writes as a representative of culture. He has won his laurels in the field more particularly of Classical Archaeology, where he is well known as a scholar of much learning, cautious, patient and judicious in his habits of mind. He therefore approaches his subject rather from the scientific and research side of letters, but still distinctly from the side of letters. He also writes with a seriousness of tone that well befits the subject he has chosen. Although speaking as a layman and from the

more »

... man's point of view, he has evidently a deep interest in religion. We may see in his book a real eirenicon. He is anxious to reconcile religion with the newer views of criticism and science. And amongst the many attempts that are made in that direction his own is distinguished by the earnestness of conviction which characterises it on both its sides. Dr. Gardner's eirenicon is not one of those that are really attacks in disguise. He does not offer an olive-branch with a sword underneath it. And yet I am afraid that his eirenicon is not quite so complete as he himself supposes. It contains, as he is aware, a great deal of criticism. His general position is that it does not matter what were the historical facts so long as the ideas of religion are preserved. And therefore, in spite of the earnestness with which these ideas are enforced, the Christian reader must be prepared to have many things that are dear to him severely questioned. And the questioning is not always quite what might have been expected from a writer of Dr. Gardner's attainments. He is a student of theology, and has read a good deal on certain lines. He speaks sympathetically and warmly enough 1 A Historic View of the New Testament.