First edition, first impression. Inscribed by the photographer, To Angus McBean – thanks for your help! Andreas Feininger. McBean contributes images to pages 144 and 200. From the library of Angus McBean.2qw
Search Results for "advanced"
Second, expanded edition, first published in 1948, of this indictment of the Nuremberg trials. Presentation copy from the author, inscribed on the half-title: “To R. T. Paget, Q.C., with the acknowledgements of the author for inspiration and encouragement. F. J. P. Veale. Nov. 4. 1953”. Together with a typed letter signed from Veale to Paget discussing the case of Dr Josef Kreuzer (an SS-Standartenführer who commanded Einsatzgruppe G in Romania, Hungary, and Ukraine), and referring to his war crime case as “the most fantastic” [i.e. far-fetched], (dated Brighton, November 4th 1953). An interesting association copy as Paget was defence counsel for Field Marshal Manstein at Nuremberg. There are letters in the National Archives at Kew relating to Paget and the case of Kreuzer. Veale had been a well-known member of the British Union of Fascists before the war.
First edition, first impression. A Dalziel and Pascoe mystery set on a campus.
First edition.”In 1897 Lockhart was placed in command of the 40,000 strong Tirah expeditionary force, after Afridis attacked British outposts along the north-west frontier during the most serious outbreak of resistance to British rule in India since the mutiny. During the difficult extended fighting in the inaccessible mountains of Tirah, he skilfully conducted punitive operations against elusive Afridi and Orakzai fighters, armed with modern rifles. Though for the most part consisting of guerrilla warfare, the campaign also included such bitterly contested engagements as the attack at Dargai and the withdrawal of the 2nd division down the Bara valley. For his services he received the thanks of the government of India, was made a GCB, and succeeded Sir George White as commander-in-chief in India in 1898″ (ODNB).
First edition, first printing.
A handsomely bound copy of Gell’s Pompeina, very attractively illustrated, with beautiful mythological studies and “views” of imaginatively reconstructed (and often rather romantically repopulated) Pompeii, the whole giving an enthusiastic impression of a beautiful, advanced, and rather sensual, civilisation. Gell originally worked, as architectural draughtsman, with architect John Peter Gandy on an archaeological survey of the classical Mediterranean, and their joint production, Pompeiana, originally published 1817-9, is (apart from William Hamilton’s notes) the first study in English of the excavation of Pompeii. The 1832 (of which this is the first Lewis 1837 reissue) edition was rewritten by Gell alone, and the focus of this production are the marvellous images, accompanied by Gell’s descriptive text. Though Pompeiana is Gell’s best known work , he also published the Topography of Troy and its Vicinity (1804), Geography and Antiquities of Ithaca (1807), Itinerary of Greece, with a Comentary on Pausanias and Strabo (1810); and Itinerary of the Morea (1816) and the Topography of Rome and its Vicinity (1834); and in these works contributed to the English reading public’s conception of the classical past during the Romantic period.
First French edition, one year after the first London. An extremely interesting account of India in the mid-eighteenth century; “a compendium of observations on both English and Indian cultures … the declining power of the Mughal government, and its replacement with English measures. A plethora of observations on subjects such as trade, fortifications, public buildings, and relations with the French” (Riddick) these last probably accounting for its rapid translation. Born in 1732, the son of an immigrant Swiss jeweller; “After taking a course in writing and merchants’ accounts at J. Bland’s academy in Bishopsgate, Grose was elected a writer in the East India Company in November 1749 and arrived to serve in the Bombay presidency in August 1750. He was advanced to deputy secretary early in 1753, but his career ended soon after, when he was dismissed the service and sent home, ‘having been deprived of his senses for some months past, and there being no hope of his recovery'” (ODNB). His life thereafter was somewhat rackety, running through his inheritance in his father’s lifetime and being forced by debt to flee to France where he lived for four years. “His mother’s death brought another inheritance (though vested in two of his brothers), [when] he returned to England in 1774, but only after being imprisoned for attempting to travel without a passport and badly injuring one of those arresting him. No later reference to him has been found.” The editing, and augmentation, of this work for publication has recently been shown to be the work of John Cleland. In his “avertissement” the translator, Philippe Hernandez, remarks that Grose had been “plus … aidé” [greatly assisted] by “M. Cl.”, “homme célébre en Angleterre par ses productions, son style & son gout” [famous in England his works, style and taste]. Circumstantially this identification of Cleland as “a key collaborator or perhaps the text’s ghostwriter”could be seen as being confirmed by the fact that Hernandez was one of the editors of the Journal Étranger in which excerpts of Fanny Hill had been published in 1755. Further hard evidence has been traced by Hal Gladfelder, who publishes a letter sent by Cleland to his lawyer in 1757 asking him to obtain “some papers relating to” the East Indies, as a “Mr. Grose of Richmond” has “appl[ied] to me for some materials towards a treatise” on the subject (Fanny Hill in Bombay: The Making and Unmaking of John Cleland, pp34-5). He also identifies a great deal of “material that echoes his preoccupations and experience”: his etymological researches; his interest in the political effects of trade; “the extended accounts of Mogul seraglios and the dancing girls of Surat [which] are akin to passages in the Coxcomb and the Dictionary of Love” (p35); together with a somewhat malicious story relating to a sea captain, William Boag, with whom Cleland had tangled previously, which could have no other source. Represents Cleland’s only writing on his time in India.An interesting edition of an important text with typically tangled eighteenth-century origins.
First edition. Outram was the resident at Lucknow from 1854 to 1856 when he became commissioner at Oudh, and from 1858 to 1860 he served on the governor general’s council. “His military experience included the Command of the Persian Expedition shortly before the Mutiny. In the campaign Havelock was his subordinate. At the conclusion of the Persian Campaign Outram returned to Calcutta and was given command of the Dinapur and Cawnpore Divisions.” He advanced with Havelock to Lucknow, graciously subordinating himself and “accompanying him only in his civil capacity as commissioner, and placing his military services at Havelock’s disposal as a volunteer.” Havelock died at Lucknow, Outram remaining to hold the Allumbagh position until reinforced by Colin Campbell to reclaim the city. “Outram was a good soldier and a skilful diplomatist. Filled with ambition, he was nevertheless most unselfish. Possessed of great courage, a strong individuality, a warm temper, untiring energy, and good physique, he was kind-hearted, modest, and chivalrous. There used to be a Bombay service saying, ‘A fox is a fool and a lion a coward compared with James Outram'” (DNB).
First edition, home issue, only printing, first state, of Churchill’s first book, this copy without the errata slip at p. 1, catalogue dated 12/97. Relates his exploits with the Malakand Field Force, led by Sir Bindon Blood, on the Northwest Frontier of India in 1897. Based on Churchill’s despatches to the Daily Telegraph and the Pioneer Mail, and, as Churchill was still in India, the final editing was undertaken by Moreton Frewen, Churchill’s uncle, husband of Clara Jerome, Jennie’s elder sister, resulting in numerous small errors which were corrected the following year in the Silver Library edition. Churchill had a clear purpose in writing these pieces, as he wrote to his mother, “I had written them with a design, a design which took form as the correspondence advanced, of bringing my personality before the electorate. I had hoped that some political advantage might have accrued … I do not think that I have ever written anything better”.
True first editions, published by the British Forces in Germany at the end of the war, both volumes inscribed “To: Alan Cunningham with my best wishes Montgomery of Alamein Field-Marshal, June 1946.” An extremely interesting association. Cunningham had served with distinction in the First World War, MC, DSO, and five times Mentioned in Dispatches, and as General Officer Commanding East Africa during the campaign to reconquer Abyssinia he “showed himself a brilliant, daring leader, moving with astonishing speed and achieving startling results …Thrusting into Somaliland, Cunningham captured Mogadishu on 25 February, and by using seaports as supply bases, reached Harar a month later, having advanced 1000 miles. He then turned on Addis Ababa, which fell on 5 April. In two months he and his men had covered 1700 miles, liberated nearly 400,000 square miles of country, and taken 50,000 prisoners, all at the cost of 500 casualties …Italian East Africa had been conquered in four months. Cunningham was appointed both CB and KCB in the same year” (ODNB). Later in 1941 he was chosen by Sir Claude Auchinleck to command the Eighth Army in the Western Desert, where his lack of “experience of the pell-mell style of desert fighting practised by Rommel, [meant that he]was unable to control such fast-moving operations”, leading to the failure of Operation Crusader. He was dismissed, and returned to England. Following the war Cunningham was appointed High Commissioner and Commander-in-Chief Palestine and High Commissioner Transjordan, positions that he held until the British hand-over in 1948, filling them with considerable dignity, being described by the distinguished Middle Eastern scholar Wm. Roger Louis as ‘a remarkable proconsul’. His tenure was however greatly complicated by his late successor i/c Eighth Army; “From June 1946 through the end of the Mandate the position of Chief of Imperial General Staff was held by … Montgomery, who had a difficult relationship with Cunningham. The discord between [them] stemmed from two factors. The first was the dissonance between a civilian outlook and a military outlook. Cunningham understood his role first and foremost as the head of civilian government in the country, the success of which could be judged by the welfare of its citizens … In contrast, Montgomery believed that the proper response to force was even greater force” (Miller, Britain, Palestine and Empire: The Mandate Years, p183) The other factor was perhaps the more powerful, and that was Montgomery’s judgement of Cunningham’s ability as a soldier; “Even before the Second World War had come to an end, Montgomery … had already written the history of the 8th Army … In this story there was no room for the founder of the 8th Army or for others … for that matter. The most coverage that such figures received was a description of their mistakes and their weaknesses. During the period … 1946-1948, Montgomery did not hesitate to tell anyone who would listen who he was, and, most importantly, who Sir Alan Cunningham was: a loser unable to move from defence to offence, who was removed from duty in the midst of battle.” So here we have Monty’s own account of his commands during the Second World War, presented rather cooly to a skilled soldier, one of his predecessors with the 8th Army, and a man whose reputation he was doing all he could to undermine.