ment which has been lately made on M. Comte's politique, that 'the ideal form of society which he set up is only fit to be an ideal, because it cannot possibly be realised,' he believes that the Republic would have answered many of the ends which the founder had in view, such as the suppression of heterodoxy, the substitution of a diffused and mild philanthropy for family affection, the avoidance of poverty, and the reduction of the influence of Aphrodite to a minimum.' He seems to take no account of the existence, at least in the progressive races of mankind, of a diffused intelligence, which in some degree determines, under the teaching of experience, what shall be changing, and what permanent, in the common sentiment of a people.

6

We are also compelled to leave unnoticed Plato's physical or cosmological ideas, which are connected with the ethical in a way, which Aristotle and Mr. Grote think destructive to either science: * also the chapters on the earlier philosophers and on the other companions of Socrates, which are not inferior to any in these volumes, and are for the most part as candid and judicious as they are lucid and penetrating. That devoted to Xenophon the military brother of the Socratic family,' is faultless so far as we are able to judge, and shows how gracefully as well as forcibly Mr. Grote can write, when he has a thoroughly congenial subject. Of his instructive but characteristic remarks on Euclides, Antisthenes, and Aristippus, we have only room to say that the objects of his criticism sometimes find themselves strangely associated. Plato would have been as much surprised to find the Socrates of his dialogues allied with Antisthenes (vol. iii. 520) and Aristippus (vol. iii. 555), as living divines have been when similarly harmonised' in recent controversy. We may notice, however, as peculiarly original and acute, the remarks in this chapter (xxxviii.), on the potential and actual (pp. 490, seqq.) and, as interesting and suggestive, the comparison of the Greek with other forms of Cynicism (pp. 513, seqq.).

In limiting ourselves to the duty of characterizing the main features of Mr. Grote's conception of Plato, we have been compelled to exclude much that might have been said in praise, and to refrain from noticing many minor points of difference. If our task has been ungraciously executed, we must plead the narrowness of the space within which our remarks are necessarily compressed. We have endeavoured to show that while his own realisation of the relativity of truth and good, and of the vari

* See the remarks on the Philebus,' vol. ii. p. 610. The conclusion of the chapter on the Timæus,' where Mr. Grote points to the contrast between Plato's magnificent ideal of the Kosmos as a whole and his dark picture of the reality as existing in detail, is well worth attention.

ableness

ableness of human reason, enables our author to bring out an aspect of Platonism which has been too little recognised, the exhaustive nature of the antithesis which he is inclined to make between a doctrine of mere relativity and that of an absolute already found, between endless divergence and peremptory authority in matters of belief, prevents him from giving place to a third notion, which alone explains the position of Plato-that of an absolute standard of knowledge, an absolute principle of life, apprehended though not comprehended, sought but not yet found, approached, although not perfectly attained, by the process of scientific inquiry. Hence, in the volumes before us, interpretation is outrun by criticism. An ancient ideal philosopher, equally removed in spirit from the majority of his countrymen and from the nineteenth century, is measured, either by the notions popularly current in his age, or by modern philosophy and logic.

For

For although Mr. Grote has given a valuable sketch of the earlier philosophers, he has hardly entered into their deep inward connexion with Plato. Nor does he appear to have conceived adequately the extremely subtle mode in which Plato's reasonings are blended with the quick-cross '-play of imagination and humour, or in which they are traversed by a vein of irony, sometimes superficial, but often profound. To try to abstract from these and find the nett logical residuum, is like confusing dynamics with statics. Yet our author has sometimes spoken as if this were possible. Thus after noticing the dramatic richness of the Charmides,' he says, 'I make no attempt to reproduce this latter attribute: though it is one of the peculiar merits of Plato in reference to ethical inquiry: imparting to the subject a charm which does not naturally belong to it.' tunately this rule could not be perfectly applied, else the effect would be like that of a prose version of 'Hamlet.' On the contrary, many of the dramatic situations, if not reproduced, are forcibly described. But Mr. Grote is sometimes even curiously matter-of-fact in his treatment of Plato. In this respect also his criticisms are like those of Aristotle, who may be described as colour-blind to some of the characteristic hues of Plato's writings. For instance, there is a passage in the 'Gorgias,' where Socrates in proof of his thesis that life is of less worth than righteousness, observes that the ferryman who has brought many passengers from Ægina to the Piræus, although he has saved all these persons and their goods from the perils of the waters, winds, and rocks, is not elated with pride, but, after taking a modest fare, walks

* The account of the Pythagoreans appears to us the least successful.

quietly

quietly on the shore, as if he had done no great thing. 'For,' he says, 'the man has wit enough to know that, in saving their lives, it is uncertain whether he has done them a good or a bad turn. For he cannot tell what manner of men they are, and how they will use their lives and their goods.' On this passage, in which a humorous image conveys a strain of feeling like that of Artabanus in Herodotus, 'There are things in life more pitiable than the fear of death,'* Mr. Grote's observations are the following :—

'We shall hardly find any greater rhetorical exaggeration than this, among all the compositions of the rhetors against whom Plato declares war in the "Gorgias." Moreover, it is a specimen of the way in which Plato colours and misinterprets the facts of social life, in order to serve the purpose of the argument of the moment. He says truly that when the passage boat from Ægina to Piræus has reached its destination, the steersman receives his fare and walks about on the shore, without taking any great credit to himself, as if he had performed a brilliant deed or conferred an important service. But how does Plato explain this? By supposing in the steersman's mind feelings which never enter into the mind of a real agent: feelings which are put into words only when a moralist or a satirist is anxious to enforce a sentiment. The service which the steersman performs is not only adequately remunerated, but is, on most days, a regular and easy one, such as every man who has gone through a decent apprenticeship can perform. But suppose an exceptional day-suppose a sudden and terrible storm to supervene on the passage-suppose the boat full of passengers, with every prospect of all on board being drowned-suppose she is only saved by the extraordinary skill, vigilance, and efforts of the steersman. In that case he will, on reaching the land, walk about full of elate selfcongratulation and pride: the passengers will encourage this sentiment by expressions of the deepest gratitude; while friends as well as competitors will praise his successful exploit. How many of the passengers there are for whom the preservation of life may be a curse rather than a blessing—is a question which neither they themselves, nor the steersman, nor the public, will ever dream of asking.' †

* Ετερα παρὰ τὴν ζωὴν τούτων πεπόνθαμεν οἰκτρότερα.

Compare vol. ii. p. 145. 'Pericles would have listened with mixed surprise and anger if he had heard any one utter the monstrous assertion which Plato puts into the mouth of Polus-that rhetors, like despots, kill, impoverish, or expel any citizen at their pleasure;' and the treatment of the Eristic argument in the "Theætetus,' 165, vol. ii. p. 368-9, where the obvious tone of banter, and the humour of the description of the logical mercenary, who, after bamboozling you with such difficulties, would let you go for such ransom as might be agreed on between you,' are quite lost sight of. After this it is not surprising that Plato should be quoted (vol. ii. p. 355) as reckoning the prophet amongst the authoritative infallible measures of future events, or should be thought to be unusually patriotic when he composed the 'Menexenus' (vol. iii. p. 348). See also on the Philebus,' pp. 592 and 612 note.

Occasionally, however, Plato is credited with a metaphor to which he has no claim. For instance in the 'Sophist,' it is said that of swimming creatures some

are

We shall be sorry if anything which has been said in this article should be construed into an attempt to detract from the greatness of the historian of Greece, who is sure to give new life to every subject which he touches, and whom the world of letters regards with a degree of just veneration, which it would be equally wrong and futile to disparage. The present work abounds with evidence that his extraordinary energy and patience, his absorbing interest in all that is Hellenic in thought and feeling, his intensity of mind, and the acuteness of his analytical powers, are unabated, and in the art of writing we venture to think that his proficience is greater than before. It is impossible not to admire the extreme clearness, liveliness, and force with which his views on the most abstruse questions are expressed. He is equally determined to understand his subject and to make himself thoroughly understood. A characteristic feature of his diction, which contributes to this end, is his frequent use of the Latin as well as of the English equivalents of the phrases of Greek philosophy. And the reader's interest is quickened and sustained, while his thoughts are expanded, by a fertility of allusion rarely equalled, as in the frequent illustrations from mythology and history, quotations from the literature and citations of the manners and opinions of various ages and countries, description of ancient in the terms of modern life,* and the equally suggestive employment of Greek and Latin words to express what is familiar to ourselves. The writer is the same as formerly, only it appears to us that he has reached a part of his work which is less suited to him, and he looks back with unmistakeable regret from Plato and the Academy to Thucydides and the Athenian people.† His general tone also is less hopeful than when he wrote the famous chapter on Socrates. But if there is one thing which these volumes place beyond the reach of doubt, it is their author's almost unrivalled fitness to deal with the latest and most difficult portion of his long task. It will be a satisfaction, with which few in contemporary literature can be compared, when we have the advantage of listening to Mr. Grote on Aristotle.

are fledged (i. e. waterfowl). On this our author observes (vol. ii. p. 401, note):— 'It deserves notice that Plato considers the air a fluid in which birds swim.'

* This has sometimes an almost ludicrous effect-as when Bavavoos is translated snobbish,' or when Plato is quoted as saying that he may possibly at some future time (D. V.) do so and so.'

† See the remarks on the 'Menexenus' and 'Gorgias.'

ART.

ART. VI.-Extracts of the Journals and Correspondence of Miss Berry, from the year 1783 to 1852. Edited by Lady Theresa Lewis. London, 1865.

HESE volumes consist of Diaries, Letters, and Memoranda, left by Miss Mary Berry to the care of the late Sir Frankland Lewis, to be used by him for biographical and literary purposes, as he might think fit. He died without any such publication, and they came into the hands of Sir George Lewis, the scholar, critic, and statesman, whose loss his country has had deeply to deplore. His well-instructed and accomplished widow Lady Theresa Lewis undertook the vicarious work, and within a few weeks of its appearance she too has passed away, leaving only her two brothers, the present Cabinet Ministers, survivors of a numerous family.

This record of busy death stands strangely side by side with the one long life of which this book is the memorial, a life that nearly lasted its century, and which included within its observations as memorable a period of our world's history as the sun's light has ever shone upon. There is something in these occasional lengthened spaces of individual existence which seems to make them especially favourable vehicles for biographical narrative: the one figure standing by the protracted course of the stream of time concentrates round itself the images and interests of the past, and acquires an integral value which at any one moment of its being it would hardly have seemed to have possessed: it becomes identified with even more than its own experiences, and is judged not so much by what it was, as by what it might have been.

Memoirs therefore such as these do not require the justification of any rare superiority of talent or character, and will be read with pleasure by many on whom the personage whose name they bear leaves little or no impression. There are others, on the contrary, who would have desired a more distinct representation of Miss Berry's personality; but they may remember that Biography is no easier than Life; and that, while every one has attempted to contemplate his own mortal existence and that of others, each as a co-ordinate whole, with its special character, its individual meaning, its exceptional moral, he has been constantly foiled by his inability to comprehend all the fragments before him and compelled to content himself either with a vague delineation which he leaves to be filled up by other thoughts and other experiences, or by a work of Art, which he knows to be the child and creature of his own imagination. When Plutarch placed