Professor, and, by the same act, facilitate the intellectual and moral progress of clerical students.

Letters from Leipsic and Heidelberg.

It is pleasant to learn that Articles in the Bibliotheca Sacra are appreciated by distinguished scholars in foreign lands. Among several letters recently received are the two following, addressed to the author of the Article entitled: Christ as a Practical Observer of Nature, Persons, and Events. See Bibliotheca Sacra, Vol. xxix., Article vi.

"Verehrter Freund in dem Herrn! - Haben sie herzlichen Dank für den übersandten Jahrgang der Bibliotheca Sacra mit Ihrem schönen Aufsatz über Christ as an Observer of nature, persons and events' von welchem ich, wenn mein Ein Tag in Capernaum' einmal wiederscheint, dankbaren Gebrauch werde machen können." - From Professor Delitzsch of Leipsic.

66

6

'Hochgeehrtester Herr! - Herzlichen Dank für Ihre gütigen Zeilen, die mich sehr erfreut haben, sowie für die schöne literärische Gabe, mit der Sie mich beehrten. Ich habe den schönen Aufsatz 'Christ as observer of nature' mit vieler Freude gelesen, und bewundere ebenso Ihre volle Vertrautheit mit der Schrift als die feine Beobachtungsgabe, die jedem gelegentlichen Worte wieder ihren Zusammenhang anzuweisen wusste und die fühlen lässt, wie innig vertraut Sie mit diesem heiligen Stoffe sind." From Professor Hausrath, Heidelberg.

ARTICLE IX.

NOTICES OF RECENT PUBLICATIONS.

A. GERMAN WORKS.

DR. P. ASMUS. THE EGO AND THE THING IN ITSELF. History of the Development of these Ideas in the Later Philosophy.1

People already speak in Germany of the last of the Hegelians; but the work before us proves that the last spark of life in the old lion has not yet gone out. Hegelian views of the history of philosophy are almost always interesting, not only because there have been, and still are, among the Hegelians, many able men, but because their views of philosophical development tend to lead their historians to the representation of a selfdeveloping organism, and the effort to accomplish this generally brings them to interesting points of view. The vindication of the Hegelian posi1 Dr. P. Asmus, Privatdocent der Philosophie an der Universität zu Halle. Das Ich und das Ding an sich; Geschichte ihrer begrifflichen Entwickelung in der neuesten Philosophie. 8vo. pp. 141. Halle: bei Pfeffer. 1873. 28 sgr.

tion by means of a history of philosophy, which our author undertakes, is not only interesting, but presents us with new illustrations of the well-known method. The object of the essay is to show how the ideas of the " Ego" and the Thing in itself (das Ding an sich) have advanced out of the preKantian position, when men had not reflected on the identity of subject and object, to the Hegelian position, when this identity was comprehended. For this purpose the author gives, in the First Part of his book, a discussion of principles for the defence and elucidation of the absolute Hegelian idealism. Here he chooses, from among the opponents of the Hegelian philosophy, Trendelenburg as the object of his attack, who, although the most renowned, is not the most important of these. Even in his keen refutation of Trendelenburg many defects are to be seen; but probably more would be discovered, if he had undertaken to notice the masterly examination and criticism of the Hegelian philosophy in Lotze's "Metaphysics" and "History of Ethics."

In the Second Part follows a history of the development of the idea of the Ego and the Thing in itself (Ding an sich) in the later philosophy. It embraces Kant, Aenesidemus, Beck, Jacobi, Fichte, Novalis, Schlegel, Schleiermacher, Schelling, and Hegel, and, finally, by way of appendix, Herbart and Schopenhauer. The criticism and refutation of Kant is based on the presumption that his original opinion was that the "Ding an sich” cannot indeed be known, but actually exists apart from us, and affects us. On this presumption, everything in Kant appears, of course, inconsistent which is opposed to the independent existence of the Thing in itself (Ding an sich). Therefore, above all, the view appears as an undeniable inconsistency which is stated in the first edition of the Critique of the Pure Reason, namely, that the unity of consciousness is that alone which perfects the relations of our impressions to an object, and thereby gives them objective validity, so that they become knowledge. This view of Kant suits the Hegelian best; since the development, according to him, must culminate in Hegel. But we may, in reply, use like tactics, and say that the lastmentioned view which appears in the first edition of the Critique of the Pure Reason is the original one. Fichte, whose mind, as it were, reflected Kant's, holds this for the original view of Kant, and so do others. Thus the inconsistency is transferred to those very passages which our author holds to represent the original view. Of course, this would not harmonize with his order of the development of the ideas; but it is more in keeping with the strictest truth..

Another strange passage in this historical discussion is the treatment of Schleiermacher. Our author, without hesitation, takes the two noted early writings of Schleiermacher, the "Discourses on Religion" (Reden über die Religion) and the "Monologues," as the only sources of information in regard to his philosophical views. At the same time, he acknowledges that in respect to systematical form these bear no comparison with his later

writings. Still, he affirms that in philosophical power and true speculative penetration these early works are the best; that the later modifications of his views are not more profound, and have not further enriched philosophical science. This assertion would be hard to maintain, in view of Schleiermacher's "Dialectics" and "Philosophical Ethics," and appears a mere arbitrary assertion.

However, aside from such particular censures, we must bear the book testimony that it represents the Hegelian views with vigorous philosophical ability, and sets forth with clearness some points of the system which have been misapprehended. We can warmly recommend the treatise to any one desirous of seeing in a clear light the relation of the Hegelian philosophy to the important problems which the book handles.

MUELLER ON THE RELATION OF THE SEMITIC TO HAMITIC AND JAPHETIC PEOPLES.1

The author of this work is the same who writes the History of the Aboriginal Religions of America. He holds that the family of peoples who are comprehended, in the Old Testament, under the name Shem were originally Indo-Germanic, but that many of them, particularly the Hebrews, adopted the Hamitic character, chiefly in respect to language. Thus the co-ordination of a peculiar Semitic type with the Hamitic and the Japhetic would be incorrect. When such a striking assertion is made by an ethnograph and student of the history of religion, whose scientific name and whose character as a prudent, sober investigator have long been acknowledged, we cannot pass it by with a mere shrug of the shoulders. The last ten years have accustomed us to draw with the utmost sharpness the line of distinction between Semites and Indo-Germans, since Renan, in several writings, has sought to prove to the world the relatively low position of the Semitic character, and since Grau, in his Semites and Indo-Germans," thinks he sees in this low estimate of the Semitic race the reason why Renan cannot honor the Messiah who has sprung from this people. Again, at the same time with the appearance of the book before us, John Rontsch, in a neat volume, endeavors to estimate worthily the essential differences between the Semitic character and the Indo-Germanic, in opposition to Renan's degradation of the former. Now comes our author, and says: "The Semitic peoples are really Indo-Germanic." If this assertion be correct, then the ground of the dispute above mentioned is removed. However, every one who is in a measure familiar with ancient ethnography knows how hard it is, in these matters, to say who is right and who is wrong. In fact, we find ourselves here in an immense field of probabilities, and he gains the victory who is able to make probabilities the most probable, and whose hypothesis lightens up the most darkness.

1 Die Semiten in ihrem Verhältniss zu Chamiten und Japhetiten, von J. G. Müller, Prof. der Theol. in Basel. 8vo. pp. 390. Gotha: bei Rud. Besser. 1872.

If we look at the matter thus, no one will deny that our author brings a large number of dark points into a clear light.

The representation is well worthy of consideration which he makes for the purpose of setting aside a prejudice strongly rooted among us. He says that our usual view, that a number of peoples whose languages are related to the Hebrew are therefore Semitic, gained its first firm footing through Schlözer and Eichhorn. In the Old Testament, whose statement on the subject is authoritative, the Canaanites with the Phoenicians, for example, are constantly reckoned among the Hamites, although they spoke the same tongue as the Hebrews. The reasoning with which the modern view sets out is the following: The Hebrews, according to their own opinion, are Semites; therefore their language is a Semitic one; therefore this whole family of languages is Semitic. But this reasoning is not conclusive. "It proceeds just as one would, if, reasoning from the fact that the French, Burgundians, and Lombards (Longobardi) speak Romance languages, one were to conclude that not only Germans who have assumed Romance languages, but also all Germans, are Romance peoples, and their languages Romance." The author proceeds to show that this conclusion is not only unnecessary, but incorrect. He first shows that the genealogies of Gen. x. which form the basis of his investigation, arrange the peoples not according to their homes, not according to color, not according to national love or hatred, not according to distinctions in their ideas of God, nor according to language, but ethnographically, that is, according to family relationship. He finds, upon close examination, that the Semites, Japhetites, and Hamites which make up the Caucasian race contain really only two great families; that blood-diversity exists only between Japhet and Ham, while Shem is so closely related to Japhet as actually to belong to him. The Semites and Japhetites formed originally one family, and spoke one language. A branch of the Japhetic family descended from the mountain slopes of upper Asia, and migrated into the Hamitic plains. This branch was called by the Hamitic Canaanites the family of the Highlanders, that is " Semites," in distinction from themselves as Lowlanders. The author derives the name "Sem" from NZ, "to be high," with DeWette and Paulus Cassel. This branch suffered very material influences from the Hamites, and, above all, their language assumed a thoroughly Hamitic type. It would carry us too far to enter into the author's interesting and learned presentation of arguments. Certainly, much in it will require correction, and much a more accurate confirmation; but the question is weighty enough to receive careful consideration, especially in its relation to the history of religion. Let the result of the investigation be what it may, the author will always have the merit of having turned our attention to points as yet essentially overlooked. In the last two sections of the work, the author seeks to prove that the Hycsos and the Philistines are also Indo-Germans, who have taken on the Hamitic character.

KUNO FISCHER'S HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY.'

This the greatest work of Kuno Fischer is gradually drawing near completion, and will form a splendid monument of genius highly gifted for the reproduction of the philosophical views of others, and for clear and elegant description.

The historian of philosophy, according to Fischer's view of the office, must possess in a high degree the art of dramatic representation; for our author undertakes the work of comprehending and reproducing each philosopher exactly as viewed in the centre of his own personality and of his relations to his time. Therefore the representation of a character is never disturbed by criticism; but the skilful hand lays stone upon stone, till the whole edifice stands complete before our eyes, and thus, as it were, a formula is written out, declaring the secret of the period of which the philosopher was the interpreter. Kuno Fischer has thus set before us Des Cartes, Spinoza, Leibnitz, Kant; and in the volume which has just appeared the same hand has portrayed the life of Schelling, to be followed by an exhibition of his doctrine. This is the first complete biography of Schelling which we possess; and to mark its value we might say that it is also the final one. Distinguished service has been rendered, in recent times, towards a historical acquaintance with the period of the Romantic School, to which Schelling belonged, by Haym's "Romantic School," and Dilthey's "Life of Schleiermacher." The biographical materials respecting Schelling could not be essentially enriched, since the collection of his letters, prepared by his son and published by Professor Plitt, was supplemented by the publication by Waitz of the correspondence between Schelling and the celebrated Caroline. Our author has made especially liberal use of this latter correspondence. The portraiture of Caroline Schlegel's mental nature and her relation to Schelling is perhaps the most successful part of the book. Next to this may be regarded as an excellence which characterizes the volume from beginning to end, the skilful weaving together of the circumstances of his life and the development of his character with the unfolding of his system. The characteristic features of the system become so clear, in connection with the development of the life, that they already appear as a well-defined picture; and a longing is awakened to possess the more delicate, finished painting of these ground-features in the accurate treatment of the system. For this we may hope that Kuno Fischer will not let us wait long; for one who has been so diligent in Jena will not let his pen rest in Heidelberg, whither Fischer has been called. If we must name a fault in this History of Philosophy, it would be one

1 Geschichte der neueren Philosophie, von Kuno Fischer. Sechster Band. Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph Schelling. I Buch. Schelling's Leben und Schriften. 8vo. pp. 380. Heidelberg: Verlag von Fr. Bassermann. 1872. 2 Thaler.