Congressional committees has been carefully digested and summarized in a few pages, and the author has taken the pains to look up the history of each of the witnesses summoned before the subcommittee for Alabama, discovering that only four of these were citizens of the state. Professor Fleming has not approached his task with a merely local or antiquarian point of view, but aims to give each local event its true setting in the history of the whole period. Reconstruction is treated as something more than a political manœuvre, as a process affecting churches, schools, trades, and professions as well as politics and civil administration. The author's sympathies are decidedly with the South, but the work is free from bitterness or prejudice, and is on the whole as impartial an account as one can expect from any writer on this subject.

WILLIAM O. Scroggs.

The Early Period of Reconstruction in South Carolina. By John Porter Hollis, Ph.D., Acting Professor of History and Economics in Southwestern University, Texas. (Baltimore, The Johns Hopkins Press, 1905, pp. 129.) The introductory chapter analyzes with some detail the situation in the state in the spring of 1865. The people of South Carolina, having resisted desperately to the last extremity, having seen their property destroyed by a vindictive enemy, having disdained to ask for peace, subdued but unconquered, submitted to the inevitable. After Governor Magrath was arrested forthwith "resolutions were adopted at various public meetings in the State, to the effect that it was the duty of all citizens to refrain from every act of hostility and to promote the return of friendly feeling toward the United States "; and President Johnson was memorialized "to appoint at once a representative citizen [to be] provisional governor" (p. 29). There should be other chapters like this. The next three chapters touch only the high places down to July, 1868, when the state was restored to full federal relations with a voting population of 133,000, sixty-three per cent. colored. Against this the Democrats remonstrated, saying: "We do not mean to threaten resistance by arms, but the white people of our State will never quietly submit to negro rule. By every peaceful means left us, we will keep up this contest until we have regained the heritage of political control handed down to us by an honored ancestry” (p. 105).

Most historians now make a virtue of showing that the Reconstruction policy of the Republicans was conceived in radicalism and born in vindictiveness. Some see clearly that it would have required great confidence in the people of the South and remarkable patience to have turned over to them the rehabilitation of their state governments before the "results of the war" had been permanently secured. But there is still another point of view from which it is the function of Garner and Fleming and Hollis and others to help us see the situation. While ""Tis true 'tis pity; pity 'tis 'tis true ", that such human nature as most people are born with could not help doing just about what the Southern

people did do to adjust themselves to the conditions produced by the war and Reconstruction.

FREDERICK W. MOORE.

TEXT-BOOKS

A Text-Book in the History of Education. By PAUL MONROE, Ph.D., Professor in the History of Education, Teachers College, Columbia University. (New York: The Macmillan Company; London: Macmillan and Company. 1905. Pp. xxiii, 772.)

THE most helpful, most interesting, and withal most suggestive division of the study of education for him who proposes to be a teacher is the history of the evolution of educational ideals and practices. It is a perspective, not a mere atmosphere, that the teacher needs, and this he never will get by mere experience (which teaches few persons anything), or by mere psychology, or indeed by any mere methodology that narrows his vision and tends to make him dependent, local, and provincial. One reason that the history of education has not been more popular as a subject for study is that too many who are going into the work of teaching want something which they can immediately apply or something which is difficult to understand. That which they can immediately apply is "methods"; that which is difficult to understand but which impresses them as necessary is psychology, or rather, the language of psychology. Another reason is the meagre provision of suitable text-books on the subject. The quality is by no means equal to the number.

When Professor Laurie's Historical Survey of Pre-Christian Education appeared, it was hailed with delight, and rightly. Mr. Monroe did us great service when he prepared his Source Book (1901), covering the same period as Laurie, and now in this book he has put us still more in his debt, because this is really his opus majus, of which his other books published or to be published are illustrations and explanations.

In the scope of the work it is worthy of remark that there is no mention of the Hebrews or the Egyptians. The Chinese certainly furnish an excellent opportunity to point a moral, but to give this nation a whole chapter and to ignore entirely the consideration of a nation that has influenced our lives as much as has the Hebrew nation deserves explanation. The general method of presentation seems to be to find out first upon what philosophic basis the system of education was formed and then to discuss the particular men and their contributions to social, political, and educational progress. This is a reaction against the extreme biographical style of some of the earlier books on this subject, but in many instances I think the author presupposes too much knowledge on the part of his readers, who may have to re-read the first portion of a chapter in the light of the second. In other words, the reader is told what general conclusions the author has arrived at, and reads the rest of the chapter to verify these from evidence submitted. The historical is too often sacrificed to the philosophical.

The treatment of Greek education is on the whole satisfactory, but as in most histories the real significance of Spartan education in its relation to the life of the people, its magnificent opportunities, and its equally magnificent failure might have been made more telling. Müller's Dorians ought to find a place on the reference list, and certainly the absence of Jowett's Plato and Newman's Aristotle is very conspicuous. In his treatment of rhetorical schools at Rome Mr. Monroe merely hints at what is really a very interesting and important fact that has a special lesson for us, namely, that while the education of these schools under the Republic was a definitely practical one, it had only a disciplinary value under the Empire; for social life and political opportunity had entirely changed, but the curriculum had remained fixed. The rise and influence of universities is traced in a very interesting manner, but one looks in vain for any account of Oxford and Cambridge. Similarly it seems that Roger Bacon might deserve more than mere mention. Among selected references for the chapter on the Reformation Arthur F. Leach's English Schools at the Reformation, 1546–1548 (Westminster, 1896), should have a place, as clearly many of the facts in the chapter are taken from it and it is referred to in "Topics for Further Investigation" (p. 441). This is an exceptionally good book and ought to be in the library of every department of education.

The treatment of modern education is well done, although one misses certain phases of the movement that no doubt the author would have treated had space allowed. A book to have definite value must be after all a revelation of one's attitude, and one's friends in literature and history must be chosen just as in one's daily life. Mr. Monroe can certainly justify his selections and, take it all in all, has given us a book that is the most useful text-book on the subject that has yet appeared.

It is to be hoped that when the book goes into a second edition there will be some corrections made, for the work gives evidence of hurried preparation (in certain infelicities of style) and of lack of careful proofreading; for instance, the sentence (p. 194) "Suetonius mentions Crates of Mallos, a Greek ambassador to Rome, who met with an accident through falling into an open sewer and was thus detained at Rome (157 B. C.) as the first Greek teacher there." "Erigina" (p. 278) is usually known as Erigena, and he was invited by Charles the Bald, not the Bold. Mahaffy's book is The Greek World under Roman Sway-not "Survey" (p. 218). The reference on page 503 to Munroe's The Educational School is probably meant for James Phinney Munroe's The Educational Ideal. Owen's Skeptics of the French Renaissance appears twice on page 502 in the list of references on Montaigne. The first Humanist schoolmaster appears as "Vittorino" on page 376 and "Vitterino" on pages 398 and 399 and in the index. As in many another case, the majority is not right. The school over which Mulcaster presided is known as Merchant Taylor's rather than as "the Merchant Tailors' School".

These, with some lapses in the index, are some of the mere surface defects which mar but which are as easy of correction as of discernment. GEORGE H. LOCKE.

Political History of Europe from 1815 to 1848. Based on Continental authorities. By B. H. CARROLL, Jr., Ph.D. (Waco, Texas: Baylor University Press. [1906.] Pp. 221.)

THIS Volume "is intended to give American Students an accurate if somewhat succinct account of the course of Post-Napoleonic European Political History", and "does not pretend to be more than a compilation from the best and most accessible and usually untranslated continental authorities". The views expressed, however, it is declared, "sometimes differ so materially" from those of the authorities consulted "that the author begs leave . . . to assume responsibility for them". No further indication is given in the narrative proper of these portentous differences, but probably the "authorities" would regard this. introductory chapter as sufficiently representative of them. Our author goes on to remark (p. 13) that “The period from the Fall of Napoleon I. to the Fall of Napoleon III. is an era almost unknown to American students", though "it is an era vastly important, for modern history; that is to say political history, in the true sense of the term, begins after the fall of that genius of war and politics". Having thus airily dismissed the preceding ages, Mr. Carroll suddenly but perhaps logically branches off "to note some things that History is not". History is declared not to be sociology and not to be political economy (for “Whatever they may do in the future, Labor and Capital, Progress and Poverty, Dives and Lazarus have not yet made History "); "It is not the mere record of wars and battles", but "Concretely History is the record of the struggle of the great powers of the world against other", and "Internally the history is the record of the attempt to lay hand on the wires of diplomacy and the hilt of the sword" (pp. 14-15). The development of states is mathematically presented as a simple equation of contest (thus "France against England equals the rise of the United States", p. 17); somewhat unexpectedly, however, this lucid statement ends with the tame conclusion (p. 18) that “Our task is none other than to show how the countries of the Continent provided themselves with constitutions."

The Baylor University Press has treated Mr. Carroll's book villainously, and some parts are almost unintelligible. The author was apparently in too great haste to attend much to the medium of his thoughts. Present and past tenses and conditions are mixed up indiscriminately, and extraordinary language is indulged in.

It is difficult to deal with entire fairness with a book of this character, and the reviewer confesses that he approached the narrative with some preconceptions. As a matter of fact, most of it is fairly good, and the characterizations of public men are at times excellent (the sketch of Metternich is stated (p. 42) to be based largely on Lord's

Beacon Lights of History). But the arrangement is poor and detail is usually put in where it is uncalled for; the disjointed sections give little impression of continuity and do not make clear the general development; nothing stands out in bold relief. The volume was issued for the use of the students of Baylor University, and it may be useful there; the author was, however, ill-advised in bringing it in its present form before the general public.

VICTOR COFFIN.

The Industrial History of the United States for High Schools and Colleges. By KATHARINE COMAN, Ph.B., Professor of Economics and Sociology in Wellesley College. (New York: The Macmillan Company; London: Macmillan and Company. 1905. Pp. xviii, 343, xxiv.)

THERE are many features of this book, judged as a text-book, which are excellent. The distribution of space is good, about the same number of pages being devoted to the colonial period, the period of the Revolution and national beginnings, the period from the War of 1812 to the Civil War, and the period of the Civil War and subsequent years. There is a good working bibliography, marginal references to which are made in connection with every paragraph. There are many useful maps and diagrams and an abundance of well-selected illustrations.

If, notwithstanding these good points, the book cannot be said to be a wholly satisfactory text-book, the explanation is doubtless to be found, in part at least, in the fact that the writer of a text-book of the economic history of the United States labors under the difficulty of the lack, not only of any comprehensive treatment of the subject, but also of any satisfactory treatment of more than a very few of its most important aspects. In view of the scattered and partial character of the material available, it is not perhaps surprising that Miss Coman's book gives the impression of a collection of facts having to do with the economic history of the United States, rather than of a clear presentation of the main features of that history and the influences by which they have been determined.

It must be said, moreover, that even in her statements of facts the author has not exercised as much care as might fairly be expected. Some of the inaccuracies, such as placing the founding of Georgia in 1753 (p. 15), and naming the thirty-fourth and thirty-fifth parallels as the limits of the grant to the London Company (p. 24), are evidently due to oversight in proof-reading, but all cannot be explained in this way. Glacial drift does not constitute an element of the soil of the Piedmont plateau from Maine to Georgia (p. 16). In describing the Navigation Act of 1660 (p. 79), no mention is made of the provision most important from the colonial standpoint, namely, that no goods could be imported into or exported from the colonies except in English ships. New Hampshire and Rhode Island first resorted to paper money in 1709 and 1710, respectively, not, as implied by the statement on p. 84, in 1733. The permission to export rice direct to countries south