5 comments about Queen Elizabeth I.

1. Every single one of Elizabeth's biographers (particularly the male ones) seem to have fallen in love with her, and this, the epic Bess bio, is the most unashamedly gushing. Part of the reason for Elizabeth's enduring appeal is that she combined good looks and dress sense with a flair for self-invention (and re-invention) - the very same qualities which still endear Onassis-Kennedy and Diana Spencer to their legions of mourners. As a politician Elizabeth's achievements approached genius, but any sympathetic biographer still has to paper over the cracks somewhat when we get to her reliigious policy, particularly the execution of Mary, Queen of Scots. Since this biography was written at a time where many Englishmen were still riding the Imperial wave, there is a tendency to forgive the Virgin Queen on matters such as this, but this work remains a milestone.



2. After having read everything I could get my hands on about Elizabethan England reading this book was very refreshing. Delving into the social and political realm of Queen Regina is what this book is all about. Well written and easy to read it gives a new perspective on the trials and tribulations of a very courageous and smart lady.



3. J.E. Neale, Elizabeth I's most famous modern biographer, is not an author who is easy to read for the modern scholar or anybody who regards the Virgin Queen as anything short of a goddess. His style of history has vanished, I'm glad to say. His worship of Elizabeth and his nationalistic biases make this a very tough read and not a very worthwhile one. Anne Somerset's modern biography would be a better use of the reader's time.



4. Although hardly a year goes by without someone new coming up with another biography on Queen Elizabeth I, this probably is the best of the lot. Many of the subsequent volumes that have appeared after Neale generally owe him a debt of gratitude at least for assembling the basic facts of the life of the Virgin Queen.

   Elizabeth's life has been told many times, her parents, Henry VIII and Anne Bolyn's ill-fated marriage, imprisionment during the reigns of both siblings, Thomas Seymour (whose sister replaced her mother in Henry's bed-would any soap opera try this plot twist?), Thomas Wyatt, William Cecil, Robert Dudley, Mary Queen of Scotts, the Spanish Armada, Shakespeare, and Gloriana. What Neale does quite well is to provide some real insight into the life of this the best of Britain's rulers and to place her actions in context. Some might think that Neale's treatment is too positive, I think the tone of the book is consistent with the greatness of this woman who, unlike her modern day namesake, ruled as well as reigned.




5. Neale's book comes from an older world of historical writing, and would not satisy the demands of current historians. It tells the story of Elizabeth I as a loving tale of a personal friend, focusing on assessments (or presumptions!) about character. The book makes Elizabeth seem a strong and deserving leader. The book reveals little, though, of the details and especially the implications of political decision-making. A war, or a raising of taxes, is seen as meaningful only as a development in some relationship between Elizabeth and some other nobleman. This work would be of almost no help to someone trying to understand the developments in English politics in the 1500s. As a personal drama, though, (perhaps as a soap-opera), this is an engaging and informative read.

No comments about Signers of the Constitution.

5 comments about Thomas Paine: Apostle of Freedom.

1. The American Revolution's roots in the British which many people thought was 'betrayed' by parliament when it restored the monarchy, the roots of common British and American democratic ideals emerging from the dissenting religions and their notions of justice and equality (it's said that British socialism has more Methodism than Marx in it), the frustrations and ideals of British republicans who invested so much of their hope in the American colonies (not then 'United') shows that even in the l8th century (and presumably before and since) there is a community of men and women who, irrespective of nationality, place justice and liberty above all other human aspirations. What we learn from this book was that Tom Paine wasn't just a great British radical, a great founding father of the American Revolution, an active member of the revolutionary French Tribunal -- he was a critic of all unearned or abused authority wherever he saw it -- from George III to George Washington -- and that he foresaw a world in which every soul enjoyed the same rights and liberties. It was his internationalism, his understanding of the drawbacks as well as the virtues of populist democracy, that made him so relevant to modern readers. You can be sure that Tom Paine would have been at the Seattle demonstrations and would have no doubt been considerably more eloquent in his criticisms of international big business than anyone alive today! He speaks to us as clearly and as authoritatively as he spoke to his first readers -- who made his work best-sellers in America, Britain and France -- and this is the first book I have read which does its great subject the justice he deserves. He shouldn't just have a statue in Washington -- he should have one in London and Paris. It is his ideas of common liberty and justice which unite people around the world, perhaps even more now than in his own day. Read this book and you will understand how valuable democracy is and how hard it was to win, how hard it remains to keep it vital and uncorrupted. Everyone interested in modern politics should read this book.



2. In the hierarchy of founding fathers, Thomas Paine is not in the top echelon, but he is significant. His principal contribution was Common Sense, a pamphlet that spurred the independence movement in the early days of the Revolution.

   One of the themes that seemed to run through Paine's life was a commitment to ideology that often had negative effects. While he was a man who backed his words with actions, he did it at a cost: he had few lifelong relationships, he was often broke and he even spent a year in jail, with the threat of execution constantly hanging over him. In the conflict between idealism and practicality, Paine favored the former.

   Fruchtman's biography does a good job in describing this important historical figure. At times slow (I feel because there are points in Paine's life that aren't very interesting), it is overall a good, educational read. It makes me feel that if Paine had exercised a little bit more common sense in his own life, he might have been even a greater man.




3. When asked to name the Founding Fathers of America, most people will name Washington, Jefferson, and Franklin. Those who have read a book or two on the early America may also say Adams, Hamilton, and Madison.

   I bet that very few people would name Thomas Paine. That is unfortunate and would be fixed quickly if this book were more widely read.

   "Thomas Paine: Apostle of Freedom" devotes little time to Paine's early years, focusing mainly on his life after arriving in America a few years before Independence.

   Before reading this fine biography, I had not given Thomas Paine much thought beyond being the author of "Common Sense". I now realize the many roles he played in both the American and French revolutions and in furthering the cause of freedom and liberty in an age of monarchy.

   Also check out:

   - "Tom Paine and Revolutionary America" by Eric Foner
   - "46 Pages: Tom Paine, Common Sense, and the Turning Point to Independence" by Scott Liell
   - "Tom Paine: A Political Life" by John Keane

   Highly Recommended!




4. One of the most enjoyable biographies I've ever read. This book is meticulously researched and well written. I highly recommend it to anyone who wants to understand the ideas and the spirit of one of the most important figures of the American Revolution.



5. Jack Fruchtman has done a fine job of giving us a total picture of Paine, warts and all. This is an intelligent, balanced and humane treatment of the life of a complex man who tends to be either demonized or deified by those who write about him. Highly recommended.

5 comments about Judah P. Benjamin: The Jewish Confederate.

1. Judah P. Benjamin is little remembered for his service to the United States of America, the Confederate States of America, and the United Kingdom. Born in the West Indies, he ended his life as Queen's Counsel in Great Britain. In between, he came to Charleston, South Carolina, studied law in New Orleans, became the first Jewish Senator--from antebellum Louisiana. Surprised? I was. Then, service as Attorney General, Secretary of War, and Secretary of State of the Confederate States of America. Almost universally well-liked and respected, the "smiling lion" whose face adorns every Confederate $2 bill (you can check your collection); this was a most remarkable Victorian American, in all respects.

   Frequently the brunt of castigation in newspapers for problems with military supply and ordnance, probably trailing close behind Jefferson Davis (also a former U.S. Senator) himself, this book is a very intriguing and documented biography. Sadly now out of print, I still highly recommend it to any student of the Civil War, the Confederacy, the history of Jews in America, jurisprudence (he wrote a book on Contracts that is still important in the United Kingdom)...he should not be forgotten. Judah P. Benjamin was a spirited man who made the most of his talents (even marrying into Catholic New Orleans aristocracy) and yet is known by few, and probably understood by even fewer.
   He is as much a part of American history and identity as Robert E. Lee, Stonewall Jackson, and Sam Houston. However, don't look for a film about him to come out from Hollywood anytime soon. You'll have to read the book!




2. Most every student of the Civil War has heard of Judah P. Benjamin but very few people know anything about him except that he served in three positions in the Confederate Cabinet. Most of these same people are also aware that Benjamin was Jewish and from Louisiana, but that is about it. This lack of knowledge about Benjamin may come from the fact that its generals often overshadow the Confederate government or it may come from Benjamin's own desire to sink into anonymity following the war. This desire on Benjamin's part has in great part made a study of him very difficult for he destroyed almost every document with his name on it, including personal correspondence. Eli Evans has taken on the difficult task though, and has turned out a fantastic biography of the elusive Benjamin.

   Benjamin's early life is dealt with in some detail, especially after he arrives in New Orleans looking for a fresh start. Through skill and hard work Judah became one of the most successful lawyers in New Orleans. He married into the Creole ruling class and gained in stature but also gained a wife who would be an embarrassment to him for the rest of his life. During this time he built a plantation and became an agricultural innovator and was remembered by his former slaves long after the war for his kindness. Benjamin was very much a progressive and this would show up later in his plans for a Confederate Emancipation Proclamation.

   Benjamin moved into politics and was in his second term in the U.S. Senate when Louisiana left the Union. He and Jefferson Davis had not gotten along very well in the Senate and Benjamin had once come to the point of challenging his Mississippi colleague to a duel. As the new Confederate President looked for a Cabinet however he wanted someone from each Confederate State and Benjamin was the obvious choice for Louisiana. From that point on a friendship blossomed that would end up making Benjamin Davis' closest advisor and confidant. This is the story Evans tells so well.

   Benjamin, for his country and his President was willing to serve as a scapegoat on several occasions for unpopular decisions Davis had to make. He also took the blame a few times for not sending needed supplies to certain points rather than hurt Confederate moral by admitting that they simply didn't have the supplies in question. Evans does a superb job of relating Benjamin's hard work and also the never-ending venom that was directed at him, especially by opponents of President Davis.

   The weak points of the book come when Evans leaves his subject and starts to write about things that he knows little about. He very quickly dispenses with battles but still often makes errors and naturally repeats the old fable about shoes at Gettysburg. He also has problems accepting that Tennessee did in fact leave the Union and while there were Tennessee men in the Union army there were many, many more in Confederate service. Tennessee was left out of Lincoln's proclamation simply because most of the state was under occupation and Andrew Johnson intervened for the rest of the state. Still, if one just sort of ignores some of his statements that do not involve Benjamin, Evans has written an excellent book.

   The final chapters trace Benjamin as he escapes to England and rebuilds his life to become one of the top lawyers in London. He remains deeply concerned about his imprisoned President but is also afraid that if the anti-Semitic Andrew Johnson can catch him he will again be the scapegoat and face a rope. Fortunately, cooler heads finally prevail and Benjamin is left alone to wow the English legal world.

   Benjamin obviously deserves more credit than he gets from Confederate historians but his destruction of most of his papers have made studying him a difficult task. Eli Evans has taken on this task and has done a masterful job. This book is an even more spectacular achievement when one considers that Benjamin took deliberate steps to avoid having his biography written. Any student of the Confederacy needs a copy of this book in their library. Also, anyone interested in Jewish-American history will find this book a must read despite Benjamin's tendency to not practice his religion by among other things, having a smokehouse full of delicious hams.




3. Judah Phillip Benjamin was born in 1812; on the Virgin Island of St. John; whose jewish parents came to South Carolina when he was still a child. His mother was a costermonger and his father a 'neer-do-well' (or in reality do nothing well). But he had a thirst for knowledge that could not be surpressed even by the anti-semitism of southern nineteenth century america.
   
   Being a remarkable student he earns a scholarship to Yale at sixteen. But he leaves school after two years under a cloud of accusations that are never delineated. But Benjamin is determined to be some one and sets off for a new start in New Orleans where he trains as a lawyer. After becoming successful enough to marry into one of the upper-crust Creole (c atholic) families, he embarks on a career as a mercantile lawyer. He does well enough to build himself a plantation with 140 slaves. But after a finacial misstep looses everything and goes back to the practice of law.
   
   Making the 'right' connections he first enters the Louisiana legislature and then is elected a US Senator. (All this time he is away from his wife who is known to be unfaithful.) When he tries to bring his wife and daughter to Washington, it turns into a fiasco, and she goes off to Paris never to return. He develops into one of the finest orators in the Senate but cannot escape the anti-semitism of his day.
   
   When his home state secedes from the Union he leaves the Senate and goes to Montgomery (Confederacy's first capital) where because of his well known knowledge of Law, Jefferson Davis makes him his Attorney General.
   
   As part of Davis' cabinet he excells in administrative logistics, which leads to his being named Secretary of War. What! A Jew as SofW for the Confederacy? He becomes the whipping boy of every anti-semite both North and South. Undetered, Davis then makes him Secretary of State (because of his knowledge of international law and French) which he remains for the last three years of the War. During the War he does his best to entice both France (under Napoleon III) and Britain to recognize the South but to no avail. At the end of the war he makes a harrowing escape through the Bahamas and Havana to England.
   
   He arrives in England without the ability to practice law and with the US government on his tail (he is tangentially and circumstantially tied to the plot to kill Lincoln) as a Confederate Cabinet Minister. But the luck of his birth on an English possession, and his naturalization through his father, allow him to claim English citizenship and protection. After a short time (and with the help of sympathizers to the southern cause) he is admitted to the English Bar.
   
   He develops a mastery of english mercantile law, and with his background of French and American law from practicing in Louisiana, he develops one of the premier practices in his field in England. His book on mercantile law- Benjamin on Sales- becomes the standard in the field. In the end he passes his last few years in Paris with his wife and married daughter and is buried in Pere Lechaise.
   
   Evans does a masterful job of using the two other detailed biographies of Benjamin (written in 1905 and 1943) which included interviews with people who knew him in Louisiana, during the Civil War and in England. Benjamin though remains an enigma in that he burned all of his papers before he left Richmond at the end of the war; and kept few if any not related to business in London. Much of the detail for the Civil War comes from his correspondence afterwards with Varina Davis and others. It would seem that his only hold on 'being' jewish was one of 'culture' and a thirst for knowledge (but not necessarily accolades).



4. I cannot think of a single book that is more difficult to assess than "Judah P. Benjamin: The Jewish Confederate". On the one hand, it paints a vivid portrait of life in the antebellum South, as well as a grim chronicle of affairs in that region (political, military, and socioeconomic) during the Civil War. This is all a backdrop, however, to its intimate exploration into the life of one of the Confederacy's most complicated and fascinating subjects - Judah P. Benjamin, brilliant orator, United States Senator from Louisiana, Secretary of War and later of State for the CSA, oft-proclaimed "Brains of the Confederacy", and Jew. The primary events in Benjamin's life are of course covered, but more fascinatingly plumbed is the depths of his mind - Eli Evans seems concerned not merely with what Benjamin did, but with who he was, and what made him tick. All of this makes for fascinating reading, and even if one were to disagree with Evans's conclusions, it cannot be disputed that they are thought-provoking.
   The problem I have with this book, however, is the short shrift that it gives to the plight of African-Americans during this period. Evans does of course pay necessary homage to the slaves' condition, but one gets the sense that his interpretation of Southern history has several pounds of Margaret Mitchell and a teaspoon of Alex Haley. I am not accusing Evans of being a racist, mind you; I am merely saying that, in order to make his central figure more sympathetic, he glosses over the fact that both he and his compatriots were fighting for an inherently wicked cause. One can easily respect Judah Benjamin's achievements without downplaying the cause for which has talents served - he was, afterall, the first non-self hating Jew to serve in the United States Senate (the only Jew to serve before him, David Levy Yulee, was also a virulent anti-Semite), a spellbinding master of rhetoric, a brilliant wartime strategist, later guru of English law, and the only Confederate cabinet official with the chutzpah to propose a Confederate Emancipation Proclamation (as a means of giving them the moral high-ground in the war, and thus receive the support of either Britain or France). Evans doesn't do either Benjamin or himself any justice by not placing sufficient emphasis on the horrors of slavery; afterall, one could have given this book a great amount of depth by pointing out that Benjamin was (as Congressman Benjamin F. Wade once said to him) "an Israelite with Egyptian principles". Instead Evans chooses the safe approach - point out Benjamin's genius while de-emphasizing the great shortcoming of how that genius was used.
   Would I recommend this book? Yes. Do I think readers should then peruse a tome about the history of slavery in the pre-war South? Absolutely.



5. One of the previous reviews of this book begins with the statement that anyone familiar with the Civil War will know the name Judah Benjamin. Frankly, I doubt it. I'll wager that very few Northerners recognize the name. The eight reviews of this book are fascinating to read, and far shorter than the book itself. Note where the reviewers live; it's significant.
   
   Judah P. Benjamin had a fascinating "teflon" life - as a wealthy lawyer and a "macher" in very early Reformed Judaism, as a social climber in Louisiana creole circles, as a Senator and then as Jefferson Davis's one efficient and effective cabinet member, as a fugitive from the righteous victory of the North, and last as a supremely successful banker in England.
   
   Eli Evans has written a solid old-fashioned sympathetic biography of this brilliant man, whose contibution to the cause of secession was more significant than that of most Southron generals. It's not a deep biography, however, neither in its analysis of Benjamin's character nor its account of the Civil War. It will have, I think, great interest for two kinds of readers: serious Civil War buffs and serious students of the history of Jewish Americans.

No comments about Churchill (Grandes biografias series).

5 comments about Edith and Woodrow: The Wilson White House.

1. Checking the other customer (and editorial) reviews, I find that no one had the reaction I did - this is a very poorly written book on an interesting subject. Author Levin wears her agenda on her sleeve from Page One, repeatedly skews the narrative to her own purposes, and fails to footnote responsibly.
   What's more, her chronology is so haphazard, and she skips around so much, that the reader is never quite sure what year or country we're in at any given time, or what the heck is going on, or who said what to whom.
   Add a boatload of odd editorial boo-boos and you have a very disappointing book.



2. Being a fan of presidential biographies and after having read some books on both of the Wilsons, I was very excited to see what appeared to be a dual biography of the couple. Levin's book was dry and downright boring . It is a very interesting and debatable premise....whether Edith Wilson really "ran" the White House when Woodrow was incapacitated by stroke.
   My complaints are that the book was much more Woodrow than Edith and I am still not sure I feel like I buy Levin's theme that Edith was the first female president.
   I was surprised to learn just how incapacitated Wilson was and how little the country was aware of.
   This could have been a much better book.



3. There are several fundamental flaws in Ms. Levin's book. First and foremost, she sympathizes with Col. Edward House. Plain and simple House is not one to treat sympathetically. A critical biography of the Wilson family would point out that Col. House deliberately attempted to sabotage the President's great peace plans starting in late 1916 (a great friend and confidant). House (and Secretary of State Lansing) collaborated with the British assuring them that the President would eventually enter the war on the side of the allies. In reality, President Wilson had no desire to enter the war (even after the German's resumed unrestricted submarine warfare in February 1917). Wilson waited two long months to finally make the decision. Edith Wilson perspicaciously distrusted House from the beginning. Maybe it was a hunch, perhaps she saw through his rather obsequious personality, but she destroyed Woodrow's relationship with House. In fact, after January 1917, House no longer held a high position in the President's mind. In short, Mrs. Levin is highly critical of the Wilson's because they abandoned Col. House.

   Second, Mrs. Levin's assertion that Edith Wilson was the first female president is highly overstated. While she did control, along with Dr. Grayson and Secretary Tumulty, who and what the President saw she never made an important governmental decision. While Wilson was unable to appear in public he was able to read and perform limited duties of his office. Any scholar who has combed even the surface of Wilson's papers understands this. For an unbiased and complete review of Wilson in the months before and after his infamous stroke an interested reader should look at John Milton Cooper's "Breaking the Heart of the World." Cooper is the foremost living authority on Wilson.

   My point here is not to completely excoriate Mrs. Levin's book but to caution readers of its flaws. There are much better books on both President Wilson and the first lady: the mentioned book by Cooper, Arthur Link's "Woodrow Wilson and the Progressive Era," and John Cooper's dual biography of Wilson and Theodore Roosevelt, "The Warrior and the Priest." As a student of Wilson I am most disappointed by Levin's failure to observe Wilson's high moral purpose and the energy which he devoted to it (this is what eventually brought on the stroke).




4. I love biographies of historical figures but this one was a disappointment from the beginning...and a plodding read, to boot.
   
   All it really manages to confirm is that politics is a dirty business and that corruption & deception are part and parcel of it all. The more things change, unfortunately, the more they stay the same.
   
   As for Mrs. Wilson, she wouldn't be the only First Lady in history who was more of a WIFE than a politician!



5. I admired the author's thorough research, which uncovers Woodrow Wilson's character flaws, and the health issues (especially those prior to the debilitating stroke of October 1919) which were concealed from the American public. Edith Bolling Wilson is not flattered but I don't think the author assumes undue harshness in recounting her less than stellar actions on Wilson's behalf, after his stroke in October, 1919. There can be no question that Wilson should have been removed from office at that time, and his vice-president given the authority due to him, but Edith Wilson circumvented this and usurped this authority, with the assistance of Wilson's physician and private secretary. In point of fact, the author shows that Edith was far from acting in a Presidential capacity; the extensive work required of the office ground to a halt for approximately five months, while Wilson struggled to make even a limited recovery.
   
   The author's style is not 'sparkling', in the sense that her writing makes you turn the pages with great eagerness and enjoyment, but it is solidly written, and well researched. I also found many interesting parallels in the description of Wilson's election(s); the personalities involved in the conduct of WWI and the Versailles peace conference, with the current situation in Iraq; the personalities of the current administration and this November's election (although this book was published in 2001). I almost couldn't help but compare Edith Wilson's unreflective, somewhat narrow-minded and stubborn character with G.W. Bush...they seem to have a great deal in common!
   
   I enjoyed this book and will look for more from this author.

1 comments about The Greatest of Friends: Franklin D. Roosevelt and Winston Churchill 1941-1945.

1. A very good and readable book that details the friendship between two of the greatest leaders in the twentieth century. Both the President and the Prime Minister had huge egos, and were known to be difficult, but the friendship that developed between them helped the Allies win the war with Germany, Italy, and Japan. Many interesting stories of the personal lives of both Roosevelt and Churchill. The friendship that developed between these two great men helped in the post war world.

5 comments about Jefferson's Vendetta: The Pursuit of Aaron Burr and the Judiciary.

1. In the early nineteenth century, former Vice-President Aaron Burr -- the recent killer of Alexander Hamilton in a duel -- was up to something. Maybe it was an attempt to conquer Spanish Mexico and set up an American empire. Perhaps it was a plot to separate the western territories (and Kentucky) from the rest of the Union. Maybe it was both. Maybe it was neither, Historians still debate the matter. But whatever it was, it ended up with Burr on trial for treason, with Chief Justice John Marshall presiding over the trial (and President Thomas Jefferson a behind-the-scenes prosecutor). Burr was eventually acqutted (probably more for lack of specific evidence and creditable witnesses -- Burr's co-conspirators did not inspire confidence in their own integrity) but it was an extraordinarily dramatic event in the early American Republic. Wheelan tells it story well, although he is clearly not sympathetic to Jefferson. I regret to say that Wheelan's accuracy is made suspect by errors he makes: in the space of four pages Wheelan writes that James Wilkinson (the comanding general of the US Army and secretly a paid Spanish agent and the chief Government witness against Aaron Burr) had in 1775 accompanied Benedict Arnold in his famous march across the Maine wilderness to attack Canada (Wilkinson had actually been among the reinforcements reaching Arnold the next year) and also that Westchester County is in Connecticut (a statement that would amaze thousands of New York State taxpayers). But, overall I found Wheelan's account to be a gripping narrative about both conspiracy and trial.



2. I don't know why Mr. Wheelan has such a sore spot about Jefferson. I would just warn readers that if you read this book, make sure you read many other historical books about these same characters. If you happen to read this book, and have not read other material about these characters, you will come away with a slanted view about Thomas Jefferson, and the other historical characters in this book. There are so many writers who, for reasons of profit or ideology, have taken upon themselves the job of rewriting history to their own liking, or that of their publisher. This book has several historical mistakes, but the overall tone reminds me of some of our current extremists who take a one sided view about many issues. Jefferson was a flawed human being, that is clear to anyone who reads history. But to paint him in this light is unfair. Burr, on the other hand, was not a nice guy. He was the kind of man Bush would have been if he had lived during that time. Power hungry, instigating failed military missions, and willing to kill to get his way. Yes, that is harsh, but painfully true. Be wary of revisionist history. I give this book four stars for its inventiveness; it does have some entertainment value. Wheelan writes well, but perhaps he should switch to fiction and stop trying to turn Jefferson into someone he was not. Thomas Jefferson was a man who would not tolerate tyrants and insisted on civil liberty. Not perfect, but not the character created in Mr. Wheelan's book.



3. Every society has a moment in time where a decision affecting civil liberties has enormous repercussions. For example, laws giving the government power to curtail political assassinations were abused by Stalin and Hitler to consolidate their dictatorships. This book covers the issues and personalities involved in the courtroom battle over whether the United States would adopt the British doctrine of constructive treason in which merely thinking that it would be desirable to have the King killed would be sufficient grounds for capital punishment. Jefferson, who intensely disliked his former vice-president Burr, sought to press treason charges for an alleged plan to cause the western regions to sucede from the United States. Faced with shaky evidence, the prosecutors urged that the Constitution be interpreted to enable them to convict Burr on the basis of constructive treason. The book cogently describes the societal and personal issues at stake, and how Chief Justice Marshall navigated the intense political and judicial issues involved in the grand jury proceeding and trial. The author does an excellent job of setting the matter in its historical context and does so in a very readable style.



4. This is a part of history I had not studied before, and the same story is told in the earlier "The Jefferson Conspiracies" which continues on with the death of Meriwether Lewis and the rest of the career of General Wilkinson the really corrupt and treasonous person in both books. Both books are very readable, I found some of the points more clear in the other book. Both books feel Wilkinson betrayed Burr to hide his own involvement and would have killed him rather than see him go to trial. The second book speculates the same may have happened to Lewis as he was traveling East because he felt he was being framed in the same manner as Burr (thou in this case apparently competely innocent), and Wilkinson may have thought he was also going to provide evidence of his corrupt land deals.
   
   This book tries to portray Burr as an innocent, which is hard to believe. While it is clear with just 50 men on there way to live on land owned by Burr , no treasous armed uprising against the US or Spain had yet occurred, (rather than the thousands of armed men approaching New Orleans that Wilkinson claimed). But it seemed that both Wilkinson and Burr solicited British and others for help with attacking Spain with Burr to be King (not President) and perhaps to divide the western territory from the US so at least in todays standards treason had occurred. Back then the Federalist were considering withdrawing New England from the union as well and before it was made illegal (but only a high misdameanor) there were US forays into Spainish terrority Jefferson at least wanted Spain to worry about a rogue attack from the US,such thoughts were not unusual in those days.
   
   It is clear that Wilkinson was in Spain's payroll, and was traitous. Both books argue Jefferson shielded him by letting him have a phoney Court Marshall rather than an investigation by Congress. The one book claims it is to protect himself and his support of his star witness against Burr. The other for the national interest, from New England threatening to leave the Union and Britain invasion from Canada , the country could not stand for the distraction, plus Wilkinson's contacts with Spain made him useful with negotian about Florida and Mexico. He escaped conviction again in 1815, which even President Madison found troubling.



5. I've often come upon Burr's escapade in reading U.S. history, but I was never able to get a clear picture of what happened. This book is well researched and gives the details of what went on and the trial that resulted from Burr's adventure.
   
   The one question that "Vendetta" doesn't answer is why did Jefferson and Hamilton hate Burr with such a passion? Burr's character comes off as complex and not as crazy as history has made him out to be. Wheelan is obviously in Burr's corner and wants to present a more positive picture of him than historians have previously given him.
   
   If you want to dig deeper into American history then "Vendetta" is an excellent choice for you. Wheelan gives the reader more "color" of the day and keen insight into the way that our society thought at the time.

1 comments about Clementine Churchill: The Biography of a Marriage.

1. This biography gives great insight into the lives of the Churchills'.It was written by Mary Soames, the youngest child of Winston and Clementine Churchill. It was amazing to see the love and devotion Clementine and Winston had for each other. They were ever faithful letter companions from the start of their romantic and strong relationship. While reading the profound letters they wrote to each other you feel as if you were there with them, feeling every emotion they felt. This biography also includes great stories and antecdotes that will keep you laughing, crying, or shouting for joy for hours. The effects this biography has on you are numerous, but the strongest one would have to be one of awe. Their marriage is a marriage to look up to. They did have troubled times. Like, when Winston went to join in the action of World War I after his loss of the position of First Lord of the Admiralty. Or of the times before WWII when Winston was trying so hard to get people to listen to him about the danger and potency of Hitler and the Nazis. They stayed together in good times and in bad and in sickness and in health. They stayed together until the death of Winston. I highly recommend this book so that you can experience this wonderful and lasting marriage and all that comes along with it.

5 comments about The World of Christopher Marlowe.

1. I agree with the reader who says the book is often abstruse. The chapter on double-agenting had my eyes rolling and I was constantly looking back pages to see who's who. Add to this the fact that these Brits (or their elite) can be referred to by a seemingly endless list of tiles each (and, then, their names, as well) and that the minor functionaries and offices of government aren't on everyone's tongue and one often feels mired in the mud. I think this could have been alleviated with chapter introductions or summaries or just a more prudent handling of the proper nouns. Anyway, when I get to that point in any book, I just try to make sure I'm getting the main point and head thru at a trot.... Life is short, and there's so much to read!
   
   What I got that was positive from this book, and it was very positive indeed, was a sense of M's contribution to blank verse and the development of Elizabethan drama. I went to my shelves to look at some earlier stuff, and yeppir, there's Marlowe at the dividing line. This certainly gave me a whole new appreciation of him as a figure in English literature and has got me back to sampling some other Elizabethan writing, including his ,comparing and contrasting, which is a nice trip. Very interesting to see how these boy's classical education trained them to snap off large amounts of magnificent English poetry. (The last British governor of Chad remarked in the NYRB that he had zero training when assigned, but the underlying assumption of his superiors was that if you translate Latin poetry to Greek poetry ad lib you could surely run a country! I suppose history has dimmed that conceit, but as a liberal artser, I liked it anyway.)
   
   The historical/political background was already well known to me and as far as who might have or could have done this or that, I like my speculation with the facts.
   
   (The book is unfortunatly cheaply produced, though not more so than many, and and the illustrations are really muddy. A book can be handsomely done for $30. Check out, for instance, Who Murdered Chaucer - St. Martin's Press - for a sad contrast in book production, also a $30 dollar item.)



2. Christopher Marlowe, the Elizabethan poet and playwright, was one of the most talented members of his generation. He helped pioneer the use of blank verse in dramatic poetry and used it to produce five masterpieces while William Shakespeare--who was only two months younger than Marlowe--was still finding his dramatic footing. Who can say how great he might have become if he were not cut down (possibly on orders of the Queen, herself) at the age of 29.
   
   As a man, Marlowe was the "unShakespeare". Where Shakespeare was a prudent man who invested his money wisely and was careful not to offend authority, Marlowe was a risk-taker both in his personal life and in his plays. In an age where not toeing the official ine was punishable by death, Marlowe never met a line he was not tempted to cross. If this is what got him killed, it also makes him a fascinating person to read about.
   
   David Riggs weaves Marlowe's personal tragedy into an exciting volume that I found as hard to put down as any thriller. It is a book I can heartily recomend.



3. I enjoyed the history in this book, and not just about Marlowe's own past. Unlike other biographies I have read, this one sometimes gets off of Marlowe and looks at other factors which influence him, either directly or indirectly, and how they might have had an effect on his work as well as his life, right up to the end!



4. Apart from some very interesting and thoughtfull exegesis of Marlowe's works, it's no surprise that readers find David Riggs's account of the poet's life "abstruse" and confusing. This is unfortunate, because of all the poets of the English Literary Renaissance, we have more real information about Marlowe than any other. Yet, sadly, a story which should be as clear as glass in its implications for all the writers of the time has been so successfully muddled, first, purposely, by the government that brought him down and then by later biographers who, for some unknown reason, have consistently chosen to believe the government's disinformation campaign rather than their own common sense. Most at fault in this is Charles Nicholl, who, while providing the most important information on Marlowe's life and death in his book The Reckoning (1992), also ensured its misinterpretation due to his refusal to see (or at least to convey) the truth of what his own research so clearly revealed.
   
   Despite Nicholl's maunderings on how easily poets can become spies--a piece of nonsense that Riggs, who should know better, cheerfully supports--the fact is that there isn't a scintilla of evidence that Christopher Marlowe (or any great poet then or later) was ever a government spy. Was spying the only possible "service to her Majesty" that a budding poet might perform? Is there any objective evidence that Marlowe was in Flushing for purposes of spying? And why, when it comes down to a "he said--she said" on the subject of Marlowe's allegience, do the biographers choose to believe, not the great freethinking poet whose words have lived for centuries, but the reprehensible turncoat who was fingering him? Riggs may choose to throw in a question mark here and there, but the result is a colossal crazy quilt made up of scraps of truth, old lies, and centuries of misinterpretation, such that no ordinary reader could possibly sort out without help.
   
   Despite the obfuscation, the fact remains: Marlowe's only proven relationship with the three government agents who saw to his removal was as the victim of an elaborate sting, one conjured up by Robert Cecil as his entry into his father's world of Machiavellian politics . To see this, all that's needed is to know a little about history (both the history of the period and History in general), read the four plays that we can be certain were actually written by Marlowe, and consider what governments have always done to writers who were driven to tell it like it is, writers like Ovid, Cicero, Voltaire, Solzinitzen, Vaclav Hamel. The fundamental truth about Marlowe was expressed shortly after his death by his fellow writer, Tom Nashe: "His life he contemned in comparison of the liberty of free speech"--a simple truth simply told by someone who did know what he was talking about.



5. This is a scholarly book about the life and times of playwright Christopher Marlowe. It is not an entertaining easy read. I read about 20% of the book before giving up. It's erudite, but still comprehensible. It just wasn't that interesting to me.
   
   In the first 82 pages, I found maybe two pages worth of information about Marlowe as a person. In contrast, there are maybe 10 pages about the town he was born in and at least 40 pages about the educational system he grew up with.
   
   I would not recommend this book for those who read biographies for just for fun. Nor would I recommend it for someone who wants to read about famous gay people. The author concludes that he probably had little contact with women, so he was either celibate or had homosexual sex.
   
   I've read and enjoyed detailed biographies like this, when I have had a greater interest in the culture and times. For those readers, this is probably a great book.