What do you think?
Rate this book
The Three Damosels #3
King Arthur's Daughter
Vintage paperback
144 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1976
4 people are currently reading
540 people want to read
About the author
Vera Chapman
39 books40 followersVera Chapman, also known as Vera Ivy May Fogerty or, in The Tolkien Society, as Belladonna Took. She founded The Tolkien Society, and also wrote a number of psudeo-historical and Arthurian books.
She was born in Bournemouth, England on the 8 May 1898 and lived in South Africa until she went to Oxford where she was one of the first woman to matriculate as a full member of Oxford University. She founded the first Tolkien Society of which she was secretary. She persuaded J R R Tolkien to become the society's honorary president. She wrote her first novel in 1975 and continued writing until her death in 1996.
She was born in Bournemouth, England on the 8 May 1898 and lived in South Africa until she went to Oxford where she was one of the first woman to matriculate as a full member of Oxford University. She founded the first Tolkien Society of which she was secretary. She persuaded J R R Tolkien to become the society's honorary president. She wrote her first novel in 1975 and continued writing until her death in 1996.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 13 of 13 reviews
September 24, 2008
I *almost* didn't read this one yet because I found out that it's the third book in a trilogy, and usually I'm really anal about reading books in order. But I thought, It's Arthurian! I know all the characters; how confusing can it be?
It wasn't very confusing. :) Although, I give this book credit in truly bringing something brand spanking new to the table: a daughter of Arthur and Guenevere. The author makes the (not-very-strong) argument that they *could* have had a daughter since history tends to forget women. But, I was so enamored by the idea of Arthur and Guenevere having a baby of their own that I was 100% willing to suspend my disbelief. I liked the character of Ursulet, but I wished that more of the story had actually focused on her; there were a surprising number of viewpoint characters for a book so short. In addition to Ursulet, you get to see a few more characters from "one-generation-down-the-line," such as Mordred's two sons, who were also interesting. The characterization of Mordred as a father was interesting, and I think this is the only Arthurian book I've read that didn't give Mordred black hair. It was fun imagining him with a red handlebar moustache! And finally, it was interesting how blatantly *fantasy* this retelling was, with unicorns, dragons, etc. It was a little refreshing, after the current trend of Arthurian retellings being all about the author showing off how much s/he knows about medieval European tribes and religious customs.
A good read; I'd definitely purchase the other two books in the series if I found them, and not *just* because they're Arthurian. ;)
It wasn't very confusing. :) Although, I give this book credit in truly bringing something brand spanking new to the table: a daughter of Arthur and Guenevere. The author makes the (not-very-strong) argument that they *could* have had a daughter since history tends to forget women. But, I was so enamored by the idea of Arthur and Guenevere having a baby of their own that I was 100% willing to suspend my disbelief. I liked the character of Ursulet, but I wished that more of the story had actually focused on her; there were a surprising number of viewpoint characters for a book so short. In addition to Ursulet, you get to see a few more characters from "one-generation-down-the-line," such as Mordred's two sons, who were also interesting. The characterization of Mordred as a father was interesting, and I think this is the only Arthurian book I've read that didn't give Mordred black hair. It was fun imagining him with a red handlebar moustache! And finally, it was interesting how blatantly *fantasy* this retelling was, with unicorns, dragons, etc. It was a little refreshing, after the current trend of Arthurian retellings being all about the author showing off how much s/he knows about medieval European tribes and religious customs.
A good read; I'd definitely purchase the other two books in the series if I found them, and not *just* because they're Arthurian. ;)
January 10, 2014
I accidentally found the book and decided to read it also if I have nor read the two previous ones. maybe that is the reason why I found it that boring? maybe for people affectionated to the serietà the book had been interesting but unfortunately it wasn' t for me. I found the characters extremely bidimensional from the male protagonist to the stereotypical villain Mordred. ursulet was probably a bit better written but still I could not manage to get emotionally invested in her and about half a book I coulnd' t care less about what was going to happen to her. still the idea of a story about a possible daughter of arthur was interesting.
June 10, 2018
A novel. Vera Chapman's two other Arthurian novels seem to be set in the same world, but I don't recall them as a trilogy, per se.
May 27, 2021
This book was messy. And not even an entertaining messy like The King's Damosel was. Every once in a while you’d see glimmers of an exciting story, like when our merry band of adventurers has to flee Mordred’s castle, but it gets bogged down in a whole lot of not much happening. So many people try to marry Ursulet immediately upon seeing her, it devolves into farce. And by far the most compelling character is Morwen, who’s set up for SUCH a cool story, then unceremoniously carted off as an afterthought. This is a pattern in Chapman’s books: she always seems to write around the most interesting characters and story beats, tantalizing the reader with what could have been.
November 13, 2024
*** 1/2
Vera Chapman wrote three short, linked fantasy novels based on Arthurian legends, originally published separately in 1975 and 1976. Two years later, the three novels were published in an ominibus edition entitled The Three Damosels.
King Arthur's Daughter appears third in the omnibus edition, and is indeed the final novel in the trilogy when read in chronological order, tying together the events and characters of the previous two books. Chapman's writings provide an enjoyable, if slight, addition to the modern retellings of the old legends, but not up to the levels of T.H. White, Mary Stewart, or Bernard Cornwell.
Vera Chapman wrote three short, linked fantasy novels based on Arthurian legends, originally published separately in 1975 and 1976. Two years later, the three novels were published in an ominibus edition entitled The Three Damosels.
King Arthur's Daughter appears third in the omnibus edition, and is indeed the final novel in the trilogy when read in chronological order, tying together the events and characters of the previous two books. Chapman's writings provide an enjoyable, if slight, addition to the modern retellings of the old legends, but not up to the levels of T.H. White, Mary Stewart, or Bernard Cornwell.
June 4, 2022
1.5. I know this book is old and written in an even older style, but it was so boring :\
August 29, 2023
This book at on the desk of the "girls' room" of my grandparents' house, and I would re-read it every summer I stayed there. Classic Arthurian legend - *chef's kiss*.
May 31, 2011
I read Chapman's The Green Knight when I was a teenager, and I LOVED it. At that time, a lot of Chapman's works were out-of-print. I had no idea she'd written other Arthur-related books.
The other day I was wandering around Portland and came across Future Dreams. I was pretty much done buying things on that trip, but this was SUCH a fun store to browse. Sci-fi, fantasy, comics, action figures, RPG source books, etc. And I came across King Arthur's Daughter almost accidentally. When I saw it was only $1.50, well...I had to buy it.
I read it on the flight back to Wisconsin, and it was magnificent. As good as I remember The Green Knight being (which now I need to re-read). Chapman explains that of course Arthur may have had a daughter because history so rarely includes women. That made enough sense to me, and Ursulet proved to be a lovable and admirable heroine. Her great love, Ambris, is not brightest fellow in Britain, but he's loyal and courageous. The supporting characters really make the story for me, however. They are clever, funny, strong, and quirky.
***SPOILERS***
Like the traditional Arthurian legends and The Once and Future King, among others, this book does not end in victory. It's a mournful story in many ways, and the characters, despite living in a rich fantasy world filled with a great deal of romance, face very harsh realities.
The other day I was wandering around Portland and came across Future Dreams. I was pretty much done buying things on that trip, but this was SUCH a fun store to browse. Sci-fi, fantasy, comics, action figures, RPG source books, etc. And I came across King Arthur's Daughter almost accidentally. When I saw it was only $1.50, well...I had to buy it.
I read it on the flight back to Wisconsin, and it was magnificent. As good as I remember The Green Knight being (which now I need to re-read). Chapman explains that of course Arthur may have had a daughter because history so rarely includes women. That made enough sense to me, and Ursulet proved to be a lovable and admirable heroine. Her great love, Ambris, is not brightest fellow in Britain, but he's loyal and courageous. The supporting characters really make the story for me, however. They are clever, funny, strong, and quirky.
***SPOILERS***
Like the traditional Arthurian legends and The Once and Future King, among others, this book does not end in victory. It's a mournful story in many ways, and the characters, despite living in a rich fantasy world filled with a great deal of romance, face very harsh realities.
March 4, 2015
All in all, a fitting end to the trilogy. It meshed together the loose threads from the previous two works quite nicely. And it's not altogether an unfeasible possible history. If Arthur did have any daughters, they would not have been documented as women were considered unimportant in the royal line except to secure alliances with other nations. And they used that historical point quite well here.
We also get lots of Lynett in this story once again, and I will NEVER complain about that because Lynett is my fave and she is definitely the most interesting character in this universe that Chapman created. Princess Ursulet is also wonderfully crafted, and you really root for her to be secure her throne, despite the fact that any person who has looked into Arthurian legends for five minutes knows what the outcome of that story is going to be. But you can't help but hope for a different outcome throughout the duration of the story.
The only character that I think wasn't developed as well as he could have been was Ambris. And that's because he kind of blends in with every other knight that features in the story (not really a fault of Chapman's as that is typical of Arthurian legends.) But we only spend limited time with Ambris and while we root for him to succesfully get Ursulet's hand, he never really has time to completely win over the devotion of the reader. I felt more loyalty to his Aunt Lynett to be honest.
And that dratted Morgan le Fay. Does she ever give up? No, she does not. And that's what makes everything so diabolical and interesting.
We also get lots of Lynett in this story once again, and I will NEVER complain about that because Lynett is my fave and she is definitely the most interesting character in this universe that Chapman created. Princess Ursulet is also wonderfully crafted, and you really root for her to be secure her throne, despite the fact that any person who has looked into Arthurian legends for five minutes knows what the outcome of that story is going to be. But you can't help but hope for a different outcome throughout the duration of the story.
The only character that I think wasn't developed as well as he could have been was Ambris. And that's because he kind of blends in with every other knight that features in the story (not really a fault of Chapman's as that is typical of Arthurian legends.) But we only spend limited time with Ambris and while we root for him to succesfully get Ursulet's hand, he never really has time to completely win over the devotion of the reader. I felt more loyalty to his Aunt Lynett to be honest.
And that dratted Morgan le Fay. Does she ever give up? No, she does not. And that's what makes everything so diabolical and interesting.
September 5, 2009
The series that started me on my life long love of Arthurian legend...
November 11, 2016
Loved the idea of Arthur's line running down through the ages by way of his daughter. I also like how all three books came together.
May 4, 2016
Read in German, 192 pages
Displaying 1 - 13 of 13 reviews