Chronology, the science which measures time by the succession of events that occur in the heftvena or on the earth. Accordingly, chronology may be di- vided into two kinds, theoretical or technical, and practical or applied ; in other words, into mathnMaJ- oal and historical. The former is, of course, the most trustworthy, as being the result of fixed laws ; while the latter is, to a great degree, contingent and in«g- ular. In this article we have to do only with Bibli- cal dates and the method of their determination. See
ASTBOZrOMT.
I. Etements.—The knowledge of the Hebrews in chronology rested altogether on appearances ; not a trace of anything like a scientific view is to be found in their litehiture. The books of the Old Testament recognise none of the great ceras which other natioBs have employed. Nor is it until the first book of the Maccabees that any such guide is found. Instead of these, the Hebrew writers usually employ more limited andlocal or national epochs. (See below.) Genealog- ical tables, indeed, are not wanting, but they are of lit- tle service for tiie general purposes of chronology. (See below.) Formerly great exactness was hoped fbr in the determination of Hebrew chronology. Although the materials were often not definite enough to fix a date within a few years, it was nevertheless ^expected that the very day could be ascertained. Hence arose unsoundness and variety of results, and ultimately a general feeling of distrust. At present crittce are rath- er prone to run into this latter extreme. The troth, as might be expected, lies between these two extreme judgments. The character of the records whence we draw our information forbids us to hope for a perfect system. The Bible does not give a complete history of the times to which it refen ; in its historical por- tions it deals with special and detached poiods. The chronological information is, therefore, not absolutely continuous, although often, with the evident purpose of forming a kind of connection between these dillw- ent portions, it has a more continuous character than might have been expected. It is rather historical than strictly chronological in its chanctur, and thm the technical part of the subject depends, so far as the Bible is concerned, almost wholly upon inference. See
HiSTORT.
In one particular, however, great care has usoalh' been exercised in the Hebrew records, namely, the prevention of error by the neglect or accnmnlation of ^fractional parts of a year in the continuous series of generations, dynasties, or reigns. This has been sre- tematically done (as in most other anciant chronolo- gies) by adding these into the beginning of each suc- cessive number, i. e. by reckoning, in all cases, from a
CHRONOLOGY
293
CHRONOLOGY
fixed point in the calendar, so that the yean are al- ways to be accounted "full" unless specified as cur- rent. Nevertheless^ in consequence of the brief and sometimes double lines of sras, beginning at various seasons of the year, confusion, or at least difficulty, has often crept into the statements, which is enhanced by the fact that the rule liere stated is not observed ' with abeolnte uniformity. All this is eepwdaUy illos- totted in the parallel lists of the kings of Judah and ISRASL (q. v.). I
1. GmeraHoni. — It is commonly supposed that the genealogies given in tlie Bible are invariably continu- | ons. When, however, we come to examine them closely, we find tliat many are broken, without being I in consequence teeknicaUy defective as Hebrew geneal- * ogies. A notable instance is that of the genealogy <tf ' our Savknir given by Bfattfaew, where Joram is imme- ' dfately followed by Orias, as if his son— Ahaziah, Jo- \ ash, and Ama«iah being omitted (Matt i, 8). That this is not an accidental omission of a copyfet is evi- dent from the spedfieatbn of the number of genera- tkins from Abraham to David, from David to the Bab- ylonish Captivity, and from the Babylonish Captivity to Clirist, hn eadi ease fourteen generations. Proba^ bly these missing names were purposely left out to make the number for the interval equal to that of the other intervals, such an omission being obvious and not liable to cause error. In £ira*s genealogy (Ezra vii, 1-5) tliere is a similar omission, which in so frmiofts , a line can scarcely be attributed to the carelessness of a copyist. There are also examples of a man being called tlie son <tf a remote ancestor, as *' Shebuel the son of Gershon [Gershom], tiie son of Hoses** (1 Chron. xxvi, 24). So, in historical narratives, Jehu is called *'the son of Ntmsfai** (1 Kings xix, 16; 2 Khigs ix, aO; 2 Chroo. xxii, 7), as well as «*the son of Jehosha- pbat the son of Nimshi" (1 Kings ix, 3, 14). Laban is called '* the son of Nahor" (Gen. xxix, 5), for grand- ion (xxviii, 2, 5; comp. xxii, 20-28). We cannot, therefore, venture to use the Hebrew genealogical lists to compote intervals of time except where we can prove each descent to be immedmte, and where the length of each generation is given. See GiifSALOOT. Ideler remarks tiiat Moees reckons by generations {Hmdbmtk, i, 606); but this is not the manner of Herodotus, who assumes an average oi three genera- tions to a century (ii, 142). There is no use of a geo- enttion as a division of time in the Pentateuch, unless, with some, we suppose tliat *^i% a "generadon,** in Gen. XV, 16, is so used; those, however, who hold tUs opinion make it an interval of a hundred years, siaee it would, if a period of time, seem to be tlie fourth part of the 400 years of verse 18 ; most probably, how- ever, the meaning is that some of the fourth genera* tion should come forth from Egjrpt. See Gbnbba- noH.