An incidental passage in Dr. Dill’s _Roman Society from Nero to Marcus Aurelius_ (p. 120 f.) deserves to be set by the side of Dr. Drummond’s. He is speaking of the _Satiricon_ of Petronius. ‘Those who have attributed it to the friend and victim of Nero have been confronted with the silence of Quintilian, Juvenal, and Martial, with the silence of Tacitus as to any literary work by Petronius, whose character and end he has described with a curious sympathy and care. It is only late critics of the lower empire, such as Macrobius, and a dilettante aristocrat like Sidonius Apollinaris, who pay any attention to this remarkable work of genius. And Sidonius seems to make its author a citizen of Marseilles. Yet silence in such cases may be very deceptive. Martial and Statius never mention one another, and both might seem unknown to Tacitus. And Tacitus, after the fashion of the Roman aristocrat, in painting the character of Petronius, may not have thought it relevant or important to notice a light work such as the _Satiricon_, even if he had ever seen it. He does not think it worth while to mention the histories of the Emperor Claudius, the tragedies of Seneca, or the _Punica_ of Silius Italicus.’ Footnote 21: The two books of Drs. Drummond and Stanton were reviewed by M. Loisy in the _Revue Critique_, 1904, pp. 422-4, and Dr. Drummond’s by Prof. H. J. Holtzmann in _Theol. Literaturzeitung_, 1905, cols. 136-9. Both reviews were disappointing, though Dr. Holtzmann’s contains the usual amount of painstaking detail. It is natural that play should be made with the real inconsistencies of Dr. Drummond’s position; but his weightier arguments are in neither case directly grappled with. LECTURE II CRITICAL METHODS. THE OLDEST SOLUTION OF THE PROBLEM OF THE FOURTH GOSPEL I. i. Defects in the Methods of current Criticism. It is now rather more than eight years since Harnack wrote the famous Preface to his _Chronologie der altchristlichen Litteratur_. It was an instance of the genial insight of the writer, and a keen diagnosis of the criticism of the day.