I believe that this was a great opportunity missed. That there was no trained historian in charge was clear from the start. Let me examine just the first episode. NYC was all about money. Well, what about all the church in NYC? Pat Bonomi's "Under the Cope of Heaven" begins with a description of NYC from the famed Burgis panorama, describing churches first and foremost as NYC's most prominent architecture and also at the heart of its society. Religion was central to colonial NYC. So where is it? Artisans were the main population core of colonial and early national NYC. Where are they? What about neighborhoods and street patterns? Lots of great images exist. Hamilton as a representative of early national NYC? He was explicitly repudiated in politics in election after election. What about the idea of republican NYC and the importance of the Jeffersonian movement and the firece partisan politics of the era. There are splendid political cartoons and broadsides to display. If one were to view the segment on colonial and early national NYC as their only source, what a warped view he or she would have. And with all the resources, what a missed opportunity. With regard to the draft riots, very exciting narration. But what about the sophisticated interpretation of Iver Bernstein. Why isn't he, now the foremost expert, ever interviewed? Whay don't they at least try to capture some of the complexity of this event, the different stages. Only a few gestures. Can television never become the least bit sophisticated? What about all the great engraved imagery from Harper's and Leslie's Illustrated? These were the core illustrations for the mid-century. Where are they? There are so many wonderful images not used that could easily have been incorporated. The Stokes Collection alone would, if they had used more of it, greatly expanded the horizons. And never are these early images or the artists indentified or explained. You can't just show an image and totally ingnore its context. Some images were out of date for the period. The lesson of this series is that although professional historians may have difficulty today reaching a wide public, they remain vital. One ignores them only at great peril. Howard B. Rock Florida International University