5 comments about The Princess Who Changed the World (Diana Princess of Wales).

1. This glutinous tribute to England's Great Whore and Traitoress made me want to spew.



2. This book seems to be either an attempt to just make money from Diana's death, or perhaps a belated apology for the trash he had written about Diana in his earlier book. This book is more sympathetic to Diana, but not as extensive in the biographical coverage of Diana's life, mostly about the last days of her life.



3. A good book about the lovely and wonderful Diana though perhaps not the best I've ever read. Still, those of us who truly loved and admired this wonderful woman will want to read it.

   To the "Reader From Oxford England" whose nasty review appeared above: Why bother to share your vapid and meaningless thoughts? My suggestion for you is to go and find other Diana-bashers, such as that two-faced Robert Fellowes, and have a great big BLOW-FEST with one another!!




4. I felt the author attempted to shed new insight on a beautiful woman who died far too early in her short life. Prince Charles said it best once...he felt that in time she would have come back to him, possibly very ill, and he would have taken care of her. I do believe, in spite of what he had told the press in his famous BBC interview, that he did love her. She was the mother of their boys.



5. I get so tired of hearing people "trash" a woman who (although she made her share of mistakes--like everyone else),did so many things that brought joy and happiness to the lives of so many people--usually the less fortunate.. Sure, she was a Princess, and wealthy and famous, but she also lived a life full of pain. Money and fame cannot take away the pain other people caused her. She was thrown into a lifestyle and a family who did very little to help her. She wanted to learn! No one wanted to bother to teach her. Just throw her to the wolves...She did very well, despite all of the troubles she had to deal with in her own life. She tried to put her unhappiness aside to help others. How many people do that in the world we Live In today. All people seem to care about is themselves. Frankly, even though Diana made mistakes, she also tried very hard to deal with her problems, while helping others with theirs. And she couldn't have possibly been a better mother to her children. She just wanted and needed love, like everyone else in the world! I am very proud that I knew a woman who did as much to help others, as Diana did. Anyone who wants to "knock" her, should try living the life she had to live and see how well they do!!!

1 comments about Diana, Princess of Wales, 1961-97: A Tribute in Photographs (Diana Princess of Wales).

1. This book is very well designed with all its colored pictures that are just so beautiful. Please visit angelfire.com/journal/grahamw to see my sale of this book.

1 comments about Prince Henry Sinclair: His Expedition to the New World in 1398.

1. Pohl takes the letters of the Italian navigator Zeno investigates his connection to Henry Sinclair. The theory is that Zeno helped Sinclair navigate to Newfoundland. Pohl's initial findings are in Zeno's letters themselves. In 1398, according to the Zeno narrative, Zeno sailed across the Atlantic with a "Prince of the Islands" (Sinclair). Pohl does some astonishing calligraphy detective work on Zeno's maps and examines the Micmac Indian legend of Glooscap. According the Micmac legends, Glooscap sailed on an island with tall trees and was white. Pohl's detective work makes for a good argument that in 1492, Columbus sailed the ocean blue, but got beat to the punch by a Scotsman. The only evidence I am truly surprised Pohl did not introduce was the carvings of Indian Corn at the Sinclair's Rosslyn Chapel in Edinburgh. The construction on the Chapel began in 1446, 50 years before anyone in Europe should have know of the existence of corn.

5 comments about Wilhelm II, Vol. 2: Emperor and Exile, 1900-1941 (Cecil, Lamar//Wilhelm II).

1. Lamar Cecil presents a suspenseful yet satisfying book in Willhelm II. Not only does he express the inner thoughts of Willhelm, yet shows a personal side which expresses the crown prince's poryphia stricken reduced him to a stalk raving mad wildabeast. Not only was he stalk raving mad, the wildabeast confronted his homosexual tendencies with Eulenburg and Walderee.



2. For the past several years Ihave been a student of late 19th and early 20th century Europe. A starting place had to be found, which is much easier said than done. My readings kept leading me back to Germany, i.e., Prussia. I only wish I had discovered Professor Cecil earlier. His two-part biography of Wilhelm II has proved indispensable. I can't fathom reading one volume without the other, but since this review speaks to Volume II, "Wilhelm II,Emperor and Exile, 1900-1941,we'll have a go. The best way to read Volume II is to read the last sentence of the book first, where Professor Cecil applies a paraphrase from the Duke of Wellington who was describing the late George IV. Cecil thusly applies it to Wilhelm: "a sovereign who lived and died without having been able to assert so much as a single claim on the gratitude of posterity." The joy of the book is getting to that last sentence. It's all in there: feuding with his uncle, King Edward VII of England; the "Mad Hare" Telegraph article; the absolute idiocy of the naval arms race with England;his ill-fated dependence on the rotting Habsburg Empire; his hatred of any form of parlimentary government; and finally his almost tragic descent when he had lost the confidence of German Military Command, members of his own family, and millions of the German people. Good books on Wilhelm are hard to find. This one, especially when taken with Volume I, is outstanding.



3. For a German history junkie, these volumes are a good 'fix'. The text is written humorously and yet fairly, without the usual bias one sees when "the victor writes the history". The analysis of the last Kaiser's life is placed in the context of the monarchical attitude of 19th century Europe, as well as the influence that his relatives in the British Empire had on his outlook. I've read the books twice. Without understanding at least some german it would be difficult to get the complete gist of what the author is trying to convey without it.



4. One of the most critically acclaimed studies of Wilhelm II is Lamar Cecil�s two-volume biography (1989, 1996 ), deemed by one reviewer as �the best-available English treatment of the waning years of the last Kaiser� available. Cecil�s portrait of Wilhelm is largely critical: the emperor ruled �maladroitly,� throughout a �barren career that was without virtue or accomplishment� (ix); �bluster, rhetoric, and natural swagger cloaked a profound emptiness, for ignorance and self-indulgence were his primary characteristics.� (1). Cecil�s assessment of the Kaiser�s war role is no less disapproving. �Domestic issues rarely interested Wilhelm II,� he notes (191), and emphasizes that the Kaiser was far more enamored by foreign policy and military minutiae. Despite this martial enthusiasm, Wilhelm was �by nature peaceful,� (194) and opposed war in 1914, afraid that a European conflict would distract Germany from the internal threat of socialism.
   Once the war began, Cecil shows, Wilhelm�s function was symbolic and superficial, at least as far as the imperial army was concerned. He often resided close to the front, was occasionally exposed to hostile fire, and relished hearing the roar of the guns. Cecil makes it clear that the Kaiser�s duties were limited to sending telegrams, war zone tours, medal presentations and other purely ceremonial tasks��it was as empty an existence as he had had in peacetime.� Cecil flatly asserts that Wilhelm�s �part in the war, especially as it concerned the army, took a secondary place behind the role of his officers.� (210). He was for the most part shielded by his ubiquitous military entourage, fearful that his inability to �withstand the strains of warfare� would break him. �The Kaiser�s ignorance of the true nature of the struggle in which Germany was engaged,� Cecil frankly summarizes, �was profound and his utility to his military leaders quite limited.� He was in essence a figurehead, �content merely to hear and endorse� the opinions of his generals. Soon after the war began, Cecil concludes, Wilhelm became �a �shadow Kaiser� (schattenkaiser), out of sight, neglected, and relegated to the sidelines in imperial Germany�s hour of trial.� (212)

   This is the gold standard of Kaiser Wilhelm II biographies.




5. Lamar Cecil should be applauded for writing an objective biography of Wilhelm II. Whilst this volume is in keeping with the high standards of the first, I am a little bit disappointed that his life after his 1918 abdication is a bit too sketchy, possibly due to the fact that Wilhelm II managed to outlive most of his contemporaries. This book is not about Wilhelmine dilpomatic history, or the Great War, but a well researched treatise on the malignant effects of autocratic rule by an unstable, pompous incompetent.

No comments about Charles the Second: King of England, Scotland, and Ireland.

2 comments about Louis XIV.

1. Levi's Louis XIV is an odd book. After the introductory first chapter, the next seven chapters proceed chronologically from his birth to the affair of the poisons, although Levi does jump around within that chronological order. The final five chapters are arranged topically on Versailles, the king's religion, war and foreign policy, Popes and Protestants (one would think that this chapter should have followed the one on the king's religion), and finally the king's character, health and death.

   
   This is not a very good book. It is jammed with facts but many of them are not right. For instance, on pages 263 and 264 Levi discusses Marshal Vauban who has been a heroic character throughout the book. On page 263 Levi says that Vauban had been appointed a member of the Order of the Holy Spirit in February 1708 with all kinds of special permissions by Louis XIV. Yet on page 264 Levi says that Vauban died in March, 1706. (He actually died in March, 1707.) Either this is sloppiness on the part of the writer or bad proofreading by the publisher. And this is one example out of many of apparent misstatements of fact or sloppy publishing.
   
   Some of Levi's sentences are unreadable. On page 269 in discussing the death of Louis XIV's grandson the duc de Bourgogne, he writes the following: "No fasting was involved, and doctors were not being provoked by being told against their judgement (sic) by a miscellany of priests and royalty that the danger of death was imminent, although it was." This is just one example of some of the monstrosities in this book.
   
   Levi makes a pair of linked outrageous claims in this book. First, he says that Louis XIV was not the son of Louis XIII but was a product of a union between Anne of Austria and Cardinal Mazarin. Then, he compounds this claim by saying that Louis XIV was aware that Mazarin was his biological father. Previous authors (John B. Wolf and Claude Dulong among them) have said that Mazarin and Anne of Austria became and remained lovers after the death of Louis XIII. And many people have wondered about the possibility of Louis XIV being produced by a one-night stand between Anne of Austria and the consumptive, possibly homosexual Louis XIII. Levi comes out and states that Louis XIV (and his brother) were not produced by Louis XIII. And he makes a strong case, but, given his problems with facts discussed above, can we trust him?
   
   And, if Louis XIV was aware that his mother had had an adulterous relationship with Mazarin, how did that affect his attitude toward monarchy? Louis XIV is widely regarded as the leading proponent and example of absolute monarchy based on divine right of kings and Levi says that it was all based on a lie that Louis XIV was aware of. Levi makes very little of this argument or of the psychological impact it may have had on Louis XIV, but instead he talks about Louis XIV as being uncertain, timid, shy, etc. This is a missed opportunity at best.




2. I bought this book in the bookstore at Versailles. After my tours of the palace and the gardens looking for ghosts and wondering what life was like and what was in the heads of the people at court of Louis XIV. This is a very readable yet scholarly history book. It doesn't get into the head of Louis XIV quite so well as Antonia Fraser was able to do in her biography of Marie Antoinette, "Marie Antoinette The Journey". Louis XIV doesn't quite become a real person in the pages of this book however it is a beginning. This is one of the better written histories I have found.

No comments about Royal Lives.

5 comments about The Bridesmaids.

1. Ms. Quine, a long-standing friend of the late Princess Grace of Monaco, did a fine job of relating all the details of Grace's engagement and marriage; in fact, I felt that I was right there alongside her and Grace throughout all the proceedings. I simply couldn't have gotten a more detailed or accurate account of one of the greatest weddings of the 20th century.

   What turned me off was that Ms. Quine spent way too much time discussing her own life: Her father's head-honcho job at a movie studio; her family's wealth and status; her own numerous, tumultuous marriages; her personal problems; and her errant children. She might as well have made this an autobiography! For those of you who don't know much about the details of Grace Kelly's life, you'll most certainly know less about her than you will about the author after you finish reading this book.




2. It's an absorbing and different kind of story, this tale of six girls, best friends, of The Lsst of the Hollywood Glamour Girls (Grace Kelly), who were bridesmaids in Ms. Kelly's Royal Wedding. There's more to the book, however, because it's a book about women who grew up believing they would find their Prince and live happily ever after someday -- and didn't.

   Whether the bride did or not remains a matter of conjecture, although the impression here is that Grace Kelly Rainier's married life really wasn't all that terrific after all.

   The book is opinionated to the point of being offensive. The author solves problems and gives advice to all who would listen. Her voice is strident but her story is compelling. I enjoyed the book, although I certainly do not agree with her perception of the women of her day. (I am one, after all, and I can speak with the authority of personal experience.)




3. It has been a long time since I first read this book, (1994) - however, this biography of Grace Kelly is one that forever stands out in my mind as a great portrayal of the princess and actress.
   Quine writes of Grace as only a best friend can. She shows Grace Kelly in good times and sad times, exploring her emotions and her fears and overall, portrays the princess as a real human being. I couldn't help but feel that as I read this book Quine was letting me into Grace Kelly's life a little more than she should, and by the time I finished this book, I felt I knew more about Grace Kelly than ever the media could allow me to. I felt literally, like one of Grace Kelly's friends or even a confidant. That is how close Quine brings you to this legendary person.



4. This is an interesting book about a very interesting lady.
   Ms Quine has an intimate view of one of the most famous marriages of the past century. She writes eloquently of a time past, where women lived to be married, and the progression to the modern day where most of the bridesmaids had shed those essential husbands.
   Ms Quine has an easy to read writing style and you can whip through this book.
   My only criticism is that the book focuses far too much on Ms Quine. She seems to have a very high opinion of herself, and while others may have found reading about her interesting, I did not.



5. Great quick read about the beautiful Grace Kelly, althought I feel like the author uses it to highlight her own life and opinions...almost to the point of disrespecting a successful beautiful woman/actress/Princess. If you want something more true to the Princess, pick another book. This was more like Grace Kelly 90210 if you get my drift.

3 comments about Queen Victoria at Home.

1. This book is a reflection on the life of Queen Victoria by someone who is clearly fascinated by her and who probably knows everything there is to know about her. It is easy to read and does not require you to know a great deal about her already in order to make any sense out of the book.
   On the other hand, if you are already well-read about Victoria, this book, in my opinion, brings little that's new. But if you are willing to take the journey with this author and let him share his thoughts in the way usually reserved for a dear old friend, then you will find a pleasant un-bumpy ride along the way.



2. this good bood on basic facts about queen victoria and her era.this is a easy read.



3. An easy read on Queen Victoria. This book adds nothing new but simply rehash everything that you've read in other biographies on Queen Victoria. Its not a bad book it is very well written and I enjoyed it very much. But if your expecting any new information on her you won't find it in this book.

1 comments about Kings and Queens of England.

1. The history of the British Royal Family extends well past 1000 years ago, but for a long time, the date of 1066 has had pride-of-place as the demarcation of the 'proper' lineage, and Brenda Ralph Lewis' book on the kings and queens of England follows suit. Lewis does not pretend to give an extensive or in-depth history here - this being a book with the Reader's Digest imprimatur, it is as one might expect, a summary and overview of the highlights of the reigns. This is not to say that Lewis gives short shrift or lack of attention to her subjects - far from it! But she does concentrate on the highlights (and lowlights) of each subject, focusing a bit more on the more headline-worthy aspects of each reign, as one might expect from the subtitle of the book, 'Murder, Mayhem, and Scandal: 1066 to the Present Day'.
   
   Scandal and attention-getting intrigue is hardly the province of the current generations of the British Royal Family. Indeed, compared to some of their predecessors, the current crop of royals can be considered rather mild in many respects. Lewis details the intrigues around many dynastic shifts - the Wars of the Roses, the race for an heir to George IV, etc. - as well as some of the personal battles - the aforementioned George's ongoing battle with his wife, Caroline, the 'Injured Queen of England', the current Queen's 'annus horibilis', and finally the Charles and Diana split, ending with Diana's death, the point at which Lewis' book on murder, mayhem and scandal concludes.
   
   One gets a bit of a distorted view of the royals from this text, in that one wonders if there is any merit at all in any of the lot for the past 1000 years. In fact, Lewis holds up various figures for their virtues, sometimes against type-casting: Queen Mary Tudor, the first queen to reign in her own right, is nicknamed by history as 'Bloody Mary', but Lewis points out that, in her own time, she was known as a kind-hearted and long-suffering woman. However, there is more than enough juicy gossip to keep the narrative going for several times the page number allotted to this text, so Lewis necessarily had to be selective in her presentation. This is, of course, the story of the English monarchs, so the various tales of the Scottish, Welsh and Irish leaders are only drawn in as they impact the English 1066 - present standard lineage.
   
   Each page is generously illustrated with full-colour photographs, paintings, diagrams, charts and other graphic images. Not a single page is without an image and colour. The text is also laid out in such as way as to make reading very easy and pleasant, with bold face, pull-quote boxes, and other such devices employed throughout. This will make reading a history text much more palatable to younger readers - this text will be of interest to secondary school students and beyond.
   
   There is a useful index, but it is a bit incomplete. The genealogy charts are also drawn so as to focus only upon the key figures in the drama, rather than the whole family, so readers hoping for more complete information in that regard should look to the Oxford History of the British Monarchy, or one of books by Antonia Fraser, among others. However, despite these minor flaws, the book is fun to read - one gets the sense that, had the popular press been around throughout the history of the royals, this would be very much what the stories and headlines would have looked like.