Brilliant read, 31 Jul 2008
I found this novel impossible to put down. It's very well paced and the characters are vivid and believable. By the end of the book, my heart was breaking for Harold and I was burning with disappointment and despair on his behalf despite already knowing what his fate would be.

The modern dialogue helps make it more convincing, in my opinion. Any form of modern English, even the most formal and "correct" is inauthentic if the characters are supposed to have lived in 1066! People living in times gone by would have used slang in their everyday speech just as we do now, and they would have sworn too while expressing themselves - it's only that we wouldn't recognise the words they used.

If Julian Rathbone had written all his characters' speech in Old English, it would be authentic but nobody reading it would understand a word. For this reason, I see his dialogue as a translation of what the characters would have said in their own language/dialect and this makes it seem all the more real and immediate.

The one thing I didn't like was the constant referencing of modern issues/people/whatever. It seemed a bit "aren't I clever?" of the author and I found it really tedious after a while. It's also rather heavy handed at times and patronising to the reader - most people reading the bit about William's deliberate policy of brutalising the native English would be quite capable of making a comparision between this and with atrocities of more recent wars without Rathbone clobbering them over the head with phrases like "racial sanitation".

But apart from that one small irritation, I thought this was a fantastic book, totally absorbing and affecting. It's made me want to learn more about Harold and William and about the Norman Conquest in general. It's one of those books I know I'll read again and again over the years and would go out of my way to recommend to other people.



fantastic!, 15 Feb 2008
One of the best pieces of historical fiction I've ever read - wonderfully entertaining, and thoroughly researched. As someone keen to learn more about this period in English history this was a thoroughly enjoyable way of doing so - 100% recommended

What historical fiction should be, 11 Apr 2007
I absolutely loved it! I can't think of another historical novel that let me inhabit the world of the characters the way this one did. I thought the use of modern language judicious: very little slang and plain language, much as the historic language would have sounded to me had I lived then.


A marvellous and enlightening read, 16 Jan 2007
I am no expert on 11th Century history so I will not dipute the merits of the novel on historical grounds. What I will say is this is a fantastic novel written in rich, pacy prose which moved me as much as it fascinated me. We get a superlative image of pre-Norman England and a vibrant picture of a fast changing Middle East.

Rathbone's view on the Norman conquest is pretty clear to any reader. The implication is that all the things that we love about English life - community spirit, love of nature, good beer and good food - are Anglo-Saxon whilst the things many of us hate - hereditary monarchy, pyramid structures, hypocritical clerics - were brought to bare on us by the Normans. I have no idea how accurate these suggestions are but it certainly makes a winning argument against the Norman propoganda still driven into school children today.

Rathbone does not shy away from reporting even the heroes of the novel in the eyes of their contemporaries not ours. Godwin's noble hoards are described ravaging villages and raping women with no deference to modern views on such barbarity whilst the Lords themselves are unfaithful and incestuous.

I'd recommend this to anyone and as for the title: There has never been an English king in the true sense of the word but Harold was clearly the last of the closest we ever got to one.

They were English, but not as we know them, 14 Jun 2005
It is about time reviewers stopped describing the Anglo-Saxons as English in inverted commas. Having found the word "English" in archaic forms in Old English dictionaries, it is clear that the Anglo-Saxons were English, that their language was English and that their civilization formed the backbone of what we consider "English" today. The fact that the language and ethnic makeup was altered after the Norman invasion does not change the above facts.

The Normans turned the country upside down by introducing the feudal system into England and changing political, legal and religious language, but eventually came to see themselves as English. The English masses did not become Norman. The identity and the language we have today still originates with the Anglo-Saxons. That is why we call it "English", not "Norman", "Breton" or "Roman". That England became more outward-looking and imperialistic under Norman overlordship does not mean that the Anglo-Saxons were not English. They were just more obviously Germanic. In fact, one could argue that it is we who are not the real English today. What is "English"? Isn't it just a feeling of belonging to that land between the Channel and Scotland?

The novel is very entertaining. Many details have already been mentioned by different reviewers, but what does it for me is Rathbone's evocation of the English desire for independence, a defiance of European meddling in a sovereign land, something to be found in today's "English". Rathbone demonstrates what a disaster Edward the Confessor was for his country (was he really "English"?) and Harold Godwinson's desperate and ultimately vain attempts to prevent the Normans from taking England. I was pleased that he cuts through some of the Norman propaganda and refutes the idea that the Normans won because they fought on horseback. I had not known that the other two Godwinson brothers, Gyrth and Leofwine, had pleaded with Harold to stay away from the battle and let them direct it - if only he had.

With Harold died Anglo-Saxon hegemony over England - however it died not forlornly with an arrow in the eye, but defiantly and furiously, sword in hand. It is fitting that Rathbone stresses the Englishness of Harold's Anglo-Saxons - any people who feel they belong to England are English, be it 1066 or 2005.

Brilliant read, 31 Jul 2008
I found this novel impossible to put down. It's very well paced and the characters are vivid and believable. By the end of the book, my heart was breaking for Harold and I was burning with disappointment and despair on his behalf despite already knowing what his fate would be.

The modern dialogue helps make it more convincing, in my opinion. Any form of modern English, even the most formal and "correct" is inauthentic if the characters are supposed to have lived in 1066! People living in times gone by would have used slang in their everyday speech just as we do now, and they would have sworn too while expressing themselves - it's only that we wouldn't recognise the words they used.

If Julian Rathbone had written all his characters' speech in Old English, it would be authentic but nobody reading it would understand a word. For this reason, I see his dialogue as a translation of what the characters would have said in their own language/dialect and this makes it seem all the more real and immediate.

The one thing I didn't like was the constant referencing of modern issues/people/whatever. It seemed a bit "aren't I clever?" of the author and I found it really tedious after a while. It's also rather heavy handed at times and patronising to the reader - most people reading the bit about William's deliberate policy of brutalising the native English would be quite capable of making a comparision between this and with atrocities of more recent wars without Rathbone clobbering them over the head with phrases like "racial sanitation".

But apart from that one small irritation, I thought this was a fantastic book, totally absorbing and affecting. It's made me want to learn more about Harold and William and about the Norman Conquest in general. It's one of those books I know I'll read again and again over the years and would go out of my way to recommend to other people.



fantastic!, 15 Feb 2008
One of the best pieces of historical fiction I've ever read - wonderfully entertaining, and thoroughly researched. As someone keen to learn more about this period in English history this was a thoroughly enjoyable way of doing so - 100% recommended

What historical fiction should be, 11 Apr 2007
I absolutely loved it! I can't think of another historical novel that let me inhabit the world of the characters the way this one did. I thought the use of modern language judicious: very little slang and plain language, much as the historic language would have sounded to me had I lived then.


A marvellous and enlightening read, 16 Jan 2007
I am no expert on 11th Century history so I will not dipute the merits of the novel on historical grounds. What I will say is this is a fantastic novel written in rich, pacy prose which moved me as much as it fascinated me. We get a superlative image of pre-Norman England and a vibrant picture of a fast changing Middle East.

Rathbone's view on the Norman conquest is pretty clear to any reader. The implication is that all the things that we love about English life - community spirit, love of nature, good beer and good food - are Anglo-Saxon whilst the things many of us hate - hereditary monarchy, pyramid structures, hypocritical clerics - were brought to bare on us by the Normans. I have no idea how accurate these suggestions are but it certainly makes a winning argument against the Norman propoganda still driven into school children today.

Rathbone does not shy away from reporting even the heroes of the novel in the eyes of their contemporaries not ours. Godwin's noble hoards are described ravaging villages and raping women with no deference to modern views on such barbarity whilst the Lords themselves are unfaithful and incestuous.

I'd recommend this to anyone and as for the title: There has never been an English king in the true sense of the word but Harold was clearly the last of the closest we ever got to one.

They were English, but not as we know them, 14 Jun 2005
It is about time reviewers stopped describing the Anglo-Saxons as English in inverted commas. Having found the word "English" in archaic forms in Old English dictionaries, it is clear that the Anglo-Saxons were English, that their language was English and that their civilization formed the backbone of what we consider "English" today. The fact that the language and ethnic makeup was altered after the Norman invasion does not change the above facts.

The Normans turned the country upside down by introducing the feudal system into England and changing political, legal and religious language, but eventually came to see themselves as English. The English masses did not become Norman. The identity and the language we have today still originates with the Anglo-Saxons. That is why we call it "English", not "Norman", "Breton" or "Roman". That England became more outward-looking and imperialistic under Norman overlordship does not mean that the Anglo-Saxons were not English. They were just more obviously Germanic. In fact, one could argue that it is we who are not the real English today. What is "English"? Isn't it just a feeling of belonging to that land between the Channel and Scotland?

The novel is very entertaining. Many details have already been mentioned by different reviewers, but what does it for me is Rathbone's evocation of the English desire for independence, a defiance of European meddling in a sovereign land, something to be found in today's "English". Rathbone demonstrates what a disaster Edward the Confessor was for his country (was he really "English"?) and Harold Godwinson's desperate and ultimately vain attempts to prevent the Normans from taking England. I was pleased that he cuts through some of the Norman propaganda and refutes the idea that the Normans won because they fought on horseback. I had not known that the other two Godwinson brothers, Gyrth and Leofwine, had pleaded with Harold to stay away from the battle and let them direct it - if only he had.

With Harold died Anglo-Saxon hegemony over England - however it died not forlornly with an arrow in the eye, but defiantly and furiously, sword in hand. It is fitting that Rathbone stresses the Englishness of Harold's Anglo-Saxons - any people who feel they belong to England are English, be it 1066 or 2005.

Very instructive, but not like his other stories, 25 Jun 2008
I am a great fan of Julian Rathbone's novels, not least because I know I will come away from them having learned a great deal about the period of history in which the novel is based. This one is different, at times I felt almost bogged down in the historical facts, the troop movements etc, it was as though the characters were secondary to the tale at times, instead of the characters themselves drawing the story on. Another aspect which was missing from this story, which I enjoyed very much in the other books, was the element of gentle leg-pulling on the part of the author. On the whole, a well written account of one of history's darkest hours.

Brilliant read, 31 Jul 2008
I found this novel impossible to put down. It's very well paced and the characters are vivid and believable. By the end of the book, my heart was breaking for Harold and I was burning with disappointment and despair on his behalf despite already knowing what his fate would be.

The modern dialogue helps make it more convincing, in my opinion. Any form of modern English, even the most formal and "correct" is inauthentic if the characters are supposed to have lived in 1066! People living in times gone by would have used slang in their everyday speech just as we do now, and they would have sworn too while expressing themselves - it's only that we wouldn't recognise the words they used.

If Julian Rathbone had written all his characters' speech in Old English, it would be authentic but nobody reading it would understand a word. For this reason, I see his dialogue as a translation of what the characters would have said in their own language/dialect and this makes it seem all the more real and immediate.

The one thing I didn't like was the constant referencing of modern issues/people/whatever. It seemed a bit "aren't I clever?" of the author and I found it really tedious after a while. It's also rather heavy handed at times and patronising to the reader - most people reading the bit about William's deliberate policy of brutalising the native English would be quite capable of making a comparision between this and with atrocities of more recent wars without Rathbone clobbering them over the head with phrases like "racial sanitation".

But apart from that one small irritation, I thought this was a fantastic book, totally absorbing and affecting. It's made me want to learn more about Harold and William and about the Norman Conquest in general. It's one of those books I know I'll read again and again over the years and would go out of my way to recommend to other people.



fantastic!, 15 Feb 2008
One of the best pieces of historical fiction I've ever read - wonderfully entertaining, and thoroughly researched. As someone keen to learn more about this period in English history this was a thoroughly enjoyable way of doing so - 100% recommended

What historical fiction should be, 11 Apr 2007
I absolutely loved it! I can't think of another historical novel that let me inhabit the world of the characters the way this one did. I thought the use of modern language judicious: very little slang and plain language, much as the historic language would have sounded to me had I lived then.


A marvellous and enlightening read, 16 Jan 2007
I am no expert on 11th Century history so I will not dipute the merits of the novel on historical grounds. What I will say is this is a fantastic novel written in rich, pacy prose which moved me as much as it fascinated me. We get a superlative image of pre-Norman England and a vibrant picture of a fast changing Middle East.

Rathbone's view on the Norman conquest is pretty clear to any reader. The implication is that all the things that we love about English life - community spirit, love of nature, good beer and good food - are Anglo-Saxon whilst the things many of us hate - hereditary monarchy, pyramid structures, hypocritical clerics - were brought to bare on us by the Normans. I have no idea how accurate these suggestions are but it certainly makes a winning argument against the Norman propoganda still driven into school children today.

Rathbone does not shy away from reporting even the heroes of the novel in the eyes of their contemporaries not ours. Godwin's noble hoards are described ravaging villages and raping women with no deference to modern views on such barbarity whilst the Lords themselves are unfaithful and incestuous.

I'd recommend this to anyone and as for the title: There has never been an English king in the true sense of the word but Harold was clearly the last of the closest we ever got to one.

They were English, but not as we know them, 14 Jun 2005
It is about time reviewers stopped describing the Anglo-Saxons as English in inverted commas. Having found the word "English" in archaic forms in Old English dictionaries, it is clear that the Anglo-Saxons were English, that their language was English and that their civilization formed the backbone of what we consider "English" today. The fact that the language and ethnic makeup was altered after the Norman invasion does not change the above facts.

The Normans turned the country upside down by introducing the feudal system into England and changing political, legal and religious language, but eventually came to see themselves as English. The English masses did not become Norman. The identity and the language we have today still originates with the Anglo-Saxons. That is why we call it "English", not "Norman", "Breton" or "Roman". That England became more outward-looking and imperialistic under Norman overlordship does not mean that the Anglo-Saxons were not English. They were just more obviously Germanic. In fact, one could argue that it is we who are not the real English today. What is "English"? Isn't it just a feeling of belonging to that land between the Channel and Scotland?

The novel is very entertaining. Many details have already been mentioned by different reviewers, but what does it for me is Rathbone's evocation of the English desire for independence, a defiance of European meddling in a sovereign land, something to be found in today's "English". Rathbone demonstrates what a disaster Edward the Confessor was for his country (was he really "English"?) and Harold Godwinson's desperate and ultimately vain attempts to prevent the Normans from taking England. I was pleased that he cuts through some of the Norman propaganda and refutes the idea that the Normans won because they fought on horseback. I had not known that the other two Godwinson brothers, Gyrth and Leofwine, had pleaded with Harold to stay away from the battle and let them direct it - if only he had.

With Harold died Anglo-Saxon hegemony over England - however it died not forlornly with an arrow in the eye, but defiantly and furiously, sword in hand. It is fitting that Rathbone stresses the Englishness of Harold's Anglo-Saxons - any people who feel they belong to England are English, be it 1066 or 2005.

Very instructive, but not like his other stories, 25 Jun 2008
I am a great fan of Julian Rathbone's novels, not least because I know I will come away from them having learned a great deal about the period of history in which the novel is based. This one is different, at times I felt almost bogged down in the historical facts, the troop movements etc, it was as though the characters were secondary to the tale at times, instead of the characters themselves drawing the story on. Another aspect which was missing from this story, which I enjoyed very much in the other books, was the element of gentle leg-pulling on the part of the author. On the whole, a well written account of one of history's darkest hours.

Entertaining history, 20 Jul 2007
Sort of, anyway.
Rathbone has his own take on history as the previous novels in this series,'Joseph' and 'A Very English Agent' so clearly demonstrate.
Modern references for the sake of humour or not....all three books are hugely entertaining and more historically sound than may be generally realised.Different to 'Flashman',I agree but nevetheless highly entertaining and very 'tongue in cheek'......along with the 'Donner Party' I had better not put my 'foot in it'......sorry,a rather silly joke on the black humour to be found in the book,I apologise.
All in all..very good...but read this,so far,trilogy in order.In the immortal words of Douglas Adams...this could well be a trilogy of four books.

Good romp, 18 Jul 2007
What I like about these novels (told in the Flashman vein) is that they are always very funny and don't take themselves too seriously. Eddie's adventures always seem to be accompanied by some fairly disgusting sexual goings on; a too friendly whaler Captain, a mexican tart and a kind native american wife, not to mention the sea lions! But all in all it's a good fast romp of a novel - well worth the money.



Birth of a Nation, 26 Mar 2006
I have read some of Julian Rathbone's work before I picked up this one. It is a rattling adventure yarn with its hero being present entirely co-incidentally at just too many points in US history. Very Flashmanesque but without Flashman's appeal.

I can accept that authors will put fictional heros into real historical situations but the authenticity of the situations was marred by modern references. They pull you up short and seem just too contrived - thay really spoiled the book for me.
EG in meeting Sam Houston before a battle -'Houston we have a problem'. From a lady on her sexual partners 'the only one who could ever reach me was the son of a preacher man'

Great story well told, 14 Dec 2005
A very enjoyable book - kind of easy reading without feeling like trash. Wonderful set pieces, some good characters, lovely use of anachronism, funny footnotes...what more can you want really?

And it's a bonus that Rathbone's politics are so consistently sound. I just hope that another volume is in the works.

The story continues, 15 Aug 2005
We follow the story of Charlie Bosham/Boylam from the Galapagos through the expanding America seeking its Manifest Destiny and back to London. We learn that he has escaped what seemed to be an inevitable meeting with the hangman (just as well - another novel is promised).

Much of the story is set in the U.S. and the areas it invaded in the 1840s, and since American history is less familiar than our own, the opportunities for felicitous contemporary references that the reader can easily pick up are fewer - no Shelleys or Peterloo radicals here. For this reason, perhaps less interesting than its predecessor (hence the 4 stars). Boylan/Bosham's opinion of the United States, and his version of the Alamo I shouldn't imagine will win this novel much favour with neocon American readers.

The strength of the novel comes in the final section, where Rathbone traces out the future of Darwin's 'transmutation' philosophy to point to the Social Darwinism that emerged a decade later, setting the scene for the imperialist push and racism and classism of the late Victorian age. Suddenly we are confronted with issues of resonance today, rather than just safely buried in the past.

Brilliant read, 31 Jul 2008
I found this novel impossible to put down. It's very well paced and the characters are vivid and believable. By the end of the book, my heart was breaking for Harold and I was burning with disappointment and despair on his behalf despite already knowing what his fate would be.

The modern dialogue helps make it more convincing, in my opinion. Any form of modern English, even the most formal and "correct" is inauthentic if the characters are supposed to have lived in 1066! People living in times gone by would have used slang in their everyday speech just as we do now, and they would have sworn too while expressing themselves - it's only that we wouldn't recognise the words they used.

If Julian Rathbone had written all his characters' speech in Old English, it would be authentic but nobody reading it would understand a word. For this reason, I see his dialogue as a translation of what the characters would have said in their own language/dialect and this makes it seem all the more real and immediate.

The one thing I didn't like was the constant referencing of modern issues/people/whatever. It seemed a bit "aren't I clever?" of the author and I found it really tedious after a while. It's also rather heavy handed at times and patronising to the reader - most people reading the bit about William's deliberate policy of brutalising the native English would be quite capable of making a comparision between this and with atrocities of more recent wars without Rathbone clobbering them over the head with phrases like "racial sanitation".

But apart from that one small irritation, I thought this was a fantastic book, totally absorbing and affecting. It's made me want to learn more about Harold and William and about the Norman Conquest in general. It's one of those books I know I'll read again and again over the years and would go out of my way to recommend to other people.



fantastic!, 15 Feb 2008
One of the best pieces of historical fiction I've ever read - wonderfully entertaining, and thoroughly researched. As someone keen to learn more about this period in English history this was a thoroughly enjoyable way of doing so - 100% recommended

What historical fiction should be, 11 Apr 2007
I absolutely loved it! I can't think of another historical novel that let me inhabit the world of the characters the way this one did. I thought the use of modern language judicious: very little slang and plain language, much as the historic language would have sounded to me had I lived then.


A marvellous and enlightening read, 16 Jan 2007
I am no expert on 11th Century history so I will not dipute the merits of the novel on historical grounds. What I will say is this is a fantastic novel written in rich, pacy prose which moved me as much as it fascinated me. We get a superlative image of pre-Norman England and a vibrant picture of a fast changing Middle East.

Rathbone's view on the Norman conquest is pretty clear to any reader. The implication is that all the things that we love about English life - community spirit, love of nature, good beer and good food - are Anglo-Saxon whilst the things many of us hate - hereditary monarchy, pyramid structures, hypocritical clerics - were brought to bare on us by the Normans. I have no idea how accurate these suggestions are but it certainly makes a winning argument against the Norman propoganda still driven into school children today.

Rathbone does not shy away from reporting even the heroes of the novel in the eyes of their contemporaries not ours. Godwin's noble hoards are described ravaging villages and raping women with no deference to modern views on such barbarity whilst the Lords themselves are unfaithful and incestuous.

I'd recommend this to anyone and as for the title: There has never been an English king in the true sense of the word but Harold was clearly the last of the closest we ever got to one.

They were English, but not as we know them, 14 Jun 2005
It is about time reviewers stopped describing the Anglo-Saxons as English in inverted commas. Having found the word "English" in archaic forms in Old English dictionaries, it is clear that the Anglo-Saxons were English, that their language was English and that their civilization formed the backbone of what we consider "English" today. The fact that the language and ethnic makeup was altered after the Norman invasion does not change the above facts.

The Normans turned the country upside down by introducing the feudal system into England and changing political, legal and religious language, but eventually came to see themselves as English. The English masses did not become Norman. The identity and the language we have today still originates with the Anglo-Saxons. That is why we call it "English", not "Norman", "Breton" or "Roman". That England became more outward-looking and imperialistic under Norman overlordship does not mean that the Anglo-Saxons were not English. They were just more obviously Germanic. In fact, one could argue that it is we who are not the real English today. What is "English"? Isn't it just a feeling of belonging to that land between the Channel and Scotland?

The novel is very entertaining. Many details have already been mentioned by different reviewers, but what does it for me is Rathbone's evocation of the English desire for independence, a defiance of European meddling in a sovereign land, something to be found in today's "English". Rathbone demonstrates what a disaster Edward the Confessor was for his country (was he really "English"?) and Harold Godwinson's desperate and ultimately vain attempts to prevent the Normans from taking England. I was pleased that he cuts through some of the Norman propaganda and refutes the idea that the Normans won because they fought on horseback. I had not known that the other two Godwinson brothers, Gyrth and Leofwine, had pleaded with Harold to stay away from the battle and let them direct it - if only he had.

With Harold died Anglo-Saxon hegemony over England - however it died not forlornly with an arrow in the eye, but defiantly and furiously, sword in hand. It is fitting that Rathbone stresses the Englishness of Harold's Anglo-Saxons - any people who feel they belong to England are English, be it 1066 or 2005.

Very instructive, but not like his other stories, 25 Jun 2008
I am a great fan of Julian Rathbone's novels, not least because I know I will come away from them having learned a great deal about the period of history in which the novel is based. This one is different, at times I felt almost bogged down in the historical facts, the troop movements etc, it was as though the characters were secondary to the tale at times, instead of the characters themselves drawing the story on. Another aspect which was missing from this story, which I enjoyed very much in the other books, was the element of gentle leg-pulling on the part of the author. On the whole, a well written account of one of history's darkest hours.

Entertaining history, 20 Jul 2007
Sort of, anyway.
Rathbone has his own take on history as the previous novels in this series,'Joseph' and 'A Very English Agent' so clearly demonstrate.
Modern references for the sake of humour or not....all three books are hugely entertaining and more historically sound than may be generally realised.Different to 'Flashman',I agree but nevetheless highly entertaining and very 'tongue in cheek'......along with the 'Donner Party' I had better not put my 'foot in it'......sorry,a rather silly joke on the black humour to be found in the book,I apologise.
All in all..very good...but read this,so far,trilogy in order.In the immortal words of Douglas Adams...this could well be a trilogy of four books.

Good romp, 18 Jul 2007
What I like about these novels (told in the Flashman vein) is that they are always very funny and don't take themselves too seriously. Eddie's adventures always seem to be accompanied by some fairly disgusting sexual goings on; a too friendly whaler Captain, a mexican tart and a kind native american wife, not to mention the sea lions! But all in all it's a good fast romp of a novel - well worth the money.



Birth of a Nation, 26 Mar 2006
I have read some of Julian Rathbone's work before I picked up this one. It is a rattling adventure yarn with its hero being present entirely co-incidentally at just too many points in US history. Very Flashmanesque but without Flashman's appeal.

I can accept that authors will put fictional heros into real historical situations but the authenticity of the situations was marred by modern references. They pull you up short and seem just too contrived - thay really spoiled the book for me.
EG in meeting Sam Houston before a battle -'Houston we have a problem'. From a lady on her sexual partners 'the only one who could ever reach me was the son of a preacher man'

Great story well told, 14 Dec 2005
A very enjoyable book - kind of easy reading without feeling like trash. Wonderful set pieces, some good characters, lovely use of anachronism, funny footnotes...what more can you want really?

And it's a bonus that Rathbone's politics are so consistently sound. I just hope that another volume is in the works.

The story continues, 15 Aug 2005
We follow the story of Charlie Bosham/Boylam from the Galapagos through the expanding America seeking its Manifest Destiny and back to London. We learn that he has escaped what seemed to be an inevitable meeting with the hangman (just as well - another novel is promised).

Much of the story is set in the U.S. and the areas it invaded in the 1840s, and since American history is less familiar than our own, the opportunities for felicitous contemporary references that the reader can easily pick up are fewer - no Shelleys or Peterloo radicals here. For this reason, perhaps less interesting than its predecessor (hence the 4 stars). Boylan/Bosham's opinion of the United States, and his version of the Alamo I shouldn't imagine will win this novel much favour with neocon American readers.

The strength of the novel comes in the final section, where Rathbone traces out the future of Darwin's 'transmutation' philosophy to point to the Social Darwinism that emerged a decade later, setting the scene for the imperialist push and racism and classism of the late Victorian age. Suddenly we are confronted with issues of resonance today, rather than just safely buried in the past.

Flashman re-written by John Pilger?, 14 May 2006
This is a great, rollicking historical spy adventure that should throw any believer in so-called Victorian Values into apoplectic fits. Julian Rathbone has written a deeply political comedy thriller that should have many readers flicking to the back for a list of references for the history books about the period that he used as raw material. Unfortunately, they will be disappointed. That, though, is the only disappointment in the book. And it's got a sequel just as good. Get stuck in.

Enormously entertaining but too clever for its own good, 21 Jun 2005
A roller coaster journey through the first half of the nineteenth century, following the adventures of Charles Bosham/Boylan from his disgraceful conduct while the battle of Waterloo was raging, to his likely demise at the hands of a Victorian hangman at the end of the novel. On one level, it is the story of an assassin and agent provocateur (yes, they did exist) licensed by one of the most reactionary governments this country has ever seen to deal with their enemies. Charlie pops up in all the expected places (Cato Street, St Peter's Fields, the Luddites - though he misses out on the Tolpuddle Martyrs) and even engineers Shelley's drowning. On another level, it could be a series of tall stories by a vagrant who turned his imagination to good effect to wheedle his listeners into laying on little luxuries for him. The reader has to choose.

Julian Rathbone writes with his usual skill. A previous reviwer thought the Shelley scene rather dull - not so. The irony of Shelley, the upper class revolutionary, being waited on by his womenfolk (including Mary Wollstonecraft's daughter!! And his raffish household really comes to life in this chapter.

I would pick out his name dropping: John Constable, painting clouds; Darcy (who turned out to be a disappointment, as many of us expected), Karl Marx, Mary Ellis (George Eliot) - and many others.

The only irritating feature -hinted at in the title to this review - is an over-cleverness that comes from knowing anachronisms: 'agent 003'; 'safe houses'- the author's little prods in the ribs. Let's leave Bond and Le Carre in the 20th Cnetury, please. Maybe 4 1/2 stars after all - but too good a book to merit 4 stars only.

Rollicking, witty and enjoyable ..., 03 Mar 2005
... but you have to be clever enough to get the jokes and there are hundreds of them. As one reviewer said, there are references to modern people slyly worked in. Did you pick up the one about George W. Bush? Julian Rathbone throws in references to other works by famous authors all the time, sometimes even stopping to explain whom he is trying to plagiarise this time, with his tongue firmly in his cheek. This is why he only gets 4 stars from me and not the Full Monty. Sometimes he is just TOO clever and an average reader will have no idea what he is on about. Plenty of eroticism though and some rumbustious sex too. Loads of social comment. Personally I love his work.

Slightly Disapointing, 03 Aug 2004
As others have said, the characters are fascinating, and you're given a glimpse into one of the less well known periods of British history. If, like me, you'd heard of Peterloo and the Corn Laws, but didn't know what they actually were, then you'll find this an interesting read.

The down side is that there isn't really a plot. Nothing gets resolved in the end, and most of the book is just repetition of similar events. It really reads as if the author got bored half-way through writing it, or maybe realised that he could save half the story for a sequel.

It was an amusing and pleasant read, and maybe if you approach it with that expectation, savouring the journey rather than the arrival, then maybe this wouldn't be a bad choice.

Fun, Fighting & Frolics aplenty, 13 Oct 2003
This is a novel in the vein of Flashman, but with considerably more sex - which is saying something! Rathbone is superb at constructing long jokes. He keeps some of these running throughout whilst surprising the reader with accurate historical interludes. One shouldn't be surprised that the late Romantic poets were considered threats to society, or that Wellington was more than just a general. This is a book for people with a certain amount of understanding about History - not for people who need to be lead around the subject. There are some excellent one-liners, and the story has good pace and impact - I'd thoroughly recommend this book to intelligent readers who like to be amused and challenged - I read it in three days and thought it a cracker.

Brilliant read, 31 Jul 2008
I found this novel impossible to put down. It's very well paced and the characters are vivid and believable. By the end of the book, my heart was breaking for Harold and I was burning with disappointment and despair on his behalf despite already knowing what his fate would be.

The modern dialogue helps make it more convincing, in my opinion. Any form of modern English, even the most formal and "correct" is inauthentic if the characters are supposed to have lived in 1066! People living in times gone by would have used slang in their everyday speech just as we do now, and they would have sworn too while expressing themselves - it's only that we wouldn't recognise the words they used.

If Julian Rathbone had written all his characters' speech in Old English, it would be authentic but nobody reading it would understand a word. For this reason, I see his dialogue as a translation of what the characters would have said in their own language/dialect and this makes it seem all the more real and immediate.

The one thing I didn't like was the constant referencing of modern issues/people/whatever. It seemed a bit "aren't I clever?" of the author and I found it really tedious after a while. It's also rather heavy handed at times and patronising to the reader - most people reading the bit about William's deliberate policy of brutalising the native English would be quite capable of making a comparision between this and with atrocities of more recent wars without Rathbone clobbering them over the head with phrases like "racial sanitation".

But apart from that one small irritation, I thought this was a fantastic book, totally absorbing and affecting. It's made me want to learn more about Harold and William and about the Norman Conquest in general. It's one of those books I know I'll read again and again over the years and would go out of my way to recommend to other people.



fantastic!, 15 Feb 2008
One of the best pieces of historical fiction I've ever read - wonderfully entertaining, and thoroughly researched. As someone keen to learn more about this period in English history this was a thoroughly enjoyable way of doing so - 100% recommended

What historical fiction should be, 11 Apr 2007
I absolutely loved it! I can't think of another historical novel that let me inhabit the world of the characters the way this one did. I thought the use of modern language judicious: very little slang and plain language, much as the historic language would have sounded to me had I lived then.


A marvellous and enlightening read, 16 Jan 2007
I am no expert on 11th Century history so I will not dipute the merits of the novel on historical grounds. What I will say is this is a fantastic novel written in rich, pacy prose which moved me as much as it fascinated me. We get a superlative image of pre-Norman England and a vibrant picture of a fast changing Middle East.

Rathbone's view on the Norman conquest is pretty clear to any reader. The implication is that all the things that we love about English life - community spirit, love of nature, good beer and good food - are Anglo-Saxon whilst the things many of us hate - hereditary monarchy, pyramid structures, hypocritical clerics - were brought to bare on us by the Normans. I have no idea how accurate these suggestions are but it certainly makes a winning argument against the Norman propoganda still driven into school children today.

Rathbone does not shy away from reporting even the heroes of the novel in the eyes of their contemporaries not ours. Godwin's noble hoards are described ravaging villages and raping women with no deference to modern views on such barbarity whilst the Lords themselves are unfaithful and incestuous.

I'd recommend this to anyone and as for the title: There has never been an English king in the true sense of the word but Harold was clearly the last of the closest we ever got to one.

They were English, but not as we know them, 14 Jun 2005
It is about time reviewers stopped describing the Anglo-Saxons as English in inverted commas. Having found the word "English" in archaic forms in Old English dictionaries, it is clear that the Anglo-Saxons were English, that their language was English and that their civilization formed the backbone of what we consider "English" today. The fact that the language and ethnic makeup was altered after the Norman invasion does not change the above facts.

The Normans turned the country upside down by introducing the feudal system into England and changing political, legal and religious language, but eventually came to see themselves as English. The English masses did not become Norman. The identity and the language we have today still originates with the Anglo-Saxons. That is why we call it "English", not "Norman", "Breton" or "Roman". That England became more outward-looking and imperialistic under Norman overlordship does not mean that the Anglo-Saxons were not English. They were just more obviously Germanic. In fact, one could argue that it is we who are not the real English today. What is "English"? Isn't it just a feeling of belonging to that land between the Channel and Scotland?

The novel is very entertaining. Many details have already been mentioned by different reviewers, but what does it for me is Rathbone's evocation of the English desire for independence, a defiance of European meddling in a sovereign land, something to be found in today's "English". Rathbone demonstrates what a disaster Edward the Confessor was for his country (was he really "English"?) and Harold Godwinson's desperate and ultimately vain attempts to prevent the Normans from taking England. I was pleased that he cuts through some of the Norman propaganda and refutes the idea that the Normans won because they fought on horseback. I had not known that the other two Godwinson brothers, Gyrth and Leofwine, had pleaded with Harold to stay away from the battle and let them direct it - if only he had.

With Harold died Anglo-Saxon hegemony over England - however it died not forlornly with an arrow in the eye, but defiantly and furiously, sword in hand. It is fitting that Rathbone stresses the Englishness of Harold's Anglo-Saxons - any people who feel they belong to England are English, be it 1066 or 2005.

Very instructive, but not like his other stories, 25 Jun 2008
I am a great fan of Julian Rathbone's novels, not least because I know I will come away from them having learned a great deal about the period of history in which the novel is based. This one is different, at times I felt almost bogged down in the historical facts, the troop movements etc, it was as though the characters were secondary to the tale at times, instead of the characters themselves drawing the story on. Another aspect which was missing from this story, which I enjoyed very much in the other books, was the element of gentle leg-pulling on the part of the author. On the whole, a well written account of one of history's darkest hours.

Entertaining history, 20 Jul 2007
Sort of, anyway.
Rathbone has his own take on history as the previous novels in this series,'Joseph' and 'A Very English Agent' so clearly demonstrate.
Modern references for the sake of humour or not....all three books are hugely entertaining and more historically sound than may be generally realised.Different to 'Flashman',I agree but nevetheless highly entertaining and very 'tongue in cheek'......along with the 'Donner Party' I had better not put my 'foot in it'......sorry,a rather silly joke on the black humour to be found in the book,I apologise.
All in all..very good...but read this,so far,trilogy in order.In the immortal words of Douglas Adams...this could well be a trilogy of four books.

Good romp, 18 Jul 2007
What I like about these novels (told in the Flashman vein) is that they are always very funny and don't take themselves too seriously. Eddie's adventures always seem to be accompanied by some fairly disgusting sexual goings on; a too friendly whaler Captain, a mexican tart and a kind native american wife, not to mention the sea lions! But all in all it's a good fast romp of a novel - well worth the money.



Birth of a Nation, 26 Mar 2006
I have read some of Julian Rathbone's work before I picked up this one. It is a rattling adventure yarn with its hero being present entirely co-incidentally at just too many points in US history. Very Flashmanesque but without Flashman's appeal.

I can accept that authors will put fictional heros into real historical situations but the authenticity of the situations was marred by modern references. They pull you up short and seem just too contrived - thay really spoiled the book for me.
EG in meeting Sam Houston before a battle -'Houston we have a problem'. From a lady on her sexual partners 'the only one who could ever reach me was the son of a preacher man'

Great story well told, 14 Dec 2005
A very enjoyable book - kind of easy reading without feeling like trash. Wonderful set pieces, some good characters, lovely use of anachronism, funny footnotes...what more can you want really?

And it's a bonus that Rathbone's politics are so consistently sound. I just hope that another volume is in the works.

The story continues, 15 Aug 2005
We follow the story of Charlie Bosham/Boylam from the Galapagos through the expanding America seeking its Manifest Destiny and back to London. We learn that he has escaped what seemed to be an inevitable meeting with the hangman (just as well - another novel is promised).

Much of the story is set in the U.S. and the areas it invaded in the 1840s, and since American history is less familiar than our own, the opportunities for felicitous contemporary references that the reader can easily pick up are fewer - no Shelleys or Peterloo radicals here. For this reason, perhaps less interesting than its predecessor (hence the 4 stars). Boylan/Bosham's opinion of the United States, and his version of the Alamo I shouldn't imagine will win this novel much favour with neocon American readers.

The strength of the novel comes in the final section, where Rathbone traces out the future of Darwin's 'transmutation' philosophy to point to the Social Darwinism that emerged a decade later, setting the scene for the imperialist push and racism and classism of the late Victorian age. Suddenly we are confronted with issues of resonance today, rather than just safely buried in the past.

Flashman re-written by John Pilger?, 14 May 2006
This is a great, rollicking historical spy adventure that should throw any believer in so-called Victorian Values into apoplectic fits. Julian Rathbone has written a deeply political comedy thriller that should have many readers flicking to the back for a list of references for the history books about the period that he used as raw material. Unfortunately, they will be disappointed. That, though, is the only disappointment in the book. And it's got a sequel just as good. Get stuck in.

Enormously entertaining but too clever for its own good, 21 Jun 2005
A roller coaster journey through the first half of the nineteenth century, following the adventures of Charles Bosham/Boylan from his disgraceful conduct while the battle of Waterloo was raging, to his likely demise at the hands of a Victorian hangman at the end of the novel. On one level, it is the story of an assassin and agent provocateur (yes, they did exist) licensed by one of the most reactionary governments this country has ever seen to deal with their enemies. Charlie pops up in all the expected places (Cato Street, St Peter's Fields, the Luddites - though he misses out on the Tolpuddle Martyrs) and even engineers Shelley's drowning. On another level, it could be a series of tall stories by a vagrant who turned his imagination to good effect to wheedle his listeners into laying on little luxuries for him. The reader has to choose.

Julian Rathbone writes with his usual skill. A previous reviwer thought the Shelley scene rather dull - not so. The irony of Shelley, the upper class revolutionary, being waited on by his womenfolk (including Mary Wollstonecraft's daughter!! And his raffish household really comes to life in this chapter.

I would pick out his name dropping: John Constable, painting clouds; Darcy (who turned out to be a disappointment, as many of us expected), Karl Marx, Mary Ellis (George Eliot) - and many others.

The only irritating feature -hinted at in the title to this review - is an over-cleverness that comes from knowing anachronisms: 'agent 003'; 'safe houses'- the author's little prods in the ribs. Let's leave Bond and Le Carre in the 20th Cnetury, please. Maybe 4 1/2 stars after all - but too good a book to merit 4 stars only.

Rollicking, witty and enjoyable ..., 03 Mar 2005
... but you have to be clever enough to get the jokes and there are hundreds of them. As one reviewer said, there are references to modern people slyly worked in. Did you pick up the one about George W. Bush? Julian Rathbone throws in references to other works by famous authors all the time, sometimes even stopping to explain whom he is trying to plagiarise this time, with his tongue firmly in his cheek. This is why he only gets 4 stars from me and not the Full Monty. Sometimes he is just TOO clever and an average reader will have no idea what he is on about. Plenty of eroticism though and some rumbustious sex too. Loads of social comment. Personally I love his work.

Slightly Disapointing, 03 Aug 2004
As others have said, the characters are fascinating, and you're given a glimpse into one of the less well known periods of British history. If, like me, you'd heard of Peterloo and the Corn Laws, but didn't know what they actually were, then you'll find this an interesting read.

The down side is that there isn't really a plot. Nothing gets resolved in the end, and most of the book is just repetition of similar events. It really reads as if the author got bored half-way through writing it, or maybe realised that he could save half the story for a sequel.

It was an amusing and pleasant read, and maybe if you approach it with that expectation, savouring the journey rather than the arrival, then maybe this wouldn't be a bad choice.

Fun, Fighting & Frolics aplenty, 13 Oct 2003
This is a novel in the vein of Flashman, but with considerably more sex - which is saying something! Rathbone is superb at constructing long jokes. He keeps some of these running throughout whilst surprising the reader with accurate historical interludes. One shouldn't be surprised that the late Romantic poets were considered threats to society, or that Wellington was more than just a general. This is a book for people with a certain amount of understanding about History - not for people who need to be lead around the subject. There are some excellent one-liners, and the story has good pace and impact - I'd thoroughly recommend this book to intelligent readers who like to be amused and challenged - I read it in three days and thought it a cracker.

Enjoyable, yet strangely annoying., 04 Jul 2008
As one of the previous reviewers said, this is a wonderful idea that could have been better executed. I won't say I didn't enjoy it, because overall I did, but I have to agree that many of the literary in-jokes were somewhat patronising. Worse still, for me, were the philosophic discussions in which characters would often accidently hit upon modern scientific theory - for instance the big bang theory and the concept of evolution through the survival of the fittest. I dare say there were many free thinkers during this period who might well have discussed puzzles in the natural world and certainly such things had been contemplated as far back as classical Greece. But I doubt that anyone at this time would have possessed the framework of thought necessary to accidently hit upon such modern terminology. I suppose the last straw was the accidental creation of lasers at the Battle of Mortimer's Cross in 1460 and, worse still, the correct labelling of the creation as a laser. It was all rather silly.

Still the book did at least have enough about it to keep me reading. Would I recommend it? Yes, if I thought someone could do with a good laugh and would pull a wry face at the in jokes. As a serously executed piece of historical fiction - I'm afraid not.

Enjoyable, but not Rathbone's best, 10 Jun 2008
In a similar vein to the excellent 'The Last English King' - which gets a small mention - but somehow not quite as good. Lots of sly references abound in this adventure that is part medieval romp, and part subversion of the Rider Haggard school of adventure writing - in that Merrie England is the primitive territory being explored by a group of eccentric adventurers. As can be seen with some of the character names - the main protagonist is called 'Ali Ben Quatar Mayeen' - groan!!

Dull, 01 Sep 2006
It is interesting that if you write a negative review that you tend to get more people voting that your review was useless. Well, I'm sorry but I can't give anything but 1 star for this. I gave up soon after the protoganists reached England. I was looking for an exciting novel with an historical setting but found this bland and tedious. Maybe it's too high brow for me. I actually liked the start where the setting was more glamourous. I guess I'm more of an escapist. I much prefer the work of David Ball and his two excellent novels, Empires of Sand and The Sword And The Scimitar. Whilst being informative from a historical perspective these novels are also great stories. From what I read of Kings of Albion it was neither.

Smashing!!!, 22 Aug 2005
A hugely enjoyable read. I read this book when it first came out after having seen it in the library. It exceeded all my expectations.
The book partly looks at medieval England from the point of view of someone from a totally different, and far more civalised culture. This is the time when England is sorting itself out and I think that the book portrays this very well. There are possibly a few historical inaccuracies but nothing that I am prepared to quibble about.
Rathbone understands the society of the time and presents this to us, the reader, with both wit and excitement. It is the small details which make this book so enjoyable. Rathbone has done some excellent reaserch.
I would recomend this book to everyone, especially to people with an interest in History.

A great idea badly executed, 03 Nov 2003
It is a long time since I have been so disappointed in a book. I don't mean it is the worst book I've ever read - I made it to the end - but it could and should have been so much better. The idea of viewing medieval England through the eyes of visitors from an alien culture (in this case, a group from India) is a good one, as it emphasises the alienness of the fifteenth century to modern readers. However, the novel failed to work for me at so many different levels.

My main complaint is Rathbone's sheer distaste for the period, as he trots out the cliched view of the middle ages as an age of ignorance, violence and casual heretic-burning. I'm not saying the author has to prettify the era, but he could at least show some affection for it. It amazes me that he should choose to write about an age for which he clearly lacks any feeling. His book is also wildly anachronistic. I am not referring to the deliberate in-jokes, but to the plot device that features the heresy of the Free Spirit. This 'heresy' was in all probability an invention of the Inquisition, and if it existed at all, it did so in the early fourtenth century, not the late fifteenth. It certianly had nothing to do with John Wyclif (or Wyclef Jean, as he was known in France). This may seem a pedantic point, but it typifies the cavalier attitude to the middle ages that carelessly lumps centuries together - "what does it matter, they all smelled of dung and burned witches whatever century you're in, didn't they?"

I could just about put up with all this, but what really pushed me over the edge were Rathbone's smug little "ooh, aren't I clever?" literary in-jokes, such as meeting a man called 'Skaksper' in Stratford-upon-Avon. Julian, it's not big, it's not clever, and it's not even particularly funny.

So if, as I was, you are faced with a long plane trip from Dallas to Indianapolis via Little Rock and St Louis, and in need of something to read, buy a newspaper, read the in-flight magazine, study the safety instruction card, read the list of ingredients on the micro-sized pack of complimentary pretzels (in English AND Spanish), just don't buy this book.

Brilliant read, 31 Jul 2008
I found this novel impossible to put down. It's very well paced and the characters are vivid and believable. By the end of the book, my heart was breaking for Harold and I was burning with disappointment and despair on his behalf despite already knowing what his fate would be.

The modern dialogue helps make it more convincing, in my opinion. Any form of modern English, even the most formal and "correct" is inauthentic if the characters are supposed to have lived in 1066! People living in times gone by would have used slang in their everyday speech just as we do now, and they would have sworn too while expressing themselves - it's only that we wouldn't recognise the words they used.

If Julian Rathbone had written all his characters' speech in Old English, it would be authentic but nobody reading it would understand a word. For this reason, I see his dialogue as a translation of what the characters would have said in their own language/dialect and this makes it seem all the more real and immediate.

The one thing I didn't like was the constant referencing of modern issues/people/whatever. It seemed a bit "aren't I clever?" of the author and I found it really tedious after a while. It's also rather heavy handed at times and patronising to the reader - most people reading the bit about William's deliberate policy of brutalising the native English would be quite capable of making a comparision between this and with atrocities of more recent wars without Rathbone clobbering them over the head with phrases like "racial sanitation".

But apart from that one small irritation, I thought this was a fantastic book, totally absorbing and affecting. It's made me want to learn more about Harold and William and about the Norman Conquest in general. It's one of those books I know I'll read again and again over the years and would go out of my way to recommend to other people.



fantastic!, 15 Feb 2008
One of the best pieces of historical fiction I've ever read - wonderfully entertaining, and thoroughly researched. As someone keen to learn more about this period in English history this was a thoroughly enjoyable way of doing so - 100% recommended

What historical fiction should be, 11 Apr 2007
I absolutely loved it! I can't think of another historical novel that let me inhabit the world of the characters the way this one did. I thought the use of modern language judicious: very little slang and plain language, much as the historic language would have sounded to me had I lived then.


A marvellous and enlightening read, 16 Jan 2007
I am no expert on 11th Century history so I will not dipute the merits of the novel on historical grounds. What I will say is this is a fantastic novel written in rich, pacy prose which moved me as much as it fascinated me. We get a superlative image of pre-Norman England and a vibrant picture of a fast changing Middle East.

Rathbone's view on the Norman conquest is pretty clear to any reader. The implication is that all the things that we love about English life - community spirit, love of nature, good beer and good food - are Anglo-Saxon whilst the things many of us hate - hereditary monarchy, pyramid structures, hypocritical clerics - were brought to bare on us by the Normans. I have no idea how accurate these suggestions are but it certainly makes a winning argument against the Norman propoganda still driven into school children today.

Rathbone does not shy away from reporting even the heroes of the novel in the eyes of their contemporaries not ours. Godwin's noble hoards are described ravaging villages and raping women with no deference to modern views on such barbarity whilst the Lords themselves are unfaithful and incestuous.

I'd recommend this to anyone and as for the title: There has never been an English king in the true sense of the word but Harold was clearly the last of the closest we ever got to one.

They were English, but not as we know them, 14 Jun 2005
It is about time reviewers stopped describing the Anglo-Saxons as English in inverted commas. Having found the word "English" in archaic forms in Old English dictionaries, it is clear that the Anglo-Saxons were English, that their language was English and that their civilization formed the backbone of what we consider "English" today. The fact that the language and ethnic makeup was altered after the Norman invasion does not change the above facts.

The Normans turned the country upside down by introducing the feudal system into England and changing political, legal and religious language, but eventually came to see themselves as English. The English masses did not become Norman. The identity and the language we have today still originates with the Anglo-Saxons. That is why we call it "English", not "Norman", "Breton" or "Roman". That England became more outward-looking and imperialistic under Norman overlordship does not mean that the Anglo-Saxons were not English. They were just more obviously Germanic. In fact, one could argue that it is we who are not the real English today. What is "English"? Isn't it just a feeling of belonging to that land between the Channel and Scotland?

The novel is very entertaining. Many details have already been mentioned by different reviewers, but what does it for me is Rathbone's evocation of the English desire for independence, a defiance of European meddling in a sovereign land, something to be found in today's "English". Rathbone demonstrates what a disaster Edward the Confessor was for his country (was he really "English"?) and Harold Godwinson's desperate and ultimately vain attempts to prevent the Normans from taking England. I was pleased that he cuts through some of the Norman propaganda and refutes the idea that the Normans won because they fought on horseback. I had not known that the other two Godwinson brothers, Gyrth and Leofwine, had pleaded with Harold to stay away from the battle and let them direct it - if only he had.

With Harold died Anglo-Saxon hegemony over England - however it died not forlornly with an arrow in the eye, but defiantly and furiously, sword in hand. It is fitting that Rathbone stresses the Englishness of Harold's Anglo-Saxons - any people who feel they belong to England are English, be it 1066 or 2005.

Very instructive, but not like his other stories, 25 Jun 2008
I am a great fan of Julian Rathbone's novels, not least because I know I will come away from them having learned a great deal about the period of history in which the novel is based. This one is different, at times I felt almost bogged down in the historical facts, the troop movements etc, it was as though the characters were secondary to the tale at times, instead of the characters themselves drawing the story on. Another aspect which was missing from this story, which I enjoyed very much in the other books, was the element of gentle leg-pulling on the part of the author. On the whole, a well written account of one of history's darkest hours.

Entertaining history, 20 Jul 2007
Sort of, anyway.
Rathbone has his own take on history as the previous novels in this series,'Joseph' and 'A Very English Agent' so clearly demonstrate.
Modern references for the sake of humour or not....all three books are hugely entertaining and more historically sound than may be generally realised.Different to 'Flashman',I agree but nevetheless highly entertaining and very 'tongue in cheek'......along with the 'Donner Party' I had better not put my 'foot in it'......sorry,a rather silly joke on the black humour to be found in the book,I apologise.
All in all..very good...but read this,so far,trilogy in order.In the immortal words of Douglas Adams...this could well be a trilogy of four books.

Good romp, 18 Jul 2007
What I like about these novels (told in the Flashman vein) is that they are always very funny and don't take themselves too seriously. Eddie's adventures always seem to be accompanied by some fairly disgusting sexual goings on; a too friendly whaler Captain, a mexican tart and a kind native american wife, not to mention the sea lions! But all in all it's a good fast romp of a novel - well worth the money.



Birth of a Nation, 26 Mar 2006
I have read some of Julian Rathbone's work before I picked up this one. It is a rattling adventure yarn with its hero being present entirely co-incidentally at just too many points in US history. Very Flashmanesque but without Flashman's appeal.

I can accept that authors will put fictional heros into real historical situations but the authenticity of the situations was marred by modern references. They pull you up short and seem just too contrived - thay really spoiled the book for me.
EG in meeting Sam Houston before a battle -'Houston we have a problem'. From a lady on her sexual partners 'the only one who could ever reach me was the son of a preacher man'

Great story well told, 14 Dec 2005
A very enjoyable book - kind of easy reading without feeling like trash. Wonderful set pieces, some good characters, lovely use of anachronism, funny footnotes...what more can you want really?

And it's a bonus that Rathbone's politics are so consistently sound. I just hope that another volume is in the works.

The story continues, 15 Aug 2005
We follow the story of Charlie Bosham/Boylam from the Galapagos through the expanding America seeking its Manifest Destiny and back to London. We learn that he has escaped what seemed to be an inevitable meeting with the hangman (just as well - another novel is promised).

Much of the story is set in the U.S. and the areas it invaded in the 1840s, and since American history is less familiar than our own, the opportunities for felicitous contemporary references that the reader can easily pick up are fewer - no Shelleys or Peterloo radicals here. For this reason, perhaps less interesting than its predecessor (hence the 4 stars). Boylan/Bosham's opinion of the United States, and his version of the Alamo I shouldn't imagine will win this novel much favour with neocon American readers.

The strength of the novel comes in the final section, where Rathbone traces out the future of Darwin's 'transmutation' philosophy to point to the Social Darwinism that emerged a decade later, setting the scene for the imperialist push and racism and classism of the late Victorian age. Suddenly we are confronted with issues of resonance today, rather than just safely buried in the past.

Flashman re-written by John Pilger?, 14 May 2006
This is a great, rollicking historical spy adventure that should throw any believer in so-called Victorian Values into apoplectic fits. Julian Rathbone has written a deeply political comedy thriller that should have many readers flicking to the back for a list of references for the history books about the period that he used as raw material. Unfortunately, they will be disappointed. That, though, is the only disappointment in the book. And it's got a sequel just as good. Get stuck in.

Enormously entertaining but too clever for its own good, 21 Jun 2005
A roller coaster journey through the first half of the nineteenth century, following the adventures of Charles Bosham/Boylan from his disgraceful conduct while the battle of Waterloo was raging, to his likely demise at the hands of a Victorian hangman at the end of the novel. On one level, it is the story of an assassin and agent provocateur (yes, they did exist) licensed by one of the most reactionary governments this country has ever seen to deal with their enemies. Charlie pops up in all the expected places (Cato Street, St Peter's Fields, the Luddites - though he misses out on the Tolpuddle Martyrs) and even engineers Shelley's drowning. On another level, it could be a series of tall stories by a vagrant who turned his imagination to good effect to wheedle his listeners into laying on little luxuries for him. The reader has to choose.

Julian Rathbone writes with his usual skill. A previous reviwer thought the Shelley scene rather dull - not so. The irony of Shelley, the upper class revolutionary, being waited on by his womenfolk (including Mary Wollstonecraft's daughter!! And his raffish household really comes to life in this chapter.

I would pick out his name dropping: John Constable, painting clouds; Darcy (who turned out to be a disappointment, as many of us expected), Karl Marx, Mary Ellis (George Eliot) - and many others.

The only irritating feature -hinted at in the title to this review - is an over-cleverness that comes from knowing anachronisms: 'agent 003'; 'safe houses'- the author's little prods in the ribs. Let's leave Bond and Le Carre in the 20th Cnetury, please. Maybe 4 1/2 stars after all - but too good a book to merit 4 stars only.

Rollicking, witty and enjoyable ..., 03 Mar 2005
... but you have to be clever enough to get the jokes and there are hundreds of them. As one reviewer said, there are references to modern people slyly worked in. Did you pick up the one about George W. Bush? Julian Rathbone throws in references to other works by famous authors all the time, sometimes even stopping to explain whom he is trying to plagiarise this time, with his tongue firmly in his cheek. This is why he only gets 4 stars from me and not the Full Monty. Sometimes he is just TOO clever and an average reader will have no idea what he is on about. Plenty of eroticism though and some rumbustious sex too. Loads of social comment. Personally I love his work.

Slightly Disapointing, 03 Aug 2004
As others have said, the characters are fascinating, and you're given a glimpse into one of the less well known periods of British history. If, like me, you'd heard of Peterloo and the Corn Laws, but didn't know what they actually were, then you'll find this an interesting read.

The down side is that there isn't really a plot. Nothing gets resolved in the end, and most of the book is just repetition of similar events. It really reads as if the author got bored half-way through writing it, or maybe realised that he could save half the story for a sequel.

It was an amusing and pleasant read, and maybe if you approach it with that expectation, savouring the journey rather than the arrival, then maybe this wouldn't be a bad choice.

Fun, Fighting & Frolics aplenty, 13 Oct 2003
This is a novel in the vein of Flashman, but with considerably more sex - which is saying something! Rathbone is superb at constructing long jokes. He keeps some of these running throughout whilst surprising the reader with accurate historical interludes. One shouldn't be surprised that the late Romantic poets were considered threats to society, or that Wellington was more than just a general. This is a book for people with a certain amount of understanding about History - not for people who need to be lead around the subject. There are some excellent one-liners, and the story has good pace and impact - I'd thoroughly recommend this book to intelligent readers who like to be amused and challenged - I read it in three days and thought it a cracker.

Enjoyable, yet strangely annoying., 04 Jul 2008
As one of the previous reviewers said, this is a wonderful idea that could have been better executed. I won't say I didn't enjoy it, because overall I did, but I have to agree that many of the literary in-jokes were somewhat patronising. Worse still, for me, were the philosophic discussions in which characters would often accidently hit upon modern scientific theory - for instance the big bang theory and the concept of evolution through the survival of the fittest. I dare say there were many free thinkers during this period who might well have discussed puzzles in the natural world and certainly such things had been contemplated as far back as classical Greece. But I doubt that anyone at this time would have possessed the framework of thought necessary to accidently hit upon such modern terminology. I suppose the last straw was the accidental creation of lasers at the Battle of Mortimer's Cross in 1460 and, worse still, the correct labelling of the creation as a laser. It was all rather silly.

Still the book did at least have enough about it to keep me reading. Would I recommend it? Yes, if I thought someone could do with a good laugh and would pull a wry face at the in jokes. As a serously executed piece of historical fiction - I'm afraid not.

Enjoyable, but not Rathbone's best, 10 Jun 2008
In a similar vein to the excellent 'The Last English King' - which gets a small mention - but somehow not quite as good. Lots of sly references abound in this adventure that is part medieval romp, and part subversion of the Rider Haggard school of adventure writing - in that Merrie England is the primitive territory being explored by a group of eccentric adventurers. As can be seen with some of the character names - the main protagonist is called 'Ali Ben Quatar Mayeen' - groan!!

Dull, 01 Sep 2006
It is interesting that if you write a negative review that you tend to get more people voting that your review was useless. Well, I'm sorry but I can't give anything but 1 star for this. I gave up soon after the protoganists reached England. I was looking for an exciting novel with an historical setting but found this bland and tedious. Maybe it's too high brow for me. I actually liked the start where the setting was more glamourous. I guess I'm more of an escapist. I much prefer the work of David Ball and his two excellent novels, Empires of Sand and The Sword And The Scimitar. Whilst being informative from a historical perspective these novels are also great stories. From what I read of Kings of Albion it was neither.

Smashing!!!, 22 Aug 2005
A hugely enjoyable read. I read this book when it first came out after having seen it in the library. It exceeded all my expectations.
The book partly looks at medieval England from the point of view of someone from a totally different, and far more civalised culture. This is the time when England is sorting itself out and I think that the book portrays this very well. There are possibly a few historical inaccuracies but nothing that I am prepared to quibble about.
Rathbone understands the society of the time and presents this to us, the reader, with both wit and excitement. It is the small details which make this book so enjoyable. Rathbone has done some excellent reaserch.
I would recomend this book to everyone, especially to people with an interest in History.

A great idea badly executed, 03 Nov 2003
It is a long time since I have been so disappointed in a book. I don't mean it is the worst book I've ever read - I made it to the end - but it could and should have been so much better. The idea of viewing medieval England through the eyes of visitors from an alien culture (in this case, a group from India) is a good one, as it emphasises the alienness of the fifteenth century to modern readers. However, the novel failed to work for me at so many different levels.

My main complaint is Rathbone's sheer distaste for the period, as he trots out the cliched view of the middle ages as an age of ignorance, violence and casual heretic-burning. I'm not saying the author has to prettify the era, but he could at least show some affection for it. It amazes me that he should choose to write about an age for which he clearly lacks any feeling. His book is also wildly anachronistic. I am not referring to the deliberate in-jokes, but to the plot device that features the heresy of the Free Spirit. This 'heresy' was in all probability an invention of the Inquisition, and if it existed at all, it did so in the early fourtenth century, not the late fifteenth. It certianly had nothing to do with John Wyclif (or Wyclef Jean, as he was known in France). This may seem a pedantic point, but it typifies the cavalier attitude to the middle ages that carelessly lumps centuries together - "what does it matter, they all smelled of dung and burned witches whatever century you're in, didn't they?"

I could just about put up with all this, but what really pushed me over the edge were Rathbone's smug little "ooh, aren't I clever?" literary in-jokes, such as meeting a man called 'Skaksper' in Stratford-upon-Avon. Julian, it's not big, it's not clever, and it's not even particularly funny.

So if, as I was, you are faced with a long plane trip from Dallas to Indianapolis via Little Rock and St Louis, and in need of something to read, buy a newspaper, read the in-flight magazine, study the safety instruction card, read the list of ingredients on the micro-sized pack of complimentary pretzels (in English AND Spanish), just don't buy this book.

Exceptional, 23 Jan 2003
This book has all the ingredients of an epic classic. Incredibly evocative of spain, comic, tragic, serious and humorous all at the same time. The book subtly, yet cleverly and wittily acknowledges - by spinning in references to - other classic literature, as well as modern culture throughout its pages. Rathbone gives a great insight into the times in which it was set through the eyes of the superbly characterised fictional hero with whom you sypathise in part but can't quite like.

I couldn't put Joseph down, and even after 600 pages wanted more! I recommended this to my father, also a hispanofile, and the verdict was the same, a brilliant book that will stay in your memory, both for it's story and it's powerful imagery, for a long time!

A highly enjoyable book! Very powerful., 04 Sep 2000
Julian Rathbones understanding of this time and the culture of Europe at this time creates a great backdrop for the enfolding scenarios around the charecter Joseph. It also works because the charecter of Joseph is so good. Like Joseph, the book is thought -provoking, funny, and enlightening. Brilliant. Only downside was it was a little too long at 600 pages

good but has done better, 10 Feb 2000
Overlong but an interesting and thought provoking read. Bits of the plot come back into mind days after the book is finished. I gained some impression of how destructive the penisular wars were.

Brilliant read, 31 Jul 2008
I found this novel impossible to put down. It's very well paced and the characters are vivid and believable. By the end of the book, my heart was breaking for Harold and I was burning with disappointment and despair on his behalf despite already knowing what his fate would be.

The modern dialogue helps make it more convincing, in my opinion. Any form of modern English, even the most formal and "correct" is inauthentic if the characters are supposed to have lived in 1066! People living in times gone by would have used slang in their everyday speech just as we do now, and they would have sworn too while expressing themselves - it's only that we wouldn't recognise the words they used.

If Julian Rathbone had written all his characters' speech in Old English, it would be authentic but nobody reading it would understand a word. For this reason, I see his dialogue as a translation of what the characters would have said in their own language/dialect and this makes it seem all the more real and immediate.

The one thing I didn't like was the constant referencing of modern issues/people/whatever. It seemed a bit "aren't I clever?" of the author and I found it really tedious after a while. It's also rather heavy handed at times and patronising to the reader - most people reading the bit about William's deliberate policy of brutalising the native English would be quite capable of making a comparision between this and with atrocities of more recent wars without Rathbone clobbering them over the head with phrases like "racial sanitation".

But apart from that one small irritation, I thought this was a fantastic book, totally absorbing and affecting. It's made me want to learn more about Harold and William and about the Norman Conquest in general. It's one of those books I know I'll read again and again over the years and would go out of my way to recommend to other people.



fantastic!, 15 Feb 2008
One of the best pieces of historical fiction I've ever read - wonderfully entertaining, and thoroughly researched. As someone keen to learn more about this period in English history this was a thoroughly enjoyable way of doing so - 100% recommended

What historical fiction should be, 11 Apr 2007
I absolutely loved it! I can't think of another historical novel that let me inhabit the world of the characters the way this one did. I thought the use of modern language judicious: very little slang and plain language, much as the historic language would have sounded to me had I lived then.


A marvellous and enlightening read, 16 Jan 2007
I am no expert on 11th Century history so I will not dipute the merits of the novel on historical grounds. What I will say is this is a fantastic novel written in rich, pacy prose which moved me as much as it fascinated me. We get a superlative image of pre-Norman England and a vibrant picture of a fast changing Middle East.

Rathbone's view on the Norman conquest is pretty clear to any reader. The implication is that all the things that we love about English life - community spirit, love of nature, good beer and good food - are Anglo-Saxon whilst the things many of us hate - hereditary monarchy, pyramid structures, hypocritical clerics - were brought to bare on us by the Normans. I have no idea how accurate these suggestions are but it certainly makes a winning argument against the Norman propoganda still driven into school children today.

Rathbone does not shy away from reporting even the heroes of the novel in the eyes of their contemporaries not ours. Godwin's noble hoards are described ravaging villages and raping women with no deference to modern views on such barbarity whilst the Lords themselves are unfaithful and incestuous.

I'd recommend this to anyone and as for the title: There has never been an English king in the true sense of the word but Harold was clearly the last of the closest we ever got to one.

They were English, but not as we know them, 14 Jun 2005
It is about time reviewers stopped describing the Anglo-Saxons as English in inverted commas. Having found the word "English" in archaic forms in Old English dictionaries, it is clear that the Anglo-Saxons were English, that their language was English and that their civilization formed the backbone of what we consider "English" today. The fact that the language and ethnic makeup was altered after the Norman invasion does not change the above facts.

The Normans turned the country upside down by introducing the feudal system into England and changing political, legal and religious language, but eventually came to see themselves as English. The English masses did not become Norman. The identity and the language we have today still originates with the Anglo-Saxons. That is why we call it "English", not "Norman", "Breton" or "Roman". That England became more outward-looking and imperialistic under Norman overlordship does not mean that the Anglo-Saxons were not English. They were just more obviously Germanic. In fact, one could argue that it is we who are not the real English today. What is "English"? Isn't it just a feeling of belonging to that land between the Channel and Scotland?

The novel is very entertaining. Many details have already been mentioned by different reviewers, but what does it for me is Rathbone's evocation of the English desire for independence, a defiance of European meddling in a sovereign land, something to be found in today's "English". Rathbone demonstrates what a disaster Edward the Confessor was for his country (was he really "English"?) and Harold Godwinson's desperate and ultimately vain attempts to prevent the Normans from taking England. I was pleased that he cuts through some of the Norman propaganda and refutes the idea that the Normans won because they fought on horseback. I had not known that the other two Godwinson brothers, Gyrth and Leofwine, had pleaded with Harold to stay away from the battle and let them direct it - if only he had.

With Harold died Anglo-Saxon hegemony over England - however it died not forlornly with an arrow in the eye, but defiantly and furiously, sword in hand. It is fitting that Rathbone stresses the Englishness of Harold's Anglo-Saxons - any people who feel they belong to England are English, be it 1066 or 2005.

Very instructive, but not like his other stories, 25 Jun 2008
I am a great fan of Julian Rathbone's novels, not least because I know I will come away from them having learned a great deal about the period of history in which the novel is based. This one is different, at times I felt almost bogged down in the historical facts, the troop movements etc, it was as though the characters were secondary to the tale at times, instead of the characters themselves drawing the story on. Another aspect which was missing from this story, which I enjoyed very much in the other books, was the element of gentle leg-pulling on the part of the author. On the whole, a well written account of one of history's darkest hours.

Entertaining history, 20 Jul 2007
Sort of, anyway.
Rathbone has his own take on history as the previous novels in this series,'Joseph' and 'A Very English Agent' so clearly demonstrate.
Modern references for the sake of humour or not....all three books are hugely entertaining and more historically sound than may be generally realised.Different to 'Flashman',I agree but nevetheless highly entertaining and very 'tongue in cheek'......along with the 'Donner Party' I had better not put my 'foot in it'......sorry,a rather silly joke on the black humour to be found in the book,I apologise.
All in all..very good...but read this,so far,trilogy in order.In the immortal words of Douglas Adams...this could well be a trilogy of four books.

Good romp, 18 Jul 2007
What I like about these novels (told in the Flashman vein) is that they are always very funny and don't take themselves too seriously. Eddie's adventures always seem to be accompanied by some fairly disgusting sexual goings on; a too friendly whaler Captain, a mexican tart and a kind native american wife, not to mention the sea lions! But all in all it's a good fast romp of a novel - well worth the money.



Birth of a Nation, 26 Mar 2006
I have read some of Julian Rathbone's work before I picked up this one. It is a rattling adventure yarn with its hero being present entirely co-incidentally at just too many points in US history. Very Flashmanesque but without Flashman's appeal.

I can accept that authors will put fictional heros into real historical situations but the authenticity of the situations was marred by modern references. They pull you up short and seem just too contrived - thay really spoiled the book for me.
EG in meeting Sam Houston before a battle -'Houston we have a problem'. From a lady on her sexual partners 'the only one who could ever reach me was the son of a preacher man'

Great story well told, 14 Dec 2005
A very enjoyable book - kind of easy reading without feeling like trash. Wonderful set pieces, some good characters, lovely use of anachronism, funny footnotes...what more can you want really?

And it's a bonus that Rathbone's politics are so consistently sound. I just hope that another volume is in the works.

The story continues, 15 Aug 2005
We follow the story of Charlie Bosham/Boylam from the Galapagos through the expanding America seeking its Manifest Destiny and back to London. We learn that he has escaped what seemed to be an inevitable meeting with the hangman (just as well - another novel is promised).

Much of the story is set in the U.S. and the areas it invaded in the 1840s, and since American history is less familiar than our own, the opportunities for felicitous contemporary references that the reader can easily pick up are fewer - no Shelleys or Peterloo radicals here. For this reason, perhaps less interesting than its predecessor (hence the 4 stars). Boylan/Bosham's opinion of the United States, and his version of the Alamo I shouldn't imagine will win this novel much favour with neocon American readers.

The strength of the novel comes in the final section, where Rathbone traces out the future of Darwin's 'transmutation' philosophy to point to the Social Darwinism that emerged a decade later, setting the scene for the imperialist push and racism and classism of the late Victorian age. Suddenly we are confronted with issues of resonance today, rather than just safely buried in the past.

Flashman re-written by John Pilger?, 14 May 2006
This is a great, rollicking historical spy adventure that should throw any believer in so-called Victorian Values into apoplectic fits. Julian Rathbone has written a deeply political comedy thriller that should have many readers flicking to the back for a list of references for the history books about the period that he used as raw material. Unfortunately, they will be disappointed. That, though, is the only disappointment in the book. And it's got a sequel just as good. Get stuck in.

Enormously entertaining but too clever for its own good, 21 Jun 2005
A roller coaster journey through the first half of the nineteenth century, following the adventures of Charles Bosham/Boylan from his disgraceful conduct while the battle of Waterloo was raging, to his likely demise at the hands of a Victorian hangman at the end of the novel. On one level, it is the story of an assassin and agent provocateur (yes, they did exist) licensed by one of the most reactionary governments this country has ever seen to deal with their enemies. Charlie pops up in all the expected places (Cato Street, St Peter's Fields, the Luddites - though he misses out on the Tolpuddle Martyrs) and even engineers Shelley's drowning. On another level, it could be a series of tall stories by a vagrant who turned his imagination to good effect to wheedle his listeners into laying on little luxuries for him. The reader has to choose.

Julian Rathbone writes with his usual skill. A previous reviwer thought the Shelley scene rather dull - not so. The irony of Shelley, the upper class revolutionary, being waited on by his womenfolk (including Mary Wollstonecraft's daughter!! And his raffish household really comes to life in this chapter.

I would pick out his name dropping: John Constable, painting clouds; Darcy (who turned out to be a disappointment, as many of us expected), Karl Marx, Mary Ellis (George Eliot) - and many others.

The only irritating feature -hinted at in the title to this review - is an over-cleverness that comes from knowing anachronisms: 'agent 003'; 'safe houses'- the author's little prods in the ribs. Let's leave Bond and Le Carre in the 20th Cnetury, please. Maybe 4 1/2 stars after all - but too good a book to merit 4 stars only.

Rollicking, witty and enjoyable ..., 03 Mar 2005
... but you have to be clever enough to get the jokes and there are hundreds of them. As one reviewer said, there are references to modern people slyly worked in. Did you pick up the one about George W. Bush? Julian Rathbone throws in references to other works by famous authors all the time, sometimes even stopping to explain whom he is trying to plagiarise this time, with his tongue firmly in his cheek. This is why he only gets 4 stars from me and not the Full Monty. Sometimes he is just TOO clever and an average reader will have no idea what he is on about. Plenty of eroticism though and some rumbustious sex too. Loads of social comment. Personally I love his work.

Slightly Disapointing, 03 Aug 2004
As others have said, the characters are fascinating, and you're given a glimpse into one of the less well known periods of British history. If, like me, you'd heard of Peterloo and the Corn Laws, but didn't know what they actually were, then you'll find this an interesting read.

The down side is that there isn't really a plot. Nothing gets resolved in the end, and most of the book is just repetition of similar events. It really reads as if the author got bored half-way through writing it, or maybe realised that he could save half the story for a sequel.

It was an amusing and pleasant read, and maybe if you approach it with that expectation, savouring the journey rather than the arrival, then maybe this wouldn't be a bad choice.

Fun, Fighting & Frolics aplenty, 13 Oct 2003
This is a novel in the vein of Flashman, but with considerably more sex - which is saying something! Rathbone is superb at constructing long jokes. He keeps some of these running throughout whilst surprising the reader with accurate historical interludes. One shouldn't be surprised that the late Romantic poets were considered threats to society, or that Wellington was more than just a general. This is a book for people with a certain amount of understanding about History - not for people who need to be lead around the subject. There are some excellent one-liners, and the story has good pace and impact - I'd thoroughly recommend this book to intelligent readers who l