A general chorus of approbation followed or accompanied these leading voices.  The reception of the work in Great Britain was a triumph.  On the Continent, in addition to the tribute paid to it by M. Guizot, it was translated into Dutch, into German, and into Russian.  At home his reception was not less hearty.  “The North American Review,” which had set its foot on the semi-autobiographical medley which he called “Morton’s Hope,” which had granted a decent space and a tepid recognition to his “semi-historical” romance, in which he had already given the reading public a taste of his quality as a narrator of real events and a delineator of real personages,—­this old and awe-inspiring New England and more than New England representative of the Fates, found room for a long and most laudatory article, in which the son of one of our most distinguished historians did the honors of the venerable literary periodical to the new-comer, for whom the folding-doors of all the critical headquarters were flying open as if of themselves.  Mr. Allibone has recorded the opinions of some of our best scholars as expressed to him.

Dr. Lieber wrote a letter to Mr. Allibone in the strongest terms of praise.  I quote one passage which in the light of after events borrows a cruel significance:—­

“Congress and Parliament decree thanks for military exploits, —­rarely for diplomatic achievements.  If they ever voted their thanks for books,—­and what deeds have influenced the course of human events more than some books?—­Motley ought to have the thanks of our Congress; but I doubt not that he has already the thanks of every American who has read the work.  It will leave its distinct mark upon the American mind.”

Mr. Everett writes:—­

“Mr. Motley’s ‘History of the Dutch Republic’ is in my judgment a work of the highest merit.  Unwearying research for years in the libraries of Europe, patience and judgment in arranging and digesting his materials, a fine historical tact, much skill in characterization, the perspective of narration, as it may be called, and a vigorous style unite to make it a very capital work, and place the name of Motley by the side of those of our great historical trio,—­Bancroft, Irving, and Prescott.”

Mr. Irving, Mr. Bancroft, Mr. Sumner, Mr. Hillard, united their voices in the same strain of commendation.  Mr. Prescott, whose estimate of the new history is of peculiar value for obvious reasons, writes to Mr. Allibone thus:—­

“The opinion of any individual seems superfluous in respect to a work on the merits of which the public both at home and abroad have pronounced so unanimous a verdict.  As Motley’s path crosses my own historic field, I may be thought to possess some advantage over most critics in my familiarity with the ground.

“However this may be, I can honestly bear my testimony to the extent of his researches and to the accuracy with which he has given the results