theory of Infinitesimals, of matter, of organic life, and of man), IV. Historical and Critical Estimate of the Philosophy of Leibniz. To each of the separate writings also, of which translations are given, a note is prefaced, showing the circumstances under which Leibniz wrote it, and giving a short summary of its contents.

The work, as a whole, is scholarly in the highest sense, and is a gratifying proof that we in England are becoming alive to the value of exact and critical study of the sources and the historical influence of modern philosophical classics. Dr. Latta has evidently lived himself into the thought of Leibniz as few outside Germany have done, and the clearness and thoroughness of his reproduction of that thought leave little to be desired. The book would form an admirable text-book for a university or college course.

In the details of the Introduction one does not always feel satisfied with the writer's stand-point. There are occasional obscurities,―e.g., in the treatment of self-consciousness (pp. 52 ff.). What is meant by the statement that "to Descartes the rational soul is the mind, and its reality comes only from its conscious certainty of itself?" Its reality? May self-consciousness, even in Des cartes, be described as "the bare witness of consciousness to itself, its empty self-consistency"? One cannot help feeling that the meanings of "self-consciousness" as (1) mere awareness of the self as subject, and (2) knowledge of the self in its true nature, are hardly kept apart from one another. Each is justifiable in its own place, and the former is the light in which Descartes regarded the ego, the latter the point of view of Leibniz, so that it is hardly just to the former to condemn him for failing to achieve what he did not attempt. So it is not easy to understand how Descartes's standard of truth, "self-evidence or absence of contradiction in the ideas," is "simply another way of describing the immediate witness of consciousness to itself" (pp. 58, 59). To Descartes it was the knowledge not of what the self is, but that it is, that was fundamental, and from the form of this truth he inferred what must be the form of all truth,-viz., non-contradiction of the ideas involved, a criterion which has not ceased to have value. Leibniz, on the other hand, taking for granted the existence of the self, was concerned to know what that self is, seeking its content in the eternal and necessary truths of reason which express the nature God and therefore of the soul as a mirror of the divine.

of

In regard to the mechanical theories of the two writers, Descartes and Leibniz, there seems again too much emphasis laid on the value

of the latter's achievements (pp. 89 ff.). Neither the one nor the other had quite clear ideas on the nature of force; the measures of force proposed by them (mv and mv,) are equally erroneous from the modern stand-point, while their respective Laws of Conservation,-Descartes's that the quantity of motion (in any given direction) is constant, Leibniz's that the quantity of moving force or kinetic energy is constant,—are equally true, on the same assumption, that of a system not acted upon by external forces. The statement, on page 107, that "the body of every substance-i.e., its matter, its confused perception, its passivity-is the physical or mechanical cause of the substance," hardly rings true of Leibniz. The confused perception of one moment is, no doubt, the mechanical cause,―i.e., the necessary antecedent of the clearer perception of the next, but hardly of the substance itself.

In the fourth part of the Introduction there is a very suggestive comparison between Kant's a priori conditions of the possibility of experience and Leibniz's "system of compossibles" as determining what exists; again, between Kant's thing in itself and Leibniz's choice of God among the possible worlds. Among the successors of Leibniz perhaps Herbart is awarded least justice ;-"if we leave out of account the influence of Fichte upon his psychology, we may regard Herbart's work as a remodelling of that of Leibniz," and that not for the better. Surely we need no longer look at Herbart through Lotze's glasses. Is there not an assumption underlying Leibniz's philosophy,-of a real world, the world of ideas in the divine mind,-and is it not precisely this assumption which Herbart brings to light and transforms into the theory of a world of "reals," each independent in existence and entirely separate in quality from all others, which reveal themselves in the finite soul, but distorted through the imperfect medium, as Leibniz taught? And is not this, after all, the only possible interpretation of an ideal world? Neither unity nor continuity of life or of thought is possible without discrete elements, such as Leibniz's universal characteristic, for example, presupposes. Herbart's metaphysics represent the natural development of Leibniz's thought in an environment such as Kant and Fichte created.

These suggestions, however, are by no means intended to detract from the worth of a most careful and at the same time attractive study of Leibniz.

UNIVERSITY COLLEGE, ABERYSTWYTH.

J. LEWIS MCINTYR

THE SCHOOL SYSTEM OF THE TALMUD. By the Rev. B. Spiers. London: Elliot Stock, 1898.

The adequate treatment of any subject connected with the Talmud demands not only a wide acquaintance with the Talmudic literature and a capacity to appreciate the rabbinical mode of thought, but also that the writer should possess enough of the scientific spirit for the critical sifting of his matter and for method in its arrangement. All who read Mr. Spiers's book on the "School System of the Talmud" will grant that the erudition of the author is fairly extensive, and that his close sympathy with the rabbis enables him to do them full justice. It is, however, less certain that the author deals with his subject from a sufficiently scientific stand-point. The one fact that he does not attempt to differentiate between the school system of Palestine, where the Hellenistic influence was never entirely impotent, and that of Babylonia is in itself sufficient to justify some doubt. The author would scarcely maintain that general instruction in Greek formed part of the curriculum in the Babylonian schools, nor would he venture to exclude from the scope of the Talmud reference to these. The author does not sufficiently distinguish between the work of the elementary schools and of the higher Talmudical colleges. His references to the historical development of the school system are inadequate. No allusion is made to the pioneer work of Shimeon ben Shetach (Yerushalmi, Ketuboth, Edit. Krotoschin, 32c) in elementary school education.

The author treats, among others, of these four subjects: first, the views of the rabbis concerning the value of education; second, the subjects of education; third, the methods of education; fourth, the relations of teacher and scholar. The first of these subjects is treated admirably. The quotations are profuse and excellent. Some of the remarks of the author are genuinely eloquent, and all are of interest. The author is less happy in his treatment of the second and third. He is far too general in his remarks upon the subjects of education, and much that he writes (Chapter III.) seems calculated to convey the impression that the study of the "various languages, the arts and sciences of their times," formed part of the ordinary school course. While it is perfectly true that individual Jews, and among them many famous rabbis, distinguished themselves by their scientific attainments, and also that some knowledge of certain of the sciences-astronomy, mensuration-is necessary

for the complete mastery of parts of the Talmud, yet it cannot be maintained that the study of these subjects entered into the general prescribed course of school education. The statement of the Talmud is quite definite on this point. The subjects of instruction are the Bible, the Mishna, and the Gemara. It is very unfortunate that the author fails to lay true emphasis upon the precise nature of the subjects taught, since this debars him from treating adequately the methods of education. The education for which general provision was made in the schools was primarily and almost exclusively religious in character, and largely the work would be learning by rote Biblical verses and the dicta of the rabbis which form the "oral law." These dicta (Mishnaioth, Tosephtoth, etc.), the reduction of which to writing was prohibited, and the Bible were the stock-in-trade of the scholar. The storing of the memory would be the first concern; the cultivation of intelligence and acuteness would come somewhat later, and, from a certain point of view, would be of secondary importance. The Talmudic methods of education have primarily the storing of the memory in view. One of the more interesting and striking features of the Talmudic literature is the keen psychological insight shown by the rabbis. We can have no clearer exemplification of this insight than the completeness with which the rabbis recognized the conditions most favorable for retention, and the skill with which they sought to secure these conditions. They strove to insure the maximum of intensity for the impressions by the simultaneous affection of several senses. The word was not only to be heard, but also spoken and read. Visual, auditory, and muscular memory were all called upon to assist in the retention of the impression. The aid of musical memory, also, was enlisted, for the scholars sang or chanted their lessons. Great insistence was laid upon adequate and constant repetition; and above all, every device was adopted to secure the full attention of the scholar by rousing his interest. In the case of the more advanced scholars, the subject for which they asserted preference was alone to be selected. Of great interest in this connection is the system of mnemonics employed and recommended in the Talmud. The scholars are exhorted to make constant use of symbols, catch-words, and other mnemonic devices. In the Tractate "Shabbath" an interesting description occurs of a esson on the alphabet. Words are selected of which the consecutive letters of the alphabet are the initials, and the words are grouped in easily remembered phrases conveying some moral injunction. Few would

expect to find in the Talmud the prototype of the familiar "A was an Archer," etc. The fourth subject, the relation of teacher and pupil, has received excellent treatment at the hands of the author. A larger work by Mr. Spiers, dealing more exhaustively with the many-sided question of the Talmudic school system, and written with a fuller regard to method and arrangement, would be highly welcome to every student of the Talmud, and to every student of educational methods.

TRINITY COLLege, Cambridge.

JOSEPH M. ASHER.

A DIALOGUE ON MORAL EDUCATION. By F. H. Matthews, M.A., Head-Master of Bolton Grammar School. London: Sonnenschein, 1898. Pp. 257.

THE TEACHING OF CHRIST ON LIFE AND CONDUCT. By Sophie Bryant, D.Sc., Head-Mistress of the North London Collegiate School for Girls. London: Sonnenschein, 1898. Pp. 100.

Mr. Matthews's Dialogue is the work of an earnest man who has had much experience of education. He treats his subject not from the point of view of the philosopher, but strictly as a practical teacher. His work may be commended to the favorable notice of all who have to train the young.

His central maxim is that education should primarily be moral education. This is undeniable if understood in the sense that character is more important than learning. But it does not necessarily follow from this that the school-master should mainly devote himself to inculcating morality. Many parents would prefer to set their own moral stamp upon their children, and only send them to school for the intellectual education which cannot be given at home. They might even say of Mr. Matthews's system that it is too sentimental to be right. But Mr. Matthews has little patience with the British parent and his efforts to train his children. However this may be, it is a pleasure to recognize the healthy tone of the work, which is that of an optimist and a lover of children.

As to the manner of the work, the dialogue form is handled with much appropriateness and freedom. It is a pity that dialogue is not used oftener in works of this kind. Nor does the author let it run away with him; he seldom deviates into paradox and never ventures into epigram. If a second edition be called for, the reader would welcome a table of contents or summary.

Mrs. Bryant's book originated in a course of lessons given to one