In this volume, covering 2/13/37 to 1/14/40, we are introduced to Prince Valiant and learn of his youth in the fens and bogs of England. We follow him as he seeks his fortune, enters Arthur's service, becomes squired to Gawain, and is knighted by Arthur (1/29/39). Published as a hardback book by Nostalgia Press in 1974, the beginning 3 years of Hal Foster's beautiful and exciting work is reproduced in full color, with a full Sunday panel on each page. The paper quality is average, but the colors are vibrant. It dazzels the eye to see such artistry in a comic stip. Nostalgia press soon went out of business, and failed to fill many of the prepaid orders for subsequent works. However, if you can find one of these beautiful books, snatch it up! Treat it gently, though. The binding is of poor quality.

This book gives an excellent translation of the 12th Century writings of one of the Waltham monks. It also gives the original Latin version which would enable a Latin scholar to gain practice or make their own check.
The book also gives the 11th & 12th Century history of the Secular monastery with many interesting facts of the times.
Ideal for Latin scholars and historians interested in the period immediately prior to, and after the Norman Conquest.

First off, I must admit that I thoroughly enjoyed Part I and absolutely adored Henry V. Having said that, I found Part II to be enjoyable, yet perhaps leaving something to be desired - like more action. Falstaff and Prince Hal both come off as somewhat disingenuous and calculating Machiavellian individuals. Disappointingly, Falstaff speaks poorly of Prince Hal while unwittingly in his midst. Conversely, The Prince of Wales prematurely takes the crown before his King Henry IV's death as well as disassociating himself with Falstaff after he is crowned King. These instances, along with others throughout the play, show the self-serving tendencies of both characters.

However, we can proudly witness the maturation of the young King from wild & dissolute young Prince Hal into one of the most revered monarchs in English history, King Henry V. Part II remains an intriguing play due to its paradoxical nature, yet unfortunately rarely acted out today. Now that I have read Henry IV(I&II) for the first time, I gladly move on to one of my personal favorites, Henry V. I recommend both parts(Folger editions) for all Shakespeare enthusiasts - they have given me greater insight into the young Henry V - when he was more concerned with downing a pint of ale rather than downing the French at Agincourt.

2 Magnificent Quotes from Henry IV Part II -
"Uneasy lies the head that wears a crown." - King Henry IV
"He hath eaten me out of house and home." - Mistress Quickly

This is the play where Henry IV squashes the Percy rebellion but himself becomes ill and dies. So, Price Hal becomes King Henry V and this leads to the next play of that name.

The wonderful Falstaff is also on glorious display. This is also the play with the famous tavern scene (Act II, Scene IV) that can be read endlessly with new enjoyment.

Everyone has his or her own take on Falstaff and his treatment at the hands of Henry V, but I dislike it even though I understand it. Prince Hal and his transformation into Henry V is not someone I admire a lot. Nor is Falstaff's manner of living, but his wit is so sharp and his intelligence so vast that it is easy to still delight in him.

But, you certainly don't need me to tell you anything about Shakespeare. Like millions of other folks, I am in love with the writing. However, as all of us who read Shakespeare know, it isn't a simple issue. Most of us need help in understanding the text. There are many plays on words, many words no longer current in English and, besides, Shakespeare's vocabulary is richer than almost everyone else's who ever lived. There is also the issue of historical context, and the variations of text since the plays were never published in their author's lifetime.

For those of us who need that help and want to dig a bit deeper, the Arden editions of Shakespeare are just wonderful.

-Before the text of the play we get very readable and helpful essays discussing the sources and themes and other important issues about the play.

-In the text of the play we get as authoritative a text as exists with helpful notes about textual variations in other sources. We also get many many footnotes explaining unusual words or word plays or thematic points that would likely not be known by us reading in the 21st century.

-After the text we get excerpts from likely source materials used by Shakespeare and more background material to help us enrich our understanding and enjoyment of the play.

However, these extras are only available in the individual editions. If you buy the "Complete Plays" you get text and notes, but not the before and after material which add so much! Plus, the individual editions are easier to read from and handier to carry around.

This is the play where the Percy rebellion begins and centers around the Achilles like Hotspur. Eventually, Hotspur (Henry Percy) and Prince Hal (Henry Monmouth - later Henry V) battle in single combat.

We also get to see the contrast between these young men in temperament and character. King Henry wishes his son were more like Hotspur. Prince Hal realizes his own weaknesses and seems to try to assure himself (and us) that when the time comes he will change and all his youthful foolishness will be forgotten. Wouldn't that be a luxury we wish we could all have afforded when we were young?

Of course, Prince Hal's guide through the world of the cutpurse and highwayman is the Lord of Misrule, the incomparable Falstaff. His wit and gut are featured in full. When Prince Hal and Poins double-cross Falstaff & company, the follow on scenes are funny, but full of consequence even into the next play.

But, you certainly don't need me to tell you anything about Shakespeare. Like millions of other folks, I am in love with the writing. However, as all of us who read Shakespeare know, it isn't a simple issue. Most of us need help in understanding the text. There are many plays on words, many words no longer current in English and, besides, Shakespeare's vocabulary is richer than almost everyone else's who ever lived. There is also the issue of historical context, and the variations of text since the plays were never published in their author's lifetime.

For those of us who need that help and want to dig a bit deeper, the Arden editions of Shakespeare are just wonderful.

-Before the text of the play we get very readable and helpful essays discussing the sources and themes and other important issues about the play.

-In the text of the play we get as authoritative a text as exists with helpful notes about textual variations in other sources. We also get many many footnotes explaining unusual words or word plays or thematic points that would likely not be known by us reading in the 21st century.

-After the text we get excerpts from likely source materials used by Shakespeare and more background material to help us enrich our understanding and enjoyment of the play.

However, these extras are only available in the individual editions. If you buy the "Complete Plays" you get text and notes, but not the before and after material which add so much! Plus, the individual editions are easier to read from and handier to carry around.

I found this book challenges every area of a Christian's life and understanding of the Christian walk. Real Christianity showed by one who has lived it.

This book has become one of the classics of popular Christian books, especially among those who lean towards the charismatic/evangelical end of the spectrum. The late Harold Hill was a nice man and great speaker; I had the pleasure of meeting him twice. He had a way of putting an interesting and humorous spin on Biblical truths. On my spiritual path, I have come to disagree with much of his theology, but his Christianity was sincere and deeply-felt. One of his later books, entitled "God's in Charge Here", dealt with the failures and short-comings of his faith walk. It was written to balance the Glory-all-the-way accounts contained in "King's Kid" and his other books. You have to admire that kind of courage and candor. Bless you Harold, for your life and your books.

This is one of the books that influenced my decision to become a Christian. For people experiencing a crisis in their lives that don't have time for lengthy theology this book provides answers based on the author's years of successful Christian living. Hill's style of writing is more that of an easily referenced technical manual than a theological dissertation. Although some people may object I find it highly appropriate for a book about practical Christianity.

If you are looking for tragedy and a dark bloody drama then I recommend Macbeth with no reservations whatsoever. On a scale of 1-5, I fell this book deserves a 4.5. Written by the greatest literary figure of all time, Shakespeare mesmorizes the reader with suspense and irony. The Scottish Thane Macbeth is approachd by three witches who attempt and succeed at paying with his head. They tell him he will become king, which he does, alog with the aide of his ambitious wife. Macbeth's honor and integrity is destroyed with the deceit and murders he commits. As the novel progresses, Macbeth's conscience tortures him and makes him weak minded. Clearly the saying "what goes around comes around," is put to use since Macbeth's doom was similar to how he acquired his status of kingship. He kills Duncan, the king of Scottland and chops the head off the Thane of Cawdor, therefore the Thane of Fife, Macduff, does the same thing to him. I feel anyone who decides to read this extraordinary book will not be disatisfied and find himself to become an audience to Shakespearean tragedies.

William Shakespeare's tragedies are universal. We know that the tragedy will be chalk-full of blood, murder, vengeance, madness and human frailty. It is, in fact, the uncorrectable flaws of the hero that bring his death or demise. Usually, the hero's better nature is wickedly corrupted. That was the case in Hamlet, whose desire to avenge his father's death consumed him to the point of no return and ended disastrously in the deaths of nearly all the main characters. At the end of Richard III, all the characters are lying dead on the stage. In King Lear, the once wise, effective ruler goes insane through the manipulations of his younger family members. But there is something deeply dark and disturbing about Shakespeare's darkest drama- Macbeth. It is, without a question, Gothic drama. The supernatural mingles as if everyday occurence with the lives of the people, the weather is foul, the landscape is eerie and haunting, the castles are cold and the dungeons pitch-black. And then there are the three witches, who are always by a cauldron and worship the nocturnal goddess Hecate. It is these three witches who prophetize a crown on the head of Macbeth. Driven by the prophecy, and spurred on by the ambitious, egotistic and Machiavellian Lady Macbeth (Shakespeare's strongest female character), Macbeth murders the king Duncan and assumes the throne of Scotland. The roles of Macbeth and Lady Macbeth are tour de force performances for virtuosic actors. A wicked couple, a power-hungry couple, albeit a regal, intellectual pair, who can be taken into any form- Mafia lord and Mafia princess, for example, as in the case of a recent movie with a modern re-telling of Macbeth.

Nothing and no one intimidates Macbeth. He murders all who oppose him, including Banquo, who had been a close friend. But the witches predict doom, for Macbeth, there will be no heirs and his authority over Scotland will come to an end. Slowly as the play progresses, we discover that Macbeth's time is running up. True to the classic stylings of Shakespeare tragedy, Lady Macbeth goes insane, sleepwalking at night and ranting about bloodstained hands. For Macbeth, the honor of being a king comes with a price for his murder. He sees Banquo's ghost at a dinner and breaks down in hysteria in front of his guests, he associates with three witches who broil "eye of newt and tongue of worm", and who conjure ghotsly images among them of a bloody child. Macbeth is Shakespeare's darkest drama, tinged with foreboding, mystery and Gothic suspense. But, nevertheless, it is full of great lines, among them the soliloquy of Macbeth, "Out, out, brief candle" in which he contemplates the brevity of human life, confronting his own mortality. Macbeth has been made into films, the most striking being Roman Polansky's horrific, gruesome, R-rated movie in which Lady Macbeth sleepwalks in the nude and the three witches are dried-up, grey-haired naked women, and Macbeth's head is devilishly beheaded and stuck at the end of a pole. But even more striking in the film is that at the end, the victor, Malcolm, who has defeated Macbeth, sees the witches for advise. This says something: the cycle of murder and violenc will begin again, which is what Macbeth's grim drama seems to be saying about powerhungry men who stop at nothing to get what they want.

While I was basically familiar with Shakespeare's Tragedy of Macbeth, I have only recently actually read the bard's brilliant play. The drama is quite dark and moody, but this atmosphere serves Shakespeare's purposes well. In Macbeth, we delve deeply into the heart of a true fiend, a man who would betray the king, who showers honors upon him, in a vainglorious snatch at power. Yet Macbeth is not 100% evil, nor is he a truly brave soul. He waxes and wanes over the execution of his nefarious plans, and he thereafter finds himself haunted by the blood on his own hands and by the ethereal spirits of the innocent men he has had murdered. On his own, Macbeth is much too cowardly to act so traitorously to his kind and his country. The source of true evil in these pages is the cold and calculating Lady Macbeth; it is she who plots the ultimate betrayal, forcefully pushes her husband to perform the dreadful acts, and cleans up after him when he loses his nerve. This extraordinary woman is the lynchpin of man's eternal fascination with this drama. I find her behavior a little hard to account for in the closing act, but she looms over every single male character we meet here, be he king, loyalist, nobleman, courtier, or soldier. Lady Macbeth is one of the most complicated, fascinating, unforgettable female characters in all of literature.

The plot does not seem to move along as well as Shakespeare's other most popular dramas, but I believe this is a result of the writer's intense focus on the human heart rather than the secondary activity that surrounds the related royal events. It is fascinating if sometimes rather disjointed reading. One problem I had with this play in particular was one of keeping up with each of the many characters that appear in the tale; the English of Shakespeare's time makes it difficult for me to form lasting impressions of the secondary characters, of whom there are many. Overall, though, Macbeth has just about everything a great drama needs: evil deeds, betrayal, murder, fighting, ghosts, omens, cowardice, heroism, love, and, as a delightful bonus, mysterious witches. Very many of Shakespeare's more famous quotes are also to be found in these pages, making it an important cultural resource for literary types. The play doesn't grab your attention and absorb you into its world the way Hamlet or Romeo and Juliet does, but this voyage deep into the heart of evil, jealousy, selfishness, and pride forces you to consider the state of your own deep-seated wishes and dreams, and for that reason there are as many interpretations of the essence of the tragedy as there are readers of this Shakespearean masterpiece. No man's fall can rival that of Macbeth's, and there is a great object lesson to be found in this drama. You cannot analyze Macbeth without analyzing yourself to some degree, and that goes a long way toward accounting for the Tragedy of Macbeth's literary importance and longevity.

One of the things you can assume when you write about Shakespeare--given the hundreds of thousands of pages that have already been written about him in countless books, essays, theses and term papers--is that whatever you say will have been said before, and then denounced, defended , revised and denounced again, ad infinitum. So I'm certain I'm not breaking any new ground here. King Lear, though many, including David Denby (see Orrin's review of Great Books) and Harold Bloom consider it the pinnacle of English Literature, has just never done much for me. I appreciate the power of the basic plot--an aging King divides his realm among his ungrateful children with disastrous results--which has resurfaced in works as varied as Jane Smiley's Pulitzer Prize-winning novel, A Thousand Acres (see Orrin's review), and Akira Kurosawa's last great film, Ran. But I've always found the play to be too busy, the characters to be too unsympathetic, the speeches to be unmemorable and the tragedy to be too shallow. By shallow, I mean that by the time we meet Lear he is already a petulant old man, we have to accept his greatness from the word of others. Then his first action in the play, the division of the kingdom, is so boneheaded and his reaction to Cordelia so selfishly blind, that we're unwilling to credit their word.

Then there's the fact that Shakespeare essentially uses the action of the play as a springboard for an examination of madness. The play was written during the period when Shakespeare was experimenting with obscure meanings anyway; add in the demented babble of several of the central characters, including Lear, and you've got a drama whose language is just about impossible to follow. Plus you've got seemingly random occurrences like the disappearance of the Fool and Edgar's pretending to help his father commit suicide. I am as enamored of the Bard as anyone, but it's just too much work for an author to ask of his audience trying to figure out what the heck they are all saying and what their actions are supposed to convey. So I long ago gave up trying to decipher the whole thing and I simply group it with the series of non-tragic tragedies (along with MacBeth, Hamlet, Julius Caesar), which I think taken together can be considered to make a unified political statement about the importance of the regular transfer of power in a state. Think about it for a moment; there's no real tragedy in what happens to Caesar, MacBeth, Hamlet or Lear; they've all proven themselves unfit for rule. Nor are the fates of those who usurp power from Caesar, Hamlet and Lear at all tragic, with the possible exception of Brutus, they pretty much get what they have coming to them. Instead, the real tragedy lies in the bloody chain of events that each illegitimate claiming of power unleashes. The implied message of these works, when considered as a unified whole, is that deviance from the orderly transfer of power leads to disaster for all concerned. (Of particular significance to this analysis in regards to King Lear is the fact that it was written in 1605, the year of the Gunpowder Plot.)

In fact, looking at Lear from this perspective offers some potential insight into several aspects of the play that have always bothered me. For instance, take the rapidity with which Lear slides into insanity. This transition has never made much sense to me. But now suppose that Lear is insane before the action of the play begins and that the clearest expression of his loss of reason is his decision to shatter his own kingdom. Seen in this light, there is no precipitous decline into madness; the very act of splitting up the central authority of his throne, of transferring power improperly, is shown to be a sign of craziness.

Next, consider the significance of Edgar's pretense of insanity and of Lear's genuine dementia. What is the possible meaning of their wanderings and their reduction to the status of common fools, stripped of luxury and station? And what does it tell us that it is after they are so reduced that Lear's reason (i.e. his fitness to rule) is restored and that Edgar ultimately takes the throne. It is probably too much to impute this meaning to Shakespeare, but the text will certainly bear the interpretation that they are made fit to rule by gaining an understanding of the lives of common folk. This is too democratic a reading for the time, but I like it, and it is emblematic of Shakespeare's genius that his plays will withstand even such idiosyncratic interpretations.

To me, the real saving grace of the play lies not in the portrayal of the fathers, Lear and Gloucester, nor of the daughters, but rather in that of the sons. First, Edmund, who ranks with Richard III and Iago in sheer joyous malevolence. Second, Edgar, whose ultimate ascent to the throne makes all that has gone before worthwhile. He strikes me as one of the truly heroic characters in all of Shakespeare, as exemplified by his loyalty to his father and to the King. I've said I don't consider the play to be particularly tragic; in good part this is because it seems the nation is better off with Edgar on the throne than with Lear or one of his vile daughters.

Even a disappointing, and often bewildering, tragedy by Shakespeare is better than the best of many other authors (though I'd not say the same of his comedies.) So of course I recommend it, but I don't think as highly of it as do many of the critics.

GRADE : B-

This star-rating system has one important flaw: you have to rank books only in relation to its peers, its genre. So you must put five stars in a great light-humor book, as compared to other ones of those. Well, I am giving this book four stars in relation to other Shakespeare's works and similar great books.

Of course, it's all in the writing. Shakespeare has this genius to come up with magnificent, superb sentences as well as wise utterings even if the plot is not that good.

This is the case with Lear. I would read it again only to recreate the pleasure of simply reading it, but quite frankly the story is very strange. It is hard to call it a tragedy when you foolishly bring it about on yourself. Here, Lear stupidly and unnecessarily divides his kingdom among his three daughters, at least two of them spectacularly treacherous and mean, and then behaves exactly in the way that will make them mad and give them an excuse to dispose of him. What follows is, of course, a mess, with people showing their worst, except for poor Edgar, who suffers a lot while being innocent.

Don't get me wrong: the play is excellent and the literary quality of Shakespeare is well beyond praise. If you have never read him, do it and you'll see that people do not praise him only because everybody else does, but because he was truly good.

The plot is well known: Lear divides the kingdom, then puts up a stupid contest to see which one of his daughters expresses more love for him, and when Cordelia refuses to play the game, a set of horrible treasons and violent acts begins, until in the end bad guys die and good guys get some prize, at a terrible cost.

As a reading experience, it's one of the strongest you may find, and the plot is just an excuse for great writing.

One of literature's classic dysfunctional families shows itself in King Lear by William Shakespeare. King Lear implicity trusts his three daughters, Goneril, Regan, and Cordelia, but when the third wishes to marry for love rather than money, he banishes her. The two elder ones never felt Lear as a father; they simply did his bidding in an attempt to win his favor to get the kingdom upon his death. Cordelia, on the other hand, always cared for him, but tried to be honest, doing what she felt was right. As Lear realizes this through one betrayal after another, he loses his kingdom -- and what's more, his sanity...

The New Folger Library edition has to be among the best representations of Shakespeare I've seen. The text is printed as it should be on the right page of each two-page set, while footnotes, translations, and explanations are on the left page. Also, many drawings and illustrations from other period books help the reader to understand exactly what is meant with each word and hidden between each line.

I'm a great fan of Robert Fagles, and by no means does he let the reader down with this adaptation of Sophocle's triumvirate masterpiece.

There are a few versions of the Three Theban Plays out there for you to buy, but this is the one I most highly recommend. And it all comes down to a key word: translation.

I really like the work that Robert Fagles does on his translations. They are easy to read, fluid, and still manage to be poetic. There's a lot of work put into these pages, and it shows.

For work or for pleasure, The Three Theban Plays is an important part of dramatic history that everyone should read. If you're reading it, read it the best way that you can. Get this translation, and get it now.

I just saw the 1957 film of Oedipus Rex. Wo - ow. What a story.
And this translation by Robert Fagles is extremely good. Sophocles' drama is so simple, and so perfect, that it will probably never be forgotten! This is the ancestor to Hollywood - from 2500 years ago. THRILL to the dramatic exposition of Oedipus' unknowing sins! LAUGH at the gorgeous double-entendres in every second line! SHUDDER at the scene where Oedipus and Jocasta think they have the prophecy licked, and laugh at the gods!

This is fine drama, no mistake. I have not yet read the other two Theban plays in this volume, but I'm sure they're great too.

Oh by the way: Australian readers take note. The cover of the Aussie edition has no fewer than EIGHT typing and setting errors! "Robert Eagles??" "Thebian Plays??" I see from Amazon that the American edition is corrected. But Australian readers should take note. I don't know, maybe someone accidentally submitted a draft?
To make sure you have the right edition, read the spine. The stuffed-up version says "THEBIAN PLAYS"...ooer.

Mrs. Alder is my English teacher and I say ,we didn't think she was capable of writing this well. It is strange to think of the person who yells at you and gives you detentions when you don't have your red marking pen writing a terrific book. But she did! We had to read the book for class and I know many people were prejudiced at the beginning, but towards the end, I think most of us enjoyed it. So here goes on the review:
Evyn is a young Welsh farmworker in the mid-1000's. He loses his tongue in revenge by the brothers of someone who his uncle killed. With it goes his dream of becoming a revered storyteller. His father is killed also, and he is sold into slavery. Luckily, his lady is kind and sends him to a monastery to learn how to read and write. He joins Harold the Fair as his squire and friend, and later on, his foster son. He returns to the monastery after the Battle of Hastings to write the history chronicles of their journeys and adventures. I think this book was well written, but there were a few points that I did not enjoy. When Mrs. Alder wrote about the Battle of Hastings, she was a little too descriptive. In fact, I felt sick. I understand that some information was vital to the battle, but the whole "He was hacked until he was unrecognizable" was just a touch too much. Also, in class, she told us that Ealdgyth and Harold had children together, but that was not included in the book. Since the Little Queen had no children, the children of Ealdgyth would have been heirs to the throne. I thought this would have been very important, and she only mentions it at the very end of the last chapter. But I also think there were very many strong points. She kept true to the historcal truth and detailed everything well, but not too much throughout the books. I really enjoyed this book and look forward to more of her work!

This is one of the absolute best books I've ever read. If you're looking for a senseless book full of gore, then you're looking at the wrong book. I thoroughly enjoyed this book, and it gave me a new view on the historical background of King Harold, as well as William the Conqueror..It gives a new aspect on the happenings of war..I believe it to be one of the best books for young adults with the story placed in the medieval time period. It not only satisfied my apetite for history, it also satisfied the need for imagery and character. The setting was wonderful, and the characters, alive; the battle scenes enthralling...the story- touching. This is a must read, by a fabulous author. Keep writing, Elizabeth Alder!

I guess it's been a number of years since I read this. But oddly, I still find myself remembering it. It pulled me in.

There were some very sad parts, definitely tragedy in here. It was memorable and unexpected. It managed to pull me in, from half-hearted to fascinated. It wasn't a "one sitting" book, but it kept me interested. It built.

This is a fascinating look at medieval life. I found the characters well-drawn and interesting -- even the ones you hated. (It did seem like the king got off the hook a little too much, morally. But he was so sympathetic it was hard to remember.) I don't generally consider myself a reader of historical or political fiction, but this was fascinating -- not overblown or down-bogging.

This book got me interested in 1066.

If you like books for young adults, books about young people trying to find their way in a hostile world, or books about the middle ages, you should try this. Heck, even if you don't like those things, try it anyway! It's an excellent example of a story that takes place over a period of time, letting actual things change in the characters' lives.

And the raven foreshadowing was spooky!

I've studied a fair amount about the Anglo-Saxon period, so I was looking forward to reading "Lord of Sunset" as historical fiction. Regrettably, the novel is more romance than history. I give two stars because the author technically writes well and occasionally rises to lyrical and touching prose. However, the book is too long with too many fuzzy digressions that do not serve much purpose in moving the story forward. The characterizations sound more like 1966 than 1066 with homey family scenes and lots of fretting about things that sound utterly out of place in the violent warrior culture of the time. Moreover, some of the actions simply lack much motivation, making it hard to believe even if you aren't bothered by historical details. Lastly, in terms of shedding light on one of the turning points in British and European history, there's not much here. In the end, read as fantasy/romance, the book may well please the reader. But if you're expecting solid historical fiction that paints a valid portrait of the time or offers intriguing suppositions into its why's and wherefore's, this treatment will likely disappoint.

I've read all the books I've been able to find on Harold II, and this one was very different and unique. Godwin's use of different narrators was not only surprising, but quite wonderful! Who would have thought to have ever learned Earl Godwin's opinion or heard Eadgytha's or Tostig's side of the tale? This technique was just marvelous! I loved getting into the heads of King Edward and Duke William. The only problem (though minor) that I had with this book was Godwin's version of Harold's famed relationship with Edith. To be perfectly honest, a man of Harold's reputation and power would not have fallen for a plump Plain Jane as Godwin portrayed Edith. He should've made her the gorgeous mate that earned her the title of "Swan-neck." All in all, though, this book is just great.

Godwin breathes life into the real-life legend of King Harold of England and his common-law wife, Lady Edith of Nazeing. Harold of Wessex served his father, his family, and the Crown with his vision of a unified England. Both an antagonist of King Edward, who married Harold's sister Eagdytha, and later his strongest supporter, Harold worked towards uniting the lords. As Harold gains power and prestige, one woman stands beside him, his beloved Edith. Forbidden to marry by Church laws, Harold and Edith are married in a civil ceremony which begins twenty years of life together. Twenty years which are threatened by the crowning of Harold after Edward's death, and by the rise of William the Conqueror. On that fateful day at Hastings in 1066, Harold and Edith stand together. Godwin's powerful descriptions allow two legendary lovers to live as normal human beings swept up in the struggles of their times. The background and the relationships are realistic, and after reading this book, you will believe his version. _Lord of Sunset_ is a prequel, without fantasy elements, to _Sherwood_ and _Robin and the King_.

There are very few published biographies of Charlemagne, King of the Franks, patron of the arts and the first Holy Roman Emperor. Part of the reason is that the sources for the early medieval era are often unreliable. And academic medievalists, particularly in covering the Carolingan period, tend to be extremely dry.

The last thing one can say about Harold Lamb is that his prose is dry. Sadly, however, he veers too far towards the opposite end of the spectrum: his prose is fruity to the point of being just plain overripe; he frequently interposes invented dialogue, and he can never avoid making pat judgments on the protagonists' foibles. This is less a history than an historical novel, and a pretty dated one at that.

If you are after a readable, reliable narrative history of Charlemagne, I would suggest either Chamberlin's book, or alternatively the entry on "Charlemagne" in Dahmus' "Seven Medieval Kings."

Harold Lamb is an amazing writer and really brings Charlemagne to life. At an age when most boys (of this era) are trying to figure out what video game to play next, Charlemagne was leading his first military expedition. The book starts off with Charles, son of Pepin the Short, being all of 11 years old and starting off with Charles being named the "noble son" of the king.

You learn of his background - he was the son of a favored mistress who married the king - a few years after Charles was born. His younger brother, born after the wedding, was the favorite of his father and Charles was somewhat jealous of that situation.

The book takes you through all the times of Charles the Great, the one they called Charlemagne - he conquered _all_ of Europe, from the Pyrenees to Constantinople,He established schools and laws that persist to this day. He was considered the absolute monarch of the Christian world. This book takes you every step of the way with him, through his military campaigns as well as his life with his family.

This book is a wonderful read and I recommend it highly for those of you who are interested in history.