I first bought this book in 2017 when I was missing my college medieval class. In the introductory chapter and it wasn’t hooked so I put it down. I only picked it up again in 2023 as part of a challenge to read books that I already owned. It was a challenge through the book.

One of my major issues with the book that author is the type of historian that only values military and political history. Most of the sub chapters about the kingdoms and countries are exclusively who is in charge, and who went to war. This is more of a book about how borders have changed in the past two thousand years. I wish that the cultural, religious, and  even the economic history was better integrated in the text. It felt out of place when it was left to the useless trivia section. 

I almost feel like this book needed to be two volumes. The ancient and medieval is really gloss over in favor for the modern history.  The first volume could be ancient/medieval and the second could be modern history 1700-now. 

There were a lot of proofreading issues that made me feel like the editor did not put enough care into the book. There were spelling errors, incorrect dates, and footnotes not in superscript. Also casual references to Wikipedia. In some ways it solidifies my feelings that this book is kind of a series of bound and printed Wikipedia articles.

If this is your first time reading Jasper Fforde, please note it is very easy to get lost and give up. The first 75 pages will be utterly confusing, but Jasper Fforde lays it out for you in time. 

It's a good book to get you out of a slump. I raced through the book in two days. I think it takes a little too long to get to the actual murder. I think some other elements were left a little unresolved. Also, for a book that is largely based on the interpersonal relationships of a theater group, I wished I could read more about the fallout afterward.  

Fantastic book. The author did a fantastic job choosing three case studies to tell a broader story of the Great Migration. However, you could tell that she grew attached to these people and had a hard time trimming down unnecessary details. On occasion she was repetitive, as if she expected people to come back to the book after putting it down for months.

Originally I thought I would be bothered by a man as a narrator of a story about women’s trauma, but to be honest I think it works really well. A male narrator has a similar level of disconnect that the readers as non Mennonite’s might feel. The male narrator guides us through it as he himself is grappling with the situation and his differences from the women.

I think the comparison to Greek tragedy is very accurate, particularly on the philosophical debates on how to best handle justice. I was deeply engrossed in their arguments. I think the author did a great job balancing the debates with the (and I hesitate to say) limitations of illiterate women. 

I think what would have made this book better was if Jenette spoke about more of her healing process and time in therapy. I wanted to see more of her growth.