ART. X.-NOTICES AND CRITICISMS.

EDUCATION AND SCIENCE.

The True Method of Studying and Teaching History. By Amos Dean, LL. D., Chancellor and Professor of History in the State University of Iowa, and Professor of Law in the University of Albany.

A pamphlet bearing this title, which has recently fallen into our hands, has interested us so much that, although it was printed several years ago, we do not hesitate to devote to it a portion of the space which is usually occupied with reviews of new publications. We learn from the title-page that it was read in August, 1857, before the American Association for the Advancement of Education, at its annual session in the City of Albany. The whole brochure does not extend beyond thirty pages; but it contains sufficient suggestions for an octavo volume. Indeed, it is a model of condensation of thought and energy of expression. We do not agree with the author in all his views on the subject of history; but even when we disagree with him most, we are obliged to admit that his arguments are founded on the best authorities. As we cannot here discuss the subject so fully as its importance deserves, we think it best to let the author speak for himself as much as possible, and, therefore, proceed at once to give extracts. After referring to the present unsatisfactory method of studying history, he points out its faultiness as follows:

"First. Very many historical works are far from being entirely truthful in all their statements. Independent of personal and party biases and predilections, tending to pervert the truth of history, many supply by imagination what they deem wanting in fact to interest; while others gratify the love of the marvellous by relating tales and fictions which may amuse, though they fail to instruct.

"The second and greatest difficulty lies in the character of the facts themselves that are brought down to us by the ordinary course of history. What is the great burden of its story? Changes and revolutions in governments-heroic conduct of individuals plots and conspiracies-rebellions, successful and unsuccessful-wars, with their bloody accompaniments of battles and sieges-the assault and the blockade-all acts of violence, individual and national-these, and such like, are mainly the subjects that fill up its record. It rarely condescends to detail the industrial pursuits of a people; to give their religious beliefs and forms of worship; to exhibit their government and jurisprudence; or to present their manners and customs, their philosophy or their arts. All these are less striking in their character; less marked in their attributes; less palpable in their effects; and furnish less food for the marvellous in our nature.

"The great difficulty seems to be, that the out-goings of human nature, in history, are studied more in their wonder-workings than in their ordinary quiet exhibitions; more in their abnormal conditions than in their normal state. It is much the same as studying the river in its cataracts; the ocean in its storms; the wind in its tornadoes; the functions of the human organs in a raging fever; the muscles in their spasms; or geology in its rocky upheavals. The river has its quiet flow as well as its cataracts; the ocean its calm as well as its storms; the wind its soft breathings as well as its tornadoes; the human organs their harmony of function as well as febrile excitement; the muscles their natural contractions as well as spasms; and geology its slow depositions of strata as well as violent upheavals."-Pp. 5, 6, 7.

None acquainted with the subject will deny the force and truth of these remarks. In our opinion, they claim the earnest attention of

every teacher; for although the student must take history as he finds it, he should learn to separate the wheat from the chaff. He is not obliged to believe all he finds in history; it is his privilege to test, as severely as possible, whatever seems of doubtful authenticity; although it is well to remember that in history, as well as in the drama, what is true has not always the appearance of probability:

"Le vrai peut quelquefois n'être pas vraisemblable."

The sources of history are placed in bold relief, and its gradation is graphically, though briefly, presented by Prof. Dean. Having told us that the monument, the man, and the written record are the three principal evidences on which it is founded, he makes Egypt the representative of the first, Arabia of the second, and Phoenicia of the third. This mode of illustration is peculiarly happy; and it will be seen that it is admirably carried out:

"Egypt is peculiarly the land of the monument. The pyramid there towers aloft in its solemn grandeur; the temple presents its forest of columns, the palace its massive architecture, and the catacomb speaks after its silence of centuries. What high promptings must have stirred the minds of those primitive fathers of human industry and art to lead them to the performance of those gigantic labors that have enabled the world in its infancy to speak to the world in its maturity.

That elder civ

"But the Nilotic valley is not alone the home of the monument. ilization that once held dominion on the banks of the Euphrates, the Tigris, the Choaspes and the Araxes, is now being proclaimed to us through the monuments of Babylon, of Nineveh, of Susa and Persepolis. These lead us towards the orient. "But in reversing our course and travelling towards the occident, we encounter in Greece and Italy the old ruins of Lycosura, of Tyrius, of Norba, and of many other cities; the remains of that cyclopian architecture that marks the pathway of the Pelasgi.

Nor should we here be unmindful of that ancient race, who may be traced, by a line of ramparts and tumuli, through the passes of the Caucasus into Siberia; and along its southern mountains from the Tobol to the Yenisei and the steppes of the middle regions of the Lena, by ruins of towns and tumuli, sepulchres, vessels, diadems, weapons, trophies, coins of gold, silver and copper; across Behring's Straits and down the great valley of the Mississippi, even as far as Mexico and Peru; scattering, all along, their mounds, ramparts, tumuli and pyramids, thus almost literally girdling the globe with their mural monuments.

"In passing from Egypt into Arabia, we find ourselves also, in one sense, in a land of monuments, but its monuments are men. Man is there monumental, because he is unchanged. The Bedouin of the Desert and the rocky Arabia possesses the same general features, traits of character, modes of life and civilization, that were in ancient times possessed by the immediate descendants of Ishmael. The Assyrian, Babylonian and Persian civilizations have travelled by him on their journey westward; while the Egyptian, Hebrew, Phoenician, Grecian and Roman have, for ages, hovered around him; and yet he has remained the same. The manners, customs, forms of intercourse, social habits and modes of life that belonged to the early patriarchs are yet to be seen impressed upon the living page of Arabian being. Man has there no institutions, but he is himself an institution. He has no history, but he is himself a record. In passing into Phoenicia, we find the home of the written record the alphabetic character-without which man could be little more than the mere creature of the present."-Pp. 7, 8, 9.

The undeniable facts contained in the above extract are too often lost sight of by both teachers and students. This is not strange, however, for such are seldom brought together; they are too widely scattered. We have abundance of histories-a still greater abundance of essays on history; but it is otherwise with the facts. In our opinion, it requires genius to group the latter so that they will make the most lasting impression. If it be objected that they exist al

ready, and only require to be pointed out, the same objection would apply to the most sublime conceptions of the poet. None will deny that the sea, the land, and the firmament are each full of poetry; but it requires a poet to give it form and expression. In a similar manner, it requires culture of a high order, long and careful study, keen perception, and above all, an analytical mind, to concentrate, as it were, the essence of history; or to take it apart and give specimens of its principal constituents, so that the student may see for himself the force and tendency of the tout ensemble. This, to a great extent, Prof. Dean has accomplished. At the same time there are some of his views in which, as already intimated, we cannot concur. In our opinion, he does not do justice to Asia in the following passage:

"Under these combined influences, man, in Asia, has ever remained the same. We have seen him exhibiting no striking evidences of mental or moral advancement; bequeathing us no important discoveries in science or art; handing down to us no trophies of his victories over the elements of nature. Exclusive of what foreign agency has effected, when have we ever witnessed an alteration in the manners, customs, laws or institutions of Southern, Eastern or Central Asia? The sun that has gladdened this day has risen upon the same, with few or no modifications, that were dawned upon by the sun of Zoroaster.

66

Centuries have there come and gone and left no impress. Let foreign influence and agency cease to operate, and they never will leave any. As soon may we expect to see the Egyptian mummy bursting the cerements of its sepulchre and displaying anew the energies of a life long lost, as to witness the Asiatic competing with the European or American in the actings and doings of this world.

"Industry, religion, government, society, philosophy and art there form one mingled mass. No attempt at separation-no effort at development, except in combination. We see everywhere exhibited the same dull, dead uniformity; the same Sahara of the mental and moral world."-Pp. 13, 14.

We think it more in accordance with those facts and phenomena which the professor himself has so graphically and eloquently placed before us to believe that we only behold Asia in her old age; and that could we have contemplated her in her youth, we could not have said that she "everywhere exhibited the same dull, dead uniformity." There is still evidence enough, it seems to us, to prove the contrary; for Asia, too, has her monuments-some of which rival in splendor and magnificence those of Greece and Rome, after having lain in ruins, surrounded by desolation, for more than three thousand years. It is to these noble vestiges Volney refers when he says: "I will evoke from the bosom of the tomb that spirit which formerly in Asia was the splendor of states and the glory of peoples."* Having described at more or less length the magnificent architectural remains of Palmyra, Babylon, Tyre, Balbec, &c., the same author exclaims, "Grand Dieu! d'où viennent de si funestes révolutions," &c. The researches of Sir William Jones alone would vindicate the ancient Hindoos and Persians from the charge of having "ever remained the same." Indeed, the languages of both would be sufficient for that purpose, since even the Greek in its most polished state cannot pretend to rival the San

"J'évoquerai du sein des tombeaux l'esprit qui, jadis dans l'Asia, fit la splendeur des états et la gloire des peuples."-Les Ruines, Chap. iv., p. 24.

scrit, not to mention the noble epics still remaining of which it is the original.

This, however, is the only fault we can find in the pamphlet before us; if, indeed, a difference of opinion can be called such. Voltaire differed with most men of culture and taste in preferring Virgil to Homer, regarding the former as the representative of the European mind, and the latter as the representative of the Asiatic mind; but notwithstanding this strange prejudice, none will deny that the author of the Henriade was a great critic and a profound thinker. It would be as illogical as unjust to form an estimate of the judgment of Plato from his views on what he considered the vicious influence of poets; but we admit that it would be nothing more so than to condemn the author of this excellent pamphlet because he happens to make some remarks in it which are at variance with the opinions of the greatest investigators. We are all the more willing to overlook the injustice which, in our opinion, is certainly done by the professor to ancient Asia, from the vivid and striking picture of Greek and Roman civilization which follows. It is, indeed, rather long for our space, but to cut it short were to spoil it:

"In Greece and Rome human elements strongly tended to separation and development. Industry, religion, government, society, philosophy and art no longer form, as they did in Asia, one commingled mass. Society, philosophy and art here achieve their enfranchisement.

"The first, escaped from the dominion of caste, asserts its own prerogatives. It claims and exercises the right of yielding obedience to its own laws, and of being governed upon its own principles. It annexes to its decrees its own sanction, and visits its members with its own joyous approval, or lays upon them the weight of a blasted name.

"The enfranchisement of philosophy was still more important. The very point of separation is the centre of a deep feeling, of an intense interest. That point was scaled with the blood of a Socrates. In him philosophy first awoke to a knowledge and comprehension of itself. It afterwards investigated earth and its productions in the researches of its Aristotle. It ascended to the source of things in the splendid idealism of its Plato.

Art, liberated from its fetters, and encouraged in its efforts, here brings forth its choicest products. This is, in fact, the crowning element of Grecian civilization. Its charm has never vanished from the world. Its spell has never been broken. It has aided in sustaining civilization in its most fearful extremity; and in every age and clime, where it has become known, it has awoke in the human mind a sense of the beautiful, and kindled in the human soul a love of the ideal. To the eye it has presented its forms of peerless beauty, as they glow on the canvas of Apelles, or stand forth in the marble of Phidias; while on the ear has fallen its full diapason, mingling the song of Sophocles and Euripides with the thunder tones of Demosthenes.

"The remaining elements, industry, government and religion, were still intimately blended together. A successive separation was necessary, for the purpose of allowing each an opportunity of being developed, or carried out into all its possible applications.

"Of these yet enveloped elements that of government, or the state, was predominant. It was the central element of the Greek and Roman movement. Around this, as a nucleus, gathered all the others. To strengthen the patriotic love of country, Industry lent its application; Religion its inspiration; Society its warm approvals; Philosophy its deductions; and Art its glowing canvas and chiselled

monument.

"The Greek formed a part of his state. Its acts were, therefore, to some extent, his acts. To him that state was the world. To it belonged the dawn of his infancy, the bloom of his youth, the vigor of his manhood, the decay of his age. Had he affections? that was their centre. Had he powers of action? that furnished motives for their exercise. To him it embodied all that was beautiful, all that was in

teresting, all that was lovely, all that was worth living for, all that was worth dying for. Beneath him was the Grecian soil; around him were Grecian monuments; above him the abode of Grecian gods.

“Individual worth, during this epoch, is estimated from the extent of individual sacrifice. The nation is the actor. The wave of Salamis; the Straits of Thermopyla; the plain of Marathon; the field of Cannæ; Carthage in ashes; a demolished empire; a subjugated world, attest the energy of its action."-Pp. 15, 16, 17, 18.

We find we have devoted much more space to the professor's brochure than we had intended; and yet we cannot conclude without indicating at least the leading points of his method. These he presents under five heads, as follows:

"1. To settle clearly how many, and what, are the great elements of humanity, insisting that they should, all together, be exhaustive, giving employment, in their separation and development, to every possible human power and energy.

2. To inquire into their successive separation from each other-the great historical epochs to which this separation has given birth; the characteristic features of each epoch, and the theatre, or region of the globe, to which the events that compose it have been chiefly limited.

"3. I would take up and exhibit the two great divisions of men, the nomadic or wandering, and the settled or civilized; giving, as far as known, the history of the former, but with the view, more particularly, of ascertaining how their action and influence have affected the latter.

"4. So far, at least, as regards the Iranian and Semitic races, as contradistinguished from the Turanian, I would give the results arrived at by ethnology; as I feel entirely convinced that national development can never be fully unfolded until the elements, the races that originally composed the nation, are thoroughly investigated and understood.

5. Leaving the extreme orient, where the elements have always existed in a state of envelopment, I would take up that ancient people, or, more properly perhaps, those peoples, composing the old Iranian empire, including what is more generally known under the Assyrian, Babylonian and Persian empires. Not that I regard these as identical in character, yet as each successively held dominion over substantially the same territory, it may be very well to consider them together."— Pp. 26, 27, 28.

We think that no friend of education will need any apology from us for having devoted so much space to such valuable suggestions. We should be glad to see all professors, who wish to be considered accomplished educators, compress an equal amount of thought into their addresses. Indeed, one of our principal reasons for noticing the "True Method" is, that it might serve to stimulate to more worthy efforts than their own that numerous class of "professors" who seem to think that it matters little how empty and commonplace their addresses are, provided they sound well.

But why will not some competent hand undertake a work that would briefly unfold the history of civilization, or the elements of human progress, on Prof. Dean's plan? May we not suggest that such a work would be worthy the attention of the Professor himself? For, judging from the ability he has displayed in his pamphlet, we know no one who is better qualified for the task.

On Matter and Ether; or, the Secret Laws of Physical Change. By THOMAS RAWSON BIRKS, M.A. 8vo. Cambridge, (England): Macmillan & Co. 1862.

We do not predict for this slender volume a large number of readers. It is too dry and technical to be popular; but it is not the less worthy