This book has everything that I might wish for in a 600 page long historic novel. A hero who makes his way in the world by using chance and opportunity, an enigmatic Queen, a King who's been the first Plantagenet on the throne and a lot of historical conflict at the core of the narrative. What I didn't find however, was a good book which I think is extremely sad because all the requirements for a great read where there. The minor thing that bothered me was language. Chadwick certainly can write, but her use of metaphors and comparisons drove me up the walls sometimes. I'll give her the benefit of the doubt in some parts because I didn't read the original but the German version but still. I found myself conciously noticing her figures of speach, which inhibited the flow of my reading alot because I was always thrown out of the narrative into musings about writing. Also, she often ends paragraphs with a comparison or a metaphor. So often that it is noticable. Now you could argue that this is a history novel and meant to entertain instead of being highly literary in writing style. Which brings me to my second, much larger problem with the book.The way the story is told and, to an even larger degree, the characters. The book spans 26 years, which is fairly normal for a historic novel that wants to depict historical developements. However, Chadwick manages to really only portray episodes instead of periods. We get glimpses of events. That, in itself, would be fine, but somehow, I could find neither drive nor urgency in any of them. No matter how significant an event was, it was told in the same, nearly solemn manner. In the afterword, Chadwick says that a lot of things, she could only hint at because William Marshall's personal history is so full of events and experiences that it would be impossible to do it justice, the reason she wrote a second book about the second half of his life (which I haven't read so I can't say whether this differs from the first one). Chadwick succumbs to that one thing that cannot happen in literature that is meant mostly for pure entertainment: she tells instead of showing. Whenever she moves on for a year or two with her narrative, the reader gets told in the opening paragraph what has happened in the years in between, then a more or less significant scene from Williams life is depicted and on we move. We do not see him develope, we get told he did.Which brings me to my second major point of criticism. The characters. I know that Marshall is a historic figure, I know that he suposedly had all the character traits a knight was thought to have, a man right out of song. But here's the pitfall. I believe she's throughly researched. But, as she writes herself in the afterword, much knowledge about him results from a ballade written after his death that has been rediscovered in 1890. Now, a ballade in itself is a literary text, it's a piece of imagination of a single person. It's prone to praise of the hero. And that's exactly what Chadwick does. William Marshall has no depth of character because he is inherently good, noble, humble and all around chivalrous. He does no wrong. The only (perceived) wrong he does, that he is able to find fault in himself for, is the fact that he wasn't with his Lord when he died and that he followed his orders and ransacked churches under Henrys command. For 26 years of life, this is an impressively small list of sins for a soldier who had a mistress (who, conviniently is infertile so she won't give him any bastards), was said to have an affair with Margaret, wife of Henry, and who fought in dozens of tournaments that usually weren't exactly havens of good behaviour. Chadwick managed to avoid every possible conflict Marshall could have had. If the documents didn't serve her with one, she could well have invented one. But she decided to stick to the sources she had, and if I have learned one thing during my history studies it's that what is important about a historical source is what it doesn't tell you. The blank spots. The hints at something they don't want you to know because it would interfer with the version of history that is supposed to be written down. Every source we have has been written down to preserve a certain notion about what has happened by a certain group or even single person. And for me, Chadwick simply believes in the greatness and goodness of William Marshall described in the ballade (that I have, admittedly, never read, so I'm doing a bit of guessing here). A character that has come such a long way, from a virtual nobody to teacher and trusted companion of the kings son(s), someone who comes from the hinterland and moves into palaces, is not believable for me if he isn't at least tempted by this gain of power. Similiarly to Marshall, the other characters remain flat because we only get to see them every once in a while and their relationships remain suspiciously devoid of emotion, a fact that for me, mainly results from Marshall's inhuman goodness, so that his relationships to the other characters always remain somewhat a token of what a real relationship would look like. So while I really was curious about the book and love the time it depicts, and really wanted to like it, I never really managed to do so. It is, however, a quick read and gives you an insight into the turbulent times of Henry II, his famous wife Eleanore of Aquitaine and their quarrelsome sons, thus two stars.
This novel tells the story of William Marshall. Not surprisingly (for those familiar with Marshall's story), it begins with a flashback of 5 year old William as a hostage of King Stephen during the war between Steven and the Empress Matilda. Stephen magnanimously (or foolishly?) decides to spare William's life, despite telling his father that William would be executed for failure to keep faith. William's father notoriously replies that he has the hammer and anvils to fashion more sons. Under that backdrop, we are introduced to William, the penniless younger son and hearth knight. William proves to rise high, notwithstanding his relatively humble family position as a younger son with few prospects. William is a star on the tourney circuit and his feirce loyalty and military prowess attracts the attention of the middle aged Eleanor of Aquitaine. William becomes Eleanor's household knight and plays a role in the military education of her sons. Eventually William is promoted to become a household knight of the "young King," Henry and Eleanour's eldest son, who is crowned king during Henry II's life, in the French fashion.The novel tells the familiar story of the warring Plantagenet sons, Henry, Geoffrey, Richard, and John and their feuding with King Henry II. Despite the familiar ground, this novel was very interesting. It followed most closely the Young King's story, as William resided with the Young King. It also is rather thought-provoking. William is seen as steadfastly loyal and rewarded for that loyalty, which is of paramount importance in feudal society. Yet, it is pretty clear to the modern reader that the Young King was not worthy of loyalty. As a 21st century reader, it is hard to imagine giving such loyalty to a man who is so impetuous, self-centered, bitter, narcissistic, and unstable. The Greatest Knight is well-written. Unlike many novels centered on royals, this is the novel of a noble who has to work hard to secure his prosperity and independence. The "second son" is not often a central character. I enjoyed the Greatest Knight a lot and I look forward to reading the sequel.
What do You think about The Greatest Knight (2015)?
Beguiling characters, stunning historical detail within a captivating narrative makes this impressive read outstanding! I am a huge fan and keen reader of works by Elizabeth Chadwick, for her impressive collection of Medieval novels stand-out above all other historical literature. It is the author’s attention to detail that makes her work so beautifully atmospheric, as past ages are brought boldly to life with much fervent intensity and color. This stunning novel cleverly combines both fact and fiction, as one of England’s greatest forgotten heroes is resurrected on the page triumphantly. Within the apex of the Middle Ages this noble Knight brought victory, he created mighty power struggles and memorable scandals; all of which has lived on through the centuries and is very much a part of our history. Elizabeth Chadwick is not only one of my favorite authors of historical fiction, as her noticeable books within this genre are something special, for she is one of the greatest writers of Medieval Fiction. Convincing and utterly compelling this exciting novel is one that encapsulates the harshness of the bleak Middle-Ages, through heated drama and conflict. Dazzling authentic details are blended beautifully with a modern twist for electric emotional drama that oozes quality, as you are left breathless in astonishment of such a feat. William Marshall’s journey from a penniless young Knight with few prospects to one of the greatest and most influential hero’s in history is truly fascinating and most interesting. That single act (of when he saves the life of Eleanor of Aquitaine; Henry VII’s wife) is the catalyst for great chance, and so plucked from obscurity he is thrust into fame and fortune. Being a Royal ‘Favorite’ also has its downfalls, as you discover what the implications are of coming into conflict with others – especially in a Royal court. An absorbing tale that is fueled by passion, exquisitely drawn and indisputably exceptional, I would highly recommend “The Greatest Knight” to those readers who delight in epic battles and re-telling the past. www.elizabethchadwick.com
—Lucinda
Most all of my reading friends have read this book and declared their undying love for William Marshall, the greatest knight. 25 percent into this book, I said, "Hm. This is really well written. Love the Eleanor tidbits, but I'm not in love with this William dude." 50 percent into the book, I said, "I have no interested in all these Henrys and Johns fighting over the crown, but Chadwick is making this interesting. This is a darn good book, but I'm still not in love with William. Everything he does is to advance himself and he never should have gone back to working for the king. What is making my friends gaga over this guy?"75 percent into the book, William gets married and on his wedding night he does the most romantic thing ever and tops it off with a heart melting quote, "I warrant that Adam had considerably more pain having a rib cut out for his Eve." And that is when I fell in love with William Marshall. I won't bother resummarizing this as so many reviewers already have. I am dying to see this version of Eleanor of Aquitaine come to life again. The only thing I didn't like about this book is I grew a bit bored at times with all the Henry vs Henry, Henry vs Richard, Richard vs John stuff. (Men in history were always bickering about power and in fairness to the author, I had no interest in those particular guys when I nabbed this book.)Funniest moment: William: "I am about to go and claim a young bride and yet here I am easing myself into a chair like an old man."Eleanor: "I doubt the parts that matter have lost their sap, William."Favorite quote: "As to what I amount to...I've heard a variety of opinions and come to the conclusion that few of them matter save the one I have of myself."
—Tara Chevrestt
I love books that teach me something. I have read about Eleanor of Aquitaine and was familiar with the basics of the Magna Carta, but this book's focus (and the next book in the series The Scarlet Lion) on William the Marshal brings the rich history of the 12th and 13th centuries to life. I found myself looking forward to getting back to this book and reading it when I needed to be reading other things! It was easy to read - just the right mix of history and character development.And now I'm fascinated with William Marshal and want to read the new biography about him by Thomas Asbridge: The Greatest Knight: The Remarkable Life of William Marshal, the Power Behind Five English Thrones.
—Patricia Kitto
