you, if they had not written Lucian under the picture. I heartily with the Doctor better luck.

Luc. And there is fome reason to hope it: for I hear he has taken pains about me, has ftudied my features well before he fat down to trace them on the canvas, and done it, CON AMORE: if he brings out a good refemblance, I fhall excufe the want of grace and beauty in his piece. I affure you I am not without pleafing expectation; especially as my friend Sophocles, who, you know, fat to him fome time ago, tells me, though he is no Praxiteles, he does not take a bad likeness.-But I must be gone, for yonder come Swift and Rabelais, whom I have made a little party with this morning: fo, my good Lord, fare you well.

< Lord L. And I must meet my dear Lucy in the myrtle grove; fo, honest Lucian, good morrow to you.'

The copious extract with which we have taken the liberty to present the Reader, will give him a very favourable idea of the spirit of this excellent work. Dr. Franklin had made himself fully mafter of his Author before he fat down to tranflate him. He generally renders the Greek by equivalent words and phrafes in the English language; he is never feized with the madness of embellifhing his original; and while he has proved himfelf, by the dialogue above inferted, worthy to emulate the fame of Lucian, he must be acknowledged fully equal to the humbler, though not lefs difficult tafk, of delineating the portrait, and copying the characteristic features of this admired writer. To juftify this commendation, we fhall infert a fhort dialogue, chofen without any particular predilection as fuperior to the reft; for the whole is uniformly correct, eafy, and natural. Diog. What! Alexander here! could he die like one of us? Alex. It is even fo, as you fee, Diogenes; and where is the wonder that a mortal man should die?

Dieg. Did Ammon lie, then, when he called you his fon; and are you really fprung from Philip?

Alex. From Philip most undoubtedly; for had I been the fon of Ammon, I had not died.

Diog. Something was whifpered too about Olympias, that the kept company with a Dragon, who was feen in bed with her, that you were the fruit of their amours, and Philip deceived, who only imagined himself to be your father.

Alex. I have heard of this as well as you; and now I perceive, that neither my mother, nor the prophets of Ammon, fpoke one word of truth.

Diog. The tale, however, was not unferviceable to you in carrying on your affairs; for many, believing you to be a god, feared you as fuch: but pray, inform me, to whom you have left your empire ?

Alex. Indeed, Diogenes, I know not: my death was so sudden, that I had not time to determine any thing concerning it, except that, when I was dying, I gave my ring to Perdiccas, What makes you fmile ?

• Diog.

Diog. I fmile to think how the Grecians behaved when they gave you the empire, how they chose you their general against the Barbarians, flattered and adored you; fome of them were for adding you to the twelve deities, building temples for, and worshipping you as the offspring of the Dragon. But, tell me, where did the Macedonians bury you?

Alex. For these three days past I have lain in Babylon; but PtoJomæus, one of my officers, has promised, when affairs are a little quiet, and be is at leifure, to carry me to Egypt, and bury me there, that I may be made an Ægyptian god.

Diog. Can I help laughing, Alexander, to fee you ridiculous even after death, and hoping to be an Ofiris or Anubis? But, pray, my moft divine friend, lay afide your hopes: no one who has ever paffed the lake, and defcended into the mouth of Tartarus, muft ever think of returning: Æacus is not fo careless, nor Cerberus fo contemptible. But I fhould be glad to know how you feel on the remembrance of paft felicity, when you recollect your guards, your Satraps, and your treasures, the people that adored you at Bactria, and at Babylon, your honours and dignities, when you fhone fo confpicuous, when you were carried by immenfe wild beasts, crowned with garlands, and clothed in purple; does not the remembrance of thefe things torment you ?-Ha! fool, doft thou weep? Did not your wife Ariftotle teach you to have no dependence on the gifts of Forune?

Alex. Call you him wife? that basest of all flatterers! I know him well, know how much he folicited, how much he wrote to me, he abused my love of science, and defire of knowledge; how he complimented and flattered me; fometimes on my beauty, as if that was a fpecies of perfection; fometimes on my actions, and fometimes on my riches, for thofe alfo he looked on as a real good, probably the better to excufe his own defire of them. Diogenes, he was an artful and defigning man, and all the fruits I reap from his wisdom, is, to be tormented now about those enjoyments which you just now mentioned. Diog. What is to be done then? Shall I point you out a remedy for this difeafe? As we have no hellebore growing here, take, as faft as you can, the waters of Lethe; drink, and drink again; Ariftotle's good things will then no longer difguft you: but I fee Clytus and Calisthenes, and feveral more, who are ready to fall upon, and tear you in pieces, for the injuries they have received from you: therefore, go into another path, and remember what I told you; drink away.'

The tranflation runs with the eafy flow of an original; and it is with pleasure that we congratulate the public on a new acquifition from the Greek, equally entertaining and inftructive.

Though Lucian did not flourish in the illuftrious ages of Grecian eloquence and philofophy, yet he had conftantly in his hands the works of Homer and Euripides, of Plato and Xenophon, of Demofthenes and Lyfias. Nourished by the cultivated fertility of thofe immortal authors, he acquired that manly fenfe, and that juft and elegant expreffion, which diftinguish him from the jejune and empty declaimers, as well as the verbofe and pedantic philologifts of his own times. He difdained

that

that measured fymmetry of periods, thofe glaring antithefes, and that tumid inanity of found without fenfe, which mark the decay of true eloquence, against which our own age will be beft preferved by studying the unaffected fimplicity, and copying the folid and manly graces, of the invaluable models of antiquity.

Dr. F. has tranflated all the works of Lucian, that could appear with decency in an English drefs. There are feveral, however, of the writings afcribed to him, which the Doctor, neither as a clergyman, nor indeed as a man of virtue and character, could have been the inftrument of communicating to the Public. What thefe are, we are informed in an advertisement, which leaves no room to regret the lofs.

G.11. s.

ART. IX. The Hiftory of the Heretics of the two first Centuries after Chrift: Containing an Account of their Time, Opinions, and Teftimonies to the Books of the New Teftament. To which are prefixed general Obfervations concerning Heretics. Published from the Manufcript of the late reverend and learned Nathaniel Lardner, D. D. With large Additions by john Hogg. 4to. 18s. Johnfon. 1780.

FR

ROM the great fervice rendered to Chriftianity by the laborious purfuits and learned compilations of Dr. Lardner, his name will ever be diftinguishingly honoured in the Hiftory of the Chriftian Church. Dr. Priestley, when he fpeaks of this most learned and excellent man, generally calls him, the Prince of modern Divines;' and we think this tribute to his illuftrious merit not improperly paid. To the moft elaborate and extenfive investigations of ecclefiaftical antiquity, he added all that knowledge of Greek and Roman literature which enabled him fo thoroughly to diferiminate the comparative worth and excellence of the facred and prophane writers. To the learning of the fcholar he added alfo the veracity of the historian; while the amiable candour and humility of the Chriftian, gave a pleafing luftre and embellishment to his more emi nent accomplishments.

The work now prefented to the public, though it contains fome curious accounts of people called Heretics, whose names had in general funk into total oblivion, is not of equal importance with thofe which the Doctor publifhed himself. To the generality it will appear to contain a very dry and uninteresting detail of perfons and facts-the memory of which was fcarcely worth preferving. This judgment will certainly be paffed on it, not by flimfy and fuperficial readers only, but by men of more enlarged understandings, and of deeper and more improvea ftudies. To the cognofcenti in ecclefiaftics, who have patience to fearch into the very rubbish of worfe than Gothic literature, REV. Jan. 1781.

D

this

this pofthumous work may afford abundant amufement; and being pleased, they may fancy themselves improved too!-But leaving every man to gratify his own appetite, without pretending to decide on the relative merit of this or that species of tafte, we proceed to give some account of the work before us.

The Editor informs us, that it was chiefly drawn up by the Doctor himself, and lay by him feveral years. Some parts of it were completely fitted for the prefs, having received his laft corrections. In other parts only a few hints were written, which (fays the Editor) I have endeavoured to follow with fidelity and exactness. . . . I have published nothing concerning any Heretic, but where the learned Writer had either drawn up part, or left fome hints or references.

Mr. Jofeph Jennings, the nephew and executor of Dr. Lardner, committed to me, in the year 1769, the papers relative to the present Hiftory, defiring me to perufe them, and to requeft the affiftance of my late worthy and learned friend, the Rev. Samuel Merivale, in order to their being prepared for the prefs. Mr. Merivale declined undertaking any thing further, than carefully examining the articles, after they were put in order and fitted for the prefs. Accordingly, as foon as each article was finished, the MS. was delivered to him, and, I have the fatisfaction to fay, met with his approbation.' The Editor makes an apology for the many imperfections attending this publication;' and very juftly obferves, that thefe imperfections might ⚫ have been avoided, had the worthy Author lived to have completed the work himself.' Nevertheless, notwithstanding the great deficiencies of fuch a pofthumous work as this, and the inequalities that muft neceffarily ftrike every difcerning eye, yet the Editor flatters himself, that even in its prefent form it deferves the attention of the public.'

The first book of this Hiftory contains fome general obfervations on Heretics, and may rather be confidered as a candid apology for their mistakes, than a zealous confutation of their errors. It opens with an explanation of the word HERESY, and obferves, that, in its fimple and original meaning, nothing more is intended by it, than an opinion voluntarily adopted. Thus, by Suidas and Diogenes Laertius, the various modes of philofophizing in the ancient Ethnic schools, were expreffed by the term Herefy, without intending to convey any opprobrium by it. In this latitude it is alfo made use of in the New Testament in two or three places. In other parts, indeed, of the facred writings, it is used in a bad fenfe; and is generally meant to convey an unfavourable idea of the principles of any perfon or fect to whom it is applied. The reafon of this (fays Dr. Lardner) feems to lie in what Tertullian fays with a view to the primary meaning of the word Herefy, viz. a chofen opinion or doctrinethat there fhould be no herefies among Chriftians, and that a heretic forfeits the character of a Chriftian, forafmuch as there is nothing left to their invention. They ought all to adhere to the doctrine taught by, and received from Chrift and his Apoftles, who have delivered all the principles of true religion..... With regard to the prefumption

of those men who introduced new opinions, the fame Father obferves pleafantly, that invention is an heretical privilege, and that heretics, as well as poets and painters, have a certain licence allowed them. (Si fortè poetica et pictoria licentia et tertia jam hæretica.)'

But though the term be easily explained, yet nothing is more difficult than to give an exact definition of the thing. On this point each will have his own opinion; and there is no fettled ftandard to determine which is pofitively right. All Chriftians pretend to make the Bible the teft of faith; but few are agreed in the explanation of it. Here they may difpute-and difpute to eternity and unless on plain and practical articles, there is no hope of bringing their debates to a decided iffue. Dr. Lardner obferves, that heretics were generally underflood, in the ancient church, to be perfons who feparated themselves from what was called the catholic or orthodox communion; or who were excluded from it by others. Austin and Tertullian call them ftrangers-without the church, &c. But (fays the learned Author) whether they were allowed by others to be Chriftians or not, they always called themfelves Christians, and laid claim to that character. Salvian to this purpose remarks, that "they be lieve what they profefs to be true, and they think themselves to be orthodox. As they are heretics in our esteem, fo are we in theirs." And as for thofe (continues our candid Author) of the two first centuries, who called themfelves Chriftians, and profeffed faith in Jefus, what good reason can there be to difpute their veracity and integrity? The profeffion of the Chriftian name was not then the way to honour, profit, or pleasure.'

In Sect. 3d, which treats in general of the caufes of herefy, the Doctor obferves, that it hath been frequently afcribed to pride, love of pre-eminence, envy, revenge, difappointment, love of fenfual pleasure, a defire to be wife and knowing above all others, and curiofity to fearch out the reafon of all things; and to other faulty caufes and principles, which indeed may have contributed to the great variety of opinions which there has been amongit Chriftians.' But that heretics may not have the load of blame thrown wholly on them, the Doctor equitably divides a juft fhare of it amongst the orthodox. From thofe faulty principles and causes of berefy, those who are called catholics, and who have been generally esteemed orthodox, have not always been free.' The learned Author, however, grants, that an eager curiofity to pry into, and know every thing, might probably have no fmall effect in this affair. Too curious inquiries into the origin of evil feem to have mifled many men. The question was difficult, and they went into feveral opinions, fome of which were wrong

and abfurd.'

The Doctor, in a former work, had attempted to apologize for the mistakes observed in the writings of the ancient Chriftians. With the fame impartiality he endeavours to maintain, in the prefent performance, an equal regard to all, without aggravating the fuppofed errors of those who have been defamed as heretics, or the mistakes, overfights, inaccuracies, and mifreprefentations of thofe who have wrote their hiftory, or who have argued against them.' The defign is truly liberal; and the execution of it is in the main perfectly confiftent with the impartiality of the plan.