What do you think?
Rate this book
Pendragon's Banner #1
The Kingmaking
As Uthr Pendragon battles to overthrow the tyrant Vortigern tragedy strikes. There is only one man who can lead Britain from the chaos of darkness into a new age of glory. Protected since birth, he is revealed as the new Pendragon.
422 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1994
83 people are currently reading
3965 people want to read
About the author
Helen Hollick
59 books526 followersI escaped London in January 2013 to live in North Devon - but was born in Walthamstow, North East London in 1953 I began writing at the age of 13. Desperately wanting a pony of my own, but not being able to afford one, I invented an imaginary pony instead, writing stories about our adventures together at every spare opportunity. In the seventies I turned to science fiction - this was the age of Dr. Who, Star Trek and Star Wars. I still have an unfinished adventure about a bit of a rogue who travelled space with his family, making an honest(ish) living and getting into all sorts of scrapes. Perhaps one day I might finish it.
I had wanted to become a journalist when leaving secondary school, but my careers advice was not helpful. "Don't be silly," I was told, "you can't type." (I still can't, I use four fingers.) Instead, I worked in a Chingford library where I stayed for 13 years although I was not very happy there - I did not realise it, but I wanted to write. The one advantage of the library, however, was the access to books, and it was there that I came across the Roman historical novels of Rosemary Sutcliff, the Arthurian trilogy by Mary Stewart, and the historian Geoffrey Ashe. I was hooked on Roman Britain - and King Arthur!
Reading everything I could, I eventually became frustrated that novels were not how I personally felt about the matter of Arthur and Gwenhwyfar (Guinevere).
By this time, I was married with a young daughter. I had time on my hands and so I started writing my idea of Arthurian Britain . I deliberately decided not to include Merlin and Lancelot, there was to be no magic or Medieval myth. My book was to be a "what might have really happened" historical novel, not a fantasy, and most certainly not a romance! What I didn't know, when I started, was that my one book was to grow into enough words to make a complete trilogy.
I found an agent who placed me with William Heinemann - I was accepted for publication just after my 40th birthday. The best birthday present I have ever had.
I had previously had a smaller success with a children's personal safety book (stranger danger) called "Come and Tell Me," a little story that I had written for my daughter when she was 3. I wanted to tell her how to keep safe in a clear and simple manner - with a message that could be easily remembered. "Always come and tell me before you go anywhere with anyone" fitted nicely. I was immensely proud when my little story was taken up as an official safety book by the British Home Office to be used nationally by the police and schools. An updated and revised version of "Come and Tell Me" was re-published by Happy Cat Books but is now out of print.
I followed on with two Saxon period novels A Hollow Crown and Harold the King - both are about the people and events that led to the Battle of Hastings in 1066 - from the English point of view.
(these titles are published as The Forever Queen and I Am The Chosen King in the US)
When Heinemann did not re-print my backlist I took my books to a small UK independent publisher with their even smaller mainstream imprint, adding my historical adventure series the Sea Witch Voyages to my list.
Unfortunately Discovered Authors / Callio Press, were not as organised as they should have been and the company closed in the spring of 2011. Not wanting my books to fall out of print in the UK I took them to an indie company - SilverWood Books of Bristol UK - and with their technical assistance "self published"
I am also with Sourcebooks Inc in the US, with Artemis Yayinlari in Turkey, Sadwolf in Germany at Catnip Edizioni in Italy.
I was delighted to make the USA Today bestseller list in 2011 with The Forever Queen (US title of A Hollow Crown)
I have published two non-fiction books: Pirates Truth and Tales with Amberley Press and Smugglers : Fact and Fiction with Pen & Sword.
I also run an historical fiction review blog, Discovering Diamonds, with a dedicated and enthusia
I had wanted to become a journalist when leaving secondary school, but my careers advice was not helpful. "Don't be silly," I was told, "you can't type." (I still can't, I use four fingers.) Instead, I worked in a Chingford library where I stayed for 13 years although I was not very happy there - I did not realise it, but I wanted to write. The one advantage of the library, however, was the access to books, and it was there that I came across the Roman historical novels of Rosemary Sutcliff, the Arthurian trilogy by Mary Stewart, and the historian Geoffrey Ashe. I was hooked on Roman Britain - and King Arthur!
Reading everything I could, I eventually became frustrated that novels were not how I personally felt about the matter of Arthur and Gwenhwyfar (Guinevere).
By this time, I was married with a young daughter. I had time on my hands and so I started writing my idea of Arthurian Britain . I deliberately decided not to include Merlin and Lancelot, there was to be no magic or Medieval myth. My book was to be a "what might have really happened" historical novel, not a fantasy, and most certainly not a romance! What I didn't know, when I started, was that my one book was to grow into enough words to make a complete trilogy.
I found an agent who placed me with William Heinemann - I was accepted for publication just after my 40th birthday. The best birthday present I have ever had.
I had previously had a smaller success with a children's personal safety book (stranger danger) called "Come and Tell Me," a little story that I had written for my daughter when she was 3. I wanted to tell her how to keep safe in a clear and simple manner - with a message that could be easily remembered. "Always come and tell me before you go anywhere with anyone" fitted nicely. I was immensely proud when my little story was taken up as an official safety book by the British Home Office to be used nationally by the police and schools. An updated and revised version of "Come and Tell Me" was re-published by Happy Cat Books but is now out of print.
I followed on with two Saxon period novels A Hollow Crown and Harold the King - both are about the people and events that led to the Battle of Hastings in 1066 - from the English point of view.
(these titles are published as The Forever Queen and I Am The Chosen King in the US)
When Heinemann did not re-print my backlist I took my books to a small UK independent publisher with their even smaller mainstream imprint, adding my historical adventure series the Sea Witch Voyages to my list.
Unfortunately Discovered Authors / Callio Press, were not as organised as they should have been and the company closed in the spring of 2011. Not wanting my books to fall out of print in the UK I took them to an indie company - SilverWood Books of Bristol UK - and with their technical assistance "self published"
I am also with Sourcebooks Inc in the US, with Artemis Yayinlari in Turkey, Sadwolf in Germany at Catnip Edizioni in Italy.
I was delighted to make the USA Today bestseller list in 2011 with The Forever Queen (US title of A Hollow Crown)
I have published two non-fiction books: Pirates Truth and Tales with Amberley Press and Smugglers : Fact and Fiction with Pen & Sword.
I also run an historical fiction review blog, Discovering Diamonds, with a dedicated and enthusia
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 185 reviews
May 2, 2016
I was pleasantly surprised! To me, before I read this book, King Arthur without fantasy was unthinkable. I found straight historical fiction King Arthur sans fantasy was very enjoyable. So I think I will try Cornwell, besides continuing with this trilogy. However, I think there is a place for both treatments of the legend--both cum and sans.
The story describes how Arthur rises from bastardy to become Pendragon finally to become king. "Pendragon" means the *main* chieftain--"pen" is Welsh for "head". The Red Dragon on the Pendragon's banner is the Welsh national symbol even today. Arthur wins and weds Gwenhwyfar [Guinevere]. Battle scenes and fight scenes were well done. This portrayal of Arthur for much of the book cast Arthur as an arrogant, selfish womanizer. The author did such a good job of characterization I really disliked him for awhile. It felt as though he fell asleep for awhile, then finally woke up and became the heroic King Arthur. The villainess, Winifred, and all of the Saxons and Jutes were completely one-dimensional.
I liked the "Author's note" in which Ms. Hollick explained that she took what scanty material there is on King Arthur and created a plausible story. She wrote why she wrote what she did. In the front, the family trees and guide to pronunciation of names were helpful.
I recommend this book for lovers of the King Arthur story to get a different slant on him.
The story describes how Arthur rises from bastardy to become Pendragon finally to become king. "Pendragon" means the *main* chieftain--"pen" is Welsh for "head". The Red Dragon on the Pendragon's banner is the Welsh national symbol even today. Arthur wins and weds Gwenhwyfar [Guinevere]. Battle scenes and fight scenes were well done. This portrayal of Arthur for much of the book cast Arthur as an arrogant, selfish womanizer. The author did such a good job of characterization I really disliked him for awhile. It felt as though he fell asleep for awhile, then finally woke up and became the heroic King Arthur. The villainess, Winifred, and all of the Saxons and Jutes were completely one-dimensional.
I liked the "Author's note" in which Ms. Hollick explained that she took what scanty material there is on King Arthur and created a plausible story. She wrote why she wrote what she did. In the front, the family trees and guide to pronunciation of names were helpful.
I recommend this book for lovers of the King Arthur story to get a different slant on him.
November 18, 2016
Mea culpa, mea culpa - mea maxima culpa!
Yes, I brought it on myself through wishful thinking! I had kinda enjoyed her pair of books about Queen Emma and Harold/William but was greatly irritated by the historical faux pas that littered the stories.
I keep reading that HH is a great one for historical detail - Bernard Cornwell is quoted as saying she 'gets her history right' (which makes me all the more doubtful of HIS!) but I decided that I could cope with that, especially in view of the book being about Arthur and therefore you can't really get the history wrong.
Now, when I complain about the historical errors, I don't mean mistakes in timing and dates or the order of facts - where they are know, HH is accurate and I am happy with her justifications for her decisions in the author's note. What I am complaining about - nay, HOWLING about! - are the myriad things that turn up in the 5th Century that were not there! And HH has an Honours Diploma in Early Medieval History, for goodness sake - she should know a lot of stuff!
It all began so well; I was enjoying the book and chiding myself for my previous uncharitable thoughts about HH, despite her irritating pursuit of 'writing forsoothly'(a pet hate I often have to ignore, lover of historical fiction as I am). I went off to work yesterday morning with a long weekend and the remains of a good book in prospect (a deliciously smug feeling) and RUSHED home to continue its delights.
Perhaps I had been in a singularly uncritical mood the night before because quite quickly I thought
Hold hard! What's this?
P196 "The casement swung wide, two panes of glass shattering." Casement? Glass? In the 5th Century? I don't think so! Yes, the Romans made glass and sometimes used it for windows but they were long gone by this time and never colonised Gwynnedd. Not far from this clanger was another - she refers to them all seeking their 'sleeping furs' (shades of Jean M. Auel) but has the mistress of the....castle????? (first stone keep in Britain built by William the Conquerer some 5 centuries later) go round next morning dishing out clean bedding - what appear to be sheets.
Purleeze!
Now, all of this may be seen as simple nit-picking and I cannot deny that I am pernickety, pedantic and a general anal retentive about detail. But I would deny any suggestion that I am a cavilling quibbler!
That aside, I have a further, more serious problem with this book; the characterisation is one-dimensional and leans heavily on stereotyping (always especially dangerous when writing the anti-heroes). And worst of all - they are horrible! Rude, callous, vindictive, violent.....you name it. What is the point of that? I couldn't care less what happened to any but two of them; Arthur was a pig of a man.
The very worst promulgation of stereotyping herein is the scene where Arthur violently rapes his wife, following which she lies shattered and bleeding on the floor - but musing that she'd happily have him do it again because she desires him so much! Yeah, yeah, women just love to be raped, we all know that - don't we? Also we love being beaten up. And this from a woman writer? Verily, women are their own worst enemies (collective generalisation, OK?)
Sheesh!
So, I finally abandoned this book at p321, which I think constitutes a very perversely thorough attempt to read (and enjoy) it.
So, it's official. I am not a fan. I think the remaining 2 books in the series are safe from me.
Could not get worse.
Yes, I brought it on myself through wishful thinking! I had kinda enjoyed her pair of books about Queen Emma and Harold/William but was greatly irritated by the historical faux pas that littered the stories.
I keep reading that HH is a great one for historical detail - Bernard Cornwell is quoted as saying she 'gets her history right' (which makes me all the more doubtful of HIS!) but I decided that I could cope with that, especially in view of the book being about Arthur and therefore you can't really get the history wrong.
Now, when I complain about the historical errors, I don't mean mistakes in timing and dates or the order of facts - where they are know, HH is accurate and I am happy with her justifications for her decisions in the author's note. What I am complaining about - nay, HOWLING about! - are the myriad things that turn up in the 5th Century that were not there! And HH has an Honours Diploma in Early Medieval History, for goodness sake - she should know a lot of stuff!
It all began so well; I was enjoying the book and chiding myself for my previous uncharitable thoughts about HH, despite her irritating pursuit of 'writing forsoothly'(a pet hate I often have to ignore, lover of historical fiction as I am). I went off to work yesterday morning with a long weekend and the remains of a good book in prospect (a deliciously smug feeling) and RUSHED home to continue its delights.
Perhaps I had been in a singularly uncritical mood the night before because quite quickly I thought
Hold hard! What's this?
P196 "The casement swung wide, two panes of glass shattering." Casement? Glass? In the 5th Century? I don't think so! Yes, the Romans made glass and sometimes used it for windows but they were long gone by this time and never colonised Gwynnedd. Not far from this clanger was another - she refers to them all seeking their 'sleeping furs' (shades of Jean M. Auel) but has the mistress of the....castle????? (first stone keep in Britain built by William the Conquerer some 5 centuries later) go round next morning dishing out clean bedding - what appear to be sheets.
Purleeze!
Now, all of this may be seen as simple nit-picking and I cannot deny that I am pernickety, pedantic and a general anal retentive about detail. But I would deny any suggestion that I am a cavilling quibbler!
That aside, I have a further, more serious problem with this book; the characterisation is one-dimensional and leans heavily on stereotyping (always especially dangerous when writing the anti-heroes). And worst of all - they are horrible! Rude, callous, vindictive, violent.....you name it. What is the point of that? I couldn't care less what happened to any but two of them; Arthur was a pig of a man.
The very worst promulgation of stereotyping herein is the scene where Arthur violently rapes his wife, following which she lies shattered and bleeding on the floor - but musing that she'd happily have him do it again because she desires him so much! Yeah, yeah, women just love to be raped, we all know that - don't we? Also we love being beaten up. And this from a woman writer? Verily, women are their own worst enemies (collective generalisation, OK?)
Sheesh!
So, I finally abandoned this book at p321, which I think constitutes a very perversely thorough attempt to read (and enjoy) it.
So, it's official. I am not a fan. I think the remaining 2 books in the series are safe from me.
Could not get worse.
May 29, 2012
Even if I tried hard to enjoy this book, I didn't succeed in this goal.
The author describes her personal view of Arthur's life as well as other very well known characters, such as his wife Gwenhwyfar, Vortigen and many others.
I did enjoy, a long time ago I must confess, Bradley's Mists of Avalon and Mary Stewart's Merlin's Trilogy and I haven't read yet Sword at Sunset by Rosemary Sutcliff.
The author describes her personal view of Arthur's life as well as other very well known characters, such as his wife Gwenhwyfar, Vortigen and many others.
I did enjoy, a long time ago I must confess, Bradley's Mists of Avalon and Mary Stewart's Merlin's Trilogy and I haven't read yet Sword at Sunset by Rosemary Sutcliff.
February 2, 2017
I should stop trying to read multiple books at the same time. (Not likely.)
I love the many variations of the Arthur. I even finished my degree with a graduate course in Arthuriana.
Helen Hollick's start to her Pendragon trilogy is superb. The myth likely grew out of a real military leader who lived in the fifth century. That the author chose that time frame, rather than centuries later, does her credit. The setting and characterization sparkle~and the plot moves as fast as Arthur's horse.
I love the many variations of the Arthur. I even finished my degree with a graduate course in Arthuriana.
Helen Hollick's start to her Pendragon trilogy is superb. The myth likely grew out of a real military leader who lived in the fifth century. That the author chose that time frame, rather than centuries later, does her credit. The setting and characterization sparkle~and the plot moves as fast as Arthur's horse.
April 15, 2015
This would have been a 4 star review except for one little (okay not so little to me) exception. Arthur commits rape. Yes, it is with his wife, and yes, it says she enjoyed it, but forcing yourself on someone without consent is rape. No two ways about it. Arthur even thinks what is the best way to hurt this woman before me. If I could set this aside (which I can't), the book was well done with some great characters. But, I am one of the few women who like my heroes to be good guys. I am torn about picking up the next two books in the series. I must puzzle it some more before I can make a decision.
December 1, 2009
This review is a bit different, I read this book at the same time as Aarti from Booklust, and we discussed the book together. The review came to be in form of some questions and is in 2 parts, the first part can be found on my blog and the second on her blog (later today.)
Did you like this more realistic version of Arthurian legend? Did you miss seeing some of the more traditional aspects of Arthur's story? I.e., Merlin and Lancelot?
B: In a way I liked this more realistic version because it was a it should be, no magic, no Merlin and no shining knights at a round table. Here there was dirt, no one was honorable and everyone only thought about themselves. Ok that I did not like, her attempt at making the legend more realistic only made it not so. I am sure there were nice people even back then.
I missed Lancelot in a way, mostly cos when Arthur slept around with every woman who walked by I felt Gwen should get some too ;)
A: I know what you mean. I liked how gritty the story was- it seemed very true to what life would have been like in post-Roman Britain. But Merlin has always been my favorite character in Arthurian legend, so it was sad not to see him. However, it was interesting to see that in this book, Arthur had a wife before Gwenhwyvar. From what I've heard, it's likely that he had three wives (possibly all named Gwenhwyvar- I guess it was a common name). This is the first time I've seen an author go that route, which was interesting to see. Also, there are still two books in the series to go, so maybe more of the traditional aspects of the story will come into play later on. This was kind of a prequel, it seemed, as Arthur was still working under another king for much of the story.
What did you think of Arthur? What did you think of his relationships with other people, like his friends and his wife and the servants?
B: Oh my fav subject. I loathed Arthur! He was a manwhore. He slept with every woman, he looked at every woman. He did not care if they were married or not, he was highborn and they should serve him. That he left a trail of bastards he could not have cared less about. He said he always loved Gwenwhyfar but nope that did not keep him at her side.
He was also whiny in a way, poor little Arthur did not get her as his wife so he married someone else who he abused, raped and hated. But well that did not keep him from her side and she still liked him. All women loved Arthur and I can't see it. They said he was not that handsome still everyone wanted him, and I would sure stay away from a wifebeating drunk. No I cannot understand it, I guess women are stupid according to her.
As for his servants, well he slept with the girls, and it is not like they ever could say no, or that he ever asked them what they wanted. Yes I could go on and on about Arthur because he has not a single good trait in him. Vortigern was supposed to be the bad guy but I feel Arthur was the bad guy in this story. He made his life and then he was angry about it. That he created a legend is beyond me.
His friends, well I guess he was nice to them, as long as they did not have a pretty wife.
A: I agree that Arthur was a jerk in many parts of the story. I think Hollick explained herself a bit in her Author's Note, saying that she did reading about the people Arthur's character might be based on and they are generally sketchy people. To one extent, I can see why to be a leader, he had to really make himself seem larger than life and more powerful than everyone else- thus he drank more than others, had more women than others, fought harder than the others, etc.
However, I also think it's sad that realism in this era means rape, pillage and drunkenness. I suppose that is a product of war to this day, and in that era, war was ever-present, everywhere. But it was really disturbing. And then the girl would get a coin for her troubles, but she'd oftentimes have to either abort a baby or raise it. I guess it will all hit Arthur when Mordred comes along (if he comes along in this version, that is), but it is sad and just seems very careless to me.
As for me- I did think Arthur was pretty charismatic with people he liked. I can see why people followed him and liked him, but I can also see why some people hated him. His whole relationship with his first wife, Winifred- well, I don't want to give anything away to anyone who has not read the story, but it is just disturbing. I read in another story about hate becoming love, or at least really bringing out passion in people. And that is certainly true of Winifred & Arthur's relationship.
What did you think of the women in the story? Do you think they acted the way they did to get noticed? To do what they thought best? To try to make an impact?
B: Oh the women, I should not use the word but they were bitchy. What kinds of women act like that? I did not care of her portrait of women. They were scheming, mean and some were killers. They used what they had to get their way, and they liked it. They were not nice, and could sure get seduced fast. The exception was Gwen, she was like the shining beacon but that did not make me like her either. She was a tomboy, she could use a dagger and she could ride a horse. Oh what an accomplishment, I am sure other women then her could ride in those days. There were no between, there were Gwen and there were the bitchy women. And why she kept liking him I do not know.
It was like they weren't that smart either. They could only think so far, silly women, playthings for men. I know that in those days it would be hard for women, but they still lived in a land were women had been powerful. And still at least one could have been nice.
A: My completely made-up theory is that authors who write about really strong, dominating men sometimes fall in love with them and the other characters fall flat in comparison. I get the impression that Hollick really loves the character of Arthur- his complexities, his demons, warts and all. I didn't get the impression that she enjoyed writing about the women nearly so much. They certainly seemed one-dimensional when compared with Arthur. Morgause and Winifred didn't have a positive trait between them, and spent most of the book "raging" or being evil. I could almost hear their cackles. I completely understand that this how Morgause is usually portrayed. But it would have been nice to see what motivated her to act the way that she did. To know what made her so hard and difficult to deal with. As for Winifred... I could have done without her in the story at all.
As for Gwenhwyvar, I spent most of the book disliking her, too, and then towards the end became more reconciled to her. I have never liked the character of Gwenhwyvar, in any Arthurian tale, so I went into the story biased against her. But I agree she was the only woman who seemed able to do anything useful, which was odd in a story when the men were often away fighting wars. Someone would have to know how to do the things Gwen did or nothing would get done at all. I thought she became more real towards the end of the book, and I liked that Hollick made her relationship with Arthur more true, rather than just based on the romance of the moment. It will be interesting to see how they evolve together.
More can be found at Aarti's blog :D Go on over later to see what we feel at the end.
Did you like this more realistic version of Arthurian legend? Did you miss seeing some of the more traditional aspects of Arthur's story? I.e., Merlin and Lancelot?
B: In a way I liked this more realistic version because it was a it should be, no magic, no Merlin and no shining knights at a round table. Here there was dirt, no one was honorable and everyone only thought about themselves. Ok that I did not like, her attempt at making the legend more realistic only made it not so. I am sure there were nice people even back then.
I missed Lancelot in a way, mostly cos when Arthur slept around with every woman who walked by I felt Gwen should get some too ;)
A: I know what you mean. I liked how gritty the story was- it seemed very true to what life would have been like in post-Roman Britain. But Merlin has always been my favorite character in Arthurian legend, so it was sad not to see him. However, it was interesting to see that in this book, Arthur had a wife before Gwenhwyvar. From what I've heard, it's likely that he had three wives (possibly all named Gwenhwyvar- I guess it was a common name). This is the first time I've seen an author go that route, which was interesting to see. Also, there are still two books in the series to go, so maybe more of the traditional aspects of the story will come into play later on. This was kind of a prequel, it seemed, as Arthur was still working under another king for much of the story.
What did you think of Arthur? What did you think of his relationships with other people, like his friends and his wife and the servants?
B: Oh my fav subject. I loathed Arthur! He was a manwhore. He slept with every woman, he looked at every woman. He did not care if they were married or not, he was highborn and they should serve him. That he left a trail of bastards he could not have cared less about. He said he always loved Gwenwhyfar but nope that did not keep him at her side.
He was also whiny in a way, poor little Arthur did not get her as his wife so he married someone else who he abused, raped and hated. But well that did not keep him from her side and she still liked him. All women loved Arthur and I can't see it. They said he was not that handsome still everyone wanted him, and I would sure stay away from a wifebeating drunk. No I cannot understand it, I guess women are stupid according to her.
As for his servants, well he slept with the girls, and it is not like they ever could say no, or that he ever asked them what they wanted. Yes I could go on and on about Arthur because he has not a single good trait in him. Vortigern was supposed to be the bad guy but I feel Arthur was the bad guy in this story. He made his life and then he was angry about it. That he created a legend is beyond me.
His friends, well I guess he was nice to them, as long as they did not have a pretty wife.
A: I agree that Arthur was a jerk in many parts of the story. I think Hollick explained herself a bit in her Author's Note, saying that she did reading about the people Arthur's character might be based on and they are generally sketchy people. To one extent, I can see why to be a leader, he had to really make himself seem larger than life and more powerful than everyone else- thus he drank more than others, had more women than others, fought harder than the others, etc.
However, I also think it's sad that realism in this era means rape, pillage and drunkenness. I suppose that is a product of war to this day, and in that era, war was ever-present, everywhere. But it was really disturbing. And then the girl would get a coin for her troubles, but she'd oftentimes have to either abort a baby or raise it. I guess it will all hit Arthur when Mordred comes along (if he comes along in this version, that is), but it is sad and just seems very careless to me.
As for me- I did think Arthur was pretty charismatic with people he liked. I can see why people followed him and liked him, but I can also see why some people hated him. His whole relationship with his first wife, Winifred- well, I don't want to give anything away to anyone who has not read the story, but it is just disturbing. I read in another story about hate becoming love, or at least really bringing out passion in people. And that is certainly true of Winifred & Arthur's relationship.
What did you think of the women in the story? Do you think they acted the way they did to get noticed? To do what they thought best? To try to make an impact?
B: Oh the women, I should not use the word but they were bitchy. What kinds of women act like that? I did not care of her portrait of women. They were scheming, mean and some were killers. They used what they had to get their way, and they liked it. They were not nice, and could sure get seduced fast. The exception was Gwen, she was like the shining beacon but that did not make me like her either. She was a tomboy, she could use a dagger and she could ride a horse. Oh what an accomplishment, I am sure other women then her could ride in those days. There were no between, there were Gwen and there were the bitchy women. And why she kept liking him I do not know.
It was like they weren't that smart either. They could only think so far, silly women, playthings for men. I know that in those days it would be hard for women, but they still lived in a land were women had been powerful. And still at least one could have been nice.
A: My completely made-up theory is that authors who write about really strong, dominating men sometimes fall in love with them and the other characters fall flat in comparison. I get the impression that Hollick really loves the character of Arthur- his complexities, his demons, warts and all. I didn't get the impression that she enjoyed writing about the women nearly so much. They certainly seemed one-dimensional when compared with Arthur. Morgause and Winifred didn't have a positive trait between them, and spent most of the book "raging" or being evil. I could almost hear their cackles. I completely understand that this how Morgause is usually portrayed. But it would have been nice to see what motivated her to act the way that she did. To know what made her so hard and difficult to deal with. As for Winifred... I could have done without her in the story at all.
As for Gwenhwyvar, I spent most of the book disliking her, too, and then towards the end became more reconciled to her. I have never liked the character of Gwenhwyvar, in any Arthurian tale, so I went into the story biased against her. But I agree she was the only woman who seemed able to do anything useful, which was odd in a story when the men were often away fighting wars. Someone would have to know how to do the things Gwen did or nothing would get done at all. I thought she became more real towards the end of the book, and I liked that Hollick made her relationship with Arthur more true, rather than just based on the romance of the moment. It will be interesting to see how they evolve together.
More can be found at Aarti's blog :D Go on over later to see what we feel at the end.
April 3, 2023
I enjoy reading the Arthurian legends in their many forms. The same story told with different flourishes and details. This was told well. It is the first time, in memory, that I had the chance to get to know Gwenwyfar so intimately. She is feisty and determined, not the sort of demur character I have read of before. I like her.
February 22, 2009
Hollick's Arthur is not the usual halo-crowned, knight in shining armour. No rose-colored version here! He has flaws, fears, a roving eye and is stubborn as a mule! But, he has the heart, strength, cunning and courage necessary to excel as King. And you can't help but have a little crush on him!
Gwenhwyfar (or Gwen as I called her throughout the novel for sanity purposes - I just could not figure out how to pronounce!) is a girl after my own heart. A tomboy all the way - she is also strong-willed, tenacious and intelligent.
Arthur and Gwen are first bonded through a mutual suffering of abuse at the hands of evil, female caretakers. Both have a chance to save each other from these witches! Arthur & Gwen were a joy to read, these two have some great exchanges of words and make quite a pair!
The Kingmaking has everything without having too much. I much prefer this "real" Arthur to the "fairy tale" Arthur. What I like about historical fiction is that the people you read about were actually living, breathing human beings and that makes it so much easier to relate to their shortcomings or concerns or emotions. The Kingmaking was a fabulous novel, hard to put down and now on my list of all-time favorites! Helen Hollick's writing is fantastic and I am very much looking forward to reading the next two in the series!
Sourcebooks is releasing the other two in the Arthur Pendragon series...
Pendragon’s Banner (book #2): released September 1, 2009
Shadow of the King (book #3): released March 1, 2010
Gwenhwyfar (or Gwen as I called her throughout the novel for sanity purposes - I just could not figure out how to pronounce!) is a girl after my own heart. A tomboy all the way - she is also strong-willed, tenacious and intelligent.
Arthur and Gwen are first bonded through a mutual suffering of abuse at the hands of evil, female caretakers. Both have a chance to save each other from these witches! Arthur & Gwen were a joy to read, these two have some great exchanges of words and make quite a pair!
The Kingmaking has everything without having too much. I much prefer this "real" Arthur to the "fairy tale" Arthur. What I like about historical fiction is that the people you read about were actually living, breathing human beings and that makes it so much easier to relate to their shortcomings or concerns or emotions. The Kingmaking was a fabulous novel, hard to put down and now on my list of all-time favorites! Helen Hollick's writing is fantastic and I am very much looking forward to reading the next two in the series!
Sourcebooks is releasing the other two in the Arthur Pendragon series...
Pendragon’s Banner (book #2): released September 1, 2009
Shadow of the King (book #3): released March 1, 2010
January 3, 2019
The book is full of drama and is a fast-paced, thus making reading easy. But some events were too far-fetched for me. I know this is fiction, but I like historical fiction to be as believable as possible. Not sorry that I read it, and I will read the others for sure.
October 29, 2023
Rated 4 stars. #1 in the Pendragon Banner Trilogy. Very much enjoyed this retelling of the King Arthur story. Very gritty with well developed characters. Nothing like the "Camelot" fantasy or the series by Mary Stewart or Bernard Cornwell. Interesting Author's Note at the end which explains her theories on this part of History which so little is known. Looking forward to reading #2 & #3.
August 11, 2015
This is a wonderfully written epic novel, the first in a trilogy that tells the story of King Arthur and Gwenhwyfar with no fantasy backdrop. It is riveting in it's portrayal of both these characters and the post-Roman Britain in which they lived. There is little known about this time period and mostly that which we think we know was written down so long after the events transpired that accuracy is not guaranteed. However this gives the author the ability to create her story without having to alter fact in any way to suit her needs (which is something I am not a fan of). As Ms. Hollick states in her author's note: "I am not expressing fact, merely what might have been". And wow do I love her account of what might have been! Ms. Hollick is an incredibly talented writer that succeeds in bringing figures from long ago, previously shrouded in mysticism, to life as flesh and blood human beings with fears, faults and feelings just as we all have. I look forward to reading the next two books in the trilogy to see how their character's progress. Currently I am vey attached to Gwenhwyfar; she is bold and brash and unwavering in her dedication to Arthur and her homeland. Arthur however is a mixed bag. His haunted childhood has formed a man that feels the need to brutally conquer everything around him. It seems that only one person brings balance to Arthur's character: Gwenhwyfar. Don't you just love when the hero myth gets turned on it's head? Well done Ms. Hollick!
November 1, 2014
Disappointing. (Two stars for the author's effort.) There is no cohesive story here, but rather a series of battle descriptions and sexual conquests that have been loosely strung together, shuffling characters from one scene to another. Beyond the insertion of familar names (characters and places) it is a stretch to claim this book is a "retelling of the Aurthurian legend", as the marketing blurb describes. These lackluster characters would not survive the ages to inspire a timeless legend. Sadly, the author managed to turn the extraordinary legend of Arthur/Pendragon into something quite ordinary and forgettable. Will not continue on with this series.
September 22, 2017
Ok, I'm at the very beginning and I haven't read all that many page. So technically, I should give a bit more chance to this book. But I feel like there's nothing in this book for me. Especially, I don't understand why except for the main female character all the other one are so one-dimensional and we're supposed to hate them. Nothing worse than the "special girl" syndrome. Uggh.
May 14, 2017
I really enjoyed this book and look forward to the next two in the series.
March 25, 2009
The fifth century in Britain was a time of upheaval and change. The Romans had abandoned the island and a power vacuum was created with their going. The native tribes, never unified except for one single, shining moment under Queen Boudicca, immediately returned to warring against each other. Cunedda, Lord of the Votodini, lost his lands north of Hadrian's Wall and was exiled to the mountains of Gwynedd in Wales. Uthr the Pendragon, great war leader and Cunedda's ally, fled the island. The victor, Vortigern, declared himself King of Britain and, to keep his throne, hired vast numbers of hated Saxon mercenaries and took a Saxon wife.
The Kingmaking begins with Arthur's arrival, at the age of fifteen, in Gwynedd. He comes as a serving boy to Uthr, but despite his low status he dreams of becoming a leader of men. A rebellion is planned to reclaim Britain from Vortigern. The war party departs, leaving Arthur behind with Cunedda's young sons and only daughter, Gwenhwyfar. In the short peaceful time they are together, Arthur and Gwenhwyfar forge a strong bond. But the harmony is shattered when the war party returns, defeated, with the news that Uthr is dead.
The demoralized troops feel that all hope has been lost with their leader. But Cunedda has a surprise announcement for all assembled. Uthr had a son, declared dead at birth but actually hidden away, in plain sight, to keep Vortigern from killing the Pendragon heir. Arthur, humble servant, is actually Uthr's son.
Arthur now has the chance that he dreamed of, and he grabs it. Unfortunately, he is young and untried, has little skill with sword or spear. He must learn and the only way to do that is to pledge his sword to the one in power, his enemy Vortigern. To cement his loyalty Vortigern exacts a terrible price, Arthur must marry Vortigern's daughter: greedy, scheming Winifred.
Gwenhwyfar is heartbroken, then horrified when she learns that she is to be forced to marry Vortigern's nephew and right hand man, Melwas. To prevent the marriage to a cruel and violent man, her family helps her escape to Less Britain, Arthur's childhood home, beyond the reach of Melwas.
The coming years will test the strength and determination of the Pendragon and his followers. They will learn lessons well, bide their time and overcome seemingly impossible obstacles on the way to their goal....giving Britain an honorable King and the hope of a peaceful future.
This is Historical Fiction at its best. The author has taken the story of Arthur and deftly shaken off the myth and fantasy that cling to it. Gone are Merlin and his sprinklings of magic, instead we have Arthur as he might have really been. A man, a leader, a soldier who drank and used women, who loved and was loyal but also cheated and lied. A warrior who adopted tactics that worked, no matter the cost. A man trying to find footing in a rapidly changing world, a complex world that included those that clung to Roman ways, followers of the Goddess and the druids, and the vast, spreading tide of Christianity.
Here you will find rich, multi-layered characters, breathtaking drama and aching sadness. Crumbling Roman cities and soaring Welsh mountains. Brilliant battles and horrible losses. A complex, compelling story and a refreshing look at the origins of a legend.
I have long been a fan of Helen Hollick's writing and The Pendragon's Banner trilogy is at the top of my list of favorite Historical Fiction. The other two books in the series are Pendragon's Banner and Shadow of the King. I can't recommend them highly enough, they are all fantastic historical novels!
The Kingmaking begins with Arthur's arrival, at the age of fifteen, in Gwynedd. He comes as a serving boy to Uthr, but despite his low status he dreams of becoming a leader of men. A rebellion is planned to reclaim Britain from Vortigern. The war party departs, leaving Arthur behind with Cunedda's young sons and only daughter, Gwenhwyfar. In the short peaceful time they are together, Arthur and Gwenhwyfar forge a strong bond. But the harmony is shattered when the war party returns, defeated, with the news that Uthr is dead.
The demoralized troops feel that all hope has been lost with their leader. But Cunedda has a surprise announcement for all assembled. Uthr had a son, declared dead at birth but actually hidden away, in plain sight, to keep Vortigern from killing the Pendragon heir. Arthur, humble servant, is actually Uthr's son.
Arthur now has the chance that he dreamed of, and he grabs it. Unfortunately, he is young and untried, has little skill with sword or spear. He must learn and the only way to do that is to pledge his sword to the one in power, his enemy Vortigern. To cement his loyalty Vortigern exacts a terrible price, Arthur must marry Vortigern's daughter: greedy, scheming Winifred.
Gwenhwyfar is heartbroken, then horrified when she learns that she is to be forced to marry Vortigern's nephew and right hand man, Melwas. To prevent the marriage to a cruel and violent man, her family helps her escape to Less Britain, Arthur's childhood home, beyond the reach of Melwas.
The coming years will test the strength and determination of the Pendragon and his followers. They will learn lessons well, bide their time and overcome seemingly impossible obstacles on the way to their goal....giving Britain an honorable King and the hope of a peaceful future.
This is Historical Fiction at its best. The author has taken the story of Arthur and deftly shaken off the myth and fantasy that cling to it. Gone are Merlin and his sprinklings of magic, instead we have Arthur as he might have really been. A man, a leader, a soldier who drank and used women, who loved and was loyal but also cheated and lied. A warrior who adopted tactics that worked, no matter the cost. A man trying to find footing in a rapidly changing world, a complex world that included those that clung to Roman ways, followers of the Goddess and the druids, and the vast, spreading tide of Christianity.
Here you will find rich, multi-layered characters, breathtaking drama and aching sadness. Crumbling Roman cities and soaring Welsh mountains. Brilliant battles and horrible losses. A complex, compelling story and a refreshing look at the origins of a legend.
I have long been a fan of Helen Hollick's writing and The Pendragon's Banner trilogy is at the top of my list of favorite Historical Fiction. The other two books in the series are Pendragon's Banner and Shadow of the King. I can't recommend them highly enough, they are all fantastic historical novels!
August 1, 2010
This is the first installment of Helen Hollick's Pendragon's Banner Trilogy, about the legendary King Arthur. Except, this isn't the King Arthur you're familiar with from Mort D'Artur and other legends. Here, there are are no knights in shining armor, no Merlin the magician, and no chivalry. Instead, Hollick creates a window into the brutal Fifth Century, a time where Rome has left Britain and created a power vacuum where the native British and the Saxons fight for supremacy. Arthur was said to live in such a time, so Hollick creates a character with the attributes most likely to prevail in these Dark Ages. Hollick's Arthur is charming but also a brute, not afraid to go for what he wants, a Machiavellian to the core. Be prepared to admire and loathe him, for he rapes and pillages and is not afraid to raise a hand to a woman - mainly his wife Winifred. Similarly, Hollick's, Guinievere (spelled the Welsh way) is no damsel in distress. She has a dagger and knows how to use it, trained in the arts of war from a young age (unlike the more Romanized women of the period). In addition to Arthur and Guinevere, the remaining characters are marvelous, three dimensional products of the Dark Ages, from the selfish Morgause to the scheming Queen Rowena and Princess Winifred.
In addition to Hollick's recounting of the chaotic Fifth Century political arena, I greatly appreciated her recounting of religion and the spread of Christianity. She depicts Christianity as a new religion slowly replacing the pagan "old ways." While some characters were devoted Christians, many swayed with the wind, embracing some aspects of Chrstianity while adhering to the old gods. I think this adds wonderful color to the novel as a work of historical fiction.
The Kingmaking left me with my mouth open, so wonderful was the conclusion with Hollick making realistic the Excalibur - drawn from a Saxon (in her author's note, she explains that saxo is stone, but could also be Saxon with a notation over the "o.") I so greatly enjoyed Hollick's attempt to make the Arthur myth real and to place it within history. Be forewarned, though, that if you want an untarnished image of Arthur or if bloody, brutal descriptions of battle turn you off, this isn't the book for you. The Kingmaking is a gritty novel - you won't find any sugar coating or romanticization of the Dark Ages here. This novel includes stinking latrines, rape, pillaging, decapitations, wenching (often by Arthur) and other unsavory aspects of the period.
I couldn't give this novel 5 stars (for me it hovered above 4 stars, though) because I didn't really enjoy the beginning. It starts out with Uthr Pendragon, Arthur's father, joining with Guinevere's father Cunedda of Gwynedd to push Vortigern and the Saxons from Britain. Arthur and Guinevere are children and I just did not find their childish perspectives to be all that interesting. For me, the novel "clicked" and started moving quickly when Uthr died and Arthur's true parentage as Uthr's son was revealed. Before then, I just could not get into the story. Thus, the first part of the book (around 15% - I read the Kindle version) was uninspiring. The remainder of the book was phenomenal, however, and I'm very excited to read the rest of the trilogy.
In addition to Hollick's recounting of the chaotic Fifth Century political arena, I greatly appreciated her recounting of religion and the spread of Christianity. She depicts Christianity as a new religion slowly replacing the pagan "old ways." While some characters were devoted Christians, many swayed with the wind, embracing some aspects of Chrstianity while adhering to the old gods. I think this adds wonderful color to the novel as a work of historical fiction.
The Kingmaking left me with my mouth open, so wonderful was the conclusion with Hollick making realistic the Excalibur - drawn from a Saxon (in her author's note, she explains that saxo is stone, but could also be Saxon with a notation over the "o.") I so greatly enjoyed Hollick's attempt to make the Arthur myth real and to place it within history. Be forewarned, though, that if you want an untarnished image of Arthur or if bloody, brutal descriptions of battle turn you off, this isn't the book for you. The Kingmaking is a gritty novel - you won't find any sugar coating or romanticization of the Dark Ages here. This novel includes stinking latrines, rape, pillaging, decapitations, wenching (often by Arthur) and other unsavory aspects of the period.
I couldn't give this novel 5 stars (for me it hovered above 4 stars, though) because I didn't really enjoy the beginning. It starts out with Uthr Pendragon, Arthur's father, joining with Guinevere's father Cunedda of Gwynedd to push Vortigern and the Saxons from Britain. Arthur and Guinevere are children and I just did not find their childish perspectives to be all that interesting. For me, the novel "clicked" and started moving quickly when Uthr died and Arthur's true parentage as Uthr's son was revealed. Before then, I just could not get into the story. Thus, the first part of the book (around 15% - I read the Kindle version) was uninspiring. The remainder of the book was phenomenal, however, and I'm very excited to read the rest of the trilogy.
September 21, 2010
THE KINGMAKING BY HELEN HOLLICK: Originally published in Britain during the early 1990s, The Kingmaking is the first book in the Pendragon’s Banner Trilogy from British author Helen Hollick. With the tagline “a novel of Arthur as he really was,” Hollick certainly does her research in bringing to life the possible idea of a war king known as Arthur that would grown to become the magical, immortal legend.
The Arthurian legend is an interesting one that has seen and continues to see countless retellings, due to the fact that there is very little evidence proving the existence of a warrior king known as Arthur; mentions of Merlin and Guenevere are even rarer, while Lancelot is a complete fabrication by Chrétien de Troyes in the twelfth century. What is known is that the fifth century was a very turbulent time for Britain with the desertion by Rome and its forces; the invasion of the Saxons, Angles, and Jutes; and the invading forces of the Scots and Picts from Ireland and Scotland respectively. Britain was a melting pot of different peoples, and the Britons were left wondering what to do after being supported and protected for so long by the Romans. It was in this time – it is thought -- at the dawn of the Middle Ages, that a warrior king arose to defend the Britons and lead them to defending their country.
Hollick uses Wales as her setting for Arthur and his people, using Welsh names like Gwenhwyfar (for Guenevere), Cunedda (for Gwenhwyfar’s father), and Uthr (for rightful king of Britain and father to Arthur). While Camelot is thought to be located near Glastonbury and Tintagel is to be found in Cornwall, with the invading forces pushing the Britons back, Wales was a very likely location for Arthur and his people. Hollick also uses characters who were known to exist, like Vortigern who supposedly ruled the Britons for some time and was purportedly the one to invite the Germanic forces from the mainland to defend the Britons against the Scotti and Picts. There is Hengest and Horsa, the ruthless Saxon Brothers, Hengest’s daughter Rowena, as well as some of Vortigern’s own offspring, Vortimer, Catigern, and his daughter Winifred.
Hollick writes of a world and life that is becoming somewhat familiar, with the growing genre of medieval historical fiction, joining other epic novels like Pillars of the Earth, World Without End, and Cathedral of the Sea. These are not the romanticized and glamorous characters of Chrétien de Troyes, Malory’s Le Morte d’Arthur, or the famous musical Camelot. It is a cold, harsh world, where much blood is shed and many die. Hollick does a wonderful job of balancing the narrative with the different characters, and not just keeping it to one person as is common in other Arthurian sagas. She also maintain the historical accuracy, using the tools and the skills that existed in the world of the fifth century, and yet making The Kingmaking a fast-paced, action-packed start to one of the best Arthurian series to be written.
For more book reviews and exclusive author interviews, go to BookBanter.
The Arthurian legend is an interesting one that has seen and continues to see countless retellings, due to the fact that there is very little evidence proving the existence of a warrior king known as Arthur; mentions of Merlin and Guenevere are even rarer, while Lancelot is a complete fabrication by Chrétien de Troyes in the twelfth century. What is known is that the fifth century was a very turbulent time for Britain with the desertion by Rome and its forces; the invasion of the Saxons, Angles, and Jutes; and the invading forces of the Scots and Picts from Ireland and Scotland respectively. Britain was a melting pot of different peoples, and the Britons were left wondering what to do after being supported and protected for so long by the Romans. It was in this time – it is thought -- at the dawn of the Middle Ages, that a warrior king arose to defend the Britons and lead them to defending their country.
Hollick uses Wales as her setting for Arthur and his people, using Welsh names like Gwenhwyfar (for Guenevere), Cunedda (for Gwenhwyfar’s father), and Uthr (for rightful king of Britain and father to Arthur). While Camelot is thought to be located near Glastonbury and Tintagel is to be found in Cornwall, with the invading forces pushing the Britons back, Wales was a very likely location for Arthur and his people. Hollick also uses characters who were known to exist, like Vortigern who supposedly ruled the Britons for some time and was purportedly the one to invite the Germanic forces from the mainland to defend the Britons against the Scotti and Picts. There is Hengest and Horsa, the ruthless Saxon Brothers, Hengest’s daughter Rowena, as well as some of Vortigern’s own offspring, Vortimer, Catigern, and his daughter Winifred.
Hollick writes of a world and life that is becoming somewhat familiar, with the growing genre of medieval historical fiction, joining other epic novels like Pillars of the Earth, World Without End, and Cathedral of the Sea. These are not the romanticized and glamorous characters of Chrétien de Troyes, Malory’s Le Morte d’Arthur, or the famous musical Camelot. It is a cold, harsh world, where much blood is shed and many die. Hollick does a wonderful job of balancing the narrative with the different characters, and not just keeping it to one person as is common in other Arthurian sagas. She also maintain the historical accuracy, using the tools and the skills that existed in the world of the fifth century, and yet making The Kingmaking a fast-paced, action-packed start to one of the best Arthurian series to be written.
For more book reviews and exclusive author interviews, go to BookBanter.
September 13, 2011
In The KingMaking, the legend of Arthur is brought to life in a way that made him more real than I ever felt he was. There is no sword in the stone, or magic. No Merlin, no Knights of the Round Table, not even a Lancelot. Since little is known of Arthur's history or even if he actually existed, taking liberties with his character has been done through time. In this book, however, Arthur is portrayed like I've never read him before. He is described by his first wife's father as a "Drunken whore-user" which he is. He likes his wine, his women, and battle, not necessarily in that order. He is harsh, ruthless and unrelenting. He does not always make the right decisions, most times making the wrong ones for what he sees as the right reasons. Arthur is not what we today would consider chivalric, but he is a man of his time.
It takes skill to make an anti-heroic character likeable. Often times author's excuse a character's behavior by making other character's so horrible that the reader ignores the protagonist's despicable acts. I've seen it attempted and failed before, but not here. Arthur is little better than the people who plot against him, as he is plotting against them as well - all for the same end. His actions are not sugar coated or excused away. It simply is what it is. It does help that that Arthur is given a charisma that translates well and makes him character the reader can root for even when his actions are not always easy to swallow.
Besides Arthur and Gwenwhyfar, there are many other characters in The KingMaking, most getting a point of view, which helps understand motivations better than a limited point of view would allow. One of the most stand out aspects of this story is Arthur's relationship with the women in his life - his mother, his father's mistress, Gwenwhyfar, and Winifred- his first wife. These relationships vary from tender to absent to outright dysfunctional. The war scenes were bloody, but that is to be expected. The political intrigue was well done, and the relationships between all of the characters is something to marvel at.
For those who like historical fiction, who are interested in a different, straight forward, no holds barred take on the life and times of King Arthur then this is the book for you. If you prefer the more romanticised versions of Arthur, are squeamish of war scenes, and like your characters wholly noble, then this story may not work for you. I happened to really enjoy The KingMaking and look forward to reading the rest of the trilogy.
It takes skill to make an anti-heroic character likeable. Often times author's excuse a character's behavior by making other character's so horrible that the reader ignores the protagonist's despicable acts. I've seen it attempted and failed before, but not here. Arthur is little better than the people who plot against him, as he is plotting against them as well - all for the same end. His actions are not sugar coated or excused away. It simply is what it is. It does help that that Arthur is given a charisma that translates well and makes him character the reader can root for even when his actions are not always easy to swallow.
Besides Arthur and Gwenwhyfar, there are many other characters in The KingMaking, most getting a point of view, which helps understand motivations better than a limited point of view would allow. One of the most stand out aspects of this story is Arthur's relationship with the women in his life - his mother, his father's mistress, Gwenwhyfar, and Winifred- his first wife. These relationships vary from tender to absent to outright dysfunctional. The war scenes were bloody, but that is to be expected. The political intrigue was well done, and the relationships between all of the characters is something to marvel at.
For those who like historical fiction, who are interested in a different, straight forward, no holds barred take on the life and times of King Arthur then this is the book for you. If you prefer the more romanticised versions of Arthur, are squeamish of war scenes, and like your characters wholly noble, then this story may not work for you. I happened to really enjoy The KingMaking and look forward to reading the rest of the trilogy.
December 27, 2012
I'm afraid the first 80% of this book just couldn't hold my interest, but my tenacity of wanting to finish it and hoping upon hope something exciting or dramatic would happen towards the end kept me going.
Firstly, I was quite taken on the idea of stripping the Arthur story of all it's Merlin like magic, mystery and hocus-pocus and planting it firmly in the dark ages, that's what sold me on the book in the first place. However, I believe it could have been so much more.
Unfortunately, it was like reading a politically convoluted Who's Who of births, deaths and marriages and not necessarily in that order. If this was the dark ages shouldn't Arthur have been out there commanding men, in the thick of battle and stating his claim to kingship instead of being manipulated, controlled, nagged and henpecked by a scourge of scheming women? As for the women, oh dear the women, it was a constant, verbal litany of claws out, bitch fights and flying fur.
But jeez, where was the action?
Arthur for me was likeable in his own way, portrayed as a manwhore, but I could have slapped him for being such a wuss and letting himself be so out-witted by his women. Those two things didn't quite balance out for me. There wasn't one narrative or description of an epic battle or sword fight, just one pathetic stabbing and a few nondescript skirmishes for most of the book. It wasn't until about the last 20% that things started to get interesting and at least for me more representative of the dark ages with some action. This is still a little too long to wait for me personally and to hold my interest in a book of near on 500 pages. However, I felt it was still not in the same league or having the same scope as a good Bernard Cornwell or Manda Scott novel.
Maybe my expectations of an Arthur saga set in the dark ages is different to the view delivered in this telling which in my personal opinion was told more from a feminine intrigue point of view. I'm afraid that unless anyone can convince me otherwise that the successive two books in this trilogy are any different then I'll be passing I'm afraid.
Firstly, I was quite taken on the idea of stripping the Arthur story of all it's Merlin like magic, mystery and hocus-pocus and planting it firmly in the dark ages, that's what sold me on the book in the first place. However, I believe it could have been so much more.
Unfortunately, it was like reading a politically convoluted Who's Who of births, deaths and marriages and not necessarily in that order. If this was the dark ages shouldn't Arthur have been out there commanding men, in the thick of battle and stating his claim to kingship instead of being manipulated, controlled, nagged and henpecked by a scourge of scheming women? As for the women, oh dear the women, it was a constant, verbal litany of claws out, bitch fights and flying fur.
But jeez, where was the action?
Arthur for me was likeable in his own way, portrayed as a manwhore, but I could have slapped him for being such a wuss and letting himself be so out-witted by his women. Those two things didn't quite balance out for me. There wasn't one narrative or description of an epic battle or sword fight, just one pathetic stabbing and a few nondescript skirmishes for most of the book. It wasn't until about the last 20% that things started to get interesting and at least for me more representative of the dark ages with some action. This is still a little too long to wait for me personally and to hold my interest in a book of near on 500 pages. However, I felt it was still not in the same league or having the same scope as a good Bernard Cornwell or Manda Scott novel.
Maybe my expectations of an Arthur saga set in the dark ages is different to the view delivered in this telling which in my personal opinion was told more from a feminine intrigue point of view. I'm afraid that unless anyone can convince me otherwise that the successive two books in this trilogy are any different then I'll be passing I'm afraid.
December 31, 2009
In this version of the King Arthur story, Arthur is a dark hero. He is young, selfish, ambitious and callous. He makes decisions based on his own desires with little thought to future consequences, making enemies left and right. Yet Ms. Hollick does a fabulous job of letting the reader glimpse just enough of his fears and vulnerabilities to keep him from being unlikeable, and to sway the reader to root for his success. Although there were instances where my reactions to his behavior were so strong I wanted to throw the book across the room, I had to keep reading, dying to find out what would happen next!
I thoroughly enjoyed the portrayal of Gwenhwyfar as the young, strong, independent princess of Gwynedd, forced to grow up all too quickly amidst the heartbreak and harsh realities of a chain of events beyond her control; her life on a course so different from that which she'd dreamed of. She is a worthy heroine in this story, and my favorite character in the book.
Though it may not be for the faint of heart - abuse against women, rape, murder and gore abound - this is a raw, gritty, realistic telling of the tale as it could have been. Ms. Hollick has done her research on the time period and it comes to life effortlessly within the pages of her first novel. She's also done extensive research on the various versions of the Arthurian legend and has used historical figures and settings to make her story and characters plausible; there are no wizards or knights in shining armor. The Dark Ages in Britain were a time of religious and cultural upheaval as Christianity and other foreign invaders settled on the island and this provides a rich backdrop for the story.
Full of heartpounding action, troubled heroes, wicked villains, violence, betrayal and, of course, true love, this well-written book is an intense read and a real page-turner. I look forward to reading the remaining two books in the trilogy.
I thoroughly enjoyed the portrayal of Gwenhwyfar as the young, strong, independent princess of Gwynedd, forced to grow up all too quickly amidst the heartbreak and harsh realities of a chain of events beyond her control; her life on a course so different from that which she'd dreamed of. She is a worthy heroine in this story, and my favorite character in the book.
Though it may not be for the faint of heart - abuse against women, rape, murder and gore abound - this is a raw, gritty, realistic telling of the tale as it could have been. Ms. Hollick has done her research on the time period and it comes to life effortlessly within the pages of her first novel. She's also done extensive research on the various versions of the Arthurian legend and has used historical figures and settings to make her story and characters plausible; there are no wizards or knights in shining armor. The Dark Ages in Britain were a time of religious and cultural upheaval as Christianity and other foreign invaders settled on the island and this provides a rich backdrop for the story.
Full of heartpounding action, troubled heroes, wicked villains, violence, betrayal and, of course, true love, this well-written book is an intense read and a real page-turner. I look forward to reading the remaining two books in the trilogy.
September 30, 2013
This will have SPOILERS.
I am really loving this series. At the beginning, as much as I adored Guinevere and I was fascinated by Morgause and Winfred as villains, I was also a bit put off by Arthur. I still am not loving Arthur but I am glad of how he is turned out. This is probably the most complex and realistic portrayal of him I have ever read as much as he is a bastard.
Things I really loved:
All the children. As soon as I found out Winfred was pregnant and Guinevere was too I started wondering who was what and who and whose children was Mordred. And then CERDIC. I really did not expect that but it a marvelous surprise. There is also Amr. I can’t wait to find out what will happen to Amr and if Arthur will have to bury him himself. And if Arthur and Morgana (or Morgause? But now I guess it’s Morgana) will conceive Mordred.
Guinevere. She is amazing and it’s a wonderful novelty to see a portrayal of her as a mother. Also, I like her relationship with Arthur, she gives as much as she takes and he gives.
Winfred. A new villain that I am liking a lot.
No Merlin! I have nothing against Merlin- I mean, not a lot, but it is almost reassuring to read a novel where there is no magical wizard with all the answers alongside Arthur. Here Arthur had to do all the work on his own.
Cei. Him ans his wonderful boots and smile. He looks dashing and he is Arthur’s bff as he should be. Thank you, Hollick. I wonder if they’ll be together or something will happen between them and their conflicting opinions. I loved also the fact that Cei acts a lot like Arthur’s morality.
Saxons and Guinevere learning that Saxons are not the evil monsters they seemed.
Things I really didn’t like:
The fact that all women but Guinevere are ‘bitches’ who hurt men. Igraine with Arthur, Roxena with Vortigern, Winfred with Arthur, Morgause with Arthur and Lot. I wish there were more female characters neutral.
I am really loving this series. At the beginning, as much as I adored Guinevere and I was fascinated by Morgause and Winfred as villains, I was also a bit put off by Arthur. I still am not loving Arthur but I am glad of how he is turned out. This is probably the most complex and realistic portrayal of him I have ever read as much as he is a bastard.
Things I really loved:
All the children. As soon as I found out Winfred was pregnant and Guinevere was too I started wondering who was what and who and whose children was Mordred. And then CERDIC. I really did not expect that but it a marvelous surprise. There is also Amr. I can’t wait to find out what will happen to Amr and if Arthur will have to bury him himself. And if Arthur and Morgana (or Morgause? But now I guess it’s Morgana) will conceive Mordred.
Guinevere. She is amazing and it’s a wonderful novelty to see a portrayal of her as a mother. Also, I like her relationship with Arthur, she gives as much as she takes and he gives.
Winfred. A new villain that I am liking a lot.
No Merlin! I have nothing against Merlin- I mean, not a lot, but it is almost reassuring to read a novel where there is no magical wizard with all the answers alongside Arthur. Here Arthur had to do all the work on his own.
Cei. Him ans his wonderful boots and smile. He looks dashing and he is Arthur’s bff as he should be. Thank you, Hollick. I wonder if they’ll be together or something will happen between them and their conflicting opinions. I loved also the fact that Cei acts a lot like Arthur’s morality.
Saxons and Guinevere learning that Saxons are not the evil monsters they seemed.
Things I really didn’t like:
The fact that all women but Guinevere are ‘bitches’ who hurt men. Igraine with Arthur, Roxena with Vortigern, Winfred with Arthur, Morgause with Arthur and Lot. I wish there were more female characters neutral.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
July 2, 2015
I am working my way through this series and am on book two right now. I have done this review a bit differently because I am reading two versions of the Arthur legend simultaneously. I was searching for books that would provided more realistic historical representations of the legend and ended up finding Helen's series along with Bernard Cornwell's version- The Warlord series. Both versions are excellent and neither are fantasy Knight in shining armor portrayals of a glorious, valiant King and his one true love. Helen has presented a version of Arthur as a much flawed warrior who makes more than his share of mistakes and then has to deal with the consequences. If you are looking for that fantasy romance, neither of these book series are quite right for you. But if you want a more realistic, gritty and sometimes harsh world that these people lived in, both of these will suit you well!
I have a summary, review and comparison of the two versions on my blog!
https://timeslipsblog.wordpress.com/2...
I have a summary, review and comparison of the two versions on my blog!
https://timeslipsblog.wordpress.com/2...
November 2, 2015
I have read this trilogy by Helen Hollick several times. She provides a realistic, historically based story from which all our legends of King Arthur could have been based. In the first book, Arthur, the bastard born child of a serving girl, travels to Gwynedd as part of Uthr Pendragon's army. There, he meets the child Gwynhywar, faces the cruel wrath of Uthr's mistress, Morgause, and dreams of being a great warrior. When Uthr dies during a battle against King Vortigern, Arthur finds out that he is actually Uthr's son, hidden away from enemies who would like to see him dead. Only young, with no family, no army and no experience, he has to face some hard decisions before he can lead the British to a long-deserved victory.
Well written and it reads as completely plausible. Arthur isn't a legend - he's a young man, scared, and questioning who he is, wanting to find a place in the world. There are clever little scenes that lay the foundation for out more fantastical myths - the stone of kings, the sudden appearance of an heir, etc. A great read.
Well written and it reads as completely plausible. Arthur isn't a legend - he's a young man, scared, and questioning who he is, wanting to find a place in the world. There are clever little scenes that lay the foundation for out more fantastical myths - the stone of kings, the sudden appearance of an heir, etc. A great read.
March 27, 2012
As the author states in the afterword, this book is culled from the various legends surrounding King Arthur and is written from her own view point of what is fact. So think of this as a novel about King Arthur which only vaguely resembles the king of myth. There is no Merlin, no sword in the stone, no magic that precedes his birth and definitely no knights, no chivalry and no questing. The bulk of the story focuses on Gwynviere and is a completely imagined story of her upbringing and how her and Arthur met and became king and queen. Again the author admits there are no real facts to support her theory so she felt free to create a new telling of the tale.
So if you enjoy stories of King Arthur with all the magic and myth involved, such as I do, then I would avoid this book.
If you like a good novel about any average tribal war chief in Britain at the time of the Saxons then they book will appeal to you.
So if you enjoy stories of King Arthur with all the magic and myth involved, such as I do, then I would avoid this book.
If you like a good novel about any average tribal war chief in Britain at the time of the Saxons then they book will appeal to you.
October 4, 2011
There was only one thing which bugged me about this novel and that was . I get that Hollick was trying to make Arthur realistic and human rather than the chivalrous knight in shining armor and I really can appreciate that. But I felt that this particular scene took it a little too far.
But otherwise, I really enjoyed Hollick's more realistic take on the Arthurian Legend. Though fiction, I feel like this period of history is now a little less obscure to me. Hollick's writing style always impresses me.
But otherwise, I really enjoyed Hollick's more realistic take on the Arthurian Legend. Though fiction, I feel like this period of history is now a little less obscure to me. Hollick's writing style always impresses me.
February 22, 2016
Spell-binding, magnificent, gutsy, heartbreaking, raw with bloodshed, triumphant! Helen Hollick's Arthurian trilogy quickly draws you into the world of legend. No genteel fairytale story of Camelot, this! Gutsy, sweaty, and real. The Dark Ages brought vividly, to life! This is the legend I want to believe in. Yes it is cruel in places, but they were cruel times. I want to read about them, but I'm glad not to have lived through them. Still, I feel as though, for a while, I was there - and it was breath-taking!
May 7, 2015
This was a very tedious read. There was a lot of potential for it to be a great story. I wanted to like it. But I never found myself enjoying it. About half way through I just wanted to finish it as quickly as possible, which is a shame. The characters were well developed, but the storyline was very slow. I was disappointed with it.
August 18, 2013
I loved it! Helen's Arthur is visceral and fleshed out. Not some goody two shoes! He lives life to the fullest as he sets out to be King. Helen fills this all out nicely so that you feel strongly about the characters. And her story makes sense! No Merlin and Lancelot! And she dedicated the book to Sharon Kaye Penman. A great read; I'm on to Pendragon's Banner.
June 20, 2012
I thoroughly enjoyed this book and recommend it to Historical Fiction lovers.
April 3, 2024
Where to start with this book. I haven't read any Helen Hollick before so I'm not sure if this is her usual style, and I should begin by saying that I prefer first person narrative with as few, preferably just one, narrators as possible. I have enjoyed a few books that bounce around and a series that I really love by AE Rayne was horrible for jumping from person to person, even mid conversation and I managed to still enjoy the books, but The Kingmaking the perspective would change mid paragraph and then I would go back and reread it now knowing who that thought process is coming from and that really took enjoyment away from the book for me.
I love tales or King Arthur, realistic or not, true as much as possible to history or overflowing with fantasy and magic. I don't know if I've ever had such a dry retelling. This book didnt call to me, it didn't make me itch to pick it back up again. I think a lot of that also had to do with Arthur, this was not a romance novel and it wasn't some ya fantasy, it read like these things could have happened, that the cultures being depicted were true, and as such Im not upset with how Arthur was shown, the womanizing, the haughty male entitled-ness, the drinking, but man did it make him unlikable. Even explaining away some of his behaviour because of trauma done to him but his aunt was not enough to make me feel any sympathy or connection to him. I don't ever recall being so turned off by a rendition of Arthur before. I could care less what happens to him in any future books.
Gwenhwyfar, on the other hand. I felt for her, I was scared and nervous for her, she gave me all the feels when you connect with a character and want them to succeed in their goals. I understood and got her connection with Arthur when they were young, but I was so confused why she didn't move on when she was in exile. I know she's still pretty young, but she has to know not only that he was married but also about his reputation that was mentioned more than once to be widely known. It makes no sense to me that she still had him on her pedestal, especially when she's described as such a fierce and independent women.
I may read the next book in this as I wonder how now it all goes wrong and I hope Gwenhwyfar makes it through okay, mainly as the new threat would be towards her and her children but I won't be in any rush to pick up book 2.
I love tales or King Arthur, realistic or not, true as much as possible to history or overflowing with fantasy and magic. I don't know if I've ever had such a dry retelling. This book didnt call to me, it didn't make me itch to pick it back up again. I think a lot of that also had to do with Arthur, this was not a romance novel and it wasn't some ya fantasy, it read like these things could have happened, that the cultures being depicted were true, and as such Im not upset with how Arthur was shown, the womanizing, the haughty male entitled-ness, the drinking, but man did it make him unlikable. Even explaining away some of his behaviour because of trauma done to him but his aunt was not enough to make me feel any sympathy or connection to him. I don't ever recall being so turned off by a rendition of Arthur before. I could care less what happens to him in any future books.
Gwenhwyfar, on the other hand. I felt for her, I was scared and nervous for her, she gave me all the feels when you connect with a character and want them to succeed in their goals. I understood and got her connection with Arthur when they were young, but I was so confused why she didn't move on when she was in exile. I know she's still pretty young, but she has to know not only that he was married but also about his reputation that was mentioned more than once to be widely known. It makes no sense to me that she still had him on her pedestal, especially when she's described as such a fierce and independent women.
I may read the next book in this as I wonder how now it all goes wrong and I hope Gwenhwyfar makes it through okay, mainly as the new threat would be towards her and her children but I won't be in any rush to pick up book 2.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 185 reviews