of the people to overthrow an unjustnmonarch is defended by St. ThomasnAquinas. Indeed, the intolerance andnrepression that Milton saw and experiencednin the state and in its officiallynsanctioned religion were manifestationsnin his culture and era of the same enemiesnagainst liberty and conscience that hadnbeen present earlier, elsewhere, and innother guises. The intellectual libertariansnwho fought, sacrificed, and recountedntheir struggles, ranging from Cicero tonPaolo Sarpi, were the predecessors whosentraits of character, qualities of sagacitynand eruditon, sense of justice, and intensenpersonal commitment were re-embodiednin Milton. Interestingly, Hill strives tondissociate Milton from this very tradition,nwhich for him is too “bookish.” As ifnthinking were antithetical to action, henseems to imply that true reform does notnresult from intellectual endeavor, philosophicalnspeculation, and a profoundnsense of the past.nIf his reading of Milton’s prose tractsnis biased, then Hill’s understanding ofnthe great poems is also tendentious. InnParadise Lost, Samson Agonistes, andnParadise Regained, Milton’s intellectualnbiography is somehow completed, for innthese poems Hill perceives Milton’s commentarynon the failure of the EnglishnRevolution. In explaining these poems,nwhich he chooses not to consider aesthetically.nHill emphasizes their so-callednpolitical action. In doing so, however,nthe characters come to represent whomevernand whatever Hill chooses. Satan,nfor instance, is variously a royalist, anRanter, a Cromwellian general, and evennMilton. From one perspective, then,nSatan is a general whose personal ambitionntaints his initial intention ofnreform. Having been on the losing side,nMilton sought to understand why Godnsanctioned a revolution in England, anrevolution that failed. Ultimately Miltonnconcludes, in Hill’s interpretation of thengreat poems, that he and the other revolutionariesnwere not adequately transformednand purified to complete theirndivinely ordained mission. Howevernnoble at first, their principles becamencorrupted, and the endeavor failed. Inn10 inChronicles of CulturenSamson’s case virtually the same pointnis made, for he too began his task ofnliberating the chosen people only to becomena captive of the Philistians. At thenend of his life, however, he learns thatnpride and ambition had tainted him, butnthat the hope of continuing the missionnis ever-possible as Providence’s grandndesign progressively unfolds. Accordingly,nSamson’s success at the end ofnMilton’s poem is designed to impart hopento the revolutionaries, for whom thenRestoration should represent a setback,nnot a final defeat.nIn the dialectic of history that Hillnperceives, a dialectic that he also seesnrecounted in Adam’s dream-vision innBooks XI and XII of Paradise Lost, thenlesson iterated is the one that Samsonnunderwent and that Milton and the revolutionariesnexperienced. The continuousnprocess of struggle, ascendancy, downfall,nand more struggle is integral to thenMarxist view of history. Concomitantly,nAbout the Chronicles of Culturenthe revolutionaries must develop worthiness,nself-sacrifice and integrity of mindnand character necessary to implementnand consummate the noble tasks theynhave undertaken. Indeed, in Hill’s conceptionnthe Christ of Paradise Regainednis the perfect man after whom the revolutionariesnshould model themselves. Tonfail is to learn, for the revelation ofnweaknesses that accompanies downfallnprepares one for the next encounter.nOhort of synopsizing the book in greatndetail, it is not possible to suggest hownrecklessly it interprets Milton’s poetry,nhow inattentive it is at times to recentnscholarship, especially that on the Incarnationnand Milton’s kenotic Christology,nand how tenaciously it proceeds to claimnMilton as an enthusiastic advocate ofndemocracy, if not a quasi-Marxist revolutionary.nNot since Milton’s God, whichnHill singles out for special praise, havenMilton and his poetry been subjected tonsuch distortion. Dn”Speaking of allies in the marketplace of ideas, we would like tonbring to your attention a fairly new venture, published by thenRockford College Institute. We speak of Chronicles of Culture …”n— The New American ReviewnApril/May 1978n”… it is a relief to receive an American publication which putsnforward another view. This view, I believe, is one which shouldnappeal to educationists and those who have to deal with youngnpeople … The paper… is called Chronicles of Culture and itncomes from the Rockford College Institute . . .”nnn—David HolbrooknThe [London) TimesnMay 30,1978n