Imagens da página
PDF
ePub

thor means by his motto-Que alteri feculo profit-that his performance may prove ufeful (or in fafhion) when theirs will be obfolete; or whether he referred by it to that operation of envy, which often renders Fame rather a pofthumous, than a living attainment, we do not pretend to determine. We think, however, that unexperienced Practitioners may read it with emolument, as the method and order of it is well conducted and logical; and as it may prefent in abstract, a good deal of what the former have given more in detail. But that our ingenious Author's profefed intention in this work, is very laudable, can admit of no doubt; fince he affures us, he was prompted to it by his continual difpofition to cultivate and improve the knowlege of phyfic; which, if candidly interpreted, may imply Philanthrophy, or, in Mr. Pope's phrafe, make felf-love and focial be the fame.'

EMILIUS and SOPHIA: or a new Syftem of Education. Tranflated from the French of J. J. Rouffeau, Citizen of Geneva. By the Tranflator of ELOISA. 2 Vols. 58. fewed. Becket, &c.

WH

HEN we mentioned the original of this work, among our foreign articles, and hinted the general defign of the Author, we little imagined we fhould fo foon have an opportunity of giving a more particular account of it, from the tranflation. We have had frequent occafion, indeed, to regret the precipitancy with which many valuable productions have been rendered out of other languages into English. An eager defire of gratifying the public curiofity, very often defeats its own purpofe; and, ambitious as writers may be, of having their works tranflated, it would be often more to their credit never to have that honour conferred on them at all, than to have their performances fo hastily and flovenly metamorphofed as they 'generally are. The great reputation of a writer is, in this refpect, frequently fatal to the tranflation of his pieces; and recent inftances might be given, wherein very celebrated productions have fallen a facrifice to the popularity of their Authors, and the avarice of bookfellers. Thefe circumftances confidered, it must be allowed, no writer could run a greater risk of fuffering by a tranflation than Mr. Rouffeau, as well on account of the peculiarity of his ftyle, as of the fingular turn of his fentiments.

;

He has had an advantage, however, over many of his cotemporary writers; and has been fortunate enough, as well on this as on a former occafion, to fall into good hands. The English reader, therefore, need not much regret his ignorance of the French language, on account of this work nor be under apprehenfions of being mifled, or difgusted, by a wretched mifreprefentation of a beautiful original. Not that he must expect to find a laboured copy, wherein the minutie of fimilitude are preferved, with all the ftudied correctness of mediocrity. Such a task must neceffarily have taken up a much longer time, as well as have been too fervile for any artist, who was fo far mafter of the fubject and of his pen, as to do juftice to the original. It is not a minute refemblance in the manner of pencilling, but the bolder touches and animated ftrokes of the piece that conflitute the merit of a copy: And in this, we have only to say, that the English verfion before us, has fully anfwered the favourable expectations we had conceived of it.

66

In regard to the work itfelf, its merit, on the whole, is in fome degree problematical. As a literary compofition it certainly has little more than that arifing from an animated ftyle, agreeable characters, and entertaining though unconnected narratives; being deficient in point of regular plan or fable, as a work of the hiftorical or epic kind, and wanting all the advantages of connection, order and method, requifite to a fyftematical treatife. The Author, indeed, feems very fenfible of this defect and apologizes for it accordingly. My firft defign, fays he, was confined to a tract of a few pages; but my fubject proving feductive, this intended tract fwelled infenfibly into a kind of large work, too large, doubtless, for what is contained in it, tho' too little for the matter of which it treats. I have hefitated long about its publication ; and, indeed, in compofing it received frequent intimations from my labour, of the difference, between having written a few pamphlets and being equal to the compofition of a book. After many fruitless efforts to do better, however, I thought it my duty to give it the public as it is; conceiving it of confequence to excite their attention to an important object; concerning which, though my notions fhould be wrong, yet if they should happen to fuggeft right ones to others, my time will not be entirely thrown away.

"We are not fufficiently acquainted with a ftate of infancy: the farther we proceed on our prefent mistaken ideas, the farther we wander from the point. Even the most faga

[blocks in formation]

cious inftructors apply themfelves to thofe things which man is required to know, without confidering what it is children are capacitated to learn. They are always expecting the man in the child, without reflecting what he is before he can be a man. It is to this branch of education I have applied myself; fo that, fhould my practical fcheme be found ufelefs and chimerical, my obfervations will always turn to account. I may poffibly have taken a very bad view of what ought to be done, but I conceive I have taken a good one of the fubject to be wrought upon. Begin then, ye Preceptors, by ftudying first your Pupils; for most affuredly you are at prefent unacquainted with them. If you read this book with that view, also, I flatter myself there are none of you but may find its perufal of use.

But does

"With regard to what may be called the fyftematical part of this treatife, which is nothing more than the progreffive fyftem of Nature, this will probably most perplex the Reader; on this, therefore, I fhall doubtlefs be attacked, and, perhaps, with reafon. It may be objected to me, that my book contains rather a heap of reveries than a treatise. But what must be done? I do not compofe a diflertation from the ideas of others; but write immediately from my own. I do not fee things altogether in the fame manner as other people; and have been frequently reproached on this account. it depend on me to give myself new eyes, or to be affected by other ideas? No. It is my fault, indeed, if I am too vain of my own manner of conception, if I believe myself alone to be wifer than all the rest of the world. It is not in my power to change my fentiments, but to diftruft them: this is all I can do, and this I have done. If I fometimes affume an affirmative tone, therefore, it is not with a view to impofe my notions on the Reader; but only to tell him what I really think. Why fhould I propofe any thing to him in the form of a doubt, of which I harbour not the leaft doubt myself? I only fay precifely what paffes in my own mind.

"In fpeaking my fentiments with freedom, I am fo far from giving them as an authority, that I always fubjoin my reafons; to the end that the Reader may weigh them, and judge for himself. Though I am not obftinate in the defence of my own notions, however, I think myfelf not the lefs obliged to propofe them as the maxims, concerning which I am of a very different opinion from other people, are far from being unimportant. They are fuch whofe truth or falfhood

it

it is of confequence for us to know; and on which depends the happiness or mifery of mankind."

The principal objections which have been made to this treatise, however, refpect rather the matter than the manner of it: the grand demerits which it has been charged with, and for which it hath undergone the fevereft of public cenfures, relate to the many new and uncommon fentiments which the Writer entertains concerning the most popular and interefting topics in politics, religion*, and morals. It might ill become us to undertake magisterially to decide in all the contested points between our Author and his opponents. To enable our Readers, however, to judge for themselves, and give them a fatisfactory idea, of this extraordinary performance, we purpofe to make a concife abftract of the whole; in the course of which we shall occafionally take into confideration fuch points as are most remarkable for their novelty or fingularity.

It would break in too much on the plan of our Review, however, to execute this task, in one article; we must, therefore, defer the profecution of it for the prefent, and refume it in the fucceeding numbers of our work. In the mean time we leave the following juft and fpirited apology, which the Translator makes for his Author, to fpeak fufficiently in his favour.

"The vague and general objection to this work is, that it contains a variety of fantastical notions, on a trite and beaten fubject. How far our Author's advice is good, or his schemes.

In juftice to Mr. Rouffeau, however, we muft obferve, that many of those reflections, which mistaken Bigots have, on this occafion, thrown out against him, as an enemy to Chriftianity, are falfe and injurious. Our Author is, indeed, the most zealous Advocate for Toleration; and if he fometimes bears hard on the mere forms of religion, he tells us plainly, it is because they are deftructive to the Spirit of it. His notions of the doctrines of Chriftianity, and the facred character of its Founder, may be gathered from the Parallel he draws, in the third volume of this work, between Jefus Chrift and Socrates; wherein he holds the latter infinitely cheap in the comparifon. Is it poffible for us to conclude the Author of the following paffage to be a difbeliever of, or an enemy to, Chriftianity.

Oui, fi la vie et la mort de Socrate font d'un fage, la vie et la mort de Jefus font d'un Dieu. Dirons nous que l' hiftoire de l'Evangile elt inventée à plaifir? Mon ami, ce n'eft pas ainfi qu' on invente, et les faits de Socrate, dont perfonne ne doute, font moins atteftés que ceux de Jefus Chrift.

practicable

practicable, experience will beft fhew; but that his fubject was ever treated before, can be faid only by fuch as have neyer read his book. Numerous differtations have, indeed, appeared on the general head of Education; our Author makes it evident, however, by what he himfelf hath done, that, how much foever may have been written on Education, the immediate objects of it were never ftudied or understood before.

"That the Reader will be frequently fruck with the novelty of the remarks, and the fingularity of the obfervations, to be met with in this work, is, hence, very certain; nor can it poffibly be otherwife. We have fo long plodded on in the track of our progenitors, and implicitly adopted the most abfurd cuftoms, that our furprize is very natural, at feeing habits fo deeply rooted, expofed as idle and ridiculous. It is equally a matter of courfe that a Writer who attempts, on every occafion, to diftinguish between nature and habit, fhould frequently be forced to maintain notorious paradoxes. Those who are capable, or defirous, of thinking for themfelves, however, on fo interefting a fubject, will enquire whence thefe apparent contradictions arife, and will foon find them artificial, and not real: in the mean time, no one fhould be either furprized or offended, that a man, who profefledly differs from the opinions of the generality of mankind, fhould be fingular in his own.

"There are, it is true, many well-meaning people, who hold received opinions as too facred to be attacked or ridiculed. A Writer fhould, doubtlefs, on all occafions, pay a proper deference to the nature of his fubject: but, if the matter in queftion be merely matter of opinion, it may be falfe, abfurd, or deftructive. Ought the fubject, therefore, to which it belongs, and on which account, perhaps, it fhould be the fooner expofed, to protect fuch falfehood or deftructive abfurdity from being detected? What would have been the confequence, if this principle, of paying an implicit regard to opinion, had univerfally prevailed for a thousand years paft? Where would have been all the improvements in matters of fcience, politics, and religion, that have been made fince thofe days of ignorance and barbarifm? Is the human fpecies arrived to its utmoft degree of perfection? Hath fociety reached the fubmit of political happinefs? Are there no farther improvements to be made in the fcience of government? No rank weeds to be ftill rooted up from the once overgrown and luxuriant foil of artificial religion?

"All

« AnteriorContinuar »