This is strictly for cerebral mystery fans who can live without setting, atmosphere and dialogue as long as the mystery is sufficiently ambiguous. There are red herrings aplenty, including a spurious digression about wife-swapping and lots of genealogy that goes nowhere. Even the many chapters spent peeling away the layers of knowledge about the first murder victim turn out to be totally irrelevant to the resolution, which comes out of left field. An unknown mystery tenant who turns out to be very important -- you won't know anything about the person's existence until the inspector and the investigator sit down to explain it all to us folks. I prefer my mystery books to give me a fighting chance to figure it all out.

Ever since reading Kissing Cousins when it first appeared, I have been waiting for another Mort Sinclair mystery. Cornish Conundrum was well worth the wait. I'm a mystery fan as well as an amateur genealogist. This book was not quite so heavy on genealogy as Kissing Cousins, but still kept me guessing until the very end. If there were clues dropped regarding the murderer, I missed them all. There was a legal husband and wife swap that confused me, however, and did not seem to matter in the advancement of the story. Early in the book it mentions one of Mort's theories called Stratton's law - that sequels stink! Not so - this is a good read.

This book showed each side to any conspiracy that could have been involved in the Lincoln assassination. I became confused after reading a chapter and then all of that historian thinking was rejected by some other guy. If you are into that kinda thing, sure go ahead and read the book, but I just got confused. I can't determine what really happened and what was people's thoughts.

Since the day Lincoln was assassinated, many theories have emerged about who was the mastermind behind the plot. Among the accused have been members of the Confederate government, including Jefferson Davis, the Catholic Church and members of Lincoln's own Cabinet.

Hanchett examines these conspiracy theories and the people who put forward the theories in an attempt to find out if a higher authority, civil or religious, ordered John Wilkes Booth and his co-conspirators to kill Lincoln and members of his Cabinet. By examining each theory individually as well as the motives behind those who suggested the theories, Hanchett does an excellent job of refuting some of the more unlikely theories.

Can there be a book that is dull yet have some intrigue? Booth's book on his Civil War life was rather disappointing to read. It contained very little personal thought in regards to camp life and fighting in battles he was engaged in. He sometimes skipped his narrative to stop the story and give a quick history lesson on what occurred. Such was true with the Sharpsburg Campaign which I would have rather read his thoughts, reactions or what he was doing at the time. Booth's 1st Maryland is later disbanded and refitted for Cavalry in which Booth is involved yet his personal story is second to a history tale of the Union and Confederate movements surrounding the Virginia and Maryland areas. At times Booth intrigued me with his story of how they attempted to free Confederate hostages in a church held by tough Union forces in which Booth is shot in the leg and the quick skirmish ends in many bloody fatalities. Stories such as these was what I was looking for. What I tired of reading was how Lee left Pennsylvania or how Pope was turned around at 2nd Manassas.

Booth is less than descriptive on his movements at times which seemed blury and though he can talk about a battle historically, he certainly doesn't set the reader up for his involvement or easily explain his movements. I have found this true in other memoirs written by soldiers though this one can't be ranked like Sam Watkin's book or other well known Civil War biographies. This book is a quick read of 170+pages though if the battle histories were erased it and the book just focussed on Booth, the book probably would have been half of that. This book was rather dull and boring at times.

There are very few Civil War memoirs from Marylanders who fought with the Confederacy and "A Maryland Boy in Lee's Army" begins to correct that deficiency. As the introduction, written by a national park service historian, explains, George Wilson Booth was an extremely intelligent, sixteen year old Baltimorean who joined the Army of Northern Virginia in 1861. Booth begins by explaining that it was "at the request of somewhat partial friends" that he decided to record this period of his life in book form and he writes to show how bravely and valiantly men of the Old Line State fought in the Civil War.

Booth records his thoughts on succession on the first page, writing, "the dissolution of the Union was looked upon as a threatened evil, to be averted by mutual concession and forbearance." A few lines later he mentions slavery for one of the only times writing "that never for one moment did the question of slavery or the perpetuation of that institution enter into the decision of my course." Getting into the action, he records how he saw the first violence of the war in Baltimore when the Sixth Massachusetts Regiment came through and a riot ensued. Booth somewhat humorously relays that he "quickly realized [his] danger and was convinced that [he] was entirely out of place [as he] had no weapon save a penknife." From there his account proceeds chronologically.

Unfortunately, Booth's descriptions of major battles lack detail. He only records his own observations and assumes that the reader is familiar with all the major encounters. However, he did not intend to write a military history of the conflict, as is seen in his statement "I do not propose to say much as to Gettysburg." Instead, Booth provides an inside look and analysis of the Maryland units which fought in the Confederate Army and has frequent praise for them. He writes that "the 1st Maryland regiment was of so high an order and their record as soldiers [was] brilliant" and "there was more life and sprit in the average Maryland soldier than in a score of those from the interior of some of the Southern States." George Booth also gives detailed accounts of several small skirmishes and actions that he was involved with as when he describes the storming of a church in which Federal troops were barricaded and the time that a flaming, explosive-filled train was sent hurtling along the tracks in his direction.

Booth's descriptions of Confederate generals are even more useful. The Maryland soldier explains that Gen. Stonewall Jackson was "naturally so combative and earnest in his work that whenever brought into contact with the enemy his first and only promptings were to strike the blow." He later describes news of Jackson's death as "the saddest intelligence that could come to moral ears." Booth records that Robert E. Lee was "a bold soldier, a master of strategy and a vigorous fighter" in whom the army "had implicit confidence." Booth's keen observations are turned on nearly all major Southern military leaders, including J. E. B. Stuart, who is called "the Rupert of the Confederacy." In that same passage, Booth goes on to call Stuart, "like our great captains-the noble Lee and the lamented Jackson- . . . a devoted Christian, who illustrated in his daily work the teachings of Christ."

Booth lightens the tale of war with his wit and humor very effectively. At one point, he explains a situation in which his unit was nearly captured by the enemy by declaring "the jig came very near being up with us" and at another point some mosquitoes are called "the vilest, most ravenous and bloodthirsty of their kind." Booth also points out the irony of a Calvinist protecting his life by hiding behind a tree during one violent battle and records a Presbyterian officer as provoking the Calvinist by saying "if it is ordained you are to be killed, the tree will not save you." At many points his humor is much understated as when, after the war when asked if he were related to John Wilkes Booth, he "disclaimed any connection with the assassin of Mr. Lincoln, and remarked that it occurred to me to be a very unnecessary question, as it was scarcely probably I would acknowledge a relationship under existing circumstances even if it were true in fact."

Throughout, Booth is never far from his central argument over the valor of the Marylanders in and the Army of Northern Virginia and Confederates in general. He writes that the 1st Maryland Cavalry "[did] honor to the state which it represented" and "the work of the Maryland Cavalry . . . won . . . most distinguished notice." Of that unit's commander, Col. Ridgely Brown, Booth writes, "he was as true as steel and as gallant a soldier as ever mounted horse or drew a blade." While the author respected Grant for his gentlemanly treatment of the defeated Lee, he credits the Northerner's victory mainly to "his immense superiority in numbers" and not to any greater bravery in Union troops (106). But Booth shows himself to be fair and praises both the Federal infantry and cavalry late in the war, calling the later "superb."

Throughout the account, Booth is seen to be very intelligent and highly educated. As the introduction reveals, after the war he eventually became the comptroller of the B&O Railroad. In his memoirs, he shows knowledge of such diverse subjects as geography, theology, and history and, as Eric Mink points out in the book's introduction, as Booth's intended audience were the men who had shared his experiences, the account can be taken as being without embellishment. His diverse experiences, which include administering a prison camp and meeting the Confederate Vice President, make this account more valuable than most. The Civil War divided the nation and Maryland was split deeper than most states. The account of George Wilson Booth, a Marylander who sided with the Confederacy, can help historians understand the deep divisions in the nation.

This short novelette held much promise. I actually read the introduction and was told that this was one of the great "love" stories in American literature.

What I got was a muddled story that was hard to follow and unfeeling. A lowly Frenchman comes to England and notices a lady in the upper class. She has noble blood. He worms his way into an introduction with her under the guise of French nobility and a made up title. She is impressed with him until he is revealed to her as a mere "barber".

Yet he is not all that he seems to be -- as the story reveals much to the woman's regret ( after she learns the truth ).

I am glad this book was short, otherwise I probably would've ditched it after page 50... but I figured I was already almost half way through and stuck with it... It started to make sense near the end but there seemed to be about 35 pages of confusion occurring.

Last reviewer missed the Tark's irony. This is not romance; it's a warning about accepting the exterior. The closest irony I can compare it to is Tom "freeing" Jim at the end of Huck Finn. One impish fellow plays a wonderfull dating game. He survives dangers, costume changes(and some fine engravings in the early edition), treachery, duels, all the romantic posturings. But, when he asks if he can be loved simply for himself, not for the trappings,...well the book could end there. I am glad that Tark gave some of the characters their come uppance in the epilogue.

This book is thin with wide margins, big print and short on creative ideas. It offers only common sense simplistic ideas (ie: wear a name tag) that anyone could figure out on their own. No innovation here.

The purpose of a trade or consumer show is to bring people together to do business. Yet may companies pay a large amount of money to display and wind up making few sales. If you ever work a show, or are in charge of staffers who do, then you need this book.

The 88 tips and ideas are concise and easy to understand. They are categorized into nine chapters. The authors do not waste your time with fluff. For a detailed description of the book's coverage, click on Table of Contents in the left-hand column of this page.

Steve Miller is the author of How to get the Most out of Trade Shows. A consultant, trainer and speaker, he has written over 150 articles on trade shows.

Charmel Bowden is a writer, speaker and promotion expert who has organized exhibits and trained trade show staff.

As the author of Book Fairs: An Exhibiting Guide for Publishers, I can testify that these two know what they talking about. DanPoynter@ParaPublishing.com.

It is highly significant that no Salvation Army personel recommend this book. The author, being unsaved and a senior British politician, concentrates on the radical social reforms the Booths and Salvation Army championed in Victorian Britain. Hattersley, sadly, hasn't a clue about salvation. I suspect Roy's next book may portray Christ as a zealous Jewish Zionist with Marxist leanings. Well written fluff. Now Roy's managed to write a book about John Wesley characterising him as a lecherous toad. Don't waste your money.

For a far better biography of William and Catherine Booth, get Trevor Yaxley's. And for John Wesley, read John Pollock's.

William and Catherine Booth were both remarkable. Many past biographers of one or the other have found it difficult to concentrate on their chosen subject, as the other keeps intruding. Roy Hattersley has solved that problem. He has written about the two of them.

The story is engrossing. William Booth, the pawnbroker's assistant, became a Methodist minister, then an itinerant evangelist, before founding the East London Mission, which eventually became The Salvation Army. Catherine, brought up by Methodist parents, met William in London in 1852, where they fell in love and soon became engaged. It was to be three more years before they were able to marry; at one time during that period they endured over 14 months of almost unbroken separation.

They formed a dynamic partnership, each complementing the other. William was an action man, a whirlwind who swept all before him. Though he was not unintelligent, he was anti-intellectual and repeatedly ignored Catherine's frequent urgings for him to study. Catherine by contrast had a powerful mind, wrote forcefully, argued convincingly, and, in spite of her shyness, became a powerful preacher. She had strongly held views about Christians abstaining from alcohol and women being allowed to preach. It is no coincidence that The Salvation Army has always taken a strong stand against alcohol, and women have been prominent in its ministry. Two of its Generals have been women.

One of the fascinating aspects of the Booths' story is the motley crowd of eccentrics they attracted to their flag. Many of their early soldiers were recruited literally from the streets, and then immediately put to work to win others to Christ. Some were illiterate, some had been drunks, others prostitutes. This particular volume, however, does not quite capture that diversity. Though The Salvation Army is probably most often thought of today as an organization engaged in social work, the Booths were first and foremost evangelists. To them the social work was secondary, both in terms of emphasis and chronology.

Roy Hattersley, the author of this book, was a cabinet minister in a British Labour Government, and his political background gives the book an interesting slant, particularly when he examines The Salvation Army's social work. The book does, however, have some problems. Hattersley seems out of sympathy with the Booths' religious convictions, and tends to sound rather condescending when discussing them. He also does not understand some basic Christian terms such as "sanctification", and frequently uses them inappropriately. In addition the book has too many avoidable errors, which suggests it may have been a rushed job. But it remains both very readable and enjoyable, and is a worthy tribute to two great Christians.

For those of us who have grown up in the UK Roy Hattersley's wit and intellect has long been well known. For those of us who are also Salvationists the prospect of Hattersley writing about the founders of the movement we love and serve filled our minds with a sense of forboding.

We needed not worry. Hattersley writes well, every word being closely considered, and brings what is for me the best biography I have yet read about these icons of The Salvation Army. In a "no punches pulled" account, which propels one forward with a real idea of the Booths' enthusiasm and obsession, one reads about how the movement began, survived and ultimately prospered. Unlike many in-house accounts there is no glossing over of the shortcomings of these very human beings, rather we learn how, fired by what the Booths would consider Divine Inspiration, they "pressed forward to the mark of their high calling".

Hattersley concludes "It is not necessary to believe in instant sanctification to admire and applaud their work of social redemption." To those of us who do believe we not only admire and applaud but also see the hand of God in all that the Booths did. Hattersley notes that the Army is the only breakaway group from schismatic 19th century Methodism which survives into the twenty-first century. Many of us who believe know the reason - "Blood and Fire" gives enough evidence for every reader to reach his or her own conclusions.

That Stanley Booth is one of America's finest profile writers AND a close friend of Keith Richards should have ensured this biography would be a moving, essential read. Instead, it is sloppy and a little sad.
Most disappointing is the fact that a significant chunk of the material seems lifted from Booth's far superior "True Adventures of the Rolling Stones." Admittedly "True Adventures," is great source material, even when cannibalized. Unfortunately, Stones fans must still endure Booth's account of his first meeting with Mick Jagger in which songs such as "Backstreet Girl" and "Connection" are linked to the album "Beggars Banquet" rather than "Between the Buttons."
To be fair, accounts of Keith's childhood and adolescence are enlightening, as are some anecdotes from the '70s and '80s. But this is a book that needed re-thinking, or at least savvy editing. Those who want a fresh, revelatory biography on Keith, or a worthy example of music writing from Booth, will have to look elsewhere.

Stanley Booth bases his capability of writing keith richards' life on the fact that he 'lived in social intercourse with him'. although he manages to create few moments of intimacy, his book is more like a glance on the stones career through richards' eyes, rather than a true biography of keith. if you like to read the story of the stones, you would find Booth's previous book - 'the true adventures of the stones' - more complete. if you are interested in keith's biography, Victor bockris' book ( 'keith richards - the biography') is more focused. most of 'standing in the shadows' is based on conversations with keith. when not recycled, some of the quotes are valuable for those who, like me, find keith richards interesting.

Stanley Booth is overqualified, to say the very least, to write this biography of Keith Richards, the muscle behind the music of the Rolling Stones; having toured with the band in 1969, he chronicled the events leading up to their December, 1969 brush with darkness at Altamont. His focus here is not on the whole band, but on the Keith himself, the Human Riff, "the world's blackest white man" and the creator of such rock classics as "Jumping Jack Flash" and "Happy." This book draws heavily from previously published material - that's a drawback; however, said material is superior in almost every respect to just about anything else you'll find about the place, concerning rock music, American culture, sex, drugs, religion, and politics. Booth, a Southern boy, obviously loves how this Englishman took to his own heart the Mississippi Delta blues of black American musicians, and made it into something...else. Booth is not incapable of being critical towards his subject; he is unsparing in his criticisms of Keith's bull-in-a-china-shop lifestyle, his drug addictions and self-denial concerning his addiction problems, but mostly, this book celebrates the life, music, and adventures of the greatest living symbol of rock's defiant spirit.

Told from the perspective of John Surratt, perhaps, after Booth himself, the least understood of the Lincoln assassination conspirators, Robertson's John Suratt is very much a fictional Surratt, as are all the historical figures presented in the book. While interesting in its depiction of Civil War Washington, ultimately, the book is a disappointment in that the characterizations are flat and stereotypical as Mr. Robertson dispenses with historical truth in search of a good yarn. The Lincoln assassination and its participants can provide enough grist for an enjoyable and plausible historical novel (as Mr. Robertson describes his work) with only marginal manipulation of history; thus the wholesale manipulation of history results in a work that is, at the end, an unconvincing and uncomfortable perversion of the historical fiction genre.

Most (though clearly not all, judging from previous comments here) Civil War and Lincoln buffs will applaud David Robertson's debut novel, which rescues a friend of John Wilkes Booth from obscurity and places him at center stage. Robertson brings to life John H. Surratt, tried as a co-conspirator and acquitted -- two years after his mother was convicted on the same charge and became the first woman to be hanged by the U.S. government. But "Booth" is a book for even readers with no special interest in the Civil War. It opens a fascinating window onto those turbulent times and offers insights -- though, granted, fictional ones -- into a story whose ending everyone already knows.

The novel opens with Surratt's 1916 New York Times obituary and then shows us diary entries he had written a few days before. In his initial entry, Surratt reveals that he has been plucked from shipping-clerk obscurity by none other than D.W. Griffith, who wants to put the reminiscences of the long-forgotten historical figure on film for an epilogue to his new movie, "The Birth of a Nation." He considers Griffith's proposal: "Perhaps," he writes, "it was time to tell the full truth about the Lincoln assassination." And with that, the septuagenarian opens up his diaries from the fateful months of 1864-65, offering up the observations and narrations of his younger self.

At 21, already a failed playwright, Surratt has just landed a job as a photographer's assistant that both affords him gainful employment and helps him avoid the draft. It was a strong recommendation by his friend Booth (one of the country's most popular actors) that got him the position, and, as he finds out, the favor comes with strings attached. According to Robertson's somewhat defensive five-page essay on his sources, Surratt wasn't actually a photographer, but the author's invention is welcome -- it enlivens both the novel and Surratt's character and allows for some remarkable bits about the Civil War photographer's art: the metal rack that painfully hol! ds subjects' heads and bodies still; the delicate glass-and-chemical work to produce photographic plates; and "the bane of the photographers' art" -- the light-absorbing fabric called bombazine. Surratt's boss complains that "with the fashion in ladies' dress, a pretty maiden of twenty who comes to my studio in her best bombazine outfit becomes . . . a fleshy blob of a face swimming in an inky darkness."

The truly fascinating element of the novel, though, is the relationship between Booth and Surratt, who is torn between obligation and independence, struggling for control over "Booth's presence in my life." Robertson's Surratt is a reluctant cipher, a humorless man searching for a cause; it's all too easy to fall under Booth's sway. He's aware of this influence, disturbed by it, fights it. He frets about his place in Booth's shadow even as his friend worries that "he is not the great man onstage" that his father, Junius Booth, was. At times Surratt reflects upon "how lucky I was to be able to call a man like John Wilkes Booth my friend." But he's fully aware that Booth is a "subtle manipulator and egotist"; even as he marvels at his friend's generosity, "I couldn't help wondering what Booth wanted."

It turns out that what Booth wants is help with a wild scheme: He intends to kidnap President Lincoln as a prisoner of war, to stop all the killing; his primary concern is that the Union army is bent on humiliating the South. His safety compromised, Surratt turns against his friend: "Booth has reduced my life to comical farce, and a low bumbling comedy. . . . I fear he is a loose cannon, and sure to get me killed -- and over something about which I am utterly disagreed with him on. Why did I ever think Booth was my friend? How can I now disassociate myself from him?" He tries to disentangle himself, deciding that "with the return of peace I will back away from Booth, and turn once again to my own hopes, my own future." But, of course, eventually it's too late, and Booth commits "the one act that would write! my name forever in the history books, and, I prayed, make the South whole again."

This last bit is from Booth's diary, written during his flight after Lincoln's murder. Booth's entries are by turns contemplative and thrilling -- and, considering the harried circumstances of their writing, a little too glossy to seem genuine. Indeed, both diaries read more like meticulously edited historical fiction than contemporary journals. They're far too nuanced and accomplished, laced with italicized flashback phrases and artful foreshadowing. The entries conclude with teasing cliffhangers. There are no missteps, no unsurety, no spontaneity. They don't *sound* right. Surratt's recollection of even throwaway dialogue is too pitch-perfect to be real, as when Booth tells a colleague: "Lewis, there is also a sideboard at the bar with pickled eggs, oysters, and beefsteaks for sandwiches. . . . You must get yourself something to eat. It's all right." Not even Truman Capote would have remembered these lines! Many readers have trouble when an author gives us an unreliable narrator, but sometimes a narrator can be *too* reliable.

The upside to the writing's shininess is that "Booth" is very smooth reading -- though I can't resist pointing out a rare stumble, when Surratt describes his dread: "I felt a cold shiver in my bowels, as if the shadow of death had sent a chill wind through them." Somehow I doubt Robertson was aiming to instill an image of wind in Surratt's bowels. But this type of lapse is unusual. "Booth" is a gripping, enlightening read that's well worth the time of even those who don't often pick up historical fiction. And for Civil War aficionados: Don't miss this one.

An enjoyable book to read, and one that is hard to put down. Robertson admittedly takes some liberties but sticks pretty much to the main facts. Telling the tale through diary accounts, we see the relationship between John Wilkes Booth and the POV character, John Surratt, develop much like that of Steerforth's and David Copperfield's in the Dickens novel. Robertson interestingly enough has the aged Surratt meet with film maker D.W.Griffith and uses this to begin the novel, to great effect. An interesting tale with historical tidbits thrown in, and some insight into early American photography techniques as well. I hope to read many more novels by David Robertson in the future.

After reading a glowing review of this book in Salon Online, I rushed to Amazon to order it. My initial disappointment was the printed hardcover. I attempt to keep my first editions in immpeccable shape, and the lack of a dust jacket puts me off. There is already some wear to the front and back cover, simply from spending a few days on my coffee table. As to the content of the book itself, I found the over-intellectualized text and rather cold presentation off-putting as well. Too be fair, the book is an exhibition catalog, so perhaps the collection of photographs therein manages to find some life in a gallery setting.

A far superior volume, full of life and contradiction is "Death Scenes: A Homicide Detectives Scrapbook" from Feral House. The text in this gritty and strangely beautiful book of photographs is by Katherine Dunn, author of the brilliant novel "Geek Love". The pictures in "Death Scenes" are not at all for the squeamis! h, but have a truth to them that "Police Pictures" lacks. It's true that there are a few plates in "Police Pictures" that are quite wonderful, most of them by WeeGee, the famed photo-journalist. One would be far better served by buying a volume of his work, and letting this one pass.

From Andersonville of the American Civil War to Tuol Sleng of Pol Pot, police have been photographing suspects, convicts, crime scenes, and prisons to collect evidence, record history, and improve techniques to fight crimes and squelch political opposition. This book tries to cover it all: from Che Guevara's fingerprints to James Earl Ray's wanted posters, from the unclaimed bodies of the Communards to the sad souls of Pol Pot's Year Zero campaign, and from murder scenes and execution of murderers.

For good and for evil, photography has recorded who we were and who we are. Photography, as a tool, has been used to support Social Darwinism and eugenics. There are photos of "typical criminal" types as well as a set used to prove that the different races of man are in fact different species. Photography has also been used to solve crimes and put dangerous criminals in jail. All these uses and more are covered in the fine book.

Author Martin Booth has done a splendid job in his attempt to tarnish the image of Jim Corbett, slayer of man eaters, author, naturalist and philanthropist through the book titled "Carpet Sahib". The author used much of his imagination in the book, rather than trying to do some hard research. The book is filled with contradictions and accusations without base. Booth believes
that grapefruit grow on vines! The hardcover edition of this book came out in 1986 as a tie in with the broadcasting of "Man eaters of kumaon" a BBC docudrama which was also scripted poorly by Booth, painting him with a 'chi-chi accent' whatever that might be. Corbett was not a reward hunter according to other biographers, but according to the script Corbett was 'amply rewarded'. Again the imagination from a fiction writer took over
the entire book, mixing facts with fiction! The paper back edition is cheaply made without any photographs and an actor's cartoon on the cover, instead of a Corbett portrait! The first biography of Corbett by D.C.Kala (1979)is much better than this, Booth borrowed material from this book without bothering to acknowledge it.

Good job in gathering some of the photographs published in the book, butthere are far too many contradictions in the text, a sign of writig in haste.The cover design for the original hard cover was good, but the Oxford reprint, the paperback edition, without any illustrations, looked pathetic!

I think Booth has done a marvellous job with Carpet Sahib. Anyone who has ever travelled to northern India - and Kumaon in particular - will appreciate Booth's vivid and sympathetic portrayal of the subject, the people of the hills and terai, and the tigers and leopards which roamed them so freely. Sadly, that world is no more. Kumaon today is a very different place. Luckily, I managed to see a tiger when I visited Corbett National Park in Uttar Pradesh, and reading this book in my cabin while hyenas sniffed and scratched outside my window was a magical experience. Carpet Sahib is a fine book and one of the few available on this fascinating individual and the wilderness of northern India.