The Southwestern Historical Quarterly, Volume 70, July 1966 - April, 1967 Page: 517

Book Reviews

While Jacobs, Caughey and Frantz, because of space limita-
tions, provide only the hors d'oeuvre, the cheese dip which is
a prelude to a more complete and satisfying meal, their vignettes
afford knowledge of men who have meant much to the study
of history, and leave the apprentice, journeyman, or master
interested in that study, with a desire to know more.
While Webb, Bolton and Turner came from different back-
grounds, walked different academic groves, and employed indi-
vidualistic methods, styles, and approaches, patterns of similarity
run through the three essays and through the lives of their
subjects, patterns of profit to every graduate student. A tremen-
dous self-discipline and devotion to work: others of equal or
perhaps greater facility and talent have failed to be of service
because unlike Webb, Bolton and Turner, they have not been
ready to shine the seats of their trousers on the hot, hard chair
of production. Pride in their profession: each liked to be thought
of as, an Historian with a capital "H," a man who could be of
benefit to humanity through his teachings and writings. Respect
for and love for his students: there are professors whom we may
have encountered with eyes in the clouds and sock tops drag-
ging the ground who are so busy and important and great and
enthralled with their own cerebrations that they have no time
for those nuisances among the lesser mortals, the students. Not
Webb, nor Bolton, nor Turner! Always ready to lend a sympa-
thetic ear, a helpful suggestion, and often his pocketbook, each
with completely erroneous modesty attributed his success to his
students. And each, to many of his students became, to his own
embarrassment, a hero and a legend.
Jacobs, Caughey and Frantz have done a superb job. His-
torians and the lay public are indebted to them. Ritual demands,
however, that all reviews in learned journals contain carping
criticism, and here it is: (1) Jacobs repeatedly and Frantz once
apologized for their subjects' lack of quantitative productivity;
and then belie their own apologies with impressive bibliog-
raphies. Webb and Turner produced quantitatively as well as
qualitatively. But if they had not-so what! Neither had aspira-
tions of becoming a George Simenon or Edgar Wallace or Earle
Stanley Gardner. And Webb spoke truth when he once observed

517