nology is indebted to the ancient coins of Greece and Rome. To point out all those dates on their coins by which History may be illustrated, and Chronology confirmed or corrected, would require a more minute acquaintance with the details of history than I can boast of; but I shall be satisfied if I shall be able to direct the attention of the reader to the principal sources from which this information can be obtained. The first coins which present us with dates, are those of the Ptolemies kings of Egypt. The founder of this dynasty, Ptolemy surnamed Soter, was one of the celebrated Generals of Alexander, and, on the death of that prince, established himself on the throne of Egypt. Dates are to be found on his coins, and on those of most of his successors; but, as the greatest part of them are merely the dates of the king's reign, and are not counted from a common æra, they are but of little value; and, as all these kings bear the name of Ptolemy, it would be in general impossible even to appropriate their coins to the monarchs who struck them, were it not for the surnames of Philadelphus, Philopater, &c. with which the name of Ptolemy is generally accompanied. A few of them, indeed, particularly those of Ptolemy II. and III. bear dates from the æra of Ptolemy I. but these are so few in number as to be of little value to Chronology, although useful in classing the coins themselves, many of which can only be ascertained by the portraits they bear; which, however well executed, must form but an unsatisfactory mode of arranging them, when we consider the great length of some of the reigns, and the change of features resulting therefrom, and also the resemblance which some of the kings bore to one another. A few of these coins are useful in confirming the account we have of the length of their reigns, the date of the last year being found on some of them, and nearly the last on several. The history of these kings, however, derives a considerable degree of illustration from the coins of the Syrian kings, with whose history that of Egypt is much blended. SYRIA. Of those coins which bear dates the next in chronological order, but infi nitely the first in importance, are those of the kings of Syria, commonly called Seleucidæ, from Seleucus the founder of the dynasty, who began to reign in 312 B. C. and from which æra the coins of his successors bear date. On those of the first six kings no dates are found, and but few on those of Antiochus III. and Seleucus IV., but on those of Demetrius I. and the fifteen monarchs who followed, (a period which, although of only eighty years, is one of the most eventful to be found in history,) they are extremely numerous, and of the utmost importance, not only in fixing the periods of the reigns of the Syrian kings, and the most important events which occurred in their reigns, but also in elucidating the History of Egypt, Macedon, Rome, and other countries, at that period so intimately connected with that of Syria. To begin then with Demetrius 1. it is mentioned in 1 Maccabees, vii. 1, that it was in the 151st year of the æra of the Seleucidæ, that Demetrius departed from Rome for Syria, where he declared himself king; and afterwards, chap. x. 57, that Alexander Bala, after Demetrius was defeated and slain, received the king of Egypt's daughter in marriage in the year 162; from which it appears that Demetrius reigned about eleven years. Josephus also mentions that Antiochus IV. died in the year 149, and that Antiochus V. his son and successor, reigned two years, when he was put to death by Demetrius, and that afterwards the latter reigned eleven years. These two accounts, which perfectly agree, are however at variance with those of several other historians, who date Demetrius's accession at the year 150, and make his reign thirteen years, whilst others have assumed the intermediate number of twelve years. The coins, however, of Demetrius and Alexander, are in evidence that Josephus and the Book of Maccabees were right; for, of the numerous dates we have of Demetrius, the first is 153, and the last 162, whilst we have dates of Alexander of the year 161, he having seized a part of the kingdom, and assumed the title of king some time before the defeat and death of Demetrius. It is therefore nearly certain that the latter reigned only from 151 to 162. Alexander Bala. Josephus mentions that this usurper laid claim to the crown of Syria in 160, that he obtained the kingdom on the defeat and death of Demetrius, and was himself defeated and slain by Demetrius II. after a reign of five years. The Book of Maccabees also mentions that Alexander was slain in 167. Other writers make him reign seven years, counting of course the two years from 160 to 162, during which he disputed the throne with Demetrius. All these accounts are confirmed by the coins of Alexander, which bear the dates 161, 167, and by those of Demetrius II. which commence with 167, and those of his rival Antiochus Vl. which commence with the same year. On the death of Alexander Bala in 167, the throne of Syria was contested by Demetrius II. son of Demetrius 1. and by Antiochus VI. supported by Tryphon. Demetrius having been made captive by the king of Parthia, Antiochus remained in undisputed possession of the kingdom, but was in a short time murdered by Tryphon his guardian, who seized the crown; the title of the latter was however contested by Antiochus VII. the brother of Demetrius, and Tryphon was defeated and slain. The first date we meet with on the coins of Demetrius II. is 167, and the first on those of Antiochus VI. also 167, which perfectly agrees with the Book of Maccabees, which says that Demetrius began to reign in that year. Of Antiochus VI. we have the dates 167 to 170. We have also of Demetrius the date 173, found on a coin of Tyre, and probably struck after he was carried into captivity, but none afterwards, until 181; this, with the exception of the date on the coin of Tyre, agrees with the Book of Maccabees, which says that Demetrius was carried into captivity by the king of Media in 172, and it will be found to agree also with Josephus, who says that, a short time after Demetrius was made captive, Antiochus was murdered by Tryphon, after a reign of four years; and if, as it is probable, Antiochus VI.'s reign began towards the close of 167, and ended in the early part of 172, it would not make more than four years and a half, which would be little more than what Josephus mentions. and the two authorities I have quoted, will be found completed as to these reigns by the following evidence afforded by them. 1st. The Book of Maccabees mentions that in 174 Antiochus VII. claimed the crown from Tryphon, and besieged him in Dora. 2d. Josephus says, that Tryphon fled from Dora to Apamea, where he was taken and put to death, after a reign of three years; and, as he gives four years to Antiochus VI. the seven years counted from 167 will exactly fall in with 174. 3d. The first date on the coins of Antiochus VII. is also 174. After this period the Chronology of Syria derives but little assistance from the Book of Maccabees, which is the more to be regretted, as the history of that country now becomes more complex and intricate; much information however is derived from Josephus and Justin, and the dates on the coins are of still more importance. Antiochus VII. being defeated and slain in a battle against the Parthians, Demetrius II. recovered the kingdom; but, having engaged in a war with the king of Egypt, the latter set up Alexander II. surnamed Zebina, as a claimant for the Syrian throne; and, Demetrius being slain at Tyre, Alexander finally obtained the kingdom. His throne was however disputed by Antiochus VIII. surnamed Grypus, son of Demetrius, and Alexander was defeated and slain; after which, Antiochus VIII. reigned for some years jointly with his mother, and afterwards by himself. Writers are much at variance as to the chronological arrangement of these events, but the surest and most satisfactory evidence will be found in the dates on the coins. With respect to the reigns I have enumerated, the dates which require to be ascertained are: 1. That of the death of Antiochus VII.; 2d. That of the claim of Alexander to the crown; 3d. That of the death of Demetrius ; 4th. The period when Antiochus VIII. disputed the throne with Alexander 5th. The death of Alexander; and 6th. The death of Cleopatra, from which event the sole reign of Antiochus may be dated. The dates afforded by the coins prove beyond doubt that these six events, with the exception of the third and fourth, took place with considerable intervals between, and the The agreement between the coins mistakes committed by several chro nologists seem to have originated from considering the defeat and death of Demetrius to have immediately followed the claim of Alexander, and that Antiochus VIII. and Cleopatra did not reign in any part of Syria until the death of Alexander. The dates of Demetrius II. from his restoration, are from 181 to 187. Those of Antiochus VIl. 174 to 187. Those of Alexander II. 184 to 190. Those of Cleopatra and Antiochus VIII. 187 to 194, all inclusive. All those dates can easily be reconciled with historical accounts, except those of Antiochus VII. from 182 to 187, which appear to me almost impossible to be accounted for, except by supposing them struck by Antiochus IX. surnamed Cyzicenus, the son of Antiochus VII. who may have even at that early period claimed a right to the throne, and perhaps been in possession of some portion of the extensive dominions of Syria; and they could not have been struck by Antiochus VIII. in the lifetime of his father, as Demetrius had an elder son who succeeded him, by the name of Seleucus V. Froelich, endeavouring to account for these dates, has quoted 2 Maccabees, ch. 1. to show that Antiochus VII. was killed several years later than has been generally supposed, but I do not think the authority sufficiently supports him, as the letter there quoted, although dated in the year 188 of the æra of the Seleucidæ, does not speak of the death of Antiochus as an event which had just taken place; and all other authorities, supported by the dates of the coins of Alexander, beginning with 184, are completely at variance with the supposition. The first date of Demetrius after his restoration is 181; which agrees with the accounts of most writers, so that we may regard that as the date of Antiochus's death, and Demetrius's restoration. As the date of 187 is to be found on the coins of Demetrius, and also on those of Cleopatra and Antiochus VIII. we may well conclude that to have been the date of Demetrius's death, the reign of Seleucus V. which lasted only a few months, and the accession of Cleopatra and Antiochus VIII. The next dates of the portion of history I have just noticed, are those of the claim of Alexander Zebina, and the period when his reign terminated; the chronologists of greatest repute make the year 185 the first, and 189 the last of his reign; but, as the dates 184 and 190 occur on his coins, I think there can be little doubt as to the accuracy of the latter. The last of those dates to be ascertained is that of the death of Cleopatra; the year 192 has been generally assigned as that of her death, but, as 194 occurs on her coins, the latter must be preferred. The remainder of the history of the Syrian monarchs is still more complicated than that I have just noticed, and the dates on their coins less numerous ; much assistance may, however, still be derived from them. Antiochus VIII. after his mother's death, enjoyed the kingdom in peace for a few years, when his title was disputed by his half-brother Antiochus IX. surnamed Cyzicenus, who, if the coins I have noticed bearing the name of Antiochus, and the dates 182-187, belong to him, must have urged his claim at a much earlier period. The two brothers then for some years appear to have reigned in different parts of Syria, Antiochus VIII. at Antioch, and Antiochus IX. at Damascus. the death of the former his son Seleucus VI. succeeded, and defeated and slew Cyzicenus, but was in turn defeated by Antiochus X. surnamed Pius, the son of Cyzicenus, and flying to Mopsuestia in Cilicia, was there killed. On After this, the throne of Syria was contested by Antiochus X. the son of Cyzicenus, and Antiochus XI.; Philip, and Demetrius III. sons of Grypus. Antiochus XI. was defeated and slain by Antiochus X. who himself fell in battle against the Parthians, leaving Philip and Demetrius in possession of Syria; and Demetrius being afterwards made captive by Mithridates king of Parthia, Philip for a short time had sole possession of Syria, untik Demetrius dying in captivity, their fifth brother Antiochus XII. and Dionysius, claimed that portion at least which belonged to Demetrius, which he seems to have possessed until he was attacked, defeated, and slain, by Aretas king of Arabia. After this, Syria fell into the hands of Tigranes king of Armenia, who enjoyed it for many years; but was at last deposed by the Romans under Lucullus, who placed Antiochus XIII. Asiaticus, the son of Cyzicenus, on the throne; but, he being four years after deposed by Pompey, Syria thenceforth became a Roman province. Appian, Josephus, and Justin, are the principal historians who have given us an account of the complicated history of these princes, and considerable differences may be observed in their narratives. I shall merely however notice such evidence as the dates on the coins supply us with, which in this part of the Syrian series are not very numerous. Justin says that Grypus, after his mother's death, reigned eight years in quiet, until his throne was disputed by Cyzicenus; but this is contradicted by the coins, for 194 is found on the coins of Cleopatra and Antiochus, and 199 on those of Cyzicenus, a period of only five years. As to the length of Grypus's reign, Josephus informs us that he reigned twenty-nine years; which, counted from 187, would place his death in 216, which was probably not far from the truth; his coins, however, throw no light on this point, as the last date afforded by them is 206. The dates of Cyzicenus do not. go further than 211, and we have no dates of Seleucus VI., Antiochus X., XI., or XII. Some writers make Philip's reign commence in 217, others in 219 and 221; and some place the termination in 229, others in 231 and 235. The dates on his coins, which are numerous, are from 220 to 229, both inclusive. As to Demetrius III. some writers make his reign to commence in 219, some in 222, but these are corrected by his dates, which are 218-224. Justin says, Tigranes reigned eighteen years; Blair's Chronology gives him only fourteen; whilst others give him twenty. It is probable however that Blair was right, as Antiochus Asiaticus is generally supposed to have been placed on the throne in 243; which, counting from 229, the last date on the coins of Philip, would be exactly fourteen years. The dates on his coins are only 236 to 241. BITHYNIA. The next in chronological order are the coins of the kings of Bithynia, but the information we derive from them is extremely limited. No dates appear before Nicomedes II. who is said to have ascended the throne 149 B. C.; the first date on his coins is 150, which counted from 457 A. V.C. he supposed date of their æra, an swers to 607 A. V. C. or 146 B.C. His dates, which are very numerous, end with 203, answering to 93 B. C. which, if Sestrini is right in the appropriation of these coins, must have been the last year of his reign, as 204 appears on those given to Nicomedes III. The dates which follow end with 223; but the most celebrated numismatic writers differ as to their appropria. tion, for Sestini gives them all to Nicomedes, whilst Dumersau and others assign some of them to Nicomedes IV. The dates found on the coins of the kings of Parthia, and the Bosphorus, and some others, remain to be considered; but I must beg leave to make them the subject of another letter. Yours, &c. JOHN LINDSAY. Mr. URBAN, OMNIA Romæ cum pretio, is an adage as true now as it was 2000 years ago, and every one who reads the newspapers of the day must have seen the advertisements headed "Douceur," seeking a Permanent Mercantile Situation," a term now well understood to mean something else which I decline naming, and for which various sums are continually offered from 50%. to 2000l.; and it is a remarkable fact that not one of these advertisements is ever repeated; I can safely aver this, as I have perused the Times Newspaper daily for many years, and have paid particular attention to this branch of its intelligence. About forty years since, however, there scems to have been less scrupulosity, as old Hooker would say, in these matters, for in the Oracle Newspaper of Nov. 1794, we have the following: "TWO HUNDRED GUINEAS ready to be given to any lady or gentleman who has interest to procure a LIEUTENANT'S COMMISSION in the NAVY, for a young gentleman of honour and reputation now on service in the Grand Fleet, and who has passed the proper examination with great credit, and really deserves promotion. Secrecy may be depended on. Answers addressed to S. F. City Coffee House, Cheapside, will be attended to." Does the march of honesty keep pace with the march of intellect? I am afraid not, Mr. Urban; and, though we may be more enlightened and more refined than those who have gone before us, I much doubt whether there be a greater sprinkling of integrity among us, than in former times. The |