2 comments about Queen Elizabeth I Paper Doll (Paper Dolls).

1. It's a pretty paper doll book of the "Queen Elizabeth I" but still I saw other paper doll book who were more beautiful, this one lack of little details but it's still a nice book if you like to know what kind of wardrobe Queen Elizabeth was wearing and if you are interest in "Elizabeth I" like I do you will like it!



2. Tom Tierney has obviously done a good deal of research in preparation for this book. The costumes are well selected and accurately colored and depicted.
   I was disappointed on two scores. Firstly, the costumes aren't printed on card (only the doll is). Secondly, I think there should have been at least two dolls showing the queen at different stages of her life.
   It's also odd that dolls of Sir Walter Raleigh and the Earl of Essex are included, but Elizabeth's closest friend (and greatest love), Robert Dudley, wasn't.

2 comments about Going to Ireland: A Genealogical Researcher's Guide.

1. I just want to point out that the authors of the book are Sherry Irvine AND Nora M. Hickey. The book is erroneously listed as being written bu one person named "Nora Hickey Irvine". Maybe this can be corrected to make it easier to find.



2. This is a fantastic, thorough and (most importantly) readable guide to the daunting ask of attempting family history research in Ireland. It is obvious that the authors have plenty of experience with the subject, and offer some unexpected and well thought out advice. I found it very helpful.

5 comments about Saxons, Vikings, and Celts: The Genetic Roots of Britain and Ireland.

1. This is a fascinating subject but perhaps it is a bit complicated as I spent most of the time wanting to rewrite it in a way that would be easier to follow. Nevertheless, if you were interested in this subject, this is a must-have book. It will stay on my bookshelf and I am sure it will be referred to regularly.



2. 
   This is truly an engaging book about population genetics as regards
   to Britain and Ireland. Professor Bryan Sykes succeeds in explaining
   complicated scientific conclusions to help us understand humanity.
   
   Where have we come from? It is a must read for those of us who care!
   
   Dag Stomberg
   St. Andrews, Scotland



3. This was purchased as a gift for a person who has most of Brian Sykes books. The recipient was most pleased with receiving it.



4. This is a very strange book. Despite the title, there is very little actual genetics here, and the author goes so far as to repeatedly denigrate the very science he practices. While it's true that science relies on numbers and technology which may be confusing to people who aren't used to dealing with them, that its strength-- the evidence that his conclusions are valid depends on the numbers. So while I would agree that reducing the various genetic ancestors to numbers has a tendency to dehumanize them, it's those numbers that allow us to know something about them, and to therefore restore humanity to people whose lives have been lost to time.
   
   It's also worth noting that, presumably, someone wouldn't pick up a book with "genetics" in the title without expecting to encounter science. So the embarrassment that the author conveys every time he mentions anything remotely scientific seems misplaced. Indeed, I wished there had been more science!
   
   That said, the few genetics chapters (4-5 of 18 of them, though the one on England is quite short) are interesting. Tracing mtDNA and Y-chromosome markers does provide an important piece of evidence in interpreting things like migrations and other kinds of culture contact in the past. However, it's hard to evaluate his conclusions when there is so little data included. In particular, it is really unconscionable, and almost unethical, to not have a single reference included in the book. Sykes has clearly used the work of many, many other scholars, including archaeologists, historians, and other scientists, and these scholars have the right to have their research acknowledged. But there are virtually no clues for the reader where he got 99% of the information. I would imagine that Sykes would be upset if someone did the same to his work.
   
   The rest of the book seems to be little more than padding, to allow him to get a book out of the few chapters that actually talk about genetics. I suppose you could argue that the history of the study of race or blood groups is tangentially relevant to a book on genetics, but taking pages to talk about the history of the Royal Irish Academy, the archaeological sites of Newgrange and Skara Brae, or the details of the events leading up to the Battle of Hastings seems pointless. These topics are all quite interesting in their own right (I'm an archaeologist, and I know that the sites are important), but they contributed nothing relevant to the discussion. Knowing when people arrived in Ireland is necessary, but a description of the site at Mount Sandel isn't. The necessary prehistory and history could have been dealt with in a few pages, and hardly required a chapter for each part of "the Isles."
   
   So in the end, I was disappointed in the book overall. If you're looking for information on the genetic background of Britain and Ireland, there are a few places here and there that summarize what may well be important contributions to the study of the past in both places. But there isn't enough detailed information in the book to be useful by itself, and there are no references so the reader can follow up with more technical publications. In the end, I was sorry I bought the book-- I could have got what I wanted from it by borrowing it from the library and xeroxing the few relevant pages that actually talk about the genetics of ancient people in Britain and Ireland.



5. In the 19th century, there was much preposterous nonsence blathered about in Europe by nationalistic professors of history. Utilizing some largely mythological sources of information, they tried in vain to create an argument for the presumed superiority of their own particular nationalities.
   
   On the lighter side, this led to some rather buffoonish proclamations of "cultural-supremacy". On the darker side, this led to Naziism.
   
   Modern DNA studies have just barely scratched the surface of a much more fascinating truth. In a region such as Europe, the prospect of an individual, or an ethnicity, being "racially pure" is actually quite absurd. Consider the vast movements of people all over the continent, over two milennia. Dr. Sykes gives us yet another fascinating study of the DNA role in anthropology. This time, the focus is on the British Isles.
   
   Whether you have any heritage from that area or not, this book will open your eyes to consider the great Epic of which your ancestors played a part. YOU are the result! YOU have a role in continuing the story! Your descendants will thank you!

3 comments about The House of Mitford.

1. Mr. and Ms. Guinness' massive biographical study of their family is tremendously interesting to any devoted reader of the Mitfords. However, their attempts to rehabilitate the legacy of unrepentant fascists Diana (Guinesses' mother--so it's an understandable lapse) and Unity are nearly comical in their reach. They go to great lengths to discredit those who've criticized Unity and Diana's reprehensible involvement in and enthusiasm for Hitler and his British minions, including of course Diana's husband, Mosley; rather than adequately contextualize Diana and Unit's fervor, these attempts serve only to make themselves appear as familial apologists.

   As scholars, the father-and-daughter biographers are lacking in appropriate perspective and historical context; however, the "insider" information they impart makes the book a veritable treasure chest of Mitfordiana.




2. Really a fascinating study on one of the British Upper Class's most contriversial families. It really is the limit though, how the author tries to excuse the support of some of the sister's for the Third Reich, granted this was the feeling of most of the Upper Class at the time, they loved the idea that some people, namely themselves, were naturally superior to the rable. You see this in such films as Gosford Park and Remains of the Day. Having said that, this book is very good, it really lets you in to the lives of the British Aristocracy of this era. These woman are to the manor born and never let anyone forget it. They chose different paths, but I really don't think deep down they are all that different, as an American this is all so foreign, but fascinating non the less, though it makes me appreciate the Revolution.



3. Prompt shipping; book arrived in pristine condition. Will do business again and, by the way, the book is fascinating.

4 comments about The Knight in History.

1. Since I have an interest in the Middle Ages (900AD-1500AD) I was recommended this book by a history professor, and I wasn't dissapointed. This is an interesting analysis of the Knights in Medieval Society not only of England and France, but Europe in general. Easy to read, analytical and comprehensive this explains the initiation, rituals, valor and hardship that the Knight had to endour everyday. The author(s) have written many outstanding books of the middle ages and this is a welcome addition to the series they have written. A MUST have book for anyone studying the middle ages or the casual reader who picks it up in a store or library.



2. Puts the development of the mounted knight in its correct historical perspective. It is particularly important to realize that the our image of the knight (fully clothed in plate armor) never fought a battle. However, the book is no competition for Barbara Tuckman's A Distant Mirror: The Calamitous Fourteenth Century. Ever ready to jump on my horse and ride into the melee:

   Gies points out that the long bow could fire much faster than the crossbow, but fails to draw any conclusions. The big lessons of Agincourt and Cr‚cy were that mobility is very important. Tuckman's opinion is that from Cr‚cy onward (1346), the mounted knight was in decline.

   "...the campaign of the knights was a model of efficiency. Its [the First Crusade's] five armies...arrived in Asia Minor intact and in fighting trim..." She doesn't mention that they also arrived richer and morally uplifted, having looted and hacked their way across Europe.

   She describes the battle of Verneuil (p.175) as a "second Agincourt", then fails to elaborate. The first one didn't get much press, either.

   Several of the original members of the Order of the Garter (p.177) are described as "Du Guesclin's foes". What does that add?

   She whines about Shakespeare apparently parodying the name of the redoubtable English knight, one John Fastlof, described elsewhere as "cruel and vengeful", and whose "scorched earth" exploits she recounts in some detail, by naming his "corpulent and cowardly buffoon" Sir John Falstaff. I don't even know where to begin on this one! Fastlof should be so lucky as to be redeemed by playing with his name. Falstaff is one of the greatest imaginary creations of all time; Fastlof slogged around western France for thirty years or so bent on pillage, terror and murder.

   How about some diagrams of these various pieces of armor?

   A remarkably cool assessment of barbaric behavior, this. Only five lines from the end of the book does she lose it and say "Knights fought for profit and killed without mercy, robbed
   those whom they should have defended, and violated those whom they should have respected."




3. It would be pretty hard to find a better concise history of European knighthood than this book by Frances Gies. Her research is very thorough and she understands the Medieval world well. At the same time, she brings her subjects alive and never lets her erudition intrude to interrupt the flow of the story. In little more than 200 pages of well-written text she traces the whole arc of the knight's history, from Charlemagne to the end of the Hundred Years War -- and beyond into the long twilight of knighthood down to the Victorian era.
   
   After tracing the origins of knighthood she gives a vivid description of the First Crusade. Then she turns to the troubadours and the development of the literature of knighthood, as well as its impact on the knights themselves. Next she takes up the career of a very notable knight of the second half of the 12th century, William Marshal in an account filled with details that reveal his character and that of knighthood in his time. The story of the remaining Crusades is organized around an account of the crusading orders, particularly the Knights Templar. Next comes a vivid mini-bio of one of the most remarkable characters of history, the mid-14th century French knight and commander Bertrand Du Guesclin. Then the story of Sir John Fastolf, a major English commander of the 15th century (only very tenuously related to Shakespeare's Falstaff) nicely illustrates the transition between the world of knightly warfare and that of armies on the modern pattern. A final chapter traces the lingering influence of knighthood in early modern Europe.
   
   There are many well-chosen black-and-white illustrations, extensive source notes, and a good bibliography.
   
   The book addresses the knight's armor and fighting techniques, but only briefly. Combats and battles, too, are treated largely in schematic fashion. The focus is on the knight's character, his views of himself and his world, and his place in his society. There is also a clear summary of the overall development of the patterns of Medieval warfare.
   
   Although there is some mention of knighthood elsewhere, the book concentrates very strongly on England and France; treatments of Southern and Central Europe of comparable quality would be very welcome. Gies does not have an ideological slant or a theory to defend -- she neither "debunks" nor extolls. Since the book's writing, two decades ago, further evidence has been discovered which naturally alters some details, but on the whole the book holds up very well.



4. Another gem of Medieval studies by Professor Gies!
   Within you will find an account of Western European Knighthood from the perspective of the Anglo-French tradition.
   The Knight is described and defined in terms of the mounted warrior-elite he was, his training, his role in society, in the Chivalric ideal presented by Troubadors,...and the grim reality in warfare.
   Professor Gies uses three notable knights in history as a sample of how they varied in character, in deed, and in living up to the Code of Chivalry: William Marshall and John Fastolf of England, and Bertrand du Guesclin of France.

5 comments about A History of the Habsburg Empire, 1526-1918.

1. Robert Kann was a Viennese Professor of History who taught at several American universities during his career. He was a recognized authority in his field, and this volume is one of the very best general histories of the Habsburg Monarchy currently in print. However, it was written in Professor Kann's second language, English; so the reading is choppy at times. In addition, the subject matter is extremely complex; so if you are expecting a page-turner, this may not be for you. Overall, if you want to know about the last 400 years of the Habsburgs, there are few better sources.



2. There is a reason why this book is out-of-print. It's as dry a book as I've ever read and is much more a critique on the Hapsburg Empire and less of a historical overview. The title implies that Kann will introduce the reader to the Central Europeon Power and detail much of the family's power over Europe but that's far from the case. Instead, Kann goes so in depth to pick apart the Hapsburg's, that impossible to keep track of where he's going. Although the chapters have a chronological order to them, Kann mentions events that happened during a five-hundred year span in the first three chapters and aimlessly wanders so much through the text, he should be arrested for reckless writing. Some writers can pull off writing like this and make it into a masterpiece (Son of the Morning Star by Evan S. Connell comes to mind), Kann simply makes it into a field of landmines in which the reader unexpectedly will step onto a trap and utter "Whaaat?" and have to skip back to try and figure out if Kann has a connection to the previous paragrapgh or if he's just writing instantaneous thoughts. Kann's rambling book reminds me of Paul Thomas Anderson movies - it's made purely to pleasure the writer while the rest of the world has its hands in the air wondering "What did I just read/ watch?"



3. This text is not a good history text. Any good text book will make the subject come alive, this book kills it. It is, however, extremely informative, if you can get through the introduction without dieing. NOT recommended for anyone who is not a post grad! (and even then, only if required for a class).



4. I am a history major at Indiana State University. In my spring term, I used the book (as one of my sources) for my research paper on the Great Siege of Malta of 1565. I will agree that this particular book is not the greatest reading in the world, but generally historians write books for historians. Also, I will agree with other reviewers that the book's title is misleading because it does not focus on the 16th century compared to others. The book was used in my research to help explain the rivilary between Charles V of Spain (the Holy Roman Emperor) and Francis I (King of France). The cause of the rivals were not because of the grudge with Charles V winning the election for the Holy Roman Emperor or Francis I imprisonment in 1525, but Francis saw the danger of the Habsburg Empire surrounding France.

   I will recommend this book for people needing information on the Habsburgs for research and to get it at your library or buy an used copy.




5. I was a History major in college. Though fascinated by the subject matter, I kept thinking that this was a complex topic made more difficult than need be. It makes one pine for the likes of B.Tuchmann or W. Bruce Lincoln or L.S. Stavrianos. If I can find a more readable work, I will buy it........otherwise, back to the slog!

3 comments about The Himmler Brothers: A German Family History.

1. Katrin has access to many family documents that were not published before, it is nice to see the family and their history, and have a look on how that typical German Family got so far in the ranks of the Nazi regime. I love studying about the Second War, and this was one of the best I've read. Loved it.



2. I'm interested in anything that sheds light on what happened in the thirties and forties to allow the Nazi party to come to power. This book gives excellent insight into the condition of the times and the background of a man whose name causes many to shiver with horror. This simple story is engaging and you won't forget easily forget it. Lots to think about...



3. This is an excellent book, a must read for anyone interested in Heinrich Himmler. I agree with David Cesarani of the Literary Review, who said this is "A courageous work"--Many thanks to Katrin Himmler for writing this.

2 comments about Scottish Clan and Family Names: Their Arms, Origins and Tartans.

1. This is an invaluble resource for anyone looking for information relating to the Scottish Clans. It includes colour pictures of coats of arms and tartans for each as well as information relating to their history and origins. The book is also liberally illustrated with excellent colour photographs of places of significance to the names under consideration. The introuction includes first rate information regarding coats of arms in Scotland, tartans, the Clan system, Scottish royalty and so on. Slightly dissappointing is the brevity of the histories for some of the Clans, for example Macrae only merits seventy words.



2. This book is an encyclopedia of Scottish Clans and family names. After a very informative introduction, which gives some interesting facts on tartan, and a great thumbnail history of Scotland, it launches into a list of the Scottish Names. A short history is given of the family, and a coat of arms is shown (in-color, of course) along with a colorful picture of the clan's tartan. Along the way, the reader is treated to many large and attractive color pictures from Scotland.
   
   Overall, I found this to be a great book, and quite a resource for anyone of Scottish descent (such as myself). I loved this book and highly recommend it to all my fellow Scots!

2 comments about Peter the Great (Critical Issues in History Ser).

1. Superbly written by Paul Bushkovitch (Professor of History, Yale University), Peter The Great is a terse, compact, yet artfully presented biography of one of Russia's greatest and most influential rulers. Portraying the culture and problems of Russia at the end of the seventeenth century, and examining the events of Peter's reign and its legacy to history, Peter The Great is a informed, informative, and thoroughly absorbing study which is very highly recommended for students of Russian History and non-specialist general readers with an appreciation of the art and science of biography.



2. I found this book to be disjointed and difficult to read. The sentences were awkward, and I detected several grammatical errors throughout the book that could potentially confuse the reader (they confused me!) The first half of the book centered on Russian politics and aristocracy; Peter didn't play much of a role until the latter part of the text. Even then, the chronology was confusing. Daughters that had never been mentioned suddenly got married; Peter died in one chapter, while his military strategy was described in the next, along with somewhat random details of his death that had been previously left out. Perhaps it's my lack of familiarity with Russian history, but I had great difficulty telling who was who and what happened when within the biography. In addition, it was rather boring in the beginning. However, the book did do a good job of providing the reader with a mostly unbiased view of Peter and the Russia he ruled, as well as an understanding of the political machinations of his day. All in all, I wouldn't recommend it for general readers.

5 comments about Rome from the Ground Up.

1. I read many of the comments by the other reviews, and I was surprised by some of the comments, particularly those of the review from Amsterdam. Please do not read his review thinking that the Blue Guide to Rome surpasses this book. It is simply misleading and not true. The Blue Guide to Rome is opinionated and poorly written, whereas McGregor's book is more impartial and fair in its assessment of Rome.
   
   In my edition, there are no errors that were mentioned by another reviewer. What this book lacks are clearer maps that could be consulted as you read. Flipping to the back of the book will only leave the reader confused.
   
   I wouldn't classify this work as a travel guide, although it certainly could be used as one. The author's task here was to communicate to the reader the many facets of Rome. Rome is a conglomeration of different architectures, different pasts that has been influenced by countless people. McGregor attempts to weave it all together into a coherent "story"...a "potrait" if you will. He attempts to build Rome, "from the ground up". Think of Rome like a cake...if you were to cut it and then pull away a slice, you would see those layers. Rome is a city built on itself, and I think that this is what the title conveys.
   
   My fingers and toes are not enough to count the number of times that I have been to Rome, and I have spent many months and years. I know the city well. When I read the book, I had not been there in almost two years. As I turned the pages of McGregor's book, I almost felt myself there. And that, I feel, is the author's greatest triumph -- providing a framework for further reading, study or travel.



2. Writer trying to find a public
   When I bought Rome from the ground up I had no idea what to expect, thinking it was perhaps something along the line of Krautheimers Profile of a city (which by the way is mentioned in the bibliograpy of the book), showing the many layers of which Rome exists and the city's long and complicated history. Just to illustrate what I mean: if you are standing in the Forum and looking at the eight surviving columns of the temple of Saturn, it would be just as easy to write ten pages about what you are seeing, as ten pages about what you are not seeing. Doing both would be quite a job. Krautheimer describes the period from 312 till 1308, skipping republic and large part of imperial Rome, and has, in my first edition, 360 very large, double columned and small lettered pages.
   But Rome from the ground up is not that sort of book. Thank God, some readers will say. You' ll find that out just by taking it in your hands. The book has 320 small pages with lots of margin, small pictures, and no maps. It is organised in 8 chronological chapters, beginning with Tiber Island and Forum Boarium, than the Forum, next the imperial part of the city and so on, ending in the 19th century really. The idea of the structure is that in this way you get an chronological overview of the city, of which different parts were indeed built in different and succeeding periods. Every chapter could be a walk, or part of it. A small problem is that you would, in each part of the city, be able to point out things which do'nt fit in, and that now and then you would have to cover quite some distance to find everything that does. In his chapter on the Baroque Mc Gregor passes from the Via del Quirinale, by way of the Palazzo Barberini to the Villa Borghese. I admit that there is a lot of Baroque to be seen, but I sincerely hope he took a bus to do so (number 10, if I am not mistaken). Mc Gregor knows Rome a lot better than I do, I presume, while behind the things he writes looms a lot more knowledge which he doesn't use. And of course, it always is a pleasure to read someone who obviously loves Rome very much. And yes, he writes well, and yes, it must have been fun to write the book too. Yet, Rome from the ground up is really nothing more than a travelguide, without the facilities that normally accompany such a book. I find the title a bit of a gimmick and also the only pretentious part of the book. What is meant, is that a chronological presentation of Rome is from the ground up.
   I guess the problem with Rome from the ground up is who its reader is supposed to be. Although the author himself suggest that while "the book stands on its own as a portrait of the city, its format and organisation also makes Rome from the ground up a useful guide to travelers", I don 't think I agree, on both points that is. As a guide it is not of much use, and you would be better off buying a Blue Guide (still the best). As a book to read at home it is only of use if you know Rome well. But then, if you know Rome well, this is no longer the sort of book you read. The long descriptions of streets, palazzi, museums etc. which you don't see, can be very fatiguing. As a travel guide it doesn't work. The author seems to have guessed the problems readers could have with his book. "Maps can be had free everywhere in Rome", he says, "and updating guides all the time has become useless in these modern internet-times." I find that rather silly. When you are walking through Rome, internet is not of much use. Having a map and a guide at the same time is in practice laborious. On the other hand I agree that you will always need a good map. But it is nice if text and maps are integrated in a sensible way, as long as you are walking, especially since Rome is not New York. I usually take several guides with me. At the same time Rome from the ground up, although well written, is also somewhat superficial, even while it has some nice personal touches. But if you for instance would really visit the musea which are described in the book, the texts there wouldn't be of much use. You might even have problems finding the entrance of the place you try to visit, or not find it at all. Ostia isn't there, the catacombs aren't, and 20th century EUR, the part of the city started under Mussolini, and finished after the second world war, gets no treatment, which I find a pity. And it wouldn't be fair to complain about that to the author. A guide doesn't have to deliver an ongoing story and can structure its text in an easier way. And still the Blue Guide needs more than 600 pages. In short, while using Rome from the ground up as a guide would not be comfortable, reading it at home is not much use too. Bit of a waste really.



3. I felt this was something of a mixed bag. Parts of it were illuminating and fresh (the geological overview; the argument that Rome is not a palimpsest of overlaid cities but a mosaic of successive cities lying mostly side-by-side), other parts less so (the ho-hum chapter on the Roman Forum).
   
   There are, however, some major historical howlers. Two will suffice: McGregor states that the senate was staffed by patricians and was all-powerful, when in fact patricians were a minority in the senate and it had no legal power whatsoever. It was certainly influential, but it was hardly all-powerful. Elsewhere, McGregor states that Vespasian (69-79) succeeded Titus (79-81), when in fact it was the opposite, as the dates in brackets make clear. Silly errors in fact like this undermine my trust in those parts of the book covering areas I am less familiar with.
   
   All in all, this book is worth having, but not a patch on Aicher's *Rome Alive* or Claridge's *Rome; An Archaeological Guide* for the curious traveller.



4. This book will not be for everyone, but it was for me. I walked (and ran) all over Rome for a week a few months ago with the aid of a useful, but necessarily terse, guidebook. So I know the city superficially, but not very well. McGregor's treatise filled many gaps for me nicely. I wanted to know more about the architecture and history of Rome, and this book did the job. McGregor is strong on his architecture and passable on his history. I did find myself skimming some of the finer architectural points, but I put the blame on my impatience more than on the author, who writes well. I think the book is better read after, rather than before or during a trip to Rome. I found myself turning often to the maps in the back which are coordinated with the text.



5. Of the several guidebooks I have walked around Rome with on several visits, this is the most insightful. The locations, buildings, objets d'art on which the author chooses to comment are placed in the context of historical forces -- political, social, and economic. I came away with a much better understanding of the significance of what I saw then ever before in Rome.
   
   However, there are several drawbacks. First, it is sometimes difficult to follow the text while walking. The text is keyed to the occasional picture, but not to the maps at the end of the book, so you may frequently not know just where you are and where you are to go next. Second, some of the walks are ordered in a sensible sequence; some make no sense at all, jumping back and forth over kilometer-long gaps. Third, the book tells you nothing about places you pass as you proceed from one location the author chose to the next. Finally, the book is printed on a glossy paper which makes it rather heavy, and somewhat unpleasant to carry.
   
   My recommendation: Read this book in your hotel room, before or after your walk, but walk with a different guidebook. (My favorite for walking in Rome is still the Michelin Green Guide.)