1. (Early in B.C. GOG.) Nebuchadnezzar's invasion, in the 3d year of Jehoiakim (Dan. i, 1).
2. (Summer of B.C. 6llG.) Subjugation by Nebuchadnezzar in his first associate year, and the ith of Jehoiakim (Jer. xxv, 1); wlien, besides some of the sacred vessels (2 Chrou. xxxvi, 7), a few royal youths were taken away as liostages, including Daniel and his companions (Dan. i, 2 sq.).
3. (Spring of B.C. 59S.) First general deportation, in the 7th year of Nebuchadnezzar's reiirn (Jer. lii, 'iS), or the Sth of his viceroyship (2 Kings xxiv, 12), and tlie beginning of Je- hoiachin's reign (2 Kings xxiv, 8), when 3023 eminent Jews (Jer. lii, 2S), including tlie king (2 Chron. xxxvi, 10), his fam- ily, and officers (2 Kings xxiv, 12), with such men as Morde- cai (Esth. ii, G), also some TOiO warriors (2 Kings xxiv, IG), were carried away, making about 10,000 individuals of note (2 Kings xxiv, 14), besides about 1000 artisans (2 Kings xxiv, 10), and leaving only the poorer classes of the city and its neighborhood (2 Kings xiv, 14).
4. (Late in B.C. 538.) Second general deportation, in Nebu- chadnezzar's 18th year of reign (Jer. lii, 20), or the 10th of his viceroyship (2 Kings xxv, S), when, besides the rest of the sa- cred vessels (2 Chron. xxxvi, IS), 832 more of the principal men who had by that time rallied to Jerusalem were taken away (Jer. lii, 29), including especially the refugees (2 Kings xxv, II), and leaving but the commonest agricultural labor- ers (2 Kings xxv, 12).
5. (Early in B.C. 5S2.) Final deportation, in Nebuchadnez- zar's 23d year (Jer. lii, 30), when the last 745 private p n'sons (Jer. lii, 30) who had not fled to Egypt (Jer. xliii, 5-7), nor been destroyed in the previous massacres (2 Chron. xxxvi, 20), were taken away — making 4G00 definitely enumerated (Jer. lii. :i0), but in ail .«ome l'^,G00 male heads of families, with their wives, children, and dependents, from Jerusalem and its vicinity alone, and a proportionate nunibcr from the residue of the country of Judsea.
The Babylonian exile thus began with the Jews
partially in B.C. 598, but generally in B.C. 588. It ended in the first year of the reign of Cj'rus (over Babylon), i. e. B.C. 536, and therefore lasted strictly 51-52 years. The reckoning of Jeremiah, however (xxv, 11 sq. ; xxix, 10 ; compare 2 Chron. xxxvi, 21 ; Zech. i, 12 ; vii, 5; Josephus, War, v, 9, 4), which as- signs it a length of 70 years, is to be understood as computed from Nebuchadnezzar's invasion of Western Asia in B.C. GOG, when, as appears from Dan. i, 1 sq., some of the members of the roj-al family of Judah were carried into captivity, in fulfilment of Isa. xxxix, G, 7. (See Offerhaus, Spicilefjium, p. 181 sq. ; Schroer, Regn. Bahjl. p. 286 sq.). This was the more natural epoch to the Jews, inasmuch as from that time Nebu- chadnezzar became to all intents and purposes the liege lord of tlie Jewish kings, and in the above table we see the j'ears of his reign are dated accordingly. It is a remarkable coincidence that from the date of the destruction of the Temple, B.C. 588 (2 Kings xxv, 8), to the time of its complete restoration, B.C. 517 (Ezra vi, 15), is precisely the commensurate (and sa- cred) terai of 70 years ; and this period is sometimes employed as an sera by tlie sacred writers (Ezek. xl, 1). Other veiy strained conjectures as to this time are those of Behm (in Iken and Hase's Thesaur. theol. philol. i, 954 sq.), Bengel {Ordo temporum, p. 196 sq.), etc. Ideler deems the desolation of the Temple to be exclusively referred to {Handbuch d. Chronol. i, 530). Gramberg (Relifjionsid. ii, 388 sq.) and Hitzig {Jerem. p. 230) tliink the 70 years merely a round number. See Seventy Ye.ves' Captivity.
The condition of the Hebrews in the exile was cer- tainly, as a general thing, not so severe (Jahn, Archd- oloffie, II, i, 209 ; comp. Leydecker, De var. reip. Hehr. statu, p. 299 sq., especially p. 310 sq. ; Verbrugge, De statu ac condif. Judmorum tempore exil. Bahyl., in his work De nomin. Hehr. plur. num. [Groning. 1730], p. 71 sq.) as is usually held. Most of them became set- tled (Jer. xxix, 5 sq.), and acquired propertj', even to affluence (Tob. i, 22, 25 ; ii, 1 ; vi, 13 ; viii, 21 ; ix, 3; x, 11 ; xiv, 15, etc.), and the possession of slaves (Tob. viii, 14 sq. ; xi, 10). Several were taken to court (Dan. i, 3 sq., 19), and even promoted to high station (Dan. ii, 48 sq. ; vi, 2 ; compare Esth. x, 3), or were honored with important trusts (Tob. i, 16) ; indeed, in one in- stance a Jewess actually' reached queenly dignities (Esth. ii, 17). They also appear to have kept up in some sort their national constitution (Ezek. xiv, i ; xx, 1 ; Susan, v, 28), and to have maintained among them- selves an observance of the Mosaic law (Tob. vii, 14 ; Susan. V, 62). According to the Talmud (R. Gedaliah in Shahhel. Ilahkuh. folio 13 ; Gemara, Mahhoth, i, 1 ; Sanhedr. i, 12 and 21), they were under the general di- rection of an aichmalotarch (q. v.), or " chief of the ex- iles" (ribjn CN~), one of their own nation (Buddaei nist. Vet. T. ii, 863). Religious discipline was exer- cised among them ; but, as they could not lawfullj' of- fer sacrifice outside Jerusalem, their worship necessa- ril}' consisted of prayer (and public reading, out of which naturallj' grew expounding) in stated assem- blies (comp. Psa. cxxxvii). See Synagogue. They did not lack strong comfort and exhortation : Ezekiel (q. V.) lifted in their midst his prophetic voice, and Jeremiah (q. v.) sent them from afar a monitory epis- tle (chap. xxix). Probably many surrendered them- selves to levity and vice (Ezek. xxxiii, 31), and yield- ed an ear to false prophets (Jer. xxix, 21 ; but comp. Tob. ii, 14 sq., 22).