King Arthur: Man or Myth

An investigation of the evidence for King Arthur based on the earliest written sources rather than later myths and legends.

This book differs from the usual Arthur theories in that it favors no particular conjecture simply analyses and clarifies the evidence presenting it all in chronological order. Starting from Roman Britain, the evidence shows how the legend evolved and at what point concepts such as Camelot, Excalibur and Merlin were added.

It covers the historical records from the end of Roman Britain using contemporary sources such as they are, from 400-800, including Gallic Chronicles, Gildas and Bede. It details the first written reference to Arthur in the Historia Brittonum c.800 and the later Annales Cambriae in the tenth century showing the evolution of the legend in later Welsh and French stories.

While not starting from or aiming at a specific person, the book compares the possibility of Arthur being purely fictional with a historical figure alongside a list of possible suspects. The evidence is presented and the reader is invited to make up their own mind before a discussion of the author's own assessment.

"What impressed me about this book is Sullivan's passion for this subject and his willingness to go the extra mile to show both sides of the argument . . . It was extremely fascinating to see how he treated this book like a criminal investigation, using different fields of study to figure out the origins of the legend, how it evolved, and whether or not there was a king named Arthur." —Adventures of a Tudor Nerd