Manuscript should be produced, which both perused. F. _Pagi_, the _Franciscan_, seems to favour _Bucherius_; for he complains of _Bollandus_ for interpolating the Manuscript, and not publishing it with all its Faults and Charms, as _Bucherius_ had done. But then he does not tell us, that he had seen the original Manuscript. _Bollandus_ on the other hand complains of _Bucherius_ for undervaluing such an unvaluable Piece; and settles by it his whole Chronology of the Popes, pretending it to have been sent by Pope _Damasus_ to St. _Jerom_[N4.3]. But for this the only Ground he has are some Letters from _Damasus_ to St. _Jerom_, and from _Jerom_ to _Damasus_, which, by the best Judges, are all thought supposititious. But even allowing it to have been sent by _Damasus_ to St. _Jerom_, that ought not to recommend it more to our Esteem than it did to his; and he seems to have paid very little Regard to it: for in his Book of _Illustrious Men_, which he wrote after the Death of _Damasus_, he places _Clement_ after _Anacletus_, though that Pontifical puts _Anacletus_ after _Clement_[N4.4]. What I have hitherto said is to be understood with respect to the Times preceding the Pontificate of _Pontianus_; for, from his Time, the Pontifical of _Bucherius_ is almost quite exact to the End, that is, to the Election of _Liberius_; and the more exact, the nearer it comes to his Time. I said _almost_, for it is not even thenceforth free from all Faults; but it has fewer than any other antient Record that has reached us; and it is on this Consideration that, from the Time of _Pontianus_, I have preferred it to all others. With respect to his Predecessors, I have adopted the Chronology of _Eusebius_, where it does not appear that he was mistaken; for that he was mistaken in some Points, is but too plain; and, for aught we know, he may have been so in many others. But as in those dark Times we have no authentic Records, no indisputable Authorities, to depend on, I thought it more adviseable to tread in the Footsteps of so famous and antient a Writer, than, by attempting to open a new Way, perplex and confound both myself and the Reader, as _Pearson_, _Dodwell_, and _Pagi_, have done. And it was not, I must own, without some Concern, that I found a Man of Dr. _Pearson_’s Learning reduced, by undervaluing the Authority of _Eusebius_, to take for his Guide a Writer of no Authority at all, _viz._ _Eutychius_ of _Alexandria_, who flourished so late as the Tenth Century, and is only famous for his Blunders, even in what relates to his own Church. To the Pontifical were annexed, in the same antient Manuscript, several other small Pieces; _viz._ 1. A List of the Consuls from the Year 205. to 354. with the Epacts, Bissextile Years, and the Day of the Week, with which each Year began. There are some Mistakes in the Epacts, but the rest is done with great Exactness. 2.