Central America Books

Although the material in this book is probably covered in greater detail elsewhere, it is pretty unique that the experiences of indigenous groups as diverse as the Iroquois and Incas, are presented here with equal detail. One learns interesting facts about each of them. While I knew about Manco Inca's revolt and establishing a mini-Inca state in the jungle, I had no idea that this was followed by a sort of "Inca Renaissance," with plays, histories and poems written in Quechua. In addition, the five groups that Wright chose either had their own written language or quickly learned one after European contact (and the Cherokee even had their own newspaper), so this history is genuinely "through Indian eyes." The unifying thread (in addition to the resilience of all 5 groups) is that the colonization of the New World by Europeans was not significantly different that of Africa and Asia- without the disease factor, the Americas might today be wholly governed by their original inhabitants.

Simply a "must" read for the Americans (talking about the whole continent for those who are geographically challenged LOL), the Europeans and anybody else interested in the "discovery" of America.

Well-researched and full of interesting facts concentrating on the 5 significant native cultures of the Americas: The Aztecs, the Mayas, the Incas, the Cherokees and the Iroquois. It is easy to read as well !!!

IMO it should be part of every high school history curriculum. Guaranteed to dispel many of the myths that are taught in schools today and reinforced by Hollywood.

Bravo Mr. Wright !!!!

My emotions, while reading this book, ranged from disbelief to outrage. Do not read this book on a full stomach.

For me, Ronald Wright exposed the faulty notion of America's 'virgin wilderness'. Before I read this I did not appreciate the size or sophistication the Native American nations he has profiled in 'Stolen Continents'.

Though this is a tragic history, it is one that should be told. The section on 'Rebirth' is encouraging, for some nations. For others it seems like the relentless attacks, that have deprived so many of so much, will never end.

I hope Mr. Wright profiles other aboriginal nations with this all too rare perspective.

I can't speak for the history of all the five nations, but my wife is Cherokee. Her family predates the arrival of the white race. She has a big thick book documenting the family genealogy compiled by her father, a true researcher. The words of Dragging Canoe, a realitive, are comprehensive and exact. Some quotes are new to the family, so Mr. Wright really did his research.

Mr. Wright painted an eye opening view of the real American Indian history, not what I learned in school and saw on TV.

As a native American whose people came perilously close to being wiped out completely, I welcome and applaud the care, consideration and integrity with which Ronald Wright has addressed the history of five native nations in the Americas--the Aztecs, Maya, Inca, Iroquois and Cherokee. By selecting cultures from north, central and south America, he shows, unequivocally, how pervasive disease and the voracious appetite for gold, land and vassals were in the nearly total devastation of the peoples of this land.

This book should be a "must" read for high school and college students in every nation in the Americas. It is phenomenal in its exploration of past and current circumstances of native Americans.

Sorenson attempts to give geographic ruins in north-central America the place names from the book of mormon text, and attempts to explain ancient culture, linguistics and genetic heritage in context of the book of mormon text. He makes no excuses for his pro-Mormon point of view, in advocating the book of mormon as real history of a lost-people.

Interestingly, he claims the culture and language of a group of north-central aboriginal americans has left remnants of their existence, but only a whisper of these alleged lost-people can be seen today. From the POV of modern-day fragments of archeology, anthropology, linguistics and genetics he attempts to construct a "probable" explanation of book of mormon events.

This is a book about WHAT Mormons could or can believe, and NOT about WHY you should believe it, and definitely NOT an official Mormon church stance on the matter. Sorenson asks so many questions that cannot currently be answered, I'm amazed more books haven't been published to counter or support this work, since it was first published in 1985! I was desperate to read a counter to Sorenson's ideas but all that I could find were whiner-babies on internet forums opposing the Mormon church or Mormonism as a religion.

Let's have a real "counter-Sorenson" scholarly treatise to this book and see what it turns up!?!

In the meantime, this book is very compelling FOR the legitimacy of the Book of Bormon.

This is indeed a fine book that has been able to stand strong for over 20 years. It offers pioneering insights that have brought the Book of Mormon into new light and have set the trajectory of Book of Mormon studies into a new and exciting arena. Indeed, this is a must for any serious student of the Book of Mormon, and would make for a fine introduction for those interested in Book of Mormon studies.

Some of the amazing insights that Sorenson brings into view in this work is the idea of two separate Cumorah's - something which David Palmer followed up with brilliantly in his book "In Search of Cumorah" - the DNA issue, long before it was up in "Losing a Lost Tribe" and the likes of the same ilk, and the discussion on plants, animals, metals, etc.

So this book is indeed a seminal work and a must for serious students of the Book of Mormon. Absolutely brilliant!

We all know a lot of things that aren't so. This may because of the way we receive knowledge from others. An individual bit of knowledge might have been garbled in its path to us, it may have always been nonsense, it might have been state of the art understanding that has since been supplanted, or it might be a decent approximation of reality. This book is, I believe, quite important because it is part of a serious effort to let the Book of Mormon speak for itself rather than imposing on it a mix of interpretations that come from certain hopes and guesses about what the Book of Mormon was actually saying without studying it thoroughly.

Sorenson first builds a map based upon the information provided in the book. This does away with the notion of the so-called "continental" view of the range of the Book of Mormon. He then shows us the very complex cultures in Meso-America and how things seem to have been in the centuries the Book of Mormon took place. While I have my own views and interpretations, I admire Sorenson for sticking to what the Book actually says and what the archaeological and anthropological evidence actually shows us. He doesn't try to get to the point of fitting it together and claiming that this is actually that or anything of the sort. That is a trap too many have fallen into over the years and it actually blinds more than it enlightens.

He compares what the Book of Mormon people say about their lives, the culture and its wars with the way the people of that region lived, adapted, and fought. Sorenson shows us how the rising population and the expansion of the Mayan kingdoms put pressure on the large mix of smaller tribes that "filled in the gaps". The author also helps us see quite clearly what was happening at the time of the end of Nephite civilization. This is a very interesting set of insights.

I think this is a terrific book. Yes, Sorenson is a believer (so am I). Still, this book does a very fine job of stating things on the basis of evidence. No, it does not provide a photograph of Lehi and Nephi on the beach holding the Liahona with the boat in the background. However, even if it did, non-believers would find a way to explain it away, and believers would still believe (because the belief comes from something beyond photographs).

The book has many helpful maps, illustrations, and photographs. It also has a very useful index.

Highly recommended.

Notwithstanding the fact I disagree with Sorenson about his views on Quetzecoatl, this book is a MUST for Book of Mormon students as it presents an extremely plausible geographical and cultural setting for the events related in the text of the Book of Mormon. Sorenson discusses how the drumlin in New York is _not_ the Hill Ramah/Cumorah of the Book of Mormon, contrary popular Latter-day Saint belief, metallurgy, plants and animals, distances, cities, and so forth. The fact that such a thing is plausible bodes poorly for the anti-Mormon theory that Smith was a fraud and the Book of Mormon is an example of 19th centiry fiction.

Dr. Sorenson, along with FARMS, theories the most logical setting for the BoM by keeping its time and changing its space. Not since the discovery of the Joseph Smith Papyri has a LDS work been so penetrating as An Ancient American Setting. This book remains to be the cornerstone of the yet complete scientific translation of the Book of Mormon.

Finally a book out there that is easy to follow about getting online. It is well-written and clearly organized. I was already able to email friends, but "Wired in a Week" taught me how to do even more -- like checking my stocks, instant messaging and so much more. Buy it--it's worth it!

This book is a must have next to your computer. It tells you how to get started online and how to use AOL for checking stocks, sports scores, email and getting pictures online. I refer to it all the time.

This book was the answer to my prayers.....I have felt "left out" on the new internet wave and Regina Lewis's book brought me "in"!!.I had no idea how helpful the internet can be!.....Thank you ...Thank you!.......Now I can "really" join in all the conversations with my adult children. It feels great to be "connected" !!

This book was really helpful. I learned a lot about AOL that I didn't already know. Illustrations were very helpful too.

Finally a book out there that is easy to follow about getting online. It is well-written and clearly organized. I was already able to email friends, but "Wired in a Week" taught me how to do even more -- like checking my stocks, instant messaging and so much more. Buy it--it's worth it!

This book is a liberal arts degree
for people who did not have the time
to get a Masters.

the information betweem the covers
is worth over 5 stars
a foundation work for individuals and their futures

for those over over 30 read it fast things jump at you
for those under 30 its an under liner

A Contemporary Mind gives a new perspective on the realities and cultural expectations that thrive in what is considered to be Latin America. The language is exuberant and finely crafted to draw the reader into a web of multiple plots. Well worth the time and effort. Great book for the beach, a must summer read.

Read it fast
it's a jazz composition

For an account of Lincoln's thought (as well as Douglas') that serves to the credit of both of them, read this book. One of the finest books I have ever read, there are some chapters on Lincoln's thought that you will read time and time again. My copy of the book is marked up with great quotes where Harry Jaffa shows great insight into the tension and wonder that is the democratic thought of Abraham Lincoln, quite possibly the greatest democratic leader in history. This book is a must read for anyone who wants to know about the mind of Lincoln before the Civil War.

This book is a most profound examination of the thinking of both Sen. Stephen Douglas and Abraham Lincoln concerning all of the issues associated with slavery up to the Civil War. Jaffa wants to set the record straight as far as any number of contentions by well-known historians of his era, known as revisionists. Most importantly, he flatly disputes the notion that the thinking and actions of Douglas (the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854) endorsing popular sovereignty were essentially equivalent to the principled stand of Lincoln based on the equality of all men in their long-term ramifications for slavery. Those revisionist historians contend that Lincoln and the Republicans should have accepted Douglas' solution to the slavery crisis, thus not precipitating the Civil War.

Another claim against Lincoln that Jaffa thoroughly discredits is that Lincoln, in fact, did not hold Negroes as equals, and simply used the issue for personal political gain regardless of the consequences for the Union. But Lincoln understood that politics is the art of the possible. The author makes clear that Lincoln held an intense respect for the principles of the Declaration of Independence, including the rights of Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness for all, including Negroes. It was one thing for the Union to be formed with the taint of slavery, but the contention that Southerners came to that slavery was a "positive good" was felt by Lincoln to have the potential to completely undermine the basis of the US. Perhaps it could even be justified to enslave a group of "inferior" whites. Lincoln felt compelled to move the nation back to its core principles without alienating those who did not have the same clarity as to what was at stake.

The book is a challenging read. The issue of permitting slavery in territories became and remained contentious from 1820 on. The arguments for and against slavery in territories are quite subtle involving constitutionality, Congressional acts, territorial legislative bodies, and court decisions. The Dred Scott decision in 1857 disallowing restrictions on taking property (slaves) into territories is examined. Lincoln and the Republicans, rightfully so, were very apprehensive as to the long term ramifications of that decision. It was hardly a stretch to see where free states could become a thing of the past.

The book is only indirectly concerned with the Lincoln-Douglas debates. They are randomly referred to throughout the text, but earlier writings and speeches receive far more attention. Douglas' words concerning the Mexican territories and the Kansas-Nebraska Act are well covered. The author devotes a large segment to examining Lincoln's speech to the Young Men's Lyceum in 1938, where his thinking on major issues had already crystallized. Lincoln's address on temperance receives much attention.

The author is a disciple of Leo Strauss, the natural rights theorist. He does regard Lincoln as a preeminent natural rights thinker. There is some discussion of pre-civil society versus civil society. But the overall import of the book does not turn on acceptance of natural rights in a purist sense.

This book, decades after its publication, cannot be ignored for understanding Lincoln.

If you want to read one book about Lincoln's thought, this is the one to read. The first part of the book, which takes Douglas seriously and states the strongest case for him, is historically dense and may be difficult for most readers. But keep going, because the payoff will be great. There follow chapters on two of Lincoln's early speeches. Jaffa's analysis here is brilliant, though perhaps a bit far-fetched. In the final part of the book, Jaffa states the case for Lincoln against Douglas. This part is rich in its ideas, rigorous in its reasoning, and eloquent to the point of being inspirational. (By the way, if you want to read one biography of Lincoln, I'd recommend the one by Lord Charnwood. Though written almost a century ago and therefore not up to date on all the details of historical scholarship, it is judicious throughout and beautifully written.)

Perhaps the most interesting thing about Jaffa is that he wrote Goldwater's famous "moderation in the defense of freedom is no virtue" speech. If you go back and read the speech (and it is on the web, of course), it echoes both the Old Testament ("our fathers") and Lincoln. I suspect he would agree with the man who told me that Lincoln is the greatest prose stylish in the English language. As for the book, Jaffa interprets the civil war as the second, and genuine, founding of the American republic, and precisely because the principle of the Declaration, equality, was written not in ink but blood (Jaffa has his own brand of Lincolnian Christianity). Lincoln, by this reading, belongs to the "tribe of the eagle and the lion" and was neither Caesar nor Brutus but possessed the best qualities of both. To understand that part of Jaffa's interpretation, you would have to read his treatment of Shakespeare. As for the Lincoln-Douglas debates, Jaffa stages Douglas as Thrasymachus and Lincoln--surprise, surprise--as Socrates.

Professor Harry V. Jaffa's "Crisis of the House Divided" is an extremely important book. In it, he succeeds in turning back the revisionist historians of the mid-Twentieth Century who sought to devalue Abraham Lincoln's commitment to the proposition that "All men are created equal."

This tide of revisionism took two general forms; partisans for the South who placed the full blame on Mr. Lincoln for sparking the "War of Northern Aggression"; and modern historians, skeptical of any higher motives and virtues in statesmen of the past, who claimed that there were really no substantial policy differences between Mr. Lincoln and Senator Stephen A. Douglas. If the latter class of historian could prove that Lincoln didn't really believe in freedom for slaves and that his rhetoric against slavery was irresponsible (knowing how it offended Southern sensibilities) while Douglas' "Popular Sovereignty" policy would have eventually led to the limitation and elimination of slavery, then Lincoln's legacy as President could be shown to be the largely accidental.

Fortunately, Professor Jaffa's work demolishes the corrosive contentions of the revisionists, showing, beyond any doubt, that Mr. Lincoln believed America was founded on the principle of human equality as much as it was founded on the idea of democracy. That democracy and equality were the twin pillars of the American Republic and were in tension was something Mr. Lincoln well understood while Judge Douglas honored only democracy. Hence, Douglas' "Popular Sovereignty" led to the concept that the majority could decide slavery was not only legal, but also moral. In opposition, Mr. Lincoln argued that a majority did not have the right to sanction the enslavement of other men, regardless of their alleged inferiority, because "All men are created equal."

Professor Jaffa shows that Mr. Lincoln built upon the Founders' thoughts in the Declaration of Independence and urged their maturation towards the ideal. Lincoln saw how the Founders invoked passion, hatred and revenge in support of the cause of independence from Britain but how these passions were no longer adequate to the task of preserving the Union from the dangers of mobocracy or dictatorship - dangers made more immediate by the revolutionary birth of America and the tendency of unrestrained democracy to disdainful the rule of law. Instead, Lincoln recommended virtuous reason to lift the United States up, to show the world that it was truly capable of lasting self-governance. Of course, the cornerstone of this reason was the thinking through in the body politic, the practical consequences of the principle, "All men are created equal."

Professor Jaffa's book is a gift to America and the world. Were more people in office aware of the fundamental issues debated by Judge Douglas and Mr. Lincoln in 1858 during their remarkable campaign for the Illinois Senate, and their implications for policies even today, our nation would be stronger and our democracy more secure.

Reviewer: Chuck DeVore is a California State Assemblyman, a retired lieutenant colonel in the Army National Guard and the author of "China Attacks."

This is comparative history at its very best. Elliott superbly describes and chronicles the history of the British and Spanish exploration and colonization of the Americas, as well as the process whereby both the British American and Spanish American colonial societies brought about their independence from the imperial governments. It is a comprehensive, detailed, and yet highly readable overview of the political, economic, social, military, and religious forces at play in the Americas during the time period. Elliott goes beyond the telling of historical events and facts, to provide analysis and interpretation of why history unfolded as it did. The writing is excellent and clearly reflects a highly learned historian who has the ability to tell history in a an engaging manner. His juxtaposition and comparison of British and Spanish America in a single volume results in a very interesting and stimulating way to learn about the two empires. The book contains very attractive end papers, a number of excellent maps and numerous color plates. Very highly recommended.

Elliott delivers the masterpiece that those who study the Atlantic World have been waiting for. The idea of studying history from the perspective of the Atlantic has been growing in popularity and worth taking a further look at. Britain and Spain established mammoth empires and Elliot looks at their rise and fall. He also considers other powers including the French and Dutch but focuses mainly on the first two mentioned. The age of exploration is put in context and in true Atlantic fashion the slave trade and development in Latin America are very important. The revolutions of the Atlantic world are very clearly explained in this book and Elliott leaves you wondering where else this field can go. Elliott writes very well and this book is a must read for those who want to consider how the Atlantic world impacted Europe and the United States.

In Empires of the Atlantic World, Professor Elliot compares and contrasts Spanish colonial America with British colonial America. I am not aware of any other books that take this is their subject, and I think that it is worthy of attention. Elliot presents 2 very different experiences in terms of government, economy, and culture. For instance, the Spanish conquistadors came upon a very highly centralized political structure, which they were able to penetrate (and co-opt for their own rule) with relative ease. This enabled them to retain the tributary labor system of the Aztecs and Incas, which they labeled the encomienda system. The British in North America did not have the same experience, as the Indians there tended to be far more decentralized. This forced the British to pursue a far different strategy in their efforts at conquest. Also, the scarcity of gold and silver in North America forced the British to diversify the colonial economy, leading to a more developed economic scene.

Additionally, I found Elliot's side-by-side discussion (between the British and the Spanish) of various other colonial themes to be well-developed. In particular, he goes into considerable detail in contrasting Spain's Catholic-only policy in the Americas with the religious diversity that existed in the British colonies. At the same time, he also explores the very different attitudes that the British and the Spanish had toward the Indians, and how those differing attitudes shaped political and social orders in the 2 regions (look at the large "Mestizo" population that exists in many parts of Latin America today, in contrast to the relatively small population within the United States). For instance, the Spanish sought to bring the Indians into the Catholic Church (witness the significant presence of the Catholic Church in the colonies), and even (theoretically) included a measure of legal protection for Indians within the encomienda system. On the other hand, the British did not make christianizing the Indians a high priority, nor did they concern themselves wth any legal protections for the Indians (a notable exception to this was William Penn).

Elliot gives a great deal of space to discussing how the political and religious regimes that existed in Great Britain and Spain were transferred to these nation's respective American colonies. For example, the British colonists were nurtured, to some degree, by the growing "liberal" ideas that were coming out of Great Britain at the start of the 1700s, while Spanish colonists had no such ideas to turn to (at least none in Spanish). Moreover, British control over its colonies was relatively decentralized (many of the colonies were private or corporate, and all enjoyed a measure of self-government), though Spanish colonies were under the tight grip of the Spanish monarchy. Finally, Elliot demonstrates how both Great Britain and Spain began to "reform" their administrative policies vis-a-vis the colonies, and how those reforms triggered colonial resentment (though the 2 nations had different results in quashing this resentment).

This well written and well organized book is a careful synthesis of the enormous secondary literatures on colonial British America and colonial Spanish America. Elliott provides a pair of parallel narrative overviews of British and Spanish America from their foundings to the revolutions that severed ties to their home nations. The narratives provide the basis for some comparative analysis that recurs throughout the book.

Knowledgeable readers will probably be familiar with much of the narrative about British North America. Much of the information about Spanish North American will probably be new to many readers (like me). For example, the small British settlements of the 17th century were dwarfed by the scope of the Spanish colonial enterprise. When Boston and Philadelphia were modest seaports, Spanish America boasted several large cities. At the time of Harvard's foundation, Spanish America already possessed several universities.

Elliott divides this book into three sections; Occupation, Consolidation, and Emancipation. Occupation is devoted to the initial experience of exploration, colonization, and encounters with the native peoples of the Americas. The chapters in Consolidation describe the development of mature colonial economies and imperial government, the challenge of developing European style societies in radically different circumstances, and the sense of identities developed in these new societies. Emancipation describes the 18th century conflicts between the metropolitan centers and the colonies, particularly as London and Madrid attempted to develop closer control and upset traditional arrangements. All chapters are particularly good combinations of political, economic, and social history.

Elliott points out the common problems faced by both British and Spanish colonial efforts but also how the different features of the home nations and different circumstances in the Americas produced different outcomes. The Spanish, for example, were confronted with very large native populations that they attempted to incorporate into their empire. This fact, plus traditions inherited from the Reconquista, would contribute to the generation of the very racially differentiated society in much of Spanish America. The existence of enormous silver deposits in Mexico and Peru drove the Spanish Crown to exercise considerably closer control of its colonies than the British monarchy would exercise over its colonies.

In his comparative analysis, Elliott deals with the major differences in British and Spanish America, and implicitly how they led to such differing outcomes after the revolutions at the end of the 18th century. Elliott's answers are surprisingly traditional. He stresses the centralized bureaucratic nature of the Spanish empire, the more 'commercial' nature of British settlements, the religious pluralism of the British colonies, and the more liberal/representative political traditions that the British brought with them. Elliott is careful to point out that many of these ultimately beneficial features were essentially inadvertant. If the English crown had been stronger or if rich gold mines had been found in the Blue Ridge mountains, the path of British colonization might well have been closer to the Spanish model.

This was an eye-opener for me as I knew very little on Spain's American territories, besides brief descriptions of some of the conquistadors such as Cortes and Pizzarro. What Elliott has done in this book is to show the comparisons and contrasts between England's New World Colonies and Spain's. There are many fascinating facets underlaying the reasons for acquiring these territories, how both sides viewed their mission and goals, and how they governed them. This is without a doubt a remarkable book that revealed a lot for me.

The first colonization was begun by the Spanish in the early 16th Century. The English made their first successful attempt in the early 17th Century. Both South and North America posed different challenges for both governments, i.e. the size of the indigenous populations, the geography and climate, natural resources and so forth. For me, the real fascination was learning more about the Spanish colonies and the establishment of the viceroyalties of New Spain (based in Mexico City) and Peru (based in Lima) with additional ones developing over time. The interaction with the natives, the attempts at Christianization, trade, and many other aspects of Spain's colonization were quite enlightening.

Being more familiar with United States history, I felt more familiar with the material covered on England's planting of settlers in Jamestown and later in New England. However, the real education was in Elliott's efforts to show how each of these two powers (Spain and England) confronted the realities and challenges of establishing their presence in these very different regions. The differences were often quite stark. Some of the points of contrast that most differentiated the two powers included each nation's attitude towards the Indians (including the attempts or lack of evangelization) and the extent of imperial bureaucracy brought over from the mother countries.

Elliott also describes how world events had helped to shape and or guide the developments that occurred in both country's territories. The Reformation, the British Commonwealth under Cromwell, the Restoration, the Glorious Revolution, the French and Indian War, the French Revolution and so forth, all served as factors in shaping the events that transpired in North and South America. The role of various monarchs, religious, military and political leaders, as well as indigenous leaders, are also discussed.

Elliott does try to take an even-handed approach in acknowledging the strengths and weaknesses of both government's endeavors. Of course it goes without saying that the notion of empire, with the connotations of exploitation of natives and their cultures, is unpopular in most peoples minds nowadays. Yes, it was and remains a blot on the records of all nations that engaged in replacing the livelihoods and cultures (sometimes more like extermination) of indigenous peoples, or those who engaged in the slave trade, but we must keep in mind that we have to try to keep modern standards in check for historical purposes.

This is such a broad subject that I find it hard to even begin to touch on more specific details found in this book; I'm just trying to outline the broader contours of Elliott's book. Having some introduction to this time period will help you, but you need not be an expert on this particular topic. An illuminating read.

Mike has done an awesome job. This is a well researched, excellent book.

Highly recommended!

It obvious the the author has done his research and is very familiar with Houston. This guide is easy to navigate and simple to follow. Houston, has so many restaurants and it's good to know where to get a bargain, even if ur a native. Might i say though if you are a first time houston visitor, splerge at least one night and go to Cafe Annie, or Marks, or Tony's, or America's, or Ruggles and live a little, I mean Houston has so many great restaurants that are well worth the steap price, just use the money u saved buying this guide used on amazon and with the knowledge u aquire there in and go treat yourself, Houston is blessed with some of the best restaurants in the country, you only live once, right?

I lived in Houston for many years, and I am impressed by how well this author knows the Houston restaurant scene. He truly did not leave out any of the tasty cheap restaurants in the city. He even mentions some of the really good but more expensive ones in a special section and guides readers to hard-to-find cuisines like Guatemalan. This is a fantastic book for both locals and visitors.

Odin be praised for I love this book! Whenever I'm in town (I'm a Londoner), I don't hesitate to use this book to choose my family's next dining adventure.

The details and descriptions of the food and establishments you cannot find in any other Houston publication.

If I ever meet Mike, I will give him one love filled sucker punch!

This book is exactly what it claims to be. Well written, and thorough. Mike seems to know of every cheap eatery in the city, and gives a comprehensive review of each. A salivating read!

This collection is among my favorites published in recent years. Janet McAdams lyrically links the personal with the political. Her work is engaging, memorable, passionate, yet not didactic--some poems will even keep you awake at night. Many poems reward multiple re-readings. I'm already looking forward to her next book.

As a poet myself, I can only stand in awe of the work in "Island of Lost Luggage." Janet Mc Adams is a major talent. I've turned my initial envy of her gift into a goad to write better and wider myself.

This Island of Lost Luggage is wonderful. Janet McAdams's poems are lyrical and gritty at the same time, swollen with life, drenched with place, and she never seems to take the easy way in or out. Highly recommended!

I used to write poetry, even studied with some of the greats, including C.K. Williams, Ellen Voight and Louise Gluck. But I found that in any workshop, I could rarely tell a great poem from a mediocre one. This made me feel less than smart about poetry. Janet McAdams has helped revive my love for the form, and my sense of poetic savvy. For with "Island of Lost Luggage" I Know I'm in the presence of Great poetry. That is clear from page one. How to say why this is Great isn't as easy, but I'll venture the following: Mc Adams is gifted with rich language, of course, but she is a more than a fine wordsmith. She takes on issues that have huge resonance, that go beyond any mere narcissim. Each time I enter one of her poetic worlds I find more layers within it, more associations building within me. So, Thanks Ms. McAdams for restoring my poetic sensitivity, and for this wonderful book, a gem, that's most highly recommended for all readers, lovers of poetry or not.

Even if poetry isn't your "thing" this book, given the quiet and serious attention it deserves, will unlock many mysteries. Highly Recommended.

For a Confederate examination, Steven Woodworth's book is essential reading in understanding the complex relationships between President Davis and his western theater leaders. Peppered throughout the book are insightful examinations of such generals as Beauregard, Polk, Van Dorn, Albert Sydney Johnston, Joe Johnston, Bragg, and Hood. Woodworth delves into Davis' leadership weaknesses by showing that his health problems and his lack of humility and people-skills (he would have six different War Secretaries) increased his inability to cooperate with others. His unyielding loyalty to promote incompetent friends to high positions routinely injected failure and casualties in campaigns, but Davis refused to bow to the facts and remove them. Woodworth wraps up his analysis with a fair theory that interconnecting these problems was Davis' hesitancy and indecision. The president often submitted suggestions and not orders in correspondence and he falsely believed backbiting and arrogant generals would just cooperate towards the common cause. His inability to provide unifying command authority, especially over the Mississippi River region further fractured what little strategy existed. Woodworth's analysis is a rare addition in the often-neglected study of western command. It is insightful, extremely well-wrttien, and engrossing.

I re-read Woodworth's excellent treatise on Jefferson Davis and his involvement in the Western Theater. The chapters are succinct and focus more on strategy than in specific battle details. My favorite parts are the reviews at the end of each chapter. I have always believed that Lee's strategy to invade the North rather than deploying his forces in the West was a major blunder. If there is one salient point that screams from this book it is that Jeff Davis' personal relationships with his generals (Polk??) definitely was a detriment to his decision making. This book should be required reading for high school and undergraduate students. Indeed any leader could profit from the analysis and history rendered here.

This book is a must read to understand the generals, campaigns, strategy, and the thinking of Jefferson Davis in the Western Theater. The book is well-written, informative, and features good analysis of the differing generals, Davis' actions, and some very good mini-biographies of the major players. Although the book does not go into major detail about specific battles, Woodworth does give a good overview of the major campaigns and battles of the West. The book also has some interesting theories on why Davis failed in the West. Although I disagreed with some of Woodworth's conclusions, especially regarding Braxton Bragg's capabilities as a commander, I found his arguments well-reasoned, although I thought he went out of his way to bash James Longstreeet. The major sticking point I had with the book was Woodworth's analysis on Bragg and his theory that J.E. Johnston thought the CSA's cause was doomed so he didn't really try to win. I thought that was utter nonsense, but that was really my only quarrel with the book. Well-written, informative, just an excellent book.

Seemingly endless Civil War books are written rehashing every minute move of Robert E. Lee and his Army of Northern Virginia. There are far fewer that cover the situation of the Confederacy's western armies and generals, despite, or perhaps because of the fact that it was in the west that the Confederacy lost the war. With Jefferson Davis and His Generals: The Failure of Confederate Command in the West, Steven E. Woodworth steps up to fill this gap with a first rate book that every serious student of the Civil War should read. He presents a clear and reasoned argument that the failure of the Confederacy in the west was not due to the quality or quantity of its armies or even of its supplies, but a direct result of a monumental failure in its high command.
Woodworth writes of Jefferson Davis as a man who seemed to be eminently and uniquely qualified to become commander in chief of the Confederacy. He was a West Point graduate, a Mexican War hero, had served as a particularly effective secretary of war under President Franklin Pierce, and had been a United States senator. He understood politics, and he clearly understood war. His resolve for his cause, like his loyalty to his friends, was unshakable. Contained within these impressive qualifications and traits, however, were flaws and blind spots that would severely hinder Davis' management of the war in the west, where he had no Lee to take charge. Foremost of these faults was a lack of judgement when appointing friends as generals, and unreasonable loyalty to them thereafter. Compounding these problems was a fierce pride in his own military judgement that left him unable to acknowledge and correct mistakes. Finally, his pride led him into bitter personal feuds with key generals that hindered his ability to utilize them to the fullest.
Woodworth follows Davis' moves in the west, from his initial organization of the Western theater, through the high stakes game played and eventually lost to gain Kentucky for the Confederacy, to the crisis at Shiloh, where with the death of General Albert Sidney Johnston, the Western Confederacy lost its best hope for competent command. The catastrophe of the loss of Vicksburg, the disastrous infighting among the generals under Bragg in the Army of Tennessee, the loss of Tennessee, the Atlanta Campaign, and Hood's final failed campaign are all covered. In each instance, Woodworth notes the command decisions that Davis made, or failed to make, in the crisis. At the end of each chapter, he summarizes and critiques Davis' performance, highlighting areas where Davis was at least partly responsible for the problems, as well as pointing out where he performed as well as could have been expected.
Woodworth clearly has a strongly opinionated point of view. He is nearly unique among the Civil War historians that I have read in his spirited defense of General Braxton Bragg as a competent commander, and lays all of the blame for the failure of Bragg's campaigns on incompetent and insubordinate generals under his command, chiefly Davis' personal friend General Leonidas Polk. He also repeatedly accused General Joseph Johnston of lacking a will to win, and of never believing that the Confederacy could win the war. While many will disagree with these positions, his boldness in stating them is characteristic of the bold approach that is evident throughout his book.
Jefferson Davis and His Generals is a bold, original work, that addresses a theme that is too often neglected in Civil War studies. It is consistently engaging, insightful, and controversial. It is clearly written, well researched, and a pleasure to read. I consider it to be among the very best books that I have read on the Civil War, and would recommend it highly, especially to those with a specific interest in the war in the west.

Theo Logos

Insightful and thought provoking analysis of what Davis did and did not do to save the West. I feel this is a very important book and one that a serious student of the war should read. Additionally, I feel that this book should be read after Connelly and Horn to preserve a balanced picture. Woodworth presents a more favorable view of Bragg than I have seen from other authors. Some of this is fair and some maybe the author's perceptions of Bragg. It takes getting used to and the more you know about Bragg and his failings the better off you are. He scores many good points and made me modify my view of Bragg and the problems he had with Polk and Hardee.

His treatment of Jefferson Davis is very fair. His points are valid and well supported, showing where Davis did well and where he did poorly. The reasons for the decisions are supported and logical, given Davis' personality. This is the best part of the book and balances the blame the "Eastern Block" that is found in other books.

I am less happy with his treatment of Longstreet, feeling that he has accepted the "Lost Cause Myth" and not explored the situation. Rather than dismiss Longstreet, I would have liked to see an explanation of his relationship with Davis and Lee's influence in this area.

This is a well written, easy to read informative book. Not without faults but a valuable addition to my ACW library.

Very sad, but an honest depiction of a part of Guatemala that we were exposed to during our recent visit. The poverty seemed crippling, and children in work roles were very common.

I love this book. Working in a library, I've been happy to be able to show it to so many people. The hero has a hard life and a mother who doesn't love him. But he has a roof over his head at his grandmother's house, and a simple determination to work, to help, and to learn.

There's an indescribable feel to this book, almost a scent, different from any other book. It really is a masterpiece.

I am from Guatemala City and currently living in the US, I read this book with my daughter and she loved it, this book has helped me to explain some of my culture to her. She knows that "anyplace can be the most beautiful place in the world..."

I have read this book aloud to my first and second grade students for years. It is an excellent story, well told, with all the realities of a different culture in a different situation than USA children. However, it is painted with the strokes of deepest, realistic love that a family can have. This is a great story to teach and talk about the struggles of families everywhere, the world and it's differences, and the importance of character "no matter what". It is the book my second graders yearn to read on their own and therefore is a super motivator. It is rich in geography.

The story that I read was really snappy and cool. It's called The Most Beautiful Place in the World By Ann Cameron. There was a boy named Juan and his grandmother. There was also Juan's mom. It takes place in San Pablo, Guatamala. The problem is she leaves him for ever and his mom doesn't let him visit her. He really loves his mom after his dad left them.Some one would want to read this book because its really sad and who ever loves tragedy or not it's a really good book.I recommend this book to people of any age.