But here he pauses. His results bear him no farther. The philological and physiological classifications of mankind, he says, do not correspond; their lines cross; nothing can be concluded from one to the other. The question of unity or diversity of physical origins he leaves to the naturalist; upon that he has no right to raise his voice. Spiritual unity he asserts firmly; linguistic unity he firmly denies; on the question of physical unity he remains modestly and candidly silent, not finding in his peculiar studies data for a rational opinion. M. Renan is not a Newton in his science. He satisfies, and he disappoints. The Newtonian depth, centrality, and poise,--well, one may still be a superior scholar and writer without these. And such he is. His tendency to central principles is decided, but with this there is a wavering, an unsteadiness, and you get only agility and good writing, it may be, where you had begun to look for a final word. Sometimes, too, in his desire of precision, he gives you precision indeed, but of a cheap kind, which is worse than any _thoughtful_ vagueness. Thus, he opens his sixth section by naming _l'onomatopee_, the imitation of natural sounds, as the law of primitive language. He knew better; for he has hardly named this "law" before he slips away from it; and his whole work was pitched upon a much profounder key. Why must he seize upon this ready-made word? Why could he not have taken upon himself to say deliberately and truly, that the law of primitive language, and in the measure of its _life_ of all language, is the symbolization of mental impression by sounds, just as man's spirit is symbolized in his body, and absolute spirit in the universe? But this is "vague," and M. Renan writes in Paris. And in Paris he has written an able and in many respects admirable treatise,--_almost_ profound, as we have said, and creditable to him and to France. It must be reckoned, we think, a foundation-stone in the literature of the problem of Language. In five or six pages the theological peculiarities of M. Renan appear. The reader, however, who is most rigidly indisposed to open question on such matters will find these six pages which do not please him a feeble counterbalance to the two hundred and fifty which do. FOOTNOTES: [A] Published 1770-71. [B] Johnson enumerates fifteen. [C] Many of the bibliographers, even, have omitted mention of it. [D] Of which the first book was published in 1772. This author is to be distinguished from George Mason, who in 1768 published "An Essay on Design in Gardening." [E] Lettre XI Liv. IV. _Nouvelle Heloise._ [F] First published in 1766. [G] Citing, in confirmation, that passage commencing,--"_Nunc dicam agri quibus rebus colantur_," etc. [H] Pp. 177-179, edition of 1802, Edinburgh. [I] Pp. 166, 167. [J] See Article of Philip Pussy, M.P., in _Transactions of the Royal Society_, Vol. XIV. [K] First published in 1724.