No comments about Maharaja: Princely States.

1 comments about George IV (The English Monarchs Series).

1. This guy was the epitome of decadents. The author described in 3D so it seams the parties,the spending, the frustration, the many mistresses of this unpopular king. No one was sorry when he passed away. That is sad indeed. The author also showed that this king was a great patron of the arts. He built schools. Great book.

1 comments about THE NEEDLEWORK OF MARY, QUEEN OF SCOTS..

1. Margaret Swain has done a fantastic job of writing what is essentially an historical book on thee influences on Mary Queen of Scots needlework, and it makes fascinating reading.

   Swain has traced her life and the types of embroidery and needlework she did in Scotland, later in France and then finally during her last captivity in England. The clever messages she used to send in her embroideries as messages to her supporters, and the puns in many of her chosen subjects are explained.

   What I found most wonderful in this book is that while I have always admired the needleword of MQS I have never really understood its significance. Margaret Swain really brought that side of it alive for me and left me with a far deeper appreciation of what they were all about.

   I have the soft cover version of this which is excellent value, it has some kind of hard wearing plastic coating which makes it almost as durable as the hard cover version. Really unfortunately there are only two pages of colour illustration in here and I think the embroidery of MQS deserves better illustration than that. It is certainly generous with the black and white pictures.

No comments about James II: The Triumph and the Tragedy (English Monarchs. Treasures from the National Archives) (English Monarchs. Treasures from the National Archives).

1 comments about The Tarnished Crown: Princess Diana and the House of Windsor.

1. Well, I normally like books about the British monarchy, but this one was not a winner. I only gave it three stars because Holden writes well and has researched his subject sufficiently, but as the title should have warned me, he took a very one-sided and negative view of events. He criticized pretty much all the key players and their personal and marital failings, the royal finances, and so on down the line--all while using Diana's name in the title to ensure larger sales. So something here smacked of sensationalism, a beating of the disparaging drum at a time (1993) when it was popular and profitable to find fault with the Windsors. Although I am not their staunchest defender, my sense of fair play was offended by this portrayal.

2 comments about Edward the Confessor.

1. Though the subject of this book may seem a bit daunting and even boring, I promise you that Frank Barlow has done a fabulous job. He has brought to life the enigmatic and somewhat obscure lives of the most important Englishmen of the late 11th century: Edward the Confessor, Earl Godwin, Edith Godwin's daughter, King Harold II, Swegn Godwinson, and Tostig Godwinson. A must-read.



2. Wow - this man knows his history! If you are a serious historian interested in Edward the Confessor - this is your Bible! The reading is extremely dry - don't think you'll find more here than the facts, but there are facts galore! Barlow begins with an indepth look at Edward's background and the background of the political situation in England. He ends with the impact of Edward during the reign of Henry III and covers literally EVERYTHING in between. Then for good measure, he adds nearly another 100 pages of appendicies, time lines, maps, tables and illustrations. I'm very impressed with the author's knowledge of the subject. I only hold back that last "star" because I regret that the author didn't make it a bit more "friendly" to read. It is dry and moves slowly and is not probably a book that would generate interest in Edward the Confessor so much as it is a book to verify facts for those already interested. I personally prefer history and historical fiction that can introduce a reader to a subject and make them want to read more. I'm afraid that his work will be too daunting to many and makes Edward sound extremely dull - which he truly was not.

2 comments about Richard III (English Monarchs).

1. The back cover calls this book a "biography" of Richard III. That, it should be emphasised, it is not. Many important events in the life of Richard III are only mentioned in passing. Readers who want to know whether Richard really ordered the murder of his nephews will have to look elsewhere, too. In fact, the author clearly assumes that the reader has already read a biography of this king, and is familiar with the facts.
   
   The book really is an assesment of Richard III as a politician: His career, the methods by which he climbed to power, and his downfall. The author makes an effort to situate Richard III in the the context of his own time, but at the same time very much portrays him as a politician who used techniques that are familiar to today's spin doctors.
   
   As such, this is a fine book, and well worth reading, even if the authors is at times guilty of too much repetition. It is an highly interesting assesment. All the same, the readers gets the annoying feeling that it is not an objective assesment; this clearly is the case for the prosecution. Where the author attempts to present also a case for the defense, he automatically falls back into prosecutorial mode. Hence the fifth star remains out of reach.



2. After reading Hick's effort at a biography about Anne Neville I thought perhaps this "leading" scholar of the period would be on firmer ground with Richard, for whom there is no lack of material. Indeed.
   However, by p.77 I could take no more; Hicks was caught manipulating a minor detail into a portrayal of Richard as a foolhardy, relentless opportunist whose greed made him the dupe of one Sir James Harrington, whose implied claims to Hornby Castle was legally specious and typical of Richard's political ineptitude, as if this Harrington was some unknown quantity to him, to his family!
   
   Had Hicks really read the biography of Richard by Prof. Charles Ross (whom he alleges to admire) he would certainly have come across this family in Ross's far more honest assessment of the facts: Harrington was the same family that stood by Richard's father, the Duke of York, especially Sir Thomas (the father of Sir James) who fought and died alongside York at Wakefield (Dec.1460).
   
   If there is nothing else that can be said about Richard I think it is he was loyal to the memory of his father and extended this loyalty to any of his father's adherents or heirs: those bonds were all he would have of this father whose head would be piked on Micklegate Bar in York when Richard was only eight.
   
   If Hicks is willing to play stupid games like this, just to make Richard look uniquely and mindlessly grapsing then for me Hicks lost all credibility and I proceeded to read every statement with not just caution but outright suspicion.
   
   One of the most annoying segments was concerning the "star witness," Dominic Mancini (p.125-136). To even suggest Mancini was in any way objective and just happened to be wandering around London in 1483, who just happened to know the Archbishop of Vienne (Angelo Cato, physician to the French king, Louis XI) strained my patience. Why any author hoping to establish Mancini as their "proof" that More and the Tudors had it right would not think to fully first establish Mancini's presumed credentials can only be doing so to plump up a very dangerous weakness in his "history."
   
   For example, who sent Mancini to London? Why early in 1483, who paid his living expenses, why did he leave just as suddenly and just as things were getting interesting, ie. a most unexpected coronation, in early July? When did he write any part of this history? What language was it written in? were there installment reports sent back to Cato while he was abroad? was he an agent of the French king's physician? was he there to report on the rumors of Edward IV's decline? Was he there to simply connect with other agents in the city, as a routine procedure? was he ever sent by Cato to any other country, as an ambassador, an agent, to check on any other king and their circle? If not, why not? When and where did he meet Cato? Why the English court?
   
   Since Hicks wasn't about to even allow he possibility that Mancini had been sent with an agenda I will provide it, thanks to the scepticism Hick's sloppy manner engenders - as far as I can ascertain from other author's references to Mancini he was probably sent by Cato as a agent, (and who knows how many others!) and specifically to report on the situation there. It was Cato's good fortune that his man was there at the time Edward IV died from his well known excesses. Mancini was recalled by Cato, with the coronation of Richard, at a most curious time: Why recall him then? Did he fear for Mancini's life? Was it now unsafe for Mancini, especially if he was consorting with Argentine, and how many others was Argentine in league with? when did Argentine leave London? Was the only mission for Mancini extended by his French "patron" - Cato - when his liege realized things had gone awary, as far as what would have been more beneficial to the French, that of a child king? Was Mancini only recalled once Cato quite suddenly realised what he was dealing with? Not the 12 year old stripling Edward V in the hands of his dozy, scholarly uncle Rivers; but instead, the most inopportune reality of Richard duke of Gloucester, now king, someone Cato et al knew to be openly hostile to them since the Treaty of Picquigny (1475) which Richard refused to sign much less attend it's signing.
   
   If Mancini showed up with any biases against Richard it was not Tudor or Lancastrian related, it was simple French mistrust and possibly even loathing for Richard, who most assuredly wanted that 1475 invasion to be another Agincourt!
   
   Mancini no doubt sent updates back to Cato, who once he recalled Mancini, then wanted a formal document drawn up to have on hand for future use if needed (for defamation, as a no doubt doctored tract would be). How much Mancini knew of these machinations I can't tell, he may simply have been aware of Cato's larger plans for his update reports only after he was recalled and then "made to" write them down as a history.
   
   So, read Hicks if you have nothing else to do, but read with a pen nearby, you will have to do alot of cross referencing to even hope to establish what is reliable versus what is Hick's tiresome malice concerning his subject.

2 comments about Nur Jahan: Empress of Mughal India.

1. Ellison Findly's "Nur Jahan" is a biography of the eighteenth and last wife of the Mogul emperor Jahangir (1569-1627). Jahangir was Nur Jahan's second husband. Her first, Sher Afghan, was killed in a fracas that followed his murder of an old friend and associate of Jahangir.

   Jahangir was given largely to sensual pleasures, including six cups of alcohol (each two parts wine to one part arrack) and two doses of opium every day (the first eight surkhs, the second six) --- following a reduced regimen, instituted by his physicians and enforced by Nur Jahan. I wish Findly had mentioned how many milligrams a surkh is. Also, how much happiness and debility a diet such as this is likely to induce. Given his level of addiction, it is no wonder that following Jahangir's wedding to Nur Jahan in 1605, political power was exercised on his behalf almost entirely by a clique constituted, initially, of his beloved Nur Jahan, his chief minister Itmaduddaula, the courtier Asaf Khan, and his son Khurram.

   Itmaduddaula was Nur Jahan's father, and Asaf Khan her brother. Khurram, the son of Jahangir's second wife, Jagat Gosaini, came to be known as Shah Jahan, later, when he ascended the throne following a protracted rebellion against his father. The ruling clique had disintegrated by the time of the rebellion. In his revolt, Khurram was covertly aided and abetted by Asaf Khan, who was also the father of his wife Arjumand Bano (later Mumtaz Mahal).

   Sharyar, a son of Jahangir from one of his concubines, and the husband of Nur Jahan's only child Ladli Begum from her marriage to Sher Afghan, was Nur Jahan's choice for Jahangir's successor. Nur Jahan had no children by Jahangir. Nurjahan had tried her very best to marry Ladli first to Khusrau, Jahangir's eldest, then to Khurram, but neither could be made to take an interest in Ladli.

   Sharyar, however, never did stand a chance against Khurram. In the few years before Jahangir's demise, Sharyar contracted leprosy, and that further reduced his chances for making a successful bid for power. A few days after Jahangir's death, Sharyar did proclaim himself emperor at Lahore, but within a few days of that he was imprisoned by Asaf Khan, and blinded by his order. Yet a few days later Shah Jahan, marching north from Deccan to Agra at the head of the rebel army, sent a message to Asaf Khan to have Sharyar and four other princes done to death. They were strangled.

   Nur Jahan was a woman of unusual ability. She exercised political authority with intelligence, courage and astuteness, and did it despite constraints (like purdah) imposed by life in the Moghul zenana. She was also responsible, almost single-handedly, for the many artistic, architectural, and cultural achievements of the Jahangir era. Her cultural and artistic achievements derived largely from the immense resources at her command. But they were also, in equal measure, due to her unflagging energy, and the keenness of her aesthetic vision. Her artistic achievements include the Moghul gardens of Kashmir and Agra, and the tomb of her father Itmaduddaula, also in Agra, which was the first example of the use of white marble embellished with the precise inlay of precious stones into the surface of marble facing --- a technique (pietra dura) exploited also in the construction of the Taj Mahal.

   Findly's biography is a work of scholarship and authority, yet very lucid and absorbing. It covers a very interesting period of Indian history, and ties together reports from a number of contemporary sources: Indian, British, Dutch, Portuguese, and Italian. Separate but overlapping chapters each cover material with thematic unity.




2. This book is interesting because Nur Jahan was the virtual ruler of India through the years of her marriage to the astute but dissolute Mughal Emperor, Jahangir, whose weak character and refinement make him a very comparable ruler to Louis XV in France.
   The Indian emperor allowed his consort to govern in his name while he enjoyed himself in the pursuit of courtly pleasures and what turned out to be a slow descent into alcholism.
   Luckily for India, Nur Jahan was a very intelligent and capable ruler, that knew how to promote the right people and had an extensive and beneficial influence over the taste and artistic developments of the period, her legacy in that respect is even more interesting than her politics. She was also acknowledged by the emperor for her accomplishments, even having coinage issued in her name which was quite an accomplishment at a time when most women's lives were confined to the harem, or zanana as it is called in India.
   Some of the most interesting passages of the book are those dealing with her patronage of the arts, and particularly for her influence in architecture and the construction of exquisite gardens. It is most important to note that the architectural style of the Taj Mahal, the greatest of all Mughal monuments and the greatest achievement of Sha Jahan's reign actually had an antecedent in the mausoleum that Nur Jahan built for her father.
   In another very interesting chapter her literary merits as a poet are discussed and quoted, so the reader is able to glimpse at her literary persona. This is perhaps the most revealing chapter in getting to know the woman behind the veil of majesty and cultural convention.
   Although I enjoyed reading this book, I found the style to be dry and dull. It is difficult to get through the chapters, and one gets the impression that the scintillating personality of the empress escapes the author's portrayal. The author has investigated her subject thoroughly but has failed to understand the charm and magnetism that made Jahangir fall in love with her, eventhough she was past her prime, widowed, and had a grown child from her first husband when he became interested in her.
   The amount of notes per page is quite staggering and the reader is advised not to follow them if he wants to keep track of the narrative, it is best to check them all at one time at the end of each chapter, as most are only referencing the sources and not necessarily clarifying the text.
   There are no maps of either cities or countryside in the book, so for the reader it may be annoying not to be able to visualize the many trips of the court or even the locations of battlefields. The book has many illustrations but none are in color, and most of the architectural pictures seem to have been taken in the early part of the 20th century, and fail to convey the delicate beauty of the Mughal monuments. More importantly, the black and white illustrations of the miniatures, which are never augmented in size, make it almost impossible to see any details. These illustrations do not provide an accurate depiction of the splendor and luxury that characterized the court of Nur Jahan, which was anything but subdued in color.
   All of the above taken into account, it is still a most interesting and important account of a fascinating character in the history of India and I strongly recommend it for anyone interested in the period or in a fascinating woman that combined in one person the strength of will and intelligence of Elizabeth I of England and the seductiveness, elegance and charm of Empress Josephine.
   Nur Jahan deserves more attention from biographers, and her life would be excellent material for an exciting film.

No comments about The Ruling House of Monaco.

5 comments about JOURNEY INTO DARKNESS: Follow the FBI's Premier Investigative Profiler as He Penetrates the Minds and Motives of the Most Terrifying Serial Criminals.

1. This book explains his career as a criminal profiler for the FBI. John Douglas solved unusual kinds of crimes done by those who kill or rape or torture because they enjoy it. Profiling requires "creative-type thinkers", not accounting or engineering types. They must work well both alone and in groups. They need good judgment based on instinct, which can't be defined in an objective nature. Douglas says serial killers are mostly made, not born. Most come from broken or dysfunctional homes, and are victims of some type of abuse. Real-life killers were used as models for "The Silence of the Lambs", "Red Dragon", and "Psycho". The modus operandi is what the offender does, the signature is why he does it (that doesn't change). Virtually all multiple killers are male. Chapter 2 gives an example of solving murders where there was only a vague eyewitness description.
   
   Chapter 3 shows many examples where profiling was used to describe the habits of killers. Chapter 4 tells of more cases, some of which will never be dramatized for TV as they are too horrible. Chapter 5 deals with pedophiles. One warning sign would be a man whose house has games and amusements that appeal to children. Chapter 6 tells of the possible dangers to young children. One example is the murder of Megan Kanka. It doesn't tell you that her murderer was released from prison against all advice because a new governor wanted to cut costs. Fast footwork by propagandists made it appear to be the fault of the parents since "they didn't know". I wonder if this law affected the crime rate? Chapter 7 tells of the Collins family; its too long. Chapter 8 tells of the murder of Suzanne Collins, a sad tragedy. Chapter 9 tells of the after-effects on Suzanne's parents, and their support group. Chapter 10 is about the savage murder of a wife and her two girls. It established the use of criminal profiling at trials. Chapter 11 tells about the crimes of a rapist-murderer near Arlington Va. [Was this the inspiration for Patricia Cornwell's "Post Mortem"?] When they noted a 3-year gap in the crimes, they looked for someone who had been in prison for burglary; they found a likely suspect. This suspect was convicted, the first person in the world to be executed on the basis of DNA evidence.
   
   Chapter 12 is about the unsolved murders of Ron Goldman and Nicole Brown Simpson. John Douglas was not called in by the police and the prosecutors, but has formed a strong opinion of the case. [Ever notice how many people's opinions are set by the first news and can never consider the facts in the case?] Note that his discussion of the attack omits the fact that two different knives were used (autopsy report). Douglas talked of the "widespread conspiracy" argument, but didn't read Steven Singular's "Legacy of Deception" which tells how a journalist in Denver got news about the LAPD! The timeline says O. J. Simpson is innocent. The limo driver arrived at 10:22 and saw no one enter or leave until the 11pm trip to the airport. Any evidence like a glove or blood drops had to be planted the next day. Ron Goldman was 5'9" and 175 lbs. His unexpected visit to Nicole's place put him in the wrong place at the wrong time. Nicole had been involved with another man who was 5'9", 175 lbs, but a few years older. In the dark the killers attacked the wrong man, then the witness who came out of the house. If her boyfriend then went into hiding, then that would confirm this theory.
   
   Chapter 13 gives the authors views on crime and punishment. Rehabilitation which makes a good guy out of a bad guy is best. But some offenders can never be rehabilitated and must be isolated from society. Capital punishment prevents the worst from recommitting their crimes. But the problem is to be sure those convicted are truly guilty. Criminals are manufactured from a poor home life. [But isn't this the result of poverty in many cases?] The problem is apparently without a practical solution.



2. I won't go much further. John E. Douglas is an excellent expert on true crime particularly the gruesome serial killings. I got the book before the Green River Killer was identified as Gary Leon Ridgway. Anyway, he analyzes cases and gives his opinions but he is pro-law enforcement most of the time. He doesn't like to give the benefit of the doubt towards the law enforcement community. Sadly, his dedication in the beginning of the book mentions only a portion of the victims in the book which some are well-known like Ron Goldman and Nicole Brown Simpson and the victims of Bernardo-Homolka crimes in Canada, as well as a few others. There were others who were murdered, brutalized, and their names are bearly mentioned in the book. Unless he changed their names to protect their true identity which I doubt because most of the murdered victims are identified. Since he is pro-law enforcement, he may not have a total open view of the criminals themselves. Granted, he knows how to identify the criminal whether a child molester or serial killer from his actions. He aids in their capture, prosecution, and their sentence whether death penalty or life in prison. He doesn't suggest ways to prevent such disasters such as a pedophile or serial killer from becoming such a creature because they aren't really human.



3. This book was a great reading experience. Douglas is an experienced storyteller, and being that these are not just stories, but actual accounts of reality make is a bonus! This book was a satisfing buy for my evil sweettooth. I loved it. It was worth adding to my collection of true crime interests.



4. Very informative, though some of the cases are repeated in the series of books that have been released by the authors.



5. As with all John Douglas books this was a completely fascinating read with so much insight. Marred only by a certain arrogance but then doing the work he does, who wouldn't be arrogant?