(1.) The Exodus is used as an ara in 1 Kings vi, 1, in giving the date of the foundation of Solomop^s Tem- ple. Thb is the only positive instance ci the occur- rence of this ara, for we cannot agree with Ideler that it is certainly employed in the Pentateuch. He refers to Exod. xiz, 1, and Num. xxxiii, 88 {Hcrndbuch^ i, 507). Here, as elsewhere in the same part of the Bi- ble, the beginning of the Exodus-year — ^not, of course, the i^Jtnal date of the Exodus (see RegitaLyearSy below) — is used as the point whence time is counted; but during the interval of which itformed the natural com- mencement it cannot be shown to be an ara, though it may have been, any more than tlie beginning of a sovereign's reign is one. See Exodb.
(2.) The foundation of Solomon's Temple is conjec- tured by Ideler to have been an ara. The passages to which he refers (1 Kings ix, 10; 2 Chron. viii, 1) merdy speak of occurrences subsequent to the inter- val of 20 years occupied in the building of the Temple and the king's house, both being distinctly specified ; so that his reading (" Zwanzig Jahre, nadidem Salo- roo das Haus des Herm erbaute") leaves out half the statement, and so makes it incorrect (ffandh, L c). It is elsewhere stated that the building of the Temple occupied seven years (1 Kings vi, 87, 88), and that of Solomon's house thirteen (vU, 1), making up the inter- val of twenty years. See Temple.
(8.) The ara once used by Ezekiel, and commencing in Joeiah's 18fch year, we have discussed above. See Josiah; Ezekiel.
(4.) The ara of Jehoiachin's captivity is constantly used by EzekieL The earliest date is the 6€h year (i, 2X and the Utest the 27th (xxix, 17). The prophet geaierally gives the date without applying any dis- tinctive term to the aura. He speaks, however, of ** the fifth year of king Jehoiachin's captivity" (i, 2), and "the twelfth year of our captivity" (xxxiii, 21), the latter of whkdi expressions may explain his constant use of the ara. The same ara is neoessarily employed, thongh not as such, where the advancement of Jehoi- adhin in the 87th year of his captivity is mentioned (2 Kings XXV, 27 ; Jer. Ui, 81). We have no proof that it waa used except by those to whose captivity it re- ferred. Its first year was current B.C. 6d8, commenc- ing in the spring of that year. See Jbhoiachin.
(B.) The begfaming of the seventy years' captivity does not sppear to have been used as an ara ; but the destruction of Jerosalem by the Babylonians is ooca- liaudly referred to for ohronologied purposes (Eaek. xl, 1). See CAPnvmr.^
* <8.) The retmrn from Babylon does not appear to be employed as an ara ; it is, however, reckoned from in Esta (iii, 1, 8), as is the Exodos in the Fentatendi. SeeJBsBA.
(7.) The SMB of;the Sdendda is used in the first and second books of Maccabees. See Sblbucus.
(8.) The liberation of the Jews from the Syrian yoke in the first year of Simon the Maocabee is stated to have been commemorated by an ara used in con- tracts and agreements (1 Mace, xiii, 41). The years 1, 2, and 8 on the coins ascribed to Simon [see Mox- BT ; Shbkbl] are probably of this ara, although it is related that the right of coining money with his own stamp was not conceded to him until somewhat later than its beginning (xv, 6), for it may be reasonably supposed either that Antiodms VII confirmed privi- « leges before granted by his brother Donetrius II (comp. XV, 6), or that he gave his sanction to money already issned {Encjfd, BriL^ 8th ed., s. v. Numismat- ics, p. 879, 880). See Maccabees.
(9.) Regnal rears.— By tiie Hebrews regnd years appear to have been counted frt>m the beginning of the year, not tnm the day of the king's accession. Thus, if a Ung came to tiie throne in the last month of one year, reigned for the whole of the next year, and died in the first mbnth of the third year, we might have dates in his first, second, and third years, al- though he governed for no more than thirteen or fouiw teen months. Any dates in tbe year of his accession before that event, or in the year of his death after it, woold be assigned to the last year of his predecessor and the first of his successor. The same prindple would apply to reckoning from aras or important events, but the whole stated lengths of reigns or inter- vals would not be Affected by it. See Kino ; King- dom.
II. Data. — ^The historical part of Hebrew chronolo- gy is not less difficult than the technical. The infoi^ mation in the Bible is indeed direct rather than infer- ential, althou^^ there is very important evidence of the latter kind ; but the present state of the numbers makes absolute certainty in some cases impossible. In addition to this difficulty, there are several gaps in the series of smaller numbers which we have no means of supplying with exactness. When, therefcH^, we can compare several of these smaller numbers with a lar- ger number, or with independent evidence, we are fr^ quently prevented ftt>m putting a condusi ve test by the deficiencies in the first series. Lately some have laid great stress upon the frequent occurrence of the num- ber 40, alleging that it and 70 are vague terms equiva- lent to "many," so that "40 yeare" or "70 JW8|' would mean no more than " many yean. " Primd/acie this idea would seem reasonable, but on a further ex- amination it will be seen that the details of some peri- ods of 40 years are given, and show that the number is not indefinite where it would at first especially seem to be so. Thus the 40 yean in the wilderness can be divided into three periods : 1. From the Exodus to the sending out of the spies was about one year and a quarter (1 year, 1+a; [2 ?] months, Num. ix, 1 ; x, 11 ; comp. ver. 29, showing it was this year, and xiii, 20, proving that the seareh ended somswliat after mid- summer) ; 2. The time of search, 40 days (Nsm. xiii, 25) ; 8. The time of the wandering until the brook Zered was crossed, 88 yean (Deut. ii, 14)— making alto- gether almost 89} yean. This perfoctly accords with the date (yr. 40, m. 11, d. 1) of the address of Moses after the conquest of Sihon and Og (Deut. i, 8, 4)^ which was subsequent to the crossing of the brook Zered. So, again, David's rdgn of 40 yean is divided into 7 yean 6 months in Hebron, and 88 in Jerusalem (2Sam.ii,ll; v,5; lChron.iii,4; but 1 Kmgs ii, 11, 7 yean, omittDig the months, and 88). This, there- fore, cannot be an indefinite number, as some might conjecture fh>m its following Saul's 40 years, and pre- oedhig Solomon's. The last two reigns, agam, could not have been much more or less fiwm the circum- stances of the history. The occurrence of some round numbere, therefore, does not warrant our supposing the constant use of vague ones. See Numbbb.