It's has been quite awhile since I last read a Paul Doherty historical mystery so I had forgotten his ability to transport magically to a specific time and place with his descriptive narrative. Sadly though, the story is set in the Middle Ages where the smell of body sweat, rotting sewage and general unhygienic practices reminds me how lucky humankind was in overcoming the various viral diseases and bacterial infections that plagued us. Once my sense of smell recovered from the descriptive onslaughts, I felt the overall mystery was "okay". The partnership between Coroner Sir John Cranston and Dominican monk Brother Athelstan is in its infancy so they are still learning from one another in how the other thinks and reacts in certain situations. The characters development is in bits and pieces so you spend a portion of the book wondering who these characters really are and what they are actually thinking. For example, Cranston is consistently portrayed as a somewhat lazy drunkard, but in a later scene, he is shown to be passionate about law reforms. It felt like the revelation came out of the blue or maybe the clues were there but they were way too subtle. The portrayal of Athelstan is not much better because you only discover the real reason behind his pliant nature (redemption for inadvertently causing the death of his brother) towards the end and by that point, you can kinda wonder, "Who cares? What about the mystery?"Speaking of mystery, I can't help but think that Brother Cadfael would have gotten to the bottom of things right away and would have investigated more thoroughly than trying to find the nearest tavern. The mystery seems almost a throwaway in order to set up a) the ongoing partnership between Cranston and Athelstan and b) the exact time period where there is tremendous chaos and confusion about the future. In any case, not a bad historical mystery set in the Middle Ages considering it is the first book in the series. It does what any good first book in the series does which is to introduce the regular characters, establish the time period and make you curious enough to check out the next book in the series. So a mild 3 out of 5 as a result.
Someone mentioned to me a while back that historical mysteries were proliferating like mad and I didn’t really grasp how true this is. This is yet another in a series, this time set in medieval London. It’s the first, and throughout I was making some allowances for it being a first novel, as it seemed a bit rough in places; then at the end I discover it’s the first of this series but that the author has written several other stories set in the period. Hmm. It’s not bad, really, and I certainly can’t complain about it not being properly in the period; in fact, it’s almost too much of a good thing in this book. He >really< emphasizes the setting, so that the filth and stenches of London in 1377 are never far away - you really feel in it. As this is what I thought I would want to do with a medieval setting, it seems pretty snarky to protest it here, but it did almost overwhelm the story as the author seemed never to miss an opportunity to point out one more disgusting detail - people pissing and spitting in beverages, a hen roosting on the edge of an open vat of beer, etc., etc., etc.
Do You like book The Nightingale Gallery (2001)?
1376 and England is in turmoil. The Black Prince is dead, Edward III is dead and a boy wears the crown.Coroner Sir John Cranston and Brother Athelstan must investigate the murder of a powerful merchant. The family offers little in the way of help and Sir John cannot seem to stay sober enough to complete a investigation. Brother Athelstan has problems of his own keeping his church in repair and his parishioners in good health.The story was good, I can see a lot of potential in the characters as a group and the atmosphere was fabulously described.
—Dawn
I like the title of this series. Not being a Catholic, I had to look up "Sorrowful Mysteries" - they're one of the sets of Mysteries used when praying the Rosary.The book has an interesting setting: London, just after the death of Edward III. John of Gaunt seems to be mixed up in the murder, although I didn't get far enough along to find out how. In addition to Brother Athelstan we are quickly introduced to a cat, a widow, a coroner, a criminal taking sanctuary in Athelstan's church, a corrupt Justice, and a great deal of filth and misery in the city.It sounds good when I describe it, but I could tell by the second page that I wasn't going to like the prose, and by the end of the first chapter I couldn't take it any more. Melodrama, exposition, and clunky writing.I can handle melodrama, although honestly, should you ever personify murder? "Murder was no stranger to London." "Murder brooded from its ghostly corner."I dislike exposition. In the first chapter Athelstan writes a letter to his Prior, describing his circumstances and bemoaning his past transgressions, none of which should be news to the Prior. It was very awkwardly done, and should you really learn all that about your protagonist within the first 20 pages?It's too bad that I didn't like the writing, because this author has written a ton of historical mysteries under several pen names (his real name is P.C. Doherty) and I was hoping I had a lot of books to look forward to.
—Jamie
A drunken coroner and a penitent friar set out to uncover the murder of one of the most powerful men in England. Edward III has just died and his son, Lord Gaunt, is regent to the heir, 10 year old Richard. And that's about as good as it gets. Some scenes successfully pulled me into the period, such as the description of the heads of those condemned of treason slammed on to poles for the ravens to peck at. Overall, the mystery just isn't that intriguing. The characters are one-dimensional and the dialogue is over-reaching. I won't read any more in this series.
—Val Sanford
