rites and priesthood flourished; and the first falls in the life-time of Manasseh, who first introduced the Law among the Cuthite inhabitants of Samaria.

The two numerical corruptions of the Roman and Alexandrine copies of the Septuagint, coming out in the years B. c. 296 and 265, both fall in the days of the Seventy Jewish interpreters.

The era of the traditional numbers, adopted by Josephus and most of the Christian fathers, with various modifications, falls B. c. 109, in the time when the expectation of the Messiah's appearance first commenced.

The epoch of the Clementine numbers, which were manifestly designed as a correction of the system of Josephus, accordingly falls A. D. 114, between the times of Josephus, A. D. 70, and of Clemens, A. D. 200.

Finally, that of the modern Jewish corruption, resulting from the altered precession, comes out A. D. 813, at the time when the first modern chronicle, which bears date A. D. 832, was composed.

The probability of truth in any one of these instances of astronomical and historical coincidence, which would in most historical cases be considered to amount to absolute proof, is, at the lowest estimate, in the ratio of two to one; but, all circumstances considered, it is infinitely greater. The probability of truth in the result of the eight cases is, therefore, at the lowest estimate in the ratio of 256 to one. But the modern Jewish corruption has the force of a double instance, in consequence of the change of the computed rate of precession. This, therefore, increases the probability of truth in the whole to the ration of 512 to one, at the lowest; while, when all things are considered, it will be found to amount to many millions to one, and therefore to be truth itself.

Another fact of the last importance is, that if we take any reckoning but the original Hebrew numbers as they now stand, for the root and standard of computation, no historical or chronological result can in any instance be elicited; while, adopting that sacred standard, the whole series comes out perfect.

Again, if we adopt any Hebrew system but the received one, which supposes Abraham to have been born in the 130th year of Terah, and the Judicial period to be 479 years (with 2 Kings vi. 1), no æra of corruption will come out right; while, computing from the received Hebrew system, there is no error in any in

stance.

It follows, that the present Hebrew numbers are not only the original of Scripture, but that the received system of Usher, Lloyd, &c. is the true one.

The restorations and illustrations of the chronological systems of Josephus, of Clemens, of Africanus, and of the fathers gene

rally, resulting from the foregoing, are likewise of incalculable importance to the science of chronology; and in fact the right application of Sir Isaac Newton's astronomical argument to the Scriptural reckoning of time, may well be considered a universal chronological key. It is almost superfluous to repeat the selfevident consequence, that the onus of all the alterations of the sacred numbers, whether protracted or curtailed, demonstrably falls on the Jews and Samaritans.

We will now consider the Hermaic, or Egyptian Corruption of the sacred Hebrew chronology. Having traced eight distinct stages of astronomical corruption, during the thirteen centuries that elapsed from the first return of the Jews from Babylon to the date of their first modern chronicle in the ninth century, in all of which the original sacred computation is raised or depressed according to the progress of astronomical error-six of these belonging exclusively to the Jewish doctors, and two to their Samaritan imitators-I was led to conclude, that the Jews, who were questionless the most ignorant in human learning of all ancient civilized nations, and manifestly thought not of this ingenious mode of raising their antiquity till they became, on the overthrow of the kingdom of Judah, mixed with the nations among whom science was cultivated, must have found some prototype among the Chaldeans or Egyptians, whence they took the principle of corruption afterwards so extensively practised. It also occurred to the writer, that, if such a prototype existed, it might, by necessarily raising the epoch of original corruption, tend to refer the record containing the inspired account of time to its proper antiquity; there being no other means of determining that question according to the rules of science; because, as the quantity of astronomical error determines the period elapsed from the diluvian æra to each date of corruption, it is plain, that where no error exists no date could be elicited, and that the æra of the Mosaic Genesis would thus come out in the year of the Deluge, the radix of all the calculations. His satisfaction was therefore equal to his surprise, on discovering not only the required prototype of corruption, but in an age that refers the date of the Mosaic record to the time of its inspired author; and this in a way that no words of the writer can embody the important fact in any thing like an adequate explanation.

It has been observed, at the beginning of these papers, that while the Seventy Jewish elders were employed by King Ptolemy in translating the Mosaic Genesis, with the rest of the inspired writings, the Egyptian annalist Manetho was busied, by command of the same patron, interpreting the history of his country, from the Egyptian Genesis and other Hermaic writings. These writings were, according to Manetho, compiled by Hermes the

Second, surnamed Trismegistus, the son of Agathodæmon, and father of Taut; having been by him transcribed from the sculptured tablets of Thoth, the first Hermes and second king of Egypt, and laid up in the temples, where Manetho found them, and translated their contents into Greek in his work named Sothis, in three books, which he dedicated to King Ptolemy.

The chronicles thus originating with Hermes Trismegistus, to whom the whole series was referred by the priests, were by the latter continued to the end of the Egyptian monarchy; for they contained, besides the history of the antediluvian gods and demi-gods, or patriarchs, that of the thirty dynasties; the whole extending through 113 generations, and a period of 3555 years of historical time, terminating with the overthrow of Nectanebus the Second, the last king of the thirtieth dynasty, by Ochus king of Persia, in the 20th year of the latter's reign—that is, in the year B. c. 340 according to the canon of Ptolemy, but B. c. 341 according to Manetho, who ascribes three years to Arses, the successor of Ochus, while, according to Ptolemy, he reigned but two. This may seem a trifling difference, but it becomes very important in the chronology of Manetho.

The first of these Hermaic books, and the especial compilation of the author of the system, was doubtless the Genesis. From it the author of the old Egyptian chronicle had the Zodiacal period of 36,525 years. From it Manetho transcribed into his first volume the history of the antediluvian gods and demi-gods, or patriarchs, and of those dynasties which ruled during the Cynic Cycle, or great Egyptian lunar period of 700 years; which originated with the monarchy, as we learn from both Manetho and the old chronicle, and elapsed between the times of the first and second Hermes, and had its name from the Dog-star, sacred to Hermes, its constructor. This period, with the history contained in the Genesis of Hermes, terminated soon after that of the Mosaic Genesis, as will appear.

From the Hermaic Genesis, also, Sanchoniatho, the Phoenician annalist, the most ancient profane writer extant, translated his Cosmogony, and genealogies reaching from the creation to the foundation of kingdoms after the Flood; for he tells us, that they were contained in memoirs written by command of Taut king of Egypt, the first Hermes of Manetho; which had been allegorized and altered by the Hierophants, down to the time of Isiris, the inventor of the alphabet, and his brother Gna, the first Phoenix, or Phoenician-doubtless the Cadmus and Phoenix of the Greeks, the contemporaries of Moses. This account is clearly the Phoenician version of that related by Manetho from the same source; and thus, whichever authority we consult, we find that the Hermaic Genesis, commencing like the Mosaic from the origin of history, was continued through nearly the same

number of ages, and terminated nearly about the same time, The inspired Genesis ends with the death of Joseph, while the Hermaic seems to have been continued till about the age of the sacred annalist; who, I believe it is not doubted, collected the records of the Patriarchs, and put their contents together, under inspiration, rather than composed the Book of Genesis from original revelation. This sufficiently agrees with the corrupted accounts of Sanchoniatho and Manetho, as to the different stages of the Hermaic writings.

In the remains of the Hermaic Genesis, therefore, which beyond question contained a corruption of the history of the Mosaic record, it seems reasonable also to look for a corruption of the inspired chronology; and if such can be found, the wonderful care of the ancients in all that related to time and motion may lead us to conclude that its consequences may be far more important than their purely historical fragments, which were altered and allegorised agreeably to the taste of the transcribers. To this end our course is clear.

The above-mentioned historical period of the Hermaic books, transferred into Manetho's history, 3555 years, is in perfect harmony with the 113 generations assigned to it; for 3555-113= 31 years to a generation, which sufficiently agrees with the course of nature, as well as with the Egyptian estimate preserved by Herodotus, of three generations to a century.

Ascending 3555 years from the termination of the thirtieth dynasty, in the 20th of Ochus King of Persia, B. c. 341, according to Manetho, as above, we arrive at the year B. c. 3896 for the ara of the gods, with which Egyptian historical time commences. But the Egyptian records being dated in the years of the vague Sothoic cycle, as is manifest from the old chronicle, and one vague year of 365 days being sunk in each 1460 years of Julian time, it follows that the above mentioned epoch should be estimated three years lower, or in the year B. c. 3893: for two vague Sothoic years set out, the one on the 1st of January, and the other on the 31st of December, in the Julian years B. C. 3441, 1981, and 521 respectively. That it is absolutely indispensible to be thus particular will soon be evident.

The period of the gods and demi-gods, with which the Hermaic history begins, was 1196 vague solar years and eight months, according to Manetho; that of the gods being 11,988 months of 30 days each, or 985 years, 2 months; and that of the demi-gods 858 Hori of four months, or 120 days each, equal to 211 years 6 months.

I am thus particular because this period has been, since the days of Scaliger, computed at 1183 years, in consequence of a mistake of Syncellus, who estimates Manetho's times of the gods in lunar, but those of the demigods in true solar time,

(viz. 11,988 Lunations=969 Solar years; and 858 Hori-214 Solar years 6 months); -a mode inconsistent of itself, and expressly contrary to the evidence of Manetho, Diodorus, Panadorus, and Eusebius; who all agree that the times were uniform, and the months and years old solar of 30 and 360 days. This will be evident to any person who examines the subject. (Compare Syncell. Chronog. pp. 18, 19, with p. 41.)

Descending therefore 1196 years, from the æra of the gods, or antediluvian patriarchs, B. c. 3893, we are conducted to the Hermaic diluvian era, B. c. 2697; which anticipates the true Mosaic date, B. c. 2347, by 350 years exactly.

It cannot be questioned but that the historical accounts, preserved by the Phoenician and Egyptian annalists from the Genesis of Hermes, are corruptions from the sacred record: if so, neither can it be doubted that the compilers of the former, as they altered the history, would also alter the chronology of the latter, so as to suit their own purposes and standards of scientific truth and having found such a system to have prevailed so largely among the chosen people of God, much more might we expect to find such corruptions among Pagan philosophers, with whom the science of numbers might be said to be the origin and end of all things. In the present case, as in those of the traditional Clementine, and modern Jewish corruptions, the diluvian æra is a fixed one, and hence no reference to the Hermaic antediluvian period is in the first instance requisite. This period will, however, be treated of in its place. If recorded observations since the epoch of the Deluge had been preserved in the times of the Jewish corruptions, much more they in the earlier ages of history. Hence, by dividing the excess of the Hermaic above the Mosaic diluvian æra, 350 years, by the excess of the Hermaic estimate of equinoctial precession above the truth, we obtain, as in the before-mentioned cases, the increase of the stars' longitude between the Deluge and the date of the Hermaic Genesis.

were

The Egyptian Zodaical period set forth in that book, 36,525 vague years, equals 36,500 fixed Sothoic or Julian years. This period divided by 360 deg. gives the rate of precession 101 yrs. 142 days, or 101 years to a degree; and 1017-71 (the true rate=298 years for the Hermaic excess of time in each degree's precession. But 350 years, as above, 298-11 deg. 42 min. 36 sec. the precession since the Deluge; and 11 deg. 42 min. 36 sec. x 1011187 years for the Hermaic period. In like manner, 11 deg. 42 min. 36 sec. x713-837 years for the true; the difference being 350 years precisely. These periods, computed from the Egyptian and Mosaic æras of the Deluge respectively, indicate the year B.C. 1510 as that of the Hermaic Genesis. For