I read this book because I wanted to understand better "The Waste Land," and to that extent at least the book was certainly successful. I have no idea how reliable the author's theories are--Segal's introduction was pretty useful in weighing the argument for both strengths and weaknesses. Also, the book had a pleasing amount of the conspiracy-ism that makes a lot of grail literature fairly exciting. ( )

The book that influenced T. S. Eliot in structure and content of The Wasteland

As for other reviews: the limitations are not in Weston's language; they are in the contemporary reader.

To assert otherwise is akin to blaming a language one doesn't understand for one's lack of understanding of the language, instead of taking responsibility for the fact one doesn't understand the language because of one's illiteracy in the language.

This book belongs on the bookshelf of anyone seriously interested in the evolution of religion. It is well-documented with plenty of footnotes. The book includes an index that any researcher could find useful.

Although well written, as some readers have commented on different reviews, the book uses a style of English that is no longer common on either side of the Atlantic. I imagine it was the norm when Jessie L. Weston (1850–1928) wrote this book (1920). I typed one of Weston’s long sentences (from page 62) in Grammarly.com. I selected “General Academic” as the style to correct. It received a score of 5 out of 100. Most likely, that would have been the standard for her time.

Other readers commented on Weston’s frequent use of Latin and French words without any translation. There is also German. For example, on page 114 there is a paragraph with 179 words in four sentences. Out of the 179 words, four are Latin or French words. Although most are recognizable to a monolingual readership, words such as “Manqué,” might require a dictionary. And let me not forget "gar keinem Verhältniss" (of all proportion). I would assume that when she wrote this book, many English-speaking book lovers could also read French and Latin, and possibly Ancient Greek and German, without much difficulty.

"In Indian cosmogony Manu finds a little fish in the water in which he would wash his hands; it asks, and received, his protection, asserting that when grown to full size it will save Manu from the universal deluge. This is Lhasa, the greatest of all fish.” (Pg. 126) Now, that story from the ancient Mahabharata, which Weston quotes, reminds me of more than one Bible story. Notwithstanding the limitations that Weston’s style may present to today’s audience, I would stress that this little book is a jewel for the serious researcher. ( )

This little book is Jessie Weston's argument that the Grail quest is an ancient vegetation ritual told in story form. She goes into a lot of detail about elements and symbols found in the story, how they relate to the Adonis/Attis/Osiris rituals, which versions were probably earliest, and how the story changed and was adapted to its later form as a romance.

I thought the book was interesting and that she made a good case for her theory. Her focus was the Grail story, so she didn't deal with Arthurian legends except as they related to it, though she wrote about other aspects and legends in other articles. Parts of the book were quite clear, but other passages contained some of the most complex and convoluted sentences that I have ever seen.