Page:The Indian Antiquary, Vol. 4-1875.djvu/76

 Fjfutvinr. 187$ ,J NOTICES nr 11O0KS. « irk retrospects ul the Vcdic and Bmhmanio age* by tho light of the material* already brought under review in the two 15 urnes. It then brings every other available authority, excepting that of the Slusalm&ii hJHtoriatw, to bear upon the general subject." Ami after uuu m orating as the chief authorities, tljfi lltiddbiit writings, the tra- vels of Fubkii and Hi wen Thaang, the ECndn Drama, Rajput traditional Marco Polo utid other traveller*, und Furiii y Souchi*» l! ron- tmn^ that three " have all been laid under contri- bution for every variety of iiifdnuottnii, and have been further illuntrated by the experience, derived during Gfteeii years* ofhYjal residence in India and Burma. In this manner" be adds, ■ liw at* tempt bus been mode to throw every light open the history, the religion. and Kb* ehrilutttlOt*. ot thepeoplp nf India, hefnm the coming of the Eng- lish upon the scene." Such a work as here indicated would bo huiUxl by every Oriental student nitfe iltl u'm. Hut, tin- fortunately, Mr. Wheeler seems to haw mi" ru.- conception of the magnitude of such a eagle than 3 m lnusof " every available authority" ou the sub- ject, Hence liit» th hr« volumes already pnhlinhod fome very far abort, not only of his pro- mise, but *A what ha* already been achiored by bin pifdrcesaor*. Mrs. "M a nnin g" ..me* on JiiriW oand Jhdianal hiditt are Jar .more trust' worthy und valuable to tho popular reader than Mr- Wheeler'* three. Ho bus not a vuded himself of every authority, nor even of thebestof them j and of Hi wen Th&nng** works, he- doc* not appear to hav, suited directly tho tnuudati<<ii by Stanislas J uUeo. but only a translation from tho Fro brief r^«ime giv. i I y If, ilartWdemy St. Hilaire- Of Hegasthone*, he u acquainted only with the fragment* in Strata and Arrian, which ho quotes in the Kngliab translations of I .md Hooke. The Siitninjayn JfriAiffaycnit he refers •Tor pious legends of Btl ind public dla- -.'*»■* between ttuddhjvt* and Jatn.-i" *l ,«f tho content* of the book which tho author i ■• Iwvo entertained had ho eoim tilled the work ittM.lf, or even looked into tho will-known (lerman analysis of it by Pro* V%*tara and I augmi ho does not even name ; nor u any work d Uasieal ■.rhirli. r in-t i i i. m :.n Kngliidi trauslar; not even that invaluable cyclopaedia of In •i'»»-Ji bfa- lory and antii(uitwM— Loordu'^ Jmdit d m Attar- . itfcvftda, In his remarks and general iaitiou* U.r. Wheeler in singularly unhappy t— *Tew impartial ob»r ho think*, "will deny the fact Unit to all ap- pearance the p drifting slowly towards the religion of the propbt-t or Arabia, rather than toward* thai, Obrtatfftnitj whin i.- freoly offered, but which they arc not prepared What could bare led th» author to moke *o rash a Itetftment in fntM^ of the latest pnpulatktn returns, which nhow that the Mulmm- tuadnuH arc increasing in a ©lower ratio Mini. even the Hindus, while tho Christum* have fully doubled in ten yean? Again, commenting on tbu change from nimtial jsierifict^ to tbOfB of rioo and butter, he remarks that tho latter "was thus associated with the triAterialistie religtmi «f the noa-Vedic population. This fact," he goes on to suy, "" thrown a new light uptiii the legend of Cain and Abel... The flesh- sacrifice was accepted t but the Y*getablo offering was rejected. 80 far it would aeetn that tbo story was intended i -nlotcil ideas. But offerings of grain were especially nasueiut'-d with a materialistic religion* an hi the (ireek wurship of Decnoter; and thin Ibrm u[ idolatry was condemned - terms by the Hebrew prophoU- Hence the offering «if Caiu wan rejected." Wa oonfess onr utter inability to follow tblu logic : and wo think a more earelnl reading of his Bible might help Mr. Wheder to WWi llw characters iff the cjirriflcers tluit primarily hud to do with the necej) 1 tlnir nn"«rings. Bnt he in 1 .irtlcabir about catching precise Nhodus of meaning or espresahiui thus ^p. 15U») he aaya— " Ln Ituijilbifiin there u the tree of wisdom, which possibly may Iwar a resemblance to the tree of knowledge of good and evil:"— in Genesis we read of '* the tree of tux knowledge of good and off! ;"" — and he qoll true* the expressions in JI« . ifiruA, ri. 6, " ; I*i«'.i*, i. 10 Ik inLu ini'maU. fled denunrialiui»» of sacrifice* t Hh) ideas regarding th* Bribnmqta juTjtj.ii i 1 1 '|>'»ft-: L d. "The Vedle Arymi(« t " he says," who colo:. ''unjAb in a rental "y. mm worship|>en» of the thcuniversu as gods and god- desMs, and ini •diikicski old Sai^kfit Tenea known a* Vodk llyraiis. At some ■ub*e- port'od the 1' "1*"" tin- ' l*hett M the Vodic Aryan* had neither tem- ple*, Idols, nor rigid ngtk dJstini tlmu . irj', ap|x*ar lo baic en- OnUTxgcrl tin- ' •MiL-trni'lwti of tetuples, 01 01 iduls." Again — "tboAryti^ giou may possibly hove been a il-v ►fthe ancient trorabip of the genii loci, the spirits of tho tni 1 *, glens, and streams. To thi» dny ni*ny of tbu bill-tribes in Eastern tndifl. . null practise this simi-i |" An- Lbttse hill- 1 tribes Ary ai be eon: as the most u" deity in " tlio Brahma nicad puutbeon," whilu " in ihnt remota ago which