and even in the text scarcely any reference to authorities; in the rare cases where an author is cited, it is usually with reference to some opinion to be rejected. Unless, therefore, one happens to know the facts, it is impossible to tell whether what Wundt states as a fact is generally accepted as such. Occasionally, indeed, one happens to know the contrary, as, for example, that the pious Puritans of New England did not, as Wundt says they did, carry on a war of extermination against the red race (p. in). Then, because perhaps of a sharpened sense for it under present conditions, we are struck by the frequency of the 'obviously,' 'doubtless' and so forth of the German professor in the presence of evidence that seems hardly to warrant the inference. Many illustrations might be cited, but one may suffice. On p. 220 there is the beginning of a section on "The Origin of the Fetish." On the same page, "the totemic origin of certain primitive forms of fetishes" is asserted as explaining the relation of the fetish and the psyche. On the page following we read of a restriction of the meaning of fetishism at the time of its origin, "which was probably totemic." This is more cautious. But then, on p. 227, we get the full-flavored modality; the fact, from becoming probable, has evolved to certainty, and we learn that "fetishism, in its genuine form, may unquestionably be regarded as a product of the totemic age." (Reviewer's italics.) The confidence of dogmatism begets the uncertainty of scepticism and the suspicion that Wundt's reconstruction of human history is, after all, a more or less ingenious hypothesis which will in turn give place to others resting on a securer foundation.
The translation is decidedly good, and a few changes would make it still better. The repeated use of 'transpire' for 'take place,' the occasional use of 'will' for 'shall,' the adoption of the vile verb 'to stress,' the solecism 'genericalness,' and the Teutonic 'will-acts' for, anglice, ' voluntary acts' or 'acts of will,' are disfigurements which can easily be removed in a second edition. The only noted misprint is on p. 178 (last line), namely, 'He knew' for (presumably) 'We know.'
H. N. Gardiner.
Smith College.
