progenitors of his people, so that we can receive no light from him at all here. Moreover, which is very worthy of attention, even the manufcript copies of the Vulgate verfion itself do not accord about the number of them who perifhed on the occafion, if we may credit those who have had accefs to their infpection. For they + inform us, that fome of them read, twenty-three thousand, and fome, thirty-three thousand; wherefore many eminent divines of the church of Rome, difregard its account thereof altogether, looking upon it as corrupted here, among whom are Arias Montanus, Cajetan, and Vatablus. Nay, in the Complutenfian and Paris Polyglotts, which were printed under the direction of the learn ed in its communion, the Latin text itself exhibits three thousand, as the total amount of those that were deftroyed, either from a reverence of the original, fupported as the genuineness of its reading is, in the manner already mentioned, or from a preference of the authority of fome manufcript of the Vulgate which did read fo, but is now loft or unknown. This Bochart obferves, who also conjectures, that the old Italic version which Jerome reformed, read three thoufand, because Ambrofe of Milan, who + Pol. Synopfis Criticorum, in locum.

Hieroz. p. 1. lib. 2 cap. 34. But his opinion about the reading of the Italic version appears very uncertain, fince Ambrofe might borrow his account from the septuagint, as it is plain he understood Greek, from his appeal to the Greek copies of the New Teftament, against fome who pretended that the Latin ones were falfified and vitiated, which the excellent Dr. Lardner hath remarked, Credib. part 2. vol. 9 page 255. And any other Latin writers, whom Bochart quotes for a like reading of the text, lived after Gregory the Great, who read twenty-three thousand.

flourished about the year of Chrift 370, in his letter
to Regulus, calls the flain for the calf no more,
Upon the whole, Voltaire hath no authority for
thus fwelling the number of the perfons that were
killed by the Levites, in obedience to Mofes's order,
but the Vulgate verfion, in oppofition to the Hebrew
and Samaritan texts, and all antient tranflators,
although that is likewise various in its readings here,
instead of uniform and confiftent, and therefore a-
bandoned by Popish writers themselves, of the great-
eft name and reputation. And is not this very dif-
ingenuous dealing, to cavil at the facred books upon
the credit of this one version, which is modern in
comparison of fome others, differs in its own repre-
fentation of the fact in the manufcript copies which
are extant of it, and is fo undeniably confuted by
every critical argument which can have place here?
Whether the number of twenty-three thousand was
firft introduced into this tranflation by an accident-
al mistake of fome tranfcriber, or whether it was first

It may be proper to take notice here, that the authors of the An-
tient Universal History, 8vo. vol. 3. page 414. fay in a note, Some
copies of the Vulgate and Seventy read twenty thousand, and others
thirty-three thousand,' while at the fame time they justify the num
ber three thousand, by this among other reasons, that it is hardly prob-
able the Levites could make a greater slaughter in so short a time, viz.
before Mofes, by his interceffion obtained the pardon of the guilty. But
as there is a typographical mistake in the number twenty thousand here,
which accordingly is in the folio edition twenty three thousand, fo I
fuppofe it must be admitted an error in them altogether, to mention the
Seventy as reading either of the ways. At leaft, Bos has marked no dif-
ferent reading in the Greek copies from the received one TXING
three thousand, except Tpes Xiadas, which hath the fame meaning
with that other expreffion.

foifted in with intention, by fome warm zealot, as certain critics have ingenioufly conjectured, that he might make the number of the flain here, quadrate with the Apostle's number, 1 Cor. x, 5. I do not now inquire, it being foreign to the work before me. He however, I think, is speaking of the mischievous effects of God's wrath against Israel, not for making and worshipping the golden calf, but for committing whoredom with the Moabitish women; for with the account of the fame by Mofes, he may, without any violence, be in different ways reconciled.

SECTION III.

Of his making, in chapter forty-third, God direct Ezekiel to cover his bread with human excrement, and thereafter with the excrement of oxen.

ANOTHER inftance of mifrepresentation, in which Mr. Voltaire hath, at least seemeth to have, the authority of the Vulgate, occurs in the forty-third chapter of his Philofophy of Hiftory. Speaking of Ezekiel, he fays, 'He is to eat bread made of wheat, barley, beans, lentiles, millet, and to cover it with human excrements. Thus, faid he, will the chil'dren of Ifrael eat their bread befmeared with those ⚫ nations among whom they fhall be driven. But af'ter having eat this bread of forrow, God allows him ' to cover it with only the excrement of oxen.' And he dwells on this again in his Philofophical Dictionary; fo delightful is the fubject to him, and fo confident is he of the truth of his account! Several Page 163. article Ezekiel.

† Page 209.

' critics cannot be reconciled to the order given him by the Lord, that during 390 days he should eat barley, wheat, and millet bread befmeared with 'man's dung. Then faid the prophet, "Ah Lord "God, behold my foul hath not hitherto been pol"luted." And the Lord answered, "Well, inftead "of man's excrements, I allow thee cow dung, and "thou fhalt prepare thy bread therewith." As it is * not customary with us to eat bread with fuch mar'malade, these orders to the generality of men appear unworthy of the divine majesty.'

That Ezekiel fhould be commanded to mix much of the coarfer and meaner kinds of grain, with a little of the finer and richer fort, by which means the stock would continue longer unexhaufted, to fignify the scarcity which the inhabitants of Jerusalem fhould labour under, and the unpalatable fare they should be reduced to fubmit to, during the fiege, we wonder not. But we are shocked at his being bid cover his bread with human excrements, ta represent that the children of Ifrael should eat their bread befmeared with thofe nations among whom they should in their captivity refide; and at his being only indulged, upon his importunity against the ufe hereof, with the excrements of oxen or cows in their room, after he had ate so abominable and loathfome food, which is Mr. Voltaire's tale, at least in one place.

Is this, however, the neceffary or reafonable import of the divine direction at first, and allowance afterward, to the prophet, that he should feed upon bread having either fuch an ingredient in its composition, or (for the reader must pardon the offen

fiveness of the idea as Voltaire's) fuch marmalade fpread over it? Not at all. The Vulgate * indeed favours it: and it is, perhaps, the most obvious fenfe even of our English verfion, † that ordure fhould be t wrought into the mass or dough from which the cakes were to be made: but the original may, nay ought to be interpreted, only to denote, that excrements should be used for fuel, in baking his bread, instead of coals, wood, turf, or like things. For as my gnug fignifies not to cover, but to bake, whence its derivatives are always rendered, cakes, so it is certain the prefix a beth in 1 begaleli, may be turned upon, as it is with frequency; in which way the command of God will run, v. 12. And as

to it, (the cake) thou fhalt bake it upon human ex'crements;' the fame being dried, fhall be employed to make a fire, over which thou fhalt harden thy bread. And this again will agree to verse 15, where the word by gnal occurs, which signifies most commonly upon, || and is fo rendered by our tranflators themselves, where there is mention of the fuel

* Vulg. verf. Ezek. iv. 12. Et ftercore operies illud.—v. 1 5. Et facies panem tuum in eo.'

+ It stands thus, iv. 12. Thou shalt bake the bread with dung that cometh out of man in their fight.-v. 15. Lo I have given thee cow's dung for man's dung, and thou shalt prepare thy bread 'therewith.'

In this way it is turned in Gen. xxxvii. 34. He put fackcloth upon his loins.' Levit. xx. 9. His blood fhall be upon him.' Neh. ii. 12. The beast upon which I rode.' Pfal. cxix. 135. 'Make thy ⚫ face to shine upon thy fervant.'

See Gen. xix. 23. xlvii. 31. Levit. xvi. 21. 15. Judg. vii. 6. 2 Sam. iv. 7. 2 Kings, iv. 34.

Num. iv. 1 1. ix.

Pf. xxix, 3.