/

moters of Learning during that whole Interval, and Ctefias's Account only supplies us with the Number and Names of the Kings, whose Reigns, according to the Royal Records of Persia, filled up such an Interval. Ctefias's Accounts, and Callifthenes's Observations were not framed with a Design to be suited exactly to one another, or to the Scripture, and therefore their agreeing so well together is a good Confirmation of the Truth of each of them.

There are indeed some Things objected against Ctefias and his History. We find the Ancients had but a mean Opinion of him; he is treated as a fabulous Writer by Aristotle, Antigonus, Caristheus, Plutarch, Arrian, and Photius; but I might observe, none of these Writers ever imagined him to have invented a whole Catalogue of Kings, but only to have related Things not true of those Persons he has treated of. There are without doubt many Miftakes and Transactions misreported in the Writings of Ctefias, and so there are in Herodotus, and in every other Heathen Historian; but it would be a very unfair way of criticizing, to set aside a whole

Work

Work as fabulous, for some Errors or Falfhoods found in it. However, H. Stephens has justly observed, that it was the Indian History of Ctefias, and not his Perfian (a), that was most liable to the Objections of these Writers; in that indeed he might sometimes romance, for we do not find he wrote it from such authentic Vouchers: But in his Persian History there are evident Proofs (b) that he had a Difpofition to tell the Truth, where he might have Motives to the contrary: In a word, tho' he might be mistaken in the Grandeur of the first Kings, thinks their Armies more numerous than they really were, and their Empires greater, and their Buildings more magnificent, yet there is no room to imagine that he could pretend to put off a List of Kings, as extracted from the Perfian Records, whose Names were never in them; or if he had attempted to forge one, he could hardly have happened to fill up so exactly the Interval, without making it more or less than it appears to have been from the Hebrew

Hen. Stephanus in Disquifitione de Ctefia.
Id. Ibid.

b

1

Scrip

Scriptures, and from what was afterwards observed from the Chaldean Aftronomy.

I am sensible that the Account which Callifthenes is faid to give of the Cœleftial Observations at Babylon, is called in question by the fame Writers that dispute Ctefias's Authority, but with as little Reason. They quote Pliny (a), who affirms Berofus to say, that the Babylonians had Cæleftial Observations for 480 Years backwards from his Times; and Epigenes to affert, that they had such Observations for 720 Years back from his Time; and they would infer from hence, that the Babylonian Observations reached no higher; but it is remarkable, that both Berofus and Epigenes suppose their Observations to be no earlier than Nabonaffar; for from Nabonaffar, to the Time in which Berofus flourished, is about 480 Years, and to the Times of Epigenes about 720 (b). The Babylonians had not (as I have obferved) fettled a good Measure of a Year, until about this Time, and therefore could not be exact in their more ancient

(a) Plin. 1. 7. c. 56. (6) Marsham. Can. p. 474.

Com

Computations. Syncellus (a) remarks upon them to this Purpose, and for this Reason Berofus, Epigenes, and Ptolemy afterwards, took no Notice of what they had observed before Nabonassar, not intending to affert, that they had made no Observations, but, their Astronomy not being at all exact, their Observations were not thought worth examining.

There are some other Arguments offered to invalidate the Accounts of Ctefias: It is remarked, that the Names of his Kings are Persian, or Greek, and not Affyrian; and it is said, that he represents the State of Affyria otherwise than it appears to have been Gen. xiv. when Abraham with his Houshold beat the Armies of the King of Shinar, Elam, and three other Kings with them: But the Latter of these Objections will be answered in its Place, and the Former, I conceive, can have no Weight with the Learned, who know what a Variety of Names are given to the Men of the first Ages, by Writers I of different Nations.

(a) Syncell. p. 207.

b2

Upon

Upon the whole, Ctefias's Catalogue of the fuft Affyrian Kings seems a very confiftent and well grounded Correction of Herodotus's Hearsay and imperfect Relation of their Antiquities, and as such it has been received by Diodorus Siculus, by Cephaleon and Castor, by Trogus Pompeius, and Velleius Paterculus, and afterwards by Africanus, Eufebius, and Syncellus. Sir John Marsham raised the first Doubts about it (a); but I can't but think, that the Accounts which he endeavours to give of the Original of the Affyrians, will be always reckoned amongst the Peculiarities of that learned Gentleman. There are fome small Differences amongst the Writers that have copied from Ctefias, about the true Number of Kings from Ninus to Sardanapalus, as well as about the fum of the Duration of their Reigns; but if what I have offered in Defence of Ctefias himself may be admitted, the Miftakes of those that have copied from him will easily be corrected in their proper Places.