No comments about Two Years In The Forbidden City.

1 comments about Charles V: The World Emperor.

1. Right from the beginning I wasn't sure what to make of this biography. Kleinschmidt doesn't try to make the story of Charles V more accessible. Rather, his story reads like a recital of facts. There isn't much to the author's writing style, which is much to be desired. Additionally, there isn't as much of Charles V as you would imagine.
   
   Where you would think Charles would be the central theme he is relegated to nothing more than the common thread, sometimes only being mentioned in passing in order to justify that section being mentioned. Most of chapter 2 is spent talking about the various maps that were drawn from the end of the fifteenth century to the middle of the sixteenth century. Perhaps this would be more interesting in a book about maps, but it doesn't belong in a biography of a Holy Roman Emperor. Throughout the book there are sections like this that branch off into philosophical meanderings or useless descriptions that seem to only be there in order to meet the quota of pages.
   
   That being said, what was mentioned of Charles was interesting to read. Seeing him come into power and battling Francis I, the Turks, or the Lutherans helped breathe some life into the biography despite the dry nature the facts were presented. The last chapter was written with the most life as the author summarized the end of Charles' life and future of the Habsburgs.
   
   I am on the fence on whether I would recommend. I am sure there is another more focused and interesting biography on this profound ruler and so would probably not recommend because of this.
   
   2.5 stars.

4 comments about The Diana Conspiracy Exposed: The Definitive Account.

1. Martyn Gregory STILL does not explain why the following happened!
   1. Why was a partial embalming done on Princess Diana while she lay in the French hospital.
   2. Why did street cleaners come into the tunnel just a few hours after the accident to clean the street where the accident was.
   3. Why did they reopen the tunnel just hours after the accident.
   4. Why was Henri Paul's blood packed with carbon monoxide.
   5. Why wouldn't anyone let Henri Paul's family do an independent study on Henri Paul's blood
   6. Why were witnesses that saw certain things eliminated from the investigation. And on and on and on. In my mind, Princess Diana was 'eliminated' by top professionals....and they got away with it. Read 'The Hidden Evidence and 'The Murder of Princess Diana'!



2. I'm still in the process of reading this book but two things are already apparent to me. 1. Mr. Gregory seems to have a powerful dislike for Mohamed al Fayed. 2.Since the wildest conspiracy theories don't hold up he seems to think that means none of the rumors could be true. I agree that the Princess likely did die in an accident but to absolutely rule out foul play is going too far. Many of Mr. Gregory's debunkings seem very well thought out and informative, even probable, I just have a feeling that something is missing.



3. Martyn Gregory's account of the couple's final journey is riddled with inaccuracies, distortions and falsehoods.



4. It is quite obvious that Mr. Gregory has done his homework here. There were several interesting details which I had not read before. He is very anti Al Fayed. But he did strain his credibility with me when he twice mentioned that JFK was assasinated in Houston. Mr. Gregory must be very young! I enjoyed the book. He argued his "case" very convincingly.

No comments about Two Years in the Forbidden City - with a new foreword by Graham Earnshaw (Tales of Old China).

No comments about The Art of Acting in The Drama.

5 comments about Elizabeth Woodville: Mother of the Princes in the Tower.

1. While I applaud the author for taking on a seldom written about subject, he took a complex and compelling woman and made her dull, which is the worst crime of all! His book is a tad sexist in places and, to me at least, seems to be biased in a "women can't be bad" type of way. This bias slants his interpretations.
   
   Also, at least as far as I could see the sourcing in this book seemed weak and the conclusions in this book were far too much based on the author's own value system.
   
   I think the assumption that nobles in this period had the same values and motives as we have today is likely false. Assuming that no mother would sacrifice her sons for her ambition (or knowingly associate with anyone that did kill them), leads this author to make conclusions that seem to me to based on his assumptions about motivations more than his analysis of data. From what I've read, it seems inconclusive what her motivations were. Allison Weir certainly thinks this one is a "bady" as they say - not that her analysis is definitive, but it is a counter-argument.
   
   However, the author should be applauded for researching a difficult and little researched subject with likely limited primary and secondary source material to use.



2. A complex book about a complex woman in complex times. I knew little about Elizabeth Woodville until I discovered this book but after digesting the detailed material within, you are completely briefed on the person, the extended family, the politics and the times. The tragedy of her children, the ruthlessness of power around her etc, can only mean you conclude the book with great sympathy for Woodville. I commend this book despite the rather dull prose (at times)



3. I've always been looking for a book on Elizabeth Woodville. History hasn't been too kind to her yet she was the mother of the princes in the tower. She went from being a widow with two children among the English class to being Queen of England. Its so rare for that to happen. You can understand the secrecy surrounding the marriage in the beginning because the other nobles weren't thrilled to say the least and most likely tried to find ways to keep the marriage from happening unfortunately that would later be used to declare her marriage invalid. How horrible it must have been to lose her husband, have her marriage invalid and lose her two sons. At least she got to live long enough to see her daughter become queen.



4. My primary interest in history--or at least that period in which I did my MA--has always been in the ancient near east. Over the past four or five years, however, I have been branching out more. Of late in particular I have been filling in what I learned of English history in a survey course I took years ago. I've read some on Richard III, on Edward I, II, III, and IV and on Edward the Black Prince. I've followed up on King Harold and his "difference of opinion" with William of Normandy, etc.

   In reading some of these works, I find that I've learned only tangentially anything about the women of these episodes. When I came upon a reference to David Baldwin's book on Elizabeth Woodville Mother of the Princes in the Tower, my curiosity was immediately aroused, and I decided to find out something more about one of these women in the background, to see what part they actually played in the drama of their times.

   Like most people interested in English history, I know the Shakespeare Richard III and the story of the little princes in the tower. Having read some of the history of the period, I realized too that the queen was not well liked by many of the more influential and established nobility of her husband's realm. These individuals tended to depict her as a small town upstart who capitalized on her personal beauty to better all of the members of her family at the expense of the "legitimate" nobility. This set the stage for a very shaky government; one tested more than once by the disaffected, and created the drama of the Tower and of Richard III. Baldwin gets at the character of Elizabeth by looking at the extant documents of the time and by analyzing how the woman fit into the on going politics of her husband's reign rather than by following the contemporary accounts circulated by the woman's detractors.

   I was particularly fascinated by the degree to which each phase of English history links naturally with its predecessor and its successor--not that this is particularly surprising perhaps. Some of the histories of other countries have far more discrete hiatuses between phases. This flow is particularly noticeable when it is viewed from the perspective of Elizabeth Woodville and her family. The royal genetics of the period was definitely convoluted. It was amazing how interrelated were not only the branches of the royal family with one another but with some of the nobility as well. (Looking at other genealogies reveals the degree to which the nobility of most of Europe were interrelated.) That "six degrees of separation" thing was definitely in operation here and pushed to the limit. It left the possibility of Elizabeth's either mending the rift between the houses of Lancaster and York, which is what the author theorizes was the intention of Edward IV, or exacerbating it. It also left a lot of people with a potential claim on the throne and with incentive to cause trouble--which is how the rift began in the first place. The chain continues into the future through the connection of the Tudors with the ultimate patriarch, Edward III. Elizabeth, her daughter--mother of Henry VIII--and her two sons help complete that link. Fascinating.

   FOR THOSE WRITING PAPERS IN HISTORY, HISTRIOGRAPHY, SOCIOLOGY, POLITICAL SCIENCES, WOMENS' STUDIES: One might look at how documents like accounts can be used to clarify lifestyles (clothing, expenses for servants, etc), status, power structures, etc or to write a biography such as this one. One might write a paper on the use of power by women in history, on how women acquire power within a society or at what the study of women and other "background" figures reveal about events during a particular episode in time. One might compare less favorable studies of Elizabeth Woodville with this one to determine to what extent the author's assessment of her reign is accurate. One might look at the story of the princes in the tower as it is told in Shakespeare--or Josephine Tey's novel Daughter of Time--and as it is presented in Baldwin's biography of Elizabeth to determine who might actually have committed the murders.

   A fun biography of an interesting woman




5. Readers with an interest in the Wars of the Roses will find this book about Elizabeth Woodville, Edward IV's Queen, and the mother of the "Princes in the Tower", perfectly readable, but not extremely compelling. This may be due to the relative scarcity of reliable, original source information about her. (I think much of the contemporary information about her is speculation about how she, a widow from the gentry class with two children, managed to attract and win the King, suggesting that witchcraft was involved.) My sense is the book may go a little far in "white-washing" her historical reputation as grasping, selfish, proud and haughty. I just don't think the sketchy information the author was able to marshall was convincing enough to really establish what kind of person Elizabeth actually was, one way or other.

   Also, regarding the earlier reviewer's suggestion that Elizabeth's negative reputation owes to the Tudors "looking back in anger", it might pay to remember that Henry VIII's grandmother was, in fact, Elizabeth Woodville (his mother's mother), so I'm not certain how much her historical reputation is a result of this. I think it actually owes a lot more to her contemporary Yorkist rivals, who were threatened by her very unexpected emergence onto the scene and potential power she could wield as the King's wife, than to the later Tudors, a dynasty Elizabeth's own daughter founded when she married Henry Tudor.

1 comments about Edward & Sophie: A Royal Wedding.

1. Lots of historical background here for the royal couple. The wedding photos are interesting but I found the best part to be the photos of Sophie, many of these I hadn't seen before and some were very flattering to the lady.

5 comments about Royalty Who Wait: The 21 Heads of Formerly Regnant Houses of Europe.

1. Sadly, what could have been a good book turns up very poor. First of all, did anyone EDIT the book? I can't even count the mistakes in the book, especially the absolute murdering of names and places. Parts of the book were written as if the target audience was comprised of 5th graders; elsewhere it was a family tree mess. And worse, parts of the book were misleading and apologistic. Wikipedia did a better job here.



2. This is an exceptionally interesting book because it details all the more obscure monarchies in Europe. I was fascinated by how these particular monarchies were formed, who ruled, what the political situation were and how the monarchies were dissolved.
   
   The information given about former rulers and who are still pretender(s)
   was very informative. I liked this book because it filled in a lot of the gaps that I have read briefly about. Now, the gaps have been filled in.
   A must for anyone who interested more obscure royal houses.



3. Reading other reviews of this book, I have discovered I
   don't know as much about royalty as I thought I did!
   Although I did know some of the information included, I
   certainly learnt more than I already knew! Many of the
   stories are very thrilling, others are very sad. But
   all are very real!
   
   Making the book even more real and interesting are
   the PHOTOGRAPHS....one photograph of each head of every
   royal house mentioned! These pictures add a genuineness
   and trueness to the text -- one realizes one is reading
   about REAL people, and not fairy-tales! I only wish that
   there were more photos in this book...but the tantalizing
   one for each royal house is very, very welcome, nonethe-
   less!
   
   The book contains a list of Monarchist Organizations,
   an extensive bibliography, and a full, (and long!) index.
   The paper is the best available, the print-style large
   enough to be readable, and very well spaced. This book
   a trade-paperback, and has the best paperback binding
   available, (with superiour glue, and a slightly rounded
   spine.) All that is missing is a hard cover, with
   gold engraving!
   
   Definitely a great book, both in content and present-
   ation!



4. I have been studying royalty and royal genealogy for more than twenty years and when I heard that this book was coming out, I wanted to purchase it. But instead I borrowed it from the library and I am so grateful that I did. My main complaint actually is that the book is too short and superficial.

   For each of the claimants addressed the author goes into a brief history of either that particular royal family or its throne. That is where its brevity and its superficiality are its downfall. The history of these families and their thrones are often complex, and despite the fact that I was already familiar with the material, it was often delivered in a manner that was confusing. In the process of trying to cram many years of royal history into small chapters a great deal of information is omitted that would clarify the events that are described within. For example, in many royal families there are often members of different generations and lines with the same name. The author dose not distinguish clearly whom they are referring to at times. For someone who does not have a strong grasp of the genealogical information that could be confusing.

   I also did not learn anything new about the claimants to the vacant thrones. I have had particular interest in the Hohenzollern family which used to occupy the thrones of Imperial Germany and Prussia. But once the history of the Prussian royal family was expounded, I learned nothing new about the claimant H.R.H. Prince Georg Friedrich of Prussia. In fact there was a great deal of information that was not included. First of all, it elaborates nowhere in the book that since the 1919 constitution of the Weimar Republic all former German royalties no longer legally obtain their titles. Their former titles have been regulated as a part of their surnames. In Germany the claimant is legally known as Georg Friedrich Prinz von Prussen. But despite the German law, much of it is ignored and the former titles of the German royals are used socially. Also, the book does not tell you that H.R.H Prince Georg Friedrich of Prussia, in his position as head of the Prussian royal family, has attended many state occasions within Germany with the full cooperation and support of the German Chancellor.

   The maps are indeed amateurish and the genealogy charts are simplistic. If you are someone who is new to the subject of royalty then this book could give you some basic information. But if you are a student of this subject who already has knowledge about formerly reigning monarchs then this book will be a disappointment.




5. Just finished Olga Opfell's ROYALTY WHO WAIT, and was not very impressed. The book does a good job providing a brief overview of the various European royal families, but that is about it.

   I purchased the book primarily for the historical context in which these families lived. It provided very limited historical context, little of which was useful if one is trying to better understand the life and times of these families.

   The book describes various kingdoms that no longer appear on modern maps, but the maps provided are very poor. They need to be overlaid against a map of modern Europe so as to put these kingdoms in context, but they were not.

   The organization of the book is also hard to understand. For example, the book lists two Royal Houses of France, and one Imperial House of France. The author made these discussions in three different chapters, but there was no continuity between the three chapters. More detail on how one family was deposed and how the next one was installed would have provided better continuity.

   The family trees provided could also use some additional detail. Ms. Opfell concentrated only on the Head of the Houses. To make them more useful, the trees should have included children, siblings, and parents. Again, additional detail would have been helpful to understand the various Royal houses and how they are related to other Royal houses. There were alot of marriages between a prince of one house and a princess of another house, and thus the various royal families are related - but it was impossible to understand this from the family trees provided.

   There was also alot of talk about the British Royal Family, and how some of the various deposed Houses are related. Ms. Opfell made briefs mentions that some houses were related to the British royal family, but provided no additional detail.

   The discussion on the Russian Royal Family seemed to contradict the conclusion of THE FLIGHT OF THE ROMANOVS by John Perry and Constantine Pleshakov. Both books agree that Romanov family is complex with various claims. It was interesting to note that the person supported by Olga Opfell was rejected by Perry and Pleshakov. The Perry and Pleshakov book is a much better book if one wants to understand the Romanovs. The detail is much greater and is thus a more satisfying read.

   Sorry to be so negative on ROYALTY WHO WAIT. It was just too shallow on too many fronts.

5 comments about Princess Masako: Prisoner of the Chrysanthemum Throne.

1. Neither my wife nor I could put this book down with its fascinating description of the challenges of the royal Japanese household, also known as the "Chrysanthemum Throne".
   
   It reads almost like another Princess Diana story, but hopefully with a far better ending. At any rate, the potential is there for Princess Masako to make more of her life and position- it is now down to the royal court to allow this.



2. Think of the word princess, and more often than not there's the image of a lovely young woman, dressed in a long flowing gown, usually with a pretty little crown or tiara on her head, and a smitten prince at her side. Rarely this romantic view ever goes on to reveal what happens when the celebrations are over and the reality of life settles in.
   
   While the monarchies of the western world have managed somewhat to balance the public's curiosity about royal life and the royal's own need for privacy, there is one monarchy that has remained firmly shuttered to prying eyes. This is the last Imperial house in the world, that of the Japanese. Australian journalist Ben Hills takes a look at one of the more tragic stories of royalty gone awry, and tells it with equal measures of compassion and anger.
   
   Princess Masako: Prisoner of the Chrysanthemum Throne tells the unusual story of a young woman, Masako Owada, the daughter of a diplomat who grew up in various cities around the world, and seemed to be heading for an outstanding career of her own. She had been educated at Harvard, spoke more than six languages and was a pretty, rather popular girl who was intent to be the very best. While she was certainly very different than the typical Japanese woman, no one suspected that her life would take a very dramatic turn.
   
   That would occur in 1993, when after a rather stilted courtship following a chance meeting, Crown Prince Naruhito was finally accepted by Masako and she married him in a tradition laiden ceremony in Tokyo. And suddenly, Masako found her life surrounded by protocol, religious duties and the overwhelming pressure to have a child -- specifically, a male child, something that hadn't happened in the Japanese Imperial family for more than forty years.
   
   Ben Hills delves rather far into the mystery surrounding this family, at least as far as a Western journalist can dig, given the interference that the Kunaicho, the Imperial Household Agency, a bureaucracy that controls every aspect of daily life for the Japanese royal family. Hills refers to these shadowy bureaucrats as The Men in Black, a rather sinister connotation. And as we see in the story, the pressure to conform, and not to sully the image that the Kunaicho want to project, is pretty potent.
   
   The ultimate tragedy of the story is Masako herself. It's sad to watch this vital young woman being crushed by a system that simply does not care about her, except as her role as royal broodmare and a pretty picture to wave in front of the masses. We watch her struggle to concieve a child -- and after nearly nine years of disappointment, and possibly through the use of In-Vitro Fertilization, finally gives birth to a daughter, Aiko. There is the pressure to remain silent and self-effacing, and the toll that takes on Masako's health. While rumours persist that she may be in the grip of major depression, and Hills presents convincing evidence that she is, nothing can be really certain if she is or not.
   
   Which gets right down to the criticism of this book. The Japanese publishers suddenly pulled out of various publication deals for a translation once it was announced that the Kunaicho did not approve of it, and censorship reared it's ugly little head. Hills has received death threats, and the response to the publication is detailed in the epilogue that is in the trade paperback edition. Indeed, anything that can be deemed detrimental to the Japanese government, morals, or the Imperial family is regularly censored, rewritten or whitewashed by those in power -- a situation that most Westerners won't, and don't, tolerate.
   
   And regularly Hills makes backhanded swipes at his subject. His description of the Japanese ceremonial and dress verges on the Oh, isn't that cute!, and at times his narrative goes as far as mockery. That's something that I tend to deplore in writing of any kind, showing a snobbish attitude that is downright rude. Too, he litters the story with Australian slang, which is unfamiliar to most American readers, and while there is some sympathy for Masako, there isn't much left over for anyone else caught up in the drama.
   
   Besides the story itself, there are two inserts of photos, one in black and white, the other in colour; as well as a genealogy chart, a map, a list of resources, a glossary of Japanese terms, and an index.
   
   While I was certainly very interested in this story, it comes across more as a gossipy expose rather than a serious study of Japanese court life. So much is left out that all that remains is a damning screed against a culture that seems to be firmly fixed in medieval traditions, liberally laced with restrictions and corruption. It's interesting, but surely, there must be something better than this out there on this topic.
   
   Three and a half stars, rounded up to four. Somewhat recommended, but only to those interested in modern Japanese life and celebrity.



3. It is quite obvious that this author has little knowledge of Japanese culture and he makes many snide comments belittling the sacredness of some traditional Japanese customs. This arrogant style is used throughout the book and is highly disrespectful of Japanese traditions.
   He scoffs at the ancient Japanese religion of Shinto of which the Imperial family follows aspects of, and undermines the Shinto symbolic rites that accompany marriage. For Japanese people, Shinto represents the religious part of Japan's unique history, and many still observe Shinto practices such as visting Shinto shrines to pray etc. The author dismisses all this as archaic and antiquated and presumes it will be laughed at by "modern people such as Masako". I think only the author himself laughs as most people are able to respect the religious traditions of others.
   The author further shows his ignorance through mistaking the Japanese symbol of the crane with the Western Stork. He ignorantly translates the very traditional Japanese wedding symbol of the crane, which symbolises "celebration" to be the stork which only in the West means "Birth" and therefore as pressure on Masako to concieve.
   He also extensively quotes Yukie Kudo, who is of rather dubious repute, and the author has obviously has not conducted a background check on this source.
   I think this is worth two stars, because at least the author has collected a lot of information into one source. But it is only worth two because of the condescending tone he uses throughout the book.
   This book was translated into Japanese, but 60% of the information was deemed unsuitable for publishing and edited out of the Japanese version therefore this book is only available in English. I think part of the reason for this book not making it into Japanese print is not only because of the Japanese wanting to protect the reputation of the Royal Family, but also because this book comes off as ignorant and therefore not completely truthful.



4. the very real story of a princess who is not living happily ever after, why do all royal families seem to attempt to strip princesses-in-training, expecting them to relinquish their creative minds, goals and imagination, all attributes that would enable them to serve a royal family, as well as a country to their highest potential...did they not learn anything from the tragedy of the loss of Princess Diana, who was finally beginning to breathe again...



5. First of all,as a Japanese,I will not sit here and watch as an affair of my country is terribly distorted and misunderstood.Let me start by pointing out the most important fact unbeknownst to Western people:The majority of the Japanese people DO NOT sympathize with Princess Masako any more,because we already know the truth all too well.
   
   Although we used to regard her in the early days as an efficient but "unfortunate" princess just as this book claims to be,now almost every Japanese inwardly thinks that she is just a loathesome,power-hungry upstart with gilded academic backgrounds and a seemingly remarkable diplomat's career who married into a highest and noblest family she never really belonged to.We also think that she should be deprived of her title and dismissed from the Imperial Family as soon as possible--not because she is a "modernized" woman who is alien to our society,but simply because she is not doing her duty at all.In fact,also unbeknownst to overseas media,she keeps on betraying the people's expectation for her to live up to her title by refusing to attend almost all the public functions out of faked sickness,seeking only fun,squandering the taxpayers'money without a reflection.
   
   In other words,all she ever does is to pretend that she's so "mentally ill" that she needs "a long rest" and to "shop till she drops" on the people's back as she goes on needless vacations.(For example,she immensely enjoyed her visit to Tokyo Disneyland with her husband and daughter by riding various attractions this March,and shortly after it was reported in the media,there appeared many weblog entries denouncing her act.)
   As you know,a real patient of depression or of any other mental illness is never able to go out not only to work,but also to play however hard he or she wants to.Even though there is yet no clear evidence that her illness is false,there is a revealing fact that the Princess has never undergone a thorough mental health check by a third-party doctor,nor has her doctor in charge officially held a press conference to announce the proper diagnosis to this day.With all the inappropriate behaviour of the Princess above in mind,we have come to a conclusion that she is an utterly ineligible Crown Princess,a Marie Antoinette-like tax-spender,a sheer disgrace to our nation and to "the Chrysanthemum Throne" in the true sense of the term.
   
   So the point here is as follows:She is no "prisoner" to be "liberated" at all;all we have here is one delinquent who would universally be dismissed should she be a princess of some Western country,and that Japanese traditions or "the way of the Kunaicho(the Imperial Household Agency)" has nothing to do with the so-called "unfairness" of the way she has been treated.We only think of her as we naturally do,and the Imperial Household Agency has been only doing its job.
   Suppose an agency of Royal or Imperial affairs did not try to admonish a troublemaker in the Family,or it did not try to defend their lord in the face of a malicious slander,then of what use would it be?Naturally,if it takes the above actions when needed, that would be NO "violation of human rights" or "violation of freedom of speech" as the author Ben Hills alleged regarding the treatment of Princess Masako and the Kunaicho's protest against his book.
   Therefore,all the author's accusations against the Kunaicho and the other members of the Imperial Family are groundless,because those accusations are made on an unsound premise that they should be blamed for their own unique "inhumanity" and "feudalism" that never really exist in this particular case.Needless to say,a tradition should never be judged from an insufficient research or a subjective,narrow-minded viewpoint like the author's,especially when the allegations are untrue.
   
   
   Finally,please DO NOT ever be deceived by this bogus story of some Imperial oppression of a well-intended,"liberated" individual which never took place,not only for our sake,but also for your own sake,because this is apparently a book of propaganda full of intentional errors designed to undermine Japan's and the Imperial Family's reputation.With Japan being a former Axis and a defeated nation of WWII,it is not uncommon for the rest of the world to demonize the Emperor or the Imperial system of Japan by deliberately depicting it as a thoroughly inhumane existence despite its now-pacifistic nature.So,all wise and conscientious readers out there, stay open-minded,for an ignorant,unsuspecting "good intention" misled by malice could lead to true unfairness such as racism and destruction of a culture that is different from your own.

1 comments about Prince Eddy: The King Britain Never Had.

1. This biography of Prince Albert Victor (Eddy) attempts to rehabilitate his image. There are three issues : (1) Was Prince Eddy Jack the Ripper? (2) Was he intellectually slow? (3) Was he involved in the Cleveland Street Scandal of 1889 and thus gay/bi?
   
   Prince Eddy makes a bad candidate for Jack the Ripper and that is easily disposed of - it might make for interesting reading, but not very possible.
   
   Having read a few books concerning this person, I would definately say that he was on the dumb side. Too many contemporaries paint him as being lazy and unconcentrated and not knowing the meaning of the word "to read." The author simply chooses not to believe this and to think that his seeming lack of intelligence came from having bad, uninspiring teachers and being immature (and some have also suggested it was because he was hard of hearing like his mother).
   
   As to the last issue, I also do not agree with the author. All other sources I've read do involve the Prince in the Cleveland Street scandal and state that there was a royal cover up. I won't go into the details except to state that this author discounts Lord Arthur Sommerset by stating that he and Prince Eddy barely knew each other and that Sommerset wound up only repeating the rumours his lawyer started to deflect interest off himself. This is conjecture in my opinion.
   
   One can agree or disagree with these issues - we will never know for sure - but I would suggest further reading on this subject if one is interested. Don't take this biography as your only source. Suggested reading: " The Cleveland Street Scandal " by Colin Simpson,Lewis Chester and David Leitch (there is another book on this subject called "The Cleveland Street Affair" by H. Montgomery Hyde), "Prince Eddy and the Homosexual Underworld" by Theo Aronson, "Clarence: Was He Jack the Ripper" by Michael Harrison, and a newer one "The Prince, His Tutor and the Ripper" by Deborah McDonald. Further background information can be gained from some of the biographies of Prince Eddy's parents, King Edward VII and Queen Alexandra, or of his brother, King George V. As far as the Jack the Ripper rumours about Prince Eddy, there are a number of other books on this subject.
   
   All in all, from reading this book I got the sense that Prince Eddy was probably just a very nice but spoiled, immature, shallow and not-very-intelligent person. And may I add heartless to that list since he was an very avid hunter. Having read "Prince Eddy: the King Britain Never Had" I find him less sympathetic than I previously did.