ANT
ANT
Pliny feems even to hold the ufe of letters to be eternal, li- ter as femper arbitror AJJyriis fuere. He goes on to obferve, that the Babylonians had agronomical obfervations written on ta- bles of brick, for thefpace of 720 years, according to Epige- nes, or at leaft of 480 years, according to Berofus ■ ; and concludes, ex quo apparet atcrnits literarum ufus b . But it is known that the Chaldeans pretended to aftronomical obferva- tions of 470,000 years according toCicero, or of 47 3,000 years according to Diodorus ; and it may be added that Berofus, who is cited by Pliny, and who wrote foon after the death of Alexander, affirmed, in the firft book of his hiftory of Baby- lon, that there were books preferved, which comprehended the hiftory of above 150,000 years. Hence it has been in- ferred by Voflius, Perizomus, and others, that Pliny's text ought to be amended, the 720 years of Epigenes, to be turned into 720,000, and the 480 o( Berofus into 480,000 c - — [* Plitt, Hift. Nat. 1. 7. c. 56. & ibid. c Hift. Crit. Rep. Lett. T. 1. p. 17. feq.]
The Abbot Sevin d has endeavoured to fet afide the correc- tion of the pafFage of Pliny in a difcourfe exprefs. Perizo- nius has altered the reading of Pliny, as to the numbers ; in which he is followed by the generality of critics c . — [ d Hift. Acad. Infcript. T. 2. p. 239. feq. c Vid. Mem. de Trev. 1721. p. 422. ]
M. Maffon has given a defence of it againft M. Sevin. Vid. Hift. Crit. Rep. Lett. T. 9. P. 1.
The Jefuits are charged with being enemies of Antiquity. The fathers Papebroch, and Germon are famous for the at- tack they have made on antient charters ; and F, Hardouin has attacked the Antiquity of books and MSS. F. Bougeant has lately revived the fyftem of this laft. He is confident there are no MSS. to be found above fix hundred years old. Bibl. Franc. T. 13. p. 228. Jealoufy is by fome fufpected to have had a large hand in this difpute ; it has been fuggefted, that the archives of the Jefuits, being lefs ftored with the venerable monuments of Antiquity than thofe of the Benedictins, and fome other re- ligious, they had undertaken to attack not only the authenti- city of charters and manufcripts, but of every thing that bears the character of Antiquity, Jour, des Scav. T. 69. p. 261. feq.
The Antiquity of religion has been often urged as a proof of the truth of it. — -Jews, Gentiles, Chriftians, Proteftants, Pap'ifts, have all in their turns made ufe of the argument from Antiquity. It is indeed of the inartificial kind ; and comes rather under the denomination of a prefumption than a proof; on the whole it feems to ferve the caufe of error better than of truth ; it is founded on this, that as we allow God to be a juft and good being, it is hardly to be conceived that he fhould have fuffered a great part of the whole world for many ages to have continued in a religion which he did not approve of. But fuppofmg this, had not the heathens reafon to condemn chriftianity at its firft appearance ; for how could it confift with the goodnefs and juftice of God to have, permitted the whole world, excepting Judea, to have conti nued in heathenifm during all former ages. V. Bibl. Anc Mod. T. 24. p. 300.
There is fcarce a nation under heaven, but lays claim to a greater degree of Antiquity than the reft of its neighbours ; the Scythians, the Phrygians, the Chaldeans, Egyptians, Greeks, Chinefe, &c. pretend each to the honour of being the firft inhabitants of the earth ; feveral of thefe nations, left they Ihould be outftripped in their pretenfions by any of the reft, have traced up their origin to ages long before the crea- tion. Hence the appellation aborigines, indigents, terrigenes. anielunares, &c. The Athenians were not afhamed to pre tend to be Autochthones ; and what is moft remarkable, So- crates bimfelf gives them this ridiculous appellation, which, as fome others of the philofophers have wifely obferved, only put them on a level with ants, and grafhoppers. Mem. Acad. Infcript. T. 7. p. 498.
The Chaldeans pretend to aftronomical obfervations of 470,000 years ; they mention the precife king who reigned over them at the time of the deluge, whofe name was Xifuthrus, and attribute to him feveral things which we afcribe to Noah. Bibl. Univ. T. 3. p. 102.
St. Auguftin laughs at the folly of the Egyptians, who pre- tend to obfervations of the ftars above t 00,000 years old; in effect no people appear to have been warmer in the conteft for Antiquity than thofe of Egypt. They pretend two periods of time ; one fhorter, during which the throne of Egypt had been filled by men, the other almoft infinite, wherein gods, and demi-gods, had wore the crown. From Jus and Ofiris to Alexander they reckoned a fpace of 23000 years, the time before that, while the gods reigned, made 42984 years more ; the whole duration from the beginning of their monarchy amounting to 65984. De Civit. Dei 1. 18. c. 40. The computation of their dynafties as given by Manetho a writer of their own, (of whom we have extracts in Syncellus, taken from Julius Africanus and Eufebius) extends to 5550 years before Alexander's time, and the Egyptian chronicle, cited by the fame Syncellus, goes further, reckoning 36525 years. Diogenes Laertius makes no lefs than 48863 years from the reign of Vulcan. Yet the Scythians, the Phrygians, the Ethio-
pians, and fome others ftill infifted on their priority to the Egyptians ; and in the judgment of many feem to have car- ried their point. Juftin after Trogus gives the precedency to the Scythians ; and affirms that they were always al- lowed to have been before the Egyptians. Jujf. Hift. 1. 2. c 1.
Pfammetichus, to make proof whether the Egyptians or Phry- gians were the oldeff, ordered two infants to be bred up without a word of any language being fpoken before them. At two years old the fhepherd who had the care of them heard them both one day ftretching out their hands towards him, and crying beccos^ beccos, which in the Phrygian tongue denotes bread ; from that time the honour of Antiquity is (aid to have been generally allowed to the Phrygians. But the fact. M. Rollin obferves muff, be falie, fince if they had never heard a word, they would never have fpoken one. Jour. Liter. T. 16. p. 192.
The Ethiopians, M.Fourmont thinks, have of all other nations the belt title ; among the antients there were none but theEgyp- tians could difpute it with them. Diodorus Siculus gives the hiftory of this famous conteft between the two nations. The Ethiopians were not a bit embarrafTed with the long feries of years in the Egyptian account, they allowed them all the An- tiquity they could defire, owned their great knowledge in the arts and fciences, their great diligence and exactnefs in record- ing the actions of their kings, and heroes ; but defired them, in virtue of this great knowledge and exactnefs, to tell them the precife epocha when the Ethiopian nation com- menced, and how much exactly the Ethiopians were younger than themfelves ? The impoffibility the Egyptians were under to do this feems to have given a victory to their adverfaries. Mem. Acad. Infcript. T. 7. p. 499. feq. Some think that the Armenians have a better claim to priority than any other nation, it being allowed that the country which they inhabit was the firft that men trod on after the deluge, when they came out of the ark. But it appears at the fame time, that Noah and his family made no longfettlement there. Mem. des MUX T. 3. p. 14.
But the Chinefe is doubtlefs the moft antient monarchy in the univerfe ; having cultivated the fciences from the earlieft ages ; and fubfifted at leaft thefe 4000 years with the fame laws, manners, and ufages. Freret. Ap. Mem. Acad. In- fcript. T. 9. p. 362.
Some indeed have called in queftion the truth and authen- ticity of the Chinefe annals, yet we find them confirmed, at leaft as high as 660 years before Chrift, by the annals of Japan. At worft the Chinefe Antiquities ftand on as good a footing as thofe either of Greece or Rome. Their anna- lifts both for order and chronology are not inferior to any of thofe antients fo much admired among us ; but far furpafs them in point of Antiquity, and have a better title to be cre- dited, as having written by public authority, which can be faid of few Greek or Roman pieces, except perhaps the ca- pitoline marbles, which are not properly a hiftory. Vignol. Ap. Bibl. Germ. T. 14. p. 143.
We have no inconiiderable confirmation of the truth of the Chinefe account, from an antient obfervation of a grand conjunction of the planets under Chuen-Hio emperor of China, related by Martinius. That prince lived 2513 years before Chrift. M. Kirchius has defended the obfervation againft Caffini, and (hewn a conjunction muft really have happened at the time mentioned by the Chinefe annals. Mifc. Berol. T. 3. p. 165. feq.
But the authenticity of this obfervation, and the whole of the Chinefe chronology, has been lately attacked by an inge- nious author, Mr. Coftar. See Phil. Tranf. N°. 483. It muft not be forgot that the Irifh alfo pretend to be the antienteft of all nations ; they trace their origin without in- terruption to Japhet f . But the Scots ftill difpute the priority with them ; holding themfelves an elder branch of the Scy- thians, the firft of men s. The Irifh however are not like to yield the victory ; on the plaufible pretence of their being called the antient Scots, they reduce their neighbour Scots to a very late origin, pretending they were not fettled in North- Britain before the eleventh century ; whereas the Scotifh hif- torians trace them in the fame country before the birth of Chrift. The writers on both fides generally allow them to have come thither from Ireland. But, in fo much ebfeurity is every thing belonging to Antiquity involved, fome deny even this ; Mackenzie maintains, that there are greater prefumptions for believing that the Scots in Ireland took their origin from thofe in North-Britain, than vice verfa. — [ f Act, Enid. Lipf. 1696. p. 249. s Mackenz. Scot. Writ. T. 1. pref. p. 3.] In the reign of king Laogair, which commenced Ann.Dom. 427, a committee of three kings and three bifhops, whereof St. Patrick was one, and three antiquaries, was appointed to examine the genealogies of the principal families and antient records of the kingdom, and having purged them of all fpu- rious relations, to depofite them in the archives of the ifland, as a venerable and authentic collection. This body of records was called the great Antiquity, and its veracity was never to be queftioned by future generations ; the book of Armach, the pfalter of Cafhel, &JV. are tranferipts of this. Nicbslf. Irifh. Hift. Libr. A pp. n. 1. p. 181.
In
