From Scythia to Camelot: A Radical Reassessment of the Legends of King Arthur, the Knights of the Round Table, and the Holy Grail

Rating:
Summary: Deconstructualist's Heaven
Review: For those who cling stubbornly to the customary interpretations of the Arthurian sagas as being wholly Celtic in nature, this book may well present what appears implausible evidence. But for those who seek further than the past thousand years for clues about the nature of the Arthurian drama and the quest for the Holy Grail, as well as many of the symbols surrounding it, this book offers much convincing evidence that rings true on many levels. Strongly recommended!

Rating:
Summary: Not for those who cling to old biases
Review: For those who cling stubbornly to the customary interpretations of the Arthurian sagas as being wholly Celtic in nature, this book may well present what appears implausible evidence. But for those who seek further than the past thousand years for clues about the nature of the Arthurian drama and the quest for the Holy Grail, as well as many of the symbols surrounding it, this book offers much convincing evidence that rings true on many levels. Strongly recommended!

Rating:
Summary: New and important material in the paperback edition.
Review: I'd like to reinforce what my co-author, Linda A. Malcor, says (see below) about the importance of the revised, paperback edition of our book FROM SCYTHIA TO CAMELOT. Among other things, we're now able to demonstrate that, in 183-85 C.E., the Roman officer Lucius Artorius Castus, commander of the Sarmatian cavalry unit based at what is now Ribchester in western Lancashire, led his troops in a victorious campaign against invading Caledonians, and that, in the process, he fought and won virtually every battle later ascribed by Nennius, Geoffrey of Monmouth, and other medieval chroniclers to the "historical Arthur" in the sixth century, including the famous battle of Badon Hill. Indeed, now that FROM SCYTHIA TO CAMELOT is available in a popularly-priced edition, we hope that it will become required reading in a variety of classes concerned with medieval literature and history, to say nothing of Arthurian studies. We also hope that readers who are seriously concerned with the nature and origin of the Arthurian tradition will add it to their collections.

Rating:
Summary: There were more peoples in Britain and Gaul than Celts!
Review: Please, take the time to look over the evidence that we present in this book before you jump to any conclusions about the origins of the Arthurian legends. In addition to copious notes and an extensive biblioraphy, we provide plates, figures, maps and genealogies. If you would like to discuss this work, please contact me at [e-mail]. Scott and I realize that there is a lot more evidence out there than just two people can amass. If you have something to contribute, we would love to hear from you! A Japanese translation of this work should be available in 1997. More copies have been printed recently. If the book is out of stock again, though, do let us know, and we will badger Garland to print more! Cheers!

Rating:
Summary: Revised and expanded paperback edition!
Review: The paperback edition of _From Scythia to Camelot_ contains a new appendix and other information not found in the original hardcover version because of our ongoing research on this topic. Errata are corrected, and reviewers comments were addressed when preparing the new edition. The paperback is well worth owning even if you already have the hardcover version.

Rating:
Summary: scythia
Review: This book was a great pleasure to read.I not only reread Herodotus, I did the Illias as well - again. Great book, well written, loved it.

Rating:
Summary: scythia
Review: This book was a great pleasure to read.I not only reread Herodotus, I did the Illias as well - again. Great book, well written, loved it.

Rating:
Summary: King Arthur was a North Iranian named Batraz?!
Review: To laypersons with a passing interest in history and archaeology this book will seem both puzzling and difficult to swallow. The authors Littleton and Malcor don't claim to have all of the answers, but put forward an interesting and plausible theory regarding the origins of Arthurian legends. I heard about their work from an issue of Archaeology magazine and managed to purchase their book at one-third the price from a friend at a bookstore. The Roman occupation of Britain is a well known bit of history because without the Roman conquests there the world as we know it would have been a radically different place. What is not well known is that the Romans used Scythian horsemen as their primary occupation force (while stationing British conscripts in other lands). From the Scythians and their stories of Batraz (a hero king of the Caucasian people whose primary descendents today are the Ossetians) Arthurian legends came to be. Also worthy of mention is the daring theory about Lancelot being of Alannic extraction. What is presented is the impact of Iranian-speaking peoples (whose better known cousins established themselves in the Near East from Kurdistan to western Pakistan) upon European culture as part of Roman armies and "barbarian" hordes. These people are a fascinating and little known Indo-European peoples who were assimilated into the general populations of Europe, but live again thanks to the work of scholars like Littleton and Malcor. An interesting work that deserves far more recognition from people interested in Arthurian legends, the various peoples of the Eurasian steppes, or radical theories made plausible.

Rating:
Summary: King Arthur was a North Iranian named Batraz?!
Review: To laypersons with a passing interest in history and archaeology this book will seem both puzzling and difficult to swallow. The authors Littleton and Malcor don't claim to have all of the answers, but put forward an interesting and plausible theory regarding the origins of Arthurian legends. I heard about their work from an issue of Archaeology magazine and managed to purchase their book at one-third the price from a friend at a bookstore. The Roman occupation of Britain is a well known bit of history because without the Roman conquests there the world as we know it would have been a radically different place. What is not well known is that the Romans used Scythian horsemen as their primary occupation force (while stationing British conscripts in other lands). From the Scythians and their stories of Batraz (a hero king of the Caucasian people whose primary descendents today are the Ossetians) Arthurian legends came to be. Also worthy of mention is the daring theory about Lancelot being of Alannic extraction. What is presented is the impact of Iranian-speaking peoples (whose better known cousins established themselves in the Near East from Kurdistan to western Pakistan) upon European culture as part of Roman armies and "barbarian" hordes. These people are a fascinating and little known Indo-European peoples who were assimilated into the general populations of Europe, but live again thanks to the work of scholars like Littleton and Malcor. An interesting work that deserves far more recognition from people interested in Arthurian legends, the various peoples of the Eurasian steppes, or radical theories made plausible.

Rating:
Summary: Deconstructualist's Heaven
Review: While it makes for an interesting read as an opposing point of view to the current ideas concerning the origins of Arthurian literature, the authors, in their attempt to "deconstruct" the Arthurian myth and cut it clean from Celtic studies, often make outstanding leaps in logic (without sufficiently reliable sources being cited) and quite often mangle the Celtic evidence (which they are trying to discredit) by utilyzing incorrect etymologies of Celtic words and ignoring Celtic literary themes and archaeological evidence which would tend to discredit their Iranian-origin theories. By throwing the baby out with the bath water, they weaken their argument, for it has been consistently proved by other authors in recent years that there is, without a doubt, a strong Celtic influence over the entire genre of Arthurian literature. This shaky scholarship, coupled with a printing that is riddled with spelling/graphical errors unfortunatley leads to a strong warning of caution to any potential reader.