Customer Reviews

Crusader Gold

5 star:		(4)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(5)
1 star:		(4)

 

 

I thought Crusader Gold's premise had promise. Unfortunately, while I found the main characters interesting and attention-worthy, and the history was complex and fascinating, the rest of the book felt like tissue paper trying vainly to hold these jewels into some semblance of a whole skein.

The pacing was entirely off. Most of the book is loaded down with complex historical exposition disguised as dialogue. When excitement does happen, it feels sudden, jarring, and out-of-place. In particular, Crusader Gold see-sawed back and forth between over-explaining and repeating information and skipping over things as though the author suddenly realized he needed to speed things up; unfortunately he often skipped just the wrong information, leaving things confused.

There are two distinct "feels" in this book that don't jibe with one another. The over-explaining of historical and technical portions of the book gives the feel of an ultra-real adventure novel in which the author wants you to know that everything he writes is absolutely possible. However, everything having to do with the bad guys (the Nazis) in this book is one-dimensional and overblown---something you might be able to get away with in a brain-candy thrill-ride, but not in a 'realistic' adventure. In addition, the main characters find their way through the plot courtesy of just enough improbable coincidence and happenstance that such ultra-realism is similarly stretched to the breaking point. Crusader Gold really needs to be one or the other: quick brain-candy thrill ride with just enough information to make it somewhat real, or ultra-realistic info-fest with all aspects given equal attention. Speaking of Nazis, the bad guys are so utterly, completely one-dimensional that they might as well be rabid dogs.

As if all of that weren't enough, the ending is quite anticlimactic. Obviously I won't give away the details, but suffice it to say that just when you're sure you still have some interesting mileage left because the characters haven't yet found their objective, it's all cut short and solved through a little dialogue.

The website of David Gibbins, the author of "Crusader Gold," roars off with this boastful trumpet blast: "New York Times bestselling author and archaeologist David Gibbins, whose novels Atlantis and Crusader Gold have sold more than half a million copies since 2005 and are being published in more than 30 languages." Who am I to doubt a word of it? Gibbins holds a Ph.D. in archeology. He was born in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, but he has based his education and career in the UK. Throughout the 1990s he was a university lecturer who taught archaeology, art history and ancient history. He is now, we are informed, devoting himself to writing novels and carrying out archeological fieldwork on a full-time basis.

Dr. Gibbins' fiction inspires some pretty profound reactions. At the Amazon UK site, the first of the two spotlighted reviews for his previous book, "Atlantis," offered these comments: "This is quite possibly the WORST book I have ever had the misfortune to read. I stuck with it thinking it has to get better when they get to Atlantis.... Please for the love of God save your money and buy something else! This book is a thinly vailed [sic] Science [sic] lesson masquerading as an adventure novel!" The second said, "Despite the atrocious ratings that have already labelled this book a disaster, I personally think that it was not all that bad." On the back cover of the book the English newspaper, the Mirror, is quoted rhetorically asking, "What do you get if you cross Indiana Jones with Dan Brown? Answer: David Gibbons." One Amazon UK reviewer snorted at that, saying, "I rather feel that the Answer should have been more along the lines of `A complete waste of money'."

This is a "what if" type of book. The particular one here being what if Harald Hardrada, the Viking King of Norway who invaded England in 1066, hadn't actually died in the battle at Stamford Bridge at the hands of the defending Anglo-Saxons? Now Harald was a barbarian's barbarian; he'd been everywhere and done everything that a Viking thought worth going or doing. He was the kind of guy who would buy Conan the Barbarian a beer and maybe offer him a few pointers. As a youngster on the losing side of a Viking battle, he'd high-tailed it down to Constantinople, risen high in the Imperial Guard, then returned home flush with loot, murdered his brother Magnus and settled in to be a king.

What if, asks Gibbins, Harald had only been wounded in the battle? If he had recuperated at the Monastery at Iona, then sailed off into the western sunset? He even quotes Tennyson on that point, but not very appropriately, I'm afraid. Here's a much more pertinent jingle from the Poet Laureate: "Death closes all; but something ere the end, / Some work of noble note may yet be done / ... for my purpose holds / To sail beyond the sunset, and the baths / Of all the western stars , until I die. / ... Tho' much is taken, much abides, and tho' / We are not now that strength which in old days / Moved earth and heaven; that which we are, we are."

Gibbins' idea is a fine one: tracing Harald in his last work of noble note. His execution of the idea, though, is atrocious. The man simply hasn't a clue about dramatic pacing. The plot has the regularity and predictability of a Ferris Wheel: voyage, lecture, discovery, lecture, crisis; voyage (last crisis now virtually forgotten), lecture, discovery, lecture, crisis ... and so on to the end. The great final confrontation (you didn't imagine there would NOT be a great final confrontation, did you?) is neither more nor less than any of the half dozen or more crises that preceded it.

Gibbins' wordsmithing skills are on a par with his plotting. His lectures, oh, his endless lectures! Page after page, one character explains things to another character who by all the laws of commonsense ought already to know. The teacher should be bound, gagged and locked in a closet by the thriller writer.

His characters have no inner life. They exist solely at the behest of the plot and act only to forward it. Here is an example that is appallingly typical of the whole book:

"`It's twenty-three metres from the edge of the platform to water surface, give or take a few centimetres. We'll need to rig a pretty elaborate gantry to get the machinery operational.'

"`If they could do it in the 1950s, we can do it now. I'll trust your ingenuity.'

"`As it happens, I've designed just the thing.'" [Page 307 of the trade paperback]

There are other faults, but I'll content myself with just two. Gibbins is an archeologist. He taught archeology. Why, then, are his heroes such thorough-going treasure hunters and looters that they make Indiana Jones look positively respectable and scholarly?

And why, even this Da Vinci Code-mad age, must we have yet another sinister Vatican conspiracy? Consider this:

"`There's a kind of internal inquisition, run by one of the cardinals. It's always been there. But this is more sinister, as bad as it can get.... All I can say now is he's shockingly powerful inside the Vatican. He could squash me on a whim. I've got nothing to pin on him for certain but enough to put his activities in the spotlight when I go public about this.'" [Page 198]

Hm, let's see now. The book was published in 2006. We can safely assume that it refers to events no later than early 2005. This very powerful cardinal who runs an internal inquisition that's always been there, he's a member of a clandestine organization that is strongly associated with Germans. Now, who could that be?

It so happens that I am not Catholic, but I am getting truly tired of this sort of Dan Brown-style nonsense, all for the sake of selling thrillers. Why can't we find our sinister villains elsewhere? A Mennonite conspiracy carried out by a shadowy band of latter day Cathar knights--now THAT would be something!

Two stars. After all, the book has the undeniable virtue of not being by Dan Brown.

I really, really, really wanted to like this book. I like the whole concept behind it and the way it sets off on one of those globe-trotting adventures I'm so fond of reading.

Within 10 pages, this book had me yawning and wondering how long it would take to finish.

The problem as I see it is that Dr. Gibbins is a very technically proficient writer. All the paragraphs are perfectly ordered. The ideas and dialogue are presented in a logical fashion. The appropriate things happen at the appropriate times. But its all just wooden. The entire time I was reading this, I kept thinking that "this is the book a college professor writes to show his students how great he is even though he can't get published". The whole thing just feels too forumlaic and contrived. Almost like something a computer would turn out if you gave it a bullet point outline of a story.

Will I try another Gibbins book? Probably. But I can't say that I'll be looking too hard to find one.

Man what a boring book. There is no mystery, no suspense, and no action whatsoever. This whole book can be based on coincidences. The characters are always in the right place at the right time. This book is supposed to be a treasure hunt but all it really is is the characters traveling from different locations easily solving the next "riddle" in the search. Seriously every place they go one person in their group knows all the history of the area and the people and can solve the next clue. Even when there seems to be no way with the characters background that anyone would know what to do next someone has conveniently done research the night before. I'm not kidding, on two different occasions a character comes out and says they were keeping quiet but just did research on the subject the day before and here is what the history is and this is what we should do next. Also there is no conflict until over 200 pages in and even when it is revealed it is very weak and really isn't all that much a factor for the rest of the book and is resolved with a snap of the finger. Another thing I hated was the author mentioned his first book way too much. I didn't read it so all of the pointless references did nothing for me. One more thing. The characters always murmured. You almost couldn't go a page without someone murmuring something even when a murmur wasn't the correct way to describe what they were saying. Just a bad bad book.

After enjoying David Gibbins' Atlantis, I was excited about reading Crusader Gold. The plot of this novel centers on marine archaeologist Jack Howard and his International Maritime University team's search for the greatest lost treasure of the Hebrews: the Menorah, which was looted from their temple by the Romans. Professor and marine archaeologist Gibbins spins a plausible alternate history predicated on the idea that Viking king Harald Hardrada was not killed by the Anglo-Saxons, but survived to continue his plundering, eventually making off with the Hebrew treasure, and venturing off into the west.

As he did throughout Atlantis, Gibbins presents a rich, detailed historical backdrop. He makes liberal use of the "As you know, Bob" technique, in which massive quantities of information are presented in the guise of dialogue. Unfortunately, he lays it on too thick too often, and the plot grinds to frequent halts under the weight of heaps of stiff, unbelievable conversation, lacking the natural flow of genuine conversation. Many sections come across as lectures.

The characters in Crusader Gold serve primarily to tell the reader the back story and go through the motions of plot. We don't learn much about the individuals, and they lack character arcs, either within the book or from book-to-book for returning characters. There are some good action sequences, but Gibbins gives the reader little reason to wonder or even care if they will survive. The adversaries are painted in only the broadest strokes: an ancient group with Nazi connections. Like the protagonists, they are not afforded a great deal of development. The requisite Vatican conspiracy connection also rears its head to annoy those of us who are ready for something different, leading one to wonder when the echoes of The Da Vinci Code will fade away, if ever.

The action sequences are entertaining, if not particularly suspenseful, and the history is interesting, though dry. The climactic battle takes place at an unexpected locale, which is a plus. Crusader Gold is a must-read for devoted Gibbins fans, but a major letdown for readers looking for fast-paced action and gripping suspense.

I first experienced David Gibbins while reading Atlantis - and had hoped for an improvement. While his depth of knowledge and research is very evident, as is his care in making sure the reader is kept informed - that takes over the book. I don't mind learning when I read for fun - but I also seek excitement and intrigue - not just a whole series of pages on history. At times, the characters converse like academic professors bent on showing their knowledge - and less with the excitement and passion you would expect in the situations they find themselves in. The first 100 pages found me waiting for something to actually happen...

That said - this was a good read from an escapism perspective - the idea of a boat from 1000 years ago carrying information that we can access now - learning about society in those times - a neat concept. This author has potential..

This is the first book by David Gibbins that I have read and I will not be eagerly looking to read others by him (I struggled to finish this book). I wanted desperately to like this book. I love historically/fact based action-adventure stories (Rollins, Brown, Crichten). I teach medieval history and love to read novels that integrate that information into them. This book included several interesting characters and there was an exciting action-scene on page 166 that grabbed my interest (as the main character and his friend investigated an iceberg). Gibbins weaves together a variety of historical facts and geography, but the end product is weak. I felt as though I was reading a history book. The majority of information in the book is communicated by one character describing historical events or "off screen" events to another. In several instances, "roadblocks" or mysteries are solved by a character scratching his head and re-examining the document or engraving.

I had read an earlier book "Atlantis" and it was fairly good. It was a bit overblown with fantastic plot twists. Crusaders Gold does it one better. I found myself skimming pages to get past the one dimensional characters. The explanations of the science and history are lengthy but pretty accurate. However, the author makes no attempt at framing the scientific investigations with some realistic touches. The interjection of a neo-Nazi secret society to tie together the thriller part of the book was, in my estimation, over the top.

I really enjoy historical novels. I love books by Jeff Shaara. I especially enjoyed "The Battle of the Crater" by Newt Gingrich. But this novel was simply boring. (Not counting all the words you couldn't possibly pronounce.) The reader was bogged down in so much medieval history, I got the impression the author didn't even want to write a story line. This is my first book by this author, and it will be my last. Sorry, I just can't handle the boredom...

Terrible, terrible book! ineptly intertwines: Vikings, the fall of Constantinople, Jesuits, early American settlements, the battles of 1066, Vatican conspiracies, icebergs, Greek archeology, Nazis--the full_kitchen sink! This man should be PROHIBITED from EVER putting pen to paper ever again! On the audio book, the reader does a VERY, VERY GOOD JOB of putting a bow on the pig! Much better than the "author" deserved!