4. From ike FomdaOon of Solomon' e Temple to its DeHruetioH, — ^We have now reached a period in which the differences of chronologers are no longer to be measured by centuries, but by tens of years and even single years, and towards the dose Of which almost per- fSect accuracy is attainable. The most important num- bers in the Bible are here generally stated more than onoe, and several means are afforded by which their accuracy can be tested. Tbe principal of these tests ue the statement of kings* ages at their accessions, tbe double dating of the accessions of kings of Jndah in the leigns of kings of Israel and the converse, and the dou- ble reckoning by the years of kings of Judah and of Nebuchadnezzar. Of these tests the most valuable is the second, which extends through the greater part of the period under consideration, and prevents our mak- ing any very serious error in computing its length. The notices of kings of Egypt and Assyria, contempo- nry with Hebrew sovereigns during this period, are also of importance, and are likely to be more so, when, ai we may expect, the chronological places of all these coBtempoimries are more nearly determined. All rec-
ords, therefore, tending to fix the chiionologies of Egypt and Assyria, as well as of Babylonia, in these times, are of great value, from their beuing on Hebrew chronol- ogy. At present the most important of such records is Ptolemy's Canon, from which no sound chronologer will venture to deviate. In the Biblical statements the number and importance of inconsistencies has usually been much exaggerated, since several supposed disa- greements depend upon the non-recognition of the mode of reckoning regnal years from the commence- ment of the year, and not from the day of the king's accession; still a few difficulties cannot be resolved without the- supposition that numbers have been alter- ed by copyists. Many of the dates are reckoned from a joint accession of several of the kings with their re- spective fitthers, and a few araeven posthumous. Two interregna in the kingdom of Israel have generally been supposed, and none others are necessary ; name- ly, one of 11 years, between Jeroboam II and Zacha- riah, and the other of 8 years, between Pekah and Hoshea. The former supposition might seem to re- ceive some support from the words of the prophet Ho- sea (x, 8, 7, and perhaps 15), which, however, may only im]dy a lax government, and the great power of the Israelite princes and captains, as an absolute anarchy. The following table exhibits tbe length of this period as thus adjusted, according to the double line of kings ; for the details of the chronology, see Isbakl (Kino« DOM of) ; Judah (Kingdom of).
JCDAII.
¥••».
Ifgjtgi-
Ymn.
SdomoQ (residaa) . . .
8T
IT
8
41
25
8
1 90
6 40 S9 63
16
14
6
-^
23
65
fi
81
0
11
0
10
885
422 7«
Jeroboam L
Nadab
. 21
Ab^ah
Asa ,•
. 1
Baaiha
. 28
Hah
1
Zimrl
0
TIbnl
4
Omii (alone)
Ahab
7 . 20
Ah^pffth T . . ..
1
Jefaonmn
JehonunL
. 12
Ahasiahll
Synchroniam
Athallah
SmuihronUm . . . . Jehu
."eo
. 28
JehoashL
Jehoahas L
. 16
Aimi|«i«h ^ ,.
JehoashlL
. 16
Vssiah
Jeroboam XL
InterTM^num
Zaoharii^
Sballan
. 41
. 11
1
. 1
Jothim
Menahem
Pekahiah
Pekah
. 10 . 2 . 20
Ahaa
Hesekiah (beginniDg)
Heseklah (reeidae) . .
Manaaseh
Amon ..............
Uoahea
. 8 9
Amyrian Captivity. MiB of dumtioo of Temi
.W
Joalah
Jeboahaxn.
Jeboiakim
JehoUchin
ZedeUah «..
Total
pie.
The gross sum total of the regnal years of Judah, to the year of the Assyrian Captivity, is 260, as the num- bers stand in the text ; of the Ten Tribes, 243 ; but, as they may be corrected by synchronal data, only 257 and 288 years respectively. This deficit of 19 years has been by most chronologists taken to imply that the two gaps in the Israelite succession, which are brought to light by the synchronisms, were intervals of anar- chy, filled up (as above) by interregna — one of 11 years, between tbe death of Jeroboam II, in 27 Uzziah, and the accession of Zachariah, in 88 Uzziah ; the other, of 8 years, between the death of Pekah, in 4 Ahaz, and tbe accession of Hoshea, in the 12th of the same reign. But later writers prefer to liquidate the reckoning by assuming an error in the regnal years of Jeroboam II and Pekah. Thus Ewald, making the difference 21
CHRONOLOGY
304
CHRONOLOGY
years, gives these Jdngs 53 and 29 yean respectively, instead of 41 and 20 {Qetch. des VoUu Itr. iU, 1, p. 261- 818) ; Thenius (dU BB, der Kdmge^ p. 846), by a more facile emendation, makes the nambers 51 and 80 (M3 for Mia, and b for 3) ; J. ▼. Qompach {ZeUr. derBab, u. Astyr,), though redacing the total amoont to 241 years, gives Pekah 29 years and retains the 41 of Jeroboam ; Lepsius {Chronol. der jEg.) makes the reigns 52 and 80 ; and Bunsen {jEgypUm Stelle, b. iv, p. 381, 895, 402) makes Jeroboam reign 61 years, and retains for Pekah his 20 years. Movers (die Phdnitier, ii, 1, 158), by a peculiar method of treatment, reduces the reigns of Is- rael to 238 years, and brings the reigns of Judah into conformity with tliis smn by making Jehoram co-re- g^nt with Jehoshaphat 4 years, Uzziah with Amaziah 12, and Jotham with Uzziah 11 years. How arbitra- ry, and therefore unjostifiable, such redaction \)f num- bers b, must be evident to every critical eye. The supposition of co-regendes is only allowable in order to explain the apparent discrepancies in some of the kings' years, but in no case are they suflbred to dis- turb the length of reigns, as given in the text See each name in its alphabetical place in this Cyclope- dia. (See Wolff, in the Thed. Stud, u, KriU 1858, iv).