ble incorporation of so many Latins, under his successors, so that the earlier inhabitants were absolutely blended with them into Latins. Their language became perfectly unintelligible to later ages, like the songs of the Salii and Arvales; and this accounts for the destruction of all historical notices of those times.

CHAPTER XVIII.

THE ERA OF THE FOUNDATION OF THE

CITY.

NEWTON has compared the pretended reigns of the Roman kings, with the average which, according to the annals of historical dynasties, is taken as the duration of a single reign where the succession is uninterrupted. He accordingly finds two hundred and forty-four years for seven kings, or nearly thirtyfive years for each-an average altogether unexampled and next to impossible, even without taking into account that during this period one king was banished who survived fifteen years, and two were murdered. We may add, that in an elective empire the duration of the reigns is necessarily shorter than in an hereditary monarchy, where even children ascend the throne; in consequence of which two reigns in France embraced a period of one hundred and thirty-one years. He therefore takes an average of seventeen years for each reign, and one hundred and nineteen for the whole period; so that the foun-·

dation of Rome occurs towards the year 125 of the received æra, or in the 38th Olympiad 35.

As in this instance he has included Romulus and Numa in history, so has he previously rejected only the kings of Alba. In all this he proceeds without any kind of historical criticism, and as if from the earliest times we were travelling over purely historic ground; yet his observations on the average duration of the kingly reigns 36 deserve serious attention in this critical history, and it cannot be denied that the one hundred and sixty-six years which elapse between the year 78 and 244 constitute an interval of such duration, that it is highly improbable it should have been filled up by five reigns, the last of which was broken off fifteen years before its natural termination. Besides, the accounts of the duration of individual reigns, as well as of the whole period, have a very suspicious appearance3⁄4; neither do I purpose to defend this chronology. All the five reigns may have been lengthened in order to comprehend that period, either because some were omitted, or which is more probable, in order to bring Tullus to the beginning of the Sæculum.

36 Sir Isaac Newton's Chronology, p. 130.

36 Ibid. p. 52, 53.

37 The reign of Ancus amounts to 24 years, 12 × 2, Tullus's to 32 = 12 x 2 + 8, Servius's to 44 = 12 × 3 + 8; and the sum of the whole period of the monarchy, according to Fabius, is two hundred and forty, which, taken as a cyclical year, is equal to two hundred civil years. All this in a mythic history seems something different from a merely fortuitous coin cidence. See further, p. 202.

If it were necessary for ascertaining an æra, that its actual commencement should be historically fixed, it would be perfectly impossible, according to what we have already said, to date the era of the building of Rome. Here, however, it is matter of indifference, provided we avoid the erroneous inference that the epoch itself is historical. The principal utility of an æra is, that it shall begin early enough to comprise the space of what are properly historical epochs, with progressive calculations; and that it shall concern a people, or an event, which shall be of equal importance with that of their own principal epochs, to all nations to whose history it may be applied.

Now the Era of the foundation of Rome holds good for all the West until the commencement of the Christian æra; for all the national histories of Europe merge in the ocean of the Roman. It is therefore preferable to the computation by Olympiads, although these begin a quarter of a century sooner, and have an apparent claim of preference from being Grecian. Besides, the sections consisting of four years, and requiring upon every comparison a multiplication, though of the simplest form, are so inconvenient, and the advantage of a single æra so decisive that one would wish to see the Roman chronology introduced even into the history of Greece.

The disadvantage of the Greek chronology, viz. that the beginning of the year was determined by the summer solstice, and therefore changeable, by which the events of every physical were classed under two

chronological years, is shewn in the earlier Roman computation, before the beginning of the consular year was fixed to the month of March. Until then it was still more confused, because the beginning of the magisterial year was frequently altered 38.

It is very probable that the Romans, long before the time of Fabius, had computed their years from the foundation of the city, according to a custom in Italy, of which Scaliger has adduced, from inscriptions, an example in the Umbrian city Interamna 39. It was undoubtedly so in Ameria, according to the statement of Cato already quoted. It certainly was the usual custom to distinguish their years as the

36 For the earlier ages before the beginning of the Olympiads Eratosthenes had introduced the æra of the destruction of Troy; and this, though the epoch be not less uncertain than the foundation of Rome, is, on account of the Trojan tradition, equally useful to Rome as well as to Greece, as an æra from whence to date events. The early chronologies of the Greeks are either visionary or fictitious. In mythology, the statements traced back through the generations of men suffice for the establishing it according to the meaning of ancient traditions; while the man of sense is reminded by this threefold method of computation what value he is to affix to these accounts. Asia possesses, at least in the historical books of the Old Testament, a proper history incomparably earlier than those of Europe, together with contemporaneous annals before history begins in Europe. The history of Asia, therefore, up to the period of the Persian war, must be regulated by a distinct chronology, nor can she find any-where a more suitable æra than in those earliest historical books. Without fearing to be censured by any one who has himself attempted to determine the history of the Judges chronologically, I take upon me to observe, that this æra cannot begin earlier than the reign of David.

"De Emendatione Temporum, p. 385.