An Inglorious Columbus; or, Evidence that Hwui Shăn and a Party of Buddhist Monks, from Afghanistan, discovered America in the Fifth Century a. d. By Edward P. Vining. New York: D. Appleton & Co. Pp. 788, with Map. Price, $5.
The term "inglorious" is not intended to be applied to our Christopher Columbus, but, in the sense in which Gray, in his "Elegy," speaks of "some mute, inglorious Milton," to the Buddhist monk who, known only to a few special scholars, has failed to receive the universality of fame which should be his due. According to the author's statement, and as is known to Asiatic scholars, there is, among the records of China, an account of a Buddhist priest who, in the year 499 a. d., reached China, and stated that he had returned from a trip to a country lying an immense distance east. In the case of other travelers, whose narratives are also preserved in ancient Chinese literature, the accounts which we possess of their journeys were either written by themselves or their followers; but, in the case of Hwui Shăn, the interest excited in his story was so great that the imperial historiographer, whose duty it was to record the principal events of the time, entered upon his official records a digest of the information obtained from the traveler as to the country which he had visited. It is this official record, or rather a copy of it contained in the writings of Ma Twanlin, which is discussed in this work. But little doubt, if any, exists as to the authenticity of the record, but there are considerable differences of opinion respecting what country it was which the monks (who were missionaries of Buddhism) visited, and described as Fusang. Some of the critics believe it to have been Japan, others America. Mr. Vining believes it was Mexico, and, in adducing the considerations to support his belief, he transcribes, or makes a summary of, all the papers that have been written on the subject, except Mr. Leland's large book, which readers are advised to buy. He believes that the route followed by the priests, which is obscurely described in their itinerary, was from Japan, or the Asiatic mainland, along the course of the Aleutian Islands—"the land of the marked bodies"—to Alaska—"the Great Han"—and thence along the Pacific coast to the "land of the Fusang-tree," which plant is not yet identified, and the "country of women," in Mexico. Among the arguments relied upon to support this view, are the correspondences of distances, which, according to Mr. Vining's computations, are close enough; the description of the country of Fusang, the customs of its people, and the characteristics of its vegetation, which is faithful as to Mexico, and includes details that would not be true of any other country; accounts, in the traditions of Mexico, of the arrival of a party of men similar to what the Buddhist party must have been; and the state of civilization in Mexico at the time of the arrival of the Spaniards, which was such as might have grown up from an Asiatic implantation. On the other hand, the history of Japan is reviewed, for the purpose of showing that that could not have been the country visited. The book also contains a translation of that part of the "Chinese Classic of Mountains and Seas" which relates to lands east of China—a work which is thought to be the oldest geography of the world, and which has never before been translated into any European language.
Assyriology: Its Use and Abuse in Old Testament Study. By Francis Brown. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons. Pp. 96. Price, $1.
The author of this book is Associate Professor of Biblical Theology in Union Theological Seminary in this city. The purpose of the book is to utter a caution against too hasty and extensive generalizations upon the discoveries that are made, one at a time, amid much groping in the dark, among the ruins of the ancient empires of the East, and which often seem to have a bearing upon the records given in the Bible. It is human nature to grasp eagerly at evidence that seems to favor what one wants proved, and to reject obstinately what seems of an opposite character; and biblical scholars are prone to the fault. Professor Brown advises such to wait in matters of Assyriology for the results of searching criticism. The discoveries in that field, though undoubtedly destined in the end to be of vast importance, are, many of them—not all—as yet too fragmentary and uncertain to build any-
