5 comments about The Lonely Empress: Elizabeth of Austria.

1. I enjoyed the book. It was well written and obviously well researched.
   I like the way it had info from personal writtings from the time, also.
   
   I enjoyed the gallery of pictures included in the text, as well.
   
   I will probably read the book at least one more time.



2. to me she should never married franz joseph i,she was to much of a free spirit.austria court was to old fashion for a soul like hers.she had the mother -in law from hell didn't help.



3. I was dreading that this book would be like all other's in that it would portray Elizabeth as a poor little spoiled, mis-understood rich girl. It didn't and I found that very refreshing.
   My only critism of this book is that there is only one occasion when the author translated the french, german, russian, etc. quotes that were used and I found that mildly annoying as I don't speak or read any of those languages.
   Overall a very good book!



4. I really enjoyed this book, there was only a minor matter which rather annoyed me. I wonder why nobody seems to have taken the trouble of checking the proper spelling of all those European names?
   As a native speaker of both German and Hungarian, I was quite
   distracted by reading Gödollo instead of Gödöllõ, to name just one of many blunders.
   Crenneville sometimes becomes Grenneville, Marie Vetsera turns into a Mary, Maria Theresia is always Maria Theresa, robbed of an i, the Ballhausplatz is shortened into Ballplatz, and while Hapsburg is not exactly wrong, it was apparently never used officially - and you don't often come across it even in Austria.
   Perhaps in future editions someone might provide corrections? I think the book is worth it.



5. Top of Form
   
   
   I was somewhat reluctant to first start reading The Lonely Empress because, from the some of the biographies I've read (but certainly not all!), they tend to start out interesting but then become dull and boring. It usually takes a talented author to write a biography on a boring royal. But even an unskilled author would have no trouble about sounding fascinating if their subject matter was Elisabeth of Austria.
   
   Born a mere daughter of a duke in Bavaria, Elisabeth had a fairytale (ish) romance. The emperor of Austria, Francis Joseph, was already engaged to Elisabeth's sister Helen when he fell in love with her. All of a sudden, to everyone's surprise, the Emperor started to rant about the grace and beauty of this younger sister, much to the dismay of his mother, the archduchess Sophie, who thought that Helen would become the perfect empress.
   
   Elisabeth was still a child when she became engaged to the Emperor. Suddenly, she wasn't allowed to run wild, like she had been when she was younger. Elisabeth had been known to skip her lessons and go out riding for hours. She inherited her father's peculiarity and was known to be her happiest when surrounded by less than royal people. Her father, Duke Max, was renowned for his strangeness. He was known to travel the Bavarian countryside to escape his duties and delighted in circuses. The poor Duchess Ludovica, Elisabeth's mother, must have had a terrible time with her daughter and equally childish husband. Because of her strangeness and wild country ways, the Viennese court look down upon Elisabeth.
   
   What makes this book more interesting is how the author has portrayed Elisabeth. She doesn't try to make her into a selfish, spoiled woman yet she doesn't spend the whole book describing her flawless beauty. Elisabeth seems to be a difficult topic to write about. As many people who have met the Empress say about her throughout the book, "She could be quite charming when she wanted to be. Yet she could also become cold and haughty."
   
   Elisabeth has you admiring her at times, like when she tries to help the Hungarian people regain their Constitution, and at other times hating her, the way she treated her husband and children, the woman whose husband spent fortunes building her three homes around Europe and who still wasn't grateful or satisfied. This woman traveled to countries far away so she could escape her duties as an Empress and her husband.
   
   But one feels for Elisabeth at how much misfortune she had dealt with in her life. She seems to be a caged bird, she seems to have those natures that cannot be trapped or caged. She needed wide spaces so she can spread her wings. The author portrayed Elisabeth excellently and made the book an enjoyable read.

5 comments about Elizabeth and Mary: Cousins, Rivals, Queens.

1. I received prompt and reliable service.... my book arrived so quickly and in perfect condition! I'm grateful!



2. For anyone looking for a straight forward biography of these two fascinating queens, Jane Dunn's excellent book is not for you. This is an in-depth, sociological, and psychological study of the two rival queens and the events that shaped their lives. Critical reviewers have accused Dunn of unfair bias toward Elizabeth, but, given the extraordinary achievements of Elizabeth, how can one not be? Mary Stewart was a very romantic, tragic, almost mythical figure, but she played the traditional female role of a queen who needed a king to rule with her; surprising considering she was the daughter of the formidable Marie de Guise. And her appalling choices of husbands #2 and #3 caused her life to spin out of control. Her poor decisions regarding the treason plot against Elizabeth displayed emotion over reason, and ultimately brought about her downfall. Elizabeth, on the other hand, was magnificent. In an era when women were commonly accepted as inferior to men, she not only overcame huge sociological prejudices to become the most powerful ruler of her era, but ultimately did it well, bringing Elizabethan England to great prosperity. The contrast between the two women, Elizabeth, struggling to be equal to a king in a totally male dominated world and Mary, relying on her femininity to achieve her desires, could not be more marked. The issue of succession, with Elizabeth's choice to remain a "Virgin Queen," (in name only, I have to say, I disagree with Dunn's viewpoint that she and Dudley were "just friends") in order to maintain her control, and thus leaving England without an heir, is complex and warranted more discussion in the book. But really, after all the historical sturm und drang does anyone else see the great irony that Mary's son James became king of the British Isles anyway, ascending to both the English and Scottish throne?



3. For anyone looking for a straight forward biography of these two fascinating queens, Jane Dunn's excellent book is not for you. This is an in-depth, sociological, and psychological study of the two rival queens and the events that shaped their lives. Critical reviewers have accused Dunn of unfair bias toward Elizabeth, but, given the extraordinary achievements of Elizabeth, how can one not be? Mary Stewart was a very romantic, tragic, almost mythical figure, but she played the traditional female role of a queen who needed a king to rule with her; surprising considering she was the daughter of the formidable Marie de Guise. And her appalling choices of husbands #2 and #3 caused her life to spin out of control. Her poor decisions regarding the treason plot against Elizabeth displayed emotion over reason, and ultimately brought about her downfall. Elizabeth, on the other hand, was magnificent. In an era when women were commonly accepted as inferior to men, she not only overcame huge sociological prejudices to become the most powerful ruler of her era, but ultimately did it well, bringing Elizabethan England to great prosperity. The contrast between the two women, Elizabeth, struggling to be equal to a king in a totally male dominated world and Mary, relying on her femininity to achieve her desires, could not be more marked. The issue of succession, with Elizabeth's choice to remain a "Virgin Queen," (in name only, I have to say, I disagree with Dunn's viewpoint that she and Dudley were "just friends") in order to maintain her control, and thus leaving England without an heir, is complex and warranted more discussion in the book. But really, after all the historical sturm und drang does anyone else see the great irony that Mary's son James became king of the British Isles anyway, ascending to both the English and Scottish throne?



4. Jane Dunn, Elizabeth and Mary: Cousins, Rivals, Queens - I would not advise any avid Mary Stewart admirers (or feminists) to purchase this book. Jane Dunn in my mind (and from the extensive text I have read) does Mary Stewart a great injustice with her blatant Elizabethan bias. She over looks the obvious motives of Queen Elizabeth for Mary's murder, instead painting Elizabeth as a strong woman in a man's world who had no option but conspire against, imprison and eventually have her cousin put to death.
   
   I was looking forward to an in-depth read, a psychological & sociological perspective of these two female power brokers... but instead found the book to view Mary in a very sexist fashion (surprising, as the author is female!). Jane Dunn's `Mary bashing' stems around her intolerance of Mary expressing and ruling with her female traits intact... Mary rules from the heart and is often merciful, and led by her intelligence and her emotions.
   
   In contrast to this, Elizabeth kills off the feminine aspects of herself, and rules with a cold, calculating and ruthless vision. She is the archetype that we 21st century women still struggle against...we do not want to have to behave like men to function at a effective level in this world, we want to be respected for our feminine qualities of caring, understanding and tolerance; something this world sadly lacks. Mary had these qualities and used them to great effect (i.e. allowing the blend of the two dominant religions in her land to co-exist). Mary had her faults as we all do but she accepted others and there faults and tried to negotiate for compromise and tolerance.
   
   Mary could have made a real difference in her time if it were for two factors.
   
   1. If she had the chance to grow and learn free of imprisonment.
   2. If she had had the support of her so called `sister' Elizabeth!!! Something that Elizabeth would never give...in fact Elizabeth was wriggled with the most terrible of negative female expression `Jealousy'... because she had suppressed her femininity, she became a twisted version of a woman, one who could not allow a real female Queen to share the same island...so much so she murdered her!
   Mary was wronged enough in her lifetime and Jane Dunn should be ashamed that she finds it necessary to slander her character and trivialize her even in death.



5. First, I would like to review the book itself, and then address some of its critics.
   
   Two of history's most famous queens, one for her unexpected and remarkable greatness, the other for her inexplicably poor judgment and bad luck. But was their famous rivalry inevitable? Was Elizabeth always the popular, talented, dominant one while Mary remained in her shadow? Jane Dunn asks these questions, and I was surprised - and pleased - by some of her answers.
   
   The first part of the book is essentially a point-by-point comparison of the two queens, detailing their very different youths and explaining how they would influence the women in later years. Essentially, Mary had a huge sense of entitlement, was overconfident in her own power and security, and was a much more 'traditional' woman - and Queen - of her day. Elizabeth, whose childhood was punctuated by dramatic changes of fortune, had a much more acute sense of how tenuous her position was, and how much she depended on the good will of her people to maintain power.
   
   Dunn does beat the Mary-as-charming-but-spoiled and Bess-as-brilliant-control-freak comparison into us a bit, but it is a good way of looking at the very different natures of these two women. Her book isn't a full biography of either queen; rather it's a look at the intersection between them - their relationship with each other, their competition, rivalry, and common causes. As such it's a fascinating look at a unique time in European history, the so-called "Age of Queens".
   Posterity-wise, Mary got the short end of the stick. History will always remember her as Elizabeth's paler shadow, a major annoyance and minor queen who had no one but herself to blame for her tragic end. Although Dunn does occasionally (perhaps unavoidably) slip into Mary-bashing and Bess-worship, on the whole she does a good job pointing out that that wasn't always the case - and, had a few things gone differently, we would paint a very different portrait of the two cousins. Her Mary and Elizabeth are fully human - flaws, quirks, charms, and all. It's the best way to explain the convoluted relationship between the two, and it provides a lot of useful character insight into all other aspects of these Queens as well. (I do wish Dunn had gone further into the possibility that Mary was bipolar. It's a fascinating hypothesis, and it would explain a lot.)
   
   Mary's end - which also serves as the book's - is too rushed; twenty years are covered in a handful of pages and the account of the execution itself offers nothing new. But until that point, I thoroughly enjoyed this provocative and inspiring portrait of two very different women whom circumstances thrust into such fierce competition.
   
   Now: Some reviewers seem to feel that Dunn was somehow "unfair" to Mary and that her comparison of the two queens is misogynist. I admit to being completely baffled by this point of view. It appears to stem from the argument that somehow Mary was a better "feminist" queen than Elizabeth, I suppose because Elizabeth "betrayed the sisterhood" by having Mary executed.
   
   Further, Dunn's critics seem to argue that Mary was a better "feminine" role model than Elizabeth was, apparently because she ruled through emotion rather than reason. They complain that Elizabeth is too "cold" and "calculating" to be a good example of a female ruler, while waxing rhapsodic about Mary's "mercy" and "gentleness". Let me be blunt: this is the sort of idiotic, feel-good, p.c. claptrap that has set the cause of working women back 50 years. Yes, there is something to be said for women's differing management styles; you will get no argument from me that in today's world, women should not have to emulate uber-masculinity to succeed. But - newsflash! - this was the 16th century. Not only were the roles of men and women completely different - and thus incomparable - than they are today, have you ever actually tried to get anything done with the kind of dithering, vapid leadership exemplified by Mary and her ilk?
   
   Attempting to repaint Dunn's dual biography as some sort of feminist management manifesto does a disservice, both to the author and her subjects. We should admire both Elizabeth and Mary for who they were and what they did, while admitting their flaws and shortcomings. But this is not the 1500s, and trying to appropriate their story to make a point about women today is grossly misrepresentative, self-centered, and intellectually careless. If you want to adopt antiquated delusions about women in the workplace, try reading Forbes online - not "Elizabeth and Mary".

5 comments about Company Commander: The Classic Infantry Memoir of World War II.

1. Company Commander: The Classic Infantry Memoir of World War II by Charles B. MacDonald. I highly recommend Company Commander: The Classic Infantry Memoir of World War II by Charles B. MacDonald. At just 21 years of age, Captain Charles B. MacDonald first commanded I Company, 3 Battalion 23rd Infantry, 2nd Infantry Division from October 1944 to January 1945 and later G Company, 2 Battalion 23rd Infantry, 2nd Infantry Division from March to May 1945. This memoir was written in 1947 when recollections were still sharp. It resulted in a very detailed account of what it was like to take command of a line infantry company and lead it into battle. The book gives us template for writing a personal military memoir.
   
   It is by far the finest memoir of any junior officer in World War II. Charles MacDonald does a great job of keeping his focus on his own experiences. He does not speculate or waste my time by giving conjecture on the big picture. We only have first hand information from the events of his personal participation. He sticks to what life was like for a junior officer in command of an infantry company, sleepless, hungry, dirty, stressful, and very dangerous. He takes us from the Siegfried Line in the Ardennes, through the Battle of the Bulge, and to the end of the war in the Czechoslovakia.
   
   This book is a must-read for all army officers who seek to command at company-level and it is informative for military historians as well. It is still required reading at West Point and on the company level officer (second lieutenant, first lieutenant, and captain) recommended reading list by the U.S. Army today. Upon this book's publication in 1947, Charles B. MacDonald was invited to join the U.S. Army Center of Military History as a civilian historian, the start of a career during which he wrote three of the official histories of World War II in Europe and supervised the preparation of others. The book is simply the best. Read and reviewed by Jimmie A. Kepler in June 2006.



2. I loved this book. It depicted the toil and drudgery of the WWII combat infantryman. There are no frills in this story, just the day to day experience of being on the spearhead of the Allied push into Germany. It portrayed the feelings and emotions of the men, in a very accurate light. I'm sure that there are people that will read this book and feel that they haven't been entertained. However, this book is not about entertainment. It is about the reality of the men that fought so unselfishly in the Ardennes Forest, and suffered intense hunger, cold (this was one of the coldest winters ever recorded in Europe), anxiety and fears. It also portrays the humor that existed amoung these brothers in arms. It is a great companion to Mac's other history, "A Time for Trumpets." Great, GREAT book! Thanks Mac!



3. An excellent book about the leadership of an army officer during the
   crucial battles that ended WWII in Europe. As an untested officer thrown
   into the Battle of the Bulge he performed magnificently. His mettle was sorly tested,and his humanity shone through. A very,very good read



4. Charles B. MacDonald wrote what it was like for a 21year old to command two infantry companies in WW2. He took notes along the way (I have a page of his notes that survived). They cover the capture of Hombressen in Germany. I also have the original typewriter on which he typed the manuscript of his book. I have trvelled the route he took in 1944/45 and found his descriptions of the various lovcations to be exceedingly accurate in every detail.
   
   Will Cavanagh



5. This book is probably the finest memoir of any junior officer in WW2. Unlike so many war memoirs, MacDonald keeps his focus firmly on his own experiences, and doesn't waste his readers time by speculating on `the big picture' or describing incidents which he didn't personally take part in. He sticks to what life was like for a junior officer in command of an infantry company - disorientating, stressful and very dangerous.
   
   On the strength of this book MacDonald was selected to work on the famous Official History of the US Army in World War Two, and produced two of the best regarded volumes in that definitive series.

5 comments about Bloody Mary.

1. Many people blame Mary for burning Protestants. The Spanish Inquisition was much worse. I mean, MUCH worse than what Mary did. Religion was a matter of life and death in the 16th century. Mary was abandoned by her father in pursuit of a male child. Mary's life was in serious danger for not recognizing his acts. I believe she relied on her ministers more than was nessesary. Mary did not have the heart of a saint when Elizabeth was born. Anne Bolyen was crying out for Mary's execution when she didn't recognize Elizabeth as princess.



2. Mary Tudor was the daughter of the infamous Henry VIII and his Spanish wife Katharine of Aragon (the daughter of Ferdinand and the indomitable bellicose Isabella of Spain.)
   Mary was a Roman Catholic who succeeded to the throne following the early death of her young half-brother Edward VI
   the son of Henry and Jane Seymour.Mary was religious, smart,
   tough and infertile! She wed Phillip II of Spain arousing hatred in England against her wedlock to a Roman Catholic Spaniard. Only a year after Mary's death in 1587 the Spanish Armada sailed against England and their new queen Eliabeth I. She was Mary's
   half-sister the daughter of the bewitiching and beheaded Anne
   Boleyn.
   Mary was a good woman who lived in perilous times. During Henry's affair and wedlock to Anne Boleyn her life was in danger.
   She and her mother Katherine were exiled from court; the cynosure of several plots against Henry and the hope of Catholicism in Great Britain.
   Mary's reign was short and bloody. During her monarchy hundreds of Protestants died at the stake or were beheaded for their beliefs. Mary was incapable of producing a child and heir to the throne. Her half-sister Elizabeth and Mary had a lifelong rivalry with Elizabeth emerging as the stronger and more successful of the siblings. During Eliabethan rule religious toleration was advanced.
   Erickson is an expert on Tudor England and she writes like a
   novelist making the convoluted tale of plots, murder, executions, dynastic jousting and descriptions of 16th century
   England and European politics palatable for modern readers.
   Erickson illuminates a dark,violent, cruel and frightening time when thosands died for their beliefs in fire, dungeon and
   by sword.
   This is a well researched, well written and well illustrated book on Mary Tudor England's first real reigning queen. The book is very detailed and is long. If you stick with it to the end you wil never forget the sad tale of Mary and the sad age in which she lived and ruled.



3. I found this book extremely interesting and absorbing to the point where I did not want to put it down. I would recommend it to anyone who, like me, wanted to find out what the foundations were of Mary Tudor's policies and also what she was really like as a person. The detail is so great that one learns even what her voice sounded like. It is as though Mary were alive again and not a figure from the 16th century. As some other reviewers have noted here somewhat critically, the book spends a lot of time discussing Mary's life before her accession to the throne. To me, this is to its' credit as an understanding of the forces, personalities and occurrences in Mary's early life are ESSENTIAL to answering questions about Mary's policies and actions as queen. I enjoyed Carolly's writing style. She is able to convey the complex interweaving of people and events in Mary's time in a manner that is easy to understand and follow along. Highly recommended, as is "Great Harry" also written by Carolly which I am reading now.



4. After years of failed pregnancies and infant deaths, a daughter was born to Henry III and Katherine of England.She was the first female child in England's history to be given the throne as a birthright.But it would be a life of strife and emotional turmoil for Mary Tudor. After being declared a bastard for the sake of her father's notorious romances and being prosecuted for her religion, Mary gradually makes her way past all the hardships only to face a new set of challenges.

   I thought this book was smart, albeit rather dull. I would reccommend this book only to readers who find this subject interesting and who have a large vocabulary. This book won't pull you in, you have to walk. In comparision to other books, this book is really quite eloquent and shows the intensity of Mary's struggle to keep her principles, yet to remain loyal to her father.




5. Queen Mary's life has been a craddle of loneliness, failure, hopelessness, tumult, lost hopes and sorrow... And the book represents it all in a very true historical context... However, the writer seems to have lost her objectivity during the process of research... The person she portrays is not the hated and incompetent ruler the history proved her to be... Instead, Erickson's Bloody Mary is rather a misunderstood "good leader" which is not in compliance with the reality...

5 comments about Elizabeth: The Struggle for the Throne (P.S.).

1. her mother was murder by her father ,she was called the whore's [...].you would think she didn't have a chance to becom queen.but elizabeth amazing strenght of character and keeping her head got her through until she finally reach the hieght of queen of england.she survive to become england greatest queen,that turn her country world power.



2. This is a nice introduction to Elizabeth. It is easy to read, moves along nicely, interesting and enjoyable to read. Nice color plates, as well.



3. This is one of the most interesting books about Elizabeth I in years. Her actual reign in fairly well documented, but why did she approach issues the way she did (e.g., religious tolerance, possible marriage, etc.)? David Starkey, who frankly confesses that she fascinates him, has found in many diverse sources the threads that made up the adult woman who was queen. His analysis of the events and people who shaped her character and personality is gripping reading.
   
   This book also is an excellent foil to Antonia Fraser's classic biograph of Mary Stuart, Elizabeth's contemporary and Catholic rival for the throne of England (starting with the attempts of her de Guise uncles, when she was a young widow, to teach her sufficient statecraft to rule Scotland). The contrast between the two women, from their personalities to their mindsets to their approaches to governance, is startling to say the least.



4. Elizabeth the struggle for the throne reads like an engrossing suspense novel. Starkey is the perfect literary tour guide for this eloquent biography about a woman's ascension to power. Starkey begins his tale with Elizabeth's birth, giving the reader a grand introduction to Anne Boleyn and Henry VIII. Henry would play an intricate part in shaping Elizabeth's strong willed personality.
   Elizabeth, witnessing Henry's no nonsense approach to courtly conducted would later administer many of his methods since she inherited many of his distinguishing qualities. Of course, opinions very on whether this was a asset or a liability. Many historians would later refer to the Elizabethan era as the golden-age of England.
   What will infatuate most readers is Starkey's exploration and treatment of Mary Tudor (who is my favorite historical figure). His picturesque approach to Mary is delightful. Most English historical literature perceives Mary Tudor as an evil vindictive individual. This is far from the truth. Mary was an indecisive, timid ruler who was unloved. Her husband Prince Philip of Spain along with the Catholic Church, Bishop Gardiner, Cardinal Pole, and Lord William Paget were the ones pulling all the strings behind the throne. Also, Emperor Charles V played a large part in Mary's decision making.
   Insofar as Mary's relationship with Elizabeth was concerned, all was not well, especially when Henry VIII disowned Mary making her a bastard after he annulled his marriage to Catherine of Aragon. This manouevre would later cause envious feeling to proliferate toward Elizabeth, furthermore, religion became a factor since Mary was a loyalist to the Catholic Church.
   This book is chalked full of surprises: the executions of Lady Jane Grey and John Dudley (the Duke of Norththumberland), Sir Thomas Wyatt's Revolt, the Protestant Reformations, Elizabeth's salacious liaison with Thomas Seymour and many more exciting developments that one can't help but mused over. In a nutshell, this was one of the most enjoyable reads I ever had. This book is a pleasure to behold.



5. Excellently written biography. What makes it more attractive is the fact that the author leaves lots of dates behind, a practice rather unusual for historic books. Instead he focuses on the causes that paved the way for her throne. David Starkey boosts the art of bio writing to a literature level. His sentences are so beautifully crafted that you reread some passages anew, e.g. " ...the Spanish King unleashed his ambassador". His descriptions of the old royal castle decors make you feel you're there. His descriptions of royal food make your mouth watering. His descriptions of Elizabeth make you wish you were born at those times. Having read this book I fell in love with the title hero to such an extent that I hung a big replica of her portrait in my room.
   Miros / Poland

5 comments about Queen of Fashion: What Marie Antoinette Wore to the Revolution.

1. I found this book to be a fantastic read! Out of the many, this is the book I chose to read first when I became interested in Marie. Caroline Weber did a beautiful job destroying (if you will) old stereotypes that are associated with this woman.
   One reviewer stated," Not sure whether it wants to be a biography or fashion."
   I respectfully disagree. I'm not sure you can have one without the other. I'm very pleased that I chose this book to be my first. It made me want to know more about this courageous woman as well as the fashion of the 18th century, the French Revolution, and all who were involved.
   Just recently I pick this book up from my shelf, dusted it off and decided to read it again, only to realize that there were things that I had either dismissed or forgotten, and am now studying them further.
   
   All in all, a fascinating and fast paced bitter sweet telling of how fashion and Marie Antoinette are intricately entwined.
   A must read for those who are just starting to learn about her as well as the seasoned expert.



2. Beautiful, informative, interesting. The famous queen comes to life, as well as her notorious wardrobe. Her ability to express her feelings through fashion and how it eventually lead to her downfall really makes you think about how much of a victim she was, especially from the jealous and arrogant courtiers of France. A must read for any Marie Antoinette fanatic or someone who just wants to know who she was.



3. Wonderful new viewpoint on the age old subject of Marie Antonette. She never really said "Let them eat cake..." but she did a lot of other interesting things!



4. I bought this upon reading the recommendations. I've read some of the other books mentioned and loved them. This one, not so much. For me, it seemed somewhat like a text book. I didn't finish it.



5. Webber explains as she only can why Marie Antoinette and her wardrobe continue to fascinate us in the 21st century.

5 comments about Chronicle of the Roman Emperors: The Reign-By-Reign Record of the Rulers of Imperial Rome (Chronicle).

1. 
   For anyone with even a passing interest in Roman history this book is an invaluable source of knowledge about the Roman Emperor's. Personally it helps to set the scene for me even if the book is a work of fiction if I can pin point the period of Roman history that is being written about and knowing what emperor was reigning in Rome and in what years is a sure fire way of pin-pointing the period in which the book is written.
   
   Of course the book is so much more than a time scale of Roman history, there is also information regarding what wars if any were fought during a particular emperor's reign and what Roman building were attributable to any given emperor. The book covers the succession of 80 emperors, with biographical portraits of the 56 most notable ones. Names that leap out from the pages of the history books, Julius Caesar, Hadrian, Nero, all names to conjure with.
   
   There are contemporary judgements made by writers of the time including Suetonius and Tacitus and these are balanced by character assessments made in the light of modern research. This is a book that is well worth having, not only for its reference capabilities but also it is a good read in its own right.



2. Replete with timelines, maps, sidebars, and photographs, this is a wonderful resource. Whether you're watching a DVD of "I, Claudius" or reading Gibbon, it's a highly useful reference book where you can get a quick read on any emperor. Often, I'll pull it down from the shelf to research a particular emperor, then find myself still reading it an hour later.
   
   What I like best about it are the photographed busts of the emperors which along with the lively writing really bring the Roman rulers to life. They also allow one to trace the change in Roman art from the idealized classicism of Augustus to the grim realism of the mid 3rd century's portrait of Philip the Arab when the Empire was falling apart to the stolid and blank cartoonlike portrait of Constantine the Great in the 4th century when the Empire had been restored, but had become Christian and more medieval.
   
   A real gem, this book is highly recommended for fans of Roman history.



3. Excellent book, very few errors. Good source of information, very nice colorfull pictures and sketches. Worth the cost.



4. I bought a second one for a friend a week after the first copy arrived. Great, concise book.



5. This is a useful reference that places the lives of the Roman Emperors in chronological order. The detail is useful but not onerous and it is quite an easy read.

5 comments about Diana: Princess of Wales.

1. As a fan of Diana's, I enjoyed seeing a more casual side of Diana. The picutres show a side of the princess that reaffirm how beautiful she was in all settings, not just formal. The pictures however are a little soft in the focus arena.



2. Five months before Princess Diana's death in August, 1997 she sat for what was to be her last photo session with the Peruvian photographer Mario Testino. The results for the most part are quite wonderful. Often shot in natural light, sometimes smiling naturally-- a difficult task for any photographer to capture-- Diana, relaxed and unadorned (she wears no jewelry and is barefoot and seated sometimes on an all-white sofa), seems to be having a very good time and could almost be the exquisitely beautiful woman next door. Having said that, I noticed that in a shot or two she has an unflattering nose. Unlike too many Brits, however, she was blessed with beautiful teeth-- and a smile that would melt concrete.
   
   In an interview with the photographer that accompanies these photos that were shot for a spread in "Vanity Fair" that sold out on the newsstands he reminisces about the day he shot these photographs and the good time that both he and his subject had doing them, commenting on what he calls real laughter, laughter from the inside, that he was able to elicit-- it is obvious in the photographs-- from Diana. In a touching note, he mentions that these photographs became the favorites of Diana's boys.
   
   My two favorites-- at least today as they might change the next time I look at this beautifully printed book by Taschen-- are numbers 33 (Diana is clutching her hands at her ankles) and 54 with 45 (the pensive Diana) as a close third. Other favorites are 42, 43, 9, 10, 36, 10 and 23, where she is most beautiful.
   
   Diana is wearing some of the 79 dresses she auctioned off at Christie's for charity. If you are interested, information about the clothes is included at the back of the book. But this isn't about the clothes. It is about Diana; she is certainly no mannequin here.
   
   Sixty or so photographs, both in black and white and in color, are included in this book; they are reproduced and numbered in the back. Fraydon Carter wrote a foreword; Meredith Etherington-Smith, an introduction.
   
   While these photographs take on a special significance because they are the last formal ones of Princess Diana before her tragic death, had she lived, she would of course have been photographed dozens and dozens of times. I cannot imagine, however, that these by Testino would not have been seen as some of the most beautiful, most compelling and would have held their own with whatever photographs came after them.



3. Stunning pictures, just a beautiful piece of art that will leave you speechless. Princess Diana was beautiful inside and out, there's nothing left to say.



4. AWFUL! Only a few photos, repeated several times, most were out of focus. Would never have purchased if I could have looked inside. I guess that's why it was wrapped in plastic in a local bookstore.



5. Although you can buy plenty of other books with photos of Diana, Testino photographed her like no one else. She looks casual, relaxed and happy in these photos. Diana does not look at all "glammed" up with excessive makeup and hair styling. The way you would see her at home, inspite of the gowns she wears in these photos. Testino captured a Diana that was probably only seen by family and friends, and in these shots he shared that Diana with the rest of the world.

5 comments about The First Elizabeth.

1. Erickson gets one star for a lively and readable writing style. She's great at engaging the reader.
   
   I'd give her zero for accurate substance.
   
   If you examine her body of work, you find that she's a Mary Tudor apologist and that bias informs every line of this "biography" of Elizabeth as she revels in gossip and ignores accomplishments.
   
   Erickson should stick to novels, because that's what she's writing here. She misrepresents facts and her editorial slant colours every line. Nearly any other biography would give you a better idea of what really went on.



2. Carolly Erickson has done her homework on the Tudors of England and in her 1984 biography of Queen Elizabeth (1533-1603)
   does a fine biographical profile.
   Elizabeth's mother Anne Boleyn died at the stake failing to produce a male heir for the cruel HENRY VIII. Her only chld was Elizabeth who ruled Britain from 1558 to her death in 1603.
   Elizabeth had a difficult and dangerous life dealing with such
   enemies as:
   1. The might of Spain and France.
   2. Various Catholic groups wanting to assasinate the Protestant leaning queen.
   3. Personal enemies include her half-sister Queen Bloody Mary
   who at times had Elizabeth imprisoned in the tower. She burned
   Protestants at the stake in her short reign from 1546-1553 following the death of her half-brother Edward VI (son of Henry and Jane Seymour). Another enemy was Mary Queen of Scots who Elizabeth had executed in 1587.
   4. Elizabeth was very intelligent, crafty and skilled in survival in a dangerous time of civil war, various rebellions and complicated international political and religious warfare.
   Erickson is good at writing Elizabeth's story focusing on her many love affairs most notably with the Earl of Leicester.
   Elizabeth's reign is well told in this biography which is a good place for a burgeoning interest in Tudor History to bloom.
   The book is one of the finest I have read on Elizabeth. I can
   recommend it to anyone who enjoys a good story well told about one of the great female rulers in history!



3. I tend to read mostly fiction, but for some reason earlier this year I decided to foray into biographies. This book gives you a peek into Elizabethan life, gives you insight into Elizabeth I's personality, and you learn quite a lot of history, scandals, and rumours-of-the-day along the way.

   This book reads more like a biographical novel than a pure biography, which, considering the subject matter is about 500-years old, probably means some license was taken with dialogue, etc., however, I think the style makes the subject infinitely more memorable.




4. The major difference in "The First Elizabeth" by Carolly Erickson and "The Life of Elizabeth I" by Alison Weir is stylistic. Both women are thoroughly versed in the life of their royal subject, and obviously enthusiastic about her as well.

   Erickson's style, however, leans more toward novelistic narrative. She seems to be sitting with you, telling you a story about this great monarch with her infamous "virgin" status, her political adeptness, her fearsome temper, her penchant for swearing oaths that made one's blood freeze, and her ability to command deep love and adoration from her subjects.

   This style is especially appealing for those for whom this biography is their first foray into Tudor biography. It introduces the major players in the queen's life thoroughly so that one is well acquainted with Robert Dudley, Cecil and Walsingham, as well as Mary I and the many other colorful characters that populated the Queen's life. You also get a real feel for the terror and uncertainty of Elizabeth's youth, when she lived in fear of death at the hands of her unstable, Catholic sister.

   Erickson adroitly paints a stunning (and sometimes shocking) picture of life at court - and what a life it must have been. Living at the various castles Elizabeth moved between (they changed castles regularly so that the one previously used could be cleaned and "aired out") was far from our 21st century idea of luxury, and when you read about the trials and travails inherent in the Queen's annual "progresses", you'll never gripe about rush-hour traffic again!

   Again, I would recommend this to anyone starting out to read about Elizabeth I, and to the reader already familiar with the life of the greatest queen of England. Those of the latter group might find that the author falls in love a bit too much with her subject (and who wouldn't, as this lady is one of the most fascinating people in history). In some places towards the end the flow of the narrative (going from event to event) isn't quite as seamless as it could be (you feel as though you are jumping from one to the other without a lead-in sentence/paragraph) but never mind that. Erickson does a marvelous job of painting a portrait of the life and times of Elizabeth and it's a most pleasurable learning experience and enjoyable read.

   After finishing "Elizabeth I", the reader would do well to continue on with Weir's biography mentioned above. I started with Weir and am now committed to reading Erickson's extensive series on the Tudors, including "Great Harry", "Mistress Anne", etc.




5. A great book about a Queen whose story reads more like "The Godfather" than you'd guess.

   Elizabeth I, thrust onto the throne while her country was still in the midst of it's centuries-long emergence from Roman rule, turned England into Great Britain through a heady mixture of guile, guts, and British steel(How's that for rhetoric?).

   It's a great book, as are most of Erickson's titles.

5 comments about Queen Victoria: A Personal History.

1. As a self described Anglophile, I have read countless royal biographies and histories, mainly focusing on the Tudor and Stuart eras. I decided to dive into Queen Victoria with this book and it did not disappoint!
   
   Although a long book, Hibbert traces the life of Victoria in an engrossing and interesting way that keeps you turning the pages. Victoria comes to life in all of her capriciousness. Her mercurial personality, painted so vividly through the observations of others and through her own diary entries, makes you alternatively detest her, think her mad, then go to loving or pitying her.
   
   The only thing that prevents this from being a five star review is that the organization of the book sometimes threw me off. While generally a chronological account of Victoria's life, some chapters, such as one covering the Price of Wales, leap ahead. It is not too jarring, but sometimes irritating.
   
   Overall, a wonderful read that gives real insight into a woman whose myth and spectre looms so large. My true rating is 4.5 stars.



2. i guess growing up knowing you will rule england make you believe the world around you was there to please you.growing up her mother keep her away from other kids,turning into a grown up without being a child.when she finally broke away she was queen.then she married albert and nine kids later .after albert death she was in mourning that she wanting all around to share .she in later year became a very selfcenter woman who couldn't see other's point of view.



3. I really enjoyed the book, but it gets so wordy, that it has literally put my daughters to sleep. My only wish is that he would have relied less on letting us know who people were (titles, positions, etc.) and more on Victoria's personality and life. I did enjoy her love affair with her husband!



4. Once again, Christopher Hibbert has spun a wonderful biography that makes his subject come alive before you're eyes, and at times to allow the reader's imagination into the very shoes of Queen Victoria!



5. Christopher Hibbert has the marvelous ability to make historical subjects come alive. He succeeds again in this biography of Queen Victoria,
   
   This book is titled a Personal History, and that's really the focus. He turns the venerable monarch into a human being, with hopes, fears, heartaches, heartbreaks, a sense of humor, mood swings, petulance and even (gasp!) desires.
   
   Victoria's image (at least to Americans) is of the stuffy old monarch, unsmiling, and always dressed in black. Hibbert portrays quite a different picture - of a young woman who loved parties, dancing, and the affection of men. He also makes clear Victoria's physical passion for her husband, Albert. This is evident in the passage where, after giving birth to eight children, she is advised by her doctor not to have anymore. Her response was "You mean I can't have any more fun in bed?" Not what we expect from a Victorian!
   
   The portrait of a post-Albert Victoria is of a woman devasted by the death of her lover. Clearly the modern picture of Victoria comes from this stage of her life. However, this image is based on incorrect assumptions. Where we assume the stolid, frumpy queen arises from her belief in Victorian morals, in this book the picture is of a woman who lost her most precious soulmate, and whose last 40 years were a struggle against loneliness and depression, while bearing the heavy responsibility of being the most powerful monarch in the world.
   
   The book also vividly portrays the numerous characters in this remarkable woman's life, including Lord Liverpool, the Duke of Wellington, Disraeli, and Kaiser Wilhelm.
   
   Recommended to anyone with an interest in English history.