They say that history is written by the victors, and consequently there is a tendency for the Britons to be forgotten in the story of the end of Roman Britain and the post-Roman period. Warlord will redress this balance looking at the extraordinary lives of British leaders from 400-550 and the strategies they used to seize and hold power during these turbulent times. The book focuses on key figures who have been largely neglected in history over the last 30 years. Starting with Gerontius, who rebelled against the Roman establishment, the story then turns the key figures of Vortigern and Ambrosius, who were faced with the Anglo-Saxon invasion, and finishes with a look at how British warlords such as Cerdic were forced to adapt to the situation and were compelled to seek power by working with the new Anglo-Saxon powerbase.
A recent-ish addition to one of my favorite early Medieval subjects: post-Roman Britain. This one has one very interesting addition to the subject: what if the Saxons weren't called in by Vortigern to fight the Picts, but were instead a slow trickle brought in by many British warlords (including Vortigern) to be used against their local enemies in a bunch of petty conflicts? An interesting take on it, and certainly one that isn't outside the realm of possibility. Laycock shows us the positions of probably Saxon sites in the West, and they do appear to be on the borders of British tribal territories. So, not unreasonable.
The author's support for the idea that the Anglicizing of England was less British-vs.-Saxon and more Mercenaries-slowly-take-over is less so. Yes, Gildas was on a rant and isn't necessarily to be taken at face value, but the fact is that I'm writing this in English and not Welsh (or some Romance language). There are also a lot of "just maybe it's conceivable if you bend the evidence just right" type arguments. Still, I enjoyed reading it, and I'll be looking at the sources in a different light from now on, which is enough to make this worth checking out.