non-attributed quotes, for example the poems in the Troubadours’ section that I don’t know where they’re from. What manuscript? What century?! It doesn’t say. Something similar happens in Bedivere’s section. This only happens maybe three times? But there it is. The lists are slightly confusing as well. Morgan is not on the Leading Ladies list but is on the Magicians list and has her own page. The Lady of the Lake is exactly like Morgan. Guinevere is on the Leading Ladies list and has her own page. Nimue is on both lists and is mentioned on the Lady of the Lake’s page but doesn’t have her own. The information would be more accessible if characters’ names were duplicated onto all the lists that apply to them.

Most children will not care or truly notice what I have complained about. Most children and adults alike will see it for a great intro to the world of King of Arthur. It actually rather exhaustive for a book geared towards children. For the purpose it sets out to serve, I think it succeeds. I’m pleasantly surprised that there’s any mention of Marie de France or that other characters from Welsh myth get introduced. The art is busy and entertaining, there is always some little detail you hadn’t seen before. But the bit of misinformation must change and about the quotes/excerpts, for all I know the author created them, but if he did I really wish he would have said so. Keep in mind that aside from the few sections every other quote/excerpt is faithfully attributed to its source. But because of this, the book left me hot and cold. I see its flaws, but would give it as an introductory piece to Arthurian legend all the same.

I actually have some questions that the book brought on that I couldn’t find answers for, so if anyone has the answers I would be very grateful if you could tell me the who, where, what, when, and why (or shortened to wwww&w):

I’ve encountered multiple claims that Morgan was once a lover of/loved Merlin? I can’t find what source(s) this claim comes from? I know that Chretien de Troyes was the first to mention her having a family connection with Arthur. And she first appears by name in Geoffrey’s Vita Merlini. In the Vulgate Cycle she studies under Merlin. But what texts are there that have a Morgan/Merlin relationship?

Also did Morgan le Fey ever make a look-alike of Guinevere? The only thing that comes to my mind is the half-sister Guinevere of the Vulgate Merlin and that had nothing to do with Morgan.

I’ve come across multiple claims of Avalon being the “Fortunate Isles” & the Fortunate Isles in Celtic Mythology. Anything that I’ve come across to do with the Fortunate Isles has been about Greek Mythology. When referring to Isles in Celtic mythology it’s usually the otherworld, Land of Youth, and imagery such as summer, feasting, hunting, music, and bountiful crops? Where are there specific texts that have The Fortunate Isles as part of Celtic Mythology or Arthurian Legend?

Rating 2.5 stars

I had two opinions of this book. One, a wide variety of interesting topics, the other choppy repetitive writing, and very little organization. There were a lot of subjects related to King Arthur covered in this book. The Round Table, Excalibur, The Knights, Camelot, Merlin and much more. Each topic was usually a page to two pages, so not a lot of text, just short descriptions. The writing though was so repetitive. At one point the work knighthood was used at least six times in one paragraph. This is not the mark of a good writing style.

In addition there really was no organization to this book. It just shifted randomly from topic to topic, and interspersed were things like poems, or quotes, or lists. It was just a very poorly constructed book.

The illustrations were really well done though. Vivid and brightly colored, and they were used well to illustrate the subjects. They really brought the medieval world to life.

Overall, not the best book I have read on King Arthur, but perhaps these are simply personal issues that might not bother other readers.

Some kids read the instruction manuals for video games over and over to learn the characters, their powers, their weaknesses, their weapons, etc. This is that kind of read for the legends of King Arthur and his court. Very clear writing organized in easy to reference sections some of which contain annotated categorical lists, such as castles and knights. It is peppered throughout with bits of literary text from or about the middle ages (i.e. excerpts from Geoffrey Chaucer's The Canterbury Tales) which deepen understanding of the era. The illustrations are richly colorful on glossy pages with large print which is very readable. Using the Internet to look at pictures of places such as the castle ruins at Tintagel can enrich the study of the history of the era and its legends.