Ireland Books

This story was an unexpected delight, especially considering that it is a MacDonald book that does not take place in England. A great coming of age novel about a young women's search for identity in her family's heritage. A great book to curl up with on a cool fall night.

MacDonald really made a great book! This book is about a 19th century irish girl who wants independence from her mother and father. So she goes off to Sweden on her own. In the end she finds romance. This is one of the best books I've read. Finally a romance where the woman is not a lovestruck doll.

Truth be told, I thought the first book in this series was pretty boring. However, the second book got slightly better, the third better still, and so forth. The fifth book definitely continued that trend. It was very slow going in the beginning of the series, but by the time this book comes about, you've had a chance as a reader to get to know the characters and learn to love them, and their faults.

This book was one of the best in the entire series, It causes you to think about who is really in control of your life. At first I thought I didn't like the series but then I couldn't put it down.

very thought provoking and well written

Prof. Schweller deserves all the compliments that he might get. "Deadly Imbalances" is a real masterpiece, poisedly merging theoretical discussion with an accurate applied analysis on an empirical case (World War II). The author's modeling departs from Waltz's neorealism, but the structural perspective is soon amended, with the inclusion of one variable that is strictly on the unit level (the state's interest). This modification approximates his scheme to classical realism, with great gains to ad hoc analysis, like the one he does. Important to say that the historical research is very good too, remarkable in a study done by a political scientist. This book should be considered a good and commendable example of case study in the International Relations area.

Christine Kinealy's, A Death-Dealing Famine: The Great Hunger in Ireland, provides an extensive examination of Ireland's greatest social tragedy. Her first chapter analyzes the historiography of the Great Hunger. Kinealy argues that it wasn't until the 1960s when the famine emerged as a dominant field among Irish scholars and it continues to remain a controversial and diverse topic among historians. Kinealy systemizes the historiography into three broad fields. The first field concerns a nationalist approach which is often too critical of the British crown and lacks historical substance. Secondly, many scholars attempt to defend, displace blame and minimize Britain's responsibility and neglect. The third field, the revisionist approach, attempts to nullify these false interpretations. Kinealy assertively criticizes the new "revisionist" interpretation because it avoids "the central issues of responsibility, culpability and blame". In her monograph, Kinealy attempts to answer these complex questions through a balanced and diverse interpretative framework.

Kinealy's second chapter provides a brief summary of British-Irish relations beginning with the Norman invasion through the eve of the famine. In this chapter Kinealy establishes three major themes. First, the turbulent social history of British-Irish relations will serve as a major influence to the crown's response to the famine. Second, the Act of Union and emerging economic theorists manipulated Britain's ideology to modernize Ireland's economy. Lastly, Kinealy cunningly raises the question: how could the most powerful empire in the world fail to save Ireland from two million casualties?

Kinealy's third chapter entitled, Rotten Potatoes and the Politics of Relief, examines the Crown's initial response to the famine. She begins by narrating Britain's previous and successful responses to the devastating famines of the18th century. However, as a consequence to the Act of Union and ideological forces, Britain failed to continue the same methods of relief and recovery it had employed a century previous. Kinealy begins by analyzing Peel's initial and subsequent actions to the outbreak of the famine. She argues that Peel was sympathetic towards the Irish, however, his actions were slow and dominated by the economic ideology of laissez-faire economics, the repeal of the corn laws and the opportunity to reform and modernize the Irish economy. In response to the atmosphere of Westminster, Peel introduced a system of public work relief programs and the importation of Indian corn. Despite the moderate success of his actions, Peel failed to introduce a long term system of relief.

Following the fall of Peel's government in 1846, the famine was no longer viewed as a temporary calamity. Peel was replaced by John Russell whose preeminent concern was fiscal conservatism by the crown. Russell's major system of relief was based on the continuation of work relief programs which experienced limited success at best. Following the outcome of the work relief programs, Parliament introduced a systemized structure of soup kitchens with the introduction of the Irish Poor Law which proved to be successful. However, the bill experienced harsh criticism from both Parliament and the public. Opponents argued against providing Ireland with a welfare system of "Queen's Pay" which would serve only as a continuation and promotion of Irish laziness and failure as an inferior society. Kinealy harshest criticism concerns the government's failure to close food exports from Ireland and limit imports of food relief. This response was motivated by the Crown's determination not to interfere with free markets and laissez-faire ideology. In 1837 the Poor Law was amended to place most of the financial burden on Irish landlords and subsequently prolonged relief and recovery.

Kinealy then shifts her narrative to a social and cultural analysis of the famine. She provides illustrative and emotional descriptions of suffering, death, disease, soup kitchen relief, national/international philanthropy and emigration. Her most powerful testimony comes from her epilogue which focuses on the indirect consequence of the famine, cultural destruction. The impact of the famine not only witnessed two million casualties, but altered the course of Irish history and identity.

I highly recommend this monograph.

Christine Kinealy got it right. Such truths help to heal and hopefully forgive the English and their government for their bad behavior 150 years ago. Never again.

The defeat of the Armada inaugurated a period which, for English history at least, culminated in the Glorious Revolution of 1688 and the triumph of a bourgeois science-based way of life.

In this book, Mattingly, unlike many others who have concentrated on the naval aspects of the episode, explores the motivations of the states and individuals involved. In brisk, experienced vignettes, he presents the dilemma facing the English government faced with the intractable problem of the putative heir to the throne, Mary, Quen of Scots, a Catholic, at a time when Elizabeth's throne had been explicity threatened by the Pope.

We see the weakness of France; the relentless attempts of the leading Catholic power, Habsburg Spain, to suppress the Protestant inspired revolt of Holland, which involved military action close to the Kent shore, and action in which England was already heavily involved and expensively subsidizing.

The cutting of the Gordian knot by the execution of Mary precipitated the Spanish attack. Philip II hoped to achieve several objectives at once: to remove Elizabethan Protestantism from Europe; to end English interference with his military action in Holland; finally to crush the Dutch Republic and re-establish the unity of Christendom.

The social and religious motivations of the actors are brilliantly portrayed by an expert in the diplomatic records of the period.

Perhaps the most telling thing you can say in favour of this book is that it is not written for the professional historian, but cannot be ignored by any of them.

I first read Mattingly's book as a grammar school (high-school to readers on the other side of the pond) history student in England in the 1960s, and have been coming back to it regularly ever since for the sheer pleasure of it. My old paperback copy wore out, so my family gave me the hardback version.

The great strength of Mattingly's treatment is that he went far beyond the purely naval aspects of the campaign. He set it squarely in the context of the politico-religious struggle for domination in western Europe, with England and the Dutch Protestants on one side, Spain and all her allies and dependencies on the other, and France paralysed by a ferocious three-cornered internal struggle in which both sides intervened. He is particularly strong on the events before and after the battle of Coutras which prevented France from either pursuing the ultra-Catholic preferences of the house of Guise (of which Mary Queen of Scots' mother was a member), or the traditional French policy of opposition to the Hapsburg rulers of Spain, which the Catholic King Henri of Valois and his Protestant heir-apparent Henri of Navarre would both have preferred. Mattingly shows great insight in realising that it was the execution of Mary Queen of Scots (the event with which he opens his narrative) that freed Philip to launch the Armada; sending it while she was alive would have risked putting a pro-French queen on the English throne.

I do nevertheless find two serious gaps in Mattingly's handling of the geopolitical context. The first is the Dutch, who after all had been fighting the war, and suffering the casualties, longer than anyone else except Spain. Mattingly ignores their internal dynamics and skates over the detail of their relationships with England, in both areas doing far less than justice to a key element in the strategic equation. The second gap is the lack of treatment of the Scottish dimension. Scotland, ruled by Mary's son James VI, was the dog that did not bark in the night in 1587-88, and the reasons for that deserve analysis. Yes, after his mother's death James was nearest heir to the English throne, but just HOW did he dissuade the Scots - over whom his power was strictly limited - from using the excuse for their usual descent on England?

Mattingly's general strength on the geopolitical aspects does not mean he is weak or lacking in detail on the naval and military aspects: quite the contrary. Coverage of Drake's 1587 raid on Cadiz is pretty much obligatory in a history of the Armada, and Mattingly gives it blow by blow (incidentally revealing what a thoroughly impossible man Drake was to work with). But he is equally strong on Parma's capture of Sluys, which he hoped would be his troops' embarkation point, in the face of dour resistance by the Dutch-English garrison. When it comes to the Armada itself, his grasp of detail is supreme. Mattingly was probably the first of all the many hundreds of Armada historians to read a tide-table and work out that Drake really would have had time to finish his game of bowls - had he ever played it. My only quibble here is over the Dutch naval contribution: they were never in contact with the Armada itself, but their presence scotched any possibility of Parma's forces making a rendezvous. Mattingly acknowledges their importance, but I personally would have welcomed more detail.

Mattingly belonged to the bravura school of English-language historians (Gwyn "The Vikings" Jones is another great exponent), which is both a strength and a weakness. His magnificent prose and grand narrative sweep carry the reader along on a flood tide - sometimes to the extent of concealing omissions and even (for all I know, not being a professional historian) errors. A few of his stylistic mannerisms grate a little nowadays, notably his use of "men" (as in "men said that ...") when a modern viewpoint requires acknowledgement that half the population is female. But these are minor quibbles - buy it and read it!

Par ses illustrations et par son recit simple et vif, l'auteur David Guard, musicien du Trio Kingston des 1950s, nous explique pourquoi le conte de la reine irlandaise la plus reconnue nous attire une vingtaine de siecles apres sa mort. La courageuse rentre chez elle, de l'exile heureux en Ecosse, pour que le massacre de son amant avec les autres fils heroiques d'Uisnach reste oppose, temoigne et lamente. Elle veut que les ecossais soit protege de la vengeance du mari qu'elle n'aurait pas du epouser, le roi Conchobar macNessa. Elle veut que les traditions et le peuple irlandais survivent a la tyrannie de ce roi gros, fou, egoiste et cruel. L'auteur nous dit que la reine Deirdre en sait et en comprend de tout, meme les echecs et les insectes! Cela m'interesse puisque l'auteur contemporain Annie Dillard nous ecrit, dans A PILGRIM AT TINKER CREEK, que ceux qui comprennent les insectes - tellement agacants, nombreux et repandus - comprennent le tout de l'univers.

David Guard's musical background shows in the angrily, bravely, happily and tragically dancing drawings and text of DEIRDRE: A CELTIC LEGEND. The former Kingston Trio member makes it clear why this story has gone through so many retellings: the skilled chess-playing daughter of Elva and storytelling harper Fedlimid macDall, Queen Deirdre returned from a seven-year exile so that her lover's murder with the other heroic sons of Uisnach would be opposed, witnessed and mourned; the old ways would not be forgotten; the people of Scotland would be safe from her husband, Red Branch Chief and Ulster High King Conchobar macNessa; and the suffering would end among her people in Ireland. I find it interesting that the author included understanding insects when talking about how much Deirdre knew: Annie Dillard says in PILGRIM AT TINKER CREEK that the key to figuring out life might be in understanding bugs. The beautifully simple book, along with the song "Deirdre" on the Beach Boy's "Sunflower/Surf's Up" album, can help readers tackle Randy Lee Eickhoff's THE RAID, THE FEAST, and THE SORROWS; Morgan Llywelyn's RED BRANCH; and the classic versions of DEIRDRE by James Stephens, John M. Synge, and William Butler Yeats.

M. Steven Fish hat Neuland beschritten, indem er erstmals die eigenartige Entwicklung russischer unabhängiger sozialer und politischer Gruppierungen in der Sowjetunion unter Gorbatschow in eine komparatistische Rahmentheorie eingebettet hat. Die Enstehung einer unabhängigen Zivil- und politischen Gesellschaft in Rußland ist zuvor schon zahlreich dokumentiert und beschrieben worden. Explizite und umfassende Erklärungsschemata für die zunächst stürmische Parteiengenese von ca. 1989 bis 1991, allerdings später immer deutlicher werdendere Fragilität dieser neuen politischen Landschaft sind bisher jedoch kaum vorgelegt worden. Zur Begründung der spektakulären organisatorischen Ineffektivität, programmatischen Abgehobenheit und ideologischen Haarspalterei der vielen neuen russischen Parteien der frühen 1990er sind bislang wenig mehr als fragwürdige Spekulationen über den unmündigen Nationalcharakter der Russen oder über die Auslöschung ihrer politischen Kultur durch das bis zuletzt "totalitäre" Regime hervorgebracht worden. Fish liefert hier ein wesentlich differenzierteres Bild und schildert mit viel Empathie und theoretischer Finesse, warum die erste Welle der Parteineugründungen von 1988 bis 1991 zum Scheitern verurteilt war.
Zwei wohldurchdachte Argumente stechen aus Fishs Begründung heraus. Erstens weist er darauf hin, daß die sogenannten "Neformaly" (wörtlich: Informellen) - also die eigentlich verbotenen, aber nichtsdestostrotz geduldeten neuen politisch und sozialen Gruppen - der zweiten Hälfte der 1980er und die neuen Parteien der frühen 1990er im Prozeß ihrer grundsätzlichen Identitätsfindung und politischen Selbstverortung nur beschränkt auf tradierte Handlungs- und Denkmuster, wie etwa auf den Hintergrund einer Dissidentenbewegung, zurückgreifen konnten. Anders als in den Ländern Ostmitteleuropas, spielten Dissidentennetzwerke und andere alternative nichtstaatliche Institutionen nur eine beschränkte Rolle im politischen Leben der UdSSR vor 1985. Die sich selbst oft explizit als "Parteien" bezeichnenden neuen Gruppierungen mußten somit bei der Formulierung ihrer politischen Ziele, Programmatik und Rolle im gesellschaftlichen Leben des Landes tatsächlich bei Null - "from scratch" - anfangen. Damit war ihr Reifungsprozeß in gewisser Hinsicht demjenigen der neuen, ebenfalls traditionslosen und lange organisatorisch ineffektiven Grünen Parteien Westeuropas der 1970er-1980er in mancher Hinsicht ähnlich. Die neuen russischen "Parteien" waren in ihrer Anfangsphase somit oft keine vollentwickelten Parteien im herkömmlichen Sinne, also pragmatische, um politische Macht ringende Organisationen. Sie sollten dies zunächst auch in erster Linie gar nicht sein. Vielmehr dienten die "Parteien" und ihre häufigen und langandauernden Kongresse und Konferenzen zunächst als Foren einer ideel-politischen Selbstvergewisserung der einzelnen Mitglieder, der kollektiven Identitätsbestimmung nach innen sowie der Abgrenzung gegenüber politischen Konkurrenten nach nach außen. Häufige Spaltungen und eine Aversion gegenüber Verschmelzung mit ideologisch nahestehenden anderen Gruppierungen waren die Folge. Prominentestes Beispiel war das vom Westen mit viel Bedauern beobachtete Scheitern der Vereinigung der Republikanischen und Sozial-Demokratischen Partei Rußlands. Obwohl beide Parteien ideologisch nahezu deckungsgleich waren und den offensichtlichen organisatorischen Nutzen des zunächst ernsthaft anvisierten Zusammengehens scheinbar verstanden, spielte die Wahrung der neugewonnenen Identität eine letztendlich größere Rolle als politische Pragmatik. Die aus der Demokratischen Plattform der KPdSU hervorgegangene Republikanische Partei wollte ihre neugewonnene Selbstidentifikation als progressive Avantegarde der intellektuellen Elite des Sowjetstaates nicht aufgeben. Die SDPR ihrerseits wollte ihren Status als alternative linke, explizit oppositionelle Partei ohne KPdSU-Vergangenheit nicht aufs Spiel setzen.
Die zweite Besonderheit der russischen Transformation war, daß eine breit angelegte Demokratisierung auf Landesebene noch vor dem Abschluß einer Reihe elementarer Liberalisierungsmaßnahmen einsetzte. Anders als in den Transitionen in Südeuropa, Lateinamerika oder Ostasien hatten politisch ambitionierte Persönlichkeiten in Rußland die Chance, sich insbesondere in Legislativorgane verschiedener Ebenen wählen zu lassen, noch bevor oder schon kurz nachdem sie die Möglichkeit erhalten hatten, sich politische zu organisieren. Nach der Wahl einiger der bekanntesten russischen Demokraten in die Volksdeputiertenkongresse sowie Regional- und Stadtsowjets beziehungsweise sogar in Exekutivorgane (Jelzin, Popow, Sobtschak) waren diese wichtigen Führer weitgehend für den Aufbau einer unabhängigen Zivilgesellschaft und Parteienlandschaft verloren. Und dies, obwohl die UdSSR und RSFSR Deputiertenkongresse und Sowjets zumindestest bis zum August 1991 in ihren Kompetenzen beschränkt waren und somit eher als Sprechtribüne für verschiedene politische Kräfte, denn als relevante Entscheidungsorgane fungierten.
Fishs fruchtbare Kombination einer Vielzahl von sowjetologischen und komparatistischen theoretischen Erkenntnissen mit gründlichen Vor-Ort-Recherchen und teilnehmenden Beobachtungen stellt zweifellos einen Meilenstein in der Aufarbeitung der neuen russischen Revolution am Ende dieses Jahrhunderts dar.

"Democracy from Scratch" explains, in theory and anecdote, why Russian politics were so confused around 1993. It is a special historical document -- and was quite an influence on me personally (in the form of a semester's worth of lectures) because Steven Fish was my senior thesis advisor.

The Mahmutcehajic's work is a perfect literature for anyone who ever wanted to know why Bosnian war happened, why Genocide, Concentration camps and enormous human suffering and misery occurred at the end of the twentieth century and what was this conflict all about. I am sure this essay will satisfy anyone who wants to discover more about Bosnian tragedy either professionally or out of curiosity. For historians an politicians Mahmutcehajic's work represents an excellent and detailed expertise, for history, politics or international affairs Students it is the richest resource available about War in Bosnia and for just a curious reader it is the best yet informer about one of the greatest human tragedies in this century.

The Mahmutcehajic's work is a perfect literature for anyone who ever wanted to know why Bosnian war happened, why Genocide, Concentration camps and enormous human suffering and misery occurred at the end of the twentieth century and what was this conflict all about. I am sure this essay will satisfy anyone who wants to discover more about Bosnian tragedy either professionally or out of curiosity. For historians an politicians Mahmutcehajic's work represents an excellent and detailed expertise, for history, politics or international affairs Students it is the richest resource available about War in Bosnia and for just a curious reader it is the best yet informer about one of the greatest human tragedies in this century.

This is a book that reads more like poetry than a novel. It's rich and sensual imagery allows the reader to become a participant observer of the events that are not always readily understood. Once you just allow yourself to become a part of the scenery, and to let the images wash over you, then you begin to be rewarded. This book brought tears of many emotions for me. It is filled with real, honest people, living real, honest lives, and like life it is both humorous and depressing, joyful and oppressed, desperate and free.

The characters in each of the stories in this book are so real that sometimes it is frightening, but in the very best way. I was completely engrossed (shocked, touched, amazed) by each tale. I discovered Jenny's writing after taking a Creative Writing course under her tutelage at a university in upstate New York. On the last day of class she let us read "Touched." I read it the first time, and thought it was good. I read it again a few months later, understood it much better and thought it was great. I then proceeded to read the rest of the stories and was completely amazed. (I think if I had read these stories *before* I took the class, I would have been too intimidated to let her see my own writing.) This is a terrific group of stories, and I wish I could read some more of her writing.

If you love to read about adventure, monsters, magic and the horrors of war and brutal human sacrifices then this is the story for you. But, if you enjoy romance then Destiny's Warriors has that for you too. This is a book for everyone of all ages from every walk of life.

Destiny's Warriors is a story about ancient Pre-Christian Ireland, a fantasy to be sure. Human Sacrifice and war plague the good people. Ancient Pagan Gods deal with their emotions and struggle to overpower other gods while addicted to the quickening begot of human sacrifice. These issues are far from today's troubles. Yet, each and every character is easy to relate to and you can't help feeling like you are in their world and part of the experience as you cringe in horror, cry in grief and cheer for their triumphs.

Betrayal, lust and greed guide the gods who rule over mortal man. Revenge, murderous plots, enchanted warriors and monsters guide the story down Destiny's path. You'll love Destiny's Warriors and want to read it over and over again.