Page:American Historical Review, Volume 12.djvu/638

62 8 Reviews of Books from the class of " Einzeldarstellungen " of which the " Oncken " and the " American Nation " series are the best-known examples. In this latter class each author is put practically' in possession of a compara- tively distinct field and works under but slightly different conditions than if he were publishing in entire independence; it is a form that would seem capable of effective use even in limited fields with regard to Kulturgeschichte. The other class is that to which the present series belongs and of which before it the Histoire Generate of Lavisse and Rambaud was the chief example; here the writers really more or less collaborate in limited periods, each furnishing but a spoke of the wheel, presenting as a specialist but a small section of the results of studies presumably covering more or less the whole period. Thus it might be hoped, not only would there be secured for each section the great weight of greater specialization, but there would be also focussed on the whole period or on the main movements in it illumination from different quarters and elevations. With regard to undertakings of this kind the reviewer is inclined to think that too much is looked for usually from the editorial supervision. The work must of course be carefully planned and apportioned, dovetailed in some degree ; but why should there be great objection to a reasonable amount of iteration or to the appearance of differing and even conflicting views ? It may be contended that the editor who ruthlessly excludes such duplicating statements or who strives to harmonize conclusions or even statements of fact will really mutilate and emasculate. The space saved will be but slight; and the reader who needs to be preserved from the terrible danger of being confronted within the same covers with differing views or even different statements of fact has probably too frail an intellectual existence to be at large at all in the rarefied atmosphere of specialization. The work of the specialist under such conditions is at best irritating and unsatis- factory; it becomes the more so with rigorous editorial efforts to secure an impossible (and probably undesirable) "unity." The present reviewer, then, while strongly deploring the very ap- parent limitations in the views and plans of the editors of the Cam- bridge Modern History, is not wholly in accord with some of the com- plaints against earlier volumes of their work. And it seems to him further that the chances of usefulness of these volumes have not been sufficiently recognized. Even the expert in this or that period may find these brief and usually very meaty statements useful in bringing together conveniently the methods and conclusions of other experts ; the real student who is not an expert can see readily what stage has been reached in the knowledge of the period and will welcome the variety of standpoints and opinions. From the point of view of the general reader or the elementary student the paucity of trustworthy work in English must be kept in mind; certainly these volumes will be of great use to the university teacher in modern history, while the serious general reader cannot easily be directed to more satisfactory political or military narratives.