A fantasic edition like all these Oxfords. It has a long introduction detailing Berkeley's life and works, and numerous notes throughout the work itself.

As for the work itself it's a recasting of Berkeley's earlier work the Principles into dialogue form. Quite what the point of this was since the Principles were already easy to read is unclear, (although a case could be made that the Dialogues require less prior knowledge of Locke than the Principles did and are therefore a better introductory work) but it's difficult to be sorry that he did as he writes the dialogue form so well, easily the best since Plato, and in my opinion probably marginally better than Plato. He handles the character who he's trying to refute much better than Plato ever did. Unfortunately his ideas aren't on a level with Plato's. As with the Principles his writing sweeps you up and it almost convinces you that perhaps matter doesn't exist and the mind is all there is, but once again take a step back and the flaws become all too apparent.

Berkeley's too important to ignore though, and besides his books are a pleasure to read. You can't do better than this edition.

The attitude of most reviewers to the philosophical thoery proposed by Bishop George Berkeley seems to be 'jolly good show old boy, wonderful stuff, shame it's just not true, and written so beautifully, more's the pity.'

Given that all the reviewers are so utterly convinced that matter and the everyday world are really real, what else could be expected ? Berkeley's philosphy is so great and so stunning precisely because it directly attacks this great bedrock assumption of the ordinary human mind. And contrary to popular belief, his attack does not fail - it merely falls on deaf ears or blind eyes.

As per Berkeley, only God's mind and the ideas within it have real existence. Fortunately for us, included within the ideas in God's mind are the idea of an external world and the idea of human minds. Our human minds involuntarily produce the idea of the external world (God has so programmed our minds), but voluntarily produce other lesser ideas (ie personal dreams and fantasies and various private thoughts). Berkeley does not deny that we experience a 'real' world, he just denies that it has any reality apart from being mentally perceived. His theory cannot be proved by pure reason (since faith in the existence of God is an absolute must for a person to accept the Bishop's views)and in this sense his theory is speculative, but equally it cannot be disproved, since in one way or another we can never separate the external world from our perception of it.

On the other side, critics of Berkeley, absolutely have to deal with Hume's destruction of the external world through the use of pure reason. Following Hume, Locke's positing of 'matter' i.e. an independently existing external world, is shown to be just as speculative as Berkeley's positing of Mind. So where does that leave the critics ?

And supporters of Berkeley, can take heart from the fact that Kant who famously reconciled Hume and Berkeley, in fact does no more (and certainly no less) than fill in the gaps and supply the missing terms to the Bishop's argument. Is it really such a very great leap to go from Kant's noumenal realm and synthetic a priori, to the existence and workings of a benevolent God ? Some would say that rightly understood, the two are identical. If you ask me, Kant, quite cunningly smuggled the Bishop in through the front gate, by the simple ruse of dressing him up in a non-theological guise - much more palatable, you understand, and of course, much less threatening.

Of course, all the above exposition, is strictly for the religious sceptics - for the believers, the good Bishop is more or less, right on the money. Rock on, good sir, rock on. Let's all sing along to the Beatles - O, he gets by with a little help from his Kant, yeah, he gets by with a little help from his Kant.

This Oxford Philosophical Texts student edition of George Berkeley's best known work features a helpful introduction, glossary, and notes by philosopher Jonathan Dancy (author of _Berkeley: An Introduction_ and editor of the Oxford Philosophical Texts edition of Berkeley's _Treatise concerning the Principles of Human Knowledge_). The forty-page introduction includes a short biography of Berkeley, a synopsis of the _Dialogues_, a summary and analysis of Berkeley's philosophy including critical discussion of his main arguments, and an exposition of the relation between the _Dialogues_ and the _Principles_. Also featured: a bibliography and an analytical table of contents for the dialogues.

As for Berkeley himself, he probably needs no introduction from me. Arguably the most judicious commentary on his thought is that of T.H. Green, who in his great _Introduction_ to Locke and Hume remarked as follows:

"His [Berkeley's] purpose was the maintenance of Theism, and a true instinct told him that pure Theism, as distinct from nature-worship and daemonism, has no philosophical foundation, unless it can be shown that there is nothing real apart from thought. But in the hurry of theological advocacy, and under the influence of a misleading terminology, he failed to distinguish this true proposition -- there is nothing real apart from thought -- from this false one, its virtual contradictory -- that there is nothing other than feeling. The confusion was covered, if not caused, by the ambiguity, often noticed, in the use of the term 'idea.' This to Berkeley's generation stood alike for feeling proper . . . and for conception, or an object thought of under relations. . . . Misled by the phrase 'idea of a thing,' we fancy that idea and thing have each a separate reality of their own, and then puzzle ourselves with questions as to how the idea can represent the thing . . . . These questions Berkeley asked and found unanswerable. There were two ways of dealing with them before him. One was to supersede them by a truer view of thought and its object, as together in essential correlation constituting the real; but this way he did not take. The other was to avoid them by merging both thing and idea in the indifference of simple feeling . . . -- an attempt which contradicts itself, since it virtually admits [the] existence [of such oppositions as inner and outer, subjective and objective] while it renders them unaccountable." [_Hume and Locke_, 1968 Apollo edition, pp. 140-142.]

This summary may not be quite adequate to Berkeley's thought overall, as later in life he does appear to have come round to a view not altogether unlike Green's. However, it seems to me to be an eminently fair assessment of the Berkeley represented in the present volume.

At any rate Berkeley was a fascinating thinker and this volume is as good an introduction to him as is available. The _Dialogues_ should eventually be read in conjunction with the _Principles_ (which they were intended to support), but anyone looking for a single volume in which to meet this great and seminal philosopher will be safe in beginning with this one.

This is, as they say, the definitive work on classic big band and swing music, full of profiles of bands and band leaders large and small, from the Artie Shaws and Glenn Millers to the Will Bradleys and Hal Kemps. The scope of the book is very well-rounded, including information on often-neglected "sweet" band musicians such as Isham Jones, along with pre-big band acts like Ted Lewis. The downside is that Simon -- a jazz music critic for "Metronome" magazine during the big band years -- wears his insider credentials on his sleeves, and is a bit of an insufferable name-dropper. Nonetheless, this is a great reference work, and a nice look back at the glory days of swing.

This book occupied a prime spot on my fathers bookshelf while I was growing up. I frequently heard this music as a kid, and was intrigued by its swing and feel. I had the pleasure of befriending George Simon, and found him to be a first class gentleman. I visited him at his home, and we would discuss the music and his experiences. It gave me tremendous insight into the times, and was always interesting. George was about fifty yeasr older than I ( I have lost touch with him after his move to Florida) but due to his involvement with the Grammys he could go from Harry James to Bob Dylan to Jimi Hendrix with ease. An interesting and insightful book by someone who loved the music and all it stood for.

George Simon was an intimate part of the big band scene. He was there when it was born and he was there when it atrophied during Word War Two. He was an original member of the Glenn Miller Orchestra (he played drums) and one of the first writers for Metronome Magazine, the trade mag for the music industry in that time. I have a hardcover copy of the 9th printing. The original copyright is indicated as 1967. I also have an accompanying three record set that is unique in that it was a cooperative effort by three competing companies: RCA, Decca and Columbia. It's a shame that this isn't available too! Over 400 bands are mentioned, some extensively. It is full of first-hand accounts, anecdotes and many photos. I felt as if I was there! George Simon gave us a true window into this piece of music history. If I had an extra thumb, I would give it three thumbs up!

Cleaves' book is an excellent read for the person who wishes to learn more about one of the best (North or South) and overlooked generals of the Civil War. While many books focus on Lee, Jackson, Grant, and Sherman, Cleaves succeeds in bringing to light the very important accomplishments by General Thomas.

Included in the book are Thomas' many military victories: the complete defeat of a Confederate army at the battles of Mill Springs and Nashville, repulse of Hood's attacks at Atlanta, and of course, perhaps his most stunning achievement - holding the Confederate Army at bay on Snodgrass Hill while the rest of the Union Army retreated from Chickamauga.

Throughout the book Cleaves describes Thomas as a man who willingly subordinated his desires for the best of the nation, something lacking in most "leaders" today. Several times Cleaves describes Thomas as a calm, confident, and not easily shaken man in whom soldiers took great comfort in knowing he was in charge.

I only wish there would have been more maps used when describing the many battles Thomas participated in. Doing so would have made it easier for me to follow the troop movements, whether in an individual battle or a campaign.

All in all, an excellent read of an excellent general and gentleman. Thomas was a refreshing change from the self-promoting methods other "leaders" in the 1860's practiced - he would still be a rare gem if he were alive in today's world!!!

Written over 52 years ago, this book is a ground breaking contribution to the Civil War's saga. It really is a must read for understanding the intricacies of the Union high command.

Union loyalists of Southern birth like Thomas, Buford, etc. were just as alone and alienated in their army as Southern loyalists of Northern birth like Pemberton. They suffered an ostracism, a fundamental distrust that really reached its peak in this country when we sent thousands and thousands of Japanese Americans to concentration camps in California in World War II while concurrently having their sons fight and die in Europe. Thomas' story is really no different and every bit as unfair.

This type of unfortunate, 'protective tuck' is a natural reaction during a national emergency. Fortunately, leading edge historians like Freeman Cleaves have left us a record of one man's sacrifice for the country of his birth.

George Thomas was not treated properly by anyone, North or South. Lincoln treats him as a political liability and pawn, Stanton fundamentally distrusts everyone of Southern heritage, and the Union troika of Grant, Sherman and Sheridan have much to be ashamed of: Grant for his smallness, Sheridan for the desertion of someone who must have been his mentor and Sherman for betraying a long standing friendship. The South simply refused to acknowledge his existence. When Thomas was down, everyone kicked. Being Southern born, he was an easy competitive target for both sides both during and after the war. He simply had no mentor anywhere.

Yet this courageous fighter survives much political intrigue to not only save a complete Union army from annihilation, an army by the way that he did not personally command but could have, but also completely destroys the South's Army of Tennessee and possibly, just possibly pulls Sherman and Grant's chestnuts out of the fire. Playing a key and fundamentally pivotal role in Grant and Shaman's grand strategy, after his success he is simply thrown aside like an old shoe and not just forgotten but treated miserably, like his very existence and success was an embarrassment to the victors.

Read this book! It is about an American patriot who sacrifices everything, his reputation, home, family and pre and post war friendships for the ability of the United States to develop into the world example it is today. It is the kind of story all Americans appreciate: doing the right thing while succeeding against all odds, foreign and domestic.

When I first started studying the civil war nearly 30 years ago, one of my first thoughts was: "Why haven't I heard of George Thomas?'' There are those who argue, including Cleaves in several sections, that he was the most important Union general _ one list, in fact, makes him one of the five men (and the only military figure) most important in the North's victory. In the prewar Army, he served with Lee, another Virginian who wavered, and was close to being considered Lee's equal.

The reasons for Thomas' relative obscurity have been well stated in other reviews _ his southern heritage; his self-effacing disposition except (as Cleaves points out) when he felt he had been done an injustice. It didn't help that Sherman, one of his sponsors and Grant, his classmate at West Point, shut him out of the post-war glory and that he died in 1870, too early to establish a reputation.

Is the subtitle ("The Man who Save the Union?'') justified? Look at it this way: There's no question that Thomas' stand at Chickamauga made Sherman's campaign through Georgia possible. And if that hadn't happened, Lincoln might not have been re-elected in 1864, perhaps leading to a truce that would have left the nation split. That in itself is reason enough to celebrate Thomas.

But as Cleaves emphasizes, Thomas was more than that. Military historieans consider him one of the best defensive generals ever, a man who would have stood out in any war. And unlike many of our heroes, he was a decent man.

We could use more like him.

This 55-year-old book could use more readers.

General George H. Thomas deserves recognition not only for his bravery in Civil War battle but also for his brave choice to fight for the Union despite his Virginia birth. Education in Violence grants this recognition, but with a shortage of style. Francis F. McKinney's prose is often wooden and he is short on drama - his long, droning passages sometimes fail to give a sense of a battle as a whole or its significance. He doesn't answer the great question of why Thomas remained with the Union while fellow Virginians like Robert E. Lee and Joe Johnston went over to the rebel side. There is also a transparent partisanship here: Thomas and Grant were at odds, and there is no doubt which side this book favors. A recent book, The Warrior Generals by Thomas B. Buell, does a better job explaining Thomas's superb organizational abilities, his mastery at using maps in battle, and his grasp of how the technological advances of his day could tip the tide in battle. Read Education in Violence as a good source book on the General that is entirely devoted to the subject but limited in style.

This is easily the best account of General Thomas' life - just about everthing you ever wanted to know about his life is here, although I wish that the author had included more examples of his writing. Much more, the book is a great history of the war in the West and of how and why the Union won so decisively. The author writes very well and has an extremely broad (and opinionated) view of the war and this book was simply a great pleasure to read.

"Education in Violence" examines the life of the most admirable general of the Civil War and the army he led, with accuracy and literary clarity. Chapter 16 provides the best overview overview of the battle of Chickamauga in print and serves as a model of visualization of the geography and complex action occurring on a battle site. The account of Stones River is somewhat superficial by comparison, but the book's strengths make it one of the very finest volumes on 19th Century American history.

This book is very succinct and the explanations for each accounting concepts are very easy to understand and easy to remember. The "Red Flags" after each concept are very useful in pointing out all the possible problems that may arise. While the strengths of this book is his conciseness, it does require you to have some basic accounting background. Otherwise, some of the explanations may seem confusing. Having said that, if i am reading an annual report, I would definitely want to have this book beside me. Happy reading!

"Keys To Reading An Annual Report" by George Thomas Friedlob and Ralph E. Welton is a wonderful, little book for all investors. Each of the fifty, three-or-four-page sections covers a key concept that investors should understand when reading a public company's annual report and other financial statements.

"Keys To Reading An Annual Report" is no substitute for a complete text about financial statement analysis, such as "The Analysis And Use of Financial Statements," but "Keys To Reading An Annual Report" is an excellent first read for new investors who are learning to understand financial statements. And, experienced readers of annual reports will probably find this book a useful review.

Some of the fifty key topics covered include:

--SEC Forms 10-K, 10-Q, and the 8-K
--Current Assets
--Cash and Receivables
--Cost of Goods Sold and Inventories
--Property, Plant, and Equipment
--Depreciation
--Intangibles and Other Assets
--Depletion and Amortization
--Current Liabilities
--Bonds and Amortization
--Owner's Equity
--Classes of Stock
--Treasury Stock
--Discontinued Operations
--Ratio Analysis
--Taxes and Tax Deferrals

Many of the topics "Red Flag" things to which investors should pay special attention. For example, the chapter about Depreciation Red Flags: "The basis for long-lived asset valuation is historical cost. Because depreciation does not measure actual decline in value, the net book value of a long-lived asset (historical cost - accumulated depreciation) is not a good measure of the cost of replacing the asset. Neither is net book value a good measure of what the asset would bring if sold." (i.e., depreciation expense is a way of expensing the long-lived asset. And, the balance sheet only lists the so-called "unexpired cost.")

The red flag also discusses the difficulty in comparing depreciation across different companies because of the different ways depreciation may be computed.

The section about Treasury Stock tells us: "Stock Issued by a company may later be reacquired by the company. In some cases, the company may retire or cancel this stock. When reacquired stock is not retired or canceled, it is referred to as treasury stock." (there is a nice glossary at the end of the book.).

Friedlob and Welton point out that treasury stock is not an asset. "A company cannot create an asset by holding stock in itself."

However, because the reacquired stock may have been reacquired at a different price than it was originally issued, the wealth within the company can change in such a treasury stock transaction. For example, suppose stock is issued for $20 per share, but reacquired for $2 per share (it's an internet company!), then, somehow, the company has taken in $18 per share on the transaction. How is this accounted for in the financial statements?

Friedlob and Welton explain: "Just as treasury stock is not an asset, a loss or gain cannot result from treasury stock transactions. 'Things' happen that you and I would call a 'loss' (reacquiring treasury stock for $20 per share and later reissuing it for $12) or a 'gain' (reacquiring treasury stock for $30 per share and later reissuing it for $40). But it is illegal for a company to produce a gain or loss transacting in its own stock. When total stockholder's equity is decreased by treasury stock transactions (a loss), the decrease is generally taken directly from retained earnings. No loss is taken... When total stockholder's equity is increased by treasury stock transactions (a gain), the increase is recorded as a separate source of capital called Paid-In Capital from Treasury Stock Transactions."

So, by reading a little, two-page section about treasury stock in Keys To Reading An Annual Report, you probably now know more than 99% of all investors know about treasury stock!

"...If you are new to investing, you might also want to pick up a copy of Barron's "Keys To Investing In Common Stocks," which is an excellent first read for investors.

Peter Hupalo, Author of "Becoming An Investor"

This small manual concisely and succinctly presents the major elements of financial statements in easy to read, line-by-line format. It is not only ideal for the average investor without an accounting background, but also for the accountant who needs to explain financial statement concepts and presentations to others. Its examples are easy to relate to and quite illustrative. I regret this wasn't available when I tried to decipher "Accounting 101".

"Thomas and Finney is remarkably easy to read." I agree. It's easy to read because there is not much of substance there. It's basically a recipe cookbook. The authors are not mathematicians and don't truly understand some of the more advanced concepts (in the last parts of the book.)

The problems are not challenging, and do not lead to any new insights. For a book with great problems and insightful discussions of the key concepts, I recommend Swokowski's Calculus.

Yet it is a decent text for what it is intended to do, which is to teach engineers. That's why the two stars.

Thomas/Finney 9th edition covers all of the essential aspects of calculus, with an adequate amount of rigor as to not to confuse the freshman audience it is intended for. The graphs and diagrams are especially useful, and the book is extremely well-written. True, some of the examples in the exercises are a bit repetitive, and extremely simple. However, I used this text for an honors calculus class at Cornell, and when supplemented with the proper theoretical background to the subject (in lecture), the text is suitable for a course of that caliber. The "theory and examples" sections (where most of our problem sets came from) presented challenging questions which required a great deal of intuition. Overall the text is excellent, and I learned a lot from it. It has earned a place on my bookshelf.

This is perhaps one of the finest high-school Calculus textbooks in existance. The first eight chapters of Thomas-Finney deal with calculus of functions of a single variable, going through what is commonly known as BC calculus. In addition to covering the essential topics of differentiation and integration, Thomas-Finney pays ample attention to the applications of the two. What results is a lucid text full of examples that ground calculus in the real world.

The second half of Thomas-Finney is devoted mainly to three-dimensional analytic geometry, multivariate calculus, and finally vector calculus. Partial derivitives, conic sections, vector-valued functions, and multiple integrals are just some of the topics covered in the second half. Here too, the book devotes ample time to examples and applications. The presentation of advanced concepts is top-notch.

The text is also interspersed with mathematical biography and sidebars that explain how to use CAS to help understand concepts. These are well presented and do not take away from the core math taught in the book.

I taught myself calculus during a summer using this book and without teacher intervention. It was the only one of five calculus textbooks that presented material clearly and simply enough to understand without outside help. In my mind, that's the highest compliment a math textbook can be given.

As George Purdy passed on recently it is worth bringing attention once again to this memoir. It is rare that a book ends too soon but that is the case with this tale. I assumed that there were many more tales to tell and would have been happy to keep reading.

What a charming and uplifting book! George Purdy's "never give up" attitude comes across loud and clear. Honesty, perserverence and enjoyment of life are his "rules of the road." - it's an easy-to-read, educational and enjoyable book every parent should have his/her child read! Delightful!

The story of a man and his love for the sea, is not only fascinating, but I lived it with him. His determination to overcome obstacles to be a part of the navy in times of peace and war is a living book. If you want adventure,achievements, and financial success, then read this book about a man that has done it all. Tom Caldwell's book is a tribute to George I. Purdy. Well done Tom.

Thomas Paine's January 1776 pamphlet, "Common Sense," is one of those documents of American culture which goes all too frequently neglected these days. Paine's insistent call for independence from Great Britain in the winter before the Second Continental Congress was instrumental in mobilizing public opinion and popular support for political and economic freedom. Economics and social values form the basis of Paine's critique of the British presence in the American colonies, and he never loses sight of either his purpose or his rationale throughout the course of his argument. "Common Sense" follows a logical schematic - from a general philosophical explication of human government, to a critique of the current state of British government, to an analysis of the American situation particularly, and even includes a general plan for an independent American government following independence. "Common Sense" is remarkable for Paine's diagnosis of the American situation, Paine having been only 14 months in the colonies when it was published, and for its eloquence and exhortative value.

Paine begins by outlining human nature as he sees it. In a fascinating inversion of Thomas Hobbes, he notes that monarchy at the present time creates a situation wherein government is as effective as it would be if there were no government at all. The nearly anarchic state of nature defies the logical purpose of government. Paine says that people form societies naturally, and form governments only because human morality is not perfect. The end of government is to protect the right to property and religious freedom. Paine favours a representative democracy wherein there is frequent turn-over, and where the common interests of the people are consulted and catered to. Finally, he argues for the rule and sovereignty of law against the arbitrary and absurd rule of kings and men.

He contrasts this with the British model, in which government seems only to serve the interests of the King and the aristocracy. Taxation, as a primary example, allows hereditary rulers, who are inherently removed from the interests of the industrious people they govern, to live off their subjects without contributing anything of substance to the society or the polis. Paine insists that the province of government is not to regulate the lives of the citizens; instead, it must create and protect an arena where free competition in the marketplace will allow people to pursue their own best interests. With a minimum of government, civil society, Paine believes, can administer itself. In one of his most clever lines, Paine says that if an American government can only see to the protection of its own economy and exports, it will flourish "and will always have a market while eating is the custom of Europe".

The impetus for "Common Sense" is the current of thought that suggested reconciliation with Britain is preferable to independence. In an American public sphere anxious about its relationship to Britain, Paine provides encouragement to debate and discussion with all the subtlety of a street-corner millennarian. Citing the inevitability of a split between the colonies and Britain, and emphasizing that the legacy of America is at stake in the choices of the present moment, Paine calls the drive to independence "the cause of all mankind". In persuasive and urgent, nearly prophetic language, Paine makes a case for the political, economic, and historical implications of American independence.

Of course, "Common Sense" is not without its problems. Paine's discussion of natural and artificial distinctions within society and government is problematic at its intersections with gender and race. Paine's strange thematic of government and prostitution reflects 18th century gender standards; and he never seems comfortable with the issues of African slavery in America or the 'problem' of Native Americans. In this context, it is easy to see, in Paine's assessment of whether independence should be pursued now or later, a prefigurement of the political and economic bases of the American Civil War. Isaac Kramnick's extensive and exhaustive introduction to this Penguin Classics edition of "Common Sense," though nearly 30 years old, sets Paine's achievement in firm and understandable contexts of its philosophical, historical, and biographical origins. An excellent edition of a work that every American, if not everyone, owes it to themselves to read.

This little book changed the world. This alone makes it worth reading, but I am always thrilled to read the wisdom of Thomas Paine. Essentially an argument that the concept of British rule over the colonies was irrational and immoral as well as a statement of conviction that at the time of the publication of the work America was ready to rise up against the Brits. Paine's writing is smooth and his logic is undeniable. Read this and understand what united the colonists and led to the achievement of the first nation to result from the great thinkers of the Enlightenment.

Common Sense written by Thomas Paine is a book the was published in 1776, short, concise and lucid in the argument that galvanized the thought in the thirteen colonies to fight England and gain independence.

Foremost in thinking at the time, Thomas Paine rallied the people to seek a better, freer, and independent movement to establish the United States. No one will ever know the true extent to which "Common Sense" played in changing public opinion in favor of independence, but it aforded a blunt and direct argument that was written in a language that could be understood by any literate colonist.

As Bernard Bailyn said, "the most brillant pamphlet written during the American Revolution, and one of the most brilliant pamphlets ever written in the Einglish language." Every United States citizen should read this book and this is a must read for all high school students.

Powerful thought for a time when estrangement between England and the thirteen colonies was growing. While the British presence in the colonies was weak throughout the eighteenth-century, and while its power and influence over Americans was by no means dominant, the time was at hand to make a decision.

A decision that would be either bring independence or tyranny, the catalysis was "Common Sense."

I was dissappointed with the book. There's no in depth discussion on any event. It just reads on and states facts like those in High School text books. Didn't capture me at all.

A huge book that traces the history of America from pre-Columbus through present day. Although considered by many to be a "text book" for study, it is not written in that format. It reads easily and clearly. It is non-biased and informative. The pictures are helpful. It's the first book on American history that I have been able to finish. Although expensive, I think that every book collection should have a copy and it is an essential part of any history collection.

My AP US History class used this book as its textbook. Statistics speak for themselves: anyone who read and studied the book got a 5! It is one of the most comprehensive texts in American history ever published. George Tindall, the primary author, is a wonderful and knowledgable man who I have met in Chapel Hill,NC. An excellent buy!

Okay, I will not deny that Herodotus is one of the greatest historians out there. Nor will I deny his ability to tell a good story. I won't deny that his scrutiny of the facts is refreshing in an era of blind acceptance of religious tradition.

BUT, I struggled to even finish the book. Herodotus's digressions are MADDENING. I have trouble keeping track of who did what to who. Just when I get a hold of what is going on, he changes the focus to another part of the world or another facet of culture.

Most introductions don't help at all with this. The scholars all assume that you already know enough of the main history and get into the deep, involved parts. Now, if Robert B. Strassler would do for Herodotus what he has done for Thucydides, it would be a lot easier for the uninitiated to read.

Maybe it's because I'm a poor, unattentive reader, but I just can't give it a high rating.

Good book, bad edition, hence the two stars. I recommend this to lovers of ancient history with the above reservations.

In case classical literature still lies in your future, you can look forward with delight to a wonderful story-teller of the 5th century BC, the first known of a genre. His tales are often mythical and require decipherment to get at their historical sources, if any. In addition, however, we get the first clear view of the Fars, long before they converted to Islam, a few centuries after they had arrived in Iran, and were still extended into a large part of southern Russia, where they contended with mounted shooters called the Skyths. The Fars today have long since been amalgamated into one people. Herodotus gives some detail of the people who were there before the Fars. He also details the assault of this new Persian Empire on the Greek world and its containment via the first enthralling battle stories ever: Marathon, Thermopylae, Salamis.

I was surprised to find the Histories to be so readable and enjoyable. I'm not used to thinking of a history book as a page-turner but the last four chapters of the Histories, which describe the Persian wars, were compelling reading. That's not to slight the first five book, which describe the world of Herodotus' time and the rise of the Persian, Egyptian and Greek Empires in fascinating detail.

Despite the rather formal language of the translation, the Histories are very engaging. Herodotus not only illuminates critical details of historical events but enlivens them with anecdotes and legends, some of this likely apocryphal. Rawlinson's translation is very good and his footnotes, despite their age, are outstanding. The best thing is that they are footnotes, not endnotes, so you won't break your fingers constantly flipping to the back of the book.

One critical missing element, however, is a map. A map of the world in Herodotus's time (such as I found online) would really make a lot of the events clearer.

In the time since I have read Herodotus, I have begun to appreciate how his Histories are the cornerstone of a classical education. The Histories are constantly referenced in western literature in everything from the Divine Comedy to the English Patient to Lawrence of Arabia to Ball Four.

If you're trying to give yourself a good foundation in history and western culture, this is the best place to start.