i picked this book after hearing a friend talk about his trip to egypt.. i expected a more descrptive kind of book about egypt and was pleasantly surprised with the novella flavour that it actually has.. the author introduces very ordinary characters from present times living through their life.. he juxtaposes this with accounts of the life of a jewish merchant and his indian slave from the 10th century.. and then draws parallels between the social issues during the two time periods which seem surprisingly similar..
but the part that i thourougly enjoyed in this book was the village life and characters from the egyptian village and the real life struggles that they were going through.. made me want to hop on the next plane to egypt and see these ppl for myself..

This is a must read book. Ghosh somehow weaves together the history of Cairo, a traveling Jewish merchant, marginalization, the fate of 2nd world countries, and a diary of his time in Egypt-- and makes it really, lively, and relavant to anyone's life. and it is written in a lovely, lyrical style

A stupifying experience to read about the experience of one ofthe most prolific, original, fantasy writers from India. This bookdeals with the delicate norms of the life led in the rural Egypt. The book catches the knowledge even though little, of the people about India in Egypt. And to compare the lifestyles which existed between the two countries in two different periods of history has been done to the delight of the aged historian. The subtle existence of similarity in two proclaimed dis-similar cultures is definitely a forte for the mastercraftsman called Amitav. Surely, a delight for all the readers who want to have an alternate view of travelogues and who love to read about cultures which exists in the deepest parts of the world. A well-written book in general. Let us expect some more interesting writings from the author in the area of travel literature!!!

Abraham Lincoln is one of the most written-about men in history. There are scores of biographies, profiles, analyses, everything to do with this great man. Because of this, it is difficult to find a good, comprehensive work that details his life adequately and faithfully. In this book, Stephen B. Oates gives a good representation of Lincoln, giving a pretty good account of his life and not trying to raise the man to deity (as others have done). Despite this, however, there are several flaws in this book that make it only of average quality.

Oates commits what I consider to be the unpardonable sin in biography--he attempts to get inside Lincoln's head. One of the necessary qualities of a good biographer is that he or she should not try to psychoanalyze the subject, should not assume he knows what was going on inside the subject's head, and should certainly not embellish the account with a bunch of supposed conversations and feelings which are more the fabrication of the author than the feelings of the subject. Oates breaks all of these rules.

The most annoying thing about the book is that Oates will paraphrase what he thinks Lincoln said. He may give a short quotation, but then he closes the quote and proceeds to adlib what he assumes Lincoln would say, speaking in the first person as though he were the President himself. He uses the pronoun 'I' in his own narrative, when he should be using 'he.' If you can get over Oates pretending to speak for Lincoln himself throughout most of the book, the rest of the account is pretty decent. But I had a hard time getting past that.

For a 400 or so page biography, this book covers the subject moderately well, though not excellently. Many men, such as Jefferson Davis, Stonewall Jackson, or Admiral Farragut, are barely mentioned, as if Lincoln had nothing to do with them at all. It would have added greatly to the account to have a more detailed description of the Civil War, and about Lincoln's counterparts in the South (such as Davis). Still, this is a pretty good book, though far from definitive in any way. With the mountains of work available on this great man, there's got to be something better out there.

Long-acclaimed and probably as popularly read in the last quarter century as any other Lincoln biography, this is a highly respectable look into the life of the sixteenth President. Competent history is rare enough but Oates goes one better by making this a delight to read. It is very comfortable without being casual and factual without being dry. I always count it a credit to an author when he/she can introduce a peripheral player only briefly yet make them memorable enough that they can be referenced simply by last name chapters later. Oates' scores in this regard as well.
My only misgivings concern Oates' tendency to gloss over serious matters such as Lincoln's suspension of the writ of habeas corpus, etc. He seems to take Lincoln only at face value at these times.
But on the whole "Malice Toward None" was definitely a positive experience and one I recommend to anyone interested in spending time with Lincoln.

This biography illustrates the human-side of Lincoln. Stephen Oates decribes Lincoln's anguish over his many major decisions that he knew would impact history. This is a very touching book. Rarely is a biography so full of facts, yet details the personality of the subject so well. This book should be mandatory reading for all politicians!

I liked the topic and focus of the book, and I think it's a worthwhile subject to explore. However, the writing was not particularly engaging and I really had to force myself to get through the book.

The book is divided into four sections. Each section contains some specific subsections with examples of Lincoln's style. I liked the format and organization of the book, but the writing in each section tended to stray from the topic in question. At the end of each subsection, the author has listed some "Lincoln Principles". These were an interesting idea, but not implemented well. Sometimes language was not updated for our time, and sometimes words seemed to be put in Lincoln's mouth - in fact, I wondered what he would think after reading this book!

There's no question that Lincoln was a powerful leader; whether or not he was "the greatest leader this world has yet known" is debatable. However, he practiced a very effective leadership style similar to Likert's System 3 of management, Blake & Mouton's Team Management theory, and level 4 of Vroom-Yetton's Leader-Participation Model. But I was particularly struck by the similarities to Kunhert and Lewis's Transformational Leadership Theory. The description seemed to be written specifically about Abraham Lincoln. He inspired great loyalty, lived by his principles, motivated people to do their best, and was arguably the greatest communicator to hold the presidency.

Overall, I think we can all learn from Lincoln's leadership style. I plan to be less dictatorial and more persuasive - I noticed that Lincoln used persuasion to great effect. He was also adept at delegating and relied heavily on subordinates, something I'd like to work towards.

I found this book to be irresitibly readable and chock full of information and material immediately applicable to life and life in the business world. Mr Phillips does a wonderful job of illustrating leadership principles through Lincoln's style and approach to leading and governing. This method makes it extremely easy for the reader to understand the concepts being conveyed. If Lincoln was able to save the Union in the most extreme condition by use of these principles, it's easy to imagine that they could work in various other situations. Mr. Phillips doesn't ignore Lincoln's weaknesses, but uses them and how Lincoln tried to handle them as teaching material to demonstrate how leaders can be effective in spite of their personal shortcomings.

In short, this is one of the more valuable, interesting, AND usable books that I have read in years. I have ordered "Leadership and the Founding Fathers" and hope to gain as much from that as I have from the Lincoln book.

Lincoln on Leadership tells the tail of one of the most influential presidents of American history. It's a quick read that really touches at the core of leadership and the man who exemplified the subject best, Abraham Lincoln. The way the book is titled makes you think that it was Lincoln himself who actually wrote it (this is not true). Although there's a good amount of writing by Lincoln in the book, the lessons are mostly interpreted by the author Donald T. Phillips, through actual historical events taken from the president's life in office. The author does a great job of extracting the jewels of leadership wisdom by analyzing Lincoln's actions. Lincoln on Leadership is not a step by step guide on leadership theory, it is more of a biography on Lincoln's life in office. If your looking for a thorough history on Lincoln don't bother, most of the items covered are during the Civil War, the time where Lincoln displayed most of his leadership abilities.

The contents of the book are presented in four parts, each part breaks down into several sub-parts pertaining to the main topic:

Part I - People

Part II - Character

Part III - Endeavor

Part IV - Communication

I must tell you, after reading this book I am definitely interested in learning more about our sixteenth president (AKA - Honest Abe). Lincoln on Leadership helped me see the extraordinary attributes of an American legend. His honesty, integrity, and tenacity are all characteristics that should be mimicked by all students of leadership.

Excellent job Donald...

This novel helps with the understanding of the events that led up to the assassination of Abraham Lincoln. Unknown to him adn his family it started off as a regular day and ended as one of the most tragic days in the history of the United States.

This book takes the reader through the minds and plans of conspirators and helps with the reasoning behind the assassinaton. For example, taking the president as a hostage to try and get what the Confederate states wanted out of the war.

On the day of the assassination, President Lincoln had received notice from the people who were to accompany him to the play that they would not be coming. As a faithful president, he still attended the play to show his support, not knowing that it would cause his death. This book also helped to show the arguements that Lincoln went through with Mary Todd about pubilc appearences and even going to Ford's Theater that night.

Taking and hour by hour look at Lincoln's life helps to familiarize the reader with Lincoln and his family and his usual daily tasks. It helps show Lincoln as the man that he is instead of just the president.

THE DAY LINCOLN WAS SHOT should be required reading for anyone with an interest in American History. The sheer amount of detail here is invaluable. Historian Jim Bishop has gone to the original newspaper accounts, court documents and government records to get at the indisputable facts. Contradictory reports have been reconciled, confusing motivations and events have been plainly explained, and the result is a book brimming with information but which is still easy enough for us laymen to read.

The format of the material will be familiar to any fan of the television show "24". Like that piece of modern drama, the book is laid out so that each chapter is devoted to a single hour. The result is a slow, detailed progression through the day that pushes up the tension as the fatal hour approaches. The book begins at 7 a.m. on the morning of April 14th, 1865, continues through the actual assassination during the 10 o'clock hour and then concludes with the death of Lincoln at 7:22 a.m. the following morning. Of course, the similarities between this account and the much-hyped television series are purely structural - the story isn't fictitious, and we already know the ending.

Two chapters interrupt this narrative. One that gives a background into the presidency of Abraham Lincoln, and another that gives us a brief history of the conspiracy. This book doesn't try to give more than a short summary on those two topics, so readers interested in those subjects should also find other material. This book is primarily concerned with getting across the actual events of the day rather than trying to put every single fact into a historical perspective. It reads like an extremely detailed journal told from an omniscient observer.

One thing I didn't like was Bishop's tendency to write the factual events in an overly dramatic style. We're treated to people's inner thoughts, their facial expressions, occasional over-dramatic language, and other items that couldn't possibly be known to the author. To be fair, Bishop does acknowledge in the introduction that he does take certain liberties of that type in the name, presumably, of dramatic license. The only problem I had with this approach is that the fourteenth of April 1895 is already one of the most gripping and shocking days in American history. There really wasn't any need to make the action more exciting. More often than not, these little pieces of intrusion annoyed me, though this wasn't nearly enough to distract from the hard facts of the event.

Prior to reading THE DAY LINCOLN WAS SHOT, my knowledge of the mechanics behind the assassination was sadly deficient. This book has provided me with a lot of information behind the events of that day as well as firing up my interest in U.S. Civil War history. I hope that future books that I read on this subject are as organized and as lucid as this one.

This is a tremendous book. It tries to faithfully re-create what occured on April 14, 1865. It gives background of the previous couple days. On the day of the assassination, Lincoln holds a cabinet meeting, the contents of which are related in the book. Lincoln's mind seemed to be telling him he was doomed. He had dreams about his death, and accepted the inevitable. JW Booth's planning of the evil acts, which included an brutal attack on Seward and his family as well as an aborted effort against Andrew Johnson, is gone into with fascinating detail. Highly recommended for history, Civil War and Lincoln buffs.

This book is the story of the assassination of Abraham Lincoln. Not the assassination that they teach in the history books but a much more in depth view of the conspirators that were involved. Most people don't know that the Federal Government actually arrested ten people for the conspiracy and assassination and hung four along with killing John Wilkes Booth during the man hunt. The conspirators were tried by a military tribunal and not in civilian courts.

This book goes very in depth at the contacts and relationships that these conspirators had. The countryside is discussed as well as events leading up to and after the shooting. It talks of previous plots of the Confederacy to kidnap Lincoln and of the Federals to kidnap Jefferson Davis. The book did, at times, read a little like a history book. So much detail that it seemed to drag in spots but only for short periods before it revived itself.

This is a very good book that students of history will love. That Civil War buffs will enjoy also. It is more of a book for high schoolers and up as at times it is tedious because it has so much information to process. Overall, I enjoyed it greatly. But then again, I love history. Check it out, see what you think.

Much like the Kennedy assassination, the Lincoln assassination has been the subject of more than its share of conspiracy theories. Mr. Steers does an excellent job of debunking most all of these theories by meticulously sifting through the evidence and proving, point by point, that these theories do not hold water. He is able to use the same method to prove most of his own hypothesis concerning Booth and his conspirators. As is mentioned in earlier reviews, Steers does seem to take particular delight in proving the guilt of Mary Surratt and Dr. Mudd. Mudd takes the brunt of Steers' assault, possibly because this is the area of Mr. Steers' greatest knowledge. It is also possible however that the vigor of the author's attacks can be traced to the fact that the Mudd family has done an excellent job convincing most Americans that the good doctor was as much of a victim as was Lincoln. Steers proves that Mudd was indeed involved, and then drives the point home. Make no mistake, he proves it, just as he proves most of his points by doing his research and doing it well.

Please don't be afraid of this book. The writing is clear and easy to follow. Most importantly, it's interesting. There are indeed a lot of names to keep up with but most of those names are going to be pretty familiar to anyone with any knowledge of the period. To make things even easier, Steers gives the reader a good concise history of the conspirators. As a bonus, there is also a chapter devoted to following Lincoln's body on its trip back to Illinois. It's a very interesting chapter at that.

I do have one serious problem with this book. To Steers' credit he does point out that if Jefferson Davis was in on the plot, he had good reason to be. It was the Federals that first broke the rule of not trying to knock off a head of state. The Confederate President had indeed been targeted for death by a group of Union raiders attempting to enter Richmond, and the southerners had the captured orders to prove it. Steers however makes no attempt to link Lincoln with this incident and in fact Lincoln may not have known anything about it. The problem is that Steers uses such flimsy evidence to connect Davis with Booth, that the same line of thought would have to connect Lincoln to the earlier plot. Over and over Steers makes statements such as, "Davis must have known," or, "Davis would have had to know." No evidence is presented to support these statements except that a plot to kidnap the President of the United States could not have been undertaken by the Confederate Secret Service without the approval of the President. If that were the case how could the U.S. Army undertake a plot to assassinate the Confederate President without Lincoln's knowledge. The answer is, it would appear to be very possible that Lincoln did not know what his army was up to just as it would be very possible that Davis had no idea what his spies were up to.

Despite this flaw, this is a fine book. New light is shed on an old subject and maybe a few old myths have been put out of their misery. I may just have to read Mr. Steers book on Dr. Mudd. If this book is any indication, it will be well worth the effort.

This meticulously researched and reasoned book by Edward Steers both tells the story of Lincoln's Assassination and builds the case against those involved.

Much of the book reads like a detective story. Since Lincoln's death, various publicity seekers, conspiracy buffs and doubters have disputed various aspects of the story. The issues Steers deals with -- and convincingly -- are ones that have plagued the assassination story for a long time. By assembling documentary evidence from a vast array of sources, Steers builds strong cases that: Dr. Mudd was a part of the conspiracy to capture Lincoln and was a confederate of Booth -- and was expecting to help Booth escape from Washington; Mary Surratt was also a part of the conspiracy and thus justly convicted; the harebrained conspiracy theories involving Vice President Johnson or Sec. of War Stanton in the assassination are just that; The Confederate Secret service was active in supporting a kidnapping of Lincoln, knew Booth and provided him with resources; the top levels of the Confederate government (including Jefferson Davis) were aware of kidnap schemes (though no claim is made that Davis or others in the Confederate high command knew of or supported the assassination plot).

The book deftly does several things. While telling the story of the assassination plot and Confederate secret service activities, it builds the case implicating individuals found guilty by the government but whose involvement has been questioned over the years. Steers also tells of and demolishes notions that Booth really escaped and that an imposter was buried in his tomb -- notions that had some currency in the early Twentieth Century. Steers provides a thorough examination of the case of Dr. Mudd -- proving his complicity in the Lincoln conspiracy and rebuking those family members who to this day try to exonerate Mudd as an innocent doctor who executed his Hippocratic Oath for the lame Booth when he came calling to his home after the murder. (Steers has also written a book solely on this topic "His Name Is Still Mudd")

This is an impressive work. Steers deftly melds both the story of Lincoln's assignation plot with the detective work proving the case against those who claim mistake or cover-up. It is well written and makes good use of primary sources. Although I have read and enjoyed "The Day Lincoln Was Shot," I'd have to rate this as the Lincoln assassination book to read.

In "The Call of the Wild," Buck, a dog living on a California estate in the Santa Clara Valley, is stolen and shipped to the Klondike where he is trained as a sled dog. After a series of adventures, he heeds "the call of the wild" and abandons human civilization. London was able to draw on his experiences in the Klondike in the late 1890s to provide accurate details of the life an environment. In a way, this book might be considered an alegory; about the return to one's roots, the fight for survival in a hostile environment, etc. In July of 1998, the editorial board of the Modern Library listed this book as one of the top 100 novels written in the English language for the twentieth century. London wrote "White Fang" to complement "The Call of the Wild" (note that Buck travels from California to the wild whereas White Fang makes the reverse trek). Again, he draws on his own experiences in the Klondike to provide accurate descriptions of life in that part of the world in the late 1890s. White Fang is part wolf and part dog. He is sold by his Indian owner to a man who tries to make him more savage so that money could be made from dogfights. White Fang is rescued by a mining engineer who takes him home to California. While there he rescues the family from an escaped convict. London shows how much environment can play in one's life. I recommend these two books highly.

Jack London has his faults -- prone to overuse of superlatives; overdescription and overemphasis; occasional suggestions of misanthropy; an uneasy blend of aristocratic intellectualism and socialist populism. But not that many writers can match his linguistic energy, and at his best his writings achieve a majesty and intensity akin to the cinematic mode of expression.

White Fang is the better story, despite London scholar Andrew Sinclair's protestations to the contrary. Criticizing the "bathos" of the ending, he probably missed the cynicism that can be extracted from the "Blessed Wolf" ending. Human recognition doesn't mean much in the end of White Fang, after all -- notice that London does not end on the note of "Blessed Wolf" but on the more important thing -- rejuvenation, the next generation...the puppies. This is the true triumph of the wolf, not the acceptance of the Sierra Vista.

White Fang succeeds on the strength of its coming-of-age story and because White Fang is less heroic than Buck. Buck in The Call of the Wild is almost too powerful to be convincing -- his defeat at the hands of The Man in the Red Sweater makes his devastation of the Yeehat tribe at the end of the novella incredible. However, Sinclair's criticisms of Jack London taking liberties with dog behaviour (eg. Buck's "imagination" while fighting; White Fang's electric-cars-as-screaming-lynxes nightmares) verge on the idiotic. The use of allusions (as in the case of the nightmares) is an ages-old and very effective device; as for Buck's "imagination", I would rather trust London to comment on dog behaviour than Sinclair. Besides, who cares? The novel was never designed to be a hard-line news-journalistic form, so to criticize a novel for "not being realistic", especially in the case of a modern mythmaker like London, is ridiculous.

The savagery of these two stories makes it baffling why they frequently end up in the children's section. Shocking, powerful storytelling set in a merciless world.

White Fang is a wonderful book. Although Jack London has some misconceptions of the nature of wolves, he has no misconceptions about the enduring power of love to heal a wounded spirit. White Fang, part dog and part wolf, is born wild into a harsh Alaskan world by a loving mother. When he is still a young pup, he comes to experience the world of native Indians, then cruel dog fighters in a heartless "gold rush" boomtown, and finally, a man which represents a more civilized and hopeful world. The book is a wonderful adventure, and sentiments fall firmly on the side of White Fang, love and fair play. It only remotely follows the story line of Disney's movie, "White Fang," so one does not preclude the other. It is also a wonderful inroduction or supplement to the sport of sleddog racing, and offers a riveting condemnation of dog fighting. Love and kindness will eventually prevail over hate and cruelty, and the book will leave readers asking for more.

If you are an engineer, skip it and do real work. It is general, basic, and lacks real knowledge. This is not a reference book, nor is it a teaching book. However, if you are an engineering manager overseeing a group conducing FEA analysis, this book will help you. It is full of wonderful insight, such as: "FEA can help build a better, more robust product". These blinding flashes of the obvious will keep most real engineers at arm's length. If I had a chance to do it again, I would not purchase this book.

FEA analysis technology, theory, pracktice examples. A 580 pages of perfect balance brtween the three. A "MUST" book for every engineering team, a great present for our engineering menagers, a "MUST" for every structural or product design engineer, design analysts, young or experienced. Great for engineering students as well. Great price also - almost a steal.

Building better products with FEA presents an alternative to the highly mathematical treatments that are normally associated with this topic. With a minimum of mathematical formulae and plenty of practical examples, the novice analyst can gain a thorough understanding of the techniques and know-how that is required to perform a successful analysis. In addition the book concentrates on the fundamental reason for FEA: to enable the designer to understand how his product behaves and to go on to make better designs.

The book starts by giving an overview of the common types of classical engineering analysis including, free body diagrams, moments of inertia, stress and strain, beam theory, failure theories and dynamic analysis. After this introduction there is no more mathematics to be found in the book. The next chapter discusses the capabilities and limitations of both h-element and p-element codes. The critical distinction between correctness and accuracy is also made clear.

In part 2 the basic types of modelling are covered with plenty of examples showing how in practical terms the modelling should be carried out. The effect of choosing different constraint systems is clearly demonstrated. There is an extremely useful section on how to build CAD models that are "Finite Element friendly"; something that is rarely discussed in other works. In chapter 8 boundary conditions are discussed in more detail and good use is made of example models showing how different constraint systems affect the answer; sometimes very dramatically. The techniques necessary for a successful part optimisation are covered, from concept design selection through fine tuning to local sensitivity analysis.

In part 3 more complex analysis issues are tackled, including joints, welds & press-fits. Non- linear, modal and dynamic analysis are covered briefly but in sufficient detail for the analyst to get started in these difficult fields.

The final part of the book covers how to choose the correct FEA system for your needs and how to successfully integrate finite element analysis into the design process. Hardware requirements are discussed in general terms. Finally some predictions are made for the future of structural analysis.

I would thoroughly recommend this book to designers and analysts who wish to get the most out of their analysis. It distils many years of finite element expertise into a highly readable book which should be on the shelf of all product designers who use, or wish to use, finite element analysis tools. It should also be read by engineering managers who wish to appreciate the potential pitfalls of FEA, and so fully reap the benefits rather than getting 'pretty pictures'.

The Right Thing is a firsthand account written (with the assistance of Ken Abraham) by Scott Waddle, the captain of the nuclear submarine USS Greeneville, which in February 2001 collided with a Japanese fishing boat resulting in a tragic loss of life. Rather than conceal or deny his role in the deaths of nine people, Waddle took the witness stand to speak directly to the truth about what happened that fateful day. This compelling memoir presents Waddle's story in personal detail, while also offering an invaluable glimpse into naval life -- as well as taking a cold look at hard choices that must be taken by those in command.

Scott Waddle's story of his role as the commanding officer of the USS GREENEVILLE is inspiring as well as a unique opportunity to learn more about this christian man.

The story takes the reader onboard and discusses the horror, emotional termoil and distress this man shouldered following the tragic accident that claimed the lives of 9 japanese civilians.

It is a book that describes what I would consider a modern day role model for our youth.

The book is published by a christian book company and contains several passages that discuss how Scott's faith was tested.

Read, learn, think about it and see if there are parallels in your life. There are many events in our lives that cause us to doubt our ability to survive the crisis. This is an inspirational man's story on how he, through his faith, family and friends survived.

Well written and well done.

I was extremely happy with this book read it in one seating as I found it very compelling and could not put it down. I had followed Cmdr. Waddles case through the media and of course television reviews. I was favorably impressed with Scott Waddle at the time and his wife and attorney in interviews. But I was especially glad to read the Cdr.s explanation of the accident without some of the distoration of the meia. After reading this book you realize how badly at times his case was handled by the Navy and that they lost a very brillant young officer when Scott retired. Our loss and the Navy's. This is a well written acount of what actually took place an honest account, and certainly well worth reading!

For those of us who have always sensed that the 2nd inaugural speech rivals and in some ways even surpasses the more acclaimed Gettysburg Address, Ronald White's book is a masterly vindication. In it White carefully traces the speech's genesis and follows its implications, both political and moral. The clear message is that the themes of conciliation, justice, equality, and compassion apply in all social contexts, not just in this one historical moment in early 1865. The distance between Lincoln as a statesman and today's politicians is even greater in style and substance than in years. What politician today would dare to call for equality and conciliation when it's so much easier (and profitable) to sabre-rattle and flag-wave?

Of special interest and value is White's reflections on what Lincoln might mean in his almost apocalyptic references in the speech to divine will and bloodshed, as well as Lincoln's almost agonized acknowledgment that religious convictions can be used to defend opposite sides of an issue. (As Lincoln says in his speech, "Both [the North and the South] read the same Bible, and pray to the same God; and each invokes His aid against the other..."). The conclusion? Be extremely wary about claiming divine favor in conflicts.

All in all, an excellent, insightful, well-written book. Anyone interested in White's book might also appreciate William Miller's recently published *Lincoln's Ethics.*

Ronald White calls Lincoln's Second Inaugural his "last will and testament to America," and he provides powerful support for that judgment in this book. The speech itself was only 703 words long. White's text probably runs to more than 50,000 words, yet his discussion never flags. He provides rich commentary, revealing biographical insights, and engrossing historical background for a speech that was initially received with little enthusiasm, yet is remembered today as one of the greatest orations of American history.

The address was steeped in biblical references, revealing not only Lincoln's substantial biblical scholarship but also his profound religiosity. White correctly states that the separation of church and state in the United States has never meant the separation of religion and politics, and he makes it abundantly clear that, in Lincoln's mind, the fate of the United States could never be separated from God's plan for the world. Often confused with fatalism, Lincoln's religious view was centered on the Presbyterian tradition of the providence of God, the faith that "His kingdom ruleth over all." Lincoln's religion was not self-righteous; he did not wear it on his sleeve; and he explicitly rejected the view, popular among war leaders, that God was on his side and against his enemies. In his mind, the Almighty was the major actor in the Civil War, and the contesting parties were his agents.

White writes clearly, logically, and often movingly. He brought tears to my eyes when he described Frederick Douglass's visit to the White House reception given at the close of the second inaugural day. A book that can touch the heart while it informs the mind and uplifts the spirit is rare. This one does that. It is a gem.

Lincoln's thought the Second Inaugural to be his greatest speech even more profound and powerful than the Gettysburg Address. Ronald C. White's remarkable analysis of the Second Inaugural will convince readers that Lincoln was right. A meditation on God's purpose in the Civil War, the Second Inaugural had several layers of meaning. In lucid prose, White explores each level and places the speech in a broad historical and theological context.

While there are numerous bits and pieces that don't quite add up in Mormonism, the Book of Abraham is where Joseph Smith gets scaught red handed in his fabrications. Unlike the Book of Mormon, where the Angel Moroni spirited away the Golden Plates once Smith had finished his "translation", here is the documented proof that Smith was no "prophet, seer and revelator."

Larson does an excellent job of tracing the controversy from the time that Smith first acquires the papyri through the first French translation by Champollion's students until the amazing discovery of the papyri in the late 1960s. His evangelical Christian agenda is apparent, but doesn't get in the way of his research until the last two chapters, when he presents his own religion as an alternative for disenchanted Mormons. Other than that, this is an excellent work.

This is a must read for any Mormon or anyone curious about Mormonism. I have a hard time seeing how anyone could believe in Smith's tales after reading this damning book.

I really liked this book. It explains the history of the Book of Abraham, and how it came about, within the context of LDS church history. There are beautiful pictures of the papyrus (this is the original document Joseph Smith used to translate and write the Book of Abraham) and many useful captions for explaining what the figures and characters mean. Larson has done a really great job as far as explaining what the original papyrus really says and how LDS members have avoided confronting it.

This book will be of interest to anyone studying Mormonism, Mormon history, doctrine, or if they are looking at the role that Egyptian culture has played in American history. It is very honest, accurate, and for the most part is well-written.

The reason I gave it four stars is because of those two darn chapters in the back. He basically says, (in so many words) "Now that you've been exposed to the errors in Mormonism, become a Christian!" Which may or may not be a bad idea, but the problem is that hardly anyone who reads this is going to agree with him, based purely on these few chapters. The falseness (or truth!) of Mormonism doesn't affect the truth (or falseness!) in mainstream Christianity, and I wish Larson had realized this. Instead, it may give Mormons a psychological reason to make ad hominem attacks on the writer and thus ignore the good, logical arguments he made. And that's a shame, because Larson's conclusion on the Book of Abraham is right.

But I still think it's a good book and I recommend it. It's easy to read and very clear, and this makes up for the shortcomings.

Larson has done a masterful job of presenting the full history of the JSP and its origins, up to the time of it's rediscovery in 1967, and the scrutiny that has followed in the last three decades. He quite clearly brings to light the correct translation of the document by many independent expert Egyptologists and the numerous fallacious responses by Dr. Nibley and other LDS apologists. After reading this book, the conclusions are right there in front of any intellectually honest person, plain as day... Joseph Smith did not come anywhere near a correct translation of the JSP in writing the Book of Abraham, and by extension his credibility has, at the very least, been seriously compromised. Despite what many church leaders endorse, i.e. faith takes precedence over all other things including facts, I strongly endorse the philosophy of "truth takes precedence over all other things (including long held beliefs)", and truth obviously includes facts. Facing truth is sometimes very difficult, but self deception is not an acceptable alternative. Regarding the final chapter that many here have complained about, I just want to point out that Larson's son, who has written a review here, claims that his father did not write this chapter and that he had to include it to get it published. This is very easy to believe as the last chapter takes on a completely different tone and while it may have some value religiously, it is totally out of place for this scholarly piece. It was most likely entirely written by Mr. McElveen mentioned at the beginning of the chapter, who is also very likely associated with the Inst. for Religious Research, which is not so sublty promoting itself at the end of this book. Hopefully future editions will be printed without this chapter as Mr. Larson's son says is likely.