Thirdly-From the 62 weeks or 434 years from the building of the street again in the thirty-eighth year of the reign of Artaxerxes, to the cutting off of the Messiah, in the twentieth year of Tiberius Cæsar, there will be found in like manner an excess of 25

years.

Fourthly-And also, from the thirty-seventh year of Artaxerxes, Esdras' 400 years to the birth of Christ, proves an error of 25 years too much.

Seeing then that the Bible plainly proves an error of 25 years too much as existing in our common tables of chronology as to this period of time, by a fourfold proof, or four prophetic streams of time, as stated above, I determined to make a critical examination of the reigning periods of the Persian and Grecian Kings and Roman Emperors, as well as the time the prophetic numbers fixed for the birth of Christ, and also the time of the destruction of Jerusalem, in order that I might discover how far the issue of such a research would tally and correspond with the calculations gleaned from the Bible, which calculations from the Bible presented themselves to my mind as proving themselves correct in an extraordinary manner.—

Hardly had I well entered upon this part of my examination, when I discovered that the error of 25 years too much lay in the generally received chronological account of time given respecting the commencement of the Grecian empire; but of this error of 25 years I shall be more particular further on. As I proceeded in my enquiries, I found that as Christ was about thirty years of age in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Cæsar, according to St. Luke, his birth

must have happened about 16 years previous to the death of Augustus Cæsar. I also observed, that as it is stated that Augustus Cæsar reigned about 44 years after the death of Anthony and Cleopatra; and also, that Herod died about the 25th year of his reign, after the death of Anthony-I perceived, I say, from this calculation, that Herod must have died about three years before the birth of Christ.

The more I examined, the more convinced I became, that erroneous calculations existed somewhere; here also as well as at the beginning of the Grecian empire, in the chronological account of the periods of time that elapsed between the death of Julius Cæsar and the death of Augustus Cæsar, because I saw that the profane chronological time did not square with the dates given in the New Testament, nor yet with the prophetic time pointed out by the Old Testament. I then resolved to direct my particular attention to that period of time which succeeded the death of Julius Cæsar; and the first thing I took notice of on reading Josephus' Antiquities, chapter ninth, was, that after Cæsar had defeated Pompey, and appointed Antipater to the office of Procurator of Judea, Antipater made his son Herod Governor of Galilee, "who was then a very young man, being only fifteen years of age. It appears, however, that his youth formed no impediment to his holding office." Roman history informs us that Octavius, afterwards named Augustus Cæsar, was about nineteen years of age when his uncle, Julius Cæsar was killed by Brutus and others, about three years and a half after the murder of Pompey in Egypt.

Antipater made his son Herod Governor of Galilee, about the time that Julius Cæsar had left Egypt, or shortly after. It appears then that Herod must have been at the time of Julius Cæsar's death about eighteen years of age. Now, as Josephus distinctly states, that Herod, when made governor of Galilee, was only fifteen years of age, and that he was very young, and seeing also he narrates the circumstance again of his being young, in his Wars of the Jews, there is sufficient proof, I think, for concluding that Josephus was not in error when he stated fifteen years for Herod's age, then, there could not have been more than about one year and a half of difference between the age of Herod and that of Octavius or Augustus Cæsar, at the time of Julius Cæsar's death, Herod being then about eighteen and Octavius about nineteen and a half years of age. Josephus says, in Antiquities, Book 18, chap. ii. sec. 2, Augustus lived seventy-seven years, and reigned fifty-seven and a half years; and it is perfectly clear that Josephus calculated his reign from the death of his uncle, Julius Cæsar: again, the time that transpired from the death of Julius Cæsar to the decease of Anthony and Cleopatra, I find from the following calculation :

Herod was about his eighteenth year at the death of Julius Cæsar. The battle of Actium was fought during the seventh year of his reign, and Anthony and Cleopatra destroyed themselves in about the second year after the battle of Actium. Then the death of Anthony took place in the ninth year of the reign of Herod, and the length of his reign was 34 years after Antigonus' death; it is then quite clear

H

that Herod had the kingly power for 25 years after the death of Anthony and Cleopatra; then add these 25 years of his reign after Anthony's death to his age, eighteen, at the death of Julius Cæsar, making, 43, being the number of years of Herod's life that is distinctly known. Now, when these 43 years are subtracted from the full term of Herod's life-which was seventy years, according to Josephus-we have a remainder of 27 years; upon a little consideration we will find that these 27 years were just the period of time that elapsed between the death of Julius Cæsar and the death of Anthony and Cleopatra, and not a lapse of 14 years, only, as we find, stated in our common chronological tables.

This calculation, moreover, distinctly points out that the length of Augustus Cæsar's reign after the death of Anthony and Cleopatra, must have been about 30 years, and not as has been erroneously, or perhaps what is worse, fraudulently, stated 44 or 45 years.

The age of Herod at his death was 70 years, and that of Augustus 77, and as Herod was one year and a half younger than Augustus, it is clear there could not be more than about five years and a half between the death of Herod and the death of Augustus Cæsar.

Their reigns, after the death of Anthony, prove the same time between their deaths; for, deduct 25 years from 30, and there will remain five years and a half. Hence it appears that about 13 years have been erroneously deducted from the true time, 27 years, that elapsed from Julius Cæsar's death to the death of Anthony, and which have been added to the true time, 30 years, of the reign of Augustus Cæsar after the

death of Anthony, making it turn out as if he had reigned about 44 years after that event, instead of the true time, 30 years. It may be asked, can any further proof be given that 27, not 14 years, elapsed from the death of Julius Cæsar to the death of Anthony and Cleopatra? I answer, yes.

Epiphaius de Ponder et Mensur states, that Cleopatra reigned 32 years, thereby showing that there were 27 years between the death of Julius Cæsar and that of her own death and Anthony's.

Again, from the fragments of the life of Augustus Cæsar that have been handed down to us, I find we may gather that one year, or thereabouts, would intervene between the death of Julius Cæsar and that of the second triumvirate, which was entered into by Octavius, Lepidus, and Anthony. An agreement was first formed for the term of five years. This agreement was again renewed for other five years, and after this for two more years; so these 12 years in addition to the foregoing one year, will constitute a period of 13 years, from the death of Julius Cæsar to the end of the second triumvirate, which second triumvirate ended by throwing aside Lepidus; and then after this Anthony and Octavius divided the empire between them; Anthony possessed the East part, and Octavius the West part-and Josephus distinctly says that Anthony reigned with Octavius for the space of 14 years. Now, there is no doubt but that these 14 years are to be calculated from the end of the second triumvirate that was entered into between Anthony, Octavius, and Lepidus-still further confirming the fact, that there was a period of 27 years between the death of Julius Cæsar and that of Cleopatra and Anthony.