ministers; that of Periander, the fatal mischiefs which attend despotic power and the dispensing with ancient laws; that of Pisistratus, the punishment of a base, false, and crafty policy, and that of Nabuchodonosor, the dreadful consequences of relapsing into impiety, after due light and admonition. The prince is at first instructed by fables, to preserve him from the passions of youth; he afterwards instructs himself by his own reflections, by the examples he sees, and by all the adventures he meets with in his travels; he goes from country to country, collecting all the treasures of wisdom, conversing with the great men he finds there, and performing heroic exploits as occasion presents.

V. Some persons, to discredit the author's work, have insinuated, that far from doing homage to religion, he degrades it.

He should think himself very unhappy to have proproduced a work so contrary to his intentions. All that he advances upon religion may be reduced to two principal points. The first is to prove against the Atheists the existence of a supreme Deity, who produced the world by his power and governs it by his wisdom. To this end Zoroaster unveils to us all the wonders of nature. Hermes consults the native and genuine tendency of the heart, and Pythagoras ascends to first principles. And thus the author endeavors to unite the strength of all that sense, natural sentiments, and reason can afford us for the proof of the first and most important of all truths. Tradition strikes in with philosophy. The author has endeavored to shew that the earliest opinions of the most knowing and civilized nations come nearer the truth than those of latter ages; that the theology of the Orientals is more pure than

that of the Egyptians, that of the Egyptians less corrupted than that of the Greeks, and that of the Greeks more exalted than that of the Romans; that the primitive system of the world was that of one supreme Deity; that in order to adapt this idea to the capacity of the vulgar, the divine attributes were represented by allegories and hieroglyphics; that mankind sinking into matter, quickly forgot the meaning of those sacred symbols, and fell into idolatry; that idolatry brought forth irreligion; that rash and inconsiderate minds, not being able to distinguish between principles and the abuses of them, ran from one excess to another. Such have been the variations of the human mind, with regard to the Deity, in almost all times and all countries. The author's intention throughout his whole system, was to shew the wild extravagance of those who maintain that the doctrines of religion are only the effects of the ignorance and stupidity of the infant world; that the first men, not knowing the phyisical causes, had recourse to invisible powers to explain the phenomena of nature; and lastly, that politicians refined and improved these indigested ideas in order to compose a system of religion useful and necessary to society.

The second point is to shew, in opposition to the Deists, that the principal doctrines of revealed religion, concerning the states of innocence, corruption and renovation, are as ancient as the world; that they were the foundations of Noah's religion; that he transmitted them to his children; that these traditions were thus spread throughout all nations; that the Pagans disfigured, degraded, and obscured them by their absurd fictions; and lastly, that these primitive truths have been no where preserved in their purity, except

in the true religion. When we see divers nations agree concerning the beginning, the decline and the re-establishment of a monarchy, the birth, exploits and virtues of the hero who is the restorer of it, is not this a sufficient proof of these principal facts, though the circumstances should be related differently, and be even fabulous? The author, in unfolding the ancient traditions, has distinguished between fable and truth, philosophical hypotheses and doctrines of faith, essence and form, the spirit and the letter, which ought never to be separated, but which cannot be confounded without disguising and dishonoring Chistianity. He hoped thereby to have given a plan of religion, equally amiable and reasonable, and to have shewn that its principles are beautiful, its consequence natural, and its original ancient that it enlightens the mind, comforts the heart, and establishes the welfare of society.

VI. Those who degrade the wisdom and goodness of God, under pretence of extolling his power and justice, have thought that Eleazar's discourse too plainly favored the opinions of Origen concerning the pre-existence of souls and the restitution of all spirits. One may venture to say, that whoever makes this objection, does not understand the plan of the work. Each philosopher speaks to Cyrus the language of his own religion and country. The Orientals, Egyptians, Greeks and Tyrians, all agree in the original purity, present corruption, and future restoration of mankind; but they wrap up these truths in different fables, each according to the genius of their nation. Eleazar clears their system from the pagan fictions, but retains in his own the opinions of his sect. The errors which prevail at this day resemble those of former times. The mind

of man sees but a small number of ideas, reviews them continually, and thinks them new, only because it expresses them differently in different ages. The Magi in Cyrus's time were fallen into a kind of atheism, like that of Spinoza; Zoroaster, Hermes and Pythagoras adored one sole Deity, but they were deists; Eleazar resembled the Socinians, who were for subjecting religion to philosophy; Daniel represents a perfect. Christian, and the hero of this book a young prince, who began to be corrupted by the maxims of irreligion. In order to set him right, the different philosophers with whom he converses successively unfold to him new truths mixt with errors. Zoroaster confutes the mistakes of the Magi; Pythagoras those of Zoroaster; Eleazar those of Pythagoras; Daniel rejects those of all the others, and his doctrine is the only one which the author adopts. The order of these conversations shews the progress of the mind, the matter being so disposed, that the Atheist becomes Deist, the Deist Socinian, and the Socinian Christian, by a plain and natural chain of ideas. The great art in instructing is to lead the mind gradually on, and to take advantage even of its errors to make it relish truth. That Cyrus might thus be conducted step by step, it was necessary to introduce a person of the religion of the Hebrews, who should confute by reason all the objections drawn from reason. Daniel could not act this part. It would not have become him to solve difficulties by uncertain conjectures; the philosopher might prepare the prince, by bare hypotheses, to submit and to distrust his understanding; but it was necessary that the prophet should disengage Cyrus from all bold speculations, how refined and bright soever they might appear, and lead him

to the belief of a supernatural religion, not by a philosophical demonstration of its doctrines, but by proving them to be divinely revealed. In a word, he should fix the mind of the young Hero by indisputable facts, which strike much more forcibly than abstract ideas. And it is for this reason that the author introduces in his last book two persons of very different characters, a philosopher and a prophet; the one employs the powers of reason against incredulity, the other imposes silence on all reasonings by a supernatural authority. This is the only use which the author would make of the opinions of Origen; they answered the objections of the incredulous concerning the beginning and duration of evil; they shew, that since the weak reason of the philosophers can find a plausible solution of those great difficulties, we may well conclude that the infinite Wisdom will be able one day to justify his ways, which are now impenetrable. So long as it is allowable to philosophise, the author exposes the most probable systems and hypotheses; but when the question is of faith, he reasons only upon palpable facts, in order to discover whether God has spoken to his creatures or not. The moment we are convinced of this, all doubtful opinions are lost and absorbed in the depths of the divine incomprehensibility.

VII. Those who thought the sketches of natural philosophy in this work misplaced, pretending that the ancients are represented more knowing than they really were, will be much more shocked to see those philosophical descriptions augmented in the present edition. It is not suprising to hear this objection made by empty, superficial minds, who laugh at the Mosaic history, while they adopt the Greek fables concerning the ori