If you do not know much about Napoleon, esp. the Waterloo campaign, this is a great book for its simplicity in the events leading up to (and including) the battle of Waterloo.

Schom is no great fan of Napolean, as his recent biography of the little Corsican demonstrates. However, I thought in reading this book that he provided a fairly even-handed, readable description of a fascinating period in European history. Most readers are familiar with the basic facts: In 1815, the deposed Napolean Bonaparte escaped from his island exile of Elba, and set sail for the shores of his beloved France. The king sent the army to recapture him, but upon encountering their former leader the troops rallied to his cause, and he ultimately marched into Belgium as the rest of Europe looked on in horror at this menace whom they thought was out of their hair forever. An alliance of troops, under the command of Lord Wellington, met up with Napolean on the great battlefield of Waterloo, leading to Bonaparte's final great defeat.

This book provides a very readable account of these 4 months, and effectively demonstrated how close Napolean actually was to pulling off one more great victory. He points out the damaging mistakes by Napolean's inferior generals, leading to his flank being disrupted by General Blucher at a crucial point in the battle. We all know how the story ends, and yet the story was oddly suspenseful in Schom's hands nonetheless. He also paints a very vivid, sometimes unflattering portrait of Napolean, who was not the same man who boldly grasped the crown from the Pope in Notre Dame and proclaimed himself Emperor over 10 years earlier. Napolean was physically weaker, had a slight drool, and lacked the dynamic force of his younger days during the final 100 day campaign.

All in all, while Schom's critical attitude towards Bonaparte has sometimes been open to attack, I thought this was a very entertaining historical narrative for the casual history buff like myself.

I attacked One Hundred Days like Wellington attacked the French. Unlike a biography I read of Boney years ago, Schom marvelously and succinctly described the background and characters of a constellation of lesser notables who surrounded the Emperor. In doing so he made understandable the mood of France as Napoleon made his spectacular come back attempt before bowing out of European history. This book filled an enormous gap in my understanding of France as a European power and as a nation at the beginning of the 19th century. My daughter could hardly have made a better choice of gifts for my birthday.

I hesitated a long time before buying this book, doubting that it could add anything to the great short story by Eric Frank Russel it was based on. Eventually I decided to buy it anyway because I loved the short story so very much and in years of searching had not been able to get a copy of the original which I had borrowed from a friend.

Though all elements of the orginal story where there, what I feared was proven right, the extension from short story to novel became boring. The lengthening of the story without really adding anything to it made it awkward rather than captivating and in the end I paged to the latter fourth of the book, no longer able to finish it.

The sad thing about it all is that it's not a bad story, just one that does not manage to capture the grandeur of the original. My advice: If you read the orginal story, don't read this one, try to get hold of one of the `flinx' books instead which are far more worthwhile.

Classic Russell material, fun and witty, using social and political avenues to defeat bad guys who could almost be government but portrayed as aliens instead!! If you dislike big government and being controlled by it, you will really enjoy this book!

The story covers what sorts of things might happen when different cultures, er "species", encounter each other. War, obviously, is one possible result. The really interesting aspect that Foster delves into is fanatical narrow-mindedness. The antags in this story can't really see how to make use of their resources to prosper. The protags very much can, and do. Also, the protags are very open-minded - in more ways than one. Plus they are quite intelligent and quite well-equiped to deal with intergalactic relations. Prosperity in this book, doesn't come from power or wealth but in a state of mind, a noble pursuit, and the willingness and ability to communicate and cogitate.

The plot is very upbeat and yet at the same time not without its share of suspense. The characters are interesting and likeable.

David Day, in writing Tolkien's Ring, has seemingly changed Tolkien's written word to suit his purpose. Not only does he make many factual errors about the books by the author of the title, but fabricates evidence and deforms Tolkien.

"Sauron of the Evil Eye," says Day, is comparable to "Balor of the Evil Eye," and so forth. Unfortunately, for Day, nowhere in Tolkien's The Lord of the Rings is Sauron called such, thus making the comparison useless. And so on. There are too many such twistings of the original text to cite, too many of Day's own extrapolations quoted as the truth in The Lord of the Rings, for my comfort.

On the plus side, he presents an intriguing collection of stories. Yet knowing how he meddled with Tolkien, I cannot help but wonder if the tales I am reading therein are true to the originals.

The main good thing about this book is Alan Lee's fantastic imagery, which once again shows him to be undeniably the greatest Tolkien artist around. Having portrayed everything from hobbits to bigfeet without ever losing the mythic and ageless qualities inherent in his works, he brings a brilliant touch to the images in this book.

If only the same could be said of Mr. Day's text.

as other reviewers have suggested, the book is attractive because Tolkien fans are ravenous for more materials and this book has Tolkien's name on it in big gold letters. However, I must stress that this is not sufficient reason to buy it:

Pros: comprehensive discussion of the history of the ring as a symbol in lore and of its use in Tolkien. Also fascinating illustrations by incomparable Tolkien illustrator Alan Lee.

Cons: First, to be called Tolkien's Ring, it ought to have more analysis of Tolkien's Ring. On the contrary, it only spends a chapter on that. The title is almost false, so called to attract Tolkien fans. Also, to put it bluntly, Day is boring to read and although the subject matter is interesting, his style is not engaging.

It was a decent read, and i recommend it to anyone interested in the history of the use of rings in lore. But Tolkien fans will not learn anything new or interesting about Tolkien or his work.

Alan Lee illustrates Tolkien Ring, with black and white and some color drawings accompanying a literary investigation of Tolkien's inspirations and stories. Suitable for a gift, yet affordable enough for personal enjoyment.

This collection of articles represents a political point of view about the politics of modern Irish history, not always to my personal taste, but carefully done, all the same.

What I found most valuable was the 13 page introductory essay by the editors. It was worth the price of the entire book to me, as I can now follow much more readily discussions I encounter at home and on-line - who's revisionist, who's counter-revisionist, or why so-and-so is anti-revisionist.

There are 10 essays by authors from several countries (including Wales and Australia). Each explores a topic; 18th century Ireland, the Act of Union between Britain & Ireland, The Famine, Irish Nationalism, Irish Unionism, Home Rule and others. The editors' expressed intention is for a "common thread" of "revisionism" to link them all not only to the debate within Ireland, but to the international debate on methods of historical interpretation.

As a 3rd generation Irish American, I was particularly interested in "Revising the Diaspora", by co-editor Alan O'Day, which I found quite fascinating, as my ancestors arrived both pre- and post- Famine, having very different experiences here in the US. It also flourishes extensive footnotes (as do they all) for further exploration.

If you're interested in modern Irish history, or in the methods and practice of history globally, this scholarly yet emminently readable book is well worth a read.

This is modest, yet suitable, book for an introductory class on visual genetics. It would work well in a M.D. or PhD program focused on that course of study.

You are much better off with Kaplan or Princeton Review. The sample tests that Arco offers are not reflective of the actual LSAT (other books actually use real LSATs)and their explantions of the answers are not very helpful. The best prep is to buy the LSAC Triple Prep books.

I've wasted 10 of my 30 days to my LSAT with this book. 15 years ago I scored in the 97th percentile in the analytical reasoning section of the GRE - I say this only to show that I'm not incapable of doing logic problems. I expected the book to help me get my somewhat rusty mental processes back up to speed. Instead, I was massivly frustrated by their muddy explainations of practice test answers and total lack of help in choosing the correct answer. Explaining that answer "E" is correct, but not why A, B, C, and D are not and what tricks lurk in them is NOT helpful! Buy the Princeton Review's or Kaplan's LSAT book if you need logic problem help, not this dud. By the way, despite what every LSAT book tells you about visiting the test site and doing a practice test in the very room where your test will be held -- forget it. Security reasons prevent test sites from giving out the room number!

The explanation and examples of the analytical part are mediocre at best; the truth is that they are no help at all: they will merely confuse you more. However. the logical/reading comp. sections are not as bad.

I am only through Day 4 of this book and I have found incorrect answers. (If anyone else has this book, check out the answers for #16 and #17 on Day 4 and see if you can find any way they are right.)