He convinces me that Arthur was real, and he outlines his campaigns thoroughly.

Ilkka Syvanne is less successful in persuading me that Ambrosius, Uther and Arthur were all one and the same person. His arguments there seem forced, and his suggestion that chroniclers referred to a king's death in metaphorical terms -- to separate past deeds from later ones -- and then changed his name simply doesn't ring true.

Even so, Britain in the Age of Arthur: A Military History is a heck of a good read, if you have an interest in Arthur beyond the purely fantastical hero-king of legend.

The amount of scholarship here is astounding. Syvanne digs deeply into the history outlined by Geoffrey of Monmouth and earlier sources, but also compares Geoffrey's account with other sources, such as Gildas, Nennius and the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle. He tells us what Arthur did, where, when and with whom, as best as he can determine from the available texts. He sorts out discrepancies and contradictions, and tells readers which version of events he believes.

Of course, this can also be a failing. Syvanne is certainly well-versed in the histories and legends of Arthur's time, but he sometimes makes assumptions and educated guesses that fail to persuade. It seems in a few cases like he simply picks the one he prefers -- which is fine, to a certain extent, but it's not always good scholarship.

If you want to know more about the military strategies Arthur and others of his time likely employed, this is definitely the book for you. Syvanne goes into immense detail about the tactics and formations that were commonly employed, broken down by nationality and situation. He analyzes battlefields and discusses how troops likely were armed, how they maneuvered and how they fought. He also explains why and how Arthur invaded portions of mainland Europe.

There is a lot of information packed between these covers.

However, the book, to me, is much longer than it needed to be, and it is also duller than it needed to be, too. Syvanne goes into far more detail than is necessary, I think, about the battle tactics used by Romans, Britons and every nation or tribe Arthur could possibly have encountered. It gets repetitive. He also tacks unrelated appendices at the end about Frothi III, Odin, St. Patrick and Swedish rock carvings -- 60 or so pages that would have fit better in a different book.

All the same, I'm glad I read Britain in the Age of Arthur. Let's be honest, I already believed Arthur was real, and I had my own theories about the truth of various legends and histories about him. Syvanne's work here does a great job of grounding Arthur in the bedrock of British history.