of their existence; or to be altogether at a lofs how to fteer for them if they were fought after; and, fo far as yet appears, our knowledge of them is not much enlarged by the prefent publication. For the meer purpose of exciting the attention of the nation toward establishing an intercourfe with those remote regions, we remain ftill of opinion, with or without the leave of Meffrs. Dalrymple and Des Broffes, that one clear well connected memoir, deduced from the materials in Mr. D.'s cuftody, would ftand a good chance of commanding more regard, than a difplay of the detached papers themfelves; which require a zeal equal to that of the Compiler to collate with each other. In this view we confider the chart of the South Sea, given in this volume, and the annexed paper containing the data on which it was formed, as by much the most valuable part of it; while it ftill remains for future trials to determine what that value may be.

Mr. Dalrymple's plan of this work, may be conceived by. the following extracts from his preface :

My plan originally was to publish the work in two parts: Part I. An Hiftorical Collection of the feveral voyages to the South Pacific Ocean, in a chronological feries.

Part II. Sect. 1. Geographical Defcription of the places. hitherto difcovered between America and Papua, on the South of the equator, comprehending,

1. Defcription of the country and anchorage.

2. Complexion, drefs, and manners of the Indians.

3. Signs of friendship amongst them.

C 4. Habitations.

" 5. Embarkations.

• 6. Arms.

6 7. Manufactures, arts, and commerce.

8. Provifions and refreshments.

Sect. 2. Examination into the conduct of the difcoverers in the tracts they pursued.

And having thus recapitulated every thing that had been done

Sect. 3. Investigation of what may be farther expected in this quarter from the analogy of nature, as well as from the deduction of past discoveries.

Sect. 4. To point out the moft eligible measures for fucceeding on fuch an undertaking, as well in the discovery, as intercourse; at the fame time examining the conduct of past discoverers to the natives, at the feveral places they vifited.

Sect. 5, and lastly, It was propofed to examine into the equipment proper for this fervice, and into the conduct adapted to the nature of difcovery voyages.

• Motives,

• Motives, which it is unnecessary to lay before the public, induced me to print the tract abovementioned, in a very imperfect state; it is not only deficient in the arrangement, but as every thing not immediately relative to a Southern Continent was omitted, nothing is inferted to the weftward of the interfection of Schouten's track by that of Tafman. The first fection, therefore, was very much curtailed; and as I found the opinions of other men very different from mine, on the two last heads, I thought it would have too much appearance of prefumption to lay down rules for any conduct but my own.'

I fhall not at prefent publifh the fecond part, containing the Geographical Defcription, &c. This must be much enlarged, when the voyages lately made by the English and French are communicated to the world; I fhall wait till then' before I go any farther than the Hiftorical Collection. So that the purchasers of this tract are to expect only the voyages of Schouten and Le Maire, of Tasman and of Roggewein.-These voyages will, I conjecture, be at leaft as much as what is now published.

I have prefixed to this Hiftorical Collection fome papers, which appeared to me not foreign to the fubject; and fome of them indeed absolutely requifite to make the work intelligible. These papers are,

I. Data, on which the chart of the South Pacific Ocean was conftructed.'

2. An Effay on the Salomon islands: this is a very dry difquifition, which, perhaps, few men will have patience to confider with the attention neceffary to make it intelligible; however, future difcoveries may fhew, that New Britain is not one, but many islands; and then every body will fee, that the old maps, which fo defcribed them, were not merely conjec

tural.

3. A lift of Authors confulted in this work, as well as of fome whofe publications or relations I have not been able to obtain.'

I have added two papers of my own; one of them has been already published in the Philofophical Tranfactions; and from thence in fome of the periodical collections; but as it will explain the nature of many iflands mentioned in this Collection, I thought it was not improper to infert it here.

• The other is an account of the pearl fishery, and some natural curiofities at Sooloo; what is faid of the pearl fishery may be of ufe in explaining part of Quiros's Memorial; but my chief motive for printing these remarks was, that they might be preferved; the laft paper did not appear to me fufficiently correct for the Philofophical Tranfactions, at the fame

time, if it was to be printed, I did not chufe to let it be altered to other men's ideas or opinions: errors may lead to truth, but when all mens notions are ground in one mill, they serve no purpose of investigation or discovery.'

For the honour of our nation, and to reward this ingenious traveller, for his induftry in grinding and fifting the uncertain obfervations and notions of former voyagers in his mill, we heartily wish he had been engaged in an undertaking for which his actual experience fo amply qualifies him.

In the Appendix to the laft volume of the Review, p. 519, may be seen an account of fome memoirs of the Count de Redern, relating to the Antarctic continent, published in the Hiftory of the Royal Academy of Sciences at Berlin, which me moirs, if Mr. D. has not feen, he may be gratified by confulting.

N.

ART. IX. A free Enquiry into the Authenticity of the first and Second Chapters of St. Matthew's Gospel. 8vo. 2s. 6d. White, &c. 1771.

E have heretofore had occafion to mention, with ap

WE plaufe, the manly and liberal turn of fentiment which

is vifible in feveral of the clergy; their difpofition to follow truth, wherever it leads them; and their readiness, in particular, to point out the errors and interpolations that have crept into the facred writings. Few of our Readers can be ignorant how freely Dr. Kennicott has expofed the corrupted state of the commonly received Hebrew text of the Old Teftament, and that Dr. Owen has done the fame with regard to the Septuagint verfion. Nor have thefe learned gentlemen done injury to the cause of revelation, by laying open the alterations which, either through inadvertence or defign, have been made in the fcriptures; but have taken the very method that was neceffary to exhibit them in their genuine purity, beauty,

and luftre.

Who or what the Author of the prefent Enquiry is, does not appear upon the face of the publication; but it is probable that he is a clergyman of fome denomination or other. Be that, however, as it may, he profeffes himself a fincere believer in Christianity, and feems evidently to have an intention of doing honour to the Gospel, in what he has now advanced. Many perfons will confider his attempt as a bold one; and, indeed, by calling in queftion the authenticity, not merely of here and there a detached paffage, but of two whole chapters of the New Teftament, he has gone much farther than others, in general, have proceeded Nevertheless, he ought not to be haftily condemned on this account. What he hath said is en

titled to a patient hearing, as every judicious friend to revelation will be affured that the interests of truth cannot suffer from the fullest and most open discussion of any fubject.

Our learned Enquirer fets out with fome obfervations on the canon of the New Teftament, and mentions a variety of circumftances which render it highly incredible that the facred books can have fuffered any fuch alterations or corruptions as affect their general authenticity.

It is, however, natural to fuppofe, that, in the course of feventeen hundred years, they must have been injured, to a certain degree, either through defign or negligence; and this, he fays, is the truth; for it is allowed, that there are feveral additions and interpolations in the facred volume, which, though they do not weaken the foundation of any doctrine, very often diurb the fenfe. Having produced three or four inftances, which the Author imagines to be of this kind, he goes on to make fome farther observations on the canon of the New Tefament, and on the characters of the ancient fathers from whom we have received it. Thefe obfervations are followed by an account of the Nazarenes, Ebionites, Cerinthians, and Carpocratians; ancient Chriftian fects of whom it was neceffary to take notice, because they received a copy of St. Matthew's Gospel which had not the genealogy, er, indeed, by all that appears, either the first or fecond chapters.

The way being thus prepared for the principal subject, our Author enters more directly upon it, by fhewing that the genealogy was wanting in fome ancient copies of St. Matthew, and that this might probably be the cafe with regard to the whole of the two firft chapters. It appears, from the teftimony of Epiphanius, that the Nazarenes, Ebionites, Cerinthians, Carpocratians, and others, ufed a Gospel which began at what is now called the third chapter, and was written in Hebrew or Syro-chaldaic. Mr. Stephen Nye, formerly, and Dr. Worthington, very lately, have fuppofed that St. Matthew publifhed different editions of his Gofpel, in different languages; each of them originals, and of equal authority. But it is juftly answered, that a double publication of the fame book is a thing never heard of, as to any book of either the Old Teftament or New, in all antiquity; and that this notion is, indeed, a modern thought, ftarted to remove certain difficulties with which men were preffed by the united teftimony of antiquity in favour of a Hebrew Gofpel by St. Matthew.

As the queftion, whether St. Matthew's Gospel was written in Hebrew or Greek, is of confiderable importance in the prefent enquiry, the teftimony of the fathers concerning it is particularly examined; and the refult of the examination is, that they all agree in affirming that St. Matthew wrote his Gofpel in He

brew,

brow, for the ufe of the believing Jews. And is not this, fays our Author, what might naturally be expected? for how common foever the ufe of the Greek language might be, yot there doubtlefs were many in Palefine unacquainted with it. The fame reafons, therefore, that induced our Saviour to preach in the Syro-chaldaic tongue-might alfo induce, at leaft, one of his difciples to publish a Gospel in the fame lanquage; namely, to inftruct and establish the poor and ignorant Jews who believed. One authentic Gofpel was fufficient to anfwer that purpose; but as the whole race of man were immediately concerned in the contents of the New Teftament, the other parts of it were publifhed in a language more univerfally known. Had Authors duly attended to this confideration, they would hardly have faid, that no reafon could be affigned why St. Matthew, more than any other Evangelift, fhould publish a Gofpel in Hebrew,'

The teftimony of the Nazarenes, Ebionites, and other fects, who were reputed heretical, being of fome weight with regard to the confirmation of our Enquirer's hypothefis, he endeavours to fhew that their evidence ought to be deemed credible and fufficient in points which do not concern their particular fentiments; and that they had neither any reafon, from the opinions entertained by them, to attempt expunging the first and fecond chapters of St. Matthew, nor would it have been in their power to effect it, if they had had fuch an inclination. In farther fupport of his fcheme, the learned Author alleges, that these two chapters are not referred to by the apoftolical fathers, or by others, for fifty years at least, perhaps for a hundred and fourteen years, after St. Matthew's Gospel was received by the Chriftian church. Some collateral arguments are added, from which we shall tranfcribe what is advanced concerning the abfolute filence of St. Luke, respecting the many remarkable events fuppofed to be related by St. Matthew.

St. Luke hath given a clear, confiftent, and natural account of the birth of Jefus, and of all the events which followed it, till Jofeph and Mary carried him home to Nazareth. But this whole account is totally different from that which is found in the two first chapters of St. Matthew. There is not the most diftant hint in St. Luke of the appearance of a ftar in the Eaft; of the vifit of the magi to Bethlehem; of the flight into Egypt; or of the flaughter of the infants. In fhort, the account given by St. Luke, and that which appears in thefe chapters, agree in no one circumftance but in Chrift's being born at Bethlehem of a virgin, and in his dwelling at Nazareth. It is very difficult to conceive that the perfon who fo particularly relates the appearance of angels to thepherds in the field, to declare the