uralists of the day have classed the facts of physiology,
and to show that literary forms spring from each other by way of
transformation in the same way as do the forms of animal or vegetable
life. Already three works have been produced by him since he entered
upon this new line of development: a history of literary criticism in
France, which forms the first and hitherto only published volume of a
large work, (The Evolution of Literary Forms); a work on the French
drama, (The Periods of the French Theatre); and a treatise on modern
French poetry, (The Evolution of French Lyric Poetry during the
Nineteenth Century.) The second and last of these were first delivered
by their author from the professor's chair or the lecturer's platform,
where he has managed to display some of the greatest gifts of the public
speaker. Most of M. Brunetiere's literary articles have been collected
in book form under the following titles:--(Questions of Criticism) (2
vols.), (History and Criticism) (3 vols.), (Critical Studies on the
History of French Literature) (6 vols.), (The Naturalistic Novel)
(1 vol.).

At various times remarkable addresses have been delivered by him on
public occasions, in which he has often represented the French Academy
since his election to that illustrious body. Unfortunately his
productive literary activity has slackened of late. In 1895 he was
called to the editorship of the Revue des Deux Mondes, and since his
assumption of this responsible editorial position he has published only
two or three articles, bearing upon moral and educational questions.

To pass final judgment upon a man whose development is far from
completed is an almost impossible task. Still it may be said that with
the exception of Sainte-Beuve's (Causeries du Lundi) and (Nouveaux
Lundis,) nothing exists that can teach the reader so much about the
history of French literature as Brunetiere's works. The doctrinal side,
to which the author himself undoubtedly attaches the greatest
importance, will strike the reader as often very questionable. Too often
Brunetiere seems in his judgments to be quite unconsciously actuated by
a dislike of the accepted opinion of the present day. His love of the
past bears a look of defiance of the present, not calculated to win the
reader's assent. But even this does not go without its good side. It
gives to Brunetiere's judgments a unity which is seldom if ever found in
the works of those whose chief labors have be