that, in fuppofing himself inspired by God with a power of difcovering Chrift to have been mentioned in the writings of Mofes, and in other parts of the Old Teftament, as the Agent of God in the creation and government of the world, he was under a manifeft delufion; and that his interpretations of paffages, which proceed on this fuppofition, abound with puerile conceits, which cannot be vindicated on the principles of found criticism; that, nevertheless, this notion was eagerly adopted by the fubfequent fathers, particularly Irenæus, Clemens Alexandrinus, Tertullian, and Eufebius; and that it was gradually improved, till at length it affumed the complete form of the Trinitarian doctrine. We fhall give one fpecimen of Mr. Lindsey's strictures on Juftin Martyr:

Juftin triumphs much in the proof here afforded, Gen. xix. 24. as he* fuppofes, of there being two diftinct perfons, who are each of them God; upon the exprefs authority of Mofes. But juftice fhould be done to him, in obferving, that he is here, and at all times, most careful to preferve a due fubordination between them. For of this fecond God of his own device, whom he makes afterwards to become man, "I affirm," fays he f," that never any thing was done by him, but what the creator of the world, above whom there is no other God, directed him both to do and to fay."

But had he attended to the proper meaning of the words of the facred hiftorian, and not brought his two Gods along with him in his own imagination, he would not have found here more than one. For it is a mere idiom of the language, to repeat the noun twice instead of using the pronoun; the Lord from the Lord, inftead of the Lord from himself; and this is all that he has here to build his notion upon, of there being two Lords. To have given the true fenfe, it ought to have been tranflated; Then the Lord rained upon Sodom and Gomorrah, brimftone and fire from himself out of heaven. So the excellent Caftellio renders it in his old french verfion: "E le Seig

'Juftin. Op. 152. 154. 222.

† εδεν γαρ φημι αύτον πεπραχέναι τουλέ, η απερ αύτος ο τον κόσμον ποιησας, υπερ ον αλλος εκ εσι θεος, βεβολήαι και πραξαν και εμίλησαι. Jufin Martyr. Op. p. 152.

See 1 Kings viii. 1. xii. 21. Dan. ix. 17. 2 Tim. i. 18. Hof. i. 7. In the two laft inftances, how much more justly would the fenfe of the facred writers be given, by tranflating, in the first; The Lord grant unto him, that he may find mercy before him in that day, inflead of that aukward phrafcology, The Lord grant unto him that he may find mercy of the Lord in that day; and in the other, I will Jave them by myself, inftead of I will fave them by the Lord their God? efpecially as the prefent improper tranflation leads many in our day, to fuppofe Chrift to be the Lord God, here intended by the prophet.'

neur

neur fit plouvoir fur Sodome et Gomorre, fouphre e feu, de foi du ciel *."

The christian writers after Juftin, Irenæus, Tertullian, Eufebius, &c. copied blindly this egregious mistake of his. Some few indeed ventured in thofe times to publifh their diffent with their reasons, fuch as we now give; but it was too plaufible an argument for thofe that wished to exalt the character of Chrift to give up; and the greater number carried it. In the council of Sirmium, about the middle of the fourth century, they proceeded fo far as to - make this decree against thofe of the contrary fentiment; " If any one fhall interpret, the Lord rained from the Lord, of his raining from himself, and not of the Father and the Son, let him be anathema."

• The arian as well as athanafian chriftians and commentators, all who have been defirous of making Chrift exift before he was born in Judea, have followed the croud, and imagined that they found Chrift in this paffage. Mr. Pyle, the friend of Dr. Clarke, thus paraphrafes it: The Moyos, the Word or Son of God, the repreJentative and agent of the Father, executed the vengeance of Jehovah, the Father, upon these people." Juftin might teach him and Dr. Clarke, this doctrine; but affuredly not Mofes.'

The remaining part of this volume is employed in pointing out fundry falfe readings in the original scriptures, and in translations of the English Bible, which very much contribute to ward the fupport of the doctrines of the Trinity, and the divinity of Chrift. Among other texts, Mr. Lindfey particularly adverts to the verse of the Three Witnesses; and, after what has lately been advanced by Mr. Porfon on the fubject, it will not, we apprehend, be commonly thought that our author has gone too far, in pronouncing it a justly exploded interpolation.

This work, unquestionably, merits a diligent perufal from all who are defirous of forming a decifive judgment concerning the much controverted doctrines on which it treats. E.

ART. VII. A Treatise on the Decorative Part of Civil Architecture. Illuftrated by fifty original, and three additional Plates, engraved by Old Rooker, Old Foudrinier, Charles Grignion, and other eminent Hands. By Sir William Chambers, K. P. S. Surveyor-general of his Majesty's Works, Treasurer, and Member of the Royal Academy of Arts in London, alfo of thofe of Paris and Florence, FRS. FAS. FSSS. The Third Edition, confiderably augmented. Imperial Folio. 31. 3s. Sheets. Cadell. 1791.

A WORK, of which, though of fuch magnitude and expence, the public appears to have thought fo well, as to call for a third edition, it feems fuperfluous to praise, and needless to

M. de Sacy's tranflation is ftill perhaps more proper; Le Seigneur repandit fur Sodome et Gomorrhe, une pluye de fouffre et de feu, qu'il fit defcendre du ciel.'

5

criticife:

"

criticife: yet the utility of the subject of which the prefent performance treats, and the masterly manner in which it is treated, demand that we should take fome notice of this edi tion; to which fome new plates are added, and very confiderable augmentations have been made. The ingenious architect gives, in his preface, the following reasons for having engaged in the work.

Having spoken, generally, of the treatises that have hitherto appeared on the fubject of architecture, Sir William obferves:

One thing of great ufe remained to be done, at leaft. in our language; which was, to collect in one volume, what lay difperfed in many hundreds, much the greater part of them written in foreign languages; and to felect, from mountains of promifcuous materials, a feries of found precepts, and perfect designs.

Whoever has applied to the ftody of architecture, will readily grant that there are few purfuits more perplexing: the vague foundation on which the more refined parts of the art are built, has given rife to fuch a multiplicity of jarring opinions, all fupported. by, at leaft, plaufible arguments, that it is exceedingly difficult to difcriminate, or diftinguifh what is real, from that which is merely fpecious: the connections which conftitute truth or fallacy being often far diftant, beyond the fight of fuperficial obfervers. Whence the merit of performances is too often measured by the fame of the performer; by the taste of the age in which they were produced; by vulgar report; party opinion; or fome other ftandard equally inadequate; and not feldom by precepts delivered fome centuries ago, calculated for other climates, other men, and other customs.

To obviate these inconveniencies, the author ventured, foon after his return from Italy, upwards of thirty years ago, to attempt fuch a compilation as is above mentioned, by a publication of the first edition of the prefent work. He flattered himself, that if well conducted, it would greatly fhorten the labours of the ftudent, and lead him to truth by eafy and more inviting paths; that it might render the study of architecture, and its attendant arts, more frequent; ferve to promote true tafte, and to diffufe the love of vertu among perfons of high rank and large fortune, the fit encouragers of elegance.

His defign was, without biafs from national, or other prejudices, candidly to confider what had been produced upon the fubject, and to collect from the works or writings of others, or from his own obfervations, in all parts of Europe famed for tafte, fuch particulars as feemed most interefting, or propereft to give a just idea of fo very useful, and truly noble an art.

Senfible that all ages had produced bad, or indifferent artists and that all men, however excellent, muft fometimes have erred; it was his intention, neither to be influenced by particular times, nor by the general reputation of particular perfons: where reafon or demonftration could be ufed, he purpofed to employ them; and where they could not, to fubftitute in their places generally admitted opinions. Abftrufe or fruitlefs arguments he wifhed carefully

to

to avoid; nor was it his intention to perplex the unfkilful, with a number of indifcriminate examples; having judged it more eligible to offer a few, calculated to serve at once as ftandards for imitation, or guides to judge by, in fimilar productions. Precision, perfpicuity, and brevity, were to be attempted in the ftyle; and in the defigns, fimplicity, order, character, and beauty of form.

The difficulty and extent of fuch task, undertaken early in life, rendered fuccefs very uncertain, and filled the writer's mind with many apprehenfions: but the indulgent encouragement, fo liberally extended to the two former publications of this work, and the frequent calls for a third, are pleafing teftimonies that his endeavours have not been wholly in vain. He ventures to confider the fale of two numerous editions, written upon a subject rather inftructive than entertaining, and in a language generally unknown to foreign artists, as a proof of the utility of his undertaking; at leaft in the country where he most wished to have it ufeful. And ftimulated by a defire of rendering it ftill more deferving public notice, he has carefully revifed, and confiderably augmented this third edition; he does not prefume to fay improved it; but flatters himself the experience gained by thirty years very extenfive practice, fince the original publication, has enabled him to judge with fome degree of certainty, at least, of what might be left out, be added, or altered to advantage.'

The concise manner, adds the author,) in which it has been attempted to treat the fubject of the prefent publication, will, it is hoped, be fome inducement to perfons of diftinction to peruse this treatife and if the precepts are as clear and fatisfactory as the author intended, the work may be of use even to gentlemen, and to travellers in particular; most of whom, from utter ignorance in architecture, as well as in other arts, have heretofore loft half the fruits of their journies, returned unacquainted with the most valued productions of the countries they had vifited, and perfectly diffatisfied with expeditions, from which they had derived very little ufeful inftruction, or real amufement.'

It is impoffible for us to follow Sir W. Chambers into his difquifitions on the origin of the art, and into the various de tails of the different proportions that have been given to the different orders.

Of the Grecian architecture, our author does not appear to think fo highly as many others who have preceded him, in treating the fame fubject:

Since the Grecian structures, (fays he,) are neither the moft confiderable, most varied, nor most perfect, it follows that our knowledge ought not to be collected from them, but from fome purer, more abundant fource; which, in whatever relates to the ornamental part of the art, can be no other than the Roman antiquity yet remaining in Italy, France, or elsewhere; vettiges of buildings erected in the politeft ages, by the wealthiest, moft fplendid, and powerful people of the world. Who, after having re

moved to Rome, from Carthage, Sicily, Egypt and Greece, the rareft productions of the arts of defign, as alfo the ablest artists of the times, were conftantly employed, during many centuries, in the conftruction of all kinds of edifices, that either ufe, convenience, luxury, or fplendor, required. Pliny informs us, that the works of the Romans were much more confiderable than thofe of any other people; that in the courfe of thirty-five years, more than a hundred fumptuous palaces had been erected in Rome, the most inconfiderable of which was fit for the refidence of a king: and that in his own time, the time of Vefpafian, there were a great number, much more fplendid than any of the hundred above mentioned. The palaces of Caligula and Nero were, in extent, like towns, and enriched with every thing that the most exquifite tafte, and the most unbounded liberality, could fuggeft.'

What was omitted, in the fecond edition, relative to the defects of the Greek architecture, the author informs us, is now added to this; as, latterly, the Gufto Greco has again ventured to peep forth, and, once more, threaten an invafion.' Sir William very honeftly confeffes, that,

In the constructive part of architecture, the ancients do not seem to have been great proficients. I am inclined to believe, that many of the deformities obfervable in the Grecian buildings, muft be afcribed to their deficiency in that particular: fuch as their gouty columns; their narrow intercolumniations; their disproportioned architraves; their hypetral temples, which they knew not how to cover; and their temples with a range of columns running in the center, to fupport the roof, contrary to every rule, either of beauty or convenience.'-Neither were the Romans much more fkilful: the precepts of Vitruvius and Pliny, on that fubject, are imperfect, fometimes erroneous; and the ftrength or duration of their structures is more owing to the quantity and goodnefs of their materials, than to any great art in putting them together. It is not, therefore, from any of the ancient works that much information can be obtained in that branch of the art.'

To the fuperiority, however, of the Gothic architecture, in this particular, the author pays the due tribute of praise for,

To thofe, (fays he,) ufually called Gothic architects, we are indebted for the first confiderable improvements in conftruction: there is a lightness in their works, an art and boldness of execution, to which the ancients never arrived, and which the moderns comprehend and imitate with difficulty. England contains many magnificent examples of this fpecies of architecture, equally admirable for the art with which they are built, the talte and ingenuity with which they are compofed. One cannot refrain from wishing, (adds Sir William, with great good fenfe and judgment,) that the Gothic Structures were more confidered, better understood, and in higher eftimation, than they hitherto feem to have been. Would our dilettanti, inftead of importing the gleanings of Greece, or our antiquaries, instead of publishing loofe coherent prints, encourage REV, APRIL 1791. perfons,

Ee