mentioned by Minucius Felix than the laft, and therefore he thinks the Word POSTREMIS is a Corruption. His Emendation removes the Difficulty, and appears very natural. The Paffage, fays he, ought to be read thus: Cum Romulo regibus ceteris & POSTERIS ducibus difciplina communis eft. Pofteri duces is to be understood in the fame Senle as poftera fecla -in Lucretius, Lib. III. v. 394."

Pag. 164. Scripta eorum (Judæorum) relege, vel fi Romanis magis gaudes, ut tranfeamus veteres, FLAVII JOSEPHI vel Antonii Juliani de Judeis require.

There is a manifeft Oppofition in thefe Words between the Jewish and the Roman Writers; and therefore, fays Dr. Davies, Jofephus who profeffed the Jewifh Religion, and was born a Jew, is improperly men. - tioned in this Paffage. Befides, Jofephus writ in Greek, and his Works were not tranflated into Latin in Minucius's time. Dr. Davies infers from thence that the Words Flavii Jofephi are a Glofs, that crept from the Margin into the Text, and reads the Pafiage thus. Scripta eorum (Judæorum) relege, vel, fi Romanis magis gaudes, ut tranfeamus veteres, Antonii Juliani de Judais require. Jofephus being a famous Writer, and treating the fame Subject as Antonius Julianus, 'tis very likely that fome body inferted his Name in the Margin, and that a Copift took it in afterwards as being Part of the Text.

The Obfervations of Dr. Davies upon Minucius Felix are Learned and Judicious; and this new Edition will be generally efteemed by all those, who are able to judge of the Merit of fuch a Performance. I hope the Author will publifh in time a new Edition of .fome other Father. The beft Pieces of the Ancient Doctors of the Church fhould be more common than they are, and illuftrated with new Obfervations.

II. The

* Dr. Davies had published a new Edition of Cicero, De Natura Deorum, and fome other Books, fince the firft Edition of thefe Menoirs.

1

II. The Inftructions of Commodianus, a Writer of the Third Century, have been inferted at the end of Minu cius Felix, with Rigaltius's Notes, and thofe of Dr. Davies. That Author has a harfh Style, and is more commendable for his Piery than for his Wit. The *Readers will be glad to find him here, because the Copies of that Work are scarce. Befides, there are in it fome Paffages, whereby the Greek and Latin Antiquities may be illuftrated; and the reading of that Book will be of great Ufe upon fome other Accounts, as Rigaltius obferves. Denique, fays that Critick, ufus & efficacia libelli hujufce fuerit, conftans & perperuus amor Chrifti; animus ad martyrium fortis; pietas erga pauperes maxima. Hoc præterea feire, "vitia, quæ etiamnum Ecclefiam dehoneftant, effe "vetuftiffima. Infinitam femper fuiffe de rebus divi"nis difputantium multitudinem, pauciffimos vere "Chriftianos.

66

66

Dr. Davies has corrected the Text of Commodianus in feveral Places. I fhall only mention two of his Emendations.

Fag. 204. O nimium ftulti qui putatis Maios ab aftris,
Nafcentes regere, aut totam mundi naturam.
In vulnera pofiti, & ipfi fub fata viventes,
છે
Obfcani, CURIOSI, bellatores, impia vita.

In the laft Line, the Editor reads FURIOSI instead of CURIOSI: Which is an undeniable Correction.

Pag. 216. Nam quod IN VANÍS fequeris, per tempora GAUDET.

In brevi letaris, & poftmodum plangis in imis.

The firft Line is unintelligible. The Editor reads it thus,

Nam quod INANES fequeris, per tempora GAUDES,

and confirms his Emendation by two Paffages. Commdian. Inftru&t. II. 2. Nolite, inquit, adorare Deos INANES. Lactant. Div. Inftit. Lib. II. c. 1. Geltio enim

convict is

convictis INANIBUS fingularis Dei adferere majeftatem.

Here follows another Remark of Dr. Davies where in he mends a wrong Explication of Rigaltius.

Pag. 266. Vane, non infanis, colere deas pictos in axe ?

Rigaltius will have the Words in axe to fignify in calo. One would wonder how that Critick, could be guilty of fuch an Error, were it not that the moft Learned Men fall fometimes into ftrange Miftakes. Axis in this Place plainly fignifies a Board. Feftus upon the Word Axis, lays, Tabula fectilis axis appellatur. And we read in Aulus Gellius, Noct. Attic. Lib. II. cap. 12. In legibus Solonis illis antiquiffimis, que Athenis axibus ligneis incifa funt.

I fhall conclude with an excellent Obfervation of Dr. Davies, which fhould have been inferted in the first Part of this Article. He takes Notice of a Miftake in thefe Words of Minucius Felix. Et Plato ideo præclare Homerum illum inclytum, laudatum & coronatum, de civitate, quam IN SERMONE inftituebat, ejecit. That Author fhould have faid, de civitate, quam RATIONE inftituebat, ejecit, to exprefs the true Sense of the Greek, Word aów. Dr. Davies, who has the Paffage of the Ancients ready at Hand upon all Occafions, obferves that St. Auftin avoided that Mistake, as it appears from thefe Words, de Civit. "Dei Lib. II. cap. 14. An forte Platoni Graco potius "palma danda eft, qui cùm RATIONE formaret, qua lis effe civitas debeat, tanquam adverfarios civitatis Poetas cenfuit urbe pellendos.

AART

ARTICLE XIII.

PROJET d'une nouvelle Grammaire pour apprendre l' Hebreu, & les anciennes Langues Orientales fans Points. Par Monfieur MASCLEF, Chanoine d' Amiens. Primere Partie.

That is,

A PROJECT of a New Grammar to Learn Hebrew, and the Ancient Oriental Languages without Points. By M. M a sCLEF, Canon of Amiens. Part. I.

T

HO' the firft Part of this Project confifts only of Thirty Pages in 12mo. I rather chufe to give an Extract of it, than to infert it at length, being perfuaded that a fhort Account of that Piece will be fufficient to fatisfy the Curiofity of the Readers.

The Author having obferved, That the Sciences are hot fo entirely exhaufted, but that they may afford ftill fome new Difcoveries, adds, that he ventures to communicate to the publick a new Method to learn the Hebrew Tongue, and the ancient Oriental Languages; and then proceeds in the following man

ner.

It has been fo fully proved, (fays he) that the Points made ufe of to read Hebrew, on which all the Grammars of that Language are grounded, were invented by the Mafforets, feveral Ages after the Beginning of Chriftianity, that there are now but few Writers of any Diftinction, who dare affirm the contrary. Some Authors place the Invention of those Points in the Fifth Century; others, in the Ninth. Granting the firft Epoch to be true, it will follow from it,

that

that the Hebrew Points were not invented till about a Thousand Years after the Hebrew Tongue ceafed to be the common Language of the Jews; fince this Alteration happened, either during the Captivity of Babylon, or foon after. But that Space of Time, and even a fhorter one, is fufficient for my Purpose.

The Hebrew Grammar is still of a later Date. And indeed it could not be formed till after the Invention of the Points; and 'tis well known that there was no fuch Grammar before the Tenth Century.

Which being granted, it must be confefs'd that the Mafforets, who fixed the Pronunciation of the Hebrew Tongue, and laid down the Rules of Grammar, with the Help of their Points, could not know how that Language was pronounced, when it was in ufe. The Hebrew had not been the common Language of the Jews above a Thousand Years; and every Body knows that the Pronunciation of any Language will be quite forgotten in a much fhorter Time. The Greek and Latin Tongues are a plain Proof of it. It is acknowledged by the moft Learned Criticks, that we are altogether ignorant how those two Languages were pronounced in the time of Demofthenes and Cicero. And yet neither of them has been fo long difufed: And there is a great Difference between thofe Criticks, who endeavour'd to retrieve their true Pronunciation, and the Mafforets. The former, befides a lively Genius, improved by a vaft Knowledge, had a great many Greek and Latin Books, even upon all Sorts of Grammatical Questions; whereas the Mafforets were Men of very indifferent Parts, and had no other Hebrew Book but the Bible, being moreover deftitute of all Sorts of Learning.

Perhaps it will be objected, That the Maforets learned by a conftant Tradition the true and ancient Pronunciation of the Hebrew Tongue. To enforce this Objection, it will be faid, that many Jews, in all Ages, ftudied the Hebrow Bible; and that Mofes and the Prophets were read in Hebrew, and the Pfalms fung in that Language, in all the Jewish Synagogues. But this is not fufficient to make one be Vol. IV.

F

lieve,