CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE. As the ancient Hebrews possesed no formal and recognised era, whence events might be dated, they necessarily used different methods of computation. The most ancient method of computation was by generations. (Gen. v. 1 -32.) Indeed, the only information we have respecting the time which elapsed from the creation of Adam to the birth of Abraham, is derived from the Mosaic genealogical tables. Those tables register the year of the life of each antediluvian and postdiluvian patriarch, when that son was born in whom his line was continued, the years each lived after the birth of his heir, and the total years of the life of each. (Gen. v. 1-32; x. 21, 22; xi. 10 -32; xii. 4; Acts vii. 4.) Still the number of years, in the several generations, as given in the Hebrew text, is widely departed from in the Samaritan copy, the Septuagint version, and also in Josephus, as will be seen by the subjoined table. Adam Seth Hebr. Samar. Sept. Josep. 130 130 230 105 105 Enoa Cainaan Mahalaleel Jared Enoch Methuselah 167 187 Lamech Noah Shem Arphaxad Cainan? 130 Salah Eber 34 134 Peleg Reu Serug Nahor 179 Terah at the birth of Abraham A.M. 0 120 2008 2249 3474 3249 edly that which has been handed down in The genuine Bible chronology is undoubtthe original Hebrew text. The various discrepancies exhibited by the versions evidently resulted, not from accident, but from premeditated design. By looking at the first table it will be seen that in no instance of the addition or substraction of a century, in the years of the antediluvian patriarchs, does the Hebrew text stand alone, but is supported either by the Samaritan against the Septuagint, or by the Septuagint against the Samaritan. Now, in this systematic disagreement, the Septuagint and the Samaritan differ throughout, so as to contradict each other in regard to the age of each of the first nine patriarchs; while the Hebrew, without following either, takes such a middle course as to have the concurrence of the Samaritan in the age of Adam, Seth, Enos, Cainan, Mahalaleel and Enoch; and of the Septuagint, or of Josephus, respecting Jared, Methuselah and Lamech. And, surely, in a disagreement of three witnesses, two must be credited against one; and most of all must he be believed, who takes such an independent course, that he is supported now by one, and now by the other. In the various ages composing the Hebrew numbers, we find no appearance of design; while all the discrepancies in the units, tens, and hundreds, in the Septuagint version, so systematic, and so skilfully adjusted as until have resulted, not from accident, but from recently to have concealed the artifice, must developing their numbers out of the Egyptthe unworthy design of the translators in ian chronology. Nor has the Egyptian chro The subjoined summary exhibits the period which has elapsed from the creation of man to the birth of Christ, according to the principal ancient eras, which are evidently derived from the lengthened chronology of the Sep-nology been without its influence on the Sam sesses a meaning. For of a lunar years era B.C. 2224, or about 124 years after the Flood, as to render the dispersion in the time of Peleg requisite is of little weight; because though those versions give additional years they give no additional generations. From the time of Arphaxad to that of Nabor, abou: 229 years, the Hebrew numbers, place upon an average each generation, ie, the birth of a son, at intervals of little more than 31 years Whereas the Samaritan and Septuagint nonbers extend their chronology for the saze period, the former 870, and the latter 1.1.9 years, only by placing upon an average cach generation, on the birth of a son, at intervals of little more than 124 and 137 years, inserting before each descent 100 or 50 years, and in one case an additional generation of 190 years; by which, in point of population, nothing can be gained. For it is manifest that as the casualties in 31 years must be less than in 124 or 137 years, where the lives are of the same length, so, according to the short Hebrew numbers, the population in the same number of generations must much more rapidly increase than according to the more extended period; and the population upon the Hebrew computatation must, in the allotted 220 years, hare been almost one-half as much again as in the most extended of these computations. The Deluge occurred, according to the Hebrew computation, B.C. 2348, or 1656 years after the creation of man, when Noah was 600 years old. The number of years which the Septuagint, according to the Alexandrian copy-the Vatican manuscript is defective in the first forty-six chapters of Genesis-inter- The argument for adopting the lengtheni poses between the creation of man and the chronology of the Septuagint in the years å Deluge is 2262, thus placing that event B.C. the postdilerian patriarchs, instead of the 3245, according to their computation. The of the Hebrew text, on the 2262 years, from the creation of Adam to the ground the supposed impossibility of the word Deluge, reduced to lunar months, ie, month-being peopled in so short a time as the years, give in round numbers 28,000. That there was such an Egyptian chronography, on which the Septuagint chronology is based, which counted 28,000 years down to B.C. 3245, is evident from the Eusebian Manetho; which reckons 25.920 years from the first of the Egyptian gods to Menes, the first of the mortal kings. To the first eleven dynasties of mortal kings it assigned 1941 years, which, added to the former, make 27.61. Thus, then, the 28,000 years from the first of the gods would end, according to this chronography, with the 139th year of the twelfth dynasty, which coincided with B.C. 3245, the Septuagint date of the Flood, when, it seems, the Septuagint chronologers imagined the monthyear of the Egyptian computation ceased, and men began to reckon by real years. This view is supported by the Eusebian Manetho, which assigns B.C. 3353 as the date of the commencment of the twelfth dynasty, which was the Egyptian year of the world 27,861; hence 139 added to B.C. 3245, bring us to B.C. 3383. So also Eusebius, in his chronological canon, states the birth of Abraham, B.C. 2016; and makes that event coincident with the first year of Manetho's sixteenth dynasty. To the fifteenth dynasty he assigns 250 years; to the fourteenth, 484; to the thirteenth, 453; and to the twelfth, 182. Thus the interval may be taken at about 1368 Egyptian real years; which bring us again to B.C. 3383, as the date of the commencement of the twelfth Egyptian dynasty. The 28,000 years, when understood of lunar months, which exactly fill up the Septuagint interval between Adam and the Deluge, remove any doubt as to the kind of calculations on which the Septuagint chronology is based. Its authors had before them this Egyptian computation, which counted 28,000 years down to B.C. 3,245, the date of the Flood as given by them. They were determined to make the Egyptian chronology tally with the Bible, by doing violence to both, hence they compressed all those thousands of years into less than a twelfth part of the space they were entitled to, on the one hand, and swelled the number of years assigned to the Bible patriarchs on the other, to make both ends meet. All these years they chose to regard as months, which they accordingly reduced to years on the common scale of ninetynine of the former to eight of the latter. Thus stands the calculation: 99 8 28,000: 2,262 $3 Even the fraction over 2,262-the Septuagint interval between Adam and the Deluge-pos798 Recent investigations in Assyrian chronology from the cuneiform inscriptions, have, on some points, contributed to the confirmation of that drawn from the Hebrew Scriptures; while on other points there exists a considerable variation. The Assyrians had no fixed epoch, but appear to have dated events from the reigns of their kings. Prof. Rawlinson refers to a recently discovered tablet, recording the occurence of a solar eclipse, which is presumed to have been total, in the month Sivan or June, in the ninth year of Asshur-dan. III. He observes that the calculations of astronomers show that the only total eclipse falling at this time of the year visible in Assyria between B. C. S47 and B.C. 647-within which period the reign of Asshur-dan. III., must have fallenwas one on June 15, B.C. 763. This eclipse commenced before noon, was total, and was visible all over Western Asia. There can be no reasonable doubt that it is the one recorded upon the tablet, and there can be little doubt that this eclipse is the one of which Amos prophesied. (Am. viii. 9.) This discovery gives a certainty, equal to that possessed by astronomical science, to the whole range of Assyrian chronology from B.C. 909 to B.C. 663, From the most recent discoveries given by Prof. Rawlinson, "Five Great Monarchies," 1871; and Mr. G. Smith, "Assyrian Discov- | reigns of the Assyrian kings from B. c. 891, which eries," 1875, we give the subjoined table of the may be compared with Usher's chronology. The The matters of Biblical interest learned from the recent decipherment of cuneiform documents are, that among Benhadad's allies when he was attacked by the Assyrians in B.C. 853, was "Ahab of Jezreel." Ahab is thus the first Israelite monarch, mentioned in the Assyrian records, who came into known contact with the Assyrians. Vul-nirari III., supposed to be the same as Pul, among other expeditions, made three into Palestine. expeditions of Tiglath-Pileser II, against Palestine are found to belong to the years B.C. 734, 733, and 732. It will be observed that Prof. Rawlinson makes Hezekiah contemporary with Sennacherib, but not with Sargon. And Fynes Clinton makes the fourteenth year of Hezekiah, B.C. 713, the time when Sennacherib invaded Judea. But according to a scheme of chronology proposed by Dr. Hincks, Hezekiah's dangerous illness nearly synchronised with Sargon's futile invasion, in the fourteenth year of Hezekiah's reign, eleven years before Sennacherib's invasion. (2 Kings xx. 1-11; Isa. xxxviii. 1-22; 2 Chron. xxxii. 24.) That it must have preceded the attack of Sennacherib is nearly obvious from the promise in 2 Kings xx. 6, as well as from modern discoveries. There is every reason to believe that the chronology of the Hebrew text is entirely trustworthy; and it was upon this assumption that Archbishop Usher, whose views regulated the chronology of the English Bible, fixed the creation of man 4004 years before Christ. Usher's system, in some points, is not free from errors; but his point of commencement is perhaps the nearest to the truth; and to depart widely from it would perplex us in our ordinary reading. In ancient chronology perfect accuracy cannot be expected; at the best we can only approximate to the truth. In addition to reckoning by generations, the Hebrews also reckoned from remarkable events, as from the birth of Noah; (Gen. vii. 11;) from the Exodus from Egypt; (Num. xxxiii. 38; 1 Kings vi. 1;) from the reigns of their kings; (I Kings vi. 1, 37, 38; xv. 1;) from the Babylonish Exile; (Ezek. xxxiii. 21; xl. 1;) and also from the reigns of the Chaldean and Persian monarchs. (Dan. viii. 1; Ezra i. 1; Neh. ii. 1.) In later times they used the era of the Seleucida; (1 Macc. xiii. 51: xiv. 27 ;) or dated from the reigns of their own kings, and the Roman emperors. (Matt. ii. 1; Luke i. 5; iii. 1.) In the following chronological table, we have made use of the labours of Usher, Fynes Clinton, Zunz, Ideler, and Winer. The first column, A.M., indicates the years since the Creation of the World, or, more correctly, and in accordance with the Scriptures, since the Creation of Adam; the second column, B.C., denotes the years Before Christ. |