This book sustains a promising essence concealed in a Christian straight-jacket. Its promise kept my attention through the whole work, but its final disappointment only served to remind me why I should not read modern Christian theology.

In that he is "nice" to Buddhism and the Buddha, I commend Richard Henry Drummond, Ph.D. That is, he doesn't take the wide spread Protestant stance that all other religions are worthless or demon-led. In fact, I can quote from pp.217 that "in spite of the distortions of Buddhist monasticism and the failures of popular religion, much if not most of that which has been noble and good in Asian history may be attributed to the influence of the Buddha." In the preface he truthfully forewarns us that,"no one, in academic context or not, operates from a life posture that can be called completely impartial or objective." His Christianity though is a far stance from anything near a fair objectivism. He knows that there is not the mathematical accuracy in regards to Christology that people are impressed with erroneously from John Dominic Crossan, but he begins with the view that we can derive a true outline of Christ's life. (I'm not suggesting that this should be denied, only that biases like this are a framework for his Christian views.) When comparing the lives and workings of the two thaumaturges, I could not believe some of the things that I read. "there is no reason of significance--historical, literary, or scientific-philosophical--to doubt that Jesus did perform mighty works, which we may call miracles, largely as reported in the New Testament accounts." (LAUGH... I suppose there aren't whole books written on that subject alone, namely against such a notion) What really restrains this book from its potential is the cherished 'uniqueness of Jesus.' This begins to play an active role in his analysis of Christ's miraculous resurrection which he in the end uses as a means to elevate Christ over Buddha. pp.150 says that, "I should like to explore the possibility that we have in the case of Jesus of Nazareth what we do not percieve in either Gautama, Zarathustra, or Muhammad; that is, a consciously chosen vicarious-redemptive role." He tries to preserve the seat of his uniqueness where he has the perfect chance to discuss the fascinating miraculous similarities extant betwixt Gautama and Yeshua. I thought without a doubt that he would deal with the alleged water-walking and storm-calming attributed to the Buddha and then the Christ. Not one mention!!! With our refusal to give up Christ's uniqueness, this implies mythical borrowing from the Axial Period. And if he actually did represent a "broader vision" this would be given spiritual attention and explanation. In the philosophies of the Christ and the Buddha, there is juxtaposition of spiritual teachings. He draws the similarities between the 'Kingdom of God' and 'Nirvana,' described as religiously transcendant but realizable in the world, and maintainable beyond. But in the end he seems reluctant to ever actually equate them, not to mention in the end still promulgating "the spirit of sacrifice and mystery of the cross" as our method of salvation, not this relationship with the spirit of the primordial tradition. Accordingly the comparisons are made more so with the Mahayana school than Theravadin, with the concepts of universal salvation.

Drummond's work and juxtaposition is very thorough and comprehensive, but as I have aimed to point out either ignorance or preservation of Jesus' uniqueness caused him to exclude some of the most valuable study between the Buddha and the Christ. I expected that a 'broad vision' comparing two religious leaders would not take the side of one of them, and that is where I was utterly disappointed. I expected the title to imply a "broader vision" than Christianity, that had room to hold Buddhism in equal importance, or even a quasi-Baha'i perspective as Buddha and Christ essentially being one in spirit as manifestations in different settings. But I realized this was not the case on pp.170, "the Christ event is unique; it is also the pivotal, the single most important event of human history."

I am very glad that a Christian author acknowledges the Buddha with high spiritual regard, but one question I would propose to Drummond, "Is he in Hell?"

I found this book to be informative and enlightening. I have always wanted to compare these two spiritual leaders and this book as helped me to start my own search. I found the writing easy to read and understand. Some of it was a bit wordy but that was no big deal.

This is a average summary of this great King of England. It summarizes the challenges Henry Plangagenet faced when he assumed control of the Kingdom and his consolidation of his holdings in France. Henry II was one of the true great rulers
of his time, defying the Church and France to lead his realm. Since Barber wrote this book back in the sixties, it is not up to date on new research into Plantagenet rulers. Also Barber confuses the reader with the names of many people that were not a central theme of the King's time. The names are the most confusing aspect of this book, and thus the rating of three stars.

In Henry Plantagenet, Richard Barber has produced a short, lively, commendably readable account of Henry Plantagenet's life and reign. The book never drags and is related in a novel-like narrative that keeps one's interest through every page. Henry II was one of Englands most intriguing rulers at battle with France and family. The husband of Eleanor of Aquitane, the father of Richard the Lion Heart and John Lackland, his story is one to behold and Barber's effort is a top notch resource with which to do so.

The "unraveling of america" was by far the most illrepresented mind jarble i have ever read. The authors uncanny ability to misconstrue the facts dealing with the Great Society was so incrediable it actually made me laugh out loud in mid sentence. For all of you considering to by this book my best advise would be to instead purchase a copy of charles murray's book "losing ground".

A very good review of the most turbulent decade in the 20th Century. Matusow encapsulates all of the major policy areas that the government dealt with, showing successes and failures as well as his analysis of the situation. For the book's second part, he writes about the left's reactions to these moves and how the various radical groups took certain aspects and focused their discontent upon them. Overall, well-written, very readable, and gives enough detail to satisfy most basic questions the reader might have regarding the issues he covers.

This very slim volume deals with two plus generations of powers in both France and England. The author has chosen a rather simplistic writing style, and has elected to gloss over nearly all detail.

Not only is detail about the presumptive main characters lacking, but also is detail on the effects the actions of rulers, the main characters, have on the people as a whole.

This book might have served as an outline for two or three really good books. Unless buying for you seventh or eigth-grader, I suggest looking elsewhere.

This is a great book of Henry and the relationship and political intrigue he had with his sons. Not only does this describe the conflicts he had with his sons Richard and John but also of Eleanor of Aquantaine and Thomas Becket. Henry was a King to be admired for his smart political skill but also to be pitied for his mistrust of his family. The interesting thing about his mistrust of his family as the book points out, it saved his life and thus made Henry II one of the greatest English Kings.

An interesting book, but there are definitely better ones to learn how age of the sail ships were manoeuvered.

To get a vivid account of how all these tasks were done during a round-cape-Horn cruise, you'd better read "Two years before the mast" of the same author.

It's Richard Henry Dana, Jr

The editors have tried to add value to this rather unexciting collection of letters and brief diary by interspersing their own comments among the letters. This is all very well when they stick to facts, but too often they inflict their own 20th-century political beliefs upon the readers. That's particularly annoying considering the lip service paid to "objectivity" in the foreword.

The letters themselves are not exactly thrilling. The soldier in question saw little action and his letters (typically of Civil War letters) concern themselves mostly with relatives he's met and what he wants to have sent from home. His prison diary is interesting mostly in that its tone differs markedly from that of the letters; it's emotional and romantic, whereas the letters are downright dull. Still, the diary offers little factual information -- though he does undermine his editors' hoopla by stating that he was actually treated reasonably well. Whether he was "unreconstructed", as the editors claim, is unknown, because no post-war writings of his own are included.

I'd skip this. The editing is annoying and the primary material adds nothing new or entertaining to the wealth of Civil War primary sources already in print.

Sojourns of a Patriot is a compelling read. It esentially follows the life a Confederate infantryman, Corporal A.P. Adamson, throughout his tenure of the War Between the States. The book is composed primarily of his letters home and a journal he kept for the last year of the war. Secondarily, the editors provide comment and explanation to some of the entries. Most revealing were the roles that camp gossip played in his thoughts on the morale of the Southern troops. Also quite interesting were the false or incomplete pieces of "news" that reached Southern camps. This aspect of the book provides the reader with an insight that is often not present in regimental or campaign histories. Often, readers know the outcome of the battle, the makeup of the casualty list, or the result of a particular election. The letters in this book permit the reader an escape from that biased knowledge and to live through the life of the writer. The love of the writer for his home, his yearning for a return to his previous life, and his concern for the future are poignantly brought to the fore through his letters to various family members. However, some of the best writing is not included in these letters, but is in his later journal. These entries are poetry disguised as prose. The images brought forth by his writings are disturbing, comforting, melancholic, and often heart-wrenching. Brief though they are, they are some of the most powerful writings of the War this reader has encountered. The only detractor to the book is in the commentaries by the editors. They focussed a little more than was perhaps necessary on the personal histories of peripheral protagonists. Some of the information was repititious. However, in their defence, the editors do warn the reader of this in the beginning and they do have personal bias to this information. Additionally, the other commentaries they provide would be useful to readers who may not be as familiar with the conflict (in fact, these could have been expanded somewhat, but there is a conscious effort by the editors to provide suggested readings which are appropriate for each entry). Overall, I highly recommend this book to any person interested in the War Between the States. It will be especially appealling to readers with interest in the personal experiences of the war and an informative diversion to those readers who generally limit themselves to straight histories.

This short book is mostly composed of self righteous lectures about how to improve the world or one's own life. There is very little detail or anecdote. I believe only a die hard fan of the sailing era could derive any value from this.

Anyone who enjoys Patrick O'Brian's novels, the Hornblower series, or the like, will be fascinated by this true-life autobiography that reads like a novel. Leech joined the Royal Navy at age 12, and was in the crew of the Macedonian when she was captured by the frigate United States during the War of 1812; his account of that battle is worth the price of the book all by itself. This book was a best-seller a century and a half ago and ought to be one again today. The fine intros add that much more, and the Naval Institute's "Classics" format makes a solid, handsome volume. (Disclaimer: I edited one of the early volumes in the series myself-- but this is an unsolicited testimonial; the book is a good read.)

The life of Henry Miller really derves the talents of someone like Robert Caro, since it can be seen as the basis for a broader history of the American West in the 19th century. Miller himself was self-made, a dynamic, visionary, and fantastically successful land and cattle baron. He also seems to have been welll-liked by the men he hired, and (at least for a land baron) by his neighbors. The story as told by Treadwell is factual enough, but devoid of personal and cultural detail. Miller's business papers are mostly in the collection of the Bancroft Library at UC Berkeley, raw data awaiting the talentrs of a more skilled biographer. An out-of-print but fairly easy to find book written by one of Miller's foremen, "California Gringos", is also informative

This book provides a firsthand look back at two crucial events in the forming of the United States: American's response to and reasons for fighting against taxation by the British, and arguments about the Constitution.

In the first half, Letters from a Famer in Pennsylvania, John Dickinson takes great care to explain why Americans should oppose all taxes that the British impose merely to raise money, namely the Townshend Acts. Dickinson expresses his concern over precendents being set, and draws heavily on the previous American refusal to pay the Stamp Act. This section was fairly interesting in that it helped explain some of the reasons Americans didn't want to pay British taxes, but it did become fairly repetitve throughout the letters.

In the second half, Letters from the Federal Farmer, Richard Henry Lee puts forth his arguments about the Constitution before it was ratified by the states. Arguments included why state governments should wield more power than the federal government, whether a bill of rights should be included in the Constitution, and why too much power was located in the federal government outlined in the Constitution.

All in all, the book was a fairly difficult read that was boring at times, but it did provide an interesting look into the opinions that shaped the US.

This book seems to be part of a set for younger readers, say around ten to twelve. Good for what it is but not as comprehensive as I would have liked.