5 comments about The Yamato Dynasty: The Secret History of Japan's Imperial Family.

1. The Seagraves' outstanding works on Japan (The Yamato Dynasty, Gold Warriors) have not only attracted hit and run reviews, but the Seagraves themselves have endured personal wire-taps and death threats for their trouble.
   
   When does a supposedly poorly researched book result in death threats? (See The Rape of Nanking, by the late Iris Chang; Dark Alliance, by the late Gary Webb, etc.) Is The Yamato Dynasty a book that no library should buy? Maybe it's simply one that the public simply must not read.
   
   It's required reading, in fact, for anyone interested in how the one-party Japanese state came into being, perpetually mired by corruption, incompetence, and cronyism; how more than a dozen Asian countries were looted by Japan from 1895 to 1945; how upon learning of the immense treasure from OSS/CIA uber-spook Edward Geary Lansdale, President Truman decided to keep the matter secret. Rather than returning the money to improverished nations as partial war reparation for years of genocide, torture, and slave labor, instead Truman, MacArthur and Co. created a bottomless, covert political action slush-fund. Yes, every U.S. president since Truman is implicated in this documented and verifiable cover-up. Marginalizing this fact as fodder for "conspiracy buffs" misses the point, and helps perpetuate the fraud.
   
   Specifically, YD traces the confluence of interests among Japanese corporate cartels, the royal family, the court, and Genro (ministers and handlers) from the Meiji period through the end of the Pacific war. Although a handful of militarist war-criminals took the fall for Hirohito and the sponsors of the Heavenly Throne (Mitsubishi, Mitsui, Sumitomo and Yasuda, as well as newcomer Nissan), the Seagraves show in stark relief the nature and background of today's inept and unapologizing LDP-controlled Japanese government, and its support and collusion from covert elements among America's government and far-right.



2. I though I knew a lot about Japan, Hirohito, and WWII, but this book was full of eye-opening surprises and behind the scenes details I had not come across before.
   
   Atrocities are common in war time. Invaders, conquerers, and even liberators, almost always steal the treasure of the vanquished. The US took tons of Nazi gold and made no effort to give any of it back from the victims. So, we should not be surprised the US also partnered with Japan, to help Hirohito off the hook, and for a big share of the stolen loot: Billions of dollars in gold, diamonds...
   
   Want to understand Japan's economic miracle? Where did they get the cash?
   
   Want to better understand why that coward MacArthur (yea yeah, I know, he supposed to be a hero) conspired to let so many Japanese war criminals escape punishment?
   
   Read this book.



3. This book blames Gen. Douglas MacArthur for failing to reconstruct Japan during the occupation. According to the authors, Herbert Hoover and officials from J. P. Morgan & Co. prevailed on MacArthur to co-opt prosecution of war criminals and Japanese industrialists because Morgan & Co. wanted Japan to repay its pre-war loans. In return, MacArthur was to have financial backing for a run at the Presidency. The author accounts for the Emperor's rehabilitation on similar gounds and accuses the Imperial family of profiting from the looting of China, Souheast Asia and other territories occupied by Japan during the Pacific war. He attributes the speed of Japan's post-war recovery to the availability of looted assets for recapitalization. He provides an extensive narrative on the history of Japan's Imperial dynasties. And they explain why Japan has never fully compensated its victims for war crimes. This book will change your opinion about the way Japan, Inc. does business and is essential for that reason alone. It's an easy read in a style that belies its gravitas. And it will make you wonder where disinformation is coming from, from the author or his critics, and why.



4. A partir de mes nombreuses conversations entre 1980 et 1990 avec Kuniko TSUTSUMI fille de Yasujiro TSUTSUMI, avec laquelle je vivais à cette époque, tout ce qui concerne les relations de la famille impériale avec les Tsutsumi et le groupe SEIBU, tel que c'est relaté par cet ouvrage est exact.



5. Many argue certain "truths" as you call them. The truths deemed so by personal prejudice and slant? For who did you choose to believe?
   
   It is true that Hirohito was rescued from a War Criminal Fate, which he more than justly deserved. By who?????
   It is true that "truths", records, are extremely scarce from that particular part of WWII, because the 'innocent' Hirohito knew to tell his fellow murderers to destroy them before anyone could get to them.
   Is is true that the real "truths" there are the true flesh and blood survivors.
   It is true that all citizens of the Dutch East Indies were, not only physically tormented, but their possessions plundered, including their bank accounts, and jewelry. And it wasn't 14k junk.
   It is true that they have asked, and no one cares, all these years, what happened to those things.
   It is true that there are a group of American South East Asia POW's who are called "The Bataan Bastards".
   It is true that they are called that because they were, and still are, abandoned. And I bet that when they are all gone (on), there will be those who argue whether they told the truth.
   It is true that they too ask, "When are we going to be compensated?"
   With all these truths, and many more left out, why should I wonder for one moment, whether a person capable of known, and unknown, atrocities isn't also capable of wearing the 'wrong' uniform for some other sick reason.
   Anyway, a crime(s) is committed and it has, and is, poo-pood away.
   Those who can hear did hear already, and those who don't, well......

5 comments about Kaiser Wilhelm II: Germany's Last Emperor.

1. The author of this book accuses Michael Balfour in his biography of Wilhelm II of being "sympathetic" to his subject. This book is not. I found the book fun to read, tho it is not well footnoted and its bibliography is not a first-rate one, in my view. I suspect there are better biographies of Wilhelm II than this one. I read Balfour's The Kaiser and His Times, but I was not overly impressed by it, either. Does anyone know what is the best biography of Wilhelm II?



2. This is a short biography of Germany's Last Emperor, William II.
   As stated previously, it is short and a summary of his life.
   The story includes his own downfall, leading Germany to the
   Weimar Republic and then Nazi Germany.

   The book does its best work in describing William's early life,
   and his frosty relations with his English mother and relatives.
   This led to alienation from the English royalty and prevented
   Germany from forming an alliance with Great Britain, and a more
   liberalized regime in Germany.

   The book describes William's views on Jews, French, Russia, and
   Great Britain. This was not a positive side to his personality.
   Also detailed is his relationship to his mother, wife, and various mistresses, with a possible homosexual relationship with
   his best friend. The author does not go into detail into this
   last aspect, because there is not much evidence. His choice of
   people to lead his Empire resulted in the First World War.




3. As with several figures in history, readers either like them or hate them. The middle of the road is less traveled. Kaiser Wilhelm is one of those characters. John Van Der Kiste tells a concise tale of the last Kaiser's life which tends to have an apologetic tone to it. Van Der Kiste hits the highlights of the Kaiser's life from his early life to the end of the First World War. In situations where the Kaiser made a mistake of failed to stand up for himself (to Bismarck and later to Hindenburg and Ludendorff) he points out what went wrong and often explains to his deformity or troubled childhood. Van Der Kiste does not overly praise Wilhelm but is not as hard on him as other biographers or historians. The reader is left feeling sorry for Wilhelm instead of hating him, which was probably the author's intent.
   
   Van Der Kiste's book is concise and as another reviewer stated, more in-depth works exist for a better understanding. This book is a good introduction to the last Kaiser.



4. This is a great summary of Germany's last emperor who was generally credited for being the cause of the first world war. "It is not by his will that he will ujnleash a war, but by his weakness," said King Edward VII about his vacillating weak-minded nephew. Using fluid language with just enough personal details, Van der Kiste provides a compelling and full portrait of this complicated and, in so many ways, unlikeable man, illuminating him as someone ultimately you could pity. A fast read for non-fiction with fascinating and thought-provoking insight into both private and political man.



5. the author does a great job of showing the true charcter of a man who treated his family and country horrible.they hateful treatment of his parents show how cruel a person he was.he say his wife as a broodmare nothing else.he didn't have a relationship with his childern.he only order them like his private army.his unstable personality lead world to war.when his uncle edward viii call him a fantisic failure he was so right.

No comments about The French Nobility in the Eighteenth Century: Reassessments And New Approaches.

No comments about The Definitive Diana: An Intimate Look at the Princess of Wales from A to Z.

1 comments about Melbourne.

1. Listed as number 100 in Modern Library's list of best non-fiction books, this volume consists of Young Melbourne written in 1939 and Lord M published in 1954. It is political biography that manages to let the reader get fully involved with the person before he becomes a public figure. Lord Melbourne is just as interesting as romantic hero, whose wife flirts with both Lord Byron and bouts of madness, as he is as leader of the British Empire. Through the pages of Young Melbourne, it is difficult to imagine his almost accidental rise to power. Melbourne's final transitions to mentor of young Queen Victoria and forgotten political relic are covered with both sympathy to the character and enough detachment to maintain authorial objectivity.
   
   With an elegant style, Lord David reveals Melbournes "starved heart" and his curious character. In a day of absurdly packaged public figures, Melbourne is striking in his enduring individuality and idiosyncrasy.
   
   I would give a 4 plus rating for lovers of pre-Victorian British history or political biography and a 3 for the general reader.

No comments about The Letters of Henry Adams, Volumes 4-6, 1892-1918 (v. 4-6).

5 comments about The Search for Cleopatra.

1. I think that some of the reviews have missed the point for this book. The real controversy is not Cleopatra's ethnicity, because we have documentation on this that dates to her era. She was a Ptolemy; therefore of Macedonian descent. Study your ancient history and put forth a little effort into some research. From most accounts that I have read, all point to her being extremely proud of that Macedonian heritage. You in the 21st century, believe that you know more about this historical figure, than the writers of the first century. In this, you must agree with me that the information we have now, is inaccurate compared to the relatively recent information that they had. You cannot rewrite history.



2. Why do you care if Cleopatra was African or Caucasian or mixed? Does it matter? You should not be thinking about the colour of her skin, more about the things she accomplished in her life! I look at the reviews above, and all I see is raving controversy instead of reviews (I am not a hypocrite...) I found this book to be extremely interesting, and insightful into the life of a great queen. Anyone who is interested in the Queen of the Nile should take a moment to read this.



3. Whether or not Cleopatra would qualify as "black" by contemporary definitions (and unless we magically got a DNA sample, that possibility simply can't be ruled out, given the limited information about her antedecents), we can be sure of two things: first, that she was vilified as have most other powerful women throughout the ages; second, that she was despised by the Romans as representing an alien, "Oriental" culture. Foss writes well, and by judicious use of the limited source material he re-tells the epic tale of the Queen of the Nile. The main elements (Caesar, Antony, asp, etc.) are thanks to Shakespeare, famous; less well-known are the tortured politics of Hellenistic Egypt. Cleopatra's family, the Ptolemys (the Macedonian dynasty which inherited the pharoah's throne from Alexander the Great) would satisfy any modern definition of "dysfunctional." With their unique blend of habitual incest, infidelity, profligacy, fratricide, patricide, matricide and perennial regicide, it took a political genius just to survive in the Ptolemy family, and Foss infers from Cleopatra's relative longevity that she was just such a genius. Provided you can get your head around relationships like "wife-mother" and "uncle-husband," this is a great yarn.



4. I like the author's philosphy of history: in the first chapter of "The Search for Cleopatra," Foss writes that our picture of the past "is not some absolute of historical truth founded on a mountain of small certain facts." Rather, history "reveals itself in drama, passion, elemental conflict, emblematic events that become the basis for mythologies."

   Cleopatra was a fascinating character, a myth in life and death. She was more brilliant than beautiful, a consummate politican and a ruthless leader. She was the mistress of the two most powerful Roman leaders of her era, partly because she wanted her Ptolemaic dynasty to survive and partly because she seems to have been genuinely devoted to her two lovers.

   The "Search for Cleopatra" is not a biography as such. Rather, it tells the story of a pivotal time in which Cleopatra played a central role. Foss sketches all of the major protagonists--Julius Caesar, Marc Antony, Octavian and a host of lesser characters--against the background of the Roman civil wars and Cleopatra's skilled but ultimately unsuccessful attempt to come out on top in a very high stakes game.

   Was Cleopatra a cruel, calculating woman, a person who did not hesitate to execute her younger brother and sister in order to rule unchallenged? Or was she a loving mother, concerned about the welfare of her children and genuinely in love with Julius Caesar and Marc Antony? As with any complex character, the answer may be "both," and this well-written book does an excellent job of making a powerful woman and a dangerous time a bit more understandable to the modern reader.

   If you are interested in the life and times of Cleopatra, you might also want to pick up "Alexandria: City of the Western Mind" by Theodore Vrettos. Vrettos devotes a substantial part of his book to telling the story of Caesar, Antony and Cleopatra, but he also describes how Alexandria transmitted Greek culture to the modern world. Another interesting view of the subject is "Not by a Nose," an essay by Josiah Ober in "What If? 2," which ponders how the world might have been different if Antony and Cleopatra had defeated Octavian at the Battle of Actium.




5. Cleopatra would not qualify as "black" because she was not a "woman of color" as some falsely allege. She came from a Dynasty that intermarried with one another. Her ethnicity was Hellenic Macedonian. She and the Dynasty she belonged to spoke Greek. . If there was even a hint that her origins were anything but that of a Hellenic Dynasty who ruled over Egypt then the ancient Greek and Roman writers would have stated as such given they did so with other people who were of "mixed" origins. Plus Cleopatra's family are Greek descendants from Northern Greece and an ancient painting from Vergina, Greece depicts Ptolemy I Soter during a hunt as being fair in coloring. Some ancient writers even claim him the son of King Philip, making the Ptolemiac Dynasty descendants from the Hellenic Argead Dynasty of whom the Macedonian royal family claimed descendant from. Its only been in modern history that this myth about Cleopatra being "black or mixed race" came about. This theory originated in the 16th century - that is thousands of years and centuries after Cleopatra's death. Most writers who question her heritage are not even ancient writers or historians but modern revisionists. Cleopatra's paternal grandmother was Cleopatra IV, her paternal/maternal grandfather's(Ptolemy IX) sister. Cleopatra's maternal grandmother was Cleopatra Selena, again the sister of her paternal/maternal grandfather's(Ptolemy IX) AND the sister of her paternal grandmother(Cleopatar IV). Making Cleopatra's paternal grandmother(Cleopatar IV), maternal grandmother(Cleopatra Selena) and paternal/maternal grandfather(Ptolemy IX) all brother and sisters, in other words the brother had children with both of his sisters. The parents of Cleopatra VII's father were Ptolemy IX and Cleopatra IV and the parents of Cleopatra's mother were Ptolemy IX and Cleopatra Selena: making Cleopatra VII's parents both brother and sister and cousins all at the same time. This was a common practice among the Ptolemeis, marrying their sisters, bothers, cousins, aunts, uncles, parents. The Ptolemies were not liked by native Egyptians who they considered "foreigner rulers". In fact Cleopatra's father survived two assassination attempts, this was the reason why they kept to themselves and married amongst each other, they distrusted foreigners. Which why the likelihood of Cleopatra's grandmother being anyone outside the Ptolemaic family tree, ie. native Egyptian, Nubian, Hebrew or anything else is zero given the xenophobic views the Ptolemies.

2 comments about The Book of Government or Rules for Kings: The Siyar al Muluk or Siyasat-nama of Nizam al-Mulk.

1. The book is comparable with Machiavelli`s book The Prince,
   bye the exception it has short "stories" like the old testament.
   The stories tells of good and bad deeds and what a ruler shall do to govern a country. It`s in a way "The art of war" by Sun Tzu concerning foreign ambassadors and representatives. It`s in a way concealing the stat of the government and to welcome them in a proper way when he crosses the border of the country.
   It is very well chaperized and writen and i can see the Choran`s influenze since it was written around 1100 century.....in doing good deeds.....

   But it`s a little bit expensive, i would have given 5 stars ìf the price was lower.




2. Synopsis:
   Nizam-Al-Mulk drew up a set of protocols for the governance of the empire called the Siyasat Nameh under Malek Shah. After administering the affairs as a vizier for Malek Shah for some thirty years Nizam-Al-Mulk was overthrown and impeached after he had rashly declared that his cap and ink-horn, the badges of his office, were connected by divine decree with the throne and diadem of the Sultan.
   On Deliverance of Justice:
   Justice is the most important virtue, and Nizam al-Mulk recommended the king hold court on two days of the week to hear complaints personally and redress wrongs so that oppressors would curb their activities from fear of punishment. Tax collectors should take only the amount due and with civility. Officers should be investigated secretly and if impropriety is found, they should be removed from office and be replaced by the learned and pious.
   On Generosity:
   A ruler should be generous in his acts. nothing is better than generosity, and kindness, and hospitality. Any peasant in need of oxen or seed should be given a loan to keep him viable. The story is told of how Sultan Mahmud, afraid that he was not handsome, was advised by Ahmad Ibn Hasan to take gold as his enemy so that men will regard him as their friend. Mahmud then became generous and charitable, and the whole world adored him.
   On Knowledge and Wisdom:
   Luqman the Wise noted that knowledge is better than wealth, because you have to take care of wealth, but knowledge takes care of you. Nizam al-Mulk believed that sound judgment is better for a king than having a powerful army. Nizam al-Mulk believed it was the perfection of wisdom not to become angry at all; but if one does become angry, intelligence should prevail over wrath. The wise have said that patience is good, but it is even better during success. Knowledge is good, but it is even better with skill. Wealth is good, but it is even better with gratitude and enjoyment.
   On Armed Forces:
   Nizam recommended having different races among the troops so that they would compete with each other to excel. He described Alp-Tegin's rise to power from a slave and page of the Samanids to a commander. He punished a page for taking hay and a chicken from a peasant without paying for it as he ordered. This made other soldiers afraid, and the peasants were safe. His justice led the citizens of Ghaznain to take Alp-Tegin as their king. Because the Samanids tried to destroy the worthy Alp-Tegin, they declined and were overcome by Alp-Tegin and his successor Sebuk-Tegin, who founded the Ghaznavid empire.
   On Appointment of Ministers:
   He wrote that two appointments should not be given to one man nor should one position be given to more than one person. He complained that many worthy people remain unemployed when some persons are given several positions each. He lamented that it used to be that those hired followed the Hanafi or Shafi'i teachings and were from Khurasan or Transoxiana; but now Taj al-Mulk wants to economize by reducing 400,000 men on the pay-roll to 70,000 in order to fill the treasury with gold. Nizam argued that a larger empire required more employees and that even more men would enable them to govern India too.
   On Qualities of King
   He believed the Sasanians fell from power because they entrusted important affairs to petty and ignorant officers and because they hated learned people. Thus instead of having wise officers, Buzurjmihr said he had to deal with incapable officers. Buzurjmihr Bakhtgan advised the king to banish the bad qualities from himself, which he listed as "hatred, envy, pride, anger, lust, greed, desire, spite, mendacity, avarice, ill temper, cruelty, selfishness, hastiness, ingratitude, and frivolity."The good qualities he should exercise are "modesty, good temper, clemency, forgiveness, humility, generosity, truthfulness, patience, gratitude, mercy, knowledge, intelligence, and justice."
   Nizam cited the early caliph 'Umar's response to the last Sasanian king Yazdijurd Shahryar to show that the latter's empire was declining, because his court was crowded with complainers; his treasury was full of ill-gotten wealth; and his army was disobedient.
   Conclusion:
   Nizam told stories from history to show that a sick era replaces good times when a just king does away with evil-doers, has right judgments, and a vizier and officers of virtue; every task has the proper worker; heretics are put down, and the orthodox are raised up; tyrants are repressed; soldiers as well as peasants fear the king; the uneducated and base are not given positions; the inexperienced are not promoted; advice is sought from the intelligent and mature; men are selected for their skill, not because of their money; religion is not sold for worldly things; everything is ordered according to merit; thus all people have work according to their capability; and all things are regulated by justice and government by the grace of God.

5 comments about Becoming Victoria.

1. I was expecting a biography on Victoria's early life, but I would not classify this book as such. It was more a dissertation on how the child rearing practices of Georgian England ultimately affected the personality of the future Queen Victoria.

   You can tell after skimming just a few pages of this book that a huge amount of research went into it (there are more that 40 pages of footnotes and references), but I found it very difficult to read and even harder to follow. It concentrated almost exclusively on the mundane facts of how she lived, rather than on who she was. There are hundreds of detailed descriptions of the clothes she wore, the books she read, the food she ate, and the toys she played with. There were even more descriptions on how the people around her influenced the food she ate, the books she read, the toys she played etc, etc.

   So don't get this book if you are looking for a biography about Victoria's early life, but check it out from the library if you want to see some truly beautiful illustrations (some by Victoria's own hand) and some outstanding photographs.




2. This work was full of interesting facts, but was written more like a college text book. It paints a picture of a very charming child and gives the reader insight into the influences in Victoria's early life and the early formation of her character as she grew into the roll of Queen Mother. The facts are nice, the subject is great, but the text book feel is dull and dry.



3. Princesses have become an item of interest in the past few years. Possibly they always have been, but series such as The Royal Diaries--fictional diaries by true life princesses-- are filling library and bookstore shelves.

   In this aristocratic climate, Becoming Victoria by Lynne Vallone stands out. Becoming Victoria examines the girlhood/teenagehood of the young woman who became Queen Victoria and consequently, the enduring symbol of an era. Ms Vallone has undertaken the remarkable task of examining how Victoria was reared, comparing her upbringing to the upbringing of contemporaries (not princesses), chronicling Victoria's relationship with her mother and illustrating the gap between the portrayal of Victoria's youth, both at the time and retrospectively, and how Victoria herself truly felt and acted.

   The reader leaves this book convinced that truth is indeed stranger than fiction or at least as strange and as remarkable. Although Becoming Victoria is not necessarily geared towards teens (and is more expositive than books such as The Royal Diaries), the insight into a princess' curriculum, familial relationships, day-to-day activities should fascinate the readership that delves into Meg Cabot's The Princess Diaries and Gail Levine's The Princess Tales.

   Becoming Victoria ends, rather disappointingly, at Victoria's ascension to the throne. This is, however, in accordance with the task set by the author. Victoria the child and teenager is Ms Vallone's focus, and she ends once her subject passes into a different stage. Consequently, the reader's appetite is whet to do further study on a most fascinating woman and queen.

   Recommendation: The price is not too bad. It is a beautifully bound book and may be worth buying new. However, if your interest is in the content, not the appearance, try used.




4. I think the thing I found most interesting about this book was the total screwiness of Victoria's mother, the Dutchess of Kent. I admit that the Dutchess was in kind of a rough spot: She was raising a monarch after all, and yet wanted to raise her to within the standards of ladylike behaviour. Can't have her going around refering to herself with male terminology like Queen Elizabeth I did, y'know.

   But in the process, the thing the Dutchess seemed to always have her eye on was the possibility of a Regency. She *wanted* to be Regent. How screwed up do you have to be to *want* to be Regent? All the responsibility, none of the adoring crowds. Yuck!

   So she was torn between the necessity of producing in Victoria a princess who could eventually take the throne (because if she failed in providing an appropriate education and upbringing the King had made it pretty clear that he *would* ensure Victoria received same, even if it meant removing her from her mother's tender care) while wanting to keep her daughter from being *able* to take the throne at 18 (there was a possibility of a regency until she reached 21), all the while hoping that King George would hurry up and die already. Which may in part be the author's spin on things, but the good Dutchess did *repeatedly* write about the possibility of a regency until Victoria was 21 even *after* Victoria was declared competent to take the throne when she reached majority at 18 (said declaration taking place several years ahead of time), which kind of points to having some serious hopes caught up in that regency.

   Victoria herself just seems like a kid caught in the middle and kept from having much fun. She got to read a lot of "improving" books, which are those sort of kids books that beat you over the head with the idea that you should always do what Mommy tells you and never, ever, talk to strangers and aren't a lot of fun, and the rest of her childhood really does fit with that choice in reading material.




5. her father died when she was a baby ,her mother was determine to keep her to herself by controling her ever move and thought.she even had victoria sleep ing everynight in her bedroom.victoria didn't get any freedom until becoming queen.

No comments about Diana on the Edge: Inside the Mind of the Princess of Wales (Diana Princess of Wales).