The Legacy of King Arthur (Chris Barber & David Pykitt)

It's really  not fair to call this a book review, as I read only a dozen pages.  That was enough, though, to make me realize I really didn't want to read any more.

In The Legacy of King Arthur, Chris Barber & David Pykitt state matter-of-factly that they've gotten it right and almost every other historian has gotten it wrong.  They claim to know not only who the real King Arthur was, but that his bloodline continues to this day.  They claim to know an impressive amount of detail and present some evidence to back their claims.  So, why did I take issue?  Well . . . hundreds, maybe thousands, of historians have searched history for Arthur.  Was he a Roman?  A Briton?  A poet's creation?  Nobody knows for sure, and enough people have been looking at the problem to make me doubt anyone's claim that they've figured it all out- not just a piece or two, but nearly everything.  Seems far-fetched.  Could they be correct?  Do Barber and Pykitt know what nobody else does?  They may well- which is why I mention the book here.  I just don't think that they do.  Ancient history is so shrouded and complicated that anyone claiming to have such a complete story- a story with which other experts in the field disagree- is bound to arouse suspicion in my book.

If you're an Arthurian nut, then read this for completeness and awareness.  I don't mean to imply that the authors have nothing to say- just be wary, and consider the source.  In a multitude of counselors there is wisdom.