5 comments about Catherine the Great: Love, Sex, and Power.

1. It's one of those surprises of history that one of Russia's most effective rulers was a woman, and not Russian at all. The Russian Empire after the death of Peter the Great in the early eighteenth century became a 'winner-take-all, free-for-all' between various descendants of his. By the time that the daughter of Peter, Elizabeth Petrovna, seized power and imprisoned the infant Ivan VI in a remote fortress, there were only two claimants to the Romanov crown left -- herself, and her nephew, a teenager named Peter. Clearly, the best solution to further palace coups and possible uprisings was to establish a clear line of succession.
   
   A bride must be found and as quickly as possible. A Roman Catholic would not be acceptable, but a German Protestant princess who would not mind converting to Russian Orthodoxy just might work. And for one princess in particular, Empress Elizabeth had a soft-spot in her heart. Once, Elizabeth had been engaged to a German prince, but when he had died, the marriage did not happen. This princeling, however, had a sister -- Johanna, who in turn married the prince of Anhalt-Zerbst, and she had a daughter who was just a year younger than Grand Duke Peter.
   
   Sophie Fredericka Auguste was a lively, intelligent teenager when she arrived in Russia with her mother for a closer look by the Empress. She wasn't exactly pretty, but she had a pair of beautiful dark blue eyes, a quick mind, and a willingness to please. Both the Empress and the Grand Duke liked what they saw, and after some careful negotiations, Sophie converted to Orthodoxy, and became Catherine Alexeyevna, and married Peter. The one problem was Johanna, who kept trying to steal the show from her daughter, dabbled in political machinations, and quite nearly ruined it all for her daughter before being returned to Germany.
   
   But married life wasn't that easy for young Catherine. Not only did she have to deal with Empress Elizabeth's whims and capricious nature, her husband Peter was less than ideal as a spouse. For one, he wasn't that eager to consummate the marriage, prefering to scrape away at his violin, and indulging his whims for playing with soldiers, both toy and real ones. Indeed, as years passed, Catherine found herself in a very unenviable state -- no heir, and an ever irritated Empress, along with a husband who cared nothing for her.
   
   There was really only one solution -- Catherine focused her mind on educating herself in politics and Russia, determined to become entirely Russian, and cutting off her homeland. She also used every scrap of charm and intelligence that she had, slowly gathering a coterie of supporters and finally managing to get her husband to make the marriage a reality. But that didn't mean the battle was over -- both of her infant children, Paul and Anna, were taken away from her and raised by Empress Elizabeth, and Grand Duke Peter started to consider divorcing Catherine. Finally, when Peter became Tsar, Catherine knew she had to act to save herself.
   
   How she took power for herself, and then managed to keep it despite attempted revolts, various pretenders, war with the Ottoman empire, and still managed to be an object of admiration for the time, well, that's what makes this biography so interesting to read. Rounding takes not a political, nor exactly a chronological, look at Catherine the Great's life, but a personal one. Using Catherine's own memoirs and letters, along with the contemporary accounts of those in her life, she gives a very personal look at a powerful woman, who wasn't afraid of taking very big bites of life.
   
   Her passions ranged from her lovers -- Gregory Orlov and Potemkin among them, to the arts -- the Hermitage, one of the most fabulous collections of art in the world, to the palaces of St. Petersburg and Tsarskoye Selo are mostly her creation and inspiration. But as well as her enjoyment of the arts, there was also a very ruthless side to the Empress. She may or may not have had a hand in the murder of her husband after his abdication -- how much Catherine was involved is still a question today, and she would discard a lover with a 'customary' present of land, serfs, and fine gifts, with the unspoken understanding that the affair was over.
   
   But throughout the story I also got to see some of the personality and vibrancy of Catherine II through her letters and descriptions of her life. One surprise was the relationship that she had with her son, who would become Tsar Paul -- while there isn't much of a maternal love there, she was genuinely interested in what he was doing, and never did seem to wish him hard. On the other hand, she took physical and emotional charge of his two eldest children, Alexander and Constantine, in much the same way that Empress Elizabeth had taken Paul away from her.
   
   Rounding's narrative is full of life and insight, and compared to most dusty and dry biographies, this one satisfies on several levels. I can happily recommend it for anyone interested in either Russian history, or how a woman in what was very much a man's world, managed to become one of its most powerful leaders. And yes, the horse myth is finally put to rest, and I hope, for good.
   
   As well as two inserts of colour photos, there are extensive notes, bibliographies, sources and index to help in further research. A genealogical chart helps to sort out the complicated relationships of the Russian rulers in the eighteenth century. The images are particularly fine in this one, and have several paintings that I have not seen reproduced elsewhere.
   
   Recommended.



2. This well-researched biography does a superb job at giving the reader a look into the world of Catherine the Great and what made her tick. Though she was born a minor German princess and didn't seem destined for much greatness or renown, she was lucky enough to have been in the right place at the right time and to become one of Russia's greatest and most beloved rulers. One of the things that endeared her to the people was her wholehearted embrace of all things Russian. Catherine wasn't anything like her husband Peter III; when she converted to Russian Orthodoxy, she really meant it, and became very devout and observant instead of merely going through the motions but remaining a Lutheran at heart, and she embraced Russia as her own land and the Russians as her own people, complete with quickly learning the language fluently. She was one of them and not just some foreign transplant.
   
   After taking power after the death of Peter's aunt Empress Elizabeth, Catherine lost no time in getting down to business. She had made powerful connections during her time as Grand Duchess, and now began using them in earnest. Besides having the support of the people and members of royal society, she was an educated intelligent woman and had been very much influenced by the ideas and people of the Enlightenment. It was clear from pretty much the outset that she was not merely going to be serving as Regent till her son Paul reached his majority. And during her reign, she saw Russia through outbreaks of bubonic plague, a flood, numerous wars, civil unrest, the beginnings of mass inoculation, many reforms of the legal, educational, social, and religious systems, an improvement in the quality of life for many Russians, and the shaping of Russia into a major world power, a player to be taken seriously on the world stage. She was also the last of Russia's great female rulers, as after her death her son Paul reinstituted the law of primogeniture, prohibiting a woman from ever again taking power.
   
   This book also cleared up some misinformation I had gotten over the years, though I had never believed that slanderous urban legend about Catherine being crushed to death by a horse she was copulating with; it's ridiculous that I had two teachers who told that story as though it were true. Catherine was an amazing inspiring woman, yet most people who aren't well-versed in Russian history usually remember only one thing about her; that's the type of urban legend that one isn't very likely to forget after having heard it. Ms. Rounding also shatters the urban legend about "Potemkin villages." I had also gotten the idea that Empress Elizabeth and Catherine were a lot closer than they actually were; far from Elizabeth mentoring Catherine and being one of her closest confidantes, she actually didn't get along too well with her on most occasions. This book also gives a more nuanced view of Peter III and Paul; while it's clear that Peter did have some screws loose, it seems as though he were more immature and unaware of the role that was expected of him than anything else. Now it seems more understandable why he acted the way he did, given how he was treated by his aunt Elizabeth and her court. As for Paul, it's probably for the better that he only became Tsar after his mother's death and then only served for 5 years before being murdered, but he was raised much like his (possible) father, and treated in much the same way even after he became an adult. No wonder he resented his mother and was such a weak person.
   
   My only complaint about the book is that it does start out kind of slow and even boring, what with so many unnecessary details, particularly about things like court ceremonies, balls, and carriage journeys. It becomes a lot more interesting and fast-paced after Catherine comes into her own and takes power. And it's great that the book focuses on her personal life instead of being bogged down in a lot of overly academic material, but it would have been nice had the portrait been balanced out by some more coverage and details of her policies, reforms, and Russian history in general. Still, this is a great biography for anyone interested in Russian history in general or Catherine in particular.



3. Finally, a biography of Catherine the Great that doesn't turn her in to the scarlet woman of the century, or the loose woman with the heart of gold. She is seen as a woman who tried to do what was best, didn't necessarily always succeed, but never gave up on herself or her adopted country. A very modern woman in a very un-modern time!



4. 
   Rounding must have poured over letters and diaries for years to produce this interesting work on the personal life of Catherine the Great. It's quite a story. Catherine's governing and military leadership are beyond the scope of the book. I would have liked more background than what was given, but the personal focus would have suffered.
   
   The highlights for me were the descriptions of her childhood and life as a young woman and wife. In this section Rounding gives the reader a lot of lot of guidance on the character of the young Catherine, her mother, her soon to be husband and the Empress Elizabeth.
   
   As the book progresses, Rounding reproduces an increasing number of paragraphs from original sources. In some cases this adds flavor. Catherine's text (p. 404) upon the death of her current favorite, Sasha Landskoy demonstrates far better than description could, Catherine's self-absorption. Other times, long quoted passages bog down the story. The quoting increases in the later parts of the book, and as a consequence, less guidance is given by the author.
   
   There is a lot of description of the pageantry, who wore what and what they ate. There are lavish parties and "alimony" settlements. I particularly liked the descriptions of how these and other royals traveled. The logistics must have been enormous.
   
   This is definitely a worthwhile book if you are interested in this period.



5. Empress Catherine II, usually referred to as Catherine the Great, was one of the most fascinating figures of power in Europe. Born Sophie Frederica Auguste of Anhalt-Zerbst in 1729, she was Empress of All the Russias from 1759 until her death in 1796.
   
   Ms Rounding has provided a biography of Catherine which, while it is based on the person, covers the history and politics as well.
   
   So, who was Catherine and how did a relatively minor princess who was not even Russian born become the longest reigning monarch in Russian imperial history?
   
   This is a fascinating study in power and politics as well as a personal journey through the life of one of the most intriguing women documented in history. Catherine herself was a complex character: a tireless legislator; a generous patron of philosophers (including men such as Denis Diderot and Voltaire); and an art collector (her systematic acquisition formed the basis of the great `Hermitage' collection). Catherine was a dutiful daughter, a domineering mother and an indulgent grandmother. Catherine was also a prodigious writer, and it is largely through her writings that Ms Rounding has compiled this biography.
   
   This book is not hagiographic. Although Ms Rounding is sympathetic to Catherine, she does not ignore the retinue of lovers, the intrigues and the rumours. If you are interested in this specific period of history, or in studies of female rulers, I recommend this book.
   
   Jennifer Cameron-Smith

No comments about Romanovs: Ruling Russia 1613-1917.

5 comments about Marie Antoinette: The Journey.

1. If you are looking for a good histoical book on Marie Antoinette, this is it! It is well written and provides plenty of historical facts. Fraser also manages to paint a rather sympathetic portrait of Marie Antoinette as a human rather than a royal, without blurring the lines of history vs. folklore.



2. Over halfway through in a just a few days. I love this book! I'm definitely looking into purchasing others by the author.



3. I really liked this book and finished it in record time--even though I knew how MA's story would end, it was fascinating to see that she was not entirely the arrogant and unapproachable Queen of lore. Yes, she made some mistakes and was extravagant at times, but certainly no more extravagant than previous Queens of France. Minimally any reader will say after reading this book that it is sad she was a Queen who did not pay more attention outside the walls of Versailles so that she might be less oblivious--but even then, I'm not sure she could have escaped her doomed fate.
   
   The treatment of the family during their captivity and particularly the treatment of their children is startling (not to mention the legendary treatment of the Princesse de Lamballe). In the end, I'm not sure what was worse--the royal family or the revolutionaries.



4. Hard to get into. The movie is better except the movie leaves out one of the children and I am sure alot more. Maybe onday I will be able to get into it.



5. I have read many books on the Dauphine over the years and this is one of the best.
   It covers in detail all of the daily life of a queen and the sacrifice she made by becoming a queen.
   It seems that the paparazzi today are angels compared to what the people of France and all of Europe did to their monarchs.
   The book is well researched, and well done and like all good books on her, this one doesnt speculate but clarifies the life of this often misunderstood young woman.
   I recommend it highly.
   But be warned - it is very detailed and there are tons of people to keep track of,
   Even so, it reads well and you never get bored with it.

5 comments about Shah of Shahs.

1. A documentary of the 27th regime collapse Kapuscinski has witnessed himself. This time it is the Shah of Iran in 1979.
   
   K. writes of a fear that creates a boundary for thinking; a thinking that involves only terms of basic materials:
   
   "The great thing about the concrete is that it has its own clearly demarcated armed frontiers with warning bells along them. When a mind immersed in the concrete begins to approach that border, the bells warn that just beyond lies the field of treacherous general ideas, undesirable reflections, and syntheses. At the sound of this signal the cautious mind recoils and drives back into the concrete" (Kapuscinski, 84).
   
   K. writes of a conversation he has with a Persian rug dealer:
   
   "It is all a question of taste, he tells me: The most inportant thing, sir, is to have taste. The world would look far different if a few more people had a drop more taste. In all horrors (for he does call them horrors), like lying, treachery, theft, and informing, he distinguishes a common denominator-such things are done by people with no taste" (Kapuscinski, 151).
   
   Americans should not glance over this book because it was published in 1979. Its themes of fear and control on the one hand, and decency and taste on the other hand, are very relevent to Americans in 2006.



2. The book is a montage of images from the Shah's reign and the revolution. A good little book for understanding why the Shah was who he was, and why he deserved his fate.
   
   Iran under the Shah was a totalitarian society. It was marked by indiscriminate terror, a single political party with membership mandatory for job advancement, a massive informant network, quotas for finding dissidents, an inefficient command economy driven by the Shah's oil money, and a total disregard for human rights.
   
   The only space the Shah didn't control was inside the Mosques. They became a refuge for people, and ultimately a base for revolution.
   
   I wonder how the Shah's fate influenced Saddam Hussein?



3. Everyone interested in understanding what is going on in Iraq, Iran and the rest of the middle east should read this book. It provides a
   succinct, informed history of rulers, dynasties, cultures, etc. that affect today's life in this area. A super read! The author literally immersed himself in these cultures at great risk in order to provide an accurate portrayal.



4. Kapuscinski writes persceptively about Iran before and during the Iranian revolution, based on his extended stay there during the period it occured. He combines factual reporting and his own impressions based on notes, tapes and photographs. It is particularly strong on the psychology of various players. He is a wonderful, direct writer. The rewarding 152 page book goes by in no time.



5. I read this book twice both in Persian & English and found lots of historical errors in the book such as claims that PM Mossadeq was democratically elected back in 1950s which is totally wrong. PM Mossadeq was APPOINTED as PM by the King of Iran, Shah Reza Pahlavi in 1950 and when ordered to quit, the Shah had to execute a UK-US backed coup against him.... Errors like that are enormous in this book.

5 comments about The Lost King of France: How DNA Solved the Mystery of the Murdered Son of Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette.

1. I enjoyed Deborah Cadbury's "The Lost King of France," although I would never recommend reading it at night, unless stories of small children being brutalized help one to sleep. Cadbury has a dry, logical style which makes her descriptions of the royal family's descent into hell all the more horrifying. I was perturbed when she stated that Fersen and Marie-Antoinette were probably lovers, without giving any evidence, especially when she was careful to give evidence for everything else. Also, on the cover of the book is most likely a picture of Louis-Joseph, not Louis-Charles (Louis XVII).
   
   Many say that the book proves beyond doubt the death of Louis XVII on June 8, 1795, but it does not. The DNA merely concluded that the desiccated heart which was allegedly removed from the little victim who died in the Temple was the child of a Habsburg princess. As anyone familiar with European history knows, Habsburg princesses were legion; many not having the last name of Habsburg, but having Habsburg genes. Although it is highly probable that Louis XVII did die in the Temple at age ten after horrendous sufferings, it should be recalled that Madame Royale herself had doubts about the fate of her brother, since she had not been allowed to identify the body.



2. Of all the human tragedy that marked the French Revolution, perhaps none was so acute as that experienced by the royal family. In this well-researched and engrossing book, Deborah Cadbury conveys the full measure of this tragedy in her description of the unspeakable horrors visited on the little Dauphin of France, Louis-Charles, son of Louis VXI and Marie-Antoinette. It is impossible to avoid that sick feeling in the pit of one's stomach as we read this harrowing tale, and it certainly helps explain why, to this day, many people can't bring themselves to believe that it was indeed Marie-Antoinette's "chou d'amour" who ended his days in so wretched a manner.
   Cadbury also does a fine job of recounting in a very readable manner the seemingly endless procession of pretenders that began to emerge shortly after the Terror, and keeps the reader in suspense until the final denouement.
   All in all, an excellent, moving book, not to be missed.



3. You read about how this little boy, who'd known only the best the world had to give, ended up in a sunless room, curled in a fetal position, full of puss and unable (or unwilling) to speak. This is a creepy tale that makes what happened to the son of the Tsar Alexander's son in 1917 (or there abouts...who knows for sure?) seem like a kind ending. It also gives you insight into his mother's execution and his sister's life.



4. This well written and compelling work of non-fiction recounts the political events that led up to the French Revolution and the tragedy that befell the royal family, Louis XVI, Marie Antoinette, and their two living children, the Louis-Charles and Marie-Therese. It gives insight into just how the royal family was treated after the revolutionists were in charge.
   
   The book details the terms of their imprisonment in Temple Tower. It is almost hard to believe the cruelty with which they were met. The heartbreak of the King and Queen is palpable as they realized what fate had in store for them. Moreover, their fear for the fate of their children must have been an incalculable agony, piercing the heart and soul of the King and Queen.
   
   While the indignities imposed upon the King and Queen were insufferable, once the royal couple met their fate at the guillotine, what was done to the now eight year old King Louis XVII was downright cruel and inhuman. Barbaric beyond belief, his treatment was nothing short of shocking. While his thirteen year old sister was also cruelly treated, her experience paled in comparison to that of her once happy and cherubic little brother.
   
   When Louis XVII was declared dead two years later, the fact that there was no marked grave sparked rumors that the he had escaped and was still among the living. Over the years, many came forward claiming to be the lost King of France. It was not until the twenty-first century that the mystery was laid to rest, thanks to DNA testing and a heart purported to be that of Louis XVII.
   
   This is a fascinating, well-researched book that will keep the reader turning the pages. Bravo!



5. I got this because I had read a book about Eleanor of Aquitaine. With all the different countries & the royal families I thought it would be interesting to read a little more. I had no interest in Marie Antointette, I thought she was a little overdone. I found the book about her son & vaguely remember hearing about the scandal in my High School French lessons. I read the book in about 2 days it was that captiavting. I thought I would have a hard time with the French names & places, but it seems like 2 years of French all those years ago stood me in good stead.
   This is a great book for someone who is looking to learn facts & resolutions from research, not someone looking to find idle gossip about a most noted royal.

5 comments about Princess Sultana's Circle (Princess Trilogy).

1. This book was not better then the first book in the series but definately beter then the 2nd one. I found the story boring at time as some issues that were already discussed in the fist book where discussed again in the 3rd book. Other then that it was a good continuation.



2. My review is the same as I gave for the book "Princess" It is very good



3. I highly recommend reading the Princess Trilogy. I had a hard time putting the book down. It's a really easy read.



4. This story is written simply but soon captivates the reader by taking them into the mysterious palace, heart and world of an Arabian princess. I was pleased to discover a well told story that gave me a light but unprotected look at Sultana's world and the culture of her nation. American women are generally aware that Middle Eastern women live under great restriction. What we don't see is how they live with it, feel about it, rationalize it or deal with it when it becomes too much. This book gave me a sense of understanding from a point of view other than my own very American one. I found myself understanding the weights that tug at the hearts and manners of these women. For American women, to defy is ordinary and not typically met with resistance. This story follows the fuel that ignited the courage to stand up to long standing injustice... no matter the cost. Admittedly, it was an easy read but it did it did offer some cultural education.



5. Excellent read . Makes me glad I am an Autralian able to live a free life. Could not put it down.

5 comments about Dreadnought.

1. It was the First World War - known at that time as "The Great War" which changed Britain and Europe forever. As the Generals on both sides sent millions and millions of men to their deaths in the carnage which they regarded as warfare, there came about a change in the psyche of the British male - a change which would herald a complete alteration in the way he thought and acted towards those of the upper, ruling classes. No longer would that British male be so quick to use such words as "M'Lord" or even "Sir." No longer would he doff his cap as a mark of respect, no longer would the ordinary police Constable be so quick to "arrest that man" just because a well dressed person had ordered him so to do.
   
   That change in British Society continues to this day and is easily traced back to the feelings of loss and despair which came with the realisation that far too many young men had died "at the front" - even though the war itself had been won and mainland Britain had escaped unscathed.
   
   In this epic tale, author Robert Massie delves deep into why that war occurred in the first place. Every single aspect of argument and behaviour on both sides (both military and political) is exposed and analysed. As the title of the book would suggest, the theme is the world's first great arms race. When Britain produced the first Dreadnought Battleship it rendered all other battleships obsolete at a stroke (including the remainder of the British Fleet!). From that moment onwards it was always a question of who could produce the most new Dreadnoughts in the quickest possible time. Set against this wish by both Britain and Germany to be seen as the world's supreme masters of the seas was a political intrigue which few have been able to commit to print in such a masterly fashion as is found in this book.
   
   In short, this is one of the greatest books of our time. It is also a damn fine read.
   
   NM



2. The book discusses a period in history when British power was at its height.
   However emergence of Germany as a great power disturbed the status quo.
   To exacerbate matters, Germany was ruled by a man who was abrasive,impetous,
   arrogant.Kaiser Wilhelm II wanted nothing but an exalted status for his nation
   under the sun. He advocated that Germany must have a colonial empire like Britain and
   a strong navy commensurate to her status. "Seize the trident",Kaiser said. This forms the background to the naval
   armament race between the two nations.
   
   Both incurred colossal expenditure in building Dreadnoughts. This was a super
   battle ship [huge,floating steel monster] capable of cruising at high speed and firing
   armor-piercing shell at a long- range.Thanks to wealth she could draw from colonies
   London was able to withstand the strain.
   
   Kaiser's scheme of things envisaged a subordinate role for Britain under renascent
   Germany which English pride,self-respect found hard to accept.As threat from across
   the North Sea mounted ,London was forced to end her splendid isolation .Between
   1904-1908 Britain became close with her former enemies : France,Russia.Europe was
   now divided into two hostile blocs: Triple Entente,Dual alliance. As tensions mounted
   Britain and Germany came closer to war :Agadir crisis in 1905.
   
   German army General Staff was crowded by Prussian militarists .These men had no
   qualms in violating in Belgian neutrality: the Schlieffen plan ,how Germany intend to
   wage war in the west.Further Berlin was served by an ally [Hapsburg -ruled,partially
   defunct Austro-Hungarian empire]which was very brash toward its neighbours.Under such circumstances sanity will never prevail.So the
   two like-minded powers fused to generate violence on an unprecedented scale.Sad,tragic
   incident in the Balkans, assassination of heir to the Hapsburg throne served as raison d'etre.
   
   My gripe about this book , the text in many areas contains details which has no relevance
   the subject making it exceptionally verbose. The book revolves too much around personalities.So I liked it only in patches.
   
   However the section dealing with Admiral John Fisher's life was interesting.Innovations he effected in naval firepower ,ship propulsion revolutionized
   war at sea. Also illuminating is author's elaboration of Admiral Alfred Von Tirpitz's
   `Risk Theory' and run down of events leading to the outbreak of great war.
   
   A reader requires abundant time, perseverance to wade through this tome.
   Indispensable read for history buffs.



3. Probably one of the best histories of the period yet produced and - as an important bonus - written in excellent English.



4. First of all -- you've got to have a real interest in the politics behind the First World War in order to complete this monster. There is some fascinating stuff here!!! The stories of Queen Victoria, Bismarck, the Kaiser, Admiral Fisher, and Winston Churchill were terrific. I give it four stars rather than five because the long narrative can be dry reading at times.
   
   Still, if you've read the well-known WWI books already, this is a great read. 'New' history from a unique perspective -- the Royal Navy.



5. This is perhaps the finest, most informative, and eminently readable book on history I have read in 50 years of exploring the subject. It is comprehensive and an indispensable book for those who wish to understand the dynamics of European and world history since the mid-19th century. Dr. M. H. Wilkinson

5 comments about The History of the Kings of Britain (Penguin Classics).

1. Geoffrey's "The History of the Kings of Britain" is an engaging book about the King's who ruled over Britain and the great deeds they accomplished. I will concentrate particularly on the tales concerning Uther Pendragon and Arthur, since these are the characters that, in one way or another, helped form the image of Arthur we relate to in today's society.
   The book is, for the most part, event driven. Geoffrey describes one battle after the next after the next. It is almost certain that he will name each and every important character just as he will explain what happens to them at one point or another. He takes great care in describing how the battles take place. You can be sure he will never miss a name. Although these and other little details about battles and events are interseting, they do not make up for the lack of insight into the characters lives, especially Arthur's.
   Throughout the novel it is possible to get a feeling that Geoffrey continues to try and convince us that Arthur is the noblest and most generous of men. Arthur's actions, however, don't always seem to be so. Was his generosity true at heart, or was it a form of subtle bribery to keep his people's and allies favor? Why was Arthur so eager to enter battle, one after another, despite losing so many of his mens lives? Geoffrey does a good job of "telling" us of Arthur's greatness, but does a poor job of "showing" it.
   Despite these minor flaws, The History of the Kings of Britain is, if not historically acurate, at least entertaining. The constant battles, change of events and the casual appearance of supernatural powers gives the book that old, medieval feel. As for the text, it is not difficult to understand. Some effort is required to completly comprehend the events taking place, but it's nothing too time consuming. Personally, I enjoyed the book and would recommend it to anyone who enjoys reading about conquest, battles and anything relating to King Arthur.



2. In The History of the Kings of Britain, Geoffrey of Monmouth presents a detailed history of the Britons, beginning with Brutus in the twelfth century B.C. and ending with Saxon invasion in the seventh century A.D. Through the main characters of his book, Brutus, Belinus and Arthur, Geoffrey illustrates Britain's glorious past, recalling the events in chronological sequence and providing detailed descriptions of every event, especially those strategic to the building of Britain.
   While Geoffrey's source has yet to be proved, in his own introduction, Geoffrey claims to follow a reliable and ancient source given to him by a friend. The lack of evidence to support this claim, coupled with the supernatural elements incorporated into The History of the Kings of Britain, makes it difficult for the modern reader to place complete trust in the text as a historical account of Britain's history. The text is, however, rich in historical value as from his writing, one can deduce much about the political structure of Britain in that time frame, as well as the sociological makeup of the nation. The emphasis on politics, war and international relations, form a rough picture of Britain's power system, and the lengthy stories revolving around his characters give the reader insight on the lives of the British nobility.
   The History of the Kings of Britain deserves as much credit (if not more) for its literary value as its historical one. While Geoffrey considers himself a historian, his artistic talents, fluency and extensive use of vocabulary bring his accounts to life, turning the text into an enjoyable literary piece. Especially in key passages (in particular those concerning Arthur), Geoffrey makes very fine and detailed points, often narrating livelily.
   Lastly, Geoffrey writes "to be read by the solitary reader, not to be declaimed aloud...recital." While unable to resist the temptation to exalt certain characters he favor, Geoffrey is sensitive to leave much room for the reader's imagination. The experience of reading Geoffrey includes filling in the gaps in his stories with speculations of your own, giving every reader a personal "version" of the book.
   The History of the Kings of Britain is both an acclaimed literary piece and a famous historical account. The richness of its text lies in the careful description of the events, and the accessible style of writing. A marvelous attempt at introducing Britain's early history, the History of the Kings of Britain also provides one of the greatest accounts of the Arthurian legend.



3. I'm not sure why another reviewer asserts that "this is not a translation of the Latin HRB." Thorpe is translating the Latin Historia Regum Britanniae from the Cambridge MS. 1706 (see p. 34 of Thorpe's intro).
   
   Geoffrey composed the History of the Kings of Britain ca. 1136-38. It is a medieval chronicle, and it adheres to the standards of historiography of the time. While it does not provide the kind of coherent reading experience one might expect from a modern novel, it does offer early versions of what will become familiar tales. Most Arthurian courses (including mine) begin with excerpts from this book--which places the figure of Arthur and his prototypes somewhere in the twilight between Late Antique history and medieval romantic legend. Later vernacular versions of the HRB will be Layamon's Brut (in early Middle English) and Wace's Roman de Brut (in Anglo-Norman French).
   
   Geoffrey was probably Welsh, and some believe that he writes the HRB to please the Norman ascendancy as they have defeated the Anglo-Saxons (the old enemy of the Welsh) a few generations earlier.



4. I had to read some parts of this book for class and there were times when I was so confused by the writing that I had to reread parts three or four times. At other times I had no problem understanding what was going on. Overall, it is an enjoyable read if you are interested in how biographies were written in the middle ages and if you don't take every word seriously since the author wasn't very faithful to history.



5. With details of troop deployments and excerpts from speeches kings deliver to their men before battle, it becomes obvious it is unlikely that the details are historically accurate. Little time is spent discussing personal relationships; most of the stories revolve around battle. The book is easy reading for the most part. Some of the details offered before any given battle are hard to understand, but they rarely have a significant impact on the course of the plot. The price is more than fair, considering the volume of the book itself and the multitude of fantastic stories. Despite the fact that the work cannot be considered a true source of history, there is still a great deal of educational value.

5 comments about Caesar: Life of a Colossus.

1. Ever since the great German historian Theodor Mommsen portrayed Caius Julius Caesar as Rome's "perfect man," the dictator has been the subject of many biographies. There are some excellent scholarly materials on the general, such as Mattias Gelzer's translated Caesar: Politician and Statesman and Christian Meier's Caesar. Some more contemporary biographies geared toward the layperson, such as The Education of Julius Caesar by Arthur Kahn and The Assassination of Julius Caesar by Michael Parenti, present the general as a popular reformer. With Caesar: Life of a Colossus by Adrian Keith Goldsworthy, an excellent combination of the scholarly and popular is presented.
   
   In Caesar: Life of a Colossus , Mr. Goldsworthy explains technical and historical terms concisely and comprehensively. (There is also a glossary included.) Detailed endnotes and a thorough bibliography are included. The author's writing style is both lively and engaging. Although sympathetic to Caesar, Mr. Goldsworthy is objective, both with the general and his adversaries. He portrays both Caesar and Rome in the late Republic in a vivid and understandable manner.
   
   Two interesting aspects that Mr. Goldsworthy ponders are Caesar's view on religious matters and the impact that the general's personal life had on political events. Our historical resources are meager on these two subjects, so Mr. Goldsworthy makes some educated guesses. Caesar was Pontifex Maximus , though some of the ancient sources and modern historians portray the dictator as a skeptic. Still, Mr. Goldsworthy speculates on how religion impacted Caesar's life and actions. For the scholar, Stefan Weinstock's Divus Julius presents the official political-religious aspects of Caesar's reign, as well as his successors' contribution to the cult of Caesar.
   There is also some discussion on the role that Caesar's family played in his formation, particularly the women in his life, such as his mother Aurelia and his daughter Julia. Again, the primary sources are limited, but the author tries to piece together the familial relationships.



2. As a non-professional reviewer, I'll just give a few comments. This book gives a wonderful picture of a fascinating man. As is often the case with a good historical biography, the book also provides a revealing insight into the subject's society, the late Roman Republic, and the amazing, alien, and yet very human characters that played a part in forming it. The book is, furthermore, a joy to read - well written, detailed without being overwhelming, and full of interesting stories. Highly recommended.



3. This is a good book, though it lacks a little organization. It's linear and accumulative. The story is not that well broken down into smaller issues like different size pieces of a puzzle, rather it's more like an accumulation of identical logs or bricks that amount to the thick book we have here. Facts and dates just follow each other in sequence. The truth is the author has enough talent to not get too messy, though at times it is monotonous. A clearer structure and less blurry lines between issues, dates and locations could have helped. If you want to go back and find the exact page where a certain issue is dealt with, it is going to be hard.
   
   Looks like a lot of cons but overall the book is readable thanks to its almost popular style, modern students friendly.
   
   A note that meant a lot to me as a Spaniard, and that I can't help mentioning: "In 92 BC an edict closed down schools teaching rhetoric Latin, stating that instruction in Greek was superior, even for teaching a man to make speeches in Latin (...) this measure was in part intended to prevent the oratorical skills useful in public life from becoming too common, for such schools were not likely to have taken pupils from those families outside the Senate (...) so this continued the emphasis on what would be useful rather than on acquiring purely academic learning." This reminded me of the banning of the Spanish language in schools in Cataluña (Spain) for the partisan interests of the entrenched nazionalist class; a class that lives on well-paid government jobs and subsidies and is throwing overboard a whole cultural legacy that belongs to a larger community than their own clan.
   
   A whole lot we still have to learn from history (and from books like this one), from Roman history specifically. Treat yourself and take sides between Cato and Caesar. But try to understand the other side too.



4. This is a book I would recommend to anyone with some curiousity about "how Rome worked"...provided the reader has a strong mental filter to separate fact from fiction. It is readable, and the author's English is delightful, in the sense that there is something of the turn of the Century (19th-to-20th - not 20th-to-21st) elegance in it. The focus is perhaps more on the "workings of Rome" than on Caesar's most important years affecting Rome - the author is a bit too shy to appear to "endorse a Dictator". And, this is the weakness of the book. It is somewhat like historical works published in the Soviet era in the Soviet Union or one of its satellites. (Yevgeniy Tarlé's works on Napolean and Talleyrand come to mind [ Bonaparte, ]. Superb history, but Tarlé, a Soviet author, must pay homage to dialectic materialism).. In this case the author cannot keep himself from paying homage to all the "important" concepts that make a British academic "politicaly acceptable". Why, oh why, do so many today contaminate their excellent work with the eager additions to show that their thinking, by they way, corresponds to what is required? In this respect, the Introduction is outright painful. Also, to be popular in the early 21st Century, we must write about sex, sex, sex... Of course, we are just speculating, and therefore to avoid any danger of being accused of mixing history with fiction, we put in some weasel-words when we have no sources... The reason why this otherwise excellent work does not get five stars is the author's self-demeaning with his eagerness to prove that he is Politically Correct.



5. Prior to this Caesar biography we essentially had Shakespeare's version and, in modern times, Meier's as respectively the popular and definitive versions of Caesar's life. This new biography reminds us once and for all that Shakespeare's play is a dramatic butchery. And it makes by comparison Meier's version read like a dry text book bereft of the dramatic juice and blood that were in fact Caesar's life. As a coincidental aside, Goldsworthy lives up to his name as a biographical historian. It requires a master of both genres to weave together the complex political machinations and upheavals, ethnic infighting, cultural norms, economic compulsions, military dispositions, and personal ambitions in Caesar's Rome that helped form who he was as, ultimately, a man. As a fairly knowledgeable fan of Julius Caesar the historical figure I found this book enlightening. As a fan of Caesar the man, I found it completely enjoyable.

5 comments about Sex with Kings: 500 Years of Adultery, Power, Rivalry, and Revenge (P.S.).

1. My mom gave me this book and told me I had to read it. I did, even though it's not a subject I've really been that interested in. Imagine my surprise, I was so engrossed in this book, I finished it in a few days. I found the interaction of kings, queens, mistresses, and everyone else just fascinating and very surprising. I'd reccommend this for someone who doesn't have a huge interest in royal history, it will entertain you just the same.



2. I was very excited to pick up Sex with Kings as a juicy read. It was definitely juicy, and the subject matter was extremely interesting, but Ms. Herman's writing style was redundant and torturous. The chapters are thematic, so you will cover more or less the same king's mistresses in each chapter, again and again and again. I would rather have read this as short biographical sketches of most of these women. The book feels very disjointed to me, but like I said, the material is extremely interesting. I just wish it had been presented better.



3. I couldn't wait to read this book, but when I saw the photo of the author in a costume, I started to worry. Very interesting subject material, but the organization made me crazy - people kept jumping back and forth in time, I felt as if I were reading the same story over and over again. And yes, some of the stories were fascinating, but the book seemed like an overlong magazine article. Very disappointing.



4. this author make history something you want to read.i can't wait for her next book.



5. one of the funniest and most interesting books i have ever read. i would highly recommend this book. think of it as a sassy history of monarchs.