;

may be, yet we may fairly interpret them to signify, that a future deliverer should appear, assuming a double character, both suffering and triumphant so far we may be allowed to go, but no farther. We may imagine it probable, that some additional information was given concerning this extraordinary personage; but we have no right to argue that there really was. We have no right to assume, that the promise extended so far as to predict, that this personage should be divine, or rather the divinity itself still less that any intimation was given concerning the time of his appearance, or concerning the place where he should appear. But if it be found that the incarnation of the divinity, by his own will and pleasure, was a doctrine of universal extent, and unquestionable antiquity; if this doctrine be found generally current throughout the East, and forming a leading article of their popular creed; if it be found also diffused throughout the western world, and taught by those philosophers who had acquired a knowlege of oriental learning; if it be also discovered that this opinion was more than ordinarily predominant at the time of the appearance of Christ; if it be proved that the Jews were, at that time, in such a state of depression, as to be the contempt and derision of the nations around them;

and that if the rumour had entirely originated from them, it would have neither been entitled to any credit, nor would have been imputed to any other motive than national vanity; if above all it be found that all these distinct circumstances are transmitted to us, not by Christians, but by some who were indifferent, and by others who were hostile, to the Christian cause if we connect all this information with the written promise contained in the history of Moses, we may fairly and reasonably infer, that the written promise was only the substance of what was more fully communicated to the early world, and which communication traditional authority has thus contributed to preserve.

But in this method of reasoning, however correct the general principle may be, there is a necessity for caution in its exercise and application. Of all authority, traditional authority is the most equivocal and least satisfactory. As information, conveyed through this channel, is always liable to corruption, by the addition of foreign circumstances, it must on that account, be difficult to trace the original truth through the mazes of error.

That all Pagan mythologies are founded on

real revelation, is a position, which though generally true, is true only to a certain extent: this assertion must be understood with several important and interesting limitations. In no instance have learning and ingenuity been more unsuccessfully directed, than in unravelling their intricacies, and especially in referring them to one cause. To explain every hieroglyphical symbol, to reconcile every physiological solecism, to reduce every poetical hyperbole, and to unravel every astronomical enigma, with the avowed design of discovering through those shadows, some important reality; even if the principle were in itself just, could never be executed in such a manner as to command a reluctant assent, and still less to enforce a rational conviction. Much of the antient Pagan creed and ritual is doubtful in its origin, much is absolutely inexplicable, and much, if it were capable of explanation, would perhaps be found to have its rise in causes trivial and absurd.

Neither will the great truths and mysteries of the Christian Revelation ever gain credit, by such an injudicious mode of defence; but on the contrary, its utility and its necessity will be less conspicuous, and may even appear problematical. Let us not, through a blind zeal, to prove that

all false religions are shadows of the true, confer on the aerial form the substance, the sinews, the vitality, and the vigor which are the property of the living original: let us not make the true religion itself nothing more than an unmeaning replicate of the false. All that we should in fairness contend for, because all that we can satisfactorily prove is, that a few prominent features of the true religion are visible through the mask of deformity, which polytheism has superinduced; with this additional circumstance, that these lines must be more clearly discernible in the countries situated nearest to the seat of primeval tradition.

This preliminary view of the subject was absolutely necessary, to enable us to enter into the discussion proposed; and will supply us with some necessary cautions, in aid of our judgment, when we attempt to delineate those proofs, still to be discovered in the Brahminical system, and which point to a higher and uncorrupted original.

The first grand doctrine of primeval revelation prevalent in all the mythologies of the Heathen world, though not generally insisted on, and seldom considered in its true light, is that which

constitutes the basis of every true religion, the doctrine of THE UNITY OF GOD.

However the forms of Paganism may be varied, yet in asserting this important truth they all agree. "From all the properties of man and nature" (is the language of an eminent writer) "from all the various branches of science, from all the deductions of human reason, the general corollary admitted by Hindoos, Tartars, and Arabs, by Persians and Chinese, is the supremacy of an all-creating and all-preserving spirit, infinitely wise, good, and powerful; but infinitely removed from the comprehension of his most exalted creatures."

While the universal voice of tradition proclaims that the religion of the primitive world was something more than pure deism, the same authority, attests that this religion was nothing different from the worship of the one true God; and fully rebuts the notion, that polytheism and idolatry were the oldest religion, on which the doctrine of the Unity of God was a refinement. If this had been the case, the opinion might have found its way into the systems of speculative

Sir W. Jones.