chronology Summary and Overview

is the arrangement of facts and events in the order of time. The writers of the Bible themselves do not adopt any standard era according to which they date events. Sometimes the years are reckoned, e.g., from the time of the Exodus (Num. 1:1; 33:38; 1 Kings 6:1), and sometimes from the accession of kings (1 Kings 15:1, 9, 25, 33, etc.), and sometimes again from the return from Exile (Ezra 3:8). Hence in constructing a system of Biblecal chronology, the plan has been adopted of reckoning the years from the ages of the patriarchs before the birth of their first-born sons for the period from the Creation to Abraham. After this period other data are to be taken into account in determining the relative sequence of events. As to the patriarchal period, there are three principal systems of chronology: (1) that of the Hebrew text, (2) that of the Septuagint version, and (3) that of the Samaritan Pentateuch, as seen in the scheme on the opposite page. The Samaritan and the Septuagint have considerably modified the Hebrew chronology. This modification some regard as having been wilfully made, and to be rejected. The same system of variations is observed in the chronology of the period between the Flood and Abraham. Thus: | Hebrew Septuigant Samaritan | From the birth of | Arphaxad, 2 years | after the Flood, to | the birth of Terah. 220 1000 870 | From the birth of | Terah to the birth | of Abraham. 130 70 72 The Septuagint fixes on seventy years as the age of Terah at the birth of Abraham, from Gen. 11:26; but a comparison of Gen. 11:32 and Acts 7:4 with Gen. 12:4 shows that when Terah died, at the age of two hundred and five years, Abraham was seventy-five years, and hence Terah must have been one hundred and thirty years when Abraham was born. Thus, including the two years from the Flood to the birth of Arphaxad, the period from the Flood to the birth of Abraham was three hundred and fifty-two years. The next period is from the birth of Abraham to the Exodus. This, according to the Hebrew, extends to five hundred and five years. The difficulty here is as to the four hundred and thirty years mentioned Ex. 12:40, 41; Gal. 3:17. These years are regarded by some as dating from the covenant with Abraham (Gen. 15), which was entered into soon after his sojourn in Egypt; others, with more probability, reckon these years from Jacob's going down into Egypt. (See EXODUS T0001283.) In modern times the systems of Biblical chronology that have been adopted are chiefly those of Ussher and Hales. The former follows the Hebrew, and the latter the Septuagint mainly. Archbishop Ussher's (died 1656) system is called the short chronology. It is that given on the margin of the Authorized Version, but is really of no authority, and is quite uncertain. | Ussher Hales | B.C. B.C. | Creation 4004 5411 | Flood 2348 3155 | Abram leaves Haran 1921 2078 | Exodus 1491 1648 | Destruction of the | Temple 588 586 To show at a glance the different ideas of the date of the creation, it may be interesting to note the following: From Creation to 1894. According to Ussher, 5,898; Hales, 7,305; Zunz (Hebrew reckoning), 5,882; Septuagint (Perowne), 7,305; Rabbinical, 5,654; Panodorus, 7,387; Anianus, 7,395; Constantinopolitan, 7,403; Eusebius, 7,093; Scaliger, 5,844; Dionysius (from whom we take our Christian era), 7,388; Maximus, 7,395; Syncellus and Theophanes, 7,395; Julius Africanus, 7,395; Jackson, 7,320.

By this term we understand the technical and historical chronology of the Jews and their ancestors from the earliest time to the close of the New Testament Canon. 1. TECHNICAL CHRONOLOGY.--The technical part of Hebrew chronology presents great difficulties. 2. HISTORICAL CHRONOLOGY.--The historical part of Hebrew chronology is not less difficult than the technical. The information in the Bible is indeed direct rather than inferential although there is very important evidence of the latter kind, but the present state of the numbers make absolute certainty in many cases impossible. Three principal systems of biblical chronology have been founded, which may be termed (the Long System, the short, and the Rabbinical. There is a fourth, which although an off shoot in part of the last, can scarcely be termed biblical, in as much as it depends for the most part upon theories, not only independent of but repugnant to the Bible: this last is at present peculiar to Baron Bunsen. The principal advocates of the Long chronology are Jackson. Hales and Des-Vignoles. Of the Short chronology Ussher may be considered as the most able advocate The Rabbinical chronology accept the biblical numbers, but makes the most arbitrary corrections. For the date of the Exodus it has been virtually accepted by Bunsen, Lepsius and Lord A. Hervey. The numbers given by the LXX. for the antediluvian patriarchs would place the creation of Adam 2262 years before the end of the flood or B.C. cir. 5361 or 5421.

CHRONOLOGY . We present here a condensation of the article of R. S. Poole on this subject in Smith's Dictionary of the Bible. We must seek a via media between putting absolute reliance upon the biblical chronological data and declaring them altogether vague and uncertain. The truth is, the Bible does not give a complete history of the times to which it refers; in its historical portions it deals with special and detached periods. This accounts for its scantiness and occasional want of continuity. Hence there is great value in independent evidence in the N.T. and in incidental evidence in the O.T. Scientific observation of the natural changes of the weather and the seasons was probably unknown to the Jews until the Captivity. But still these changes must have been noted, and from these observations we are safe in deducing their divisions of time. An hour was the smallest division the Jews recognized. The "sun-dial of Ahaz" -whatever instrument, fixed or movable, it may have been- implies a division of the kind. The civil day was reckoned from sunset, the natural day from sunrise. The night was divided into three watches, though the first must be inferred. The "middle watch" occurs in Jud 7:19; the "morning watch" is mentioned in Ex 14:24 and 1 Sam 11:11. In the N.T. four watches are mentioned -the Roman system; all four are mentioned together in Mark 13:35 -the late watch, midnight, the cock-crowing, and the early watch. The Hebrew week was a period of seven days, ending with the Sabbath, which word indeed is often used for "week." As the Egyptians divided their month of 30 days into decades, the Hebrews could not have borrowed their week from them; probably both it and the Sabbath were used and observed by the patriarchs. The month was lunar. The first day of it is called the "new moon," and was observed as a sacred festival. In the Pentateuch, Joshua, Judges, and Ruth we find but one month, the first, the month Abib, mentioned with a special name, the rest being called according to their order. In 1 Kgs. three other names appear -Zif, the second, Ethanim, the seventh, and Bui, the eighth. No other names are found in any book prior to the Captivity. The year was made up of 12 lunar months, beginning with the first part of our April. The method of intercalation can only have been that which obtained after the Captivity -the addition of a thirteenth month whenever the twelfth ended too long before the equinox for the first-fruits of the barley-harvest to be offered in the middle of the month following, and the similar offerings at the time appointed. The later Jews had two beginnings to the year, the seventh month of the civil reckoning being Abib, the first of the sacred. The sabbatical and jubilee years began in the seventh month. Agricultural considerations probably led to this anomaly. The seasons do not appear to have been fixed among the ancient Hebrews. We find mention of the merely natural divisions of "summer and winter," "seed-time and harvest." Anciently, their festivals and holy-days were noticeably few; for besides the Sabbaths and new moons, there were but four great festivals and one fast -the feasts of the Passover, of weeks, trumpets, tabernacles, and the fast on the day of atonement. But after the Captivity many holy days were added, such as the feast of Purim, of the dedication -recording the cleansing and rededication of the temple by Judas Maccabseus- and fasts on the anniversaries of great national misfortunes connected with the Babylonish captivity. The sabbatical year was a year of rest. It commenced at the civil beginning of the year, with the seventh month, at the feast of tabernacles. Deut 31:10. The jubilee year began on the day of atonement, after the lapse of seven sabbatical periods, or 49 years. It was similar to the sabbatical year in its character, although doubtless yet more important. Eras seem to have been used by the ancient Hebrews, but our information is scanty. The Exodus is used as an era in 1 Kgs 6:1, in giving the date of Solomon's temple. The era of Jehoiachin's captivity is constantly used by Ezekiel. The earliest date is the fifth year, Ezekiel 1:2, and the latest the twenty seventh Ezekiel 29:17. The era of the Seleucidae is used in the First and Second Maccabees, and the liberation of the Jews from the Syrian yoke, in the first year of Simon the Maccabee, is stated to have been commemorated by an era used in contracts and agreements. 1 Macc 13:41-42. Regnal years seem to have been counted from the beginning of the year, not from the day of the king's accession. We may distinguish different periods in Jewish history, although we are not able with accuracy to assign them dates. 1. From Adam to Abram's departure from Haran. This period is the most indefinite of all. We have indeed two genealogical lists -from Adam to Noah and his sons, Gen 5:3-32, and again from Shem to Abram. Gen 11:10-26. But the Masoretic Hebrew text, the Septuagint, and the Samaritan Pentateuch greatly differ. The Septuagint makes this period 1000 years longer than the Hebrew. The question to which list the preference should be given is still unsettled. 2. The second period is from Abram's departure from Haran to the Exodus. The length of this period is stated by Paul in Gal 3:17 to be 430 years, and there is no difficulty in the way of accepting his figures which cannot be solved. 3. The third period is from the Exodus to the foundation of Solomon's temple. We may consider this period about 638 years, but others reduce it to one-half. 4. The fourth period is from the foundation of Solomon's temple to its destruction. We come now upon tolerably sure ground; from b.c. 1000 on we have contemporary evidence. Two interregnums have been supposed -one of 11 years, between Jeroboam II and Zachariah, and the other of 9 years, between Pekah and Hoshea. We prefer, in both cases, to suppose a longer reign of the earlier of the two kings between whom the interregnums are conjectured. The whole period may be held to be of about 425 years; that of the undivided kingdom, 120 years; that of the kingdom of Judah, about 388 years; and that of the kingdom of Israel, about 255 years. 5. The fifth period is from the destruction of Solomon's temple to the return from the Babylonish captivity. The difficulty in calculating this period springs from the prophesied number -the 70 years. Two numbers, held by some to be identical, must here be considered. One is the period of 70 years, during which the tyranny of Babylon over Palestine and the East generally was to last, Jer 25; and the other the 70 years of the Babylonish captivity. The commencement of the first is the first year of Nebuchadnezzar and the fourth of Jehoiakim, Jer 25:1, when the successes of the king of Babylon began, Jer 46:2, and the conclusion is the fall of Babylon. The famous 70 years of captivity would seem to be the same period, since it was to terminate with the return of the captives, Jer 29:10; and the order for this was published by Cyrus, who took Babylon, in the first year of his reign. Principal Systems of Biblical Chronology. -There are three, long, short, and Rabbinical. The long chronology takes the Septuagint for the patriarchal generations, and adopts the long interval from the Exodus to the foundation of Solomon's temple. The short chronology -that in the margin of the A.V., and derived from Archbishop Ussher (1580-1656)- takes the Hebrew for the patriarchal generations, and makes the second period to be 480 years. The Rabbinical chronology accepts the biblical numbers, but makes the most arbitrary corrections. We subjoin a table in which the results of some of the more important of the various chronological schools are contrasted:

There are three principal systems, the Long, the Short, and the Rabbinical The nature of the evidence hardly admits of certainty as to all details. The dates of the flood, etc., are thus differently given in the Septuagint, the Hebrew, and the Samaritan Pentateuch: Hales takes the long system mainly from the Septuagint account of the patriarchal generations. He rightly rejects the number 480 years assigned in 1 Kings 6:1 as having elapsed from the Exodus to the foundation of the temple in the fourth year of Solomon's reign. It must be an ancient error of transcribers, because 40 years elapsed from the Exodus to the death of Moses, Joshua was for more than seven years Israel's leader in Canaan, Israel's servitude and the rule of the judges to Eli's death occupied 430 years, thence to Saul's accession was more than 20 years, Saul's reign was 40 years, David's reign was 40 years, Solomon's reign, before the temple's foundation, was 3 years; i.e. 580 years in all: besides the unknown intervals between Joshua's leadership of seven years and his death; and again between his death and the first servitude; also the unknown period, above 20 years, between Eli's death and Saul's accession. These unknown times are approximately estimated at 6 years, 32 years, and 20 years respectively, i.e. 58 years in all; which, added to the 580 years, will give 638 years. The Old Testament never dates events from an era, which makes 1 Kings 6:1 suspicious. Origen, Commentary (John 2:20), quotes 1 Kings 6:1 without the words "in the 480th year." See also Judges 11:26. But (See EGYPT below as to Thothmes III and the inscription favoring 1 Kings 6:1. Ussher is the representative of the short system, following the Hebrew in the patriarchal generations, and taking the 480 years as given in 1 Kings 6:1 between the Exodus and the foundation of the temple. The rabbinical system is partly accepted in Germany; it takes the Biblical numbers, but makes arbitrary corrections: The differences between the Hebrew and the Septuagint consist in the periods assigned by them respectively to the patriarchs before and after the births of their oldest sons. Thus, Adam lives 130 years before the birth of his oldest son in Hebrew, but 230 years in the Septuagint; Seth is 105 in the Hebrew text, but 205 years in the Septuagint, etc. After the births of their oldest sons, Adam, 800; Seth, 807 in Hebrew, but 700 and 707 in the Septuagint; thus, the totals come to the same, Adam (930), Seth (912), in both Hebrew and Septuagint Similarly, in the case of Enos, Cainan, Mahalaleel. This proves that the change, whether by shortening (if the Septuagint is the true reading, or by lengthening if the Hebrew is the true reading) is NOT accidental but was made on system. The Septuagint and Luke 3:36-37 have a second Cainan, who is omitted in the Hebrew Bible; Philo and Josephus also know nothing of him. In genealogies (e.g. Matthew 1:8) names are often passed over, a man being called "the son of" a remote ancestor, his father and grandfather and great grandfather being omitted; as Joram is followed by Ozias, Ahaziah, Joash, and Amaziah being omitted. For some divine purpose connected with the mystical sense of numbers the generations are condensed into fourteen (the double of the sacred seven) in each of the three periods, from Abraham to David, from David to the captivity, and thence to Christ. Compare Ezra 7:1-5; 1 Chronicles 26:24. So Jehu is "son of Nimshi," also "of Jehoshaphat son of Nimshi" (2 Kings 9:2; 2 Kings 9:14; 2 Kings 9:20; 1 Kings 19:16). Again, the length of generations varies: Abraham, at a time when life was so much longer than now, implies a generation was about 100 years (Genesis 15:16, compare Genesis 15:13), "the fourth generation" answering to "four hundred years." The Hebrew text was preserved with much more scrupulous care than the Septuagint on the other hand, the civilization and history of Egypt, Babylonia, and Assyria reach further back than accords with the Hebrew, and so favor the Septuagint. "The sojourning of Israel who dwelt in Egypt was 430 years" (Exodus 12:40-41). Paul, in Galatians 3:16-17, dates this period from God's promise to Abraham. In Genesis 15:13-14, compare Acts 7:6-7; "thy seed shall be a stranger in a land not theirs ... and they shall afflict them 400 years"; by putting the comma after "afflict them," the "400 years" refers to the whole time of their being "a stranger in a land not theirs," compare Hebrews 11:9. It would not be literally true that the Israelites were afflicted for the whole 400 years by the Egyptians, even if the 400 be applied to the sojourn in Egypt alone. Therefore, there is no greater strain put on the words by supposing the 400 includes the sojourn in Canaan. Abraham probably means (Genesis 15:16), "in the fourth generation they (i.e. some of the fourth generation, allowing 100 years for each generation) shall come hither again." There were more than four generations in fact; thus, in Rth 4:18, etc., 1 Chronicles 2:5-6, there are six generations from Judah to Nahshon, the tribe prince in Moses' time; nine generations from Joseph to Joshua (1 Chronicles 7:20, etc.). Abram was 75 years old upon leaving Haran; 100 at Isaac's birth; Isaac was 60 at Jacob's birth; and Jacob was 130 years old upon entering Egypt -in all 215 years. Again, Joseph was about 45 years old upon entering Egypt, 92 occupied the rest of his life; then followed, after all Joseph's brethren and that generation were dead (Exodus 1:6, etc.), the oppression; Moses was 80 years old at the Exodus. Thus, there will be 172 years, besides the interval between Joseph's generation dying and the oppression, and between the beginning of the oppression and the birth of Moses; which may be reasonably set down as 215 in all; which, added to the 215 in Canaan, will yield the 430 years. The increase from 70 years, at Jacob's going down to Egypt, to 600,000 at the Exodus is accountable when we remember the special fruitfulness promised by God. There were at the eisodus 51 pairs at least bearing children, for there were 67 men, namely, Jacob's 12 sons, 51 grandsons, and four great grandsons, besides one daughter and one granddaughter (Genesis 46:8-27). These 51 must have taken foreign wives. Then, besides, polygamy prevailed. All these causes together fully account for the great increase in 215 years. Another note of time is furnished by Paul (Acts 13:19-21): "after that (the division of Canaan) He; gave judges about the space of 450 years until Samuel"; or rather, as the three oldest manuscripts -the Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, and Alexandrinus manuscripts, "He distributed their land to them for an inheritance, about 450 years. And after that He gave unto them judges until Samuel." The dative in the Greek text marks, not duration of time, as KJV, but a point of time. The point of time backward to which the 450 refers is implied in Acts 13:19, "when He had destroyed seven nations"; i.e., about 450 or 462 elapse between God's promise to drive out those nations in 400 years from that time (Genesis 15:13-21), and God's commencing the fulfillment of it under Joshua; the former date is about 1913, the latter 1451 (Joshua 1). Jephthah makes 300 years elapse between his time and Joshua's division of Canaan (Judges 11:26). Theophilus of Antioch (Autol. 3:22) states that the Tyrian archives of Hiram, David's contemporary, prove that the building of the temple took place 566 years after the Exodus from Egypt. The whole period between the foundation and the destruction of the temple is about 425 years; that of the undivided kingdom 120, that of Judah 388, that of Israel 255. The Median, Hebrew, Babylonian, and Assyrian chronicles, according to J. W. Bosanquet, coincide in making Nebuchadnezzar's reign begin 581 B.C. He makes Jotham's 16 years' reign begin in 734 B.C.; Ahaz' 16 years begin at 718; Hezekiah's 29 begin at 702; Manasseh's 55 begin at 673; Amon's two begin at 618; Josiah's 31 begin at 616; Jehoiakim's 11 begin at 585. Two periods of 70 years are specified by Jeremiah; that during which Babylon's dominion over Israel and the East was to last (Jeremiah 25), and that of the captivity (Jeremiah 29:10; Daniel 9:2), probably identical. The former begins the 1st of Nebuchadnezzar and the 4th of Jehoiakim (606 or 607 B.C.), and ends with Babylon's fall (Jeremiah 25:26), 536 B.C., when Cyrus decreed the return of the Jewish captives (Jeremiah 29:10). Ptolemy's famous canon counts it 66 years; but if the Jewish years meant be the prophetical ones of 360 days each, as in Daniel 12:7, the sum will be about 69 tropical years. (See CAPTIVITY.) Ecclesiastically, the 70 years began with the destruction of the temple 586 B.C., and ended with its restoration in the sixth year of Darius, 516 B.C. The Apis tablets of Egypt prove the synchronism of Josiah and Pharaoh Necho; also they demonstrate that of Hezekiah and Tirhakah. An inscription on the quarries of Silsilis in Upper Egypt records the cutting of stone in the 22nd year of Sheshonk I, or Shishak, for the chief temple of Thebes, where still is to be seen a record of his conquest of Judah; thus confirming the Scripture account of his synchronism with Rehoboam whom he conquered. The Bible puts Rehoboam 249 years before Hezekiah, i.e. 973 B.C.; and Shishak's invasion in his fifth year, i.e. 969; 22 before that would make Shishak's accession 990 B.C., which closely agrees with Manetho's list. R. P. Stewart (Smith's Bible Dictionary) mentions the coincidence, in their commencements, of the vague year of the Egyptians and the Hebrew year at the first Passover; i.e., the 14th of Abib, the full moon of the Passover Exodus, corresponded to the 14th day of a Phamenoth in a vague year commencing at the autumnal equinox; this took place, it is computed, on Thursday, April 21st, 1652 B.C. This date for the Exodus is but four years earlier than Hales's, and the interval to Solomon's temple foundation is 642, only four more than the 638 obtained above by Bible calculations. Thus, 430 back to the promise to Abraham (Genesis 15) will bring the promise to 2082 B.C. But see above on the 450 years in Acts 13:20. Stewart takes Peleg's birth, 2698 or (correcting Terah's age at Abraham's birth) 2758. Abraham was perhaps youngest son of Terah; for Terah was 70 when he began having sons, and died at 205 years old (Genesis 11:26; Genesis 11:32), and Abraham was 75 when he left Haran (Genesis 12:4). This would make Terah survive Abraham's migration 60 years, if Abraham were the oldest (Genesis 11:26). But Acts 7:4 says Terah died BEFORE it. Therefore, Terah was probably 130 years old when Abraham was born, and died when Abraham was 75, at his migration from Haran. Haran, the older brother of Abraham, was father of Iscah = Sarah (Genesis 11:27-29). Since Milcah married her uncle Nahor, so Iscah, = Sarai, her uncle Abraham; hence, he calls her his sister, as granddaughter of (i.e. sprung from) his father, though not sprung from his mother (Genesis 20:12). She was only ten years younger than Abraham (Genesis 17:17), which shows Abraham was Terah's YOUNGEST son. The flood he assigns to 3099 or 3159. The Egyptian monuments do not carry us back for the foundation of its first kingdom earlier than the latter end of the 28th century B.C. Adam's creation he makes 5361 or 5421. G. Rawlinson truly says: nothing in ancient manuscripts is so liable to corruption from mistakes of copyists as numbers, it is quite possible that we may not possess Moses' real scheme in any of the three extant versions of his words." The traditions of Greece, Babylon, and Egypt confirm the Scripture account of the longevity of the patriarchs. Sprung from a pair originally immortal, living a simple even course of life, they retained some of the original vitality of Adam's state in paradise. This longevity favored the multiplication of mankind, and the formation of marked character for good or evil in the different races. The geological arguments for man's great antiquity are relics of man, flints, etc., in recent formations, along with bones of the mammoth and extinct animals; it is argued that, at the present rate of deposition, the beds that overlie these remains must have taken a vast time to form. But probably causes were at work at the time of their formation which made the rate much speedier than it is now. A mammoth has been found in the Siberian ice with skin, hair, and flesh; and it is hardly likely that it was dead more than 6,000 years. Many animals have become extinct within the human period. The present population is about that which would spring from a single pair in 6,000 years. The historical arguments for man's great antiquity, from Egyptian lists of dynasties, are set aside by the strong probability that many of these are contemporary dynasties. Another argument is drawn from the slowness of growth of languages, e.g. 1,500 years have been taken in forming from Latin the French, Italian, and Spanish languages. But it is only the languages with a literature that change slowly; a few years suffice to change completely a language without a literature, wild tribes in a single generation cannot comprehend one another. The 3,000 years between the flood and the Christian era in the Septuagint allow 1,800 years before the Vedas for the Sanskrit tongue to have reached the perfection apparent in that poem. Besides, the miraculous Babel-confounding of tongues is to be taken into account. The ethnological objection from the fixity of type in the negro as represented under Sethos I on the monuments is answered by the consideration that races placed continuously under the same conditions of climate and other circumstances do not change. The negroes may have been in Africa 1,500 years before Sethos I. Rapid changes take place when circumstances change rapidly, as in Europeans settling in N. America. The Genealogies in Genesis 5 and Genesis 11 give only the great leading links, omitting many intermediate ones. frontGENEALOGIES.)