The Art of War is a Chinese military treatise that was written during the 6th century BC by Sun Tzu. Composed of 13 chapters, each of which is devoted to one aspect of warfare, it has long been praised as the definitive work on military strategies and tactics of its time. The Art of War is one of the oldest books on military strategy in the world. It is the first and one of the most successful works on strategy and has had a huge influence on Eastern and Western military thinking, business tactics, and beyond. Sun Tzu was the first to recognize the importance of positioning in strategy and that position is affected both by objective conditions in the physical environment and the subjective opinions of competitive actors in that environment. He taught that strategy was not planning in the sense of working through a to-do list, but rather that it requires quick and appropriate responses to changing conditions.

O carte spectaculoas?, care ??i asum? nu pu?ine riscuri, intr?nd pe terenurile pu?in explorate ale romanului. Cercetarea ?n care ne-am angajat este analitic? ?i speculativ?, o ipotez? pe care ne-o ?nchipuim ?n anticamera adev?rurilor simple ?i general-consim?ite despre romanul secolului XX, fiindc? aceste adev?ruri sunt a?teptate ?nc? spre a fi spuse. Istoriile sistematice, studiile exhaustive despre romanul secolului abia ?ncheiat lipsesc deocamdat?. Este ?i prima dificultate majora pe care a trebuit s? o ignoram pur ?i simplu. Risc?m propria noastr? ipoteza ?ntr-un spa?iu ?nc? insuficient ordonat ?i tocmai de aceea ispititor pentru orice c?l?torie critic?.

It is believed that the scene of this tale, and most of the information necessary to understand its allusions, are rendered sufficiently obvious to the reader in the text itself, or in the accompanying notes. Still there is so much obscurity in the Indian traditions, and so much confusion in the Indian names, as to render some explanation useful. Few men exhibit greater diversity, or, if we may so express it, greater antithesis of character, than the native warrior of North America. In war, he is daring, boastful, cunning, ruthless, self-denying, and self-devoted; in peace, just, generous, hospitable, revengeful, superstitious, modest, and commonly chaste. These are qualities, it is true, which do not distinguish all alike; but they are so far the predominating traits of these remarkable people as to be characteristic. It is generally believed that the Aborigines of the American continent have an Asiatic origin. There are many physical as well as moral facts which corroborate this opinion, and some few that would seem to weigh against it. The color of the Indian, the writer believes, is peculiar to himself, and while his cheek-bones have a very striking indication of a Tartar origin, his eyes have not. Climate may have had great influence on the former, but it is difficult to see how it can have produced the substantial difference which exists in the latter. The imagery of the Indian, both in his poetry and in his oratory, is oriental; chastened, and perhaps improved, by the limited range of his practical knowledge. He draws his metaphors from the clouds, the seasons, the birds, the beasts, and the vegetable world. In this, perhaps, he does no more than any other energetic and imaginative race would do, being compelled to set bounds to fancy by experience; but the North American Indian clothes his ideas in a dress which is different from that of the African, and is oriental in itself. His language has the richness and sententious fullness of the Chinese. Philologists have said that there are but two or three languages, among all the numerous tribes which formerly occupied the country that now composes the United States. They ascribe the known difficulty one people have to understand another to corruptions and dialects. The writer remembers to have been present at an interview between two chiefs of the Great Prairies west of the Mississippi, and when an interpreter was in attendance who spoke both their languages. The warriors appeared to be on the most friendly terms, and seemingly conversed much together; yet, according to the account of the interpreter, each was absolutely ignorant of what the other said. They were of hostile tribes, brought together by the influence of the American government; and it is worthy of remark, that a common policy led them both to adopt the same subject. They mutually exhorted each other to be of use in the event of the chances of war throwing either of the parties into the hands of his enemies. Whatever may be the truth, as respects the root and the genius of the Indian tongues, it is quite certain they are now so distinct in their words as to possess most of the disadvantages of strange languages; hence much of the embarrassment that has arisen in learning their histories, and most of the uncertainty which exists in their traditions. Like nations of higher pretensions, the American Indian gives a very different account of his own tribe or race from that which is given by other people. He is much addicted to overestimating his own perfections, and to undervaluing those of his rival or his enemy; a trait which may possibly be thought corroborative of the Mosaic account of the creation. The whites have assisted greatly in rendering the traditions of the Aborigines more obscure by their own manner of corrupting names. Thus, the term used in the title of this book has undergone the changes of Mahicanni, Mohicans, and Mohegans; the latter being the word commonly used by the whites.

IT is much easier to understand and remember a thing when a reason is given for it, than when we are merely shown how to do it without being told why it is so done; for in the latter case, instead of being assisted by reason, our real help in all study, we have to rely upon memory or our power of imitation, and to do simply as we are told without thinking about it. The consequence is that at the very first difficulty we are left to flounder about in the dark, or to remain inactive till the master comes to our assistance.? Now in this book it is proposed to enlist the reasoning faculty from the very first: to let one problem grow out of another and to be dependent on the foregoing, as in geometry, and so to explain each thing we do that there shall be no doubt in the mind as to the correctness of the proceeding. The student will thus gain the power of finding out any new problem for himself, and will therefore acquire a true knowledge of perspective.?? George Adolphus Storey??Book First?The Necessity of the Study of Perspective to Painters, Sculptors, and Architects?LEONARDO DA VINCI tells us in his celebrated Treatise on Painting that the young artist should first of all learn perspective, that is to say, he should first of all learn that he has to depict on a flat surface objects which are in relief or distant one from the other; for this is the simple art of painting. Objects appear smaller at a distance than near to us, so by drawing them thus we give depth to our canvas. The outline of a ball is a mere flat circle, but with proper shading we make it appear round, and this is the perspective of light and shade.? ‘The next thing to be considered is the effect of the atmosphere and light. If two figures are in the same coloured dress, and are standing one behind the other, then they should be of slightly different tone, so as to separate them. And in like manner, according to the distance of the mountains in a landscape and the greater or less density of the air, so do we depict space between them, not only making them smaller in outline, but less distinct.’?Sir Edwin Landseer used to say that in looking at a figure in a picture he liked to feel that he could walk round it, and this exactly expresses the impression that the true art of painting should make upon the spectator.??There is another observation of Leonardo’s that it is well I should here transcribe; he says: ‘Many are desirous of learning to draw, and are very fond of it, who are notwithstanding void of a proper disposition for it. This may be known by their want of perseverance; like boys who draw everything in a hurry, never finishing or shadowing.’ This shows they do not care for their work, and all instruction is thrown away upon them. At the present time there is too much of this ‘everything in a hurry’, and beginning in this way leads only to failure and disappointment. These observations apply equally to perspective as to drawing and painting.? Unfortunately, this study is too often neglected by our painters, some of them even complacently confessing their ignorance of it; while the ordinary student either turns from it with distaste, or only endures going through it with a view to passing an examination, little thinking of what value it will be to him in working out his pictures. Whether the manner of teaching perspective is the cause of this dislike for it, I cannot say; but certainly most of our English books on the subject are anything but attractive.??All the great masters of painting have also been masters of perspective, for they knew that without it, it would be impossible to carry out their grand compositions. In many cases they were even inspired by it in choosing their subjects. When one looks at those sunny interiors, those corridors and courtyards by De Hooghe, with their figures far off and near, one feels that their charm consists greatly in their perspective, as well as in their light and tone and colour... ?

Antológiánk magyar zsidó t?rténelemr?l szóló tanulmányok gy?jteménye. ?sszeállításunk azonban mind témájában, mind módszertanában kül?nb?zik az eddig megszokott ábrázolástól. A magyar (azaz a t?rténelmi Magyar Királyság területén él?) zsidóságot a t?rténetírók leginkább a modern eszmékhez lelkesen csatlakozó és asszimilációra t?rekv? k?z?sségként ábrázolták, amelyet csupán az antiszemitizmus id?szakos fellángolásai akadályoztak meg végs? céljuk elérésében. Sokszor még az is el?fordult, hogy a magyar zsidókat a legsikeresebben asszimilálódott európai zsidóságként jellemezték, ami már nyilvánvaló túlzás. Valójában a magyar zsidóság sajátos jellege sokkal inkább a jelent?s létszámú ortodox réteg határozott asszimiláció-ellenességéb?l fakadt. Az itt k?tetbe gy?jt?tt ?t tanulmány a magyar ortodoxia t?rténetével, ezzel a mostanáig igen kevés figyelemre méltatott területtel foglalkozik.

Rejtély, amelyet másfél száz éve próbálnak írók, irodalomt?rténészek, színházi szakemberek, esztéták, filozófusok megfejteni. Mese? ?rgirus királyfi és Tündér Ilona csodásan valószer?tlen t?rténete számtalan változatban létezik a magyar népmesekincsben, s olasz k?zvetít? forrásokon át g?r?g, s?t egyiptomi gy?kerekig nyúlik vissza az aranyalmát term? fa s a két szerelmes t?rténete. Szerelmi románc? Nem fontos a kor, a táj, a t?rténelmi háttér, csak az érzelmeiben egymásba gabalyodott két ember – itt és most: Csongor és Tünde – lángolása, viharzása, minden eléjük tornyosuló akadályt leromboló akarása, szerelmi szárnyalása. Színdarab? Karakteres, jó szerepek – ?rd?g?k, boszorkányok, b?lcsek, ledérek – forgataga zegzugos cselekmény, váratlan fordulatok, lehet?ség mindenféle színpadi csoda semmi nem korlátozva megvalósítására: sok alakra bomló, egy személybe olvadó boszorkány, leveg?ben r?pk?d?, láthatatlanná váló ?rd?gfiak, f?ld mélyér?l szemünk láttára kiemelked?, fényárban úszó tündérpalota. Minden pillanatban tátva maradhat a szánk. Filozófiai traktátus? ?letutak: Kalmáré a kincs, Fejedelemé a hatalom, Tudósé a b?lcsesség; Csongoré a szerelem. A kincs elpereg, a hatalom elkopik, a tudás semmivé porlad. A szerelem ?r?k. Drámai k?ltemény? ?jfélt?l éjfélig élünk: hajnalodik, felragyog az ég, dél van, alkonyodik, beesteledik, már f?lénk borul az éjszaka. Reményekkel telten, harcra készen kezdjük hajnalban, küszk?dünk reggel, boldogok vagyunk délben, szorongunk alkonyatkor, s?tétedéskor belenyugszunk az elmúlásba. De másnap újra f?lkel a nap. V?r?smarty Mihály 1830-ban fejezte be m?vét, a cím alá azt írta: színjáték ?t felvonásban. Már csak boldogan sajgó, rejtve rejtett szomorú emlék szívében reménytelen szerelme, Perczel Etelka. Mindennapi életében legf?képpen arra büszke, hogy sok kínnal keletkezett nagy m?vét, a Zalán futását a várva várt nemzeti eposzként ünneplik. Tagja az éppen szület? Magyar Tudományos Akadémiának, a legismertebb, legfontosabb szépirodalmi és m?vészeti lapok ?dolgozótársa”, szívét melenget? jóérzés: Széchenyi István a barátja. Igaz, a pénztárcája t?bbnyire lapos, gyakran kínosan lapos, de ismert és népszer? ember. Harminc éves. Férfi. Kincse nincs, hatalomra nem vágyik, a tudásról azt gondolja: valójában senki nem tudja, mennyit ér s mire jó. De Csongor boldog, amikor megpillantja Tündét, boldog, amikor át?leli, boldog, amikor elveszíti, mert hiszi, tudja: nem ?r?kre veszítette el. Küzd, harcol, verekszik: keresi a boldogságot. S boldog, amikor embert próbáló kalandok után végre megtalálja Tündét, s f?ldi létükben ?r?kre ?sszeforrnak. Csongor és Tünde számára a szerelem a kincs, a hatalom, a tudás. El nem veszíthet? kincs, ?r?kre er?t adó hatalom, b?lcsességgé párlódott tudás. ?gy lesznek halandók halhatatlanok. ?s másnap újra f?lkel a nap.

sszevissza csereberéldik egy ikerpár, lóvátesznek egy felfuvalkodott trtett, tmérdek móka, dal, vidámság szvi át két, nagy nehezen egymásra találó szerelmespár trténetét. Oly' darab ez, amint a kznség szeret, kíván, óhajt – ami nektek kell”, mondta Szász Károly errl a vígjátékról, amelynek már a címe is jókedvre derít.

A Hamlet (1601), talán legismertebb, legt?bbet játszott m?ve Shakespeare-nek. K?zéppontjában az élet kínálta, s mindenkiben f?lmerül? kérdés áll: "Lenni vagy - nem lenni?", és ha lenni - hogyan? Mi az emberi cselekvés végs? határa a vélt vagy valós hiba, netán b?n helyrehozatalához? Egyáltalán van-e igazi létezés, s ha van, az mennyire lehet veszélyes a létez?re? Vívódó, t?preng? alkotás a dráma, miként a f?szerepl? maga. Hamlet késleltetett bosszúját hosszas ?nmarcangoló kérdéselvetések, bizonyságkéresésék el?zik meg. Végül igazságot szolgáltat, de ? is belepusztul. T?rni vagy ellenszegülni? A reneszánsz ember dilemmája ?r?kérvény?! Mert a cselekvés erk?lcsileg legvitathatóbb pontja az emberi élet kioltása. Van-e joga valakinek - ha oka van is - ?lni? K?vetkezmények nélkül semmi sem vállalható, kül?n?sen nem a pusztítás. De van-e joga az embernek vélt vagy valós igaza tudatában nem cselekedni, nem vállalni a tett kockázatát? Mennyire tartozunk felel?sséggel a külvilág és saját lelkiismeretünk el?tt? Hamlet tettével válaszol a kérdésekre, ám az egész dráma nem ad egyértelm? feleletet. Nem is adhat. Remekm?vek; géniuszok és a természet sajátossága a talányosság... Nem beszélve arról, hogy a mindennapok kisebb-nagyobb d?ntéseit mindenkinek magának kell meghoznia.

Demagóg, ?rült, gazember? Népvezér, próféta, mártír? E két véglet k?z?tt ingadozott Szálasi Ferenc megítélése kortársai szemében. Az utókor azonban k?zel sem ilyen megosztott személyét illet?en, Szálasi a 20. századi magyar t?rténelem talán legelutasítottabb alakja. K?tetünkben arra keressük a választ, miként vált azzá. Miért lépett egyáltalán a politika színpadára otthagyva ezzel a biztos karriert kínáló katonaságot? Milyen célok vezették? Mit gondolt és mit tett politikusként? Szálasi életútjának állomásairól számos egykori dokumentum vall, ami lehet?séget ad, hogy t?bb, olykor lényegesen eltér? néz?pontokból vizsgálhassuk ugyanazt az eseményt. K?nyvünkben megkíséreljük a sok esetben részrehajló – vagy éppen elfogult – kortársak írásai alapján áttekinteni Szálasi életútját: a katonáét, az ideológusét, a politikusét – gyermekkorától egészen haláláig. Végül pedig azt is bemutatjuk, miként viszonyul hozzá az utókor. A k?tetet életrajzi kronológia, válogatott bibliográfia, valamint térképek teszik teljessé. PAKSA RUDOLF 1981-ben született Ajkán, az ELTE-n doktorált t?rténelemb?l és 2009 októberét?l az MTA BTK T?rténettudományi Intézetének a munkatársa. ?rdekl?dési területe a modern kori magyar t?rténelem; kutatásai súlypontja a 19–20. századi historiográfia, a régi E?tv?s Collegium, valamint a Horthy-kori széls?jobboldali irányzatok.

Eseurile cuprinse ?n aceast? carte au ?n comun c?teva teme care m-au preocupat: ra?ionalitatea, valorile ?i libertatea. O parte din articole au ap?rut ?n diferite publica?ii, altele au v?zut lumina tiparului prin aceast? carte. Am ?ncercat s? aduc ?n con?tiin?a public? c??iva g?nditori rom?ni importan?i ?n spa?iul cultural rom?nesc ?i l?sa?i ?n umbra uit?rii. Opera acestora e realizat? ?n bun? parte ?n perioada interbelic?, ?ntr-un climat de libertate, f?r? presiuni ideologice sau de alt? natur?, fiind rezultatul for?ei intelectuale ?i al culturii personale. Dup? 1946 regimul comunist a ?ngr?dit progresiv libert??ile politice, a ?ncercat s? distrug? tradi?iile culturale a?a-zis burgheze, exercit?nd o represiune asupra intelectualit??ii ?i a creatorilor de opere. Domeniul ?tiin?elor sociale a fost afectat de o cenzur? inchizitorial?, pun?ndu-se la index autori ?i opere considerate periculoase pentru societatea rom?neasc? ?i ideologia marxist?.

n condiiile n care cmpul teoriilor cosmopolite contemporane se afl ntr-o permanent expansiune, lucrarea urmrete maniera n care aceast paradigm a cosmopolitismului, care nu este lipsit de anumite tensiuni i controverse, poate fi aplicat i n analiza tiinelor politice, n general, i a teoriei politice, n special. Nivelurile de analiz se refer la principiile fundamentale, noile concepte i ipotezele formulate i soluiile propuse n cadrul cosmopolitismului.

„Într-o pres? care nu prea mai pune pre? pe reportaje, Liliana Nicolae persevereaz? cu inteligen?? ?i har. La radio ?i în Dilema veche, subiectele ?i cuvintele ei bine m?surate reconstituie lumea din frînturi, în toat? normalitatea ei. Ascultate sau citite, reportajele sale ne pun pe gînduri în fa?a Vie?ii pe care, gr?bi?i, uit?m uneori s-o contempl?m ori s-o în?elegem.“ – Mircea Vasilescu (Dilema veche)

A meg?zvegyült Szilvai professzornak az a terve, hogy a gyámsága alá tartozó unoka?ccséhez feleségül adja titokban nevelt gyámleányát, Mariskát. A fiú k?zben a professzor tudta nélkül Liliomfi néven vándorszínésznek áll, és meghódítja Mariska szívét. A professzor ellenzi a házasságot, éppen attól a férfit?l félti a lányt, akihez egyébként feleségül szeretné adni. Liliomfi pedig azt hiszi, hogy a nagybátyja hitvesének akarja Mariskát. A h? barát és színésztárs, Szellemfi segít Szilvai megtévesztésében, Liliomfinak adva ki magát. Egy másik - társadalmi kül?nbségek miatti - reménytelennek látszó szerelem (Gyuri, a pincér és Erzsi, a gazdag Kányai fogadós uram lánya) t?rténete ?sszefonódik Liliomfi és Mariska sorsával.

When his cartoons began to reach America toward the end of 1916 this country was neutral. It is with peculiar satisfaction, therefore, that I base this brief foreword upon press extracts published prior to America’s participation in the war. If it were possible to discover today an individual who was entirely ignorant as to the causes and conduct of the war, he would, after an inspection of a hundred or more of these cartoons, probably utter his conviction somewhat as follows: ?“I do not believe that these drawings have the slightest relation to the truth; I do not believe that it is possible for such things to happen in the twenti-eth century.” ??He would be quite justified, in his ignorance of what has happened in Europe, in expressing such an opinion, just as any of us, with the possible exception of the disciples of Bernhardi himself, would have been justified in expressing a similar view in July, 1914.??What is the view of all informed people today? “To Raemaekers the war is not a topic, or a subject for charity. It is a vivid heartrending reality,” says the New York “Evening Post,” “and you come away from the rooms where his cartoons now hang so aware of what war is that mental neutrality is for you a horror. If you have slackened in your determination to find out, these cartoons are a slap in the face. ??Raemaekers drives home a universal point that concerns not merely Germans, but every country where royal decrees have supreme power. Shall one man ever be given the power to seek his ends, using the people as his pawns? We cannot look at the cartoons and remain in ignorance of exactly what is the basis of truth on which they are built.”?The “Philadelphia American” likens Raemaekers to a sensitized plate upon which the spirit which brought on the war has imprinted itself forever, and adds: ?“What he gives out on that subject is as pitilessly true as a photograph. They look down upon us in their naked truth, those pictures which are to be, before the judgment-seat of history, the last indictment of the German nation. Of all impressions, there is one which will hold you in its inexorable grip: it is that Louis Raemaekers has told you the truth.”

** Pamella Singh – Miss India 1982… spioan? de pat la NATO ** Frumoasele Miss, prad? u?oar? pentru trafican?ii de stupefiante ** Angela Nichitin – Miss Johannesburg, victim? a traficului de carne vie ** O Miss pentru solda?ii americani din Irak ** Miss Diaspora… uneori important poten?ial pentru spionaj ?i contraspionaj? ** Momeal? pentru pedofili ** Tita Cristescu, fost? Miss Rom?nia, ucis? cu cianur? de potasiu ** Concursurile Miss ?i reginele alese, motiv de scandal ?i crim?? ** Heather Whitestone – Miss America 1994, sub teroarea unui obsedat ** Evreica Lise Goldarbeiter – Miss Univers 1929 a supravie?uit nazismului ** C?teva regine… surpriz? **** Zsa Zsa Gabor – Miss Ungaria 1936. Nou? c?s?torii ?i scandaluri cu duiumul ** Rosemarie Frankland – Miss Univers 1961, ucis? de singur?tate? ** Imelda Marcos – Miss Leyte ?i ?Muza Manilei“ al?turi de un dictator ** Bess Myerson – Miss America 1945, de la politicieni, la mafio?i ** Plou? cu Miss-uri: Nud, Fund Mare, Jumbo ?i mai tr?snite ** Miss Penitenciar sau… Miss Pu?c?rie? ** Zig-zag ?n lumea concursurilor de frumuse?e ?i a concurentelor. Pilule dulciFiecare om, evident, are destinul s?u. Reginele au avut ?i au, ?i ele, firesc, destinul lor. Cele ?ncoronate ?i declarate ca atare datorit? frumuse?ii lor fizice ?i intelectuale sunt, de multe ori, superioare celor n?scute cu s?nge albastru, dar totodat? ele sunt expuse ?i mai mult unor pericole ce le dau t?rcoale. Tenta?iile ce apar des ?i capcanele ce li se ?ntind fostelor Miss sunt de multe ori ?irezistibile“. Din nefericire, unele tinere nu le-au sesizat la timp ?i, treptat, uneori f?r? voia lor, au c?zut ?n plasa unor servicii de spionaj sau a unor re?ele mafiote interna?ionale, implicate ?n traficul cu droguri, armament ?i fiin?e umane. Altele, ?ns?, au avut un destin ?i mai tragic, ajung?nd dup? gratii sau devenind ?inta unor asasinate care au f?cut v?lv? ?n pres?.Au fost ?ns? ?i ?Regine“ fericite. Din p?cate, pu?ine ?i pentru o perioad? scurt? de timp. Nici ?n lumea Miss-urilor n-au fost ?i nu vor fi dou? destine la fel.O carte ce cuprinde un soi de miniromane poli?iste, axate pe soarta, uneori-adeseori, dramatic? a reginelor frumuse?ii.

Hard Times – For These Times (commonly known as "Hard Times") is the tenth novel by Charles Dickens, first published in 1854. The book appraises English society and highlights the social and economic pressures of the times. Hard Times is unusual in several respects. It is by far the shortest of Dickens' novels, barely a quarter of the length of those written immediately before and after it. Also, unlike all but one of his other novels, Hard Times has neither a preface nor illustrations. Moreover, it is his only novel not to have scenes set in London. Instead the story is set in the fictitious Victorian industrial Coketown, a generic Northern English mill-town, in some ways similar to Manchester, though smaller. Coketown may be partially based on 19th-century Preston. One of Dickens's reasons for writing Hard Times was that sales of his weekly periodical, Household Words, were low, and it was hoped the novel's publication in instalments would boost circulation – as indeed proved to be the case. Since publication it has received a mixed response from critics. Critics such as George Bernard Shaw and Thomas Macaulay have mainly focused on Dickens's treatment of trade unions and his post–Industrial Revolution pessimism regarding the divide between capitalist mill owners and undervalued workers during the Victorian era. F. R. Leavis, a great admirer of the book, included it—but not Dickens' work as a whole—as part of his Great Tradition of English novels. ***‘Now, what I want is, Facts. Teach these boys and girls nothing but Facts. Facts alone are wanted in life. Plant nothing else, and root out everything else. You can only form the minds of reasoning animals upon Facts: nothing else will ever be of any service to them. This is the principle on which I bring up my own children, and this is the principle on which I bring up these children. Stick to Facts, sir!’ ? ?The scene was a plain, bare, monotonous vault of a school-room, and the speaker’s square forefinger emphasized his observations by underscoring every sentence with a line on the schoolmaster’s sleeve. The emphasis was helped by the speaker’s square wall of a forehead, which had his eyebrows for its base, while his eyes found commodious cellarage in two dark caves, overshadowed by the wall. The emphasis was helped by the speaker’s mouth, which was wide, thin, and hard set. The emphasis was helped by the speaker’s voice, which was inflexible, dry, and dictatorial. The emphasis was helped by the speaker’s hair, which bristled on the skirts of his bald head, a plantation of firs to keep the wind from its shining surface, all covered with knobs, like the crust of a plum pie, as if the head had scarcely warehouse-room for the hard facts stored inside. The speaker’s obstinate carriage, square coat, square legs, square shoulders,—nay, his very neckcloth, trained to take him by the throat with an unaccommodating grasp, like a stubborn fact, as it was,—all helped the emphasis. ‘In this life, we want nothing but Facts, sir; nothing but Facts!’The speaker, and the schoolmaster, and the third grown person present, all backed a little, and swept with their eyes the inclined plane of little vessels then and there arranged in order, ready to have imperial gallons of facts poured into them until they were full to the brim.

Are you the world's biggest JCat? Or do you want to know everything there is to know about George, Josh, JJ and Jaymi? If so, then this is the book for you! Contained within are 101 amazing facts about everything, from how the boys got started in the music business to their love lives, their favourite things and much, much more. The book is easily organised into sections so you can find the information you want fast and is perfect for all ages!

Are you the world's biggest Britney Spears fan? Or do you want to know everything there is to know about the pop princess who is one of the biggest selling artists of all time?If so, then this is the book for you! Contained within are 101 amazing facts about everything, from how Britney got started in the music industry to her turbulent love life, collaborations with other artists, her public meltdown and much more. The book is easily organised into sections so you can find the information you want fast and is perfect for all ages!

Are you a fan of football legend David Beckham? Do you know everything there is to know about the world-famous free kick specialist and fashion icon? Then this is the book for you! In this easy-to-digest eBook are 101 facts about your favourite sports star - do you know all of them?Test yourself and your friends with these handily-packaged facts easily organised into categories for maximum enjoyment. Sections include his upbringing, his football career and his wife, former Spice Girl Victoria.

Daniel Radcliffe rose to fame in the lead role of the Harry Potter films, and quickly became a firm favourite of fans across the world. From the saviour of the wizarding world to his horror debut in The Woman in Black, Daniel has proved himself to be a box office draw time and time again.This interesting book contains 101 amazing facts, separated into categories for your enjoyment. It covers all subjects from his acting, his personal life, his upbringing, and his friends and family.Find out everything there is to know about Daniel, and show everyone you are the master of Radcliffe knowledge!

A choice selection of one-act plays from the Nobel Prize for Literature and Academy Award winning playwright George Bernard Shaw.Includes: Augustus Does His Bit: A True-to-Life Farce The Dark Lady of the Sonnets How He Lied to Her Husband The Inca of Perusalem: An Almost Historical Comedietta Overruled Press Cuttings