The object of the fection is to fhew the coincidence of the accounts delivered in the New Teftament, with the hiftory of the times to which those accounts relate; and the part of St. Paul's conduct to which we allude, is the appearance which he made before Ananias and the council in Jerufalem. Here, as cur author obferves, the learned have met with confiderable difficulties.

"1. Who this Ananias was? a question which Krebs has explained in his remarks taken from Jofephus, having fhewn him to be the fon of Nebedeni. 2, How can it be reconciled with Chronology that Ananias was called at that time High Prieft, when it is certain from Jofephus, that the time of his holding that office was much earlier. 3. How it comes to pals that St. Paul fays, I wist not, brethren, that he was the High Priest; fince the external marks of office must have determined whether he were or not: a jelt would have ill fuited the gravity of a tribunal, and a falfehood ftill lefs the character of St. Paul.

"On all these obfcurities is thrown the fulleft light, as foon as we cxamine the fpecial hiftory of that period.-Ananias, the fon of Nebedeni, was High Priest at the time that Helena, queen of Adiabene, fupplied the Jews with corn from Egypt, during the famine which took place in the fourth year of Claudius, mentioned in the eleventh chapter of the Acts. St. Paul, therefore, who took a journey to Jerufalem at that period, could not have been ignorant of the elevation of Ananias to that dignity. Soon after the holding of the first council, as it is called, at Jerufalem, Ananias was difpoffeffed of his office, and fent prifoner to Rome, whence he was afterwards released, and returned to Jerufalem.-In the mean time, Jonathan, though we are not acquainted with the circumftances of his elevation, had been raifed to the fupreme dignity in the Jewish church. Between the death of Jonathan, who was murdered by order of Felix, and the High Priesthood of Ifmael, who was invested with that office by Agrippa, elapfed an interval, in which this dignity continued vacant. Now it happened precifely in this interval that St. Paul was apprehended in Jerufalem: and the Sanhedrim being deftitute of a prefident, he (Ananias) undertook, of his own authority, the discharge of that office, which he executed with the greatest tyranny. It is poffible, therefore, that St. Paul, who had been only a few days in Jerufalem, might be ignorant that Ananias, who had been difpoffelled of the Priesthood, had taken upon him/elf a truft to which he was not entitled; he might, therefore, very naturally exclaim, I wist not, brethren, that he was the High Priest! Admitting him, on the other hand, to have been acquainted with the fact, the expreffion must be confidered, as an indirect reproof, and a tacit refusal to recognize ufurped authority." (PP. 51—53.)

This detail, which our author fupports by direct references to Jofephus, not only throws the cleareft light on a paffage which has hitherto been involved in obfcurity, but alfo fhews that the whole hiftory of St. Paul's imprisonment; the confpiracy of the fifty Jews, with the confent of the Sanhedrim; and their petition to Feftus to fend him from Cæfarea to Jerufalem, are facts which correfpond to the hiftory of the times.

In the twelfth fection the author removes the objections which have been fometimes made to the authenticity of the New Teftament

from

from the contradictions real or apparent between the hiftorical parts of it and the accounts of profane authors. Wherever the evangelifts really differ from Jofephus and other writers, he proves, in the most fatisfactory manner, that, independent of infpiration, which in the prefent inquiry he properly overlooks, the fulleft credit is due to the former authors; that they had the beft means of information, as well as the smallest inducement to deviate from the truth; and that of the contradictions, which at first fight appear real, foine are only apparent.

In proving the authenticity of the New Teftament, Michaelis, like Lardner, makes no ufe of the teftimony of fpurious writings. Hence, he refers not to the Canons called Apoftolical, though in one of them we have a catalogue of the books of the Old Teftament as they are received by proteftants, and of the New, with the exception of the Apocalypfe, which alone is omitted. We readily admit that he has completely proved the authenticity of the books called Homologoumena, without calling in the aid of writings which are in any fenfe fpurious; but the Canons, to which we allude, though neither dictated by the apoftles, nor written by St. Clement, are entitled to a degree of refpect, to which no work forged in the name of an individual can justly lay claim. They are indifputably of high antiquity; for they are referred to as antient ecclefiaftical canons by Athanafius, Bafil the Great, and the council of Nice. They feem to have been compiled by feveral fynods in the third century, and collected, not all at once, but gradually, as they were enacted; and it is certain that they formed the rule of difcipline for the eastern part of the primitive Church. They afford, therefore, an illuftrious proof of the fense of that Church refpecting the authenticity of the books attributed to Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Paul, Peter, and James; for though the canon mentions the Apoftolical Conftitutions, attributing them to Clement, it is obvious from the manner in which that work is introduced, that a distinction was made between it and the canonical writings. Indeed it appears evident to us that the whole claufe relating to Clement and the Conflitutions, has, at fome period fubfequent to the council of Laodicea, (anno 367,) been tagged to the Canon by fome unfkilful hand*; for the Laodicean Canon, which enumerates

the

μου

-

* The learned and primitive Bishop Beveridge thinks otherwife. The books of the New Teftament are, in the canon, enumerated thus; "The four golpels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John; fourteen epiftles of Paul; two of Peter; three of John; one of James; one of Jude; two epiftles of Clement; and the Constitutions for you bithops, published by meClement, in eight books, which are not to be divulged to all, becaule of the mystical things contained in it; and the acts of us the apottles." The bishop infers from the infertion of the words, that the collector of thefe canons, and the publisher of the constitutions neither was, nor pretended to be the Clement whofe two epiftles are mentioned after the epiftle of

Jude:

the facred books, feems to be a mere tranfcript of the apoftolical canon; and in it no mention is made either of Clement's Epifties or of the Conftitutions.

OF

(To be continued.)

Pinkerton's Modern Geography.

(Continued from Vol. XVII. p. 386.)

F a work comprehending fo immenfe a mass of multifarious information, it is evident that any account which we can give must be very circumfcribed and partial. A detailed analysis of it is plainly impoffible. We can, therefore, characterife it only in general terms, and, by producing fome fpecimens, enable our readers to eftimate for themselves, the kind and degree of inftruction and amufement which it is calculated to afford. Of the plan we have been at confiderable pains to exhibit a pretty full and correct idea; and of the execution we cannot but fpeak, on the whole, in the language of the moft decided approbation. Nor has our opinion been formed on a hafty and inattentive, but on a cool, deliberate, and, in many inftances, repeated, perufal. We therefore recommend this fyftem to the public, with the utmoft confidence, as a capital production, with which there is nothing in the English language that deferves at all to be compared. It is a monument undoubtedly of fingular industry, of extenfive knowledge, and of difcriminating judgment. One eminent advantage the reader will find in it, which he will find in no preceding fyftem; and that is the fcrupulous punctuality with which the author has conftantly quoted his authorities. This, it will univerfally be acknowledged, is an improvement of the highest magnitude, which, while it places, in the most confpicuous light, the patient refearch and candid good faith of the writer, is productive of many defirable confequences to the reader. It not only infpires him with rational truft in the capacity and fidelity of his inftructor, but by indicating the proper fources of information, furnishes him, in any cafe of difficulty or doubt, with the readieft means of deciding for himself.

Our first extracts from Mr. P.'s book fhall be his sketches of English and of French manners, which, we think, are well drawn, and likely to prove acceptable to the generality of our readers.

"The English are generally esteemed to exceed in the ufe of animal food; but, after the recent importations of French emigrants of all claffes, this pofition begins to be doubted. If ftomachic difeales be really more

Jude: and he offers fome plaufible arguments in fupport of his opinion that the Constitutions were pubinhed, and the Apoftolical Canons collected by Clement of Alexandria. It appears to us, however, that he must be mil taken; for Clement of Alexandria could not have called-the acts of the Apos είες οι πράξεις ήμων των αποστόλων.

frequent

frequent than in other countries, they may more juftly be afcribed to our potations of heavy malt liquor, which defervedly ftrike foreigners as a fingularity in English diet. Even our lighteft liquors of that fort have not efcaped their remark; for a late French traveller has obferved, that the English commonly drink at their meals a fort of medical ptifan, which they call small beer. Our ancestors prided themselves in the variety and richnets of their ales; and old writers enumerate many forts, as Cock, Stepney, Stitchback, Hull, Derby, Northdown, Nottingham, Sandback, Betony, Scurvy-grafs, Sage-ale, College-ale, China-ale, Butler's-ale, &c.; nor even at prefent do we refufe praife to the various qualities of our Burton, Dorchefter, Taunton, Scottish, and other ales. But the most peculiar malt beverage is porter, which ought to be folely compofed of brown or high-dried malt, hops, liquorice, and fugar, but is fometimes debased by other ingredients: that of London is particularly famous, and is an article of exportation, being esteemed a luxury on the banks of the Delaware, and [of] the Ganges. Punch was another national liquor, compofed of fpirits, water, acids, and fugar, but its use is now in the decline, though the late Dr. Cullen efteemed it a falutary potation in a moift and variable climate. The prodigious confumption of tea is another peculiar feature, the use of that plant being rare in other European countries; to phlegmatic conftitutions it may be beneficial, but, among the common claffes, its enervating powers are often attempted to be corrected by the ufe of fpirituous liquors. The latter' bane has been long known in Ruffia, and other northern kingdoms, but in the milder climes of Great Britain and Ireland, is destructive of the health and morals of the people. The legislature has been often forced to interpofe to prevent the growth of drunkenness, wretchednefs, and vice; and it is to be wished that a late committee of the House of Commons had fanctioned a motion that was made to reftrict fpirituous liquors to their ancient boundaries, the fhops of the chymifts.

"The fimplicity of the English cookery strikes foreigners as much as that of the drefs, which, even among the great, is very plain, except on the days of court-gala. A Frenchman drinks his wine during dinner; but the Pate Mr. Gibbon has remarked, that the luxury of a daily table in England permits a gentleman to taste half a dozen forts of wine during dinner, and to drink his bottle of claret afterwards. The red wine of Portugal is, however, a greater favourite than that of France, as its aftringent and antifeptic. qualities are found highly falutary in a moist climate. A late French traveller (St. Fond) has remarked, that the English know not the proper use of coffee, but will swallow feveral cups of a brown water, instead of one cup of the real ftrong coffee drunk in other countries.

"The houses in England are peculiarly commodious, neat, and cleanly; and domeftic architecture feems here arrived at its greatest perfection. The drefs, as has been before obferved, is rather plain and neat, than splendid; a praise which alfo applies to that of the ladies, who have now abandoned the tight form, fo prejudicial to health, and have allumed much of the Grecian eafe and elegance.

"The amufements of the theatre and of the field, and various games of fkill or [of] chance, are common to moft nations. The baiting of bulls and bears is, it is believed, nearly discontinued. One of the moft peculiar amusements of the common people is the ringing of long peals with many changes, which deafen thofe who are fo unhappy as to live in the neighbourhood of the church. (Vol. i. Pp. 63, 64.)

The

The following picture of the French character is painted with a masterly pencil:

"The manners and customs of the French have been so often delineated, that the theme has become trivial and familiar. The moft pleafing parts of the portrait are vivacity, gaiety, politeness, a fingular difpofition towards focial enjoyments, and that savoir vivre which enables the adept to dispose of his occupations and pleasures in an agreeable fucceffion, free from liftle/snefs or fatigue. In general, Frenchmen regard care as a mortal poifon, and ftudy, if poffible, to avoid its moft diftant approach. On the other hand, ancient and recent events confpire to fix a fanguinary stain on the national character, which one would little expect amid fo much gaiety and feeming benevolence. The caufes of this incongruity might afford an ample fubject for philofophical inquiry. Even the violent changes which have taken place feem to have little affected their characteristic gaiety, and Paris continues to be one of the happiest cities in the world: while the fcreams of massacre refounded in fome parts of the city, in others the theatres were crowded, and nothing was heard but founds of pleasure.

"The ancient and rooted enmity between France and England nourished many prejudices against the French character, which have fince disappeared in the reports of more candid authors. Yet, with travellers accustomed to the elegance of English life, many of the French manners and customs cannot be reconciled to ideas of phyfical purity; and the example of the perfonal and domeftic cleanliness of the English muft ftill be recommended to imitation. The laws and decencies of marriage are alfo frequently facrificed; and the loofenefs of the French morals, in regard to the fex, has become proverbial. A republican form of government has not fuperinduced republican manners, nor has the liberty of divorce proved any bond of chaftity. As every thing continues to be ruled by fashion, it is not unreasonable to hope that even virtue may become faflionable.

"While fome phyficians have attempted to account for English melancholy from the quantities confumed of animal food, it appears, on the contrary, that a Frenchman will confume as much as two Englishmen, difguifed, indeed, and modified, fo as to beguile and ftimulate the appetite to larger indulgence. In the difference of climate, therefore, and in the ufe of light wines, muft be fought the chief phyfical caufes of this difcrepancy. The houses of the French often difplay a ftrange mixture of magnificence and naftiness; and while even a cottage in England will fhew attention to the comforts, conveniencies, feelings, and infirmities of human nature, in France the nose may be affailed, while the eyes are enraptured. France has long afforded models of drefs to all Europe; nor have the fashions of Paris yet totally lost their fantastic authority. In the frequent and ridiculous allufions to the ancient republics, none of which bore the moft diftant resemblance of modern France, it was natural that the Grecian and Roman drefs fhould afford models of imitation, and an infallible confequence that the drefs would become more elegant. In a country where life itself is an

*It is here proper to obferve that Mr. P. confiders the prefent government of France as republican in form only: for he elsewhere describes it as it really is, A MILITARY DESPOTISM, THE DESPOTISM OF FREEDOM." (p. 254, and 291.)

amufement,