5 comments about The Lives of the Kings and Queens of England, Revised and Updated.

1. Well written and documented overwiew
   
   But it lacks a bibliography for further reading



2. My dad gave me this lovely book for Christmas back in '99, and I have used it as a reference ever since. Although it is a splendid read from cover-to-cover, I find that it is one of the best books out there to really whet the appetite for more in-depth research into the monarch, rebel or time period of your choice.
   
   The genealogy charts are fun to puzzle out, and the illustrations, including coats of arms, maps, tapestries and portraits, add extra personality to the history, which is, in itself, fascinating.
   
   Of course, a book of this length only scratches the surface of the noble, scandalous, shocking and never-dull lives of the British monarchs, their families, friends and enemies, so you must dig deeper if any one subject appeals to you. All in all, a well-written, organized and illustrated overview of a sizeable chunk of history.



3. As a lover of British royal history, I think this is a fantastic overview that 'sums' things up, devoting a few pages to tell the story of each monarch. Antonia Fraser manages to pass on a lot of information in short form. The illustrations are wonderful, as are the charts (although as someone else mentioned, they are missing some details for us serious fanatics). I consider this is a great compilation if you just want the big picture, or a starting point to jump off into detailed biographies of individual monarchs and/or houses.



4. I love this book. Even with all of the reading I have done on the British Monarchy, this book had never before seen pictures. My only complaint would be that it often focuses more on political events rather than personal lives. But, there is wonderful information in this book, and I have enjoyed every page.



5. If your a history buff like I am you will love this book. It is a must for those interested in the past.

5 comments about Eating Royally: Recipes and Remembrances from a Palace Kitchen.

1. I love this book!
   I love the recipes and the stories.
   This is truly a book that is great for a gift or yourself.
   Recipes are well nice!



2. Elegant and beautiful book. Great to give as a gift. Recipes are wonderful. Very well put together, as a cook book and keepsake.



3. Very enjoyable book with beautiful illustrations. Mouth-watering recipes included as well as the feeling the author knew and loved the royal family.



4. This was well worth the investment. It contains many recipes served to the Royal family. Wonderful pictures and information on the Queen's dinner events and occasions. Filled with many memories of the food service given by Chef Darren McGrady. I would recommend it to any one who is interested in the Royal family lifestyles.



5. This is a wonderful cookbook on several levels and I am happy to see that it has received consistently positive reviews!
   
   Darren McGrady deserves congratulations for creating an entertaining cookbook that also delivers delicious recipes. His personal anecdotes about the Queen and Princess Diana are both amusing and discreet.
   
   The book is well structured according to seasons and royal residences, such as Christmas at Sandringham and Autumn at Balmoral. The beginning of each chapter contains an overview of the season and location, and Chef McGrady weaves his own professional memoir into this structure.
   
   Copies of formal menus, handwritten notes of instruction from the royal family, and informal snapshots of the various royal kitchens are interspersed in an elegant scrapbook fashion. Then come the recipes for the chapter, back to back.
   
   Favorite recipes of the royal family are included, many with an introductory paragraph of just what it was that made that particular recipe so special to the individual. I must add, though, that you will have fun reading between the lines in a description of a culinary episode about a former duchess. You will have to admit, Darren McGrady has style.
   
   The recipes that I have tried so far come from the Kensington Palace section, nicely subtitled "A Home for All Seasons." These are Princess Diana's favorites and are lighter and more contemporary. I particularly enjoyed the stuffed aubergines and the lobster Thermidor (OK, not so light and not so contemporary, but a delicious classic). And after eating a salad with the Pureed Herb Dressing, I have to take a bit of bread to sponge up the remaining dressing because it is that good. The recipes that I tried worked perfectly and most of them are accompanied by photographs.
   
   This was very neatly done. I was left with the impression of a great chef, good writer, and generous man: 100% of the proceeds of this book go to the Elizabeth Glazer Pediatric Aids Foundation.
   
   Naughty thought: I wonder how Paul Burrell, Diana's tell-all butler, feels about this?

5 comments about The Sisters of Henry VIII: The Tumultuous Lives of Margaret of Scotland and Mary of France.

1. Everyone knows about the six wives of Henry VIII but the two sisters of Henry are relatively unknown to most readers. These women were queens in their own right and the elder sister Margaret was the grandmother of Mary Queen of Scots.This is a side of Henry's family that is not familar to most history readers. The book is well written and does not spend an inordinate amount of time discussing the relationship between Henry and his sisters,Margaret and Mary. The focus of the book is on their lives and the marriages they were arranged for them in Scotland and France.Henry is shown as a brother who is most interested in the influence and power his sisters play in their roles in their adopted lands and in center of royal power. He is never far from advising them on what to do for the benefit of England and as their all powerful brother.It is not brotherly love just brotherly advise that he offers and that he also enforces on them. His knows his sisters are well placed and wants to make sure that his interests and those of England are reflected in his sisters counsel to their spouses who are the kings of Scotland and France.
   The book is well written and keeps the stories of the sisters separate and does not try to interweave these lives. I found the story of Margaret more interesting and turbulent as she was Regent of Scotland and had bouts with the Scottish lords which her grandaughter Mary, Queen of Scots which she would encounter later in the century.Also,her influence on history was greater than her sister Mary who lived briefly in France as Queen for less than three months when her aged husband died and she returned to England to live a fairly unevenful life as wife of Charles Brandon.
   I recommend the book to those who want to extend their knowledge of this period and also to understand the nature of arranged marriages of royals from different countries as religious changes were occuring.



2. This is my first Maria Perry book. Her research was/is great and very detailed. This is not just another dry history. She brings understanding along with facts to this story.



3. The book is just what I expected of it on what respects to the contents, I received it in Spain,in perfect conditions and in a very reasonable time.



4. Margaret and Mary were the daughters of Henry VII and the sisters of Henry VIII. When Margaret was 13 she was married to 30 year old King James IV of Scotland. They had several children, only one of whom James lived to majority. After the death of James Margaret was married to the Duke of Angus and had a daughter by him named Margaret. Unfortunately this marriage was not a love match and after many years they got divorced, and Margaret married again.
   
   Mary on the other hand was married to the elderly King Louis of France when she was 18. She was only married to him for several months before his death. Before she left for France thought she had gotten a promise from her brother saying that when Louis died she could marry whom she wanted. By the time Mary was back in England she was married to thrice married Charles Brandon, Duke of Suffix. Because of some irregularities in his marriages (he had married a woman, divorced her to marry her aunt, then remarried his first wife) it was a while before the marriage was declared legitimate. By that time thought they were the parents of several children. They remained married for many years before Mary's death in 1536 after which Charles married one of their wards.
   
   While there are some parts that can be a bit boring, it can also be very interesting and very informative.



5. The title of this book is misleading. The sisters are mentioned in the book, but you really have to hunt to find much about them. And what got me off to a bad start was the second sentence of the introduction. Maria Perry says (and I'd like to know why she thinks ths----) that few people realize that Henry had two sisters. Anyone interested in the Tudors, and Henry especially, would certainly know he had sisters. This book's fatal flaw, however, is that it is just plain boring. I gave it three stars because there is certainly a lot of words in it, so Maria Perry put in a lot of effort, but frankly, everything in it has been written so much better in so many other books.

3 comments about The First Queen of England: The Myth of "Bloody Mary".

1. Mary I of England (1516-1558), the elder daughter of Henry VIII, has long been overshadowed by her younger half-sister Elizabeth. As it happens, Mary's "Bloody" reputation is a partly a construct of the following era, due largely to John Foxe and encouraged by Elizabeth herself. But many of the successes of the Elizabethan period, resulting in economic prosperity and flourishing of the arts, were actually continuations of Mary's reforms and policies. One of Elizabeth's advantages was sheer longevity, together with the country remaining Protestant. As a result, historians have traditionally had a rather foreshortened view of Mary's reign.
   
   In her new biography, Linda Porter aims to rehabilitate Mary as a good and competent monarch on balance, and as a pioneer among reigning queens. Porter sets out by explaining the woman that Mary became, examining the people and events that shaped her life--especially her increasingly complicated family and its drama. The resulting depiction of Mary, usually convincing and very well-written, is a worthy addition to historical studies of the Tudor era and queens regnant.
   
   From her mother Katherine of Aragon, Mary learned at an impressionable age that "conscience was the most important justification for behaviour that anyone could make." Katherine refused to step out of the way for Henry's dynastic concerns--she wouldn't even countenance retiring to a nunnery, though Henry, by declaring their marriage invalid from the beginning, actually foreclosed that option. Because Henry divorced Katherine in the end, Mary had to be declared illegitimate.
   
   Strangely--or naively--Henry didn't think that displacing Mary in this way would affect her negatively. But for the young lady who had yielded precedence within the kingdom only to her parents, being uprooted from her (as she saw it) God-given place was simply inconceivable. She objected to any perceived affront, and Henry in his lenience only made the matter worse by not forcing her obedience right away. "The delay raised false hopes and developed in her a pattern of opposition based on conscience and self-identity, where suffering almost became a goal in itself."
   
   Anne Boleyn's jealousy towards Mary grew as the king's divorce dragged on, and in 1531 she became so defensive ("Did she fear that Mary could still salvage her parents' marriage?") that she didn't allow Mary at court at Christmas. Even after Henry married Anne, Mary refused to recognize her as queen, and their encounters always degenerated into rudeness and reprisals. The moral victory was always Mary's:
   "A more subtle woman [than Anne] might have considered outmanoeuvring Mary by occasionally bringing her to court, treating her with kindness and consideration and letting her show the world that, if she continued to defy her father, she was just a sulky, jealous child and a disobedient daughter. The new queen, who liked to be the centre of attention, feared Mary too much to follow such a strategy."
   
   After Anne's death (which Mary may have helped bring about indirectly) and a brief euphoric period in which Mary thought she would be restored to her former position, Henry finally forced his older daughter to submit and acknowledge her reduced status. Mary endured another fifteen years of subjection, first to her father (although she got along quite well with Catherine Parr, her last stepmother) and then to her half-brother Edward VI, whose tolerance of her Catholic observance did not last.
   
   Against the background of this understanding of Mary's character, the events of the last six years of her life fall into place: She rose up with the support of the people to triumph over John Dudley, Duke of Northumberland, who would have ruled in the name of his daughter-in-law, Lady Jane Grey. She resumed the practice of the traditional religion, whose beauty and mystery most people probably missed (Northumberland even reverted to the Catholic faith, a huge propaganda victory for the new regime). She married Philip of Spain somewhat reluctantly, it seems, and made it clear that her motherly relationship to her people would take priority. She encouraged trade and reformed the currency that both her father and brother had debased. As for her sobriquet, the level of violence during her reign, although inexcusable to our sensibilities, was not that different from other early modern regimes. As for Calais and its loss, the author glosses it over as ultimately untenable and not all that valuable (an explanation that is not completely satisfying). But when Mary's poor health finally overtook her, she brought about a smooth transition to the next regime by acknowledging Elizabeth as her heir.
   
   Only in the last thirty years or so has Mary I has been rehabilitated and recognized for her own accomplishments, by a series of sympathetic (but not hagiographic) biographers starting with David Loades (newer version), and continuing with Carolly Erickson, J. A. Froude, and others. Porter's biography is not just the latest of these, but also one of the best, with an admirable level of detail and accuracy (especially in the characterizations of supporting figures like Catherine Parr). It is a riveting book, and I finished it with the sense that the traditional smears had been peeled back to reveal something of the pivotal ruler that Mary actually was.



2. Periodically some historian writes a new biography of "Bloody" Mary I, queen of England from 1553-1558, seeking to rehabilitate her reputation. Her short reign was marked by a rise in religious reaction that resulted in some 270 deaths through judicial murder, the flight of some 800 important Protestants abroad seeking to save their lives, and largely alienated the English public from the Roman Catholic Church. In this book, author and historian Linda Porter sets out to show Mary as a cultured Renaissance monarch, moderate, but determined to revitalize England.
   
   Overall, I found this to be a disappointing book. I think that the author did a good job of showing how Mary had been cruelly treated by her father, and by the powerful men who ruled Tudor England before her ascension to the throne. However, once the narrative reaches Mary's coronation, that earlier treatment seems to be forgotten - as showing her to have been vengeful, or perhaps just another player in the Tudor blood sport of politics, would have undercut the author's recasting of Mary as enlightened monarch.
   
   Further, the author eschews any discussion of Mary's mental instability, for example not going into any great detail on Mary's two phantom pregnancies, or their significance. The author laid a great deal of blame for Mary's subsequent reputation on the person of John Foxe, the author of the Book of Martyrs, but fails to go into any detail on how one book could so overcome the "truth" of Mary's enlightenment.
   
   No, I must say that I did not find this to be a good, impartial book on Queen Mary I, but saw it as more of a whitewash of her flaws. Has Mary been mistreated by historians since her reign? Most certainly. But, was she an enlightened and humanistic ruler, one of England's best monarchs? I think that that is going more than a little too far. Overall, I do not recommend this book.



3. Dr Linda Porter has meticulously researched the tragic life of England's first queen regnant in her vivid and well-written book. For readers who only know the 'myth' of Bloody Mary, Porter's book offers a real glimpse of the all-too-human queen behind that myth. For those who think they know the 'real' Mary, they, too, will have a stunning surprise and fascinating read. We see Mary hurtling toward disaster after disaster, from the moment she's put in the care of her tutor, Jean de Vives; to the confrontations of long, obdurate duration with her father, Henry VIII; through the separations from her mother and her half-siblings; and headlong into a disastrous, love-struck marriage with Philip II of Spain. Mary's story has been much neglected by historians to date -- with the great Dr David Starkey even lumping her together with her half-brother Edward VI as the 'forgotten Tudors'. Yet Mary's reign (as well as that of her brother Edward) was a watershed, not only in English history, but in the history of the Protestant reformation movement that spread with England's nascent empire during her half-sister Elizabeth I's reign. Without understand Mary Tudor, we can't understand why and how Elizabeth and other monarchs acted after her. This is a must read for anyone interested in British history, family history, or the history of Catholicism and the Protestant reformation.

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 Mary, Queen of Scots, and the Murder of Lord Darnley.

1. I'll start off by saying that before reading this book, my only knowledge of Mary Queen of Scots came from fiction books. I had thought she was an interesting character, so I bought this to read more about her. For a 600+ history book, I swallowed it pretty fast.
   
   This book is written well, discussing an interesting topic, and all in all, clearly presenting facts that are very intriguing in a manner that makes it interesting to anyone who tries to read it. While I can't say that I know whether or not the facts were accurate or not, I know that it all seemed plausible to me (or, well, most of it, at least) and that I enjoyed myself reading this.
   
   For those who may know more about this fascinating queen and simply want another view, I don't see why you shouldn't read this. It's nice, it's well done, and it's certainly a good way to spend a few days. For those trying to get into Mary, this may also be your book. It's not too difficult to read, and while some of Weir's beliefs on what happened are questionable, it's a good book.



2. Alison Weir writes wonderfully. Her discussion is crisp, engaging, and even by turns charming. She has a knack for pulling out telling detail, and weaves original source material deftly through each passage. In introducing Lord Darnley, the then-future husband of Mary, Queen of Scots, she notes that his parents doted on him, holding him particularly precious as most of his siblings died in infancy. She finds a letter he wrote at 8 that sheds insight on his ambition and religion. Detail by detail, she paints his personality, bringing him to life before us. This is a book that is hard to put down.
   
   Yet, Weir also has a knack for building assumption on frail assumption, trying to build a house of bricks on a foundation of straw. As an example, she speculates that the illness that plagued Darnley in the months before his death was not smallpox (as commonly assumed) but rather an intermediate stage of syphilis. She acknowledges that this is not clear from the record, but merely speculation, and outlines both the pros and cons for her view. Weir is clear enough: there's some reasonable chance she is right, but she acknowledges that, across the years, it is impossible to establish her position with certainty. Weir then builds on this assumption, suggesting it was "inconceivable" that Mary did not find out that syphilis ailed her husband, making assumptions about Mary's state of mind, whether or not she may have had another pregnancy, and how she interacted with other men and her husband based on the speculations about Darnley's disease. This is but one example. Again and again, as one works through the book, speculations which are carefully qualified and limited on first argument become certainties when repeated a few pages later, so that as one finally reaches her conclusion, gets her point, and steps back to consider whether she is right, her logic simply melts away. In the end, she adds nothing to the history but her pretty words.
   
   Had this been a work of historical fiction, I would praise it. Weir is a wonderful story teller. Alas, the book masquerades as history. But, oh, if only other historians could write like Weir!



3. I was disappointed in the book, because I hoped for a more balanced, objective look at the murder of Darnley, and Mary's degree of involvement. I agree with the reviewer who said the book needed better editing. Too much time was devoted to repetitious and indignant refutation of George Buchanan's ludicrous allegations about Mary, and Ms. Weir's point of view was driven home too vehemently. The research was meticulous, to the point of ponderous. Near the end of the book, I found myself thinking "Off with her head!" and skipping chunks of pages to reach the conclusion, which, by that time, I found rather satisfying.



4. When i brought this book i was hoping that i would come away with a new and clear understanding unfortunitly i was not 100 per cant satisfied.This book moves along at a very brisk pace this is justified i suppose by the fact that the early life and other events that exclude the Darnly affair are not supposed to be the highlight of the story.Alison weir does not make it very clear who was most likely to be guilty of the crime i suggest this book for someone who enjoys deciphering but if you just like to have a casual read then this is not the book for you.I was not too disapointed for i was able to get it new for 5 dollars pheraps for this price i may say it was a good buy but if you are paying above 8 dollars then i would not bother.My review may sound critical but i merely would not like others to be dissapointed and other alison weir books such as the wives of henry the 8th or the life of elizabeth the first are more desirable



5. Like many people, I'm aware of who Mary Queen of Scots is, how she died and the death of her husband. But, I knew little about the actual details of the case, the atmosphere of the time, and the specific evidence against her. In this book, Alison Weir reveals her theory of what happened to Lord Darnley and how his wife Mary was involved.
   
   Since this mystery is many hundreds of years old, there is no concrete forensic evidence to lay it to rest. Some historians and readers will no doubt disagree with Weir's solution. She doesn't present new "facts," she provides her interpretation of the existing ones. However, she has done meticulous research, which is readily apparent, and presents a solid circumstantial case for Mary's guilt or innocence (I won't ruin it!). In one way, Weir's conclusion is irrelevant. Some reviewers have already mentioned Weir's take on the Casket Letters. Weir is not the only historian to doubt their validity, so I had no problem seeing that viewpoint. What makes this worth reading is learning what evidence was used at the time, the placement of people and events, and an examination of it all. I appreciated learning more about this famous, ill-fated woman.
   
   Weir's trademark easy writing style makes this flow like a novel, while still remaining non-fiction. It is a long book, but I don't feel it was bogged down. Readers need more details on the political mood, Mary and the events leading up to Darley's death to get the full picture. I don't think this is as good as The Princes in the Tower. That read like a true-crime novel, and I found myself convinced by her argument at the end. I'm still uncertain what I think really happened to Darnley, but I found Weir somewhat persuasive in her view. Most of Weir's books are worth reading, but this is definitely one of her best efforts via a vis a mystery. Highly recommended.

5 comments about The Emperor.

1. I am amazed at how misguiding and angry the previous review is. It is well known that Haile Selassie being the leader of a non-aligned country, an anti-colonial advocate and a denouncer of the injustice of western nations perpetrated against third world nations was a victim of an intense propaganda by those nations. Books based on idiotic rumors and hearsays were written by people who are in no way related with this part of history. No world leader was more enlightened than Haile Selassie who was even awarded the title of Prince of Peace by the international orthodox church. Haile Selassie has not only abolished slavery in Ethiopia, but is the inspiration behind the organization of African Unity through which He helped resolve many African conflicts. This is just a few of His achievements and I would recommend the following books for a more intelligent look into his life: "The Mission", "Selected Speeches", "Le dernier Roi des Rois". I will end with this quote from "The Mission": "In the eyes of many today, his image appears blurred, but the most striking characteristic of Western public opinion, where the person of Haile Sellassie is concerned, is ignorance..."



2. This book reminds me of two novels I have read, Autumn of the Patriarch by G. G. Marquez, and Rene Leys by Victor Segalen. They both are about the labyrinthine palaces of out of touch emperors, a sort of politics mixed with overtones of Gormenghast. The Emperor is not a novel, however, it is reportage -- the author was a Polish foreign correspondent who interviewed the palace attendants of Selassie after the Emperor had been deposed. It makes Selassie out to be a idealistic but somewhat corrupt aristocrat who was simply too tired to put up a fight against what became the savage Mengistu regime.
   
   I would differ from the other two reviews in different ways. First I wanted to say that even though he is critical, the author is in some ways sympathetic to Selassie. He realizes that at the beginning Selassie was a force for good. And I think saying that "if enlightenment means killing 50,000+ citizens of your own nation, I am again grateful that we in America have not yet had an 'enlightened' leader...." is sort of missing the fact that we've had leaders recently who have killed over ten times that many people, though they are citizens of other nations.
   
   But the other review is nationalistic and doesn't engage the book at all. I know that after the Derg and then Meles, many Ethiopians look back to Selassie as a "Golden Age" ruler -- and that is a useful myth. But although I think that there are probably some fanciful parts of the book, as far as I can tell this is mostly based on real interviews. Selassie was not a perfect ruler, and you can't criticize a foreign reporter for not buying into a nationalist myth.



3. A great insight to a problematic past through the eyes of the directly effected. Selassie is seen as a God to some and an evil man by many, you can see both sides through these stories of real people who lived in Ethiopia during his reign.



4. What is most astonishing in Kapuscinski's book is not the fact that it was written in a more than evident biased tone with no regard whatsoever to Ethiopia's history and achievements throughout the 20th century, it is rather the fact that the book was deemed to deserve many a positive review. A a journalistic work, it is poorly written and conveys the impression that all the author wished was to defame one of the most important heads of state of the past century and justify the revolution that overthrew him. As for the style, a second-hand copy of P.G. Wodehouse revisiting the Duke of Saint-Simon, it is a regrettable example of how cynicism may be employed as a replacement for the truth of historical facts. As an historical document, it is null. It must be reminded that Selassie was a dynastic monarch, not an opportunist, that he played quite an important role in the League of Nations and through his political ability secured the very existence of Ethiopia as a country. Also, to keep a fair perspective of his reign and of his time it must be recalled that until the 1930's much of Ethiopia was an unexplored frontier, where one would still find native warriors drinking their foes' blood and eating their hearts, as one may notice in one of Wilfred Thesiger early books. Briefly, the Emperor is a sad example of how widespread ignorance of African history makes possible that a badly written and poorly researched piece of political propaganda - serving both imperialist and communist interest -may be the object of so many undeserved prints, translations and awards.



5. An oral biography of Haile Selassie's reign. Not really a page-turner, but it's fascinating listening to all these people who used to work in his palace double-speaking about him; they're still scared to say anything negative about him, so they say things like "Stupid peasants! Can't they see that by not giving them food, His Ineffable Highness was encouraging them to focus on the simple joys of life?"
   
   Worth reading if you're interested in His Ineffable Majesty. Short, too.

5 comments about The Life of Charlemagne (Ann Arbor Paperbacks).

1. Einhard's depiction of Charlemagne is one portraying his private and public life. For those of you thinking that this book was only written so that Einhard could honor Charlemagne, please look again. At first glimse this book does seem to be a superficial accounting of the life and times of Charlemagne, however, it is only after you begin to peel back the layers that the truth comes out. Einhard's depiction of charlemagne humanizes the great ruler by balancing the brutal warrior persona with his private, loving father and friend, persona. It is important to note that Einhard's book would have been read before the court, so it was imperative that the content be pleasing to those in attendance. With that in mind as well as the fact that Einhard revered Charlemagne, he manages to shed light onto Charlemagne's character and it's not always flattering. This is a biography or hagiography of Charlemagne's character. Einhard depicts a man, Charlemagne, motivated by human desires, not unlike any one of us. He was guilty of wrath, lust, gluttony, and greed and gave the church huge sums of money to be exonerated from his sins. This book shows that Charlemagne loved the institution of the church,not necessarily the church itself, because it brought him wealth and power. Charlemagne wanted to unify the cultures around him, but only after he conquered the peoples and re-settled them away from their homeland did he accept them. He smoothed the edges. He only wanted cultures that had been 'watered down'. People didn't want to be near Charlemagne, he was militaristic, oppressive, and aggressive. In fact to quote from the book "Have the Frank for your friend, but not for your neighbor" (43). Einhard exposes many of Charlemagne's flaws in this work, so read it with a critical eye.



2. Charlemagne's reign was a brief flash of light in the dark centuries that followed the collapse of the Roman empire. As king of the Franks, Charlemagne unified much of Western Europe - what today is northeastern Spain, all of France, and parts of Germany and Italy. He revived education and learning, repaired existing churches and built new ones, and helped strengthen the position of the Pope in Rome. In the year 800 Charlemagne was crowned Emperor Augustus, ruler of the new Roman empire.
   
   This new empire was short lived, but Charlemagne became legend. Einhard, a scholar in Charlemagne's court and author of this short biography, was faced with a difficult question: how does one write a balanced and honest biography of a revered king, a king that had become legendary in his own time?
   
   Einhard had few examples to follow. The religious biographies of saints were not entirely appropriate. He turned to a classical source, The Lives of the Caesars by the Roman historian Seutonius. Einhard devotes about half of his work to Charlemagne's extensive military campaigns, but his focus remains on Charlemagne the leader and Charlemagne the man, not on military tactics and strategy.
   
   The modern reader will find it helpful to read between the lines. Einhard obviously admired Charlemagne, and his criticisms are muted. Also, Einhard's writing reflects a world view very different from today.
   
   For example, Einhard in discussing the continual uprising of the Saxons says: he never allowed their faithless behavior to go unpunished, but either took the field against them in person, or sent his counts with an army to wreak vengeance and exact righteous satisfaction.
   
   Wreak vengeance? Exact righteous satisfaction? The editor's footnote explains that at the time of a revolt in 782 Charlemagne had 4,500 Saxons beheaded in one day at Verden. Similarly, after a formidable conspiracy in Germany was put down, "all the traitors were banished, some of them without mutilation, others after their eyes had been put out".
   
   Einhard provides many details of Charlemagne's character and private life. Charlemagne enjoyed the exhalations from natural hot springs. He often practiced swimming; few could surpass him in this sport. Einhard carefully describes the clothing worn by Charlemagne. He apparently disliked foreign costumes, and was most comfortable in the common dress of the Frankish people.
   
   He was temperate in eating, and especially drinking. He was particularly fond of roast meat prepared on a spit and disregarded medical advice to eat only boiled meat. He could speak Latin fluently. St. Augustine's The City of God was among his favorite books. He never developed proficiency at writing, although he practiced regularly during his later years.
   
   Einhard's biography was immensely popular and more than eighty manuscripts still exist today.
   
   My copy of The Life of Charlemagne was published by Ann Arbor Paperbacks, University of Michigan Press. The foreword by historian Sidney Painter was quite helpful in establishing the historical context. My copy includes a ninth century map of Europe, footnotes, and a genealogical table for the family of Charlemagne and Hildegard.



3. Written in the decade following Charlemagne's death, Einhard's biography is based on over twenty years of personal service to Charlemagne and gives readers a tightly-woven narrative of the sovereign's life, personal character, and military conquests. Although presenting an idealized version of events, the historical accuracy of most of the book's details have been largely confirmed by modern historians. The book's modern index reaffirms this conclusion by documenting less than ten minor factual errors.
   
   The biography was obviously written to honor Einhard's former patron, but the deeds and exploits chronicled in Einhard's book are nevertheless plausibly presented in a idealized manner reminiscent of patriotic middle school textbook renderings of George Washington or Theodore Roosevelt. The book's format is continuous, breaking only at the end of a four-page preface before continuing on with an unbroken string of pages which are presented without the benefit of chapter divisions. The style of Einhard's writing tends to be wooden and Spartan - the biography tells the reader of Charlemagne's accomplishments but makes scant mention of the difficulties he faced - and any criticism of Charlemagne is obviously muted by the author's attempt to balance the idealized expectations of his partisan audience with the Roman ideal of factual honesty.
   
   Einhard's biography starts with a concise outline of Charlemagne's lineage, beginning with a brief mention of his great-grandfather Pepin of Heristal, followed by three pages summarizing the exploits of grandfather Charles Martel and father Pepin the Short. Due to an admitted lack of source material, Einhard skips Charlemagne's childhood and proceeds directly to his first military undertaking; the Aqauitanian war begun by Pepin the Short. The rest of the book's sixty seven pages are essentially divided into two parts: the first half concisely presenting a chronological, episodic narration of Charlemagne's military campaigns (confining the focus to Charlemagne's motives and decisions while largely ignoring his tactics and strategy), before backtracking to conclude with a twenty seven page glimpse of the monarch's personal and family life.
   
   The author's purpose in writing the book, plainly stated by him in the book's preface, reveal an unmistakable admiration which borders on hero worship. Descriptive phrases like "most excellent," "justly renowned," and "a very great and distinguished man" clearly display Einhard's to write the book as tribute to the greatest man of his age. In this he succeeds; although the book's superficial and miserly accounting of its subject's exploits leave the reader hungry for more details.
   
   The book effectively chronicles the subject's glorious life and accomplishments from the point of view of a member of his court. Simultaneously, Einhard manages to shine some much-needed light onto Charlemagne's moral stature and political machinations, in addition to providing the reader with a general military history of the period.



4. This chronicle was commissioned at the request of Louis the Pious one of Charlemagne's successors, was written by Einhard, a monk, historian, and a dedicated servant of Charlemagne. His Life of Charlemagne, written between 817-830 is clearly in the vein of the famous Roman historian Suetonius' The Twelve Caesars (a text that existed at the monastery where the author worked). The work is brief, to the point, and for the most part does not include tangential information, and is biased. The bias is completely understandable and the introduction to the text points out where and why. His chronicle was written to make Louis the Pious' famous father look good. For example, one of the morally stained aspects of the Charlemagne's reign were the actions of his unmoral daughters, which Einhard carefully does not tell us about. Einhard, in short, sometimes deliberately obscures the truth. However, what is so appealing about Einhard's text is the fact that his most of his information was based off of 26 years as a servant of Charlemagne and his court, and information that he includes of actions before Charlemagne's reign most likely was gathered from sources and documents which he had access to. Lastly, Einhard's attempt at stringently following the model of Suetonius Twelve Caesars makes him connect the characteristics of great emperors such as Augustus to Charlemagne, obscuring Charlemagne's actual habits, personality etc...
   
   The introduction is ok but is mostly summary, the map is good, but the notes are scanty. A MUCH better addition would be the Penguin Classics text, Two Lives of Charlemagne, that also includes the equally interesting (although vastly different) De Carlo Magno written 70 years after Charlemagne's death.



5. King Charles the Great, more commonly known as Charlemagne, was the first truly great leader of France. His reign was one of great expansion as he created a French nation that controlled nearly all of Western Europe. Charlemagne was a great military commander and one who appreciated learning, he did a great deal to promote the relearning of so much that was lost with the fall of the Roman Empire.
   Einhard was one of the learned people that Charlemagne sponsored, and so in this book Einhard quite naturally praises the great king. Yet, it is historically accurate and written in 830 CE, it is contemporary to the life of the great king. Einhard's direct observation of the life of Charlemagne is a historical classic, one that should be read by all students of what we now call the Dark Ages. For Charlemagne was a rare glimmer of light during those times of meager learning and education.

5 comments about Cooking for Kings: The Life of Antonin Careme, the First Celebrity Chef.

1. I am currently in school for my bachelors in culinary and this book is a must have for all students i believe i have only started to read it but so far it is great



2. For an excellent blend of biography and cookbook, choose Cooking For Kings: The Life Of Antonin Careme, The First Celebrity Chef, a survey of the life of the first known celebrity chef Antonin Careme and his recipes. The cook's own memoirs are used to trace his rise from an abandoned child to becoming one of the greatest cooks in Paris. Careme was more than a chef: he invited chef's tools, he cooked for kings and noblemen, and he even made Napoleon's wedding cake. His marriage of food with glamour made him a notable figure - as well as the first chef to become rich by publishing cookbooks. This is a lively history recommended for food fans.



3. In addition to telling the story of the great chef, this book also provides a lot of insight into the history of food and its evolution, and some of the "dark" side of being a chef during the days of Careme. His health suffered mightily from the fumes from the poorly ventilated kitchens during the time, and the long hours that he worked pushed him into exhaustion, further compromising his health.
   
   I found this full of detailed research and interesting anecdotes. The recipes included were also very insightful, and well chosen. It was also written with a good pace and narrative style. Would highly recommend. I've moved on to "Escoffier: The King of Chefs."



4. This is a wonderful book. I'm writing a historical romance and I used this book for reference on the food and times of France and Europe in 1815. It's marvelous.



5. This was a very interesting read about the beginning of the modern foodie movement and the Frenchman responsible for it. The historic recipies included make it possible for a modern reader to eat as royalty once did.

5 comments about Victoria's Daughters.

1. If you like Queen Victoria's stuff, you will love this story about her daughters.



2. 
   Last year I read the mesmerizing "Born to Rule" about Queen Victoria's granddaughters who became ruling monarchs. That wonderful book, led me to this one.
   
   The book begins, as expected, with the royal childhoods. The Queen would never have her staff spare the rod, nor would she take pains to spare the child any humiliation. She calls them ugly and dumb, and they know where they stand. (No wonder they had so much grief when their father died!)
   
   Victoria's views were transplanted to Germany by her eldest daughter. Vicky's first son's handicap, and the resulting strict regimine should have spurred some maternal empathy, but all little Willy got was structure, punishment and criticism. One could build an argument Queen Victoria's child rearing methods spawned WWI.
   
   Queen Victoria comes off as totally self involved, and like the other royals she's obsessed with monarchy. Marriages, if not based on passion are bargained with it. Rank is the central issue. Fortunately, Victoria allows her daughters/granddaughters veto power, but keeps it for herself as well. For all the care and negotiation surrounding the marriages, not one of them or the life it brought, seemed to yield much happiness.
   
   Since there are 6 key characters (mother + 5 daughters) each worthy of their own biography, it is by nature a once over lightly. It has a good narrative style and is worth reading if you are interested in this period.



3. For all the pomp, ceremony and privileges of belonging to a Royal family, the chores, the duties, the self discipline and living your life in the public eye would make, for me, an onerous task, for which no amount of money or fame could make up. This book is a fascinating look at Victoria's daughters and how their lives were virtually mapped out for them at birth. In that era, Royal Princesses were expected to marry according to rank and for whatever alliances could be brought to their country. I had known a fair bit about the lives of the more well known daughters, such as the Empress of Germany, poor creature, whose early widowhood caused the rise to the throne by her lunatic son, William, the Kaiser who started WW1, but loved finding out about the private lives of several of the younger girls and their marriages and families, some of which worked out quite well and others which were an utter disaster. The tragedy of the haemophilia which was passed through the generations by Victoria's daughters brought sorrow to many of the girls who lost sons in infancy or when they were only very young men, was a constant terror among the Royal families of Europe, into which these daughters married, as there was no way of forecasting or curing any potential carrier. It's a great look into life in Victorian times.



4. Victoria's Daughters is so well-written and informative, I found it hard to put down. Jerrold Packard seems to strike just the right happy medium of having tons of information without going into too many unnecessary details. The book contains sometimes startling insights into the personalities and private lives of Vicky, Alice, Helena, Louise, and Beatrice that most biographers don't delve into. This is easily one of the best royal biographies I've ever read.



5. A very good biography on Queen Victoria's five daughters Victoria, Alice, Helena, Louise , and Beatrice. All five growing up under a domineering and interfering mother who was also queen which none of them were ever allowed to forget. Victoria grew up the favorite daughter while Alice became the more humble and more interested in helping others especially nursing. The youngest three found it more difficult to try and have their own marriages after the death of their father the last on Beatrice in particular ended up fighting over a year in order to get her marriage because her mother didn't want to lose her helper. In the end Beatrice got her marriage but was still not allowed to leave her mother's side as her mother's messager Beatrice was often isolated from her other siblings. In fact upon her mother's death didn't quite know what to do with herself. I enjoyed reading about their childhood especially. An excellent read.