note editions: I soon saw that I could not do this with any degree of
uniformity, and therefore determined to refer all who desire this
bibliographic assistance, to _The Dictionary of Authors_, by my friend S.
Austin Allibone, LL.D., in which bibliography is a strong feature. I am
not called upon to eulogize that noble work, but I cannot help saying that
I have found it invaluable, and that whether mentioned or not, no writer
can treat of English authors without constant recurrence to its accurate
columns: it is a literary marvel of our age.

It will be observed that the remoter periods of the literature are those
in which the historic teachings are the most distinctly visible; we see
them from a vantage ground, in their full scope, and in the interrelations
of their parts. Although in the more modern periods the number of writers
is greatly increased, we are too near to discern the entire period, and
are in danger of becoming partisans, by reason of our limited view.
Especially is this true of the age in which we live. Contemporary history
is but party-chronicle: the true philosophic history can only be written
when distance and elevation give due scope to our vision.

The principle I have laid down is best illustrated by the great literary
masters. Those of less degree have been treated at less length, and many
of them will be found in the smaller print, to save space. Those who study
the book should study the small print as carefully as the other.

After a somewhat elaborate exposition of English literature, I could not
induce myself to tack on an inadequate chapter on American literature;
and, besides, I think that to treat the two subjects in one volume would
be as incongruous as to write a joint biography of Marlborough and
Washington. American literature is too great and noble, and has had too
marvelous a development to be made an appendix to English literature.