We hope our review of this firft effay will be confidered as a fufficient fpecimen of the whole performance. We have purpofely omitted entering into an analysis of the fecond, not as inferior in merit to the firft, but because it would have tref paffed on the limits of our review; and because the subject, however curious and useful in itself, can only prove interesting to a very few of our readers; nor do we apprehend that the fulleft review would fufficiently fatisfy thofe for whofe perufal thefe effays are intended.

VI. A Large Collection of Ancient Jewish and Heathen Teftimonies to the Truth of the Chriftian Religion, with Notes and Obfervations. Containing the Teftimonies of Heathen Writers of the Third Century, and to the Converfion of Conftantin, the firft Christian Emperour. Vol. III. By Nathaniel Lardner, D. D. 4to. Pr. 10s. 6d. Buckland.

HIS learned and laborious compiler having, in two preceding volumes, collected the teftimonies of all the Jewish and heathen writers of the first and second century, concerning the chriftian religion, now proceeds, to give an account of all the heathen authors who have taken notice of the chriftians, from the beginning of the third century, to the conversion of Conftantine, the first christian emperor.

As this collection contains every imperial edict, every infcrip. tion, and every obfervation, which are to be found in pagan au thors, relative to chriftianity, it exhibits a view of our religion, according to the reprefentation of its adverfaries, in its primæ val ftate.

In this volume we have an account of all the perfecutions endured by the chriftians, from the year 202, when the emperor Severus published his edict against them, to the year 312, or 313, when Conftantine and Licinius put an end to the perfecution begun by Dioclefian.

The first writer of the third century, mentioned in this col lection, is Diogenes Laërtius. By a paragraph in this author, Dr. Lardner attempts to illuftrate the infcription of the altar To the unknown God, which St. Paul obferved at Athens.

2

In the life of Epimenides, Laërtius informs us, that the Athenians, by the direction of an oracle, fent for Epimenides to purify, or expiate their city, when they were afflicted with a peftilence. Epimenides, when he came to Athens, took feveral fheep, fome black, fome white, and then let them go, where they would, directing those who followed them, when any one fould lie down, to facrifice it τω προσήκοντι Θέω. VOL. XXI. June, 1766.

Ee

In

In the Latin verfion these words are rendered, To the God next the place. Dr. Drake, in a Latin fermon, publifhed at Cambridge, in 1724, tranflates them, To the proper God, to whom that affair belonged; to him, whoever he was, who should remove the inflicted peftilence.

Dr. Doddridge, reciting this paragraph in his notes upon A&s xvii. unde: ftands the direction to be, when the sheep lay down, to facrifice them to the God, near whofe temple or altar they then were.

Our author propofes the following interpretation. • Epimenides took with him up to the Areopagus, several sheep, fome black, fome white. And when he let them go, he directed, that each one, when it lay down, hould be facrificed to the God, to which it appertained, or belonged, ut eam mactarent Deo, ad quem pertineret. Black facrifices were offered to fome gods, white to others. Epimenides knew not, by what god the peftilence had been inflicted upon the Athenians. When he was defired to purify the city, in order to its deliverance; he chofe out facrifices of different kinds, black sheep, and white sheep, and led them up to the Areopagus! And from that place, the citadel, or the feat of the fenate, and of the court of judicature, he fent out the fheep, as in the name of the whole city and commonwealth, to be facrificed, in order to appease the offended deity, whoever he was. A fheep with a black fleece, when it lay down, was to be offered to a deity, who delighted in fuch facrifices. A fleep with a white fleece was to be offered to a deity, to whom white facrifices were acceptable. By this means he hoped to ingratiate the offended deity, whoever he was.'

This interpretation fuppofes, that each black and white sheep appertained to one particular deity; which is abfurd. The tranllation of Dr. Drake is the only account of this affair, which fuggefts any reafon for an altar being infcribed to an unknown God.

It follows in Laërtius. "And fo the plague ceased. Hence it has come to pafs, that to this prefent time may be found in the boroughs of the Athenians, anonymous altars, a memorial of the expiation then made."

Suppofing these altars were erected in the time of Epimenides, they must have ftood, when St. Paul was at Athens, about 650 years; and 800, when Diogenes Laërtius wrote; which is hardly credible.

M. Le Clerc fays, that though the infcription was in the plu ral number, St. Paul was in the right to allege it in the fingu. lar number. But it is not to be fuppofed that St. Paul, in a public court, would allege an infcription which had no exift

ence.

1

ence.

What our author fays is confirmed by feveral writers, that the infcription was in the fingular number, as St. Paul quotes it. But as there were feveral altars at Athens, or near it, afcribed to the unknown God, it was natural, he thinks, for Paufanias, and other writers, to call them altars of unknown gods.

In the twenty-fifth chapter we have the following account of Alexander Severus: This emperor, whofe reign began in the ycar 222, as we learn from Lampridius, one of the Auguftan writers, was favourable both to Jews and chriftians, and had a respect for Jefus Chrift. He had two private chapels, one more honourable than the other. In the first were placed the deified emperors, and also fome eminently good men, and among them Chrift, Abraham, and Orpheus. Some other things of a like kind may be feen in this chapter, which are of use to fhew, that the chriftians were then well known, and that their innocence, or freedom from licentious principles, and great crimes, was manifeft. This emperor, he obferves, deferves to be commended for his moderation, and the juftness of his fentiments.

In the twenty-fixth chapter the author cites and examines a paffage of Lactantius, in which we are informed, that the fa mous lawyer Domitius Ulpianus, about the year 222, in his book of the duty of a proconful, made a collection of all the edicts of former emperors against the chriftians.-This treatife of Ulpian is loft.

The twenty-feventh chapter contains the teftimony of Dion. Caffius. In this writer, Dr. Lardner obferves, we have a tef timony to that important event, the deftruction of Jerufalem, and the conqueft of Judea by Titus and Vefpafian. We have alfo a teftimony in the fame author of Domitian's perfecution, and Nerva's favourable regard for the chriftians.

The perfecution under Maximin the Thracian, and the character of the emperor Philip, are the subjects of the two following chapters. In the latter our author, in oppofition to Baronius, Huetius, and others, proves that Philip was not a chriftian.

In the thirtieth, thirty-firft, thirty-fecond, and thirty-third chapters he relates the perfecutions of Decius, Gallus, and Valerian; and examines an obfervation of Amelius, a Platonic philofopher, on the Gofpel of St. John.

In the thirty-fourth chapter he confiders the celebrated encomium which Longinus has bestowed on the Jewish legiflator; and fubjoins a remark, communicated by the ingenious Mr. James Merrick, on a fragment afcribed to that eminent critic, in which a teftimony is given to St. Paul's abilities as an orator. Eez

The

The clause, however, relating to the apostle is looked upon by Fabricius as a forgery, and our author feems to be of his opinion.

As the famous paffage in which Mofes is applauded, is abruptly introduced in the midst of a difcourfe on the writings of Homer, we have been fometimes inclined to fufpect its authenticity. But we shall not here contend for a notion which is probably groundlefs. We fhall leave the point to be difcuffed by any hypercritic who fhall think it worthy of a formal disqui

fition.

The teftimony of Numenius, a Pythagorean philofopher of Apamea, in Syria, is considered in the thirty-fifth chapter. The faying of this writer, What is Plato, but Mofes in Greek? is well known, and recorded in feveral ancient authors; but the time of Numenius is uncertain. Nor is it clear that he has at all referred to the affairs of chriftians, or their fcriptures.

We fhall give our readers the fubftance of the four subsequent 'chapters in the words of the author.

The emperor Aurelian reigned from 270 to 275. Flavius Vopifcus, one of the Auguftan writers, has preferved a part of a letter, written by him to the fenate, at the beginning of his reign, in which the chriftians are expressly mentioned. Which fhews, that the chriftians were then well known to the Roman emperors, and to the Roman senate, and to all men.

A like obfervation (if it is of any importance) may be made upon a ftory, told by Lampridius, concerning a design, which Heliogabalus had formed, of uniting the religion of the Jews, and the Samaritans, and the devotion of the chriftians in the worfhip of the god to whom he was priest.

In this period were feveral learned men, the chriftians, and the chriftian religion.

who wrote against One of whom is

Porphyrie. He was born about the year 233. We have placed him as flourifhing in the year 270. He was disciple of the celebrated Plotinus, and was himself a learned man, and a philofopher of the first rank. He published many books, some of which are still extant. His work against the chriftians confifted of fifteen books, and feems to have been prolix, and carefully ftudied, and filled with a great deal of learning, and the quotations of divers authors not now extant. Rufinus calls him a determined enemie of Chrift, and fays he did his utmost to overthrow the chriftian religion by his writings. His objections against christianity were in esteem with heathen people for a great while, as we learn from Auguftin, and others. And his memorie was in abhorrence with chriftians, for the bitterneffe, with which he had opposed them. His work was a violent attack upon our Scriptures, both of the Old and the New Teftament:

Teftament as we can perceive by the fragments of his work ftill remaining in Chriftian writers, who have quoted him. At the fame time they are a teftimonie to them. They bear witneffe to their antiquity, and to the great efteem, which they were then in with chriftians. And if his work were ftill exftant, it might be of farther ufe to us in that refpect, and upon fome other accounts. I have made a large collection of the remaining fragments of his work: to which I refer my readers, without adding any more obfervations here. But the work, called the Philofophie of Oracles, which has been quoted by fome, as his, I take to be a forgerie. And I have affigned my reafos at large for that opinion.

At the beginning of Diocletian's perfecution, about the year 303, another publifhed a work against the chriftians. He is mentioned by Lactantius. We do not know his name. But he likewife was by profeffion a philofopher. His work was writ in an infinuating manner, making fair pretences of good will to the chriftians, that he might recover them from errour, and deliver them from the fufferings, to which they were expofed by a worship contrarie to the laws. It feems to have been · a large volume. For it confifted of three books. Lactantius flights it. But this philofopher's objections may have been fufficient to affect many of the common people among the Gentiles. And if it were now exftant, it would be a great curiofity.

About the fame time another work was writ against the christians by Hierocles, a man of learning, and a person of authority and influence, as he was a magiftrate. It was in two books. Nor did he take upon him the character of an enemie to the chriftians. He aimed rather to be efteemed a kind and friendly counsellour and adviser. He was well acquainted with our fcriptures, and made many objections againft them thereby bearing teftimonie to their antiquity, and to the great refpest, which was fhewn to them by the chriftians. For he has referred to both parts of the New Teftament, the Gofpels and the Epiftles.

And by Diocletian's edit the chriftian feriptures were ordered to be burnt, when their temples were demolished. It was the first order of the kind. It fhews, that our fcriptures were then well known, and that the Gentile people were fenfble of their importance. Whether Hierocles was the adviser of

that order, we cannot fay.

• He did not deny the truth of our Saviour's miracles. But in order to weaken the argument, which the chriftians formed from them, in proof of our Saviour's divine authority and iniflion, he fet up Apollonius Tyanaeus, as a rival, or fuperio