ought to be, may be, because, as the Affairs of the Infant State of Rome required that the City fhould be in the Hands of the moft able Warriors, as well as skilful Counsellors, fo they chose to the Crown none but Perfons in their Prime of Life; as well to have a King of fufficient Ability to lead their Armies, as that they might not have frequent Vacancies of the Throne to fhake and unfettle the Frame of their Government, not as yet firmly enough compacted to bear too many StateConvulfions. Dionyfius of Halicarnaffus has been very particular in informing us of the Age of moft of thefe Kings, when they began to reign, how many Years each of them reigned, and at what Age most of them died (c): He fuppofes the oldest Man of them all, not to have lived to above Eighty-three, for that was Numa's Age when he died (d); and he reprefents L. Tarquinius as quite worn out at Eighty (e); fo that none of them are supposed to have lived to an extravagant Term of Life. But if after what I have offered, it fhould be ftill thought that their Reigns, one with another, are too long to be admitted; I might remark farther, that there were Interregna between the Reigns of feveral of them. There was an Inter

regnum between Romulus and Numa (f); another between Numa and Tullus Hoftilius (g); another between T. Hoftilius and Ancus Martius (b); another between A. Martius and L. Tarquinius (i). Each of thefe Interregna might perhaps take up fome Years. The Hiftorians allot no Space of Time to thefe Interregna; but it is known to be no unusual thing for Writers to begin the Reign of a fucceeding King from the Death of his Predeceffor, tho' he did not immediately fucceed to

(c) In Lib. 2, 3, 4. Lib. 2. c. 57; (i) Id. ibid. c. 46.

(d) Lib. 2. ad fin. (g) Id. lib. 3. c. I.

(e) L. 3. c. 72. (b) Id. ibid. c. 36.

to divide the Ancus Martius

his Crown. Numa was not elected King, until the People found by Experience, that the Interregal Government was full of Inconveniencies (k), and fome Years Adminiftration might make them fufficiently fenfible of it. When Tullus Hoftilius was called to the Crown, the poorer Citizens were in a State of Want, which could no way be relieved but by electing fome very wealthy Perfon to be King, who could afford Crown Lands amongst them (). was made King, at a Time when the Roman Affairs were in a very bad State, thro' the Neglect of the publick Religion, and of Agriculture (m). And L. Tarquinius was elected upon the Neceffity of a War with the Apiolani (n): And thus thefe Kings appear not to be called to the Crown until fome publick Exigencies made it neceffary to have a King. They feem to have fucceeded one another, like the Judges of Ifrael; the Succeffor did not come to the Crown immediately upon the Demife of his Predeceffor; but when a King died, the Interreges took the Government, and adminiftred the publick Affairs, until fome Crifis demanded a new King. If this was the Fact, there can be no Appearance of an Objection against the Lengths of the Reigns of thefe Kings; for the Reigns of the Kings were not really fo long, but the Reigns, and the intervening Interregna, put together; and the more I confider the State of the Roman Affairs as reprefented by Dionyfius, the more I am inclined to fufpect that their Kings fucceeded in this manner.

III. Sir Ifaac Newton contends (0), that there were no fuch Kings of Affyria, as all the ancient Writers have recorded to have reigned there from Ninus to Sardanapalus, and to have governed a

(4) Dionyf. Halic. 1. 2. c. 57. (4) Id. 1. 3. c. 1. (m) Id. l. 3. c. 36. (2) Id. ibid. c. 49. () Newton's Chron. chap. 3.

great

Our

great Part of Afia for about 1300 Years. great and learned Author follows Sir John Marsham, in this Particular; for Sir John Marsham first raised Doubts about thefe Kings (p); and indeed that learned Gentleman hinted a great Part of what is now offered upon this Subject. I have formerly endeavoured to anfwer Sir John Marsham's Objections, as far as I could then apprehend it to be neceffary to reply to them (q); but fince Sir Ifaac Newton has thought fit to make ufe of fome of them, and has added others of his own to them, it will be proper for me to mention all the feveral Arguments. which are now offered against thefe Affyrian Kings, and to lay before the Reader, what I apprehend may be replied to them.

And, 1. It is remarked (r), that "the Names "of these pretended Kings of Affyria, except "two or three, have no Affinity with the A"rian Names." To this I anfwer; Ctefias, from whom we are faid to have had the Names of thele Kings, was not an Affyrian: He was of Cnidus, a City of Caria in the Leffer Afia; and he wrote his Perfian or Affyrian Hiftory (I think) in the Greek Tongue (s). The Royal Records of Perfia fupplied him with Materials (t), and it is most reafonable to think, that the Affyrian Kings were not regiftred by their Affyrian Names, in the Perfian Chronicles; or if they were, that Clefias, in his History, did not use the Names which he found there, but made others, which he thought equivalent to them. Diodorus Siculus did not give the Egyptian Heroes whom he mentioned their true Egyptian Names, but invented for them fuch as he thought, if duly explained, were Synonymous to them (u). The true Name of Mithridates's

(p) See Marfham's Can. Chron. p. 485. (q) Pref. to Vol. I. (r) Newton's Chron. chap. 3. (s) See Diodor. Hift. 1. 2. p. 84. (t) Id. ibid. (a) Id. 1. 1. p. 3.

Fellow

Fellow-Servant was Spaco, but the Greeks called her Cyno (f), apprehending Cyno in Greek to be of the fame Import as Spaco in the Mede Tongue. This was the common Practice of the ancient Writers, and fome of the Moderns have imitated it, of which Inftances might be given in feveral of the Names in Thuanus's Hiftory of his own Times; but certainly I need not go on farther in my Reply to this Objection. If Clefias named thefe Kings according to his own Fancy, really mif-named them, it can in no wife prove that the Perfons fo mif-named never were in Being.

and

2. It is argued, that Herodotus did not think Semiramis fo ancient as the Writers who follow Ctefias imagined (g): I anfwer; By Herodotus's Accounts, the Affyrian Empire began at latest A. M. 2700; for Cyrus began his Reign at the Death of Aftyages, about A. M. 3444 (b). Aftyages, according to Herodotus, reigned 35 Years (1), and therefore began his Reign A. M. 3409; he fucceeded Cyaxares (k). Cyaxares reigned 40 Years (1), and therefore began his Reign A. M. 3369. Phraortes was the Predeceffor of Cyaxares, and reigned 22 Years (m), and fo began his Reign A. M. 3347. Deioces preceded Phraortes, and reigned 53 Years (n), and therefore began to reign A. M. 3294. Herodotus fuppofes the Medes

to have lived for fome time after their Revolt from the Affyrians without a King (0), we cannot fuppofe lefs than two or three Years; and he remarks, that the Affyrians had governed Afia 520 Years before the Revolt of the Medes, fo that according to his Computations the Affyrian Empire

(f) Herodot. Hift. lib. 1. c. 110. (g) Newton's Chron. p. 266, 278. (b) Uther's Chron. Prideaux Connect. (k) lbid. c. 107. (7) Ibid. c. 106.

c. 130.

C. 102. (") Ibid.

(0) Ibid. c. 96.

(i) L. 1. (m) Ibid.

began

to

began about A. M. 2771, which is about the Time of Abimelech (P). Sir Ifaac Newton begins the Affyrian Empire in the Days of Pul who was cotemporary with Menahem (9), in the Year before our Saviour 790 (r), i. e. A. M. 3212; so that Herodotus, however cited in favour of our learned Author's Scheme, does, in reality, differ near 450 Years from it. But to come to the Particular for which our learned Author cites Herodotus : He fays, that Herodotus tells us, that Semiramis was five Generations older than Nitocris the Mother of Labynitus, or Nabonnedus, the laft King of Babylon; and therefore (he adds) fhe flourished four Generations, or about 134 Years before Nebuchadnezzar. I anfwer; If Herodotus intended represent, that Semiramis lived but 134 Years before Nebuchadnezzar, when, according to his own Computations, the Affyrian Empire began as above A. M. 2771, he was abfurd indeed; for all Writers have unanimously agreed to place Semiramis near the Beginning of the Empire; but this would be to fuppofe her in the later Ages of it. Sir Ifaac Newton himself, who begins the Empire with Pul, places Semiramis in the Reign of Tiglath-Pilefer, whom he fuppofes to be Pul's Succeffor ($), and certainly Herodotus muft likewise intend to place her near the Times where he begins the Empire, as all other Writers ever did; and indeed, the Works he afcribes to her feem to intimate that he did fo too (t); fo that I cannot but fufpect a Mifreprefentation of Herodotus's Meaning. Herodotus does indeed fay, that Semiramis was Téve yeveñar before Nitocris ("); but the Word Yeved has a double Acceptation It is fometimes used to fignify a Generation or Defcent, and I am

(p) Judges ix. Usher's Chron. (9) Chron. p. 268. (r) See the Short Chron. (s) Newton's Chronol. p. 278. (u) Ibid,

dot. l. 1. c. 184.

(t) Hero

VOL. II.

C

fenfible