This book completes the three book series, the Warlord Chronicles, by Bernard Cornwell. The stories are narrated by Derfel, a Christian monk, recalling the Arthurian legend, in which he was a participant.

If this is your introduction to this series, you would be well advised to begin with 'The Winter King.'

Among other things, this is a story of the conflict between a fledgling Christianity in Britain, and the old religion, whose priests were the Druids. It is also the author's version of the legend of King Arthur.

Bernard Cornwell has studied his subject, like Jack White, Mary Stewart and John Steinbeck. It amazes me how these people's fertile imaginations have ended with such different stories, given the same basic, if sparse, research facts.

It was a real pleasure to read Cornwell's novels in this series, and I'm sorry to see the end. Of course, he's written a couple of dozen other books, including the entire series of Sharpe's adventures, so all is not lost.

Joseph Pierre,
Author of THE ROAD TO DAMASCUS: Our Journey Through Eternity

If you are ready to read this book, though, then you should know all this. You should have already read the first two books. If you liked them, this one will not let you down. These books will bring Arthur and his companions alive again in the imagination of anyone who reads them.

The book chronicles the search for George Mallory and Andrew Irvine by the 1999 Mallory & Irvine Research Expedition. It juxtaposes the dramatic turn of events during their expedition with those of the 1924 British Everest Expedition which saw Mallory and Irvine attempt a summit climb, only to disappear into the mists of Everest, never to be seen again. It makes for a spell binding narrative, as past events are woven through present day ones.

The 1999 Mallory & Irvine Research Expedition was a meticulously well prepared and well organized venture. With its discovery of George Leigh Mallory's body, it enjoyed much success. The research and analysis that went into its ultimate, well thought out conclusions were comprehensive and fascinating, with its strong reliance upon forensics and deductive reasoning. Their reconstruction of Mallory's and Irvine's last climb is riveting. Unfortunately, the ultimate question still remains unanswered. Did they or did they not reach the summit of Mount Everest back in 1924?

The beautiful photographs of the personal effects found upon Mallory's person underscore a certain poignancy about the discovery of Mallory's well preserved body. The photographs which memorialize this discovery are amazingly lovely and tasteful, considering its subject matter, and hauntingly illustrate the finality with which Everest may deal with mountaineers, no matter how accomplished.

The photographs also highlight how ill equipped for the harsh climatic conditions were the early Everest expeditions. It is amazing, and a credit to those early expeditioners' courage and fortitude, in braving such an inhospitable and harsh terrain with the inadequate clothing and equipment available to them at the time. Mallory and Irvine were certainly intrepid explorers!

This book is a fitting tribute to two men who sought to make a historic summit and, in their attempt, would forever be a part of Everest.

This is a beautifully produced book. The paper is heavy and glossy, the photographs are fantastic and the makeup is flawless.

The content I would have to say is uneven. The electrifying discovery of Mallory's body is well written and in good taste. The trials and tribulations of getting financial support are well done. The duplicity of the good and gray BBC is an eye-opener. No punches are pulled about the various expedition team's strengths and weaknesses. However, it shows the faults of a book written by committee and the continuity is sometimes poor. I felt the pages and pages devoted to oxygen tanks were, to put it kindly, far too many.

The 1999 expedition uncovered a treasure lode of documents and artifacts about Mallory and Irvine's last day on earth and can be considered a total success. The big question: Did Mallory and Irvine summit Mr. Everest some 29 years before Sir Edmund Hillary? Maybe. To this reader the most compelling evidence was what was not found on Mr. Mallory's body: the picture of his wife that he always carried in his billfold. He had said he was going to leave her picture on the summit of Everest. Maybe he did.

I just can't seem to describe how good this book is. Really, that good it is. The characters are alive and the tension they are forced to endure will grip you and won't let go of you. I'm not making this up, just when you thought things couldn't go any worse Frost twists the story into something darker. And I believe it is rightly justified to say this book introduces a criminal with such an evil and complex mind that he easily rivals the likes of Hannibal Lecter.

The last chapters are some of the best I've read in modern horror fiction, introducing us to the real goals of the secret society and the results of their doings. They read like something Arthur Machen could have wrote and I have no doubt the society was lightly inspired on the members of the Golden Dawn. (Of which Arthur Machen was a member)

So why then four instead of five stars? Well, the last line of the book (Yes, I mean it, the LAST line of the whole book) is a bit of a cliché.

Highly recommended.

As I struggled through Chaucer while in college, I've not yet gotten up the courage to read the original middle-English version of this work (my apologies to all of the English professors out there). Therefore, it is good that Mr. Keith Baines was kind enough to translate the middle-English into a more accessible lexicon for me & people like me. Baines reveals the myths and legends in all their glory, and I can't help but believe that he expresses them in at least some measure of their middle-English power.

This is an ABSOLUTE must-read for all persons who have even a remote interest in the Arthurian fantasy. Although the book is abridged from the original, it nonetheless contains all of the most famous characters and episodes from the legend.

Within these pages, one will encounter Arthur, Gwynevere, Sir Launcelot, Sir Galahad, Sir Modred, Sir Bors, Sir Percivale, Merlin and all the rest. The purity of Galahad is contrasted with the sinful nature & temporary madness of Launcelot. The memorable allegory of Sir Percivale's duel with Satan, as well as so many other knightly adventures, are all recorded for us here.

This book is highly recommended to all fans of medieval times, medieval literature, the history of Great Britain and the idea of Chivalry. The codes of honor, the rules of fair play and the heroic ideals conceived by the knights of the middle-ages have followed us down thru the centuries and are still as relevant to the best of us today as they were 500-1500 years ago. The story ends with one of the most memorable Latin phrases in literary history:

HIC IACET ARTHURUS, REX QUONDAM REXQUE FUTURUS

[Here lies King Arthur, the once and future King]

Now for the details, open up the book!

On the other hand, the actual recipes (at least the ones I've tried so far, which are quite a few) seem to work, even from the first time you try them. I mention this because I've heard & read all sorts of comments about whether N.Lawson's recipes work or not. Maybe this is because Nigella Lawson has become a celebrity in England--imagine: she writes well, cooks well, & to top all that, she's beautiful too! How can you beat that? This is why 2 camps seem to have emerged--a "pro-Nigella" camp & an "anti-Nigella" camp!! This is all ridiculous, of course. The point is that Nigella Lawson has written, at least in my opinion, one of the best cookbooks of recent years. Down to earth, with good & long-winded explanations, written in a direct, friendly style, with such love for good food that even reading the book makes you want to rush to the kitchen & start creating a feast. "How to eat" is about comfort-eating at its best, & for me at least, it serves as comfort-reading too...

Winners: spiced prunes with barbados cream; Anna's chickpea and pasta soup; beef braised in beer; cod with parma ham over lentils; pasta carbonara; cinnamon-hot rack of lamb... All of these I make on a regular basis, and they always turn out amazingly well.

Plus, it's a great read. What more could you want!

On the other hand, the actual recipes (at least the ones I've tried so far, which are quite a few) seem to work, even from the first time you try them. I mention this because I've heard & read all sorts of comments about whether N.Lawson's recipes work or not. Maybe this is because Nigella Lawson has become a celebrity in England--imagine: she writes well, cooks well, & to top all that, she's beautiful too! How can you beat that? This is why 2 camps seem to have emerged--a "pro-Nigella" camp & an "anti-Nigella" camp!! This is all ridiculous, of course. The point is that Nigella Lawson has written, at least in my opinion, one of the best cookbooks of recent years. Down to earth, with good & long-winded explanations, written in a direct, friendly style, with such love for good food that even reading the book makes you want to rush to the kitchen & start creating a feast. "How to eat" is about comfort-eating at its best, & for me at least, it serves as comfort-reading too...

"If the net potential of lead I is positive, it is plotted in a positive direction along the lead I axis. Conversely, if this potential is negative, it is plotted in the negative direction."

Numerous passages like the one above make you feel frustrated and annoyed. Time is a valuable thing to waste; I would suggest getting a more condensed and better organized book on physiology.

I want to address some of the criticisms of this book. One reviewer claims that it is missing trivia that professors love like the so called ENaC channels. Well, it does mention these channels on pg 304 as the special channels through which sodium diffuses into P-cells. Any medical student who has studied pharmacology or medicine knows that these are the channels that are inhibited by potassium sparing diuretics (amiloride and triamterine). Till recently they were called amiloride inhibitible sodium channels. Since they are found on other epithelial cells, they are now called ENaCs (epithelial sodium channels). There may be many more such trivial points you may find missing in Guyton, but if it is physiology you want to learn (rather than get into trivial pursuit) this is the book for you. No book is perfect and no book can contain EVERY single detail. Even Ganong, while being a very good book is lacking in the explanation of many fundamental concepts which it states but does not explain, for example it just tells you that high protein diets raise the GFR, but only Guyton tells you why. The chapters on cells and immunity etc could use updating, but these are topics covered in great detail in other courses--cell bio, molecular bio, biochem, immunology.

Another criticism is about lack of diagrams. I found that the diagrams in the book were of a functional nature--good enough to explain the concepts being discussed. If it is comic books you are looking for, buy an atlas.

Thirdly, the so called verbiosity. Yes, the explanations are detailed, but many first time readers would find that a positive point. It is hardly physiology for dummies.

In conclusion, although all the above criticisms are justified to an extent, if you want to learn the hows and whys of physiology, Guyton still remains a good book that covers pretty much everything a med student needs to know for physiology for courses and the usmle.

The world they find is every bit as captivating as Michael Crichton's Jurassic Park, and the danger is every bit as exhilarating. The characters are more engaging, and the story contains a good deal of humor as the four strong personalities clash a number of times on a number of levels.

There are no velociraptors to menace the adventurers, who have become hopelessly marooned, but a tribe of ape men serves quite well to provide the danger. It is a pleasure to have the English language used so well in describing the adventures of the four.

"The Lost World" is obviously the inspiration for Crichton's "Jurassic Park." Crichton may have modernized the story, but he certainly didn't improve it. Unfortunately, "The Lost World" reflects the ethnic insensitivity and "classism" of the Victorian Era, but if you can overlook that flaw, you will thoroughly enjoy the story.

The reality is that, if you're reading speed doesn't reach 2,000 words-per-minute, and if you don't have the desire to go to college for that doctorate in Philosophy, you're probably not going to be able to cover all of the greatest Western thinkers in their deserved depth.

This is where Bertrand Russell comes in. Bertrand, an early twentieth century thinker, educated at Cambridge, does the incredible: he provides a comprehensive history of Western thought, that is not only easy to understand, but amazingly hard to put down. Even if you're not usually interested in philosophy, Russell's lively account will pull you in. It's filled with history, humor, ancedotes and fascinating lives, but, most of all, it's filled with great ideas that will cringe your brow and make you ponder.

The History is easy to get through. It's written in quick, easy-to-digest chapters, usually about 10-15 pages in length. Want to know about Aristotle's Ethics? Read the chapter. Want to know about Christianity During the First Four Centuries? About Mohammedan Culture and Philosophy? About the Italian Renaissance? About Machiavelli, Descartes, Locke, Hume, Rousseau, Kant, Hegel, Schopenhauer, Nietzsche, or Marx? Read the chapters. If you're eager for knowledge, your excitement will lead you quickly through this book, and Russell's intelligence and humor will not let you down. He's a great teacher.

A few criticisms. Because Russell is not afraid to give his opinion of all the philosophers, sometimes you wonder if you're getting the real picture. For example, he paints Jean-Jacques Rousseau as the arch-villain of history; this is certainly an intriguing perspective, but I can't help but question the author's implicit conclusion that Rousseau is almost singularly responsible for the ills of the world. Also, while the content is generally well-balanced, Russell gives an undue amount of attention to Locke (40+ pages), and two modern philosophers, Bergson (20 pages), and Dewey. As John Dewey is Russell's contemporary, Russell seems to have a keen desire to ingratiate himself to the man, and such toadying doesn't play well in a History of Western Philosophy. On the whole, though, the book sings.

You may think you're going to use this as a reference, but, like a good bag of potato chips, once you taste a bit of it, you'll want to finish the whole thing and your hand will be at the bottom of the bag, scraping out the crumbs and yearning for more.