Light, and gives philological reasons. Prof. Sayce, when noticing Brinton's account of this myth, says, "Michabo had his home on the verge of the east [f. the abode of the lunar Kirke at the ἀντολαὶ Ηελίοιο], whence he sent forth the luminaries on their daily journey," just as Kirkê sent Odysseus. His name is derived from michi, 'great,' and wabos, which, though it means 'hare' [as the white animal], properly signifies 'white.'" Michaboz, therefore, equals "the Great White One," a title excellently suited to Selênê Leukotheê; and this White Hare reminds us of the lunar White Cat of the fairy tale.

Mr. Lang adds that "When mythopoeic man spoke of a Hare, he probably meant a Hare es phrase." But, in this case, how was man mythopoeic? The animal, too, must have strangely changed its habits from the days when it was wont to dance when the Lion died, spit on the Bear's cubs, laugh at the dying Eagle, guard the cave of the wild beasts (cf. Kirke), and defend the Lambs (Stars) from the Wolf (Darkness). ROBERT BROWN, JUN.

APPOINTMENTS for NEXT WEEK.

MONDAY, March 3, 3p.m. Royal Institution: "Scenery
of the British Isles," VI., by Dr. A. Geikie.
5 p.m. Royal Institution: General Monthly
Meeting.

5 p.m. London Institution: "Beach Studies," by Mr. Arthur Severn.

by Mr. E. J. Poynter.

Sp.m. Royal Academy: Lecture on Sculpture, 8 p.m. Aristotelian: "Perceptional Conception: a Vindication of Idealism," by the Rev. E. P. 8p.m. Society of Arts: Cantor Lecture, "Build

Scrymgour.

ings." by Dr. S. Louis.

ing of London Houses," III., by Mr. R. W. Eddis. 8p.m. Victoria Institute. TUESDAY, March 4, 3 p.m. Royal Institution: "Animal Heat," L., by Prof. Gamgee. 8pm. Society of Biblical Archaeology: "Handicrafts and Artisans mentioned in Talmudical Writ8 pm. Civil Engineers: "Hydraulic Propulsion," by Mr. Sydney W. Barnaby. 8.30 p.m. Zoological: "A Revision of the Fishes of the Genera Sicydium and Lentipes, with Descriptions of Five New Species," by Mr. W. R. Ogilvie Grant; Description of New Asiatic Diurnal Lepidoptera, chiefly from Specimens in the Calcutta Museum," by Mr. F. Moore; "Note on capensis," by Count T. Salvadori." WEDNESDAY, March 5.8 p.m. Society of Arts: "The Preece.

Progress of Electric Lighting," by Mr. W. H.

8 p.m. Geological: "The Structure and FormaConnexion with Crystallisation and the Develop

tion of Coal," by Mr. E. Wethered; "Strain in ment of Perlitic Structure," by Mr. Frank Rutley "Sketches of South-African Geology, I.-A Sketch of the High-level Coal-fields of South Africa," by Mr. W. H. Penning.

8 p.m. British Archaeological: "Finger Nail Lore," by Mr. H. Syer Cuming. THESDAY, March 6, 3 p.m. Royal Institution: "The Older Electricity," II., by Prof. Tyndall. 7 p.m.

London Institution: "The Aurora Borealis," by Prof. Schuster. Sp.m. Chemical: "Studies on Sulphonic Acids, I--The Hydrolysis of Sulpho-compounds and the Recovery of the Benzines from their Sulphonic Acids." by Dr. Armstrong and Dr. Miller; The Behaviour of the Nitrogen of Coal during Destructive Distillation and a Comparison of the Amount of Nitrogen left in Cokes of Various Origin," by Mr. Watson Smith; "Some Experiments to determine the Value of Ensilage as a Milk- and Butterproducing Food," by Mr. Thos. Farrington.

S p.m. Linnean: "The Relations between InMivart; "Indian Cyperus," by Mr. C. B. Clarke; Metamorphosis of Filaria sanguinis hominis in the Mosquito," by Dr. P. Manson; "Afghanistan FRIDAY, March 7, 8 p.m. Philological: "Personal and

stinct and other Vital Processes." by Prof. St. G.

Ale," by Dr. J. Schaarschmidt.

Place Names," by the Rev. E. Maclure.

Sp.m.

Society of Arts: "The New Bengal

Rent Bill." by Mr. W. Seton-Karr. 9pm. Royal Institution: "Bicycles and Tricyles," by Mr. C. V. Boys. SATURDAY, March 8, 3p.m. Royal Institution: "Photographie Action," II., by Capt. Abney.

3 p.m. Physical: Experiments illustrating an

Explanation of Hall's Phenomena," by Mr. Shelford
Bilwell; "Note on Hall's Phenomena," by Prof.
S. P. Thompson and Mr. Colman C. Starling.

SCIENCE.

RECENT WORKS ON CICERO.

M. Tullii Ciceronis De Natura Deorum Libri
Tres. With Introduction and Commentary
by Joseph B. Mayor. Vol. II. (Cam-
bridge University Press.)

M. Tulli Ciceronis de Finibus Bonorum et
Malorum Libri Quinque. The Text Revised
and Explained by James S. Reid. In 3
vols. Vol. III., containing the Translation.
(Cambridge University Press.)

M. Tulli Ciceronis Pro Publio Sestio Oratio ad
Judices. With Notes, &c., by the Rev. H.
A. Holden. (Macmillan.)

THE second volume of Prof. Mayor's edition
of the De Natura Deorum does not complete
the work, as the editor had intended that it
should, but only contains the text of the
Second Book, with a critical and explanatory
Commentary. The increase in the scale of
his notes is due to the fullness with which it
has been necessary to discuss the scientific
views of the ancients, so far as these
furnish the basis for Cicero's arguments.
Few students are likely to find fault
with the editor for the scale on which he
has planned this portion of his commentary.
It may be said, indeed, that it is just the
lack of trustworthy assistance on such points
which has stood in the way of the more
general reading of a treatise which yields to
none of Cicero's philosophical works in his-
toric interest. Great as are the merits of
Schömann's edition in many respects, it left
much to be desired; and even if his notes had
been put within reach of the large, but
happily diminishing, class of students in our
universities who cannot use a German com-
mentary, they would have needed great
That under-
expansion in this direction.
graduates should be encouraged to study for
themselves at first hand the Greek writers on
physics, astronomy, and physiology, as Prof.
Mayor desires, is a counsel of perfection not
very likely to be realised under present or
immediately future circumstances. Hearty
thanks are therefore due for the thoroughness
with which Prof. Mayor has worked these
indispensable sources for the benefit of his
readers, and for the fullness with which he
has quoted the most important passages, in-
stead of amassing, after the fashion of some
editors, a pile of references which the student
will be probably unable, and certainly un-
willing, to consult for himself. But the
wide limits which the editor has allowed him-
self (about four pages of explanatory notes to
one of text) have rarely, if ever, led him into
discursiveness. The only instance which I
have noted is almost, but not quite, laudable.
The ludicrous nonsense quoted from Moses
and Geology, the production of a gentleman
who has recently been appointed, under high
patronage, as a quasi-official demolisher of
"modern scepticism," well deserves to be
pilloried; but a fitter place for the pillory
might perhaps have been found than in the
pages of what will long be recognised as the
standard edition of a great literary work.

But Prof. Mayor's attention has not been
concentrated on the substance of his author's
thought to the neglect of the language.
Questions of syntactical construction are
carefully discussed, with contributions, here

and there, of great value from Mr. Roby; the etymology of important words and names is well treated, and the text, in some places sadly corrupt, is judiciously handled. Occasionally, Mr. Mayor offers an emendation of his own which is a real contribution to the settlement of the text (cf., e.g., sec. 47).

On the whole, this volume well keeps up the promise of the first, and must be regarded as one of the most valuable contributions made for many years past by any English scholar to the study of Cicero.

A few points may be noted for consideration. The note on augury on sec. 9 is misleading without a reference forwards to that on augurs and haruspices on sec. 10, and that on Cynosura (sec. 105) is hardly intelligible without that on Phoenices (sec. 106). In the story about Ti. Gracchus (secs. 10, 11) the point seems to turn on the double meaning of rogator, which is recognised by the editor but not applied. The authority for the Semitic origin of the name Mopsus, which is not generally accepted, might as well have been quoted. Vaniček is derivations which he only gives as propounded perhaps too often cited as the authority for by others. The number of the augurs, according to Sulla's constitution, has no bearing on the collegium to whom Ti. Gracchus wrote (sec. 11). "The qualitative force of omnis" is not a very clear explanation of a usage which might have been illustrated more fully from Cicero (cf. Halm on Cat., iii. 2, 5). The "Homa-drink of the early Aryans should have been mentioned by its original and more familiar name of Soma rather than by the Persian form of the word. On anfractus (sec. 47) the remarks of Corssen (i2 397) might have been taken into account; on Saturnus 0. Meyer's view, preferred by Nettleship, is at least worth discussing (ib. 418). The slight character of these suggestions may be taken as some evidence of

the singular fullness and accuracy of a commentary which, though containing, as Conington used to say, some thousands of propositions on the most various subjects, affords so little scope for correction or supple

ment.

Mr. Reid's translation of the De Finibus is published in advance of his text and commentary, because his plan required him to complete the translation before writing out the commentary, and there seemed to be no reason why students should not be able to use the former even before the latter was issued. It would be a signal advantage if more commentators would follow Mr. Reid's plan, and complete a translation, whether intended for publication or not, before issuing a body of notes; we should then have far fewer of those pretentious guides, who are profuse of their assistance where the path is perfectly straightforward, and fail the reader only when he is likely to find himself in a difficulty. Mr. Reid's translation, it is likely to find little favour with those critics who think that the success of a version is to be measured by the extent of its departure from the form of the original. Cicero's syntax is followed as closely as the English language permits, and the student is nowhere left in doubt as to the way of taking any passage. This is the aim which the translator has set before him, and he has attained it with remarkable success,

As to

The closer any passage is examined, the clearer it is seen how the force of every word and of every collocation in the original is preserved. At the same time, this is done without any unnecessary stiffness; and an English reader may go through the book, not, indeed, without feeling it to be a translation-a delusive ideal, which has to answer for so much reckless travesty-but without once pausing at any forced or obscure construction. It might appear hardly possible that the vigilance of the most accurate scholar should not have failed him occasionally in carrying out a task which must often have been wearisome, and only at rare intervals very inspiring. But a careful comparison of every line of this version with the original has only brought to light one solitary passage where the translator's words do not appear to be a fairly defensible rendering of the original. Unless Mr. Reid is translating from an emended text, his version of se texit in i. 35 seems due to an unlucky reminiscence of ii. 73. There are, of course, more instances than this where it is open to doubt whether the happiest English equivalent has been chosen. The most important of these is the formula prima naturae, which Mr. Reid renders "primary endow ments of nature." Now the confused way in which Cicero, as Madvig showed, uses this phrase is enough to baffle any translator, and doubtless Mr. Reid in his commentary will point out the misleading results of this confusion. But his rendering brings out almost too sharply the want of lucidity in Cicero's language in passages like the following:"And this purpose. . . must be laid down to consist in the attainment of as many as possible from among the most important of those primary endowments which harmonise with nature's plan" (iv. 25; cf. v. 18).

avoided : 66

some

doubtful, though Addison uses "complacency"
for facilitas. In iii. 57 bene audire a parent-
ibus can hardly be "to be of good report in
the eyes of his parents;" in iv. 25 nosmet
psos commendatos esse nobis seems much
stranger than "that we look with favour on
our own existence," and denotes rather what
is brought out in the next clause, that the
tendency to self-preservation is implanted in
us by nature; in v. 27 enodatius is perhaps
"somewhat simply," rather than "in great
detail." On one point Mr. Reid has
times pushed a good principle too far. He
knows very well that the school-boy's render-
ing of enim by "for," while absolutely in-
correct for earlier Latin, is often unsatisfactory
for Cicero; but he carries his aversion to it
so far that he often avoids using it where it
is quite the most natural expression; and in
the same way now frequently replaces
"for" as a rendering of nam, not always to
the advantage of the argument. In ii. 117 the
force of the nec enim... neque is thus obscured,
to the unquestionable injury of the sense.
But again I must apologise for the notice
given to such trifles. There are not many
translations which would repay the minute
study needed to observe such points, and still
fewer which would stand the scrutiny. That
they have been mentioned at all must be
taken as a tribute to the remarkable excel-
lence of a version which will be widely
accepted as a model of the style to which, at
least, one great university endeavours to train
its alumni.

It is, perhaps, almost sufficient to record the appearance of Dr. Holden's edition of the oration Pro Sestio. All interested in the study of Cicero know by this time just what they have to expect from a commentary by Dr. Holden. The present work is constructed In iv. 8, Mr. Reid's rendering of ad genera on the same lines as his edition of the speech formasque generum by "to the species and the pre Plancio. There is the same fullness of classes which contain the species" may, per- grammatical explanation, the same careful haps, admit of defence; but it is in such use of the most recent German editions, the startling contrast to Ciceronian usage that it same liberal supply of close and often happy will need defence in the commentary, especially renderings. By a curious oversight, the when it has been immediately preceded by editor has omitted to mention that his introthe translation of ut res in partes dividatur by duction is a literal translation of that by "the division of a class into species." Natu- Halm, which, though excellent as usual, rally, a few inconsistencies have not been might have been with advantage supplemented those who are subject to death" and recast for English students. An ordinary is used in one sense in i. 49, in quite a school-boy will certainly be puzzled when he different, and a more correct, sense in ii. 40; reads of "the regent of the Commonwealth," "recalcitrant," in i. 58, does not express and will not find it easier to identify "the pugnantibus, which must mean "at variance three regents" unless he is familiar with with each other; "perspicuous," in ii. 15, Mommsen to a degree which would render is a better rendering for illustris than "daz- the whole introduction superfluous. zling" in i. 71; in this last section "catch-oration is one which has many difficulties, The ing" may be suggested in the place of "lend- though not of such a nature as to make it ing his ear to," and magistra ac duce natura unfit for reading in schools; and Dr. Holden are surely taken in the wrong place; in ii. 21, has done good service in issuing so useful an "the most authoritative" from its position edition of it. Its value is considerably enwould not be understood by the English hanced by the numerous notes which Mr. reader to be the explanation of kúpia; in Reid has contributed. A scholar is happy ii. 67, is the tense of nominari consistent with who can give to so many of his friends the the rendering given to schola, which certainly gleaning of the grapes of Ephraim, while he is not the only alternative? In ii. 82, more for himself the vintage of Abi-ezer. cultured" is ugly in itself, and doubtful from A. S. WILKINS. the context as a rendering of humanius; for "morals," in iii. 1, "morality" would be more natural; in iii. 52, it would have been better to render promota by "promoted," reserving "advanced" for praeposita, for which it is used in sec. 53. Whether " "complacent is now legitimate English for faciles (ib.) is

66

presses

CORRESPONDENCE.
THE TRUE DATE OF BUDDHA'S DEATH.
Oxford: Feb. 16, 1884.

I was much pleased to see in Prof. Peterson's
letter, published in to-day's ACADEMY, that

Pandit Bhagvanlâl, to whose careful researches we owe already so many useful discoveries, has brought new and important evidence in support of my opinion that the date 486 (A.D. 430) in the Kâvî grant ought not to be reckoned from the Vikrama era (see India, what can it I had read Mr. Fleet's

teach us? p. 285).

objections to my theory, or, to speak more correctly, to Mr. J. Fergusson's theory, in the pages of the Indian Antiquary (November 1883, p. 293), but I thought it better not to answer his criticisms for the present. I have always felt a very high regard for Mr. Fleet's extremely important contributions to Indian remarks seemed to me not quite fair, I did not archaeology and chronology; and, though his think that they called for an immediate reply. Mr. Fleet says that the only substantial objec tion which I brought forward against the date which he had assigned to the Kavi inscription was that it would be destructive of my own theory that the Vikrama era was only invented But surely this is hardly a fair statement. It by Harsha-Vikrama of Uggayinî in A.D. 544. might be fair, if coming from a lawyer, who cares for victory only, but not as coming from a scholar, who cares for truth. Mr. Fleet holds that the era of Vikramaditya began 56 B.C. I hold that it was invented in A.D. 544. We are both looking out for inscriptions either to confirm or to refute our respective theories. Mr. Fleet thinks he has at last discovered one without the name of Vikrama, before A.D. it, inscription bearing a Vikrama date, though thus completely upsetting my theory. I should have been delighted if it were so; but I pointed out that it would seem strange that, between 56 B.C. and A.D. 544, this Kâvî inscription should be the only one dated according to an era which we are asked to believe was introduced nearly 500 years before, without ever occurring on any inscription whatsoever. I therefore recommended caution. I never ventured to refer the date of the Kâvî inscription to the Saka era; but I looked forward to some such terminus a quo as Pandit Bhagvanlâl has now discovered-namely, about A.D. 245-that is, just 300 years before the date when the after the date from which it was calculated. Vikrama era was calculated, and 300 years The fact remains, therefore, that, so far as we know at present, the Vikrama era has never been found on any inscription before A.D. 544.

It is always well, in researches which depend on discoveries that may spring upon us from day to day, not to be too positive, and not than twenty-five years ago that, in my His to be in too great a hurry. It is now more tory of Ancient Sanskrit Literature, I laboured

very hard to establish the date 477 B.C. as the
real date of Buddha's death. Owing to the
uncertainty of Kandragupta's reign, I allowed
a latitude of about ten years, but adopted
doubted it, others, again, have advanced some
A.D. 477 as the best working hypothesis. Some
scholars have accepted that date, others have
arguments against it. I still hold to it, though
not with such unreasoning pertinacity as to
Nay, I feel so conscious of the purely tentative
consider any modification of it impossible.
character of all dates before Alexander's in-
vasion of India that when my friend Mr.
Bunyiu Nanjio brought me
the following
extract, which, in the most startling manner.
seems to confirm the date which I assigned to
Buddha's death, I said to myself, what I now
say publicly, that it is almost too good to be
true. However, Mr. Bunyiu Nanjio's transla-
tion ought to be published, and everyone may
then form his own opinion.

Mr. Bunyiu Nanjio writes :-
“In A.D. 664, or a few years later, under the great
Thân dynasty (A.D. 618-907), Tâo-süen (Dô-sen),*
a Chinese priest and a contemporary of the famous

Hiouen-thsang, compiled the Tâthân-nêi-tien-lu (Dai-to-nai-ten-roku), or Catalogue of the Buddhist Books, in sixteen fasciculi [see No. 1483 in my Oxford Catalogue]. In fasc. 4a, fol. 20a sq., under the notice of a work on the Vinaya, he writes: Shân-kien-phi-pho-shâ-lüh (Zen-ken-biba--hâ-ritsu, or Sudarsana-vibhâshâ-vinaya, No. 1125), a work in eighteen fasciculi, was translated by the foreign Sramana Sanghabhadra, whose name is translated Kun-hsien (Shu-ken, lit. ". compay-wise"), in the reign of the Emperor Wu Ba, A.D. 483-493, of the former Tshi (Sei) dynasty, A. D. 479-502.'

Following this number counted by Poh-hsiu
(Haku-kiu), Khân-fân m counted it from the 9th
year of the Tâ-thun (Dâi-dô) period, A.D. 543,
down to the present year, the 17th
the Khâi-hwân (Kâi-kwo) period, A.D. 597, the
cycle of which was Tin-sz' (Tei-shi), and obtained
the total number of 1,082 years."

year of

"If so, (only a little more than) a thousand years have just elapsed since the Tathagata's Nirvana. We are (therefore) not yet very remote from the time of the Sage (lit. still near to the "He then continues: "There is a tradition, Sage), so that we should heartily be glad and handed down from teachers to pupils, that after rejoiced. May we altogether diligently and sinBuddha's Nirvana, Yiu-po-li (U-ha-ri, i.e., Upâli) cerely promulgate the Law left (by the Sage)!' collected the Vinaya-pitaka. Then on the 15th day of the 7th month of that year, when he is added after each Chinese name, whether it is a "The Japanese sound of the Chinese characters had received the Tsz'-tsz' (Zi-shi, lit. "self-transliteration or an original. throwing off restraint," i.e., Pravârana or Pavâ“'Pavâranâ ... the festival held at the termirana, or Invitation), he worshipped the (MS. of nation of the Buddhist vassa or Lent.'-Childers' the) Vinaya-pitaka with flowers and incense, and Páli Dictionary, p. 374; of. Oldenberg's Buddha added one dot at the beginning of the Vinaya-pitaka. (Eng. trans.), p. 374. Thus he did every year in the same way. When 'Sacred Books of the East,' vol. x., Upali was going to enter Nirvâna he handed it e, the Vinaya-pitaka) over to his disciple Thosie-kü (Da-sha-ku, i.e., Dâsaka). When Dâsaka was going to enter Nirvânad he handed it over to his disciple Sü-kü (Shu-ku, i.e., Saunaka or Sonaka). When Saunaka was going to enter Nirvana he handed it over to his disciple Sikiê- Shin-shiu, and also some other sects, in Japan "This name is still used by the priests of the pho (Shitsu-ga-ba, i.e., Siggava). When Siggava for the summer term in the theological colleges. was going to enter Nirvana' he handed it over to This term corresponds to the rainy season in India, his disciple Mu-kien-lien-tsz' Ti-sü-mu (Moku- when Buddha and his disciples are said to have ken-ren-shi Tai-shu-moku, i.e., Maudgalyâyanî-lived or stayed together in one place, and disputra Tishya, or Moggaliputta Tissa (see Dîpa- cussed the law. vamsa). When Maudgalyayanî-putra Tishya was

going to enter Nirvana he handed it over to his disciple Kan-tho-pho-shö (Sen-da-batsu-zia, i..., Kandavaggî) (see Dîpavamsa).

Thus these teachers handed it over succes

sively till the present teacher of the Law of the Tripitaka. This teacher of the Law of the Tripitaka brought (the MS. of) the Vinaya-pitaka to Kwan-keu, or the province Kwang (i.e., Canton). When he was embarking homewards from there, he handed (the MS. of) the Vinaya-pitaka over to his disciple, San-kiê-pho-tho-lo (San-ga-batsuda-ra, i.e., Sanghabhadra).

"In the 6th [read 7th] year of the Yun-min (Yei-mei) period, A.D. 489, Sanghabhadra, together with the Sramana San-i (Sô-i, a Chinese priest), translated this Sudarsana - vibhasha (-vinaya), in the Ku-lin-sz' (Kiku-rin-zi, lit. Bamboogrove monastery," i.e., Venuvana-vihâra), in the province Kwang (i.e., Canton). He stayed there keeping the An-kü (An-go, lit. " easy-living"). In the middle (i.e., the 15th day) of the 7th month of the 7th [read 8th] year of the Yun-min Yei-mei) period, A.D. 490, the cycle of which was Kan-wu (Kô-go), when he had received the Tsz'tez' (Zi-shi, or Pravârana), he worshipped (the MS. of the Vinaya-pitaka with flowers and incense, According to the law or rules of his preceding teachers, and added one dot (to the MS.). In that year, A.D. 490, there were 975 dots in all, one dot representing one year.

In the first year of the Tâ-thun (Dai-dô) period, A.D. 535, under the Liân (Riô) dynasty, A.D. 502-556, Kâo Poh-hsiu (Kio Haku-kiu, a Chinese) met Hun-tu (Gu-do), a teacher of the Vinaya who was practising painfully at the Lushan (Ro-san, or the Lu mountain, in China). From him he obtained this record of the dots having been added by holy men successively after Buddha's Nirvâna. The date in it (as marked by the dots) ended in the 7th [read 8th] year of the Yun-min (Yei-mei) period, A.D. 490, under the Tshi (Sei) dynasty. Then Poh-hsiu (Haku-kiu) asked Hun-tu (Gu-do), saying: "Why do we see no more dots added after the 7th [read 8th] year of the Yun-min (Yei-mei) period? Hun-tu (Gudo) answered: "Before that (year) there were holy men who entered on the path, and who added these dots with their own hands; but I, who am deprived of the path, being an ignorant person, might only take hold of and worship it (the MS. of the Vinaya-pitaka), and should never dare to adi a dot."

Poh-hsiu (Haku-kiu) (afterwards) counted the number following these old dots down to the 9th year of the Ta-thun (Dai-dô) period, A.D. 543, the cycle of which was Kwei-hái (Ki-gai), under

C 447 B.C.part i., p. xliv.

1

d 397 B.C.
353 B.O. 300 B.C. 233 B.C.
"The name of this teacher is not given, but he
was evidently the teacher of Sanghabhadra, as seen
below.

must be changed into the 7th and 8th year (ie,
"The 6th and 7th year (i.e., A.D. 488 and 489)
A.D. 489 and 490), not only because the cycle of
the latter year, given in the text, corresponds to
the 8th year or A.D. 490, instead of the 7th year
distance between two later dates, given in the text
or A.D. 489, as the text reads, but also because the
below, is exactly in accordance with; this emenda-
tion.

= 1028.

"I.e., 975 (A.D. 490) +53 (A.D. 543)
of the Buddhist books in A.D. 597 (see No. 14 in
"m Fê Khân-fân was the compiler of a Catalogue
Appendix iii. of my Catalogue).

=

This word present seems to have been
taken from Khân-fan's writing, because Dão-süen
was only about four years old in A.D. 597, and his
Catalogue was completed not earlier than A.D. 664.
“• Ï.e., 1028 (A.d. 543) +54 (a.d. 597) — 1082.”
It would follow from these statements, as
translated by my friend, Mr. Bunyiu Nanjio, that
there was a MS. of the Vinaya-pitaka in existence
at the time of Sanghabhadra, say A.D. 490, which
contained 975 dots, and that each of these dots
was believed to mark one year. This would
give the year 485 as the year in which the MS.
death of Buddha. The dots were counted by
was written by Upâli, immediately after the
Kao Poh hsiu in A.D. 535, by Khân fân in
A.D. 597, not very long, therefore, before A.D.
664, when the story was written down.

The objections to this statement, as written
down in A.D. 664, are palpable. First of all,
we do not know that Upâli actually wrote a
MS., and we read in the Mahavamsa that the
Pitakattaya and the Atthakatha were not written
down before the reign of King Vattagâmani,
88-76 B.C. (see my Introduction to the Dhamma-
pada, "Sacred Books of the East," vol. x.,
P. xiii.). Secondly, even if Upâli wrote a copy
of the Vinaya-pitaka, it is not likely that that
identical copy should have been carried to China.
Thirdly, the process of adding one dot at the
end of every year during 975 years is extremely
precarious.

Still, on the other hand, there was nothing to induce a Chinese Buddhist to invent so modern a date as 485 B.C. for the council held immediately after Buddha's death. It runs counter to all their own chronological theories, and even the writer himself seems to express surprise that he should find himself so much nearer to the age of Buddha than he imagined. Let scholars accept the tradition for what it is

worth. Whatever their conclusions may be,
they will all be grateful to Mr. Bunyiu Nanjio
for having brought this curious tradition to
their knowledge. For the present, and till we
get new materials, I feel inclined to agree with
my friend Prof. Bühler, when in his Three
New Edicts of Asoka (1877, pp. 19-20) he says:
"For all practical purposes, the date for the
Nirvâna, 477-78 B.C., fixed by Prof. Max Müller,
by Gen. Cunningham, and others, is perfectly
sufficient. The new inscriptions show that it
cannot be very far wrong. The two outside termini
for the beginning of Kandragupta's reign are
321 B.C. on the one side, and 310 B.C. on the other.
For this reason, and because the Ceylonese dato
for the beginning of the Mauryas, 163 A.B., must
now be considered to be genuine, the Nirvâna
must fall between 483-82 B.C. and 472-71 B.C. If,

therefore, the date 477-78 for the Nirvâna should
eventually be proved to be wrong, the fault cannot
be more than five or six years one way or the

other."

F. MAX MÜLLER.

THE ORIGIN OF CHINESE CIVILISATION. Louvain: Feb. 20, 1884. The remarkable researches of M. Terrien de many obscure points in the history of Chinese La Couperie have cast an unexpected light on mythology. It is scarcely possible any longer to doubt that a large number of the traditions which we find in the historians of the Celestial Empire had their origin in the land of Accad, ingenious comparisons made by M. de La or at least to the west of the Hindu Kush. The Couperie will have carried conviction to most minds. But from the manifest analogies can we conclude that the primitive civilisation and scarcely admit this conclusion, and that for two religion of China had this same origin? I can reasons- (1) The historians who relate these legends date from a late epoch. Some of them, century A.D. such as Lopi and Lieu-ja, wrote in the twelfth The creation and propagation of these myths is usually attributed to the degenerate disciples of Laou-tse. The orthodox Chinese and the ancient historians inveigh with energy against the products of the imagination of the Taouists, whom they charge with corrupting the true and ancient doctrine. (2) The authentic histories and the most ancient canonical books, such as the Shu-king and the Shiking, make no allusion to these myths, and even teach a doctrine which excludes them. Above man there is only Shan-ts, the Sovereign Lord, the Lord of Heaven (in Manchu Bergi-Bi, Abka-i-Han), Sovereign Master of the World spirits whom man has to reverence, for they and of the Empires; and, besides, very inferior may to a certain degree be useful to him. Beyond this, there is nothing supernatural. I intend shortly to discuss this question. Does it not result from these facts that, if the Chinese myths were borrowed from the West, especially from the land of Accad, this borrowing only took place at a recent epoch, and that the original civilisation of China comes from another source? Such is my conviction. I submit these reflections to the distinguished scholar whom University College has just called to occupy so important a chair.

C. DE HARLEZ.

SCIENCE NOTES. THE Clarendon Press will shortly publish Memoirs, Addresses, and Fragments of the_late Prof. Rolleston, arranged and edited by Prof. William Turner, with a biographical memoir by Dr. E. B. Tylor. These two volumes contain a selection of the most important essays contributed by Prof. Rolleston to the Transac

tions of various learned societies and to scientific journals, together with several addresses delivered before the British Association and

same time, demand further study and reflec-subscriptions of the vicar and parishioners to the tion. Thus he traces back to an event in the life Solemn League and Covenant, and the appointment of Buddha the first germ of the famous "Open of a committee to decide on the fitness of those Sesame" incantation in the story of the Forty desirous of partaking of the Communion. Mr. Thieves of the Arabian Nights, and also the Freshfield referred to several of the vicars, one of cian one of St. George and the Dragon. Western legend of King Arthur and the Cappado- whom, Mr. Davenport, left England to take charge of a church in Newhaven, America; and also to two distinguished parishioners-Isaac Pennington and Owen Roe, who assisted at the trial of Charles I. Some of the church plate was also exhibited, bearing, as a sort of crest, a cock in a hoop.

EDUCATION SOCIETY.-(Monday, Feb. 18.) E. BLAIR, Esq., in the Chair.-A paper was read by Mr. Fleay, entitled "A Few Thoughts as to the Relations of Theory to Practice in Education." Mr. Fleay criticised modern methods of education allowed, had great value, but they contributed as involving too much bookwork. Precepts, he nothing to the formation of good habits, which can be obtained by exercise in right doing, and in that way only. Objection was taken to the fondness of teachers for grammar. Knowledge of grammar is not knowledge of a language. The value of unconscious work was dwelt upon, for the best art, it was asserted, is always unconscious. Education itself, in Mr. Fleay's view, was not a science, but an art to be developed by practice and test.--A discussion followed, in which Mr. H. C. Bowen, It was urged that there is a science of education, Mr. Bryant, Mr. Spratling, and others took part. though it is as yet imperfect, and that the best methods of good teachers have a foundation in principle. Exception was also taken to the view that the highest action is unconscious.