'LOST AND FOUND' is a very thorough biography of Heinrich Schliemann but the insightful discussion concerning "Priam's Treasure", post Schliemann's lifetime, would have been better suited for an extended newspaper editorial. The intricacies of Schliemann's archaeological methodology are not explained adequately and that is a shame. Moorehead mentions Schliemann's innovative use of ceramic analysis (potsherds) but fails to adequately define how revolutionary and important it was at the time. Moorehead does a great job explaining how Schliemann's initial foray into archaeology resembled the work of grave robber. If you are interested in Heinrich Schliemann the man, then read this book... now. But, if you are interested in the evolution of 19th century archaeology or in-depth archaeological validation of the Trojan War, then there are much better books on the subject. A good example of a better book on the latter two subjects is: 'FINDING THE WALLS TROY: FRANK CALVERT AND HEINRICH SCHLIEMANN AT HISARLIK', by Susan Allen.

Caroline Moorehead's Lost and Found (the 9,000 Treasures of Troy, Heinrich Schliemann and the Gold That Got Away) is basically a biography of Schliemann with a long epilogue tracing the travels of the gold from Troy in the twentienth century, taking in its journeys through Nazi Germany and, ultimately, Soviet Russia. This section of the book is fascinating but the real meat is the story of Schliemann himself. The author can be a bit of an apologist for Schliemann but considering the vitriol that has been heaped on him in his own time and the following decades, a little defense is not inappropriate. The story is well told and quite exciting. Schliemann may be a hard subject to like but he is always fascinating to read about and this book tells his story very well. A short, interesting read for those with any interest in the peculiarities of nineteenth century archeology.

The amount of treasure looted durning World War II was staggering. Moorehead describes convoys of 150 trucks, trains and wagonloads of Europe's artworks carried to and from Germany by avaricious politicians and soldiers alike. The damage done is enormous, but at some point, the description of the cost in human life in Berlin alone eclipses the loss of artworks. As a treasure story, it needs more. As a bio of Schliemann it presents an interesting man, and possibly the greatest catalyst for archeological discovery.

Hugh Thomas, as we know, writes a good story. Here he argues that the guy caught by the British and buried (later cremated) after committing suicide in May 1945 may not have been Heinrich Himmler but a near look-a-like Heinrich Hitzinger. The Himmler of this book is not the Hitler sychophant but a scheming, power hungry warlord who accepted the war was lost as early as 1943 and laid plans to succeed his master by treachery if necessary. Thomas argues that the devious Himmler, who amassed a huge personal fortune via SS income, would not have been so stupid as to fall into the hands of the British so soon after hostilities ceased. The chapters range far and wide and include discussion of the goings-on in the British legation in Stockholm as well as the part played by spies such as Philby and Blunt. It's interesting stuff, but is it convincing? This reviewer does not think so. Sometimes Thomas actually misleads. Thus he argues that Himmler during the war never wore the horn rimmed spectacles seen in the presumed death photographs after he swallowed poison. This is patently untrue. You have only to flick, for example, through Martin Mansson's pictorial chronicle of the Reichsfuhrer for lots of wartime photos of him with hornrimmed glasses. Another problem is that some of the key source material in Thomas' book is not verifiable, being unpublished theses or private information or rumours from published secondary sources. The author casts doubt on the dental charts from the first British autopsy, claiming they are not Himmler's, but the argument is not proven. The British records on Himmler's death will not be publicly released until 2045 which allows Thomas to smell a conspiracy. And that's the point. If you enjoy conspiracies, you're gonna love this book. But whether it's fiction or non fiction is another matter. Never mind, it's a brisk and enjoyable read.

Here's an interesting and well documented book that seems to inject a lot of theorizing ino the mix. Suppose the accepted death of Heinrich Himmler were not true? Interesting reading with some real revelations and chilling photographs. Collectors of WWII history might be especially interested in this work.

The strange death of Heinrich Himmler by Hugh Thomas was a well done-put together product. It is highly likely that this book will be a slow seller since few readers are interested in such subject matter. The book is very detailed and has some rather good photos-some I have never seen before. The book, in my opinion, is a "4" star item. Himmler, the greatest mass murderer in history, was no doubt, a very unusual person and questionable. When he was captured by Allied forces, he revealed his real self, a little man with no powers at all without Hitler and the Third Reich. He was weak,had a bad stomach (probably from his mass murder approvals of 7 million Jews and Poles), was a paper general, never a true Reich soldier, never won any awards, except political, loved his black uniform, and was viewed by other Nazi Generals as a political party member only, and wasn't well respected. No other person in world history can lay the unfortunate claim of killing so many human beings. His photos in this book, and those of his death, indicates that he was finished, at the end of the line, and show that he knew his fate, thus escaping justice by swallowing poison, a easy way out on earth, but he is likely paying the price now as we speak.

After reading Seven Years in Tibet, this book (which I managed to pick up in Pilgrims bookshop in Kathmandu, after visiting Tibet myself in 1998) came across more as a thesis, compared to the story like format of the former book. Return to Tibet concerns Heinrich Harrer's return to Lhasa in 1982 as part of one of the first tour groups to enter Tibet after China began to open up after Mao and the Cultural Revolution. He compare the Lhasa and Tibet he knew over thirty years before with that he saw on his return. He also manages to break away from the group he was with and meet some of the people he used to know - again, the differences in these people show a sharp contrast.

Whereas Seven Years in Tibet is an easy read, this is a lot heavier going. To be honest, I felt that Heinrich Harrer spent too much time lamenting the old days which made for not one the most memorable reads. That said, if only to show how much had changed, it is still interesting from a historical point of view and what caught my attention most was the changes between the Heinrich Harrer's visit in 1982 and my own trip their in 1998 (for example, on the good side monasteries being rebuilt, easier to get around Tibet, but not so good was the development of Lhasa into a modern city with less character, with a very large influx of non-Tibetans into Tibet in general).

I found Mr. Harrer's account of his return to Tibet after Chinese occupation an interesting account from a factual point of view, but it was rather dry from a reader point of view. If you are interested in Tibet, I would recommend it; if you are interested in a good story, I would not.

It is amazing that Henrich Harrer has written separate accounts on Tibet, the roof of thw world, with incredible disparity in emotions. The successor of "Seven Years in Tibets", "Return to Tibet" records the author's revisit 30 years after his departure in 1950. "Return to Tibet" is often regarded as the continuation of "Seven Years in Tibet", except that readers shouldn't read it as a travelogue. Interwoven with the once-vivid and jocund recollection of the country, Harrer contrasted the dismal Tibet under the Chinese neocolonialism. One might find the later volume dry and even disappointing because "Return To Tibet" is not really a showcase of colorful Tibetan costumes, or the rancid butter tea, or the architecture of monasteries. Instead, it is more a political review of how China had annihilated the Tibetan cultures by forcing adoption of new beliefs and ideologies. The climax of the book falls into the author's report to the Dalai Lama, with whom Harrer had built a close friendship. It is through Dalai Lama, spiritual leader of Tibet, that the author realized that Tibetans' beliefs are unshakable. "Tibetans are people of love and patience. They never value war. Yet they value religion and belief more than anything. They would value religion more than not going to war."

I generally enjoy reading Heinrich Boll although there are times he confuses me ("Billiards at Half Past Nine" comes to mind). My main confusion with "And Never Said a Word" was that I found myself looking past the story to a symbolism that may or may not have been there. I almost missed a reasonably good sketch in the process.

The story starts out giving us some clear signs of a marriage in trouble; a husband sends just about all of his paycheck to his wife and then drinks up the remainder. We discover more and more problems as the novel unfolds. This is helped by the author's effective use of the narration which alternates each chapter between husband and wife. As I was going along, I sensed a metaphor between the collapse of a marriage and the collapse of Nazi Germany, the soldier returning home to a marriage destroyed as a metaphor to returning to a society destroyed. Oops, that didn't seem to pan out. The husband's military service was "boring" duty as a telephone operator. His personal struggle seems to be with poverty in the present tense rather than post traumatic stress disorder. Then I looked to the marital seperation as a metaphor for the division of Germany into East and West. This, too, seemed to be a stretch. This is the story of a marriage that is failing and of the efforts of the spouse's to deal with the situation. I guess it's the scarcity of hope and the disfunctional nature of the husband that sends one looking for meaning on a larger scale. Yet the title causes one to reflect one last time on the novel's message. We find out that the title comes from the American Negro Spiritual "And He Never Said a Mumblin' Word". I only heard that spiritual once and my recollection of the message was that of Christ taking his pain and suffereing in quiet submission. It is with quiet submission that Fred and Kate Bogner take their pain and suffering. We know that within Christ's pain and suffering is a powerful love. On an admittedly lesser scale we see the same thing in "And Never Said a Word".

"The lucky ones were those who did not love each other when they got married." Lucky because there was nothing to stand in the way of the dissolution of their marriage when that marriage became stressful. The husband and wife in this story, assailed by the stresses of poverty, cramped living spaces, and the prospect of another child they can't afford, react with an awkward attempt at separation. This separation, rather than bringing either of them a dreamt-of liberation, takes them from frustration to the brink of despair. The husband and wife alternate, each chapter, telling the story of this separation. The husband's pathetic urban peregrinations occur within the gravitational field of the wife. The wife cannot relate the story of her harsh home-life with the children without reference to the husband. Boll, though critical, as usual, of Catholic culture, here creates a few positive Catholic characters and depicts, with hope rather than sentimentality, the power of a genuine marital love.

kung is a smart man and a scholar. however, in trying to make christianity all-inclusive, he dilutes christianity into little more than dialectic feel-good mysticism. i think he needs to buy a Bible and reexamine/meet Jesus.

"Christianity and the World Religions" has been selected for listing in "Religion and Psychoactive Sacraments: An Entheogen Chrestomathy" http://www.csp.org/chrestomathy

While Kant's work is important for many philosophical reasons (e.g., his splendid arguments for how our minds shape our experiences), this book just happens to find Christianity the most rational of all faiths per lots of convoluted "reasons" as shallow as they are boring.

It has been more than 200 years since this book was firstpublish (1788) and it remains actual, so this shows the uniqueness ofKant's work. There is no doubt that the philosopher born in Koenigsberg in 1724 is among of the greatest thinkers of all time. In "Critical of Practical Reason", Immanuel Kant continues his explorations in the procedures of knowledge, understanding and experience started at 'Critical of Pure Reason."... When you read this book it becomes clear why such a philosopher was so important in the development of the science in the 19th and 20th century where the discussion about analysis, synthesis and causality remains open END

The most hard work in the FMS implementation is the design. But how you'll be ensure that the design have correctly designed?. By choising the apropiate tool.
And this is an object-oriented methodology (the best at now, RUP).
Now, the rest is an UML approach to the proyect success.

Roderic Castella
Univ. Bio-Bio
Chile

10 machine and 3 type part manufacturing in FMS and ýts have an 12 route and which route willbe manufacture which type part....

Schenker's special theories were still largely undeveloped when he wrote this. Begin with INTRODUCTION TO SCHENKERIAN ANALYSIS by Allen Forte. Or if you just want to learn basic music theory use Robert Ottman's ELEMENTARY HARMONY and ADVANCED HARMONY or an early edition (unmangled by Mark Devoto) of Walter Piston's HARMONY. Readers interested in music theory will probably also want to look at PENTATONIC SCALES FOR THE JAZZ-ROCK KEYBOARDIST by Jeff Burns.

For the studied musician or composer, this book offers a new approach to the way we veiw both music theory and composition. Schenker begins with a detailed description of how we perceive music based on the natural laws of overtones. He then demonstrates how the "old systems", i.e. the church modes no longer, or ever really could be consisdered as independant systems of tonality. The only valid systems are the major and the minor. The first half encompasses his broad yet clarifying theories and the second half demonstrates these theories in practical applications. The concepts of "compositional unfolding" and many others have increased my understanding and comprehension of theory as it should be.....the way Bach, Beethoven, and many of the greats perceived it before Ramaeu. This is definetly worth the time!

Don't waste $25 on a partial edition --- spend $40 for Llewellyn's complete "Three Books of Occult Philosophy," which is also a much better edition, with good annotations. This edition, like just about everything from Kessinger, is essentially a xerox copy bound in thin cardstock. Agrippa's book is the great masterpiece of its kind from the early 16th century; modern practitioners as well as intellectual historians may find it somewhat impenetrable. As an historical resource and compendium of magical material, the work is unparalleled. I suspect that many modern practitioners will find it annoying that Agrippa gives essentially no practical examples. For the linguistically adept, there is an excellent Latin critical edition from E.J. Brill, edited by V. Perrone Compagni.

The title of this particular offering is somewhat misleading - however, in the publisher notes above it is clearly stated that this is ONLY Agrippa's First Book on Occult Philosophy, which covers Natural Magic. You will NOT find his Second book concerning Celestial Magic, nor his Third book concerning Ceremonial Magic within this volume. You can however order his Fourth book, which is a simplified "rude and unfashioned" How To reference to his third book - if you can find it. In the mean time, you might do better ordering Francis Barrett's - The Magus, which is basically a condensed version of Agrippa's work.

It was a GREAT! book. very informative. I learned unfathomable amounts about my religion's roots, lore, and more experienced magick. It was sooooo helpful in my studies. I hope you get a chance to read it.

What is most illuminating about this gossip-ridden compendium of neo-conservative arguments against the brilliant collaboration of famed sociologist C. Wright Mills ("White Collar", "The Sociological Imagination", "The Power Elite") with his long-time friend and fellow University of Wisconsin graduate student Hans Gerth is the fact that it is an obvious attempt to discredit the now famous work of these two scholars. The two collaborated to successfully translate for the American academic and intellectual community many of the heretofore-unavailable works of famed German sociologist Max Weber. In what one of my former professors would refer to as the "carbuncle theory" of history, these two authors attempt to discredit Mills and Gerth by engaging in a vicious (and totally uncalled for) smearing of their admittedly difficult and sometimes stridently competitive combined efforts.

As with the famous carbuncle theory, which was a notorious attempt by conservative turn of the century scholars to explain away Marx's brilliant observations regarding the way in which social forces act as the motive force of history as simple dyspepsia due to his chronic affliction with carbuncles. Of course, the professor's point is that, in the last analysis, Marx's theories must be judged based on their rational and intellectual merits, not on some silly emotional attempt to discredit the author without considering the weight of his or her intellectual argument. So, too, here, we must keep in mind that however messy and unpleasant the process, the fruit of intellectual labors must be judged based on their results rather than on the personalities or character flaws of the individuals involved. Sad to say, it appears that these two authors are all too willing to sully their own academic reputations by engaging in such gossip mongering.

Another reviewer admits to shock and surprise regarding the ways in which petty egos and aggressive careerism affect the ways in which the gentlemen in question behave. Might I suggest he read James D. Watson's own surprising autobiographical accounting for similar shortcomings, personal ambition, and pettiness among the several Nobel laureates who jointly discovered the helical nature of DNA in "The Double Helix"? Perhaps it is time for such naïve people to grow up and recognize the fact that the stuff of science and research is often a messy and unpleasant business, and not at all the stiff, pristine, disinterested, and sanitized search for truth that appears monthly within the carefully arranged type-set pages of "Scientific American" magazine. Noted scientific luminaries like Albert Einstein admitted as much in their own memoirs, and perhaps the reading public should realize that anything as worthwhile as meaningful scientific research doesn't necessarily emanate from people who always chew with their mouths closed. Bad people may in fact do brilliant science, and it matters not a rattler's damn whether we like these people or not.

Therefore, regardless of what these two sociologists say in their shameless attempt to rake over the ashes of the dead in this mean-spirited effort to make their own academic reputation here, the fact remains that both C. Wright Mills and Hans Gerth published widely recognized and acclaimed works during their very fruitful careers, and the efforts they made to collaborate on "From Max Weber", "Character and Social Structure", and other tomes has stood the test of time, and are all still in active use. Moreover, there is a new resurgence of interest in C. Wright Mills work in particular, and one suspects that the two authors writing this book are attempting to capitalize on his newly resurgent cache (witness the new publication of his collected letters) in order to make their own bones and to sell some books of their own. I do not recommend this book. It is a pathetic and singularly unscientific attempt to discredit some of sociology's most prolific and productive authors by deliberately sullying their characters and personal reputations.

As Oakes and Vidich state in their introduction, this book is an anaylsis of the ethics of academic career management. It is NOT a study of how scholars' career choices are affected by the historical conjuncture in which they find themselves, nor is it meant as an assessment of either Gerth's or Mills' contributions to sociological scholarship. Instead, we get an analysis "built close to the ground it covers." In nearly exhaustive detail, the authors paint a devastating picture of one man -- Gerth -- whose undisciplined brilliance left him nearly totally dependent for his academic achievements on another man -- Mills -- who proved to be totally and ruthlessly pragmatic in his own career choices. Although Oakes and Vidich claim not to be taking sides, Gerth comes across as a tragic, bungling, and ultimately self-destructive emigre who was no match for Mills' amibitions to become a "big shot." Mills himself used that telling phrase to describe the people he admired and whose tactics he copied.
Who should read this book?: Graduate students who've not yet made up their mind about going into an academic career, as well as junior faculty whose sensibilities have been jarred by their dawning recognition that "success" is not going to be solely a function of their "talent." Oakes and Vidich's own assessment of what a reader can learn from the book is summed up in their last sentence: "The path to a successful scientific career is traced by the fine line between overweening ambition that inspires doubts about honesty and a diffidence or restraint that disqualifies its possessor from participation in the contest for priority." They make their case very well in this engrossing portrait of the relationship between Hans Gerth and C. Wright Mills.

Many of Max Weber's early English translations were created through the joint efforts of H.H. Gerth and C. Wright Mills. When the secrecy, paranoia, and intrigues surrounding their work are carefully examined,it is revealed that two of sociology's notable minds are shown to have all too common shortcomings. Essential reading for those concerned with the ethincs of scholarhship,the work may also be an eye opener for those engaged in collaborative academic research and writing. When one

considers the effort and intellectual rigor requiredto produce important scholarship, and the paltry sums and ego wars typically involved in academic publishing, this book inadvertently gives newmeaning to the notion of a lumpenprofessoriate: a professionally insecure band of academics and their apprentices who diligently toil in a garden of the mind that is sadly overrun with the weeds and detritus of a university system increasingly dominated by a careerist tone--and which can sport a commercial logic and a backbiting spirit that the denizens of Wall Street might envy.

This study serves as a warning to scholars presently working to establish themselves in an academic career and to their keepers, as well: all that glitters,indeed, may not be worth the candle if it distorts the collective norms of scholarly inquiry to the point where they become warped and corroded by the potential of winning a bit of praise from "the marketplace". The danger imnplied throughout the book is that lesserlights may not have the academic gifts of Gerth and Mills--thus anticipating the current academic scene.

Oakes and Vidich are insightful and thorough, but some comparative data would strengthen their argument. Too bad that none are provided. Were Mills and Gerth more similar to,or significantly different from, others in like-situated cohorts of American students and emigre scholars from the Nazi era? If they were different, why? If there was a pattern,why not explore its significance? Such a curious and devastating omission is quite ironic, given the extensive treatment of CHARACTER and SOCIAL STRUCTURE--the thrust of which champions Mills's quest to identify the structural determinants of personal troubles. That Oakes and Vidich are so steeped in biographical specifics that they should stress the individual trees of idiosyncracy (which are located in the PERSONALITY) and ignore the structural forest of the academy, strikes me as odd, at best, for a sociological work,and as being overly psychological, at worst.

Without an interpretive structural framework it is simply impossible to know whether Gerth and Mills were merely examples of STRANGE FOLKS, i.e., wayward individuals, ofifthe issues touched by their distinctively opposed, yet mutually reinforcing, academic styles suggest the emergence of an uncomfortable order of social fact that may come to dominate the modern academy. That two Weberian scholars should miss this is

unfortunate. otr