ANNO MUNDI. 



92. We shall conclude this brief exposition of the principal 

 subjects included in the almanack, with some notice of the 

 different epochs or eras which different nations have in different 

 ages adopted as the zeros or starting points of their chronology. 



93. It is evident that when any great event, political or 

 religious, is adopted as the era, it would in general be necessary 

 to count from it forwards and backwards, forwards for subsequent 

 and backwards for preceding events. One era only would be 

 exempt from this, and that is the era of the creation of the world, 

 in which an event is dated ANNO MUNDI. Many profound re- 

 searches have been accordingly made, to determine the date of 

 this great standard of human chronology. 



Unfortunately, however, the only authorities which could 

 throw light upon the question, are involved in much obscurity, 

 and give inconsistent results. The Hebrew, the Samaritan, 

 and the Septuagint texts are apparently at variance on this 

 question. 



The following are the results of the researches of different 

 chronologists as to the age of the world : 



According to Julius Africanus, the date is . . 5500 B.C. 



According to the monk Panodorus . . . . 5493 



According to the Greek researches .... 5509 



Scaliger, by a comparison of different texts . . . 3950 



Father Pezron 5873 



Jewish estimate 3761 



Archbishop Usher 4004 



The estimates of Jewish historians are, however, very various. 

 Josephus gives it as 4163 B.C., others give it as 6524 B.C. 



The estimate most commonly adopted by chronologists is that of 

 Archbishop Usher. 



The era of the Julian period has been already explained. 



94. An era, called that of Nabonassar, has acquired a certain 

 celebrity from the circumstance of its having been adopted as the 

 point of departure in the calculations of several ancient astro- 

 nomers, and more especially of Ptolemy. 



The date of this era is 747 B.C. 



It does not appear what circumstance determined the selection 

 of this epoch, as there is no recorded event, social, political, or 

 military, with which it is connected. It has been said that it is 

 the date of the foundation of the kingdom of Babylon, out of 

 the wreck of the Assyrian empire, after the death of Sardanapalus. 

 It is also said that Nabonassar was the head of a new dynasty, and 

 that he introduced the Egyptian year into Chaldea, but none of 

 these statements have been satisfactorily proved. 



55 



