No comments about Christopher Marlowe: A Literary Life (Literary Lives).

2 comments about Anne Boleyn..

1. In my quest to gain biographical information on the six wives of Henry VIII for historical novel purposes, Ms. Bruce's book on Henry VIII's second wife was one of the first to which I turned. Though it is difficult to prove a great many facts about Anne Boleyn, what Ms. Bruce has written is well supported by gripping evidence. Her extensive travel and study has rewarded her readers with a deep sense of knowledge concerning the knight's daughter-made-Queen and a good understanding of the rise and fall of Queen Anne. However, Ms. Bruce's biography has been succeeded by more recent works on Anne Boleyn, and the date of the studies conducted may point a reader in search of the hard facts in a different direction. Still, Bruce's "Anne Boleyn" is a wonderful and well-written source.



2. I must admit that it has been quite a while since I read this. It was always my favorite biography of Anne Boleyn - I thought it brought her to life more than most that I have read. Bruce has some very interesting speculations and insights. I was quite impressed at the care she took in placing certain incidents which other writers have inserted, apparently almost at random, during or after Anne's life. The prime example is the conversation between Henry VIII and Jane Seymour regarding their future children - this is often placed after Anne's imprisonment or death, but Bruce carefully locates it before any accusations were even made against Anne.
   
   This has now be superseded by Eric Ives' the Life and Death of Anne Boleyn, but it is still very much worth reading.

No comments about Travel With John Knox.

No comments about John Todd: The Story Of His Life Told Mainly By Himself.

No comments about Margot Asquith, an Autobiography: Two Volumes in One.

5 comments about King John (Yale English Monarchs Series).

1. I was a little hesitant about ordering this book at first for fear it would be dry and complicated. I was very happy to discover it was neither. It is well researched and well written. Warren gives you a good feel about the period and the challenges John faced. I even found myself asking "what would I have done in his place?" This book busted a few of the "Bad King John" myths as well as some of the "Good King Richard" ones. This is a very readable book provided you have an interest and a little knowledge about the period. If you are looking for a "Robin Hood" type story this isn't it. It's not a page turner but nor should it be. This is the story of a complex man during a complex time and Warren did a great job of bringing it to life without making it dull.



2. This book shows the "dastardly" King John of Robin Hood fame in a more realistic light. He is seen to be an enlightened ruler who reviewed the law courts and other English institutions and who truly, of all the previous Plantagenet kings, preferred England as his inheritance. He is not the cowed king who is seen to have signed the Magna Carta, but a king who was faced with the accumulatiom of misrule by previous Plantagnet rulers including his brother Richard the Lion Heart. This book does not hide the King's less likeable attributes, avarice, lustfullness, a bad temper, a vengeful nature, but then Richard Coeur de Leon had that too. This book shows that John was no worse than his predecessors. Read also "Eleanor of Aquitaine" by Alison Weir, which corroborates this book very well..



3. King John has the reputation as being the absolutely worse King England has ever had. Accused of lechery, murder, treason and much more, John is looked on as an absolute failure, and is warped out of all recognition as the bad Prince John of Robin Hood. The only bright spot in his reign is John's grant of the Magna Charta, which is looked on by many as the ultimate foundation stone upon which English and American freedoms rest.
   W.L. Warren, in this exhaustively researched book, paints a full picture of the life of this least successful of English kings. Dr. Warren points out that much of John's bad reputation results from writer's contrasting him with his brother, Richard the Lionheart.
   This book gives us the reality of King John. It doesn't excuse him. It does explain him.



4. An excellent history book, factual as a text book but reads like a novel. Hollywood could never dream up a life or character so complex.



5. In this excellent book, W. L. Warren attempts to rehabilitate the image of King John of England. Warren sees a gulf existing between the reality of John's reign and its popular perception. He writes, "It is a gulf that I have attempted in this book to bridge--reassessing the reign of King John in the light of the most recent research, and presenting it in a way that is, I hope, both readable and sound" (xi). In KING JOHN, Warren succeeds in this aim by producing an accessible text that illuminates the complex rule of John.
   
   Warren begins by analyzing the source materials and the biases that the sources contain. He explains how depending on which sources you believe, John was either an industrious and clever, yet flawed, monarch, or a foolish and wicked do-nothing king. Warren convincingly argues for the former portrait of John.
   
   John's reputation is much lower than that of his father and elder brother, but Warren's book shows that in many ways he was much like them. John was far from being the inept successor to great men. John had Henry and Richard's talent and energy, but he also had their heavy-handedness. John inherited a dire need for silver and an unstable political situation on the continent from his brother. These things coupled with John's inherent distrust of his barons robbed him of much of his continental territory. John's reign, however, was not merely one of failure. Though he didn't regain Normandy, he did consolidate power over Ireland and manage to frustrate Philip's seemingly realistic dreams of conquering England. Warren's portrayal of John is much more interesting than his reputation as the wicked king. KING JOHN is an excellent example of biography, both convincing and readable.

No comments about John Ruskin: A Life.

1 comments about The Story of Ireland: A History of an Ancient Family and Their Country.

1. This book traces an ancient Irish family from the mists of time into the 20th century. It shows the impact of historical events on a family and its fortunes. The author, I understand, is in his nineties and grew up in Ireland. So he saw and experienced some of the old ways and knows firsthand many of the recent changes. A charming and interesting book.

5 comments about Blood and Fire: The Story of William and Catherine Booth and the Salvation Army.

1. For those of us who have grown up in the UK Roy Hattersley's wit and intellect has long been well known. For those of us who are also Salvationists the prospect of Hattersley writing about the founders of the movement we love and serve filled our minds with a sense of forboding.

   We needed not worry. Hattersley writes well, every word being closely considered, and brings what is for me the best biography I have yet read about these icons of The Salvation Army. In a "no punches pulled" account, which propels one forward with a real idea of the Booths' enthusiasm and obsession, one reads about how the movement began, survived and ultimately prospered. Unlike many in-house accounts there is no glossing over of the shortcomings of these very human beings, rather we learn how, fired by what the Booths would consider Divine Inspiration, they "pressed forward to the mark of their high calling".

   Hattersley concludes "It is not necessary to believe in instant sanctification to admire and applaud their work of social redemption." To those of us who do believe we not only admire and applaud but also see the hand of God in all that the Booths did. Hattersley notes that the Army is the only breakaway group from schismatic 19th century Methodism which survives into the twenty-first century. Many of us who believe know the reason - "Blood and Fire" gives enough evidence for every reader to reach his or her own conclusions.




2. It is highly significant that no Salvation Army personel recommend this book. The author, being unsaved and a senior British politician, concentrates on the radical social reforms the Booths and Salvation Army championed in Victorian Britain. Hattersley, sadly, hasn't a clue about salvation. I suspect Roy's next book may portray Christ as a zealous Jewish Zionist with Marxist leanings. Well written fluff. Now Roy's managed to write a book about John Wesley characterising him as a lecherous toad. Don't waste your money.

   For a far better biography of William and Catherine Booth, get Trevor Yaxley's. And for John Wesley, read John Pollock's.




3. William and Catherine Booth were both remarkable. Many past biographers of one or the other have found it difficult to concentrate on their chosen subject, as the other keeps intruding. Roy Hattersley has solved that problem. He has written about the two of them.

   The story is engrossing. William Booth, the pawnbroker's assistant, became a Methodist minister, then an itinerant evangelist, before founding the East London Mission, which eventually became The Salvation Army. Catherine, brought up by Methodist parents, met William in London in 1852, where they fell in love and soon became engaged. It was to be three more years before they were able to marry; at one time during that period they endured over 14 months of almost unbroken separation.

   They formed a dynamic partnership, each complementing the other. William was an action man, a whirlwind who swept all before him. Though he was not unintelligent, he was anti-intellectual and repeatedly ignored Catherine's frequent urgings for him to study. Catherine by contrast had a powerful mind, wrote forcefully, argued convincingly, and, in spite of her shyness, became a powerful preacher. She had strongly held views about Christians abstaining from alcohol and women being allowed to preach. It is no coincidence that The Salvation Army has always taken a strong stand against alcohol, and women have been prominent in its ministry. Two of its Generals have been women.

   One of the fascinating aspects of the Booths' story is the motley crowd of eccentrics they attracted to their flag. Many of their early soldiers were recruited literally from the streets, and then immediately put to work to win others to Christ. Some were illiterate, some had been drunks, others prostitutes. This particular volume, however, does not quite capture that diversity. Though The Salvation Army is probably most often thought of today as an organization engaged in social work, the Booths were first and foremost evangelists. To them the social work was secondary, both in terms of emphasis and chronology.

   Roy Hattersley, the author of this book, was a cabinet minister in a British Labour Government, and his political background gives the book an interesting slant, particularly when he examines The Salvation Army's social work. The book does, however, have some problems. Hattersley seems out of sympathy with the Booths' religious convictions, and tends to sound rather condescending when discussing them. He also does not understand some basic Christian terms such as "sanctification", and frequently uses them inappropriately. In addition the book has too many avoidable errors, which suggests it may have been a rushed job. But it remains both very readable and enjoyable, and is a worthy tribute to two great Christians.




4. William and Catherine Booth endured this kind of humanist gossip throughout their marvellous ministry. It is highly significant that no Salvation Army personel recommend this book. The author, being unsaved, and a senior British politician, concentrates on the radical social reforms the Booths and Salvation Army championed in Victorian Britain. Hattersley, sadly, hasn't a clue about salvation. It's akin to Scott of the Antarctic, frozen to death in his blizzard-bound tent, trying to commentate on a Barbados Test Match. Not only does this author not know his subject, but he has no idea of his subject's Subject. I suspect Roy's next book may portray Christ as a zealous Jewish Zionist with Marxist leanings. It's fluff. Dentist room reading only. Now Roy's even managed to write a book about John Wesley, characterising him as a lecherous toad. Don't waste your money.
   For a far better biography of William and Catherine Booth, one written by a Christian, get Trevor Yaxley's (ISBN 0764227602). And for John Wesley, read John Pollock's biography.



5. The Booths were certainly a very interesting social couple during the mid to late 1800's. The things that they did to reform the church were noteworthy, but not always positive. However, the legacy of the Salvation Army deserves the respectful and compassionate overview. The author does wax political and/or socialist at times, but mostly sticks to the fascinating lives of William and Catherine Booth. Written with heart and soul, this book is a rewarding read. This couple should be remembered more often than they are in secular circles for the enormous contribution they made to British society, and the continuing service the Salvation Army renders to the poor and jobless. A beautiful book!

2 comments about Anne Boleyn.

1. This book is one of the best fictional biographies of Anne Boleyn. It is well-written and beautiful. Vercors believes in Anne 100%!



2. The contention that Anne was noble and gave her life for her country is utterly absurd. She was firstly a political pawn moved by her famliy and secondly desperately ambitious. Admiring Anne for her skillful manipulation of court politics is one thing but romanticising her as some kind of heroine misses the point entirely.