5 comments about Gladstone: A Biography.

1. I bought this 600+ page tome because I wanted to learn more about 19th century English history. I knew virtually nothing about Gladstone, and I was convinced by the cover that claims this to be "[an] enthralling biography ... utterly absorbing" [an exact quote] according to "The Atlantic Monthly."
   
   But as noted by other reviewers, this book dwells only on minutiae without (before I gave up at around page 60) providing any memorable insights into anything. It is possible that I can't "get it" because I'm an American without a grounding in the basics of English politics and English history -- exactly who are the Whigs, who are the Tories, Palmerston, that sort of thing -- but I think this book's problems are deeper than that.
   
   For instance, we learn on page 57 that Gladstone's sister-in-law married "George Lyttelton, of Hagley Hall, who had succeeded as the fourth Lord Lyttelton of the second creation in 1837" and that his later achievements included "honorary degrees from both Oxford and Cambridge" and becoming "the first principal of Queen's College, Birmingham." But a few pages later, where we find Gladstone giving an important speech in the Commons concerning his opposition to the Opium Wars, we are told absolutely nothing about the Opium Wars, etc.
   
   I know quite a bit about American history, but when reading a biography of Andrew Jackson, I doubt I would be very interested in learning about the comings and goings of the second cousins of members of his administration.



2. William Gladstone is probably the most recognized name in British life and politics during the period known as the Victorian era. His public life ran nearly concurrently with Queen Victoria's reign, usually not to his comfort or benefit, but his influence in government and public life was both an embodiment of the Victorian Age and at times a check upon its excesses.
   
   I spent a fair amount of time wondering if the United States had ever produced someone even remotely similar to Gladstone, and I have still come up empty. Gladstone entered Parliament in 1833 and gave his last address in 1894. Despite youthful political indiscretions, an early tendency toward controversial outspokenness in matters theological, religious eccentricities, a tendency toward micromanagement, a temperamental sovereign, and a mixed record as four-time prime minister, Gladstone navigated sixty-some years of public service in a fashion that earned him the universal title Grand Old Man. The Gladstone portrayed by Jenkins becomes a character greater than the sum of his parts, certainly at least as responsible for the Pax Victoria as Victoria herself, whose vanities of empire were stoked, unwisely as it proved, by Gladstone's lifelong rival, Disraeli.
   
   The young Gladstone fancied himself a theologian, and as a young MP produced a lengthy and polemical defense of the Anglican Church that fortuitously came to be forgotten in succeeding years. He never lost interest in theology, however, nor in the health of the established Anglican Church. The conversion of his friends Newman and Manning to Roman Catholicism troubled him, but the experience perhaps ameliorated a residual dogmatism to the point where he could converse with such as Charles Darwin in the latter's home. Religion would always be a major drive in Gladstone's life, but one of his religious practices has drawn particular interest over the years.
   
   Gladstone, during the first half of his life, believed he was called to rescue prostitutes from a life of sin. Jenkins is careful here to walk a thin line in his assessment of Gladstone's "ministry." He [Jenkins] concludes that while Gladstone probably did believe his work was religious, he did find erotic stimulation in visiting such women in their places of residence, but apparently without technical marital infidelity. Gladstone himself would admit later that he succeeded in converting perhaps one of the ninety or so women he frequented; his diary indicates that such activity caused him enough moral discomfort that he engaged in frequent self-flagellation.
   
   Fortunately for Gladstone, it was his legislative, oratorical, and administrative competence that shaped his public image. Somewhat like Churchill, he served in a number of government capacities, but clearly he was best suited as Chancellor of the Exchequer. American government does not have an equivalent officer who in effect draws up the nation's budget and establishes spending and taxing priorities for Parliament to vote up or down. Gladstone was a Conservative of a curious sort by today's standards: he eschewed deficit spending but did not shrink from raising taxes for what Henry Clay would have called "internal improvements." His policies over the years were generally good for the economy, and as Prime Minister for four separate tenures he enjoyed popularity among the laboring classes. In his later years Gladstone took to campaigning for elections and causes, attracting large and generally friendly crowds. This was an innovation in British politics, and Victoria thought it pedestrian.
   
   Four times during his career Gladstone was summoned by the Queen to form new governments. Relations between the two were never warm, particularly after the death of Prince Albert. Gladstone, unlike many in government, became more liberal in old age. He was never entirely at peace with jingoistic rhetoric of empire [which Disraeli, according to Jenkins, spoon-fed the Queen to saturation], and his major political crucible was a morally equitable settlement of the Irish dilemma, a dream which regrettably escaped him and crippled his governments. Victoria, with a near neurotic fear of anarchy, found Gladstone's popularity unsettling and his politics too radical.
   
   Gladstone, on the other hand, took advantage of the rapidly expanding railroad systems to observe first hand economic and political developments both in England and on the Continent. In some ways he shared Victoria's concern over nineteenth century upheavals and threats to legitimate and long established structures of authority, but his political instincts guided him toward moderate governance and a steady improvement in the standard of living. One may argue that Gladstone was also voted out of office four times, which is true; in his defense, his "social agenda" on such matters as Ireland and suffrage, modest as it was, ran against the tide of a reactionary monarch and the still well entrenched aristocracy of the House of Lords.
   
   Gladstone's foreign policy was generally benign, a case of his being lucky and good. He was a Confederate sympathizer during the Civil War, but he did not object to American damage claims involving the Confederate warship Alabama, outfitted in England. His one major adventure was an incursion into Egypt in 1882 to stem nationalist unrest. Gladstone, then old and distracted, was not enthused by the cause but won pundits when the uprising was quelled with minimal loss of life.
   
   Gladstone died in 1898 at the age of 89. Queen Victoria outlived him by about three years. Although a devotee of long walks, chopping trees, and frigid swimming outings, Gladstone's life was marred with illnesses and perhaps a tendency toward hypochondria. Certainly his very location in history is remarkable--a living bridge between Napoleon and Winston Churchill. Jenkins makes the most of this tenure in a very satisfying way for the reader. I would note here that an excellent sequel to this work is A.N. Wilson's "After the Victorians."



3. This book on one of Britian's greatest prime ministers, especially of the 19th century proves to be very boring. I guess that is blunt enough. This is a political biography written by a politican turned historian. The narrow focus of this biography ensure that we know everything about Gladstone's political life and almost nothing outside of it. Subject matters that does not involved Gladstone, the author did not touch. We do not know what kind of Britain Gladstone presided over, what her foreign policies or even her domestic policies if Gladstone wasn't involved. How did Britain's imperialism, her many wars and its cost affected Gladstone? In all these 640 odds pages, we hardly know what kind of man Gladstone was outside of his political arena. His personal relationship with his family, friends, allies and enemies remains vague, superificial and smokey. What we get after reading this biography is a highly detail narrative of Gladstone's political accomplishments, failures, relationships and "what if" political scenarios. I guess if a politican writes about another politican, this is the type of biography you might get, an one dimensional look.
   
   I didn't find the book very well written. It almost look like the author was overdosing on his thesaurus to impressed his English composition teacher. I found the Amazon.com review regarding that element to be very accurate.
   
   Thus, I was bit surprised to read all these nice accolodes printed in the book. I wondered if any of these people actually read the book which can put almost anyone to sleep unless of course, if you are a politican.
   
   I find it hard to recommend this book to anyone. Its definitely not for casual reading unless 19th century British parlimentary history is what you are looking for.



4. William Ewart Gladstone (1809-1898), 4 times Prime Minister of Great Britain during the height of Britain's influence and imperial power, was an extraordinary leader and individual who repays close study. His life, like that of Queen Victoria herself, spanned most of the 19th century. He was perhaps the most eminent of the British Victorians. One can compare him only to Darwin in the extent to which he influenced the culture and lives of his countrymen during that century. He was fourth son of Sir John Gladstone, a wealthy merchant in Liverpool who attained his riches at least partially via his holdings in the slave-worked Carribean cotton and sugar plantations. Like many of the sons of the rich in England during the early Victorian period, William was educated at Eton and Christ College, Oxford. It was at Oxford apparently where the future prime Minister awoke to his three greatest passions: religion, politics and Homer.
   
   Gladstone's intellectual struggles with those three passions are very ably summarized in a coupl eof recent books on the man: Babbington's book on Gladstone's intellectual development and the biography here under review by Jenkins. It speaks well of Gladstone that he took seriously the question of how religion and politics, or church and state ought to be related both culturally and institutionally/legally. Gladstone really did grapple mightily with the issue and his labors did produce fruit it seems to me. In some ways Gladstone was the ideal man to pursue the question of Church and State. He was an able politician and administrator in a country where Church and State issues had been life or death matters for centuries. He was also a deeply religious man who read voraciously in theology and spirituality and who all his life engaged in regular prayer and ministry. On the other hand, though he was a very successful politician he was not a profound political thinker. He did not have the same deep grounding in either theology or in political philosophy that many of his contemporaries had. He knew enough, however, to know that he did not know and thus he very wisely sought counsel from the experts. Although he was an almost fanatical High Anglican churchman, he eagerly sought counsel from three Roman Catholics: the German theologian Dollinger, the convert John Henry Newman and the political historian Lord Acton. Three of these men, Gladstone, Acton and Dollinger, were lifelong friends who corresponded and met regularly over several decades. Newman corresponded with the 3 but was limited in his travel and meetings during to his clerical life and duties. Gladstone, Acton and Dollinger, nevertheless, held Newman in highest regard, though Gladstone always regretted Newman's conversion to Roman Catholicism.
   Gladstone's position on Church-state relations evolved along with his political views over the many years he spent in public life. When he graduated from Oxford in 1832, his father convinced the Duke of Newcastle to sponsor his son for the Newark constituency and thus Gladstone entered politics in a fateful year for Britain and for Gladstone. In that year the great Reform Act of 1832 had been passed which substantially increased the franchise. Gladstone would be at the center of further increases in the franchise throughout the 19th century.
   
   Gladstone distinguished himself with fine oratorical skills in his maiden speeches in parliament. He was very conservative and opposed the extension of the franchise and loosening up the tight Church-state relationship. He very quickly developed the view that the strength of a polity depended on the strength and respect given to the Church. His deep religious sense also allowed him to sometimes place the interests of the state in service to the interests of the Church. This makes sense if you view the interests of the population as the same as or coterminous with the interests of religion. If the people need religion in order to flourish then the job of the State is to protect and nurture religious institutions and power. To do so would be to increase the power of the people.
   
   He parliamentary speeches got him noticed by Peel, the prime Minister, who appointed him to a post in the Treasury. He quickly evidenced unusual administrative ability and the following year he was promoted to under-secretary for the colonies. Before he could distinguish himself in this new post he lost office when Peel resigned in 1835. He reasonably quickly returned to the government, however, when the Whigs were forced out of power in 1841. He now began to display extraordinary political and administrative skills. In 1844 he put together the Railway Bill that obliged railway companies to transport third-class travelers for fares that did not exceed a penny a mile. This bill reduced the unpopularity of his party among ordinary Britons.
   
   In1847 Gladstone was elected the conservative member of parliament (MP) for Oxford University. This is a significant fact as Oxford at that time was a bastion of High Church, conservative thought which held that the State ought to support, financially, legally and in general promote an established religion, namely the High Church form of Anglicanism. Gladstone believed that Anglicanism had discovered the right form of state-church relations with the two entities roughly co-equal influence in the larger culture and each competent in its own domain. The state could not and should not undertake any actions that would undermine the influence of the Church and vice versa. Gladstone opposed Roman Catholicism insofar as it yielded where religious questions were concerned to a power outside of the local nationality. He also opposed low church and protestant manifestations of religion in England as disordered in their relations to the state: either they were hostile to the state and too subservient to state powers (e.g. the Puritans under Cromwell). All his life Gladstone was quite critical, even fanatically so, of the Roman Catholic Papacy-this despite his intense and life-long friendships with devout Roman Catholics. His own sister had converted to Roman Catholicism. Yet he saw the papacy as illiberal and operating to instill superstious subservience in the life of the faithful. When the First Vatican Council created the dogma of papal infallibility Gladstone only felt confirmed in his estimate of the backwardness of the Papacy. He never learned to see that the Papacy represented a cultural force that could be appealed to over and beyond the state. It represented a check on state power... but Gladstone never understood that. Indeed, it is now generally believed by many competent historians that democracy emerged first in the West precisely because the Papacy always constituted an extra-local, extra-national, spiritual, legal and institutional authority that could trump the local sovereign in several important cultural and economic domains that affected the lives of ordinary people nominally under the jurisdiction of the local Sovereign. Such was not the case in the Eastern Orthodox tradition where Church (in the form of the Metropolitan and Patriarchate) was subordinated to the Emperor and Czar. Thus it is not Christianity per se that yields liberty and democracy but the Latin rite which does so.
   
   When Lord Palmerston, the leader of the Whigs, became Prime Minister in1859, he made Gladstone the post of Chancellor of the Exchequer. Again Gladstone proved an extraordinarily able Administrator: He abolished the paper duty which enabled publishers to produce cheap newspapers. He, bucked the tide in his own party and supported another reform Bill which would have enfranchised large sections of the working class (but this was defeated). His support for reform cost him his seat as representative from Oxford University. He now moved away from the conservative party. Lord Russell, the new Prime Minister, asked Gladstone to become leader of the House of Commons as well as Chancellor of the Exchequer. Gladstone again introduced a reform bill and again was defeated and Russell's administration resigned.
   
   Lord Derby, leader of the conservatives now became Prime Minister with the unscrupulous Benjamin Disraeli acting as leader of the House of Commons. To steal the thunder from Gladstone and the liberals, Disraeli proposed (in 1867) a new Reform (enfranchisement) Act. Unlike Disraeli himself who had earlier blocked Gladstone's efforts on the same measure, Gladstone took a principaled stand, pointed out that he had practically written the bill himself (Disraeli being too stupid to undertake the task), supported the bill and the measure was passed.
   
   The new reform act gave the vote to every male adult householder living in a borough constituency, approximately1,500,000 new voters. Who would get the new voters? Interestingly, the new voters were not decieved by Disraeli's machinations. In the general election of December 1868, the conservatives were defeated and Gladstone, leader of the liberal party, became Prime Minister. Now Gladstone acted with astonishing energy. He wrote and passed the education act (1870) and quickly moved to consolidate his party's base by passing the Ballot Act (1872). This made voting anonymous. Until then voters had to mount a platform and announce their choice of candidate to the officer who then recorded it in the poll book. Employers and local landlords therefore knew how people voted and could punish them if they did not support their preferred candidate.
   
   In the 1874 general election, however, the conservatives squeaked out a bare majority and Disraeli now became Prime Minister. Gladstone led the opposition. At this point he began his lifelong habit of intense scholarly and religious research when out of office. Amazingly enough in less than two years he wrote and published (all while leading the opposition in Parliament!) his book An Inquiry into the Time and Place of Homer in History (1876). It is difficult to describe the work as it contained some very big ideas (Greek culture as part of the Christian revelation-not merely foreshadowing the revelation) and some extraordinary minutiae only scholars could find interesting (e.g. an enumeration of styles, descriptions and functions of doorways in Homer...such info later helped helped anthropologists excavating ruins of Mycanae and Troy).
   
   On a side note: While Disraeli gained the favor of Queen Victoria, Gladstone incurred her wrath. This it turns out was due to the fact that Gladstone was constantly trying to get her to play a role in the religious and political affairs of state (while Disraeli preferred a more tame royalty)-yet she would not budge from the Palaces after the death of Prince Albert. Disraeli's inactivity on the domestic front and bungling of foreign crises led to the dissolution of Parliament in 1880, and the general election resulted in a overwhelming Liberal victory and Gladstone's return to the Prime Minister-ship. Once again he acted energetically, introducing two new measures concerning parliamentary reform. The corrupt practices act reigned in some of the buying and selling of candidates and offices that proliferated under the Disraeli regime. The 1884 reform act gave the counties the same franchise as the boroughs and added about six million to the total number of new voters. Not surprisingly Gladstone and the liberals won the 1886 general election.
   
   He now began another unpopular crusade: Gladstone now attempted to convince Parliament to accept Irish Home Rule. At this time the master Irish politician Parnell was using brilliant parliamentary tactics to bring the issue before Parliament. When Gladstone finally introduced a home rule bill the proposal split his own party and Parliament rejected the measure. He nevertheless tried again but this time Parnell became embroiled in a personal scandal (He had a mistress whom he apparently passionately loved and later married). Without Parnell's leadership in the House of Commons the bill suffered and again went down to defeat. Gladstone was defeated in the polls in the 1886 elections but was once again returned to office for the final time in 1892. He tried once more. The following year the Irish home rule bill was defeated in the house of lords. William Gladstone resigned from office in March 1894 and died at Hawarden on 19th May, 1898.



5. Gladstone was a remarkable, complicated, even enigmatic man and Jenkins does not waste our time with the sort of pop-psychology projection and junk theories that ruin so much contemporary biography. Instead, Jenkins lets the facts speak for themselves, weighting them based on their demonstrable impact on Gladstone's own life and on British society viewed from the vantage point of 100 years or more of subsequent history. Gladstone emerges through records of his actions, the memoirs of his contemporaries, and his own diary. Jenkins resists the too-common modern conceit of pretending intimate knowledge of Gladstone as if through some astral mind-meld. Although he admits his own affection for the man, Jenkins lets readers decide for themselves what they think of this stubborn, courageous, long-winded, sanctimonious, and usually dead right -- even prophetic -- dynamo.

   Along the way there are delightful, balanced, spot-on portraits of some of Gladstone's contemporaries. The often-deified Disraeli comes out as a man of great talent, imagination, and political genius who was a self-absorbed, underhanded lightweight. (A portrayal such as that some modern critics have applied to Bill Clinton.) The slow intellectual and emotional curdling of Queen Victoria after the death of Prince Albert is as eloquent a meditation on the corruptions of isolation and power as I've read in some time. Spencer, Parnell, Hartington, Rosebery, Balfour, Joseph Chamberlain, Manning, Wilberforce, Palmerston -- all are here drawn with flavor and economy and no trace of bitterness or partisanship.

   One of the great strengths of this biography is that it never talks down to the reader. Jenkins is clearly an almost frighteningly literate individual, and his vocabulary occasionally sent me to the dictionary, but I consulted it in delight as every rare word was clearly used unselfconsciously by an author who knew it well and knew exactly what he was trying to say. (As Simon Winchester has noted, there are very few true synonyms in English.) More challenging in this regard may be the fact that the book, having been written for a British audience, assumes an elementary knowledge of the outlines of British history, which many American readers don't have. Just as a book about a prominent American nineteenth-century figure would not feel it necessary to produce extensive background on, say, the industrial revolution, the transcontinental railroad, or abolition, so Gladstone assumes the reader's familiarity with the Indian Raj, the expansion of the franchise, Britain's own industrial progress, and other subjects. My advice is to just jump right in anyway -- I myself was not well versed in these topics yet found the narrative so strong that the author's insights were easy to follow.

3 comments about Jane Austen: Her Life: The Definitive Portrait of Jane Austen: Her Life, Her Art, Her Family, Her World.

1. This book claims to cover a great deal of new material, although I would have to say that it doesn't seem to me to add much to other biographies. I would guess that a lot of the new material relates to Frank Austen, since the biography begins, somewhat surprisingly, with a several page account of his entry into the Navy. I would therefore recommend it to Janeites, who will want all the details, but those who have already read a biography and are not terribly interested probably won't find that this rewards the additional reading. (I am among those who just love details, although this is a bit much even for me.)
   
   Previous biographers, such as Elizabeth Jenkins (Jane Austen: A Biography), have portrayed the Austens as a loving and harmonious family. Recent biographers have challenged this view, sometimes even arguing for serious tension between Jane and her sister Cassandra. Honan argues for a relatively harmonious group, with some normal dissensions.
   
   I give somewhat mixed marks to the writing. I find statements such as "The deepest purpose of her burlesques was always to ensure her freedom within the loving group of the Austens ... " (p.70) as unverifiable verbiage that adds little to the reading experience. I don't think that we needed several pages on the actual events of the Battle of Trafalger, although of course it adds to the general historical detail. On the other hand, Honan's reconstruction of JA's possible thoughts as she agonized over withdrawing from her engagement to Bigg-Withers are quite affecting, even if speculative. I don't think that I have ever read a more moving account of her courage during her last illness.
   
   The bibliographic citations are frustratingly uneven and incomplete. Previous biographers have pilloried Edward Austen (Knight) for his failure to offer his mother and sisters a home immediately after his father's death. Honan claims in passing that he did make such an offer and they declined it. There is no citation for this startling, and in understanding the interactions of the Austens, important statement! Honan also agrees with Valerie Grosvenor Myers (Jane Austen, Obstinate Heart: A Biography) in stating that Mrs. Cassandra Austen (JA's mother) was reluctant to get married, but neither cites a source! This claim suggests a number of interesting possibilities regarding the mother-daughter relationship and JA's own decisions regarding marriage, and is certainly important enough to require substantiation.
   
   One of the reviewers has mentioned that there are numerous errors in the book. I can't say that I was struck by them, unless the reviewer is speaking of difference in interpretation, but I can't claim to be any expert, either.
   
   Honan includes several family trees and the notes, such as they are, are arranged so as to be easy to find. There is an index, not as detailed as it might be. There is a useful review of materials and previous writings on Austen and related topics.
   
   Honan does not like John Halperin's book, The Life of Jane Austen, which he claims is inaccurate, but it is so far my favorite and the most focussed of the long biographies. For a short biography, which I like to read before long biographies when available, I recommend Carol Shield's book, Jane Austen (Penguin Lives), and Valerie Grosvenor Myer's Jane Austen, Obstinate Heart: A Biography, as a midlength book. The latter is flawed by a lack of notes.



2. I found 23 factual errors in Honan's book -- when I mentioned this to someone I was told that a reader in Virginia had found 142. There are much better biographies of Jane Austen out there -- for starters, no one has yet surpassed Elizabeth Jenkins', first published in the 1930s, and a fine recent one, a good introduction to JA's life, is Maggie Lane's latest, Jane Austen's World. Don't be put off by the fact that it is slick and, as they say, richly illustrated -- it's readable, sound and remarkably complete despite its size.



3. Park Honan (professor of English and American Literature at the Universiy of Leeds in England) wrote "Jane Austen: Her Life" in the late 1980's. At the time he wrote his book, he had access to much new material including a treasure trove of letters written by various folks who knew Ms. Austen. Mr. Honan has included an impressive bibliography in his book which should keep one reading for years to come.

   Honan says Ms. Austen understood the current affairs of her time and he provides ample documentation to substantiate this assertion. He also suggests her knowledge of current events is reflected in her writing, albeit thinly disguised.

   Although Austen lead a somewhat sheltered life as the daughter of an English vicar, she lived in exciting times. Napolean was at his height, the Revolution in France and subsequent 'Reign of Terror' kept English on pins and needles, thirteen of England's 23 American colonies had revolted and created a new nation that had sided with the French, and the aristocracy was in turmoil over scandels surrounding the monarcy.

   Austen was kept abreast of these activities in a variety of ways including letters from her naval brother Frank. Historians have uncovered over 500 letters Frank wrote to family members, and he kept meticulous journals of his time in the navy. Although he probably did not tell Jane everything, he did share many newsworthy events such as the difficulties on his ship the 'London' when six men were hanged and some others "lashed for insolence, mutiny and an 'unnatural crime of Sodomy." Honan says Austen refers to this incident in "Mansfield Park" when she has the character Mary Crawford who is living next door with her adulterous admiral uncle say, "Of Rears and Vices, I saw enough."

   Honan says Austen was influenced by the writings of Mme. de Sevigne, whom Ms. Austen's father considered too much of a feminist. Jane Austen was very concerned about the plight of women and considered adultry and divorce a scourge on women. She was aware of the Regent Prince's attempt to put aside his wife Queen Charlotte on "trumped up" charges of adultry. She sympathized with the Queen, unaware that the Queen was a fan of her books.

   Influenced by works such as the third Earl of Shaftesbury's "Characteristics of Men, Manners, Opinions, Times" she enjoined her readers to have the 'sense' "to control one's emotions through observation, reason and moral understanding" and the sensibility to have an "accurate perception of other people and their feelings."

   There are plenty of examples throughout Honan's book of the effect of external events on Ms. Austen's writing and thinking, not only her books, but in the letters that did survive and journals kept by Ms. Austen and others.

   This is an informative an excellent book for anyone who wants to know more about Ms. Austen's life and works.

5 comments about The Firm: The Troubled Life of the House of Windsor.

1. I can see what the other reviewers meant by a lack of continuity. The author has a tendency to jump around and as the book progresses her views change, which can make it seem "cut and pasted." This reason alone stopped me from giving it five stars. From an American with an interest in the monarchy, I think it gives an interesting history while touching on why a monarchy works (at least as long as the Queen is the monarch in question). It also has a bunch of tidbits that make it good reading and gave another view of the Princess of Wales. All in all, I think it was a great book and I recommend it to anyone with an interest in the monarchy - especially to us Americans that don't understand it.



2. I tried reading this yesterday as soon as I got it, but after the first three chapters, I had to put it down.
   
   I enjoy biographies that tell both the postive and negative side of a person or insitution; this book mostly promotes the positive side of Prince Charles, and doesn't really tell of his negative side.



3. This book is a total waste of time. It is highly subjective and very critical of Princess Diana. The rest of the royal family members come under scrutiny, but Diana fairs the worst. It is more than obvious that the author favors the queen and the Prince of Wales, especially the prince. The author lavishes praise on Kate Middleton and hopes that Middleton and Prince William will settle down and live happily ever after and bring credibility and respectability to the monarchy. Give me a break! I found the book to be tactless and devoid of any substance.



4. I love things about the royal family. But this book put me to sleep faster than a double dose of Ambian.
   Penny is a Prince Of Wales fan, through and through. And she quite likes Camilla. This felt like reading a book written by the Prince's PR machine.
   The most disappointing book about the Windsors ever. Too much minutia and not enough substance. I agree, check it out of the library! Caution. DO NOT BUY!



5. 
   Before watching the film -title Queen ý'D like to have some ideas about the Royal family and ý think Watching the film after having o good idea about the family and their sufferings of being a member of a royal family will give me a total understanding and pleasure of knownig what you are going to watch.
   The book is perfect

5 comments about England's Mistress: The Infamous Life of Emma Hamilton.

1. The book is excellent...always loved the topic of Lady Hamilton...but wanted to read this take on her...enjoy!



2. Very little is known about Emma Hamilton's early life, but that doesn't stop the author from both speculating about it (not a problem) and attributing emotions and attitudes to people, when there is simply no evidence at all to support them. This is more of a novel than a history, and if you read it that way, it's probably not bad... and that probably accounts for a lot of the glowing reviews... but if you're looking for biography, try another text.
   
   The other thing that surprises me about the reviews is everyone's impression that Emma Hamilton was intelligent and brave. She was, I suppose, brave in a way, but also exceptionally foolish. She failed to secure a future for herself or her daughter when it would only have been common sense to do so, failed to understand the limitations of her position, and allowed herself to be constantly used and bled dry by her friends and relatives. Failures of heart, perhaps, understandable and forgivable. But not wise, and bravado is not really the same thing as courage.



3. I have read several historical biographies and never has one taken me by the heartstrings as much as this one. I remember over 30 years ago seeing the magnificent painting by Romney of Emma in Straw Hat at the Huntington Art Museum and wondering at this lovely woman. At that time all I ever could find on her to read was about her flamboyant lifestyle as a mistress and dying a shameful death in debt and alcoholic. This book in all it's wonderful research has proven those past books entirely short sighted. I'm certainly relieved Kate Williams has set this womans life to rights and we can finally see what a truly soft hearted, lovely woman she was, just born before her time.



4. I must say at once that I'm very impressed with Kate William's writing. She writes in a modern style but with no discordant notes to take away from the period to which she is transporting the reader. Emma was born to an impoverished family in England in 1765. After a hard battle just to survive as a child, she spent a short stint as a domestic before following her natural bent as a theatrical, eventually ending for a short period, as a "woman of ill-fame". She then was taken up by dissolute aristocrat, Charles Greville, who used her casually and tried to pass her off to one of his relatives when she became pregnant. Luckily for Emma, the relative was Sir William Hamilton, a rich diplomat in his late sixties who lived in Naples and who, recognising her theatrical talents, honed her dancing and singing skills with excellent teachers so that she soon became a favourite at the Court of the King and Queen of Naples. Hamilton married her after a few years, much to the chagrin of his family who resented the potential loss of his fortune. Their marriage was a happy one, even though he was unable to give her a much wanted child, as she nursed him devotedly through bouts of ill health and generally made his life happy and contented. In 1793, the renowned Admiral of the British fleet, Horatio Nelson, sailed into the harbour at Naples and the rest is history. They fell passionately in love to such an extent that even Sir William bowed to the inevitable and, rather than lose Emma, agreed to live in a menage a trois and accept parentage of their daughter, Horatia. After Nelson's death, Emma's so-called friends who had been only too willing to accept her hospitality and generosity, now totally shunned her, leaving poor Emma ill, penniless and alone, to die in great pain in Calais. Like another reviewer, Michael Schuyler, this book left me feeling melancholic and very bitter towards grasping predators who use and abuse the famous and perhaps naive.



5. I saw the film "That Hamilton Woman" as a teenager, and was curious about the real Emma. After reading mixed reviews about previous biographical works on Emma, I decided to wait it out, and I'm glad that I did. This book is wonderful, and I think that many people of all ages and backgrounds can identify with Emma's plight. I agree with the previous review that mentions some of the maybes, what ifs, and other uncertainties that are discussed in the book, particularly with Emma's early life. That said, I think that the author tried to put Emma's life in a context, giving the reader a picture of what typical life was for someone in her circumstances. Many of the specifics of Emma's early life are long buried, it's nice to have a glimpse of what life in Hawarden was like for a working class family, etc.
   
   This book is a wonderful read; I found myself fretting over her ordeals, because the book is written in a way that really connects with the reader. If you like historical biographies, you'll probably enjoy this one. I consumed both Marie Antoinette and Georgiana very quickly, and this one was no different!

5 comments about Nelson: A Dream of Glory, 1758-1797.

1. There are possibly more books on the shelves of bookshops (certainly in England) about Nelson than any other English hero and because of the recent anniversary of Trafalgar many more have either been written or re-printed. How does the reader pick one out from the rest. Well my own recommendation would be to buy this particular volume,
   
   In the historical time scale, Nelson lived and died in the fairly recent past, so many of the books written about him are only regurgitated facts that have never been checked properly, or may have no foundation in factual terms. John Sugden has left no stone unturned in his quest for the truth, not only about the public persona of the man, but also gives a brilliant insight into the life of the private man. His hopes, his fears, his weaknesses and his strengths.
   
   John Sugden's writing style is both lively and stylish and does not leave the reader feeling overpowered with dull facts that he or she cannot take on board. Yes the book is a historical work, but it is written with a sensitive touch that almost makes the reader think they are reading an adventure novel. This is achieved without prostituting the historical content in any way. I enjoyed it immensely.



2. This is a very detailed biography of Nelson, the best that I have read. It really deserves a high rating.
   
   At almost 800 pages of narrative and 943 pages total, you really get your money's worth here (if money was an issue). It's thicker than your phone book if you're from Montana or the Dakotas. Heck, it's almost as thick as my Seattle phone book. And after reading it, my wrist muscles have become curiously strong.
   
   What I like about it:
   
   It is very detailed, this author really has spent the time to do the research and read the correspondences and contemporary accounts, it's no summary of already written books. That's very heroic in itself. I have a feeling that it's one of those rare books where academia is it's own reward and not just the profits, not that a biography of Nelson is going to be a bestseller (Maybe would have been in 1806).
   
   Gives a very good feel of what Nelson was like as a person and professionally. All over the book Sugden gives us his impressions of Nelson and backs it up with correspondence and notes from either him or the people he dealt with.
   
   Discussed his personal life in some detail, which is good because many other authors glossed over it, especially historical authors who had certain limits of decorum.
   
   Gives a very good background of the naval service in Nelson's day and the political situation, that in itself was worth reading the book for. In fact, I can also say that it's the best description of the Royal Navy and the political situation from the naval services point of view at that time that I've ever read - not only informative, but serves as a backdrop of how Nelson developed and why he did the things he did.
   
   When some things could not be explained, he did explain that no accounts or correspondence could be found to explain it.
   
   This is not a book for the amateur. For the serious reader, the detail is what makes the book so absorbing, I revel in the detail, keep it coming. This book is not exceptionally easy to read. Again, serious readers will not find that a hurdle. For readers looking for a lighter (and shorter book) a search through Amazon will give you a lot of hits - just look for one about 100 pages long.
   
   The minor negatives of the book
   1) Some of the minutae was too minute, however, I easily skipped over those small parts. For a book of this caliber, better to have too much (which I can always skip over) rather than to have too little.
   2) I wished that some actions were described in more detail, but perhaps there were no good accounts.
   3) I wish there were some more maps and maybe some diagrams, but this ain't a picture book.
   
   Overall, a very, very good biography. Highly, highly recommended. I look forward to part two. Meanwhile, some wrist strengtening exercises with the barbells.



3. As we know, not all history books are alike. Many are dry, while others try to make it interesting by either making stuff up or writing like Tom Clancy. Sugden does a good job of engaging the reader with interesting narrative, while clearly distinguishing facts from conjecture. You definitely get a taste for Nelson's charm, drive, as well as foibles. There is a lot of maritime terminology, but if you're interested enough to read an 800-page book about a naval hero, you can probably handle an occasional trip to the dictionary.
   So I found the book very exciting, but I have one major complaint. The author claims to aspire to make this book the new definitive Nelson biography. He tells in great detail his glories of the Battle of Cape St. Vincent, and then his great failure at Santa Cruz de Tenerife, where he lost his arm. Nelson gets really depressed, and returns to England. Then there is a conclusion of his career. Sugden observes that even though Nelson was depressed at the time, and likely to retire, no one could have imagined what glories were still ahead. The end.
   How can you have a definitive Nelson book, 800 pages long, and not include the Battle of Trafalgar? Argh! Admittedly, the vook title tells it right there, since these things happened after 1797. But if you're reading the book to learn about these things, well, you get the idea. I guess I'll have to read a different book to discover why his statue is in Trafalgar Square...
   NOTE: Rumor has it this is part one, and supposedly Sugden will be writing another book, to tell the rest of the story.



4. Its difficult for me to improve on the several excellent reviews of this work that have preceded mine. But most importantly I want to state quite categorically that this is not a boring book. Biographies by their nature are not action stories, they must discuss periods of their subjects life that are perhaps bland and slow, but without this our understanding of the person would be incomplete. Nelson was not solely defined by his actions in the great naval engagements in which he fought.
   
   Nelson was a fascinating bundle of contradictions, self serving and adulterous, disparaging of superiors he perceived as inept yet immensely loyal to able subordinates, devoted to his country, and personally courageous. He was a man who embodied the fighting spirit of the Royal Navy at the peak of its prowess and whose methods of warfare continued to influence the navy for another century.
   
   I await the second volume of this work with great expectations.



5. This is a truly awful book. Sugden writes well enough, and no doubt the book is AUTHORITATIVE, but anyone looking to be entertained should simply forget it. The author never met a detail he didn't like, but by the end of this book, the reader will have met more than he can count. Simply put, Sugden goes into such detail about so many insignificant and downright dull matters that he loses any sense of perspective and entirely fails to creat an interesting and READABLE account of a truly interesting life. YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED.

1 comments about Henry VIII's Last Victim: The Life and Times of Henry Howard, Earl of Surrey.

1. This is an excellent book on so many levels. It sheds a bright light on Henry VIII's Court, and shows it to be a complex and often dangerous place. The book reveals Henry Howard, the Earl of Surrey, to be an intelligent, talented, brave, egotistic, and ultimately doomed man. The research is also solid. Jessie Childs looks under every possible rock for any scrap of evidence, and so is able to present a vivid, full-scale biography of the Earl. But what really sets this book apart from most others is the writing, which crackles and sparks like burning logs in a fireplace.
   Jessie Childs is a fresh voice, and thus brings a new perspective to the Court of Henry VIII. What a marvelous first book this is! One can't help but look forward to many more such works from this young, talented historian.

1 comments about Margaret Thatcher: A Tribute in Words and Pictures.

1. Not every British Prime Minister is a Thatcher or Churchill. Not every American President is a Lincoln, Kennedy, or Clinton. And even rarer a jewel is a woman who can lead a country not as a token female but a first among equals, whether they are man or woman. Such is the legacy of Margaret Hilda Roberts Thatcher, who in her 8 decades of life has epitomized the sheer force of will, intellect, fortitude, and backbone that brought Britain back from the brink of bankruptcy. One need not agree with Thatcher's reign but one thing is for certain: she was a woman of fierce drive with the intellectual and political savvy to boot. Most of all .... isn't it grand to know that in the machinations of international politics ... there are those world leaders who understand the courage and strength of conviction.

5 comments about Lennon Remembers.

1. The problem with any biography or autobiography is the problem of bias. As much as a biographer (or autobiographer) wishes to be impartial or objective, his pen is ultimately driven and guided by his own beliefs and ideologies. It is for this reason that Jenn S. Wenner's 1970 interview Lennon Remembers with John Lennon and wife Yoko Ono is truly remarkable.
   
   The semi-autobiographical interview leaves no room for dishonesty or bias; neither interviewer nor Lennon has the luxury of time to craft a story. Thus, neither individual is capable of bending and changing details or infusing partiality into the account. The result is a shocking collection of unbridled and unfettered memories that provide readers with a glimpse into the life of one of the greatest musicians of the 20th Century.
   
   The majority of the interview deals with the period of Lennon's life dominated by "Beatlemania." Lennon very candidly talks about virtually all aspects of his life as a superstar. For Wenner, no stone is left unturned, as Lennon tackles issues around his tumultuous relationship with members of the band and his "insane" experiences with LSD and "going around London on it."
   
   Wenner also works to explore Lennon's life as a musician-activist. In the interview, Lennon acknowledges how his work as a pacifist won him notoriety in many circles, saying, "If I walk down the street now I'm more liable to get talked to about peace than anything I've done." His pacifism breathes within the lyrics of songs like "Give Peace a Chance" and "Happy Xmas." Also, Wenner exposes the creative dimension of Lennon and Ono's pacifism. For their honeymoon, Lennon and Ono conducted a "beautiful" "Bed-in," refusing to leave their bed as an act of protest against war and violence. The couple sent acorns to heads of state around the world, including Golda Meir and Haile Selassie, as a symbol of their peace campaign. Whether they were singing at the Moratorium Day in Washington, DC or promoting their "War is Over" poster campaign, John Lennon and Yoko Ono did what they could to aggressively and effectively advance the pacifist cause.
   
   Wenner does a commendable job of investigating the source of Lennon's pacifism, taking a look at important influences in the musician's life. Certainly growing up in Liverpool, a working class English city devastated by World War II, helped cultivate Lennon's apparent disdain for violence. Furthermore, The Beatles' connection with Hinduism and the Maharishi, the pioneer of Transcendental Meditation, intensified their preoccupation with the horror of war and bloodshed. The interview, however, seems to suggest that Lennon's love for Yoko Ono most noticeably influenced his pacifist activism. When talking about his pacifist career with Ono, Lennon said, "Yoko didn't want to do anything that wasn't for peace." Indeed, Lennon's love for Ono, and his belief in the power of love constitute the foundation for all of Lennon's pacifist beliefs and actions.
   
   On the other hand, Wenner does a marvelous job of exposing Lennon's growing uncertainty about the place of pacifism in a war-torn world. In the interview, Lennon seems content with accepting the inevitability of war, saying, "But I'm beginning to think what else can happen?"
   
   However, Lennon's apathy and resignation are the symptoms of a life characterized by volatility. In a life marked by moments of incredible happiness and indescribable agony and depression, Lennon and Ono appeared ready to live each day as if it were their last. Lennon articulates this belief in the "now," saying, "It's only going to be alright now, this moment, that's alright."
   
   The strength of Wenner's book are quite evident. The candor and striking honesty of the interview are refreshing, a pioneering piece of journalism in a field characterized by spin and sway. Furthermore, Wenner masterfully uses questions to craft a brutally accurate story about the life of an amazing man. The interview paints a complete picture of a beautiful life, characterized by depression, euphoria and music.
   
   The interview's strengths, however, do not eclipse the glaring weaknesses of the story. Although she manages to discover a little bit about life in Liverpool for Lennon, Wenner does not explore this aspect of Lennon's life adequately. Rather, readers are left with a superficial account of a meaningful period of time in the musician's life.
   
   Way too much time in the interview is spent investigating the shaky relations of the band members. Such stories make for interesting, juicy reads, but do not abound with substance and meaning.
   
   Lastly, the interview, for one with no previous knowledge of John Lennon and his life, presents Lennon as a flaky, waffling character with no concrete belief in anything. Lennon's disillusionment with pacifism, amongst other things, must be contextualized and examined as a product of circumstance.
   
   Wenner's interview with Lennon is an honest account of the life of a very honest man. The interview format is problematic in its lack of organization and informational incompletion. However, the candor of the interview provides readers with a complex, multi-dimensional picture of a man who believed in the potential for change within himself, of a man who claimed, "I don't believe in Beatles. I just believe in me."



2. 
   The journalistic style of Jann S. Wenner's book Lennon Remembers offers a new, non-traditional, and fascinating glimpse into the mind of John Lennon. Rather than telling the story of Lennon's life through her own methods of research and writing, Wenner has elected to let Lennon tell his own story in an interview - style method. The conversation between the journalist, and Lennon (along with his wife Yoko Ono) allows the reader to see John Lennon's true self better than any form of factual biography possibly could. Lennon's first person account of his life is told in 1970, after the breakup of the Beatles. The slowing of the pace of his life has obviously given him some time to reflect, and Lennon's demeanor is telling of this. The book leaves the reader with a multifaceted, less idealized, and altogether more real understanding of Lennon's views towards what he has accomplished through his music, his efforts for peace, and even his shortcomings.
   As a book, Lennon Remembers draws its strength from the manner in which it exposes John Lennon's human side. After reading the exact words from Lennon's mouth, one begins to see that Lennon was, like the rest of us, a mortal who grappled with conflicting ideas in his life. Throughout the dialogue, Jann Wenner manages to expose Lennon's frustration with aspects of his career, how the `dream of the Beatles' died within him, and his general distrust of dogmas after his time spent with the hypocritical Maharishi. Lennon's description of his life makes it clear that he values the extent to which he could spread pacifism through his music, but simultaneously conveys a tragic loss of faith. The book Lennon Remembers, because it is a direct transcription of Lennon's own words, portrays this somewhat depressing shift more powerfully than any traditional biography could.
   The main downside to Wenner's book is the multitude of technical musical discussion which pads some of the discussion. Rather than focusing on the meaning of Lennon's music and his philosophies, the book tends to get caught up in the personal relationships of the Beatles and specific musical analysis which seems irrelevant to any reader who is not an avid musician. Lennon, himself, admits that he believes lyrics are the most important part of a song, yet the book devotes entirely too much time to the discussion of musical technicalities, and not nearly enough to the overall message which Lennon wanted to convey to his audience.
   After reading Jann Wenner's Lennon Remembers, I found myself with a new, yet ambivalent view of John Lennon as a person. I had always thought of Lennon as a man who valued peace above anything else in his life. Reading his own reflections about his career made me see him as far less perfect than I had imagined. At times he seemed bitter, prone to bickering, faithless, and as if he had given up on anything he once valued. His admissions to excessive drug use and constant fighting with his band members also seemed to suggest that Lennon was far less of a role model than many think. Upon reflection, however, these flaws are somewhat endearing as well. John Lennon was, after all, a human. He was a man that found himself in a unique position that allowed him tremendous influence in the world, and he tried to do what he could to make the world a better place. He wholeheartedly believed in pacifism, and tried to use his power to further peaceful causes. Even with his pessimistic comments, Lennon allows the reader an opportunity to relate. After all, do we not all go through phases of doubt? If for no other reason, Lennon Remembers is a successful journalistic work because it paints John Lennon for who he truly was.



3. Although I agree it's a decent interview once you get past the overt anger, Lennon seems to have short-term memory loss throughout. Compare this interview with David Sheff's in "All We Are Saying". Lennon's tormented artist soul is more at peace and his memory is better.



4. In the "Forward", Yoko describes the interview as unsettling:
   "You will probably feel like getting up and walking around the room after every paragraph...It's a jolt on your nerves like bad, bad espresso. People with weak stomachs should close the window before reading. You might just feel like jumping out."
   With words like that, you might expect to be deeply disturbed by the impending interview. Or fearing worse, you might even soil your trousers. Was John a necrophiliac? Did he like to wear ladies' stockings? Did he sleep with Phil Spector?
   
   All that really managed to surprise me was how easily he used the word 'fags' to describe gays despite the fact that he had many gay friends and co-workers. However, I can't imagine anyone having to don a helmet or feeling as though they couldn't stomach this interview. I read it in two sittings.
   
   If anything, Lennon Remembers gives me a negative impression of John. At the time of this interview, he seems highly judgmental, bitter and more egotistical than I had been familiar with. On the other hand, 1968-1970 were tough times for John and Yoko: the Beatles and the press treated them harshly - especially Yoko; their experiments - both artistic and political - were often criticized by a trite, conventional media; Yoko had suffered a miscarriage, etc...all of which might have contributed to the tone of the interview. Often accustomed to the edited and fun-loving John, I have no doubt that this interview will reveal his human fallibility...even to his most die-hard fanny-licking fanatics.
   
   Jann Wenner, as interviewer, frequently comes across as a broken record: 'What do you think of Paul's album? What do you think of George's album? of Dylan's? What do you think of Sgt. Pepper's? Rubber Soul? Abbey Road? Are you pleased with your new album?'
   Even Jann seems bent on dragging John through his turbulent years with the Beatles. It's understandable that a representative from a rock magazine would be more interested in talking about the Beatles' phenomenon, but it's pretty obvious that John, no longer a member, would have wanted to talk about the here and now of 1970: what he's involved in, how he's changed, what he'd like to do, etc.
   
   Lennon Remembers is a pretty decent offering, but it fails to capture the essence of John's new found independence. John was much more than a Beatle, he was a person of great wit, talent, and charm. With the demise of the Beatles, his life was only just beginning.



5. John Lennon gave only two lengthy, in-depth interviews in his life. The first was in 1970 to Rolling Stone magazine and his final interview was given in 1980 to Playboy. Both are instructive to read, especially when you contrast their tone and content. The Lennon in this book had just left the Beatles and was trying desperately to convince the interviewer and the public that it just didn't bloody matter. Though history has shown Lennon emerged from the Beatles break-up much more undamaged emotionally than McCartney, the dissolution of his band was bound to leave some scars. John puts up a bit of a front here and I fear he doth protest too much, especially when he says he can't remember much about the Beatles and didn't think they were that great of a band to begin with.

   In 1970, John was in the midst of his Arthur Janov primal scream therapy and he talks about this at great length. If you're primarily interested in the Beatles, then you might wish to skip over this section. The most interesting chapters of the interview are undoubtedly his thoughts about the Beatles and his individual bandmates. Read this with caution, however. This was the same year Lennon penned the visceral anti-Paul ode, How Do You Sleep? His caustic comments about Paul would soften a trifle by 1980, as he himself admitted in the 1980 Playboy piece. There is also some intentional untruths here, such as when John says Lennon and McCartney rarely collaborated on a song post-1964. He corrects this in his '80 recollections. He tells some wonderful stories about Ringo and how he helped George with the lyrics to Taxman in 1966.

   I first read this book at the age of 8, when it was published. It's remained an integral part of my Lennon collection and still makes for some excellent reading. Whether you've grown up on Lennon or are new to him, this is an indispensable tool in trying to understand his mindset at the critical juncture of his life.

5 comments about Marlborough: His Life and Times, Book One.

1. Winston Churchill wrote this book during the 1930's while in political exile. His masterful handling of Hitler, Roosevelt, and Stalin is presaged as he tells the tale of John Churchill, who overcame party strife in England, baseness and shortsightedness in coalition partners, and (finally) Louis XIV of France. WSC tell the story with his brilliant flair and style, but he also pauses with the reader to reflect on such matters as how to blunt a violent political storm without being yourself destroyed, how best to handle superiors who will hold you responsible for results but will not let you do the job, and how to act honorably when all of your life's work is thrown away by your enemies. These trenchant insights were pertinent in 1700, in the 1930's, and today. You are in for a treat, read this one.



2. Winston Churchill, in a relatively well-known bad patch during the 1930s, began to write this history of his famous and much maligned ancestor. The first volume contains the first two books of the original four book set. The life of John Churchill, Duke of Malborough, is both a fascinating look at an historical era as well as a personal portrait of a great military general. Book One consists of a large chunk of history, spanning the downfall of Charles I through Cromwell, to the Restoration of Charles II, through the overthrowing of his brother, the Catholic James II by William of Orange married to James II's daughter, Mary, to the crowning of Queen Anne. The second Book of Volume one concentrates on a mere 3 years of Anne's rule.
   
   I will not reiterate what other reviewers have already said. However, I would add that in the writing of this book, Winston Churchill prepared himself to become even greater than his general ancestor. It can hardly be surprising that as this history was being written, events were conspiring to lead Winston Churchill into the biggest world confrontation ever. After studying the campaigns in Europe of Lord Malborough, it can hardly be surprising that Churchill fully suspected the coming of the war long before his fellow MPs.
   
   This is a scholarly work and shouldn't be undertaken without serious patience. Each of the two volumes are in themselves close to 1,000 pages long. The history is written from the point of view of a defender, though Winston Churchill is careful not to gloss over details that might cast an unfavorable opinion of his ancestor. Well worth the effort.
   
   BOOK TWO -
   
   Since I reviewed Book One, I felt it was important to follow up with a review of Book Two of this work. My initial comment is that sticking with something this huge is a task in itself, but often the reward is hard to describe. For me, I feel each time I finish a huge work like this (or Hegel, or Kant, or ... well, anything "Big") I sense my own mind has been exercised a bit. It's a reward in and of itself.
   
   Firstly, like Book One, this is really Volume Three and Volume Four of the a Four Book series bound together in Two mammoth volumes. Reading these 2000 plus pages is like running a marathon: the beginning is difficult, then you break the pain barrier and coast for quite a long while until the last staggering climb to the finish. In Book Three we continue with the war of Spanish Succession. These 500 pages are essentially concerned with the gigantic battles Marlborough fought. It was a time in which his glory was highly esteemed. As we get into Book Four, much like Book One, the narrative returns to the over all political scene which dominated and brought down the Great Duke. It is also the point where the reader might become overwhelmed again by both the multifaceted political machinations as well as the constantly revolving names (John Churchill becomes the Duke of Marlborough, etc.)
   
   However, for all these difficulties, the overall sense from both volumes is as thorough and detailed and enthralling as history can be written. There can be no doubt that Winston Churchill, as he surveyed the ever-mounting rearmament of the Germanic states and looking over the ancient maps of Europe imagining both the current and past, felt an immense burden of responsibility. By undertaking the task of "reforming" The Duke of Marlborough's image, he delved deep in to the vaults of history and warfare. It was not surprising that at the same moment he should be the first to recognize (at least in Britain) the significance of Hitler's intensions.
   
   One other thing struck me as fascinating about this era. The whole course of European politics, war, peace, and financial stability were tied up in the lives of three bickering women: Sarah (Marlborough's wife), Abigail (cousin to Sarah), and Queen Anne (whom both served and guided with gossip and whisperings.) Out of this small time period bore the seeds of Napoleon, the American discontent with England, and Slavery. Big stuff.
   
   I recommend these Four volumes (two books). The paperbacks are perhaps overstuffed, though. Book One split right down the middle. I was more careful with Book Two, though my hands suffered from it. Perhaps spending the money for the hardback editions in this case is worth it?



3. Winston Churchill was a man who rarely met a topic upon which he didn't harbor a strong opinion that he was willing to share. The Duke of Marlborough is no different. Churchill is clearly enamoured with this relative of his and lets it show. That said, Churchill plainly states that there are two camps on Marlborough and tells the world which camp he falls into. By doing so, he opens up the reader to get a feel not just for Marlborough and his times, but also for the debate by historians that rages around a polarizing historic figure like Marlborough. (Sound familiar to anyone else?) The result is a richly layered work.
   
   Winston Churchill viewed history as something that was alive and tangible and his historic writings capture that feeling for readers. Marlborough's battles - both military and political - come to life in the hands of Churchill. We get to see one of the great military minds of the 18th century push military science closer and closer to its modern form. We also see him perform less well on the political front against his foes there.
   
   Through the entire book, we get to listen to Winston Churchill in his element, telling us a story about a topic he feels passionately about. So many of the trials, trevails, and reactions that Churchill ascribes to Marlborough are so obviously parallels to Churchill's life and his reactions that the book has a clear autobiographical tone to it as well.
   
   Highly recommended for history buffs and for people who want to understand Churchill more deeply.



4. John Churchill, Duke of Marlborough, is the uncontested military genius of late Stuart England, the uncrowned political/military heir to William of Orange and the famous ancestor of Winston Churchill. In tandem with Austria's general, Eugen of Savoy, he led the coalition armies in the War of the Spanish Succession, defeating in detail several of Louis XIV's French and Bavarian armies, most famously at Blenheim, but also at Ramilles, Ourdenarde and Malplaquet. Meanwhile, on the domestic front, his wife, the beautiful but intemperate Sarah Jennings, later Duchess of Marlbourough, became a "favorite" of Queen Anne and secured for him (at least for most of the war) the political support that necessary for him to field an army on the Continent for the many years.

   As a writer of history, Churchill ranks with Gibbon for his mastery of prose and his ability to use vivid imagery to hold the reader's attention to minute detail. For each year of the Spanish Succession War, Churchill opens with a strategic appreciation of how the Anglo-Austrian forces plotted out each year's campaigns, and goes to great pains to explain the reasons behind Marlborough's various deployments. And he paints on a simply massive canvas: he begins with a detailed account of Charles II's Restoration, of James II's abortive reign (and Marlborough's role in ending it), of William III and Mary II's joint reign (Churchill is NOT a fan of William and Mary) and of the underlying workings of the French monarchy. He is not afraid to address the various failings in Marlborough's character, particularly his secret negotiations with both the enemy and the exiled Stuarts, but does seek to defend Marlborough (and Sarah) from the more libellous charges.

   This book was written in the 1930s, politically Churchill's decade of exile (and personally, his worst years of depression). If everyone turned unemployment, financial crisis and depression to such good use, the world would be a far better place.




5. Winston Spencer Churchill's biography of his ancestor, John Churchill First Duke of Marlborough, stands out as a restoration of Marlborough's reputation, an account of England under the reigns of Charles II, James II, William III and Queen Anne, and an in-depth military and political history of the War of Spanish Succession.
   
   WSC gives us a picture of the whole man, including his faults. One of WSC's purposes is to rescue Marlborough's reputation from the attacks of generations of historians. The book becomes a brilliant defense and of course it cannot be unbiased. WSC is Marlborough's defense attorney, not his judge.
   
   By the 1920s, Marlborough had been called miserly, greedy, ambitious, duplicitous, disloyal and treacherous. As he recounts Marlborough's life, WSC continually picks up an episode that seemingly illustrates one of these traits, but turns it around.
   
   Where unsympathetic historians saw miserly habits, WSC saw thrift and WSC goes further. Marlborough was miserly when it came to his own needs, such as when he insisted surgeons cut his stocking along the seem so that it could be resown. Yet he paid his army's bills and wages on time; apparently this was unusual in those days. He paid, from his own discretionary funds, which other generals often pocketed as a matter of course, for military intelligence that proved crucial to securing many of his victories.
   
   Where accusers saw ambition needlessly prolonging a difficult war, WSC presents Marlborough has being bound by duty to achieve the best results possible, and to reject a timid peace, which would have left Europe in the hands of a despot.
   
   WSC has a more difficult, but no less successful time defending Marlborough's continued correspondence with St-Germain, the exiled English court of James II and later his son, as recognized by Louis the XIV. The problem here is that today such acts would indeed be treason, but in the seventeenth century they were part of the normal workings of diplomacy, war time or not. After all, if passports and safe conduits were routinely given to enemies to allow them to rest and confer in between campaigns, it could not have been that unusual to keep in touch with people one knew, even if they were officially enemies.
   
   WSC also presents Marlborough's most important relationships: with his wife Sarah Jennings; with his military ally Prince Eugene, with whom he won at Blenheim; with his political colleague Godolphin, who secured funds for his military work; with the kings and queen of England from James II to George I;
   
   But WSC does accuse Marlborough on occasion of having been unwise. He is particularly critical of the Duke's obsession with his palace at Blenheim (where WSC himself was born). Marlborough didnft want an opulent residence, rather he wanted to leave a monument that would survive centuries and remember his name to future generations. WSC writes that as such Blenheim was a failure: it added nothing to the Duke's reputation and the worries it caused may have taken years from his life. Winston Churchill must have felt his biography was a better memorial to his ancestor.

5 comments about Kings, Queens, Bones and Bastards.

1. There is a lot of history in this book. Over 1500 years is covered. The author digs deep into history to give us the histories of the people that became the Kings and Queens of England from the reign of Egbert in the 800's to Queen Elizabeth II who is currently reigning.
   
   The book is broken down into sections. The first section details the lives of the King or Queen in question. The next details the people that they married. The next is how the person died and where they are buried. The next section details wither the King or Queen had any illegitimate children.
   
   Very informative book for people who are interested in the royal family or just want to learn more. It also has a family tree that connects the first King of England to Queen Elizabeth-fascinating stuff!



2. This is a fun book that gives interesting and little known facts occuring in the royal history of England. It ties together many unions, births, deaths and other important events of English royalty and lesser royals. It is an easy read and a great reference for understanding the royal succession.



3. Honestly, people - calm down. Did any of the previous readers/reviewers honestly expect a book with the title "Kings, Queens, Bones and Bastards" to be a flawless description of centuries of English history ? And that with scholarly accuracy and intellect ? Take it for what it is worth. Read the "Oxford Illustrated History of the British Monarchy" if you want accuracy. This book is a highly entertaining, easy read. I highly recommend it for its amusing anecdotes and enjoyable style.



4. leading to Princess Sophia Dorothea`s apartement.

   In fact Count Königsmarck was last seen whe he left his house in Hannover on the evening of 11.July 1694. No corpse was ever found. Of course there were rumours all over the town that he had been assassinated and murdered and that his body had been thrown in the river Leine. But wether this had really happened an if it was being carried out on the instruction og George Ludwig (the latter George I) or his father Ernest Augustus, Elector of Hannover or the Countess of Platen (who was not only Königsmarck`s mistress but also Ernest Augustus`s) will never be known. Princess Sophia Dorothea was not divorced and put under house arrest in Ahlden because the dying Königsmarck was found lying before her bodouir But because she was forced to return to her father in Celle. This business was called run away and although she did not "flee" voluntarily and although of course her father turned her down she was accused of wilful deserting thus justifying George Ludwig to divorce her. As a note of history she became not only the mother of the english dynasty of Hannover but through her daughter, another Sophia Dorothea, the mother of the prussian dynasty of Hohenzollern.

   But on the whole the book is remarkably enertaining and gives you a fascinating insight into 1500 years of englisch history.




5. The book is entertaining but if your goal is the study of history, do not buy this book. It is, as another reviewer pointed out, full of mistakes. The first one I found (that stood out) was on page 10. The author states that Mary II (of William III and Mary II) was the sister of James II. She was, in fact, James II's daughter. William's mother, Mary, was the sister of James II and Charles II.

   I also found that Hilliam's method of tracing the lines of descent of the various royal houses of Great Britain seemed designed to confuse, rather than enlighten, the reader. I think that it even confused the author himself(see page 10).

   On the plus side, the sections on Bones and Bastards are entertaining to read, if you don't plan on using this book for research purposes.