What do you think?
Rate this book
Chaucer #1
Chaucer and the House of Fame
It is 1370, right in the middle of the Anglo-French conflict, the Hundred Years War. In danger of losing the Aquitaine territory, England sends Geoffrey Chaucer, protégé of the king's son, to France. As a poet on a diplomatic mission, Chaucer must persuade one of the most important noblemen of the region to remain loyal to England's king. The problem is that the noble, Henri, Comte de Guyac, whose wife Chaucer had previously fallen in love with when he was held prisoner by Henri, is not exactly neutral in his feelings for Chaucer. Wondering how he will feel when he meets with Rosamund, the Comte's wife, Chaucer reaches de Guyac's castle and is greeted by turmoil. There are factions ready to undermine his mission, which is further complicated when Henri is killed during a boar hunt. Chaucer soon realizes the Comte's death is no hunting accident and that he must solve the murder before returning home. Enemies and suspects abound. Wanting only to return to England and get back to his work, Chaucer finds himself in the midst of a brightly colorful puzzle that turns him into a fugitive in a foreign country, unsure who his friends and enemies really are.
341 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 2004
1 person is currently reading
58 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 14 of 14 reviews
October 9, 2013
Although I very much enjoyed this book, I can identify immediately one possible reason why it's never become a huge hit: as someone just now entering their fifth year of university education on the very subjects (medieval history and literature) dealt with in this book, I suspect that I'm better prepared to be flung headlong into the fourteenth century without much preamble than many readers coming to this novel. (I don't know for sure, of course, since my perception of what non-medievalists know about the period has been skewed by half a decade of total saturation in the field, but that was certainly my impression.) Morgan doesn't waste time explaining the wider context in which the story takes place, which is a shame in a way, since the book has obviously been very well researched, and the whole plot is kick-started by a crisis point in the Hundred Years War with which I suspect not many people are deeply familiar. The story clocks in at a mere 341 pages - and there are a lot of blank pages indicating chapter breaks within that - which immediately suggests that the emphasis will not be so much on the politics of the era as on "Geoffrey Chaucer solves a murder", in the style of numerous historical domain figures like Oscar Wilde and Sir Arthur Conan Doyle who have been appropriated by modern detective fiction over the past few years. However, I was surprised to discover that the history is given greater precedence than the mystery here - the advertised murder doesn't take place until a little past the novel's halfway point, and its solution is repeatedly overshadowed by a mounting political intrigue which - SPOILER - turns out to have only the most tangential connection to the crime; and the unmasking of the killer, while satisfying, is far from being the book's climactic scene, and is dealt with almost by-the-bye once everything else is winding down. Think John le Carré meets Brother Cadfael meets Wolf Hall meets Agatha Christie, all compressed down to three hundred and fifty pages. Hugely enjoyable and, yes, a well rounded story which draws in all the plot elements introduced earlier, and is well aware of the one thread it leaves (deliberately) dangling; but unable to get to grips with any of its many complementary themes in anything like the detail they merit or deserve.
The use of Geoffrey Chaucer as the novel's main character and nominal detective is handled quite well, and it's easy to appreciate how tricky this must have been for the author. As a historical figure primarily known through his writings - particularly his final work, The Canterbury Tales - and whose biography is fairly complete for his time but nevertheless extremely sketchy by modern standards, it would have been easy for Morgan's Chaucer to descend into caricature, taking the bawdy comedy displayed in those Tales which seem currently to be the most popular as evidence for a man whose character was defined by an enjoyment of scatological and sexual humour. Morgan, however, is aware of Chaucer's wider biography and uses it to add a great deal of nuance to his character: in 1370-71 Chaucer was still actively engaged in diplomatic work in France and Italy, the poetry he was producing at the time was far more serious in tone than his later works (it's mentioned at one point that he recently wrote The Book of the Duchess, one of his first major works, a touching elegy for his patron's first wife), and to this Morgan adds the realistic detail that Chaucer is, at this stage of his life, more concerned with the welfare of his young family than with the acquisition of fame, whether through his diplomatic work or his writing. Little else is revealed about Chaucer's personality through his dialogue and actions, but in a way this is one of the novel's greater strengths: it allows the reader to use a familiar historical figure as a touchstone in a quite possibly unfamiliar world, supplying detail from their own knowledge about his background and temperament, allowing him to lead the way without attempting to impose a particular interpretation upon him which might distract a reader who held different pre-conceived views or expectations of him as a character. Any English civil servant of the period - whether real or invented - might have taken Chaucer's place as the hero of the novel, at the expense of a few pleasing episodes in which Chaucer witnesses or hears something which is obviously going to influence his writing of The Canterbury Tales several years down the line (his young assistants' bed-hopping adventure in the inn at Canterbury in the first few chapters, for example, is explicitly linked to his writing of The Reeve's Tale) - but I think it is the benefit of a figure familiar to the reader which, more than anything else, makes Chaucer's place in this book so important.
(And a note to my fellow Chaucerian nerds out there: The House of Fame is more or less the only major work of Chaucer's which doesn't receive a shout-out at some point during the novel, nor is its relevance to the plot obvious. But this is a minor nit-pick.)
I have given this book 3 stars instead of 4 because, despite my great enjoyment of it while I was reading it, I don't expect it will stay with me for very long. It impressed me enough that I checked the second and third books in the series out of my local library, and I look forward to reading them, but its main impact has been to make me want to re-read some Chaucer rather than jump headlong into the remainder of Morgan's trilogy, which I'm content to let sit on my shelves for a while before starting on them. Perhaps this is partly because, despite the plain and uncomplicated (yet distinctly better than average) prose and the well-drawn characters, I was never entirely drawn into the fictional world of the novel; it remained words on a page for the most part, which I think may have been intentional - a meta-fictional homage to the way formal technique took precedent over realistic world-building in the literature of Chaucer's time? - but still potentially a bit dry in places, especially when you sit down expecting a straightforward historical murder mystery. Overall, however, it's a very easy read - I got through it in three days' worth of breakfast and lunchtime sittings - and I recommend it to anyone with an interest in medieval history as well as murder mystery.
The use of Geoffrey Chaucer as the novel's main character and nominal detective is handled quite well, and it's easy to appreciate how tricky this must have been for the author. As a historical figure primarily known through his writings - particularly his final work, The Canterbury Tales - and whose biography is fairly complete for his time but nevertheless extremely sketchy by modern standards, it would have been easy for Morgan's Chaucer to descend into caricature, taking the bawdy comedy displayed in those Tales which seem currently to be the most popular as evidence for a man whose character was defined by an enjoyment of scatological and sexual humour. Morgan, however, is aware of Chaucer's wider biography and uses it to add a great deal of nuance to his character: in 1370-71 Chaucer was still actively engaged in diplomatic work in France and Italy, the poetry he was producing at the time was far more serious in tone than his later works (it's mentioned at one point that he recently wrote The Book of the Duchess, one of his first major works, a touching elegy for his patron's first wife), and to this Morgan adds the realistic detail that Chaucer is, at this stage of his life, more concerned with the welfare of his young family than with the acquisition of fame, whether through his diplomatic work or his writing. Little else is revealed about Chaucer's personality through his dialogue and actions, but in a way this is one of the novel's greater strengths: it allows the reader to use a familiar historical figure as a touchstone in a quite possibly unfamiliar world, supplying detail from their own knowledge about his background and temperament, allowing him to lead the way without attempting to impose a particular interpretation upon him which might distract a reader who held different pre-conceived views or expectations of him as a character. Any English civil servant of the period - whether real or invented - might have taken Chaucer's place as the hero of the novel, at the expense of a few pleasing episodes in which Chaucer witnesses or hears something which is obviously going to influence his writing of The Canterbury Tales several years down the line (his young assistants' bed-hopping adventure in the inn at Canterbury in the first few chapters, for example, is explicitly linked to his writing of The Reeve's Tale) - but I think it is the benefit of a figure familiar to the reader which, more than anything else, makes Chaucer's place in this book so important.
(And a note to my fellow Chaucerian nerds out there: The House of Fame is more or less the only major work of Chaucer's which doesn't receive a shout-out at some point during the novel, nor is its relevance to the plot obvious. But this is a minor nit-pick.)
I have given this book 3 stars instead of 4 because, despite my great enjoyment of it while I was reading it, I don't expect it will stay with me for very long. It impressed me enough that I checked the second and third books in the series out of my local library, and I look forward to reading them, but its main impact has been to make me want to re-read some Chaucer rather than jump headlong into the remainder of Morgan's trilogy, which I'm content to let sit on my shelves for a while before starting on them. Perhaps this is partly because, despite the plain and uncomplicated (yet distinctly better than average) prose and the well-drawn characters, I was never entirely drawn into the fictional world of the novel; it remained words on a page for the most part, which I think may have been intentional - a meta-fictional homage to the way formal technique took precedent over realistic world-building in the literature of Chaucer's time? - but still potentially a bit dry in places, especially when you sit down expecting a straightforward historical murder mystery. Overall, however, it's a very easy read - I got through it in three days' worth of breakfast and lunchtime sittings - and I recommend it to anyone with an interest in medieval history as well as murder mystery.
December 6, 2021
Interesting look at the 100 Years war and the lengths England went to try and keep the Aquitaine part of France. Chaucer and two English knights are sent to Bordeaux to convince a noble to stay loyal to the English. Chaucer had lived here a decade earlier, as the captive of that noble. While he senses someone is following them, he can't pin him down. To complicate the mission, they fall in with a small troupe of actors in Bordeaux as they head to the castle at Guyac. Between the spy, the actors and Chaucer's party, life suddenly gets even more complicated, when the Duke of Guyac is killed on a boar hunt. As Chaucer and party escape the castle, he begins to piece together who really wanted the death the most.
December 16, 2020
Probably 3.5 stars. Combination spy thriller and murder mystery set in 1370. Geoffrey Chaucer is sent on a mission by John of Gaunt, his patron. Travelling from London to Calais to Aquitaine is dangerous at the best of times, without those who want to keep Chaucer from completing his mission dog his footsteps. While most of the story is told from Chaucer's point-of-view, some is told from the point-of-views of others, so the reader possesses more knowledge. Fast-paced, with lots of action. Full of interesting, believable characters in a well-depicted setting. Recommended.
June 10, 2021
интересни времена. от тях стават добри истории, но не са добри да живееш в тях. самата филипа морган отбелязва този факт някъде из романа, подчертавайки, че ако рицарите мандахерцайки се по бойните полета, дрънчейки с брони и щитове, могат и да се чувстват славни, то обикновените хорица, най- вече жените и децата, го отнасят.
та... интриги, опасни приключения и чосър сред краткия мир на стогодишната война.
та... интриги, опасни приключения и чосър сред краткия мир на стогодишната война.
dnf
June 3, 2017DNF ~ 90 pages
I just don't care. The villain is cartoonishly evil. Chaucer is...there. Neither gets much in-depth characterization despite huge infodumps about...stuff.
I just don't care. The villain is cartoonishly evil. Chaucer is...there. Neither gets much in-depth characterization despite huge infodumps about...stuff.
May 22, 2011
I only got about 156 pages into this 350ish page book. The story seemed to be going horribly slowly to the point where I wasn't sure what the point of it was. I found myself wondering, "Why am I reading this again? What's the purpose of this excursion?" It was just extremely bland and not very exciting. I have never stopped reading a book midway through before but I simply couldn't force myself to finish this one and not just because of the lackluster series of events...
I have an issue with violence. Mainly, needless violence. In this book, one of Chaucer's adversaries is a spy that is following his group through England and France that is needlessly killing people along the way. I absolutely HATE that! I understand that we're supposed to be repulsed by this character and hate him and he's clearly supposed to be the antithesis to Chaucer but I just feel like there are more nuanced ways to make this known than by having a character kill innocent people. I feel like that's an author's easy way out and I don't respect it. Especially in a novel that's focused on political intrigue, not violence. So in that case, why not make Hubert/Janus more vile with his wiley ways than by him leaving a trail of dead people behind him? Besides that, I always feel like this type of storyline always asks me to suspend reality that much more since this spy kills at the drop of a pin. He's clearly a psychopath, but a psycopathic killer could never have become as successful a spy as him. It just really rubs me the wrong way.
I also feel like the opening regarding the previous emissary to Gault was awkward and unnecessary. I was really hoping to be impressed with this book but just couldn't handle it.
I have an issue with violence. Mainly, needless violence. In this book, one of Chaucer's adversaries is a spy that is following his group through England and France that is needlessly killing people along the way. I absolutely HATE that! I understand that we're supposed to be repulsed by this character and hate him and he's clearly supposed to be the antithesis to Chaucer but I just feel like there are more nuanced ways to make this known than by having a character kill innocent people. I feel like that's an author's easy way out and I don't respect it. Especially in a novel that's focused on political intrigue, not violence. So in that case, why not make Hubert/Janus more vile with his wiley ways than by him leaving a trail of dead people behind him? Besides that, I always feel like this type of storyline always asks me to suspend reality that much more since this spy kills at the drop of a pin. He's clearly a psychopath, but a psycopathic killer could never have become as successful a spy as him. It just really rubs me the wrong way.
I also feel like the opening regarding the previous emissary to Gault was awkward and unnecessary. I was really hoping to be impressed with this book but just couldn't handle it.
August 27, 2007
CHAUCER AND THE HOUSE OF FAME (Historical Mystery-France-1370) – VG
Morgan, Philippa – 1st in series
Constable, 2004- UK Hardcover
Geoffrey Chaucer has been asked by his brother-in-law, John of Gaunt, to deliver a letter to France and to Comte de Guyac. He is unaware of being shadowed and that murders are occurring behind him, until the Comte dies in, what is clearly not, a hunting accident.
*** I wasn't certain about Chaucer in a mystery, but this worked mainly because the character was used in a believable way. Chaucer was, in fact, a diplomat as well as poet. The story is more political suspense, than a traditional mystery. There is a very effective sense of threat and danger that runs as a top note through the story, as well as an excellent twist at the end. There are stories within the story and a wonderful feel of time and place. I think it does help to know the actual history. For history lovers who don't need high action, I highly recommend it.
Morgan, Philippa – 1st in series
Constable, 2004- UK Hardcover
Geoffrey Chaucer has been asked by his brother-in-law, John of Gaunt, to deliver a letter to France and to Comte de Guyac. He is unaware of being shadowed and that murders are occurring behind him, until the Comte dies in, what is clearly not, a hunting accident.
*** I wasn't certain about Chaucer in a mystery, but this worked mainly because the character was used in a believable way. Chaucer was, in fact, a diplomat as well as poet. The story is more political suspense, than a traditional mystery. There is a very effective sense of threat and danger that runs as a top note through the story, as well as an excellent twist at the end. There are stories within the story and a wonderful feel of time and place. I think it does help to know the actual history. For history lovers who don't need high action, I highly recommend it.
July 26, 2010
Historical mystery. Aquitaine is becoming more disaffected from England. John of Gaunt sends Chaucer to an Aquitainian lord to talk him into staying allied with England. Chaucer knows the lord, who once held him for ransom, and he knows the lord's wife, who once dazzled him. He is distressed when Lord Henri dies in a boar hunt. The death creates an opportunity for some political reshuffling.
I must comment: what a boar hunt it was! Best part of the book, because of the exciting sense of reality that existed nowhere else in the book for me. I enjoyed the glimpses of Chaucer's family by marriage. Also he travels for a time with an interesting troupe of mummers ... and trailed by an assassin. Essentially the reason I gave it only 2 stars was that my disbelief was never suspended.
I must comment: what a boar hunt it was! Best part of the book, because of the exciting sense of reality that existed nowhere else in the book for me. I enjoyed the glimpses of Chaucer's family by marriage. Also he travels for a time with an interesting troupe of mummers ... and trailed by an assassin. Essentially the reason I gave it only 2 stars was that my disbelief was never suspended.
November 14, 2016
Good little murder mystery, but, like the second in the series (which I actually read first), the historic detail was lacking. Chaucer was traveling to Aquitaine at a time of great political upheaval to persuade his one-time friend and captor to side with England. This period of history is so rich with drama and intrigue but somehow Chaucer's plodding along in this murder mystery (which only happens half way through the book) minimizes this exciting time in Medieval France. Chaucer seemed more like an innocent bystander than one who was actively engaged in solving a crime.
May 7, 2016
When I picked up this book I expected to enjoy the history and mystery promised in the summary. I really tried to like this book, but after about 130 pages I decided I couldn't waste any more time trying to finish the book. I think this story could have worked better as a short story rather than a novel, there was much that I felt was unnecessary, which made it slow-moving and boring. So much so that I questioned where the plot was even going.
March 13, 2013
Chaucer is sent on a mission to Aquitaine to persuade the lord there to join the English cause. Thee's a mysterious person followinghim and killing people. Various other things happen in the plot but I found I didn't really care. Not as good as I expected.
March 14, 2009
I didn't finish it in time to return . . maybe another day? But not too bad for a first book.
October 12, 2010
Good to very good.
May 11, 2014
Good reading but essential clues were left out until near the very end. There was no way you could deduct the murderer on your own until the end.
Displaying 1 - 14 of 14 reviews