Republic by Plato complete and unabridged Jowett Translation about the classic work on the ideal commonwealth which starts out as an inquiry into the meaning of justice and turns into an examination of the Just Man or Just State.

This translation is the truist translation yet... it captures Plato for Plato as he writes as Socrates who questions to get answers. I found this writing to be part of individual life as each performs his appropriate function as "the world goes around," with time being eternity.

This book and this particular translation seems to be the best as Jowett knows his Plato, very straight forward and easily understood as eternal reason.

If you'll recall, Socrates was considered wisest man in ancient Greece because he insisted he didn't know anything......
We're told this was his ploy in confronting Sophists, the TALKING-HEADS of his day. The SOCRATIC METHOD comprised incessant questioning; defining one's terms; avoiding contradiction and...until inevitable METAPHYSICAL hypothesis...circular argument that's mere opinion. Like many classical thinkers our man Plato...pupil and exponent of the Socratic modus...has fallen on tough times due to historical revisionism; DECONSTRUCTIONIST nihilism; and PC pop-thought. A person wishing to peruse, renew or review Grounding in Tradition and values of Western Thought "must" begin with Plato's adventures of Socrates related in THE DIALOGUES and most definitvely in THE REPUBLIC. British philosopher Alfred N. Whitehead asserted "all Western philosophy was a footnote to Plato"(Socrates).Nonsense!Plato is preamble to ARISTOTLE--Plato's pupil--a strategic "artillery-pounding" prelude (AFM). The point being that Socrates was often a "mystic"(gnostic is more accurate)with his FORMS and radical IDEALISM (...try figuring-out how you "learn" anything shackeled inside The famous CAVE.."anamnesis": the not/ un-forgetting...is illuminating only if it's quite literally so!..)As Aristotle also contested: men(women too)certainly can do wrong; yet know the Good, Right & True.(Plato/Socrates believed EVIL is done only out of IGNORANCE!)

Yet Platonic Thought begins and informs Western Thought-- particularly the IDEA of THE GOOD as basis of Justice: a proper ordering of one's thoughts; deeds; and relations--within (The Soul); and without(to neighbor, as Polis or community).Plato has been called fascist elitist (Philosopher Kings rarely run for President)as often as Socrates been called first martyr for Truth and secular saint. These and other sobriquets would probably wither under intense SOCRATIC inquiry. But the concept of pursuit of Knowledge-in-Virtue(ARETE)is the essence of Socrates-Plato's gift to mankind as summarized later by Aristole's assertion: ALL MEN BY NATURE DESIRE TO HAVE KNOWLEDGE.
Knowledge, of course, means TRUTH. "What is Truth?" Procurator Pontius Pilate had occasion to pose this question where respect for its value might have had an answer that radically altered history...

THE REPUBLIC is acknowledged classic of philosophy. Therefore,
try a "classic" translation that's proven itself. This Benjamin Jowett version has been ajudged "faithful". Who says so? Numerous readers since its publication in 1871. Try the Bloom interpretation later if you will. And for Heaven's sake avoid these Post-Modernist revisionaries who ground their PLATO in Martin Heidegger(infamous Nazi philosophe); or Jacques Derrida, the Nihilist Deconstructionist. Socrates and Plato above all believed in LOGOS...the subsistent FORM and validating Principle of The Good & True. Anyone asserting differently does not know his Plato. Benjamin Jowett does......

Asmov covers this time in history with humor, realism and wit. It's acurate enough to be a source and enjoyable enough to just sit and read. I found his writing to be inpartial and eloquent.

The great thing about this book is that it is written by an actual writer. Too many times i have picked up a history book by some famous historian and have found the sentances so convoluted that i could hardly find any meaning in them. Many historians have attempted to become authors and have failed. Asimov is a writer who has become a historian with sucess. This book offers a glimpse at the Roman Republic with the same depth as many well known historians, but is on a literary difficulty level equal to the cat in the hat. I have read many books that are slightly more indepth than this, but none that were written in a way so that the level of understanding of the roman republic even comes close to the level provided by asimov.

When I first started reading Livy's "The War with Hannibal", the book that cronologically precedes "Rome and the Mediterranean", I was not sure if I was going to be able to get to the end of it. I had never read Livy before and it is a long book. As it happened, immediately after I finished reading "The War with Hannibal" (hereafter referred to as WWH) I started reading "Rome and the Mediterranean", which is no less long, and no less good. I wrote a comment on WWH and everything I said of Livy there equally holds true here: he is a remarkable narrator and, though partial to the Romans, his style is measured and believable. As a historian, he is no less inventive than other fellow historians of his time. But his accounts are extremely detailed and always interesting. It could be said that WWH is more atractive than this book because it relates the Second Punic War, the story of Hannibal's invasion of Italy, one of the most interesting episodes in the entire history of the world. I would venture the following comparison: WWH resembles a novel. The whole book deals with Rome's war against Carthage, be it in Italy, Spain of Africa. Hannibal is the main character and Scipio Africanus, Fabius Maximus and Marcellus the secondary ones. On the other hand "Rome and the Mediterranean" is more like a collection of short stories. It is full of different anectodotes, stories and situations. Of course all of them revolving around the conflicts Rome had against Greece, Macedon and Asia during the years 200-167 BC, but there is no other unifying principle. Here you will find a variety of plots and characters. I know this comparison is arguable but I think it can convey an approximate idea to someone who hasn't read the book. I would also like to point out that while WWH is mainly a military history, this book is also a politcal one as well. Not only we find descriptions of battles and tactics, but a detailed account of the complex politics between the Greeks, the Macedonians, the Aetolians, the Acheans and the different kings of the multiple states of Greece and Asia, and their relationships with Rome. All this changing history of treacheries, pacts, leagues, alliances and complots is wonderfully and clearly portrayed, written with Livy's characteristic mastery of the craft. And you will also find here a sequel to the events of WWH: you will find out, for example, what happened with Scipio Africanus and Hannibal after the battle of Zama (what tragic and similar destiny!, both great men dying in exile and distanced from their own people; Plutarch should have written their biographies together in his Parallel Lives). Because of this, I would advise you to read both books, if you have the opportunity, and in cronological order: first WWH and afterwards "Rome and the Mediterranean" (don't let the length of both books combined intimidate you!). This is a very good edition (although a couple of more detailed maps would have been helpful) and so is the translation.

I have been fascinated by Roman history since I was a teenager, and over the years I have read the works of many of the classical historians. Livy has always been among my favorites. A contemporary of Augustus, Livy wrote a full history of Rome from its beginnings up to his own time. Tragically, only a portion of his work has survived. This book contains his History from Rome's legendary beginnings up through 167 B.C. except for books XXI through XXX, which deal with the war against Hannibal and are published separately.

His source material being necessarily limited, much of the early history is sketchy. However, Livy seems to draw on as much material, whether traditional or documentary, as he could muster. Further, he wrote with the desire to both inform and entertain. His work is lively and dramatic and he has a knack for vividly portraying the principal personalities. Like other ancient historians, Livy isn't bashful about inventing dialogue for his leading protagonists, but this adds an air of reality to what would otherwise become a dry narrative.

This is classical history at its best and I highly recommend it for anyone with an interest in ancient Rome.

There once lived a secret tribe of very beautiful creatures called ciguapas, underwater in "cool blue caves hung with seashells and seaweed". They were terribly afraid of humans and came out on land only at night to hunt for food. They were convinced that if humans saw them, they would be captured, put in cages, studied by doctors and made to take baths and do laundry. They had one special attribute that kept them safe from humans. Their feet were backwards and when they walked, pointed in the opposite direction. Because of this, no human had ever been able to follow their footprints and their secret existence had remained safe. That is until one young ciguapa, named Guapa, became too curious and hunted before dark, meeting a surprisingly kind human family. And this curiousity almost led to the tribe's discovery..... Julia Alvarez retells a wonderful folk tale, that will charm and delight children of all ages. Her language, so full of imagery and magic, lets you feel the cool water and hot sun and hear the palms swaying in the breeze and the birds singing their favorite songs. Fabian Negrin's captivating, vibrant artwork compliments the story perfectly and takes you away to this very lush tropical island. The Secret Footprints is an enchanting tale, told by an accomplished storyteller and will make a wonderful addition to all home libraries.

Julia Alvarez has transformed the mythic Dominican tale of the Ciguapa into a lush, dramatic story for all audiences to appreciate. I was fortunate enough to hear Alvarez read her first children's book to 80 second graders at the Carol Morgan School of Santo Domingo in the Dominican Republic. The children as was this writer literally spellbound.

The tale which is reminiscent of "The Little Mermaid," is set in the Domincan Republic where the Ciguapas live in secret caves underwater. The Ciguapas, women with long black hair, only come out at night and walk backwards on land to fool their enemies. The littlest Ciguapa who is fond of humans, gets herself into a sticky situation and her "secret" is almost discovered by a young boy. Adults will not only learn more about these Caribbean "creatures," but their children will learn more about tolerance.

A poetic journey deep into the lives of the Roma people living in the former republics of the Soviet Union. Should be on your bookshelf next to Koudelka's Gypsies.

This book is visually stunning, and should be owned by anyone who treasures real insight into the lives of the Rom. The photo quality is award-winning, and the candor in the faces of the subjects gives one a glimpse behind the usual self-protective personas is one is used to seeing. Several of the photographs of the children, in particular, stopped my heart. Friends who have picked up the book to glance through it have expressed the same feeling. There is a texture to the photographs that makes your fingers twitch to reach in and examine further. I treasure this book.

I am also amazed at how little reviewed (and read?-I hope not!) this book has been. As a Spaniard with close knowledge of the events, I can say Jackson has done the best job to date of tracing the political and social developments that led to the conflict, and of describing the uprising itself and the conduct of the military and propaganda operations. Infinitely better than Hugh Thomas' and every other account. By the way, if you'd rather read a first-hand narrative, Orwell's "Homage to Catalonia" is much better than Hemingway's.

I am astounded that no one has yet reviewed this book. Originally published in 1965, it remains the classic center-left interpretation of the Republic and Civil War. It is balanced, well researched and comprehensive. For those looking for a more conservative treatment of this period, see Stanley Payne's "Spain's First Democracy."

This is a wonderful piece of work. If you are interested in Iranian society during the Revolution and ensuing war with Iraq this is a must have. Written very well and has a sheik layout that will keep you mesmerized. Highly recommended.

The authors have created a guide that serves towards understanding the antecedents to the revolution. The photographs, content and level of clarity is remarkable. It is tour de force. If interested in Persian studies, one needs to have it.

Para mí que he seguido con pasión el desarrollo social y político de la República Dominicana durante la última década, el libro de Jonathan Hartlyn es como una especie de bálsamo dentro la abundante y desigual historiografía sobre este tema. Armado de un marco conceptual novedoso y una excelente investigación de primera mano, la obra de Hartlyn analiza las causas de la continúa crisis del sistema democrático en Santo Domingo, después de la muerte de Trujillo en 1961. El autor reta las principales interpretaciones (especialmente la escuela de la dependencia) que explican el surgimiento de caudillos, dictadores y líderes autoritarios en la historia de la Isla, motivado únicamente por la debilidad del estado y el imperialismo norteamericano.
El proceso político dominicano, propone Hartlyn, tiene que entenderse como una interracción de los diferentes sectores sociales con las fuerzas de poder interna y externa: sin que una opaque la otra. Durante los últimos 40 años, los electores han tenido, señala el autor, que debatirse entre las prácticas autoritarias (de tipo neopatrimonial), encarnadas en la figura de Joaquín Balaguer, y en los intentos (fallidos) de los dos gobiernos del Partido Revolucionario Dominicano (PRD) por alejarse de esa posición antidemocrática. Los doce años de Balaguer (1966-78), productos del golpe de Estado al gobierno de Juan Bosch en 1963 y la eventual intervención de tropas norteamericanas en 1965, son vistos por Hartlyn como parte de la transición de la dictadura trujillista (calificada de neosultánica) a un régimen de características neopatrimoniales. Definición que el autor utiliza a lo largo de su libro para describir al "gobernante que maneja al país como sí fuera una extensión de su hogar"[la traducción es mía, p.3]
No obstante, en el último período del gobierno de Balaguer (1974-78) las condiciones -tanto nacionales como internacionales- que propiciaron inicialmente el fortalecimiento del estado neopatrimonial fueron declinando. En poco tiempo, fenómenos como la movilización del campo a la ciudad, la emigración y el urbanismo permitió, explica Hardlyn, una mayor independencia de los nuevos sectores económicos con relación al estado. De esta forma, los grupos en lucha fueron canalizando sus intereses y necesidades en estructuras políticas, en este caso el PRD, más abiertas a los cambios de poder. La victoria electoral del PRD en 1978 fue, arguye el autor, la oportunidad perfecta para abandonar el neopatrimonialismo y consolidar el proceso democrático en la República Dominicana.
Durante los ocho años de administración perredeísta (1978-84), ni Antonio Guzmán ni Salvador Jorge Blanco fueron capaces de eliminar los elementos neopatrimoniales legados de los doce años de Balaguer. Según Hardlyn, estancados los proyectos sociales y las reformas institucionales, Guzmán y Jorge Blanco optaron por prácticas neopatrimoniales para lidiar con la inflación y la paralización de la economía, afectando su popularidad rápidamente; unido al crecimiento de la corrupción y la lucha intrapartido, los líderes de PRD crearon, de acuerdo con el autor, las bases para la vuelta nuevamente de Balaguer en la década de los ochenta. Dentro de un marco social y económico distinto en 1986, Balaguer modificó el carácter neopatrimonial de su régimen, ajustándolo a las nuevas realidades de la política mundial.
Ante las exigencias de Estados Unidos y los organismos internacionales financieros y diplomáticos (el Banco Mundial, el Fondo Monetario Internacional y la Organización de Estados Americanos), Balaguer orientó, afirma Hardlyn, las funciones neopatrimoniales del estado en dirección hacia las zonas francas, el turismo y la tecnología como nuevas fuerzas de producción y acumulación de capital. Además de utilizar los recursos del Estado para mantenerse en el poder a cualquier costo; afectándose, de este modo, la credibilidad y la confianza de las instituciones en el proceso democrático. La constante del proceso electoral, tanto en las elecciones del 1990 como las 1994, fue las reiteradas denuncias sobre fraude en ambos comicios para beneficiar la candidatura de Balaguer, alega el autor. Sin embargo, la crisis poseleccionaria del 1994 puso sobre el tapete la intolerancia hacia las prácticas neopatrimoniales, provocando un ajuste en el propio proceso electoral a través de enmiendas a la constitución.
Por primera vez desde 1966, ni Balaguer ni Bosch corrieron como candidatos presidenciales, siendo electo en esta ocasión el joven Leonel Fernández, aspirante por el Partido de la Liberación Dominicana, agrupación política fundada por el propio Bosch en 1973. Para Hardlyn la victoria de Fernández, aunque ensombrecida por la alianza con el Partido Reformista Social Cristiano (PRSC) de Balaguer, mantiene la esperanza de un mayor fortalecimiento de la sociedad civil, en pro de un estado constitucional permanente y democrático. Esta es la agenda que los nuevos sucesores, a juicio del autor, tienen que asegurar.
Finalmente, el libro de Hardlyn es lectura obligada para repensar el difícil y complejo proceso democrático en la República Dominicana. A tono con las nuevas discusiones teóricas en el campo de las Ciencias Sociales, la obra llena con éxito las expectativas sobre el tema, como uno de los modelos que la historiografía política dominicana debe, a mi entender, emular o superar.

This volume is by far the best English language analysis of Dominican politics to appear in the last decade. Hartlyn's extensive in-country experience and theoretical understanding of politics in developing democracies make this a premier case study. While his sophisticated analysis of neo-patrimonial vs neo-sultanistic regimes will be beyond the vocabularly of casual readers, it will delight professional political scientists. His critique of conservative as well as liberal administrations since Trujillo is even handed and insightful. What he omits in terms of comprehensive economic trends and pressures, he more than makes up for in terms of detailed interest group manuevering and inter-party fights. His analysis of the influence of US policies vis a vis the Dominican Republic during the last century is equally insightful.

How many politicians take the time to sit back and think about their career, the world around them, and the state of affairs in general? How many take the time to then write what they are thinking and share it with the world? Few; almost none. That is what makes Havel so special and this book so inspiring. By the time you read it many of the arguments he makes for and against certain laws or policies may be largely moot. But that isn't the point! The point of the book is to look at Havel's sense of morality and his philosophy of politics and government. Every politician should be required to read this book!

Havel's heart is placed on each page. His masterful ability to break down complex issues with his personal moral code inspires hope and resolve in the reader. A true world leader and example in a world of fallen leaders and stained examples. The reader leaves the book a better person. And in the final analysis, isn't this what it is all about? Havel thinks so.

Erik Hildinger ties together the rise of professional armies and the downfall of the Roman Republic in a cohesive, encompassing narrative. He does make reading more challenging to those without a working knowledge of Latin, but not particularly difficult as he defines the key terms and translates the lengthy quotes. Nevertheless, this book is well worth the time and effort.

An excellent study of an important period of Roman history.