of morals and politics.-We admire the labour that M. de Guignes has employed in compofing and digesting this Memoir, and we learn from hence, that in the wide fields of literature there is food for every kind of appetite, natural and artificial.

It appears evident, by the refearches of this learned Academician, that, in the hiftory of the two first Chinese Dinaftics, there are no remains or traces of philofophy, and that it is only in the third, which commenced about the year 1122 before the Christian Era, that we begin to difcover the first marks of fomething like philofophical fcience.

MEMOIR II.

The fubject of this fecond Memoir is the fchool of Tao, or Lao-tje.. The school of the learned beheld with pity the corrup tions of human nature, and endeavoured, by their examples and difcourfes, to recal men from their deviations to the practice of virtue; on the contrary, the school of Tao or Lao-tfe, perfuaded that mankind were not only corrupt, but incorrigible, fed from fociety, lived fequeftered from the world, and, confining all their views to themfelves, fought for their happiness in aa auftere and frugal life. The time when the head of this fchool lived, has been debated among the learned even in China; the accounts which M. de Guignes gives us, of the Chinese philofophers before Tao, are treated by himself as fabulous, yet they take up many pages, and have not even the merit of fables, which are more or less interefting to the imagination. It is impoffible to imagine any thing more abfurd, obfcure, and trivial, than the maxims and tenets that are here fcraped together, incoherently enough.-With refpect to Tao or Lao-tfe, our Author (after confulting one hiftorian, who affirms that he was conceived by a ftar, and another, who relates that he was seventy years in his mother's womb) fuppofes that he lived in the seventh or eighth century before Chrift. The principal work of this philofopher is the Tao-te-king, i. e. the Book of the Power of Tas; it is univerfally confidered by the Chinese as the production of this pretended fage; and as M. DE GUIGNES deems it the most important of all the writings of Tao, and as containing the ancient doctrine of his fchool, he gives us here ample extracts from it, which are, in general, fuch effufions of nonsense as furpafs perhaps the most extravagant ravings that ever were heard in the cells of Bedlam. There are, however, among the eighty-one paragraphs, that compofe this book, fome strokes, that difcover a glimpse of the fublime amidst their obscurity, like a feeble flash from a cloud, and others that resemble the maxims of Stoicifm.-What is here faid of the Tao, the only divinity mentioned in the book, is the only one of the feveral paragraphs quoted by our Academician, that conveys any thing like meaning. "The Tao (fays Lao-tfe, and the Reader mutt excufe the bull) has no name, and it is impoffible to know him:

be

he is the principle of heaven and earth, the mother of all beings, -incomprehenfible and moft int. lligent."-Again "This Tao produced one, one produced two, two produced three, and three produced all things." That this fentence may not be carried, as an auxiliary, into the field of polemic theology, we must ob ferve, that by the term one, the Chinefe doctor underflood WATER, by two FIRE, and by three, WOOD.-Here we have another excellent paragraph in point of perfpicuity: rifum teneatis!"The heavens arrive at unity by purity, the earth arrives at unity by tranquillity,-the mind arrives at unity by intelligence, the void (vacuum) arrives at unity by plenitude,

things arrive at unity by production-fovereigns arrive at unity by juftice: if things are not fo, continues Lao tfe, (refuming all the links of this feries) all must be destroyed."- Now Lao-tfe may have attached fome ideas to this jingle of words, but we can attach none. His moral precepts are more clear, and are fometimes fenfible: they turn upon apathy, humility, and felf-government, on the contempt of riches; all which he lays down as the bafis of true glory and exaltation.

The fchool of Lao-tfe or Tao, combined together religion and philofophy, affirmed the poffibility of preventing death by a golden pill, and a certain beverage, which were the objects of their deep and affiduous researches, pretended (by the help of chemistry and magic) to do fupernatural things, fuch as to difpofe of rain, ftorms, and thunder, and command, restrain or modify them at pleafure. Thus the school of Tao obtained a high degree of credit in the esteem of certain princes, and in the opinion of the people; and it was a zeal for this fect, that engaged the emperor Chi-hoang-ti to burn the books of the fchool of the learned. But thefe magical tricks, which railed their reputation, for fome time, occafioned, at length, their dif, grace. The doctrine of Confucius, which was collected, in part, from the remains of the fchool of the learned, became the religion of the empire, and the fchool of Lao-tfe was left to the populace.

Thus, according to our Academician, the doctrine of Pytha goras feems to have formed (if there be not fancies connatural to minds of a certain turn, and in fimilar circumftances, which therefore may exift in diftant regions without traditionary com→ munication) two fchools in China, that of the learned, who, involving their fpeculative fcience in the mysterious labyrinth of mufic and numbers, chofe, in their practical leffons and inftruc tions, the plaineft rules and maxims of morality - and the school of Tao, whofe followers applied themfelves to the study of magic, and difdained to form or correct the manners of mankind. These two schools ftill exift-but the latter is funk into contempt.

Nn 2

Reflections

Reflections on an Indian book called BAGAVADAM, one of the eigh teen Pouranam, or facred Bocks of the Indians, of which a Translation was fent in 1769 to M. Bertin, Minifter and Secretary of State. By M. de GUIGNES. It is the fate, and feems to be the tafte, of this learned man, to be almost always wading through the clouds of philology, to fnuff up conjectures. In the piece, how ever, now before us, he makes good ufe of his critical acumen, and the object is of fome confequence. This Bagavadam, ot Divine Hiftory, which claims an antiquity of above five thou fand years, and has given rife to a fuppofition, that all the other nations of the world have derived their knowledge of the arts and fciences from the Indians, has been tranflated into French by Meridas Poullé, of Indian origin, chief interpreter to the fupreme council of Pondicherry, and dedicated to his protector, M. Bertin. The tranflator tells us, in his preface, that the book was compofed by Viaffer the fon of Brahma, the fame who digefted the four Vedam, and is of facred authority among the Vaijfchtnaver, or thofe who confider Vischnow as the Supreme Being. The French tranflation was made from a verfion Tamoul; for the language of the original text is the Sanfert, or facred language of the Indians. M. de GUIGNES collects all the traditions and relations of the Indians, that are defigned to afcertain the antiquity of this book; and they all tend to date its compofition from the year 3116 before the Chriftian æra. He then proceeds to examine the pretenfions of this book to fuchs remote antiquity, and both finds and proves them unfatisfactory. Among other things he copies from it a curious chronicle of th kings of India, which furnishes evident proofs that the Baga dam is of a much more recent date than the Indians pretend, to mention an account of the deluge contained in this chronicle, which has been probably borrowed from the writings of Chri tians or Jews, and been disfigured into a conformity with the fpirit of the indian theology, by the addition of fome fabulo circumftances. M. de GUIGNES finds allo, in this book, th veftiges of foreign, nay even of Greek and Latin words, which betray a modern date; and he thinks it abfurd to explain this by the confufion of tongues after the deluge, fince the Greeks (who founded the kingdom of Bactria after the death of Alexan der, and after the deftruction of that kingdom, fettled on the banks of the Indus) must (or may) have conveyed inftruction to that people, as alfo the Romans, who followed their example, and fince it is well known that the Arabians carried the patio fophy of Ariftotle into India.

An Enquiry into the Nature and Origin of the Hellenifmus, concerning the Religion of Greece. Memoir Vil. and Vili. B the Abbé FouCHER.

La

In the first of thefe Memoirs we have an account of the Phenician Theophanies (i. e. appearances of deities in human forms). In the first and fecond parts of this Memoir, the very learned and judicious Abbé inveftigates the origin, and unfolds the nature of the idolatry that reigned among the Phenicians; and in the third part, difcuffes the two following questions: Did the Phenicians pay divine worship and adoration to men? —What were the men to whom this worship was paid? The learned Freret, who examined, with his ufual fagacity and erudition, the former of thefe queftions, and decided it in the negative, is, we think, refuted with great modefty, candour, and dexterity, by the Author of this Memoir, who in the courfe of his reafoning appreciates, with exquifite judgment, the credit that is due to the Fragment of Sanchoniathon, and fteers a wife and middle way, between the fupercilious contempt, and enthufiaftic veneration, with which that hiftorical relic has been treated by different writers. The fourth part of this feventh Memoir contains an, account of the new Theophanies, which took place among the Affyrians, Chaldeans, Egyptians, and Phenicians.-To underftand what our Academician means by the new Theophanies, it must be obferved, that the first Theophanies, or men to whom divine honours were paid, in the earlier periods of the Phenician hiftory, must have been the antediluvian patriarchs, or thofe, who peopled the world anew, after the deluge: for our. Academician renders it more than probable, that the Phenicians (who were early a learned people) could not be so stupid as to take (like the Greeks) one of their cotemporaries for a god; but they were more eafily deceived with refpect to the ancient heads of the nations, whom they faw (as it were) magnified through the mift of antiquity, and fo exalted by the reports of tradition, that they appeared above the common measure of humanity. This was alfo the cafe with the Syrians and Affyrians in the earlier periods of hiftory; but in more modern times, in the reign of Manaffeh, king of Judah, and from thence to the conclufion of the Babylonifh captivity, the frenetic habit of deifying mortals became more and more in vogue. These were,.

what our Author calls, the new Theophanies, with refpect to which our Abbé fhews, that the eaftern nations, among whom they took place, did not look upon the man, as become a god, but as being no man, but an ancient god, defcended from heaven, under a human form.-From this principle, which is learnedly proved, our Author throws great light upon the orien tal deifications-the principal object of this Memoir,

The eighth Memoir, contains an account of the Indian, Peruvian, Aufonian, and Celtic Theophanies; and both these papers do great honour to the extenfive erudition and critical fagacity of the Abbé Foucher.

Nn3

Memoir

Memoirs I. II. and II. Concerning the Marine of the Ancients. By M LE ROY.

Thefe inftructive memoirs have been published apart in a work, which we mentioned in the Foreign Article of our Review for November 1777.

ART. IX

Tableau de l'Hiftoire generale des Provinces Unies, &-A Sketch of the general History of the United Provinces. Vol. III. 12mo. 1778.

W

HEN the first and fecond volumes of this Work appeared, we took the liberty to fay, that, though greatly defective in compofition and ftyle, they were not deftitute of a certain degree of merit. This was a fentence of clemency and indulgence, which in courts of literature, as well as in courts of justice, may, now and then, be pronounced in favour of an individual, whofe cafe and circumftances render him an object of mercy, but which our regard for the well being of the republic of letters, will not permit us to pronounce frequently.Our correfpondents at trecht and Amfterdam had informed us that M. CERISIER, the Author of this work, though naturally of a completion fomewhat rough, cynical, and fanguine, was nevertheless a laborious man, who compiled, compofed, and tranflated without ceafing, and thus ate the bread of honeft induftry. This laft circumftance difarmed our critical justice, Inftead of faying, that his French was barbarous and disgusting in the highest degree, and that his hiftorical facts, uncouthly drawn together, were often interiperfed with flat, and fometimes obscene anecdotes, beneath the gravity of hiftorical compofition (which is ftrictly true), we only faid that his work was defective in compofition and ftyle, and that he had not the art of leaving out, in his perspective view, uninteresting objects.

Our decifion with respect to the merit of his book has put M. CERISIER out of humour, and made him fay, more rafhly than might have been expected from a fober, candid man, that we had judged his book without having read it. We were surprised to find this accufation in the preface to the third volume now before us; for this is making too free with truth, and is therefore peculiarly unbecon ing in an hiftorian. How can we beJieve the facts which M. CERISIER relates in his hifto y without Vouchers, when we fee him here forging an untruth with fuch boldness and facility? we declare, upon honour, that we read his book, though with heavy eye-lids, and if any circumstance can render this declaration doubtful to good judges of historical compofition, it must be the tender manner in which we treated it.