- Shopping Bag ( 0 items )
-
This is an entertaining nineteenth century romantic romp
Lydia Boyce is a chip off the old block as a scholar; her dad is noted Egyptologist Henry Boyce. However, some of the artifacts her dad sends from Egypt are fakes. She investigates expecting her father to be exonerated and to affirm her theory that rakish Lord James Durham is the villain.
On first contact, each loathes the other as she assumes he is a shallow womanizer and he believes she is a phony intellectual snob. Still they realize they need each other to uncover the real con artist. As Lydia and James team up in a distrusting alliance, they search for the legendary Tears of Idihet and the forger.
This is an entertaining nineteenth century romantic romp starring two likable seemingly opposites. The story line is fast-paced as the intelligent obstinate Lydia sets out to prove her father's innocence when she confronts Durham. He initially comes across as a typical rake, but also typical of the sib-genre demonstrates to her he is much more than just a drunken womanizer. Fans will enjoy their escapades though there is too much description of the era that at times detracts from an otherwise fun historical Romancing the Stone like adventure.
Harriet Klausner1 out of 1 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful? Yes NoThank you for your feedback. Report this reviewThank you, this review has been flagged. -
Anonymous
Posted February 19, 2010
No text was provided for this review.
-
Anonymous
Posted March 3, 2011
No text was provided for this review.
-
Anonymous
Posted July 31, 2011
No text was provided for this review.
-
Anonymous
Posted February 5, 2011
No text was provided for this review.
-
Anonymous
Posted October 23, 2011
No text was provided for this review.
-
Anonymous
Posted June 18, 2011
No text was provided for this review.
-
Anonymous
Posted January 24, 2011
No text was provided for this review.
-
Anonymous
Posted October 6, 2010
No text was provided for this review.
-
Anonymous
Posted December 26, 2010
No text was provided for this review.
-
Anonymous
Posted July 28, 2011
No text was provided for this review.
-
Anonymous
Posted January 19, 2011
No text was provided for this review.
-
Anonymous
Posted January 27, 2010
No text was provided for this review.
-
Anonymous
Posted January 4, 2011
No text was provided for this review.
-
Anonymous
Posted August 17, 2011
No text was provided for this review.
-
Anonymous
Posted February 15, 2012
No text was provided for this review.
-
Anonymous
Posted January 16, 2010
No text was provided for this review.
-
Anonymous
Posted December 27, 2009
No text was provided for this review.
-
Anonymous
Posted February 13, 2011
No text was provided for this review.
-
Anonymous
Posted December 3, 2011
No text was provided for this review.