FROM Dionyfius

are collected the following ap

pofite notations, expreffing the dates of reigns.

Olympiads 1 vii. Books and Chapp. i. 161.

REIGNS.

Romulus

Numa Pompilius

Tarq. Superbus

ii. 58.

iii. 1.

iii. 37.

iii. 47.

iv. I.

iv. 41.

I.

Brutus & Collatinus, the first pair 2 lxviii. of Confuls.

V.

THUS the reigns of the feven kings, from Romulus to the first pair of Confuls exclufively, amount to 244 years. The reasons, which militate against Sir I. Newton's reduction of them to 119, have already been fet forth at large; and if the objections, to the abbreviation of reigns, be fatisfactory and infurmountable, no inducement occurs for bringing the date of the Varronian computation forward to the year before Chrift 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 fufpicion of compreffing, at one bold opera

As Dionyfius profeffedly adopts the Caton'an reckoning, which brings the several dates two years lower than the Varronian, the acceffion of Romulus must be computed from the 3d of the vith Olympiad, the first consulate from the 4th of the lxviith, and each intermediate date carried two years higher.

tion,

tion, 432 years into 124. Much more plaufible it was to extend an expedient of gradual retrenchment through 676 nominal years, comprehending 21 reigns, all which reigns it was judged advisable to retain, but to exclude 277 years, as incompatible with the course of nature in generations.

SUFFICE it to have mentioned, without an intent to amplify, certain inftances of deviation from the truth of chronology, hiftory, and nature, in detached parts of this extenfive work. It must not, however, be diffembled, that certain decifions of this great mafter in computation, contradict affumed principles, and fhake the foundation of pre-established difcoveries..

WITH a felicity of uniting dispersed materials, (a talent almost peculiar to himself), Sir I. Newton found that Carthage was deftroyed A. P. Jul. 4568;-that it had flood 737 years ;-that it had been built A. P. Jul. 3831. Eafy it was to recollect that the year, when Carthage was overthrown, coincided with the 608th from the foundation of Rome: and that 4568608 3960, which operation continues the reckoning back to the first half of the third year in the 6th Olympiad, or the true source of the Varronian epoch. Thus Sir I. Newton's principles, fairly applied, invalidate his own decifions: for 3960-3831=129, by which quantity Carthage was older than Rome. But if the foundation of the latter were laid after the lapfe of 38 Olympiads, the difference in time is 260 years. Befides the incongruity of shifting terms, the age of Carthage being measured by the years of Rome,

computed

computed from the 6th Olympiad, and then this foundation is removed, and the interval enlarged by one half, with respect to the date of the two cities, but diminished with respect to the term of co-exiftence. This mode of computation resembles fome of the plaufible fallacies in logic. Befides this obvious incongruity, another and greater perplexity occurs. The first Punic war broke out in the 188th confulate from the expulfion of the kings; A. Claudius Caudex, and M. Fulvius Flaccus, then holding the fafces. Sir Ifaac allows but 119 years for the period of monarchy: and 188+119=307, denotes the year of Rome according to the CHRONOLOGY of ancient Kingdoms amended, at the commencement of the first Punic war. By the fame authority Carthage had stood 567 years. The very suppofition that Rome, at so very early a period, was more than a match for Carthage, exhibits the aspect of something more than a historical paradox.

8. In the 6th year from the Varronian Era, inclufively, began the famous computation called The Era of Nabonaffar, on the partition of the Affyrian Empire by him and Tiglath-Pilefer. Bishop Beveridge extols it, as a very accurate character of Times, and incapable of deception *.

AN account of its form, mechanism, and quantity, is incompatible with the narrow limits of this Appendix. As a term in computation it obtained a general and

Hâc epochâ nihil in totâ chronologiâ celebrius, nihil cognitu magis neceffarium, utpote qui exactiffimus eft temporum character, et fallere nefcius. Inftit. Chronol, lib. ii. E e

сар.

16. 1.

almoft

almost exclusive reception, over Affyria, Chaldea, Egypt, Media, and Perfia. With its first year Ptolemy began his very learned performance, the Mathematical Syntaxis, and Dean Prideaux his excellent Connexion of the Old and New Teftament Hiftory with that of Paganism. It ferves as an infallible directory for the chronology and hiftory of the times, under the fucceffive monarchies, during the lapse of nine centuries.

THAT very eminent author continues his valuable work down to the time of M. Antoninus, and, not without obvious propriety, concludes his researches, after having afcertained a fufficient number of fixed periods, which may be prolonged indefinitely in the progreffive series of years and centuries, for conducting future adventurers through the thorny paths of chronological difquifition. Such has the writer of these fheets found them. The fanguine defire of improving the useful difcoveries of his ingenious and learned predeceffors, for facilitating progrefs in facred literature, has prompted him to strike out, in many cafes of difficult investigation, a new track for himself; cautious, on the one hand, of innovation, and on the other, of intemperate cenfure.

THE primary inducement to an enterprize so complicated and extenfive, was the correction of those numbers, relative to family pedigrees and chronology, which, feemingly at mutual variance, incongruous with nature, or intuitively abfurd, either mar the fenfe, or impair the credibility, of many fuch notations in the facred volumes. For the attainment of an end fo

defirable, recourfe was had to various expedients, and to many without effect. As a series of genealogies, or intervals of lineal defcent from a firft ancestor, is the fole bafis of the facred chronology, during the long fpace of 25 centuries prior to the Exodus ;-and, as the infpired writers were directed to number the intermediate generations from the creation to our era ;— it seemed reasonable to conclude, that genealogy is an ingredient, effential to certainty in the computation of times, fo remote.

WITHOUT a scheme of chronology framed according to the natural measures of time, and to instituted combinations of its integral parts, that accuracy in computation, which excludes the poffibility of deception, is not attainable.

SUPPOSE a hiftory conftructed on fuch infallible principles, it must extend back to the primary fource of measured time, otherwife that radical point, whence PROCREATION begins, cannot be ascertained.

THE Bible History alone mentions a BEGINNING of computation by natural days. These are combined into weeks; these into months, fo denominated from periodical afpects of the moon; and months into years. Years are diftinguished into lunar, luni-folar, folartropical, and fidereal. Whatever might have been the form or dimenfions of the civil years, in diverfe ages or climates, the folar-tropical of 365d. 5 h. 48m. 57s. was the standard of computation among the Patriarchs, Hebrews, Ifraelites, and Jews. Hence it is collected that their computations were conformable to the natural measures

E e 2