King Arthur And The Knights Of The Round Table

by Antonia Fraser

Retellings of seventeen tales about King Arthur, Lancelot, Gawaine, Tristram, and other knights of the Round Table.

Genres: Arthurian, Childrens, Historical Fiction, Fiction, Historical, Classics

208 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1954

About the author

Antonia Fraser is the author of many widely acclaimed historical works, including the biographies Mary, Queen of Scots (a 40th anniversary edition was published in May 2009), Cromwell: Our Chief of Men, King Charles II and The Gunpowder Plot (CWA Non-Fiction Gold Dagger; St Louis Literary Award). She has written five highly praised books which focus on women in history, The Weaker Vessel: Women's Lot in Seventeenth Century Britain (Wolfson Award for History, 1984), The Warrior Queens: Boadecia's Chariot, The Six Wives of Henry VIII, Marie Antoinette: The Journey (Franco-British Literary Prize 2001), which was made into a film by Sofia Coppola in 2006 and most recently Love and Louis XIV: The Women in the Life of the Sun King. She was awarded the Norton Medlicott Medal by the Historical Association in 2000. Antonia Fraser was made DBE in 2011 for her services to literature. Her most recent book is Must You Go?, celebrating her life with Harold Pinter, who died on Christmas Eve 2008. She lives in London.

Reviews

[Lance · Rating 2 out of 5]

"The ways of magic were strange and mysterious to Arthur."

This was a really interesting second-hand find from the Glouscester Green market in Oxford! The illustrations, made by the author's twelve year old daughter Rebecca, are a very special feature. I now I would have been greatly impressed with these as a child and practiced art a lot more win an effort to draw as well as Rebecca. A real inspiration to younger children. Her human figures are great, really well-depicted in a range of challenging medieval costumes, and I also really enjoyed the details added into the scenes such as the Lady of the Lake decorated with a pair of swans a cygnet!
The writing, however, was always going to suffer in comparison with the monumental Once and Future King, one of my all-time favourites which I read recently. Although there was good pacing, continual action, and solid historical details, I found the chapters chosen by Fraser to be slightly disjointed and to distract from the central development of Arthur, Merlin, Lancelot and Gwenevere which alternately bring such hope and despair to these resoundingly human characters. I wouldn't have bothered with Balin and Bors, or Geraint and Enid, and I probably would have completely binned off Tristram (that scoundrel!). I understand Fraser's motivation in updating the canon tales to be more child-friendly, with increased marital fidelity, happy endings, and removing the incest and illegitimacy, but I think that this drew to distinct a line between the good and evil characters. It would have been helpful to see more moral dilemmas from the characters, even if mortal sin was out of the question for such a young audience. Having said that, I preferred Fraser's rewrite of Elaine as a strong-willed self-entitled empress to any other reading of her, and I particularly enjoyed the character of Vivian/Nimue with her mixed femininity and total evil. So, overall, the characters were well written, but I would have preferred for more of the story to be spent with the central characters.
Now, time for the real substance of the review. Guess who that will be about:
"Gwenevere saw another knight in black armour, mounted on a magnificent black horse, with lance poised in hand. This was a devil in armour, not an ordinary knight."
Still don't know? How about this:
"Then he drew a little apart from Percival and Merlin, to ponder why god had chosen to reward his cruelties."
That's right. It's time to talk about Lancelot. I felt that at times Fraser came close to capturing the tormented idealism of this great character so eternally suspended between perfection and disgrace. "'I have no high position or formidable reputation. I am simply a young soldier of fortune who has come to your court, Arthur Pendragon, because the ideal of a gallant king fighting enemies on all sides appeals to me.'" Handsome, thoughtful, and passionate, I would have liked to have seen more of Lancelot's peerless handling of the Round Tables' many, many moral debates rather than a heavy focus on his fighting prowess and, kind of hilariously, his way with the ladies. "Like all the knights, Geraint was inclined to be jealous of Lancelot." Lancelot is not a ladies' man! He is a tortured soul who bares no judgement but God's! Anyway, I had to dock two stars from the book over Lancelot-related grumps. The first of these was a WRONG! description of him wearing a highly ornamented helmet plume to a tournament. The second, much worse, was his death during Arthur’s final battle whilst Bedevere survives? I understand Fraser was trying to give Lancelot a noble end that young children could appreciate, but vain sacrifice was never something that Lancelot stood for and his retirement to a monastery is so much more meaningful and heartfelt a penance than dying in battle. I’m sorry, but that simply isn’t good enough. Read The Ill-Made Knight and you’ll know what I mean.

"'Dear God, that I had not lived to see this grievous sight - a knight of the Round Table betraying his vows.'"

[Jim Reicker · Rating 4 out of 5]

I'm halfway through and thoroughly enjoying every adventure. And I'm 79! (After 40-50 yrs on my shelf, it's time to read it.) It's my first exposure to a formal telling of the tales and I wonder where the accepted, traditional version ends and Antonia Fraser's imagination takes over. These tales, as she tells them, are so much more exciting, colourful, dangerous, engaging and intriguing than today's one-dimensional, never-ending, pointless superhero stories. Sure, there are immoral events -- people are involved. Higher values are always valued, if not achieved. And BTW, I love the illustrations -- they are full of action, colour, passion, purity and innocence, perfect for a younger audience.

[Daniel Wright · Rating 3 out of 5]

This was a book I read as a child that got me into Arthurian legend and contributed to my love of both history and fantasy. I rediscovered it and decided to give it a read. Whilst it is nowhere near as good as I remember it being (with some poor writing and strange choices), it did give me the same joy of discovering these amazing stories of knights and magic. Just don't expect the greatest ever retellings here.

[Audrey · Rating 1 out of 5]

She did my man Palomides so dirty, literally made the Tristan story racist where it wasn’t originally. Medieval Palomides is a complex and fascinating character because of his being a “Saracen” but Fraser’s version is just an orientalist & islamophobic caricature.

[Bill Bleuel · Rating 5 out of 5]

An exceptional modern day introduction into King Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table, expertly told. A superb primer and introduction to White's "The Once and Future King."

[Robert Stepanyan · Rating 4 out of 5]

I chose the book King Arthur and the Knights Of the Round Table because my brother recommended it to me. In the book, there was a normal person named Arthur. His brother and father were both knights, and when they heard about the sword in the stone, they went to try pulling it out. The stone said whoever can pull it out and has the king's blood, then they should become the king. They both failed but Arthur pulled it out and became the king. Later, Merlin, a wizard, got Arthur a hue round table with 32 loyal knights. They all swore an oath about honesty, respect, and loyalty. Arthur got in a war and an evil witch tricks Merlin into death because Merlin was an adviser and guard for Arthur. In Arthur's final battle, he got injured and one of his knights wept as he died. I like this Arthur's writing style and point of view, but some of the events in the book didn't add up and were hard to understand. I would recommend this book to my cousin because he likes books like this one.

[Rik · Rating 2 out of 5]

It was alright, but there were quite a few occasions when the story didn't quite add up. For example, right near the end it says that all Arthurs gallant knights had perished, then on the next page it says 'the kings champions, few though they were...'. The story isn't ruined by the poor continuity, but it does make it not such a good read.

[Leah · Rating 3 out of 5]

Really good, but the stories were so similar! And it just made most of the knights sound like really bad people (so mean/ rude to the women!)

The writing didn't really have too much character either but it wasn't unpleasant.

[Ruth · Rating 3 out of 5]

this is actually a book meant for kids but i read it anyway because i had a hard time finding anything else about arthur.it was ok.

[Aubrey · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a easily readable adaptation.

[Becca · Rating 4 out of 5]

I think some of the alternate retellings might be more interesting than the actual stories...