man deprived of a power, the possession of which is usually regarded as necessary for the performance of almost every duty, bravely contending against every disadvantage which beset his pathway, and succeeding in discharging with credit and acceptance all the duties of an arduous profession. He may well congratulate himself, if others have done more, none have done better. And the satisfaction which he himself manifests, is not the result of an inordinate egotism, but a profound consciousness that he has wrought in faithfulness and deserves well of mankind.

This book contains, besides the record of the author's life, many interesting sketches and anecdotes of his friends, and several letters from distinguished men whose acquaintance he enjoyed, which add considerably to the book. We, however, except from this remark, the very long and tedious epistle of his nephew, Mr. Lester, giving an account of an interview he had with the Pope, at the Vatican,-the style of which is that of a Fourth of July oration, and contrasts strangely enough with the elegant simplicity and classic grace of the rest of the book.

In conclusion, we take great pleasure in assuring our readers that they will find the "Autobiography of the Blind Minister" worth reading. It will, as it deserves, have a wide circulation. We can assure those who shall peruse these pages, that they will find in them not merely entertainment for an hour, but instruction for a life time.

B. B. B.

ART. IV.

Grote's History of Greece.

History of Greece. By George Grote, Esq. In twelve volumes. New York: Harper and Brothers. 1856.

WHEN the distinguished leader of the American antislavery movement, on occasion of a visit in England, was

introduced to a prominent philanthropist of the latter country, the Englishman, with a look of surprise, exclaimed, "Why, I had supposed you were a negro! So closely had the individual thus addressed identified himself with the despised and injured race, of whose rights he has become the most eminent champion, that the Englishman had all along supposed, as a matter of course, that he must be one of the much-wronged people. It had not occurred to him as a possibility, that a white man could so completely break through the dividing line of race, and make the oppressions of the negro his own. The involuntary exclamation we have quoted, was as high a tribute to the disinterestedness of purpose and earnestness of zeal of the person who was the object of it, as could have been uttered. Were it not that the lapse of more than two thousand years, makes the case impossible, the reader of the twelve noble volumes named at the head of this article, might with reason exclaim, "Surely, this Mr. Grote must be a Greek!" And not only has this historian broken through the barrier of race,-the vast interval of time does not appear to be any serious obstacle in the way of his sympathies. So far from seeming the distant looker-on, he appears as if he were a contemporary of the men and events which he describes. He seems to have been at the side of Miltiades, when the Persian host was put to flight by the few Grecian hoplites on the plain of Marathon; his account of the battle of Salamis could hardly exhibit a more lively and personal interest in the event of that anxious day, had he been the companion of Themistocles, and witnessed the shock of the gallies which shattered the Persian fleet, and saved Greece from the invader; an intelligent Athenian of the days of Pericles, could he speak from the tomb of centuries, would hardly give expression to a more earnest and personal admiration of that wonderful statesman, than breathes in Mr. Grote's history of the Athenian democracy; and when we read his censure of Nicias, whose dilatory and effeminate leadership, brought ruin on the noblest and most promising armament that ever sailed from a Grecian harbor, and thereby inflicted on his country the wound from which it never recovered, it requires a conscious effort of reflection to be assured, that our author

is an Englishman of the nineteenth century, and not a citizen of Athens in the day of its deepest gloom. And even when Mr. Grote has occasion to write of the religion of the Greeks, his language is always that of a man, who, if he does not himself have faith in the deities and the supernatural events he recognizes, has nevertheless a sympathetic appreciation of the sentiments and practices of those to whom such matters had the solemnity and power of earnest realities.

We could hardly propose to ourselves a more inviting theme, than a review of Mr. Grote's entire work. The voluminous, and at the same time compact character of his volumes, in connection with our prescribed limits, makes such an undertaking impracticable. A general statement of the character of his history as a whole, and of some of the peculiarities which distinguish it, is all that we can attempt with reference to a work, which we have read with deep interest, and we may hope with no very small degree of profit.

Of the historian personally a word is due. Mr. George Grote is an Englishman; and in the threefold character of a London banker, a member of Parliament, and a scholar of varied, minute and profound erudition, he has attained a rare combination of the qualities which are essential to the historian. It is easy to trace the financier, the statesman, and the student in every chapter of his work. His readers hardly need be told, that his twelve volumes are the results of thorough and patient preparation in the important particulars of selecting, arranging, and testing materials; yet they will hardly be prepared for the statement, that this labor alone employed him for more than twenty years! His first volume came from the press in 1846; but twenty years before this date he was actively engaged in getting materials for the work. There are, we imagine, few authors who bestow so much labor on their works before committing a line to the printer. We must confess that to us, so grand a purpose so nobly fulfilled, approaches the truly heroic, and kindles within us a feeling somewhat akin to pride, that human nature, in any individual, is capable of so much.

Mr. Grotes style is eminently peculiar. We know of nothing like it in any other author. There is nothing of

the panoramic delineation, and epigrammatic smartness which make Macaulay so fascinating; profoundly reflective, yet without any similarity to the exuberant philosophy so ornately presented in the pages of Bancroft; and so far from being paralleled by the smooth flow of Prescott, Mr. Grotes' periods do not flow at all-every sentence treads as if conscious of its weighty burden. His sentences are of too tough a material to receive a nice polish; in this particular, not unlike the granite block in a massive temple, which polishing defaces but cannot adorn. In this, the contrast between Grote and Gibbon is very marked; a contrast, however, which we are confident a discriminating posterity will not recognize to the advantage of the author of the "Decline and Fall." Mr. Grote's sentences are models of perspicuity; their meaning is obvious at a glance-due exception being made for the large number of foreign terms, which always prove obstacles even to the learned reader. We must add, that no one can read a chapter of his history without recognizing the author's love of truth. That charm which always betokens the presence of this noble quality, but which it is difficult to express by words, is in every statement. We read our author with unswerving confidence; we realize that whatever else may mislead us, it will not be either prejudice or design on the part of the historian.

A marked peculiarity of Grote's History of Greece, appears in the purpose avowed in the preface, to correct certain erroneous statements, to which the popularity of Mitford's history had given a wide currency. Mr. Mitford's aim, in writing a history of Greece, does not appear to have been even an avowed purpose to tell the simple truth, but to present arguments against republican institutions, and in favor of monarchical governments! Mitford was doubtless sincere in his avowed conviction, that republican governments are dangerous, and that only monarchy can be trusted; he doubtless believed that the experience of the ancient Greeks illustrated and confirmed this conviction; and in carrying out his plan to record this experience for such a purpose, there is no occasion to charge him with an intention to record an untruth. But whoever writes history for purposes of argument, -whoever writes it, not for itself, but to make it serve a

distinct end, however he may state nothing but truth, he cannot produce the effect of truth. Accordingly, it is now the almost unanimous verdict of those competent to form a judgment in the matter, that no people ever received more unfair treatment at the hands of the historian, than the ancient Greeks have received in the pages of Mitford. Yet, up to the appearance of Dr. Thirlwall's work, Mitford was the standard authority for all historical matters relative to ancient Greece.

And here, as bringing into view the spirit and purpose of Mr. Grote's work, we cannot do better than to quote the words in which he exposes Mitford's superficial notion of kingship as it existed in ancient times, and his most unwarrantable procedure in speaking of Grecian antipathy to monarchy, as if it were antipathy to the English idea of monarchy. Quoting the words of Herodotus, in which he gives the Grecian conception of a king," He subverts the customs of the country; he violates women; he puts men to death without trial,". Mr. Grote continues:

"Our larger political experience has taught us to modify this opinion by showing that under the governments of modern Europe, the enormities described by Herodotus do not take place; and that it is possible, by means of representative constitutions, acting under a certain force of manners, customs, and historical recollections, to obviate many of the mischiefs likely to flow from proclaiming the duty of peremptory obedience to an hereditary and unresponsible king, who cannot be changed without extra-constitutional force. But such larger observation was not open to Aristotle, the wisest as well as the most cautious of ancient theorists; nor if it had been open, could he have applied with assurance its lessons to the governments of the single cities of Greece. The theory of a constitutional king, especially, as it exists in England, would have appeared to him impracticable; to establish a king who will reign without governing

1 Throughout this article we purposely place the work of Grote before that of Thirlwall in the order of time; for though Dr. Thirlwall's volumes first came from the press, the materials contained in Mr. Grote's history, were first collected and tested. We take this occasion to say, that the censures bestowed on Mr. Grote's predecessors, must not be applied to Dr. Thirlwall. In fact, the work of the author last named, is one of very great excellence, and breathes throughout a candid and appreciative spirit. As a record of the experiences of the ancient Greeks, it is, in importance, fulness, and reliability, second only to the work now under notice.