Who was King Arthur? Whether it is concluded that he was a Celtic king or a Roman officer, or something in-between, there is one conclusion that virtually all investigators agree on: he was some kind of war leader who fought against the Saxons in Britain. This is a fair conclusion, but it misses—or ignores—something crucial. In the legends of Arthur, he engages in a monumental campaign into Europe and wages war against the Roman Empire. Few researchers even attempt to offer an explanation for this, most simply dismissing it as fiction. The few theories that have been offered to explain the historical origin of this part of the legend are invariably unconvincing and do not address the scale of Arthur's campaign in the legend. In this book, the historical event behind this legend is revealed. Arthur's enemies are identified as real historical figures. Most importantly, the identity of the man who conquered Europe is discovered and it is shown exactly how he came to be known as King Arthur.
If you have ever wondered about the historical Arthur character but know little about him don't make this your first book to read as you will be disappointed. This is a work where knowledge of resources and the main events of the age is needed as it's the whole discussion in the book. The author does a very good job of comparing and analyzing the various sources. He doesn't provide too much in the way of his own conclusions about who the historical Arthur might of been, preferring to let the reader decide. What's lacking is the telling of a story and the Arthur figure cries out for that. It lessens the book quite significantly. Many years ago I read another Arthur book (can't remember the name). Although I didn't agree with all the conclusions it was a riveting read. Something this book lacks.