No comments about At the Dragon's Gate: With the OSS in the Far East.

5 comments about The Highly Civilized Man: Richard Burton and the Victorian World.

1. A critical study of Sir Richard Burton. Most of his biographers, bowldered by the epic nature of their subject (understandably so, this is one remarkable guy), often smooth over some real contradictions in his thought, less than favorable interpretations, etc.. This author brings Richard under real scrutiny, examining his views on religion, sex, race, and his persona as a "explorer" or "impersonator"; Not much new info; just bringing to light what is usually in the background of most biographies. Perhaps a finer portrait emerges of the man- though its undeniable that some of his statements- esp about race were wildly contradicting. He tries to demonstrate how Victorian attitudes influenced who Burton was- which is obvious in a way, he knew what his countrymen would find shocking and played on it- thus building his persona as a man who flaunted social conventions, though of course in other respects- sexuality, his Stone Talk work- he didn't cater to anyone, - one thing I couldn't help noticing, and which Kennedy points out, though a compulsive, prolific author, and highly opinionated, Burton was not a particularly good writer.



2. Nineteenth century Western colonialism and imperialism including the Industrial revolution changed Western values and social perceptions and mores, but more so, our awareness of the world as a whole, in terms of defining ourselves against difference. The Victorian influence towards modernism is far greater than historians first realized. One of the most romantic and pivotal figures of the Victorian age was Sir Captain Richard Burton. In Kennedy's critical biographical overview of the man's life and thought, unlike most of the numerous biographies to date, attempts to represent and reinterpret Burton's life and thought in the context of the Victorian era. By doing this, he proposes, we come to understand this highly complex genius in terms of the historical values of the time.
   
   Kennedy outlines Burton's numerous accomplishments as a prolific writer, linguist, (twenty-five languages and many dialects) explorer, archaeologist, spy, amateur physician, translator, artist, poet, expert swordsman and sexologist. He wrote over twenty-five travel volumes containing his many adventures, and translated the Kumar Sutra and The Arabian Nights which is the most often read an quoted in present time. Similar to many of his contemporaries, his studies of Orientalism and African cultures were done in the spirit of difference, or the `other'. Kennedy's thesis is that Burton was a product of the Victorian age but an important precursor to modernism.
   
   As the 19th century has a virtual endless list of incredible men and women, according to Kennedy, what set Burton apart, was "...restless determination to extend the reach of his experience to ever more pockets of humanity and to draw insights from those increasingly varied encounters in order to advance the larger epistemological quest to understand, explain, and classify difference." (p.270) Burton's vast written work, his copious notes and observations reveals this holy quest, his unwavering pursuit of hidden knowledge and knowledge of the `other', strange cultures and bizarre religions until his death in 1895.
   
   The author devotes most of his analysis on Burton's works as a sexologist. Burton's many erotic translations, promoting his notion that Victorian repression of sexual matters and desire is tremendously unhealthy, paved the way for future sexologists to study the subject within a scientific framework. His controversial translations and writings also revealed a sexual hypocrisy that the Victorian age is infamously known for. Rather than study sex on moral grounds, Burton proposed a relativist position, attributing different climates around the world to certain sexual behaviours. We know this to be nonsense, however, including this premise, Burton achieved distance from the moral position, giving his subject a form of objectivity.
   
   Dane Kennedy's approach to Burton is a fresh perspective of the man. He was an individual that accomplished more in one lifetime than many, but he was a man of his times, attempting to define the identity of western culture during a period of vast change. Despite over one hundred years since his death, even a critical appraisal of his life and work, does not in any way lessen his accomplishment nor profound influence in the Romantic age towards modernism.
   
   A Highly Civilized man is a fresh and well-written account of an icon of the Romantic-Victorian age.



3. A thoughtful book which most of the time attaches its arguments firmly to sources, scrupulously researched. A little verbose at times, tending to fall prey to the current academic fashion of attaching a superfluity of labels (particularly those ending in -ist) to its subject. Certainly there's the intention to 'de-mythologize' Burton and expose him to some quite valid criticisms, as well as plaudits. Kennedy reminds us that J.L. Burckhardt, not Burton, was the first European to travel on the Hajj in disguise. He suggests that in Burton's day, such disguise would only really have been necessary to enter the holiest places; simply because Burton could have professed conversion to Islam. I'm uncomfortable on those occasions when Kennedy states speculation as fact, for example (p63): 'Burton saw an opportunity to tap into this rich vein of curiosity by undertaking the pilgrimage to Mecca and exposing the city and its Muslim faithful to the scrutiny of his Christian Countrymen'. And then, later: "It must be understood, however, that Burton's decision to undertake a hajj in an "Oriental" disguise was directed as much at a British audience as it was at the Muslims with whom he associated during the journey." Although the facts are suggestive that this may be true, no proof is given - that would be very hard to do.
   
   Kennedy concludes (p92) "There is little doubt that Burton too was attracted to impersonation precisely because it provided a way of transgressing against the codes and conventions that governed society, challenging the psychic shackles imposed by civilization." This conclusion could be a little superficial: we might also add that his daily dress of grotesque beard; eyes sometimes ringed with kohl; the brandishing of iron cane, pistol or navaja and his frequent adoption of a truly wicked and fearsome persona ("to shock"), could well have been a part of the same charade - whose ultimate purpose was to divert attention away from self. Did Burton suffer from some profound insecurity and a distaste for who he really was? Was he truly the "Sheep in wolf's clothing" that W.S. Blunt claims? The book had perhaps an opportunity to take this further.
   
   The point is raised that, far from hacking their way through virgin African forest - unexplored territory - as is the general impression (my own, anyway), Burton and Speke took advantage of well-trodden arteries which had been used for slave and ivory traffic by Arab traders for generations - affording themselves of the supply infrastructure and information sources already in place to tend these parties. Wielding what must surely be humour, Kennedy observes that Burton was faced with insurmountable difficulties in the use of disguise on his African expeditions.
   
   The subject of race and Burton's undeniable racism threads its way unceasingly through this book. Kennedy uses the word `troubling' numerous times when confronting it. He employs an early 21st century scrutiny to pass clear judgment on a latter 19th century culture - perhaps unconsciously setting relativism aside.
   
   In 1633, Galileo Galilei was forced to abjure and recant his prior assertion of "...having held and believed that the sun is the center of the world and immovable, and that the earth is not the center and moves." Although we are dumbfounded by this today, we shouldn't be. There are dogmas in place in 2006 which no historian or anthropologist dares to contradict - on pain of professional suicide and even jail in a few countries. These dogmas touch upon versions of history enforced by law and statements upon the subject of race that are officially held to be modern heresies. Thus when judging Burton by the measures of our day with regard to racial matters and, then, reversing the scrutiny and weighing this book's criticisms by my own unfashionable standards; I, as a reader, am forced to conclude that neither one of them has the right of it. I am hit on the nose by the consequences of relativism!
   
   Burton had good and bad to say about everybody - and an awful lot of the bad is directed at white Victorian society (which is nowhere labeled `racism'). The scientist in Burton (and he was a very good one I think) brought out his objectivity; the human being railed mightily and emotionally against slights, insults and injustices; some the consequence of his own misguided actions; some dead on target. I think Kennedy walks into the pitfall of early 21st century political correctness: time and again he is so troubled by negative remarks made concerning a particular race, yet seems to accept those that are positive without demur. In true critique, must we not take exception to all such generalizations? Burton made `hurtful' observations on colour and physiognomy which, I predict, in future times, will be done in the painless language of DNA base-pairs.
   
   Certainly Kennedy cites instances where Burton takes relativistic stands, such as (p155): "There is more of equality between the savage and the civilizee - the difference being one of quantity, not of quality - than the latter will admit. For every man is everywhere commensurate with man". Kennedy then asks "How can these remarks be reconciled with Burton's insistence on the innate inferiority of the African?" Having raised the idea that the contradictions could be ascribed to "an undisciplined and volatile mind", Kennedy points out that such a conclusion would cause us to:
   
   "... miss what may have been Burton's most intriguing contribution to Victorian conception of race. His understanding of race as a closed space defined by difference serves a double purpose: it supports the standard racists' contention that biology is destiny, but it also ventures the view that races have their own systems of beliefs and behaviour, each incommensurate with the other and implicitly standing against a universalist standard of values."
   
   Doesn't that take rather a lot of words to say (without any of the promised reconciliation) that Burton was inconsistent: giving the Victorians a fresh new viewpoint on race while at the same time reinforcing their old prejudices?
   
   The chapter entitled "The Sexologist" thoroughly covers a lot of well-trodden ground; over-trodden one might say. On homosexuality, Kennedy is of the opinion that Burton had probably actually indulged and cites a rather telling letter of Swinburn's in support, yet, knowing this was rather likely (even close to certain), so what? What more can be written about Burton? The answer is evident here: very little. This, by the way, is not a criticism of the book.
   
   The final chapter "The Afterlife" is for me one of the more interesting. Kennedy speculates on Burton's spiritual beliefs and brings out his agnosticism as well as his horror of annihilation at death. In "A Glance at the Passion Play" (I quote the full context which Kennedy doesn't), Burton says (p165), on Spiritualism, " it satisfies a real want, a crave which is to millions - a part only of our kind but numbering millions - the bread of moral life." He then offers a `Spiritualist's Decalogue' of which Kennedy quotes article VI "Death, physically considered, dissolves a certain organic unity; it is not, however, annihilation, but change."
   
   This was an astute selection by Kennedy and brings us closer to an understanding of Burton's spirituality.



4. When I first discovered that a new Burton biography by a professor of history was soon to be published I had high expectations. Upon receipt of Professor Kennedy's Burton biography titled The Highly Civilized Man, I started digesting his work. The asserted themes of the work included 1) placing Burton and his work in context with the larger issues and challenges of Victorian times, and 2) using Burton to better understand the nature of changes beginning to percolate socially due to the interaction of Victorian England with its colonial enterprises. Indeed, as far as I know, this approach is pioneering and insightful. As I continued reading to about page 90, I thought Professor Kennedy's effort was well done, and the book would be another jewel to adorn the crown of Burton research, along with the work of Mary Lovell. I am of the opinion Professor Kennedy succeeded in achieving both this stated objectives. From this standpoint, his book is a success.
   
   The observations of Burton as a harbinger bridging the transition from the Victorian Era to the Modern Era reflect the type of insights one expects from a biographer trained in the rigors of academic scholarship. I enjoyed the in depth academic analysis of Burton from the standpoint of concepts of relativism as applied to notions of cultural difference. Professor Kennedy has also highlighted the role played by Burton in the early development of anthropology as an academic discipline. Social/Cultural Anthropology's primary research methodology is called participant/observation. Certainly, this approach was an inherent part of Burton's nature, and the scope of his anthropological observations were derived by this research approach. I was also glad to see that Professor Kennedy gave particular attention to discussing Burton's Stone Talk and his Kasidah. The earlier biographies did not devote much attention to either of these important works.
   
   As long as Kennedy stayed focused on academic based scholarship he avoided the pitfalls that plagued the earlier biographies that predated Lovell's Rage to Live. Unfortunately, the book digressed into complicated histories that are not fully recounted. Yet, Professor Kennedy felt compelled to make several definitive conclusions sorely lacking the professional level of scholarship a professor should be required to meet. The outcome of Kennedy's failures is a setback in Burton scholarship. Given the effort to place Burton in context, the irony is that the book with notable examples omits necessary context to understand and evaluate some of the Professor's conclusion. For example, the recounted history of Burton firing over the head of a crowd of Greek Orthodox Christians fails to acknowledge that Burton resorted to this solution after trying less violent alternatives, and after he and fellow members of his party were injured by rocks thrown at them. The key point is that Burton used a hierarchy of options to confront unstable situations. This point also relates to the absurd conclusion that Richard and Isabel were role-playing in the desert, and that there is a hidden psychology to uncover. The decision to have Isabel act as Richard's son was an attempt to protect her from rape and death, and to give Richard an option before resorting to lethal force. The Burtons took their personal safety serious as illustrated by their habit of carrying two revolvers and three Bowie knives when traveling.
   
   
   
   Professor Kennedy has a mildly obsessive theme about people Burton did not know going into the desert for homosexual interludes that randomly pops up in the book. He includes a discussion of Burton and several earlier biographers who speculated about Burton's sexuality. But Kennedy failed to note those writers assumed Richard and Isabel had a loveless and sexless marriage, and they used outmoded, almost now quaint, modes of Freudian analysis. The illusion of the Burton's loveless marriage was gutted by the original sources brought to light by Ms. Lovell. Professor Kennedy fails to point out the deficiencies of Brodie and Mclynn concerning their analysis of Burton and sexuality. The deficiencies in The Highly Civilized Man about the question of Burton's sexual interests are too numerous to address in a short review nor are the issues he raised concerning Damascus, Crowley and others. Kennedy's treatment of Burton in Damascus is a travesty. Not once does the professor inform the reader that all segments of society in Damascus worked to bring Burton back from his recall. The Damascus treatment is lacking in necessary detail and skewered to the degree that the discussion should have been deleted form the book. It is also one of the examples where Kennedy included information that is extraneous to accomplishing his two professed themes.
   
   The book appears to have been written with segments produced using an academic analysis methodology with other portions written in an almost stream of consciousness with points lacking critical evaluation. Moreover, there are instances of contradiction. This leads one to conclude the work was not scrutinized properly before going to press. The Kasidah analysis includes a conclusion that Burton believed there is no God or afterlife, yet in the chapter titled the Afterlife, Kennedy indicates Burton may have concluded there is continuing life. In fact, towards the end of the Kasidah and towards the end of note 2, Burton makes it plain he has a positive view on a continuing future life. It is not a life however with the attributes of anyone's religious acculturation. The chapter on the afterlife in large part is one of the commendable aspects of this biography.
   
   All of the hallmarks of a work that will withstand the centuries are present in this work if only the good professor would later reissue it, and correct the many deficiencies and expand the themes of Burton as harbinger, Burton as catalyst, Burton as a pioneering mystic and Burton as scribe in the manner of Thoth, the Ancient Egyptian principle of wisdom.



5. One of the most remarkable men who ever lived was Captain Sir Richard Francis Burton. He was a poet, explorer, linguist, soldier, and translator, with remarkable accomplishments in each of these fields. The best biography of this astonishing and energetic man is still _The Devil Drives_ by Fawn Brodie, but in _The Highly Civilized Man: Richard Burton and the Victorian World_ (Harvard), Dane Kennedy has written something else. His book covers aspects of this multi-faceted man who was busy all his life making his own legend, but who is revealed here as "very much a man of his time, a product of nineteenth-century Britain and its imperial encounter with the world." Kennedy traces the sources of the intellect behind Burton's many efforts, even his famous physical feats such as his pilgrimage in disguise to Mecca or his role in finding the source of the Nile. Among other things, Burton was, as the chapter headings here classify him, an Orientalist, a relativist, a racist, and a sexologist, and Kennedy has taken a useful look at all these roles.
   
   The different chapters with their themes cover Burton's life in a more-or-less chronological way. Burton had a genius for languages and would eventually become fluent in perhaps a couple of dozen of them. His first foreign assignment was to the British East India Company, and although Burton sought glory in battle, his contribution was really to increase the knowledge of the land, the language, and the people. He took his capacity for imitation of other cultures to its most famous exercise in making the hajj in 1853. As Kennedy points out, there was no reason for any disguise; he could have simply have asserted his belief in Islam (a freethinker, he always did value the societal strengths of Islam, and he considered Christian missionaries to be on a misconceived quest) and joined the flood of foreigners in the pilgrimage. But this would not serve his purposes. A convert to Islam (no matter of what degree of sincerity, or how loosely attached to the Church of England) would be outcast from respectable society, preventing him from becoming a national hero and limiting sales of his great _Personal Narrative of a Pilgrimage to Al-Medinah and Meccah_. Burton's racism was a product of his time, and of his travels in Africa; he respected African cultures, even if he felt Negroes to be inferior and incapable of improvement. Kennedy makes the case that Burton had a relativist conception of culture, but such relativism did not encompass any struggle for improvement of political rights. Burton's value of other cultures included his view of their acceptance of sexuality, an acceptance he found lacking in his own country. Kennedy explains that with publication of his translations of the _Kama Sutra_, _The Perfumed Garden_, and especially _The Book of the Thousand Nights and a Night_, Burton intended to subvert his nation's "purity forces." While Burton wrote that the _Nights_ was not fit for women to read, he filled it with strong and independent female characters who exhibited the sort of sexual desire women were supposed to keep hidden. Burton wanted to change British sexual morality, and his views would have grated against the current "just say no" philosophy. "Shall we ever understand," he sighed, "that ignorance is not innocence?"
   
   Kennedy makes the case that not only was Burton remarkable in the many aspects of his efforts, he was eager to "advance the larger epistemological quest to understand, explain, and classify difference." He thus informed Victorian debates on race, religion, and sexuality, debates that are continuing into our own contentious times. Burton is a compelling character, and these essays on different features of his career and interests are filled with important insights about him and about the times of which he was a product.

2 comments about A Brief History of British Kings and Queens: British Royal History from Alfred the Great to the Present (Brief History, The).

1. This author assumes that the reader lives in the UK and you happen to know where all the regions are located (I had to keep glancing at the maps). The interesting thing though is that he covers all monarchs from like 100 BC and all regions, but I ended up just skipping all those parts as I couldn't pronounce the names or the places (especially the welsh names how the heck to do you say "ap" or is this an abbreviation for something?). Also he covers each one so quickly you can't even get the chronology straight in your head. The book does have good geneological and chronological tables though. "Brief" is exactly information the book gives.



2. With individual portraits of all the kings of Britain, no one could accuse this of incompleteness, but the solemn tone and lengthy paragraphs make for a rather dry read.
   
   Billed as from "Alfred the Great to the Present" it begins long before Alfred, with overviews of the Celts, the Roman Occupation, and the Dark Ages. Ashley's organising principle, unity versus disunity within Britain, results in some confusing arrangement of material. For example, in the first Section, Kingdom Against Kingdom: Early Britain: after "The House of Normandy 1066-1154" he backtracks several hundred years to the Kingdoms of Wales (500-1240) and Scotland (850-1165). Then the narrative resumes in 1154 with The House of Anjou.

   This mine of information, though daunting at first glance, covers monarchs' appearance, character, consorts, political, social, religious and cultural history. Among 100 pages of appendices are lists of Roman emperors and governors, kings of British provinces, royal consorts, family trees. The massive bibliography, handy for historic royal watchers, precedes the index.

   You would probably want something more snappy and anecdotal on your shelf as well as this. However it's worth investing in as a reference source.

5 comments about Fire in the Night: Wingate of Burma, Ethiopia, and Zion.

1. I would just like to correct two statements of fact in an editorial review of Fire in the Night.
   
   Publishers Weekly states that Wingate is the "only foreign officer to be buried in Arlington National Cemetery".
   
   Whatever his achievements, Wingate is not unique in this regard. There is at least one other foreign officer buried at Arlington, namely, Field Marshall Sir John Dill. He was the British representative on the Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee in Washington during the Second World War who died very much in harness and was buried in Arlington as a mark of the respect his US counterparts had for him.
   
   The same review also contains another error - the plane carrying Wingate crashed in March 1944, not 1943.



2. My mother thought Orde reminded her of Stonewall Jackson of American Civil war fame. There are many similarities between the two, but I think Trevor Royle's book title nails his character right on the head. Both Jackson and Wingate were average military scholars, but brilliant field commanders. They had no equal on the field in terms of battle tactics. Both were deeply religious, both eccentric, though in very different ways. Both were Gideons of the supreme, heavenly order. I am convinced if Stonewall were alive today, he would be an ardent zionist as Orde became when his command led him to palestine in pre-WWII years. Orde's first assignment was in the Sudan where he became fluent in Arabic. His Hebrew which he tried to learn was terrible according to Moshe Dayan. His few days in palestine, however, bore much fruit in that he taught the jews of palestine tactics which would help transform the IDF into the amazing fighting force today and which served them extremely well in the immediate days and years following.
   
   Orde's success in restoring the Ethiopian empire to Haile Selassie was definitely Stonewallian. How he routed the entire Italian fascist force residing in Ethiopia with a small force was little short of miraculous.
   
   I don't think Stonewall was as outspoken as Orde and was a bit surprised at how Orde got by with some of his very strong opinions which he was not afraid to voice. That for me was the biggest contrast between the two.
   
   Most important, I think, about Wingate was what he had accomplished in the jungles of the far east where he died in a tragic aviation accident during WWII.
   
   This book was thoroughly enjoyable, is well written, but I defer to the better judgement of one of my favorite Amazon friends and recommend Royle's book as being most accurate as to Orde's views of the jews and palestine. This book was a good prelude to me, a good introduction into the life and character of this most remarkable of British soldiers, Orde Wingate.



3. Like Lawrence of Arabia, Orde Wingate is a perennially fascinating figure of the later British Empire and era of World Wars I and II. Unlike Lawrence, Wingate was not a literary artist who immortalized his own career, so we rely on biographies to understand him. This work is thorough if not definitive, using a wide array of sources to describe his military/political adventures in Palestine, Ethiopia, and finally Burma where his long-range penetration strategy was most publicized and problematic, but at least partly successful. Such a forceful, idiosyncratic figure will always stimulate controversy, and the authors explore the disagreements well enough, though they cannot satisfy all readers. Why marginal? Wingate's and Lawrence's successes, and failures, occurred in peripheral theaters of both wars. Scholars debate whether such operations significantly influenced the outcome of campaigns in Africa, Southwest and Southeast Asia, or primarily served to expand or protect the Empire. But major (and costly) sea, air and especially land campaigns were essential to winning world wars; the character of 20th century total war effectively marginalized the efforts and the theaters where romantic individualists fought, though they remain dashing, compelling figures. "Fire in the Night" is exciting and deserves 4-5 stars taken on its own terms, but excess attention given to special ops ultimately obscures the nature of Allied triumphs. A. Mockler, "Haile Selassie's War" narrates the 1935-41 Ethiopian conflict. In "Defeat Into Victory" William Slim recounts the inspiring reconquest of Burma, with pointed critiques but general praise for his difficult subordinate. (The authors seem overly hard on Slim in this respect.) J. Nunneley, "Tales from the King's African Rifles" captures well the brutal, unglamorous experience of most Burma veterans.



4. Like many sources, this book praises wingate without enough
   careful examination of his flaws. The book focuses mostly
   on three chapters in Wingate's life. It starts with his
   service in palestine in 1936.
   
   Driven by religious fanaticism and his contempt for what
   he saw as uncivilized peoples (arabs or any non-europeans
   really), he attached himself to Zionism and zionist politicians.
   In the process he exceeded or ignored his orders, then after
   politically compromised himself in open alliance with zionist
   groups to a point where he could not possibly serve there.
   His great "vision" for the region was for a "sub-empire"
   with Zionists serving as a sort of spartan military elite
   to subdue and westernize those considered lesser humans. All
   as part of some sort of twisted fanatical vision of christianity.
   
   After having been booted out of Palestine, he eventually ended
   up in Ethiopia where he again ignored his orders. His goal
   this time was to force a royal government on Ethiopia regardless
   of what anyone else thought and in spite of serious reservations
   on the part of politicians and his superiors. His campaign
   was a wonderful "boys adventure" sort of a affair, but in the
   end it was army won the campaign. Wingate's great accomplishment
   was saddling Ethiopia with an unstable and territorially
   aggressive monarchy that eventually collapsed in a bloodbath
   in the 1970s.
   
   After, he went into open revolt against the entire leadership
   of the army in the area. He openly insulted them and held them
   in utter contempt. In his mind, though he had never held
   a position of high responsiblity in the army, he saw himself
   as being some sort of grand illustrious figure. And when
   his campaign of alination, insults and personal attacks failed
   to get him recognition, he attempted suicide. Contrary to the
   book, his megolmania and self-destructive behavior would indicate
   someone with serious problems rather than a great leader.
   
   He was rescued from career oblivion by a friend in India. He
   was sent into Burma in 1942 to see what could be done in the
   way of irregular warfare. For all his bluster, he did nothing.
   And beyond that, while other men were suffering and dying
   on the march back to India, Wingate arranged to be flown out.
   
   Back in India, he was given a brigade to test out his theories
   with. He whined about what he was given in terms of men. He
   only wanted british soldiers. He threw the men into jungle
   camps during the monsoon with the idea that by inflicting the
   maximum amount of suffering and disease, that british men
   who had his opinion been weakened by access to health care
   and doctors in britain would be made strong again. When the
   casualty rate reached over 50%, he moved the men into regular
   housing and they recovered. The book presents the self-serving
   fiction that the casulaty rate declined due to weeding out
   "bad men" when in reality it only improved because the monsoon
   ended and the worst of the camps was abandoned.
   
   Wingate's first mission into Burma served no real purpose. It
   was originally to be part of a broader plan, but when the
   broader plan was cancelled, wingate demanded that the operation
   go ahead anyway as a training exercise. He led the men into
   Burma, put a railway out of operation for a few weeks and
   then led his men deep into Burma where they accomplished nothing.
   Eventually, Wingate executed one of his brilliant strategies
   to solve the situation. He broke up his command and effectively
   gave the order every man for himself. The force or more
   properly what survived of the force returned in small parties
   to India.
   
   Once back, Wingate ignored his men in favor of launching a
   press and publicity campaign on his achivements. He wrote
   a self-serving account of operations and when his commanders
   raised objects to it, he arranged for a copy to be given
   directly to Churchill and the cabinet. Wingate decided to
   bypass the entire army and come under the patronage of
   politicians. The politicans heard about the brilliant victory,
   but they did not hear about the officer running naked in the
   jungle or of the man who believed bringing back flogging was
   necessary for real dicipline.
   
   When he returned to India in the fall of 1943, he fell ill
   because he had recklessly drank contaminated water in north
   africa on the way back. He had been given a blank cheque
   for any resources he wanted for operations in Burma.
   
   However, due to a combination of him being out of the country
   and ill, his operational role in developing the second chindit
   force wasn't very large. Eventually, an plan was thrown
   together for operations in 1944. Rather than being an evolution
   of his supposed theories, it mostly involved a new idea of
   fighting a special operations war with a division-sized formation
   operating from large bases in enemy controlled territory.
   
   Wingate died early on during the operation so its impossible to
   know what would have been the result if he had lived. However,
   the only other time his 1944 strategy was used was by the
   French in Vietnam where it led to total disaster.
   
   Wingate has a number of followers. Obviously, Israelis are
   greatful for the help he provided in forming what eventually
   became their army. There are also those who, like wingate,
   who see the british army as a failed institution and somehow
   see innovation in the form of a man who cut his own throat,
   ran around naked in camp, wanted to bring back flogging and
   credited broader access to good health care in civilian life
   as being responsible for weakening the british soldier.
   
   A good work on Wingate has to deal with the positive aspects
   and the negative ones. Too many draw a one-sided portrait
   (including this one) while sweeping the not so nice parts of
   the story under the rug.



5. Having been brought up on stories from my early years about the brave and often forgotten exploits of the Chindits I was very enthused to tuck into this book. Orde Wingate has been the hero of many, not so much because he was a military successful warrior, but because he was wildly unconventional at a time when staid ethics and methods of war were leading to defeats of the western allies on all fronts.

   A fierce Old Testament fear and learning of the bible bread in what would now be called a fundementalist christian family, he blended this with [...] eccentricities like, indifference to appearing nude before his collegues and newspapermen, a complete indifference to British Monarchy and the hierarchical class-bound society and way of thinking. An appreciator of new ideas and probably quite to the left of many of his superiors, he had no hestation in punishing and physically striking his recruits (no matter their colour), and could kill the enemy mercilessly, or order large groups knowingly to their death without a blink.

   Wingate pioneered unconventional warfare with his notion that large unit groups can function in the rear of the enemy for long periods of time if they were self-sufficient and well trained. He eschewed the entire idea of "special forces" as they are often called nowadays. In the end I do not think that he squared the circle large unit action and special forces --- he wanted both and got really neither. His tactics worked rather well against the Italians (but that was no surprise he realised), but they were problematic against the Japanese. The first operation, "Long Cloth" was an unmitigated disaster, with enough adventures from its many participants to fill an entire library (they still make some of the most heart thumping reads available). The entire operation broke down and became in some cases, every man for himself. Wingate himself giving the order.

   His second operation was more problematic. No doubt these operations had significant effect on the enemy and no doubt were very helpful in the taking of Myikyena and Mogang, but I really think that 14th Army would have rolled up the Japanese flank nicely anyway, as they did and win the Battle of Burma with overwhelming firepower and troops as well unmitigated air superiority.

   In the end the Japanese in Burma were beaten by traditional large unit engagements.

   That is not a defeat of the ideas of Orde Wingate, nor do they negate the incredible bravery of the men who served with him. What it does DO however is to put to rest the idea that Orde Wingate was a purveyor of "Truth" -- his ideas were worthy, but they were not the be-all end-all of jungle combat. His developments were prodigeous and his personal bravery never in doubt. But I think that, like Moses, he got involved too much in fanatical devotion to one idea and was willing to sacrifice a lot for an idea. In the case of Moses, his people --- in the case of Wingate, it was often his own troops.

   This books admirably chronicles the multifacted nature of Wingate. It is factual and comes across as neutral as possible, often citing critical sources and those men (also of incredible courage) that did not fall under his spell.

   The narrative is tight and WELL EDITED. Unlike your regular 1000 page biography Smith and Beirman are able to deal with the subject adequately in 400 pages with nothing substantive missing. Also there is just enough detail of almost all of his life. The final 150 pages deals with the Burma campaign the authors are very skillful in their use of detail. They include all of the crucial elements necessary of his many campaigns.

   I found the book to be a very admirable read. I think that it only deepened the questions I have about Wingate --- was he a daring experimenter or a madman? --- I think that one can add, bitterly-troubled person to the heap of other appelations surrounding this man.

   I still ask myself, if this man were my commander would I succumb and become a convert? Would I stand aloof and protest that something is terribly wrong? I do not know, and cannot judge because I was not born at the time these events transpired. I was not a part of this great crusade, the glory they gained or the horrors they endured.

5 comments about Samuel Johnson.

1. I found this in out annual library sale for $1. I look forward to reading it based on the reviews here on Amazon. I suspect he is the famous Dr. Johnson that was said to disprove Berkeley by kicking a rock? Yes.



2. I always wondered how anyone dare write a biography of Samuel Johnson since Boswell's Johnson is arguably the single greatest volume in all biographical literature. I now understand a bit better how this can be done , thanks to W.Jackson Bate.
   Boswell presented Johnson as he knew him and heard him. He was a living witness who both worshipped the great man, and knew how to draw him out. Boswell is presented Johnson as he appears to contemporaries, in a way Johnson 'live'.
   Walter Jackson Bate is doing something different. He is taking all the accumulated knowledge of Johnson, and using whatever techniques modern psychological and literary approaches give for understanding the human personality.
   He is telling the story in a more detailed , systematic way and in a way which aims at a kind of deeper comprehension.
   What he does is provide insights into the life and character of one of the most fascinating and loveable characters of all English Literature.
   Physically huge and powerful, and yet tremendously vulnerable emotionally, a person at once strictly critical in his evaluations of others and of literature, and yet suddenly surprisingly kind in care for friends and misfortunates, Johnson is many paradoxes. But what fascinates above all is his tremendous genius, his great mental and linguistic power in presenting an understanding of Literature as vital to Life.
   He is certainly one of English Literature greatest 'characters' and 'creators' as this work makes abundantly clear.



3. Samuel Johnson was a brilliant critic, perhaps the greatest English writer after Shakespeare, a fascinating eccentric, and a genuinely heroic man. The great merit of Mr. Bate's biography is that he succeeds in the magical illusion of bringing Johnson alive again, giving us a vivid sense of what it might have been like to know him.
   
   The highest praise for this book is the regret you will feel when the pages end and Johnson's great figure bows out. The biography is that rare item, a genuinely inspiring book.



4. This biography has everything: meticulous scholarship, incisive literary criticism, and a prose style that recalls the days when professors could actually write a beautiful sentence.

   The weaknesses are very few. At times Bate's analysis can "sprawl," as he once put it, especially when he tries to apply Freud while discussing Johnson's "self-demand" (an intriguing concept that never really explains Johnson's indolence satisfactorily). Also, Bate tends to defend the Thrales even when they come off poorly, which is surprisingly often. Finally, a bit more on Johnson's relationship with Edmund Burke would have been welcome, for these two geniuses were all too aware of each other's greatness.

   But these are only minor quibbles. Altogether an inspiring achievement, and a testament to the heights that only the humanities reach.




5. I read this book over 20 years ago. It was my introduction to Samuel Johnson. The book inspired my deep devotion to Johnsonia. The subject, I now know, is fascinating; for over two centuries biographies of Johnson have never been out of print. But this book caught my attention and fixed it. It is a moving portrait of a person like all of us except with greater disabilities and greater strength and, after years of struggle, greater triumphs.

   I urge anyone with an interest in English literature or 18th century England or in the heights to which a honest and brave man can reach to make the effort to read this book. It is, at the very least, a good read. It may also make ytou a better person.

5 comments about Queen Victoria's Little Wars.

1. This is simply a terrific book for those who wish an overview of British military involvements in the 19th Century without having to sort through the literally thousands of works which have been written about them. It is not, and was plainly not intended to be, an exhaustive history of the subject, but rather a terse and readily digestible summary, made vital and appealing by Farwell's engaged and engaging writing style. As is true of his several other, and equally well-crafted, books, the author tells this story through the lives and exploits of the principal military leaders involved, from the brilliant but ultimately frustrated (and, he thought, betrayed) Garnet Wolseley, to that Hapless Hero, Evelyn Wood, who appears not to have been able to eat dinner without stabbing himself with his fork. They're all here, leading the finest soldiers in the world at the time, through a seemingly endless thicket of minor and major conflicts, many the product of hasty and defective thinking by their political masters, but nonetheless invariably costly in blood and treasure. Every time I read one of Farwell's books, I picture him as having picked up his pen (he died in 2000) thinking, "I'll write what I find interesting, and see if readers agree." We do.



2. This book, says the back cover quote from the Library Journal, "will be of value and interest to both the student of military history and of the Victorian Empire," but on the first page of the Foreword, Farwell writes, "Scant attention is paid [here] to the causes of the wars or the political manoeuverings which preceded the hostilities. They are not of much importance." Such matters are, however, of great importance to anyone wanting insight into "the Victorian Empire." And, as others have pointed out, this book is far too short to do justice to the military history, so unless a reader is looking for little more than a "light read," this book disappoints on all scores.



3. This extremely well-written book tells the reader, in somewhat condensed form, about the various wars, excursions, etc., that happened during the long reign of Queen Victoria. I don't think that it's completely comprehensive, because to even say a little about each event would mean this book would be three or four times its length. The author hits the "highlights" (if you will), and the reader who is interested in further in-depth resarch can do it on his or her own. There are a plethora of books about the various actions of Imperial Britain during the 19th century, but this one short book gives the reader guidance for them. It's a book that contains much savagery, but there is a touch of humor also, which relieves the almost constant tension. There are also thumbnail biographies of the most important personages of the times, which are quite helpful. This is an excellent short book on the apex of the British Empire.



4. Magnificent job,describes the various military expeditions, little wars, rebellions, mutinies(well only one was the only big threat to the Queen Victoria Empire, the Indian Mutiny)and all the small affairs to repel a proboked attack, to save or to protect resident Britons, to avenge an insult or to stop any other Empire from extending it.

   A lively and compelling study of the Savage wars of peace and the eccentric personalities who fought them,from 1837 to 1901 continuos warfare to protect British Interest in Asia, Canada, Africa, Arabia, this is not a complete work but is one of the best, Mr. Farwell gave us a fascinating overview highly readable with many entertaining historical anecdotes of British colonial wars and bloody confrontations, well written.

   I know that there are other works that name all the battles or small campaigns(like the work of Philip J. Haythornthwaite "The Colonial Wars Source Book")but a fascinating and exciting story that was omitted was the Fashoda Incident,this was going to be one of the greatest collision of rival imperial ambitions, the French with their historic claims of the Nile try to take control of a small town call Fashoda and this was a big threat to the British control of the Suez Canal and Egypt so after the famous battle of Omdurman Kitchener was send to stop the young Colonel Marchand, at the end the Fashoda crisis was eventually resolved, the British gave the French a free hand on Morrocco and the French forget about Egypt.

   Even with out this the author made an exciting book and a valuable addition to military history, maps and pictures,well laid out, nice appendix, one on the British Regiment system essential to understand the British Military Mind and the other a easy to follow list of the Little wars from 1837 to 1901 this is a partial record of the conflicts for the "PAX BRITANNICA"




5. Queen Victoria fought more wars in her time then any queen in english history. Under Victoria the british government was involved in countless wars in the colonies across the world. This was the era of the great british empire, that the sun never set on. THis book details these wars from the war against the SIhks to the wars in Sudan and the Boer war and many more. Churchill wrote anumber of books on this period as well including his book the 'River war'. Unfortuantly this read tries to compact all these fascinating events into a single volume, but the text is horribly boring and tedious. Its a great resource and one of the only books of its kind(that focus on the entire period and detail every small skirmish and battle). It should be updated by a writer who will help you live history rather then a writer who writes like sheep, like a plodding lawnmower.

5 comments about O Come Ye Back to Ireland: Our First Year in the County Clare.

1. Easy read, entertaining and educated me about what County Clare was like a few decades ago. Took place in the area my grandmother came from so was especially interesting to me. On a recent trip to Ireland, I met one of the authors, Christine Breen. She gave us a tour of Kiltumper Cottage which was center stage of the story. Fascinating lady. And such a treat to see the cottage I read about! Highly recommend this book!!



2. This book was interesting as I am married to an Irish woman and we travel to Ireland often. The descriptions of everyday life in Ireland are grand and are usually explained as compared to life in the states. It's not a very humourous book, but worth resding if you long for Ireland.



3. Before I knew it, I was done with this book and on-line ordering all three of Niall Williams' next books. Rather than just another quaint book about "the Irish", this book weaves a funny and entertaining story of two Americans trying to fit-in in rural west Ireland. From learning the customs to waiting to get a party-line phone, there was a smile on every page.



4. I am planning a trip to Ireland and always enjoy reading some books set in the place I am visiting. This story of a couple who moves to Ireland definitely gave a feel for the place. Both the material poverty but social richness.



5. When I traveled to Ireland two years ago and felt like I'd "come home" from the beautiful scenery (I never knew there could be *that* many shades of green) to the friendly people, to the rather mystical appearance of a Dolmen-shaped cloud in the sky just after we had viewed Dolmen in north County Clare, the experience was one I will not only never forget but hope to repeat sometime soon. During this time it was County Clare which spoke to me most of all.

   Niall Williams, born in Dublin and Christine Breen, from New York, have left their Manhattan home to move to County Clare and into the cottage where Chris's grandfather was born. The struggles and triumphs of their first year are engagingly told in this wonderful little book. I was able to be transported back to the rural west of Ireland I learned to love in just a few short days.

   In leaving their jobs and friends in Manhattan, Niall and Chris took a very big risk. To go to a place with no central heating, a telephone out of the early 20th C., and to one of the wettest summers on record took real courage. They quickly fit right in with their neighbors and by the time they host a New Years Eve party they are definitely one of "them."

   If you're an armchair traveler, someone who's visited the Emerald Isle, or just hope to someday, this is a story to cherish. I have also now read their book of travel essays and am awaiting arrival of their other two books which I have recently ordered.

   Although I am too old to do what Niall and Chris have done, it's great to live vicariously through them! Well done!

1 comments about King Edward II: Edward of Caernarfon His Life, His Reign, and Its Aftermath 1284-1330.

1. Roy Martin Haines is a life member Clare Hall, Cambridge University, a fellow of the Society of Antiquaries, and the author of numerous scholarly works concerning British history. In King Edward II: His Life, His Reign, And Its Aftermath, 1284-1330, Haines presents a scholarly, exhaustive, painstakingly researched, in-depth, and authoritative account of the days and rule of Edward of Caernarfon (1284-1327). King Edward II inherited a war with Scotland, yet his lack of skill in the art of war would eventually precipitate Scotland's independence. Ultimately, Edward would also become the first anointed king of England to be dethroned since Ethelred in 1013. King Edward II is an informed, informative, and very highly recommended contribution to personal and academic British History & Biography reference collections.

1 comments about Anne Neville: Queen to Richard III (England's Forgotten Queens series).

1. Anne Neville is one of the most poorly documented queens of England; Hicks originally doubted that he could find enough material. I applaud his effort, but 4 stars is somewhat generous: I award it for the uniqueness of the work and the lovely cover. This book should be of interest to the people interested in the Richard III controversies. The history and politics that determined the course of Anne's life are not well explained; anyone unfamiliar with the Wars of the Roses may want to read up on them first. Since the people mentioned here were the main actors, a few encyclopedia articles would probably be enough for a start.
   
   The book begins slowly with a chapter on Anne and Richard as fictionalized by the unavoidable William Shakespeare. Is there a law in the UK that the Wars of the Roses can't be discussed without extensive reference to the Bard? Hicks next tells us about Anne's noble ancestry; the reader should consult the genealogy at the end of the text to keep all the Richards, Annes, Isabels and Cecilys straight. Hicks might at least have included the stories about her semi-mythic ancestors: Guy of Warwick and The Swan Knight since he mentions the names. After this, Hicks launches into Anne's life history and the book is fairly good until after Anne is widowed.
   
   The rest of the book is chiefly concerned with the (dubious) dealings of her second husband, Richard, Duke of Gloucester; Anne is scanted. One would think that the death of her sister Isabel would be an event in Anne's life, let alone the attendant drama of illegal executions leading to a confrontation with Edward IV and Clarence's death, but it is mentioned almost parenthetically in a discussion of inheritance. Certainly there is room for more information: the book is only 215 pages, much of it is redundant: on p.71 Hicks tells about the consanguity between Clarence and Isabel. On pp.132-133, he gives us similar information about Richard and Anne, much of it the same. Since Clarence and Richard were brothers and Anne and Isabel were sisters, the reader probably knows a lot of this from p.71; the problem with their being cousins is obviously the same, only the issue of now being additionally related by marriage is added. Then on pp.143-144 he recounts it all again and recaps it on p.205.
   
   I belong to the Richard III Society; that does not require me to think of him as a saint (I checked before I joined), but a lot of this is silly. Hicks seems torn between trying to be fair and trying to find almost any excuse to scald Richard. This accounts for a certain amount of the redundancy: issues may be visited twice, once with a neutral interpretation, than again with an anti-Richard interpretation. At least he does include the neutral interpretations.
   
   He claims that their marriage was scandalous to their contemporaries, without quoting any who were scandalized. Related multiple times, Anne and Richard required dispensations to marry. Hicks argues that this may have been impossible, then mentions cases where such permission was granted. Proper documentation has not been found, but the marriage was accepted by their contemporaries. Hicks cites the property settlement as proof of a lack of proper dispensation, since it provides for the event of the marriage being annulled. As I recall, so did the marriage agreement for Richard's nephew, the Duke of York - this was outrageously unfair to the bride, but was this a standard provision for princes? There is also what I call the Obvious Problem: if the settlement makes it obvious that there was no dispensation, why didn't their contemporaries realize this? It was an Act of Parliament: how secret can it have been? I am much more cynical about dispensations: I think they involved more money & politics and less theology than Hicks seems to.
   
   There is no evidence that Richard and Anne married chiefly for love, but as Hicks mentions, that was typical for their time and it made sense for them to join forces. Anne had a vast inheritance which she couldn't access, Richard was possibly the only man with the influence to get it. I do not see why Richard shouldn't have fought for Anne's share, nor do I see how this necessarily "exploited" her; Hicks finds it unseemly. Anne probably wanted her share for herself (to the extent that married women had any control), and her heirs as much as Richard did.
   
   He makes provocative statements such as: "One must moreover deplore the immorality of the match. A custodial sentence and registration would result today for any man like Duke Richard [then 19] guilty of having sexual intercourse with a fifteen-year-old girl, but fifteenth century standards permitted such relations and indeed regarded them as normal and legitimate." [p.130] That's certainly having it both ways! Hicks has already told us, without any evidence of disapproval, that Margaret Beaufort was married at 12 [her husband was about 25] and a mother at 14. Anne was a already a widow before she married Richard: at 14 she had a consummated marriage with 17-year-old Edward of Lancaster. It certainly wasn't necessary to tell us again that early marriage was common; Hicks apparently just wanted to associate Richard, and only Richard, with sex offenses.
   
   On the other hand, while discussing the possibility that Richard poisoned Anne, which Hicks certainly should, he surprised me by concluding that she probably wasn't.
   
   Given the lack of personal detail for Anne's life, I think that it would have been better if Hicks had spent more time describing the usual life of a woman of her status, details of pageants that she may have attended, etc. One of the pleasures of reading biographies of ill-documented people is that the authors, not having to cram in a large amount of material, often create a better picture of the age than they do with major figures.

No comments about Florence Nightingale: The Making of an Icon.