menti di Filosofia ad uso delle Scuole Secondarie.

Turin, 1857, 8vo.

There are other works by Peyretti based on Rosmini's system.

POLONINI, Carlo. Accordo delle Dottrine dell' abate Rosmini con quelle di S. Tommaso dimostrato e difeso contro le Accuse del Sac. Antonio Valdameri, Autore dell' Odierno Conflitto. Spagliardi, Parabiago, 1879, 12mo, pp. 292.

PUECHER, Francesco. Della Conformità del Rosmini con S. Tommaso nella Dottrina Ideologica (Estratto della Cronaca, No. 19). 1857, 8vo, pp. 8.

Osservazioni sulle Lettere Critiche del Theiner.

Casuccio, Casale, 1851.

RAGGIO, Prof. Luigi. Le odierne Condizioni della Filosofia in Italia. Florence, 1867.

RAYNERI, G. A.

1854.

Primi Principii di Metodica. Turin,

ROSSI, Vincenzo. Un Articolo di Scienza (Estratto dall' Imparziale di Faenza, an. V., Nos. 47 and 50). Faenza, 1845, 16mo, pp. 14.

SCIOLLA, Prof. Giuseppe. Elementa Philosophiæ Moralis. Unione Tip.-Edit., Turin, 1838, 8vo, pp. 230. SANDONA, Sac. Giuseppe. Della Filosofia Morale, considerata in sè e ne' suoi rapporti alle Condizioni d'Italia. Florence, 1847, 2 vols. 12mo.

Trattato di Diritto Internazionale moderno. Florence, 1870. 8vo. Forms the seventh volume of the Biblioteca delle Scienze Legali.

SANI, Prof. Achille. Prolusione Philosophica.

SATURDAY REVIEW, November 19, 1881.

Rosmini.

Article on

SEYDEL, R. Review of the Rinnovamento della Filosofia in Italia, in the Zeitschrift für Philosophie und philos. Kritik, vol. xxxiii. (1858-59), pp. 263-274

TAGLIORETTI, Sac. Angelo. Il Verbo Essere. Frammenti di un Dialogo. Milan, 1878 (2nd edit.), 8vo, pp. 29. TARDITI, Prof. Lettere di un Rosminiano a Vincenzo Gioberti. Favale, Turin, 1841-42, 12mo, pp. 200.

These letters, though gathered by Tarditi, were really written by Rosmini himself.

TODESCHI, Bar. Giuglio. Dialoghi Filosofico - morali. Lugano, 1849, 16mo; Casuccio, Casale, 1849, 16mo, pp. 197.

TOMMASEO, N. Antonio Rosmini. 1855.

Esposizione del Sistema Filosofico del Nuovo Saggio sull' Origine delle Idee di A. Rosmini-Serbati. Padova, 1838, 8vo, pp. 126.

Studi Filosofici. Gondoliere, Venice, 1840, 2 vols. 8vo, pp. 282, 283.

Svo.

Studi Critici. Gondoliere, Venice, 1843, 2 parts,

Studi Morali. Sanvito, Milan, 1858, 12mo, PP. 480.

V▬▬▬▬▬, D. A. M. Lettera intorno al Saggio della Teorica sopra gli Universali secondo i Principi di S. Tommaso d'Aquino. Mareggiani, Bologna, 1863, 12mo, pp. 39.

WEISSE, Prof. Review of the Nuovo Saggio, in Zeitschrift für Philosophie und philosophische Kritik, vol. xxviii., Heft 2.

NOTE. Besides these works there are published two periodicals, whose purpose it is to uphold the philosophy of Rosmini-La Sapienza, a monthly magazine, Speirani, Turin, 1880 sqq.; and L'Ateneo, a weekly illustrated paper, also published at Turin. The former contains many valuable articles, among which those by Professor Stoppani, the eminent geologist, take a high place. The latter is one of the best of the Italian weeklies.

INTRODUCTION.

PERHAPS the strongest objection that can be urged against revolutions and the selfish conservatism that makes them necessary is that, in overthrowing vicious and burdensome systems, they likewise destroy, or cast into oblivion, much of the good which originally rendered these systems possible and, in their day, useful. This was particularly true of that revolution which took form in the philosophy of the seventeenth century, and which overthrew the Scholasticism of the Middle Ages. No doubt, the later Scholasticism, that of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, deserved most of the contempt which fell to its lot; but it was a mistake to confound in a common rejection this degraded, empty, flatulent system with the vigorous thought of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. This mistake was committed by modern thought, when it revolted entirely from Scholasticism. This result, indeed, was almost unavoidable; for a thorough-going temporary breach with Scholasticism was necessary, in order to deprive it of that tyrannical and morbid influence which, as the handmaid of theology, it had gained over human intelligence. Nevertheless, the reactionary spirit of modern thought caused it

* "Theologia non accipit sua principia . . . ab aliis scientiis tanquam a superioribus, sed utitur eis tanquam inferioribus et ancillis" (St. Thonias, Sum. Theolog., i. q. 1, art. 5, ad fin.).

to overlook much that was valuable in Scholasticism, and, from pure ignorance, to set out with principles so false and one-sided, that they developed into systems as unwholesome and undesirable as those which they supplanted. The cause of the decay and consequent rejection of Scholasticism was, at bottom, its incapacity to deal with the questions to which the subtlety of its own methods and. the revival of ancient learning, in many ways hostile to its results, had given birth. This incapacity was due to a defect, inherited by Scholasticism from the philosophers of Greece-the entire lack of a consistent theory of cognition. In spite of the deftest efforts of a Parmenides, a Plato, an Aristotle, and a Plotinus, ancient thought never succeeded in finding any but the crudest material image to express the mode of cognition, or in discovering any principle to vouch for truth. Parmenides, who first found a way out of the absolute scepticism of the system of Herakleitos, by distinguishing being from becoming, placed the former, as the sole object of knowledge, in an ideal world by itself, and accounted for its being known by the rude and childish device of calling it identical with intelligence.* At the same time he abandoned the entire real world of things to contempt, as merely the delusive object of opinion. This theory, in consequence, contained the two greatest defects which a theory of cognition can have: first, it confounded cognition with being, or assumed identity of subject and object; and, second, it utterly failed to account or vouch for our knowledge of reality.

In spite of these two cardinal defects, Parmenides' theory of cognition, by a kind of right of primogeniture, which first explanations not unfrequently enjoy, maintained itself, with little or no modification, throughout the whole

"To Yáp autò voeîv dotív te kal elvai" (Fragmenta Parm., edit. Mullach, 1. 40; cf. Buroni, Dell'Essere e del Conoscere, pp. 55 sqq.)