[ 45 6 ] 
felf one of the number, which, confequently, will 
bring us only to Feb 26. 
Befides; what hath been faid, hath been built up- 
on the fuppofition that the day of the fohHce was, at 
that time, precifely known ; a thing, however, not 
haftily to be granted. The inaccuracy of obfervations, 
and the want of proper inftruments, in times much 
later than this we are here fpeaking of, would incline 
one not to attribute too much to them, in a cafe of fo 
much nicety. Since, then, we find the folftice fell 
out fo early in the morning ; either December the 
28th, or 29th, might have been taken for the folfli- 
cial day: And, accordingly, 60 days after will be ei- 
ther February the 26th, or 27th. But as the Sun’s 
change of declination, at that feafon of the year, is very 
flow (26) ; an error of a day, or two, or more, either 
forward, or backward (a thing by no means impof- 
fible), will bring us to Feb. 2 y. or 28. which is a dif- 
ference of no lefs than 4 days. 
If any one thinks fuch a miftake as this incre- 
dible, let it be obferved, that in the calendar pre- 
fixed, in fome editions, to Ovid’s Fafti , the Sun is 
faid to enter Aquarius XV kalend. Feb. or Jan. 18. 
Ovid himfelf feems to place it XVI kalend. Feb. or 
Jan. 17. and with him agrees Pliny j tho’ Columella, 
under the reign of Claudius, and Ptolemy, under An- 
toninus Pius, place it one day earlier, or the XVII 
kalend. Feb. Here is plainly a difference of 3 days, 
and yet all of them wrong : For Ovid, as is generally 
agreed, infcribed his Fafti to Germanicus foon after 
(26) Keill. Lett. AJiron. p. 250. 
his 
