Imágenes de páginas
[ocr errors]

who liated every body, in the manner usually practised by the ' Turks, by laying his hand on his heart, and bending his head every now and then. The grand signior's sword, and two of his turbans, ornamented with precious stones, were borne by men. The taste, variery, and richness of the dresses, the turbans, arms, and the furs, the beauty of the Arabian horses, whose housings were edged with gold and filver, and covered with jewels, altogether formed a spectacle no where to be met with, but at Constantinople.

• After the procession I saw some carriages of a very singular constructin. They were gilt, and made of basket-work; and are used by the Turkish ladies of quality, when they go abroad for amusemen'. In these carriages there is a mattress, on which four women can fit conveniently enough: they are usually drawn by buffaloes; for horses here are destined to a better use, and this I think is right.'

Speaking of Turkish monasteries, the traveller thus proceeds:

• There is another convent of dervises at Tophana : and the Mur. stimen have their Ignatius, their Bruno, their St. Francis, and their St. Anthony. There is one at Scutari, the dervises of which per-form very fingular ceremonies. They dance once a week; and, from an excess of piety, mark themselves on the face, and other parts of the body, with a red hot iron. A similar species of superItition prevailed among the ancients. The priests of the Syrian Goddess, who were eunuchs, whipped each other on certain days, after drawing blood from their elbows. Lucian, in relating this circumstance, adds, that the devotees among them all seared themselves, some in the wrist, and others in the neck : on this account, he says, all the Affyrians had about them marks of burning. Men must have conceived a terrible notion of God, before they could have reached such a pitch of infatuation.

• The principles of all these dervises, were they to live up to them, are very austere; but here, as every where else, they only impose on the vulgar, whose fate it is to be constantly the dupes of the artful. These priests conceal every vice under the garb of hypocrisy, intoxicating themselves continually with wine, opium, Itrong liquors, &c.

• There is, however, a sect among the Turks, called Kalenders, whose manner of thinking is very different from that of the dervises whom I have been describing; and what is uncommon, and not difficult, their practice corrresponds with their principles. The maxim of these people, according to Rycaut, is, “ This day we may call ours, to-morrow belongs to him who lives to enjoy it.” Hence, dismissing every melancholy idea, they think of nothing but enjoying the present moment; and they spend their lives in eating, driuking, and amusing themselves. They maintain, that a tavern is as


holy as a mosque; and by a toleration the more extensive as it is a theological one, they imagine this kind of worship to be as acceptable to the Deity as that of those who serve him with austerity and submission.---There are none of this sect here.

· The Mahommedans, as well as all the Christians of the eaft, in order to give the greater fanctity to monastic institution, trace back their origin to the beginning of the world, and lav; that a nong the children of God, the posterity of Seth devoted themselves to a monastic and religious life on the holy mountain.'

In p. 194, the author speaks of the Alcoran, though it be now univerfally spelled Koran, as the Al only implies the; and we might with equal justice say The Thebible. Tlie printinghouse now at Conftantinople we rather doubt: there was one.

The following paffage, in the commencement of a letier from Gibraltar, we prefent with applause; the sentiment is trite, we wish we could say the practice:

After a long and tedious passage, we are now performing qua. rintine in this bay, which discord has so often stained with gallant blood. Alas! when will men cease to become dupes to the ambition of their rulers? What avails it to be enlightened, if we cannot discover that war can never be advantageous to any people; that. this scourge is equally ruinous to the conqueror and the conquered ; and that it is the height of madness to fill a life so fleeting and transi. tory with pain and anxiety? Excuse these reflections: they are the more melancholy, as it is to be feared that the wishes in which they originate will never be realised.'

In a letter from Carthage, July 8, 1789, the author observes, that many Carthaginian coins in copper, impressed with the horse's head, are found on the spot, some of which he bought. This sufficiently contradicts Eckhel's migration of Carthaginian coins, in his late 4to, in which, by embracing too wide a plan, he has fallen into many errors. Indeed Shaw found similar coins there, elle we should little trust the testimony of the present author. When we find him speaking of the Ara Ægimori, the Ara Philenorum, &c. as still extant (p. 225,) we really are led to suspect that thefe travels were fabricated in the closer; a practice as ancient as the days of Gemelli Carreri; and now so common, that half of the books of travels, published in France and England, are of this description.

[blocks in formation]

Letters to a Young Man. Part II. Occasioned by Mr. Evare

Ton's Treatise on the Disonance of the Four generally received Evangelists. By Joleph Priejiley, LL.D. F. R.S. '8vo.

35. fewed. Johnson. 1793. AS Dr.-Priestley provoked Mr. Evanson to the present conn troversy, it was certainly natural for him to make a reply. His talents, also, are unquestionably respectable; his tudies have been directed to the New Testament; he is, also, as well as Mr. Evanson, an Unitarian. On each of these accounts he appears a proper person to meet Mr. Evanson in the present controversy.

The talents, as well as the proofs of integrity, exhibited by Mr. Evanfon, entitle him to respect; and we were pleased at the following candid testimony from Dr.-Priestley,

By what particular train of thought Mr. Evanson was original. ly led to entertain the doubts which at length produced the work on which I here animadvert, does not appear. That it was, directly or indirectly, from any disbelief of Christianity, I have not the smallest fufpicion. His noble conduct in resigning a valuable church preferment, rather than recite the offices, after he had rejected the doctrines, of the established church, is an abundant proof both of his firm belief of Christianity, and of the happy influence it had upon his mind; unbelievers in general making no scruple to adhere to any church, so long as they can receive the emoluments of it. The cast of Mr. Evanson's writings also proves, not only that he is a Christian, but that Christian literature is his favourite ftudy, all his publications being of this kind, intended to enforce, and illustrate, some article of Christian faith or practice.

• But having given more particular attention to the subject of prophecy, to which we are indebted for his excellent letter to the bishop of Worcester, he apppears to me to have overlooked, and undervalued, the evidence of Christianity from teftimony; not seein. ing to have considered the nature of it, and how it has actually operated in all ages, and must do, while human nature is the same that it now is, and ever has been. Also, not being able to vindicate, so well as he could wish, some particular patrages in the Gofpels of Matthew, Mark, and Joiin, and in some of the Epistles of Paul, which have been urged in support of doctrines and practices which he juftly deems to be corruptions of genuine Christianity, he may have wished to find those books not to be genuine, as that would be the easiest way of getting rid of the difficulty ; and without considering the external evidence of their authenticity, and not having the critical skill, or the patience, that was requsite to ascertain the true sense of those passages, he has hastily concluded them to be spurious productions. In a state of mind which I have sup

posed posed, nothing is easier than to find objections to any writings; and when a man has, though ever so hastily, and incautiously, advancced any thing in public, the best of us are so much men, and have so much of human imperfection about us, as to wish to defend it.

• In this manner I endeavour to account for the work, the principles of which I lave, in these Letters, undertaken to refute. In liis excellent letter on the subject of prophecy, Mr. Evanfon first threw out an infinuation against the credit of the Gospel of Matthew, which offended many of his friends, and the friends of Christianity. But he has given us all particular satisfaction in producing the reasons on which that infinuation was founded, as we can now examine them, and judge for ourselves; whereas many persons, having a high opinion of the judgment and integrity of Mr. Evanson, wore inclined to suppose his reasons to be more weighty than they will find them to be.

Some parts, however, of the preceding passage it may be difficult to reconcile with that candour and respect which are due, in Dr. Prieitley's own opinion, to Mr Evanfon : and some of our readers may probably indulge themselves in a smile, when they hcar the doctor making the following des claration:

• The only circumstance that offends me in this work of Mr. Evanson's, is the levity and contempt with which he treats those books of the New Tettanent which he thinks he has seen reason o reject. He had no occasion in this manner to hurt the feelings if many of his readers. What they have been long accustomed to read with reverence, they must be fnocked to see made the subject of ridicule and unsparing farcasm, and especially by a proíciled Christian. From unbelievers we expect nothing better, and therefore we are prepared for every thing contemptuous that they can throw out. Having nothing in their habitual feelings and state of mind congenial to the sentiments of Christians (who believe that they derive every pleasing prospect for time and eternity from the Scriptures) it cannot be supposed that they mould respect those feelings of which they have no idea, and which they cannot conceive even to exiit. They, therefore, have an excuse which Mr. Evanson has not.

• Mr. Evanson must, in his early years, have been taught to peruse the whole of the New Testament with nearly equal respect; and in reading the Gospels of Matthe r', Mark, and John, must have felt juit as he did in reading that of Luke. And as he grew us, and reflected upon what he read, and attended to the imirt lines which those writings made upon him, he niust have perceived the same unequivocal marks of genuine piety, and a disinterested regard to truth, in all the evangelifts. How he Mould ever coine to lose those impreftions, and feel differently in reading any of them, I

P 3


cannot tell. But whenever he came to suspect or to think, that they were not genuine (which he must have done with great reluctance) he should have contented himself with simply giving his reasons for the opinion he had adopted, and have dismilled those books as old friends, to whom he had formerly conceived himself to be under fome obligation, and not have turned them out of doors with so much rudeness and infult.

• Mr. Evanson may impute it to weakness and prejudice, but I own I have not been able to read his work, and copy so much of it as I have thought proper to do, without very unpleasing feelings. Notwithstanding this, I hope it will not be perceived that it has at all influenced me in my replies to him, or that I have given way to asperity, where nothing but calm difcufiion was wanted. I could not treat Mr. Evanson as he has done the authors of the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and John; and I am persuaded they will approve of my conduct, and not think the worfe of their advocate for defending them without anger. On this, as on every other occasion, I could wish to imbide their excellent spirit, and in every controversy, in which human prejudices and passions are too apt to mix themselves, not to forget that I am a Christian.'

Though Dr. Priestley is certainly not a sarcastic writer, yet he does not surely hold himself bound to treat those parts of the New Testament, which he does not consider genuine, with any particular reverence :' and some may probably think, that as Mr. Evanson considers those parts of the New Testament forgeries, which he treats with contempt, he does not act la much out of character, at least he is kept in countenance by many of those, who, by the opposite party, have been deemed heretics.

These Letters contain, Remarks on the Nature of Historical Evidence, which is illustrated by that of the Propagation of Christianity-On the Authenticity of the Four Gospels in general - On the Preference given by Mr. Evanson to the Gofpel of Luke-On the Gospel of Matthew in general--On Mr. Evanson's Objections to particular Paftages in the Gospel of Matthew, contradictory to Paslâges in the Gospel of LukeOn the Ignorance and Inconsistencies, that Mr. Evanson imagines he has discovered in the Gospel according to Matthew--On the Things that Mr. Evanson objects to, as unworthy of our Saviour, in the Gospel of Matthew-On Mr. Evanson's Objections to the Gospel of Mark - On Mr. Evanson's Objeélions to the Epistle to the Romans-On Mr. Evanson’s Objections to some other Epifles in the New Testament-On the arbitrary Procecding of Mr. Evaníon, in making Luke's Gornel his standard, by which to examine the other GospelsIt also contains, Remarks on fome Paflages in Mr. Evanton's Leiter to the Bishop of Worcester, on the Date of Luke's Gospel-And on the Identity of Luke and Silas:


« AnteriorContinuar »