Wars of the Roses: Stormbird, by Conn Iggulden (2014)

Conn Iggulden is not a new face in historical fiction, but Wars of the Roses: Stormbird, is the first of his many novels I've read. Looking for something with an approximate historical relationship to my recent reading of English medieval royalty tales, I found this first volume of Iggulden's newest series. As the title makes clear, the historical setting is England's civil war fought to decide the successor to King Edward VI.

Stormbird begins with a prologue scene at the death of Edward III in 1377. The characters present at that drama foreshadow the later conflict between the two noble houses: Lancaster and York (Iggulden includes a helpful family tree).

Then the date jumps to 1443, 21 years after the death of the legendary warrior Edward V, hero of Agincourt and a Lancaster. The young son surviving Edward's premature death is now grown, but has not shown the leadership qualities of his father. English possessions on the continent are threatened by Philip II of France, and Edward's advisors attempt to buy peace with that tried-and-true royal strategy - marriage.

 The peace treaty that comes with the wedding vows fails, however, to stop the erosion of English fortunes, and dissatisfaction grows with the king's lack of martial and political prowess. Leader of the opposing royal faction is Richard, Duke of York - also a great-grandson of Edward III. But rebellion rises first from a more humble level, led by a Kentish commoner named Jack Cade, whose peasant army threatens London itself.

It was a turbulent time in merrie olde England, and Conn Iggulden tells the story well.  

The five criteria:

1. Did the novel inspire me to further historical research?

Yes. Much of this history was only vaguely familiar to me. Everyone has heard of the "War of the Roses", probably because of the poetic-sounding name, but the gory details make great historical-novel fodder.
Score = 5

2. Did the novel include enough history to make it an interesting historical story?

Yes. Iggulden obviously enjoys the twists and turns and details of political intrigue, and this slice of English history contains an extra-large helping of those elements. That emphasis puts his style closer to Sharon Kay Penman than the more military-centric Bernard Cornwell.
Score = 5

3. Was the depiction of historical events accurate?

Yes. The historical research seems to be thorough and on a par with other hist-fict writers I like. Inclusion of a "Historical Note" section at the end raises the score from 4 to 5.
Score = 5

4. Was the depiction of historical characters accurate?

As with most novels employing fictionalized historical characters, the most you can usually say is that the characters' actions are consistent with historical records of those actions. The real fun of this type of historical novel, however, is the examination of personalities, motivations, influences and - in the case of Henry VI - even medical histories. Iggulden seems to consider all of the historical evidence available before going on to fill in the blanks with informed fiction. The question becomes, then: "Don't fictionalized historical characters, by definition, have to be less "accurate" than ones who only do and say the things history has recorded? So as a rule, although I often enjoy them more, I'm going to take a point away (from now on) from any novel that fictionalizes historical characters.
Score = 4

5. Were the fictional or fictionalized plot and characters plausible?

Yes - from a modern perspective. Another unavoidable problem with historical fiction is the impossibility of understanding a lot of what people were thinking 600 years ago, but within that context I found Iggulden's storytelling to be excellent. He avoids the extreme stereotype heroes and villains, and the plot moves always make sense.
Score = 5

A King's Ransom, by Sharon Kay Penman (2014)

A King's Ransom is the long awaited sequel to 2011's Lionheart, by the extraordinary Sharon Kay Penman - and a rare opportunity for me to review a book less than a year old! This novel spans the last years in the life of King Richard I, 1192-1199, and is also the end of Penman's Angevin series (she has already written about Richard's brother and successor John I in Here Be Dragons).

The central thesis of this story is that Richard's capture and nearly-15-month imprisonment in Austria and Germany profoundly affected his mental state for the rest of his life. Richard's all-consuming hatred of his captor Holy Roman Emperor Henry VI, along with co-conspirator King Philip of France, completely determined the English king's agenda during the final five years of his reign. His incessant war against Philip and his allies impoverished England and devastated large swathes of France.

The life spans of the Angevin dynasty enabled a neat summing up of Penman's narrative. Richard died in warfare, as he had lived, and his sister Joanna died shortly after. Eleanor of Aquitaine outlived most of her children and saw her lifelong dedication to her family's fortunes descend finally onto the untrustworthy shoulders of her youngest son. John's inability to command the loyalty of the great lords who had supported Henry and Richard led to the rapid loss of much of the Angevin lands in France, but A King's Ransom ends shortly after Richard's death - before Eleanor's final years were spent watching that slow-motion disaster.    

As with Lionheart, this novel earns straight 5's on my 5 criteria. My only regret, really, is that four years elapsed between publication of the two novels. I can forget an awful lot of what I've read in four years, and found myself constantly having to review events briefly mentioned in A King's Ransom, which were dealt with thoroughly in Lionheart. Maybe that was a blessing in disguise, reinforcing through repetition my knowledge of that turbulent and fascinating historical period.

To The Ends Of The Earth, by Frances Hunter (2006)

To The Ends Of The Earth: The Last Journey Of Lewis & Clark is the well-conceived and written first historical novel of Frances Hunter, which turns out to be a pen name belonging to a pair of sisters named Mary and Liz Clare. They have since published one other historical, which I have yet to read - but plan to.

In the early-U.S. history sub-genre, it's hard to find novels so free of hagiography except for the lone voice in the wilderness of Gore Vidal, and among the post-moderns like Barth and Pinchon. Much as I enjoyed Mason & Dixon, however, the literary gimmickry (just my opinion) gets in the way of my desire to become immersed in a good story.

To The Ends Of The Earth spins a marvelous tale of intrigue, mystery, suspense - and yes, history - including the kind of intelligent historical speculation I enjoy so much in Iain Pears novels like Stone's Fall. And such a motley crew of early Americans! I feel much better about the 21st century after getting to know the collection of cutthroats, thieves, liars, bigots, hypocrites, racists and substance abusers inhabiting this novel. Not all that different from Mark Twain, actually.

Everyone knows the names Lewis & Clark from their famous 1803-4 expedition to the Pacific Coast, but few are familiar with "the last journey" of 1809. There's a good reason for that. After the triumphant return in 1804, Lewis and Clark were "rewarded" with diplomatic appointments in the new Louisiana Territory. Neither man was suited to such a life, and Governor Lewis soon found himself embroiled in political and financial difficulties.

The last straw was when the War Department in Washington D.C. refused to pay some drafts he had issued in the name of the territorial government. Lewis resolved to travel in person, mostly overland, from St. Louis to the Capitol to straighten things out. He never got there - Lewis died in mysterious circumstances on the trail, in what is now Tennessee. Worried about his friend, William Clark had set out after him but caught up too late, either to prevent or observe the death of his friend.

Frances Hunter found many aspects of this story to be very odd, and set out to construct a plausible fictional narrative that could explain all. The result is highly entertaining, full of skullduggery and moral dissolution while remaining faithful to history. In a stroke of genius, the authors pull in one of the most remarkably scandalous figures in all of U.S. history - General James Wilkinson - as chief villain.  

Wilkinson holds the dubious distinction of appearing in several historical novels, filling the standard role of "the bad guy who always gets away with it by shifting blame onto the innocent hero". Perhaps the earliest of those is Rabble in Arms, by Kenneth Roberts (1933). Someone should make "Jamie" the hero of his own novel, bringing some balance to his fictional reputation, as Gore Vidal did with Aaron Burr (by blaming Wilkinson!)

The five criteria:

1. Did the novel inspire me to further historical research?

Yes. As mentioned above, I knew very little about the later careers of Lewis & Clark. Always a rich trove of character study - what famous people do with the rest of their lives after the thing that made them famous.
Score = 5

2. Did the novel include enough history to make it an interesting historical story?

Yes. The events that occur within the novel's time/space frame are fairly restricted, but a skillful use of flashbacks brings a much wider historical scope to the novel.
Score = 5

3. Was the depiction of historical events accurate?

Yes and maybe? As is necessary in this style of novel, there's a fair amount of speculation regarding the thinking behind the characters' actions, but Hunter freely acknowledges that in an excellent concluding "Author's Note". In addition, Hunter adds a number of fascinating but obscure facts gleaned from primary sources not generally well known. Since the climactic action - the death of Lewis - is itself shrouded in mystery, the "real" history in this tale is somewhat slippery. Mainly for that reason, I'm awarding less than the highest score, but that should not be taken as criticism.
Score = 4

4. Was the depiction of historical characters accurate?

It's hard to know. Despite the detailed journals Lewis & Clark kept during their eponymous expedition, they were "men of few words" about themselves. Their contemporaries were mostly of the same ilk, describing events in as few words as possible and giving few clues to their emotional states. Suffice it to say, then, that Hunter stays faithful to the things we do know about the historical characters (who are also most of the main characters). Again, a "4" here is not a criticism.
Score = 4

5. Were the fictional or fictionalized plot and character motivations plausible?

Yes. The most fun thing about this novel was the clever plausibility of its plot. This is my favorite style of historical novel - one that includes an entirely plausible but historically unknown fictional plot that doesn't bend any known historical facts along the way.
Score = 5

Grail Quest series, by Bernard Cornwell

Previously, writing about the Cornwell novel 1356, I admitted to not realizing until later that it was the fourth book in Cornwell's Grail Quest series - and I hadn't yet read the earlier three. That totally screwed up my main pleasure in reading a series of novels so long after the first was published - going from one to the next without waiting years for its publication.

Water under the bridge - despite knowing the end of the story (never a major concern with historical novels), I did go back and read the earlier installments in the Thomas of Hookton saga: The Archer's Tale (aka Harlequin in some editions), Vagabond, and Heretic. These three suffer from the same fictional strengths and historical weaknesses as 1356 - they're generally lighter on recorded historical events and persons than many other Cornwell novels.

For that reason, the 5 criteria will look pretty similar. More significant at this time is a change to the criteria themselves. It has occurred to me that many historical novels do a fine job of presenting historical events and characters, but fail to create believable personalities for the fictionalized versions of those characters , or to give them plausible motivations for their actions.

Creating believable characters is probably the hardest thing to do in any form of fiction, so I can't be too hard on historical novelists. In one way, they get a head start - historical characters have at least some events of their lives recorded. The novelist can approach the character's personality as a detective might, construction plausible motivation from a series of actions.

Other novelists take a different approach, creating entirely fictional characters like Thomas of Hookton, who inhabit the chosen historical setting. Fictional characters can run in well-greased fiction personality grooves, making them instantly familiar to readers but ultimately less satisfying. So, for instance, we know Thomas of Hookton will never give up The Quest, because he's a man of honor, and men of honor never give up (in novels).

These thought about believable characters and plausible plots led me to revise the 5 criteria. I dropped #5 - "Would I read another novel by this author, continuing in this historical period, with these characters (or new ones)?" I don't bother to write about a book if I didn't enjoy it enough to read another by the same author, so the question answers itself.

The new #5 is "Were the fictional or fictionalized plot and character motivations plausible?" Plausible is perhaps a lower bar than believable but is, I think, the minimum standard necessary to ensure reader satisfaction. As indicated above, although I enjoyed Thomas as a character, some of his characteristics and actions are plausible only within the well-known and established framework of  "man of honor" and "mythic hero" archetypes.

So, the revised 5 criteria will debut next time, and we'll see how it works out.    

The Nathaniel Starbuck Chronicles, by Bernard Cornwell (1992-96)

Perhaps it takes a Brit to write good historical fiction about the American Civil War. It seems difficult for Americans to gain perspective on the way that, for all its savagery and horror, the Civil War began as a series of small skirmishes that most people expected would soon end. The leaders of North and South would come to their senses, sit down together and work things out. Yet the skirmishes got steadily larger and bloodier, the voices of reason and restraint grew fainter, and the United States stumbled into full-fledged civil war.

Bernard Cornwell captures that sense of war momentum building until it became unstoppable in his tetralogy of novels under the overall title of The Nathaniel Starbuck Chronicles. The action is set mostly in Virginia, during the period from the war’s beginning to the Battle of Antietam on Spetmeber , 1862 (known to southerners as the Battle of Sharpsburg, as noted by Cornwell) - still the bloodiest single day in all of American history.

To help give a sense of the way the Civil War tore apart families and states as well as a nation, Cornwell created two protagonists who break with their families, friends and neighbors to fight on the opposing side. The titular Nathaniel Starbuck is the son of a fire-breathing northern protestant preacher who has nothing but contempt for the southern states and their people. Nathaniel finds himself in Virginia when war breaks out, having run away from home and college in an act of impulsive youthful rebellion. He is visiting a friend from college, Adam Faulconer, son of a wealthy Virginia planter.

Somewhat implausibly, but lending great forward impetus to the story line, Nathaniel finds himself more and more determined to maintain what began as a shallow rebellious gesture. He joins the rebel army in Virginia and finds, for the first time in his life, a place where he feels he belongs.

Meanwhile, Adam Faulconer is struggling with his conscience. He is a unionist, pacifist and abolitionist at heart, and sees his hopes of national reconciliation fading month by month, battle by battle. In desperation, he concludes that only a quick northern victory can save the south from total annihilation, and resolves to help bring that about by becoming a Union spy in his native Virginia.

The titles of the four novels follow Nathaniel’s and Adam’s respective journeys of self-discovery: Rebel (1993), Copperhead (1994 - a pejorative nickname for the peace movement in the North), Battle Flag (1995), and The Bloody Ground (1996 – a description of the Antietam/Sharpsburg battlefield).

As with all Cornwell’s wartime novels, those who are disturbed by graphic descriptions of horrific violence, killing, maiming, suffering and all the other evils of war should probably avoid The Starbuck Chronicles.

The five criteria:

1.     Did the novel inspire me to further historical research?

Yes. It’s been a while since I’ve done much Civil War reading, but these novels made me want to revisit that era. There wasn’t, however, that thrill of discovering historical events I’d never heard of before.

Score = 4

2.     Did the novel include enough history to make it an interesting historical story?

Yes. Taking four novels to cover the events of less than two years in just one theater of the Civil War allowed a wealth of historical detail.  

Score = 5

3.     Was the depiction of historical events accurate?

Yes. Cornwell’s usual meticulous research was on full display. And, as always, the Historical Notes at the end explain any deviations from strict historical fact and/or chronology.

Score = 5

4.     Was the depiction of historical characters accurate?

Yes. Always a tricky question for novels where historical characters interact with fictional ones. Cornwell resists the too-common tendency (among American novelists)  toward hagiography in fictionalized versions of such legendary figures as Robert E. Lee and “Stonewall” Jackson. Maybe it’s that British perspective, but Cornwell feels free to present Lee, and especially Jackson, as very human.

Score = 5

5.     Would I read another novel by this author, continuing in this historical period, with these characters (or new ones)?

Yes. I fear that, since the last of these four novels was published in 1996, Cornwell will not return to the Civil War, but one can always hope. 

Score = 5

Stonehenge, by Bernard Cornwell (2000)

While waiting for my local library to gather all four volumes of Cornwell's Nathaniel Starbuck series, I picked up Stonehenge. Normally averse to pre-historic novels, but respectful of Cornwell's story-weaving skill, the book proved to be a worthwhile diversion.

Subtitled: 2000 B.C. (presumably for symmetry with the book's publication date), Stonehenge can't really be called a historical novel - it's more of an archaeological novel. Cornwell studied the research to date on the neolithic construction in England, which has resulted in quite a lot of information about the construction timeline, origins of the different types of stone, construction methods, possible uses of the various parts of the structure, etc. From this wealth of data, Cornwell invented an interesting tale of the late bronze-age: rivalries and conflicts between  tribal societies, leaders and religious traditions - in other words, the same kind of human drama that continues today.

The 5 criteria can't be applied to Stonehenge, so I'll just say that it was an enjoyable read, and far less speculative than most prehistoric tales. The story incorporates a lot of what archaeologists have deduced from the site's remains, in a much more entertaining way than plowing through a stack of journal articles.

The Sharpe series, by Bernard Cornwell

The prolific Bernard Cornwell began his "Sharpe" series of historical novels in 1980. The most recent was published in 2006. Waiting until now (although not intentional) allowed me to read them in chronological order rather than published order, which is quite different. Cornwell's website includes an explanatory list. Historically, the series begins in 1799 (Tiger) and ends in 1820 (Devil).

The stories follow the military career of the fictional Richard Sharpe, who rises through the ranks from private to colonel in the British army. Sharpe's units mostly serve under the command of Arthur Wellesley, later the Duke of Wellington. Notable digressions allow Sharpe to be present at Trafalgar with Nelson in 1805, and to meet Napoleon on St. Helena and Cochrane in Chile in 1820. The short novels share a title structure (Sharpe's xxx), several characters and a lot of descriptive detail so, rather than review individual novels, it seems better to talk about the series as a whole.

If there is one consistent criticism of the Sharpe series, it's that large sections of descriptive detail appear with little alteration in each of the novels. Through sheer repetition, it's unlikely I'll ever forget the process of loading and firing a cannon, flintlock musket or rifle of that era. Some readers are undoubtedly put off by the graphic and gory details of various types of wounds and battlefield sights, sounds and smells. Lest we forget - war is not pretty.

The five criteria:

1. Did the novel inspire me to further historical research?

Yes. I had not previously read much of the history of the Napoleonic Wars, and the Sharpe novels are a pleasure way to begin. The early campaigns in India, especially, were new to me. 
Score = 5

2. Did the novel include enough history to make it an interesting historical story?

Yes. For the most part, the battles depicted were actual battles; the campaign movements described are what actually happened, the military units and most of the commanders are historical. Only Sharpe, his circle of closest compatriots and female conquests (usually one per book) are fictional.  
Score = 5

3. Was the depiction of historical events accurate?

Yes. As always with Cornwell, the attention paid to accuracy of historical detail is far greater than most "historical setting" novels. The inclusion of "Historical Notes" at the end of each novel clarifies the extent of artistic liberty taken.
Score = 5

4. Was the depiction of historical characters accurate?

Not sure. I haven't yet read biographies of Napoleon, Wellington, Nelson or any of the many other historical figures appearing in these novels, so I can't really say how much they are fictionalized.
Score = ...

5. Would I read another novel by this author, continuing in this historical period, with these characters (or new ones)?

Yes. I'm always sad to reach the end of a Cornwell novel or series, but that has to happen eventually in historical fiction that actually includes the history.
Score = 5

Agincourt (2009) and 1356 (2013), by Bernard Cornwell

The Cornwell reading marathon continues with this pair of novels set in France during what we now call the Hundred Years War. Because of the proximity of dates and locations, I thought there might be some continuity of fictional characters from 1356 (date of the battle of Poiters) to Agincourt (1415). The fact, however, that the earlier novel describes the later historical event should have disabused me of that notion. I now realize that 1356 is actually the fourth novel in Cornwell’s Grail Quest series, featuring fictional hero Thomas of Hookton (the other three are The Archer’s Tale, Vagabond, and Heretic).

As the series title indicates, Thomas of Hookton’s adventures involve a search for various venerated Christian relics reputed to hold extraordinary power. The object of pursuit in 1356 is the sword wielded by Saint Peter in the Garden of Gethsemane to cut off the ear of one of those come to arrest Jesus (insert chapter and verse here). Cornwell’s mastery of and faithfulness to historical detail raises 1356 far above the level of other Christian mystery/intrigue/thriller novels like The Da Vinci Code.

Both of these novels are somewhat disappointing to a reader interested in the history. Compared to The Fort, with its skillful construction of fictionalized historical characters from their own writings, these two seem shallow and formulaic. The overarching historical theme seems to be an argument that the English longbowmen of that period were almost superhuman in mastery of their deadly weapon - enough to bring unlikely victory to the badly outnumbered English armies.

Still, these are very well-written and entertaining tales, if somewhat over-the-top in blood and gore. Fans of Cornwell's Sharpe series will enjoy Agincourt. 1356 has the added medieval mysticism of the Grail Quest.

The five criteria:

1. Did the novels inspire me to further historical research?

Yes, to some extent - mainly because these were my first novels set in the Hundred Years War. Some follow-up reading about the English longbow was interesting.
Score = 3

2. Did the novel include enough history to make it an interesting historical story?

Yes, but I would have liked more - including an explanation of the spelling change from Azincourt to Agincourt for the American edition.
Score = 3

3. Was the depiction of historical events accurate?

Yes, although the abilities of the longbowmen were somewhat exaggerated for dramatic effect.
Score = 4

4. Was the depiction of historical characters accurate?

Probably - Cornwell is very conscientious. I don't yet have any straight biography to provide a comparison. The historical characters weren't deeply involved in the fictional story, so there wasn't much need to question their actions.
Score = 4

5. Would I read another novel by this author, continuing in this historical period, with these characters (or new ones)?

Yes. Both Thomas of Hookton and Nicholas Hook are compelling lead characters.
Score = 5

The Fort, by Bernard Cornwell (2010)

Over three years ago, I read and wrote about a historical novel called Arundel, by Kenneth Roberts, set in what is now the state of Maine in the early days of the Revolutionary War (1775). In that novel, I learned a lot about a neglected chapter of that war's history, so I was excited to discover The Fort - another Revolutionary War novel set in Maine. Bernard Cornwell is a reliably excellent historical novelist, and The Fort is another well-researched and written novel from the prolific author.

I was surprised, however, to find no connection at all between the events described and the story of Arundel. For starters, The Fort is set four years later - near the end of the war. All of the main characters in Arundel had moved on to other theaters and one - Benedict Arnold - had even changed sides. Secondly, although the physical distance between the two stories was minimal, the remoteness and small population of Maine meant there was little communication between the scattered towns. Nothing that happened in Arundel led in any way to the events of The Fort. The only continuity I found was the ineptitude of the divided and contentious American military command structure - which was a major factor in the failure of both campaigns.

The Fort tells the story of the Penobscot Expedition, which resulted in a resounding British victory that nevertheless had little effect on the outcome of the war. The war drama, in Cornwell's capable hands,  is full of memorable characters - some of whom went on to become well known historical figures. Most prominent of all - from an American perspective - is Paul Revere, who served as an artillery officer in the Massachusetts militia sent from Boston along with a large naval force to recapture Penobscot Bay after the British sent an occupying force from their base at Halifax, Nova Scotia. The titular fort built and defended by the British forces was called Fort George.

Cornwell's specialty is graphic descriptions of historical battle scenes, but the verbal encounters among the various military commanders in The Fort are even more interesting. The fictional writing is interspersed with text from actual letters written at the time by the novel's characters.  

The five criteria:

1. Did the novel inspire me to further historical research?

Yes. In particular, the role of rebel privateers in the war warrants investigation - either in novels (if available) or in straight history. On the other hand, the Penobscot Expedition was such an isolated action that it doesn't really point to any lead-in or follow-up Revolutionary War events.

Score = 4

2. Did the novel include enough history to make it an interesting historical story?

Yes. The inclusion of many historical letters is just one of the ways Cornwell showed that he did his homework before writing. As always in a Cornwell novel, the descriptions of ships, weapons and tactics used, along with domestic details like food, housing and clothing  are interesting and well-researched.

Score =5

3. Was the depiction of historical events accurate?

Yes. Inclusion of historical notes following a novel always scores points with me, and Cornwell is very good about explaining his sources and noting where he occasionally takes minor artistic liberties with events.
Score = 5

4. Was the depiction of historical characters accurate?

Probably, mostly. It's always risky for a novelist to use fictionalized historical persons as main characters, but the historical letters tend to back up Cornwell's depictions. Especially interesting is the fictionalized Paul Revere who, as Cornwell notes, is known to us today mainly as the heroic midnight rider in Longfellow's famous poem. The real man apparently did not always live up to that high standard - which should come as no surprise to readers of history. A point gets subtracted here just as a caveat about the inherent dangers of fictionalizing real people, but Cornwell's Paul Revere is certainly more accurate than Longfellow's, so one can argue that Revere's reality had already been distorted.  

Score = 4

5. Would I read another novel by this author, continuing in this historical period, with these characters (or new ones)?

Yes. Happily, Cornwell is incredibly prolific and it will take quite a while to get caught up. Already consumed and awaiting a writeup is Redcoat, another excellent Revolutionary War novel.
Score = 5

Bird of Another Heaven (2007), by James D. Houston

The previous post discussed Snow Mountain Passage (2001), by James D. Houston. Six years later, Houston published Bird of Another Heaven. Not surprisingly, it has some similarities in style. Like the earlier novel, Bird uses a fictional present-day narrator to introduce the main fictional historical characters. Those characters' stories are self-narrated and/or related by the modern character. A diary is again used as a self-narrative device for one of the earlier characters.

Unlike Snow Mountain Passage, the contemporary character's real-time story is an important part of the overall narrative, and is skillfully used to pull the historical strands together into a reflection on the classic "what we've gained / what we've lost" discussion that makes the history even more compelling.

The present-day protagonist is a public radio talk show host named Sheridan "Dan" Brody. He knows that he is of mixed racial ancestry, but his father's early death and his mother's reluctance to talk about the past have left him without much information about his heritage. His quest to recover his family story is the plot device that pulls together all of the historical threads.

Bird of Another Heaven begins with a visit to San Francisco in 1891 by David Kalakaua, last King of Hawai'i. What was intended to be a brief visit turns out to be the final episode of his eventful life. From that beginning, the novel swings both to future and past. Dan eventually learns that his birth father's name was Sheridan Wadell, that he is a distant cousin of that Hawai'ian king, and that he also has native Californian ancestry along with his mother's Arkansas anglo heritage.

The story of how the blood of Hawai'ian royalty and a northern California Miwok village came to be combined in Dan Brody, and how his discovery of that heritage affects his present-time view of his place in the world, are the central themes of Bird of Another Heaven. Along the way, the reader learns about a number of historical events and characters, including the Swiss entrepreneur Johan "John" Sutter, who had to sail first to the Sandwich Islands (Hawaii) to get from Oregon to California in 1838. While there, he hired a dozen Hawaiians willing to go with him to unexplored regions of the Sacramento River in Mexican Alta California and help build a new settlement among the Miwok. That wilderness settlement became known as Sutter's Fort, and evolved into the capitol city of the state.

This novel, like Snow Mountain Passage, gets straight "5"s on my criteria, so there's no need to go through the whole list. There's one thing I wish Houston could have done that would have made Bird of Another Heaven even more fun (for me and other fans of serial hist-fic). The one historical character with a significant role in both novels is John Sutter. Unfortunately, his appearance in Bird of Another Heaven is in 1838, while in Snow Mountain Passage, the year is 1846. That made it impossible to include, in the later novel, a reference to Sutter's role in the earlier novel, or repeat appearances by fictional characters. Sutter's kanaka mistress is a fictional character in Snow Mountain Passage, but no other Hawai'ians figure into the Donner Party story. The author may have had no desire to include such a self-reference anyway, since these two novels cannot be considered serial in any significant sense.