their great dramatists, Eschylus, Sophocles. Euripides and Aristophanes, and the struggle with Philip of Macedon is studied in the speeches delivered against him by his great opponent Demosthenes the Athenian. Remember, however, that while these speeches are sources, they are not the best of sources and it is not fair to judge Philip by the political speeches of Demosthenes, for Demosthenes does not always tell the truth.

Let the pupils consult an encyclopedia for the data needed concerning the different sources. Each time that a new source is taken up they should be required to make a brief statement as to who made the record, when he lived, where he lived, and what the value of the source is. These questions, raised in connection with every new record, will soon become familiar and will be asked involuntarily. Much has been gained when the pupil has learned to ask for proof and has learned, too, that all evidence is not of equal value.

REFERENCE LISTS.

The laws underlying historical evolution are treated at length in the writings of Herbert Spencer. Every teacher of history should make a careful study of Spencer's First Principles. Darwin's Descent of Man, Huxley's Man's Place in Nature, and Gidding's Principles of Sociology may be studied in turn after Spencer has been mastered, or by way of light reading in connection with Spencer!

If more material is needed for the study of Grecian history, I should advise that the sources be supplied first, either to the teacher's own library or to the school library. Even if the pupil has not time to work over any more material on the Persian Wars, for instance, it is an education to him to handle the whole of Herodotus in a translation, to glance through the book, get some idea of its size, and to read a little here and there. All the sources quoted from in Sheldon may be found in the Bohn or Harper libraries, and

Plumptre's

may be had for ninety-five cents or less. translations of Eschylus and Sophocles and Frere's translation of Aristophanes are excellent, are cheaper than the Harper translations and preferable to them. Plato's Apology is to be had in a cheap form in Hind's Handy Literal Translations. A catalogue will be found in the back of the Bohn and Harper books giving all the Greek translations published by them. Myer's History of Greece (larger work), published by Ginn & Co., gives references to the sources and a good list of narratives dealing with the whole or parts of Greek history. The four standard narratives dealing with Grecian history as a whole are by Grote, Abbott (not yet finished), Curtius (translated from the German), and Holm (now being translated from the German). Grote's history is one of the best that has ever been written. It may be had for three or four dollars. I should advise that the sources be purchased first with a set of Grote. The other narratives may be added from time to time.

Next month the history of the Romans will be treated.

CHAPTER III.

THE ROMANS.

The Interpretation of the Period.

In the last number of the JOURNAL we dealt with the beginning of European civilization and the evolution of the first branch of the Aryan race- -the Greeks. We followed that evolution to the point where the Greeks had come into contact with the Romans, and had become a part of the Roman Empire. It is necessary now to retrace our steps and follow the development of the Roman power.

The Beginning.

With the appearance of Rome in European history, the area of history becomes larger and the number of peoples involved becomes greater. We shall trace rapidly the growth of Rome, beginning with the little city state upon the Tiber, following its conquests as it becomes mistress of the Italian peninsula, of the Western and of the Eastern Mediterranean.

Until Rome had conquered the Greeks in southern Italy, it may be said to have been outside of the larger circle of European civilization. When the light of history is shed upon the Italian peninsula, we find it occupied by a number of different tribes more or less closely related, the Italians, Etruscans, Celts, and Greeks. The Etruscans had undoubtedly dominated the whole peninsula, but when they first come to our notice they are confined to the northern and western half. The Celts were just pushing in over the Alps of the north, while the Greeks occupied the south of the peninsula. The Italians in the center were thus shut in by the Etruscans and Greeks.

In the seventh century B. C., there was nothing in the condition of Rome to indicate its future greatness. It was one of a large number of Latin communities forming a subdivision of the Italians. It had grown

up upon the Tiber upon the frontier of the Latin settlements, forced to struggle continuously with the Etruscans and with the small tribes bordering on Latium to the south.

Conquest of Italy.

Much depended upon these early struggles and upon the early organization of the city, but we know little or nothing about them. They are all shrouded in darkness. But there is one thing that we do know. This frontier city, having entered into alliances with other towns of Latium, began gradually to show a marked preponderance over its neighbors. While the southern Latins were bearing the brunt of war, growing gradually weaker, Rome was increasing in size and developing a most effective constitution. While the constitution itself was growing, much of the strength of Rome was given to its internal affairs and to civil wars. During this period the progress outside of the city was insignificant, but when the constitution had once taken definite shape, plebeians and patricians had been merged into a common state and granted equal civil and political rights, then it was possible for Rome to devote all its forces to external affairs and its dominion then progressed by leaps and bounds. By most skillful diplomacy that enabled it to divide its opponents and to fight them singly, or to make alliances for the purpose of crushing too strong an opponent, Rome conquered one after the other, Latium, Etruria, Samnium, the Celts, and last of all, the Greeks of southern Italy. By the conquest of southern Italy, Rome not only became mistress of the peninsula of Italy, but became a factor in the civilization of the Mediterranean basin,

Southeastern Europe.

At this time, the state of the Mediterranean world was not unlike that of Europe of to-day. In the west was the commonwealth of Carthage and the tribal states of Spain and Gaul. In Greece a variety of governments existed. Macedonia was a monarchy; Assyria was an empire, while Egypt was a monarchy under Grecian princes. In a brief period of time all these states were destined to disappear before the advance of Rome and to become absorbed in one great world empire.

Conquest of Carthage.

When the conquest of the peninsula was finished, Rome's interest seemed to lead it in two directions, to the west and to the east. By the conquest of the Greeks of southern Italy it had naturally involved itself in the affairs of the east. The nearness of Sicily and the fact that Carthage held the most of this island made a struggle with that power inevitable. Here for the first time was the great republic brought face to face with an equally great republic. Rome was mistress of the peninsula. Carthage was mistress of the sea,

The struggle that followed divides itself into three periods. The first centering around Sicily, resulting in a marked success for Rome, and characterized by the creation of a fleet that drove the Carthaginian fleet from the sea. At the close of the first war, Rome was in possession of Sicily and soon afterwards of Corsica and Sardinia. Carthage made good its loss by extending its territory in Spain.

The second period was one of the most critical in the whole history of Rome. Hannibal crossed the Alps and carried the war into the heart of the enemy's country, marching and countermarching upon the soil of Italy and threatening Rome itself. While contest