Kineas and his companions are back. Alexander the Great is smarting from his captain's defeat and vows to subdue the Eastern Scythians on the Sea of GKineas and his companions are back. Alexander the Great is smarting from his captain's defeat and vows to subdue the Eastern Scythians on the Sea of Grass. Kineas and Srayanka - his Western Scythian woman - have vowed to aid their Eastern allies. And so begins an epic trek across the Ancient World.
Again, the author captures the feel of the ancient world. The distances involved are staggering. Crossing from Crimea to the Caspian sea is an unbelievable journey. Cameron captures the spirit of this trip - the logistics needed to move two thousand warriors and their camp followers. This is the author's strength - the authenticity. When Kineas crosses the Sea of Grass you can feel the wind whipping against your face.
Unfortunately, the authenticity is also the book's weakness. It is, at times, a very long story. Fortunately there is a payoff in the wait. The book's action scenes - the fight against Persian bandits, the battle in Hyrkernia (sp?), and finally the epic battle against Alexander himself are simply awesome.
The other thing that kind of bugged me is the mysticism associated with Kineas. He is having prophetic dreams. He sees his death, but also his victory. Meh. I don't like it. In my historical fiction I prefer to keep magic out of the picture - unless it is simply peoples' beliefs. In this case Kineas appears to be actually having real mystic experiences.
Three stars out of five. The book is simply too long at points, and I don't like the mysticism. On the plus side the action is great - epic battles and Alexander in a rare defeat at the hands of Scythian barbarians and a few Greek mercenaries....more
Kineas is an Athenian mercenary back from fighting with Alexander in Asia Minor and Persia. He is hired by the Tyrant of Olbia, a city on the Black SeKineas is an Athenian mercenary back from fighting with Alexander in Asia Minor and Persia. He is hired by the Tyrant of Olbia, a city on the Black Sea. On the surface it looks as if he is to train the city's cavalry to better defend against the Steppe nomads. Instead, Kineas and his companions find themselves webbed in a net of plots where their fate is poised on the edge as they cope with treachery in Olbia and an invasion of a Macedonian army.
This book started out too slowly for my taste. I think this is a trait of the author. I've read a number of his books and more than a few feel this way. Part of this, I think, is the author's dedication to immersion and authenticity. He wants his readers to experience the world of Alexander and the Greeks (or whatever he is writing about). When Kineas treks north out of the Greek lands, across Thrace, over the Danube, and finally makes it to Olbia, he wanted his reader to understand just what an epic trek that was. It was a long, arduous journey filled with danger - not a jaunt down the highway. I like the immersion, but it makes for a longer story - and it's very different from more action oriented historical fiction of Cornwell and Scarrow. It requires a bit more of a commitment from the reader.
The author also included a "what is it all for" moment in the book that I thought was well done. Kineas, Ajax, Philokles, and the other companions are seated around a fire after the younger Olbian's first blooding, and they discuss the meaning of the contest. It was a nice touch, and I don't think he was projecting today's morality on a pre-modern world. I suspect men (and women) of any era who face the horror of savage combat (and it was incredibly savage - hand-to-hand, face-to-face) wonder if it is worth it. It adds to the overall immersion.
Three and a half stars rounded down to three. I like the immersion and realism. The final battle was truly epic. I didn't really care for the mystic side of things - Kineas' dreams and Kam Bacqa (?). I don't want magic in my historical fiction. Mysticism, sure; magic, no. I thought the book crossed a line there. Also, the relationship with the Scythian woman seemed a bit unreal to me.
I am always leery of historical fiction that focuses too closely on a single historical person or event - especially one who is so prominent. Too tighI am always leery of historical fiction that focuses too closely on a single historical person or event - especially one who is so prominent. Too tight of a focus on a single significant person or event can squeeze the tension out of the story. It becomes a quasi-historical narrative rather than a unique story that follows its own unique path. My own preference is to read historical fiction focusing on smaller events and people working (and making possible) in the shadows of great people/events.
God of War, I am pleased to say, nails it. The book is the story of Alexander, but it is told through the eyes of Ptolemy. Ptolemy is a character that I knew very little about - other then he does wind up as King in Egypt after Alexander's death. Focusing on Ptolemy frees up the story from the weight of history.
Walking in Ptolemy's shoes the reader overcomes enemies and experiences triumph. Ptolemy grows and discovers love. He takes part in a great struggle against an ancient foe, the Persians. We are also there as he feels regret and disgust at the loss of friends and innocent Persians, Syrians, and Indians. And we are there when he loses faith in a childhood friend, Alexander. Alexander in many ways emerges as the primary nemesis of Ptolemy - and this makes the story work.
My main knock on the book is two fold. First, it was a bit long. I wonder if it could have been tightened up at all. When it was good it was great, but there were parts that dragged a bit more than I would've liked. Next, on finishing the book I wondered whether or not the book made an unfair characterization of Alexander. He comes across as pretty bad. I don't know, and I guess that is OK.
The third book following Arimnestos of Platea was, I think, even better than the first two. The story takes place during a lull in the wars of Persia The third book following Arimnestos of Platea was, I think, even better than the first two. The story takes place during a lull in the wars of Persia and the Greek states - after Marathon but before some other conflicts. I appreciated how the author did not follow the major wars but instead explored the western Mediterranean and even the world beyond - the Atlantic, Gaul and even Albion. I learned a great deal about the tin trade, the Carthaginians, and seafaring in the ancient world. All of this was wrapped in a shell of pirates, epic ship battles and raids. The only downside that I saw was the beginning. It felt a little contrived, but that's OK. The book was still great!...more
At first I was disappointed in the book. It was slower to build than the prior volume, Killer of Men, but at its end, wow, what a great read.
It's strAt first I was disappointed in the book. It was slower to build than the prior volume, Killer of Men, but at its end, wow, what a great read.
It's strange. With historical fiction, you know the outcome, but Christian Cameron brought the battle of Marathon to life. Between the action of the battle itself and the personal dramas surrounding Arimnestos I was on the edge of my seat. Great read. I highly recommend.
Dropping to four stars after some reflection....more
Loading...
