Disclaimer: ARC via Netgalley and Open Road Media

I hadn’t heard of the Sandyford Murder case until reading this book. In the 1860s, in Glasgow, a young woman by the name of Jess M’Lachlan was accused of murdering her friend, Jessie M’Lachlan (no relation). The case was in part tried in the press, leading to a public outcry that influenced the case.

Brand’s detailed book about the case not only gives background into the central players, but also evaluates the evidence. She also includes detailed layouts of the scene of the killing.

Jessie M’Lachlan was in service to the Fleming family, and one of the issues of the case is whether Fleming senior had anything to do with the murder. In part, the case highlights issue of class, something that Brand does deal, as well as gender, something that Brand could have had more analysis of. Brand’s primary focus seems to be on the case, and the pros and cons of each side. Brand does give detail about how hog tied M’Lachlan’s defense was because of her changing stories.

While Brand cannot solve a case of such long standing, she does a wonderful job of detailing the living conditions of the time. In fact, this detail brings another layer to the story. How much, one wonder as reading this, have things really changed? Does not society still wash its hands of the poor?

Somewhat interesting, mostly in terms of the Celts.

Disclaimer: ARC read via Netgalley.

                It’s all Braveheart’s fault. Totally. Mel Gibson’s movie about Scotland’s Freedom Fight, William Wallace, might be one of the reasons why there is shortly going to be a vote about the dissolution of the union, but it sure as hell played fast and loose with history.

                It wouldn’t be a surprise if, when asked about Robert the Bruce, most Americans said something like “you mean that guy who sold out Braveheart?”

                This is a shame because, in many ways, it is because of The Bruce that Scotland became Scotland, yet outside of the United Kingdom he is not as well known as he should be. Michael Penman does go some way in changing this.

                The book, in terms of style, is not perfect. It borders on being dry at times. The scholarship seems good (I am not an expert in the field) and everything is footnoted. If a reader does not have any background knowledge about the period, the reader might be a little lost. Knowing about Edward I and II is a benefit as is being away of the politics. Penman does not include much background material.

                Those criticisms aside, reading the book is a learning experience, even for those who know who Bruce was. It is comprehensive as it can be in terms of Bruce’s life, focusing, in particular, on his relationship with his father and brothers. Areas of debate are examined and when the facts are unclear, Penman makes sure that the reader knows that. It seems a common thing to point but considering how many authors make jumps based on little evidence, a writer who doesn’t does deserve some praise.

                Recommended highly for those interested in Scottish history.

Just because you pick an interesting topic, doesn't mean a winner.  Honestly, interesting facts in some cases, but made St. Mary's Close even sound boring.