Customer Reviews

The Isle of Stone: A Novel of Ancient Sparta

5 star:		(18)
4 star:		(9)
3 star:		(6)
2 star:		(4)
1 star:		(4)

 

 

I love a good historical novel though I'm leery of picking them up these days since so many disappoint. This one, I'm delighted to say, did not. In fact, although it had a few dry moments, it captured me as only the best fiction can, reeling me in until I found myself still reading as the clock approached 2 A.M., unwilling to put it aside until I'd reached the final page. What better testament of a book's quality is there than that?

In some ways I liked Nicastro's new novel even better than Pressfield's Gates of Fire which is a long time favorite of mine. Nicastro handled the Greeks more tellingly and to better effect, I think, than Pressfield did (though it's a long time since I read Gates). More, while I found myself liking Nicastro's Spartans a good deal less than I had Pressfield's, no doubt because Nicastro removed the romantic gloss one finds over everything in the Pressfield book, I still became fascinated by, and oddly attracted to, the personas of the main characters including Antalcidas, the spurned and wounded son, and Damatria his even more deeply damaged mother.

One generation, Nicastro shows us, passes its pain to the next, giving us these Spartans in all their proto-fascist harshness as they torment and dominate the Helots who serve them. But we also see, in stark terms, just how this hard-edged society which the Spartans have built themselves wears down and destroys its own leading adherents no less than the enslaved Helots who live in fear beneath them.

The battle scenes weren't as glorious as Pressfield does them but the horror and futility of it all is so much clearer. Nor do the Athenians come off much better. All are human beings in utterly human circumstances, doing what must be done to get by. Some are fools and some are wise but even the wise are only men, ruled by circumstances and events. There were a few things I didn't care for: the author uses an ominscient narrator's voice, redolent of 19th century writing which jars a bit when it manifests. But, frankly, Nicastro makes it work anyway and it's not ultimately distracting. I also wasn't keen on Nicastro's decision to jump about in telling his tale, from one point of view to another, from the Laconian Valley of the Peloponnesians to Athens and back again. But he made that work, too.

In sum he surmounted the obstacles he set for himself, like the Spartans surmount the jagged rocks of Sphacteria where they are ultimately trapped by the Athenian general Demosthenes. I especially liked the book's end which gives us no heroic posturing, no larger than life champions surpassing all others, but only men and women, trapped in their own worlds, unable to free themselves and reduced, at last, to accepting what life has cast up from the sea beyond.

Nicastro makes them all live again in the pain they endure and, uncomprehendingly, inflict on those around them. In so doing he has restored the flesh of belief to the bones of the ancient world. I'm glad I took a chance on this one.

Stuart W. Mirsky author of The King of Vinland's Saga

P.S. Here are some other quite decent works of historical fiction for those with a fairly broad range of interest:

With Fire and Sword - Polish knights errant battle to save the kingdom in the face of a rising by the Cossacks

Shogun - English navigator shipwrecked with his crew on the coast of medieval Japan with no way to make it home again

Gates of Fire: An Epic Novel of the Battle of Thermopylae - Spartan heroes battle to save their homeland in the face of an epic Persian invasion

Musashi: An Epic Novel of the Samurai Era - Itinerant Japanese peasant soldier struggles to remake himself as a master samurai and strategist

In this historical novel, Nicastro details the two lowest points of Spartan history: the disastrous earthquake of 464BCE and the surrender of the island on Sphacteria in 425. Nicastro frames a story around two brothers who have a twisted nexus between these two events.

The primary source for the story of Sphacteria is from Book IV of Thucydides The History of the Peloponnesian War. At first glance, the siege of Sphacteria does not seem to be the most exciting topic to write a book about. In truth, it is not the most exciting event in military history. That said, Nicastro does a terrific job of captivating the reader with an interesting story that's full of anectodes about Spartan life.

The book is very well-researched. Nicastro summoned the assistance of leading authorities on ancient Sparta (such as Paul Cartledge of Cambridge and Anton Powell) to re-create the historical drama with authenticity. Likewise, the author also gives details from the Athenian point of view as well. Even scholars who are familiar with Thucydides may learn some of the subtle details of the siege.

While many of the details of this book are fabricated (not a knock on the novel), the basic story is true. Sphacteria was the first known time that Spartan hoplites ever surrendered to the enemy. The fallout had a big effect on both sides of the war. For that reason, this book is highly recommended to all persons who have an interest in classical history.

As a fan of Pressfield's novels about the Greeks, I thought I'd branch out and try another author writing on the topic. I certainly enjoyed Nicastro's candid portrayal of the Spartans and feel that he does an excellent job of giving a general depiction of Spartan attitude and lifestyle, but I didn't find the particular plot as interesting or engaging as I thought I might. The book never dragged too terribly, but it never really excited me either.

Ostensibly an account of one critical campaign in the Peloponnesian War, Nicholas Nicastro's Isle of Stone is really much more: a richly imagined peek inside totalitarian Sparta. The novel has at least three things going for it: story, writing and historical accuracy.

Story: The Pylos campaign, which culminated in the siege of Sphacteria, was one of the most curious episodes in the long war between Athens and Sparta yet Thucydides, the great historian of that conflict, does not describe it in much detail. It certainly merited a fuller treatment. Nicastro's narrative primarily focuses on the Spartan troops trapped on the island but we also meet the Athenian politician/general Nicias and his rival, the demagogue Cleon. The crew of the Athenian trireme Terror make a number of appearances and provide a bit of comic relief.

Writing: The novel is extremely well written. The characters and dialogue in historical novels can often seem silly or anachronistic but that is not the case here. Antalcidas and Damatria, the two main characters, really come to life and the final chapters are genuinely moving.

Accuracy: Nicastro clearly did a thorough job of research, consulting both ancient texts and the latest research to build up a convincing picture of Spartan society. I learned a few things while reviewing the manuscript (see page 361) though, I hasten to add, the prose is never didactic. Ancient Sparta isn't exactly the most well documented society so some imagination was necessary but in this novel the gaps are filled with very plausible speculation.

Though it lacks the clever framing device and famous main character of his Empire of Ashes, Isle of Stone is definitely the better book. There are a couple typos but the most glaring one concerns the accent marks on a Greek word (page 309) so few readers will probably notice. Overall this is a highly entertaining novel.

I have to differ with some of the opinions of the two reviewers below-- this book (and this author) is an impressive departure from the competition. On the surface, Nicastro knows his facts, and he knows how to build dramatic tension into this story of the famous siege of Sphacteria in 425 BC. On a deeper level, he illuminates both what is familiar and alien about the people and cultures of these ancient worlds. Perhaps most risky for him, he doesn't pander to the expectations of his readers--he challenges them. For this reason Nicastro will probably never be as popular as Stephen Pressfield, who skillfully but unfortunately peddles many heroic cliches about the Spartans in "Gates of Fire". Yet it is impressive that this author succeeds in being both true to the period, and highly relevant to the politics of this moment--a quality this book shares with "Empire of Ashes".

Readers should note that Paul Cartledge, perhaps the world's foremost expert on Sparta, has enthusiastically endorsed this book, as has historian/author Barry ("The Battle of Salamis") Strauss. The novel's accuracy is unquestionable--it just remains to be seen whether readers warm up to Nicastro's uncompromising vision.

There's an old chestnut in the writing business that hinges on the kindergarten "show and tell" time. Most children would be bored by a lecture on the zebra--they'd rather see one. Taken metaphorically, a good writer shows the important things that happens in his book and tells only enough to fill in gaps in the reader's knowledge.

The Isle of Stone is the story of Antalcidas and Epitadas, Spartan soldiers and sons Damatria. Raped by a helot on her wedding day, Damatria is psychologically damaged and raises her two sons in markedly different ways, turning them into very different men. As adults, they find themselves trapped on a barren island, surrounded by their Athenian enemies and faced with starvation or death in battle. You couldn't ask for a more compelling setup.

The majority of The Isle of Stone is telling rather than showing. Nicastro seems to prefer--until the very end--narrating from a distant remove to bringing us into the nitty-gritty action of the story. Some passages that should be exciting are as bone-dry and analytical as Thucydides, who at least recognized that an audience has to be entertained if they're going to keep reading.

The biggest problem with the "telling" is that the two main characters, Antalcidas and Epitadas, are almost never shown fighting or doing anything noteworthy until the end of the book. When they go to battle, Nicastro shows us the action from a distance or the perspective of several minor characters, and only after the fact is it revealed that it was one of our heroes that did this or that. Some of the narration is so allusive or vague that important details slipped by undetected--for instance, until they were shown on the island, I had no idea, based on Nicastro's narration, that Antalcidas and Epitadas were among those stranded there. That's the kind of thing that needs to be made clear.

I've dwelt on the book's problems, but I must say that the end of the book was good, almost making up for the ill-paced stuff leading up to it. Here Nicastro does what he should have been doing all along--bring the reader into the action and showing Antalcidas and Epitadas under fire. The final battle scenes are gripping--on par with the repeatedly-mentioned Stephen Pressfield--and created a powerful sense of desperation and disappointment in me as I read. Especially moving, or perhaps upsetting, was the fate of Antalcidas's wife and child.

On a side note, it seems that Nicastro is trying to do a hit-job on Sparta, and that makes The Isle of Stone almost an anti-Gates of Fire or anti-300. He dwells on the cruelty and seemingly humanity-bankrupt aspects of Spartan culture. The result is just as realistic as Pressfield's work, though the two authors emphasize different sides of the same coin.

Other good parts of the novel included the characterization of Cleon, an actual historical figure from Athens and a notorious demagogue. Some of the banter between the Acharnian sailors is hilarious and the very personal nature of Athenian politics was well-drawn. And the specialty of this kind of fiction--the grueling Hellenic combat--is superb once Nicastro brings the reader into the action.

Overall, I want to give The Isle of the Stone the benefit of the doubt. Four stars seems too high and three too low a rating, but I'll compromise in favor of the parts of the novel--the first chapter and the final sixty pages or so--that worked so well and moved me so much.

Recommended.

I was looking for a historically accurate story about Spartan warriors' fabled training methods and their legendary battlefield heroics. Nicastro delivered both of those things in this compelling novel that was as entertaining as it was informative.

This fast-reading book was centered on the Peloponnesian battle (Sparta versus Athens) over the small island of Sphacteria in 425 B.C. Much more than just a battlefield novel, Nicastro provided detailed insights into Spartan culture, including daily life, socio-economic norms, and the politics of the day. Set in the sixth year of the Peloponnesian War, I enjoyed the unexpected similarities between Nicastro's Greek world and the United States today after six-plus years fighting the war on terrorism: dedicated warriors; a tough, protracted war; and the people and politicians divided over the future of the war.

Nicastro's well-researched understanding of Spartan life and his lively, easy-to-read writing style brought to life the story of this little-known but strategically important battle. I highly recommend this book to anyone, especially military history buffs or those who enjoy reading about heroic warriors and their ways.

Overall I enjoyed Nicastro's handling of the mundane Spartan life back home. While I agree that Pressfield's Gates of Fire depicted the battle scenes with better detail and gripping vision, Nicastro impressed me with his depictions of the Rearing, the period of brutal training for boys beginning at the age of seven, and with the other scenes of Spartan life.

At the end of the novel, when the Spartans had surrendered and been led away in captivity, this book broke my heart at the depiction of how some of the soldiers' family members were treated back home. While there is much to be admired in the Spartan's culture, there is much to be loathed as well. And Nicastro's passage of the ultimate fate of an infant who was not found worthy to be accepted in Spartan society moved me deeply. I read those two pages over and over. For me, that passage alone was worth the price of the book.

Full Disclosure: I've been a fan of Nicastro's writing for some time, and eagerly awaited this book. The depth of his main characters and the relentless drive of his narrative create a seamless blend of the fictive and the historical. The reader is left with a greater understanding of the period's most important campaign, and with the rare privilege of glimpsing what it might have been like to live through it.

The Island of Stone focuses on an engagement between isolated Spartans and Athenians during the Pelopponesian War. Although the specifics are different, the novel covers the same general time period as Mary Renault's outstanding The Last of the Wine and Stephen Pressfield's enjoyable Tides of War. Both books are better than this one. I was unimpressed by Nicastro's Empire of Ashes, which to me seemed to be written in the Oliver Stone way of history: as much conjecture as research. This novel is more grounded in research; however, I wonder if it would have benefited from more conjecture. The best parts deal with the Rearing, the years-long training period of young Spartans as they are groomed into Spartiates. Very few books deal with the Rearing in detail, and it is a subject on which I wish Nicastro would have invested more time and thought. It would also have distanced the novel from Pressfield's tour de force Gates of Fire, which deals with similar themes and character types. Despite the novel's shortcomings, I recommend it to anyone interested in historical fiction set in ancient Greece. Just read Renault and Pressfield first.