Page:American Historical Review vol. 6.djvu/550

540 Rez'iezvs of Books the influence of a generation of criticism. It would probably be incor- rect to say that Dr. Purves has proved an exception to such an expecta- tion, but his work gives but few evidences of critical influence. In ac- cordance with the admirable plan of the series to which his volume belongs, he has considered briefly the sources upon which his work rests ; but in no case has he surrendered an element of the traditional view as regards the authorship of the New Testament writings, even as regards II. Peter. And although he occasionally passes lightly over the super- natural occurrences in the opening chapters of Acts, he unquestioningly accepts the book as a piece of historical work of the first order. Even when theological matters are not at issue, Dr. Purves shows unwillingness to concede anything of importance to recent scholarship. Thus as re- gards the location of the Galatian churches, a matter of late so ably re- argued by Ramsay, he holds steadily to the view of Lightfoot. It is therefore easy to understand why he should reject the two-source hypoth- esis as to the origin of the synoptic gospels, upon which New Testa- ment scholars are so generally agreed, and prefer the hypothesis of West- cott and others of an oral gospel used by the three evangelists. But if the book is open to serious objections from the point of view of the critical historian, it is hardly more acceptable to the historical theologian. Dr. Purves' s position forbids his handling the difficult but fundamental questions as to the relation of Pauline and early Christian thought concerning the Second Coming of Christ with current Judaism, or that of other elements with current Graeco-Roman philosophy. In its exposition of the Pauline theology, however, the book is not without value. Dr. Purves is a trained exegete, to whom Paulinism is by no means a closed volume. While, therefore, the scope of the series does not permit any large treatment of biblical-theological subjects, in so far as it is devoted to direct e.xposition, it is welcome. Naturally, however, we should not expect in it any marked recognition of other than canonical writings as co-ordinate sources of early Christian teaching. Altogether, therefore, we must say the volume is what its author probably intended to make it, — a well-balanced presentation of the his- tory of the apostolic age from the point of view of those who, while using the methods of current criticism, reject such of its results as do not square with a presupposed theological position as regards inspiration. Sh.^iler Matthews. The Sources and Literature of English History from the Earliest Titnes to about 14.85. By Charles Gross. (London and New York: Longmans, Green and Co. 1900. Pp. xx, 618.) No scholar can look at this book without an immediate sense of acknowledgment to its author, deepening into real gratitude and appre- ciation as he examines it further. It is true that he may suppress a sigh when his thoughts turn to a cherished hoard of bibliographical notes and references, painfully gathered through toilsome years ; realizing that as far