Doctor Who: The Flames of Cadiz
2013

Ratings1

Average rating4

15
JKRevell
Jamie RevellSupporter

A First Doctor story told from the perspectives of Ian and Susan, who alternate narration throughout the course of the play.

This is a straight historical, and one in the relatively grim style of Marco Polo or The Massacre, rather than, say, The Romans. The TARDIS crew arrive in Seville in 1587, the year before the Spanish Armada sets sail. The first half of the story, however (and it's a double-length one) instead concerns Ian being arrested by the Inquisition, and really gets quite chilling in places.

There are some historical inaccuracies regarding the Inquisition here, although they may be intentional, to help move the story along. And, if I hadn't read a fairly detailed history of the organisation and its methods, it's unlikely I'd have noticed most of them. At any rate, the general menace of the Inquisition, which was undeniably real, is played up, along with the danger they posed to the Morisco population at that time.

The second half switches to Cadiz and the Singeing of the King of Spain's Beard, the historical event that provides the title of the play. The horrors of war are addressed amidst the action, and the depiction of Francis Drake as a bit of a thug seems plausible enough to me. The weakness in this section though, is the difficulty in believing that, given what he's just been through, Ian would be stupid enough to get himself involved in this - Barbara, at least, seems to get the historical significance, but Ian just seems to think it's going to be fun.

The guest characters are well written, as is so often the case, and there are some amusing hints to the secret about one of them that's revealed right at the end. As is also usual, the story suffers from the Companion Chronicle format, and William Russell's voice is definitely betraying his age, but the fact that there are two guest stars as well as two narrators does help to mitigate against this.

The story does stretch credibility in a couple of places, although it's not inconsistent with the TV stories of the era. How much you enjoy it may well depend on how easily you can put those elements aside and appreciate the characters and setting. 3.5 rounded up to 4.

September 27, 2017Report this review