The North American colonial wars between Great Britain and France that flared repeatedly through the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries have long been hidden in the great shadow cast by the American Revolution. How many people today remember King William's War (1689-97), or Queen Anne's War (1702-13), or King George's War (1744-48), or the French and Indian War (1755-62)? But these conflicts should be better known, because in actual fact they determined the cultural fate of most of North America. Howard Peckham's volume, first published in 1964, is the best short survey of all of them.

Beginning in the 1600s, Great Britain began to colonize the eastern seaboard of North America from Maine to Georgia. Even earlier, France had begun to occupy the valley of the St. Lawrence and to spread westward into the Great Lakes and then south to the Mississippi. From the late 1600s to the mid-1700s, conflicts in Europe between these two colonial powers (and between the Protestant and Catholic worlds they represented) spilled over into North America. Indian tribes played both sides off against each other, forming shifting alliances in an attempt to retain their own independence. Because of disputes over who should occupy the Spanish throne, for example, farmhouses were burned in the New England countryside, and Indian villages were destroyed in the woods of Maine. In the end, Great Britain and her colonies gained ascendancy, and France was forced to cede all of her Canadian possessions. The last of these imperial conflicts, the French and Indian War, set the political and military stage for the American Revolution which began only thirteen years after the French and Indian War had ended.

Why should anyone remember these ancient battles? One simple reason is that they have left their mark all over the cultural landscape of eastern North America. They explain why there are lakes with names like "Champlain" along the borders of states like New "York"; why the eastern United States is dotted with towns named "Amherst" and "Pepperell" and "Shirley" (all generals in the colonial wars); and why so many people in French-speaking Quebec, more than 300 years after the colonial wars began, are still trying to secede from English-speaking Canada.

For a short work, this was interesting and exceptional reading. Mr.Peckham's accounts of the four Colonial Wars was accurate and complete. The struggle between France,England and Native Americans for control of North America is lost in schoolbooks and classrooms of today, because it was prior to the Revolutionary War. But the impact that these Colonial Wars had on the forming of our country is unmeasurable. Quality reading for those who want to turn the clock back a bit farther than the Boston Tea Party, and Bunker Hill.

Fans of Tudor history will enjoy this meaty volume which delivers a very different take on the life of Queen Katherine Howard...she is hardly the hysterical and promiscuous girl so often depicted. Especially interesting characterizations of "Bloody" Mary Tudor and Henry VIII, as well. Strictly for fans of the subject, however, or otherwise tedious reading.

Ford Madox Ford's "The Fifth Queen" - actually a collection of three separate novels - is a fictionalized account of the fifth wife of England's Henry VIII, Katharine Howard. As A.S. Byatt explains in her Introduction, "This figure bears little relation to what we have about the real Katharine . . ." and thus the reader should be conscious that Ford's Katharine - a young, pretty, pious woman who yearns for a return to Catholicism after Henry's split with Rome - is strictly fictional. That said, the only real failure of this work is that Katharine is the least appealing, least interesting character; we first meet her as a dispossessed ingenue seeking entrance to Henry's court around the time of his disasterous fourth marriage to Anne of Cleves, and it is this description which will follow her throughout the book. Even as she becomes Queen, it is almost by accident, surviving the machinations of Cromwell, Lord Privy Seal and the recklessness of her devoted cousin Culpepper. She is Queen by default. She constantly protests that all she seeks is a Catholic England - the "old ways" - and yet throughout she resigns herself to letting events happen to her, as if she cannot control the consequences of her own life. Indeed, her final speech to Henry where she confesses to an adultery which did not occur, becomes her last fatal act of passivity, for which she pays with her life. She cannot see that there are those who wish to help her and that her naive, narcissistic piety does not have to be her ruin. What holds these novels together is the rich supporting cast: the aforementioned Cromwell, who has his own sovereign Protestant image of England, free from the entanglements of Rome. There is the brooding Princess Mary, Henry's daughter by his first wife, who knows how to carry a grudge for her mother's divorce, the super-spy Throckmorton, the lecherous Magister Udal and more. Ford uses Katharine to show that the blind commitment to an ideal - any ideal - will only result in failure, that this world is more than ideas and faiths, but of people who are imperfect, people who will fail. It is a world five hundred years in the past, but it is also our own.

Intrigue and romance in the court of Henry VIII
Katherine Howard, armed only with education, wit and honesty, becomes the Fifth Queen, Henry VIII's fifth wife in this amazing historical trilogy. The plot-ridden court comes to vivid life as everyone high and low maneuvers for advantage. Everyone except Katherine Howard, whose unwillingness to scheme will make her queen and defenseless at the same moment. Even knowing the general story this is a fascinating and occasionally shocking novel, with a stunning ending...

It's tough to criticize a book written by the man himself and say that other books are somehow better, despite the fact that these writers did not participate in the journey. But unfortunately, that is the case. If you're a real Shackleton fan, you'll want to read this book only as background after taking on works by Caroline Alexander or Alfred Lansing.

In comparison, 'South' has the following shortcomings:

1. The writing style is impenetrable & stilted. It has not aged well in the 80+ years since it was put down on paper.

2. The misuse of Frank Hurley's photographs is annoying - they're out-of-focus, oddly chosen and misplaced in sequence in the book. See Alexander's book for a revelation of the power and majesty of Hurley's work.

3. You only get Shackleton's point of view here. Lansing and Alexander pull together the journals of many particpants and you get a real flavor of the men that comprise the crew. Here, you get only Sir Ernest, dispensing some kind words about each member, last name only, no background info. The other books tell you quite a bit about flawed characters like McNish and Lees.

This book is one of the primary sources for "Endurance" by Alfred Lansing. The latter is a distillation of these writings plus the actual diaries of Sir Ernest.

I read "Endurance" first and so I was primed for this book. One aspect of the voyage that is not encountered in Lansing's work is the fate of the Aurora, the companion ship to the Endurance whose job it was to lay up the depots for Shackleton on his way across the continent once he reached the Pole. This was an ill-fated journey on which three men died (Shackleton himself didn't lose a man). The Aurora was also locked in the ice and drifted all the way to New Zealand leaving a portion of her crew stranded in McMurdo Sound.

It's a great book with tremendous appeal for those of us interested in these fantastic voyages.

EKW

If you've read about and were fascinated with Ernest Shackleton and his band of Anarctic explorers, it's a real treat to see the adventure through his eyes.

What an incedible story of attitude, character, perseverance and fortitude! Shackleton tells the story so matter-of-factly that you can sometimes forget that he and his men were experiencing one of the harshest climates on earth with little more than their own inventiveness to keep them alive. That all 28 men survived this ordeal with "reindeer skin" sleeping bags and "sledging rations" is amazing. No Gortex, Polartec, Hollowfil, freeze-dried food or GPS.

Shackleton's writing style is not the most engaging, but the story itself is so amazing that it kept me turning pages. Getting 28 men through an experience like this is a testimony to the power of his leadership, although he takes little credit himself.

Read this in front of a crackling fire!

This was a time whena young man who had to be carefully taken in the steps of knightlyhood. With the days going by, he had o fight his father's foe.

I would recommend this book to a friend of mine who would like to read classsic books, and hopefully he/she would find this book enjoying. I wouldn't say the boook was totally boring, however, it could have been a bit more exciting. It always counts to the persons' opinon.

This book was so good, when I just saw the cover, it caught my attention. It had a lot of color and I knew it would have a lot of action in it. This book is called Men of Iron. The author is Howard Pyle. This book is historical fiction.
It was about a boy named Myles Falworth.He was brave and strong. He also had a lot of courage. This man believes in himself know matter what. Myles earns a reputation because hae proves himself brave.
He never gives up. At the end he wins the war. I didn't like the part he got stabbed because if that happened to me I would feel bad. It would hurt me and I wouldn't like it. I liked the part where he proves himself brave because before he got into the war he had to fight the captain to prove himself brave. I loved this book because it had a lot of adventure in it and I like adventure books.
I would recommend this book to everybody because it helps you be focused on the book. It makes you want to read more and more.

A wonderful book for young adults and adults who love tales of knights & armour. Howard Pyle's descriptions are both factual and highly entertaining, and a wonderful description of castle life in the early Middle Ages. After 30-plus years,I still re-read the copy I have!!!!!

The stories of the unfortunate Anne Boleyn and the tragic Catherine Howard (Henry VIII's beheaded wives) are linked in this thrilling book by Jean Plaidy. The girls were cousins, and both could be said to have been the wife Henry VIII loved best. Yet he beheaded them. With Anne Boleyn, it was simple. She could not produce a son. False charges were made against her, and she was sentenced to death. Catherine Howard was a young woman, and it is probable that her charges of adultery were true. She was married to an old king and she probably just wanted to marry someone who was her age, a young person. This was evident in Murder Most Royal, and it shows clearly that Henry VIII essentially murdered his wives, but got away with it because he was royal. I liked this book because it had two wives looked at and compared and because of the sympathy shown for both.

This is a handy if somewhat eclectic little collection, with works by some poets who are hard to find elsewhere, such as Henry Howard. If you don't have a copy of the long-out-of-print Hebel and Hudson anthology of English Renaissance Poetry, pick up this.

Wyatt and Surrey are the twin towers of the early English sonneteers. This book is an indispensable resource as it brings their works together. Those who would study Spenser and Shakespeare's sonnets will benefit from the reading of these wonderful authors. I particularly recommend "They flee from me" by Wyatt. There be giants here... and Shakespeare stands upon their shoulders.

Carl Henry is a theologian of great character and insight.
This series is his opus.

A few clarifications: Dr. Henry is an Evangelical theologian not a Fundamentalist (he broke with them in the 40s), a term which is particular to Protestantism from 20th Century America; but which was redefined by a religious studies project at the University of Chicago to defame any conservative religious viewpoint which may effect public values. Also, he isn't a literalist, as some would coin, but holds that God has communicated with clarity in the text - a similar notion to that of John Wycliff. His view is universal not just American.

It is long. Look through the Indices to see what subject you want to study.

Unfortunately, Dr. Henry is pilloried by many academics and contermporary "evangelicals" who want to shed his influence for post-modern presuppositions or post-Bartian notions.

Dr. Henry understands the Lord as above a singular history and greater than one's words, but one who seeks to communicate liberty to those who want to hear.

This magnum opus of Dr. Henry's theology is simply the most thoughtful, incisive, and relevant work in modern theology, evangelical or otherwise.

Henry's basic propositions are at once both simple and profound - that revealed truth must be communicable in propositional form, that is, in complete sentences, with subject, verbs, and objects. Truth is not a commodity for the intellectually or spiritually elite. In other words, if you cannot tell me in plain language what the truth is, then I must question whether or not what you are considering is really the truth. Furthermore, God has set this example by personally revealing Himself in this manner in our own objective, external history - the same history of which we are all now a part. This is not to say that there are truths in the universe that are not communicable verbally, only that the Truth that has been revealed by God must be, and has been, communicated in that manner.

Henry's antagonists are those theologians (Barth, Bultmann and company)who propose that history is of two kinds - the day-to-day, external, objective history with which we are all familiar, and a special, internal "geschichte" history where God reveals himself internally to individuals within gaps in the causal uniformity of external history, and the less extreme theologians (Moltmann, Pannenberg, and company) who propose that there is one, encompassing salvation-history ("heilsgeschichte") within which there is no distinction to be made between the natural and supernatural and hence, no need to distinguish between two different kinds of history.

Although some find the concepts of geschichte and heilsgeschichte intellectually appealing in that the altogether-other God is revealing himself in an altogether-other history that is suitable to His nature, it falls short of the biblical concept of salvation, in which God has revealed Himself personally and powerfully within our own, external day-to-day history, where we live, die, marry, raise children, and work out our lives. The logical conclusion of geschichte seems to be that, if our salvation has been wrought in a different kind of history that stands apart from our own familiar day-to-day history, then so must our Christian life be wrought in a similar fashion. Heilsgechichte hold up slightly better under scrutiny, but still falls short by de-mystifying the supernatural into the realm of the ordinary. Henry demonstrates that these concepts are neither biblical nor Christian.

Once, he told us a story about a press conference he attended with Karl Barth. During the question and answer period, Dr. Barth was engaged in several lively discussions on his theme of geschichte. When it came Dr. Henry's turn to pose a question, he asked, "Herr Barth, what would the newspapers have read on the morning following the resurrection?" The visibly disturbed Barth responded, "Did you say you were the editor of Christianity Yesterday, or was it Christianity Today?" Henry calmly responded, "That would be Christianity yesterday, today, and forever."

I am aware that his detractors use the tired, old, "just another [biased] *evangelical* perspective" argument, as if the mere use of the term dispatches Henry's contribution to the growing body of truly irrelevant theology. I sometimes wonder if these detractors have taken the time to make an honest appraisal of Henry in the same manner as they request the rest of us to do with Pannenberg, Moltmann, Barth, Bultmann, and company? Or even worse, does geschichte and helsgeschichte captivate their attention because they allow salvation to be considered separately from the course of daily life?

I am afraid, however, that you must read Henry for yourself and decide, as I, the student, am not greater than his Master.

This is not "A" book. This is a collection of Henry's writtings from over his whole life. It is organized into 5 separate softback books. Don't pay attention to that last guy. He hasn't even seen these books.

This collection of letters makes Henry Miller look like a pathetic old geezer. Miller, who if you read multiple biographic works on him, never was much of a "real person", but some kind of morphic creature who would become fascinated with something for a while & his entire existence would be geared towards that thing. Sometimes it was UFOs, sometimes the idea of what he thought China was....seemingly anything and everything, just so long as Miller could run away & hide from being an actual individual. During the part of his life covering these letters, he was in his "Japanese phase". Hoki Miller was an attractive woman who was a cheesy lounge singer & wannabe actress working at a Los Angeles Japanese resteraunt. Miller fell in love with some image he concocted & Hoki saw him for the patsy he was. All this woman did was tease & lead on Miller, and like a fool, he went right along. She never gave him the sexual play he so longed for, but he bought her a new white Jaguar that she quickly smashed up. Miller kept tossing money at her, and even went to Japan with her to try to use his fame there to promote Hoki The Hack's failing acting career. The letters in this collection are no literary masterpieces, and would only be of intrest to hardcore Miller fans or maybe somebody looking for a laugh at a rich & famous old man's expense. If you're not really interested in Miller's personal life, I'd suggest spending your money on something else.

This is a great collection of letters that will give great insight to Henry Miller's fans. The letters follow this tumultuous relationship & show Henry Miller at his most childish and pathetic. Hoki was a scam artist extraordinaire & Henry went along for the ride, while paying for the car, the insurance, gas, food along the way, etc. This is a must read for any Henry Miller fan. Others will find it kind of pointlessly pitiful.

This book is useful as a quick reference for attorneys and others with little to no forensic science backgrounds. It is not an in-depth text. It offers only the briefest of explanations and descriptions. Most information is presented in outline or listing forms only.

This book covers a broad array of topics by physical evidence type, listed alphabetically. It is very easy to use and a good starting reference for determining how a particular type of evidence should be (or should have been) handled. A good reference for any attorney or investigator.