Historic King Arthur: Authenticating the Celtic Hero of Post-Roman Britain

Reno acts as a guide in this journey in search of historical truth, explaining his methods and logic in evaluating the evidence, but he does not rigidly insist upon the absolute truth of his conclusions. Frequently, he explains that there are other reasonable answers to the questions than the one he favors. Sometimes, such as in his analysis of the locations of many of the battles fought by Arthur (as described in Reno's "Historic Figures In the Arthurian Era"), he concludes that no single "best" answer is really possible. At times, his explanations are complex and subtle to the point where the reader may have difficulty following the path Reno is laying out. That is perhaps a natural consequence of the type of evidence that must be used and of the detail in which it is presented. Usually, however, Reno returns to the same subject of investigation later in the book to again address the questions and to clarify his answers. Thus, attention to detail on the reader's part is required and patience must be exercised as the author slowly builds his case.

And what are Reno's answers to what above I termed the central questions? He believes that Arthur was of a Roman-British background, operating as a high king primarily in Wales and the adjacent midlands, although also in southern England and northern Gaul, from the middle of the Fifth Century AD through the early portion of the Sixth. Reno contends that many of Arthur's campaigns were waged not against Saxon hordes fresh from Germany, but against Saxons who had been settled in Britain for one or more generations, these "English" Saxons being in league with leaders and forces of native British. And Reno believes that "Arthur" was a man known otherwise to history as Ambrosius Aurelianus and as Riothamus and finally as Arthurex, not a name at all but an epithet connoting his status as a great leader.

I will not claim that I am yet wholly convinced of this "triad" equation of Ambrosius Aurelianus, Riothamus, and Arthur but, as the author himself points out, rejection of this total identity does not negate the validity of many parts of Reno's overall work. I found to be especial important Reno's conclusions regarding Cerdic, a "Saxon" king with a wholly Celtic name, and Cerdic's people, the West Saxons. If Reno is correct, our understanding of the Arthurian era must be substantially altered, with a consequence that the course of events becomes much more clear. I expect Reno's conclusions to be challenged - this is inevitable in a field where evidence is scant and subject to multiple interpretations - but at the very least he has provided us with a provocative, comprehensive portrait of man and era.

To my knowledge there is no other Arthurian study available to the general public that explores the ancient sources in such depth to provide answers to the old questions. If I might be critical of some peripheral features, I do wish that the index was somewhat more comprehensive and illuminating (given the complexity of the issues at hand, I found myself turning to the index again and again to go back to earlier points) and the maps, although numerous, sometimes lack the visual clarity that could have been achieved. Nonetheless, "The Historic King Arthur" and "Historic Figures In the Arthurian Era" are books that should be of great interest to anyone seriously interested in attempting to glimpse the real King Arthur.


A wonderful true life book of a man thought to be a mith.   November 5, 1998
 1 out of 6 found this review helpful

This book took a time and a man, explained the truth of the time and captured my heart. Knowing there was King and how Mr. Reno went about proving his existance was interesting, intreeging, heart warming and fun. I can not wait for the next book!