« السابقةمتابعة »
THE LAST REVOLUTION OF THE EARTH.
“ a second asylum” (p. 29), and that, generally speaking, there may have been “more than one primitive land” (p. 28). We should prefer giving at once to one primitive land a greater extent, and not confining it within such narrow limits. It must also not be overlooked, into what wide regions of the earth one and the same name for vast moun. tains and countries, in the old world, was often applied and extended. The name of the Caucasus gives us an instance of this, so likewise of the Imaus, and lastly of Asia itself. If. therefore, the Himalaya and the Hindukush lie nearest the Indian (p. 24), and are especially named before all others in the Indian tradition ; if the Altai (p. 52) forms the pivot, as it were, for the first immigration of the North-Asiatic tribes, and the Ural designs the great, old national way (p. 53) to the west, that is, to northern and central Europe ; so Moses also ought not to be passed over with such indifference, because he makes the patriarch Noah rest with the ark on Mount Ararat. Each tradition, as we see, refers on the whole but to one and the same central higb land, and to one primeval Asiatic mountain-chain, in all its wide ramifications. If Anquetil's opinion were the right one, which places Eeriene at the foot of the Albordi, in the land that is watered by the Kur and Araxes, the declaration of the Zendavesta, according to this interpretation, would then agree very closely with that of Moses. From what was quoted and examined into further back, this explanation relative to Eeriene cannot well be admitted ; but' an agreement so very accurate and precise is neither to be expected nor songht for in this case. Nevertheless, where the explaining of ancient geography is coupled with so much doubt, and where the best opinion is for the most part only the more probable one, this ought to make us diffident, and not too eager, for the sake of a preconceived opinion, to reject any old Asiatic tradition, how much less, then, the Mosaic document.
With this remark we conclude this communication respecting the work of the author. It has, perhaps, been too lengthily drawn up. Should I have succeeded in producing a conviction in his mind, that Moses and the Genesis may be, after all, regarded also in another and different point of view from what he has hitherto done, I should rejoice, if my expectations on this score should be not deceived, or be even surpassed. In every case my design was to examine thoroughly and seriously, excluding all partiality from the primitively-historical inquiry; to show, also, that what is only too frequently represented as entirely separate or even contradictory, when rightly understood, agrees perfectly well together. Lastly, it is indeed high time that the two witnesses of the living truth and clear knowledge of antiquity, viz. “ writ and nature,” should no longer be used and misused in mutual opposition, that they should lie, dead for all more exalted knowledge, neglected in the lane, abandoned to the scorn of ignorant understanding. The moment has visibly arrived when they shall rise again victoriously, as loud witnesses of the divine truth so long misunderstood, to the greater and ever greater glorification of that truth both in science and in life. It is doing but a sorry service to religion, or rather to both, when we put religion in opposition to science, to which this esoterical branch of history also so essentially belongs. Now if, in this first attempt at a profounder understanding of this subject, much should be still found that will be, perhaps, “a stumbling-block to the Jews, and to the Greeks a foolishness," as all that is conceived in a Christian manner with science for the most part is, I nevertheless know that this way, which I have attempted to point out here, will be more and more recognized, and . more universally perfected, because it is the right one.
ALBERT (the Emperor), his love of ARCHITECTURE, influence of the
justice, 122 ; his treatment of the crusades on, 111, 112.
ARMINIUS, the type of his age, 40;
his noble character, 40, 42 ; his
success in war, 41; his familiarity
with Roman civilization, ibid. ; his
policy, 42 ; the hatred of his kind.
red, ibid. ; the ingratitude of his
countrymen, ibid. ; his fame after
death, 43 ; vast historical conse-
quences of his deeds, ibid. ; cele-
brated in a poem of Klopstock's,
69 ; his moral qualities, ibid. ; com- tionary philosophy, 115 ; his su-
pared with Charlemagne, ibid. periority to later heretics, ibid.
his earlier career glorious, 220; history,1,2; the useful, when bene-
ficial to man, 22, 117.
rior to that of the Franks, 68; 57; his wars desolating, 55 ; his
used the Gothic language, ibid. ;
attempted to root out the Latin,
59; career of, a frequent subject
of Gothic poetry, 74.
necessarily destroys itself, ibid. ;
principle of inculcation second only
to that of perfect justice, ibid.
BOURBON, duke of, his desertion
from the French king to be pal-
I liated, 182.
ideas, ibid. ; favourable to the re-
publican spirit, ibid. ; its rejection
of the mysterious, 237 ; was fruit-
ful of new sects, 237, 238.
CHARLEMAGNE, his heroic ancestry,
66, 67; his conquests, 67 ; his
wars and military capacity, 67,
67; the Rhenish provinces the
the Græco-Macedonian states, 9;l high civilization of the Rhine land
due to him, ibid. ; the subjugation
career on Europe, 144 ; his cha-
gundian kingdom, ibid.
policy erroneous, 123 ; his imperial
ral and intellectual character, ibid.
rical epoch, 139; origin of great
ingen, ibid. ; his efforts to restore