| + + | School R. 13: 274.[*] Mr. ‘05. 110w. |
“The greatest weakness is in the method of treatment. This is strikingly unscientific. The second great weakness in this work is the narrow point of view. A third characteristic weakness is seen in the trivialities with which the book is loaded.” Junius L. Meriam.
| — — — | School R. 13: 517. Je. ‘05. 1350w. |
Chancellor, William Estabrook, and Hewes, Fletcher Willis. United States: a history of three centuries, 1607-1904; population, politics, war, industry, civilization. 10 pts. pt. 1. [**]$3.50. Putnam.
The purpose of the joint authors in offering a new work on American history is “to present in a comprehensive and carefully proportioned narrative an account of the beginnings of the national existence and of the successive stages in the evolution of our distinctive national qualities and institutions.” Colonization, 1607-1697, forms the subject matter of this first part, which is divided into four sections: “Population and politics,” “War,” “Industry,” and “Civilization.” “The second section presents the record of war and of conquest, chiefly in their military phases,” while the fourth section is devoted to “religion and morality, literature and art, education and social life.”
“In none of the four divisions [of Vol. I] is anything like a serious study of institutions attempted. The unique separateness of treatment is so faithfully observed that the historical trains on this four-track road of American development rarely graze one another in passing. They appear to run quite free from any essential interconnection. The Bibliography is a hodgepodge. The titles of the ‘authorities’ are frequently misquoted, none of the references cite pages, and the notes are numbered consecutively. As the work progresses the number of notes steadily decreases, but the grade of intelligence displayed in their selection remains the same. The index ranges itself alongside of the notes and references. As for literary composition, whatever be the claims of the publishers, the book abounds in cheap comments, efforts at fine writing and big words. Of the making of positive errors, misstatements, and slipshod phrases there is no end. Wrong dates, misspellings, and misuse of proper names and places are so common as to call for no special remark.” William R. Shepherd.
| — — — | Am. Hist. R. 10: 642. Ap. ‘05. 1130w. |
“It would hardly be correct to say that it makes no contribution to historical literature; in parts three and four, ‘Industry’ and ‘Civilization,’ a good many interesting facts have been brought together, but it would be difficult to say who will profit by them.” David Y. Thomas.
| + — | Ann. Am. Acad. 26: 601. S. ‘05. 350w. (Review of v. 1.) |
“The ‘Perspectives’ at the close of certain chapters are more valuable than the chapters themselves, being completer chronologies. Dark sayings, easy verdicts, drippings of philosophy and misquotations in the style of ‘popular lecturers’ are characteristic of the book.”