difficulties inexplicable would have arisen; and, by afferting the pretenfions of the Indians to fuch remote antiquity, these volumes would ultimately have tended to fupport the hypothefis of the fceptic. For this reason I eagerly embraced the Septuagint chronology, in the first place, because, by giving a greater age to the world, it allows a more extended period for the arts and sciences to have arrived at maturity; and, fecondly, because I am of opinion, that the arguments brought by Voffius and Jackson unanswerably prove it to be the genuine chronology of the Hebrews. On this account, fome zealous advocates for that chronology, as generally received, not fufficiently attentive to my views in doing this, have thought proper warmly to arraign that part of my book; but I had fully weighed the question, and on conviction adopted it as the system most reconcileable to reafon and revelation. On this occafion, I must repeat that it is not for a few centuries more or less that we wage war with infidelity, but for the grand Christian code itself, which the enormoufly exaggerated chronologies of fceptical aftronomers,

aftronomers, could they establish their vagaries, tend utterly to annihilate.

To refume the confideration of the fkill of the old Indian race in ftatuary, a very uncommon share of original merit (for, they certainly never condefcended to be copyifts) cannot be denied them. Without any claim to the merit of nice geometrical proportion or Grecian elegance, the figures of men and animals, engraved externally and internally on the pagodas of India, are by no means so destitute of the general outlines of the science as greatly to offend the eye, however the uncouth mythology, and the joining together of heterogeneous portions of human and brutal forms, may infult the correct tafte and matured judgement of the European fpectator. If in elegance they are greatly inferior to Grecian fculpture, they are at all events much fuperior to the mis-shapen ftatues of the Egyptian artists. Had not the Indian been chained down by the mythology of his country to a certain indifpenfable routine, both in defign and execution, from which he dared not deviate, his progress towards maturity would have been more rapid; as, in Bartolomeo's judge

ment,

ment, the modern Indians want neither talents nor taste in either of those respects. The ftatuary, he informs us," muft make the statues of the gods exactly in the way and manner prescribed by the priests; in order, according to their opinion, that the attributes of the deity may be properly expreffed. Hence it happens that the Indian ftatues have from four to fix hands; three, and fometimes more, heads; and, in general, a very horrid appearance. The architect, however, has full scope for his genius, and is by no means fubjected to the arbitrary prescriptions of the Brahmins. For this reason the Indian architecture exhibits more taste, and is much more perfect, than their works of fculpture: but I will not deny that the ftatuaries alfo make excellent pieces when they are allowed to follow the impulse of their own genius; as is proved by the many bafs-reliefs, crucifixes, madonnas, vases, and other articles of ivory, which are here and there executed by the Indian artists." P. 387.

The fame apology is urged by this very fenfible writer for the defects, of a fimilar kind, that appear in their paintings. In

either cafe their genius is equally cramped, and their progrefs in the fine arts alike retarded.

"In regard to the painting of the Indians, the cafe is the fame as with their fculpture. This much is certain, that no one can follow the dictates of his own genius, and paint the gods as he pleases. Every innovation of this kind is confidered as an act of impiety. The Brahmin prescribes the figure and form which a statue must have under these, and no other, it must be painted; and the leaft part of his care is whether these be confiftent or not with the rules of art and of good taste. I have already obferved, on different occafions, that the Indian mythology gives to each deity a certain furname and appellation, the object of which is to exprefs their different qualities; and a painter, when he sketches out a god, must represent these qualities alfo. Thus, for example, Seeva is called the god who bears the trident; and for that reafon he must be always reprefented with a trident in his hand. He is called, likewife, the Conqueror of Death; and, on that account, must be delineated with a number D d

VOL. VII.

of

of fabres, daggers, and fculls, lying around him, and with a man under his feet. He exhibits a horrid countenance; his mouth is diftorted; his eyes feem to dart forth fire; and he has around his neck a cord on which a great number of fculls are ftrung. The cafe is the fame with all the other deities, which must always be represented in fuch a manner as is agreeable to their character and attributes. From this it appears, that the painting of the Indians, like their fculpture, is in the closest connection with their theogony; and, as the Brahmins alone have the right of explaining it, they affume the exclufive privilege of judging in regard to works of painting and ftatuary. As the painters are acquainted neither with the Sanfcreet language nor their mythology, it has been imposed on them as a duty to confult the Brahmins; and whoever tranfgreffes this law is punished by expulfion from his caft. This is the true reason why painting and ftatuary have made fo little progress in India." P. 388.

Thus, according to this author, has the defpotifm of fuperftition opposed an everlafting barrier to the farther progress of the

noble