Page:Catholic Encyclopedia, volume 3.djvu/817

 CHRONOLOGY

733

CHRONOLOGY

t hat. as a rule, the Greek anil Samaritan agree against the Hebrew. Indeed they are identical, except that the name of Cainan, whose age at the birth of Sale is given as 130 years, is to be found in the Creek duly. Whether or not the original table contained the name Cainan. we cannot tell. Some hold that it was introduced into the Septuagint to increase the length of time between the Flood and Abraham, or again to make the number of the patri- archs between the Flood ami Abraham equal to that of those between Adam and the Flood. At any rate this genealogy gives rise to many questions, thus: Is the name Cainan a later insertion, or has it dropped out from the Hebrew? It is given by St. Luke (iii, 36). Again, are there any lacuna?? For, according to science, the length of this period was much greater than appears from the genealogical table. There is no difficulty in admitting such lacuna?, for we know that St. Matthew (i.S) says: — "Joram begot Ozias ", though between the two intervened Ochozias, Joab, and Amasias. For, as Professor Sayce says (Early History of the Hebrews, 144), "son in Semitic idiom was frequently equivalent to descendant ". We have also instances of similar omissions in I Chron., vi, 1, and in I Esdr., vii, 1-5. With critical scholars the Flood was a very partial affair. It is not, however, the business of the chronologist to enter into a discus- sion of that matter. In any case, whether we follow the traditional or critical view, the numbers obtained from the genealogy of the Patriarchs in chapter xi must be greatly augmented, in order to allow time for such a development of civilization, language, and race type as had been reached by the time of Abra- ham.

(5) Birth of Abraham to the Exodus. — At the birth of Isaac, Abraham is said to have been 100 years old (Gen., xxi. .5): Isaac was sixty at the birth of Jacob (Gen., xxv. 26); Jacob arrived in Egypt, at the age of 130 (xlvii, 9). These figures, added, give 290; add to this 430 (the number of years spent by Israel in Egypt i and we get 720 years, which would be the length of time between the birth of Abraham and the Exodus, A difficulty arises, since the Samaritan Pentateuch and the Septuagint read in Exodus, xii. 40: "The abode of the Children of Israel that they made in Egypt and the land of Canaan was 130 years." If this be correct, then only 215 years are left for the sojourn in Egypt. 21.5 years being required for the sojourn in Canaan, as we have to subtract 75, the age of Abraham when he came to Canaan, from 290 (see above). Still, not all the MSS. of the Septuagint adopt this reading; and. in any case, we are only face to face with another such diversity between the Creek and Hebrew as is to be found in t he genealogies of the Patriarchs.

Let us now bring these farts into relation with the Christian Era. lor fill Kings, vi. 1 ) the fourth year of King Solomon is said to have Fallen in the 480th year after the Exodus; and bsshcr dates the reign of King Solomon from 1011-975 B. r. But as the Temple was begun in t he Fourth year of that king, or in 1010, the Exodus took place in the year 1 190 n. c. How do these results square with the teaching of science? Pro- fessor Sayce, from the connexion of Abraham with I'liel in the episode related in Genesis, xiv, says that " we can approximately lix the period when the family of Terah migrated from I'r of the Chaldees. It was ab.mt 2300 b. c, if the chronology of the native Babylonianhistorian." i correct ' (Early Historyofthe Hebrews, 1_'. Then again he tells us that "Cnanaan could not have been invaded by the Israelites until after the fall of the eighteenth dynasty. When Khu-n- aten died it was still an Egyptian province, garrisoned by Egyptian troops" l Higher Criticism and the Monu- ments, 241). This we learn from the Tel-el-amarna tablets. So we are taken to a period after the death of Ramses II in 1281 b. c. for the date of the Exodus,

which most likely took place in the reign of Meneptah, son and successor of Ramses, earlier t ban the year 1200 B. c. This is not the traditional date of the Exodus, but as Father Hummelauer (Genesis, p. 29) says, it is the conclusion of most men in these days. Nor is there anything to prevent the student of the Old Testament from endeavouring to throw all the light he can upon the vexed question of Biblical chronology, consider- ing how involved it often is in obscurity.

(6) The Exodris to the Building oj Solomon's Tt m/ple. — The Third Book of Kings (vi, 1) states that Solomon began to build the Temple in the 480th year (the Sep- tuagint gives 440 years) after the Exodus. For the Catholic, that passage seems to settle the question. But a difficulty arises from the fact that there is al- most a consensus of scientific opinion that the Exodus from Egypt took place in the reign of Meneptah. or, possibly, that of his successor, Seti II. Moreover we are driven to a date later than the year 1400 for the Exodus, since up to that date, Assyriologists and Egyptologists agree, Palestine was an Egyptian prov- ince, with an Egyptian governor (Driver, "Genesis", p. xxix). Ramses II, the builder of Pithom and Raamses, was the Pharaoh of the oppression, and as he reigned from 1348-1281 (Sayce) we have to descend to one of his successors to find the Pharaoh of the Exodus. Hence we are driven to his immediate suc- cessor. Meneptah, at earliest, anil to about the year 1277 (Early History of the Hebrews, 150) for' the date of the Exodus. On the other hand, the date of the building of the Temple cannot be put later than the middle of the tenth century b. c. But if wc take the time between these two dates, we are left with only about 327 years, as against 480 required by III Kings, vi. 1. Wellhausen does not treat the chro- nology seriously (Prolegomena, 229), but, in company with many other critics, pronounces it to be merely artificial. They say that the number 480 is made up of twelve times 40; forty being taken as a generation; and so the number 10 predominates amongst chrono- logical numbers in this part of Scripture. Thus the time in the desert was 40 years; Othoniel, Debora, Gedeon, each ruled for 40 years. Aod ruled for twice 40, or 80 years; the land was under the Philistines 40 years, and David reigned for the same period. But the following facts must lie taken into consideration. Professor Sayce points out that "40 years in Hebrew idiom merely signified an indeterminate and unknown period of time, and the Moabite Stone shows that the same idiom existed also in the Moabite language" (Early History of the Hebrews, 146). Chronology in those days was in its infancy; and that the dates were only roughly given is obvious from the recur- rence of round numbers. If we were to write down all the numbers that occur during this period, as lather Hummelauer does in his commentary on Judges (p. 12), we should find that the number 40 recurs by no means as often as we are led to suppose. The difficulty remains that III Kings, vi, 1, gives for the length of this period 480 years; science seems t, say "not more than 327". But we have to notice the uncertainties that surround the chronology of this period. We have also to point out that Well- hausen and Stade regard chapter vi. 1. as a late in- sertion (Burney, "Hebrew Text of Kings", 58). If this were the case it would meet the difficulty: and perhaps it is rendered more likely by the fact that in the Creek this verse is inserted before 31 anil 32 of chapter v, and also that it reads 110 instead of ISO. We conclude, therefore, that the date ol the Exodus was about 1277, the monarchy was founded by Saul, 1020; David mounted the throne, 1002; Solomon in 962. and the Temple was begun, 958 B. C.

(7) Building of the Temple in it* Destruction* — "On

le voit ", says Mangenot (in Yig., Diet, de la Bible, S. V. "Chronologic", 732), "la chronologie de I'gpoque des rois d'lsrael et de Juda n'est pas aussi ferine et aussi