Reviews

King Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table by Rupert S. Holland

introvertedbear's review against another edition

Go to review page

2.0

I would give this book 2.5 stars.

I really can't hate on it too much since these stories were written a long time ago. A lot of people seemed to make a big deal out of King Arthur and the Round Table, and so I expected a little more. Maybe there's more historical value in the history and folklore of this book, but I didn't have annotations and notes to enjoy that history.

For those of you who know nothing about King Arthur, I'll just give you a basic summary. King Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table are legendary figures from England's folklore. They have ties to the whole world, especially the Roman empire, and so therefore, the knights are chivalrous and goodly while King Arthur is so great he has the right, by birth, to rule over everything. This book is basically a collection of tales that follow different knights from Arthur's Round Table. They begin with the origin of Arthur and end tragically with a bitter war.

Personally, I thought this book was basically a soap opera written by men. It was very repetitive and dramatic with lots of fighting and killing. There are also a few ladies to love on the side, and a sneaky affair that nearly destroys everyone in its way. Every now and then, a knight will run into some devious magic or will have to put their faith in God.

I do think there's historical significance to learn from these tales when someone reads them. However, I didn't particularly enjoy them, and so, I rated this book pretty low. If you enjoy reading about medieval times and like reading about knights, then this book would be perfect for you.

As a side note, I thought King Arthur was the greatest man ever in these stories, but it turns out that Sir Lancelot is even bigger than Arthur.

gsanta1's review against another edition

Go to review page

3.0

The stories are very repetitive in the beginning. Ride out, kill some knights, rescue trapped maidens, joust. Rinse and repeat.

It gets more dynamic towards the end with Lancelot (thank God).

So the plot was mostly boring, but what bothered me was the inconsistencies. I can't tell if this was one narrative or if the author weaved several stories from different sources.

Important characters/antagonists came in once and never seen again. The Lady of the Lake died in one story but was alive in another. Excalibur seemed important but was never mentioned again until the last few pages. Noble Knights doing wretched and vile things. Magic plays a role in the beginning but then never heard of again. Merlin disappears.

I was disappointed by the Knights. The Knights were often killing each other, or betraying each other. Not sure what King Arthur was doing. As far as I can tell all his Knights would do is go out and fought other knights and brought them into his fealty. That's it.
What was noble about the Round Table? I guess they never torture anyone? Or kept anyone imprisoned for fun? Low bar.

Even the Quest for the Holy Grain was disappointing. Finds grain. Gets lifted to heaven. Wasn't it supposed to bless the land with peace or something? Or at least bring it back to Camelot...

I finished it. That's what matters. But, boy, was that a pain to get through.
More...