Stuart Books

A thorough historical analysis, very scholary textbook. Not as entertaining as A McCullough biography but its not meant to be. Using good sources and sound interpertation this would be a good recomendation for any student, scholar or dabbler.

Table of Contents (concise)

I. Political and Constitutional history 1603-29

Lists major events (P1-46)
e.g.Rochester's ascendancy p16
Fall of Sir Edward Coke,1616 p20
Rise of Buckingham p22
meeting of parliament in 1621 p24 etc. . .

II. Foreign Relations 1603-30
(p47-67)
Peace made with Spain, 1604 p.49
relations with United provinces p.51
causes of rivalry with Dutch p.52
Influence of Gondomar, Spanish ambassador, 1613-22 p.54
The Spanish match, 1615-23 p.55
Beginning of Thirty Years War, 1618 p.55 etc. . .

III. Religious History 1603-40
(p68-79)

IV. Political and Constitutional history 1629-40
(p80-98)

V. Political and Constitutional History 1640-1
(p99-123)

VI. Political and Constitutional History 1642-9
(p124-158)

VII. Political and Constitutional History 1649-58
(p160-189)

VIII. Religious History 1640-60
(p190-214)

IX. Foreign Relations 1630-60
(P215-234)

X. Political and Constitutional History 1658-60
(p237-260)

XI. Social and economic History
(p261-311)

XII. Foreign trade and colonies
(p316-349)

XIII. Education and science
(p350-373)

XIV. The arts
(p374-389)

XV. Literature
(p390-415)

Bibliography
(p417-444)

The above is an abreviated table of contents. The entire series is extremely useful and though sometimes can be a little dry in places is written well enough to keep events moving and be relevant

Mr. Riggs does an excellent job of putting the battle of Gettysburg in its proper light. The battle was won on the East Cavalry Field by Custer. Had he not held off Stuart,with Fitzhugh Lee and Wade Hamptons cavalry, Pickett's charge would have broken through the Union defenses and the South could have won the war. It was Custer that stopped the Confederate forces from coming behind the northern troops and causing a panic as Pickett's men were charging.

Given all the books that have been written about the Tudor period it is extraordinary that none has covered Thomas Howard, the 3rd Duke of Norfolk. He lived through the reigns from Henry VII to Mary and played a major part in the maintenance of the Tudor grip on England. He even survived being sentenced to death for treason under Henry VIII, and spending Edward VI's reign in the Tower. Not bad for a staunchly conservative man of Catholic persuasions. (He avoided the block because Henry VIII chose the day appointed for his execution to die). Thomas Howard was released in the reign of Mary and died shortly afterwards at the age of 80. It is hard to think of any other aristocrat who was so fortunate. However, for once in the Tudor period, justice was done; he had backed his sovereign through thick and thin. Indeed, he has been much maligned as being no more than a 'yes-man' to Henry VIII and none too bright with it. But although he made no great claims to learning his contribution was immense. He communicated directly with diplomats, accumulated many works of art (preserving several of the Holbein portraits that are increasingly well-known today). He is perhaps best thought of as the last of the feudal lords, able to raise effective armies almost at will (though always in the interests of his liege sovereign).

David Head is apologetic about the length of time it has taken to produce this work, which has been gestating for over a decade, notwithstanding that it formed the basis of his doctoral thesis. However it is clear to the educated eye that a colossal amount of work has gone into it. It is increasingly rarely that one can read a history book and be sure that it is entirely the work of the person whose name appears on the cover. Possibly the reason no-one has attempted a similar work to this in the intervening period is that its reputation for excellence and academic rigour (sorry, I'm English!) travels before it.

This book is worth every penny to the serious scholar, although it may come as a bit of a shock to those who thought that Tudor History and Antonia Fraser were synonymous!

John A.W. Lock

I remember finding this book in my mom's collection back when I was about 7 or 8 yrs old, and it's probably the reason I became a horror reader. The stories are all well-known classics (The Monkey's Paw being my favorite of the bunch), but it's the artwork that makes this a must-have. Each story is beautifully/grossly illustrated, and if they wouldnt scare guests, I'd frame the pages themselves! (Ya I'm sick!) If you can find it, get it!

This is a lovely little book. Delightful, funny and gentle. Magic, magical creatures and the occasional wayfarer from Camelot.
Don't read it to your kids - read it to yourself.

I'm a longtime poker player. This is simply a great book--great stories, and lots of great advice. I've read tons of other ones, by all the great names. This is better written than almost all of them, because after his poker career, the Poker Pigeon went on to have a successful career as a thriller and mystery writer. I guarantee you'll enjoy this book.

I read this book for a graduate Mill seminar in Philosophy. Recommended reading for anyone interested in education, philosophy, political science, and history.

John Stuart Mill, 1806-73, worked for the East India Co. helped run Colonial India from England. Minister of Parliament 1865-68 he served one term.

In John Stuart Mill's autobiography, he tells readers how he benefited and suffered from having one of the most unique educational experiences known to humankind. His father, James Mill, was personally involved in the education of John and his other siblings John was a brilliant student who read Greek by the age of three and Latin at eight years old. By the time he matured to adulthood, he was extremely well read. Thus, John received an academically rigorous education at home; however, it was devoid of any interaction and social contact with other children his own age. In adulthood, he developed very strong views about the advantages that universal education would have on improving people's characters, which would lead to fostering social change for the better. In addition, he held very strong beliefs on reforming university curriculum to improve Britain's intellectual class. Mill summarized many of his ideas on education in 1867 after accepting the position as Rector of the University of St. Andrews. In his Inaugural Address Delivered to the University of St. Andrews, one of the points that he made in his speech was the responsibility that universities had in building their student's characters. In large measure, the type of curriculum the university taught to its students would in part shape one's character. More importantly, the proper university curriculum would ultimately provide student's with the tools necessary to continue to learn throughout their lives, critically analyze, and if necessary become agents for change in society. He thought that this goal was best served in two ways. First, he believed immersing students in Western civilization's classical works especially the great works of the Greeks and Romans was an important foundation of knowledge. Secondly, he also believed that reading contemporary works of literature was of paramount importance to develop the human character.

As an intellectual himself, Mill was especially interested in the development of the character of gifted people who had the ability to develop a higher intellect than most of their peers. Mill's writings are replete with advice as to what knowledge he thought was most worth attaining to develop one's character and intellect. Looking at what Mill wrote regarding the proper kind of education the intellectually gifted should receive in a university, is where one can then start to ascertain what side he would support in the canon vs. multicultural debate. Although I will use key passages from his writings to illuminate why Mill would ultimately champion the supporters of an increased multicultural curriculum for universities, I also find there is evidence in his writings that he would insist that student's posses a knowledge base in the canon. As an example, in his essay titled Civilization in 1836, which was written when he was 30 years old, one finds Mill's early and life long penchant for studying the classics of ancient Greece and Rome. "Such is the principle of all academical instruction which aims at forming great minds. Ancient literature would fill a large place in such a course of instruction; because it brings before us the thoughts and actions of many great minds."

I find the influence that the classic Greek cultural had on Mill is most illuminating. Williams found that Mill's experience with the Greeks was largely comprised of his reviews he wrote for his friend, George Grote; on his multi-volume work, Grote's History of Greece, as well as Mill's own translations of several of Plato's dialogues. To say that Mill was enamored with the classical Greeks would be a gross understatement. In a review of Grote's work Mill penned the following about the Greeks. "They were the most remarkable people ever to have existed: in historical literature, oratory, poetry, sculpture, architecture, mathematics, physics, politics, and philosophy they made the indispensable first steps, originating speculation and freedom of thought." Mill's interest in the Greeks was in primarily what they had to contribute to present society in the study of politics and philosophy. He thought the Greeks in these two areas had the most influence both on Western civilization as a whole, and was very useful in character formation in educating both the masses and the intelligentsia. In his review of Grote's works, Mill wrote that, in essence, the Athenian democratic model "afforded the mental tranquility which is also one of the conditions of high intellectual or imaginative achievement." Thus, the Athenian society based on liberty would become the historical foundation that Mill would use to defend his own political as well as philosophical views for the improvement of society.

Some 31 years after writing his essay Civilization, Mill's theories for properly educating citizens and the proper makeup of a university curriculum were brilliantly articulated in his Inaugural Address Delivered to the University of St. Andrews in 1867. In this speech, he decried the idea of what universities had become. "Universities are not intended to teach the knowledge required to fit men for some special mode of gaining their livelihood. Their object is not to make skilful lawyers, or physicians, or engineers, but capable and cultivated human beings." He understood that only people with a well grounded education in liberal arts could become the intellectual nucleus that was ultimately necessary to lead and improve society.

Francis Garforth writes that, based on the totality of Mill's writings about his love of the Greek and Roman classics, one could easily interpret from them that he was an elitist. However, Garforth finds, and I agree, that Mill's elitism is more nuanced then that of the "run of the mill" elitist. Today elitism has become a politically charged word, and it would be disingenuous in my opinion to paint Mill as an elitist in the present day context that it is so often used in. Mill throughout his life judged peoples ability to learn and become part of an intellectual class based on their mental capacities and not on any biological or religious characteristics. He passionately wrote against and in many instances actively acted against various forms of discrimination, particularly against women, people of color, and Jews. In addition, Mill wrote an essay in 1869 for the Fortnightly Review entitled Endowments, wherein he proposed that members of the lower class or laboring class as he would put it who showed a capacity to develop their intellect be given the financial assistance necessary to do so through endowments. "But the superior education which it" the government "does not owe to the whole of the poorer population, it owes to the élite of them. I believe there is no single thing which would go so far to heal class differences." Thus, Garforth astutely deduced from Mill's writings that his elitism was intellectually based. "Sometimes he means by it a source of authority, whether intellectual, moral, or cultural, which is vested in the few whose education and experience...have given them a knowledge and wisdom superior to those of the majority." One can defend Mill's elitism as his search to educate and nurture a cadre of intellectuals, regardless of their creed, color, sex, or class, who would provide the leadership necessary to improve society for all of its citizens.

I read this book for a graduate Mill seminar in Philosophy. Recommended reading for anyone interested in education, philosophy, political science, and history.

John Stuart Mill, 1806-73, worked for the East India Co. helped run Colonial India from England. Minister of Parliament 1865-68 he served one term.

In John Stuart Mill's autobiography, he tells readers how he benefited and suffered from having one of the most unique educational experiences known to humankind. His father, James Mill, was personally involved in the education of John and his other siblings John was a brilliant student who read Greek by the age of three and Latin at eight years old. By the time he matured to adulthood, he was extremely well read. Thus, John received an academically rigorous education at home; however, it was devoid of any interaction and social contact with other children his own age. In adulthood, he developed very strong views about the advantages that universal education would have on improving people's characters, which would lead to fostering social change for the better. In addition, he held very strong beliefs on reforming university curriculum to improve Britain's intellectual class. Mill summarized many of his ideas on education in 1867 after accepting the position as Rector of the University of St. Andrews. In his Inaugural Address Delivered to the University of St. Andrews, one of the points that he made in his speech was the responsibility that universities had in building their student's characters. In large measure, the type of curriculum the university taught to its students would in part shape one's character. More importantly, the proper university curriculum would ultimately provide student's with the tools necessary to continue to learn throughout their lives, critically analyze, and if necessary become agents for change in society. He thought that this goal was best served in two ways. First, he believed immersing students in Western civilization's classical works especially the great works of the Greeks and Romans was an important foundation of knowledge. Secondly, he also believed that reading contemporary works of literature was of paramount importance to develop the human character.

As an intellectual himself, Mill was especially interested in the development of the character of gifted people who had the ability to develop a higher intellect than most of their peers. Mill's writings are replete with advice as to what knowledge he thought was most worth attaining to develop one's character and intellect. Looking at what Mill wrote regarding the proper kind of education the intellectually gifted should receive in a university, is where one can then start to ascertain what side he would support in the canon vs. multicultural debate. Although I will use key passages from his writings to illuminate why Mill would ultimately champion the supporters of an increased multicultural curriculum for universities, I also find there is evidence in his writings that he would insist that student's posses a knowledge base in the canon. As an example, in his essay titled Civilization in 1836, which was written when he was 30 years old, one finds Mill's early and life long penchant for studying the classics of ancient Greece and Rome. "Such is the principle of all academical instruction which aims at forming great minds. Ancient literature would fill a large place in such a course of instruction; because it brings before us the thoughts and actions of many great minds."

I find the influence that the classic Greek cultural had on Mill is most illuminating. Williams found that Mill's experience with the Greeks was largely comprised of his reviews he wrote for his friend, George Grote; on his multi-volume work, Grote's History of Greece, as well as Mill's own translations of several of Plato's dialogues. To say that Mill was enamored with the classical Greeks would be a gross understatement. In a review of Grote's work Mill penned the following about the Greeks. "They were the most remarkable people ever to have existed: in historical literature, oratory, poetry, sculpture, architecture, mathematics, physics, politics, and philosophy they made the indispensable first steps, originating speculation and freedom of thought." Mill's interest in the Greeks was in primarily what they had to contribute to present society in the study of politics and philosophy. He thought the Greeks in these two areas had the most influence both on Western civilization as a whole, and was very useful in character formation in educating both the masses and the intelligentsia. In his review of Grote's works, Mill wrote that, in essence, the Athenian democratic model "afforded the mental tranquility which is also one of the conditions of high intellectual or imaginative achievement." Thus, the Athenian society based on liberty would become the historical foundation that Mill would use to defend his own political as well as philosophical views for the improvement of society.

Some 31 years after writing his essay Civilization, Mill's theories for properly educating citizens and the proper makeup of a university curriculum were brilliantly articulated in his Inaugural Address Delivered to the University of St. Andrews in 1867. In this speech, he decried the idea of what universities had become. "Universities are not intended to teach the knowledge required to fit men for some special mode of gaining their livelihood. Their object is not to make skilful lawyers, or physicians, or engineers, but capable and cultivated human beings." He understood that only people with a well grounded education in liberal arts could become the intellectual nucleus that was ultimately necessary to lead and improve society.

Francis Garforth writes that, based on the totality of Mill's writings about his love of the Greek and Roman classics, one could easily interpret from them that he was an elitist. However, Garforth finds, and I agree, that Mill's elitism is more nuanced then that of the "run of the mill" elitist. Today elitism has become a politically charged word, and it would be disingenuous in my opinion to paint Mill as an elitist in the present day context that it is so often used in. Mill throughout his life judged peoples ability to learn and become part of an intellectual class based on their mental capacities and not on any biological or religious characteristics. He passionately wrote against and in many instances actively acted against various forms of discrimination, particularly against women, people of color, and Jews. In addition, Mill wrote an essay in 1869 for the Fortnightly Review entitled Endowments, wherein he proposed that members of the lower class or laboring class as he would put it who showed a capacity to develop their intellect be given the financial assistance necessary to do so through endowments. "But the superior education which it" the government "does not owe to the whole of the poorer population, it owes to the élite of them. I believe there is no single thing which would go so far to heal class differences." Thus, Garforth astutely deduced from Mill's writings that his elitism was intellectually based. "Sometimes he means by it a source of authority, whether intellectual, moral, or cultural, which is vested in the few whose education and experience...have given them a knowledge and wisdom superior to those of the majority." One can defend Mill's elitism as his search to educate and nurture a cadre of intellectuals, regardless of their creed, color, sex, or class, who would provide the leadership necessary to improve society for all of its citizens.

I have read this book at graduate level as a class material in Human Resource Management. The most obvious priority of Schulers book is its case studies which are developed elaborately and absolutely topic-related. It was my assignment to translate case studies included in this book into Turkish and while I was reading cases, I realized that as I read, I better understood topics. Although cases are impressive in this book, the chapter titled as "The Role of HRM Department in Total Quality Management Process" is not rich in terms of content.

I reccommend this book especially to international students whose English proficiency level is not very high because the language and structure of Schulers book is very simple, accordingly understandable. A good source in the field of HRM. Highly reccommended.

This book contains an authentic transmission of seated '8 pieces of brocade' qigong with complete instructions for opening the microcosmic orbit.
It contains a very good translation of Chinese texts and useful commentary by the author.
Please note that no book can replace a teacher, but it can serve as a good supplementary material.

Very recommended!!!