monopolies, it would seem that Marx and his disciples should in justice receive more credit. The ethics of socialism are all very well in the matter of social reform and in determining the attitude of the reformers; but when the author admits that under our present régime all natural monopolies must come under the absolute control of the few, and that this in turn must lead to the necessity of their ultimate socialization, he would seem himself to be following step by step that very theory of economic evolution he cast aside only a moment before as too materialistic. Dr. Ely has evidently written more for the general public than for the scientific few. Except for the chapters on monopolies there is little attempt at originality. The book, however, is well arranged, and interesting throughout. A series of appendices contain the platforms and principles of socialistic parties and societies, and a full bibliography. LINDLEY M. KEASBEY. BRYN MAWR College. Der Wucher: Eine Socialpolitische Studie. Von DR. LEOPOLD CARO. Leipzig, Duncker & Humblot, 1893.-311 pp. This is one of the shoal of writings that have been called forth of late years in Germany and Austria-Hungary by the agitation for the restoration, and now for the further elaboration, of the legal prohibition of usury. It distinguishes itself from most of them in that it does not confine itself to generalities, but devotes a long chapter of more than a hundred pages to the condition of affairs in a particular province, Galicia, "the classic land of usury”—a country with which the author is intimately acquainted and concerning which he has had peculiar opportunities of obtaining official information. Valuable as his statement of facts is, he would have added weight to his argument if he had attempted to determine the extent to which the evils he deplores are due to the presence of the village usurer, and the extent to which they are the result of the new freedom to dispose of their land which the peasants have only enjoyed since the emancipation. It may be added that if writers of Dr. Caro's opinions wish to convince "city-men" in the more advanced lands of Europe, not to mention economists in England and America, it would be well to dispense with vague denunciations of "Manchesterism," and equally vague explanations of the ethical purpose of the state, and to put in their stead a matter-of-fact description of a typical village in Galicia or elsewhere. The difficulty in controversies such as this about usury is that the opposing schools remain in different intellectual atmospheres; on the one side are the doctrinaires (and "doctrine" is an indispensable political force), who are ignorant of the real facts; on the other side are the practical men, who know the evils and feel obscurely that there ought to be some alleviation of them. The latter think they have got to overthrow the principles of their opponents, when really their first business is to inform them. HARVARD UNIVERSITY. W. J. ASHLEY. Deutsche Geschichte. Von KARL LAMPRECHT. Berlin, Gaertners Verlagsbuchhandlung. Vol. I, 1891, 364 pp.; Vol. II, 1892, 397 pp.; Vol. III, 1893, 420 pp. Professor Lamprecht gained his reputation eight years ago by the ponderous volumes which he devoted to the mediaval agrarian life of the Moselland, under the title Deutsche Wirthschaftsleben im Mittelalter. Emboldened by this success, he next tried his hand at semi-popular essays, and certainly showed that he was the master of a pleasant and vigorous style. And then, with courage and selfreliance, he girded up his loins for an undertaking which demanded both learning and style. This was nothing less than to tell the whole history of Germany, in a way which should satisfy alike the historical scholar and the general educated public. It is a striking fact that, great as has been the development of historical studies in Germany, and considerable as have been the achievements of German scholars, like Räumer, Giesebrecht, Ranke, Droysen and Treitschke, in particular fields of their nation's history, there is no work covering the whole national development which can be compared with that of Hume or Lingard for England. There certainly seemed room for such a work as Professor Lamprecht contemplated. If he has not altogether succeeded in producing a masterpiece which shall live as does Hume or even Lingard, the cause is largely to be found in the broader scope of the task he has marked out for himself. Himself an authority of the first rank on the agrarian life of the later middle ages; touched, as all men who are sensitive to the influences of the time must be, by the new interest in the economic development of society; realizing that all the great manifestations of a people's activitypolitical, economic, artistic-must be inter-related: Professor Lamprecht has sought to tell the whole story of the past, instead of a part only, as Hume did. But the fact is that the time is not It ripe for any such constructive effort as he has attempted. may be said with truth that, while it has for some time been possible to lay out the main lines of German political development with what is probably tolerable accuracy, all the really fundamental questions of social development are still open to discussion. But it must be remarked that this fact is even to-day hardly recognized in Germany, and was scarcely dreamt of a few years ago. By ignoring, unconsciously of course, all the work that was being done by scholars outside of Germany, and by moving constantly in the atmosphere of a few great ideas which had been so driven into the thought of the time by the school of Waitz as to have become postulates of historical writing, it was possible to have a feeling of certitude which it is hard for one who is not a German to share to-day. It is precisely those parts of his work, therefore, which have struck Professor Lamprecht's countrymen as most novel, -the chapters devoted to economic development, which are least satisfactory. In the chapters which tell the political story, Professor Lamprecht gives us a well-written and even eloquent summary of the conclusions of the great historians; and readers will be fortunate who make their first acquaintance with the story of Charles the Great and the Ottos and the Hohenstaufen in his interesting pages. The chapters relating to literature and art the present writer does not feel competent to criticise; they look fascinating. But after all it is the economic development, and especially the agrarian, that is fundamental, and Professor Lamprecht tries to make his readers realize this. And here his positions are in some cases highly questionable, and in others so tantalizingly vague and unrelated to one another, that it needs all the charm of a facile pen to give them an air of solidity or consistency. The task of criticism is not rendered easier by the circumstances that, appealing to a popular audience, the author has thought it best to dispense with the citation of authorities, and that, presumably for the same reason, he has chosen to assume an air of certainty which is probably foreign to his real mental attitude. The scheme of the book, as has been already hinted, is furnished by the familiar idea of the progressive degradation of the primitive self-governing and communistic "full free-man" by the growth of feudalism. But this is prefaced by a sketch of prehistoric development, under the guidance of anthropology, and here the author finds the key to some of the gravest problems of later history. The Centena, or Hundertschaft, for instance, is explained as "the kindred according to mother-right "; and this conclusion is led up to by a sketch, following Morgan and other authorities, of the evolution of the monogamic patriarchal family out of a communal promiscuity. It is, indeed, confessed that there is not much evidence for this evolution in Germany itself; but it is assumed as already sufficiently proved for mankind at large. Now it is hardly necessary to say that no one, except perhaps a cocksure socialist popularizer, like Herr Engels, would write in this way since the publication of Professor Westermarck's book. Writing as Professor Lamprecht did in 1891, he can hardly be blamed for accepting teaching which, before Westermarck arose, was rapidly gaining general adhesion from anthropologists and folk-lorists. But the part played by Mutterrecht in his book is certainly an example of the dangers of the schematizing tendency. Our old friend the Markgenossenschaft is, of course, here in all its simplicity. It will hardly be worth while to dwell on the well-worn theme; what is wanted now is certainly not more destructive criticism. But, as it has of late been complained that critics of von Maurer disregard the modifications of the doctrine by later scholars of his school, it may be well to notice what precisely the modifications are which are here presented by Professor Lamprecht. And in the first place, according to him, the original "agrarian economic community" was the Hundertschaft, or hundred. This apparently rests only on the statement of Cæsar that the magistrates allotted land annually "gentibus cognationibusque hominum qui una coierunt "gentes" and "cognationes" being assumed to be obviously "hundreds,”—and on later "survivals" in the shape of the joint control of pastures or woods by several communes (I, 142–144). The association of the hundred, however, split up after a time, we are informed, into smaller groups- the later villages - based on kinship through males, and organized economically as the larger group had been. The mark communities thus created are given all the characteristics Maurer ascribed to them; and Professor Lamprecht waxes enthusiastic over the imperishable virtues of the "type of man produced by this "association not of owners but of men!" and quotes Horace, "si fractus illabatur orbis." Secondly, our author follows Dr. Inama-Sternegg in describing the growth in the Merovingian and Carolingian periods of a Grossgrundbesitz,-of large seigneurial properties, by grants from the sovereign to his magnates of great tracts of wood and marsh (II, 89, 90). These magnates cleared and tilled them (where they got the necessary labor from is hardly indicated), and set an example of agricultural enterprise and organization that was urgently needed by the small freeman on his virgate (Hufe). Professor Lamprecht shows how the great properties were split up, and how villages under local lords may be supposed to have grown up upon them. And from this point the free communities which he started with drop out of the story, and a development is sketched which might apparently have taken place had they never existed. No attempt is made to estimate the relative magnitude of the area subject to free communities and that subject to great lords; or to show precisely how it was that on the lord's great estates the freemen, who are described as flocking in and renting land, fell into the serfdom which we find in the later middle ages. Indeed, any one who has been through the severe discipline by which Mr. Seebohm and Professor Vinogradoff and Professor Maitland have made us realize the daily life of the average villain, cannot help feeling that Professor Lamprecht's construction is all "in the air." It "lacks actuality." For the economist, the most interesting sections in the third volume are those which deal with the beginnings of trade, and therein of the merchant guild and of town life. Where so many doughty disputants are engaged, and especially that very acute swashbuckler, Professor von Below, it would be dangerous for the reviewer to take sides. Dr. Lamprecht apparently has an eclectic theory of the origin of the constitution of the medieval town— combining the market-privileges theory of one school, with the hundred-court theory of another, and enriching the composition by the constitution of a new caravan theory" of his own for the merchant guild. It must be confessed, however, that the three elements are harmonized rather by a smooth and confident style than by internal coherence. 66 The three volumes that have so far appeared reach to the end of the period of the Hohenstaufen. In the later volumes Professor Lamprecht will be dealing with less controversial matter, in which his narrative skill and width of interest will secure a less qualified success. We may still expect four volumes to complete the work; and the whole set should certainly be on the shelves of every fair historical library. At six marks a volume unbound and eight bound, they are certainly "within the means of the humblest" college library; and, after all deductions have been made, it must again be remarked that they are exceedingly interesting. W. J. ASHLEY. HARVARD UNIVERSITY. |