What do you think?
Rate this book
Merlin and the Making of the King
In this collection of three exciting Arthurian legends, Merlin the magician watches over young Arthur as he rises to become king of all England. But many threats befall Arthur in the kingdom of Camelot: the evil witch Morgan le Fay, the traitor Mordred, and even his best friend, Sir Launcelot. Will the courageous Arthur triumph over the evil forces in his path and bring peace and justice to the world?
With lyrical storytelling and dazzling paintings, renowned author Margaret Hodges and celebrated illustrator Trina Schart Hyman together capture the beauty, danger, and glory of these timeless tales adapted from Sir Thomas Malory's Le Morte d'Arthur.
With lyrical storytelling and dazzling paintings, renowned author Margaret Hodges and celebrated illustrator Trina Schart Hyman together capture the beauty, danger, and glory of these timeless tales adapted from Sir Thomas Malory's Le Morte d'Arthur.
32 pages, Hardcover
First published June 1, 2004
2 people are currently reading
407 people want to read
About the author
Margaret Hodges
72 books53 followersMargaret "Peggy" Hodges was an American writer of books for children.
She was born Sarah Margaret Moore in Indianapolis, Indiana to Arthur Carlisle and Annie Marie Moore. She enrolled at Tudor Hall, a college preparatory school for girls. A 1932 graduate of Vassar College, she arrived in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania with her husband Fletcher Hodges Jr. when in 1937 he became curator at the Stephen Foster Memorial. She trained as a librarian at Carnegie Institute of Technology, now Carnegie Mellon University, under Elizabeth Nesbitt, and she volunteered as a storyteller at the Carnegie Library of Pittsburgh. Beginning in 1958 with One Little Drum, she wrote and published more than 40 books.
Her 1985 book Saint George and the Dragon, illustrated by Trina Schart Hyman, won the Caldecott Medal of the American Library Association.
She was a professor of library science at the University of Pittsburgh, where she retired in 1976.
Hodges died of heart disease on December 13, 2005 at her home in Oakmont, Pennsylvania. She suffered from Parkinson's disease.
She wrote her stories on a notepad or a typewriter. "I need good ideas, and they don't come out of machines," she once said.
She was born Sarah Margaret Moore in Indianapolis, Indiana to Arthur Carlisle and Annie Marie Moore. She enrolled at Tudor Hall, a college preparatory school for girls. A 1932 graduate of Vassar College, she arrived in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania with her husband Fletcher Hodges Jr. when in 1937 he became curator at the Stephen Foster Memorial. She trained as a librarian at Carnegie Institute of Technology, now Carnegie Mellon University, under Elizabeth Nesbitt, and she volunteered as a storyteller at the Carnegie Library of Pittsburgh. Beginning in 1958 with One Little Drum, she wrote and published more than 40 books.
Her 1985 book Saint George and the Dragon, illustrated by Trina Schart Hyman, won the Caldecott Medal of the American Library Association.
She was a professor of library science at the University of Pittsburgh, where she retired in 1976.
Hodges died of heart disease on December 13, 2005 at her home in Oakmont, Pennsylvania. She suffered from Parkinson's disease.
She wrote her stories on a notepad or a typewriter. "I need good ideas, and they don't come out of machines," she once said.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 63 reviews
June 20, 2009
Although I felt this was a good child's introduction to the legend of Arthur, as a Arthur-nerd, I found some aspects of the book annoying and unsettling. My biggest complaint is that the author was not really true to the spirit of the tale.
In such a short book, I don't expect great character development, but I found all the characters in this book distant and 2D. Although Arthur is a flawed hero, Hodges portrays Arthur as a weak, foolish, king- a bumbling idiot who gained the crown not by divine right, or noble birth, but because he "knew a guy" (Merlin). My other peeve is that the author fails to introduce main characters (Lancelot, Morgan, Uther)until they become important to the story. Although Hodges gives us backstory when necessary, it would be much EASIER to introduce Morgan Le Fay in the beginning of the story by simply stating that Igraine had a daughter. Then, when Morgan reappears, she doesn't seem so bizarre and out-of-the-blue.
Obviously, I would expect details like Arthur's conception, Mordred's birth or Guinevere's infidelity to be removed from a picture-book version of the story, but the author felt the need to reference them, although not directly. In doing so, the author presents or implies the shadier parts of Arthurian legend WITHOUT actually discussing them.
Example: In the beginning of the story, the author decides not to discuss Uther's "rape" of Igraine. Since Uther plays very little role in the simplified version of Arthur's story, it would make sense to leave him out altogether, but instead Hodges introduces Uther NOT as King, but as a bloodthirsty enemy of Cornwall who steals Igraine as his wife, and then surrenders his firstborn son essentially because Merlin asked him to.
My last complaint is with the illustrations, or should I say, lack of illustrations. This book is considered a picture book, and it features some beautiful illustrations by Trina Schart Hyman (illustrator of Saint George and the Dragon; Snow White), but because of the size of the book, the illustrations are very small and cramped. To make matters worse, this book has around 10 illustrations total- or one for every 4 pages. I felt that this arrangement- huge paragraphs of text, very few illustrations, and the unique size of the book, are at odds with the requirements of a picture book.
In such a short book, I don't expect great character development, but I found all the characters in this book distant and 2D. Although Arthur is a flawed hero, Hodges portrays Arthur as a weak, foolish, king- a bumbling idiot who gained the crown not by divine right, or noble birth, but because he "knew a guy" (Merlin). My other peeve is that the author fails to introduce main characters (Lancelot, Morgan, Uther)until they become important to the story. Although Hodges gives us backstory when necessary, it would be much EASIER to introduce Morgan Le Fay in the beginning of the story by simply stating that Igraine had a daughter. Then, when Morgan reappears, she doesn't seem so bizarre and out-of-the-blue.
Obviously, I would expect details like Arthur's conception, Mordred's birth or Guinevere's infidelity to be removed from a picture-book version of the story, but the author felt the need to reference them, although not directly. In doing so, the author presents or implies the shadier parts of Arthurian legend WITHOUT actually discussing them.
Example: In the beginning of the story, the author decides not to discuss Uther's "rape" of Igraine. Since Uther plays very little role in the simplified version of Arthur's story, it would make sense to leave him out altogether, but instead Hodges introduces Uther NOT as King, but as a bloodthirsty enemy of Cornwall who steals Igraine as his wife, and then surrenders his firstborn son essentially because Merlin asked him to.
My last complaint is with the illustrations, or should I say, lack of illustrations. This book is considered a picture book, and it features some beautiful illustrations by Trina Schart Hyman (illustrator of Saint George and the Dragon; Snow White), but because of the size of the book, the illustrations are very small and cramped. To make matters worse, this book has around 10 illustrations total- or one for every 4 pages. I felt that this arrangement- huge paragraphs of text, very few illustrations, and the unique size of the book, are at odds with the requirements of a picture book.
March 23, 2018
This was a rather choppy and short retelling of the Winchester manuscript of the story of King Arthur for young readers. I understand that for such a short version of the massively complicated story there isn't a lot of room for character development or dialogue but I felt that some of the more notable characters should have been properly introduced instead of sprung up when the story called for them with a bit of backstory information. I understand that the author left out Uther's rape of Ingraine but instead made it look like he was a bloodthirsty ruler. But the author made it look like Uther gave up Arthur simply because Merlin asked him to. Arthur's friendship with Merlin is shallow in this book. The villains or antagonist of the stories played such small and rushed parts that we hardly noticed them or their deeds and then they were defeated so quickly that we hardly noticed their demise. This retelling seemed a bit dull and meaningless because it lost it's magical elements in each part of the story when it was summarized into three short parts: The Sword in the Stone, Exaclibur, and The Lady of the Lake. Also, the illustrations were quite lacking and didn't make up for the shortcomings of the stories.
December 30, 2024
A beautiful book about Arthurian legends. I wish Hodges/Hyman adapted literally everything in medieval English literature for children. This one is a real delight, based on a Malory text (not Caxton's). It captures the feel of medieval literature, is dramatic without being graphic, and gives that Arthurian vibe.
July 30, 2010
I realize that the Arthurian cycle is enormous and complex and could not possible all fit in a short book for young readers. However, I don't think editing the entire reign of Arthur down to a few incidents is at all beneficial. Here the story seems meaningless; there is no emotional content and we are told nothing about Arthur's impact on the people or kingdom. In the space of a few pages he goes from unborn infant to king to the last battle. Unless the reader was already familiar with the tales the response would be "Who cares?" And for a reader with some familiarity with the material this is not of much interest as the episodes selected for retelling are among the best known. The only real attraction here is Hyman's illustrations, which don't take center stage.
April 23, 2025
I read this to my five-year-old grandson in three installments. It was a mighty leap from Frog and Toad. Trina Schart Hyman's illustrations are magnificent and saved the day.
I feel deficient in never having been able to gin up much enthusiasm for the King Arthur stories, so I'm not qualified to evaluate the adaptation. Callahan enjoyed the book but has not clamored for rereadings.
I feel deficient in never having been able to gin up much enthusiasm for the King Arthur stories, so I'm not qualified to evaluate the adaptation. Callahan enjoyed the book but has not clamored for rereadings.
May 23, 2017
I'd hoped this introduction would help me appreciate other tellings more. So far, I generally avoid Arthurian stories. But I did love what Hodges and Hyman did with St. George, so I was excited to try this. Unfortunately, I found it unsatisfying on all levels. Not a bad book, but neither substantial, nor engaging, nor concise - just simple.
October 31, 2009
This book really is beautiful. It summarizes the basics of the Arthurian story for children. This has the distinct advantage of getting Malory's story without having to slog through Malory, or the more depressing parts of White, though White's cleverness is also missing. Naturally, a good deal is glossed over (even the best can only do so much in 38 pages) but it is a good introduction and would probably make children interested in reading more.
The best part of this book is the art. The illustrations are nice in themselves, but the floral borders on every page make it feel sumptuous to read. As the story progresses, the borders change from spring flowers to summer berries to winter holly. Non-story pages are bordered in daisies with (what else) red dragons. If you run across this volume, be sure to look at every page.
The best part of this book is the art. The illustrations are nice in themselves, but the floral borders on every page make it feel sumptuous to read. As the story progresses, the borders change from spring flowers to summer berries to winter holly. Non-story pages are bordered in daisies with (what else) red dragons. If you run across this volume, be sure to look at every page.
August 17, 2024
A pared-down, but beautifully illustrated highlights reel of the Arthur myth.
December 16, 2016
I got really excited when I saw this, because it looked like it was done by not only the same illustrator (whom I adore) but also by the same author as my childhood Saint George book. Right on both counts!
Unfortunately, while beautiful, this one doesn't hold together as well as a story as Saint George. I think that's partially the nature of the story being adapted (it's impressive to pull from Malory, but Malory is ginormous).
Unfortunately, while beautiful, this one doesn't hold together as well as a story as Saint George. I think that's partially the nature of the story being adapted (it's impressive to pull from Malory, but Malory is ginormous).
May 11, 2022
3 stars
A child's introduction to the Arthurian myths with the artwork of Trina Schart Hyman! It is ok, though it heavily skims over the more questionable aspects of the saga. Ages 7/8 +.
Reread Jan 19, 2017
4 stars
A really lovely introduction to the Arthurian legends with evocative art. A lovely volume.
A child's introduction to the Arthurian myths with the artwork of Trina Schart Hyman! It is ok, though it heavily skims over the more questionable aspects of the saga. Ages 7/8 +.
Reread Jan 19, 2017
4 stars
A really lovely introduction to the Arthurian legends with evocative art. A lovely volume.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
July 23, 2013
A lovely piece. I think book should have been larger to better appreciate the pictures. I also thought the tales needed more flavor. They felt a bit flat.
November 12, 2019
Beautifully illustrated and so interesting to learn about :)
January 18, 2022
In theory, I am interested in Arthurian legend. In practice, I haven't consistently enjoyed my endeavors to read up on the subject. Many years ago, I read T.H. White's "The Sword in the Stone" and really did not like it, though now I cannot recall just why. "The Story of King Arthur and His Knights" (Howard Pyle) I DID enjoy, mostly, though I got a bit hung up on all the fights to the death between knights, just because they saw each other. But I digress.
This particular picture-book retelling by Margaret Hodges has renewed my interest, however. The illustrations are intricately detailed and prettily coloured; the text condenses a great amount of story into just thirty pages or so. I remained with many questions because it left so much of the story untold (and I have forgotten most of it). For instance, what happened to Arthur's birth mother, Igraine? She just disappeared from the story after giving her baby to Merlin. And why did the infant have to be taken away from her? And Morgan le Fay: purported half-sister to Arthur, but how? Uther's daughter? Igraine's? The Duke's whom Uther killed?
A child reading this may or may not have similar questions, but undoubtedly this book will spur him on to learn more, if he has any leaning toward knights and kingly legend.
Hodges based her retelling on "Le Morte d'Arthur" by Sir Thomas Malory. I may track that one down and see if I like it any better than White's. For that matter, perhaps I will try White's again as well, eventually.
This particular picture-book retelling by Margaret Hodges has renewed my interest, however. The illustrations are intricately detailed and prettily coloured; the text condenses a great amount of story into just thirty pages or so. I remained with many questions because it left so much of the story untold (and I have forgotten most of it). For instance, what happened to Arthur's birth mother, Igraine? She just disappeared from the story after giving her baby to Merlin. And why did the infant have to be taken away from her? And Morgan le Fay: purported half-sister to Arthur, but how? Uther's daughter? Igraine's? The Duke's whom Uther killed?
A child reading this may or may not have similar questions, but undoubtedly this book will spur him on to learn more, if he has any leaning toward knights and kingly legend.
Hodges based her retelling on "Le Morte d'Arthur" by Sir Thomas Malory. I may track that one down and see if I like it any better than White's. For that matter, perhaps I will try White's again as well, eventually.
June 22, 2019
Hodges’ adaptation of Malory isn’t as strong as her distillation of Spenser in “Saint George and the Dragon.” She relates only a few tales relating to Merlin and Excalibur, but without the connecting tissue of the knightly adventures and the Grail Quest, the book feels more hollow and disjointed than it should. Outside of Merlin and Arthur, characters are poorly introduced or not introduced at all. Events happen suddenly, sometimes without foreshadowing or explanation, and the end lacks weight because of this. Perhaps trying to compact the entirety of Arthur’s episodic epic into a 38-page children’s book was simply the wrong approach.
Nonetheless, Hodges’ writing is often admirable in its clarity and storytime eloquence. The stories still hold power to make one dream.
And the main reason to read this, and why I highly recommend it, is for the magnificent art of Trina Schart Hyman. She isn’t allowed as many full page spreads as in “Saint George and the Dragon,” but her drawings retain the perfect blend of mystical legend and human passion that appeal so strongly to my imagination. Part storybook, part illuminated manuscript, and all beautiful. If you’re a fan of Arthurian literature, check this book out, if for the art alone.
Nonetheless, Hodges’ writing is often admirable in its clarity and storytime eloquence. The stories still hold power to make one dream.
And the main reason to read this, and why I highly recommend it, is for the magnificent art of Trina Schart Hyman. She isn’t allowed as many full page spreads as in “Saint George and the Dragon,” but her drawings retain the perfect blend of mystical legend and human passion that appeal so strongly to my imagination. Part storybook, part illuminated manuscript, and all beautiful. If you’re a fan of Arthurian literature, check this book out, if for the art alone.
May 21, 2023
A short and succinct approach to telling the highlights of the King Arthur legend. Aimed at children, the telling glosses over much of the darker and more mature elements but allows a bit of the violence to persist.
It's quick and maybe too condensed to feel like an actual story is being told at times. The book is broken into three chapters that are mostly highlights on the big moments of his life. The Sword in the Stone, Excalibur, and The Lady in the Lake.
Unfortunately it lacks much of the essence that will allow you to care about these big moments.
It can do an alright job as an introduction for young readers. But by the time they are capable to read this book, there are likely better choices.
It's quick and maybe too condensed to feel like an actual story is being told at times. The book is broken into three chapters that are mostly highlights on the big moments of his life. The Sword in the Stone, Excalibur, and The Lady in the Lake.
Unfortunately it lacks much of the essence that will allow you to care about these big moments.
It can do an alright job as an introduction for young readers. But by the time they are capable to read this book, there are likely better choices.
February 19, 2020
That was a severely shortened and chopped up telling of King Arthur. I understand it’s intended for children, but had I read this as a child I would not have been interested in learning more about this legend, and I absolutely love and adore the legend of King Arthur.
The illustrations were amazing and is the saving grace for this review, I just wish they had been bigger to fully take in and appreciate them.
The illustrations were amazing and is the saving grace for this review, I just wish they had been bigger to fully take in and appreciate them.
November 2, 2020
A beautifully illustrated and concise version of the Arthurian mythos (broken down into 3 short stories) for young children; I used it as part of my efforts to add Arthurian myth to the "Early Britain" unit of my children's history lessons for homeschooling (because honestly, I can't do Dark Ages Britain between the withdrawal of the Roman Empire and the conquest by the Anglo-Saxons without at least mentioning the myth of King Arthur!). Really excellent, highly recommended!
December 20, 2017
As someone who absolutely loves the Arthurian legends, these three tales taken from Le Morte d'Arthur is a great way to introduce children to King Arthur and Merlin. While this is heavily abridged and modified for a younger audience, it serves it's purpose and it gets you interested to learn more. With some good artwork, it's a read you don't have to pick up but you'll still enjoy if you do.
September 27, 2019
I wanted to like this more. The exquisite illustrations are definitely its strength, but the book is so small they aren't as engaging. The text is rather humdrum where a lyrical quality would have been more appropriate and as other reviewers mention is more of a simplified plot summary with some odd cherry picking. Still, not a bad introduction to the legend.
June 25, 2020
Excellent adaptation of the Arthur legend, based on a manuscript that Dr. W. F. Oakeshott found in 1934 in the Winchester College library, in the city that Sir Thomas Mallory called "Camelot" in his Le Morte d'Arthur manuscript collection. So the stories are a little different. Two swords, Excalibur having a magic healing scabbard.
August 23, 2023
I'm not the intended audience for this, but for kids it may be a good introduction to King Arthur. Not sure though since the story was so oversimplified I thought it was boring. More like a school textbook. I hate to see what the author would do to Greek/Roman myths to make them just as boring. The illustrations were well done.
April 1, 2022
Accurate telling of King Arthur. My boys all listened attentively, despite the gorgeous pictures being few and far between. If the the pictures were larger and more frequent, I would have upped it a star.
February 25, 2025
Trina Schart Hyman's contributions to this short, straightforward summary of The Sword in the Stone, Excalibur, and The Lady of the Lake are beautiful, as always. I'm just not sure how to categorize this book; it's not quite a picture book ... but is not a chapter book, either.
May 7, 2017
The Hodges/Hyman team is just great, although the "Trust in yourselves" bit at the end was disappointing.
April 24, 2019
Three short stories that clearly summarize the story of Merlin's involvement with King Arthur and his journey to Excalibur. Gorgeous illustrations and told in an interesting story format.
April 23, 2021
Gorgeous art.
Read
August 8, 2023Gorgeous calligraphy and artwork!
September 1, 2023
Beautiful illustrations where they are present. It evokes a lot of nostalgia for me. It is also very much a rise and fall book, with very little of the adventures in-between.
December 31, 2023
cried because merlin and arthur :(
November 8, 2024
3 for the writing, 5 for the artwork
Displaying 1 - 30 of 63 reviews