Rating: 
Summary: Dismal, dreary, dull....need I say more?
Review: I've waded through the first 4 Camulod books hoping they would get better, but The Fort at River's Bend finally did me in.The premise of the 'real' story of Arthur and Merlyn is a wonderful idea, and could have been a phenomenal read by a different writer. Whyte, however, isn't a good writer. His prose is laborious, dull, and long-winded to say the least. Merlyn is one of the stupidest characters I've ever come across, he rambles on in his head about nothing for page after page. The same information comes up on multiple pages with no new insights at all. The dialogue is stilted and unnatural, and the characters all sound alike. Also, a good editor was vital for this kind of series, but unfortunately Whyte didn't have one. There are so many inconsistencies and mistakes throughout the whole series that it made it impossible for me to enjoy the books. The Fort at River's Bend is the worst however because absolutely nothing happens. 461 pages of a storyline that could have been condensed into less than 100. I'm sorry to say I won't be reading any more of Whyte's books. The idea is captivating, the telling of it unfortunately is mind-numbing.
Rating:
Summary: pointless
Review: If this Whyte is so smart about the Roman era in England, why does he misuse the word DECIMATE like every other ignorant John Q. Public? From context, he means DEVASTATE (p. 414 paperback). Decimation was a punishment used within the Roman army: if a unit had misbehaved badly enough, one in ten (10%) of the members of that unit were killed, I believe by stoning, and the killings were performed by their fellow soldiers in that unit. Certainly a severe punishment from an emotional standpoint but not catastrophic to the military function of the unit. Devastation, of course, means a severe level of destruction, certainly more than 10%. Mr. Jack Whyte has at least one foot of clay.
| 
