One of the persisting paradoxes confronting sociology, a discipline that seeks to explain the organization and dynamics of societal processes, is that of explaining its own development and changes as part of those societal processes. In short, we are obliged ? or as some would have it, cursed ? to see ourselves and our leading thinkers as objects for sociologi? cal study. We are obliged to feel uncomfortable and suspicious about social influences on their ideas, wary about their values and their legacy. We are obliged to continuously scrutinize and reevaluate their work, not because we are afflicted with a fetish for navel gazing, but because we feel the need, as a result of historical changes, to periodically reset our compass as we navigate new terrain. When one thinks of those persons whose writings and professional activities helped to set the compass of American sociology's early develop? ment, few ? if any ? were as enigmatic, influential or interesting as Robert Park. It is for this reason that Stanford Lyman's Militarism, Imperialism and Racial Accommodation is long overdue and welcome. Lyman presents an extensive introductory interpretation along with Park's early writings on: German militarism and imperialism, capitalist imperialism in the Belgium Congo, various aspects of black American life, and observations pertaining to teaching. In light of the enormous changes in the black American com? munity and in American society over the past half-century since Park's death, this collection of Park's pre-Chicago writings provides an opportune occasion to reassess and to enlarge our understanding of his intellectual career. As a pioneer ? if not to say, the leader ? in shaping the character and direction of American sociology between the two world wars, Park in? fused into sociology both the peculiar Puritanical qualities of his personality and the practical precepts of his non-academic experiences. To a degree perhaps unparalleled by anyone except Talcott Parsons, Park presided over the mainstream sociology of his day. In the opinion of Morris Janowitz,