William King Books

the book was used, but it served the purpose for the class my husband took.

Let's just say i was registered for a class on Friday that started on Monday and I got my book on Tuesday without paying an arm and a leg for expedited delivery. I'm really thankful for AMAZON :)

This book helped me to understand accounting in a simpler way though my background is engineering. Nice examples and explanations are written in simpler language that everybody can understand.

I was not impressed with this book. I found it long-winded and text-y. I was expecting an Accounting-for-non-accountants approach but I couldn't have been more wrong. The more I read this book, the more I wanted to buy another book-- Accounting for Dummies. Thank God for my instructor's supplementary materials for without those, I would truly be lost. Her presentations provide more concise, to-the-point information.

If you are a non-accountant like me and you wish to understand accounting by your own terms, this is definitely not the book for you. Their exercises don't even have quick and available answers.

Over the last ten years, I've read and studied from a lot of textbooks, as I've earned an undergraduate degree, a master's, and a medical doctorate. Much of the material I've learned has been completely foreign so I've often had to rely on the quality of the text to help get me through. In short, I've studied from A LOT of textbooks in a range of subjects while in college, and this book is by far one of the most difficult I've ever utilized in an attempt to learn a new subject. It is extremely difficult to fluently read and the concepts are explained in terms that are much too complex, making the acquisition of information therein very difficult. I can research a topic on the web and its explanation is much easier to understand while still getting across the same point. What I find most frustrating; however, are the exercises and problems at the end of the chapters. More often than not, a workable methodology for their solutions cannot be found in the text or online on the supplemental "Homework Manager." Often, to answer a question I either go completely on what I THINK the answer might be or research it on the web, as this book in no way prepares one to thoroughly answer most of the questions. I'm finding myself getting decent grades on the assignments, but at the end of the day I have no idea what I'm doing or how to replicate my work from one week to the next because I'm arriving at my answers in such a piecemeal fashion, i.e. part of the solution online, part from the text, part from other students, and part from guesswork. Although the book's topics are basic to accounting, it is written in such a way that is not compatible to a student being introduced to the field. I have no idea why my school has chosen to utilize it but I would not recommend it to anyone, other than perhaps maybe an accountant or financial expert who is attempting to enhance their present knowledge level of the subject.
Also, be leery of reviews that praise this book as I have a very hard time believing that anyone could enjoy it as much as a few of the other reviews have indicated. I gave it 2 stars simply because the book does appear to cover all of the essential topics in accounting. It's interesting that all of the three authors are professors, yet the book presents the material in a method that is WAY too complicated and doesn't facilitate learning to the degree it should. Perhaps in the authors' attempts to demonstrate their extensive abilities they overlooked a few essentials, such as the students' abilities and learning needs???

This author seems to have a problem with fact checking and editing. The flaws in this book are too numerous to mention and appear in other reviews. Also, his writing style is not exactly engrossing and he focuses on being revisionist for the sake of being revisionist. This is at least superior to his book on Allied brutality during the occupation of the defeated Third Reich.

The book is good because it examines one of the figures who was instrumental in shapping the 20th century. The author proves that he was very erratic with his forighn policy and his views on the world. The author also disproves the misconception that it was his imperial ambitions that led to the first World War and points out that it was the militarism of prussian aristocrats.

I enjoyed reading this book. There were a few times I lost track of who was who doing what to what and when and where, but for the most part I felt I understand better the role and personality of a complex and contradictory charactor in history.

In regard to the Kaiser, the quote by Daisy Pless in this book may say it best. "Poor man, he means so awfully well, and everything he does is intended for the best, and still he is completly destitute of tact that everything turns out exactly opposite to what he intends."

Still,little comfort to the millions who died in the "War to End All Wars."

I picked up this book on recommendation from my dad, a history buff much like myself, and was extremely disappointed in it. Instead of dealing properly with the Kaiser himself it spent the vast majority of the time discussing and analyzing German politics and political figures active during the Kaiser's reign and made only the most fleeting references to the personal life of the Kaiser (or anything to do with him personally, for that matter). It's as if the author was too afraid to delve into the private life of this controversial figure because he knew that the bright picture he put forth of the Kaiser would be blown to pieces. Needless to say, this book should be entitled "Politics and Political Figures During the Reign of Kaiser Wilhelm II."
Go to another book if you are looking for a true biography of Wilhelm. This one will only disappoint.

The most recent English language biographical study of Wilhelm is The Last Kaiser: The Life of Wilhelm II by Giles MacDonogh (2001). MacDonogh seems to have set out deterministically to write something other than an "indictment" of Wilhelm. He asserts that historians have been unduly critical against the emperor for eighty years, which has prompted him to examine Wilhelm "in a light which, if not ridiculously positive, [is] at least a little more indulgent than that which as coloured attitudes in the past." (viii) While MacDonogh's study is not "ridiculously positive," it does tend to minimize Wilhelm's culpability for the various blunders historians commonly associate with his reign. While he concurs with other scholars of Wilhelmine Germany that the emperor was "a mass of contradictions," (1) MacDonogh also minimizes the Kaiser's documented anti-Semitism, and strongly implies that the "cases brought up against the emperor" such as the Kruger telegram (1896), the "Hun Speech" of 1900, and the Daily Telegraph Affair (1908), were handled "reasonable, and in some cases well" by the Kaiser. (7) This attempt to show that Wilhelm did not act maliciously, criminally or incompetently is what differentiates The Last Kaiser from its predecessors.
In MacDonogh's account of Wilhelm's wartime role, he reaches a familiar conclusion: "it would be impossible to make out that he played the role of `Supreme Warlord' between 1914 and 1918." (3) He shows that Wilhelm "wavered over the preventive strike" long advocated by the General Staff, and "each time he looked in to the abyss he drew back in horror and countermanded" his generals' orders for such an attack. (9) This gives the kaiser too much of a benevolent, conscientious role for the time. MacDonogh portrays a Kaiser swept up with the emotions and events of August 1914, a leader who allowed himself to be carried into the war. By the first weeks of the conflict, "he had become increasingly peripheral." (367) This declension culminated in January 1917 with Bethmann Hollweg's removal at the insistence of Hindenburg and Ludendorff, at which point Wilhelm "was no more than a shadow emperor. No one listened to him." (391) Probably true.....
Despite showing far more sympathy toward his subject than other biographers of Wilhelm II have done, MacDonogh echoes many of their conclusions. "It is perhaps right that we condemn William," he suggests, "for if the First World War was not his undertaking, the finger of blames points over and over again to the failure of German diplomacy in which he tried so hard to play a positive role." (460) MacDonogh seems reluctant to assign Wilhelm much direct blame for the origins of the Great War or how it was conducted. On the contrary, most students of the last Hohenzollern ruler of Germany concur with the concise biographical entry in The Oxford Companion to Military History (2001): Kaiser Wilhelm II was "seduced by...nationalism and militarism," and came to discover that "leading a cavalry charge on maneuvers...is not the same thing as presiding over a beleaguered state engaged in total war." The last German Kaiser "lacked the strength of character and consistency of purpose which his role demanded, and if he cannot be blamed for leading Germany into war, he may be more justly censured for what one historian has called `a childlike flight from reality' in the crisis of 1914."

This is in places an engaging read, as Gray's passion for his subject is evident everywhere. But what makes it engaging in some places makes it amateurish in others, because Gray's biases too often color his historical objectivity. He often openly ignores documented fact--or the lack thereof--in order to speculate on the emotions and thought processes not only of Wallace, but also of Robert the Bruce, Edward I, and many other figures key to the war for Scottish independence. He also relies heavily on folkloric sources like the Wallace-idolizing Harry the Blind, who Gray admits is biased but to whom Gray refers more than any other source. The book's organization leaves much to be desired, too; it reads more like a masters thesis than a carefully vetted work of professional scholarship. A good effort if Gray was indeed a grad student when he wrote this, but mostly, this book just makes me want to track down a more reliable source. Perhaps I made a mistake by reading this after Ronald McNair Scott's masterful treatment of Robert the Bruce.

This is almost certainly the worst-written history I have ever read, if it can even be called a history. D.J. Gray seems to have read a few well-regarded histories of Scotland and of Wallace, pared them down to 152 pages, and then paraphrased them. Poorly. It is rare that I come across at least one sentence per page that makes me cringe with its awkwardness, and it is rare that the thought persists so in my mind: I could write better than this guy. I know this may come across as hyperbole, but it is not. This book truly has the writing quality of a college essay.

Not only is the prose amateurish, but the flow of the story is atrocious. Frequently, the author inserts anecdotes with no context, failing to explain their relevance to the surrounding text. The author's analysis of the earliest historical sources on William Wallace is poorly explained, leaving the reader with little understanding of the contradictions that exist among those sources, or of the author's process of reconciling them.

Perhaps most glaringly, Gray fails to provide original insights or analysis of his own. Entire sections are merely paraphrased from other, more accomplished historians, as is immediately obvious from a glance at the "References" section.

As a work of prose, this book is appalling. As a work of history, it is a joke. Readers would be better served by purchasing one of the few books on which Gray relies almost exclusively for his knowledge, such as The Scottish War of Independence, by Evan Macleod Barron; William Wallace, Guardian of Scotland, by James Fergusson; or Sir William Wallace, by A.F. Murison. These are the giants on whose shoulders D.J. Gray stood to produce his book.

Naturally with Braveheart ( and all its errors!! ) people with curiosity about one of Scotland's greatest Heroes have questions. This book goes a long way to presenting fact from fiction. Gray's work is easy to read, well balanced account of Scotland and Wallace.
Gray starts with the background and clime of Scotland before Wallace came into play. Gives you chapters on Edward Longshanks moving through Balliol being raised to King by Edward's Great Cause, and sets the stage for the rising of Wallace. He work is well thought out, just not another repeating of tales, balancing previous details put forward about Wallace with whether they were truth or not.

And excellent work for anyone wishing to learn more about Wallace.

An entertaining read but more opinion than fact based. Plenty of references but even more conjecture and supposition. Was Wallace so virtuous and Edward so evil? I don't think so. A book written to support the author's point of view with very little objectivity. The writing style is at times difficult to follow with events being related out of sequence or seemingly unrelated to the points being made...this is hardly a scholarly work. There must be better books on this subject....

a nicely written synopsis that can be read on vacation and enjoyed for hitting the high points and amusingly trailing off into interesting theories and ideas.

Brief in scope but informative enough to satisfy your curiosity about this fascinating subject.

A very nice read.

Gross is an excellent bond trader (and thats the key word, he actively trades, PIMCO trades) no doubt about it, but Middleton makes a read much like Bonners "Financial Reckoning Day" he just keeps repeating his mantra: Total Return.

In total honesty you could summarize this book in the following words: active buying and selling of bonds will give you "total return." What counts as total return is the coupon and the price you make from selling. There are no "secrets" as alleged on the slick paper wrapper and there is very little "Gross." Its all Middleton's fluff and it looks like he would do quite well in a prior era where people were paid by the word.

If you really want to understand bill gross, this overly wordy substanceless book is the last place to go. Go to PIMCO's website and read through all of the past investment outlooks he has put out. This book promises something nuanced and wonderful and never delivers. Aside from some interesting biographical information about the man, there is nothing that will improve your mind in this book that you can't get out of a PIMCO prospectus. If you are a serious student of the market, you will be sorely disappointed.

Even after 17 years as a financial journalist, I knew precious little about Bill Gross, one of this country's richest men and greatest investors. Yes, I knew that Gross was the acknowledged king of the bond market, the Warren Buffet of the fixed-income set. But I had little appreciation for the scope or scale of his accomplishments or the methodology behind them. Thanks to this entertaining book from Timothy Middleton, a former colleague of mine at Dow Jones, I now consider my education more complete. "The Bond King" is fun reading, and, for the value-conscious, three books in one: a lively personality profile that benefits from Middleton's behind-the-scenes access to Gross over the course of nine months of research, a primer on the bond market, and a how-to manual for anyone interested in trying to mimic Gross's success. For good measure, the book also includes portraits of three legendary investors who influenced Gross's career: speculators Jessie Livermore and Bernard Baruch, and financier J. Pierpont Morgan. While reading "The Bond King" may not make you an all-star bond investor--for that, you'd need not just Gross's recipe but also his genius--it will make you a better bond investor. And if you just want to know more about a man who will go down as one of the legendary investors of our era, "The Bond King" is a perfect read for the beach this summer.

Bill Gross it the Peter Lynch of the bond world. The PIMCO money manager has consistently outperformed his benchmarks over the last 20 years. Middleton attempts to provide an bird's eye view of Gross's personal life and uses those perspectives to discuss how he makes money in the bond world. In summary, the answer is total returns, return from the yield on the coupon (think mortgage rate, interest) as well as the pricing on the issue.

The author starts down the path of constructing bond portfolios that span the risk and reward spectrum, but does not provide any perspectives. The book converts to a PIMCO prospectus in the middle of the book and could have been chopped at the editor's desk without losing any of main points and saving the paper in the world.

For those who really want to understand Bill's view on the world, he writes a wonderful thought piece every month that summarizes his views in a very practical and easily readable form. Well worthing reading.

In summary, worth reading if you are a bond neophyte and want to understand how people make money in the bond markets.

Your total return seeking reviewer,
Fred "Govvies" Sanford

When you think of bond trading, what adjectives come to mind? Dull? Boring? Stagnant? All of the above? You're not alone. Stocks and, to a lesser degree, mutual funds tend to rule the roost as far as excitement is concerned in the world of investing. Your image of the dull bond market may change after reading this biography of the man who created the Pacific Investment Company, Bill Gross.

Bill Gross has become the most respected man in the bond market, probably the most famous bond trader to date. Not only will you get his philosophy on trading and the market, but you'll learn how he arrived where he is today. From a high school entrepreneur, a mechanical engineer, a writer of code for Lotus, a professional blackjack player, and a stint in the Navy -- it all makes for very fascinating reading.

After reading this, I have a new respect for the man and a new appreciation for the bond market. I'd recommend this to anyone interested in learning more about the financial markets, as well as insight into the mind of a financial genius. You'll never view the bond market the same way after reading this!

I love the book. I am not a history buff, so it was all new material to me. In fact it was the first historical fiction novel I have ever read, it was a fascinating story.

This book was almost unreadable it had so many typos and just plain spelling errors. Don't recommend.

This author has combined truthin history with a romance that keeps the story going! What a great way to learn about history!

This story was all over the place - nothing was discussed in detail at all! Full of typos and punctuation errors. The history in this book is based loosely on fact and is not satisfying at all for the reader if they enjoy a more historically accurate book. I was bored to tears by the lack of depth of the characters. Don't waste your money on getting this new - order it used if you feel compelled to read it.

I keep returning to this book, wondering if I should buy it. But there is no information about which Henry the book is about, and I am just wondering if these reviews are real. I would like to have this book, but before I spend the money to buy it, would someone who has read it tell more about the story, not just give a glowing review.

Being fond of ancient Sumer in general and the Gilgamesh epic in particular, I found Mr. Silverberg's book a profound disappointment. It appears that the author's intention was to rework the venerable story to remove its fantastic elements. Along the way he practically ignores an interesting milieu, makes the characters boring, and replaces dynamic episodes with confusing ones.

Admittedly, Mr. Silverberg did make an effort to make his characters seem as though they actually are living in a different day and time. However, as historical fiction this book falls flat. (If you want historical fiction set in Sumer check out The Three Brothers of Ur by J.G. Fyson, and forget this book.)

The narrator of Gilgamesh the King is the hero of the oldest surviving literary epic. His ruminations about the gods of ancient Sumer paint a picture of a period of history when goddesses had become subservient to male gods but had not yet been totally suppressed.
Gilgamesh the King is categorized as science fiction. In fact all of its fantasy elements constitute the conditioned beliefs of the narrator, who more than once raises the possibility that the true explanation of events he interprets metaphysically could be coincidence or something equally mundane. Even when he travels to an island I identify from the context as Bahrain, to seek immortality from Ziusudra, whose ark later evolved into Noah's ark, he learns that the alleged world-covering flood was a localized thunderstorm, the "ark" was a fairy-tale elaboration, and Ziusudra's immortality was likewise mere myth.
This book will appeal to lovers of science fiction (which it is not), lovers of historical fiction, and persons who like to see ancient myths demythologized into the possible historical events from which the myth evolved. I loved it.

Gilgamesh The King is a thoroughly engrossing retelling of the famous Sumerian myth from the perspective of the figure himself. It creates a plausible blend of superstition, ancient knowledge and characterization as underpinnings of the legend.
In the same way that Mary Stewart's historical tales carry the reader to ancient times through the eyes and thoughts of the main character, Gilgamesh The King brings a profound humanity to such fabled material.

An entertaining spin on the myth of Gilgamesh, by one of our foremost living authors. I have read the original (or a translation, anyway) and it is remarkable how he manages to be so faithful to the tone of the book and yet to shore up an often-fragmentary narrative. Definitely, a must-read.

This book may be a peculiar exception to what people expect from this author. The book seems to be somewhat maligned in reviews, and by library staff as well - i think that is extremely undeserved.

Silverburg tells the story of the archetypical royal hero Gilgamesh in this book. The story here is stark and sophisticatedly simple versus well developed and textured, maybe analogous to the simple early Middle Eastern figurines, staring hauntingly down through the ages with their exaggeratedly large eyes, versus some busy Bosch painting.

Paintings and such aside, Silverburg's telling of the story has Gilgamesh swashbuckling his masculine way through the times of early Middle Eastern city-states. While the times may have actually been brutal, Silverburg's version makes it seem better characterized as 'passionate', royalty and dominion being established by hubris and warring, and sexuality being an integral part of the society.

In the original story, from the beginnings of history, a rivalry goes unresolved in a contest; Gilgamesh meets his match, and becomes an admirer of the mysterious Enki-du, his proven equal. Silverburg's Gilgamesh has a big heart. Gilgamesh's hearty confidence and gusto, through which the reader sees the events in the story, tempers the impression of the actual time and place. In fact, the warmth and uplifting emotional buoyancy of this character puts a winning and human face on masculinity.

In a culture that has turned to hatefully undermining heterosexual masculinity and destroying fraternity wherever it is found, this book is a hopeful illustration, not only of a distant past, but maintenance of a spirit for the future. Definitely, it is the opposite of one of our contemporary 'chick books'.

This book does not deserve maligning reviews, nor does the author deserve the belittling review. It is a 'must read' for a thinking man, and will only disappoint those who are narrow-minded.

Professor John Röhl of the University of Sussex has written extensively on Wilhelmine Germany, including his collection of essay entitled The Kaiser and his Court: Wilhelm II and the Government of Germany (1994). Röhl asserts that Wilhelm has for many years "been marginalized by professional German historians," who viewed the Kaiser as one "who played no part in shaping the policies of the Kaiserrreich." Other scholars have depicted him as "an aggressive autocrat who must bear a large degree of responsibility for plunging Old Europe into war and catastrophe." (xi) Regarding Wilhelm and the Great War, Röhl implies that his influence was negligible. The Kaiser was never a "full-scale" autocrat, and while he perhaps "dreamed of establishing absolute rule for himself...it remained no more than a dream." Röhl contends that this was particularly true in terms of military power, of which the emperor had very little. (3) However, Röhl shows that the Kaiser was not uninvolved in Germany's diplomatic and military decision-making process, notably at the start of the war. He cites Wilhelm's influence in the rejection of Britain's generous peace proposal in 1912, a move supported by his chancellor, Bethmann Hollweg, and one which might have forestalled war altogether. (6)
For Röhl, the Kaiser's involvement in the Great War was heavily influenced by his personality. Wilhelm "never matured," and was seen as a child-like figure at army headquarters. This trait was coupled with a "notorious overestimation of his own abilities, and a refusal to accept constructive criticism. To emphasize the emperor's requirement that he be at center stage at all times, Röhl repeats the apposite bon mot that Wilhelm "insisted on being the stag at every hunt, the bride at every wedding and the corpse at every funeral." (11-13) These qualities did little to endear himself to senior military officers and worked to push the Kaiser to the sidelines of decision making as the war intensified. Röhl holds that Wilhelm's public and private antics brought much scorn down upon himself and the German monarchy as a whole. He opines that
the history of the last hundred years," he opines, "has shown that a monarchy in a modern state can only hope to survive if it restricts itself firmly to its purely representational functions and avoids making any political comment and exerting any influence. That Wilhelm II did precisely the opposite is a matter of embarrassing record. (104)

Röhl concludes that Wilhelm's role in the formation of Germany policies was not insignificant before the war, particularly with regard to the turn-of-the-century naval armaments race with Great Britain, and in the domestic arena-though he was "vulnerable to manipulation by his generals and his military entourage." (166) By late 1914, Röhl declares, Wilhelm's influence began to wane, though the awareness by military leaders of which plans, people or policies the emperor would and would not support acted as "a blocking mechanism," a fact which indicates that the Kaiser could not be completely ignored. (116) Indeed, Röhl reminds his readers that "not a single appointment to an official position, and no political measure, could be undertaken without the express consent of the Kaiser." (117)

If you are a scholar and like lots and lots of references to peruse, you might like this book. However, if you are somebody who enjoys reading history in a non-academic form, you might find this book mind-numbingly boring. I could barely get through the first 100 pages and pretty much gave up after that. I love history and am always looking for great stories; this isn't one of them.

This book talks about Wilhem II, and his court in Germany. It also speaks about the hatred that he had toward Jewish People. The book is very interesting, and it sets the record straight on alot of things. This book is a must!

Do not expect to read much about Kaiser Wilhelm II in this book. The title is quite misleading---it is about the era of Wilhelm, but few details about him are included here, esp. his role in WWI.

This book is a very interesting look into the theory and practice of government under Wilhelm II - particularly in those years of "personal rule" after the dismissal of Bismarck from the chancellorship. The book is essentially a collection of essays devoted to various issues involving the Kaiser and his government. So while it is not structured like a conventional history of this era, or a biography of the Kaiser, an abundance of historical and biographical information is presented.

I enjoyed this book very much - it is very well-written and was a pleasure to read. I think anyone interested in this period of German/European history will find reading this book well worth the effort.

I love this cookbook!!! Most of the recipes are one-page in length and are gourmet quality. It's restaurant quality recipes done at home - for those very special dinners. I tested over twenty of the dishes and all are award winning in taste and in presentation. I would recommend this book for the advanced cook who knows the basics and likes to experiment with seafood and sauces.

There are too many errors in this cookbook. For example the Jamaican Rum sauce starts with remove from the heat but at no time does it list when to start the sauce on heat. It seems like there is a step missing from every recipe which is shame because this could have been a really good seafood cook book. Does anyone know who to contact about the missing steps?

I bought this book after having visited several McCormick & Scmick's restaurants, and really loved their food. The recipes are easy to follow, simple to make and are very tasty.
The reason for my rating, is that their are HUGE errors throughout the entire book. A few examples: Crab Rangoon recipe calls for yellow cornmeal in the ingredients list but makes no mention of it in the instructions. The recipe for Stuffed Salmon with Crab & Shrimp has no salmon in it! The photo on the facing page shows a stuffed salmon fillet, but the recipe calls for halibut.
This book suffers from poor editing. It smacks of being rushed for publication before the editing was completed.
This book would be a great addition to any home cooking library, but be prepared to find confusing recipes.

McCormick & Schmick's Seafood Restaurant Cookbook is a sort of seafood encyclopaedia of recipes. This book contains everything appetizers, soup, and salads through sandwiches, pastas, and seafood classic dishes to recipes for fish, specialties, and grilled dishes. This book even includes dessert recipes.

Though not likely a cookbook that you will want to pull out to prepare the average family meal, this book will be an extremely valuable addition to anyone who loves a little seafood every now and then. Surprisingly, the recipes are pretty simple to make with the instructions being very easy to follow. However, these recipes do require fresh ingredients. Therefore, these dishes are probably best made for special occasions, a romantic meal, or just because you deserve a delicious treat when you have access to fresh seafood or fish. Alternately, go to McCormick & Schmick's Seafood Restaurant.

I like the recipes in this book for being realistic for the average kitchen and fairly unpretentious. There's nothing too exotic here, just good solid combinations of flavors. However there's little in the way of soups or sides or salads, mostly just different ways of handling protein. Also, if you are hoping to reproduce the meal you had at the restaurant, abandon that hope, because these have either been dumbed-down or changed slightly from what the house actually serves.

I have to say this is my favorite Bible, and I pretty much use it exclusively. Contrary to what Mr. Zeolla writes, I think the update is just enough, to where only the very arcahaic and obsolete words are updated to their modern day synonyms. This feature makes it a joy to read, study, and memorize. I love the print type (very unique feature), and the overall layout. I have the burgundy bonded leather edition and it is extremely well crafted, so I know I will have years of use from this Bible. As the publishers note in their preface, this is not a re-translation but a careful and faithful update. Job well done.

If you only read the KJV, but are troubled by the out-of-date vocabulary, this may be for you. This is a very mimimal update compared to NKJV or even the 1967 Scofield. Only the very out-of-date words are replaced, nothing else is changed. In fact, it seems many borderline archaic words were left in. The only bad part is that the typeface strategy is distracting, but some readers, those trying to instruct children or lead classes, might like it.

The KJ21 is an updating of the KJV. But IMO, it does not update the KJV enough. For example, consider the following question and statement by Jesus, "Why make ye this ado and weep? The damsel is not dead, but sleepeth" (5:39) This is English; but not the kind of English that I speak. The only time I have ever used the word "ado" is in the Shakespearean phrase, "Much ado about nothin'." And I have heard of "a damsel in distress" but a damsel that sleepeth?

For comparison, the New King James Version (NKJV) renders this passages, "Why make this commotion and weep? The child is not dead, but sleeping."

Moreover, the KJ21 is not consistent in updating words that have changed meaning. And it does not seem to update some of the inaccuracies of the KJV.

For example, Mark 1:34 reads in the KJ21, "And He healed many who were sick with divers diseases, and cast out many devils; and He suffered not the devils to speak, because they knew Him."

Compare the NKJV rendering, "Then He healed many who were sick with various diseases, and cast out many demons; and He did not allow the demons to speak, because they knew Him."

Note the use of the word "suffered" in the KJ21. Today, "suffer" means to experience pain. So the NKJV has "allow" here, which fits the context much better. Note also the word "divers." The only time I have ever used this word is in reference to people who jump headfirst into water. The NKJV's "various" is much more understandable.

Lastly, note the word "devils" in the KJ21. The Greek word is "daimonia" and is better rendered "demons" as it is in the NKJV. The Greek word for "devil" is "diabalos" (Matt 4:1). There are many demons, but only one devil ("diablos" is always singular in Scripture when referring to the devil).

So the KJ21 seems not to have changed the wording of the KJV when it would have been prudent to do so. However, I am pleased that the KJ21 did not change a couple of aspects of the KJV. First off, the KJ21 appears to be based on the Textus Receptus that the KJV is based on. I believe this Greek text is truer to the original manuscripts than the "Critical Text" that other most modern-day translations use.

Also, the KJ21 follows the same "formal equivalence" (word for word) translation principle of the KJV. This principle differs from the "dynamic equivalence" (thought for thought) theory that most other modern-day versions use. I much prefer the "formal equivalence" principle. However, the above two points are also true for the NKJV.

So my impression of the KJ21 is not very good. If you are going to "update" the KJV, then update the KJV. But the KJ21 seems to only go part of the way; it updates some of the language but leaves much, well, "dated."

This conclusion is especially pointed as there are alternatives. In addition to the NKJV, the "Modern King James Version" and "The Literal Translation of the Bible" provide formal equivalence or literal translations of the Textus Receptus, but do so using modern-day English. And my own "Analytical-Literal Translation" provides a literal translation of the Majority Text, which is very similar to the Textus Receptus.

For a detailed discussion of the different translation principles and Greek text-types mentioned above, see my book "Differences Between Bible Versions." My book also reviews the other versions mentioned above, along with many other Bible versions.

Why??? Why did someone go to all this trouble to update KJV? If you love the classic KJV, then buy one. If you want the latest in textual scholarsip, then buy a NRSV. The KJV 21 is the WORST of both worlds: It screws up the beauty of the original KJV, and does not provide any increase in accuracy.

The single column layout is less distracting than the double colmun, traditional layout. The page design is the main reason I chose this Bible. There are minimal, well-abbeviated references. Also, there are three text types for emphasis and chapters summaries are nice. I have read from it daily for the past year. I'm hooked!

Far from being "as exciting as a novel," this pedestrian re-telling of what should be a fascinating story is bland and far from insightful. The author's evident unfamiliarity with even basic military and naval terminology leads one to wonder about the accuracy of other elements. (A ship-of-the-line is a "gunboat.") The Recorded Books version is read in a sneering, condescending delivery by an Englishman who whistles into the microphone every second sentence, producing a "nails on the blackboard" sensation which accentuates the discomfort.

One has to look at the vicissitudes of life in the great tragic figures of history, Cortes, Columbus, Napoleon, etc., to find precedents in the relatively obscure life of Charles Edward Stuart, "The Great Young Pretender," Bonnie Prince Charlie.

Although towards the latter part of his life he came to stoop very low, he had, as a young man, decades earlier, reached out very high unto the stars with unwavering courage and determination in his conquest of Scotland and England. His defeat at Culloden in 1746 precipitated tragically what can only be described as the genocide of the Scottish Highlanders.

What a life! The life of Bonnie Prince Charlie is a study of human nature at its extreme. Belatedly, devastatingly, he found out the cruel fact that despite his forceful, determined personality, he was not the master of his own destiny. Be that as it may, he came to be vindicated.

This is a magnificent book of a great, albeit obscure, tragic figure of history.

Miguel A. Faria, Jr., M.D. is Editor-in-Chief of the Medical Sentinel of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS), and author of Vandals at the Gates of Medicine (1995) and Medical Warrior: Fighting Corporate Socialized Medicine (1997).

The eldest son of James, the Old Pretender, Bonnie Price Charlie was raised to believe that the throne of England and Scotland was his destiny. Born in Italy and used as a pawn of Louis XV against George II, Charles was seen as a promising young man. In his early twenties, he sailed to Scotland and was able to convince several Highland chiefs to support his cause. Numerous victories came swiftly because the English were unprepared for the various attacks. However, once the English determined that the threat was real, Prince Charles and his troops were quickly over run. He returned to France where he was asked to leave and again settled in Italy. With no ambitions left to him, he quickly dissapated into an alcoholic daze. He fathered one child by a Scottish woman and later married a German princess but that marriage quickly soured. His later years were redeemed somewhat as his daughter Charlotte came to his aid. He died, leaving his youngest brother Henry as the last Stuart pretender to the throne. Henry was a Cardinal and therefore fathered no children so with his death the Stuart dynasty came to an end.

I enjoyed the book and found it useful for someone with limited knowledge of this time period. Not very detailed with but a good overview of events.

This was a good summary of a lot of secondary source material on Bonnie Prince Charlie, condensed into a fairly short biography. It's an enjoyable leisurely read, but don't look for depth, great detail, or anything like original thought about Prince Charlie and what he meant in the context of Scottish, English, European, or Catholic history in the 18th century. This is not a good text for anyone already familiar with the Jacobites and looking for any new scholarship on the subject.