Customer Reviews

The Last English King

5 star:		(4)
4 star:		(5)
3 star:		(7)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(4)

 

 

Author Julian Rathbone immediately introduces Walt, a likable character who will not only serve as guide through his 11th Century world but also acts as a participant in one of its most significant events - the Battle of Hastings. While this reader often finds books that ignore linear chronology in telling their story annoying, here the technique works quite well. We meet Walt, once guardsman to the late King Harold II shortly after the decisive battle. Injured, defeated, guiltridden, he trudges across Europe in search of either oblivion or expiation. The angst Walt carries around makes him accessible to a modern reader, but he is never made to seem either offensively anachronistic or unduly gloomy.

In brief, but compelling narrative the author recreates the sensation of traveling through the countryside in what was still, effectively, the Dark Ages. When he reaches the outskirts of the Byzantine Empire and then Constantinople itself, Rathbone cleverly sums up the wonders of the city through Walt's literally stunned reaction to a religious service he witnesses in the Hagia Sofia.

During the course of his journey, Walt encounters Quint, a quirky, nomadic character with an inquisitive nature. As he and Walt take to the road together, Quint begins to question his companion about his former life. It is in these discussions that the author sets up the social milieu in which the battle will ultimately take place. The two travelers are then, in effect, left "on the road" and Rathbone takes up the tale from the early years of Edward the Confessor's reign, focusing on his interactions with the powerful Godwin family as well as the King's relationships with his mother and his lover.

This is as far as I've gotten, and while it may seem strange to write a review before actually finishing the book, I feel that it has been such a fascinating read up to this point that I can't imagine being disappointed by what will follow. The non-linear chronology allows Rathbone to simultaneously spin multiple strands of the story thus keeping interest high on many levels: the battle itself, the perils of 10th Century travel, the tensions between Norman and English, King Edward and the Godwins, Walt and Quint, Walt and Harold Godwin. The narrative is so rich, I could continue on in this strain. Anyone appreciating historical fiction that shows a strong respect for the facts on which it was based will thoroughly enjoy this book.

I bought this book at Stansted Airport hoping to pass a few otherwise boring hours of travel. I didn't realise how enthralled I was to become, not just in the plot but in the whole scene of pre-Norman England. Certainly Julian Rathbone's presentation brings the rather stilted characters depicted on the Bayeux Tapestry to life as flesh and blood. It has also aroused in me (an Englishman in exile living in Spain surrounded by Scots!) a definite patriotism as well as an interest to read further into the history of the period. (I romantically like to think of my own ancestors linking shields to protect the last truly English king). Certainly the parallelism with our own end of Millennium 'threat' from across the Channel was not lost on me. The wide (but not pretentiously used I think) vocabulary made this interesting as literature.

On the minus side: The anachronisms (depsite the plea of the author in his foreword) do sometimes grate. And I think he possibly has some religious axe to grind.

The basic proposition of this book is interesting and imaginative in following the reflections of a survivor from Harold's housecarls after Hastings. But, ultimately, I just found the rendering impossible to believe and rather irritating. I understand the desire to de-mystify history, but this should not mean a cavalier assumption that the 11th century was pretty much like now except people fought with swords and had bad table manners. The characters are way too modern in their language, emotions, and attitudes and the story's atmosphere suffers for it. The author displays a chronic inability to write set pieces such that climactic events are usually rendered with dull explanations and narratives rather than with action. Consequently, the book contains numerous mind-numbing stretches. The author's greatest attentions seem given to sex scenes (straight, gay, incestuous...you get the picture). I have no objection to 'sex in literature', but it should serve some purpose in driving the story forward. In sum, the book represents a good idea weakly executed.

Imagine if Aragorn had fallen at the battle of Pelinor Fields, and one of his close companions had run away and finally given an account of his defeat, and you have some idea of how this book reads. Filled with cheerful anachronisms, "The Last English King" evokes "I, Claudius" but also "The Lord of the Rings". At the end both Excalibur and Durandil are mentioned. The fugitive survivor creeps across the forests and rivers of Europe till he fetches up on the quays of the Golden Horn. There at the capital of the last empire of the West he falls in with fellow travellers and recounts the tale of the defeat of Harold Godwinson at the Battle of Hastings. A housecarl he is close beside his lord at the last and fails to fend off a fatal blow directed at the king. Guilt of this and love of home kept him in exile. Now he recalls what English democracy was and how it was lost - "for a thousand years". Dispensing with the second millenium we can now likewise look back to the first for some distant mirror of ourselves. Here is one, fun-house distorted at times, silly and gloomy by turns, but for all its fictions striking home at last.

The Last English King is, of course, a slight historical inaccuracy (Harold being half Scandinavian), but slight inaccuracies in the name of a good yarn are rife and to be tolerated if one is to enjoy this book...which I am doing. Yes, Im not even finished "reading" it (via the excellent talking book version), but can offer some insights. Having read many varying historical analyses, I am always eager to see how an author of fiction brings the tale to life , plugs the holes in fact and disentangles the embellishments and propoganda of history without creating too many of their own. Harold Godwineson, portrayed as a fair and worthy king (and why not, if we are to view the pre-conquest time as a golden age), has been dead for some years as his former housecarl (bodyguard) and friend Walt Edwinson wanders around Europe torturing his soul with guilt, as he tries to live with his failure at surviving the battle on the hill "near the hoar apple tree" near Hastings. As he unloads his tale to Quint, a slightly fallen former Saxon monk, he also schools us on the history and the intricate intrigues leading up to October 14, 1066. The personal portrayal of history brings it to life in a believable fashion, though some of the tales are a bit tall. The role of Talliefer, the magician/musician is a little too Merlinesque for me. The historical existence of this character is too doubtful to give him a role of such magnitude. Also, a royal housecarl (particularly an inner circle one such as Walt) would have to lose their head before leaving a field in battle without their king...be he dead or alive. The back and forth narrative would work well in a visual medium, but could prove difficult for a reader without a knowledge of the known history. For ease of understanding and plot development, I preferred Helen Hollicks recent "Harold the King", which seemed more plausible historically, if a little too virtuous in its portrayal of Harold (he seemed...such a great guy)and light on in the final battle scenes. For dark twists, Rathbones book has more visceral reality, but perhaps too many of them to gel (such as Edward the confessors illicit relationship with Tostig, and abortive pagan nuptials with Edith). And as a fan of Bernard Cornwells Arthurian "Warlord Chronicles" , I also found the comparison between Walt and Derfel Cadarn just a little too similar (both having been close friends of a King, having lost their hand, and telling their tale in retrospect) .

Julian Rathbone, in his introduction, indicates that he uses some cultural anachronisms because they amuse him, and he hopes that they will amuse his readers, as well. I must say that it was these comedic little touches that changed my disdain for this book into grudging admiration. While The Last English King is not my favorite historical novel ever, or even my favorite read of the year, it was time well spent.

Walt, the last surviving bodyguard to King Harold, wanders the world after the Battle of Hastings, wherein his King and his friends were lost. He meets interesting characters on the road, including Quint, who draws Walt's stories out of him, and Taillefer, who brings his own side of the story to the table. Also woven into this "tapestry" are fleeting sightings of a "nasal folk singer who said that the answer to everything was on the breeze," and quick references to a "poet named Omar." William (later known as William the Conqueror, but whose appellation here is not shareable in a family forum) is written as a dangerous, though comic figure, and his "pep talk" to the troops is hilarious. I found that worth the price of admission on its own.

I must admit that I had a great deal of trouble, due to my lack of knowledge of this period of British history, in keeping up with who was whom within the narrative. I had difficulty understanding who was in line for the Throne and why they felt their claim was valid. This might have been remedied through less flights of fancy on Rathbone's part and more clarity. However, I felt it to be a stroke of genius to put this novel in fairly modern language so as to make it accessible to a reader such as myself. As much as I loathe it when Suzannah Dunn does it, I liked it here, perhaps because Rathbone does it well, and that's the trick that Miss Dunn has missed. The goal of historical fiction, from my point of view, was reached, in that it made me want to know more about Edward the Confessor, the Godwins and Godwinsons and their contemporaries.

I got this as a loaner from a friend and can say that this one is worth buying. The story opens with Walt, a survivor of the Battle of Hastings returning home to his native England. It may confuse readers at first but this is actually the end of what happens at the story. One wonders why the author may do this but at the end of the book you understand. It then jumps back in time right after the battle, Walt meets an ex-monk named Quint and from there the story becomes two in one. The adventures of Walt and Quint journeying to the holy land and then Walt telling of his times as a bodyguard to Harold Godwineson, the defeated king of England on the Hastings battlefield.

Rathbone is good at making each character disinctive. Showing different points of view very effectively. But there is very little compassion to be felt for them and I found myself to be ultimately indifferent save for Harold and that was toward the very end. He does, however, manage to make William the Conqueror a comics relief, which is a feat. Some may feel a bit of trepidation after what I just said, but he balances it very well by treating the character with respect and it's a highpoint in the book. And the way he presents Edward the Confessor is, to play on the pun, divine.

Those who are fans of this period of history (such as myself) will find his conclusions very entertianing and interesting. Where he excels again is his narrative when presenting the battles both at Hastings and Stanford Bridge. Where the book drags however is the adventures of Walt and Quint in the holy land. After they leave Turkey, it meanders. They pick up various characters along the way and the author is blatant about embodying his moderatly interesting but ultimatley unnecessary philosiphy into them.

Despite the critisms, this is a good book and great historical fiction. Just be prepared that a third of the book takes place after the Conquest and out of England. Those who are fans of Mary Renault will not be dissapointed. I'm looking forward to reading more of Julian Rathbone.

excellent, imaginative novel that satisfies demands of history and storytelling, and also, the writer's wish to amuse himself along the way. i am glad that this is not a straight historical "romance". btw, this is a very sad, but also in places, a very funny book. some readers will be offended by the sex and the language choices in the book. yep its profane, but considering we are considering the dark ages, i think Rathbone's choices are appropriate. good and solid.

The Last English King has the primary ingredients for an outstanding historical novel: Harold Godwinson, Edward the Confessor, William the Conqueror and the epic events which culminated in the Battle of Hastings. This is the Norman Conquest, 11th century England, political power-play and court intrigue at it's best. Yet, somehow, Julian Rathbone manages to take these ingredients and present something of a flop.

He selects Walt, a Godwinson housecarl (bodyguard), as his protagonist who fails to die with his king at Hastings and, guilt-ridden, wanders the breadth of Europe seeking to find himself. Along the way, he meets a defrocked monk who communicates in anachronistic psycho-jargon, an illusionist whose 11th-century repertoire would put David Copperfield to shame, and a wealthy, bewigged gem dealer whose intense interest in these transients is never fully explained. This wandering troupe is the audience to which Walt tells his story. Indeed, disconcertingly, an audience is all they ever become.

Rathbone chooses to employ a strictly modern vernacular which takes something away from the period setting. But, it is in Walt's recounting of events where this novel begins to find some merit. As with most historical novels, the reader can extract swaths of information about the life and times in which it is set. The Norman Conquest is a compelling story and even Rathbone's somewhat nonsensical premise cannot destroy it.

Still, The Last English King manages to conclude itself with a final nod toward mediocrity. Walt's tale finished, he abruptly bids adieu to his traveling companions in Asia Minor and hops aboard an adjacent ship loading for England. If readers haven't spotted the artifice of this traveling band of "ears" and the utter superfluousness of their trek, they will now and they will likely be disappointed.

I'd love to rate The Last English King higher because it's easy to see what it could have been. As it is, it is largely forgettable and, given the subject matter, this is a shame. 3 stars.

One critic has called "The Last English King" a work that has embroidered fact with fiction, much as the weavers of the Bayeaux Tapistry did. That may be a comment made of whole cloth--or even pulling the wool over our heads--but nonetheless the yarn that Julian Rathbone has spun is a fascinating tale. The author pulls few punches as he needles his way through a carpet of historical myths, tales, and fact in portraying King Harold, unlucky enough to be the last of the Anglo-Saxon kings of England.

The year 1066 was the last time that England was invaded by land by foreign troops and but for a few quirks, William the 'Illegitimate' (B&N won't accept the other word!) out of Normandy (responding to the promise that King Edward the Confessor had made to him a few years earlier) invades to take "his" crown. The Battle of Hasting proves to be William's "day" and a new chapter of British history is born. In "The Last English King," set some three years after the invasion, we find Walt, one of King Harold's personal guards, wandering around Europe, broken, guilt-filled, despondent. He meets up with Quint, an ex-man of the cloth, and they soon decide to journey to the Holy Land, for a number of reasons, catharsis being the foremost (the guilt seems to hang around forever!).

Walt, having been the most faithful of faithful of servants to his king, was able to see first hand the plots, the intrigues, the betrayals of the two kings, as they jockeyed for the final thrust for the throne. (Harold had been quickly crowned following the Confessor's death before William could arrive from Normandy.) Clearly, Rathbone favors Harold, whom he depicts as being fair-minded, just, admirable. In turn, it's William who's the heavy, whom he labels a psychopath, among other things. Rathbone's account of the Norman invasion very cleary combines fact with fiction--but understanding this--after all, it's a novel--makes the story flow more smoothly, become more palatable. (Historians certainly will disagree on some of his assumptions and "revelations"!) That said, however, Rathbone's story is one of intrigue, of despair, of hope, of expiation. It's a book that's filled with "historical fare"--and one that should keep you attentive throughout. (Billyjhobbs@tyler.net)