2 comments about A Thomas More Source Book.

1. Although some scholars purchase this book as part of the class and lecture series on Thomas More, I bought it to console myself since I could not attend a class.
   I was impressed by Thomas More's clarity of thought and ability to decide "the right thing to do" at each turn in his life. Clearly, many of his contemporaries admired him for this characteristic of his as well, as their contributions to this book show. I enjoyed the thought-provoking depth which Thomas More shares through his own writing.



2. What a great contribution these authors have made to the world of Renaissance and Thomas More studies! This comprehensive anthology provides a wealth of primary sources as well as related materials on Thomas More and his world. Due to the multi-faceted character of its subject, this book will be of interest to historians, biographers, educators, theologians, writers, politicians, and many others as well. The "Man for All Seasons" was a lawyer, judge, husband and father, scholar, counselor to the king, and martyr, and this rich source book provides the background to the inner man. The authors begin with contemporary biographies and sketches of More, then explore samples of his own works. Selections from his early poems and letters are followed by some of his writings on education (he was a trend-setter in promoting education of women), government, and religion. The closing section, "More's Last Days", includes samples of his letters, various accounts of his trial, and the Paris Newsletter report on his execution.
   
   This book provides a solid foundation for More studies and would serve as an excellent college text. Following an informative Introduction, a treasury of More-related material is provided. Even the Elizabethan play "Munday and Shakespeare's 'Sir Thomas More'" is provided in its entirety. Explanatory introductions are given to all selections, and clear glosses enrich the text throughout the book. Perhaps the only thing one might miss here is More's most famous work, "Utopia", but for study at this level, it certainly deserves to be treated separately, in its entirety.
   
   This handsome and convenient text is further enriched by a lovely collection of portraits and other related artworks, even reproductions of pages from More's prayer book (showing his own hand-written additions). Helpful material at the end of the book includes several chronologies, some original well-annotated maps, and a very thorough Index. These tools should prove most useful to More scholars.
   
   In sum, I feel that this book provides a wonderful tool for those who explore the world of Renaissance England and the person of Thomas More. We can only be grateful that Professors Wegemer and Smith foresaw the need for this book and did such a fine job in producing it.

3 comments about A Circle of Sisters: Alice Kipling, Georgiana Burne Jones, Agnes Poynter, and Louisa Baldwin.

1. I read Ms. Flanders' previous work, "Inside the Victorian Home",(loved it) and therefore I was familiar with Ms. Flanders' writing style. Knowing the author's style helped me to enjoy CIRCLE OF SISTERS much more than if I had not first read Ms. Flanders previous book.
   
   I guess what I'm eluding to is: Ms. Flander's "interesting" writing style. Her style is almost Edwardian,for lack of a better word. Her style can get rather dull in some parts of this book, but luckily, the various intertwining life-stories help the reader to pick up the pace.
   
   If you want to read an intersting book about what life must have been like during the Victorian Era, and especially for four rather "unusual" sisters (ie: unusual for their time), then a reader may find this book quite fascinating, as I did.
   
   The book starts off with a Geneology Tree showing where each sister, and how their respected mates and relatives, fit into the picture.
   
   Then the book takes you back to grandfather MacDonald's life and how he and his wife rose to the challenges they encountered (eg: loneliness of a minister's wife, low pay, many moves).
   
   Soon, the reader is taken to a description of each of the sisters. By the way, there were actually FIVE MacDonald sisters, but Edith, the youngest, never married and therefore she was only slightly talked about. The main plot actually evolves around the four older sisters,(Georgie, Agnes, Alice and Louisa) because these four "main" sisters ended-up marrying famous men (such as Rudyard Kipling's father) and had more exciting lives than poor Edith , who ended-up being the parents' caretaker and stayed home most of the time.
   
   Each chapter of this book describes a "stage" in the sisters' lives (eg: meeting their mates, marriage, their children, infirmary, strange health issues, old age, death, etc.).
   
   The author does a very nice job with even the slightest details of each sisters` life....Example, from what they wore and ate the day one sister met her future husband (eg: Alice was biting into an onion when first approached by John Lockwood Kipling in KIPLING PARK), to when another sister had to deal with infidelity (ie: Georgie's husband's affair).
   
   The other interesting part of this book is that it describes, in detail, how each of the sisters' children felt and how each turned-out, in the long run! For instance, I think that readers will be quite surprised to learn, how Trix and Rudyard Kipling grew-up and how their personalities changed because of their environments and upbringing.
   
   I don't want to say much more, because that might ruin the story, but I must say that after reading this book I knew more about the MacDonald sisters, the Victorian Era, and the sisters' relatives, than I had ever imagined.



2. This isn't something that I would recommend to every reader. The title sounds a lot more warm and fuzzy than the sisters were. If you are expecting a heart-warming tale of the days when all families were close and unfailingly took care of one another, this isn't it. One recommendation I would make is to look up the Rudyard Kipling, Stanley Baldwin, Edward Burne-Jones and Edward Poynter in an encyclopedia, the Dictionary of National Biography or on the internet if they are not familiar. I say this not by way of faulting the book, there are too many characters to give each a full treatment, but it helps to have some idea of who these people were.
   
   The book focuses on the daughters of a Methodist minister. Four either married men who became famous or had sons who became famous. Unfortunately, these are generally not terribly charming personalities, so it is no great delight getting to know them unless one is interested in the period or these particular people. But for those with a special interest, I think it will probably be quite interesting. There were also two brothers, one who was rather unsuccessful and one who was quite successful as a Methodist clergyman, but they take a back seat to their sisters both in the book and in the sisters' lives.
   
   The one thing that I would have liked to have seen developed better is successful relations within the extended family. Georgiana Burne-Jones was very close to her nephew Rudyard, but I'm not really certain why. This may be a problem with a lack of sources on this particular point - Flanders can infer from guest books which relatives saw little of each other but more positive information would be necessary for this.
   
   The MacDonald sisters: Alice, Georgiana, Agnes, Louisa and Edith, came from a modest, barely middle-class background. It is quite interesting that three of them married men from equally undistinguished roots, one a man who was perhaps upper middle-class. Despite these seemingly unpromising beginnings, two of the initally undistinguished husbands, Edward Burne-Jones and Edward Poynter (married to Georgiana and Agnes, respectively) became very successful and famous in the field of art. The third husband, Lockwood Kipling, married to Alice, was successful in his field, and their son, Rudyard, would become an international literary success and quite wealthy. The fourth, husband, Alfred Baldwin, married to Louisa, was a model as an industrialist, noted for public service, who went into politics. Their son, Stanley Baldwin, was three time Prime Minister. Many of the less famous members of the family pursued successful careers as writiers, sometimes quite well known in their time. A few were failures as life: either suffering psychological problems, perhaps due to a frustration of their creative potential, or too comfortable as the children of the famous. Judith Flanders attempts to discover how nurture, i.e., being related to the MacDonalds, may have lead to the surprising achievements. I don't think that she really succeeds, not that I believe that we necessarily can ferret out these influences, but she does draw a probing picture of an interesting family. She considers not only the facts, but draws reasonable inferences about the human beings they refer to. She is quite clear about when she is speculating.
   
   Flanders has done an enormous amount of research. There are many notes, a 12-page "Select Bibliography" and an index. There are eight pages of plates, with 45-50 well-selected pictures of the extended family. I particularly want to commend how the notes and index were done. The notes have both the chapter number and chapter running title, making it much easier to match them with the notes in the text. The index has brief explanatory notes in parentheses after the names of less important characters, e.g. (niece of so-and-so), which is often all that is needed, as well as cross-reference to variant names.
   
   Probably not for everybody, but a excellent work for its subjects.



3. Ms. Flanders' previous work, Inside the Victorian Home, was as delightful as it was informative. That's why A Circle of Sisters is such a letdown- its informative alright, if you care about a group of self-absorbed cold-natured odd ducks. (In 30 years, brother Harry received two visits from his loved ones. Sister Edie was disparaged as a failure for remaining unmarried, even as they all expected her to play nurse and nanny as their situations saw fit.)The subjects, including Rudyard Kipling, never quite come alive on the page. This may not be entirely Ms. Flanders' fault--there seems to have been an awful lot of letter burning in this family. (Plus its hard to feel empathy for people who kept their emotional lives so tightly buttoned down.) The writing, addtionally, is not as crisp as Inside the Victorian Home. You'll forget these women soon enough, and be glad you did.
   
   
   That said, her book Inside the Victorian Home is excellent. I highly recommend it.

No comments about The Diaries of Lady Anne Clifford.

5 comments about The Downing Street Years.

1. Mrs. Thatcher's memoirs of her decade-plus as Prime Minister of the United Kingdom are a very illuminating look at the 1980s, which were perhaps the most critical decade for Britain - and the rest of the Western world - since the Second World War. This is a massive, 800-plus page tome. But if you're interested in recent British history, or in the 1980s or the late Cold War, this book will reward your time and effort. Mrs. Thatcher may have been controversial - loved by many and hated by nearly as many - but one thing you can't accuse her of is failure to lead.
   
   All of the important events of her tenure as PM are covered. Some of it is tedious - such as minute details about tax policies, for example. (Though these do, however, illustrate Mrs. Thatcher's impressive ability to understand the complexities of important issues.) But the wonderful thing about this book is that it's organized simultaneously chronologically and topically, which means you can skip over parts you're not interested in and go ahead to something else. (I admit I did this more than once.)
   
   I particularly liked the parts dealing with the Falkland Islands War and those dealing with the Cold War. In the case of the former, I've read several military accounts of the conflict, but Mrs. Thatcher's detailed chronicling of the diplomatic aspects added greatly to my understanding of it. It was amazing how much the US, in the form of Secretary of State Al Haig, meddled in it to try to achieve "compromise," despite the fact that Argentina was clearly the aggressor.
   
   The parts on the last phases of the Cold War were the strongest parts of the book. It's neat to get an insider's account of all the personalities and the diplomatic wrangling. Mrs. Thatcher was the Churchill of her time - she was instrumental in using real leadership skills to help hold together an alliance against aggressive dictatorships. The combination of her leadership with that of Ronald Reagan, Pope John Paul II, and Mikhail Gorbachev - the first Soviet leader who seemed to genuinely have good intentions, despite his continuing belief in communism - was a major factor in bringing about the end of the Cold War. I believe that as time goes by, Mrs. Thatcher will only be more vindicated, both for her contributions to the West's Cold War victory, and for starting the process of revitalizing Britain. (A former professor of mine who specialized in modern Britain and was - of course - a dedicated left-winger always gave Mrs. Thatcher a lot of credit for making some tough decisions that had positive long-term effects on the British economy; in fact, my professor even said that the prosperity Britain enjoyed in the `90s probably had more to do with Thatcher than with Blair. Coming from a leftist, that's saying something!)
   
   Yes, this book is biased and one-sided; Mrs. Thatcher, atypically for a European leader, speaks (and writes) in a very straightforward, tell-it-like-it-is, here's-what-I-think-and-why-I'm-right fashion. (She almost seems like an American, with a habit like that!) But remember, these are memoirs. Memoirs, especially by former political leaders, are ALWAYS biased; they're not meant to be objective. Instead, they're meant to be one person's account, one person's case. If you keep that in mind, this is a very good book - huge and dense, perhaps, but worth the effort if the subject matter interests you.



2. Hillary Clinton has mentioned that she went blond after reading Thatcher's autobiography.
   Why did Thatcher go blond?
   
   Thatcher's books don't list blond, bleach or hair in the index.
   I wish more books were in digital form.
   thanks.



3. 
   "The Downing Street Years" is an interesting, informative, enlightening and fascinating account of Margaret Thatcher as the Prime Minister of Great Britain for 11 years. Lady Thatcher was clearly a brilliant politician with a sharp intellect who has left an enduring legacy and indelible mark in British and world politics. Readers can get an insight on how she made certain decisions.
   
   My political views are very different from hers but I greatly admire her achievements for Britain. She had the courage, perseverance and decisiveness to stand up for her beliefs and not just to please some people. Her rise to power in a male dominated society and Conservative Party is nothing short of remarkable. Things to her were in clear black or white, no grey areas, which generated either intense loyalty or deep seated dislike of the lady. She was truly an "Iron Lady".
   
   In her memoirs, the reader will learn how she dealt with various significant events during her tenure in office such as the Falklands War, the USSR, the Miners Strike, and the privatization of nationalized industries, her encounters and opinions on various world leaders as well as how she won three elections (1979, 1983 and 1987). Her close friendship with Ronald Reagan played a significant role in the collapse of the USSR. She also reveals the challenges she often encountered in politics including betrayals and dealing with government officials steeped in bureaucracy.
   
   This is excellent reading for executives and politicians of all political persuasions.



4. I can't help but like Margaret Thatcher, even though much of what she stood for abrades my own values and sense of what is right and wrong. If for nothing else than her iron-hard, Churchillian stance against the IRA in the 1980's---thus in the face of no British pullout from Northern Ireland sparing the Republic in the south from dealing with the fighting in Ulster---she rates all right in my eyes. She rose to power in her own party in a time when even in matriarchal Great Britain women were not supposed to be able to make it to the top. She also orchestrated the defeat of the entrenched if unpopular Labour Party in the 1970's by taking the minds and souls of her countrymen back to more glorious times of Empire. If there is any doubt that so many parallels can be drawn between her and her contemporary US counterpart Ronald Reagan, then consider how expertly she used one-liners and power slogans in her own campaigns and political battles. ("Labour Is Not Working" a popular banner of the late-70's is probably the best and most clever tool her party employed.)
   
   In this memoir of the Downing Street years, Thatcher does only one thing wrong in my view and that's how she drifts too often into self-congratulation. I mean, that's the only way I can say it. Instead of sticking to facts and letting society and history be her jury, she appears perfectly content to do it herself. If "humility is truth" maybe in a way her take on herself is a virtue, I don't know, but to me, it came off as a slight faux pas.
   
   The Prime Minister a reader meets in these topic-by-topic discussions of events germane to her lengthy time in office (she outlasted two US Presidents and nearly a third) is a capable, tough, self-confident personage who was probably the best and most fitting person to lead her nation at that moment.



5. Athena was the ancient Greek Goddess of war, wisdom, and strategy and is a common Jungian archetype. Lady Thatcher was a living breathing embodiment of Athena and well deserved her iron lady nickname. Britain must be doing something right because they had Churchill and Thatcher as Prime Ministers in the same century just three decades apart. Churchill was the bulldog who refused to say uncle to Germany. Thatcher was a conviction politician (an even rarer breed in 2005) ... who gave the defiance to communism. The Downing Street Years are her personal testamony of her courage to bring Britain out of near bankruptcy, her strength to crush the socialist unions, and the stealth to hold to her vision. In a world where too many leaders spend 90 percent of their time worrying what other people think, Thatcher had a steely spine and never bent to win some fluffy popularity contest. The prequel "The Path to Power" is an equally fascinating personal memoir of a life designed out of unbelievable confidence.
   
   Thatcher entered Oxford at 17 on full scholarship despite opposition from her Headmaster. Teenage Maggie challenged the latin exam, crammed three years of study into four months, and aced her scholarship to read analytical chemistry at university. If you want your daughter to manifest her leadership, dsetiny, and persevere according to an inner compass, Margaret Thatcher is one of those mentors whose actions truly are larger than her words.
   
   Having had the privilege to hear Lady Thatcher speak in person during Unviersity, her ability to move the room, only sharpened after her exited 10 Downing Street for the final time. Ronald Reagan and Thatcher's warm friendship sealed the melting of the iron curtain. It took iron to melt iron. Lady Thatcher is one special leadership, intellectually powerful and able to translate and apply her brilliance for enduring political currency. Her legacy is unlike any other female leader in today's climate. Only Senator Clinton might share a similar legacy whilst not quite sharing Thatcher's policies. If Thatcher was two decades younger I would lobby her to cross the pond and take over the leadership of this (Canada) other Commonwealth country. After four decades of socialism ... we need it!

No comments about Winston Churchill: The Wilderness Years.

2 comments about Mary Queen of Scots.

1. This is a wonderful book about the Queen of Scotland! I was in Edinburgh, Scotland a couple months ago, and saw this book. It contains wonderful pictures and is well-written! Great book for anyone interested in the Mary Queen of Scots!



2. What an excellent addition to a library dedicated to Mary of Scotland. This book covered her life in a beautiful way, what with portraits (done during her life and modern), pictures of the places she lived, and members of her court. Although every detail of Mary's life just couldn't be incorporated into this book, there was enough to help a person see the time that she lived in and, perhaps, what motivated her to do some of the things she did. For a thorough understanding of her days, please enjoy the grand bio of her by Antonia Fraser. For a quick synopsis of her life, this coffee-table style edition is just wonderful.

3 comments about Young Elizabeth: The First Twenty-Five Years.

1. Elizabeth I is one the most famous woman in history, and yet history books concentrate on the accomplishments of her reign without paying much attention to the woman behind them. This book is a wonderful introduction to Elizabeth the woman- well researched and detailed, it is never-the-less an enjoyable read for the non-historian. By reviewing the early incidents which shaped Elizabeth and her view of the world, Plowden lays the groundwork for explaining her actions thoughout her long reign. I haven't read the rest of the series yet, but I am looking forward to doing so in the near future.



2. Books should be judged on whether they achieve their purpose. Plowden's purpose in this book appears to be the creation of a scholarly, yet readable biography of Elizabeth I's pre-queen years. This she does with consummate skill. The writing is superb, and the scholarship seems excellent. Plowden selects details calculated to wet the reader's curiosity and to draw a thorough picture of her subject. She has definite opinions, but she does not do all her readers' thinking for them.

   I found this book and the rest in Plowden's Elizabeth quartet very appealing. Based on these books, I've been collecting biographies on all sorts of other tantalizing personalities that the writer mentions in passing.

   Note: I am an English masters student, not a historian. I am therefore better qualified to judge the quality of the writing than the quality of the research.

   One criticism: The book begins with a very swift overview of the complex circumstances leading to Elizabeth's birth. The part pertaining to Henry VIII is easily digestible, but the earlier section involving Henry VII, Katherine of Valois, Owen Tudor, and the War of the Roses proceeds at baffling speed. If you are not already familiar with this convoluted period of English history, the multitude of characters entering and exiting the stage may overwhelm you. My advice: hang in there; it gets better.




3. I think this excellently written book gives a historically accurate insite of the early life of Elizabeth I. I would recomend this book to anyone who is interested in Elizabeth I and Tudor history. :)

5 comments about Greatness: Reagan, Churchill, and the Making of Extraordinary Leaders.

1. If I could have met two Historical figures they would have been Prime Minister Churchill & President Reagan. I often thought that someone should do a comparison of these two great icons of History and here it is.
   
   I have read this book and in my humble opinion Mr. Hayward has done a great job in comparing & contrasting the style and personalities of these two men.
   
   I think that if you are an admirer of either PM Churchill or President Reagan (like I am)then this is a must have book. I'm glad it is part of my Churchill/Regan collection.



2. Looking at the title of the book I thought, "wow a book about Reagan and Churchill, what could be better?" But in the end I thought the book was more just a telling of facts more than an indepth review of their leadership characteristics and I never found in the book where it talked about the making of great leaders. It just seemed to say everything that happened to Reagan and Churchill and that seemed to be enough for the author. I did learn some things about Reagan that I did not know so I will go back to this book for those facts but it just was not what I thought it would be from the book's description.



3. Can greatness among human beings really be spoken of in modern times? Perhaps it is a politically incorrect, anachronistic idea in our egalitarian age. Indeed, regarding both these men, Churchill and Reagan, the media appears to have downplayed their legacies for just this reason. For example, Time magazine in 1950 named Winston Churchill "Man of the Half-Century" but passed him over at century's end for "Person of the Century", explaining that "...Churchill turned out to be a romantic refugee from a previous era who ended up on the wrong side of history." And Reagan? The news media, which had consistently downplayed him during his presidency, was astonished by the outpouring of public sentiment at his death in 2004 as this showed in spades the esteem in which he was held.
   
   Certainly the verdict of history is not passed immediately on the legacy of statesman; it takes time. Who would have thought in the 1980's, that the name of Ronald Reagan would be uttered in the same sentence as that of Winston Churchill, less than twenty years after the former had left public office? The idea that Churchill was a great man, though not agreed upon by everybody, still seems to be more easily embraced than the idea that Reagan was. But our response to Reagan's death, one of looking back and re-assessing his legacy, surprises us at the warmth we found ourselves feeling for the man. I don't need to read an essay to feel it in my bones that there was something about Ronald Reagan that touched greatness. Steven Hayward (the author) gives some insights into explaining what many of us already believe to be true. He spends most of the 170 page book comparing both men, demonstrating the surprising number of similarities that they had, from their childhoods, to their early liberal inclinations, to their switch to conservative political views, and to how they were perceived at the time. Certainly a common perception of Reagan during his presidency was that he was "uninformed, even ignorant, and relied on simplistic platitudes to get by." But some of Churchill's top aides said the same thing, that Churchill "has only half the picture in his mind, talks absurdities, and makes my blood boil to listen to his nonsense" (Field Marshall Alanbrooke). This is just one of many, many parallels that are listed. We remember that Reagan was charged with being a warmonger. So was Churchill. He alienated himself from many in his own party during the 1930s for his strident warnings of German fascism. In fact, Churchill's "Iron Curtain" speech in 1946 was not received very well and his own government made a point of distancing itself from it. Forty years later, Reagan's "tear down this wall" speech at the Berlin Wall had his own aides fearing that he would only embarrass himself. Even after Reagan's presidency, when the Berlin Wall had in fact come down, and the Soviet Union was no more, some felt that the credit belonged to Gorbachev. Time magazine, in fact, named Gorbachev "person of the decade" in 1990. But I think it is appropriate to ask for Gorbachev's assessment, since his early opinion of Reagan was far from flattering. His presence at Reagan's funeral in 2004, seated next to Margaret Thatcher reinforced his words in 2002 that "I am not sure what happened would have happened had he (Reagan) not been there."
   
   In his Iron Curtain speech Churchill said that World War II could have been prevented "without the firing of a single shot." According to Margaret Thatcher, Reagan brought the cold war to an end "without firing a single shot." Both men believed in peace through strength. Both men doggedly spoke their minds and followed convictions that had not only their political adversaries, but also those in their own party, scratching their heads. Especially regarding what they considered the evil of communism, both men stood alone at times, but history has vindicated them. They were far from perfect, but how many great men are? Arriving at a conclusion of greatness is made even more difficult when the concept of greatness itself in the modern world is called into question. Steven Hayward has done a masterful job of not only allowing us the possibility of considering greatness abstractly, but of applying it to these two remarkable men.



4. Steven Hayward extends his research of Churchill and Reagan to look at comparisons of leadership skills, styles and effectiveness. While the comparisons are interesting, I found it difficult to see the relevance. As a specific comparative analysis, the book brings forward otherwise obscure parallels in the life and times of these two great leaders. The title is misleading in that I found no insights on "the making" of an extraordinary leader. As a book on leadership, Mr. Hayward's work gives examples of Churchill and Reagan leadership, but the work doesn't analyze the leadership examples in a way that the reader could learn leadership tips.
   
   Overall, I found the book interesting, but not terribly relevant.



5. Hayward does a wonderful job in only 170 short pages of describing the similarites between Churchill and Reagan. It is a very quick read and will leave you feeling good about these two men and the accomplishments they achieved while in office.
   
   Hayward makes this statement, "Greatness is ultimately a question of character: Good character does not change with the times: it has eternal qualities." Are there any great leaders with character today? As in the lives of Churchill and Reagan, history will tell.

2 comments about Empires of the Plain: Henry Rawlinson and the Lost Languages of Babylon.

1. At initial glance, any biography of Sir Henry Rawlinson would seem to be a ready made best-seller. Here was a man who found time to decipher three ancient languages over several decades, while still keeping his day job of fighting wars and conducting diplomacy. Thus, if a writer focused just on Rawlinson's life, the resulting biography should be both entertaining and informative. But, Adkins' real interest lies in archeology. Consequently, she can't resist spending extra time detailing the elements of cuneiform creation and decipherment. These details, while mildly interesting, can't compare to the better story of Rawlinson's life. As a result, it's hard for the non-archeologist reader to maintain enthusiasm through the book's non-biography portions.
   
   It seems that Adkins the scientist was fighting with Adkins the would-be popular writer when this book was written, because it sometimes reads like two distinct books. The end result of this dichotomy is a story whose sum isn't greater than its parts. Empires of the Plain isn't bad. But, it would have been a better book had Adkins focused a bit less on the science and a bit more on the biography.



2. This book tells the story of Henry Rawlinson -- British soldier, diplomat, and amateur linguist in the 1820s, '30s, and '40s. His stomping ground: Persia and what is now Iraq. His principal claim to fame is the decipherment of cuneiform, giving us the ability to read for the first time texts that were between 2500 and 4000 years old.
   
   In this endeavor he was entirely self-taught, virtually cut off from potential colleagues in Britain and on the continent, and working under the most hostile conditions imaginable. To decipher cuneiform, he had to first acquire samples of ancient text -- which in one especially important instance meant clinging to a cliff-face hundreds of feet off the ground and laboriously copying the strange script into a notebook.
   
   The book itself is well written, well illustrated with drawings and photographs, and filled with stories of Rawlinson's contemporaries -- including real heroes, like Henry Layard, who excavated Nineveh and Babylon, and not a few semi-villains. All in all, an amazing story and a terrific book.

1 comments about Shooting of Michael Collins: Murder or Accident.

1. Every year on August 22, I remember the death of Irish politician Michael Collins, usually by watching Niel Jordan's 1996 movie. This last Friday, though, I opted for a change of pace and decided to attempt to completely read a book about Collins in two days. I chose The Shooting of Michael Collins: Murder or Accident? by John M. Feehan.
   
   In the early months of our marriage, my wife and I used to sometimes spend Sunday nights down at a Barnes & Noble in Salt Lake City. Often, I would grab this book off the shelf and spend my time trying to understand Collins' death. As it was a confusing and hectic event, I became comfused myself but also very interested. I later bought the book.
   
   I started to read it this last Friday morning and finished it late Saturday night. I have to say that, overall, it is a good book- generally well-written and full of interesting information. Its shortcomings are that Feehan often repeats bits of informtion and that some of his logic is not clear. But its strength is that Feehan had access to sources very close to the event. He personally interviewed several people who were there on that fateful night in 1922, or who were politically active during that period. Feehan also analyzes, line by line, several printed accounts by eyewitnesses such as those by Maj. Emmet Dalton (who was riding the backseat of the touring car with Collins just before his death, and Smith, the motorcycle escort that night. These testimonies form the basis of the narrative, especially in the final two chapters and Feehan shows himself to be a true historian by using original documents to follow where the evidence takes him. These documents and his analyzation alone are worth the purchase and reading of the book. It would be helpful if the reader has a basic understanding of the Irish Civil War and the personalities involved before reading. There is very little background information other than what Feehan explains during his short biography of Collins in the first chapter.
   
   In the end, I find some of Feehan's conclusions to be sensible and others weak but his work is an interesting read nonetheless. I recommend The Shooting of Michael Collins.
   
   For more on Collins' death, see Meda Ryan's excellent book The Day Michael Collins Was Shot.