The Demon Archer & The Field Of Blood (both 1999) by Paul Doherty

In 1303, the outlaw known as the Owlman stalks Ashdown Forest, while Sir Henry Fitzalan, the lord of the manor and hated by almost everyone, is shot through the heart while leading a hunting exhibition. With a delegation from the French government in attendance, Sir Hugh Corbett is sent by the King to ensure everything goes smoothly, but it seems that there is far more than simple hatred behind the murder.

Meanwhile – sort of – about eighty years later, Brother Athelstan finds himself investigating the three bodies that have been found in his parish, else his parish be made to a fine that would bankrupt them. A second case, however, threatens to disrupt his investigation – a number of bodies have been found in a field behind the Paradise Tree, an inn of some repute. Most of the bodies were from the time of the plague – but two of them are far more recent.

This won’t be the only time that I catch up on my holiday reviews by reviewing two books at the same time. These are both re-reads, so I’ll be brief. Ish.

The Demon Archer is classic Doherty, and definitely comes recommended as a starting place. There are multiple plot strands, a well-hidden but clued motive, a reasonably surprising villain – the only downside is that it does slightly spoil the final scene of the previous book, The Devil’s Hunt. Not the murderer, don’t worry about that, but something happens to Corbett that… basically doesn’t make an awful lot of difference to this one, to be honest.

It’s a great read that keeps the reader guessing, and with a couple of surprising, sudden murders – there’s a sense of “nobody” is safe – and there are some excellent moments here. The final paragraphs between Edward I and de Craon are chilling, showing Edward as more than just a bystander in these stories, but a real mover behind the scenes.

The Field Of Blood has something in common with The Demon Archer, other than being conveniently on my Kindle while I was in a cabin surrounded by sheep and being published in the same year, namely that unlike most of Doherty’s books, they don’t contain a locked room murder/impossible mystery. Unlike The Demon Archer, however, this is quite a long way from the best book in the series.

The Field Of Blood was the first Athelstan book that I read, basically because I was just starting out on my Doherty odyssey and it was the only one in the library. I wasn’t that impressed with it at the time – thank you, Sergio, for directing me to The House Of The Red Slayer – and I’m still not. It’s hard to put my finger on exactly why, as the background and character work is as strong as ever, but the two mysteries aren’t that interesting. Indeed, it’s hard to see which one is supposed to be the main plot – although one of them does have a well-hidden murderer to be fair.

Anyway, despite The Field Of Blood having a disappointing plot, I still enjoyed both these reads. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again – people who enjoy proper mysteries and have a vague interest in history really need to give Dr Doherty a try…

One comment

  1. Get ready to be shocked, but agree with you on The Demon Archer. I loved the forest setting teeming with wild animals and dangerous humans. It had more of a Robin Hood-esque atmosphere than The Assassin in the Greenwood and the excellent plot really had no need for a locked room murder. So glad you enjoyed it!

    Like

Leave a reply to TomCat Cancel reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.