The thing that frustrates me most about Ben Kane's books is that picking one up can be such a hit and miss event. There are books where you devour it with relish and really invest in the characters, yet there are others that are just the archetype of staid, wooden and cardboard devoid of anything of note.The most baffling thing of such inconsistency is that Kane is notably talented as crafting realistic human emotion & characters and, most often seperately, one of the most consistently skillful at descriptions of battle scenes and personal contributions. The trouble lies in the fact that more often than not, Kane prefers to focus on one over the other - for example, in the opening book of his Hannibal series, it was the human element that took precedence; in the sequel, the battle scenes - often at the expense of the reader's enjoyment.That at least is my theory as to why I found myself enjoying, or rather not hating, this book. The story manages to balance both human stories and the various battles & military points. Possibly around 60:40 in favour of the human element.There are some neat, if not quite genius, tricks used to deflect you just when you think you know where the story is leading.Altogether a distinct improvement on the opening book in the series. Ben Kane is carrying on with a good story. The main characters have many more adventures as one would expect with this genre, although I do get tired with the female character nearly being raped or having to have sexual encounters as part of her role. This is my only criticism so far as this trilogy is proving to be what is intended, an adventure story with good against evil, the depressed against the Roman status quo, victory over seemingly insurmountable odds, etc. I've now started the last book, Road to Rome, and am interested to see how Kane manages to keep up the momentum of the story and how it pans out.
What do You think about The Silver Eagle (2009)?
Very good, follows on from the previous two well.
—Christina
