King Arthur and the Myth of History by Laurie A. Finke and Martin B. Shichtman (review)

68ARTHURIANA Jewers's essay, with its focus on medieval films produced for Generations X and Y, serves as a fitting ttansition into the collection's final pedagogical section, particularly John Ganim's musings on his student's reception and reading ofmedieval film, which should serve to both encourage and caution anyone considering a similar course. The other essay in this section, Edward Benson's examination ofJoan ofArc films, provides a critique ofthe modern ideologies that hamper cinema's ability to capture Joan's story accurately, reminding us, as Driver and Ray assert in their Preface, that medieval film 'demonstrates the tendency to bend history to fit a political agenda (and). . .more often than not supports white male heterosexual hegemony.' Even if readers may sometimes find themselves wishing the authot had had mote space to develop historical context or to expand analyses ofthe films, TheMedievalHero on Screen is an impressive collection—thought-provoking and insightful. It is a welcome addition to the discussion of medieval film that should appeal to many audiences: Arthufianists, historians, scholars working in both ttaditional medieval studies and medievalism, and those who study Popular Culture. It is also well-suited to the graduate and undergraduate classrooms. SUSAN ARONSTEIN University of Wyoming laurie a. finke and martin B. shichtman, King Arthur and the Myth ofHistory. Gainesville, University Press ofFlorida, 2004. Pp. 262. isbn: 0—8130-2733-0. $59.95. KingArthurandthe Myth ofHistory is a well-researched and theoretically sophisticated wotk that examines how the figure of King Arthur has been appropriated and manipulated 'historically' Indeed, one ofthe book's key strengths is its deft tteatment of both history-writing and historicism: Finke and Shichtman deal not only with responses to events produced within particular cultural moments by those identifying themselves as writers of'histories' or 'chronicles,' but also with the critical discourse of historicism and the 'production' ofArthurian history. The authors contend that Atthur has frequently been used as 'a potent, but empty, social signifiet to which meaning could be attached that served to legitimate particular forms ofpolitical authority and cultural imperialism' (p. 2). As they move from the medieval to the modern period, they make their case by means of a pyramid-like organizational structure that allows them to focus on thtee major periods ofcultural crisis. The base of the pyramid (Chapters 1-4) examines the explosion of interest in the Arthurian legend that occurred with the Norman colonization of England in the eleventh and twelfth centuries. In separate chapters, the authors discuss the Arthurian portions of William of Malmesbury's Gesta Regum Anglorum, Geoffrey of Monmouth's Historia Regum Britannie, Wace's Roman de Brut, and Lagamon's Brut. Building on this foundation, Finke and Shichtman move on and up to the fifteenth century and the Wats ofthe Roses to address John Hardyng's Chronicle and Caxton's print ofMalory's Morte Darthur. Finally, at the top ofthe pyramid, they bring their REVIEWS69 discussion of history and historicism into the twentieth century by examining the intersection ofArthurian and Nazi ideals in Jean-Michel Angebert's The Occultand the ThirdReich: The Mystical Origins ofNazism andthe Searchfor the Holy Grailand Ttevor Ravenscroft's SpearofDestiny: The OccultPower BehindtheSpear which Pierced the Side ofChrist. Anothef strength of this book is its blend of solid historical contextualization with innovative theoretical literary analyses. To show how the figure of Arthur functions as 'symbolic capital' in various texts at different times, Finke and Shichtman make effective use oftheotetical frameworks offered by Pierre Bourdieu, Jean-Joseph Goux, and a number of postcolonial theorists. Some of their most interesting arguments draw upon the work ofBenedict Anderson, particularly his theorization in Imagined Communities of the rise of nationalism—a concept they critique and modify to demonstrate the complex formation ofindividual and collective identities these 'histories' of King Arthur enact. Their use oftheory is sophisticated yet judicious; it never thteatens to ovetwhelm or diminish the impottant historically-grounded work that is the book's core. In fact, the first four chaptets are so thorough in their description of the historical context in which the early Arthurian chronicles were written—and so meticulous in their summary ofrecent ctitical thinking about the agendas behind the composition and dedication ofthese...