Sword at Sunset

by Rosemary Sutcliffe

Paper Book, ?

Status

Available

Call number

823.914

Publication

New York : Tor Books.

Description

This brilliant Arthurian epic cuts through the mists of pagan, early Christian, and medieval splendors that have gathered about the subject and tells the authentic story of the man who may well have been the real King ArthurArtos the Bear, the mighty warrior-king who saved the last lights of Western civilization when the barbarian darkness descended in the fifth century. Presenting early Britain as it was after the departure of the Romansno Round Table, no many-towered Camelotthe setting is a hard, savage land, half-civilized, half-pagan, where a few men struggled to forge a nation and hold back the Saxon scourge. Richly detailed, the story chronicles the formation of a great army, the hardships of winter quarters, the primitive wedding feasts, the pagan fertility rites, the agonies of surgery after battle, the thrilling stag hunts, and the glorious processions of the era. Stripped of the chivalric embellishments that the French applied to British history centuries ago, the Arthurian age here emerges as a time when men stood at the precipice of historya time of transition and changing values and imminent national peril.… (more)

User reviews

LibraryThing member DinadansFriend

My favourite novel about King Arthur. It pretty much sums up the historical Arthur as of 1963, and I was swept into the story, which I had earlier known from the series of books by Howard Pyle, and "The Great Captains" by Henry Treece. I found Cerdic ap Vortigern an engaging villain, and haven't

found any replacement for this novel in writings on the topic since. An apotheosis!
First read in 1963, and lotsa dipping since.

Show Less

8 more

LibraryThing member varielle

This is a realistic account of the life of Arthur told from his perspective. Realistic in that is devoid of the magic, myths, and legends that surround his story, though superstitions abide. The politics of tribal infighting and Saxon depredations in post-Roman Britain are detailed as if they are

current events. This is the best account of the life, loves and politics of Arthur (Artos the Bear) that I’ve come across.

Show Less

LibraryThing member Miro

I didn't enjoy this book much. It's a melodramatic rendering of Arthur's defence of Britain against Saxon invaders after the collapse of the Roman Empire. It's written in superficial way, introducing one stereotyped character after another, rather like a bad film. Some of the descriptions of nature

are good but I finally gave up 3/4 of the way through.

Show Less

LibraryThing member antiquary

The climax of Sutcliff's Roman Britain series, a longer, more adult story of Arthur as a Roman-British leader, generally well done but inevitably tragic. One variant --the role of Lancelot is taken by Bedivere, since Lancelot is a
later French addition. Sutcliff accurately follows the theories

current in her time about Arthur as a cavalry leader, thugh some later scholars have rejected them.

Show Less

LibraryThing member lycomayflower

I love Arthurian legends and am always up for a retelling of most any kind, so I'm excited when I come across recommendations for good Arthurian stories. This one seems to be high on everyone's list of Arthur must-reads, but I found it entirely lackluster. Part of the fun in reading Arthur stories

is in seeing how each writer interprets the myths, how she takes the story kernels from the legends and weaves her own tale around them. But naturally each reader will have her own favorite elements of the legends and will thus react poorly to a retelling which gives those elements short shrift. My lukewarm reaction to Sword at Sunset is at least somewhat in that vein. There's no Merlin here, hardly any magic, barely a hint of the workings of fate or destiny, no grail quest, and no sense that Arthur's rule is special or new or uniquely hopeful. While I don't feel a grand attachment to every one of those elements (I can usually do just fine without the grail quest, for instance), when you lose them all I start to wonder what makes this an Arthur story rather than just a story about some warrior-king in the Early Middle Ages. Sure there's the "moment of hate and sin seeding the downfall of a great man" plot (Morgan, Mordred, etc) that goes with Arthurian stories, but if Arthur isn't held up as special, why do we care so much? We would, I suppose, if the characters were entirely compelling in their own right, but Sutcliff's are not. This novel is often hailed as a good character study of Arthur (it's told from his point of view in the first person), but I didn't think the portrayal was particularly deft or enlightening or the story particularly well retold. In fact, the whole book felt a bit "stuff stuff battle Arthurian plot point stuff battle battle Arthurian plot point stuff stuff" to me. It also suffered from lack-of-map-itis, especially given the (not uncommon) use of Roman place names. Not a bad book, not at all, and certainly one that people with different expectations for an Arthur retelling might enjoy thoroughly. It would particularly appeal, I think, to readers who like the recent trend toward making Arthurian novels more historical and less legendy.

Show Less

LibraryThing member SeriousGrace

The fifth century is not always the easier time period to lose yourself in, but the writing of Rosemary Sutcliff is the exception. Her vivid imagination combined with great storytelling brings Artos the Bear to life. I will admit, I am not an avid reader of Arthurian tales. I do not have the

details of the legend down-pat and would not know where Sutcliff takes artistic liberty. Probably the best part about Sword at Sunset is the personality of its hero, Artos the Bear. His complex character as a warrior and companion is crystal clear and believable, and dare I say, attractive? In times of battle all of his decisions are calculated and fair. I especially liked his reaction to Minnow's news that he must leave the company to marry a merchant's girl who is with child. I also liked his treatment of animals, particularly his taming of a fallen commander's wolfhound. The scenes of battle are appropriate and gut-wrenching. And speaking of gut-wrenching, the final betrayals by Bear's best friend and son are tragic.

Show Less

LibraryThing member MrsLee

In spite of being a huge Rosemary Sutcliff fan, and a lover of King Arthur stories, I didn't care for this book. I couldn't get past 50 pages. The first person narrative grated, the total unfamiliarity and complicated names didn't grab me. It is quite possible that it was not the right time in my

life to attempt this read, so don't hold this comment against the book.

Show Less

LibraryThing member john257hopper

This novel is the sequel to the author's famous and wonderful Eagle of the Ninth trilogy. Although ostensibly written for a more adult audience, it is written in the same ageless and beautifully written style that can truly be enjoyed by readers of all ages. The narrative viewpoint changes from

that of the Romans at the centre of the trilogy, to that of Artos (Arthur) the Romano-British leader fighting over several decades against the growing incursions of Saxon invaders, including Cerdic. Some of the classic elements of Arthurian myth are present, but this is very much a realistic and reasonably gritty historical novel (Sutcliff also wrote a more mythology-based trilogy on King Arthur). My only criticism would be that, at 500 pages, it is probably a bit too long, but with writing this good, it is a joy to read.

Show Less

LibraryThing member PollyMoore3

I have kept this because I like the strong old-fashioned cover, and I love all things Arthurian. That said, Ms Sutcliff's Arthur is a bit of a sad sack. He lacks the charisma one expects from an "Artos", and the battle descriptions are tedious as well as gory (but then I find that with all

historical novels).
Artos and indeed all the other characters spring fully-formed onto the page, and there is no personal development whatsoever. Mary Stewart's Arthur, on the other hand, and all her characters, are portrayed in a much more fascinating way. I wonder if Mrs Stewart read this and thought "I'll have a go at depicting a Dark Ages Arthur"; there are some interesting correspondences with some of the Sutcliff characters, particularly Ambrosius. 1963 for this book, 1970 for the Crystal Cave.
The scene-setting and description and action are brilliant though, as one expects from Ms Sutcliff. And note the reappearance of Aquila from "The Lantern Bearers", and the way the flawed emerald ring is handed on.

Show Less

Fewer