History Books

In Athens, during the fifth century B.C., the Sophists were wise men. They were not philosophers, or scientists, they were itinerant teachers. Socrates was a moralist and a religious man. Plato was forty years younger than Socrates. THE APOLOGY and the CRITO are founded on fact, shaped by Plato's artistry, (he was a poet, also).

Socrates was indicted for impiety. A public action was brought against him as a menace to society. Orators and poets disliked Socrates's influence on the young. He asserted in THE APOLOGY that the true champion of justice must confine himself to private life. Socrates received the death penalty. He did not think he should stoop to servility because he was in danger.

Death is either annihilation or migration of the soul. Crito visited Socrates in prison. Crito urged him to escape. He claimed that Socrates was throwing away his life when he might save it. Socrates argued with Crito that he had no problem with the laws and, thus, he had a duty to be law-biding. Aiding Socrates's escape would be a breach of faith.

PHAEDO is the last conversation. Socrates believed a man should be cheerful in the face of death. A love of wisdom, not the body, makes a person cheerful. Soul resembles the divine, body resembles what is mortal. No soul which has not practiced philosophy may attain the divine nature. Pythagoreans have a theory of the soul. The soul is imperishable. Friends were admonished by Socrates to just be themselves. The philosopher faced death handily.

Amazing and wonderful, the three titles are a compelling work.

...a 2400 year old work of philosophy? The question, itself, is not without philosophic interest.

Rather than presume to judge Plato, or Socrates, or Plato-as-Socrates, I will simply add my own voice to the chorus of general opinion and say: TLDoS is as resonant and, in its way, relevant, today as it was so many aeons ago. Though hardly a work of unassailable logic it is, nonetheless, a deeply thoughtful, imaginative, and passionately argued one. As I made my way through it, I had to remind myself, from time to time, that what I had before me was a work of ancient literature. Tredennick and Tarrant are to be commended for their eminently readable translation. As I am not a classicist, I cannot speak to the quality of the translation, but if the quality of the endnotes serves as any indication, I would venture to guess that the translation is first-rate.

A very complex Socrates -- as remembered, as imagined, and perhaps also as invented -- emerges from the four dialogues in TSDoS. That this same Socrates still has power to reach across the ages to confound, inspire, frustrate, entertain, and teach is as sure a testament to his legacy, and to the legacy of classical Greek philosophy, as any.

Read and learn.

THE DEATH OF SOCRATES is a very inspiring book to read, especially now, when many of us may be facing the same situation he faced--though with a crucial difference. Whatever distortion of the real Socrates may have been introduced by Plato or other writers, enough comes through to paint a portrait of the first true individual in history-- the first person to be guided by his own individual conscience to do what is right, regardless of the consequences. Reading the Apology, one thrills to Socrates intransigence in the face of the Athenian jury which sentenced him to death. CRITO presents the best argument for government under law ever offered, and thus the beginning of the tradition of civil disobedience later taken up by Thoreau, Gandhi, and Martin Luther King Jr. When Socrates' friend Crito urges him to flee, saying that most people will think he was really guilty if he does not, Socrates says, "Why should we pay so much attention to what most people think?" Then he engages in a symbolic dialogue with the Law of Athens, which can be thought of as comparable to the US Constitution. It is clear that he is grateful to the Laws for having given him the opportunity to be a dissenter. The crucial fact is that they have permitted him the right to attempt to persuade his fellow citizens by permitting him free speech. Even when he was arrested for his teachings, he was allowed to speak in his own defense. Although the verdict was unjust, he was a victim not of the Laws but of his fellow men. (p. 95)

However, the tradition of civil disobedience which Socrates founded is only meaningful in a democracy, where people have the right to dissent and to have a fair and public trial. And it is rapidly becoming obsolete. For on October 17, 2006, President Bush signed into law the Military Commissions Act, initiating the gravest crisis in US history, not excepting the Civil War, Pearl Harbor, and 9/11 itself. Congress has had over a year to repeal or amend that act but has failed to do so. Now it is up for review by the Supreme Court. If that body, now nearly half-filled with "rubber stamp" justices, fails to strike down the law as unconstitutional we shall have to resort to a very different tradition than that of Socrates, one which has its roots in medieval England, and was transformed in the 17th century into John Locke's social contract theory. Jefferson expressed it in the immortal words of the Declaration of Independence: speaking of the American colonists, he wrote, "But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object, evinces a design to reduce them to absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government and provide new guards for their future security." Faced with the prospect of living in a society which would have made his dissenting individualism impossible, I'm sure Socrates would have agreed.

In this simply-organized compilation of Socratic Dialogues, I would offer that the way Penguin Classics presents them cannot be outdone. The playfully loquacious dialogues are pure-gold bricks of logic, and should therefore be cherished greatly. This book is easy to understand because there are endnotes on every page. Spanning the entirety of over 200 juicy pages, Harold Tarrant and Hugh Tredennick present The Last Days of Socrates to the reader in an easy to follow pattern of notes. These final works of Plato should not be thought of as poor entertainment, but rather highly intense and compelling Greek discussions. It is very well-done and should be read over and over again.



Although every Socratic dialogue is absolutely riddled with complacent people for Socrates to question, this collection actually reveals the largest variety of listeners. From crazy commoners to cynical and court-goers, a critical criminal and the crowd of conflicting friends, Socrates caught every category and class of character off guard. At first, the evidence that hints at Socrates' trial is a mere conviction and nothing more. He had been free then. He had boldly questioned commoners at the very steps to the courthouse that he would defend himself in later. This penniless philosopher inquired of many people during his spare time.



In this collection, the second and third dialogues are the ones that depict the powerful defense of Socrates using logic to its full extent. In brilliantly defending himself, Socrates caressed, persuaded, and rallied only just under half of the jury. Unfortunately, he had failed to win the jury over completely, but he had come so close. Sleeping in the cell that was later constructed for him, Socrates was aroused by Crito, a man who had been a believer in Socrates. The extent of the discussion is contained in the third dialogue titled Crito. Anyhow, the general public hated Socrates so much that only death would avenge their flaming lust for revenge. The second and third dialogues depict Socrates' infamous apologetics and must be read. That is not all, however.



In Phaedo, Socrates calmly awaited his own death by hemlock, in a full chamber of the courthouse. He first addressed his followers and comrades alike concerning the meaning of life. He wanted to reassure them that there was indeed life after death, and that he would be going to a better place. Before he drank the poison, however, Socrates spurred a discussion of the soul and its immortality, or at least as logic had presented it to him. (Of course he had to argue it.) When two of his followers timidly provided Socrates with their opposing views, he only smiled and destroyed each argument consecutively. This he did because he wanted to share his hopes with his friends and did not want them to doubt his reincarnation. Nobody could fight back tears as he took the poison and perished. Socrates' legend now carries from there on. In Phaedo, the philosopher convinced his pals that his soul had not been dying, but had rather been transcending.



I love how Penguin has organized these significant conversations. Socrates is much easier to comprehend because of this book. Socrates had been last heard saying, "Crito, we ought to offer a cock to Asclepius. (This is because Asclepius had been the god of pleasure.) See to it and don't forget." Buy this book. See to it and do not forget. When I purchased this book, which was in a used condition, it only cost two cents and has not disappointed me. Since it is known that Socrates is always welcome to thinkers, the price feels reduced even further for those who love logic. You will deprive yourself if you miss out on this intellectual classic of the Father of Greek philosophy.

Although many accounts of Socrates' trial are known to have existed for some time after the actual events described by Plato, only Plato's and Xenophon's accounts survive. Both writers were sympathetic to Socrates, and so are somewhat suspect as to whether they adequately and accurately describe the full nature of the charges against Socrates. Plato, a 27-year-old admirer of Socrates at the time of the trial, describes the charges as being impiety (questioning the state sanctioned [poly]theology) and, thereby supposedly corrupting the minds of Athens' youth. A similar charge had, years earlier, driven Anaxagoras from Athens, but many scholars believe there were probably other factors involved in the case against Socrates. Here we find an intractable mystery (and some unwarranted speculations that are merely libelous)*.

Plato's telling of Socrates' last days consists in four parts:
(1.) Euthyphro: Socrates in Action. (2.) The Apology: Socrates on Trial. (3.) Crito: Socrates in Prison. (4.) Phaedo: The Last Conversation.

Euthyphro, The Apology, and Crito are better paced and more interesting than Phaedo, which is a long Socratic argument that the soul must possess some extra-material existence, which continues, or is somehow renewed, beyond corporeal death. I suspect that most readers will enjoy the first three sections of this text, but find the last (and longest) more of a chore; at least that is my opinion. Throughout the text, Plato presents Socrates as a man of both relentless curiosity and an admirable ethical heroism.

* As to the rather facile side bar discussion that seems to have been present in earlier reviews in this forum (while noting the forensic evidence indicating that the worst of these comments was deleted): Given the full weight of the available evidence, Socrates' supposed bisexuality can add up to nothing more than idle speculation. As to his relationships with young men, it cannot be confirmed that they involved males that were considered to be below an age at which they could accountably assent--and even more importantly, IF any such relationships were of a sexual nature at all. Given the available accounts, arguments that these were NOT sexual relationships seem clearly more defensible than (slanderous?) accusations that they were. In other words, as regards this charge, we simply enter an arena of irresolvable facts and potential slander. Why go there?! What we CAN glean from the only extant accounts of Socrates' character is that he considered himself to be one who strove to consistently abide by the highest ethical standards, and that this is consistent with Plato's account here. As cited in Phaedo, these comments of Socrates' seem particularly relevant to this [particular slander]: ". . . true philosophers abstain from all bodily desires and withstand them and do not yield to them. . . those who care about their souls and do not subordinate them to the body dissociate themselves firmly from these others and refuse to accompany them on their haphazard journey; and, believing that it is wrong to oppose philosophy with her offer of liberation and purification, they turn and follow her wherever she leads."

Two Harvard philosophy majors have written a funny, satirical look at their chosen vocation. They discuss Western philosophy including logic, existentialism, ethics, and language. Philosophy can sometimes be a deep, dreary subject (especially when discussing Sartre or Nietzsche) but this book makes it fun.

In this small book, Thomas Cathcart and Daniel Klein purport to teach "philosophy through jokes," but the effort falls flat. Though the authors seem to believe in their own premise, the jokes only rarely have more than the most tenuous connection to the philosophical principle at hand, and as such are not very effective illustrations.

The book's length also works against it: the authors have crammed a lot into the 200 undersized pages, but this means each idea gets only minimal space. Hence, the descriptions try to put everything into as few words as possible, resulting in a lot of text that is, if not confusing, at least not very inviting for a philosophical amateur. Someone who has taken one or two philosophy courses may have better luck following the explanations, but at that point, the reader may already know more than the book has to teach. All of this makes the intended audience somewhat unclear.

The most helpful thing here might be the glossary, which takes all of the major concepts in the book and distills each one down to one or two clear, concise sentences--but these five pages alone are hardly worth the purchase price. "Plato" has a smattering of decent gags (the timeline of philosophical history, also in the back, might be the funniest thing in the book), but on the whole it tries to do too much and ends up not doing anything very well.

~

This is an amusing little trip through the various fields and schools of Philosophy. It is lightened with jokes and anecdotes, little stories and perceptions which are never too difficult, and never require much time to absorb. It is of course not for anyone who wishes to go into philosophical questions in depth but rather for those who would like to have a bit of fun in the world of ideas.

Plato & a Platypus is a funfilled look at philosophy. The authors review major ideas and reinforce the discussion with a series of topical jokes. A theological discussion with God ends with, "Is there anyone else I can talk to about this?"

This won't get you through Philosophy 101, but the jokes will be a hit with the professor.

This book is incredible! First of all, the jokes are simply amazing. I've never read a book of jokes with more memorable winners that get funnier each time you tell them. (Of course, some of the jokes are not politically correct, so you can't tell them in California, where I live.) Second, the rest of the text is funny and light, too, with hilarious cartoons and witty dialogue. Third, the philosophy is actually right on the money. If you read and think about the discussion in this book, you will definitely be doing philosophy. It is rather lighter than some other books (e.g., Paulos' "I think, therefore I laugh"), but it quickly and genuinely gets to the major issues in each of the great areas of philosophy it handles, including logic, epistemology, metaphysics, ethics, social philosophy, and philosophy of language. Finally, it's a hard-bound book of excellent craftsmanship selling at a crazy low price.
I have taught introductory philosophy courses to high school seniors, college students, and adults. I have used a number of different books, including "Sophie's World" and "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance," as well as more traditional textbooks like Schick and Vaughn's "Doing Philosophy." Those books all have their strengths. But I think that this book would lead to more and better discussion (with less pedantry). And it would be a lot more fun, if you can catch your breath after laughing so hard.
(I'm sorry my review is not funny. But I swear the book is.)

I really enjoyed this book, remembering the 50s. Brought back some fond memories. We chose this book for our book Club, and will discuss it tomorow. It was an easy read.

Bryson is well-known for his travelogues but here he takes us through his growing up years. All things mundane related to childhood turn interesting and are set aglow when touched by his genial wit. Bryson's companionable style is evident in this very entertaining memoir which is also a tribute to a much safer, much more innocent, and much more personable lifestyle of 1950s America. At times warm, at times wise, at times nostalgic, and always funny, this is a heart-warming chronicle of childhood by a gifted humourist which brings back cherished memories of our own.

If you spent any time in the 50's this will be a laugh out loud perspective that will not disappoint. Bryson is smart, funny and just has a gift for narrative.
The humor may be more appealing to males but I am not really sure.
Enjoy this treat.

It's a historical text book wrapped in a delightful tale of a "regular" kid from the 1950s. And I will say, funny, funny, funny. I was reading it on an airplane and I was laughing out loud almost to the point of my embarrassment. Bryson is very sharp. He supplements his childhood anecdotes with (sometimes shocking) historical facts. He successfully juxtaposes the good and the bad. Every time I turned the page, I wished America could return to a "simpler" time and then I'd turn another page and count my blessings that we have moved on. It made me long for the smell of grammar school coat closets and thank goodness we weren't all blown to pieces with a nuclear holocaust.

If you like TV, toys, kids, adults, baseball, movies, state fairs, underage drinking, family vacations, teenage pranks or anything relating to history at all, I would recommend this book as a must read.

My son has been raving about Bill Bryson's for some time now, but I was not sure that they would appeal to me. After hearing others rave about his memoir: The Life and Times of the Thunderbolt Kid, I thought this might be a fun audio book. I am sorry I waited so long to try Bryson's work.

This memoir was terrific. It leaves you with a feeling of appreciation for the simple things in life. Bill Bryson and I were born a year apart, and as baby boomers growing up in the 50's and 60's, I found this memoir to be a trip down memory lane. He talks about his mom's bad cooking, his strange relatives, going to the store for penny candy (candy cigarettes), playing outdoors until dark, first crushes, Saturday at the movies, loss of innocence etc. He could be describing a whole lot of baby boomers in this memoir. This book is hysterical, and there were many times I had tears in my eyes from laughing so hard. The audio version is highly recommended.

I have visited the town of Eyam several times and well familiar with the "plague village," so I eagerly looked forward to reading this book. The story of the villagers plight is gripping and readable, but overall, the characters are lack depth and became tiresome. They wer either near-perfect, virtuous people, stoics or downright evil, nothing in between. The last 80 or so pages are outright ridiculous, even laughable with gratuitous sex and a rather unbelievable ending. Like another reviewer said, maybe the author grew bored and just wanted to finish the story. In the end, the reader really knows little about how villagers planned to begin anew once the plague had passed. Yes, this is a good story that has "entertainment" value, but don't have high expectations that this is a truly great novel .

This is one of the best books I've read in the past year. It is dark, sometimes overwhelming so, but wonderfully written with a protagonist that you want to journey along with. The ending was so quickly and perfectly wrapped up and such a contrast to the atmosphere of the rest of the book that it was nearly fairy-tale-ish. Oddly, this actually added to the satisfaction of reaching the last page, it was a sweet reward for all the suffering that went before.

I love this book, Geraldine Brooks is obviously an extremely talented writer and now I can't wait to read The People of the Book.

I loved the book, the story was riveting until the very abrupt ending. What happened? After so much detail in the first 80% of the book, did Geraldine Brooks get bored somehow and just decide she needed to finish the story immediately? If only she had taken a little time to flesh out the details of what happened between the "year" and the aftermath, she would have had a truly epic novel. Phooey!

Brooks' Year of Wonders is almost a social commentary in the way it depicts the actions of people under the stress of a catastrophe such as the plague. Her prose is engagingg and haunting. Her detailed descriptions of daily life gave way to a beautiful line like this one: "The sun glinted off the serried instruments and then I could see the notes of music, molten, dripping like golden rain." The entire novel is filled to the brim with such imagery, that one can practically taste the scent the apples bring in the vividly described orchards. Everything about this book is so well-imagined. But it falters. There is a chapter-long detour about mining that seemed misplaced, and the bizarre Epilogue is sudden and grossly unbelievable. That shift in tone was uncalled for, and makes one think that it is from another book entirely. Luckily, it is short, and one can forget about it when confronted with the previous narrative. Because until that point, the characters had roundness and well-developed backstories that explained present motivations. Brooks tells of a time that, though seemingly past us, yields emotions and actions that could mirror any disaster in the modern age. Wondrous and rich, Year of Wonders is a treasure that, like a living person, stumbles, yet delivers.

"Year of Wonders" is a fantastic book by Geraldine Brooks that chronicles a severe outbreak of the Bubonic plague in an isolated English village during the year 1666. The story revolves around Anna Frith, a housemaid who loses her two young children to the plague and emerges as a heroine during this terrible time. Anna assists the town rector and his wife, Michael and Elinor Mompellion, and together they tend to the sick and dying while also trying to keep the peace in their crippled village. As numerous people succumb to the terrible illness or face other challenges, Anna manages to find the strength within herself to carry on.

I was blown away by this book. The story is based on the real town of Eyam, which experienced a massive plague outbreak in the 1600s. Amazingly, "Year of Wonders" is the author's very first novel, and it's filled with memorable characters, challenging moral dilemmas, and incredible stories of loss, love, and determination.

The final 40 pages of the book were rather disappointing, as I was horrified to see what eventually became of Michael's character, and I though Anna's story came to a very rushed and somewhat unfathomable conclusion. However, those shortcomings weren't enough to spoil this novel for me. "Year of Wonders" is one of the best, most engaging books I've read in a long time. I highly recommend it.

Dr. Mardy Grothe is a gourmet chef of the English language and prepares a feast of delectable morsels in his book, "I Never Metaphor I Didn't Like." It's easy to read yet insightful. He shares his joy of analogies, metaphors and similies which help us see "old ideas in new ways." He provides just enough biographical information to place the quotations in historical context. Truly a readable feast!

As usual, Mardy Grothe has compiled a fascinating array for those of us hooked on quotations. A great addition to his oeuvre.

With your purchase of "I Never Metaphor I Didn't Like" by Dr. Mardy Grothe, look out! Your pen has just become mightier. Your library and your resources for effective expression have just become richer, and more varied and interesting. It is as though you just acquired a trusted companion, who has no agenda except to offer you the wit and wisdom you can always rely on for the word or expression most aptly suited to your needs. I do not exaggerate. Within a few minutes of purchasing the book and eagerly taking it to a comfortable place, I had found half a dozen quotes that I will use immediately in my own writing projects. With these discoveries, I grew confident that there is much more where they came from. With further reading, I became sure of that. It is almost as though I had found someone who has spent his entire life finding the greatest quotations, and then has classified and indexed them for my ready reference. In fact, it is exactly so, for that is what Dr. Grothe has done. This book is only the talented Dr.'s most recent effort to share his exhaustive and long-standing research on words and quotations with everyone who will accept the offer. We are all in his debt for this latest accomplishment.

There are certain kinds of books that are simply fun. They do not have any great thesis or argument. They offer the reader a selection of very varied fare and suggest sampling it.
So this collection of Metaphors, Similes, and Analogies. Some will make you smile, some will make you think again.Some you will have to squint a bit to puzzle out.
But it will all be enjoyment.
For me a book like this is of special value. As a writer I am always studying ( which does not mean- learning) how other writers did truly good things. This book is rich in examples. As Henny Youngman might have said " One man's metaphor is another man's corned-beef sandwich."

What a terrific Book! I have been a fan of Dr Grothe for a long time and now I have such a great collection of his wisdom and humor. Recommended to anyone who is in speaking, teaching or who wants to be enlighted themselves! I am each of those and find it a great resource. You will too!

This book is an astute history of a painful episode in Mormon history: the massacre of an immigrant train in southern Utah while it was on its way to California in September 1857. This has been a difficult subject for members and leaders of the LDS Church to deal with, but these three Mormon historians and scholars write with candor and great detail about the incident in ways that will not necessarily be entirely comforting to their co-religionists. I recommend the book highly. REB

This book is written by three LDS historians who claims that they had the full support of their church in writing about this incident. The book covers the subject of Mountain Meadow Massacre that took place in Sept 1857 where 120 white settlers of a wagon train passing through Utah were murdered by white Mormons. Majority of the victims were women and children. This was the worst case of mass murder by Americans on Americans until the Oklahoma City bombing.

The book is well written and it appears to be well researched. There are 438 pages in this book but the actual narrative is only 230 pages long. First half the narrative relates to persecutions of the Mormons before they fled to Utah and second half dealt with the massacre and its environments, like the Utah War. The book set up excuses for Mormon atrocity while stating that there is no excuse for it. Remaining 208 pages of the book are filled with appendixes, notes and index. The three authors obviously wanted to show off their massive research effort in writing this book.

The book faithfully and surprisingly recount the story of the Mountain Meadow Massacre. The three LDS historians did not shy away from the fact that it was indeed the white Mormons who maintained the main attacks and tricked the doomed settlers into surrender by using a false white flag and had them murdered in a very efficient Nazi style massacre. Of course, all this have been recounted before by Will Bagley, Sally Denton and Juanita Brooks books. Interestingly, despite of their massive research, this book really don't say anything really new.

The maps proves to be quite good and there were nice historical photographs to go with it.

The authors did not appears to be surprise that local leadership of that area took it upon themselves to attack and massacre large numbers of white settlers in such major scale. Usually in a theocratic society like the one under Bingham Young, local leaders don't act on something this big without some sort of approval from their leaders. Authors did not think it was strange that Indian leaders who after meeting with Bingham Young, some of them were involved in the initial attack the wagon train that turn out to be was just a prelude to the Mormons' participation that was the main event. Nor the authors thought of injustice that these Indians got the total blame for the massacre there after. It is also funny that these LDS historians insisted that most Mormons who took part of the massacre were good people who led exemplary lives before and after the incident. The authors should read Christopher Browning's Ordinary Men. That book shows how ordinary men could turned into evil murderers when given a proper environment and lack of morals.

The book overall acknowledge Mormon participation but avoid Mormon responsibility. As the authors see it, it is a work of the few good but misled men who strayed morally for a moment. It say nothing about the effort of the church to cover up this crime and protected the men who took part of it. The book ends with the massacre and there is one additional chapter on John D. Lee, the official sacrificial lamb of the church who was executed for the crimes of so many others. Why the book did not go into the aftermath more closely is strange considering all the research the authors have done. In the criminal justice system, those who sheltered, protected, aided and abetted a crime is just as guilty as those who pulled the trigger. This is where many who blamed the LDS Church point their fingers and this is one subject that this book totally failed to address. Maybe the authors are looking for more profits and seeking to write a second book....?

Of course, as church historians, these authors will have a hard time if they actually did point out how responsible the church was for their part in the aftermath of the massacre. I do understand that but that do taint any book regarding the subject of objectivity!

Its hard to recommended this book if you have read the other three written by Bagley, Brooks and Denton. Their books are more complete. Whether you agreed with these three books or not, at least they presented the whole material. Massacre at Mountain Meadow does not. Its an incomplete book with a lot of unfinished material yet unwritten. Considering the shortness of the narrative, this is a very strange. For the price, I would recommend you wait for the follow up book if any. The material is basically introductionary in nature and considering all the research done and shown, there appears to be very little in print to show for it.
(PS: I did some revision work on this review, I think TWO stars is more worthy then three.)

This is the first book I have read or heard about that has presented the facts of Mountain Meadows in a nonbiased manner.

The authors take great pains to present as much background information as possible to allow the reader to understand all of the facts that fueled one of the biggest tragedies of the 1800's. Half the book is dedicated to providing references to where the authors found their information as well as their own limited personal conclusions. How could a group of God fearing people who had sacrificed much to cross the plains be a part of such a heinous act and then go on to live relatively happy lives? This book allows readers to develop their own conclusions without the slightest hint of trying to persuade them into one direction or another.

I felt this book gave a fairly unbiased account of what happened at Mountain Meadow although the authors are members of the Morman church. They give both sides of the events leading up to the tragedy. It is by far the best information I have found on this subject. I would recommend this book to anyone who is interested in learning the facts surrounding the Mountain Meadow tragedy.

I took a class where we only focused on this subject for the entire semester. Like a lot of history subjects, there is no such thing as an unbiased look at this subject. You either are looking for every reason to blame Brigham Young and prove the Mormons wrong or you are looking for a reason to blame the locals for acting stupidly and prove Brigham Young had nothing to do with it. After reading journals and trial proceedings and primary documents (which Bagley hardly uses) there is no evidence that Brigham Young ok'd it. There is a problem we have now-a-days called presentism. We see things in the past with our current ideas. Things were much different in 1850's Utah. The authors try to portray that so we understand where everyone is coming from, not from our peachy "everyone loves each other" 2000's. Everyone didn't love each other then. Mormons had people massacred too, including the founder of the church. They were probably a little on edge considering the US army was coming. The caravan wasn't blameless either. They made violent threats against the Mormons.
I am not trying to justify what they did, it was wrong, but it is not as cut and dry as we think it is today. There are so many factors that the authors try to help us see besides a detailed account of what happened that day.
It is an excellent book.

The book arrived quickly, in great condition, was a great read and at a good price. Would definitely buy from them again.

This book is considered a "must" for all editors. Murch is pretty famous for his work and style so, in my opinion, I agree it's worth the read (and worth having). My book arrived on time and in the condition promised!

Satisfied customer overall!

are walter murch books overrated? at least there's no trace of michael ondaajte (spelling?) here.

This book has a wealth of information for the inexperienced and beginner, film editer, or anyone who is looking for a good book on the subject. I have found it to be very helpful, as I am still learning how to do professional editing!

This is NOT a "how to" book for what some students may be looking for, but it is however, the best book I've read on the "ART" of editing. Insightful and well written, it helped me to really understand when to make a cut that works and when to avoid those that don't work. I would recommend it to all my friends who are editors.

I found this translation eminently readable. While I agree that the use of endnotes rather than footnotes leads to inefficient turning of pages, the substantive content of the notes added a great deal of context to the translation as a whole and made for an enjoyable and educational read.

Watch Video Here: http://www.amazon.com/review/R3G8H2WCBZ1009 The Histories (Penguin Classics)

This book is required for anyone interested in historiography or history generally. I will keep my comments brief:

1. One of the first known books of history that we know of.
2. A comprehensive study of the then known world (though there are errors and problems in it).
3. All scholars of history have to read it.
4. All scholars of the ancient world have to read it.
5. Want to study the ancient world? - You must read this book.
6. Want to study the history of Western or world civilization? - You must read this book.

These are my opinions. Having said the foregoing, like most any work of history, there are errors in it, and it also has a mythological outlook (action or agency by the gods), and other flaws. See my review of Thucydides, History of the Peloponnesian War. Thucydides corrected some of the "errors" of Herodotus' outlook on how historical events are influenced by unseen agents (like gods). If you are studying how history was written over time, you should start with Herodotus. I do not believe his work is excellent from a historical-fact view. It is however instructive on historical methods used at the time, and the evolution on how human history is written, and has improved over time. If you have to choose between reading Herodotus and Thucydides, read Thucydides.

`After the capture of Babylon, Darius invaded Scythia.' Thus commences book four of the Histories, and if these are the kind of words that set your pulse racing, your eyes going all dreamy, this book is for you.

The ancient Greek historian's famous opus has an impressive geographical and chronological spread, and this, together with its precedence over most recovered documents of its type, explains why it is regarded as so important. Herodotus relates over a century of Persian expansion, including the Egyptian and other conquests, from about 600 BC, and of Persian conflict with the Greeks, culminating in his compatriots' victories at Salamis and Platea. As it is explained in the notes and introduction, much of his account has been reaffirmed by modern historical and archaeological research, some of it over earlier condemnations, though much is also being questioned.

Indeed, intriguingly, this rings both as history as we understand it and as something else. Herodotus explicitly aims to make an objective and truthful account, unlike other chroniclers of antiquity (for example Egyptian) driven by religious, political or artistic imperatives. He traces facts to sources and steps back when sources conflict. This is familiar. But in other ways, his book is from a culture very distant from ours. Herodotus believes in oracles, in the premonitory value of dreams. It doesn't shock him that a queen might give birth to a lion, or a god strike down an army to protect a sanctuary. Hubris is always punished, and disregard for the warnings of fate, or the desecration of temples. And descriptions are inflated for effect. For example, Herodotus has five million Persian subjects crossing the Hellespont; this probably exceeded the adult male population of the Persian empire, and modern historians have the number at 100,000 to 200,000. In many ways, the Histories are myth, epic, as much as history, and they probably tell us as much about the ancient Greeks and their beliefs as about what happened in the Persian wars.

I always loved history in school, so it seems a bit strange that I'm finally coming back to read some actual documents that were written in the time periods I'm interested in. I picked up this version of "The Histories" at a museum, after spending the day looking at ancient Greek and Roman artifacts. I didn't really know what to expect.

What I discovered was a grand set of stories about different cultures in the ancient world. I wasn't expecting to delve into the folk lore of Egypt, the kingdoms of the Scythians, or the creation of the Persian Empire. I did get more of what I expected as well: stories of the Greek city states banding together to face the Persians, and the causes of this epic conflict. On top of all that, I also got a bunch of mythic stories, tales of oracles, even a bit of information about Heracles that I was never privy too. Herodotus takes many different elements that would be outside of a modern history and weaves them all together and in a compelling fashion. The block of history he chooses to examine is also presented in a way to fits his thematic ideas of destiny, conflict and hubris. His stories illustrate his views and inform at the same time.

Of course as a modern reader, I began to seriously doubt some of his claims (even without the notes). But I soon got over the idea of reading a true history. After all, what history written by any person could be "true"? As long as a writer has a perspective, there will always be bias in the writing. Instead, I enjoyed the stories that were being told.

This version of the book includes a clean and easy to read translation by Aubrey De Selincourt. In addition there is an excellent introduction by John Marincola that explains a bit about Herodotus and points out some of the themes of the work. There are extensive notes at the end of the book, which will require at least two bookmarks (one for the place you are reading and one for your spot in the notes). These notes give a bit more information either provided by modern authors, later ancient authors, or archeological evidence. There is an extensive list of books for additional reading, a time line of events covered in the book, a list of the kings of key countries, a glossary, a table of monetary values and four maps. The maps are very helpful, but not as detailed as I wish they could be. The notes often point out other books with more detailed maps (especially of battle sites).

All in all, this was a great book for a first time reader of ancient history by an ancient historian. I definitely recommend this edition to anyone looking to jump into ancient Greek history. Just know going in that this is Herodotus' version of events.

This was required for college and read several chapters before dropping the class because of an inferior professor, while there maybe several stories and versions of what happened in American History, the one thing that has changed my life from reading this book is that, people who call people by other names (not referring to nicknames) is traced back to the slave period when slave owners re-named their slaves as an act of control or hate. I no longer tolerate anyone calling me anything other than my name as I know know it's a hostile act against me.