quoted author was not hit by Bowyer; but who will wonder at it? It is impoffible to avoid all errours in a book of this kind, wherein fo many things are collected and contracted. In other places, for inf Act. x. 3. faults of the first edition are corrected.

Rich is this collection likewife. The first edition had already mote conjectures than Wetllein. To thefe Mr. Bowyer has collected a great many more fince the year 1763; and I found feveral in the fécond edition which I had added myself to the firft. After the printing was finished, Mr. Bowyer had already collected fo many more, or received from others, that he was obliged to add two fupplements from p. 350-380, which contain nothing but new ones. Many of thefe are marked by R.* which, it feemeth, Mr. Bowyer likes particularly; from what he fays of them at the end of the preface:

"Many conjectures, however, which are wanting in the first edi tion, are wanting in the fecond likewife, and the collection could be very much augmented, particularly by a German. Bowyer does not understand German. It was, therefore, impoffible for him to give an extract from German books; even many Latin books of German authors, particularly the neweft, are unknown to him. He has made ufe of Heumann's Latin writings; but all the conjectures in his explication of the New Teftament are wanting, though not a great lofs in itfelf, but here, where compleatnefs is the greatest merit. The nu merous and more interesting conjectures of Semler are here fought for in vain, though they are found in his Latin writings. Even a conjecture of Reuchlin, adopted by Dr. Luther in his German tranflation of the Bible, Act. viii. 36, is wanting, and fome very ingenious conjectures made in England; for inft. Matth. v. 32. dongis instead οι πορνειας. Αt Act. vi. g. λυβοςώξι inftead of λύβεςωξ, the author, who has given the most probability to it, is left out. (See Ryland in Notis ad Jofephi, Lib. xvi. Antiq. cap. vi. §. 1.) Altmann's and Pa lairet's Conjectures at Cor. xvi. 3. and Rom. viii. 26. are wanting. likewife, though found in Latin books. I defire my friends, not ro take these remarks as a cenfure. I know very well, that I fhould not have made this collection half fo compleat, as it is. I would but men tion, what is left for others, particularly my countrymen, if they would take this book as the ground to collect upon, what is known of occurs to them. And fo it may be compleated in a long tract of time. I wished therefore, that it might be tranflated, and I am fure it would be very well received. Every critical reader of the New Testament, the most learned not excepted, may learn very much from Bowyer's book. It is, moreover, fo entirely a fupplement of Wetftein's New Teftament, that every body who has this, or the Prolegomena of it, hould have the work of Mr. Bowyer likewife. The German edition could have this great advantage over the English, that, if the fuppleiments were entered into the text of the book, you need not to look for every verse in three different places.

"With the main point which I have been defcribing, Mr. Bowyer has connected an accidental one, viz. to collect all the explications dif fering from the vulgar pointings. These are conjectures of quite ano

The learned Reader may perhaps not know that these were by the late Mr. Markland. Rev.

ther kind; they fhould rather be called explications. Because, all thefe pointings are neither added by the writers, nor found in the oldest manufcripts; which, however, are fome hundred years later than the Apoftles. They are firft put to very late manufcripts by the tranfcribers, and afterwards by the editors after their own liking, and after their opinion of the text. Whoever, therefore, alters them, does no more than they who first put them he fhews but his explication of the text; and if he does it without any predeceflor, it is no objection against him. But whoever will alter what we properly call the vulgar reading, whoever will alter the letters, is obliged to give very ftrong reafons for it; because the evidence of all the manufcripts is against him, which first must be overthrown. It would, therefore, have been more methodical and proper, to diftinguish one from the other; but even here fo many interesting things are collected, that it is impoffible to be offended with the collector. A tranflator might alter or leave it qut, and publish it feparately.

"The preface contains many things, which might have been left out without any lofs to the book; for instance. The treatise on the language of the New Testament. All that is faid there, is very well and true; but I think a little out of place. What follows from p. 29. about Whilton's tranfpofitions in the Gofpel of St. Matthew, is more interefting and more to the purpofe.

"As Mr. Bowyer has done me the honour to quote often my Introduction to the New Teftament in his Preface, I am obliged to inform my readers, that he quotes always the first edition, and after the English tranflation. The fecond he has not yet feen; I suppose, as he does not understand German. Therefore, fometimes an opinion of mine is cited, which I have afterwards changed; for inft. p. 350. my conjecture about Matth. x. 10. which I have told the reasons of, p. 1055. of the fecond edition, why it could not take place. P. ii. I am not well understood. Mr. Bowyer believes that to be my opi nion, which I deny; and he endeavours to bring me over to his opi nion. Perhaps there is fome obfcurity in the English tranflation, which I never faw; perhaps a denying particle left out, a fault of printing. The quoted place is to be found in the fecond edition, in the beginning of p. 59.-" I fay, a various reading, which is found in moft manufcripts, is not always to be pleaded for." Mr. Bowyer fancies, that I give a quite contrary rule, viz. it is always to be pleaded for. He endeavours very civilly to convince me of the 'contrary, and in this cafe only falls out with me where we totally agreed.

Bowyer's Conjectures. Tranflated and augmented by F, C. F. Schultz. The first Pari. 344. pages, Svp.

"This is the first part of a tranflation of Mr. Bowyer's collection, which I have reviewed already. I fhall not now, therefore, fay any thing about the original. The tranflation is made exactly after the

plan

plan which I propofed in my former Review. The fupplements of Bowyer are entered into the book, and feveral additions made, particularly out of Heumann's and Semler's writings, which I mentioned for this purpose. Profeffor Schultz has even done what I forgot to propofe; he has corrected many of Bowyer's quotations and extracts. Thefe improvements and additions of Profeffor Schultz I will now speak of.

"It is very eafy, to diftinguish them from Bowyer's collection, as they are included in a bracket.-But is the work now compleat? Is there nothing more left for a future collector?-Not even fo much as Bowyer and Schultz have already collected -This is, perhaps, the question of every connoiffeur; a question which I have already anfwered in my former Review, faying there, that a work of this kind cannot be compleated but in a long tract of time. And, therefore, even in this tranflation many conjectures are wanting. Of all those which I had added myself to the first edition, I find but two or three in the additions of Profeffor Schultz. Even the conjecture of Reuchlin, which I mentioned in my former Review, is wanting. And this conjecture is, however, fo very interefting for us, fhewing, that even the tranflation established by our church, has taken the liberty to change the text after critical conjectures.-But Profeffor Schultz has done more than could reasonably be expected in the short time between the publication of Mr, Bowyer's collection and his tranflation of it. He has, indeed, exceeded my expectation; which was, however, not difhonourable for him, and he deserves thanks for his application from every body who makes ufe of his book.-Among the additions I find feveral which are not properly placed here, being not true conjectures, but various readings from the fathers, or old verfions; for inft. Matth. xj. 16. from Ireneus et v. 16, 17. from Origen. But too much will always be more agreeable to the reader, than too little.

"It is very well done by Profeffor Schultz, that he has added in fome places the whole words of the author of a conjecture; that he has added them in Latin, if they are written in Latin. Thus he deals particularly with Dr. Semler's conjectures; for it is likely, as he obferves, to make Semler fay more or less even in the most faithful translation, than he perhaps intended.

Very feldom and very circumfpectly Profeffor Schultz gives his opinion about the collected conjectures. The moit remarkable inftance of it is the opinion about the paltry conjecture of Dr. Bahrdt, John i. 1. a conjecture fhewing only the will to remove "the word was God" from the Bible. I own freely, that I never faw a more poor and pitiful conjecture in my life, than this of Bahrdt. He and Samuel Orell had the fame intention; they differed only in the manner of purfuing it.-Matth. xxiii. 33. I expected the remark that "the Son of Jojada" is not only a conjecture, having been in the Hebrew Gofpel of the Nazareans.-Matth. xxviii. 9. I diffent from Profeffor Schultz. The words quoted by St. Matthew, are fo widely different from the Hebrew text, Zach. xi. 12, 13. that we cannot rea fonably alter the text to make it a quotation of Zacharias'; especially fince fuch a fragment of Jeremiah is found. (See No 66 of my

Rev.)

Rev.) It is more poffible by Jeremiah, than by any other prophet, that fomething was formerly in his prophecies, which we want now. If we only remember the tranfpofition of his chapters in the 20th verfion; the addition of Apocryphical book of Baruch; and the quite arbitrary order of his chapters: how can we think it to be impoffble that fomething fhould be loft, and that St. Matthew read perhaps more in him than we do?

"Profeffor Schultz makes the remark in the preface, and wonders, that it has not been made before; that one book of the New Teftament is more correctly copied than another. This remark is fcarce, but certainly made before. Only I do not find that the Acts are copied fo incorrectly, and want fo much, conjectures. Perhaps the printed text of them is bad in fome places, because the hiftory of St. Paul's converfion, told thrice, has been interpolated in one place from the other. But there we do not want conjectures, but only to look into the manufcripts. The Gospel of St. Luke and the Second Epiftie to the Corinthians, feem rather to be carelefly copied; and I have often owned in my lectures, that I could not give any fenfe to fome places of them without conjectures; or that I feared the transcriber might have left out fomething. For inft, after Luke xxiv. 12.

"The first part of the tranflation, now published, contains the four Gofpels and the Acts. The fecond, I fuppofe, will foon follow."

FOREIGN CATALOGUE,

Effays de Jean Rey, Doleur en Medecine, fur la Recherche de la caufa pour laquelle l'Eftain et le Plomb augmentent du poids quand on les calcine, &c.-Or Effays, by John Rey, M.D. on the Investigation of the Caufe why Lead and Pewter increase in weight by Calcination. Svo. Paris.

It appears from thefe effays, which are not new productions, but tracts of near a hundred and fifty years ftanding, that the chemical experiments and difcoveries, which have latey, made fo much noife in England and France, were long fince made and exhibited by a provincial phyfician of Perigord. It is true that the main object of thefe effays, when firft published, was to account for the additional weight of metals by their paffing through the fire. The fact was known to Boyle and others, who imputed it to the weight deduced from heat; as Buffon hath done long fince, imputing gravity to fire. Dr. Rey, however, fo long ago as the year 1630, attributes fuch additional weight to the condensed, or fixed, air; which attaches itself to the calcined fubftance, and that in proportion

to

to the divifion of its parts. It is farther remarkable, that, in a final tract annexed to thefe effays, the prefent Editor gives us an account of a method, ufed upwards of fifty years ago, to pour fixed air out of one veffel into another; which is the very fame made ufe of by Dr. Priestley, Lavoifier, and other modern experimentalifts.-A confiderable part of the volume contains the learned correfpondence that paffed between the author, Dr. Rey, and the celebrated Father Merfenne.

Oeuvres du R. B. de la Barthonye.-Or, The Works of Father de la Barthonye, of the Order of Preaching Friars. Writ ten in Defence of the Chriftian Religion against Infidels and Jews. 3 vol. 12mo. Paris.

It is to this ecclefiaftic that has been imputed the converfion of the celebrated M. Bouguer; who had entertained his doubts concerning the divine authority of Chriftianity: That Father Berthonye is an able cafuift, and powerful preacher, is not to be denied. We have fo many much better argumentative tracts, however, on this fubject, in our language, that an English reader, ever fo little verfed in religious controverfy, will meet with but little information or edification in perufing thefe admired volumes.

Memoires pour fervir à l'Histoire de Louis Dauphin de France, c. -Or, Materials for the Hiftory of the late Dauphin of France; who died at Fontainbleau, the 20th of Dec. 1765. 2 vol. 12mo. Paris.

Thefe materials feem to be of unquestionable authenticity; having been communicated to the memorialift by the late Dauphinefs. To thefe memoirs are alfo added a treatife on the knowledge of mankind, written by the command of the Dauphin, in the year 1758. of which tract, it being feparately published, we may speak hereafter.

VOL. VI.

3 R

Vie