SECTION V.

But the Credibility of the ancient Greek Chrono logy will be further illuftrated and confirmed, by confidering the feveral Objections that have been raised against it.

The firft Argument generally infifted on, to weaken the prefent Syftem thereof, is taken from the Uncertainty of the Length of the Year in thofe early Times, "For 'tis impoffible we fhould have any Chronology that may be fafely depended upon, unless we firft fuppofe fome certain Measure of Time, whereby to mark out the precife Diftance between the feveral Facts that are related.” But this Reflection, tho' true in itself, does, we are told, very little, if at all, affect the Subject of our prefent Inquiry; as appears by a curfory Survey of the Hiftory of the Greek Year.

That Mankind had always fome ftated Method of measuring Time, is more than probable, as well from the Mofaic Hiftory, as the most ancient profane Authors. 'Tis likely the Moon, as performing her Revolutions more frequently than the Sun, of fered Mankind the firft Method of Computation. But it must have been very foon obferved, that these lunar Tears came about too often to be of any great Service in ascertaining the larger Portions of Duration, and in diftinguishing the Seafons. Nor was it poffible for them to be long at a lofs for a Remedy as to this Particular, when the Sun fo obviously offered itself to their Notice for that Purpofe. As its Revolution from one Tropic to the fame again, was the most remarkable Object of their Senfes, and must be their Guide in Manuring, Sowing, and Planting, Nature itself muft direct them to obferve the Number of Days and Nights, and even lunar Years or Moons themfelves, that were included within

D3.

within that greater Period. And as all were capable of doing this, without the leaft Help of Aftronomy, it is impoffible but that their Intereft as well as Curiofity must prompt them to it; and fo the true Quantity of the Year muft have been nearly 'known, even in the most early Ages of Mankind.

There is no need of our inquiring particularly what fort of Year was in ufe amongst the Greeks, before the Arrival of the Egyptians into their Coun try. We may be fure, however, that the different Seasons themselves would prevent them from runing into any very confiderable Miftakes upon this Point.

It is generally agreed that the Egyptian Year, when Cecrops left that Country, was that of 360 Days. We have reafon therefore to think this was it which he introduced into Greece, if it was not there before. For we find that, even in later Ages, all the public Acts of that Nation, whether civil or religious, were regulated thereby.

They became however quickly fenfible of the Imperfection of this Form of the Year; and from hence arose those frequent and early Attempts for its Correction, which we find mentioned by Cenforinus, Herodotus, &c. And these afford us Reafon to conclude, that the Greeks, as far back at leaft as the Times wherein we are concerned, were very nearly acquainted with the true Length of the folar Year; for otherwife, how could they fo often have endeavoured to reduce that in civil Ufe to an Equality with it. It is therefore highly probable that this, as the most perfect, was generally used in their chronological Computations, tho' the civil Year of 360 Days might ftill continue eftablished by public Authority.

When Mr. Squire has pretty well, as he apprehends, established this Hypothefis, he refolves a Queftion, which may naturally enough be afked

upon

upon this Occafion, viz. Seeing by what he has advanced, it is evident, that the true Length of the Year was known even in the moft early Ages of Greece, how came it to pafs that the Calendar was not publickly reformed?" He refolves it entirely into that fuperftitious Reverence which the greatest Part of Mankind pay to old and established Customs, especially where their Religion is any ways concerned.

But now let us go on, and even suppose that the Greeks, for full eight hundred Years after the Coming of the Egyptians into their Country, were wholly ignorant of the true Quantity of the Year; or, which is the fame here, ufed no other than that of 360 Days in all their Computations; yet will not their Chronology be much affected by fuch Conceffion, the Error arifing thereby being little above ten Years in that whole Period: And what is that in Matters of fo high Antiquity? But when we are told that the whole Series of Greek Hiftory, till the Times of the Perfian Empire, is advanced more than four hundred Years beyond the Truth, it then behoves us, our Author fays, either to renounce all Credit in its Authors, or to vindicate their Authority by fhewing, that what is alledged against them is infufficient.

SECTION VI

But 'tis further objected, that it's altogether impoffible the Chronology of the ancient Greeks fhould be attended with any Certainty, because in those early Ages there were no fixed Epochas, from whence the Account of fubfequent Facts might be regularly deduced.

Our Author makes very light of this Argument: For as he has no Concern beyond the Entrance of the Egyptians into Greece under Cecrops, fo, that

D 4

being

being a most remarkable Event, which could no eafily be forgotten, it was impoffible, from the Na-: ture of Things and Men, but that it must be made a constant Ufe of, as a grand Epoch, from whence, to date the fucceeding Years and Ages. And that it was fo, is fully confirmed from Fact itfelf; for we actually find the Attic Chronologers, generally beginning their Account of that Nation from Gecrops the Founder of their Commonwealth, as is evident from Eufebius's Works, and more particularly from the Author of the Parian Chronology.

4

SECTION VIL

But it is faid, Thirdly, That as the most ancient, Greek Authors were Poets, we ought, on that Account alone, to give little or no Credit to what they related, fo as to make it fubfervient to any hiftorical or chronological Purpose. Now allowing the moft ancient Writings of the Grecian Hiftory to have been composed in a kind of Measure, will it neceffarily follow from thence, that the Foundation of these Verses, the Facts themselves rehearsed in them, are not true, and fuch as may be depended upon? Why may we not fuppofe, that thefe firft poetical Effays were in reality only fo many historical Narrations in a fort of loose and arbitrary Measure, Hymns made in Praife of their Gods, or to celebrate the Exploits of thofe illuftrious Heroes, who by their Valour had promoted the public Weal of their Country: Of the fame Nature as those Verfes, compofed by the old German and Arcadian Poets, mentioned by Tacitus and Polybius, or as thofe Songs written by the ancient British Bards, the Gothic Runes, and the Irish Scaldi. No one, furely, doubts that there was fuch a Perfon as Agamemnon, or fuch an Expedition as Homer speaks of, undertaken by the Greeks against Troy; though,

at

at the fame time, there is no Reason for crediting all the various Circumstances related by the Poet concerning it. Strabo afferts that the Ground work of the ancient Poems, the chief Facts cele brated by them, were always taken from true Hiftory: And if the Writers fometimes made use of Fiction to adorn and enliven their Works, they always did it in fuch a Manner as never totally to lofe Sight of the Truth. Sir Ifaac Newton himself fays, HOMER and HESIOD wrote their Works before the Greeks bad corrupted their Antiquities. May we not fuppofe likewife that the other ancient Writers amongst the Greeks compiled their Narrations before the Corruption of their Antiquities? And if To, What Caufe have we to question but our prefent Chronology of this Country was originally drawn from and founded upon them?

SECTION VIII.

No, fays Sir Ifaac, that cannot poffibly be, fee ing the prefent Syftem thereof is built entirely on. a quite different Foundation, upon Principles abfolutely repugnant to the ordinary Courfe of Nature. For the Ancients, before the Method of computing by the Olympiads came into Ufe, which was not till near Seventy Years after the Death of Alexander the Great, digefted all Things by the Number of Generations or Succeffions of Men paffed from fuch a Time to fuch a Time, and as they reckoned three Generations to amount at a Medium to about one bundred Years fo likewife in their Succefions of Kings, they always reckoned three equivalent to fo many Generations or one hundred Years. But if we look into any Series of modern Kings, whofe Chronology is exact, we find that Generations and Reigns - are not equipollent, but that Kings reign one with another, at a Medium, not above eighteen or twenty

Years