Today we associate the Renaissance with painting, sculpture, and architecture—the “major” arts. Yet contemporaries often held the “minor” arts—gem-studded goldwork, richly embellished armor, splendid tapestries and embroideries, music, and ephemeral multi-media spectacles—in much higher esteem. Isabella d’Este, Marchesa of Mantua, was typical of the Italian nobility: she bequeathed to her children precious stone vases mounted in gold, engraved gems, ivories, and antique bronzes and marbles; her favorite ladies-in-waiting, by contrast, received mere paintings. Renaissance patrons and observers extolled finely wrought luxury artifacts for their exquisite craftsmanship and the symbolic capital of their components; paintings and sculptures in modest materials, although discussed by some literati, were of lesser consequence. This book endeavors to return to the mainstream material long marginalized as a result of historical and ideological biases of the intervening centuries. The author analyzes how luxury arts went from being lofty markers of ascendancy and discernment in the Renaissance to being dismissed as “decorative” or “minor” arts—extravagant trinkets of the rich unworthy of the status of Art. Then, by re-examining the objects themselves and their uses in their day, she shows how sumptuous creations constructed the world and taste of Renaissance women and men.

"Portraits and sketches of state officials, senators, representatives, etc. ... List of committees. Portraits and roll of delegates to Constitutional convention of 1902." The proposed constitution and the vote

An early 20th century American journalist's articles on Mexico before the Revolution.

Comprised of 200 readable and informative historic vignettes reflecting all areas of Senate activities, from the well known and notorious to the unusual and whimsical. Prepared by Richard A. Baker, the Senates Historian, these brief sketches, each with an accompanying illustration and references for further reading, provide striking insights into the colorful and momentous history of The World's Greatest Deliberative Body. Review from Goodreads: "Jason" rated this book with 3 stars and had this to say "This coffee table book on Senate History comes from none other than the U.S. Senate Historian, Richard Baker. The House of Representatives recently acquired noted historian of the Jacksonian era, Robert Remini as the official House Historian. He recently wrote a pretty impressive tomb on the House of Representatives. The Senate already has a 4 volume history written by US Senator, Robert C. Byrd of West Virginia, so the Senate could not reply in that manner. So, I think the coffee table book was the best that we could muster. I think this is the first time I have actually read a coffee table book from cover to cover. It is a chatty little story book filled with useful cocktail-party-history of the US Senate. That's useful knowledge to me, as I never know what to say at Washington cocktail parties. Perhaps anecdotes about Thomas Hart Benton will help break the ice. The most striking thing to me about the book was the number of attacks on the Capitol. I had heard about all the incidents individually, but it is more jolting to see them sequentially. 3 bombings, 2 gun attacks and then the attempt on September 11th. In a way, its remarkable that the Capitol complex remained so open for so long. Note, I use the past tense here. As any of you who have visited the capitol recently will have noted, it is increasingly difficult to get in. And once the Capitol Visitor Center is completed, I expect it will be very much a controlled experience like the White House. In any case, Baker's prose is breezy and he is dutifully reverent to the institution without missing the absurdities of Senate life. You also get a sense of the breakdown in lawfulness that preceded the Civil War. Its not just the canning of Charles Sumner, its also the Mississippi Senator pulling a gun on Missouri Senator Thomas Hart Benton in the Senate chamber. Then there is the case of California Senator David Broderick (an anti-slavery Democrat) being killed in a duel by the pro-slavery Chief Justice of the California Supreme Court. Apparently, back in those days, California was a lot more like modern Texas. In any case, the slide toward anarchy can definitely be found long before Fort Sumter. Another interesting aside that I really never knew concerns the order of succession. All of us learn in school that it is the President, then the Vice President, then the Speaker of the House and then President Pro Tempore of the Senate. After that, you get the members of the Cabinet, and I was aware that as new departments were created, they have been shuffled up a bit. What I did not know, is that Congress was not always in the order of succession at all. For a long time, it devolved from the President to the VP and then directly to the Secretary of State. Furthermore, when they first inserted Congress, it was the President Pro Tempore of the Senate who was third in line over the Speaker of the House. The structure we all know and love was only finalized in 1947 after some hard thinking in light of FDR's demise and the Constitutional Amendments on succession that followed. Anyway, this is a book for government geeks. If you are one, its a nice read and about as pleasant a way to introduce yourself to Senate history as I have found. If not, there are prettier coffee table books to be had."

"Every serious student of woman suffrage must take account of this vital contemporary document, which tells the story of the struggle for woman suffrage in America from the first woman's rights convention in 1848 to the passage of the Nineteenth Amendment in 1920. Originally published in 1923, it gives the inside story of this remarkable movement, told by two ardent suffragists: Carrie Chapman Catt (of whom the New York Times wrote, 'More than anyone else she turned Woman Suffrage from a dream into a fact') and Nettie Rogers Shuler. Writing from vivid recollection, the authors offer some of their own ideas about what caused the United States to be the twenty-seventh country to give the vote to women when she ought 'by rights' to have been the first"--Unedited summary from book cover.