“In a general way Dr. Avery is fully abreast of modern scholarship. Of really serious errors in the book there are none. The great weakness of the book lies in the absence of page references. Dr. Avery’s style of writing is smooth and flowing. It is altogether too flowery either for a permanent classic or for a serious piece of historical work.” Anna Heloise Abel.
| + + — | Dial. 38: 262. Ap. 16, ‘05. 1150w. |
“The advance sheets have been submitted to special students on the subjects treated. But they could not, without rewriting his book, correct his point of view. Rarely takes the trouble to come to a conclusion of his own. On the whole the book is well and attractively written and is accurate as to fact.”
| + + — | Ind. 58: 380. F. 16, ‘05. 800w. |
[*] “While accuracy of detail has been secured thru several revisions by specialists, the emphasis is bad and the literary style is often stilted.”
| + + — | Ind. 59: 1156. N. 16, ‘05. 50w. |
“Dr. Avery’s text stands well the test of critical examination. The narrative ... is systematically compressed, but it is well proportioned, and gives evidence throughout of careful use of authorities and of intelligent and restrained judgment. From a literary point of view, the history is eminently readable, though the style shows a tendency to ornateness.”
| + + + | Nation. 80: 69. Ja. 26, ‘05. 360w. |
“Reasonably full, critical, and even iconoclastic in many respects. To judge then, from vol. I. this history bids fair to become popular in the best sense of the term. It is certainly not dry—parts of it reading like a stirring romance. Now and then he goes perhaps a trifle too far in his impartiality.”
| + + | N. Y. Times. 10: 20. Ja. 14, ‘05. 1420w. |