King Arthur and the Myth of History by Laurie A. Finke and Martin B. Shichtman (review)

Abstract

LAURIE A. PINKE and MARTIN B. SHICHTMAN, King Arthur and the Myth of History. Gainesville, University Press of Florida, 2004. Pp. 262. ISBN: 0-8130-2733-0. $59.95. King Arthur and the Myth of History is a well-researched and theoretically sophisticated work that examines how the figure of King Arthur has been appropriated and manipulated 'historically.' Indeed, one of the book's key strengths is its deft treatment of both history-writing and historicism: Finke and Shichtman deal not only with responses to events produced within particular cultural moments by those identifying themselves as writers of'histories' or 'chronicles,' but also with the critical discourse of historicism and the 'production' of Arthurian history. The authors contend that Arthur has frequently been used as 'a potent, but empty, social signifier to which meaning could be attached that served to legitimate particular forms of political authority and cultural imperialism' (p. 2). As they move from the medieval to the modern period, they make their case by means of a pyramid-like organizational structure that allows them to focus on three major periods of cultural crisis. The base of the pyramid (Chapters 1-4) examines the explosion of interest in the Arthurian legend that occurred with the Norman colonization of England in the eleventh and twelfth centuries. In separate chapters, the authors discuss the Arthurian portions of William of Malmesbury's. Gesta Regum Anglorum, Geoffrey of Monmouth's Historia Regum Britannic, Wace's Roman de Brut, and Lagamon's Brut. Building on this foundation, Finke and Shichtman move on and up to the fifteenth century and the Wars of the Roses to address John Hardyng's Chronicle and Caxton's print of Malory's Morte Darthur. Finally, at the top of the pyramid, they bring their discussion of history and historicism into the twentieth century by examining the intersection of Arthurian and Nazi ideals in Jean-Michel Angebert's The Occult and the Third Reich: The Mystical Origins of Nazism and the Search for the Holy Grail and Trevor Ravenscroft's Spear of Destiny: The Occult Power Behind the Spear which Pierced the Side of Christ. Another strength of this book is its blend of solid historical contextualization with innovative theoretical literary analyses. To show how the figure of Arthur functions as 'symbolic capital' in various texts at different times, Finke and Shichtman make effective use of theoretical frameworks offered by Pierre Bourdieu, Jean-Joseph Goux, and a number of postcolonial theorists. Some of their most interesting arguments draw upon the work of Benedict Anderson, particularly his theorization in Imagined Communities of the rise of nationalism-a concept they critique and modify to demonstrate the complex formation of individual and collective identities these 'histories' of King Arthur enact. Their use of theory is sophisticated yet judicious; it never threatens to overwhelm or diminish the important historically-grounded work that is the book's core. In fact, the first four chapters are so thorough in their description of the historical context in which the early Arthurian chronicles were written-and so meticulous in their summary of recent critical thinking about the agendas behind the composition and dedication of these texts-that King Arthur and the Myth History could be said to offer a history of Arthurian historicism. It is, however, much more than this. The careful construction of this groundwork allows the authors to paint a larger and more complex picture of how Arthur has been used historically than would otherwise be the case. The first chapter offers a prime example: here the authors show how the story of a fifth- or sixth-century ruler came to be explosively popular in the twelfth century. Finke and Shichtman begin their investigation with an analysis of William of Malmesbury's Gesta Regum Anglorum, a work many historians and critics have taken at 'face value,' especially in comparison with the work of his near-contemporary Geoffrey of Monmouth, whose Historia Regum Brittanie is almost universally hailed as at once fraudulent, propagandistic, and hugely entertaining. …