{"collection":"philosophy-ethics","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_46330/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_46330","id":"gutenberg_46330","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/46330","summary":null,"tags":["Aesthetics","Art -- Philosophy","Category: Art","Category: Philosophy & Ethics"],"text":"THE INTRODUCTION TO\n\n    HEGEL'S PHILOSOPHY OF FINE ART\n\n\n\n\n    THE INTRODUCTION TO\n\n    HEGEL'S\n\n    PHILOSOPHY OF FINE ART\n\n\n    TRANSLATED FROM THE GERMAN\n\n    _WITH NOTES AND PREFATORY ESSAY_\n\n\n    BY\n\n    BERNARD BOSANQUET, M.A.\n\n    LATE FELLOW AND TUTOR OF UNIVERSITY COLLEGE, OXFORD\n\n\n    LONDON\n\n    KEGAN PAUL, TRENCH & CO., 1 PATERNOSTER SQUARE\n\n    1886\n\n\n(_The rights of translation and of reproduction are reserved._)\n\n\n\n\nTRANSLATOR'S PREFACE.\n\n\nHegel's \"_\u00c6sthetik_,\" or \"Philosophy of Fine Art,\" is a work which\nshould no longer be inaccessible to the English reading public, but the\nreproduction of which, in its complete form of 1600 pages, is a task\nnot to be lightly undertaken. I know of three partial reproductions\nof the \"_\u00c6sthetik_\" in English, viz. Mr. Bryant's translation of\nPart II.,[1] Mr. Kedney's short analysis of the entire work,[2] and\nMr. Hastie's translation of Michelet's short \"Philosophy of Art,\"[3]\nprefaced by Hegel's Introduction, partly translated and partly analysed.\n\nI wholly disapprove of analyses (among which may be reckoned Michelet's\nsummary above mentioned) as representations of Hegel's writing, which\nis attractive chiefly by the force and freshness of its detail. I\nam convinced that Hegel should be allowed to speak for himself, and\nthat failing the translation of the whole \"_\u00c6sthetik_,\" or of very\ncopious selections, the best course is that which I have adopted in the\npresent volume, viz. to translate the entire Introduction, including\nthe chapter entitled, \"Division of the Subject.\" This Introduction\nis in Hegel's best manner--so far as he can be said to have literary\nmanner at all, especially in a work which has been produced by editors\nfrom lecture-notes,--and is tolerably complete in itself. It is not\ncontained as a whole in any of the above-mentioned works. I ought to\nsay, however, that Mr. Hastie's translation is excellent in style;\nbut after the first thirty-four pages it also becomes an analysis.\nNor is it wholly free from serious mistakes. I have hoped that the\npresent volume may be of interest to many who, without being students\nof philosophy, are intelligent lovers of art. I have therefore done\nmy best to _interpret_ philosophical expressions, instead of merely\nfurnishing their technical equivalents. I have also added a few short\nnotes, either to explain literary allusions, or to complete the\ninterpretation of technical terms. The prefatory essay was written with\na similar intention, not as original speculation, but as an assistance\nto general readers in apprehending the point of view from which Fine\nArt is regarded by Hegel and kindred writers.\n\nI have broken up the \"_Einleitung_,\" or Introduction proper, which is\ncontinuous in the original, into four chapters,[4] hoping that the\narrangement of the discussion may be thus rendered easier to follow.\nThe \"_Eintheilung_,\" which forms my Chapter V., is a separate chapter\nin the original. The table of contents is translated from the original,\nexcepting those portions of it which are enclosed in square brackets,\n[ ].\n\nMy literary notes are entirely borrowed from the late Mrs. F. C.\nConybeare's translation of Scherer's \"History of German Literature;\" a\nwork invaluable to the English student, whose gratitude must for long\nbe saddened by the untimely death of the translator.\n\n\n\n\nCONTENTS.\n\n\n                                                               PAGE\n\n  TRANSLATOR'S PREFACE                                           vii\n  PREFATORY ESSAY BY THE TRANSLATOR                             xiii\n\n  CHAPTER I.\n\n  THE RANGE OF \u00c6STHETIC DEFINED, AND SOME OBJECTIONS\n  AGAINST THE PHILOSOPHY OF ART REFUTED (1-25).\n\n  [[Greek: a.] \u00c6sthetic confined to Beauty of _Art_               2\n  [Greek: b.] Does Art _merit_ Scientific Treatment?              5\n  [Greek: g.] Is Scientific Treatment _appropriate_ to Art?       8\n  [Greek: d.] Answer to [Greek: b.]                              13\n  [Greek: e.] Answer to [Greek: g.]]                             20\n\n  CHAPTER II.\n\n  METHODS OF SCIENCE APPLICABLE TO BEAUTY AND ART (26-42).\n\n  [1. Empirical Method--Art-scholarship                          27\n\n  (_a_) Its Range                                                27\n  (_b_) It generates Rules and Theories                          28\n  (_c_) The Rights of Genius                                     38\n  2. Abstract Reflection                                         40\n  3. The Philosophical Conception of Artistic Beauty, general\n  notion of]                                                     41\n\n  CHAPTER III.\n\n  THE PHILOSOPHICAL CONCEPTION OF ARTISTIC BEAUTY,\n  BEGINNING WITH CURRENT IDEAS OF ART (43-105).\n\n  PART I.--The Work of Art as Made and as Sensuous            43-78\n\n  1. Work of Art as Product of Human Activity                    48\n  [(_a_) Conscious Production by Rule                            48\n  (_b_) Artistic Inspiration                                     50\n  (_c_) Dignity of Production by Man                             54\n  (_d_) Man's Need to produce Works of Art]                      57\n\n  2. Work of Art as addressed to Man's Sense                  60-78\n  [(_a_) Object of Art--Pleasant Feeling?                        60\n  (_b_) Feeling of Beauty--Taste                                 63\n  (_c_) Art-scholarship                                          65\n  (_d_) Profounder Consequences of Sensuous Nature of Art        66\n  ([Greek: a]) Relations of the Sensuous to the Mind             67\n  ([Greek: aa]) Desire                                           68\n  ([Greek: bb]) Theory                                           70\n  ([Greek: gg]) Sensuous as Symbol of Spiritual                  72\n  ([Greek: b]) The Sensuous Element, how Present in the\n  Artist                                                         74\n  ([Greek: g]) The _Content_ of Art Sensuous]                    78\n\n  PART II.--The End of Art.\n\n  3. [The Interest or End of Art                            (79-106)\n  (_a_) Imitation of Nature?                                     79\n  ([Greek: a]) Mere Repetition of Nature is--                    79\n  ([Greek: aa]) Superfluous                                      80\n  ([Greek: bb]) Imperfect                                        80\n  ([Greek: gg]) Amusing merely as Sleight of Hand                82\n  ([Greek: b]) _What_ is Good to Imitate?                        83\n  ([Greek: g]) Some Arts cannot be called Imitative              85\n  (_b_) _Humani nihii_--?                                        87\n  (_c_) Mitigation of the Passions?                              90\n  ([Greek: a]) _How_ Art mitigates the Passions                  91\n  ([Greek: b]) _How_ Art purifies the Passions                   94\n  ([Greek: aa]) It must have a Worthy Content                    95\n  ([Greek: bb]) But ought not to be Didactic                     95\n  ([Greek: gg]) Nor explicitly addressed to a _Moral_\n  Purpose                                                        98\n  (_d_) Art has its own Purpose as Revelation of Truth]          105\n\n  CHAPTER IV.\n\n  HISTORICAL DEDUCTION OF THE TRUE IDEA OF ART IN\n  MODERN PHILOSOPHY (107-132).\n\n  1. Kant                                                       107\n  [(_a_) Pleasure in Beauty not Appetitive                      110\n  (_b_) Pleasure in Beauty Universal                            111\n  (_c_) The Beautiful in its Teleological Aspect                112\n  (_d_) Delight in the Beautiful _necessary_\n   though _felt_]                                               113\n  2. Schiller, Winckelmann, Schelling                           116\n  3. The Irony                                                  120\n\n  CHAPTER V.\n\n  DIVISION OF THE SUBJECT (133-175).\n\n  [1. The Condition of Artistic Presentation is the Correspondence\n  of Matter and Plastic Form                                    133\n  2. Part I.--The Ideal                                         141\n  3. Part II.--The Types of Art                                 144\n  ([Greek: a]) Symbolic Art                                     145\n  ([Greek: b]) Classical Art                                    148\n  ([Greek: g]) Romantic Art                                     151\n  4. Part III.--The Several Arts                                157\n  ([Greek: a]) Architecture                                     160\n  ([Greek: b]) Sculpture                                        162\n  ([Greek: g]) Romantic Art, comprising                         164\n  (i.) Painting                                                 167\n  (ii.) Music                                                   169\n  (iii.) Poetry                                                 171\n  5. Conclusion]                                                173\n\n\n\n\nPREFATORY ESSAY BY THE TRANSLATOR.\n\nON THE TRUE CONCEPTION OF ANOTHER WORLD.\n\n\"With such barren forms of thought, that are always in a world beyond,\nPhilosophy has nothing to do. Its object always something concrete,\nand in the highest sense present.\"--HEGEL'S _Logic_, Wallace's\ntranslation, p. 150.\n\n\nIt will surprise many readers to be told that the words which I have\nquoted above embody the very essence of Hegelian thought. The Infinite,\nthe supra-sensuous, the divine, are so connected in our minds with\nfutile rackings of the imagination about remote matters which only\ndistract us from our duties, that a philosophy which designates its\nproblems by such terms as these seems self-condemned as cloudy and\ninane. But, all appearances to the contrary notwithstanding, Hegel\nis faithful to the present and the concrete. In the study of his\nphilosophy we are always dealing with human experience. \"My stress\nlay,\" says Mr. Browning,[5] \"on the incidents in the development of a\nsoul; little else is worth study.\" For \"a soul\" read \"the mind,\" and\nyou have the subject-matter to which Hegel's eighteen close-printed\nvolumes are devoted. The present introductory remarks are meant to\ninsist on this neglected point of view. I wish to point out, in two or\nthree salient instances, the transformation undergone by speculative\nnotions when sedulously applied to life, and restrained from generating\nan empty \"beyond.\" By so doing I hope to pave the way for a due\nappreciation of Hegel's philosophy of fine art. That the world of mind,\nor the world above sense, exists as an actual and organized whole, is a\ntruth most easily realized in the study of the beautiful. And to grasp\nthis principle as Hegel applies it is nothing less than to acquire a\nnew contact with spiritual life. The spiritual world, which is present,\nactual, and concrete, contains much besides beauty. But to apprehend\none element of such a whole constitutes and presupposes a long step\ntowards apprehending the rest. It is for this reason that I propose, in\nthe first place, to explain, by prominent examples, the conception of\na spiritual world which is present and actual, and then to let Hegel\nspeak for himself on the particular sphere of art. So closely connected\nindeed are all the embodiments of mind, that the Introduction to the\n\"Philosophy of Fine Art\" is almost a microcosm of his entire system.\n\nWe know, to our cost, the popular conception of the supra-sensuous\nworld. Whatever that world is, it is, as commonly thought of, not here\nand not now. That is to say, if here and now, it is so by a sort of\nmiracle, at which we are called upon to wonder, as when angels are\nsaid to be near us, or the dead to know what we do. Again, it is a\ncounterpart of our present world, and rather imperceptible to _our_\nsenses, than in its nature beyond contact with sense as such. It is\npeopled by persons, who live eternally, which means through endless\nages, and to whose actual communion with us, as also to our own\nwith God, we look forward in the future. It even perhaps contains a\nsupra-sensuous original corresponding to every thing and movement in\nthis world of ours. And it does _not_ necessarily deepen our conception\nof life, but only reduplicates it.\n\nSuch a world, whatever we may think about its actual existence, is\n_not_ the \"other world\" of philosophy. The \"things not seen\" of Plato\nor of Hegel are not a double or a projection of the existing world.\nPlato, indeed, wavered between the two conceptions in a way that should\nhave warned his interpreters of the divergence in his track of thought.\nBut in Hegel, at least, there is no ambiguity. The world of spirits\nwith him is no world of ghosts. When we study the embodiments of mind\nor spirit in his pages, and read of law, property, and national unity;\nof fine art, the religious community, and the intellect that has\nattained scientific self-consciousness, we may miss our other world\nwith its obscure \"beyond,\" but we at any rate feel ourselves to be\ndealing with something real, and with the deepest concerns of life.\nWe may deny to such matters the titles which philosophy bestows upon\nthem; we may say that this is no \"other world,\" no realm of spirits,\nnothing infinite or divine: but this matters little so long as we know\nwhat we are talking about, and are talking about the best we know. And\nwhat we discuss when Hegel is our guide, will _always_ be some great\nachievement or essential attribute of the human mind. He never asks,\n\"Is it?\" but always \"What is it?\" and therefore has instruction, drawn\nfrom experience, even for those to whom the titles of his inquiries\nseem fraudulent or bombastic.\n\nThese few remarks are not directed to maintaining any thesis about\nthe reality of nature and of sense. Their object is to enforce a\ndistinction which falls _within_ the world which we know, and not\n_between_ the world we know and another which we do not know. This\ndistinction is real, and governs life. I am not denying any other\ndistinction, but I am insisting on this. No really great philosopher,\nnor religious teacher,--neither Plato, nor Kant, nor St. Paul--can\nbe understood unless we grasp this antithesis in the right way. All\nof these teachers have pointed men to another world. All of them,\nperhaps, were led at times by the very force and reality of their own\nthought into the fatal separation that cancels its meaning. So strong\nwas their sense of the gulf between the trifles and the realities\nof life, that they gave occasion to the indolent imagination--in\nthemselves and in others--to transmute this gulf from a measure of\nmoral effort into an inaccessibility that defies apprehension. But\ntheir purpose was to overcome this inaccessibility, not to heighten it.\n\nThe hardest of all lessons in interpretation is to believe that great\nmen mean what they say. We are below their level, and what they\nactually say seems impossible to us, till we have adulterated it to\nsuit our own imbecility. Especially when they speak of the highest\nrealities, we attach _our_ notion of reality to what _they_ pronounce\nto be real. And thus we baffle every attempt to deepen our ideas of the\nworld in which we live. The work of intelligence is hard; that of the\nsensuous fancy is easy; and so we substitute the latter for the former.\nWe are told, for instance, by Plato, that goodness, beauty, and truth\nare realities, but not visible or tangible. Instead of responding to\nthe call so made on our intelligence by scrutinizing the nature and\nconditions of these intellectual facts--though we know well how tardily\nthey are produced by the culture of ages--we apply forthwith our idea\nof reality as something separate in space and time, and so \"refute\"\nPlato with ease, and remain as wise as we were before. And it is true\nthat Plato, handling ideas of vast import with the mind and language\nof his day, sometimes by a similar error refutes himself.[6] He makes,\nfor instance, the disembodied soul see the invisible ideas. Thus he\ntravesties his things of the mind as though they were things of sense,\nonly not of _our_ sense--thereby destroying the deeper difference\nof kind that alone enables them to find a place in our world. That\nhis doctrine of ideas was really rooted, not in mysticism, but in\nscientific enthusiasm, is a truth that is veiled from us partly by his\ninconsistencies, but far more by our own erroneous preconceptions.[7]\n\nThere is, however, a genuine distinction between \"this\" world and\nthe \"other\" world, which is merely parodied by the vulgar antitheses\nbetween natural and supernatural, finite and infinite, phenomenal and\nnoumenal. We sometimes hear it said, \"The world is quite changed to\nme since I knew such a person,\" or \"studied such a subject,\" or \"had\nsuggested to me such an idea.\" The expression may be literally true;\nand we do not commonly exaggerate, but vastly underrate its import. We\nread, for instance, in a good authority, \"These twenty kinds of birds\n(which Virgil mentions) do not correspond so much to our species as to\nour genera; for the Greeks and Romans, I need hardly say, had only very\nrough-and-ready methods of classification, just as is the case with\nuneducated people at the present day.\"[8] Any one may verify the same\nfact as regards the observation of flowers. Every yellow ranunculus\nis called a \"butter-cup,\" every large white umbellifer a \"hemlock.\"\nThese, with hundreds of other differences of perception, affect the\nsurroundings in which men consciously live, at least as much as a\nconsiderable degree of deafness or blindness. It is no metaphor, but\nliteral fact, to say that man's whole environment is transformed by the\ntraining even of his mere apprehension of natural objects. But there\nis more in the matter than this. Without going into metaphysics, which\nI wish to avoid, I cannot, indeed, maintain that mind \"makes\" natural\nobjects, although by enabling us to perceive them it unquestionably\nmakes our immediate conscious world. My individual consciousness does\nnot make or create the differences between the species of ranunculus,\nalthough it does create my knowledge of them. But when we come to speak\nof the world of morals or art or politics, we may venture much further\nin our assertions. The actual facts of this world do directly arise\nout of and are causally sustained by conscious intelligence; and these\nfacts form the world above sense. The unity of a Christian church or\ncongregation is a governing fact of life; so is that of a family or a\nnation; so, we may hope, will that of humanity come to be. What is this\nunity? Is it visible and tangible, like the unity of a human body? No,\nthe unity is \"ideal;\" that is, it exists in the medium of thought only;\nit is made up of certain sentiments, purposes, and ideas. What even of\nan army? Here, too, an ideal unity is the mainspring of action. Without\nmutual intelligence and reciprocal reliance you may have a mob, but\nyou cannot have an army. But all these conditions exist and can exist\nin the mind only. An army, _qua_ army, is not a mere fact of sense;\nfor not only does it need mind to perceive it--a heap of sand does\nthat--but it also needs mind to _make_ it.\n\nThe world of these governing facts of life is the world of the things\nnot seen, the object of reason, the world of the truly infinite and\ndivine. It is, of course, a false antithesis to contrast seeing with\nthe bodily eye and seeing with the mind's eye. The seeing eye is always\nthe mind's eye. The distinction between sense and spirit or intellect\nis a distinction _within the mind_ just as is St. Paul's opposition\nbetween the spirit and the flesh. Nevertheless, the mind that only sees\ncolour--sense or sense-perception--is different from the mind that sees\nbeauty, the self-conscious spirit. The latter includes the former, but\nthe former does not include the latter. To the one the colour is the\nultimate fact; to the other it is an element in a thing of beauty. This\nrelation prevails throughout between the world of sense and the world\nabove sense. The \"things not seen,\" philosophically speaking, are no\nworld of existences or of intelligences co-ordinate with and severed\nfrom this present world. They are a value, an import, a significance,\nsuperadded to the phenomenal world, which may thus be said, though with\nsome risk of misunderstanding, to be degraded into a symbol. The house,\nthe cathedral, the judge's robe, the general's uniform, are ultimate\nfacts for the child or the savage; but for the civilized man they are\nsymbols of domestic life, of the Church, and of the State. Even where\nthe supra-sensuous world has its purest expression, in the knowledge\nand will of intelligent beings, it presupposes a sensuous world as\nthe material of ideas and of actions. \"This\" world and the \"other\"\nworld are continuous and inseparable, and all men must live in some\ndegree for both. But the completion of the Noumenal world, and the\napprehension of its reality and completeness, is the task by fulfilling\nwhich humanity advances.\n\nI pass to the interpretation, neither technical nor controversial, of\none or two of Hegel's most alarming phrases.\n\nThe \"infinite\" seems to practical minds the very opposite of anything\nreal, present, or valuable. As the description of life, it is the\nmere negation of the life we know; as the description of a purpose,\nit is the very antithesis of any purpose that we can conceive to be\nattainable; as the description of a being, it appears to be formed\nby denying every predicate which we attach to personality. And I\ncould wish that Hegel had not selected this much-abused term as the\ndistinctive predicate of what is most real and most precious in life.\nHe adhered to it, no doubt, because his infinity, though different in\nnature to that of common logic, yet rightly fills the place and meets\nthe problem of that conception. I will attempt to explain how this\ncan be, and what we are discussing when we read about infinity in the\nHegelian philosophy.\n\nIt is an obvious remark, that infinity was a symbol of evil in\nHellenic speculation, whereas to Christian and modern thought it is\nidentified with good. Much idle talk has arisen on this account, as to\nthe limitation of the Hellenic mind. For in fact, the Finite ascribed\nto Pythagoras, and the idea of limit and proportion in Plato or in\nAristotle, are far more nearly akin to true infinity than is the\nInfinite of modern popular philosophy. Infinite means the negation of\nlimit. Now, common infinity, which may be identified in general with\nenumeration _ad infinitum_,--the _false_ infinity of Hegel--is the\nattempt to negate or transcend a limit which inevitably recurs. It\narises from attempting a task or problem in the wrong way, so that we\nmay go on for ever without making any advance towards its achievement.\nAll quantitative infinity--which of course has its definite uses,\nsubject to proper reservations--is of this nature. A process does\nnot change its character by mere continuance, and the aggregate of a\nmillion units is no more free from limitation than the aggregate of\nten. A defect in kind cannot be compensated by mere quantity. We see\nthe fallacious attempt in savage, barbaric, or vulgar art. Meaningless\niteration, objectless labour, enormous size, extravagant costliness,\nindicate the effort to satisfy man's need of expression by the mere\naccumulation of work without adequate idea or purpose. But such\nefforts, however stupendous, never attain their goal. They constitute a\nrecurrent failure to transcend a recurrent limit, precisely analogous\nto enumeration _ad infinitum_. A hundred thousand pounds' worth of\nbricks and mortar comes no nearer to the embodiment of mind than\na thousand pounds' worth. To attempt adequate expression by mere\naggregation of cost or size is therefore to fall into the infinite\nprocess or the false infinity.\n\nAnother well-known instance is the pursuit of happiness in the form\nof \"pleasure for pleasure's sake.\" The recurrence of unchanging units\nleaves us where we were. A process which does not change remains the\nsame, and if it did not bring satisfaction at first, will not do so at\nlast.[9] We might as well go on producing parallels to infinity, in the\nhope that somehow or somewhere they may meet. An infinite straight line\nmay serve as a type of the kind of infinity we are considering.\n\nInfinity in the Hegelian sense does not partake in any way of this\nendlessness, or of the unreality which attaches to it. Its root-idea is\nself-completeness or satisfaction. That which is \"infinite\" is without\nboundary, because it does not refer beyond itself for explanation, or\nfor justification; and therefore, in all human existence or production\ninfinity can only be an aspect or element. A picture, for instance,\nregarded as a work of fine art, justifies itself, gives satisfaction\ndirectly and without raising questions of cause or of comparison,\nand is in this sense--_i.e._ in respect of its beauty--regarded as\n\"infinite.\" When, on the other hand, we consider this same work of art\nas an historical phenomenon, as a link in a chain of causation--_e.g._\nas elucidating the development of a school, or proving the existence\nof a certain technical process at a certain date--then we go beyond\nitself for its interest and explanation, and depress it at once\ninto a finite object. The finite is that which presents itself as\nincomplete; the infinite that which presents itself as complete, and\nwhich, therefore, does not force upon us the fact of its limitation.\nThis character belongs in the highest degree to self-conscious mind,\nas realized in the world above sense; and in some degree to all\nelements of that world--for instance, to the State--in as far as they\nrepresent man's realized self-consciousness. It is the nature of\nself-consciousness to be infinite, because it is its nature to take\ninto itself what was opposed to it, and thus to make itself into an\norganized sphere that has value and reality within, and not beyond\nitself. If false infinity was represented by an infinite straight line,\ntrue infinity may be compared to a circle or a sphere.\n\nThe distinction between true and false infinity is of the profoundest\nmoral import. The sickly yearning that longs only to escape from the\nreal, rooted in the antithesis between the infinite and the actual or\nconcrete, or in the idea of the monotonous \"_infini_\" which is one with\nthe \"_ab\u00eeme_\" or the \"_gouffre_,\" is appraised by this test at its true\nvalue. It is seen to rest on a mere pathetic fallacy of thought and\nsentiment. So far from the infinite being remote, abstract, unreal,\nnothing but the infinite can be truly present, concrete, and real.\nThe finite always refers us away and away through an endless series of\ncauses, of effects, or of relations. The infinite is individual, and\nbears the character of knowledge, achievement, attainment. In short,\nthe actual realities which we have in mind when, in philosophy, we\nspeak of the infinite, are such as a nation that is conscious of its\nunity and general will, or the realm of fine art as the recognition of\nman's higher nature, or the religious community with its conviction of\nan indwelling Deity.\n\nNow, whether we like the term Infinite or not, whether or no we think\nthat man's life can be explained and justified within the limits of\nthese aims and these phenomena, there is no doubt that these matters\nare real, and are the most momentous of realities. In acquainting\nourselves with their structure, evolution, and relation to individual\nlife, we are at least not wasting time, nor treating of matters beyond\nhuman intelligence.\n\nThere is a very similar contrast in the conception of human Freedom.\n\"Free will\" is so old a vexed question, that though the conflict still\nrages fitfully round it, the world hardly conceives that much can\nturn upon its decision. But when in place of the abstract, \"Is man\nfree?\" we are confronted with the concrete inquiry, \"When, in what,\nand as what, does man carry out his will with least hindrance and with\nfullest satisfaction?\" then we have before us the actual phenomena of\ncivilization, instead of an idle and abstract Yes or No.\n\nMan's Freedom, in the sense thus contemplated, lies in the spiritual or\nsupra-sensuous world by which his humanity is realized, and in which\nhis will finds fulfilment. The family, for example, property, and law\nare the first steps of man's freedom. In them the individual's will\nobtains and bestows recognition as an agent in a society whose bond\nof union is ideal--_i.e._ existing only in consciousness; and this\nrecognition develops into duties and rights. It is in these that man\nfinds something to live for, something in which and for the sake of\nwhich to assert himself. As society develops he lives on the whole\nmore in the civilized or spiritual world, and less in the savage\nor purely natural world. His will, which is himself, expands with\nthe institutions and ideas that form its purpose, and the history\nof this expansion is the history of human freedom. Nothing is more\nshallow, more barbarously irrational, than to regard the progress of\ncivilization as the accumulation of restrictions. Laws and rules are a\nnecessary aspect of extended capacities. Every power that we gain has a\npositive nature, and therefore involves positive conditions, and every\npositive condition has negative relations. To accomplish a particular\npurpose you must go to work in a particular way, and in no other way.\nTo complain of this is like complaining of a house because it has a\ndefinite shape. If freedom means absence of attributes, empty space\nis \"freer\" than any edifice. Of course a house may be so ugly that we\nmay say we would rather have none at all. Civilization may bring such\nhorrors that we may say \"rather savagery than this;\" but in neither\ncase are we serious. Great as are the vices of civilization, it is only\nin civilization that man becomes human, spiritual, and free.\n\nThe effort to grasp and apply such an idea as this can hardly be\nbarren. It brings us face to face with concrete facts of history,\nand of man's actual motives and purposes. True philosophy here, as\neverywhere, plunges into the concrete and the real; it is the indolent\nabstract fancy that thrusts problems away into the remote \"beyond\"\nor into futile abstraction. Plato, the philosopher, knows well that\nthe mind is free when it achieves what as a whole it truly wills. But\nPlato, the allegorist and imaginative preacher, refers the soul's\nfreedom to a fleeting moment of ante-natal choice, which he vainly\nstrives to exempt from causal influence. Pictorial imagination, with\nits ready reference to occurrences in past and future, is the great foe\nto philosophic intelligence.\n\nFinally, it is impossible to omit all reference to the notion of an\nimmanent Deity, which forms the very centre of Hegel's thought. When\nan unspeculative English reader first meets with Hegel's passionate\ninsistence that God is not unknowable, that He necessarily reveals\nhimself as a Trinity of persons, and that to deny this is to represent\nmen as \"the heathen who know not God,\" he feels as if he had taken\nsand into his mouth. He is inclined to ask what these Neo-Platonic or\nmedi\u00e6val doctrines are doing in the nineteenth century, and why we\nshould resuscitate dead logomachies that can have no possible value for\nlife or conduct. Now, I must not attempt here to discuss the difficult\nquestion of Hegel's ultimate conception of the being of God, and I am\nbound to warn any one who may read these pages that I only profess\nto reproduce one--though by far the most prominent--side of that\nconception. But, subject to this reservation, I have no hesitation in\nsaying, that our own prejudices form the only hindrance to our seeing\nthat Hegel's subject-matter is here, as elsewhere, human life. He\ngives us what he takes to be the literal truth, and we will have it\nto be metaphor. Verbally contradicting Kant, he accepts, completes,\nand enforces Kant's thought. \"Revelation can never be the true ground\nof religion,\" said Kant; \"for revelation is an historical accident,\nand religion is a rational necessity of man's intelligent nature.\"\n\"Revelation is the only true knowledge of God and ground of religion,\"\nsays Hegel, \"because _revelation consists in the realization of God in\nman's intelligent nature_.\" We are, however, not unaccustomed to such\nphrases, and our imagination is equal to its habitual task of evading\ntheir meaning. We take them to be a strong metaphor, meaning that God,\nwho is a sort of ghostly being a long way off, is, notwithstanding,\nmore or less within the knowledge of our minds, and so is \"in\" them,\nas a book which is actually in London may be in my memory when I am\nin Scotland. Now, right or wrong, this is not what Hegel means. He\nmeans what he says; that God is spirit or mind,[10] and exists in the\nmedium of mind, _which is actual as intelligence, for us at any rate,\nonly in the human self-consciousness_. The thought is hard from its\nvery simplicity, and we struggle, as always, to avoid grasping it. We\nimagine spirits as made of a sort of thin matter, and so as existing\njust like bodies, although we call them disembodied. And then we think\nof this disembodied form as an alternative to human form, and suppose\nspirit to have somehow a purer existence apart from human body. This\nerror really springs from imagining the two as existences of the same\nkind, and so conflicting, and from not realizing the notion of spirit\nas mind or self-consciousness, which is the only way of conceiving its\nactual presence in our world.\n\nMind uses sensuous existence as its symbol; perhaps even needs it. The\npoet who has hit Hegel's thought so nearly,[11] fails here:--\n\n                      \"This weight of body and limb,\n    Are they not sign and symbol of thy division from Him?\"\n\nHere we leave the track of the higher Pantheism for that of vulgar\nmysticism. Spiritual being is conceived as somehow incompatible with\nbodily shape, either because incapable of any concrete embodiment, or\nbecause it has a quasi-material shape of its own. Now, this is just the\nreverse of the Hegelian idea. According to Hegel, it is only in the\nhuman form that intelligence can for us find its full expression. The\nnotion of a spiritual body other than and incompatible with the natural\nbody does not arise. Spirit exists in the medium of consciousness, not\nin a peculiar kind of matter. The spiritualization of the natural body\nis not to be looked for in an astral or angel body, but in the gait\nand gesture, the significance and dignity, that make the body of the\ncivilized man the outward image of his soul, and distinguish him from\nthe savage as from the animal. The human soul becomes actual itself,\nand visible to others, only by moulding the body into its symbol\nand instrument. It ought to have been an axiom of physiology, Hegel\nsays, that the series of animated forms must necessarily lead up to\nthat of man. For this is the only sensuous form in which mind could\nattain adequate manifestation. Thus anthropomorphism in fine art is\nno accident, nor an unworthy portrayal of divinity. If the Deity is\nto be symbolized to sense, it must be in the image of man. The symbol\nis not indeed the reality, as the sensuous image is not conscious\nthought; but this is a defect inherent in artistic presentation, and\nnot attributable to anthropomorphism in particular.\n\nIt is obvious that in the light of such a conception, a speculative\nimport can be attached to the doctrine of the Incarnation, and Hegel's\nreading of Christian ideas is, in fact, to be interpreted entirely in\nthis sense. This is not the place to go deeper into such views, which,\nhowever profound, may perhaps continue to seem non-natural expositions\nof Christian dogma. I am only concerned to show how here, also, the\nspeculative idea, operating upon the concrete and actual, generates\na fresh and inspiring insight into life and conduct. Few chapters of\nanthropology are more thorough, profound, and suggestive than Hegel's\naccount of the \"actual soul;\" _i.e._ of the habits and attributes which\nmake the body distinctively human by stamping it with the impress of\nmind. Nor has philosophic insight ever done better service to the\nhistory of religion than in grasping the essence of Christianity as the\n_unity_, (not merely the _union_) of the divine and human nature.\n\nAmong the things which are spiritually discerned, an important place\nbelongs to beauty. As a boundary and transition between sense and\nthought, it is peculiarly fitted to illustrate the reality which we\nclaim, in contradistinction to mere sensuous appearance, for what\nis best in life. Many who distrust Hegelian formul\u00e6 are convinced\nthat beauty at least is real. They will admit that fine art and the\nrecognition of beauty are not trifles, not amusements, but rank high\namong the interests that give life its value. All such will find\nthemselves in sympathy with the purpose of a great philosopher who has\nbent all the power of his genius and his industry to vindicating a\nplace for art as an embodiment of the divine nature. The Introduction\nto Hegel's \"\u00c6sthetic,\" which is all that it was possible to reproduce\nin the present volume, lacks, of course, the solidity and detailed\nelaboration of the treatise. Yet to all who care for thorough and noble\nthought on a great subject, and for a defence of their faith in the\ntrue spiritual realities, I have hope that the ensuing pages, however\nmarred by imperfect translation, will be welcome.\n\n\n\n\nHEGEL'S \u00c6STHETIC.\n\nINTRODUCTION.\n\nCHAPTER I.\n\nTHE RANGE OF \u00c6STHETIC DEFINED, AND SOME OBJECTIONS REFUTED.\n\n\nThe present course of lectures deals with \"\u00c6sthetic.\" Their subject\nis the wide _realm of the beautiful_, and, more particularly, their\nprovince is _Art_--we may restrict it, indeed, to _Fine Art_.\n\nThe name \"\u00c6sthetic\" in its natural sense is not quite appropriate to\nthis subject. \"\u00c6sthetic\" means more precisely the science of sensation\nor feeling. Thus understood, it arose as a new science, or rather as\nsomething that was to become a branch of philosophy for the first\ntime,[12] in the school of Wolff, at the epoch when works of art\nwere being considered in Germany in the light of the feelings which\nthey were supposed to evoke--feelings of pleasure, admiration, fear,\npity, etc. The name was so inappropriate, or, strictly speaking, so\nsuperficial, that for this reason it was attempted to form other\nnames, _e.g._ \"Kallistic.\" But this name, again, is unsatisfactory,\nfor the science to be designated does not treat of beauty in general,\nbut merely of _artistic_ beauty. We shall, therefore, permit the\nname \u00c6sthetic to stand, because it is nothing but a name, and so is\nindifferent to us, and, moreover, has up to a certain point passed into\ncommon language. As a name, therefore, it may be retained. The proper\nexpression, however, for our science is the \"Philosophy of Art,\" or,\nmore definitely, the \"Philosophy of Fine Art.\"\n\n[Greek: a.] By the above expression we at once exclude the _beauty\nof Nature_. Such a limitation of our subject may appear to be an\narbitrary demarcation, resting on the principle that every science has\nthe prerogative of marking out its boundaries at pleasure. But this is\nnot the sense in which we are to understand the limitation of \u00c6sthetic\nto _the beauty of art_. It is true that in common life we are in the\nhabit of speaking of beautiful colour, a beautiful sky, a beautiful\nriver, and, moreover, of beautiful flowers, beautiful animals, and,\nabove all, of beautiful human beings. We will not just now enter into\nthe controversy how far such objects can justly have the attribute\nof beauty ascribed to them, or how far, speaking generally, natural\nbeauty ought to be recognized as existing besides artistic beauty. We\nmay, however, begin at once by asserting that artistic beauty stands\n_higher_ than nature. For the beauty of art is the beauty that is\nborn--born again, that is--of the mind;[13] and by as much as the mind\nand its products are higher than nature and its appearances, by so\nmuch the beauty of art is higher than the beauty of nature. Indeed,\nif we look at it _formally_--i.e. only considering in what way it\nexists, not what there is in it,--even a silly fancy such as may pass\nthrough a man's head is _higher_ than any product of nature; for such\na fancy must at least be characterized by intellectual being and by\nfreedom.[14] In respect of its content, on the other hand, the sun,\nfor instance, appears to us to be an absolutely necessary factor in\nthe universe, while a blundering notion passes away as accidental and\ntransient; but yet, in its own being, a natural existence such as the\nsun is indifferent,[15] is not free or self-conscious, while if we\nconsider it in its necessary connection with other things we are not\nregarding it by itself or for its own sake, and, therefore, not as\nbeautiful.\n\nTo say, as we have said, in general terms, that mind and its artistic\nbeauty stand _higher_ than natural beauty, is no doubt to determine\nalmost nothing. For \"higher\" is an utterly indefinite expression, which\ndesignates the beauty of nature and that of art as if merely standing\nside by side in the space of the imagination, and states the difference\nbetween them as purely quantitative, and, therefore, purely external.\nBut the mind and its artistic beauty, in being \"_higher_\" as compared\nwith nature, have a distinction which is not simply relative. Mind, and\nmind only, is capable of truth, and comprehends in itself all that is,\nso that whatever is beautiful can only be really and truly beautiful as\npartaking in this higher element and as created thereby. In this sense\nthe beauty of nature reveals itself as but a reflection of the beauty\nwhich belongs to the mind, as an imperfect, incomplete mode of being,\nas a mode whose really substantial element is contained in the mind\nitself.\n\nMoreover, we shall find the restriction to fine art very natural, for\nhowever much has been and is said--though less by the ancients than by\nourselves--of the beauties of nature, yet no one has taken it into his\nhead to emphasize the point of view of the _beauty_ of natural objects,\nand to attempt to make a science, a systematic account of these\nbeauties. The aspect of _Utility_, indeed, has been accentuated, and a\nscience, _e.g._ of natural things useful against diseases a _materia\nmedica_, has been compiled, consisting in a description of minerals,\nchemical products, plants, and animals that are of use for curative\npurposes. But the realm of nature has not been arrayed and estimated\nunder the aspect of beauty. In dealing with natural beauty we find\nourselves too open to _vagueness_, and too destitute of a _criterion_;\nfor which reason such a review would have little interest.\n\nThe above prefatory remarks upon beauty in nature and in art, upon the\nrelation between the two, and the exclusion of the former from the\nregion of the subject proper, are meant to remove any idea that the\nlimitation of our science is owing merely to choice and to caprice.\nBut this is not the place to _demonstrate_ the above relation, for the\nconsideration of it falls within our science itself, and therefore it\ncannot be discussed and demonstrated till later.\n\nSupposing that for the present we have limited ourselves to the beauty\nof art, this first step brings us at once into contact with fresh\ndifficulties.\n\n[Greek: b.] The first thing that may suggest itself to us is the\ndifficulty whether fine art shows itself to _deserve_ a scientific\ntreatment. Beauty and art, no doubt, pervade all the business of\nlife like a kindly genius, and form the bright adornment of all our\nsurroundings, both mental and material, soothing the sadness of\nour condition and the embarrassments of real life, killing time in\nentertaining fashion, and where there is nothing good to be achieved,\noccupying the place of what is vicious, better, at any rate, than vice.\nYet although art presses in with its pleasing shapes on every possible\noccasion, from the rude adornments of the savage to the splendour of\nthe temple with its untold wealth of decoration, still these shapes\nthemselves appear to fall outside the real purposes of life. And\neven if the creations of art do not prove detrimental to our graver\npurposes, if they appear at times actually to further them by keeping\nevil at a distance, still it is so far true that art belongs rather to\nthe relaxation and leisure of the mind, while the substantive interests\nof life demand its exertion. Hence it may seem unsuitable and pedantic\nto treat with scientific seriousness what is not in itself of a serious\nnature. In any case, upon such a view art appears as a superfluity,\neven if the softening of the mental temper which preoccupation with\nbeauty has power to produce, does not turn out a detrimental, because\neffeminating influence. In this aspect of the matter, the fine\narts being granted to be a _luxury_, it has been thought necessary\nin various ways to take up their defence with reference to their\nrelation towards _practical_ necessities, and more especially towards\nmorality and piety; and, as it is impossible to demonstrate their\nharmlessness, at least to make it credible that the mental luxury in\nquestion afforded a larger sum of _advantages_ than of _disadvantages_.\nWith this view very serious aims have been ascribed to art, and it\nhas been recommended in various ways as a mediator between reason\nand sensuousness, between inclination and duty, as the reconciler of\nthese elements in the obstinate conflict and repulsion which their\ncollision generates. But the opinion may be maintained that, assuming\nsuch aims of art, more serious though they are, nothing is gained for\nreason and duty by the attempt at mediation, because these principles,\nas essentially incapable of intermixture, can be parties to no such\ncompromise, but demand in their manifestation the same purity which\nthey have in themselves. And it might be said that art itself is not\nmade any more worthy of scientific discussion by such treatment, seeing\nthat it is still doubly a servant--to higher aims, no doubt, on the\none hand, but none the less to vacuity and frivolity on the other; and\nin such service can at best only display itself as a means, instead of\nbeing an end pursued for its own sake. Finally, art, considered as a\nmeans, seems to labour under this defect of form, that, supposing it to\nbe subordinated to serious ends, and to produce results of importance,\nstill the means employed by art for such purposes is _deception_.\nFor beauty has its being in appearance.[16] Now, it will readily be\nadmitted that an aim which is real and true in itself ought not to\nbe attained by deception, and if it does here and there achieve some\nsuccess in this way, that can only be the case to a limited extent, and\neven then deception cannot approve itself as the right means. For the\nmeans should correspond to the dignity of the end, and only what is\nreal and true, not semblance or deception, has power to create what is\nreal and true; just as science, for instance, has to consider the true\ninterests of the mind in accordance with the truth of reality and the\ntrue way of conceiving it.\n\nIn all these respects it may appear as if fine art were _unworthy_\nof scientific consideration; because, as is alleged, it is at best a\npleasing amusement, and even if it pursues more serious aims is in\ncontradiction with their nature, but is at best the mere servant alike\nof amusement and of serious aims, and yet has at command, whether as\nthe element of its being or as the vehicle of its action, nothing\nbeyond deception and semblance.\n\n[Greek: g]. But, in the second place, it is a still more probable\naspect of the question that, even if fine art were to form a subject\nof philosophical reflections in a general way, it would be no\n_appropriate_ matter for strictly scientific treatment. The beauty\nof art presents itself to sense, to feeling, to perception, to\nimagination; its sphere is not that of thought, and the apprehension\nof its activity and its productions demand another organ than that of\nthe scientific intelligence. Moreover, what we enjoy in the beauty of\nart is precisely the _freedom_ of its productive and plastic energy. In\nthe origination, as in the contemplation, of its creations we appear\nto escape wholly from the fetters of rule and regularity. In the forms\nof art we seek for repose and animation in place of the austerity\nof the reign of law and the sombre self-concentration of thought;\nwe would exchange the shadowland of the idea for cheerful vigorous\nreality. And lastly, the source of artistic creations is the free\nactivity of fancy, which in her imagination is more free than nature's\nself. Not only has art at command the whole wealth of natural forms\nin the brilliant variety of their appearance, but also the creative\nimagination has power to expatiate inexhaustibly beyond their limit in\nproducts of _its own_. It may be supposed that, in presence of this\nimmeasurable abundance of inspiration and its free creations, thought\nwill necessarily lose the courage to bring them _completely_ before it,\nto criticize them, and to array them under its universal formul\u00e6.\n\nScience, on the contrary, every one admits, is compelled by its form to\nbusy itself with thought which abstracts from the mass of particulars.\nFor this reason, on the one hand, imagination with its contingency and\ncaprice--that is, the organ of artistic activity and enjoyment--is of\nnecessity excluded from science. And on the other hand, seeing that art\nis what cheers and animates the dull and withered dryness of the idea,\nreconciles with reality its abstraction and its dissociation therefrom,\nand supplies out of the real world what is lacking to the notion,\nit follows, we may think, that a _purely_ intellectual treatment of\nart destroys this very means of supplementation, annihilates it, and\nreduces the idea once more to its simplicity devoid of reality, and to\nits shadowy abstractness. And further, it is objected that science,\nas a matter of _content_, occupies itself with what is _necessary_.\nNow, if \u00c6sthetic puts aside the beauty of nature, we not only gain\nnothing in respect of necessity, but to all appearance have got further\naway from it. For the expression _Nature_ at once gives us the idea\nof Necessity and Uniformity,[17] that is to say, of a behaviour which\nmay be hoped to be akin to science, and capable of submitting thereto.\nBut in the mind, generally, and more particularly in the imagination,\ncompared with nature, caprice and lawlessness are supposed to be\npeculiarly at home; and these withdraw themselves as a matter of course\nfrom all scientific explanation.\n\nThus in all these aspects--in origin, in effect, and in range--fine\nart, instead of showing itself fitted for scientific study, seems\nrather in its own right to resist the regulating activity of thought,\nand to be unsuitable for strict scientific discussion.\n\nThese and similar objections against a genuinely scientific treatment\nof fine art are drawn from common ideas, points of view, and\nconsiderations, which may be read _ad nauseam_ in full elaboration in\nthe older writers upon beauty and the fine arts, especially in the\nworks of French authors. And in part they contain facts which have a\ncertain truth; in part, too, the argumentation[18] based upon these\nfacts appears plausible at first sight. Thus, _e.g._, there is the\nfact that the forms of beauty are as manifold as the phenomenon of\nbeauty is omnipresent; and from this, if we choose, we may proceed\nto conclude to a universal _impulse of Beauty_ in human nature, and\nthen go on to the further inference: that because ideas of beauty are\nso endlessly various, and therefore, as seems obvious, are something\n_particular_,[19] it follows that there can be no universal laws of\nbeauty and of taste.\n\nBefore it is possible for us to turn from such considerations to our\nsubject proper, it is our business to devote a brief introductory\ndiscussion to the objections and doubts which have been raised. In the\nfirst place, as regards the _worthiness_ of art to be scientifically\nconsidered, it is no doubt the case that art can be employed as a\nfleeting pastime, to serve the ends of pleasure and entertainment,\nto decorate our surroundings, to impart pleasantness to the external\nconditions of our life, and to emphasize other objects by means of\nornament. In this mode of employment art is indeed not independent, not\nfree, but servile. But what _we_ mean to consider, is the art which is\n_free_ in its end as in its means.\n\nThat art is in the abstract capable of serving other aims, and\nof being a mere pastime, is moreover a relation which it shares\nwith thought. For, on the one hand, science, in the shape of the\nsubservient understanding, submits to be used for finite purposes,\nand as an accidental means, and in that case is not self-determined,\nbut determined by alien objects and relations; but, on the other\nhand, science liberates itself from this service to rise in free\nindependence to the attainment of truth, in which medium, free from all\ninterference, it fulfils itself in conformity with its proper aims.\n\nFine art is not real art till it is in this sense free, and only\nachieves its highest task when it has taken its place in the same\nsphere with religion and philosophy, and has become simply a mode\nof revealing to consciousness and bringing to utterance the Divine\nNature,[20] the deepest interests of humanity, and the most\ncomprehensive truths of the mind. It is in works of art that nations\nhave deposited the profoundest intuitions and ideas of their hearts;\nand fine art is frequently the key--with many nations there is no\nother--to the understanding of their wisdom and of their religion.\n\nThis is an attribute which art shares with religion and philosophy,\nonly in this peculiar mode, that it represents even the highest ideas\n_in sensuous forms_, thereby bringing them nearer to the character\nof natural phenomena, to the senses, and to feeling. The world, into\nwhose depths _thought_ penetrates, is a supra-sensuous world, which\nis thus, to begin with, erected as a _beyond_ over against immediate\nconsciousness and present sensation; the power which thus rescues\nitself from the _here_, that consists in the actuality and finiteness\nof sense, is the freedom of thought in cognition. But the mind is able\nto heal this schism which its advance creates; it generates out of\nitself the works of fine art as the first middle term of reconciliation\nbetween pure thought and what is external, sensuous, and transitory,\nbetween nature with its finite actuality and the infinite freedom of\nthe reason that comprehends.\n\n[Greek: d]. The _element_ of art was said to be in its general nature\nan _unworthy_ element, as consisting in appearance and deception. The\ncensure would be not devoid of justice, if it were possible to class\nappearance as something that ought not to exist. An appearance or\nshow, however, is essential to existence. Truth could not be, did it\nnot appear and reveal itself,[21] were it not truth _for_ some one or\nsomething, _for_ itself as also _for_ Mind. Therefore there can be no\nobjection against appearance in general, but, if at all, against the\nparticular mode of appearance in which art gives actuality to what is\nin itself real and true. If, in this aspect, the _appearance_ with\nwhich art gives its conceptions life as determinate existences is to\nbe termed a _deception_, this is a criticism which primarily receives\nits meaning by comparison with the external world of phenomena and\nits immediate contact with us as _matter_, and in like manner by\nthe standard of our own world of feeling, that is, the inner world\nof _sense_. These are the two worlds to which, in the life of daily\nexperience, in our own phenomenal[22] life, we are accustomed to\nattribute the value and the title of actuality, reality, and truth, in\ncontrast to art, which we set down as lacking such reality and truth.\nNow, this whole sphere of the empirical inner and outer world is just\nwhat is not the world of genuine reality, but is to be entitled a mere\nappearance more strictly than is true of art, and a crueller deception.\nGenuine reality is only to be found beyond the immediacy of feeling\nand of external objects. Nothing is genuinely real but that which is\nactual in its own right,[23] that which is the substance of nature\nand of mind, fixing itself indeed in present and definite existence,\nbut in this existence still retaining its essential and self-centred\nbeing, and thus and no otherwise attaining genuine reality. The\ndominion of these universal powers is exactly what art accentuates and\nreveals. The common outer and inner world also no doubt present to us\nthis essence of reality, but in the shape of a chaos of accidental\nmatters, encumbered by the immediateness of sensuous presentation, and\nby arbitrary states, events, characters, etc. Art liberates the real\nimport of appearances from the semblance and deception of this bad and\nfleeting world, and imparts to phenomenal semblances a higher reality,\nborn of mind. The appearances of art, therefore, far from being mere\nsemblances, have the higher reality and the more genuine existence in\ncomparison with the realities of common life.\n\nJust as little can the representations of art be called a deceptive\nsemblance in comparison with the representations of historical\nnarrative, as if that had the more genuine truth. For history has not\neven immediate existence, but only the intellectual presentation of it,\nfor the element of its portrayals, and its content remains burdened\nwith the whole mass of contingent matter formed by common reality\nwith its occurrences, complications, and individualities. But the\nwork of art brings before us the eternal powers that hold dominion in\nhistory, without any such superfluity in the way of immediate sensuous\npresentation and its unstable semblances.\n\nAgain, the mode of appearance of the shapes produced by art may be\ncalled a deception in comparison with philosophic thought, with\nreligious or moral principles. Beyond a doubt the mode of revelation\nwhich a content attains in the realm of thought is the truest reality;\nbut in comparison with the show or semblance of immediate sensuous\nexistence or of historical narrative, the artistic semblance has the\nadvantage that in itself it points beyond itself, and refers us away\nfrom itself to something spiritual which it is meant to bring before\nthe mind's eye. Whereas immediate appearance does not give itself\nout to be deceptive, but rather to be real and true, though all the\ntime its truth is contaminated and infected by the immediate sensuous\nelement. The hard rind of nature and the common world give the mind\nmore trouble in breaking through to the idea than do the products of\nart.\n\nBut if, on the one side, we assign this high position to art, we must\nno less bear in mind, on the other hand, that art is not, either in\ncontent or in form, the supreme and absolute mode of bringing the\nmind's genuine interests into consciousness. The form of art is enough\nto limit it to a restricted content. Only a certain circle and grade of\ntruth is capable of being represented in the medium of art. Such truth\nmust have in its own nature the capacity to go forth into sensuous form\nand be adequate to itself therein, if it is to be a genuinely artistic\ncontent, as is the case with the gods of Greece. There is, however, a\ndeeper form of truth, in which it is no longer so closely akin and so\nfriendly to sense as to be adequately embraced and expressed by that\nmedium. Of such a kind is the Christian conception of truth; and more\nespecially the spirit of our modern world, or, to come closer, of our\nreligion and our intellectual culture, reveals itself as beyond the\nstage at which art is the highest mode assumed by man's consciousness\nof the absolute. The peculiar mode to which artistic production and\nworks of art belong no longer satisfies our supreme need. We are\nabove the level at which works of art can be venerated as divine,\nand actually worshipped; the impression which they make is of a more\nconsiderate kind, and the feelings which they stir within us require\na higher test and a further confirmation. Thought and reflection have\ntaken their flight above fine art. Those who delight in grumbling and\ncensure may set down this phenomenon for a corruption, and ascribe it\nto the predominance of passion and selfish interests, which scare away\nat once the seriousness and the cheerfulness of art. Or we may accuse\nthe troubles of the present time and the complicated condition of civil\nand political life as hindering the feelings, entangled in minute\npreoccupations, from freeing themselves, and rising to the higher\naims of art, the intelligence itself being subordinate to petty needs\nand interests, in sciences which only subserve such purposes and are\nseduced into making this barren region their home.\n\nHowever all this may be, it certainly is the case, that art no longer\naffords that satisfaction of spiritual wants which earlier epochs\nand peoples have sought therein, and have found therein only; a\nsatisfaction which, at all events on the religious side, was most\nintimately and profoundly connected with art. The beautiful days of\nGreek art, and the golden time of the later middle ages are gone by.\nThe reflective culture of our life of to-day, makes it a necessity for\nus, in respect of our will no less than of our judgment, to adhere to\ngeneral points of view, and to regulate particular matters according\nto them, so that general forms, laws, duties, rights, maxims are what\nhave validity as grounds of determination and are the chief regulative\nforce. But what is required for artistic interest as for artistic\nproduction is, speaking generally, a living creation, in which the\nuniversal is not present as law and maxim, but acts as if one with\nthe mood and the feelings, just as, in the imagination, the universal\nand rational is contained only as brought into unity with a concrete\nsensuous phenomenon. Therefore, our present in its universal condition\nis not favourable to art. As regards the artist himself, it is not\nmerely that the reflection which finds utterance all round him, and the\nuniversal habit of having an opinion and passing judgment about art\ninfect him, and mislead him into putting more abstract thought into his\nworks themselves; but also the whole spiritual culture of the age is of\nsuch a kind that he himself stands within this reflective world and its\nconditions, and it is impossible for him to abstract from it by will\nand resolve, or to contrive for himself and bring to pass, by means of\npeculiar education or removal from the relations of life, a peculiar\nsolitude that would replace all that is lost.\n\nIn all these respects art is, and remains for us, on the side of its\nhighest destiny, a thing of the past. Herein it has further lost for\nus its genuine truth and life, and rather is transferred into our\n_ideas_ than asserts its former necessity, or assumes its former\nplace, in reality. What is now aroused in us by works of art is over\nand above our immediate enjoyment, and together with it, our judgment;\ninasmuch as we subject the content and the means of representation\nof the work of art and the suitability or unsuitability of the two to\nour intellectual consideration. Therefore, the _science_ of art is a\nmuch more pressing need in our day, than in times in which art, simply\nas art, was enough to furnish a full satisfaction. Art invites us to\nconsideration of it by means of thought, not to the end of stimulating\nart production, but in order to ascertain scientifically what art is.\n\n[Greek: e]. As soon as we propose to accept this invitation we are\nmet by the difficulty which has already been touched upon in the\nsuggestion that, though art is a suitable subject for philosophical\nreflection in the general sense, yet it is not so for systematic and\nscientific discussion. In this objection there lies the false idea\nthat a philosophical consideration may, nevertheless, be unscientific.\nOn this point it can only be remarked here with brevity, that,\nwhatever ideas others may have of philosophy and philosophizing, I\nregard the pursuit of philosophy as utterly incapable of existing\napart from a scientific procedure. Philosophy has to consider its\nobject in its necessity, not, indeed, in its subjective necessity or\nexternal arrangement, classification, etc., but it has to unfold and\ndemonstrate the object out of the necessity of its own inner nature.\nUntil this evolution[24] is brought to pass the scientific element\nis lacking to the treatment. In as far, however, as the objective\nnecessity of an object lies essentially in its logical and metaphysical\nnature, the isolated treatment of art must be conducted with a certain\nrelaxation of scientific stringency. For art involves the most complex\npre-suppositions, partly in reference to its content, partly in respect\nof its medium[25] and element,[26] in which art is constantly on the\nborders of the arbitrary or accidental. Thus it is only as regards\nthe essential innermost progress of its content and of its media of\nexpression that we must call to mind the outline prescribed by its\nnecessity.\n\nThe objection that works of fine art elude the treatment of scientific\nthought because they originate out of the unregulated fancy and out\nof the feelings, are of a number and variety that defy the attempt\nto gain a conspectus, and therefore take effect only on feeling and\nimagination, raises a problem which appears still to have importance.\nFor the beauty of art does in fact appear in a form which is expressly\ncontrasted with abstract thought, and which the latter is forced\nto destroy in exerting the activity which is its nature. This idea\ncoheres with the opinion that reality as such, the life of nature and\nof mind, is disfigured and slain by comprehension; that, so far from\nbeing brought close to us by the thought which comprehends, it is by\nit that such life is absolutely dissociated from us, so that, by the\nuse of thought as the _means_ of grasping what has life, man rather\ncuts himself off from this his purpose. We cannot speak fully on this\nsubject in the present passage, but only indicate the point of view\nfrom which the removal of this difficulty, or impossibility depending\non maladaptation, might be effected.\n\nIt will be admitted, to begin with, that the mind is capable of\ncontemplating itself, and of possessing a consciousness, and that\na _thinking_ consciousness, of itself and all that is generated by\nitself. Thought--to think--is precisely that in which the mind has its\ninnermost and essential nature. In gaining this thinking consciousness\nconcerning itself and its products, the mind is behaving according\nto its essential nature, however much freedom and caprice those\nproducts may display, supposing only that in real truth they have\nmind in them. Now art and its works as generated and created by the\nmind (spirit), are themselves of a spiritual nature, even if their\nmode of representation admits into itself the semblance of sensuous\nbeing, and pervades what is sensuous with mind. In this respect art\nis, to begin with, nearer to mind and its thinking activity than is\nmere external unintelligent nature; in works of art, mind has to do\nbut with its own. And even if artistic works are not abstract thought\nand notion, but are an evolution of the notion _out of_ itself, an\nalienation from itself towards the sensuous, still the power of the\nthinking spirit (mind) lies herein, _not merely_ to grasp _itself only_\nin its peculiar form of the self-conscious spirit (mind), but just as\nmuch to recognize itself in its alienation in the shape of feeling\nand the sensuous, in its other form, by transmuting the metamorphosed\nthought back into definite thoughts, and so restoring it to itself.\nAnd in this preoccupation with the other of itself the thinking spirit\nis not to be held untrue to itself as if forgetting or surrendering\nitself therein, nor is it so weak as to lack strength to comprehend\nwhat is different from itself, but it comprehends both itself and its\nopposite. For the notion is the universal, which preserves itself\nin its particularizations, dominates alike itself and its \"other,\"\nand so becomes the power and activity that consists in undoing the\nalienation which it had evolved. And thus the work of art in which\nthought alienates itself belongs, like thought itself, to the realm of\ncomprehending thought, and the mind, in subjecting it to scientific\nconsideration, is thereby but satisfying the want of its own inmost\nnature. For because thought is its essence and notion, it can in the\nlast resort only be satisfied when it has succeeded in imbuing all the\nproducts of its activity with thought, and has thus for the first time\nmade them genuinely its own. But, as we shall see more definitely\nbelow, art is far from being the highest form of mind, and receives its\ntrue ratification only from science.[27]\n\nJust as little does art elude philosophical consideration by unbridled\ncaprice. As has already been indicated, it is its true task to bring\nto consciousness the highest interests of the mind. Hence it follows\nat once with respect to the _content_ that fine art cannot rove in the\nwildness of unfettered fancy, for these spiritual interests determine\ndefinite bases[28] for its content, how manifold and inexhaustible\nsoever its forms and shapes may be. The same holds true for the forms\nthemselves. They, again, are not at the mercy of mere chance. Not every\nplastic shape[29] is capable of being the expression and representation\nof those spiritual interests, of absorbing and of reproducing them;\nevery definite content determines a form suitable to it.\n\nIn this aspect too, then, we are in a position to find our bearings\naccording to the needs of thought in the apparently unmanageable mass\nof works and types of art.\n\nThus, I hope, we have begun by defining the content of our science,\nto which we propose to confine ourselves, and have seen that neither\nis fine art unworthy of a philosophical consideration, nor is a\nphilosophical consideration incompetent to arrive at a knowledge of the\nessence of fine art.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER II.\n\nMETHODS OF SCIENCE APPLICABLE TO BEAUTY AND ART.\n\n\nIf we now investigate _the required mode of scientific consideration_,\nwe here again meet with two opposite ways of treating the subject,\neach of which appears to exclude the other, and so to hinder us from\narriving at _any true result_.\n\nOn one side we see the science of art merely, so to speak, busying\nitself about the actual productions of art from the outside, arranging\nthem in series as a history of art, initiating discussions about extant\nworks, or sketching out theories intended to provide the general points\nof view that are to govern both criticism and artistic production.\n\nOn the other side we see science abandoning itself independently to\nreflection upon the beautiful, and producing mere generalities which do\nnot touch the work of art in its peculiarity, creating, in short, an\nabstract philosophy of the beautiful.\n\n1. As regards the former mode of treatment, which starts from the\nempirical side, it is the indispensable road for any one who means\nto become a student of art. And just as in the present day every\none, even though he is not busied with natural science, yet pretends\nto be equipped with the essentials of physical knowledge, so it has\nbecome more or less obligatory for a cultivated man to possess some\nacquaintance with art,[30] and the pretension to display one's-self as\na dilettante and connoisseur is pretty universal.\n\n(_a_) If such information is really to be recognized as\nart-scholarship,[31] it must be of various kinds and of wide range. The\nfirst necessity is an exact acquaintance with the immeasurable region\nof individual works of art of ancient and modern times, works which\nin part have actually perished, in part belong to distant countries\nor portions of the world, or which adverse fortune has withdrawn from\none's own observation. Moreover, every work belongs to its _age_, to\nits _nation_, and to its environment, and depends upon particular\nhistorical and other ideas and aims. For this reason art-scholarship\nfurther requires a vast wealth of historical information of a very\nspecial kind, seeing that the individualized nature of the work of\nart is related to individual detail and demands special matter to\naid in its comprehension and elucidation. And lastly, this kind of\nscholarship not only needs, like every other, a memory for information,\nbut a vivid imagination in order to retain distinctly the images of\nartistic forms in all their different features, and especially in order\nto have them present to the mind for purposes of comparison with other\nworks.\n\n(_b_) Within this kind of consideration, which is primarily historical,\nthere soon emerge various points of view which cannot be lost sight\nof in contemplating a work of art, inasmuch as our judgments must be\nderived from them. Now these points of view, as in other sciences\nwhich have an empirical starting-point, when extracted and put\ntogether form universal criteria and rules, and, in a still further\nstage of formal generalization, _Theories of the arts_. This is not\nthe place to go into detail about literature of this kind, and it\nmay, therefore, suffice to mention a few writings in the most general\nway. For instance, there is Aristotle's \"Poetics,\" the theory of\ntragedy contained in which is still of interest; and to speak more\nparticularly, among the ancients, Horace's \"Ars Poetica\" and Longinus's\n\"Treatise on the Sublime\" suffice to give a general idea of the way\nin which this kind of theorizing has been carried on. The general\nformul\u00e6 which were abstracted by such writers were meant to stand\nespecially as precepts and rules, according to which, particularly in\ntimes of degeneration of poetry and art, works of art were meant to be\nproduced. The prescriptions, however, compiled by these physicians of\nart had even less assured success than those of physicians whose aim\nwas the restoration of health.\n\nRespecting theories of this kind, I propose merely to mention that,\nthough _in detail_ they contain much that is instructive, yet their\nremarks were abstracted from a very limited circle of artistic\nproductions, which passed for _the_ genuinely beautiful ones, but yet\nalways belonged to a but narrow range of art. And again, such formul\u00e6\nare in part very trivial reflections which in their generality proceed\nto no establishment of particulars, although this is the matter of\nchief concern.\n\nThe above-mentioned Horatian epistle is full of these reflections, and,\ntherefore, is a book for all men, but one which for this very reason\ncontains much that amounts to nothing, _e.g._--\n\n    \"Omne tulit punctum qui miscuit utile dulci\n    Lectorem delectando pariterque monendo\"--\n\n\"He carries all votes, who has mingled the pleasant and the useful,\nby at once charming and instructing his reader.\" This is just like so\nmany copybook headings,[32] _e.g._ \"Stay at home and earn an honest\nlivelihood,\" which are right enough as generalities, but lack the\nconcrete determinations on which action depends.\n\nAnother kind of interest was found, not in the express aim of directly\ncausing the production of genuine works of art, but in the purpose\nwhich emerged of influencing men's judgment upon works of art by such\ntheories, in short of _forming taste_. In this aspect, Home's \"Elements\nof Criticism,\" the writings of Batteux, and Ramler's \"Introduction\nto the Fine Arts,\" were works much read in their day. Taste in this\nsense has to do with arrangement and treatment, the harmony and finish\nof what belongs to the external aspect of a work of art. Besides,\nthey brought in among the principles of taste views that belonged to\nthe psychology that was then in vogue, and that had been drawn from\nempirical observation of capacities and activities of the soul, of\nthe passions and their probable heightening, succession, etc. But it\nremains invariably the case that every man judges works of art, or\ncharacters, actions, and incidents according to the measure of his\ninsight and his feelings; and as that formation of taste only touched\nwhat was meagre and external, and moreover drew its precepts only from\na narrow range of works of art and from a _born\u00e9_ culture of intellect\nand feelings, its whole sphere was inadequate, and incapable of seizing\nthe inmost and the true, and of sharpening the eye for the apprehension\nthereof.\n\nSuch theories proceed in general outline, as do the remaining\nnon-philosophic sciences. The content which they subject to\nconsideration is borrowed from our idea of it, as something found\nthere; then further questions are asked about the nature of this idea,\ninasmuch as a need reveals itself for closer determinations, which\nare also found in our idea of the matter, and drawn from it to be\nfixed in definitions. But in so doing, we find ourselves at once on\nuncertain and debatable ground. It might indeed appear at first as if\nthe beautiful were a perfectly simple idea. But it soon becomes evident\nthat manifold sides may be found in it, one of which is emphasized by\none writer and another by another, or, even if the same points of view\nare adopted, a dispute arises on the question which side after all is\nto be regarded as the essential one.\n\nWith a view to such questions it is held a point of scientific\ncompleteness to adduce and to criticize the various definitions of the\nbeautiful. We will do this neither with historical _exhaustiveness_,\nso as to learn all the subtleties which have emerged in the defining\nprocess, nor for the sake of the _historical_ interest; but we will\nsimply produce by way of illustration, some of the more interesting\nmodern views which come pretty close in their purport to what in fact\nthe idea of the beautiful does involve. For such purpose we have\nchiefly to mention Goethe's account of the beautiful, which Meyer\nembodied in his \"History of the Formative Arts[33] in Greece,\" on which\noccasion he also brings forward Hirt's view, though without mentioning\nhim.\n\nHirt, one of the greatest of genuine connoisseurs in the present day,\nin his brochure about artistic beauty (_Horen_,[34] 1797, seventh\nnumber), after speaking of the beautiful in the several arts, sums\nup his ideas in the result that the basis of a just criticism of\nbeauty in art and of the formation of taste is the conception of the\n_Characteristic_. That is to say, he defines the beautiful as the\n\"perfect, which is or can be an object of eye, ear, or imagination.\"\nThen he goes on to define the perfect as \"that which is adequate to its\naim, that which nature or art aimed at producing within the given genus\nand species[35] in the formation of the object.\" For which reason,\nin order to form our judgment on a question of beauty, we ought to\ndirect our observation as far as possible to the individual marks which\nconstitute a definite essence. For it is just these marks that form\nits characteristics. And so by _character_ as the law of art he means\n\"that determinate individual modification[36] whereby forms, movement\nand gesture, bearing and expression, local colour, light and shade,\nchiaroscuro[37] and attitude distinguish themselves, in conformity, of\ncourse, with the requirements of an object previously selected.\" This\nformula gives us at once something more significant than the other\ndefinitions. If we go on to ask what \"the characteristic\" is, we see\nthat it involves in the first place _a content_, as, for instance,\na particular feeling, situation, incident, action, individual; and\nsecondly, the _mode_ and _fashion_ in which this content is embodied\nin a representation. It is to this, the mode of representation, that\nthe artistic law of the \"characteristic\" refers, inasmuch as it\nrequires that every particular element in the mode of expression shall\nsubserve the definite indication of its content and be a member in the\nexpression of that content. The abstract formula of the characteristic\nthus has reference to the degree of appropriateness with which the\nparticular detail of the artistic form sets in relief the content\nwhich it is intended to represent. If we desire to illustrate this\nconception in a quite popular way, we may explain the limitation which\nit involves as follows. In a dramatic work, for instance, an action\nforms the content; the drama[38] is to represent how this action takes\nplace. Now, men and women do all sorts of things; they speak to each\nother from time to time, at intervals they eat, sleep, put on their\nclothes, say one thing and another, and so forth. But in all this,\nwhatever does not stand in immediate connection with that particular\naction considered as the content proper, is to be excluded, so that in\nreference to it nothing may be without import. So, too, a picture, that\nonly represented a single phase of that action, might yet include in\nit--so wide are the ramifications of the external world--a multitude\nof circumstances, persons, positions, and other matters which at\nthat moment have no reference to the action in question, and are not\nsubservient to its distinctive character.\n\nBut, according to the rule of the characteristic, only so much ought\nto enter into the work of art as belongs to the display[39] and,\nessentially, to the expression of that content and no other; for\nnothing must announce itself as otiose and superfluous.\n\nThis is a very important rule, which may be justified in a certain\naspect. Meyer, however, in his above-mentioned work, gives it as his\nopinion that this view has vanished and left no trace, and, in his\njudgment, to the benefit of art. For he thinks that the conception in\nquestion would probably have _led_ to caricature. This judgment at\nonce contains the perversity of implying that such a determination\nof the beautiful had to do with _leading_. The Philosophy of art\ndoes not trouble itself about precepts for artists, but it has to\nascertain what beauty in general is, and how it has displayed itself\nin actual productions, in works of art, without meaning to give rules\nfor guidance. Apart from this, if we examine the criticism, we find\nit to be true, no doubt, that Hirt's definition includes caricature,\nfor even a caricature may be characteristic; but, on the other hand,\nit must be answered at once that in caricature the definite character\nis intensified to exaggeration, and is, so to speak, a superfluity of\nthe characteristic. But a superfluity ceases to be what is properly\nrequired in order to be characteristic, and becomes an offensive\niteration, whereby the characteristic itself may be made unnatural.\nMoreover, what is of the nature of caricature shows itself in the light\nof the characteristic representation of what is ugly, which ugliness\nis, of course, a distortion. Ugliness, for its part, is closely\nconnected with the content, so that it may be said that the principle\nof the characteristic involves as a fundamental property both ugliness\nand the representation of what is ugly. Hirt's definition, of course,\ngives no more precise information as to what is to be characterized and\nwhat is not, in the artistically beautiful, or about the content of the\nbeautiful, but it furnishes in this respect a mere formal rule, which\nnevertheless contains some truth, although stated in abstract shape.\n\nThen follows the further question--what Meyer opposes to Hirt's\nartistic principle, _i.e._ what he himself prefers. He is treating, in\nthe first place, exclusively of the principle shown in the artistic\nworks of the ancients, which principle, however, must include the\nessential attribute[40] of beauty. In dealing with this subject he is\nled to speak of Mengs and Winckelmann's principle[40] of the Ideal, and\npronounces himself to the effect that he desires neither to reject nor\nwholly to accept this law of beauty, but, on the other hand, has no\nhesitation in attaching himself to the opinion of an enlightened judge\nof art (Goethe), as it is definite,[41] and seems to solve the enigma\nmore precisely.\n\nGoethe says: \"The highest principle of the ancients was the\n_significant_, but the highest result of successful _treatment_, the\n_beautiful_.\"\n\nIf we look closer at what this opinion implies, we find in it again two\nelements; the content or matter in hand, and the mode and fashion of\nrepresentation. In looking at a work of art we begin with what presents\nitself immediately to us, and after that go on to consider what is its\nsignificance or content.\n\nThe former, the external element, has no value for us simply as it\nstands; we assume something further behind it, something inward, a\nsignificance, by which the external semblance has a soul breathed into\nit.[42] It is this, its soul, that the external appearance indicates.\nFor an appearance which means something, does not present to the mind's\neye itself and that which it is _qua_ external, but something else; as\ndoes the _symbol_ for instance, and still more obviously the _fable_,\nwhose moral and precept constitutes its meaning. Indeed every _word_\npoints to a meaning and has no value in itself. Just so the human\neye, a man's face, flesh, skin, his whole figure, are a revelation of\nmind and soul, and in this case the meaning is always something other\nthan what shows itself within the immediate appearance. This is the\nway in which a work of art should have its meaning, and not appear as\nexhausted in these mere particular lines, curves, surfaces, borings,\nreliefs in the stone, in these colours, tones, sounds, of words, or\nwhatever other medium is employed; but it should reveal life, feeling,\nsoul, import and mind, which is just what we mean by the significance\nof a work of art.\n\nThus this requirement of _significance_ in a work of art amounts to\nhardly anything beyond or different from Hirt's principle of the\n_characteristic_.\n\nAccording to this notion, then, we find distinguished as the elements\nof the beautiful something inward, a content, and something outer which\nhas that content as its significance; the inner shows itself in the\nouter and gives itself to be known by its means, inasmuch as the outer\npoints away from itself to the inner.\n\nWe cannot go into detail on this head.\n\n(_c_) But the earlier fashion alike of rules and of theories has\nalready been violently thrown aside in Germany--especially owing to\nthe appearance of genuine living poetry,--and the rights of genius,\nits works and their effects, have had their value asserted against the\nencroachment of such legalities and against the wide watery streams of\ntheory. From this foundation both of an art which is itself genuinely\nspiritual, and of a general sympathy and communion with it, have\narisen the receptivity and freedom which enabled us to enjoy and to\nrecognize the great works of art which have long been in existence,\nwhether those of the modern world,[43] of the middle ages, or even of\npeoples of antiquity quite alien to us (_e.g._ the Indian productions);\nworks which by reason of their antiquity or of their alien nationality\nhave, no doubt, a foreign element in them, yet in view of their\ncontent--common to all humanity and dominating their foreign\ncharacter--could not have been branded as products of bad and barbarous\ntaste, except by the prejudices of theory. This recognition, to speak\ngenerally, of works of art which depart from the sphere and form of\nthose upon which more especially the abstractions of theory were based,\nled, in the first instance, to the recognition of a peculiar kind of\nart--that is, of _romantic_ art,--and it therefore became necessary to\napprehend the idea and the nature of the beautiful in a deeper way than\nwas possible for those theories. With this influence there co-operated\nanother, viz. that the idea in its self-conscious form, the thinking\nmind, attained at this time, on its side, a deeper self-knowledge in\nphilosophy, and was thereby directly impelled to understand the essence\nof art, too, in a profounder fashion.\n\nThus, then, even judging by the phases of this more general evolution\nof ideas, the theoretical mode of reflection upon art which we were\nconsidering has become antiquated alike in its principles and in\nits particulars. Only the _scholarship_ of the history of art has\nretained its permanent value, and cannot but retain it, all the more\nthat the advance of intellectual receptivity, of which we spoke, has\nextended its range of vision on every side. Its business and vocation\nconsists in the \u00e6sthetic appreciation of individual works of art, and\nin acquaintance with the historical circumstances that externally\ncondition such works; an appreciation which, if made with sense and\nmind, supported by the requisite historical information, is the\nonly power that can penetrate the entire individuality of a work of\nart. Thus Goethe, for instance, wrote much about art and particular\nworks of art. Theorizing proper is not the purpose of this mode of\nconsideration, although no doubt it frequently busies itself with\nabstract principles and categories, and may give way to this tendency\nwithout being aware of it. But for a reader who does not let this\nhinder him, but keeps before him the concrete accounts of works of art,\nwhich we spoke of just now, it at all events furnishes the philosophy\nof art with the perceptible illustrations and instances, into the\nparticular historical details of which philosophy cannot enter.\n\nThis, then, may be taken to be the first mode of the study of art,\nstarting from particular and extant works.\n\n2. There is an essential distinction between this and the opposite\naspect, the wholly theoretical reflection, which made an effort to\nunderstand beauty as such out of itself alone, and to get to the bottom\nof its idea.\n\nIt is well known that Plato was the first to require of philosophical\nstudy, in a really profound sense, that its objects should be\napprehended, not in their _particularity_, but in their _universality_,\nin their genius, in their own nature and its realization: inasmuch as\nhe affirmed that the truth of things[44] did not consist in individual\ngood actions, true opinions, beautiful human beings or works of art,\nbut in _goodness_, _beauty_, _truth_ themselves. Now, if the beautiful\nis in fact to be known according to its essence and conception, this\nis only possible by help of the thinking idea, by means of which\nthe logico-metaphysical nature of the _Idea as such_, as also that\nof the _particular Idea of the beautiful_ enters into the thinking\nconsciousness. But the study of the beautiful in its separate nature\nand in its own idea may itself turn into an abstract Metaphysic, and\neven though Plato is accepted in such an inquiry as foundation and\nas guide, still the Platonic abstraction must not satisfy us, even\nfor the logical idea of beauty. We must understand this idea more\nprofoundly and more in the concrete, for the emptiness of content\nwhich characterizes the Platonic idea is no longer satisfactory to the\nfuller philosophical wants of the mind of to-day. Thus it is, no doubt,\nthe case that we, too, in modern times, must in our philosophy of art\nstart from the idea of the beautiful, but we ought not to abide by the\nfashion of Platonic ideas, which was purely abstract, and was the mere\nbeginning of the philosophic study of beauty.\n\n3. The philosophic conception of the beautiful, to indicate its true\nnature at least by anticipation, must contain, reconciled within it,\nthe two extremes which have been mentioned, by combining metaphysical\nuniversality with the determinateness of real particularity. Only thus\nis it apprehended in its truth, in its real and explicit nature. It is\nthen fertile out of its own resources, in contrast to the barrenness of\none-sided reflection. For it has in accordance with its own conception\nto develop into a totality of attributes, while the conception itself\nas well as its detailed exposition contains the necessity of its\nparticulars, as also of their progress and transition one into another.\nOn the other hand, again, these particulars, to which the transition\nis made, carry in themselves the universality and essentiality of\nthe conception as the particulars of which they appear. The modes of\nconsideration of which we have so far been treating, lack both these\nqualities,[45] and for this reason it is only the complete conception\nof which we have just spoken that can lead to substantive, necessary,\nand self-complete determinations.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER III.\n\nTHE CONCEPTION OF ARTISTIC BEAUTY.\n\nPART I.--THE WORK OF ART AS MADE AND AS SENSUOUS.\n\n\nAfter the above prefatory remarks, we approach closer to our subject,\nthe philosophy of artistic beauty. Inasmuch as we are undertaking to\ntreat it scientifically we must begin with its _Conception_. Not till\nwe have established this conception can we map out the division, and\nwith it the plan of the entirety of the science; for a division, if it\nis not, as is the case with unphilosophical inquiries, taken in hand in\na purely external manner, must find its principle in the conception of\nthe object itself.\n\nIn presence of such a demand we are at once met by the question,\n\"Whence do we get this conception?\" If we begin with the given\nconception of artistic beauty itself, that is enough to make it a\n_pre-supposition_ and mere assumption; now, mere assumptions are not\nadmitted by the philosophical method, but whatever it allows to pass\nmust have its truth demonstrated, _i.e._ displayed as necessary.\n\nWe will devote a few words to coming to an understanding upon this\ndifficulty, which concerns the introduction to every philosophical\nbranch of study when taken in hand by itself.\n\nThe object of every science presents _prima facie_ two aspects: in the\nfirst place, that such an object _is_; in the second place, _what_ it\nis.\n\nIn ordinary science little difficulty attaches to the first of these\npoints. It might even, at first sight, look ridiculous, if the\nrequirement were presented that in astronomy and physics it should\nbe demonstrated that there was a sun, heavenly bodies, magnetic\nphenomena, etc. In these sciences, which have to do with what is given\nto sense, the objects are taken from external experience, and instead\nof demonstrating them (\"beweisen\") it is thought sufficient to show\nthem (\"weisen\"). Yet even within the non-philosophical sciences,\ndoubts may arise about the existence of their objects, as _e.g._ in\npsychology, the science of mind, it may be doubted if there _is_ a\nsoul, a mind, _i.e._ something subjective, separate, and independent,\ndistinct from what is material; or in theology, whether a God _is_. If,\nmoreover, the objects are of subjective kind, _i.e._ are given only\nin the mind, and not as external sensuous objects, we are confronted\nby our conviction that there is nothing in the mind but what its own\nactivity has produced. This brings up the accidental question whether\nmen have produced this inner idea or perception in their minds or not,\nand even if the former is actually the case, whether they have not made\nthe idea in question vanish again, or at any rate degraded it to a\nmerely _subjective idea_, whose content has no natural and independent\nbeing. So, for instance, the beautiful has often been regarded as not\nnaturally and independently necessary in our ideas, but as a mere\nsubjective pleasure or accidental sense. Our external intuitions,\nobservations, and perceptions are often deceptive and erroneous, but\nstill more is this the case with the inner ideas, even if they have in\nthemselves the greatest vividness, and are forcible enough to transport\nus irresistibly into passion.\n\nThis doubt whether an object of inward ideas and inward perception\nas such is or is not, as also the accidental question whether the\nsubjective consciousness has produced it in itself, and whether the act\nor mode in which it brought it before itself was in its turn adequate\nto the object in its essential and independent nature--all this is just\nwhat aroused in men the higher scientific need, which demands that,\neven if we have an idea that an object is, or that there is such an\nobject, the object must yet be displayed or demonstrated in terms of\nits necessity.\n\nThis proof, if it is developed in a really scientific way, must also\nsatisfy the further question _What_ an object is. But to expound this\nrelation would carry us too far in this place, and we can only make the\nfollowing remarks on the point.\n\nIf we are to display the necessity of our object, the beautiful in art,\nwe should have to prove that art or beauty was a result of antecedents\nsuch as, when considered in their true conception, to lead us on with\nscientific necessity to the idea of fine art. But in as far as we begin\nwith _art_, and propose to treat of the essence of _its_ idea and of\nthe realization of that idea, not of antecedents which go before it _as\ndemanded by_ its idea, so far art, as a peculiar scientific object,\nhas, for us, a pre-supposition which lies beyond our consideration,\nand which, being a different content, belongs in scientific treatment\nto a different branch of philosophical study. For it is nothing short\nof the whole of philosophy that is the knowledge of the universe as in\nitself _one single_ organic totality which develops itself out of its\nown conception, and which, returning into itself so as to form a whole\nin virtue of the necessity in which it is placed towards itself, binds\nitself together with itself into _one single_ world of truth. In the\ncoronal of this scientific necessity, each individual part is just as\nmuch a circle that returns into itself, as it has, at the same time, a\nnecessary connection with other parts. This connection is a backward\nout of which it derives itself, as well as a forward, to which in its\nown nature it impels itself on and on, in as far as it is fertile by\ncreating fresh matter out of itself, and issuing it into the further\nrange of scientific knowledge. Therefore, it is not our present aim\nto demonstrate the idea of beauty from which we set out, that is, to\nderive it according to its necessity from the pre-suppositions which\nare its antecedents in science. This task belongs to an encyclop\u00e6dic\ndevelopment of philosophy as a whole and of its particular branches.\nFor us, the idea of beauty and of art is a pre-supposition given in\nthe system of philosophy. But as we cannot in this place discuss this\nsystem, and the connection of art with it, we have not yet the idea\nof the beautiful before us _in a scientific form_; what we have at\ncommand are merely the elements and aspects of it, as they are or have\nat former periods been presented, in the diverse ideas of the beautiful\nand of art in the mere common consciousness. Having started from this\npoint, we shall subsequently pass to the more profound consideration of\nthe views in question, in order thereby to gain the advantage of, in\nthe first place, obtaining a general idea of our object, and further,\nby a brief criticism effecting a preliminary acquaintance with its\nhigher principles, with which we shall have to do in the sequel. By\nthis mode of treatment our final introduction will act, so to speak, as\nthe overture to the account of the subject itself, and will serve the\npurpose of a general collection and direction of our thoughts towards\nthe proper object-matter of our discussion.\n\nWhat we know, to begin with, as a current idea of the work of art,\ncomes under the three following general predicates:--\n\n(1) We suppose the work of art to be no natural product, but brought to\npass by means of human activity.\n\n(2) To be essentially made _for_ man, and, indeed, to be more or less\nborrowed from the sensuous and addressed to man's sense.\n\n(3) To contain an _end_.\n\n1. As regards the first point, that a work of art is taken to be a\nproduct of human activity, this view has given rise (_a_) to the view\nthat this activity, being the _conscious_ production of an external\nobject, can also be _known_, and _expounded_ and learnt, and prosecuted\nby others. For, what one can do, it might seem, another can do,[46] or\nimitate,[47] as soon as he is acquainted with the mode of procedure;\nso that, supposing universal familiarity with the rules of artistic\nproduction, it would only be a matter of any one's will and pleasure\nto carry out the process in a uniform way, and so to produce works of\nart. It is thus that the above-mentioned rule-providing theories and\ntheir precepts, calculated for practical observance, have arisen. But\nthat which can be executed according to such instruction, can only be\nsomething formally regular and mechanical. For only what is mechanical\nis of such an external kind that no more than a purely empty exercise\nof will and dexterity is required to receive it among our ideas and\nput it in act; such an exercise not needing to be supplemented by\nanything concrete, or anything that goes beyond the precepts conveyed\nin general rules. This is most vividly displayed when precepts of the\nkind in question do not limit themselves to what is purely external\nand mechanical, but extend to the meaning-laden spiritual activity\nof true art. In this region the rules contain nothing but indefinite\ngeneralities; _e.g._ \"The theme ought to be interesting, and each\nindividual ought to be made to speak according to his rank, age, sex,\nand position.\" But if rules are meant to be adequate on this subject,\ntheir precepts ought to have been drawn up with such determinateness\nthat they could be carried out just as they are expressed, without\nfurther and original activity of mind. Being abstract, however, in\ntheir content, such rules reveal themselves, in respect of their\npretension of being adequate to fill the consciousness of the artist,\nas wholly inadequate, inasmuch as artistic production is not formal\nactivity in accordance with given determinations. For it is bound as\nspiritual activity to work by drawing on its own resources, and to\nbring before the mind's eye a quite other and richer content and ampler\nindividual creations than any abstract formul\u00e6 can dictate. Such rules\nmay furnish guidance in case of need, if they contain anything really\ndefinite, and therefore of practical utility; but their directions can\nonly apply to purely external circumstances.\n\n(_b_) The tendency which we have just indicated has therefore been\nabandoned, and, in place of it, the opposite principle has been pursued\nto no less lengths. For the work of art came to be regarded no longer\nas the product of an _activity general_ in mankind, but as the work of\na mind endowed with wholly peculiar gifts. This mind, it is thought,\nhas then nothing to do but _simply_ to give free play to its particular\ngift, as though it were a specific force of nature, and is to be\nentirely released from attention to laws of universal validity, as\nalso from the interference of reflection in its instinctively creative\noperation. And, indeed, it is to be guarded therefrom, inasmuch as its\nproductions could only be infected and tainted by such a consciousness.\nIn this aspect the work of art was pronounced to be the product of\n_talent_ and _genius_, and stress was laid on the natural element\nwhich talent and genius contain. The view was partly right. Talent is\nspecific, and genius universal capability, with which a man has not the\npower to endow himself simply by his own self-conscious activity. We\nshall treat this point more fully in the sequel.\n\nIn this place we have only to mention the aspect of falsity in the\nview before us, in that all consciousness respecting the man's own\nactivity was held, in the case of artistic production, not merely\nsuperfluous, but even injurious. Production on the part of talent\nand genius then appears, in general terms, as a _state_, and, in\nparticular, as a state of _inspiration_. To such a state, it is said,\ngenius is in part excited by a given object, and in part it has the\npower of its own free will to place itself therein, in which process,\nmoreover, the good service of the champagne bottle is not forgotten.\nThis notion became prominent in Germany in the so-called _epoch of\ngenius_, which was introduced by the early poetical productions of\nGoethe, and subsequently sustained by those of Schiller.[48] In their\nearliest works these poets began everything anew, in scorn of all the\nrules which had then been fabricated, transgressed these rules of set\npurpose, and, while doing so, distanced all rivals by a long interval.\nI will not enter more closely into the confusions which have prevailed\nrespecting the conception of inspiration and genius, and which prevail\neven at the present day respecting the omnipotence of inspiration\nas such. We need only lay down as essential the view that, though\nthe artist's talent and genius contains a natural element, yet it is\nessentially in need of cultivation by thought, and of reflection on\nthe mode in which it produces, as well as of practice and skill in\nproducing. A main feature of such production is unquestionably external\nworkmanship, inasmuch as the work of art has a purely technical side,\nwhich extends into the region of handicraft; most especially in\narchitecture and sculpture, less so in painting and music, least of\nall in poetry. Skill in this comes not by inspiration, but solely by\nreflection, industry, and practice; and such skill is indispensable to\nthe artist, in order that he may master his external material, and not\nbe thwarted by its stubbornness.\n\nMoreover, the higher an artist ranks, the more profoundly ought he to\nrepresent the depths of heart and mind; and these are not known without\nlearning them, but are only to be fathomed by the direction of a man's\nown mind to the inner and outer world. So here, too, _study_ is the\nmeans whereby the artist brings this content into his consciousness,\nand wins the matter and burden of his conceptions.\n\nIn this respect one art may need the consciousness and cognition of\nsuch matter more than others. Music, for instance, which concerns\nitself only with the undefined movement of the inward spiritual\nnature, and deals with musical sounds as, so to speak, feeling\nwithout thought, needs little or no spiritual content to be present\nin consciousness. It is for this reason that musical talent generally\nannounces itself in very early youth, while the head is still empty\nand the heart has been but little moved, and is capable of attaining\nto a very considerable height in early years, before mind and life\nhave experience of themselves. And again, as a matter of fact we\noften enough see very great expertness in musical composition, as\nalso in execution, subsist along with remarkable barrenness of mind\nand character. The reverse is the case with poetry. In poetry all\ndepends on the representation,--which must be full of matter and\nthought--of man, of his profounder interests, and of the powers that\nmove him; and therefore mind and heart themselves must be richly and\nprofoundly educated by life, experience, and reflection, before genius\ncan bring to pass anything mature, substantial, and self-complete.\nGoethe's and Schiller's first productions are of an immaturity, and\neven of a rudeness and barbarism, that are absolutely terrifying.\nThis phenomenon, that the greater part of those attempts display a\npredominant mass of thoroughly prosaic and in part of frigid and\ncommonplace elements, furnishes the chief objection to the common\nopinion, that inspiration is inseparable from youth and youthful\nfire. Those two men of genius, it may be said, were the first to give\nour nation works of true poetry, and yet it was only their mature\nmanhood[49] that presented us with creations profound, substantial, and\nthe outcome of genuine inspiration, while no less thoroughly perfect\nin form. Thus, too, it was not till his old age that Homer devised and\nuttered his immortal songs.\n\n(_c_) A third view, which concerns the idea of the work of art as\na product of human activity, refers to the position of such a work\ntowards the external appearances of nature. It was an obvious opinion\nfor the common consciousness to adopt on this head, that the work of\nart made by man ranked _below_ the product of nature. The work of art\nhas no feeling in itself, and is not through and through a living\nthing, but, regarded as an external object, is dead. But we are wont\nto prize the living more than the dead. We must admit, of course,\nthat the work of art has not in itself movement and life. An animated\nbeing in nature is within and without an organization appropriately\nelaborated down to all its minutest parts, while the work of art\nattains the semblance of animation on its surface only, but within is\ncommon stone, or wood and canvas, or, as in the case of poetry, is\nidea, uttering itself in speech and letters. But this aspect, viz.\nits external existence, is not what makes a work into a production of\nfine art; it is a work of art only in as far as, being the offspring\nof mind, it continues to belong to the realm of mind, has received\nthe baptism of the spiritual, and only represents that which has been\nmoulded in harmony with mind. A human interest, the spiritual value\nwhich attaches to an incident, to an individual character, to an action\nin its plot and in its _d\u00e9no\u00fbment_, is apprehended in the work of art,\nand exhibited more purely[50] and transparently than is possible on\nthe soil of common unartistic reality. This gives the work of art a\nhigher rank than anything produced by nature, which has not sustained\nthis passage through the mind. So, for instance, by reason of the\nfeeling and insight of which a landscape as depicted by an artist is a\nmanifestation, such a work of mind assumes a higher rank than the mere\nnatural landscape. For everything spiritual is better than anything\nnatural. At any rate, no existence in nature is able, like art, to\nrepresent divine ideals.\n\nUpon that which, in works of art, the mind borrows from its own\ninner life it is able, even on the side of external existence, to\nconfer _permanence_; whereas the individual living thing of nature\nis transient, vanishing, and mutable in its aspect, while the work\nof art persists. Though, indeed, it is not mere permanence, but the\naccentuation of the character which animation by mind confers, that\nconstitutes its genuine pre-eminence as compared with natural reality.\n\nNevertheless, this higher rank assigned to the work of art is in turn\ndisputed by another idea of the common consciousness. It is said that\nnature and its products are a work of God, created by his goodness and\nwisdom, whereas the work of art is _merely_ a human production, made\nafter man's devising by man's hands. In this antithesis between natural\nproduction as a divine creation and human activity as a merely finite\ncreation, we at once come upon the misconception, that God does _not_\nwork in man and through man, but limits the range of his activity to\nnature alone. This false opinion is to be entirely abandoned if we\nmean to penetrate the true conception of art. Indeed, in opposition to\nsuch an idea, we must adhere to the very reverse, believing that God\nis more honoured by what mind does or makes than by the productions or\nformations of nature. For not only is there a divinity in man, but in\nhim it is operative under a form that is appropriate to the essence of\nGod, in a mode quite other and higher than in nature. God is a Spirit,\nand it is only in man that the medium through which the divine element\npasses has the form of conscious spirit, that actively realizes itself.\nIn nature the corresponding medium is the unconscious, sensible, and\nexternal, which is far below consciousness in value. In the products\nof art God is operative neither more nor less than in the phenomena of\nnature; but the divine element, as it makes itself known in the work\nof art, has attained, as being generated out of the mind, an adequate\nthoroughfare for its existence; while existence in the unconscious\nsensuousness of nature is not a mode of appearance adequate to the\nDivine Being.\n\n(_d_) Granting, then, that the work of art is made by man as a creation\nof mind, we come to the last question, which will enable us to draw a\ndeeper result from what has been said. What is man's need to produce\nworks of art? On the one hand the production may be regarded as a\nmere toy of chance and of man's fancies, that might just as well be\nlet alone as pursued. For, it may be said, there are other and better\nmeans for effecting that which is the aim of art, and man bears in him\ninterests that are yet higher and of more import than art has power\nto satisfy. But, on the other hand, art appears to arise from the\nhigher impulse and to satisfy the higher needs, at times, indeed, even\nthe highest, the absolute need of man, being wedded to the religious\ninterests of whole epochs and peoples, and to their most universal\nintuitions respecting the world. This inquiry concerning the not\ncontingent but absolute need of art we cannot as yet answer completely,\nseeing that it is more concrete than any shape which could here be\ngiven to the answer.[51] We must, therefore, content ourselves for the\npresent with merely establishing the following points.\n\nThe universal and absolute need out of which art, on its formal\nside,[52] arises has its source in the fact that man is a _thinking_\nconsciousness, _i.e._ that he draws out of himself, and makes explicit\n_for himself_, that which he is, and, generally, whatever is. The\nthings of nature are only _immediate and single_, but man as mind\n_reduplicates_ himself, inasmuch as _prima facie_ he _is_ like the\nthings of nature, but in the second place just as really is _for_\nhimself, perceives himself, has ideas of himself, thinks himself,\nand only thus is active self-realizedness.[53] This consciousness\nof himself man obtains in a twofold way: _in the first place\ntheoretically_, in as far as he has inwardly to bring himself into\nhis own consciousness, with all that moves in the human breast, all\nthat stirs and works therein, and, generally, to observe and form an\nidea of himself, to fix before himself what thought ascertains to be\nhis real being, and, in what is summoned out of his inner self as in\nwhat is received from without, to recognize only himself. Secondly,\nman is realized for himself by _practical_ activity, inasmuch as he\nhas the impulse, in the medium which is directly given to him, and\nexternally presented before him, to produce himself, and therein at\nthe same time to recognize himself. This purpose he achieves by the\nmodification of external things upon which he impresses the seal of his\ninner being, and then finds repeated in them his own characteristics.\nMan does this in order as a free subject to strip the outer world of\nits stubborn foreignness, and to enjoy in the shape and fashion of\nthings a mere external reality of himself.[54] Even the child's first\nimpulse involves this practical modification of external things. A boy\nthrows stones into the river, and then stands admiring the circles that\ntrace themselves on the water, as an effect in which he attains the\nsight of something that is his own doing. This need traverses the most\nmanifold phenomena, up to the mode of self-production in the medium\nof external things as it is known to us in the work of art. And it is\nnot only external things that man treats in this way, but himself no\nless, _i.e._ his own natural form, which he does not leave as he finds\nit, but alters of set purpose. This is the cause of all ornament and\ndecoration, though it may be as barbarous, as tasteless, as utterly\ndisfiguring or even destructive as crushing Chinese ladies' feet, or\nas slitting the ears and lips. It is only among cultivated men that\nchange of the figure,[55] of behaviour, and of every kind and mode of\nself-utterance emanates from spiritual education.[56]\n\nThe universal need for expression in art[57] lies, therefore, in man's\nrational impulse to exalt the inner and outer world into a spiritual\nconsciousness for himself, as an object in which he recognizes his own\nself. He satisfies the need of this spiritual freedom when he makes\nall that exists explicit for himself _within_, and in a corresponding\nway realizes this his explicit self _without_, evoking thereby, in\nthis reduplication of himself, what is in him into vision and into\nknowledge for his own mind and for that of others. This is the free\nrationality of man, in which, as all action and knowledge, so also art\nhas its ground and necessary origin. The specific need of art, however,\nin contradistinction to other action, political or moral, to religious\nimagination and to scientific cognition, we shall consider later.\n\n2. We have so far been considering that aspect of the work of art\nin which it is made by man. We have now to pass on to its second\ncharacteristic, that it is made for man's _sense_, and for this reason\nis more or less borrowed from the sensuous.\n\n(_a_) This reflection has furnished occasion for the consideration\nto be advanced that fine art is intended to arouse feeling, and\nindeed more particularly the feeling which we find suits us--that, is\npleasant feeling. Looking at the question thus, men have treated the\ninvestigation of fine art as an investigation of the feelings, and\nasked what feelings it must be held that art ought to evoke,--fear, for\nexample, and compassion; and then, how these could be pleasant--how,\nfor example, the contemplation of misfortune could produce\nsatisfaction. This tendency of reflection is traceable particularly to\nMoses Mendelssohn's times, and many such discussions are to be found\nin his writings. Yet such an investigation did not lead men far, for\nfeeling is the indefinite dull region of the mind; what is felt remains\nwrapped in the form of the most abstract individual subjectivity,[58]\nand therefore the distinctions of feeling are also quite abstract, and\nare not distinctions of the actual object-matter itself. For instance,\nfear, anxiety, alarm, terror, are no doubt of one and the same sort\nof feeling variously modified, but in part are mere quantitative\nheightenings, in part are forms which in themselves have nothing to do\nwith their content itself, but are indifferent to it. In the case of\nfear, for instance, an existence is given in which the subject (_i.e._\na person) has an interest, but at the same time sees approaching\nthe negative that threatens to annihilate this existence, and so\nfinds immediately in himself, as a contradictory affection of his\nsubjectivity, the two at once, this interest and that negative. Now,\nsuch fear considered in itself is not enough to condition any content,\nbut is capable of receiving into itself the most diverse and opposite\nmatters.[59] Feeling, as such, is a thoroughly empty form of subjective\naffection. No doubt this form may in some cases be manifold in itself,\nas is hope, grief, joy, or pleasure; and, again, may in such diversity\ncomprehend varied contents, as there is a feeling of justice, moral\nfeeling, sublime religious feeling, and so forth. But the fact that\nsuch content is forthcoming in different forms of feeling is not enough\nto bring to light its essential and definite nature; they remain purely\nsubjective affections of myself, in which the concrete matter vanishes,\nas though narrowed into a circle of the utmost abstraction.[60]\nTherefore, the inquiry into the feelings which art arouses, or ought to\narouse, comes utterly to a standstill in the indefinite, and is a mode\nof study which precisely abstracts from the content proper and from\nits concrete essence and notion. For reflection upon feeling contents\nitself with the observation of the subjective affection in its\nisolation, instead of diving into and fathoming the matter in question\nitself, the work of art, and, while engaged with it, simply letting\ngo the mere subjectivity and its states. In feeling it is just this\nvacant subjectivity that is--not merely retained, but--given the first\nplace, and that is why men are so fond of having emotions. And for the\nsame reason such a study becomes tedious from its indefiniteness and\nvacancy, and repulsive from its attentiveness to little subjective\npeculiarities.\n\n(_b_) Now, as a work of art is not merely to do in general something of\nthe nature of arousing emotion--for this is a purpose which it would\nhave in common, without specific difference, with eloquence, historical\ncomposition, religious edification, and so forth--but is to do so only\nin as far as it is beautiful, reflection hit upon the idea, seeing that\nbeauty was the object, of searching out a _peculiar feeling of beauty_\nto correspond to it, and of discovering a particular _sense of beauty_.\nIn this search it soon appeared that such a sense is no blind instinct\nmade rigidly definite by nature, and capable from the beginning in\nits own independent essence of discerning beauty. Hence it followed\nthat education came to be demanded for this sense, and the educated\nsense of beauty came to be called _taste_, which, although an educated\nappreciation and apprehension of the beautiful, was yet supposed to\nretain the nature of immediate feeling. We have already mentioned\nhow abstract theories undertook to educate such a sense of taste, and\nhow external and one-sided that sense remained. The criticism of the\ntime when those views prevailed, was not only defective in _universal_\nprinciples, but also, in its particular references to individual works\nof art, was less directed to justifying a _definite_ judgment--the\npower to make one not having at that time been acquired--than to\nadvancing the general education of taste. For this reason such\neducation in its turn came to a standstill in the indefinite, and\nmerely endeavoured so to equip feeling as sense of beauty by help\nof reflection, that there might thenceforth be capacity to find out\nbeauty whenever and wherever it should exist. Yet the depths of the\nmatter remained a sealed book to mere taste, for these depths demand\nnot only sensibility and abstract reflection, but the undivided reason\nand the mind in its solid vigour; while taste was only directed to the\nexternal surface about which the feelings play, and on which one-sided\nmaxims may pass for valid. But, for this very reason, what is called\ngood taste takes fright at all more profound effects of art, and is\nsilent where the reality comes in question, and where externalities\nand trivialities vanish. For when great passions and the movements\nof a profound soul are unveiled, we are no longer concerned with the\nfiner distinctions of taste and its pettifogging particularities. It\nfeels that genius strides contemptuously over such ground as this, and,\nshrinking before its power, becomes uneasy, and knows not which way to\nturn.\n\n(_c_) And thus, as we should expect, men have abandoned the tendency\nto consider works of art solely with an eye to the education of taste,\nand with the purpose of merely displaying taste. The _connoisseur_,\nor scholar of art, has replaced the art-judge, or man of taste. The\npositive side of art-scholarship, so far as it concerns a thorough\nacquaintance with the entire circumference[61] of the individual\ncharacter in a given work of art, we have already pronounced to\nbe essential to the study of art. For a work of art, owing to its\nnature as at once material and individual, is essentially originated\nby particular conditions of the most various kinds, to which belong\nespecially the time and place of its production, then the peculiar\nindividuality of the artist, and in particular the grade of technical\ndevelopment attained by his art. Attention to all these aspects\nis indispensable to distinct and thorough insight and cognition,\nand even to the enjoyment of a work of art; it is with them that\nconnoisseurship, or art-scholarship, is chiefly occupied; and all that\nit can do for us in its own way is to be accepted with gratitude. Yet,\nthough such scholarship is entitled to rank as something essential,\nstill it ought not to be taken for the sole or supreme element in the\nrelation which the mind adopts towards a work of art, and towards art\nin general. For art-scholarship (and this is its defective side) is\ncapable of resting in an acquaintance with purely external aspects,\nsuch as technical or historical details, etc., and of guessing but\nlittle, or even knowing absolutely nothing, of the true and real nature\nof a work of art. It may even form a disparaging estimate of the value\nof more profound considerations in comparison with purely positive,\ntechnical, and historical information. Still, even so, art-scholarship,\nif only it is of a genuine kind, at least strives after definite\ngrounds and information, and an intelligent judgment, with which is\nclosely conjoined the more precise distinction of the different, even\nif partly external, aspects in a work of art, and the estimation of\ntheir importance.\n\n(_d_) After these remarks upon the modes of study which have arisen\nout of that aspect of a work of art in which, being a sensuous object,\nit is invested with a relation to man as a sensuous being, we will\nnow consider this aspect in its more essential relation to art as\nsuch, and so ([Greek: a]) partly as regards the work of art as object,\n([Greek: b]) partly with respect to the subjectivity of the artist, his\ngenius, talent, and so on; but without entering into matter relative to\nthese points that can only proceed from the knowledge of art in its\nuniversal idea. For we are not yet on genuinely scientific ground, but\nhave only reached the province of external reflection.\n\n([Greek: a]) The work of art then, of course, presents itself to\nsensuous apprehension. It is addressed to sensuous feeling, outer or\ninner, to sensuous perception and imagination, just as is the nature\nthat surrounds us without, or our own sensitive nature within. Even\na speech, for instance, may be addressed to sensuous imagination\nand feeling. Notwithstanding, the work of art is not only for the\n_sensuous_ apprehension as sensuous object, but its position is of such\na kind that as sensuous it is at the same time essentially addressed to\nthe _mind_, that the mind is meant to be affected by it, and to find\nsome sort of satisfaction in it.\n\nThis intention of the work of art explains how it is in no way meant\nto be a natural product and to possess natural life, whether a natural\nproduct is to be ranked higher or lower than a _mere_ work of art, as\nit is often called in a depreciatory sense.\n\nFor the sensuous aspect of the work of art has a right to existence\nonly in as far as it exists for man's mind, but not in as far as _qua_\nsensuous thing it has separate existence by itself.[62] If we examine\nmore closely in what way the sensuous is presented to man, we find\nthat what is sensuous may bear various relations to the mind.\n\n(_aa_) The lowest mode of apprehension, and that least appropriate to\nthe mind, is purely sensuous apprehension. It consists naturally in\nmere looking, listening, feeling, just as in seasons of mental fatigue\nit may often be entertaining to go about without thought, and just to\nhear and look around us. The mind, however, does not rest in the mere\napprehension of external things by sight and hearing, it makes them\nobjects for its own inner nature, which then is itself impelled in a\ncorrespondingly sensuous form to realize itself in the things, and\nrelates itself to them as _desire_. In this appetitive relation to\nthe outer world, the man stands as a sensuous particular over against\nthe things as likewise particulars; he does not open his mind to them\nwith general ideas as a thinking being, but has relations dictated\nby particular impulses and interests to the objects as themselves\nparticulars, and preserves himself in them, inasmuch as he uses them,\nconsumes them, and puts in act his self-satisfaction by sacrificing\nthem to it. In this negative relation desire requires for itself not\nmerely the superficial appearance of external things, but themselves in\ntheir concrete sensuous existence. Mere pictures of the wood that it\nwants to use, or of the animals that it wants to eat, would be of no\nservice to desire. Just as little is it possible for desire to let the\nobject subsist in its freedom. For its impulse urges it just precisely\nto destroy this independence and freedom of external things, and to\nshow that they are only there to be destroyed and consumed. But, at the\nsame time, the subject himself, as entangled in the particular limited\nand valueless interests of his desires, is neither free in himself,\nfor he does not determine himself out of the essential universality\nand rationality of his will, nor free in relation to the outer world,\nfor his desire remains essentially determined by things, and related\nto them. This relation of desire is not that in which man stands\nto the work of art. He allows it to subsist as an object, free and\nindependent, and enters into relation with it apart from desire, as\nwith an object which only appeals to the theoretic side of the mind.\nFor this reason the work of art, although it has sensuous existence,\nyet, in this point of view, does not require concrete sensuous\nexistence and natural life; indeed, it even _ought_ not to remain on\nsuch a level, seeing that it has to satisfy only the interests of mind,\nand is bound to exclude from itself all desire. Hence it is, indeed,\nthat practical desire rates individual things in nature, organic and\ninorganic, which are serviceable to it, higher than works of art, which\nreveal themselves to be useless for its purpose, and enjoyable only for\nother modes of mind.\n\n([Greek: bb]) A second mode in which the externally present may be\nrelated to the mind is, in contrast with singular sensuous perception\nand desire, the purely theoretical relation to the _Intelligence_. The\ntheoretic contemplation of things has no interest in consuming them as\nparticulars, in satisfying itself sensuously, and in preserving itself\nby their means, but rather in becoming acquainted with them in their\nuniversality, in finding their inner being and law, and in conceiving\nthem in terms of their notion. Therefore the theoretical interest\nlets the single things be, and holds aloof from them as sensuous\nparticulars, because this sensuous particularity is not what the\ncontemplation exercised by the intelligence looks for. For the rational\nintelligence does not belong, as do the desires, to the individual\nsubject[63] as such, but only to the individual as at the same time\nin his nature universal. In as far as man has relation to things in\nrespect of this universality, it is his universal reason which attempts\nto find himself in nature, and thereby to reproduce the inner essence\nof things, which sensuous existence, though having its ground therein,\ncannot immediately display. But again, this theoretic interest, the\nsatisfaction of which is the work of science, is in the scientific\nform no more shared by art, than the latter makes common cause with\nthe impulse of the purely practical desires. Science may, no doubt,\nstart from the sensuous thing in its individuality, and may possess a\nsensuous idea of the way in which such an individual presents itself in\nits individual colour, shape, size, etc. Still, this isolated sensuous\nthing, as such, has no further relation to the mind, inasmuch as the\nintelligence aims at the universal, the law, the thought and notion of\nthe object. Not only, therefore, does it abandon all intercourse with\nthe thing as a given individual, but transforms it within the mind,\nmaking a concrete object of sense into an abstract matter of thought,\nand so into something quite other than the same object _qua_ sensuous\nphenomenon. The artistic interest, as distinguished from science, does\nnot act thus. Artistic contemplation accepts the work of art just as\nit displays itself _qua_ external object, in immediate determinateness\nand sensuous individuality clothed in colour, figure, and sound, or as\na single isolated perception, etc., and does not go so far beyond the\nimmediate appearance of objectivity which is presented before it, as\nto aim, like science, at apprehending the notion of such an objective\nappearance as a universal notion.\n\nThus, the interest of art distinguishes itself from the practical\ninterest of _desire_ by the fact that it permits its object to subsist\nfreely and in independence, while desire utilizes it in its own service\nby its destruction. On the other hand, artistic contemplation differs\nfrom theoretical consideration by the scientific intelligence, in\ncherishing interest for the object as an individual existence, and not\nsetting to work to transmute it into its universal thought and notion.\n\n[Greek: gg] It follows, then, from the above, that though the sensuous\nmust be present in a work of art, yet it must only appear as surface\nand _semblance_ of the sensuous. For, in the sensuous aspect of a work\nof art, the mind seeks neither the concrete framework of matter, that\nempirically thorough completeness and development of the organism\nwhich desire demands, nor the universal and merely ideal thought.\nWhat it requires is sensuous presence, which, while not ceasing to be\nsensuous, is to be liberated from the apparatus of its merely material\nnature. And thus the sensuous in works of art is exalted to the rank\nof a mere _semblance_ in comparison with the immediate existence of\nthings in nature, and the work of art occupies the mean between what is\nimmediately sensuous and ideal thought. This semblance of the sensuous\npresents itself to the mind externally as the shape, the visible look,\nand the sonorous vibration of things--supposing that the mind leaves\nthe objects uninterfered with (physically), but yet does not descend\ninto their inner essence (by abstract thought), for if it did so, it\nwould entirely destroy their external existence as separate individuals\n_for it_. For this reason the sensuous aspect of art only refers to the\ntwo _theoretical_ senses of _sight_ and _hearing_, while smell, taste,\nand feeling remain excluded from being sources of artistic enjoyment.\nFor smell, taste, and feeling have to do with matter as such, and with\nits immediate sensuous qualities; smell with material volatilization\nin air, taste with the material dissolution of substance,[64] and\nfeeling with warmth, coldness, smoothness, etc. On this account these\nsenses cannot have to do with the objects of art, which are destined to\nmaintain themselves in their actual independent existence, and admit\nof no purely sensuous relation. The pleasant for these latter senses\nis not the beautiful in art. Thus art on its sensuous side purposely\nproduces no more than a shadow-world of shapes, sounds, and imaginable\nideas;[65] and it is absolutely out of the question to maintain that it\nis owing to simple powerlessness and to the limitations on his actions\nthat man, when evoking worlds of art into existence, fails to present\nmore than the mere surface of the sensuous, than mere _schemata_.[66]\nIn art, these sensuous shapes and sounds present themselves, not simply\nfor their own sake and for that of their immediate structure,[67] but\nwith the purpose of affording in that shape satisfaction to higher\nspiritual interests, seeing that they are powerful to call forth a\nresponse and echo in the mind from all the depths of consciousness.\nIt is thus that, in art, the sensuous is _spiritualized_, _i.e._ the\n_spiritual_ appears in sensuous shape.\n\n([Greek: _b_]) But for this very reason we have a product of art only\nin so far as it has found a passage through the mind, and has been\ngenerated by spiritually productive activity. This leads us to the\nother question which we have to answer--how, that is, the sensuous\nside, which is indispensable to art, is operative in the artist as a\nproductive state of the subject or person. This, the method and fashion\nof production, contains in itself as a subjective activity just the\nsame properties which we found objectively present in the work of art;\nit must be a spiritual activity which, nevertheless, at the same time\nhas in itself the element of sensuousness and immediateness. It is\nneither, on the one hand, purely mechanical work, as mere unconscious\nskill in sensuous sleight of hand,[68] or a formal activity according\nto fixed rules learnt by rote; nor is it, on the other hand, a\nscientific productive process, which passes from sense to abstract\nideas and thoughts, or exercises itself exclusively in the element\nof pure thinking; rather the spiritual and the sensuous side must in\nartistic production be as one. For instance, it would be possible in\npoetical creation to try and proceed by first apprehending the theme to\nbe treated as a prosaic thought, and by then putting it into pictorial\nideas, and into rhyme, and so forth; so that the pictorial element\nwould simply be hung upon the abstract reflections as an ornament or\ndecoration. Such a process could only produce bad poetry, for in it\nthere would be operative as two _separate activities_ that which in\nartistic production has its right place only as undivided unity.\n\nThis genuine mode of production constitutes the activity of artistic\n_fancy_. It is the rational element which, _qua_ spirit, only exists\nin as far as it actively extrudes itself into consciousness, but yet\ndoes not array before it what it bears within itself till it does so in\nsensuous form. This activity has, therefore, a spiritual import, which,\nhowever, it embodies in sensuous shape. Such a process may be compared\nwith the habit even of a man with great experience of the world, or,\nagain, with that of a man of _esprit_[69] or wit, who, although he\nhas complete knowledge of the main stakes of life, of the substantive\ninterests that hold men together, of what moves them, and of what is\nthe power that they recognize, yet neither has himself apprehended\nthis content in the form of general rules, nor is able to explain it\nto others in general reflections, but makes plain to himself and to\nothers what occupies his consciousness always in particular cases,\nwhether real or invented, in adequate instances, and the like. For in\nhis ideas, everything shapes itself into concrete images, determinate\nin time and place, to which, therefore, names and other external\ncircumstances of all kinds must not be wanting. Yet such a kind of\nimagination rather rests on the recollection of states that he has gone\nthrough, and of experiences that have befallen him, than is creative\nin its own strength. His recollection preserves and reproduces the\nindividuality and external fashion of occurrences that had such and\nsuch results with all their external circumstances, and prevents the\nuniversal from emerging in its own shape. But the productive fancy of\nthe _artist_ is the fancy of a great mind and heart, the apprehension\nand creation of ideas and of shapes, and, indeed, the exhibition of\nthe profoundest and most universal human interests in the definite\nsensuous mould of pictorial representation. From this it follows\nat once, that in one aspect Fancy unquestionably rests on natural\ngifts--speaking generally, on talent--because its mode of production\nrequires a sensuous medium. It is true that we speak in the same way\nof scientific \"talent,\" but the sciences only presuppose the universal\ncapacity of thought, which has not, like Fancy, a natural mode (as\nwell as an intellectual one), but abstracts just precisely from all\nthat is natural (or native) in an activity; and thus it would be more\ncorrect to say that there is no specifically scientific talent in the\nsense of a _mere_ natural endowment. Now, Fancy _has_ in it a mode of\ninstinct-like productiveness, inasmuch as the essential plasticity and\nsensuousness of the work of art must be subjectively present in the\nartist as natural disposition and natural impulse, and, considering\nthat it is unconscious operation, must belong to the natural element\nin man, as well as to the rational. Of course, natural capacity leaves\nroom for other elements in talent and genius, for artistic production\nis just as much of a spiritual and self-conscious nature; we can but\nsay that its spirituality must, somehow, have an element of natural,\nplastic, and formative tendency. For this reason, though nearly every\none can reach a certain point in an art, yet, in order to go beyond\nthis point, with which the art in the strict sense begins, it is\nimpossible to dispense with native artistic talent of the highest order.\n\nConsidered as a natural endowment, moreover, such talent reveals itself\nfor the most part in early youth, and is manifested in the impelling\nrestlessness that busies itself, with vivacity and industry, in\ncreating shapes in some particular sensuous medium, and in seizing on\nthis species of utterance and communication as the only one, or as the\nchief and the most suitable one. And thus, too, a precocious technical\nfacility, that up to a certain grade of attainment is without effort,\nis a sign of natural talent. A sculptor finds everything transmute\nitself into shapes, and he soon begins to take up the clay and model\nit. And, speaking generally, whatever men of such talents have in their\nimagination, whatever rouses and moves their inner nature, turns at\nonce into shape, drawing, melody, or poem.\n\n([Greek: g]) Thirdly, and to conclude: the _content_ of art is also in\nsome respects borrowed from the sensuous, from nature; or, in any case,\neven if the content is of a spiritual kind, it can only be seized and\nfixed by representing the spiritual fact, such as human relations, in\nthe shape of phenomena with external reality.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER III. (_Continued_).\n\nTHE CONCEPTION OF ARTISTIC BEAUTY.\n\nPART II.--THE END OF ART.\n\n\n3. The question then arises, what the interest or the _End_ is which\nman proposes to himself when he reproduces such a content in the\nform of works of art. This was the third point of view which we set\nbefore us with reference to the work of art, and the closer discussion\nof which will finally make the transition to the actual and true\nconception of art.\n\nIf in this aspect we glance at the common consciousness, a current idea\nwhich may occur to us is--\n\n([Greek: a]) The principle of the _imitation of nature_. According\nto this view the essential purpose of art consists in imitation, in\nthe sense of a facility in copying natural forms as they exist in a\nway that corresponds precisely to them; and the success of such a\nrepresentation, exactly corresponding to nature, is supposed to be what\naffords complete satisfaction.\n\n([Greek: a]) This definition contains, _prima facie_, nothing beyond\nthe purely formal[70] aim that whatever already exists in the external\nworld, just _as_ it is therein, is now to be made a second time by man\nas a copy of the former, as well as he can do it with the means at his\ncommand. But we may at once regard this repetition as--\n\n([Greek: aa]) A _superfluous_ labour, seeing that the things\nwhich pictures, theatrical representations, etc., imitate and\nrepresent--animals, natural scenes, incidents in human life--are before\nus in other cases already, in our own gardens or our own houses, or\nin cases within our closer or more remote circle of acquaintance.\nAnd, looking more closely, we may regard this superfluous labour as a\npresumptuous sport which--\n\n([Greek: bb]) Comes far short of nature. For art is restricted in its\nmeans of representation; and can produce only _one-sided_ deceptions,\n_i.e._ for instance, a semblance of reality addressed to one sense\nonly; and, in fact, it invariably gives rise, if it rests in the formal\npurpose of _mere imitation_, to a mere parody[71] of life, instead of\na genuine vitality. Just so the Turks, being Mohammedans, tolerate,\nas is well known, no pictures copied from men or the like; and when\nJames Bruce, on his journey to Abyssinia, showed paintings of fish\nto a Turk, the man was amazed at first, but soon enough made answer:\n\"If this fish shall rise up against you on the last day, and say, 'You\nhave created for me a body, but no living soul,' how will you defend\nyourself against such an accusation?\" The prophet, moreover, it is\nrecorded in the Sunna, said to the two women, Ommi Habiba and Ommi\nSelma, who told him of pictures in \u00c6thiopian churches--\"These pictures\nwill accuse their authors on the day of judgment!\"\n\nThere are, no doubt, as well, examples of completely deceptive\nimitation. Zeuxis' painted grapes have from antiquity downward been\ntaken to be the triumph of this principle of the imitation of nature,\nbecause the story is that living doves pecked at them. We might add\nto this ancient example the modern one of B\u00fcttner's monkey, which bit\nin pieces a painted cockchafer in R\u00f6sel's \"Diversions of the Insect\nWorld,\" and was pardoned by his master, in spite of his having thereby\nspoilt a beautiful copy of this valuable work, because of this proof\nof the excellence of the pictures. But when we reflect on these and\nsimilar instances, it must at once occur to us that, in place of\ncommending works of art because they have _actually_ deceived _even_\npigeons and monkeys, we ought simply to censure the people who mean\nto exalt a work of art by predicating, as its highest and ultimate\nquality, so poor an effect as this. In general, we may sum up by saying\nthat, as a matter of mere imitation, art cannot maintain a rivalry with\nnature, and, if it tries, must look like a worm trying to crawl after\nan elephant.\n\n([Greek: gg]) Considering the unvarying failure--comparative failure,\nat least--of imitation when contrasted with the original in nature,\nthere remains as end nothing beyond our pleasure in the sleight\nof hand[72] which can produce something so like nature. And it is\ndoubtless open to man to be pleased at producing over again what is\nalready present in its own right, by his labour, skill, and industry.\nBut enjoyment and admiration, even of this kind, naturally grow frigid\nor chilled precisely in proportion to the resemblance of the copy to\nthe natural type, or are even converted into tedium and repugnance.\nThere are portraits which, as has been wittily said, are sickeningly\nlike; and Kant adduces another instance relative to this pleasure in\nimitation as such, viz. that we soon grow tired of a man--and there\nare such men--who is able to mimic the nightingale's strain quite\nperfectly; and as soon as it is discovered that a man is producing\nthe notes, we are at once weary of the song. We then recognize in it\nnothing but a conjuring trick, neither the free production of nature,\nnor a work of art; for we expect from the free productive capacity\nof human beings something quite other than such music as this, which\nonly interests us when, as is the case with the nightingale's note, it\ngushes forth from the creature's own vitality without special purpose,\nand yet recalls the utterance of human feeling. In general, such\ndelight at our skill in mimicking can be but limited, and it becomes\nman better to take delight in what he produces out of himself. In this\nsense the invention of any unimportant and technical product has the\nhigher value, and man may be prouder of having invented the hammer,\nthe nail, and so forth, than of achieving feats of mimicry. For this\nfervour of abstract[73] copying is to be evened with the feat of the\nman who had taught himself to throw lentils through a small opening\nwithout missing. He displayed this skill of his before Alexander, and\nAlexander presented him with a bushel of lentils as a reward for his\nfrivolous and meaningless art.\n\n([Greek: b]) Moreover, seeing that the principle of imitation is\npurely formal, to make it the end has the result that _objective\nbeauty_ itself disappears. For the question is in that case no longer\n_of what nature_ that is which is to be copied, but only whether it\nis _correctly_ copied. The object and content of the beautiful comes\nthen to be regarded as matter of entire indifference. That is to\nsay, if we go outside the principle and speak of a difference of\nbeauty and ugliness in considering beasts, men, landscapes, actions,\nor characters, this must nevertheless, in presence of the maxim in\nquestion,[74] be set down as a distinction that does not belong\nparticularly to art, for which nothing is left but abstract imitation.\nIn this case the above-mentioned lack of a criterion in dealing with\nthe endless forms of nature reduces us, as regards the selection of\nobjects and their distinction in beauty and ugliness, to subjective\n_taste_ as an ultimate fact, which accepts no rule and admits of no\ndiscussion. And, in fact, if in selecting objects for representation we\nstart from what _men_ think beautiful or ugly, and therefore deserving\nartistic imitation--that is, from their taste,--then all circles of\nnatural objects open to us, and not one of them will be likely to\nfail of a patron. Among men, for instance, it is the case that at\nany rate every bridegroom thinks his bride beautiful, and indeed,\nperhaps, he alone; though not, it may be, every husband his wife; and\nthat subjective taste for such beauty has no fixed rule one may hold\nto be the good fortune of both parties. If we, moreover, look quite\nbeyond individuals and their accidental taste, to the taste of nations,\nthis again is full of extreme diversity and contrast. How often we\nhear it said that a European beauty would not please a Chinese or\neven a Hottentot, in as far as the Chinaman has quite a different\nconception of beauty from the negro, and the negro in turn from the\nEuropean, and so forth. Indeed, if we look at the works of art of those\nextra-European peoples--their images of the gods, for instance--which\ntheir fancy has originated as venerable and sublime, they may appear to\nus as the most gruesome idols, and their music may sound to our ears\nas the most horrible noise; while they, on their side, will regard our\nsculptures, paintings, and musical productions as trivial or ugly.\n\n([Greek: g]) But even if we abstract from an objective principle of\nart, and if beauty is to be based on subjective and individual taste,\nwe shall still soon find on the side of art itself that the imitation\nof nature, which certainly appeared to be a universal principle and\none guaranteed by high authority, is at any rate not to be accepted\nin this universal and merely abstract form. For if we look at the\ndifferent arts it will at once be admitted that even if painting and\nsculpture represent objects which appear like those of nature, or\nthe type of which is essentially borrowed from nature, yet works of\narchitecture on the other hand--and architecture belongs to the fine\narts--and the productions of poetry, in as far as they do not confine\nthemselves to mere description, are by no means to be called imitations\nof nature. At least, if we desired to maintain the principle as\nvalid in the case of these latter arts, we should have to make a long\ncircuit by conditioning the proposition in various ways, and reducing\nthe so-called truth[75] at any rate to probability. But if we admitted\nprobability we should again be met by a great difficulty in determining\nwhat is probable and what is not; and still, moreover, one would\nneither consent nor find it possible to exclude from poetry all wholly\narbitrary and completely original[76] imaginations.\n\nThe end of art must, therefore, lie in something different from the\npurely formal[77] imitation of what we find given, which in any case\ncan bring to the birth only _tricks_ and not _works_ of art. It is,\nindeed, an element essential to the work of art to have natural shapes\nfor its foundation; seeing that its representation is in the medium of\nexternal and therefore of natural phenomena. In painting, for instance,\nit is an important study to know how to copy with precision the colours\nin their relations to one another, the effects of light, reflections,\netc., and, no less, the forms and figures of objects down to their\nsubtlest characteristics.[78] It is in this respect chiefly that the\nprinciple of naturalism in general and of copying nature has recovered\nits influence in modern times. Its aim is to recall an art which has\ngrown feeble and indistinct to the vigour and crispness of nature;\nor, again, to invoke against the purely arbitrary and artificial\nconventionalism, as unnatural as it was inartistic, into which art\nhad strayed, the uniform, direct, and solidly coherent sequences of\nnature. But however true it is that there is something right in this\nendeavour from one point of view, yet still the naturalism at which it\naims is not as such the substantive and primary concern that underlies\nfine art. And, therefore, although external appearance in the shape\nof natural reality constitutes an essential condition of art, yet,\nnevertheless, neither is the given natural world its _rule_, nor is the\nmere imitation of external appearance _as_ external its _end_.\n\n(_b_) The further question then arises--What _is_ the true content\nof art, and with what aim is this content to be presented. On this\nsubject our consciousness supplies us with the common opinion that it\nis the task and aim of art to bring in contact with our sense, our\nfeeling, our inspiration, _all_ that finds a place in the mind of man.\nArt, it is thought, should realize in us that familiar saying, \"Homo\nsum: humani nihil a me alienum puto.\" Its aim is therefore placed in\narousing and animating the slumbering emotions, inclinations, and\npassions; in filling the _heart_, in forcing the human being, whether\ncultured or uncultured, to feel the whole range of what man's soul in\nits inmost and secret corners has power to experience and to create,\nand all that is able to move and to stir the human breast in its\ndepths and in its manifold aspects and possibilities; to present as a\ndelight to emotion and to perception all that the mind possesses of\nreal and lofty in its thought and in the Idea--all the splendour of\nthe noble, the eternal, and the true; and no less to make intelligible\nmisfortune and misery, wickedness and crime; to make men realize the\ninmost nature of all that is shocking and horrible, as also of all\npleasure and delight; and, finally, to set imagination roving in\nidle toyings of fancy, and luxuriating in the seductive spells of\nsense-stimulating visions. This endlessly varied content, it is held,\nart is bound to embrace, partly in order to complete the natural\nexperience in which our external existence consists, and partly with\nthe general aim of provoking the passions of our nature, both in order\nthat the experiences of life may not leave us unmoved, and because\nwe desire to attain to a receptivity that welcomes all phenomena.\nNow, such a stimulus is not given in this sphere by actual experience\nitself, but can only come by the semblance thereof, by art, that is,\ndeceptively substituting its creations for reality. The possibility\nof this deception by means of artistic semblance rests on the fact\nthat all reality must, for man, traverse the medium of perception and\nideas, and cannot otherwise penetrate the feelings and the will. In\nthis process it is quite indifferent whether his attention is claimed\nby immediate external reality, or whether this effect is produced by\nanother means--that is, by images, symbols, and ideas, containing\nor representing _the content_ of reality. Man can frame to himself\nideas of things that are not actual as though they were actual. Hence\nit is all the same to our feelings whether external reality or only\nthe semblance of it is the means of bringing in contact with us a\nsituation, a relation, or the import of a life. Either mode suffices to\nawaken our response to its burden, in grief and in rejoicing, in pathos\nand in horror,[79] and in traversing the emotions and the passions\nof wrath, hatred, compassion, of anxiety, fear, love, reverence, and\nadmiration, or of the desire of honour and of fame.\n\nThis awakening of all feelings in us, the dragging of the heart\nthrough the whole significance of life, the realization of all such\ninner movements by means of a presented exterior consisting merely in\ndeception--all this was what, from the point of view which we have been\nconsidering, constituted the peculiar and pre-eminent power of art.\n\nNow, as this mode of treatment credits art with the vocation of\nimpressing on the heart and on the imagination good and bad alike,\nand of strengthening man to the noblest, as of enervating him to the\nmost sensuous and selfish emotions, it follows that the task set before\nart is still purely formal, and so it would have no certain purpose,\nbut would merely furnish the empty form for every possible kind of\nsignificance and content.\n\n(_c_) It is a fact that art does include this formal side, in that it\nhas power to present every possible subject-matter in artistic dress,\nbefore perception and feeling, just exactly as argumentative[80]\nreflection has the power of manipulating all possible objects and modes\nof action, and of furnishing them with reasons and justifications.\nBut when we admit so great a variety of content we are at once met\nby the remark that the manifold feelings and ideas, which art aims\nat provoking or reinforcing, intersect and contradict, and by mutual\ninterference cancel one another. Indeed, in this aspect, in so far\nas art inspires men to directly opposite emotions, it only magnifies\nthe contradiction of our feelings and passions, and either sets them\nstaggering like Bacchantes, or passes into sophistry and scepticism,\nin the same way as argumentation.[81] This diversity of the material\nof art itself compels us, therefore, not to be content with so\nformal[82] an aim for it, seeing that rationality forces its way into\nthis wild diversity, and demands to see the emergence of a higher\nand more universal purpose from these elements in spite of their\nself-contradiction, and to be assured of its being attained. Just in\nthe same way the State and the social life of men are, of course,\ncredited with the purpose that in them _all_ human capacities and _all_\nindividual powers are to be developed and to find utterance in _all_\ndirections and with _all_ tendencies. But in opposition to so formal a\nview there at once arises the question in what _unity_ these manifold\nformations must be comprehended, and what _single end_ they must have\nfor their fundamental idea and ultimate purpose.\n\nAs such an end, reflection soon suggests the notion that art has the\ncapacity and the function of mitigating the fierceness of the desires.\n\n([Greek: a]) In respect to this first idea, we have only to ascertain\nin what feature peculiar to art it is that the capacity lies of\neliminating brutality and taming and educating the impulses,\ndesires, and passions. Brutality in general has its reason in a\ndirect selfishness of the impulses, which go to work right away,\nand exclusively for the satisfaction of their concupiscence. Now,\ndesire is most savage and imperious in proportion as, being isolated\nand narrow, it occupies the _whole man_, so that he does not retain\nthe power of separating himself as a universal being from this\ndeterminateness, and becoming aware of himself as universal. Even if\nthe man in such a case says, \"The passion is stronger than I,\" it is\ntrue that the abstract I is then separated for consciousness from\nthe particular passion; but still only in a formal way, inasmuch as\nthis separation is only made in order to pronounce that, against the\npower of the passion, the I as such is of no account whatever. The\nsavageness of passion consists, therefore, in the oneness of the I\nas universal with the limited content of its desires, so that the\nman has no will outside this particular passion. Now, such brutality\nand untamed violence of passion is softened through art, to begin\nwith, by the mere fact that it brings before the man as an idea what\nin such a state he feels and does. And even if art restricts itself\nto merely setting up pictures of the passions before the mind's eye,\nor even if it were actually to flatter them, still this is by itself\nenough to have a softening power, inasmuch as the man is thereby at\nleast _made aware_, of what, apart from such presentation, he simply\n_is_. For then the man observes his impulses and inclinations, and\nwhereas before they bore him on without power of reflection, he now\nsees them outside himself, and begins already to be free from them, in\nso far as they form an object which he contrasts with himself. Hence\nit may frequently be the case with the artist that when attacked by\ngrief he softens and weakens the intensity of his own feelings in its\neffect on his own mind by representing it in art. Tears, even, are\nenough to bring comfort; the man, who to begin with is utterly sunk\nand concentrated in grief, is able thus, at any rate, to utter in a\ndirect fashion this his inner state. Still more of a relief however,\nis the utterance of what is within in words, images, pictures, sounds,\nand shapes. For this reason it was a good old custom at deaths and\nfunerals to appoint wailing women, in order to bring the grief before\nthe mind in its utterance. Manifestations of sympathy, too, hold up\nthe content of a man's misfortune to his view; when it is much talked\nabout he is forced to reflect upon it, and is thereby relieved. And\nso it has always been held that to weep or to speak one's fill is a\nmeans to obtain freedom from the oppressive weight of care, or at least\nto find momentary relief for the heart. Hence the mitigation of the\nviolence of passion has for its universal reason that man is released\nfrom his immediate sunkenness[83] in a feeling, and becomes conscious\nof it as of something external to him, towards which he must now enter\ninto an _ideal_ relation. Art, by means of its representations, while\nremaining within the sensuous sphere, delivers man at the same time\nfrom the power of sensuousness. Of course we may often hear those\nfavourite phrases about man's duty being to remain in immediate oneness\nwith nature, but such oneness in its abstraction is simply and solely\ncoarseness and savagery; and art, in the very process of dissolving\nthis oneness for man, is raising him with gentle hand above and away\nfrom mere sunkenness in nature. Man's mode of occupying himself with\nworks of art is always purely contemplative,[84] and educates thereby,\nin the first place, no doubt, merely attention to the representations\nthemselves, but then, going beyond this, it cultivates attention to\ntheir significance, the power of comparison with other contents, and\nreceptivity for the general consideration of them, and for the points\nof view which it involves.\n\n([Greek: b]) To the above there attaches itself in natural connection\nthe second characteristic which has been ascribed to art as its\nessential purpose, viz. the _purification_ of the passions, instruction\nand _moral_ perfecting. For the characteristic that art was to bridle\nsavageness and educate the passions remained quite abstract and\ngeneral, so that a question must again arise about a _determinate_ kind\nand an essential _end_ of this education.\n\n([Greek: aa]) The doctrine of the purification of passion suffers\nindeed under the same defect as the above doctrine of the mitigation of\nthe desires; yet, when more closely looked at, it at any rate arrives\nat the point of accentuating the fact that the representations of art\nmay be held to lack a standard by which their worth or unworthiness\ncould be measured. This standard simply means their effectiveness in\nseparating pure from impure in the passions. It therefore requires\na content that has capacity to exercise this purifying power, and,\nin as far as the production of such an effect is taken to constitute\nthe substantive end of art, it must follow that the purifying content\nmust be brought before consciousness in its _universality_ and\n_essentiality_.\n\n([Greek: bb]) In this latter aspect the end of art has been pronounced\nto be that it should _teach_. Thus, on the one side, the peculiar\ncharacter of art would consist in the movement of the emotions and in\nthe satisfaction which lies in this movement, even in fear, compassion,\nin painful pathos and shock--that is to say, in the satisfying\nengagement of the emotions and passions, and to that extent in a\ncomplacency, entertainment, and delight in the objects of art, in their\nrepresentation and effect; but, on the other side, this purpose (of\nart) is held to find its higher standard only in its instructiveness,\nin the _fabula docet_,[85] and thus in the useful influence which the\nwork of art succeeds in exerting on the subject.[86] In this respect\nthe Horatian saw,[87] \"Et prodesse volunt et delectare poet\u00e6,\" (\"Poets\naim at utility and entertainment alike\") contains, concentrated in\na few words, all that has subsequently been elaborated in infinite\ndegrees, and diluted into the uttermost extreme of insipidity as a\ndoctrine of art. As regards such instruction we have, then, to ask,\nwhether it is meant to be directly or indirectly, explicitly or\nimplicitly contained in the work of art.\n\nIf, speaking generally, we are concerned about a purpose which is\nuniversal and not contingent, it follows that this purpose, considering\nthe essentially spiritual nature of art, cannot but be itself\nspiritual, and indeed, moreover, one which is not contingent,[88] but\nactual in its nature and for its own sake. Such a purpose in relation\nto teaching could only consist in bringing before consciousness,\nby help of the work of art, a really and explicitly significant\nspiritual content. From this point of view it is to be asserted that\nthe higher art ranks itself, the more it is bound to admit into\nitself such a content as this, and that only in the essence of such\na content can it find the standard which determines whether what is\nexpressed is appropriate or inappropriate. Art was, in fact, the first\n_instructress_ of peoples.\n\nBut the purpose of instruction may be treated as _purpose_, to such a\ndegree that the universal nature of the represented content is doomed\nto be exhibited and expounded directly and obviously as abstract\nproposition, prosaic reflection, or general theorem, and not merely\nin an indirect way in the concrete form of a work of art. By such a\nseverance the sensuous plastic form, which is just what makes the\nwork of art a work of _art_, becomes a mere otiose accessory, a husk\nwhich is expressly pronounced to be mere husk, a semblance expressly\npronounced to be mere semblance. But thereby the very nature of the\nwork of art is distorted. For the work of art ought to bring a content\nbefore the mind's eye, not in its generality as such, but with this\ngenerality made absolutely individual, and sensuously particularized.\nIf the work of art does not proceed from this principle, but sets in\nrelief its generalized aspect with the purpose of abstract instruction,\nthen the imaginative and sensuous aspect is only an external and\nsuperfluous adornment, and the work of art is a thing divided against\nitself,[89] in which form and content no longer appear as grown into\none. In that case the sensuously individual and the spiritually\ngeneral are become external to one another.\n\nAnd further, if the purpose of art is limited to this _didactic_\nutility, then its other aspect, that of pleasure, entertainment, and\ndelight, is pronounced to be in itself _unessential_, and ought to have\nits substance merely in the utility of the teaching on which it is\nattendant. But this amounts to pronouncing that art does not bear its\nvocation and purpose in itself, but that its conception is rooted in\nsomething else, to which it is a _means_. Art is, in this case, only\none among the several means which prove useful and are applied for\nthe purpose of instruction. This brings us to the boundary at which\nart is made no longer to be an end on its own merits, seeing that\nit is degraded into a mere toy of entertainment or a mere means of\ninstruction.\n\n([Greek: gg]) This boundary becomes most sharply marked when a question\nis raised, in its turn, about a supreme end and aim for the sake of\nwhich the passions are to be purified and men are to be instructed.\nThis aim has often, in modern times, been declared to be _moral_\nimprovement, and the aim of art has been placed in the function of\npreparing the inclinations and impulses for moral perfection, and\nof leading them to this goal. This idea combines purification with\ninstruction, inasmuch as art is, by communicating an insight into\ngenuine moral goodness--that is, by instruction,--at the same time\nto incite to purification, and in this way alone to bring about the\nimprovement of mankind as its useful purpose and supreme goal.\n\nRegarding art in reference to moral improvement, the same has _prima\nfacie_ to be said as about the didactic purpose. We may readily grant\nthat art must not as a principle take for its aim the immoral and its\nfurtherance. But it is one thing to take immorality for the express\naim of representation, and another to abstain from taking morality.\nEvery genuine work of art may have a good moral drawn from it, but, of\ncourse, in doing so much depends on interpretation and on him who draws\nthe moral. Thus one may hear the most immoral representations defended\nby saying that we must know evil, or sin, in order to act morally; and,\nconversely, it has been said that the portrayal of Mary Magdalene,\nthe beautiful sinner who afterwards repented, has seduced many into\nsin, because art makes it look so beautiful to repent, and you must\nsin before you can repent. But the doctrine of moral improvement, if\nconsistently carried out, goes in general yet further. It would not be\nsatisfied with the possibility of extracting a moral from a work of art\nby interpretation, but it would, on the contrary, display the moral\ninstruction as the substantive purpose of the work of art, and, indeed,\nwould actually admit to portrayal none but moral subjects, moral\ncharacters, actions, and incidents. For art has the choice among its\nsubjects, in contradistinction to history or the sciences which have\ntheir matter fixed for them.\n\nIn order that we may be able to form a thoroughly adequate estimate of\nthe idea that the aim of art is moral from this point of view, we must\ninquire first of all for the definite standpoint of the morality on\nwhich this doctrine is based. If we look closely at the standpoint of\nmorality as we have to understand it in the best sense at the present\nday, we soon find that its conception does not immediately coincide\nwith what apart from it we are in the habit of calling in a general\nway virtue, respectability,[90] uprightness, etc. To be respectable\nand virtuous is not enough to make a man moral.[91] Morality involves\n_reflection_ and the definite consciousness of that which duty\nprescribes, and acting out of such a prior consciousness. Duty itself\nis the law of the will, which man nevertheless lays down freely out of\nhis own self, and then is supposed to determine himself to this duty\nfor duty's and its fulfilment's sake, by doing good solely from the\nconviction which he has attained that it is the good. Now this law, the\nduty which is chosen for duty's sake to be the guide of action, out\nof free conviction and the inner conscience, and is then acted upon,\nis, taken by itself,[92] the abstract universal of the will, and is the\ndirect antithesis of nature, the sensuous impulses, the self-seeking\ninterests, the passions, and of all that is comprehensively entitled\nthe feelings[93] and the heart. In this antagonism the one side is\nregarded as _negativing_ the other; and, seeing that both are present\nas antagonists within the subject (person), he has, as determining\nhimself out of himself, the choice of following the one or the other.\nBut, according to the view under discussion, a _moral_ aspect is\nacquired by such a decision, and by the act performed in accordance\nwith it, only through the free conviction of duty on the one hand, and,\non the other hand, through the conquest, not only of the particular or\nseparate will, of the natural motives, inclinations, passions, etc.,\nbut also through that of the nobler emotions and the higher impulses.\nFor the modern moralistic view starts from the fixed antithesis\nof the will in its spiritual universality to its sensuous natural\nparticularity,[94] and consists not in the completed reconciliation of\nthese contrasted sides, but in their conflict with one another, which\ninvolves the requirement that the impulses which conflict with duty\nought to yield to it.\n\nThis antithesis does not merely display itself for our consciousness,\nin the limited region of moral action; but also emerges as a\nfundamental distinction and antagonism between that which is real\nessentially and in its own right,[95] and that which is external\nreality and existence. Formulated in the abstract, it is the contrast\nof the universal and particular, when the former is explicitly fixed\nover against the latter, just as the latter is over against the former;\nmore concretely, it appears in nature as the opposition of the abstract\nlaw against the abundance of individual phenomena, each having its\nown character; in the mind, as the sensuous and spiritual in man, as\nthe battle of the spirit against the flesh, of duty for duty's sake,\nthe cold command, with the individual interest, the warm feelings,\nthe sensuous inclinations and impulses, the individual disposition\nas such; as the hard conflict of inward freedom and of natural\nnecessity; further, as the contradiction of the dead conception--empty\nin itself--compared with full concrete vitality, or of theory and\nsubjective thought contrasted with objective existence and experience.\n\nThese are antitheses which have not been invented, either by the\nsubtlety of reflection or by the pedantry of philosophy, but which\nhave from all time and in manifold forms preoccupied and disquieted\nthe human consciousness, although it was modern culture that\nelaborated them most distinctly, and forced them up to the point of\nmost unbending contradiction. Intellectual culture and the modern\nplay of understanding create in man this contrast, which makes him an\namphibious animal, inasmuch as it sets him to live in two contradictory\nworlds at once; so that even consciousness wanders back and forward\nin this contradiction, and, shuttle-cocked from side to side, is\nunable to satisfy itself _as_ itself on the one side as on the other.\nFor, on the one side, we see man a prisoner in common reality and\nearthly temporality, oppressed by want and poverty, hard driven by\nnature, entangled in matter, in sensuous aims and their enjoyments;\non the other side, he exalts himself to eternal ideas, to a realm of\nthought and freedom, imposes on himself as a _will_ universal laws and\nattributions, strips the world of its living and flourishing reality\nand dissolves it into abstractions, inasmuch as the mind is put upon\nvindicating its rights and its dignity simply by denying the rights\nof nature and maltreating it, thereby retaliating the oppression and\nviolence which itself has experienced from nature. Such a discrepancy\nin life and consciousness involves for modern culture and its\nunderstanding the demand that the contradiction should be resolved.\nYet the understanding cannot release itself from the fixity of these\nantitheses. The solution, therefore, remains for consciousness a mere\n_ought_, and the present and reality only stir themselves in the\nunrest of a perpetual to and fro, which seeks a reconciliation without\nfinding it. Then the question arises, whether such a many-sided and\nfundamental opposition which never gets beyond a mere ought and a\npostulated solution, can be the genuine and complete[96] truth, and,\nin general, the supreme purpose. If the culture of the world[97] has\nfallen into such a contradiction, it becomes the task of philosophy to\nundo or cancel it, _i.e._ to show that neither the one alternative in\nits abstraction nor the other in similar one-sidedness possesses truth,\nbut that they are essentially self-dissolving; that truth only lies in\nthe conciliation and mediation of the two, and that this mediation is\nno mere postulate, but is in its nature and in reality accomplished\nand always self-accomplishing. This intuition agrees directly with the\nnatural faith and will, which always has present to the mind's eye\nprecisely this resolved antithesis, and in action makes it its purpose\nand achieves it. All that philosophy does is to furnish a reflective\ninsight into the essence of the antithesis in as far as it shows that\nwhat constitutes truth is merely the resolution of this antithesis, and\nthat not in the sense that the conflict and its aspects in any way\n_are not_, but in the sense that they _are_, _in reconciliation_.\n\n(_d_) Now, as an ultimate aim implied a higher standpoint in the case\nof moral improvement, we shall have to vindicate this higher standpoint\nfor art no less than for morals. Thereby we at once lay aside the\nfalse position, which has already been remarked upon, that art has to\nserve as a means for moral ends, and to conduce to the moral end of\nthe world, as such, by instruction and moral improvement, and thereby\nhas its substantive aim, not in itself, but in something else. If,\ntherefore, we now continue to speak of an aim or purpose, we must, in\nthe first instance, get rid of the perverse idea, which, in asking\n\"What is the aim?\" retains the accessory meaning of the question,\n\"What is the _use_?\". The perverseness of this lies in the point that\nthe work of art would then be regarded as aspiring to something else\nwhich is set before consciousness as the essential and as what ought\nto be; so that then the work of art would only have value as a useful\ninstrument in the realization of an end having substantive importance\n_outside_ the sphere of art. Against this it is necessary to maintain\nthat art has the vocation of revealing _the truth_ in the form of\nsensuous artistic shape, of representing the reconciled antithesis\njust described, and, therefore, has its purpose in itself, in this\nrepresentation and revelation. For other objects, such as instruction,\npurification, improvement, pecuniary gain, endeavour after fame and\nhonour, have nothing to do with the work of art as such, and do not\ndetermine its conception.\n\nIt is from this point of view, into which _reflective_ consideration\nof the matter resolves itself, that we have to apprehend the idea of\nart in its inner necessity, as indeed it was from this point of view,\nhistorically speaking, that the true appreciation and understanding\nof art took its origin. For that antithesis, of which we spoke, made\nitself felt, not only within general reflective culture, but no less in\nphilosophy as such, and it was not till philosophy discovered how to\novercome this antithesis absolutely, that it grasped its own conception\nand, just in as far as it did so, the conception of nature and of art.\n\nHence this point of view, as it is the re-awakening of philosophy\nin general, so also is the re-awakening of the science of art; and,\nindeed, it is this re-awakening to which alone \u00e6sthetic as a science\nowes its true origin, and art its higher estimation.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER IV.\n\nHISTORICAL DEDUCTION OF THE TRUE IDEA OF ART IN MODERN PHILOSOPHY.\n\n\nI Shall touch briefly upon the historical side of the transition above\nalluded to, partly for its historical interest, partly because, in\ndoing so, we shall more closely indicate the critical points which\nare important, and on the foundation of which we mean to continue\nour structure. In its most general formulation, this basis consists\nin recognizing artistic beauty as one of the means which resolve and\nreduce to unity the above antithesis and contradiction between the\nabstract self-concentrated mind and actual nature, whether that of\nexternal phenomena, or the inner subjective feelings and emotions.\n\n1. The Kantian philosophy led the way by not merely feeling the lack\nof this point of union, but attaining definite knowledge of it, and\nbringing it within the range of our ideas.[98] In general, Kant\ntreated as his foundation for the intelligence as for the will, the\nself-related rationality or freedom, the self-consciousness that\nfinds and knows itself in itself as infinite.[99] This knowledge of\nthe absoluteness of reason in itself which has brought philosophy to\nits turning-point in modern times, this absolute beginning, deserves\nrecognition even if we pronounce Kant's philosophy inadequate, and\nis an element in it which cannot be refuted. But, in as far as Kant\nfell back again into the fixed antithesis of subjective thought and\nobjective things, of the abstract universality and the sensuous\nindividuality of the will, it was he more especially who strained to\nthe highest possible pitch the above-mentioned contradiction called\nmorality,[100] seeing that he moreover exalted the practical side of\nthe mind above the theoretical. In presence of this fixed antithesis,\nwith its fixity acknowledged by the understanding, he had no course\nopen but to propound the unity merely in the form of subjective\nideas of the reason to which no adequate reality could be shown to\ncorrespond, or again, to treat it as consisting in postulates which\nmight indeed be deduced from the practical reason, but whose essential\nnature[101] was not for him knowable by thought, and whose practical\naccomplishment remained a mere ought deferred to infinity. Thus, then,\nKant no doubt brought the reconciled contradiction within the range\nof our ideas, but he succeeded neither in scientifically unfolding its\ngenuine essence nor in presenting it as the true and sole reality. Kant\nindeed pressed on still further, inasmuch as he recognized the required\nunity in what he called the _intuitive understanding_; but here,\nagain, he comes to a standstill in the contradiction of subjectivity\nand objectivity, so that although he suggests in the abstract a\nsolution of the contradiction of concept and reality, universality\nand particularity, understanding and sense, and thereby points to the\nIdea, yet, on the other hand, he makes this solution and reconciliation\nitself a purely _subjective_ one, not one which is true and actual in\nits nature and on its own merits.[102] In this respect the Critique\nof the power of judgment, in which he treats of the \u00e6sthetic and\nteleological powers of judgment, is instructive and remarkable. The\nbeautiful objects of nature and art, the rightly adapted products\nof nature, by connecting which Kant is led to a closer treatment of\norganic and animated beings, are regarded by him only from the point of\nview of the reflection which subjectively judges of them. Indeed Kant\ndefines the power of judgment generally as \"the power of thinking the\nparticular as contained under the universal;\" and he calls the power\nof judgment _reflective_ \"when it has only the particular given to it,\nand has to find the universal under which it comes.\" To this end it\nrequires a law, a principle, which it has to impose upon itself; and\nKant suggests as this law that of _Teleology_. In the idea of freedom\nthat belongs to the practical reason, the accomplishment of the end\nis left as a mere \"ought,\" but in the teleological judgment dealing\nwith animated beings, Kant hits on the notion of regarding the living\norganism in the light that in it the idea, the universal, contains\nthe particulars as well. Thus in its capacity as end, it determines\nthe particular and external, the structure of the limbs, not from\nwithout, but from within, and in the sense that the particular conforms\nto the end _spontaneously_. Yet even in such a judgment, again, we\nare supposed not to know the objective nature of the thing, but only\nto be enunciating a subjective mode of reflection. Similarly, Kant\nunderstands the _\u00e6sthetic_ judgment as neither proceeding from the\nunderstanding as such _qua_ the faculty of ideas, nor from sensuous\nperception as such with its manifold variety, but from the free play of\nthe understanding and of the imagination. It is in this free agreement\nof the faculties of knowledge, that the thing is related to the subject\nor person, and to his feeling of pleasure and complacency.\n\n(_a_) Now this complacency is, in the first place, to be devoid of any\ninterest, i.e., _devoid of relation to our appetitive faculty_. If\nwe have an interest, by way of curiosity for instance, or a sensuous\ninterest on behalf of our sensuous want, a desire of possession and\nuse, then the objects are not important to us for their own sake, but\nfor the sake of our want. In that case, what exists has a value only\nwith reference to such a want, and the relation is of such a kind that\nthe object is on the one side, and on the other stands an attribution\nwhich is distinct from the object, but to which we relate it. If, for\ninstance, I consume the object in order to nourish myself by it, this\ninterest lies only in me, and remains foreign to the object itself.\nNow, what Kant asserts is, that the relation to the beautiful is not\nof this kind. The \u00e6sthetic judgment allows the external existence\nto subsist free and independent, giving licence to the object to\nhave its end in itself. This is, as we saw above, an important\nconsideration.[103]\n\n(_b_) The beautiful, in _the second place_, says Kant, is definable\nas that which, without a conception, _i.e._ without a category of the\nunderstanding, is perceived as the object of a _universal_ delight.\nTo estimate the beautiful requires a cultivated mind; the natural\nman[104] has no judgment about the beautiful, seeing that this judgment\nclaims universal validity. The universal is, indeed to begin with,\n_as such_ an abstraction; but that which in itself and on its own\nmerits[105] is true, bears in itself the attribution and the claim\nto be valid even universally. In this sense the beautiful, too, ought\nto be _universally_ recognized, although the mere conceptions of the\nunderstanding are competent to no judgment thereupon. The good, that,\nfor instance, which is right in particular actions, is subsumed under\nuniversal conceptions, and the act passes for good when it succeeds\nin corresponding to these conceptions. Beauty, on the other hand,\naccording to the theory, should awaken a universal delight directly,\nwithout any such relation. This amounts to nothing else than that, in\ncontemplating beauty, we are not conscious of the conception and of the\nsubsumption under it, and do not permit to take place the severance\nof the individual object and of the universal conception which in all\nother cases is present in the judgment.\n\n(_c_) In the _third_ place, the beautiful (Kant says) has the form of\nteleology,[106] in as far as a teleological character is perceived in\nthe object without the idea of an end. At bottom this only repeats the\nview which we have just discussed. Any natural production, _i.e._ a\nplant or an animal, is organized teleologically, and is so immediately\na datum to us in this its teleology that we have no separate abstract\nidea of the end, distinct from its given reality. It is in this way\nthat even _the beautiful_ is to be displayed to us as teleological.\nIn finite teleology[107] end and means remain external to one another,\ninasmuch as the end stands in no essential inner relation to the\nmaterial medium of its accomplishment. In this case, the idea of the\nend in its abstraction[108] distinguishes itself from the object in\nwhich the end appears as realized. The beautiful, on the other hand,\nexists as teleological in itself, without means and end revealing\nthemselves in it as distinct aspects. For instance, the purpose of\nthe limbs of an organism is the vitality which exists as actual in\nthe limbs themselves; separately they cease to be limbs. For in the\nliving thing the end and the material medium of the end are so directly\nunited, that the existing being only exists so long as its purpose\ndwells in it. The beautiful, Kant maintains, when considered from this\npoint of view, does not wear its teleology as an external form attached\nto it; but the teleological correspondence of the inner and outer is\nthe immanent nature of the beautiful object.\n\n(_d_) Lastly, Kant's treatment determines the beautiful, in the\n_fourth_ place, as being recognized, without a conception, as object\nof a _necessary_ delight. Necessity is an abstract category, and\nindicates an inner essential relation of two aspects; _if_ the one is,\nand _because_ the one is, _then_ (_and therefore_) the other is. The\none in its nature involves the other as well as itself, just as cause,\n_e.g._, has no meaning without effect. The delight which the beautiful\ninvolves is such a necessary consequence, wholly without relation to\nconceptions, _i.e._ to categories of the understanding. Thus, for\ninstance, we are pleased no doubt by what is symmetrical, and this\nis constructed in accordance with a conception of the understanding.\nBut Kant requires, to give us pleasure, even more than the unity and\nequality that belong to such a conception of the understanding.\n\nNow, what we find in all these Kantian laws is a non-severance of\nthat which in all other cases is presupposed in our consciousness to\nbe distinct. In the beautiful this severance finds itself cancelled,\ninasmuch as universal and particular, end and means, conception\nand object thoroughly interpenetrate one another. And thus, again,\nKant regards the beautiful in _art_ as an agreement in which the\nparticular itself _is_ in accordance with the conception. Particulars,\nas such, are _prima facie_ contingent, both as regards one another\nand as regards the universal, and this very contingent element,\nsense, feeling, temper, inclination, is now in the beauty of art not\nmerely _subsumed_ under universal categories of the understanding\nand _controlled_ by the conception of feeling in its abstract\nuniversality, but so united with the universal that it reveals itself\nas inwardly and in its nature and realization[109] adequate thereto.\nBy this means the beauty of art becomes embodiment of a thought, and\nthe material is not externally determined by this thought, but exists\nitself in its freedom. For in this case the natural, sensuous, the\nfeelings and so forth have _in themselves_ proportion, purpose, and\nagreement; while perception and feeling are exalted into spiritual\nuniversality, and thought itself, not content with renouncing its\nhostility to nature, finds cheerfulness therein. Thus feeling,\npleasure, and enjoyment are justified and sanctified, so that nature\nand freedom, sensuousness and the idea, find their warrant and\ntheir satisfaction all in _one_. Yet even this apparently complete\nreconciliation is ultimately inferred[110] to be, nevertheless,\nmerely subjective in respect of our appreciation as in respect of our\nproduction, and not to be the naturally and completely true and real.\n\nThese we may take as the main results of the Kantian Criticism, so far\nas they have interest for us in our present inquiry. This criticism\nforms the starting-point for the true conception of artistic beauty.\nYet this conception had to overcome the Kantian defects before it could\nassert itself as the higher grasp of the true unity of necessity and\nfreedom, of the particular and the universal, of the sensuous and the\nrational.\n\n2. And so it must be admitted that the artistic sense of a profound,\nand, at the same time, philosophic mind was beforehand with philosophy\nas such, in demanding and enunciating the principle of totality and\nreconciliation as against that abstract endlessness of reflective\nthought, that duty for duty's sake, that intelligence devoid of plastic\nshape, which apprehend nature and reality, sensation and feeling as\na mere _limit_, and as an absolutely hostile element. For _Schiller_\nmust be credited with the great merit of having broken through the\nKantian subjectivity and abstractness of thought, and having dared\nthe attempt to transcend these limits by intellectually grasping the\nprinciples of unity and reconciliation as the truth, and realizing\nthem in art. Schiller, in his \u00e6sthetic discussions, did not simply\nadhere to art and its interest without concerning himself about its\nrelation to philosophy proper, but compared his interest in artistic\nbeauty with the principles of philosophy; and it was only by starting\nfrom the latter, and by their help that he penetrated the profounder\nnature and notion of the beautiful. Thus we feel it to be a feature in\none period of his works that he has busied himself with thought--more\nperhaps than was conducive to their unsophisticated beauty as works of\nart. The intentional character of abstract reflection and even the\ninterest of the philosophical idea are noticeable in many of his poems.\nThis has been made a ground of censure against him, especially by way\nof blaming and depreciating him in comparison with Goethe's agreeable\nstraightforwardness[111] and objectivity. But in this respect Schiller,\nas poet, did but pay the debt of his time; and the reason lay in a\nperplexity which turned out only to the honour of that sublime soul and\nprofound character, and to the profit of science and cognition.\n\nAt the same epoch the same scientific stimulus withdrew Goethe,\ntoo, from poetry, his proper sphere. Yet just as Schiller immersed\nhimself in the study of the inner depths of the _mind_, so Goethe's\nidiosyncrasy led him to the _physical_ side of art, to external nature,\nto animal and vegetable organisms, to crystals, to cloud formation,\nand to colour. To such scientific research Goethe brought the power of\nhis great mind, which in these regions put to rout[112] the science\nof mere understanding with its errors, just as Schiller, on the other\nside, succeeded in asserting the idea of the free totality of beauty\nagainst the understanding's science of volition and thought. A whole\nset of Schiller's productions is devoted to this insight of his into\nthe nature of art, especially the \"Letters upon \u00c6sthetic Education.\"\nIn these letters the central point from which Schiller starts is that\nevery individual human being has within him the capacity of an ideal\nhumanity. This genuine human being, he says, is represented by the\nState,[113] which he takes to be the objective, universal, or, so to\nspeak, normal form in which the diversity of particular subjects or\npersons aims at aggregating and combining itself into a unity. There\nwere, then, he considered, two imaginable ways in which the human\nbeing in time (in the actual course of events) might coincide with the\nhuman being in the Idea: on the one hand, by the State, _qua_ genus\nor class-idea of morality,[114] law, and intelligence, destroying\nindividuality; on the other hand, by the individual raising himself\nto the level of his genus, _i.e._ by the human being that lives in\ntime ennobling himself into the human being of the Idea. Now reason,\nhe thinks, demands unity as such, the generic character, but nature\ndemands diversity and individuality; and both these legislative\nauthorities have simultaneous claims on man. In presence of the\nconflict between these antagonistic elements, \u00e6sthetic education simply\nconsists in realizing the requirement of mediation and reconciliation\nbetween them. For the aim of this education is, according to Schiller,\nto give such form to inclination, sensuousness, impulse, and heart,\nthat they may become rational in themselves, and by the same process\nreason, freedom, and spirituality may come forward out of their\nabstraction, and uniting with the natural element, now rationalized\nthroughout, may in it be invested with flesh and blood. Beauty is thus\npronounced to be the unification of the rational and the sensuous, and\nthis unification to be the genuinely real.\n\nThis notion of Schiller's may be readily recognized in the general\nviews of \"Anmuth und W\u00fcrde,\"[115] and in his poems more particularly\nfrom the fact that he makes the praise of women his subject matter;\nbecause it was in their character that he recognized and held up to\nnotice the spontaneously present combination of the spiritual and\nnatural.\n\nNow this _Unity_ of the universal and particular, of freedom and\nnecessity, of the spiritual and the natural, which Schiller grasped\nfrom a scientific point of view as the principle and essence of art,\nand laboured indefatigably to evoke into actual existence by help of\nart and \u00e6sthetic culture, was considered, by a further advance, _as\nthe Idea itself_, and was thus constituted the principle of knowledge\nand of existence, while the Idea in this sense was recognized as the\nsole truth and reality. By means of this recognition, science, in\nSchelling's philosophy, attained its absolute standpoint, and although\nart had previously begun to assert its peculiar nature and dignity in\nrelation to the highest interests of humanity, yet it was now that\nthe actual _notion_ of art and its place in scientific theory were\ndiscovered. Art was now accepted, even if erroneously in one respect,\nwhich this is not the place to discuss, yet in its higher and genuine\nvocation. No doubt before this time so early a writer as Winckelmann\nhad been inspired by his observation of the ideals of the ancients in a\nway that led him to develop a new sense for the contemplation of art,\nto rescue it from the notions of commonplace aims and of mere mimicry\nof nature, and to exert an immense influence in favour of searching out\nthe idea of art in the works of art and in its history. For Winckelmann\nshould be regarded as one of the men who have succeeded in furnishing\nthe mind with a new organ and new methods of study in the field of art.\nOn the theory, however, and the scientific knowledge of art his view\nhas had less influence.\n\n3. To touch briefly on the further course of the subject, A. W. and\nFriedrich von Schlegel, in proximity to the renaissance of philosophy,\nbeing covetous of novelty and with a thirst for what was striking and\nextraordinary, appropriated as much of the philosophical idea as\ntheir natures, which were anything but philosophical, and essentially\nof the critical stamp, were capable of absorbing. Neither of them can\nclaim the reputation of a speculative thinker. But it was they who,\narmed with their critical understanding, set themselves somewhere near\nthe standpoint of the Idea, and with great plainness of speech and\naudacity of innovation, though with but a poor admixture of philosophy,\ndirected a clever polemic against the traditional views. And thus they\nundoubtedly introduced in several branches of art a new standard of\njudgment in conformity with notions which were higher than those that\nthey attacked. As, however, their criticism was not accompanied by the\nthorough philosophical comprehension of their standard, this standard\nretained a character of indefiniteness and vacillation, with the result\nthat they sometimes did too much and sometimes too little. No doubt\nthey are to be credited with the merit of bringing afresh to light\nand extolling in a loving spirit much that was held obsolete and was\ninadequately esteemed by their age, e.g. the work of the older painters\nof Italy and the Netherlands, the \"Nibelungen Lied,\" etc.; and, again,\nthey endeavoured with zeal to learn and to teach subjects that were\nlittle known, such as the Indian poetry and mythology. Nevertheless,\nthey attributed too high a value to the productions of such epochs,\nand sometimes themselves fell into the blunder of admiring what was\nbut mediocre, _e.g._ Holberg's comedies, and attaching a universal\nimportance to what had only relative value, or even boldly showing\nthemselves enthusiasts for a perverse tendency and subordinate\nstandpoint as if it were something supreme.\n\nOut of this tendency, and especially out of the sentiments[116] and\ndoctrines of Fried. von Schlegel, there further grew in all its\nmanifold shapes the so-called _Irony_. This idea had its deeper root,\nif we take it in one of its aspects, in Fichte's philosophy, in so\nfar as the principles of his philosophy were applied to art. Fried.\nvon Schlegel, as also Schelling, started from Fichte's point of view;\nSchelling, to pass wholly beyond it, Fried. von Schlegel to develop it\nin a peculiar fashion, and to tear himself loose from it. As regards\nthe intimate connection of Fichte's principles with one tendency\n(among others) of the irony, we need only lay stress on the following\npoint, that Fichte establishes the =I= as the absolute principle of\nall knowledge, of all reason and cognition; and that in the sense of\nthe =I= which is, and is no more than, utterly abstract and formal.\nFor this reason, in the second place, this =I= is in itself absolutely\nsimple, and, on the one hand, every characteristic, every attribute,\nevery content is negated therein--for every positive matter is\nannihilated by absorption into this abstract freedom and unity; on the\nother side, every content which is to be of value for the =I=, is given\nposition and recognition only by favour of the =I=. Whatever is, is\nonly by favour of the =I=,[117] and what is by my favour =I= am in turn\nable to annihilate.\n\nNow, if we abide by these utterly empty forms which have their origin\nin the absoluteness of the abstract =I=, then nothing has value in\nits real and actual nature, and regarded[118] in itself, but only as\nproduced by the subjectivity of the =I=. But if so, it follows that\nthe =I= is able to remain lord and master of everything, and in no\nsphere of morality or legality, of things human or divine, profane or\nsacred, is there anything that would not have to begin by being given\nposition by the =I=, and that might not, therefore, just as well be in\nturn annihilated thereby. This amounts to making all that is actual in\nits own right[119] a mere _semblance_, not true and real for its own\nsake and by its own means, but a mere appearance due to the =I=, within\nwhose power and caprice it remains, and at its free disposal. To admit\nit or to annihilate it stands purely in the pleasure of the =I= which\nhas attained absoluteness in itself and simply as =I=.\n\nIn the third place,[120] then, the =I= is a _living_, active\nindividual, and its life consists in bringing its individuality to its\nown consciousness as to that of others, in uttering itself and taking\nshape in phenomena. For every human being while he lives, seeks to\nrealize himself, and does realize himself. With respect to beauty and\nart this receives the meaning of living as artist and forming one's\nlife _artistically_. But, according to the principle before us, =I=\nlive as artist when all my action and utterance in general, whenever it\nhas to do with any content, is for me on the level of mere _semblance_,\nand assumes a shape which is wholly in my power. So =I= am not really\nin _earnest_, either about this content, or generally, about its\nutterance and realization. For genuine earnest comes into being only\nby means of a substantial interest, a matter that has something in\nit, truth, morality, and so forth; by means of a content which, as\nsuch (without my help) is enough to have value for me as something\nessential, so that =I= myself only become essential in my own eyes\nin as far as =I= have immersed myself in such a matter and have come\nto be in conformity with it in my whole knowledge and action. At the\nstandpoint according to which the artist is the =I= that binds and\nlooses[121] of its own power, for whom no content of consciousness\ncounts as absolute and as essentially real, but only as itself an\nartificial and dissoluble semblance, such earnest can never come into\nbeing, as nothing has validity ascribed to it but the formalism of the\n=I=. By others, indeed, my self-display in which =I= present myself to\nthem may be taken seriously, inasmuch as they interpret me as though I\nwere really concerned about the matter in hand; but therein they are\nsimply deceived, poor _born\u00e9_ creatures, without talent and capacity to\napprehend and to attain my standpoint. And this shows me that not every\none is so free (_formally_[122] free, that is) as to see in all that\nusually has value, dignity, and sanctity for mankind, simply a product\nof his own power of caprice, whereby he is able to set his seal on the\nvalue of such matters, and to determine himself and obtain a content by\ntheir means, or not. And then this skill in living an ironical artist\nlife apprehends itself as a _God-like geniality_,[123] for which every\npossible thing is a mere dead creature, to which the free creator,\nknowing himself to be wholly unattached, feels in no way bound, seeing\nthat he can annihilate as well as create it. He who has attained such\na standpoint of God-like geniality looks down in superiority on all\nmankind besides, for they are pronounced _born\u00e9_ and dull in as far as\nlaw, morality, and so forth retain for them their fixed, obligatory,\nand essential validity. And the individual who thus lives his artist\nlife assigns himself indeed relation to others, lives with friends,\nmistresses, etc., but as genius he sets no value on this relation to\nhis determinate reality and particular actions, or to what is universal\nin its own right; that is, he assumes an ironical attitude towards it.\n\nThis is the universal import of the genial God-like irony, as that\nconcentration of the =I= into itself for which all bonds are broken,\nand which will only endure to live in the bliss of self-enjoyment.[124]\nThis irony was the invention of Herr Fried. von Schlegel, and many\nfollowed him in prating about it then, or are prating of it afresh just\nnow.\n\nThe proximate form of this negativity which displays itself as irony\nis, then, on the one hand the futility[125] of all that is matter of\nfact, or moral and of substantive import in itself; the nothingness of\nall that is objective, and that has essential and actual value. If the\n=I= remains at this point of view, all appears to it as nothing worth\nand as futile, excepting its own subjectivity, which thereby becomes\nhollow and empty, and itself mere conceit.[126] But on the other hand,\nthe reverse may happen, and the I may also find itself unsatisfied\nin its enjoyment of itself, and may prove insufficient to itself, so\nas in consequence to feel a craving for the solid and substantial,\nfor determinate and essential interests. Out of this there arises\nmisfortune and antinomy, in that the subject desires to penetrate into\ntruth and has a craving for objectivity, but yet is unable to abandon\nits isolation and retirement into itself, and to strip itself free of\nthis unsatisfied abstract inwardness (of mind), and so has a seizure\nof sickly yearning[127] which we have also seen emanate from Fichte's\nschool. The discontent of this quiescence and feebleness,--which does\nnot like to act or to touch anything for fear of surrendering its\ninward harmony, and, for all its craving after the absolute, remains\nnone the less unreal and empty, even though pure in itself,--is the\nsource of morbid saintliness[128] and yearning. For a true saintly soul\nacts and is a reality. But all that craving is the feeling of the\nnullity of the empty futile[129] subject or person, which lacks the\nstrength to escape this its futility,[129] and to fill[130] itself with\nsomething of substantial value.\n\nIn so far, however, as the Irony was treated as a form of art, it did\nnot content itself with conferring artistic shape upon the life and\nparticular individuality of the artist. In addition to the works of art\npresented by his own actions, etc., the artist was bound to produce\nexternal works of art as creations of his fancy. The principle of these\nproductions, which for the most part can only come to the birth in\npoetical form, is, in due course, the representation of the Divine as\nthe Ironical. The ironical, as \"genial\" individuality, consists in the\nself-annihilation of what is noble, great, and excellent; and thus even\nthe objective shapes of art will have to represent the mere principle\nof absolute subjectivity, by displaying what has value and nobleness\nfor man as null in its self-annihilation. This implies, not merely that\nwe are not to be serious about the right, the moral, and the true, but\nthat the highest and best of all has nothing in it, inasmuch as in its\nexhibition through individuals, characters, and actions, it refutes\nand annihilates itself, and so is irony at its own expense. This mode,\ntaken in the abstract, borders closely on the principle of comedy; but\nyet within this affinity the comic must be essentially distinguished\nfrom the ironical. For the comic must be limited to bringing to nothing\nwhat is in itself null, a false and self-contradictory phenomenon;\nfor instance, a whim, a perversity, or particular caprice, set over\nagainst a mighty passion; or even a _supposed_ reliable principle or\nrigid maxim may be shown to be null. But it is quite another thing\nwhen what is in reality moral and true, any substantial content as\nsuch, exhibits itself as null in an individual and by his means. Such\nan individual is then null and despicable in character, and weakness\nand want of character are thus introduced into the representation. In\nthis distinction between the ironical and the comic it is therefore\nan essential question what import that has which is brought to\nnothing. In the case supposed they are wretched worthless subjects,\npersons destitute of the power to abide by their fixed and essential\npurpose, but ready to surrender it and let it be destroyed in them.\nThe \"Irony\" loves this irony of the characterless. For true character\ninvolves on the one hand an essential import in its purpose; on the\nother hand, adherence to that purpose, such that the individuality\nwould be robbed of its whole existence if forced to desist from and\nto abandon it. This stability and substance constitute the keynote of\ncharacter. _Cato_ can live only as Roman and as republican. Now, if\nIrony is taken as the keynote of the representation, this means that\nthe supremely inartistic is taken as the true principle of the work of\nart. For the result is in part insipid figures; in part shapes void\nof import and of conduct,[131] seeing that their substantive nature\nturns out to be a nullity; and in part, finally, those yearning moods\nand unresolved contradictions of the heart that attach themselves to\nsuch conceptions. Representations of this kind can awake no genuine\ninterest. And for this reason it is from the Irony that we have eternal\nlamentations over the lack of profound feeling, artistic insight, and\ngenius in the public, inasmuch as it does not understand these heights\nof Irony. That is to say, the public does not like all this mediocrity,\nhalf grotesque and half characterless. And it is well that these\nunsubstantial languishing natures afford no pleasure; it is a comfort\nthat such insincerity and hypocrisy are not approved, and that, on the\ncontrary, man has a desire no less for full and genuine interests than\nfor characters which remain true to the weighty purposes of their lives.\n\nIt may be added as an historical remark that those who more\nparticularly adopted irony as the supreme principle of art were Solger\nand Ludwig Tieck.\n\nThis is not the place to speak of Solger at the length which is due to\nhim, and I must content myself with a few observations. Solger was\nnot like the others, satisfied with superficial philosophical culture,\nbut the genuine speculative need of his innermost nature impelled him\nto descend into the depths of the philosophic idea. And therein he hit\nupon the dialectical element of the Idea, the point to which I give the\nname of \"infinite absolute negativity,\" the activity of the idea in\nthat it negates itself as the infinite and universal, so as to become\nfiniteness and particularity, and just as really cancels this negation\nin turn, establishing thereby the universal and infinite in the finite\nand particular. Solger got no further than this negativity, and it is\nno doubt an element in the speculative idea, but yet when conceived\nas this mere dialectic unrest and dissolution both of infinite and of\nfinite _no more than_ an element; not, as Solger maintains, _the entire\nIdea_. Unhappily Solger's life was too soon interrupted for him to\nhave achieved the concrete development of the philosophical Idea. And\nso he never got beyond this aspect of negativity, which has affinity\nwith the dissolution that Irony effects of what is determinate and of\nwhat has substantive value in itself, a negativity in which he saw the\nprinciple of artistic activity. Yet in his actual life, considering the\nsolidity, seriousness, and strength of his character, he neither was\nhimself, in the sense above depicted, an ironical artist, nor was his\nprofound feeling for genuine works of art, developed in protracted art\nstudies, in this respect of an ironical nature. So much in vindication\nof Solger, whose life, philosophy, and art merit to be distinguished\nfrom the previously mentioned apostles of irony.\n\nAs regards Ludwig Tieck, his culture, too, dates from that period\nin which for some time Jena was the literary centre.[132] Tieck and\nothers of these distinguished people display great familiarity with the\nphrases in question, but without telling us what they mean by them.\nThus, Tieck no doubt always says there ought to be Irony; but when he\nhimself approaches the criticism of great works of art, though his\nrecognition and portrayal of their greatness is excellent, yet, if we\nfancy that now is the best opportunity to explain where the Irony is,\n_e.g._ in such a work as \"Romeo and Juliet,\" we are taken in--for we\nhear no more about the Irony.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER V\n\nDIVISION OF THE SUBJECT.\n\n\n1. After the above introductory remarks, it is now time to pass to\nthe study of our object-matter. But we are still in the introduction,\nand an introduction cannot do more than lay down, for the sake of\nexplanation, the general sketch of the entire course which will be\nfollowed by our subsequent scientific considerations. As, however, we\nhave spoken of art as proceeding from the absolute Idea, and have even\nassigned as its end the sensuous representation of the absolute itself,\nwe shall have to conduct this review in a way to show, at least in\ngeneral, how the particular divisions of the subject spring from the\nconception of artistic beauty as the representation of the absolute.\nTherefore we must attempt to awaken a very general idea of this\nconception itself.\n\nIt has already been said that the content of art is the Idea, and that\nits form lies in the plastic use of images accessible to sense. These\ntwo sides art has to reconcile into a full and united totality. The\n_first_ attribution which this involves is the requirement that the\ncontent, which is to be offered to artistic representation, shall show\nitself to be in its nature worthy of such representation. Otherwise\nwe only obtain a bad combination, whereby a content that will not\nsubmit to plasticity and to external presentation, is forced into that\nform, and a matter which is in its nature prosaic is expected to find\nan appropriate mode of manifestation in the form antagonistic to its\nnature.\n\nThe _second_ requirement, which is derivable from this first, demands\nof the content of art that it should not be anything abstract in\nitself. This does not mean that it must be concrete as the sensuous\nis concrete in contrast to everything spiritual and intellectual,\nthese being taken as in themselves simple and abstract. For everything\nthat has genuine truth in the mind as well as in nature is concrete\nin itself, and has, in spite of its universality, nevertheless, both\nsubjectivity and particularity within it. If we say, _e.g._, of God\nthat he is simply _One_, the supreme Being as such, we have only\nenunciated a lifeless abstraction of the irrational understanding. Such\na God, as he himself is not apprehended in his concrete truth, can\nafford no material for art, least of all for plastic art. Hence the\nJews and the Turks have not been able to represent their God, who does\nnot even amount to such an abstraction of the understanding, in the\npositive way in which Christians have done so. For God in Christianity\nis conceived in His truth, and therefore, as in Himself thoroughly\nconcrete, as a person, as a subject,[133] and more closely determined,\nas mind or spirit. What He is as spirit unfolds itself to the religious\napprehension as the Trinity of Persons, which at the same time in\nrelation with itself is _One_. Here is essentiality, universality, and\nparticularity, together with their reconciled unity; and it is only\nsuch unity that constitutes the concrete. Now, as a content in order to\npossess truth at all must be of this concrete nature, art demands the\nsame concreteness, because a mere abstract universal has not in itself\nthe vocation to advance to particularity and phenomenal manifestation\nand to unity with itself therein.\n\nIf a true and therefore concrete content is to have corresponding to it\na sensuous form and modelling, this sensuous form must, in the third\nplace, be no less emphatically something individual, wholly concrete\nin itself, and one. The character of concreteness as belonging to both\nelements of art, to the content as to the representation, is precisely\nthe point in which both may coincide and correspond to one another; as,\nfor instance, the natural shape of the human body is such a sensuous\nconcrete as is capable of representing spirit, which is concrete in\nitself, and of displaying itself in conformity therewith. Therefore we\nought to abandon the idea that it is a mere matter of accident that an\nactual phenomenon of the external world is chosen to furnish a shape\nthus conformable to truth. Art does not appropriate this form either\nbecause it simply finds it existing or because there is no other. The\nconcrete content itself involves the element of external and actual,\nwe may say indeed of sensible manifestation. But in compensation this\nsensuous concrete, in which a content essentially belonging to mind\nexpresses itself, is in its own nature addressed to the inward being;\nits external element of shape, whereby the content is made perceptible\nand imaginable, has the aim of existing purely for the heart and mind.\nThis is the only reason for which content and artistic shape are\nfashioned in conformity with each other. The _mere_ sensuous concrete,\nexternal nature as such, has not this purpose for its exclusive ground\nof origin. The birds' variegated plumage shines unseen, and their\nsong dies away unheard, the _Cereus_[134] which blossoms only for a\nnight withers without having been admired in the wilds of southern\nforests, and these forests, jungles of the most beautiful and luxuriant\nvegetation, with the most odorous and aromatic perfumes, perish\nand decay no less unenjoyed. The work of art has not such a na\u00efve\nself-centred being, but is essentially a question, an address to the\nresponsive heart, an appeal to affections and to minds.\n\nAlthough the artistic bestowal of sensuous form is in this respect\nnot accidental, yet on the other hand it is not the highest mode\nof apprehending the spiritually concrete. Thought is a higher mode\nthan representation by means of the sensuous concrete. Although in a\nrelative sense abstract, yet it must not be one-sided but concrete\nthinking, in order to be true and rational. Whether a given content\nhas sensuous artistic representation for its adequate form, or in\nvirtue of its nature essentially demands a higher and more spiritual\nembodiment, is a distinction that displays itself at once, if, for\ninstance, we compare the Greek gods with God as conceived according to\nChristian ideas. The Greek god is not abstract but individual, and is\nclosely akin to the natural human shape; the Christian God is equally a\nconcrete personality, but in the mode of pure spiritual existence, and\nis to be known as _mind_[135] and in mind. His medium of existence is\ntherefore essentially inward knowledge and not external natural form,\nby means of which He can only be represented imperfectly, and not in\nthe whole depth of His idea.\n\nBut inasmuch as the task of art is to represent the idea to direct\nperception in sensuous shape, and not in the form of thought or of pure\nspirituality as such, and seeing that this work of representation has\nits value and dignity in the correspondence and the unity of the two\nsides, _i.e._ of the Idea and its plastic embodiment, it follows that\nthe level and excellency of art in attaining a realization adequate to\nits idea,[136] must depend upon the grade of inwardness and unity with\nwhich Idea and Shape display themselves as fused into one.\n\nThus the higher truth is spiritual being that has attained a shape\nadequate to the conception of spirit. This is what furnishes the\nprinciple of division for the science of art. For before the mind can\nattain the true notion of its absolute essence, it has to traverse\na course of stages whose ground is in this idea itself; and to\nthis evolution of the content with which it supplies itself, there\ncorresponds an evolution, immediately connected therewith, of the\nplastic forms of art, under the shape of which the mind as artist\npresents to itself the consciousness of itself.\n\nThis evolution within the art-spirit has again in its own nature two\nsides. In the _first_ place the development itself is a spiritual[137]\nand universal one, in so far as the graduated series of definite\n_conceptions of the world_ as the definite but comprehensive\nconsciousness of nature, man and God, gives itself artistic shape;\nand, in the _second_ place, this _universal_ development of art is\nobliged to provide itself with external existence and sensuous form,\nand the definite modes of the sensuous art-existence are themselves a\ntotality of necessary distinctions in the realm of art--which are _the\nseveral arts_. It is true, indeed, that the necessary kinds of artistic\nrepresentation are on the one hand _qua_ spiritual of a very general\nnature, and not restricted to any one material;[138] while sensuous\nexistence contains manifold varieties of matter. But as this latter,\nlike the mind, has the Idea potentially for its inner soul, it follows\nfrom this that particular sensuous materials have a close affinity\nand secret accord with the spiritual distinctions and types of art\npresentation.\n\nIn its completeness, however, our science divides itself into three\nprincipal portions.\n\n_First_, we obtain a _general part_. It has for its content and object\nthe universal Idea of artistic beauty--this beauty being conceived as\nthe Ideal--together with the nearer relation of the latter both to\nnature and to subjective artistic production.\n\n_Secondly_, there develops itself out of the idea of artistic beauty a\n_particular_ part, in as far as the essential differences which this\nidea contains in itself evolve themselves into a scale _particular_\nplastic[139] forms.\n\nIn the _third_ place there results a _final_ part, which has for its\nsubject the individualization of artistic beauty, that consists in\nthe advance of art to the sensuous realization of its shapes and its\nself-completion as a system of the several arts[140] and their genera\nand species.\n\n2. With respect to the first part, we must begin by recalling to\nmind, in order to make the sequel intelligible, that the Idea _qua_\nthe beautiful in art is not the Idea as such, in the mode in which\na metaphysical logic apprehends it as the absolute, but the Idea as\ndeveloped into concrete form fit for reality, and as having entered\ninto immediate and adequate unity with this reality. For the _Idea\nas such_, although it is the essentially and actually true, is yet\nthe truth only in its generality which has not yet taken objective\nshape; but the _Idea_ as the _beautiful in art_ is at once the Idea\nwhen specially determined as in its essence individual reality, and\nalso an individual shape of reality essentially destined to embody\nand reveal the Idea. This amounts to enunciating the requirement that\nthe Idea, and its plastic mould as concrete reality, are to be made\ncompletely adequate to one another. When reduced to such form the Idea,\nas a reality moulded in conformity with the conception of the Idea,\nis the _Ideal_. The problem of this conformity might, to begin with,\nbe understood in the sense that any Idea would serve, so long as the\nactual shape, it did not matter what shape, represented this particular\nIdea and no other. But if so, the required truth of the Ideal is\nconfounded with mere correctness, which consists in the expression of\nany meaning whatever in appropriate fashion so that its import may be\nreadily recognized in the shape created. The Ideal is not to be thus\nunderstood. Any content whatever may attain to being represented quite\nadequately, judged by the standard of its own nature, but it does not\ntherefore gain the right to claim the artistic beauty of the Ideal.\nCompared indeed with ideal beauty, even the presentation will in such\na case appear defective. From this point of view we must remark to\nbegin with, what cannot be proved till later, that the defects of a\nwork of art are not to be regarded simply as always due, for instance,\nto individual unskillfulness. _Defectiveness of form_ arises from\n_defectiveness of content_. So, for example, the Chinese, Indians,\nand Egyptians in their artistic shapes, their forms of deities, and\ntheir idols, never got beyond a formless phase, or one of a vicious\nand false definiteness of form, and were unable to attain genuine\nbeauty; because their mythological ideas, the content and thought of\ntheir works of art, were as yet indeterminate in themselves, or of a\nvicious determinateness, and did not consist in the content that is\nabsolute in itself. The more that works of art excel in true beauty of\npresentation, the more profound is the inner truth of their content and\nthought. And in dealing with this point, we have not to think merely\nperhaps of the greater or lesser skill with which the natural forms as\ngiven in external reality are apprehended and imitated. For in certain\nstages of art-consciousness and of representation, the distortion and\ndisfigurement of natural structures is not unintentional technical\ninexpertness and want of skill, but intentional alteration, which\nemanates from the content that is in consciousness, and is required\nthereby. Thus, from this point of view, there is such a thing as\nimperfect art, which may be quite perfect, both technically and in\nother respects, _in its determinate_ sphere, yet reveals itself to be\ndefective when compared with the conception of art as such, and with\nthe Ideal. Only in the highest art are the Idea and the representation\ngenuinely adequate to one another, in the sense that the outward shape\ngiven to the Idea is in itself essentially and actually the true\nshape, because the content of the Idea, which that shape expresses,\nis itself the true and real content. It is a corollary from this,\nas we indicated above,[141] that the Idea must be defined in and\nthrough itself as concrete totality, and thereby possess in itself the\nprinciple and standard of its particularization and determination in\nexternal appearance. For example, the Christian imagination will be\nable to represent God only in human form and with man's intellectual\nexpression, because it is herein that God Himself is completely known\nin Himself as mind. Determinateness is, as it were, the bridge to\nphenomenal existence. Where this determinateness is not totality\nderived from the Idea itself, where the Idea is not conceived as\nself-determining and self-particularizing, the Idea remains abstract\nand has its determinateness, and therefore the principle that dictates\nits particular and exclusively appropriate mode of presentation, not\nin itself but external to it. Therefore, the Idea when still abstract\nhas even its shape external, and not dictated by itself. The Idea,\nhowever, which is concrete in itself bears the principle of its mode of\nmanifestation within itself, and is by that means the free process of\ngiving shape to itself. Thus it is only the truly concrete Idea that\ncan generate the true shape, and this correspondence of the two is the\nIdeal.\n\n3. Now because the Idea is in this fashion concrete unity, it follows\nthat this unity can enter into the art-consciousness only by the\nexpansion and reconciliation of the particularities of the Idea, and\nit is through this evolution that artistic beauty comes to possess a\n_totality of particular stages and forms_. Therefore, after we have\nstudied the beauty of art in itself and on its own merits, we must see\nhow beauty as a whole breaks up into its particular determinations.\nThis gives, as our _second part_, _the doctrine of the types of art_.\nThese forms find their genesis in the different modes of grasping the\nIdea as artistic content, whereby is conditioned a difference of the\nform in which it manifests itself. Hence the types of art are nothing\nbut the different relations of content and shape, relations which\nemanate from the Idea itself, and furnish thereby the true basis of\ndivision for this sphere. For the principle of division must always be\ncontained in _that_ conception whose particularization and division is\nin question.\n\nWe have here to consider _three_ relations of the Idea to its outward\nshaping.[142]\n\n[Greek: a]. First, the Idea gives rise to the beginning of Art when,\nbeing itself still in its indistinctness and obscurity, or in vicious\nuntrue determinateness, it is made the import of artistic creations.\nAs indeterminate it does not yet possess in itself that individuality\nwhich the Ideal demands; its abstractness and one-sidedness leave its\nshape to be outwardly bizarre and defective. The first form of art is\ntherefore rather a mere search after plastic portrayal than a capacity\nof genuine representation. The Idea has not yet found the true form\neven within itself, and therefore continues to be merely the struggle\nand aspiration thereafter. In general terms we may call this form the\n_Symbolic_ form of art. In it the abstract Idea has its outward shape\nexternal to itself[143] in natural sensuous matter, with which the\nprocess of shaping begins, and from which, _qua_ outward expression,\nit is inseparable.\n\nNatural objects are thus primarily left unaltered, and yet at the same\ntime invested with the substantial Idea as their significance, so that\nthey receive the vocation of expressing it, and claim to be interpreted\nas though the Idea itself were present in them. At the root of this\nis the fact that natural objects have in them an aspect in which they\nare capable of representing a universal meaning. But as an adequate\ncorrespondence is not yet possible, this reference can only concern _an\nabstract attribute_, as when a lion is used to mean strength.\n\nOn the other hand, this abstractness of the relation brings to\nconsciousness no less strongly the foreignness of the Idea to\nnatural phenomena; and the Idea, having no other reality to express\nit, expatiates in all these shapes, seeks itself in them in all\ntheir unrest and disproportion, but nevertheless does not find them\nadequate to itself. Then it proceeds to exaggerate the natural shapes\nand the phenomena of reality into indefiniteness and disproportion,\nto intoxicate itself in them, to seethe and ferment in them, to do\nviolence to them, to distort and explode them into unnatural shapes,\nand strives by the variety, hugeness, and splendour of the forms\nemployed[144] to exalt the phenomenon to the level of the Idea. For\nthe Idea is here still more or less indeterminate and non-plastic, but\nthe natural objects are in their shape thoroughly determinate.\n\nHence, in view of the unsuitability of the two elements to each other,\nthe relation of the Idea to objective reality becomes a _negative_\none, for the former, as in its nature inward,[145] is unsatisfied with\nsuch an externality, and as being its inner universal substance[146]\npersists in exaltation or _Sublimity_ beyond and above all this\ninadequate abundance of shapes. In virtue of this sublimity the natural\nphenomena and the human shapes and incidents are accepted, and left as\nthey were, though at the same time understood to be inadequate to their\nsignificance, which is exalted far above every earthly content.\n\nThese aspects may be pronounced in general terms to constitute the\ncharacter of the primitive artistic pantheism of the East, which\neither charges even the meanest objects with the absolute import, or\nagain coerces nature with violence into the expression of its view.\nBy this means it becomes bizarre, grotesque, and tasteless, or turns\nthe infinite but abstract freedom of the substantive Idea disdainfully\nagainst all phenomenal being as null and evanescent. By such means the\nimport cannot be completely embodied in the expression, and in spite\nof all aspiration and endeavour the reciprocal inadequacy of shape\nand Idea remains insuperable. This may be taken as the first form of\nart,--Symbolic art with its aspiration, its disquiet,[147] its mystery\nand its sublimity.\n\n([Greek: b]) In the second form of art, which we propose to call\n\"_Classical_,\" the double defect of symbolic art is cancelled. The\nplastic shape of symbolic art is imperfect, because, in the first\nplace, the Idea in it only enters into consciousness in _abstract_\ndeterminateness or indeterminateness, and, in the second place, this\nmust always make the conformity of shape to import defective, and in\nits turn merely abstract. The classical form of art is the solution\nof this double difficulty; it is the free and adequate embodiment of\nthe Idea in the shape that, according to its conception, is peculiarly\nappropriate to the Idea itself. With it, therefore, the Idea is capable\nof entering into free and complete accord. Hence, the classical type\nof art is the first to afford the production and intuition of the\ncompleted Ideal, and to establish it as a realized fact.\n\nThe conformity, however, of notion and reality in classical art must\nnot be taken in the purely _formal_ sense of the agreement of a\ncontent with the external shape given to it, any more than this could\nbe the case with the Ideal itself. Otherwise every copy from nature,\nand every type of countenance, every landscape, flower, or scene, etc.,\nwhich forms the purport of any representation, would be at once made\nclassical by the agreement which it displays between form and content.\nOn the contrary, in classical art the peculiarity of the content\nconsists in being itself concrete idea, and, as such, the concrete\nspiritual; for only the spiritual is the truly inner self. To suit such\na content, then, we must search out that in Nature which on its own\nmerits belongs to the essence and actuality of the mind. It must be the\nabsolute[148] notion that _invented_ the shape appropriate to concrete\nmind, so that the _subjective_ notion--in this case the spirit of\nart--has merely _found_ it, and brought it, as an existence possessing\nnatural shape, into accord with free individual spirituality.[149] This\nshape, with which the Idea as spiritual--as individually determinate\nspirituality--invests itself when manifested as a temporal phenomenon,\nis _the human form_. Personification and anthropomorphism have often\nbeen decried as a degradation of the spiritual; but art, in as far as\nits end is to bring before perception the spiritual in sensuous form,\nmust advance to such anthropomorphism, as it is only in its proper body\nthat mind is adequately revealed to sense. The migration of souls is\nin this respect a false abstraction,[150] and physiology ought to have\nmade it one of its axioms that life had necessarily in its evolution\nto attain to the human shape, as the sole sensuous phenomenon that\nis appropriate to mind. The human form is employed in the classical\ntype of art not as mere sensuous existence, but exclusively as the\nexistence and physical form corresponding to mind, and is therefore\nexempt from all the deficiencies of what is merely sensuous, and from\nthe contingent finiteness of phenomenal existence. The outer shape\nmust be thus purified in order to express in itself a content adequate\nto itself; and again, if the conformity of import and content is to\nbe complete, the spiritual meaning which is the content must be of\na particular kind. It must, that is to say, be qualified to express\nitself completely in the physical form of man, without projecting\ninto another world beyond the scope of such an expression in sensuous\nand bodily terms. This condition has the effect that Mind is by it at\nonce specified as a particular case of mind, as human mind, and not\nas simply absolute and eternal, inasmuch as mind in this latter sense\nis incapable of proclaiming and expressing itself otherwise than as\nintellectual being.[151]\n\nOut of this latter point arises, in its turn, the defect which brings\nabout the dissolution of classical art, and demands a transition into a\nthird and higher form, viz. into the _romantic_ form of art.\n\n([Greek: g]) The romantic form of art destroys the completed union\nof the Idea and its reality, and recurs, though in a higher phase,\nto that difference and antagonism of two aspects which was left\nunvanquished by symbolic art. The classical type attained the highest\nexcellence, of which the sensuous embodiment of art is capable; and\nif it is in any way defective, the defect is in art as a whole,\n_i.e._ in the limitation of its sphere. This limitation consists in\nthe fact that art as such takes for its object Mind--the conception\nof which is _infinite_ concrete universality--in the shape of\n_sensuous_ concreteness, and in the classical phase sets up the perfect\namalgamation of spiritual and sensuous existence as a Conformity of\nthe two. Now, as a matter of fact, in such an amalgamation Mind cannot\nbe represented according to its true notion. For mind is the infinite\nsubjectivity of the Idea, which, as absolute inwardness,[152] is not\ncapable of finding free expansion in its true nature on condition of\nremaining transposed into a bodily medium as the existence appropriate\nto it.\n\nAs _an escape from such a condition_ the romantic form of art in its\nturn dissolves the inseparable unity of the classical phase, because\nit has won a significance which goes beyond the classical form of art\nand its mode of expression.[153] This significance--if we may recall\nfamiliar ideas--coincides with what Christianity declares to be true of\nGod as Spirit, in contradistinction to the Greek faith in gods which\nforms the essential and appropriate content for classical art. In\nGreek art the concrete import is potentially, but not explicitly, the\nunity of the human and divine nature; a unity which, just because it\nis purely _immediate_[154] and _not explicit_, is capable of adequate\nmanifestation in an immediate and sensuous mode. The Greek god is the\nobject of naive intuition and sensuous imagination. His shape is,\ntherefore, the bodily shape of man. The circle of his power and of his\nbeing is individual and individually limited. In relation with the\nsubject,[155] he is, therefore, an essence and a power with which the\nsubject's inner being is merely in latent unity, not itself possessing\nthis unity as inward subjective knowledge. Now the higher stage is\nthe _knowledge_ of this _latent_ unity, which as latent is the import\nof the classical form of art, and capable of perfect representation\nin bodily shape. The elevation of the latent or potential into\nself-conscious knowledge produces an enormous difference. It is the\ninfinite difference which, _e.g._, separates man as such from the\nanimals. Man is animal, but even in his animal functions he is not\nconfined within the latent and potential as the animal is, but becomes\nconscious of them, learns to know them, and raises them--as, for\ninstance, the process of digestion--into self-conscious science. By\nthis means Man breaks the boundary of merely potential and immediate\nconsciousness, so that just for the reason that he knows himself\nto be animal, he ceases to be animal, and, as _mind_, attains to\nself-knowledge.\n\nIf in the above fashion the unity of the human and divine nature,\nwhich in the former phase was potential, is raised from an _immediate_\nto a _conscious_ unity, it follows that the true medium for the\nreality of this content is no longer the sensuous immediate existence\nof the spiritual, the human bodily shape, but _self-conscious\ninward intelligence_.[156] Now, Christianity brings God before our\nintelligence _as spirit_, or mind--not as particularized individual\nspirit, but as absolute, in _spirit_ and in truth. And for this\nreason Christianity retires from the sensuousness of imagination into\nintellectual inwardness, and makes this, not bodily shape, the medium\nand actual existence of its significance. So, too, the unity of the\nhuman and divine nature is a conscious unity, only to be realized by\n_spiritual_ knowledge and in _spirit_. Thus the new content, won by\nthis unity, is not inseparable from sensuous representation, as if that\nwere adequate to it, but is freed from this immediate existence, which\nhas to be posited[157] as negative, absorbed, and reflected into the\nspiritual unity. In this way, romantic art must be considered as art\ntranscending itself, while remaining within the artistic sphere and in\nartistic form.\n\nTherefore, in short, we may abide by the statement that in this third\nstage the object (of art) is _free_, concrete intellectual being, which\nhas the function of revealing itself as spiritual existence for the\ninward[158] world of spirit. In conformity with such an object-matter,\nart cannot work for sensuous perception. It must address itself to the\ninward mind, which coalesces with its object simply and as though\nthis were itself,[159] to the subjective inwardness, to the heart, the\nfeeling, which, being spiritual, aspires to freedom within itself,\nand seeks and finds its reconciliation only in the spirit within. It\nis this _inner_ world that forms the content of the romantic, and\nmust therefore find its representation as such inward feeling, and\nin the show or presentation of such feeling. The world of inwardness\ncelebrates its triumph over the outer world, and actually in the sphere\nof the outer and in its medium manifests this its victory, owing to\nwhich the sensuous appearance sinks into worthlessness.\n\nBut, on the other hand, this type of Art,[160] like every other, needs\nan external vehicle of expression. Now the spiritual has withdrawn\ninto itself out of the external and its immediate oneness therewith.\nFor this reason, the sensuous externality of concrete form is accepted\nand represented, as in Symbolic art, as something transient and\nfugitive. And the same measure is dealt to the subjective finite mind\nand will, even including the peculiarity or caprice of the individual,\nof character, action, etc., or of incident and plot. The aspect of\nexternal existence is committed to contingency, and left at the mercy\nof freaks of imagination, whose caprice is no more likely to mirror\nwhat is given _as_ it is given, than to throw the shapes of the outer\nworld into chance medley, or distort them into grotesqueness. For this\nexternal element no longer has its notion and significance, as in\nclassical art, in its own sphere, and in its own medium. It has come\nto find them in the feelings, the display of which is _in themselves_\ninstead of being in the external and _its_ form of reality, and which\nhave the power to preserve or to regain their state of reconciliation\nwith themselves, in every accident, in every unessential circumstance\nthat takes independent shape, in all misfortune and grief, and even in\ncrime.\n\nOwing to this, the characteristics of symbolic art, in difference,\ndiscrepancy, and severance of Idea and plastic shape, are here\nreproduced, but with an essential difference. In the sphere of the\nromantic, the Idea, whose defectiveness in the case of the symbol\nproduced the defect of external shape, has to reveal itself in the\nmedium of spirit and feelings as perfected in itself. And it is because\nof this higher perfection that it withdraws itself from any adequate\nunion with the external element, inasmuch as it can seek and achieve\nits true reality and revelation nowhere but in itself.\n\nThis we may take as in the abstract the character of the symbolic,\nclassical, and romantic forms of art, which represent the three\nrelations of the Idea to its embodiment in the sphere of art. They\nconsist in the aspiration after, and the attainment and transcendence\nof the Ideal as the true Idea of beauty.\n\n4. The third part of our subject, in contradistinction to the two just\ndescribed, presupposes the conception of the Ideal, and the general\ntypes of art, inasmuch as it simply consists of their realization in\nparticular sensuous media. Hence we have no longer to do with the\ninner development of artistic beauty in conformity with its general\nfundamental principles. What we have to study is how these principles\npass into actual existence, how they distinguish themselves in their\nexternal aspect, and how they give actuality to every element contained\nin the idea of beauty, separately and by itself _as a work of art_, and\nnot merely as a general type. Now, what art transfers into external\nexistence are the differences[161] proper to the idea of beauty and\nimmanent therein. Therefore, the general types of art must reveal\nthemselves in this third part, as before, in the character of the\nfundamental principle that determines the arrangement and definition\nof the _several arts_; in other words, the species of art contain in\nthemselves the same essential modifications as those with which we\nbecome acquainted as the general types of art. External objectivity,\nhowever, to which these forms are introduced through the medium of a\nsensuous and therefore _particular_ material, affects these types in\nthe way of making them _separate_ into independent and so particular\nforms embodying their realization. For each type finds its definite\ncharacter in some one definite external material, and its adequate\nactuality in the mode of portrayal which that prescribes. But,\nmoreover, these types of art, being for all their determinateness, its\n_universal_ forms, break the bounds of _particular_ realization by a\ndeterminate form of art, and achieve existence in other arts as well,\nalthough in subordinate fashion. Therefore, the particular arts belong\neach of them specifically to _one_ of the general types of art, and\nconstitute _its adequate_ external actuality; and also they represent,\neach of them after its own mode of external plasticity, the totality of\nthe types of art.[162]\n\nThen, speaking generally, we are dealing in this third principal\ndivision with the beautiful of art, as it unfolds itself in the several\narts and in their creations into a _world_ of actualized beauty. The\ncontent of this world is the beautiful, and the true beautiful, as\nwe saw, is spiritual being in concrete shape, the Ideal; or, more\nclosely looked at, the absolute mind, and the truth itself. This\nregion, that of divine truth artistically represented to perception\nand to feeling, forms the centre of the whole world of art. It is the\nindependent, free, and divine plasticity, which has thoroughly mastered\nthe external elements of form and of medium, and wears them simply as\na means to manifestation of itself. Still, as the beautiful unfolds\nitself in this region in the character of _objective_ reality, and\nin so doing distinguishes within itself its individual aspects and\nelements, permitting them independent particularity, it follows that\nthis centre erects its extremes, realized in their peculiar actuality,\ninto its own antitheses. Thus one of these extremes comes to consist\nin an objectivity as yet devoid of mind, in the merely natural vesture\nof God. At this point the external element takes plastic shape as\nsomething that has its spiritual aim and content, not in itself, but in\nanother.[163]\n\nThe other extreme is the divine as inward, as something known, as\nthe variously particularized _subjective_ existence of the Deity;\nit is the truth as operative and vital in sense, heart, and mind of\nindividual subjects, not persisting in the mould of its external\nshapes, but as having returned into subjective, individual inwardness.\nIn such a mode, the Divine is at the same time distinguished from its\nfirst manifestation as Deity, and passes thereby into the diversity\nof particulars which belongs to all subjective knowledge--emotion,\nperception, and feeling. In the analogous province of religion,\nwith which art at its highest stage is immediately connected, we\nconceive this same difference as follows. _First_, we think of the\nearthly natural life in its finiteness as standing on one side; but,\nthen, _secondly_, consciousness makes God its object, in which the\ndistinction of objectivity and subjectivity is done away. And at\nlast, _thirdly_, we advance from God as such to the devotion of the\ncommunity, that is, to God as living and present in the subjective\nconsciousness. Just so these three chief modifications present\nthemselves in the world of art in independent development.\n\n([Greek: a]) The _first_ of the particular arts with which, according\nto their fundamental principle, we have to begin, is architecture\nconsidered as a fine art.[164] Its task lies in so manipulating\nexternal inorganic nature that it becomes cognate to mind, as an\nartistic outer world. The material of architecture is matter itself in\nits immediate externality as a heavy mass subject to mechanical laws,\nand its forms do not depart from the forms of inorganic nature, but\nare merely set in order in conformity with relations of the abstract\nunderstanding, _i.e._ with relations of symmetry. In this material and\nin such forms, the ideal as concrete spirituality does not admit of\nbeing realized. Hence the reality which is represented in them remains\ncontrasted with the Idea, as something external which it has not\npenetrated, or has penetrated only to establish an abstract relation.\nFor these reasons, the fundamental type of the fine art of building\nis the _symbolical_ form of art. It is architecture that pioneers the\nway for the adequate realization of the God, and in this its service\nbestows hard toil upon existing nature, in order to disentangle it from\nthe jungle of finitude and the abortiveness of chance. By this means it\nlevels a space for the God, gives form to his external surroundings,\nand builds him his temple as a fit place for concentration of spirit,\nand for its direction to the mind's absolute objects. It raises an\nenclosure round the assembly of those gathered together, as a defence\nagainst the threatening of the storm, against rain, the hurricane, and\nwild beasts, and reveals the will to assemble, although externally, yet\nin conformity with principles of art. With such import as this it has\npower to inspire its material and its forms more or less effectively,\nas the determinate character of the content on behalf of which it sets\nto work is more or less significant, more concrete or more abstract,\nmore profound in sounding its own depths, or more dim and more\nsuperficial. So much, indeed, may architecture attempt in this respect\nas even to create an adequate artistic existence for such an import\nin its shapes and in its material. But in such a case it has already\noverstepped its own boundary, and is leaning to sculpture, the phase\nabove it. For the limit of architecture lies precisely in this point,\nthat it retains the spiritual as an inward existence over against the\nexternal forms of the art, and consequently must refer to what has soul\nonly as to something other than its own creations.\n\n[Greek: b] Architecture, however, as we have seen, has purified the\nexternal world, and endowed it with symmetrical order and with affinity\nto mind; and the temple of the God, the house of his community, stands\nready. Into this temple, then, in the _second_ place, the God enters in\nthe lightning-flash of individuality, which strikes and permeates the\ninert mass, while the infinite[165] and no longer merely symmetrical\nform belonging to mind itself concentrates and gives shape to the\ncorresponding bodily existence. This is the task of _Sculpture_. In\nas far as in this art the spiritual inward being which architecture\ncan but indicate makes itself at home in the sensuous shape and its\nexternal matter, and in as far as these two sides are so adapted to\none another that neither is predominant, sculpture must be assigned\nthe _classical form of art_ as its fundamental type. For this reason\nthe sensuous element itself has here no expression which could not\nbe that of the spiritual element, just as, conversely, sculpture can\nrepresent no spiritual content which does not admit throughout of being\nadequately presented to perception in bodily form. Sculpture should\nplace the spirit before us in its bodily form and in immediate unity\ntherewith at rest and in peace; and the form should be animated by the\ncontent of spiritual individuality. And so the external sensuous matter\nis here no longer manipulated, either in conformity with its mechanical\nquality alone, as a mass possessing weight, nor in shapes belonging\nto the inorganic world, nor as indifferent to colour, etc.; but it is\nwrought in ideal forms of the human figure, and, it must be remarked,\nin all three spatial dimensions.\n\nIn this last respect we must claim for sculpture, that it is in it that\nthe inward and spiritual are first revealed in their eternal repose\nand essential self-completeness. To such repose and unity with itself\nthere can correspond only that external shape which itself maintains\nits unity and repose. And this is fulfilled by shape in its abstract\nspatiality.[166] The spirit which sculpture represents is that which\nis solid in itself, not broken up in the play of trivialities and of\npassions; and hence its external form too is not abandoned to any\nmanifold phases of appearance, but appears under this one aspect only,\nas the abstraction of space in the whole of its dimensions.\n\n([Greek: g]) Now, after architecture has erected the temple, and\nthe hand of sculpture has supplied it with the statue of the God,\nthen, in the third place, this god present to sense is confronted in\nthe spacious halls of his house by the _community_. The community\nis the spiritual reflection into itself of such sensuous existence,\nand is the animating subjectivity and inner life which brings about\nthe result that the determining principle for the content of art, as\nwell as for the medium which represents it in outward form, comes to\nbe particularization [dispersion into various shapes, attributes,\nincidents, etc.], individualization, and the subjectivity which they\nrequire.[167] The solid unity which the God has in sculpture breaks up\ninto the multitudinous inner lives of individuals, whose unity is not\nsensuous, but purely ideal.[168]\n\nIt is only in this stage that God Himself comes to be really and\ntruly spirit--the spirit in His (God's) community; for He here\nbegins to be a to-and-fro, an alternation between His unity within\nhimself and his realization in the individual's knowledge and in\nits separate being, as also in the common nature and union of the\nmultitude. In the community, God is released from the abstractness\nof unexpanded self-identity, as well as from the simple absorption\nin a bodily medium, by which sculpture represents Him. And He is\nthus exalted into spiritual existence and into knowledge, into the\nreflected[169] appearance which essentially displays itself as inward\nand as subjectivity. Therefore the higher content is now the spiritual\nnature, and that in its absolute shape. But the dispersion of which\nwe have spoken reveals this at the same time as particular spiritual\nbeing, and as individual character. Now, what manifests itself in\nthis phase as the main thing is not the serene quiescence of the God\nin Himself, but appearance as such, being which is _for_ another,\nself-manifestation. And hence, in the phase we have reached, all the\nmost manifold subjectivity in its living movement and operation--as\nhuman passion, action, and incident, and, in general, the wide realm\nof human feeling, will, and its negation,--is for its own sake the\nobject of artistic representation. In conformity with this content, the\nsensuous element of art has at once to show itself as made particular\nin itself and as adapted to subjective inwardness. Media that fulfil\nthis requirement we have in colour, in musical sound, and finally in\nsound as the mere indication of inward perceptions and ideas; and as\nmodes of realizing the import in question by help of these media we\nobtain painting, music, and poetry. In this region the sensuous medium\ndisplays itself as subdivided in its own being and universally set down\nas ideal.[170] Thus it has the highest degree of conformity with the\ncontent of art, which, as such, is spiritual, and the connection of\nintelligible import and sensuous medium develops into closer intimacy\nthan was possible in the case of architecture and sculpture. The unity\nattained, however, is a more inward unity, the weight of which is\nthrown wholly on the subjective side, and which, in as far as form and\ncontent are compelled to particularize themselves and give themselves\nmerely ideal existence, can only come to pass at the expense of the\nobjective universality of the content and also of its amalgamation with\nthe immediately sensuous element.[171]\n\nThe arts, then, of which form and content exalt themselves to ideality,\nabandon the character of symbolic architecture and the classical ideal\nof sculpture, and therefore borrow their type from the romantic form\nof art, whose mode of plasticity they are most adequately adapted to\nexpress. And they constitute a _totality_ of arts, because the romantic\ntype is the most concrete in itself.[172]\n\ni. The articulation of this _third sphere_ of the individual arts may\nbe determined as follows. The _first_ art in it, which comes next to\nsculpture, is painting. It employs as a medium for its content and for\nthe plastic embodiment of that content visibility as such in as far as\nit is specialized in its own nature, _i.e._ as developed into colour.\nIt is true that the material employed in architecture and sculpture is\nalso visible and coloured; but it is not, as in painting, visibility\nas such, not the simple light which, differentiating itself in virtue\nof its contrast with darkness, and in combination with the latter,\ngives rise to colour.[173] This quality of visibility, made subjective\nin itself and treated as ideal, needs neither, like architecture,\nthe abstractly mechanical attribute of mass as operative in the\nproperties of heavy matter, nor, like sculpture, the complete sensuous\nattributes of space, even though concentrated into organic shapes.\nThe visibility and the rendering visible which belong to painting\nhave their differences in a more ideal form, in the several kinds of\ncolour, and they liberate art from the sensuous completeness in space\nwhich attaches to material things, by restricting themselves to a plane\nsurface.\n\nOn the other hand, the content also attains the most comprehensive\nspecification. Whatever can find room in the human heart, as feeling,\nidea, and purpose; whatever it is capable of shaping into act--all this\ndiversity of material is capable of entering into the varied content of\npainting. The whole realm of particular existence, from the highest\nembodiment of mind down to the most isolated object of nature, finds\na place here. For it is possible even for finite nature,[174] in its\nparticular scenes and phenomena, to make its appearance in the realm\nof art, if only some allusion to an element of mind endows it with\naffinity to thought and feeling.\n\nii. The _second_ art in which the romantic type realizes itself is\ncontrasted with painting, and is music. Its medium, though still\nsensuous, yet develops into still more thorough subjectivity and\nparticularization. Music, too, treats the sensuous as ideal, and does\nso by negating,[175] and idealizing into the individual isolation of a\nsingle point, the indifferent externality[176] of space, whose complete\nsemblance is accepted and imitated by painting. The single point, _qua_\nsuch a negativity (excluding space) is in itself a concrete and active\nprocess of positive negation[177] within the attributes of matter, in\nthe shape of a motion and tremor of the material body within itself and\nin its relation to itself. Such an inchoate ideality of matter,[178]\nwhich appears no longer as under the form of space, but as temporal\nideality,[179] is sound, the sensuous set down as negated, with its\nabstract visibility converted into audibility, inasmuch as sound, so to\nspeak, liberates the ideal content from its immersion in matter. This\nearliest inwardness of matter and inspiration of soul into it furnishes\nthe medium for the mental inwardness--itself as yet indefinite,--and\nfor the soul[180] into which mind concentrates itself; and finds\nutterance in its tones for the heart with its whole gamut of feelings\nand passions. Thus music forms the centre of the romantic arts, just\nas sculpture represents the central point between architecture and\nthe arts of romantic subjectivity. Thus, too, it forms the point of\ntransition between abstract spatial sensuousness, such as painting\nemploys, and the abstract spirituality of poetry. Music has within\nitself, like architecture, a relation of quantity conformable to the\nunderstanding, as the antithesis to emotion and inwardness; and has\nalso as its basis a solid conformity to law on the part of the tones,\nof their conjunction, and of their succession.\n\niii. most spiritual mode of representation of the romantic art-type,\nwe must look for it in _poetry_. Its characteristic peculiarity lies\nin the power with which it subjects to the mind and to its ideas the\nsensuous element from which music and painting in their degree began\nto liberate art. For sound, the only external matter which poetry\nretains, is in it no longer the feeling of the sonorous itself, but is\na _sign_, which by itself is void of import. And it is a sign of the\nidea which has become concrete in itself and not merely of indefinite\nfeeling and of its _nuances_ and grades. This is how sound develops\ninto the _Word_, as voice articulate in itself, whose import it is\nto indicate ideas and notions. The merely negative point up to which\nmusic had developed now makes its appearance as the completely concrete\npoint, the point which is mind, the self-conscious individual, which,\nproducing out of itself the infinite space of its ideas, unites it\nwith the temporal character of sound. Yet this sensuous element,\nwhich in music was still immediately one with inward feeling, is in\npoetry separated from the content of consciousness. In poetry the\nmind determines this content for its own sake, and apart from all\nelse, into the shape of ideas, and though it employs sound to express\nthem, yet treats it solely as a symbol without value or import. Thus\nconsidered, sound may just as well be reduced to a mere letter, for the\naudible, like the visible, is thus depressed into a mere indication of\nmind.[181] For this reason the proper medium of poetical representation\nis the poetical imagination and intellectual portrayal itself. And as\nthis element is common to all types of art, it follows that poetry runs\nthrough them all and develops itself independently in each. Poetry is\nthe universal art of the mind which has become free in its own nature,\nand which is not tied to find its realization in external sensuous\nmatter, but expatiates exclusively in the inner space and inner time\nof the ideas and feelings. Yet just in this its highest phase art\nends by transcending itself, inasmuch as it abandons the medium of a\nharmonious embodiment of mind in sensuous form, and passes from the\npoetry of imagination into the prose of thought.\n\n5. Such we may take to be the articulated totality of the particular\narts, viz. the external art of architecture, the objective art of\nsculpture, and the subjective art of painting music and poetry.\nMany other classifications have been attempted, for a work of art\npresents so many aspects, that, as has often been the case, first one\nand then another is made the basis of classification. For instance,\none might take the sensuous medium. Thus architecture is treated as\ncrystallization; sculpture, as the organic modelling of the material in\nits sensuous and spatial totality; painting, as the coloured surface\nand line; while in music, space, as such, passes into the point of\ntime possessed of content within itself, until finally the external\nmedium is in poetry depressed into complete insignificance. Or, again,\nthese differences have been considered with reference to their purely\nabstract attributes of space and time. Such abstract peculiarities of\nworks of art may, like their material medium, be consistently explored\nin their characteristic traits; but they cannot be worked out as the\nultimate and fundamental law, because any such aspect itself derives\nits origin from a higher principle, and must therefore be subordinate\nthereto.\n\nThis higher principle we have found in the types of art--symbolic,\nclassical, and romantic--which are the universal stages or\nelements[182] of the Idea of beauty itself. For _symbolic art_\nattains its most adequate reality and most complete application in\n_architecture_, in which it holds sway in the full import of its\nnotion, and is not yet degraded to be, as it were, the inorganic\nnature dealt with by another art. The _classical_ type of art, on the\nother hand, finds adequate realization in sculpture, while it treats\narchitecture only as furnishing an enclosure in which it is to operate,\nand has not acquired the power of developing painting and music as\nabsolute[183] forms for its content. The _romantic_ type of art,\nfinally, takes possession of painting and music, and in like manner\nof poetic representation, as substantive and unconditionally adequate\nmodes of utterance. Poetry, however, is conformable to all types of the\nbeautiful, and extends over them all, because the artistic imagination\nis its proper medium, and imagination is essential to every product\nthat belongs to the beautiful, whatever its type may be.\n\nAnd, therefore, what the particular arts realize in individual works\nof art, are according to their abstract conception simply the universal\ntypes which constitute the self-unfolding Idea of beauty. It is as the\nexternal realization of this Idea that the wide Pantheon of art is\nbeing erected, whose architect and builder is the spirit of beauty as\nit awakens to self-knowledge, and to complete which the history of the\nworld will need its evolution of ages.\n\n\n\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[1] New York, Appleton and Co.\n\n[2] Chicago, Griggs and Co., 1885.\n\n[3] Edinburgh, Oliver and Boyd, 1886.\n\n[4] Of these, Chapter III. is subdivided into two Parts, because of the\ndisproportionate length of the division in the original to which it\ncorresponds.\n\n[5] Preface to \"Sordello.\"\n\n[6] \"Endless duration makes good no better, nor white any whiter,\" is\none of Aristotle's comments on Plato's \"eternal\" ideas, and is just,\nunless \"eternal\" conveys a difference of kind.\n\n[7] Whewell, I think, misinterprets Plato's language about astronomy\nin this sense. Plato is not decrying observation, but demanding a\ntheoretical treatment of the laws of motion,--a remarkable anticipation\nof modern ideas.\n\n[8] \"A Year with the Birds,\" by an Oxford Tutor.\n\n[9] See note above, p. xii.\n\n[10] The fusion of these meanings in the German \"Geist\" gives a force\nto his pleading which English cannot render. He appeals, _e.g._,\ntriumphantly to \"God is a Spirit,\" _i.e._ not \"a ghost\" but \"mind.\"\n\n[11] See Tennyson's \"Higher Pantheism,\" especially the fine lines--\n\n    \"Speak to Him thou, for He hears, and Spirit with Spirit can meet,\n      Closer is He than breathing, and nearer than hands and feet.\"\n\n\n[12] In Baumgarten's \"\u00c6sthetica,\" 1750. See Lotze's \"\u00c6sthetik in\nDeutschland,\" p. 4, and Scherer's \"Hist. of German Literature,\" Engl.\nTransl., ii. 25.\n\n[13] _Aus dem Geiste_--allusion to \"born of water and of the Spirit.\"\n\n[14] Not in the sense of fancying what you please, but in the technical\nsense of having separate existence; detached, so to speak, from the\ngeneral background of things, not a mere concurrence of other elements.\n\n[15] Has no power of distinguishing itself from other things.\n\n[16] \"_Das Sch\u00f6ne--in dem Scheine._\"\n\n[17] \"_Gesetzm\u00e4ssigkeit._\"\n\n[18] \"_Raisonnement_\"--a disparaging term in Hegel.\n\n[19] \"Particular\"--different unconnected matters, considered as merely\nthrown together in an aggregate, or occurring in a series; opposed to\nparts or cases united by an essential principle.\n\n[20] \"_Das G\u00f6ttliche._\"\n\n[21] \"_Schiene und erschiene._\"\n\n[22] The life in which we treat common circumstances and sensations as,\nin their degree, realities.\n\n[23] \"_Das An--und F\u00fcrsichseyende._\"\n\n[24] \"_Explication._\"\n\n[25] \"_Material_,\" _e.g._ colour, sound, heavy matter, etc.\n\n[26] \"_Element_:\" perhaps more especially any mental function entering\ninto art--sense, imagination, understanding, etc.\n\n[27] \"Philosophy,\" \"_Wissenschaft_.\"\n\n[28] \"_Haltpunkte_:\" ultimate points that the matter of art must not\nleave hold of, leading ideas that must somehow dominate it.\n\n[29] \"_Gestaltung_:\" shaping, as if arrangement of shapes.\n\n[30] \"_Kunstkenntniss._\"\n\n[31] \"_Gelehrsamkeit._\"\n\n[32] \"_Par\u00e4netischen Lehren._\"\n\n[33] \"_Bildenden K\u00fcnste._\" I am not sure if I have given the best\nrendering. It is wider than _Plastik_, because it includes painting and\narchitecture.\n\n[34] _Die Horen_--the monthly magazine whose establishment by Schiller,\nin 1795, first brought Schiller and Goethe into contact. It only\nexisted for three years. See Scherer, Eng. Trans., ii. 173.\n\n[35] That is, not a caprice of nature or art, but the perfection of the\nobject _after its kind_.\n\n[36] \"_Individualit\u00e4t._\"\n\n[37] \"_Helldunkel._\"\n\n[38] \"_Drama_,\" Gr. [Greek: drama] = _Handlung_, \"action.\"\n\n[39] \"_Erscheinung._\"\n\n[40] \"_Bestimmung._\"\n\n[41] \"_Bestimmend._\"\n\n[42] \"_Begeistet wird_\"--\"Is spiritualized.\"\n\n[43] I have no doubt he means Shakespeare, who was unpopular in Germany\nbefore Goethe's time. _Vide_ \"Wilhelm Meister.\"\n\n[44] \"_Das Wahre sehen nicht die einzelnen_,\" etc.\n\n[45] The exhibition of particulars as contained in the principle, and\nof the principle as contained in particulars.\n\n[46] \"_Machen._\"\n\n[47] \"_Nach-machen._\"\n\n[48] See Appendix to Eng. Trans. of Scherer, ii. 347. Goethe's \"G\u00f6tz\nvon Berlichingen\" appeared in 1773; Schiller's \"Ra\u00fcber\" in 1781.\n\n[49] The \"Iphigenie\" was completed in Goethe's thirty-eighth year,\nfourteen years later than \"G\u00f6tz.\" The bulk of his great works are of\nthe same date as the \"Iphigenie,\" or later. See Scherer, ii. 152,\nand Appendix, 1. c. Schiller's \"Wallenstein\" was completed after his\nthirty-fifth year.\n\n[50] Free from irrelevancies.\n\n[51] _i.e._ it requires a definite or determinate answer, depending on\na number of ideas which cannot be explained in an introduction.\n\n[52] _i.e._ considered generally, apart from the wishes and, perhaps,\nselfish aims of individual artists.\n\n[53] \"_Fursichsein._\"\n\n[54] Reality derivative from his own reality.\n\n[55] He means as in attitude, bearing, gentle movement, etc.\n\n[56] \"_Bildung._\"\n\n[57] \"_Bedurfniss zur Kunst._\"\n\n[58] _i.e._ you cannot describe it or picture it definitely, like a\nthing with attributes, although you feel it in yourself.\n\n[59] _i.e._ you may be afraid of anything; the fact that you are afraid\ndoes not in itself indicate what you are afraid of.\n\n[60] My private feeling is compared to a small circle, in which\nmorality, justice, etc., may _be_, but have not room to show their\nnature. Feeling allows of no definition.\n\n[61] _All_ its positive aspects or relations, age, phase, artist's\nhistory, etc.\n\n[62] Its sensuous aspect has no independent warrant or justification,\nas that, for example, of an animal has in its own separate life. So it\nmust simply be such as is enough to appeal to man's mind, _e.g._ mere\nsurface painting.\n\n[63] _i.e._ person.\n\n[64] Nothing can be tasted which is not dissolved in a liquid.\n\n[65] \"_Anschauungen._\"\n\n[66] Abstract forms, which are to reality as a diagram to a picture.\n\n[67] Lit. \"figure,\" _Gestalt_.\n\n[68] \"_Handgriffen._\"\n\n[69] \"_Eines geistreichen._\"\n\n[70] General, abstract, as much applicable to one thing as to another.\n\n[71] \"_Heuchelei_,\" lit. \"hypocrisy.\"\n\n[72] \"_Kunstst\u00fcck._\"\n\n[73] _i.e._ _mere_ copying, devoting one's-self to the one-sided\npurpose of making a thing over again, without putting any life or\nmeaning into it.\n\n[74] Which says that the business of art is to imitate.\n\n[75] Of imitation.\n\n[76] \"_Phantastischen._\" \"Fantastic\" means \"odd or wild.\" Hegel only\nmeans \"original,\" \"creative.\"\n\n[77] Mechanical, without origination.\n\n[78] \"_N\u00fcancen._\" Context seems to forbid referring it to colour. I\nsuspect it of meaning character of outline.\n\n[79] \"_Ersch\u00fcttern._\"\n\n[80] \"_Raisonnirende_;\" a term of disparagement in Hegel, applied to\nproofs, _pro_ and _con_, which do not rest on a thorough conception of\nthe fundamental nature of what is being discussed.\n\n[81] \"_Raisonnement._\"\n\n[82] \"Formal\" means here as usual, empty, or general; _i.e._ not taking\naccount of varieties in the matter to which it is applied.\n\n[83] \"_Befangensein._\"\n\n[84] \"_Theoretisch._\" I have no doubt that it has here the meaning\nof [Greek: The\u00f4rein] without a trace of allusion to \"theory.\" It is\nopposed to \"destructive,\" or \"appetitive.\"\n\n[85] The moral.\n\n[86] Person, _i.e._, here, audience or spectator.\n\n[87] \"_Kernspruch._\"\n\n[88] \"Contingent\" means, not so much \"what may or may not exist,\" as\nthe trivial, which makes no difference whether it exists or not.\n\n[89] \"_In ihm selbst gebrochenes._\" I do not suppose there is an\nallusion to the words I use.\n\n[90] \"_Sittlichkeit_\" almost = morality in the English sense. It means\nthe habit of virtue, without the reflective aspiration after goodness\nas an ideal.\n\n[91] \"_Moralit\u00e4t_\" almost = conscientiousness or scrupulosity. The\nabove sentence is hardly true with the English word \"moral.\"\n\n[92] \"_F\u00fcr sich_,\" is often used where there is no notion of\ndevelopment, and seems very like \"an sich.\"\n\n[93] \"_Gem\u00fcth._\"\n\n[94] As _e.g._ if we suppose that an act done at the bidding of natural\naffection cannot also be a fulfilment of the command of duty. The\n\"reconciliation\" would be in supposing the natural affection, _e.g._\nfor parents, to operate as a moral motive, being transformed by a\nrecognition of its sacred or spiritual character.\n\n[95] \"_An und f\u00fcr sich._\"\n\n[96] \"_An und f\u00fcr sich Wahre._\"\n\n[97] \"_Allgemeine Bildung._\"\n\n[98] \"_Vorstellung._\"\n\n[99] See Pref. Essay, p. xix.\n\n[100] Or conscientiousness--what was above described as the moralistic\nview.\n\n[101] \"_An sich._\"\n\n[102] \"_An und f\u00fcr sich wahrem und wirklichem._\"\n\n[103] See p. 68, _supra_.\n\n[104] \"_Der mensch wie er geht und steht._\"\n\n[105] \"_An und f\u00fcr sich._\"\n\n[106] \"_Zweck-m\u00e4ssigkeit._\"\n\n[107] _i.e._ in any means which we adopt in order to effect an end\nwhich we have distinctly before us as an idea. A knife does not include\ncutting, nor a spade digging, although their construction is relative\nto these ends. But a man does include living, _i.e._ he is not a man if\nhe ceases to live.\n\n[108] \"_F\u00fcr sich._\"\n\n[109] \"_An und f\u00fcr sich._\"\n\n[110] By Kant.\n\n[111] \"_Unbefangenheit._\"\n\n[112] On Goethe's discoveries in morphology and errors in optics, see\nHelmholtz's \"Popular Lectures,\" series i., lecture ii.; but compare\nSchopenhauer, \"Werke,\" vol. i., \"_Ueber das Sehn und die Farben_.\"\n\n[113] Compare Browning's \"Luria:\"--\n\n    \"A people is but the attempt of many\n    To rise to the completer life of one.\"\n\n[114] Or \"Of the moral, etc., man.\"\n\n[115] \"_Ueber Anmuth und W\u00fcrde_,\" \"Of Grace and Dignity,\" a work of\nSchiller that appeared in 1793.\n\n[116] \"_Gesinnungen._\"\n\n[117] The Baccalaureus' speech in Faust (Part 2) \"Die Welt, sie war\nnicht, eh' ich sie erschuf,\" etc., appears to be a parody of Fichte's\nideas in this aspect.\n\n[118] I think the order of the German must be a misprint. \"_So ist\nnichts an und f\u00fcr sich und in sich selbst werthvoll betrachtet._\"\n\n[119] \"_An und f\u00fcr sich seyende._\"\n\n[120] The three points are, (i.) The I is abstract. (ii.) Everything is\na semblance for it. (iii.) Its own acts, even, are a semblance.\n\n[121] Not literal. \"_Das alles an sich setzende und aufl\u00f6sende Ich._\"\n\n[122] _Formal_ freedom is detachment from everything, or the (apparent)\ncapacity of alternatives; it is opposed to _real_ freedom, which\nis identification of one's-self with something that is capable of\nsatisfying one.\n\n[123] \"_Genialit\u00e4t_:\" the character or state of mind in which genius is\ndominant--here, the mere self-enjoyment of genius.\n\n[124] \"_Selbstgenuss._\" I do not think it means self-indulgence, but\nthe above-described enjoyment of reposing in the superiority of the ego.\n\n[125] \"_Eitelkeit_,\" also = \"conceit;\" which is the other side of this\nattitude. Hegel uses it on purpose.\n\n[126] \"_Eitle._\"\n\n[127] \"_Sehnsuchtigkeit._\"\n\n[128] \"_Krankhafte Sch\u00f6nseligkeit._\" _Sch\u00f6nseligkeit_ seems to be\nreally a word formed like _Redselig_, etc., but to be given an\nequivocating reference to \"_Sch\u00f6ne Seele_,\" which I have rendered in\nthe next sentence by \"saintly soul.\"\n\n[129] \"_Eitlen_,\" \"_Eitelkeit._\"\n\n[130] This recurring phrase may be used etymologically, as a\nreminiscence of the Platonic [Greek: pl\u00earousthai].\n\n[131] _Haltung_: \"bearing\" in general, and more especially _the_\nbearing of one who bears himself nobly by reason of a principle.\n\n[132] See Scherer, Eng. Transl., ii. 248.\n\n[133] It is natural for a reader to ask in _what_ person or subject God\nis conceived to have reality. On this see below, p. 165. It appears\ncertain to me that Hegel, when he writes thus, is referring to the\nself-consciousness of individual human beings as constituting, and\nreflecting on, an ideal unity between them. This may seem to put a\nnon-natural meaning on the term \"person\" or \"subject,\" as if the common\nelement of a number of intelligences could be a single person. It is\nobvious that the question hinges on the degree in which a unity that\nis not sensuous but ideal can be effective and actual. I can only say\nhere, that the more we consider the nature of ideal unity the higher we\nshall rate its capabilities. See Prefatory Essay, p. xiv.\n\n[134] _Fackeldistel_ = \"Torch thistle,\" a plant of the genus _Cereus_,\nNat. Order _Cactace\u00e6_.\n\n[135] Or \"as spirit and in spirit.\"\n\n[136] The idea of art.\n\n[137] The two evolutions are, speaking roughly, (i.) that of the\nsubject-matter; (ii.) that of the particular mode of art: (i.)\n_e.g._ you have Egyptian, Greek, Christian religion, etc., with the\ncorresponding views and sentiments, each in its own relation to\nart; (ii.) you have, as a cross division to the former, the several\narts--sculpture, music, poetry, etc., each having its special ground\nand warrant.\n\n[138] He is asking himself why sound or paint, etc., should correspond\nto one type of art as theoretically defined--this being intellectual,\nnot sensuous, at root--and answers that these media _qua_ natural\nobjects have, though more latent than in works of art, an import and\npurpose of their own, which reveals itself in their suitability to\nparticular forms of art.\n\n[139] \"_Gestaltungsformen._\" I use \"plastic\" all through in a\npregnant sense, as one speaks of plastic fancy, etc.; meaning ideally\ndeterminate, and fit for translating into pictures, poetry, etc. These\n\"plastic forms\" are the various modifications of the subject-matter of\nart. See note, p. 139, above.\n\n[140] See note, p. 139, above.\n\n[141] See p. 134, above.\n\n[142] \"_Gestaltung._\" I do not think this means the process of shaping,\nbut the shapes taken collectively.\n\n[143] _i.e._ not in a separate ideal shape devoted to it. He means that\nman takes a stock or stone as representation or symbol of the divine,\nand as there is no real connection between divinity and the stone, it\nmay either be left untouched and unshaped, or be hewn into any bizarre\nor arbitrary shape that comes to hand: see next paragraph.\n\n[144] This description is probably directed, in the first place, to\nthe Indian representation of deities, and would apply to those of\nmany barbaric religions. But its truth may be very simply verified in\ndaily observation of the first attempts of the uneducated at plastic\npresentation of their ideas, where costliness, ingenuity, labour, or\nsize take the place of beauty.\n\n[145] \"_Sie als Inneres._\"\n\n[146] _i.e._ an idea or purpose which gives these partial and defective\nrepresentations all the meaning they have, although they are incapable\nof really expressing it.\n\n[147] \"_G\u00e4hrung_,\" lit. \"fermentation.\"\n\n[148] \"_Der urspr\u00fcngliche Begriff_,\" lit. \"the original notion.\"\n\n[149] _i.e._ God or the Universe _invented_ man to be the expression of\nmind; art _finds_ him, and adapts his shape to the artistic embodiment\nof mind as concentrated in individual instances.\n\n[150] Because it represents the soul as independent of an appropriate\nbody--the human soul as capable of existing in a beast's body.\n\n[151] \"_Geistigkeit._\" \"The nature of thought, mind, or spirit.\" It\ncannot be here rendered by mind or spirit, because these words make us\nthink of an isolated individual, a mind or soul, and neglect the common\nspiritual or intellectual nature, which is referred to by the author.\n\n[152] It is the essence of mind or thought not to have its parts\noutside one another. The so-called terms of a judgment are a good\ninstance of parts in thought which are inward to each other.\n\n[153] Compare Browning's \"Old Pictures in Florence.\"\n\n[154] _i.e._ in the form of feeling and imagination--not reflected upon.\n\n[155] Subject, _i.e._ conscious individual person.\n\n[156] \"_Innerlichkeit_,\" lit. \"inwardness.\"\n\n[157] Taken, considered as or determined to be negative.\n\n[158] \"Inward,\" again, does not mean merely inside our heads, but\nhaving the character of spirit in that its parts are not external to\none another. A judgment is thus \"inward.\"\n\n[159] _i.e._ does not keep up a distinction between percipient and\nobject, as between things in space. Goodness, nobleness, etc., are not\nfelt to be other than or outside the mind.\n\n[160] The romantic.\n\n[161] _i.e._ species, modifications naturally arising out of a\nprinciple.\n\n[162] Thus _e.g._ Sculpture is _the_ art which corresponds _par\nexcellence_ to the general type called Classical Art; but there is _a_\nSymbolic kind of sculpture, and I suppose _a_ Romantic or modern kind\nof sculpture, although neither of these types are exactly fitted to the\ncapabilities of Sculpture.\n\n[163] Architecture as relative to the purposes of life and of religion.\nSee below, p. 162.\n\n[164] \"_Die sch\u00f6ne Architectur._\"\n\n[165] In the sense \"self-complete,\" \"not primarily regarded as\nexplained by anything outside,\" like a machine or an animal contrasted\nwith a wheel or a limb, which latter are finite, because they demand\nexplanation and supplementation from without, _i.e._ necessarily draw\nattention to their own limit.\n\n[166] _i.e._ shape taken simply as an object filling space.\n\n[167] The terms used in the text explain themselves if we compare,\n_e.g._, a Teniers with a Greek statue, or again, say, a Turner with the\nsame. \"Subjectivity\" means that the work of art appeals to our ordinary\nfeelings, experiences, etc. Music and poetry are still stronger cases\nthan painting, according to the theory. Poetry especially can deal with\n_everything_.\n\n[168] The unity of the individuals forming a church or nation is not\nvisible, but exists in common sentiments, purposes, etc., and in the\nrecognition of their community.\n\n[169] An expression constantly applied to consciousness, because it can\nlook at itself. _Cf._:--\n\n    \"'Tell me, good Brutus, can you see your face?'\n    'No, Cassius; for the eye sees not itself\n    But by reflection, by some other things.'\"\n\n    _Julius C\u00e6sar._\n\n[170] Posited or laid down to be ideal; almost = pronounced or made\n_to be_ in the sense of _not being_; e.g. musical sound is \"ideal\" as\nexisting, _qua_ work of art, in memory only, the moment in which it\nis actually heard being fugitive; a picture, in respect of the third\ndimension, which has to be read into it; and poetry is almost wholly\nideal, _i.e._ uses hardly any sensuous element, but appeals almost\nentirely to what exists _in the mind_. \"Subdivided,\" \"_besondert_,\"\nlike \"_particularisirt_\" above; because of the variety and diversity\npresent in the mere material of colours, musical sounds, and ideas.\n\n[171] Again, the subject of a Turner or Teniers is not objectively\nuniversal, in the simplest sense; not something that is actually and\nliterally the same everywhere and for every one. And both painting and\nmusic (immediately sensuous elements) are less completely amalgamated\nwith the ideal, represent it less solidly and thoroughly than the\nstatue, so far as the ideal is itself external or plastic.\n\n[172] The greater affinity of Romantic art with the movement and\nvariety of the modern spirit displays itself not only in the\ngreater flexibility of painting, music, or poetry, as compared with\narchitecture and sculpture, but in the fact that the Romantic type\ncontains these three arts at least, while the Symbolic and Classical\ntypes had only one art each.\n\n[173] This is drawn from Goethe's doctrine of colour, which Hegel\nunfortunately adopted in opposition to Newton's theory.\n\n[174] He means landscape, principally.\n\n[175] \"_Aufheben_,\" used pregnantly by Hegel to mean _both_ \"cancel,\"\n\"annul,\" _and_, \"preserve,\" \"fix in mind,\" \"idealize.\" The use of this\nword is a cardinal point of his dialectic. See \"Wiss. der Logik.,\"\ni. 104. I know of no equivalent but \"put by,\" provincial Scotch \"put\npast.\" The negation of space is an attribute of music. The parts of\na chord are no more in space than are the parts of a judgment. Hegel\nexpresses this by saying that music idealizes space and concentrates it\ninto a point.\n\n[176] The parts of space, though external to each other, are not\ndistinguished by qualitative peculiarities.\n\n[177] \"_Aufheben._\"\n\n[178] \"Ideality of matter:\" the distinctively material attribute of a\nsonorous body, its extension, only appears in its sound indirectly, or\ninferentially, by modifying the nature of the sound. It is, therefore,\n\"idealized.\"\n\n[179] Succession in time is a degree more \"ideal\" than co-existence in\nspace, because it exists solely in the medium of memory.\n\n[180] \"_Seele_:\" mind on its individual side, as a particular feeling\nsubject. \"_Geist_\" is rather mind as the common nature of intelligence.\nThus in feeling and self-feeling, mind is said to concentrate itself\ninto a soul.\n\n[181] Hegel seems to accept this view. Was he insensible to sound in\npoetry? Some very grotesque verses of his, preserved in his biography,\ngo to show that his ear was not sensitive. Yet his critical estimate\nof poetry is usually just. Shakespeare and Sophocles were probably his\nfavourites. And, as a matter of proportion, what he here says is true.\nIt must be remembered that the beauty of sound in poetry is to a great\nextent indirect, being supplied by the passion or emotion which the\nideas symbolized by the sounds arouse. The beauty of poetical sound\nin itself _is_ very likely less than often supposed. It must have the\ncapacity for receiving passionate expression; but that is not the same\nas the sensuous beauty of a note or a colour. If the words used in a\nnoble poem were divested of all meaning, they would lose much, though\nnot all, of the beauty of their sound.\n\n[182] \"Stages or elements.\" \"_Momente_,\" Hegel's technical phrase for\nthe stages which form the essential parts or factors of any idea. They\nmake their appearance successively, but the earlier are implied and\nretained in the later.\n\n[183] Adequate, and so of permanent value.\n\nTHE END.\n\nPRINTED BY WILLIAM CLOWES AND SONS, LIMITED, LONDON AND BECCLES.\n\n\n\n\n  A CLASSIFIED LIST\n  OF\n  Kegan Paul, Treneh, Tr\u00fcbner & Co.'s\n  PUBLICATIONS.\n\n  DECEMBER, 1896.\n\nINDEX.\n\n  Angling, 67\n\n  Animal Magnetism, 30\n\n  Anthropology, 48\n\n  Arts, Useful and Fine, 56\n\n  Astronomy, 49\n\n  Bibliography, 93\n\n  Biography, 34\n\n  Botany, 49\n\n  Buddhism, 91\n\n  Chemistry, 51\n\n  Chess, 56\n\n  China, 86\n\n  Diet, 57\n\n  Education, 44\n\n  Egypt, 87\n\n  Essays, 3\n\n  Ethnology, 48\n\n  Ethics, 31\n\n  Fiction, 12\n\n  Finance, 46\n\n  Folk-lore, 28\n\n  Gastronomy, 57\n\n  Geology, 51\n\n  History, 39\n\n  History, Constitutional, 45\n\n  India, 81\n\n  Islam, 89\n\n  Japan, 90\n\n  Languages, 67\n\n  Law, 45\n\n  Medicine, 57\n\n  Mental Science, 31\n\n  Metaphysics, 31\n\n  Meteorology, 51\n\n  Military Science, 60\n\n  Mineralogy, 51\n\n  Moral Science, 27\n\n  Music, 61\n\n  Mythology, 28\n\n  Numismatics, 61\n\n  Occult Sciences, 29\n\n  Oriental, 81\n\n  Painting, 62\n\n  Periodicals, 95\n\n  Persian, 78, 92\n\n  Philology, 67\n\n  Philosophy, 31\n\n  Philosophy, Religious, 27\n\n  Physics, 53\n\n  Physiology, 57\n\n  Poetry, 3\n\n  Politics, 46\n\n  Religion, 16\n\n  Sculpture, 62\n\n  Sociology, 44\n\n  Societies' Publications, 95\n\n  Speculative Theology, 27\n\n  Sports, 66\n\n  Technology, 63\n\n  Theosophy, 26\n\n  Topography, 41\n\n  Travels, 41\n\n  Voyages, 41\n\n  Zoology, 54\n\nPATERNOSTER HOUSE,\n\nCHARING CROSS ROAD, LONDON, W.C.\n\n\n\n\n  PATERNOSTER HOUSE,\n  CHARING CROSS ROAD, LONDON, W.C.,\n\n  _December, 1896._\n\n  A CLASSIFIED LIST OF\n  KEGAN PAUL, TRENCH, TR\u00dcBNER & Co.'s\n  PUBLICATIONS.\n\nNOTE.--The letters I. S. S. denote that the Work forms a Volume of the\nInternational Scientific Series.\n\nI. BELLES-LETTRES.\n\nPOETRY AND ESSAYS.\n\n=\u00c6SCHYLUS=, =The Seven Plays=. Translated into English Verse by\nProfessor LEWIS CAMPBELL. Crown 8vo, 7_s._ 6_d._\n\n=ALEXANDER, WILLIAM, D. D.=, BISHOP OF DERRY, =St. Augustine's\nHoliday=, and other Poems. Crown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n=ARNOLD, Sir EDWIN=, =In My Lady's Praise=. Poems Old and New, written\nto the honour of Fanny, Lady Arnold. Fourth Edition. Imperial 16mo,\nparchment, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n =Indian Idylls.= From the Sanskrit of the Mah\u00e2bh\u00e2rata. Second Edition.\n Crown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n =Indian Poetry.= Containing 'The Indian Song of Songs' from the\n Sanskrit, two books from 'The Iliad of India,' and other Oriental\n Poems. Sixth Edition. 6_s._ (_Tr\u00fcbner's Oriental Series._)\n\n =Lotus and Jewel.= Containing 'In an Indian Temple,' 'A Casket of\n Gems,' 'A Queen's Revenge,' with other Poems. Third Edition. Crown\n 8vo, 6_s._\n\n =Pearls of the Faith=; or, Islam's Rosary. Being the Ninetynine\n Beautiful Names of Allah. Sixth Edition. Crown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n =Poems, National and Non-Oriental=, with some New Pieces. Second\n Edition. Crown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n =The Light of Asia=; or, The Great Renunciation. Being the Life\n and Teaching of Gautama. Presentation Edition, with Illustrations\n and Portrait, small 4to, 21_s._ Library Edition, crown 8vo, 6_s._\n Elzevir Edition, 6_s._ Cheap Edition (_Lotos Series_), cloth or\n half-parchment, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n =The Secret of Death.= Being a Version of the Katha Upanishad, from\n the Sanskrit. Fifth Edition. Crown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n =The Song Celestial=; or, Bhagavad-Git\u00e2. From the Sanskrit. Sixth\n Edition. Crown 8vo, 5_s._\n\n =With Sa'di in the Garden=; or, The Book of Love. Being the 'Ishk,' or\n third chapter of the 'Bost\u00e2n' of the Persian poet Sa'di, embodied in a\n Dialogue. Fourth Edition. Crown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n =Poetical Works.= Uniform Edition, comprising--'The Light of Asia,'\n 'Lotus and Jewel,' 'Indian Poetry,' 'Pearls of the Faith,' 'Indian\n Idylls,' 'The Secret of Death,' 'The Song Celestial,' 'With Sa'di in\n the Garden.' 8 vols. crown 8vo, 48_s._\n\n_See also Class_ ORIENTAL.\n\n=AVELING, F. W.=, =The Classic Birthday Book=. 8vo, cloth, 8_s._ 6_d._;\npaste grain, 15_s._; tree calf, 21_s._\n\n=BARNES, WILLIAM=, =Poems of Rural Life in the Dorset Dialect=. New\nEdition. Crown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n=BLUNT, WILFRID SCAWEN=, =Poems=:--\n\n =The Wind and the Whirlwind.= 8vo, 1_s._ 6_d._\n\n =The Love Sonnets of Proteus.= Fifth Edition. Elzevir 8vo, 5_s._\n\n =In Vinculis.= With Portrait. Elzevir 8vo, 5_s._\n\n =A New Pilgrimage,= and other Poems. Elzevir 8vo, 5_s._\n\n =Esther, Love Lyrics, and Natalia's Resurrection.= 7_s._ 6_d._\n\n=BOSWELL, C. STUART=, =The Vita Nuova and its Author=. Crown 8vo, 3_s._\n6_d._ net.\n\n=BREITMANN.= _See_ LELAND, C. G.\n\n=BRINTON, D. G.=, =Essays of an Americanist=. 8vo, 12_s._\n\n=BRYANT, W. CULLEN=, =Poems=. Cheap Edition. Small 8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n=BURNS, ROBERT=, =Selected Poems=. With an Introduction by ANDREW\nLANG. Elzevir 8vo, vellum, 7_s._, 6_d._; parchment or cloth, 6_s._\n(_Parchment Library_); New Edition, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n=CALDERON=: =Essay on the Life and Genius of Calderon=. With\ntranslations from his 'Life's a Dream' and 'Great Theatre of the\nWorld.' By ARCHBISHOP TRENCH. Second Edition, revised and improved.\nExtra foolscap 8vo, 5_s._ 6_d._\n\n=CARLYLE, THOMAS=, =Sartor Resartus=. Elzevir 8vo (_Parchment\nLibrary_). Vellum, 7_s._ 6_d._; parchment or cloth, 6_s._\n\n =CHAUCER, Canterbury Tales.= Edited by A. W. POLLARD. 2 vols. Elzevir\n 8vo (_Parchment Library_). Vellum, 15_s._; parchment or cloth, 12_s._\n\n =Canterbury Chimes=; or, Chaucer Tales retold to Children. By F. STORR\n and H. TURNER. With 6 Illustrations from the Ellesmere Manuscript.\n Third Edition. Foolscap 8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n=COLEBROOKE, H. T., Miscellaneous Essays.= With Biography by his Son,\nSir T. E. COLEBROOKE. 3 vols. 8vo, 42_s._\n\n=DE QUINCEY, THOMAS, Confessions of an English Opium Eater.= Edited\nby RICHARD GARNETT. Elzevir 8vo (_Parchment Library_). Vellum, 7_s._\n6_d._; parchment or cloth, 6_s._\n\n=DOBSON, AUSTIN, Poems on Several Occasions.= With 7 full-page Etchings\nby ADOLPHE LALAUZE, and Portrait of the Author etched from life by\nWILLIAM STRANG. 2 vols. demy 8vo, 25_s._ net.\n\n =Ballad of Beau Brocade=, and other Poems of the Eighteenth Century.\n With 50 Illustrations by HUGH THOMSON. Crown 8vo, 5_s._\n\n =Proverbs in Porcelain.= With 25 Illustrations by BERNARD PARTRIDGE.\n 5_s._\n\n =Old World Idylls=, and other Verses. Elzevir 8vo, gilt top, 6_s._\n\n =At the Sign of the Lyre.= Elzevir 8vo, gilt top, 6_s._\n\n =Story of Rosina=, and other Verses. Illustrated by HUGH THOMSON.\n Crown 8vo, 5_s._\n\n =Eighteenth Century Essays.= Edited by AUSTIN DOBSON. With\n Frontispiece. Elzevir 8vo (_Parchment Library_). Vellum, 7_s._ 6_d._;\n parchment or cloth, 6_s._ Cheap Edition.\n\n  _See also under_ GAY _and_ PRIOR.\n\n=DOWDEN, EDWARD, Studies in Literature, 1789-1877.= Fourth Edition.\nLarge post 8vo, 6_s._\n\n =New Studies in Literature.= Large post 8vo, 12_s._\n\n =Transcripts and Studies.= Large post 8vo, 6_s._\n\n  _See also under_ SHAKSPERE.\n\n=Elizabethan Sonnet Cycles.= Edited by MARTHA FOOTE CROWE. In 4 vols.\nSmall crown 8vo, 5_s._ net each vol.\n\n  Vol. I. =Phillis=, by THOMAS LODGE. =Licia=, by GILES FLETCHER.\n      II. =Delia-Diana.=\n\n=ELLIOTT, EBENEZER, Poems.= Edited by his son, the Rev. EDWIN ELLIOTT,\nof St. John's, Antigua. 2 vols. crown 8vo, 18_s._\n\n=English Comic Dramatists.= Edited by OSWALD CRAWFURD. Elzevir 8vo\n(_Parchment Library_). Vellum, 7_s._ 6_d._; parchment or cloth, 6_s._\n\n=English Lyrics.= Elzevir 8vo (_Parchment Library_). Vellum, 7_s._\n6_d._; parchment or cloth, 6_s._\n\n=English Sacred Lyrics.= Elzevir 8vo (_Parchment Library_). Vellum\n7_s._ 6_d._; parchment or cloth, 6_s._\n\n=English Poets (Living).= With Frontispiece by HERBERT RAILTON. 1894\nEdition. Large crown 8vo, printed on hand-made paper, vellum, 15_s._;\ncloth or parchment, 12_s._\n\n=FRASER, Sir WILLIAM, Bart.=, =Disraeli and His Day=. Second Edition.\nPost 8vo, 9_s._\n\n=French Lyrics.= _See_ SAINTSBURY.\n\n=GAY, JOHN=, =Fables=. Edited by AUSTIN DOBSON. With Portrait. Elzevir\n8vo (_Parchment Library_). Vellum, 7_s._ 6_d._; parchment or cloth,\n6_s._\n\n=GOLDSMITH=, =Vicar of Wakefield=. Edited by AUSTIN DOBSON. Elzevir 8vo\n(_Parchment Library_). Vellum, 7_s._ 6_d._; parchment or cloth, 6_s._\n\n=GOODCHILD, JOHN A.=, =The Two Thrones=. A Drama. Small crown 8vo,\n3_s._ 6_d._\n\n=GOSSE, E.=, =English Odes=. Edited by E. GOSSE. With Frontispiece.\nElzevir 8vo (_Parchment Library_). Vellum, 7_s._ 6_d._; parchment or\ncloth, 6_s._\n\n=GREG, W. R.=, _Literary and Social Judgments_. Fourth Edition. 2 vols.\ncrown 8vo, 15_s._\n\n=Griselda.= A Society Novel in Rhymed Verse. 5_s._\n\n=GURNEY, ALFRED=, =The Vision of the Eucharist=, and other Poems. Crown\n8vo, 5_s._\n\n =A Christmas Faggot.= Small 8vo, 5_s._\n\n =Voices from the Holy Sepulchre=, and other Poems. Crown 8vo, 5_s._\n\n=HARRISON, CLIFFORD=, =In Hours of Leisure=. Second Edition. Crown 8vo,\n5_s._\n\n=HOMER=, =Iliad=, Greek Text, with Translation. By J. G. CORDERY. 2\nvols. 8vo, 14_s._; Cheap Edition (translation only), crown 8vo, 5_s._\n\n=HORATIUS FLACCUS, Q.=, =Opera=. Edited by F. A. CORNISH. With\nFrontispiece. Elzevir 8vo (_Parchment Library_). Vellum, 7_s._ 6_d._;\nparchment or cloth, 6_s._\n\n=HOUSMAN, A. E.=, =A Shropshire Lad=. Small crown 8vo, 2_s._ 6_d._\n\n=Kalender of Shepherdes.= _Fac-simile_ Reprint. With Introduction and\nGlossary by Dr. H. OSKAR SOMMER. \u00a32 2_s._ net.\n\n=KEATS, JOHN=, =Poetical Works=. Edited by W. T. ARNOLD. Large crown\n8vo. Choicely printed on hand-made paper. With Etched Portrait. Vellum,\n15_s._; parchment or cloth, 12_s._ New Edition. Crown 8vo, cloth, 3_s._\n6_d._\n\n=KEBLE, J.=, =The Christian Year=. With Portrait. Elzevir 8vo\n(_Parchment Library_). Vellum, 7_s._ 6_d._; parchment or cloth, 6_s._\nNew Edition. Rubricated, crown 8vo, 2_s._ 6_d._ Also to be had in\nleather bindings.\n\n=KING, Mrs. HAMILTON=, =Poems. The Disciples=. Tenth Edition. Elzevir\n8vo, 6_s._; Small 8vo, 5_s._\n\n =Book of Dreams.= Third Edition. Crown 8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n =Sermon in the Hospital= (from 'The Disciples'). Foolscap 8vo, 1_s._\n Cheap Edition, 3_d._\n\n =Ballads of the North=, and other Poems. Crown 8vo, 5_s._\n\n=LAMB, CHARLES=, =Beauty and the Beast=; or, A Rough Outside with a\nGentle Heart. A Poem. Foolscap 8vo, vellum, 10_s._ 6_d._\n\n=LANG, ANDREW=, =Lost Leaders=. Crown 8vo, 5_s._\n\n =Ballades in Blue China=. Elzevir 8vo, 5_s._\n\n =Rhymes \u00e0 La Mode=. With Frontispiece by E. A. ABBEY. Second Edition.\n Elzevir 8vo, 5_s._\n\n=LELAND, C. G.=, =Breitmann Ballads=. Only Complete Edition, including\n19 Original Ballads, illustrating his travels in Europe. Crown 8vo,\n6_s._ Another Edition (_Lotos Series_), 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n =Pidgin-English Sing-Song=; or, Songs and Stories in the China-English\n dialect. Second Edition. Crown 8vo, 5_s._\n\n=LINDSAY, LADY=, =The King's Last Vigil=. Elzevir 8vo, 5_s._\n\n =Lyrics and Other Poems.= Second Edition. Elzevir 8vo, 5_s._\n\n=LINTON, W. J.=, =Rare Poems of the Sixteenth and Seventeenth\nCenturies=. Crown 8vo, 5_s._\n\n=LINTON, W. J., and STODDARD, R. H.=, =English Verse=. Chaucer to\nBurns--Translations--Lyrics of the Nineteenth Century--Dramatic Scenes\nand Characters--Ballads and Romances. 5 vols. crown 8vo, 5_s._ each.\n\n=LOCKER, F.=, =London Lyrics=. Tenth Edition. With Portrait. Elzevir\n8vo, cloth extra, gilt top, 5_s._\n\n=LOWELL, JAMES RUSSELL=, =Biglow Papers=. Edited by THOMAS HUGHES, Q.C.\nFoolscap 8vo, 2_s._ 6_d._\n\n=LYALL, Sir ALFRED=, =Verses Written in India=. Fourth Edition. Elzevir\n8vo, gilt top, 5_s._\n\n=MACAULAY, Lord=, =Essays on Men and Books=: Lord Clive, Milton, Earl\nof Chatham, Lord Byron. Edited by ALEX. H. JAPP. (_Lotos Series_),\n3_s._ 6_d._\n\n=MACKAY, ERIC=, =A Lover's Litanies=, and other Poems. With Portrait of\nAuthor. (_Lotos Series_), 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n=MARCHANT, W. T.=, =In Praise of Ale=: Songs, Ballads, Epigrams, and\nAnecdotes. Crown 8vo, 10_s._ 6_d._\n\n=MILTON, JOHN=, =Poetical Works=. 2 vols. Elzevir 8vo (_Parchment\nLibrary_). Vellum, 7_s._ 6_d._; parchment or cloth, 6_s._\n\n =Sonnets.= Edited by MARK PATTISON. With Portrait. Elzevir 8vo\n (_Parchment Library_). Vellum, 7_s._ 6_d._; parchment or cloth, 6_s._\n\n =Prose Writings.= Edited by E. MYERS. Elzevir 8vo (_Parchment\n Library_). Vellum, 7_s._ 6_d._; parchment or cloth, 6_s._\n\n=MORRIS, Sir LEWIS=, =Complete Poetical Works=, including 'A Vision of\nSaints.' 1 vol. With latest Portrait. Tenth Thousand. Crown 8vo, cloth\nplain, 6_s._; cloth extra, gilt edges, 7_s._ 6_d._\n\n =The Epic of Hades.= With 16 Autotype Illustrations, after the\n Drawings of GEORGE R. CHAPMAN. 4to, cloth extra, gilt edges, 21_s._\n\n =The Epic of Hades.= Presentation Edition. 4to, cloth extra, gilt\n edges, 7_s._ 6_d._\n\n =The Epic of Hades.= Elzevir Edition. Printed on hand-made paper,\n cloth extra, gilt top, 5_s._\n\n =Poetical Works.= Complete in 7 vols. Foolscap 8vo, 5_s._ each.\n\n  Vol. I. =Songs of Two Worlds.= Twenty-second Thousand.\n      II. =The Epic of Hades.= Thirty-eighth Thousand.\n     III. =Gwen= and =The Ode of Life=. Twentieth Thousand.\n      IV. =Songs Unsung= and =Gycia=. Seventeenth Thousand.\n       V. =Songs of Britain.= Fifteenth Thousand.\n      VI. =A Vision of Saints.= Fifth Thousand.\n     VII. =Songs Without Notes.=\n\n =Idylls and Lyrics.= Third Edition. 12mo, cloth, 5_s._\n\n =The Birthday Book.= Edited by S. S. CHAPMAN. With Frontispiece. 32mo,\n cloth extra, gilt edges, 2_s._; cloth limp, 1_s._ 6_d._\n\n=MUNCHAUSEN'S Travels and Surprising Adventures.= Illustrated by ALFRED\nCROWQUILL. (_Lotos Series_), 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n=NEWMAN, Cardinal, Characteristics from the Writings of.=\n\n Selections from his various Works. Arranged by W. S. LILLY. Ninth\n Edition. With Portrait. Crown 8vo, 6_s._ [asterism] Portrait of the\n late Cardinal Newman, mounted for framing, 2_s._ 6_d._\n\n=PARKES, Sir HENRY, Sonnets and other Verse.= Elzevir 8vo, 2_s._ 6_d._\n\n=PLINY, The Letters of Pliny the Younger.= Translated by J. D. LEWIS.\nPost 8vo, 15_s._\n\n=POE, EDGAR ALLAN, Poems.= Edited by ANDREW LANG. With Frontispiece.\nElzevir 8vo (_Parchment Library_). Vellum, 7_s._ 6_d._; parchment or\ncloth, 6_s._\n\n =The Raven.= With Commentary by JOHN H. INGRAM. Crown 8vo, parchment,\n 6_s._\n\n=POLLEN, JOHN, Rhymes from the Russian.= Translations from the best\nRussian Poets. Crown 8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n=POSNETT, H. M., Comparative Literature.= Crown 8vo, 5_s._ (_I. S. S._)\n\n=PRAED, W. MACKWORTH, Every-day Characters.= Profusely Illustrated by\nCECIL ALDEN. Imperial 8vo, 6_s._\n\n=PRIOR, MATTHEW, Selected Poems.= Edited by AUSTIN DOBSON. Elzevir 8vo\n(_Parchment Library_). Vellum, 7_s._ 6_d._; parchment or cloth, 6_s._\n\n=Psalms of the West.= Small 8vo. 1_s._ 6_d._\n\n=SAINTSBURY, GEORGE, Specimens of English Prose Style, from Malory to\nMacaulay.= Selected and Annotated. With an Introductory Essay. Large\ncrown 8vo, printed on hand-made paper. Vellum, 15_s._; parchment\nantique or cloth, 12_s._\n\n =French Lyrics.= Edited by GEORGE SAINTSBURY. With Frontispiece.\n Elzevir 8vo (_Parchment Library_). Vellum, 7_s._ 6_d._; parchment or\n cloth, 6_s._\n\n=SCHEFFEL, J. V., and others, Gaudeamus=: Humorous Poems. Translated\nfrom the German by C. G. LELAND. 16mo, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n=SCOONES, W. B., Four Centuries of English Letters.= A selection of 350\nLetters by 150 Writers, from the period of the Paston Letters to the\nPresent Time. New and cheaper Edition. 5_s._\n\n=Sea Song and River Rhyme, from Chaucer to Tennyson.= With 12 Etchings.\nEdited by ESTELLE ADAMS. Large crown 8vo, 10_s._ 6_d._\n\n=SEARS, LORENZO, The History of Oratory from the Age of Pericles to the\nPresent Time=. Crown 8vo, 7_s._ 6_d._\n\n=SHAKSPERE, WILLIAM, Works=:--\n\n AVON EDITION. 12 vols. Elzevir 8vo (_Parchment Library_).\n\n =Vellum, 7s. 6d. per vol.; parchment or cloth, 6s. per vol.=\n\n CHEAP EDITION, =1s. per vol. net.=\n\n [asterism] THE CHEAP EDITION may also be had complete--\n\n =12 vols. in cloth box, 15s. net; or bound in 6 vols., 12s. net.=\n\n In ONE VOLUME, with Glossarial Index--\n\n =Super Royal 8vo, 7_s._ 6_d._=\n\n =Concordance to Shakespeare's Poems.= By Mrs. FURNESS. 18_s._\n\n =A New Variorum Edition of Shakespeare.= Edited by HORACE HOWARD\n FURNESS. 18_s._ each vol.\n\n  Vol. I. =Romeo.=\n\n  II. =Macbeth.=\n\n  Vols. III. and IV. =Hamlet.=\n\n  Vol. V. =Lear.=\n\n  VI. =Othello.=\n\n  VII. =Merchant of Venice.=\n\n  Vol. VIII. =As You Like It.=\n\n =Sonnets.= Edited by EDWARD DOWDEN. With Frontispiece. Elzevir 8vo\n (_Parchment Library_). Vellum, 7_s._ 6_d._; parchment or cloth, 6_s._\n\n =Index to Shakespeare's Works.= By <sc>E. O'Connor</sc>. Crown 8vo,\n 5_s._\n\n =Shakespeare Classical Dictionary=; or, Mythological Allusions in the\n Plays of Shakespeare explained. By H. M. SELBY. Foolscap 8vo, 1_s._\n\n =Shakspere=: A Critical Study of his Mind and Art. By EDWARD DOWDEN.\n Ninth edition. Large post 8vo, 12_s._\n\n =Shakespeare=, and other Lectures. By GEORGE DAWSON. Edited by GEORGE\n ST. CLAIR. Large crown 8vo, 7_s._ 6_d._\n\n=SHELLEY, P. B., Complete Poetical Works.= Centenary Edition. Edited by\nGEORGE EDWARD WOODBERRY. 4 vols. crown 8vo, 24_s._ net.\n\n =Poems.= Edited by RICHARD GARNETT. With Frontispiece. Elzevir 8vo\n (_Parchment Library_). Vellum, 7_s._ 6_d._; parchment or cloth, 6_s._\n\n =Select Letters=. Edited by RICHARD GARNETT. Elzevir 8vo (Parchment\n Library). Vellum, 7_s._ 6_d._; parchment or cloth, 6_s._\n\n=SIDNEY, Sir PHILIP, The Countess of Pembroke's Arcadia.= Edited by\nH. OSKAR SOMMER. The original 4to edition (1590) in Photographic\n_Fac-simile_, with Bibliographical Introduction. \u00a32 2_s._ net.\n\n=SMITH, HUNTINGTON, A Century of American Literature.= Benjamin\nFranklin to James Russell Lowell. Crown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n=SWIFT, DEAN, Letters and Journals.= Edited by STANLEY LANE POOLE.\nElzevir 8vo (_Parchment Library_). Vellum, 7_s._ 6_d._; parchment or\ncloth, 6_s._\n\n =Prose Writings.= Edited by STANLEY LANE POOLE. With Portrait. Elzevir\n 8vo (_Parchment Library_). Vellum, 7_s._ 6_d._; parchment or cloth,\n 6_s._\n\n=SYMONDS, JOHN ADDINGTON, Vagabunduli Libellus.= Crown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n=TAYLOR, Sir HENRY, Works.= 5 vols, crown 8vo, 30_s._\n\n =Philip Van Artevelde.= Foolscap 8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n =The Virgin Widow=, etc. Foolscap 8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n=TENNYSON, Analysis of Tennyson's 'In Memoriam.'= (Dedicated by\npermission to the Poet Laureate.) By F. W. ROBERTSON. Foolscap 8vo,\n2_s._\n\n=TRENCH, Archbishop, Poems.= Tenth Edition. Foolscap 8vo, 7_s._ 6_d._\nLibrary Edition, 2 vols. small 8vo, 10_s._\n\n =Household Book of English Poetry=. Edited by Archbishop TRENCH.\n Fourth Edition, revised. Extra foolscap 8vo, 5_s._\n\n=TYNAN, KATHERINE, Shamrocks.= Small 8vo, 5_s._\n\n =Ballads and Lyrics.= Small 8vo, 5_s._\n\n=WAGNER, RICHARD, Prose Works.= Translated by W. ASHTON ELLIS.\n\n  Vol. I. =The Art Work of the Future=, etc. 8vo, 12_s._ 6_d._ net.\n      II. =The Drama.= 8vo, 12_s._ 6_d._ net.\n     III. =The Theatre= 8vo, 12_s._ 6_d._ net.\n      IV. =Art and Politics.= 8vo, 12_s._ 6_d._ net.\n\n=WORDSWORTH, W., Selections.= By WILLIAM KNIGHT and other Members of\nthe Wordsworth Society. Printed on hand-made paper. Large crown 8vo.\nWith Portrait. Vellum, 15_s._; parchment, 12_s._ Cheap Edition, crown\n8vo, 4_s._ 6_d._\n\n =Wordsworth Birthday Book.= Edited by ADELAIDE and VIOLET WORDSWORTH.\n 32mo, 2_s._; cloth limp, 1_s_. 6_d._ #/\n\n\nWORKS OF FICTION.\n\n =ADAMS, Mrs. LEITH=, =The Old Pastures=. Crown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n =AMYAND, ARTHUR=, =Only a Drummer Boy=. Crown 8vo, picture boards,\n 2_s._\n\n =BAIN, R. NISBET=, =Weird Tales from the Northern Seas=. From the\n Danish of JONAS LIE. With Illustrations by LAURENCE HOUSMAN. Large\n post 8vo, 7_s._ 6_d._\n\n =BANKS, Mrs. G. LINN\u00c6US=, =God's Providence House=. Crown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n =BENSON, MAY ELEANOR=, =At Sundry Times and in Divers Manners=. With\n Portrait and Memoir. 2 vols. Crown 8vo, 10_s._ 6_d._\n\n =CAIRD, MONA=, =The Wing of Azrael=. Crown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n =CHILD, J. T.=, =The Pearl of Asia=. 10_s._ 6_d._\n\n =COMPTON, C. G.=, =Scot Free=. A Novel. Crown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n =FLETCHER, J. S.=, =The Winding Way=. Crown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n =GOODCHILD, JOHN A.=, =My Friends at Sant 'Ampelio=. Crown 8vo, 7_s._\n 6_d._\n\n =GRAY, MAXWELL=, =In the Heart of the Storm=. With Frontispiece. Crown\n 8vo, 6_s._\n\n =The Reproach of Annesley.= With Frontispiece. Crown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n =Silence of Dean Maitland.= With Frontispiece. Crown 8vo, 6_s._ New\n and Illustrated Edition, post 8vo, 6_s._\n\n =Costly Freak.= With Frontispiece. Crown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n =An Innocent Impostor.= With Frontispiece. Crown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n=GREY, ROWLAND=, =In Sunny Switzerland=; A Tale of Six Weeks. Second\nEdition. Small 8vo, 5_s._\n\n =Lindenblumen=, and other Stories. Small 8vo, 5_s._\n\n =Jacob's Letter=, and other Stories. Crown 8vo, 5_s._\n\n=GURNEY, Rev. ALFRED=, =The Story of a Friendship=. Crown 8vo, 5_s._\n\n=HAWTHORNE, NATHANIEL=, =Works=. Complete in 12 vols. Large post 8vo,\n7_s._ 6_d._ each.\n\n =Scarlet Letter.= New Illustrated Edition. Post 8vo, 10_s._ 6_d._\n\n =Dr. Grimshawe's Secret.= A Romance. With Preface and Notes by Julian\n Hawthorne. Post 8vo, 7_s._ 6_d._ #/\n\n =HOUSMAN, LAWRENCE=, =All Fellows=. With 7 Illustrations, Title Page,\n and Cover designed by the Author. Imperial 16mo, 6_s._\n\n =The House of Joy.= With 9 Illustrations, and Cover specially designed\n by the Author. Crown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n =A Farm in Fairyland.= With 12 Illustrations by the Author. Crown 8vo,\n 6_s._\n\n=HUYSMANS, J. K.=, =En Route=. Translated by C. KEGAN PAUL. Second\nEdition. Crown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n=INGELOW, JEAN=, =Off the Skelligs=. A Novel. With Frontispiece. Crown\n8vo, 6_s._\n\n=LANG, ANDREW=, =In the Wrong Paradise=, and other Stories. Crown 8vo,\n6_s._\n\n=MACDONALD, GEORGE=, =St. George and St. Michael=. With Frontispiece.\nCrown 8vo, 6_s._ New and cheaper Edition, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n =What's Mine's Mine.= With Frontispiece. Crown 8vo, 6_s._ New and\n cheaper Edition, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n =Annals of a Quiet Neighbourhood.= With Frontispiece. Crown 8vo, 6_s._\n New and cheaper Edition, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n =The Seaboard Parish.= A Sequel to 'Annals of a Quiet Neighbourhood.'\n With Frontispiece. Crown 8vo, 6_s._ New and cheaper Edition, 3_s._\n 6_d._\n\n =Wilfrid Cumbermede.= An Autobiographical Story. With Frontispiece.\n Crown 8vo, 6_s._ New and cheaper Edition, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n =Thomas Wingfold, Curate.= With Frontispiece. 6d 8vo, 6_s._ New and\n cheaper Edition, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n =Paul Faber, Surgeon.= With Frontispiece. Crown 8vo, 6_s._ New and\n cheaper Edition, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n =The Elect Lady.= With Frontispiece. Crown 8vo, 6_s._ New and cheaper\n Edition, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n =Flight of the Shadow.= With Frontispiece. Crown 8vo, 6_s._ New and\n cheaper Edition, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n =Malcolm.= With Portrait of the Author engraved on Steel. Crown 8vo,\n 6_s._ New and cheaper Edition, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n =Castle Warlock.= With Frontispiece. Crown 8vo, 6_s._ New and cheaper\n Edition, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n =There and Back.= With Frontispiece. 6_s._ New and cheaper Edition,\n 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n =Donal Grant.= With Frontispiece. Crown 8vo, 6_s._ New and cheaper\n Edition, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n =Home Again.= With Frontispiece. Crown 8vo, 6_s._ New and cheaper\n Edition, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n =The Marquis of Lossie.= With Frontispiece. Crown 8vo, 6_s_ New and\n cheaper Edition, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n=MacKENNA, S. T.=, =Plucky Fellows=. A Book for Boys. With 6\nIllustrations. Fifth Edition. Crown 8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n=MALET, LUCAS=, Colonel Enderby's Wife. With Frontispiece. Crown 8vo,\n6_s._\n\n=A Counsel of Perfection.= With Frontispiece. Crown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n=Little Peter.= A Christmas Morality for Children of any age. With\nnumerous Illustrations. Fourth Thousand. 5_s._\n\n=MULHOLLAND, ROSA=, =Marcella Grace=. An Irish Novel. New Edition, with\nIllustrations. Crown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n =A Fair Emigrant.= With Frontispiece. Crown 8vo, 6_s._ New and cheaper\n Edition, 2_s._\n\n=OWLGLASS, TYLL=, =Marvellous and Rare Conceits=. Translated by KENNETH\nMACKENZIE. Illustrated by ALFRED CROWQUILL. (_Lotos Series_), 3_s._\n6_d._\n\n=PONTOPIDDAN, HENRIK=, =The Apothecary's Daughters=. Translated from\nthe Danish by GORDIUS NIELSEN. Crown 8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n=PRIG=, =The Prigment=: 'The Life of a Prig,' 'Prig's Bede,' 'How to\nMake a Saint,' 'Black is White.' Second Edition. In 1 vol. crown 8vo,\n5_s._\n\n =A Romance of the Recusants.= Crown 8vo, 5_s._\n\n =Black is White=; or, Continuity Continued. Second Edition. Foolscap\n 8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n =Prig's Bede.= The Venerable Bede Expurgated, Expounded, and Exposed.\n Second Edition. Foolscap 8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n =Riches or Ruin.= Foolscap 8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n =Egosophy.= Foolscap 8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n=REANEY, Mrs. G. S.=, =Waking and Working=; or, From Girlhood to\nWomanhood. New and cheaper Edition. With Frontispiece. Crown 8vo, 3_s._\n6_d._\n\n =Blessing and Blessed.= A Sketch of Girl Life. New and cheaper\n Edition. Crown 8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n =Rose Gurney's Discovery.= A Story for Girls. Dedicated to their\n Mothers. Crown 8vo, 7_s._ 6_d._\n\n =English Girls=: Their Place and Power. With Preface by the Rev. R. W.\n DALE. Fifth Edition. Foolscap 8vo, 2_s._ 6_d._\n\n =Just Any One=, and other Stories. With 3 Illustrations. 16mo, 1_s._\n 6_d._\n\n =Sunbeam Willie=, and other Stories. With 3 Illustrations. 16mo, 1_s._\n 6_d._\n\n =Sunshine Jenny=, and other Stories. With 3 Illustrations. 16mo, 1_s._\n 6_d._\n\n=ROSS, PERCY=, =A Professor of Alchemy=. Crown 8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n=SHAW, FLORA L.=, =Castle Blair=. A Story of Youthful Days. Crown 8vo,\n3_s._ 6_d._\n\n=SPINNER, ALICE=, =Lucilla=: An Experiment. 2 vols. crown 8vo, 12_s._\nnet. Also cheaper Edition, crown 8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n =Sporting Stories and Sketches.= By G. G. With Frontispiece by G.\n BOWERS. New and cheaper Edition, picture-boards, crown 8vo, 2_s._\n\n=STRETTON, HESBA=, =David Lloyd's Last Will=. With 4 Illustrations. New\nEdition, royal 16mo, 2_s._ 6_d._\n\n='TASMA,'= =A Sydney Sovereign=, and other Tales. Crown 8vo, cloth,\n6_s._\n\n=In Her Earliest Youth.= Cheap Edition. Crown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n=TAYLOR, Colonel MEADOWS=, =Seeta=. A Novel. With Frontispiece. Crown\n8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n =Tippoo Sultaun.= A Tale of the Mysore War. With Frontispiece. Crown\n 8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n =Ralph Darnell.= With Frontispiece. Crown 8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n =A Noble Queen.= With Frontispiece. Crown 8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n =The Confessions of a Thug.= With Frontispiece. Crown 8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n =Tara.= A Mahratta Tale. With Frontispiece. Crown 8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n=THACKERAY, W. M.=, =Sultan Stork=, and other Stories and Sketches,\n1829-44. Now first collected, to which is added the Bibliography of\nThackeray. Large 8vo, 10_s._ 6_d._\n\n=THEODOLI, The MARCHESA=, =Candiduccia=. Scenes from Roman Life. 2\nvols. crown 8vo, 12_s._ net.\n\n=TRAHERNE, Mrs. ARTHUR=, =The Mill on the Usk=. Crown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n\n_II. RELIGION._\n\nTHEOLOGY, EXEGESIS, DEVOTIONAL WORKS, ETC.\n\n =ABRAHAMS, L. B.=, =Manual of Scripture History for Jewish Schools and\n Families=. With Map. Crown 8vo, 1_s._ 6_d._\n\n =ALEXANDER, WILLIAM, Bishop, The Great Question=, and other Sermons.\n Crown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n =ALLIES, THOMAS W.=, =The Monastic Life, from the Fathers of the\n Desert to Charlemagne=. Post 8vo, 9_s._ net.\n\n =ANDERSON, ROBERT=, =A Doubter's Doubt about Science and Religion=.\n Second Edition. Crown 8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n =ARNOLD, THOMAS, and SCANNELL, T. B.=, =Catholic Dictionary=. An\n Account of the Doctrine, Discipline, Rites, Ceremonies, etc., of the\n Catholic Church. Fourth Edition, revised and enlarged. 8vo, 21_s._\n\n =BADHAM, F. P.=, =Formation of the Gospels=. Crown 8vo, 5_s._\n\n =BAGSHAWE, EDWARD G., Bishop, Notes on Christian Doctrine=. Crown 8vo,\n 5_s._\n\n =BAGSHAWE, JOHN B.=, =Skeleton Sermons for the Sundays and Holidays in\n the Year=. Crown 8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n =Bibliotheca Sacra.= Annual Subscription, 14_s._\n\n =BOLD, PHILIP=, =Catholic Doctrine and Discipline Simply Explained=.\n Revised and in part Edited by Father EYRE, S.J. Post 8vo, 10_s._ 6_d._\n\n =BRIDGETT, Rev. T. E.=, =History of the Holy Eucharist in Great\n Britain=. 2 vols. 8vo, 18_s._\n\n =BROOKE, Rev. STOPFORD A.=, =Christ in Modern Life=. Seventeenth\n Edition. Crown 8vo, 5_s._\n\n =The Spirit of the Christian Life.= Fourth Edition. Crown 8vo, 5_s._\n\n =The Fight of Faith.= Sermons preached on various occasions. Sixth\n Edition. Crown 8vo, 5_s._\n\n =Sermons.= Two Series. Thirteenth Edition. Crown 8vo, 5_s._ each.\n\n =Theology in the English Poets=--Cowper, Coleridge, Wordsworth, and\n Burns. Sixth Edition. Post 8vo, 5_s._\n\n=BUDGE, E. A. WALLIS=, =The Book of Governors=. The Historica Monastica\nof Thomas, Bishop of Marga. 2 vols. 8vo, 40_s._ net.\n\n=Saint Michael the Archangel.= Three Encomiums in the Coptic Texts,\nwith a Translation. Imperial 8vo, 15_s._ net.\n\n=CARPENTER, R. L.=, =Personal and Social Christianity=. Sermons and\nAddresses by the late RUSSELL LANT CARPENTER. With a Short Memoir by\nFRANCES E. COOKE. Edited by J. ESTLIN CARPENTER. Crown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n=Catherine of Siena.= The Dialogue of the Seraphic Virgin Catherine of\nSiena. Translated from the Italian, with an Introduction on the Study\nof Mysticism. By ALGAR THOROLD. 8vo, 15_s._\n\n=CHEYNE, Canon T. K.=, The Origin and Religious Contents of the\nPsalter. The Bampton Lectures, 1889. 8vo, 16_s._\n\n =The Prophecies of Isaiah.= With Notes and Dissertations. Fifth\n Edition. 2 vols. 8vo, 25_s._\n\n =Job and Solomon=; or, The Wisdom of the Old Testament. 8vo, 12_s._\n 6_d._\n\n =The Book of Psalms=; or, The Praises of Israel. With Commentary.\n 8vo, 16_s._ Elzevir 8vo (_Parchment Library_). Vellum, 7_s._ 6_d._;\n parchment or cloth, 6_s._\n\n=CLARK, HENRY W.=, =History of Tithes, from Abraham to Queen Victoria=.\nCrown 8vo, 5_s._\n\n=CLARKE, JAMES FREEMAN=, =Ten Great Religions=. An Essay in Comparative\nTheology. 8vo. Part I. 10_s._ 6_d._; Part II. A Comparison of all\nReligions, 10_s._ 6_d._\n\n=CLODD, EDWARD=, =Jesus of Nazareth=. With a Brief Sketch of Jewish\nHistory to the Time of His Birth. Second Edition. Small crown 8vo,\n6_s._ Special Edition for Schools, in 2 parts, 1_s._ 6_d._ each.\n\n =Childhood of Religions,= including a Simple Account of the Birth\n and Growth of Myths and Legends. New Edition, revised and partly\n re-written. Crown 8vo, 5_s._ Special Edition for schools, 1_s._ 6_d._\n\n=COX, Rev. SAMUEL, D. D.=, =Commentary on the Book of Job=. With a\nTranslation. Second Edition. 8vo, 15_s._\n\n =Balaam.= An Exposition and a Study. Crown 8vo, 5_s._\n\n =Miracles.= An Argument and a Challenge. Crown 8vo, 2_s._ 6_d._\n\n =Salvator Mundi=; or, Is Christ the Saviour of all Men? Twelfth\n Edition. Crown 8vo, 2_s._ 6_d._\n\n=The Larger Hope.= A Sequel to 'Salvator Mundi' Second Edition. 16mo,\n1_s._\n\n=Genesis of Evil,= and other Sermons, mainly Expository. Fourth\nEdition. Crown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n=DAVIDSON, SAMUEL, Introduction to the New Testament.= Third Edition,\nRevised and enlarged. 2 vols. demy 8vo, 30_s._\n\n=DAWSON, GEORGE, The Authentic Gospel,= and other Sermons. Edited by\nGEORGE ST. CLAIR. Fourth Edition. Small 8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n=Every-day Counsels.= Edited by GEORGE ST. CLAIR. Crown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n=Prayers.= First Series. Edited by his Wife. Tenth Edition. Small 8vo,\n3_s._ 6_d._ Second Series. Edited by GEORGE ST. CLAIR. Small 8vo, 3_s._\n6_d._\n\n=Sermons on Disputed Points and Special Occasions.= Edited by his Wife.\nFifth Edition. Small 8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n=Sermons on Daily Life and Duty.= Edited by his Wife. Fifth Edition.\nSmall 8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n=DEMBO, Dr. J. A., The Jewish Method of Slaughter.= Crown 8vo, 2_s._\n6_d._ net.\n\n=DIDON, Father, Jesus Christ.= Cheaper Edition. 2 vols. 8vo, 12_s._\n\n=Belief in the Divinity of Jesus Christ.= Crown 8vo, 5_s._\n\n=DORMAN, MARCUS R., From Matter to Mind.= Crown 8vo, 7_s._ 6_d._\n\n=DRAPER, J. W., The Conflict between Religion and Science.=\nTwenty-first Edition. Crown 8vo, 5_s._ (_I. S. S._)\n\n=EYTON, ROBERT, The Apostles' Creed.= Sermons. Crown 8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n=The True Life,= and other Sermons. Second Edition. Crown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n=The Lord's Prayer.= Sermons. Crown 8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n=The Ten Commandments.= Sermons. Crown 8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n=The Search for God, and other Sermons.= Crown 8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n=The Temptation of Jesus,= and other Sermons. Crown 8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n=The Beatitudes.= Sermons. Crown 8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n=French Jansenists.= By the Author of 'Spanish Mystics' and 'Many\nVoices.' Crown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n=FRIEDL\u00c4NDER, M., Text Book of Jewish Religion.= Fourth Edition,\nRevised. Crown 8vo, 1_s._ 6_d._\n\n =The Jewish Religion.= Crown 8vo, 5_s._\n\nGRIMLEY, REV. H. N., TREMADOC SERMONS. Chiefly on the Spiritual Body,\nthe Unseen World, and the Divine Humanity. Fourth Edition. Crown 8vo,\n6_s._\n\n =The Prayer of Humanity.= Sermons on the Lord's Prayer. Crown 8vo,\n 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n =The Temple of Humanity,= and other Sermons. Crown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n=HAWEIS, Rev. H. R., Current Coin.= Materialism--The\nDevil--Crime--Drunkenness--Pauperism--Emotion--Recreation--The Sabbath.\nSixth Edition. Crown 8vo, 5_s._\n\n =Arrows in the Air.= Fifth Edition. Crown 8vo, 5_s._\n\n =Speech in Season.= Sixth Edition. Crown 8vo, 5_s._\n\n =Thoughts for the Times.= Fourteenth Edition. Crown 8vo, 5_s._\n\n =Unsectarian Family Prayers.= New Edition. Foolscap 8vo, 1_s._ 6_d._\n\n=HERSHON, J. P., Talmudic Miscellany=; or, One Thousand and One\nExtracts from the Talmud, the Midrashim, and the Kabbalah. Post 8vo,\n14_s._ (_Tr\u00fcbner's Oriental Series._)\n\n=ISLAM.= _See Class_ ORIENTAL.\n\n=KEMPIS, THOMAS \u00c0, Imitation of Christ.= Revised Translation. Elzevir\n8vo, (_Parchment Library_). Vellum, 7_s._ 6_d._; parchment or cloth,\n6_s._\n\n RED LINE EDITION. Foolscap 8vo, 2_s._ 6_d._ Cabinet Edition, small\n 8vo, 1_s._ 6_d._; cloth limp, 1_s._\n\n MINIATURE EDITION. 32mo. With Red Lines, 1_s._ 6_d._; without Red\n Lines, 1_s._\n\n =De Imitatione Christi.= Latin and English. Crown 8vo, 7_s._ 6_d._\n\n=L\u00c9PICIER, ALEXIUS W., D.D., Indulgences=: Their Origin, Nature, and\nDevelopment. Post 8vo, 10_s._ 6_d._\n\n=Life's Greatest Possibility.= An Essay in Spiritual Realism. Foolscap\n8vo, 2_s._ 6_d._\n\n=LOVAT, Lady, Seeds and Sheaves:= Thoughts for Incurables. Crown 8vo,\n5_s._\n\n=MAIMONIDES=, =Guide of the Perplexed=, from the Original Text.\nAnnotated by H. FRIEDL\u00c4NDER. 3 vols. post 8vo, 31_s._ 6_d._\n(_Philosophical Library._)\n\n=MANNING, Cardinal=, =Towards Evening=: Selections from the Writings of\nCardinal Manning. Fourth Edition, with _Fac-simile_. 16mo, 2_s._\n\n=MEAD, C. M., D.D.=, =Supernatural Revelation=: An Essay concerning the\nBasis of the Christian Faith. Royal 8vo, 14_s._\n\n=MOORE, AUBREY L.=, =Science and the Faith=: Essays on Apologetic\nSubjects. Third Edition. Crown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n=PARKER, THEODORE= (Minister of the Twenty-eighth Congregational\nSociety at Boston, U.S.), =Collected Works=. 14 vols. 8vo, 6_s._ each.\n\n Vol. I. =Discourse on Matters Pertaining to Religion.=\n\n II. =Ten Sermons and Prayers.=\n\n III. =Discourses on Theology.=\n\n IV. =Discourses on Politics.=\n\n V. & VI. =Discourses on Slavery.=\n\n VII. =Discourses on Social Science.=\n\n VIII. =Miscellaneous Discourses.=\n\n IX. & X. =Critical Writings.=\n\n XI. =Sermons on Theism, Atheism, and Popular Theology.=\n\n XII. =Autobiographical and Miscellaneous Pieces.=\n\n XIII. =Historic Americans.=\n\n XIV. =Lessons from the World of Matter and the World of Man.=\n\n =Discourse on Matters Pertaining to Religion.= People's Edition. Crown\n 8vo, 2_s._; 1_s._ 6_d._\n\n=PASCAL=, =Thoughts=. Translated by C. KEGAN PAUL. Foolscap 8vo,\nparchment, 12_s._ New Edition, crown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n=PASTOR, Dr. LUDWIG=, =The History of the Popes=. Translated from the\nGerman by FREDERICK J. ANTROBUS. Vols. 3 and 4, 8vo, 24_s._ net.\n\n =Paul of Tarsus.= By the Author of 'Rabbi Jeshua.' Crown 8vo, 4_s._\n 6_d._\n\n=PEARSON, SAMUEL=, =Scholars of Christ=. Crown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n =Week-Day Living.= Third Edition. Crown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n=PULPIT COMMENTARY, The (Old Testament Series).= Edited by the Very\nRev. Dean H. D. M. SPENCE, D.D., and Rev. J. S. EXELL. Super royal 8vo.\n\n =Genesis=, by the Rev. T. WHITELAW, D.D. Homilies by the Very Rev. J.\n F. MONTGOMERY, D.D., Rev. Prof. R. A. REDFORD, Rev. F. HASTINGS, Rev.\n W. ROBERTS. Introduction to the Study of the Old Testament, by Ven.\n Archdeacon FARRAR, D.D. Introductions to the Pentateuch, by the Right\n Rev. H. COTTERILL, D.D., and Rev. T. WHITELAW, D.D. Ninth Edition.\n 15_s._\n\n =Exodus=, by the Rev. Canon RAWLINSON. Homilies by the Rev. J. ORR,\n D.D., Rev. D. YOUNG, Rev. C. A. GOODHART, Rev. J. URQUHART, and Rev.\n H. T. ROBJOHNS. Fifth Edition. 2 vols. 9_s._ each.\n\n =Leviticus=, by the Rev. Preb. MEYRICK. Introductions by the Rev. R.\n COLLINS and Rev. Prof. A. CAVE. Homilies by the Rev. Prof. REDFORD,\n Rev. J. A. MACDONALD, Rev. W. CLARKSON, Rev. S. R. ALDRIDGE, and Rev.\n MCCHEYNE EDGAR. Fifth Edition. 15_s._\n\n =Numbers=, by the Rev. R. WINTERBOTHAM. Homilies by the Rev. Prof.\n W. BINNIE, D.D., Rev. E. S. PROUT, Rev. D. YOUNG, and Rev. J. WAITE.\n Introduction by the Rev. THOMAS WHITELAW, D.D. Fifth Edition. 15_s._\n\n =Deuteronomy=, by the Rev. W. L. ALEXANDER, D.D. Homilies by the Rev.\n C. CLEMANCE, D.D., Rev. J. ORR, D.D., Rev. R. M. EDGAR, and Rev. J. D.\n DAVIES. Fourth Edition. 15_s._\n\n =Joshua=, by the Rev. J. J. LIAS. Homilies by the Rev. S. R. ALDRIDGE,\n Rev. R. GLOVER, Rev. E. DE PRESSENS\u00c9, D.D., Rev. J. WAITE, and Rev. W.\n F. ADENEY. Introduction by the Rev. A. PLUMMER, D.D. Sixth Edition.\n 12_s._ 6_d._\n\n =Judges and Ruth=, by the Bishop of BATH and WELLS and Rev. J.\n MORISON, D.D. Homilies by the Rev. A. F. MUIR, Rev. W. F. ADENEY, Rev.\n W. M. STATHAM, and Rev. Prof. J. THOMSON. Fifth Edition. 10_s._ 6_d._\n\n =1 and 2 Samuel=, by the Very Rev. R. PAYNE SMITH, D.D. Homilies by\n the Rev. DONALD FRASER, D.D., Rev. Prof. CHAPMAN, Rev. B. DALE, and\n Rev. G. WOOD. Seventh Edition. 2 vols. 15_s._ each.\n\n =1 Kings=, by the Rev. JOSEPH HAMMOND. Homilies by the Rev. E. DE\n PRESSENS\u00c9, D.D., Rev. J. WAITE, Rev. A. ROWLAND, Rev. J. A. MACDONALD,\n and Rev. J. URQUHART. Fifth Edition. 15_s._\n\n =2 Kings=, by the Rev. Canon RAWLINSON. Homilies by the Rev. J. ORR,\n D.D., Rev. D. THOMAS, D.D., and Rev. C. H. IRWIN. Second Edition.\n 15_s._\n\n =1 Chronicles=, by the Rev. Prof. P. C. BARKER. Homilies by the\n Rev. Prof. J. R. THOMSON, Rev. R. TUCK, Rev. W. CLARKSON, Rev. F.\n WHITFIELD, and Rev. RICHARD GLOVER. Second Edition. 15_s._\n\n =2 Chronicles=, by the Rev. PHILIP C. BARKER. Homilies by the Rev. W.\n CLARKSON and Rev. T. WHITELAW, D.D. Second Edition. 15_s._\n\n =Ezra, Nehemiah, and Esther=, by the Rev. Canon G. RAWLINSON. Homilies\n by the Rev. Prof. J. R. THOMSON, Rev. Prof. R. A. REDFORD, Rev. W. S.\n LEWIS, Rev. J. A. MACDONALD, Rev. A. MACKENNAL, Rev. W. CLARKSON, Rev.\n F. HASTINGS, Rev. W. DINWIDDIE, Rev. Prof. ROWLANDS, Rev. G. WOOD,\n Rev. Prof. P. C. BARKER, and the Rev. J. S. EXELL. Seventh Edition.\n 12_s._ 6_d._\n\n =Job=, by the Rev. Canon G. RAWLINSON. Homilies by the Rev. T.\n WHITELAW, D.D., the Rev. Prof. E. JOHNSON, the Rev. Prof. W. F.\n ADENEY, and the Rev. R. GREEN. 21_s._\n\n =Psalms=, by the Rev. Canon G. RAWLINSON. Homilies by the Rev. E.\n R. CONDER, D.D., Rev. W. CLARKSON, Rev. C. CLEMANCE, D.D., Rev. W.\n FORSYTH, D.D., Rev. C. SHORT, D.D., Rev. S. CONWAY, and Rev. R. TUCK.\n 3 vols. 10_s._ 6_d._ each.\n\n =Proverbs=, by the Rev. W. J. DEANE and Rev. S. T. TAYLOR-TASWELL.\n Homilies by the Rev. Prof. W. F. ADENEY, Rev. Prof. E. JOHNSON, and\n the Rev. W. CLARKSON. Second Edition. 15_s._\n\n =Ecclesiastes and Song of Solomon=, by the Rev. W. J. DEANE and Rev.\n Prof. R. A. REDFORD. Homilies by the Rev. T. WHITELAW, D.D., Rev. B.\n C. CAFFIN, Rev. Prof. J. R. THOMSON, Rev. S. CONWAY, Rev. D. DAVIES,\n Rev. W. CLARKSON, and Rev. J. WILLCOCK. 21_s._\n\n =Isaiah=, by the Rev. Canon G. RAWLINSON. Homilies by the Rev. Prof.\n E. JOHNSON, Rev. W. CLARKSON, Rev. W. M. STATHAM, and Rev. R. TUCK.\n Third Edition. 2 vols. 15_s._ each.\n\n =Jeremiah and Lamentations=, by the Rev. Canon T. K. CHEYNE, D.D.\n Homilies by the Rev. Prof. J. R. THOMSON, Rev. W. F. ADENEY, Rev. A.\n F. MUIR, Rev. S. CONWAY, Rev. D. YOUNG, and Rev. J. WAITE. Fourth\n Edition. 2 vols. 15_s._ each.\n\n =Ezekiel=, by the Very Rev. E. H. PLUMPTRE, D.D. Homilies by the Rev.\n Prof. W. F. ADENEY, Rev. Prof. J. R. THOMSON, Rev. J. D. DAVIES, Rev.\n W. JONES, and Rev. W. CLARKSON. Introduction by the Rev. T. WHITELAW,\n D.D. 2 vols. 12_s._ 6_d._ each.\n\n =Daniel=, by the Rev. J. E. H. THOMSON, B.D. Homilies by the Rev.\n Prof. W. F. ADENEY, Rev. H. T. ROBJOHNS, and Rev. J. D. DAVIES. 21_s._\n\n =Hosea and Joel=, by the Rev. Prof. J. J. GIVEN, D.D. Homilies by the\n Rev. Prof. J. R. THOMSON, Rev. A. ROWLAND, Rev. C. JERDAN, Rev. J.\n ORR, D.D., and Rev. D. THOMAS, D.D. Second Edition. 15_s._\n\n =Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, and Micah=, by the Rev. W. J. DEANE. Homilies\n by the Rev. J. EDGAR HENRY, Rev. Prof. J. R. THOMSON, Rev. S. D.\n HILLMAN, Rev. =A. Rowland=, Rev. D. THOMAS, Rev. A. C. THISELTON, Rev.\n E. S. PROUT, Rev. G. T. COSTER, and Rev. W. G. BLAIKIE. 15_s._\n\n =Nahum=, by the Rev. W. J. DEANE. Homilies by the Rev. T. WHITELAW,\n Rev. S. D. HILLMAN, and Rev. D. THOMAS. 15_s._\n\n=Pulpit Commentary, The (New Testament Series).= Edited by the Very\nRev. H. D. M. SPENCE, D.D., and Rev. JOSEPH S. EXELL.\n\n =St. Matthew=, by the Rev. A. L. WILLIAMS. Homilies by the Rev. B.\n C. CAFFIN, Rev. Prof. W. F. ADENEY, Rev. P. C. BARKER, Rev. M. DODS,\n D.D., Rev. J. A. MACDONALD, and Rev. R. TUCK. 2 vols. 21_s._ each.\n\n =St. Mark=, by the Very Rev. Dean E. BICKERSTETH, D.D. Homilies by the\n Rev. Prof. J. R. THOMSON, Rev. Prof. J. J. GIVEN, D.D., Rev. Prof. E.\n JOHNSON, Rev. A. ROWLAND, Rev. A. F. MUIR, and Rev. R. GREEN. Sixth\n Edition. 2 vols. 10_s._ 6_d._ each.\n\n =St. Luke=, by the Very Rev. Dean H. D. M. SPENCE. Homilies by the\n Rev. J. MARSHALL LANG, D.D., Rev. W. CLARKSON, and Rev. R. M. EDGAR.\n Second Edition. 2 vols. 10_s._ 6_d._ each.\n\n =St. John=, by the Rev. Prof. H. R. REYNOLDS, D.D. Homilies by the\n Rev. Prof. T. CROSKERY, D.D., Rev. Prof. J. R. THOMSON, Rev. D. YOUNG,\n Rev. B. THOMAS, and Rev. G. BROWN. Third Edition. 2 vols. 15_s._ each.\n\n =The Acts of the Apostles=, by the Right Rev. Bishop of BATH and\n WELLS. Homilies by the Rev. Prof. P. C. BARKER, Rev. Prof. E. JOHNSON,\n Rev. Prof. R. A. REDFORD, Rev. R. TUCK, and Rev. W. CLARKSON. Fifth\n Edition. 2 vols. 10_s._ 6_d._ each.\n\n =Romans=, by the Rev. J. BARMBY. Homilies by the Rev. Prof. J. R.\n THOMSON, Rev. C. H. IRWIN, Rev. T. F. LOCKYER, Rev. S. R. ALDRIDGE,\n and Rev. R. M. EDGAR. 15_s._\n\n =Corinthians and Galatians=, by the Ven. Archdeacon FARRAR, D.D., and\n Rev. Preb. E. HUXTABLE. Homilies by the Rev. Ex-Chancellor LIPSCOMB,\n Rev. DAVID THOMAS, D.D., Rev. DONALD FRASER, D.D., Rev. R. TUCK, Rev.\n E. HURNDALL, Rev. Prof. J. R. THOMSON, Rev. R. FINLAYSON, Rev. W. F.\n ADENEY, Rev. R. M. EDGAR, and Rev. T. CROSKERY, D.D. 2 vols. Vol. I.,\n containing 1 Corinthians, Fifth Edition, 15_s._ Vol. II., containing 2\n Corinthians and Galatians, Second Edition, 21_s._\n\n =Ephesians, Philippians, and Colossians=, by the Rev. Prof. W. G.\n BLAIKIE, D.D., Rev. B. C. CAFFIN, and Rev. G. G. FINDLAY. Homilies by\n the Rev. D. THOMAS, D.D., Rev. R. M. EDGAR, Rev. R. FINLAYSON, Rev. W.\n F. ADENEY, Rev. Prof. T. CROSKERY, D.D., Rev. E. S. PROUT, Rev. Canon\n VERNON HUTTON, and Rev. U. R. THOMAS, D.D. Third Edition. 21_s._\n\n =Thessalonians, Timothy, Titus, and Philemon=, by the Right Rev.\n Bishop of BATH and WELLS, Rev. Dr. GLOAG, and Rev. Dr. EALES. Homilies\n by the Rev. B. C. CAFFIN, Rev. R. FINLAYSON, Rev. Prof. T. CROSKERY,\n D.D., Rev. W. F. ADENEY, Rev. W. M. STATHAM, and Rev. D. THOMAS, D.D.\n Second Edition. 15_s._\n\n =Hebrews and James=, by the Rev. J. BARMBY, and Rev. Preb. E. C. S.\n GIBSON. Homilies by the Rev. C. JERDAN, Rev. Preb. E. C. S. GIBSON,\n Rev. W. JONES, Rev. C. NEW, Rev. D. YOUNG, Rev. J. S. BRIGHT, and Rev.\n T. F. LOCKYER. Third Edition. 15_s._\n\n =Peter, John, and Jude=, by the Rev. B. C. CAFFIN, Rev. A. PLUMMER,\n D.D., and Rev. Prof. S. D. F. SALMOND, D.D. Homilies by the Rev. A.\n MACLAREN, D.D., Rev. C. CLEMANCE, D.D., Rev. Prof. J. R. THOMSON, Rev.\n C. NEW, Rev. U. R. THOMAS, Rev. R. FINLAYSON, Rev. W. JONES, Rev.\n Prof. T. CROSKERY, D.D., and Rev. J. S. BRIGHT, D.D. Second Edition.\n 15_s._\n\n =Revelation=. Introduction by the Rev. T. RANDELL, Principal of Bede\n College, Durham. Exposition by the Rev. A. PLUMMER, D.D., assisted\n by Rev. T. RANDELL and A. T. BOTT. Homilies by the Rev. C. CLEMANCE,\n D.D., Rev. S. CONWAY, Rev. R. GREEN, and Rev. D. THOMAS, D.D. Second\n Edition. 15_s._\n\n=PUSEY, Rev. E. B., D.D., Sermons for the Church's Seasons from Advent\nto Trinity.= Crown 8vo, 5_s._\n\n=RENAN, ERNEST, Life of Jesus.= Crown 8vo, 1_s._ 6_d._; paper covers,\n1_s._\n\n =The Apostles.= Crown 8vo, 1_s._ 6_d._; paper covers, 1_s._\n\n=REYNOLDS, Rev. J. W., The Supernatural in Nature.= A Verification by\nthe Free Use of Science. Third Edition, revised and enlarged. 8vo,\n14_s._\n\n =Mystery of the Universe Our Common Faith.= 8vo, 14_s._\n\n =Mystery of Miracles.= Third Edition, enlarged. Crown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n =The World to Come.= Immortality a Physical Fact. Crown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n=RICHARDSON, AUSTIN, What are the Catholic Claims?= Introduction by\nRev. LUKE RIVINGTON. Crown 8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n=RIVINGTON, Rev. LUKE, Authority=; or, A Plain Reason for Joining the\nChurch of Rome. Fifth Edition. Crown 8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n =Dependence=; or, The Insecurity of the Anglican Position. Crown 8vo,\n 5_s._\n\n=ROBERTSON, Rev. F. W., Notes on Genesis.= New and cheaper Edition.\nSmall 8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n =St. Paul's Epistle to the Corinthians.= Expository Lectures. New\n Edition. Small 8vo, 5_s._\n\n =Lectures and Addresses=, with other Literary Remains. New Edition.\n Small 8vo, 5_s._\n\n =Sermons.= Five Series. Small 8vo, 3_s_. 6_d._ each.\n\n  [asterism] Portrait of the late Rev. F. W. ROBERTSON, mounted for\n  framing, 2_s._ 6_d._\n\n=ROWAN, FREDERICA, Meditations on Death and Eternity.= Translated from\nthe German by F. ROWAN. Published by Her Majesty's gracious permission.\nCrown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n =Meditations on Life and its Religious Duties.= Translated from the\n German by F. ROWAN. Published by Her Majesty's gracious permission.\n Crown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n=SCANNELL, THOMAS B.=, and =WILHELM, JOSEPH, D.D.=, =Manual of Catholic\nTheology=, based on SCHEEBEN'S 'Dogmatik.' Vol I. 15_s._\n\n=SCHLEIERMACHER, F., On Religion.= Speeches to its Cultured Despisers.\nTranslated, with Introduction, by J. OMAN. 8vo, 7_s._ 6_d._\n\n=TAYLER, J. J., Retrospect of the Religious Life of England=; or,\nChurch, Puritanism, and Free Inquiry. Second Edition. Post 8vo, 7_s._\n6_d._\n\n=TIELE, Prof. C. P., Outlines of the History of Religion to the Spread\nof the Universal Religions.= From the Dutch, by J. ESTLIN CARPENTER.\nFifth Edition. Post 8vo, 7_s._ 6_d._ (_Philosophical Library, and\nTr\u00fcbner's Oriental Series._)\n\n\n =History of the Egyptian and Mesopotamian Religions.= Translated by J.\n BALLINGAL. Post 8vo, 7_s._ 6_d._ (_Tr\u00fcbner's Oriental Series._)\n\n=TRENCH, Archbishop, Notes on the Parables of our Lord.= 8vo, 12_s._\nCheap Edition. Sixty-first Thousand. 7_s._ 6_d._\n\n =Notes on the Miracles of our Lord.= 8vo, 12_s._ Cheap Edition.\n Forty-eighth Thousand. 7_s._ 6_d._\n\n =Brief Thoughts and Meditations on some Passages in Holy Scripture.=\n Third Edition. Crown 8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n =Apocalypse: Commentary on the Epistles to the Seven Churches of\n Asia.= Fourth Edition, revised. 8vo, 8_s._ 6_d._\n\n =On the Authorised Version of the New Testament.= Second Edition. 8vo,\n 7_s._\n\n =Proverbs and their Lessons.= Eighth Edition, enlarged. Foolscap 8vo,\n 4_s._\n\n =Studies in the Gospels.= Fifth Edition, revised. 8vo, 10_s._ 6_d._\n\n =Synonyms of the New Testament.= Tenth Edition, enlarged. 8vo, 12_s._\n\n =Sermons, New and Old.= Crown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n =Lectures on Medi\u00e6val Church History.= Being the substance of Lectures\n delivered at Queen's College, London. Second Edition. 8vo, 12_s._\n\n =Shipwrecks of Faith.= Three Sermons preached before the University of\n Cambridge. Foolscap 8vo, 2_s._ 6_d._\n\n =Westminster and other Sermons.= Crown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n=TRUMBULL, H. CLAY, The Blood-Covenant.= A Primitive Rite, and its\nbearing on Scripture. Post 8vo, 7_s._ 6_d._\n\n=TURTON, Major W. H., The Truth of Christianity.= Crown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n=WILSON, Archdeacon, Rochdale Sermons, 1891-4.= Crown 8vo, 5_s._\n\n=WYLD, Dr. GEORGE, Christo-Theosophy;= or, Spiritual Dynamics. Crown\n8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._ net.\n\n\nRELIGIOUS PHILOSOPHY AND SPECULATIVE THEOLOGY.\n\n(_See also_ PHILOSOPHY.)\n\n =ARNOLD, Sir EDWIN, Death--and Afterwards.= Reprinted from the\n _Fortnightly Review_ of August, 1885, with a Supplement. Eleventh\n Edition. Crown 8vo, cloth, 1_s._ 6_d._; paper covers, 1_s._\n\n =FEUERBACH, L., Essence of Christianity.= From the German, by MARIAN\n EVANS. Second Edition. Post 8vo, 7_s._ 6_d._ (_Philosophical Library._)\n\n =FITZARTHUR, T., The Worth of Human Testimony.= Foolscap 8vo, 2_s._\n\n =GRAHAM, WILLIAM, Creed of Science, Religious, Moral, and Social.=\n Second Edition, revised. Crown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n =GREG, W. R., The Creed of Christendom.= Eighth Edition. 2 vols. post\n 8vo, 15_s._ (_Philosophical Library._)\n\n =Enigmas of Life.= Seventeenth Edition. Post 8vo, 10_s._ 6_d._\n New Edition, with Prefatory Memoir, Edited by his Wife. 6_s._\n (_Philosophical Library._)\n\n =Miscellaneous Essays.= Two Series. Crown 8vo, 7_s._ 6_d._ each.\n\n=HEGEL, G. W. F., Lectures on the Philosophy of Religion.= Translated\nby the Rev. E. B. SPIERS and J. BURDON SANDERSON. 3 vols. 8vo, 12_s._\neach.\n\n  (_See also_ PHILOSOPHY.)\n\n=HEINE, H., Religion and Philosophy in Germany.= Translated by J.\nSNODGRASS. Post 8vo, 6_s._ (_Philosophical Library._)\n\n=MORISON, J. COTTER, The Service of Man.= An Essay towards the Religion\nof the Future. Crown 8vo, 5_s._\n\n=NEWMAN, F. W., Miscellanies.= Essays, Tracts, and Addresses, Moral and\nReligious. 8vo. Vol. I. 10s. 6d.\n\n=PHYSICUS, Candid Examination of Theism.= Second Edition. Post 8vo,\n7_s._ 6_d._ (_Philosophical Library._)\n\n=READE, WINWOOD, The Martyrdom of Man.= Fourteenth Edition. Crown 8vo.\n7_s._ 6_d._\n\n=WARD, W. G., Essays on the Philosophy of Theism.= Edited, with an\nIntroduction, by WILFRID WARD. 2 vols. 8vo, 21_s._\n\n\nMYTHOLOGY, ETC.\n\n =BRINTON, D. G., Rig Veda Americanus.= 8vo, 12_s._\n\n =COX, Sir G. W., Bart., Mythology of the Aryan Nations.= New Edition.\n 8vo, 16_s._\n\n =Tales of Ancient Greece.= New Edition. Small crown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n =Tales of the Gods and Heroes.= Small Crown 8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n =Manual of Mythology in the Form of Question and Answer.= New Edition.\n Foolscap 8vo, 3_s._\n\n =Introduction to the Science of Comparative Mythology and Folk-Lore.=\n Second Edition. Crown 8vo, 7_s._ 6_d._\n\n=DOWSON, JOHN, Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology and History,\nGeography and Literature.= Post 8vo, 16_s._ (_Tr\u00fcbner's Oriental\nSeries._)\n\n=GUBERNATIS, ANGELO DE, Zoological Mythology=; or, The Legends of\nAnimals. 2 vols. 8vo, \u00a31 8_s._\n\n=MUIR, JOHN, Cosmogony, Mythology, etc., of the Indians in the Vedic\nAge.= Third Edition. \u00a31 1_s._\n\n=VIGNOLI, TITO, Myth and Science.= An Essay. Third Edition. With\nSupplementary Note. Crown 8vo, 5_s._ (_I.S.S._)\n\n=WAKE, C. S., Serpent Worship=, and other Essays, with a Chapter on\nTotemism. 8vo, 10_s._ 6_d._\n\n=WESTROPP, H. M., Primitive Symbolism as Illustrated in Phallic\nWorship=; or, The Reproductive Principle. With Introduction by\nMajor-Gen. FORLONG. 8vo, 7_s._ 6_d._\n\n=WILSON, H. H., Vishnu Pur\u00e1n\u00e1.= A System of Hindu Mythology and\nTradition. From the original Sanskrit. Illustrated by Notes derived\nchiefly from other Pur\u00e1n\u00e1s. Translated by H. H. WILSON. Edited by FITZ\nEDWARD HALL. 5 vols, \u00a33 4_s._ 6_d._\n\n\nFOLK-LORE.\n\n =BLEEK, W. H. I., Hottentot Folk-Lore.--Reynard the Fox in South\n Africa=; or, Hottentot Fables and Tales. Post 8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n =CATLIN, GEORGE, Mandan Customs.--O-Kee-Pa=, a Religious Ceremony; and\n other customs of the Mandans. With 13 Coloured Illustrations. Small\n 4to, 14_s._\n\n =COX, Sir G. W., and JONES, E. H., Popular Romances of the Middle\n Ages.= Third Edition. Crown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n =GASTER, M., Greeko-Slavonic Literature and its Relation to the\n Folk-Lore of Europe during the Middle Ages.= Large post 8vo, 7_s._\n 6_d._\n\n =GOMME, G. LAURENCE, Ethnology in Folk-Lore.= Crown 8vo, 2_s._ 6_d._\n (_Modern Science Series._)\n\n =Indian Folk-Lore.= _See class_ ORIENTAL.\n\n =LONG, J., Eastern Proverbs and Emblems Illustrating Old Truths.= Post\n 8vo, 6_s._ (_Tr\u00fcbner's Oriental Series._)\n\n =MACRITCHIE, DAVID, Fians, Fairies, and Picts.= With Illustrations.\n Large post 8vo, 7_s._ 6_d._\n\n =NORTHALL, G. F., English Folk Rhymes.= A Collection of Traditional\n Verses relating to Places and Persons, Customs, Superstitions, etc.\n Crown 8vo, 10_s._ 6_d._\n\n =Turkish Tales.--The History of the Forty Vezirs;= or, The Story of\n the Forty Morns and Eves. Translated from the Turkish by E. J. W.\n GIBB. Crown 8vo, 10_s._ 6_d._\n\n\n_III. OCCULT SCIENCES._\n\n =BAUGHAN, ROSA, The Influence of the Stars.= A Treatise on Astrology,\n Chiromancy, and Physiognomy. 8vo, 5_s._\n\n =BINET, A., and F\u00c9R\u00c9, C., Animal Magnetism.= Second Edition. Crown\n 8vo, 5_s._ (_I.S.S._)\n\n =COLLINS, MABEL, Through the Gates of Gold.= Mysticism. Small 8vo,\n 4_s._ 6_d._\n\n =COOK, LOUISA S., Geometrical Psychology;= or, The Science of\n Representation. An Abstract of the Theories and Diagrams of B. W.\n BETTS. Sixteen Plates. 8vo, 7_s._ 6_d._\n\n =COTTON, LOUISE, Palmistry and its Practical Uses.= Twelve Plates.\n Crown 8vo, 2_s._ 6_d._\n\n =D'ASSIER, ADOLPHE, Posthumous Humanity.= A Study of Phantoms, from\n the French. By COLONEL OLCOTT. With Appendix and Notes. Crown 8vo,\n 7_s._ 6_d._\n\n =DEWEY, J. H., The Way, the Truth, and the Life.= A Handbook of\n Christian Theosophy, Healing, and Psychic Culture. 10_s._ 6_d._\n\n =HARTMANN, FRANZ, White and Black Magic=; or, The Science of Finite\n and Infinite Life. Fourth Edition, revised. Crown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n =Life of Paracelsus, and the Substance of his Teachings.= New and\n Revised Edition. Post 8vo, 7_s._ 6_d._\n\n =Life and Doctrines of Jacob Boehme.= An Introduction to the Study of\n his Works. Post 8vo, 10_s._ 6_d._\n\n=HEIDENHAIN, RUDOLPH, Hypnotism, or Animal Magnetism.= With Preface by\nG. J. ROMANES. Second Edition. Small 8vo, 2_s._ 6_d._\n\n=HERMES, TRISMEGISTUS, Christian Neoplatonist=, Theological and\nPhilosophical Works of. Translated from the Greek by J. D. CHAMBERS.\n8vo, 7_s._ 6_d._\n\n =The Virgin of the World.= Translated and Edited by the Authors of\n 'The Perfect Way.' Illustrations. 4to, imitation parchment, 10_s._\n 6_d._\n\n=JENNINGS, HARGRAVE, The Indian Religions=; or, Results of the\nMysterious Buddhism. 8vo, 10_s._ 6_d._\n\n=KINGSFORD, ANNA, and MAITLAND, EDWARD, The Perfect Way=; or, The\nFinding of Christ. Third Edition, revised. Square 16mo, 7_s._ 6_d._\n\n=KINGSFORD, ANNA, Spiritual Hermeneutics of Astrology and Holy Writ.=\nWith Illustrations. 4to, parchment, 10_s._ 6_d._\n\n=MATHERS, S. L. M., The Key of Solomon the King.= Translated from\nancient MSS. in the British Museum. With Plates. Crown 4to, 25_s._\n\n =The Kaballah Unveiled.= Containing the Three Books of the Zohar,\n translated from the Chaldee and Hebrew Text. Post 8vo, 10_s._ 6_d._\n\n =The Tarot.= Its Occult Signification, use in Fortune-telling, and\n method of Play. With Pack of 78 Tarot Cards, 5_s._; without the Cards,\n 1_s._ 6_d._\n\n=OLCOTT, Colonel, Theosophy, Religion, and Occult Science.= With\nGlossary of Eastern Words. Crown 8vo, 7_s._ 6_d._\n\n=OWEN, ROBERT DALE, Footfalls on the Boundary of another World.= With\nNarrative Illustrations. Post 8vo, 7_s._ 6_d._\n\n =Debatable Land between this World and the Next.= With Illustrative\n Narrations. Second Edition. Crown 8vo, 7_s._ 6_d._\n\n =Threading My Way.= Twenty-seven Years of Autobiography. Crown 8vo,\n 7_s._ 6_d._\n\n=PREL, CARL DU, Philosophy of Mysticism.= Translated from the German by\nC. C. MASSEY. 2 vols 8vo, cloth, 25_s._\n\n =Psychical Research Society, Proceedings.= Irregular.\n\n=SERJEANT, W. C. ELDON, The Astrologer's Guide= (=Anima Astrologi\u00e6=).\n8vo, 7_s._ 6_d._\n\n=STREET, J. C., The Hidden Way across the Threshold=; or, The Mystery\nwhich hath been hidden for Ages and from Generations. With Plates.\nLarge 8vo, 15_s._\n\n=VAUGHAN, THOMAS, Magical Writings.= Edited, with Introduction and\nNotes, by A. E. WAITE. Small 4to, 10_s._ 6_d._\n\n=VINCENT, R. HARRY, The Elements of Hypnotism.= Crown 8vo, 5_s._\n\n=WAITE, A. E., Lives of Alchemystical Philosophers.= 8vo, 10_s._ 6_d._\n\n =Magical Writings of Thomas Vaughan.= Small 4to, 10_s._ 6_d._\n\n =Real History of the Rosicrucians.= With Illustrations. Crown 8vo,\n 7_s._ 6_d._\n\n =Mysteries of Magic.= A Digest of the Writings of Eliphas L\u00e9vi. New\n and revised Edition. With Illustrations. 8vo, 10_s._ 6_d._\n\n =The Occult Sciences.= Crown 8vo, 6_s._ #/\n\n\n_IV. PHILOSOPHY._\n\n(_See also_ RELIGION.)\n\n =ACLAND, Sir THOMAS DYKE, Knowledge, Duty, and Faith.= A Study of\n Principles Ancient and Modern. Crown 8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n =ALEXANDER, S., Moral Order and Progress=: An Analysis of Ethical\n Conceptions. Second Edition. Post 8vo, 14_s._ (_Philosophical\n Library._)\n\n =ALLEN, GRANT, Colour Sense=: Its Origin and Development. An Essay\n in Comparative Psychology. Second Edition. Post 8vo, 10_s._ 6_d._\n (_Philosophical Library._)\n\n =ARISTOTLE, The Nicomachean Ethics.= Translated by F. H. PETERS. Third\n Edition. Crown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n =BAIN, ALEXANDER, Mind and Body=: The Theories of their Relations.\n With Four Illustrations. Eighth Edition. Crown 8vo, 5_s._ (_I. S. S._)\n\n =BASTIAN, H. CHARLTON, Brain as an Organ of Mind.= With numerous\n Illustrations. Fourth Edition. Crown 8vo, 5_s._ (_I. S. S._)\n\n =COMTE, AUGUSTE, Positive Philosophy.= Translated and Condensed by\n HARRIET MARTINEAU. 2 vols. Third Edition. Large post 8vo, 15_s._\n\n =Catechism of Positive Religion.= From the French by R. CONGREVE.\n Third Edition. Crown 8vo, 2_s._ 6_d._\n\n=FICHTE, J. GOTTLIEB, Characteristics of the Present Age.= Translated\nby W. SMITH. Post 8vo, 6_s._\n\n =New Exposition of the Science of Knowledge.= Translated by A. E.\n KROEGER. 8vo, 12_s._\n\n =Science of Knowledge.= Translated by A. E. KROEGER. With an\n Introduction by Prof. W. T. HARRIS. 10_s._ 6_d._ (_Philosophical\n Library._)\n\n =Science of Rights.= Translated by A. E. KROEGER. With an Introduction\n by Prof. W. T. HARRIS. 12_s._ 6_d._ (_Philosophical Library._)\n\n =Science of Ethics.= Translated by W. T. HARRIS. 7_s._ 6_d._\n\n =Popular Works=: The Nature of the Scholar, The Vocation of\n the Scholar, The Vocation of Man, The Doctrine of Religion,\n Characteristics of the Present Age, Outlines of the Doctrine of\n Knowledge. With a Memoir by W. SMITH. 2 vols. 21_s._ (_Philosophical\n Library._)\n\n=GUICCIARDINI, F., Counsels and Reflections.= Translated by N. H.\nTHOMSON. Crown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n=HARTMANN, E. von, Philosophy of the Unconscious.= Translated by W. C.\nCOUPLAND. 3 vols. post 8vo, 31_s._ 6_d._ (_Philosophical Library._)\n\n=HEGEL, G. W. F., Lectures on the History of Philosophy.= Translated by\nE. S. HALDANE. 3 vols. post 8vo, each 12_s._\n\n=HINTON, JAMES, The Law-Breaker=, and =The Coming of the Law=. Edited\nby MARGARET HINTON. Crown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n =Mystery of Pain.= New Edition. Foolscap 8vo, 1_s._\n\n =Philosophy and Religion.= Selections from the MSS. of the late James\n Hinton. Edited by CAROLINE HADDON. Second Edition. Crown 8vo, 5_s._\n\n =The Larger Life. Studies in Hinton's Ethics.= By CAROLINE HADDON.\n Crown 8vo, 5_s._\n\n=HUGHES, H., Principles of Natural and Supernatural Morals. Vol. I.\nNatural Morals=. 8vo, 12_s._\n\n =The Theory of Inference.= 8vo, 10_s._ 6_d._\n\n=JORDAN, F., Character as seen in Body and Parentage.= With\nIllustrations. Third Edition. Small crown 8vo, 2_s._ 6_d._ net.\n\n=LEWES, GEORGE HENRY, Problems of Life and Mind.= 8vo.\n\n  Series I. =Foundations of a Creed.= 2 vols. 28_s._\n        II. =Physical Basis of Mind.= With Illustrations. 16_s._\n       III. 2 vols. 22_s._ 6_d._\n\n =The Physical Basis of Mind.= With Illustrations. New Edition. With\n Prefatory Note by Prof. J. SULLY. Large post 8vo, 10_s._ 6_d._\n\n=LANGE, Prof. F. A., History of Materialism, and Criticism of its\nPresent Importance.= Authorised Translation by ERNEST C. THOMAS. 3\nvols. post 8vo, 10_s._ 6_d._ each. (_Philosophical Library._)\n\n=LESLEY, J. P., Man's Origin and Destiny.= Sketched from the Platform\nof the Physical Sciences. Second Edition. Crown 8vo, 7_s._ 6_d._\n\n=LUBBOCK, Sir John, Senses, Instincts, and Intelligence of Animals.=\nWith special reference to Insects. With 100 Illustrations. Third\nEdition. Crown 8vo, 5_s._ (_I. S. S._)\n\n=LUYS, J., Brain and its Functions.= With Illustrations. Third Edition.\nCrown 8vo, 5_s._ (_I. S. S._)\n\n=MAUDSLEY, H., Body and Will.= An Essay concerning Will, in its\nMetaphysical, Physiological, and Pathological Aspects. 8vo, 12_s._\n\n =Responsibility in Mental Disease.= Fourth Edition. Crown 8vo, 5_s._\n (_I. S. S._)\n\n =Supernaturalism.--Natural Causes and Supernatural Seemings.= Second\n Edition. Crown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n=MILL, JOHN STUART, Auguste Comte and Positivism.= Third Edition. Post\n8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._ (_Philosophical Library._)\n\n=MIVART, ST. GEORGE, On Truth.= 8vo, 16_s._\n\n =Origin of Human Reason.= 8vo, 10_s._ 6_d._\n\n=MOORE, AUBREY L., Essays, Scientific and Philosophical.= With Memoir\nof the Author. Crown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n=MORSELLI, Prof. H., Suicide.= An Essay on Comparative Moral\nStatistics. Second Edition. With Diagrams. Crown 8vo, 5_s._ (_I. S. S._)\n\n=RIBOT, Prof. T., English Psychology.= Crown 8vo, 7_s._ 6_d._\n\n =Diseases of Memory.= An Essay in the Positive Psychology. Third\n Edition. Crown 8vo, 5_s._ (_I. S. S._)\n\n=RIEHL, Dr. A., Introduction to the Theory of Science and Metaphysics.=\nTranslated by Dr. ARTHUR FAIRBANKS. Post 8vo, 9_s._ (_Philosophical\nLibrary._)\n\n=ROMANES, G. J., Mental Evolution in Man.= Origin of the Human Faculty.\n8vo, 14_s._\n\n =Mental Evolution in Animals.= With Posthumous Essay on Instinct by\n CHARLES DARWIN. 8vo, 12_s._\n\n =Animal Intelligence.= Fourth Edition. Crown 8vo, 5_s._ (_I. S. S._)\n\n=SCHOPENHAUER, ARTHUR, The World as Will and Idea.= From the German. By\nR. R. HALDANE and J. KEMP. Third Edition. 3 vols. post 8vo, 12_s._ each\nvol.\n\n=SIMCOX, EDITH, Natural Law.= An Essay in Ethics. Second Edition. Post\n8vo, 10_s._ 6_d._ (_Philosophical Library._)\n\n=SULLY, JAMES, Illusions.= A Psychological Study. Third Edition. Crown\n8vo, 5_s._ (_I. S. S._)\n\n=WEDGWOOD, JULIA, The Moral Ideal.= An Historic Study. Second Edition.\n8vo, 9_s._\n\n\n_V. HISTORY._\n\nBIOGRAPHY.\n\n =Alchemystical Philosophers=, Lives of. With a Bibliography of\n Alchemy. By A. E. WAITE. 8vo, 10_s._ 6_d._\n\n =ANSELM, St., Archbishop of Canterbury, and Primate of the Britons=,\n Life and Times of. By MARTIN RULE. 2 vols. 8vo, 32_s._\n\n =APPLETON, Dr.=, His Life and Literary Relics. By J. H. APPLETON and\n A. H. SAYCE. Post 8vo, 10_s._ 6_d._ (_Philosophical Library._)\n\n =BACON, FRANCIS=, Life and Times of. By JAMES SPEDDING. 2 vols. post\n 8vo, 21_s._\n\n =BETTERTON, THOMAS.= By R. W. LOWE. Crown 8vo, 2_s._ 6_d._ (_Eminent\n Actors._)\n\n =BLAVATSKY, Madame=, Incidents in the Life of. By A. P. SINNETT. With\n Portrait. 8vo, 10_s._ 6_d._\n\n =BOEHME, JACOB=, Life and Doctrines of. An Introduction to the Study\n of his Works. By FRANZ HARTMANN. Post 8vo, 10_s._ 6_d._\n\n =BRADSHAW, HENRY.= A Memoir. By G. W. PROTHERO. With Portrait and\n _Fac-simile_. 8vo, 16_s._\n\n =Brave Men's Footsteps.= A Book of Example and Anecdote for Young\n People. By the Editor of 'Men who have Risen.' Illustrations by C.\n DOYLE. Ninth Edition. Crown 8vo, 2_s._ 6_d._\n\n =BRUNO, GIORDANO, the Nolan=, Life of. By I. FRITH. Revised by\n Professor MORIZ CARRIERE. With Portrait. Post 8vo, 14_s._\n\n =BURKE, the Very Rev. T. N.=, Life of. By W. J. FITZPATRICK. With\n Portrait. 2 vols. 8vo, 30_s_. New and cheaper Edition, 7_s._ 6_d._\n\n =BURROWS, HENRY WILLIAM.= Memorials. By E. WORDSWORTH. With Portrait.\n Crown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n =CAXTON, WILLIAM, England's First Printer=, Biography and Typography\n of. By W. BLADES. 8vo, hand-made paper, imitation old bevelled\n binding, \u00a31 1_s._ Cheap Edition, Crown 8vo, 5_s._\n\n =DAWSON, GEORGE=, Biographical Lectures. Edited by GEORGE ST. CLAIR.\n Third Edition. Large crown 8vo, 7_s._ 6_d._\n\n =DICKENS, CHARLES, and the Stage=; or, A Record of his Connection with\n the Drama. By T. EDGAR PEMBERTON. Crown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n =DIGBY, Sir EVERARD=, The Life of a Conspirator, a Biography of. By\n one of his Descendants. With Portrait. Demy 8vo, 9_s._\n\n =DORA, Sister.= A Biography. By MARGARET LONSDALE. With Portrait.\n Thirtieth Edition. Small 8vo, 2_s._ 6_d._\n\n =DRUMMOND, THOMAS=, Life and Letters of, Under-Secretary in Ireland,\n 1835-40. By R. BARRY O'BRIEN. 8vo, 14_s._\n\n =DUNCAN, FRANCIS, C.B., R.A., M.P.=, Life of. By Rev. HENRY BIRDWOOD\n BLOGG. With Introduction by the BISHOP OF CHESTER. Crown 8vo, 3_s._\n 6_d._\n\n =EDMUND, St., of Canterbury=, Life. From Original Sources. By WILFRID\n WALLACE. With 5 Illustrations and Map. 8vo, 15_s._\n\n =EMERSON, RALPH WALDO=, Talks with. By C. J. WOODBURY. Crown 8vo, 5_s._\n\n =Emerson at Home and Abroad.= By M. D. CONWAY. With Portrait. Post\n 8vo, 10_s._ 6_d._ (_Philosophical Library._)\n\n =Episodes in the Lives of Men, Women, and Lovers.= By EDITH SIMCOX,\n Crown 8vo, 7_s._ 6_d._\n\n =FICHTE, JOHANN GOTTLIEB=, Memoir of. By W. SMITH. Second Edition.\n Post 8vo, 4_s._\n\n =FORBES, Bishop.= A Memoir. By DONALD J. MACKAY. With Portrait and\n Map. Crown 8vo, 7_s._ 6_d._\n\n =FRANCIS, S., of Assisi=, History of. By Abb\u00e9 L\u00c9ON LE MONNIER. With a\n Preface by Cardinal VAUGHAN. 8vo, 16_s._\n\n =FRANCIS XAVIER, the Apostle of the Indies.= By MARY HALL MCLEAN.\n Crown 8vo, 6_s._ net.\n\n =From World to Cloister=; or, My Noviciate. By 'BERNARD.' Crown 8vo,\n 5_s._\n\n =GARRICK, DAVID=. By JOSEPH KNIGHT. With Portrait. Demy 8vo, 10_s._\n 6_d._ net.\n\n =GILBERT, Mrs.= Autobiography, and other Memorials. Edited by JOSIAH\n GILBERT. Fifth Edition. Crown 8vo, 7_s._ 6_d._\n\n =GLADSTONE, WILLIAM EWART=, Life of. Told by Himself in Speeches and\n Public Letters. By H. J. LEECH. Crown 8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n =GOOCH, Sir DANIEL, Bart.=, Diaries of. With an Introductory Notice\n by Sir THEODORE MARTIN, K.C.B. With 2 Portraits and an Illustration.\n Crown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n =GORDON, Major-General C. G.=, His journals at Khartoum. Printed from\n the Original MSS., with Introduction and Notes by A. EGMONT HAKE.\n Portrait, 2 Maps, and 30 Illustrations. 2 vols. 8vo, 21_s._ Cheap\n Edition, 6_s._\n\n =Gordon's Last Journal=: A _Fac-simile_ of the Last Journal received\n in England from GENERAL GORDON. Reproduced by photo-lithography.\n Imperial 4to, \u00a33 3_s._\n\n=GOWER, Lord RONALD, My Reminiscences.= New Edition. Post 8vo, 7_s._\n6_d._\n\n=HAMILTON, ARTHUR, B.A.=, of Trinity College, Cambridge. Memoirs of.\nCrown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n=HINTON, JAMES=, Life and Letters of. With an Introduction by Sir W.\nW. GULL, and Portrait engraved on steel by C. H. JEENS. Sixth Edition.\nCrown 8vo, 8_s._ 6_d._\n\n=JOHNSON, SAMUEL, Lives of the Most Eminent English Poets.= Edited,\nwith Notes and Introduction, by ARTHUR WAUGH, and with 30 Portraits. 6\nvols. foolscap 8vo, \u00a31 16_s._\n\n=KEMPIS, THOMAS \u00c0.= Notes of a Visit to the Scenes in which the\nLife of Thomas \u00e0 Kempis was spent. By F. R. CRUISE. With numerous\nIllustrations. 8vo, 12_s._\n\n=KHAMA.= The Story of an African Chief. By Mrs. WYNDHAM KNIGHT-BRUCE.\nFourth Edition. 16mo, 2_s._\n\n=K\u00d6R\u00d6S, ALEXANDER COSMA DE=, Life and Works of, between 1819 and\n1842. With a short notice of all his Works and Essays, from original\ndocuments. By THEODORE DUKA. Post 8vo, 9_s._ (_Tr\u00fcbner's Oriental\nSeries._)\n\n=LAUD, WILLIAM=, sometime Archbishop of Canterbury. By A. C. BENSON.\nCrown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n =Life of Archbishop Laud.= By a Romish Recusant. 8vo, 15_s._\n\n=LESLIE, FRED.=, Recollections of. By W. L. VINCENT. With\nIllustrations. 2 vols. 8vo, 30_s._\n\n=LESSING=: His Life and Writings. By JAMES SIME. New and cheaper\nEdition. 2 vols. With portraits. Post 8vo, 12_s._ (_Philosophical\nLibrary._)\n\n=LONGFELLOW, HENRY WADSWORTH=, Life of. By his Brother SAMUEL\nLONGFELLOW. With Portraits and Illustrations. 3 vols. 8vo, 42_s._\n\n=LOWDER, CHARLES.= A Biography. By the Author of 'St. Teresa' Twelfth\nEdition. With Portrait. Crown 8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n=LYTTON, Lord=, Life, Letters, and Literary Remains of Edward Bulwer,\nLord Lytton. By the Earl of LYTTON. With Portraits, Illustrations, and\n_Fac-similes_. 8vo. Vols. I. and II., 32_s._\n\n=MACKLIN, CHARLES.= By EDWARD ABBOTT PARRY. Crown 8vo, 2_s._ 6_d._\n(_Eminent Actors._)\n\n=MACKONOCHIE, ALEXANDER HERIOT.= A Memoir. By E. A. T. Edited, with\nPreface, by E. F. RUSSELL. With Portrait and Views. Large crown 8vo,\n7_s._ 6_d._ Cheap Edition, crown 8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n=MACREADY, WILLIAM CHARLES.= By WILLIAM ARCHER. Crown 8vo, 2_s._ 6_d._\n(_Eminent Actors._)\n\n=MARIE ANTOINETTE=, Last Days of. An Historical Sketch. By Lord RONALD\nGOWER. With Portrait and _Fac-similes_. Foolscap 4to, 10_s._ 6_d._\n\n =Marie Antoinette and Her Children, the Dauphin and the Duchesse\n D'Angoul\u00eame=, The Prison Life of. By M. C. BISHOP. New and revised\n Edition. With Portrait. Crown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n=MITCHEL, JOHN=, Life of. By W. DILLON. With Portrait. 2 vols. 8vo,\n21_s._\n\n=MOHL, JULIUS and MARY=, Letters and Recollections of. By M. C. M.\nSIMPSON. With Portraits and 2 Illustrations. 8vo, 15_s._\n\n=MOLTKE (General von).= Letters to His Wife and other Relatives. The\nonly complete Edition in any language. With an Introduction by SIDNEY\nWHITMAN. Portraits, etc. 2 vols. 8vo, cloth, \u00a31 10_s._ 1896.\n\n  \"Of the most surpassing interest.\"\n\n=MORRIS, GOUVERNEUR, Minister of the United States to France=, Diary\nand Letters of. By ANNE C. MORRIS. With Portraits. 2 vols. 8vo, 30_s._\n\n=MOTLEY, JOHN LOTHROP.= A Memoir. By OLIVER WENDELL HOLMES. Crown 8vo,\n6_s._\n\n=MUNRO, Major-General Sir THOMAS.= A Memoir. By Sir A. J. ARBUTHNOT.\nCrown 8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n=NEWMAN, JOHN HENRY=, the Founder of Modern Anglicanism, and a Cardinal\nof the Roman Church. By WILFRID MEYNELL. Crown 8vo, 2_s._ 6_d._\n\n=NUN, A=: Her Friends and Her Order. Being a Sketch of the Life of\nMother Mary Xaveria Fallon. By KATHERINE TYNAN. Crown 8vo, 5_s._\n\n=O'CONNELL, Count=, The Last Colonel of the Irish Brigade, and Old\nIrish Life at Home and Abroad, 1745-1833. By Mrs. MORGAN J. O'CONNELL.\n2 vols. 8vo, 25_s._\n\n=OWEN, ROBERT DALE=, Threading my Way. Twenty-seven Years of\nAutobiography. Crown 8vo, 7_s._ 6_d._\n\n=PARACELSUS=, Life of, and the Substance of His Teachings. By FRANZ\nHARTMANN. New and Revised Edition. Post 8vo, 7_s._ 6_d._\n\n=PLUTARCH.= His Life, His Lives, and His Morals. By Archbishop TRENCH.\nSecond Edition enlarged. Foolscap 8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n=RAWLE, Bishop.= A Memoir. By G. MATHER and C. J. BLAGG. Large crown\n8vo, 7_s._ 6_d._\n\n=ROBERTSON, F. W.=, Life and Letters of. Edited by STOPFORD BROOKE.\n\n    I. Library Edition, with Portrait. 8vo, 12_s._\n   II. With Portrait. 2 vols. crown 8vo, 7_s._ 6_d._\n  III. Popular Edition. Crown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n=RUPERT of the Rhine.= A Biographical Sketch of the Life of Prince\nRupert. By Lord RONALD GOWER. With 3 Portraits. Crown 8vo, buckram,\n6_s._\n\n=SELWYN, Bishop, of New Zealand and of Lichfield.= A Sketch of his\nLife and Work, with further Gleanings from his Letters, Sermons, and\nSpeeches. By Canon CURTEIS. Large crown 8vo, 7_s._ 6_d._\n\n=SHELLEY, PERCY BYSSHE=, Life of. By EDWARD DOWDEN, LL.D. With\nPortrait. 12_s._ net.\n\n=SKINNER, JAMES.= A Memoir. By the Author of 'Charles Lowder.' With\nPreface by the Rev. Canon CARTER, and Portrait. Large crown 8vo, 7_s._\n6_d._ Cheap Edition, crown 8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n=SPINOZA, BENEDICT DE=, Life, Correspondence, and Ethics of. By R.\nWILLIS. 8vo, 21_s._\n\n=TAYLOR, REYNELL, C.B., C.S.I.= A Biography. By E. GAMBIER PARRY. With\nPortrait and Map. 8vo, 14_s._\n\n=TENNYSON, Poet, Philosopher, and Idealist.= By J. C. WALTERS. With\nPortrait. 8vo, 12_s._\n\n=TRENCH, Archbishop=, Letters and Memorials of. By the Author of\n'Charles Lowder.' With 2 Portraits. 2 vols. 8vo, 21_s._\n\n=TRENCH, Mrs. RICHARD=, Remains of the late. Being Selections from her\nJournals, Letters, and other Papers. Edited by her Son, Archbishop\nTRENCH. New and cheaper Edition. With Portraits. 8vo, 6_s._\n\n=Wells Wills=, arranged in Parishes and Annotated. By F. W. WEAVER.\n8vo, 10_s._ 6_d._\n\n=WILBERFORCE, Bishop, of Oxford and Winchester=, Life of. By his Son.\nCrown 8vo, 9_s._\n\n=WOLSELEY, WILLIAM, Admiral of the Red Squadron=, Memoir of. By MARY C.\nINNES. 8vo, 9_s._ net.\n\n\nHERALDRY.\n\n =Heraldry=, English and Foreign. By R. C. JENKINS. With a Dictionary\n of Heraldic Terms and 156 Illustrations. Small 8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n\nHISTORY.\n\n =BAIN, R. NISBET, Gustavus III. and His Contemporaries, 1746-1792.=\n From original documents. 2 vols. post 8vo, 21_s._ net.\n\n =BAIRD, HENRY M., The Huguenots and the Revocation of the Edict of\n Nantes.= With Maps. 2 vols, 8vo, 30_s._\n\n =BANCROFT, K. H., Popular History of the Mexican People.= 8vo, 15_s._\n\n =BARING-GOULD, S., Germany, Present and Past.= New and cheaper\n Edition. Large crown 8vo, 7_s._ 6_d._\n\n =BRIDGETT, T. E., Blunders and Forgeries.= Historical Essays. Crown\n 8vo, 6_s._\n\n =BRYANT, SOPHIE, Celtic Ireland.= With 3 Maps. Crown 8vo, 5_s._\n\n =BRYCE, JAMES, Two Centuries of Irish History.= With Introduction by\n JAS. BRYCE, M.P. 8vo, 16_s._\n\n =GREVILLE, The Hon. E., The Year-Book of Australia.= Published\n Annually. 8vo, 10_s._ 6_d._ net.\n\n =DENVIR, JOHN, The Irish in Britain from the Earliest Times to the\n Fall and Death of Parnell.= By JOHN DENVIR. Crown 8vo, 2_s._ 6_d._\n\n =DJEMALEDDIN, BEY, Sultan Murad V.= The Turkish Dynastic Mystery,\n 1876-95. With 6 Portraits. Crown 8vo, 9_s._ net.\n\n =DURUY, VICTOR, The History of Greece.= With Introduction by Prof. J.\n P. MAHAFFY. Maps and many Illustrations, some coloured. 8 vols. super\n royal 8vo, \u00a38 8_s._\n\n =Egypt.= _See_ ORIENTAL.\n\n =FREEMAN, E. A., Lectures to American Audiences.= I. The English\n People in its Three Homes. II. Practical Bearings of General European\n History. Post 8vo, 9_s._\n\n =GARDINER, SAMUEL R.=, and =MULLINGER, J. BASS, Introduction to the\n Study of English History.= Third and enlarged Edition. Post 8vo, 7_s._\n 6_d._ net.\n\n =HILLEBRAND, KARL, France and the French in the Second Half of the\n Nineteenth Century.= Translated from the Third German Edition. Post\n 8vo, 10_s._ 6_d._\n\n =HOLST, H. von, The French Revolution.= 2 vols. crown 8vo, cloth,\n 18_s._\n\n =HOPE, Mrs., The First Divorce of Henry VIII.= As told in the State\n Papers. Crown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n =India.= _See_ ORIENTAL.\n\n =JANSSEN, JOHANNES, History of the German People at the Close of the\n Middle Ages.= Translated by M. A. MITCHELL and A. M. CHRISTIE. 2 vols.\n 8vo, 25_s._\n\n =KINGSFORD, W., The History of Canada.= By W. KINGSFORD. Vol.\n i. 1608-1682; vol. ii. 1679-1725; vol. iii. 1726-1756; vol. iv.\n 1756-1763; vol. v. 1763-1775; vol. vi. 1776-1779; vol. vii. 1779-1807;\n vol. viii. 1808-1815. With Maps. 8vo, 15_s._ each volume.\n\n =LELAND, C. G., The Gypsies.= Crown 8vo, 10_s._ 6_d._\n\n =LEONARD, Major ARTHUR G., How We Made Rhodesia.= Second Edition.\n Crown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n =LIVY.= Discourses on the First Decade of Titus Livius. From the\n Italian of NICCOL\u00d2 MACHIAVELLI. By N. HILL THOMPSON. Large crown 8vo,\n 12_s._\n\n =MOORE, AUBREY L., Lectures and Papers on the History of the\n Reformation in England and on the Continent.= 8vo, 16_s._\n\n =O'CLERY, THE, The Making of Italy, 1856-1870.= 8vo, 16_s._\n\n =O'HAGAN, JOHN, Joan of Arc.= An Historical Essay. Crown 8vo, 3_s._\n 6_d._\n\n =PARAVICINI, FRANCES DE, The Early History of Balliol College.= 8vo,\n 12_s._\n\n =PASTOR, Dr. LUDWIG, The History of the Popes.= Translated from the\n German by FREDERICK J. ANTROBUS. Vols. III. and IV. 8vo, 24_s._ net.\n\n =PEET, Rev. STEPHEN D., Prehistoric America.= Vol. I., The Mound\n Builders. Illustrated. Crown 8vo, 21_s._ net.\n\n =REINDORF, Rev. CARL CHRISTIAN, History of the Gold Coast and Asante.=\n Demy 8vo, 9_s._ net.\n\n =SARJENT, Lt. HERBERT H., Napoleon Bonaparte's First Campaign.= Crown\n 8vo, 6_s._\n\n =TRENCH, Archbishop, Gustavus Adolphus in Germany, and other Lectures\n on the Thirty Years' War.= Third Edition, enlarged. Foolscap 8vo, 4_s._\n\n =WALPOLE, C. G., Short History of Ireland.= With 5 Maps and\n Appendices. Third Edition. Crown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n =WRIGHT, THOMAS, Early Britain--The Celt, the Roman, and the Saxon.= A\n History of the Early Inhabitants of Britain down to the Conversion of\n the Anglo-Saxons to Christianity. Corrected and Enlarged Edition. With\n nearly 300 Engravings. Crown 8vo, 9_s._\n\n\nTRAVELS, VOYAGES, GUIDE-BOOKS, ETC.\n\n =AUBERTIN, J. J., Wanderings and Wonderings.= With Portrait, Map, and\n 7 Illustrations. Crown 8vo, 8_s._ 6_d._\n\n =By Order of the Sun to Chili.= With Illustrations. Crown 8vo, 5_s._\n\n=BEVAN, THEODORE F., Toil, Travel, and Discovery in British New\nGuinea.= With 5 Maps. Large crown 8vo, 7_s._ 6_d._\n\n=BRADSHAW'S Guide.= Dictionary of Mineral Waters, Climatic Health\nResorts, Sea Baths, and Hydropathic Establishments. With a Map, 3_s._\n6_d._; without Map, 2_s._ 6_d._\n\n=BROWN, HORATIO F., Venetian Studies.= Crown 8vo, 7_s._ 6_d._\n\n=BURGESS, W. W., Bits of Old Chelsea.= 40 splendid Etchings. With\nLetterpress Descriptions by LIONEL JOHNSON and RICHARD LE GALLIENNE.\nOnly 100 copies printed. Folio, \u00a310 10_s._ net.\n\n=CORNEY, P., Early Northern Pacific Voyages (1813-1818).= With Preface\nby Prof. W. D. ALEXANDER. Crown 8vo, 7_s._ 6_d._\n\n=CROKER T. CROFTON, A Walk from London to Fulham.= Enlarged and\nRe-written by BEATRICE E. HORNE. With Illustrations. 7_s._ 6_d._ net.\n\n=GRIMBLE, AUGUSTUS, The Deer Forests of Scotland.= Illustrated by A.\nTHORBURN. 4to, \u00a32 10_s._ net.\n\n=HAECKEL, Prof. ERNST, A Visit to Ceylon.= Post 8vo, 7_s._ 6_d._\n\n=HEILPRIN, A., Bermuda Islands.= 8vo, 18_s._\n\n=HENDRIKS, DOM LAURENCE, The London Charterhouse: Its Monks and its\nMartyrs.= Illustrated. 8vo, 15_s._\n\n=HORNADAY, W. T., Two Years in a Jungle.= With Illustrations. 8vo,\n21_s._\n\n=IM THURN, EVERARD F., Among the Indians of Guiana.= Sketches,\nchiefly Anthropologic, from the Interior of British Guiana. With 53\nIllustrations and a Map. 8vo, 18_s._\n\n=JOHNSTON, H. H., The Kilima-Njaro Expedition.= A Record of Scientific\nExploration in Eastern Equatorial Africa. With 6 Maps and 80\nIllustrations. 8vo, 21_s._\n\n =History of a Slave.= With 47 Illustrations. Square 8vo, 6_s._\n\n=KRAUS, J., Carlsbad and its Natural Healing Agents.= With Notes by\nJOHN T. WALLERS. Third Edition. Crown 8vo, 6_s._ 6_d._\n\n=LELAND, C. G., Fu-Sang=; or, The Discovery of America by Chinese\nBuddhist Priests in the Fifth Century. Crown 8vo, 7_s._ 6_d._\n\n=MARKHAM, Captain ALBERT HASTINGS, The Great Frozen Sea.= A Personal\nNarrative of the Voyage of the _Alert_ during the Arctic Expedition of\n1875-76. With Illustrations and Map. Sixth and cheaper Edition. Crown\n8vo, 6_s._\n\n=MITCHELL, E. H., Forty Days in the Holy Land.= With 6 Illustrations.\nCrown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n=MULHALL, M. G. and E. T., Handbook of the River Plate=, comprising\nthe Argentine Republic, Uruguay, and Paraguay. With Railway Map. Sixth\nEdition. Crown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n=OATES, FRANK, Matabele Land and the Victoria Falls=: A Naturalist's\nwanderings in the interior of South Africa. Edited by C. G. OATES. With\nnumerous Illustrations and 4 Maps. 8vo, 21_s._\n\n=PIDGEON, DAVID, Venice.= With Frontispiece after TURNER. Small crown\n8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._ net.\n\n=RENDELL, J. M., Handbook of the Island of Madeira.= With Plan and Map.\nSecond Edition. Foolscap 8vo, 1_s._ 6_d._\n\n=REYNOLDS-BALL, E. A., Mediterranean Winter Resorts.= With Maps and\nDiagrams. Third Edition. Foolscap 8vo, 5_s._\n\n=ROLFE, E. N., and INGLEBY, H., Naples in 1888.= With Illustrations.\nCrown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n=ROUTLEDGE, Canon C. F., History of St. Martin's Church, Canterbury.=\nCrown 8vo, 5_s._\n\n=ST. CLAIR, GEORGE, Buried Cities and Bible Countries.= Large crown\n8vo, 7_s._ 6_d._\n\n=SAMUELSON, JAMES, Bulgaria, Past and Present=: Historical, Political,\nand Descriptive. With Map and numerous Illustrations. 8vo, 10_s._ 6_d._\n\n=STODDARD, CHARLES AUGUSTUS, Cruising among the Caribbees.= Summer Days\nin Winter Months. With Illustrations. 8vo, 9_s._\n\n=STRACHEY, Sir JOHN, India.= With Map. New Edition. Crown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n=TAYLOR, Canon ISAAC, Egypt.= Leaves from an Egyptian Note-Book. Crown\n8vo, 5_s._\n\n=VINCENT, FRANK, Around and About South America=: Twenty Months of\nQuest and Query. With Maps, Plans, and 54 Illustrations. Medium 8vo,\n21_s._\n\n=Wales.--Through North Wales with a Knapsack.= By Four\nSchoolmistresses. With a Sketch Map. Small 8vo, 2_s._ 6_d._\n\n=WARD, BERNARD, History of St. Edmund's College, Old Hall (Ware).= With\nIllustrations. 8vo, 10_s._ 6_d._\n\n=WRIGHT, G. F., and APHAM, W., Greenland Icefields, and Life in the\nNorth Atlantic.= With Maps and Illustrations. Crown 8vo, 7_s._ 6_d._\n\n=YOUNG, ROSALIND AMELIA, Mutiny of the 'Bounty,' and Story of Pitcairn\nIsland: 1790-1894.= By a NATIVE DAUGHTER. Third Edition, Illustrated.\nCrown 8vo, 5_s._\n\n\n_VI.--SOCIOLOGY._\n\nEDUCATION.\n\n =BAIN, ALEXANDER, Education as a Science.= Seventh Edition. Crown 8vo,\n 5_s._ (_I. S. S._)\n\n =BROWNING, OSCAR, Introduction to the History of Educational\n Theories.= Second Edition. 3_s._ 6_d._ (_Education Library._)\n\n =GALLOWAY, R., Scientific and Technical Education=; or, How the\n Inductive Sciences are taught, and how they ought to be taught. 8vo,\n 10_s._ 6_d._\n\n =HAECKEL, Prof. E., Freedom in Science and Teaching.= With a Prefatory\n Note by Prof. T. H. HUXLEY. Crown 8vo, 5_s._\n\n =HAWTREY, MABEL, The Co-Education of the Sexes.= Crown 8vo, 2_s._\n 6_d._ net.\n\n =LESSING, G. E., Education of the Human Race.= From the German. By F.\n W. ROBERTSON. Fourth Edition, revised. Foolscap 8vo, 2_s._ 6_d._\n\n =LANDON, JOSEPH, School Management.= Including a General View of the\n Work of Education, Organisation, and Discipline. Eighth Edition. Crown\n 8vo, 6_s._ (_Education Library._)\n\n =MAGNUS, Sir PHILIP, Industrial Education.= 6_s._ (_Education\n Library._)\n\n =MAHAFFY, Prof., Old Greek Education.= Second Edition. 3_s._ 6_d._\n (_Education Library._)\n\n =MASON, CHARLOTTE M., Home Education.= A course of Lectures to Ladies.\n New Edition. 8vo, 6_s._\n\n =Parents and Children.= 8vo. 6_s._\n\n=Our Public Schools=: Eton, Harrow, Winchester, Rugby, Westminster,\nMarlborough, and the Charterhouse. Crown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n=Parents' Review.= Monthly. 6_d._\n\n=PLUMPTRE, C. J., Lectures on Elocution.= Delivered at King's College.\nFifth Edition. Illustrated. Post 8vo, 15_s._\n\n\nLAW.\n\n =AMOS, Prof. SHELDON, History and Principles of the Civil Law\n of Rome.= An Aid to the Study of Scientific and Comparative\n Jurisprudence. 8vo, 16_s._\n\n =Science of Law.= Seventh Edition. Crown 8vo, 5_s._ (_I. S. S._)\n\n=BENTHAM, JEREMY, Theory of Legislation as Enunciated by Bentham.=\nTranslated from the French of Etienne Dumont by R. HILDRETH. Seventh\nEdition. Post 8vo, 7_s._ 6_d._ New and cheaper Edition. Crown 8vo,\n3_s._ 6_d._ (_Paternoster Library._)\n\n=BERTILLON, ALPHONSE, Signaletic Instructions, including the Theory\nand Practice of Anthropometrical Identification.= Translated under the\nSupervision of Major R. W. MCCLAUGHTY. Illustrated. Large 8vo, half\nmorocco, \u00a31 10_s._\n\n=FIELD, D. D., Outlines of an International Code.= Second Edition.\nRoyal 8vo, \u00a32 2_s._\n\n=FOSTER, ROGER, Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States,\nHistorical, and Juridical.= Vol. 1, royal 8vo, \u00a31 4_s._ net.\n\n=HALLECK'S International Law=; or, Rules Regulating the Intercourse\nof States in Peace and War. Third Edition, thoroughly revised by Sir\nSHERSTON BAKER, Bart. 2 vols. 8vo, 38_s._\n\n=HOLST, H. von, The Constitutional Law of the United States of\nAmerica.= Translated by ALFRED BISHOP MASON. Royal 8vo, cloth, 10_s._\n6_d._\n\n =The Constitutional History of the United States.= Translated by\n LALOR. 8 vols., 8vo, cloth. Vols. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 7, 18_s._ each;\n vols. 6 and 8, 12_s._ 6_d._ each.\n\n=JENKINS, E., and RAYMOND, J., Architect's Legal Handbook.= Fourth\nEdition, revised. Crown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n=LEVI, Prof. LEONE, International Law, with Materials for a Code of\nInternational Law.= Crown 8vo, 5_s._ (_I. S. S._)\n\n=SALAMAN, J. S., Trade Marks: their Registration and Protection.= Crown\n8vo, 5_s._\n\n\nPOLITICS, LABOUR, SOCIALISM, FINANCE, ETC.\n\n =AMOS, Prof. SHELDON, Science of Politics.= Third Edition. Crown 8vo,\n 5_s._ (_I. S. S._)\n\n =BAGEHOT, WALTER, Physics and Politics=; or, The Application of the\n Principles of 'Natural Selection' and 'Inheritance' to Political\n Society. New Edition. Crown 8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._ (Paternoster_ Library._)\n\n =The English Constitution. New Edition.= Crown 8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._\n (_Paternoster Library._)\n\n =Lombard Street.= A Description of the Money Market. New Edition. With\n Notes, bringing the work up to the present time, by E. JOHNSTONE.\n Crown 8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._ (_Paternoster Library._)\n\n =Essays on Parliamentary Reform.= New Edition. Crown 8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._\n (_Paternoster Library._)\n\n=BESANT, Sir WALTER, and Others, The Poor in Great Cities.= With\nIllustrations by HUGH THOMPSON, etc. 8vo, 12_s._\n\n=BRENTANO, LUJO, History and Development of Guilds, and the Origin of\nTrade Unions.= 8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n=BRYCE, J., Handbook of Home Rule.= Being Articles on the Irish\nQuestion. Second Edition. Crown 8vo, 1_s._ 6_d._; paper covers, 1_s._\n\n=CLAPPERTON, JANE H., Scientific Meliorism, and the Evolution of\nHappiness.= Large crown 8vo, 8_s._ 6_d._\n\n=DAVITT, MICHAEL, Speech before the Special Commission.= Crown 8vo,\n5_s._\n\n=FAIRBANKS, ARTHUR, Introduction to Sociology.= Post 8vo, 7_s._ 6_d._\n(_Philosophical Library._)\n\n=GEORGE, HENRY, Progress and Poverty.= An Inquiry into the Causes\nof Industrial Depressions, and of Increase of Want with Increase of\nWealth; the Remedy. Fifth Edition. Post 8vo, 7_s._ 6_d._ Cabinet\nEdition, crown 8vo, 2_s._ 6_d_. Cheap Edition, limp cloth, 1_s._ 6_d._;\npaper covers, 1_s._\n\n =Protection or Free Trade.= An Examination of the Tariff Question,\n with especial regard to the interests of Labour. Second Edition. Crown\n 8vo, 5_s._ Cheap Edition, limp cloth, 1_s._ 6_d._; paper covers, 1_s._\n\n =Social Problems.= Fourth Thousand. Crown 8vo, 5_s._ Cheap Edition,\n limp cloth, 1_s._ 6_d._; paper covers, 1_s._\n\n =A Perplexed Philosopher.= Being an Examination of Mr. Herbert\n Spencer's various utterances on the Land Question, etc. Crown 8vo,\n 5_s._ Cheap Edition, limp cloth, 1_s._ 6_d._; paper covers, 1_s._\n\n=GRAHAM, WILLIAM, Socialism New and Old.= Crown 8vo, 5_s._ (_I. S. S._)\n\n =The Social Problem, in its Economic, Moral and Political Aspects.=\n 8vo, 14_s._\n\n=GREG, W. R., Political Problems for our Age and Country.= 8vo, 10_s._\n6_d._\n\n=HAGGARD, H. RIDER, Cetewayo and His White Neighbours.= Crown 8vo,\n3_s._ 6_d._ (_Paternoster Library._)\n\n=HOPKINS, ELLICE, Work amongst Working Men.= Sixth Edition. Crown 8vo,\n3_s._ 6_d._\n\n=HUMBOLDT, Baron W. von, The Sphere and Duties of Government.= From the\nGerman, by J. COULTHARD. Post 8vo, 5_s._\n\n=JEVONS, W. STANLEY, Money and the Mechanism of Exchange.= Ninth\nEdition. Crown 8vo, 5_s._ (_I. S. S._)\n\n=KAUFMANN, M., Christian Socialism.= Crown 8vo, 4_s._ 6_d._\n\n =Utopias=; or, Schemes of Social Improvement, from Sir Thomas More to\n Karl Marx. Crown 8vo, 5_s._\n\n=LEFEVRE, Right Hon. G. SHAW, Peel and O'Connell.= 8vo, 10_s._ 6_d._\n\n =Incidents of Coercion.= A Journal of Visits to Ireland. Third\n Edition. Crown 8vo, limp cloth, 1_s._ 6_d._; paper covers, 1_s._\n\n =Irish Members and English Gaolers.= Crown 8vo, limp cloth, 1_s._\n 6_d._; paper covers, 1_s._\n\n =Combination and Coercion in Ireland.= Sequel to 'Incidents of\n Coercion.' Crown 8vo, cloth, 1_s._ 6_d._; paper covers, 1_s._\n\n=LYNCH, E. M., Killboylan Bank=; or, Every Man His Own Banker. Foolscap\n8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._ (_Village Library._)\n\n=MINTON, FRANCIS, Welfare of the Millions.= Crown 8vo, limp cloth,\n1_s._ 6_d._; paper covers, 1_s._\n\n=O'BRIEN, R. BARRY, Home Ruler's Manual.= Crown 8vo, cloth, 1_s._\n6_d._; paper covers, 1_s._\n\n=Irish Wrongs and English Remedies=, with other Essays. Crown 8vo,\n5_s._\n\n=PERRY, ARTHUR LATHAM, Principles of Political Economy.= Large post\n8vo, 9_s._\n\n=PLIMSOLL, SAMUEL, Cattle Ships.= Being the Fifth Chapter of 'An Appeal\nfor our Seamen.' With 46 Illustrations. Cheap Edition, 1_s._\n\n=SPENCER, HERBERT, Study of Sociology.= Fifteenth Edition. Crown 8vo,\n5_s._ (_I. S. S._)\n\n=SUMNER, W. G., What Social Classes Owe to each Other.= 18mo, 3_s._\n6_d._\n\n=TAYLOR, Sir H., The Statesman.= Foolscap 8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n=TAYLOR, R. WHATELEY COOKE, The Modern Factory System.= 8vo, 14_s._\n\n=THOMPSON, Sir H., Modern Cremation.= Second Edition, revised and\nenlarged. Crown 8vo, 1_s._; cloth, 2_s._\n\n\n_VII.--NATURAL SCIENCE._\n\nANTHROPOLOGY AND ETHNOLOGY.\n\n =Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland, Journal of.=\n Quarterly. 5_s._\n\n =BALKWILL, F. H., The Testimony of the Teeth to Man's Place in\n Nature.= With Illustrations. Crown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n =CARPENTER, W. B., Nature and Man.= With a Memorial Sketch by J.\n ESTLIN CARPENTER. Portrait. Large crown 8vo, 8_s._ 6_d._\n\n =CLODD, EDWARD, Childhood of the World=: A Simple Account of Man in\n Early Times. Eighth Edition. Crown 8vo, 3_s._ Special Edition for\n Schools, 1_s._\n\n =CURR, EDWARD M., The Australian Race.= Its Origin, Languages,\n Customs, etc. With Map and Illustrations. 3 vols. 8vo, 1 vol. 4to, \u00a32\n 2_s._\n\n =FORNANDER, A., Account of the Polynesian Race.= Its Origin and\n Migrations, and the Ancient History of the Hawaiian people. Post\n 8vo. Vol. I. 7_s._ 6_d._; Vol. II. 10_s._ 6_d._; Vol. III. 9_s._\n (_Philosophical Library._)\n\n =GEIGER, LAZARUS, Development of the Human Race.= Translated from the\n German by D. ASHER. Post 8vo, 6_s._ (_Philosophical Library._)\n\n =HAECKEL, Prof. ERNST, History of the Evolution of Man.= With numerous\n Illustrations. 2 vols. post 8vo, 32_s._\n\n =JOLY, N., Man before Metals.= With 148 Illustrations. Fourth Edition.\n Crown 8vo, 5_s._ (_I. S. S._)\n\n =QUATREFAGES, Prof. A. DE, The Human Species.= Fifth Edition. Crown\n 8vo, 5_s._ (_I. S. S._)\n\n =SMITH, R. BROUGH, The Aborigines of Victoria.= Compiled for the\n Government. With Maps, Plates, and Woodcuts. 2 vols. royal 8vo, \u00a33\n 3_s._\n\n =STARCKE, C. N., The Primitive Family in its Origin and Development.=\n Crown 8vo, 5_s._ (_I. S. S._)\n\n =WRIGHT, G. FREDERICK, The Ice Age in North America, and its Bearing\n upon the Antiquity of Man.= With Maps and Illustrations. 8vo, 21_s._\n\n =Man and the Glacial Period.= With 111 Illustrations and Map. Crown\n 8vo, 5_s._ (_I. S. S._)\n\n\nASTRONOMY.\n\n =DRAYSON, Major-General, Untrodden Ground in Astronomy and Geology.=\n With Numerous Figures. 8vo, 14_s._\n\n =LOOMIS, E., A Treatise on Astronomy.= 8vo, sheep, 7_s._ 6_d._\n\n =Introduction to Practical Astronomy.= 8vo, sheep, 7_s._ 6_d._\n\n=STANLEY, W. F., Notes on the Nebular Theory.= 8vo, 9_s._\n\n=YOUNG, Professor, The Sun, with Illustrations.= Crown 8vo, 5_s._ (_I.\nS. S._)\n\n\nBOTANY.\n\n =CANDOLLE, ALPHONSE DE, Origin of Cultivated Plants.= Second Edition.\n Crown 8vo, 5_s._ (_I. S. S._)\n\n =COOKE, M. C., British Edible Fungi: How to Distinguish and how to\n Cook them.= With Coloured Figures of upwards of Forty Species. Crown\n 8vo, 7_s._ 6_d._\n\n =Fungi: their Nature, Influences, Uses, &c.= Edited by Rev. M. J.\n BERKELEY. With numerous Illustrations. Fourth Edition. Crown 8vo,\n 5_s._ (_I. S. S._)\n\n =Introduction to Fresh-Water Alg\u00e6.= With an Enumeration of all the\n British Species. With 13 plates. Crown 8vo, 5_s._ (_I. S. S._)\n\n=DAVIES, G. CHRISTOPHER, Rambles and Adventures of Our School Field\nClub.= With 4 Illustrations. New and cheaper Edition. Crown 8vo, 3_s._\n6_d._\n\n=HENSLOW, Prof. G., Origin of Floral Structures through Insect and\nother Agencies.= With 88 Illustrations. Crown 8vo, 5_s._ (_I. S. S._)\n\n =The Origin of Plant Structures.= Crown 8vo, 5_s._ (_I. S. S._)\n\n=HICKSON, S. J., The Fauna of the Deep Sea.= Crown 8vo, 2_s._ 6_d._\n(_Modern Science Series._)\n\n=LENDENFELD, R. von, Monograph of the Horny Sponges.= With 50 Plates.\nIssued by direction of the Royal Society. 4to, \u00a33.\n\n=LUBBOCK, Sir JOHN, Contribution to Our Knowledge of Seedlings.= With\nnearly 700 figures in text. 2 vols., 8vo, 36_s._ net. Also Popular\nEdition. Crown 8vo, 5_s._ (_I. S. S._)\n\n=PHILLIPS, W., Manual of British Discomycetes.= With Descriptions of\nall the Species of Fungi hitherto found in Britain, included in the\nFamily, and Illustrations of the Genera. Crown 8vo, 5_s._ (_I. S. S._)\n\n=SEDDING, JOHN D., Gardencraft, Old and New.= With Memorial Notice by\nthe Rev. E. F. RUSSELL. 16 Illustrations. Second Edition. 8vo, 12_s._\n\n=Tropical Agriculturist.= Monthly. Annual Subscription, \u00a31 6_s._\n\n=TROUESSART, E. L., Microbes, Ferments, and Moulds.= With 107\nIllustrations. Second Edition. Crown 8vo, 5_s._ (_I. S. S._)\n\n=WARD, H. MARSHALL, The Oak: a Popular Introduction to Forest Botany.=\nCrown 8vo, 2_s._ 6_d._ (_Modern Science Series._)\n\n=WEED, C. M., Fungi and Fungicides.= A Practical Manual. Crown 8vo,\n5_s._\n\n=YOUMANS, ELIZA A., First Book of Botany.= Designed to Cultivate the\nObserving Powers of Children. With 300 Engravings. New and Cheaper\nEdition. Crown 8vo, 2_s._ 6_d._\n\n\nCHEMISTRY.\n\n =COOKE, Prof. J. P., Laboratory Practice.= A Series of Experiments on\n the Fundamental Principles of Chemistry. Crown 8vo, 5_s._\n\n =New Chemistry.= With 31 Illustrations. Ninth Edition. Crown 8vo,\n 5_s._ (_I. S. S._)\n\n=RICHTER, Prof. V. von, Chemistry of the Carbon Compounds: or Organic\nChemistry.= Authorised Translation by EDGAR F. SMITH. Second American\nEdition from Sixth German Edition. Crown 8vo, 20_s._\n\n =Text-Book of Inorganic Chemistry.= Authorised Translation by EDGAR F.\n SMITH. Third American Edition from Fifth German Edition. Crown 8vo,\n 8_s._ 6_d._\n\n=SMITH, EDGAR F., Electro-Chemical Analysis.= With 25 Illustrations.\nSquare 16mo, 5_s._\n\n=STRECKER, ADOLPH, Text-Book of Organic Chemistry.= Edited by Professor\nWISLICENUS. Translated and Edited, with extensive Additions, by W. R.\nHODGKINSON and A. J. GREENAWAY. Second and cheaper Edition. 8vo, 12_s._\n6_d._\n\n=VOGEL, Dr. HERMANN, Chemistry of Light and Photography.= With 100\nIllustrations. Fifth Edition. Crown 8vo, 5_s._ (_I. S. S._)\n\n\nGEOLOGY, MINERALOGY, ETC.\n\n =ABERCROMBY, Hon. RALPH, Weather.= A popular Exposition of the Nature\n of Weather Changes from day to day. With 96 Figures. Second Edition.\n Crown 8vo, 5_s._ (_I. S. S._)\n\n =BALL, Sir ROBERT, The Cause of an Ice Age.= Crown 8vo, 2_s._ 6_d._\n (_Modern Science Series._)\n\n =BONNEY, Prof. T. G., Ice Work, Present and Past.= Crown 8vo, 5_s._\n (_I. S. S._)\n\n =CATLIN, GEORGE, The Lifted and Subsided Rocks of America.= With their\n Influence on the Oceanic, Atmospheric, and Land Currents, and the\n Distribution of Races. With 2 Maps, Crown 8vo, 6_s._ 6_d._\n\n =DANA, E. S., Text-Book of Mineralogy.= With Treatise on\n Crystallography and Physical Mineralogy. Third Edition. With 800\n Woodcuts and Plates. 8vo, 15_s._\n\n =DANA, J. D., Text-Book of Geology=, for Schools. Illustrated. Crown\n 8vo, 10_s._\n\n =Manual of Geology.= Illustrated by a Chart of the World, and 1000\n Figures. Fourth Edition. 8vo, 28_s._\n\n =The Geological Story Briefly Told.= Illustrated. 12mo, 7_s._ 6_d._\n\n=DANA, J. D., and BRUSH, J. G., System of Mineralogy.= Sixth Edition,\nentirely re-written and enlarged. Royal 8vo, \u00a32 12_s._ 6_d._\n\n =Manual of Mineralogy and Petrography.= Fourth Edition. Numerous\n Woodcuts. Crown 8vo, 6_s._ net.\n\n=DAWSON, Sir J. W., Geological History of Plants.= With 80\nIllustrations. Crown 8vo, 5_s._ (_I. S. S._)\n\n=GEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF INDIA IN CALCUTTA:=\n\n =Pal\u00e6ontologia Indica.= Folio. 1863-95. Published at various prices.\n\n [asterism] Index to the Genera and species described in the\n Pal\u00e6ontologia Indica up to the year 1891. By W. THEOBALD. 186 pp.\n folio. 1892. 4_s._\n\n =Memoirs of the Geological Survey.= Vols. I.--XXIV. Royal 8vo.\n 1859-91. 10_s._ each.\n\n [asterism] Contents and Index to the first 20 volumes. By W.\n THEOBALD. Royal 8vo. 1892. 4_s._\n\n =Records of the Geological Survey.= Vols. I.-XXVIII. Royal 8vo.\n 1868-95. 4_s._ each.\n\n [asterism] Contents and Index to the first 20 volumes (1868-87).\n Royal 8vo. 1891. 4_s._\n\n=HAECKEL, Prof. ERNST, The History of Creation.= New Edition.\nTranslation revised by Prof. E. RAY LANKESTER. With 20 Plates and\nnumerous Figures. Fourth Edition. 2 vols. large post 8vo, 32_s._\n\n=JUDD, Prof. J. W., Volcanoes=: What they Are, and What they Teach.\nWith 96 Illustrations on wood. Fourth Edition. Crown 8vo, 5_s._ (_I. S.\nS._)\n\n=KINAHAN, G. H., Valleys, and their Relations to Fissures, Fractures,\nand Faults.= Crown 8vo, 7_s._ 6_d._\n\n=LOOMIS, E., A Treatise on Meteorology.= 8vo. sheep, 7_s._ 6_d._\n\n=MALLET, F. R., Manual of the Geology of India.= Part 4.--Mineralogy\n(mainly non-economic). 175 pp. royal 8vo. 1887. 4_s._\n\n=MILNE, J., Earthquakes and other Earth Movements.= With 38 Figures.\nThird and revised Edition. Crown 8vo, 5_s._ (_I. S. S._)\n\n=MOSES, A. J., and PARSONS, C. L., Elements of Mineralogy,\nCrystallography, and Blow-pipe Analysis.= 8vo, 10_s._\n\n=OLDHAM, R. D., Manual of the Geology of India.= Second Edition,\nrevised and largely re-written. Royal 8vo, half calf. 1893. 16_s._\n\n=SCOTT, ROBERT H., Elementary Meteorology.= Fifth Edition. With\nnumerous Illustrations. Crown 8vo, 5_s._ (_I. S. S._)\n\n=SYMONS, G. J., The Eruption of Krakatoa, and Subsequent Phenomena.=\nReport of the Krakatoa Committee of the Royal Society. With 6\nChromo-lithographs, and 40 Maps and Diagrams. 4to, \u00a31 10_s._\n\n=TYNDALL, J., Forms of Water in Clouds and Rivers, Ice and Glaciers.=\nWith 25 Illustrations. Tenth Edition. Crown 8vo, 5_s._ (_I. S. S._)\n\n=WRIGHT, G. F., The Ice Age in North America, and its Bearing upon the\nAntiquity of Man.= With Maps and Illustrations. 8vo, 21_s._\n\n\nMATHEMATICS.\n\n =CLIFFORD, W. KINGDON, Common Sense of the Exact Sciences.= Second\n Edition. With 100 Figures. Crown 8vo, 5_s._ (_I. S. S._)\n\n =KLEIN, FELIX, Lectures on the Ikosahedron, and the Solution of\n Equations of the Fifth Degree.= Translated by G. G. MORRICE. 8vo,\n 10_s._ 6_d._\n\n\nPHYSICS.\n\n =BABBITT, E. D., The Principles of Light and Colour.= With over 200\n Engravings and 4 Coloured Plates. Royal 8vo, 21_s._ net.\n\n =Electricity in Daily Life.= A Popular Account of its Application to\n Everyday Uses. With 125 Illustrations. Square 8vo, 9_s._\n\n=GLAZEBROOK, R. T., Laws and Properties of Matter.= Crown 8vo, 2_s._\n6_d._ (_Modern Science Series._)\n\n=HOSPITALIER, E., The Modern Applications of Electricity.= Translated\nand Enlarged by JULIUS MAIER. Second Edition, revised, with many\nAdditions and Numerous Illustrations. 2 vols. 8vo, 25_s._\n\n=LE CONTE, JOSEPH, Sight.= An Exposition of the Principles of Monocular\nand Binocular Vision. Second Edition. With 132 Illustrations. Crown\n8vo, 5_s._ (_I. S. S._)\n\n=LOMMEL, Dr. EUGENE, Nature of Light.= With a General Account of\nPhysical Optics. With 188 Illustrations and a Table of Spectra in\nChromo-lithography. Fifth Edition. Crown 8vo, 5_s._ (_I. S. S._)\n\n=ROOD, OGDEN N., Colour.= A Text-Book of Modern Chromatics. With\nApplications to Art and Industry. With 130 Original Illustrations.\nThird Edition. Crown 8vo, 5_s._ (_I. S. S._)\n\n=STALLO, J. B., Concepts and Theories of Modern Physics.= Third\nEdition. Crown 8vo, 5_s._ (_I. S. S._)\n\n=STEWART, BALFOUR, Conservation of Energy.= With 14 Illustrations.\nSeventh Edition. Crown 8vo, 5_s._ (_I. S. S._)\n\n=WURTZ, Prof., The Atomic Theory.= Translated by E. CLEMINSHAW. Fifth\nEdition. Crown 8vo, 5_s._ (_I. S. S._)\n\n\nZOOLOGY.\n\n =BENEDEN, J. P., van, Animal Parasites and Messmates.= With 83\n Illustrations. Fourth Edition. Crown 8vo, 5_s._ (_I. S. S._)\n\n =BERNSTEIN, Prof., The Five Senses of Man.= With 91 Illustrations.\n Fifth Edition. Crown 8vo, 5_s._ (_I. S. S._)\n\n =COMSTOCK, JOHN HENRY and ANNA B., A Manual for the Study of Insects.=\n Royal 8vo, 25_s._ net.\n\n =FLOWER, W. H., The Horse: A Study in Natural History.= Crown 8vo,\n 2_s._ 6_d._ (_Modern Science Series._)\n\n =HARTMANN, R., Anthropoid Apes.= With 63 Illustrations. Second\n Edition. Crown 8vo, 5_s._ (_I. S. S._)\n\n =HEILPRIN, Prof. A., Geographical and Geological Distribution of\n Animals.= With Frontispiece. Crown 8vo, 5_s._ (_I. S. S._)\n\n =HORNADAY, W. T., Taxidermy and Zoological Collecting.= With Chapters\n on Collecting and Preserving Insects, by W. J. HOLLAND, D.D. With 24\n Plates and 85 Illustrations. 8vo, 10_s._ 6_d._\n\n =HUXLEY, Prof. T. H., The Crayfish: An Introduction to the Study of\n Zoology.= With 82 Illustrations. Fifth Edition. Crown 8vo, 5_s._ (_I.\n S. S._)\n\n =KEW, H. W., Dispersal of Shells.= Crown 8vo, 5_s._ (_I. S. S._)\n\n =LUBBOCK, Sir JOHN, Ants, Bees, and Wasps.= A Record of Observations\n on the Habits of the Social Hymenoptera. With 5 Chromo-lithographic\n Plates. Tenth Edition. Crown 8vo, 5_s._ (_I. S. S._)\n\n =On the Senses, Instincts, and Intelligence of Animals.= With Special\n Reference to Insects. With 118 Illustrations. Third Edition. Crown\n 8vo. (_I. S. S._)\n\n=MAREY, Prof. E. J., Animal Mechanism=, A Treatise on Terrestrial and\nA\u00ebrial Locomotion. With 117 Illustrations. Third Edition. Crown 8vo,\n5_s._ (_I. S. S._)\n\n=MEYER, G. HERMANN von, Organs of Speech and their Application in the\nFormation of Articulate Sounds.= With 47 Illustrations. Crown 8vo,\n5_s._ (_I. S. S._)\n\n=PETTIGREW, J. B., Animal Locomotion=; or, Walking, Swimming, and\nFlying. With 130 Illustrations. Third Edition. Crown 8vo, 5_s._ (_I. S.\nS._)\n\n=POULTON, E. B., Colours of Animals: their Meaning and Use, especially\nconsidered in the case of Insects.= With Coloured Frontispiece and 66\nIllustrations in text. Crown 8vo, 5_s._ (_I. S. S._)\n\n=RODD, E. H., Birds of Cornwall and the Scilly Islands.= Edited by J.\nE. HARTING. With Portrait and Map. 8vo, 14_s._\n\n=ROMANES, G. J., Jelly-Fish, Star-Fish, and Sea-Urchins.= Being a\nResearch on Primitive Nervous Systems. With Illustrations. Second\nEdition. Crown 8vo, 5_s._ (_I. S. S._)\n\n  (_See also_ PHILOSOPHY.)\n\n=SCHMIDT, Prof. O., Doctrine of Descent and Darwinism.= With 26\nIllustrations. Seventh Edition. Crown 8vo, 5_s._ (_I. S. S._)\n\n =Mammalia in their Relation to Primeval Times.= With 51 Woodcuts.\n Crown 8vo, 5_s._ (_I. S. S._)\n\n=SEMPER, KARL, Natural Conditions of Existence as they affect Animal\nLife.= With 2 Maps and 106 Woodcuts. Fourth Edition. Crown 8vo, 5_s._\n(_I. S. S._)\n\n=STEBBING, T. R. R., A History of Crustacea.= Recent Malacostraca. With\nnumerous Illustrations. Crown 8vo, 5_s._ (_I. S. S._)\n\n=TRIMEN, ROLAND, South African Butterflies.= A Monograph of the\nExtra-tropical Species. With 12 Coloured Plates. 3 vols., 8vo, \u00a32\n12_s._ 6_d._\n\n=WARNER, Prof. F., Physical Expression: Its Modes and Principles.= With\n50 Illustrations. Second Edition. Crown 8vo, 5_s._ (_I. S. S._)\n\n=WEED, C. M., Insects and Insecticides.= Illustrated. Crown 8vo, 7_s._\n6_d._\n\n=WITHERBY, HARRY, Forest Birds, their Haunts and Habits.= With\nIllustrations. Crown 8vo, 2_s._ 6_d._\n\n\n_VIII.--USEFUL ARTS AND SCIENCES AND FINE ARTS._\n\nCHESS.\n\n =British Chess Magazine.= Monthly, _d._\n\n =EUCLID'S Analysis of the Chess Ending=, King and Queen against King\n and Rook. Edited by E. FREEBOROUGH. 8vo, 6_s._ net.\n\n =FREEBOROUGH, E., Chess Endings.= A Companion to Chess Openings,\n Ancient and Modern. Edited and arranged by E. FREEBOROUGH. Large post\n 8vo, 7_s._ 6_d._\n\n =Select Chess End Games.= Edited and arranged. Crown 8vo, 1_s._ 6_d._\n net.\n\n=FREEBOROUGH, E.=, and =RANKEN, C. E., Chess Openings, Ancient and\nModern.= Revised and Corrected up to the Present Time from the best\nAuthorities. Large post 8vo, 8_s._\n\n=GOSSIP, G. H. D., The Chess Player's Text-Book.= An Elementary\nTreatise on the Game of Chess. Numerous Diagrams. 16mo, 2_s._\n\n=GREENWELL, W. J., Chess Exemplified in One Hundred and Thirty-two\nGames of the Most Celebrated Players.= By W. J. GREENWELL, 8vo, 5_s._\n\n=WALKER'S Chess Studies.= New Edition. With Preface by E. FREEBOROUGH.\nLarge post 8vo, 7_s._ 6_d._\n\n\nGASTRONOMY AND DIET.\n\n =ALLEN, MARY L., Luncheon Dishes.= Comprising Menus in French and\n English, as well as Suggestions for Arrangement and Decoration of\n Table. Foolscap 8vo, cloth 1_s._ 6_d._; paper, 1_s._\n\n =Five O'clock Tea.= Containing Receipts for Cakes, Savoury Sandwiches,\n etc. Eighth Thousand. Foolscap 8vo, 1_s._ 6_d._; paper covers, 1_s._\n\n=CAMERON, Miss, Soups and Stews, and Choice Ragouts.= 1_s._ 6_d._;\npaper covers, 1_s._\n\n=DE JONCOURT, MARIE, Wholesome Cookery.= Fifth Edition. Crown 8vo,\n1_s._ 6_d._; paper covers, 1_s._\n\n=HOOPER, MARY, Cookery for Invalids, Persons of Delicate Digestion, and\nChildren.= Fifth Edition. Crown 8vo, 2_s._ 6_d._\n\n =Every-Day Meals.= Being Economical and Wholesome Recipes for\n Breakfast, Luncheon, and Supper. Seventh Edition. Crown 8vo, 2_s._\n 6_d._\n\n =Little Dinners.= How to Serve them with Elegance and Economy.\n Twenty-first Edition. Crown 8vo, 2_s._ 6_d._\n\n=KINGSFORD, ANNA, The Perfect Way in Diet.= A Treatise advocating a\nreturn to the Natural and Ancient Food of our race. Third Edition.\nSmall 8vo, 2_s._\n\n=NEWMAN, FRANCIS WILLIAM, Essays on Diet.= Small 8vo, cloth limp, 2_s._\n\n=SANTIAGO, D., Curry Cook's Assistant.= Foolscap 8vo, 1_s._ 6_d._;\npaper covers, 1_s._\n\n=SMITH, E., Foods.= With numerous Illustrations. Ninth Edition. Crown\n8vo, 5_s._ (_I. S. S._)\n\n=THOMPSON, Sir H., Diet in Relation to Age and Activity.= Foolscap 8vo,\n1_s._ 6_d._; paper covers, 1_s._\n\n\nMEDICINE AND PHYSIOLOGY.\n\n =BROTHERS, A., Infantile Mortality during Child-Birth, and Its\n Prevention.= 8vo, 7_s._ 6_d._ net.\n\n =BROWNE, EDGAR A., How to use the Ophthalmoscope.= Third Edition.\n Crown 8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n =BUNGE, Prof. G., Text-Book of Physiological and Pathological\n Chemistry=, for Physicians and Students. Translated from the German by\n L. C. WOOLDRIDGE. 8vo, 16_s._\n\n =BYFORD, H. J., Manual of Gynecology.= With 234 Illustrations. Crown\n 8vo, 10_s._ 6_d._ net.\n\n =CARPENTER, W. B., Principles of Mental Physiology.= With their\n Applications to the Training and Discipline of the Mind and the Study\n of its Morbid Conditions. Illustrated. Sixth Edition, 8vo, 12_s._\n\n =CATLIN, GEORGE, Shut Your Mouth and Save Your Life.= With 29\n Illustrations. Eighth Edition. Crown 8vo, 2_s._ 6_d._\n\n =DUNN, H. P., Infant Health.= The Physiology and Hygiene of Early\n Life. Small crown 8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n =DYMOCK, W., WARDEN, C. J. H.=, and =HOOPER, D., Pharmacographia\n Indica.= The principal Drugs of Vegetable Origin met with in British\n India. Six Parts and an Index. 8vo. 1889-93 \u00a33 10_s._\n\n =GREEN, F. W. EDRIDGE, Colour Blindness and Colour Perception.= With 3\n Coloured Plates. Crown 8vo, 5_s._\n\n =HAMMERSTON, OLOF, A Text-Book of Physiological Chemistry.= 8vo, \u00a31.\n\n =HARLINGEN, A. van, Handbook on the Diagnosis and Treatment of Skin\n Disease.= With 60 Illustrations. 8vo, 12_s._ net.\n\n =Index Medicus.= A Monthly Classified Record of the Current Medical\n Literature of the World. Annual Subscription, \u00a35 5_s._\n\n =JACKSON, EDWARD, Skiascopy and Its Practical Application to the Study\n of Refraction.= 5_s._\n\n =KRAUS, Dr. J., The Etiology, Symptoms and Treatment of Gall-Stones.=\n With Remarks on Operative Treatment by H. MORRIS. Crown 8vo, 5_s._\n\n =KRAUS, Dr. J.. Senr., Pathology and Therapy of Gall-Stones.= Crown\n 8vo. 5_s._\n\n =Carlsbad: Its Thermal Springs and Baths, and How to Use them.= Fourth\n Edition, revised and enlarged. Crown 8vo, 6_s._ 6_d._\n\n=LAGRANGE, F., Physiology of Bodily Exercise.= Second Edition. Crown\n8vo, 5_s._ (_I. S. S._)\n\n=LEHMANN, K. B., Methods of Practical Hygiene.= Translated by W.\nCROOKES. 2 vols., 8vo, \u00a31 11_s._ 6_d._\n\n=L\u00dcCKES, EVA C. E., Lectures on General Nursing.= Delivered to the\nProbationers of the London Hospital Training School for Nurses. Fourth\nEdition. Crown 8vo, 2_s._ 6_d._\n\n=METCHNIKOFF, ELIAS, Lectures on the Comparative Pathology of\nInflammation.= Translated from the French by F. A. and E. H. STARLING.\n8vo, 12_s._\n\n=NUNN, T. W., Growing Children and Awkward Walking.= Crown 8vo, 2_s._\n\n=PILCHER, J. E., First Aid in Illness and Injury.= With 174\nIllustrations. Crown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n=PURITZ, LUDWIG, Code-Book of Gymnastic Exercises.= 32mo, 1_s._ 6_d._\nnet.\n\n=PYE, W., Surgical Handicraft.= A Manual of Surgical Manipulations, &c.\nWith 235 Illustrations. Third Edition. Revised and Edited by T. H. R.\nCROWLE. Crown 8vo, 10_s._ 6_d._\n\n =Elementary Bandaging and Surgical Dressing, for the use of Dressers\n and Nurses.= Twelfth Thousand. 18mo, 2_s._\n\n=RIBOT, Prof. T., Heredity: A Psychological Study of its Phenomena,\nLaws, Causes, and Consequences.= Second Edition. Large crown 8vo, 9_s._\n\n=ROSENTHAL, Prof. J., General Physiology of Muscles and Nerves.= Third\nEdition. With 75 Illustrations. Crown 8vo, 5_s._ (_I. S. S._)\n\n =Sanitarian.= Devoted to the Preservation of Health, Mental and\n Physical Culture. Monthly. Annual Subscription, 18_s._\n\n=SCOVILLE, W. L., The Art of Compounding Drugs.= For Students and\nPharmacists at the Prescription Counter. 8vo, 12_s._\n\n=STRAHAN, S. A. K., Marriage and Disease.= A Study of Heredity and the\nmore important Family Degenerations. Crown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n=TAYLOR, CHARLES BELL, Lectures on Diseases of the Eye.= Third Edition.\n8vo, 10_s._\n\n=TYRRELL, WALTER, Nervous Exhaustion: its Causes, Outcomes, and\nTreatment.= Crown 8vo, 3_s._\n\n=WAKE, C. STANILAND, Development of Marriage and Kinship.= 8vo, 18_s._\n\n=WALLIS, J. WHITE, Manual of Hygiene.= Crown 8vo, 2_s._ 6_d._\n\n=WOOLDRIDGE, L. C., On the Chemistry of the Blood, and other Scientific\nPapers.= Arranged by VICTOR HORSLEY and ERNEST STARLING. With\nIntroduction by VICTOR HORSLEY. With Illustrations. 8vo, 16_s._\n\n\nMILITARY SCIENCE.\n\n =BAKER, Lt-Col. EDEN, R.A., Preliminary Tactics.= An Introduction to\n the Study of War. For the use of Junior Officers. Crown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n =BRACKENBURY, Major-General, Field Works.= Their Technical\n Construction and Tactical Application. 2 vols. small crown 8vo, 12_s._\n\n =BUXTON, Major, Elements of Military Administration.= First Part:\n Permanent System of Administration. Small crown 8vo, 7_s._ 6_d._\n\n =Cavalry Tactics, Organisation, etc., Notes on.= By a CAVALRY OFFICER.\n With Diagrams. 8vo, 12_s._\n\n =CLERY, Gen. C. FRANCIS, Minor Tactics.= 13th Edition Revised, with 26\n Maps and Plans. Crown 8vo, 9_s._\n\n =FOSTER, C. W., Modern War.= Translated by C. W. FOSTER. Part I.:\n Strategy, and Atlas of 64 Plates. 8vo, \u00a31 16_s._ Part II.: Grand\n Tactics, 15_s._\n\n =GALL, Captain H. R., Solutions of the Tactical Problems Examinations\n for Captains, May, 1896.= Crown 8vo, 2_s._ 6_d._\n\n =HARRISON, Col. R., Officer's Memorandum Book for Peace and War.=\n Fourth Edition, revised. Oblong 32mo, red basil, with pencil, 3_s._\n 6_d._\n\n =HUTCHINSON, Col., and MACGREGOR, Major, Military Sketching and\n Reconnaissance.= Fifth Edition. With 16 Plates. Small crown 8vo, 4_s._\n\n =PRATT, Lieut.-Col. S. C., Field Artillery.= Its Equipment,\n Organisation, and Tactics. Sixth Edition. Revised by Lieut.-Col. EDEN\n BAKER. Small crown 8vo, 6_s._ (_Military Handbooks._)\n\n =Military Law.= Its Procedure and Practice. Eleventh revised Edition.\n Small crown 8vo, 4_s._ 6_d._ net. (_Military Handbooks._)\n\n=SCHAW, Col. H., Defence and Attack of Positions and Localities.=\nFourth Edition. Crown 8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n=SHAW, Lieut.-Col. WILKINSON, Elements of Modern Tactics practically\napplied to English Formations.= Eighth Edition. With 31 Plates and\nMaps. Small crown 8vo, 9_s._ net. (_Military Handbooks._)\n\n=TRENCH, Major-General, Cavalry in Modern War.= Small crown 8vo, 6_s._\n(_Military Handbooks._)\n\n=WINDHAM, Sir C. A., The Crimean Diary of the late General Sir Charles\nA. Windham, K.C.B.= With an Introduction by Sir W. H. RUSSELL. Edited\nby Major HUGH PEARCE. With an added Chapter on The Defence of Cawnpore,\nby Lieut.-Col. JOHN ADYE, C.B. 8vo.\n\n\nMUSIC.\n\n =BLASERNA, Prof. P., Theory of Sound in its Relation to Music.= With\n Numerous Illustrations. Fourth Edition. Crown 8vo, 5_s._ (_I.S.S._)\n\n =LOCHER, CARL, Explanation of Organ Stops.= With Hints for Effective\n Combinations. 8vo, 5_s._\n\n =PARRY, C. HUBERT H., The Evolution of the Art of Music.= Crown 8vo,\n 5_s._ Also cloth, gilt top, 6_s._ (_I.S.S._)\n\n =POLE, W., Philosophy of Music.= Lectures delivered at the Royal\n Institution. Fourth Edition. Post 8vo, 7_s._ 6_d._ (_Philosophical\n Library._)\n\n =WAGNER, RICHARD, Prose Works.= Translated by W. ASHTON ELLIS.\n\n  Vol.   I. =The Art Work of the Future, &c.= 8vo, 12_s._ 6_d._ net.\n  Vol.  II. =The Drama.= 8vo, 12_s._ 6_d._ net.\n  Vol. III. =The Theatre.= 8vo, 12_s._ 6_d._ net.\n  Vol.  IV. =Art and Politics.= 8vo, 12_s._ 6_d._ net.\n\n\nNUMISMATICS.\n\n =Numismata Orientalia.= Royal 4to, in paper wrapper. Part I.--Ancient\n Indian Weights. By E. THOMAS. With a plate and Map, 9_s._ 6_d._ Part\n II.--Coins of the Urtuki Turkum\u00e1ns. By S. LANE POOLE. With 6 Plates,\n 9_s._ Part III.--Coinage of Lydia and Persia. By BARCLAY V. HEAD. With\n 3 Plates, 10_s._ 6_d._ Part IV.--Coins of the Tuluni Dynasty. By E.\n T. ROGERS. With 1 Plate, 5_s._ Part V.--Parthian Coinage. By PERCY\n GARDNER. With 8 Plates, 18_s._ Part VI.--Ancient Coins and Measures of\n Ceylon. By T. W. RHYS DAVIDS. With 1 Plate, 10_s._\n\n Vol. I. Containing the first six parts as specified above. Royal 4to,\n half bound, \u00a33 13_s._ 6_d._\n\n Vol. II. =Coins of the Jews.= Being a History of the Jewish Coinage\n in the Old and New Testaments. By F. W. MADDEN. With 279 Woodcuts and\n Plate. Royal 4to, \u00a32.\n\n Vol. III. Part I.--=The Coins of Arakan, of Pegu, and of Burma.= By\n Lieut.-General Sir ARTHUR PHAYRE. Also contains the Indian Balhara\n and the Arabian Intercourse with India in the ninth and following\n centuries. By EDWARD THOMAS. With 5 Illustrations. Royal 4to, 8_s._\n 6_d._\n\n Vol. III. Part II.--=The Coins of Southern India.= By Sir W. Elliott.\n With Map and Plates. Royal 4to, 25_s._\n\n=Numismata Orientalia.= Illustrated. Fifty-seven Plates of Oriental\nCoins, Ancient and Modern, from the collection of the late WILLIAM\nMARSDEN, F.R.S. Engraved from drawings made under his directions. 4to,\n31_s._ 6_d._\n\n\nPAINTING, SCULPTURE, ETC.\n\n =BLAKE, WILLIAM, Selections from the Writings of.= Edited, with\n Introduction, by LAURENCE HOUSMAN. With Frontispiece. Elzevir 8vo,\n Parchment or cloth, 6_s._; vellum, 7_s._ 6_d._ (_Parchment Library._)\n\n =CLEMENT C. E., and HUTTON, L., Artists of the Nineteenth Century and\n their Works.= 2050 Biographical Sketches. Third Edition, revised.\n Crown 8vo, 15_s._\n\n =GOWER, Lord RONALD, Bric-\u00e0-Brac.= Being some Photo-prints\n illustrating Art Objects at Gower Lodge, Windsor. With Letterpress\n Descriptions. Super-royal 8vo, 15_s._; extra binding, 21_s._\n\n =HOLMES, FORBES A. W., The Science of Beauty.= An Analytical Inquiry\n into the Laws of Aesthetics. Second Edition. Post 8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n =HOUSMAN, LAURENCE, Arthur Boyd Houghton.= Selections from his Work in\n Black and White. With Introductory Essay. 4to, 15_s._ net.\n\n =HOWELLS, W. D., A Little Girl among the Old Masters.= With 54 Plates.\n Oblong crown 8vo, 10_s._\n\n =LEIGHTON, Lord, P.R.A., Addresses to the Students of the Royal\n Academy.= With Portrait. 8vo, 7_s._ 6_d._\n\n =MITCHELL, LUCY M., History of Ancient Sculpture.= With numerous\n Illustrations. Super-royal 8vo, 42_s._\n\n =REYNOLDS, Sir JOSHUA, Discourses.= Edited by E. GOSSE. Elzevir 8vo\n (_Parchment Library._) Vellum, 7_s._ 6_d._; parchment or cloth, 6_s._\n\n =THACKERAY, W. M., Essay on the Genius of George Cruikshank.=\n Reprinted verbatim from the _Westminster Review_. With 40\n Illustrations. Royal 8vo, 7_s._ 6_d._\n\n =THOMPSON, Sir E. MAUNDE.= English Illuminated Manuscripts. With 21\n Plates in chromo-lithography. Imp. 8vo, 18_s._\n\n =WOLTMANN, ALFRED, and WOERMANN, KARL, History of Painting.= With\n numerous Illustrations. Med. 8vo, Vol. I.: Painting in Antiquity and\n the Middle Ages, 28_s._ Vol. II.: The Painting of the Renasence,\n 42_s._ The two volumes may be had bound in cloth with bevelled boards\n and gilt leaves, price 30_s._ and 45_s._ respectively.\n\n\nTECHNOLOGY, ETC.\n\n =Amateur Mechanic's Workshop.= Plain and Concise Directions for the\n Manipulation of Wood and Metals. By the Author of 'The Lathe and its\n Uses.' Sixth Edition. Illustrated. 8vo, 6_s._\n\n =ANDERSON, WILLIAM, Practical Mercantile Correspondence.= A Collection\n of Modern Letters of Business. With Notes. Thirtieth Edition, Revised.\n Crown 8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n =AXON, W. E. A., The Mechanic's Friend.= A Collection of Receipts and\n Practical Suggestions relating to Aquaria, Bronzing, Cements, Drawing,\n Dyes, Electricity, Gilding, Glass-working, &c. Second Edition.\n Numerous Woodcuts. Crown 8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n =BELLOWS, W., The Ocean Liners of the World Illustrated.= Second\n Edition. Small oblong 4to, 1_s._\n\n =DU MONCEL, Count, The Telephone, the Microphone, and the Phonograph.=\n With 74 Illustrations. Third Edition. Small 8vo, 5_s._\n\n =EGER, GUSTAV, Technological Dictionary.= In the English and German\n Languages. 2 vols. royal 8vo, \u00a31 7_s._\n\n =FULTON, J., A Treatise on the Manufacture of Coke, and the Saving of\n By-Products.= 8vo, 21_s._\n\n =GALLOWAY, ROBERT, Treatise on Fuel.= Scientific and Practical. With\n Illustrations. Post 8vo, 6_s._\n\n =HULME, F. EDWARD, Mathematical Drawing Instruments, and How to Use\n them.= With Illustrations. Third Edition. Imperial 16mo, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n =HUSMANN, G., American Grape Growing and Wine Making.= New and\n entirely Revised Edition. Crown 8vo, 7_s._ 6_d._\n\n =INMAN, JAMES, Nautical Tables.= Designed for the use of British\n Seamen. New Edition, Revised and Enlarged. 8vo, 16_s._\n\n =JAPP, A. H., Days with Industrials.= Adventures and Experiences among\n Curious Industries. With Illustrations. Crown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n =KAMARSCH, KARL, Technological Dictionary of the Terms Employed in the\n Arts and Sciences= (Architecture, Engineering, Mechanics, Shipbuilding\n and Navigation, Metallurgy, Mathematics, &c.). Fourth Revised Edition.\n 3 vols. imperial 8vo.\n\n  Vol.   I. German--English--French. 12_s._\n  Vol.  II. English--German--French. 12_s._\n  Vol. III. French--German--English. 15_s._\n\n =KROHNKE, G. H. A., Handbook for Laying out Curves on Railways and\n Tramways.= Crown 8vo, 5_s._\n\n =Lathe, The, and its Uses=; or, Instruction in the Art of Turning Wood\n and Metal. Sixth Edition. Illustrated. 8vo, 10_s._ 6_d._\n\n =LAWLOR, J. J., Practical Hot Water Heating, Steam and Gas Fitting.=\n Crown 8vo, 8_s._ 6_d._\n\n =LEFFMANN, HENRY=, and =BEAM, W., Examination of Water for Sanitary\n and Technical Purposes.= Second Edition, Revised and Enlarged. With\n Illustrations. Crown 8vo, 5_s._\n\n =Analysis of Milk and Milk Products.= Crown 8vo, 5_s._\n\n=LUKIN, J., Amongst Machines.= A Description of Various Mechanical\nAppliances used in the Manufacture of Wood, Metal, etc. A book for\nboys. Third Edition. With 64 Engravings. Crown 8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n =The Boy Engineers.= What They Did, and How They Did It. A book for\n boys. With 30 Engravings. Third Edition. Crown 8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n =The Young Mechanic.= A Book for Boys, containing Directions for the\n Use of all kinds of Tools, and for the Construction of Steam Engines\n and Mechanical Models. Seventh Edition. With 70 Engravings. Crown 8vo,\n 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n=MAGUIRE, W. R., Domestic Sanitary Drainage and Plumbing. Second\nEdition.= Revised. 8vo, 12_s._\n\n=MALDEN, W. J., Pig Keeping for Profit.= Crown 8vo, 2_s._ 6_d._\n(_Village Library._)\n\n=MOORE, CUNNINGHAM WILSON, A Practical Guide for Prospectors,\nExplorers, and Miners.= 8vo, 12_s._ net.\n\n=MORFIT, CAMPBELL, Pure Fertilisers, and the Chemical Conversion of\nRock Guanos, etc., into various valuable products.= 8vo, \u00a34 4_s._\n\n =Manufacture of Soaps.= With Illustrations. 8vo, \u00a32 12_s._ 6_d._\n\n=OSTERBERG, MAX, Synopsis of Current Electrical Literature.= 8vo, 5_s._\nnet.\n\n=RICHARDSON, M. T., Practical Blacksmithing.= With 400 Illustrations. 4\nvols. Crown 8vo, 5_s._ each.\n\n =Practical Carriage Building.= 2 vols. 10_s._\n\n =Practical Horse-shoer.= With 170 Illustrations. Crown 8vo, 5_s._\n\n=ROSS, Lieut.-Col. W. A., Pyrology=; or, Fire Chemistry. Small 4to,\n36_s._\n\n=SCHEIDEL, Dr. A., The Cyanide Process=; its Practical Applications and\nEconomical Results. 8vo, 6_s._\n\n=SCHOOLING, J. HOLT, Handwriting and Expression.= A Study of Written\nGesture, with 150 _Fac-simile_ Reproductions of the Handwritings of Men\nand Women of various Nationalities. Translated. 8vo, 6_s._\n\n=SCH\u00dcTZENBERGER, Prof., Fermentation.= With 28 Illustrations. Fourth\nEdition. Crown 8vo, 5_s._ (_I. S. S._)\n\n=Science.= Weekly. \u00a31 2_s._\n\n=Scientific American.= Weekly. 18_s._\n\n=Scientific American.= Export Edition. Monthly. \u00a31 5_s._\n\n=Scientific American.= Building Edition. Monthly. 14_s._\n\n =Do. Supplement.= Weekly. \u00a31 5_s._\n\n=SEDDING, J. D., Art and Handicraft.= Six Essays. 8vo, 7_s._ 6_d._\n\n=SMITH, HAMILTON, Hydraulics.= The Flow of Water through Orifices, over\nWeirs, and through Open Conduits and Pipes. With 17 Plates. Royal 4to,\n30_s._\n\n=THURSTON, Prof. R. H., History of the Growth of the Steam Engine.=\nWith Numerous Illustrations. Fourth Edition. Crown 8vo, 5_s._ (_I. S.\nS._)\n\n =Manual of the Steam Engine.= For Engineers and Technical Schools.\n Parts I. and II. Royal 8vo. 31_s._ 6_d._ each Part.\n\n=WANKLYN, J. A., Milk Analysis.= A Practical Treatise on the\nExamination of Milk and its Derivatives, Cream, Butter and Cheese.\nSecond Edition. Crown 8vo, 5_s._\n\n=WANKLYN, J. A., and CHAPMAN, E. T., Water Analysis.= A Treatise on the\nExamination of Potable Water. Tenth Edition. thoroughly Revised. Crown\n8vo, 5_s._\n\n=WANKLYN, J. A., and COOPER, W. J., Bread Analysis.= A Practical\nTreatise on the Examination of Flour and Bread. Crown 8vo, 5_s._\n\n =Air Analysis.= A Practical Treatise. With Appendix on Illuminating\n Gas. Crown 8vo, 5_s._\n\n=WATERHOUSE, Col. J., Preparation of Drawings for Photographic\nReproduction.= With Plates. Crown 8vo, 5_s._\n\n=WEISBACH, JULIUS, Theoretical Mechanics.= A Manual of the Mechanics of\nEngineering. Designed as a Text Book for Technical Schools, and for the\nuse of Engineers. From the German, by E. B. COXE. With 902 Woodcuts.\nSecond Edition. 8vo, 31_s._ 6_d._\n\n=WIECHMANN, G. F., Sugar Analysis.= For Refineries, Sugar-Houses,\nExperimental Stations, &c. 8vo, 12_s._ 6_d._\n\n=WILCOX, LUTE, Irrigation Farming.= Crown 8vo, 10_s._\n\n=WYLDE, W., Inspection of Meat.= A Guide and Instruction Book to\nOfficers supervising Contract Meat, and to all Sanitary Inspectors.\nWith 32 Coloured Plates. 8vo, 10_s._ 6_d._\n\n\nSPORTS.\n\n =GOULD, A. C., Modern American Pistols and Revolvers.= 8vo, cloth,\n 7_s._ 6_d._\n\n =Modern American Rifles.= 8vo, cloth, 10_s._ 6_d._\n\n=HILLIER, G. LACY, All About Bicycling.= 12mo, 1_s._\n\n=MONEY, Captain ALBERT (\"Blue Rock,\") Pigeon Shooting.= Foolscap 8vo,\n5_s._ net.\n\n=NEWHOUSE. The Trapper's Guide.= A Manual of Instruction. Crown 8vo,\n5_s._\n\n=Practical Hints on Shooting.= By \"20-BORE.\" 8vo, 12_s._\n\n=WHEELDON, J. P., Angling Resorts near London.= The Thames and the Lea.\nCrown 8vo, paper, 1_s._ 6_d._\n\n\n_IX.--PHILOLOGY._\n\nCOMPARATIVE PHILOLOGY.\n\n =ABEL, CARL, Linguistic Essays.= Post 8vo, 9_s._ (_Tr\u00fcbner's Oriental\n Series._)\n\n =Slavic and Latin.= Lectures on Comparative Lexicography. Post 8vo,\n 5_s._\n\n=BRUGMANN, K., Elements of the Comparative Grammar of the Indo-Germanic\nLanguages.= A Concise Exposition of the History of Sanscrit, Old\nIranian, Old Armenian, Old Greek, Latin, Umbrian, Samnitic, Old Irish,\nGothic, Old High German, Lithuanian, and Old Bulgarian. In 5 vols. 8vo,\ncloth.\n\n Vol. I. =Introduction and Phonology.= By J. WRIGHT. 582 pp. 1888.\n 18_s._\n\n Vol. II. Part I.--=Morphology.= Stem Formation and Inflection. By S.\n CONWAY and W. D. ROUSE. 500 pp. 1891. 16_s._\n\n Vol. III. Part II.--=Morphology.= Numerals, Nouns, and Pronouns. By S.\n CONWAY and W. D. ROUSE. 412 pp. 1892. 12_s._ 6_d._\n\n Vol. IV. Part III.--=Morphology.= Verbs: Formation of the Stem, and\n Inflection or Conjugation. By S. CONWAY and W. D. ROUSE. 630 pp. 1895.\n \u00a31.\n\n Vol. V. Index of Words, Matters, and Authors mentioned in Vols. I.-IV.\n 250 pp. 1895. 9_s._\n\n=BYRNE, Dean JAMES, General Principles of the Structure of Language.= 2\nvols. Second and Revised Edition. 8vo, 36_s._\n\n =Origin of Greek, Latin, and Gothic Roots.= Second and Revised\n Edition. 8vo, 18_s._\n\n=CUST, R., Linguistic and Oriental Essays.= Post 8vo. First Series,\n10_s._ 6_d._ Second Series, with 6 Maps, 21_s._ Third Series, 21_s._\n(_Tr\u00fcbner's Oriental Series._)\n\n=DELBRUCK, B., Introduction to the Study of Language.= The History and\nMethods of Comparative Philology of the Indo-European Languages. 8vo,\n5_s._\n\n=GARLANDA, FEDERICO, The Fortunes of Words.= Crown 8vo, 5_s._\n\n =The Philosophy of Words.= A Popular Introduction to the Science of\n Language. Crown 8vo, 5_s._\n\n=GREG, R. P., Comparative Philology of the Old and New Worlds in\nRelation to Archaic Speech.= With Copious Vocabularies. Super royal\n8vo. \u00a31 11_s._ 6_d._\n\n=LEFEVRE, ANDR\u00c9, Race and Language.= Crown 8vo, 5_s._ (_I.S.S._)\n\n =Philological Society, Transactions and Proceedings of.= Irregular.\n\n=SAYCE, A. H., Introduction to the Science of Language.= New and\nCheaper Edition. 2 vols. Crown 8vo, 9_s._\n\n =The Principles of Comparative Philology.= Fourth Edition, revised and\n enlarged. Crown 8vo, 10_s._ 6_d._\n\n=SCHLEICHER, AUGUST, Comparative Grammar of the Indo-European,\nSanskrit, Greek, and Latin Languages.= Translated from the Third German\nEdition by H. BENDALL. 8vo, 13_s._ 6_d._\n\n=TAYLOR, Canon ISAAC, The Alphabet.= An Account of the Origin and\nDevelopment of Letters. With numerous Tables and _Fac-similes_. 2 vols.\n8vo, 36_s._\n\n=WHITNEY, Prof. W. D., Life and Growth of Language.= Sixth Edition.\nCrown 8vo, 5_s._ (_I.S.S._)\n\n =Language and the Study of Language.= Fourth Edition. Crown 8vo,\n 10_s._ 6_d._\n\n =Language and its Study.= With especial Reference to the Indo-European\n Family of Languages. Edited by R. MORRIS. Second Edition. Crown 8vo,\n 5_s._ #/\n\n\nAFRICAN.\n\n =CUST, R. N.= A Sketch of the Modern Languages of Africa. 2 vols. With\n 31 autotype portraits, 1883. Post 8vo, 18_s._ (_T.O.S._)\n\n\nALBANIAN.\n\n =Grammaire Albanaise=, \u00e0 l'usage de ceux qui d\u00e9sirent apprendre cette\n langue sans l'aide d'un ma\u00eetre. Par P. W. Crown 8vo, 7_s._ 6_d._\n\n\nANGLO-SAXON.\n\n =RASK, ERASMUS, Grammar of the Anglo-Saxon Tongue.= From the Danish,\n by B. THORPE. Third Edition. Post 8vo, 5_s._ 6_d._\n\n\nARABIC.\n\n =COTTON, General Sir A., Arabic Primer.= Consisting of 180 short\n sentences, containing 30 primary words prepared according to the vocal\n system of studying language. 38 pp., crown 8vo, cloth. 1876. 2_s._\n\n =Diwans, The, of the six ancient Arabic Poets=--Enn[=a]biga, 'Antara,\n Tharafa, Zuhair, 'Alqama, and Imruulqais, and a collection of their\n fragments, with a list of the various readings of the text edited by\n W. AHLWARDT. 8vo, wrapper. 1870. 12_s._\n\n =HIRSCHFELD, H., Arabic Chrestomathy in Hebrew characters, with a\n Glossary.= viii. and 174 pp., 8vo, cloth. 1892. 7_s._. 6_d._\n\n =MEAKIN, J. E. BUDGETT, Introduction to the Arabic of Morocco.=\n English-Arabic Vocabulary, Grammar, Notes, etc. Foolscap 8vo, 6_s._\n net.\n\n =NEWMAN, F. W., Dictionary of Modern Arabic.= (Anglo-Arabic and\n Arabo-English.) 2 vols. Crown 8vo, \u00a31 1_s._\n\n =Handbook of Modern Arabic.= Post 8vo, 6_s._\n\n=PENRICE, J., Dictionary and Glossary of the Kor\u00e2n, with copious\nGrammatical References and Explanations.= 1873. Small 4to, \u00a31 1_s._\n\n=SALMON\u00c9, H. A., Arabic-English Dictionary.= Comprising about 120,000\nArabic words with English Index of about 50,000 words. 2 vols. Post\n8vo, 36_s._\n\n\nBANTU.\n\n =KOLBE, F. W., A Language Study based on Bantu.= An Inquiry into the\n Laws of Root Formation. 8vo, 6_s._\n\n =TORREND, J., Comparative Grammar of the South African Bantu\n Languages.= Comprising those of Zanzibar, Mozambique, the Zambezi,\n Kafirland, Benguela, Angola, the Congo, the Ogowe, the Cameroons, the\n Lake Region, &c. Super-royal 8vo, 25_s._\n\n\nBASQUE.\n\n =VAN EYS, W., Outlines of Basque Grammar.= Crown 8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._.\n\n\nBENGALI.\n\n =YATES and WENGER, Bengali Grammar.= New and Revised Edition. 136 pp.\n small 8vo, cloth. 1885. 4_s._\n\n\nCHINESE.\n\n =BALL, J. D., How to Write Chinese.= Part I. Royal 8vo, boards. 1888.\n 10_s._ 6_d._\n\n =EITEL, E. J., Chinese Dictionary in the Cantonese Dialect.= With\n Supplement. Royal 8vo, half calf. \u00a32 12_s._ 6_d._\n\n =HIRTH, F., Text Book of Documentary Chinese.= With a Vocabulary. 2\n vols, demy 4to, \u00a31 1_s._\n\n =Notes on the Chinese Documentary Style.= 1888. 8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n=LOBSCHEID, Rev. W., Chinese and English Dictionary.= Arranged\naccording to the Radicals. 1871. Royal 4to, cloth, \u00a32 8_s._\n\n =English-Chinese Dictionary.= With the Punti and Mandarin\n Pronunciation. 1866-69. 4 vols., folio, \u00a34 4_s._\n\n=WILLIAMS, S. WELLS, Syllabic Dictionary of the Chinese Language.=\nArranged according to the Wu-Fang Yuen Yin, with the Pronunciation\nof the Characters as heard in Pekin, Canton, Amoy, and Shanghai.\nThird Edition. 4to, half calf, \u00a33 15_s._ Also Index to same, arranged\naccording to Sir Thomas Wade's system of orthography, by ACHESON. 8vo,\ncloth, 12_s._ 6_d._\n\n\nCUNEIFORM.\n\n =BERTIN, GEORGE, Abridged Grammar of the Languages of the Cuneiform\n Inscriptions.= Crown 8vo, 5_s._\n\n\nDANISH.\n\n =BOJESEN, MARIA, Guide to the Danish Language.= 12mo, 5_s._\n\n =OTT\u00c9, E. C., Dano-Norwegian Grammar.= A Manual for Students of\n Danish, based on the Ollendorffian System. Third Edition. Crown 8vo,\n 7_s._ 6_d._ Key, 3_s._\n\n =Simplified Grammar of the Danish Language.= Crown 8vo, 2_s._ 6_d._\n\n=ROSING, S., Danish Dictionary.= Crown 8vo, 8_s._ 6_d._\n\n\nDUTCH.\n\n =AHN, F., Grammar of the Dutch Language.= 12mo, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n =HALDEMAN, S. S., Pennsylvania Dutch.= A Dialect of South Germany,\n with an Infusion of English. 8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n\nEAST INDIAN.\n\n =BEAMES, J., Outlines of Indian Philology.= With language Map. Second\n Edition, enlarged and revised. 1868. Crown 8vo, 5_s._\n\n =Comparative Grammar of the Modern Aryan Languages of India.= Hindi,\n Panjabi, Sindi, Gujarati, Marathi, Oriya, and Bengali. In 3 vols. 8vo,\n 16_s._ each vol.\n\n  Vol.   I.--On Sounds, xvi. and 360 pp. 1872.\n  Vol.  II.--The Noun and Pronoun, xii. and 348 pp. 1875.\n  Vol. III.--The Verb, viii. and 316 pp. 1879.\n\n=CAMPBELL, G., Specimens of Languages of India.= Including those of the\naboriginal tribes of Bengal, the Central Provinces, and the Eastern\nFrontier. Royal 4to, boards. 1874. \u00a31 11_s._ 6_d._\n\n=WHITWORTH, G. E., Anglo-Indian Dictionary.= A Glossary of Indian terms\nused in English, and of such English or other non-Indian terms as have\nobtained special meanings in India. 8vo, 12_s._\n\n\nEGYPTIAN.\n\n =BUDGE, E. A. WALLIS, First Steps in Egyptian.= Large post 8vo, 9_s._\n net.\n\n =An Egyptian Reading Book for Beginners, with a Vocabulary.= 8vo,\n 15_s._ net.\n\n\nENGLISH.\n\n =BARTLETT, J. R., Dictionary of Americanisms.= A Glossary of Words and\n Phrases colloquially used in the United States. Fourth Edition. 8vo,\n 21_s._\n\n =BOWEN, H. C., Studies in English.= For the use of Modern Schools.\n Tenth Thousand. Small crown 8vo, 1_s._ 6_d._\n\n =English Grammar for Beginners.= Foolscap 8vo, 1_s._\n\n=CARRE\u00d1O, Metodo para aprender a Leer, escribir y hablar el Ingles\nsegun el sistema de Ollendorff.= 8vo, 4_s._ 6_d._ Key, 3_s._\n\n=JENKINS, JABEZ, Vest-Pocket Lexicon.= An English Dictionary of all\nexcept Familiar Words, including the principal Scientific and Technical\nTerms. 64mo, roan, 1_s._ 6_d._; cloth, 1_s._\n\n=SMITH, H. PERCY, Glossary of Terms and Phrases.= Cheap Edition. Medium\n8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n=TRENCH, Archbishop, English Past and Present.= Fourteenth Edition,\nRevised and Improved. Foolscap 8vo, 5_s._\n\n =On the Study of Words.= Twenty-third Edition, Revised. Foolscap 8vo,\n 5_s._\n\n =Select Glossary of English Words used formerly in Senses Different\n from the Present.= Seventh Edition, Revised and Enlarged. Foolscap\n 8vo, 5_s._\n\n=WEDGWOOD, H., Dictionary of English Etymology.= Fourth Edition,\nRevised and Enlarged. 8vo, \u00a31 1_s._\n\n =Contested Etymology in the Dictionary of the Rev. W. W. Skeat.= Crown\n 8vo, 5_s._\n\n=WHITNEY, Prof. W. D., Essentials of English Grammar.= Second Edition.\nCrown 8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n\nFRENCH.\n\n =AHN, F., Method of Learning French.= First and Second Courses. 12mo,\n 3_s._ Separately, 1_s._ 6_d._ each.\n\n =Method of Learning French.= Third Course. 12mo, 1_s._ 6_d._\n\n=BELLOWS, JOHN, French and English Dictionary for the Pocket.=\nContaining the French-English and English-French Divisions on the\nsame page, Conjugating all the Verbs, Distinguishing the Genders by\nDifferent Types, giving Numerous Aids to Pronunciation, &c. Fifty-third\nThousand of the Second Edition. 32mo, morocco tuck, 12_s._ 6_d._; roan,\n10_s._ 6_d._\n\n=BRETTE, P. H.=, and =THOMAS, F., French Examination Papers set at\nthe University of London.= Part I.--Matriculation and the General\nExamination for Women. Crown 8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._ Key, 5_s._ Part\nII.--First B.A. Examinations for Honours and D. Litt. Examinations.\nCrown 8vo, 7_s._\n\n=CASSAL, CHARLES, Glossary of Idioms, Gallicisms, and other\nDifficulties contained in the Senior Course of the 'Modern French\nReader.'= Crown 8vo, 2_s._ 6_d._\n\n=CASSAL, CHARLES=, and =KARCHER, THEODORE, Modern French Reader.=\nJunior Course. Nineteenth Edition. Crown 8vo, 2_s._ 6_d._ Senior\nCourse. Crown 8vo, 4_s._ Senior Course and Glossary in 1 vol. Crown\n8vo, 6_s._\n\n =Little French Reader.= Extracted from the 'Modern French Reader.'\n Third Edition. Crown 8vo, 2_s._\n\n=KARCHER, THEODORE, Questionnaire Fran\u00e7ais.= Questions on French\nGrammar, Idiomatic Difficulties, and Military Expressions. Fourth\nEdition. Crown 8vo, 4_s._ 6_d._; interleaved with writing paper, 5_s._\n6_d._\n\n=LARMOYER, M. DE, Practical French Grammar.= Crown 8vo. New Edition, in\none vol., 3_s._ 6_d._ Two Parts, 2_s._ 6_d._ each.\n\n=LE-BRUN, L., Materials for Translating English into French.= Seventh\nEdition. Post 8vo, 4_s._ 6_d._\n\n=NUGENT, French-English and English-French Pocket Dictionary.= 24mo,\n3_s._\n\n=ROCHE, A., French Grammar.= Adopted by the Imperial Council of Public\nInstruction. Crown 8vo, 3_s._\n\n =French Translation.= Prose and Poetry, from English Authors, for\n reading, composition, and translation. Second Edition. Foolscap 8vo,\n 2_s._ 6_d._\n\n=SIMONN\u00c9, Metodo para aprender a Leer Escribir y hablar el Frances,\nsegun el verdadero sistema de Ollendorff.= Crown 8vo, 6_s._ Key, 3_s._\n6_d._\n\n=VAN LAUN, H., Grammar of the French Language.= Crown 8vo. Accidence\nand Syntax, 4_s._; Exercises, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n=WELLER, E., Improved Dictionary.= English-French and French-English.\nRoyal 8vo, 7_s._ 6_d._\n\n\nGERMAN.\n\n =AHN, F., Grammar of the German Language.= New Edition. Crown 8vo,\n 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n =Method of Learning German.= 12mo, 3_s._ Key, 8_d._\n\n =Manual of German Conversation=; or, Vade Mecum for English\n Travellers. Second Edition. 12mo, 1_s._ 6_d._\n\n=FROEMBLING, F. OTTO, Graduated German Reader.= A Selection from the\nmost popular writers. With a Vocabulary. Twelfth Edition. 12mo, 3_s._\n6_d._\n\n=Graduated Exercises for Translation into German.= Extracts from the\nbest English Authors, with Idiomatic Notes. Crown 8vo, 4_s._ 6_d._;\nwithout Notes, 4_s._\n\n\nGREEK.\n\n =CONTOPOULOS, N., Lexicon of Modern Greek-English and English-Modern\n Greek.= 2 vols., 8vo, 27_s._\n\n =Modern-Greek and English Dialogues and Correspondence.= Foolscap 8vo,\n 2_s._ 6_d._\n\n=GELDART, E. M., Guide to Modern Greek.= Post 8vo, 7_s._ 6_d._ Key,\n2_s._ 6_d._\n\n =Simplified Grammar of Modern Greek.= Crown 8vo, 2_s._ 6_d._\n\n=PAUL, C. KEGAN=, and =STONE, E. D., Philological Introduction to Greek\nand Latin for Students.= Translated and adapted from the German. Third\nEdition. Crown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n=THOMPSON, E. MAUNDE, Handbook of Greek and Latin Pal\u00e6ography.= Second\nEdition. Revised. With numerous _fac-similes_. Crown 8vo, 5_s._ (_I. S.\nS._)\n\n\nGUJARATI.\n\n =TISDALL, Rev. W. ST. CLAIR, A Simplified Grammar of the Gujarati\n Language.= Together with a short Reading Book and Vocabulary. Crown\n 8vo, 10_s._ 6_d._\n\n\nHEBREW.\n\n =BALLIN, ADA S.= and =F. L., Hebrew Grammar.= With Exercises selected\n from the Bible. Crown 8vo, 7_s._ 6_d._\n\n =BICKELL, G., Outlines of Hebrew Grammar.= 8vo, cloth, 4_s._\n\n\nHINDI.\n\n =BALLANTYNE, J. R., Elements of Hindi and Braj Bhakha Grammar.=\n Compiled for the East India College at Haileybury. Second Edition.\n Crown 8vo, 5_s._\n\n =BATE, J. D., Hindi-English Dictionary.= Royal 8vo, cloth. 1875. \u00a31\n 11_s._ 6_d._\n\n =KELLOGG, S. H., Grammar of the Hindi Language.= With copious\n Philological Notes and Tables. Second Edition, Revised and Enlarged.\n 1893. 8vo, cloth, 18_s._\n\n\nHINDUSTANI.\n\n =CRAVEN, T., English-Hindustani and Hindustani-English Dictionary.=\n New Edition. 18mo, 4_s._ 6_d._\n\n =DOWSON, J., Grammar of the Urd[=u] or Hind[=u]st[=a]n[=i] Language.=\n Second Edition. Crown 8vo, 10_s._ 6_d._\n\n =Hind[=u]st[=a]n[=i] Exercise Book.= Passages and Extracts for\n Translation into Hind[=u]st[=a]n[=i]. Crown 8vo, 2_s._ 6_d._\n\n=FALLON, S. W., A New English-Hindustani Dictionary.= With\nIllustrations from English Literature and Colloquial English. iv. and\n674 pp. royal 8vo, cloth. 1883. (Published at Rs. 22.) Reduced to \u00a31.\n\n  [asterism] Printed in Roman characters only.\n\n=A New Hindustani-English Dictionary.= With Illustrations from\nHindustani Literature and Folk-lore. xxiv. ix. and 1216 pp. royal 8vo,\ncloth. 1879. (Published at Rs. 52.) Reduced to \u00a32.\n\n  [asterism] All Hindustani words are printed in the Persian and Roman\n  character; those of Hindi origin also in the Devanagari.\n\n=PALMER, E. H., Simplified Grammar of Hindustani, Persian, and Arabic.=\nSecond Edition. Crown 8vo, 5_s._\n\n=PHILLIPS, Col. A. N., Hindustani Idioms.= With Vocabulary and\nExplanatory Notes. Crown 8vo, 5_s._\n\n\nHUNGARIAN.\n\n =SINGER, J., Simplified Grammar of the Hungarian Language.= Crown 8vo,\n 4_s._ 6_d._\n\n\nIRISH.\n\n =STOKES, WHITLEY, Goidelica.= Old and Early-Middle Irish Glosses,\n Prose and Verse. Second Edition. Medium 8vo, 18_s._\n\n\nITALIAN.\n\n =AHN, F., Method of Learning Italian.= 12mo, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n =CAMERINI, E., L'Eco Italiano.= A Guide to Italian Conversation. With\n Vocabulary. 12mo, 4_s._ 6_d._\n\n =MILLHOUSE, J., English and Italian Dictionary.= 2 vols. 8vo, 12_s._\n\n =Manual of Italian Conversation.= 18mo, 2_s._ #/\n\n\nJAPANESE.\n\n =BABA, TATUI, Elementary Grammar of the Japanese Language.= With easy\n Progressive Exercises. Second Edition. 5_s._\n\n =CHAMBERLAIN, Prof. B. H., Simplified Japanese Grammar.= Crown 8vo,\n 5_s._\n\n =Romanised Japanese Reader.= Consisting of Japanese Anecdotes and\n Maxims, with English Translations and Notes. 12mo, 6_s._\n\n =Handbook of Colloquial Japanese.= Second Edition. 8vo, 12_s._ 6_d._\n\n =Handbook of the Japanese Language.= For Tourists and Residents. In\n the Colloquial style. 24mo, 4_s._\n\n=HEPBURN, J. C., Japanese and English Dictionary.= Second Edition. Imp.\n8vo, half roan, 18_s._\n\n =Japanese-English and English-Japanese Dictionary.= Third Edition.\n Royal 8vo, half morocco, 30_s._ Pocket Edition, square 16mo, 14_s._\n Index of Chinese characters in the royal 8vo. Edition, arranged\n according to their radicals by W. H. WHITNEY. 1888. Cloth, 4_s._ 6_d._\n\n=IMBRIE, W., Handbook of English-Japanese Etymology.= Second Edition,\n1889. 8vo, 6_s._\n\n=MUTSU, H., Japanese Conversation Course.= 1894. Small 8vo, 2_s._ 6_d._\n\n\nKHASSI.\n\n =ROBERTS, H., Grammar of the Khassi Language.= Crown 8vo, 10_s._ 6_d._\n\n\nLATIN.\n\n =AHN, F., Latin Grammar for Beginners.= Thirteenth Edition. 12mo, 3_s._\n\n =IHNE, W., Latin Grammar for Beginners, on Ahn's System.= 12mo, 3_s._\n\n\nMALAGASY.\n\n =PARKER, G. W., Concise Grammar of the Malagasy Language.= Crown 8vo,\n 5_s._\n\n\nNORWEGIAN.\n\n =SMITH, M.=, and =HORNEMAN, H., Norwegian Grammar.= With a Glossary\n for Tourists. Post 8vo, 2_s._\n\n\nPALI.\n\n =CHILDERS, R. C., Pali-English Dictionary.= With Sanskrit Equivalents.\n Imperial 8vo, \u00a33 3_s._\n\n =M\u00dcLLER, E., Simplified Grammar of the Pali Language.= Crown 8vo,\n 7_s._ 6_d._\n\n\nPANJABI.\n\n =TISDALL, W. ST. CLAIR, Simplified Grammar and Reading Book of the\n Panjabi Language.= Crown 8vo, 7_s._ 6_d._\n\n\nPERSIAN.\n\n =FINN, A., Persian for Travellers.= Oblong 32mo, 5_s._\n\n =PALMER, E. H., English-Persian Dictionary.= With Simplified Grammar\n of the Persian Language. Royal 16mo, 10_s._ 6_d._\n\n =Persian-English Dictionary.= Second Edition. Royal 16mo, 10_s._ 6_d._\n\n =Simplified Grammar of Hindustani, Persian, and Arabic.= Second\n Edition. Crown 8vo, 5_s._ #/\n\n\nPOLISH.\n\n =MORFILL, W. R., Simplified Grammar of the Polish Language.= Crown\n 8vo. 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n\nPORTUGUESE.\n\n =D'ORSEY, A. J. D., Colloquial Portuguese=; or, The Words and Phrases\n of Every-day Life. Fourth Edition. Crown 8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n =Grammar of Portuguese and English.= Adapted to Ollendorff's System.\n Fourth Edition. 12mo, 7_s._\n\n=VIEYRA'S Pocket Dictionary of the Portuguese and English Languages.= 2\nvols. Post 8vo, 10_s._\n\n\nPUSHTO (or Afghan).\n\n =TRUMPP, E., Grammar of the Pas't[=o]=; or, Language of the\n Afgh[=a]ns, compared with the Tr[=a]nian and North Indian Idioms.\n Cloth, 1873. 21_s._\n\n\nROMANY.\n\n =LELAND, C. G., English Gipsies and their Language.= New and Cheaper\n Edition. Crown 8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n\nROUMANIAN.\n\n =TORCEANU, R., Simplified Grammar of the Roumanian Language.= Crown\n 8vo, 5_s._\n\n\nRUSSIAN.\n\n =RIOLA, HENRY, How to Learn Russian.= A Manual for Students. Based\n upon the Ollendorffian System. Fourth Edition. Crown 8vo, 12_s._ Key,\n 5_s._\n\n =Russian Reader.= With Vocabulary. Crown 8vo, 10_s._ 6_d._ #/\n\n\nSANSKRIT.\n\n =BALLANTYNE, J. R., First Lessons in Sanscrit Grammar.= Fifth Edition.\n 8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n =BENFEY, THEODOR, Grammar of the Sanskrit Language.= For the use of\n Early Students. Second Edition. Royal 8vo, 10_s._ 6_d._\n\n =COWELL, E. B., Short Introduction to the Ordinary Prakrit of the\n Sanskrit Dramas.= Crown 8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n =Prakrita-Prakasa, or the Prakrit Grammar of Vararuchi.= With the\n Commentary (Manorama) of Bhamaha. 8vo, 14_s._\n\n=WHITNEY, Prof. W. D., Sanskrit Grammar.= Including both the Classical\nLanguage and the Older Dialects of Veda and Brahmana. Second Edition.\n8vo, 12_s._\n\n\nSERBIAN.\n\n =MORFILL, W. R., Simplified Serbian Grammar.= Crown 8vo, 4_s._ 6_d._\n\n\nSOMALI.\n\n =Somali-English Dictionary.= Post 8vo. In the Press. Orders booked.\n\n\nSINHALESE.\n\n =MENDIS, GUNASEKARA A., A Comprehensive Grammar of the Sinhalese\n Language.= 8vo, 12_s._ 6_d._\n\n =Sinhalese Made Easy; or, Phrase-Book of Colloquial Sinhalese.=\n Revised and enlarged Edition. 12mo, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n\nSPANISH.\n\n =BEALE, ALFRED A., Excelsior English-Spanish and Spanish-English\n Dictionary.= Commercial and Technical. Foolscap 8vo, roan, 10_s._\n 6_d._\n\n =BUTLER, F., Spanish Teacher, and Colloquial Phrase-Book.= 18mo, half\n roan, 2_s._ 6_d._\n\n =VELASQUEZ, M. de la CADENA, Dictionary of the Spanish and English\n Languages.= For the use of Young Learners and Travellers. Crown 8vo,\n 6_s._\n\n =Pronouncing Dictionary of the Spanish and English Languages.= Royal\n 8vo, \u00a31 4_s._\n\n =New Spanish Reader.= Passages from the most approved Authors, with\n Vocabulary. Post 8vo, 6_s._\n\n =Introduction to Spanish Conversation.= 12mo, 2_s._ 6_d._\n\n=VELASQUEZ and SIMONN\u00c9, New Method of Learning the Spanish Language.=\nAdapted to Ollendorff's system. Revised and corrected by Senor VIVAR.\nPost 8vo, 6_s._; Key, 4_s._\n\n\nSUAHILI.\n\n =KRAPF, L., Dictionary of the Suahili Language.= 8vo, \u00a31 10_s._\n\n\nSWEDISH.\n\n =OTTE, E. C., Simplified Grammar of the Swedish Language.= Crown 8vo,\n 2_s._ 6_d._\n\n\nTAMIL.\n\n =ARDEN, A. H., A Progressive Grammar of Common Tamil.= 8vo, 5_s._\n\n =A Companion Reader to Arden's Progressive Tamil Grammar.= 2 vols.\n 8vo, 5_s._ each. Vol. I.: Companion Exercises and Easy Stories. Vol.\n II.: The Panchatranta in Tamil. #/\n\n\nTIBETAN.\n\n =J\u00c4SCHKE, H. A., Tibetan Grammar.= Prepared by Dr. H. WENZELL. Second\n Edition. Crown 8vo, 5_s._\n\n =Tibetan-English Dictionary.= With special reference to the prevailing\n dialects, to which is added an English-Tibetan Vocabulary. Royal 8vo,\n cloth. (Published \u00a31 10_s._) \u00a31 1_s._ #/\n\n\nTURKISH.\n\n =ARNOLD, Sir EDWIN, Grammar of the Turkish Language.= With Dialogues\n and Vocabulary. Post 8vo, 2_s._ 6_d._\n\n =REDHOUSE, J. W., Simplified Grammar of the Ottoman-Turkish Language.=\n Crown 8vo, 10_s._ 6_d._\n\n =Turkish Vade-Mecum of Ottoman Colloquial Language.= English-Turkish\n and Turkish-English, the whole in English Characters, the\n Pronunciation being fully indicated. Third Edition. 32mo, 6_s._ #/\n\n\nVOLAPUK.\n\n =SPRAGUE, C. E., Handbook of Volapuk.= The International Language.\n Second Edition. Crown 8vo, 5_s._\n\n\nZULU.\n\n =ROBERTS, C., An English-Zulu Dictionary.= Crown 8vo, 5_s._ net.\n\n =The Zulu-Kafir Language.= Crown 8vo, 6_s._ net. #/\n\n\n_X.--ORIENTAL._\n\nBRITISH INDIA.\n\n =ALB\u00caRUNI'S India: The Religion, Philosophy, Literature, &c., of India\n about A.D. 1030.= Arabic Text, edited by Prof. E. SACHAU, 1887. 4to,\n \u00a33 3_s._\n\n =ARNOLD, Sir EDWIN, India Revisited.= With 32 full-page Illustrations.\n Crown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n  (_See also class_ BELLES-LETTRES.)\n\n _BALDWIN, Capt. J. H., Large and Small Game of Bengal and the\n North-Western Provinces of India._ With Illustrations. Second Edition.\n Small 4to, 10_s._ 6_d._\n\n =BALL, V., Diamonds, Coal, and Gold of India.= Foolscap 8vo. 1881.\n 5_s._\n\n =BALLANTYNE, J. R., Sankhya Aphorisms of Kapila.= Translated and\n Edited. Third Edition. Post 8vo, 16_s._ (_Tr\u00fcbner's Oriental Series._)\n\n =BARTH, A., Religions of India.= Translated by the Rev. J. WOOD. Third\n Edition. Post 8vo, 16_s._ (_Tr\u00fcbner's Oriental Series._)\n\n =Bhagavad-Gita; or, The Song Celestial.= From the Sanskrit by Sir E.\n ARNOLD. Fifth Edition. 1894. Crown 8vo, 5_s._\n\n =Bhagavadgita.= With Commentary and Notes, as well as References\n to the Christian Scriptures. Translated from the Sanskrit by M.\n CHATTERJI. Second Edition. 1892. 8vo, 10_s._ 6_d._\n\n =Bhagavad-Gita.= English translation, with a Commentary and a few\n introductory papers by HURRYCHUND CHINTAMON. 1874. x. and 83 pp. 8vo,\n 6_s._\n\n =Bhagavad Gita; or, the Sacred Lay.= Translated, with notes, from\n the Sanskrit by J. DAVIES. Third Edition. 1893. Post 8vo, 6_s._\n (_Tr\u00fcbner's Oriental Series._)\n\n =BOSE, P. NATH., A History of Hindu Civilization during British Rule.=\n Vols. I. and II. together, 15_s._ net. Vol. III., 7_s._ 6_d._ net.\n Crown 8vo. To be completed in 4 volumes.\n\n =BOYD, P., Nagananda=; or, the Joy of the Snake World. From the\n Sanskrit of Sri-Harsha-Deva. 1872. Crown 8vo, 4_s._ 6_d._\n\n  _BRITISH MUSEUM CATALOGUES OF INDIAN LITERATURE._\n\n  _Special List Sent on Application._\n\n =BURNELL, A. C., South Indian Pal\u00e6ography, from the 4th to the 17th\n Century.= Enlarged Edition, with Map and Plates. 4to, \u00a32 12_s._ 6_d._\n\n =Ordinances of Manu.= Translated from the Sanskrit, with introduction.\n Completed and edited by E. W. Hopkins. 1884. Post 8vo, 12_s._\n (_Tr\u00fcbner's Oriental Series._)\n\n=CHRISTIAN, J., Behar Proverbs.= Classified and arranged according to\nsubject-matter, with notes. 1890. Post 8vo, 10_s._ 6_d._ (_Tr\u00fcbner's\nOriental Series._)\n\n=COTTON, H. J. S., New India=; or, India in Transition. Third Edition.\nCrown 8vo, 4_s._ 6_d._\n\n=COWELL, Prof. E. B., Short Introduction to the Ordinary Prakrit of\nthe Sanskrit Dramas=. 1875. Crown 8vo, 3_s._\n6_d._\n\n =Prakrita-Prakasa; or, The Prakrit Grammar of Vararuchi.= With the\n Commentary (Manorama) of Bhamaha. 1868. 8vo, 14_s._\n\n=COWELL= and =GOUGH, A. E., The Sarva-Darsana-Samgraha=; or, Review of\nthe Different Systems of Hindu Philosophy. 1882. Post 8vo, 10_s._ 6_d._\n(_Tr\u00fcbner's Oriental Series._)\n\n=CUNNINGHAM, Major-Genl. ALEX., Ancient Geography of= India. Vol. I.:\nThe Buddhist Period. With 13 Maps. 1870. 8vo, \u00a31 8_s._\n\n=DAVIES, J., S[=a]nkhya K[=a]rik[=a] of Iswara Krishna.= An Exposition\nof the System of Kapila. 1881. Post 8vo, 6_s._ (_Tr\u00fcbner's Oriental\nSeries._)\n\n=DOWSON, J., Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology and History,\nGeography and Literature.= 1879. Post 8vo, 16_s._ (_Tr\u00fcbner's Oriental\nSeries._)\n\n=DUTT, ROMESH CHUNDER, History of Civilisation in Ancient India, based\non Sanskrit Literature.= Revised Edition in 2 vols. 1894. 8vo, 21_s._\n\n =Lays of Ancient India.= Selections from Indian Poetry rendered into\n English verse. 1894. Post 8vo, 7_s._ 6_d._\n\n=DUTT, TORU, Ancient Ballads and Legends of Hindustan.= With an\nIntroductory Memoir by EDMUND GOSSE. 18mo, cloth extra, gilt top, 5_s._\n\n=EDGREN, H., Compendious Sanskrit Grammar.= With a brief sketch of\nscenic Prakrit. Crown 8vo, 10_s._ 6_d._ (Forms a volume of _Tr\u00fcbner's\nCollection of Simplified Grammars_.)\n\n=ELLIOT, Sir H. M., History of India, as told by its own Historians.=\nThe Muhammadan Period. Revised and continued by Professor JOHN DOWSON.\n8vols. 1871-77. 8vo, \u00a38 8_s._\n\n =History, Folk-lore, and Distribution of the Races of the\n North-Western Provinces of India.= Edited by J. BEAMES. With three\n coloured Maps. 2 vols. 1869. 8vo, \u00a31 16_s._\n\n=FERGUSSON, J., Arch\u00e6ology in India.= vii. and 115 pp. text, with\nnumerous Cuts. 1884. 8vo, 5_s._\n\n=FERGUSSON, J.=, and =BURGESS, J., The Cave Temples of India.= 536 pp.\ntext, with one hundred Plates. 1880. 4to, half calf (Pub. at \u00a32 2_s._)\n\u00a31 11_s._ 6_d._\n\n=GOUGH, A. E., Philosophy of the Upanishads.= 1882. Post 8vo, 9_s._\n(_Tr\u00fcbner's Oriental Series._)\n\n=GOVER, C. E., Folk Songs of Southern India.= Containing Canarese,\nBadaga, Coorg, Tamil, Malayalam, and Telugu Songs. 8vo, 10_s._ 6_d._\n\n=GRAY, J., Ancient Proverbs and Maxims from Burmese Sources=; or,\nThe Niti Literature of Burmah. Post 8vo, 6_s._ (_Tr\u00fcbner's Oriental\nSeries._)\n\n=GRIFFIN, Sir LEPEL, The Rajas of the Punjab.= History of the principal\nStates in the Punjab, and their political relations with the British\nGovernment. 1870. Royal 8vo, 21_s._\n\n=HAIG, Maj.-Gen., The Indus Delta Country.= With 3 Maps. 1895. Royal\n8vo, 5_s._ net.\n\n=HAUG, M., Essays on the Sacred Language, Writings, and Religion of the\nParsis.= Third Edition. Edited and enlarged by E. W. WEST. 1884. Post\n8vo, 16_s._ (_Tr\u00fcbner's Oriental Series._)\n\n=HODGSON, B. H., Essays on the Languages, Literature, and Religion of\nNepal and Tibet.= 1874. 8vo, 14_s._\n\n =Miscellaneous Essays relating to Indian Subjects.= 2 vols. 1880. Post\n 8vo, 28_s._ (_Tr\u00fcbner's Oriental Series._)\n\n=HUNTER, Sir W. W., Imperial Gazetteer of India.= Second Edition,\nenlarged and revised. 14 vols. 1885-87. 8vo, half calf. (Pub. at \u00a33\n3_s._) \u00a32 2_s._\n\n=Imperial Series of the Reports of the Arch\u00e6ological Survey of India.=\n_List Sent on Application._\n\n=JACOB, G. A., Manual of Hindu Pantheism.= The Ved\u00e2ntas\u00e2ra. Translated,\nwith Annotations, &c. Third Edition. 1891. Post 8vo, 6_s._ (_Tr\u00fcbner's\nOriental Series._)\n\n=JOHNSON, S., Oriental Religions, and their Relation to Universal\nReligion: India.= 2 vols. 1879. 402 and 408 pp. 8vo, \u00a31 1_s._\n(_Tr\u00fcbner's Philosophical Library._)\n\n=KNOWLES, J. H., Folk Tales of Kashmir.= 1888. Post 8vo, 16_s._\n(_Tr\u00fcbner's Oriental Series._)\n\n=Koran.= Selections from it, with a commentary. Translated by E. W.\nLANE. New Revised Edition, with Introduction by S. LANE-POOLE. 1879.\nPost 8vo, 9_s._ (_Tr\u00fcbner's Oriental Series._)\n\n=Mahabharata.= Translated literally from the original Sanskrit text\ninto English prose by M. N. DUTT, M.A. To be complete in 30 parts, of\nwhich the first three are out. Subscription price to the whole work, \u00a31\n5_s._\n\n=Mahabharata.= Translated into English prose by the late PROTAP CHUNDRA\nR[=O]Y. Price of the whole work, bound in 10 vols. 8vo, \u00a310 10_s._\n\n=MAISEY, Gen. F. C., Sanchi and its Remains.= With Introductory Note by\nthe late Maj.-Gen. Sir ALEX. CUNNINGHAM. With 40 plates. 1892. Royal\n4to, \u00a32 10_s._\n\n=Manava-Dharma-Castra, the Code of Manu.= Original Sanskrit text.\nEdited, with critical Notes, by JULIUS JOLLY. 1887. Post 8vo, 10_s_.\n6_d_. (_Tr\u00fcbner's Oriental Series._)\n\n=MASON, F., Burma, its People, and Productions.= Being Notes on the\nFauna, Flora, and Minerals of Tenasserim, Pegu, and Burma. New Edition,\nre-written and enlarged by W. THEOBALD. 2 vols. 1884. 4to. (Pub. at \u00a33\n3_s._) \u00a31 11_s._ 6_d._\n\n=MUIR, J., Original Sanskrit Texts, on the Origin and History of\nthe People of India, their Religion and Institutions.= Collected,\nTranslated, and Illustrated by JOHN MUIR. 5 vols. 8vo. Price of a\ncomplete set, \u00a35 5_s._ Sold only in sets.\n\n=M\u00dcLLER, MAX, Sacred Hymns of the Bramins=, as preserved in the\nRig-Veda-Sanhita. Translated from the Sanskrit. Vol. I.: Hymns to the\nMaruts, or the Storm-Gods. 1869. 8vo, 12_s._ 6_d._\n\n =Hymns of the Rig-Veda.= In the Sanhita and Pada texts. Reprinted from\n the Edition Princeps. 2 vols. Second Edition. 1877. 8vo. (Pub. at \u00a31\n 12_s._) 16_s._\n\n=Naradiya Dharma-Sastra=; or, The Institutes of Narada. Translated from\nthe Sanskrit by JULIUS JOLLY. 1876. Crown 8vo, 10_s._ 6_d._\n\n=PICKFORD, J., Maha-vira-Charita=; or, The Adventures of the Great Hero\nRama. From the Sanskrit of Bhavabh\u00fcti. 1871. Crown 8vo, 5_s._\n\n=ROUTLEDGE, J., English Rule and Native Opinion in India.= From notes\ntaken in 1870-74. 1878. 8vo, 10_s._ 6_d._\n\n=SCOTT, J. G., Burma as it Was, as it Is, and as it Will Be.= Cheap\nEdition. 1886. Crown 8vo, 2_s._ 6_d._\n\n=STRACHEY, Sir J., India., with map.= New Edition. 1894. Crown 8vo,\n6_s._\n\n=WATT, G., A Dictionary of the Economic Products of India.= 6 volumes,\nbound in 9. 1889-1893. Royal 8vo, half calf, \u00a33 3_s._\n\n=WEBER, A., History of Indian Literature.= Translated from the German.\nThird Edition. 1890. Post 8vo, 10_s._ 6_d._ (_Tr\u00fcbner's Oriental\nSeries._)\n\n=WHEELER, J. TALBOYS, History of India.= From the Earliest Ages down to\nthe time of the Mughul Empire. 5 vols. 1867-1881. 8vo, \u00a36 6_s._ net. Or\nseparate, except vol. I.\n\n =Early Records of British India.= A History of the English Settlements\n in India. 1878. Royal 8vo, 15_s._\n\n=WILLIAMS, Sir M. MONIER, Modern India and the Indians.= Fifth Edition.\nPost 8vo, 14_s._ (_Tr\u00fcbner's Oriental Series._)\n\n=WILSON, H. H., Complete Works.= 12 vols., bound in 13. 1862-77. 8vo,\n\u00a310 10_s._ net.\n\n =Rig-Veda-Sanhita.= A Collection of Ancient Hindu Hymns. From the\n Sanskrit. Edited by E. B. COWELL and W. F. WEBSTER, 6 vols. 1854-1888.\n 8vo, \u00a36 6_s._ net.\n\n =The Megha-Duta (Cloud Messenger).= Translated into English verse with\n the Sanskrit text of Kalidasa. Third Edition. 1867. 4to, 10_s._ 6_d._\n\n\nCENTRAL AND WESTERN ASIA.\n\n =BRETSCHNEIDER, E., Medi\u00e6val Researches from Eastern Asiatic Sources.=\n Fragments towards the Knowledge of the Geography and History of\n Central and Western Asia, from the 13th to the 17th Century. 2 vols.\n With two Maps. 1888. Post 8vo, 21_s._ (_Tr\u00fcbner's Oriental Series._)\n\n =Papers Relating to Indo-China.= Reprinted from Dalrymple's \"Oriental\n Repertory,\" \"Asiatic Researches,\" and the \"Journal\" of the Asiatic\n Society of Bengal. 2 vols. 1886. Post 8vo, 21_s._\n\n =----Second Series.= Edited by the late R. ROST. With Plates, and a\n Map. 2 vols. 1887. 25_s._ (_Tr\u00fcbner's Oriental Series._)\n\n =RALSTON, W. R. S., Tibetan Tales.= Derived from Indian sources. Done\n into English from the German of F. ANTON VON SCHIEFNER. 1882. Post\n 8vo, 14_s._ (_Tr\u00fcbner's Oriental Series._)\n\n\nCHINA.\n\n =ALEXANDER, Maj.-Gen. G. G., Confucius, the Great Teacher.= Crown 8vo,\n 6_s._\n\n =Lao-tsze, the Great Thinker.= Crown 8vo, 5_s._\n\n=ALLEN, C. F. ROMILLY, Book of Chinese Poetry.= Being the Collection\nof Ballads, Sagas, Hymns, and other Pieces known as the Shih Ching,\nmetrically translated. 8vo, 16_s._\n\n=BALFOUR, F. H., Leaves from my Chinese Scrap-Book.= Post 8vo, 7_s._\n6_d._\n\n=DENNYS, N. B., Folk-Lore of China, and its Affinities with that of the\nAryan and Semitic Races.= 8vo, 10_s._ 6_d._\n\n=DOUGLAS, Prof. R. K., Catalogue of Chinese Printed Books, Manuscripts,\nand Drawings in the Library of the British Museum.= 4to, 20_s._\n\n =Chinese Language and Literature.= Crown 8vo, 5_s._\n\n =Life of Jenghiz Khan.= Translated from the Chinese. Crown 8vo, 5_s._\n\n=EDKINS, J., D.D., Religion in China.= Containing a Brief Account of\nthe Three Religions of the Chinese. Third Edition. Post 8vo, 7_s._\n6_d._ (_Tr\u00fcbner's Oriental Series._)\n\n=FABER, E., The Mind of Mencius=; or, Political Economy Founded upon\nMoral Philosophy. A Systematic Digest of the Doctrines of the Chinese\nPhilosopher Mencius. Translated from the German, with Additional Notes,\nby A. B. HUTCHINSON. Post 8vo, 10_s._ 6_d._ (_Tr\u00fcbner's Oriental\nSeries._)\n\n=FERGUSSON, T., Chinese Researches, Chinese Chronology and Cycles.=\nCrown 8vo, 10_s._ 6_d._\n\n=HAHN, T., Tsuni-Goam, the Supreme Being of the Khoi-Khoi.= Post 8vo,\n7_s._ 6_d._ (_Tr\u00fcbner's Oriental Series._)\n\n=JOHNSON, S., Oriental Religions and their Relation to Universal\nReligion.= China. 8vo, cloth, 25_s._\n\n=LEGGE, JAMES, Chinese Classics.= Translated into English. Popular\nEdition. Crown 8vo.\n\n  Vol.   I.--=Life and Teachings of Confucius.= Sixth Edition.\n              10_s._ 6_d._\n   \"    II.--=Works of Mencius.= 12_s._\n   \"   III.--=She-King, or Book of Poetry.= 12_s._\n\n=SMITH, ARTHUR H., Chinese Characteristics.= Second Edition. Revised,\nwith Illustrations. 8vo, 10_s._ 6_d._\n\n\nEGYPT AND ASSYRIA.\n\n=BRITISH MUSEUM PUBLICATIONS:=\n\n =TYLOR, J. J., Wall Drawings and Monuments of El Kab.= Part I.:\n Paheri. 18 Plates. With Notes by SOMERS CLARKE. \u00a32 2_s._ [Other Parts\n in preparation.]\n\n =BUDGE, E. A. WALLIS, Book of the Dead.= The Papyrus of Ani, in the\n British Museum. With Translation and Transliteration. 4to, half\n morocco, \u00a31 10_s._\n\n =Archaic Classics, Assyrian Texts.= Being Extracts from the Annals of\n Shalmaneser II., Sennacherib, and Assur-Bani-Pal, with Philological\n Notes. Small 4to, 7_s._ 6_d._\n\n =History of Esarhaddon= (Son of Sennacherib), King of Assyria, B.C.\n 681-668. Translated from the Cuneiform Inscriptions in the British\n Museum. Post 8vo, 10_s._ 6_d._ (_Tr\u00fcbner's Oriental Series._)\n\n=Inscriptions in the Hieratic and Demotic Character.= Folio, \u00a31 7_s._\n6_d._\n\n=Egyptian Texts of the Earliest Period.= From the coffin of Amamu. 32\nColoured Plates. Folio, \u00a32 2_s._\n\n=Fac-simile of an Egyptian Hieratic Papyrus of the Reign of Rameses\nIII.=, now in the British Museum. Folio, \u00a33.\n\n=Photographs of the Papyrus of Nebseni=, in the British Museum.\nUnmounted, \u00a32 2_s._ Or, Mounted and in portfolio, on special terms.\n\n=EGYPT EXPLORATION FUND:=\n\n  =MEMOIRS.=\n\n  Vol.   I.--=The Store City of Pithom, and the Route of the Exodus.=\n  By E. NAVILLE. Third Edition. 1887. Out of print.\n\n   \"    II.--=Tanis.= Part I., by W. M. FLINDERS PETRIE. Second\n  Edition. 1888. \u00a31 5_s._\n\n   \"   III.--=Naukratis.= Part I. By W. M. FLINDERS PETRIE. Third\n  Edition. 1888. \u00a31 5_s._\n\n   \"    IV.--=Goshen, and the Shrine of Saft-el-Henneh.= By E.\n  NAVILLE. Second Edition. 1888. \u00a31 5_s._\n\n   \"     V.--=Tanis.= Part II. Including Tell Defenneh, and Tell\n  Nebesheh. By W. M. FLINDERS PETRIE, etc. 1888.\n  \u00a31 5_s._\n\n   \"    VI.--=Naukratis.= Part II. By E. A. GARDNER and F. L.\n  GRIFFITH. 1889. \u00a31 5_s._\n\n   \"   VII.--=The City of Divas, and the Mound of the Jew.= By E.\n  NAVILLE and F. L. GRIFFITH. 1890. \u00a31 5_s._\n\n   \"  VIII.--=Bubastis.= By E. NAVILLE. 1891. \u00a31 5_s._\n\n   \"    IX.--=Two Hieroglyphic Papyri from Tanis.= 1891. 5_s._\n              I. The Sign Papyrus. By F. L. GRIFFITH.\n             II. The Geographical Papyrus. By W. M. FLINDERS PETRIE.\n\n   \"     X.--=The Festival Hall of Osorkon II.= (Bubastis). By E.\n  NAVILLE. 1892. \u00a31 5_s._\n\n   \"   XI.--=Ahnas el Medineh.= By E. Naville. And =The Tomb\n  of Paheri at El Kab.= By J. J. TYLOR and F. L.\n  GRIFFITH. 1894. \u00a31 5_s._\n\n   \"  XII.--=Deir el Bahari.= Introductory Volume. By E. NAVILLE.\n  1894. \u00a31 5_s._\n\n   \" XIII.--=Temple of Deir el Bahari.= By E. NAVILLE. Part I.\n  1896. \u00a31 10_s._\n\n =Atlas of Ancient Egypt.= Second Edition. Revised. Small 4to, 3_s._\n 6_d._\n\n=LE PLONGEON, AUGUSTUS, Queen Moo and the Sphinx.= Royal 8vo, \u00a31 10_s._\nnet.\n\n=MARIETTE, ALPHONSE, The Monuments of Upper Egypt.= Crown 8vo, 7_s._\n6_d._\n\n=PATON, A. A., History of the Egyptian Revolution.= From the Period of\nthe Mamelukes to the death of Mohammed Ali. Second Edition. 2 vols.\n8vo, 7_s._ 6_d._\n\n  =PUBLICATIONS OF THE ARCH\u00c6OLOGICAL SURVEY\n  OF EGYPT:=\n\n FIRST MEMOIR.--=Beni Hasan.= Part I. By P. E. NEWBERRY. 1890-91. \u00a31\n 5_s._\n\n SECOND MEMOIR.--=Beni Hasan.= Part II. By P. E. NEWBERRY and G. W.\n FRASER. 1891-92. \u00a31 5_s._\n\n THIRD MEMOIR.--=El Bersheh.= Part I. By P. E. NEWBERRY. 1892-93. \u00a31\n 5_s._\n\n FOURTH MEMOIR.--=El Bersheh.= Part II. By F. L. GRIFFITH and P. E.\n NEWBERRY. 1893-94. \u00a31 5_s._\n\n FIFTH MEMOIR.--=Beni Hasan.= Part III. By F. L. GRIFFITH. \u00a31 5_s._\n\n=SANDWITH, F. M., Egypt as a Winter Resort.= Crown 8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n\nISLAM.\n\n =BLUNT, W. S., The Future of Islam.= Crown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n =BROWN, J. P., The Dervishes.= With Illustrations. 1868. Crown 8vo,\n 14_s._\n\n =BUNSEN, ERNEST DE, Islam, or True Christianity.= Crown 8vo, 5_s._\n\n =HUNTER, Sir W. W., The Indian Musalmans.= Third Edition. 1876. 8vo,\n 10_s._ 6_d._\n\n =LANE, E. W., Selections from the Koran.= New Edition. With\n Introduction by STANLEY LANE-POOLE. Post 8vo, 9_s._ (_Tr\u00fcbner's\n Oriental Series._)\n\n =REDHOUSE, J. W., History, System, and Varieties of Turkish Poetry.=\n Illustrated by Specimens in the Original English Paraphrase. 8vo,\n 2_s._ 6_d._\n\n =The Mesnevi.= Usually known as the Mesnev[=i]yi Sher[=i]f, or Holy\n Mesnev[=i] of Mevl[=a]n[=a] (Our Lord), Jel[=a]lu'd-Din Muhammed\n Er-R[=u]m[=i]. Illustrated by a Selection of Characteristic Anecdotes.\n Translated by J. W. REDHOUSE. Post 8vo, \u00a31 1_s._ (_Tr\u00fcbner's Oriental\n Series._)\n\n =Tentative Chronological Synopsis of the History of Arabia and its\n Neighbours, from B.C. 500,000 (?) to A.D. 679.= 8vo, paper, 1_s._\n\n=SELL, Rev. EDWARD, The Faith of Islam.= Second Edition, Revised. Post\n8vo, 12_s._ 6_d._ (_Tr\u00fcbner's Oriental Library._)\n\n=WHERRY, A Comprehensive Commentary to the Quran.= To which is Prefixed\nSale's Preliminary Discourse, with additional Notes and Emendations.\nTogether with a Complete Index to the Text, Preliminary Discourse, and\nNotes. Vols. I., II., and III., 12_s._ 6_d._ each. Vol. IV., 10_s._\n6_d._\n\n=WRIGHT, W., Book of Kalilah and Dimnah.= Translated from Arabic into\nSyriac, with Preface and Glossary in English. 8vo, 21_s._\n\n\nJAPAN.\n\n =CHAMBERLAIN, BASIL, Classical Poetry of the Japanese.= Post 8vo,\n 7_s._ 6_d._ (_Tr\u00fcbner's Oriental Series._)\n\n =Things Japanese.= Second Edition. Crown 8vo, 8_s._ 6_d._\n\n=Chushingura, or the Loyal Retainers of Akao.= Translated by JUKICHI\nINOUYE, with numerous Illustrations by EISEN TOMIOKA. 8vo, 3_s._ 6_d._\n\n=GOWER, Lord RONALD, Notes of a Tour from Brindisi to Yokohama,\n1883-84.= Foolscap 8vo, 2_s._ 6_d._\n\n=GRIFFIS, W. E., The Mikado's Empire.= Book I.--History of Japan from\nB.C. 660 to A.D. 1872. Book II.--Personal Experiences, Observations,\nand Studies in Japan, 1870-74. Second Edition. Illustrated. 8vo, 20_s._\n\n=History of the Empire of Japan.= Compiled and Translated under\nthe direction of the Department of Education, Tokyo. With numerous\nIllustrations, of which some are in Colours and Collotype, and a Map.\nvi. and 428 pp. of text. 1893. 8vo, boards, 12_s._ 6_d._\n\n  [asterism] The Illustrations are printed on Japanese paper.\n\n=Nihongi; or, Chronicles of Japan from the Earliest Times to A.D. 697.=\nTranslated from the original Chinese and Japanese, by W. G. ASTON. Vol.\nI. 1896. 8vo. Price, complete in 2 vols., 21_s._\n\n=SALWAY, CHARLOTTE M., Fans of Japan.= With 10 full-page Coloured\nPlates, and 39 Blocks in Text. Royal 4to, 31_s._ 6_d._ net.\n\n=TAYUI, R., The Commercial Guide and Trade Directory of Japan.= Royal\n8vo, cloth, \u00a31 1_s._\n\n=WENCKSTERN, F. von, Bibliography of the Japanese Empire.= Being a\nClassified List of all Books, Essays, and Maps in European Languages,\nrelating to Dai Nihon, published in Europe, America, and the East,\nfrom 1859-93, to which is added a _fac-simile_ reprint of L\u00e9on Pag\u00e8s'\n_Bibliographie japonaise depuis le XV^e. si\u00e8cle jusqu'\u00e0 1859_. 1895.\nLarge 8vo, \u00a31 5_s._ net.\n\n\nORIENTAL BUDDHISM.\n\n =BEAL, S., The Romantic Legend of Sakya Buddha.= From the Chinese\n Sanskrit. 1875. Crown 8vo, 12_s._\n\n =Life of Hiuen-Tsiang.= By the Shamans HWUI LI and YEN-TSUNG, with an\n Account of the Works of I-TSING. Post 8vo, 10_s._ (_Tr\u00fcbner's Oriental\n Series._)\n\n =Dhammapada.=--Texts from the Buddhist Canon, commonly known as\n Dhammapada. Translated from the Chinese. Post 8vo, 7_s._ 6_d._\n (_Tr\u00fcbner's Oriental Series._)\n\n =Catena of Buddhist Scriptures.= From the Chinese. 8vo, 15_s._\n\n =Si-Yu-Ki: Buddhist Records of the Western World.= Translated from\n the Chinese of HIUEN TSIANG (A.D. 629). With Maps. 2 vols. Post 8vo,\n 24_s._ (_Tr\u00fcbner's Oriental Series._)\n\n=BIKSHU, SUBHADRA, Buddhist Catechism.= 12mo, 2_s._\n\n=EDKINS, J., D.D., Chinese Buddhism.= Sketches Historical and Critical.\nPost 8vo, 18_s._ (_Tr\u00fcbner's Oriental Series._)\n\n=EITEL, E. J., Chinese Buddhism.= Handbook for the Student of. Second\nEdition. Crown 8vo, 18_s._\n\n=FAUSBOLL, V., The Jataka.= Together with its Commentary, being tales\nof the anterior birth of Gotama Buddha. Now first published in Pali.\nVols. I.-VI. 8vo, 28_s._ each.\n\n=JENNINGS, H., The Indian Religions=; or, Results of the Mysterious\nBuddhism. 1890. 8vo, 10_s._ 6_d._\n\n=KISTNER, O., Buddha and his Doctrines.= A Bibliographical Essay. 4to,\n2_s._ 6_d._\n\n=LILLIE, A., Popular Life of Buddha.= Containing an answer to the\nHibbert Lectures of 1881. With Illustrations. 1883. Crown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n =Buddhism in Christendom=; or, Jesus the Essene. With Illustrations.\n 1887. 8vo, 15_s._\n\n=RHYS-DAVIDS, T. W., Buddhist Birth-Stories=; or, Jataka\nTales. The Oldest Collection of Folk-Lore extant. Being the\nJ[=a]takatthavannan[=a], translated from the Pali Text of V. FAUSBOLL.\nVol. I. Post 8vo, 18_s._ (_Tr\u00fcbner's Oriental Series._)\n\n=ROCKHILL, W. W., Life of the Buddha and the Early History of\nhis Order.= Derived from Tibetan works in the Bkah-Hgyur and the\nBstan-Hgyur. 1884. Post 8vo, 10_s._ 6_d._ (_Tr\u00fcbner's Oriental Series._)\n\n =Udanavarga.= A collection of Verses from the Buddhist Canon. Compiled\n by DHARMATR\u00c2TA, and translated from the Tibetan. 1883. Post 8vo, 9_s._\n (_Tr\u00fcbner's Oriental Series._)\n\n=SWAMY, Sir M. C., Sutta Nipata=; or, Dialogues and Discourses of\nGotama Buddha. Translated from the Original Pali. Crown 8vo, 6_s._\n\n =The Dathavansa=; or, the History of the Tooth Relic of Gotama\n Buddha., Pali Text with Translation. 8vo, 10_s._ 6_d._ English\n Translation only, 6_s._\n\n  (_See also under_ CHINA.)\n\n\nPERSIAN.\n\n =HAFIZ, The Divan.= By KHWAJA SHAMSU-D-DIN MUHAMMAD-I-HAFIZ-I-SHIRAZI.\n Translated into English Prose, with Remarks, etc., by Lieut.-Col. H.\n WILBERFORCE CLARKE. Vols. I. and II. 1891. 4to, cloth, \u00a32 12_s._ 6_d._\n Vol. III., 4to, cloth, \u00a31 11_s._\n\n =HAFIZ, of Shiraz, Selections from His Poems.= Translated from the\n Persian by H. BICKNELL. 1875. 4to, cloth, \u00a32 2_s._\n\n =JOHNSON, S., Oriental Religions and their Relation to Universal\n Religion.= Persia. 8vo, 18_s._\n\n =OMAR KHAYYAM, The Quatrains.= Persian Text with an English Verse\n Translation by E. H. WHINFIELD. 1883. Post 8vo, cloth, 10_s._ 6_d._\n (_Tr\u00fcbner's Oriental Series._)\n\n =The Quatrains.= New Translation into English Verse by E. H.\n WHINFIELD. 1881. Post 8vo, cloth, 5_s._ (_Tr\u00fcbner's Oriental Series._)\n\n=RIEU, C., Catalogue of Persian Manuscripts in the British Museum.= 3\nvols. 1879-83. 4to, cloth, 25_s._ each volume.\n\n=SA'D UD DIN MAHMUD SHABISTARI. Gulshan i Raz (the Mystic Rose\nGarden).= Persian Text with an English Translation, Notes, and a\nCommentary, by E. H. WHINFIELD. 1880. 4to, cloth, 10_s._ 6_d._\n\n =The Gulistan, or Rose Garden of Shekh Mushliu'd-Din Sadi of Shiraz.=\n Translated from the Atish Kadah, by E. B. EASTWICK. Second Edition.\n Post 8vo, 10_s._ 6_d._ (_Tr\u00fcbner's Oriental Series._)\n\n=Vazir of Lankuran.= A Persian Play, with a Grammatical Introduction,\nTranslation, Notes, and Vocabulary, by W. H. HAGGARD and G. LE STRANGE.\nCrown 8vo, 10_s._ 6_d._\n\n\n_XI.--BIBLIOGRAPHY, PERIODICALS, AND PUBLICATIONS OF SOCIETIES._\n\n\nBIBLIOGRAPHY.\n\n =ALLIBONE, S. A., Dictionary of English Literature and British and\n American Authors.= From the Earliest Accounts to the Latter Half of\n the 19th Century. 3 vols. Royal 8vo, \u00a35 8_s._ SUPPLEMENT, 1891, 2\n vols. royal 8vo, \u00a33 3_s._\n\n =Bibliographica--3 Volumes.= Containing the 12 parts. Bound in half\n morocco (Roxburgh style). Large Imperial 8vo, \u00a32 2_s._ net. each.\n\n =British Museum Publications.= List on application.\n\n =DUFF, E. GORDON, Early Printed Books.= With Frontispiece and Ten\n Plates. Post 8vo, 6_s._ net. (_Books about Books._)\n\n =ELTON, CHARLES and MARY, The Great Book Collectors.= With 10\n Illustrations. Post 8vo, 6_s._ net. (_Books about Books._)\n\n =FLETCHER, W. YOUNGER, English Bookbindings in the British Museum.=\n With 66 plates. Printed in _fac-simile_ by W. GRIGGS. Folio, limited\n to 500 copies, \u00a33 3_s._ net.\n\n =HARDY, W. J., Book Plates.= With Frontispiece and 36 Illustrations of\n Book Plates. Post 8vo, 6_s._ net. (_Books about Books._)\n\n =HORNE, H. P., The Binding of Books.= With 12 Plates. Post 8vo, 6_s._\n net. (_Books about Books._)\n\n =IBRAHIM, HIMLY, Prince, The Literature of Egypt and the Soudan.=\n A Bibliography, comprising Printed Books, Periodical Writings,\n and Papers of Learned Societies, Maps and Charts, Ancient Papyri\n Manuscripts, Drawings, etc. 2 vols. Demy 4to, \u00a33 3_s._\n\n =Japan, Bibliography of.= (_See_ ORIENTAL.)\n\n =MADAN, FALCONER, Books in Manuscript.= With 8 Plates. Post 8vo, 6_s._\n net. (_Books about Books._)\n\n =POLLARD, A. W., Early Illustrated Books.= With Plates. Post 8vo,\n 6_s._ net. (_Books about Books._)\n\n =POOLE, W. F., Index to Periodical Literature.= Revised Edition. Royal\n 8vo, \u00a33 13_s._ 6_d._ net. FIRST SUPPLEMENT, 1882 to 1887. Royal 8vo,\n \u00a32 net. SECOND SUPPLEMENT, 1887 to 1892. Royal 8vo, \u00a32 net.\n\n =SLATER, J. H., Early Editions.= A Bibliographical Survey of the Works\n of some Popular Authors. 8vo, 21_s._ net. Interleaved with Writing\n Paper, 26_s._ net.\n\n =SWINBURNE, Bibliography of Algernon Charles Swinburne from 1857 to\n 1887.= Crown 8vo, vellum, gilt, 6_s._\n\n =THACKERAY, Bibliography of.= Sultan Stork, and other Stories and\n Sketches, 1829-44, now first collected. To which is added the\n Bibliography of Thackeray. Large 8vo, 10_s._ 6_d._\n\n =THOMPSON, Sir E. MAUNDE, English Illuminated Manuscripts.= With 21\n Plates in Chromo-Lithography. Imperial 8vo, 18_s._ net.\n\n =TR\u00dcBNER'S Bibliographical Guide to American Literature from 1817 to\n 1887.= 8vo, half bound, 18_s._\n\n =Catalogue of Dictionaries and Grammars of the Principal Languages and\n Dialects of the World.= Second Edition. 8vo, 5_s._ #/\n\n\nPERIODICALS AND SOCIETIES.\n\n =Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland, Journal of.=\n Quarterly. 5_s._\n\n =Antiquarian Magazine and Bibliographer, The.= Edited by EDWARD\n WALFORD and G. W. REDWAY. Complete in 12 vols. 8vo, \u00a33 net.\n\n =Asiatic Society of Bengal, Journal.= 8vo, 3_s._ per number.\n Proceedings, 1_s._ per number.\n\n =Asiatic Society, Royal.= Bombay Branch. Journal. Irregular.\n\n =Asiatic Society, Royal.= Ceylon Branch. Journal. Irregular.\n\n =Asiatic Society, Royal.= China Branch. Journal. Irregular.\n\n =Asiatic Society, Royal.= Straits Branch. Journal. Irregular.\n\n =Asiatic Society.= Japan Branch. Transactions. Irregular.\n\n =Bibliotheca Sacra.= Quarterly, 3_s._ 6_d._ Annual Subscription, 14_s._\n\n =British Chess Magazine.= Monthly, 9_d._\n\n =Calcutta Review.= Quarterly, 6_s._\n\n =Imperial Institute Year Book.= 10_s._ net.\n\n =Index Medicus.= A Monthly Classified Record of the Current Medical\n Literature of the World. Annual Subscription, 50_s._\n\n =Indian Antiquary.= A Journal of Oriental Research in Arch\u00e6ology,\n History, Literature, Languages, Philosophy, Religion, Folk-lore, etc.\n Annual Subscription, \u00a31 16_s._\n\n =Indian Evangelical Review.= Annual Subscription, 10_s._\n\n =Psychical Research Society, Proceedings.= Irregular.\n\n =Sanitarian.= Devoted to the Preservation of Health, Mental and\n Physical Culture. Monthly. Annual Subscription, 18_s._\n\n =Science.= Weekly. Annual Subscription, \u00a31 2_s._\n\n =Scientific American.= Weekly. Annual Subscription, 18_s._\n\n =Scientific American, Export Edition.= Monthly. Annual Subscription,\n \u00a31 5_s._\n\n =Scientific American, Building Edition.= Monthly. Annual Subscription,\n 14_s._.\n\n --------=Supplement.= Weekly. Annual Subscription, \u00a31 5_s._\n\n =Tropical Agriculturist.= Monthly. Annual Subscription, \u00a31 6_s._\n\n =Parents' Review.= Monthly, 6_d._\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n =Messrs. KEGAN PAUL, TRENCH, TR\u00dcBNER & CO., Ltd, are also Publishers\n to the following Societies, etc., lists of publications of which may\n be had on application:=\n\n  =The Chaucer Society.=\n  =The Early English Text Society.=\n  =The New Shakspere Society.=\n  =The Wagner Society.=\n  =The British Museum.=\n  =The Geological Survey of India.=\n  =The India Office.=\n  =The Egypt Exploration Fund.=\n\nPlymouth: W. BRENDON and SON, Printers\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n  Transcriber's Note\n\n  Obvious typographical errors have been corrected, but inconsistencies\n  of spelling, hyphenation and accent have been retained.\n\n  The table of contents confuses Translator's Preface and Prefatory\n  Essay by the Translator, omitting the second of these. This has been\n  corrected.\n\n  Italics are represented thus, _italics_ and bold thus, =bold=.\n\n  The list of publications contains a number of asterisms shown as\n  [asterism] and several macron accented vowels shown as, for example\n  [=a].\n\n  The page reference in the book catalogue index to Theosophy has been\n  corrected.","title":"The Introduction to Hegel's Philosophy of Fine Arts: Translated from the German with Notes and Prefatory Essay","tradition":"philosophy-ethics","translated_text":null,"word_count":73383}