Ancient History Books

Exceptional. Read this with one eye on Homer's version and the other on Huler's. An epic journey all comes together.

A very interesting book. Scott Huler does a very good job of blending an ancient tale of travel and adventure with his own personal wanderings around Southern Europe. Scott's obsession with "The Odyssey" becomes the reader's obsession too. - Ray Charlton

Back in 2001 author and radio commentator Scott Huler swore that he would never read James Joyce's "Ulysses" after a number of failed efforts to do so. Inevitably, soon afterwards Huler found himself a member of a reading group focused on reading "Ulysses". And Huler found himself thinking more and more about Homer's "Odyssey", the fountain from which "Ulysses" sprang. He determined to re-read "The Odyssey", but then found to his chagrin that he could not "re-read" it because he had never actually read it in the first place, beyond a junior high school exposure to the book which -- like most such high school exposures to the great classics -- was much more an exercise in escaping reading "The Odyssey". So, as a mature adult Huler began genuinely reading the epic poem and became entranced by it, to the point that he decided to undertake a journey to follow Odysseus's path across the Mediterranean and seek to better understand the places experienced and the lessons learned by the ancient Greek hero, "the man of twists and turns." These are lessons applicable to everyday life, it would seem -- not that Huler ever adopts a didactic (or even overtly "inspiring") tone. Rather, "No-Man's Lands" is pleasantly rambling.

"No-man's Lands" is Huler's tale of his journey, as much of a journey through his heart and mind as through the Mediterranean. It is good-natured and thoughtful. And along the way, the reader learns with Huler much about the real soul of "The Odyssey".

At age 44, having finally read James Joyce's Ulysses (which he had vowed never to do), Scott Huler immerses himself in Homer's epic tale, The Odyssey, and embarks on an adventurous six-month pilgrimage to retrace Odysseus's return from the Trojan war to Penelope and Telemachus, his wife and son, in Ithaca.

When Polyphemus the Cyclops demands to know Odysseus' identity, Odysseus replies, "My name is No-man." Later, when the Cyclops cries out, "No-man is killing me!" his fellow Cyclopes think he is not in any trouble. Hence the book's title, and Huler's determination to boldly go where No-man has gone before.

Along the way, we encounter the Lotus-eaters, the Cyclopes, the Laestrygonians, the witch Circe, the kingdom of the dead, the island of the Sirens, Scylla and Charybdis, the cattle of the sun, and enjoy many other episodes.

Whether The Odyssey is historical/geographical or a mythological tale imagined by a poet ("The poets always lie," said Plato), cannot be ascertained. However, Huler quotes many ancient Greek and Roman writers--Thucydides, Strabo, Herodotus, Ovid, Pausanias, Polybius--who provide a plausible itinerary for Odysseus's travels.

Reading Huler's travelogue/memoir is a sheer delight! Filled with self-deprecating humor, No-Man's Lands provides numerous chuckles and laughs. The book is more than slapstick humor, however. The author's critical analyses reveal an impressive knowledge of Homeric questions, and his sensitive judgments takes the answers he learns and sagely applies to our own lives and world.

This is the wonderful result of one person's five-year dedication to the life of this fascinating bird. Not only is the photography superb, the text is heartfelt and poetic. The organization by region provides a coherent structure for traveling with cranes through their various habitats. A generous gift to all of us who otherwise would not be able to make this journey.

A geo-photographic tribute to America's elusive but elegant cranes, along with their widely diverse habitats. Part journal and part photography book, the author takes the reader on journeys to Alaska (including a breathtaking view of cranes flying past Mt. McKinley) to Florida, from the Central Valley of California to the agricultural plains of Wisconsin. Between, readers are treated to wildlife vistas in the Teton and Yellowstone National Park region, Bosque Del Apache National Wildlife Refuge in the desert of New Mexico, and the Platte River, which flows through the High Plains of Central Nebraska. Not just a travel documentary, this is the first book of a remarkable young artist, who will dazzle and delight readers with a poetry of cranes as observed through the lens of his camera.

At once a coffee table photo celebration and a natural history, any avid birder should consider photographer Michael Forsberg's On Ancient Wings: The Sandhill Cranes Of North America to be essential reading. The photos alone - full-page color spreads which are gorgeous in their all-season crane portraits - are worth repeated looks, covering cranes in environments from Alaska to Cuba. Then, there's the discourse surveying the natural history and lives of cranes, revealing their interactions with people and their attempts to adapt to a changing natural world. A fine tribute marries natural history and visual display, inviting audiences from natural history students to casual readers to partake.

Michael Forsberg has put together an amazing collection of photos and is a good writer as well. On Ancient Wings shows that it doesn't matter if you've been a pro photographer for 35 years or ten, all that matters is the emotional impact of the photography. There's certain well-known wildlife photographers out there who talk talk talk about how good they think they are and then there's photographers who just are. Forsberg falls in the latter category.

Aristotle is amazing in his insight into the human nature. "Aristotle on rhetoric" focuses on what people like, how to talk to them, and how to act around them. However, be forewarned that the reading is not light, many hours can be spent on each chapter. If you are interested in finding out that people are the same today as they were in ancient Greece, read this book!

I can't understand quite what it is about Kennedy's book that has so outraged the last reviewer("Spare me the PC!!",Dec. 26,'01). It can't be any real "PC" dogmatism;there's none in Kennedy's book. But take a look at the passage the anti-PC reviewer refers to,& judge for yourself:
"Two features of my translation may be worth pointing out in advance. ...[Here Kennedy discusses a feature that need not concern us now.]... A second feature is avoidance of some of the sexist language seen in older translations,which often speak of 'men' when Aristotle uses a more general plural. I have used *man* or *men* only in those few instances in which the word appears in the Greek; otherwise I use *someone*,*people*,or *they*. On the other hand,to alter Aristotle's many uses of *he*,*his*,or *him* in reference to speakers or members of a Greek assembly or jury would be unhistorical & involve an actual change in the text. Aristotle usually envisions only males as speaking in public; but he clearly did not think that rhetoric was a phenomenon limited to males...."
Now whether Kennedy considered this feature a "virtue" of his translation (as the anti-PC reviewer suggests) is debatable; but based on what I've quoted,Kennedy seems only to speak of it as one of two features "worth pointing out in advance".
Now what has so outraged the anti-PC reviewer? It's not as though Kennedy is translating Aristotle's use of the Greek words for *man* or *men* into gender-neutral English words. Kennedy explicitly says that he has *not* done so.
Kennedy is saying that wherever Aristotle uses a noun or pronoun (*other* than "man/men" or "he/him") that happens in Greek to be masculine in gender,even though there is no particular reason to think (and maybe even positive reason *not* to think) that Aristotle means to be referring exclusively to males,then in such cases (and,from what I understand,*only* in such cases) Kennedy uses a word that in English is gender-neutral,like "person/people" or "someone". Now there is no reason to get into a huff about this or think that Kennedy is constructing some barrier between us English readers & what Aristotle is actually saying. The neuter "gender" just wasn't used in Greek as a way to refer to a mixed group of males & females or as a way to refer to people without specific reference to their gender. The masculine "gendered" words were used for this purpose. This was just a fact about the language.
It's true that in English we sometimes oddly use a word like "guys" to refer to a mixed group of males & females or even to a group of women only,& we sometimes use a word like "he" to refer indefinitely to *someone*,male or female. But in English such cases aren't the norm. In fact,it's peculiar that the specific word "guys" *may* be used in the way I just mentioned,but the word "men" is *never* used in that way. And although "he/him" is,as I said,used with gender-indefinite reference,it's increasingly *not* the norm; these days we just as often see the words "he or she" or even "she" were we formerly found only "he". Now this is just a fact of our language,whether or not you agree that it is an improvement. (I haven't commented on the use of the suffix "-man",which is another matter that is fairly irrelevant here.)
So unless we think that Aristotle actually is referring exclusively to males every time he uses a noun or pronoun that happens in Greek to be masculine in gender,a translator is rather misrepresenting the Greek to translate,as a matter of course,these words into words that in English are obviously-and almost always,exclusively-masculine,like "man/men" & "he/him". Kennedy is simply trying to accurately represent in English a grammatical feature quite common to Greek words but rather rare in English.
I have made a big deal of a point that Kennedy only says was "worth pointing out". I've done this only to do better justice to Kennedy's translation which is quite an improvement over previous English translations.(Even *if* the anti-PC reviewer were justified in his/her characterization of Kennedy's attitude about gender,I don't see how the reviewer arrived at his/her one-star rating. Is this all the reviewer cares about in a translation? Or does he/she think that Kennedy's choice of "people" over "men" totally *ruins* an otherwise good translation?!)
The anti-PC reviewer has (apparently unwittingly) propagated the PC agenda by giving undue attention to what,for serious readers of Kennedy's translation,can be only marginally important.

I read these works for a graduate seminar on Aristotle.
Definition of Rhetoric- capacity of persuasion. Plato is critical of the Rhetoric and the tragic poetry. Rhetoric is approach to political public speeches in the forum. Plato thought that they clouded the mind and thus created a part of his critique of democracy in general. Plato thinks Socrates was killed by rhetoric used by the Athenian democracy. Plato feared the danger of democracy. Poetry appeals to the base human emotions rhetoric, and poetry block rational truth according to Plato. Rhetoric is psychological force of language vs. logical force of language. Psychology leads people to believe things based on emotions. Speech must appeal to the masses in a democracy. Psychology is persuasion, logic is truth. Deduction and induction is arguing logically. Plato says rhetoric is not a technç, (craft) nor is poetry, because they are undisciplined and not uniform in design. Thus, appeal to psychology and emotion can never be done away with in a democracy, thus Plato abhors them and democracy. Plato calls it sophistry this psychological appeal and democracy requires this to exist, so the problem persists. Plato is clear and consistent in his abhorrence of sophistry and democracy.

Aristotle's Rhetoric and Poetics are an alternative to Plato. Aristotle's rhetoric tries to strike a middle position. Aristotle says rhetoric and poetry are a technç, the Rhetoric is a handbook. Aristotle says speaker needs to appeal to appropriate information for the particular setting. Much like a lawyer's argument, not just relying on facts, need to appeal to people's emotions. Aristotle does understand that rhetoric can be used in a harmful way.

Aristotle lays out three features in rhetoric:
1. Ethos= character of the speaker, also charisma, speaker earns the audience's trust, use of body language.
2. Pathos= condition of the hearer.
3. Logos= essential bearing on political persuasion, truth.

Thus, Plato's concern by definition excludes speech because it deals with emotion. These three conditions must be in play for a speech to be successful. The rhetoric contains a detailed analysis of the different human emotions and how to elicit them in a speech. Aristotle knows the speaker must be a good student of human nature to tap into human emotions.

Epistçmç is scientific knowledge. Phronçsis is the capacity of the soul for using education, experience and habit all this is in the ethics. This is the same in political world so politics is not an episteme no scientific reasoning. The things that come up in politics are not deduced scientifically. In politics, humans use deliberation between several possible outcomes unlike math where there is only one correct answer. Political speech is contentious because the nature of politics is contentious.

There are two circumstances in rhetoric.
1. Judicial rhetoric has to do with the past like in a court case.
2. Deliberative rhetoric has to do with the future, what decision should we make in political policies.

I recommend Aristotle's works to anyone interested in obtaining a classical education, and those interested in philosophy. Aristotle is one of the most important philosophers and the standard that all others must be judged by.

Aristotle's treatise "On Rhetoric" has been the seminal work in the field since it was written. There is a very real sense in which there is nothing new under the sun since Aristotle's day, and that the rhetorical constructs of Burke, Toulmin and every other rhetorical theorist are simply Aristotle's concepts dressed up in new terms. Certainly no one has been as comprehensive in cataloguing all the available means of persuasion. The study of rhetoric begins in earnest with Aristotle's volume. While there are numerous translations of "On Rhetoric" available, this remarkable translation by George A. Kennedy is the one worth owning. Kennedy has studied classical rhetorical for over three decades and he brings his knowledge of what rhetoric meant in the time of Aristotle to his translation. By the time you get to the first sentence of this translation--"Rhetoric is an antisrophos to dialectic"--you have ample evidence that Kennedy is the ideal translator for this text. You will have gone through a Prooemion, an Introductory essay, a synopsis of the first three chapters of Book 1 before you get to that first sentence, which contains two footnotes detailing the contemporary meanings of "rhetoric" and "antistrophos." More than any other scholar to tackle this project, Kennedy is as well versed in the subject matter as he is the original language. Kennedy's translation also benefits from the fact that it is eminently readable.

Additionally, this volume includes only a glossary and bibliography, but two excellent appendixes. The first consists of Supplementary Texts: (A) Gorgias' "Encomium on Helen," the showcase speech by the leader of the Sophists; (B) Aristotle on "Art as an Intellectual Virtue" from his "Nicomachean Ethics"; (C) "An Introduction to Dialectic" from Aristotle's "Topics"; (D) Cicero's "Description of Aristotle's Synagoge Tekhnon"; (E) Aristotle on "Word Choice and Metaphor" from his "Poetics"; and (F) Kennedy's note on "The Concept of the Enthymeme as Understood in the Modern Period." The second appendix features three Supplementary Essays: (A) "The Composition of the 'Rhetoric'"; (B) "The History of the Text After Aristotle"; and (C) "The Strengths and Limitations of the 'Rhetoric.'" The supplemental works alone would make this the translation to own. Every teacher or student of rhetorical theory/criticism needs to own Kennedy's translation of Aristotle's "On Rhetoric."

This is not really a book for scholars, though they could certainly benefit. It's a book for the rest of us who wondered where science comes from and what science has to do with the fight to change society. This is a very readable and lively book, both focused and far-ranging, with insights into everything from English literature to physics and union politics. Novack points out that materialism is totally linked to science, including the science of changing society. The Marxist method is the necessary update for the scientific approach that was begun by the Greeks. This book is written to provide the nonphilosophy student with some very necessary tools. While amazon may sometimes list this book as not available from time to time, it is always available from booksfrompathfinder. Click on the "new and used" line above and then scroll down.

What does reality consist of and where did it come from? These are questions that have vexed human beings ever since they began to think. They are also questions most people figure they don't really need to spend time thinking about. But George Novack, who was a serious student of philosophy and a leader of the Socialist Workers Party for many years, does a great job of explaining just how relevant these basic questions are to ordinary people who want to change the world. What makes this book so helpful is that it does not assume the reader is an academic philosopher. The book looks at the evolution in ancient Greece and Rome of a materialistic outlook, which began to understand that human beings could make sense of the world without relying on ideas of god and the supernatural. He shows how and why the Greeks in particular made incredible advances in thinking which were shunted aside, only to be rediscovered more than a thousand years later by later materialistic thinkers in Europe during the Renaissance. You will understand more about these ideas in reading this book than by reading twenty academic tomes on philosophy. Save your money and buy this one.

I read everything by George Novack that I can get my hands on-- all his works on politics, history and philosophy. He has a way of presenting ideas precisely and clearly, and of explaining the historical setting and importance of each one. And while he meets high academic standards, he writes directly for working people who want to understand the world and figure out how to act to change it. He helps you see why questions of materialism vs. idealism, dialectics vs. formal logic, history and change are important and helps you grapple with them seriously.

Here Novack gives a sweeping overview of the rapidly changing Greek society over five centuries BC. He explains not only what happened in the great development of human ideas, philosophy, logic, reason and scientific inquiry, but also why it was possible and likely that they would occur when they did.

I strongly recommend some of Novack's other works as well, including: America's Revolutionary Heritage, Democracy and Revolution, The Logic of Marxism, and Polemics in Marxist Philosophy.

Does reality exist independent of human (or superhuman) consciousness? What is the relationship between mind and matter? Is there any spirit that creates or changes the world at will? These questions are as old as human society itself. George Novack traces the evolution of materialist thought, and its opposite, idealism through ancient Greek and Roman society. He explains why the rise of the Roman slave empire, and the later establishment of Christian orthodoxy, crippled the development of both materialism and scientific discovery in Europe for some 1,200 years. He contrasts the earliest forms of materialism with the rationalism of the Enlightenment and the dialectical materialism codified by Marx and Engels.

The left page has the original in Latin and the right has an English translation. The set up of the text and plenty of line numbering allows you to easily track the corresponding phrases. There are occasionally some English words or phrases that sound old fashioned which is hardly a surprise since this is a translation almost a hundred years old. The original 1915 translation was corrected for errors in 1921 and the type reset in 1960. The book is a hard cover with good quality opaque paper that will accept pencil notations and erasures without substantial damage. The typeface is clear, well spaced and of adequate size. The six volumes of Ovid's works in this series include two covering the Metamorphoses. I found these to be particularly useful in following what liberties had been taken in other translations of this work.

The Metamorphoses, of course, is one of, if not the, classical world's greatest mythological treatises. The Loeb edition's convenient format of original Latin text opposite a clear, concise English translation is invaluable for anyone who has ever been interested in Latin, and a wonderful study guide for the Latin scholar. Highly recommended.

I wrote a thesis on Ovid in college, so I'm a little biased, but this is one great translation. I love the Loeb series in general, and haven't seen a single edition that hasn't been well translated and edited. If you're reading a classic, read a Loeb.

Ovid is by far the greatest Roman poet. Certainly, Vergil's work must not be overlooked, with his excellent style and powerful emotion (a favorite scene of mine is the death of Laocoon); however, Ovid surpasses Rome's poet laureate by leaps and bounds: Ovid's dactylic hexameter is ornate and precise, and his poetry contains a daring irreverence that outraged Augustus. Few authors have surpassed the power of Ovid's pen, and his _Metamorphoses_ is his best work.

Although I am not entirely impressed with pedestrian prose translations of poetry, the Lobe edition's side-by-side translation provides the reader an adequate aid to begin to grasp the poet's beauty.

(If one desires to read Ovid's _Metamorphoses_ in English, I highly recommend Rolfe Humprhies's excellent translation.)

That is the question that burned in the hearts of those Greeks, who by their own excellence, or ARETE, made lasting contributions to humanity's imagination about being fully human. Just to add a few words to those reviews below:
This is one of those books that simply cannot go out of print as all who have read it and learned from will not let that happen. It's that important! No study of anything Greek would be complete without reading this book. The mesmerizing power that the ancient Greeks continue exert on all intelligent persons everywhere is summed up in their formulation of PAIDEIA, and the manner of their ASKESIS (discipline involved in forging one's true self) in embodying it. Read it well and this book will cleanse you of the muck of modern education, especially of the public kind, and help you think more nobly. That is to say, clearly.

The book shows how the greek people were the first to concentrate their attention on the perfection of MAN and his place in society. Jaeger traces this fact from Homeric times through Plato and explains it through many outstanding writers such as Hesiod, Solon, Sophocles, and many more. He shows the powerful Ideals of the greeks in all their beauty which continue to live on in the world today. He reveals how Poetry, Philosophy, Rhetoric, Politics, Medicine, etc. have their basis in the quest to reach the highest standard imaginable for man and society. The space contributed to Plato is subtantial and the first volume is really only an intro to Plato by the authors own admission. That's a four hundred page intro! But it all leads to the greatest of inventions...Philosphy. I enjoyed the whole book, but the second volume "the search for the divine center" was the best part explaining many things about Plato. To understand in greater depth the influence of these ideals on the western world I recommend reading a book (which I read first) called "The Classical Tradition" by Gilbert Highet whom is also the translator of this book. That book reveals how most of the surviving great works throughout western history were written by authors who were well aware of the greek world and their ideals including many writers in the Christian tradition. Jaeger wrote a short book called "Greek Paideia and Early Christianity" which shows that connection very well. He has convinced me beyond doubt of his statement that the ancient greeks are the educators of the western world.

Anyone with an interest in Ancient Greece must read this book! Jaeger weaves elements of history, anthropology, philosophy, and psychology with masterful dexterity. I've read a number of general texts on Ancient Greek culture. There are some quite good ones out there. H.D.F. Kitto's, The Greeks, is another favorite of mine. Nevertheless, Jaeger's work stands well above the others. He provides a great deal of depth and detail but it never seems to wane as his genius provides a stunning insight on every page. Jaeger uses a concept well-known to classicists, arete, as a synthesizing thread. Paideia, which is roughly equal to our idea of culture, in the sense of 'she is a very cultured woman,' defined the aims and ideals of a Greek education. Arete, a blend of excellence, virtue, nobility, and skill provided a telos for that process of education. Jaeger, using the framework of educational ideals, came to present the true spirit of Ancient Greek culture. This idea, of using educational ideals to survey the depth and breadth of a culture, would rightfully scare a well-educated American. For our educational aims, which are primarily vocational or simply technical, represent a vacuum of higher values and ideals. Even the once powerful currency of 'honor' as a unifying goal has long since expired. A review of Ancient Greece, steeped in values and appreciative of the finest things in life, may rekindle the search and development of values in our own time and place. This book should be a guide for the quest.

Chalk me up as another mesmerized reader. Paideia will take you back to the beginnings of Western Civilization to examine how the Greeks conceived of excellence or arete and the disputes that arose as the new definition ran into the old definitions. Plato is the anchor of the three volumes, and Jaeger treats him with a sense of awe, while I found his ideas as listed in "The Republic" unnerving.

The find of the books for me was Isocrates, the master of rhetoric and a hypochondriac who almost lived to 100. The stories of Isocrates and Demonsthenes renewed by interest in the study of rhetoric. Homer, Hesiod, Pindar, Socrates, they are all here. Overall a fantastic trilogy.

Ms. Evan Brann is one of the finest translators of Greek in the country. Using the system laid out by Jacob Kline, Ms. Brann has perfected the ideal of literal translation. She stays with the Greek and allows the reader to decide just what Plato said without getting in the way. The glossaries are particularly useful to those with even a rudimentary knowlege of the language of the Greeks. Do not allow a translator or editor to stand between you and the text: choose Brann.

To my mind, this translation surpasses all others with which I am familiar. The translation (1) has a flowing literary style that does justice to the rich feel of reading Plato's own prose, (2) is remarkably precise in its reflecting of the original language, with the result that, when one notices something interesting going on in the language of the translation, one will consistently find it is reproducing what is found in the Greek. In both these ways, this is a very trustworthy text--the reader can confidently presume to be experiencing Plato's writing. The dialogue itself--Plato's _Phaedo_--has few parallels for philosophical, literary and cultural depth and importance. It is the conversation Socrates has on the day of his death with a number of philosophical admirers. It is a rich discussion of the nature of knowledge, the nature of virtue, the ultimate nature of reality and especially the nature of death itself. The introduction by the translators is also uncommonly good for putting the reader in a position to read the text well. This is the only translation of the _Phaedo_ that I will assign to my classes. This translation is a fantastic accomplishment.

_If it was up to me to preserve just one of the dialogues of Plato for posterity it would be the Phaedo. That is because this is the metaphysical core of the teachings of Socrates (the main character) as told by Plato. As is emphasized in the text, death is the main topic of concern for the true philosopher- and that is what is covered here. However, there is nothing morbid about it. This is a message of hope, for Socrates establishes the divinity and immortality of the soul. The good man, he who has purified himself through the love of wisdom (Philosophy) goes to a higher, purer realm to be with like-minded souls and the gods themselves. The bad man also goes to his just reward with those of like character.

_If I was to abstract the core truth here it would be that the true philosopher is always trying to free his soul from the body- for only then is the soul free of the distractions and distortions that can corrupt it and keep it from direct perception of the Ideals (Absolute Truth, Good, Beauty, and Justice.)

_You easily see where the Church borrowed so much of its basic theological underpinnings. In fact, reading this work abolishes forever in your mind the idea that the pre-Christian pagans were in anyway necessarily savage or barbaric in their deepest spiritual beliefs. This is spirituality more pure than anything preached by the Church- and it is supported by reasoned argument and not appeal to empty faith and authority.

_The closing of the dialog is probably the finest depiction in Western literature of the death of a great and good man. You truly concur that Socrates was indeed the wisest and justest and best of all men.

Socrates is unique among philosophers, not just for his place among the early Greek philosophers, but also for the fact that he is the most famous philosopher to never write his own books. What we know of Socrates comes from contemporary accounts and students, most particularly Plato.

Set in 399 BCE, the Phaedo is a reconstruction of Socrates final conversations with friends on the day he died. We do not know when this dialogue was written, but it was probably before The Republic (Plato's most famous work, also featuring the figure of Socrates). Like The Republic, this dialogue features a well developed theory of Forms -- these are introduced gradually here, slowly filling out the details of each step. This develops the story of the caves idea from Plato's earlier work in epistemological, metaphysical, moral, and semantic terms. Plato also advances the 'imperfection argument' here -- the idea that when we sense something, it is never perfectly the thing we are thinking of, and that idea or standard to which we relate what we see, hear, feel, etc. is tying into a more perfect Form.

However, the idea of the soul is rather less developed here than in The Republic. The soul is simply mind, or intellect - all emotions are here placed as bodily aspects. This is rather Pythagorean in a fashion, that only the soul grasps the perfect Forms, and so should consist of nothing but reasoning ability, for emotions distort and cloud the perceptions and judgments.

In the end of the Phaedo, we witness Socrates drink the hemlock, without fear or trembling, as a philosopher should know the value of life and welcome death with a firm hope. The story is almost religious in nature here.

However, there are other possible readings, and this edition opens these up. This translation is part of a series done by the translators and Focus Publishing of the Plato dialogues. It has an introduction and a glossary of Greek terms, as well as a brief bibliography. The translators avoid a clunky translation by doing some interpretative work, but explain their reasonings in the introduction. They argue in the introduction against many traditional renderings of Phaedo, and as such provide an interesting counterweight to the prevailing editions available.

Of the more than 100 feet of bookshelves in my home Poems from the Greek Anthology translated by Kenneth Rexroth with introduction by David Mulroy represents the most cherished 3/8 inch. I am not literate in Greek nor do I have a background in literary analysis. I lost my original copy of this work by lending it to a faithless wretch (read former girlfriend). I am delighted that it has been reissued. The original 1962 edition has been amplified with "The Last Utterance of the Delphic Oracle" and an introduction and source data by David Mulroy that I found quite valuable as a guide both to Rexroth's approach to the translations and to the subtle techniques used to render the translations relaxed and readable. But the success is Rexroth's and the poets he treats; the winner is the reader. (I have my copy again and can now forgive the girlfriend....)

I've read all the English translations (and even some of these poems in the original Greek). This collection, while small, is the best English "Greek Anthology" going. Quick check: in "The Norton Book of Classical Literature" the Rexroth excerpts shine compared to the other (highly respected) translators.

In terms of directness and emotional resonance Rexroth, "the father of the beats," triumphs again and again. For those who want to explore one of the world's greatest collections of poetry, this is a good place to start. For those interested in translation, there is much to learn from this volume.

The real Greek Anthology is massive and not all the poems are winners. Rexroth has boiled it down to his favorites and in so doing created perhaps the best poems he ever wrote. Those who want a deeper exploration should go to the library. To those who want to add to the bookshelf, this is the essential volume.

Kenneth Rexroth is the best translator of the Greek Anthology since the Renaissance. The Greek Anthology has suffered big ups and downs in reputation, depending on whether the sensibility is available in one time or another to approach it. Rexroth gets it right on. For further information, you may take a look at the online review in the Bryn Mawr Classical Review.

I came across an original edition of this collection in a small used bookstore, and having enjoyed Rexroth's other works picked it up immediately.

This may be one of my best finds, ever, and I'm so glad to see it reproduced in this edition.

Each of these poems, most no more than six to ten lines, does what so much poetry fails to... it says something. It is a complete, vivid, passionate thought. I read this book as if I were sipping a glass of wine, slowly, a handful of verses each day. Let your mind linger on them awhile.

I'll admit to a level of ignorance--I know very little about the "scholarly history" of the Greek Anthology, so I cannot compare these translations to those that came before. But reading Rexroth's personal takes (his introduction is wonderful in itself), I can hardly imagine how they could be improved.

Rexroth is at his finest here. Any lover of poetry will be glad to receive this into their library.

This is a great book to take along if you have a day to spend in Pompeii and prefer self-guided tours or want to explore the ruins unaccompanied. It describes three routes through the city, each covering different sections. We were easily able to identify each stop described in the book, and to identify important artifacts from the photographs in the book. The book also provides concise historical information for each artifact - it was easy to read a little interesting background information about the artifact and then move on to the next.

This book is an excellent visitor's guide. It is full of high quality pictures and maps that will guide you to the important sights. The text is rather dry, but this is only of concern in the somewhat long introduction that deals with the history of Pompeii. After that the book follows a pattern of a photograph or other picture on each page with a detailed legend explaining what is being shown. Even if you don't visit Pompeii you will know what you would have seen if you did.

I purchased this book as a gift for friends who were going to Pompeii. I wanted them to be prepared to really understand what they would be seeing. The book seemed very complete and contained pictures to further help them get a glimpse into the history of the city. They were very pleased and used the book to enjoy their tour.

This book is great for anyone planning a trip to Pompeii. The maps and pictures are great. The guide is organized around 3 itineraries so that you can more easily plan your time to maximize what you can see. Pompeii looks vast, so that organization like this could be important in spending your time at the site wisely before you can't walk anymore. I wish there was a book like this for when I visited Ostia last year. The maps are great and accurate enough so that you can mark in extra sites that you might want to visit that you get off the web and integrate then into the planned itinerary for that day.

later after the trip to Pompeii
It's a good idea to buy this book becaseu it has all kinds of pictures of the interiors of houses you won't be able to see when you go to Pompeii. The pictures inside are exquiste. What you don't know is that a lot of the houses that are described in the book on the 3 walks that are outlined are either not open to the public, being 'restored", or are only open on Saturday and Sunday and you have to make an appointment online to be able to see to see them. Once you get to the gates of Pompeii (even on sat or Sunday), you can't get into either the House of the Gilded Cupids or the House of Menander. The House of the Vetti, lupanare, and the House of Julius Polybius are also being restored and god know when that will be done. The House of the tragic Poet can't be entered and you have to view the mosaic from the other side of a gate. You can't see the frescoes of Vestorius Priscus either; they were locked up and unable to be viewed. i can say the same about several other houses that Dr Guzzo did not mentione in the book, but could have been substitutes fo what was being restored. In fact a lot of the houses were locked up and the interesting stuff that you could view form 10 feet away can be more easily viewed in books (and at considerably less cost).

This is about as fine a book as you will find on this subject.
I enjoyed reading it immensely.

Out of respect for the author's hard and dedicated work I encourage you to vote the jackass one-star review below by "Jeromiah Cox" as "Inappropriate" so that it can be removed.

This book is with out a doubt an wonderful souce for students and Pompeii fanatics. As a classist myself, I was enraptured by this book. Zanker is able to intergrate the archaeological evidence with a comperhensive look at the pompeian socity. This is not to be missed!!

This book is an excellent introduction to Pompeii studies. Paul Zanker expertly describes the beginnings and variations on the private houses in Pompeii; how they were influenced by lavish country villas and how many of the houses were changed to provide an illusion of luxury. The "illusion" comes into play because many of the houses had very limited space and made the best of what they had. Several of the homes, such as the House of the Grand Duke, were not known to me.

Mr. Zanker begins by relating the beginnings of Pompeii as an Oscan city and traces its development through the Social War, when Sulla settled veterans in the city, and into the Augustan period. The latter was arguably the golden age of Pompeii when the emperor took an interest in the city (by having an imperial aqueduct diverted to the city) and was a period of great civic building. The author provides a glimpse into some of the current theories about the city, such as did the wealthy leave Pompeii following the earthquake of 62? This is a theory that could use a chapter on its own and gets a page of discussion here. Another interesting discussion has to do with the reconstruction following the earthquake in 62 CE. Why were buildings like the basilica, and other civic buildings, left in ruins? One possibility is that buildings were rebuilt because there were fraternal groups that needed the use of the buildings (like the worshipers of Isis). Buildings like the amphitheater were repaired but the theaters were not.

So this is a good introduction to the private homes of Pompeii: a book that can be read and followed up by more in depth reading. It is a fascinating look at the public and private sides of the city, illustrated nicely, and well written. Highly recommended.

Zander's Pompeii is one of the main textbook books on Pompeii these days. She covers the city from an archaeologist's point of view by discussing the public and private areas of the city and how Pompeiians would have used them. She discusses not only how each of these areas were populated by regular Pompeiians, but also the women's and slaves' roles throughout the city through these private and public areas.

This book is filled with good information for students, teachers and the amateur classicist alike. A must have for anyone interested in Pompeii or ancient Roman culture.