lence from the democratical assemblies of England,' as he calls them, the Common-halls of London, the meetings of Palace-Yard, or the elections at Brentford? (Vol. v. p. 43.) These are digressions which Lord Bacon, in the austere but simple language of philosophy, wisely and unanswerably rebukės. "Quidam politica," (he is talking of history,)" in quibus sibi complacent, ubique inculcent, et diverticula ad ostentationem quærendo; narrationem rerum nimis leviter interrumpant.

We have objections, also, and those not slight, to a great part of Mr. M.'s diction. The exact and appropriate style of history it were now perhaps romantic to expect, and unjust to demand. We may, indeed, amuse ourselves with dreams of purity and correctness, of the union of strength and elegance, and of that sober but graceful modesty of language which imagination rather than experience sketches out to us, when we inquire what ought to be the proper style of a history written in the English language. We may picture to our selves the balanced correctness of Robertson, corroborated by a more vigorous and idiomatic expression; or wander to that beau idéal of narration which the antient critics seem to have realized in Xenophon, that unaffected ease which no affec tation can imitate. "Scripsit historiam," says Cicero of that writer, "leviore quodam sono usus, et qui illum impetum orationis non habeat. Xenophontis sermo est ille quidem melle dulcior, sed a forensi strepitu remotissimus." Yet, without exacting any thing approximating even to this, we have a right to expect a clear and uninverted diction, with some reve rence for the established canons of our language; and we are the more intitled to make such a demand on Mr. Mitford, because the early portions of his work, with the exception of his singular affectation in orthography, are well and vigorously written. Whether it be that, as nature gives us the sad warnings of her declension in the stiffness and debility of the corporeal muscles, so the mind also imparts the same unwelcome memento in the stiffened and enfeebled nerve of the diction which interprets her operations; whether such be or be not the cause, no doubt can be entertained of the inferiority in this respect between the last two and the first three volumes of this History of Greece. The task were endless to

point out instances to prove our remark: but it is our duty to notice them, with regret indeed rather than reprehension; and to protest against them, lest the imitation of these and

* De Augment. Scient. l. ii. c. v. + Cic. Orat. 1. ii.

similar

similar licences of style should pollute the antient and genuine simplicity of our tongue with unauthorized and barbarous innovations.

We must not abstain from selecting one or two of the singularities to which we object. Besides the conjectural tone of the following sentence, it seems to have a most enigmatical construction: Tho not remaining directly said, it seems largely indicated that Demosthenes was the politician who brought about the northern confederacy, and that the traders were his agents among the barbarous nations.' (Vol. v. p. 59.) The definite article is dismissed without any ceremony, and most discourteously thrust out from almost every sentence: as, they addressed supplication to the Athenian people.' The poor relative pronoun is also severed from its verb by a most pitiless divorce: Greece was represented in danger of subjugation from the arms of Philip, if Athens did not prevent.' (Vol. iv. p. 439.) The indefinite article meets with the same fate: This was most important for the purposes of the war-party, but little inviting to the Many, as revenue to arise from this new dominion could not be pretended.' (Ib.) The energy of Demosthenes had provided that a body of troops was at Thebes or in the neighbourhood.' (Ib.)

With regard to orthographical excentricities, we shall say but little, being impatient to leave this ungracious part of the subject: but what absolution has Mr. Mitford received from observing the fixed and received usages of the language? Custom, the great legislator of speech, has long assigned certain determinate orthographies to English words. Dr. Middleton attempted to break loose from her laws, but in vain; and Ritson has been ridiculed and forgotten. We must remind our readers of some of Mr. Mitford's peculiarities. Deity, real, and idea, are thus dotted; and endevor, theater, forein, soverein, hainous, steddy, are items out of a large catalogue. Lastly, we fear that his attempts, though we wish him success in this respect, to reform those transmutations of Greek and Roman names with which the French have made such dreadful havoc, will be equally unavailing.

ART.

ART. V. Translation of an Abridgment of the Vedant, or, Resolution of all the Veds; the most celebrated and revered Work of Brahminical Theology: likewise a Translation of the Cena Upanishad, One of the Chapters of the Sama Veda; according to the Gloss of the celebrated Shancaracharya, establishing the Unity and the sole Omnipotence of the Supreme Being: and that he alone is the Object of Worship. By Rammohun Roy. 4to. pp. 36. 3s. 6d. Hoitt, Upper Berkeley Street. THIS curious publication deserves in two distinct points of view the attention of the literary world: 1st. As an important accession to the translated stock of oriental literature; and secondly, as a remarkable document of the state of living opinion in Hindustan. The author, Rammohun Roy, is by birth a Bramin, and a native of the province of Bengal, where he was born in 1774. At the age of twenty-two he commenced the study of the English language, and, having been employed as dewan, or collector of the revenue, in the service of the East-India Company, he progressively made acquaintance with many English gentlemen, acquired the power of conversing in their tongue, became a regular reader of the English news-papers, and (oddly enough) derived from them an enthusiastic admiration for Bonaparte. His curiosity extended to the perusal of many philosophical books; and he thus gives an account of the state of his faith, in the fortieth year of his age, to his English friend and correspondent, the editor of the publication before us.

"The consequence of my long and uninterrupted researches into religious truth has been, that I have found the doctrines of Christ more conducive to moral principles, and better adapted for the use of rational beings, than any others which have come to my knowledge; and have also found Hindoos in general more superstitious and miserable, both in performance of their religious rites, and in their domestic concerns, than the rest of the known nations on the earth: I therefore, with a view of making them happy and comfortable both here and hereafter, not only employed verbal arguments against the absurdities of the idolatry practised by them, but also translated their most revered theological work, namely Vedant, into Bengallee and Hindoostanee, and also several chapters of the Ved, in order to convince them, that the unity of God, and absurdity of idolatry, are evidently pointed out by their own scriptures. I however, in the beginning of my pursuits, met with the greatest opposition from their self-interested leaders, the Brahmins, and was deserted by my nearest relations; I consequently felt extremely melancholy; in that critical situation, the only comfort that I had, was the consoling and rational conversation of my European friends, especially those of Scotland and England.

"I now

"I now with the greatest pleasure inform you, that several of my countrymen have risen superior to their prejudices; many are inclined to seek for the truth; and a great number of those who dissented from me, have now coincided with me in opinion. This engagement has prevented me from proceeding to Europe as soon as I could wish."

This extract, the editor observes, is given without alteration, and shews how well Rammohun Roy has overcome the difficulties of our language. In this work, he presents to our country an English translation of that Vedant which he had previously translated into Bengallee, and also a translation of the Cena Upanishad, a remarkable chapter of one of the four Veds of which the Vedant is a summary. The object of the author is to discriminate those parts of the Veds which are to be interpreted allegorically, and consequently to correct those exceptionable practices which not only deprive Hindus in general of the common comforts of society, but also lead them too frequently to self-destruction, or to the sacrifice of the lives of their friends and relations. It will be evident to the philosophic reader, that the plan of Rammohun Roy for reforming the religion of Hindustan bears a close resemblance to that which Philo imagined for the reformation of the Jewish religion. The system of both writers consists in adopting unitarianism, or pantheism, for their radical theology; they both inculcate the natural immortality of the human soul, and its ultimate absorption into divine beatitude; and they both resolve into allegory, emblem, and mysterious significance, all the ceremonial law and material ritual that are enjoined by the established code of their countrymen. The eventually extensive success of Philo was greatly favoured by the patronage which his opinions experienced in the Christian sect: (the author of the epistle to the Hebrews has especially contributed to the ecclesiastical circulation of them;) and it is probable that the Christian missionaries, who may hereafter visit Hindustan, will find a marked local convenience in somewhat allying themselves with the principles of Rammohun Roy. These principles, however, are more analogous to those of the unitarian than to those of the trinitarian Christians of Europe; and they approach far nearer to the tenets of Servetus than of Socinus. We have spoken on this topic in our lxxxvith volume, p. 9. A sort of allegorical trinitarianism, indeed, may be detected in certain passages of the writings expounded by Rammohun Roy: but it every where refers to the three capacities of the pantheists, not the three persons of the Latin church. Thus he affirms: "One unknown true Being is the Creator, Preserver, and Destroyer of

the

the universe." The summary or catechism of doctrine here taught is couched in the following thirteen articles:

1st. Who is he [asks a pupil of his spiritual father] under whose sole will the intellectual power makes its approach to dif ferent objects? Who is he, under whose authority, Breath, the primitive power in the body, makes its operation? Who is he, by whose direction language is regularly pronounced? And who is that immaterial being, that applies vision and hearing to their respective objects?

2d. He [answers the spiritual parent] who is the sense of the sense of hearing; the intellect of the intellect; the essential cause of language; the breath of breath; the sense of the sense of vision; this is the Being, concerning whom you would enquire-learned men having relinquished the notion of selfindependence, and self-consideration, from knowing the supreme understanding to be the sole source of sense, enjoy everlasting beatitude, after their departure from this world.

3d. Hence no vision can approach him; no language can describe him; no intellectual power can compass or determine him. We know nothing of how the Supreme Being should be explained he is beyond all that is within the reach of comprehension, and also beyond nature, which is above conception. Our ancient spiritual parents have thus explained him to us.

6

4th. He alone, who has never been described by language, and who directs language to its meaning, is the Supreme Being; and not any specified thing which men worship: know thou this 5th. He alone, whom understanding cannot comprehend, and who, as said by learned men, knows the real nature of understanding, is the Supreme Being; and not any specified thing which men worship: know thou this

6th. He alone, whom no one can conceive by vision, and by whose superintendance every one perceives the objects of vision, is the Supreme Being; and not any specified thing which men worship: know thou this

7th. He alone, whom no one can hear through the sense of hearing, and who knows the real nature of the sense of hearing, is the Supreme Being; and not any specified thing which men worship: know thou this

8th. He alone, whom no one can perceive through the sense of smelling, and who applies the sense of smelling to its objects, is the Supreme Being; and not any specified thing which men worship: know thou this

9th. If you, [continues the spiritual parent,] from what I have stated, suppose and say, that "I know the Supreme Being thoroughly," you, in truth, know very little of the Omnipresent Being; and any conception of that Being, which you limit to your powers of sense, is not only deficient, but also his description, which you extend to the bodies of the celestial gods, is also imperfect; you, consequently, should enquire into the true knowledge of the Supreme Being. To this the pupil replies: "I perceive that at this moment I begin to know God." • 10th,