beauty and originality of the Greek authors. [23] _Kunstarchæologische Werke._ Berlin, Calvary, 18 mo. 1873. But of all these works, that which has perhaps rendered the greatest service to the science of archæology is the _Handbuch der Archæologie der Kunst_, which was published in Breslau in 1830.[24] Translated into French, Italian, and English, it at once took its place as the indispensable guide for all those who wished to learn something of antique art.[25] In all the universities into which archæology had made good its entrance, this manual has formed the basis of the teaching, and also has enabled the pupils to supplement for themselves the lessons which they learnt from their professors. Even now it has not been superseded, and to all appearance it will long preserve its supremacy. [24] _Handbuch der Archæologie der Kunst_, 1 vol. 8vo. [25] The French translation, from the pen of M. P. Nicard, forms three volumes of the collection of handbooks known under the name of the _Encyclopédie Roret_. It appeared in 1841, so that the translator was unable to make use of the additions and corrections with which Welcker enriched the edition of 1848. But M. Nicard's edition has one great advantage over the German versions in the complete tables with which it is provided. The best English translation is that by J. Leitch, the second edition of which appeared in 1850.--ED. The form of a _handbuch_ or manual, which Ottfried Müller gave to his work, was well and favourably known to cultivated Germans, but it was not so with the French. They had nothing of the kind but worthless epitomes made to facilitate the passing of University examinations. In this matter the Germans are better off than any other nation in Europe. They have manuals in which every branch of history and science is treated by competent writers with as much care and skill as the most ambitious publications, a few being original works by savants of the first order. The arrangement of the _Handbuch_ is very simple. It opens with an introduction in which the author defines art--more especially the plastic arts--divides it into classes, and indicates the principal works to be consulted, namely, those to which he himself has had continually to refer during the progress of his book. Then comes the history of Greek and Roman art divided into periods, and the paragraphs which are devoted to Etruria and the East. To this historical epitome succeed the theoretical chapters.