Some people seem to dislike this book intensely. I get it. It takes a while to get from A to B, and from B to C. I'm not even sure that it got to C, to be honest. So if you like a nice, tight, spare novel, this isn't for you. It's a bit Byzantine, a bit sprawling. It spends pages focused on a bureaucrat seated in his office thinking about a problem, for example.
What does it have? For starters, it's got a shout-out to Herodotus on the Persians. This isn't the first time I've seen this little gem worked into historical fiction (or in this case, historically-grounded fantasy-ish), but I still got goosebumps. Here's K.J. Parker:
"Another thing he’d heard about these people; they respected truth above all things. The perfect education, they said with pride, consisted of horsemanship, archery and telling the truth."
And Herodotus:
"From the age of five to the age of twenty, they teach their sons just three things: to ride horses, to shoot the bow, and to speak the truth."
The book also has a psychopath active at the margins -- I'm guessing he'll be an important figure, but for now the margins -- and I really enjoyed this bit of philosophizing by another character, speaking about our psychopath:
"What I mean is, it’s possible for someone to do the sort of things he’s done and still regard himself as a more or less normal human being; he thinks to himself, I’ve done something wrong, but it’s fine, I can put it right. If there really was such a thing as evil, he couldn’t think like that. No, it’s not that easy — some people are monsters, they’re evil through and through; you tell yourself that so you can make sense of the world. It’s like believing in a religion, a god and a devil, all good on one side, all bad on the other. But that’s not how it is. Instead, you’ve got people who are capable of doing things that you can’t even bear to think about; for bloody certain you can’t ever forgive them. But they can still feel guilt and shame, they can still fall in love, try and do the right thing, appreciate what the right thing is — and then they cheerfully go and do the next unbelievably bad thing, and it all goes round again. So you tell yourself, it’s because they’re not right in the head, it’s an illness, they aren’t in control of what they do. That’s another easy way round it, and of course it isn’t true. And then you get people like me; and people like you, as well. It should be up to us to kill men like him on sight, like wolves, but we don’t. We talk ourselves into believing that it’d be wrong, which is just that same old belief again, an excuse for not facing something we can’t understand."
I was reminded of The Kindly Ones by Johnathan Littell, and I'm sure there are any number of other examples out there. Evil -- what is it, and what does it look like from the point of view of the evildoer?
Also, logistics, early renaissance technology, and the idea that love can be a force for (really, really) bad as well as for good.