70 years are accomplished at Babylon I will visit you Ier. 29.10 For I will rise up against them saith the Lord of hosts and cut off from Babylon the name and remnant both son and nephew saith the Lord. Esa 14.22 And againe When there commeth a Nation out of the North and layeth Babel wast then in those dayes and at that time saith the Lord the Children of Israel shall come weeping and enquiring the way to Sion Ier. 50.4 Now that no part of this could goe beyound the death of Belshazzar the third King is apparant out of Daniels prophecy For this saith he is the interpretation of the thing MENE God hath numbred thy Kingdome and finished it Dan. 5.26 Where note that if Nebuchadnezzars Kingdome were numbred and finished at the death of Belshazzar then must no part either of his Kingdome or of the 70 years be after that time for not onely were the years of the Kingdome but of the Captivity to end then their dates by Scripture depending each upon other It is therefore said in Esay that Tyrus which we know was one of them that was to bear Babels yoake shall be forgotten 70 years according the dayes of one King Esa 23.15 Which expression according to the dayes of one King is certainly meant of one Kingdome and is expounded so by a like phrase in Dan. 7.17 23. Of one Kingdome I say viz. The Kingdome of Babylon which was Nebuchadnezzars Kingdome continued onely to him his son and his sons son as was before mentioned out of Ier. 27.7 and Esay 14.22 Upon consideration of which sure it was Hist World lib. 3. c. 1. sect 4. that Sir Walter Raleigh in his History of the World could say They who meerly follow the authority of the Scripture without borrowing any helpe from others name onely three Kings viz. Nebuchadnezzar Evilmerodach and Belshazzar For which they have not onely the filence of Daniel for their warrant who names none other but even the promise of Ieremiah also precisely and in a manner purposely teaching the same Jer. 27.7 In which text be words expressing the continuance of the Chaldaean Empire and number of the Kings so as will hardly be qualified with any distinction And indeed I finde no other necessity of qualification to be used herein then such as may grow out of mens desire to reconcile the Scriptures unto prophane Authours Which desire were not unjust if the consent of all Histories were on the one side and the letter of the holy Text were single on the other side Thus he very gravely and judiciously and therefore without some handsome way of reconcilement I shall build no more upon the Authority of this Fragment of Berosus then I have hitherto done But perhaps a way may be found Suppose we then this to be propable That after Evilmerodach had reigned two years that then he gave himselfe to sloth and luxury and thereupon appointed Naragalrazar his sisters husband to be his Deputy which continued for the space of four years at the end whereof Evilmerodach either dyed or was slain by his Debuty who thereupon strove what he could to establish the Kingdome to his owne son Labosardach albeit he were a child But Nabonidus otherwise called Balthasar or Belshazzar impatient of such an injury prevailes against him For though for nine moneths space he was a little molested yet at the end thereof he was quietly possessed of his Fathers throne which he held for the space of seventeen years and was then slain at the taking of Babylon by King Cyrus who in the second year of his expedition took the City and so ended the time of Babels Kingdome in which the Nations were to serve Nebuchadnezzar his son and his sons son This I confesse would seeme something probable were all things correspondent but here is so short a time for the reign of these Kings that they will be all dead and gone before the Captivity was ended which can by no means be I remember therefore what is conjectured by the knight before mentioned in his History of the World lib. 3. cap. 1. sect 13. viz. That the seven years or six years and nine moneths given by Berosus to Evilmerodach Naragalrazar and Labosardach are not to be reckoned after the death of Nebuchadnezzar but rather before namely in the time of his Madnesse and living Wilde during which time Evilmerodach having expected the recovery of his Father about some three moneths reigned two years then Naragalrazar having put him downe rules four years and last of all Labosardach nine moneths in the end whereof Nebuchadnezzar is againe restored Which opinion though differing from that of Lyranus and Pererius who make Evilmerodach the sole Regent in his Fathers absence and is also differing from that of Josephus who speaking of Nebuchadnezzars madnesse saith none durst invade the Kingdome all those seven years yet for all that I think no wise man will lightly esteeme it for it serves better to reconcile Berosus to the Scriptures then any other opinion that hitherto hath been extant Scaliger in his Animadversions upon Eusebius expounds Berosus otherwise and saith Evilmerodach succeeded Nebuchadnezzar whom Naragalrazar slew thereby to advance his own son the nephew of Nebuchadnezzar to the Septer which himself swayed as Protectour in the minority of his son who was called Labosardach But Naragalrazar being dead and his son more fit for a Chamber then a Throne Nabonidus conspired against him slew him This Nabonidus saith Scaliger is Darius Medus and Labosardach is that Belshazzar mentioned by Daniel according to his interpretation of the Prophet out of Berosus and Megasthenes which indeed is but his interpretation who we know was in all thing singular and in most things peremptory and therefore though he scorneth all other Chronologers who subscribe not to his magisteriall Dictates yet are his bare words no warrant nor scornes good proofes to make us think his Tenets the onely true ones no not here in this now under question For the Oracle of the Prophet points us out no other then Nebuchadnezzar Evilmerodach and Belshazzar as already hath been proved Unto which let me add that Herodotus calleth the last King of Babylon Labynitus and who was this but Nabonidus in Berosus and who was Nabonidus but Belshazzar called by the Babylonians Naboandel as saith Josephus who was Belshazzar but he whom Cyrus conquered as Xenophon plainly with the Prophet Daniel beareth witnesse Note also further that Darius Medus was a Mede by birth and not a Babylonian being Darius of the seed of the Medes Dan. 9.1 And if a Mede by birth then how could Nabonidus be Darius Medus who even in Berosus himselfe is said to be a Babylonian And as Daniel is against him so also Esay shewing that he came not to his Kingdom by Election For behold I will stur up the Medes against thee Esa 13.17 The Medes therefore assaulted Babylon and took it together with the Persians not by favour but by
the same Chap. v. 23. namely That the Priests were written to the times of Iohanan the chiefe Priest But he was not under the last Darius it was his sonne Iaduah whom Nehemiah might see being a child but not a chiefe Priest neither doth he say he did So then though Nehemiah might and did come low in the times of this Monarchie yet not to the end of it by farre For beside all this Iaduah began to be in the Priests office 32 years at the least before the last year of the last Darius although he entred thereon but at the death of Mnemon whereas no man can tell but he might be in the Priesthood some years before and so not only be old when he met Alexander but also be so high in the Persian times as Nehemiah might record him heire of the Priesthood At which time though it were when Nehemiah was old yet is not this granted without warrant For that Nehemiah lived till he was laden with age Josephus affirmeth in his Antiquities at the end of the fifth Chapter of the eleventh booke But I do ill you will say to mention Josephus for by him Nehemiah being of equall time with Sanballat must be as low as the dayes of the last Darius Joseph lib. 11. cap. 8. Whereto Iansw that though it be cōmonly collected from Iosephus that he who resisted Nehemiah at the building of the wals of Jerusalem was the same Sanballat who obtained leave of Alexander to build a Temple on mount Garizim for his son in law Manasses yet by Scripture records compared with his writings it appeareth otherwise For in Josephus Manasses who was then the son in law to Sanballat and cast out by a tumult of the people through the assistance of the high priest Jaduah was the brother of Jaduah But he whom Nehemiah mentioneth was not the brother of Jaduah but the brother of the father of Jaduah and not cast out by the people assisted by the chiefe priest but cast out by Nehemiah himselfe as is manifest in Neh. 13.28 It can therefore be no absurdity to grant there were two Sanballats the one in the dayes of Nehemiah and the other in the dayes of the last Darius and of Alexander magnus which last died after the end of the Persian Monarchie two yeares after the taking of Gaza Joseph antiq lib. 11. c. 8. And thus having removed all such Scruples as may seeme to hinder the beginning of Daniels weekes in the 20th year of Artaxerxes Longimanus I proceed and go on to interpret the words following Vnto Messiah the Prince This is meant of Christ Jesus our Lord as may be seen Esa 55.4 Psal 2.2 Ioh. 1.41 For this is to be noted that the word Messiah is never used for an Adjective being set before the Substantive as here MESSIAH NAGID Messiah the Prince And therefore doth here mean no other then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 CHRIST THE LORD as the Angel stiles him Luke 2.11 and is for certaine a proper name in this text belonging unto him who is the Saviour of the world who after seven weekes and threescore and two weekes was crucifyed upon the Crosse even in the last weeke of the Seventy And note likewise that when in other texts it is attributed to other persons it is then after another manner having a Pronounce affixed or a Substantive of the Genitive case as Mine annointed Thine annointed The annointed of God his annointed or The Priest which is annointed But here is no such thing and therefore must upon necessity meane CHRIT JESUS our Lord and no other Which even Rabbi Judah confesseth in his Comment upon Daniel alleadging thereupon that saying of the prophet in Esa 55.4 Behold I have given him for a witnesse to the people a Prince and a Commander of the Nations Seven weekes and threescore and two weekes These put together do make 69. weekes or 483. years whose precise end was at the beginning of Christs Ministery for then did Christ Jesus our Saviour Messiah the Prince openly manifest himself being annointed to that office a little before when he was baptized by John in Jordan proclaimed then by a voice from Heaven to be the son of God Both which fell into the yeare of the Iulian Period 4742. the one on the sixth of January when he was baptized the other on the third of October when he began his Ministery 483. yeares from the beginning of the weekes For in 69 weekes are 69 sevens of yeares and they put together do make 483. yeares If it be objected that the Medea distinctio or the Hebrew point Athnah standing in the originall next after Seven weekes are against this interpretation my answer then is that though there be indeed such a distinction or point there yet the sence is not therefore to be suspended at Seven weekes as if they might not together with the 62 make one whole number of 69. For in the first Chapter of Genesis at the first verse thewords and the points stand thus In the beginning God created the Heavens and the Earth And yet there Athnah hath not so much as the force of a Comma It would therefore be observed that the holy Hebrew as one saith hath 19 Kingly accents and eleven Servants The Kings stay many times on the chiefe word or number in the sentence whilst the servants hasten on And although any King for the most part will make a full sence as words be pointed in other tongues yet sometimes not so much as a Comma But why is seven seperated from sixty two Quest and not rather 69 set downe in whole number Answ I answer the Angel dividing these weekes which were 70 into sixty two and one sheweth what was to fall out in every of those parts This first part thereof is for that which was done first and because seven is farre lesse then sixty two it is called after a Propheticall and obscure phrase Astreight of times In which first intervall most like it is that the City was fully finished and set in order That is both publike and private works and buildings as houses streets and wayes substituting of right Officers with other things of the like kind With which interpretation the interlinearie Glosse agreeth as Petavius noteth Verse 26. And after 62 weekes Messiah shall be slaine That is Sixty and two weekes after the Seven for when the Seven weekes were ended then were the 62. to take beginning and the one weeke next after them for the confirming of the Covenant In which one weeke it was that the Messiiah was slain for as the Angel here sheweth it was after seven and sixty two and therefore in the seventieth or last Week of the seventy And why I say after seven and sixty two is because of the division first seven then sixty two Which is all one with after sixty two accounted from the end of the seven for so without doubt the Angel meaneth To which purpose Lansbergius noteth saying Non
then Abraham For at the destruction of Sodome Abraham being then * At which time Abrahams body was said to be dead but was revived by the power of God not onely for the generation of Isaac but for further procreation as appeareth Gen. 25. 99 years old when the daughters of Lot lay with their Father they said of him that he was an old man Set then the birth of Abraham before Harans and how can any of these things be Beside the time from the Flood to Terah's seventieth year was too short to have the world so full of People and Kingdomes as it was in Abrahams time Hist of the World lib. 2. page 190. For in Abrahams time and long before as it is excellently observed by Sir Walter Raleigh all the then known parts of the World were peopled All regions and countries had their Kings Egypt had many magnificent Cities and so also had Palestine and all the bordring Countries yea and all that part of the World beside as farre as India And those not built with sticks but of hewen stones and defended with wals and Rampires Which magnificence needed a Parent of more Antiquity then they have supposed who place the birth of Abraham so near the Flood as Terah's seventieth year For that time even in reason is not sufficient being * It was no more then 292 lesse then 300 years All therefore considered doe make me conclude that Abraham undoubtedly was borne when Terah was 130 years old For though some frivilous objections may be made to the contrary yet it is in vaine to object against such testimonies and proofes as will passe for current any where but among the Singular and inconsiderate who are rather willing to wrangle for the upholding of their opinions then to yeeld or give over from what they first tooke up to be true For as there be some who love to keep to that which best fits their fancy so there be others who think it a discredit to let goe what they at first maintained SECT III. Of the third Period from the Promise at Abrahams departing out of Haran to the comming of the Israelites out of Egypt that it was a Period of four hundred and thirty years THis is proved by texts and testimonies out of Scripture For first Saint Paul saith expresly That the Law began * There were some odd moneths more But the Apostle leaveth out the moneths as an imperfect number 430 years after the Promise Galat. 3.17 Which that it was the same promise of Christ that Abraham had in Gen. 12. is manifest by what the same Apostle said before at the eighth verse viz. That in thee shall all the Nations of the Earth be sed agreeing therein to Moses Gen. 12.3 Now this directeth to the right reckoning but is not altogether so precise as that which we have in Exod. 12.40 For there we may perceive that the precise and exact ending of these years was not on the day that the Law was given but on the day that the Israelites came away out of Egypt The words of which Text be these And the sojourning of the Children of Israel whereby they sojourned in Egypt 30 years and 400 years which speech is altogether Elliptica oratio or a defectve speech and is thus to be supplyed namely And the sojourning of the Children of Israel whereby they sojourned in Egypt was to the end of 430 years Not that they were in Egypt so long but that they were a sojourning Nation so long the beginning whereof was in the dayes of Abraham at the time when he received the Promise as by that of the Apostle before mentioned may be seen The word Sojourning therefore here used by Moses hath relation to that time of the Promise when Abraham left his Fathers house and became a sojourner in a strange Land even the Land which God had promised to shew him and which he afterwards gave to him to be possessed by his posterity in the fourth generation after him Gen. 15.16 And now that these years are precisely and exactly so many and no more appeareth by what followeth in the next verse viz. Exod. 12.41 wherein it is said That when the 430 years were finished even on the same day all the hosts of the Lord went out from the Land of Egypt They therefore that begin this reckoning at Jacobs going thither are deceived For first Koath was one who went when Jacob went Gen. 46.11 His son was Amram Exod. 6.18.20 and Amrams son was Moses Num. 26.59 Wherefore seeing Koath was the enterer and Moses the departer the time from thence could not extend to 430 yeares for Koath lived but 133 years Exod. 6.18 Amram but 137 vers 20. and Moses was but 80 at the departure Exod. 77. All which added together make but 350. and yet some of those years must be deducted because they were not born one at the just end of anothers life but lived some while the father and the son together which deduction being made the years remaining will be yet fewer and want still more of 430. Secondly Jochabed was the mother of Moses and immediate daughter of Levi born to him in Egypt as it is Num. 26.59 Take then for a tryall the age of Moses at the departure which was * Exod. 7.7 80 years and the whole age of Levi was * Exod. 6.16 137. years and add them together so shall you have 217. Unto which number must be added 213 for the age of Jochabed or else there cannot be 430. But that this should thus hang together is impossible for Levi was born 43 years before he came into Egypt and living but 137 in all there can be but 94 taken from him and but 80 from Moses which added together make but 174. Now then supposing that the abode in Egypt from Jacobs going thither was fully 430 years it must needs be that Jochabed lived 256 years although her age be accounted but from the day of her fathers death unto the day of her sons birth But to say there is likelyhood in this were extreme madnesse For who thinks it probable that a woman in those dayes could be 256 years and yet bear a childe or that a Kings daughter would make choyce of one so old to be her Nurse Beside this womans age must be yet longer for it is not like that she was born just at her fathers death neither is it true that she dyed at her sons birth because she was chosen by Pharaoh's daughter to be his Nurse And as for Levi to prove that he was 43 years old as hath been mentioned this is well known viz. that Joseph was but four years younger then he and when Iosephs brethren came into Egypt Ioseph then was but 39 years old Levi therefore must needs be 43 at the same time because four and 39 make 43 and not live his whole time after the descending of Iacob thither Se Gen. 41.46 and compare it with Gen.
45.6 Thus we see how Moses is to be understood in Exod. 12.40 and consequently to account the 430. years of this Period For the dwelling of the children of Israel who dwelled in Egypt was 430. yeares that is Their peregrination or their dwelling as strangers And so the Greeke translateth which the Apostle also confirmeth in Act. 13.17 Their dwelling I say as strangers begun from the time that Abraham left his kindred and his Fathers house as already hath been proved For though this people were not called Israelites in Abrahams time ☜ but afterwards N. B. yet because they proceeded out of Abrahams loynes and did evermore boast of him as their Father and because he also the thing which Moses aymes at was the first in their generation who sojourned in a strange land the foresaid Text in Exodus puts no difference but speaks of them all according to that name by which they were then called when Moses brought the seed of Abraham out of Egypt even in the fourth generation as God himselfe had formerly spoken and told it to Abraham in particular long before And thus we have hitherto the right meaning of that text Quest Quest But how is Moses to be understood in his number of 400. yeares in Gen. 15.13 doth not that crosse the former account Answ Nothing at all For there is a double summe of yeares mentioned concerning the seed of Abraham sojourning and afflicted viz. 400. Gen. 15.13 and 430. Exod. 12.40 The 430. yeares was from Abrahams departing out of Haran to the comming of the Israelites out of Egypt as hath been proved And the 400 was from the fifth of Isaac to that time also for both these reckonings have both one time of ending but begin not both at once the latter not beginning till Ismael who was borne of the Egyptian woman Hagar mocked Isaac and was cast out of Abrahams house The Apostle makes this manifest by calling Ismaels mocking of Isaac persecution Galat. 4.28 So also Moses in saying that Abrahams seed should be evill entreated For know this of a surety that thy seed shall be a stranger in a land not theirs and shall serve them and they shall entreat them evill 400. yeares Gen. 15.13 meaning that from the beginning of this affliction should be 400. years before the end of their affliction from the Egyptian bondage For as the first manifest affliction of Ahrahams seed began now when this son of the Egyptian woman in a strang land mocked Isaac so it ended at the bringing of the same out of Egypt 400. yeares after Not that they were afflicted all that time but that their affliction which began now in a strange land should not be ended nor they brought into their promised land untill the end thereof SECT IIII. Of the fourth Period from the comming out of Egypt to the beginning of the building of King Salomons Temple that it was a Period of 479. yeares compleat or of 480. yeares current THis is proved by a plaine Text in 1 King 6.1 where we read thus And it came to passe in the foure hundredth and fourescore yeare after the children of Israel were come out of the land of Egypt in the fourth yeare of Salomons reigne over Israel in the moneth of Zif which is the second Moneth that he began to build the house of the Lord. In which Text we have the whole summe in grosse but must finde the particulars elsewhere and they are found as followeth First 40. yeares in the wildernesse after the Israelites came out of Egypt Deut. 1.3 Deut. 34.4.5 Josh 1.2 Psal 95.10 Act. 13.18 Secondly 17 to the death of Joshua after Moses For seeing all the other numbers but this may be found expresly written this must needs be as much as all the other when they are gathered together shall want of 480. Thirdly from the death of Joshua to the death of Othniel 40. Jud. 3.11 Fourthly 80. after that to the death of Ehud Jud. 3.30 Fifthly 40. from thence to the death of Deborah Jud. 5 31. Sixthly 40. after that to the death of Gideon Judg. 8.28 Seventhly Abimelech 3 yeares after Gideon Judg. 9.22 Then Thola 23 Judg. 10.2 Jair 22. Judg. 10.3 Jeptha 6. Judg. 12.7 Ibsan 2. Judg. 12.9 Elon X. Judg. 12.9 Abdon VIII Judg. 12.14 Sampson XX. Judg. 16.31 Heli 40. 1 Sam. 4.18 Samuel and Saul 40.10 Act. 13.21 David after Saul 40.2 Sam 5.4 Salomon after David till the founding of the Temple 4 current for in the fourth yeare of his reigne the Temple was founded 1 King 6.1 All which Summes being added together amount to 480. To which I add this note that if Salomon began in the last yeare of King David as some men thinke then must Joshua have 18 yeares for the time that he had ruled after Moses which I also thinke he had Quest But if this account be true Quest how must we understand the 300. yeares in Judg. 11.26 where Jeptha saith That the children of Israel dwelt in Heshbon and her Townes and in Aroer and her Townes and in all the Cities that be along by the coasts of Arnon three hunded years By which it seemeth to be gathered that Jeptha judged not till 300 yeares after the children of Israel came out of the wildernesse into the land of Canaan at the death of Moses And if the time from thence thither were 300. yeares then must the time from the comming out of Egypt to the Temple be more then 480. For from the first yeare of Jeptha to the fourth yeare of King Salomon were 175. years which added to the 40 yeares of the wildernesse and to the 300. after that to Jeptha doe make in all 515. But I answer that these 300. Answ yeares are not to be reckoned from Moses death but from the time mentioned in the beginning of Jeptha's narration ver 16. where the words are But when Israel came up from Egypt c. From whence to the dayes of Jeptha were 306. years which 6 odd yeares Jeptha omitted it being not greatly materiall to account them so precisely thus doth Luther understand the place Iunius Broughton and others Broughtons observation being this Note saith he that the 40 yeares in the wildernesse are joyned as one time here that things done in sundry parts of it be reckoned from one beginning Or as a late writer answereth About 34 years after that Sihon King of the Amorites had fought against the predecessour of Balack the son of Zippor King of Moah and had taken all his Land even unto Arnon Israel smote Sihon and all his people possessed his Country Which was in the last year of Moses From whence unto Ieptha were but 266 years current yet by adding the years of their owne possession unto Sihon's whose right they had by the Law of Conquest Ieptha did justly say that they had dwelt in or possessed those Countries 300 years Which indeed is the same answer that Sir Walter Raleigh giveth in his History of the
 In this yeare Troy was taken and destroyed 408. yeares before the Olympiads of Iphitus and 432. before the building of Rome began as is witnessed by Diodorus lib. 14. CHAP. VIII Of the Kingdome of the Aborigines THis Kingdome was in Italy and began in the year of the Julian Period 3385. Janus was the first King he reigned 33. yeares In his time Saturn fled out of Crete into this Country as both Poets and Historiograpers witnesse The time when he came was in the 17. yeare of Janus after which he and Janus reigned about 17. yeares accounting the yeare when he came to be the first yeare of his reigne Scal. Euseb These people were called Aborigines at the first because their Originall was unknowne and yet * Dionys Hal. some say they were formerly Arcadians and came with Oenotrius Sonne of Lycan into Italy But Scaliger saith their right name was Aberrigines a multo errore from their much wandring The next King after those two before mentioned was Picus the Sonne of Saturne he reigned 37. yeares Euseb Saint Austin speaking of Picus saith that he was the Son of Saturn and first successor in the Kingdome of the Laurentines For Laurentium was the eldest City of Latium the seat of the Aborigines and the place where their Kingdome after they came into Italy was founded called Laurentum of the Laurell Wood that grew neere it Moreover it is said of Picus that he was turned into a Pye because being a great Sooth-sayer he kept such a Bird alwayes for his Augury Of which see more in Saint Aug. De civit lib. 18. cap. 15. together with the notes of Ludovicus Vives thereupon Faunus the Sonne of Picus succeeded and reigned 44. years Euseb Vives ex Dionys Helvic Dionisius saith that some held Mars to be his great Grandfather and that the Romans worshipped him with Songs and Sacrifices as their Countries Genius Latinus reigned after Faunus 36. yeares in the latter end of his reigne Aeneas came into Italy and when Latinus was dead reigned after him three years But of Aeneas more shall be spoken afterward And now see all these in their right times Yeares of the Julian Period when they beg A List of the ancient Kings of Italy before Aeneas rightly fixed 3385. Janus and Saturne 33. 3418. Picus the Sonne of Saturne 37. 3455. Faunus the Sonne of Picus 44. 3499. Latinus after Faunus 36. 3535. In this yeare Latinus dyed and Aeneas began to reigne CHAP. VI. Of the Kings of Italy after Latinus PEtavius gathers out of Dionisius that Aeneas the Successor of Laâ—inus began to reigne in Italy in the fift yeare after the destruction of Troy The first year therefore of his reigne was in the yeare of the Julian Period 3535. and yeare of the World 2826. This was about three yeares after he came into this Country for he came hither about the second or third year after that City was destroyed Soon after his comming he married Lavinia Daughter to Latinus and built Lavinium Then when Latinus was slaine in the Warre with the Rutili and leaving no issue Male behind him he succeedeth in the Kingdome but is warred against by Turnus formerly betroathed to Lavinia but in this Warre Turnus is slaine by Aeneas and hee also slain afterward in another Warre with Mezentius King of Tuscanie after he had reigned three yeares Ascanius was his Successor with whom also Mezentius waged Warre and besieged him so streightly in Lavinium that he was glad to crave for peace but could not have it unlesse upon hard conditions whereupon he sallied out suddainly and slew Lausus the sonne of Mezentius which put that Army into such a feare that Mezentius not only condiscended to peace upon equall termes but ever after remained a true friend to Ascanius His Father was Aeneas and his Mother not Lavinia but Creusa For though Lavinia were with child by Aeneas yet she was not delivered till after her Husbands death And indeed being left alone without either Father or Husband she much feared his Son Ascanius and thereupon betooke her to the chiefe Herdsman of her deceased Husband by whom she had an house built her in the Woods and was there delivered of a Sonne whom she called Silvius Posthumus Now the People knew nothing of this save onely that she was with Child Ascanius therupon is suspected to have murthered her but he to clear himselfe causeth them to be both brought from thence and provideth carefully for them For in the seven and twentieth yeare of his reigne he leaveth the City Lavinium to his Step mother and built Alba longa where he reigned to the end of 38. years from the death of Aeneas and at his death neglecting his Sonne Julus he constituted * From him all the Albanian Kings were called Silvii Silvius Posthumus for his Successor Howbeit Julus was honorably provided for and from him discended the Family of the Julii This Sonne then of Aeneas by Lavinia succeeded Ascanius and reigned after him twenty nine yeares who because he was born in a Wood and after his Fathers death had this name of Silvius Posthumus The next after him was Aeneas Silvius he reigned one and thirty yeares After him was Latinus Silvius who reigned 51. yeares For if that which was the first year of Numitor was also the first yeare of Romulus as Saint Austin saith it was then must the time of this mans reigne be rather 51. then 50. yeares And note that of him the people were called Latines Alba Silvius succeeded and reigned 39. yeares Then Silvius Athys 24. Capis Silvius 28. Calpetus Silvius 13. Tiberinus Silvius 8. Of him the River came to be called Tiber because it was his hap to be drowned in it Agrippa Silvius succeeded and reigned 40. yeares After him was Aremulus otherwise called Alladius Silvius who having reigned 19. yeares was with Palace wherein he lived swallowed up because he strived to imitate the Thunder Next after him was Aventinus Silvius 37. Then Proca Silvius 23. Amulius Silvius 44. And last of all Numitor one which was also the first yeare of Romulus And now see them in their right times Yeares of the Julian Period when they beg A Catalogue of the Kings after Latinus ex Eusebio all of them fixed in their right times 3535. Aeneas 3. 3538. Ascanius 38. 3576. Silvius Pasthumus 29. 3605. Aeneas Silvius 31. 3636. Latinus Silvius 51. 3687. Alba Silvius 39 3726. Silvius Athys 24. 3750. Capis Silvius 28. 3778. Calpetus Silvins 13. 3791. Tiberinus Silvius 8. 3799. Agrippa Silvius 40. 3839. Aremulus sive Alladius 19. 3858. Aventinus Silvius 37. 3895. Proca Silvius 23. 3918. Amulius Silvius 44. 3962. Nunitor 1. Which was also the first yeare of Romulus and yeare when the foundation of Rome was laid CHAP. X. Of the British Kings that reigned in England from Brute to the time of Julius Caesar and after BRute the first King of the Brittaines arrived here in this Iland according to the common