effect in giving the candidates high or low places, in comparison with language-skill.

325 If what has thus been done for Ancient History should be extended to such other subjects as we have mentioned, as philosophy, and the like, I should look with great interest and hope upon the experiment. But if a plan of this kind were spoken of as something which had already a definite form in the minds of its proposers and in the general understanding of the University, and which might therefore be offered as an equivalent for any existing condition imposed upon Classical students, I should be obliged to say that the nature of this new element is not yet definite enough for us to consider it as the equivalent of anything already known to us and existing in our system. If we are told that our eminent classical scholars wish to institute an Examination, not in the language of Plato and Aristotle merely, but in the moral and political and intellectual philosophy which is to be found in their writings, I should say that I think the attempt a laudable one, and will gladly do what depends upon me to favour it. But till it has been in operation for several years; till I have seen several papers of questions proposed in such subjects, and know what kind of answers the Examiners expect and approve; till I know what books are read in order to prepare for this new examination, and what books and lectures are recommended by those who take a leading part in it, I do not know what the examination is about: I do not know what is meant by the philosophy of Plato and Aristotle. And this is so, not because I do not find vast stores of valuable philosophy, of various kinds, in those great authors, but because I do not yet know how far that which I find there is what the Examiners want and will take as satisfactory. Different ages, countries, sects, philosophers, have found very different philosophies in Plato, very different philoso

phies in Aristotle. I do not mean that we have no power of judging which is the right view in those cases; but I do not know which is the kind of view which the Examiners will take, which I must know in order to estimate the effect of such an Examination as I have spoken of. The mode in which we describe the philosophy which we find in any book, depends upon the philosophy which we ourselves hold. An attempt to give such an account of any system of philosophy as shall be quite uncoloured by our own views will end only in vagueness and ambiguity. Our abstract terms involve theories. Our words include assumptions. And in this there is no harm. Whatever be the view of a modern scholar who expounds an ancient writer, his exposition may be good, and instructive, and a valuable element of education, if it be consistent. I do not want the Examiners in Classical philosophy to be of no sect; but I want them to have some tinge of philosophy. And so they no doubt would, when they had carried on their Examinations for some time: but till then, they might deal with the ancient philosophy so as to make it suggest and encourage no coherent thought in the minds of the Examinees or at least, (for that is all that I need to say for the purpose of my argument) I do not see any clear certainty that they would make it a discipline of thought and reason.

326 This difficulty would be much lightened or altogether removed if our Classical scholars had recently been in the habit of publishing works upon the philosophy, history, antiquities and philology of Greece and Rome. This has been the case in other countries. In Germany, France, Holland, many dissertations have appeared respecting the works and doctrines of Plato and Aristotle, for instance. I do not know that anything of this kind has appeared among ourselves; at least anything considerable enough to be taken as an [PT. II.]

D

indication of what would be the result if a substantial examination in Plato and in Aristotle were established among us. One mode in which scholars have commonly made known their views with regard to the philosophical import and connection of ancient authors has been by translating them, and adding notes or comments; as Schleiermacher and M. Victor Cousin have done with regard to Plato. But I do not know that our English Scholars have recently produced any such work. Mr Sewell's exposition of Plato's philosophy, however interesting, would probably not be cor sidered by us as an adequate guide for our purpo Aristotle's Ethics, indeed, has long been, at Oxfor the subject of examinations which are intended to relate to the substance, as well as the matter of the work and this state of things has produced precisely that indication of prevailing interest in the subject which I miss at Cambridge, so far as ancient philosophy is concerned. Various editions and translations and commentaries, and dissertations on special views of the subject, have been published by Oxford scholars. I think it is natural to expect that when our Cam bridge scholars have begun to give much thought t the moral, political or intellectual philosophy of th ancients, they will produce similar works. If such works were published, we should know what it is that they offer to us when they propose a substantial examination (as for the sake of brevity I may perhaps call an examination in the matter of a book) in Plato, Aristotle, or any other author.

327 That such indications of a prevalent direction of thought in the University should precede any innovation in the Examinations which proceeds on the supposition of the Examiners at least being able to deal with the new subjects, would manifestly be very convenient; and such an order of events would agree with what has already happened on former occasions when

new subjects have been introduced into the University Examinations. Those who, thirty years ago, introduced among us the more analytical modes of treating mathematical subjects, did themselves publish about that time, various books in which they remodelled the usual subjects of study according to what appeared to them the improved views of the best modern writers. On this point I may quote the First Report of the Board of Mathematical Studies, lately published. After reviewing the changes which have taken place in the Mathematical subjects of University Examination they dd: "In taking this retrospect it is satisfactory to emark that the more important innovations in the subjects of examination, and in the modes of treating them, receive a kind of sanction by having originated in works written by members of our body whose names are closely connected with the scientific reputation of the country. The responsibility of introducing the alterations rested with the Moderators and Examiners, no regulations having being provided by the University to which they could refer for authority and guidance: - and there is reason to say that the uncertainty as to cthe subjects the examination would embrace, and the want of any due notice of any extension being given to them, have been felt as serious inconveniences by the higher class of students. Generally, however, the introduction of each subject was preceded by the publication on that subject by a Cambridge mathematician, in which the Propositions were enunciated and proved in a manner suitable to the established system of examination." It would be convenient, as I have said, that the introduction of such subjects as the Platonic or Aristotelian philosophy into our Examinations should be preceded by one or more publications on the subject by Cambridge philosophical scholars; in which the doctrines ascribed to these authors should be presented in a manner so clear and systematic that Examiners

and Examinees might understand each other with respect to them; for that is what is meant by the latter part of the above sentence of the Report.

328 But it may be said, the institution of examinations on new subjects would soon produce publications on those subjects; as has already been seen in other cases; and as indeed has happened in the very cases just spoken of, Oxford Ethics and Cambridge Mathematics. It may be added that there are many works of eminence by foreigners, which might supply materials for such a substantial examination in philosophy as I have spoken of: for instance, the works of Schleiermacher and M. Victor Cousin already referred

to.

It may be added that there are many valuable modern works on the History, Antiquities and Philology of Greece and Rome, which have been written by English scholars, as well as many other which have been translated from the German: and out of these, it may be alleged, abundant materials for a comprehensive and substantial examination in such subjects as have been proposed.

329 I reply that I assent to this statement and wish very much to see it acted upon. I have myself proposed (94) that our Classical scholars should be impelled to read the Capital works on Greek and Roman antiquities and history: and I have there mentioned several such works. The same may be said of works on philosophy and other subjects belonging to the substance matter of classical literature. I should much wish to see the attention of our students turned to such works, by means of Examinations, since that appears to be the only effective means at present of commanding their attention. But I may still remark that we want, in dealing with this mass of literature for our purpose, some guidance and direction, which no doubt the examinations themselves would supply in