I'm absolutely thrilled to discover this book in print once again! This is the cherished Book of Common Prayer I was raised with as an Episcopalian, and when the Episcopal Church abandoned this version for its contemporary revision, it cast aside one of the most beautiful works of literature ever printed. I am able once again, as an Anglican in America, to enjoy the 1928 BCP in my worship, which is made even more special with this wonderfully crafted leather version. I can only describe this book as remarkable. The gilded pages are crisp and thin as an onion skin, yet lay open willingly upon the soft leather cover, which nestles on the hand. The book marks are very convenient. Though this book is of paramount significance to all Anglicans and traditional Episcopalians, I cannot imagine any Christian not being comforted and inspired by this magnificent work, which is companion to the King James version of the Bible. Among the highlights of the 1928 BCP the reader will appreciate, in addition to Morning Prayer, Evening Prayer and Holy Communion, are the Collects, Epistles and Gospels used throughout the Christian calendar year, Holy Baptism, Matrimony, Confirmation, Catechism, The Psalter or Psalms of David, and forms of prayer for families for all occasions. This is a complete work that every Christian should explore.

A wonderful example of what a Book of Common Prayer should be. Thankfully the ECUSA has re-authorized the 1928 BCP for "special occasions," sadly though, many parishes have been so long without this gem as to make it unfamiliar.

Absolutely beautiful.

There is a lot to like about this book. It has the usual host of colorful and varied characters that one finds in Trollope's novels. There are strong and complex women, sturdy and weak-willed men, and some wonderful set-pieces. It's a bit of a let-down after _Phineas Finn_, though, which to my mind is the greatest political novel in the English language. The previous two 'Palliser' novels having been clearly both for and about Liberals, I think that Trollope was struggling in this novel to write in a way that would both reflect and appeal to more Conservative sensibilities. So we get a lot of domestic gossip, a little mild anti-semitism, and endless lectures about the Proper way for a Gentleman to Behave to a Lady. Still, the protagonist, Lizzie Eustace, is a gem.

Lucy Morris is a bore. If you like Jane Austen you will like this novel! It has all the necessary ingredients to keep you turning the pages. It's fun and charming to read just like its heroine Lizzie Eustace. Trollope argues that she is no heroine at all but it is when she appears that your interest is held the longest and that you laugh the loudest. She is wicked and selfish and vain and yet childike spoiled and that's what makes her great. Lucy Morris in comparison bores you with her goodness and her morality and her prim and proper attitude which although greatly admired in 19th century women leaves her nonetheless dull and insipid in comparison to charmingly wicked Lizzie.

I have only read one Anthony Trollope novel, and I had the very good fortune of having chosen "The Eustace Diamonds." This superbly constructed novel begins with what is probably my favorite opening sentence of a novel--it's right up there with the opening sentence to Jane Austen's "Pride and Prejudice":

"It was admitted by all her friends, and also by her enemies--who were in truth the more numerous and active body of the two--that Lizzie Greystock had done very well with herself." The second sentence further clarifies Lizzie's character when it goes on with, "We will tell the story of Lizzie Greystock from the beginning, but we will not dwell over it at great length, as we might do if we loved her."

Lizzie Greystock--eventually to become Lady Eustace--is a fascinating combination of cunning and foolishness, of avarice and pitiable character, of steely backbone and whimpering fits. She reminds me so very much of both Emma Bovary and Scarlett O'Hara. Her determination to keep the Eustace family diamonds entirely for herself is what sets the novel in motion, and with this rather simple device, Trollope goes on to spin out a tale which encompasses morality, greed, Victorian social mores, the corrupting influence of money, and the blindness it can cause to everything else of value.

Lizzie is contrasted, with every shade under the sun, with the sweet and constant Lucy Morris. Picture the contrast as one very much like that of Scarlett O'Hara and Melanie Wilkes. "The Eustace Diamonds" is a deliciously satisfying book, and a classic for a very good reason: despite having been written in the 19th century, what it has to say reverberates as soundly now as when Trollope first published it. I can't recommend it highly enough.

Romola is constantly called Eliot's weakest novel, with even serious critics reluctant to praise it. However, it was seen in the 19th century as Eliot's masterpiece. Some of the blame for the novel going out of fashion must rest with F.R. Leavis who said that "few will want to read Romola a second time, and few can ever have got through it once without some groans." If Leavis, viewed as one of the great literary minds, thinks this, then more average readers like us are bound to be put off.

True, the start of Romola is bogged down in detail, but it is introduced by a wonderful, stirring and majestic 'Proem' which sees the Angel of the Dawn sweeping across the Earth and loftily states how humanity is the same now as it was when Romola is set. After this, the notes are best ignored - consult them separately, and concentrate on getting into the book. It is a stirring and sometimes hard read, and moves one with awe at what Eliot has created - you really feel you are experiencing Florence in the 15th century. There is one scene that stands out for me - the haunting and almost surreal episode where Romola drifts by boat to an apparent coastal haven. Images of peace and life are reversed disturbingly.

So ignore Leavis and the dissenters. If you've read another Eliot, you'll like it. If you haven't, maybe start with something else, but come back, for it's a rewarding read

Given the majority of Eliot readers begin with Middlemarch, I found myself in the unique position of not only beginning with Romola, but also on a subject that I find most interesting. That of Renaissance Italy. Beginning at the death of the great Lorenzo di Medici in '92 I read this great novel twice. Once quickly as any other Twenty-First century paperback; the second, slowly, with more respect for the intellectual scope within the pages.
After the first attempt I was mildly disappointed. I came away with no true sense of the whole that is fifteenth century Florence and a bewilderment at the inconsistent central characterisation of Tito Melema and his golden-haired wife, Romola. The supporting actors were brilliant, from Fra Girolama's fantatical Catholicism to Bratti's salesmanship. But I was left disappointed, believing in the superficality of Tito, the maddening naivety of Tessa, and the almost puritanical martyrdom of Romola.
So I re-read it. Slowly.
It is now extremely clear why this great work of english literature is, as Eliot herself puts it, a "book of mine which I more thoroughly feel that I swear by every sentence as having been written with my best blood".
Each scene is mesmerically depicted, the infintesimal attention to details and Eliot's total control of her subject matter shines through.
Renaissance Florence wasn't so well depicted by its contemporaries.
From Tito's waking at the Loggia de' Cerchi to his final fall at the Ponte Vecchio his character moves through a full range as you would expect from a man in his early twenties. His child-like mesmerism coupled with his Greek tutorage gives rise to a cherubic man whom Florence loves. His fatal flaw is his desire for love and a single terrible lie he gives that, like Murphy's Law, evolves into a a stigma that alters his very persona. What is all the more damaging is that you truly believe he is unaware of the pain he causes. He is truly egocentric, in an almost blameless way. For Romola, you cold argue the opposite. Indeed she is potentially more culpable. Her fierce intellectualism is offset by a descent into a world of religious supersition, a world where religion is used as a political tool. Throughout she has the knowledge of where her actions will take her and a terrible sense of duty and restrains her. From the beginning, with the story we hear so often of Tito's escape from drowning, to his final near drowning at the hands of the mob, to his strangulation by his father there is a certain bitter justice until all that he leaves is his proud and world-scarred wife Romola and the innocence that he preserved with Tessa. Tito's move from innocent 'hero' to startled villain is an excerise in human failings. Yet it is not a sufficient single human tragedy, as Eliot says, "Florence was busy with greater affairs, and the preparation of a deeper tragedy".
In many respects 'Romola' is Eliot's King Lear. The parallels are many, including Baldessare's depiction. There is no Edgar, nor Edmund but the Fool is here in many guises. In taking one of Shakespeare's finest themes, Eliot has given true life to fifteenth century Florence and it is, perhaps, best encapsulated by Romola's final statement to Tessa's son, Lillo:
"There was a man to whom I was very near... who made almost everyone fond of him, for he ws young, and clever, and beautiful...I believe, when I first knew him, he never thought of anything cruel or base. But because he tried to slip away from everything that was unpleasant, and cared for nothing else so much as his own safety, he came at last to commit some of the basest deeds - such as make men infamous."
So, Eliot's 'Romola'. Read it, delight in it because it truly is, as the author can rightly claim, one of the finest works in english literature.

Yes, it bristles with Glossaries and Appendices and Notes like so much barbed wire. (And if you actually read the Penguin editor's introduction, it's a sure thing you'll never read the novel: she makes it sound like about as much fun as chewing rocks.) But don't let all that deter you. You may have some rough going at the beginning, mostly because Latin and Greek scholarship is so important to the plot. Use the notes and they'll enhance your enjoyment of the story, but ignore them and you're still in for a thrilling tale gorgeously told. Tito Melema is one of the great characters in fiction, and he's someone we all know: a thoroughly despicable human being who has no idea he's anything but a nice guy. Eliot has wrought a dreamy and hair-raising hybrid of fiction and history, infused with her own astonishing insight and complicated sympathy and delivered in her matchless prose. I loved this book.

This book is probably the best introduction to the Shakespeare authorship controversy available at the moment. What impressed me most about it was its tone of quiet logic, and its careful, balanced account of the facts and the arguments on both sides. The orthodox Stratfordians are given their due, and their arguments and their objections to the Oxfordian view are discussed in detail. I also liked the way that facts are put into context, rather than just baldly stated.

On the other hand there is a little repetition, and the chapters sometimes give the impression of being written as separate essays, and then tweaked a bit and put into book form. The first half of the book is devoted to the case against William of Stratford, and the second half to the case for Edward de Vere, the Earl of Oxford.

I'm certainly not a person who is inclined to accept conspiracy theories. As someone who has always loved Shakespeare and is interested in Elizabethan history, I dismissed the alternative authorship theory for many years as a crackpot idea. However, once I actually started reading the details of the arguments in favor of Edward de Vere (and reading other books on the subject besides this one), I soon became convinced. I think that a careful, objective consideration of the evidence shows that it is far more likely that de Vere wrote the plays than that William of Stratford did. The Stratfordian arguments seem labored and clumsy, and based largely on guesswork, while the Oxfordian view fits into place very easly and effortlessly, and has ample factual evidence to support it. For me this has added a whole new level of insight and understanding to the plays and poetry, and a much deeper appreciation and enjoyment of them.

Whalen's book is highly recommended for anyone who wants a good summary of the issues and arguments.

Many people don't know that there's a controversy over the authorship of the plays. Many of those that know of the issue ask "why bother? Shakespeare wrote Shakespeare" and that's that." I used to feel that way until I fell in love with the works of Shakespeare in college and wanted to know more about the individual who wrote the plays. Was it Shakspere, the business man from London or Shake-speare (Edward De Vere)?

For me, part of the joy of reading the works of Shakespeare was finding out the history behind them. The more I read about the man, the more I found academia didn't know about him. They had a handle on the times and the events, but not the man. This raised several questions in my mind:

1. Why is there little or no mention of William Shakspere amongst his contemporaries (Jonson, Dryden and Marlow to name a few)?
2. Why is the only written documentation referencing Shakspere concern business dealings. For a playwright and poet as prolific as Shakespeare, you'd think someone would have "something". Yet in the centuries since his passing -- little or nothing.
3. How could an outsider (Shakspere) have intimate knowledge of the aristocracy? (i.e.: Burghley/Polonius) There were definite social boundries in Elizabethan times. Oxford (De Vere) was in that inner circle.

These are just a few of the questions readers of Shakespeare have had about the man from Stratford over the years. Mr. Whalen takes several of these questions and condenses them into a neat little volume, making this a wonderful place for someone interested in the authorship controversy to start.

In this succinct summary of the authorship debate, Mr. Whalen sets for himself a very modest goal: "to persuade the general reader that the controversy is valid and genuinely fascinating, that Oxford may indeed be the true author, and that more research should be done into this most significant of literary problems." It would be a churlish reader indeed who, after reading his book, would fail to grant that the debate at least warrants further study. Anyone who looks at the case objectively cannot but concede its merit, whichever side they eventually come down on.

Before they spout off about it being merely a mad theory of cranks and crackpots, churls should remember that the same was said about Copernicus, Darwin, and Wegener (plate tectonics), and that history has long since vindicated each. They should also note that the list of cranks and crackpots includes: Justice Harry A. Blackmun; Justice Lewis F. Powell, Jr.; Justice John Paul Stevens; Sir John Gielgud; Leslie Howard; Sigmund Freud; Sir Derek Jacobi; Orson Welles; Clifton Fadiman; Daphne DuMaurier; John Galsworthy; Charles DeGaulle; James Joyce; Lewis Lapham; Clare Booth Luce; Charlie Chaplin; Mark Twain; Malcolm X; Walt Whitman-you get the idea that being labeled a crank lumps you with some pretty good company. Please, then, call me a crank, too!

The author covers a lot of ground very quickly, giving the general reader a broad synopsis of the debate, without getting into the grinding detail that is better left to the specialist. From what I can gather from Mr. Whalen's fine little survey, the crank that came out with the first unequivocal, public denouncement of Will Shakespere of Stratford as the usurper of the Shakespeare canon was one Joseph C. Hart, an American lawyer who wrote in the early 19th century, "It is a fraud upon the world to thrust his surreptitious fame upon us." Hear, hear! Would it were that one day the name of Hart will be in literary circles what the names Copernicus, Darwin, and Wegener are to scientific ones and to the wider public: a voice in the wilderness calling the world to reason.

Engrossing, densely textured read.
Could claim greatness on the basis of the Wragges and Madame alone, but also contains one of the most original heroines in Victorian fiction,and draws a fascinating portrait of venality, social corruption and hypocrisy -- at times, it reminded me of both 'Pere Goriot' and 'Les Miserables'.
And it's full of those little concrete details that make nineteenth century fiction so deliciously materialistic. Don't miss out on the Oriental Cashmere Robe!

This is the best-plotted book I have ever read. The intricacies of the ingenious cat-and-mouse game kept me unable to put the book down (despite its length, and my general impatience as a slow reader). Unlike other books I've read by Collins, this one is also extremely funny, largely because of one character who is an incredible rascal and scoundrel. This is really one of the most enjoyable novels I've ever found.

It is to Wilkie Collins' credit that more than a century after he wrote his novels, they still engage the reader and make sense in social terms. In "No Name," two sisters by the last name of Vanstone find out that they are illegitimate. Their formerly comfortable lives are disrupted to the core as their lose their places in society, their friends, their inheritances, and even, literally, their names. Collins makes their predicament alive and vital despite the fact that today this sort of news would barely stir a social ripple.

It's hard to find superlatives enough to describe this edition. Everything about it is both useful and beautiful.

A pocket Bible with the Apocrypha is rare enough to begin with, but--in addition to the usual Catholic Deuterocanonicals and Protestant Apocrypha--this little book manages to include everything in the Greek and Slavonic canons. It will fatten your pocket a little, but it's worth the extra bulk to have the extra books, especially if you're interested in the history of Christian thought.

The binding makes pocket Bibles from American publishers look crude. The type, even in the footnotes, is remarkably legible. There are just enough helps in the back to be useful without bulking up the book unnecessarily.

The Anglicized Edition is not substantially different from the American edition of the NRSV. If you're a pastor, lector, or writer who needs to use the NRSV in the exact form that's approved for the liturgy in your church, you might not want to rely on this edition. I don't think most other readers will notice the difference.

For those looking for a portable, inexpensive edition of the NSRV, look no further. Although the size of the volume is slighter larger than most of its kind, its sturdy construction makes it a suitable choice for travelers or commuters. The binding is a dark olive leatherflex with gold lettering.The type is small, but still easy to read. Please take note that this is the Anglicized version, so there are slight differences in spelling and usage. However, most readers should not find that a problem.

I am very picky about the typography in my Bibles--and for its small size this beautiful little Bible is very easy to read. I have the Burgundy Leather Bound edition which is beautifully bound and finished. This is the aforementioned "anglicised" version--I do want to counter the review above by saying that I don't find the differences troublesome at all. There are very few discrepancies between this and my "regular" NRSV...

This book is far better than Haykin's Communication Systems textbook and is cleaner in presentation and organization by leaps and bounds. This book does not introduce topics ad hoc and expect you to have previous background, as Haykin's book does. I really cannot find anything major at all wrong with this book. Everything is clear, the examples are relevant, and the book is really smooth if you start from the beginning. I used this book in addition to Communication Systems by Haykin to learn the subject, and this one is far better; my fellow students agree with me.

This book is excellent for the beginners. People who think that the book is not good probably don't have enough elementary science background.

I have used this book as the adopted text for a course in Communication Systems in Electronics and Communication Engineering major. I find this text a marvelous one in every aspect for introducing the subject, instigating interest in this exciting area. The treatment of math in the text is excellent, as the author takes all efforts to work us through the solved examples, with increasing mathametical maturity. The author goes further to explain the mathametical analysis mapping it to the real world behaviour. I had a chance to refer to other texts in this area too - Simon Haykin's Communication Systems, Carlson's text and others. While they are good, I think this one is the best one for any newcomer to the subject. It helped me in understanding advanced texts like Proakis's Digital Communications.

It is great to finally have a collected works of Aristotle. The quality of the 2 volumes is superb and the translations, as far as I can tell, seem quite good.
However, the INDEX leaves a lot to be desired. First, there is only an index in volume 2 covering both volumes. This is a nuisance if you only have volume 1. Secondly, the index is, for all practical purposes, not subdivided. That is, let's say you want to look up "virtue," all you get is tons of reference (page) numbers but no additional information, so in order to find precisely what you're looking for, you basically have to look up all the references and decide for yourself. And that keeps the index from being very useful.

The Complete Works of Aristotle Volume 2 edited bu Jonathan Barnes is a continuation of the revised Oxford translation. Aristotle is one of the greatest thinkers in the Western tradition, but also one of the most difficult.

As with the first volume, this translation makes the surviving works of Aristotle easily read for the English-speaking readers. This volume combined with the first makes a comprehesive work. Both volumes are nicely bound and the type is easy to read. Also, the volumes have numerals printed in the outer margins to key the translations to Immanuel Bekker's standard edition of the Greek text of Aristotle of 1831. The index of both editions could use a bit more work as they are cumbersome to work with, but not impossible.

I've found that using "The Cambridge Companion to Aristotle" of great help. This is also edithed by Jonathan Barnes. The contents of volume 2 are as follows: On Plants, On Marvellous Things Heard, Mechanics, Problems On Indivisible Lines, The Situation and Names of Winds, On Melissus,Xenophanes,and Gorgias, Metaphysics, Nicomachean Ethics, Magna Moralia, Eudemian Ethics, On Virtues and Vices, Politics, Economics, Rhetoric, Rhetoric to Alexander, Poetics, Constition of Athens, Fragments.

As with the first voume, this work contains works that the authenticity has been seriously doubted and works that are spurious and have never been seroiusly contested.

The translations are easily read and flow. You can definately understand what Aristotle is trying to say. Both of these volumes make an excellent addition to your home library.

The Complete Works of Aristotle: Volume 1 edited by Jonathan Barnes is the revised Oxford translation. These works are readable and comprehensive.

Aristotle is a difficult and challenging thinker... one of the greatest thinkers. The first volume deals with the following: Categories, De Interpretatione, Prior Analytics, Posterior Analytics, Topics, Sophistical Refutations, Physics, On the Heavens, On Generation and Corruption, Meteorology, On the Universe, On the Soul, Sense and Sensibilia, On Memory, On Sleep, On Dreams, On Divination in Sleep, On Length and Shortness of Life, On Youth,Old Age,Life and Death,and Respiration, Oh Breath, History of Animals, Parts of Animals, Movement of Animals, Progression of Animals, Generation of Animals, On Colours, On Things Heard, Physiognomonics.

This volume contains authenticity that is been serously doubted and also works that are spurious and has never been seriously contested. So, if it looks like Aristotle, then it's here.

There are numerals printed in the outer margins which key the translation to Immanuel Bekker's standard edition of the Greek text. All in all, this is an excellent translation and can be easily referred to by English speakers. I enjoyed the translations, even the footnotes when the translations deviated from the preferred... such places are rare though.

This along with volume 2 are excellent additions to your library.

Aristotle was one of the greatest men that has lived on Earth, and his contributions are numerous, however, I found this book to drone on and on about the types of government...I had to put it down, because I was so bored. If it gets better later in the book, please let me know.

Aristotle's The Politics is without a doubt one of the most celebrated works of political science from antiquity. He begins with a description of a state, advances through the numerous types of constitutions, describes the ideal citizen, and defines good government-not to mention numerous other fascinating political insights into the running of a state.

Aristotle's outline for government and state has been influential to political scientists for over 2,400 years. His discussion on the cons of complete unity, as well as his chapter on "the natural and unnatural methods of acquiring goods," certainly must have influenced Karl Marx, and his discussions on the "good of all" certainly led to Mills and Bentham's utilitarianism.

The Penguin Classics edition gives the reader an authoritative, inexpensive copy that is ideal for scholars as well as students. The footnotes are helpful, but not excessive. An excellent purchase all around.

As a mystery novelist, I find that reading a wide variety of materials helps enormously in my work. This book is one I read regularly. I first read POLITICS OF ARISTOTLE during my college days at Claremont McKenna College. The political science department insisted on a classical background for its students, and this book was one of the canon. It impressed me then. It still impresses me today. I only wish Aristotle could collect royalties on the books sold.

My recommendation was for the Oxford rather than the Everyman edition, edited by L.G. Mitchell. I apologise for this error.

I personally find, overall, that other persons writing
about and analyzing Burke and his views tend to be a bit
more interesting and compelling, than Burke himself in
his prose.
I do not consider myself a "conservative" -- in the
sense that that is a political agenda or mindset, nor
a reactionary. There is much in academics and political
philosophy which tends to want to damn by labels -- and
by putting ideas into boxes, filing, and forgetting...rather
than listening to, or thoughtfully considering.
One can believe in classic values, and find his
grounding in classical philosophy without being a
rigid reactionary or even a doctrinaire conservative.
So, when Burke speaks with the speech of the
Ancients and espouses classical warnings and
remonstrances about the necessity of restraint
and careful consideration, one can agree with him.
And, as the editor and author of the "Introduction"
to the Penguin Classics edition, Conor Cruise O'Brien,
points out, there is that of the prophet in Burke as
well, since he published these REFLECTIONS in 1790,
before the Reign of Terror in 1793, yet he correctly
foresees the excesses to which the French Revolution
will proceed in its unchecked course.
One of the best quotes which I like very much from
this work follows:
"When I see the spirit of liberty in action, I see
a strong principle at work; and this, for a while,
is all I can possibly know of it. The wild GAS, the
fixed air is plainly broke loose: but we ought to
suspend our judgment until the first effervescence is
a little subsided, till the liquor is cleared, and
until we see something deeper than the agitation of
a troubled and frothy surface. I must be tolerably
sure, before I venture publicly to congratulate men
upon a blessing, that they have really received one.
Flattery corrupts both the receiver and the giver;
and adulation is not of more service to the people
than to kings. I should therefore suspend my
congratulations on the new liberty of France, until
I was informed how it had been combined with
government; with public force; with the discipline
and obedience of armies; with the collection of an
effective and well-distributed revenue; with morality
and religion; with the solidity of property; with
peace and order: with civil and social MANNERS. All
these (in their way) are good things too; and, without
them, liberty is not a benefit whilst it lasts, and
is not likely to continue long."

Reflections on the Revolution in France written by Edmund Burke and Edited with an introduction by Conor Cruise O'Brien the Penguin Classics version is the best version of this unparalleled powerful work. The reason for this is that included in this version you have an introduction that gets the reader upto speed. For Burke is without doubt the foremost conservative British political thinkers of his time, (1729-1797).

There is a biographical note on Edmund Burke right after the introduction giving the reader a historical perspective into who is Edmund Burke and why his advice was sought after with regard to the French Revolution and the consequenses of its following. Unlike the United States, France had an established entrenched government, so any change in form of government meant that an upheavel of property, religion, and traditional French institutions would have to occur. Underlying the French Revolution was the latent Catholic Cause which being Irish Burke had a good deal of sympathy.

Burke's Reflections written in 1790 was a really good prediction of the events pretaining to the Reign of Terror experienced by the French. This edition of Edmund Burke's "Reflection on the Revolution in France" has well explained footnotes further giving the reader a much greater appreciation for the practical wisdom of Burke. Burke was a man who would've rather seen a gradual or piecemeal reform as opposed to a revolution as he was sceptical in his belief in expediency.

Another plus for this edition, in contrast to the others available, is that there is a well appointed "Notes" at the end of Burke's writing. Also, at the very end of this book you'll have a recommended reading list, which for those inclined is indispensable. By far this edition is well worth reading and great care has been given to bring this important work in a form that is easily understandable, with enough detail to make it interesting reading.