gerated to the color student, or to any one anxious to be exact in use of color harmony and contrast.

Not unseldom it happens to be desirable that separate objects, discordant in tone, should continue to remain near each other, and it may be, exactly where, at present, their individual colors persistently quarrel. In such case the interposition of one of the light tints, usually called white, and the consequent power of tone reaction, will be sure to reconcile contentions and change ill-temper into at least tolerable friendship.

The walls and ceiling being now provided for, next comes the floor covering. An ideal rug would have its main body plain in pattern and substantially or actually plain in color, of any preferred tint of gray that is light and warm; and around this single-toned center a border, rich and wide, will lap onto some cold tone (filler) extending quite to the warm side-wall. This massing of uniform color with no interruption of mechanical design-certainly, not of one resembling or recalling the checkerboard-is an important factor in pictorial decoration. The same may be said of the interposition of cold "filler," to separate and thus to accentuate the warmths of wall and of rug. Such arrangement compels a well-defined and lively tone reaction of each on the other, and, by supplying the contrast needed for play of color according to law, heightens the effect of both. No room ornamentation can be entirely satisfactory or wholly effective, in which this color antiphony is wanting. Color-Law so decides, and those who know it best, and who enjoy the broadest experience, are most thoroughly convinced that the law of gravitation is not more inflexible, nor less patient of discussion.

But, already, the room begins to respond to our wishes. In a measure, we find the matchless home-look so earnestly sought! Every added detail promises future gratification and gives present reward for our efforts. Even now, an ensemble invites so encouragingly, that the owner is eager to see installed in its allotted space each intended belonging. He is in haste to add the very last ornament of window drapery and revel in the finishing fluffiness of unstinted white lace.

When, finally, every individual object has not only found a place, but is in it—when the room reeks with prim precision, Color-Law deftly begins to undo each collection of stereotyped, provincial common-place. There is clear fascination in the opportunity to watch and to follow the happy touches of skillful disorder, with which finished art upsets all traces of machinemade uniformity, and, as painters say, "spoils " every separate group of plumb-line and brick-wall accuracy.

It is well worth while to remark that here, near the window, a scrap of flimsy old-gold stuff serves admirably to blunt the sharp edges of various corners, whose right angles bristle with too frequent exactness. And it is interesting to study this trifling chiffon now metamorphosed into a matter of serious importance and endowed with art significance.

While there, on the opposite side, over the low mantel, a simple, blue-blacked oriental fan hurries out from behind the gilding of a broad frame, with no object immediately apparent; but, by the power of this single motion, it supplies an additional color-play with its grateful coolness against the side-wall warmth. Thus it pleasingly interrupts over-repetition of a neighbor's outline. This it does, not alone by virtue of properly contrasted color, but through force of opposing shape in rounded form. Picturesque spots of warm or of cold color are fixed here, and suspended there, but everywhere contrived to come between the eye and some relief-giving tone, intended to act as background.

Thus, inimitable and inexhaustable, Color-Law contrives to better everything with a seemingly simple, but really, magic hand. The result follows, of course! Familiarity with, and knowledge of, color is asserted as clearly by this room, as was inexperience and lack of judgment by the monochromic houseexterior already criticized.

Color-Law is always ready to help and is far from being unsociable, but the honor of its friendly acquaintance is not accorded to any one, unsolicited. More than that, this same honor must be as honestly earned, as where deserved it is impartially granted.

An unmistakable art vocation may exist with sympathies inclined to satisfaction from severe outlines of form, rather

than from more sensuous beauty of color. Such colder enthusiasm may not be offended by monotony of straight line or frequent repetition of right-angle, that starve and grieve the eye specially endowed for enjoyment of color.

But, these gifted temperaments are deeply penetrated with the color truths here presented. Inspired with knowledgecompelled respect for these truths they are both dead in earnest. Both insist that the last words repeat the first. They both wish it announced, published, proclaimed to all concerned, that, in matters where pigment is employed, in any form whatever, all discussion is useless and every contentious wriggle is in vain; that, in each case where color is selected and applied it is entirely right, or must be absolutely wrong. Color-Law, alone, decides the question. Its ruling is final; from its decision, there can be no appeal.

F. WAYLAND FELLOWES.

ARTICLE V.-PHILO, AND HIS LATEST INTERPRETER.

Philo Judaeus; or the Jewish-Alexandrian Philosophy in its Development and Completion. By JAMES DRUMMOND, LL.D., Principal of Manchester New College, London. 2 vols. London: Williams and Norgate, 1888.

THE studies of which these volumes are the outcome originated, we are told, "in the desire to learn at first hand what Philo thought, and why he thought it" (Pref. p. iii.). A book from this source should be heartily welcomed, for it is a matter of no common interest to know what Philo thought, and why. We may briefly state the reasons for this interest before asking how far it finds satisfaction in the present work.

During the life-time of Philo, the Jew of Alexandria, Jesus of Nazareth lived and labored, and the Christian religion began its course in the world. The work of these two men, of one age and race, invites comparison. There are points of likeness between the movement initiated by Jesus, and that represented by Philo. In each, Judaism forsook its narrow limits and moved toward universality. Jesus did not in form, and Philo did not in intention, break with the traditional religion, but by both the particularism and the legalism of Jewish faith and practice were in principle abolished. Both in Christianity and in Alexandrian philosophy, Judaism opened its hand to the Greeks, and offered its treasures to the world. But Christianity did not, like Alexandrianism, set out "to make Jews Greeks, and Greeks Jews,"* to reconcile by philosophy and in books Jewish conceptions with current ideas. It rather rose to a higher plane where "there is no distinction between Jew and Greek, for the same Lord is Lord of all." Alexandrianism rationalized Judaism, Christianity spiritualized it.

In another respect Philo attempted what Jesus accomplished. A mediation between God and the world, and between God and man, was felt to be needed. It was sought in Egypt by

* Schürer, Geschichte des jüdischen Volkes, II., p. 872.

speculation and in the region of ideas, it was found in Judæa by faith and in a life. To those who had sought for such a mediator in the Logos of philosophy, the Christian message was, "the Logos became flesh and dwelt among us."

In the sense of sin and the desire for deliverance from its bondage, Philo's language often reminds us of the New Testament, and especially of Paul. But sin in his view was closely connected with the body and with ignorance, so that the renunciation of sense and the enlightenment of the mind were the ways of salvation, and its end was the vision of God in ecstasy. The trouble and the remedy were metaphysically and intellectually conceived rather than spiritually.

It is interesting, then, to know what Philo thought, because he was a Jew of the time of Christ, and because he tried to make Judaism universal, or rather to show that it was so, to find a mediator between God and man, and to escape evil and attain good by the knowledge of God.

But it is safer and more profitable to deal with actual historical relations than with ideal comparisons, and it is on the field of history that Philo is of greatest significance. He is significant as the outcome and representative of a development, and as the source of an influence.

The development of Judaism on Greek soil and amid Greek influences is a most striking spectacle. Jewish and Greek ideas have so deeply influenced western and modern thought, that their first meeting is an event of peculiar interest. Alexander's conquest had brought Greek culture into the east, while Jews of the Dispersion were living in almost all the cities of the civilized world; so that the most favorable opportunities existed for the interchange of ideas. There were, in Philo's time, a million Jews in Egypt. That was their home. Greek was their native tongue, and they were not unacquainted with Greek literature and philosophy. The early stages of the development of Judaism under these conditions are in much obscurity. Philo refers to predecessors of whom we have no further knowledge. The Septuagint, with the Apocrypha, especially the Wisdom of Solomon, the older Sibylline Oracles, the fragments remaining of Demetrius, Artapanus, Aristobulus (whom Dr. Drummond, contrary to the prevailing opinion,