number of persons in New South Wales and its dependencies amounted to 4848. The price of labour, however, compared with the prices of provisions, (as given in Mr. Collins's Tables,) does not appear so high as to enable the workman to live very comfortably. He who receives but three shillings for his day's work, and gives two shillings for a pound of mutton, fifteen pence for a pound of pork, and half of that sum for a pound of flour, will scarcely derive from his mere labour the support necessary for a family. That many things are yet wanted to give full effect to the advantages which the colony now enjoys, Mr. Collins declares in the following paragraph; with which he concludes his account: • The want at this time of several public buildings in the settlement has already been mentioned. To this want must be added, as absolutely necessary to the well-being and comfort of the settlers and the prosperity of the colony in general, that of a public store, to be opened on a plan, though not exactly the same, yet as liberal as that of the Island of St. Helena, where the East-India Company issue to their own servants European and Indian goods, at ten per cent. advance on the prime cost. Considering our immense distance from England, a greater advance would be necessary; and the settlers and others would be well satisfied, and think it equally liberal, to pay fifty per cent. on the prime cost of all goods brought from England; for at present they pay never less than one hundred, and frequently one thousand per cent. on what they have occasion to purchase. It may be supposed that government would not choose to open an account, and be concerned in the retail of goods; but any individual would find it to his interest to do this, particularly if assisted by go. vernment in the freight; and the inhabitants would gladly prefer the manufactures of their own country to the sweepings of the Indian bazars. • The great want of men in the colony must be supplied as soon as a peace shall take place; but the want of respectable settlers may, perhaps, be longer felt; by these are meant men of property, with whom the gentlemen of the colony could associate, and who should be thoroughly experienced in the business of agriculture. Should such men ever arrive, the administration of justice might assume a less military appearance, and the trial by jury, ever dear and most congenial to Englishmen, be seen in New South Wales. That we had not a thorough knowledge of the coast fron Van, Dieman's Land as far as Botany Bay, though to be regretted, was not to be wondered at. As a survey of the coast cannot very conveniently be made by any of the ships belonging to the settlement, it must be the business of government to provide proper vessels and persons for this service; and it is to be hoped that we shall not be much longer without a knowledge of the various ports, harbours, and rivers, and of the soil and productions of the country to the southward of the principal settlement.' In another Article, we shall take notice of the account which Mr. Collins gives of Norfolk Island, and of the manners, customs, &c. &c. of the natives of these distant shores. [To be continued.] ART. II. Analysis of Researches into the Origin and Progress of Historical Time, from the Creation to the Accession of C. Caligula : an Attempt to ascertain the Dates of the more notable Events in Ancient Universal History by Astronomical Calculation; the mean Quantity of Generations, proportionate to the Standard of Natural Life, in the several Ages of the World; Magistracies, National Epochs, &c.; and to connect, by an accurate Chronology, the Times of the Hebrews with those of the co-existent Pagan Empires; interspersed with Remarks on Archbishop Usher's Annals of the Old and New Testament. Subjoined is an Appendix, containing Strictures on Sir Isaac Newton's Chronology of Ancient Kingdoms, and on Mr. Falconer's Chronological Tables, from Solomon to the Death of Alexander the Great. By the Rev. Robert Walker, Rector of Shingham, Norfolk. 8vo. pp. 460. 7s. Boards. Cadell, Jun. and Davies. 1798. IN N a late Number of our work *, we reviewed a chronological publication of a learned and very modest author; and now we have before us the production of a writer of some learning but of less diffidence. Mr. Walker (though, as far as we know, himself a novus homo in the world of letters) writes with an air of presumption which is hardly conceivable. Mr. Falconer's Tables are sent by Mr. W., without ceremony, to 'those aromatic repositories, where pepper, odours, and frankincense are sold.' The Doctors Jackson and Kennicott are 'expert practitioners in the court of calumny; and the author of a late English version of the Pentateuch, who is elsewhere called 'one Geddes,' is a Romish impostor. Why? Because he has had the temerity to prefer the Septuagint chronology, in the eleventh chapter of Genesis, to that of the present Hebrew text? We have always thought that any writer might adopt either the Hebrew, or the Samaritan, or the Greek computations in the Bible, without meriting abuse. Very learned chronologers and deep critics have defended each of them; and if Mr. W. imagines that he can prop his own favourite system by such illiberal reflections, he will undoubtedly find himself much deceived: but what can we think of an author who calls the Greek translators themselves a set of men of whose abilities their version gives a very contemptible specimen; and whose want of principle, in giving their sanction to the absurd fictions * See Rev. vol. xxiv. N. S. p. 9. REV. Nov. 1798. of of Paganism, in opposition to the authority of a venerable re cord, (which they were under sacred obligations to translate with fidelity,) transmits their infamy to all ages?"-Who informed Mr. W. that those translators did not faithfully render. the venerable record, from which they made their version? Who told him that the record, which they had before them, was the same with the present Hebrew copy?-This is the very point in question, which has not been evidently settled: though, in our apprehension, every presumption is in favour of the Greek chronology. Mr. W. has a just right to defend the Hebrew computation, if he is really persuaded of its superior merit: but he ought to have defended it as a scholar and a gentleman. Let us now see, however, what this great master in Ifrael has done towards the perfection of chronology. He begins by telling us that Usher's annals are constructed on an erroneous hypothesis; this we all know, but it is a matter of very little importance whether the date of Christ's Birth be placed four years later, or four years sooner, than the exact time when it really happened. Kepler, more than 100 years ago, thought that he had demonstrated that our Saviour was born full five years before the commencement of the vulgar æra : " demonstratum puto natum esse Jesum... quinque foli dis annis ante principium æra hodierne;" and if any thing in antient chronology can amount to a demonstration, Kepler's reasoning is entitled to that appellation :- but, though the year of Christ's birth, with respect to posterior time, is almost absolutely certain, it is far otherwise with respect to prior time: for in what precise year, from the creation, Jesus was born, no man has been able to demonstrate: nor is the subject, in our opinion, capable of demonstration. From some intermediate epochs, the year may be nearly guessed: but, from the æra of the creation, all is mere conjecture and uncertainty. How should it be otherwise? We have no other chronological memoirs for almost half the period, than such as are found in the Hebrew writings,; and in these we have three different computations; neither of which perhaps is exactly true. We say three computations; for, with Mr. Walker's leave, we consider the Septuagint version and the Samaritan text as of at least equal credibility with the present Hebrew copy. Granting, however, that which of necessity we need not grant, that the present Hebrew copy is a genuine record, which has-in no respect been mutilated or altered, it will not follow that from it alone the precise year of Christ's birth can be ascertained. Have chronologists yet been able to adjust and reduce the various dates and years mentioned in the Hebrew Scriptures, 5 Scriptures, to one regular and certain series of chronology ? The proof that they have not is their perpetual disagreement. -The ages of the patriarchs, if the Hebrew copies be genuine, fix the deluge at A. M. 1656: but, from that period, he must be a conjurer indeed who shall be able to reconcile the biblical dates, and furnish a connected chronological chain to the æra of Jesus Christ. The chronology of the Judges and Kings is attended with insuperable difficulties; and almost every new writer frames to himself a new system, in order to solve them. Mr. W. has laboured in the same field, with as little success, we think, as some of his predecessors; and the chronological knowlege which he has added to the common stock is neither great nor precious. That our readers may form some judgment of this work, we give the second chapter entire; with a very few remarks on some particular parts of it : ANNALS Creation • First Age of the World. Chronology of the Pentateuch. Events and Dates. A.M. J.P. B.С. A.M. J.P. B.С. Ο 709 ARRANGEMENTS ο I 710 4004* Deluge ends 1656 2365 2349 I 705 706 4008 1657 2362 2351 A scheme of the primeval week, according to both computations, is thus exhibited: ANNALS. October. ARRANGEMENTS. October. By this scheme it is evident, that the very respectable author, conformably to the general opinion of the age in which he wrote, supposed that Saturday was the viith day of the primeval, and of all the subsequent weeks from the creation; and that the change from the seventh to the first day of the week, first took place from the day on which Christ rose from the dead. Misled by this problematical hypothesis, the very learned Metropolitan chose for the source of his ealculations the number of the Julian period 710, which was not the • * The Primate's confusion of terms is here exemplified. A. M. 1 is placed in coincidence with the 4004th before the Christian era. He means the vulgar computation; whereas A. M. 4004 is in truth the historical year of Christ's birth, and the 4th before, (but not including,) the common term A. D. 1. which last is coincident with the number of the Julian Period 4714.' first first, but the fifth from the origin of things. By the scheme of the Annals Saturday, the 29th October, was the day, which the Creator blessed and consecrated, in its periodical returns, for rest and devotion. But in the proposed Arrangements, which, agreeably to the sacred chronology, assign to the creation an earlier date by four years, Sunday, the 28th October, was the seventh of the primeval week, and its repetitions were observed by the patriarchs, from Adam to Moses, as the weekly Sabbath. At the Exodus the day of holy rest was transferred from the seventh of the patriarchal, to the first of the Mosaical, week; and at the resurrection of Christ the first of the Jewish and Christian week, was, and still continues, astronomically coincident, in the rotation of weeks, with the primeval Sabbath. • The proofs which establish this conclusion cannot be specified, much less set forth at large, in this brief Analysis. Suffice it to observe, 1. That in the year before, (but not including,) the first of the Christian era, 4008, the autumnal equinox fell within the limits of the 25th October. 2. That the two great luminaries were set in the firmament of heaven on the fourth day of the creation week. According to the ARRANGEMENTS, the moon was full, and the sun in Libra, on Thursday the 25th October in that week. But in the ANNALS the 25th October was Tuesday, the third of the week *. 3. If the calculation be framed on the principle of astronomical, (not Julian years,) and consequently on the hypothesis of stationary equinoxes; if likewise this calculation be continued progressively to A. D. 1792-the 28th October fell on a Sunday, the seventh of the patriarchal, but the first both of the Jewish and the Christian week †. Thus is the uniform rotation of weeks ascertained during the lapse of 58 centuries, now past. Should it be the will of the Almighty to continue the planetary revolutions 58 centuries more, Sunday will again fall on the 28th October, in the year of the world 11,600. With the fundamental principle of the ANNALS, this uniform, and invariable, series of weeks is incompatible. • The Mosaical chronology is constructed on the genealogy of the patriarchs; the age of each father at the birth of each specified son, respectively, being exactly defined, the sum of the intervals between the several descents, independently on the duration of particular lives, constitutes the measure of the distinct periods from the creation to the deluge; thence to the sojourning of Abraham; and thence to the Exodus. • In the first and second of these periods each specified year of procreation is counted from and to the autumnal equinox. For example Adam lived 130 years and begat Seth." The 130th of the father's life is continued to the subsequent autumnal equinox, and from that cardinal point is t is computed the first year of the son. This is the general rule. Otherwise the same year would be twice counted. • This first age of the world comprehends 1657 expanded years, ending with the six hundredth and first year of Noah's life. * See the Scheme,' •† Consult the almanacks for that year.' • Stages |