What do you think?
Rate this book
Attila Trilogy #2
Attila: The Gathering of the Storm
The gripping and bloody story of one of history's most infamous and enigmatic villains - part II in the ATTILA trilogy
The 5th century has dawned in blood. The young boy exiled thirty years ago has grown into a man. One stormy autumn day, a mysterious rider is seen out on the plains. Attila has returned, his sentence served, to claim his kingdom.
He will ride out at the head of no more than one hundred chosen men, driven by the ambition to unite all the feuding Hunnish and Scythian tribes under single banner and a single king. An impossible ambition. For Attila and his chosen men must triumph over blizzards and deserts, bandit kings and hidden mountain kingdoms, and furious battle with the terrible Kutrigur Huns.
But all will flock to his banner, answer his call. His power is mysterious and inexpressible, his strength of character and iron will cannot be opposed. And far to the west lies a promised empire both fabulously wealthy and tottering to its knees. An empire full of gold and silver and dark-eyed slavegirls … the Empire of Rome. And this strange horde from out of the Scythian wilderness will bring a night to fall on that Empire like no other…
The 5th century has dawned in blood. The young boy exiled thirty years ago has grown into a man. One stormy autumn day, a mysterious rider is seen out on the plains. Attila has returned, his sentence served, to claim his kingdom.
He will ride out at the head of no more than one hundred chosen men, driven by the ambition to unite all the feuding Hunnish and Scythian tribes under single banner and a single king. An impossible ambition. For Attila and his chosen men must triumph over blizzards and deserts, bandit kings and hidden mountain kingdoms, and furious battle with the terrible Kutrigur Huns.
But all will flock to his banner, answer his call. His power is mysterious and inexpressible, his strength of character and iron will cannot be opposed. And far to the west lies a promised empire both fabulously wealthy and tottering to its knees. An empire full of gold and silver and dark-eyed slavegirls … the Empire of Rome. And this strange horde from out of the Scythian wilderness will bring a night to fall on that Empire like no other…
336 pages, Paperback
First published November 7, 2007
25 people are currently reading
548 people want to read
About the author
William Napier
50 books61 followersLibrarian Note: There is more than one author in the GoodReads database with this name. See this thread for more information.
A pseudonym of Christopher Hart
Christopher Hart (born 1965) is an English novelist and journalist.
He was educated at Cheltenham College (expelled), Leicester University (dropped out), Oxford Polytechnic and Birkbeck College, London, where he completed a PhD on W.B.Yeats.
Under his original name he has written two contemporary novels, The Harvest and Rescue Me. Since 2001, he has written four historical novels under the pseudonym of William Napier, the last three a best-selling trilogy about Attila the Hun and the Fall of the Roman Empire.
As a journalist he has worked as Literary Editor of the Erotic Review (magazine folded) and Agony Aunt for Time Out (sacked.) He currently writes regularly for the Sunday Times, where he is lead theatre critic, and the Daily Mail.
A pseudonym of Christopher Hart
Christopher Hart (born 1965) is an English novelist and journalist.
He was educated at Cheltenham College (expelled), Leicester University (dropped out), Oxford Polytechnic and Birkbeck College, London, where he completed a PhD on W.B.Yeats.
Under his original name he has written two contemporary novels, The Harvest and Rescue Me. Since 2001, he has written four historical novels under the pseudonym of William Napier, the last three a best-selling trilogy about Attila the Hun and the Fall of the Roman Empire.
As a journalist he has worked as Literary Editor of the Erotic Review (magazine folded) and Agony Aunt for Time Out (sacked.) He currently writes regularly for the Sunday Times, where he is lead theatre critic, and the Daily Mail.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 55 reviews
December 13, 2021
**Should Read as 4.5 Stars!**
Read this book in 2007, and its the 2nd volume of the wonderful "Attila" trilogy.
Its the year AD 441, and in this book we see Attila returning to his homelands after serving 30 years as a Roman hostage, and now with a heart full of hate he's looking on revenge and the annihilation of Rome.
And so Attila's journey will begin by gathering together all the tribes, they being Hun or Scythian, and bring them under one banner and one King.
Bringing down his enemies in the East, he will be able to unite the rest of the tribes, and so make himself ready to invade the Roman Empire to destroy it completely.
What will follow is a very entertaining and thrilling historical adventure, in which Attila and his tribes are making ready to invade the Western Roman Empire, and bring destruction and death to all in their path.
Very much recommended, for this is an excellent addition to this great trilogy, and that's why I like to call this middle episode: "A Very Satisfying Attila Sequel"!
Read this book in 2007, and its the 2nd volume of the wonderful "Attila" trilogy.
Its the year AD 441, and in this book we see Attila returning to his homelands after serving 30 years as a Roman hostage, and now with a heart full of hate he's looking on revenge and the annihilation of Rome.
And so Attila's journey will begin by gathering together all the tribes, they being Hun or Scythian, and bring them under one banner and one King.
Bringing down his enemies in the East, he will be able to unite the rest of the tribes, and so make himself ready to invade the Roman Empire to destroy it completely.
What will follow is a very entertaining and thrilling historical adventure, in which Attila and his tribes are making ready to invade the Western Roman Empire, and bring destruction and death to all in their path.
Very much recommended, for this is an excellent addition to this great trilogy, and that's why I like to call this middle episode: "A Very Satisfying Attila Sequel"!
January 28, 2014
-Menos acción, más Historia, algo menos de ficción.-
Género. Novela histórica.
Lo que nos cuenta. Bastantes años después del volumen anterior, Atila ya no es ningún niño sino un hombre fuerte, astuto e inmisericorde que se dedica al ajuste de cuentas con sus propias manos y usurpa el trono de los hunos, al que tiene relativo derecho, al frente de cuyos guerreros piensa llegar hasta el último confín de occidente, bajo control romano de complaciente displicencia ante posibles amenazas. Segundo volumen de la trilogía Atila.
¿Quiere saber más de este libro, sin spoilers? Visite:
http://librosdeolethros.blogspot.com/...
Género. Novela histórica.
Lo que nos cuenta. Bastantes años después del volumen anterior, Atila ya no es ningún niño sino un hombre fuerte, astuto e inmisericorde que se dedica al ajuste de cuentas con sus propias manos y usurpa el trono de los hunos, al que tiene relativo derecho, al frente de cuyos guerreros piensa llegar hasta el último confín de occidente, bajo control romano de complaciente displicencia ante posibles amenazas. Segundo volumen de la trilogía Atila.
¿Quiere saber más de este libro, sin spoilers? Visite:
http://librosdeolethros.blogspot.com/...
February 17, 2013
In every way a leap up from the first.
For thirty pages I was uncertain; before page fifty I was won. Won by Attila, whom Napier has ambition to portray as a truly great man – and succeeds, for me. Won also by description of the steppe. The first had an element of fantasy; this doesn’t, but I was put in mind of fantasy whenever we journey over the steppe: description both very real in local detail and a little surreal, and just the sense of the unexplored, the strange (yet not fantastic) landscapes to be met with. Won, thirdly, by a philosophical vein in the book.
That’s largely from the person of Attila. Attila gave his first speech around page fifty, or more of a contemplation aloud over the campfire, for three pages. Near the end of the book we have a chapter called, ‘Attila Speaks, the Council Listens’ and that’s his fieriest speech, for seven pages. I was electrified by both. But it’s daring, isn’t it, it’s stretching the expectations of histfic – Attila speaks, for several pages, and when I tell you he quotes from a kindred spirit, he gives you a couple of proverbs from ‘The Marriage of Heaven and Hell’, you’re going to talk about trespasses against histfic, maybe. I happen to be an admirer of William Blake as of Attila, and I can see where their thoughts about the world might intersect. Does that make me the audience for this book?
There are two ways in which this is not the straightest of straight histfic. I can get bored with the straightest of the straight, so I’m happy with both of these: they either crank up my brain or they fire my imagination. I’ve told you one; the other has to do with history.
The plot of this second is, Attila unites the steppe. Black Huns, White Huns, the monstrous Kutrigur Huns, once-Huns who have settled and corrupted: by means fair or foul he has them declare a brotherhood, to be one army, Huns undistinguished, against the settled world. We visit the steppe from end to end; Attila has travel tales from his thirty years of exile, he has seen the Yellow River and the Great Wall, he has been to the Huns’ lost home in the Ordos. There you have it. Attila’s Huns keep a memory of China, and the name of China does not cross their lips – until Attila is bold enough, not only to remind them of their old humiliations, but to forge a nomad army and march, first against Rome and next, against the original enemy, the other empire that has done the Huns wrong. For Rome and China are two imperial peas in a pod, to nomad eyes, and Attila has speeches to tell you why.
Now, this can’t exactly be called historical. It draws on history before and after. I think he has drawn on Attila’s later distant cousin, Genghis – both for Attila’s life story, and for this grand conception of conquest east and west. These Huns can sing the Mongols’ origin legends, and the Turkic epic Manas. Of this I’m going to say, Napier widens history. He fits more history in. He has a time period, but he draws into that strands from before and after, because he wants to talk about historical issues – large ones. He wants to talk about the settled and the steppe, and to that end Attila, steppe spokesman, knows things he can’t have known, travels further than in any likelihood he did. As I say, this is fine by me, and makes for a fiction that comments on history.
There’s a Roman interlude, to keep us up to date with Rome and Constantinople. This wasn’t a trot-through, for me; I cared about the people we meet – Aetius and Athenais – and I’m glued to the page by his style. The scandal-sheet was a riot, as were the deviant adventures of Galla Placida’s daughter. Though the latter stopped being funny when she has a hideous forced abortion. Napier always has a heart for the unfortunate, and though awful things happen in this book, he writes about them with humanity. Only once or twice do I think his love of description runs away with him so that he glories in the porridge brains out the saucepan of the skull. With descriptive skills like his, I understand an ill-judged one or two.
For thirty pages I was uncertain; before page fifty I was won. Won by Attila, whom Napier has ambition to portray as a truly great man – and succeeds, for me. Won also by description of the steppe. The first had an element of fantasy; this doesn’t, but I was put in mind of fantasy whenever we journey over the steppe: description both very real in local detail and a little surreal, and just the sense of the unexplored, the strange (yet not fantastic) landscapes to be met with. Won, thirdly, by a philosophical vein in the book.
That’s largely from the person of Attila. Attila gave his first speech around page fifty, or more of a contemplation aloud over the campfire, for three pages. Near the end of the book we have a chapter called, ‘Attila Speaks, the Council Listens’ and that’s his fieriest speech, for seven pages. I was electrified by both. But it’s daring, isn’t it, it’s stretching the expectations of histfic – Attila speaks, for several pages, and when I tell you he quotes from a kindred spirit, he gives you a couple of proverbs from ‘The Marriage of Heaven and Hell’, you’re going to talk about trespasses against histfic, maybe. I happen to be an admirer of William Blake as of Attila, and I can see where their thoughts about the world might intersect. Does that make me the audience for this book?
There are two ways in which this is not the straightest of straight histfic. I can get bored with the straightest of the straight, so I’m happy with both of these: they either crank up my brain or they fire my imagination. I’ve told you one; the other has to do with history.
The plot of this second is, Attila unites the steppe. Black Huns, White Huns, the monstrous Kutrigur Huns, once-Huns who have settled and corrupted: by means fair or foul he has them declare a brotherhood, to be one army, Huns undistinguished, against the settled world. We visit the steppe from end to end; Attila has travel tales from his thirty years of exile, he has seen the Yellow River and the Great Wall, he has been to the Huns’ lost home in the Ordos. There you have it. Attila’s Huns keep a memory of China, and the name of China does not cross their lips – until Attila is bold enough, not only to remind them of their old humiliations, but to forge a nomad army and march, first against Rome and next, against the original enemy, the other empire that has done the Huns wrong. For Rome and China are two imperial peas in a pod, to nomad eyes, and Attila has speeches to tell you why.
Now, this can’t exactly be called historical. It draws on history before and after. I think he has drawn on Attila’s later distant cousin, Genghis – both for Attila’s life story, and for this grand conception of conquest east and west. These Huns can sing the Mongols’ origin legends, and the Turkic epic Manas. Of this I’m going to say, Napier widens history. He fits more history in. He has a time period, but he draws into that strands from before and after, because he wants to talk about historical issues – large ones. He wants to talk about the settled and the steppe, and to that end Attila, steppe spokesman, knows things he can’t have known, travels further than in any likelihood he did. As I say, this is fine by me, and makes for a fiction that comments on history.
There’s a Roman interlude, to keep us up to date with Rome and Constantinople. This wasn’t a trot-through, for me; I cared about the people we meet – Aetius and Athenais – and I’m glued to the page by his style. The scandal-sheet was a riot, as were the deviant adventures of Galla Placida’s daughter. Though the latter stopped being funny when she has a hideous forced abortion. Napier always has a heart for the unfortunate, and though awful things happen in this book, he writes about them with humanity. Only once or twice do I think his love of description runs away with him so that he glories in the porridge brains out the saucepan of the skull. With descriptive skills like his, I understand an ill-judged one or two.
February 14, 2017
Despite an exciting battle where Attila & his men defend a village and a strong last chapter, I found this book rather dull.
The problem for me was with Attilas' character. He rants at his men throughout the whole book like some angry motivational speaker. One rant lasted several page's!
If you want to bring down an empire then Attilas' your man, but if you saw him in the pub your heart would sink in case he trapped you between the Gents & the fruit machine ranting away about " vengeance being the energy of life ".
Thanks but no thanks! Less pomposity please , more action.
I enjoyed the first book in this trilogy, but this one considerably less so.
I'm not angry, (unlike Attila), just disappointed.
The problem for me was with Attilas' character. He rants at his men throughout the whole book like some angry motivational speaker. One rant lasted several page's!
If you want to bring down an empire then Attilas' your man, but if you saw him in the pub your heart would sink in case he trapped you between the Gents & the fruit machine ranting away about " vengeance being the energy of life ".
Thanks but no thanks! Less pomposity please , more action.
I enjoyed the first book in this trilogy, but this one considerably less so.
I'm not angry, (unlike Attila), just disappointed.
January 28, 2014
-Menos acción, más Historia, algo menos de ficción.-
Género. Novela histórica.
Lo que nos cuenta. Bastantes años después del volumen anterior, Atila ya no es ningún niño sino un hombre fuerte, astuto e inmisericorde que se dedica al ajuste de cuentas con sus propias manos y usurpa el trono de los hunos, al que tiene relativo derecho, al frente de cuyos guerreros piensa llegar hasta el último confín de occidente, bajo control romano de complaciente displicencia ante posibles amenazas. Segundo volumen de la trilogía Atila.
¿Quiere saber más de este libro, sin spoilers? Visite:
http://librosdeolethros.blogspot.com/...
Género. Novela histórica.
Lo que nos cuenta. Bastantes años después del volumen anterior, Atila ya no es ningún niño sino un hombre fuerte, astuto e inmisericorde que se dedica al ajuste de cuentas con sus propias manos y usurpa el trono de los hunos, al que tiene relativo derecho, al frente de cuyos guerreros piensa llegar hasta el último confín de occidente, bajo control romano de complaciente displicencia ante posibles amenazas. Segundo volumen de la trilogía Atila.
¿Quiere saber más de este libro, sin spoilers? Visite:
http://librosdeolethros.blogspot.com/...
January 9, 2015
If I could have given 2.5 stars, I would have. But since I can't I'll be gracious and give three. The only reason I'm giving three instead of two is that the writer did leave me wanting to finish the trilogy.
The parts of this book that were actually about Attila were engaging, and the battle scenes were very well and thoroughly done. On the other hand, the (what felt like half) of this book that was about Rome and/or Constantinople were exhausting. I understand the Empire played a role here, but wow, there was a lot about Rome in this book!
I'll pick up book three some day, but not right away.
The parts of this book that were actually about Attila were engaging, and the battle scenes were very well and thoroughly done. On the other hand, the (what felt like half) of this book that was about Rome and/or Constantinople were exhausting. I understand the Empire played a role here, but wow, there was a lot about Rome in this book!
I'll pick up book three some day, but not right away.
August 17, 2014
The overwhelming feel of this, the second installment in the Attila trilogy, not only suffers very much from mid-series sag but from an air of pomposity greater than found in the author's other books.
The opening novel in the series, (obviously) the preceding book to this, left you feeling that it was building up to something, setting the foundations for something epic, only for this second book to spend most of the first half of the book steadfastly going virtually nowhere. It seems to take far more interest in waxing, waning and musing on speculation and threadbare mystery, ironically adding far more depth to the chronicler, Panis Of Priscum, rather than adding any extra weight to the story on the whole.
When you bear the quality of this book in comparison to the authors books not in this series, you should hopefully agree that this is a relatively poor addition to the canon, especially if you were to read his 'Clash Of Empires' book based on the Siege Of Malta in 1565 which is far more enigmatic, engrossing and rewarding.
Hopefully the final installment in the trilogy will prove the redemption of the series.
The opening novel in the series, (obviously) the preceding book to this, left you feeling that it was building up to something, setting the foundations for something epic, only for this second book to spend most of the first half of the book steadfastly going virtually nowhere. It seems to take far more interest in waxing, waning and musing on speculation and threadbare mystery, ironically adding far more depth to the chronicler, Panis Of Priscum, rather than adding any extra weight to the story on the whole.
When you bear the quality of this book in comparison to the authors books not in this series, you should hopefully agree that this is a relatively poor addition to the canon, especially if you were to read his 'Clash Of Empires' book based on the Siege Of Malta in 1565 which is far more enigmatic, engrossing and rewarding.
Hopefully the final installment in the trilogy will prove the redemption of the series.
May 20, 2014
Second in a trilogy and it's already losing its way a bit. Multi-page motivational speeches about creation don't strike me as the most engaging way to fictionalise the life of Attila the Hun.
Having the ageing narrator become hot and bothered and having to calm himself down halfway through a description of a teenage girl's sexual exploits was somewhat odd.
The violent battles and historical scene setting were really good and the impending big showdown with the Romans should keep me going for the final book - though at twice the size of this one I expect some more padding with crap speeches, season long marching across barren wastelands and random acts of witchcraft.
Having the ageing narrator become hot and bothered and having to calm himself down halfway through a description of a teenage girl's sexual exploits was somewhat odd.
The violent battles and historical scene setting were really good and the impending big showdown with the Romans should keep me going for the final book - though at twice the size of this one I expect some more padding with crap speeches, season long marching across barren wastelands and random acts of witchcraft.
April 7, 2018
Too many motivational speeches; it's luke del carnegi or shiv khera speaking through Attila's mouth. Disappointed.
April 9, 2011
This is the second of a trilogy and I will definitely head backwards to read the first part.
At times, this book mesmerized me with descriptions of being not CIVILIZED but being ALIVE. It continuous to amaze me that guys like Attila and Genghis are largely forgotten but a movies about King Arthur comes out every year. They're stories are filled with honor and grandeur blood-lust.
May 23, 2013
I'm actually finding this book quite painful to read. The first part of the book has very little about Attila - it's more of a history lecture than a novel! The first book spent a lot of time building up the characters but the second book has failed miserably to continue this trend. Very disappointing!
June 23, 2015
In truth , I found this book to be boring , like most part 2 of a trilogy , it is a build up book , but nothing happens for long periods , the book just dragged on and on
July 28, 2017
A volta flamejante do príncipe ao acampamento huno, agora degenerado de seus costumes ancestrais. Após o treinamento dos Escolhidos, um pequeno teste num distante leste. Já em Constantinopla, o agora general Aécio, envolvido com uma princesa impiedosa, cai nas graças da mulher de Teodósio ... Finalmente, após 200 páginas, uma batalha digna de um conquistador, nem que tenha sido por um pedaço de deserto. Mais a leste, enfrentam - com um reforço - um grupo de Wei (chineses) com uma facilidade espantosa até para eles próprios. Ainda na China, tomam uma cidade somente com a astúcia de Átila... Até que - após regimentarem um exército considerável - partem para o oeste, rumo à conquista de Roma.
Uma citação: "A religião é um cobertor para abafar fatos intransigentes."
Quanto à Editora Record, eles têm revisores? Ou seriam os tradutores que pensam porque usam corretamente algumas vezes "apesar de isto ter acontecido/acontecer...", não sabem usar "antes/depois de isto ter acontecido/ acontecer..."? O irmão de Átila, Bleda, se torna 'ela' em um trecho... além de outros 'deslizes editoriais'.
Uma citação: "A religião é um cobertor para abafar fatos intransigentes."
Quanto à Editora Record, eles têm revisores? Ou seriam os tradutores que pensam porque usam corretamente algumas vezes "apesar de isto ter acontecido/acontecer...", não sabem usar "antes/depois de isto ter acontecido/ acontecer..."? O irmão de Átila, Bleda, se torna 'ela' em um trecho... além de outros 'deslizes editoriais'.
August 17, 2021
As volume two of Napier’s Attila trilogy, this follows Attila’s return from 30 years of exile to unite the numerous Hun tribes. Never forgetting Rome’s cruelty to him as a boy, he collects a massive army, with the goal of conquering the Empire.
Though the story is filled with cruelty and mayhem (and a few instances of unexpected kindness), Napier’s power of description overrides the gore. Few writers could make barbarian hordes in the heat of battle seem almost elegant in their choreography. I particularly appreciated his description of lawyers, when one of the men asked whether the lawyer was a shaman, or wise one. Attila shook his head no, “Not a lawgiver, a dispenser of wisdom. A lawmaker: a petty haggler in courts full of like hagglers. A man who lays chains on other men’s souls, who harvests souls for gold.”
This book is part of my “reading through history” project, and helped explain why the Roman Empire fell. I found the first two volumes surprisingly interesting, and definitely plan to finish the trilogy.
Though the story is filled with cruelty and mayhem (and a few instances of unexpected kindness), Napier’s power of description overrides the gore. Few writers could make barbarian hordes in the heat of battle seem almost elegant in their choreography. I particularly appreciated his description of lawyers, when one of the men asked whether the lawyer was a shaman, or wise one. Attila shook his head no, “Not a lawgiver, a dispenser of wisdom. A lawmaker: a petty haggler in courts full of like hagglers. A man who lays chains on other men’s souls, who harvests souls for gold.”
This book is part of my “reading through history” project, and helped explain why the Roman Empire fell. I found the first two volumes surprisingly interesting, and definitely plan to finish the trilogy.
August 28, 2022
Primeiro livro que leio de ficção histórica, com alguma cepticismo mas que se revelou infundado! É sempre bom ter presente que este livro mistura factos com personagens reais e situações verídicas, mas que a narração é ficção. Pensei que isso retiraria algum valor ou conteúdo do livro mas não, pelo contrário, dá uma energia diferente à leitura. Este autor transporta-nos para o centro da batalha num ápice e noutro instante estamos envolvidos num trama familiar com uma facilidade imensa. Muito bom
November 7, 2025
One of those books that you keep on reading just to see how bad it can get. I understand that it might be an enjoyable easy read for some people, but I cannot fathom how anyone would call this historical fiction. Attila and his contemporaries talk about "Byzantines" and "Italians" and "Chinise"... The narrator (who is supposed to be a contemporary of Attila) uses the Gregorian calendar. Nations and geographical locations refer to modern geopolitical entities. There is constant avalanche of anachronisms. This killed for me any possibility to be immersed in the story.
November 10, 2025
While I enjoyed finding out about Attila the Hun, I felt the story telling was slow and ponderous. Attila goes off of long Shakespearean rants to his nomadic followers who would have no idea what he was talking about (presumably references to his travels from Book 1). I would like to find out more about Attila but I don't think I will be tempted to look for Book 3 of the trilogy.
August 6, 2018
Not as impressive as the first part. It has nice chapters and then some boring parts. It’s a typical in-between sort of book.
August 8, 2019
Многу подобро од првиот дел.
September 7, 2022
Un poco más interesante que el primero, pero continúa habiendo más fantasía que historia.
Sería un 3.5
Sería un 3.5
Read
December 24, 2016"There were other things for me to do", said Attila.
"What things have you done? "asked Little Bird, his voice quieter.
Attila's voice too, was quiet." What things have I not done? "
Fantastic book. Terrifically written, full of back stabbing, plotting, murder and gore. Napier's taken a few liberties here and there, and the writing is quite long winded , especially with the mysticism and Attila's speeches, but it still hits home hard.
"What things have you done? "asked Little Bird, his voice quieter.
Attila's voice too, was quiet." What things have I not done? "
Fantastic book. Terrifically written, full of back stabbing, plotting, murder and gore. Napier's taken a few liberties here and there, and the writing is quite long winded , especially with the mysticism and Attila's speeches, but it still hits home hard.
June 27, 2011
So this is marginally better than the first in the series. It deals with Attila's return from exile and his gathering of the various Hun tribes to march against Rome.
That's about it. Not much else happens in the plot. In my last review I said that his major problem was trying to squeeze in as many facts about Rome as possible to the detriment of pacing or characterisation. This problem all but disappeared when Attila returned to the Huns, the only information we have about the Huns is from a Roman perspective, we have no sources from their point of view. So for the last 50 pages or so the story really picked up because he didn't have hundreds of facts to show off. This installment is told almost entirely from the point of view of the Huns and if far better for it. My favourite character, the Hun shaman and token madman Little Bird, is much more prominent here. The story opens up with a lot more action, Attila usurping King Ruga, and there is some mystery about how exactly he intends to get his revenge on Rome. He also displays a sense of humour, largely absent from the previous book, in the character of Little Bird, in occassional jokes amongst the men and in ironically scorning novels as 'arrant nonsense that openly delights the unlettered multitude ' (78). (Novels were considered pretty trashy in the ancient world)
And then he ruins it all with a 60 page digression summing up what's been happening in Rome in the past thirty years. 60 pages! It just goes on and on. I wouldn't have minded so much if he had actually told it as a story but he skims over nearly everything, providing a summary so that we never actually get to know more than a cardboard version of any character.
This tendency to summarise rather than involve the reader in the moment, I feel, is Napier's biggest problem. His narrator for the series is Priscus of Panium, the only historical account surviving from this period. As such he attempts to imitate the ancient style of historical chronicles, which frankly can get pretty boring. We have very little of the internal deliberations of characters, rather their actions are summarised and padded out with endless description.
Once he returns to the Huns this description is everywhere and I found myself skipping over paragraphs and sometimed even pages only to have missed nothing but a three page monologue on some opposing barbarians tattoos and topknot. He is very good at describing battles and the acts of cruelty common in ancient histories (But the battles are much more engaging). Overall there is far too much description that doesn't add to anything and there is still not enough plot. The book could have done with more editing, especially to get rid of errors in continuity such as Attila berating a man for shooting a horse when they attack a column, then his very next order is to shoot the horses. Similarly Priscus applauds the woman Athenais for boldly defending herself in court full of men and refusing the emperor's offer, then condemns women who are audacious enough to sit at the table with their husband and his friends. Also his characters occassionally quote Shakespeare which gets kind of annoying condidering the story is set 1100 years before Shakespeare. I'd say Napier didn't realise he was doing this, some half remmebered quote from school just seemed to fit the situation he was writing about but it is a bit jarring when barbarians and Romans say things like 'it is an honour that I dream not of' (Romeo and Juliet) and describe jealousy as a 'green-eyed monster' (Othello).
His characters clairvoyance from the previous book is replaced with a remarkable passivity in this one. They follow Attila unquestioningly. He returns after a thirty year exile for treason, murders their King in his own tent and declares himself ruler and everyone just nods along. He defeats the Kutriger Huns in battle, a people Napier repeatedly describes as filled with bloodlust and extremely cruel, but rather than seek vengeance they join him. He slaughters hundreds of their warriors in battle and threatens their women and children and then the Kutriger force of thousands bow down to Attila's 80 remaining men. It is for these reasons that his slight improvements (such as hugely cutting back on infodumps, his sense of humour and his vivid battle scenes) do not make up for the lapses in this story for me.
Overall I didn't enjoy reading this which made it feel far too long, for anyone wanting to learn about Attila pick up a textbook. I don't think I'll read the next one for a long time.
That's about it. Not much else happens in the plot. In my last review I said that his major problem was trying to squeeze in as many facts about Rome as possible to the detriment of pacing or characterisation. This problem all but disappeared when Attila returned to the Huns, the only information we have about the Huns is from a Roman perspective, we have no sources from their point of view. So for the last 50 pages or so the story really picked up because he didn't have hundreds of facts to show off. This installment is told almost entirely from the point of view of the Huns and if far better for it. My favourite character, the Hun shaman and token madman Little Bird, is much more prominent here. The story opens up with a lot more action, Attila usurping King Ruga, and there is some mystery about how exactly he intends to get his revenge on Rome. He also displays a sense of humour, largely absent from the previous book, in the character of Little Bird, in occassional jokes amongst the men and in ironically scorning novels as 'arrant nonsense that openly delights the unlettered multitude ' (78). (Novels were considered pretty trashy in the ancient world)
And then he ruins it all with a 60 page digression summing up what's been happening in Rome in the past thirty years. 60 pages! It just goes on and on. I wouldn't have minded so much if he had actually told it as a story but he skims over nearly everything, providing a summary so that we never actually get to know more than a cardboard version of any character.
This tendency to summarise rather than involve the reader in the moment, I feel, is Napier's biggest problem. His narrator for the series is Priscus of Panium, the only historical account surviving from this period. As such he attempts to imitate the ancient style of historical chronicles, which frankly can get pretty boring. We have very little of the internal deliberations of characters, rather their actions are summarised and padded out with endless description.
Once he returns to the Huns this description is everywhere and I found myself skipping over paragraphs and sometimed even pages only to have missed nothing but a three page monologue on some opposing barbarians tattoos and topknot. He is very good at describing battles and the acts of cruelty common in ancient histories (But the battles are much more engaging). Overall there is far too much description that doesn't add to anything and there is still not enough plot. The book could have done with more editing, especially to get rid of errors in continuity such as Attila berating a man for shooting a horse when they attack a column, then his very next order is to shoot the horses. Similarly Priscus applauds the woman Athenais for boldly defending herself in court full of men and refusing the emperor's offer, then condemns women who are audacious enough to sit at the table with their husband and his friends. Also his characters occassionally quote Shakespeare which gets kind of annoying condidering the story is set 1100 years before Shakespeare. I'd say Napier didn't realise he was doing this, some half remmebered quote from school just seemed to fit the situation he was writing about but it is a bit jarring when barbarians and Romans say things like 'it is an honour that I dream not of' (Romeo and Juliet) and describe jealousy as a 'green-eyed monster' (Othello).
His characters clairvoyance from the previous book is replaced with a remarkable passivity in this one. They follow Attila unquestioningly. He returns after a thirty year exile for treason, murders their King in his own tent and declares himself ruler and everyone just nods along. He defeats the Kutriger Huns in battle, a people Napier repeatedly describes as filled with bloodlust and extremely cruel, but rather than seek vengeance they join him. He slaughters hundreds of their warriors in battle and threatens their women and children and then the Kutriger force of thousands bow down to Attila's 80 remaining men. It is for these reasons that his slight improvements (such as hugely cutting back on infodumps, his sense of humour and his vivid battle scenes) do not make up for the lapses in this story for me.
Overall I didn't enjoy reading this which made it feel far too long, for anyone wanting to learn about Attila pick up a textbook. I don't think I'll read the next one for a long time.
May 26, 2021
Attila: The Gathering of the Storm is the second instalment of Attila’s trilogy and it continues thirty years after Attila’s boyhood when he returned back to his tribe after a long exile to usurp the throne and unify the scattered Hun tribes across the plains of Scythia. The whole storyline is compelling enough to follow but I found some chapters rather dull with too many flowery words. It seems like William Napier’s only research was based on the Roman side rather than the Huns as the Huns’ portrayal in this second book is basically the offshoot of the Mongols and, to some degree, the Turkic tribes. Attila’s impossible feat to unite the other nomadic Hunnic tribes across Central Asia was fascinating and the author did a good job to describe the various tribes and landscapes that Attila and his fearsome band of warriors encountered on their journey east.
Perhaps, one element that I didn’t particularly like in this book was Attila’s penchant for long-rousing speeches that, at some parts, took the whole chapter. Attila is charismatic, sure, but to deliver such a philosophical speech that contained Roman, Greek, and Christian terms to his Hunnic audiences was very tedious. I felt like it’s the author who did the speech to us, the readers, rather than the character Attila to his Hunnic audiences. The interregnum story of Aëtius was rather a breath of fresh air. Aëtius was described as equally charismatic as Attila though he became a man of few words and disciplined general instead of a general who makes encouraging speeches before the battle.
Overall, some chapters are entertaining and some chapters are dull, slow-paced, and just full of long speeches.
Perhaps, one element that I didn’t particularly like in this book was Attila’s penchant for long-rousing speeches that, at some parts, took the whole chapter. Attila is charismatic, sure, but to deliver such a philosophical speech that contained Roman, Greek, and Christian terms to his Hunnic audiences was very tedious. I felt like it’s the author who did the speech to us, the readers, rather than the character Attila to his Hunnic audiences. The interregnum story of Aëtius was rather a breath of fresh air. Aëtius was described as equally charismatic as Attila though he became a man of few words and disciplined general instead of a general who makes encouraging speeches before the battle.
Overall, some chapters are entertaining and some chapters are dull, slow-paced, and just full of long speeches.
December 19, 2020
Absolutely a must read.
May 8, 2011
While part 1 of this trilogy ticked a lot of boxes for me (the end of the Roman Empire, epic adventure, a dash of fantasy/mysticism) and left me eager for part 2, 'The Gathering of the Storm' failed to hit the mark for me.
The scale of this book felt very limited in comparison to the first part, both geographically and temporally. It follows Attila, in his homeland, stamping out usurpers and mustering support from his clansmen. The character of Attila just felt completely different (not just older and wiser) to the boyhood equivalent in part 1, and a lot of the loose ends from part 1 are never touched upon throughout this book.
Also, technically speaking the narrative used a heck of a lot of adjectives - to the extent that it really detracted from the story in places.
I think it's a shame after such a captivating start to the trilogy and I can only hope part 3 saves the day.
The scale of this book felt very limited in comparison to the first part, both geographically and temporally. It follows Attila, in his homeland, stamping out usurpers and mustering support from his clansmen. The character of Attila just felt completely different (not just older and wiser) to the boyhood equivalent in part 1, and a lot of the loose ends from part 1 are never touched upon throughout this book.
Also, technically speaking the narrative used a heck of a lot of adjectives - to the extent that it really detracted from the story in places.
I think it's a shame after such a captivating start to the trilogy and I can only hope part 3 saves the day.
March 30, 2015
I was incredibly disappointed with this book. I had really enjoyed the first book as I really liked the characters and enjoyed Attila's character development particularly. This book did not feel connected to the first book at all. The Attila that I knew and liked was not this Attila. Thirty years had passed and Napier hadn't filled in any of the missing time. He just brought in this King Attila who you could not really connect with as he never really talked or interacted with others. The plot was very disjointed and I was completely lost when scenes suddenly transferred to Rome and Constantine. What did that have to do with anything? I got bored through a lot of the scenes and found myself wishing it over.
I will not be bothering with the third book.
I will not be bothering with the third book.
September 3, 2014
A good solid second book. I found the second half better that the first, was more of a page turner. I perfered the chapters set in the royal Roman court, I'm a sucker for life at court. I know the story is about Attila but I like to know whats going on with the royals! Attila is still a very likable character. I sence that maybe the witch lady is going to have some bad effect on him that may change that in the next book. Looking forward to the final book.
May 27, 2016
I'm not looking forward to the next one, but I've started so I'll probably finish. This had the feel of padding; an episode that had to be put together to make the series a trilogy, when a quick chapter would have served as well. It certainly looks a lot shorter than the other two, which was probably just as well, really. The Roman interludes were a welcome relief. Hope Rome features more in #3; hope it has more narrative and makes more sense.
Read
August 3, 2011I loved the first book in this series, but this one was a struggle. I would probably give it 2 stars, but there were some interesting historical perspectives in the book. This one told much less about Attila and the people and seem to go on forever about the land and the mythology of Huns. Some of that is great. But this made up a major portion of the book (or at least it seemed to).
December 17, 2012
A really good set-up for the 3rd and final book in the series "Attila: The Judgement". Author is very adept at painting the hardships endured by Attila and his people of the Asian steppes, and at building up to the final showdown between the Huns and the Roman Empire. You just know the last book is going to be "bad-ass". :)
Displaying 1 - 30 of 55 reviews