1 comments about The Rise and Fall of the House of Windsor.

1. I had read this book before, but just re-read it this weekend.
   It is one of the best books on the British Royal Family that I have read. The author's insights and observations are right on target. It was published in 1993 before the tragic death of Princess Diana, but that does not change his thoughts on the problems of the monarchy. Nothing will change until the death of Queen Elizabeth II as she is too bound up in tradition to modernize. The whole family lives in a time warp.

   I recommend this book highly to anyone who is interested in the history of the House of Windsor and how it is crumbling.

2 comments about The Real Hornblower: The Life and Times of Admiral Sir James Gordon, GCB.

1. "The Real Hornblower" is a surprisingly in-depth book following and examining the life of Admiral Sir James Gordon. Perrett has obviously researched Gordon under a microscope, as there is very few sections of his life that are not covered. The book begins with a short examination of C. S. Forester, and his creation of Horatio Hornblower, and then delves into Gordon's life, through newpaper articals, personal letters, ship logs, and Gordon's own unpublished auto-biography. In addition to following Gordon, Perrett gives a very acurate historical account of the wars and politics (which revolve around the European and American naval fleets) during the time that Gordon was alive, make this an excellent naval history or reference book as well. For anyone who has read C. S. Forester's series on Horatio Hornblower, this book is an excellent supplement, allowing you to see a different side of 'Hornblower' in Admiral Sir James Gordon.



2. This was a moderately interesting real-life account of a British sea captain contemporaneous with the Hornblower books. As such, it makes for an interesting comparison between fact and fiction, and, as the author says, sometimes the former is even more extraordinary than the latter.

   The author doesn't fully prove his case that Hornblower was based on Gordon, though there are some striking parallels. The most notable one is that Gordon came up the Chesapeake as a commodore with a small fleet very similar to the one that Hornblower led into the Baltic. (What the author finds suspicious is that Forester wrote a naval history of this period that glosses over this incident, perhaps due to the similarities with Hornblower.) The author uses footnotes and an introduction to point out other points of commonality.

   As I said, moderately interesting, particularly to a Hornblower reader, but not particularly a page-turner.

2 comments about The Life of David Brainerd (The Works of Jonathan Edwards Series, Volume 7).

1. This is a rare, almost forgotten document depicting life in pre-Revolutionary America during the period when religious enthusiasm swept the colonial frontier. From 1743 to 1747 Brainerd had been a missionary to the Indians. Riding alone, thousands of miles on horseback, he kept a journal of daily events that he continued until the week before he died, at the age of twenty-nine, in Edwards' house. First published in 1749, the book became a spiritual classic in its own time. As the first popular biography to be published in America, it went through numerous editions and has been reprinted more frequently than has any other of Edwards' works. But what has not until now been known is that Edwards made drastic alterations in the original text. He shaped the narrative events to fit his own needs, presenting Brainerd as an example of a man who by example and deed opposed the rationalist, Arminian stance. Because the Yale edition is the first to print that portion of Brainerd's manuscript that survives, set in parallel columns with Edwards' text, these alterations can readily be discerned.



2. David Brainerd's recorded life speaks my heart and breath--my longings for my heavenly home. This is a must read for all as it washes away the deceiving beguilement of trendy Christianity.
   
   Traveling through his pages of life, you witness his true mission that of only knowing Christ and Him crucified, 1 Corinthians 2:1-2. He was one of few who despised this vile world with its entertaining ways.
   
   His soul displayed was that of a faithful, humble, loyal pastor who ministered to the natives in isolated areas of New England. He never set himself above these socially rejected ones who he found to be quite refreshing in contrast to snobbish white folk. He became known among fur trappers as "the man who trapped Indians with love."
   
   Below are experts from David Brainerd's diary. The initial are the quotes of "His Heart." The following are observances of "His Natives."
   
   His Heart:
   
   "I know I long for God and conformity to His will, in inward purity and holiness, ten thousand times more than for anything here below."
   
   "God was so precious to my soul, that the world, with all its enjoyments, was infinitely vile. I had no more value for the favor of men, than for pebbles."
   
   "Spent the day mainly in conversing with friends; yet enjoyed little satisfaction, because I could not find but few disposed to converse on divine and heavenly things. Alas, what are the things of this world, to afford satisfaction to the soul! In secret, I blessed the God for retirement, and that I am not always exposed to the company and conversation of the world. Oh, that I could live in the secret of God's presence!"
   
   His Natives:
   
   "Discoursed from John 4:13, 14. There was a great attention, a desirable affection, and an unaffected melting in the assembly. It is surprising to see how eager they are to hear the Word of God. I have oftentimes thought that they would cheerfully and diligently attend divine worship twenty-four hours together if they had an opportunity so to do."
   
   "I never saw any appearance of bitterness or censoriousness (being critical) in these, nor any disposition to `esteem themselves better than others.'"

No comments about The Inventory of King Henry VIII: Transcript of the Inventory (Studies in Medieval and Early Renaissance Art History, 23).

2 comments about Dawning of the Raj: The Life and Trials of Warren Hastings.

1. The life and trials of Warren Hastings are followed in this story of early British rule in India, recommended for students of India history and for those researching early legal issues. Dawning of the Raj reads like a novel at times but is packed with facts about the trials of Warren Hastings, following the man's life and achievements.



2. Most of this book is interesting, but it is very cursory either as a biography of Warren Hastings or as a history of the beginning of the Raj. It contains a lot of marginally relevant information that I enjoyed reading, but which doesn't contribute enough towards the alleged main purpose of the book to explain the number of pages devoted to it. If this were an exhaustive multi-volume work, I might understand why it includes so much information on George Bogle, Robert Oppenheimer and Fanny Burney, but as it is, the biographical information on Hastings is skimpy and some of it is repetitive. There are two somewhat contradictory stories of one duel, separated by a number of pages without any apparent recognition that they don't quite fit together.
   
   The book opens with a chapter on Bogle's trip to Tibet at the direction of Hastings. This shows something about Hastings' activities in India and his breadth of mind, but Bernstein carefully chronicles Bogle's childhood, family, etc., in a surprising amount of detail. Intriguing, but not precisely part of the main story.
   
   Hasting's early life is chronicled in appropriate detail, but once he reaches adulthood, I am baffled as to exactly what he did and why he was made Governor-General. The story moves in a series of brief hops from Hastings' first employment to India quickly to his quarrels during his administration with other members of the Company. There is very little detail in between. Bernstein chronicles the events that would figure in his trial, but I am left with no coherent picture of Hastings' tenure nor his significance in the shift from the East India Tea Company's dealings with India to the official takeover by the British government. I found most of these chapters rather dull because I could make little sense of them. Were Hastings' activities actually important in the shift, or was he, as Bernstein seems to suggest in his discussion of the trials, simply seized upon as a pawn to pursue political ends that had little to do with him as an individual?
   
   Fanny Burney seems to occupy more of the book that Mrs. Hastings or Eliza Hitchcock, Hasting's goddaughter and supposed illegitimate daughter, who had a continuing relationship with him. I have learned far more about the latter from biographies of Jane Austen, Eliza's cousin and sister-in-law. Burney's life is carefully explained in unnecessary, though enjoyable detail. It is interesting that she wrote about the trial, but why this requires more than a passing reference is beyond me.
   
   Bernstein compares the treatment of Hastings to the travails of J. Robert Oppenheimer. Why, I am not sure. I am an American, and 52; frankly, while I have heard a great deal about Oppenheimer and the atom bomb, I was totally unaware of his problems with Congress. They occurred when I was a small child. If Bernstein thinks that he is illuminating Hastings' situation by comparing it with Oppenheimer's, I believe that he is mistaken: I don't think that enough people are aware of the details of the latter case. Perhaps Bernstein thinks that we ought to be more knowledgeable, but that's another book. (And that book would be American Prometheus: The Triumph and Tragedy of J. Robert Oppenheimer, by Kai Bird and Martin J. Sherwin.)
   
   The explanation of the trial itself is interesting, especially for its essential pointlessness. Bernstein seems oddly puzzled that after four years, Hastings changed his mind about how he would like the trial conducted - I think it was obvious, Hastings wanted to get it over with! The trial was conducted in small installments over a period of seven years with the result that very few of the Lords determining Hastings' fate had heard all the evidence. I read this part and the epilogue on his latter years with great interest.
   
   I can't say reading the book was a waste of time: there was a lot of interesting material. It was a disappointment as a biography, however, which was why I wanted to read it.

5 comments about Richard III: England's Black Legend.

1. This is an entertaining mixture of historical story-telling, scholary gumshoe work, and criticism. No aspect overpowers the book, which makes it an interestingly told history, and a well-shaped argument for Seward's perspective of Richard III's reign.

   Of course, so much of his work in the primary sources leads him to numerous conjectural qualifications. This state of affairs demonstrates why there is so much divergence of opinion on Richard III. However, if both Richard's contemporary subjects and their progeny have such a consistently malignant view of the man's rule, why go to such effort to rehabilitate (revisionize) him? It is obvious Richard's black legend is not solely a product of Tudor propaganda. The man simply did all the heavy lifting on establishing history's view of his reign.

   Seward's book is a good read. It's not a purely speculative, breathless narrative of "Maybe this happened, then that ... probably," but an argued case that approaches all of the sources in the field, primary and modern. This book has the potential to become the definitive history of Richard III and his reign; it simply lacks the appeals to cliched romanticism that surround much work in English history.




2. I got this as a result of seeing Ian McKellen's film version of the Shakespearean play. It left me wanting more History as well as more Drama. I had heard that Shakespeare was essentially writing anti-Richard propaganda, since the man who defeated him, Richmond, went on to become Henry VII grandfather of Queen Elizabeth. But while the truth is no doubt more complicated than the play suggests, Seward convincingly shows that Shakespeare got the essentials right even if he did take a few liberties. He doesn't merely elucidate the character of Richard himself, but of those around him. The Woodvilles, Ann, Catesby, Tyrell, Brackenbury, the Duke of Buckingham and Lord Stanley were all real players in Richard's rise and fall, well known at the time for their victimizations through or their contributions to his tyranny. (Catesby for example was known as the Cat in a popular rhyme of the day.) Seward gives an in depth though not necessarily complete view of the constraints and shared assumptions they were operating under which eventually leads to the characterization of the King himself. It's difficult to tell how much of Richard's tyranny stemmed from the bloodthirstiness of the times he lived in, or if good really triumphed over evil at Bosworth field, and Seward makes no assertions to that effect. But he does throw into sharp relief the flaws that earned Richard his bloody reputation, and they aren't saintly ones. He is also very clear cut about which primary sources he is drawing from, Thomas More, Dominic Mancini and the Croyland Chronicler, how they culled their information, and how he reads them. I'm sure there's a wealth of information on this subject, yet I found this book to be a very satisfying introduction.



3. While Seward makes some convincing arguments and successfully rebuts some Ricardian explanations, he does so in a horribly pretentious manner. He makes the constant claim that Richard was unpopular, which may have been so, but he does not bother to use reliable sources to prove it. He is also guilty of using the words 'obviously' and 'plainly' while not giving the reader any inication why he thinks these things are so obvious and plain. An example of this is found when Seward states, "When speaking of Richard, Commynes uses the word 'proud' more than once. Plainly he employs it in the sense of vain glory or self delusion. Had he known the word 'hubris' he would have used that too." Be that as it may, Seward does not offer any proof as to why he believes the word 'proud' is used to mean self delusion, and his assumption that the writer would have used 'hubris' hints of Seward's own pride and arrogance. This neglect to explain basic charges runs throughout the entire book, which makes it an almost unbearable read to one simply trying to find out the truth, rather than wallow in anti-Ricardian sentiment. Almost all historians of Richard III are guilty of writing from bias, but it is not usually so suffocating as this.



4. Reading this book is a good way to get to know the basic story of Richard III, and the related context of English history in the time of the "War of the Roses." To my mind, the greatest virtue of the book is Seward's recognition of Richard as a prince in the Machiavellian style: a ruthless, conniving tyrant. What is weakest in the book is the author's pronounced psychological naivete: even as he writes of Richard as an alert political strategist, willing to do anything to advance his own cause, the author interprets his attitudes and decisions as if they were being made by someone with average working-class values and education. Overall, though, the story is well-told, with a readable mix of engaging narrative and scholarly history.



5. I have been fascinated by Richard III since I saw on TV , when I was seven years old , the 1955 Laurence Olivier adaptation of the Shakespeare play.
   
   
   In this book , Desmond Seward makes a compelling case for his theory that Richard III of England was indeed a bloodthirsty tyrant who cut down all who got in the way of his Machiavellian ambition , that the traditional view of Richard III (outlined dramtically by Shakespeare) is very near the truth.
   The author believes King Richard to have been the cruellest tyrant to have ever occupied the English throne . Seward gives seemingly incontrovertible evidence that he did indeed murder his young nephews in the tower , shining a new light on the tragedy of these boys. He outlines how Richard almost undoubtedly murdered Henry VI and very possibly Henry's son too.
   His death brought to an end , a nightmare for England , not least for Richard himself , who seward believes to have been highly paranoid , and disturbed by psychotic episodes.
   
   
   Seward re-examines contemporary sources , and also Sir Thomas Mores life of the King , which contained much valubale information that Seward brought to light.
   He gives us a history of events leading up to Richard's seizure of power , after the War of the Roses , analyses of the key power players in the England of the time producing the picture of a 'peculiarly grim young English precursor of Machiavelli's Prince'
   
   Defenders of Richard III have criticized this work , but is undoubdetly a major component in shedding light on the life of Richard III and the England of the times.

5 comments about God Save the Queen?: Monarchy and the Truth About the Windsors.

1. I laughed so hard my gut ached when I read this book. It is a witty, extremely well-researched investigation into the monarchy, both intellectually stimuling and filled with gossip. The reviews were right. This is a must-read.



2. Mr Hari is inded a 'non-journalist', as John Pilger describes him. He is arrogant, ignorant and pompous beyond his years. It's no surprise that the reactionary Trotskyite and Bush-loving fool Christopher Hitchens likes him. This damns them both! Hari hates the British royal family and wants to get rid of them in order to make it easier for Tony Blair to abolish Britain's sovereignty and make us a province of a new undemocratic state called Europe. This would open the door for Blair to become President not just of Britain but of Europe. A new Pope, indeed!



3. Johann Hari is one of Britain's most distinguished journalists and has won loads of awards - all deserved! This book shows why he is so acclaimed. I loved its mix of gossip, political wisdom, and intellect. I cannot imagine anybody but the most crazy monarchist disliking it (and even they would have to admit there's some great anecdotes here...)
   
   (by the way, the other commenters here on this book seem to be slightly insane. An EU coup in Britain? Uh... yeah...)



4. I purchased this book in the hopes that I might learn more about some of the contemporary issues/public opinion surrounding the monarchy of the United Kingdom. I was horribly disappointed. Quotes taken out of context, unattributed quotes, and silly gossip form the basis for a nasty polemic. This is the kind of distortion one probably should expect from an acolyte for republicanism. It is not the kind of book, however, that anyone interested in serious discussion about the monarchy would want to waste his/her money on. It is so unbalanced a perspective, that even those few positive contributions the author feels forced to cite during his diatribe are attributed not to generosity of spirit but to psychological disorder. It is sad that this kind of royal character asassination does not still carry a penalty of some time in the Tower.



5. This book is very well written. It is like he is talking to me in person. He is, I feel, a little bit too harsh on the Queen but right on about Philip, Charles and the Queen Mother and Margaret. A good book.

1 comments about Queen Victorias Highland Journals.

1. Editor David Duff's lavishly illustrated and carefully compiled book is a deft selection of those diary entries which best give an unprecedented inside tour of a royal lifestyle. Queen Victoria was a disciplined woman of strong habits and a diarist who possessed the gift of descriptive narrative. Her entries, once released as two bestselling works, strongly evoke a place, Scotland, and a time, most of the years of her reign, and tell of the scenery, weather, people, and events as she experienced them. From her entries about rides out on Highland moors, to reports on shooting parties, frank retellings of lugubrious funerals, seemingly endless notations of carriage rides, including one in which Her Majesty was injured in an accident, descriptions of formal dinners, and impromptu luncheons with simple folk met on her excursions, logs of royal cruises, jotted facts about legends and local histories, Queen Victoria's journal is colorful, factual, impeccable, and leaves a reader feeling a part of a distant era, and as a bonus, one cannot but come away from these books with a strange sense that Victoria was someone known personally. The Journals are divided into two sections, the first those happy two decades before her widowhood began with Albert's passing in 1861, the second basically all that came after, a time largely invested in mourning, years dominated by her faithful friend and servant, the sturdy Highlander John Brown. I have always enjoyed reading these Highland Journals, and took this particular version with me to Scotland in order to locate certain places Queen Victoria mentioned, and my experience of visiting these sites was so much greater for that connection. Any lover of history or Victoriana should appreciate this illustrated collection of the Queen's extraordinary writings.

No comments about The Letters of Matthew Arnold: Volume 5, 1879-1884 (Victorian Literature and Culture Series).

No comments about Sweet Killough: Let Go Your Anchor.