| |
APPENDIX I
CHRONOLOGICAL TREATISE
AND TABLES
THE point of contact between sacred and profane chronology,
and therefore the first certain date, in biblical history, is the accession
of Nebuchadnezzar to the throne of Babylon (cf. Daniel 1:1 and
Jeremiah 25:1). From this date we reckon on to Christ and back to Adam.
The agreement of leading chronologers is a sufficient guarantee that David
began to reign in B.C. l056-5, and therefore that all dates subsequent
to that event can be definitely fixed. But beyond this epoch, certainty
vanishes.. The marginal dates of our English Bible represent: in the
main Archbishop Ussher's chronology,[*] and notwithstanding his eminence
as a chronologer some of these dates are doubtful, and others entirely
wrong.
* Bishop Lloyd, to whom was entrusted the task of editing
the A. V., in this respect made a few alterations, as ex. gr.,
in the book of Nehemiah he rejected Ussher's chronology, and inserted
the true historical date of the reign of Artaxerxes Longimanus.
Of the doubtful dates in Ussher's scheme the reigns of Belshazzar
and "Ahasuerus" may serve as examples. Belshazzar's case is specially interesting.
Scripture plainly states that he was King of Babylon at its conquest by
the Medo-Persians, and that he was slain the night Darius entered the city.
On the other hand, not only does no ancient historian mention Belshazzar,
but all agree that the last king of Babylon was Nabonidus, who was absent
from the city when the Persians captured it, and who afterwards submitted
to the conquerors at Borsippa. Thus the contradiction between history and
Scripture appeared to be absolute. Skeptics appealed to history to discredit
the book of Daniel; and commentators solved or shirked the difficulty by
rejecting history. The cuneiform inscriptions, however, have now settled
the controversy in a manner as satisfactory as it was unexpected. On clay
cylinders discovered by Sir H. Rawlinson at Mughier and other Chaldean sites,
Belshazzar (Belsaruzur) is named by Nabonidus as his eldest son. The inference
is obvious, that during the latter years of his father's reign, Belshazzar
was King-Regent in Babylon. According to Ptolemy's canon Nabonidus reigned
seventeen years (from s. c. 555 to B.C. 538), and Ussher gives these years
to Belshazzar.
In common with many other writers, Ussher has assumed that the King of the
book of Esther was Darius Hystaspes, but it is now generally agreed that
it is the son and successor of Darius who is there mentioned as Ahasuerus
– "a name which orthographically corresponds with the Greek Xerxes."[1]
1. Rawlinson's Herodotus, 4., p. 212. Xerxes
(old Persian Khshayarsha) is derived by Sir H. Rawlinson from Khshaya,
'a King'" (Ibid. 3., 446, App. Book 6. note A).
The great durbar of the first chapter of Esther, held
in his third year (ver. 3), was presumably with a view to his expedition
against Greece (B.C. 483); and the marriage of Esther was in his seventh
year (2:16), having been delayed till then on account of his absence during
the campaign. The marginal dates of the book of Esther should therefore
begin with B.C. 486, instead of B.C. 521, as given in our English Bibles.
But these are comparatively trivial points, whereas the principal error
of Ussher's chronology is of real importance. According to 1 Kings 6:1,
Solomon began to build the Temple "in the 480th year after the children
of Israel were come out of the land of Egypt." The mystic character of this
era of 480 years has been noticed in an earlier chapter. Ussher assumed
that it represented a strictly chronological period, and reckoning back
from the third year of Solomon, he fixed the date of the Exodus as B.C.
1491, – an error which vitiates his entire system.
Acts 13:18-21, St. Paul, in treating of the interval between the Exodus
and the end of Saul's reign, specifies three several periods; viz., 40 years,
about 450 years, and 40 years = 530 years. From the accession of
David to the third year of Solomon, when the temple was founded, was forty-three
years. According to this enumeration therefore, the period between the Exodus
and the temple was 530 + 43 years = 573 years. Clinton, however, whose chronology
has been very generally adopted, conjectures that there was an interval
of twenty-seven years between the death of Moses and the first servitude,
and an interval of twelve years between "Samuel the prophet" (1 Samuel 7)
and the election of Saul. Accordingly he estimates the period between the
Exodus and the temple as 573 + 27 + 12 years = 612 years.[2]
2. Josephus appears to confirm this in Ant. 20:10
Ch. 1, where he specifies 612 years between the Exodus and the temple,
but in Ant. 8:3 Ch. 1, he fixes the same period at 592 years.
It is supposed that in the longer era he included the twenty years during
which both the temple and the palace were building.
Clinton's leading dates, therefore, are as follows:--
- B.C. 4138. – Adam.
B.C. 2482. – The Deluge.
B.C. 2055. – The Call of Abraham.
B.C. 1625. – The Exodus.
B.C. 1096. – The Election of Saul.
B.C. 1056. – David.
B.C. 1016. – Solomon.
B.C.. 976. – Rehoboam.
B.C. 606. – The Captivity (i.e., the Servitude to Babylon).
In this chronology Browne proposes three corrections (Ordo
Sec., Ch. 10, 13); viz., he rejects the two conjectural terms of
twenty-seven years and twelve years above noticed; and he adds two years
to the period between the Deluge and the Exodus. If this last correction
be adopted (and it is perfectly legitimate, considering that approximate
accuracy is all that the ablest chronologer can claim to have attained
for this era), let three years be added to the period between the
Deluge and the Covenant with Abraham, and the latter event becomes exactly,
as it is in any case approximately, the central epoch between the Creation
and the Crucifixion. The date of the Deluge will thus be put back to B.C.
2485, and therefore the Creation will be B.C. 4141.
The following most striking features appear in the chronology as thus
settled:--
- From Adam to the Covenant with Abraham (B.C. 4141 to
B.C. 2055) is 2086 years.
From Abraham to the Crucifixion of Christ (B.C. 2055 to A.D. 32) is
2086 years.
From Adam to the Deluge (B.C. 4141 to B.C. 2485) is 1656 years.
From the Deluge to the Covenant (B.C. 2485 to B.C. 2055) is 430 years.
From the Covenant to the Exodus (B.C. 2055 to B.C. 1625) is 430 years.
From the Exodus to the Crucifixion (B.C. 1625 to A.D. 32) is 1656 years.[3]
3. Cf. Browne Ordo Saec. Ch.
13. His system, however, compels him to specify the destruction of Jerusalem
(A. D. 70) as the close of the Mosaic economy, which is certainly wrong.
The crucifixion was the great crisis in the history of Judah and of
the world.
The Covenant here mentioned is that recorded in Genesis
12 in connection with the call of Abraham. The statements of Scripture
relating to this part of the chronology may seem to need explanation in
two respects.
Stephen declares in Acts 7:4 that Abraham's removal from Haran (or Charran)
took place after the death of his father. But Abraham was only
seventy-five years of age when he entered Canaan; whereas if we assume
from Genesis 11:26 that Abraham was born when Terah was but seventy, he
must have been one hundred and thirty at the call, for Terah died at two
hundred and five. (Compare Genesis 11:26, 31, 32; 12:4.) The fact however
is obvious from these statement that though named first among the sons
of Terah, Abraham was not the firstborn, but the youngest: Terah was seventy
when his eldest son was born, and he had three sons, Haran, Nahor, and
Abraham. To ascertain his age at Abraham's birth we must needs turn to
the history, and there we learn it was one hundred and thirty years.[4]
And this will account for the deference Abraham paid to Lot, who, though
his nephew, was nevertheless his equal in years, possibly his senior;
and moreover, as the son of Abraham's eldest brother, the nominal head
of the family. (Genesis 13:8, 9.)
4. Clinton, F. H., vol. 1., p. 299. Alford's supercilious
comments on this (Gr. Test., Acts 7:4) could be easily disposed
of were the occasion opportune for the discussion this would involve.
Indeed a passing reference to Genesis 25:1, 2, would have modified his
statements.
Again. According to Exodus 12:40 "the sojourning of the children
of Israel, who dwelt in Egypt, was 430 years." If this be taken to mean
(as the statement in Genesis 15:13, quoted by Stephen in Acts 7:6, might
also seem to imply) that the Israelites were four centuries in Egypt, the
entire chronology must be changed. But, as St. Paul explains in Galatians
3:17, these 430 years are to be computed from the call of Abraham, and not
from the going down of Israel into Egypt. The statement in Genesis 15:13
is explained and qualified by the words which follow in ver. 16. The entire
period of Israel's wanderings was to be four centuries, but when the passage
speaks definitely of their sojourn in Egypt it says: "In the fourth generation
they shall come hither again" – a word which was accurately fulfilled,
for Moses was the fourth in descent from Jacob.[5]
5. His mother was a daughter of Levi (Exodus 2:1).
It was not till 470 years after the covenant with Abraham
that his descendants took their place as one of the nations of the earth.
They were slaves in Egypt, and in the wilderness they were wanderers; but
under Joshua they entered the land of promise and became a nation. And with
this last event begins a series of cycles of "seventy weeks" of years.
- From the entrance into Canaan (B.C. 1586-5) to the
establishment of the kingdom under Saul (B.C. 1096) was 490 years.
From the kingdom (B.C. 1096) to the servitude to Babylon (B.C. 606)
was 490 years.
From the epoch of the servitude (B.C. 606) until the royal edict of
the twentieth year of Artaxerxes Longimanus, the national independence
of Judah was in abeyance, and with that date began the mystic era of
490 years, which form the "seventy weeks" of the prophecy of Daniel.
Again the period Between the dedication of the first temple
in the eleventh year of Solomon (B.C. 1066-5) and the dedication of the
second temple in the sixth year of Darius Hystaspes of Persia (B.C. 515),
was 490 years.[6]
6. It is a remarkable coincidence that the era of the
second temple was so nearly this same period of 490 years, B. C. 515
to about B. C. 18 when Herod rebuilt it.
Are we to conclude that these results are purely accidental?
No thoughtful person will hesitate to accept the more reasonable alternative
that the chronology of the world is part of a Divine plan or "economy of
times and seasons."
The chronological inquiry suggested by the data afforded by the books of
2 Kings, 2 Chronicles, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and Daniel, is of principal importance,
not only as establishing the absolute accuracy of Scripture, but also because
it throws light upon the main question of the several eras of the captivity,
which again are closely allied with the era of the seventy weeks.
The student of the book of Daniel finds every step beset with difficulties,
raised either by avowed enemies, or quasi expositors of Holy Writ.
Even the opening statement of the book has been assailed on all sides. That
Daniel was made captive in the third year of Jehoiakim "is simply an invention
of late Christian days," declares the author of Messiah the Prince (p.
42), in keeping with the style in which this writer disposes of history
sacred and profane, in order to support his own theories.
In Dean Milman's History of the Jews, the page which treats of this epoch
is full of inaccuracies. First he confounds the seventy years of the desolations,
predicted in Jeremiah 25, with the seventy years of the servitude, which
had already begun. Then as the prophecy of Jeremiah 25 was given in the
fourth year of Jehoiakim, he fixes the first capture of Jerusalem in that
year, whereas Scripture expressly states it took place in Jehoiakim's third
year (Daniel 1:1). He proceeds to specify B.C. 601 as the year of Nebuchadnezzar's
invasion; and here the confusion is hopeless, as he mentions two periods
of three years each between that date and the king's death, which nevertheless
he rightly assigns to the year B.C. 598.
Again, Dr. F. W. Newman's article on the Captivities, in Kitto's
Cyclopaedia, well deserves notice as a specimen of the kind of criticism
to be found in standard books ostensibly designed to aid the study of Scripture.
- "The statement with which the book of Daniel opens
is" (he maintains) "in direct collision with the books of Kings and
Chronicles, which assign to Jehoiakim an eleven years' reign, as also
with Jeremiah 25:1. It partially rests on 2 Chronicles 36:6, which is
itself not in perfect accordance with 2 Kings 24. In the earlier history
the war broke out during the reign of Jehoiakim, who died before its
close; and when his son and successor Jehoiachin had reigned three months,
the city and its king were captured. But in the Chronicles the same
event is made to happen twice over at an interval of three months and
ten days (2 Chronicles 36:6 and 9); and even so we do not obtain accordance
with the received interpretation of Daniel 1:1-3."
This writer's conclusions are adopted by Dean Stanley
in his Jewish Church (vol. 2., p. 459), wherein he enumerates among
the captives taken with Jehoiachin in the eighth year of Nebuchadnezzar,
the prophet Daniel, who had gained a position at the court of Babylon
six years before Jehoiachin came to the throne! (Compare 2 Kings 24:12
with Daniel 2:1.)
A reference to the Five Great Monarchies (vol. 3., pp. 488-494),
and the Fasti Hellenici, will show how thoroughly consistent the
sacred history of this period appears to the mind of a historian or a
chronologer; and moreover how completely it harmonizes with the extant
fragments of the history of Berosus.
Jehoiakim did in fact reign eleven years. In his third year he became
the vassal of the King of Babylon. For three years he paid tribute, and
in his sixth year he revolted. There is not a shadow of reason for believing
that the first verse of Daniel is spurious; and apart from all claim to
Divine sanction for the book, the idea that such a writer – a man
of princely rank and of the highest culture, (Daniel 1:3, 4.) and raised
to the foremost place among the wise and noble of Babylonia – was
ignorant of the date and circumstances of his own exile, is simply preposterous.
But according to Dr. Newman, he needed to refer to the book of Chronicles
for the information, and was deceived thereby! A comparison of the statements
in Kings, Chronicles, and Daniel clearly establishes that the narratives
are independent, each giving details omitted in the other books. The second
verse of Daniel appears inconsistent with the rest only to a mind capable
of supposing that the living king of Judah was placed as an ornament in
the temple of Belus along with the holy vessels; for so Dr. Newman has
read it. And the apparent inconsistency in 2 Chronicles 36:6 disappears
when read with the context, for the eighth verse shows the writer's knowledge
that Jehoiakim completed his reign in Jerusalem. Moreover the correctness
of the entire history is signally established by fixing the chronology
of the events, a crucial test of accuracy.
Jerusalem was first taken by the Chaldeans in the third year of Jehoiakim
(Daniel 1:1). His fourth year was current with the first of Nebuchadnezzar
(Jeremiah 25:1). This accords with the deft, the statement of Berosus
that Nebuchadnezzar's first expedition took place before his actual accession
(Jos., Apion, 1. 19). According to the canon of Ptolemy, the accuracy
of which has been fully established, the reign of Nebuchadnezzar dates
from B.C. 604, i.e., his accession was in the year beginning the
first Thoth (which fell in January) B.C. 604, and the history leaves no
doubt it was early in that year. But the captivity, according to the era
of Ezekiel, began in Nebuchadnezzar's eighth year (comp. Ezekiel 1:2 and
2 Kings 24:12); and in the thirty-seventh year of the captivity, Nebuchadnezzar's
successor was on the throne (2 Kings 25:27). This would give Nebuchadnezzar
a reign of at least forty-four years, whereas according to the Canon (and
Berosus confirms it) he reigned only forty-three years, and
was succeeded by Evil-Merodach (the Iluoradam
of the Canon), in B.C. 561.
It follows therefore that Scripture antedates the years of Nebuchadnezzar,
computing his reign from B.C. 605.[7] This would be sufficiently accounted
for by the fact that, from the conquest of Jerusalem in the third year
of Jehoiakim, the Jews acknowledged Nebuchadnezzar as their suzerain.
It has been overlooked, however, that it is in accordance with the ordinary
principle on which they reckoned regnal years, computing them from Nisan
to Nisan. In B.C. 604 the 1st Nisan fell on or about the 1st April,[8]
and according to Jewish reckoning, the King's second year would begin
on that day, no matter how recently he had ascended the throne. Therefore
"the fourth year of Jehoiakim that was the first year of Nebuchadnezzar"
(Jeremiah 25:1), was the year beginning Nisan B.C. 605; and the third
of Jehoiakim, in which Jerusalem was taken and the servitude began, was
the year beginning Nisan B.C. 606.
7. Clinton, F. H., vol. 1., p. 367.
8. The Paschal new moon, in B. C. 604, was on the 31st of March.
This result is most remarkably confirmed by Clinton, who
fixes the summer of B.C. 606 as the date of Nebuchadnezzar's first expedition.[9]
9. F. H., vol. 1., p. 328.
It is further confirmed by, and affords the explanation of
a statement of Daniel, which has been triumphantly appealed to in depreciation
of the value of his book. If, it is urged, the King of Babylon kept Daniel
three years in training before admitting him to his presence, how could
the prophet have interpreted the King's dream in his second year? (Daniel
1:5, 18; 2:1). Daniel, a citizen of Babylon, and a courtier withal, naturally
and of course computed his sovereign's reign according to the common era
in use around him (as Nehemiah afterwards did in like circumstances.) But
as the prophet was exiled in B.C. 606, his three years' probation terminated
at the close of B.C. 603, whereas the second year of Nebuchadnezzar, computed
from his actual accession, extended to some date in the early months of
B.C. 602.
Again. The epoch of Jehoiachin's
captivity was in the eighth year of Nebuchadnezzar (2 Kings 24:12),
i.e., his eighth year as reckoned from Nisan.
But the ninth year of the captivity was still current on the tenth Tebeth
in the ninth year of Zedekiah and seventeenth of Nebuchadnezzar (comp. Ezekiel
24:1, 2, with 2 Kings 25:1-8).
And the nineteenth year of Nebuchadnezzar
and eleventh of Zedekiah, in which Jerusalem
was destroyed, was in part concurrent with the twelfth year of the captivity
(comp. 2 Kings 25:2-8 with Ezekiel 33:21).
It follows therefore that Jehoiachin (Jeconiah) must have been taken
at the close of the Jewish year ("when the year was expired," 2 Chronicles
36:10), that is the year preceding 1st Nisan, B.C. 597; and Zedekiah was
made king (after a brief interregnum) early in the year beginning on that
day.[10] And it also follows that whether computed according to the era
of Nebuchadnezzar, of Zedekiah, or of the captivity, B.C. 587 was the year
in which "the city was smitten."[11]
10. This is confirmed by Ezekiel 40:1, compared with
2 Kings 25:8, for the twenty-fifth year of the captivity was the fourteenth
year after the destruction of Jerusalem (viz., the nineteenth of Nebuchadnezzar),
reckoned inclusively according to the ordinary practice of the
Jews.
11. These results will appear at a glance by reference to the table
appended.
The first link in this chain of dates is the third year of
Jehoiakim, and every new link confirms the proof of the correctness and
importance of that date. It has been justly termed the point of contact
between sacred and profane history; and its importance in the sacred chronology
is immense on account of its being the epoch of the servitude of Judah to
the King of Babylon.
The servitude must not be confounded with the captivity, as it generally
is. It was rebellion against the Divine decree which entrusted the imperial
scepter to Nebuchadnezzar, that brought on the Jews the further judgment
of a national deportation, and the still more terrible chastisement of the
"desolations." The language of Jeremiah is most definite in this respect.
"I have given all these lands into the hand of Nebuchadnezzar, the king
of Babylon, my servant." "The nation which will not serve the same Nebuchadnezzar,
the king of Babylon, that nation will I punish, saith the Lord, with the
sword, and with the famine, and with the pestilence, until I have consumed
them by his hand." "But the nations that bring their neck under the yoke
of the king of Babylon, and serve him, those will I let remain still
in their own land, saith the Lord, and they shall till it and dwell
therein" (Jeremiah 27:6, 8 11; and comp. chap.38:17-21).
The appointed era of this servitude was seventy years, and the twenty-ninth
chapter of Jeremiah was a message of hope to the captivity, that at the
expiration of that period they should return to Jerusalem (ver. 10). The
twenty-fifth chapter, oil the oilier hand, was a prediction for the rebellious
Jews who remained in Jerusalem after the servitude had commenced, warning
them that their stubborn disobedience would bring on them utter destruction,
and that for seventy years the whole land should be "a desolation."
To recapitulate. The thirty-seventh year of the captivity was current on
the accession of Evil-Merodach (2 Kings 25:27), and the epoch of that king's
reign was B.C. 561. Therefore the captivity dated from the year beginning
Nisan 598 and ending Adar 597. But this was the eighth year of Nebuchadnezzar
according to Scripture reckoning. Therefore his first year was Nisan 605
to Nisan 604. The first capture of Jerusalem and the beginning of the servitude
was during the preceding year, 606-605. The final destruction of the city
was in Nebuchadnezzar's nineteenth year, i.e., 587, and the siege
began 10th Tebeth (or about 25th December), 589, which was the epoch of
the desolations. The burning of Jerusalem cannot have been B.C. 588, as
given by Ussher, Prideaux, etc., for in that case[12] the captivity would
have begun B.C. 599, and the thirty-seventh year would have ended before
the accession of Evil-Merodach. Nor can it have been B.C. 586, as given
by Jackson, Hales, etc., for then the thirty-seventh year would not have
begun during Evil-Merodach's first year.[13]
12. As this event was in the nineteenth year of Nebuchadnezzar
(2 Kings 25:8), and the captivity began in his eighth year (2 Kings
24:12).
13. Clinton, F. H.. , vol. 1., p. 319.
This scheme is practically the same as Clinton's,[14] and
the sanction of his name may be claimed for it, for it differs from his
only in that he dates Jehoiakim's reign from August B.C. 609, and
Zedekiah's from June B.C. 598, his attention not having been called
to the Jewish practice of computing reigns from Nisan; whereas I
have fixed Nisan B.C. 608 as the epoch of Jehoiakim's reign, and Nisan B.C.
597 for Zedekiah's. Not of course that Nisan was in fact the month-date
of the accession, but that, according to the rule of the Mishna and
the practice of the nation, the reign was so reckoned. Jehoiakim's
date could not be Nisan B.C. 609, because his fourth year was also the first
of Nebuchadnezzar, and the thirty-seventh year, reckoned from the eighth
of Nebuchadnezzar, was the first of Evil-Merodach, i.e., B.C. 561,
which date fixes the whole chronology as Clinton himself conclusively argues.[15]
It follows from this also that: Zedekiah's date must be B.C. 597, and not
598.
14. Ibid., pp. 328-329.
15. Fasti H., vol. 1., p. 319.
The chronology adopted by Dr. Pusey[16] is essentially the
same as Clinton's. The scheme here proposed differs from it only to the
extent and on the grounds above indicated. His suggestion: that the fast
proclaimed in the fifth year of Jehoiakim (Jeremiah 36:9.) referred to the
capture of Jerusalem in his third year, is not improbable, and points to
Chisleu (Nov.) B.C. 606 as the date of that event. For the reasons above
stated, it could not have been B.C. 607, as Dr. Pusey supposes, and the
same argument proves that Canon Rawlinson's date for Nebuchadnezzar's expedition
(B.C. 605) is a year too late.[17]
16. Daniel, p. 401.
17. Five Great Mon., 4. 488.
The correctness of this scheme will, I presume, be admitted,
as regards the cardinal point of difference between it and Clinton's chronology,
namely, that the reigns of the Jewish kings are reckoned from Nisan. It
remains to notice the points of difference between the results here offered
and Browne's hypotheses (Orda Saec., Ch. 162-169). He arbitrarily
assumes that Jehoiachin's captivity and Zedekiah's reign began on the
same day. This leads him to assume further (1) that they were reckoned
from the same day, viz., the 1st Nisan, and (2) that Nebuchadnezzar's
royal years dated from some date between 1st Nisan and 10 Ab 606 (Ch.
166). Both these positions are untenable. (1) The Jews certainly reckoned
the reigns of their kings from 1st Nisan, but there is no proof that they
so reckoned the years of ordinary periods or eras such as the captivity.
(2) The presumption is strong, confirmed by all the synchronisms of the
chronology, that they computed Nebuchadnezzar's royal era either according
to the Chaldean reckoning, as in Daniel, or according to their own system,
as in the other books.
TABLE #1-- CHRONOLOGICAL
TABLE
The following table will show at a glance the several
eras of the servitude to Babylon, king Jehoiachin's captivity, and the
desolations of Jerusalem.
In using the table it is essential to bear in mind two points already
stated.
- 1. The year given
in the first column is the Jewish year beginning the 1st Nisan (March
– April). For example, B.C. 604 is the year beginning the 1st
April, 604; and B.C. 589 is the year beginning the 15th March, 589 According
to the Mishna,[18] "On the 1st of Nisan is a new year for the
computation of the reign of kings, and for festivals." To which the
editors of the English translation add this note:" The reign of Jewish
kings, whatever the period of accession might be, was always reckoned
from the preceding Nisan; so that if, for instance, a Jewish king began
to reign in Adar, the following month (Nisan) would be considered as
the commencement of the second year of his reign. This rule was observed
in all legal contracts, in which the reign of kings was always mentioned."
18. Treatise, Rosh Hashanah, 1. 1.
2. The years of
the different eras are only in part concurrent. For example the
first year of the desolations dates from the tenth day of Tebeth (25th
December), B.C. 589, and the tenth year of the captivity begins even
later, while the ninth year of Zedekiah and seventeenth of Nebuchadnezzar
dates from the 1St Nisan (15th March) B.C. 589.
If these points be kept in view the chronology of the
table will be found to harmonize every chronological statement relating
to the period embraced in it, contained in the Books of Kings, Chronicles,
Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and Daniel.
|
CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE
From the servitude to Babylon to the dedication of the second
temple.
|
|
Jewish Year*
|
Kings of Babylon
|
Kings of Judah
|
Era of the Servitude
|
Era of the Captivity
|
Era of the Desolations
.
|
Events and Remarks
|
|
B.C.
606
|
20th year of Nabopolassar
|
3rd year of Jehoiakim (Eliakim)
|
1
|
-
|
-
|
The 3rd year of Jehoiakim,
from 1st Nisan, 606, to 1st Nisan, 605. Jerusalemtaken by Nebuchadnezzar
(Dan. i. 1, 2), see p. 231, ante. With this event the servitude
to Babylon began, 490 years (or 70 weeks of years) after the establishment
of the Kingdom under Saul. "The 4th year of Jehoiakim, that was the
1st year of Nebuchadnezzar," i.e., the year beginning 1st Nisan,
605 (Jer. xxv. 1). |
|
605
|
Nebuchad
nezzar
|
4
|
2
|
-
|
-
|
|
604
|
2
|
5
|
3
|
-
|
-
|
Vision of the great image (Dan. ii). |
|
603
|
3
|
6
|
4
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|
602
|
4
|
7
|
5
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|
601
|
5
|
8
|
6
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|
600
|
6
|
9
|
7
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|
599
|
7
|
10
|
8
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|
598
|
8
|
11
|
9
|
1
|
-
|
This
year included the 3 months' reign of Jehoiachin (Jeconiah), whose
captivity began in the 8th year of Nebuchadnezzar (2 Kings xxiv. 12,
see pp. 234,
236, ante). |
|
3 months of Jehoiachin
|
|
597
|
9
|
Zedekiah
|
10
|
2
|
-
|
Reigned 11 years (2 Kings xxiv. 18). |
|
596
|
10
|
2
|
11
|
3
|
-
|
-
|
|
595
|
11
|
3
|
12
|
4
|
-
|
-
|
|
594
|
12
|
4
|
13
|
5
|
-
|
Ezekiel began to prophesy in the 30th
year from Josiah's Passover (2 Kings xxiii. 23), and the 5th year
of the captivity (Ezek. i. 1,2.) |
|
593
|
13
|
5
|
14
|
6
|
-
|
-
|
|
592
|
14
|
6
|
15
|
7
|
-
|
-
|
|
591
|
15
|
7
|
16
|
8
|
-
|
-
|
|
590
|
16
|
8
|
17
|
9
|
-
|
-
|
|
589
|
17
|
9
|
18
|
10
|
1
|
Jerusalem invested
for the third time by Nebuchadnezzar, on the 10th day of Tebeth--
"the fast of Tebeth,"-- the epoch of the "Desolations" (see
pp. 69, 70, ante). |
|
588
|
18
|
10
|
19
|
11
|
2
|
"The 10th year of Zedekiah, which was
the 18th year of Nebuchadnezzar" (Jer. xxxii. 1). |
|
587
|
19
|
11
|
20
|
12
|
3
|
Jerusalem
taken on the 9th day of the 4th month, and burnt on the 7th day of
the 5th month in the 11th year of Zedekiah, and the 19th year of Nebuchadnezzar
(2 Kings xxv. 2,3,8,9, see
p. 234, ante), called "The 12th year of
our Captivity" in Ezek. xxxiii. 21, the news having reached the exiles
on the 5th day of the 10th month. |
|
586
|
20
|
-
|
21
|
13
|
4
|
-
|
|
585
|
21
|
-
|
22
|
14
|
5
|
-
|
|
584
|
22
|
-
|
23
|
15
|
6
|
-
|
|
583
|
23
|
-
|
24
|
16
|
7
|
-
|
|
582
|
24
|
-
|
25
|
17
|
8
|
-
|
|
581
|
25
|
-
|
26
|
18
|
9
|
-
|
|
580
|
26
|
-
|
27
|
19
|
10
|
-
|
|
579
|
27
|
28
|
20
|
11
|
-
|
-
|
|
578
|
28
|
29
|
21
|
12
|
-
|
-
|
|
577
|
29
|
30
|
22
|
13
|
-
|
-
|
|
576
|
30
|
31
|
23
|
14
|
-
|
-
|
|
575
|
31
|
32
|
24
|
15
|
-
|
-
|
|
574
|
32
|
33
|
25
|
16
|
-
|
The 25th year of the Captivity was the
14th (inclusive, as the Jews usually reckoned) from the destruction
of Jerusalem (Ezek. xl. 1). |
|
573
|
33
|
34
|
26
|
17
|
-
|
-
|
|
572
|
34
|
35
|
27
|
18
|
-
|
-
|
|
571
|
35
|
36
|
28
|
19
|
-
|
-
|
|
570
|
36
|
37
|
29
|
20
|
-
|
-
|
|
569
|
37
|
38
|
30
|
21
|
-
|
-
|
|
568
|
38
|
39
|
31
|
22
|
-
|
-
|
|
567
|
39
|
40
|
32
|
23
|
-
|
-
|
|
566
|
40
|
41
|
33
|
24
|
-
|
-
|
|
565
|
41
|
42
|
34
|
25
|
-
|
-
|
|
564
|
42
|
43
|
35
|
26
|
-
|
-
|
|
563
|
43
|
44
|
36
|
27
|
-
|
-
|
|
562
|
44
|
45
|
37
|
28
|
-
|
According
to the Canon, the accession of Iluoradam (Evil-Merodach) was in the
year beginning 1st Thoth (11th Jan.) B.C. 561, (see
p. 232, ante). But the year 562 in
this table is the Jewish year, i.e., the year preceding 1st Nisan
(or about 5th April 561, and the 37th year of Jehoiachin's captivity
was current till towards the close of that year. In this year Jehoiachin
was "brought forth out of prison." (Jer. lii. 31). |
|
561
|
Evil-Merodach
|
46
|
38
|
29
|
-
|
-
|
|
560
|
2
|
47
|
39
|
30
|
-
|
-
|
|
559
|
Neriglissar or Nergalsherezer
|
48
|
40
|
31
|
-
|
-
|
|
558
|
2
|
-
|
49
|
41
|
32
|
-
|
|
557
|
3
|
-
|
50
|
42
|
33
|
-
|
|
556
|
4
|
-
|
51
|
43
|
34
|
-
|
|
555
|
Nabonidus
|
-
|
52
|
44
|
35
|
The Nabonadius of the Canon is called
Nabunnahit in the Inscriptions, and Labynetus by Herodotus. |
|
554
|
2
|
-
|
53
|
45
|
36
|
-
|
|
553
|
3
|
-
|
54
|
46
|
37
|
-
|
|
552
|
4
|
-
|
55
|
47
|
38
|
-
|
|
551
|
5
|
-
|
56
|
48
|
39
|
-
|
|
550
|
6
|
-
|
57
|
49
|
40
|
-
|
|
549
|
7
|
-
|
58
|
50
|
41
|
-
|
|
548
|
8
|
-
|
59
|
51
|
42
|
-
|
|
547
|
9
|
-
|
60
|
52
|
43
|
-
|
|
546
|
10
|
-
|
61
|
53
|
44
|
-
|
|
545
|
11
|
-
|
62
|
54
|
45
|
-
|
|
544
|
12
|
-
|
63
|
55
|
46
|
-
|
|
543
|
13
|
-
|
64
|
56
|
47
|
-
|
|
542
|
14
|
-
|
65
|
57
|
48
|
-
|
|
541
|
15
|
-
|
66
|
58
|
49
|
In or before this year, Belshazzar (the
Belsaruzur of the Inscriptions) became regent in the lifetime of his
father, Nabonadius. Daniel's vision of the Four Beasts was in the
1st year, and his vision of the Ram and the Goat was in the 3rd year
of Belshazzar (Dan. vii., viii.). |
|
540
|
16
|
-
|
67
|
59
|
50
|
-
|
|
539
|
17
|
-
|
68
|
60
|
51
|
-
|
|
538
|
Darius (the Mede)
|
-
|
69
|
61
|
52
|
Babylon taken by Cyrus. Daniel's vision
of the 70 weeks was in this year. |
|
537
|
2
|
-
|
70
|
62
|
53
|
-
|
|
536
|
Cyrus
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
54
|
Decree of Cyrus authorizing the Jews
to return to Jerusalem: end of the Servitude. (N.B. The 70th year
of the Servitude was current till the 1st Nisan, 536.) |
|
535
|
2
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
55
|
-
|
|
534
|
3
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
56
|
Year of Daniel's last vision (Dan. x.-xii.). |
|
533
|
4
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
57
|
-
|
|
532
|
5
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
58
|
-
|
|
531
|
6
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
59
|
-
|
|
530
|
7
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
60
|
-
|
|
529
|
Cambyses
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
61
|
-
|
|
528
|
2
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
62
|
-
|
|
527
|
3
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
63
|
-
|
|
526
|
4
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
64
|
-
|
|
525
|
5
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
65
|
-
|
|
524
|
6
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
66
|
-
|
|
523
|
7
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
67
|
-
|
|
522
|
8
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
68
|
-
|
|
521
|
Darius I
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
69
|
Darius
Hystaspes (p.
57, ante). |
|
520
|
2
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
70
|
End
of the Desolations. The foundation of the Second Temple was laid on
the 24th day of the 9th month in the 2nd year of Darius (Hag. ii.
18, see
p. 70, ante). |
|
519
|
3
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|
518
|
4
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|
517
|
5
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|
516
|
6
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
The Temple was finished on the 3rd day
of Adar in the 6th year of Darius (Ezra vi. 15). |
|
515
|
7
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
The Temple
was dedicated at the Passover in Nisan 515 (Ezra vi. 15-22), 490 years
after the dedication of Solomon's temple (B.C. 1005), and 70 years
before the date of the edict to build the city (see
p. 66, ante). |
-
- TABLE #2-- TABLE OF CHRONOLOGICAL
PARALLELISMS
SHOWING THAT THE CALL OF ABRAHAM WAS THE CENTRAL POINT BETWEEN THE
CREATION AND THE CRUCIFIXION
| BC |
|
|
| 4141* Adam –
The Creation |
|
|
| to |
= 1656 yrs |
|
| 2485* Noah –
The Flood |
+
|
= 2086 yrs |
| to |
= 430 yrs |
|
| 2055 Abraham –
The Covenant** |
|
|
| to |
= 430 yrs |
|
| 1625 Moses –
The Law |
+
|
= 2086 yrs |
| to |
= 1656 yrs |
|
| AD 32*** Christ –
The Crucifixion |
|
|
- the key--
* These dates differ from Clinton's chronology
by three years. See p. 223, ante.
** Galatians 3:17 "And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed
before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty
years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none
effect."
*** See pp. 97 and 122, ante.
TABLE #3--
CERTAIN LEADING DATES IN HISTORY, SACRED AND PROFANE[19]
19. These dates are Clinton's, subject to
remarks in App. 1., ante. They are selected mainly to throw light
on Daniel's visions. The names of historians, etc., are introduced in
the fifth century B. C. to indicate the character of the age in which
the prophetic era of the seventy weeks began.
- BC
- 2055. The Covenant with Abraham.
- 1625. The Exodus. The giving of the Law.
- 1585. The entrance into Canaan under Joshua.
- 1096. Saul. The kingdom established.
- 1056. David.
- 1016. Solomon
- 1014. The Temple founded.
- 1006. The Temple dedicated.
- 976. Rehoboam. Israel revolts from Judah, and becomes
a separate kingdom under Jeroboam.
- 776. Era of the Olympiads begins.
- 753. Era of Rome (A.U.C.) begins.
- 747. Era of Nabonassar begins.
- 726. Hezekiah king of Judah (reigned 29 years).
- 721. Israel (the ten tribes) carried captive to Assyria.
- 697. Manasseh (55 years).
- 642. Amon (2 years).
- 640. Josiah (31 years).
- 627. Jeremiah began to prophesy.
- 608. Jehoiakim (11 years).
- 606. Babylon.-- Jerusalem taken by Nebuchadnezzar.
Servitude began.
- 598. Jerusalem taken the second time by the Babylonians.
King Jehoiachin's captivity.
- 589. Jerusalem besieged the third time by the Babylonians.
The Desolations.
- 587. Jerusalem taken and destroyed.
- 561. Death of Nebuchadnezzar and accession of Evil-Merodach.
- 559. Cyrus begins to reign in Persia.
- 538. Persia. – Babylon taken by the Medes and
Persians.
- 536. Cyrus succeeds Darius in the empire. Decree to
build the temple.
- 521. Darius Hystaspes of Persia.
- 520. Foundation of the 2nd Temple. Haggai and Zechariah
prophesied.
- 515. Dedication of the second temple.
- 490. Battle of Marathon.
- 485. Xerxes succeeds Darius; the Ahasuerus of
the book of Esther.
- 484. Herodotus the historian born.
- 480. Battles of Thermopylae and Salamis.
- 471. Themistocles banished by ostracism. Thucydides
(historian) born.
- 468. Socrates born (died 399).
- 466. Flight of Themistocles to Persia.
- 465. Artaxerxes Longimanus of Persia.
- 458. Decree of Artaxerxes to beautify the temple (Ezra
7.)
- 449. Persians defeated by the Athenians at Salamis
in Cyprus.
- 445. Era of the 70 weeks begins. Twentieth year of
Artaxerxes: Jerusalem restored. Herodotus, aet. 39, engaged on
his history.
- 429. Plato born (died 347).
- 424. Darius Nothus of Persia (Nehemiah 12:22).
- 405. Artaxerxes Mnemon of Persia.
- 397. Malachi. The dispensation of "the Prophets" closes.
End of the first week of Daniel's 70 weeks.
- 359. Ochus of Persia.
- 336. Darius Codomanus of Persia.
- 333. Greece. – Battle of Issus. (Battle of Granicus,
334; & of Arbela, 331)
- 323. Death of Alexander the Great.
- 312. Era of the Seleucidae begins.
- 301. Battle of Ipsus.
- 170. Jerusalem taken by Antiochus Epiphanes.
- 168. The temple defiled by Antiochus.
- 165. Jerusalem retaken by Judas Maccabeus. The temple
cleansed, and the Feast of the Dedication appointed. (1 Maccabees. 4:52-59;
John 10:22).
- 63. Rome.. – Pompey takes Jerusalem.
- 40. Herod the Great appointed king of Judea by the
Romans.
- 37. Herod takes Jerusalem, and is acknowledged as king
by the Jews.
- 31. Battle of Actium.
- 12. Augustus Emperor of Rome.
- 4. The Nativity.
- 3. Death of Herod. Archelaus made Ethnarch of Judea,
and Herod Antipas set over Galilee.
- A.D.
- 14. Tiberius Emperor of Rome (from 19th August).
- 28. 15th year of Tiberius, from 19th Aug. A.D. 28,
to 19th Aug. 29. The Lord's ministry began in this year, Luke 3.
- 32. The crucifixion (at the fourth Passover of the
Lord's ministry).
.
.
TABLE #4-- THE
JEWISH MONTHS
Nisan, or Abib ... March – April.
Zif, or Iyar ... April – May.
Sivan ... May – June.
Tammuz ... June – July.
Ab ... July – August.
Elul ... August – September.
Tisri, or Ethanim ... September – October.
Bul, or Marchesvan ... October – November.
Chisleu ... November – December
Tebeth ... December – January
Sebat ... January – February
Adar ... February – March
Ve-Adar (the intercalary month).
Full information on the subject of the present "Hebrew Calendar"
will be found in an article so entitled in Encyc. Brit.
(9th ed.), and also in Lindo's Jewish Calendar, a Jewish
work. The Mishna is the earliest work relating to it.
|
