King Arthur: Myth-Making and History by N.J. Higham (review)

Abstract

REVIEWS117 The next three chapters form the real core of Higham's study. Chapter II, 'The Genesis ofArthur,' examines the political and ideological context of'Britishness' in the centuries immediately following the Roman withdrawal from Britain. This chapter deals with both Gildas's text and the possible historic origins of Arthur. Chapter III, 'Contested Histories: Anglo-Saxons and Britons c. 730-830,' likewise examines Bede's Historia Ecclesiastica and the Historia Brittonum, noting how their portrayals of fifth- and sixth- century Britain (and Britons) are conditioned by the immediate political contexts of their composition. Chapter IV, 'Text in Context: TheAnnaUs Cambriaec. 954,' applies this approach in the tenth century and usefully compares the historical treatment of Arthur with the references to him in Welsh heroic poetry. The discussions ofall three chapters are detailed and wide-ranging, as Higham brings historical, archeological, and textual evidence to bear in his analyses of his central texts. Though one might quibble with details of the argument (I'm not sure I hear, with his certainty, all the echoes of borrowed language Higham hears between his central texts), his notion that Gildas's De Excidio, the Historia Brittonum, and the AnnaUs Cambriae are modelled on or influenced by biblical narrative, and that, for example, parallels between Arthur and Joshua may well account for the title dux belbrum, as well as other details, is well argued and generally convincing. By insisting on viewing these early texts as rhetorical expressions with particular social and political concerns, Higham minimizes their worth as sources for historical information concerning Arthur. Chapter V, 'The Rise and Fall of the "Historical" Arthur,' studies the cultural uses of the historical Arthur beginning with Geoffrey of Monmouth and on into the twentieth century. This useful chapter nicely complements the opening one and rounds out Higham's study. The final chapter, Chapter VI, 'Postscript: The Rhetorical Arthur,' is really one final conclusion, summarizing the main points of Higham's book-long argument. The book is well constructed; each chapter is divided into clearly titled and demarcated sub-sections, and each chapter has a brief conclusion which summarizes its argument. The discussion is handsomely advanced by 39 maps, diagrams, and photographs, and supported with an extensive bibliography and index. All Arthurians should take an interest in this study; even those not specializing in the seventh to tenth centuries may take advantage of the layout ofthe book and the chapter conclusions to glean a good deal ofinsight into the evolution ofthe figure ofArthur. KEVIN T. GRIMM Oakland University n.J. higham, King Arthur: Myth-Making and History. London and New York: Routledge, 2002. Pp. xi, 303. isbn: 0-415-21305-3. $27.95 Around the year 1200 the eminent English historian William of Newburgh wrote Historia Rerum Anglicarum, in part at least to decry the 'wanton and shameless lying' of Geoffrey of Monmouth, perpetrated, claimed William, to provide the ignoble Britons with a noble—albeit fabricated—past. William has found a worthy successor in Nicholas Higham, whose latest book provides similar criticism to Il8ARTHURIANA Geoffrey's two most important Arthurian sources, the Historia Brittonum (c.830, hereafter HB ) and the AnnaUs Cambriae (c.950, hereafter AC). The Welsh authors ofthese works, claims Higham, 'historicized' Arthur (here a figure offolklore, not history) and invented his victories over the Saxons in order to counter the Britons' proverbial reputation for cowardice and duplicity. Like William's Historia, Higham's book is a thorough and blistering attack on popular assumptions about Arthur and Arthurian writers. Higham's study begins with a survey ofthe historiography ofthe historical Arthur debate, from the mid-nineteenth century to the present. Higham covers all of the major scholarly works, gives the reader a glimpse at some of the many popular 'historical Arthur' theories in current circulation, and rightly criticizes 'academic skeptics' for not engaging the 'laity' in this debate (pp. 3 and 35). But the heart of this new study, chapters two through four, concentrate on what Higham calls 'contested histories,' namely Gildas, Bede, the Historia Brittonum, and the AnnaUs Cambriae. According to Higham, Gildas and Bede set up the framework of fifth/ sixth century British history, as well as the notion that God punished the...