The historical setting, characters and writing style were a winning combination. The pace, the plot and the action kept me interested against the interesting backdrop of the settings and customs at the time of this crusade. ( )

This is a stellar read! Good to the last drop with nice plot twists. ( )

Overall, the book left me with mixed feelings. It was undeniably well-written with vivid and evocative descriptions and realistic and exhilarating battle scenes- at least at the beginning. Towards the end the kidnappings or attempted kidnappings), attacks, narrow escapes, rescues and almost inevitable accompanying fight scenes seemed to become a little repetitive, predictable and dare I say, overdone or over reliant on action?
Also, the apparently invincibility of the hero Marcus Annan and his servant Marek seemed to stretch credibility- with the former able survive numerous wounds, to fight with broken bones or other injuries, and the latter surviving being thrown off a balcony- all of when other characters are killed with far less (Was really that easy to cut through chain mail?)
Another scene in which one of the villains broke into a castle guarded by precisely one man at the main gate seemed decidedly implausible Seriously, I doubt a castle in the Middle of potentially hostile territory would have been so poorly defended, or so easy to break into twice and destroy with only a few men.

The hero Marcus Annan could be a frustrating character. His actions were sometimes inconsistent or hardtop work out- wanting to be rid of the monk Gethin one minute then riding off to save him shortly after. Also, the characterization of a Crusader cum pilgrim with religious doubts is perhaps not the most original, as similar protagonists can be found in other books and movies. Like them, Annan’s skepticism, apparent bias against the Crusaders, and some of his other beliefs and attitudes seemed rather too modern.

There were also a number of historical issues- the most notable being the depiction of events that took place after the capture of the city of Acre in 1191- the controversial order given by Richard the Lionheart to massacre 2700 Muslim prisoners. In the novel it is made out that Richard gave this order after only a few days when Saladin hadn’t produced the sum of money demanded as part of the negotiated terms of surrender- and he is made out to be the bad one for having broken his oath to Saladin to deliver the prisoners and acting dishonourably. Yet in reality, Richard made no oath to Saladin, and the impetus was on him to fulfill the terms of surrender, who acted just as duplicitously as Richard by playing for time, trying to change the terms, and draw the Crusaders into battle.
Also, over 30 days elapsed, the agreed deadline for fulfilling the terms of surrender, before the order was given. Finally, it is claimed that women and children were among those massacred, when this is not mentioned in any contemporary sources, and at least two modern historians have asserted those slain consisted entirely of fighting men. Admittedly, the origin of this inaccurate depiction was in the sources the author used, not she herself, but given the capacity of historical fiction to influence people’s perception of history, it bears mention. One other inaccuracy was ironed out towards the end, and further historical details suggested a good amount of research.

I also seriously do wonder whether the leading characters would have been allowed to get away with murdering or plotting to murder, their fellow nobles, or the rape of a noblewoman, right under the king’s nose- so to speak. Medieval nobles were generally quite assertive in defence of their rights- to the point that they even rebelled against Kings who abused their power. So I certainly think the nobles would have acted to defend themselves against the villains of this story, or complained to the King
My final complaint was some of the language such as repeated use of the nineteenth century nautical slang term ‘bucko’. I think this and other phrases might have been used because they sounded ‘British’ but I’m a Brit, and I’d never heard of it.

Overall Behold the Dawn was a worthwhile - and I might say somewhat compulsive read, and was certainly an engaging story with solid Christian and well-presented Christian themes of redemption and forgiveness , but d required perhaps more suspension of disbelief then I like. On the other hand I probably would read it again.
( )

Fast-moving, enthralling novel of the Third Crusade. A tourneyer, Marcus Annan, is convinced to go the Crusades by a mysterious crippled monk from Annan's past. There is much fighting but the main story is that of Annan's self-forgiveness and redemption. As one character says, and I'm paraphrasing: Each new dawn brings with it a new beginning with the new day.

I figured out part of Annan's past early on, but I wish the rest had been explained early on in a clearer form. What exactly happened at St. Dunstan's monastery that affected Annan's and the monk's lives? I disliked Annan's sidekick; I felt he was impertinent and a complainer. I saw no humor in him, but yes, he did fill a niche in the story. I liked neatness with which the story was wound up.

Highly recommended. ( )

This is a story that took me by surprise - it was difficult to start, but once I got into it, everything fell into place. Behold the Dawn is a tale of salvation, redemption and revenge set during the Third Crusade. Every one of the characters has a secret and the secrets seemed tied to other secrets. I particularly enjoyed the beginning scene at the tournament - not your sanitized tourney straight out of "Camelot" or the first season of "The Tudors," but the ugly, violent, yet exciting sport that was banned in England by Henry II and condemned the church. You taste the dirt, the sweat, the blood, and you feel the pain at times. You get inside the troubled soul of Marcus Annan and wish better for him - and you wonder what went wrong that forced him onto his life's journey.

The main characters are enignmatic, and puzzling - you have to keep reading.

I would give "Behold the Dawn" five stars, but some of the dialogue grated on me - the use of the word 'bucko' and the wise-cracking sidekick's dialogue and behavior was out-of-century. Did not like two of the main characters, especially Marek. Would a squire talk like that to his master, especially one as lethal as Marcus Annan, and be able to stand up straight after smarting off to the boss? Don't think so. Also, I wished the author would have better explained the dirtiest secret of all, the one alluded to at every step and in every scene and by every character. All are connected in one way or another to it. When I got to the end, as satisfying as it was, there were still a lot of unanswered questions in my mind. And yet, I have to say it was a good read. Perhaps a prequel is in order, if one hasn't already been done.
( )