sense, comparative, partial, secondary, figurative. The principle is perfectly just. We cannot consistently interpret them by a different rule. When Jesus said, having little children before him, "of such is the kingdom of heaven," we understand the declaration in a comparative sense. When he said of the Son of God, "no man receiveth his testimony," we understand him to speak comparatively. And when it is said, "every imagination of man's heart was evil continually," we take the declaration in a comparative sense. David, making confession of his crimson-colored wickedness, and exclaiming, "I was shapen in iniquity, and born in sin," and Agur, the son of Jakeh, in the book of Proverbs, modestly professing his humble claims to notice in the following terms; "I am more brutish than any man, and have not the understanding of a man ;" may be classed together, and understood to speak the language of comparison and hyperbole. But when it is declared, "Adam begat a son in his own likeness," we give a purely literal interpretation. The first man's sons were just such men as he was; Adam received a constitution from God at the moment of his formation, and this is communicated to all his descendants. He was frail, peccable, mortal; and such are they. Adam's posterity are depraved in the same sense that he was; and in no other. So teaches the text last quoted, and with this sentiment harmonizes the whole experience of mankind.

Would we divest ourselves of all our prejudices, the light, both from within and from without, would be surprisingly brightened. We should grow in knowledge, escaping from a vast amount of obscurity and darkness; losing our factitious knowledge, we should gain much that is true and healthful. Our rational and moral nature would then act agreeably to the design of Him who gave it. In all very important respects, we should " even of our own selves judge what is right." Ours would be the path of the just; as the shining light of the morn, "waxing brighter and brighter unto the perfect day."

S. F.

CRITICAL NOTICES.

Lectures on Modern History, from the Irruption of the Northern Nations, to the Close of the American Revolution. By WILLIAM SMYTH, Professor of Modern History in the University of Cambridge. Cambridge: J. & J. J. Deighton. William Pickering: London. 1840. 2 vols. 8vo.

THE general ignorance of history in all classes of our community has long been a subject of regret with those, who have most assiduously watched over its intellectual discipline and culture. The calm self-possession which its lessons are adapted to teach, seems especially wanting, where political power is the birthright of every man. The call has been made upon our Colleges to do something towards removing the evil; but so far has, for the most part, been entirely unnoticed, or met with objections of a practical character. Many think it impossible to deal with a subject so extensive, in the little time that could be allotted to it in a course of college study. Others look upon history as something well worth knowing; but regard an acquaintance with it as something which must always depend on the choice and perseverance of each individual. They distrust all plans for teaching it. Give the instructor as large a proportion of time as he may desire, and they would not expect his pupils to derive any great advantage from his labors.

Without stopping to answer formally these objections, or even to show how all teaching in our Colleges is but an attempt to put the student in the way of the independent pursuit of the different branches taught, never aiming to exhaust any, we beg leave to refer to the work named above as their practical refutation. Not that such, for the first time, now makes its appearance. Other nations are wiser than we in this respect. In Germany, especially, an acquaintance with historical and with classical literature, are much more nearly on a level, than here. The lectures of many continental professors have been published; and almost all of these works have given proof of great talents and persevering industry, sometimes even of creative genius. And not only so, but have further shown, that the highest problems which the historian has to solve may be interesting to the general reader; and that direct instruction can accomplish as much in this department of study as in any other.

We doubt not, indeed, that many of these works display far greater talent than the less pretending volumes of Professor Smyth. But none, with which we are acquainted, have so com

pletely met the objections alluded to above, as these. Thirty-six hours suffice the lecturer to discuss the most important problems, and characterize the most eminent writers, in historical literature, from the irruption of the Northern barbarians into the Roman empire, to the close of the American Revolution. Twice that number of hours in each college term, might be given to such pursuits, without encroaching upon other departments of study, or imposing an ungrateful task upon the students. Of the Professor's method of teaching his boundless subject, which is a fair answer to our second class of objectors, we propose now to speak more in detail.

One sees at once, that in so small a compass there cannot be included all which it is desirable for the general reader to know of Modern History. And should the book be taken up with that expectation, nothing but disappointment can ensue. În fact, it is not so much a history of events, as a history of histories, or a series of critical notices of those works, which best illustrate different epochs, disposed in such a manner as to give the student a fair view of what has been written upon each, together with such hints on the political or religious bias of the various authors, as ought to weigh in our estimate of the value of their statements and opinions. The lecturer supposes the general outline of the facts to be known to his hearers; and starting on that assumption, goes on to speak of the differences of opinion about the principles, from which resulted the conduct of the most remarkable men, and to enumerate the different historians, who, as being the representatives of certain parties or interests, must be consulted by one who would form an independent judgment. And such is the interest he has given to his subject, that we venture to say he was not disappointed in the hope of finding his hearers. prepared to benefit by his instructions. Indeed, we have it from the best authority, that few men have taught history to more purpose than Professor Smyth; not that he actually conveyed a greater amount of information than other teachers; but that he excited in all who heard him a desire of reading the books he mentioned, and so directed that desire as to make their studies productive of the greatest improvement. And such, we think, will be the effect of these lectures on the reader. It is, therefore, with great pleasure, that we hear of their probable republication in this country, to serve the purposes of a text-book for one of the classes in Harvard University. Other institutions, we doubt not, will follow so good an example as their elder sister is setting them in this respect; and who then shall calculate the good which these volumes will be the means of doing throughout our community? We venture to suggest, however, that in all cases,

a manual setting forth the facts of history should be studied as a preparation for reading Professor Smyth.

But to return from this digression; in one important point great judgment has been shown; and that is, in the choice of subjects for the different lectures. Instead of adhering to a close chronological arrangement, our author groups together narrations and reflections according to their most natural relations; giving to each topic introduced the place which is its due in the great order of causes and effects. Then, omitting all details, he singles out the marked features of an important period, and refers us to the historian in whose pages may be found the pith of the whole matter. If it is one about which party feelings have been called into play, he not only refers us to the authorities on both sides, but frequently shows how far the statements of each are to be qualified or set aside. But while doing this, he is careful not to obtrude upon our notice a mass of books, for the perusal of which a life would hardly suffice. A passage from his introductory lecture will show how idle he considers such a course. "It is in vain to recommend to the generality of readers books, which it might be the labor of years to peruse; they will certainly not be perused, and the lecturer, while he conceives that he has discharged his office, has only made the mistake so natural to his situation, that of supposing that there is no art or science, or species of knowledge in existence, but the one he professes, and that his audience are, like himself, to be almost exclusively occupied in its consideration." Nor is the allusion to Dufresnoy less to the point; "After laying down a course of historical reading, such as he conceives indispensably necessary and quite practicable, he calmly observes, that the time which it is to take up is ten years; and this too upon a supposition, that much more of every day is to be occupied with study than can possibly be expected, and that many more pages shall be read in the twenty-four hours than can possibly be reflected upon." Professor Smyth is seldom found asking us to read a book through. He tells us, for instance, that this chapter of Gibbon, or that essay of Hume, contains just what is wanted for the elucidation of the subject in hand; and in respect to many books, either tacitly or expressly advises to omit all but the few pages which have called forth his remarks. But no arrogance accompanies his notices of those historians, whom he condemns to partial or total neglect. One sees that if art were shorter and time longer, no one of them would be treated with even apparent unkindness. Nor could its necessity be better illustrated, than in the anecdote which follows.

"I remember to have heard, that a man of literature and great historical reading had once been speaking of the great French historian,

Thuanus, in those terms of commendation which it was natural for him to employ, when alluding to a work of such extraordinary merit. A youth, who had listened to him with all the laudable ardor of his particular time of life, had no sooner retired from his company, than he instantly sent for Thuanus, resolving to begin immediately the perusal of a performance so celebrated, and from that moment to become a reader of history. Thuanus was brought to him, seven folio volumes. Ardent as was the student, surprise was soon succeeded by total and irremediable despair." - p. 7.

Indeed, we cannot sufficiently commend the spirit in which these lectures are written. There is, perhaps, no situation in the world, in which one is more tempted to run into paradox and startling doctrines, than the professor's chair. This, to be sure, is not so much the case in England as in France and Germany; but what is true in a great degree of Paris and Heidelberg, cannot, we think, be entirely false of Cambridge. For, though Universities have often been called, and frequently are, the headquarters of conservatism, yet is there even here ever a temptation to awake attention, by advancing new theories, and to strive for the fame of having developed new ideas, or discovered new facts. We are glad to see that Professor Smyth is above all artifices of this sort. He never makes us feel that in his own opinion he alone could fill his place with credit; and this is no slight relief to one who has been reading the lectures of some of the continental professors.

Neither does our author bend the facts of history to suit his purposes as a politician. We do not say that it would be impossible to guess at his political sentiments from the pages before us; we should be sorry if it were so; but we do say that no fair-minded man of any party has a right to complain of the treatment received at his hands. We are told that the Professor was, in his younger days, a Whig of the old school; but that his later talk is of the" Whigs having lost their wits, and of the Tories beginning to come to their senses." It is not from such a man that misstatements growing out of party feeling are to be apprehended. In his views of the Reformation, many, both Catholics and Protestants, may be disposed to reject his guidance. Yet here, there is nothing said unbecoming an honest sincere believer in the right of private judgment.

The passage, in which Gibbon is characterized, will convey a favorable idea of our author's method of criticism, and we accordingly extract it entire.

"It cannot have escaped your observation, how often I have mentioned the historian Gibbon; how much I leave entirely to depend on him; the manner in which I refer to him, as the fittest writer to supply VOL. XXIX. 3D S. VOL. XI. NO. III.

47