What? Me reading a vampire story? Honestly, I think the vampire theme is so worn out since the hubbub of those Robert Pattinson movies, A Discovery of Witches, and The Historian. I don’t know what steered me to open this one and read about Vampire Crusader.
Reading its profile on Goodreads, I found the series’ premise quite interesting. There are at least eight books listed there, spanning over periods in history, but with one goal: chasing a vampire.
Featured image made in Canva.com
Contents
Opening
Indeed, I’m in the mood for some out-of-this-world fantasy type of reading right now. Perhaps it would help to take me elsewhere rather than dwell on the no-solution to my world’s problems.
So, I thought, what the hey. It’s a story that is less than 300 pages long. I could take a chance and see where it goes. What’s the worst could happen, right?
I recognised Dan Davis through his YouTube channel. I’ve watched some of his videos, and I knew him to be an author as well, but I’ve never tried to read his works. Right now, I don’t know what I’m jumping into and how I would get out after reading it. I have no expectations other than Vampire Crusader being something that diverts my mind from my current situation.
Vampire Crusader
Vampire Crusader is the first instalment of the Immortal Knight series by Dan Davis. The first chapter of Vampire Crusader immediately jumped into the origin story of Richard of Ashbury, the main character. That night in 1190, someone attacked and slaughtered his family while he was out of the house. Isabella, his sister-in-law, managed to tell him who the perpetrator was before she died. It was William de Ferrers.
This revelation led Richard of Ashbury to have the one and only purpose: revenge. As it was stated clearly and loudly, this was definitely the theme that drove the whole story.
For some people, having one main goal in life sounds ridiculous. But I think I can understand the course Richard of Ashbury had taken after coming home and finding his family slaughtered. I can forgive him for being one-minded in getting revenge for his family.
Following clues on his search for, he was thrown into the midst of the Third Crusade. That’s where he then got a second purpose, Alice, and achieved it.
Of course, as in real life, happiness doesn’t tend to last forever. Not long after enjoying the new life with Alice and her children, Richard of Ashbury lost them again thanks to the interference of William de Ferrers.
After this event, I don’t think Richard of Ashbury is simply one-minded. He has all the reasons in the world and wants revenge for what William de Ferrers did.
Plot twist?
Yes, Vampire Crusader has it. Perhaps it’s an apparent or obvious plot twist, but I’m actually curious how the story would expand or evolve.
Several questions I had as I read along had been answered, and I’m content with the answers.
I’m trying to place the Vampire Crusader storyline within history. It was mentioned that Henry de Champagne died. So, the year at the end of this story would be 1197. Henry’s successor as King of Jerusalem was Aimery II de Lusignan. I think…
Then came the news about the death of Richard I, The Lionheart, in 1199. Richard of Ashbury decided to return to England and took a seat at Ashbury Manor. He had heard news about William de Ferrers’ whereabouts. People said he’s lingering around the ancient forest of Sherwood in Nottingham under disguise, using the name Robert.
I guess we all know what the second book will be about. It’s time to jump through history to the next chapter on Richard of Ashbury’s adventures.
Historical accuracy?
I haven’t checked on historical accuracy yet. Nevertheless, I feel it can be overlooked, for I think it did not and would not interfere with the storyline. Or perhaps my lack of interest in the story’s historical background made me less attentive to the historical accuracy. I don’t know. I still enjoyed the story, though, if that still matters.
I noted down some historical facts that would help me understand the context and situations during my reading of Vampire Crusader.
- Battle of Hattin – 4 July 1187
- 1190 – Lionheart conquered Sicily
- 1191 – Lionheart conquered Cyprus
- June 1191 – Lionheart landed in Acre
- Battle of Arsuf where the Hospitallers broke ranks to attack the Saracens – September 1191
It might have mentioned the Siege of Acre too, but I wasn’t paying attention.
I don’t have any problem identifying Richard of Ashbury as a fictional character. Or am I wrong? Was he a real person?
In my Googling ‘research’, I would guess that the character of William de Ferrers was based on William de Ferrers, 4th Earl of Derby. Why? Was he a vampire? I highly doubt it. I was guessing based on the timeline described in the story.
I had a thought that it could have been based on William de Ferrers, the 3rd Earl of Derby. But his date of death made me think it made sense if it was his son who became a vampire and slaughtered Richard of Ashbury’s family in this story.
Anyway, it could have been the first or the second William de Ferrers. Does it matter, though?
I’m going to say it again: this time, accuracy does not matter. At least for me.
Afterthoughts
Verdict
I like it, but I don’t love it yet. Vampire Crusader possesses all the things I enjoy in my reading experience. It didn’t shy away from the gore and disgusting things in wars and battles.
The story feels like a history class crammed into one night before an exam. Concise, rapid, quick.
I like it, but I don’t love it yet.
The story feels like a history class crammed into one night before an exam. Concise, rapid, quick.
The weaving-in of fictional characters is simpler than other books I’ve read. But this does not discourage me from reading on. I find the method refreshing, for I need not to remember too many names or get attached to characters which would then be killed off.
The writing style in Vampire Crusader isn’t something I’m familiar with. I’m used to ornate, long, and laborious sentences when reading historical fiction. Some of the other reviews I read also mentioned how the writing style affected them.
Vampire Crusader possesses all the things I enjoy in my reading experience. It didn’t shy away from the gore and disgusting things in wars and battles. The Cavern of Blood, though… it’s a bit too much. But it’s awesome!
One good thing came out as a result after reading Vampire Crusader. It made me read about the Crusades and all the conflicts that happened there. One of the periods in history that isn’t my favourite, though important. Good job, Dan Davis. You made me read about something that I don’t like, and ended up educated myself.
Lingering questions:
- Was William de Ferrer’s father also a vampire in this story? I think it was mentioned that when William thought he had killed his father, he was awaken one more time and that he had to chop him down.
- So, how did William de Ferrer got his vampiric ability? Was his story about what happened in the Battle of Hattin true? Was that how he was turned into a vampire?
- Now that Richard of Ashbury had a taste of the ‘sacrament’, is he a vampire too?
I feel like there was something missing from Vampire Crusader. One of them was the basic rules of being a vampire. What are the basic vampire rules here? Sunlight kills, silver bullets, crucifixes, and garlic scare them?
It was mentioned in the book, and I get that the ability can fade, but a vampire would stay alive even though the vampiric ability fades? Really, what are the rules here?
Maybe I’m too used to the classic vampire stories that I expected there would be ‘vampiric terms of conditions’ being relayed early in the story. However, I understand that every vampiric world has its own rules. I’m still trying to grasp these rules and await further revelations in the next instalment.
Let’s go to Nottingham now, and see what chaos William de Ferrers (a.k.a. Robert) creates there.
