5 comments about First Great Triumph: How Five Americans Made Their Country a World Power.

1. Warren Zimmerman uses short but trenchant bios of five important American decision makers and opinion leaders to tell a story about the beginnings of the American empire.
   
   John Hay, Navy Capt. Alfred T. Mahan, Elihu Root, Henry Cabot Lodge and Theodore Roosevelt are the principal actors. These men provided the intellectual atmosphere and the institutional framework that enabled the United States to step away from her traditional isolationism, recognize her place in the world as a power of the first rank, and take up that role. In order for that to happen the American people first had to understand the dangers that expansionist European powers presented to their nation. Zimmerman weaves the various strands that these five men bring to this story as well as the reluctantance of President McKinley and the objections of actors like Mark Twain and former senator and newspaper editor Carl Shurz, into an exciting and thoughtful work. The book is worth the price for the bios of the principals alone but it is the story of this interaction, as skillfully told by Zimmerman, that makes this book so interesting and such a quick read.
   
   For those who believe that America is not an imperial power (though not quite cut in the mold of European imperialism) this book will provide much to think about. For those interested in knowing how we became a world power in such a short time, this book is invaluable.
   
   The author is a former foreign-service officer who obviously has experienced the mixed blessings of the nation's global responsibilities.



2. If you want to know how the United States became a great power this is the book to read. The United States quest for empire and manifest destiny can be summed up by the five men covered in this book: TR, Elihu Root, John Hay, Alfred Mahan and Henry Cabot Lodge. The book focuses on conquest in the Philippines, Cuba and Mexico as well as the importance of the Panama Canal. It is a very interesting read that offers a lot about the course of US Empire. Imperialism and Americanism can be seen as one in the same during this time period and these five people acting together set America on a course to become not only a great power but eventually a super power. A must have for anyone interested in America's imperial past.



3. Empire building is not necessarily a bad thing. As such the First Great Triumph tries to force the reader to understand our nations obsession with empire and empire
   
   building. The book starts off by telling us about the west. Our nation was growing and the American people were driven to move across the country to carve out homes
   
   and states west of the Mississippi. Once our nation grew from sea to shining sea the energies behind empire building became global. We could no longer focus our
   
   energies on the continent of North America, so we had to look outward. This incredible drive to expand, and the passions behind it, became a central part of the American
   
   spirit.
   
   But in order to bring our manifest destiny to the global scale we had to become a force that would be strong enough to hold on to our gains. As such we needed to
   
   become a first rate power. One who could compete among the nations of old for dominancy in this brave new world.In order to gain such power we needed leadership to
   
   guide us. Theirfore the First Great Triumph is not only about empire building but about the figures who helped bring our nation into this new found power. The author
   
   concentrates on five powerful Americans. They are ; Theodore Roosevelt, Alfred T. Mahan, Henry Cabot Lodge, John Hay, and Elihu Root. All of which , our author feels,
   
   were instrumental in guiding our nation onto the world scene. The belief the author has is that without these five, our nation would not have risen to our present status of
   
   a world power. Let us examine why.
   
   The top of the pyramid was Theodore Roosevelt. It was his leadership that made our nation's stature as a world power possible. An influential man both as a states
   
   man and president. It was he who had the vision to build up America's naval power and turn it loose upon the world. The great white fleet was assembled and sent out
   
   under his guidence. The showing of such a fleet of ships was enough to prove to the world that we had become a first rate power. Under Theodore's leadership we gained
   
   influence in both Latin America and the Pacific. This was due to Theodore's timely usage of naval power. Theodore had also assembled a cast of first rate leaders around
   
   him and was able to use them to the best of his abilities. Theodore was able to delegate his many tasks among the two others to help establish American hegemony.
   
   Root was given the task of setting up the government of our conqured territories while Hay was given the task of handling our nations diplomacy with the other forgein
   
   powers. Both performed admirably and were able to give Theodore a stable base from which he could direct his energies upon the world.
   
   John Hay was the statesman from which all diplomacy flowed. He was pro-europe but also an American. As such his unique perspective allowed him to see problems
   
   and solutions from both sides. As such he was an excellent diplomat and arbitrator. Theodore would view him weak, but in reality Hay's greatest strength was his ability
   
   to have patience. His skills with diplomacy , when used, would help smooth out problems the U.S. was having and as a direct result Hay would win wars with words
   
   instead of bullets.
   
   But diplomacy and leadership are not the only tools one needs to run a country. You need beauraucrcy, that day to day grind that makes politics and government
   
   possible. For that we had Elihu Root. Root was instrumental in creating new ways of governing our new acquisitions. They were not perfect but they showed us what
   
   could work, and what could not work. As such Root would be able to show our government how to administer conquered territories. Root's ability to do this paved the way
   
   for our country's dealings with later nations and later wars.
   
   While Theodore's trio was able to expand the power of the executive branch, Lodge was able to channel the energies of the legislative branch to greatness. Lodge was
   
   not only an incredible intelectual but he was a man of vision. He dreamed of an imperial American, one that could rival Brittain in both power and strength. As such Lodge
   
   dedicated his abilities into keeping the pressure up on the legislative branch. His dedication to empire building left a stamp on congress and Lodge's actions helped sway
   
   several presidents towards the battle for empire. His observations of the dying world regime helped stir the American public into understanding their new role in the world.
   
   Spain was dying and Brittain was winding down. As such the American star was rising and a key to world dominance would be by gaining American soverignty over the
   
   area in the Pacific.
   
   All of these thoughts for empire stem from Alfred T. Mahan. It was his writtings on seaman ship and Naval power that got this entire ball rolling. In order for a nation to
   
   be great you had to be able to control the Oceans. Mahan had based his writtings on history and how the ancients giants, throught time, all had control of the seas
   
   (Oceans). He argued that the United States would always be considered a second rate power as long as their Navy was second rate. To build up the NAvy not only meant
   
   new ships. It also meant the training of a profesional class of sailors, new technologies, and refueling ports / way stations for the ships to be based at. Only by combining
   
   these three points would the U.S. gain dominancy in the world's seas and as a direct result gain dominancy on the world.
   
   But in order to understand history we sometimes have to look at how the author presents his material. What I found at in this book was that it is not an enjoyable read.
   
   The author has fallen in love with the big five and treats them like lovers. Their faults are glossed over and their actions are heightened to god like epics. As such you
   
   agree with the author. After all the author believes that these five mortal men changed the face of America. By their labors, and their labors alone, they turned our country
   
   into a first rate power. But the author is biased. It is his thesis after all that these men made America, so he will do anything and everything to back it up. Now the author
   
   never lies about the five, but he does seam to make them heroic. Never the devil, these five are always building our country up and never bringing it back down. They are
   
   the "Music Makers" after all and to attack any one of these idols would be an assault to the author. One he could not stand.
   
   The author wants you to feel sympathy for the five as both men and Gods. As such he imerses you into their past. Hopeing to gain your sympathy and trust the author
   
   instead disgusts and bores you. After all the book will speak of the historic events these men made, yet instead of completing the story, our author has decided to fill you
   
   in on the history of the "music Makers" while in the midst of the story. Instead of breaking down the history of the characters in an orderly fashion, you instead are given
   
   snippets of the character's personality. Once the personality is constructed you are then given the history of the person. But this history is given piece meal and while the
   
   author is narrating a story. As such the reader can become confused and bored while learning about these heros. It is also obvious that the book was written for an
   
   audience already familiar with the five. As such amusing incidents are placed , like Easter eggs, throught the entire book. Instead of amusing, I found them unapropriate.
   
   The detracted from the content of the book since I was out of the loop and unable to figure out the joke.
   
   The book is also a racist book. This is not to say it is a bad thing but the book has been written with the gloves off. Theirfore it is shocking to read about. Now I did
   
   enjoy the honesty the author wrote about. After all it is rare now adays to read a piece of work that has not been cleansed by the censors. The author's dealings about
   
   empire building stir strong emotions in people. His objective look at how race influenced empire building was refreshing. All to often we stay mute on race. It is a tender
   
   subject. But you can not deny how the concept of race has shaped our nation. Learning that our nation of the past felt so strongly about white America helped shed light
   
   on these topics. The conflict of civil rights has always been a sore spot in our nations history. Now, at last, you can understand some of the pettiness and even some of
   
   the injustices. To know that our nation had dificulty dealing with our black population is one thing. But to finally learn that our nation thought all races but the white man's
   
   were beneath his was fascinating. And these ideas were ones our nation was building it's empire on. Even with all the bias and hero worship in this book I still feel that it
   
   is a must read. Simply for the way the book reaches you about race relations and how the White man viewed his world back then.
   
   The First Great Triumph not only teaches you about the founding of modern day America and the people who helped create it but it also teaches you the reader about
   
   his own personal history with the United States. As such a bridge is formed between past and present and we can learn about our American heritage in all its being. That
   
   being both monstrous and glorious.



4. What do the above have in common? The answer is provided quite nicely in Warren Zimmerman's book "First Great Triumph". In it, he explains what 5 great Americans - John Hay, Alfred Thayer Mahan, Theodore Roosevelt, Hencry Cabot Lodge, and Elihu Root had to do with the forming of the American century (the 20th Century).
   
   Each of these men played his own role in creating Imperialistic America, starting in the late 19th century, and their contributions to American foreign policy continue through to this day.
   
   This is an important book for anyone that wants to understand the personalities of these five men and the actions that each took to make America the dominant player in world affairs that it has been during the last 100+ years.
   
   The book is divided into two sections; biographical sketches of each of these five men, and then a section on how America became an Imperalistic power, similar to Great Britain or any of a number of the European countries in earlier centuries. Starting with the Spanish American war, the annexation of the Hawaiian Islands, and pushing through to American intervention in World War I, this book does a fantastic job of explaining the events that occured and the personalities involved.
   
   I now understand why Zimmerman chose these five men to study in this book - when I first started to read it, I thought that perhaps others, such as William McKinley or William H. Seward should have been included in the biography section, but Seward's contributions were too early to be included in this study, and McKinley was too reserved to be included in a group of men that firmly believed in American expansion, much as earlier Americans had proclaimed "Mainfest Destiny".
   
   I enjoyed the book greatly, and would highly recommend it to anyone that is looking for a study of early American foreign policy, or an understanding of why America played such a big role in world events during the 20th century.



5. This book by a former U.S. Ambassador is an elegantly-written history of the Spanish-American War of 1898, when the United States acquired colonies in the Caribbean and the Pacific and emerged as a major world power. The nuanced, balanced narrative deals with "big picture" geopolitics and historical trends but never loses sight of the human factor or the role that ego and personal ambition played in America's rise to power. Zimmerman doesn't flinch from concluding that American troops committed atrocities in the Philippines or that our acquisition of Hawaii and the Panama canal zone was little more than theft. At the same time, he avoids ahistorical condemnations of turn-of-the-century imperialism. His book will leave leftwing revisionists and flag-waving rightists equally disappointed -- surely a sign of scholarly achievement.

   "First Great Tiumph" brims with insights into diplomacy and politics, based on Zimmerman's many years in the U.S. foreign service. Indeed, many parts of the book are eerily topical, such as the discussion of how war-lover Theodore Roosevelt seized on the sinking of the battleship Maine as a pretext for a war in Cuba. The book was published prior to the non-discovery of the much-hyped WMDs in Iraq but the parallels to current events are there for any intelligent reader to see. I gave the book four stars instead of five only because the "multi-biographical" approach is a bit contrived and results in the inclusion of much unnecessary biographical material in the first section of the book.

5 comments about An Uncommon Woman - The Empress Frederick: Daughter of Queen Victoria, Wife of the Crown Prince of Prussia, Mother of Kaiser Wilhelm.

1. A very well written and interesting book on Empress Frederick who's mostly nowdays remembered in relation to her domineering mother Queen Victoria and her psycho eldest son Kaiser Wilhelm II. Her childhood was very interesting and it was fun to read about her courtship and marriage to a man she actually loved and loved her and how the death of her father impacted her life completely. Another wonderful addition to anyone's collection of royal biographies.



2. This was a great biography that made you feel the happiness and sadnest moments in Empress Frederick's life time. Although I must admit there were moments in the book, particularly when Kaiser Frederick as well as the Empress herself were on their death beds, that made me want to box the ears of Kaiser Wihelm if he were still alive today!



3. Hannah Pakula did it again in another superb biography of one of the last great princesses in the sunset of European royalty. The high-minded, brilliant, passionate, beautiful oldest daughter of Queen Victoria was a woman fit to rule in her own right and yet she was shackled by the narrow, rigid Hohenzollern court. The very liberalism with which her father Prince Albert indoctrinated her ended up working against her ability to influence German political affairs in a positive way. Her great love for her husband and their passionate relationship is captured as well as the tragic dimensions of his death. It is horrible how Vicky dies, and especially the way her awful son treated her. A book that shows that sometimes marrying the handsome prince of your dreams is not enough. Highly recommended!



4. An Uncommon Woman is an excellent, first rate biography of Vicky, eldest daughter of Queen Victoria who, through marriage, became the Crown Princess of Prussia, and then Princess and later Empress Frederick of the German Empire. She played an influential (and one wishes a much more influential) role in German, and more broadly European, history during the latter 19th to early 20th centuries. Vicky strove to move German politics towards a more liberal, democratic, parliamentary form of government, but was successfully opposed by the autocracy of Chancellor Bismarck and even her son, who eventually became the Kaiser. The author persuasively implies that had this "uncommon woman" been able to prevail, European history may have benefited. The book succeeds as both an intimate, full-fledged account of this remarkable woman, her family members, and the many important historical persons of the times, as well as a comprehensive history of the creation of the German Empire, the rise of autocracy and militarism, and the lead-up to World War I. The writing style is excellent; the author is exceptionally skilled at presenting a thoroughly well-researched life of Vicky and detailed history of the times in a highly readable, well paced narrative. One of the most engaging and informative biographies I have read. Highly recommended.



5. You will feel great sympathy towards Vicky, the Empress Frederick, who was an unfortunate hostage to the intrigues of the German court. Sympathy will soon give way to awe at her courage and determination to do her best while having to perform the impossible: being all things to all people.
   
   Vicky was seen as the catalyst for change in Germany. Her parents, Queen Victoria and Prince Albert did not like the autocratic, militaristic way in which Emperor Wilhelm I was running Prussia. Instead, they visualized a united German nation with a government much like that of England. Their plan was to sow seeds of liberalism and constitutional monarchy through their daughter and her marriage to Wilhelm's son, Prince Frederick (Fritz). In preparation for the eventual match, Vicky was schooled in politics and German life by Prince Albert. Eventually, she and Fritz would be Emperor and Empress of Prussia, and could bring about German unity.
   
   Little did Vicky know that upon arriving in Berlin, she was at a disadvantage from the start.
   
   As the daughter of Queen Victoria, she was encouraged to retain her Englishness yet was expected to be a Prussian wife and princess. Her efforts to raise her eldest son Willy as Prince Albert had raised her backfired. Her tendency to over-criticize (a trait passed on from Victoria) turned the young Wilhelm away, and he grew up under his thoroughly Prussian grandfather Wilhelm. Otto von Bismarck had seen his own chance to manipulate the future emperor, and along with the groveling royal court, Willy was turned into a bombastic power fanatic.
   
   Her relationship with Fritz was not seen as loving, but as an English princess scheming to Anglicize the House of Hohenzollern. Vicky was painted as "die Englanderin", unfaithful to Germany and a demon on the shoulder of her husband, whom she 'manipulated'.
   
   Hopes that Fritz's mother, Empress Augusta, would watch over Vicky were dashed. Augusta was known to be very liberal and free-thinking, unusual for royal women of the time. In her they thought they had an ally, but both the Queen and Vicky would be sorely disappointed. The once-progressive Augusta had seen her marriage to Emperor Wilhelm unravel over the years, and as a result she became a bitter, self-absorbed woman. She gave Vicky little support in her new role.
   
   When they finally became Emperor and Empress, Vicky and Fritz had precious little time to implement any real changes. Fritz died from cancer of the larynx three months into his reign. Upon his passing, Vicky was left alone and devoid of support or influence. Your heart cries at the unfairness of brilliant minds wasted, while Willy becomes Kaiser Wilhelm II - egotistical, manipulative, and dangerous.
   
   Thankfully, Vicky did not live to see the destruction of the Hohenzollern dynasty when Wilhelm II pulled Germany and England into a devastating world war. After fighting his own relations across Europe, he headed into exile, never to see the throne again. Albert's catalyst did indeed create a change, but not in the way he had expected. Germany would be unified, but the reigning royal house would fall from power, never to recover. -MandysRoyalty.org

No comments about My Bondage and My Freedom - Frederick Douglass.

5 comments about Memoirs: Ten Years And Twenty Days.

1. This has been one of a number of books in either biography or memoirs categories of the elite or main players from World War 2 that I have read and again this is excellent reading.
   The book gives details of his earlier career in the German Navy during World War 1, inter war years then through to World War 2 and his days as the last leader of the Third Reich - covers everything from torpedeo development / failures, submarine development or advancement to counteract Allied advances in anti submarine warfare, uboat losses and the aces, the constant pressing to enlarge the uboat fleet and gain a naval air arm - this book is well written, easy to follow and certainly not something you will get bored with.



2. The book is fairly complex reading; only because, I feel, that I was looking at it from "my side", and the analysis was that much more difficult. Doenitz was a remarkable man, a brilliant strategist, and a professional soldier in the highest regard. One has to constantly keep referenced to the basis of Doenitz's dissertation, and moreso, keep in proper perspective the historical trackwork of the war.
   One of the things that I found a little humourous was the statement that Doenitz was "appalled at the pictures of the contrentration camps". I believe that statement was to keep his neck out of the noose! And he was smart enough to know that he was in a position to "stay above" any indictments of war crimes and atrocities. His only crime, as recorded, was to have been "GrandAdmiral ReichMarine". To his credit, many allied high-ranking officers, Nimitz in particular, accorded him the highest respect and esteem. To his fear and chagrin, Eisenhower seemed to be "gunning" for him; at least as I perceived it.
   Excellent book. Read the liner notes on rear cover. I think you will agree. Gives one pause to wonder...



3. Ten Years and Twenty Days is a direct reference to the time Karl Doenitz spent in Spandau Jail having been convicted of War Crimes.
   
   As an English boy growing up in a post-war Britain (I was born in 1950), we would play games where the Germans always lost - just like the Cowboys always won and the Indians always lost. Much later in life, I began to research various ships and shipwrecks through my scuba diving and the name of Karl Doenitz came up time and again. Over many years I came to respect this man for the way in which he conducted both himself and his branch of the war with Britain. I consider him to have been an honourable enemy of my country.
   
   Having read so many accounts of this once great Admiral before reading his own memoirs, I have reached the conclusion that he was convicted of no more a crime than "being one of the enemy" and it was for that he served his ten years and twenty days. Others, of course, were directly responsible for the great human atrocities of WW2 and it was they who were either sentenced to death of life imprisonment.
   
   I am sure there are those who will disagree with my assessment of this man - and, indeed, their own assessment may be more accurate. Nevertheless, this book is a great work and one which should be read by all those with an interest in Karl Doenitz the German Naval Officer and Karl Doenitz - the last Fuhrer who's first task on succeeding Hitler was to seek peace.
   
   NM



4. My friend lent me this book. It was my first book on the naval aspect of the Second World War. I figured after the hundreds I had read on the land and air element I should start to look into the naval war. I could not put this book down, I devoured it. I have been gobbling up submarine books since that day.
   Wow! First you have to be awed by the fact that this is a book written by the man that became the successor to Hitler. Second, its the best way to get the big picture of the U-boat campaign from the German viewpoint. Doenitz wrote this before he found out about allied successes in breaking his naval codes.
   There are many fascinating stories here, about individual submarine actions, convoy battles, raids, rescue missions. Great stuff that you could make into great movies some day. You really get a good sense of how close the Germans were to winning the war. Thankfully, and Doenitz goes into it, the Third Reich did not take the U-boat arm seriously until it was too late. Whew!
   Doenitz was charged with war crimes after the war and jailed. Specifically for conducting unrestricted submarine warfare.
   Like every nazi that seems to write after the war - he defends himself by saying that being at the front he was not aware of everything going on back at home. Truth? Maybe, maybe not. But you cannot stop yourself from sympathizing with the man who was left holding the bag in May of 1945. We forget that the Allies waged unrestricted submarine warfare against the Japanese from the beginning. Doenitz has written that some American admirals were sympathetic after the war, and tried to get him acquitted. Very interesting story. A must for every World War Two reader.



5. Do you know Doenitz? Are you a WWII enthusiast? A historian? A submariner? Then, this book is a MUST HAVE. There are lots of books about the WWII submarine campaign, from both sides, many of them better written. So what's special? No other book provides that specific background knowledge and information. Why didn't Germany build more submarines than it did in the crucial early years? How did the wolf pack tactics evolve? What measures did the German Naval High Command take after discovering their torpedo crisis? How did they counter Allied scientific breakthroughs? Why didn't they devine Enigma was being broken? Finally, you will hear the German opinion about Roosevelt's "Short of War" strategy - nowaday's United Nations would be in turmoil...

   Second, if you can read between the lines, this book will reveal the personality of one of the mightiest leaders of WWII. Was he a war criminal? Maybe, but certainly his biggest crime was to be a soldier (with very limited horizon apart from his daily duty) who happened to fight on the wrong side. Bad luck, for both sides...

   This book certainly doesn't replace other narratives about the "Atlantic War", but it supplements all of them. Only here, you can find the background story.

   If you're looking for more WWII memoirs, try Doenitz' superior, Raeder, and DON'T OVERLOOK Churchill, as he was the greatest writer among all of them.

   If you still have no idea as to who Doenitz might have been, then try to read Lothar Guenther Buchheim's vivid picture about how the submariners themselves felt, instead; that is indeed great war literature.

5 comments about After Long Silence.

1. I'm sorry but I couldn't finish it... so I did not get to the part of the author being lesbian (!) It was... funny, predictable, I read books like that before written by Jewish Americans, they all seem to use the same myths over and over and base whole book around them. You read one, you have a feeling like you read them all. Boring...



2. I really enjoyed reading about the holocaust from the perspective of the second generation. The content was often not pleasant (what holocaust story is?)but the effect on the next generation and the family relationships made for a different story line that I appreciated. I definitely recommend this book!



3. Imagine as a young adult, passionately involved in your career, you start pulling away the pieces of the facade your parents had created to protect you and your sister fom the truth about your own family. Like pulling a thread and unravelling your entire wardrobe to show your nakedness, Helen Fremont knew whe was dealing with sensitive, even explosive issues, but he could not stop pulling that thread.
   What she has done with this remarkable memoir is show her family's roots and branches in ways she never knew existed before she and her sister began discussing the "What if's?" It is a moving story packed with complicated relationships and the true history of her parents' lives and the terrors they went through during the Holocaust era in Europe. You finish the book wondering how such a powerful story could be supressed, and cheering for Helen Fremont for unearthing it. As with so many memoirs, you are also left wondering, "where are they now?" and hoping for a sequel.



4. I have given this book as a gift to at least five friends. I couldn't put it down!



5. From today's perspective, it is difficult to comprehend just why a couple who survived the Holocaust would hide their Jewish identify from their daughters for years, insisting that they are Polish Catholic refugees in the USA. This memoir, however, explains how their fear of a repeat pogrom drives them to deny their heritage, keep secret their loss of religious identify, and assuage their horrific memories and guilt at surviving.Fremont and her sister's quest to discover the truth causes their parents much pain, but the author is clear that the family's pain had dominated their lives since birth.

5 comments about Mistress Anne.

1. You remember that old mnemotic device on remembering the six wives of Henry VIII? Divorced, beheaded, died, divorced, beheaded, survived. Anne Boleyn was the first of his two wives who died at the Tower of London being beheaded at the cruel King Hal's order.
   Anne was raised in France where she served as a lady in waiting to Henry's sister Mary who had married the aged French monarch. Anne's sister Mary was known as the English whore bedding King Francis and several other noblemen.
   Upon her return to England she became a lady in waiting to Henry's Spanish Queen Katherine of Aragon. Katherine had produced no sons for Henry's dynastic needs but had given birth to Princess Mary (later to become Queen). Katherine was related to the Holy Roman Emperor Charles V and was a staunch defender of Roman Catholicism and the Pope Clement VII.
   Henry wished to divorce her since he believed he was guilty of the sin of marrying his brother's widow. His brother was the Prince of Wales Arthur who died aftere only five months of wedlock to Katherine. Henry was a strong, tall, athletic, musical and amorous monarch with keen intelligence and unbridled energy.
   Henry broke from Rome since the papacy refused to grant him an annulment of his marriage to Katherine. He married Anne who gave birth to their daughter the future Queen Elizabeth I. Anne failed to have a male child so following the death of Katherine of Aragon he divorced her. Anne was accused of adultery and witchcraft in her seduction of the king. Anne was arrogant and vindictive desiring the deaths of Katherine and Princess Mary so her daughter Elizabeth could one day reign over England. Anne and her brother were executed in May, 1536.
   Erickson gives a balanced view of Anne noting her defects of character and showing how she seduced the tyrant Henry. The book is slow reading for those expecting a fast paced story. It is interesting to learn more about Anne, Henry, Cardinal Wolsley, Thomas Cromwell and Katherine of Aragon which makes Tudor history a joy to study.
   The book is not spectacular but is well written and historically accurate. It is not the most thrilling biography you will read but it is solid and worth your time.



2. Very well documented piece on Boleyn. Fairly neutral in presentation, as to Anne's character; etc. Entertaining, and it contains info on Henry, Mary and Elizabeth (as well as the entire host of Henrican supporting actors) that is unique to this book. In other words if you read all of Erickson's works on the Tudors, each book offers different info, as well as being historically written in an engaging way.



3. this book although alot longer than the brief paragraphs i've read about Anne Boleyn,doesn't give alot of new info.One interesting interpretation presented though seems to indicate that Henry the 8th may not have wanted Anne executed but more pushed aside as he had previously done with Queen Catherine. Erickson gives a strong case that the execution of Anne may have been pushed forward by Henry's advisors who were afraid of Anne's influence over the king.It seems by this book that the Archbishop of Canterbury,Thomas Cranmer and the king's right hand man,Thomas Cromwell,wanted Anne Boleyn and her friends and family at court out of the picture(permanently). This way there would be no way the Boleyn's could reenter the picture with a bigger hand.One of the lessons of the Wars of the Roses was that too often leaving political enemies to "lick their wounds"was a certain way to lose one's head (on the block)!The Boleyn family had spent about twenty years living in the French court at Paris when relations between France and England were a scant better,Anne's father was a French diplomat for Henry the 8th.It seems the English public believed Anne had picked up some permiscuous habits during her years there and craftily used them to entice and capture Henry's heart.Whether it was true or not didn't matter,and given this Anne was off on the wrong foot right from the start.Not to mention she had supplanted the popular Queen Catharine. One slip by the Boleyn's and it wouldn't be hard to imagine the consequences,both the"man (or woman)in the street and the king's advisors against the Boleyn's from the outset.The book emphasized the family of Anne Boleyn and their rise and fall in Henry's capricious court.A dangerous place to be. Another interesting part of the book deals with how the women of the king's court would make themselves desirable to capture the men's favor.It actually seems they treated their skin with mercury and white lead to give themselves that"wasted by amours" look.Looking good for a few brief years was more important than a long life for them. Beneath all the pomp and jollity of Henry's court there were alot of corpses."Great Harry" comes off as an almost certain mean spirited alcoholic covered with a thin veneer of hospitality and hardy har-har.The Boleyn's according to what I read from Erickson's book knew the stakes they were playing and overestimated their ability to "thrive and survive". Primary sources in regard to the Boleyn's are rare,and i'll bet Henry's "buddies" had alot to do with it so we'll never know the complete story but this book is about as good as will ever be found.The assertion about Anne's lose morals by Henry were probably not true but a classic case of pointing the finger,that is three pointing back at the lecherous Henry.



4. I have to agree with the other reviews I've read. I was thoroughly disappointed with this book. I bought it because I am interested in anything having to do with Anne Boleyn/Henry VIII, and Elizabeth I.
   
   While there was some good factual information in this book, that's all it really was- information. The book itself was very dry and had no real substance to it. I've never read a book by this author before, so I don't know if this her usual delivery or not. But, she took what could have been an outstanding book about a very intriguing period of history and basically wasted a lot of good paper.



5. I am a specialist in British Renaissance literature and history. This book made me so angry that I literally threw it at the wall--before I threw it in the trash. As others have noted, Erickson is biased and the book is full of stale anecdotes and cliches. Worse still is her nauseatingly florid writing style. I'll never read another book by this author again.

5 comments about Shackleton's Boat Journey.

1. This book is an interesting first hand account of the Shackleton expedition and their journey by small boat to South Georgia Island. As a narrative by the captain of the Endurance, it can make for laborious reading, as it is not written as a spell-binding novel. As well, it requires some basic foreknowledge of the Shackleton expedition; their mission and the result. The Endurance sinks on the first page of this book, so there is really no background information about the expedition. If you know nothing about Shackleton, you probably should read a more comprehensive history before you read this book. If you already know a bit about it, though, this narrative provides an interesting look at their boat journey from the perspective of the captain. The details of the journey are clearly understated, but you can still gain a glimpse of the horrors of the voyage by reading between the lines. This was a nearly impossible journey, completed by tough and capable men who triumphed against the odds. The story is awe-inspiring and powerful, just make sure you have some background knowledge before you read it.



2. 
   In the summer of 1914 Ernest Schackleton's ship Endurance became trapped in Antarctic ice in 53 degree below zero weather. The following winter, the ship was crushed and sank, leaving the crew to camp on the ice while eking out subsistence under unimaginable conditions. In April of 1916, the ice broke apart beneath their feet, and twenty eight men piled into the lifeboats they had rescued from the wreck of the Endurance.
   
   These hair raising events are not part of the story of Shackleton's Boat Journey, but simply the preamble, described in less than a page, that sets the stage for the real action that is to follow.
   
   The tale is told by F.A. Worsley, the Captain of the Endurance. And what a saga it is, as the entire crew barely makes it to Elephant Island and from there an advance party navigates across the raging, freezing ocean in a tiny boat, all the way to South Georgia Island, from which the balance of the crew are eventually rescued, without one man being lost.
   
   What these men endured is beyond belief, yet Worsley recounts it humbly, with understatement, and with considerable grace. Here is an example of his prose:
   
   "Squall by squall the wind grew fiercer and the sea heavier. Through a rift in the clouds the moon shone out on the stormy sea and for two minutes revealed the ghostly white uplands and glaciers of the island. Another squall blotted everything out. We heard whales blow right alongside. They may have been killers, but, whatever they were, a push from one of them would have capsized us. If they were killers we would have had a quicker end. Soon to our great relief they left us for some nobler quarry than dirty smelly little men in Burberry overalls".
   
   It is amazing that in the midst of a Herculean struggle for survival the author was able to take note of beauty in what must have been a living hell, and to describe it so elegantly. Here for example, is his description of icebergs, "All the strange fantastic shapes rose and fell in a stately cadence, with a rustling, whispering sound and hollow echoes to the thudding seas, clear green at the water line, shading to a deep dark blue far below, all snowy purity and cool blue shadows above".
   
   This combination of gripping action and poetic insight makes for a richly rewarding read.
   
   Highly recommended.



3. If you want to imagine cold -- real bone-numbing cold -- read Worsley's memoir of Ernest Shackleton's ill-fated voyage to the south polar regions during 1914-15. I first learned about Shackleton in the 2000 documentary The Endurance (narrated by Liam Neeson and quite a fine film), and I found I wanted to know more. And what better account than one written by Shackleton's friend, and the captain of the Endurance, Frank Worsley?
   
   The real surprise is just how good Worsley's writing is! Despite the harrowing ordeal, the adventure really comes through — what it is that would make Shackleton want to venture into the south polar regions in the first place. And the truly amazing thing is that Shackleton managed to save every single last man from that star-crossed journey. They may have had to live on rotten seal meat, but they all lived to tell the tale.
   
   Worsley's praise of Shackleton is at times almost ridiculously hyperbolic, but I suppose we can forgive him that, under the circumstances. And his writing is lively and entertaining at every turn. A wonderful ocean adventure tale.



4. This is an outstanding little book. Worsley, who was part of the adventure, writes in the first person and keeps the reader on the hook. Of course, Shackleton's adventure is well known and well covered by authors. However, Worsley's being there and telling stories of the crew is unique. If you are into Polar adventures, this book is a must read.



5. This book is well written. I've read a great deal about Shackleton and seen videos, movies, DVDs and Hurley film. But this book provides detail where the second hand accounts do not. If you like sailing, you will especially love this book. The testament also highlights some areas of disagreement between Sir Ernst and Worsley, not of much import, but also not often discussed. Overall a required addition to any Expidetion library. But most of all, perhaps of the the greatest adventures ever told.

5 comments about The Buried Book: The Loss and Rediscovery of the Great Epic of Gilgamesh.

1. Good subject, bad idea. Damrosch makes a decision to work in reverse chronological order that flaws his account of the discovery and deciphering of the tablets of the Epic of Gilgamesh, then doesn't follow through because he needs to build on chronological knowledge to bring the Epic to the general readers his book is intended for.
   
   So he starts with synopsis of the discovery of some of the tablets, then goes through the deciphering of the tablets, before going back to the discovery in more detail, then works backward to a synopsis of the Epic, before concluding with a prologue which returns to a tacked-on discussion of the cultural impact of the Epic today. Damrosch would have been better served by a straight chronological sequence or some other organizational framework.
   
   Also, in the telling he goes off-topic in his earnestness to resurrect the career of an Iraqi native who was crucial to the 19th-century archaeological finds--a worthy effort to be sure, but then to spend a whole chapter in a thin book on Hormuzd Rassam's subsequent 20-year diplomatic career away from the archaeological field betrays Damrosch's lack of confidence in his core subject material.



2. Excellent read. Great look at history about how the artifacts were saved..not stolen. Well researched



3. This is a strange sort of an introductory book. It is so very general, in fact that I cannot help but feel that with a little more creativity and work it could have become one more title in the For Dummies series. Now, I like those books, they are often quite good for what they are. This poor book cannot seem to figure out just what it is. Part real history and part literary speculation, it has only two of the Ten Parts of a For Dummies title and they are not at all well melded together. The illustrations don't help to advance the tale much either as they are of very poor quality for the most part. If and only if, the person who reads this book goes on to read some of the other books and articles this book cites does this title earn its keep.



4. I really enjoyed reading "The Buried Book". Unlike some other Amazon readers, I felt it was a lot less tedious than actually sifting through sand and transcribing cuneiform. If you're looking for a book about the translation or the process of archaeology, look elsewhere. If you enjoy reading about personalities within a social context and high adventure, this book is for you. The reader also learns a lot about ancient literature within Mesopotamian culture. David Damrosch's research is impressive. Those that like "The Buried Book" might also like Joseph Alexander MacGillivray's "Minotaur".



5. A fascinating topic for a book is made tedious and annoying by author David Damrosch. Damrosch, a comparative literature teacher, manages to bury a great story under an avalanche of trite comments. The man simply has no idea how to let a story tell itself. He makes the interesting banal. Damrosch burns through forests-worth of paper impressing himself with his own wit, leaving the reader to sift through his academic prose for the 'good parts' version of the Gilgamesh back-story.
   
   For an author who obviously did a lot of research in putting this book together, Damrosch makes a rookie error in stating that Stanley's expedition to find Livingston was funded by the Daily Telegraph: it was the New York Herald that paid his freight.
   
   "The Buried Book" is in dire need of a ghostwriter, someone who can turn the fruits of Damrosch's research into something readable.
   
   *with apologies to Ambrose Bierce, a man who knew how to tell a tale.

5 comments about Facing Death in Cambodia.

1. Peter Maguire's mix of personal travelogue and historical study works well, with the author lingering on the question of impunity and the ineffectual international community, whilst interviewing victims and perpetrators of Khmer Rouge crimes on many visits following his first trip to Cambodia in 1994. That first exciting yet unnerving visit in 1994 is something the author and myself have in common, as we do the loss of a close Cambodian friend in recent years. His loss was Sok Sin, well known as every journalist's 'fixer' and Maguire's tale of his demise is poignant. His interviews with the suvivors of Tuol Sleng such as Bou Meng, Vann Nath and Im Chan contrast sharply with the soul-less KR photographer Nhem En and guard Him Huy, whilst DC-Cam and Youk Chhang rightly emerge as a beacon of light in the chaos that is Cambodia. He also tracked down Mai Lam, the Vietnamese colonel who'd turned Tuol Sleng into a Genocide Museum though ultimately their discussions were stymied. I found the book stimulating, frustrating, insightful and vexing in equal measures, with Maguire admitting up front that he ultimately failed to come to any clear-cut conclusions. However, the journey to get to nowhere is an interesting one.



2. This remarkable book takes the reader deep inside the minds of a culture so hard to penetrate that I am returning this year to Cambodia just to attempt to understand the obvious - here is a country in a state of denial. "Facing Death in Cambodia" very effectively analyses Cambodia's culture of compliance, a nation meek to authority, and seemingly paralyzed by a recent past so convulsive that to even think about it is an invitation to "bad karma" - even among survivors and the unindicted killers of their children who sometimes share the same street. Mr Maguire excells at the job of rendering the 75-79 story in human terms. His portraits of the familiar figures like the photographer of those shattering Tuol Slong ID pictures are very important to our understanding of what sort of mental gymnastics many at the heart of the genocide are capable of. The heroic Vann Nath, whose miraculous survival is powerfully and touchingly explained in the book, emerges as a beacon of clear sightedness.Yet even here there is paradox - the survivor is eager to greet the photographer almost as an old friend. The author's tenacious search for the mind set and value system of the killers, and how D.K.'s perverted ideology can be effortlessly justified in Cambodia's "culture of impunity", make for provocative reading. I was particularly impressed by the author's descriptions of lurking violence. The weserner's stereotypes of the smiling Khmer do not long survive exposure to present reality. When Mr. Maguire takes you through the marketplaces and cafes of Phnom Penh, don't expect a comfortable ride. In one shattering passage,we are told how quickly peasant vengeance in the street over seeming trifles turns to horror in a blink. Overall, this book is one of the most important documents of Cambodia's modern history. Mr Maguire has no illusions that this beautiful, tormented country's battle to start over is going to be over soon. Here is a writer of compassion and power, and his book is an excellent one.



3. This is a clear and concise book about the horrendous regime of Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge (1975-1979)and the aftermath. The author asks the question: why haven't leaders of the Khmer Rouge been prosecuted for the mass murder they perpetrated on their own people. He finds a partial answer by looking at international politics and the machinations of Cambodian leaders, the UN, and the US and everyone's lack of priority in seeking justice in Cambodia.
   
   The author, along the way, adds his personal experiences and interesting observations about Phnom Penh and Cambodia in the 1990s and up until 2003. He interviews a large number of Cambodians, including guards and survivors, about the goings on at the notorious S-21 prison. As many as twenty thousand entered the prison; fewer than a dozen survived. There are photos of some of the murdered and the survivors and several historic photos of Khmer Rouge soldiers. The author delves into the mentality of the mass murderers and present day Cambodians who still suffer the trauma of that horrific era.
   
   Chapter two in this book is one of the best brief descriptions of the Khmer Rouge takeover of Cambodia and its consequences that I have read. All in all the book is a readable introduction to the sordid history of the Khmer Rouge and the half-hearted international efforts to cope with mass murder and its perpetrators.
   
   Smallchief



4. I've often wondered about the genocide in Cambodia. The amount of material available on the Holocaust is emmense. We basically went to war to stop the "Ethnic Clensing" in the Balkans. But in Cambodia, almost noting, even while it was going on it seemed to be largely ignored. The famous pictures of the piles of skulls seemed to have no effect.
   
   When this was happening we had just ended our participation in the Viet Nam war. I asked a Viet Nam protester why they weren't protesting what was happening there, why are we building a Holocaust museum when something of almost horror was happening in Cambodia. There was no answer.
   
   For a time I thought that it might be an issue of race/color. The Jews were white, the Cambodian brown. Then the happenings in Rawanda got a fair amount of press coverage. And I can only conclude that it was just a matter of time. Viet Nam took all the energy the protestors had, perhaps combined with such a contempt/hatred for our own government that they couldn't see the evil in the Khmer Rouge. Maybe it was the left's "love" for communism that made them blind.
   
   Peter Maguire's book puts a personal and human face on this genocide. He has talked to the people all over Cambodia, he has analyzed the international response and concluded that "international law, human rights, and international criminal courts are little more than sonorous fictions without political will."
   
   There is no political will to even think much about Cambodia, not while it was happening, not now.



5. I just bought a copy of this book because I saw the lecture Dr. Maguire gave on CSPAN and was riveted. The book is unbelievably important in these times when the United States claims to be doing things for international justice. But when you read this and see how Pol Pot got away with so much and what's going on in Asia you won't be able to understand why we were so consumed with a man like Saddam Hussein (oil). Everyone should read this book.

No comments about Cicero: Select Letters (Cambridge Greek and Latin Classics).