On learning the cult favourite1999 film The Thirteenth Warrior is based on a Michael Crichton novel, I was intrigued to learn more. Though both the novel and the film contain surprises, it helps to keep your expectations low.

A letter from Yiltawar, King of the Saqaliba has reached the Commander of the Faithful, al-Muqtadir. In it, he requests al-Muqtadir to send him emissaries to instruct him in Islam, to construct a mosque to carry out the mission of converting his people throughout his kingdom and who might advise him on the construction of fortifications and defensive works.

Al-Muqtadir, in our narrator’s view, is not an especially strong or wise leader. Instead, he is easily manipulated by flattery. Though, it must be said, our narrator is not the company of those close to the Caliph. In fact, he has made enemies among them after a certain embarrassing incident. So, when men are chosen to make this mission to Saqaliba, our narrator’s name – Ahmad ibn-Fadlan, ibn-al-Abbas, ibn-Rasid, ibn-Hammad – is included among them.

And so, in June of 921, ibn-Fadlan leaves the City of Peace, Baghdad, on a long and arduous winter journey northward. They continue on from the Oghuz Turks, crossing rivers and weaving between mountains until they cross the Volga and enter the land of the Bulgars. Along the way, ibn-Fadlan details the customs, beliefs, appearances of the peoples he encounters.

Then, ibn-Fadlan is among the Northmen. Again, he describes their food and customs, most of which he finds vulgar and disgusting. Their fear of mist is inexplicable to him. When they arrive, at this Northmen village, their chief, Wyglif, is ill and living apart from the rest of his people. Buliwyf, a young noble, has been chosen to succeed him if he dies, which he does soon after ibn-Fadlan arrives.

The death of Wyglif is followed by a ten-day-long funeral process during which ibn-Fadlan is not permitted to leave. He describes the funeral which involves sexual activity, the sacrifice of a slave girl and the sending off of a burning ship, overseen by an old crone or witch.

A visitor arrives. He is Wulfgar, kin of Buliwyf. He has come to tell of an unnamed danger from the north and to request help. Under the guidance of the same crone who oversaw the funeral a party is chosen to go north. Once again, ibn-Fadlan finds himself chosen for a mission he wants nothing to do with.

Ibn-Fadlan strongly protests but it seems he is not given a choice. He makes his farewells to his entourage. He does not know what became of them.

The journey is not easy. Long days are spent sailing on the river followed by more long days riding on horseback through dense forests. All the while ibn-Fadlan struggles against the extreme cold. He learns more about the Northmen. Their food and drink. Their superstitions and marital relations. All of which he finds alien and immoral.

He learns of the significance of the number thirteen to them. The thirteenth passage of the moon is considered magical and foreign. It was for this that ibn-Fadlan was chosen as the thirteenth member of the party.

They sail on to Yatlam, Buliwyf’s home town where his parents live. They smell smoke before they arrive. The town has been attacked and burned. Everyone is dead. Buliwyf searches among the ruins until he emerges with a huge, oversized sword named Runding.

By now, ibn-Fadlan must be wondering if he will ever see his home again.

I am always on the lookout for underrated or forgotten novels and films. Though such a description can be deceiving. Often something that is ‘forgotten’ is simply unknown to the mainstream, while it has long been remembered and enjoyed by those with specialist knowledge.

I had heard that the 1999 film, The Thirteenth Warrior, is one such film that did poorly on release but has attracted a cult following. The film starts Antonio Banderas with a small role for Omar Sharif and is directed by John McTiernan who also directed Die Hard, Predator and The Hunt for Red October. Seeing that it was based on a novel by Michael Crichton furthered my interest and I bought the book soon after learning this.

I was a Michael Crichton fan in my unsophisticated youth when I read rarely and then only for entertainment. I liked Sphere and Jurassic Park was the first time I had read a book before seeing the film. I put him in a category of writers of that era like Tom Clancy and John Grisham. Perhaps you could include Stephen King in this group or maybe that is a little harsh. Dan Brown is another. Robert Harris is one from the end of that era who is still active. Lee Child might be the contemporary torch-holder though in our genre-fiction era he is usually considered a crime-genre writer.

They are not considered literary for the most part. Sometimes, they are accused of being bad writers. Even their best works may not endure and achieve ‘classic’ status. What they may have sometimes lacked they made up for by being entertaining, having some great ideas and for being easily adaptable for film and television.

In the case of Eaters of the Dead, Crichton explains the inspiration in the book’s Appendix. It began with a disagreement with a friend as to whether Beowulf – the medieval Old English epic poem – is too tedious for modern readers and a challenge to create a more readable version.

From the beginning Crichton encountered problems. Realising that asking modern readers to accept the supernatural aspects while remaining in an historical setting might stretch credulity, he sought a factual basis. He defends this by pointing out that several epic poems have been found to have a factual basis; at least being based on real places and peoples – The Iliad, The Odyssey, the voyage of the Argonauts.

Further, in clarifying the enemy of his novel, Crichton suggests that some branches of the human family tree may have coexisted and encountered one another for longer than we assume. The Eaters of the Dead was first published in 1976. I imagine that if it were written today, Crichton would stress this idea more given all we have learned about our ancestors coexisting with neanderthals; that most people who originate outside of Africa have some neanderthal DNA; and the discovery of Homo Floresiensis.

Another problem Crichton had with giving Beowulf a factual basis is how to tell the story. While he considered inventing a fictional narrator, he chose instead to adapt the narrative of Ahmad ibn Fadlan’s famous journal. In the tenth century, Ahmad ibn Fadlan travelled from Baghdad to Russia where he encountered Volga Vikings. This would mean placing the Beowulf story a few centuries later than its original setting.

It is a short novel. Crichton does an adequate job of getting the voice of his narrator right. Ahmad ibn Fadlan’s point of view is an interesting one; a tenth-century Muslim from the Arabian Peninsula taking in the customs of medieval Europeans. While not losing his identity, practicality means he must make compromises to survive and assist his new comrades. The action and tension and the climax of the story was the highlight for me and showed Crichton’s writing at its best.

Crichton mentions that he received some tough criticism for this novel but also some love from Beowulf fans.   

The film is not too bad. The early parts of the film move too quickly. There is not adequate build up to what comes later. It sounds like a lot was left on the editing floor and for a film that is only an hour and forty minutes this was probably a mistake.

It is also very much a film from the 1990s. Comparable to other historical action-adventure films of the era such as Braveheart and Robin Hood: Price of Thieves but quickly overshadowed by the quality of Ridley Scott’s Gladiator which was released just a year later.

Still, the second half of the film is entertaining enough and I can see why it deserves better than its usual rating. The best parts of the novel – ibn Fadlan’s character arc and the thrilling finale – are preserved in the film. It is still enjoyed by those who like historical action-adventure films and for its positive depiction of Muslims in a Hollywood film.

Overall, I can’t say I was terribly impressed with Eaters of the Dead. Even compared to Crichton’s other work, I think it is not to the same standard. Crichton in my opinion stands as one of those writers of impressive imagination but not always equally strong story craft or writing. Though I have no regret in making the effort to experience the novel and the film, it is difficult for me to imagine either enjoying a long legacy with so many strong alternatives.