424 POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY. 



briick, Lenz and Biilow, all of the strictest Eanke sect, answer this 

 question in the negative, and in support of their position they have 

 successfully shown that numerous errors of detail have been made, that 

 in many instances Lamprecht has used the writings of his predecessors 

 without making the customary acknowledgment. Errors of detail in 

 such a work covering, as it does, two thousand years of German his- 

 tory, are to be expected, and they are, if not too serious, readily excusa- 

 ble. This seems to be the case with the 'Deutsche Geschichte' even if 

 we accept all that the Berlin critics claim. The second objection, the 

 use of the writings of his predecessors vdthout making the usual ac- 

 knowledgments, is not so easily explained away unless one admits Lam- 

 precht 's theory, referred to above, that a historical writing of any 

 pretension should embody the best works of the past and interpret them 

 to the reader in the forms of present-day thought, and that it is not 

 incumbent on the historian to give his authority for ever}'thing he 

 states. Admitting this, Lamprecht 's book meets every requirement of 

 historical criticism and at the same time advances history-writing a 

 long step forward. 



One thing is evident, the Eankianer have of late years carried their 

 methods to great extremes, to such extremes that many American stu- 

 dents have manifested a disposition to revolt. And their position in 

 Germany is still more untenable. A new man and a new method were 

 needed; Lamprecht met the demand. On the other hand, a better 

 style, a more attractive form of histor5^-writing has long been the 

 prayer of the general public. Ko one denies that Lamprecht is master 

 of a brilliant style; he is not surpassed in the use of idiomatic German 

 by the celebrated v. Treitschke himself, perhaps the best stylist of the 

 Eanke school. 



On the whole, Lamprecht has done a notable work. He has gath- 

 ered about him more students of history than any other teacher in 

 Europe; he has called into serious question the prevailing methods of 

 studying and writing history; he has given us a book which is exceed- 

 ingly interesting, which does not seriously violate the rules of the best 

 criticism ; and finally, he has almost convinced us that history is a 

 science. 



