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!

5 comments about Sir Francis Drake: The Queen`s Pirate (Yale Nota Bene).

1. I love the story of Sir Francis Drake and his adventures in the Spanish Main and was eager at this chance at such a thourouh telling of his story.



2. For afficionados of Drake, Elizabethan England, or nautical history, this is a first rate read! The scholarship is thorough and well documented without leaving the prose too dry. Author Kelsey exegetically strips the gloss which has been after-added to most accounts of Drake's life (my brother, who is a nautical archaeologist, found it professionally worthwhile). Unfortunately, Kelsey's apparent bias against Drake's commercial focus prevents a discussion of Drake's larger role as an economic multiplier in the Elizabethan fiscus. The cash brought in by Drake's expeditions and similar ilk were probably critical in enabling the crown to finance the struggle against the Spaniards. Still, all in all, highly recommended.



3. Judging by the editorial the book gives a completely wrong picture judging actions from another time and place by modern rules.

   Sir Francis Drake had very little in common with the pirate from the movies. He was more of talented gentleman of 16 century on dangerous, but profitable enterprize.

   I do not remember Drake looting churches, but even if he did - one must not forget about him being protestant during major religious unrest in Europe. His attituide to his enemies was good and he wasn't bloodthirsty. His moral values were quite normal for his time. And his military prowess definitely was higher than normal.

   His performance during engagement with Spanish Armada was good as well (worth to mention, that, unlike of admiral Hogwart - commander of the English fleet, Drake owned some ships of English fleet). The book "Defeat of Spanish Armada" by Garrett Mattingly gives very accurate account on that issue.

   He never lost Queen's favor. He rather lost Queen's admiration, because results of his last expeditions were less spectacular, but he died vice-admiral commanding his fleet.

   I have unplesant feeling that the book is just one of those "detroning" biographies, which use the standard approach "all great people are just good liars" and aimed to entertain readers with no background in the area. Pity, because writing biography of Drake give unique possibility to make reader understand 16 century through picture of this great military leader.




4. Most professional historians at least try to feign objectivity in their treatment of historical figures. Harry Kelsey does not. The author despises Drake and makes no attempt to hide that fact. Kelsey set out to do a hatchet job and he certainly wasn't going to let history get in the way.
   
   Although the author does a reasonable job of addressing many of the established historical events, he deliberately fails to report dozens of well documented incidents of Drake's mercy and largesse. While Drake's Spanish contemporaries were torturing or executing the Englishmen they captured, Drake repeatedly spared his captives' lives, fed and treated them well, then eventually released them unharmed. These accounts are well documented BY DRAKE'S CONTEMPORARY SPANISH ENEMIES, yet Kelsey cannot bring himself to report these incidents.
   
   Why? Harry Kelsey loathes Drake and cannot force himself to simply objectively report the positive things that Drake's own enemies said about him.
   
   
   More objective treatments of Drake include
   
   1. "Francis Drake" by John Cummings
   
   2. "The Secret Voyage of Sir Francis Drake" by Samuel Bawlf
   
   3. Passing treatment of Drake in "The Queen's Slave Trader" (biography of John Hawkins) by Nick Hazlewood
   
   Even Kelsey's own more recent (2003) work "Sir John Hawkins -- Queen Elizabeth's Slave Trader" treats Drake (albeit incidentally) more evenhandedly than his "Sir Francis Drake: The Queen's Pirate".



5. The discontented sources used for this book were a sure guarantee that Sir Francis Drake's historical accomplishments would not be shown as world-shaking events but merely "maritime myth". Many in the Royal Admiralty and Queen Elizabeth I's court blatantly reviled Drake as an upstart commoner and threat to the courtly status quo. They frankly hated Drake's guts, and wrote down all their antimosity, while all of Drake's firsthand accounts (especially the journals and logs of his Circumnavigation) have been lost to posterity.
   
   Why did the author treat Drake's actions as cruel and/or unusual in an era when Spanish and Portuguese colonists/explorers/conquistadores' brutality towards the peoples of the Americas, Africa and Southeast Asia knew no bounds whatsoever? Drake showed much more consideration for the native peoples he met than most of the Spanish or Portuguese had ever done.
   
   The author uses a contemporary politically judgemental tendency to color his attitudes. Having read some of the sources cited in this book and seen none of the spiteful inferences made in TQP, I think the author's attitude perhaps colored his interpretive judgement.
   
   Drake's piracy is condemned, although he only appropriated the riches that the Spanish had extracted through forced labor from the Incas and Aztecs. But nowhere does the author either state or condemn the brutal methods the Spanish used to rob the indigenous people of their culture and their freedom in the name of Empire and the Roman Catholic Church.
   
   Drake had many flaws: a legendary temper, brusque manner and lack of courtly breeding, but he proved himself as a leader of men, a superb sailor and an erascible member of English maritime history.

2 comments about The English Eccentrics.

1. The inimitable Edith Sitwell, in her jewelled prose, weaves together the threads of assorted strange personages, and the effect is hypnotic. The approach is poetic, oblique, and perhaps not to everyone's taste - and if it were, would you be at all interested? I, for one, was enchanted by her descriptions of, for example, the amphibious Lord Rokeby, the Ornamental Hermits, the dandy Romeo Coates, the rascally William Huntington "the coal-heaver Preacher", the intrepid Squire Waterton, and the ingenious Princess Caraboo, among dozens of others.

   Such understated whimsy within these pages! Such a singular philosophy bound these disparate lives! Read, for example, of the rich Miss Beswick, whose sole concern was that, having passed on, she might not realize it, and that her death "might prove to be only an illusion, a dreamless sleep." And so she left a large sum of money to a certain doctor and his family, "on condition that the doctor should pay her a visit every morning, after what appeared to uninstructed persons, to be her death, in order that he might be assured of the reality of this." Dame Edith dryly notes, "When the Doctor died, the mummified Miss Beswick, that candidate for immortality, was removed to the Lying-in Hospital."

   It's Edith Sitwell's droll, ornate prose, moreso even than the picturesque eccentrics, that make this a book to savor, to read bits of aloud, in the small hours of the night.

   And now the hurled invective: Shame! Shame that this book is out of print! What poverty-stricken, unpoetic times are these?




2. Who but Dame Edith Sitwell could produce such a wonderful send-up of the British, poking fun by speaking the truth as she saw it, in The English Eccentrics. Eccentricity was often simply the Ordinary carried to a high degree of pictorial perfection, Sitwell claims, and thus we get a gifted glimpse of the usually-overlooked obvious.
   
   Of course, there is so much material to work with, it is a wonder the book isn't multi-volumed! Originally published in 1933, it retains much of its vitality and levity despite being two generations (at least) behind the times. Sitwell caught the character of the English Eccentric at a time just before the wholesale decline of Empire, and thus the character portrayed here is a 'standard' one.
   
   'Eccentricity exists particularly in the English, and partly, I think, because of that peculiar and satisfactory knowledge of infallibility that is the hallmark and birthright of the British nation.'
   
   In the relating of small tales and glimpses of life, Sitwell takes us through a history of language usage and abusage, cultural niceties gone awry, personal proclivities taken to extremes, historical remembrances remembered a bit incorrectly, all the while maintaining a strong British 'we know just what we're doing, thank you, and we're doing it quite correctly' attitude.
   
   We find hermits, both ancient and ornamental (the distinction between the two of course being a relative flash that one would think inimical to the hermit-age); quacks and alchemists, some members of the sporting set (we learn of one who, in an attempt to scare the hiccups out of himself, set fire to his nightshirt--of course he was still in it--and was satisfied despite the burns that his hiccups had been vanquished), various other sorts and sets in the land.
   
   Perhaps the most valuable lesson to be learned from this book would the Of the Benefits of Posthumous Fame. Using Milton as the first example, Sitwell proceeds to demonstrate just how this posthumous fame (for the man who sold Paradise Lost for the meagre sum of £20) can be a great boon to all concerned, particularly those who have the foresight to collect locks of hair or write poetry about rummaging through the bone-remains of the dead poet. Of course, there followed in short order a detailed (yet anonymous) description of why the poet could not have actually handled the bones of the poet, not least of which being that as the grave said 1653, and Milton was not in fact buried until 1674, et cetera; thus begins an active correspondence of attempting to prove or disprove in fashion why Milton was not bodily handled.
   
   This is a thoroughly English treatment; like her eccentrics, Sitwell's style of writing is likewise gloriously eccentric. Much will be missed on the first reading, and again the second; by the third reading (should you be so eccentric as to persevere through to such) you will either be so charmed by the writing that you will carry this book around, quoting passages that need context to be understood (and thus be ordained into a minor order of eccentricity yourself) or, you will give the book away to the most tedious of your friends, hoping that the friend will take the hint.
   
   The choice is yours.

5 comments about Warriors of God: Richard the Lionheart and Saladin in the Third Crusade.

1. My son had to read this book for a University course. He thought that I, a history buff, might find it useful as a reference book. To my pleasant surprise, this book is quite simply a joyous read. Interesting, fast-paced, and very well written, it is fit to be consumed rapidly and then re-read. Myths are exposed, and explained, and multiple characters are presented in their historical contexts with all of their flaws, and attributes of greatness, fully discussed. This book has relevance today, as it puts the Western imprint on the Middle East at the forefront of discussion, without criticism of the West, nor undue praise. Richard the Lionhearted is portrayed as what he apparently was - a great warrior with a surprising appetite for things not often associated with soldiers. As for Saladin, it is quickly evident why he was both feared and revered, why both are deserved, and why honor is not simply a Western characteristic.



2. I've actually been planning to read this book for years and finally picked it up off the shelf at our local library. What I had hoped for was an education and understanding of this pivotal period of history.
   
   I would say I did learn things I had not previously understood but I believe I had to do so with care given not to swallow hook, line and sinker. I find, as other reviewers have mentioned, that the author seems to prefer or have taken sides with the Muslim "defenders". They are rendered in a glorious and patriotic light while the "offenders" are small and trivial people.
   
   Considering the amount of time I've wanted to read this book, I'd have to say I was a little disappointed. To credit where credit is due, I did enjoy the flow of the near storybook style of writing employed. I found there were times I wasn't sure I was reading a good historically inspired novel or the real thing.



3. This is a very entertaining piece of popular history. As usual for such work, it may be of less interest to the serious and well-informed student of history, but I would recommend it anyway just for the fun it will give you. The author manages to make the events exciting and draw the reader in, but not without the occasional hint of farce. At the same time, by keeping you reading the book brings across just how differently thought was structured in the Middle Ages. Richard's Crusade was ultimately futile and a waste both of life and of an opportunity to rule, including massacres of civilians and prisoners that would be proscribed today, although there was great chivalry between the key players. Saladin comes off better, and it is worth reading more to get a better feel for the man's flaws, but the Crusaders' acts and nature cannot really be whitewashed.
   
   A fascinating and occasionally hilarious snapshot of a very different time.



4. As a complete novice to the history of the Third Crusade (Robin Hood and Ivanhoe were about as historically deep as I got), I found Warriors of God to be a lively introduction to a fascinating and colorful cast of characters--most of whom I'd never heard of before. I enjoyed the fast-paced, episodic style of the work, and I could tell Mr. Reston was enjoying himself with these stories--that sort of enthusiasm on the part of the author can cover a multitude of sins.
   
   But not all. While the book makes for a good read, I'm not entirely sure it makes good history. As other reviewers have mentioned, Mr. Reston has a tendency to state things as fact without much bothering about proof. At one point Mr. Reston, commenting on the tangled, soap opera relations of the Plantagenet family, says that Henry II, Eleanor, and Alais: "raged at one another, as we know from the modern play The Lion in Winter" (page 61 in the hardcover). Now, James Goldman's play is excellent (go read it), but it's a highly fictionalized account of a Christmas court that never took place. Perhaps Mr. Reston merely phrased this badly, but it sounds as if we are meant to give as much historical credence to a modern author as to eye witness accounts from the 12th century.
   
   There are also several obvious fact checking errors--for example, the child king Baldwin V is referred to as the son of Baldwin IV (page 75 in the hardcover) rather than his nephew. Many historians have a tendency to be dismissive of popular histories already--there's no need to add fuel to the fire by making mistakes that any web page can manage to get right.
   
   All that being said, I did enjoy the book, and found myself utterly drawn into this world and these people's stories. The extensive use of quotations from primary sources really brought the history to life. It absolutely "hooked me" into seeking out more on the subject. And as long as that's as deeply as one needs to read it, Warriors of God is worth a look.



5. I recently finished Warriors of God : Richard the Lionheart and Saladin in the Third Crusade by James Reston Jr. The book is informative and full of wry humor. It was also full of "oh, that's what they meant" moments.
   This is the first book that I've read that talks about the third crusade from both the Muslim and Christian perspectives. This balance is made more meaningful given it's post- 9/11 publication. It in no way makes an explicit connection, but you can see the beginnings of struggles (hostile and diplomatic) over Jerusalem that are still operant.
   The very beginning of the book covers an era reported in two movies in particular. The Lion in Winter, if not exactly historically accurate, at least conveys the same gist and tone as Warriors of God. Wikipedia says, about the movie,
   "The Lion in Winter is fictional: there was no Christmas Court at Chinon in 1183; there was a Christmas court at Caen in 1182; none of the dialogue and action is historic, though the outcomes of the characters and the background are historically accurate. In reality, Henry had many mistresses and many illegitimate children; the "Rosamund" mentioned in the film was Henry II's mistress until she died."
   Kingdom of Heaven covers the next slice of time, but combines characters and adds an improbable and non-existant love relationship.
   I recommend the book to anybody that's curious about this era and place.

5 comments about Winston Churchill's War Leadership.

1. This book succinctly and brilliantly encapsulates Churchill's qualities as a wartime leader and shows Martin Gilbert's writing at its best. Ranging across the influence of Churchill's' long experience on his war leadership, his daily pattern of work, his personal example and his relationships with those under his command, this is a fascinating survey, first given by Gilbert in the White House.



2. This book manages to outline the major principles of Churchill's greatness as a leader, and to give a fascinating account of the decision- making process during the Second World War. One of the major elements and this should be kept in mind by Western leaders today is that Churchill even in the darkest hours would not placate and negotiate with Evil. The word 'Defeat' was simply not part of his strategic vocabulary. His indomitable spirit influenced all those around him.
   This does not mean as Gilbert makes clear that Churchill did not have his doubts, his despairs, his periods of anger and frustration. But always he was able to overcome , and to keep the main goal, the defeat of the enemy before his eyes. His remarkable courage and his great ability to inspire others , combined with his thorough, responsible and comprehensive intellect helped make him the outstanding political leader of the twentieth century. Whether at the darkest hour of retreat at Dunkirk or in the moments of great relief and victory Churchill made himself the living embodiment of the spirit of the people, the salty and courageously defiant British people he led and loved.
   Gilbert is a master of condensation, of wise judgment in writing. He has done all those who care about the subject of Leadership a very real service with this small in size, but great in meaning, work.



3. It's a small book but very informative. I'm not sure I would want to read it for fun. I'm using it for my thesis.



4. If you are new to Winston Churchill, and looking for an executive summary of his unique style, this is a book for you. I had read a couple of bio's from the library. My parents had visited Chartwell and brought me a book about the house from there. So I already knew a bit about his war years.
   
   What tempted me to this book was the thought that it offered a perspective on Churchill that would be useful in our daily lives; from the summary, I was expecting almost a guide to setting up self-management systems that really work. The book started out well, but drifted a bit towards being yet another bio of Churchill and his peers in later pages.
   
   Don't be put off buying this book; by making my own 2-page summary of the "lines-between-the-lines", I got some of what I was after. However, I thought I would have just that bit more.



5. There should be a law against very short monographs or pamphlets that disguise themselves as books (complete with a book price)! Unfortunately, this practice is becoming more common among (even great) historians eager to make a dollar.
   
   Martin Gilbert is a talented historian and the world's foremost expert on Winston Churchill and his official biographer. I enjoy reading anything on Winston Churchill and anything written by Martin Gilbert and have paid full price for most of his real books.
   
   This monograph, however, left me feeling robbed. Not only was there nothing new here (all of this has been covered in his previous works), but it was less readable than Martin's other works. Indeed, this is nothing more than the transcript of a talk Gilbert gave at the White House in February 2002, suggesting that he is perhaps more comfortable with the written word than the spoken one.
   
   I will continue to purchase Gilbert's historical works, but will shy away from ever purchasing another of his pamphlets!

3 comments about The Godwins: The Rise and Fall of a Noble Dynasty (The Medieval World).

1. My wife is a Godwin and during the Queen Elizabeth II corination the Godwins were invited. By reading the book you can see why and it has been a big help while doing our family history.



2. "The Godwins" by Frank Barlow is an excellent account of the turbulent history of England in the half-century leading up to the Norman Conquest, charting the rise and fall in fortunes of the dynasty established by Earl Godwin and which reached its zenith with the succession of his son, Harold, as king in 1066.
   
   Though the book is less than 200 pages long, Barlow nevertheless is able to write in great depth about his period, evoking a sense of the turbulent politics and the rapidly shifting fortunes of his subjects. He describes the rapid rise of Godwin and his family, from relative obscurity in the reign of Aethelred 'the Unready' (978-1016) to power and wealth under Edward the Confessor (1042-66), and then finally to the kingship itself with Harold's succession in 1066. His account of the events leading up to the Norman invasion, as well as of the Battle of Hastings itself, is thorough and detailed in every respect.
   
   The sources available to the historian for the 11th century are fuller than for earlier periods, but nevertheless remain somewhat fragmentary. Barlow, however, does an excellent job of drawing them all together in a scholarly yet readable manner. Indeed these sources are constantly referenced throughout the book, with a list of notes at the end of every chapter. Moreover, where there are uncertainties or discrepancies in the material, he is careful to highlight them. To help the reader keep track of the various players, there are four family trees, depicting both the Anglo-Saxon and the Danish royal lines, as well as Godwin's own family. Also included are 12 pages of black and white plates, reproducing images of the coinage of the age in addition to key scenes from the Bayeux Tapestry.
   
   All in all, "The Godwins" is a truly excellent book; indeed, one of the best on the subject of King Harold and the Norman Conquest. Also highly useful for understanding the social history of eleventh-century England is Richard Fletcher's "Bloodfeud: Murder and Revenge in Anglo-Saxon England", while at the same time a useful counterpart to Barlow is David C. Douglas's "William the Conqueror", which deals with the same period but from the Norman perspective.



3. The author does a good job describing the Rise and Fall of the Godwin family. It rose out of obscurity and ended for the most apart at the infamous Battle of Hastings. The hard part about piecing together information on the Godwins is that there's so little information out there. Most of it comes from books written a couple hundred years after their fall or from the viewpoint of the Normans which you don't really know how much information from them you can trust. I do like was how the author did point this out when ever he brought up a Norman point he was also able to counter it with other explantations that sounded just as reasonable like why Harold didn't wait before attack William's army or decisions Edward the Confessor made and things the Godwins did and their background (as much as there was). I liked reading more about the rest of the Godwins, his brothers and sisters and parents.

3 comments about George III: America's Last King (The English Monarchs Series).

1. It is not a book for someone who doesn't know anything about George III.
   It is not for begginers. But it is very good book to get to know George very well. What he was thinking about politics, religion, etiquiete . But especially very well is described his relationship to his ministers.



2. I was very well satisifed with the book. It was very enlightening. It was Hard cover and made very well. Thank you so much.
   
   Sincerely
   
   Diann Geary



3. I am not a historian; I am a fan of history. I know enough modern history to recognize skillful writing, accomplished research and craftsmanship. Jeremy Black's book qualifies in all these categories. William Hays excellent review of this biography in the Wall Street Journal is a wonderful, concise summary of Mr. Black's book. Since it is unlikely I can match his fine description, I will confine my comments to cautious criticism rather than perform an academic dissection.
   
   American readers should be warned that this is not an easy book to read. Mr. Black, who is a professional historian, write to an audience familiar with British politics that understands title inheritance (sixth earls), peer promotions (and name changes), Parliamentary procedure (ministerial nominations and dismissals) and English history (the Glorious Revolution). It is unlikely that American readers, who rarely have this kind of grounding, will understand these conditions upon opening his first chapter. Nor had I managed to greatly expand my knowledge base when I closed his last chapter. The biography would gain greatly from a brief introduction to late eighteen century British politics, even at the risk of boring our English cousins.
   
   It is also not easy to read because Mr. Black's sentences are occasionally confusing and his paragraphs disjointed. Tighter editing should have corrected this problem. Perhaps his editors were intimidated by his academic position. I am not. A competent reader recognizes good grammar. A sentence that requires three readings qualifies for either better editing or waiting until one is sober. This doesn't happen often but it does with regularity.
   
   I was quickly lost upon encountering the different orders of the King's bedchamber. A search through several internet sources was no help. Is the lord chamberlain superior in rank to the master of the groom? Perhaps it makes no difference. However, being curious about such matters left me cast ashore without resources. The Order of the Garter placed me in a similarly abandoned state. And I must say, at a minimum, I wondered why offices were named for intimate adornments (robes and garters). This are not meant as great criticism. It is simply that unsophisticated readers such as me are disadvantaged and would appreciate a brief introduction to the Georgian political world.
   
   American readers will be slightly disappointed in Mr. Black's discussion of how Colonial politicians related to George III. Thomas Jefferson is mentioned occasionally as is John Adams. Both spent time in London and left original source documents. Yet I wondered if they were indeed snubbed. I find it unlikely although the same stories continue to be told. Jefferson is known to have manipulated truth to suit his purposes, and Adams is a prejudiced, judgmental and sometime unreliable journalist. I wanted to know if George III did, in fact, slight them, and if so, why. He would likely have left a note of such a performance I would appreciate Mr. Black's comments.
   
   Yet this book is extraordinarily instructive. A careful reading of Mr. Black's biography yields an excellent assessment of George III. He ultimately appears as a steadfast, conscientious man thoroughly devoted to his wife, religion, country and duty. In short, he is the consummate royalist, and Mr. Black goes to great extremes explaining exactly why. A Freudian analysis will probably explain more. Surely some internal medicine specialist will eventually diagnose why this uniquely admirable and unfortunate man suffered so terribly and how he might have been more humanely treated in his declining years. After all, if we do not try to profit from our mistakes, reading history is a useless exercise in arrogant commentary. I highly recommend Mr. Black's biography and only graded it as four stars based on some minor concerns about my lack of preparation and his writing style.

5 comments about The Perfect Prince: Truth and Deception in Renaissance Europe.

1. If you like real mysteries and have a taste for all the problematical aspects of real history and research, this is an incredible, masterful book. It is one of the most satisfying books I have ever read - satisfying on many levels and in many ways.
   
   I am surprised by some of the negative reviews. Obviously, there are people who did not read the book with suffient care and attention. For example, to quote Wroe on Perkin's final confession, as if this is her last word, is to show a woeful understanding of her style and the way the book works. This is not a short book, but it is a truly fine book. If you liked Barbara Tuchman's _A Distant Mirror_, you will love this tale as it is better written, more complex and mysterious, and about a historically more significant person.



2. I am a history buff and an avid reader of anything written about the Wars of the Roses, and in particular, anything written about Richard III and the mystery of the Princes in the Tower. This book, however, was hard to finish. The narrative style is so rambling and incoherent that it is difficult to follow. Facts, dates, and quotes are muddled, sentance structure is meandering and the author never seems able to make a point. How this book got past a copy editor, I'll never figure out.



3. I found the Perfect Prince to be a well written and superbly research book on Perkin Warbeck affair that plagued King Henry VII of England duirng the last decade of the 15th century. The research goes deeply into this blond pretender who claims to be Richard, Duke of York who somehow survived his days in the Tower of London while his older brother was murdered. The level of deception proves to be so great that many great monarchs of Europe gave their support of him and many English men great or small gave their support as well as their lives for him.
   
   Ann Wroe investigates this interesting sideshow of European history, trying to determined the true nature of this blond fellow who fooled so many, often with their lives and his origins. The study of motivation of Perkin Warbeck, aka: Ricahrd, Duke of York proves to be an interesting and indepth look. One of the important side subjects of this book remains the fate of the princes of the tower, a subject that continued to interest many during the last decade of the 15th century as well as up to the 21st century.
   
   If there was a weakness in this book, I believed it had a lot to do with the fact that the book was over written. Too many petty details were brought out in the book, too tedious at times in some sections. I thought the book could have been edited more tightly.
   
   Still, this book proves to be an interesting read although it tailored to a specific subject matter. Anyone who got any interest in the fate of the Princes in the Tower should read this book. Of course, Henry VII make a dour subject matter but this booka also reflects upon his rule as well.



4. When I first saw the synopsis of this book, I was very excited. The mystery of Perkin Warbeck (was he or wasn't he the younger of the Princes in the Tower?) has one that has always intrigued me. Besides, being a staunch Ricardian who firmly believes that Richard III is innocent of his nephews's murder, I thought to myself, if there's even a possibility that Perkin WAS Richard, Duke of York, then it goes to prove that the Princes in the Tower were not murdered at all, by their wicked uncle or anyone else (theories abound on who that someone else may have been, or if there ever was a double murder).
   
   On that last point I very quickly found out that Ms. Wroe thinks no such thing. In the first pages she describes Richard III as having been cut down "like a dog" (when in reality he fought bravely against overwhelming odds due to great treason, and his death caused a "great heaviness" in York and the North). That was the first disappointment. Still, it was moot to the story of Perkin himself, so I ploughed on.
   
   Well, you do need to hang in there tight, the book is overlong and overladen with totally irrelevant details (who cares about trade between Senegal, Portugal and Spain, what does the Aeneid have to do with the story, why spend so much time on Margaret Duchess of Burgundy's illuminated Book of Hours and her "visions", etc.?). When it does come to Perkin Warbeck himself, the narrative is thoroughly confusing. It takes some mental gymnastics to keep it all straight, between the boatman's son, the boy who was Brampton's attendant, the Prince who showed up in several royal courts of Europe, and who did what to him when. Same goes for his wanderings before he gets to Scotland. The narrative just doesn't flow. The sheer dryness of the writing, the contrived prose, the irrelevancies and the confusion make for the other disappointments.
   
   The only (almost) straight piece of narrative is when "Richard, Duke of York" does try to invade England after having married one of the King of Scots' kinswomen, up to his capture and "confession". Here I have another bone to pick. Ms. Wroe's contends that, since this confession was made just before he died, it must be true. I don't see the logic of that. Being tried as a commoner, he was probably "coerced" (to put it mildly) into confessing to almost anything. Bertram Fields, in his book "Royal Blood", devotes a chapter to Yorkist pretenders who tried to overthrow Henry VII, in which he casts serious doubts about Warbeck's confession and points out some inconsistencies that might impugn its reliability.
   
   Well, I give the book 3 stars simply as a reward for so much painstaking research. It's a pity that, so as not to have her time and effort wasted, Ms. Wroe crams all the results of that research, relevant or not, into her book, making it unwieldy, hard to follow, and a very dry read. The stars also go to having tackled an obscure historical figure and tried to shed some light in a 500-year-old mystery.
   
   If you're a history buff and are interested in the small footnotes of history, by all means read the book. If your interest is more in history-as-entertainment and an easy read, seek elsewhere. There are other non-fiction books on the period that are a lot more digestible.



5. This is an extremely well-researched, well-written biography of an intriguing young man who may have been the rightful King of England. I give Wroe full marks for her fascinating, open-minded portrayal of a confusing and turbulent period of history that in other hands has often been handled so poorly that it's impossible to follow. Her work is highly readable, and her research is original, cutting-edge, nsightful and thought-provoking. If a reader is really interested in this period, then Ann Wroe's book must not be missed.

2 comments about James the Good: The Black Douglas.

1. This book is fantastic, I couldn't put it down!! I'm a Scottish history buff, genealogist and a Douglas descendant, so obviously there was a very personal interest for me. But the unique aspect of this book is that it takes you to the locales present day so you could actually go and relive the history for yourself if you're so inclined - and who doesn't want to go to Scotland and Spain?!!! My family and I recently returned from Teba, Spain, the site of James' last battle. An ex-patriot Scot named Tom McDaid actually offers tours of the area, and it was a great experience, one we'll never forget, and I very much enjoyed reading about the battle for the Castle of the Star in the book. I'm looking forward to reading more of this author's other books. Alba gu brath!!!!!



2. Another great edition to the series David Ross made famous with his 'On the Trail of'' books tracing the lives of two great Scottish Patriots, Wallace and Brus. So now comes his recount of the vast accomplishments of Scotland's most beloved knight (and my ancestor) James Lord Douglas. As an historical researcher and author of three books on Sir James, his father Sir William le Hardi Douglas and his family and descendants, the My Truth Trilogy... My Truth Lies in the Ruins, In the Shadow of My Truth and most recently My Truth a Mist in Time...I know well the stirring tales that literally jump from the pages of contemporary chronicles and 13th and 14th century documents. Several site locations I was able to find for my books can be attributed to the writings of David Ross; a man who lives for the passion of Scottish history to honor the lives of these great warriors...Liberators for a free and independent Scotland. Saor Alba! www.mytruthliesintheruins.com Dr. Deborah Richmond Foulkes, FSAScot

5 comments about Once In A House On Fire: A Memoir.

1. Some books disappear from your memory a day after you've read the last page. Some books stay with you forever, and constantly bounce back with tidbits of emotion. Andrea Ashworth's 'Once in a House on Fire' clearly fits in the second category. How she managed to survive intact and come out at the other end as a seemingly balanced person is beyond belief.

   A brave tale witten by a very brave young lady who coped with the horrors of growing up with abusive 'fathers'. Five stars for the book - ten stars for surviving.




2. What can I say about this book except it was incredible? I read it in 2 days on holiday, I just couldn't put it down... the only thing is, I wanted it to go on even after it had stopped... I just kept thinking - What happened next? As one critic of the book said, it is only a shame that she had to live it to write it.



3. Andrea Ashworth is brave, smart, and amazing. I will later tell you why. First, I will discuss the base of the plot of the book. I have read this book about her childhood and teenage memoirs of life with her family, and know now what she went through. Following the death of her real father, she lived through a situation with two different abusive stepfathers, who emotionally and physically abused her mother, and occasionally her and her younger sister. This type of situation is an oft kept "secret" in this world-a subject that does not often get talked about; a problem that very rarely gets "cured". Against a backdrop of East London, and Canada, Ashworth recalls her tale. It is amazing that Ashworth, who is now an adult, remembers details far back into her childhood so vividly. It is amazing that she got through that part of her life without too many "visible" scars. I will not tell too much more of the story, you must read it for yourself. But again I say that Andrea Ashworth is brave, smart, and amazing. She is brave to recall this story; smart to address it, so that this world renowned secret can be uncovered and maybe tackled as a real problem for many families; and amazing to survive and then tell it to us later. Her story surely helped her deal with her past, and thus it will probably help others learn about abuse in families, and help others who may or may not have experienced similar situations in their lives as well.



4. Andrea Ashworth's book is testament to the strength in the human spirit. I was going backwards and forwards between feeling repulsed by her mother's inaction to being amazed at the coping strategies and abilities of Ashworth and her sister's. I feel it hard to swallow that at the end of the book Ashworth thanked her mother for her spirit, etc. I wonder what has happened since the book was published and whether her mother has recognised how she has failed her children. Her 'blindness' and selfishness was astounding. Ashworth's book was interesting also due to tha fact that it was based in Manchester and it was a valuable social commentary and insight into what parts of the city was like before. A must read for everyone to wake up to the fact of how prevalent abuse is in society and how it manages to escape people who choose to look the other way.



5. and her siblings. This book really drew me into her life. When it ends you want more..I hope the author decides to write about her life after this memoir ended.