254 REVIEWS OF RECENT BOOKS 



tl., I, ni the tendency is to occupy too much space with these 



[Stranger*. Bere it seems appropriate to mention another defect in 

 all foreign histories of China. The reader gets the impression that 

 the whole history of the country consists of wars and conflicts. In 

 hifl history of the English People, J. E. Green, mentions that it is 

 a great mistake to think that the main elements of a people's history 

 consists of wars. This at most only forms a side issue. The main 

 ncern of a people's history lies in the growth of its institutions > 

 in it. administration, in its laws, its home life and social conditions, 

 its agriculture and business pursuits, its educational opportunities, 

 and in the conditions of its art and literature. And we think that the 

 present work is lacking in these respects. Too much has been made of 

 wars, too little of the life of the people. The excuse may be advanced 

 that things must be taken as they are. That if there is the defect, 

 it lies with the sources in the Chinese histories themselves. To a 

 great extent this may be true. For we remember that in the long 

 history of Ssu Ma Kuang, after an excellent exordium dealing with 

 the meaning of history, the author proceeds to give the annals, seriatim 

 of the successive reigns. These become lifeless and wearisome. 

 Still it was the noble desire of another historian, Ssu Ma Ch'ien 

 to supplement mere chronological annals by monographs on art, religion 

 and economics, treating of these round some central figure. To some 

 extent this is true of other Chinese historians as well. If more 

 such ideas had been extracted by foreign and modern Chinese histor- 

 ians, who have written in English or other language, the result would 

 have been of much more value and entertainment. In this way too we 

 should have a far better apprehension of the nature of the Chinese 

 people and their survival through the long succession of the centuries. 

 (Vrtainly the author of Dictionaire Bibliographique was well equipped 

 for such a task, at least as far as the works of foreign writers are 

 concerned ; for no one can be so well acquainted with them as he. 



We therefore think the learned author of this work has fallen 

 under the allurements of "Les pay^ etrangers" and given undue pro- 

 minence to this phase of a history of China. This side is overweighted 

 3 no true proportion is found and an equal balance is wanting. We 

 need only refer to the section dealing with Kang Hsi. Very little 

 pertaining to that remarkable man is inserted. Foreign relations 

 ititute the major part of the narrative and even individuals who 

 ad to do with China as early as the 1584 and 1604 are introduced 

 reign that began only in 1662. If a summary of the dynastic 

 ■tory, the Tung Hua Luh, had, been incorporated, it would be 

 Si Valuable and illuminating of that remarkable reign. But as 



