NOTES AND ILLUSTRATIONS. (A.) CHRONOLOGY OF THE and consequently the commencement PERIOD OF THE JUDGES. of the building of the Temple falls in B.C. 1012, current; and, reckoning back the 480 years, we obtain the beginning (spring) of B.C. 1491 for the epoch of the Exodus, the date adopted in the received chronology of Ussh er. THIS is one of the most difficult problems of Scripture chronology. In the earlier books we have had a consecutive series of numbers, which give by their addition results possessing a primâ facie authority, though needing 2. There is, however, another total further discussion. Such data are of- which seems, primâ facie, irreconcilfered also in the Book of Judges; but able with the former. In St. Paul's there seem to be important gaps at discourse at Antioch, in Pisidia, he the beginning and the end, no num- says: "After that "-the division of ber of years being fixed for the time the land by lot-"he gave them of Joshua and the elders who outlived judges about the space of 450 years, him, nor for the judgeship of Samuel. until Samuel the prophet: and afterThe doubt has also been raised wheth- ward they desired a king."* This er the numbers given in Judges are clearly makes the interval from the properly consecutive; and it has been division of the land to the election of supposed that some of the servitudes Saul as king about 450 years. Addand of the judgeships were contem- ing to this forty years for the time poraneous in different parts of the spent in the wilderness, with seven land. Under these difficulties, we years for the conquest of Canaan, have to seek for additional data; and and, at the other end, eighty years we find such partly in the distinct computation of the whole period, and partly in the Scripture genealogies. for the reigns of Saul and David, with the first three years of Solomon, or 130 years in all, we obtain 580 years 1. The commencement of the build- from the Exodus to the building of ing of the Temple, in the fourth year the Temple. The difference of a of Solomon's reign, is expressly stated round 100 years fairly suggests the to have been in the 480tl. year after hypothesis of a textual error; but the the children of Israel left Egypt (1 K. other elements must first be carefully vi. 1). A computation like this pos- examined. sesses the highest authority. It must have been made with scrupulous care from the ancient records; and critics have sought in vain for any trace of error in the text. The epoch of Solomon's accession is fixed by the independent evidence of the subsequent annals of the kingdom at B.C. 1016, 3. Supposing, for the moment, that the numbers given in the Book of * Acts xiii. 20, 21. The word "about" should not be overlooked in reasonings based on this passage. Josephus makes the same period 5 2 years, which seems to show that some such computation was the received one among the learned Jews about the Christian era. Judges are consecutive, we have the In the face of this agreement, it seems following results : From the division of the land to the death of the elders who outlived Joshua... First Servitude, to Mesopotamia. Second Servitude, to Moab.. Second Judge: EHUD.. Third Judge: SHAMGAR. Third Servitude, to Jabin and Sisera.. Fourth Judge: DEBORAHI and BARAK. Fourth Servitude, to Midian.. Fifth Judge: GIDEON. Sixth Judge: ABIMELECH.... Fifth Servitude, to Ammon. Ninth Judge: JEPHTHAH.. Total period of the Judges.. Years. impossible to treat the genealogies as of little consequence in determining the chronology of the period. Conclusions should, of course, be drawn 40 from them only with great caution. Meanwhile, their inconsistency with the longer period is self-evident.* 8 18 80 40 3 23 18 6 20 Such are the chief materials of the 7 argument. We do not encumber it 40 with the statements of the ancient chronologers, Eusebius, Africanus, 22 Syncellus, and the rest, because they are only opinions resting on these data. These writers all agree in a long pe10 riod; and it may be observed that 40 they all follow, with a professional 20 narrowness, the tendency of chronologers to make their science a matter of arithmetic, without sufficient regard to the broader historical criticism, in the light of which alone the numbers cf chronology become intelligible and consistent. 8 40 66 450 The exact agreement of this total with the computation of Acts xiii. 20, 21, suggests that the latter was obtained, by the same process of simple addition, from the numbers as they stand in the Hebrew text; but whether the computation was made by the Apostle himself, or whether it is a gloss, is a question fairly open to further examination. There is an obvious inconsistency between these numbers and the whole period of 480 years given in (1). 4. Before subjecting these results to criticism, let us see what we obtain from the genealogies. In four distinct passages we have the following four generations between the passage of the Jordan and the birth of David (Ruth iv. 17, 21, 22; 1 Chron. ii. 11, 12; Matt. i. 5; Luke iii. 32). 5. In applying such criticism to the scheme of numbers derived from the Book of Judges in (3), we discover the following defects of principle, besides others of detail. The threefold process of declension, punishment, and deliverance, has been already described. For each of these three steps time must be allowed; and the scheme in question, while affecting to compute the second and third with numerical exactness, makes no allowance for the first. It seems as if the people fell into sin and captivity simultaneously immediately on the death of each judge; that this state lasted for a definite number of years, at the end of which a new judge is raised up, for whose work of deliverance no distinct period is allowed; and then, that deliverance being effected, the land has *We speak here without reference to the proposed interpolation of generations supposed to be wanting-a device only justifia. ble by necessity, except, of course, in the well-known cases where they are certainly passed over. rest for a certain number of years. | naanites, and their allies. How could For this is, in several cases, the state- Ehud's enterprise have been supported ment of the text; and, if we are to at once by the forces that rallied at insist on taking each phrase literally, the sound of his trumpet in Mount we must allow four divisions of each Ephraim, unless there had been bands period-first, the declension; then, already in resistance to the tyrant? the punishment; thirdly, the deliver- We can not suppose that Hazor was ance; and, last, the period of rest, raised again from its ruins, and the which would give us a total far ex- tyranny of the second Jabin estabceeding the longest of the above.*lished, without a hard resistance from But, in truth, if we look at the ques- the warriors of Zebulun and Naphtali, tion in the light of ordinary history, who seem to have been already in we shall see that this whole system of arms among their mountains under definite divisions rests on a false prin- Barak, when he was summoned by ciple. The real process must rather Deborah; and she is expressly stated have been such as this: when the peo-to have judged Israel in Mount Ephple forsook Jehovah and began to raim during the oppression of Jabin abandon their attitude of opposition (Judg. iv. 14). In the cases of Gideon to the heathen around and among and Samson, we have the whole histhem, the power of the latter against them would begin to increase, by a natural process as well as by a judicial retribution, till they obtained a decided superiority. From the first moment that the tide turned, many of the Israelites would grieve over their fate, and some few-men of the spirit of Othniel and Gideon-would begin to plan their enterprises of patriotism From all these considerations we till a struggle of greater or less length draw the conclusion that the number was crowned by a signal victory. But of years given at the end of the histoeven after this victory, much work ry of each judge is the total of the pewould remain to complete the deliv-riod from the death of the preceding erance and to secure the "rest," with judge, including the declension, opwhich each narrative concludes. All pression, deliverance, and rest — in this is true, more or less, from the very one word, that these periods are inclunature of the case, and from our ex-sive; and it appears plain on the face perience of similar conflicts; but in-of the book that they are consecutive." dications of it are not wanting in the We may even reconcile this view with narrative itself. We are expressly told that the deliverer was raised up as soon as the people cried to Jehovah; and we know that the Israelites were never slow to cry out under suffering. Othniel's whole history is one of conflict with the Amorites, Ca As a proof that common sense demands some latitude of interpretation, we may cite the curious phrase: "And that year they vexed and oppressed the children of Israel eighteen years" (Judg. x. 8). tory, from the birth to the death of the deliverer; and the period during which the latter judged Israel is expressly included in the forty years' tyranny of the Philistines. That tyranny, too, was triumphant during the time of Eli, and lasted over the administration of Samuel into the reign of Saul. the most literal construction of the text, by reading-" And the land had rest: [it was] forty years" (Judg. iii. 11, etc.)—that is, regarding the date as appended to the whole narrative. * The exception in the case of Shamgar confirms the argument, for no number of years is assigned to him, and, as we have seen, the oppression of Jabin is dated from the death of Ehud. This care to mark Shamgar's period as not consecutive with the one named before it confirms the general principle of the con secutiveness of the rest. We have seen a case precisely similar in the prophecy to Abraham of the fortunes of his posterity (Gen. xv. 13), where the words "four hundred years" most clearly describe the whole period from the call of Abraham to the Exodus, and must not be read exclusively with the preceding phrase, "they shall afflict them." brackets. The length assigned to pe riod ii. seems probable in reference to the course of the history, and consistent with the analogy of the preceding period; for, as forty years were allowed for the extinction of the older generation in the wilderness it seems natural that the same perioł should be allowed for the decease of the eld6. Looking at the narrative from ers of the next generation. An obthis point of view, we are struck by jection may be raised, however, from two curious facts: first, the prevalence the length given to the life of Othniel, of the number forty, which we have who must have been upward of twen already had in the three forties of the ty years old at the time of the division life of Moses, and which we meet with of the land, and therefore upward of again in the forty years of Saul and one hundred at his death; but this is the forty years of David; and, second- not inconsistent with the duration of ly, that the total of 480 years in the life among the most vigorous men of Book of Kings is equal to twelve times that age, as we see in the case of forty years. On turning to the Book Joshua and Caleb. The double peof Judges to see how far it is possible riod of eighty years (viii. and ix.), to make out twelve periods of forty from Abimelech to Abdon, agrees years each, we have found the follow-nearly enough with the sum of the ing results: all the numbers, except separate numbers assigned to the those in brackets, are taken directly judges of that period, which make up from the Book of Judges itself; only seventy-nine years. About period xi. the periods of servitude are passed there is some difficulty. We do not over as being included in the others. find forty years distinctly assigned to the reign of Saul in the Old Testament, Years.* about but it is expressly mentioned by St. Paul (Acts xiii. 21); and all the chronologers agree in accepting the number, either for the reign of Saul himself, or for the whole period from the death of Eli to that of Saul. Ap interesting confirmation of the scheme is furnished by one of those coincidences of independent passages, which are of the utmost value. In the remonstrance of Jephthah against the hostilities of the King of Ammon, it is stated that the Israelites had pos1051 sessed the land east of the Jordan 300 years. This period, reckoned from B.C. 1452, brings us to B.C. 1152, which agrees with the date assigned to Jephthah by our scheme. Periods. i. From the Exodus to the passage of Jordan... ii. To the death of Joshua and the surviving elders.. Ending B.C. 40 1451 [40] 1411 40 1371 1291 iii. Judgeship of Othniel.. iv. v. Judgeship of Ehud (Shamgir included).. vi. Julgeship of Deborah and Barak. 40 vii. Judgeship of Gideon. tal..... 1251 40 1211 ..[80] 1131 x. Oppression of the Philistines, contemporary with the judgeships of Eli, Samson (and Samuel) ?.. xi. Reign of Saul (including perhaps Samuel).. xii. Reign of David. Total... iii.-x. belong properly to the 40 1091 40 480 320 Judges.. It is an essential part of our argument to egard these as only round numbers. The scheme makes no allowance for the first three years of Solomon, which preceded the building of the when Jesse was born we know simply nothing. On the whole, then, the intervals of 80 years may be accepted, though with the caution which is always needed in using the genealogies as chronological evidence. Temple. Nor is this of any conse-distinct intimation of his advanced quence; for if the number of 480 age (Ruth iii. 10). Of Obed's age years be made up in the way supposed, we must take it for granted that the numbers given are the nearest round numbers to the true ones, purposely arranged in multiples of 10 and 4, and submultiples of 12 × 10, for ease and simplicity of computation and remem- 8. Finally, there is the question, brance, but preserving, in their aver- What becomes of the authority of St. ages and their total, an agreement Paul in favor of the longer period? with the actual numbers. We can The difficulty is certainly a grave one not, however, pretend to answer all for those who hold that the whole possible objections. We only offer it weight of inspired authority attaches as a highly probable solution of a prob- to every report of every statement lem which has hitherto baffled chro-made by the Apostles, even in renologers; a solution recommended gard to matters of which their knowl not only by its simplicity, but especial-edge was obtained from the ordinary ly by its preserving the grand total sources of information. For such which rests on the high authority of the passage in Kings, without demanding arbitrary assumptions or improbable transpositions in the story of the Judges. persons the suggestion may be of some weight that the numbers, which certainly form no essential part of the Apostle's argument, may have been added as a gloss upon the text, though there is no critical authority in support of this possibility. Others may the disciples of Gamaliel would adopt, in an incidental allusion to a point of chronology made in a Jewish synagogue, the opinion held by the learned Jews of his day, without raising the question of its accuracy. CHRONOLOGY OF JUDGES xvii.-xxi. 9. It is generally admitted, as plain on the face of the book itself, that these chapters form one complete nar 7. It remains to compare this scheme with the genealogies. As they stand, they are quite inconsistent be content with the consideration that with the longer period; but are they long enough even for the shorter? Assuming the birth of David to be about contemporary with the election of Saul (and it may have been later), we have, as above (4), four complete generations from the conquest of Canaan to the birth of David, or from 80 to 90 years for a generation. This is certainly a long period, but not too long for the duration of life in that age, nor for what we know of the in-rative, and refer to the same period. dividuals. Except Obed, there is Besides various indications of a time nothing to show that they were first- not long after the death of Joshua, born sons; and, in the case of David, especially the cordial agreement of we know the contrary, and that Jesse the tribes in punishing the sin of Benwas an old man when he was very jamin, we have the certain guide that young. It is most probable that Sal- the first story belongs to the time of mon and Rahab were both young at Jonathan, the grandson of Moses, then the time of the taking of Jericho. As a young man, and the second to the to Boaz, we see him using the author-high-priesthood of Phinehas, grandity of an elder at the time of his mar- son of Aaron, whose father, Eleazar, riage with Ruth; and there is one died soon after the death of Joshua. |