Seventh Book in the Crowner John Series - Rated 
Bernard Knight, or to give him his correct title, Professor Bernard Knight, CBE, was a pathologist to the Home office until 1980 when he was appointed Professor of Forensic Pathology at the University of Wales College of medicine, 1980. He has written the extremely successful Crowner John series of medieval mysteries, of which there are now ten or eleven books, His character Crowner John is certainly among my favourite characters in medieval mysteries.
In 12th century England much of the country lies under the rule of the Royal Forest Laws, with all hunting reserved for the King. When times are hard the ordinary villagers may well turn to poaching to boos their meagre larder, but the penalties are harsh and almost always upheld. The penalty for killing a deer on the King's land is mutilation or death and the laws are upheld by the King's foresters.
When a horse gallops into the village of Sigford, and its rider is being dragged along by the stirrup, with a broken arrow shaft sticking out of his back and the wearing the uniform of a senior forester there are any number of people who may have had cause to hate the man to such a degree that they would take his life. However when a second forester is attacked Sir John decides that there is something far more sinister than just a grudge killing and begins to uncover evidence of something far more sinister. And why is John's brother-in-law, the sheriff, Sir Richard de Revelle, a staunch supporter of Prince John taking such an interest in the attacks?
Prosaic and prolix, but authentic - Rated 
Did you know that the Woodmote was a court that dealt with offences against the vert amounting to less than four pence, whereas larger vert offences and those against venison were dealt with by the Forest Eyre? Well, you will do after reading this novel, because the author tells you several times. As always, Knight packs plenty of history and very little mystery into this Crowner yarn. Much of the dialogue is stilted and unnatural, sounding like a history lecture. The trick in historical fiction is to be authentic without the authenticity being obtrusive, a trick that Knight has not mastered. Nor is he unfailingly accurate, despite his obviously meticulous research. The term 'rogering' is certainly anachronistic, and I'm not sure that 'goodwife' was current at the time, either.
This is an adventure story rather than a mystery. It is therefore in the tradition of Ivanhoe, but without Scott's poetry. The subplot involves complications in the hero's extramarital affairs, and this aspect of the story is surprisingly well done, leading to a very poignant finale.
These novels are prone to misprints, which is annoying. Thus we have a character who is fighting for his life and we are told "...it was killed or be killed". Well, I suspect it was actually "kill or be killed", but it's a great way to break the tension in a fight scene. I spotted a dozen or more such mistakes, including one sentence which had become garbled beyond all comprehension.
As always, Knight draws out scenes that most writers would deal with more succinctly, and so devotes 410 pages to what could have been related in less than 300.
This series will appeal to lovers of historical fiction who value authenticity and character depiction rather than literary prose or twists and turns in the plot. If you are new to the series and would like to try it, start with the first, The Sanctuary Seekers, because the novels form a continuous narrative.
|
