the corrupted, periods and epochs, according to the estimates of the different compilers, it may here be mentioned, that the double systems of Josephus and Eusebius furnish ample precedent for such a proceeding. Thus the former fixes the protracted Adamic and Diluvian æras in the years B.C. 5433 and 3077, but the original Hebrew in the years B.c. 4133 and 3477; the difference being the thirteen centuries added to the patriarchal generations in the original Jewish corruption. The first-mentioned date of creation he fixes 5000 years before the 32d of Artaxerxes Longimanus, B. c. 433; the second, 3513 years before the destruction of the first temple, B.C. 620, as before: so that doubt on their position is out of the question. Eusebius fixes the protracted Adamic and Diluvian æras in the years B.C. 5200 and 2958, but the original Hebrew in the years B.C. 3964 and 2308; the difference being the 1236 years added to the original generations in the Roman codex of the Seventy, less a century in that of Nahor, which nearly all followers of the Roman numbers omit. Hence the original Hebrew estimate of any of the compilers may be found by subtracting their centenary patriarchal additions from their corrupted æras.

We come now to the Modern Jewish Corruption. The progress of error in the seven above mentioned corruptions of the sacred numbers, effected by the learned Jews and Samaritans, between the times of the return from Babylon and the final dispersion of the Jewish nation, being in every respect conformable to the progress of astronomical error, in relation to chronology, induced the writer to conclude the modern contracted reckoning of the Jews might be founded on similar principles; for it is utterly improbable that the principles adopted by their ancient doctors should have been forgotten by those of the middle ages, till which learning continued to flourish, and gain ground, in the East; and as the modern Jewish chronology, instead of exceeding the original truth, falls short of it, so the estimate of equinoctial precession in those ages, instead of exceeding the truth, as among the ancients, also fell short of it. His satisfaction was great at finding the result to exceed even his hopes.

We are now arrived at the last stage of those astronomical corruptions, in the modern Jewish system; which refers the Adamic and Diluvian æras to autumn in the years B.C. 3760 and 2104; preserving the original antediluvian interval of 1656 years, but falling short of the true Hebrew dates by 243 years, exactly; the greatest part of the contraction being in the times of the Persian empire, to make Daniel's seventy weeks connect the destruction of the first and second temples, and thereby outstep the Messiah's appearance, as before mentioned. Hence, in rejecting, and attempting to correct, the errors in excess of

their predecessors, they also rejected the true scriptural epochs, and created a new error in defect.

Learned men differ as to the æra of this system. We know, however, with certainty, that it is of a date subsequent to the time of Josephus and the dispersion of the Jews by the Romans, for which the chronology of Josephus itself affords ample proof; and not more recent than the date of the first of their seven modern chronicles, which respectively ascend to the era of Creation, and were composed between the years 832 and 1592 of the Christian æra-for an account of which see Prideaux's preface to Part ii.

The earliest of these chronicles, the Seder Olam Rabbah, being the first Jewish historical work after the time of Josephus, and therefore probably coeval with the invention of the modern Jewish system of time, reaches from the creation to the final dispersion of the nation by Adrian, and bears date, according to R. Azarias, 762 years after the destruction of Jerusalem, or A.D. 832 (Prideaux, ubi supra); an intermediate date between that of the Babylonish Talmud composed in the beginning of the sixth century, from which the Seder Olam Rabbah contains large extracts, and that of the expulsion of the Jews by the Mohammedan princes from Babylonia and Mesopotamia, where they had many celebrated seminaries of learning, A.D. 1057. With these last-mentioned dates the intermediate one, A.D. 832, for the composition of the first modern Jewish chronicle, and the fabrication of their chronological system, is in strict harmony, and is confirmed, as much as such matters are generally susceptible of confirmation. Certain it is, that no proof exists of either the chronicle or the chronology being previously extant; and the date of the second Jewish chronicle, between A.D. 967 and 997, altogether forbids a later æra.

At this time, A.D. 832, the seat of Jewish learning was at their academies at Naherda, Sora, Pombeditha, &c. in the territory of Babylonia; where, and in the adjacent countries, science was then carried to a high pitch, under the patronage of the caliphs.

The error of the ancient rate of equinoctial precession, at one degree in a century, which had continued in partial use among astronomers, at least till the time of Proclus Diadochus, in the sixth century, had been detected before or in the present age, and was now estimated by the Arabian astronomers at 66 years to a degree. At this it was computed by Albategnius, the great Arabian astronomer, who made his observations at Aracta in Mesopotamia; whereby he corrected the Ptolemaic astronomy in the 1194th year of the Seleucidæ, or A.D. 882, fifty years after the date of the Seder Olam Rabbah. The same was nearly the estimate of the Hindu astronomers of this

age, and for several centuries before (probably since the time of Brahma Gupta, about A.D. 500); their computation being 54 seconds annually, or 663 years to a degree. So that it prevailed throughout the East.

But if the ancient Hellenistic Jews of Alexandria and other places altered the sacred computation agreeably to the received estimate of equinoctial precession, from the fifth century before till the second after the Christian æra, it can hardly be doubted but that, when its errors were detected, the Jews, who flourished at the head-quarters of science at the time, and who were actually then engaged in composing chronicles of their nation's history, would set about correcting the astronomical mistakes of their predecessors; the more so because the prevailing astronomy of the ninth century enabled them not only to reject the excessive numbers of the Hellenistic Jews, but to curtail the original Hebrew reckoning itself, instead of raising it; and thereby furnished them with arguments both against the traditional date of the Messiah's coming, and the right application of Daniel's prophecy. For, as the rate of precession in use, when the former corruptions were effected, produced an error in excess of 28 years to each degree of precession; so the corrected estimate, of 66 years to a degree, now prevalent, falling short of the true rate of 71 years by 5, produced that error in defect in each degree's precession since the Deluge.

The modern Jewish Adamic and Diluvian æras, B. c. 3760 and 2104, fall short respectively of the original Hebrew epochs, B. C. 4003 and 2347, by exactly 243 years, as above. It hence appears that these corrupters did not meddle with the original antediluvian period, but left it 1656 years, as in the Hebrew. It follows, that, if this were an astronomical corruption, it was, like all the former, computed from the diluvian æra; and the identity of the original and modern Jewish antediluvian period, renders the diluvian point of corruption more evident here than even in any of the former cases. That the series of ancient observations, ascending to the Deluge, which (or at least records in which the difference of the stars' longitude was from time to time set down) doubtless existed in the second century, as the Clementine corruption evinces, had been preserved and continued in the East, where science never ceased till comparatively modern times, seems hardly to be doubted. The exquisite correction of the Persian calendar by the astronomers of Sultan Gelaleddin, in the eleventh century, seems sufficient evidence of this. That it was the ancient Egyptian tropical year, mentioned in my paper on the Chaldean observations, which those astronomers then restored, I hope to shew in another paper.

According to the Chinese records, the astronomers of that country had observations of the longitude of the stars for 42 deg.

of precession, from the reign of their patriarchal emperor Yao to A. D. 1005.

It follows, that if the modern Jewish be an astronomical corruption, the deficiency of their diluvian æra below the original Hebrew, 243 years, as above, divided by 5 years, the deficiency of the Arabian estimate of precession below the truth, should give, as before, the precession in degrees from the Deluge to the date of the system. But 243-5)=44 deg. 10 min. 55 sec., for the precession; and 44 deg. 10 min. 55 sec. x711=3159 years from the original Diluvian æra till that of the corruption; and 44 deg. 10 min. 55 sec. x 66=2916 years, from the Jewish æra of the Flood to the same. These periods, which differ 243 years exactly, computed respectively from B. c. 2347, the true diluvian æra, and from B. C. 2104, the Jewish, both conduct to A. D. 813; differing 19 years only from the date of the Seder Olam Rabbah, A. D. 832, as above. Hence this last æra of corruption comes out one of the most critical in the whole series.

Thus, if the idea of astronomical corruption be at all admitted, the evidence is complete, from the first to the last stage of Jewish corruption, during a period of nearly thirteen centuries. The sacred periods were increased, and the epochs raised, with the astronomical error occasioned by the ancient excessive estimate of precession; while they diminished with the progress of the error produced by a defective estimate; and as this deficiency was but small, the coincidence becomes still more surprising. Not a single series of numbers comes out till after the destruction of the kingdom of Judah, and the mixture of the Jews with the more scientific nations of antiquity; while the last comes out just before their expulsion from the seats of Oriental learning in the middle ages.

It should be noted, that as Josephus and his followers raised the times after the captivity as the astronomical error increased, instead of making further addition to the patriarchal ages; so the modern Jewish corrupters depressed those times; for they could not shorten the original patriarchal numbers, which have no centenaries to be rejected. They therefore lowered the times of the Persian empire, to make the seventy weeks connect the destructions of the first and second temples; whereby they thought astronomically to set aside, not only the application of that prophecy, but that of the traditional computation to the Messiah's coming, as above.

This last result, together with all the foregoing, seems to throw the onus of raising, as well as of depressing, the numbers of the different versions altogether on the Jews and Samaritans; contrary to the usual hypothesis of the advocates of the protracted numbers, that the present Hebrew chronology has been lowered

from the original standard by Jewish management. Had this been the case, it is most singular that they should have fixed them so as to make the coming of our Lord the fulfilment of their Talmudic Tradition-which assigns to the period before the Law 2000 years, to the reign of the Law 2000, and to the Messiah's reign 2000-in perfect agreement with the time of Christ's coming. This argument against the Hebrew computation, therefore, confutes itself, even were there no proof that the Jews had really originally raised, instead of depressing, the sacred numbers, wholly with the view of raising their nation's antiquity; and then invented the traditional era in conformity to the preadopted system. This last corruption makes all this clear, almost beyond conception; and proves, that, whether the Jews raised or depressed the sacred chronology, the same principles of corruption were adopted.

Passing by all the other corruptions; when we find the æras of both the Roman and Alexandrine numbers of the Greek version come out in the days of the Seventy interpreters, computing the precession at the received estimate of 100 years to a degree; while that of the modern Jewish computation comes out 1100 years lower, in the days of the author of their first modern chronicle, computing the precession at 66 years to a degree, as then in use; I hesitate not to say, that the whole is unanswerable, and that, were there no instance of corruption extant beyond those of the Seventy interpreters and the modern Jews, the adequacy of Sir I. Newton's astronomical argument to the solution of this long-contested problem, as assumed at the commencement of these pages, is without further proof most fully demonstrated. If I speak confidently, the subject is assuredly such as to warrant it.

In concluding this part of the argument, I beg the learned reader's attention to the following short recapitulation of facts. We have detected eight stages of astronomical corruption by the Jewish and Samaritan doctors, between the times of the return from Babylon and the breaking up of the Jewish academies in the East, in the eleventh century; the æra of each resulting from the progressive astronomical error, and all coming out historically right.

Of these, the first Jewish corruption, resulting from the numbers afterwards adopted by Josephus, bears date B. c. 465, being in the age to which that historian affirms the sacred chronological canon used by him came down. This likewise agrees with the testimony of Aristobulus, the Peripatetic.

The original and Hellenistic Samaritan corruptions, B. C. 345 and 141, both come out in the interval of 250 years, during which the temple of Mount Gerizzim stood, and the Samaritan