Not very far into this I had to go back and read the description to make sure it was a historical mystery, because there was no sign of it in the book itself. Yep: London, 1920's. Which made me wonder why so many probably-anachronistic words were being used - like the straw that broke the camel's back, hassle: <a href=" http://www.dictionary.com/browse/hassle">"First recorded in 1935-40; origin uncertain"</a>. Of course, referring to someone as "Ms. Steinbeck" was a close call. (Using "Ms." as a title dates from pretty much from when you'd think.) I have no patience for a tin ear - why write a historical if you have no feel for the language? Basically, this seemed like a poor attempt at a London-based Phryne Fisher.

The language on the whole was not good – awkward and over-done. I have far too many books I've pledged to read to waste time on the really bad ones.

The usual disclaimer: I received this book via Netgalley for review.

Great read for a debut mystery series. I will be back to read this series again!

This is a debut novel about a wealthy British woman in the 1020's who solves mysteries. There are many female sleuths in this era already (Daisy Dalrymple and Kate Shackleton come to mind) so the field is a bit crowded. This book does not stand up to these other mysteries. The writing is not tight, the setting sometimes falls out thru language usage (using modern day terms in a book written in 20s setting, and the book seems hastily put together. What was that brooch all about, anyway? as it disappears, never to be heard from again. I don't really find Jake to be a likable character. Though the series may have potential, it will have to do better than this to keep me reading.