A Rustle of Silk is ... OK, I guess.
It's 1603, Elizabeth I is dead and England awaits the arrival of their new king, James VI of Scotland, who will be James I of England. Meanwhile, Gabriel Taverner, a former sailor in the Royal Navy, and now a doctor (he claims to be a physician, but knows more about surgery), is trying to set up a practice in his old home town. Someone's leaving him vile little "presents" of dead animals on his doorstep, and they don't suspect a cat.
And then a man is found dead. It turns out to be his brother-in-law, a silk merchant. Was it suicide, or murder?
The prose style and characterization were good.
On the other hand, the mystery didn't make much sense at a certain level, and we had a villain with talking disease. (No cat in his lap this time, though!) Taverner seemingly can't decide if he's a physician or a surgeon, which were two very different jobs in the period, performed by different people of different experiences and social ranks. (A physician learned his craft at a university, and observed clients and made prescriptions. He might inspect their urine, but physical interaction with patients' bodies was usually limited to bleeding them due to an "inbalance in the humors." A surgeon, on the other hand, was of a lower class in society, did not need to go to a university, and had the practical experience of removing limbs, with more or less success. Physicians were far more respected than surgeons, who often did double duty as barbers.)
Also, the occasional word choice struck me as non-period ("opportunist" would not be in use for some 200 or 250 years after this is set), and in the understandable desire to avoid info dumping, Clare has Taverner unaware of some things he really should have known, despite having been 15 years at sea. (In particular, that suicides could not receive a decent Christian burial in a churchyard.)
I might read another in the series, but I doubt I'd go out looking for one in particular.