portant facts in the gospel hiftory; and the reft will either follow of courfe, or their credibility may be fafely neglected.'

To this Harmony the author has prefixed a number of Critical Differtations,. On the Time of the Birth and Death of Chrift, on Daniel's Seventy Weeks, on the Length of the Reign of Xerxes, with an Extract on that Subject from Mr. Lauchlan Taylor's Effay on the Revelation, on the Duration of Chrift's Ministry, on the Order of the principal Events in the Gospel History, &c.'

In his Obfervations on the Birth and Death of Chrift, for the former, he fixes on the year 7, before the commencement of the common Chriftian æra, or the year of the Julian period, 4707; and for the latter the year 29 of the vulgar computation, and of the J. P. 4742, in the confulfhip of the two Gemini. St Luke indeed fays, that when Chrift, was baptised, he was wos, about thirty years of age. This our author thinks is by no means a definite expreffion, and may well enough agree with his baptifm falling on the 28th year of the vulgar æra, as he would then be thirty-five. But the point, which. he has more particularly laboured to determine, is the duration of Chrift's miniftry.

Sir Ifaac Newton, in his Obfervations on Daniel, fays: the Chriftians who first began to enquire into these things, as Clemens Alexandrinus, Origen, Tertullian, Julius Africanus, Lactantius, Jerom, Auftin, Sulpicius Severus, Profper, &c. and as many as placed the death of Chrift in the 15th or 16th of Tiberius, make Chrift to have preached but one year, or at most but two. At length Eufebius difcovered four fucceffive paffovers in the gospel of John, and thereupon fet on foot an opinion, that he preached three years, and an half, and fo died in the 19th of Tiberius.'

This opinion is now generally prevalent, However, it appears, that Eufebius had a very different idea of the diftribution of the events in the gospel history from our modern harmonifts, He fays, Hift. xiii. 24, "It is evident, that all the acts of our Saviour related by Matthew, Mark, or Luke, are thofe that followed the imprisonment of John, and were comprized within the space of one year; and that John enlarged the history, by taking in the events, which preceded the imprisonment of the baptift,' Eufebius therefore throws that business into one year, which the generality of harmonists diftribute into two or three.

Yet notwithstanding the fentiments of the Chriftian fathers, cited by fir Ifaac Newton, and thofe of Juftin Martyr, Tatian, Ammonius, and others, fir Ifaac himself has extended the miniftry of Chrift fo as to comprehend in it five paffovers. And

when

when Mr. Mann modeftly propofed the original hypothefis of of one year, he surprised the whole Christian world; and very few, if any, adopted his opinion.

Our author briefly recites the evidence which the latter has produced, and then fubjoins the following additional arguments, in fupport of the notion, that Chrift preached only one year and a few months.

1. Some very fhort periods of our Lord's public miniftry appear, according to the accounts of all the evangelifts, to have been very full of bufinefs. He feems to have been almost inceffantly employed in teaching, in healing great numbers of difeafed perfons, and performing other miraculous works; and from the manner in which the evangelists describe his ufual way of life, it should feem that the greatest part of his time was thus fully employed. He continually went about doing good, making it his meat and bis drink to do the will of his heavenly Father.

If, now, our Lord had paffed three or four years in this manmer, and the twelve apoftles had also been teaching and working miracles in fix different places for the fpace of a year or more, in that fmall country, and the feventy alfo in thirtyfive places more, for the fame fpace of time, as is generally fuppofed; fuch a number of miracles would have been performed, as we cannot but think, muft have exceeded every proper purpose of them. Either there could have been no unbelievers left in Judea or, if the tendency of the miracles had been to exafperate, fuch a refentment would have been raised in the minds of the Jewish rulers, as, without a greater miracle than any of the reft, could not but have terminated in his death long before. For my own part, inftead of thinking a fingle year not to have been fufficient for the purpose of our Lord's miffion, I rather wonder, confidering in what manner he fpent his time, that the incredulity of the people could hold out, or that the malice of his enemies could be reftrained fo long as one year.

• Confidering the violent prejudices, that fuch a people as the Jews must have had against the pretenfion of a Meffiah, who made the appearance that Jefus did, one may indeed imagine, that the bulk, or the more depraved and worldly-minded of them might withstand the evidence of miracles performed in one year; but hardly any degree of incredulity can be supposed to have stood out against the thousands, and ten thousands of miracles, that must have been wrought upon the common hypothefis.

2 It is alfo more eafy to account for the prejudices of the apofiles, and their ignorance of the true nature of Chrift's kingdom, even at, and after our Lord's death, on the fuppofition that his ministry was of a hort, than that it was of a long

duration.

' 3. If

3. If our Lord really preached three or four years; and confequently if the evangelifts have fometimes paffed over all the events of whole years at a time, is it not furprising, that none of them fhould ever connect thofe very diftant parts of their narrative by fuch phrafes as the year following; after one, or after two years, &c. &? The feafons of the year are fometimes particularly diftinguished, and we find the exact number of days that intervened between two events carefully noted; but nothing that implies fuch chafms as are commonly fuppofed to be in the evangelical hiftory. Their ufual tranfition, after thefe things, or af terwards, cannot be conftrued to mean after a year or two.

4. If Jefus had been preaching and working miracles, both in Judea and in Galilee, almost a year before the death of John the Baptift, agreeably to the common hypothefis, Herod, who reigned in Galilee, could not but have heard of him; and therefore could not but have known that he was not John that was rifen from the dead, as in Matt. xiv. f. Whereas, if we fuppofe that Jefus had preached only a few weeks before the death of John, we may imagine, that, engaged as Herod was in a multiplicity of bufinefs and pleafure, he might not have heard of him till that time; and therefore might, with fome plausibility, conjecture, as he did, that he was John rifen from the dead. This argument appears to me to be almoft conclufive against the common bypothefis.

5. All our Lord's journies that the evangelifts give us any account of, agree in fo many circumftances, that they are evidently the fame, and are fuppofed to be fo by all harmonists. Now fince thefe four hiftorians have felected very different events in our Saviour's life, is it not furprifing, that all his journies to Jerufalem make no more than four; three of which, at least, every pious Jew was obliged to make in the compafs of every year? Our Lord must have made that journey three or four times as often, in three or four years, and it may well be fuppofed that fomething remarkable must have happened in feveral of them, befides those four. John, who fupplies many of the deficiencies of the other evangelifts, only makes up the number of them to four. He fupplies many new difcourfes, and new incidents, but no more journies to Jerufalem than thofe above mentioned.

If we read the hiftory of the evangelifts with attention, we fhall find feveral fmall periods of time, as was obferved before, exceedingly crouded with bufinefs, particularly a week or two after his appearance in Galilee, after the first passover, and a week before his death. If only a month or two of the year were fpent in this manner, all the bufinefs that is recorded in all the evangelifts might have been tranfacted in it; fo that, even upon this hypothefis, we muft fuppofe great omiffions in our Lord's hiftory, according to the teftimony of John.

It may be objected to this hypothefis, that in John vi. 4. we read, the paffover, a feast of the Jews, was nigh,' But it VOL. XLIV. Dec. 1777.

Ff

is

is obferved, that John cannot be fuppofed to have expreffed himself in this manner, because he had mentioned the paffover in ch. ii. and even related feveral of the events of it; and therefore could not imagine, that his readers would want an explanation of the term in that place. Ger. Voffius, therefore, and other critics, would read, "a feaft of the Jews was nigh," prefuming, that the word poover was firft added by fome perfon or other, as a conjectural explanation. The ancient fathers could never have fuppofed, as they did, that Chrift preached only one year, if this third paffover had been expressly mentioned in their copies of this gofpel. Irenæus, when he collected all the evidence he could against this opinion, which had been maintained by Valentinus, would not have omitted this paffage, if waoxa had exifted in his copy. Vide 1. ii. c. 39. And, if Eufebius had ever seen this word, he could not have fuppofed, fays our author, that all the events mentioned by Matthew, Mark, and Luke were comprized within the space of one year.'.

The greatest objection, that can be made to this hypothefis, arifes from the fuppofed impoffibility of crowding the business of the evangelical hiftory into the compafs of a year, or a year and a few months. To answer this objection the more effectually, the author briefly recites every material circumstance in the life of Chrift, and gives us a computation of the time, which in his opinion, was neceffary for his travels, his preaching, and his continuance in different places. The refult of which is, that one year was abundantly fufficient for all the events recorded in the evangelical hiftory.'

There are many valuable obfervations in this work, which the limits of our Review oblige us to omit. Dr. Priestley is an inge- nious writer; and as he is not reftrained by any human formularies, he gives free fcope to his pen, and attacks whatever notion he conceives to be erroneous, without fear or referve. This freedom of fpeculation has either directly or indirectly been of infinite fervice to Chriftianity; and therefore her judicious friends are never alarmed at the fight of a champion, who hakes the pillars of orthodoxy.

This Harmony is printed in Greek; but for the fake of common readers, the Obfervations, and the Harmony in Englifh, accompanied with illuftrations of difficult paffages, is fold without the original.

A Dictionary

A Dictionary Perfian, Arabic, and English; to which is prefixed a Differtation on the Languages, Literature, and Manners of Eastern Nations, by John Richardfon, Efq. F. S. A. of the MiddleTemple, and of Wadham College, Oxford. Folio. 51% 55% Murray.

THE real lovers of learning and philofophy must receive fincere pleasure from an attempt to trace literature to its fource, and to make the East as well as the West contribute her fhare to the general improvement. With peculiar fatisfaction we announce the appearance of a work which tends to promote this purpose; a work much defired, and long expected; the defign of which has been undertaken, abandoned, refumed, by men of equal industry and abilities; and which the unwearied labours of Mr. Richardfon have at length brought to a conclufion.

By a fatality which eludes explanation, the best and most useful dictionaries in almost every language, have been undertaken and executed by private perfons, unaided by the protec tion of government, or the affiftance of public focieties. The French Dictionary of Furetiere is by many preferred to that of the Academy: the laborious and fuccefsful exertions of Dr. Johnfon are well known; and there is little doubt that pofterity will rank the prefent work with the approved productions of these celebrated writers.

When we confider the difficulties which Mr. Richardfon muft have struggled with in carrying on this extenfive undertaking -the vast variety of materials which it was neceffary to collect, and most of which lay beyond the reach of ordinary research: -the expensive preparation of types in alphabets fo complicated and perplexing-the neceffity of writing with his own hand a work of near three hundred fheets, as well as the painful task of correcting the errors of the prefs-thefe, though trifling circumstances, when compared with the perfevering and intenfe application of mind neceffary in the judicious arrangement of the whole performance, yet appear fufficient to have deterred. a man, poffeffed of no fmall degree of enterprize, from so bold and arduous a defign. As to the collecting and difpofing of the Dictionary itself, it is what few men of letters in this, perbaps in any other country, could have performed. Many gentlemen from India are acquainted with the Perfian; and many belonging to the univerfities are learned in the Arabic; but few poffefs an extenfive and critical knowledge of both lan* A few copies of the Differtation are printed in octavo, at 3 s. 6 d. each.

Ff2

guages,