mamasquirrel's review against another edition
1.0
So. I know that Rome invades the majority of England. And I know that Boudica is captured and her daughters raped. Consequently, at just passed half-way through the second installation of the series, I give up. It's battle after battle, in which Ban gets more evil and Boudica gets more desperate. I know there's probably some big reconciliation at some point, but I can't hang in there for it--too many other good books to read.
katmarhan's review against another edition
5.0
9/10
So good. It felt believable and historically accurate, as much as possible. The characters are compelling and heartbreaking. While I am anxious to read the rest of the series, I think it may be difficult. This book was, but satisfying as well.
So good. It felt believable and historically accurate, as much as possible. The characters are compelling and heartbreaking. While I am anxious to read the rest of the series, I think it may be difficult. This book was, but satisfying as well.
scyian's review against another edition
3.0
An excellent continuation from the first book marred by some character choices. Namely Caradoc’s reasoning for keeping his character where he historically ends up. Also Bán going full on ‘Anakin’ and embracing the dark side Roman way of life and actively destroying his own people makes little sense when he knew at the end of book one that he was lied to and his sister lived.
davidreyno's review against another edition
The series should have been called The Traitor Ban. Once again, Boudica (Breaca) is on the periphery as we struggle along with the focus on her traitorous, non-historical brother and the atrocities he suggests the Romans undertake to subjugate the tribes. I simply don't like anti-heros much, and Ban is a villain to me. I'll try with another author sometime in the future.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Violence
winangela's review
adventurous
emotional
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
4.5
stefhyena's review
3.0
I thought it was a good book- it seemed well researched and there was complexity in the way two very different cultures, and two spiritualities that are somewhat alien to a modern reader were presented. I found the spirituality intriguing, because people's conversations and beliefs in various (conflicting) gods were presented as "true". I also really loved the way the cultures were contrasted in all sorts of ways such as attitudes to gender, sexuality, family, what counts as being "civilised" and the way a lot of this came out in the careful writing sort of naturally but there is also a scene in Gaul where Cygfa and Valerius discuss war and ethics with Valerius representing reason, order and masculinity and Cygfa a sort of androgynous femininity, chaos and emotion and yet in other scenes Valerius is a mess of emotions while similtaneously trying to deny/avoid them.
So while it is a historical book about the Boudica and her times (the Roman invasion of Britain and the defence by indigenous people) it is also a book about identity (which is clearly shown to splinter in Valerius), relationships (complex alliances of family, love, religion and army mates) and values. There was a great deal of complexity in how some of the romans were presented simultaneously as cruel invaders but also sympathetic in their loves. There are sexual relationships between soldiers, but these are written in a way that focuses on the deep love they share rather than invading their privacy with descriptions of acts. There is Rome that has a gender-binary and marriage (ownership) view of (hetero)sexuality while men will have relationships with other men that seem deeper and are also erotic but don;t upset the status quo. On the other hand there are the Ecceni who are polyamorous (or serial mono-amorous) and seem to be bisexual (with possibly a greater incidence of man-woman pairings implied due to the need to procreate). I found all of that interesting because it showed how cultural values and political ideology form who we are as sexual and relating beings and also as gendered beings (I found it very interesting on p346 how Cygfa being young is somewhat androgynous and resembles a young version of her father).
I did not enjoy Valerius as a character but I thought he was well and sensitively written. I was irritated by aspects of the way Cunomar was portrayed early on (although I had to admit it was a good attempt to detach "eternal childhood" from the character and put him in a different setting and therefore mindset, I think there was some psychologising which led back into essentialism and sabotaged the attempt to some degree but at the same time I think aspects of this scene were necessary for his character growth) I thought there were too many main characters (although not as many as some books, in that it was relatively restrained) and we lost sight of Breaca a lot in the focus on Valerius which was pretty dominating but then uncomfortably taken over by for example Dubornos or Cunomar for a short segment so that we began to bond with that character only to have him become a background character once more. If the POV was going to shift so much it probably ought to have been loosened from Valerius a little more or this should have just been his story.
I hated the torture scenes, the slow journey of the book through despair and the long drawn out almost death scenes (with enough actual death scenes in other places to make them quite harrowing to live through with the characters). The scenes were well painted but it was all too much for me- too much suspense and pain, despair and loss. I get it that in reality invading armies and megalomaniac emperors are that cruel but I don't like to dwell on it. Kudos to Scott for bringing us through all that hellishness with some hope for human nature intact (and some desire to resist such evil even when it is daunting). But for me the book dragged painfully whenever it was about torture, also the idea of flaying traitors alive and especially the crucifixion or hanging of children was brought up too many times. It goes from having shock factor to just being depressing. I do however think I am more squeamish about that than many people and anyone who enjoys game of thrones would probably love this book for the mixture of intrigue and just awful things people do to each other for power.
I thought Agrippina was interesting as a character and even though I hated her I sort of felt there were reasons for her to be that way. A lot of characters were almost over-described as if the cameos of every real historical person the author knew of had to be got just right.
Ultimately for the complexity, mysticism, and especially the gender in the book I liked it. I will quite likely read more from this author although I am still not looking forward to the descriptions of violence.
So while it is a historical book about the Boudica and her times (the Roman invasion of Britain and the defence by indigenous people) it is also a book about identity (which is clearly shown to splinter in Valerius), relationships (complex alliances of family, love, religion and army mates) and values. There was a great deal of complexity in how some of the romans were presented simultaneously as cruel invaders but also sympathetic in their loves. There are sexual relationships between soldiers, but these are written in a way that focuses on the deep love they share rather than invading their privacy with descriptions of acts. There is Rome that has a gender-binary and marriage (ownership) view of (hetero)sexuality while men will have relationships with other men that seem deeper and are also erotic but don;t upset the status quo. On the other hand there are the Ecceni who are polyamorous (or serial mono-amorous) and seem to be bisexual (with possibly a greater incidence of man-woman pairings implied due to the need to procreate). I found all of that interesting because it showed how cultural values and political ideology form who we are as sexual and relating beings and also as gendered beings (I found it very interesting on p346 how Cygfa being young is somewhat androgynous and resembles a young version of her father).
I did not enjoy Valerius as a character but I thought he was well and sensitively written. I was irritated by aspects of the way Cunomar was portrayed early on (although I had to admit it was a good attempt to detach "eternal childhood" from the character and put him in a different setting and therefore mindset, I think there was some psychologising which led back into essentialism and sabotaged the attempt to some degree but at the same time I think aspects of this scene were necessary for his character growth) I thought there were too many main characters (although not as many as some books, in that it was relatively restrained) and we lost sight of Breaca a lot in the focus on Valerius which was pretty dominating but then uncomfortably taken over by for example Dubornos or Cunomar for a short segment so that we began to bond with that character only to have him become a background character once more. If the POV was going to shift so much it probably ought to have been loosened from Valerius a little more or this should have just been his story.
I hated the torture scenes, the slow journey of the book through despair and the long drawn out almost death scenes (with enough actual death scenes in other places to make them quite harrowing to live through with the characters). The scenes were well painted but it was all too much for me- too much suspense and pain, despair and loss. I get it that in reality invading armies and megalomaniac emperors are that cruel but I don't like to dwell on it. Kudos to Scott for bringing us through all that hellishness with some hope for human nature intact (and some desire to resist such evil even when it is daunting). But for me the book dragged painfully whenever it was about torture, also the idea of flaying traitors alive and especially the crucifixion or hanging of children was brought up too many times. It goes from having shock factor to just being depressing. I do however think I am more squeamish about that than many people and anyone who enjoys game of thrones would probably love this book for the mixture of intrigue and just awful things people do to each other for power.
I thought Agrippina was interesting as a character and even though I hated her I sort of felt there were reasons for her to be that way. A lot of characters were almost over-described as if the cameos of every real historical person the author knew of had to be got just right.
Ultimately for the complexity, mysticism, and especially the gender in the book I liked it. I will quite likely read more from this author although I am still not looking forward to the descriptions of violence.
ryan_h's review
adventurous
dark
emotional
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? It's complicated
5.0
l0ners's review against another edition
4.0
I liked this one a lot more than the last one! Very exciting but still vague in parts
morgandhu's review
4.0
Manda Scott, Dreaming the Bull
The blurb for this engaging sequel to Dreaming the Eagle describes the events of the second (of four) volumes of Scott's historical fantasy epic as follows:
Hailed as Boudica, the Bringer of Victory, Breaca now leads her people's resistance against the occupying legions of Rome. Opposing her is Julius Valerius, an auxilary cavalry officer whose increasing brutality in the service of his god and emperor cannot shield him from the ghosts of his past. Caught between them are two children, pawns in a game of unthinkable savagery, while in distant Rome the emperor Claudius holds the balance of lives in his hands.
For most of this book, the focus is on Breaca's brother Ban, now known as Julius Valerius, as he binds himself to Rome and the soldier's god, Mithras. The plot takes the reader through the years of the rebellion led by the man the Romans called Caratacus, here identified as Caradoc, lover of Breaca and father of her two children Cunomar and Grainne. In Scott's version of history, Caradoc is captured and taken to Rome along with his son Cunomar, his former lover Cwnfen, their warrior-daughter Cynfa, and another Eceni warrior (Roman sources record the captivity of Caratacus, his wife, brother and two children).
Accepted history says that Caratacus and his family lived in Rome for the rest of their lives, but does not record further details; the date of Caratacus' death and the fate of yhe rest of his family is unknown. Scott makes use of these lacunae to propose that Caradoc, Cwnfen, Cunomar, Cynfa and their compatriot Dubornos escape during the confusion surrounding the last days of the Emperor Claudius, escorted and protected, on Claudius' orders, by none other than Julius Valerius.
The more I read of it, the more these books appear as a sort of secret history - with mystical elements - of British resistance to the occupying Roman Empire. Rather presenting the various tribal rebellions as a series of separate incidents, Scott is weaving a story of multigenerational resistance among peoples linked by ties of kinship and other loyalties. The paucity of contemporary documents speaking to the history of the British tribes gives Scott the leeway to imagine this web of alliances, and to present a strong cast of characters to drive the story.
Looking forward to volume three, and hoping that in the long run, the mystery of the historical Boudica's end will give Scott's Breaca and Caradoc the bittersweet joy of a final meeting once the battles are over.
The blurb for this engaging sequel to Dreaming the Eagle describes the events of the second (of four) volumes of Scott's historical fantasy epic as follows:
Hailed as Boudica, the Bringer of Victory, Breaca now leads her people's resistance against the occupying legions of Rome. Opposing her is Julius Valerius, an auxilary cavalry officer whose increasing brutality in the service of his god and emperor cannot shield him from the ghosts of his past. Caught between them are two children, pawns in a game of unthinkable savagery, while in distant Rome the emperor Claudius holds the balance of lives in his hands.
For most of this book, the focus is on Breaca's brother Ban, now known as Julius Valerius, as he binds himself to Rome and the soldier's god, Mithras. The plot takes the reader through the years of the rebellion led by the man the Romans called Caratacus, here identified as Caradoc, lover of Breaca and father of her two children Cunomar and Grainne. In Scott's version of history, Caradoc is captured and taken to Rome along with his son Cunomar, his former lover Cwnfen, their warrior-daughter Cynfa, and another Eceni warrior (Roman sources record the captivity of Caratacus, his wife, brother and two children).
Accepted history says that Caratacus and his family lived in Rome for the rest of their lives, but does not record further details; the date of Caratacus' death and the fate of yhe rest of his family is unknown. Scott makes use of these lacunae to propose that Caradoc, Cwnfen, Cunomar, Cynfa and their compatriot Dubornos escape during the confusion surrounding the last days of the Emperor Claudius, escorted and protected, on Claudius' orders, by none other than Julius Valerius.
The more I read of it, the more these books appear as a sort of secret history - with mystical elements - of British resistance to the occupying Roman Empire. Rather presenting the various tribal rebellions as a series of separate incidents, Scott is weaving a story of multigenerational resistance among peoples linked by ties of kinship and other loyalties. The paucity of contemporary documents speaking to the history of the British tribes gives Scott the leeway to imagine this web of alliances, and to present a strong cast of characters to drive the story.
Looking forward to volume three, and hoping that in the long run, the mystery of the historical Boudica's end will give Scott's Breaca and Caradoc the bittersweet joy of a final meeting once the battles are over.