ner: and in India, Vishnu himself was the rudder of the ship, that conveyed the diftreffed people to land. Similar tales exift among all the ancient nations in this quarter of the globe, adapted to the traditions and circumftances of each: and convincing as they are, that the deluge of which they fpeak was general throughout Afia, they help us at once out of the strait, in which we unneceffarily confine ourselves, when we take every circumstance of a familyhistory exclusively for a history of the world, and thus deprive the. history itfelf of its well-founded credibility.

:

The genealogical table of this race after the deluge proceeds in a fimilar manner: it is confined within the limits of the country and its topography, not ftretching beyond them into Hindoftan, China, Eaftern Tartary, &c. The three chief branches of those who were faved are evidently the people on either fide the western Auatic mountains, including the eaftern coaft of Europe, and the northern of Africa, as far as they were known to the collector of the traditions. He traces them as well as he can, and endeavours to connect them with his genealogical table; but does not give us a general map of the world, or a genealogy of all nations. The pains that have been taken to make all the people of the earth, according to this genealogy, defcendants of the Hebrews, and half-brothers of the Jews, are contradictory, not only to chronology and univerfal hiftory, but to the true point of view of the narrative itself, the credibility of which has been nearly destroyed by its being thus overstretched. On all the primitive mountains of the world, nations, languages, and kingdoms, were formed, after the deluge, without waiting for envoys from a Chaldean family and in the eaft of Afia, man's primitive and most populous feat, we ftill evidently find the most ancient cuftoms and languages, of which this western race of a later people knew nothing, and could not be otherwife than ignorant. It would not be much lefs impertinent to inquire, whether the Chinese defcended from Cain or Abel, that is from a tribe of troglodytes, husbandmen, or thepherds, than to what beam of Noah's ark the American bradypus hung: but on this fubject I fhall not here enlarge; and even the inveftigation of points fo important to our hiftory as the abridgement of the duration of man's life, and the general deluge itfelf, I muft defer to another place. Suffice it, that the firm central point of the largest quarter of the globe, the primitive mountains of Afia, prepared the firft abode for the human race, and has maintained itself through every revolution of the earth, Not firft raised naked from the bottom of the fea by the deluge, but, as both natural hiftery and the most ancient traditions teftify, the original country of man, it was the first grand theatre of nations, the inftructive infpection of which we fhall now purfue.' P. 286.

With the clue juft laid down. M. Herder examines the ancient and modern races of men, beginning fro.n China, Japan,

and Tartary, including Hindoftan and Thibet. Some late publications would have effentially affifted him; but of the materials in his hands he has made the best use, and illuminated the obfcure receffes of ancient hiftory by the torches of philofophy and good fenfe. We hefitate not to fay, that more light is thrown on ancient hiftory in a few pages of the prefent work than in many very bulky volumes. He proceeds with the fame fpirit to examine the traces of the early hiftory of Babylon, Affyria, and Chaldæa; of the Medes, Perfians, and Hebrews; of Phoenicia, Carthage, and Egypt. It is impoffible to follow him in this detail, but we fhall felect what he has obferved of the ancient Egyptians, rather becaufe Egypt has of late engaged much of our attention, than that it deferves peculiar preference. Indeed his obfervations on the early kingdoms of Affyria and the political fituation of the Hebrews, were not the remarks too extenfive, are apparently more valuable and original.

In my opinion the natural hiftory of the country is fufficient to show, that the Egyptians are no primitive indigenous nation: for not only ancient tradition, but every rational geogony exprefsly fays, that Upper Egypt was the earlier peopled, and that the lower country was in reality gained from the mud of the Nile by the 1kilful induftry of man. Ancient Egypt, therefore, was on the mountains of the Thebaid; where too was the refidence of its ancient kings; for had the land been peopled by the way of Suez, it is inconceivable why the first kings of Egypt fhould have chofen the barren Thebaid for their abode. If, on the other hand, we follow the population of Egypt, as it lies before our eyes, in it we fhall likewife find the caufe, why its inhabitants became fuch a fingular and diftinguished people, even from their cultivation. They were no amiable Circaffians, but, in ali probability, a people of the fouth of Afia, who came weftwards across the Red Sea, or perhaps farther off, and gradually fpread from Ethiopia over Upper Egypt. The land here being bounded as it were by the inundations and marthes of the Nile, is it to be wondered, that they began to conftruct their habitations as troglodytes in the rocks, and afterwards gradually gained the whole of Egypt by their induftry, improving themfelves as they improved the land? The account Diodorus gives of their fouthern defcent, though intermingled with various fables of his Ethiopia, is not only probable in the highest degree, but the fole key to an explanation of this people, and its fingular agreement with fome diftant nations in the eaft of Afia.

As I could purfue this hypothefis here but very imperfectly, it must be deferred to another place, availing myfelf only of fome of its evident confequences, with regard to the figure made by this people in the hiftory of mankind. The Egyptians were a quiet, induftrious, well-meaning people, as their political conftitution, their

arts, and their religion, collectively demonftrate. No temple, no column of Egypt, has a gay, airy, Grecian appearance: of this defign of art they had no idea, it never was their aim. The mummies fhow that the figure of the Egyptians was by no means beautiful; and as the human form appeared to them, fuch would neceffarily be their imitations of it. Wrapped up in their own land, as in their own religion and conftitution, they had an averfion to foreigners and as, conformably to their character, fidelity and precifion were their principal objects in the imitative arts; as their fkill was altogether mechanical, and indeed in its application to religious purposes was confined to a particular tribe, while at the same time it turned chiefly on religious conceptions; no deviations toward ideal beauty, which without a natural prototype is a mere phantom, were in the least to be expected in this country. In recompenfe they turned their attention fo much the more to folidity, durability, and gigantic magnitude; or to finishing with the utmost industry of art. In that rocky land, their ideas of temples were taken from vast caverns: hence in their architecture they were fond of majestic immenfity. Their mummies gave the hint of their ftatues : whence their legs were naturally joined, and their arms clofed to the body; a pofture of itfelf tending to durability. To fupport cavities and separate tombs, pillars were formed: and as the Egyptians derived their architecture from the vaults of rocks, and understood not our mode of erecting arches, the pillar, frequently gigantic, was indifpenfable. The deferts, by which they were furrounded, the regions of the dead, which from religious notions floated in their minds, alfo moulded their ftatues to mummies, wherein not action, but eternal reft, was the character, on which their art fixed.' P. 342.

When M. Herder treats of Greece, the profpe&t is more pleafing. M. Herder derives the inhabitants from the north-east of Alia, without glancing at an Egyptian origin, an idle fable of modern theoriffs, drawn from one or two equivocal expreffions in ancient claffics. The language, the mythology, and the poetry of Greece, difplay equally the author's learning and tafte indeed this part of the work will prove to the claffical fcholar peculiarly attractive. The arts of the Greeks he derives from their religion admitting reprefentations of the deities, and of courfe obliging the artifts to feek for fomething fuperior to nature, the fine ideal; adding, probably with strict truth, that no nation, to which reprefentations of the gods were prohibited, ever made any great advancement in the imitative arts.' Their moral and political accomplishments, with their fcientific acquifitions, are noticed in a masterly comprehenfive manner, and the fubject concludes with a hiftory of the revolutions of Greece.

Rome next engages M. Herder's attention, and he developes,

with philofophical accuracy, the conftitution of that ftate, from the difpofition as well as the manners of the Romans. Rome was a military ftate, and all its inftitutions were of this kind; hence may be dated its origin, its decline and fall. This indeed is but an outline; yet of a history so extensive in a political, military, and literary view, an outline only can be admitted.

From an hiftorical furvey of the nations of this globe, we sɛe vice and wickednefs triumph, while virtue and integrity fink into diftrefs. Where then is the fuperintending Providence, whose wisdom we admire and whofe benevolence we adore, at every step we take in the natural world? This is the next fubject of inquiry, before M. Heider proceeds to the history of more modern nations. In the folution of the difficulty he is not however very fatisfactory; or at leaft, to have enfured conviction, the principle on which it refts fhould have been more perfpicuously developed. The existence of the baleful paffions and their triumphs are the ftorms and hurricanes, the hemlock and the ferpents of the moral world, defigned perhaps to exercise our faith, our patience, and attention, working filently, though fometimes feverely, to a happy conclufion. Where philofophy and diligent inquiry have extended our field of view, we very clearly perceive the truth of this pofition, fo that we ought to reft with confidence on the fame tendency of thofe powers whofe immediate influence we do not fo clearly dif cern. M. Herder thinks that the deftructive powers' must ultimately yield to the maintaining powers,' and be at last subfervient to the general good, while, after various ebbs and flows, civilifation and happinefs, which are wholly founded on reafon and juftice, will be established. This is the foundation of our author's folution, which he has expanded in many different ways, and eftablished, on the whole, with fome fuccefs. Our explanation differs in this, that virtue and religion, though they fuffer in the conteft, are really promoted in the struggle.

(To be continued.)

The Georgics of Virgil tranflated: by William Sotheby, Efq. F. R. S. &c. 8vo. 75. Boards. Wright. 1800. IN confequence of the decifion of Ariftotle, many a fevere and fervile critic of pofterior æras has denied the rank and praife of poetry to fubjects of a didactic nature. Many will perhaps argue, that Ariftotle was as much in the right as Plutarch, and that Caftelvetro was in the wrong. The ftagirite pretended not to lay down rules à priori; but, from the best examples before him, concentrated a code of precepts

to correct and guide the taste of his own and future ages. His judgement refpecting the ode was formed from the fublime numbers of Pindar, and his ideas of the epopea from the nervous harmony of Homer; but, in the epoch of Ariftotle, there was no didactic poet who could, in any meafure, be put in competition with thefe great founders of lyric and heroic compofition. Hefiod he found a Heliod he found a mere chronologift; and Theocritus, though poffeffed of much fuavity of style, too defective in fpirit and energy for a man inspired by the muíes. The poem of Empedocles On the Nature of Things, and the Four Elements,' is totally loft to modern times, but appears to be the only one that had a chance of pleading in favour of didactic fubjects at the period in which Ariftotle wrote. The candid and polite Lucretius has paid a compliment to Empedocles for this philofophic effufion, which will endure as long as literature is cultivated in any country; and the Grecian critic himfelf has condefcended to denominate him Ομηρικος, δεινος περιφρασιν, μεταφορικός; • Homeric, energetic, metaphoric.' But, nevertheless, he does not appear to have poffeffed thefe qualifications in a fufficient degree to have entitled him to the appellation of a poet in the judgement of Aristotle; and, after this attempt of Empedocles, he deemed it impoffible for didactic fubjects of any kind to be proper vehicles for the harmony of the mufes, and therefore excluded, or at leaft teftified a wifh to exclude, all fuch difquifitions from the catalogue of poems.

But what Greece could not effect, Rome amply accomplished. The fweet, fublime, and pathetic numbers of Lucretius and Virgil, both labourers in the didactic vineyard, prove evidently that Ariftotle was in an error, and leave no room to doubt that, if his poetics had been compiled in a period pofterior to the time of thefe immortal bards, he would as readily have admitted the idea of didactic as of heroic or lyric poetry. The laws of Ariftotle, therefore, which were drawn, in every inflance, from the actual existence of archetypes before him, and which extended no farther than thofe archetypes would juftify, were perfect in his own æra, but have been defective for many ages fince. He however is amply juftified, and entitled to the thanks of the literary world, for having done all that was poffible at the time in which he wrote: but the apology will not attach to critics of fucceeding ages; who, with the force of demonftration before them, ftili continue blind to its irradiation, and flavishly fettered by the obfolete opinions of their great mafter. The fact is, that every true poet is a Midas; and though, unluckily, he cannot convert every thing he touches into gold, he can convert it into poetry. A dry ca