صور الصفحة
PDF
النشر الإلكتروني

parents of this disease.” But this we are untaught a little lower in the fame page, which infers, “ the proximate cause of the Scrofula is a preternatural viscidity of the Lymph, and not an acrimony or acidity.” On the contrary, page 23 affirms, “ the discharge [from the ftrumous ulcers] is not laudable matter, but rather an acrimonious ichor or curd-like pus." A Physical Reader, would be apt to infer from hence, there might be as much acrimony, or acidity, or both together, as viscidity in the cause. And our Author's own curative indication, p. 27, is “ to direct our intentions to the removing the obstruction of the glands, by inciding the vilcidity of the humours, and correcting their acrimony." We are also allured, p. 41, < that by remedies adapted to incide the vifcidity of the lymph, and to correct its acrimony, he has brought some of the most difficult cases to a happy issue." Mr. D. terms this disease Herculean, p. 27, and he may justly add ænigmatical too, since he has discovered the cause of it to be acrimonious and not acrimonious, acid and not acid. Now for so marvellous a cause, perhaps such a marvellous remedy as will remove it, and will not remove it, inay be properly calculated; according to analogy at least. But we have been talking of a profound fccret, and let pofterity unravel it.

In the inean time briefly to analyze this Treatise. The Title-page, the Preface of four pages, the immaterial Trunk or Body of the Work of forty two pages, may all be considered as constituting one Master of the Ceremonies, in order to introduce fix Cases of scrofulous Patients, of which, our Author says, he cured five, and has greatly mended one Case, the subject of which obftinately refused taking any more of his medicines, to which her mother imputes her want of a perfect cure. But to account for this want, from another material want, we are literally told, p. 50-This girl being very poor, and living at a great distance, much perplexed my intentions." We were so greatly edificd by this ingenuous acknowlegement, that gratitude obliges us to repeat it to the Public, that Mr. T. Durant, Scrophulous Surgi on, lives in Fetter-lane, at the Sign of his own Name and his own Treatise on the King's Evil; where, and elsewhere, we heartily with he may perfectly cure every Patient aftlicled with it, who applies to him, to the reciprocal comfort of all parties.

K Art. 33. The Difenfes of the Bones, of M. du Verney, M. D.

antient Professor of Anatomy and Surgery at the King's Garden, and Member of the Royal Aiademy of Sciences at Paris. Tranflated by Samuel Ingham, Surgeon. 8vo. 55. Osborne.

From this Title-page fome may be led to imagine, that the book is a Treatise on the Difices of Mi. du l'erney's Bones. This odd arrangement of words is like that in the Sign-Painter's Exhibition : Frill Butter every Day and Eggs new loid by me Martha Simpson

This work is sufficiently known and approved in the original ; and the more English Reader may be thankful for the present translation, which, notwithltanding the inaccuracy above noted, will not lead him far fiom the sense of the Author.

Art. 34.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

10s. 68Phyfici Royalpha

Art. 34. A Treatise on the Diseases of Women; in which it is

attempted to join a juft Theory to the most safe and approved Praktice. With a chronological Catalogue of the Physicians who have written on these Diseases. Translated from the French Original. Written by Dr. J. Astruc, Royal Professor of Physic at Paris, and consulting Physician to the King of

France. 8vo. 2 Vols. 1os. 6 d. bound. Nourse. · About twenty years ago a book appeared in English, bearing nearly the same tiile with the present work, and having the sanction of this Gentleman's name. It was extremely well received by the Public, although it was by no means to be considered as the work of Dr. Atruc, being no other than a Digest of the Notes collected by one of his Pupils. The present work, however, is the genuine product of this learned Physician's mature consideration, and most affiduous application to the study of his subject. He is now his own Editor, and the English Student will do well to make himself acquainted with the curious and accurate theory, laid down by so diligent and able a proficient in this branch of the Medical Art.- The Doctor intends another volume to compleat his plan.

Art. 35. A Treatise on the Disease called a Cold, shewing its

general Nature and Causes, its various Species and different Events; together with some cautionary Rules of Conduct, proper to be observed in order to get safely rid of it, when taken, &c. By John Chandler, F.R.S. 8vo. 2s. 6d. Millar. Mr. Chandler has Mewn himself so intimately and thoroughly acquainted with his subject, that we think his book a valuable and dieful performance, although somewhat aukwardly and pedantically written, Such a parade of learned words and phrales may prevent the work from becoming fo generally useful, (among unmedical Readess) as it might have proved, had the style been less scientific, and more fami'iar. The Author is certainly an excellent Apothecary, but not the most agreeable Writer.

SINGLE SERMONS. 1. A N Enquiry into the irue Character of David, King of Frael.

P – Pefore the University of Oxford, at St. Mary's, January 24, 1702; in which the exceptions of a late Writer to the conduct of David, on fome occasions, are obviated. By William Cleaver, M. A. of Lincoln College. Rivington.

2. The Ule, l'alue, and Improvement of various Readings, mewn and illustrated, -before the University of Oxford, at St. Mary's, Odober 18, 1961. By William Worthington, D. D. Chaplain to the Archbishop of York, and Author of the Essay on Redemption. Fletcher.

3. Before the House of Commons, January 30, 1762. By Samuel Şa'ter, D. D. Matter of the Charter-House, Rector of St. Bartholomew the Little in London, and Prebendary of Norwich. Bachurft.

4. Before

4. Before the Lords, on the above-mentioned Occasion. By San muel Lord bishop of St. Davids. Walter.

5. An opproved Pafor. A Charge delivered at Daventry, Feb. 25, 1762, at the Ordination of the Rev. Joannes Runnals, A. L. M. and Philof. Doct. By Hugh Worthington, A, M. Published at the Desire of the Person ordained, and of other Ministers then present. Henderson.

6. Every Man cur Neighbour,-at the Opening of the 'Lock Hofpital near Hyde Park Corner, March 28, 1762. By the Rev. Mr. Madan, Chaplain to the faid Hospital. Dilly.

7. The Council of Gamaliel considered, before the Society in Scotland for propagating Christian Knowlege, at their Anniversary Meet• ing in the High Church of Edinburgh, Jan. 4, 1762. By Robert Dick, D. D. Minister of the Trinity College Church of Edinburgh.

8. No Acceptance with God by Faith only,---before the University of Oxford, at St. Mary's Church, July 19, 1761. With a Postscript, containing some Stri&tures on the Substance of a Sermon lately published by the Rev. Mr. Madan. By John Allen, M. A. Vice Principal of St. Mary Magdalen Hall. Whifton.

9. The Use of Reason in Matters of Religion, stated and explained, at the University of Oxford, at St. Peter's in the East, March 7, 1762. · By Thomas Randolph, D. D. President of C.C.C. Oxford. Fletcher.

10. A Right to eternal Glory, through the meritorious Obedience of Chrift, proved to be consistent with the absolute Freedom and sovereignty of Divine Grace. By John Brine Keith.

11. At the Anniversary Meeting of the Governors of the Magdalen Charity, March 18, 1762, at St. George's, Hanover Square. By William Dodd. M. A. Chaplain to the Bishop of St. Davids, and Lecturer of Westham in Essex. Davis, &c.

12. The Charoller and Reward of the good and faithful Servant, a Sermon preached at Crouched Friars, London, April 18, 1762,-on Occasion of the Death of George Benson, D. D. who died April 6, in the 63d Year of his Age. By Edward Pickard. To which is added, The Oration at the Interment. By. E. Radcliff. Henderson, &c.

Sermons on the Fast, March 12, 1762. 1. The Prospect of our Success in the present War,—at Crutched Friers. By E. Radcliff. Henderfon.

2. At St. George the Martyr, Queen's Square. By James Sheeles, M. A. Flexney.

3. Before the House of Lords, at St. Peter's, Westminster. By the Lord Bishop of Landaffe. Payne, Meuse-gate.

4. Before the House of Commons, at St. Margaret's, Westminfter. By Henry Barton, D D. Warden of Merton College, Oxford. Sandby.

5. Two Sermons before the University of Oxtord, Feb. 11, 1757, and March 12, 1-62; the Days appointed for general Falting, &c. By John Burion, D. D. Fellow of Eton College. 15. Fletcher.

6. The safe Retreat from impending Judgmentse a t Leeds. By John Edwards. Dilly.

[ocr errors][ocr errors]

THE MONTHLY REVIEW,

For J U N E, 1762.

Netæ, five Lectiones, ad Tragicorum Græcorum veterum, Æschyli,

Sophoclis, Euripidis, quæ supersunt Dramata, deperditorumque Reliquias. Auctore Benjamino Heath. Concluded.

T TAVING in our last Review considered Dr. Heath's

o Annotations on Æschylus, we shall now proceed to his Notes on Sophocles and Euripides,

Perhaps no ancient Author whatever has suffered more froin the mischievous labours of Commentators and Restorers, than the illustrious Sophocles. They have bled and physicked, they have impaled and excoriated him; they have cut off his natural limbs and given him others of wood: insomuch, that were he to rise again upon earth, and behold his poor Tragedies, might he not say with exquisite irony,

To go order onsit,
Aistysuoá t'in c:Tev, xan

Καλεκτιμήσα του μον' όμμα. .. About the beginning of the fourteenth century, one De. metrius Triclinius took it into his head to revise Sophocles, and to examine him metrically. For this purpose he provided himself with a fcale of feet, and went to work with his Author. Where he supposed the length of his verse fitted his Scale, it was well ;, id ftood as it was ; where he found it either too long or too short, wie sout any more ado he pieced or curtailed it, and sometimes interwove whole lines of his own manufacture with the original text. It was fortunate enough that he had the honesty, or rather the vanity, to acknowlege whatever he altered or intetted; but is it not strange that even after this acknowlegement, his copies Thould be followed by future Editors, and that Turnebus, who published Rev. June, 1762. Dd

his his Edition of Sophocles in the sixteenth century, should adopt thein only as genuine? However, to be convinced of their futility and stupidity, nothing more will be necessary than to compare them with the edition of Aldus, executed from more ancient and authentic copies.

After these sufferings the Poet might reasonably hope to meet with some redrefs from our learned Commentator; and we doubt not that the title of The Reforer of Sophocles was reserved for Dr. Heath.

In Ajax, v. 143, we entirely agree with the Doctor, that instead of it to ou ann ought to be read ITT TOVOU.ov, which will be a very just and natural epithet to help wr', analogous to which is Bourou.ov a'zilav in Electra, v. 182. For i Touarn, whether applied to Ajax or to asiywv, will have very little propriety : in TOYou or is therefore a good emendation.

In the following passage, however, we cannot embrace the Doctor's opinion that models aules should be referred to the Greeks, and not to the Avium Greges in the line above.

Ara' (ite yop on To con build and my
Ila!"/dJ mi, ate mlwy cycar)
Μεγαν αιγυπιον γ υποδεισαιες,
Tax'crezi porę to ou Cx10175,
Esyn aintenar e punon.

Ajax, v. 167, &c. So the Doctor reads this passage, and places the parenthesis ; but in our opinion

. Μεγαν αιγυπιον η υποδεισανλες ought to be included in the parenthesis, and modercules should be referred to creat, for fo the construction will be most natural and easy.

Ajex, v. 304. Oon tüt clav vēpor ixtisail'suro
This verfe is rightly rendered

Quantis ipfos cruciatibus mox regreffus zikiiscerctur. We are obliged for this construction, as well as for many other sensible illustrations of Sophocles, to Mr. Mudge of Plymouth; to whose critical abilities our Author bears ha nourable testimony in his Preface,

Ibid. 745. Tos xupions yep marice xpn ondour dog or • The alteration that Johnson proposes in this verse of δηλουν λογον to δουλον λεγειν, we cannot by any means agree to; for it is not only, as our Commentator obferves, far from being clear that the messenger was a Nave, but, in our opi

nion,

« السابقةمتابعة »