For the first time I'm having a difficult time reviewing a book. I agree with both the praising reviews as well as the scathing comments. There is much to be found here that is silly and contrived. A learned female doctor from Salerno is asked to investigate the murder of a number of young children in medieval Cambridge. It always is important to add terms such as "fiercely independent", "highly competent", etc to reviews of this type of novel. It is however that part of the novel that feels forced. A female physician no matter how skilled would not have been accepted in that time period and artificially creating a conducive situation doesn't help. But does that negate the story telling? No, in this case definitely not and here's why.

Events and people are depicted all to real. I'm not saying they are described believably, they are not. But we can relate to them, understand them and follow them with ease and understanding. Never does the author try to add apologies for what she feels is the nature of evil and the expression of madness. There are no euphemisms that attempt to disguise anachronisms. In that way the writing is brutally honest and with that the author comes over as very confident. I have no illusion that the author sees herself as writing literature but I can see that she sees herself as writing well designed historical romance with a good mystery. There is good storytelling going on here and that is the novel's main reward. Events are fluid, the immersion into a time long gone by is complete and the dialog comes with ease and feels natural.

I would like to add one important note, something I've found other reviewers have misinterpreted. The main characters aren't handsome, perfect, sleek or nicely acceptable. I would have to go back but in this historical romance novel (which it is) I recall the female lead being described as plain at best and the male lead as essentially a large boar. This to me is refreshing, very refreshing. We can relate to regular people who struggle and who make mistakes. ( )

An incredibly detailed, sometimes to the point of stomach-churning, forensic-styled murder mystery set in the late 1100s. This was phenomenally well-researched and I never had the slightest jolt even though the author's note mentioned a few anachronisms that completely passed me by. Deep characters, unhurried shifts in knowledge but a well-paced plot. Enjoyable. ( )

In 1171 in Cambridge, England 4 children have been brutally killed. Mistakenly the local Jewish community is accused and has received sanctuary from King Henry II. But to quell the threatening Christian community answers need to be found. Into this mix comes Adelia Aguilar, prodigy female doctor of death (forensic coroner), Simon of Naples (investigator), and Mansur (Adelia’s Arab bodyguard). On the road to Cambridge Adelia saves the life of the local Prior and his gratefulness is their access to the community. As the investigation unfolds it looks as if the culprit may have been a member of the pilgrim group that they entered town with. One member of this group Sir Rowley Picot keeps turning up at opportune moments, seeming to be very helpful. Others create roadblocks. The story is rife with religious, racial and gender prejudice. The author did a good job of presenting historical detail and making you feel what life was like then. I personally would not want to live during that time. Well done mystery. ( )

This is the second time I have read this book. I'm glad I re-read it before continuing on in the series. A doctor of the dead seems very unusual for the time this book takes place. A female Dr. especially of the dead is almost impossible. It is a great story with great characters. It is also a great history lesson. ( )

This mystery was too long and the love story was not an asset. The concern about plague was a bit out-of-sync since the black death was around 150 years away, though plagues did occur before. And the convolutions to get our heroine to England when Sicily has many tales to tell was way Anglo-centric for me. ( )