Hiftory, however it may be regarded as the Regifter of paft Events, cannot be a fufficient Proof of a Fact which appears contrary to Reason, because Hiftorians are obliged to accommodate themselves to the Errors and Humours of the People among whom they live, and to follow the Stream of Superftition and Prejudice; and there are Inftances of Hiftorians who have reported a great many Facts, of whofe Falfhood they themselves were fufficiently convinced, tho' they were not able to ruin the Credit of them. But more particularly our Author endeavours to fhew the Uncertainty of Hiftory, 1ft, From the Obfcurity of the first Periods of it. The Hiftory of the first Ages of the World is fo dark, and mixed with Fable, that if we will make ufe of our Reason, we cannot belfeve a great Part of what is reported concerning thofe Times. We have no Accounts of what paffed before the Flood, but from the Writings of Moses, to whom we ought to give abfolute Credit, because he was conducted by infallible Infpiration; but the Notices he gives us of thefe Ages are very inconfiderable, and confined entirely to the Nation of the Jews; and if we fet afide the Confideration of his Infallibility, and confider him as a mere Hiftorian, we fhall find his Accounts contradicted by the Annals of the Egyptians and Chinefe, which have not the Air of Fiction or late Invention. His Account of the Flood is liable to feveral Objections, from the Nature of Things, as well as the Hiftories of other Nations, which cannot be easily answer'd. His Account of the Peopling of the Earth by the Sons of Noah and their Pofterity, to appearance, not very confiftent with the great Numbers of People, Empires and Kingdoms, which we discover foon after the Deluge: So that, if Scripture did not determine our Faith, we fhould be at a great lofs between the contradictory Accounts of the Jewish Hiftorian and thofe of other Nations; but as the Cafe now ftands, Probability feems to be on the Side of the latter, but Religion declares in favour of the former. 2dly, From the Partiality

7

Partiality of Hiftorians in favour of their own particular Nations and Religions; a great many Inftances whereof might be found among the Jewi Hiftorians, and those of Greece, especially in the Works of Herodotus; nor were the Romans exempted from this Weakness; and we may be eafily convinced, that thofe of our own Times are as guilty in this refpect as any, from thofe Authors who have wrote the Life of Charles the 5th, who besides other Extravagancies of this Kind, are very pofitive that the Sun ftopp'd his Courfe, till the Imperialifts entirely defeated the Duke of Saxony and the Proteftant Army, in the Year 1547. 3dly, From the Prodigies and Miracles with which the Works of Hiftorians are often ftuffed. In many antient Authors, Sacrifices, Entrails of Victims, &c. often occafion the Gain or Lofs of an Empire, and decide the Fate of Kingdoms. In the firft Book of Herodotus, there are almost as many Refponfes of Oracles as Pages. Titus Livius, a Writer of great Reputation, has given an insufferable Catalogue of fuch pretended Miracles as were agreeable to pagan Superftition. Almost all our Catholick Hiftorians are full of childish and pious Chimera's, which render their Works despicable to Men of Sense; and in this Humour the French seem to rival it with the Spaniards. Those who have tranfmitted to us the Hiftories of Croifades, have filled them with fo many Miracles, and those so contrary to Reason, that it would be useless to spend time in fhewing the Falfhood and Extravagance of them. 4thly, From the different and contrary Representations of the fame Facts by Authors of different Parties and Religions. As foon as a Catholick Author writes a Book, he is confuted by the Proteftants, and the fame Facts appear in a quite different Light. It is impoffible for any Man of Judgment, who reads the Hiftories of the Reformation in France, without Paffion or Prejudice, to form a Judgment of the principal Events of that Time. The Maffacre of the Proteftants lofes much of its

horrid and execrable Nature, in the Writings of fome Catholick Hiftorians; and no Man can judge of the Characters of the Managers of the different Parties at that Time, fuch as the Guifes, the Conde's, Montmorancy's and Chatillon's, from the Authors that lived near that Period; fo that if we were to judge of the Truth and Certainty of Facts by Jofephus's Maxim, viz. the Agreement of all Writers, there is ground to doubt whether this Agreement can ever be obtained, fo long as Monks continue to write Hiftory. 5thly, From the Extravagance of the Hiftories or Annals of the different Orders of Monks. Books of this kind are filled with fo many Lies, and fo many ridiculous Fables, that whoever can read them fo as to give them any Degree of Credit, has for ever loft the Way of Truth. Those who want Inftances of this Kind may have recourfe to the Accounts that are given of St. Francis, the Works of the Monk Cafarius, and the Pia Hilaria wrote by the Jefuit Gazeus. 6thly, From the Ignorance of Hiftorians with refpect to the true Causes and Occafions of many hiftorical Events. The greatest Enterprizes fometimes take their Rife from the Jealousy of a Coquette, the Ambition of a Favourite, or the Hatred of a Minifter to his Prince; and Hiftorians have wrote whole Books upon the political Reasons of a War, which has been raised and carried on by no other Influence. Thus the Expedition of Francis the First in the Milaneze, which was one of the greatest and most expensive Enterprizes of France, if we believe Brantome, was entirely owing to the Gallantry of that Prince, and the Intemperance of the Admiral Bonnivet: And if we could discover the true Caufes of one half of the Events of the late Wars, how many Inftances of the Intrigues, Jealoufies, and extravagant Ambition of Women, should we find out? For many are confident, that Women were the fole Caufes of the Siege of Lifle, the raifing of the Siege of Turin, and the Prefervation of Toulon.

Our

Our Author having reprefented the Uncertainty of Hiftory, proceeds to confider the precarious Nature of thofe Sentiments and Opinions that are founded upon Tradition. Nothing is fo falfe and ridiculous as the Notions which moit People entertain, of the Foundations of the Kingdoms and the Originals of the Nations to which they belong. The Egyptians, Greeks, and Romans, and after them the French and other modern Nations, feem to rival one another, in tranfmitting to Pofterity a thousand Chimera's, which they think may serve to raise the Reputation of their Country or Religion. Hence we have the fabulous Dynafties of the Egyptians, the Gods and Demi-gods of the Grecians, the Wolf that nurfed Romulus and Remus, the Foundation of the Kingdom of the Gauls by the Son of Hector; and a thousand other Absurdities both pious and profane, which have been carefully handed from one Generation to another down to our Times. Thus was formed the Jewish Talmud, an indigested Heap of Jewish Vifions, compiled by the Rabbins Afe and Hammai, in the Year 476: And not to speak of the Legends of other Chriftian Saints, there is no reafon to doubt, but if what has been written concerning the Conformity of Jefus Chrift and St. Francis, and the Works of his Difciples, were joined with the Life of St. Mary of Alcaoque, they would together make up a Book more ridiculous and abfurd than the Alcoran, and equal in these respects to the Talmud it felf. But more particularly our Author proves in feveral different Setions, That Traditions are in a great measure founded upon our Indolence, and the Prejudices of our Infancy. That many of them take their Rife from the Works of Poets, Orators, and Painters, which he confirms by a great many Instances: And, to conclude, That Traditions are the common Support of Errors among all Nations, and in all Religions. Mabometans, fays he, Jews and Pagans, have their Traditions as well as we; they are fupported by their Antiquity and religious Superftition, as well as ours;

A 4

and

and why should we think that ours are more authentick than theirs? What Ground have we to pretend that they fhould forfake their Opinions, or examine seriously whether they are contrary to Reafon and good Senfe, when we are not willing to obferve the fame Rules? We ought not to exact of others what we are not willing to fubmit to our felves; and if we are, from our Infancy, ftrictly prohibited to examine certain Opinions, Turks and Jews have as good Right to imitate us in this, as we have to give the Example, &c.

The Author concludes this Differtation by fhewing that the Authority of learned Men ought not to be our Rule, nor prevail with us to think or act contrary to our Reason; because, as he proves at great Length, learned Men differ very much in their Sentiments from one another, and are fway'd by their Interefts, Paffions, and Prejudices, as well as the reft of Mankind. Their Pride and Vanity engage them to support the Opinions they have once declared for, even after they have found them false and erroneous. The most ridiculous and extravagant Opinions have been espoused by fome of the moft knowing Men, witnefs the Affertions of the most learned Stoicks about their wife Man, which yet are not more unaccountable than the Sentiments of Pythagoras and his Followers about their Tranfmigration of Souls, and the ridiculous Fables that were contriv'd to fupport that Doctrine. One half of the Opinions of learned Men are owing to the Hatred and Jealousy they entertain one against another; to this, the Author tells us, he has good Ground to afcribe the Bishop of Meaux's Oppofition to the Archbishop of Cambray's Works, and Du Pin's Ecclefiaftical Hiftory, the Difference between the Janfenifts and Jefuits, &c. And, to conclude, many of the greatest Men have acknowledg'd the Narrowness and Imperfection of their Knowledge, that they were entirely ignorant of a great many Things, and at great Lofs and Uncertainty concerning others of great Importance;

I

which