Customer Reviews

The House of Death: A Mystery of Alexander the Great

5 star:		(3)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

Given Paul Doherty's prolific pen, this is the first of his many mysteries I have read. I must confess that I found this enjoyable but nothing makes it outstanding compared to contemporaries such as Davis, Saylor, Gregory et al.
The novel brings in a new sleuth - Telamon, boyhood friend of Alexander, physician extraordinaire - who uses his intellect to move through Alexander's encampment off the Hellespont to pinpoint a murderer who is killing both guides and physicians with some alacrity ensuring that a single winged celtic style dagger is left behind with each body together with quotes from the Iliad designed to unsettle Alexander's mind. In itself, this seems straightforward but Doherty moves beyond the plain murder mystery, taking us into the politics of the time as Alexander prepares to face both Arsites and Memnon, generals of Darius to weave a credible timeline and powerful motivation behind all of the actions. We are shifted from Alexander's camp to Darius palace to witness the thrust and counter of political intrigue as each seeks to confuse and misdirect the other.
In some respects, the place and method of this murder mystery echoes JMR's 'Nobody Loves A Centurion' with the culprit picking off people in a camp where politics is all important. Alexander's failure to gain good auspices, the spying and counterspying of multiple people all mingle to give both motive and opportunity to a range of people. Part of Telamon's problem is to discern precisely who is (or not) a spy and which side they are on.
Telamon is eventually enlists a red-haired Theban ex-slave, ex-handmaiden of Athena who becomes his assistant and, ultimately, provides the vital link to help Telamon discover who Naiphat, and therefore the culprit, is.
Doherty's grasp of the time is good, his characterization excellent (though Telamon seems overly dry occasionally) and his ability to confound the reader makes this an enjoyable read. The reason this only gets four stars is because all the protagonists have such good alibis that becomes inevitable that only one person can be the guilty party several chapters before the denouement. As such it ends up being more confirmation of strong reader's suspicions, rather than a real surprise.
However, this is enjoyable enough to ensure I read the next Alexander mystery from Doherty's pen.

The House of Death is an entertaining little novel (270 pages)--part historical mystery, part character sketch, and part war story. It is about Telamon, an observant physician, who must solve a series of murders afflicting the Macedonian war camp before Alexander embarks to invade the Persian Empire. Although the novel starts slow, burdened by too much historical detail, it picks up speed once Telamon is among the Macedonians and investigating the murders of Alexander's guides. The mystery crackles, with several unexplained deaths, the suggestion of a conspiracy, numerous suspects, and the constant threat of Alexander's displeasure. Telamon may be the protagonist, but Alexander is the star: The author's portrayal is occasionally unfavorable, zeroing in on Alexander's impetuousness and hunger for personal glory. But even these traits have a purpose, and by the end Alexander embodies a shrewdness that has rarely been attributed to him in other books.

Telamon is a likable main character who deigns a cold, clinical demeanor but is in fact a compassionate soul. He instantly reminds me of Ruso, the physician-detective in Ruth Downie's splendid ancient Rome mystery series. Both are reluctant investigators who nevertheless treasure the truth and have willful former slaves as love interests. Since The House of Death was written first, I wonder if Doherty's Telamon inspired Downie's Ruso. Doherty also includes a motley supporting cast, highlighted by spymaster Aristander with his bodyguard of singing Celts, the dwarf Hercules, and the Greek mercenary Memnon.

In the last twenty pages, the novel changes course and becomes a war story, featuring stirring descriptions of combat that would be home in a Bernard Cornwell book. Doherty makes an effort to depict and explain Alexander's tactics, especially in an extended conversation between Telamon and Cassandra. At first, the discussion seems like an unnecessary chunk of exposition, but it actually foreshadows the engagement between Alexander and the Persians that is yet to come.

If the novel has a weakness, it is the way the mystery fizzles at the end. The resolution is uncreative, and I think that Telamon makes deductions independently of the reader--i.e., the reader is not capable of solving the mystery along with Telamon because the story obfuscates the important clues and evidence. This quibble is minor in an otherwise enjoyable novel, and I look forward to reading more of Telamon's adventures alongside Alexander the Great.

Having read the two previous books in this series I was really looking forward to this book. I am not disappointed. "The House Of Death" is indeed a very good mystery of Alexander the Great. It takes of immediately after the end of "A Murder In Thebes" and the murders and mysteries begin in the first chapter. The new main character Telamon is an interesting improvement, although a bit anachronistic. A pacifist and non-drinker in 334 BC!
Unwillingly he comes into the camp of Alexander at Sestos and is plunged into a dangerous web of intrigue, murder and mystery. The story is exciting and fast-moving, often gruesome. There is a lot of hidden humour and ironies. Telamon's many troubles with solving the mass murder in Alexander's camp are set against the planning and actions of the Battle of the Granicus, a much larger mass murder indeed.
I have read a lot of books about Alexander the Great, both fiction and fact. This is a most readable book, almost the best of the ones I am aquainted with. It is written in the tradition of Mary Reanult ant in some ways almost as a sequel to "Fire Of Heaven".
I can warmly recomment it to all who has an interest in Alexander and his times&troubles.

This supposed historical murder mystery will disappoint any intelligent reader unless she is deeply into the itinerary and military tactics of Alexander the Great, or what his soldiers wore. Their military clothes, that is. Author P.C. Doherty at one memorable point intrudes a scene of a "transvestite" Athenian footsoldier in makeup and drag swivel-hipping his way around Alexander's first Asia Minor army campsite, near Troy. It is unfortunately a typical example of Doherty's style: ludicrous and ahistorical, thinly written, and utterly unconnected with the plot. We do, eventually, get a fine recreation of Alexander's first great victory against the Persians, complete with what his soldiers wore into battle as well as Alexander's bold tactics, intricate strategies, fiery leadership, and personal bravery. And the Asian countryside is pleasantly depicted. But that's it. As a historical murder mystery, the book collapses, its plot totally unconvincing, its historicity in considerable doubt.

The problem is twofold. First, it appears that Doherty writes his novels at 3 a.m. during caffeine jags. Characterization moves from the muddled and inconsistent to the laughably stick-figure, particularly with Alexander's unruly bevy of battle-competent generals. The writing is hasty, off-putting, jerky. The plot makes little or no sense and moves forward in a similarly jerky, stick-figure fashion. The detective, a young doctor named Telamon, is (uncharacteristically for Doherty) somewhat complex as a person, but not very convincing as a sleuth. It is as though Doherty invented the deus ex machina to keep things moving along. The several villains are given internally inconsistent motivations and characterizations. Alexander himself is stereotypically (and ahistorically) pseudopsychoanalyzed by Doherty as the almost schizoid child of a stern dictatorial womanizing father and a feminist-mystic hysterical termagent of a mother; he is brilliant and commandingly mature at one moment, confused and peevishly childish at another. None of it seems well thought through, much less well plotted.

The second problem is Doherty's day job, as headmaster of an English preparatory school. Or, at least, so it seems. Sex between persons of the same gender, especially between adult and adolescent males, was an accepted commonplace of ancient Greek (as well as late Persian and Roman) society and it was an important part of Alexander's life and exploits. However, sex between students of the same gender, or between adult masters and their students, though constantly a temptation in single-gender boarding schools, is today utterly verboten. A headmaster who wrote in any way approvingly of such would soon be sacked. Doherty obediently follows fashion here, looking down his nose at any same-sex dealings. Moreover, modern readers ignorantly expect all same-sex relationships to be modeled upon and to approximate heterosexual ones; that the range of, and moral attitudes toward, sexual modes such as lesbianism, pedophilia, or transvestism would have been the same in the past as they are now; and that humans can only be either heterosexual or homosexual. Doherty panders blatantly to these oversimplified stupidities. While he admits that Alexander had sexual relations with several men, Doherty explains this away through amateur psychologizing. His adolescent males are either "bum boys," effeminate and mincing, or "normal," without any supposedly effeminate characteristics. Women are either "followers of Sappho" (that is, lesbian), or "straight." The reality of Mediterrenean sexual mapping two milennia ago was amazingly disparate from that of today--male/male permanent adult homosexual relationships were quite uncommon, sex by adult males with children (especially with boys) was normal and common, sexual promiscuity was a normal part of certain religious activities, transvestism was unknown, and males typically had sex with members of both genders during their whole lives, though less so as post-30 adults. (We know almost nothing about adult sexual relations between women.) Doherty seems to pride himself on his historical accuracy with regard to use of source materials, to the known events in Alexander's life, and to military matters, but he prostitutes himself on the altar of modern sexual prudishness when it comes to representing the sexual mores of Alexander's time. Along with his caffeinated writing, it ruins his historical murder mystery, for this reader at least.

Paul Doherty is the consummate professional when it comes to writing historical novels. I for one do not know how he can be so prolific with his offering of books and yet make sure that each of them is well researched. Whether they be 13th, 14th, or fifteenth century they are always true to the period. He also writes about Ancient Egypt and now he has taken to writing about Alexander the Great. Paul Doherty has the rare talent of making you feel as though you are there, be it medieval England, or battling with Alexander. The sounds and smells of the period seem to waft from the pages of his books.

The year is 334 BC and Alexander has decided to add the Persian empire to all of his other conquests. He has proved himself to be the most tactically aware army commander that the world has ever seen and has arrived at the Hellespoint with his troops who after all they have been through together would follow Alexander down into hell.

But not everything is going smoothly for the great commander, before attacking the empire of Darius III, the great Persian king, Alexander seeks approval from the gods by making sacrifices, but the omens do not bode well and worse still his guides are being systematically murdered . . .

It is one of those books you cannot stop reading until you are through the whole book. It is set in a time when Alexander was preparing his army for the first major battle in Persia. Based on many historical facts and characters but at the same time exploring Alexander's personality and genius. Apart from being historical reading, it has an excellent story behind, mystery, a bits of military strategy, and captures political plotting of then kings and army generals. It comes close to books like Egyptian and The Name of the Rose, yet it is not that deep and does not span that long time frame. I loved every piece of it!