As a way of retelling history, turning dry facts into a novel with a mix of real and constructed characters isn’t at all new, and if you objected to that I suppose you rule out Shakespeare and many others too. However, before I read this second volume in Conn Iggulden’s series, I read the first one, and was hooked. In well written hands the sweeping story of family feuds and battles for the throne makes a real thriller, even when the outcomes are well known. It has the feel of some well- researched preparation. Quite how much is absolutely true, who knows? History is generally told by the winner, and these stories have been told and retold many times, gaining whatever spin a storyteller might add. So, treat as a vivid novel, not a history book, and you will be well entertained. I look forward to the next one.

I've always been suspicious with the trend of parachuting a completely fictitious character into an historical novel, giving them a central role whilst surrounded by and interacting with actual historical characters. If the character is strong enough the real people fade into the background. If they are not strong enough they seem to be out of place. In this novel I'm afraid it's the latter. This is the second in Iggulden's series on the Wars of the Roses, the story of two feuding families, and their respective hangers-on, struggling for control of England in the 15th century. Normally the books in these sort of series stand alone but I found myself asking different questions, and not finding the answers, about the created character Derry Brewer. He is described as a 'spymaster' but if that was his role I'm surprised he wasn't sacked long before this book began. He doesn't foresee any disaster, doesn't prevent the Lancastrian side from facing defeats that border on annihilation, and doesn't come up with any clever trick, ruse or tactic to keep his favoured king on the throne. In fact when he's not swanning around in court he seems to be on the run for his own life. I thought spies were supposed to maintain some sort of anonymity? Iggulden admits that he has used artistic license in some of his reconstructions and that makes these historical novels difficult for me as, unless you're an expert on the period what's written becomes what actually happened in many readers' minds. To give an idea of the power of these ideas in artistic creations I heard on the radio the other day that there are US Vietnam veterans who actually think they suffered as the American prisoners did in the film The Deer Hunter – where they were forced to play Russian Roulette, with loaded guns, to feed the gambling sadism of the Vietnamese. The ONLY reference to this in any place is the film The Deer Hunter – so there is a responsibility on authors to be careful about their creations and if nothing else should come up with a cracking story. This book just didn't take off for me, although with all the intrigue around at the time there was plenty of opportunity.