La Science chez les Chinois by Ernest MartinReview by: G. S.T'oung Pao, Vol. 6, No. 5 (1895), pp. 527-528Published by: BRILLStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4525165 .

Accessed: 24/06/2014 22:37

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

BRILL is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to T'oung Pao.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 185.2.32.36 on Tue, 24 Jun 2014 22:37:00 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

XBULLET'IN CRITIQUE. 527 XBULLET'IN CRITIQUE. 527

couleur locale, but the general

outlines of the story are doubtless

faithfully retained, and many of the

incidents are genuinely and un-

mistakeably Corean.

The sketch of Corean History

which is prefixed to this romance

is open to more serious criticism.

It is a very poor performance.

M. Hong really presumes too much

on the ionorance of his readers

when he says that Corean History

is 'totalement inconnue 'a l'etran-

ger'. This only shows his own

ignorance of the works of Ross

and Griffis, not to speak of other

sources of information. Even the

few pages devoted to the subject

in the 'Histoire de 'Eglise de Coree'

are better than M. Hong's Essay.

Judginig from the spelling and

other indications, it would appear

to have been compiled, in part at

least,from Japaanese sources, and is

in several particulars grossly in-

accurate. It is not true that

GenghisKhan did not molest Corea,

and it is, to say the least, mis-

leading to assert that China ac-

knowledged the independence of

Corea. The Treaty with the United

couleur locale, but the general

outlines of the story are doubtless

faithfully retained, and many of the

incidents are genuinely and un-

mistakeably Corean.

The sketch of Corean History

which is prefixed to this romance

is open to more serious criticism.

It is a very poor performance.

M. Hong really presumes too much

on the ionorance of his readers

when he says that Corean History

is 'totalement inconnue 'a l'etran-

ger'. This only shows his own

ignorance of the works of Ross

and Griffis, not to speak of other

sources of information. Even the

few pages devoted to the subject

in the 'Histoire de 'Eglise de Coree'

are better than M. Hong's Essay.

Judginig from the spelling and

other indications, it would appear

to have been compiled, in part at

least,from Japaanese sources, and is

in several particulars grossly in-

accurate. It is not true that

GenghisKhan did not molest Corea,

and it is, to say the least, mis-

leading to assert that China ac-

knowledged the independence of

Corea. The Treaty with the United

States was signed in 1882, and not

in 1886. Germany,France,Englaud

and Russia have not sent Ministers

Plenipotentiary or Charges d'affai-

res to Seoul, but only Consuls-

General. M. Hong might have

verified these points with very little

trouble and his carelessness in such

rnatters inclines us to suspect equal

inaccuracy in places where we have

no means of testing his statements.

W. G. ASTON.

States was signed in 1882, and not

in 1886. Germany,France,Englaud

and Russia have not sent Ministers

Plenipotentiary or Charges d'affai-

res to Seoul, but only Consuls-

General. M. Hong might have

verified these points with very little

trouble and his carelessness in such

rnatters inclines us to suspect equal

inaccuracy in places where we have

no means of testing his statements.

W. G. ASTON.

La Science chiez les Chinois, par

le docteur ERNEST MARTIN, ex-

medecin de la Legation de France

en Chine, etc. (pubiHe par la Revue

scientifique 'a Paris).

M. Martin juge d'apres son

point-de-vue doctrinaire, et, par

consequent, son jugemenit sur la

science chez les Chiiiois est tres

defavorable.

Il aurait du' preciser, et dire

sciences naturelles ou exactes, et

alors nous avouons que les Chi-

nois ne sont pas plus avances dans

cette science que nous autres Euro-

peens ne l'etioDs encore dans le

dernier siecle (1655), comme je I'ai

La Science chiez les Chinois, par

le docteur ERNEST MARTIN, ex-

medecin de la Legation de France

en Chine, etc. (pubiHe par la Revue

scientifique 'a Paris).

M. Martin juge d'apres son

point-de-vue doctrinaire, et, par

consequent, son jugemenit sur la

science chez les Chiiiois est tres

defavorable.

Il aurait du' preciser, et dire

sciences naturelles ou exactes, et

alors nous avouons que les Chi-

nois ne sont pas plus avances dans

cette science que nous autres Euro-

peens ne l'etioDs encore dans le

dernier siecle (1655), comme je I'ai

This content downloaded from 185.2.32.36 on Tue, 24 Jun 2014 22:37:00 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

528 BULLETIN CRITIQUE.

demontre dans ce Journal meme

(Vol. I, p. 178). Quant aux obser-

vations dans l'bistoire naturelle,

les Chinois en ont fait qui sur-

passent, sous plusieurs rapports,

lnos propres observations. Daus les

autres branches de la science hu-

maine ils sont aussi forts que nous

puisqu'ils ont a traiter avec des

faits et non pas avec des raisonne-

ments si chers a l'Europe reveuse

qui nomme philosophie toutes les

r'flexions transcendentales ema-

nant de ses tendances poetiques et

qu'elle meAle avec la science, tandis

que les Chinois separent netteinent

science, philosophie et poesie.

On appelle en Hollande les

sciences exactes < Bespiegelende

wijsbegeerte > (Philosophie specu-

lative ou contemplative). Le mot

est expressif, mais le Chinois n'est

pas contemplatif en science. Ce

qu'il ne peut pas saisir avec ses

organes, iA le laisse de cote comme

inutile. S'ils n'ont pas invente la

poudre, 'a ce que M. Martin pre'tenld

(mais que je nie), tant mieux; car

nous ne voyons pas l'Ftilite d'in-

ventions comme la poudre, la

dynamite, la picrite et autres ex-

plosifs dont MM. les anarchistes en

Europe se servent d'une fa9on si

aimable. G. S.

This content downloaded from 185.2.32.36 on Tue, 24 Jun 2014 22:37:00 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions