Kamm's book is an interesting introduction to Roman history, and his topical approach to the subject allows first-time readers to separate aspects of Rome that are often confusingly twisted together.

However, that being said, Kamm still has some problems. He is short on detail, which will leave those who already have some knowledge of the subject disappointed. Plus, he regularly passes judgement on the Ancient Romans based upon modern mores. For example, and this is just one of many, on page 126 he calls the slaughter of wild beasts in the Roman arena a "sickening morning's overture to the gladitorial contests in the afternoon." Well, while it is "sickening" to modern-day sensibilities, it certainly wasn't to the Roman mob, who constantly clamored for more blood. When Kamm passes judgement on the Romans based upon his own modern sensibilities he is committing a fallacy called "presentism." It is most unprofessional and detracts from his work.

Kamm has written a compulsively readable and highly instructive volume on Ancient Rome. He is a talented writer and a great teacher.

While in St Petersburg for several months I stocked up on three guidebooks. The Rough Guide was an excellent way to get to know the city. The amount of information is so dense that it actually becomes a drawback at times. I used the Rough Guide in conjuction with the Lonely Planet guide to St Pete. Together they were a great combination.

If you want one book that will fill you in on the background of St Pete's and delves in depth into its subject matter this is the guide for you. Or, if you are going on an extended stay- as I was- I can recommend this guide.

If you're going on a shorter trip you may try the very good (and shorter) Lonely Planet guide.

This book is a must if you are traveling to St. Petersburg. It has tons of great info and is definately worth the $20 some bucks it cost.

I knew relatively little about the Chechnya conflict prior to reading this book, and I found it to be a good introduction to the background and history of the Chechens and their relationship to greater Russia. I am an absolute amateur, and I didn't find the book to be ponderous or academic; at times it was actually quite thrilling. Dunlop seems to be sympathetic to the cause of the Chechen people, yet I found him to be pretty balanced in his analysis. Only problem I had was keeping straight all of the long Russian names, especially not knowing how to pronounce them...

This book goes into details about the Chechen-Russian conflict beginning with the original Russian expansion into the region. It talks about the religious, social, and economic factors involved in the Chechen conflict, as well as details on the traumatic depopulation of Chechnya in 1944 and the appropriation of the lands for other, more "loyal" peoples. A little repetitious at times and NOT for someone doing some light reading, but definitely a good book on the subject.

This book does a good job of outlining some of the major trends within Turkish nationalism, which Poulton identifies as state-centered secularism (Kemalism), militant, racist nationalism, and Islamism. Poulton is a critical writer and he spends considerable time on the threats to the Kemalist status-quo. This has its advantages in giving the reader a sense of some of the fault-lines within Turkish society. At the same time, Poulton overstates his case and his portrayal underplays the extent to which the nationalist project in Turkey has been successful. The weakest part of his discussion is his treatment of theories of nationalism... his coverage is shallow and his (mis)use of jargon weakens an otherwise useful book.

For general readers, this book may be a bit too scholarly. A better written alternative which covers some of the same themes is Hugh and Nicole Pope's Turkey Unveiled. For those looking for a general academic history of Turkey (as opposed to an analysis of Turkish nationalism), try Zurcher's Turkey: A Modern History.

Appearence falsifies us easily. This is true for M.Kemal Ataturk and the Turkish Republic which is founded on his principles. Contrary to common beliefs, almost nothing has changed in Anatolia in the last century. This book tells all. This book is like one of the secret books of Aristoteles that had been hidden from eyes in the Medieval times to prevent the collapse of the Christendom. Similarly this book has lots of facts that are criticizing the fundamentals of the Turkish Republic. Like what? The books tells how other languages were suppressed by Ataturk in Anatolia. The book tells how Ataturk and other prominent leaders enjoyed chovenist ideas. The book tells how the leaders of the country tried to bargain with Hitler to gain territories in the East. The book tells how the minorities have been oppressed. When you read it you will realize that nothing has changed with the Turkish Republic in Anatolia. The revolutions that were brought up were superficial and some of them were oppressive tough. The book tells all with plenty of solid evidence from governmental telegrams, newspapers, the leaders' own speeches etc. This book has a potential to pull away the curtain on your eyes. All you have to do is read.

Unfortunately, he was killed in a helicopter crash in Krasnoyarsk, Russia...Spring of 2002.

Former general Lebed, despite some legitimate Western concerns about his authoritarianism and inexperience in international affairs, comes off in this Rand/USAF study as a not unreasonable alternative to the political and economic chaos of post-Soviet Russia.
His early years are sketched in a few words, leaving many unanswered questions about his character and early development, but his expressed opinions and political maneuverings are charted here in a way which provides some illumination. He seems neither the Russian Napoleon some fear nor the saintly figure seen by the simpler Russian voter, but, possibly, a man with whom the West could do business.
The book is necessarily dated, and doesn't cover Lebed's dismissal as Yeltsin's national security advisor, nor his relatively obscure more recent activities, but is of value nonetheless as scarce material on a man with whom the West may yet reckon.
(The numerical rating above is a default setting within Amazon's format. This reviewer does not employ numerical ratings.)

Very good book. Deals with photographic safaris. There is only one page on hunting. There are very good descriptions of the different parks and the native people of the region. Information on visas is out of date.

This book tells of the author's adventures looking for amber as well as facts about it.

Written at the end of the American Civil War, Brownson asks and answers some of the most basic questions about America and in the process produces a classic of political philosophy. For example: What is it that makes any nation sovereign? In America, which came first, the states or the union? (Brownson's answer: they were created at the same moment) What is the precise relationship between the states and the federal government? How important is our written constitution as opposed to the unwritten one that constitutes us as a people? As the make-up of the American people changes, should our constitution change as well? Brownson's answers are often unexpected but his arguments reveal such a profound insight into our country that they emerge as almost obvious and one wonders why we didn't see them ourselves.

Georgia may be famous in the former Soviet Union as a land of wine, poets, filmmakers, and beautiful scenery. Some Georgian words seem to have circulated among all the republics of that now-vanished empire---tamada, Kinzmarauli, chacha, khachapuri, and so on, but outside that Soviet world, few people know much at all about Georgia. Certainly English-language books on the country are far and few between. In all my life, I've only ever seen one coffee table book on Georgian art and architecture. I found it in a most unlikely place---a weekly country fair on the forested outskirts of Melbourne, Australia---and I traded an original photograph for it. This is it, THE ARTS OF ANCIENT GEORGIA, published in the 1970s with a foreword by the doyen of Georgian studies in the Anglophone world, David Marshall Lang, and with a large number of most excellent photographs by Rolf Schrade. If you are interested in Georgia or its arts, I believe this book is a must. It is thorough, it is incredibly detailed, and very well-organized. It is a book for professionals, for art historians, or for those wanting an extremely painstaking description of Georgian architectural treasures.

Before you rush right out and buy it, let me add one more thing. I don't know if the original were written in Georgian or Russian, but it was translated into German, and this book is the English translation of that ! If you think that might make for a wooden style, you are right. Reading this text is like swimming with your boots on. Not only that, but the authors had to toe the line of political correctness then prevalent in the USSR. That meant looking at the world through spectacles of social Darwinism and Marxist-Leninist theory. Phrases such as "levels of development", "standards of achievement" and "progress made by the Georgian people...in the development of cultural life in their country" pepper the text---all kinds of terminology that implies a hierarchy of cultures in the world (with Europe no doubt at the top). The endpiece map has no boundaries of any kind on it to avoid stimulating the kind of ethnic nastiness that sprang up after 1991. If you want an example of both wooden language and Soviet vocabulary, here is a quote from p.47 "Certain variations emerge in the historical development of these installations [fortifications] which were determined by the particular features of individual stages in the evolution of the feudal system." If you can hack a lot more of this, you are ready to read THE ARTS OF ANCIENT GEORGIA. Otherwise, look at the pictures and use it as a reference book. You won't be sorry.

P.S. The two authors' names are mixed up on the Amazon.com page.