The edition of Edward II I read was the New Mermaid Series one, which had a very good and informative introduction, and has the spelling modernized. The spelling modernization extends to place names as well as general terms. I am not sure how I feel about spelling modernization, as it is nice to see how the work was originally spelled, but it made the work very easy to read. The play itself is amazing, very engaging even though it is a history, and is mostly based on things that actually happened. The language is not as flowery as Shakespeare, but is lovely nonetheless. Some of the characters of the play are very fickle, and seem to suddenly change as you read the text of the play. (Queen Isabella goes from devoted and self-sacrificing wife to cunning adulteress.) It makes more sense on stage, and after seeing this play, it was easier to see how good it is.

Marlowe's final play is also his masterpiece. To be sure, the dramatic events in this play really did happen, but Marlowe shows himself at his best when he paints the picture. At first, Marlowe masterfully allows us to detest Edward for undoing all the fine work of his father Edward Longshanks. We also are able to feel sorry for Mortimer and Isabella. (the eventual villains). Isabella feels neglected and Mortimer can not stand to see the fine work of Edward Longshanks undone. Later, we come to have some respect for Edward II when he shows himself to have some of his father's fine qualities and he crushes the first rebellion against him with courage and intelligence. When the second uprising successful, we no longer are lead into any feelings of admiration for Mortimer and Isabella. Once they have power they are more vile and disgusting than Edward II ever was. By Act 5.1, Marlowe gives Edward II moving soliloquies and does not allow our new won pity to slack for a moment. The final scene of this play when Edward II's 17 year old son Edward III flips the tables, crushes his corrupt mother, has Mortimer put to death, and offers prayers to his murdered father is a scene that is almost unsurpassed in literature. To be sure, this did actually happen, but Marlowe not only tells us what happened, but colors it with his superb mastery of the language.

Edward the second, or to give it its full title, 'The troublesome reign and Lamentable death of Edward, the second king of England, with the tragical fall of proud Mortimer', is famous for being an Elizabethan 'Gay play', but this is only one of the subjects contained within the play. Politics, cruelty and the Feudal System are all important themes in this, one of the great masterstrokes of Elizabethan literature. The play itself is a history play, set in the 14th century featuring Edward and his previously basished lover, Gaveston, who returns after the death of Edward's father. This return enrages the barons, who were sworn to Edward's father that Gaveston would never return. This is the catalyst for a plot that races around like a cheetah on speed, culminating in one of the most excruciating deaths ever portrayed on stage. "Shakespeare? Who? Marlowe was far better!"

Provides a lot of background information on the antichrist King Juan Carlos. Though this book does not have any "satanic pictures" of Juan Carlos you can get that in the Nov.97 issue of Vanity Fair where Carlos is dressed in a black Prince of Darkness robe and red cape with a german sheppard. Look out! King Juan Carlos' day of revealing draws nearer, only now will he continue to work from behind the scenes until that day of infamy arrives. Repent now or face the Great Tribulation under the "iron fist" of King Juan Carlos as his song of the day will be "No More Mr. Nice Guy" as the price for food and to stay alive will be your soul.

Charles Swindoll does an excellent, if not remarkable, job of not only presenting the trials of David in modern day life, but he also vividly illustrates the psalmist's shortcomeings into lessons for today. Without a doubt, this book was written with God's guidance (no slight intended towards Mr. Swindoll), and I recommend this book to be used as a tool for the Christian of today in his/her walk with God. Upon finishing, I not only had renewed insight upon David, but also within myself, and found newborn strength to conquer my own daily struggles. God has annoited this book, of that there is no doubt, and I strongly urge Christians to delve into it.

Chuck Swindoll really challenged me with this book. I learned a lot about my life by learning about the life of David. I face many of the same struggles he did. Swindoll wrote this book as if he were talking to you instead of writing a book. The personal touch helped in gaining a greater understanding of King David.

Every time a pick up a book from Swindoll's "Great Lives from God's Word" series I think that nothing can be better than the last one. Starting with Joseph and then reading Moses gave me the impression that these were his best. Now I've returned back and read David and continue to find that brother Chuck has been blessed with a deep understanding about God's word, God's people and God's ways. As with the other books, Chuck doesn't leave any stone unturned in David's life and digs deep into the things that we can all relate to. I recommend this reading especially to those who are facing the giants in life whether they are physical or spiritual. King David is a great study for all of us seeking to be a "man after God's own heart."

This is quick read, but well worth it. On occasion the editor lacks detail, but the content is very useful for anyone seeking a greater grasp of life as an Oglalas Sioux.

The story of the rediscovery of The Autobiography Of Red Cloud is told in the introduction. Though much edited, the narrative derives from talks between Red Cloud and Samuel Deon, an old trader friend, recounted to Charles Allen, contemporary postmaster at Pine Ridge. The Autobiography Of Red Cloud spans the life experiences of Red Cloud up to 1865-66, the time when the Oglala chose the war path against whites. Written in the third person and otherwise heavily edited, The Autobiography Of Red Cloud tells much of Oglala life and war practices prior to 1865. These reminiscences detail Red Cloud's experience in war with his Tribe's traditional enemies - Shoshones, Pawnees, Arikaras, Arapaho, and Crow. A vivid picture of Lakota plains life at the height of glory days emerges. The high regard for honorable battle with a worthy adversary, the daily and seasonal patterns and activities of the tribe and many daring exploits establish the foundation for Red Cloud's well deserved reputation as war leader. A picture of a shrewd, astute man with uncanny timing emerges. Also delineated like a war bonnet is the habit of command, not always easily held among the Lakota. Another of Red Cloud's demonstrated skills is the ability to analyze a natural setting and then use it to tactical advantage, as well as to predict the plans and moves of his enemy. The sometimes close relationship between enemy tribes is richly described or inferred. To read The Autobiography Of Red Cloud is to have some experience of that 200 plus year old life of the Plains Indians - hunting buffalo, riding and stealing horses, following the game in season, etc. that so briefly held full flower before white settlement took over. In the aftermath even today, it will be a valuable mirror to the world of the culture, the nation, and the man.

Nancy Lorraine Reviewer

This could have been such a good book. It is like he just put something together,just to get out another volume. I won't be getting anymore in the series. This one wasted my money.

Contrary to other reviews, I really enjoyed this book in the Great Lives Series by Swindoll. The book is an excellent encouragement to stand firm in the Lord even when others are compromising.

Among the excellent points Swindoll mentions are:

1. Lessons to be learned from Elijah's life.
2. Principles about God's leading.
3. Trust in the Lord and spend time alone with Him.
4. Reasons why Elijah may have been intimidated by Jezebel.
5. Do not let self-sufficiency replace your dependence on God!
6. Elijah had to learn self-denial and to rely on God instead of himself.
7. Living in sin will make you unsure and indecisive.
8. God will often use tests to shape us into His likeness.

Again, these are just a few of the many excellent points mentioned in the book. An excellent supplement to the Bible, I highly recommend it!

So far I have read Elijah, David, and Moses. All three are excellent, but Elijah has been my favorite. If you are a Christian looking for a way to have more of God and draw closer to Him. Elijah will be of great benefit to you. Elijah was a man with a great annointing on His life and was selfless and dedicated to obedience. Charles Swindoll does show a balanced view of Elijah's weaknesses and strengths. Swindoll has a way of getting into the skin of each person he is studying. It was easy for me to relate to Elijah on a personal level because Charles Swindoll has a way of reflecting the human qualities of this giant for God along with the supernatural nature of God that lives within each of us. I enjoyed reading this book slowly so as not to miss one drop. :}

I've never read the bible. I never will. there are far better fictional stories out there.

Are about as close as you come to good historical novels in the OT. Really one book sort of like the three synoptic books of NT, Matthew, Mark, and Luke.

This book is very good and covers the ground well. I wish it were longer.

From an historical point of view, it comports well with what is unambiguously agreed upon as historical events. (David has been getting his knocks lately, but he is still the KING.)

I prefer to think of it in the classical sense, the end of the third phase of ancient Hebrew writings (of 12 as commonly stated) So, if you compared it to Gibbons "Decline & Fall of Roman Empire" you would be up to around chapter 30 of Gibbons.

I read these thing with a critical eye for finding fault, and find little to fault in this book, except to wish it were wider and longer.

An index with cross references such as to Elephantine documents or even Greek or Syrian writings might have been usefull.

But this is a great small book. I read it almost straight through. I think you will actually find it easy reading and hard to lay down.

Why is it that many of the books I'm looking at have such bad reviews from people who haven't even read them just because they are about the Christian faith. Now I haven't read this book but I am currently reading 1 Kings. And if they think this book is so fictional than try reading the book of Daniel which contains very specific prophecy about Alexander the Great and the fate of his kingdom.

I am not trying to force my faith on anyone. I am merely upset at those that dismiss my faith and what I believe as fictional without even investigating it. That is very demeaning to me.

My only complaint about this play is that Shakespeare should have had some dialogues where the characters discussed crucial history before the play opens. Gloucester (murdered or dead before the play but mentioned several times) had tried to usurp Richard's crown too many times. History itself is not sure if Gloucester died or was murdered. Bolingbroke for a while conspired with Gloucester and now sees another oppurtunity to usurp the crown.The virtuous John of Gaunt served Richard with honor and integrity and eventually moved parliament into arresting Gloucester for treason. This would of made John of Gaunt's rages all the more valid. Otherwise this play is outstanding! Richard shows himself to be capable of ruling at times, but gains our contempt when he seizes his the honorable John of Gaunt's wealth. John of Gaunt's final rage in 2.1 is a passage of immense rageful beauty. Also, Shakespeare moves us into strongly suspecting that Richard had Gloucester murdered. However, despite Richard's crime, Shakespeare masterfully reverses our feelings and moves us into having deep pity for Richard when he is deposed. The Bishop of Carlisle (Richard's true friend) provides some powerful passages of his own. I can not overestimate the grace in which Shakespeare increases our new won pity for Richard when Bolingbroke (Gaunt's rightful heir) regains his wealth and the death of Gloucester is left ambiguous. 5.1, when Richard sadly leaves his queen and can see that Henry IV and his followers will eventually divide is a scene of sorrowful beauty. 5.4 is chilling when Exton plots Richard's murder. 5.5 is chilling and captivating when Richard dies but manages to take two of the thugs down with him. The icing on the cake is that Bolingbroke (Henry IV) can only regret his actions and realize that he has gotten himself into a troublesome situation. But that will be covered in "1 Henry IV" and "2 Henry IV." We can easily argue that it is in "Richard II" where we see Shakespeare's mastery of the language at its finest.

Richard II was incompetent, wastefully extravagant, overtaxed his nobles and peasants, ignored his senior advisors, and lavished dukedoms on his favorites. His rival, Henry of Bolingbroke (later Henry IV), was popular with the common man and undeservingly suffered banishment and loss of all his property. And yet two centuries later Elizabethans viewed the overthrow of Richard II as fundamentally wrong and ultimately responsible for 100 years of crisis and civil war. Queen Elizabeth's government even censored Shakespeare's play.

Shakespeare masterfully manipulates our feelings and attitude toward Richard II and Bolingbroke. We initially watch Richard II try to reconcile differences between two apparently loyal subjects each challenging the other's loyalty to the king. He seemingly reluctantly approves a trial by combat. But a month later, only minutes before combat begins, he banishes both form England. We begin to question Richard's motivation.

Richard's subsequent behavior, especially his illegal seizure of Bolingbroke's land and title, persuades us that his overthrow is justified. But as King Richard's position declines, a more kingly, more contemplative ruler emerges. He faces overthrow and eventual death with dignity and courage. Meanwhile we see Bolingbroke, now Henry IV, beset with unease, uncertainty, and eventually guilt for his action.

Shakespeare also leaves us in in a state of uncertainty. What is the role of a subject? What are the limits of passive obedience? How do we reconcile the overthrow of an incompetent ruler with the divine right of kings? Will Henry IV, his children, or England itself suffer retribution?

Richard II has elements of a tragedy, but is fundamentally a historical play. I was late coming to Shakespeare's English histories and despite my familiarity with many of his works I found myself somewhat disoriented. I did not appreciate the complex relationships between the aristocratic families, nor what had happened before. Fortunately I was rescued by Peter Saccio, the author of "Shakespeare's English Kings". Saccio's delightful book explores how Shakespeare's imagination and actual history are intertwined.

I hope you enjoy Richard II as much as I have. It is the gateway to Henry IV (Parts 1 and 2) and Henry V, all exceptional plays.

The thing with Shakespeare histories is that almost no one reads them, as opposed to his tragedies and comedies. I don't know why that is. The histories that are read are either Henry V (largely due to Branagh's movie), Richard III (because the hunchback king is so over-the-top evil), or the gargantuan trilogy of Henry VI, with the nearly saintly king (at least by Part III) who much prefers contemplating religion and ethics to ruling and dealing with the cabals among his nobles.

So why read a relatively obscure history about a relatively obscure king? Aside from the obvious (it's Shakespeare, stupid), it is a wonderful piece of writing - intense, lyrical, and subtle. Richard II is morally ambiguous, initially an arrogant, callous figure who heeds no warnings against his behavior. Of course, his behavior, which includes seizing the property of nobles without regard for their heirs, leads to his downfall. Nothing in his character or behavior inspires his subjects so he has no passionate defenders when one of the wronged heirs leads a rebellion to depose Richard II. But Richard now becomes a much more sympathetic figure -especially in the scene where he confronts the usurper, Richard acknowledges his mistakes, but eloquently wonders what happens when the wronged subjects can depose the leader when they are wronged. What then of the monarchy, what then of England?

On top of the profound political musings, you get some extraordinarily lyrical Shakespeare (and that is truly extraordinary). Most well known may be the description of England that was used in the airline commercial a few years back... "This royal throne of kings, this sceptred isle, ..."

If you like Shakespeare and haven't read this play, you've missed a gem.