First Knight (Media Tie-In)

Elizabeth Chadwick is an excellent writer on medieval history. You can imagine that you are actually in the story yourself.

Very happy with this item

If you've seen the movie, you don't need to read the book, and if you've read the book you probably don't need to see the movie -- they are virtually identical. It's like the proverbial horse before the cart, I don't know which came first, the book or the movie. From the promo on Amazon, I suspect the movie, and they decided a book would be a nice way to "enhance" the profits. Either way, this is not a typical Chadwick book, there is no sense of time travel to another century for the weekend whilst reading her book. Only for die hard Chadwick fans(and I am one), or die hard fans of this movie. Otherwise, skip this.

Much of Elizabeth Chadwick's research is carried out as a member of Regia Anglorum, this is an early medieval re-enactment society.This book is an attempt by the author to relate the love between the famous Sir Lancelot of the Lake and King Arthur's Queen Guinevere. As a lover of all things relating to the fabled King Arthur and his kingdom of Camelot I read and enjoyed the book. But I cannot help but feel that it was written with the possibility of it being made into a film at the back of the author's mind.Hollywood has never been very good at portraying English history and the film they made of this book is no exception. Although many people will have found the film entertaining, it bears no relationship to what Arthur and his knights may have looked like, or their surroundings.Arthur, or someone very much like him may have existed but certainly not as a "suited and booted" knight in shining armour. Something that was not invented until about five hundred years after Arthur may or may not have existed.