OCR Text |
Show : Efay 391 : The fecond Bookeof the firft part 486. i Cuarr.64) CuaragSoge | of the Hiftory of the World, Tris likewife proued by the Aftronomicall obferuations ; whic h proceedingfrom the Babylonians, not fromthe A//yrians , doe thew, that Nabonaffar , from whom Ptalomp drawes that Epocha, oraccount oftimes , waga Babylonian, and no Affjrian. Thirdly, and more ftrongly,, it is confirmedby the fucceffor of Nabonaffar , which was Mardp. cempadus, called in his owne language Mere-dac-ken-pad , but motebriefly in Efay his prophelie, Ater edach, by the former part of his name ; or Mer odach d ‘aladan » the fonne of Baladan. Nowif Merodach, thefonne of Baladan, K ing of Babel, were thefonne Sciences,and particularly in the Mathematicks,amongtheir Subie&s of the Low Coun. tries,than were any that I read of then liuing in Spaine,if Spaine at thattime hac any; yet Ithinke, Pofterity will not vfc this as an argum ent, theirs. It may wellbe,that Sa/manaffar or Nabona to proue that Spaine vvas none of ffar,did vfethe Affjrian Souldiers, é Babylonian Schollers: but it feemes,, that hee and his pofter ity, bygiving themfelues wholly to the more warlike Nation, loft the richer,out of which the yfirft iffued,as likes avaffar King of U4//pria. What can be sian ¢ As forthe cadence ofthefe twonames, Nabona/farand Salnntg , being me-thinks none otherthan anfwers to fomewhat that is or might be alleadged on of Nabona/farthen was Nabonxa/far none other than Balada King of Babel,and not Sele aa(jarswhichin Greeke or Latine writing hath no difference, weare taught by Scaliger, that inthe Hebvew letters there is found no athinitythercin, Soconcerning the places of Babylonia,whereinto Sa!masa/far carried captiue {ome part of the ten Tr ibes;it may wel 2 gtanted,that in the Prouince of Babylon, Salmanafjar had gotten fomewhat, yetwill it not follow that hewas King of Babylon it felfe.To conclude, Merodach beganhisteign ouer Babylon in the fixtyeare of Hezekia,at which time Salmana(far tooke Samariasthere- fore,ifSe/manalfar were King of Babylonthen muft wefay that he and Merodech, yeaée Nabonaffer,wereallonemah, Thefe are the argumentsof that nobleand learned Wii- tet Jofeph:Scaliger ;vvho not contented to follow the common opinion, founded yp- onlikelihood of coniecures,- hath drawnehis proofes from matterof morenecelliry 9 infetence: Touching all that was {aid before of Phal Belofus, for the prouing that Phuland Bee lofus were not fundry Kings; Jo/eph Scaligerpitties their ignorance,that haue {pent theit labourto fo little purpofe. Honeft and painefull men he confeffeth that they were, who bytheir diligence might haue wonthe goodliking oftheir Readers, had they not, by mentioning danius his Authors,giuen {uchoffence, that men refuled thereupon toread their Bookes and Chronologies. A fhort anfwer. , For mine owne part, hhowfocuer Lbelecue nothing that Anwius his Berofus, Metaflt aesand others ofthat ftampeaifirme,in refpect oftheir bare authority ; yet am I notlo {queamith,but that I can well enough digeft agood Booke, thoughI finde the namesof,30 one ortwo ofthefe good fellowes alleadgedinit: Lhaue(fomewhat peraduenturetoo often) already fpoken my mindof Asmins his Authors: Neuertheleffe, I mayfay hetea- aine,that where other Hiftories are filent,orfpeake not enough,there maywewithout ame borrowof thefe,as muchas agrees with thatlittle whichelfewhere vvefinde,an feructh to cxplaine or inlarge it without improbabilities. Neither indeede arethofe honeft and Painful men (as Scaliger tearmesthemj mae ning,if I miftake him not, good filly fellowes)who fet downe the A/fjrian Kings en Pal forwards,as Lords alfo ofBabylon,taking Pal for Belofis, and Salmenaffar for Nr na/(Jar,fach Writers as.a man fhould bee afhamed or vnwilling to reade. For (to om? | multitude ofothers,that herein follow Anninethoughdifliking himin genetall) Gree Mercétor is not fo flight a Chronologer; that he fhould be laughed out of doores,™ the name ofan honeft meaningfellow. ae But I will not make comparifons betweene Scaliger and Mercator ; they weit a7 them meni notably learned let vs examine the arguments of Scaliger, and fee Yee they beoffuch force,as cannoteither be refifted or auoided. It vvill eafily bee ee that Nabonaffar vas King ofBabylon;that he vvas not King ofa/yria, fome men ai whether Scalizers reafons bee enough to proue. For though Wabona/far beca ne" name,and Salmana(far an Affyriaws yet what hinders vs from beleeuing, thatonem twolanguages mightbee called by two feuerall names ¢ That Aftronomy flourithe : mong the Chaldecs is not enougli to proue Nabonaffar cither an Aftrologer, ora yaa an. So it is, that Scaliger himfelfe cals them » Prophetas nefcio gquos , quit Nebo Seal. canon. 1.3, Afronemum fuilfein fomnis viderant 5 Prophets know not who, that in their sleepe ™ dreamt of Nabonallar, that he was an Aftrolezer, «ataife Whether Nabena/far were an Aftrologer or no, Icannot tell ; itis hard to ae thenegatiue, But as his being Lord ouerthe Chaldeans , doth not proue himf°" eene learned in their feiences . fo doth itnot proue him, not to haue be f = Emperour Cherlesthe fift,who was bornein Gant,> andearned PANina{| The King of gpria. Sonne, King ofSpaime; and Lords ofthe Netherlands,had men farre more learnee" Scien wife kingPhilip loft partly,& partly did put to a dangerous hazzardall the Nether lands, by yi fucha.courfe. As-for the two vn-an{werable arguments (as Scalizer term S es them ? so thecontrary fide) one of them yvhich is:drawne fromthe valike found and writing of thofe names,Sa/manaffar and Naboraffar in the Hebrew, Lholda point about which no man vvill difpute ; for it is not likeneffe of found,but agreement of time; and manycircumftances elfe,that muft take away the diftin@ion ofperfons : the other i}kewife may be granted ; whichis,that Salmanalfar might be Lord of fome placesin the Prouince of Babylon yet not king of Babylonit {elfe ; this indeed might be fo, andit might be otherwife.Hitherto there is nothing fane conie@ure.Butin that whichis alleadged out of the Prophet.é/zy concerning Merodach the fonne of Baladaw; andin that whichis {aid of this Merodach,or Mardokenpadus, his being the Succefforof Nabonaffar, anc 1 his begin= ning to reigne inthe fixt yeareofHezekia, I finde matter of more difficulty,than can be 20 2afwered in hafte.I willtherefore deferrethe handling of thefe obiections vntill I meet withtheir fubiect in his properplace ; vvhichwill pee vvhen wee cometothe time of Hezekia, vvberein Méredach lived and vvas King. Yet that I may not leanetoo great 2 feruplein the minde of the Reader; thusfarre vvill Lheere fatisie him ; that how {trong {oeuerthis argument mayfeeme, Scalizer himfelfe didline to retraG it, ingenuoufly confefling,that in thinking a¢eredach to be the fonof Nabonaffar; he had been deceiued, Nowthereforelet ys confider,in whatfort they haue fathione dtheir Story, vvho tas king Pal to bee a diftiné perfon from Belofus ox Beleflés,haue inlike fort, as was necefla= ty, diftinguifhed their oft-{pring, making that of Pz/to faile in Afarhaddon;vvhich left 30 allto Aderodach the Babylonian. And heere I mutt firtt confeile my vvant of Bookes,if perhapsthere be many,that haue gone about to reducethis natration into fome fuch ors der,as might prefent vnto ysthe body of this Hiftory , in one view. Diners; indeede; there are,whomI hane feene,thatfince Jo/eph Scaliger deliner ed his opinion, haue writ. ten in fauour of fome one orother point thereof: but Sethus Caluifins himfelfe,who hath abridged Scaligers learned Worke, De emendatione Teraporum; hath not been-carefull to giue ys notice, how long Belofus,Baladan, Pul, or Tiglat Pal, r, did reigne, ( perhaps becaufe he found it-not exprefled in Scalizer Jbutis content to fet downe Baladan.for the fame perfon vvith Nabonaffar, which Scaliger himfelf e reuoked. In this cafe therefore I mutt lay downe the plotof thefe diuided Kingdomes, in fuch fort as I find it contriued » by duguflines T orniellus; who onely ofall that I haue feene, fets downethefuccefliony continuance, and acts, of thofe that reignedin Affjria after Sardanapalus; difting uithing themfrom Belofus,and his Pofterity, ofvvhomhee hath the like remembratice. This Torsiellasisa Regular Clarke ofthe congregation ofS. Pan/, whofe Annalesivere prinited the laft yeare yhe appeares to me a manofa curious induftr y, found iudgement,and free Spiritsyet many times (and I take it,wilfu lly) forgetfull of thanking,or ihentioning 6% thofe Pr otestant WVtiters, by whofe Bookes hee hath receined goodinfo rmation , and enriched his yyorkes by inferting fomewhat oftheirs. But in this bufinefle hee hath openly profefledto follow Scaliger,w hofe helpe, vvithoat wrong or difhonourto himelfe he hartl oe = x {clfe,he hath * ~ both. vfed and acknowledged. For mine ownepart, will not {pare to doe sotight vnto Tornicllus 3 but confeffe myfelfe to +haue receiued benefit byhis writing y and with that his Annales had fooner cometo light; forthat as he hath mich confirmed mee in fomethir {0 would he haueinftruc ted and emboldne me,to write more fully and ;- amorouilyin other things, which nowI haue notleifudre to reuife. Particularly in | a a . 8 es 1 ~. : o fa coniectu ‘ re(whichI had ° faintly deliuere djand yet feared left ithad ouer-hattily paf-e 4 Out of my hand,and beene expofed to other mens conftructions) of the foure Kings that inuaded the Vally ofsiddim, and wereflaine by Abraham, I finde him aduenturing. as Thaue > C.1.§.134 Lced : done, tofay , that they mayprobably bee thought to haue beene fome petty (r ords sthe contrary opinion ofall Writers notwithftanding.s But now let vs confider how |