himself. The history is not far enough advanced to enable
us to judge whether Mr Grote will preserve himself from a political
bias, the opposite of that which has been so much censured in Mitford. A
sufficient portion however, is published, to authorise us in saying that
it is not in point of _narrative_ that the present author will obtain
any advantage over his predecessors. It is in disquisition that he
rejoices, and succeeds; it is the argumentative matter which excites and
sustains him. His style seems to languish when the effort of
ratiocination gives place to the task of the narrator. We fancy we see
him resume the pen with listlessness, when nothing remains for the
historian but to tell his story.

Neither can we congratulate Mr Grote on possessing the art of
arrangement or compression, on the knowing when to abbreviate, or how to
omit. His subject has in itself this unavoidable disadvantage, that the
history of Greece lies scattered and broken up amongst many independent
cities and communities: this disadvantage our author's voluminous and
discursive manner does nothing to remedy, does much to aggravate. One
would almost suspect that Mr Grote had entertained the idea that it
belonged to the history of Greece to give us an account of all that the
Greeks knew of history. It seems sufficient that a subject has been
mentioned by Herodotus to entitle it to a place in his pages. This
fulness of matter, it may be said, will enrich the work. Very true. But
what if, in this process of enriching, the work be made unreadable?
What if the treasures be so piled up and heaped together that to get at
them may be little less difficult than to extract the precious metals
originally from the mine? If the work advance on the plan hitherto
pursued, it will be found that, "A History of Greece" is far too
restricted a title, and that it should rather have been called a history
of the ancient world during the times when the Greeks rose and
flourished;--so well disposed does the author appear to wander over to
Phoenicia and Assyria, to Babylon and Egypt. Mr Alison might as well
have entitled his great historical work simply a history of the French
Revolution. It is true, there is no reason to be given why Mr Grote
should not do for ancient Europe during the period of the development of
the Greeks, what Mr Alison has done for modern Europe during the great
drama enacted by the people of France. Unhappily, however, Mr Grote does
not poss