My problem lies specifically with the Oxford World's Classics version of the text, which 'helpfully' chooses to add historical notes throughout the book. There I was - approaching the end of the story, happy to see that good had triumphed over evil once again, when I flicked to the back for one of the notes. To my horror, this note basically revealed the ending to the sequal to this book - The Man in the Iron Mask!

There was no reason to do this, it had nothing to do with the point being made, and completely overshadowed the story I was reading. What's more, I'm not sure how I can finish reading the trilogy with this knowledge. I don't know how this note was ever published, and I sincerely hope the person responsible has been reprimanded.

In short - please read Twenty Years After, but please do not read this version!


An excellent sequel   June 13, 2000
 11 out of 12 found this review helpful

As a general rule sequels are not as good as the original. And while that holds true for the musketeers this book comes very close indeed to being as good and in some ways is better. The only reason why I personally feel that The Three Musketeers is still a better book is that this does have a few longueurs whereas the original has none.

Once again the plot has a grounding in history, although those who know the period well may wish to cringe with the liberties taken by Dumas. However if you can suspend your disbelief there is a stunning story to be enjoyed. We rejoin our heroes twenty years down the line with the English monarchy on the verge of collapse and France on the brink of civil war. We also find that time has dispersed the loyalties of our once inseparable heroes.

This is a magnificent story of honour and friendship with some of the greatest scenes in literature. Scenes such as that under the scaffold or the trial, the absolution and the escape of the Duc de Beaufort are without equal.