(which appears at irregular intervals in Oncken's "Allgemeine Geschichte") has also appeared. Critically, Professor Stade occupies an advanced position, and his conclusions do not in all cases commend themselves: but he writes with a warm sympathy with his subject, and is nearly always instructive. The present part contains in particular an ably drawn sketch of the early civilization of Israel. In the popular religion of Israel, Professor Stade finds traces of ancestor-worship, which he thinks at one time must have prevailed extensively: but he does not omit to point out how fundamentally opposed to this was the religion inaugurated by Moses, and how the latter, in virtue of its unique character and claims, overcame both ancestor-worship and every form of polytheism (p. 438 sq.).

In David Castelli's "La Legge del popolo Ebreo nel suo svolgimento storico," a clear and full exposition of the modern critical view of the legislation (or rather, legislations) contained in the Pentateuch, is combined with a popular and readable explanation of the laws themselves. The author, who is professor at Florence, writes with moderation, and shows independence of judgment. After examining the traditional opinion (ch. i. ii.), and stating briefly (ch. iii.) the conclusions of critics on the composition of the Pentateuch, he proceeds in the chapter following to explain the laws in detail, beginning with the Decalogue (ch. iv.), then passing to the "First Code" (Exod. xxi.-xxiii.), after this to Deuteronomy (ch. viii.), and ending (ch. ix.) with the "Priests' Code," which embraces the ceremonial law of Leviticus and Numbers. This is not the place to criticize the theory here presented of the course taken by Hebrew legislation: doubtless it embodies elements of truth, and it unquestionably throws great light upon particulars which seem otherwise anomalous or obscure. At the same time there are questions connected with it which are yet not clear; and something still remains for future investigation to explore. Castelli, it may be added, is a good Talmudical scholar; and the expositions of Jewish legalists and commentators are continually referred to in his volume.

A brochure of 108 pages by Dr. F. E. König, entitled "Die Hauptprobleme der altisraelitischen Religions-Geschichte," is a helpful and well-timed attempt to bring to a clear issue the questions now so warmly debated on the field of Old Testament criticism. Dr. König is a Privatdocent at Leipzig, and is already favourably known to scholars by two learned and useful works on Hebrew Grammar and Theology. He accepts upon literary and historical grounds the same critical position as Castelli,† while repudiating the theological assumptions with which it is sometimes associated, and arguing that it can be stated with such limitations and in such a form as to be in no way incompatible with the belief in a supernatural influence operating in the religious development of Israel. In the present brochure the issues raised are stated under thirteen heads and briefly discussed, the general conclusion being that, while it is true that there is a development traceable in the Old Testament, its extent has been exaggerated by naturalistic critics, while the facts which limit it have not

"Historisch-kritisches Lehrgebäude der Hebräischen Sprache" (1881); "Der Offenbarungsbegriff des Alten Testaments" (1882).

↑ See the last-named work, vol. ii. pp. 321–332.

been duly estimated. The distinction insisted upon by König between the critical and the theological issues is an important one, and in its more general recognition, alike in this country and upon the Continent, will probably be found the ultimate solution of the controversies which at present divide Old Testament scholars. Neither the critical position of Keil nor the theological position of Kuenen will be found in the long run to be tenable; and the problem which now demands the concentrated energies of all serious students is the discovery and reconciliation of the truth which beyond doubt underlies both the opposed views. There is an appreciative and favourable notice of König's book by Kautzsch in Schürer's Theol. Zeitschrift, 1884, No. 22, and it is, we believe, in course of being translated into English.

Dr. Berliner has merited the thanks of all interested in the Ancient Versions of the Old Testament by his reprint of the Sabionetta edition (1557) of the "Targum " of Onkelos, the most celebrated of the translations of the Pentateuch into Jewish Aramaic, with a valuable introduction, containing critical notes, and an explanation of the nature and history of the Targum, with especial reference to the changes through which the text has passed since it was committed to a written form. The relative antiquity of this "Targum" on the Pentateuch, and of another of which fragments have been preserved, has been a matter of controversy among scholars, and further investigation seems still to be required. Dr. Berliner reverts to the traditional opinion, but in this connection the remarks of Nöldeke, in the Lit. Central-Blatt, 1884, No. 39, deserve to be consulted; in all probability, also, Dr. Berliner antedates the period at which the Targum was committed to writing. The useful "Handwörterbuch des Biblischen Altertums," edited by Dr. Riehm, has also been completed during the past year. In the field of grammar and lexicography may be mentioned Kautzsch's Grammar of Biblical Aramaic (the so-called "Chaldee "), which will at once supersede all others upon this subject, and Strack and Siegfried's small but scholarly" Lehrbuch der neuhebräischen Sprache und Litteratur," which will be a welcome aid in a study for which there are few helps at present available. The defects of the ninth edition of Gesenius' Lexicon, edited by Mühlau and Volck in 1883, which formed the subject of a long notice by Siegfried in the Theol. Literaturzeitung for Nov. 17, 1883, have provoked a characteristic article from Professor Lagarde, in the Gottingische gelehrte Anzeigen (No. 7, 1884), which well deserves to be read. Certainly, Mühlau-Volck's work is in many respects unsatisfactory, and not preferable to the well-known translation of Gesenius, edited by Tregelles; it is to be hoped, should it ever appear in an English dress, that something more than a mere translation may be attempted.

Inscriptions continue to throw their light upon the Old Testament; and seldom a year passes without the zeal of explorers conducting them to some new discovery. During last year the identity of Tiglath Pileser and Pul, which had been long suspected, and to which, as Schrader showed, the existing evidence pointed very distinctly, seems to have been definitely settled. Two parallel lists of Babylonian kings have been discovered by Mr. Pinches in the British Museum, of which one names Pulu, the other Tugulti-pal-Esara as the successor of Ukinzer on the throne of Babylon, in a position exactly corresponding

to Πώρος, the successor of Χινζίρος, mentioned in the Canon of Ptolemy (Proceedings of the Society of Bibl. Arch., May 6, 1884, p. 193 ff.). In 1883 a long and important bilingual inscription (Greek and Aramaic) of 137 A.D., relating to taxes and imposts (vóμos teλdwvikòs), found at Palmyra, was published by de Vogué in the Journal Asiatique. This inscription (to say nothing of the fresh light thrown by it on the provincial government of the Romans) is remarkable as acquainting us with a dialect more closely resembling the Aramaic of Daniel and Ezra than any previously known. The principal linguistic features are noticed and explained by Sachau in the Zeitschrift of the German Oriental Society, 1883, pp. 562-71 (see also Duval in the Revue des Etudes Juives, viii. 1884, p. 57). At the beginning of 1884, Mr. Charles Doughty, who had explored parts of the north of Arabia in 1876-7, offered copies of inscriptions which he had taken during his travels to the French Academy of Inscriptions and Belles-Lettres, on condition that they should be published as speedily as possible. The offer was accepted; they were entrusted to the competent hand of M. Renan; and they are now published in a quarto volume, with transcriptions and explanations. The district of Arabia in which these inscriptions were found is a little north of Medina, and formed in the first century of our era part of the kingdom of "Hartat, king of the Nabatæans" (the Aretas of St. Paul and Josephus), whose name repeatedly occurs in them, and whose forty-eighth year is twice mentioned. The inscriptions are chiefly sepulchral, prohibiting unauthorized persons from using or disturbing the tombs. Like the Palmyrene inscriptions, they exhibit other new forms, supposed until now to be peculiar to the Aramaic of the Bible; they are also of interest as illustrating certain rare proper names occurring in the Old Testament. The publication of a selection of Phoenician and Aramaic inscriptions, in a convenient form, with short explanatory notes, would be of great service to the student.

Of articles in periodicals may be named a study in Comparative Grammar (the terminations of the perfect tense) by Theodor Nöldeke, in the Zeitschrift der Deutsch-Morgenländischen Gesellschaft (1884, p. 407-22), the sequel to an article in the preceding volume, p. 525; in Stade's Zeitschrift für die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft, the conclusion of Voller's notes on the LXX. translation of the Minor Prophets, and of the correspondence between Delitzsch and Dietrich (now first published) on the pronunciation of the Tetragrammaton; an article by Siegfried on the pronunciation of Hebrew in Jerome, abundantly illustrated by classified examples; a new attempt by Rud. Smend, only partially satisfactory even to its author, to solve the historical problems offered by the difficult section of Isaiah, ch. xxiv.xxvii.; and in the Theologisch Tijdschrift, an article by Kuenen on "Balaam," which is important for its criticism of Wellhausen's view of the composition of Numbers xxii.-xxiv., and refutation of an improbable theory, recently propounded, respecting the historical purport of the song preserved in Numbers xxi. 27-30.

S. R. DRIVER.

II.-MENTAL PHILOSOPHY.

MR. D. G. THOMPSON'S "System of Psychology " is one of the largest of recent contributions to the literature of the subject. Mr. Thompson disarms criticism by the unaffected modesty of the note with which he closes his second volume. There can be no harm, however, in saying that the book might have been more useful, and altogether a better book, if it had been kept within more moderate limits. The author seems, from a laudable desire of being comprehensive, to have gone upon the principle of taking nothing for granted, and the result is that his work treats of a great many subjects not usually included under the term Psychology. It is true that Psychology, as the last or most complex of the sciences, presupposes or postulates the fundamental notions of the simpler sciences; but that is hardly justification for the extent to which the statement and criticism of physical notions is allowed to run. Again, the summary of general biology, followed by a sketch of human physiology, extending in all to nearly 80 pp., does not profess to be more than a compilation from authorities. Why, then, does the author cumber the entrance to his own treatise with it, when a reference to one or two of the accepted treatises on the subject might have sufficed? The same is true of the matter contained in the chapter on "The Expression of Science," which belongs partly to comparative philology and partly to logic. But this criticism of a fault which lies upon the surface of Mr. Thompson's book should not be permitted to obscure the substantial merits of the work. Errors of excess may to a large extent be rectified by the judicious reader; and such a reader will soon discover that the purely psychological parts of the book are the best. Mr. Thompson is an acute and careful observer himself, and a systematic student of the results put forward by other workers. The standpoint from which he writes will be apparent from the fourfold acknowledgment in the prefatory note-"To Julius H. Seelye, the personal teacher of my youth; to John Stuart Mill, the ever-influencing though unseen friend of boyhood, youth, and manhood, who with the first-named taught me to love truth above all things else; to Herbert Spencer and Alexander Bain, who with the second of the four, have shown me the paths of true knowledge in the department of Psychology." Mr. Thompson does not prefer any claim to originality, and indeed it is evident that the more any body of knowledge assumes the fixed form and character of a science, the less scope must there be for originality in any one who undertakes to give a conspectus of the whole subject. Psychology may now claim to be fairly established as a science, and, as in the other sciences, the work begins to be parcelled out among specialists, who attain the only originality possible by elaborate monographs on separate-often very minutedepartments of the subject. Hence the author's statement that he has "only been endeavouring to present Psychological science as it is, with occasionally some contribution of my own in the way of original observation, objective or introspective," is one which hardly requires to be taken in an apologetic sense. And, though at times one could

* "A System of Psychology." By Daniel Greenleaf Thompson. In two volumes. London: Longmans, Green & Co. 1884. .

wish that the influence of Professor Bain had been less overpowering, the author has amply made good the modest claim he puts forward for himself as an independent student. His powers of first-hand introspective analysis are best seen, perhaps, in the elaborate classification of feelings which he undertakes in Part VIII. ("Integrations of Feeling," vol. ii., pp. 293-501). Here he has been less forestalled by systematic treatises, and he allows himself accordingly more scope for original treatment. On the other hand, the Part immediately preceding, devoted to "Cognitive Integrations," exemplifies perhaps at its worst that unconsciousness of the true limits of Psychology which runs through the whole book and constitutes its main defect. The discussion of concepts and judgments deals with these almost entirely in their logical character, and the chapters on "Definition and Division," and on "Arguments"-the latter containing Mill's canons of induction, and a classification of logical fallacies-belong clearly to a treatise on logic. This Part closes with two long chapters on "Some Theories of Intuitional Knowledge" and "Necessary Truth," which belong, as clearly, not to Psychology, or the science of mental states, but to Philosophy proper, or, more exactly, to the Theory of Knowledge. There is a fundamental distinction between the intellectual functions, as states of consciousness or physical facts whose history and conditions can be given, and knowledge as an ideal content whose validity requires examination. The investigation of the history and conditions of mental facts is the business of psychological science; the investigation of knowledge (in its constituent notions and the validity which attaches to them) belongs to the theory of knowledge, and constitutes a philosophical question in the strict sense of that term. The mingling of the two questions can only lead to confusion. It is only of late years, thanks mainly to the Kantian influence, that this distinction has begun to be clearly apprehended in England; and Mr. Thompson, to judge from many of his utterances, has not emancipated himself from the tendency to substitute psychology for philosophy, which is so strong in the older English psychologists.

The absence of a definite philosophical criticism of knowledge makes itself felt in Mr. Thompson's attempt-as it does in the attempts of his masters-to define the Ego or mind, which psychologists are supposed to study. A start is made with the fundamental distinction between Ego and non-Ego, the indicia of this distinction being respectively "impressions from without and ideas within, or as some choose to say, sensations and ideas, the former being distinguishing manifestations of the non-Ego, the latter of the Ego. These manifestations exist in parallel streams or currents." The first stream is afterwards spoken of as "phenomena of the non-Ego," and, as "based upon a common property of extension," is treated as equivalent to "phenomena extended." But if this is so, the study of sensations would cease to be a part of psychology and would require to be relegated to physics and physiology. Or if, as most people suppose, sensations are not extended, they are strictly mental facts, and as such, phenomena of the Ego; in other words, the distinction of impressions and ideas in no way carries us beyond the individual mind. The distinction drawn breaks down equally when followed out on the other side, owing to "the curious fact," as Mr. Thompson calls it, "that

VOL. XLVII.