5 comments about Richard II (The English Monarchs Series).

1. Richard II has been a controversial figure from his deposition from the English throne in 1399 to our own day. Like his later fifteenth-century namesake Richard III, interpretations of him and of his motives have varied widely, and were dominated for much of the twentieth century both by Shakespeare's play and by the image of the mad autocrat first painted by Anthony Steel in his "Richard II" (1941). Now Professor Nigel Saul has given us what will deservedly be the standard life for at least the next half-century. This work, first published three years ago, forms part of an outstanding series of lives of the English kings, and is every bit the equal of the best of them, from Warren's "Henry II" (1973) to Barlow's "William Rufus" (1983). Saul presents Richard as a man thrust, at the tender age of ten, into an office and a domestic and international situation which he could not fully grasp, and forced to do the impossible: fill the gargantuan shoes of both his grandfather, Edward III, and his father, the outstanding warrior Edward the Black Prince. The uncertainty of Anglo-French relations during this stage of the Hundred Years War, and the expectations of Richard's magnates and subjects - that he would be a military leader and vigorous defender of the English position in France like his predecessors - bedeviled the king during his minority and placed constraints upon his behavior which he found unbearable. Saul examines the entire context of Richard's reign and the forces at work in his world, from Richard's peace overtures to the French (which were opposed by his magnates as insulting to English "national" honor) to his support of unpopular court favorites, and even to the king's religious attitudes (traditional in a time of growing discontent with the Papacy and the Catholic Church). He thus gives us a complete structure to support the fascinating final chapters of the book. It is here, just as in any finely crafted piece of literature, that we see all the strands of Richard's life and character woven together with what, for him, was a terrible finality: his revenge against those, including members of his own family, who had insulted and demeaned him in his youth, his growing paranoia, and his assault on the property rights of his magnates, rights which were a cornerstone of the late medieval English state. The result, as Saul rightly puts it, was a "terrible denouement" in which Richard, showing a tragic lack of judgement (as he had so often done), lost his throne to his cousin Henry Bolingbroke. Saul's final view of Richard as psychologically disturbed, but understandably so, is well supported by evidence and is very plausible. The book has no major weaknesses and few minor ones, and will provide a thorough understanding not only of Richard II, but of power and its limitations in late medieval England.



2. Richard II was a fascinating and enigmatic character, whose reign was marked by his being dethroned not once, but essentially twice. This in addition to Richard's being faced with that oddity, a nearly successful popular uprising. Thse two losses of power constitute about as disastrous a pattern as any ruler can produce. What the sources of the turmoil were and why Richard was so spectacularly unsuccessful at dealing with them should make for an absorbing tale. Unfortunately, Nigel Saul is good neither at telling the events of the reign nor in laying out the nature of Richard's character.

   It may be no easy task to build up a character on the basis of the fragmentary and often very dry records left by medieval English society. However, as some fine volumes in this series illustrate, this task can be accomplished with aplomb, even by authors working with even weaker material than Saul has and with a less gripping tale that they might tell. Saul falls into a number of traps. The most blatant of these is his repeated failure to distinguish trivia from significant facts. He also fails to distinguish speculation from well-supported fact and makes little attempt to eschew the former as much as possible. Furthermore, Saul repeatedly presumes detailed knowledge of certain aspects of the individuals and situations under consideration to a quite unreasonable extent for anything purporting to be a book for anyone other than an expert. At other times he belabors matters that need little exposition for anyone with much familiarity with the subject.

   The presumption of knowledge is most annoying when Saul is discussing taxation. Saul never explains what a "fifteenth and tenth" was; though he has Parliament grant it to the King repeatedly in the early going. What is totally lacking in the book is a discussion - and here there is a lot of material available - on what the sources of revenue of the English crown really were, and how they were used.

   Another example of the author's annoying habits is illustrated by the offhand way in which Harry Percy (Hotspur) is introduced which presumes a full and immediate knowledge of who he was. (To make matters worse, the index doesn't even list the real introduction, which is in a footnote.) It is not clear that Hotspur needed to be mentioned when he was, but if he is going to enter the tale, we should be told who he is when he appears, especially since the real Hotspur differed in very significant ways from the picture to be gleaned from Shakespeare.

   And so it goes. Lists of names where some analysis is needed, places visited with no explanation of why it would matter, etc. The book is so badly organized so that it is repetitious without being illuminating. Lengthy disputes with other scholars are undertaken on minor matters, while little care is given to establishing what is and is not known about major matters.

   The general background of a society in transit, with serious demographic dislocation from the Black Death, is not analyzed and not related to Richard's troubles and successes. Only in discussion of religion and Lollardy do we get anything like an analysis of the background. This temporary strength is marred as Saul breaks off for meaningless (since there has been no clear analysis of the roles of the individuals) lists of adherents, and the thinnest of analysis of Richard's beliefs. Much of this latter involves the interpretation of an altar piece in whose design we are given no reason to suppose that Richard himself was involved.

   Even the concluding chapter, which is probably the best of the book, is marred by raising material to buttress arguments which was not covered earlier and by making points quite unsupported by any material that went before. That chapter also quotes Shakespeare, with chunks pulled randomly and out of order from the play, and one can only conclude that Shakespeare, though no historian, had a better grasp of the situation than does Saul.

   This is supposed to be the best biography of Richard II available. It may be - I am no expert - but if so, the field is crying out for a better one. One hopes that it is already sitting on some scholar's desk or in some editor's briefcase. In the meantime, there are many far better books on British medieval history and the character of its kings to absorb the energies of the interested reader.




3. If you are not well-versed in this period of English history, then reading this book could be a struggle at times. It is not the best-organized book I have read; there were several times I had to re-read for 4-5 pages to make sure I was following the narrative properly. Also, the author assumes that the reader knows the subject thoroughly. Do you know the difference between the Great Seal, the Privy Seal and the signet? The difference between scutage and amercements? That the names Duke of Lancaster, Prince John, John of Gaunt and Gaunt all refer to the same person (sometimes several being used on the same page)? The difference of a "grant in fee simple" and a "grant in tail male?" The author assumes you do, for he offers no details. If you are in the dark about this, you will remain utterly confused at times with what appears to be meaningless terminology.

   Also, echoing another reviewer, the author bases a number of assumptions on some rather sparse documentation. He may make an assertion and in the next paragraph observe that there is virtually nothing in the historical record to indicate one way or another what exactly was going on? Is the author then simply guessing at times? This is a little troubling for the reader.

   The narrative can get unnecessarily tangled at time as the author gets bogged down in what seems to me to be minute details. This was a gripping period of English history, a prelude to the War of the Roses, where one witnessed a struggle for power between Parliament and the King, as well the struggle within the royal family itself, a struggle that would erupt more violently two generations later. This story would seem to provide a gripping narrative, but at times the prose is positively leaden. Be warned, the words do not flow gracefully from Saul's pen.

   If you are able to stick with it, you will find this book to quite informative, but I cannot believe that this book could not have been a bit more accessible.




4. I found Nigel Saul's biography on King Richard II to be pretty complete and interesting. It pretty obvious that the author have a pretty good knowledge of his subject and the period he lived in. The book appears to be well researched and while the writing seem bit awkward at times, I enjoyed reading it and for most part, it flowed pretty nicely. The book covers most of the aspects of Richard's reign although I am bit disappointed that it doesn't covered the subject between Richard and his wife, Anne of Bohemia. It supposed to be one of the great love stories of the English crown but it don't get a lot of pages.
   
   The book appears to be written for people with good background on English history. It definitely wasn't written for the popular masses and I agreed with some of the previous reviewers that the author take too much upon himself to believed that everyone knows much as he does on the period at hand. At times the book appears to be overly complicated.
   
   But for those who do have a high level of interest in this period of history, this book proves to be filled with information and facts that the author laid out with considerable skill and insight. He looked at Richard with a fresh perecption and logically followed his strengths and flaws. Comparison made between Richard II and Edward II proves to be interesting.
   
   For correctional purpose, I offered to point out that in 1961, Harold Hutchinson wrote a biography on Richard II titled "Hollow Crown". I thought that was a pretty interesting book as well and well written for novice reader. For some reason, this book completely escaped the author's radar.
   
   However for modern biography, this one on Richard II come highly recommended only if you are well versed in English medieval history.



5. As I picked up Nigel Saul's mammoth "Richard II" (1999, 514-page paperback) I remembered that some have blamed the rule of this troubled monarch for planting the seeds for the War of the Roses (a hundred years later). I thought it exciting to again step into the 14th century's chivalrous pageantry, political mayhem, and late medieval preparation for the age of discovery.
   
   Saul's is a fascinating story of the birth of English appeasement politics. Although the "a word" ("appeasement") is only sparingly used here, this history surprisingly demonstrates Richard II to be the first great appeaser in English kings history. It is shocking how quickly king Richard, when he's allowed to control the government, gives away the farm.
   
   According to Saul, the king is too generous with friends (Burley, de Vere, de la Pole, etc.) and foes (handing over huge tracts of English continental land to France for uncle John of Gaunt to become duke of Aquitaine). Through "Richard II" one sees why Parliament's commons, dukes Gloucester and Arundel, and Londoners were so often frustrated, to the point of royal disposement. (Richard II lost royal governance to them twice!)
   
   This interesting book is too long (thus earning fewer stars). The helpful eight pages of black and white photographs, the 29 pages of appendix and bibliography, and the 18 pages of exhaustive index are to be expected from a Yale University history series. The downside of this book is Saul's reader expectation. He assumes vast reader knowledge. His historical explanation is only a canopy over Richard II information. Also his grammar is not always clear (i.e., see page 116 for a list of royal uncles that seems to include royal friend Michael de la Pole, a syntactic mistake).
   
   This book is a good overview and therefore should be brief (perhaps the author's droning is a cover for story vacancies). It is recommended to everyone familiar with Richard II that has plenty of time for only his highlights.

5 comments about Crowning Anguish.

1. A truly tragic account of the life of a Persian Princess in the nineteenth century, this book will touch nerves even today. But aside from recounting a life, Taj Al-Saltana's memoir makes three significant contributions to the history of Persia. First and foremost, it is an original and quite possibly the first modern-day feminist book by a Persian woman on the condition of women in Taj's era. Second, her memoir is immensely important to understanding life in the Qajar Dynasty's royal harem. Finally, this book allows the most private look into King Nassir Al-Din's life. Nassir Al-Din ruled Persia for nearly one half of the nineteenth century.

   This book comes with a detailed introduction from its editor Professor A. Amanat of Yale University. The intro is in-depth, reader friendly, and helps set the stage for understanding Taj's era and life in Persia. I would highly recommend the Book "Pivot of the Universe" also by Amanat, on the life of Taj Al-Saltana's father, King Nassir Al-Din Qajar.




2. I was largely disappointed with this book - I expected an autobiographical glimpse into the life of a pioneering feminist Iranian princess and her family. What I got was a "dear diary"-style mess penned by a selfish and astonishingly conceited young woman. Princess Taj al-Saltana's memoir of her life in her father's harem is loaded with self-aggrandizing statements and little else. Granted, the princess' spoiled brat mentality and overblown self image are undoubtedly products of her coddled earlier life as the daughter of the Shah, however, the constant self promotion makes for terribly boring reading. Taj rehashes the same themes and stories time and again, all while constantly paying homage to her own alleged beauty and intellect. I am sorry to say that the princess' method of relating her story was tiresome, and I couldn't wait for it to end. I found myself rolling my eyes each time I came across a ludicrous reference to her great beauty or amazing mental capacity -- her photographs and her actions do not quite measure up to her excessive claims. I was also disappointed by the lack of information regarding harem life. For example, while she writes of the rituals involved with marriage, her disjointed writing style and intense self-focus give the reader only a fleeting idea of what actually happened during her marriage ceremony. The princess' writing is unfocused and often skips back and forth in time, making her story difficult to follow. The reader is provided with very little useful information about royal harem life. The princess' interest in civil rights for Iranian women is overshadowed by her greater interest in her own freedom to do as she pleases.

   The book was edited by Abbas Amanat, who provides a dry and lengthy prologue (of just over 100 pages) which sets the stage for the princess' memoir. I found it puzzling at first that the prologue was so long, however, I soon recognized the need for it. The princess provides very little historical orientation in her memoir, and it is necessary for the editor to fill his readers in with pertinent information regarding the political and social atmosphere in turn-of-the-century Iran. While I agree that the intended topic of "Crowning Anguish" is fascinating, those interested in learning about harem life would be better off skipping this book.




3. I was required to read this book for a class on the history of the modern Middle East. I thought this would be one of the more interesting textbooks that I have to read this semester. I was wrong; this thing is painful.
   I've been informed by a friend of mine from the area that it probably loses something in the transition from Arabic to English, but to me the whole thing is overwritten, self centered and features the "heroine" blaming her problems largely on society. Of course she does go into detail about that society, providing the historical value, but still. In places it reads like a manuscript rejected from Harlequin Romance Novels.
   If you really want a picture of life in the Middle East. read "Struggle and Survival in the Modern Middle East" by Edmund Burke. Gives a better pictue.



4. A good primary source, of which few exist. I wanted to point out to one of the reviewers that the language of Iran (Persia) is Persian and NOT Arabic. The memoirs were written in Taj's native Persian (not Arabic) and then translated into English.



5. This book was a non-fiction story of daughter of King of Kings Naser Din. She expressed her difficult circumstances of her life as a lady living in a patriarchy society. Once, she learned secular education she moved away from superstitution. She no longer believed that lighting was god's anger but because of scientific reason. In 1936, she passed away as a destituted person.

5 comments about Diana.

1. Bradford sounds like a fan of the Princess. She gives Diana the benefit of the doubt at every juncture. In a way, this makes for a pleasant and poignant read. Diana is portrayed as misunderstood and misused by "the establishment," the press, her family and most of her lovers. The only ones who didn't let her down were us (her public) and Hasnat Khan, the Pakistani surgeon who loved her dearly but couldn't/wouldn't marry her. Diana's more destructive impulses are portrayed as being the flip side of her strength. The thing of it is, though, very little of this information is new and much of it is hard to believe. Diana did bring much of her heartache onto herself. As Tina Brown's superior book exhibits, Diana's real story -- objectively told -- is just as compelling and heartbreaking as this more rose-colored version.



2. I wasn't sure about "Diana" by Sarha Bradford when I picked it. I thought that it would be a Diana hate fest or love fest. But this book was either. I was a balance book about Princess of Wales. Ms. Bradford should that Diana was just everyone else in the world. She had her up and downs with family and friends and all that she was looking for was her place in world, but unlike the rest of us the whole world was watching her do it.
   If you are a fan of the late Princess of Wales this may be the book for you.



3. If you're like me and just want to know Princess Diana's whole story, this is the book you need to read. It tells her life story in such an intertaining way that i just couldn't stop reading it until the very end. Sarah Bradford's work is remarkable. I highly recommend it.



4. This is probably the closest we will get to an "official" biography of the late Princess of Wales for many years to come. Sarah Bradford (who is also Viscountess Bangor) was able to interview countless friends and servants and other acquaintances of Princess Diana, including apparently several unnamed members of the Royal Family. The result is a book which, while overall sympathetic to the Princess, also acknowledges her darker side.
   
   Lady Diana Spencer broke into the world's consciousness as a shy, smiling young girl in 1981. After her magnificent wedding most people thought the fairy tale would go on forever. There were warning signs from the beginning as Bradford points out: Diana's troubled childhood, her tendencies to overdramatize and manipulate her way out of difficulties, and her sadly neglected education. The Prince of Wales, Bradford also demonstrates, also had more than his share of problems. With hindsight, we can only wonder why any one thought this marriage ever had a chance.
   
   Bradford does a good job of dissecting the numerous contradictions in the life of the Princess, exposing the differences between reality and the facade erected by both the Prince and the Princess. At the end, the reader is left still feeling sympathy for this tragic couple but very aware that they themselves did much to sabotage their lives.



5. I have read several Diana biographies and too much of the time it's a simple rehash of stories and moments already told. Sarah Bradford's bio is a breath of much needed fresh air. I think it's the definitive biography on Princess Diana's life. At times you feel for her and at others you are left in total disbelief at how petty and irrational she could be. The book is a success because the author doesn't try or attempt to side with Diana or any other member of the royal family. There's no line crossing here, Bradford keeps her subject at arms length but at the same time manages to weave a touching and warm biography. Towards the later part of the book that deals with her life from the time she agreed to do the Morton book, reading about how manipulative and out of control she could be I was left wondering why I respected this woman. But because of the author's talent in presenting both sides of a person, I ended up not hating Diana but respecting that she was a complex person, as are all human beings. She was not a saint but a woman trying to find peace, succeeding at times and due to outside circumstances and her own misjudgment failing to find the peace she sought. By the end of the book I found myself tearing up. This is truly a wonderful and well paced biography.

5 comments about Emperor of Japan.

1. This is the canonical biography of the Emperor Meiji. Not to put too fine a point on it, but I seriously doubt that anyone will write as complete and well-researched a biography - at least in English - in the next 50 years. In addition to this, it is a very readable 800 pages. So why only 4 stars? Keene writes well and there is little question that reading his book is an enjoyable and intellectually rewarding experience. However, Keene is one of the leading, if not the leading, expert of Japanese literature in the United States. He is neither a historian nor a political scientist by training and this is entirely apparent in his analysis of Meiji and his life. Meiji presided over what is unquestionably a revolutionary period in Japanese history - an era in which Japanese society, culture, and politics was entirely transformed - and yet the precise way in which Meiji expanded his power and then used it to facilitate these changes, particularly vis a vis his ministers and councilors, is not given the thorough treatment it deserves. After reading Keene's biography, I agree with him that Meiji deserves more credit than he is often given for the changes in Japan during the late 19th and early 20th century, but I am still not entirely sure of what Meiji's role was in those changes. The narrative is engaging - exceptional, even - but the scope of the book is such that I was left begging for a richer analysis. I would have happily read another 300 pages had Keene provided this. Ironically, a less thorough treatment of Meiji might have earned 5 stars: the disappointment of reading such a magisterial book with such thin analysis would have been lessened considerably.



2. This has to be the best book on the Meiji emperor currently in English. Professor Keene has assembled enough primary and secondary material to form as complete a picture of the Meiji emperor as is likely to exist for a long time. This book is an esential source book for anyone seeking to understand the man or his era.

   Professor Keene has a fascinating subject to explore in this book. If Augustus can be said to have found Rome to be city of mud huts and left strutures of marble behind, the Meiji emperor was born into a backward feudal nation and left when it had become a world power. Unlike Augustus, he cannot claim all of the credit for this achievement. There were many talented and visionary politicians who came to power during the period. However, the environment to foster the rise of Japan as a world power was certainly fostered by the emperor's departure from the traditional role of the Japanese emperor, a position which under the preceeding Shogunate period could be said to resemble that of a national high priest.

   What is fascinating about this book is how Japan became a modern country. Persons who look at things like how modernity and change affects rising nation states will certainly find this book fascinating. At anyone of several periods throughout this period, Japan could have found efforts to modernize halted and it returning to the status of a rather unimportant Asian power.

   Even though I thoroughly enjoyed this book, I will suggest that this is not really the best book to begin a study of Japanese history. Somethings are not fully explained and the significance of certain individuals not perfectly introduced. I would suggest reading a survey history of Japan before reading this one. However despite this shortcoming, Professor Keene has composed the definative text.




3. Great perspective into the life and times of one of the most influencial characters in Japanese history.
   This book will not only give insight into the life of Japans royalty but a good look at that period of history. Easy to read, no previous knowledge of Japanese history or culture needed cause the book tells ya everything youll need and want to know about this time. It is alot longer then the average book, 800 pages or so, (the other 300 is notes and index), but fast moving enough to keep ya interested. Author does make alot of assumptions at times though.
   I found the book pretty balanced, but if yur one of the many people who just read books on Japan to bash the Japanese, ya might want to go somewhere else as it doesnt spent much time on social commentary for ya to rip on.



4. During the Meiji Period (1868-1912), Japan was thrust back into the world after a two-century self-imposed absence in which Japanese were prohibited from leaving and foreigners were banned from entering Japan-punishable by death. In this period, Japan entered the world stage hellbent on modernizing and catching up with the imperial powers of the West. Donald Keene, the dean of Japan studies and Professor Emeritus at Columbia, attempts to paint a picture of the Emperor for whom the period is named and about whom little is known. His name and the period are of course extremely well-known, both inside and outside of Japan; but the life of the Meiji Emperor himself remains hidden.
   Drawing extensively from the Tenno no Ki, or official imperial diary, and other Japanese sources, Keene fills in the many blanks of the life of a man often derided as a mere figure-head. When the Meiji Emperor began his rule, in 1867, Japan was not a unified country per se; it was dominated rather by the shogun and the daimyos, who ruled over Japan's more than 250 decentralized domains. However, these rabidly xenophobic men yielded ultimately to a new constitution and Japan was on the road to becoming a modern state.
   Keene's biography begins with the emperor's traditional education; we see the formal occasions that acquainted the young emperor with his subjects; have a ringside seat at his court, marriage, and his relationships with various consorts. This is a massive tome that will keep the reader hoping for more and sorry to see its 900-plus pages end.



5. As other reviewers note, this is a wonderful biography of Emperor Meiji. It is well written, seemingly deeply sourced, and a great source to learn about Japanese history at one of its true turning points. Other reviewers have pointed out its strengths (comprehensiveness, scholarship, clarity), and Keene himself confesses its greatest weakness: the nearly impenetrable mysteries surrounding Meiji, his personality, and sentiments.
   
   That said, this book is simply not user-friendly. The sixty-three chapters are untitled, which would be pardonable if they were grouped into parts, but they are not. Thus, for a book of 725 odd pages of dense type, the table of contents is utterly worthless. Moreover, the 135 pages of end-notes are a bear to navigate. (Jansen's "Making of Modern Japan" is an exemplar of how to handle end-notes.) Other editorial oddities include a few non-sequitur index entries and a few typos (notably in the reproduction of the Charter Oath on p. 139: "deliberate assemblies" instead of "deliberative assemblies").
   
   This is a magisterial work, and a must-read for those interested in Meiji Japan, or Japan in general, but I wish it were easier to use for research.

5 comments about Princess Diana: The Hidden Evidence.

1. Oh, for God's sake! What utter drivel. Diana wasn't bright enough to implicate anyone more substantial than a poorly trained manicurist.

   Here's a conspiracy question to think about -- if Diana was so committed to the anti-landmines issue why did she chose Dodi Fayed as a consort? Some of his relations are huge arm dealers. Hey -- maybe THEY knocked her off!




2. My beloved Princess Diana was most definitely murdered by the Establishment. This book gives hard facts to support this statement and points out inconsistencies within the investigation, both in France and England. Assasinations like this have been going on since the beginning of time, since John the Baptist. If you loved Princess Diana you must read this book. It will make you so sad to realize what was done to her.



3. The book was written in the form of a trial and the reader is the jury. Well, if I was on that jury, I would have voted for the defense. And if I was the judge, I would have thrown the case out after the prosecution finished his case for lack of evidence. The title is perfect "Hidden Evidence" as the evidence was so hidden that I couldnt find it in the book. The author makes many hypothesis but does not have any REAL support for his hypothesis.
   
   I believe that we have not heard the full and real story of the death of Diana and was hoping to find it here - but I was disappointed. Stay clear.



4. I read this book as I thought there was a lot more to the death of Princess Diana then has ever been brought out. And, according to this book, there is. Since the house of Windsor is in reality German and the house of Stuart is Scottish and Diana is a descendent of the house of Stuart, it is more then understandable why certain members of the house of Windsor would want her out of the way since she was more entitled to the throne then Prince Charles. Then you have the military-industrial complex which, in reality, rules this earth. When Diana started the campaign against landmines, she was a very visible and known world wide person who was able to bring to the forefront the damage that landmines do to innocent people. Since Diana's death I have not heard anymore talk about banning landmines anywhere in the world.
   
   It is brought out that Henri Paul worked for MI6 and the CIA. That could have been in as much as money was deposited into his bank accounts that was a lot more then he was making at the Ritz. It is also alleged that his blood sample was switched with another sample taken from a suicide victim at the morgue. But, has anyone thought that Henri Paul was drinking that night knowing that he had a mission to perform and that was to make sure that Princess Diana was killed in an automobile accident? It is entirely possible that was the case. As for the carbon monoxide in Henri Paul's blood sample, it has been brought out that he was smoking cigars at the Ritz prior to leaving on his last ride. That in itself will cause an increase of carbon monoxide in the blood.
   
   There are many unanswered questions to the death of Princess Diana and we will never know the answers to them. If MI6 and the CIA want to cover up their involvement in the accident they most certainly could and no one will be able to find out if they were involved or not. The intelligence agencies of a lot of countries know how to keep something from being linked back to them and this could or could not be the case here.



5. The book is written well enough which is why I am giving it two stars, however its the content that speaks volumes...volumes about diddley squat. I tried to read this book with an open mind, however the more I read, the quicker I came to the conclusion there was no conspiracy to commit murder against Diana. How did I arrive at this conclusion? I used plain, old common horse sense and took a closer look at the real facts that are known about the case. Sorry, but I just don't buy into the author's rip current theories. Diana died in a tragic car crash at the hands of a drunk driver, being heckled by bunch of vultures who were salivating over every juicy morsel in her life and due to the fact that both she and Dodi were not wearing their seat belts. The French way of taking their time with severe trauma patients and crawling at a snail's pace to the hospital certainly didn't help matters either. If there was a murder and cover-up, where's all the others that move in the same circles who have been oh so done away with or was she the only one since JFK? Were there some mysterious events that occured? Of course, there are always mysterious events surrounding ANY death when it can't be explained down to the last minute detail. If you are into "way out" conspiracy theories this may be the book for you, otherwise there are other quality books out there on the life and tragic loss of Diana. I highly suggest shopping around.

No comments about Diana, Princess of Wales: A Biography (Greenwood Biographies).

2 comments about King Alfred the Great.

1. Alfred Smith, a professor of medieval history at the University of Kent, provides us with a masterful biography of Alfred the Great. Smith's biography is a radical departure from the traditional view of Alfred as a neurotic invalid who remained piously illiterate until he was almost 40. Alfred's life is thoroughly examined to reveal a man of great physical stamina who had been a scholar all his life and who used his intellectual abilities, military prowess and administrative skills to change the course of English history prior to the Norman Conquest. This beautifully written biography examines Alfred's writings and charters, the Anglo Saxon Chronicle, and Asser's biography of Alfred (which Smith believes was a medieval forgery). This biography should be added to the library of historians, students and lovers of medieval history!



2. A great and comprehensive biography of one of the most amazing figures of history. Although some may take a little time getting used to the Saxon names and genealogy anyone who enjoys biographies or history should love this book.
   
   Although filled with detail Smyth breaths life into the days of Alfred. A religious man who was both a brilliant scholar a brilliant tactician and one tough soldier. Such was his brilliance he did such remarkable things as help to adapt the Viking boat to suit his own army's needs for a craft more suited to navigating the coast of Britain.
   
   He almost single-handedly created what we know today as England and through his treaty with the Vikings he established an economic zone of a type shared by both the Saxons and the Vikings and in so doing played an important role in the creation of the English language.
   
   After his peace with the Vikings he established a just system of laws and an aggressive plan to educate the populace of England.
   
   The biography starts with the peculiar and unfortunate circumstances within his family that led to his succession. He found himself, trained as monk, in the midst of one of the great watershed moments of British history when England was being overrun by the Vikings. His campaigns as a defeated underdog reclaiming his kingdom makes for truly exciting reading. The book is filled with detail including shedding light on how the main biography historians in the past (Asser's "Life") had been drawing from was a forgery.
   
   The story of the forgery of Asser's "Life" , what was the standard biography of Alfred the great up until recent times, is in itself a story within a story in this book.
   
   Through the examination of works of Alfred himself we come to understand his great wisdom.
   
   A fascinating read about a monumental figure of history.
   
   Highly recommended.

5 comments about Six Wives CD: The Queens of Henry VIII.

1. David Starkey's 'Six Wives: The Queens of Henry VIII' is obviously a highly researched piece of work. I've read many Tudor biographies, and this is by far the most extensive I have ever laid eyes on. But unfortunately I have more bad than good to say about it.
   
   What good I can say is trivial. It's a large, long book that takes some concentration and thought to get through. Starkey knew his material well before getting down to business, although I don't believe he wrote about everything he could have. In the space of 765 pages (not counting the index and notes, which took an additional 80+ pages) there is so much information on the politics of Henry VIII's marriages, one cannot help but feel some awe. But that is where the interest ends for me as a reader. Unlike with the Tudor biographies of Alison Weir and Antonia Fraser, I wasn't drawn into the story in the least. And this is where the bad begins.
   
   Where should I start? First of all, the book is completely unbalanced. Well over 300 pages are devoted to the rise and fall of Anne Boleyn, while barely 40 explain the relationship with Anne of Cleves. The same can be said for the story of Catherine Howard and Catherine Parr. Perhaps there really is much, much more to the relationship between Boleyn and Henry Tudor, but I still believe that a balance could have been found and more depth explored with Henry's other wives.
   
   Many reviewers have lashed out against Starkey's language and grammar. While I'm no English expert, I must agree that it's difficult to "get into" the story and stay focused on Starkey's writings. And yes, he does tend to ask too many questions and doesn't hesitate to express his opinion, and stick with it, over historical facts.
   
   And last for this review, but certainly not least and not the truly last of my personal complaints against the book, is Starkey's blatant disregard for other historians and authors. In his introduction, he denounces the books of Fraser and Weir (with author names), which totally lacks class and respect and in my opinion. And that's far from the only time he does such a thing. I remember at one point in the book, just after the birth of Elizabeth (daughter of Henry and Anne Boleyn), Starkey denounced, with a bit of cool arrogance, the "unsubstantiated" claim that Anne wanted to breast-feed Elizabeth but Henry wouldn't allow it. I won't deny that I have read about this before and that I really don't know if it's true or not, as I am not a hard-core historian. But I am curious as to why Starkey believes, as he seems to in many sections of his book, that his is the one and only true version of events. How does he know that? And just because there is no hard evidence for certain events, how does Starkey know that they did or didn't happen?
   
   PBS created a mini-series based on Starkey's book (Starkey himself narrated) which turned out to be worse than the book. It's a sorry thing that a book so long and informative should turn out so uninteresting, but it did.



2. Starkey's writing is terrible! First off, he thinks his view is the one, true, right one and all other Tudor biographers got it wrong! He has an annoying habit of making ridiculous assuptions about the personalities of the queens. He puts them into misogynistic,cartoonish categories--he dismisses Jane Seymour as a boring, mousey doormat, then speculates whether that was all really a *calculated act* on her part! I guess that's the only way she could be interesting to him as he seems to relish the conniving/bitchy/vamp portraits he paints of Ann Boleyn and Catherine Howard. Starkey supposes that 16th c. queens reacted to certain situations in a flippant manner as would modern teenagers, or teens on the "O.C." This is so ridiculous. These were patriarchal times and these queens were literally fighting for their lives. I can't believe some people loved this steaming pile of poop! This book is a waste of time and money! It isn't fit to line my bird's cage!



3. Friends, this is an excellent book. If you were to watch his DVD series on Elizabeth and other Tudor monarchs, you would clearly see that David Starkey is an excellent scholar, has an outstanding grasp of the Tudor monarchs, is quite articulate, and can take the highly complex issues and explain them in a very understandable way. This book is no exception. It is very intelligently written, is helpful, and not just a rehash of other scholars.
   
   I find Megan's reveiw of this book so far from reality and utterly foolish as to be offensive. Her suggestion that one could learn as much from a story book is utterly absurd. Undoubtedly, her review must be the result not only of pure bias but also of pure inebriation.



4. I read this book with great deal relish in thinking that I might get fresh perception on the history of the six wives of Henry VIII. What I found was an easy to read, easy to understand, well researched but highly opinionated book. I think the author tries so hard to be different from other historians and books on this subject that he managed to turned opinions and conjuctures into facts as he see it.
   
   Most of the book deals with two wives, Katherine of Aragon and Ann Boleyn. The rise, love and fall of both women who dominated much of Henry's life takes up much of the author's book. The rest of the four wives, Jane Seymour, Anne of Cleves, Catherine Howard and Katherine Parr all got parred down, almost like an summarized aftermath after the two main events. I always thought each woman was pretty unique. (Henry seems to like "Katherine or Catherine as a name in his women.)
   
   This book also proves to be dominated by Henry VIII as he's in almost every single page once he's crowned. From this book, the reader will have a good understanding about how Henry deals with his interpersonal relationship with his wives. You may have a better understanding of Katherine of Aragon and Ann Boleyn even if you may not agreed with many of the author's opinions. But after that, the rest of the four wives adds nothing to what lies published before this book.
   
   I would recommend Allison Weir or Antonia Fraser books on this subject initially. I would recommend this book only for experienced readers of this subject matter. Reason for that is that the author proves to be too opinionated in his writing and it would be best if you read this book if you got a good grounding on the subject.



5. David Starkey's "Six Wives" is very engaging and easy to read, despite the intimidating weight of the hardcover. Starkey is a brilliant historian and he breathes life into his subjects as he covers their life and times. He is an expert on all things Elizabethan and readers can trust that his interpretation of events always has extensive research behind it. The few pages of prints in the center of the book are a nice addition, though personally, I wish there were illustrations of the various castles and manors as well as the formal portraits we are given.

5 comments about Josephine: A Life of the Empress.

1. This was my first read of Carolly Erickson, and I was enthralled by her writing style. Yes, the book reads like a novel, but I don't find this detrimental. One of the biggest problems with historical biographies are they are often heavy and dull, and I don't think this should be the case when describing extraordinary times and events. I felt like I was transplanted "into the period;" and while Josephine had qualities pro and con, I found her to be accessible and human. A lot of times with biographies, I ended hating the subject by the time I am done, because the author relishes revealing the subject's tarnished persona in such an unflattering light. Ms. Erickson's Josephine I liked, despite her evident flaws.

   My only complaint would be overindulgence in trivial detail, e.g., her "rotten teeth" and "fading beauty." No one really likes aging, do they?




2. This was my first read of Carolly Erickson, and I was enthralled by her writing style. Yes, the book reads like a novel, but I don't find this detrimental. One of the biggest problems with historical biographies are they are often heavy and dull, and I don't think this should be the case when describing extraordinary times and events. I felt like I was transplanted "into the period;" and while Josephine had qualities pro and con, I found her to be accessible and human. A lot of times with biographies, I ended hating the subject by the time I am done, because the author relishes revealing the subject's tarnished persona in such an unflattering light. Ms. Erickson's Josephine I liked, despite her evident flaws.

   My only complaint would be overindulgence in trivial detail, e.g., her "rotten teeth" and "fading beauty." No one really likes aging, do they?




3. This was my first read of Carolly Erickson, and I was enthralled by her writing style. Yes, the book reads like a novel, but I don't find this detrimental. One of the biggest problems with historical biographies are they are often heavy and dull, and I don't think this should be the case when describing extraordinary times and events. I felt like I was transplanted "into the period;" and while Josephine had qualities pro and con, I found her to be accessible and human. A lot of times with biographies, I ended hating the subject by the time I am done, because the author relishes revealing the subject's tarnished persona in such an unflattering light. Ms. Erickson's Josephine I liked, despite her evident flaws.

   My only complaint would be overindulgence in trivial detail, e.g., her "rotten teeth" and "fading beauty." No one really likes aging, do they?




4. This is a very well written book, and the author keeps the reader captivated as she tells the life story of Josephine, better known as Napoleon's first wife.
   
   For avid history buffs of the Napoleonic era, this book will offer scant new insights. If, however, you are only beginning to learn about the movers and shakers in imperial France, this may be a good jumping off point for you. Bear in mind that everyone is a secondary player to Josephine, so every one presented is colored by how they interacted with her-- and the author's mostly sympathetic portrayal of the woman.
   
   Josephine is not presented as a saint by anymeans in this book. She is, however, given a back story that allows us to have a greater understanding at how she could be both kind and charming while attempting to amass a fortune as a war profiteer.
   
   Ultimately this book is like cotton candy. Sweet and charming but leaving the reader wanting for more. I find that to be a good thing in this case, I'll be reading more about Josephine and her contemporaries in an attempt to gain an even larger understanding of her and the times she lived in.



5. Josephine (1763-1814) was born Rose Tascher on the French colonial island of Dominique. Her father raised her on a failing sugar plantation she wed a disssolute French aristocrat (who wa
   executed during the Reign of Terror in the French Revolution)
   and had two children by him: Hortense and Eugene.
   Josephine met the young Corsican Napoleon and wed him. Napoleon knew she had connections in the government and married her for politcal reasons as well as to satisfy his lustful longings for the fetching Creole.
   Josephine was five feet tall, had rotting teeth and was unfaithful to Napoleon (as he was as well!). She could not produce a male heir and the Emperor divorced her to marry Marie Louise of Austria.
   Her life was one of glamour, love, rejection by her husband and dissolute living. Josephine was no saint but she was known
   for her loving kindness.
   Erickson has written a good biography of Josephine which introduces the reader to a fascinating woman living in amazing times.

1 comments about Aethelred the Unready: The Ill-Counselled King.

1. Aethelred the Unready is portrayed as anything but in this fascinating new history of his reign. He was rarely unready and frequently quick on the march to stop Danish/Viking invasion of the 10th century when he reigned as king over England for 38 years. A reformer and passionate defender of his people he deserves to be up there with other great Kings such as William the Conquerer, King Arthur, Henry II, Edward III and Richard II.
   
   A fascinating individual in this biography, one of the few on this extraordinary man, the story of 10t century England comes alive, describing the people who populated England before the Norman invasion of 1066.
   
   Seth J. Frantzman