absence of Mr. Matthew Arnold, the high priest of culture; but we have
to remember that Mr. Arnold is solicitous to stand apart, that he holds
up ideals which he is careful to inform us are not those of his time,
and that he is fastidious in selecting a point of view where he cannot
be jostled, with perspectives to which no vision but his own can
accommodate itself. His culture may represent that of the future, but
certainly does not typify that of the present.

Mr. Leslie Stephen, on the contrary, might very well stand as a type of
his class both in its positive and negative qualities. He, more than
any of his confreres, is a product of culture. Unlike the greater
number of them, he has no special talent, or pet object of enthusiasm,
or erratic tendencies. He is a trained critic, and is "nothing if not
critical." His coolness is a real coolness, not the effect of any
"toning down" for the occasion, as we may suspect to have been the case
with Mr. Froude and Mr. Goldwin Smith. His knowledge is accurate, his
judgments are sound, his taste is seldom at fault, his style is
faultless and colorless, he never attempts what he is unable to do well
and without any appearance of strain. Though he may have given more
attention to the literature of the eighteenth century than to that of
any other period, one feels that he might safely have been entrusted
with the preparation of any volume of this series. It was probably from
a sense of fitness, not by mere chance, that he was selected to write
the initial volume, which pitched the key for those that were to
follow, and that so far he is the only writer who has been called upon
for a second contribution.

His task in the present instance has been much less easy and simple
than that which he before undertook. In the case of Johnson he had only
to select and condense from material so copious and authentic as left
no question of fact or problem of criticism unsettled. Pope's career,
on the other hand, after all the research that has been spent upon it,
is full of obscurities; his character, while it invites, seems to
evade, analysis; even his rank and exact position in literature cannot
be said to be conclusively determined. It is needless to say that Mr.
Stephen has been diligent and skilful in examining and summarizing
whatever facts relating to his subject have been brought to light by
recent or early investigation; that he weighs all the evidence with
strict impartiality, and, wh