Obrazy na stronie

Ascanius Ascanius Æneas Ascanius
Sylvius. Sylvius Ascanius Sylvius

: Æneas Sylvius Æneas Latinus Latinus Larinus Launus Alba Alba

Alba Albas Epytus Sylvius, Athis Atis Capetus Capys Capys Capys Capys Capetus Calpetus Calpetus Calpetus Tiberinus Tiberinus Tiberinus Tiberinus Agrippa Agrippa Agrippa Agrippas Remulus Remulus Remulus Allades Aventinus Aventinus Aventinus Aventinus Proca Procas Proca Procas Numitor Amulius Amulius Amulius

[ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]

In these four editions the names, and order of suc. cession, are too much at variance to acquire the credit due to auhentic records. The numbers taken from Dionyfius do not amount to 432. He afligns indeed 7 years to the firft Æneas and his predecessor Latinus ; which fill the blank. Proper, but inefficient, is Sir Isaac Newton's scheme for reducing the quantum of these reigns from 432 to 280 years, as it has been hewn, that the space, between Latinus and Romulus, cannot exceed 147 years. Absolutely necessary it is to retrench the one half of the nominal kings, that the

arrangements arrangements by generations and reigns may correspond to the national eras, by which the history of the times is to be adjusted.

5. Dido the great grand-daughter of Ethbaali laid the foundation of Carthage in the 18th year from the defolation of Troy, as formerly mentioned, in co-inci.. dence with sundry chronological characters. As the history of this new state is incorporated with that of the Roman Empire, the time of its origin is an acquisition of no small importance. < 6. A. M. 3232 IPHITUS restored the Greek Olympiad 124 years after the conclusion of the Trojan war, and 7 after the foundation of Carthage. It is not alleged that this year was diftinguished by the exhibition of the usual solemnities, but that is affirmed to be the true source whence the first circulating period of four years, characterised as the original Olympiad, begins. One invariable criterion discriminates the years on which prizes were adjudged to the victorsthey were BISSEXTILE. This appropriate and exclufive mark of the periodical quadriennium in Greece, is the more remarkable, as prior in time to the knowledge of the astronomical reafon, which requires the intercalary day: for it is observed by Mr. Costard, « That the time is uncertain when it was discovered that the true length of the solar year was 3654 days ; but probably not much before the time of Eudoxus, that is, 363 years before our era :" or, 413 subsequent to the era of the restored Olympiad * This noted term • See Costard's Aftronomy of the Ancients, 1746, p. 36.

of computation, Sir Isaac Newton admits, was called, by the Greeks, the fource of HISTORICAL time. But he adds, “ The fabulous ages wanted a good chronology, and so also did the historical for the firft 60 or 70 Olympiads *." · If this postulate be implicitly admitted, the illustrious author's arrangement, which defers the foundation of Rome to the 38th Olympiad, is involved in all the uncertainty of the fabulous ages; nay, it may be doubted whether the first year of the 68th Olympiad were the true date of the Regifuge, as is asserted, without a peradventure t. . . Suppose the consulate introduced with the ensuing year, this important revolution is characterised by a very ambiguous point in time; that imperceptible line which divides the hitorical from the fabulous ages.

7. In the year of the world 3255 was the foundation of Rome laid, 147 from the fall of Troy, 130 from the rise of Carthage, and 23 from the revival of the Olympiad 1. Sir I. Newton's rash and groundless

hypothesis, hypothesis, which protracts the building of Rome to the 38th Olympiad, incurs the censure of an egregious metachronism. The word protracted is here fitly used, for certain it is, that the work was begun 130 years carlier. , The Olympiad from its restoration did not immediately become a general term in reckoning, even among the Greeks. If the Romans, after several centuries, began to connect their own history with the chronology of the Olympiads, their notations, if supported by various probabilities of certainty, are not to be rejected, as of doubtful credit. On this foot, Eutropius, and others, who assign the third of the vith Olympiad for the historical origin of Rome, are not to be suspected of credulity or falsehood. .

* Chron. p 44. + Chron. p. 130. 1 Sir I. Newton says, that Varro computes the first of Rome from the first of the viith Olympiad, Chron. p. 129. This erroneouis date is, without the least fafyicion of'allacy, copied from Dionyfius 'he Antiquary, lib i.c 92. In the 4th chapter of the fame hook he remarks, “.Porcius Cato adopts no Grecian account, but being no less accurate in coecting ancient historical facts, than the very best writers, he connects the building of Rome with the 132d after the taking of Troy. This term, compared with the tables of Eratosthenes, coin.


cides with the first of Olympiad vii. If Cato followed no Greek chronologer, he ventured to introduce a computation of his own. The first Varronian year of Rome did coincide in January A.P.J. 3961, with which month began A. U.C.1; and the third year of the vith Olympiad expired about the time of the ensuing fummer folftice. By the Falti Consulares the fourth of the vith Olympiad is the first of Rome; and, by the Catonian era, this date is brought one year lower ftill. Unavoidable is the conclusion that Dionyfius and Sir I. Newton fell into a mistake, when they affirmed the fynchronism of the Varronian epoch, with the first of the viith Olympiad. With an obvious neglect of propriety, does the great antiquary connect the first year of Romulus with the third of the Varronian era.


· FROM Dionyfus * are collected the following apposite notations, expressing the dates of reigns.





Olympiads i vii. Books and Chapp. i. 165. Numa Pompilius

ü. 58. Tullus Hoftilius

2 xxvii.

üi. 1. Ancus Marcius


iii. 37. Tarquinius Prifcus.

iii. 47. Servius Tullius


iv. s. Tarq. Superbus


iv. 41. Brutus & Collatinus, the first pair a Ixviii. of Consuls.



Thus the reigns of the seven kings, from Romulus so the first pair of Consuls exclufively, amount to 244 years. The reasons, which militate againft Sir I. Newton's reduction of them to 119, have already been set forth at large ; and if the objections, to the abbreviation of reigns, be satisfactory and insurmountable, no inducement occurs for bringing the date of the Varsonian computation forward to the year before Christ 627, as in the SHORT CHRONICLE. The penetrating author seems to have been aware, that his scheme for bringing the overthrow of Troy almost 300 years lower than the general opinion, would not escape the rod of criticism. He therefore judged it proper not to incur the suspicion of coinpressing, at one bold opera

• As Dionyfius professedly adopts the Caton'an reckoning, which brings the several dates two years lower than the Varronian, the accession of Romulus must be compted from the 3d of the vith Olympiad, the first consulate from the 4th of the Ixviith, and each intermediate date carried two year: higher.


« PoprzedniaDalej »