There is a difficulty in the statement with which the book of Daniel opens, which is generally interpreted to mean that in the third year of Jehoiakim, Nebu- chadnezzar besieged and captured Jerusalem, partially plundered the Temple, and carried off the first portion of the people into captivity, amon^ whom was Daniel. The text, however, does not explicitly say so much, although such is the obvious meaning ; but if this is the only interpretation, we find it in direct collision with the booiu of Kings and Chronicles (which assign to Jehoiakim an ekven years* reign), as also with Jer- emiah XXV, 1. The statement in Daniel partly rests on 2 Chron. xxxvi, 6, which is itself not in perfect ac- cordance with 2 Kings xxiv. In the earlier history, the war broke out during the reign of Jehoiakim, who died before its close ; and when hfe 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, at an interval of three months and ten days (2 Chron. xxxvi, 6 and 9), and even thus we do not obtain accordance with the re- ceived interpretation of Daniel i, 1-8. It seems, on the whole, the easiest supposition that **the third year of Johoiikim" is there a mistake for **the third month of JehoiacAtn. " Hengstenberg, however, and H &vemick defend the common reading, and think they reconcile it with the other accounts ; which may not unreasona- bly be done by understanding the date in Dan. i, 1, to refer to the setting out of Nebuchadnezzar on the cam- paign in question. See Judah, kingdom of.
There has been considerable difference of opinion as to how the 70 years of captivity spoken of by Jeremiah (xxv, 12 ; xxix, 10) are to be estimated. A plausible opinion would make them last fh)m the destruction of the first Temple, B.C. 588, to the finishing of the sec- ond, B.C. 516 ; but the words of the text so specify " the punishing of the king of Babylon" as the end of the 70 years— which gives us the dato B.C. 588— that many, with Jahn, cling to the belief that a first captiv- ity took place in the third year of Jehoiakim, B.C. 605. But, in fact, if we read Jeremiah himself, it may ap- pear that in ch. xxv he intends to compute the 70 years from the time at which he speaks (ver. 1, *^ in the fourth year of Jehoiakim," i. e. B.C. 604) ; and that in xxix, 10, the number ** seventy years" is still kept up, in remembrance of the former prophecy, although the language there used is very lax. There seem, in fact, to be two, if not more, co-ordinate modes of comput- ing the period in question, used by the sacred writers, one civU^ and extending ftt>m the first invasion by Nebuchadnezzar to the decree of Cyrus B.C. 606-536), and the other ecdesiastical^ ftom the burning of the Temple to its reconstruction (B.C. 588-617). See Sev- B^TFY Teabs' Captivity.
2. Its Extent, — Jeremiah dates by the years of Neb- uchadnezzar's reign, and estimates that in his seventh year 8023 were carried off, in his eip;hteenth 832, and in his twenty-third only 745, making in all, as the writer is careful to note, 4600 (Jer. lii, 28, etc.). The
third removal he ascribes to Nebuzaradan, the Baby- lonian general. Tliat some mbunderstanding hete exists, at least In the numbers, appears undeniable ; for 4600 persons was a very petty fraction of the Jewish people ; and, in fitct, 42,860 are stated to have reComed immediately upon the decree of Cyrus (Ezra ii, 64). In 2 Kings xxiv, 8-16, we find 18,000 carried off at onee, in the third month of king Jehoiachin, and in the ei^th year of Nebuchadnezzar, which evidently is the same as the first removal named by Jeremiah. After this, the vassal king Zedekiah having rebelled, his city is beleaguered, and finally, in his eleventh year, is redoced by Nebuchadnezzar in person ; and in the course of the same year, '* the nineteenth of Nebuchadnezzar'* (2 Kings xxv, 8), Nebuzaradan carries away all the population except the peasants. Perhaps we need not wonder that no mention is made in the book of Kings of the third deportation, for the account of the destruc- tion was in a manner complete upon the second inva- sion. The first expatriation was directed to swell tlie armies and strengthen the towns of the conqueror ; for of the 18,000 then carried away, 1000 were '* craftsmen and smiths, all strong and apt for war," and 7000 of the rest are called * * mighty men of valor.*' (Yet there is an uncertainty about verses 14 and 16 in 2 Kings xxiv. Probably here, as well as in Jer. liii, heads of families only are counted.) It was not until the re- bellion of Zedekiah that Nebuchadnezzar proceeded to the extremity of breaking up the nation^ existence. As the Temple was then burnt, with all the palaces and the city walls, and no government was left but that of the Babylonian satrap, this latter date is evi- dently the true era of the captivity. Previously Zed- ekiah was tributary, but so were Joeiah and Ahaz long before; the national existence was still saved. See Babylonia.