which forbid to confound this kind of pulfe with the others.' Here we confefs ourselves at a loss how to difcover the difference between this fimple pectoral and the general critical pulse above defcribed. The one is dilated, developed, foftened, equal, extended; the other, foft, full, dilated, equal. If, in this chapter, Mr. Bordeu has no juft accufation against his tranflator, we are of opinion that no finger but his own will be able to diftinguish one pulfe from the other. In juftice however to Mr. Bordeu, we muft obferve, that in the hiftories of cafes, which he fubjoins, by way of illuftration, to his description of the simple pectoral, the pulfe was conftantly reduplicated with fuppleness; so that we are apt to fufpect that our Tranflator, in the words there may be, has misunderstood his Author.

The fimple guttural pulfe, or that which indicates fimply the excretions of the glands of the throat, is developed, strong, with a reduplication in each ftroke, lefs full, and oftentimes more frequent than the pectoral pulfe: it feems to be intermediate between the pectoral and the nafal.

The fimple nafal pulfe is commonly the forerunner of a bleeding at the nofe: it is reduplicated as well as the guttural pulfe, but it is more full, more hard, it has much more force and celerity.' This is the dicrotus of Solano. We cannot poffibly difmifs this pulfe without tranfcribing Obfervation XX. A young man, of a robust conftitution, appearing to be pretty near his ufual good state of health, defired me to feel his pulse; having found it to be an abfolutely nafal one, I told him that if he had been in a state of illness, I fhould believe him on the point of having a bleeding at the nose: he anfwered me with an air of aftonishment, that he had bled at the nose the evening before, and that very day.' Was not this an Irish pulfe, by its prediction? From the cafes (which are here called obfervations) it appears, that the term rebounding particularly distinguishes this pulfe.

We come now to the 2d divifion of fimple critical pulfes, viz. the inferior, or that which precedes any critical evacuation below the diaphragm. Its principal characteristic is to be irregular.' Query, does the word irregular regard pulse or characteriftic? If we allow the natural conftruction, we must refer it to the latter; but the Tranflator thus explains himself that is to fay, that the pulfations are unequal among themselves, and have unequal intervals. These intervals are sometimes fo confiderable that they form real intermittences, according to the species of the inferior pulfe, and according as this fpecies is more or lefs declared. We feel alfo pretty often, a kind of faliency in the artery, which ferves greatly to characterize the inferior pulfe. This pulfe is never as much developed, as fupple, as equal, as the fuperior pulfe.' It were to be wished that the Tranflator

Tranflator had expreffed himself with more grammatical propriety.

The fimple flomachal pulfe is the leaft developed of all the critical pulfes, it is lefs unequal than all the other kinds of inferior pulfes; the artery feems to stiffen and to quiver under the finger; it is often pretty falient, the pulfations are frequent, and with intervals pretty equal.'

We cannot proceed to the next fimple pulfe without taking notice of the word ftomach instead of belly or inteftines in the title of Chap. XI. This cannot be a typographical blunder. The nature or ftate of the critical inteftinal pulfe is as follows it is hard, much more developed, than that which indicates vomiting; its pulfations are pretty ftrong, as it were rounded, and efpecially unequal, as well in their force, as in their interyals, which is a thing very difficult to diftinguish, since it happens almost always, that after two or three pulfations pretty equal and high, there appears two or three which are lefs developed, never quick, more clofe, and as it were subentrant; hence refults a kind of faliency or explosion (did he mean to write expanfion?) of the artery, or lefs regular; to the irregularities of this pulfe are joined frequently very remarkable intermittances (why not intermiffions?) It is never as full nor as developped (conftantly with a double p) as the fuperior pulfe: it has not neceffarily any fixed order in its intermittances; it is, on the contrary, by its diforder (inftead of irregularity) that it makes itfelf diftinguishable,'

The fimple pulfe of the matrix is commonly raised to a higher degree, more developed than in a natural ftate, its pulfations are unequal; it is accompanied with reboundings, but to fay the truth, lefs conftant, lefs frequent, or, at leaft, lefs remarkable than the nafal pulfe, yet fufficiently perceivable.'

By the hepatic pulfe, our Author means that which portends a jaundice. This pulfe, he informs us, is evidently inferior: after the ftomachal, there is no critical pulfe fo concentrated; it has neither hardness nor fiffness, it is unequal, and faid inequality confifts in this, that two or three pulfations unequal in themfelves, fucceed to two or three pulfations perfectly equal, and which often feem natural. It is lefs ftrong, lefs alert than that of the matrix; is alfo lefs brifk, lefs irregular than the inteftinal, and not rebounding.'

.

The fimple hemorrhoidal pulfe is thus diftinguished. To three or four pulfations fomewhat concentrated, brifk, renitent, and moft equal, fucceed two or three pulfations fomewhat dilated, it were rounded and lefs equal; the three or four following fations are rebounding; but these different pulfations have s in common, that we feel in them a kind of tremor pretty conftanta

3

conftant, and that they are more frequent and clofe than in the other kinds of inferior pulfes.'

The vefical pulfe, or that which portends a critical discharge of urine, when it is thoroughly critical, is found to have a great relation with the inteftinal pulfe, 'tis known that its pulTations are unequal; but it appears that in the very inequality there is a fort of regularity which the intestinal pulfe has not: the urinary pulfe has many pulfations effer the one than the other, and which proceed diminishing till they are lost in a manner under the finger; it is in the fame order that they return from time to time; the pulfations that are performed during these intervals are more developed, pretty equal, and fomewhat falient.'

We come laftly to the pulfe which indicates a critical sweat. When the pulfe is full, fupple, developed, ftrong, and that to its modifications there is joined an inequality, in which fome pulfations rife above the ordinary pulfations, and rife gradually until the laft, which makes itself diftinguished by a dilation, and at the fame time a fuppleness more marked than in the other pulfations, we must always expect a critical sweat.'

Thus far our Author, with regard to what he calls the fimple pulfes. The remainder of his work treats of these pulfes combined with each other. With what difficulty they are to be comprehended may be easily fuppofed by what we have already tranfcribed. Whatever may be the opinion of phyficians in general concerning the reality of the Author's fyftem, it were certainly unjust to fuppofe it merely the produce of an inventive genius, especially when we find, by the cafes annexed to his defcription of each particular pulfe, that his prognostics, founded on this theory, were generally verified by the event. Either there is more truth in thefe obfervations than is generally fuppofed, or the hiftories of cafes by which they are illuftrated are fictitious. We muft obferve, however, that the Author is extremely deficient for want of an accurate explanation of his terms, without which a work of this nature is in a great nieasure unintelligible. As to the tranflation, we must say, that it is very far from being elegant.

Phyfiological Reveries. 4to. I S.

Becket and De Hondt.

THE HE Author of this pamphlet has in fome degree prevented criticiim by the title of his performance, and by his adver tence, that we are to receive his reflections rather as crude beginnings of ideas, than as clear and authenticated conceptions.'

But

But that crude beginnings of ideas, and obfcure conceptions deserve little attention from the public, cannot be doubted: neverthelefs, as the fubjects propofed, viz. refpiration, falivary fecretion, and fevers, are in themselves important, we fhall briefly lay this Author's Reveries before our Readers.

With regard to the first of these fubjects, he chufes to imagine, that animals breathe not only by the lungs, but by every pore on the surface of the body, which thus, as he expreffes it, becomes one great pneumatic engine.' In fupport of this opi nion, he urges the general fimplicity of nature, whofe character is that of performing her work by the feweft inftruments poffible for, according to his hypothefes, there will be no need of inhaling ducts on the furface of the body; inhalation and exhalation being performed by the fame pores. But this proves nothing with regard to their admiffion of air, which is the fole point in queftion. As to the general fimplicity of nature, it is the ftrongeft argument which the Author could poffibly have advanced against his own reverie. Naturalifts have difcovered that infects breathe through pores on the external furface of their bodies, poris lateralibus refpirantia; but for this there is an evident neceffity, because they are not provided with lungs.

Our Author's idea concerning the falivary fecretion is, that its principal ufe in the animal oeconomy is to repair and nourish the body, for which purpose he thinks it better adapted than the crude aliment received into the ftomach.

That the faliva is a neceffary ingredient in the formation of chyle is evident; that the wafte of blood, by the various fecretions from it, is conftantly supplied by chyle poured into the left fubclavian, is alfo univerfally known; nor is it lefs certain, that from the blood are made the various fecretions in the animal body. The faliva therefore is fecreted from the blood, which blood, according to our Author, is again formed of the faliva. Who does not perceive the abfurdity of this circle? Can the Author be ignorant of the very inconfiderable quantity of the faliva compared with the other fecretions from the blood? which faliva he nevertheless imagines to be the principal ingredient in the formation of that blood. In fhort we cannot help obferving, that this fecond (no less than the firft) reverie, fhews the Author to be no very great adept in phyfiology.

As to his third reverie, if it is any thing at all, it is patholo, and not phyfiological, as the Author has thought fit to call Here he vents his indignation against the ignorance of those o mistake a fever for a difeafe; who fuppofe that any man, ince the creation of the world, ever died of a fever; who be lieve that fevers are not always fymptomatical.

That

That a fever frequently proves a remedy to a disease, is afferted by Hippocrates in various parts of his works: quibus hepar circumcirca dolet, his febris fuperveniens dolorem folvit. Aph. vii, 52. Lippitudine affecto fuborta febre, folutionem affert. Coac. 222. &c. So that, a fever's being often a remedy rather than a difeafe, is a very old opinion. Nor is our Author by any means fingular in his belief, that a fever is generally an effort of nature to effect fome falutary purpose; but it does not therefore follow that no man ever died of a fever. Suppofe, for inftance, a perfon receives a wound, which, from the part injured, is by no means mortal: yet a fever fupervenes, and the patient dies. In this cafe, the wound was the caufe of the fever, but the fever was the immediate cause of death. So in innumerable other inftances, though a fever may be excited by nature with a falutary. intention, yet, if not properly reftrained by the phyfician, it often deftroys the patient. In fupport of his affertion, that fevers are always fymptomatic, our Author proves nothing more, than that no effect is produced without a caufe; an axiom which we are not in the leaft inclined to conteft.

A large Collection of antient Jewish and Heathen Teftimonies to the Truth of the Chriftian Religion, with Notes and Obfervations. Vol. II. Containing the Teftimonies of Heathen Writers of the fecond Century. By Nathaniel Lardner, D. D. 4to. Ios. 6d. Buckland, &c.

W

E have here a fresh opportunity of doing juftice to the great learning, and uncommon induftry of the worthy Author of this work, whofe judicious writings in defence of Christianity do him great honour, and have done eminent fervice to the caufe which he fupports.

This fecond volume of his Collection is introduced with a Preface, containing fome farther obfervations upon the paragraph, in the works of Jofephus, concerning our bleffed Saviour. In his firft volume, the Doctor took no notice of an anonymous Differtation, printed at Oxford in the year 1749, and generally afcribed to Dr. N. Forfter; wherein the Author endeavours to fhew, that the celebrated paffage in queftion, fome flight corruptions only excepted, may reafonably be esteemed genuine. As great regard has been fhewn to this Differtation by fome learned men, our Author thinks proper to confider the merits of it.

The Author of the Differtation looks upon the account in Jofephus as a mere fimple narrative, in which there is not a

For our account of the fr volume, fee Rev. Vol. XXXII. p. 1.

fentence,