Naddo will doubtless tell us that this poem is not built broadly on the human heart; there is too much discussion about the difficulty of becoming a Christian, and the subtile genius flits so quickly through the lines that an ordinary butterfly-net does not catch it.  That is well for the genius.  But we are of opinion that the human heart will always find in this great poem the solemn and glorious things that belong to it, and more and more so as new and clearer thought is born into the world to read it.  It is no more difficult to read than “Paradise Lost,” while its scenery is less conventional, and the longings of a religious heart are taken by a bold imagination into serene and starry skies.

A History of the Intellectual Development of Europe. By JOHN WILLIAM DRAPER, M.D., LL.D.  New York:  Harper & Brothers.

Water and the science of Physiology are both good things.  But water is one thing to drink, and another to be drowned in.  In like manner, though Physiology is a large and noble science and a yet larger symbol, furnishing analogies to the thinker quite as often as uses to the medical doctor, nevertheless, Physiology in the form of a deluge, overflowing, swamping, drowning almost everything else, and leaving only Body, the sole ark, afloat,—­this is a gift which we are able to receive with a gratitude not by any means unspeakable.  And such, very nearly, is the contribution to modern thought which the author of the above work endeavors to make.  He holds Physiology to be coextensive with Man, and would prove the fact by including History in its laws.

In truth, however, it is a pretty thin sort of Physiology to which this extension is to be given,—­resembling water in this respect also.  Our physiological philosopher seeks to prove (in 631 octavo pages) that there are in history five perpetually recurring epochs, answering—­the reader will please consider—­to the Infancy, Childhood, Youth, Maturity, and Old Age of the individual body.  So much, therefore, as one would know concerning Physiology in its application to the individual body, in virtue of being aware that men pass from infancy to age, thus much does Dr. Draper propose to teach his readers concerning the said science in its application to History.  Add now that his induction rests almost wholly on two main instances, of which one is yet incomplete!  Should one, therefore, say that his logic is somewhat precipitate, and his “science” somewhat lacking in matter, he would appear not to prefer a wholly groundless charge.

Were Dr. Draper simply giving a History of the Intellectual Development of Europe, he could, of course, relate only such facts as exist; and should it appear that this history has but two cycles, one of them incomplete, he would be under no obligation to make more.  But such is not the case.  His “history” is purely a piece of polemic.  His aim is to establish a formula for all history, past, present, and to come; and, in this view, the paucity of instances on which his induction rests becomes worthy of comment.