fuperftition, falutary difcipline with abfurd penances and civil authority was converted into an engine of deftruction. In all these enormous corruptions is Rome Antichriftian a genuine type of Rome Pagan. IN the Auguftan age, or the fulnefs of time, God fent forth his Son, invefted with a human character, and a special commiffion to break down the partition wall between Jew and Gentile, and slay their mutual enmity; not to mention many other purposes of effential goodness. What if it fhould be evinced, that the Auguftan age was likewife the fitnefs of time; nay even the fittest of all from the creation to the now expiring century.

1. The Roman Government had lately acquired a new form.

ITs primitive conftitution, under feven fovereigns, was regal; under annual confuls, republican; under tribunes of the army and of the commons, and other occafional magiftracies, partly popular and partly ariftocratical. Laft of all, it was an empire or monarchy, under one fupreme ruler, invefted with all the prerogatives of royalty, though without the title. This form of administration, as characterifed in prophecy, reftricts its commencement either to its firft, or to its last period. The first cannot be the prophetical term. For one indifpenfable criterion of its effence is neither priority of order, nor co-existence, but fucceffion to the other three. The firft feries of kings from Romulus

began about 148 years before the Babylonian empire. This arrangement is therefore an egregrious prochronifm.

FOR the like reafons is the republican fyftem, in all its modifications, exploded. It was almost coeval with the Perfian monarchy, and commensurate with that of Greece. The republican form is fpecifically different from the regal or imperial; and it is expressly affirmed, that identity of character should be an attribute common to all the four kingdoms, yet, admitting fuch marks of diversity as difcriminate individuals of the fame fpecies. The laft did actually commence immediately after the third had loft its political exiftence ;-and it is added, immediately after it had acquired its true prophetical character, by emerging from its republican form.

2. A reformed CALENDAR was necessary for the Truth of COMPUTATION.

THE primitive year, as regulated by Romulus, was deficient in quantity, and inartificial in form. It was improved by his fucceffor, Numa; but not on ftrict aftronomical principles. Julius Cæfar, in the Varronian year 708, and the 45th before A. D. 1, by the advice of Sofigenes, an eminent Egyptian aftronomer, reformed the national calendar, and procured its introduction over the whole empire. As exquifitely framed for popular ufe, the Julian year foon became the model in computation; and Iras, by immemorial prescription, been generally adopted in Europe. It exceeds the natural year by a few excrefcent-fractional parts, which,

being a well known quantity, have been, and may be, without limitation of future time, reduced to the flandard of nature, by periodical equations *.

IN the ANNALS of the Old and New Teftament,

The

have the chronology and history of no prior age been involved in a deeper gloom of artificial obscurity, than the fhort period of Chrift's life and miniftry. moft reverend author, it must be acknowledged, was in part mifled, even by the moft renowned hiftorians of the Auguftan and fubfequent age; and it may be confidered as a paradox, were it affirmed, that palpable chronological mistakes in Livy, Paterculus, Suetonius, &c. can be rectified no otherwife, than by indubitable characters of time in the Evangelist Luke. Such are, for infance, the date of the enrolment before the demife of Herod ;-of the actual taxation under Cyrenius the 15th of Tiberius, compared with the commencement of the 70th prophetical week ;-the age of Jefus in the first of John's miniftry. With all these notations full in his view, the primate feems to have put a veil before his face, and thrown an impenetrable fhade of darkness over fome of the moft luminous parts of the gospel history. Nor of it alone; for, by an arbitrary tranfpofition of hiftorical events, and a ftrange confufion of dates, the fabbatical cycles, prophetical periods, and national æras, are either rendered

* Of the Julian year, with respect to form, quantity, and mechanism, a more minute account is reserved for THE PRIN CAPLES OF COMPUTATION, under the article, CIVIL YEAR.

useless, or acquire the character of fallacious guides, in the art of computation.

How are thefe anachronisms in the Roman hiftories, and in the venerable AUTHOR of the ANNALS, to be corrected? By two infallible dates :-the reformation of the Roman calendar ;-and the demife of Tiberius Nero.

BUT can the quantity of this interval be ascertained? With the utmost ease. As each term is fixed by characters of equal certainty, it is a matter of pure indifference whether the intermediate years be computed in the retrograde or progreffive line. Various and decifive are the chronological measures applicable to this fhort and memorable period. Two are selected, in perfect agreement with all the reft;-the Jul. Per. and the years of the Varronian epoch of Rome.

TIBERIUS Nero died A. P. J. 4747, coincident with U. C. 787. on the 16th March; and in the fecond Julian year, on the 15th March, was Julius Cæfar slain in the senate house, A. P. J. 4670, coincident with U. C. 710. Nero was born about the end of the first Julian year, and died in the currency of his 78th. Deduct now 4669, the year of Nero's birth, from 4747, the date of his death, the furplus, 78, is the age Nero. Again 787-709-78, the refult of the two operations is the fame; but a few odd months are included. If, however, the computation proceed from the death of the firft Cæfar to that of Tiberius, the third, the interval is circumfcribed within the limits of

of

77 full

133

77 full years, and one natural day. For 4747-4670 =77 and 787-710-77.

Two queries remain for difcuffion ;-whether the hiftorians of that and the fucceeding age, have truly defined this interval;—and whether the Metropolitan's arrangement be confiftent with itself, with the report of history, and with chronology.

"AUGUSTUS, the second Roman emperor, died, as Jofephus teftifies, after a reign of 57 years, fix months, and two days *. "Tiberius died after his predeceffor 22 years, five months, and three days +.”

THE fum (57. 6. 2+22. 5. 3=79 y. 11 m. 5 d.) exceeds the true quantity by almost three years.

"AUGUSTUS, together with Antony and Lepidus, governed almost twelve years, and lastly by himself 54‡.' "Tiberius died in the 23d of his reign §." "Tiberius ruled with arbitrary power 23 years nearly ." After the confulate of Hirtius and Pansa, Auguftus fucceeded to that dignity. Add 56 years for this reign, and 23 for that of Tiberius, the fum is 79. But from the affaffination of Julius to the confulate of Octavius, was a space of 18 months. Thus is the interval enlarged to 80 years fix months **.-Easy it were to multiply authorities. But falfehood, though attefted by a cloud of witnesses, does not change its nature. Can the fource of this mistake be discovered? The deception is obvious, at first view. Jofephus, and the author of the