I've gotten this e-ARC from the publisher via NetGalley, thanks to the author and publisher!

Ok, I am a romantic at heart! Truly enjoyed the pace, the high, the low, the excitement and the scheme of things that made this story enjoyable. Though it's fiction, Dina has managed to incorporate a lot of the current affairs back then into this, making it more realistic. To ponder: We do need more chivalry though in our current world.

My full review here:
http://www.sholee.net/2015/10/mpov-chivalrous-valiant-hearts-2-e-arc.html ( )

A trilogy, that common animal in Fiction, can be a mixed bag. The first book can be wonderful, whilst others fail to please, or vice versa. Such was the case for me with Chivalrous. I did genuinely like Dauntless, the first book and the series- and that is high praise from me, who sets my standards for Medieval Fiction very high indeed.

In such cases, it’s best to start with the positive. Chivalrous was a tight, well-told story, with some important messages, and delivered its main religious theme about trusting God in difficult and seemingly impossible circumstances well, without being too preachy. Readers of the first book might also enjoy seeing Allen of Ellsworth, an important character from the first book, come into his own. There is also plenty of action, adventure and intrigue to keep young adult readers enthralled- as well as plenty of romance.

However, for me there some major deficiencies. One thing was that I never really warmed to the female protagonist, Gwendolyn. Like Merry from the first book she adopts a traditionally male role, that of a wannabe knight- but unlike Merry, her wish to do this seems to result more from rebellious obstinacy, and a refusal to conform to social norms than anything else-at least at the beginning of the story.
In the early part of the book, she just seemed like a brat with a chip on her shoulder because she was not allowed to play with swords and was expected to stay in her family’s castle, and do ‘boring’ things she did not want to do.

Okay, so the idea of a medieval woman fighting is not so implausible. Yet the notion of a teenage girl with no direct military experience being able to best trained soldiers, or even kill fully armoured knights on the battlefield when not even wearing a helmet (essential for preventing serious head injuries, or death) and escape unscathed is a bit much. Even for men, failure to use the proper armour or equipment in battle proved fatal, so how could she manange without it?

Again, I had no problem with the issue of domestic abuse in this story. These things do happen and its necessary to explore them at times. However, I do object to the idea that Gwen’s situation- that of having a father who abuses her mother, and even his children, was common in medieval times, and such actions were generally considered acceptable. Nor do I accept the idea that Gwen’s father’s attitude towards women and their roles were normal for the period. For instance, he believes women should not ride horses, as it could damage their reproductive organs. I have heard the Victorians believed something along those lines about riding bicycles, but know of no evidence for such an idea in the medieval times. Indeed, there are plenty of images of women riding horses from the period.

Oh, and he also wants to force her to marry a horrid, cruel man. A bit of a cliché, but forced marriage is very much prevalent in this story. It is something else I have a problem with in fiction- mostly because the church actually banned it in the eleventh century, and for a marriage to be valid the free consent of both parties had to be given willingly. Despite this, many authors seem to ignore or discount the ban, and make out that it was the norm-even though the evidence shows many noblewomen chose their own husbands. One of those ‘don’t let the facts get in the way of the story’ situations.

Even the notion of North Britannia being a ‘progressive’ state got to me, because of the way this was treated. Basically, it’s supposed to be some paragon of medieval chivalric ideals, and Christian virtues in the midst of the universally corrupt society around it. I can accept that this is meant to be ‘dystopian’ fiction- but it’s almost too dystopian. The characters constantly harping on about how ‘progressive’ they were, whilst pointing the accusing finger at anyone who did not share their ideals smacks too much of modern liberalism.

Seemingly most other societies, including their neighbour England (which they are actually meant to be part of) were in danger of being regarded as backwards, repressive and their customs and ideas often treated with scorn.
The villain is opposed to this ‘progress’ and wants a return to ‘traditional feudalism’ (which is regarded as bad, bad, bad) like they supposedly had in backwards England, and scorn such notions as rule of Law, rule by council, democracy and equality. The problem this representation in inaccurate- and such notions were not alien and repugnant to Medieval Englishmen. The notion of rule of law existed in English society before the Magna Carta, most Medieval Kings had councils, and it was a nobleman who established the British parliament including the House of Commons, in the same century as this book is set.

More generally, I was concerned with the attitude towards authority that was held by some of the characters. The most progressive North Britannians seem to have little time for the idea that fathers should be able to ‘rule their household’ and have a legal right to authority over their wives and underage children. Yet this concept is supported in scripture- although not in the way that Gwen’s father uses it, but the characters in question seem to consider the notion itself to be wrong and unjust.
Allen and his fellows seemed to think that if the political authorities, in this case the Council that he was meant to be leading, supported something which that regarded as tyrannical, unfair or unjust, they should ‘follow their own heart’, and the alleged leading of the Holy Spirit- instead of being ‘ruled by men’. At one point he condemns said council as ‘tyrannical’- basically because it would not let him run off and rescue and damsel in distress, instead of facing his responsibilities and running the Dukedom.

The New Testament contains a number of passages which expressly state we should obey those in authority, for God puts them in that place, and even be subject to Kings and rulers. Only if they require us to do something which is expressly against Christian teaching is there any precedent for refusal to obey. Not just because we don’t like or think it’s right. Not just because they will not let us do what we want.
Now, I do not in any way condone the abuse of this power that Gwen’s father represents- but nor do I believe we should pick and choose which parts of the Bible we want to believe, and reject that which does not fit in with our ideas. The idea that you can reject anything in mainstream religious teaching, or that any authority figure tells you that conflicts with your innate idea of ‘doing what is right’, as the characters often seem to do, is one that is worrying. Especially when encountered by teenagers who might already have a problem with authority.

I almost think ‘Rebellious’ could have been a fitting title for this novel, which would really have worked better as fantasy than historical fiction. I would consider reading the next title in this series, and I’m not meaning to imply the author is deliberately misrepresenting anything, but just to proceed with caution.

I recieved an e-galley of this book, from the publisher via Netgalley for review. No other renumeration was given and all opinions expressed are my own. ( )

When I requested Chivalrous to read, I thought that it would be a companion story to Dauntless. It had been a while since I had read the book and didn't recognize the names of some of the characters. To my surprise and delight, I found out that continues with one of the characters from Dauntless.

Gwendolyn is a young lady who doesn't like the future that is presented to her. She has trained to be a warrior with her brothers from her youth and the thought of being wed to a man she does not love holds little interest for her. She continues training on the sly, because it has been forbidden by her father, and enters a tournament. That is where she meets the Knight Allen of Ellsworth.

Allen is one of the Ghosts of Farthingale Forest from Dauntless. He has moved beyond his origins and finds himself a Knight and on the Council for North Britannia. His honor and duty may take precedence over his heart as he struggles to find his place in his new home.

This book is a second in a series, while it makes references to the first, it could read as a stand alone. It is well written and full of romance and adventure. I loved the characters. The setting is in the middle ages and the Duke has tried to emulate the Kingdom of Camelot. I love Arthurian Legend, so that aspect was a bonus for me.

The book has some violence and kissing. Allen of Ellsworth is a devote Christian and this book has many religious references. ( )

I was given a copy of the eGalley of Chivalrous by NetGalley in exchange for an honest review.

This was a very interesting book about a woman, Gwen, headstrong and proud, who managed to train herself in the knightly and chivalrous arts. She is trapped by society into a conventional life and finds herself being forced into a marriage she has no interest in. She finds connection with a poor knight from the south of England but of course the relationship is doomed. This book is about her adventures while trying to be both a dutiful daughter to a daunting father AND a free-spirited, knight of the realm. ( )

A little predictable. I already knew how Gwendolyn and Allen would meet, long before they did, in fact, meet that way. The writing is fine, although some of the dialogue, in the attempt to be representative of the time period, comes off sounded stilted.

Slieman seems to have done her homework, and explains her worldbuilding in her notes at the end of the book.

There’s a definite divide in the characters—basically, they’re obvious “good guys” or obvious “bad guys.” There are very few who have a mixture of those qualities.

Gwendolyn is a little too good to be true—beautiful, strong, has cute dogs, kind to her servant, develops a testimony of God. Allen—well, he’s a paragon, too. Even their faults are attractive.

My favorite scene might just be the one in which Gwendolyn calls out her father and they have a fistfight. There’s no redeeming quality about the man at all—a flat, stock character.

Rosalind, Gwendolyn’s maid, is a more interesting and complex character, who faces deeply affecting choices—and their consequences. It is too bad that she is allowed to simply disappear from the story without any actual resolution. Some are speculating that she will be the focus of the next book in the series.

That said, I have not read the first book of the series, and did not find that to be a problem. Yes, characters from the first appear in the second, but it is not necessary to know the details of their backstory.

Possible objectionable material:
Out-of-wedlock pregnancy, followed by abortion. Murder. Violence (hey, it’s what knights do.) Spousal/child abuse. None of this is particularly graphic, but it is there. Make no mistake—this is Christian fiction. An important facet of the characters’ inner lives is their relationship with God. If you are not religious, this could range from mildly annoying to downright incomprehensible.

Who would like this book:
Readers of Christian fiction, young adult romance, stories about knights and chivalry. Since there are multiple POVs, it is not actually dominated by males or females. Approximate Lexile: 750.

Thank you, NetGalley, for the advance reader e-book. ( )