View Full Version : Kingfisher History Encyclopedia

07-03-2004, 08:38 PM
I asked on abcteach for some "insider" information about the Usborne World History book because I had heard it was something that more conservative people would want to censor (first nude Olympians, etc. :shock: ) A few of you helpful ladies confirmed the accounts I had read and I decided not to purchase something that I would prefer my ds to be able to read at will.

Well, I've been looking into the Kingfisher History Encycopedia and wanted to find out if it is somewhat the same with respect to nudity and if it harps on the evolution of man :roll: . We have spent countless hours addressing evolution in our home so we could tackle that again if necessary (unless evolution is intertwined throughout the text). The nudity would be a more severe problem.

Please don't hold back.....I am coming from a conservative Christian perspective and would appreciate nit picking of the text! :D

07-04-2004, 12:48 PM
Hi Brooke!

Well...I haven't read it cover to cover but....I did flip through it just for you. :D

I saw 2 pages that had a statue or a drawing on rock that could have been of nude people but...ya can't tell anything.

Then I found one page that some men are playing a sport and while they do have bottoms on you can see the side of their tush.

I think it' s a great book.

Hope that helps you decide.

p.s. I think this is my first post on the new location. I'm getting dizzy from moving around so much. LOL

07-04-2004, 06:33 PM
Actually, the nudity wasn't a problem with us in the Usborne book. All the pcitures were side/back views, so no fronts were showing. And it would be inacurate to have Greek men participating in Olympic games clothed. We saw the picture, read the page, and went on. If either of my girls noticed it, they didn't mention it, and neither did I. I borrowed the old Kingfisher book from the library to see if I wanted it. I looked through it, but we didn't "read" it. I didn't notice anything that I felt was inappropriate.

07-05-2004, 04:47 PM
Wow, Brooke! DH and I went through the Usbourne book last night, and found a LOT that I hadn't noticed!!! Most of it there was no reason for. For example, Pocohontas is topless when she rescues John Smith. It's a small picture and not that noticable, but it IS there. Also, there's a picture of Egyptians, and one is totally naked, again for no apparent reason. And a picture of a lady baking bread topless, hanging down over top of her kneading. The others in the picture are "properly" dressed; I've no idea why she isn't.

07-05-2004, 05:05 PM
I've seen some other Usbourne books that have been offensive to me in very similar ways, to the point where we've removed them from our home because they were next thing to R-rated!
They do have many, many good books for kids as well though. But, I guess it's smart for us to be questioning others' opinions before purchasing something that we wouldn't want to share with our kids.

07-05-2004, 05:19 PM
I remember alot of that from the Usborne discussion on abcteach. I was wanting to make sure that the Kingfisher book was not so risque.

I might be able to get the Kingfisher book on interlibrary loan at a library half and hour away. We also have a state university within an hour if all else fails. I just don't want to invest in anything and then have to get rid of it for a fraction of the cost.

07-05-2004, 10:58 PM
Hey Brooke....

I don't remember seeing that many pictures in the Kingfisher that would be considered risque. But it has been more than a year or so since Dh and I discussed this and looked it over, so I can double check. Jackie is correct about the Usborne.

I personally don't find the Usborne books offensive, in my OWN very humle opinion because of the manner they were portrayed and displayed. Not in vulgarity, or meant to be obscene or offensive, but with as much accurate description as possible. Something I highly value in reference or primary documents.

Dh and I waffled back and forth about this one. We wanted good reference books with accurate depictions and didn't know how ds would react.

Remember, my background is different. My mother was a midwife for several, several years. I grew up watching, in my early pre teen years, labor/delivery births of women's bottoms and nursing. My parents taught us at a very early age a healthy, christian view bearing in mind our own sensitivies and age appropriatedness.Of course, I would not expect such depictions in this type of book, nor do they have them :wink:

So I completely understand if you feel that this is not appropriate for your son. :) at this time. My 9yo and 7yo don't spend anymore or less time *doting* on those pictures. It is presented as *history and customs back then* and on we go. I don't treat them as such.

Matter of fact it was very interesting the connection they made! They both were kind of thinking out loud and connected the fact that Adam and Eve were naked first, then clad sparsly thereafter because of the climate perhaps.....could it be that these people too dressed or lack thereof the same way because of their close proximity to the Garden of Eden and/or its climate...WOWEE.....as Momma teacher I was THRILLED about that one!!! LOL LOL That was IT for history for us on that day!!!!!!

I can double check the Kingfisher for you and give you an EXACT *report* LOL on that one. I don't mind at all :D


07-06-2004, 03:50 PM
Tina, I would appreciate it, but you are soooooo busy right now that I wouldn't want to burden you with "one more thing". :roll: If you get a chance, great. But if not, don't worry about it.

We have addressed those cultural differences in light of the scriptures about keeping ourselves covered. My ds covers his eyes if he thinks that something shouldn't been seen (i.e. scantily clad Britney Spears full-size poster at the local convenience store). God bless him! I've even seen him walk backwards when his sissy is not thinking and getting changed in her room with the door cracked open. What a precious boy!

Anyway, because of his sensitivity to the issue of being covered, I believe we will need to be careful about our selection of material. Thanks for everyone's input.

07-06-2004, 07:04 PM
Hey Brooke.....

No problem. Really, I don't mind! I completely understand. :D

I guess I didn't want you thinking that partial nudity was just placed haphazardly in a child's reference book without regard to purpose, or with the purpose of vulgarity, obscenity and well just general provactiveness.

We all know as christians that the way any sensitive subject is presented is the key to a respectful, healthy and the christian view of it.

A little more on our group. I have 5 christian families that I probably to do things with more than others. 3 of us use that book for history, 2 don't. One family that uses it, she is a EMT and he his a firemen. I thought I was approaching this in a conservative,christian view, GEEZE....she has life size posters of nudes (both sexes) with all the body parts labled for her 7 yo and 10 yo. I was shocked! :shock: LOL LOL She is going to be sure they know their MEDICAL terms!! and body parts!!! LOL.. As for me I'm content with labeling muscles and bones on our body :D

An-o-hoo, I will look over the Kingfisher book and give you EXACT details in a day or two!


07-07-2004, 10:36 AM
Thanks, Tina! Will you be posting the full-length version of your findings or the abridged? :lol:

07-07-2004, 03:24 PM

WATCH OUT!!!!! I might go into all the pages that have pagan idols on them too!!! :lol: :lol:

Ok.....your not going to believe this, but I already had the page numbers marked when I looked into this last year, (it must have been year before because we did ancients last year) OH WEll, any-o-hoo......here is my UNABRIDGED edition!!!! :P

p. 16 snakegod of the Minoans topless.Believe or not she has on a beautiful full skirt with handcrafted jewelry, which they were famous but no top in keeping in custom with their dress,is the quote from the book.
p.36 another god ,Ishtar, chief god of Babylonians, topless
p75. Hercules, get a glimpse here, somewhat obscure, but can make out a little
p93 Maya man, just showing their *cheek side* but nevertheless wanted you know.
p184 Sandstone topless figure
p245 Sumo wrestlers, here again, not complete nudity, as in all the pictures of Kingfisher and usborne, just partial...They have loin cloth, but still show part of *cheeks*
P.426 Modern history, showing the change in the roaring 20's. shows a chorus line of girls in black/white picture. They are dressed in like a bikini top and miniskirt to show the revolt and change of morals,etc.,blah...

OK.......thats its!!!!

I wanted to be sure you knew everything. I know I would not like it if my son's sensitive, spiritual conscious pricked them! :x and they got upset :( So now you have everything!

I tell you what Brooke, we have crossed some other paths that kind of *sneaked up* on me. That is ALL the tons of myths and legends that surround the ancients.

I tried to strike a balance between having the boys understand what the patriarchial fathers had to go through like Abraham, but I didn't want to spend a lot of time teaching about paganism either. However, I wanted them to understand the depth of his faith for truth no matter what it seemed like the whole pagan world around him believed. KWIM? This is one we in our group go round/round on.

Also, some of the pictures we just skipped over that seemed, in my own very humble opinion vulgar. Like Romulus and Remus nursing from a momma wolf. Every reference book I saw had that such picture because obviously that is the tale or legend, maybe even parts of it being true of how Rome was started.

I know some others in our group used he Dempsey Parr world books. They are printed by parragon and supposedly put out by ToysRUS and/or Sams...Some chose that as an alternative to Usborne.I personally did not have the time hunt for it or peruse them and well ds liked Kingfisher because of the reading level. Usborne for next younger one....From I what I understood from the other girls, Dempsey Parr was between Usborne and KF in reading level. So it wouldn't have worked for us anyway! :wink:

OK....hopes that helps! :D


07-07-2004, 09:29 PM
Girl, you are too good to me! :oops: :D

Thanks so much for the rundown! Overall, it seems to have less of the gratuitous nudity than the Usborne book based on the reviews I have read (not here).