While this is a great book, like almost all of Nigel Tranters' works, I cannot fail to notice the drop in standards in this novel. Well, perhaps not so much the drop in standard, which is still high, it is a more the lack of dedication that I feel when reading this book. I recently re-read the Bruce triology (some of my favourite books) and was hungry for more historical action from around that same time period in history. This novel takes up The Wars Of Independence from the perspective of Angus Og MacDonald, a predominant character in the Bruce novels and one of my favourite characters in the series. However, anyone expecting The Islesman to be of the same calibre of The Bruce triology will probably be dissapointed, although it is still a good read.
There is very little talking in this novel, with the contents bieng mostly descriptive and most of the dialogue itself bieng briefly alluded to instead of actualy writen out in the form of talking. Indeed it seems, at times, like Tranter is merely trying to refresh, and proove, his historical expertise by re-hashing his memory of The Wars Of Independence in the form of another novel. It even seems as if he was desperate to write about the Bruce again, so took up the opportunity to write about the Bruce through the eyes of Angus Og. During the story, when Angus becomes more heavily involved in the monarchs efforts, I swear there where times I forgot Angus was meant to be the main character.
By no means is this meant to be a negative review, I honestly believe that this book simpy wasn't finished before Tranters' bereavement. I think this book was written in 2003, 3 years after Tranters death, so perhaps it was based on a first draft and notes that he was in the middle of writing? That would certainly explain the lack of dialouge.
This is still a good read and of course I would recommend it. But if you are expecting the novel to be as gripping as some of Nigel Tranters more epic novels, you will probably be slightly dissapointed.