Arthur Davis Books

In May 1855 a 36-year-old physician named Jacob Davis Babcock Stillman visited Texas to observe the culture of the state and to study its "resources and natural history" (p. 16). He saw himself as an intellectual in the mold of Frederick Law Olmstead, whose travel accounts in the South and West have become classics of that type of literature. Stillman wrote about his travels in Texas for "The Crayon," a New York magazine devoted to landscape art. The first appeared in the June 1855 issue and ran through April 1856. A total of 11 letters were published by Stillman in "The Crayon." Divided into two series--the series were delineated by the year in which they appeared--the first contain seven letters and the second had four. It is these letters which editor Ron Tyler has assembled, edited, and made available here for the first time in book form.

During his six-month stay in Texas, J.D.B. Stillman commented in his letters on geography; the mixing of Spanish colonial, Mexican, southern, German, and black cultures; the settlement of west Texas and the conflicts with Indians, and the social and cultural aspects of life on the frontier. Stillman was especially interested in the German immigrant settlements along the Gulf Coast and spent considerable time there. He shared many of these people's values, especially their aversion to slavery, and enjoyed their company. He also used his medical training to gain an invitation from the Army to see the more untamed sections of West Texas. Practicing medicine as he went, Stillman visited Fort Clark; Camp Lancaster, from which two letters in the second series originate; and other places in the far west along the San Antonio- El Paso road. Finally, in the fall of 1855 Stillman returned to California, and settled in Sacramento.

This first book-length compilation of Stillman's writings about Texas will be a useful primary resource for those interested in the early history of state. While the letters have been available in "The Crayon," this book makes them more readily accessible, something which The Arthur H. Clark Company has been doing for primary sources related to the American West for decades. An informative introduction adds to the value of the publication.

I happened across this book a couple years back at the local bookstore, and the title intrigued me, so I snapped it up. Fantastic read; I read it nonstop from cover to cover. I just unearthed it again recently, and did the same thing all over again. It's not quite a "secular" look at the Bible and the stories in the Old Testament, but the author clearly leaves some of the interpretation of scripture to the readers- rightly so, I think. No need to prostetylize, especially when the author's background experience is informational works on other subjects (Don't Know Much about American History, for instance). I would reommend this book to anyone, even the non-religious; the Bible is still a beautiful book.

This is a very good read, full of amazing facts that many Christians are simply unaware of. For example, there are TWO versions of Creation in Genesis, not one.

For example, Jesus never met St Paul; he died before Paul's conversion.

For example, Jesus had 3 brothers and a sister. He had an Uncle Cleopas.

For example, Jesus did not ride a dinosaur around Galilee; dinosaurs are not mentioned in the bible at all.


Read it, enjoy it, live it!

Kenneth C. Davis's "Don't Know Much About the Bible: Everything You Need to Know About the Good Book but Never Learned" is an interesting popular history/theological discourse on the Biblical stories many of us don't know or don't remember. Davis, the author of other books in the "Don't Know Much About" series, has written an interesting and entertaining book, but, while I did learn something about the Bible reading this book, I have little faith that Davis's views on many of these subjects are correct.

Davis tells many of the Biblical stories in blunt, revealing language. He enjoys shocking the reader and bringing out the unsavory portions of the Biblical stories - the sex, the murder, the intrigue - that many people don't realize are there. He gives the historical context of Israel and tries to explain the role of many of the Biblical stories to the early Jews. Davis also recounts and explains the recurring themes of the Old Testament and helps tie together the stories and morals in ways that short Biblical readings every Sunday don't or can't do. This is where the book is the strongest.

However, although I am not in any way a Biblical scholar (else I probably wouldn't have been reading this book), there was enough in the book that made me mistrust too many of Davis's perspectives and his factual statements about the history of the Bible. Davis presents his perspective as the "truth" about the Bible, but two particular nuggets made me doubt his perspective:

-Davis wrote that "most scholars agree" that the first five books of the Bible (the Pentateuch) were written by four authors: J, E, D, and P. This is the "documentary hypothesis." However, some basic research reveals that the documentary hypothesis began to lose favor by most scholars in the 1960s and now is only one of several competing hypotheses behind the authorship of the Pentateuch.

-During the Proverbs discussion, Davis quoted: "Withhold not correction from the child: for if thou beatest him with the rod, he shall not die" (Proverbs 23:13). He said that equating discipline with beating is a bad idea and that it turns morality upside down. Then he went on to say, ""In an era of commonplace child abuse, even hinting that the Bible condones such behavior is a grievous mistake." That method of "analysis" - condemning a Biblical proverb because of a perceived modern problem - is completely out of place in a supposedly-historical treatment of the Bible and made me doubt Davis's entire approach.

Davis's book is interesting, eye-opening, and thought-provoking. Ultimately, though, I doubted Davis's arguments and questioned his agenda. Still, this book may spark interest in the Bible and provide a loose framework, however flawed, for further learning about this book that so many of us know, but few know well.

This book is filled with interesting information, and regardless of any claims the author makes, he truly doesn't believe the Bible is God's Word. He always gives the benefit of the doubt to the scientific information that refutes the Bible stories. He never considers that God can provide information to the authors of the Bible that may be true, even if it doesn't appear true to science. Basically, he considers the Bible a very interesting series of mythical books.
It's an interesting read, but I admit, I would have appreciated a balanced point of view. He really mocks the point of view that believes the Bible is the inerrant word of God. He may know a lot about Bible stories, but he doesn't know the most important thing, that it is the very word of God. If you don't believe the most basic claim of Biblical books, that this IS God's Word, then I don't understand why you would take the time to study it. Without faith, it's just folly and that is what the author presents the Bible as: folly.

Davis has the right title for this book. Except the title is more adaptable for himself than the readers. From reading his book I can see that he obviously doesn't know much about the Bible. As other readers have stated, I am not one of those close-minded conservatives who won't hear opposing arguments. This book is just downright amusing and angering. I'm not a monk or a priest & I haven't read the whole Bible, but I have plenty of knowledge and even a normal churchgoer has enough knowledge to be able to knock down Davis' so-called truths regarding the Bible. He presents a one-sided argument that is meant to discredit the Word of God. Like saying that the Four Gospels are contradictary. The 4 Gospels are like watching the same news story on 4 different channels. It's the same story told from different angles by 4 different people. Police can question a group of witnesses who saw the same crime but they will all recall it a different way. This book is great for anyone who wants an excuse for not believing in God. Davis presents what he thinks are inconsistencies and you wonder if he even took the time to read the verses he's writing about. For example, he tries to discredit Noah's Ark by saying the Bible says it rained for 40 days & 40 nights and that water covered the earth for 150 days. Is that your argument? Of course if it rained for 40 days & 40 nights then the water wouldn't evaporate the second the rain stopped. It would still be covering the earth, DUH! Davis is more content in calling truth the Greek myths, ancient folklore, Egyptian fairy tales, etc. This is nothing more than a work of blasphemy. Davis is an obvious nonbeliever and he doesn't even have enough of an argument to debate with. He basically calls Christians people who believe in God (yeah Davis doesn't know WHICH God) because Christians blindly believe what our ancestors did & believing in God is better than the alternatives because we might as well believe in something while we're down here. Oh yeah sure. And belief in God has been going on for how long? So how come this "myth" has outlasted any other?

Even though the latest editions have been dumbed down considerably by Snider, what remains of Harry F. Davis are still far better than the similar book by Marsden and Tromba.

For example the introduction uses the word roughly, which is an important qualification. When i read parts of Gibbs original book (available free on-line), Elements of Vector Analysis, i see that he left some wiggle room in his definition. I don't think this was unintentional. For it makes Gibb's text quite adequate even for today's scientists and engineers. Gibbs probably anticipated others working on a more exact definition than his work provided (though not by Procustean means and methods as is common today).

Anyway on page 1, here's Davis-Snyder defition:

"Roughly speaking a vector is a quantity that has direction as well as magnitude."

This text presents each subject in a very clear manner. Every subject is developed in concise proofs that are easy to remember and satisfying to those who require mathematical proofs to understand the derivation of the subjects but are not interested in long-winded theory. After each section's quick and dirty derivation, the authors provide a small yet effective selection of challenging questions to be able to gain confidence in the subject. The style of the book is also refreshing in this age of heavy books with flashy photos and wasted space. This book includes 408 pages full of useful mathematics and vector diagrams but nothing else; the book is very light and small. This is a classic.

This book provides a great reference for people studying the physical sciences. I'm a Ph.D. student in Physical Chemistry and have been using it extensively to help out with some other courses. It might not be as good for someone with a more puritanical or abstract interest, e.g. a mathematician, but it's great for anyone that needs a handy reference that explains the rudiments of vector analysis.

This book was used in my vector calculus class at UCSD. I think if I was in one of my upper division engineering classes it would be great to use as a reference to help me figure out problems. However, as a math book alone, this was not too helpful. Many of the explanations lack clarity and are from a mathmatician's point of view (in other words, very difficult for lower division students who are not math majors to understand). Also, a lot of the problems are practically impossible. The only reason I did alright in this class was because I had a great teacher. I would recommend this book for people who are in science or engineering classes and need a superficial introduction to vector calculus, but NOT for math classes that go into deep analysis of vectors.

I have the third edition and the latest edition of this book. In my opinion, the later editions have been dumbed down considerably. In addition to developing the basics of vector analysis, the older editions included splendid discussions of curvilinear coordinates, tensor analysis and touched on differential forms (the wedge product being introduced). While the latest edition features appendices covering specific applications such as Maxwells and Navier-Stokes equations, the explanations are far too brief to be of much use. I suggest that interested parties attempt to get used older editions whose content were presumably under the control of Davis (not Snider) being much better written and probably less expensive. The older edition had few typos with very useful and entertaining problem sets. A better alternative book might be "Vectors and Tensors in Engineering and Physics" by Donald A. Danielson in paperback.

This nutshell is great, I learned more out of it than I did in my patent law class. I wish I had read it before I took the class, that way I'd have a better understanding of it, it explains the confusing concepts really well. It was a life-saver on the final exam, and I'm going to use it for my trademark law class next semester as well!!

The text was as described with no issues. The delivery was prompt and handled in a professional manner. I recommend this seller.

I don't know whether or why the 2d edition would be on sale, as the first reviewer implies in his or her nevertheless good review. The third edition has been out for two years and it is complete, accessible, understandable, and better than the competition--by far! If you want to understand patents, copyrights, trademarks, this book will make you an expert in an afternoon.

Like almost all hornbooks or outlines, this one glosses over Trademark law. Copyright, Patents, and Trademarks are all taught seperately, so I don't understand why they are lumped together and glossed over superficially by almost all hornbooks.

I only read the patent section, and have no knowledge of the other sections. However I have found the book to be entirely too superficial to be of any assistance. Additionally, at more than one occasion on topics that are fairly important, the information was just wrong. I have read the patent section of my IP supplements to prepare for the exam, and I by far recommend the IP hornbook. It's a little longer but WAY worth it over this book. If your library doesn't have a copy and it's too expensive for you, then try Examples and Explanations, but whatever you do, don't just rely on this book, you'll look like an idiot when you completely misstate some things. I mean 90 to 95% of it is right, I'm sure, but I'm going to get enough wrong on my own, I don't need help.

.
Highly recommended for the adventurous at heart.

When I began reading Lubow's biography, I knew nothing of RHD, other than he was a well-known journalist at the turn of the century. A major discovery was in store. During this most interesting read, I became fascinated with his persona, his rise to fame, his peculiar first marriage, and most especially his experience and adventures in covering (so many!) wars.

Equally fascinating is the criticism that followed him.

His writing was "overblown." He put on airs of royalty. His fiction was simple-minded, etc. etc. etc. Deserved? Maybe on some points. He wrote a certain way for a certain time. It may not all have been high art, but it worked, famously. So what really nagged his critics? HE WAS TOO POPULAR.

We can only imagine how big a star he'd be today. He was the best known journalist of his day. He was startlingly handsome. He wrote best sellers. He worked in New York City. He built a dream house in the country. He loved to party with famous friends. He enjoyed plays on Broadway. He WROTE plays for Broadway. He was a member of a social elite few could ever join, and fewer would ever want to leave. Enough? Now add his European, Latin American, South African and Far Eastern war adventures, some of which were astonishing, and you've got the makings of a major, major modern day celebrity.

I was happy to make his acquaintance.

It is unlikely that another so detailed biography will be written of RHD. It is as factually correct as any will get (footnotes abound). Yes, there could have been more analysis and commentary, but as written, we are left to make our own judgments about the man. Read the book, if you can still get it, and you will be happy to discover Richard Harding Davis.

A final word. When he died, Theodore Roosevelt and Winston Churchill were among those who wrote him tribute. But most memorably, here are the final lines offered by Booth Tarkinton:

"Youth called to youth: all ages read him, but the young men and young women have turned to him ever since his precocious fame made him their idol. They got many things from him, but above all they live with a happier bravery because of him. Reading the man beneath the print, they found their prophet and gladly perceived that a prophet is not always cowled and bearded, but may be a gallant young gentleman. This one called merrily to them in his manly voice; and they followed him. He bade them see that pain is negligible, that fear is a joke, and that the world is poignantly interesting, joyously lovable. They will always follow him."

Wow.

I know less about the times of Richard Harding Davis than I should, and was pleased to learn a little of it by peaking over his well-clothed shoulder. I would, however, enjoyed learning about the character of RHD more if the author liked him better. There's certainly something to be said for a biographical author who is not also a sycophant, but there's also something to be said for having at least a modicum of respect for your target. Yes, RHD certainly seemed silly, prissy, pretentious, sentimental, overdressed, and moderately rediculous - in fact, a charicature of his own public persona - but I would quite like to have figured that out for myself without Lublow constantly, and in so many words, calling the man ridiculous. He certainly wrote the rest of the book well enough that we would have figured it out for ourselves.

No idea why Amazon is flogging these articles for 6 dollars a pop when they are:

a) available online for free from the Canadian Army Journal site

b) flogging these without author's consent

As the author of this article, I object to its sale on this site

No idea why Amazon is flogging these articles for 6 dollars a pop when they are:

a) available online for free from the Canadian Army Journal site

b) flogging these without author's consent

As the author of this article, I object to its sale on this site

The price is prohibitive; it must be a textbook. Perhaps this extensive subject can be broken down for general readership into five or six categories under two main ones: 1) victims of violence: murder, assault, rape; and 2) victims of non-violence: prostitution, drug use, burglary. Or whatever. And divvied up into three or four separate books. I would be interested in reading about particular types of crime victims such as those that have affected me, but I certainly am not willing to spend that much money on a book three quarters of which would not interest me in the least unless I were a victims' rights advocate.