Bible itself. Where differences appear, one can confidently rely on the Biblical record, set down either by eyewitnesses or by those who, like Luke, “traced all things from the start with accuracy.” (Luke 1:1-4) The accurate chronological information in the accounts of Luke and others makes possible the fixing of the dates for principal events of Jesus’ life and of the apostolic period.—Matt. 2:1, 19-22; Luke 3:1-3, 21-23; and many others.

THE BIBLICAL COUNT OF TIME

The ancient secular records obviously must all be used with due caution. They are known to have inaccuracies in many matters and it is most unlikely that their chronologies should somehow have escaped such inaccuracies. By contrast, the Bible has proved true in all fields dealt with, giving by far the most accurate picture of the ancient times it treats. Its chronology is also reliable.—See BIBLE.

When measuring Biblical periods in harmony with modern dating methods it should be remembered that cardinal and ordinal numbers differ. Cardinal numbers, such as 1, 2, 3, 10, 100, and so forth, have full value. But with ordinal numbers, such as third, fifth, twenty-second, it is necessary to subtract one to obtain the full number. Thus, in the reference to the “thirty-seventh year of the exile of Jehoiachin the king of Judah,” the term “thirty-seventh” is an ordinal number and represents thirty-six full years plus some days, weeks or months (whatever time had elapsed from the end of the thirty-sixth year).—Jer. 52:31.

When counting a number of years from a calendar date in the “B.C.E.” period to one in the “C.E.” period, it should be kept in mind that from a date such as October 1 of the year 1 B.C.E. to October 1 of the year 1 C.E. is only one year, not two, as can be seen in this diagram:

B.C.E. | C.E

2, 1 | 1, 2

___________________

Oct.1 |———| Oct.1

This is because the year dates are ordinal numbers. Thus, from about October 1 of the year 2 B.C.E. (the approximate time of Jesus’ birth) to October 1 of 29 C.E. (the approximate date of Jesus’ baptism) is a total of thirty years, that is, one full year plus three months in the B.C.E. period and 28 full years plus 9 months in the C.E. period.—Luke 3:21-23.

COUNTING FROM THE TIME OF HUMAN CREATION TO THE PRESENT

Modern historians are unable to determine any certain date for the beginning of the “historical period” of mankind. Whether they turn to the history of Assyria, Babylon or Egypt, the chronology becomes increasingly uncertain and unstable as they work their way back through the second millennium B.C.E., and in the third millennium B.C.E. they are faced with confusion and obscurity. By contrast, the Bible provides a connected history that allows for a methodical count back to the beginning of human history, a count that is facilitated by Biblical references to certain eras or large periods of time, such as the 479 full-year period from the Exodus to the start of the temple construction during Solomon’s reign.—1 Ki. 6:1.

To make the count in terms of modern calendar dating we must use some fixed point or pivotal date with which to commence, that is, a date in history that has sound basis for acceptance and that corresponds with a particular event recorded in the Bible. From this date as a pivotal point we can figure backward or forward and assign calendar dates to many of the events referred to in the Bible.

One such date, harmonizing with both Biblical and secular history, is the year 29 C.E., representing the fifteenth year of Tiberius Caesar, whose rule began after the death of Augustus on August 17, 14 C.E. (Gregorian calendar). It was in the year 29 C.E. that John the Baptist began his preaching and also when, six months later, he baptized Jesus.—Luke 3:1-3, 21, 23; 1:36.

Another date that can be used as a pivotal point is the year 539 B.C.E., supported by various historical sources as the year for the overthrow of Babylon by Cyrus the Persian. (As has been shown, secular sources for Cyrus’ reign include Diodorus, Africanus, Eusebius and Ptolemy, as well as the Babylonian tablets.) During Cyrus’ first year his decree releasing the Jews from exile was given. And, as considered in the article on CYRUS, it is very probable that the decree was made by the winter of 538 or toward the spring of 537 B.C.E. This would permit the Jews time to make necessary preparations, effect the four-month journey to Jerusalem, and still arrive there by the seventh month (Tishri, or about October 1) of 537 B.C.E.—Ezra 1:1-11; 2:64-70; 3:1.

Using such pivotal dates, we can then relate a very large number of the Bible events to specific calendar dates. The basic framework into which such chronology fits is as follows:

EVENT CALENDAR DATE TIME PERIOD

BETWEEN EVENTS

To the rebuilding of

Jerusalem’s walls 455 B.C.E. 82 years

To the baptism of Jesus 29 C.E. 483 years

To the present 1969 C.E. 1,940 years

1969 C.E. 5,994 years

What, then, is the Biblical basis and, in some cases, the secular history supporting such chronology? We here give further details showing how each of the time periods listed is determined.

From Adam’s creation to the Flood

The 1,656 yeas of this period are set out in Genesis 5:1-29; 7:6, and may be outlined as follows:

Then to the birth of Enosh 105 years

To the birth of Kenan 90 years

To the birth of Mahalalel 70 years

To the birth of Jared 65 years

To the birth of Enoch 162 years

To the birth of Methuselah 65 years

To the birth of Lamech 187 years

To the birth of Noah 182 years

To the Flood 600 years

___________

Total 1,656 years

The figures shown for the pre-Flood period are those found in the Masoretic text, on which modern translations of the Hebrew Scriptures are based. The figures found in the book of Genesis in the known copies of the Septuagint Version, however, differ from those of the Masoretic text. In giving the fathers’ ages at the time of the birth of their sons, the Septuagint increases the ages by 100 years for all those from Adam to Enoch, with the exception of Jared. However, it then decreases by 100 the number of years each lived after becoming father to the stated son, so that the total ages of these men come out equal in both the Masoretic text and the Septuagint. This difference, nevertheless (plus a difference in the ages of Methuselah and Lamech at the time of their sons’ births), would make the time from Adam’s creation to the Flood equal 2,242 years, according to the Septuagint. A similar addition of years appears in the Septuagint for the chronology after the Flood from Arpachshad to Nahor.—Gen. 11:14-22.

The evidence for accuracy of transmission in this matter clearly favors the Hebrew Masoretic text. For, as M’Clintock and Strong’s Cyclopœdia (Vol. II, p. 299) states: “There is every reason to think that the Rabbins have been scrupulous in the extreme in making alterations; the Sept[uagint], on the other hand, shows signs of a carelessness that would almost permit change.” The Critical Doctrinal and Homiletical Commentary by Schaff-Lange, comments (Genesis, p. 272, ftn.): “The internal evidence is shown to be decidedly in favor of the Hebrew from its proportional consistency. The numbers in the LXX evidently follow a plan to which they have been conformed. This does not appear in the Hebrew, and it is greatly in favor of its being an authentic genealogical record. . . . On physiological grounds, too, the Hebrew is to be preferred; since the length of the life does not at all require so late a manhood as those numbers [in the Septuagint] would seem to intimate. . . . the added 100 years, in each case, by the Septuagint, shows a design to bring them to some nearer proportional standard, grounded on some supposed physiological notion, . . . . To all this must be added the fact that the Hebrew has the best claim to be regarded as the original text, from the well-known scrupulous, and even superstitious, care with which it has been textually preserved.”

There is evidence that the Israelites originally counted the year as beginning in the fall, and Jewish tradition holds that Adam’s creation took place in the fall. At any rate, if counting from the fall of the year, the ‘second month and the seventeenth day of the month,’ on which the Flood began, would correspond more or less to the first part of November.—Gen. 7:11.

It may be noted that Genesis 7:6 refers to Noah as “six hundred years old” (a cardinal or whole number), while verse 11 speaks of the “six hundredth year” (an ordinal number) of Noah’s life. It has been suggested that this could mean that Noah entered the ark while yet in his six hundredth year and then completed it shortly thereafter, perhaps during the forty-day period “when the deluge of waters occurred on the earth.”—Vs. 6.

The duration of the floodwaters upon the earth until their drying up and the subsequent departure of Noah and his family from the ark was a period of 1 year and 10 days. (Gen. 7:11; 8:13, 14) For the length of the year as measured by Noah, see YEAR.

While modern historians would extend the period of human habitation on the earth much farther back than 4026 B.C.E., the facts are decidedly against the position they maintain. The thousands of years of “prehistory” they argue for are dependent on speculation, as can be seen from this statement by prominent scientist Dr. P. E. Klopsteg, who stated: “Come, now, if you will, on a speculative excursion into prehistory. Assume the era in which the species sapiens emerged from the genus Homo . . . hasten across the millenniums for which present information depends for the most part on conjecture and interpretation to the era of the first inscribed records, from which some facts may be gleaned.” [Italics ours.]—Science, December 30, 1960, p. 1914.

The period of the post-Flood era begins with the year 2369 B.C.E. Whereas some would assign certain pictographic writings to the period 3300 to 2800 B.C.E. (New Discoveries in Babylonia About Genesis, by P. J. Wiseman, 1949, p. 36), these are not actually dated documents and their supposed age is based only on archaeological conjecture. That there are no dated documents prior to the year 2000 B.C.E., and that no archaeological finds contain any datable astronomical phenomena beyond the first millennium B.C.E. (with the possible exception of data on the so-called “Venus tablets of Ammisaduga,” tentatively placed just before the middle of the second millennium B.C.E.), are facts acknowledged by some of the most prominent archaeologists and astronomers.

While appeal is sometimes made to datings based on the radiocarbon (C-14) technique, its unreliability is illustrated in the following statement from Science magazine of December 11, 1959: “What bids to become a classical example of ‘C-14 irresponsibility’ is the 6000-year spread of 11 determinations for Jarmo, a prehistoric village in northeastern Iraq, which, on the basis of all archaeological evidence, was not occupied for more than 500 consecutive years.” There is thus no solid or provable evidence to favor an earlier date than 2369 B.C.E. for the start of the post-Flood human society. In the book The Secret of the Hittites (by C. W. Ceram, p. 150) the author states that the “earliest computed date in history which can be considered ‘very probably correct’” is 2350 B.C.E., the supposed date for the beginning of the reign of Sargon I, and even his historicity is questioned.

From the Flood to the establishing of the covenant with Abraham (2370 to 1943 B.C.E.)

The chronological structure of this period may be summed up as follows:

Then to the birth of Shelah 35 years

To the birth of Eber 30 years

To the birth of Peleg 34 years

To the birth of Reu 30 years

To the birth of Serug 32 years

To the birth of Nahor 30 years

To the birth of Terah 29 years

_________

Total 427 years

The basis for these figures is Genesis 11:10 to 12:4. The expression “after the deluge” (Gen. 11:10) used in connection with Arpachshad’s birth would logically refer to the actual falling of the waters that marked the start of the Flood, rather than simply to the continuance of the waters upon the earth for a period of time thereafter. The Hebrew term for “deluge” also indicates this.—Compare Genesis 6:17; 7:4-6, 10-12, 17; 9:11.

The date of the attempt at building the Tower of Babel is not stated in the record. Genesis 10:25 indicates that the division resulting from the confusion of the languages there occurred sometime during ‘the days of Peleg.’ It does not necessarily follow that this event occurred at Peleg’s birth. The expression “in his days” would in fact indicate that the division took place, not at or immediately subsequent to Peleg’s birth, but sometime during his life-span, which extended from 2269 B.C.E. to 2030 B.C.E. If each post-Flood male parent at the age of thirty were to begin fathering children at the rate of one child every three years, with an average of one male child every six years, and continued this until the age of ninety, then in a period of about one hundred and eighty years from the end of the Flood (that is, by 2189 B.C.E.) the population could have grown to a total of over 4,000 adult males. This conservative number would be ample to fit the circumstances relating to the tower construction and the dispersal of the peoples.

By compliance with God’s instruction, Abraham, upon crossing the Euphrates on his way to the land of Canaan, became the recipient of God’s promise and was brought into the covenant known as the Abrahamic covenant. As his departure from Haran and his entry into Canaan followed Terah’s death, the date of the establishing of this covenant is set at 1943 B.C.E. (Gen. 11:32; 12:1-7) However, as to another factor that may affect dates prior to this, see ABRAHAM.

From the establishing of the Abrahamic covenant to the Exodus (1943 to 1513 B.C.E.)

Exodus 12:40, 41, states that “the dwelling of the sons of Israel, who had dwelt in Egypt, was four hundred and thirty years. And it came about at the end of the four hundred and thirty years, it even came about on this very day that all the armies of Jehovah went out of the land of Egypt.” Whereas most translations render verse 40 so as to make the 430 years apply entirely to the dwelling in Egypt, the original Hebrew allows for the above translation. Also, Paul’s statement at Galatians 3:17 shows that the 430-year period applies from the time when the Abrahamic covenant took effect on his entry into Canaan until the exodus from Egypt and the giving of the Law covenant in that same year. Evidence that such understanding of the text prevailed from early times is indicated by the Septuagint rendering, which reads: “But the dwelling of the sons of Israel which they dwelt in the land of Egypt and in the land of Canaan [was] four hundred and thirty years long.”

The period from Abraham’s entry into Canaan until Jacob’s going down into Egypt was 215 years. This figure derives from the fact that 25 years passed from Abraham’s departure from Haran to the birth of Isaac (Gen. 12:4; 21:5); from then to the birth of Jacob was 60 years (25:26); and Jacob was 130 at the time of his entry into Egypt (47:9); thus giving a total of 215 years (from 1943 to 1728 B.C.E.). This means that an equal period of 215 years was thereafter spent by the Israelites in Egypt (from 1728 to 1513 B.C.E.). That the Israelites could have multiplied sufficiently in 215 years to have a population including 600,000 “able-bodied men” is demonstrated under the heading EXODUS.—Ex. 12:37.

Jehovah told Abram (Abraham): “You may know for sure that your seed will become an alien resident in a land not theirs, and they will have to serve them, and these will certainly afflict them for four hundred years.” (Gen. 15:13; see also Acts 7:6, 7.) This was stated prior to the birth of the promised heir or “seed,” Isaac. By 1932 B.C.E. Ishmael was born to Abram by the Egyptian servant girl Hagar, and in 1918 B.C.E. Isaac was born. (Gen. 16:16; 21:5) Counting back 400 years from the Exodus, which marked the end of the ‘afflicting’ (Gen. 15:14), would bring us to 1913 B.C.E., and at that time Isaac would be about five years old. It appears that Isaac was weaned then, and, already “an alien resident” in a land not his, he now experienced the start of the foretold affliction in the form of Ishmael’s “poking fun,” Ishmael being about nineteen. (Gen. 21:8, 9) Although in modern times Ishmael’s mocking of Abraham’s heir might be viewed as inconsequential, such was not the case in patriarchal times. This is evidenced by Sarah’s reaction and God’s approval of her insistence that Hagar and her son Ishmael be sent away. (Gen. 21:10-13) The very fact of this incident’s being recorded in detail in the divine record also points to its marking the commencement of the prophesied 400-year period of affliction that would not end until the Exodus.—Gal. 4:29.

From the Exodus to the division of the kingdom (1513 to 997 B.C.E.)

It was in the “four hundred and eightieth year after the sons of Israel came out from the land of Egypt,” in the fourth year of Solomon’s reign, that construction began on the temple at Jerusalem. (1 Ki. 6:1) “Four hundred and eightieth” is an ordinal number representing four hundred and seventy-nine full years plus some additional time, in this case one month. Counting 479 years from the Exodus (Nisan 1513 B.C.E.) brings us to 1034 B.C.E., with the temple construction beginning in the second month, Ziv (corresponding to part of April and part of May). Since this was the fourth year (another ordinal number) of Solomon’s rule, his reign began three full years earlier in 1037 B.C.E. His forty-year rule evidently ran from Nisan 1037 to Nisan 997 B.C.E., with the division of the kingdom taking place in the latter year. The chronological structure for this period would therefore be as follows:

EVENT DATE TIME PERIOD BETWEEN EVENTS

From the Exodus 1513 B.C.E.

to 40 years

the entry of Israel into Canaan 1473 B.C.E.

to 356 years

the close of the period of the 1117 B.C.E.

Judges and the beginning of

Saul’s reign

to 40 years

the beginning of David’s reign 1077 B.C.E.

to 40 years

the beginning of Solomon’s reign 1037 B.C.E.

to 40 years

the division of the kingdom 997 B.C.E.

Total years from the Exodus to

the division of the kingdom _________

(1513 to 997 B.C.E.) 516 years

These figures find their basis in texts such as Deuteronomy 2:7; 29:5; Acts 13:21; 2 Samuel 5:4; 1 Kings 11:42, 43; 12:1-20. Some critics call attention to the four periods of forty years each, occurring in this period, claiming that this is evidence of a ‘mere seeking after symmetry’ on the part of the Bible writers rather than an accurate chronology. To the contrary, whereas the period of Israelite wandering before their entry into Canaan was almost exactly forty years in fulfillment of the divine judgment recorded at Numbers 14:33, 34 (compare Exodus 12:2, 3, 6, 17; Deuteronomy 1:31; 8:2-4; Joshua 4:19), the other three periods may have all included fractional figures. Thus, David’s reign is shown to have actually lasted for forty and a half years, according to 2 Samuel 5:5. If, as seems to have been the practice, regnal years of these kings were counted on a Nisan-to-Nisan basis, this could mean that King Saul’s reign lasted only thirty-nine and a half years, but with the months remaining until the following Nisan being credited to Saul’s reign and hence not officially included in David’s forty regnal years. Such, at least, was the known practice among Semitic rulers in Mesopotamia, the months intervening between the death of a king and the following Nisan being termed the “accession period” of the succeeding king, but his official first year of rule not beginning to count until the arrival of the month of Nisan.

The length of the period from the entry into Canaan till the end of the period of the Judges is not directly stated, being arrived at only by deduction. That is, by subtracting the 123 years of the known periods (of the wilderness wandering, of Saul and David, and the first three years of Solomon’s reign) from the 479 years intervening between the Exodus and Solomon’s fourth year, 356 years remain.

The manner in which these 356 years (from Israel’s entry into Canaan in 1473 B.C.E. until the start of Saul’s reign in 1117 B.C.E.) are to be apportioned is not shown. Apparently the initial conquest of Canaan under Joshua’s leadership took some six years. This is indicated by Caleb’s statement that he was forty years old when sent out as a spy in the second year of the Exodus (1512 B.C.E.) and was eighty-five (a cardinal number meaning he had completed eighty-five years) when the tribal inheritances were distributed after the principal warring campaigns had ended, which would then be 1467 B.C.E., or six years after the entry into Canaan in 1473 B.C.E. (Num. 9:1; 10:11, 12; 13:1-3, 6; Josh. 14:6, 7, 10) From the distribution of the land to the first oppression, under Syrian Cushan-rishathaim, comes an unstated period in which Joshua and also the other “older men” died and a new generation unacquainted with Jehovah’s miraculous works for Israel grew up. (Judg. 2:7, 10; 3:8) While the record speaks of “many days after Jehovah had given Israel rest from all their enemies,” when Joshua gathered the heads of the people for final counsel and then died at the age of 110, the “many days” need not refer to a very long period. (Josh. 23:1; 24:29-31) This is seen from the following facts:

Since he and Caleb gave a faithful report after the spying trip, Joshua was exempt from the divine judgment sentencing those twenty years old and upward to die in the wilderness. (Num. 14:5-9, 26-30) While some translations (AV, RS) of Exodus 33:11 refer to Joshua as a “young man,” the Hebrew term used (naʹʽar) may also be translated “servant” (AT) or “attendant” (NW). (Compare Isaiah 36:4 and 37:6, the Hebrew naʹʽar being applied to men such as Rabshakeh.) Though it can mean a young child, naʹʽar (“young”) can also apply to a man forty-one years old, as in Rehoboam’s case. (2 Chron. 12:13; 13:7) Hence, Joshua could feasibly have been forty or over at the time of the Exodus. He was then one of the “heads of the sons of Israel” and commander of the army, positions not ordinarily held by one of much less age.—Ex. 16:1; 17:1, 8-13; Num. 13:3-8.

So, Joshua’s death may have occurred within twenty or thirty years after the conquest. It may be noted that, immediately after the summation of the principal warring campaigns, he is described as already “old . . . advanced in years.” (Josh. 13:1) In the chart presented herewith a span of thirty-five years after the conquest is allowed for the death of Joshua and other “older men” and the rising up of a new generation, but this figure is intended to be viewed only as a reasonable suggestion.

Beginning with the oppression by Cushan-rishathaim, the book of Judges lists periods of oppression and periods of judgeships and of peace. Counted in succession, the figures in the different accounts would total 410 years. Evidently some periods were concurrent rather than successive, and this is the view of most commentators. Thus, The Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible (1962, Vol. 1, p. 584) suggests: “It is doubtless necessary to recognize that in many cases the judges were contemporaries of one another, exercising authority over limited tribal areas.”

The circumstances described lend themselves to this explanation. The oppressions involved different areas of the land and affected different tribes. Cushan-rishathaim came down from Syria; the Moabites under Eglon came from the SE; Jabin of Hazor from N of the Sea of Galilee; Midian and the Ammonites likely from the E; and the Philistines from the SW. Thus the expression “and the land had no further disturbance,” used after recounting the Israelites’ victories over their oppressors, may not in every case embrace the entire area occupied by all twelve tribes but may apply to the portion that the particular oppression primarily affected.—Judg. 3:11, 30; 5:31; 8:28; compare Joshua 14:13-15.

As an example, the oppression by King Eglon of Moab seems to have affected mainly the tribes E of the Jordan and only Benjamin and Ephraim to the W of the Jordan. (Judg. 3:12-15, 27-30) On the other hand, the oppression by King Jabin of Hazor appears to have been localized mainly in the northern and central tribes W of the Jordan, particularly Naphtali and Zebulun, with the men of Issachar, Ephraim and Benjamin lending support in Barak’s victory over Jabin’s forces. The other tribes evidently took no part in the fight.—Judg. 4:1-7; 5:14-18.

After Ehud’s victory over Moab, an 80-year period of ‘no disturbance’ followed. The record does not say that Ehud lived to the end of that 80-year period. He could have died within the first part of that peaceful period, even as Jephthah died six years after his victory. (Judg. 3:30; 4:1; 12:7) So, the 20 years of King Jabin’s oppression and the 40-year period of peace that followed it could have run concurrently, either totally or partially, with the ‘80 years of peace’ resulting from Ehud’s defeat of Moab. That there were one or more overlappings somewhere along the line is indicated by Jephthah’s later reference to a ‘300-year’ period in which the Israelites had occupied land now claimed by the Ammonites, for the figures given in the book of Judges up to that point (including the six years of conquest of Canaan) would already total about 325 years, plus whatever time is to be allowed between the conquest and the death of Joshua and the other older men—Judg. 11:26.

Even though the ‘300 years’ mentioned by Jephthah may have been a round number, if it is taken to be reasonably close to the actual time, then there would remain approximately 56 years from the time of his victory over Ammon until the reign of Saul. The chart presented shows how the judgeships of Jephthah, Ibzan, Elon, Abdon, and Samson, as well as the Philistine oppression and the priestly activity of Eli and Samuel, might fit into this period. Again it may be stated that this is intended to show only a reasonably harmonious arrangement, since the lack of specific chronological data for many points makes impossible any conclusive presentation. Even as the years between the tribal distribution of Canaan and the initial oppression by Cushan-rishathaim are indeterminate, so too the time elapsing between Samuel’s leading Israel to victory over the Philistines and the beginning of Saul’s kingship is indeterminate, though it may have been relatively short. The evidence presented, however, shows that a 356-year figure for the period from the entry into Canaan to the beginning of Saul’s reign is not inconsistent with the record.

At Acts chapter 13 the apostle Paul reviewed God’s dealings with Israel from the ‘choosing of the forefathers’ on through the period in Egypt, the Exodus, the wilderness wandering, the conquest of Canaan, and the distribution of the land, and then stated: “All that during about four hundred and fifty years. And after these things he gave them judges until Samuel the prophet.” (Acts 13:20) Considerable misunderstanding has resulted from the Authorized Version rendering of this text, which reads: “And after that he gave unto them judges about the space of four hundred and fifty years, until Samuel the prophet.” However, the most ancient manuscripts (including the Sinaitic, Vatican MS. No. 1209, and the Alexandrine), as well as most modern translations (such as AS, RS, AT, Kx, JB and others), all favor the previous translation, which shows the period of the judges coming after the 450 years. Since the period of “about 450 years” had its start with God’s ‘choosing the forefathers’ of Israel, it would seem to have begun in the year 1918 B.C.E. with the birth of Isaac, the original “seed” promised to Abraham. It would therefore end about 1467 B.C.E., when the initial conquest of Canaan reached its conclusion, allowing for the distribution to proceed. Inasmuch as the figure is stated to be approximate, a difference of a year or so would not be of consequence.

(The chronological framework for events down to the year 997 B.C.E. is constructed on basically the same line of evidence as is set out in the book “All Scripture Is Inspired of God and Beneficial,” published in 1963.)

From the division of the kingdom to the desolation of Jerusalem and Judah (997 to 607 B.C.E.)

This period of the northern and southern kingdoms (Israel and Judah) is one of the more complex periods when viewed from the standpoint of modern reckoning. It must therefore be recalled that the Biblical chronologers of the kings’ reigns were not viewing time periods in the same way as is generally done today, that is, as fitting into a standardized calendar system of counting years from a certain fixed starting point or beginning of an era. Their starting point could vary according to the point of view adopted by the chronologer when considering a particular reign or certain features of that reign.

Thus, when 2 Chronicles 16:1 states that, “in the thirty-sixth year of the reign of Asa, Baasha the king of Israel came up against Judah,” the thirty-six years do not count from Asa’s first year of rule. This is made obvious by Biblical statements showing that Baasha began to reign in Asa’s third year and ruled only twenty-four years, hence dying in Asa’s twenty-sixth year. (1 Ki. 15:27, 28, 33; 16:8) It therefore appears that the thirty-six years start counting from the beginning of the divided kingdom in 997 B.C.E., Asa’s reign being viewed by the chronologer as a continuation of the rule of the kingdom of Judah in its reduced state that began in that year.

A king’s reign might also be viewed as if continuing on in that of his successor, as is evidently the case with the reference to the “twentieth year of Jotham,” since Jotham is shown to have actually ruled only sixteen years, his “twentieth year” thus being represented by the fourth year of his son and successor, Ahaz.—2 Ki. 15:30-33; 16:1.

The point in a king’s reign in which he became a tributary or vassal to some foreign monarch might also serve as the starting point used by the chronologer. Thus, Jehoiakim’s “third year” mentioned by Daniel (1:1) is shown to refer to his third year as vassal of the king of Babylon, whereas, counting from the actual start of Jehoiakim’s rule, it was his eleventh year.—2 Ki. 24:1; 2 Chron. 36:5-7.

These methods are not without their approximate counterpart in the chronological records of other ancient nations, and they may, indeed, cast light on some of the apparent difficulties in some of those secular records.

A helpful guide as to the overall length of this period of the kings is found at Ezekiel 4:1-7 in the mimic siege of Jerusalem that the prophet Ezekiel carried out at God’s direction. Ezekiel was to lie on his left side for 390 days to “carry the error of the house of Israel,” and on his right side for forty days to “carry the error of the house of Judah,” and each day was shown to stand for a year. The two periods (of 390 years and of 40 years) thus symbolized evidently stood for the length of Jehovah’s forbearance with the two kingdoms in their idolatrous course. The Jewish understanding of this prophecy, as presented in The Soncino Books of the Bible (Commentary on Ezekiel, pp. 20, 21) is: “The guilt of the Northern Kingdom extended over a period of 390 years ([according to the] Seder Olam [the earliest postexilic chronicle preserved in the Hebrew language], [and Rabbis] Rashi and Ibn Ezra). Abarbanel, quoted by Malbim, reckons the period of Samaria’s guilt from the time when the schism took place under Rehoboam . . . until the fall of Jerusalem. . . . The right [side, on which Ezekiel lay] indicates the south, i.e. the Kingdom of Judah which lay to the south or right. . . . Judah’s corruption lasted forty years beginning soon after Samaria’s fall. According to Malbim, the time is reckoned from the thirteenth year of the reign of Josiah . . . when Jeremiah began his ministry. (Jer.i.2).”

From the division of the kingdom in 997 B.C.E. to the fall of Jerusalem in 607 B.C.E. was 390 years. While it is true that Samaria, the capital of the northern kingdom, had already fallen to Assyria in 740 B.C.E. in Hezekiah’s sixth year (2 Ki. 18:9, 10), it is probable that some of the population fled into the southern kingdom before the Assyrians’ advance. (Note also the situation in Judah following the division of the kingdom as described at 2 Chronicles 10:16, 17.) But, more importantly, the fact that Jehovah God continued to keep the Israelites of the exiled northern kingdom in view, and that the messages of his prophets continued to include them long beyond the fall of Samaria, shows that their interests were still represented in the capital city of Jerusalem and that its fall in 607 B.C.E. was an expression of Jehovah’s judgment, not alone against Judah, but against the nation of Israel as a whole. (Jer. 3:11-22; 11:10-12, 17; Ezek. 9:9, 10) When the city fell, the hopes of the nation as a whole (with the exception of the few who maintained true faith) suffered collapse.—Ezek. 37:11-14, 21, 22.

In the chart that follows, this 390-year period is adhered to as a sound chronological guide. A summation of the years listed for all the reigns of the kings of Judah from Rehoboam to Zedekiah gives a total of 393 years. Whereas some Biblical chronologers endeavor to synchronize the data concerning the kings by means of numerous coregencies and “interregnums” on the Judean side, it appears necessary to show only one coregency. This is in the case of Jehoram, who is stated (at least in the Masoretic text and some of the oldest MSS. of the Bible) to have become king “while Jehoshaphat was king of Judah,” thus giving some basis for assuming a coregency. (2 Ki. 8:16) In this manner the overall period comes within the 390-year limit.

The reigns of the kings of Judah, as representing the official Davidic line, were allowed to govern in the chart, and the data given concerning the kings of Israel was conformed to this reckoning. In view of the preeminence given to the reigns of the Judean kings in the books of Chronicles, it would appear that such assigning of primary value to them is justified.

The years of reign assigned to the Judean kings in the books of Kings and Chronicles were therefore considered to be full regnal years running from Nisan to Nisan (basically, spring to spring). This means that any particular year of the reign would include approximately nine months of one of our calendar years and three months of the next. Hence in stating the first year of Rehoboam the date would be given as 997/996 B.C.E.

Synchronisms are frequent, that is, statements to the effect that a certain king of Judah became king in a particular year of the reign of a king of Israel. Where these synchronisms required it, the time when an individual “became king” in Judah was viewed as having taken place during the last year of his predecessor (generally due to the death of that predecessor; compare 2 Chronicles 16:13). However, that entire final year was credited in the chart as forming part of the official reign of the predecessor, and the first year of the succeeding king was not counted as beginning officially until the following Nisan. As noted already, David actually ruled forty and a half years, yet is evidently officially credited with just a forty-year reign. (2 Sam. 2:11; 5:3-5; 1 Ki. 2:11) Possibly the extra six months were prior to Nisan of 1077 B.C.E. and so were credited to Saul’s reign, conforming to the arrangement described previously. The Jewish Talmud expresses the tradition that if a king ruled one day beyond the first of Nisan and then died, the entire year was nevertheless credited to him. This may or may not have been the case.

In a few instances it appears that the expression “became king” refers to the anointing or official appointing of a son as the heir to the throne while the reigning king yet lived, as was done in Solomon’s case. (1 Ki. 1:32-48) Secular records show this to have been the practice among Mesopotamian and Persian kings to ensure the desired line of succession. Such anointing could take place several years before the individual assumed sole rulership.

In the chart, the stated figures of the years of rule of the kings of Israel were not viewed as having the same precise value as those of the kings of Judah, since the synchronisms in the record do not allow this. For example, Nadab is said to have become king in Asa’s second year and to have ruled for two years, yet he is shown to have been put to death in Asa’s third year. (1 Ki. 15:25-28) Hence the “two years” evidently mean ‘parts of two years.’ The fact that the northern kingdom did not have Jehovah’s approval and was only tolerated by him could have resulted in the inspired Biblical chroniclers’ treating the reigns of that kingdom on such a general basis. It is also possible that, since the northern kingdom isolated itself from the temple at Jerusalem, the annual festivals were not consistently observed there and the system of reckoning the kings’ reigns was not as well regulated or as systematically chronicled as in Judah.—Compare 1 Kings 12:26-33.

While difficulties exist, it should be kept in mind that we do not know all the circumstances of the times and explicit details are not always given. As an example, Ahaz is shown to have ‘become king’ at the age of twenty and to have ruled for sixteen years. (2 Ki. 16:2) Yet his son Hezekiah was twenty-five years old when he succeeded Ahaz. (2 Ki. 18:1, 2) This means that Ahaz must have been under twelve years of age when he fathered Hezekiah. Though this may seem rare, it is by no means impossible. Whereas puberty in males is usually reached between the ages of twelve and fifteen in temperate climates, it may come earlier in warmer climates. Marriage customs also vary. A report on Marriage Conditions in a Palestinian Village published in 1931 by Hilma Granqvist and quoted in the book The Mysterious Numbers of the Hebrew Kings (E. R. Thiele, p. 119, ftn. 17) shows that child marriage is frequent in Palestine even in recent times, one case being cited of two brothers aged eight and twelve who were married, the wife of the older attending school with her husband.

The chart set forth is not intended to be viewed as an “absolute” chronology but, rather, as a suggested presentation of the reigns of the two kingdoms. The ancient inspired writers were dealing with facts and figures well known to them and to the Jewish people then, and the different chronological viewpoints adopted by the writers at certain points presented no problem. Such is not the case today and hence we may be satisfied with simply setting out an arrangement that harmonizes reasonably with the Biblical record. The footnotes at the bottom of each page of the chart show how certain texts are considered as applying.

As shown in the section on “Babylonian Chronology,” the available Babylonian records harmonize with the Bible record of Nebuchadnezzar’s first siege of Jerusalem, in Jehoiakim’s third year of vassalship to Babylon (618/617 B.C.E.). The Bible record shows that, before Nebuchadnezzar’s capture of the city, Jehoiakim died and was succeeded by Jehoiachin. On taking the city, Nebuchadnezzar sent Jehoiachin into exile and placed Zedekiah on the throne. Only the Bible provides information on the subsequent events leading to the destruction of Jerusalem. For further information as to how the year 607 B.C.E. (as the date for that destruction) harmonizes with and is confirmed by Bible prophecy, see APPOINTED TIMES OF THE NATIONS. The events leading up to the destruction of Jerusalem are considered under the headings JEHOIAKIM; JEHOIACHIN; NEBUCHADNEZZAR; ZEDEKIAH..

From the desolation of Jerusalem and Judah to the Jewish return from exile (607 to 537 B.C.E.)

The length of this period is fixed by God’s own decree concerning Judah, that “all this land must become a devastated place, an object of astonishment, and these nations will have to serve the king of Babylon seventy years.”—Jer. 25:8-11.

Various attempts have been made to harmonize this seventy-year period with the Ptolemaic dates used by modern historians, such as counting the seventy years from the initial exile, when King Jehoiachin, Daniel, and others were taken captive (2 Ki. 24:12-17), or by considering the seventy years as counting from the time of the temple’s desolation until the time of its completed reconstruction in the sixth year of Darius I. (Ezra 6:15) Endeavoring to uphold this seventy-year temple destruction theory (supposedly running from 586 to 516 B.C.E.), some scholars cite Zechariah 7:5-7. Jehovah there refers to the fasting done by the Jews in certain months of each year for seventy years. But nothing is said in this text as to this seventy-year period terminating with the completion of the rebuilt temple in 516/515 B.C.E. Rather, it is quite evident that Jehovah is referring to the past practice of the Jews, when they fasted at those specific times during the seventy years prior to their return to Jerusalem and Judah in 537 B.C.E. This is evident also from the fact that these words were spoken in the “fourth year of Darius the king,” whereas the temple was not completed until Darius’ “sixth year.”—Ezra 6:15; Zech. 7:1.

The Bible prophecy does not allow for the application of the seventy-year period to any time other than that between the desolation of Judah, accompanying Jerusalem’s destruction, and the return of the Jewish exiles to their homeland as a result of Cyrus’ decree. It clearly specifies that the seventy years would be years of devastation of the land of Judah. The prophet Daniel so understood the prophecy, for he states: “I myself, Daniel, discerned by the books the number of the years concerning which the word of Jehovah had occurred to Jeremiah the prophet, for fulfilling the devastations of Jerusalem, namely, seventy years.” (Dan. 9:2) After describing the conquest of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar, 2 Chronicles 36:20, 21 states: “Furthermore, he carried off those remaining from the sword captive to Babylon, and they came to be servants to him and his sons until the royalty of Persia began to reign; to fulfill Jehovah’s word by the mouth of Jeremiah, until the land had paid off its sabbaths. All the days of lying desolated it kept sabbath, to fulfill seventy years.”

Jerusalem came under final siege in Zedekiah’s ninth year (609 B.C.E.) and the city fell in his eleventh year (607), corresponding with Nebuchadnezzar’s nineteenth year of actual rule (counting from his accession year in 625). (2 Ki. 25:1-8) In the fifth month of that year (the month of Ab, corresponding to parts of July and August) the city was set afire, the walls were pulled down, and the majority of the people led off into exile. However, “some of the lowly people of the land” were allowed to remain and these did so until the assassination of Gedaliah, Nebuchadnezzar’s appointee, whereupon they fled into Egypt, finally leaving Judah completely desolate. (2 Ki. 25:9-12, 22-26) This was in the seventh month, Ethanim (or Tishri, corresponding to parts of September and October). Hence the count of the seventy years of desolation must have begun about October 1, 607 B.C.E., ending in 537 B.C.E. It was in the seventh month of this latter year that the first repatriated Jews arrived back in Judah, exactly seventy years from the start of the full desolation of the land.—2 Chron. 36:21-23; Ezra 3:1.

From the Jewish return from exile to the conversion of Cornelius (537 B.C.E. to 36 C.E.)

In the second year of the return from exile (536 B.C.E.), the foundation of the temple was relaid in Jerusalem, but the rebuilt temple was not completed until the sixth year of the reign of Darius. (Ezra 3:8-10; 6:14, 15) Since Darius I (Persian) did not establish himself in Babylon until defeating the rebel Nebuchadnezzar III in December of 522 and shortly afterward capturing and killing him in Babylon, the year 522 B.C.E. may be viewed as the accession year of King Darius I. His first regnal year, then, began in the spring of 521 B.C.E. (Babylonian Chronology 626 B.C.—A.D. 75, Parker and Dubberstein, page 30) Darius’ sixth year therefore began April 11/12, 516 B.C.E., and continued until the end of March of 515 B.C.E. On this basis, the rebuilding of the temple was completed by Zerubbabel on March 5/6 of 515 B.C.E.

The next date of major importance is the commissioning of Nehemiah in the twentieth year of Artaxerxes I. (Neh. 2:1, 5-8) The reasons for favoring the date of 455 B.C.E. for this year as against the popular date of 445 B.C.E. have been considered earlier in this article and particularly in the article on ARTAXERXES No. 3. This commissioning, and the rebuilding of Jerusalem and its walls resulting from it, form the starting point of the prophecy concerning the “seventy weeks” at Daniel 9:24-27. The weeks there are clearly “weeks of years” (Dan. 9:24, RS, AT, Mo), totaling 490 years. As demonstrated under the heading SEVENTY WEEKS, the prophecy pointed to Jesus’ appearance as the Messiah in the year 29 C.E.; his death at the “half of the week” or in the middle of the last week of years, that is, in 33 CE.; and the end of the period of God’s special favor to the Jews in 36 C.E. Thus, the seventy weeks of years closed with the conversion of Cornelius, 490 years from the year 455 B.C.E.—Acts 10:30-33, 44-48; 11:1.

Jesus’ appearance as the Messiah came in the precise year foretold, six months after John the Baptist began his preaching in the “fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar.” (Luke 1:36; 3:1, 2, 21-23) Since, as has been shown, Tiberius began his rule on August 17, 14 C.E. (Gregorian calendar), his fifteenth year ran from August 17, 28 C.E., to August 16, 29 C.E. The evidence, then, is that Jesus’ baptism and anointing took place in the fall of the year 29 CE.

Since Jesus was thirty years of age in 29 C.E. at the time of his baptism (Luke 3:23), his birth took place thirty years earlier, or about the fall of the year 2 B.C.E. He was born during the reign of Caesar Augustus and the Syrian governorship of Quirinius. (Luke 2:1, 2) Augustus’ rule ran from 27 B.C.E. to 14 C.E. P. Sulpicius Quirinius, Roman senator, was governor of Syria twice, the first time evidently coming after P. Quintilius Varus, whose term as legate of Syria ended in 4 B.C.E. Some authorities place Quirinius’ first governorship in 3-2 B.C.E. (See REGISTRATION.) Herod the Great was then king of Judea, and we have seen that there is evidence pointing to the year 1 B.C.E. as the likely time of his death. Thus, all the available evidence, and particularly the Scriptural references, indicate the fall of 2 B.C.E. for the human birth of God’s Son.

The later apostolic period (36 to c. 100 C.E.)

It is possible to fix approximate dates for a number of the events taking place during this period. The prophecy of a great famine spoken by the Christian prophet Agabus, and the subsequent persecution instigated by Herod Agrippa I, resulting in the apostle James’ death and the jailing of Peter, evidently took place in 44 C.E. (Acts 11:27-30; 12:1-4) Herod Agrippa died that year and there is evidence that the foretold famine came in the year 46 C.E. This latter date (or shortly thereafter) probably marks the time of the relief ministration effected by Paul and Barnabas.—Acts 12:25.

Paul’s first visit to Corinth can be dated through the proconsulship of Gallio. (Acts 18:1, 11-18) As explained in the article on GALLIO, this proconsulship ran from the summer of 51 to the summer of 52 C.E. Thus, Paul’s eighteen-month activity in Corinth likely began in the autumn of 50 C.E., ending in the spring of 52 C.E. This is further confirmed by the fact that two of Paul’s associates in Corinth, Aquila and Priscilla, had recently arrived there from Italy due to Emperor Claudius’ edict requiring all Jews to depart from Rome. (Acts 18:2) Paulus Orosius, historian of the fifth century, states that this order was given in Claudius’ ninth year, early in 50 C.E.

The two years Paul spent in prison at Caesarea were during the last two years of the governorship of Felix, Paul thereafter being sent on to Rome by Felix’ successor Porcius Festus. (Acts 21:33; 23:23-35; 24:27) The date of the accession of Festus is somewhat uncertain, historical evidence not being in full agreement. However, the most probable time appears to narrow down to the years from 57 to 60 C.E., with some modern authorities favoring either 59 or 60 C.E. At any rate, Paul’s subsequent arrival in Rome may be placed between 59 and 61 C.E.

The great fire that ravaged Rome came in July of 64 C.E. and was followed by fierce persecution of Christians, Nero being the instigator. It is probable that Paul’s second imprisonment and his execution took place shortly thereafter. (2 Tim. 1:16; 4:6, 7) The exiling of John to the isle of Patmos is generally considered to have taken place during the reign of Emperor Domitian. (Rev. 1:9) The persecution of Christians reached a peak during his rule (81-96 C.E.), particularly in the last three years. The traditional view is that John was released from exile following Domitian’s death and died in Ephesus about the close of the first century C.E. Thus, by John’s writing his epistles about this time, the Bible canon was completed and the apostolic period came to its close.

CHRYSOLITE

(chrysʹo·lite).

A transparent or translucent, yellow or green semiprecious stone composed of silicates of magnesium and iron. It generally occurs in volcanic rocks (also, in dolomite and some types of limestone) in solid, crystalline or granular form. “Chrysolite” is from the Greek word khry·soʹli·thos meaning “gold stone,” and it seems that at least some ancients applied this name to various yellow colored gems. Fine-quality chrysolite crystals are found in Egypt.

In compliance with Jehovah’s instructions, a chrysolite (Heb., tar·shishʹ; LXX, “chrysolite”) was placed in the first position in the fourth row on Aaron’s “breastpiece of judgment” to represent one of the twelve tribes of Israel. (Ex. 28:2, 15, 20, 21; 39:13) Chrysolite was also included among the precious stones that served as a “covering” for the king of Tyre.—Ezek. 28:12, 13.

When Ezekiel received two separate visions involving four wheels, he noted that the appearance of the wheels was “like the glow of chrysolite.” (Ezek. 1:15-21; 10:9) The Shulammite girl likened the hands