4 comments about Anne Boleyn.

1. Even those who have little interest in the story of the second wife of Henry VIII could be attracted by Mr. Ives' clear writing style, wit and "proper historical scepticism". To those with a keener interest, this book is as irresistible as Anne herself. With much of the book based on original research, the text offers new and absorbing insights into a complex person and of life at court under Henry VIII. For the most part, Mr. Ives maintains a proper distance from his subject, but from time to time, he opens his cloak of objectivity to expose the admirer beneath. If you are also an admirer of glimpses of court life, both in France and England, then you should order this book.



2. Scholarly but not stuffy, Eric Ives' book is the best biography by far I have read of Anne Boleyn. It is packed with original research and serious scholarship but at the same time is readable and easy to follow. The average intelligent layperson would enjoy reading this. Ives, Antonia Fraser and Alison Weir are all MUST READS for Tudor scholars and history buffs.



3. I found this an excellent read when I was studying Anne Boleyn. While never becoming too bogged down in details, it tells her story compellingly and with the necessary human touch which makes Anne's story so engrossing.

   Focusing on faction as one of the major causes of Anne's downfall, we are taken from her contested date of birth to her final end, through the whims of the king, life at court and her dubious romances. Ives gives the legends a brisk working over and gives the facts clearly with all the available evidence. This is THE book on Anne to read and I strongly recommend it to anyone studying her life.




4. Anne Boleyn was accused of essentially the same catalog of crimes used against every powerful woman since (and probably before) Jezebel - sexual infidelity, witchcraft, heresy, capriciousness and foul temper. As Ives explains, she may not have been physically the most beautiful woman at court, but her intellect, sophistication and worldliness (she had served at the Austrian and French courts) made her by far the most attractive. What is incredible about her courtship with Henry is the sheer number of missed chances to get a proper annulment of Hal's earlier marriage to Katharine - which, of course, would have removed the impetus for the English Reformation, and all the carnage that followed. What makes this a great read is Ives' ability to translate renaissance history into modern terms: Anne's rise and fall were inextricably linked to larger political and religious forces in Henry's court: her demise was the direct product of a temporary court alliance between the hard line crypto-Protestants (Thomas Cromwell et. al.) and the equally hard line Catholic sympathizers (Norfolk, plus the former followers of Thomas More). Once Anne was off the scene, they happily returned to their ideological trenches and resumed ploting against each other. Anne's was a vibrant life in a world which punished the vibrant and the intelligent.

5 comments about Oxford: Son of Queen Elizabeth I.

1. It sounds plausible. Compare the pictures of Henry VIII, Elizabeth, Edward de Vere, Sir Henry Neville, and Henry Wriothesly, the Earl of Southampton. They all have red hair, and look remarkably similar. It is begining to look like Edward and the two Henrys could have been brothers!! Sir Henry Neville became very fat in middle age - like Henry VIII. He was an only child - rather rare in those days.
   
   Read "The Truth Will Out" by Brenda James - who makes a very good case for Sir Henry Neville being Shakespeare. He was tutored by Sir Henry Saville, top Oxford scholar, and several hundred coincidences link him to the works of Shakespeare.
   
   The two Henrys were put in the Tower together, under sentence of death for their part in the Essex plot to depose Elizabeth.
   
   But why were they were not put to death like the other plotters? - because they were Elizabeths children?
   
   I wonder if the skeletons of all these people are available? We could test their dna!
   
   If Sir Henry Neville was the son of Elizabeth, and wrote the plays - and also wrote the sonnets to his "brother" the Earl of Southampton - it is not surprising that it was kept secret - a state secret no less. Hamlet, and To Be or Not To Be, was written while the two Henrys were in the Tower under sentence of death.
   
   Worth reading.



2. Paul:
   
   I finished reading it and I am somewhat at a loss for words to express my opinions.
   
   * Absolutely fascinating book.
   * Remarkably interesting for me.
   * Almost unbelievably detailed.
   * Astonishingly insightful, superlatively written with a fabulous command of the English language and a profound intellect.
   
   I cannot imagine how you found the time to absorb so much information and then detail it in writing. Meticulous.
   
   I spent my career in areas of Earth Science and geology so I am accustomed to "detective work" fossil identification, geological sequences, unraveling the past, using clues to seek out facts. Further, I have an intense interest is archaeology and anthropology as well as history so this book provided an abundance of information about life in the Elizabethan era that I knew little about. Now a void has been filled.
   
   My other readings attributed the KJV bible to Sir Francis Bacon so I will have some reconciling to do.
   
   William E. Tibbe, Sr. Chestnut Ridge, New York



3. Try Shakespeare by Another Name first... And the Wives of Henry the XIIIth and then go back to this one.



4. First of all, this book isn't worth fifty bucks. I spents all my birthday money on it, and I was disappointed.
   
   Second of all, it's pretty obvious this guy doesn't like Elizabeth much. I don't know if it's anti-feminism, or what, but he makes some pretty rotten accusations against her. He seems to use Mary Queen of Scots as his main source that anything happened between Elizabeth and Oxford. In case no one noticed, Mary isn't a very good source. Mary and Elizabeth didn't like each other and they both loved to say nasty things about the other one. Philip II isn't a good source either. Using Mary and Philip as sources is like calling up Severus Snape and asking for a biography of Harry Potter. You aren't going to get very goood info. She was a decent woman, and a decent ruler, but Mr. Streitz seems bent on proving she wasn't.
   
   Second of all, it's pretty obvious he didn't do his research. He can't seem to remember how old these people are at given times. He says Elizabeth was 13 when she had Oxford. Actually, she would've been 14 or 15 depending on whether or not she had him after her birthday. I'm just a kid, but even I know basic math. And he said Jane Grey was Mary Tudor's daughter, but she was her grandaughter. Anyone with a basic knowledge of Tudor history would know that right away.
   
   Third of all, he does actually have something here. It seems to me that he found a bunch of wholes and history and decided to fill them up with one answer. I don't think Elizabeth had all those kids he talked about, I mean maybe she was pregnant after what her step-dad did to her, but I don't really see any proof it was Oxford. However, Oxford could of thought he was King of England. Not because of who his parents were, but just cause of his ego. Essex probably wasn't her kid (despite what the book says) but he seemed to think he was king. The only concrete evidence he had was the play in 1609: "To our ever-living poet" They tend not to say that about people who aren't dead. So maybe Oxford was Shakespeare, or atleast he wrote some stuff for him (I think it was more than one person). But I don't think he was the Queen's son, and I'm a little offended by his Elizabeth dissing and his elitist attitude "Shakespeare was poor and poor people can't write!".
   
   In conclusion:
   Don't buy it, borrow it if you get the chance.
   Try another Oxfordian book for a better look at things.
   Mr. Streitz should learn his dates. (hey that rhymed!)
   
   
   - J.
   [...]



5. I certainly agree that this book suffers greatly from a too-evident lack of editing. Nevertheless, the premise is ultimately fascinating and stunning in its impact.
   
   I've long been dismayed by the tendency of Stratfordians to jump to marginally warranted conclusions about the "facts" of Shakespeare's life. (Read any of the major biographies carefully, and you'll soon observe how very quickly phrases such as "it seems" and "it seems certain" transform smoothly into conclusions that then are spoken of as if proven facts.) Thus, to be fair, I must admit that Mr. Streitz develops a fascinating but similarly unproven thesis about Oxford's relationships with both Elizabeth I and Southampton. The difference, it seems to me, is that his theory provides a context that makes startling sense of the tone taken in several of Shakespeare's more puzzling sonnets.
   
   Intrigued by Streitz's analysis of the significance of "Venus and Adonis," I left off his book and fetched my copy of the poem and read it straight through. Frankly, considering the poem's content in view of Mr. Streitz's suggested context was not only stunning but left me with chills for some time thereafter. His context renders the poem not merely darkly erotic but shatteringly so. Viewed relative to the whole of Streitz's theory, it is absolutely chilling.
   
   An extremely intriguing book without a doubt. I'd suggest reading this in conjunction with Diana Price's SHAKESPEARE'S UNAUTHORIZED BIOGRAPHY. Both raise quite compelling doubts about the connection of the "Man from Stratford" with the works.

No comments about I'll Tell the Jokes Arthur.

No comments about The Making of King James II.

No comments about A Queen Of Napoleon's Court: The Life Story Of Desiree Bernadotte.

No comments about The Memoirs Of Marguerite De Valois.

No comments about Albert and Victoria.

1 comments about William: The People's Prince.

1. Ian Lloyd has succeeded in producing a book of highly enjoyable, and well taken photos, but he should have put as much time into fact checking as he did picking out pics. I'd say buy the book, but just look at the pictures. Don't bother reading the mistake riddled text.

5 comments about Edward the Caresser: The Playboy Prince Who Became Edward VII.

1. Edward the Caresser is a fine biography of the Prince of Wales who became King Edward VII. The title is slightly misleading since he was only called "Edward the Caresser" after he became King in 1901, and while he was Prince of Wales he was known to the public as "Prince Albert Edward". But such quibbling should be put aside. This is a wonderfully entertaining story of a boy and man who had many fine qualities which were not appreciated by his parents Queen Victoria and Prince Albert, who set impossibly high standards for him and were constantly and openly disappointed when he failed to meet them. Bertie (as he was known in the family) also had to deal with being compared to his older sister and younger brother, who were their parents' favorites. After being made to bear the burden of being (in his mother's eyes) the chief contributor to his father's death, Bertie spent the rest of Victoria's reign looking for something to do. Since the Queen refused to allow him constructive work, having fun in various dissipations was his main occupation. Given such a background, the fact that Bertie turned out to be a kind, good natured man with a wide circle of friends and a loving wife and family is surprising.

   Stanley Weintraub always produces a fine biography, and I hope he will follow up on "Edward the Caresser" with another volume on Edward VII's reign. It will be interesting to see how the playboy prince from an emotionall disadvantaged background turned into one of the most successful and well beloved British monarchs of the twentieth centuries




2. An old saying goes something like, 'The child is the father of the man.' Coming off successful biographies of Queen Victoria, the Prince Consort, and other eminent Victorians, Stanley Weintraub has given us a fine biography of the Victorian era's most elderly 'child' of all, Albert Edward (aka 'Bertie'), the Prince of Wales.

   Heir to the throne must be a difficult position in the best of circumstances and despite his luxuriant lifestyle, Bertie's circumstances were not the best. His mother decided early on that her eldest son was uneducable (Weintraub argues he was dyslexic), unreliable, untrustworthy, and at least partially at fault for the early death of the Prince Consort, the husband she worshipped. As the decades passed, she refused to modify this harsh judgment, viewing him as a wayward and unruly child even after the Prince was himself a grandfather. In fact, if never an intellectual like his father (Weintraub seems to doubt the Prince ever in his life read a book cover to cover), Bertie proved himself clever, sympathetic, popular with the people, and a fairly skilled, if unofficial, diplomat. Nevertheless, the Queen would not allow him access to state papers, or hand off to him any but the most minor of ceremonial duties.

   Barred by custom from involvement in politics, and by his mother from any meaningful preparation for his inheritance, Bertie devoted himself to the one area he could influence the most, society. Weintraub's biography shines in its illustration of how the Prince's active social life, essentially frivolous in so many ways, nevertheless helped him discover talents and develop skills that served him in good stead as sovereign. And while never prurient, Weintraub is nevertheless comprehensive in his treatment of Bertie's many extramarital affairs, from his brief flings to his longstanding relationships with Lillie Langtry, Alice Keppel, and others (including, lest we forget, his beautiful and long-suffering wife, Princess Alix of Denmark).

   Weintraub's picture of Albert Edward, in short, is a fully drawn one, and the reader can develop a fairly complete understanding of him as a man and as a Prince. I found him very human, disturbing and yet sympathetic. I would recommend this biography to any student of Britain's Royal Family or historian of the Victorian era.




3. Looks like I'm alone, but I found this book frightfully superficial and entirely lacking in depth. The marriage of the Prince and Princess of Wales, and for that matter, the relationships between the Prince and his mistresses, is glossed over and there is nothing in this book that makes one feel like they have learned anything substantial about anyone. I was SO disappointed, having read many other wonderful books on the subject. This is hardly worth the time or effort to order/read this one.



4. If you look in the dictionary, you'll find a picture of King Edward VII illustrating the word "cad." In fact, you will also find him next to rogue, rake and bon vivant. Well, not really--but he would be a perfect match! In Edward the Caresser, Stanley Weintraub explores the life of Albert Edward, The Prince of Wales, who later becomes King Edward VII. "Bertie" is perhaps one of the most colorful royals of the last 200 years. The oldest son of Queen Victoria, Bertie is a disappointment from the time he is small, and it just continues throughout his adult life. Because of her lack of confidence in Bertie, Victoria gives him very few royal responsibilities and he will come to the throne at age 59 with very little training. The Prince of Wales uses all his free time to over-indulge in eating, drinking, smoking, gambling, hunting, traveling and most of all, women. He associates with many upper-crust gentlemen of questionable character. And he tends to go from one controversy to the next. His name is dragged through the courts for a variety of offenses from gambling to divorce proceedings. He is blackmailed on more than one occasion over indiscreet letters he has written to various women. He has a number of illegitimate children and often stands as their godfather when they are christened. He also gets himself into tremendous debt financing this opulent lifestyle. But the people of England love the prince--mainly because he is personable and also, because he shows himself to his mothers' subjects: something the Queen stopped doing after the death of her consort. Bertie is definitely a charmer, and as he opens hospitals and plants trees, the British come to forgive him his indiscretions.

   One of the things I found most fascinating is comparing the life of this Prince of Wales with that of Charles, the present Prince of Wales. Although a full century separates them, they are made from the same cloth. Both men have spent the majority of their lives in the role of Prince of Wales. Both their mothers are long livers, and they've had to go through life doing inane jobs waiting to become king. They were both married to beautiful women who were adored the world over, and both cheated on their brides. At least Charles hasn't had a stable of mistresses (unlike Bertie), but ironically, the present prince must have assumed he was still living in Victorian society when it was perfectly fine to remain married to your wife and have a mistress, also. There is also irony in that one of Bertie's favorites, Alice Keppel, was the great-grandmother of Charles' current squeeze, Camilla Parker Bowles. Charles has also gotten himself into his fair share of controversy over the years, and we are left to wonder whether he will ever reign as king. (These comparisons are mine only, and are not made by the author in this book).

   In terms of the book itself, I became a little bored when Weintraub went into great detail about the Prince's Indian expedition and got tired of reading the details about what he bagged on each hunt. Weintraub also has a disturbing habit of alternating between proper names and titles when mentioning various individuals. For instance, he sometimes mentions Benjamin Disraeli and sometimes Lord Beaconsfield (they are one in the same). It gets very confusing with less well-known individuals. I also think that the author does not do just to Bertie's wife, Alexandra.

   All in all, Edward the Caresser is an enjoyable read. The author states that Bertie "was a walking argument for the defects of primogeniture." After reading this book,, you'll wonder how the monarchy survived.




5. Like the previous reviewer, I am surprised at the praise given this book by others. Edward is not an easy subject to begin with, given that his callously selfish, pleasure-seeking behaviour and shameless exploitation of his exalted position is unlikely to inspire much sympathy in the reader. The only remedy against disgust is delving beneath the surface - the one thing Weintraub doesn't do. He's much more interested in dishing out the well-known scandals and gossip, dropping endless lists of meaningless names, and describing at length cartoons in Punch and other such periodicals. Newspapers seem to be his main source material throughout, actually.
   
   He has several habits that quickly become annoying. One is to add elaborations in parentheses that add nothing to the reader's understanding of the narrative, such as: "...sub-lieutenant Berkeley Levett (nephew of the Earl of Denbigh)" - aah, that one! Or: "...waiting for Rosa Bonheur (named after the famous French painter of horses)". Or yet, more weirdly: "...he visited the Golden Temple and Sacred Pool (now polluted, and covered with green scum)". No wonder the book extends to over 400 pages. The editing in my edition of the book is, by the way, sloppy, with words missing on several pages.
   
   Narrative coherence isn't among the author's strengths either. Weintraub tends to describe events starting right in the middle, apparently assuming the reader already knows all about it. You may read for instance that Edward was still abroad when the Cleveland Street scandal broke into the newspapers. It is left to the reader to conjecture what it was about; it is not until a full page later that the author bothers to make it clear (and then still almost as if by accident, in parentheses). Priorities are surprising, to say the least. An inordinate deal of attention is given to the American press and, especially, the prince's North American trip in 1860. Two full chapters are lavished on an almost hour-by-hour description of this 3 month tour; later on, the years 1892 to 1897 will be despatched in the same number of pages. And absurdly, Weintraub decided not to include Edward's brief (and surprisingly succesful) reign at all. A four-page `afterword' is dedicated to it, that is all.
   
   By the end, I didn't feel I had gained any understanding of the person Edward was, and why. I was stuck with the image of a fat, superficial cad, who spent all his days hunting, gambling and womanizing. Other characters, like Queens Alexandra and Victoria, or a colourful and witty man like Disraeli, rise from these pages even more sketchily. Disappointing.

5 comments about Ludwig II of Bavaria: The Swan King.

1. This book, which was wonderfully researched, provides a detailed information about this magnificent king. It is preferred that persons who read it know a little about the Swan King, but it is not necessary. He discusses Ludwig's intimate life, including controversial topics. One might enjoy this book for many reasons, especially if you have an interest of how court life was around the late 1800's, and how Ludwig's mind worked, his thoughts, feelings, etc. A definate buy!



2. A great in-depth look at the life of Ludwig II. McIntosh includes many excerpts from letters and historical documents, and never draws a conclusion without abundant proof to back it up. This book is not just for history buffs--anyone who enjoys a good story should read McIntosh's take on Ludwig's life.



3. The problem I find with this book is it focuses on trying to explain rumors by twisting facts into ficton-a problem I found when reading many Evita bios. I feel there definitely needs to be a better bio written for the market. The book on the whole was interesting for me as a first time reader of LudwigII.

   However, the author tends to overlook important issues ie.I was really disappointed when we are told Ludwig toured the western region of Bavaria, but instead of finding out about what he did on the tour(in reflecting his FACTUAL actions),we are drawn back to what Wagner was doing and his importance in Lud's life.

   Good for first time read but I have read better.




4. In March of this year (2000), I was in Bavaria and visited the castles of Ludwig II. Upon my return I purchased this book to learn more about the King. I found this book fascinating. I only wish I had read it before my trip to his castles so I could have appreciated my visit more.



5. THIS VERSION IS DISAPPOINTING. TEDIOUSLY DULL. LUDWIG II WAS ONE OTHE THE MOST COMPLEX AND INTERESTING KINGS OF HIS DAY. THIS BOOK TELLS VERY LITTLE OF THE PERSONAL OR PUBLIC LIFE OF THE KING. YES, HE WAS MAD AS A HATTER, OR SHOULD IT BE CRAZY LIKE A FOX. HE WAS A HARMLESS HOMOSEXUAL THAT LOVED BEAUTY. HE WAS AN ADEQUATE, IF UNINSPIRED KING TO HIS PEOPLE UNTIL THE LAST. IN EARLIER HISTORY, HE WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN TREATED SO BADLY. THIS RENDITION IS MISSING SO MUCH OF THE MAN. IT ISN'T EVEN HALF THE STORY.