ivine right of the monarch, than the Thibetan has of the divine right of the grand lama. The Buddhist thinks he has secured the continuous re-appearance of supernatural wisdom in human form, and the regular transmission of political ability in the same family was the ideal for which the devotees of mediæval despotism had to hope. Nothing could be further from the aspirations of our author than a race of mere palace kings seeking enjoyment only in self-indulgence. The king was to be the ruler and leader of his people. The relation and interdependence of the several classes is emphatically proclaimed, and the claims of duty are urged upon each.

The book enables us to gauge the literary culture of the thirteenth, fourteenth, and fifteenth centuries. Poor as it may now seem, it belonged, in those days, to the "literature of power," and had great influence. The form is one which lent itself readily to poetic and historic illustration, and indeed demanded such treatment. The authors and translators were chiefly learned and distinguifhed ecclesiastics. Caxton, the representative of the new time when literature was to be the common heritage, was filled to overflowing with the best literature then accessible. A writer of the present century, probably borrowing his sentiment, has defined originality to be undetected imitation. Such refinements were unknown to Cessoles and his contemporaries. A writer took whatever suited his purpose from any and every source that was open to him. A quotation was always as good as an original sentiment, and sometimes much better. Why should a man take the trouble of laboriously inventing fresh phrases about usury or uncleanness when there were the very words of St. Augustine or St. Basil ready to hand? Why seek modern instances when the great storehouse of anecdotes of Valerius Maximus was ready to be rifled? Very frequently the author is given, mostly it may be imagined from a sense of the value of the autho