Page:1902 Encyclopædia Britannica - Volume 27 - CHI-ELD.pdf/102

 BIBLICAL CHRONOLOG Y, conjectured that the Israelites took the opportunity of suspicious. On the whole no8 certain chronology of this escaping during the unsettlement that was thus occasioned. period is at present attainable. III. From the Fourth Year of Solomon to the Captivity of Alternative dates for Ramses II. : Sayce, Early Israel, p. 2//, Judah. — During this period the dates are both more 1348-1281 b.c. (the Exodus [p. 286], 1276); Maspero, op. cit. p. 449, c. 1320-1255 ; Lehmann, 1324-1258 (at earliest). Attempts abundant, and also, approximately, far more nearly correct, have been made to identify the Khabiri, who are mentioned often than in any of the earlier periods; nevertheless in details in the Tel el-amarna letters as foes, threatening to invade Pales- there is still much uncertainty and difficulty. The Books tine and bring the Egyptian supremacy over it to an end, with of Kings are a compilation made at about the beginning the Hebrews. The Exodus, it has been pointed out, might then be placed under Amen-hotep II. (1490-1474 B.C., Maspero ; 1449- of the Exile, and one object of the compiler was to give 1423, Petrie), the successor of Thothmes, and more time would be a consecutive and complete chronology of the period emallowed for the events between the Exodus and the time of David braced in his work. With this purpose in view, he not (c. 1000), which, if the date given above be correct, have been thought to be unduly compressed (see Orr in the Expositor, March only notes carefully the length of the reign of each king in 1897^ P- 161 ff.); but there are difficulties attaching to this both kingdoms, but also (as long as the northern kingdom view’ and it has not been adopted generally by scholars. existed) brings the history of the two kingdoms into' The mention of Israel on the stele of Merenptah, discovered by relation with one another by equating the commencement Petrie in 1896 (“ Israel is desolated ; its seed [or fruit] is not”), is too vague and indefinite in its terms to throw any light on the of each reign in either kingdom with the year of the reign question of the Exodus. See the discussion (with the references) of the contemporary king in the other kingdom. in Hogarth’s Authority and Archaeology, pp. 62-65. The following are examples of the standing formulfe used by II. From the Exodus to the Foundation of the Temple the compiler for the purpose:—“In the twentieth year of Jeroboam king of Israel began Asa to reign over Judah. And (in the fourth year of Solomon, 1 Kings vi. 1).—In the forty and one years reigned he in Jerusalem” (1 Kings xv. 9, 10). chronological note, 1 Kings vi. 1., this period is stated to “ In the third year of Asa king of Judah began Baasha the son of have consisted of 480 (LXX. 440) years. Is this figure Ahijah to reign over all Israel in Tirzah, (and reigned) twenty correct 1 If the years of the several periods of oppression and four years ” (ibid. ver. 33). and independence mentioned in the Book of Judges (Judges In these chronological notices the lengths of the reigns iii. 8, 11, 14, 30; iv. 3; v. 31; vi. 1; viii. 28; ix. 22; were derived, there is every reason to suppose, either from x. 2, 3, 8; xii. 7, 9, 11, 14; xiii. 1; xv. 20; xvi. 31) be tradition or from the state annals—the “ book pf the added up, they will be found to amount to 410 years; to these chronicles of Israel ” (or “ Judah ”), so constantly referred must be added further, in order to gain the entire period to by the compiler as his authority (e.y., 1 Kings xv. 23, 31 from the Exodus to the foundation of the Temple, the xvi. 5) ; but the “ synchronisms ”—i.e., the corresponding 40 years in the wilderness, x years under Joshua and dates in the contemporary reigns in the other kingdom— the elders (Judges ii. 7), the 20 years’ judgeship of Eli were derived, it is practically certain, by computation from (1 Sam. iv. 18), the judgeship of Samuel (perhaps 20 the lengths of the successive reigns. Now in some cases,, years; cf. 1 Sam. vii. 2), the y years of Saul (the two perhaps, in the lengths of the reigns themselves, in other years of Sam. xiii. 1 [B..V.] seem too few), the 40 years of cases in the computations based upon them, errors have David (1 Kings ii. 11), and the first four years of Solomon, crept in, which have vitiated more or less the entire chronoi.e., 144 + ^ + y years, in all 554 years, + two unknown logy of the period. The existence of these errors can be periods denoted by x and y—in any case considerably demonstrated in two ways: (1) The chronology of the more than the 480 years of 1 Kings vi. 1. This period two kingdoms is not consistent with itself; (2) the dates might no doubt be reduced to 480 years by the supposi- of various events in the history, which are mentioned also tion, in itself not improbable, that some of the judges in the Assyrian inscriptions, are in serious disagreement were local and contemporaneous; the suggestion has also with the dates as fixed by the contemporary Assyrian been made that, as is usual in Oriental chronologies, the chronology. years of foreign domination were not counted, the be(1) That the chronology of the two kingdoms is inginning of each judge’s rule being reckoned, not from the consistent with itself is readily shown. After the division victory which brought him into power, but from the death of the kingdom the first year of Jeroboam in Israel of his predecessor; we should in this case obtain for the coincides, of course, with the first year of Behoboam period from the Exodus to the foundation of the Temple in Judah; and after the death of Jehoram of Israel and 440 + a? + y years,1 which if 30 years be assigned con- Ahaziah of Judah in battle with Jehu (2 Kings ix. 24, 27), jecturally to Joshua and the elders, and 10 years to Saul, the first year of Jehu in Israel coincides similarly with would amount exactly to 480 years. The terms used, the first year of Athaliah in Judah : there are thus however (“and the land had rest forty years,” iii. 11 ; in the history of the two kingdoms two fixed and certain similarly, iii. 30; v. 31; viii. 28), seem hardly to admit of synchronisms. Now, if the regnal years of the kings of the latter supposition ; and even if they did, it would still Israel from Jeroboam to Jehoram be added together, they be scarcely possible to maintain the correctness of the 480 will be found to amount to 98, while if those of the kings years: it is difficult to harmonize with what, as we have of Judah for the same period (viz., from Behoboam toseen, appears to be the most probable date of the Exodus; Ahaziah) be added together, they amount only to 95. This it is, moreover, open itself to the suspicion of having been discrepancy, if it stood alone, would not, however, be formed artificially, upon the assumption that the period in serious. But when we proceed to add up similarly the question consisted of twelve generations 2 of 40 years each. regnal years in the two kingdoms from the division after In the years assigned to the different judges, also, the Solomon’s death to the fall of Samaria in the sixth year of frequency of the number 40 (which certainly appears to Hezekiah (2 Kings xviii. 10), we find in the southern have been regarded by the Hebrews as a round number) is kingdom 260 years, and in the northern kingdom only 1 Namely, 40 years in the wilderness; Joshna and the elders (Judges 241°years 7 months. This is a formidable discrepancy. ii. 7), x years; Othniel (iii. 11), 40 years ; Ehud (iii. 30), 80 years ; Ussher, in order to remove it, has recourse to the doubtful Barak (v. 31), 40 years; Gideon (viii. 28), 40 years; Jephthah and 3 The “300 years” of Judges xi. 26 agrees very nearly with the five minor judges (x. 2, 3 ; xii. 7, 9, 11, 14), 76 years ; Samson sum of the years (namely, 319) given in the preceding chapters for the (xvi. 31), 20 years ; Eli (1 Sam. iv. 18), 40 years ; Samuel (vii. 2), 20 years ; Saul, y years ; David, 40 years ; and Solomon s first tour years, successive periods of oppression and independence. The verse occurs —in all 440+ x +1/years. _ j in a long insertion (xi. 12-28) in the original narrative ; and the figure 2 Namely, Moses (in the wilderness), Joshua, Othniel, Ehud, was most probably arrived at by computation upon the basis of the present chronology of the book. Deborah, Gideon, Jephthah, Samson, Eli, Samuel, Saul, and David. 7G