The Chronology of the Bible

TH E

CHRONOLOGY OF THE BIBLE.

B Y S A M U E L S H A R P E ,

T H E H I Q I O R \ O F F C Y PT

L O N DO N :

. R U SSEL L SMI TH 3 6 S AR E J , , SOHO QU . L O N D O N

PR I N TED B Y WOO F ALL AN D KI N DER D , I F R M L O R D L AN E S T AN D, “ , 57 P R E F AC E .

V ER Y few words are needed to show the importance

C hr n olo H i stor of o gy . The moral teachings of y

r may gain our warmer admi ation , but Chronology is the skeleton or framework which supports the t several par s of History , and saves the whole from falling into a confused heap . The Hebrew Chrono

on logy , in particular , has many claims our notice ;

ﬁrst , for its help towards our understanding the

Bible ; and , secondly , for its contribution towards the Chronology of the neighbouring nations , par ticularl y of Egypt and Assyria . The Chronology of the ancient world is indebted

ﬁrst to Babylon for its recorded eclipses , preserved for us by Claudius Ptolemy the Astronomer , and then to those countries that were ruled by a succession of monarchs , whose reigns measured time with a con ven ie n c e unknown to their republican neighbours . Were all modern and intermediate Chronology de stroyed , or any number of links in the chain broken between the present time and the overthrow of the 4 PR EF AC E .

Persian monarchy by Alexander the Great , yet our knowledge of the previous dates would remain un

’ changed . The moon s place as determined by an eclipse or by the occultation of a star is an in de pe n

dent event , which , when recorded with its day and

’ a stron o hour , and year of a king s reign , enables an mer to ﬁx by his calculations that otherwise unknown time with the same mathematical certainty that a sailor ﬁxes hi s unknown place in longitude on the

ocean . Thus the Babylonian eclipses give us a ﬁxed

point from which we may measure time . And the unbroken time of Jewish kings followmg one another

son in quiet succession , from father to , reaching over a period of four hundred years from Solomon to

Zedekiah , who all dated by the years of their reigns , carries our reckoning back with reasonable certainty from the time of these eclipses at Babylon to the

tenth century before the Christian era . It thus

’ ﬁxes the time of Solomon s reign , from which , as

from a new starting point , the history of the world must be traced backwards along the line of Egyptian

kings . The history of the Israelites under their Judges has come down to us in a form too broken to be of much chronological value and the succession of patriarchs before the time of the Judges can have

no claim to attention as a portion of History .

But the History , and therefore the Chronology , of the Hebrew monarchy deserve at least as much

attention as they receive . During that time were E E 5 PR FAC .

w written the most valuable of the Hebre books . Perhaps the Book of Judges alone was written before the rise of the monarchy ; and only the less valuable portions of the other books were written after its fall . The laws in the Pentateuch , when they are ecclesiastical , are also political ; the Psalms are as much political as devotional ; the writings of the

Prophets are wholly political , though dictated by religious zeal and clothed in a religious dress ; and all these , to be properly understood , must have their place in History assigned , by noting what political events give rise to the laws or are spoken of as contemporaneous with the writer . Hence any ser vi ce that Chronology renders to the History is a servi ce rendered to the religious portions of the

Bible . WO R KS B Y TH E S ME A AUTH O R .

’ TH E N EW E MEN ran s a r m e G riesb ach s x . T STA T, t l t d f o Te t F ifth

TH E HE E E N ED n BR W SCRIPTUR S TRA SLAT bei g 3. Revisi on of th e A ri z e En is O l d e s amen I n 3 v s utho d gl h T t t . ol

EX F M TH E H E ex a n e the he the T TS RO OLY BIBL , pl i d by lp of i e n n me n s An c t Mo u t . HISTORIC NOTES ON TH E BOOKS O F TH E OLD AN D N EW

E A E T . e c n E i i n T ST M N S S o d d t o . CRITICAL NOTES ON TH E AUTHORIZED ENGLISH V ERSION F TH E N EW E TA E e c n E i i n . O T S M NT. S o d d t o

TH E H O F E r m the Ear es mes ll the ISTORY GYPT, f o li t Ti ti h rab s A D 640 E i i n n e s b t e A in . . r . Co qu t y , . Fou th d t o TH E H N AN D E H O F N EN E C RO OLOGY G OGRAP Y A CI T GYPT .

ALEXAN DRIAN CHRONOLOGY .

E N N N r m the r sh M s e m and her GYPTIA I SCRIPTIO S, f o B iti u u ot

s rces . 21 6 a es i n o i . ou Pl t , F l o

EGYPTIAN HIEROGLYPHICS bein g an Attempt to Explain

eir a re ri in an d eanin Wi a V cab ul ar . th N tu , O g , M g. th o y

EGYPTIAN ANTIQUITIES IN TH E BRITISH MUSEUM de s cri b e d .

E N M H AN D E N H N GYPTIA YT OLOGY GYPTIA C RISTIA ITY, ir n ﬂ en c on th e in i ns of ern ri s i ani with the I u e Op o Mod Ch t ty . TABLE OF C ON TEN TS.

I ntroduction Recei ve d Age of the World

’ F rom the Creation to Solomon s R eign O n the Book of Judges The Chron ology of the Septuagin t His torical Chron ology TAB LE or TH E C H RON OL OG Y or TH E KI N G S Notes on the foregoin g Table The Seven ty Weeks of Dan iel

’ C H RON OLOG Y or C H RI ST S MI N I S TR Y The Year of the Baptism The Regnal Years

’ The N ew Year s Day The Year of the Crucifixion The Day of the Passover The Day of the Cruciﬁx ion

I n Ma he Mar an d e tt w, k , Luk Tabular V iew

’ I n John s Gospel The Preparation for the Pass over The Last Supper The Driving the D ealers out of the Temple - yard

’ Table of Christ s Ministry Year of H is Birth

TH E CH RON OL O GY OF TH E B I B LE.

D T IN TR O U C IO N .

I N this work the writer ventures on no opinion about the age of the world , or the number of years that it has been inhabited by man , nor even attempts to decide the date of the Exodus of the Israelites out of Egypt , under Moses . His aim is merely to show at what times the Hebrew writers place those events . He has simply taken out the spaces of time mentioned in the Bible , and placed them together in a serie s till they come down to the recorded eclipses . Modern science tells us with certainty how many years before our own time these eclipses happened ; and thus to the Table of years which had been made

n by counti g forward , we are able to put our own more usual and more convenient dates by counting backwards , from the Christian era . Thus , if an eclipse is known to have taken place 2489 years 1 868 before this present year , which we call , we 1 868 sa deduct from the above number , and y that 2 B C . 6 1 . it happened . The chronology of the Old Testament may con venien tl y be divided into two parts , the traditional chronology and the historical chronology . 10 TH E H N or TH E B I B L E C RO OLOGY .

The ﬁrst is formed by adding together the age of each of the patriarchs at the time of the son ’ s birth from which we learn that Abraham left Haran in S A. M 2023 yria in . that the Exodus of the Israelites 6 A. M 2 68 from Egypt took place in . ; and that S olomon , in the fourth year of his reign , built the

A M . 8148 . Temple of Jerusalem in . Here the tra dition al chronology may be said to end ; and , after this time , the dates are recorded with so much i greater care , and with such an ev dent aim at exact ness , that we may safely consider that we have e n tei e d upon historical chronology . From this we learn that the building of the Temple took place in i c of the yea B . . 973 . We thus gain the opinion the Hebrew writers that Adam was created in the yea r

B . c . 4121 3 148 The received chronology places the creation of c 4004 4000 Adam in the year B . . , or years before the birth of Jesus ; and it will be not uninteresting ' to examine the reasons for its doing so . The Epistle of Barnabas mentions an Opinion held by was d the Jews , that the world to be destroye at the

’ “ 6000 its end of years from creation , because , accord

i . ing to Genesis chap . , it was created in six days , “ 2 . 8 and , according to Peter iii , one day with the hi Lord is as a thousand years . On comparing t s with our chronology, it will be seen that the Promises A M 2023 u were given to Abraham in . . , and that Jes s A M 4121 was born in . . . Hence , a very little altera tion of the dates will make the Bible seem to declare that manki nd had lived 200 0 years before 2000 the Promises , more before the Gospel ; and this adjustment of the chronology, to make it agree with 1 1 I N TRODUCTION .

a fanciful opinion , has been made in the margin of the authorized English Bibles . This opinion also led to the natural prophecy , among those who are fond of such fanciful interpretations , that the world is to a 20 00 l st years under the Gospel , and to come to

an A. D . 2000 A. D . 1996 end in , or more exactly, in , because mod ern criticism has made it probable that e s 4 J us was born in the year R e . .

TABLE or T H E TRADITIONAL C R R O N O L O G Y F ROM TH E ’ C R EATION TO S OL OMON S REI G N .

hen 130 ears e a e h w y old , b g t S t 10 5 En os 9 0 Cain an 70 Mahalaleel 6 5 Jare d 162 En och 6 5 M ethuselah 1 8 7 L amech 1 82 Noa h 5 00 hem 7 n n n S 6 00 Th e F lood ears a er the F hem e a r ha xa Two y ft lood, S b g t A p d Ar haxacl hen 3 5 ears a ah p , w y old , S l a ah 3 0 E er S l , b E er 3 4 e e b , P l g e e 30 R eu P l g, B en 32 er , S ug er Nah r S ug, o Nah r 29 erah o , T erah 70 ram T , Ab ram 75 e Hara n Ab , l ft hen 1 0 0 ears 25 ears a er e a saa W y old , y l t , b g t I c saa he n 6 0 ears a I c, w y old, J cob a 1 30 se es i n E J cob , ttl gypt

A er 430 ears he eave E 2668 ft y , t y l gypt

480 years after the Exodus i s the 4th of Solomon 1 2 TH E TH E E CHRONOLOGY OF BIBL .

O N TH E B O O K E OF JUDG S .

TH E 480 the above mentioned period of years , which 1 1 d writer of Kings vi . , places between the Exo us u and the building of the Temple by Solomon , wo ld seem to have been learned by adding together [the times mentioned in the history . In the Books of Joshua and Judges there are periods amounting to 460 h years . If we continue , in the same way , to t ink t none of the events contemporaneous , we mus add to this sum 1 year from the Exodus to the espying of the d — 1 1 — 2 lan Numb . x . . xiii . . 40 ’ years of David s reign . ’ 3 years of Solomon s reign to the buildin g of the Temple ; 4 les making a total of 5 0 years . How the writer

sened this down to 480 it is in vain to conjecture . Sound criticism would lead us to lessen it much more by considering many events in the Book of Judges as contemporaneous .

i —x11 n . . Thus , chapters vi we have a continuous history , limited for the most part to the middle O f h tribes Ephraim and Manasseh , thoug some times we ﬁnd Gad , Issachar , and Zebulun joined to them . This describes an invasion and conquest of their country by the Midianites and others from the east of the Jordan , and then the reigns of Gideon and Abimelech , and the judgeships of Tola and Jair l . . 1 (chap x , These quiet reigns are fo lowed by E 18 TH E BOOK OF JUDG S .

a second great invasion and conquest of the land .

This is by the children of Ammon from the east , and by the Philistines from the south , and it is fol lowed by the judgeships of Jephthah , Ibzan , Elon , 144 and Abdon . The whole occupies years namely, 9 5 49 years before the second invasion , and years after it . It seems probable that these two portions embrace the whole period of time which the Book of

Judges covers , and that the other invasions relate to

tr other parts of the . c oun y which sometimes had judges of their own . Thus the wars of Benjamin against the Moabites , and the conquest of Moab , in 14— 30 chap . iii . , and the wars of the northern tribes — S . . 8 11 against the yrians , in chap iii , and against

v the Canaanites , in chap . iv , . , may have taken place ’ during the ﬁrst of these periods ; and Samson s wars — against the Philistines , in chap . xiii xvi . , may have been included in the second period of time . This shortening of the chronology of this book will make it better agree with the genealogies ; for , since Moses vi is the fourth in descent from Jacob , and Da d the eleventh , we cannot allow more than four , or at most ﬁve , generations of men to the time occupied by the Book of Judges .

On the other hand , the Book of Judges , in chap .

xi . 26 , has preserved a tradition , relating to a yet 300 earlier time , that the Israelites had dwelt for years on the east of the Jordan , between the time of the Exodus and the time of Judges ruling in

Canaan . This very probable statement is expressly

. 12 1 contradicted in Numb . xxxii , xxxiv . 7, and

Joshua iii . TH E O F TH E E 14 CHRONOLOGY BIBL .

TH E O F TH E E CHRONOLOGY S PTUAGINT .

H E W N the Greek Jews made the Septuagint version , in the reign of Ptolemy Philadelphus , $ they seem not to have been content with the very moderate antiquity for theirnation and the human race given in the Hebrew 1466 books ; and , accordingly , they added years to the age of the world , by making the patriarchs Older 5 8 6 at the birth of their sons . They thus add in — 88 . 0 v . . . Genesis vii , and in Genesis xi , xii They probably meant to add an exact Egyptian cycle of 65 146 3 0 . ff six four times , or years The di erence of years may be an error of the scribe . On comparing the criti Greek chronology with the Hebrew , sound ci sm will certainly lead us to conclude that the

Hebrew is what the writers originally wrote . However mistaken we may think them in supposing that the world had only been peopled with mankind for such a th e small number of years , yet we cannot accept i Greek chronology as the original . It is ev dently a

c . orrection , an attempted improvement on the Hebrew

And even as an improvement it is of very little value , since even with its help we by no means carry back the creation of man to a time early enough to sati sfy the reasonable requirements of science . A second improvement proposed by the Greek translators was to shorten the time of the Israelites’ residence in Egypt— the time between Jacob ’ s bring ’ ing his family into Egypt and Moses leading them T T E 15 H E CHR ONOLOGY OF H E S PTUAGINT .

s out . This , in the above table , is quoted from Exodu

xi i 40 430 . . , as years But in the Greek, this period of 430 years is said to include their residence in

Canaan as well as their residence in Egypt , com ’ men cin g with Abraham s leaving Haran ; and it thus 215 i s shortens the residence in Egypt by years . Th certainly agrees better wi th the genealogies ; but it cannot be accepted as what the writer originally wrote .

TH E SECOND OR HISTORICAL PORTION O F TH E E E H BR W CHRONOLOGY . THIS is calculated backwards from the eclipse in the 5 th N ab o ulas sar 621 of p , , by the help of the i years mentioned in Ezek el , Jeremiah , and the Books O f i of Kings . In the Books K ngs we often meet with contradictory statements . The length of the reign, as there stated , does not always agree with the length as we should calculate it to be , when the writer gives a us a d te for its ending , and also a date for the end determin of the previous reign . The latter mode of ing the length seems to be of the two the more trust worthy . The contradiction can only be reconciled

’ upon the supposition that many of the kin gs reigned i mi jointly w th their fathers , and had thus been no nally reigning several years before their real reign began . This is the supposition of many of the best

Biblical critics . Our Table thus makes the reign of Solomon about thirty - nine years more modern than the received chronology, which , on the other hand , supposes each king of Judah to have counted his ’ a ye rs from his father s death . Thus , with us , it 16 TH E H CHRONOLOGY OF T E BI BLE . becomes unnecessary to place an interregnum between

Jeroboam II . of Israel and his son Zachariah , and a s econd interregnum between Pekah of Israel and

Hosea who dethroned him .

The received chronology, which may be seen in the O f margin most Bibles , is formed by simply adding ’ U p together the length of every king s reign , over looking the diﬁculty caused by the double method

i n of reckoning employed the Books of Kings , and overlooking the fact , certain in some cases and pro k ’ bable in others , that a ing s years were reckoned , ’ was not from his father s death , but from when he

associated with his father on the throne . If we had

nothing to guide us but the Books of Chronicles , we

should be driven to that mode of reasoning . But the i i Books of K ngs teach us otherw se , and thus lead us ’ to shorten the sum of the kings reigns by thi rty-nine years . When the reigns of the Jewish kings come to an

end , the Table is continued forwards by the help of

Claudius Ptolemy , to the seventh year of Cambyses , which i s again ﬁxed by an eclipse ; and to the second

year of Darius , when the Jews had leave to rebuild

the Temple .

The quotations from the historians , by which the

Table is formed , are placed at the end of it .

T E 18 TH E CHRONOLOGY O F H E BIBL .

A H SRAEL . JUD . I

(27) 8 of Asa 6 of B aasha (28) 9 7 (29 ) 10 8 (30 ) 11 9 (3 1 ) 12 10 (32) 1 3 1 1 (33 ) 14 12 (3 4) 1 5 1 3 (3 5 ) 16 14 (3 6 ) 17 1 5 1 8 1 6 19 1 7 20 18 2 1 19 22 20 23 21 24 22 25 23 26 24 1 of Elah [9 ] 2 7 of O mri & T1bni 28 2 2 [10 ] 29 3 0 3 1 3 2 3 3 3 4 3 5 3 6 3 7 1 i A 1 1 3 8 2 . of hab [ ] 2

40 . 3 41; 1 0 fJe hoshaphat[ 12] 2 3 TH E TH E KI 19 CHRONOLOGY OF NGS .

AH SRAE L JUD . I .

8 of Jehoshaphat 1 1 of Ahab

of Ahaziah [13] ofJehoram [14 ]

Jehoram [ 15]

. 1 of Ahaziah [ 1 7] 1 of Athaliah [ 19 ]

o l of Jehoash [20] 0 T H E L E 2 H E CHRONOLOGY OF T BI B .

AR SRAEL . JUD . I

1 4 of Jehoash 20 of Jehu 15 2 1 1 6 22 1 7 23 18 24 1 9 25 20 26 2 1 27 22 28 1 O f Jehoahaz [21 ] 24 NJ O 25 O

P- 26 l

i J 27 C

'J 28 O 29 Q O 3 0 O D 3 1 C 3 2 3 3 34 3 5 3 6 l of Jehoa Sh 22 3 7 1 5 . [ ] l h 23 2 3 8 l of Amaz a [ ] 1 6 . 3 9 2 1 7 3 1 rob oamII 3 of Je . 5 2 join tly with his 6 3 father 1 A h 25 zaria , [ ] n 2 when 1 6 years c n 3 old oin tl with c , j y 4 his father 10 q o 5 1 1 o 6 12 9 1 3 10 14 1 1 15 12 am 16 13 Je robo I I . 14 alone [24] F TH E K 21 TH E CHRONOLOGY O INGS .

AH SRAEL . JUD . I

1 7 12 of Amaziah an d 1 5 erob oa m I I of J . 1 1 6 18 3 Azariah . 1 9 1 4 17 20 15 18 21 1 6 1 9 22 1 7 20 23 1 8 21 1 9 22 25 20 23 26 2 1 24 27 2 2 28 23 29 24 Azari ah or U z 25 ziah alone [26 ] 26 27 28 3 1 29 3 2 3 0 3 3 3 1 34 3 2 3 5 3 3 3 6 3 4 35 3 8 3 6 3 9 3 7 40 3 8 41 1 of Zachamah [27] H Sha um 28 3 9 of ll [ ] “- P of Me nahem[29] 40 M O 41 C

1 0 03 q o o o c l — l o 0

‘ ) —I I H A V . 3 H oH Pekahiah w 22 TH E H TH E B E C RONOLOGY OF BI L .

A H SRAEL . JUD . I

5 2 of Azariah or Uzziah 1 of Pekah [32] 1 of Jotham [3 3] 2 3

' H of Ahaz NJ O C

1 ‘ —D 1 O U D O Q D 1 6 G 9

1 ofHoshea 13 2 14 3 15 1 of H ezek1ah [36] 16 2 5 O O 6 - Q 7 H ﬂ C 8 b O 9 Shalman e z er con

Q quers I srael .

’ h w Sennacherib s overt ro . ’ B erodach B aladan s em

[bassy . TH E TH E 23 CHRONOLOGY OF KI NGS .

JUDA H . 18 of Hezekiah 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 1 of Manasseh 2 3

Esarhaddon succe e ds

Sennacherib . E 24 TH E CHRONOLOGY O F TH E BIBL .

H JUDA .

29 of Manasseh 30

2 1 of Josiah NJ D O

K O D O Q O O O Q a— r O a—‘— r l

26 TH E H T C RONOLOGY OF H E BIBLE .

A H AB Y LON JUD . B .

1 1 of Captivity 1 0 of Zedekiah 18 of Neb ucha d 12 1 1 1 of City 1 9 [ n ez zar [5 0 ] 13 2 smitten[5 1] 20 14 21 1 5 22 16 23 17 24 1 8 25 19 26 20 27 21 28 22 29 23 3 0 24 3 1 25 32 26 3 3 27 34 28 3 5 29 3 6 3 0 3 7 3 1 3 8 32 3 9 3 3 40 34 41 35 42 3 6 43 3 7Jehoiachi n 44 l ofEvil [ 5 3] released from 45 2 Merodach prison 46 3 474 4 8 1 of N e rig 49 2 [lissor 5 0 3 5 1 4

5 2 . 5 5 3 1 of N a 5 4 2 b on n e d or 5 5 3 B el shazzar 5 6 4 5 75 2 TH E CHRONOLOGY OF TH E CAPTIV ITY . 7

AE AB Y LON JUD . B . 40 of City smit 5 8 of Nebu 6 of Nabon 4 1 [ten 5 9 c hadn e z zar 7n e d or B el 42 60 or of Jere 8 shazzar ’ 4 3 6 1 miah s pro 9 44 6 2 phe cy 1 0 45 6 3 1 1 46 6 4 12 47 6 5 13 48 6 6 14 49 6 7 15 5 0 6 8 1 6 5 1 69 1 7 5 2 Pri nce Ze 70 1 of C yaxare s 5 rub ab el II o rDari uS 3 [ b 2 . 5 4 3 theM e de a n d 5 5 4 of Cyrus in 5 6 5 B abylon[5 6] 5 7 6 5 8 7 5 9 8 60 9 6 1 1 of Cambyse s 6 2 NJ O 63 O 6 4 $

I 6 5 O D 66 O 6 7 7An eclipse 68 8 recorded[5 7] M 69 1 of D arius 70 2 [5 8]

The Temple ﬁnished 6 of Dariu s [5 91 E h u X st er made Q een O f Persia 3 of erxes I . [60 1 E X zra returns to Jerusalem 7of erxes I . [6 11 Nehemiah returns to Jerusalem 20 of Artaxe r xes [62] 28 TH E E CHRONOLOGY OF TH E BIBL .

E N O T S .

CONTAINING TH E AUTH ORITIES F O R TH E F OREGOING E O F TH E K N O F UD H E AN D TABL I GS J A , ISRA L,

BABYLON .

V DA ID reigned f orty years , namely , seven six years and months in Hebron over Judah , and then in Jerusalem thirty - three years over both Israel 2 5 and Judah ; Samuel v . . Solomon reigned forty years over all Israel ; 4 2 . 1 Kings xi . Some small portion of this may have been jointly with his father David . R s on ehoboam , the of Solomon , reigned 1 2 1 . seventeen years over Judah Kings xiv .

Abijam , the son of Rehoboam , began to reign erob oam in the eighteenth year of J , and reigned three 1 i years over Judah ; K ngs xv . 1 .

To this reign , said to be of three years , we can only allow two ; and the same dropping of a year will be Observed in many other cases . Thi s is B osh explained in the Mishna , in treatis e Has

i . hanah , chap . , where we read that the years of a king ’ s reign were said to end with the New Y ear ’ s day ; and thus the ﬁrst year of every reign may have f w consisted of only a e weeks or even a few days .

The same , of course , was the case with the last year of a reign . Thus the last year of one king and the ﬁrst of his successor together only ﬁlled twelve E NOT S . 29

months . This mode of reckoning the regnal years was used throughout Egypt , Babylonia , Syria , and

Asia Minor , even for the Greek kings and Roman emperors who afterwards reigned over those coun tries ; and it will have to be attended to when we meet with authors who lived in those countries dating the baptism and cruciﬁxion of Jesus by ’ means of the years of an emperor s reign . Asa son , the of Abijam , began to reign over erob oam Judah in the twentieth year of J , and

- 9 . reigned forty one years ; 1 Kings xv . son Nadab , the of Jeroboam , began to reign k over Israel in the second year of Asa ing of Judah , 1 and reigned two years ; Kings xv . This was

-ﬁrst in the twenty year of his father , and it contra 2 r boa 1 . 0 e o m dicts Kings xiv , where we are told that J

- reigned twenty two years , unless we suppose that son father and reigned jointly .

Baasha slew Nadab , and began to reign over Israel in the third year of Asa ; and he reigned in

- 1 . Tirzah twenty four years Kings xv 33 .

- In the thirty sixth year of Asa , Baasha makes 1 war against him ; 2 Chron . xvi . . Here the years of Asa are probably counted in continuation of those of

- his grandfather , as Baasha died in the twenty sixth i 8 . year of Asa ; 1 K ngs xvi . son Elah , the of Baasha , began to reign in

- Asa the twenty sixth of , and he reigned for two 1 8 years ; Kings xvi . .

- As a In the twenty seventh of , Zimri slew an d 1 i Elah , reigned for seven days over Israel K ngs

1 5 . . xvi . We have omitted his name from the table

Then Omri and Tibni divided the kingdom of Israel . TH E O F TH E E 3 0 CHRONOLOGY BIBL .

six Omri reigned twelve years , for the ﬁrst in Tirzah , a n d six for the last in Samaria , the new capital of 1 i 23 Israel ; K ngs , xvi . . Tibni reigned ﬁve years ,

- ﬁrst dying in the thirty of Asa , leaving Omri to reign 1 22 for seven years over all Israel ; Kings xvi . .

Ahab , the son of Omri , began to reign in

- the thirty eighth of Asa , and reigned over Israel in

- 2 Samaria twenty two years ; 1 Kings xvi . 9 . ehosha hat son Asa J p , the of , began to reign

over Judah in the fourth year of Ahab , and reigned

- ﬁ 1 i 41 e . twenty v years K ngs xxii .

Ahaziah , the son of Ahab , began to reign over ehosha hat Israel in the seventeenth of J p , and reigned

i 5 1 . two years ; 1 Kings xx i . This contradicts 1 ’ . 29 Kings xvi , by Shortening Ahab s reign , unless we suppose that the son reigned jointly with his

father , which is very possible , though not allowed by

1 40 . Kings xxii . , which says he reigned in his stead son Jehoram , the of Ahab , succeeded his

brother in the eighteenth year of Jehoshaphat , and 2 1 reigned twelve years over Israel ; Kings iii . . The ﬁrst two years of his reign were also jointly

with his father , unless , as before remarked , we t ’ shorten the fa her s reign .

In the ﬁfth year of Joram king of Israel , ehoram son ehosha hat J , the of J p , began to reign over

Judah while his father was yet alive . He reigned

2 i . 16 1 . eight years ; Kings v ii , 7 As the father son and are here said to have reigned jointly, as did son David and his Solomon , it is not unreasonable to suppose that it may have been the same with has other kings , when the historian not expressly

said so . NOTES .

2 i . 1 We read in K ngs i 7, that in the second year of Jehoram king of Judah , Jehoram of Israel Ah succeeded to his brother aziah . But this date can in no way be reconciled with what we have 14 learned from other passages . See notes ( ) and

Ahaziah , king of Judah , began to reign in 2 the eleventh year of Joram king of Israel , Kings

. 29 2 ix , or in the twelfth year, according to Kings

25 . viii . This latter date seems the more probable .

He reigned one year . He is called Jehoahaz in

2 . 1 Chron xxi . 7. k Jehu , who had slain Jehoram ing of

- i 2 . 3 6 . Israel , re gned twenty eight years ; Kings x i O f Ahaziah , k ng Judah , was slain at the

i 2 . same time as Jehoram k ng of Israel , Kings ix 2 7, and he was succeeded by his mother , Athaliah , 4 2 xi . who reigned seven years ; Kings . In the

verse before we are told that the child , the rightful

king , was hidden for only Six years . This may be explained by note where we learn tha t six years

may easily get counted for seven regnal years . eho a sh In the seventh year of Jehu , J began

to reign over Judah . He reigned forty years ; 2 1 Kings xii . .

- O f ehoash b In the twenty third year J , Je oa

haz , the son of Jehu , began to reign over Israel , and 1 reigned seventeen years ; 2 Kings xiii . . In the thirty - seventh year of Jehoash of ehoash son ehoahaz Judah , J , the of J , began to reign 2 over Israel , and reigned sixteen years ; Kings 10 xiii . . c In the se ond year of Jehoash of Israel , son Amaziah , the of Jehoash of Judah , began to 2 TH E TH E E 3 CHRONOL OGY OF BIBL .

- 2 reign , and he reigned twenty nine years ; Kings 1 : eh h xiv . he survived J oas of Israel ﬁfteen years ;

2 1 son so - Kings xiv . 7. Then his began in the called

- ero am 2 1 twenty seventh of J b o Kings xv . .

In the ﬁfteenth year of Amaziah , Jeroboam

- began to reign over Israel , and reigned forty one 2 xi 2 3 . years ; Kings v . This can only be reconciled with other quotations by supposing that he then began to reign alone , after having reigned thirteen

- years jointly with his father . See note Here , t hen , we shorten the usual chronology .

Azariah , or Uzziah , son of Amaziah , reigned

ﬁft - 2 y two years over Judah ; 2 Kings xv . . We place his beginning in the sixth year of his father ’ s reign . If we followed the usual chronology, and

- e rob oam made him begin in the twenty seventh of J , we should have to place an interregnum of twelve years in Israel between Jeroboam and his son

Zachariah , as is done in the margin of the Authorized V ersion of the Bible .

- erob oam In the twenty seventh year of J , says

2 . 1 . the historian , Azariah began to reign Kings xv This was ﬁfteen years after the death of Jehoa sh of 2 1 Israel ; Kings xiv . 7. Hence it is clear that Jerob oam had reigned twelve years jointly with his father .

- In the thirty eighth year of Azariah , Zacha r iah began to reign over Israel . He reigned for Six

2 i 8 . months ; K ngs xv . He succeeded on the death 2 of Jeroboam his father ; 2 Kings xiv . 9 ; but the usual chronology places an interregnum between them .

T E 3 4 TH E CHRONOLOGY OF H BIBLE .

two dates mean the same year though Jotham had e be n dead four years , his years were still used in

dating events .

In the third year of Hoshea , Hezekiah began

- to reign over Judah , and reigned twenty nine years 1 2 Kings xviii . . But we place the beginning of his wi reign one year later , agreeably with the two follo ng

quotations . The fourth year of Hezekiah was the Shalman ez er k seventh of Hoshea . In that year , ing

2 . 9 . of Assyria , besieged Samaria ; Kings xviii The sixth year of Hezeki ah was the ninth

of Hoshea . In that year the monarchy of Israel 2 i 6 . 10 . came to an end ; K ngs xvii . ; xviii The year 721 was the ﬁrst year of Mardoc Em adu s p king of Babylon , by an eclipse of

the moon observed in Babylon , and recorded by B eroda Claudius Ptolemy . He is called ch Baladan in the Hebrew ; and he sends an embassy to Heze 15 kiah , perhaps about years before the death of C 13 — R . 7 2 . 6 12 . the latter , or about Kings xx

E us R C . 0 Mardoc mpad died 79 . his Manasseh succeeded father Hezekiah ,

ﬁft -ﬁve 2 xxi 1 and reigned y years ; Kings . . Hence forth we ha ve no kings of Israel for the historian to make use of their years in dating the kings of

Judah .

Amon succeeded his father , Manasseh , and 2 19 reigned two years ; Kings xxi . .

Josiah succeeded his father Amon , and

- 2 1 reigned thirty one years ; Kings xxii . . Jeremiah begins ' to prophesy in the thir

teen th - y ear of Josiah ; Jerem . xxv . 3 . See note NOTES . 35

B . C 621 The year . was the ﬁfth year of N ab 0 ulassar i c s p , k ng of Babylon , by an e lip e of the moon , recorded by C . Ptolemy . u Jehoahaz , called also Shallum , s cceeded Je Josiah , and reigned three months , and then h oiakim i , called also Eliak m , reigned eleven years ;

2 i . 3 1 3 6 . K ngs xxiii , The fourth year of Jehoiakim was the ﬁrst

- of Nebuchadnezzar , and the twenty third from the 1 thirteenth of Josiah ; Jerem . xxv . . The Captivity in Babylon was to come to an end in seventy years from this time .

Jehoiachin , called also Jeconiah , reigned three months , and was then carried into captivity in O f 2 i the eighth year Nebuchadnezzar ; K ngs xxiv . 8 — 12 se e . His series of years , we Shall , was con “ $ ti n ue d under the name of the Captivity . Some “ writers make the ﬁrst year O f the Captivity follow the ﬁrst year of Jehoiachin but this is con tradi cted by other passages .

Zedekiah , called also Mattaniah , reigned ehoiachin eleven years , while J was a captive in

2 i 18 . Babylon ; K ngs xxiv . The ﬁfth year of the Captivity is the year 30 E k z e i . of an era not named ; . This is obviously

N ab 0 ula ar of p ss . Ezekiel seems to have thought ’ B C 5 96 390 that this year . . was after Jeroboam s revolt , which he calls the iniquity of Israel ; chap . ’

m s R C 86 . r boa . 9 5 . e o iv . He thus places J revolt in R C 936 O f Our table places it in . , and the margin

R C . 5 the authorized Bible places it in 97. The tenth year of Zedekiah is the eighteenth

1 . of Nebuchadnezzar Jerem . xxxii . 6 TH E TH E E 3 CHRONOLOGY OF BIBL .

The City of Jerusalem was smitten in the 21 twelfth year of the Captivity , Ezek . xxxiii . , and in

8 . the nineteenth of Nebuchadnezzar ; 2 Kings xxv . This shows that the years of “ the Captivity $ were ’ counted from the king s accession , not from his being carried captive . The twenty - ﬁfth year of the Captivity is the mi XI 1 fourteenth of the City s tten ; Ezek . . . Evil Merodach began to reign in the thirty 2 2 seventh year of the Captivity ; Kings xxv . 7 a n n e d t N b o of Cl . P olemy seems to be the

same as Belshazzar of the Book of Daniel .

The Desolation of seventy years , mentioned 1 1 in Jeremiah xxv . , came to an end in the ﬁrst 21 1 year of Cyrus 2 Chron . xxxvi . Ezra i . . The Jewish captives in Babylon then returned home under

Prince Zerubbabel . X C ro aedia enophon , in his y p , makes axare s C y II . of Media the conqueror of Babylon ; and the Book of Daniel says that it was Darius the

Mede who overthrew the Babylonian monarchy . By some these two kings are thought to be the same ;

but by some their very existence is denied ; and Cl . Ptolemy makes Cyrus of Persia the immediate suc f i cessor o the last k ng of Babylon . But in favour

of there having been such a Median conqueror , we

11. 11 1 may remark that Jerem . , and Isaiah xiii . 7, w hich are later additions to those books , both Speak of the Medes as the conqueror s of Babylon ; and in xxi 2 Isaiah . , those nations are Spoken of as the joint

conquerors . Cyrus reigned nine years . 5 2 The year B C . 3 was the seventh of Cam

b se s C 1. y , by an eclipse of the moon recorded by

Ptolemy . Cambyses reigned eight years . 3 7 NOTE S .

In the second year of Darius , Jerusalem had

1 2 . been punished seventy years ; Zechariah i . 7,

The years of the Babylonian kings , after the over throw of the Assyrians and before their own over 1 C . throw , are in Ptolemy fewer by one than in our table ; thus m As v I n . t e . abo e . Cl P ol y

l s r 1 r 20 e s . N ab 0 pu a sa 8 yea s . y ar Ne b u chadn e z zar 4 3 43 Evil Me rodach 2 N eriglisso r Nab on n e d

87 86

The building of the second Temple was 15 ﬁnished in the sixth year of Darius (Ezra vi . ) by

Prince Zerubbabel ; Zechariah iv . 9 . i s S Esther made queen in usa , the capital of

Persia , by Ahasuerus , who reigned over one hun

- dred and twenty seven provinces , from India to 1 Ethiopia ; Esther . This was in the third year of X ﬂ his reign . He was probably erxes I . Her in uence may have Obtained for Ezra permission to return to

Jerusalem .

In the seventh year of Artaxerxes , Ezra returns to Jerusalem as the Persian governor of the

8 . city Ezra vii . This was probably in the reign of X I . . erxes , called Ahasuerus in the Book of Esther This was ﬁfty - nine years after the Decree of Cyrus

which allowed the ﬁrst return of the Jews . See Daniel

25 - ix . , where forty nine years only are allowed to

what seems to be meant for this space of time .

In the twentieth year , probably of Artaxerxes L on iman u s g , Nehemiah returns to Jerusalem ; Nehe

miah i . 8 TH E TH E B E CHRONOLOGY OF BI L .

O H E EV E EEK E C R AP N T I X. S NTY W S OF DANI L , .

TH E Hebrew word here translated a Week , simply means a Seven , and is open to the same ambiguity as the word for Month , which means , a Renewing , Y and the word for ear , which means , a Change . To clear up the ambiguity , a writer sometimes says , a “ $ $ “ year of days , a month of days , a week of $ days . But the context usually makes his meaning clear , and these fuller expressions are not often used . Y et their being occasionally used shows the ambi guity which hangs upon the words . Hence our commentators take no liberty whatever in under standing the week in this chapter to mean a week of years , and the seventy weeks spoken of to mean

490 . years After this preface , we may turn to the

autho passage in Daniel , of course correcting the riz e d version

Know therefore and understand , that from the B C 5 38 going forth of the command ( . . ) to lead back home , and to build up Jerusalem , unto an Anointed Ruler shall be seven weeks (or forty - nine years Then in sixty and two weeks (or 434 years)

B . C 5 5 the Broad Place shall be built again ( . ) and the ditch , even amid the distress of the times . After the Sixty and two weeks shall an Anointed One be

off . cut , and nothing Shall remain to him And the people of the Ruler that shall come will destroy the city and the Holy Place ; and the end thereof will T H E EV E WEEK O F E S NTY S DANI L .

a ﬁood b e with ; and until the end of the war , deso lation s are determined . And he will conﬁrm a treaty wi th Many for one week (or seven years) . And in

B C . 5 1 the middle of the week ( . ) he will cause the ff sacriﬁce and the meal o ering to cease , and upon the battlements shall be the abominations of desolation , e i ven unt l the consummation , and that which has been $ determined , Shall be poured out on the desolator . B C 5 38 d In the year . . , the Me es , who may have been under the command of a sovereign named

C axare s . u y II , or Darius , and the Persians , nder the

c . ommand of Cyrus , conquered Babylon That both nations were engaged in the conquest appears from 2 Isaiah xxi . , though the Medes only are mentioned 1 1 . . 1 in Isaiah xiii 7, and Jeremiah li . The date we r learn from C . Ptolemy , who says that Cy us reigned over Babylon nine years , and was then succeeded by w 5 2 as B C . 3 C . . ambyses The seventh of Cambyses , a s fixed by an eclipse of the moon hence the first 8 B C 5 3 . of Cyrus was . . In that year the Jewish captives in Babylon were allowed to return home 2 22 l . . . and rebui d their Temple See Chron xxxvi , 1 S Ezra i . . Prince Zerubbabel , or heshbazzar , was the leader who brought them back to their own country . 5 38 That year R C . is also fixed for the return of the captives , by a passage added by some writer who lived at that time , to the writings of Jeremiah . 1 — 14 J r m . e e . xxv , tells us that for seventy years ’ after Nebuchadnezzar s accession , or after the fourth year of Jehoiakim , the land Shall be desolate , and in subjection to the king of Babylon . See page 25 , where the fourth of Jehoiakim is shown to be D 2 4 TH E TH E E 0 CHRONOLOGY OF BIBL .

60 R C . 7 and thus the seventieth year from that

C 5 38 . time is R . 4 B . C 9 The year . 7 may be certainly shown to be X ft the seventh year of erxes I . It is the twel h year

R C . 491 after the eclipse of the moon , in the thirty

ﬁrst of Darius and Darius reigned , according to C .

- Ptolemy , thirty six years . It was in that year that was Ezra , the Jewish high priest , made ruler of b Jerusalem y the Persian king , Artaxerxes . See i ’ Ezra vi . 7. The Persian kings names are used by various historians rather indiscriminately ; the

r Xe xes I . of the Greek writers is probably the Arta h 1 xerxes of Ezra , and the A asuerus of Esther i . . That year is ﬁfty - nine year s— not forty- nine years

after the command to build up the Temple . Here ,

n . 25 then , if Ezra is the Anoi ted Ruler of Dan . ix , i s R C . 5 5 our chronology seems at fault . The year , 4 434 R C 5 8 9 . 3 however , years and years later than ,

and in this year we ought to have , not the Temple , but

r its fortiﬁcations rebuilt , if we are ight in believing ’ C 5 38 i s that the year R . the point from which Daniel s

seventy weeks are to be counted . The writer who added this chapter to the book of Daniel may have ’ been mistaken in Ezra s date , but he is less likely to have been uncertain as to how long an event in his ’ own day was from the ﬁrst year of Cyrus s reign . “ $ Josephus , in his History of the Jews , writes with

so little chronological method , that it is not easy to

ﬁx with exactness the date of the events mentioned .

C 5 5 H r an u s But it was about B . that y c began to rebuild the walls of Jerusalem in sadly troublous Al son times , to defend himself against exander , the

of his brother Aristobulus , with whom he had been

42 TH E TH E E CHRONOLOGY OF BIBL .

ff ri daily sacriﬁce and meal o e ng ceased . The only ﬂaw k in our reasoning seems to be , that we now of no Anointed Ruler fortya n in e years after the return f rom captivity . Ezra , who most nearly suits the

ﬁft - requirements of the case , was made Ruler y nine years after the return . The author of this chapter in the book of Daniel

R C . 5 1 would seem to have written it in the year , his that is , half a week, or three years , before

seventy weeks were to come to an end .

N ’ N TR Y TH E CHR O OL OG Y O F CHR IST S MI IS .

THIS i s a subject which will by most persons be

granted to be of some importance . If we could determine with reasonable certainty the time of the o n baptism and that of the cruciﬁxi n , we should k ow the length of the ministry ; and this would help uS

materially to a right understanding of the life , and

thence of the teachings of Jesus . Again , if we

knew the year of the cruciﬁxion , we should know, by

the help of the Jewish law and customs , the day of

the week on which the Passover supper was eaten , and thence whether Jesus ate that supper with his

disciples , as we are told in the ﬁrst three Gospels , or whether he wa s put to death before the Passover a s we are told in the fourth Gospel . At present , so opinions are much divided on these matters , that the subject has seemed to be in hopeless confusion . ’ 43 CHRIST S MINISTRY .

But I venture to think that , with a more patient and

u . thoro gh inquiry , the doubts might yet be removed The reason why these difﬁculties have not been d cleare up , seems to arise from the less common w books hich must be read , and from the less agree i able l ne of study which must be followed , for that o purp se . Our scholars are too much conﬁned to the c classi al writers of antiquity , who can in this case h give t em no help . A date cannot be understood with exactness unless we understand the almanac or mode of dating in use at the time and in the country to which it relates ; and many of our scholars who have gi ven an opinion about the chronology of the

New Testament , may perhaps never have looked at M H ashan ah the ishna , in Treatise Rosh , or at Censo $ ’ A n rin ui . stro o De die Natali , or at C Ptolemy s ’ ’ a w The on s mic ork , or at and Heraclius s fragments the on ancient year , or have examined a series of

Egyptian and Asiatic coins of the Roman emperors , or even have looked to the method of dating em Y e t 10 . p 3ed in the Hebrew Books of Kings most , a or ther all , of these authorities have to be studied in irder to understand the time meant by those very ’ “ Sin le p words of Luke s Gospel , the ﬁfteenth year of Tiberius C ae sar ; although it is perfectly well krown that Tiberius became emperor on the death h A D 4 0 1 19t . . 1 . Augustus on the August , To this

iin t p I shall ﬁrst conﬁne myself.

TH E Y E O N AR OF TH E BAPTISM .

’ 1 WE read in Luke s Gospel (iii . ) that Jesus was 15 baptized by John in the th year of Tiberius . Our 44 TH E TH E E CHRONOLOGY OF BIBL .

a r inquiry , therefore , is on wh t days did that yea r begin and end , according to the mind of the w iter / But we Shall make the question more simple if we state it thus the ﬁrst year of Tiberius began (in the 19 O f A 14 . D . d th August , ; when did his secon year i beg n And I propose to Show that the ﬁrst year , according to the mode of civil reckoning in use at

the time , contained only ten days ; that the ’ 29th year s day was the of August ; and that , 2 th A D 14 the 9 . . fore , on the of August , , b second year of Tiberius ; and accordingly the

29th 27. ﬁfteenth year began on the of August , ’ Perhaps no English work on ancient chronoiogy

stands higher , or deserves to stand higher , ’ i Clinton s Fast . He begins his Fasti Romani wi these words , which contain the error which I refute The death of Augustus , A was in the ﬁfth month before these

an A D Romani] commence , which begin Kal . J . , . n a i h la s m 1 cl o the rst co t n t e 9 . and t 7 . f ﬁ $ b ri u of Ti e s . This last statement of Clinton hardly be called untrue , because it would be tr stated of Queen V ictoria instead of Tiberi propose to show that it is untrue to the 35 5 days , if made use of when reading a date any ancient writer who dates by means of a reg year ; and that Clinton Should have said that

2 . Tables would contain the last 7m . 9 d of ’ second year of Tiberius . Clinton s mistake is in the assumption that an ancient regnal year and ended with the accession day , which it doe the kings of modern Europe . B may be Shown that the regnal TH E 45 TH E YEAR OF BAPTISM .

writers always began and ended with the civil New ’ year s day, excepting , of course , the ﬁrst and last

years of a reign , each of which contained only some

odd months or days . With us the last year of a reign contains only some O dd months or days ; with in com the ancients , the ﬁrst year also was equally let i e . p The last year of one k ng or emperor , and the ﬁrst year of his successor together contained twelve months .

To establish this point , let us read ﬁrst in the 25 First Book of Kings . We there ﬁnd (xv . ) that

Nadab , kin bg of Israel , began to reign in the second i i ei n e d yea of Asa king of Judah , and g two years ; 33 thii d and yet Baasha (xv . ) began in the year of

i n Asa . Again , Baasha , beginning the third year of Asa 24 , reigned years , and yet Elah , his son , began 1 i 26th . 8 . in the year of Asa , K ngs xvi Again , 26th Elah , beginning in the year of Asa , reigned 2 th two years , and yet Zimri killed him in the 7 year f 1 1 O 0 . Asa , Kings xvi . It is unnecessary to multiply instances from the Hebrew writers . The ’ two years of Elah s reign mean parts of two years .

Deeds , perhaps , had been dated in his ﬁrst and ’ - b e second year . A New year s day had happened tween his accession and his death and these quota tions prove that in each of these cases the ﬁrst year , s like the last year , contained only some odd month or days .

Moreover , this is not a mere inference from the apparent contradiction in the above quotations from the Book of Kings ; but the Jewish work , the , 0 A. D 15 Mishna , written about . , in the Treatise Rosh ’ H ashan ah on the N ew - ea r s da , y y , begins by saying 46 TH E TH E E CHRONOLOGY OF BIBL .

’ that regnal ve ars were reckoned from the N e w- year s

- u s day ; that is , not from the accession day , as with .

The Mishna , however , says that of the four days on which , for various purposes , the year was said to n l st begin , the regnal year bega on Nisan , which we shall have to Show was not the legal New ’ year S day used by Eastern subjects of the Roman emperor .

The Alexandrian coins of the Roman emperors , l which are usua ly dated with a regnal year , quite confirm this mode of reckoning . Thus Galba A reigned seven months , but we have lexandrian coins dated in the first and second year of his reign , ’ because the New - year s day fell within that space of time . So Titus died in September after a reign of only two years and three months but as that space ’ - of time contained three New years days , we have ri coins dated in his fourth year . The Alexand an coins of the last year of Nero , of Domitian , of Tra jan , of Hadrian , and others , in each case claiming for them a year more than the historian allows , might in the same way be quoted to prove that the first year of an emperor ’ s reign contained only the few months or days which passed between his acces ’ - - sion day and the next New year s day . Elagabalus reigned three years and nine months , and yet , as

Gibbon mentions with surprise , we have coins dated th in his 5 year . This mode of reckoning was also used under the Greek kings , the Ptolemies , as may be proved ’ from Porphyry s chronology of their reigns , printed ’ Scali er in g s Eusebius . Thus Porphyry says that Philadelphus reigned 38 years ; and the well - estab T EAR 4 H E REGNAL Y . 7

li shed chronology of those kings conﬁrms this ; but we have a coin dated in the 39th year of his reign . We now proceed to determine upon what day of the natural year , or rather of our year , the civil New year ’ s day fell for those parts of the Roman empire which dated by means of regnal years . But we must

ﬁrst remind the reader that in Rome , and in the

West, wherever the Latin language was used , the

regnal year was unknown . The Romans dated by

consulships , which began in January and ended in u December , nless any political event cut a consulship

Short in the middle . The Latin writers do not ’ hi s Speak of an emperor s reign , or count years by

any expression , except his consulships or Tribunician so power ; to do would be to consider him as a king , while he never assumed any title but those which were used under the republic . But it was otherwise S in the East . In Egypt , yria , Babylonia , and Asia

Minor , the people had been used to kings ; and in O ctavian u s a very few years after , afterwards called

Augustus , had made himself sole master of Rome and its provinces , all these provinces dated by the a s years of his reign , they had before dated by their i Al own Greek k ngs , the successors of exander , using ’ the same calendar and New - year s day that they had before used . This we now proceed to Show was 2 th the 9 of August . Claudius Ptolemy has preserved a series of Baby lonian and Al exandrian eclipses and occultations of of the moon , recorded sometimes by means the reg N ab 0 ul a s sar nal year of the kings of Babylon , as p an d his Persian successors Cambyses and Darius , 48 TH E TH E E CHRONOLOGY OF BIBL . and sometimes by the regnal year of the Alexandrian

Philometor kings , as Philadelphus , , and their

Roman successors Domitian and Hadrian . In all these cases modern astronomical science has proved 3 65 that the year used consisted of days only ,

- without an intercalary day or leap year . Hence the ’ New- year s day in these countries was always moving at the rate of one day in four years . Censorinus , who wrote on the various eras in use , tells us that U l ius in his day , in the consulship of p and Pontia ’ 991 5 62 is nus , of Rome , of Alexander s death [that , ’ - A. D in . this movable New year s day was vii . 25 th 100 Kal . Jul . [or June] , but that years earlier 21 t in . . s it had been xii Kal . Aug [or July] . This formation is fully conﬁrmed by all the above - men ’ ti on e d astronomical observations , which in Halma s edition of C . Ptolemy have been carefully calculated and made to throw all the required light upon ob ro n olo gy . Following up this knowledge , we easily R C 25 learn that in the year . , which the Egyptians 5 th called the year of Augustus , the movable New ’ 2 th O f year s day was the 9 August . There it was ﬁxed for the future for all those countries which had ’ - previously used the movable New year s day , because at that time the Julian year was introduced into

Alexandria by the emperor . This we are told by the astronomer Theon , in an extract published by

Cory in his Ancient Fragments . He there says 100th Diocle that at Midsummer , in the year of 102 tian , there had been intercalary days , or leap

- years , in Alexandria ; that is , that the leap year of

- 21 was the ﬁrst leap year in Alexandria . On ’ - that year , as we have said , the New year s day was

5 0 TH E TH E E CHRONOLOGY OF BIBL .

- - summer , or by the Greco Asiatic or Greco Egyptian 29th year , which began on August , or by the old

- Egyptian year , which for want of a leap year began n 1 6th when Luke was writi g on August , and was used by none but the astronomers and astrologers . These two last were the only modes by which a regnal year was ever counted before the reign of

Diocletian .

O N TH E Y E TH E AR OF CRUCIFIXION .

H AvI N G thus shown reason for believing that the evangelist Luke meant , by the ﬁfteenth year of

29th A. D . 27 Tiberius , a year beginning on August , , it will be unnecessary to Show that Clement of i Alexandria , when speaking of the cruciﬁx on as happening in the sixteenth year of Tiberius , meant 2 th 2 9 A. D 8 a year beginning on August , . , and that as the day of the cruciﬁxion was near the spring equinox , he considered it to have happened in

A D 29 . . . His words are as follows When ﬁxing the time of the Passion more exactly in the sixteenth ae sa year of Tiberius C sar , some y that the Saviour ff 25 th Phamen oth su ered on the of the month , 25 th some on the of Pharmuthi , and some on the

19th of Pharmuthi . (Strom . I . p . Thus there were three traditions about the exact day of

A D . 29 21 st the cruciﬁxion in . , namely, Monday , 14th March , Thursday , April , and Wednesday,

20th April . All were agreed upon the year ; they only differed about the day of the month and day of the week . i Tertullian , who wrote about the same time w th TH E 5 1 TH E YEAR OF CRUCIFIXION .

A D 210 Clement , namely , about . . , agrees with him in the year of the crucifixion , though not in the day, ff saying , Which su ering by Him of dismissal [that is crucifixion] was completed under Tiberius Caesar in the consulship of R ub elliu s Geminus and R ufiu s

Geminus , in the month of March at the time of the

Passover , on the seventh day of the Calends of April , on the ﬁrst day of unleavened bread , on which they slew the lamb , as had been commanded by Moses .

udaeo s . . (Adv . J liber , cap viii ) It is unnecessary to bring proof of what nobody disputes , namely, that the two Gemini were consuls from January to July 2 A D 9 . in . . The day ﬁxed upon by Tertullian , there S 26th fore , is aturday, March , which he at the same time declares to have been the day of the Passover .

Origen , who wrote about thirty years later than

Clement and Tertullian , in his work against Celsus , agrees with this year so far as to say that the Temple at Jerusalem was destroyed forty- two years after the cruciﬁxion . This may be understood as agreeing with our view of there being about forty - one years

A. D 2 and a half between the Spring of . 9 and the A D 0 autumn of . . 7, when the Temple was destroyed by Titus and it will not allow us to place the h A. D 29 . cruciﬁxion in any later year t an . All later writers must be supposed to be guided by these , unless the contrary can be Shown . Thus Lac tan tiu s gives us the same day of the year in the con sul ship of the two Gemini as Tertullian but he contradicts himself when he adds that it was in the

ﬁfteenth of Tiberius , which we have shown , in the A D mouth of a Greek or Asiatic , would have meant . . 28 unless we suppose that in the mouth of a Latin 5 2 TH E TH E E CHRONOLOGY OF BIBL .

A D 2 writer it may possibly have meant . . 9 . So Julius

Africanus , as quoted by Eusebius in his Chronicle , places the cruciﬁxion in the Sixteenth year of Tiberius ; L actan tius but then , like , he contradicts himself by adding that was in the second year of the 202n d

Olympiad , which would make it two years later .

It is unnecessary to add more quotations , which

would all be of little value compared with these .

Resting , therefore , upon Clement and Tertullian ,

L actan tiu s supported as they are by Origen and , we may take it as proved that the cruciﬁxion took place

A. D 29 in . , unless doubt can be thrown upon this by

any writers of equal value . But it may be as well to repeat that the reason why the date of the cruci ﬁxion has hitherto been thought doubtful , is because the mode of counting the regnal year s used by the Greeks in the East has not been understood ; and ’ hence Tertullian s date has been thought to be

contradicted by Clement , and both of these by the

evangelist Luke . Thus Dr . Strauss places the 2 A. D 9 baptism in . , while we have shown it may have

A. D . 2 been as early as September , 7; and others A D 0 . . 3 place the cruciﬁxion in , while we have shown al l A D 2 that the early authorities agree in . . 9 . We thus have arrived at the conclusion that the

ministry of Jesus did not exceed nineteen months , 2 th 9 A. D . 2 that it began after the of August 7, and

A D . 2 ended at the Passover of . 9 .

TH E DAY or TH E V E A. D . 2 O N PASSO R IN 9 .

I AM indebted to Professor Adams for the in for A D 29 mation that in . . , the ﬁrst new moon after the TH E 5 TH E DAY OF PASSOV ER . 3

Spring equinox took place at Jerusalem on Saturday ,

2n d 8 R M . the April , at I have since had this con

- ﬁrmed by the Astronomer Royal , in a paper signed u un by Mr . Hind . Hence , according to the us al derstan din 3 rd g of the Mosaic Law, Sunday , April , was the ﬁrst day of the month Nisan , and the Pass over supper was eaten by twilight in the evening of l 6th t Saturday, April , which was the four eenth of

Nisan . See Exodus xii Leviticus xxiii . ; Numbers

i x .

To this whole train of reasoning , by which it is argued that the Passover supper in the year of the k cruciﬁxion was eaten on a Saturday , I now of no

Objection that can be made , unless it be argued that the month of Nisan took place a lunation earlier , following the new moon of March 3rd ; and that 4th Friday , March , was the ﬁrst of Nisan and that therefore the 14th of Nisan when the Passover was 1 th 7 . eaten was Thursday , the of March But this

is opposed to the opinion of the modern Jews , who , guided as they profess to be in the arrangement of

their calendar by Maimonides , ﬁx the Passover at

the full moon which follows the spring equinox . In this the Jews are supported by Christian testi

. A D 25 . . 3 mony When the Council of Nicaea , in ,

decreed that the Christians should keep their feast ,

not with the Jews at the full moon , but on the ﬁrst

Sunday which followed the full moon , they made no

change in the lunation by which the feast was ﬁxed . And Epipha n ius says that when God through this Council guided the Church in respect to the feast of

Easter , they settled that it took place when the fourteenth day of the moon fell after the spring E 5 4 TH E C TH E E HRONOLOGY OF BIBL .

ae equinox (Adv . H res . III . i . He had before said that the natural year as arranged by God does 1 not end before the equinox (Adv . Haeres . III . . The Mosaic law is not so explicit ; but it goes to conﬁrm this view . The month or lunation that we have been Speaking of is there named Abib , as being the month when barley is in ear and becomes ripe in

Judea . The day after the Passover supper was the feast of unleavened bread (see Leviticus and on the morrow after the Sabbath (or fe ast of unleavened bread) , that is the sixteenth day of the month Abib , a sheaf of ripe barley was to be brought to the priest . Now our travellers tell us that even in the warmest parts of Judea the barley is not ripe before the 1 st

view ~ foun de d of April ; thus conﬁrming our , both on Jewish and Christian tradition , that the Passover supper was far less likely to have been eaten in that

SO 1 th on e year early as Thursday , 7 March , than 1 6th month later , on Saturday , April .

ON TH E DAY O F TH E CRUCIF IXION .

M a rk a nd L uke l i n M a tthew . st , ,

WE have already quoted Tertullian as saying that S 26th Jesus was cruciﬁed on aturday , the of March ; and Clement as mentioning three days as Spoken of 21 st for that event , Monday , the of March , Thurs 14th 20th day , the of April , and Wednesday, the of

April . Now, if we compare these four days , ﬁrst with the two possible days mentioned above for the

Passover feast , and , secondly, with the statement H 5 5 TH E DAY OF T E CRUCIFIXION .

in which all the Gospels agree , namely, that the

cruciﬁxion took place in the latter half of the week, se e we Shall that the only result we can arrive at is ,

that he was cruciﬁed two days before the Passover , 14 that the day was Thursday, the th of April , and 1 6th that the Passover was eaten on Saturday, the

of April . And we thus arrive at the conclusion that v the external e idence , independent of the New Tes tament writers , goes to confirm the fourth Gospel , rather than the first three Gospels , in the history of i the Last Supper and the Crucifix on . This opinion that the crucifixion took place on a

Thursday is , however , opposed to the uniform belief of the last fifteen centuries , which seems to have been founded upon the belief that the word Prepa $ 62 42 i ration (Matt . xxvii . ; Mark xv . ; Luke xx ii . 4 5 ) was used for Friday . But we may remark that it is not opposed to the Opinion of Clement and who Tertullian , neither of them seem to fix upon i a Fr day . And even if our determination of the days of the week from their days of the month be doubted , yet , in the case of Clement , it is clear that he had no belief that the day of the week was c c tain l y Friday , because of the three days that he t men ions , no two can be on the same day of the week . Let us see how far our opinion is supported by the Gospels . If Jesus was crucified at noon on

Friday , and buried after sunset on that evening , and the tomb was found empty on Sunday morning , the

- six body was less than thirty hours in the tomb , which very little agrees with the expected time , so 40 often mentioned in the Gospels . Matthew (xii . ) says that the Son of Man is to be “ three days and E 2 5 6 TH E H TH E E C RONOLOGY OF BIBL .

three nights in the heart of the earth , and in three

. 21 . 23 . 19 other places (xvi , xvii , xx ) says that he $ i s expected to rise from the dead on the third day . 3 1 Mark also in two places (ix . , x . and Luke in

. 22 . 33 . 7 three (ix , xviii , xxiv , repeat that he is

expected to rise on the third day . Indeed , in

both places in Mark , and in two in Luke , some of SS hr M . the oldest have after t ee days . Now the evangelists certainly mean us to understand that these expectations were fulﬁlled ; and hence we can hardly suppose that they meant to say that the body was in the tomb for a Shorter period than three t nigh s and two days , namely from Thursday evening

till Sunday morning .

If we now turn to the narrative in the Gospels , we Shall find that our fixing upon Thursday or Friday for the crucifixion will depend upon whether we un derstan d that some of the actions there described

took place on the Sabbath or no . Luke alone says “ $ (xxiii . they rested on the Sabbath . But if we are allowed to carry this remark into the other

- Gospels , and to suppose that neither high priests

nor disciples did anything on the Sabbath , we Shall

then ﬁnd that Matthew most clearly , and Mark with

less certainty , place the cruciﬁxion on Thursday ,

while Luke , omitting some of the events , places it on

Friday . Of the fourth we must speak separately .

Treating the Sabbath as a day without events , the narrative in Matthew is as follows 1 Ch . xxvi . 7. On the ﬁrst day of unleavened

bread the disciples prepare the Passover , and eat it i s with Jesus in the evening . That night Jesus

betrayed to the priests . This I call Wednesday .

T E H E CHR ONOLOGY O F TH BIBLE .

MATTHE M ARK K E . W. . LU

xxv . 1 7. F rs da xiv. 1 2 F rs da i i t y . i t y n eav n r l v r e e ea . n ea en e ea of u l d b d of u d b d . The disciples prepare The di sciples prepare

the ass ve . the ass v r P o r P o e . i h xx v . 20 . I n the xi v . 1 7. I n t e even in g the Supp er i s evening the Supper i s eaten ; Jesus is b e eaten ; Jesus i s b e

tra d . t r d ye aye .

I n th m rn . 1 . e da xxv . 1 . I n th e xv The ii o 7. m in h i l ed i n he i s l ed a e v n read orn g e s to g to Pil t , of un lea e ed b a e a nd r ﬁe an d r ﬁe at n n The i s es re ar Pil t , c uci d c uci d oo d cipl p p

a n n s v r. t oo . the Pas o e h v n 42 . I n t e e e h xx v . 5 I n the xv . 1 4 h en t ii 7. xxi i . . W even n se h e s in i s the re ara h r is me the Su i g Jo p b g g, it P p ou co p for the r es n a Prosabb aton er is ea en es s body, bu i it, tio , , p t J u i an d r l s a s n e on se h e s for th e ol to Jo p b g betrayed . he r th m s a h t e . doo of to b body, buy clot , i s th r ara r es es s r l s a [It e P ep bu i J u , o l n s n e on the r tio . ] to doo of h m t e to b .

xxvn . 6 2 . O n the xx11 66 . h en . W i morrow a fter the Pre wa s d ay he is l ed t aration the h h a e an d cruciﬁe p ig Pil t , r es s et a ar t n n p i t g gu d a . s oo r m a e an d sea x 2 se x 5 . n f o Pil t l iii . Jo p r the m . e s for the an e to b b g body, f ha d a buries it . T t i s th e Preparation Sabba th is dawning [I n the even in g the [I n the even in g the The women prepar Sabbath begin s ] Sabbath b egin s ] spices an d oin tmen ts

Th e a a h h The a a h hen xx 5 6 The en . . [ S bb t , w [ S bb t , w iii n h n n hi n i s n s ot i g is done ] ot g do e . ] rested on the Sabb atl e q a rdi n the com n cco g to i m n a men . p d t n x i 1 hen th v . e A . W ° Sabbath i s passe d the s s s es di ciple buy pic .

xxv 1 At x . i 2 r . B . a n v . Ea on xx v . 1 d iii d w . y y ay s l i n of the first day of the th e first day of the break on the first da u h p week t e two Maries we e k they come to the of the week the dis e me th m m c e . i l m th A . c es e ‘ o to to b to b p co to m to b . TH E TH E 5 9 DAY OF CRUCIFIXION .

i Here it will be observed , that if the cruciﬁx on took

place on Friday , according to the common opinion , Matthew would describe the priests as violating the S abbath by taking a guard and sealing the tomb on the next morning Mark would make Joseph violate the Sabbath by buying a cloth and burying Jesus on te Friday af r sunset , though the same Gospel de scribes the di sciples as respecting the Sabbath by not buying their Spices till after sunset on Saturday . Luke seems not to have been aware that the Sabbath

began at sunset on Friday . He alone clearly de di as S scribes the sciples violating the abbath . He s on ays that the night of the cruciﬁxion , when the S abbath was dawning , Joseph buries the body , and the women prepare spices and ointments and yet

he then adds , they rested on the Sabbath , according $ to the commandment . He seems not to have been aware that the Sabbath had already begun with sun s et on Friday , and that he was describing a breach

of the Sabbath . Thus of the ﬁrst three Gospels ,

Luke alone , while showing a want of familiarity with i Jewish customs , places the cruciﬁx on on Friday ; the other two will both appear more consistent if we

suppose them to place that event on Thursday , and simply to have omitted from their narrative the so remark , to a Jewish reader very unnecessary , that

nothing was done on the Sabbath , and hence that none of the events mentioned took place on that

day .

The Mishna , in the Treatise Sabbath , would leave us rather in doubt about the act of Joseph in laying

- Jesus in the tomb on the Sabbath day , because though it forbids the carrying a corpse to burial 60 TH E or TH E E CHRONOLOGY BIBL .

oh on that day ( . x . yet it allows the anointing and washing it and doing what is barely needful

(ch . xxiii . here in the case of a person cruciﬁed Joseph would seem to have been allowed to lay it in

the tomb , which was close at hand but the sealing

- the tomb by the high priest , mentioned in Matt .

i . 66 i xxv i , the buy ng a cloth , and rolling the stone to

the door of the tomb by Joseph , mentioned in Mark 46 xv . , the preparing spices and ointments by the

i . 5 6 women , mentioned in Luke xx ii , are all acts which we must suppose ought to have been done before the commencement of the Sabbath or before the sunset of Friday ; and therefore if they were

done in the evening , as the narrative leads us to

understand , they must have been done either in breach of the Sabbath or on the evening of Thursday

’ n l O n the d a o he cruc xi on in John s G os el a nd 2 d y . y f t iﬁ p ; n h e a o t e Pr p ra ti on .

Of the fourth Gospel we must Speak separately ; it has its own diffi culties in this portion of the so narrative . But before doing we must consider

the meaning of the Preparation , which is mentioned in every Gospel as one of the circumstances by which the day of the cruciﬁxion was dated ; but in the fourth Gospel is described as the preparation for

the Passover , while in the others it must be under a stood as preparation for the Sabbath . Pe sachim The Mishna , in the Treatise , says , that on the evening previous to the 14th of Nisan it is necessary to make search for leaven by the light of a candle and if no search has been made on the 14th t evening preceding the , it must be done on hat TH E TH E 61 DAY OF CRUCIFIXION .

day ; and quotes one Rabbi who says that in that case it must be done early in the morning of the 14 th . This ceremony seems to be the preparation “ 14th meant . It afterwards adds , that when the of

Nisan happens on the Sabbath , all the leaven must $ be removed before the Sabbath commences . Thus we learn that when the Passover is eaten on a

Saturday evening , this ceremonial search for leaven , which may very reasonably be called a preparation

for the Passover , must be begun on Thursday after

sunset , and if not ﬁnished then must be ﬁnished S early on the Friday . In the yriac Gospels the

G ehrevah preparation is named the , meaning the eve n in g ceremony , because it was to be performed in the dark by candlelight ; it was only in case of i omission performed on the follow ng morning .

The fourth Gospel says (xviii . that on the morning of the cruciﬁxion the Jews lead Jesus to a the Pr etorium of the Roman Governor , but go not deﬁled in themselves , that they might not be , but

that they might eat the Passover . de file men t This fear of does not help our inquiry , defilemen t ul because such wo d last a week . We read 1 1 in Numbers xix . , that he that toucheth a dead body shall be unclean for seven days ; and in the Pe sachim 8 Mishna , Treatise , ch . viii . , on the various defilemen ts which will disqualify a man from

eating the Passover , that he who has just parted from the uncircumcised must be considered as one

who has just parted from a grave .

(Ch . xix . Pilate gives up Jesus , apparently

to the Jews , to be cruciﬁed , and it was the prepara $ tion for the Passover , about the sixth hour , or noon . 62 TH E CHR ONOLOGY OF TH E BI B LE .

“ (Ch . xix . When Jesus was dead , the Jews , that the bodies might not remain upon the cross on the Sabbath , because it was the Preparation , for the $ day of that Sabbath was an high day , asked to have the bodies removed .

. . s (Ch xix Joseph and Nicodemu bury Jesus , in a tomb already made , as it would seem hurriedly , “ ’ i s because of the Jews Preparation . It necessary

V arti cu here to depart from the Authorized ersion , p “ $ l arl y when it speaks of the Preparation day , since “ in the Greek it is simply the Preparation , and V the Syriac ersion , as already quoted , makes it rather $ the Preparation night . Now in all this there is nothing to determine the exact day of the cruciﬁxion , except the mention of i the Preparation . Our prev ous reasoning has gone to prove that the Passover was eaten on Saturday cus evening , and it is conﬁrmed in this case by the tom of the modern Jews , who declare that it must b e never be eaten on Friday evening , which is the ’ ginning of the Sabbath (See E . H . Lindo s Jewish

Calendar) . The Preparation was made , or at least u : begun , on Th rsday evening hence when we are told that the day of the cruciﬁxion was the Preparation , it might be either Thursday or Friday it might mean it was the day in which the Preparation ought to be was made , or that it the day in which it was com pleted if omitted on the previous night . But when i s Jesus buried , which would seem to have been

after sunset , and we are still told that it was the sa Preparation , and the writer does not y that the

Sabbath had begun , the remark would seem to ﬁx

the day as Thursday , because by sunset on Friday T 63 H E DAY OF TH E CRUCIFIXION .

b e the Preparation was over , and the Sabbath had ff gun . Opinions may di er about the day meant , but the fourth Gospel cannot be quoted as contradicting that tradition which places the crucifixi on on Thurs 14th day, the of April . The determination of the day of the week on i which the crucifix on took place is , however , of less importance our aim has only been to show that it took place before the Passover supper was eaten , and that in this respect the fourth Gospel is in all pro b abilit sa y more correct than the first three , which y that he ate the Passover supper with his disciples before he was crucified . In this matter the fourth Gospel is also confirmed by two of the earliest and least questioned portions of the New Testament

1 . . 7 l ﬁrst , the apostle Paul , in Cor v , ca ls Jesus

the Passover slain for us ; and , secondly , the book

of Revelation , written probably by the apostle John , 6 in chap . v . , compares him to a Lamb slain . Both writers must be understood to mean that his death

took place Shortly before the Passover supper . The ﬁxing the day of the week is chieﬂy interesting in so far as it agrees with the train of reasoning by

which we ﬁx the year . The astronomical argument ,

A. D 2 founded upon our supposing . 9 to be the year x 16th of the cruciﬁ ion , gives us Saturday , the of

April , for the Passover ; and of the three traditions

recorded by Clement , that which best agrees with u S 14 this gives Thursday, the th of April , for the cruciﬁxion ; and then it is s atisfactory to ﬁnd that the weight of evidence furnished by the Gospels a leans also to Thursday . The strongest objection to our train of reasoning 64 TH E H TH E C RONOLOGY OF BIB LE .

wa a o xev is , that the preparation , p n, is the distinct name of Friday evening in Josephus and in some of r the early Christian w iters , as being the preparation for the Sabbath ; and hence it came to mean the whole day Friday . But it will be observed that of the four Gospels John certainly does not so use the

word ; he speaks of the preparation for the Passover ,

not the preparation for the Sabbath . Clement and s o Tertullian do not understand it , as they do not v propose Friday for the cruciﬁxion . Moreo er , it seems improbable that Matthew should be so usi ng

it . He speaks of the morrow , which is after the $ preparation . Now if that had been the morning of so the Sabbath , he would certainly have said , and not have used such an indirect mode of describing

it . Mark , indeed , does explain the preparation as

r o o a a r o v even i n be ore a S a bba th. a p ﬁﬁ , or g f But

that does not prove that he means Friday evening , because other solemn days besides Saturday were xvi sometimes called Sabbaths . Thus in Leviticus . 2 3 1 . 3 and xxiii , the fast day on the tenth of the seventh month is called a Sabbath ; and the Sabbath 1 1 16 spoken of in Leviticus xxiii . , , is understood

to mean the sixteenth of Nisan , the great day of

the Feast of Unleavened Bread . And again , the $ - ﬁrst vi . 1 second Sabbath spoken of in Luke , b e must understood to mean , not a Saturday, but a new - moon day in one of those months to which

- the Jewish calendar allows two new moon days . Luke alone declares the Preparation to be Friday

evening by saying that a Sabbath was dawning . It i s not necessary to say much about the objection that the preparation for the Passover was killing the

66 TH E C R R O N O L O G Y TH E B OF BI LE .

appearance of exactness . We read in John (xiii . V correcting the Authorized ersion , Now there ’ was lying at meat in Je su s s bosom one of his dis c i les p whom Jesus loved . To him therefore Simon

Peter beckoned to ask who it was of whom he spake . ’ Je su s s He then , leaning back on breast , saith to $ him , Lord , who is it Jesus answereth , He it is to whom I shall give the sop when I have dipped

it . And after dipping it he giveth it to Judas $ Iscariot .

Thus John , the disciple whom Jesus loved , was lying on that part of the couch which was said to be ’ Je su s s in bosom ; and he thought he was able , by ’ simply leaning back his head , to ask Peter s question so quietly that the others Should not hear it either

asked or answered . But Jesus , yet more cautious of

being heard , tells him that he will answer it by a

Sign , namely by giving a sop to the suspected trai

so . tor . And he does accordingly Now if we read i n se e this narrative Matthew and Mark , we shall no reason whatever for Jesus pointing out the traitor by

a Sign , rather than by naming him openly . Luke

does not mention the Sign , or that any answer was given to the question who would be the traitor ; his narrative seems to be incomplete . But Matthew and Mark , if incomplete , are faultily so ; they men tion the Sign of dipping into the dish , but fail to explain to us why it was used . The fourth Gospel alone does this , and thereby gains a claim to be thought in this matter also more trustworthy than the others . O N TH E DR I vI N G TH E DEAL ERS OUT OF TH E TEMPLE

YARD .

BEFORE attempting to form a chronological table of

the ministry , which can be formed for the fourth

Gospel only , we must consider one important passage in which John is contradicted by the three dr other evangelists . This is in the iving the dealers

- out of the temple yard shortly before a Passover .

John places this at the beginning of the ministry,

and the others at the end . Here , I think , we may w safely rely on Matthe , Mark, and Luke , and con 1 — . 21 sider the passage in John (ii 3 iii . ) as bein g

out of place , for the following reasons

First , after this act and the conversation with 22 Nicodemus in Jerusalem , we are told , iii . , that

Jesus and his disciples go into Judea , which could hardly be said at that time when the division of the

land into twelve tribes was forgotten , and the whole

country was divided into Galilee , Samaria , and Judea .

At that time Jerusalem was in Judea , and travellers could hardly be described as going from Jerusalem into Judea . O f Secondly , the driving the dealers out the court

of the Gentiles , with the approval , which it must O f have had , the surrounding multitude , was an act

of such political importance , that we may well con sider it as one of the reasons for the rulers wishing

to have Jesus removed out of their way , as a popular

teacher who was interfering with their authority . In the other Gospels this act naturally follows upon m his triu phal entry into Jerusalem , with a crowd of believers who had accepted him as a prophet . 68 TH E TH E E CHRONOLOGY OF BIBL .

Thirdly , if this act and the Passover which is mentioned with it are allowed to stand in their

present place , then the fourth Gospel mentions three Passovers as falling within the time of the

ministry . This would require us to allow to it a space of more than two years ; whereas we have seen reason to believe that the ministry was limi ted

to one year and seven months .

For these reasons I think we may follow Matthew ,

Mark , and Luke , in thinking that the cleansing of the temple - yard did not take place sooner than a

few days before the cruciﬁxion . The removal of this act to a later part of the history will carry with

it not only the conversation with Nicodemus , but the remark that it wa s already forty - Six years from when

Herod began to rebuild the temple . But this remark is rather tantalizing than important ; for Josephus leaves us SO far in doubt about the exact year in which Herod began to build that we cannot

count from it with any certainty .

Of our four histories of the ministry , Matthew ,

Mark , and Luke give no hint of the time of year in

which any event happens , except in the case of the se e cruciﬁxion , and of one other event , which we

was at the time of the harvest . But John has many six such hints , besides mentioning the occasion of

Jewish feasts . By the help of these we may form

a chronological table of the ministry , at least for the

fourth Gospel . For determining the time occupied by the events in the other Gospels we have no such helps ; and we shall conﬁne ourselves to the fourth

Gospel , making no use of the others except for two

particulars . First , we shall borrow from Luke that ’ CHRIST S MINISTRY . 69 the baptism took place in the ﬁfteenth year of

Tiberius ; and we Shall be guided , as we have said , by the three Synoptics , as they are sometimes called , in considering Christ ’ s drivi ng the dealers out of the temple -yard as having happened on this last visit to

Jerusalem , and in thinking the passage , John ii . 13— 21 iii . , out of its proper place , and in thus reducing the number of feasts mentioned to ﬁve .

’ C ER I ST S O F CHRONOLOGY OF MINISTRY .

’ - New year s Day , and the ﬁrst day of the O f S ﬁfteenth year Tiberius . oon after d war s Jesus is baptized by John , Luke 1 iii . . [N o te The visit to Jeru sal em an d cle an sing he em e - ard at th e Pa sso f hn t t pl y ver o Jo ii . — 1 b on t th a Pa ss ver. 1 3 ii i . 2 e o e s o , l g l t ] E . 23 John is baptizing in non , John iii ,

probably before the rains in November ,

when the crowds could not be abroad .

Jesus goes into Judea .

There are yet four months to the harvest ,

which was to begin in April , John iv . 3 5 ’ . He is in Samaria , at Jacob s

Well .

There was a feast of the Jews , probably 1 the Dedication , John v . . Jesus goes

to Jerusalem .

4 The Passover is at hand , John vi . .

Jesus is beyond the Lake of Galilee .

N e B w een ohn 4 an d vii 1 the ot e vi . . [ t J , even ts of Six mon ths are p assed ove r un men F 70 TH E CHRONOLOGY OF TH E BIBLE .

A. D. 28 Th e ar d s r th tion ed . y e e c ib ed in e other G os e s an d ass n ed to hi s s ace of t me b the p l , ig t p i y men on of the whe a h arve s h ch i s in ti t t , w i M h a . ee a ew x 1 M ark ii . 3 M y S tt ii . 2 L uke

vi . Now the Jews ’ Feast of Tabernacles was 1 at hand , John vii . . Jesus goes to

Jerusalem from Galilee . Jesus is still in Jerusalem at the Feast of 22 Dedication , John x . . 29 A. D. . wa s April 2 . The moon new at Jerusalem on

Saturday , one hour after sunset , accord

ing to Professor Adams and Mr . Hind .

3 . April This is the ﬁrst day of the month Nisan , n ew being the day of the moon .

April 10 . Jesus arrives in Bethany Six days before ‘ 1 the Passover, John xii . . This is a

Sunday . In this week he drives the dealers out of

- - six the temple yard . This was forty years and some months after Herod

began to rebuild the temple , John ii . 20 . According to Matthew, Mark , and hi s Luke , this was on last visit to

Jerusalem . 4 April 1 . On Thursday Jesus is cruciﬁed at noon . It is the day of the preparation for the 14 Passover , John xix . . This is the

12th day of Nisan . 14 April . On Thursday evening after sunset was the

preparation , or ceremonial search for

- leaven . Not twenty three hours before

the Passover , as usual , because that ’ 1 C R R I ST S MINISTRY . 7

A .D. 29. would have been during the Sabbath ;

- but a day and twenty three hours before , a s the Passover was to be eaten on

Saturday evening . See the Mishna . During the night Joseph and Nicodemus

38 . embalm and bury Jesus , John xix . 15 April . No event of Friday during the daylight is 62 here mentioned . See Matt . xxvii . , where the obtaining the guard and seal

ing the tomb belong to this day . 15 April . At sunset on Friday the Sabbath begins , when neither the preparation nor the purchase of the cloth nor embalmment

could have taken place .

16 . 14 April Saturday the th day of Nisan , when the

Passover is eaten in the evening .

April 17. On Sunday, the ﬁrst day of the week , the 1 disciples ﬁnd the tomb empty , John xx . . six It is three full days , wanting only

ﬁx1 cruci 0 n . hours , from the on Thursday

’ O N TH E Y EAR OF JESU S S BIRTH .

F O R this date we have no other authority than the “ . . 23 words of Luke , in chap iii , And Jesus when — i he began that is , when he began his m nistry $ was about thirty years of age . These words do

not purport to give us great exactness , and they may be founded on the known requirements of the Levi

tical law , which ﬁxed upon thirty as the age when

the priests entered on their service . See Numbers

. 2 1 . . 3 iv , and Chron xxiii , where only men of thirty 2 TH E TH E 7 CHRONOLOGY OF BIBLE .

years of age and upward are registered for the

priesthood . However , if we are to build upon these

words of Luke as being exact , we should place the O f 4 B C . . birth Jesus in the autumn of the year . This would make him thirty years old when he stood up to read the Scriptures in the synagogue at Naza

A D . 2 reth , soon after September, . 7 Hence we learn that our vulgar era has been

ﬁxed four years wrong . This mistake was made by Exi uu s Dionysius g , who wrote on the Calendar of

- the Church , and declared the well known year of the Philoxen u s in consulship of and Probus , the third

diction in the reign of the Emperor Justin , to be 5 25 the year of our Lord . His opinion was accepted

by the Church , and , consequently, by the later

writers , who used the birth of Christ as a date ; and all Christendom have counted the years forward from that year to the present in obedience to the Exi uus e calculation of Dionysius g , whose mistak

leads to no error in chronology .

W C W fa an d Kin er rin e rs i f r an e ran . ood ll d , P t , M l o d L , St d,