The self-styled "H.R.H. Prince Michael" claims a descent from "Bonnie Prince Charlie Stewart", the young pretender. Fact is that Bonnie Prince Charlie married Louise of Stolberg. He did recognize an illegitimate daughter, Charlotte, who may or may not be an ancestress of Michael. However, Michael claims that he also descends from a "Prince" born to Marguere de Lussan, and he claims that she had married Bonnie Prince Charlie. This marriage never took place and Charles Stewart never recognized a child by this woman.
To make his claim to royal descent even more ridiculous, Michael has added the completely fake genealogy of the Holy Blood, Holy Grail book to his book, thus claiming descent through the Guises and the Merovingians from Jesus Christ himself! This claim is completely absurd.

However, if you do not mind about historic accuracy, the book is quite pleasantly written and it is clear that the author loves Scotland. Besides the silly genealogy stuff, it contains a series of biografies of Scottish Kings.

As a Scots from Scotland, born & bred on the right side of the borders, this book became within 3 weeks of publication a bestseller (number 2 in Scotland, 7 in UK) and has seen a public awareness of a new alternative to party politics in the up coming and new Scotland. For those die hard pro-Hanoverian (or Windsor as most people know them today), I am glad to say that 'your time is up'. People, in Scotland, are already campaigning for the return of their lawful Royal House in a big way. There are many things which have been said by two particular reviewers, namely all rather negative. However, HRH Prince Michael of Albany is the legal, recognised head of the Royal House of Stewart, a title which has been mentioned on his British Passports since 1986. His claim has never been denied by the authorities in Great Britain and was, in matter of fact, confirmed by the British Home Office on 24-04-91. There are contemporary archives (British State) proving that Charles Edward's progeny, Edward James Stuart of Stuarton and Albany, survived into the 19th & 20th centuries. The book is extremely well researched, drawing from european archives and explains in details what happened to the family while surviving in exile. While passionate, it is focused. The Prince's understanding of Scottish history, for one born in Belgium, is superb and his political analysis second to none. This man, when he becomes King of Scots (notice when, not if), will prove to be what Scotland has been needing all along. A representative of the people, for the people. For all who are truly interested, not merely in the past of Scotland but in her future, read this book and learn. And no matter what some rather poorly misguided individuals may tell you, think Scotland, sing Scotland and support the Royal House of Stewart.

If only this book had been available when I was a schoolboy (post war) and had been taught as our history. Scotland will gain strength from knowing that her true Prince is back to fight for her freedom. This is a Royal House believing in 'Service to the people'. A movement has now been organised around the Prince and Scottish politicians are finally taking note of what visions Prince Michael has for Scotland. I attended one of his lecture (the hall was full, people stood for lack of chairs) and it was the best evening I have had for a long time. The house of Stewart has NEVER died out. If you believe it has, you are a fool. It is alive, kicking, it is modern, relevant, politically aware and ready to make waves. It will also bring Scottish Independence quicker than we think. Scottish businesses are linking with him in an attempt to be more fully and more efficiently represented. It is a breath of fresh air which Scotland has craved for these past many years. It is the most exciting read the end of this century has had to offer. From Scotland to Scots the world over.

Not to be nasty, but I feel would-be readers should be warned: this "hero" is strictly for those who enjoy locker-room bragging and a dialogue composed mostly of snide comments about women's body parts. There are "rascals" in fiction who are also talented, basically good-hearted or at least witty (i.e., Lindsey Davis' Didius Falco). The sleazy, stupid and utterly unappealing Roger Shallot is NOT one of them!

I've read all of Clynes' Journals of Sir Roger Shallot. All of the books take place during the reign of Henry VIII and focus on the reluctant detective work of Roger and his master, the nephew of Cardinal Wosley. Roger tells the stories as flashbacks from his present position as a seclusive and retired lord of the realm. In the books Roger is a cowardly, lusty, and unrepentant vagabond who follows his master as they are assigned to investigate various heinous crimes by the cardinal and Henry. I love the books for the mixture of diabolical plots, historical backdrop, and the effort Clynes puts into developing the characters. Every one of the books feature involved plots, surprise villans, and a certain dark and wry humor. You'll find yourself rapidly finishing the books, engrossed in trying to solve the crimes yourself and simultaneously laughing aloud at the misfortunes that befall Roger.

I have high respect for the author and I find the front matter on skiing history and ski techniques very interesting & informative.

However, for a guidebook, I was disappointed to find NO maps of ski trails for anywhere. No ski tours are described. Instead each ski area is described in general terms. The description of developed ski facilities and lodging is good, but where's the ski trails?

Furthermore, the coverage is spotty. All the areas around Tahoe and Donner are covered, but the southern and eastern Sierra and southern California ski areas are poorly represented.

I recommend buying Marcus Libkind's "Ski Tours in the Sierra Nevada." He has 4 volumes for various parts of the Sierra and another book on Lassen.

Disclaimer: I am not a professional reviewer hired by the publisher, but a real skier.

Michael Jeneid's Cross-Country Skiing California provides a guide to both trails and resorts, with chapters covering all of the state's major ski regions and local accommodations as well. An excellent guide to the best skiing.

Please, if you have a choice of textbooks, do NOT buy this one. I have a feeling the author knows nothing of eCommerce, yet was given 80 references, told to mash them together as non-sensically as possible and fire the result off to the publisher.
I've worked in eCommerce for a number of years and this book is a total waste of time and money. Many "industry terms" used do not exist. The author contradicts himself on a number of occasions. Many of the charts and illustrations are good for a laugh. I truly feel sorry for people who have this book as their introduction to eCommerce. You're going to come away with a lot of mangled/antiquated theories, and a bunch of "facts" that are just plain wrong. I'm sorry to say I had to memorize all of this junk in order to get an A in my course. As soon as I handed that exam in, I made a concerted effort to forget everything I read in this text.

The new edition is very current (the title even has "2002" in it). It covers practically every imaginable topic concerning Electronic Commerce. The general organization of the book is also good. For example, each chapter states objectives up front, covers them, ends with a summary, and then provides a list of key terms, questions for review & discussion, internet exercises, and team assignments. The glossary in the back is especially useful. So, for classroom use, it's a good text.

However, there is way too much detail, case studies, etc..., that makes it a very monotonous book to wade through. It would be much easier to read and more effective if it was condensed down (a "Reader's Digest version"). It has countless references to web site examples and "see more" sources, but to a fault, as it slows down reading. There are also graphics, diagrams, and tables throughout the book, but many are too detailed and others just add "more material" and not more value.

If you want a lot of information, this book has it -- but unfortunately with all the excitement of reading an encyclopedia.

I am a big fan of the tech books of E. Turban. His Decision Support Systems & Intelligent Systems was my first intro to his spin on tech topics. He and his co-authors have put together a really nice guide for management still in the "chin stroking" mode on what to do with E-Commerce. It is also a great textbook for undergrads/grads in a business school. Check out his table of contents--it hits all the bases to help management avoid the black holes and pot holes to make a smooth transition into the new economy.This book is a great place to start.

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.

I bought this mostly for Ecclesiastes, and unfortunately, Juliet Mills' interpretation is absolutely wrong. This is one of the most beautiful, realistic and world-weary books in all of literature and she reads it as an angry, old testement prophet, or worse, a hell and brimstone fundamentalist preacher. Michael York is far too bright and hopeful for the Psalms. I don't think these people understood the true nature of the writings they were reading. A very shallow, TV evangelist approach to the Bible.

Although I usually read Michael Williams DragonLance novels I bought this book as it seemed the only intresting one in the quite understocked shop.Knowing Michael Williams for his poetry in the dragonlance novels and his own novels in the series such as weasels luck I was expecting even a partially decent novel, and although the prologue was good the book rapidly fell downhill, becoming confusing with a boring plot, unoriginal characters and some actual gaping holes in the plot as far as I can see, such as basing the novel in a fantasy land and then refering to places in the real world. The book was a struggle to finish reading and must be one of the only books I can remember not having enjoyed. After reading such poor material I almost feel I could do better myself and am warning you if you enjoy michael williams work stay away from this book as it will only be a dissapointment.

Even though no one will probably read this, I feel I have to warn Holmes fans if they find this book and want to read it. I'll put it bluntly, it was very boring. I had to force myself to finish it, mostly because it was due back at the library soon. I have no idea what the author was trying to do writing this book, since it obvisously didn't get much attention. The book is not really a biography, he (Holmes) does not start out saying where he was born, in fact he never goes there but sort of skips to his childhood in the middle of the story to explain why he never talked about his childhood with Watson. Which isn't reason enough to read this book. Some things that annoyed me was the fact that the author tells us that "the woman" was actually a famous (or is that infamous?) prostitute; Holmes had never gotten married because the type of women he liked were of "a certain occupation." Holmes? Never! All in all a very bad, boring, and not worthy of Sir Author Conan Doyle.

In the introduction to this book, Mr. Senior states (rather proudly I might add) that he has so very professionally hacked away 2 thirds( aw, just a few sentences..) of the entire story. He claims that much of it was needless details (such as descriptions of battles, ect.) but rambles on to announce that he has cleanly ripped away a few other side plots not necessary to to the well-being of the whole (as he sees it); any of the adventures of Sir Gareth, you won't find here. Other knights seem to drop into the story, and while all of the characters in the tale will appear to know who they are, you are left in the dark, because they happened to be on the editor's 'bad list' and their earlier excursions were deleted.
But then Mr. Senior finishes with this; that we must "not bewail these losses" (after all, he knows what he's doing). I suppose 2 thirds of Sir Thomas Malory's work was in vain.

if you had put some info on the internet, i might have gotten on a on the report