putat Angelus sexaginta duas Septimanas à principio septimanae primae sed à fine Septimae ut sensus sit Christum moriturum esse Septimana Septuagesima That is The Angel accounteth not the sixty and two Weekes from the beginning of the first Week but from the end of the seventh so that the sense is Christ was to dye in the seventieth Weeke But in what year of that Weeke is shewed afterwards Shall be slain The word in the Originall is Carath which signifyeth to cut off either by banishment or death In the first sense Christ was cut off when the Jews said We have no other King but Caesar Joh. 19.15 and in the other sense he was cut off when after their loud cryes of crucifie him crucifie him they put him to death But not for himselfe This is likewise true of Christ as the Prophet sheweth Esa 53.4 5 6. But whether it be the right reading of this place some make question and doe therefore render the words thus And there shall not be unto him that is He shall not be or not have any being but be extinct and gone Meaning that being slain or cut off by death he should have no longer being among the living and so also Esay saith He was cut off out of the Land of the living for the transgression of my people was the stroke upon him Esa 53.8 All which was certainly fulfilled when Christ tasting death was not onely buried but by his enemies shut in the Sepulcher least he should againe be seene in the Land of the living And the people of the Prince to come shall destroy the City and the Sanctuary This is meant of the Romans under the Conduct of Titus the son of Vespasian Emperour of Rome by whom the City of Jerusalem and the Temple were destroyed which is here foretold as a judgement to come upon the Jews for their putting Christ to death And the end thereof shall be with a Flood Meaning that the Romane Army should be unto them as the overflowing of Waters in a Flood and should therefore prevaile against all the force that the forsaken Jews could make against them And unto the end of the War desolations are determined By which is meant that so long as the War continued should be nothing but desolations and destructions Which accordingly came to passe fast one upon another first in one place then in another till all was wasted as Iosephus hath at large declared in his seventh book of the Jews War at the first chapter in his sixt book at the first chapter likewise as also in some other places of his writings Whose relations doe excellently agree with the word desolations in the plurall number here foretold by the Angel in the words of this prophecy Ver. 27. One Weeke This is the last week of the seventy in which the Angel sheweth that though the Jewish Nation should be cast off and their City and Temple destroyed yet neverthelesse the Messiah should for one whole Week Offer himselfe unto them and gather many of them into the Covenant of the Gospel This Week was therefore wholly spent in preaching to those of the Circumcision in the forepart whereof Christ himselfe in his own person preached unto them and in the latter part he also preached unto them by his Apostles who went not unto the Gentiles till this Week was ended For as the 70 Weekes were cut out over the People of Israel and over the holy City but not over the Gentiles so also the confirming of the Covenant by Christ in this last Week of the 70 was cut out over the people of Israel and over the holy City but not over the Gentiles And that not without cause For though Christ by his death redeemed as well the Gentiles as the Jews Ioh. 11.52 yet because he was in the first place promised to the Jewish Nation and after a peculiar manner their Saviour it was consentaneous that in the first place he should offer Salvation unto them and confirm his Covenant with many of them before he caused his Gospell to be spread abroad and to take place among the Gentiles This appeareth by that Caveat which in this Week he gave to his Apostles when they had their first power to preach namely that they should not turn into the way of the Gentiles Mat. 10.5 It appeareth also by that which himselfe said to the woman of Canaan That he was not sent but to the lost sheep of the house of Israel Math. 15.24 And as they had this Caveat so they heeded it very carefully even after his death and Passion insomuch that Peter abstained from preaching to any but the Jews untill he was taught by Vision that the Gentiles also pertained to the society of the Church Acts 10.1 In a word Paul was converted about six moneths after the Passion of Christ three years after which he returned to Ierusalem that he might see Peter from whence after he had stayed 15 dayes he went into the regions of Syria and Cilicia and preached there to the Gentiles Gal. 1.18 By which it appeareth that it was full three years and an half after Christ's Passion before they began to preach to any but the Jews and at that time this One Weeke was ended For as it followeth Christs death was in the middle of this very Week And in the midst of the Weeke he shall cause Sacrifice and Oblation to cease This was certainly done by Christs death For in the former verse it was said That after threescore and two Weeks Messiah should be slain and now in this verse is shewed the very precise time of his death viz. That it was in the middle of this Weeke for then was Christ to cause the Sacrifices and Oblations to cease Yea all the Sacrifices of the old Testament and the whole Legall and Typicall service was then at an end by that one Oblation of Christ upon the Crosse for nothing but the death of Christ was of efficacie to abolish the Sacrifices and Legall figures which were but figures of him and of his Sacrifice as may be seen by that which St Paul writeth to the Hebrewes in the ninth and tenth Chapters He taketh away the first that he may establish the second saith the Apostle there Chap. 10. verse 9. Not that the Jewish Sacrifices did actually then cease Peta De Doct. Temp. lib. 12. cap. 35. but that they were de jure or in very deed and truth then abolished as Petavius noteth Which also not onely the last voyce of Christs dying saying It is finished but even the vaile of the Temple being rent in twaine from the top to the bottome declared Mat. 27.51 For by that Symbol Christ witnessed that he by his death abolished all the Sacrifices and all the legall worship For as Lansbergius well observeth so long as that Shadowie service of the Jews remained Lansberg in his Chronol lib. 2. cap. 11. the vaile was between in the
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
World lib. 2. cap. 13. sect 8. But I take the first answer to be the best leaving the Reader neverthelesse to make choyc of which he pleaseth Qust Quest But what shall we think of Saint Pauls number mentioned in Acts 13.20 where we read that after the Land was divided God gave his people Judges by the space of 450. years till Samuel the Prophet Verily if that time were a space of 450 years then what with the forty years in the Wildernesse the whole time of Ioshua the forty years of Samuel and Saul the forty of David and the four of Solomon the whole time from the comming out of Egypt to the Temple will be almost 600 years Answ No it will not For it is answered either that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth 400 was mistaken by the scribe and put for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is but three hundred or else that Saint Paul reckoned as they did who reckoned the years of the Oppressours so as they added them to the years of the Judges and not included them As for the first Beroald lib. 3. Chronol c. 4. it might be granted were it not that all Copies have 450. For we doe not know saith Beroaldus of any Copy either Greek or Latine which hath 350 but as the ordinary reading is 450. And therefore we cannot think either that there was a fault in the scribe or that after the Apostles time some one or other * Master Perkins thinketh so in his Harmony of Scripture took in hand to correct the text according to their understanding of the Book of Judges as Master Perkins supposeth For as another speaketh Non est cur dicamus omnes Codices Graecos Latinos esse corruptos cum suppeditat expedita conciliationis ratio And therefore according to the second solution we may rather think that Saint Paul reckoned as they did who took the years of the Oppressours and added them to the years of the Judges accounting those times apart which are of right to be included As for Example When Jabin oppressed Israel Deborah was one who Judged at the same time Judges 4.4 And when the Philistines oppressed then was Sampson a Judge For saith the text He judged Israel in the dayes of the Philistines twenty years Iudges 15.20 By which two places I doubt not but we are taught how to account the rest The maine objection is how the Land can be said to have rest 40 years after the overthrow of Chusan by whom they were afflicted eight years or eighty after the overthrow of Eglon if part of those years it were vexed with war and the people held by their oppressours under a miserable bondage But to this I finde a late writer in his Annotations upon the place give a fair answer viz. That it is not unusuall in the Scripture to denominate a full number of years from that which is properly true onely of the greater part of that number as we see Gen. 35.26 Where after the naming of the twelve sons of Iacob this clause is added These are the sons of Iacob that were born to him in Padan-Aram and yet Benjamin is mentioned amongst them who was not born in Padan-Aram but in the Land of Canaan and so likewise Acts 7.14 where it is said that Ioseph sent and called his Father and all his kindred threescore and fifteen souls and yet indeed there went but threescore and ten of them at that time into Egypt Gen. 46.27 And so againe Exod. 12.40 where it is said that the sojourning of the children of Israel who dwelt in Egypt was four hundred and thirty years and yet they were not in Egypt after Iacobs going thither above two hundred and fifteen years And therefore in that it is said And the Land had rest forty years the meaning may well be that the Land had rest to the end of forty years to wit counting the forty years from the death of Ioshua to the death of Othniel and so of the rest where the like phrase is found And so indeed Tremelius translates these words usque ad quadragesimum annum unto the expiration of forty years Which is further confirmed by the like expression in the fourteenth Chap. at the seventeenth verse where it is said of Sampsons wife that she wept before him the seven dayes while the feast lasted and yet the meaning is onely that she wept to the ending of those seven dayes to wit from the time he refused to tell her the meaning of his Riddle Furthermore Saint Matthews Genealogies from Rahab to David doe make it yet more manifest For Rahab hid the spies She was the mother of Boaz He the father of Obed and Obed of Iesse and Iesse of David Now though Rahab should bring forth Boaz at 80 and Boaz beget Obed at 120 and Obed Iesse at 120 and Iesse David at 120 yet all these far stretched ages would fall short of 450. How Saint Paul therefore reckoned is apparent and his true meaning is explained without wrong to any text For in mentioning 450 it is with a clause of Proviso saying not absolutely God gave them Judges 450 years but as it were or after a sort 450 years Which is as if it should be said they were 450 years by adding the Judges and Opressours years together Joseph Antiq. lib. 9. c. 11. after which manner the Jews as we see by Josephus used to reckon these times For Josephus setteth the building of the Temple five hundred ninty years and one after the departure of the Israelites out of Egypt which in an expresse text of Scripture is but 480 as at the first I shewed out of the 1 Kings 6.1 and have hitherto cleared it to be so against all objections made to the contrary Howbeit some perhaps may not as yet be fully satisfyed untill I further speak my minde concerning the opinions of Codoman and Petavius who have declined the common path and pitched upon an Interpretation serving rather to enlarge this Period then to open the truth of the reckoning And as for Codoman Codom Chro. lib. 1. c. 17. and lib 2. quest 27 20. he reckoneth from the death of Joshua to the death of Eli 430 years not accounting Sampsons 20 years but under the 40 years of the Philistines And whereas Saint Paul nameth 450 he findes 20 years to make up Saint Pauls number to have been spent after the death of Joshua by the Seniours before the Oppression under Chusan After which to make all this reconcilable with the account of the 480 years in the 1 Kings 6.1 he saith we must begin to reckon them not in the beginning but in the ending of the journying of the Israelites from Egypt which he makes to be 25 years after the beginning of Othniels government from whence if we cast the years of the Judges with the years of Servitude and so to these years add the 40 of Samuel and Saul the 40 of David and the
every man would lay a side all rash and inconsiderate zeale that so weighing things with an equall Ballance he may no longer be a carelesse disturber of the true and right Computation of these times But they have objections out of Scripture ☜ And first they produce the age of Mordecai Mordeca's age objected affirming that he was carried captive with Iechoniah Esth 2.5 and therefore could not live till the dayes of Xerxes to which time he must live if Xerxes were that Assuerus who married Esther To which is answered Answ That Mordecai was not carried captive but rather Kish the great Grand-father of Mordecai For thus stand the words in the place objected There was a certaine Jew at Shushan the Kings seate sth 2.5 whose name was Mordecai the son of Iair the son of Shimei the son of Kish a man of Iemini who had been carried away from Ierusalem with the Captivity c. Where the Relative who is to be referred not to the furthest Antecedent Mordecai but to the nearest Kish as may be seen in an Example much like it in 1 Chron. 2.7 where the words are And the sons of Carmi Achar the troubler of Israel who transgressed in the thing accursed And indeed to what other end should mention be made of Kish or why is the Genealogie produced no higher then to him but that thereby we may be taught that he and not Mordecai went into Captivity it was to shew by his carrying away captive how Mordecai a Jew born of him became Citizen of Shushan And so also the Apocryphall fragment in Esth 11.4 brought forth by some to prove the contrary fully sheweth saying Erat autem viz. Mordecai ex Captiva turba quam captam Nebuchadnezzar abduxerat that is Mordecai arose of that company or came of that company which Nebuchaanezzar carried Catptive Which well observed doth excellently confirme the truth of Gods Promise made to his people Ier. 24.6 namely That they should returne be built up planted and not rooted out Whereupon they were commanded tomarry wives beget children that they might increase there and not be minished Ier. 29.6 From which places itwell appeareth that the promise was made to them and their posterity the accomplishment whereof is excellently declared by this of Mordecai and Esther both of them born in the time of Captivity The truth of which is yet further manifest in regard That that Mordecai which nourished Esther was not the same who returned in the first year of Cyrus For he who nourished Esther staid still at Shushan The other returned with them who went first into the Land of Judea Neh. 7.7 It is not enough to say he gave his name to goe up but went not for what were this but to deny a plaine and expresse testimony as may be seen also Ezra 2.2 And therefore these two not being both one their opinion is still more and more weakned who strive to prove Mordecai and not Kish to be the man that was carried captive for it was common and ordinary to call divers men by one and the same name as afterwards shall be shewed Secondly they object the age of Ezra the son of Seraiah Ezra's age objected who was slaine by Nebuchadnezzar in the nineteenth year of his reigne 2 Kin. 25.18 Arguing from thence that the time of the Persian Monarchy could not be so long as is usually accounted For Ezra saw well near the whole time thereof being alive in the dayes of Johanan the father of Jaduah Ezra 10.6 Which Jaduah was high priest in the reigne of the last Darius when Alexander conquered the Monarchy and won it wholly from the Persians Neh. 12.22 See also Joseph in the eleventh book of his Antiquities at the seventh and eighth Chapters Which being so it will follow that had Ezra been begot but a day before his fathers death his age must be 250 years or thereabouts though we account not to the end of this Monarchy by almost ten years To which I answer There is ambiguity in the word Son Answ which men take properly as if Ezra had been the immediate son of Seraiah whereas he was so Seraiahs son as the Jews used to call their posterity by the name of Son even to the fifth or sixt descent As for example Josiah is said to be the father of Iechoniah Matth. 1.11 whereas the father of Ieconiah was Iehoiakim 2 Chron. 36.8 So also Zedekiah is called in * 2 Chron 36.10 one place the brother of Ieconiah and in * 1 Chro. 3.16 in another place the son of Ieconiah because he reigned next after him and yet we know that by propriety of speech he was his uncle as may be seen in 2 Kin. 24.17 So also Salathiel is called the son of Iechoniah Mat. 1.12 and yet not only did Ieconiah dye childlesse Ier. 22.30 but also Salathiel was indeed the son of Assir 1 Chron. 3.17 So also Zorobabel is said to be the * Ezra 5.2 Mat. 1.12 son of Salathiel Matth. 1.12 whereas he was not his immediate son for Zorobabel was indeed the son of Pedaiah 1 Chron. 3.19 So also the Prophet Zachariah is called the son of Iddo Ezra 5.1 whereas indeed he was the Grandchilde of Iddo and son of Barachiah Zachar. 1.1 And more nearly concerning the party objected it is not manifest that neither was he the proper and immediate son of Seraiah For though Ezra in the * viz. Ezra 7.1.2 c. place objected made good his purpose in shewing for his greater honour and renown that he came from Aaron yet he hath not precisely set downe all his Ancestours which were in that line between Seraiah and Aaron but hath omitted * viz. Amariah Ahitub Zadok Ahimaaz Azariah and Jonathan as may be seen by comparing Ezra 7.3 with 1 Chron. ca. 6 ver 7.8.9.10 six in one place and might also omit some in that other place between himselfe and Seraiah for this we finde herein to be true and certaine that Iehozadak was the immediate son of Seraiah as is expresly mentioned in 1 Chron 6.14 And therefore though Ezra were so near kindred to that stock yet it might be in a collaterall line by some that proceeded from Seraiah and yet neverthelesse be reckoned in Genealogy as if he were his son according to that before mentioned of Salathiel called the son of Ieconiah or that of Zedechia in 1 Chron. 3.16 Where though Zedechia were the Uncle yet he stands upon record as if he were the very son of Ieconiah For thus we see some brought in as sons which were indeed but near kinsmen But for all this some perhaps will say Object the difficulty of too long an age is not yet quite taken away For from the twentieth of Artaxerxes Longimanus to the end of the Persian Monarchy were 122 years or thereabouts and therefore Ezra living till towards the end thereof will be still older then can be well allowed though he were
the Moon p. 11 CHAP. IV. Of the antient and Naturall year that it was measured by the course of the Sunne though the Moneths were reckoned by the course of the Moon p. 19 CHAP. V. Of the Periods of time by which the years of the World may be truely reckoned As also of the Jubilees how to account them where also to begin and end them p. 25 CHAP. VI. Of the Julian Period and how to joyne the years of the World thereunto p. 33 CHAP. VII Other Observations concerning the Times in their Periods untill the Destruction of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar p. 35 CHAP. VIII The Periods againe considered and all such doubts and scruples cleared as may arise concerning the just length of any of them together with answers to certaine other questions not impertinent p. 51. In the former Chapter be eight Sections CHAP. VIII Sect. 1. Of the time from the Creation to the end of the Flood p. 51 CHAP. VIII Sect. 2. Of the second Period from the end of the Flood when the face of the ground was dry to the Promise at the time of Abrahams departure from Charran into Canaan that it was a Period of 427. yeares current but not compleat p. 68 CHAP. VIII Sect. 3. 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 430 years p. 75 CHAP. VIII Sect. 4. Of the fourth Perod from the comming out of Egypt to the beginning of the building of Solomons Temple that it was a Period of 479 years compleat or of 480 current p. 78 CHAP. VIII Sect. 5. Of the fifth Period from the foundation of the Temple in the fourth year of King Solomon to the Desolation thereof by Nebuchadnezzar In which is also shewed the true and right account of the 390 and 40 years in Ezekiel p. 87 CHAP. VIII Sect. 6. Of the sixth Period from the Destruction of the Temple by Nebuchadnezzar to the beginning of the building thereof by Zorobabel in the second year of Darius King of Persia In handling whereof many things of note are discussed and Scaliger refused upon good and warrantable grounds both out of Scripture and other good Authours p. 106 CHAP. VIII Sect. 7. Of the seventh Period from the second year of Darius Hystaspis to the twentieth year of Artaxerxes Longimanus p. 115 CHAP. VIII Sect. 8. Of Daniels 70 Weekes in the ninth Chapter of his Prophecy at the 24.25 26 and 27. verses An exposition of them together with a Confutation of Master Broughton and others concerning Olympiads and length of the Persian Monarchy p. 124 CHAP. IX Of the LXX years in the Prophecy of the Prophet Jeremy commonly called the 70 years of Judahs Captivity p. 155 CHAP. X. Of the time when Tyrus and Egypt were subdued and taken by Nebuchadnessar according to the Prophecies of Esay Jeremy and Ezekiel p. 159 CHAP. XI Of the number of Kings that reigned in Babylon during the time of the Captivity In the handling whereof the fragments of Berosus and Megasthenes are examined divers errores of Scaliger discovered and the truth laid plainly open p. 164 CHAP. XII Of the first year of Cyrus and of Darius Medus mentioned in holy Scripture p. 174 CHAP. XIII Of Alexander the great signified by the Horne between the eyes of the Goat Dan. 8.5 p. 176 CHAP. XIIII Of the four hornes which came up in stead of the great horne broken off as was prophesied in Dan. 8.8 21 22. As also of the beginning of that Date of the Kingdome of the Greeks so often mentioned in the Books of the Maccabes and in Josephus p. 178 CHAP. XV. Of the little Horne in the eighth Chapter of Daniel at the ninth verse And at the 2300 dayes that were givin it verse 14. p. 180 CHAP. XVI Of the fourth Kingdome in Daniel that it signifieth the Monarchy of the Romans p. 182 CHAP. XVII Of the Times and Distances of the taking of Jerusalem by Pompey Herod and Titus p. 188 CHAP. XVIII Of the time of Herods reigne and of his Posterity p. 192 CHAP. XIX Of a true and right year of our Saviours Birth and Baptisme p. 202 CHAP. XX. Of the day of Christs birth that it was kept and on what Day both among the Ancients and in the succeeding Ages p. 212 CHAP. XXI Of the reigne of Tiberius and of the beginning and end of Pontius Pilat's government As also of the Year and Day of our Saviours Passion p. 228 CHAP. XXII Of Killing the Paschal Lambs and whether at Christ's death the Jews and our Saviour kept the Passeover upon one and the same day p. 237 CHAP. XXIII Wherein is shewed the times of Vespasian and Titus together with the Destruction of Hierusalem To which Chapter is added a Chronologicall Table and a Kalender for that very year wherein Hierusalem was destroyed by the Romans p. 241 CALAMVS MENSVRANS OR The measuring Reed CHAP. I. Gentle Reader I Have undertaken a Subject which in it selfe cannot be enough commended in the handling whereof I have opposed no man out of any Singularity or Spirit of contradiction but onely for the love of truth which I doubt not but I may do and yet arrogate to my self nothing more then is meet History is a Subject commended I know by the most as being the Herald of Antiquity the Light of Truth the Life of Memory and the Eye of the World but Chronology is little esteemed few prize it according to the true value and yet 't is indeed the very Eye of History Alter Historiae oculus as one speaketh And so another saying Nulla historia lucem habet sine temporum serie No history hath Light without a right order of the Times Nor can it be thought the Holy Spirit of God would be so exact in noting the Times even to Moneths Weeks and Dayes in the sacred story if the carefull account of them were not to be regarded Sure I am it can be no small confirmation of a mans faith concerning the threatnings and promises of God and consequently of the whole Scripture when he seeth how the Prophecies at their determined times came to be accomplished and how the linking of one period with another makes up such a chaine as cannot but minde us of the Providence of God in his Government of the World eternally foreknowing and wisely disposing of what should be acted in future times Math. 24.15 Our Saviour Christ mentioning the Abomination of Desolation spoken of by Daniel the Prophet saith Let him that readeth understand Revel 13.18 And in the Revelation He that hath understanding let him count the number of the Beast Deut. 4.32 And in the fourth chapter of Deuteronomy even the conferring the Histories of holy Scriptures with the Narrations of other credible bookes is commanded that thereby Gods doings may be compared Besides which the exact handling of these things makes it manifest that the Being of the
the same Period 3311. and year of the World 2602. But if it be so that every Seventh Seven must be a Iubilee Quest then how could the Iubilee be the fiftieth year Well enough Answ For though the Iubilee fell alwayes into the Seventh Seven yet neverthelesse it was the fiftieth year by including that year from whence the nine and forty exclusively were accounted For if the year of Iubilee be reckoned otherwise the commandement concerning the years of Rest for the Land could not be observed but the whole order would be disturbed and the eighth year in every Iubilee be accounted for a year of Rest though it were indeed the first year of another Week and a year in which they were to plow and sow their ground Levit. 25.22 And that the manner of this reckoning may not seeme strange I will shew you in a word or two some few other presidents wherein the accounts are of the same nature As for example In Musick we call that an eighth which exclusively is but seven and no wayes eight but by including the two extream Notes So also we call a Quartaine Ague which hath not four dayes but by including the two sick dayes Christ likewise is said to arise the third day which could not be but by including as well the day of his death and buriall as of his Resurrection for on Friday he suffered on Saturday was the Jewes Sabbath and on Sunday in the morning that being the first day of the week he arose Math. 16.21 Marke 16.2 And thus also it must be in the account for the year of Iubilee which though it fall into the seventh Seven is neverthelesse the fiftieth year by including the two extreme termes of the reckoning But if this be not enough for the cleare understanding of this difficulty know we that here as in all numbring two things are to be considered The parts numbered and the manner of numbering The parts numbered are three namely The two extreme termes and the Middest or what is between them The manner of reckoning that also is three-fold The first is when the middle numbers onely are accounted and the two extreme termes excluded The other when the midst with both the extreme termes are included and under this manner of reckoning is contained whatsoever is expressed by any Ordinal number The third and last is when the midst and one extreme terme onely is included the other which is the first terme being excluded and under this forme of reckoning falleth the true account of all such reckonings as are made by Cardinall numbers For there be Ordinall numbers and Cardinall numbers By Cardinall numbers we inquire how many And by Ordinall numbers we inquire of what Order the thing in question is As for example If the question be first concerning the number of years in a Jubilee the answer then is That there are but forty nine But secondly If the question be of what order is the yeare of Jubilee the answer then is That it falleth into the fiftieth year Both which the holy text doth well expresse For thou shalt number unto thee saith God unto Moses seven Sabbaths of years seven times seven years and the space of seven Sabbaths of years shall be unto thee forty and nine years Levit. 25.8 In which words we have the first question resolved namely of the number of years in a Jubilee That they are but forty nine Then for the second Moses sheweth that also at the tenth verse saying And ye shall hallow the fiftieth year c. Now that this fiftieth year was no other then the last year of the seventh Week is plaine in regard that it is a question whose resolution is by Ordinall numbers having the middle years with both the extreme termes included That therefore which learned Junius hath noted upon this text of Moses Jun. edit 2. is worth the marking And thou shalt hallow the fiftieth year that is saith he The fiftieth year inclusively considered as the Jews use to reckon By which I doubt not but he meaneth the ancient Jews who had seen as well the observation of the Jubilee as of the Passeover which Maimonides never did and therefore the lesse reason had Broughton and Ainsworth to follow him in this particular especially considering that the Period or Cycle of the Jews Hillel set forth this Period anno dom 358. but Maimon was not till about the year of Christ 1180. which they call Aera Mundi set forth long before Maimon lived will allow of no interruption of the Sabbaticall years but granteth them to succeed orderly each to other the dividing of it else by seven could never shew any one true year of the Rest And if so then must the Jubilee necessarily fall into the seventh seven and not into the year next after it for if the Iubilee be not till the year next after the seventh seven then must the year next after that be accounted but for the first year of a new Week which is manifestly false for if that supposed first year be divided by seven it will not have one but two remaining The like method is to be observed for finding the Sabbaticall years by dividing the year of the Iulian Period in any year after the death of Moses by seven for if nothing remaine then doth the Autumne of the year divided begin a year of Rest or Sabbath to the Land if one remaine then about Autumne the first year of Sowing beginneth if two then the second And so of all the other years according to what remaineth As for example the 150. year of the Grecians when Eupator besieged Ierusalem was in the year of the Iulian Period 4551. which being divided by seven hath one remaining and therefore that year was Sabathicall unto the Autumne thereof 1 Maccab. 6. Ioseph Antiq. lib. 12. cap. 14. So also for the year when Simon the Father of Hyrcanus was slain Joseph ontiq lib. 13 c. 15. it was in the year of the Iulian Period 4579. before the year of the Grecians 177. was ended which year of the said Period being divided by seven hath also one remaining and was therefore Sabbaticall untill the Autumne thereof So also for the year when Herod took Ierusalem it was when M. Agrippa and L. Canidius Gallus were Consuls in the year of the Iulian Period 4677. the ninth Julian year and year of the City 716. Now this year of the said Period being likewise divided by seven hath also one remaining and was therefore a Sabbathicall year or year of Rest from the Autumne before until the Autumn thereof and so Iosephus sheweth in his Antiquities l. 14. c. 28. By which three examples all the other Sabbathicall years are knowne to be rightly fixed and may be evermore found by the method aforesaid yea though the head of their reckoning should not take place untill either the seventh or fourteenth year of Ioshua Some I know and they no meane Authours begin this account at
before the Flood The Flood as we have already seen began in the yeare of the world 1657. and continued a yeare so that it was not ended untill after the yeare of the World 1658. was begun for on the 27 day of the second Moneth was the full end thereof Two yeares after which Arphaxad was borne that is in the yeare of the world 1660. Gen. 11.10 To which yeare of the World add 35 the age of Arphaxad when Salah was borne so shall the birth of Salah be in the yeare of the world 1695 Gen. 11.12 To which add 30 the age of Salah when Heber was born so shall the birth of Heber be in the year of the world 1725. Gen. 11.14 To which add 34 the age of Heber when Peleg was born so shal the birth of Peleg be in the year of the world 1759. Gen. 11 16. To which add 30 the age of Peleg when Reu was borne so shall the birth of Reu be in the yeare of the world 1789 Gen. 11.18 To which add 32 the age of Reu when Serug was borne so shall the birth of Serug be in the year of the world 1821. Gen. 11.20 To which add 30 the age of Serug when Nahor was borne so shall the birth of Nahor be in the yeare of the world 1851. Gen. 11.22 To which add 29 the age of Nahor when Terah was borne so shall the birth of Terah be in the yeare of the world 1880. Gen. 11.24 To which add 130. the age of Terah when Abraham was borne so shall the birth of Abraham be in the yeare of world 2010. To which add 75 the age of Abraham soon after the death of Terah so shall we come to the yeare of the world 2085. and year of the Julian Period 2794 in which yeare about the beginning of May Abraham having received the promise departed out of Haran and was a Son of seventie five years old Gen. 12.4 that is he was going on in his Seventie and fifth yeare which not long after was accomplished ☟ the reckoning being here as before in the 600. yeare of Noah when the Flood began Quest The true time of Abrahams birth But why is it that Abraham is reckoned to be borne when his Father was 130. yeares old and not rather when he was seventie as the text seems to intimate Gen. 11.27 Answ Because Abraham who was a Sonne of * Gen. 12.4 75 yeares at his departure from Haran departed not thence untill his Father was dead as Saint Stephen witnesseth Act. 7.4 Now we know that his Father lived * Gen. 11.32 205. yeares from whence if we take 75 it will appeare that Abraham was not borne when Terah was Seventie as the text seemeth to intimate but when he was 130. because 75. taken out of 205 leaveth for the remainder 130. Secondly it is witnessed by the ancient testimony of the true not forged Philo who being a Jew was Ambassadour from his owne Nation to Caius Caligula witnessed I say by him that Abraham went not from Haran otherwise called Charran untill his Father was dead For it is not like saith he that any who have read the Law can be ignorant how Abraham removing from the Chaldean Land stayed in Charran and when his Father dyed there he removed also from that Land And againe He leaveth it being seventie five years old which Moses also saith in Gen. 12.4 This of Philo is a cleare testimony and well worthy of our serious acceptation for he was as ancient as the Protomartyr Stephen and understands Moses no other way then he had done Thirdly Rabbi Menasseh in his Conciliator declareth the same shewing there that their best learned Interpreters understand it so Fourthly The age of Abraham bring expressed when he came from Charran and not when he removed from Vr was for no reason but to guid us to the time his of birth by being joyned to the time of Terah's death who dyed in Charran and not in Vr Gen. 11.32 And further note that in Chaldea God appeares to Abraham and bids him Get thee out of thy Country and from thy kindred but maketh no mention of leaving his Fathers house for that he took along with him Gens 11.31 But when God cals him from Haran or Charran he then bids him depart from his Father house as well as he had done from his Country and kindred before for now he left his brother Nahor and all his Fathers house behinde him In the first Call Terah was alive to him is ascribed the conduct of that Journey from Vr to the Chaldees as if he had received the Call and had been the chiefe mover in the businesse but it is onely to shew his * Ioshua 24.2 Conversion and readinesse to goe with Abraham to whom God appeared whilst he was in Vr of the Chaldees Gen. 15.7 saying Get thee out of thy Country and from thy kindred Acts 7.2.3 See also Josh 24.2 But in the second Call Terah was dead and Abraham was 57 years old Gen. 12.1.4 Acts 7.4 And as he was 57 so his Father was 205. which sheweth still that Abraham was borne when Terah was 130. For the story in Genesis runs current and in a continuation this being the order of the words And the dayes of Terah were 205 years and he dyed in Charran and God said unto Ahraham Get thee from thy Fathers house and in thee all the Nations of the Earth shall be blessed and Abraham was 75 years old when he departed from Charran To illustrate then the whole by way of paraphrase God in Vr of the Chaldees appeared to Abraham and said unto him Get thee out from thy kindred but take thy Fathers house with thee and goe to to a Land which I shall shew thee And when Abraham told Terah of his command Terah condescended and consented And Terah took Abraham and Lot and Sarai and they went away together from Vr to Haran and dwelt there And Terah dyed in Haran And then God saith to Abraham Get thee out of thy Country and from thy kindered and from thy Fathers house also now and goe into the Land that I shall shew thee that is into Canaan whether Abraham went so soon as he departed from Charran which was in the Land of Chaldea also and not far from Vr wherefore God againe called Abraham thence to goe into Canaan Gen. 12.1 And although there was a nearer way from Vr to Canaan than to goe By Charran as in the Maps of those Countries may be seen yet because the nearest way was most dangerous and troublesome God led them about by an inhabited and safe way providing so for their infirmities as he did the like afterwards for Abrahams children Exodus 13.11.18 Beside when Joshua saith Ioshua 24.2 Our fathers beyond the River worshipped strange Gods even Terah the Father of Abraham he maketh Moses more clear and manifest viz. that to Abraham in Vr God appeared by
 41  3931 3222 4  229  27  1 After the death of Jeroboam there was no King in Israel till the 38. yeer of Azariah King of Judah 2 King 15.8 and therefore here must be an interregnum of twelve yeers Hoseae the prophet speaks of it in the tenth chapter of his prophesie at the first and third verses  3932 3223 5  230  28 Esay began to Prophesie 2  3933 3224 6  231 Olympiads  29 3  3934 3225 7 5 232  30  4  3935 3226 1  233  31  5  3936 3227 2  234  32  6  3937 3228 3  235  33  7  3938 3229 4  236 1. 1 34 the first yeer of the first Olympiad 8  3939 3230 5  237 2  35 9  3940 3231 6  238 3  36  10  3941 3232 7 6 239 4  37  11  3942 3233 1  240 1 2 38  12  3943 3234 2  241 2  39  1 Zachary and Shallum Menahen began in the latter part of the 39. yeer of Azariah after he had slain Shallum he reigned ten yeers 2 Kin. 15.14 17.  3944 3235 3  242 3  40  1  3945 3236 4  243 4  41  2  3946 3237 5  244 1 3 42  3  3947 3238 6  245 2  43  4  3948 3239 7 7 246 3  44 The XIV Jubilee 5  3949 3240 1  247 4  45  6  3950 3241 2  248 1 4 46  7  3951 3242 3  249 2  47  8  3952 3243 4  250 3  48  9  3953 3244 5  251 4  49  10 Pekaia 2. he began in the 50 yeer of Azariah 2 Kin. 15.27  3954 3245 6  252 1 5 50  1  3955 3246 7 1 253 2  51  2  3956 3247 1  254 3  52  1 Peka 20. he began Yeers of the Julian Period Yeers of the World Yeers of Rest and Jubilees Olimpiads Yees of the Temple A Table of the Kings of JUDAH and ISRAEL during the time that the Temple stood   Kings of Judah Kings of Israel  3957 3248 2  4  255 1  Jotham the son of Azariah begā his reign in the second yeer of Peka King of Israel reigned sixteen yeers 2 Kin. 15.33 2 in the 52. yeer of Azariah 2 Kin. 15.27  3958 3249 3  1 6 256 2  3  3959 3250 4  2  257 3  4  3960 3251 5  3  258 4  5  3961 3252 6  4  259 5  6  3962 3253 7 2 1 7 260 6  7 In this yeer begā the Building of Rome by Romulus on the 21. day of April and on the 27. of July next after the seventh Olympiad began  3963 3254 1  2  261 7  8  3964 3255 2  3  262 8  9  3965 3256 3  4  263 9  10  3966 3257 4  1 8 264 10  11  3967 3258 5  2  265 11  This was the first yeer of the Aera of Nabonassar he reigned fourteen yeers Ptol. 12  3968 3259 6  3  266 12  13  3969 3260 7 3 4  267 13  14  3970 3261 1  1 9 268 14  15  3971 3262 2  2  269 15  16  3972 3263 3  3  270 16 1 Achas began in the seventeenth yeer of Peka King of Israel and reigned sixteen yeers 2 King 16.1 17  3973 3264 4  4  271 2  18  3974 3265 5  1 10 272 3  19  3975 3266 6  2  273 4  20  3976 3267 7 4 3  274 5  1 Hoshea killeth Peka in this yeer being the fift yeer of Achas and the twentieth yeer since the beginning of Jotham's reign from which time till the twelfth of Achas he was unsetled in his Kingdom and no absolute King till then See 2 Kin. 15.30 ch 17.1 Egypt  3977 3268 1  4  275 6  2  3978 3269 2  1 11 276 7  3  3979 3270 3  2  277 8  4  3980 3271 4  3  278 9  5 41  3981 3272 5  4  279 10  6 42  3982 3273 6  1 12 280 11  7 43  3983 3274 7 5 2  281 12  8  44  3984 3275 1  3  282 13  1 ¶ Here Hoshea began to reign viz. in the latter part of the twelfth yeer of Achas and reigned nine yeers 2 Kin. 17.1 1 Sabaccon 8.  3985 3276 2  4  283 14  2 2  3986 3277 3  1 13 284 15  3 3  3987 3278 4  2  285 16 1 Ezekias began in 4  4  Yeers of the Julian Period Yeers of the World Yeers of Rest and Jubilees Olympiads Yees of the Temple A Table of the Yeers of the Kings of JUDAH and ISRAEL during the time that the Temple stood  Kings of Judah Kings of Israel 3988 3279 5  3  286 2 the end of Hoshea's third yeer and reigned 29. yeers as may be seen in the second Book of Kings chap. 18. 5  5  3989 3280 6  4  287 3 6  6  3990 3281 7 6 1 12 288 4 7  7  3991 3282 1  2  289 5 8  8  3992 3283 2  3  290 6 9 Here the Kingdō of Israel ended 1 Sethon or Sevechus 14. 3993 3284 3  4  291 7  2 3994 3285 4  1 13 292 8  3 3995 3286 5  2  293 9  4 3996 3287 6  3  294 10  5 3997 3288 7 7 4  295 11 At Autumn the XV. IUbilee began 6  3998 3289 1 Jub xv 1 14 296 12  7  3999 3290 2 2  297 13  8  4000 3291 3  3  298 14  9  4001 3292 4  4  299 15 Sennacharib invades Judea the 14 yeer of Ezekia almost ended 10  4002 3293 5  1 15 300 16 In this yeer he invades Egypt viz. in the 11. yeer of Sethon King of Egypt 11  4003 3294 6  2  301 17 12  4004 3295 7 1 3  302 18 In this yeer he returns into Judea again and hath 185000 of his Souldiers slain by an Angel 2 Kin. 18.13 chap. 19.35 Herodotus heard of these things in Egypt but they were greatly corrupted telling us how a great multitude of Mice came into the Army of Sennacherib in the night and did so gnaw the Bows Quivers
Ahasuerus which was his Imperial name and was so called as being the first that obtained the Persian Monarchie by the right of inheritance for such saith Master Lydiat is the signification of the word Ahasuerus or Assuerus Nor will Scaliger himselfe but confesse that it was ordinary with these Kings to change their names when they tooke the Government of the Empire upon them as Cluverus observeth in his Computo Chronologico Cambyses therefore is not unfitly taken for Ahasuerus Ezra 4.6 Next after whom was Magus the Magician who reigned under the name of the brother of Cambyses the other son of Cyrus called by Ctesias not Smerdis as in Herodotus but Tanyoxarces or Tanyoxerxes the same sure which Ezra calleth Artaxerxes or Arthashast Ezra 4.7 So that thus we have the first Artaxerxes he who was before Darius And as for the other after him we need not make question but he was Artaxerxes Longimanus For though Longimanus did not immediately succeed Darius yet was he the first King after him who shewed favour in the restoring Jerusalem If they say the reigne of the Magician was too short to have any hand in the hindring the building of the Temple I answer it was not so short as some may imagine for though he reigned but seven moneths after the death of Cambyses yet was not that the whole time of his reigne for he sat in the throne a good while before even most of the time that Cambyses was out of Persia making war in Egypt and in Ethiopia and against the Ammonians To all which Petavius well accordeth in his twelfth book and 25 Chapter De Doctrina Temporum where noting the Kings of Persia in that order wherein they stand in the book of Ezra thus he saith The first is Cyrus then Assuerus cap. 4.6 to whom the Jews were accused Then Artaxerxes verse 7. who also favoured the Jews enemies and forbad the building of the Temple Afterwards Darius cap. 5. in whose second year the Temple is restored And after him Artaxerxes That Artaxerxes saith he who is mentioned next after Assuerus was not Longimanus but either the same with Assuerus as Josephus thinketh supposing Cambyses to be signified by both those names to whom Torniellus agreeth Or else to speak truely Assuerus is Cambyses and Smerdis the Magician Artaxerxes who cunningly held the Empire eight moneths after Cambyses and hath some of his acts remembred by Herodotus as that he should free his subjects from tribute and grant them a cessation from military employments for the space of three years yea even for almost six years did this personated brother of Cambyses lie hid saith Ctesias and carryed himselfe so cunningly as if he had been Tanyoxerces indeed whom Herodotus call Smerdis Quare ad hunc trahi non immerito potest quod in Esdra legitur Praefectos adversus Judaeos literas ad Artaxerxem dedisse Petav. De Doctr. Tempor lib. 12. c. 25. Learned Langius likewise assenteth hereunto and hath lately declared himselfe against Scaliger in this particular Quid enim vetat saith he reliquorum Regum more hos cum imperium capescerent nomen mutasse ex Cambyse Oxyarem sive Assuerum ex Smerde supposititio quem Ctesias Tanyoxarcen vocat Artoxarcen factum fuisse Thus he with much more to the same purpose in his second book and ninth Chapter De annis Christi And thus in this Section I have shewed the true time of the building of Zorobabels Temple and proved it to be not in the dayes of Darius Nothus but in the dayes of Darius the sonne of Hystaspis who began his reigne in the year of the Julian Period 4193 which was fifteen years after Cyrus proclaimed liberty for the Jews to returne home againe into their owne Country Which account doth exactly agree to the Caelestiall Observations of Ptolomie joyning the twentieth year of this Darius with the 246 of Nabonassar as also the one and thirtieth with the 257 of Nahonassar the first whereof was in the year of the Julian Period 4212 and the next in the year of the same Period 4223. In both which years the Moon is noted by him to be Eclipsed The first according to our Julian account was on the nineteenth day of November And the other on the 25 of Aprill Before which there is another Eclipse noted by him in the seventh year of Cambyses whereto he joyneth the 225 of Nabonassar and was in the year of the Julian Period 4191. The first of Darius Hystaspis must therefore needs be in the year of the said Period 4193. SECT VII Of the seventh Period from the second year of Darius Histaspis to the twentieth year of Artaxerxes Longimanus THis seventh Period is a Period of 65 years which I cannot better demonstrate then by running through the reignes of all the Kings of Persia from the first of Cyrus to the end of the last Darius whom Alexander conquered I begin then with Cyrus who by the consent of all Authours began to reigne in the first year of the 55 Olympiad viz. in the latter part thereof which was in the year of the Julian Period 4155 at the Summer time whereof the second year of the said Olympiad began He reigned 30 years as Ctesias and most Authours write of which seven were over Babylon according to Xenophon or nine according to Ptolomie in his Mathematicall Canon of the Kings of Babylon But I like best to follow Xenophon The next after Cyrus was Cambyses who had some kinde of Dominion in the third year of Cyrus as Daniel sheweth but from his Fathers death who dyed in the year of the Julian Period 4185 to his owne death he had but seven years and five moneths as it is testifyed by Herodotus and confirmed by Ptolomie In Ctesias his fragment we finde 18 which I beleeve to be a corruption and should more rightly be eight the last of which was incompleat as by the seven years and five moneths noted in Herodotus well appeareth This King Cambyses went to war in Egypt in the third year of the sixty third Olympiad which was in the year of the Julian Period 4188 as Diodorus sheweth lib. 2. during which time of his war there and in Ethiopia and against the Ammonians his Kingdome at home was governed partly by his owne brother Tanyoxerxes and partly by one of the Magoi of Persia who slew his brother and then counterfeted his person and under the vaile of his name held the Empire til the death of Cambyses and seven moneths after at which time the chiefe Nobles of Persia discovering the fraud slew him and advanced Darius the son of Hystaspis to the throne in the year of the Julian Period 4193. The next therfore that reigned after this counterfeit brother of Cambyses was Darius the son of Hystaspis the years of whose reigne are so diversly computed by sundry Authors as that it may seem hard to say how long he reigned For Tertullian lib. contra Judaeos gives him
but ninteen years the Marmora Arundelliana 28 Orosius 30 Ctesias 31 Julianus Toletanus 34 Herodotus 36 and Clemens of Alexandria 46. In which diversity all the helpe that we have is from Herodotus who though he give him 36 years doth neverthelesse declare that he dyed in the fifth year after the Marathon war which war was not till the second year of the seventy second Olympiad in which was the one and thirtieth year of his reigne And therefore the whole time of his reigne could be but 34 years compleate as Julianus Toletanus reckoneth And of these he reigned but 33 before his son Xerxes was taken in to reigne with him as in Herodotus again appeareth lib. 7. Xerxes therfore began in the year of the Julian Period 4226 and as Diodorus saith reigned something more then twenty years after whom Artabanus by whom Xerxes was slain continued seven moneths and at the end thereof Artabanus also being slain Artaxerxes Longimanus began to reigne alone and dyed not untill the seventh year of the Peloponnesian War in the winter time thereof viz in the year of the Julian Period 4289 almost finished as both Thucidides and Diodorus witnesse Thucid. lib. 4. Diodor. lib. 11. Ctesias therefore was right in giving 42 years to this King after the death of Artabanus But we are to note that this Artaxerxes had a twofold beginning to reigne The one some years before his Father Xerxes dyed The other after his Fathers death when he had slain Artabanus who slew his Father seven moneths before From the first he reigned 49 years and from the second but 42 as hath been shewed The first began in the year of the Julian Period 4240 towards the end thereof even before the beginning of the seventh moneth the other in the year of the same Period 4247. Thucidides hath an eye to the first of these and so have the holy Scriptures in accounting the years of this King but other old Authours generally account from the latter time when he began to reigne alone in which Diodorus a little differeth from Ctesias and hath therefore but 40 years in the stead of 42. But now why this King should begin in his Fathers life time and so soon as I have mentioned is in regard of what we finde storyed concerning the banishment of Themistocles the Athenian who being expelled out of Athens by his unthankfull Country-men and Citizens fled to the King of Persia for succour in the second year of the seventy seventh Olympiad as Diodorus casts the time and then we are sure Xerxes was living because the time of his reigne was something more then twenty years Diodorus hereupon saith that Themistocles came to Xerxes and so doe some others but Thucidides who was near those times as also Plutarch Charon Lampsacenus and Aemilius Probus have witnessed that he came to Artaxerxes of late having begun to reigne And if to Artaxerxes of late having begun to reigne it must needs follow that Artaxerxes had a beginning before the second year of the 77 Olympiad which as appeareth by the account of Daniels 70 Weeks was in the year of the Julian Period 4240 about the sixth moneth which among the Jews was called Elul and living after that till the seventh year of the Peloponnesian War must needs have a longer time of reigne from this beginning then either forty or two and forty years But for a more clear demonstration and so to reconcile these Authours that they may speak true on either side let me add out of Petavius namely That Themistocles being banished came to come to Xerxes King of Persia as Diodorus and diverse other Story-writers declare and finding Xerxes busied in some expedition or not in the City which was the seate of his Kingdome he sent letters to his son Artaxerxes who of late had began to reigne as Thucidides sheweth For in this respect Story-writers may indifferently relate that he fled as well to the one as the other and our conclusion from hence may be that he fled to the Persians Xerxes yet living when Artaxerxes was already taken in to reigne with him in the Empire as being the next that was to reigne alone after him Thus Xerxes also began to reigne before Darius dyed as hath been proved out of Herodotus Petay lib. 12. cap. 25. For according to a Law among the Persians when the King went to war abroad he did for the most part appoint and constitute one of his sons for his successour from which time some Authours account the years of such an ones reigne whilest others account but from the time of his Fathers death And in the Kingdome of Babylon Nebuchadnezzars reigne began after the same manner as by Berosus compared with holy Scripture may be seen This was usuall also among the Kings of Judah and Israel as by the Scripture alone is manifest which not observed hath caused many grosse mistakes concerning the right reckoning of their reignes Eusebius mentions the flight of Themistocles two years sooner then Diodorus doth who therefore casteth it into the fourth year of the seventy sixth Olympiad which was in the year of the Julian Period 4241 and then was the first year of Artaxerxes still running on by my account This of Eusebius I finde approved by a late learned writer Jacobus Armachanus in his Annals of holy Scripture who sayes that it agrees conveniently enough to the tradition of Thucidides which setteth the comming of Themistocles to Artaxerxes between the siege of Naxus and that noble victory gotten by Cimon over the Persians at Eurimedon and doth withall place the beginning of the reigne of Artaxerxes between those bounds For * viz. Thucidides he said Themistocles then sent letters to Artaxerxes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of late having begun to reigne by which he both desired his friendship and also promised his owne aide to him against the Greekes From which is found out the true beginning of the reigne of Artaxerxes and is from hence proved not to be so late by nine years as is commonly accounted Thus he in his Annals I say of holy Scripture which when I saw I was not a little confirmed in my judgment For though I accounted thus long before I ever read any thing of his in this kinde yet for my better confirmation herein I was glad to meete with the concurrence of so eminent a man from whom though I varie much in the ancient account of the Hebrew moneths and year as also in some other particulars yet here as in many things elsewhere I cannot but embrace him with much gladnesse and shall ever esteeme him as sure enough he is a man of excellent parts great industry piety and much learning worthy to be accounted among the number of those whose memories are precious after their deaths But to returne There is moreover a passage mentioned by Petavius out of Justin to shew the occasion of this beginning as may be seen in his Doctrina Temporum lib. 10.
c. 25. where he also answereth to what Pererius objecteth against it And indeed it is probable that when Xerxes upon the death of Pausanias who should have betrayed Greece to the Persians but was discovered went about to renew his war against the Grecians that then he tooke this his sonne Artaxerxes to reign with him and to be his next successour which Artabanus afterwards would have hindered and made void but could not The next after this Artaxerxes was Xerxes the second who reigned two Months or as Ctesias saith 45 days After whom Sogdianus had seven or eight Moneths more And when Sogdianus was dead Darius Nothus in the yeare of the Julian Period 4290 began to enter upon those XIX yeares which Diodorus saith was the time of his reigne according to whom I reckon the yeares of all the other Kings in this Monarchie to the end thereof And must therefore give to Artaxerxes Mnemon after the death of Nothus 43 years To Artaxerxes Ochus after the death of Mnemon 23. To Arses after Ochus 3. And to Darius Codoman after Arses 6. And thus we have all the Kings of this Monarchie together with the yeares of their reigne and do thereby finde the death of the last of them to be in the yeare of the Julian Period 4384. But for a more cleare demonstration see the Table following Y. of the Julian Period Yeers of the World Rests Jubilees Captivity Olympiads Egypt Babylon Lydians Medes Persians A Perfect Table for the better understanding of some of the former and following Passages 4131 3422 1  24 2 14  25  35  13  CYRUS over Persta *  This was the 24th yeer of the Captivity the fourteenth yeer of Apries King of Egypt the 25th yeer of Nebuchadnezzar King of Babylon the 35. of Halyattes King of Lydia and the thirteenth of Astyages King of Media 4132 3423 2  25 3 15  26  36  14   4133 3424 3  26 4 16  27  37  15   4134 3425 4  27 1 17  28  38  16   4135 3426 5  28 2 18  29  39  17   4136 3427 6  29 3 19  30  40  18   4137 3428 7 6 30 4 20  31  41  19   4138 3429 1  31 1 21  32  42  20    4139 3430 2  32 2 22  33  43  21    4140 3431 3  33 3 23  34  44  22    4141 3432 4  34 4 24  35  45  23   Tyrus is yeelded to Nebuchadnezzar and Egypt is conquered soon after continuing under Babel forty yeers 4142 3433 5  35 1 25 Amafis 45. 36  46  24   4143 3434 6  36 2 1 37  47  25   4144 3435 7 7 37 3 2 38  48  26   4145 3436 1 Jub xviii 38 4 3 39  49  27  1 * Nebuchadnezzar is seven yeers mad 4146 3437 2 39 1 4  40  50  28  2 4147 3438 3 40 2 5  41  51  29  3  4148 3439 4 41 3 6  42  52  30  4  4149 3440 5 42 4 7  43  53  31  5  4150 3441 6 43 1 8  44  54  32  6  4151 3442 7 1 44 2 9  45  55  33  7  4152 3443 1  45 3 10  1 Evilmerodaeh 12. 56  34   Evilmerodach began in this yeer and reigned twelve yeers Sulpit. 4153 3444 2  46 4 11  2 57  35   4154 3445 3  47 1 12  3 1 Crefus 14. 1 Cyaxares secundus  Astyages being dead Cyaxares began Xenoph. 4155 3446 4  48 2 13  4 2 2 1  In this yeer Cyrus is made Generall of the Persian and Median Forces from which time his thirty yeers of reign are to be accounted 4156 3447 5  49 3 14  5  3 3 2  4157 3448 6  50 4 15  6  4  4 3  4158 3449 7 2 51 1 16  7  5  5 4  4159 3450 1  52 2 17  8  6  6  5  4160 3451 2  53 3 18  9  7  7  6   4161 3452 3  54 4 19  10  8  8  7   4162 3453 4  55 1 20  11  9  9  8   4163 3454 5  56 2 21  12  10  10  9   4164 3455 6  57 3 22  1 Belshazzar 14. 11  11  10  Evilmerodach being slain in battel Belshazzar began and reigned 14. yeers Sulpit. 4165 3456 7 3 58 4 23  2 12  12  11  4166 3457 1  59 1 24  3 13  13  12  4167 3458 2  60 2 25  4 14  14  13  In this yeer Cyrus conquers Croesus and possesseth his Kingdom 4168 3459 3  61 3 26  5  15  14  4169 3460 4  62 4 27  6  16  15   4170 3461 5  63 1 28  7  17  16   Y. of the Julian Period Yeers of the World Rests Jubilees Olympiads Persians Medes Egypt Babylon Captivity A Perfect Table for the better understanding of some of the former and following Passages 4171 3462 6  2  17 18 29 8  64  4172 3463 7 4 3  18 19 30 9  65  4173 3464 1  4  19 20 31 10  66  4174 3465 2  1 60 20 21 32 11  67  4175 3466 3  2  21 22 33 12  68  4176 3467 4  3  22 23 34 13  69  4177 3468 5  4  23 24 35 14 Cyrus 7. 70  4178 3469 6  1 61 24 25 36 1 Babylon is taken by Cyrus and the seventy yeers of the Captivity are ended even in this first yeer of Cyrus which was also the first of Darius-Medus 4179 3470 7 5 2  25  37 2 4180 3471 1  3  26  38 3  4181 3472 2  4  27  39 4  4182 3473 3  1 62 28  40 5  Egypt shakes off all subjection to the Kingdom of Babylon forty yeers after Nebuchadnezzar conquered it Ezek. 29.13 Jer. 46.26 4183 3474 4  2  29  41 6  4184 3475 5  3  30  42 7  4185 3476 6  4  43 1 Cambyses 7. 5 m. Cyrus being dead Cambyses began to reign alone and reigned from hence seven yeers
 183 27 20   4267 3558 4  2 28 21   4268 3559 5  3 29 22   4269 3560 6  4 30 23   4270 3561 7 4 184 31 24   4271 3562 1  2 32 25   4272 3563 2  3 33 26   4273 3564 3  4 34 27   4274 3565 4  185 35 28   4275 3566 5  2 36 29 Yeers of the Peloponnesian War  4276 3567 6  3 37 30  4277 3568 7 5 4 38 31  4278 3569 1  186 39 32  4279 3570 2  2 40 33  4280 3571 3  3 41 34  4281 3572 4  4 42 35  4282 3573 5  187 43 36  4283 3574 6  2 44 37 1 This was the first yeer of the Peloponnestan War it began at the Spring witnesse that great Eclipse of the Sun which was on the fourth of August next after This War lasted 27. yeers  4284 3575 7 6 3 45 38 2  4285 3576 1  4 46 39 3  4286 3577 2  188 47 40 4  4287 3578 3  2 48 41 5  4288 3579 4  3 49 42 6  4289 3580 5  4 2m 8m 7 Xerxes the 2 d two moneths after whom Sogdianus 8 m. 4290 3581 6  189 1 ¶ 8 In this yeer Darius Nothus began and reigned 19 yeers SECT VIII Of Daniels seventy Weekes in the ninth Chapter of his Prophecy at the 24.25.26 and 27. Verses I Shall need to say nothing of the seventh Period more then what hath been already in the former Section and Table annexed to it I come therefore to the eighth which takes beginning the 20th year of Artaxerxes Longimanus in the year of the Julian Period 4259 and endeth at the beginning of Christs Ministery in the year of the same Period 4742. This is a Period of 69 Weeks Petavius De Doctr. Temp. lib. 12. c. 35. or of 483 years accounted from the Execution of the Decree for the restoring and building of Jerusalem unto Messiah the Prince vers 25. Of which Petavius speaketh excellently in these words saying Sexaginta novem hebdomades desinunt in Christum Ducem non nanscentem quidem sed in lucem apertumque prodeuntem seque ad 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 atque 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 accingentem hoc est in Baptismum ipsius qui anno primo septuagesimae hebdomadis incurrit Meaning in effect the same that I doe for though he applyes the end of the 69 Weekes to the Baptisme of Christ yet he saith as well that they end at Messiah the Prince namely not at the time when he was borne but when he came abroad and shewed himselfe openly beginning to dispose of his hid treasures and to preach the Gospel in the Synagogues of Galilee which was not untill the very end of these 69 Weekes made up of seven and sixty two and beginning of the seventieth For as before I noted in the fifth Chapter after John was put in prison Jesus came into Galilee preaching the Gospell of the Kingdome of God and saying 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The time is fulfilled that is the last Week of the seventy is come and the Kingdome of God is at hand Mar. 1.14 In the middle of which last week the Messiah Christ Jesus our Lord and Saviour was slain vers 26. And by the end of it the Covenant was confirmed with many of the Jews verse 27. Immediately after which time the Apostles turne to the Gentiles Acts 10.1 and Acts 11.18 They were all of them Weeks not of Days but of years according to the custome of Prophetical Dayes and years of Jubilee there being seven Weeks in 49 years as is seen in Levit. 25.8 Whereupon it followeth that in seventy Weekes are 490 years There can be no doubt of this I may therefore goe on and for the more cleare understanding of what I have already briefly touched set downe the words of the text in each verse at large Ver. 24. Seventy Weekes is cut out upon thy people and upon thy holy Cities to finish transgression and to make an end of sin and to make reconciliation for iniquity and to bring in everlasting righteousnesse and to seale up Vision and Prophet and to annoint the Most Holy Ver. 25. Know therefore and understand that from the Out-going of the word to returne and to build Jerusalem unto Messiah the Prince shall be seven Weekes and threescore and two Weekes it shall be built againe Street and Wall even in the strait of times Ver. 26. And after the threescore and two Weekes shall Messiah be slain but not for himselfe wherefore the Princes people to come shall destroy the City and the Sanctuary and the end thereof shall be with a Flood and unto the end of the War desolations are determined Vers 27 But in one weeke he shall confirme the Covenant with many and in the midst of the weeke he shall cause the Sacrifice and the Oblation to cease and by a Wing of abominations making desolate he shall flow upon the desolate even untill the Consummation determined These be the words of the Prophecie carefully translated which in the next place I thinke fit to open and explain noting upon them as followeth Vers 24. Seventy weekes is cut out By which phrase is meant that the full and just number of 70 weekes is cut out For when a Verb singular is joyned to a Substantive plurall it teacheth in Hebrew that an exact account is then in every part thereof fully intended Thy people that is Thy Country men the Jewes as may be seen in the first Chapter of Ruth at the tenth verse where the Jewes are called Naomies people The like is also in the third Chapter of the Lamentations at the fourteenth verse where Jeremy complaining saith He was a laughing stock to all his people Thy Holy City this meanes Jerusalem Esa 52.1 Matth. 4.5 so called because it was the speciall place consecrate to the holy worship of God This Prerogative of being called The holy City it was to retaine as here appeareth untill the full end of these 70. weekes And therefore when Christ came Salvation was first tendred to the Jewes They in generall made light of it and put Christ to death howbeit the covenant of the Gospell was confirmed with many of them during the time of the last week which being ended their Prerogative ceased and thereupon the Apostles turne to the Gentiles to whom the Gospell began not to be preached untill three yeares and an halfe after Christs Passion at which time every one of the Seventy weekes were fully ended Now this holy City was called Daniels City either because he was born there or because that was the place of his bringing up or in which he dwelt till he was carryed away Captive Thus Capernaum is called Christs City because he dwelled in it Matth. 9.1 and
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
Baptisme when the last weeke was ready to begin For then the holy Ghost came downe upon him in the likenesse of a Dove the Heavens being also opened and a voice from the Father saying This is my welbeloved sonne in whom I am well pleased Matth 3.16.17 Luk. 3.22 After which inauguration at the beginning of the last weeke he entred on his Ministry and began to preach deliverance to the Captives and in the middle of the weeke satisfied for us on the Crosse and by his death made an end of sinne freeing us from it and putting it away by the Sacrifice of himselfe as was before proved Joh. 1.29 Rom. 6.18 Heb. 9.26 All therefore that shall need to be now observed further is the method of the Angel in the verse objected speaking of that last which was done first and of that first which was done last which if Calvisius had well observed he needed not have urged the annointing of the Most holy against the right ending of these weekes But perhaps it will be still objected out of the 26 and 27 verses Object that the last weeke could not be the weeke of Christs passion because those verses do expresly mention the destruction of the City and tell us of the Abomination of Desolation which even Christ himselfe would should be regarded as a token or signe of the ruine of the City Answ Mat 24.15 To which I answer that although the destruction of the City be there mentioned yet not because it was within the compasse of the weekes or because the end of them must be extended thither but because the destruction of the City was to follow and fall upon the Jewes as a punishment for their putting Christ to death as in the Annotations foregoing hath been shewed It was spoken of to shew the hainousnesse of that sin and is foreshewed to follow as a just judgement of God for so great a wickednesse and not because it is to be included within the compasse of the weekes And of this destruction the Abomination of Desolation was but a signe spoken of by Daniel the Prophet that 's all and more then that cannot be justly gathered from the places objected But they further urge Object that though the sinne of the Iewes was the cause of their punishment yea and among other sinnes that of putting Christ to death yet did not Ierusalem utterly cease to be a City or Church of God till they contradicted and blaspemed the Apostolicall Ministery by persisting still in their wickednesse For when Jerusalem had condemned and crucified Christ Saint Peter inspired by the holy Ghost saith still To you belong the Promises and to your children Acts 2.39 True Answ I grant as much for after Christs Passion there were still three years and an halfe before the 70 Weekes were ended And till then there was no tender of Salvation to the Gentiles For in the last Week Christ first by himselfe and afterwards by his Apostles preached to the Jews confirming a Covenant with many of them during the time of that Week which being ended the Apostles turne to the Gentiles as already I have most fully and plainly proved But perhaps it will be objected out of Beroaldus Object that the word in the Original commonly translated Middle Beroald lib. 3. cap. 8. must be translated Halfe and not Middle So that Christ shall be said to abolish Sacrifice and Oblation not in the Middle of the Week but in Halfe of the week which Halfe was not the first Halfe because seventy weekes and not sixty nine and ½ were cut out over the people and the Holy City To which is answered though the word indeed is used as well for Halfe as Middle yet here it must be rendred Middle and not Halfe. For even in the text it selfe Christ is said to cause to cease or to abolish Sacrifice and Oblation Now this action is not Actio manens and continuata but cito transiens for it is meant of the death of Christ who put away sin by the death or Sacrifice of himselfe abolishing legall offerings for sin to establish his owne Sacrifice and Oblation once offered upon the Crosse Heb. 9.26 chap. 10.9 Unlesse therefore we will make Christs death to be a continued action and say that he continued in that act of dying for the space of three years and an halfe we must needs grant as the truth is that he was crucified or slaine in the Middle of the Weeke which the confirming of the Covenant doth fully prove But saith Funccius the Sacrifices were of right abolished when Christ was Baptized in witnesse whereof there came a voice from heaven saying This is my beloved son in whom I am well pleased Mat. 3.17 Quasi dicat Nulla posthac hostia nullum Sacrificium Mosaicum mihi placebit Which is as if it should be said No offering no Mosaicall Sacrifice shall henceforwards please me any more Whereunto is answered that the Sacrifices of the Law did never please God otherwise then types and shadowes of Christs owne Sacrifice of himselfe and in that respect Moses his Sacrifices and such types of Christ were as well acceptable to God after his Baptisme till his Passion as before which is plain by that in Matthew 8.3 where Christ after his Baptisme bids the Leper offer the gift that Moses commanded which among other things was two Hee Lambes and one Ewe Lamb as is recorded Levit. 14.10 So that still I see the former exposition will stand notwithstanding this Objection But however though their ending may be right yet their beginning cannot unlesse they begin in the first year of Cyrus For if the 70 weeks begin not in the first year of Cyrus the alogie of the 70 years of Captivity and the seven times 70 years of liberty cannot stand To which is answered Answ that an analogie is a proportion similitude or resemblance which one thing hath unto another Now that any intervenient time can destroy an Analogie is as one truely saith a meere Paradox For it is certain there was a true Analogie between the Paschall Lamb in the first Passeover and the Passion of Christ in the last Passeover and yet we know that the one was many hundreds of years after the other Joh. 3.14 As the Serpent was lift up in the wildernesse so must the son of Man be lifted up there was a true analogie but many years between As Jonas was three dayes and three nights in the Whales belly so must the son of Man be three dayes and three nights in the heart of the Earth Mat 12.40 there also was a true analogie but with many years again between This objection therefore is no hindrance either to the length of the Persian Monarchy or to the beginning of the 70 weeks although they begin not just when 70 years of Captivity were ended I conclude therefore that the beginning of the LXX Weeks was in the twentieth year of Ataxerxes Longimanus in the year of the Julian
God at which time not onely was Iehoiakim bound in fetters to be carryed to Babylon but Daniel with certaine more of the Children of Israel and of the Kings seed and of the Princes were brought thither by Ashpenaz the master of the Eunuches and taught there the learning and tongue of the Chaldeans Daniel 1.3 4. Nor doth the same Prophet elsewhere but understand the beginning of these yeares thus For I understood saith he by books the number of the yeares whereof the word of the Lord came to Jeremiah the Prophet that he would accomplish 70 yeares in the desolations of Jerusalem Dan 9.2 In which text the word is plurall Desolations to shew that the 70 years must include all the Calamities which fell upon Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar King of Babylon beginning even from the first of them and were not ended untill the reign of the Kingdome of Persia namely when Cyrus King of Persia had conquered Babylon and thereupon could say All the Kingdomes of the Earth hath the Lord God of Heaven given me and hath charged me to build him an house in Jerusalem 2 Chron. 36.20.23 There is saith Petavius a double intervall of 70 yeares expressed in the Scriptures the one by the Prophet Jeremiah the other by the Prophet Zachary and is altogether strange and differing from the former The first intervall is from the first yeare of Nebuchadnezzar to the two and twentieth year of Cyrus when he tooke Babylon The second is from the Desolations of the Temple and City to the second yeare of Darius the sonne of Hystaspis Thus he in his twelfth booke and twenty fourth Chapter De Doctrina Temporum And certainly he was not farre from truth in all this as by that which I have already written may be seen I account I confesse a little otherwise but decline not his grounds for in the first seventy I come two years lower then the two and twentieth of Cyrus and begin not the second when Nebuchadnezzar destroyed the City and burnt the Temple but when he laid his last siege against Jerusalem in the yeare of the Julian Period 4125. of which see more in the eighth Chapter and sixth Section And now of all in this Chapter hitherto this is the conclusion that Nebuchadnezzar being sent by his father upon an expedition into Egypt and Syria came against Jerusalem and besieged it in the third year of Jehoiakim by such time at his third year was ended and his fourth a little entred the Lord gave Jehoiakim into his hand with part of the vessels of the house of God This was in the year of the Iulian Period 4107. in the ninth Moneth by reason whereof the Jews kept a Fast in that Moneth as is mentioned Ier. 36.9 The Scripture accounteth this for the first yeare of Nebuchadnezzars reigne as well it might for not only now was Nebuchadnezzar taken in as a consort with his father in the Empire but also whilst he was employed in this expedition his father died even in the twentieth year of his reigne as afterwards shall be proved And note that Iehoiakim being now taken by this rod of Gods anger to whom Judah and other Neighbouring Nations must be put in Subjection was bound in fetters to be carried to Babylon among the other Captives 2 Chron. 36.6 but went not For afterwards in the way by an agreement of servitude he was released and sent home againe and so became his servant 2 Kin. 26.1 This was about the Spring time of the yeare of the Julian Period 4108. from whence the 70 years in Jeremy began as without all further scruple may be freely granted especially considering that the first draught must be given to Judah as may be seen in Jer. 25.18.29 CHAP. X. Of the time when Tyrus and Egypt were subdued and taken by Nebuchadnezzar according to the Prophecies of Esay Jeremiah and Ezekiel THat the Jews and other neighbouring Nations were delivered into the hands of Nebuchadnezzar in the first yeare of his Kingdome already hath been proved Jer. 25.9.11 and albeit they refused to beare his yoake yet by degrees he brought them all under Jerusalem he tooke and destroyed in the nineteenth yeare of his reigne at which time Tyrus thought her selfe safe and secure enough She therefore rejoyced at the fall of that great City and is thereupon threatned with destruction for the power and might of Nebuchadnezzar was to come against her This was spoken in the eleventh year of Jechoniah's Captivity which all men know was the nineteenth year of Nebuchadnezzar and therefore till after this time there was no siege laid against Tyrus witnessed by the Prophet Ezek. 26.1.2 and at the seventh verse most plainly For thus saith the Lord God Behold I will bring upon Tyrus Nebuchadnezzar King of Babylon Where note that he was not yet come but was after this time to come against her Scaliger therefore casts his account amisse when he reckoned that Tyrus was besieged and taken before the time of this threatning That Tyrus was besieged thirteene years we have it from Iosephus in his first book against Apion who had it out of the Annals of the Phoenicians These eighteen yeares siege were in the reigne of Ithobalus and began in the seventh yeare of his reigne which was also the three and twentieth of Nebuchadnezzar as appeareth by accounting on to the 14 year of Irom from the 14 year of Irom must at least in some part of it fal into the first year of Cyrus as Ioseph here sheweth that is into his first year over Babylon and not into his first yeare over Persia And thus will this account agree wel with that already mentioned out of the 26. Chapter of Ezekiel although it differ much from that which Ioseph Scaliger mainly strives for And note also that from the time at which Tyrus began to be besieged to the death of Irom are 54 yeares which by this account is as right as can be I conclude therefore that Tyrus was taken in the end of the yeare of the Iulian Period 4141. or in the beginning of the next year whilst the seven and twentieth year of Iechoniah's Captivity was still running on for then doth Ezekiel mention the taking of it even after a long siege and service against it as may be seen Ezek. 29.17.18 After which Tyrus is to be forgotten till the end of those seventy yeares which were the date of Nebuchadnezzars Kingdome began from the beginning of the Captivity as the Peophet meaneth in Esa 23.15 A like Phrase is in Gen 11.32 and in Exod 12.40 as Philippus in his Chronologie upon that place in Esay hath observed In oblivione eris ô Tyre 70 annis Tyrus dicitur in oblivione futura 70 annis non quod totos illos annos oblivio tenuerit sed terminarit Thus he and thereupon referrs us to Gen. 11.32 and to Exod. 12.40 And thus we have the right time both for the besieging and taking of Tyrus A list of them that
reigned there is as followeth The latter Kings of Tyre out of Josephus exactly accounted and fixed in their right times  years of their reigne The years of the Julian Period when they began to reigne 1. Ithobalus 19 4123 2. Baal 10 4142 3. Ecnibalus M. 2. 4152 4. Chelbes M. 10. 4152 5. Abharus M. 3. 4153 6. Mytgonus 6 4153 7. Gerastus 6 4153 8. Belatorus 1 4159 9. Merbalus 4 4160 10. Iromus 20 4164 This is the lift By which it appeareth that Tyrus began to be besieged in the year of the Julian Period 4129. three years after the destruction of Ierusalem and a little more then 13 yeares before the Conquest of Egypt For this we are to note that about the Summer time of the year of the Iulian Period 4142. Nebuchadnezzar conquered Egypt not many Moneths after Tyrus was taken Ezek. 29.17 18 19 20. This was the Six and thirtieth yeare of his reigne or five and thirtieth yeare ending being also the beginning of the first yeare of his absolute Monarchie before which time he had his dream of the foure Monarchies For that dream could not be in the second year of his absolute MOnarchie after he had conquered Egypt because Tyrus as we have seen was first conquered Egypt given him for his wages but Daniel was famous before Tyrus was taken and yet his wisdome not knowne till the expounding of this dreame Ezek. 28.3 and Dan. 2. In the second year therefore of Daniels service with the King he expounded this dream For though it be said In the reigne of Nebuchadnezzar yet are not those words to be joyned with the former in the second yeare as appeareth saith one by the Hebrew distinction rebiah set over the word shetaim Second but to shew that it was not in the Second yeare of Cyrus For in the last words of Daniels first Chapter it is said that Daniel was to the first yeare of King Cyrus Now therefore least any should thinke that this was done in the second of Cyrus direct mention is made of the reigne of Nebuchadnezzar This I thought good to touch at by the way in regard of that mistake which is among many who account the time of this dream to be in the second year after the conquest of Egypt More like it is that in these times Nebuchadnezzar set up his golden Image was famous for his stately buildings had his dreame of the Tree and twelve Moneths after began to be madde which I take to be about the end of the eight and thirtieth year of his reign For in that year I account that the first year of his madnesse began which lasted seven years at the end wherof he was restored and died soon after For if his death had not been soon after the end of his madnesse it is thought he would have restored the Jews out of Captivity But because it was not he that must do this it is like God took him away and kept them still in Captivity untill the first yeare of Cyrus And thus we have the right time also of the conquest of Egypt The King that reigned there then was Apries or as he is called by the Prophet Hophra Ier. 44.30 in whose two and twentieth yeare I thinke it probable that Amasis rebelled against him which thereupon perhaps was the cause why Diodorus saith he reigned but 22 years whereas in Herodotus we finde that he reigned twenty five And indeed it is not unlike but that Egypt was sore shaken before Nebuchadnezzar came to conquer it which therefore helped him to effect that he came for the sooner with the greater ease For what with the calamity of the Cyrenian warre and what with the rebellion of Amasis thereupon the strength and arme of Egypt was greatly broken and so faire a way made for Nebuchadnezzar to come and conquer it as that he might quickly and with much ease performe the worke the businesse in a manner being done to his hand before he came which agrees well to the speech and phrase of the Prophet who saith that this Country was given to him as his wages for that great service which he caused his Army to serve against Tyrus Ezek. 29.18.19 And note after all this that Egypt was not restored untill the end of 40 yeares from hence Ezek. 29.13 Ier. 46.26 And if so then shall Amasis have but five yeares reigne after he revolted from the Babylonian by whom as is very probable he was intrusted with the Lieutenantship of the Country as a reward for his rebellion against his naturall Prince in regard that he thereby helped Nebuchadnezzar there to fix his throne For it is without question that Amasis was neither 44 nor 55 yeares together King of Egypt after Apries though Herodotus and Diodore tell us so The truth is the Priests of Egypt would not mention any thing of Nebuchadnezzars reigning there but did notably delude Herodotus and Diodorus with lyes coyned upon a vaine-glorious purpose of hiding their owne disgrace and bondage and so these two being strangers to that which Nebuchadnezzar did there because they wanted the helpe of holy Scripture rested satisfied with any thing though false that the lying Priests would tell them But as for us we know the contrary and may not smother that which the word of God relateth For thus saith the Lord of Hosts the God of Israel Behold I will send and take Nebuchadnezzar the King of Babylon my servant and will set his throne upon these stones that I have hid and he shall spread his royall Pavilion over them Ier. 43.10 But now see the list of them that reigned A List of the latter Kings of Egypt out of Herodotus and fixed in their right times  Years of their reigne The years of the Iulian Per. when they began to reign 1. Psammiricus 54 4041 2. Pharaoh Necho 17 4095 3. Psammis 6 4112 4. Apries 25 4118 ☜ CHAP. XI Of the number of Kings that reigned in Babylon during the time of the Captivity THe fragments of Berosus and Megasthenes in accounting more Kings then three during the time of the Captivity agree so ill with the Scripture as I know not how to build upon them For they tell us of Nebuchadnezzar Evilmerodach Naragalrasar Labosardach and Nabonidus whereas in Scripture we find no more named then Nebuchadnezzar Evilmerodach and Belshazzar And as no more named so no more to be named nor reckoned for Kings of Babylon during these times For in Scripture this we find This whole Land shall be a desolation and an astonishment and these Nations shall serve the King of Babylon 70 years And it shall come to passe when 70 years are accomplished that I will punish the King of Babylon and that Nation saith the Lord Jer. 25.11 12. And againe All Nations shall serve him and his son and his sons son untill the very time of his Land come and then many Nations and great Kings shall serve themselves of him Ier. 27.7 And when
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
alive when Nebuchadnezzar began his expedition against Egypt and Syria but died soone after probably about such time as Nebuchadnezzar altered his purpose concerning Jehoiakim For having bound him in fetters with an intent to carry him to Babylon he agreed with him that he should become his servant and so sent him home to Jerusalem which I take to be in regard of the newes of his Fathers death And if so then will the reigne of Nabopollassar be something short of 20 yeares For whilst some give him 29 yeares some Copies of Ptolomey 25 other 21 I should rather thinke 19 to be the truer number which in Berosus his fragment is corruptly said to be 29. or if 20 it must be but 20 running on and so shall both the beginning of the Captivity and the beginning of Nebuchadnezzar after the death of his Father be at one and the same time viz. in the year of the Iulian Period 4108. Howbeit the ordinary account of Nebuch adnezzars reigne is not to be taken from hence but from the beginning of his expedition CHAP. XII Of the first year of Cyrus and of Darius Medus mentioned in holy Scripture THe first year of Cyrus mentioned in Scripture was not the first year of his reigne over Persia but the first year of his Monarchy which began at the conquest of Babylon and was a Date reckoned not onely by the Jews as an Aera or Epocha first began in honour of their returne out of Captivity but as the first year of a new Kingdome in the beginning whereof the Jews indeed came out of Babylon but the Record bearing date for this was found in a Coffer which was at Achmetha a Provice of the Medes in the Palace there Ezr. 6.2 We may not therefore with Joseph Scaliger begin this Monarchy some certaine years after the taking of Babylon but at the very time thereof For first if there were four Monarchies one to succeed another as we are taught in the second and seventh Chapters of Daniel then I ask from whence shall we reckon the beginning of the second but from the end of the first which went before it Or shall we say that when the one was extinguished the other was not as yet begun Surely no. For Nebuchadnezzars Image which represented the four Monarchies was but one entire body and withall an entire body wherefore as soon as the Head of Gold was cut off which was at the * Nam ante ejus expugnationem populum ibidem captivum dimittere non potuit neque pronunciare data sibi esse à Deo caeli omnia regna terrae Regnum enim Babylonicum erat omnium potentissimum quo nondum subacto ipse Monarcha jure appellari nequibat vide Cluverum taking of Babylon Jer. 27.7 and chap. 50.4 the power remained in the Armes and Breast of Silver and well might Cyrus at that time say All the Kingdomes of the earth were given unto him because his power was then so great and so much encreased by that conquest in having wonne the destroyer and conquered the conquerour that other subordinate Kingdomes were as nothing to resist him Secondly Daniel was unto the first year of Cyrus Dan. 1.21 that is he continued in Babylon till that state was altered the Kingdom translated to Cyrus For upon the conquest Darius took Daniel thence and carryed him to the Medes as * Josep Antiq. lib. 10. ca. 12. Josehus writeth in which Country he was had in great honour made a chiefe officer in the Kingdome To which testimony of Iosephus even Daniel also adds no little light seeming to point out the place of his own imprisonment among the Lions to be in Media For in the sixth Chapter at the eighth verse the Law of the Medes and Persians is urged Now that this was also the first year of Darius is apparent out of the two formost verses of the ninth Chapter For in the first year of Darius Daniel understood by books that the 70 years were accomplished which could not be if this first of Darius had not been likewise the first of Cyrus For not only upon the immediate dissolution of the Babylonian state did Cyrus begin as already hath been proved out of Dan. 1.21 but even the 70. years of the Jews servitude was at an end in which the Jews and the other threatned Nations were to serve Nebuchadnezzar his son and his sons son not that they were subdued all at once but by degrees and were not delisered out of that servitude untill the end of the 70 years which were not only to end the Captivity but the time also of Babels Kingdome as in the former Chapter I have fully proved CHAP. XIII Of Alexander the great signified by the Horne between the eyes of the Goate Dan. 8.5 IN this eighth Chapter of Daniel the Prophet relateth what he saw in a vision concerning the Persian and Grecian kingdomes The first whereof is described by a Ram verse 4. The second by a Goate verse 5. The Ram saith the Angel having two hornes are the Kings of the Medes and Persians verse 20. The Goate is the King of Grecia and the great horne which is between his eyes is the first king verse 21. This great horn then was Alexander ille magnus Alexander the great born 33 years before the beginning of the 114 Olympiad at the day of whose birth the Temple of Diana at Ephesus was set on fire which the Magicians interpreted to signifie that one then was borne who should set fire on all Asia At fifteen years of age he was committed by his Father to Aristotles tuition with whom as Iustin reporteth he spent five yeares in the learning of Arts and other knowledge meet for a King and about the end of this time his Father died Then began he to reigne and having reigned 6 yeares he prevailed over the Ramme and by the end of six yeares more he is broken off This was whē his fortunes were at the greatest as was signified vers 8. for being returned from his conquest of the Indians and purposing to passe over into Greece and the Westerne parts he died in the way at Babylon where Embassadours from most parts in the world expected him Some say he was poysoned but the most agree that he died of a surfeit which he gat at a Physitians house where having first of all glutted himselfe with eating he drowned himselfe in extreame quaffing and carousing through which distemper he fell into a burning feaver and so died before he came againe into his owne Country His successe in Battell was admirable for he never encountred enemy but he overcame him never besieged City but he tooke it and in three fights he overcame all the power of Asia extending his Empire to such a wonderfull largenesse that he came not only to India and the river Ganges and to those places where Semiramis Hercules and Cyrus had set up Altars before him but also conquered the more Noble
parts of Europe Syria and Egypt and these things done with such celerity that he might well appear to Daniel in one of his Visions with * Quia nihil fuit velocius Alexandri victoria as Saint Hierom observeth wings on his backe Dan. 7.6 Apelles knew no such Prophecie and yet to signifie his great swiftnesse and agility he added to his Picture a Thunderbolt and Lysippus another painter drew him in this fashion looking up towards Heaven and as it were uttering these words Jupiter asserui terram mihi tu assere coelum Jupiter I have taken the earth to my selfe do thou take the Heaven Which Poesie pleased him and gave him great content insomuch that none afterwards might take his Picture except Lysippus at length growing to be more and more taken with an itch of vaine glory he called himselfe the son of Jupiter arrogating such a worship to be due unto him as was conferred on the Gods which when Callisthenes refused to give he caused him to be killed Howbeit before he had glutted himselfe with the pleasures of Asia he was more milde and better-minded for as Josephus hath recorded meeting Jaduah the high Priest of the Jewes in his Pontificall robes Joseph Antiq. lib. 11. cap. 8. he fell down before him and gave him reverence and being asked by Parmenio why he did so he answereth I worship not the man but God in the man who in the same habit had appeared to him and gave him encouragement to go forward in that enterprise concerning the conquest of Asia And indeed upon this appearance he grew confident went on couragiously and with good successe untill the time came that he must be broken off which was in the first year of the 114 Olympiad as most Authours reckon aster which foure other hornes sprang up in his stead CHAP. XIV Of the four Hornes which came up in stead of the great Horne broken off as was prophecyed Dan. 8.8.21.22 As also the beginning of that Date of the Kingdome of the Greekes so often mentioned in the Bookes of the Maccabees and in Josephus THese foure Hornes were the four successours of Alexander or rather the foure Kingdomes into which his great and mighty Monarchy was divided after him not instantly or immediately after he was dead but by the time that his whole stocke and posterity were rooted out And for this we have the warrant of Daniel in another place of his prophecy namely in the eleventh Chapter at the fourth verse in which place is said His Kingdome shall be divided towards the foure windes of Heaven but not to his posterity This was not untill twelve yeares after the death of Alexander for then none of his posterity being left alive neither Mother Brother Wife nor child his Captaines composed the differences that were between them by entring into a League among themselves and began to reigne bringing the dominion of the whole for which they strove into four Heads and so there were foure Kingdomes though not according to the dominion which he ruled nor in such power as he had Daniel sheweth it Dan. 8.22 and Dan. 11.4 The most eminent among these and which had most to do with the Jews was the Kingdome of the Syro-Grecians or the Kingdome of the Greekes in Syria and Babylon For Ptolomy the sonne of Lagus obtained Egypt and is called he and his successours after him the King of the South In the North Antigonus held Asta minor In the West Cassander possessed the Kingdome of Macedonia and in the East Seleucus Nicanor obtained the Kingdome of Babylon and Syria in whose first yeare that date so often mentioned in the Bookes of the Maccahees and in Josephus tooke beginning That in the first Booke of Maccabees on the thirteenth day of March in the yeare of the Iulian Period 4402. That in the second Booke of the Maccabees at the Spring time of the next yeare between both which was another beginning on the sixth day of September in the same yeare with the first And thus we have the severall heads of this Aera of Seleucus The first is called Minjan staros that is Aera Contractuum Eusebius calleth it Aera Edessenorum and others the Aera of the author of the first Booke of Maccabees and is followed by Josephus They that cast it into the 436. yeare of Nabonassar are right if they marke how they account it which must be thus The 436. yeare of Nabonassar began in the yeare of the Iulian Period 4401 on the ninth day of November and on the thirteenth day of March next after whilst the same yeare of Nabonassar was still running on the first yeare of the Greekes began This first yeare therefore of the Kingdome of the Greekes began in the yeare of the Iulian Period 4402. as at the first was said on the thirteenth day of March at the Summer time of which year entred in the first year of the 117 Olympiad The second is called Aera Antiochena seu Alexandrea sive * Id est a duobus coâ—â—bus seu duobus imperiis quae ex uno orientali Alexandrino enata sunt Orig De temp p. 24. Lydiat De emend tem pag. 83.84 Dilkarnaim beginning on the sixth of September in the same year with the former The third is Aera Chaldaica seu Macedonica beginning in the Spring time of the following year falling therefore into the yeare of the Iulian Period 4403. and is called the Aera of the Author of the second Booke of Maccabees followed as I conceive by Ptolomy Lib. magni operis 11. cap. 7. who beginneth his account in the yeare of Nabonassar 437. In the 148 year of this Kingdome according to the first account Judas Maccabeus purged the Temple and the holy places which the Heathen had polluted and defiled building a new Altar and restoring the Sacrifices as is recorded in 1 Macc. 4.52 53. This was in the year of the Julian Period 4549 and year of the World 3840 on the 25 day of Casleu If this year were annus Embolimaeus then must the 25 day of Casleu be on the two and twentieth or three and twentieth of November as Calvisius reckoneth But as I account it was not annus Embolimaeus and therefore the 25 of Casleu was on the * Because the first of Nisan was April 6. f. 1. and so it must be by reason of the Equinox two and twentieth day of December f. 2. In the year next after was the beginning of a year of Rest on the 21 day of September and is mentioned after the death of Antiochus when Eupator beseiged Jerusalem 1 Macc. 6.48 49. In the yeare therefore of the Julian Period 4550 this Sabbathical year began and reached to the seventh moneth of the next year In the year of the same Period 4578 began another and in the year 4676 another All of them spoken of in Josephus and two of them in the History of the Maccabees CHAP. XV. Of the little
Syrians who succeeded Alexander and Alexander also himselfe are said to reigne as Grecians and not as two Kingdomes divers from one Monarchy Whereupon we read in the eighth Chapter of Daniel that the two horned Ram is expresly meant of the Medes and Persians verse 20 and that the Goate fignifieth the whole Kingdome of the Gecians Dan. 8.20.21.22 viz. of Alexonder and his successours For at the one and twentieth verse The Goate is the King of Grecia and the great horne which is betwixt his eyes is the first King Now that being broken whereas four stood up for it four Kingdomes shall stand up of that Nation but not in his strength If then there be a first King there must be no more then one and if more then one the Monarchy could not end in Alexander and if the Monarchy did not end with Alexander then the Seleucian or Syrian Kings must necessarily be part of the third Monarchy and they being part of the third Monarchy the fourth and last is the Monarchy of the Romans And now also lest it should be thought that the third Beast of the seventh Chapter doth not likewise comprehend the whole Kingdome of Grecia both of Alexander and his successours the words of the sixth verse stand thus After this I beheld and loe there was another like a leopard which had upon his back four wings of a fowle the beast had also four heads and Dominion was given him These wings were Emblems of Alexanders speedie conquests together with that suddain division of one body into four parts soone after the great horne was broken off The four heads are his four successours even as is seen in the eighth Chapter and signified there by the four hornes of a Goate By which it appeareth that both Alexander and his successours are comprehended under both Beasts for what the one expresseth by foure heads is in the other also meant by four horns then which there can be nothing plainer Thirdly Antiochus Epiphanes is described by that little horn which came fourth of one of the foure hornes of the Goate Chap. 8.9 Which beast is taken as hath been already seen for Alexander and his successours answering to the third beast of the seventh Chapter But if Antiochus belonging to the Seleucian Kingdome be a part of the third Beast he cannot also signifie the fourth or any part thereof for then one Beast should be both the third and fourth Monarchy Fourthly the Kingdome of this fourth Beast endeth with the destruction of that little horne which came up among the ten horns Chap. 7.11 and then the everlasting Kingdome of Christ succeedeth but the Kingdome of the Seleucians ended not with Antiochus many of that line succeeded afterwards and there was almost as many years from Antiochus Epiphanes death unto the comming of Christ as there were from Alexanders death to Antiochus Fifthly it is said that the life of each Beast was prolonged for a certaine time and season Dan. 7.12 But Alexanders reigne lasted no longer then six years and a few moneths after the destruction of the second Beast or Persian Monarchy And in so short a season what Periods or conversions of times could be observed Sixthly Saint Johns Beast in the Revelation is described according to the pattern of Daniels fourth Beast having ten horns and a mouth speaking great things and reigning also under the regiment of that blasphemous mouth for the space of 42 moneths or for a Time Times and halfe a Time as may be seen in the thirteenth and seventeenth Chapters of the Revelation Wherefore seeing one and the same Beast is described in both Prophecies neither in Daniel nor in the Revelation can be signified by either of them the Kingdomes of the Seleucians and Syrians For look what things concerning this Beast are told to Daniel more succinctly and abstrusely the same are revealed to Saint John more largely and as it were with a kinde of explanation And may not the ten toes in the feet of the Image serve as certaine tokens to shew that although the Beast had always ten horns in respect of the principal Provinces under it yet the ten hornes called by the name of ten Kings are not to be looked for in the first dayes of the Monarchy but in the declining estate and weakned times of the Empire as the toes signifie Seventhly it is said Dan. 2.28 There is a God in heaven that revealeth secrets and hath shewed to the King what shall be in the latter dayes But the latter dayes are the dayes since the first comming of Christ this time being the last houre and the last age 1 Joh. 2 18. as Saint John hath told us whereas the Syrians or Seleucians both began and ended long before Christ was born The latter dayes therefore were not come till they were gone and the prolonging of their kingdom come to an end for as I said before the life of each Beast was prolonged for a certaine time and season Dan. 7.12 Eighthly in the dayes of these Kings or Kingdomes viz. before they be all destroyed the God of heaven shall raise up the eternall Kingdome of Christ and of his Saints Dan. 2.44 But if the fourth Kingdome be interpreted of the Seleucians then these kingdomes were all extinguished before Christs kingdome began whether we reckon it from his first or second comming whereas on the contrary Christs birth fell into the reigne of the Romans who are not utterly to be destroyed in all and every relique till his comming againe to judgement Which is manifest by that of Daniel also in the seventh Chapter namely that there shall remaine some shew or relicts of the fourth Beast untill the thrones be set verse 9. and the Books be opened verse 10. and till the son of Man come in the cloudes of heaven verse 13. and till he get all dominion and honour and Kingdomes and that all People Nations and tongues may serve him verse 14. and untill the Ancient of dayes cause judgement to be given verse 22. and till his everlasting Kingdome come which never shall have an end verse 27. All which doe properly belong unto the day of judgement and second comming of Christ and therefore the fourth Monarchy must needs be meant of the Roman Empire and not of the Syrian or Seleucian Kingdome which was decayed and gone before Christ was born for it fell first of all to Tigranes King of Armenia and afterwards to the Romans in the dayes of Lucullus and Pompey Yea and at the death of Cleopatra Augustus was sole Monarch the longest surviver of the four heads and hornes being then expired in the losse of Egypt And so the fourth Beast trampled the rest under his feet as was foretold Dan. 7.7 And note that the Iews in not expecting the comming of the Messiah untill the Roman Monarchy be destroyed have put a false glosse upon Daniel For it is as Helvicus well observeth a vaine interpretation which they bring For Daniel in
27. even when the worst of Winter was past which in one place of Josephus is translated rigor hyemis as thus ubi autem rigor hyemis cessit c. and in another place ubi tempestas desaeviit Now we know that even in our Northerne Climate the worst of Winter is past long before Aprill which in hotter Countries must be passed sooner then with us by far I reckon therfore that Herod came against Jerusalem in the beginning of February and laid seige against it and that the Iews resisted him for five months space before he took it for he took not the City till the 22 of June next after which was the three and twentieth of Sivan and Sabbath day as well in this year as in that when Pompey took it the authorities else of Dion and Xiphilin will be nothing worth no nor the authority of Iosephus for the Sabbathical year which was running on whilst the City was beseiged and withall was not ended when Herod had taken it which well regarded will give no leave to that opinion maintaining that he took it not till the tenth day of the seventh moneth called Tisri as I have already shewed Note also further Antig. lib. 14. cap. 28. that on the fortieth day after Herod returned from the marriage of Mariamne and that he and Sosius both of them bent their forces against the City the first Wall was taken fifteen dayes after that the second for so I understand Iosephus in those particulars But that it were three moneths after this before the Temple and upper City was taken I cannot think for the Porches and outward Temple were taken and burnt even when the second wall was taken and then quickly after the fury of the Souldiers set them on work to take the rest sparing neither sex nor age as Iosephus also sheweth This was saith he in the hundreth and seven and twentieth year of the Assamonaean Family but how we must account these years I doe not well understand unlesse it be that we are to begin our account in the 150 year of the Greekes which was in the year of the Iulian Period 4551. for then did Antiochus Eupator make a Covenant though he quickly broke it with Judas Maccabeus and the rest of the Iews that they should enjoy their Laws and Liberties as formerly they had done 1 Macc. 6.58 And indeed there is reason to reckon from hence seeing the end of these years is fixed in the death of Antigonus when Herod and Sosius took Jerusalem And now also for the time when Titus took and destroyed this City it must be one hundred and seven years after Herod had taken it and these 107 not compleate but current For Jerusalem was destroyed as saith Iosephus by the Romans one hundred and seven years after Herod had taken it yet so Antiq. lib. 20. cap. 8. as the destruction thereof by Titus must fall into the second year of Vespasian as he againe declareth De bello Iudaic lib. 7. cap. 10. and cap. 18. The time therefore when Titus destroyed it will fall into the year of the Iulian Period 4783 which was in the hundreth and seventh year after it was taken by Herod and Sosius For whereas Herod took it towards the latter end of Iune in the year of the Iulian Period 4677 the Temple was burned by Titus his Soldiers in August in the year of the same Period 4783 and the City in September next after the second year of Vespasian being begun on the Kalends of Iuly before For there were saith Xiphilin from the death of Nero who dyed on the ninth of Iune to the beginning of Vespasian one year and two and twentie dayes But of this destruction of Ierusalem by Titus I shall speake more afterwards in the last Chapter I come therefore now to shew the true time of Herods reigne CHAP. XVIII Of the time of Herods reigne and of his Posterity IT was near about such time as the Romans were growing into a full Monarchy that Herod the great the son of Antipater came to his Kingdome He had a reigne of 37 years from that time wherein he was declared King by the Senate and of 34 from the taking of Jerusalem by himself and Sosius witnessed by Iosephus * Antiq. lib. 14. cap. 26. and lib. 17. ca. 10. De bello Iudaic. lib. 1. cap. ult in sundry places of his Writings Then after him his son Archelaus reigned nine years compleat and near the beginning of his tenth year was banished by Augustus And in the twentieth year of Tiberius his other son Philip dyed having then had a reigne of 37 years after his Father as * Antiq. lib. 17. cap. ultim lib. 18 cap. 6. Iosephus again declareth Antipas also another of his sons was Tetrarch of Galile which he held from the time of his Fathers death untill the dayes of Caius Caligula who by the meanes of Agrippa banished him into France This Antipas was he by whom the Baptist was beheaded and under whom out Saviour suffered Agrippa was the son of Aristobulus and Nephew to Antipas for Aristobulus was another of Herods sons who was put to death by his Father And as for Agrippa it was he who put Iames to death and was himselfe eaten up of Wormes Herod King of Chalcis was this Agrippa's brother he dyed in the eighth year of Claudius and had his Kingdom given to Agrippa junior the son of Agrippa senior who reigned over it for the space of four years at the end whereof the Emperour takes it away from him also and in the stead thereof gives to him the Tetrarchships of Philip and Lysanias c. In them he reigned and lived in friendship with the Romans untill the third year of Trajan and was therefore alive thirty years after the destruction of Ierusalem by Titus But this is not that which I aime at for that which I chiefly intend to prove is the true time of Herod the great before whose death our Saviour Christ was certainely borne Math. 2.1 For as the Scripture speaketh he was born in the dayes of Herod the King This Herod as I said before had a reigne of 37 years from that time wherein he was declared King by the Romans and of 34 from the taking of Jerusalem by himselfe and Sosius The first of these reckonings began in the sixth Iulian year when Cn. Domitius Calvinus and C. Asinius Pollio were Consuls the other in the ninth Iulian year when M. Agrippa and L. Canidius Gallus were Consuls And if so then the last of these years must certainly begin in the two and fortieth Iulian year and year of the Iulian Period 4710 Herod therefore dyed in the three and fortieth Iulian year and year of the same Period 4711 before Easter when from his first beginning he had reigned 37 years compleat and from his second 34 years current Petavius strives for the year before this and that chiefly in regard of an Eclipse of the
Moon which was then on the thirteenth day of March Kepl. in his Silva Chro. annexed to his book De novis stellis and Petav in his Doctr. Temper lib. 11. cap. 1. for in the 42 Iulian year was an Eclipse of the Moon on the thirteenth day of March about three houres before Sun-rising continuing two hours 47 minutes the digits eclipsed being six as Kepler Petavius have observed Now this they think to be that Eclips which Josephus speakes of in his Antiquities lib. 17. cap. 8. But in case Iosephus should there meane a naturall Eclipse of the Moon yet could not this be it for there was too small a space between the thirteenth day of March and the Easter of this year which was on the eleventh of Aprill to have all those things done which Josephus mentions to be done between that time of the Moones darknesse and the death of Herod Inter enim crematos Rabbinos Paschatis festum contigerunt tam multa variaque ut ad ea non paucularum hebdomadum sed multorum mensium tempus requiratur Vossius de Teâ—b Naâ—iv Christi Quod cuivis Iosephum legenti apertissimum erit as saith a famons Authour Adding moreover That every darkenesse and obscurity of the Moon deserves not the name of an Eclipse unlesse the Earth be placed between the Sun and the Moon howbeit it is vulgarly called an Eclipse when without that cause the palenesse and darknesse of a Star of light hath the shew of an Eclipse As happened at the death of * Maro primo Georg. Plin. lib. 2 cap 30. Et Plutarch in vita Caesaris Iulius Caesar or when his Nephew Octavius hearing of his death came to Rome and entred the City Of which Calvisius also speaketh saying Nullibi hoc anno hisce diebus quando Octavius urbem ingressus est Eclipsis Solis invenitur quam anxiè inquirit Harwartus ab Hohnburg Concludendum igitur fuisse aliquod Phaenomenon in Sole c. So also when Xerxes moved from Sardes there was as saith Herodotus a great darknesse of the Sun in a cleare aire which almost all Chronologers taking to be meant of an Eclipse at that time have grievously tormented and vexed themselves to finde it out but fayling to finde any at the right time they have moved this march of Xerxes some to one year and some to another that thereby they might fit it to an Eclipse when indeed there was no Eclipse meant but onely some Phaenomenon strange sight or miraculous disappearing of the Sunne for a season Beside if that Eclipse of the Moon in the two and fortieth Iulian year must serve as a true Character to shew the time of Herods death then how shall the years of his reigne be made good for in the beginning of that year Herod had reigned but 36 years from his first beginning and not 33 from his second beginning The two and fortieth Iulian year could not therefore be the yeare of Herods death no evasion can serve to bring it up so high but upon necessity it must be in the year next after and that was the three and fortieth year As much also doe they erre who bring his death downe to the 44 Iulian year for it is directly against the testimony of Iosephus to say that Herod was not made King by the Romans till a little before the end of the sixth Iulian year Antiq. lib 14. cap. 25.26 It was Winter time indeede when he hazarded himselfe upon the Seas to come to Rome where the Senate made him King but it was not the Winter that entred near the end of the sixth Iulian year for then the Olympiad was not 184 but 185. Now we know it from Iosephus that Herod was made King by the Romans in the 184 Olympiad as well as when Domitius Calvinus and Asinius Pollio were Consuls for if we take onely this and not likewise that we lay hold but upon halfe our testimony And if in the 184 Olympiad then before the Winter which entred near the going out of their Consulships The series therefore of the passages in Iosephus which concern this Antiq. lib 14. c. 24 25. 26. standeth thus namely that at the Pentecost of the fifth Iulian year Herod was in Iudea at Autumne he purposed to goe from Alexandria to Rome but was hindred by a great tempest and came not to Rome till a good part of the Winter was entred and that the new Consuls were in their Offices who entring on the first day of Ianuary tell us plainely that it was in the beginning of the sixth Iulian year when the Senate made him King I commend Calvisius therefore in this particular for he hath here faithfully delivered the minde of Iosephus though he afterward wrong him as much in setting the death of Herod in the 45 Iulian year which is two years after the end of those 37 years that Iosephus giveth him But there was an Eclipse of the Moon in the 45 Iulian year on the ninth of Ianuary at the thirteenth houre which lasted for the space of foure houres and that 's the reason why Scaliger and Calvisius kept Herod alive till then Howbeit it is not that will serve their turne for Herods longest time of reigne being but 37 years from his first beginning will have him dead two years before the time that they mention doe what they can And as Herods owne yeares be against them so are the yeares also of his sonnes Archelaus and Philip. For first Archelaus had but nine yeares compleat after his Father and was banished in the tenth and that 's the reason why Josephus in one place gives him nine years and in another place ten telling us moreover that he was banished in the seven and thirtieth yeare of the Actium fight Ant. l. 18. c. 3. The seven and thirtieth yeare of which fight began in the fifty one Iulian yeare on the second of September and ended at the same time in the next year in the beginning therefore of the 52 Iulian year was the banishment of Archelaus a little after he had begun the tenth yeare of his reigne which still sheweth the death of Herod to be at the time aforesaid This is also further confirmed by Dion lib. 55. writing that Herod of Palestine being accused of his brethren was banished beyond the Alpes when Emilius Lepidus and Lucius Arruntius were Consuls which was in the 51 Iulian year By which difference between him Josephus I take to be meant that the accusation against Archelaus came to Rome neare the end of the 51 Iulian year and that then the Emperour decreed his banishment but before it could be effected and he take notice of it by being actually put out of his Kingdome and the President sent to confiscate his Goods both the two and fiftieth Iulian year and tenth year also of his reign was begun And note also further that by this Testimony of Dion it well appeareth that Archelaus
was sometimes called Herod of Palestine or Herod Archelaus which is nothing strange because others of the same stocke had the like Praenomen or forename As for Example his name who was the Tetrarch of Galilee when the Baptist was beheaded and under whom our Saviour suffered was Antipas howbeit he was also called Herod Luke 23.8 Also Agrippa sonne of Aristobulus had not only the name of Agrippa but of Herod Act. 12.19 and so I do not doubt but that Archelaus was also sometimes called by the name of Herod Secondly Josep an t lib. 18 cap. 6. Philip dyed in the twentieth year of Tiberius and in the seven thirtieth year after his Father The twentieth of Tyberius began in the 78 Iulian year on the nineteenth day of August and ended not until the same time in the next year the death of Philip therefore was in the 79 Iulian yeare before the nineteenth of August and consequently the death of Herod in the three and fortieth yeare as at the first was proved Scaliger did somewhat sticke at these things whereupon his conjecture was that there might be some fault in Josephus and that for the 20 yeare of Tyberius we ought to read the 22 which he found warranted by Ruffinus an ancient interpreter of Josephus Kep Silva Chronol But Kepler answereth that the Greeke Copies of Iosephus are of better credit and that the fault therefore is in the Latine which we may not preferre above the Greeke because the one is the Translation the other the Originall Thirdly after Philip had gotten the Tetrachship of Galile Iosephus telleth us that he built a Towne and in the honour of Iulia the Daughter of Augustus called it Iuliada which certainely he did whilst Iulia was in favour otherwise he had transgressed against the Emperour but Iulia was out of favour and banished for her foule adultery in the foure and fortieth Iulian year And therefore Herod could not be alive in the beginning of the next year as Scaliger would have him because this Towne was not built by Philip till after his Fathers death And as for the banishment of Iulia Dion lib. 48. that it was in the yeare aforesaid is thus proved She was born saith Dion when Marcus Censorinus and Calvisius Sabinus were Consuls and from thenceforth flourished and lived in her Fathers favour and in the favour of the people of Rome Macrob. Sat. lib. 2. cap. 5. untill as saith Macrobius the eighth and thirtieth yeare of her age These men were Consuls in the seventh Iulian year the eight and thirtieth from whence was sure enough the foure and fortieth in which year Cesar himselfe was the thirteenth time Consul Fourthly Iosephus also testifieth that after Herod was dead the sonnes of Herod contended before Augustus concerning their Fathers Heritage and then Cajus was at Rome and sat in judgement but Cajus was absent and gone into Syria in the same year that Iulia was banished And therefore Herod must needes be dead before that time And that Cajus went so soone into Syria may thus be proved He was borne as Dion sheweth in that year when Apuleius and Nerva were Consuls which was in the six and twentieth Iulian year in the nineteenth year after he went into Syria and afterwards into Armenia returning no more for he died in the 49 Iulian year when Sex Aelius and Sentius were Consuls as is testified by Paterculus Tacitus saith Quirinus was made an Overseer to Cajus Cesar not being twenty yeares old when he went to Warres in Armenia Ovid de Arte amandi lib. 1. Ovid gives him the same age which his Father had when he also began to be famous and enter into the Warres which was about nineteene according to what is found in an old Monument recording the famous deeds done by Augustus Annos undeviginti natus exercitum privato concilio privataque impensa câ—mparavi Where the word undeviginti sheweth that he wanted one of twenty But what need I urge these two last proofes thus far seeing those before them are sufficient I conclude therefore that Herod dyed in the forty three Iulian yeare about the six and twentieth day of February which was three and thirty dayes before Easter for that he dyed so long before Easter appeareth by the great Pompe and State at his Funerall together with some other circumstances mentioned by Iosephus Three and thirty dayes before that 's the least it might perhaps be forty which will therefore make his death to be on the nineteenth day of February feria tertia that being the fift day of the twelfth Moneth Adar thirty seven yeares compleat from his first beginning to reigne and thirty four current from the death of Antigonus when he and Socius tooke Ierusalem There is no objection of moment that can be made against it howbeit because something is objected I shall not be wanting to give an answer Our Country-man Lydiat hath greatly taxed Iosephus as if herein he had reckoned amisse but it was an unjust censure For questionlesse those things wherein he blameth him and would make the world thinke him to be faulty would never have been forgotten by his adversarie Apion if in them he had been worthy of blame The greatest Cavill which I suppose can be urged is out of the fourteenth booke of his Antiquities at the beginning of the seventeenth Chapter where Herod is said to be of the age of fifteene yeares in the time of the Pharsalian battell which was in the year of the City 705 and yeare of the Iulian Period 4666. from whence he lived untill he was about seventy yeares old testified also by the same Author in the 17th Booke of his Antiquities at the eight Chapter and in his first Booke De bello Iudaico at the last Chapter From whence it followeth that Herod dyed not till the year of the Iulian Period 4720. which was the 52 Iulian year when A. Licinius and Q. Caeeilius were Consuls Which if it be true then must not the beginning of his reigne be untill the first year of the Actium fight where Iosephus setteth the seventh yeare of his reigne and not the first even the seventh of his 34 yeares accounted from the taking of Ierusalem by him and Socius Some indeed and among them Cardinall Baronius and our Country-man Lydiat begin the thirty seven years of his reigne but then grounding chiefly upon this That that fight being ended and the Victory falling on the side of Augustus Herod who had taken part with Antonius against him came as a suppliant laid downe his Crowne and had never more taken it up if Augustus the Conqueror had not been favourable and given him leave againe to weare it so that receiving his Crowne at that time from the hands of Augustus he at that time began the 37 years of his reign A weake argument I dare boldly say for this at the most was but the pardoning of his offence and thereupon the confirming of him in his
former Royalty and reigne begun ten yeares before this time of the Actium victory For should he reigne thirty seven yeares from hence and after him Archelaus nine then where shall we finde roome for them that governed in Iudea after Archelaus was removed from his Kingdome For after Archelaus was removed from his Kingdome Antiq. lib. 17. c 15. lib. 18. c. 3. Iosephus nameth Cyrenius and Coponius as Rulers and disposers of Iudea for a season And after Coponius Marcus Ambibuchus was Ruler and after him Aanius Rufus and then dyed Augustus Ioseph antiq lib. 18. c. 3. Now lay all these together and it will necessarily follow that Herod could not begin his thirty seven years so late as the first year of the Actium fight And if not so late as the Actium fight then for those 15 of Herods age at the Pharsalian battel we must read 25. And so Suslyga Kepler and * Tirinâ—usin Sacr. Bib. Tom. 1 Tornicl in Annall others have answered namely that the forementioned age of 15 years is directly against the mind of Iosephus because he writeth * Antiq. lib. 14. c. 23. elsewhere that Herod was familiarly acquainted with the most Noble among the Romans about tenne yeares before this time which could not be properly said of a Child being between five or six yeares old We may therefore acknowledge an ancient fault in some one or other who at the first transcribed the Authors Copy writing 15. in the stead of 25. which being long agoe is still continued both in the old Manuscripts and later printed Bookes For who seeth not how easily 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 might be written for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the one signifieth 15 the other 25. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith the Greeke text of Josephus where the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth olim or quondam shewing that Antonius had had familiar acquaintance with Herod and Phasaelus in former times This sure cannot be denied especially seeing all the other numbers and yeares both in Herod and his succeeding Sons agree very well and may be taken up without any the least contradiction Torniellus therefore in his Annals admonisheth that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vitiose scriptum est in Josepho qui ex Josepho descripserunt viz. Gorionide Photio Nicephoro Abulensi c. meaning that 15. is corruptly written in Josephus for 25 as also in those who have written out of Josephus viz. in Gorionides Photion Nicephorus and Abulensis Tirinius also in his Comment upon the holy Bible is of the same opinion and therefore he placeth the birth of Herod in the fourth yeare of the 176. Olympiad from whence to the three and fortieth Iulian year we have seventy yeares about which age Herod was when he dyed For the fourth year of the 176 Olympiad was in the year of the Iulian Period 4641. and the three and fortieth Iulian year in the year of the same Period 4711. which was 70 yeares after So also it will be if you account forty five from the yeare of the Iulian Period 4666. when the Pharsalian battell was for in that battell Herod was twenty five to which adde forty five and so shall his age be seventy in the year of the Iulian Period 4711 as hitherto hath been proved But doe I not heare it yet objected that the death of Herod will be far later then I have hitherto mentioned and that because the time of Archelaus his banishment was not till the reigne of Tiberius Iosephus and Strabo are compared to fortifie this objection For first Iosephus is witnesse that Archelaus was married to Glaphyra the daughter of Archelaus King of Cappadocia whose last husband before him had been Iuba King of Mauritania Now Iuba as is in the second place alleaged out of Strabo was alive till towards the middle of the second year of Tiberius and therefore Archelaus marrying his Widdow could not be banished till the end of the said year or beginning of the next To which I answer first that * Master Tho. Lydyat he who makes this objection is not constant to himselfe for in his Book De emendat Temp. page 162. he placeth the the banishment of Archelaus in the last year of Augustus saying that he was not banished in the 37 year of the fight at Actium but in the 37 year after Augustus had received that power and dignity which was called Tribunitia potestas and thereupon he dissenteth every way from Iosephus and gives him but eight years after his father Then in another book written on purpose to confirme the arguments of his first he would not have Archelaus banished till the dayes of Tiberius in regard of Iuba who was alive till then and whose Widdow he married as formerly hath been said But to this I have a second answer to wit that in Strabo we finde more Iuba's then one who were Kings of Mauritania about such time as the Romans were the greatest Monarchs in the World and therefore it were little lesse then great folly to distrub the times by pitching upon none but the last to be him whose Widdow Archelaus should marry We may as well say that among the Popes Gregory the first and Gregory the second were both one Or that among the Kings of England Richard the first and Richard the second were the same See therefore what Strabo saith in the end of his seventeenth and last book in the Description of Mouritania After Syphaces saith he Masinissa obtained the Kingdome and then Micipsa and his successours and in our times Iuba who was father to that Iuba who dyed lately And thus much concerning the times of Herod and his posterity The next thing to be spoken of is the birth of Christ of which in the following Chapter CHAP. XIX Of the true and right year of our Saviours birth and Baptisme HAving in the former Chapter clearly shewed the times of Herod and of his posterity it will in the next place be worth our while to inqure into the the right time of our Saviours birth Concerning which I finde a variety of opinions both among the Ancient and Moderne Writers and were it not for the time of Herods death should scarce know which to follow For first the Ancients they are divided and tell us thus When Calvisius Sabinus and Lucius Rufinus were Consuls then was Christ borne according to Sulpitius Severus in the second book of his sacred History this was in the 42 Iulian year and year of the Iulian Period 4710. But when Lentulus and Messalinus were Consuls then was Christ borne according to Tertullian Clemens Alexandrinus Cassiodorus Maximus Monachus and Cedrenus this was in the 43 Julian year Epiphanius and Eusebius are for the next year when Cesar the 13th time and Sillanus were Consuls this was in the 44 Julian year Dionysius Exiguus pitcheth upon the next year after when Lentulus and Piso were Consuls By which testimonies we finde how the Ancients were divided and that from
them may be gathered four severall years for the birth of Christ And as for the Modernes Dekerius and Petavius are for the one and fortieth Julian year Kepler for the fortieth and M. Antonius Capellus Franciscanus for the nine and thirtieth Scaliger goeth along with them who pitch upon that year when Lentulus and Messalinus were Consuls Bucholcerus followeth Epiphanius and Eusebius and so doe many others But that which is the latest taken up is the 48 Julian year three yeares latter then the common account and is mainely defended by Master Thomas Lydyat both in his book De Emendatione Temporum as also in another book written on purpose to confirme it Thus they But I for my part shall absolutely rely upon none of them for no authority without good ground can be sufficient And therefore my course herein shall be this that having already out of * Herodis imperium res ab eâ—gestas primus antiquâ—ssimus omnium qui quidem extant Josephus in historiam retulit reliqui eadem commâ—ntati postea sunt ex ejus fontibus rivulos suos duxerunt Et tamen incredibile est quantum ab authore ipso magistroque suâ— dissentiant ex quo intolerabiles quidam in historiam errores perturbationesque sunt infusae Petav. Doctr. Temp. lib. 11. cap. 1. Josephus found the true time of Herods death I shall next seek for the birth of Christ in some year before it as by Scripture I am directed And if in that I can have any of the Ancients to guide me I shall gladly embrace them otherwise not Or to make my way the more plaine I shall first note the year of Herod in which the Ancients say Christ was borne Secondly the year of Augustus and Thirdly the time of the generall taxing when all the world under the Roman Empire went to be taxed For as in Saint Matthew we read that he was borne in the dayes of Herod the King Mat. 2.1 So in Saint Luke we reade that it was in the dayes of Augustus when the Decree was gone forth that all the World should be taxed Luke 2.1 And for the first we have the testimony of Epiphanius and Severus Sulpitius expresly noting that the three and thirtieth year of Herod to be the time of our Saviours birth Which will be proved true if it be rightly taken For it might very well be his three and thirtieth year not from his first beginning to reigne but from the time that he Sosius took Jerusalem else should Christ be 36 years old when he was baptized which is certainely false Herod therefore could not be alive four years after the birth of Christ although Epiphanius as well as Sulpitius hath written so for they having an eye only to his 37 years mistook themselves in this particular thereupon have cast the years of Christ afterwards into wrong years of Archelaus and Antipas as is plainly manifest As for the second Tertullian and Saint Hierom point us to the 41 year of Augustus But from whence must this 41 year be accounted Saint Hierom joynes it with the 28 year of Augustus and yet seemes to compute both that 28 year and the 41 year from one time which is very absurd Tertullian accounts it from the death of Cleopatra not onely against the truth of the thing it selfe but also against his owne reckoning who writeth that after this Augustus lived fifteen years and yet reigned but 43 after Cleopatra From which confused contradictory accounts of theirs it well appeareth that albeit they found in some ancient Rolls publick Records of the Romans that there was a general taxing of the World by Augustus about such a year as bore the date of an one and 40th year yet from whence to derive the right head of their reckoning they were either carelesse or altogether ignorant I should therefore think that by this 41 year was meant the 41 Iulian year for with that the three and thirtieth year of Herod before mentioned doth exactly accord Jrenaeus more ancient then either of these affirmes it to be about the 41 year of Augustus For Natus est Dominus noster saith he circa primum quadragesimum annum Augusti imperii lib. 3. contra haeres cap. 25. And in this he is none of the worst Authours for Christ being born on the 25 day of December and in the 33 year of Herod was born in the latter end of the 41 Julian year and so near the beginning of the 41 year of Augustus from the death of Julius Cesar that there were but seven dayes wanting to make his birth fall fully into it I conclude therefore from hence that the first year of Christ was for the most part of it in the 41 year of Augustus and that Christ was born but seven dayes before that year took beginning For he was born in the 41 Iulian year on the 25 day of December that day being accknowledged and kept for the day of his Nativity throughout many ages long before our times as in the Chapter next following shall be shewed Come we then now to the third and last thing that I noted to be a directour to us in this particular I meane the time of the generall taxing when all the World under the Romane Empire went to be taxed In the searching after which this I finde viz. that in all the time of Augustus there were only three generall taxings and in one of those three it must neede be that Christ was born witnesse the words of Saint Luke saying There went out a Decree from Augustus that all the World should be taxed Luke 2.1 By which words it appeareth that we must not seek for Christs birth at the time of a particular taxing but at a such time as there was a generall taxing And that there were three such taxings in the dayes of Augustus is testified by Suetonius in the life of the said Emperour about the end of the seven and twentieth Chapter where he telleth us that Augustus made three general taxings Censum populi ter egit primum ac tertium cum Collega medium solus The first of these was too soone for the birth of Christ for it was as Dion sheweth lib. 52. lib. 53. when Cesar Augustus the fifth time and Sextus Apuleius were Consuls viz. in the seventeenth Julian year and year of the City 724 which was but the twelfth year of Herods reigne after his first beginning and 56 years before the fifteenth year of Tiberius And as for the last it was too late for when that began Herod had been sixteen years dead well nigh It followeth therefore that Christ must needs be born in the time of the middle taxing for if the first were too soon and the last too late then must the birth of our Saviour be for certaine in that which was between both Kepler referreth the beginning of it to the 36 Julian year when those incredible Conquests of Drusus Tiberius and L. Piso
had purchased a peace to the Empire But he was deceived in his reckoning without all question For first when this taxing began Cyrenius or as he is otherwise called Quirinius was President of Syria which could not be untill the fifth year after his Consulship for untill such a time not any who had been Consul could be sent as an Officer into the Provinces as Suetonius and Dion tell us and therefore untill then Quirinius was not President of Syria Secondly there is in very good Authours mention made of an old Monument of Stone recording the famous deedes of Augustus wherein these three taxings are recorded and although age hath somewhat eaten into it and in certaine places worne out some pieces of the words yet it well appeareth that the Middle taxing was about the Consulship of one whose name was Asinius For when the Monument speaketh of that Taxing although some of the letters be wanting yet we finde sinio Cos By which is meant Asinio Cos That is Asinius being Consul for if the letter A. be put to sinio it will upon necessity be so And indeed where was there a Consul or what was his name who had that termination but Asinius Well but what Asinius was this In the 38. Iulian yeare we finde one called by the name of Cajus Asinius Gallus who was then Consul with Cajus Martius Censorinus After whom there was none of that name Consul til after Herod was dead This then declareth that here was the beginning of that taxing within the compasse whereof Christ was born For first though Dion omitteth to tell us in what year this Middle Taxing was yet doth his silence hinder nothing for by these Characters we find it Secondly this was the fifth year after the Consulship of Quirinius And thirdly we find a passage in Tertullian by which we are pointed to the dayes of Sentius Saturnius which is not impertinent For Saint Luke doth not say that our Saviours birth was under the taxing made by Cyrenius but rather that Cyrenius first began the taxing or that it was first made wheÌ„ Cyrenius was President of Syria To which Suidas well accordeth saying Augustus obtaining a Monarchy appointed twenty men of honest life and conversation whom he sent throughout his Provinces to tax the people their substances of which they were to give an account in publick and this he first began when Quirinius or as Saint Luke calleth him Cyrenius was President of Syria By all which it well appeareth that as this Taxing began in some part of the 38 Julian year so it was depending and not ended untill the 42 Julian year which was the 28 year of the Actium fight the year next after the birth of Christ For if the testimony of Tertullian in his fourth book and 19 Chapter against Marcion formerly mentioned be understood otherwise it must needs clash with the holy Scripture which upon such termes may by no meanes be admitted Nor doth this hitherto mentioned concerning the year of Christs birth but agree well with the time of the slaughter of the Innocents at Bethlem and the parts thereabouts which as appeareth by Scripture was in the second year after either the conception or birth of Christ For Herod having inquired diligently of the Wise men at what time the Star appeared to them was punctually informed of the time thereof and thereupon when a little before his death he put in practise his bloody purpose of slaying the infants he slew them who were of two years old and under according to the time that he had diligently inquired of the Wise-men who came not to Jerusalem in the second year after Christ was born but in the same year even before the day of Maries Purification For first when they came they inquired for Christ under the notion of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which word properly taken is to be understood of a child newly born and is so used to expresse the birth of Moses in Heb. 11.23 Secondly when in the forme of their inquiry they say Where is he that is born King of the Jews it is more properly to be undestood of a King lately born then of one born some certaine years before Thirdly when they made this inquiry all Jerusalem was troubled as at some new thing of which they had heard nothing before whereas at the time of the Purification he was proclaimed openly in the Temple where were enough to take notice of him and to spread the fame thereof abroad to others Then did good old Simeon take him up in his armes and hold him forth as the glory of Gods people Israel because he was born among them and likewise as a light to lighten the Gentiles because in these Wisemen he shewed them the way unto him Fourthly and lastly when the Wisemen came they found him at Bethlehem where he was not to be found after the time of his mothers Purification for as Saint Luke telleth us after his parents had in that duty of theirs performed all things according to the Law of the Lord they returned into Galilee to their owne City Nazareth that is They went bach againe * Hoc est postquam Maria Joseph omnia illa adimplerunt quae secundam legis praecâ—pta ad ritum purificationis spectabant saith one now to that very place from whence they departed when they went to Bethlehem the City of David to be taxed as may be seen Luke 2 4 39. Saint Matthew I grant passeth this over in silence and writes as if Joseph and Mary came not with Jesus to Nazareth untill they had been in Egypt But that saith Theophilact which Matthew was silent in Theoph. in Matth. c. 2. Saint Luke supplyed Disce igitur qued quae siluit Matthaeus dicit Lucas Vt exempli gratia Postquom natus est implevit quadraginta dies deinde descendit in Nazareth haec dicit Lucas Matthaeus autem dicit post haec quòd fugerit in Aegyptum deinde venerit ab Aegypto in Nazareth Non dissident ergo inter se Nam Lucas dicit descensum à Bethlehem in Nazareth Matthaeus autem postea reditum ab Egypto in Nazareth Thus that Father Well but though the comming of the Wisemen was while Mary lay in at Bethlehem yet as I said before the slaughter of the Infants was not untill the second year after the Star appeared as is plaine out of the Text telling us of what age they were that Herod slew Mat. 2.7.16 and that his slaughter of them was according to the time that he had diligently inquired of the Wisemen Now his inquirie was of the time of the Stars appearing according whereunto he ordered that the male Children of such an age as he knew well agreed thereto should be massacred both in Bethlem and the parts thereabout by his bloody men of warre And thereupon he slew all 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 à bimatu infra from the age of two * Bimatus signifieth one who is
16 G 5 6 Â 17 F 4 6 Â 17 A 6 7 Â 18 G 5 7 Â 18 B 7 8 Â Pethaniah the 19th course 19 A 6 8 Â 19 C 1 9 Â 20 B 7 9 Â Bilgah the fifteenth course 20 D 2 10 Â 21 C 1 10 Â 21 E 3 11 Â 22 D 2 11 Â 22 F 4 12 Â 23 E 3 12 Â 23 G 5 13 Â 24 F 4 13 Â 24 A 6 14 Â 25 G 5 14 Â 25 B 7 15 Â Jebezekel the 20th course 26 A 6 15 Â 26 C 1 16 Â 27 B 7 16 Â Immer the sixteenth course 27 D 2 17 Â 28 C 1 17 Â 28 E 3 18 Â 29 D 2 18 Â 29 F 4 19 Â 30 E 3 19 Â 30 G 5 20 Â Â 31 A 6 21 Â CHAP. XXI Of the reigne of Tiberius and of the beginning and end of Pontius Pilate his Government As also of the year and day of our Saviours Passion TAcitus in the 15 Book of the tenth Chapter of his Annals speaking of the Christians saith The Authour of that name was Christ who in Tiberius reigne was put to death under Pontius Pilate Procuratour of Iudaea But in what year of Tiberius or Pontius Pilate he doth not shew Some I finde who would have the beginning of Tiberius be before the death of Augustus and so would have then two Emperours to reigne at once for which they chiefly build upon the testimony of Velleius who saith that before Augustus dyed Tiberius was equalled with him in command But to begin the reigne of Tiberius upon this mistaken ground is to unjoynt the setled times and make old Authours speak that which they never meant For as Petavius well observeth the Proconsular dignity was given without the Empire and never were two men Emperours together till Aurelius Antonius his time And therefore though Tiberius was equalled in command with Augustus some time before Augustus dyed yet it was but in some things which dignity was bestowed upon him not as Emperour but as he was a gallant Generall over the Army and like to be the next succeeding Emperour This even Velleius sheweth who accounts but 16 years from the beginning of Tiberius as Emperour to the Consulship of M. Vinitius and C. Cassius the seventeenth year therefore of his reigne began in the time of their Consulship which was in the 75 Iulian year Tacitus declaring moreover not onely how loath Tiberius was which also Velleius sheweth to take the Empire upon him when Augustus was dead but also how fearfull his Mother Livia was lest any other should get into the Empire before him This againe may be seen in Tacitus by the tenth year of Tiberius for when Tiberius had reigned nine years then was C. Asinius and C. Antistius the Consuls viz. in the 68 Iulian year The beginning therefore of Tiberius is certaine and may not be set either here or there as men upon false perswasions shall be pleased but must be accounted from the death of Augustus and no sooner For though it were usuall among the Kings of Persia to have their years accounted from such time as they began to be Co-partners with their Fathers in the Empire as Ciesias compared with other Authors maketh manifest and as was also among the Kings of Iudah and Israel yet that it was so among the Romans or that two were Emperours together till Aurelius Antonius his time we doe not finde Now Augustus we know dyed as Velleius Dion and all others testifie when Sextus Pompeius and Sextus Appuleius were Consuls on the nineteenth day of August in the 59 Iulian year and year of the Iulian Period 47 27 there therefore we must begin the first year of Tiberius who reigned 22 years seven moneths and seven dayes and dyed when Cn. Proculus and Pontius Nigrinus were Consuls on the 26 day of March in the 82 Iulian year and year of the Iulian Period 4750. By which it appeareth that the Passion of Christ must necessarily be in some year after the 74 Iulian year and before the 82. By Orosius his account it must be in the 75 Iulian year For Sejanus perished in the 76 Iulian year as cannot be denied according to Orosius Christ must suffer before the fall of Sejanus For in his seventh Book and fourth Chapter we read That when Tiberius had heard what Pilate related to him of the Death and Resurrection of our Saviour Jesus Christ and that thereupon Tiberius would that the Senate should Canonize Christ for a God the Senate would not but stood against it and so saith he did Sejanus who shewed himselfe a great enemy to the Christian profession whereupon it came to passe that an Edict was made for the rooting of all Christians out of the City Thus saith Orosius and therefore by him Christ must suffer not one jot later then the 75 Iulian year in the year of the Iulian Perion 4743 when M. Vinitius and C. Cassius were Consuls in whose Consulship Epiphanius also setteth Christs Passion But this is false as appeareth not onely by the severall Passeovers mentioned by Saint John after Christs Baptisme to the day of his death but also by the silence of other Authours And therefore the testimonies of Orosius concerning Sejanus cannot stand good for being a matter of story he must have it from them who wrote before him but that he hath not For Tertullian makes no mention of it nor Eusebius and yet they speak how Tiberius would have had Christ Canonized for a God by the Senate when Pilate had related to him the Passion and Resurrection of Christ I finde indeed that Sejanus like another Haman did earnestly endeavour and desire it of the Emperour that the whole Nation of the Jews might be rooted out as Eusebius relateth out of Philo the Jew And from hence sure it was that Orosius mistook himselfe and applyed that to the Christians after Christs Passion which was pertinent to the Jews before Christs Passion Tertullian saith Christ was baptized in the twelfth year of Tiberius and crucified in the fifteenth when the two Gemini were Consuls this was in the 74th Julian year Epiphanius maketh Christ about 29 years old when he was baptized and nameth Iunius Silanus and Silius Nerva to be Consuls then which was one year sooner then the Consulships of the Gemini which two Gemini albeit they were Consuls but in the fifteenth year of Tiberius are said not onely by Teriullian but by Iulius Africanus Lactantius Saint Austine Sulpitius Cedrenus and others to be Consuls when Christ was crucified This I beleeve they took up from what Clemens of Alexandria held before them for it was the opinion of Clemens Alexandrinus Strom. 1. that Christ lived fifteene years under Augustus and as many under Tiberius in all 30 In the last whereof he preached and suffered For which opinion he had none before him that he followed but the Gnostickes and no other then a mistaken ground
to uphold it His ground was in Esay chap. 61.2 Concerning the Acceptable year of the Lord which Christ was to preach Which I say was a mistaken ground For though it be true that Christ indeed proclaimed that year in the sence that the Prophet meant it and in the first year after his Baptisme when he preached at Nazareth shewed that it was come as we read in Luke 4.19 Yet that he therefore preached but one year is such an extreame mistake that it is a wonder any who had read the Gospels should not see to avoid it Origen erred much after the same manner for lib. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cap. 1. thus he saith Anno aliquot mensibus docuit He taught one year and some odd moneths which is also false for it is certaine that the Baptist began not to preach and baptize untill the fifteenth year of Tiberius Luke 3.1 and that Christ was presently put to death after Iohn began is very justly denied For he must increase saith John but I must decrease John 3.30 Which words John spake after there had been one Passeover since the Baptisme of Christ Iohn 2.23 Beside which the same Evangelist expresly nameth two more the last whereof was that in which Christ suffered as may be seen in Iohn 6.4 and chap. 13.1 But of the Passeovers more shall be spoken by and by Among late Writers the greatest part goe along with Eusebius who maketh choice of the eighteenth year of Tiberius for the year of Christs Passion Scaliger more rightly is for the nineteenth year and year of the Iulian Period 4746. Petavius saith Christ was baptized in the year of the Iulian Period 4742 and crucified in the year of the same Period 4744 even in the third Passover after his Baptisme for he was baptized on the sixth day of Ianuary as Epiphanius saith And as for the day of his Passion he referreth it to the 23 day of March therein following Irenaeus lib. 2. cap. 38. Apollinaris of Laodicea apud Hieron in 9. Dan. Origen cap. 2. cont Cels Epiphanius Haeres 51. Which also a Councell held at Caesaria Anno Dom. 197 under Victor Bishop of Rome declareth The 23 day of March was indeed in that year which Petavius mentioneth on the sixth day of the Week but the Passeover was not untill three or four dayes after and therefore how could Christ suffer on the 23 day of March in the year of the Iulian Pe. 4744. Scaliger is for the third of Aprill and Paulus Forosemproniensis for the thirtieth of March in the six and thirtieth year of Christ according to the common account even whilest the 22 year of Tiberius was still running on which was in the 81 Iulian year and year of the Iulian Period 4749 when Q. Plautius and Sextus Papinius were Consuls This last is taken up by Master Lydyat and mainely defended by him but all in vaine For not only was Christ crucifyed whilst Tiberius was alive but also whilst Pontius Pilate was in office Now Pontius Pilate was certainly out of office before the Easter of the eighty first Iulian year and therefore that could not be the year of Christs Passion For as Tacitus sheweth Vitellius came into Syria towards the end of the * viz. when C. Cestius and M Servilius were Consuls Taci lib. 6. eightieth Iulian year before whom Pilate was accused and was sent to Rome to defend his cause before the Easter of that year in which Vitellius was at Ierusalem as appeareth out of Iosephus in the eighteenth book of his Antiquities at the fifth and sixth Chapters Before which time of his being sent away he had been President of Iudaea ten whole years and did succeed in that office Valerius Gratus whom Tiberius soon after the beginning of his Empire at the death of Augustus sent to rule and governe that Province which he did for the space of eleven years as Iosephus againe declareth Take then eleven of Gratus and ten of Pilate and add them each to other so we have 21 years Which one and twenty being added to the 59 Iulian year in the latter part whereof Tiberius began will make it appeare that Pilate departed from his Province in the end of the eightieth Iulian year or however before the Easter of the eighty first For Vitellius after he had commanded Pilate to goe away to Rome and had set Marcellus over his Province came to the solemne feast of the * This was in the 81. Jul an yeare when Quint. Plauii and Sex Papinius were Consuls Passeover at Ierusalem and gave leave to the chief Priests to keep the holy Robe as Iosephus also sheweth After which time he received letters from Tiberius of making peace with Artabanus which he did and wrote thereof to Tiberius But Herod the Tetrarch prevented his intelligence and had wrote of all to the Emperour before him Whereupon Tiberius wrote back againe to Vitellius that he knew all the whole businesse already having had notice thereof by the Letters of Herod Now these things being thus certified each to other after Easter could not be done in the eighty second Julian yeare for before the Easter of that year Tiberius died And if not in the eighty second Julian year then must they necessarily be done in the year before viz. in the 81. And if in the eighty first then could not that be the year of Christ's passion for at the Easter time of that year when our Saviour suffered Pilate was in full power which made him therefore say Knowest thou not that I have Power to Crucifie thee and have Power to release thee Ioh. 19.10 This he spake in the seventy eight Julian year about two yeares before he departed his Province as will easily appear to him who computeth the times aright and as I shall after shew more fully and clearly to every eye For by the Passovers already mentioned out of the Gospell of Saint Iohn it is most plainly manifest that the first yeare wherein we can but thinke of searching for our Saviours Passion must be the 76 Iulian yeare for the three Passovers in Saint Iohn after the fifteenth year of Tiberius when Christ was baptized will certainly reach thither That yeare therefore is the first year wherin we must search and if upon the search we can find that the fifteenth day of Nisan falleth on the sixth day of the weeke then may that be the year of his Passion and the Passovers after his Baptisme till his death be no more then three But upon the search the fifteenth day of Nisan in that yeare is found to be on the third day of the weeke that therefore could not be the yeare nor those the just number of the Passovers For though Saint Iohn hath clearly and expresly mentioned but three yet for all that we are not tyed from searching after more For as it is certaine that all things which Jesus did are not written so also it is as certaine that all things which
are written of him in the Gospels are not recorded by one Evangelist And again why I name the fifteenth day of Nisan when the Passover was kept to be on the sixth day of the weeke at Christs Passion is because he arose from the dead on the first day of the week and on the third day after his death That it was on the first day of the Week is manifest by all the four Evagnelists chiefly by St Marke in his 16th Chap. at the ninth verse And that it was likewise on the third day after his Passion is as manifest by a whole multitude of Scriptures As for example in Matthew 16.21 from that time forth began Jesus to shew unto his Disciples how that he must goe into Jerusalem and suffer many things of the Elders and chief Priests and Scribes and be killed and be raised againe the third day And in the next Chapter at the 23. verse they shall kill him and the third day he shall be raised againe And in the 20 Chapter at the nineteenth verse They shall deliver him to the Gentiles to mocke and to scourge and to curcifie him and the third day he shall rise again And in Marke 9.31 he taught his Disciples and said unto them The Sonne of man is delivered into the hands of men and they shall kill him and after that he is killed he shall rise the third day And in the next Chapter at the 34 verse They shall mocke him and shall scourge him and shall spit upon him and shall kill him and the third day he shall rise againe And in Luke 9.22 The Son of man must suffer many things and be rejected of the Elders and chief Priests and Scribes and be slaine and be raised the third day And in the eighteenth Chapter at the 33. verse They shall scourge him and put him to death and the third day he shall rise againe And in the four and twentieth Chapter at the seventeenth verse The Son of Man must be delivered into the hands of Sinfull men and be crucified and the third day rise again And in Act. 10.40 Him God raised up the third day and shewed him openly And in 1. Cor. 15.4 That he was buried and that he rose againe the third day according to the Scriptures In which last Testimony note I pray you not only what the Apostle maintaineth but how namely That the rising of Christ from the dead on the third day is according to the Scriptures If there be any text of Scripture which at the first fight may seeme to say Christ rose not till after the third day it is to admit of an interpretation that thereby it may be like the other Scriptures As for example in Marke 8.31 the phrase is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 post tres dies after three dayes as it is usually translated Where the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Mat. 16.26 Mar. 14.22 Luke 22.20 is not to be taken for post after but for intra within As it should be said They shall put him to death and within three dayes he shall rise again Now this appeareth by Deut. 14.28 compared with Deut 26.12 A like phrase is in Luke 2.46 as the context declareth That also which Matthew and Marke doe say concerning the institution of the holy Supper that it was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Luke saith was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which we must not translate After Supper but inter coenandum whilst they were at Supper ' The Pharisees also who told Pilat what Christ would doe after his three dayes understood the Phrase but of the third day for no longer did they desire that the Sepulcher should be watched Mat. 27.63 And indeed Christ had said the same before in words plain enough for saith he Destroy this Temple and within three dayes I wil raise it up Iohn 2.19 This is that time to which the Prophet pointed when he said After two dayes he will revive us in the third day he will raise us up we shall live in his sight Hos 6.2 Vpon which words one observeth this vivificat nos post duos dies tertio die eriget ut vivamus coram ipso quia in Christo cum Christo pater caelestis nos nipote membra Christi ex mortuis suscitavit Ephes 2.5.6 By which we see that the Resurrection is certainely bounded within the compasse of three dayes and not to be expected afterward The onely place remaining to be objected against it is in Mat. 12.40 where our Saviour saith As Jonas was three dayes and three nights in the Whales belly so must the Son of Man be three dayes and three nights in the heart of the earth Which words are also to be interpreted they agree not else to the other Scriptures Know therefore that by three dayes and three nights we are to understand three naturall dayes accounted from Evening to Evening as the Jews use to reckon in which respect the day and the night are confounded and both of them made but one By the three dayes then and the three nights we are I say to understand three such days in the last wher of Christ arose for by a Senecdoche we reckon that done after three dayes which is done but after the third day is begun The first of these three dayes was the sixth day of the Weeke and the fifteenth day of Nisan and was from one Sun-setting to another For before the fifteenth day of Nisan was quite out Christ was crucified dead and buried The second day began at the Sunsetting next after during which time was the Sabbath The third and last began at the end of the former and was the first day of the weeke in the morning whereof very early Christ arose And all this according to the Scriptures But I go on and am to search next into the 77 Iulian year at the Easter whereof must be a fourth Passover since Christs Baptisme which if it be found to fall on the Sixth day of the weeke may be the year of his Passion But I finde it otherwise for in the 77 Iulian year the fifteenth of Nisan was on the first or second day of the weeke and not on the Sixth day This therefore could not be the year of Christs Passion no more then the former The year next after this was the 78. Iulian yeare and year of the Iulian Period 4746. which will be found to be the very year we seeke after For in this year the fifteenth of Nisan was for certaine on the Sixth day of the week being the third day of April and day of the fifth Passover which is mentioned by all the four Evangelists not one of them omitting it The yeare that followeth affordeth no such Character no nor the year next after that This therefore must needs be the year of Christs death which being in this year was on the third day of Aprill the Cycle of the Sun was 14 the Dominicall letter D. and the
which must therefore make it to be in the thirtieth yeare of Herod and this not the thirtieth since he first began to reigne but the thirtieth since the death of Antigonus at the taking of Ierusalem And as for the Olympiad that will also appeare to be 193 in the first year whereof was the thirtieth year of Herod as aforesaid And why 193 is in regard Caesarea was not dedicated after it was built untill Drusus was dead as Iosephus also in the place above cited hath declared Now Drusus was Consul and alive in the fourth year of the 192 Olympiad but dyed in the same year as Velleius sheweth lib. 2. cap. 97. All which considered will make it very plain and manifest that I have rightly explained Iosephus in this particular as also that the building of the Temple by King Herod was not begun untill his twentieth year for there must be as much difference between the true and ordinarie account as is between ten and twelve That which concernes the Kalender is nothing else but the joyning of severall Moneths together which without wrong to Iosephus cannot be understood of the Hebrew and Iulian Moneths but of the Hebrew and Macedonian Moneths for their dayes accord in the Kalender but not the other The Kalender is for the yeare of the Iulian Period 4783. when Jerusalem as I have already said was destroyed by the Romans The Cycle of the Sun then was 23 the Dominicall letter G. and the Cycle of the Moon 14. By which is gathered that the first day of the first Moneth namely Nisan was on or near the last day of March for the meane conjunction of the Luminaries at Jerusalem was on the thirtieth day of March 24 minutes past two in the afternoon And therefore the Moneth being according to the Vision of the Moon could not begin untill the next day at the soonest And so also for the fifth Moneth Ab the Conjunction was on the six and twentieth day of July about 24 minutes past five in the afternoon the first day of Ab was not therefore till the twenty seventh day and consequently the ninth of Ab not till the fourth of August which day was Sabbath day But the ninth of Ab faith Scaliger was feria prima agreeing therein to the testimony of Rabbi Iose who writeth that the Temple was destroyed by Titus on the ninth of Ab and evening of the Sabbath day See Master Lively in his Persian Monarchy p. 151. which I understand of the evening ending the Sabbath Which also the Seder Olam Rabba sheweth saying when the first Temple was destroyed that day was the next after the Sabbath and the next after the weeks end and the Course of Iehoiarib and the ninth of Ab and in like manner was it at the destruction of the second Temple We have already found it to be so at the destruction of the first Temple and by these testimonies it should be so at the destruction of the second Temple And indeed the late time of the day when the Luminaries were in Conjuction do rather cast the beginning of the fifth Moneth into the day that the Seder Olam noteth then into the day before Scaliger therefore makes here a two fold calculation and approves best of that which makes the ninth of Ab to be on the first day of the weeke I shall therefore begin the first day of the first Moneth on the first of April and the first of Ab on the 28th day of Iuly as in the Kalender following may be seen And why I give it the title of a Macedonian Kalender is because the Iewes accounted the Macedonian Moneths as they did their owne changing them as other people did who had been * Postquam vero Menses bi Macedonum una oum victoribus in Asiam penetraverunt mutationem quandamsubiâ—re Quamvis enim apud plurimos Graeiorum tales manerent quales pr ncipio suerant ab aliis tamen immutati sunt et ad cujusvis populi annum civilem accommodati Quippe Judaei quibus Neomenia non à jugo sed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dependebat etiam Mecedonum Menses inde inchoanent Hanc obcausam menses Judaici Macedonici ita inter se conferuntu ut plane pro iisdem habeantur Quartus decimus namque Nisan apud Josephum cum 14. Xanthici quartus decimus Tisri dum quarto decimo Hyperberetaei plane conveniunt Larg De annis Christi lib. 1. pag. 184. conquered by the Grecians to make them serviceable to their owne account This we may see in the Antiquities of Iosephus lib 3. c. 10. An Hebrew Julian and Macedonian Kalender for the yeer of the Destruction of Jerusalem by Titus in the year of the Julian Period 4783. The Cycle of the Sum then was 23 the Dominicall letter G and the Cycle of the Moon 14. The first Moneth Aprill Nisan or as Josephus calleth it Xanticus This was the first Moneth 1 1 1 G Note that in the Kasender of this year osephus joyneth the Hebrew and Mecedonians Moneth together and makes his account by them And why I every where account but 29. dayes to the first moneth See before Chap. 7. I beleeve it was not otherwise untill the Kalenders of the later Jewes came in use in which we have indeed the sirst 30. the second 29. the third 30 c.  2 2 2 A  3 3 3 B  4 4 4 C  5 5 5 D  6 6 6 E  7 7 7 F Abijah The eighth course 1 Chron. 24.10  8 1 8 G  9 2 9 A  10 3 10 B  11 4 11 C  12 5 12 D  13 6 13 E  14 7 14 F Jeshua The ninth course 1 Chron. 24.11 And now was the Passeover at which time Jerusalem began to be besieged  15 1 15 G  16 2 16 A  17 3 17 B  18 4 18 C  19 5 19 D  20 6 20 E  21 7 21 F Shechaniah The tenth course 1 Chron. 24.11  22 1 22 G  23 2 23 A  24 3 24 B  25 4 25 C  26 5 26 D  27 6 27 E  28 7 28 F Eliashib The eleventh course 1 Chron. 24.12  29 1 29 G  An Hebrew Julian and Macedonian Kalendar for the yeer of the Destruction of Jerusalem by Titus in the yeer of the Julian Period 4783. The Jecod Marleek May. Ijar the second Moneth which with the Macedonians was Artemisius 1 2 30 A  2 3 1 B  3 4 2 C  4 5 3 D  5 6 4 E  6 7 5 F Jakim the twelsth course 1 Chron. 24.12  7 1 6 G  8 2 7 A  9 3 8 B  10 4 9 C  11 5 10 D  12 6 11 E  13 7 12 F Huppah the thirteenth course 1 Chron. 24.13  14 1 13 G  15 2 14 A  16 3 15 B  17 4 16 C  18 5 17
farther even into the Land of Assyria and there he built Niniveh with three Cities more For this we are to note that the Scripture names not Ashur who came of Sem to be the mighty Hunter but Nimrod who was the Son of Cush and the Grandchild of Cham. The margent therefore of our last Translation doth not without cause point us to that reading which at the first I mentioned agreeing therin to learned Junius Willet and a great many more of good note whom upon necessity I am bound now to follow unlesse I will acquit Nimrod of that brand which the Scripture layes upon him and by following a wrong translation lay it without other warrant upon another This I may not do and therefore I look upon Nimrod still as the great and mighty Hunter who was the first that hunted out of one Country into another to inlarge his dominions This he began to doe eight yeares after the confusion of Tongues viz. in the yeare of the Julian Period 2530. when the yeare of the World was 1821. And why I place Nimrods going into Assyria his building of Niniveh and laying the foundation of a Kingdome there in this yeare is because it must be about one thousand yeares before the destruction of Troy as Diodorus Siculus hath told us lib. 2. cap. 6. Now Troy as we know was destroyed in the year of the Julian Period 3530. at which time as he also saith Tautanes reigned in Assyria Tautanes and not Semiramis for she was rather in the Patriarch Abrahams time when as Josephus saith the Assyrians had the Empire of Asia Howbeit some have accounted otherwise the ground of which mistake I do beleeve arose first from hence and came to be embraced both because there were more Zoroasters then one and also because there was another Semiramis later then she that reigned next after Ninus the grandchild of Nimrod One of the Zoroasters was but six hundred yeares before Xerxes the Persian went with his huge Army into Greece as Xanthus Lydius mentioned by Diogenes Laertius hath told us another long before and was that King of the Bactrians with whom King Ninus waged warre as Diodorus and Justin out of Trogus testifie And as for Semiramis the first was the daughter of Derceto begotten on her by an unknown man the other was the daughter of the second Belochus King of Assyria many years after Ninus And therefore whereas Porphyrius alledgeth out of Sanchoniato that Semiramis was not long after the dayes of Moses it must be understood of the latter and not of the first Semiramis for the latter indeed began to flourish with her Father not above 15. years after the death of Moses as by warrantable computation appeareth but the former was a long time before But to returne again to Nimrod he as I said began to lay the foundation of the Assyrian Kingdome in the yeare of the Julian Period 2530. from whence it continued without any great alteration till the year of the Julian Period 3893. in which year Sardanapalus came to his end through the conspiracy that Arbaces and Belesis made against him For when they saw how he retired himselfe from his Nobles and betooke him to spin and dally with his Curtizans they then rise up in Arms against him and doe at last drive him to sacrifice himselfe with his Wealth nd Wenches to Vulcan in a great pile of Wood set on fire that in it he might dye with all his Delights about him in which onely thing saith Justin he shewed himselfe a man This time of his death was 1238. yeares after Ninus began as in Eusebius may be seene by gathering into one summe the particular years of the Kings that reigned here And as it was 1238 years after Ninus before whom Belus next after Nimrod reigned sixty five years So was it 1363. yeares from the time that Nimrod came out of Shinar and founded first this Kingdome here Herodotus I know fals far short of these numbers but is followed by none of the Ancients neither Ctesias Trogus Pompeius Diodorus Siculus Velleius Paterculus Josephus Eusebius nor Augustine Ctesias I confesse reckons 1360. from Ninus to the death of Sardanapalus but it had been better and in a manner right if he had reckoned from the time aforesaid when Nimrod went into Assyria built Niniveh and laid the foundation of this Kingdome there for in reckoning so I can find but three years difference between him and my selfe Trogus or Justin out of him reckons no more then 1300. leaving out perhaps the sixty three odde years and speakes onely of the round or even number but begins as Ctesias before him from Ninus instead of beginning from the time when Niniveh was first founded Or rather he accounts 1300. from Ninus to the time aforesaid instead of accounting them from Belus the Father of Ninus for from Belus to the end of Sardanapalus were but three yeares more as will afterwards better appeare Diodore in the end of his second book saith that this Kingdome continued more then 1400. yeares which is also true if we account from the time that Nimrod who also founded this Kingdome began to reigne at Babylon for from thence hither were 1411. yeares Velleius helpeth nothing for the beginning but much for the ending for by him we gather that this Kingdome ended not many more then sixty five years before the building of Rome which upon a precise account was just sixty nine befor Romulus laid the foundation thereof Eusebeus without question had seene all these but sought not thus narrowly into the ground of their difference howbeit he might and did perceive they all aimed at this to make Ninus the Establisher of the Assyrian Kingdome At him therefore he begins his Chronology and finds according to the testimony aforesaid that in the Temple of the Trojan warre and when Troy was taken Tautanes reigned in Assyria This Tâ—utanes saith Diodorus sent aid to Priamus in the time of the Trojan Warre viz. one thousand Ethiopians and as many Susians with two hundred Chariots and made Memnon a Duke of Persia Generall over them This Memnon did good service but was slaine by the treason of the Thessalians Diod. lib. 2. cap. 6. Moreover Eusebius by some Testimony sure that he had seen dates the time of Sardanapalus by the reignes of Ariphron and Tespieus Archons of Athens namely that in one of them he began to reigne and in the other he lost his life when Arbaces and Belesis rose up against him I reckon therefore that Belus who was the next King after Nimrod began his reigne in the year of the Julian Period 2590. and reigned as Eusebius and Augustine say sixty five yeares He was a man of a more contenting disposition then his Father and imployed himselfe most in drayning the Fennes about Babylon and carrying of the water from the low grounds to make the Country the more useful which pleasing government of his was so gratefull to his Subjects as that they
even deified him and made him the Sire of many petty gods such as Bâ—l Baal Baalberith Baalzephon and the like Howbeit it is a question whether the Assyrians worshipped him for a god before his death when by the meanes of his warlike sonne Ninus he had a Temple built for him in Babylon which in Plinie his time was standing still who also saith of him that he was the Inventor of Astronomy and that the Assyrians dedicated a Jewel to him which they call Belus his eye He might perhaps adde something considerable to Astronomy though the Art it self was found out long before Moreover the Caldeans prefixed Bel or Bal as an Ensigne of honour to their names as Baladan Balthasar The Carthagineans they added it to theirs as may beseen in the names of Asdrubal and Hanibal But how long did Nimrod reign before this Belus began I Answer that he reigned eight and forty yeares in Babylon and sixty yeares in Assyria which together do make 108. from the beginning of the Tower of Babel as already in what I have written by way of computation may be seen Nor is this time of reigne too long it seemes rather too short if we consider how long men lived in those dayes But I have done with these of whom I have spoken more then at the first I intended and therfore now I come to Ninusâ— of whom and his successors in the following Chapter CHAP. II. Of Ninus and his Successors THough the Assyrian Kingdome was not founded by Ninus yet the Monarchy thereof began first in him according to the consent of all Authors To which purpose Sir Walter Raleigh speaketh well in his History of the World saying it will be found best agreeing to Scripture and to reason and best agreeing with the story of that Age written by prophane Authors that Nimrod founded Babel Erech Accad and Chalne the first workes and beginning of his Empire according to Moses and that these being finished within the Valley of Shinar he looked further abroad and set in hand the worke of Ninus lying neer unto the same streame that Babel and Chalne did which worke his Granchild Ninus afterward amplyfied and finished as Semiramis this Ninus his wife did Babylon Hence it came to passe that as Semiramis was counted the Foundresse of the City which she onely finished so also Ninus of Niniveh For so did Nabuchodonosor vaunt himselfe to be the Founder of Babylon also because he built up again some part of the Wall over born by the fury of the River which worke of his stood till Alexanders time whereupon he vaunted thus Is not this great Babel that I have built Dan. 4.27 Thus then these workes of Babylon and Niniveh begun by Nimrod in Chaldea and Assyria Ninus and Semiramis made perfect Ninus finished Niniveh Semiramis Babylon wherein she thought to exceed her Husband by farre Thus that Knight lib. 1. cap. 10. Sect. 3. and lib. 1. cap. 12. Sect. 1. I shall not need therefore to answer further to objections made out of other Authors concerning the building of these Cities as if they were to owne no other Builders but Ninus and Semiramis for it is one thing to begin another thing to adde and bring to perfection Nimrod did the first they the latter the fame whereof in after ages swallowed up the memory of the first Founder and made those Authors which knew not the holy Scripture speak as they did without distinction Leaving this therefore I shall come more neerly to Ninus Ninus who when he inlarged Niniveh imparted to it his own name He began to reign in the yeare of the Julian Period 2655. and as Eusebius saith reigned fity two yeares He caused the Statua of his Father Belus to be set up and worshipped probably in that Temple which was built for him in Babylon which Image of his as some say continued untill Daniels when it was destroyed by Darius Medus or Cyrus upon the discovery of the Imposture of Bels Priests shewen in that Apocriphall fragment of Bell and the Dragon Nimrod being the first he must needs be the third King of Assyria in whose time the dominion of the Assyrians was very large for there was then no Kingdom so famous nor so spatious as the Assyrian which was afterward increased by Semiramis after his death as Saint Austin writeth lib. 18. cap. 2. De Civit. Dei Orosius also saith that this King waging Warre abroad continued that course by the space of fifty yeares Oros lib. 1. cap. 4. In which I think Orosius was not altogether right for his whole time of reign was but fifty two yeares in the beginning whereof he was busied in the building of that Temple which he built in honour of his dead Father Belus and at the first had but a small part of Asia under his command as Dionysius Halcarnassensis saith in the first booke of his Roman Antiquities but afterward joyning in society with Ariaeus King of the Arabians he did in seventeen yeares bring all Asia under his subjection excepting the Indians and the Bactrians and at the last the Bactrians were subdued by him as Diodorus and Justin testifie At which time Zoroaster was King of that Country and slaine by him of whom Saint Austin writeth that he laughed at the time of his birth which prodigious mirth in the opinion of the same Father booded him no good for he was saith he as is reported the first Inventor of Magicke By which if he meaneth Naturall Magicke being the knowledge of things in respect of their causes there was no cause why he should be blamed For as Plinie also writeth he not onely laughed when he was born but had also such a brain as was perceived to beat at the time of his birth which signified some great Excellency to be in him as appeared afterward when he was growne up I meane if this were that Zoroaster whom Ninus slew Eusebius would that Abram should be borne in the three and fortieth year of this King Ninus his reign but note that this is not from any given or recorded Testimony that he thus placeth Abrams birth but from that manner of reckoning which he bringeth back from the fifteenth yeare of Tiberius as may be seen in his tenth booke and third Chapter De Praep. Evang. And in that regard though he be followed by Saint Austin and some other of the Ancients yet a righter computation may be made by such as shall more exactly cast the times according to Scripture and then apply the accounts thereunto following therein the Hebrew verity and not the numbers which the Septuagint produceth Next after Ninus was his Wife Semiramis Semiramis she succeeded her Husband and began to reigne in the yeare of the Julian Period 2707. twelve years compleat before the birth of Abram for his birth falleth into the thirteenth yeare of her reigne She was the daughter of a Nimph whose name was Dercero and was begotten on her by an unknowne man for
beginning of the eighteenth Dynastie Next after these follow the Kings that reigned in the eighteenth Dynastie as we likewise finde them in Josephus who in his first booke against Apion reckoneth on as followeth beginning first with Themosis otherwise called Amasis to whom he giveth 25. yeares and foure Moneths Chebron succeeded and had twelve yeares Amenophis 20. yeares and seven Moneths Amesses sister to Amenophis 21. yeares and nine Moneths Mephres twelve yeares and nine Moneths Mephramuthosis 25. years and ten Moneths Thmosis nine years and eight Moneths Amenophis 30. yeares and ten Moneths This is he who was sirnamed Memnon or the speaking stone because his Image as saith Eusebius Strabo and others gave a sound at the Sun-rising till the comming of Christ The next after him was Orus thirty six yeares and five Moneths After Orus was Acenchres the daughter of Orus 12. yeares and one moneth Then Rathoris the brother of Acenchres 9. yeares His Sonne succeeded his name Acencheres and the time of his reign 12. yeares and five Moneths Another Acencheres was after him and reigned 12. yeares and three Moneths Armais foure yeares and one Moneth Armesis one yeare and four Moneths or as he is otherwise written Ramesses by a transposition of letters His successour had the same name and was Ramesses Miamun though commonly written Armesesmiamun the time of whose reigne was sixty six yeeres and two Moneths This was that new King which knew not Joseph as being born after his death and willing to forget the memory of his benefits Exod. 1.8 The hard bondage of the Children of Israel began in his time His Daughter was Thermutis by whom Moses was preserved for so Josephus and Epiphanius call her Amenophis succeeded next in the Kingdome of Egypt and reigned after Amnesesmiamun nineteene yeares and six Moneths and not untill the end thereof were the Children of Israel delivered For though his Predecessor who reigned long was dead and gone yet their bondage still endured as is noted by Moses in Exod. 2.23 where the words be these And it came to passe after a long time that the King of Egypt died and the Children of Israel sighing by reason of the bondage cryed c. that is they cryed by reason of their hard bondage and servitude which still continued notwithstanding the long reign of the former King was ended Now this King as I apsaid before reigned nineteene yeares and six Moneths and pears plainly to be that very Pharaoh which was drowned in the Red Sea Nor doth Manetho but confesse as much in that which Josephus relateth out of him in his first book against Apion For though Manetho like a lying Priest of Egypt doth what he can with fabulous reports to colour over the matter for the credit of his Nation yet all things well observed he hath delivered enough to shew that Amenophis here mentioned was that King that followed after Moses when he led the Children of Israel out of Egypt Master Lydyat also sheweth the same not onely by mentioning this Testimony of Manetho but by adding thereunto that this was hee Qui ab Hippotamo raptus interiisse fertur which though it be taken as a Fable yet saith he and not amisse it is digna attentione fabula a Table well worthy of attention And thus having thus farre considered the severall Kings of this Dynastie I shall in the next place present them in a perfect List or Catalogue all fixed in their right times Yeares of the Iulian Period when they beg Kings of Egypt in the eighteenth Dynastie ex Josepho 2891. Themosis otherwise called Amasis twenty five yeares and four moneths 2916. Ghebron twelve yeares 2928. Amenophis twenty yeares and seven moneths 2949. Amesses ejus soror one and twenty yeares and nine Moneths 2971. Mephres twelve yeares and nine Moneths 2984. Mephramuthosis twenty five years and ten Months 3010. Thmosis nine yeares and eight Moneths 3020. Amenophis thirty yeares and ten Moneths 3051. Orus thirty six yeares and five Moneths 3087. Acenchres Ori Filia twelve years and one Moneth 3099. Rathoris Frater Acenchris nine years 3108. Acencheres Rathoris Filius twelve yeares and five Moneths 3120. Acencheres alter twelve years and three Moneths 3133. Armais four yeares and one Moneth 3137. Ramesses or Armesis one yeare and four Moneths 3138. Ramesses or Armesesmiamun fixty fix yeares and two Moneths 3204. Amenophis nineteen yeares and fix Moneths 3224. In this yeare Amenophis was drowned in the Red-Sea whose death gave an end to this Dynastie The next that followed was the nineteenth Dynastie in which these Kings reigned The first was Sethosis whose time of reigne was 51. yeares Helvic ex Afric This Sethosis or Sethos was Egyptus the brother of Danaus as Manetho sheweth and is also thought to be the same whom Herodotus and Diodorus call Sesostres This King if he were Sesostres is said to grow so mighty and proud that he made his tributary Kings to draw his Chariot by turnes But it one day so happened that one of those unfortunate Princes cast his eye many times on the Chariot Wheeles and being by Sesostres asked the cause of his doing so he replyed That the falling of that Spoke lowest which but just before was in the height of the Wheele put him in mind of the instability of Fortune Which when Sesostres deepely weighed he gave over to use that barbarous custome any more Next after Sethosis if we follow Africanus for this Dynastie Rhapsaces reigned 61. yeares After him Ammenepthes 20. Then Ramases 60. After Ramases was Ammenemes 5. And last of all Thuoris 6. All which particulars being cast into one summe do amount to 203. Thus then this Dynastie presents it selfe Yeares of the Julian Period when they beg Kings of Egypt the nineteenth Dynastie ex Africano 3224. Sethosis began and reigned fifty one yeares 3275. Rhapsaces sixty one 3336. Ammenepthes twenty 3356. Ramases or Rampses sixty 3416. Ammenemes five 3421. Thuoris six 3427. Here was the end of this Dynastie and beginning of the next The next was the twentieth Dynastie to which they who follow Africanus gives 125. but that 's a number too short as in the following reckonings better knowne will well appeare It is better therefore to account so many yeares to it as we find in Eusebius 178. It had in it twelve Kings accorto Africanus but neither doth he nor Eusebius name them Howbeit I thinke it probable that Cetes otherwise called Proteus Rampsynitus Nileus and those other that were before Chembis Memphites reigned now as we find in Diodorus This Dynastie began as hath been said in the yeare of the Julian Period 3427 and ended in the yeare of the same Julian Period 3605. The next after this was the one and twentieth Dynastie to which not without cause Eusebius gives 130. yeares and reckoneth it in these Kings Semendes 26. Psusennes 41. Nephercheres 4. Amenophthis 9. Opsochon 6. Spinaces 9. Psusennes 35. The first of these I take to bethe same whom other Authors call
Cephrenes The second I thinke to be Cheops or Chembis Memphites who as Diodorus saith reigned 1000. yeares before the 180. Olympiad and built the greatest of the Pyramids which as he also saith was twenty yeares in building Nephercheres might be Cherinus or Mycerinus Opsochon might be Alychis And the last Psusennes might be Chabeas or Vaphres the Father in Law of King Salomon Or rather which is most probable let some of these be lookt upon as Viceroyes reigning under Chembis and Chabreus and then this Dynastie will not have more then three chief Kings though it might and did last 130. years And they were these Semendes or Chephrenes to whom we may give 24. yeares Chembis or as Herodotus cals him Cheops 50. yeares Chabreus or Vaphreus or as he is otherwise called Vaphres 56. yeares All which summes put together do make 130. There is no great scruple sure in all this unlesse it be that Chephrenes is set before Cheops and indeed that scruple would be removed which cannot be unlesse we set him after Cheops Take them therefore thus that as he whom Herodotus cals Cheops Diodorus cals Chembis so he whom Diodorus cals Chabreus Herodotus cals Chephrenes The first of which namely Cheops reigned fifty yeares the second namely Chephrenes 56. And now after all this let us proceed to List them into their right times Yeares of the Julian Period when they beg Kings of Egypt in the XXI Dynastie set downe in their right times 3605. Smendes or Semendes 24. 3629. Cheops otherwise called Chembis 50. 3679. Chephrenes otherwise called Chabreus or Vaphres fifty six 3735. Here was the end of Vaphres his reigne with whom this Dynastie concluded and gave way unto the next in the beginning whereof Sesac began to reigne I therefore leave this and come to that Sesac was as I said the first King here Some Authors call him Sesochosis others Sesonchosis but in the sacred Scripture he is called Shesack or Shishak King of Egypt who in the fifth yeare of Rehoboam came up against Jerusalem 1 King 14.25 The seventy Interpreters saith one call him Susachim and the Hebrew text Sesak he reigned twenty one yeares and was succeeded by his sonne Vsorthon otherwise called Osorthon whose time of reigne was fifteene yeares After Osorthon Scaliger and Helvicus reckon three Anonumoi who had among them twenty five yeares at the end whereof Takellothis began and reigned thirteen yeares After him were again three Anonumoi to whom the forecited Authors give 42. yeares All which parcels being put into one summe doe make 116. yeares And now see them in their times Yeares of the Julian Period when they beg Kings of Egypt in the XXII Dynanastie fitted to their right times 3735. Sesochosis or Sesac 21. 3756. Vsorthon or Osorthon 15. 3771. Anonumoi tres 25. 3796. Takellothis 13. 3809. Anonumoi tres 42. 3851. In this yeare was the end of this Dynastie and the beginning of the next Yeares of the Julian Period when they beg Kings of Egypt in the XXIII Dynastie fitted to their right times 3851. Petubastes was the first King he reigned 40. yeares 3891. Osorchos 8. 3899. Psammus 10. 3909. Ze otherwise called Zerah omitted by Eusebius began in this year and reigned 31 years This is that King whom Asa King of Judah overthrew 2 Ch. 1.4.9.12 3940. Here was the end of this twenty three Dynastie As for the Dynasties following I shall omit the distinguishing of them in such a manner as I have done these before going Howbeit I shall set downe the reignes of the Kings in their right times and begin first with him who is next namely Becchorus 3940. Bocchorus began now and reigned 44. yeares 3984. Sabaccon 8. the Scripture cals him So 2 Kin. 17.4 3992. Sevechus otherwise called Sethon 14. 4006. Tharacus 18. the Scripture cals him Tirhakah 4024. Here began an Anarchy which lasted two yeares Diod. 4026. Twelve Captanes begin and reigne 15. years I de 4041. Psammiticus subdues them and reignes 54 yeares Herod 4095. Pharaoh Necho began and reigned 17 yeares I de 4112. Psammis 6. I de 4118. Arries or as the Scripture cals him Hophra 25. 4143. Ausasis he had rather 45. then 55. or 44. 4188. Cambyses goes into Egypt and conquers it CHAP. IV. Of the Kingdome of Sycionia and of the Kings that reigned there THe next Kingdome which by the course of time offers it selfe is the Kingdome of Sycionia It was at the first called Aegialea from Aegialeus the first King thereof who began to reigne in the yeare of the Julian Period 2616. Afterwards it was called Apia of Apis the fourth King and then Peloponesus of Pelops as being Peninsula Pelopis and after that it came to be called Sycionia of Sycion the 19th King thereof The Sycionians saith Pausanias bordering upon Corinth say that Aegialeus was their first King that he came out of that part of Peloponesus that is called Aegialos after him and dwelt first in the City Aegialea where the Tower stood then where the Temple of Minerva is now In a word Sycionia at the first was but a small Region in Achia but the Kings thereof inlarged their Dominions through all Achaia and made Sycion their Seat as Ludovicus Vives noteth This Kingdome continued from hence to the death of Zeuxippus 992. yeares as I find in Eusebius After which Apollo's Priests reigned thirty two even untill the returne of the Heraclidae at eighty yeares after the destruction of Troy And note that by this account thus fixed the Theban Warre in the dayes of Adrastus will be just thirty seven years before the fall of Troy and so Clemens of Alexandria saith it should be Eusebius likewise gives us the particular reigne of each King thus Aegialeus 52. Europs 45. Selchin or Telchin 20. Apis 25. Thelasion 52. Saint Austin calleth this King by the name Thelxion and saith he had so happy a reigne that when he was dead the Sycionians adored him as a god with Sacrifices and Playes of which it is said they were the first Inventors After Thelasion Aegydius reigned thirty foure yeares Then was Thurimachus 45. At his Tombe the Syoionians used to offer Sacrifice as the said Father also saith After Thurimachus was Leucippus he reigned 53. Mossapius or Messapius 47. Eratus or Peratus 46. Plemneus 48. Or thopolis 63. Marathon 30. Marathus 20. Echyreus 55. Corax 30. Epopeus 35 he built a Temple to Minerva by reason of the good successe he had against Nyctaeus the Brother Lycus Tyrant of Thebes as some suppose Next after him was Lamedon 40. Then was Sycion 45. and of him the Country was called Sycionia Polybus was next after him and reigned 40. Then Janischus whom Eusebius cals Inachus 42. After him Phaestus 8. Adrastus in whose time was the Theban Warre 4. Polyphydes 31. Pelasgus 20. And last of all Zeuxippus 32. In the Dynastie next after these were the Priests of Apollo's Temple who reigned as followeth 1. Archelaus 1 year 2. Automedon 1 year
his stealing away of Jupiters Fire by it is meant either that he first taught to strike Fire with a Flint or else that his knowledge reached to the very Starres For he was a great Astronomer and did thereupon ascend to the Mount Caucasus where 9with a restlesse desire he used to search out the natures motions and influences of the heavenly bodies His Brother was also a great Astronomer from whence arose that Fable of his supporting Heaven with his Shoulders Phorbas succeeded Criasus and reigned after him thirty five yeares This King Phorbas in the thirteenth yeare of his reigne tooke Rhodes and cleared it from venemous Beasts with which the Country had been infected for which he and his Wife were deified after their deaths as Strabo and Eusebius tell us Triopas succeeded Phorbas and reigned after him forty six yeares Next after Triopas was Crolopus whose time of reigne was twenty one yeares In his dayes as Eusebius mentioneth out of Tatianus was Phaetous burning and Deucalions Flood to which the account of Varro well agreeth who saith that the Flood of Deucalion was in the dayes of Cranaus the second King of Athens who as I shall afterward shew you was contemporary to this King Crotopus Next after Crotopus was Stethnelas he reigned eleven yeares and was the ninth King of Argos Gelanor being about to succeed him is expulsed by Danaus who being driven out of Egypt by his Brother arriveth in Greece and there gets the Kingdome of Argos in which he reigned 50. yeares For when he was driven out of Egypt he came as I said into Greece among the Argives and being come among them he contended with Gelanor about the Kingdome in which contention the People were to umpire And when much was said on both sides Danaus seemed to speake as good reason as the other whereupon they could not determine untill the next day And on the next day a Wolfe comes hurling into the Pasture where he begins a fight with the chiefe Bull of the Kings Heard which when the People saw they attended the issue and finding that the Wolfe had the hap to kill the Bull they gave the judgement on Danaus his side For as the Wolfe is a stranger to Man so was Danaus to them but because the Wolfe overcame Danaus must reigne and Gelanor be expulsed This was 382. yeares after this Kingdome of Argos first began And note that this King was the first that digged Wels in Argos who also because of the Wolfe that seemed to predict his good Fortune built and dedicated a Temple to Apollo Lycius Finally he was slain by his Sonne in Law Lynceus who reigned after him one and forty yeares the Story of which is as followeth This Danaus of whom we speake ruled first in Egypt nine yeares for his brother Sethosis otherwise called Aegyptus in which time it was told him by the Oracle that he should one day be slaine by a man who should be his Sonne in law For feare of which Prediction he refused to marry his daughters and would not thereupon give them to the Sonnes of his Brother although his Brother did earnestly desire it For which denyall together with other things wherein he had by his misrule offended his Brother Aegyptus his said Brother expelled him out of Egypt by force and comming as hath been said into Argos was received there as King in the stead of Gelanor Thither did Aegyptus send his Sonnes after him with command either to marry his daughters or to kill him Which charge they pursued so well that they forced him to condiscend that they should enjoy them yet so that he gave to every Daughter privately a Sword with charge to kill their Husbands All of them executed his will except Hypemnestra who discovered the Plot to Lynceus her Husband and thereupon he saved himselfe by flight Now this disobedience caused Danaus to arraign his Daughter but she was acquit by the Argives howbeit her Father would not release her but kept her still in prison After this Lynceus returned from Egypt with so ces slew Danaus released his Wife Hypemnestra and possessed her Fathers Kingdome which as I said before he held for the space of 41 yeares The lives of the other Sisters were spared for Hypemnestra's sake but imbarked in a Ship without Pilot Mast or Saile and so committed to the mercy of the Sea where for a time floating up and downe they are at the last as I find in some Authors cast upon the Isle of Albion which was then inhabited by Gyants who on them begat Children of their owne proportion And for all this Master Isaackson quotes Justin Pausanias Higinus Virgil. Next after Lynceus was the reigne of Abas he was the Father of Praetus and Acrisius and reigned 23. yeares Of him the Argive Kings were called Abantiadae Proetas succeeded Abas and reigned 17. yeares His three Daughters called the Proetides were so extreamly proud of their owne beauties that they fell mad and were cured by Melampus with Hellebour which ever since hath been called Melampodium He had the one of them given him for his cure and was married to her And of this man Melampus it is further said that he understood the notes of Birds and the voice of Beasts as Pausanias writeth Acrisius the last King of Argos succeeded Proetus and reigned after him 31. yeares He was accidentally slaine by his Grandchild Perseus the Sonne of his Daughter Danae who thereupon forsooke this Country of Argos and founded this Kingdome at Mycenae For we are to know that Acrisius had a daughter called Danae whom he sequestered to a Tower and there kept her private because the Oracle had told him that her sonne should kill him Now Jupiter hearing of the same of her beauty and finding no meanes to come to her descended as is said into her lap through the roofe of the Tower in a shower of Gold and had thereby the opportunity to get her with childe By which is meant that he corrupted her keepers with gold and thereupon had liberty to worke his will At last she was delivered of a sonne even of this sonne Perseus which when Acrisius her Father came to know he forthwith caused her and the childe to be inclosed in a Chest and cast into the Sea The Chest was driven upon the coast of Apulia and taken up by Fishermen who finding her and the childe in it presented them to Pylumnus the King to whom she was married Perseus after this being growne to be a man did many valiant exploits and comming into Argos where he practised the throwing of the quoit did by mischance braine his Grand-father Acrisius with one of them and so ended the Kingdome of Argos For when Perseus saw what he had done he translated the Kingdome from thence to Mycenae Some say that this accident happened whilst he indeavoured to shew his Grandfather the invention of the Discus or Leaden ball for whilst Acrisius was more curious to see what was
done then carefull to avoid the danger that might betide him he came under the dint of what was throwne whether Quoit or Ball of Lead and so was slain But I must now set downe the Kings already mentioned in their right times and present them in one List at once befor thee After which I shall proceed to the Kingdome of Mycenae in which I shall meet with difficultie more then ordinary because the Kings of that Kingdome are scarce rightly computed by any Author that I have seen Petavius in his Rat. Temp. comes nearest to truth as will be afterward shewed Yeares of the Julian Period when they beg Kings of Argos to the death of Acrisius ex Eusebio 2852. Inachus 50. Years of his reigne 2902. Phoroneus 60. Years of his reigne 2962. Apis 35. Years of his reigne 2997. Argus 70. Years of his reigne 3067. Criasus 54. Years of his reigne 3121. Phorbas 35. Years of his reigne 3156. Triopas 46. Years of his reigne 3202. Crotopus 21 Years of his reigne 3223. Stethnelas 11. Years of his reigne 3234. Danaus 50. Years of his reigne 3284. Lynceus 41. Years of his reigne 3325. Abas 23. Years of his reigne 3348. Praetus 17. Years of his reigne 3365. Acrisius 31. Years of his reigne 3396. In this yeare the Kingdome of Argos was ended through the untimely death of Acrisius 544. yeares after it began I come therefore now to that of Mycenae in the handling of which that I may account aright I shall crave a little leave to depart away from the common path For as is commonly accounted Perseus and Sthenelus had but eight yeares together whereas Perseus alone had not lesse then one and thirty yeares because mention is made of the two and thirtieth yeare of his reigne as may be seen in Eusebius his tenth Booke and his third Chapter De Praeparatione Evangelica After these two Euristheus reigned 38 say some 43. say others Then Atreus and Thyestes 65. and Agamemnon 15. After him Aegystus 7. Orestes 70. and last of all Tisamenus Penthilus and Cometes 3. among them the end whereof must be at 80. yeares after the destruction of Troy as Velleius sheweth lib. 1. cap 2. The years of these last after Agamemnon I think may passe as they are except with Sir Walter Raleigh I reckon six and not seven to Aegystus or else account some one of their years after Agamemnon to be but current And as for Agamemnon himselfe that he should have but 15 is contrary to what Eusebius writeth in the Chapter and book aforesaid where agreeing with Clemens of Alexandria he telleth us that Agamemnon reigned 18. yeares in the last whereof Troy was taken Then for Atreus and Thyestes that they together should have 65. yeares is nothing probable for as Petavius proveth out of Thucidides and Isocrates it is not to be doubted but that Eurystheus predecessor to them was slaine by the posterity of Hercules after Hercules himselfe was dead To which saith he Diodorus addeth saying the posterity of Hercules fought against Eurystheus having Theseus and Hyllus for their Captaines Have an eye then to the time when Theseus both began and ended his reigne and see whether the time of Eurystheus can possibly be thrust up so high as the 65. yeares of Atreus and Thyestes will croud it More like it is that they two between them had not above six yeares For the Scholiast of Thucidides sets downe the time of the Heraclidae's first eruption into Peloponnesus to be twenty yeares before the destruction of Troy and the latter to be 80. yeares after it was destroyed But saith Petavius their first comming in is to be taken two wayes For in the beginning thereof they with their Captains Jolaus Theseus and Hillus fought against Eurystheus and he being slaine they enjoyed Peloponnesus for about a yeare untill by pestilence they were driven out Then in the third yeare after they come againe even just twenty yeares before the destruction of Troy when Hyllus concluded with Atreus the successor of Eurystheus that if hee viz. Hyllus were overcome in single fight the Heraclidae should depart to the place from whence they came and not returne into Peloponnesus againe untill an hundred yeares after Now it so fell out that Hyllus was slain they thereupon depart as was agreed and returne not againe untill the time appointed which being an hundred yeares after and yet but 80. yeares after the fall of Troy must needs declare that Hyllus was slaine twenty yeares before Troy was destroyed viz. in the year of the Julian Period 3510 three years before which viz. in the yeare of the Julian Period 3507. Eurystheus was slaine In that yeare therefore of his death was the first yeare of Atreus who together with his Partner in reigne Thyestes could have but six yeares if Agamemnon have eighteen And that Agamemnon had eighteen rather then fifteene is witnessed as I said before by Clemens in Eusebius who saith that Troy was taken in the eighteenth yeare of his reigne Nor doth Eusebius himselfe but record so many yeares for the whole reigne of Agamemnon though he wrongfully coupleth his fifteenth with the fall of Troy which is indeed the onely reason why some Authors say that he had but fifteene years of reigne For if Troy was taken in his fifteenth yeare then must that be his last because at his returne from thence he was slain by Aegystus set on to do it by the suggestion of Clytemnestra Agamemnons owne Wife who in the absence of her Husband and whilst he was at the Seige of Troy committed Adultery with Aegystus and now together with him defileth her hands with Blood as before for the satisfying of her wicked lust she had filthily defiled her Husbands bed and so in conclusion adds murther and Adultery both together But it was not the fifteenth but eighteenth year of this gallant King when the Greekes tooke Troy according to the Testimony aforesaid and therefore we must not account lesse then eighteene yeares for Agamemnon And as for Perseus the first King of this Kingdome mention as I said before is made of the two and thirtieth years of his reigne but how much he reigned longer is uncertaine Onely that he began in the yeare of the Julian Period 3396. I am very confident and have reason for it For first Danaus was banished out of Egypt nine yeares after King Pharaoh was drowned in the Red-Sea which therefore makes his banishment to be in the yeare of the Julian Period 3233. and consequently his beginning to reigne in Argos in the year of the same Period 3234. Which time of Danaus being thus fixed serves well to direct us both to the beginning and end of the Kingdome of Argos and consequently for the beginning of the Kingdome of Mycenae whose first King was as already hath been said King Perseus Secondly the two and thirtieth yeare of Perseus before mentioned was 63. years before the expedition of the Argonauts and therefore in the yeare of
the Julian Period 3427. which thereupon directs us to the beginning of his reigne in the year of the same Period 3396. And that it was so long before that expedition is mentioned by Eusebius out of Apollodorus in libro de temporibus But you will say when and in what year was that Expedition I answer it was in the end of the reigne of Laomedon and in the beginning of the reigne of Priamus as Helvicus hath well observed Now Priamus we know reigned but till the destruction of Troy which was destroyed in the year of the Iulian Period 3530. 408. years before the beginning of the Olympiads of Iphitus Diod. lib. 14. and 432 before Rome was built Priamus therefore must needs begin to reigne in the year of the Iulian Period 3490 for he reigned forty years and no more as Bucholcerus out of Archilochus hath recorded And if Priamus began to reign then it will follow that then also was the expedition of the Argonauts how else could it be in the end of the reigne of Laomedon and beginning of Priamus as Helvicus saith it was And thus we have the beginning and ending of the Kingdome of Argos rightly fixed and consequently the beginning of the Kingdome of Mycenae but how long Perseus reigned is still unknowne Probable it is that he and his sonne Stethlenus had together sixty six years Eurystheus 45. Atreus and Thyestes six Agamemnon 18. Aegystus six Orestes 70. Tisamenus Penthilus and Cometes three these ended in the year of the Iulian Period 3610. at that descent of the Heraclidae which was foure score years after the fall of Troy Know also that the Olympiads of Hercules began 442. years before those of Iphitus as is reckoned by Clemens out of an old ancient Chronologer after which he lived not above nine years as is very probable and therefore dyed in the year of the Iulian Period 3505. upon whose death his children are banished by Eurystheus for feare they should deprive him of his Kingdome But by this feare he wrought himselfe a mischiefe for hereupon it came to passe that by two years after they came against him and destroyed him as already hath been said But now see a Catalogue of these in their right times as near as in all probability can be gathered Yeares of the Julian Period when they beg A Catalogue of the Kings of Mycenae probably fixed in their right times 3396 Ferseus and Stethlenus 66. 3426. Euristhous 45. 3507. Atrius and Thyestes 6. 3513. Agamemnon 18. 3531. Aegystus 6. 3537. Orestes 70. 3607. Tisamenus Penthilus and Cometes 3. 3610. In this year was the descent of the Heraclidae foure score years after the fall of Troy Now also ended the Kingdome of Sycionia For as most Authours say upon this returne of the posterity of Hercules the Kingdome of Mycenae was changed to Lacedemon and was under the government of Euristhenes whilst that of Sycion was translated unto Corinth and was under the government of Alethes both these beginning much about one and the same time Of which more shall be spoken afterward CHAP. VI. Of the Kingdome and Kings of Athens the first whereof was Cecrops THis Kingdome of Athens was scituated also in Greece as well as those of Sycion Argos and Mycenae already mentioned The * The first I meane in this knowne Dinastie first King was Cecrops from the beginning of whose reigne to the death of Codrus were 490 years as Gaffarell sheweth from the testimony of those who have read no lesse from the Characters of the Stars Eusebius wanteth three years of this number the reason whereof I take to be because he accounts no time of Interregnum between Pandion and Aegeus of which I shall speake more by and by In the meane time I begin with Cecrops who reigned fifty years and began in the year of the Iulian Period 3154. It is reported that he was of a double shape his upper part like a man and his lower part like a beast but this is a fable For he was indeed called * Id est A duobus natur is constants 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but it was because he spake two languages saith Eusebius as well the language of the Greecians as the language of the Egyptians among whom he was borne and from whom he came Or else being taller then other men he was as if he had the proportion of two men Or finally he was called Diphyes because he taught the people civility and did also institute a strict observance of the matrimoniall band and society taking order that women should be deprived of that licensious liberty which formerly was a little too common among them this therefore made some say that he was man in his upper parts but his lower were feminine as Ludovicus Vives noteth When he began to repaire the City where he reigned called afterward Athens an Olive tree grew sodenly up in one place and a fountain burst as sodenly out in another Which prodigies drave the King to Delphos to know the Oracles minde whose answer was that the Olive tree signified Minerva and the fountain Neptune and that the City might be called after which of these the people pleased Hereupon Cecrops gathered all the people of both sexes together to make their Election the men being for Neptune Aug. De. tivit Dei li. 18. c. 9. and the women for Minerva now it so fell out that the women had the most voices who thereupon named the City 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is as Saint Austine saith Minerva Neptune being displeased herewith spoyled the Country by * This was through the power of the Divell by whom also their Oracles spake inundation And the people to pacifie him punished the women by enacting three lawes against them First that thenceforth no woman should be admitted to any consultation Secondly that none after that time should be named after the name of their mother And thirdly that none of their families should be named Athenae Ludovicus Vives saith there were three Cities of this name The first this in Achaia The second in the I le of Euboea And the third in Laconia The next King after Ceerops was Cranaus Deucaliens Flood he reigned nineyeares and was Sonne in Law to Cecrops Deucalions Flood was in his time as Varro saith and as the Marmora Arundelliana cast it in the fourth yeare of his reigne which by my account falleth into the yeare of the Julian Period 3207. and after the Flood of Ogyges 257. years This Flood was in Thessalie where Deucalion then was King For we are to note that he reigned in Thessalie neare the mount of Pernasus But it extended farther then so For it wasted Italy Greece and the Island of Atalanta and yet that in Ogyges time is said to be greater Prometheus foretold of this Deluge Deucalion thereupon * He also invented the wearing of Rings on the fourth finger as saith Eusebius provided himselfe a kind of Vessel called
Cibotium or Larnax in which he saved them who fled to him for succour The conflagration under Phaeton is said to be much about the same time not onely in Ethiopia Phaetons burning but in Istria a Region in Italy and about Cumae and the Mountaines of Vesuvius Of both which be strange Fables as that Phaeton should set the World on fire by overthrowing the Chariot of the Sun which indeed and truth was nothing else but an extraordinary great heat wherewith the World was vexed in those dayes And as for the other that Deucalion and his wife should be the restorers of mankind it was nothing else but because he cherished them that fled to him for succour for in his Boat Larnax or Cibotium he preserved many who otherwise had been drowned Ovid the Father of these Fables had without doubt read the first booke of Moses but Ovid was a professed Heathen Rom. 1 2â—.25 and the Heathen as Saint Paul telleth us became vaine in their imaginations and thereupon to fit their owne fancy turned the truth of God into a lye as well in this as in such other things as the Apostle mentioneth in his first Chapter to the Romans Amphiction succeeded Cranaus and reigned after him ten yeares He finding Greece to be weake and subject to the incursions of the Barbarians instituted out of the body of the whole Country one generall meeting or Assembly which from him was called the Amphictionian Councill and in it he made Laws which beside those that were proper to every City were common to all as Helvicus noteth So that this seemeth to be the first Parliament that ever was in the world The first Parliament The next that reigned here was Ericthonius who having deposed Amphyction reigned after him 50. yeares He is said to be the Inventor of Waggons and to be the first that built a Temple to Minerva Pandion whose daughters were Progne and Philomela succeeded Ericthonius and reigned after him forty yeares This Pandion in the nine and thirtieth yeare of his reigne warred with Labdacus King of Thebes being aided by Tereus the Son of Mars for which favour Pandion gave him his daughter Progne Of whom we read that after Tereus had married her he ravished her other Sister Philomela cut out her tongue and cast her into prison where she wrought her story in needle worke and sent it to her Sister Progne hereupon slew her Sonne Itys whom she had borne to Tereus and set him before her Husband to eat Tereus upon this attempted to kill her but she fled and escaped Of all which Ovid fableth after this manner viz. that whilst Tereus followed after Progne he was turned into a Lapwing she into a Swallow and Philomela into a Nightingale Ericthius was the next King he succeeded Pandion and reigned after him 50. yeares His daughter Orithya was taken away and ravished by Boreas of Thrace The Poets ascribe this Rape to the North wind which was for nothing else but because Thrace was North from Athens About which time was also the Rape of Proserpina by Orcus or Aidoneus King of the Molossians But whether of these was first Eusebius sheweth but is not cleare whether they were when Ericthonius or Ericthius reigned Cecrops the second reigned next after Ericthius forty years Pandion the second succeeded Cecrops and reigned 25. years betweene whom and his successor was an Interregnum of two yeares For lesse then so there could not be in regard the whole time of this Kingdome to the death of Codrus was 490. which the particulars in Eusebius will not make unlesse there be so many yeares of Interregnum as at the first was noted Aegeus was the next he succeeded Pandion at the end of the Interregnum and reigned after 48. yeares He had as Justin saith two Wives The first was Aeâ—â—ra by whom he had Theseus the second was Medea whom he married after she was rejected by Jason and by her he had Medus It is proble that he came to gaine his Fathers Kingdome by the aid of his Grandfather Pyla King of the Magarenses For as Pausanias saith when his Father was expeiled he fled to his Wives Father Pyla and died in his Country The aid therefore that was granted by Pyla was not to 〈◊〉 Pandion but his Sonne Aegeus though Sygonius writeth otherwise Or if it were to restore Pandion yet because he died before his restitution could be effected it must needes be that not he but his son was restored by it After Aegeus Theseus succeeded and reigned thirty yeares who before he was King according to his lot was sent into Creete to be devoured of the Minotaure For we are to know that not many yeares before the end of Aegeus his reigne Aâ—â—rogeus sonne to Minos King of Creet was treacherously slaine at Athens For which fact Miâ—â—â— rose up in Armes against the Athenians and being too hard for them propounded them peace upon this condition namely that they should every yeare send seven Noble young men and as many Virgins to Creete to be devoured by the Minotaure Now it came to passe that in the fourth yeare of this agreement the lot fell upon Theseus the Kings Sonne who thereupon was sent thither in a Ship with blacke Sâ—ils and Rigging in token of the great sorrow that was in Athens at his departure but chiefly in Aegeus his Father who gave command to his Sonne that if his hap were so good as to slay the Minotaure he should change his Sailes from blacke to white at his comming home againe Now it so fell out that Theseus by Ariadnes advice slew the Minotaure but at his returne being overjoyed with his good fortune forgat to alter his Sailes Whereupon it came to passe that his Father Aegeus looking from an high Tower and seeing the Ship to come back with Blacke Sailes thought his Sonne to be dead and for griefe thereof he presently cast himselfe into the Sea and was drowned Which Sea wasever after called by the name of Aegean-Sea But as for this Theseus he was Cosin German to Hercules to whom he was assistant in many of his Labors He it was that first of all stole away the beautious Helena being aided therein by Pyrithous whom hee must therefore aid in the like Rape which he did For though Helena was at this time rescued againe by her brothers Castor Pollux yet Theseus makes good his promise to Pyrithous and is assistant to him in his attempt to steale Proserpine the daughter of Aidoneus King of the Molossians In which theft Theseus was taken Prisoner and afterward set free by Hercules Coelius Rhodiginus relates this story otherwise and saith that her name whom these two came to steale was Cora the daughter of Ades and that they went to the River Acheron there to have done it Which I like better then to call her Proserpine because that Rape was long before this and was either in the dayes of Ericthonius or in the dayes of Ericthius
as I have already mentioned Mnestheus was the next King of Athens who attained the Kingdome through the faction of Helen's bretheren who expelled Theseus and made him King This Mnestheus reigned twenty foure years and dyed but a little before Aeneas came into Italie as Ludovicus Vives noteth Demophoon reigned next but was none of his Son For Demophoon was the Son of Theseus and Phaedra who upon the death of Mnestheus recovered his Fathers Kingdome and reigned in it thirty three years This was he who for his neglect caused faire Phillis to hang her selfe Oxintes succeeded Demophoon and reigned after him twelve years His successour was Aphidas who reigned one year After Aphidas was Timoetes who reigned eight years Then after him was Melanthus who reigned 37. years The next after him was Codrus who reigned 21. years and was the seventeenth and last King of Athens For the next that governed here after Codrus were the Archontes perpetui after them the Archontes decennales and last of all the Archontes annui The Archontes perpetui were for terme of life and did in their successions reigne 316. years after the death of Codrus The Archontes decennales had ten years a peece and did reigne each after other untill seventy years were ended The Archontes annui were no other then yearly officers whos 's first beginning was in the year of the Iulian Period 4030 which was the first year of the 24. Olympiad and is an account commended much by Master Selden in his Marmora Arundelliana who in that book placeth the first of these annuall officers in the very same year I shall not need to set downe the particular names of these untill I come to shew you them in their right times which shall be now in the following Catalogues Years of the Iulian Period when they beg A perfect List or Catalogue of the Athenian Kings ex Eusebio 3154. Cecrops 50. 3204. Cranaus 9. 3213. Amphyction 10. 3223. Ericthonius 50. 3273. Pandion 40. 3313. Ericthius 50. 3363. Cecrops secundus 40. 3403. Pandion the second 25. 3428. An Interregnum of two years began now 3430. The end of the Interregnum and beginning of Aegeus whose time of reign was 48. years 3478. Theseus 30. 3508. Mnestheus 24. 3532. Demophoon 33. 3565. Oxintes 12. 3577. Aphydas 1. 3578. Timoetes 8. 3586. Metanthus 37. 3623. Codrus 21. 3644.  In this year was the death of Codrus just foure hundred and ninety yeares fince Cecrops the first began to reigne This was the last King of Athens who for the good of his Country put himselfe into a disguise that he might be slame For when the Kings of Peloponnesus who descended from Hercules warred upon Athens it was told them by the Oracle that they should conquer if they killed not the Atheman King hereupon they concealed as much as they could the answer of the Oracle and withall gave a strict charge that none should touch Codrus But the Athenians hearing of this Oracle Codrus being desirous of glory and the good of his Country disguised himselfe went into the Camp of his Enemies and falling to brable with the Souldiers was flaine from whence * Aug de civit dei lib. 18. c. 19 came that saying of Virgill Aut jurgia Godri Now after this the Athenians would have no more Kings which was not out of any inconvenience found in the rule of Soveraignty but in honour of Codrus as saith a learned Knight Sir Walter Raleigh lib. 2 cap. 17. Sect. 10. in his History of the World And indeed it might very well be so for after Codrus had thus delivered his Country the Athenians * Aug. lib. 18. cap. 19. de civit dei sacrificed to him as a God and would as I said have after him no more Kings for feare I think they should not be so good as he For his worth was able to Eclipse theirs if at any time they failed of what was required Howbeit the Government was still in a manner Regall for between Kings and the Archontes perpetui was little or no difference save onely in the name For the Princes that followed after Codrus without regall name governed Athens during the time of their life and so in effect were Kings although they were called Archonts The first of these was Medon from whom all else in the same Dynastie were called Medontidae of which as followeth Yeares of the Julian Period when they beg A perfect List or Catalogue of the Archonts of Athens called Archontes perpetui ex Eusebio 3644. Medon 20. 3664. Agasâ—us 36. 3700. Archippus 19. 3719. Tersippus 41. 3760. Phorbas 31. 3791. Mezades 30. 3821. Diognetus 28. 3849. Pheredus 19. 3868. Ariphron 20. In his time Sardanapalus began to reig 3888. Tespiâ—us or Thesphorus 27. In his time Sardanapalus lost his Kingdome as saith Eusebius 3915. Agamnestor 20. 3935. Aeschilus 23. 3958. Alemenon 2. 3960. Here was the end of this Dynastie  Archontes decennales 3960. Carops 10 3970. Aesimides 10. 3980. Elidicus 10. 3990. Hippomenes 10. 4000. Leocrates 10. 4010. Absander 10. 4020. Erixias 10. 4030.  Here the Archontes decennales ended and the Archontes annui began therein agreeing to that which Master Selden commendeth in his Marmora Arundelliana who placeth the first of these Annuall officers in the very same year as I said before CHAP. VII Of the Kings that reigned in the Kingdome of Troy before the Greeks destroyed it THe first of these Kings with whom I begin was Dardanus the son in Law of Teucer he began to reigne in the year of the Julian Period 3234 and as Eusebius saith reigned 63. years His Kingdome was in Phrygia the lesse and Asia the lesser The chiefe City was Troy which he built and called it after his owne name Dardania Of Tros it came to be called Troy and of Ilus Ilium Ericthonius succeeded Dardanus and reigned after him 46. yeares Euseb Homer and Diodorus say that he was extreamly rich and that he had 30000 Mares and their Colts continually feeding in his Pastures Tros succeeded Ericthonius and reigned after him 61. Euseb He altered the name of Dardania and turned it to Troy from whom the people also were called Trojans Ilus was the next King he would that the City should be called Ilium and so was Howbeit it lost not the name of Troy but it was known by both names The time of his reigne here was 50 yeares Laomedon succeeded Illus and reigned after him thirty six yeares Ral. After Laomedon was King Priamus who reigned not 52. but 40. years according to the best and truest account taken by Bucholcerus out of Archilochus So that all the times of these Kings was 296. yeares And now see their List rightly fixed Yeares of the Julian Period when they beg A List or Catalogue of the Kings of Troy before it was destroyed all of them fixed in their right times 3234. Dardanus 63. 3297. Fricthonius 46. 3343. Tros 61. 3404. Ilus 50. 3454. Laomedon 36. 3490. Priamus 40 3530.
 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
opinion 1108. yeares before the vulgar time of the birth of Christ which because it was about such time as Silvius Posthumus ended his reigne gave occasion to some idle headed Monkes to deliver to posterity that Brute was his Sonne and thereupon descended from the blood of the Trojans And that this might carry with it the face of an History they stuck not to tell us that which no Roman Writer reporteth viz. that he should kill his owne Father by chance and thereupon forsooke his owne Country to seeke his fortune elswhere But Verstegan proves all this to be fabulous and admireth much to see how many people have sought to derive their discents from the Trojans and how that many foundations of Cities are reported to have laid by them Yea saith he the follies of men have been such that they have given the glory to the fugitive People of almost all that is excellent in all Europe This therefore would be wisely considered for it standeth with farre more likelihood of truth that we hold him for some * Alstedius saith he came into France out of Italy was at the first a King of a people there called Rutuli and that he was droven thence by Aeneas Prince of Gallia from whence he came when he arrived here in this Island then called Albion where conquering the present Inhabitants he setled himselfe and obtained the rule and dominion over the whole Land which now after him the Conqueror must be called Brittain At the time of his death he divided the whole into three parts and left them to be governed by his three Sonnes Locrine Albanact and Camber Vnto Locrine who was the eldest he left Loegria now called England Vnto Albanact the second Sonne he allotted Albania now called Scotland and unto Camber the third Sonne he gave Cambria now called Wales And all this when he had reigned twenty foure yeares namely twenty after he built London and foure before This was the first King The next as I said was Locrine of whom and his Successors I intend to make no large discourse but shall rather endeavour to set downe the Kings and yeares that they reigned as punctually as I can not varying from what is commonly accounted except upon good ground for the reconciling of this Story to other Histories And to effect this I shall gather out of sundry Authors the years of their reign following no one not further then I find just cause For unlesse an eye be had not only to the times of Belinus and Brennus but also to the time of Coilus otherwise called Coelius or Cecilius I beleeve I shall produce no truer account then what hath been produced already by such as have trod this path before me from which I must here and there step a little aside the better I say to reconcile this Story to other Histories But first if the Brittaines came not from the Trojans it would be shewed how the now City of London came to be called Troy novant I answer that where it hath beene conceited that any Country or people have had their descent from the Trojans there they have interpreted the names of their Cities according as in nearnesse of sound they came neare to any thing concerning Troy and so * or Trenevid Trenewith which in the British Tongue is as much as to say New towne came to be corruptly called Troy novant that is to say new Troy which is now saith * In his Restit of Antiq. c. 4. Verstegan our old London This being answered I come now to the List or Catalogue which is as followeth Yeares of the Julian Period when they beg A Catalogue of the British Kings probably fixed in their right times   3606. Brute 24. He built London and was buried there 3630. Locrin 20.  3650. Guendolin 15.  36â—5 Madan * 40. * He built Don caster and was slaine by Wolves and wild beasts in hunting 3705. Mempricius 20.  3725. Ebranke * 60. * He built Yorke and by 20. Wives had twenty Sons and thirty daughters 3786. Brute * Greensheild 30.  3815. Leill * 22. * He built Carlile and was buried there 3837. Rudburdibras * 39. * He built Canterbury Shaftsbury and Winthester 3876. Bladud * 20. * He was a great Astronomer and made the Bathes at Caerbrand and attempting to fly fell down and was broken in peices falling upon the top of Apollo's Temple 3896. Leir 40.  3936. Cordilla or * Cordelia 5.  3941. Cunedag and Morgan 12.  3953. Cunedag alone * 33. * He built three Temples the first to Mars at Pexth in Scotland the second to Mercury at Bangor in Wales the third to Apollo in Cornwall 3986. Rivallo * 22.  4008. Gurgustus 15.  4023. Sicilius 49.  4072. Jago 25.  4097. Kinimachus 54.  4151. Gorbodug 58.  4209. Ferex and * Porex 5. In the death of these two the line of Brute failed 4214. Cloten 50.  4264. Dunwallo * 40. He was the first King of Britaine that was crowned with a Crowne of Gold and by him Blackwell Hall was built Malmsbury and the Vies He also ordained weights 4304. * Belinus and Brennus 15.  4319. Belinus alone 11.  4330. Gurngust 19.  * So called of bearing such a shield in the wars with Gaule * Betweene her reign and that of Queene Mary Daughter of K. Henry the eight no woman ruled in Brittain * In his time it rained blood for three dayes * He built Belingsgate and the Tower of London Yeares of the Julian Period when they beg The continuation of the former List of the British Kings   4349. Guentholen 26. Measures and made good Laws against Theft 4375. Coilus * 7. * He was slaine in his Bed by Fergus in reward whereof the Scots made Fergus their King 4382. Kymor 3.  4385. Elanius * Howan 6.  4391. Morwith * 9. * This King fonght with is Monster that came out of the Irish Sea and was slaine by it 4400. Grandabod or * Grantbodian 10  4410. Arthogaile 1.  4411. Elidurus 3.  4414. Arthogaile againe 10.  4424. Elidure againe * 1. * The reignes of â—â—e Kings from the death of this Elidure are held to be very uncertaine howbeit I have assayed to set them down according to what I find in some Authors but am not fully satisfied why Heli afterward thentioned should have but one year 4425. Vigenius and * Peridure 7.  4432. Peridure alone * 2.  4434. Elidure againe 4.  4438. Gorbonian 10.  4448. Morgan 2.  4450. Emerianus 6.  4456. Idwallan 8.  4464. Rhimo 11.  4475. Geruntius 13.  4488. Catill 10.  4498. Coel 12.  4510. Porrex 2.  4512. Cherin 1.  4513. Fulgen 2.  4515. Eldred 1.  4516. Andragie 1.  4517. Vranius 3.  4520. Eliud 5.  4525. Dedantius 5.  4530. Detonus 2.  4532.
Gurginius 3.  4535. Merian 2.  * He was buried at Ikaldown or as we now call it Jekelton in Cambridgesheir For so I find it in a very old Chronicle of England * He built Cambride and Grantham * He built the Towne of Pickering Yeares of the Julian Period when they beg The continuation of the former List or Catalogue of the British Kings   4537. Bladunc 2.  4539. Capb 1.  4540. Ovinus 2.  4542. Cicill 2.  4544. Bledgebred 20.  4564. Archemall 14.  4578. Eldelus 4.  4582. Rodianus 32.  4614. Hertir or Redarius 5.  4619. Samulius 2.  4621. Penisellus 3.  4624. Pyrrhus 6.  4630. Caporus 7.  4637. Dinellus 3.  4640. Helius * 1. * The Isle of Eley was named after his name and the town thereof built by him 4641. Lud 11.  4652. Cassibelan 19.  4659. In this year being the eighth of Cassibelan Cesar came first against Britaine but was repulsed and made no Conquest here till the next yeare   4660. This was that next the ninth of Cassibelan the 699. of Rome and the third yeare of the 181. Olympiad it was also the 4660. yeare of the Julian Period and yeare oâ— the World 3951. And now had the Britaines reigned 1055. yeares current when Cesar made this conquest   4671. Theomantius reigned next 23.  4694. Cymbeline 35. In his time Christ was born 4729. Guiderius 28. He denied to pay the Romans their tribute whereupon the Emperour Claudius raised a great Army and came against him in the yeare of our Lord 43. * He is said by some to rule 60. yeares and that the yeares of the Kings before him ever since the death of Elidure are uncertain in his time Cherry-Trees was first planted in this Iland as Master Isâ—â—cson writeth in his Chronology pag. 171. The next after Guiderius was Arviragus he reigned 28. yeares and began in the yeare of the Julian Period 4757. In the last yeare but one of his reigne Jerusalem was destroyed by Titus the sonne of Vespasian even in the year of the Julian Period 4783. And thus I have prosecuted this History of the British Kings thus farre and listed them in their right times and order as neare as I can and have as you see taken my first Rise from the arrivall of their first King Brutus who comming out of France came into this Land then called Albion and found no other Inhabitants in it but some Gyants which dwelled in Moutaines and Caves these were vanquished by him and his men the chiefest whereof was Corin one of Brutes strongest Champions by whom the Gyant Gogmagog was slaine But if this Island were once a Continent to France as Verstegan proveth in his * chap 4. restitution of decayed Antiquities then I do suppose the most ancient name thereof was Samothea Afterward being made an Island by the Sea eating through that little Isthmus or neck of Land between Dover and Calice it was called Albion from Albion a Son of Neptune as some have said by whom and whose posterity it was inhabited untill Brute made conquest of it which as is commonly accounted was in the year before Christ 1108. And there I have fixed it even in the yeare of the Iulian Period 3606. and yeare of the World by my account 2897. CHAP. XI Containing the Dynasties of severall other Kingdomes THe Kingdomes which next offer themselves to be considered are the Kingdomee of Lacedemon and Corinth which began at the last descent of the Heraclidae fourscore yeares after the destruction of Troy as before in the end of the fifth Chapter was shewed Some begin them both in one yeare whilst others make a yeares difference which I doe beleeve ariseth from this that Automenes is sometimes reckoned for the last King of Corinth and sometimes for the first Annuall Officer after the end of the second Dynastie But I for my part shall reckon Automenes for the * and so Eusebius also reckons last King after whom were Annuall Officers or Princes for 124. yeares as is accounted by Helvicus in his Chronologie At the end of which yeares Cypselus began to reigne and reigned 28. yeares Some say that he was a Tyrant but by Sir Walter Raleigh in his History of the World lib. 2. cap. 28. Sect. 5. he is mentioned not as a Tyrant but as a quiet Prince who notwithstanding by expelling the race of the Bachidae made himselfe Lord of Corinth After Cypselus was Periander who was indeed a Tyrant and reigned 44. yeares according to Aristotle dying in the fourth year of the 48. Olympiad as saith Laertius The death therefore of this Tyrant and end of the Kingdome of Corinth fell into the yeare of the Julian Period 4129. for then was the fourth yeare of the 48. Olympiad And as for the beginning of it that must be in the yeare of the same Period 3610. foure score yeares after the fall of Troy as already hath been said See now the List Years of the Iulian Period when they beg A List of the Kings of Corinth ex Euseb all fixed in their right times  3610. Athletes or Alethes 35. Dynastie 1. 3645. Ixion 37. Dynastie 1. 3682. Agilaus 37. Dynastie 1. 3719. Pryminas 35. Dynastie 1. Years of the Iulian Period when they beg The Dynastie of the Bachidae in Corinth ex Eusebio  3754. Bachis 35. Dynastie 2 3789. Agelas 30. Dynastie 2 3819. Eudemus 25. Dynastie 2 3844. Aristemedes 35. Dynastie 2 3879. Egemnon 16. Dynastie 2 3895. Alexander 25. Dynastie 2 3920. Phelesteus 12. Dynastie 2 3932. Automenes 1. Dynastie 2 3933. Annuall Officers began and continued one hundred twenty foure yeares  4057. Cypselus 28. 4085. Periander 44. 4129. The death of Periander and fourth year of the forty eight Olympiad  Years of the Iulian Period when they beg A List or Catalogue of the Lacedemonian Kings taken out of Eusebius and fitted to their right times  3610. Euristheus 42. 3652. Agis 1. 3653. Archestratus 35. 3688. Labotes 37. 3725. Doristus 29. 3754. Agesilaus 44. 3798. Archelaus 60. 3858. Telechus 40. 3898. Alcamenes 37. 3935. Here was the end of this List or Catalogue in in which were seven Kings and they among them reigned 325. yeare  The next that I shall mention The reigns of the Lydians were the Kings of Lydia and the time of their Dynasties the first of which I must passe over as not knowing how to reckon it The second began in the yeare of the Julian Period 3492. and lasted as saith Herodotus 505. yeares even till the beginning of Gyges but we want a continued Series of the Kings for the space of 426. yeares even till the first yeare of Ardysus who reigned 36. yeares Alyattes 14. Meles 12. Candaules 17. After Candaules the third Dynastie began and had in it 170 * not compleat but current years divided among five Kings
and they were these Giges 38. Ardis 49. Sadiattes 12. Halyattes 57. Croesus 14. Scaliger gathereth out of Sosicrates a Laconian Historiographer that Cyrus tooke Sardes and subdued Croesus 41. years after the death of Periander who thereupon setteth the end of Croesus his Kingdome in the first year of the 59. Olympiad the like doth Helvicus and some others And indeed the account would fit the turne well enough if all things else were correspondent but because they are not I must let it alone to them that like it For though from the fortieth yeare of Periander which was all the time that he reigned according to Laertius there be 41. years to the time that Cyrus subdued Croesus yet not so many from the end of his 44. at which time he dyed even in the fourth yeare of the 48. Olympiad as already hath been shewed I conclude therefore that when Croesus lost his Kingdome it was not the first year of the 59. Olympiad but rather and indeed the first year of the 58. Olympiad fourteenth year of his reign For we are not to account that last of his to be compleat but current when this calamity fell upon him and that it was also towards Winter in the yeare of the Julian Period 4166. Which being considered I would that the reigne of the Lydians be set one year higher then they be in the Table in the first Part next after the one hundred and nineteenth Page For there the conquest that Cyrus made of Croesus his Kingdome standeth against the year of the Julian Period 4167 whereas here I conclude it to be in the yeare of the same Period 4166. when the Soldiers were ready to take up their winter quarters But now see the List Years of the Iulian Period when they beg A List or Catalogue of the Kings of Lydia rightly fixed 3918. Ardysus 36. 3954. Alyattes 14. 3968. Meles 12. 3980. Candaules 17. This is he who lost his Kingdome by shewing his naked Wife to Gyges 3997. Giges 38. 4035. Ardys 49. 4084. Sadiattes 12. 4096. Halyattes 57. 4153. Croesus 14. current Cyrus conquered him and his Kingdome in the first yeare of the 58. Olympiad teste Solino and that was in the yeare of the Julian Period 4166. as before was said He had a Sonne who never spake in all life till now but now seeing a Souldier goe about to kill his Father upon a suddaine passion he brake his Tongue-string cryed out and said Oh man take heed wilt thou kill Croesus And from that day to his death he could speake as well as other men Herodot The next to be mentioned according to their order or course of time be the Kings of the Medes The reigne of the Medes of whom I gave notice in the latter end of the second Chapter They reigned without any strict hand over their subjects untill the dayes of Dioces and that 's the reason why he is accounted by Herodotus as the first King Nor is this my opinion alone Hist World l. 2. c. 27. S. 5. but of Sir Walter Raleigh likewise in his History of the World saying this Dioces was the first that ruled the Medes in a strict forme commanding more absolutely then his Predecessors had done For they following the example of Arbaces had given to the people so much licence as caused every one to desire the wholesome severity of a more Lordly King Herein Dioces answered their desires to the full For he caused them to build for him a stately Palace he tooke unto him a Guard for the defence of his Person he seldome gave presence which also when he did it was with such austerity that no man durst presume to spit or cough in his fight By these and the like Ceremonies he bred in the people an awfull regard and highly upheld the Majestie which his Predecessors had almost letten fall through neglect of due comportments In execution of his royall office he did uprightly and severely administer justice keeping secret spies to informe him of all that was done in the Kingdome He cared not to enlarge the bounds of his Dominion by encroaching upon others but studied how to govern well his owne The difference found between this King and such as were before him seemes to have bred that opinion which Herodotus delivers that Dioces was the first who reigned in Media Thus that Knight Moreover this was he that built the great City of Echatane which now is called Tauris and therefore should in all likelihood be that King Arphaxad mentioned in the booke of Judith which even the course of time approveth But if he be Arphaxad who was it that was that great Nabuchodonosor which fought against him I answer this seemes to be Saosduchinus King of the Assirians about the beginning of whose twelfth year Dioces was slaine For so it is read in the first Chapter of the book of Judith translated into Latin out of the Caldee by St. Hierom as a worthy Author well observeth in his laborious and learned Annals of the old Testament In the Greeke indeeed we are one while directed to the twelfth yeare another while to the seventeenth year of this King but that unconstancie argues a defect in the Copie and so I leave it comming now to shew the course of succession among these Kings of Media who began at the death of Sardanapalus Yeares of the Iulian Period when they beg A Catalogue or List of the Kings of Media partly out of Eusebius and partly out of Herodotus 3893. Arbaces 28. 3921. Sosarmus 30. 3951. Medidus 40. 3991. Cardiceas 13. 4004. Dioces 53. 4057. Phraortes 22. 4079. Cyaxares 40. 4119. Astyages 35. 4154. Here was the end of Astyages and the beginning of the reigne of Cyaxares secundus who according to Xenophon was the son of Astyages and called in the sacred Prophecy of Daniel by the name of Darius Medus He was the Vncle of Cyrus as being Brother to his Mother which Xenophon also sheweth Moreover we are to note that in the booke of Tobit and Daniel Astyages the Father of this Cyaxares is called Ahasuerus or Assuerus as may be seen Dan. 9.1 and Tob. 14.17 Next after these we are to reckon the Kings of Assyria which reigned at Niniveh after the death of Sardanapalus Kings of Assyria after Sardanapalus as those before mentioned reigned in Media The first of them may be granted to be that King whom Castor in his Canon calleth Ninus secundus saying as his words sound in the Latine Initium Chronographiae fecimus a Nino eam deduximus usque ad Ninum qui successionis jure accèpit Regnum a Sardanapalo Thus he Now this name some thinke was given him for the better lucke sake namely as I conceive That as the ancient Ninus did at the first enlarge this Kingdome so as it came to be a great Monarchy in like manner the same was hoped for by them who gave this name to this King Or else because he was
fortunate in the enlarging of it they said of him that he was a second Ninus the time of whose reigne is gathered out of Castor aforesaid in the Greeke Chronicle of Eusebius to be nine yeares His Successor I take to be the same who in the Scripture is called Phul and came in the dayes of Menahem and invaded the land of Israel 2 Kin. 15.19 and 1 Chr. 5.26 How long he reigned is not expressed any where that I know except it be in the Writings of Annius where we find 48. yeares mentioned for the time of his reigne Tiglath pilezer succeeded him and according to the said Author reigned 25. years Salmanasar 17. Senacharib 7. How I should contradict this Author for the reigns of these four Kings I cannot see except it be in the reigne of Phul who if the rest be right must have but 43. because after Senacharibs army was slain by the Angel and that he thereupon went streight way home with shame to his owne Country he lived not fully fifty five dayes For before 55. dayes were ended he was slain by his own Sons Adramelech and Sharezer as he was worshipping in the house of Nisroch his god Tob. 1.21 and Esa 37.38 If any further helpe could be had from other Authors I would not be beholding to Annius for thus much but because it cannot it wil I hope be no harm to take aime from him so farre as he thwarts no other To the next King namely Esarhaddon or as he is otherwise written Asarhaddon he giveth ten years but there I leave him For it is extreamely probable that he had a longer time then so thirty yeares in Niniveh and after that twelve yeares more in Babilon In all 42. with some odde moneths over above For at the end of the eight years of Interregnum that were in Babilon the King that began to reigne there was Assaradinus as Ptolomy calleth him in his Mathematical Canon of the Kings of Babilon who in all probability was this Assarhaddon the Sonne of Senacharib formerly mentioned And now see the List Yeares of the Julian whē they began to reigne A List or Catalogue of the Kings of Assyria after Sardanapalus 3893. Ninus junior 19. 3912. Phul 43. 3955. Tiglath pileser 25. 3980. Salmanassar 17. 3997. Senacharib 7. 4004. Esarhaddon 30. 4034. Here as is probable this King Esarhaddon beto reign in Babilon after he had been King of Assyria 30. years But the first of them in Babilon whose years of reign stand upon record since the Death of Sardanapalus was Nabonassar and with him Ptolomy begins his Mathematicall Canon before mentioned Howbeit by what we find elswhere it may be gathered that there were Kings of Babilon after Sardanapalus before the Aera of this King Nabonassar took beginning as in Eusebius his Chronicle may be seen in the beginning of the reigne of Arbaces For first having shewed how the Empire of the Assyrians was shattered in pieces by the fall of this Epicurious King he saith that the Medes brought it home to themselves that is they purchased hereby their ancient Liberty which with reference to the opinion of Herodotus before mentioned he sheweth to be so great that it was as if they had no Princes to reigne over them untill the time of Dioces and yet he setteth down four that reigned before him But they by slacking too much the reins of Soveraignty did more hurt to the generall estate of Media then the pleasure of freedome which it enjoyed could recompence For hereupon it came to passe that the Assyrians encroached upon their Dominions and got away some towns from them which they held still in the dayes of Salmanassar when the ten Tribes were carried away captive as the holy Scriptures beare us witnesse in 2 Kin. 18.11 and elsewhere Then secondly the Chaldeans also prevailed and had saith Eusebius successions of Kings And so had other Nations too who were now governed by their own proper Kings as wel as they By which it appeareth that there were Kings of Babylon before Nabonassar for the time from the death of Sardanapalus to the beginning of his reigne was 74 years But who they were that reigned in that space excepting Belesis or Belochus who was contemporary with Arbaces is altogether unknowne Probable it is that a new race of Kings began in Nabonassar or that he was some excellent restorer of Astronomie and thereupon had the honour of an account of times to be instituted and observed in memory of him ever after which began on the six and twentieth day of February in the year of the Julian Period 3967 when the year of the World was 3258. And as for the Kings you have them before in the first Part even in the latter end of the seventh Chapter page 50. The reignes also of the Kings of Persia The Kings of Persia from the beginning of Cyrus to the end of the last Darius be likewise there in the seventh Section of the eighth Chapter I shall not need therefore to set them downe againe here in this place but come next to the Kings of Mecedon These reigned 485 years from the beginning of Cranaus The Kings of Mecedon to the death of Alexander Magnus as Saint Austin rightly reckoneth in his twelfth booke and tenth Chapte Decivitate Dei This Cranaus began in the year of the Julian Period 3905. and reigned twenty eight years of whom and his Successours in the following List Yeares of the Julian Period when they beg A List or Catalogue of the Kings of Macedon fixed in their right times 3905. Cranaus 28. 3933. Coenus 12. 3945. Tyrimas 38. 3983. Perdiccas the first 51. 4034. Archeus 38. Yeares of the Iulian Period whē they beg The continuation of the former List or Catalogue of the Kings of Macedon 4072. Philippus 38. 4110. Aeropus 26. 4136. Alcetas 29. 4165. Amyntas the first 50. 4215. Alexander dives 43. 4258. Perdiccas the second 41. 4299. Archelaus 16. 4315. Orestes 00. 4315. Aeropas tutour to Orestes 6. 4321. Pausanias 1. 4322. Amyntas primo 1. 4323. Argeus 2. 4325. Amyntas again 21. 4346. Alexander 1. 4347. Alorites 3. 4350. Prediccas 4. 4354. Philip the Father of Alexander 24. 4378. Alexander magnus 12. 4390. Here Alexander dyed even in the first year of the hundreth and fourteenth Olympiad And note that Perdiccas the second had a longer reign then is commonly given him for he was alive in the sixtenth yeare of the Peloponnesian Warre and could not therefore have lesse then forty one yeares which number is given him by Nicomedes Acanthius as he is cited by Master Selden in his Marmora Arundelliana When he had reigned about twenty seven yeares viz. about the third or fourth yeare of the Peloponnesian War Sitalces King of Thrace came against him with a purpose to have made Philip the sonne of Amyntas King but by the care of Perdicccas a Peace was made and so Perdiccas kept his Kingdome still Note also that at the death of Alexander
magnus the Grecian Monarchie was divided and came at last to be in foure chiefe darts viz. Syria Macedon Egypt and Asia the lesse as before in the first Part may be seene CHAP. XII Of the Kings and other Governours of Rome from the foundation thereof by Romulus to the Destruction of Hierusalem by Titus I Shewed before in the end of the ninth Chapter of this second Part that when Romulus began to reigne the foundation of Rome was laid viz. in the yeare of the Julian Period 3962. at the Summer time whereof the first year of the seventh Olympiad began 432. yeares after the Destruction of Troy This was in the yeare of the World 3253. the sixth year of Jotham King of Judah and the seventh of Paka King of Israel before which time that which now began to be a City was but an ordinary Village The first Government whereof was by Kings which lasted 244. yeares as in the following Catalogue may be seene Yeares of the Julian Period when they beg A Catalogue of the Kings of Rome fixing them all in their right places 3962. Romulus 37. 3999. An Interregnum 1. 4000. Numa Pompilius 43. 4043. Tullus Hostilius 32. 4075. Ancus Martius 24. 4099. Tarquinius Priscus 38. 4137. Servius Tullius 44. 4181. Tarquinius Superbus 25. 4206. Here was the end of the Goverment by Kings The next Government was of Consuls who began in the year of the Julian Period 4206. There were other alterations afterward but that which was most eminent was the Government of Emperours The first whereof in some sort was Julius Cesar by whom the Brittains were made tributary in the ninth of Cassibelan but not till Augustus was Rome fully brought under the command of one Soveraigne Imperiall Monarch He therefore properly was the first Emperour whose death did so much greive the people that they wished either that he had never been borne or else that he had never dyed Tiberius succeeded him and began in the Julian Period 4727. after his Predecessour forementioned had reigned 57. years five moneths and foure dayes for Cesar was slaine in the Senate house receiving there three and twenty wounds in the year of the Julian Period 4670. on the fifteenth day of March and Tiberius began on the nineteenth day of August when Augustus dyed even in the year of the said Period 4727 aforesaid not long before that Eclipse of the Moon which Tacitus mentions This Tiberius dyed on the sixteenth day of March in the year of the Julian Period 4750 after he had reigned 22 years six moneths and 28 dayes His successour was Caligula who reigned three years ten moneths and nine dayes He was so prodigall that he spent an hundred Millions of money in three years He deflowred his three fisters and one of their daughters and was also so cruell that he wished all the people of Rome to have had but one neck that he might cut it off at one blow Finally he dyed being slaine by Cassius Cherea and Sabinus the Tribune on the 24 day of January in the year of the Julian Period 4754. His Unckle Claudius succeeded him and reighed thirteene years eight moneths and ten dayes In his time was that Famine which Agabus foretold Acts 11.28 He commanded all Jewes to depart from Rome Asts 18.2 And made Felix Governour of Judea who was made to tremble in the presence of his Minion Drausilla at Saint Pauls Sermon of Temperance and Judgement to come Acts 24.24 25. Simon Magus lived in his time and so played his pranks in Rome that he got to be honoured as a God After Claudius that cruell monster Nero began to reigne in the year of the Julian Period 4767 on the thirteenth day of October at which time the aforesaid Emperour dyed being poysoned by his wife Agrippina through the helpe of a Physician whose name was Xenophon This Nero was a most notorious wicked man he reigned thirteen years seven moneths and 28. dayes dying by his owne hand on the ninth of June in the year of the Julian Period 1681 one year and 20 dayes before Vespasion was made Emperour Galba succeeded in the year aforesaid whose whole time was but seven moneths and eight dayes He was slain by Otho who after three moneths and foure dayes killed himselfe being overcome by Vitellius who also after nine moneths is slain and Vesprtian thereupon sole Emperour In the second year of whose reigne that stately City and Temple of Jerusalem was destroyed by Titus the gallant and brave son of this Emperour in the year of the Julian Period 4783 as more at large in my first Part and last Chapter I have declared to which I now send you For here I intend no more but shall put an end now even to this Part also giving thanks unto God who hath brought me unto it Laus Deo FINIS Errata PAge 5. for evolvendo read revolvendo page 9. line 24. for be the best read be in the best p. 12. l. 27. read excerptis p. 14. l. 21. r. course of the Sun p. 15. l. 1. f. no other r. no moneth p. 16 l. 2. for twentieth r. two and tweitieth and l. 4. f. been r. but p. 17. l. 4. r. spoken of p 25. cap 5. f. October r. Aprill p 29. f. a Quartaine r. that a quartaine p. 31. l. 8. for of the Rest r. of Rest p. 33. l. 3. r. enough p. 36. l. 18. r. is concluded p. 37. l. 1. f. to r. in l. 14. f. on r. of p 38 l. 1. r. had not been l. 27. f. to r. on f. a Sabbath r. Sabbath l. 34. r. as I said l. 37. r. as we are pag. 39. l. 11. r. on Ararat p. 40. lin 32. for thirteenth read thirtieth page 42. line 42. for Egypt read out of Egypt page 49. line 9. for to read not page 70. line 13. r. of the Chaldees and l. 20. f. 57 r. 75. p. 71 l. 23 r. was his house p. 72 l. 3 r. goe on p. 75 l. 17 f. sed r. blessed p. 76 l. 27 r. which was 137 p. 77 l. 17 r. how to account p. 83 lin 36 r. Danites p. 91 l. 14 r. Jehoahaz 3 months In the Table of the Kings of Judah in Joash his reign f. the seventeenth of Jehu r. the seventh p. 108 l. 37 r. Zacharia p. 110 l. 32 r. Zorobabel p. 112 l. 24 r. as Ezra sheweth c. 4. An Hebrew and Julian Calender for the Year of the Vniversall Deluge or Flood The twelfe Moneth MARCH The twelfth Moneth Anno Mundi 1657. Â Â 1 12 Â A Â 2 13 Â B On this day a third Dove is sent and she returns no more howbeit Noah did not open the covering of the Ark untill the first day of the next Moneth Gen. 8.12 13. 3 14 Â C 4 15 Â D 5 16 Â E 6 17 Â F Â 7 18 Â G Â 8 19 Â A Â 9 20 Â B Â 10 21 Â C The first day of the Week 11 22
 D  12 23  E  13 24  F  14 25  G  15 26  A  16 27  B  17 28  C The first day of the Week 18 29  D  19 30  E  20 31  F  21 1 April G The first day of APRIL 22 2 A  23 3  B  24 4  C The first day of the Week 25 5  D  26 6  E  27 7  F  28 8  G  29 9  A  30 10  B On this day was the Vernall Equinox In Part I. the first leaf of K. is fall put this leaf in its place An Hebrew and Julian Calender for the Yeer of the Vniversall Deluge or Flood The first Moneth APRIL The first Moneth Anno Mundi 1658. 1 11  C On the first day of this Moneth Noah removed the Covering of the Ark and looked and behold the face of the ground was dry Gen. 8.13 howbeit he commeth not out till God commanded him which was not untill the 27 th day of the next Moneth For though the Waters were dryed from off the Superficies of the Earth by this first day of the first Moneth yet the ground was still soft unfit for habitation and not dry enough to be trodden on by either Man or Beast untill the twenty seventh day of the second Moneth in this yeer of the World 1658. 2 12  D 3 13  E 4 14  F 5 15  G 6 16  A 7 17  B 8 18  C 9 19  D 10 20  E 11 21  F 12 22  G 13 23  A  14 24  B  15 25  C The first day of the Week 16 26  D  17 27  E  18 28  F  19 29  G  20 30  A  21 1 May B The first day of MAY. 22 2 C The first day of the Week 23 3 D  â—4 4 E  25 5 F  26 6 G  27 7 A  28 8 B  29 9 C The first day of the Week A Postscript to the Reader Gentle Reader I Am now come towards the conclusion or end of what at my first undertaking I intended for the close of which I have got together a few Characters Chronologicall Characters which now in the last place I present unto thee They are pertinent to what is before written in my Measuring Reed and will serve well to confirm the whole Fabricke of my foregoing computation And first I will begin with Adam of whom I have not much to say and yet if I might not be thought too curious I could shew wiâ—h very much ease and probability the very day as well as the yeare of his death He was not borne nor begotten but treated in the yeare of the Julian Period 710 on the 29 day of April Feria sexta when the Sun was in the sixth degree of Aries as I have elsewhere shewed from whence he lived as the Scripture telleth us 930 yeares Gen. 5.5 His Death must therefore be in the yeare of the same period 1640 at such time as the Sun was againe in the same point of Heaven as at the first when God created him which in this yeare of his death is found to be on the 22 day of April This 22 day in the yeare aforesaid was on the sixth day of the week when was also the 14 day of the first month Adam therefore dyed on the same day of the week on which he was made which was also the same day of the month on which I finde it probable that he fell To which the Testimony of Eutychius a learned Patriarch of Constantinople well agreeth for as hath been told us by that famous and illustrious Master Selden Adam died on the sixth day of the week and fourteenth day of that moneth which was nearest to the Vernall Equinox as learned Languius expounds that passage of his taken from Eutychius which is indeed an exposition very true For thus stands the words in Mr. Seldens Booke De Anno Judaico if they be set downe in English And Adam dyed on Friday on the fourteenth day of the Moonth which was the sixth day of the Moneth Nisan c. By which sixth day of Nisan he certainly meaneth the sixth day after the Sun entred into Aries at which time must be the fourteenth day of the Moone and sixth day of the week All which I finde to be exactly on the 22 day of April aforesaid in the yeere of the Julian Period 1640 which was therefore the very day and yeere of Adams death and very beginning of the yeare of the World 931. The further consideration of which is not onely a sure character of the precise time of the creation but also serveth to declare that the Ages of the Patriarches were full and compleat yeeres and that therefore Noah's Flood came not in the yeere of the World 1656 as the most account but in the yeere of the World 1657. for Methuselah must finish the yeeres of his life before it came as the signification of his name in the Hebrew sheweth which is He dyeth and the emission or Dart commeth In this yeere of the World being the yeere of the Julian Period 2366 the seventeenth day of the second moneth on which day the Flood began was also on the sixth day of the weeke which is a character likewise worth the marking For it clearely sheweth that as on the sixth day of the weeke God made both Man and Beast so on the same day of the week he sends a flood of Waters to destroy them And as this was on the sixth day of the week so when Noah came out of the Arke was the seventh day of the week in the yeere of the Julian Period 2367. on the fifth day of June which in that yeare was the 27 day of the second moneth and Sabbath day at which time Noah offered Sacrifice even at the very end of a full year of dayes after the flood began which adds still something for confirmation Another Character next after this confirming me yet more fully in a firm confidence of the truth of my accounts is taken from the time of the comming out of Egypt which I finde to be on the last day of Aprill in the yeare of the Julian Period 3224. which very day in that yeare was on the sixth day of the week even as on the same day of the week Christ purchased a better Redemption by the bloud of his crosse one thousand five hundred and two and twenty yeares after In all which I doe much admire at the wonderfull providence of God in disposing of the Times so exactly and harmoniously for as on the sixth day of the weeke Man was made and Christ suffered so on the sixth day of the weeke Israel was delivered out of the Egyptian bondage on the very next day after
And why I end them at the foresaid deplorable condition of Zedechia in the time of the siege is ecause this position of Stars was seen thus and read a little before the Jewes saw their Scepter cast downe to the ground and their liberty quite carried Captive into Babylon which must needs be in the yeare of the Julian period 4125 when Nebuchadnezzar laid his last siege against Jerusalem Thus after the same manner the length of the Persian Monarchy founded by Cyrus is said to be 208 yeares in which though he may seeme to differ two yeares from my account which precisely alloweth but 206 yet he doth abundantly confute Beroaldus Broughton and such others who would make the world believe that this Monarchy lasted but 130 yeares or thereabouts whereas it must be 206 at the least and begin according to Xenophon seven yeares before the death of King Cyrus or 208 if we account from the time that Cyrus laid the foundation thereof in conquering Asia and the whol continent about Babylon against which he made his last expedition two yeares before he tooke it The notice of which time is not impertinent for even the prophet had an eye thereunto in Jer. 51.46 Howbeit the Head of Gold was not as yet quite cut off for that was not till Babylon was taken and Belshazzar slaine not many houres before which there was an hand-writing upon the wall which told it Then was as well the first yeare of Cyrus as of Darius Medus how else had Daniel been in Babylon unto the first of Cyrus seeing upon the Conquest Darius tooke him with him into Media as Josephus sheweth where he was unto the third yeare of Cyrus though how much longer we know not Dan. 10.1 Whereas therefore it is said in Dan. 1.21 that Daniel was unto the first yeare of Cyrus it is to be understood thus namely That Daniel continued in Babilon till that state was altered and the Kingdome translated to Cyrus who made such a partition thereof between himselfe and Darius as that Darius had the chiefe Title of honour though he in effect had the dominion That which we read in the fifth Chapter hath respect hereunto for there we read not onely that Belshazzars Kingdome was divided and given to the Medes and the Persians but also that Darius Medus took the Kingdome being threescore and two yeares old Dan. 5.28.31 After which it seemeth probable that he lived but a while not onely because his Climactericall yeare was now at hand but also in regard of the time noted in the date of Daniels Visions For in this new State after Daniels first Vision in the first yeare of Darius when he prayed for the returne of the people from their captivity there is no more mentioned of any thing dated in the yeares of his Reign but in the yeares of Cyrus which if Darius had been still alive would not have beene as is easie to go grant if we do but consider that Darius tooke Daniel away with him into Media as soon as Babylon was conquered and made him there the chiefest Officer of his Kingdome Nay more that this first yeare of Darius must be the very yeare likewise when Cyrus released the captivity is plain not onely because now the 70 yeares were accomplished which were both the date of Nebuchadnezzars Kingdome Dau. 5.26 Jer. 2â— finished at the death of Belshazzar and of the peoples servitude which was to be during the Reigne of him his son and his sons son whom Esay calleth his Esa 14.22 in which place by Nephew we are to understand the sonnes sonne The same with that in Jer. 27.7 Nephew but also in regard of Daniels prayer for their Return made at this time which was indeed the fulfilling of the condition required of God in his promise concerning their freedome For as soon as ever God had made a promise to his people that they should come home again when 70 yeares began to be accomplished at Babylon then this followeth and is annexed as the condition of his promise namely that they seeke him for as Junius renders that text when ye shall call upon me that ye may Or goe away returne and pray unto me then will I heare you Ier. 29.10.12 which when Daniel considered he prayes earnestly to God in the behalf of the people even in the first yeare of Darius and is told by the Angel Gabrel not onely that his prayer was heard but also that the Lord had decreed a spirituall deliverance for his Church which at the time appointed and mentioned in the seventy weekes should be accomplished by the death of Christ whom Daniel calls the Messiah as may beseen at large in the ninth Chapter of his prophecy But to return again to Gaffarel and his learned Chomier who tel us that the continuation likewise of the Graecian Kingdome is also found after the same manner and in the Heavens pointed out to be 284 yeares which was foreshewed by foure Stars that made up the Verbe Parad a word which signifieth to divide and in which the number was 284. Now this is true as well as the rest that are before mentioned if we begin to reckon from the yeare of the Iulian period 4384 when Alexander the Great subdued He was the last King of the Persian Monarchy Darius Codoman and end in the yeare of the same period 4668. when Iulius Caesar was created perpetuall Dictator for the Romans in whom the foundation also of their Monarchy began first to be laid though it came to no great perfection till Augustus overcame Marke Anthony from whence all the time after to the destruction of Ierusalem by Titus is ninety and nine yeares And at that I end LAUS SOLI DEO FINIS
Jeremiah that Nebuchadnezzars yoke must not be endured 70 years but that within two full years it must be broken Which story is at large set downe in the 27 and 28 Chapters of Ieremiah and by Scaliger referred to the first year of Zedechia who indeed supposeth it to be the fourth year after a year of Rest of which I see no reason because the whole scope of the four and thirtieth Chapter doth demonstrate that year to be a year of Rest when Nebuchadnezzar laid his seige against Ierusalem which we know to be the ninth year of Zedechia and tenth day of the tenth moneth Ier. 52.4 Now this was in the year of the Julian Period 4124. on the seventh of Ianuary feria tertia at which time the ninth of Zedechia was still running on and was not ended till about the beginning of the fourth moneth next after Nebuchadnezzar therefore began to beseige Ierusalem on the seventh day of Ianuary in the year of the Julian Period 4124. which year was Sabbathicall from the Autumne before till the Autumne thereof and was that Sabbathicall year in which the Jews let their servants goe free in the beginning thereof thereby encouraging them to fight against the Chaldeans who then were come into the confines of Iudea ser 34.1 and fought againg the Cities thereof Ierusalem not excepted but had not yet laid their seige against it for that was not untill the time before mentioned How long this continued before the Egyptians came with an Army to succour Zedechia by raising this first seige is not expressed Jer. 37.5 but that they came and that the seige thereupon was raised is certaine This when the Jews perceived and saw that the Chaldeans were gone from them to fight against the Egyptians Jer. 37.10 they took their freed servants againe into bondage vainely perswading themselves that the Chaldeans would come back no more which proved farre otherwise For Nebuchadnezzar having put to flight the Army of Pharaoh returns againe to Ierusalem and on the fourth day of May in the year of the Julian Period 4125. renewes his seige against it * viz. by reckoning first 390. and then forty dayes Ezek. 4.5.6 for these put together doe make 430. end on the eighth day of July they must therfore begin on the fourth of May in the year next before that year in which they ended 430. dayes before the City was broken up as may be gathered out of the fourth Chapter of Ezekiel This fourth day of May was on the two and twenty day of the second moneth feria tertia from whence the seige continued without any further interruption untill the City was taken which was as I said before on the eighth day of July When therefore we read in Ier. 32.1.2 that Nebuchadnezzars Army lay before Ierusalem in the tenth year of Zedechia and eighteenth year of Nebuchadnezzar it is to be understood of his lying against it after this renewing of his seige and before the beginning of the fourth moneth for about the end of the third moneth or beginning of the fourth was the beginning of Zedechia's eleventh year and likewise of all the other years of his reigne insomuch that his ninth year began at the same time in the year of the Julian Period 4123 and was Sabbathicall from the Autumne thereof untill the Autumne next after From whence I conclude that if any part of Zedchia's ninth year was Sabbathicall then could to his first year be the fourth after a Rest but the sixth Hananiah therefore dyed in no other then the fourth year of Zedechia having resisted the Prophet Ieremiah from the beginning of Zedechia's reigne till then as Iearned Iunius in his Annotations upon the place well observeth And as for the burning of the Temple take this note further viz. that the Temple was burnt before the full end of Nebuchadnezzars ninteenth year 2 Kin. 25.8 For though at that time Zedechia had reigned eleven years compleat yet was not Nebuchadnezzars ninteenth year fully finished in regard that Nebuchadnezzar began his reigne something later in the year then Zedechia did for Zedechia began about the beginning of the fourth moneth and Nebuchadnezzar began not till after the seventh day of the fifth moneth at the soonest whose first year was in the end of Jehoiakims third year and beginning of his fourth in the year of the Julian Period 4107. at the Summer time of that year For in the Spring time of the year of the Julian Period 4104. towards the end of the second moneth Iosiah was slain Dan. 1.1 Jer. 25.1 Towards the end of the third the seige began but not till the fourth was entred did God give Jehoiakim into the hands of Nebuchadnezzar 2 Chro 36.6 after whom Iehoahaz reigned three moneths Then in the Summer time of the same year Iehoaikim began in the end of whose third year and beginning of his fourth was the first year of Nebuchadnezzar as comparing the Prophet Daniel to the Prophet Ieremy may be seen at which time his Father was alive as Berosus sheweth Moreover in this year in the ninth moneth and that 's the reason why the Jews fast then God gave Iehoiakim into the hands of Nebuchadnezzar he was thereupon his prisoner and bound in chaines to be carryed to Babylon but went not for afterwards by an argreement of servitude he was released and sent home viz. in the * But not till near the entring of the Spring quarter beginning of the year of the Julian Period 4108. and so became his servant 2 Kings 26.1 from whence the 70 years in Ieremy do undoubtedly take their beginning Ier. cap. 25.2 and cap. 29.10 After this Nebuchadnezzar prosecuting his victories takes all that belonged to the King of Egypt between the river of Egypt to the great river Euphrates and in the mean while his Father dyed after he had reigned one and twenty years as Berosus and Ptolomy in his Mathematical Canon have declared And now upon this Nebuchadnezzar is sent for home into Babylon where he takes the whole Empire upon him and reigneth from hence 43 years as is testified by the Authours aforesaid of which more shall be spoken * viz In cha 11. An Eclipse in the fifth year of Nabopollassar afterward And note that in the Julian Period 4093. was an Eclipse of the Moon noted by Ptolomy to be in the year of Nabonassar 127. and fifth year of Nabopollassar and so indeed there was For though in this year of the Julian Period the sixth year of Nabopollassar began yet the Eclipse was whilst the fifth year was still running on for the Eclipse was on the 23 day of Aprill 29 minutes past five in the morning the sixth yeare not beginning untill some time after Shall I add any thing more A list of the Kings of Babylon from the beginning of Nabonassar then take a list of the Kings of Babylon and their years from the beginning of Nabonassar till the death
of Nebuchadnezzar which is as followeth Nabonassar began in the year of the Julian Period 3967. and reigned 14 years Nadius two Chozirus and Porus five Ilulaeus five Mardokempadius 12. Arcianus five An Interregnum two Belithus three Apronadius six Regebelus one Mesessimordachus four An Interregnum eight Assaradinus 12 compleat or 13 current Saosduchaeus 20 his first was in the thirteenth or last of Assaradinus Then Chyniladanus 22 Nabopollassarus 21. And after him Nebuchadnezzar 43. He reigned as it were * Or one year and some odd moneths two years with his Father which with the 43 after him ammount to 44 and some odd moneths The rest of the Kings after Nebuchadnezzar untill Cyrus shall be mentioned afterwards Here therefore now is the end of this Chapter CHAP. VIII The Periods againe considered and all such doubts and scruples cleared as may arise concerning the just length of any of them together with Answers to certaine other Questions not impertinent SECT I. Of the time from the Creation to the end of the Flood THat the Flood came in the year of the World 1656. is granted by almost al Chronologers only some few have cast it into the year 1657. which I also take to be the right yeer and have so accounted it And that for these reasons First because it came not till Methuselah was dead who being born in the year of the World 688. as by the ages of the Patriarches well appeareth and living 969. years must needs be a live till the year of the World 1656. was ended The Flood therefore came not till the year of the World 1657. It is but a fabulous fancy to say that this Patriarch was alive and taken into Paradise for unlesse his abode were with Noah in the Ark the Waters of the Flood could not but drowne him But as his name in the Hebrew signifieth He dyeth and the Emission or Dart meaning the Flood cometh Secondly Noah was born as doth also well appear by the ages of the Patriarchs in the year of the World 1057. and lived 950 years he dyed not therefore till the year of the World 2007. was begun Out of which take 350. for so long Moses saith Noah lived after the Flood and there will remaine 1657. for the year when the Flood began And thirdly the Mathematicall calculations already mentioned agree well to that year But it is objected If the Flood came not in the year of the World 1656. how then could it come in the six hundredth year of Noah as Moses in Gen. 7.11 saith it did Well enough For though the Six hundreth year of Noah was not ended till after that Moneth in which the Flood began yet it might be ended within some short time after For though the years of the Patriarchs both when they begat their children and also when they themselves died were full and compleat yeares yet who can clearly prove that they were all born at one and the same time of the yeare It is therefore to be observed that Moses beginns not his account of their yeares from the punctuall day of their Nativity but rather from the beginning of the naturall yeare nearest and next after the day of their birth as learned Langius noteth Patet id saith he in Noacho Anno namque quo diluvium finitum est ineunte primo die primo mensis statim incipiti 601 Noachi cum tamen minime certum sit Noachum isto die aut tempore fuisse natum Lang. l 2. pag. 253. Reckon therefore thus viz. That Seth was borne to Adam when Adam was fully and compleatly 130. yeares old that is in the yeare of the world 131. Gen. 5.3 To which add 105. theage of Seth when Enos was borne and so will the birth of Enos be in the year of the world 236 Gen. 5.6 To which add 90. the age of Enos when Kenan was born so shall the birth of Kenan be in the yeare of the world 326. Gen 5.9 To which add 70 the age of Kenan when Mahalaleel was borne so shall the birth of Mahalaleel be in the yeare of the World 396. Gen. 5.12 To which add 65 the age of Mahalaleel when Jared was borne so shall the birth of Jared be in the year of the world 461. Gen. 5.15 To which add 162. the age of Jared when Henoch was born so shalll the birth of Henoch be in the yeare of the World 623. Gen. 5.18 To which add 65. the age of Henoch when Methuselah was born so shall the birth of Methuselah be in the yeare of the world 688. Gen. 5.21 To which adde 187. the age of Methuselah when Lamech was born so shall the birth of Lamech be in the yeare of the World 875. Gen. 5.25 To which add 182. the age of Lamech when Noah was borne so shall the birth of Noah be in the year of the world 1057. Gen. 5.29 To which add 600 years of Noah so shall the year of the world be 1657. in the begining whereof the six hundreth yeare of Noah was not quite finished as already hath been shewed And thus we see the year of the Flood to be in the yeare of the World 1657 which ended not untill the year 1658. was begun And now for the time of the yeare when it began Moses saith that it was in the second Moneth and seventeenth day of the Moneth when all the fountaines of the great Deepe and Windowes of Heaven were opened which second Moneth must be reckoned from the Spring and not from Autumne as in the second Chapter I have already proved Berosus the Chaldean agreeth thereunto saying that the Flood began on the fifteenth day of that Moneth which with them was called by the name of Desius which Moneth Desius is confessed by Scaliger in his Notes page 44. to agree to that which Moses calleth the second Moneth The lesse reason therfore had Scaliger to decline it only he might have held to this that though the Moneth were right yet the day was wrong for if Desius were alltogether the same with that which was the second Moneth among the Jewes then should not the day mentioned be the fifteenth but seventeenth Gen. 7.10 Or if the Moneth were not alltogether the same but must have a fixed time of beginning which Langius proveth to be on the 25 day of May then must the Flood begin not on the fifteenth day thereof but on thr twelfth which day of Desius I take to be the first day of the Flood in regard that in this year it agreeth both to the fifteenth day of the second Moneth mentioned by Moses as also to the fifth day of June when the Flood began But of this I shall need to say no more That which is next shall be an Hebrew and Iulian Kalender for the whole time of the Flood accounting the beginning thereof to be in the yeare of the Julian Period 2366. on the fifth day of June feria sexta An Hebrew and Julian Calender for the Yeer