The Parian chronicle originally contained a chrono, logy of Greece, and particularly of Athens, from the reign of Cecrops, A. C. 1582, down to the archonship of Diognetus, A. C. 264; comprising a period of 1318 years. But a considerable portion of the lower part, containing the events of 90 years, haying been damaged before its arrival, the inscription now terminates with the magistracy of Diotimus, A. C. 354. It was fortu nately one of those marbles that first engaged the atten tion of Selden, by whom it was transcribed ; otherwise we should now have had to lament, more seriously, an additional mutilation of this superb monument. In his time it contained 79 epochs, or principal events ; but a large portion of the beginning, containing 31 of these xras, has been since destroyed, for the purpose, it is said, of mending a fire-place.
In this ebronicon, the various events are dated retro spectively, from the archonship of Diognetus, at Athens, A. C. 264, which is supposed to be the period at which the chronicle• was compiled, about 20 years earlier than the Smyrnxan league. The plan, and some other cir cumstances, will be best understood from a short ex tract. The inscription begins thus : " I have described the times downwards, be ginning with Cecrops, who first reigned at Athens, to the archonship of Astyanax in Paros, and of Diognetus at Athens.
"Epoch 1st. Since Cecrops reigned at Athens, and the country was called Cecropia, which formerly was called Actica, from the native Actmus, 1318 years.
Ep. 2d. Since Deucalion reigned at Parnassus, hi Lycorea, Cecrops reigning at Athens, 1310 years.
" Ep. 3d. Since a controversy happened at Athens, be tween Mars and Neptune, respecting Hallirrothius, the son of Neptune, and the place was called Areopagus, 1268 years, Cranaus reigning at Athens.
" Ep. 4th. Since a deluge happened, in the days of Deucalion ; and Deucalion fled trom the rains out of Lycorea, taking refuge at Athens with• Cranaus ; and built the temple of Phyxian and Olympian Jupiter, and offered sacrifices of preservation, 1265 years, Cranaus reigning at Athens." Ste.
From this short specimen, the reader will see that the Parian chronicle is a monument of the most curious description. It resembles the notes of a man of letters, in which every event is marked which could interest a reader of Grecian history. There are several circum stances recorded in it which occur no where else ; and, though the dates of events, before the annual archon ship at Athens, are here made earlier by several years, generally 26, than in the common accounts, the purpose of the compiler, which seems merely that of approxima tion, is perfectly well accomplished. Athens being the
most learned of all the Grecian cities, and its history being consequently most famous, its magistrates are here connected with every event, and made to serve as an index to the chronology.
This marble was long considered as a genuine autho rity, and as such was referred to by most of the literati, who distinguished themselves in these studies during the 17th and 18th centuries. Sir Isaac Newton, indeed, denied its accuracy ; but his system of chronology being chiefly founded on the improbable supposition that Chi ron had fixed the solstitial points with astronomical accuracy, was forced into wide variance, not only with this chronicle, but with every other system. A more direct attack has lately been made on the marble ; an attack which, we fear, will for the future destroy all confidence in its authority ; for no sooner does scepti cism spread the tale of defamation, than the character of certainty, like that of morals, is generally forever ruined. In an essay entitled The Parian Chronicle, Mr Robertson has thrown out such learned and ingenious doubts respecting its antiquity, that the strongest proofs would now be scarcely sufficient to restore it to its for mer credit.
For our own part, we are clearly of opinion, that the same style of scepticism would apply with equal force to any other monument in existence. If the inscription be a modern fabrication, it is a wonderfully learned one. Its unassuming author must have been, on this suppo sition, capable of a much nobler, as well as a more lu crative, production ; since on this single, stone, to use the words of Pridcaux, there is more explained, con cerning the ancient times of the Greeks, than in almost all the books extant. Besides, the critics who first ex amined it, Petty, Selden, and Young, and who flourished so near to the period at which alone it could have been forged, the revival of letters, saw nothing suspicious either in its external appearance, or in its contents. On the contrary, the obliterations, corrosions, and other symptoms of antiquity, were at that early period so pow erfully predominant on its surface, that the very subject was long a matter of doubt. Accordingly, all the first rate scholars, from those days to the present, Pctuvius, Usher, Salmasius, Vossius, Bentley, Prideaux, and others, have not, with all their matchless learning, dis.